Tell Me :
Talk
That said I can understand that Keith got tired of doing all the guitars alone. But history shows that Brian had never stayed at one instrument.
He founded the Stones, came up with the name, was the soul of the band, was one of the first, if not the first to play slide guitar in England, came up with the riff for The Last Time, played countless instruments which took the songs to another level, was a brilliant harp player and he had a great sense for counter-melodies.
i know what jazz is, but i still like asking others....
That's what I'm thinking, too. This is about a poster - and I'm sure he's not alone, here - has a disliking for the 1963-67 era Rolling Stones. In other words, the 60's Stones and the period associated with Brian Jones. Brian needn't come into it, really.
I like all the era's that span the Stones work.
In talking about Brian, after the "early death" myth factor is peeled back, it is still fair to say his contributions were invaluable, and also recognizing the Stones went on to make perhaps their greatest music without him.
I guess one could also say that if Jagger/Richards didn't show up that day, there would also be no Stones. It took all of them to make it happen, even Wymans amp.
Jones was miles ahead of Jagger whilst Jones was still alive.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2011-04-27 00:08 by His Majesty.
Jagger was nowhere near as good as Jones on harp. Not even close.
Mick was rather weak to begin with, but he did develop in to a great player with unique feel. For me Mick's best harmonica playing came during the time Brian was leaving/after he died.
Exactly. Mick and Keith's refusal to acknowledge Brian's contributions over the years has led to a general ignorance of who Brian was. It's as if he's been cut out of the band's history. Yes, Mick and Keith mention Brian in interviews, but begrudgingly. The closest thing the Stones ever did in regards to a dedication to Brian was Continental Drift (and the BBC documentary of its recording). But when pressed by the host about Brian's importance to the band, Mick just wouldn't bite. "Brian was really into the music of Morocco . . . but so were we." Mick was perhaps candid with this comment, but he at the same time discredits Brian by saying that he wasn't solely responsible for the Stones' experimental sound. So, then, is Continental Drift a true dedication to Brian?
Wow.
Spot on, my friend. I grew up as a teenager during this period when image was everything. The band certainly had an image and Brian was an important part of that and he also made some good musical contributions. I'm sure he was very frustrated that the band moved on from the blues, where he was at his most comfortable, and his personality problems are well documented. If he had been able to accept his limitations things may have turned out differently. The music played by the band with his replacement, Mick Taylor, is the best the band has ever produced but I still love the early stuff to this day.
Brian is not overrated, he was what he was, faults and all, and without him the band may not have taken off so quickly because his sex appeal attracted the female fans who bought the records and screamed their way through the early tours.
What from the Taylor era is better than Satisfaction, Ruby Tuesday, Paint It Black, The Last Time, 2000 Light Years From Home, Jumpin' Jack Flash, Street Fighting Man etc etc?
There isn't anything better, it's just different, more rock orientated and with fancier guitar solos.
It's all said.... How can you compare Dirty Work with Satanic? Imo, Satanic are miles away..
Yes, Jagger has certainly progressed beyond his rudimentary slop harp playing at the end of Little Red Rooster. But, even at his best, he's not better than Jones was on those first few albums. Brian Jones was among the best harp players in rock 'n' roll ever.
Talk about your favorite band.
For information about how to use this forum please check out forum help and policies.
Re: Brian Jones. Overrated?
Posted by:
Carnaby
()
Date: April 26, 2011 17:04
First of all, we are talking about a genius. Just (and just) for starters, consider this- How did a teenage kid living on that leafy street in Cheltenham in the late 50's/very beginning of the 60's ever learn so much, or even know about its existence, the blues to such a quintessential level? I mean, Christ, the guy turned Keith on! But, that's genius.
Re: Brian Jones. Overrated?
Posted by:
tonterapi
()
Date: April 26, 2011 18:09
I think that it was a wise move to not stay on the guitar. Brian couldn't write songs so he had to compete for the limelight in other ways as his ego wasn't any less than Mick's or Keith's. Brian was a musician in the first place and used his skills in that department to get attention from the fans and to have a voice in the band. It worked good then and still works since people remember him for the multi-instrumentalism today.Quote
Amsterdamned
Sure he was good on other instruments, but the Stones where a 2 guitar band basically, and Keith didn't want to do it on his own. Using huge amounts of dope didn't make it any better.
That said I can understand that Keith got tired of doing all the guitars alone. But history shows that Brian had never stayed at one instrument.
Re: Brian Jones. Overrated?
Posted by:
stones78
()
Date: April 26, 2011 18:21
Quote
DiscoVolante
what did he do? Why do so many fans still adore him?
He founded the Stones, came up with the name, was the soul of the band, was one of the first, if not the first to play slide guitar in England, came up with the riff for The Last Time, played countless instruments which took the songs to another level, was a brilliant harp player and he had a great sense for counter-melodies.
Quote
DiscoVolante
a band which became so much better when he wasn't in the band
Re: Brian Jones. Overrated?
Posted by:
His Majesty
()
Date: April 26, 2011 18:38
Funny thread.
Overrated? Depends who's doing the rating and what their benchmark is.
Misunderstood? Yeah, the waffle in this and many other forums, threads, books and newspapers makes me think so.
If you don't feel it and don't get it there's little point in trying to explain things to you.
You think the band sucked whilst he was a member, so be it.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2011-04-26 18:45 by His Majesty.
Overrated? Depends who's doing the rating and what their benchmark is.
Misunderstood? Yeah, the waffle in this and many other forums, threads, books and newspapers makes me think so.
If you don't feel it and don't get it there's little point in trying to explain things to you.
You think the band sucked whilst he was a member, so be it.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2011-04-26 18:45 by His Majesty.
Re: Brian Jones. Overrated?
Posted by:
Rocky Dijon
()
Date: April 26, 2011 18:52
Fans can, by definition, always carry their appreciation to extremes, but I think it's fair to say Brian was a very talented multi-instrumentalist whose contributions did as much to enhance Mick and Keith's songs as Mick Taylor's contributions in the seventies. Largely they've relied on sidemen to add color ever since or not bothered at all. That's not a slam on Ronnie, but he did not fill the same role nor was he intended to do so.
Re: Brian Jones. Overrated?
Posted by:
batcave
()
Date: April 26, 2011 18:57
I don't think he was overrated, but I do think that dying young has helped enhance the myths, both good and bad....
Re: Brian Jones. Overrated?
Posted by:
courtfieldroad
()
Date: April 26, 2011 20:24
Is Brian overrated? Sure, by some. I don't think he was a genius, but then there are very few musicians that I'd bandy that particular term about when discussing.
Brian Jones had a hell of a talent on slide/harp, the drive to get out the word on R&B and start the Rolling Stones, as well as hold them together in the beginning, and a very wonderful musical sensitivity that resulted in his adding musical touches that made songs far greater than what Mick and Keith no doubt expected they could ever be.
I agree with His Majesty, if you don't appreciate the 1960s era Stones, you just will not get why Brian Jones truly matters.
Brian Jones had a hell of a talent on slide/harp, the drive to get out the word on R&B and start the Rolling Stones, as well as hold them together in the beginning, and a very wonderful musical sensitivity that resulted in his adding musical touches that made songs far greater than what Mick and Keith no doubt expected they could ever be.
I agree with His Majesty, if you don't appreciate the 1960s era Stones, you just will not get why Brian Jones truly matters.
Re: Brian Jones. Overrated?
Posted by:
24FPS
()
Date: April 26, 2011 20:32
I know this thread seems ludicrous to most people. It's hard to explain to someone who came along later what Jones brought to the table. First off, he didn't give a toss about rock and roll. Keith did. Those two melding their styles is what formed the basis of the Stones sound. It still winds through that sound every night on stage. Brian brought Chicago blues, Keith brought Chuck Berry. And Brian loved R&B. He did bring a funky little groove in his rhythm playing. (Off The Hook).
God, this could go on all day, delineating what Brian was, what he performed. As a symbol he had a fantastic sense of style. Maybe the sharpest dresser in pop, ever. Mick took that and carried it forward after Brian died. Brian was also a mentally unbalanced, immature individual who overconsumed drugs. Keith carried that forward after Brian died. What Brian took with him, and this to me is the absolutely irreplaceable element, was his feel. The emotional, yet technical slide on Little Red Rooster is incomparable. (Yeah, I know, a 'crappy' little cover). Brian was hypnotic but point on with his slide work on another 'crappy' cover, I Can't Be Satisfied. Brian takes a shade off the roughness of the original songs, moves them slightly uptown, without missing an emotional beat. He changed them without losing the respect of the original black artists.
Enough. Louis Armstrong said, "If you have to ask what jazz is, you'll never know." If you ask what Brian Jones was to the Rolling Stones.............
God, this could go on all day, delineating what Brian was, what he performed. As a symbol he had a fantastic sense of style. Maybe the sharpest dresser in pop, ever. Mick took that and carried it forward after Brian died. Brian was also a mentally unbalanced, immature individual who overconsumed drugs. Keith carried that forward after Brian died. What Brian took with him, and this to me is the absolutely irreplaceable element, was his feel. The emotional, yet technical slide on Little Red Rooster is incomparable. (Yeah, I know, a 'crappy' little cover). Brian was hypnotic but point on with his slide work on another 'crappy' cover, I Can't Be Satisfied. Brian takes a shade off the roughness of the original songs, moves them slightly uptown, without missing an emotional beat. He changed them without losing the respect of the original black artists.
Enough. Louis Armstrong said, "If you have to ask what jazz is, you'll never know." If you ask what Brian Jones was to the Rolling Stones.............
Re: Brian Jones. Overrated?
Posted by:
StonesTod
()
Date: April 26, 2011 20:36
Quote
24FPS
Enough. Louis Armstrong said, "If you have to ask what jazz is, you'll never know." If you ask what Brian Jones was to the Rolling Stones.............
i know what jazz is, but i still like asking others....
Re: Brian Jones. Overrated?
Posted by:
Big Al
()
Date: April 26, 2011 20:49
sQuote
courtfieldroad
I agree with His Majesty, if you don't appreciate the 1960s era Stones, you just will not get why Brian Jones truly matters.
That's what I'm thinking, too. This is about a poster - and I'm sure he's not alone, here - has a disliking for the 1963-67 era Rolling Stones. In other words, the 60's Stones and the period associated with Brian Jones. Brian needn't come into it, really.
Re: Brian Jones. Overrated?
Posted by:
Single Malt
()
Date: April 26, 2011 21:07
Definitely not overrated. The Rhythm&Blues era is great. Of course there were cover songs early in their career because they were in the first wave to bring black American music to Britain (and Europe) but they were good songs. And there are some songs they played well during the sixties and never since. Songs that aren't just working anymore. Just like Sway isn't Sway without Mick T. But just listen EP Got LIVE If You Want It, that's bloody marvelous Brian era live recording. The combination of first three tracks always give me goose bumps. And of course the post r&b era albums aftermath-buttons-satanic are also interesting. Satanic is not a bad album after all, IMO.
Re: Brian Jones. Overrated?
Posted by:
MKjan
()
Date: April 26, 2011 21:13
Quote
cookwazzahoe
No Jones=No Stones
I like all the era's that span the Stones work.
In talking about Brian, after the "early death" myth factor is peeled back, it is still fair to say his contributions were invaluable, and also recognizing the Stones went on to make perhaps their greatest music without him.
I guess one could also say that if Jagger/Richards didn't show up that day, there would also be no Stones. It took all of them to make it happen, even Wymans amp.
Re: Brian Jones. Overrated?
Posted by:
rollmops
()
Date: April 26, 2011 21:36
At the begin of the band musical activities, Brian Jones was an essential part of the group. He knew his shit about the blues and R&B. He was also very ambitious and well spoken; there is an interview from 1964 from Canada I believe, during which Brian does the talking while the others are just goofing in the background. When Mick and Keith teamed up to write songs, Brian's role and voice took a hit. He still had his musical skills and versatility to bring to the table but the talented duo had the upper hand as they were able to write hit after hit after hit. Then Brian started to focus on drinking and drugs, slowly losing interest in making music with the Rolling Stones; at that low point in his career with the Stones to pretend that he still was great would have been to overrate his achievements.
Brian Jones should be left in peace and not be judged harsly by us who didn't know him.
Rock and Roll,
Mops
Brian Jones should be left in peace and not be judged harsly by us who didn't know him.
Rock and Roll,
Mops
Re: Brian Jones. Overrated?
Posted by:
Marie
()
Date: April 26, 2011 23:09
Has anyone else heard where the Brian Jones estate gets paid royalties for Tumbling Dice?
Re: Brian Jones. Overrated?
Posted by:
Wry Cooter
()
Date: April 26, 2011 23:13
I'd say he was an adequate to pretty good harp player -- I think Jagger is better. Also, I guess in the early days the chicks thought he was cute, but I don't see the "charisma". Kinda creepy actually. But then I'm not a 13 year old girl!
As mentioned, where he was really great was on the exotic instruments and textures -- his counterpoint and intuitive musicality. Pretty much from "Aftermath" to parts of "Beggars Banquet" including the non-LP singles. A 2 - 3 year run that included greatness on his part. Some folks' favorite Stones era, and often considered their most adventurous period. Certainly one of the reasons I love the Stones.
Just my 2 cents.
As mentioned, where he was really great was on the exotic instruments and textures -- his counterpoint and intuitive musicality. Pretty much from "Aftermath" to parts of "Beggars Banquet" including the non-LP singles. A 2 - 3 year run that included greatness on his part. Some folks' favorite Stones era, and often considered their most adventurous period. Certainly one of the reasons I love the Stones.
Just my 2 cents.
Re: Brian Jones. Overrated?
Posted by:
His Majesty
()
Date: April 27, 2011 00:07
Quote
Wry Cooter
I'd say he was an adequate to pretty good harp player -- I think Jagger is better.
Jones was miles ahead of Jagger whilst Jones was still alive.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2011-04-27 00:08 by His Majesty.
Re: Brian Jones. Overrated?
Posted by:
neptune
()
Date: April 27, 2011 00:18
Quote
Wry Cooter
I'd say he was an adequate to pretty good harp player -- I think Jagger is better.
Jagger was nowhere near as good as Jones on harp. Not even close.
Re: Brian Jones. Overrated?
Posted by:
His Majesty
()
Date: April 27, 2011 00:36
Quote
neptuneQuote
Wry Cooter
I'd say he was an adequate to pretty good harp player -- I think Jagger is better.
Jagger was nowhere near as good as Jones on harp. Not even close.
Mick was rather weak to begin with, but he did develop in to a great player with unique feel. For me Mick's best harmonica playing came during the time Brian was leaving/after he died.
Re: Brian Jones. Overrated?
Posted by:
neptune
()
Date: April 27, 2011 00:46
Quote
Kingbeebuzz
It would not have hurt the Stones to issue an album of early unreleased tracks and clearly promote it as a dedication to Brian. Rock history is in danger of forgetting his contribution. "DiscoVolante's" comments would not have been made had Jagger & Richards dealt with Brian's contribution differently in passed years and it would be nice to think they were big enough to read his comments now, recognise how sad they are, and act to officially place Brian more centrally to their early history.
Exactly. Mick and Keith's refusal to acknowledge Brian's contributions over the years has led to a general ignorance of who Brian was. It's as if he's been cut out of the band's history. Yes, Mick and Keith mention Brian in interviews, but begrudgingly. The closest thing the Stones ever did in regards to a dedication to Brian was Continental Drift (and the BBC documentary of its recording). But when pressed by the host about Brian's importance to the band, Mick just wouldn't bite. "Brian was really into the music of Morocco . . . but so were we." Mick was perhaps candid with this comment, but he at the same time discredits Brian by saying that he wasn't solely responsible for the Stones' experimental sound. So, then, is Continental Drift a true dedication to Brian?
Re: Brian Jones. Overrated?
Posted by:
neptune
()
Date: April 27, 2011 00:48
Quote
DiscoVolante
Apart from being a well dressed icon of the 60's and a founding member of a band which became so much better when he wasn't in the band, what did he do?
Wow.
Re: Brian Jones. Overrated?
Posted by:
Elmo
()
Date: April 27, 2011 01:31
Quote
Kingbeebuzz
As "withsssoul" says..........."DiscoVolante" you must be young.
Unfortunately anyone who did not live in the UK between 1961 and 1969 cannot possibly imagine the impact both the Stones and Beatles had within the UK.
It was not just music and fashion, it included their attitude, what they said in the media, their accents on the BBC, their humour, their unwillingness to conform in what now appear trivial ways. The Stones by 1967 were truely seen as a risk by the UK government.......unbelievable in todays society. Stones records were banned on the BBC, their images were censored on BBC television, the police targeted them, a leading UK newspaper entrapped them.
Brian Jones was central to all this and together with Lennon was responsible to a great extent for unknowingly changing UK society. True there were others but Brian and Lennon were in at the start. It was who they were.
And also for what its worth, when Brian was in the Stones it was him and Jagger that the cameras lingered on, who were interviewed and whose pictures were on a 1000 bedroom walls. Keith was shy and quiet and very rarely interviewed in the sixties when Brian was in the band (which was called a group then). It was only after Brian died that Keith emerged into the media spotlight and became more central.
It would not have hurt the Stones to issue an album of early unreleased tracks and clearly promote it as a dedication to Brian. Rock history is in danger of forgetting his contribution. "DiscoVolante's" comments would not have been made had Jagger & Richards dealt with Brian's contribution differently in passed years and it would be nice to think they were big enough to read his comments now, recognise how sad they are, and act to officially place Brian more centrally to their early history.
Spot on, my friend. I grew up as a teenager during this period when image was everything. The band certainly had an image and Brian was an important part of that and he also made some good musical contributions. I'm sure he was very frustrated that the band moved on from the blues, where he was at his most comfortable, and his personality problems are well documented. If he had been able to accept his limitations things may have turned out differently. The music played by the band with his replacement, Mick Taylor, is the best the band has ever produced but I still love the early stuff to this day.
Brian is not overrated, he was what he was, faults and all, and without him the band may not have taken off so quickly because his sex appeal attracted the female fans who bought the records and screamed their way through the early tours.
Re: Brian Jones. Overrated?
Posted by:
His Majesty
()
Date: April 27, 2011 02:08
Quote
Elmo
. The music played by the band with his replacement, Mick Taylor, is the best the band has ever produced
.
What from the Taylor era is better than Satisfaction, Ruby Tuesday, Paint It Black, The Last Time, 2000 Light Years From Home, Jumpin' Jack Flash, Street Fighting Man etc etc?
There isn't anything better, it's just different, more rock orientated and with fancier guitar solos.
Re: Brian Jones. Overrated?
Posted by:
NICOS
()
Date: April 27, 2011 02:12
But because of his early death he has become somewhat of a legend, forever young.
That's a well know fact, that count for many celebrities ...die young and you will be more famous, but Brian was already a livin' legend
The Stones really did become something else without him, the widly considered masterpieces are the suit of Let it bleed-Sticky fingers-Exile on Main st and he isn't on those records (I can't really say percussion or autoharp is a serious contribution to a record). I have a really hard time picturing him playing Brown Sugar for an instance. Wouldn't y'all agree?
Even if he stayed in the Stones they would become something else, it's started with TSMR, JJFlash and SFMan, and what the use of image him playing Brown Sugar
__________________________
That's a well know fact, that count for many celebrities ...die young and you will be more famous, but Brian was already a livin' legend
The Stones really did become something else without him, the widly considered masterpieces are the suit of Let it bleed-Sticky fingers-Exile on Main st and he isn't on those records (I can't really say percussion or autoharp is a serious contribution to a record). I have a really hard time picturing him playing Brown Sugar for an instance. Wouldn't y'all agree?
Even if he stayed in the Stones they would become something else, it's started with TSMR, JJFlash and SFMan, and what the use of image him playing Brown Sugar
__________________________
Re: Brian Jones. Overrated?
Posted by:
BJPortugal
()
Date: April 27, 2011 02:22
Quote
DiscoVolanteDidn't Ron Wood play a sitar guitar live on some numbers? Anyway, it's just a matter of taste. The Open G-straight forward rock n roll-guitar weaving sound is the Stones sound I love and that sound has been working for the past 40 years. And except from Under My Thumb, all those tracks belongs to the psychedelic era. Yuck, I'd rather listen to Dirty Work than that Satanic Majesties crap...Quote
Sleepy City
I have an even harder time picturing Mick Taylor (or Ronnie Wood) playing a sitar on Paint It Black / a recorder on Ruby Tuesday / marimbas on Under My Thumb / mellotron on 2000 Light Years From Home / oboe on Dandelion...
Wouldn't y'all agree?
The guy was a musical genius, & the only person with the onstage charisma to rival Jagger.
It's all said.... How can you compare Dirty Work with Satanic? Imo, Satanic are miles away..
Re: Brian Jones. Overrated?
Posted by:
ryanpow
()
Date: April 27, 2011 06:02
Absolutely not. What a bunch of rubbish.
Re: Brian Jones. Overrated?
Posted by:
ab
()
Date: April 27, 2011 06:32
Quote
His MajestyQuote
neptuneQuote
Wry Cooter
I'd say he was an adequate to pretty good harp player -- I think Jagger is better.
Jagger was nowhere near as good as Jones on harp. Not even close.
Mick was rather weak to begin with, but he did develop in to a great player with unique feel. For me Mick's best harmonica playing came during the time Brian was leaving/after he died.
Yes, Jagger has certainly progressed beyond his rudimentary slop harp playing at the end of Little Red Rooster. But, even at his best, he's not better than Jones was on those first few albums. Brian Jones was among the best harp players in rock 'n' roll ever.
Re: Brian Jones. Overrated?
Posted by:
24FPS
()
Date: April 27, 2011 06:54
Brian's harp playing was hypnotic. I know Mick thinks he is a better harp player, but that's not true. They have different styles. And Brian's playing was hypnotic. As a matter of fact that's what I first noticed about Brian when I went back and heard the first few albums in the early 70s. At that point I had no reference to what he'd contributed to the band. For one thing the band didn't sound like that anymore. I'm a King Bee blew me away. All the stuff that came later, starting with Beggar's Banquet, were returning to areas originally explored by Brian, with Keith. And of course the irony is that just as they returned to those sounds, Brian was fading fast. That menace in Midnight Rambler was in Brian's playing from the get go.
Long before Keith's junkie elegance, Brian had dark, dark circles under his eyes. Long before Mick played around with sequins and eye shadow, Brian was sporting boas and jewelry, while remaining masculine. Brian rocked the unisex without being camp about it. It appears that Brian had a much bigger impact in Europe. By the time the Stones got out from under the Beatle's shadow in the States, Brian was on his way out. One thing is for sure, the Stones wide palette of sound shrank considerably with Brian gone. There was a lot of guitar rock, but the Stones used to be so much more.
Long before Keith's junkie elegance, Brian had dark, dark circles under his eyes. Long before Mick played around with sequins and eye shadow, Brian was sporting boas and jewelry, while remaining masculine. Brian rocked the unisex without being camp about it. It appears that Brian had a much bigger impact in Europe. By the time the Stones got out from under the Beatle's shadow in the States, Brian was on his way out. One thing is for sure, the Stones wide palette of sound shrank considerably with Brian gone. There was a lot of guitar rock, but the Stones used to be so much more.
Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.
Online Users
emotionalbarbecue , FeelslikeaGhost , frankotero , gagiwh , georgelicks , GJV , icantgetno , jplambert , keefmick , MonkeyMan2000 , mtripoli , rastakeith , RollingFreak , Sighunt , SonicDreamer , TooTight , trm15 , wolundamo
Guests:
2163
Record Number of Users:
206
on June 1, 2022 23:50
Record Number of Guests:
9627
on January 2, 2024 23:10