Quote
Turner68

Quote
LeonidP
The big 4 come first in terms of greatness, the order can be flexible. Then comes Some Girls. That is the last great one!

There are many other very good ones but for me it is those 5 and then the rest.

i really suggest you listen to more of the brian jones era stones. they have plenty of records as good as some girls.

I'm quite sure i've heard all the earlier albums far more than you have.

Quote
blivet

Quote
LeonidP
The big 4 come first in terms of greatness, the order can be flexible. Then comes Some Girls. That is the last great one!

There are many other very good ones but for me it is those 5 and then the rest.

I really think Some Girls is hugely overrated..

I don't.

I don't get how Stripped is even in the discussion. All versions on Stripped are vastly inferior to the original versions, imo.

Quote
DandelionPowderman

Quote
TheGreek

Quote
DandelionPowderman

Quote
TheGreek
Undercover is the last great one where the Glimmers cared enough to fight about it !

Have you forgotten about the making of B2B?

I love B2B, they are a lot of really good tunes on there but it is not the same as UNDERCOVER and previous studio albums.Also i have to mention Voodoo lounge as a good later day Stones album but unlike the really creative and very fertile songwriting from Undercover and before .

I agree, but I was referring to the fight on B2B

as i recall B2B was 2 Stones albums in one Keith's album and Mick's album .Everything leading up to when Keith got rid of his nasty habit from the infamous Toronto bust to him reaserting himself creativly lead to quite the nasty dust up with his Glimmer twin and hence forth the schism the ultimatly destroyed the working releationship between Jagger/Richards.After Undercover the glimmers changed the model of how they wrote and produced there albums .Yes they did make nice music together again but never with the same fire .Case in point examine how Dirty work was recorded ,Richards ,Wood, Charlie and Bill would be in the studio cutting tracks then Mick would come in and do his vocals .Not the best vibes in that circumstance.Also no tours from 1982 thru 1989 to when they rolled out the Steel wheels album and tour .Which Steel wheels has some nice songs on it but! So in a way Mick convinced Keith to jump on board and Make all of the treasure that followed and huge world tours packing stadiums and making fans (myself included ) very happy to capture and enjoy our favorite band.

Quote
LeonidP
I don't get how Stripped is even in the discussion. All versions on Stripped are vastly inferior to the original versions, imo.

I'm not sure I agree with this - The Spider and the fly, for example, was transformed in the stripped version - both Keith and Charlie fabulous - I'd love to hear them play it as old men - The lyrics would need updating again but Mick has said in latter years he didn't like this song ( too close to the bone perhaps )

Quote
EJM

Quote
LeonidP
I don't get how Stripped is even in the discussion. All versions on Stripped are vastly inferior to the original versions, imo.

I'm not sure I agree with this - The Spider and the fly, for example, was transformed in the stripped version - both Keith and Charlie fabulous - I'd love to hear them play it as old men - The lyrics would need updating again but Mick has said in latter years he didn't like this song ( too close to the bone perhaps )

The original is great, the Stripped version pales. Even the great Love In Vain, so many great versions, studio, live etc. , somehow they did their worst rendition ever for Stripped.

Quote
LeonidP

Quote
EJM

Quote
LeonidP
I don't get how Stripped is even in the discussion. All versions on Stripped are vastly inferior to the original versions, imo.

I'm not sure I agree with this - The Spider and the fly, for example, was transformed in the stripped version - both Keith and Charlie fabulous - I'd love to hear them play it as old men - The lyrics would need updating again but Mick has said in latter years he didn't like this song ( too close to the bone perhaps )

The original is great, the Stripped version pales. Even the great Love In Vain, so many great versions, studio, live etc. , somehow they did their worst rendition ever for Stripped.

The STRIPPED version of The Spider And The Fly is, playing wise, superiour to the original. They actually sound like a blues band (same with Honest I Do).

Sweet Virginia is, although not as moving as the original, pretty damn good. Not Fade Away is excellent.

Quote
Roll73

Quote
His Majesty
Exile.

As much as I love SG, TY I agree with that. Some post Exile albums might be classic for Stones fans but not for the wider audience. Crosseyed Heart - a classic album? Seriously?

It's a new classic Keith album...

Quote
GasLightStreet

Quote
Roll73

Quote
His Majesty
Exile.

As much as I love SG, TY I agree with that. Some post Exile albums might be classic for Stones fans but not for the wider audience. Crosseyed Heart - a classic album? Seriously?

It's a new classic Keith album...

Like l said the bar is way down in the hole...

"No dope smoking no beer sold after 12 o'clock"

'great classic' sounds like an odd term to me
their last classic album was exile (of course)
their last great album imo was some girls, I know some would argue for tattoo you

What was their first classic album? Rolling Stones Now?

Quote
Turner68
CoUntry honk is a classic. Love the fiddling. Also one of the earliest experiments with country on a rock record.

I simply used two arbitrary songs that I think fit the criteria.

My point is that not every song on a classic album needs to be a masterpiece. A few filler songs that connect the masterpieces is allowable. Albums where EVERY song is a stone-cold masterpiece are exceedingly rare.

Actually, that's a good thread idea...

Bridges To Babylon

Grrr

2 1 2 0

Quote
Turner68
What was their first classic album? Rolling Stones Now?

THIS ONE!



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 2015-10-01 13:07 by DandelionPowderman.

Quote
DandelionPowderman

Quote
Turner68
What was their first classic album? Rolling Stones Now?

THIS ONE!

Exactly! Although it contains no original material it is still one of their best albums, it´s sparkling with power, youth and love for the music. The early Stones are often a bit neglected at this board, at least I got the impression. For most fans the Stones seem to start with LIB or BB, but the albums before weren´t bad (in fact very good - good) and their single-output was simply phenomenal.

Written before the two last posts, when I was interrupted by a lunch break with colleagues:

Quote
Turner68
What was their first classic album? Rolling Stones Now?

Their classic albums, understood as their treatment of the music that was classic to them, may be seen as applying to R&B. Then that concerns their first two albums (in UK releases) and, besides, their two studio and one live EPs, plus a couple of singles (perhaps up to "Little Red Rooster" ). It would mean that their classic albums are Rolling Stones vol 1 and 2. Then OUT OF OUR HEADS (UK Version once again) can suitably be seen as a transitional album also in this context, involving a couple of soul or soul/gospel numbers, considered as natural extension of their R&B Music, but otherwise implies the start of their development into other musikal spheres..

As to what in this approach is great out of this classical music for the Rolling Stones, is debatable. Myself I would say the first album (vol 1), the EPs and some of the mentionned single stuff.



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 2015-10-01 14:14 by Witness.

Quote
HMS

Quote
DandelionPowderman

Quote
Turner68
What was their first classic album? Rolling Stones Now?

THIS ONE!

Exactly! Although it contains no original material it is still one of their best albums, it´s sparkling with power, youth and love for the music. The early Stones are often a bit neglected at this board, at least I got the impression. For most fans the Stones seem to start with LIB or BB, but the albums before weren´t bad (in fact very good - good) and their single-output was simply phenomenal.

Tell Me (Jagger/Richards), Little By Little (Nanker Phelge/Phil Spector) and Now I've Got a Witness (Nanker Phelge)

Quote
Witness
Written before the two last posts, when I was interrupted by a lunch break with colleagues:

Quote
Turner68
What was their first classic album? Rolling Stones Now?

Their classic albums, understood as their treatment of the music that was classic to them, may be seen as applying to R&B. Then that concerns their first two albums (in UK releases) and, besides, their two studio and one live EPs, plus a couple of singles (perhaps up to "Little Red Rooster" ). It would mean that their classic albums are Rolling Stones vol 1 and 2. Then OUT OF OUR HEADS (UK Version once again) can suitably be seen as a transitional album also in this context, involving a couple of soul or soul/gospel numbers, considered as natural extension of their R&B music.

As to what in this approach is great out of this classical music for the Rolling Stones, is debatable. Myself I would say the first album (vol 1), the EPs and some of the mentionned single stuff.

5 out of 12 tracks are soul music on «The Rolling Stones No 2». I think it's fair to say that the transition started there already.

There was a reason that I had not posted before my lunch break. I noticed that now in an addition to the post, but I am too slow. It is transitional in the sense that is

"involving a couple of soul or soul/gospel numbers, considered as natural extension of their R&B music, but otherwise implies the start of their development into other musical spheres."

Edits: One misprint. And two others. And a capital letter that I did not write.



Edited 3 time(s). Last edit at 2015-10-01 14:26 by Witness.

Quote
HMS

Quote
DandelionPowderman

Quote
Turner68
What was their first classic album? Rolling Stones Now?

THIS ONE!

Exactly! Although it contains no original material it is still one of their best albums, it´s sparkling with power, youth and love for the music. The early Stones are often a bit neglected at this board, at least I got the impression. For most fans the Stones seem to start with LIB or BB, but the albums before weren´t bad (in fact very good - good) and their single-output was simply phenomenal.

I agree with your point about the early Stones. I wonder if in 10 years this board will have forgotten about LIB, BB et al and the "classic period" will be considered SG and TY.

Quote
Turner68

Quote
HMS

Quote
DandelionPowderman

Quote
Turner68
What was their first classic album? Rolling Stones Now?

THIS ONE!

Exactly! Although it contains no original material it is still one of their best albums, it´s sparkling with power, youth and love for the music. The early Stones are often a bit neglected at this board, at least I got the impression. For most fans the Stones seem to start with LIB or BB, but the albums before weren´t bad (in fact very good - good) and their single-output was simply phenomenal.

I agree with your point about the early Stones. I wonder if in 10 years this board will have forgotten about LIB, BB et al and the "classic period" will be considered SG and TY.

I seriously doubt that, but honestly, I'm not as well-versed on pre-BB Stones as I should be. I own Aftermath and Hot Rocks, but I've tended to neglect everything pre-BB. I need to fix that.

To me, I'd say, it is

UNDERCOVER - a great treat at that specific period -

and

VOODOO LOUNGE, of course.

dead.flowers

Quote
Turner68

Quote
HMS

Quote
DandelionPowderman

Quote
Turner68
What was their first classic album? Rolling Stones Now?

THIS ONE!

Exactly! Although it contains no original material it is still one of their best albums, it´s sparkling with power, youth and love for the music. The early Stones are often a bit neglected at this board, at least I got the impression. For most fans the Stones seem to start with LIB or BB, but the albums before weren´t bad (in fact very good - good) and their single-output was simply phenomenal.

I agree with your point about the early Stones. I wonder if in 10 years this board will have forgotten about LIB, BB et al and the "classic period" will be considered SG and TY.

Not a chance. No one can doubt how great the early albums are. The 'classic' for me, anyway, means when they took the songwriting to a whole new level. Obviously they started experimenting much more around Between and Satanic (both of which have great songs) beyond the typical verse-chorus-verse ... but they did not master that until Beggars, with songs like Jigsaw, Sympathy, Stray Cat Blues with those blistering guitars! And then to follow that up w/ Let It Bleed, just simply incredible ... There's no way to compare the earlier albums to these, as much as well all love them.

Quote
DandelionPowderman

Quote
Turner68
What was their first classic album? Rolling Stones Now?

THIS ONE!

Yup.

Quote
GasLightStreet

Quote
LeonidP

Quote
EJM

Quote
LeonidP
I don't get how Stripped is even in the discussion. All versions on Stripped are vastly inferior to the original versions, imo.

I'm not sure I agree with this - The Spider and the fly, for example, was transformed in the stripped version - both Keith and Charlie fabulous - I'd love to hear them play it as old men - The lyrics would need updating again but Mick has said in latter years he didn't like this song ( too close to the bone perhaps )

The original is great, the Stripped version pales. Even the great Love In Vain, so many great versions, studio, live etc. , somehow they did their worst rendition ever for Stripped.

The STRIPPED version of The Spider And The Fly is, playing wise, superiour to the original. They actually sound like a blues band (same with Honest I Do).

Sweet Virginia is, although not as moving as the original, pretty damn good. Not Fade Away is excellent.

Again, different ears. The original smokes and is a fine reflection of the burbling Brian Jones blues era. The Stripped version sounds like they were sitting around, trying to remember the song. Which they were.

Quote
24FPS

Quote
GasLightStreet

Quote
LeonidP

Quote
EJM

Quote
LeonidP
I don't get how Stripped is even in the discussion. All versions on Stripped are vastly inferior to the original versions, imo.

I'm not sure I agree with this - The Spider and the fly, for example, was transformed in the stripped version - both Keith and Charlie fabulous - I'd love to hear them play it as old men - The lyrics would need updating again but Mick has said in latter years he didn't like this song ( too close to the bone perhaps )

The original is great, the Stripped version pales. Even the great Love In Vain, so many great versions, studio, live etc. , somehow they did their worst rendition ever for Stripped.

The STRIPPED version of The Spider And The Fly is, playing wise, superiour to the original. They actually sound like a blues band (same with Honest I Do).

Sweet Virginia is, although not as moving as the original, pretty damn good. Not Fade Away is excellent.

Again, different ears. The original smokes and is a fine reflection of the burbling Brian Jones blues era. The Stripped version sounds like they were sitting around, trying to remember the song. Which they were.

But the way they remembered it... way more bluesy. Which is better.