Where should I begin?

Lammastide said:

Where should I begin?

I love the Stones and some of my fav cd's are:

Sticky Fingers

Some Girls

Let it Bleed

Exile in Main Street

Tattoo You

Steel Wheels

Black and Blue

I would start with Sticky Fingers.

I love all of their music. I love the songs Keith sings too. They are very passionate and meaningful. Some of their live cd's are excellent!

With this thread: http://prince.org/msg/8/345321

sextonseven said:

With this thread: http://prince.org/msg/8/345321

How timely. Thanks!

Empress said:

Lammastide said:

Where should I begin?

I love the Stones and some of my fav cd's are:

Sticky Fingers

Some Girls

Let it Bleed

Exile in Main Street

Tattoo You

Steel Wheels

Black and Blue

I would start with Sticky Fingers.

I love all of their music. I love the songs Keith sings too. They are very passionate and meaningful. Some of their live cd's are excellent!

Start with Sticky Fingers, eh?

Lammastide said:

Empress said:

I love the Stones and some of my fav cd's are:

Sticky Fingers

Some Girls

Let it Bleed

Exile in Main Street

Tattoo You

Steel Wheels

Black and Blue

I would start with Sticky Fingers.

I love all of their music. I love the songs Keith sings too. They are very passionate and meaningful. Some of their live cd's are excellent!

Start with Sticky Fingers, eh?

Just my opinion, but I think the entire cd is fantastic.

Lammastide said:

sextonseven said:

With this thread: http://prince.org/msg/8/345321

How timely. Thanks!

I remembered that thread being longer. I'm probably thinking of the Top 10 Stones albums thread from around the same time.

the Beatles are much better choice

I'm a huge Beatles fan, but there is just something about the Stones that makes me crazy. In a good way.

Their "golden age" is widely considered the following sequence of albums:

Beggar's Banquet

Let It Bleed

Sticky Fingers

Exile on Main Street

I'd either start with those 4, or maybe their excellent 2-CD career retrospective "40 Licks".

And don't sleep on the underrated "Undercover" and "Steel Wheels" albums from the 80s. I particularly have a soft spot for "Undercover". Just a dark, nasty, groovy rock album. Love it.

FORTY LICKS - definitely, the best place to start. 33 gold classics of the 60s,70s and 80s, + 3 decent tracks of the 90s, a great (for me) 2002 single (Don't Stop) plus other three just-ok new tracks...

I also suggest

Some Girls

Let It Bleed

Sticky Fingers

you can't go wrong with those albums...

NoVideo said:

And don't sleep on the underrated "Undercover" and "Steel Wheels" albums from the 80s. I particularly have a soft spot for "Undercover". Just a dark, nasty, groovy rock album. Love it.

I agree. Undercover is a madcap-evil rock album with some 80s twists here and there. Jagger was probably insane at that time Surely their last great album, and nearly as good as Tattoo You...

sextonseven said:

Lammastide said:

How timely. Thanks!

I remembered that thread being longer. I'm probably thinking of the Top 10 Stones albums thread from around the same time.

http://www.google.com/cse...ing+stones

[Edited 12/1/10 16:55pm]

JoeTyler said:

sextonseven said:

I remembered that thread being longer. I'm probably thinking of the Top 10 Stones albums thread from around the same time.

http://www.google.com/cse...ing+stones

[Edited 12/1/10 16:55pm]

A lot of people are mentioning their run of classic albums in the late 60's early 70's, but you can't go past their string of masterfull singles in the 60's.

This is a must have!

Personally I go back and forth on who I like better out of The Beatles and The Stones. In the end they are so different, but equally great.

WildStyle said:

JoeTyler said:

http://www.google.com/cse...ing+stones

[Edited 12/1/10 16:55pm]

A lot of people are mentioning their run of classic albums in the late 60's early 70's, but you can't go past their string of masterfull singles in the 60's.

This is a must have!

Personally I go back and forth on who I like better out of The Beatles and The Stones. In the end they are so different, but equally great.

That box perfectly encapsulates the sound of 60s european hard-rock. 5 S-T-A-R-S

[Edited 12/1/10 17:04pm]

Looks like I have some my work cut out for me. I think learning the Stones will be my winter project.

OK, I picked up Hot Rocks '64-'71 late last night as a sort of appetizer. I already knew most of it, but there's some stuff I've ignored over the years that it turns out I definitely dig. "Street Fighting Man" is easily my immediate favorite from that set, so I'm thinking I may go straight for Beggar's Banquet, move in sequence up to Exile on Main Street, and then branch out to the years before and after their 1968-1972 "golden era."

Should be interesting.

[Edited 12/2/10 11:31am]

i have the forty licks compilation which is very good but i have struggled to get into the stones....i have always been a huge beatles fan so i think i have always thought the stones were inferior i suppose....jagger and richards dont compare to lennon and mccartney for me....i admit i havent listened to many albums....i tried exile on main street but it did very little for me....maybe i should try listening to it again...maybe try the sticky fingers album as well....

[Edited 12/2/10 11:46am]

just to add....if you like the beatles....the kinks released some very good albums in the late 60s....ray davies was writing some great stuff during that period....something else.....village green and arthur are great melodic albums....

blackbob said:

i have the forty licks compilation which is very good but i have struggled to get into the stones....i have always been a huge beatles fan so i think i have always thought the stones were inferior i suppose....jagger and richards dont compare to lennon and mccartney for me....i admit i havent listened to many albums....i tried exile on main street but it did very little for me....maybe i should try listening to it again...maybe try the sticky fingers album as well....

[Edited 12/2/10 11:46am]

The Stones have always had singles here and there that I've enjoyed, but I know (and I feel somewhat shallow in saying this) that a big part of why I was never bowled over by them is that they seem to have had a far less pointed appreciation than the Beatles for overall aesthetic. Everything from the Beatles' initial compositions, orchestrations and recording studio approaches was always so intentional, and I'm told even by Stones diehards that the Beatles' albums work better as conceptual wholes, for example. Elsewhere, the Beatles were also always aware of their look and presence -- and they were much cuter. This all made for an amazing sort of multisensory artistry.

The Stones, on the other hand, seem a more visceral musical pleasure. They just jam. I'm trying to appreciate that.

[Edited 12/2/10 12:14pm]

blackbob said:

just to add....if you like the beatles....the kinks released some very good albums in the late 60s....ray davies was writing some great stuff during that period....something else.....village green and arthur are great melodic albums....

Will check them out. Thanks.

blackbob said:

i think i have always thought the stones were inferior i suppose....jagger and richards dont compare to lennon and mccartney for me....

I've heard that for many years and I think that it's just an old, unfair stereotype.

Beatles and Stones are pretty different band; there was a short competition in the mid-60s, yeah, about which was the best band, and I think that's ridiculous...since Satisfaction or Paint It Black it was clear that the Stones were a completely different animal than the Beatles. By 1968, the Beatles had released a double album of cutting edge pop/rock while the Stones released a tight 10-songs british folk-delta blues album...nuff said

and hell, if we're in 1965 all over again give Satisfaction or Get Off Of My Cloud any day over Help! or Drive My Car (and I'm a huge Beatles fan too )

I've never understood this weird competitions anyway...

Beatles vs Stones

Led Zeppelin vs Black Sabbath

David Bowie (glam) vs T.Rex

REM vs U2

Blur vs Oasis

Radiohead vs The Verve

oranges and apples...

JoeTyler said:

blackbob said:

i think i have always thought the stones were inferior i suppose....jagger and richards dont compare to lennon and mccartney for me....

I've heard that for many years and I think that it's just an old, unfair stereotype.

Beatles and Stones are pretty different band; there was a short competition in the mid-60s, yeah, about which was the best band, and I think that's ridiculous...since Satisfaction or Paint It Black it was clear that the Stones were a completely different animal than the Beatles. By 1968, the Beatles had released a double album of cutting edge pop/rock while the Stones released a tight 10-songs british folk-delta blues album...nuff said

and hell, if we're in 1965 all over again give Satisfaction or Get Off Of My Cloud any day over Help! or Drive My Car (and I'm a huge Beatles fan too )

I've never understood this weird competitions anyway...

Beatles vs Stones

Led Zeppelin vs Black Sabbath

David Bowie (glam) vs T.Rex

REM vs U2

Blur vs Oasis

Radiohead vs The Verve

oranges and apples...

You mean "apples and oranges."

...Apples deserve top billing as far as I'm concerned.

Lammastide said:

JoeTyler said:

I've heard that for many years and I think that it's just an old, unfair stereotype.

Beatles and Stones are pretty different band; there was a short competition in the mid-60s, yeah, about which was the best band, and I think that's ridiculous...since Satisfaction or Paint It Black it was clear that the Stones were a completely different animal than the Beatles. By 1968, the Beatles had released a double album of cutting edge pop/rock while the Stones released a tight 10-songs british folk-delta blues album...nuff said

and hell, if we're in 1965 all over again give Satisfaction or Get Off Of My Cloud any day over Help! or Drive My Car (and I'm a huge Beatles fan too )

I've never understood this weird competitions anyway...

Beatles vs Stones

Led Zeppelin vs Black Sabbath

David Bowie (glam) vs T.Rex

REM vs U2

Blur vs Oasis

Radiohead vs The Verve

oranges and apples...

You mean "apples and oranges."

...Apples deserve top billing as far as I'm concerned.

That nasty, naughty tongue is gonna eat that little harmless apple!!

By the way, I've always felt that George Harrison should have been a Stone: he looked, talked, thought, played and acted like a Stone...do you imagine the possibilities?? I mean :

Mick Jagger

Keith Richards

George Harrison

Bill Wyman

Charlie Watts

...

omg omg

George, why did you waste your life with that silly Ringo, the crazy John and that harmless apple pie called Paul?? Mick and Keith would have welcomed you with open arms...

JoeTyler said:

By the way, I've always felt that George Harrison should have been a Stone: he looked, talked, thought, played and acted like a Stone...do you imagine the possibilities?? I mean :

Mick Jagger

Keith Richards

George Harrison

Bill Wyman

Charlie Watts

...

omg omg

George, why did you waste your life with that silly Ringo, the crazy John and that harmless apple pie called Paul?? Mick and Keith would have welcomed you with open arms...

I could see that back in '68 to, say, '72, but I think George was a bit too chilled-out and clean-living to be a Stone through the later '70s up 'til his death.

I was surprised to hear, though, that the Beatles and Stones actually got along and that John and Paul did backup vocals on Their Satanic Majesties Request. The "rivalry" had me believing until recently that they all hated each other.

[Edited 12/2/10 13:40pm]

Lammastide said:

JoeTyler said:

By the way, I've always felt that George Harrison should have been a Stone: he looked, talked, thought, played and acted like a Stone...do you imagine the possibilities?? I mean :

Mick Jagger

Keith Richards

George Harrison

Bill Wyman

Charlie Watts

...

omg omg

George, why did you waste your life with that silly Ringo, the crazy John and that harmless apple pie called Paul?? Mick and Keith would have welcomed you with open arms...

I could see that back in '68 to, say, '72, but I think George was a bit too chilled-out and clean-living to be a Stone through the later '70s up 'til his death.

I was surprised to hear, though, that the Beatles and Stones actually got along and that John and Paul did backup vocals on Their Satanic Majesties Request. The "rivalry" had me believing until recently that they all hated each other.

[Edited 12/2/10 13:40pm]

Well, Keith has recently said that he remembers John as a "silly sod" (and he probably was )

but yeah, the Stones basically admired the Beatles and viceversa, at least until 1980, when John infamously said "won't they just retire?" weeks before his assassination

And the Beatles also gave to the Stones a pretty good Lennon/McCartney song in 1964, "I Wanna Be Your Man"... and George, Mick and Keith used to go together to drug parties in 1966/67 ... Mick and Keith got busted, but the cops let George go