just wondering what peoples perception of the rolling stones were when they were getting interested in them, but hadnt yet heard the majority of the back catalogue, and having then heard almost all thier songs, was that perception justified, were they better than what you thought they would be, different to what you expected or much the same.

in my own experience, i listened to music since about 1974 when i was 5, my mother had the radio on every morning before we went to school, so i got to know different bands, then i became a regular viewer of top of the pops, but even as i grew up, i never really had heard of the rolling stones music although as time passed i knew the band had existed.

By the time i was in my teens in the early 80,s i had no idea they were touring or even still made records, there was little in the music media, that told me this and it wasnt till around 1987 i bought my first tape, love you live, up till this point i had seen them in clips on a programme called the rock and roll years and thought they looked different to other bands, they had this cool attitude and visually looked superb, about this time i realized they had been called the grestest rock and roll band in the world and wanted eventually to find out what gave them this title.

my perception of the band at this early moment just prior to buying my first tape was that they were into rock and roll in the 60,s, to heavy rock in the 70,s and also thought they had quit in the 70,s.

fast forward nearly 29 years and i realize how different they really were from what i percieved, and so much better than i ever had imagined. i just didnt realize one band could hold my interest for this amount of time, didnt know at that time how different many songs could be from each other, how many styles and genres of music was produced and also that today they would still be going and be ever so popular having clocked up 54 years in existence.

an amazing journey, and one that i never seen coming.

whats everybody elses experience of discovering the band.

No expectations... I discovered the Stones in 1970 hearing Little Queenie, the single from GYYO. I was 9 years old. Thanks to the Stones, I discovered Chuck Berry and all the blues greats. And fantastic music from the Stones themselves, especially the next couple of albums. I had no expectations and I got a lot from them

No expectations currently. They grabbed me with 12x5, Rolling Stones Now, Out of Our Heads, Aftermath, Beggar's, Bleed, parts of Sticky and almost all of Exile. Everything since is cherry picked with the exception of side two of Tattoo You which is a groove from beginning to end. They were my main group to listen to for years. But, now they and selected songs are just a part of the music mix. They should fulfill their own expectations of just what the RS are. When they do, they'll possibly fulfill ours.

I first heard 'em when I was four. I didn't know what expectations were at the time. But, if I did, I'd say they well exceeded any reasonable expectations. Would it have been reasonable to expect 50-plus years of musical enjoyment?

Of course they did. They exceeded all expectations.

Quite simply the greatest band that's ever walked the planet and I don't think we will ever see another band like them.

Nate

Question will be answered with a resounding Yes ... I listened yesterday evening to Aftermath a couple of three times ... it's as good now as it was in 1966 ...

2 1 2 0

Hellyeah! More than exceeded! Like no other can!
(They didn't have a back catalog yet when I first heard them, but anyway!)

YESk

It were the early 80s, when my life was enriched with getting to know the Stones.
Strange as it might seem in hindsight, Emotional Rescue caught my attention, followed
by She's so cold. I'd heard only of the name of the band before that (mainly because
the blond older sister of one of my friends was wearing a jacket with the name on the back).
The album ER already contained many surprises; how could it be the same band that sang
Indian Girl, Summer Romance, All about you as the band with those two singles?

The journey took another turn when I bought a "greatest hits" record, that was High Tide
and Green Grass. What a great collection of tunes, but how could As tears go by and
Lady Jane be written by the same guys as those songs from ER? And what about the exitement
of Satisfaction and Paint it, Black?
My third album was Get yer ya-ya's out! Confusion again. All these heavy guitars, pumping
rhythmes, brutal vocals.

No need to say, my expectations were never fixed about this band. Diversity, that was
what this band was about. When Tattoo you came out, my first "new" album, my expectations
were confirmed. The glorious diversity was all there again.

An amazing journey, like buttons67 called it. Yes, over the last 35 years they never
failed to amaze me, discovering both published and unpublished musical adventures.

Just as long as the guitar plays, let it steal your heart away



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 2016-04-13 11:04 by marcovandereijk.

I started to listen to music in the early 80's, so most music was terrible but I didn't know it yet. First British ska, which was okay (until I found out about the original ska from Jamaica, which was much better), then punk which was occasionally fun but often simplistic, then new-wave, which was more often than not pretentious, humourless and dull, and hardrock, which was silly. Meanwhile, "commercial mainstream" music was something me and my friends rejected. So, the Stones were out. Then I got interested in blues music, and by chance I listened to the first album of the Stones. It inmediately hit me, especially Mona, but the entire record: the sound of the guitars and harmonica and Mick's voice. From there on, I had a long way to go, like an explorer in a new continent, from album to album, a fantastic journey, which indeed was much better than my expectations. The first real, deep, disappointment (but by then I was completely hooked to the Stones anyway), was when "Dirty Work" came out, and a bit later Mick's solo song "Let's Work". It was bloody embarrassing, but it couldn't destroy my lasting love for all the great albums they had done before.

I was 5 when Satisfaction came out and I've been a fan ever since. But it was Ya Yas that made a true fanatic out of me at age 10 and I've been hooked ever since. I do recall being let down at times, like when I first heard Fool To Cry, thinking, "Is this the same band that made Ya Ya's?" Alas, such songs proved to have a sneaky way of growing on me...and making me a fan all the more. Yes, I'll admit their peak years are now past, but yes - they have very well lived up to my expectations! God bless the Stones!

As a kid that grew up on LET IT BLEED, GYYYO! and HOT ROCKS, the first album I found myself seeking out on my own was TATTOO YOU thanks to hearing Start Me Up on AM radio and some friends that had the album already. Around 1983 I had heard Doo Doo Doo Doo Dooooooo on the radio a few times while riding the bus and no one seemed to know what LP it was on.

UNDERCOVER came out, I heard the horns in Undercover Of The Night on the radio and thought, oh, it must be on that album.

So I got the album. Awesome album cover. Got home, put it on, listened to the whole album. No Doo Doo Doo Duh Dih Doo Doooooo. That was disappointing. My expectations were bombed. But I figured it out after talking to someone a few years older than me (I even sang the horn bit and he said, Yeah, I know that song - Heartbreaker - it's on GOATS HEAD SOUP, and managed to get GOATS HEAD SOUP within a few weeks).

Once I was over the shock of Doo Doo Doo Doo Doo Doo Duh Doooooo not being on U I really started to like Feel On Baby and Tie Me Up, She Was Hot and All The Way Down. When finally seeing the videos for UOTN and She Was Hot and eventually Too Much Blood, I was sold: they were able to make the videos reflect the album. I had spent that previous summer mowing lawns and had a Walkman that I made a tape of various LOVE YOU LIVE tracks so getting U was a breath of fresh air and seemingly quite a mystery that it was the same band.

So I suppose you could say my expectations grew with he album.




But talk about a let down... hell, I will:

When I heard Harlem Shuffle on the radio a few years later I thought, cool, they have a new album coming out and if it sounds like this it'll be a treat!

When I went to the record store and grabbed DIRTY WORK I almost put it back.

What a mistake that was to purchase that piece of shit: after bringing it home and unwrapping it and seeing the horrendous handwriting for the credits and the horrible incredibly bad cartoon drawing and then hearing the album?

EXPECTATIONS DESTROYED.

No wonder Rolling Stone magazine praised STEEL WHEELS.

Quote
buttons67
just wondering what peoples perception of the rolling stones were when they were getting interested in them, but hadnt yet heard the majority of the back catalogue, and having then heard almost all thier songs, was that perception justified, were they better than what you thought they would be, different to what you expected or much the same.

in my own experience, i listened to music since about 1974 when i was 5, my mother had the radio on every morning before we went to school, so i got to know different bands, then i became a regular viewer of top of the pops, but even as i grew up, i never really had heard of the rolling stones music although as time passed i knew the band had existed.

By the time i was in my teens in the early 80,s i had no idea they were touring or even still made records, there was little in the music media, that told me this and it wasnt till around 1987 i bought my first tape, love you live, up till this point i had seen them in clips on a programme called the rock and roll years and thought they looked different to other bands, they had this cool attitude and visually looked superb, about this time i realized they had been called the grestest rock and roll band in the world and wanted eventually to find out what gave them this title.

my perception of the band at this early moment just prior to buying my first tape was that they were into rock and roll in the 60,s, to heavy rock in the 70,s and also thought they had quit in the 70,s.

fast forward nearly 29 years and i realize how different they really were from what i percieved, and so much better than i ever had imagined. i just didnt realize one band could hold my interest for this amount of time, didnt know at that time how different many songs could be from each other, how many styles and genres of music was produced and also that today they would still be going and be ever so popular having clocked up 54 years in existence.

an amazing journey, and one that i never seen coming.

whats everybody elses experience of discovering the band.

No, they FAR surpassed them

yes and they still far exced my expectations !!!!!!!!!!

If you're a MUSIC fan, the Rolling Stones should have exceeded ALL EXPECTATIONS on all levels! They are still touring after 52 years, they are older gents who can still play LIVE, and for over 2 1/4 hours every show! Their catalog is mind-blowing! On a personal level, I cannot imagine life without the Stones.

We are spoiled. We have been lucky.They have far exceeded expectations.Appreciate them, nothing lasts forever.Stoned since '64.

Simply the the greatest rock and roll band in the world. The best live show experience for over 50 years.

Was 16 in 1977 when a friend introduced me to them -- he an 8-track tape of Hot Rocks and we drove around for hours listening to that.
Compared to the hard rock of the time -- Zep, Foghat, other crap bands -- the Stones not only rocked but they had melodies and musicianship.
About that time I started listening to old Kinks and Who and became sort of a 60s snob and only bought albums from that era.
The kids in school derided Miss You as disco Stones, but I liked Shattered and When the Whip comes down, but I was too busy listening to Beggar's Banquet and Exile to get into Some Girls very much.
I remember hearing Emotional Rescue when it came out and thinking right away, this is a departure, but it sounds like the Stones.
I bought TY and Undercover -- liked them well enough but they couldn't compare to the classic albums. I tried to get into the '81 tour but it wasn't a very good one, imo, probably the nadir of the band. They looked unhappy and overwhelmed.
Dirty Work was dreadful and I just wrote them off at that point. I liked Keith's solo albums, though.
I saw them on the Voodoo Lounge tour -- was impressed that Keith was running around on stage, from some reason I thought he was an old man barely with us -- but it was a stadium and I didn't really get into it as much as I thought.
I bought Bridges to Babylon and liked it. I liked You're Not the Only One.
Haven't seen them since '94, but their playing on stage seems to have gotten better over the years. Less exciting, yes, but the band is more organized and professional.
Every now and then I'll put on Exile and be transported. Or Beast of Burden will come on the radio and I'll be grooving to Keith's layered guitars and Charlie's skips and starts.
Also I find them to be talented and interesting people and I've enjoyed reading about them over the years.

Correx -- saw the Steel Wheels tour stop in Chapel Hill, NC.

And they still do.

Quote
wonderboy
Was 16 in 1977 when a friend introduced me to them -- he an 8-track tape of Hot Rocks and we drove around for hours listening to that.
Compared to the hard rock of the time -- Zep, Foghat, other crap bands -- the Stones not only rocked but they had melodies and musicianship.
About that time I started listening to old Kinks and Who and became sort of a 60s snob and only bought albums from that era.
The kids in school derided Miss You as disco Stones, but I liked Shattered and When the Whip comes down, but I was too busy listening to Beggar's Banquet and Exile to get into Some Girls very much.
I remember hearing Emotional Rescue when it came out and thinking right away, this is a departure, but it sounds like the Stones.
I bought TY and Undercover -- liked them well enough but they couldn't compare to the classic albums. I tried to get into the '81 tour but it wasn't a very good one, imo, probably the nadir of the band. They looked unhappy and overwhelmed.
Dirty Work was dreadful and I just wrote them off at that point. I liked Keith's solo albums, though.
I saw them on the Voodoo Lounge tour -- was impressed that Keith was running around on stage, from some reason I thought he was an old man barely with us -- but it was a stadium and I didn't really get into it as much as I thought.
I bought Bridges to Babylon and liked it. I liked You're Not the Only One.
Haven't seen them since '94, but their playing on stage seems to have gotten better over the years. Less exciting, yes, but the band is more organized and professional.
Every now and then I'll put on Exile and be transported. Or Beast of Burden will come on the radio and I'll be grooving to Keith's layered guitars and Charlie's skips and starts.
Also I find them to be talented and interesting people and I've enjoyed reading about them over the years.

Nice post !!