... i cant anaylsis it,,, i just know black and blue is never far from me, strange, cause no one would consider it 'there' best body of work,,, i like the place it puts me, theres a few real songs there, , i gravitate to there mid tempo stuff... and once again, ill never forget seeing the billboard for the first time, and the roar it caused wayyyy back then...
georgelicks Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > I like the record, it sounds fantastic in > comparison with IORR.
Yes and songs like IYCRM would have been even better with that new production but TWFN is produced just right I think. B&B was the last LP I bought cause it was so hard to find in the late 80s.
Were they on Sanibel Island for any reason other than the cover photos? Always seemed odd to me that the whole band would make that trek for that sole purpose.
Glam Descendant Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Were they on Sanibel Island for any reason other > than the cover photos? Always seemed odd to me > that the whole band would make that trek for that > sole purpose.
According to Rolling Stone at the time, they went there for the photos.
I always had the feeling that they put more effort into the cover than the they did the music on that one.
and the music.....well, sounded very uninspired to me at the time in spring of '76.....but 31 years later this album really sounds nice...so much better then ABB or Bridges
ablett Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > All i can say is thank god for 'Some Girls'...... > > Roppy old album!
Always thought that Some Girls is one of their worst. Never did like songs without great intros. Beast Of Burden is a great song though. To bad the rest of it is just terrible. Give me A Bigger Bang anyday.
Black & Blue is one of the Stones album which means little too me. I own it, like some of the tunes and may even play it once a year, but I'm just not attached to it in anyway.
It's not from an era that particulary interests me to be honest. I was a Brian era fan initially, then learned to love the Taylor years and truthfully, am far more interested in their 89-present activities and tours than what they were churning out in the mid-late 1970's.
What would have happened if the woman in bondage depicted in the ad for Black & Blue (with a tagline something along the lines of "I'm black and blue from the Rolling Stones and I love it") had been featured on the cover of the album?
Maybe the album would have become an icon of the band's nastiness, and that would have given it more attention.
Beffars, Let It Bleed, Sticky, Exile, Goats and IORR all have songs with lyrics that some found scandalous. By those standards, Black and Blue was a little tame. And with Some Girls, the Stones got people like Jesse Jackson upset with the lyrics of that album's title track.
Well no one made a big deal about "Hey, Negrita." They could have easily done so as they did with "Brown Sugar." Also a line like "I'm gonna cut your balls, boy" could have generated controversy if anyone noticed, but they didn't. Ditto "Short and Curlies" on IORR. Hell, "Melody" could have come under fire as much as "Crazy Mama" and "Hand of Fate." Its actually quite a violent album, but the music doesn't seem dark at all in spite of the lyrics. I like the album and always have. I also find it easier to accept its shortcomings knowing what was around the corner and that there wouldn't be a seven year wait between albums like we had between BRIDGES and A BIGGER BANG.
HelterSkelter Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > ...inside photo SNC? Some kind of designer > bellbottoms , Hugh Hefner playboy mansion COKE > storage jackets straight out of STUDIO 54 - Rather > forget me boy.... plus (you know this) the oldest, > chessiest trick in still photography, time -lapse, > well, maybe not as bad as the soft focus filters > Bobby Guch was using on his Penthouse models in > the 70's..... but close, VERY CLOSE.... BTW, see > the new - da da - 21.1 megapixel Canon DSLR for > $7999.00? Blows everything else OUT OF THE WATER > (check Calumet Photo).... effing MIND BLOWER me > photog friend !!!! This is SERIOUS EQUIPMENT, NASA > stuff - lol.......
Actually the cover to Black And Blue is a cop out...there's a MUCH tougher cover shot of the boys...I'm looking all over for it and I can't find it...where they are in the same positions but they look so much more DUSTED and WASTED...and really awesome. Jagger looks completely fried in it...wonderful. I don't know why they chose this vanilla version.
Perhaps the great Rockman can find the 'alternate' cover. I remember seeing it several times and wondering to myself why the hell they went with the other one. Let's see if someone comes up with the alternate and you'll know what I mean...
BTW...I have the Canon 5D and the Nikon D200 and I'm blown away by what Helter writes regarding the new Canon...it sounds like a monster...
perhaps Rockman can find the 'alternate' cover......
Hey yeah Turd On Da Run...( geez man that's a mean name ta type )... Know that different "wasted" shot ya talking of but where is it...What book where????
YES! Excellent Erik_Snow...thanks a bunch! That's the one!
This picture should have been the cover to Black And Blue.
Look at that image...isn't that MUCH more effective and evocative in expressing what the Stones were all about circa 1976? THAT'S our favorite rock band...the boys in a Rock Hero haze. The original vanilla cover is so tame in comparison. It pales.