For information about how to use this forum please check out forum help and policies.
Quote
HairballQuote
keithsmanQuote
HairballQuote
keithsmanQuote
His MajestyQuote
Midnight Toker
The Stomes best records were with MT.
No they weren't.
Sticky Fingers
Exile
GHS
IORR
not the Stones best records surely these four in a row were their peak, four of the best in a row in 4 years.
Beggars Banquet (sans Taylor) is arguably better than all of those - definitely far better than the latter two imo.
And while I would currently name Exile as the best, Beggars, Let it Bleed, and Sticky Fingers sometimes get the nod.
As great as MT was, not everything recorded in the studio from his era can be considered "the best".
Live performances are another story though - everything he touched turned into GOLD... ... (including the 50 and Counting shows)!
I agree, plus Beggars and Let It Bleed don't have Ronnie on them, and that's the point.
I thought your point was "four of the best in a row in 4 years" were Sticky Fingers, Exile, GHS, and IORR, and that those were "their peak" (failing to mention Beggars) - at least that's how it read to me.
But now that you cleared that up (?), I'd go so far to say that Some Girls is better than both GHS and IORR. Yes there are some great tunes on those two (some of which I prefer over anything on Some Girls),
and some of the solos from Taylor are exquisite and amongst his best, but as a whole album from start to finish as one complete piece - my vote goes to Some Girls, thanks in part to Ronnie's contributions.
Could be a personal attachment and the memories it evokes from when it was released in '78 when I was 15 (the soundtrack to the summer of '78, etc.), and obviously just my opinion, but if put on a desert island and only allowed to bring one of those three - Some Girls it is.
Quote
His Majesty
Life without Exile is fine and dandy.
Beggars, LIB, Sticky and Exile are all kind of the same thing. A formula was landed upon in 1968 and re used for the next few albums.
Beggars Banquet is the best one though because it's has the freshness of new found inspiration and it's by the actual Rolling Stones.
Taylor entered the Stones when they were at their full maturity. It is no coincidence that the best albums of that period were the first two SF and EOMS, the other two GHS and IORR are good albums but not the top. Ronnie entered the Stones when it seemed that the Stones were at the end, M. Taylor said in an interview that when he left the band he thought that the Stones would be finished anyway. Obviously, the contribution of Wood was different from that of Taylor, despite everything they did the best selling Stones album (Some Girls) and they managed to continue doing good music and great concerts and continued to have great success with the concerts.Quote
keithsmanQuote
HairballQuote
keithsmanQuote
HairballQuote
keithsmanQuote
His MajestyQuote
Midnight Toker
The Stomes best records were with MT.
No they weren't.
Sticky Fingers
Exile
GHS
IORR
not the Stones best records surely these four in a row were their peak, four of the best in a row in 4 years.
Beggars Banquet (sans Taylor) is arguably better than all of those - definitely far better than the latter two imo.
And while I would currently name Exile as the best, Beggars, Let it Bleed, and Sticky Fingers sometimes get the nod.
As great as MT was, not everything recorded in the studio from his era can be considered "the best".
Live performances are another story though - everything he touched turned into GOLD... ... (including the 50 and Counting shows)!
I agree, plus Beggars and Let It Bleed don't have Ronnie on them, and that's the point.
I thought your point was "four of the best in a row in 4 years" were Sticky Fingers, Exile, GHS, and IORR, and that those were "their peak" (failing to mention Beggars) - at least that's how it read to me.
But now that you cleared that up (?), I'd go so far to say that Some Girls is better than both GHS and IORR. Yes there are some great tunes on those two (some of which I prefer over anything on Some Girls),
and some of the solos from Taylor are exquisite and amongst his best, but as a whole album from start to finish as one complete piece - my vote goes to Some Girls, thanks in part to Ronnie's contributions.
Could be a personal attachment and the memories it evokes from when it was released in '78 when I was 15 (the soundtrack to the summer of '78, etc.), and obviously just my opinion, but if put on a desert island and only allowed to bring one of those three - Some Girls it is.
Sorry Hairball allow me to clarify, i meant that the four albums in a row with Taylor were a peak compared to the next activity with Wood. It was just in response to people saying the Stones are better with Wood. That was the point, i was making comparisons with albums Wood and Taylor played on, not albums before Taylor came along that were equally brilliant.
It's down to taste, if someone prefers the 5 year period of Black And Blue, Some Girls and Emotional Rescue to the 4 year period of Sticky Fingers , Exile, GHS and IORR that's cool, but the general consensus is that the Taylor period was a peak.
Obviously 64' to 69' was a peak too, but since Tattoo You its all been down hill creatively, Stones by numbers as Doxa says.
Quote
His Majesty
I used to love Exile, but in time I just got bored with it and blues rock in general. A too easily boring and overly glorified genre.
Quote
StoneageQuote
His Majesty
I used to love Exile, but in time I just got bored with it and blues rock in general. A too easily boring and overly glorified genre.
Funny, I never got bored with EOMS. And probably never will. But I got bored with blues epigonism.
That's why I never bought "Blue & Lonesome". I was bored with it even before listening to it...
Quote
keithsmanQuote
HairballQuote
keithsmanQuote
HairballQuote
keithsmanQuote
His MajestyQuote
Midnight Toker
The Stomes best records were with MT.
No they weren't.
Sticky Fingers
Exile
GHS
IORR
not the Stones best records surely these four in a row were their peak, four of the best in a row in 4 years.
Beggars Banquet (sans Taylor) is arguably better than all of those - definitely far better than the latter two imo.
And while I would currently name Exile as the best, Beggars, Let it Bleed, and Sticky Fingers sometimes get the nod.
As great as MT was, not everything recorded in the studio from his era can be considered "the best".
Live performances are another story though - everything he touched turned into GOLD... ... (including the 50 and Counting shows)!
I agree, plus Beggars and Let It Bleed don't have Ronnie on them, and that's the point.
I thought your point was "four of the best in a row in 4 years" were Sticky Fingers, Exile, GHS, and IORR, and that those were "their peak" (failing to mention Beggars) - at least that's how it read to me.
But now that you cleared that up (?), I'd go so far to say that Some Girls is better than both GHS and IORR. Yes there are some great tunes on those two (some of which I prefer over anything on Some Girls),
and some of the solos from Taylor are exquisite and amongst his best, but as a whole album from start to finish as one complete piece - my vote goes to Some Girls, thanks in part to Ronnie's contributions.
Could be a personal attachment and the memories it evokes from when it was released in '78 when I was 15 (the soundtrack to the summer of '78, etc.), and obviously just my opinion, but if put on a desert island and only allowed to bring one of those three - Some Girls it is.
Sorry Hairball allow me to clarify, i meant that the four albums in a row with Taylor were a peak compared to the next activity with Wood. It was just in response to people saying the Stones are better with Wood. That was the point, i was making comparisons with albums Wood and Taylor played on, not albums before Taylor came along that were equally brilliant.
It's down to taste, if someone prefers the 5 year period of Black And Blue, Some Girls and Emotional Rescue to the 4 year period of Sticky Fingers , Exile, GHS and IORR that's cool, but the general consensus is that the Taylor period was a peak.
Obviously 64' to 69' was a peak too, but since Tattoo You its all been down hill creatively, Stones by numbers as Doxa says.
Quote
Hairball
Actually your response was to His Majesty who thinks everything the Stones have accomplished after Brian left is fake ( ),
and who seemingly has no real stake in the Taylor vs. Wood debate - in other words, 'no Jones, no Stones'....lol
But never mind, now that you've clarified everything, your point is very clear.
Quote
Stoneage
Wood is a good but not great guitarist. But he fitted very well in with the band from the start. Image wise better than Taylor. I have never questioned Wood. A good choice at the time.
Quote
HairballQuote
keithsmanQuote
HairballQuote
keithsmanQuote
HairballQuote
keithsmanQuote
His MajestyQuote
Midnight Toker
The Stomes best records were with MT.
No they weren't.
Sticky Fingers
Exile
GHS
IORR
not the Stones best records surely these four in a row were their peak, four of the best in a row in 4 years.
Beggars Banquet (sans Taylor) is arguably better than all of those - definitely far better than the latter two imo.
And while I would currently name Exile as the best, Beggars, Let it Bleed, and Sticky Fingers sometimes get the nod.
As great as MT was, not everything recorded in the studio from his era can be considered "the best".
Live performances are another story though - everything he touched turned into GOLD... ... (including the 50 and Counting shows)!
I agree, plus Beggars and Let It Bleed don't have Ronnie on them, and that's the point.
I thought your point was "four of the best in a row in 4 years" were Sticky Fingers, Exile, GHS, and IORR, and that those were "their peak" (failing to mention Beggars) - at least that's how it read to me.
But now that you cleared that up (?), I'd go so far to say that Some Girls is better than both GHS and IORR. Yes there are some great tunes on those two (some of which I prefer over anything on Some Girls),
and some of the solos from Taylor are exquisite and amongst his best, but as a whole album from start to finish as one complete piece - my vote goes to Some Girls, thanks in part to Ronnie's contributions.
Could be a personal attachment and the memories it evokes from when it was released in '78 when I was 15 (the soundtrack to the summer of '78, etc.), and obviously just my opinion, but if put on a desert island and only allowed to bring one of those three - Some Girls it is.
Sorry Hairball allow me to clarify, i meant that the four albums in a row with Taylor were a peak compared to the next activity with Wood. It was just in response to people saying the Stones are better with Wood. That was the point, i was making comparisons with albums Wood and Taylor played on, not albums before Taylor came along that were equally brilliant.
It's down to taste, if someone prefers the 5 year period of Black And Blue, Some Girls and Emotional Rescue to the 4 year period of Sticky Fingers , Exile, GHS and IORR that's cool, but the general consensus is that the Taylor period was a peak.
Obviously 64' to 69' was a peak too, but since Tattoo You its all been down hill creatively, Stones by numbers as Doxa says.
Actually your response was to His Majesty who thinks everything the Stones have accomplished after Brian left is fake ( ),
and who seemingly has no real stake in the Taylor vs. Wood debate - in other words, 'no Jones, no Stones'....lol
But never mind, now that you've clarified everything, your point is very clear.
Quote
KeithNacho
During the Taylor years, Keith Richards was SO GOOD!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Quote
keithsmanQuote
KeithNacho
During the Taylor years, Keith Richards was SO GOOD!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
He was , but come on, he was still good in 78' 81' 82' 88' 89' 90' 92' 93' 98'
Quote
runrudolphQuote
keithsmanQuote
KeithNacho
During the Taylor years, Keith Richards was SO GOOD!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
He was , but come on, he was still good in 78' 81' 82' 88' 89' 90' 92' 93' 98'
Dont forget 2017 n 2018.
Jeroen
Quote
keithsman
Now i see what you mean Hairball, thanks for the heads up, i really had no idea, well in that case i agree with him , sorry to His Majesty.
Quote
His MajestyQuote
keithsman
Now i see what you mean Hairball, thanks for the heads up, i really had no idea, well in that case i agree with him , sorry to His Majesty.
Which bit do you agree with?
GHS although perhaps a bit weaker than the big guns before it does have a unique and emotive atmosphere about it.
IORR a peak? Hardly. That's things getting stale even with the melodic wonder in the band. The album opener essentially setting things up for what was to come.
It's only rock an roll, such an uninspiring statement of intent. No wonder Taylor left.
Quote
keithsman
Well i agree that from Beggars to Exile was their greatest Peak, but i was just taking the MT albums and noting they were a higher grade of albums creatively than in the period that followed with Wood.
Quote
His Majesty
Ronnie in 1969. Much aceness and would have been a great addition to the stones collective.
A wicked messenger with the ability to fly.
[www.youtube.com]
[www.youtube.com]
If the stones could be great with a dysfunctional Brian, they sure as hell would have been great with an inspired Ronnie.
Quote
keithsman
But that's just it, Ronnie became incredibly uninspired, he turned into the mother of yes men and continues to do so to this day.
We have all seen what he can do, but for decades we only witnessed it sparingly, basically drink came first until recently.
Quote
straycatuk
I find it painful to watch San Jose 99. It really does highlight how poor and out of it Ronnie got. He cleaned up just in time to cover for a fading Keith ( due to Arthritis, Accidents and drinking ). Both guitarists appeared sober last year and it was a major improvement .
Quote
Mathijs
Just to note on Exile: Keith's sparing partner for Exile was much more Nicky Hopkins than Taylor, who apart from some lead guitar is greatly missing from the album.
Mathijs