For information about how to use this forum please check out forum help and policies.
Quote
shadooby
Bigger Bang doesn't get enough love. It really was a great album for a bunch of old farts.
Quote
DandelionPowdermanQuote
Stoner72Quote
DandelionPowderman
Harlem Shuffle anyone? Could have been included on ANY Stones album without making the album poorer, imo.
Well that's setting the bar pretty low, isn't it?
No
Quote
FanOfGRARBITWQuote
shadooby
Bigger Bang doesn't get enough love. It really was a great album for a bunch of old farts.
Love it. I firmly believe that if ABB were recorded and released in the seventies, it would be considered a classic today!
Quote
stonehearted
Are you saying they only write good songs half the time?
Quote
treaclefingersQuote
MILKYWAY
Goat's Head Soup - by a country mile.
I've seen people try to include this and expand it to 'the Big Five'...not on my watch!
Quote
treaclefingersQuote
FanOfGRARBITWQuote
shadooby
Bigger Bang doesn't get enough love. It really was a great album for a bunch of old farts.
Love it. I firmly believe that if ABB were recorded and released in the seventies, it would be considered a classic today!
I agree...I think they also would have edited it to 10 or 11 songs which would have, as keith might say, "cut the crap".
That would have been an excellent album.
Quote
MILKYWAYQuote
treaclefingersQuote
MILKYWAY
Goat's Head Soup - by a country mile.
I've seen people try to include this and expand it to 'the Big Five'...not on my watch!
C'mon, treaclefingers, you know you like it.
Quote
treaclefingersQuote
stonehearted
Are you saying they only write good songs half the time?
If they only wrote good songs have the time, every one of their albums would be 5 star classics.
Batting 500 would be amazing. You're saying 'writing' half the time, not 'recording and releasing'.
Quote
stoneheartedQuote
treaclefingersQuote
stonehearted
Are you saying they only write good songs half the time?
If they only wrote good songs have the time, every one of their albums would be 5 star classics.
Batting 500 would be amazing. You're saying 'writing' half the time, not 'recording and releasing'.
Okay, I'll rephrase. Are you saying they only record and release good songs half the time? Or perhaps too many songs at the same time? That's my complaint about Exile. It should have been a single album, or broken up into separate albums. Of all the albums from 1964 to 1974, that's the one I listen to the least.
I think the reason they have been releasing longer albums in the last 20 years is not so much because of the CD era, but because the occasion of their getting together in a studio just becomes increasingly rare. With ABB, they must have figured that they'd better make it an hour's worth of songs and give people their money's worth--because they knew they would be spending the next 2 years on the road and at least 3 years off after that.
If they released a new album today, I think it would be the same approach. Because it's been so long since they recorded an album and because there might not be another occasion in the future to draw them together in the studio again, they would probably go all out and cram as much material as they could onto one disc. If they were still in the habit of recording an album every other year or so like they were up until Steel Wheels, then the output would be shorter albums with higher quality and better continuity, where 10 or 11 songs would really count rather than B-side quality material getting lost in the shuffle of 16 or 17 tracks clocking in at just over 60 minutes.
Quote
treaclefingersQuote
stoneheartedQuote
treaclefingersQuote
stonehearted
Are you saying they only write good songs half the time?
If they only wrote good songs have the time, every one of their albums would be 5 star classics.
Batting 500 would be amazing. You're saying 'writing' half the time, not 'recording and releasing'.
Okay, I'll rephrase. Are you saying they only record and release good songs half the time? Or perhaps too many songs at the same time? That's my complaint about Exile. It should have been a single album, or broken up into separate albums. Of all the albums from 1964 to 1974, that's the one I listen to the least.
I think the reason they have been releasing longer albums in the last 20 years is not so much because of the CD era, but because the occasion of their getting together in a studio just becomes increasingly rare. With ABB, they must have figured that they'd better make it an hour's worth of songs and give people their money's worth--because they knew they would be spending the next 2 years on the road and at least 3 years off after that.
If they released a new album today, I think it would be the same approach. Because it's been so long since they recorded an album and because there might not be another occasion in the future to draw them together in the studio again, they would probably go all out and cram as much material as they could onto one disc. If they were still in the habit of recording an album every other year or so like they were up until Steel Wheels, then the output would be shorter albums with higher quality and better continuity, where 10 or 11 songs would really count rather than B-side quality material getting lost in the shuffle of 16 or 17 tracks clocking in at just over 60 minutes.
OK, everything after you said Exile needed to be a single album became incoherent to me. It may just be that I blacked out.
Quote
Witness
You must have, treaclefingers, because the second paragraph of stonehearted's post before his latest catches the perspective perfectly.
And provided B-side quality on one hand is taken to be their rather high B-side quality really, and if on the other UNDERCOVER substitutes STEEL WHEELS in the text in the last paragraph, we get a mighty good glimpse there of where and why the career of the Stones arrived at crossroads.
Quote
Witness
There is only one other aspect that complicates your precept. Those rather high B-side quality songs have got one other characteristic. The resulting many songs are that good that fans disagree, which of them they will have, and which they would have wanted edited away. Then what?
Quote
sonomastone
between the buttons
Quote
treaclefingersQuote
DandelionPowdermanQuote
Stoner72Quote
DandelionPowderman
Harlem Shuffle anyone? Could have been included on ANY Stones album without making the album poorer, imo.
Well that's setting the bar pretty low, isn't it?
No
And yet it raised Dirty Work to a solid 2 star album!
Quote
Wry CooterQuote
sonomastone
between the buttons
X2. The Rolling Stones listen to the Kinks and I like it. And "Miss Amanda Jones" is one of their most underrated rockers -- whatta riff!
Quote
DandelionPowdermanQuote
treaclefingersQuote
DandelionPowdermanQuote
Stoner72Quote
DandelionPowderman
Harlem Shuffle anyone? Could have been included on ANY Stones album without making the album poorer, imo.
Well that's setting the bar pretty low, isn't it?
No
And yet it raised Dirty Work to a solid 2 star album!
Come on! You just love hating that album. 4 good out of 10 (a kind estimate) makes at least a solid 3...
Quote
treaclefingersQuote
DandelionPowdermanQuote
treaclefingersQuote
DandelionPowdermanQuote
Stoner72Quote
DandelionPowderman
Harlem Shuffle anyone? Could have been included on ANY Stones album without making the album poorer, imo.
Well that's setting the bar pretty low, isn't it?
No
And yet it raised Dirty Work to a solid 2 star album!
Come on! You just love hating that album. 4 good out of 10 (a kind estimate) makes at least a solid 3...
With every other album they've done a 6 or higher it makes it a very difficult album to go to whether you give it a 2 or 3.
To address your point, yes, I love hating that album...it humanizes them...even they can have a bad effort, and bounce back.
Quote
DandelionPowdermanQuote
treaclefingersQuote
DandelionPowdermanQuote
treaclefingersQuote
DandelionPowdermanQuote
Stoner72Quote
DandelionPowderman
Harlem Shuffle anyone? Could have been included on ANY Stones album without making the album poorer, imo.
Well that's setting the bar pretty low, isn't it?
No
And yet it raised Dirty Work to a solid 2 star album!
Come on! You just love hating that album. 4 good out of 10 (a kind estimate) makes at least a solid 3...
With every other album they've done a 6 or higher it makes it a very difficult album to go to whether you give it a 2 or 3.
To address your point, yes, I love hating that album...it humanizes them...even they can have a bad effort, and bounce back.
I love it when you turn serious, if only for a minute