naw, i just REALLY cant see how people hate on the beatles, STILL!!! dudes were geniuses, give them that atleast, okay you dont like their music, they dont suck, not by a long shot. and i think that the rolling stones are pretty overrated on the whole. never dug em. i like there early raw as shit, but other than that, im cool
Mack. I understand where you're coming from. I never really got that into Rolling Stones til my friend put me up on Exile. It gave me a whole new appreciation for all the stuff I had already heard.
Not to mention the mix on Exile is absolutely insane. I don't think I have a remaster, and it bangs
I was never that into the Stones, but one night when I was like 19 I was on mushrooms riding in my friend's car and "Under My Thumb" came on the stereo and I was just like "Oh, I see." I like a lot of their stuff to this day, but I probably listen to the Beatles more. And I listen to Beatles covers more than I listen to either of them. I need to see that Cocksucker Blues movie still. Has anyone here seen it?
y'all sound like a bunch of fat guys in a bar that serves 10 cent hot wings
I agree with you, but I just get annoyed with Beatles hatters.
Killer Beatles albums IMO:
Magical Mystery Tour Let It Be Introducing...The Beatles Rubber Soul Yesterday and Today Sgt Pepper's Lonely Hearts Club Band White Album Revolver Help!
Buy you some, relisten.
And BTW, what did the Rolling Stones do for Willie Dixon?
See, I agree with you in general(ie. prefer to lISTEN to the Beatles more so than the Stones in general) but I can't take any Beatles fan THAT seriously when they rate a toss-together forgettable collection of songs like 'Let It Be' and don't even include possibly one of the finest burts of creative pop songwriting of the 60s, 'A Hard Days Night'! At least you got 'Rubber Soul' in there!
Cmon, fuck the Stones? Dudes always hatting on the Stones and it's played. I thought I'd state for the record that hatting on the Stones, while perfectly cool as personal opinion is hella
Seriously. They put out some great work. And for a bunch of geezers, their new album is pretty decent, IMO. And you cannot compare them to the Beatles. They weren't going for a different audience--they were going for a different sound.
Re: Sticky Fingers - Can You Hear me Knocking is my stuff.
Haven't gotten into these cats until the past year or so, and now when I finally want to buy their records, they don't turn up mint and reasonably priced. And when I think I have a clean copy, it ends up being not as clean as my original copy. What gives?
I was never that into the Stones, but one night when I was like 19 I was on mushrooms riding in my friend's car and "Under My Thumb" came on the stereo and I was just like "Oh, I see." I like a lot of their stuff to this day, but I probably listen to the Beatles more. And I listen to Beatles covers more than I listen to either of them. I need to see that Cocksucker Blues movie still. Has anyone here seen it?
I saw a bootleg copy in college. Not a good look. Art film about Rockstars. Sound sucks. Can't understand a thing.
I was never that into the Stones, but one night when I was like 19 I was on mushrooms riding in my friend's car and "Under My Thumb" came on the stereo and I was just like "Oh, I see." I like a lot of their stuff to this day, but I probably listen to the Beatles more. And I listen to Beatles covers more than I listen to either of them. I need to see that Cocksucker Blues movie still. Has anyone here seen it?
I saw a bootleg copy in college. Not a good look. Art film about Rockstars. Sound sucks. Can't understand a thing.
'Charlie is My Darling' is much more entertaining, mainly because instead of footage of the Stones' entourage and roadie's groupies, you actually have close up shots of Mick and Brian stoned out of their minds, babbling on and on about things like the 'film' Brian is working on. Baked. Completely and totally BAKED. But funny if you are baked too, or are a big Stones nut, or both.
i just think if you think the stones are "over-rated" you clearly don't have any real opinions about rock music.
I'm not saying they suck, I just don't understand all the accolades their music garners.
Castillo, London pressing LPs are prone to being trashed easy. Satanic Majesties LPs that have looked real nice for me have played My theory is quality of their vinyl is kinda shaky like Polydor.
I think it's the most fun thread I have seen all day. Probably because I don't have much of an opinion on Paul Wall or mixers.
i just think if you think the stones are "over-rated" you clearly don't have any real opinions about rock music.
i guess, but that was how the whole thread started...dude(who I assume is older than 16) had no real knowledge of the Stones period, which, coming from MY context, simply blows my mind! In my neighborhood, the Beatles/Stones/Zep/Floyd/Kiss was all just the local basics. If you didn't have a working knowledge(love/hate/whatever) you didn't have much to talk about music-wise. Shit, I used to get into HEATED arguments about who's better Paul or John!? I mean, this forum did not create music nerds!
just go buy all their stuff starting from Exile on Main Street and work backwards... the Stones sucked donkey cock after exile IMO...
but all their stuff is pretty much dollarbin common to $10 for everything from 'England's Newest Hitmakers' on up, provided you are satisfied w/US pressings. You may even luck into some cheap UK press if you hit up stores with good rock selection.
Early Stones is always some great raw shit, all the way up thru Exile. Not every LP was great, but most were good or better, and some are sublime (like 'Aftermath' and '12x 5' and several more.
to the Bird here. The titles that he refers to here are:
Beggar's Banquet Let It Bleed Sticky Fingers Exile on Mainstreet
I also dig:
Some Girls Tatoo You
Some of: It's Only Rock n' Roll Goat's Head Soup
and lots of their early stuff. They do one of the best covers of Not Fade Away and It's All Over Now is nice. Many people think their mid 60s work is really interesting and their most original work. Wes Anderson films celebrate this period thoroughly.
I agree with both of the above posts, but to elaborate a little further: all of the Rolling Stones' studio albums from their debut through Exile on Main St. are worth owning, with the possible exception of Satanic Majesties' Request. (The two live records from that era just aren't as great.) Myself, I prefer the latter end of the spectrum (i.e., Aftermath, Between the Buttons, Beggar's Banquet, Let It Bleed, Sticky Fingers and Exile). The earlier stuff is good too, but the LPs move me less-- they were doing a lot of covers and I find it just a little too derivative of American R&B.
After Exile on Main St. they recorded a number of very good albums (Black and Blue, Some Girls, Tattoo You), but nothing as essential as their earlier stuff.
If I had to pick 6, it would be Aftermath, Between the Buttons, Beggar's Banquet, Let It Bleed, Sticky Fingers and Exile, but you'd still be missing out on plenty of great songs (e.g., "Satisfaction," "Mother's Little Helper," "Emotional Rescue," "Time Is on My Side" etc. etc.).
The record critics critiquing the critics that are criticizing the critics who were so critical they became musicians. I've never seen so much poop on a thread.
To the original poster, I'd reccomend borrowing the albums from someone you know or from someone on the internet. The ones you like you should buy.
To Agent45. I reccomend getting a bit of tea, and calming down. I can feel your hot air from here.
I was never that into the Stones, but one night when I was like 19 I was on mushrooms riding in my friend's car and "Under My Thumb" came on the stereo and I was just like "Oh, I see." I like a lot of their stuff to this day, but I probably listen to the Beatles more. And I listen to Beatles covers more than I listen to either of them. I need to see that Cocksucker Blues movie still. Has anyone here seen it?
I have - not worthy of the hype. You'll never find a copy that isn't absolute shit (It's a super 8 handheld film anyway, so it was shitty BEFORE it went through 231 generations of VHS transfers), and it's only worth seeing if you want to see Mick Jagger jonsing so hard for cocaine he just acts like an ass to everyone in sight and only cares about his fix, and the Stones' roadies molesting groupies who were hoping to get molested by the Stones themselves. There's a couple of cool live performances, but the sound is so bad it just doesn't matter.
As for buying Stones records, I have never spent more than 3 or 4 bucks on any Stones LP, and I have mono copies of almost all the first LP's that were "as is" yet play completely fine. Buy trashed mono OG's for $3 and save the money you would waste on sanitized remixed CD's, which sound pretty ass compared to those vinyls.
Oh, and hating on "Satanic Majesties" is a strange look for this board - file under "If I put that record in a homemade sleeve and called it a 'private press psych LP' you guys would fight each other to pay $500 for it!"
Oh, and hating on "Satanic Majesties" is a strange look for this board - file under "If I put that record in a homemade sleeve and called it a 'private press psych LP' you guys would fight each other to pay $500 for it!"
We might, but if someone on a budget asked me to recommend six essential psych LPs I sure as shit wouldn't be recommending a $500 2-tracker, even on reissue.
"Satanic Majesties" has its moments, it's just not as good throughout as the others mentioned.
"Satanic Majesties" has its moments, it's just not as good throughout as the others mentioned.
Almost another Apples & Oranges situation, though. It's such a departure from their usual shit. I'll say this - anyone interested can definitely save their money and just buy the 45 of "She's a Rainbow/2,000 Light Years from Home" and be all set - although then no kooky 3-D cover. And, no, I would never place it in a top 5...shit, top 10 of their records.
Even though it's a bastard US hack job LP, I really love "Flowers" just for the stuff on it..."Ride On Baby" and "Out of Time" are to me prime era RS.
One more thing, I can't even look at them now - the thought of going to one of those shows is beyond my comprehension.
here is a sidetrack hijack...ever tried to argue why Led Zeppelin is a good band to a bunch of garage rock meathead snobs? Mind you I like a little garage rock, but when you get around garage rock snobs who think it is the only original rocknroll ever, it is like yelling a brick wall...I gave up pretty quickly though, it was a waste of time...I am "Vinyl Ritchie" on this board.... http://www.goner-records.com/board/index.php?action=vthread&forum=4&topic=8968
Comments
Mack. I understand where you're coming from. I never really got that into Rolling Stones til my friend put me up on Exile. It gave me a whole new appreciation for all the stuff I had already heard.
Not to mention the mix on Exile is absolutely insane. I don't think I have a remaster, and it bangs
please believe
...and those who dig this should also get this
Was a Beatle involved? Nope. It was Bill Wyman.
It's easy, it's fun, and it pisses people off. And don't get me wrong, I'd take The Pretty Things over The Rolling Stones in a heartbeat.
Are you saying that sales are proportional to an artists worth? You must work in the industry (or at least drank the kool-ade).
See, I agree with you in general(ie. prefer to lISTEN to the Beatles more so than the Stones in general) but I can't take any Beatles fan THAT seriously when they rate a toss-together forgettable collection of songs like 'Let It Be' and don't even include possibly one of the finest burts of creative pop songwriting of the 60s, 'A Hard Days Night'! At least you got 'Rubber Soul' in there!
Now, pass me them hot wings, bitch!
Seriously.
They put out some great work. And for a bunch of geezers, their new album is pretty decent, IMO. And you cannot compare them to the Beatles. They weren't going for a different audience--they were going for a different sound.
Re: Sticky Fingers - Can You Hear me Knocking is my stuff.
Haven't gotten into these cats until the past year or so, and now when I finally want to buy their records, they don't turn up mint and reasonably priced. And when I think I have a clean copy, it ends up being not as clean as my original copy. What gives?
You must not be familiar with Reynaldo's,uh, I mean MEL's work. How much better are the Beatles than Garth Brooks, though?
+ Between The Buttons and this
maybe i'm fucked up for being under 50 and liking this record,
but the tune with Bootsy and Bernie is
I saw a bootleg copy in college. Not a good look. Art film about Rockstars. Sound sucks. Can't understand a thing.
'Charlie is My Darling' is much more entertaining, mainly because instead of footage of the Stones' entourage and roadie's groupies, you actually have close up shots of Mick and Brian stoned out of their minds, babbling on and on about things like the 'film' Brian is working on. Baked. Completely and totally BAKED. But funny if you are baked too, or are a big Stones nut, or both.
I think it's the most fun thread I have seen all day.
Probably because I don't have much of an opinion on Paul Wall or mixers.
Castillo,
London pressing LPs are prone to being trashed easy. Satanic Majesties LPs that have looked real nice for me have played
i guess, but that was how the whole thread started...dude(who I assume is older than 16) had no real knowledge of the Stones period, which, coming from MY context, simply blows my mind! In my neighborhood, the Beatles/Stones/Zep/Floyd/Kiss was all just the local basics. If you didn't have a working knowledge(love/hate/whatever) you didn't have much to talk about music-wise. Shit, I used to get into HEATED arguments about who's better Paul or John!? I mean, this forum did not create music nerds!
I agree with both of the above posts, but to elaborate a little further: all of the Rolling Stones' studio albums from their debut through Exile on Main St. are worth owning, with the possible exception of Satanic Majesties' Request. (The two live records from that era just aren't as great.) Myself, I prefer the latter end of the spectrum (i.e., Aftermath, Between the Buttons, Beggar's Banquet, Let It Bleed, Sticky Fingers and Exile). The earlier stuff is good too, but the LPs move me less-- they were doing a lot of covers and I find it just a little too derivative of American R&B.
After Exile on Main St. they recorded a number of very good albums (Black and Blue, Some Girls, Tattoo You), but nothing as essential as their earlier stuff.
If I had to pick 6, it would be Aftermath, Between the Buttons, Beggar's Banquet, Let It Bleed, Sticky Fingers and Exile, but you'd still be missing out on plenty of great songs (e.g., "Satisfaction," "Mother's Little Helper," "Emotional Rescue," "Time Is on My Side" etc. etc.).
12x5 - These guys could really play rock and roll.
Beggars Banquette - This is the country one right? Or is Let It Bleed the country one?
Decembers Children - Get Off My Cloud, AS tears Go By
Big Hits High Tide And Green Grass - 19th Nervous Breakdown and some of the hits you've missed.
Some Girls - They sounded good in the 80s too.
You might want to pick up Hot Rocks to get some of the hits you missed with this list.
Don't you think if he wanted to know if he should get Stones or Beatles he would have asked that?
Dan
To the original poster, I'd reccomend borrowing the albums from someone you know or from someone on the internet. The ones you like you should buy.
To Agent45. I reccomend getting a bit of tea, and calming down. I can feel your hot air from here.
- spidey
I have - not worthy of the hype. You'll never find a copy that isn't absolute shit (It's a super 8 handheld film anyway, so it was shitty BEFORE it went through 231 generations of VHS transfers), and it's only worth seeing if you want to see Mick Jagger jonsing so hard for cocaine he just acts like an ass to everyone in sight and only cares about his fix, and the Stones' roadies molesting groupies who were hoping to get molested by the Stones themselves. There's a couple of cool live performances, but the sound is so bad it just doesn't matter.
As for buying Stones records, I have never spent more than 3 or 4 bucks on any Stones LP, and I have mono copies of almost all the first LP's that were "as is" yet play completely fine. Buy trashed mono OG's for $3 and save the money you would waste on sanitized remixed CD's, which sound pretty ass compared to those vinyls.
Oh, and hating on "Satanic Majesties" is a strange look for this board - file under "If I put that record in a homemade sleeve and called it a 'private press psych LP' you guys would fight each other to pay $500 for it!"
THIS AIN'T AMERICA IS IT?
WHERE COULD I BE?[/b]
We might, but if someone on a budget asked me to recommend six essential psych LPs I sure as shit wouldn't be recommending a $500 2-tracker, even on reissue.
"Satanic Majesties" has its moments, it's just not as good throughout as the others mentioned.
Almost another Apples & Oranges situation, though. It's such a departure from their usual shit. I'll say this - anyone interested can definitely save their money and just buy the 45 of "She's a Rainbow/2,000 Light Years from Home" and be all set - although then no kooky 3-D cover.
And, no, I would never place it in a top 5...shit, top 10 of their records.
Even though it's a bastard US hack job LP, I really love "Flowers" just for the stuff on it..."Ride On Baby" and "Out of Time" are to me prime era RS.
One more thing, I can't even look at them now - the thought of going to one of those shows is beyond my comprehension.
Some1 aint gettin any attention at home.
Please enlighten me on some of ure preferred rock groups.
http://www.goner-records.com/board/index.php?action=vthread&forum=4&topic=8968