Some posts of late like the ry cooder and the stones place in history got me thinking. were the Stones merely an above average pub rock blues band who were in the right place at the right time and meet the right people in the right place. and if circumstances were a wee bit different, their place in history might have been alongside the Animals, Them etc, just a thought ?

smile: that's like suggesting that Sinai was just another mountain.
the timing was perfect, of course, but the Stones are the genuine article.
destined. and we are the fortunate witnesses - say hallelujah

True, being in the right place at the right time may work for a while, but 45 years? There's something more going on there.

I was thinking about this the other day also. My thoughts are as follows.

To me The Stones were just another pretty talented "British Invasion" band, far behind The Beatles in my mind, even though they had a few admirable singles like Satisfaction and Jumpin Jack Flash. What eventually made me a serious fan was hearing Get Yer Ya Yas Out. I think when they canned Jones and hired Taylor they radically changed their sound to a much better place. Their studio recordings with Taylor sealed the deal. If Jones had stayed with them I don't think I would have been nearly as impressed.

>> ... I don't think I would have been nearly as impressed. <<

LoFL: that's what some people say about Sinai too :E
but we are blessed anyway. say hallelujah

I think it was once they started writing their own singles that they zoomed waaaay ahead of the opposition, & by the time of 'Paint It Black' (& 'Aftermath') none of the R&B-based groups could touch them.

As for Ya-Yas, I must be one of the few Stones fans who find it a little over-rated. Love the versions of the 1968-1969 material, but the Chuck Berry covers are a bit too ploddy for my liking (give me the speed-fueled energy of '65-'67 any day!).

Quote
King Snake
True, being in the right place at the right time may work for a while, but 45 years? There's something more going on there.

You're right. Ultimately it has to be the music that's carried them through.

I do sometimes think however that had they faded round about the time of many of their contemporaries from the early days they might well be doing the 'Solid Silver 60's' Cabaret & Supper circuit now like The Searchers, Troggs, Dave Dee etc.
Tix might be cheaper I suppose!

I'd agree with you if it weren't for one thing.

Mick Jagger.

[thepowergoats.com]

Some of you seem to completely underestimate the power of the Stones music and performance from the beginning. with sssoul summed it up perfectly.

While it's true that Eric Burdon, for example, had a compelling voice and manner The Animals were far from a great musical aggregation. Very uneven situation. Alan Price great musician but the rhythm section couldn't compare to Charlie and Bill. No strong original songs.

They had to be great to embark on the Journey they did.
We might not always like where they've pushed the boundaries to...but they've pushed them... and remained staggeringly successful for 45 years!
If the Stones had faded with all the other R&B inspired 60s bands...who knows how different much Rock music might be today.

I can follow to large extend, but they've written too many too great songs and albums to just put it away as being in the right place at the right time.

Jelle

No, they were not 'just another pub blues rock band". Right from the beginning they were unique, and seemingly, all the people who saw them in Richmond, and from the early days seem to share this opinion. Read that post from Norman Jopling in the other threat; he seems capture the magic of the band very well.See [www.iorr.org]. This is already opinion shared by many of their 'contemporaries' who were wittnessing them then: Eric Clapton, Pete Townshend, Ronnie Wood... For this very reason - the magic in Richmond - it looks like all the other London cats of their generation seem to be 'secondary' to them, and think of them 'bigger' or head above all the rest. They made an enermous impact then. It is true that Jagger/Richard material would put the band into a higher level, to more realize its potentia, but the point is that the band was amazing even without THAT material yet. To this very day the secret of the band is there in that unique chemistry and the noise these characters make together. These guys just click in a way plus they have fronting them the most exciting performer England has never brought.

But of course, their success is a series of lucky incidencies and contingencies. And the idea of being in right place in a right time applies into every story of success (read, for example, Dylan's biography or watch the Scorsese documentary). The biggest mames just happen to turn those incidencies into a story of great talent and choice, and make them look necessary and natural choices of fate. If you ask the thing from Jagger, I think he might tell you a story of real hard work and dedication. (I think one of the biggest talents of Mick and Keith is to hang around with right people in a right time: Brian, Gomelsky, ALO, Klein, Mick Taylor, Ronnie Wood, Cohl... the list is a huge one.)

- Doxa



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2008-08-06 11:07 by Doxa.

Quote
with sssoul
smile: that's like suggesting that Sinai was just another mountain.

Great one.

JumpingKentFlash

<I'd agree with you if it weren't for one thing.

Mick Jagger.>

Two things: Mick Jagger and Keith Richards. Some people are born into this. They are, for sure.

Strange that you should post this Nanker coz only on Monday (now renamed DBTday)I was in Ed's diner in London eating my Hotdog, onions and fries for Lunch and House of the Rising Sun came on the Jukey and I couldn't help but think that a) it's a great version by them and b) What if the Stones had recorded it instead and c) why aren't the Animals as big as the Stones. Then I realised something it's down to ability, balls and being the the right band at the time to counterpoint the Beatles.

NickB

You can't always get what you want.....

www.myspace.com/thesonkings

Twas a blessed(or should that be cursed?) union from the start... Hallelujah!!!

Even their earliest recordings have something that the other crop of British R 'n' B groups don't have, lots of other bands used top session players on their recordings and they still disappeared, but the stones had the magic!

I must admit this post was a bit of a "wind up" but there was a serious point" The stones had a window of opportunity in that massive cultural sea change and they had the goods at the time, both on record and live, and indeed singles and albums. pick any 5 or 6 post 7ts albums and they wouldn't have had the impact.
conversely should the stones record an album as good as something from that period it also would not have the same impact. not that they will of course, and i don't believe we even have to right to expect one.

The ROLLING STONES is a brand now, and the only real expectation we have of them is that when the play live the come up with the goods

You could say that they're an above average bar band with a whole heap of song writing talent.

NickB

You can't always get what you want.....

www.myspace.com/thesonkings

The best ever "bar band".
...which is sadly why they always have top play such big bars ;^)