Kaka Tim
Half Arsed and Slapdash till I Die
They were a pretty damn good singles band in their day but SF Sorrow is two and half times better than Let It Bleed.
Edgelord nonsense
Are the rolling stones sh*t?
- Thread starter Humberto
- Start date
Edgelord nonsense
It was a bit of a wind up but genuinely yes. SF Sorrow is a better album than Let It Bleed.
The Stones maybe a better band but Let It Bleed is a collection of failed singles plus Gimme Shelter plus (the "oh bloody hell the used a choir
") You Can't Always Get What You Want. The more rock parts are actually quite flaccid whereas the country and blues stuff is great it still had been done before and better by others and Jagger just isn't suited to either of those styles. And that's the problem with it - it's redundant for the most part. It's about ten years behind the times.
SF Sorrow is a proper sit-down-and-listen-to-the-whole-thing album with all sorts of little innovations and inventiveness and the first "rock opera" (ie. story telling in a rock format). It's not great musicianship it's just a great well rounded listen and a much bigger indicator of where music was heading and they didn't just use the studio as a tool to polish their songs. Forward looking not backward looking.
But anyway. The Stones were great and the OP is a silly question. Best album is probably the US edition of Aftermath IMO. Best song is probably Under My Thumb.
The Stones maybe a better band but Let It Bleed is a collection of failed singles plus Gimme Shelter plus (the "oh bloody hell the used a choir
") You Can't Always Get What You Want. The more rock parts are actually quite flaccid whereas the country and blues stuff is great it still had been done before and better by others and Jagger just isn't suited to either of those styles. And that's the problem with it - it's redundant for the most part. It's about ten years behind the times.SF Sorrow is a proper sit-down-and-listen-to-the-whole-thing album with all sorts of little innovations and inventiveness and the first "rock opera" (ie. story telling in a rock format). It's not great musicianship it's just a great well rounded listen and a much bigger indicator of where music was heading and they didn't just use the studio as a tool to polish their songs. Forward looking not backward looking.
But anyway. The Stones were great and the OP is a silly question. Best album is probably the US edition of Aftermath IMO. Best song is probably Under My Thumb.
Also is Gimme Shelter really that great? Great intro granted. Great vocals granted. But otherwise its a bit of an old plod of a song. And it's overworked, does it really need that piano or the second guitar? It's a really quite dull thick soup, lots of not very colourful things going on. Not that I don't like it but it's far from my favourite Stones song, it's not even my favourite song off Let It Bleed.. In the earlier period they weren't afraid to strip it right down, Let's Spend the Night Together is just bass, drums and piano plus a dab of organ in terms of instrumentation. 64-67 was the Stones best period IMO.
The Stones version has some dreadful vocals by Jagger, it has heavy handed drumming, it is based on twee guitar arpeggios, even twee-er mandolin and a slide guitar that clashes with everything else.
And that is why it is great and in the spirit of old time blues which always verged on a glorious rhythmic and harmonic mess. It's not the hit-the-nail-on-the-head poignant heartbreak of the original but then it's a cover not a copy. And let's be honest Mick Jagger was never going to break anyone's heart. There's just enough of Robert Johnson's tasty little turnarounds on the guitar backing to make it a fine tribute while taking the song somewhere else.
This is an example of the Stones getting it right. This is the best track on the album.
I don't know about the rest of you, but I am so bored that I am talking about an album that I have listened to maybe once in the last twenty years. Anyone up for an in depth discussion of SF Sorrow?
D'wards
IT'S YOUR DECISION DANIEL
Anyone who argues that the Rolling Stones are shit is an Edgelord Supreme
Orang Utan
Psychick Worrier Ov Geyoor
nonsense. people who love canonised bands don't understand that some people are tired of that shit
To be honest, I was more making a point about how brilliant SF Sorrow is. I like the Stones, but they don't exactly fascinate me and there's not much to say about them. Don't know what I'm doing on this thread in the first place....
Kaka Tim
Half Arsed and Slapdash till I Die
not being interested, or tired of hearing them cos of overexposure or annoyed at overerverance - fair enough - but that doesn't make them shit.
bmd
Island in the stream.
My daughter asked who he was when they were doing that "please don't forget about the once-famous" gig on telly a few nights ago. When I told her, she said "and he's a sex symbol?" I felt compelled to leap to his defence for the sake of the Brown Sugar album alone.
bmd
Island in the stream.
Sweet FA
✪ Three rounds Lord, in my .44 ✪
Just been googling them in 1965. Something like 7 singles, 2 or 3 US/UK albums and 11 tours - including 2 of the US (The Rolling Stones 1965 tours - Wikipedia). That TOTP is from March '65; since January that year, they'd already toured N.Ireland, Australia, New Zealand and Singapore. Two days after this performance, they started the first of 2x UK tours.
TOTP 11/3/65
HERMAN’S HERMITS – Silhouettes
P.J. PROBY – I Apologise
THE SEARCHERS – Goodbye My Love
THE SHADOWS – Mary Anne
GEORGIE FAME & THE BLUE FLAMES – In The Meantime
MARIANNE FAITHFULL – Come And Stay With Me
THE PRETTY THINGS – Honey I Need
THE WHO – I Can’t Explain
TOM JONES – It’s Not Unusual
THE ROLLING STONES – The Last Time
TOTP 11/3/65
HERMAN’S HERMITS – Silhouettes
P.J. PROBY – I Apologise
THE SEARCHERS – Goodbye My Love
THE SHADOWS – Mary Anne
GEORGIE FAME & THE BLUE FLAMES – In The Meantime
MARIANNE FAITHFULL – Come And Stay With Me
THE PRETTY THINGS – Honey I Need
THE WHO – I Can’t Explain
TOM JONES – It’s Not Unusual
THE ROLLING STONES – The Last Time
danny la rouge
More like *fanny* la rouge!
I used to think they were a singles band, but I just listened to their singles the other day and a fair number of them are pretty dull too. There is a particular loose-tight sound they had in the late 60s/early 70s that is a classic rock sound. But the Faces did it better.
Pickman's model
Starry Wisdom
Round the time Brian Jones died
Always thought they went shite when Mick Taylor left. They didn't. They went shite before he left. 4 decent albums - don't care for most of the early or later stuff.. Saw them live a couple years ago and didn't really do anything for me.
Great band though.
One thing that I've come to appreciate about the Stones is that in the 70's when they were huge they didn't just pump out plodding stadium thumpers, which would have been so easy for them to do. If anything they got more subtle/sophisticated than they were in the 60's. Listen to Sticky Fingers in contrast to the earache that is Who's Next or Led Zep IV, and it's remarkable how little they gave in to the temptation to just live off their rock giant status and how much they were still exploring (in this case soul, gospel and country). At the same time it's all so clean and clinical especially with Mick Tayler's precision slide, I just can't love it. And it has to be said that by this time Keith Richard's very Keith Richardsy open G guitar tricks are very old hat.
The Mick Tayler period is overrated but that's because it's rated so ridiculously highly. Once you get over the surprise that they're still producing valuable original work, you look round and discover the earth hasn't been shattered by it either.
The Mick Tayler period is overrated but that's because it's rated so ridiculously highly. Once you get over the surprise that they're still producing valuable original work, you look round and discover the earth hasn't been shattered by it either.
Similar threads
