Quote
Witness
I want to construct a thought experiment, rather unrealistic. Imagine one passionate and knowing Rolling Stones fan more than most, familiar with all that happened earlier, waking up on a later date from unconsciousness, which hit him or her after THEIR SATANIC MAJESTIES REQUEST. To cheer up the fan, temporarily advised not to try to read, the '68 - '72 albums are played. Information of the order of the albums is not given. Titles of albums and songs are on the other hand presented, but the doctors and nurses are supposed not to know too much details.

The question is: If asked, would the passionate and understanding fan be certain to be able to guess, in which order the albums were released, only by listening to them. Myself, with no command over any music instruments, put into the situation, I think, I would have been unable. Am I alone?

It's hard to say, but I think that what you might call the texture of the sound of each album does show a progression, and such a fan would probably be able to place Beggar's Banquet and Let It Bleed before Sticky Fingers and Exile on Main Street, and I think Exile would probably strike our newly awakened fan as most different from the Stones output he was familiar with, so the latest of the bunch.

Quote
kleermaker

Funny that it's just you that voices my feelings about Let It Bleed so well. I always felt it misses something, however great the album is. But I was never able to put my finger on it, as we say it here. You did.

The strongest third man tracks, Live With Me & You Got The Silver are made strange as far as true Rolling Stones listening experience goes due to one not featuring Bill on bass and the other not featuring Jagger on lead vocal.

Let It Bleed is a very true representation of the band during the time in which the majority of the album was made though. Jones was useless and Taylor had yet to integrate fully.

It is essential within the context of the so called big 4 and also their bigger picture story becaue of the strength of the songs, but also becauee it actually does capture and present the band in transition. So even if it has a strange feel as a whole, it is still mostly very powerful and interesting stuff.

That the essentially four piece Autumn 1968 - Spring 1969 Rolling Stones could produce such strong music is testament to their musicianship and musical connection.



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 2014-01-02 18:46 by His Majesty.

The fact that the original subject (GHS as part of a "big 5" ) has gotten snowed under by a discussion on Let It Bleed, says it all: GHS is good but doesn't hold a candle compared to the previous 4 (or 5 if you include Get Yer Ya Ya's Out).

What surprises me is that the general consensus here seems to be that Let It Bleed is the "odd one out". For me, the weaker one of the 4 (5) would be Sticky Fingers, but it's largely academic since all these 4 (5) albums are so absolutely great. The only other Stones albums coming even close to that level of satisfaction are Rolling Stones Vol 1, Some Girls and Tattoo You.

My list of appreciation would be something like:
1. Exile on Main Street (or Let It Bleed)
2. Let it Bleed (or Exile on Main Street)
3. Get Yer Ya Ya's Out
4. Beggar's Banquet
5. Sticky Fingers
6. Tattoo You
7. Some Girls
8. Rolling Stones Vol 1.
9. Aftermath

My main criterion of how I appreciate an album is on how many times I can listen to the entire album on the same day, without skipping a single song. It would be very hard for me to come up with a rational analysis why some albums work so much better for me than others. I only know I could listen to Exile on Main Street or Let It Bleed the rest of my life without getting bored.

Another criterion possibly might be to look at the weakest song of each album. For Beggar's Banquet that would be "Dear Doctor", for Let It Bleed "Country Honk", for Sticky Fingers "I Got The Blues" and for Exile on Main Street "Turd on the Run" or "Rip This Joint", and clearly even any of those are much and much better than the weakest songs on GHS ("Hide Your Love, "Silver Train", "Can You Hear the Music", "Dancing with mr. D" ), which - as always with the Stones - is not just a matter of the originality of the song as such (the same old 3 chords more often than not) as of the groove, the feeling, that typical Stones thing that - thank God - noone knows how to describe.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2014-01-02 18:53 by matxil.

Quote
Doxa

Quote
kleermaker

Quote
DandelionPowderman
BS also sounds like a "four piece-band", as Taylor is either buried in the mix or inaudible

I've always said I find the studio BS boring, though it's a great song. The live performances from 70-73 do show the song in its full glory.

Like always, I differ in opinion here (which I guess can be seen my post in regards to "Brown Sugar" in this thread...). I think the original studio version is perfect, but so are the best 'road versions' of it as well. Of the latter, my favourite are the 1972/73 show openers, which added a new dimension to the song. I generally like the idea to make the songs differ from the originals (and previous live versions), just for arts sake. (A very old-fashionable idea nowadays, I know - but gladly Bob Dylan exists).

But that said, I like the fresh "Brown Sugar" from Altamont, which is very close to the 'version' they just cut in a studio two-three days earlier (so probably not much time or reason for artistic reinterpretation...). You Kleerie left that out...

- Doxa

Yeah I did, but I prefer the Altamont version to the studio version because it's a bit affecting, it being the first live version (the Essen 1970 version is my favourite, even though it's not complete). The same goes for the first Shelter live version, though I prefer the 72/73 Shelter versions. The Shelter fragment rehearsal from Dalles June 72 shows to me the special of two guys interacting (especially from 2:10 on). And it's not fortuitous that No Expectations is my favourite song on Beggars.

Quote
michaelsavage

Quote
2000 LYFH
Should GHS be added to the BIG 4 list and make it a 5 album run of the greatest music ever recorded?

Beggars Banquet
Let It Bleed
Sticky Fingers
Exile on Main St
Goats Head Soup


Love this album:

Dancing with Mr. D
100 Years Ago
Coming Down Again
Doo Doo Doo Doo Doo (Heartbreaker)
Angie
Silver Train
Hide Your Love
Winter
Can You Hear the Music
Star Star

No. It's much more than that..

Include IORR and Black and Blue and Some Girls and you have 8!!! It is NOT a reach to make this case.

My bad. Big 9 with Ya Yas!

Quote
michaelsavage

Quote
michaelsavage

Quote
2000 LYFH
Should GHS be added to the BIG 4 list and make it a 5 album run of the greatest music ever recorded?

Beggars Banquet
Let It Bleed
Sticky Fingers
Exile on Main St
Goats Head Soup


Love this album:

Dancing with Mr. D
100 Years Ago
Coming Down Again
Doo Doo Doo Doo Doo (Heartbreaker)
Angie
Silver Train
Hide Your Love
Winter
Can You Hear the Music
Star Star

No. It's much more than that..

Include IORR and Black and Blue and Some Girls and you have 8!!! It is NOT a reach to make this case.

My bad. Big 9 with Ya Yas!

Come on Man, shoot for the Big 10!

I wish Some Girls didn't contain "Lies" (waste of a song & space) imo MEZ

Quote
kleermaker

Quote
His Majesty
This is where it seems I differ slightly from Doxa and kleermaker. Or maybe not.

For me context and consistency is important. Gimme Shelter as heard on the album or on it's own is magic, same with Midnight Rambler, Monkey Man (except for the lyrics hehe) and so on.

It's not essential that every core band member should be on every track, the music doesn't call for that and it seems they are quite willing to acquiesce when the track requires it or someone else has a stronger idea on how a part should go etc.

The weirdness of let It Bleed is that we get so many tracks which only feature the four piece Rolling Stones and even the tracks featuring the third man, new or old, doesn't reslly give us either of those line ups in their fully formed and functioning way.

Hearing a load of tracks essentially recorded by four piece Rolling Stones all together without any real distinctive contribution from either Jones, Taylor makes for a weird, incomplete stones listening experience.

In essence a whole Rolling Stones album made up of the line up on Gimme Shelter still makes for ace listening, but it's strange listening as far as it being an album by The Rolling Stones.

Beggars Banquet treads a fine line, but I think there's enough of the full core band on the album to balance any of the variations of the core band set ups on it.

Funny that it's just you that voices my feelings about Let It Bleed so well. I always felt it misses something, however great the album is. But I was never able to put my finger on it, as we say it here. You did.

You two might have very different opinions about what it misses, though

Quote
His Majesty

Quote
kleermaker

Funny that it's just you that voices my feelings about Let It Bleed so well. I always felt it misses something, however great the album is. But I was never able to put my finger on it, as we say it here. You did.

The strongest third man tracks, Live With Me & You Got The Silver are made strange as far as true Rolling Stones listening experience goes due to one not featuring Bill on bass and the other not featuring Jagger on lead vocal.

Let It Bleed is a very true representation of the band during the time in which the majority of the album was made though. Jones was useless and Taylor had yet to integrate fully.

It is essential within the context of the so called big 4 and also their bigger picture story becaue of the strength of the songs, but also becauee it actually does capture and present the band in transition. So even if it has a strange feel as a whole, it is still mostly very powerful and interesting stuff.

That the essentially four piece Autumn 1968 - Spring 1969 Rolling Stones could produce such strong music is testament to their musicianship and musical connection.

Neither LWM or YGTS are typical "third man tracks". The "third man" simply isn't that important for those tracks, imo. Taylor's rhythm guitar is cool for the first minute or so on LWM, though.

Well, here my Top 5 stones-Albums:

1. aftermath (UK)

2. Out of our heads (UK)

3. the rolling stones 1.LP decca

4. he Rolling stones no.2

5. Let it Bleed

Quote
DandelionPowderman

Neither LWM or YGTS are typical "third man tracks". The "third man" simply isn't that important for those tracks, imo. Taylor's rhythm guitar is cool for the first minute or so on LWM, though.

Exactly!

Let It Bleed doesn't feature strong, distinctive third man contributions as part of core five piece band like there are on Beggars Banquet and Sticky Fingers. It feels and sounds weird to have them on Let It Bleed, but not featured in any strong or distinctive way.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2014-01-02 19:20 by His Majesty.

Quote
Havo
Well, here my Top 5 stones-Albums:

1. aftermath (UK)

I love your consistency!

I think it should be counted as the Big 5.
I love all the songs in this great album which contains wonderful Mick Taylor's guitar playing and solos.

Quote
DandelionPowderman

Quote
kleermaker


Funny that it's just you that voices my feelings about Let It Bleed so well. I always felt it misses something, however great the album is. But I was never able to put my finger on it, as we say it here. You did.

You two might have very different opinions about what it misses, though

A distinctive third man is a distinctive third man.

As an experiment/new years resolution I am putting my real Rolling Stones point of view to bed for 2014. I think it's best for my own sanity as well as the sanity and patience of others. haha.

I must say, listening to the Kansas City live recording with Richards, Taylor & Wood has done much to ease my obsession with this real thing stuff. I'm placing it third in my post Jones fav live stones recordings. Hyde Park being 1st, Ya-Ya's being 2nd.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2014-01-02 19:37 by His Majesty.

Quote
runaway
October 2002- Musicians and Mojo Writers determine, once and for all, the 10 Greatest Stones Albums Of All Time!
1-Exile On Main Street.
2-Let It Bleed.
3.Beggars Banquet.
4-Sticky Fingers.
5-Their Satanic Majesties Request.
6-Aftermath.
7-Some Girls.
8-Goats Head Soup.
9-The Rolling Stones.
19-Tattoo You.

Hmm... sometimes the 'experts' get something right... I would put the same albums in my top ten, not exactly in the same order, but the albums making top four and then 5-10 are 'right' ones (and the exact positions are just semantics)...

Great to see SATANIC MAJESTIES getting such a big recognition.

- Doxa

Quote
His Majesty

As an experiment/new years resolution I am putting my real Rolling Stones point of view to bed for 2014. I think it's best for my own sanity as well as the sanity and patience of others. haha.

I must say, listening to the Kansas City live recording with Richards, Taylor & Wood has done much to ease my obsession with this real thing stuff. I'm placing it third in my post Jones fav live stones recordings. Hyde Park being 1st, Ya-Ya's being 2nd.

- Doxa

Quote
Doxa

Quote
runaway
October 2002- Musicians and Mojo Writers determine, once and for all, the 10 Greatest Stones Albums Of All Time!
1-Exile On Main Street.
2-Let It Bleed.
3.Beggars Banquet.
4-Sticky Fingers.
5-Their Satanic Majesties Request.
6-Aftermath.
7-Some Girls.
8-Goats Head Soup.
9-The Rolling Stones.
19-Tattoo You.

Hmm... sometimes the 'experts' get something right... I would put the same albums in my top ten, not exactly in the same order, but the albums making top four and then 5-10 are 'right' ones (and the exact positions are just semantics)...

Great to see SATANIC MAJESTIES getting such a big recognition.

- Doxa

Ignoring the order, that is a very fair and seemingly just list. The UK Between The Buttons just misses out due to not including Night and Ruby. Aftermath's strength is that it doesn't really suffer from not having the big related singles on it like Buttons kinda does. Buttons is still an interesting album, but perhaps outside of any essential defining best albums kind of list.



Edited 3 time(s). Last edit at 2014-01-02 20:09 by His Majesty.

Quote
Doxa

Quote
runaway
October 2002- Musicians and Mojo Writers determine, once and for all, the 10 Greatest Stones Albums Of All Time!
1-Exile On Main Street.
2-Let It Bleed.
3.Beggars Banquet.
4-Sticky Fingers.
5-Their Satanic Majesties Request.
6-Aftermath.
7-Some Girls.
8-Goats Head Soup.
9-The Rolling Stones.
19-Tattoo You.

Hmm... sometimes the 'experts' get something right... I would put the same albums in my top ten, not exactly in the same order, but the albums making top four and then 5-10 are 'right' ones (and the exact positions are just semantics)...

Great to see SATANIC MAJESTIES getting such a big recognition.

- Doxa

Thanks-I'm a magazine collector.

Quote
runaway
October 2002- Musicians and Mojo Writers determine, once and for all, the 10 Greatest Stones Albums Of All Time!
1-Exile On Main Street.
2-Let It Bleed.
3.Beggars Banquet.
4-Sticky Fingers.
5-Their Satanic Majesties Request.
6-Aftermath.
7-Some Girls.
8-Goats Head Soup.
9-The Rolling Stones.
19-Tattoo You.

Swap Brussels Affair for Satanic Majesties, and this would be my list.

Quote
His Majesty

Quote
DandelionPowderman

Quote
kleermaker


Funny that it's just you that voices my feelings about Let It Bleed so well. I always felt it misses something, however great the album is. But I was never able to put my finger on it, as we say it here. You did.

You two might have very different opinions about what it misses, though

A distinctive third man is a distinctive third man.

As an experiment/new years resolution I am putting my real Rolling Stones point of view to bed for 2014. I think it's best for my own sanity as well as the sanity and patience of others. haha.

I must say, listening to the Kansas City live recording with Richards, Taylor & Wood has done much to ease my obsession with this real thing stuff. I'm placing it third in my post Jones fav live stones recordings. Hyde Park being 1st, Ya-Ya's being 2nd.

In a Las Vegas thread I remarked in the passing to your highly remarkable oneliner

Quote
Witness

Quote
His Majesty
The 50th and counting tour is something different from the Vegas era.

It is interesting above almost anything that you of all people would see a difference from a "Las Vegas era" tag.
........................................

but I went on with something I was engaged in. Then I missed the opportunity to, what I very much would like now instead to, ask:

As an introduction, what do you, His Majesty, implicate when YOU employ the term "Las Vegas Era"?
But all the more interesting now, especially what did you have in mind when you told that you found "the 50th and counting" tour to be something different from that? And now you to the same effect even put the Hyde Park concert first among your post-Jones Stones live recordings.

Quote
drbryant

Quote
runaway
October 2002- Musicians and Mojo Writers determine, once and for all, the 10 Greatest Stones Albums Of All Time!
1-Exile On Main Street.
2-Let It Bleed.
3.Beggars Banquet.
4-Sticky Fingers.
5-Their Satanic Majesties Request.
6-Aftermath.
7-Some Girls.
8-Goats Head Soup.
9-The Rolling Stones.
19-Tattoo You.

Swap Brussels Affair for Satanic Majesties, and this would be my list.

Yes I was thinking as well bout Live albums: Get Yer Ya Ya's Out or Brussels?
I think that the enthousiasm for the Satanics album has grown in time, but I loved at the time and still do.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2014-01-02 20:20 by runaway.

If one wants to consider LIB a transition album that's fine because it is but BAB was a transitional album as well (and just how much was Jones involved with on BB? Even that could be considered transitional in that aspect - he was already on his way out in terms of contribution). Of course LIB and BAB are as far apart as they could ever be regarding songwriting and the recording of the songs. What if they had included Jiving Sister Fanny on LIB? Taylor is on that and it's awesome. Would that have made it that much less of a transition album?

But to say that LIB isn't up to par with the others of The Big 4 is ridiculous. Monkey Man isn't up to snuff? That's whack. The only reason anyone can say anything about Midnight Rambler being whatever on LIB is strictly because of the GYYYO version which is better. As brilliant as EOMS is it has more duds on it than any of the other albums of that era due to it having so many songs, of course. With so many people doing things on EOMS and what Taylor didn't do (or is hardly heard of due to the mixing of some songs) on EOMS could be used as another example of the Stones in trasition. Or more the culmination of what they had done to that point. Plus the fact that there were SF leftovers put on EOMS.

I get people wanting to include GYYYO as part of the group but it's a "live" album. I don't consider it as part of the studio albums strcitly for that matter. Perhaps if they had released a live album from the EOMS tour or even the GHS tour there could be more conversation about how good GYYYO is but it's limited to the time. It will always remain their best live album sans any of the officially released bootlegs.

To reflect that MOJO top ten, and to get back to the topic of this fascinating thread, I think the argument against GOATS HEAD SOUP not changing the BIG4 to the BIG5 is that there are three other albums I think equally justified to make the fifth best album position.

One could argue that SATANIC MAJESTIES - their first clear album as a serious artistic statement - was the route to the big four (their artistic peak) as much GOATS HEAD SOUP was a way out of there. Which is more important? Going in or out? Their most ambitious album ever, and a real gem anyone to know what 'psychedelia' really was all about if taken seriously. Not for beginners though.

Then SOME GIRLS is an obvious 'late day' peak - their most important album since EXILE, after the mid-70's low period, and a favourite of many, many Stones fans. Damn coherent, re-inventive album with some excellent, even classical songs.

AFTERMATH is their probably their most important album ever, and a claim for artistic independency, and took the band, after some hit singles, seriously to the class of The Beatles and Dylan of the biggest original voices of the day. Still such a fresh air to hear, the Swingin' London put in music. Their natural musicianship have never flowered so beautifully and effortlessly as it does here.

The next would be their first, strong testament of the hottest r&b band of London, and TATTOO YOU, their last claim for musical greatness and memorability, but I wouldn't quite rank these albums to the class of the four above mentioned.

- Doxa



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2014-01-02 20:40 by Doxa.

Hmmm. Good point Doxa. There are moments on TSMR that point towards the future sonically but not songwriting wise. To me anyway. It's certainly an in-between album for them, a one off for lack of a better term, more so than BEWTEEN THE BUTTONS is, which was more of a 'we're spent' album. TSMR reveals them leaning towards a heavier kind of rock'n'roll with 2000 Man and Citadel that they would expand on with JJF and SFM and go forward with with songs like Gimme Shelter, Midnight Rambler, Live With Me, Brown Sugar, Sway and on... a new norm.

On GHS it's sonically worse (which I love ha ha) in ways than EXILE and it's songwriting is a bit more... I dunno. Relaxed? Not as good? Certainly not as intense. There are some, depending on how one likes the songs, that could be arguably included as being 'as good' as anything from The Big 4 but even that is probably a weak point. As great as Coming Down Again is how can that realistically fit in with anything from 68-72? None of the GHS songs fit in.

In reality to their discography though the GHS songs are not as good as the 68-72 ones. GHS and IORR are very similar in ways and are a double isolation of their discography in a similar way to how SG, ER and U are similar in terms of sonicness and production. I love most of the songs on GHS but they could never be included in a best of, in strict era-ness, a 68-72 compilaiton. They simply don't fit.

It will always be the weakest of the Jimmy Miller albums. Funny way to call it that considering how he is held in such high esteem with the Stones - as he should be. I would call GHS a transitional album as well - a definite moving away from what they were doing. Listening to GHS and IORR back to back reveals that. Yet fascinating to listen to GHS, IORR, BAB and SG in a row - wow, what the HELL!!!???

Quote
His Majesty

Quote
DandelionPowderman

Quote
kleermaker


Funny that it's just you that voices my feelings about Let It Bleed so well. I always felt it misses something, however great the album is. But I was never able to put my finger on it, as we say it here. You did.

You two might have very different opinions about what it misses, though

A distinctive third man is a distinctive third man.

As an experiment/new years resolution I am putting my real Rolling Stones point of view to bed for 2014. I think it's best for my own sanity as well as the sanity and patience of others. haha.

I must say, listening to the Kansas City live recording with Richards, Taylor & Wood has done much to ease my obsession with this real thing stuff. I'm placing it third in my post Jones fav live stones recordings. Hyde Park being 1st, Ya-Ya's being 2nd.

LOL! You still have some catching up to do, though

Jones was more interested, involved and better able to contribute in spring 1968 than he was in spring 1969. This is reflected in the music on Beggars Banquet even though it treads a fine line. There's enough third man contribution to stop it from being too much of an album made by a core four piece stones. That line is also treaded very finley due to Keith playing two key basslines on the album.

Had Let It Bleed featured Taylor contributing distinctivley on, for example, Love In Vain, then yes, I think that would alter the sound and feel of the album, atleast the A side. The inclusion of Cooder - Love On Vain, but also Cooder - Sister Morphine would really have made it sound and feel odd. Viewed as a potential core band, that would have been like 4 variations of the stones within the space of 10 or so songs.

The inclusion of Cooder - Sister Morphine on Sticky Fingers is totally eased due to the sheer quality and quantity of actual core five peiece band tracks.

Beggars Banquet is the last studio album made by the Jones era band, Sticky Fingers is the first studio album made by the Taylor era band. Let It Bleed sits inbetween with the transition from one to the other present.

Let It Bleed is solid proof that the four piece Rolling Stones were still an effective, creative band. However, is something that some how feels incomplete as far as a whole album by The Rolling Stones.

BB is a transitional album - just as much as LIB - much due to it being a "guitar album" where Keith where totally in charge, just like on LIB.

Secondly, because they found back to their blues and folky roots, after dabbling with experimental pop and psychedelia.

But perhaps the most important transitional album might be TSMR. That's when Keith found his guitar sound which made the albums you call the big four.

Quote
DandelionPowderman

LOL! You still have some catching up to do, though

Kinda.

I think bootlegs like Brussels Affair will for ever give me a sore head though. There's something about the combination of the playing and guitar tones that just irritates me.

Had the Richards, Taylor & Wood mashup took place during the earlier ampeg eras I might have got a sore head from that bootleg too.

Quote
DandelionPowderman
BB is a transitional album - just as much as LIB

Nah, there's too much distinctive to the third man contributions.

The things you are focusing on are part of the evolution of the first professional incarnation of The Rolling Stones.

Let It Bleed marks the transition from the past in to the future. Get Yer Ya-Ya's Out/Sticky Fingers is the arrival and completion of that process.



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 2014-01-02 21:59 by His Majesty.

Quote
His Majesty

Quote
DandelionPowderman
BB is a transitional album - just as much as LIB

Nah, there's too much distinctive to the third man contributions.

Not guitar-wise, and it's mainly a rock/blues/folk album.

I agree about some songs, though, like JSP and NE. But let's face it, those are pretty deep cuts. On DD I've always wondered who played the harp(s), and that says a lot about the influence of "the third man" on that number...