For Those Who Love The Rolling Stones :)

[Newguy562]

I've never been a big stones fan, but Star Star is pretty awsome. 

why not? and yes it is and the album it's on is awesome as well.

i've just never really liked most of their stuff, except for Star Star, Get Off My Cloud, Some Girls(the song), and Sympathy For The Devil. I will say that they were a pretty decent live band for a while. I'd say 1969-72 was their peak.

wow :/ ..you checked out all their body of work though right?

[Jay]

No.

[MBE]

Brian Jones and all of his work is under rated.

brian jones received more praise after his death then he would if he was alive.

Nope

yup

First Brian formed the band, directed their sound blueswise, expanded them past the blues, and when he died they lost all their individuality. I don't care if someone is dead or alive if I like their music. That makes no sense. I like Brian's music period. The 1963-68 stuff is the only stuff I would put on my all time best list. I like everything from Let It Bleed through Some Girls , but Mick and Keith found a formula in 1968 (as Brian was being eased out) and stuck to it.  Cool music without Brian yes, innovative without Brian not to me. I ignore anything past 1978 except Tatoo You which was old anyhow. It may help to know I like Rock and Roll much better than Rock. Will post more if I have to on this.

[Newguy562]

No.

one day you should check out their work,you might like it

[Newguy562]

Brian Jones and all of his work is under rated.

brian jones received more praise after his death then he would if he was alive.

Nope

yup

First Brian formed the band, directed their sound blueswise, expanded them past the blues, and when he died they lost all their individuality. I don't care if someone is dead or alive if I like their music. That makes no sense. I like Brian's music period. The 1963-68 stuff is the only stuff I would put on my all time best list. I like everything from Let It Bleed through Some Girls , but Mick and Keith found a formula in 1968 (as Brian was being eased out) and stuck to it.  Cool music without Brian yes, innovative without Brian not to me. I ignore anything past 1978 except Tatoo You which was old anyhow. It may help to know I like Rock and Roll much better than Rock. Will post more if I have to on this.

if anything they became way more innovative after he died their best work was after he died.

[MBE]

I'll try again. Here is my review of Keith's life book which is about why Brian isn't given his due.
First let me say I think Keith was a terrific artist in the sixties and seventies but I really dislike the book being a fan of Brian's. My opinion was made more strident after reading in Keno's "Rolling With The Stones" book of how Keith has not given songwriting credit to Brian, Mick Taylor and Bill Wyman. He had a chance to come clean here and didn't and I don't have a lot of respect for someone who can't admit to their own mistakes especally with hard drugs. I suppose he does reveal his role in certain issues but I still don't feel he understands that he hurt others with his actions.

I'm reading "Foundation Stone" right now writen by Grahm Ride. That Keith would even attempt to say he introduced Brian to electric blues is worse then him taking Anita away. Taking away Brian's place in history he is doing the man a much bigger diservice. Honestly to those in the know he only makes himself look bad not Brian by going out of his way to discredit all of Brian's musical innovations . Innovations that I feel are as strong or even stronger then Keith's when it comes to

1-Blending blues and rock. Keith makes a big deal about his open tuning in 1968. Ok Keith was good at it but Brian was doing it in 1961!

2-Adding new intruments to rock or at least playing them in a new way

3. Being one of the first mainstreem rock artists to bring world music to the general public.

Books like this are dangerous because they go down in history as the truth. Anyone who gives even a little bit of a damn about the Stones should not roll over on this as without Brian Jones we NEVER would have heard this wonderful music.

Let's go even deeper. Keith doesn't credit Bill or Brian for any of the riffs. He even says it was him and Mick who wanted to bring the blues to the world with Little Red Rooster. Also he claims to have taught Ike Turner open tuning. Guess he never heard his early stuff. To me Brian was the most interesting in the band and it must be said he actually did write a lot of the music. "Ruby Tuesday" was his and Keith's, he wrote parts of all the Nanker/Phelge songs, and he also wrote the music for some of the Satanic LP. He wasn't credited and that was part of the reason he LEFT the band. He was NOT fired but left after making it clear that he no longer wanted to be a part of the group by simply not showing up.

Unlike the myth that Keith tries to sell us Brian worked hard on every LP up through "Beggers". It was only the early Let It Bleed sessions that saw him not participating. Again I must say people should read Keno's "Rolling With The Stones" for the truth about what Brian did and did not do. Both of Bill Wyman's and Marriane Faithfull's first book also are much clearer on Brian's role in the band. He did sing quite a bit in 62-64 (a little bit through 66 as well) although he only did a few leads that sadly remain in the vaults. I also recomend people read "Golden Stone" by Laura Jackson and "Death Of A Rolling Stone" by Mandy Aftel both fair and solid books on Brian.

Since 1980 Keith had gotten bitchy about Mick and Brian and it's sad and old. Brian didn't do anything Keith and Mick haven't done. Hitting girls, knocking them up, getting loaded and blowing off a performance. Brian was a kid messed up in the head who had a drug problem. Yet it seems that he had a very kind side and he certainly had intelect and talent. It also seems he was trying to straighten out by 1969.

I don't excuse how Brian's faults but I also don't excuse Keith or Anita for what they did either. Brian's ego never matched Keith's growing ego of the last 32 years and Mr. Richards was also known to beat Anita. A real hypocrite! Andrew, Mick, and Keith did steer the band away from Brian but he was so popular and good at his craft that it was only after Brian died that Keith got much attention publically. That is a fact! It's also a fact that Keith gave Brian a lot of credit before the 80's and his brain became a pile of mush.

Brian never had a chance to grow up and he did some bad things, but one thing Brian didn't do was put his bandmates down in public. Brian was very well spoken and articulate. If he had a reason to bash Keith he would have not taken cheap shots and would have explained his views. If Keith died I can't picture Brian acting like Richards has. Again I ask what happened to the cool pre 1979 Keith?

[Jay]

Great post.  I have Keith's book, and I think it's a crime that he and Mick seem to want to forget that Brian Jones was even a part of the group. I also got the impression that after all these years. Keith still doesn't seem to get why heavy drug use is a bad thing.

[SMiLE Brian]

Keith and Mike have gone to huge lengths to cover up Brian Jones' role in the group.

[Pinder's Gone To Kokomo And Back Again]

Anyone here ever read "Stone Alone"?

Bill Wyman gives Brian big props in that book.

[Newguy562]

Anyone here ever read "Stone Alone"?

Bill Wyman gives Brian big props in that book.

i wanna see the movie about brian's life...what was t called again? rolling stoned? or something like that

[Heysaboda]

Brian Jones and all of his work is under rated.

brian jones received more praise after his death then he would if he was alive.

Nope

yup

First Brian formed the band, directed their sound blueswise, expanded them past the blues, and when he died they lost all their individuality. I don't care if someone is dead or alive if I like their music. That makes no sense. I like Brian's music period. The 1963-68 stuff is the only stuff I would put on my all time best list. I like everything from Let It Bleed through Some Girls , but Mick and Keith found a formula in 1968 (as Brian was being eased out) and stuck to it.  Cool music without Brian yes, innovative without Brian not to me. I ignore anything past 1978 except Tatoo You which was old anyhow. It may help to know I like Rock and Roll much better than Rock. Will post more if I have to on this.

if anything they became way more innovative after he died their best work was after he died.

For reals?!?!?!?
So, then let's hear it, exactly WHAT did The Rolling Stones, erm, "innovate" AFTER Brian Jones died?  Hmmm?  Other than being over the hill rock n roll doofuses.  They became caricatures of themselves.

It's no coincidence that the Stones started sucking around the time of the death of Brian Jones.

[Newguy562]

Brian Jones and all of his work is under rated.

brian jones received more praise after his death then he would if he was alive.

Nope

yup

First Brian formed the band, directed their sound blueswise, expanded them past the blues, and when he died they lost all their individuality. I don't care if someone is dead or alive if I like their music. That makes no sense. I like Brian's music period. The 1963-68 stuff is the only stuff I would put on my all time best list. I like everything from Let It Bleed through Some Girls , but Mick and Keith found a formula in 1968 (as Brian was being eased out) and stuck to it.  Cool music without Brian yes, innovative without Brian not to me. I ignore anything past 1978 except Tatoo You which was old anyhow. It may help to know I like Rock and Roll much better than Rock. Will post more if I have to on this.

if anything they became way more innovative after he died their best work was after he died.

For reals?!?!?!?
So, then let's hear it, exactly WHAT did The Rolling Stones, erm, "innovate" AFTER Brian Jones died?  Hmmm?  Other than being over the hill rock n roll doofuses.  They became caricatures of themselves.

It's no coincidence that the Stones started sucking around the time of the death of Brian Jones.

wow wtf!!! what albums by the rolling stones are the most critically acclaimed?? was brian jones in the stones when let it bleed came out? no!! exile in main st? no!..sticky fingers? no!
i'll give them beggars banquet but that's it,

[Pinder's Gone To Kokomo And Back Again]

I gotta go with Newguy here!

They innovated by being THE STONES!!!!!!!!!!!!

[Heysaboda]

I gotta go with Newguy here!

They innovated by being THE STONES!!!!!!!!!!!!

"Angie, Angie, Angie, Angie....."  LOL

Right, they innovated one of the worst songs in Musical History LOL

blech

[SMiLE Brian]

I find it funny that they were the punks of the 1960s, but by 1976 they were part of the bloated rock establishment that bands like the sex pistols and ramones didn't like.

[Pinder's Gone To Kokomo And Back Again]

To each his own! Angie is a killer song. Just listen to what Charlie does on the hi-hat to drop the beat right when Mick whispers "Angie"!

[Pinder's Gone To Kokomo And Back Again]

I find it funny that they were the punks of the 1960s, but by 1976 they were part of the bloated rock establishment that bands like the sex pistols and ramones didn't like.

Yeah, and people made fun of The Stones for being sloppy and drugged out on stage while praising The Sex Pistols for the same damn thing.

I'm not mentioning the Ramones merely because they are the 2nd greatest band of all time behind The Beach Boys and could do no wrong

[Newguy562]

I gotta go with Newguy here!

They innovated by being THE STONES!!!!!!!!!!!!

i should've just said that lol short but sweetttttt!

[MyGlove]

the stones are kinda like the beach boys. everybody thinks that they lost it way before they actually did. i think the stones were good even into the 80's. Up till Dirty Work. and even that wasn't terrible. Emotional Rescue and Undercover are really underrated. i think i probably have to change my answer to those two. and Black and Blue. And i agree with newguy on the innovation thing. If nothing else they really influenced a lot of the later 70's "riff bands"

[Heysaboda]

Yes, indeed, to each his own.

AND I don't mean to disrespect your taste or interest!!   

But for me, the Stones were a great band up till Let It Bleed, then, I've no idea what happened after that.

Still, you've not listed any real "innovations".  Like sitars, or backwards guitars, or sophistated harmonies in songs about God.  Those types of innovations!  Are there really any?  Disco?  LOL  They dabbled in country, but not very well.  They were a decent band up to a point.   

[Newguy562]

the stones are kinda like the beach boys. everybody thinks that they lost it way before they actually did. i think the stones were good even into the 80's. Up till Dirty Work. and even that wasn't terrible. Emotional Rescue and Undercover are really underrated. i think i probably have to change my answer to those two. and Black and Blue. And i agree with newguy on the innovation thing. If nothing else they really influenced a lot of the later 70's "riff bands"

it's extremely underrated...and yes they had awesome 80's work ..do you think tattoo you is over-rated?

[Pinder's Gone To Kokomo And Back Again]

Yes, indeed, to each his own.

AND I don't mean to disrespect your taste or interest!!  

But for me, the Stones were a great band up till Let It Bleed, then, I've no idea what happened after that.

Still, you've not listed any real "innovations".  Like sitars, or backwards guitars, or sophistated harmonies in songs about God.  Those types of innovations!  Are there really any?  Disco?  LOL  They dabbled in country, but not very well.  They were a decent band up to a point.  

No disrespect either. I mean, I can certainly get why one would lose interest in the Stones after Brian went. They lost A LOT with him gone. No doubt about it. Though some of their innovations: like having the killer samba beat for Sympathy For The Devil or the pump organ, weird beat for Paint It Black, weren't Brian's doing.

As for innovation. Well, that can be an intangible thing. They innovated, I guess, well, first off, they didn't NEED to innovate. Most bands don't innovate beyond honing their sound and basically repeating it over and over with the odd quirk here and there, which is fine. But the Stones never put out an album that sounded or felt just the same as the last. They dabbled in disco and made it legit with rock. Or something like that. Keith, Brian, Mick, Ronnie certainly pioneered (or at least defined) the two guitar rock attack. Keith and Ronnie certainly nailed "weaving" and Charlie nailed FEEL where a rock drummer is concerned. And Bill certainly developed his own unique way of not just playing the root note and of almost never repeating a phrase or run in a song. All important things if not high innovations.

[MyGlove]

the stones are kinda like the beach boys. everybody thinks that they lost it way before they actually did. i think the stones were good even into the 80's. Up till Dirty Work. and even that wasn't terrible. Emotional Rescue and Undercover are really underrated. i think i probably have to change my answer to those two. and Black and Blue. And i agree with newguy on the innovation thing. If nothing else they really influenced a lot of the later 70's "riff bands"

it's extremely underrated...and yes they had awesome 80's work ..do you think tattoo you is over-rated?

No way! I love it. It's as great as Sticky Fingers to me I do think it gets a pretty fair amount of acclaim tho. Same with Goats Head Soup. It very very good. But i think people generally think that about it.

[Newguy562]

the stones are kinda like the beach boys. everybody thinks that they lost it way before they actually did. i think the stones were good even into the 80's. Up till Dirty Work. and even that wasn't terrible. Emotional Rescue and Undercover are really underrated. i think i probably have to change my answer to those two. and Black and Blue. And i agree with newguy on the innovation thing. If nothing else they really influenced a lot of the later 70's "riff bands"

it's extremely underrated...and yes they had awesome 80's work ..do you think tattoo you is over-rated?

No way! I love it. It's as great as Sticky Fingers to me I do think it gets a pretty fair amount of acclaim tho. Same with Goats Head Soup. It very very good. But i think people generally think that about it.

i love sticky fingers well at least the first side of it and bitch and i might go over the line for saying this but i prefer listening to it more than exile lol...

[Pinder's Gone To Kokomo And Back Again]

Tattoo You is a killer album!

It might have been odds and ends from recent (and not so recent to 1981) years, but it seems like more care than usual was put into track sequencing and making the thing feel like a unified whole.

And, to be fair, only basic tracks in most cases were carried over from what was recorded in the disparate years. From what I can gather, nearly all of Mick's vocals are circa 1981 and the tracks Heaven and Neighbors (and I think one other) were newly conceived/recorded for the album.