Rolling Stones

[genrex]

In talking with people about the Rolling Stones, I sometimes hear them express a preference for the early Stones, vs the later Stones.

I'm not terribly familiar with the Stones, but I think they are saying they prefer the earlier more melodic and more emotionally intimate Stones, vs the later louder blues-jazz musical style and edgy-controversial song content.

Is there an album that defines the "dividing line" between the early Stones and the later Stones? After that album, was there still sometimes a return to their earlier style in form and content?

_

[svandamme]

they are old.. Mick these days, it's shouting, to singing, don't like it.
And all of their new stuff (recent 20 years ) sounds the same to me

[GG Allin]

Big stones fan, but I really only like the very late sixties stuff up through Tattoo You.

[nota]

when brian left

[Dana Norris]

Let it Bleed was the album that forshadowed the change from rythem and blues.

[herr_oberst]

Beggars Banquet is the apex between old and new, IMHO
(or Let It Bleed)

[Dottore]

The boys peaked in the late sixties.

Let It Bleed, Beggars's Banquet and Sticky Fingers are their best albums IMO, though if I were really in the bag I would add Exile on Main Street to that list.

Your characterization of their early and later periods is not right. They really started out as a pure blues band doing blues covers. All their early stuff is "bluesy".

They were never really edgy...unless you count Their Satanic Majesties Request as edgy...which of course you shouldn't.

They're just a rock band. (It's only rock and roll - but I like it.)

[craigster59]

Originally Posted by Dana Norris

Let it Bleed was the album that forshadowed the change from rythem and blues.

And what I think is their best album next to Exile On Main Street.

[ossiblue]

Originally Posted by nota

when brian left

Agree, but change was not sudden or abrupt.

I have been a Stones fan since they first came on the scene. I would disagree with something the OP posted (which he heard from others)--that the early Stones were more melodic and intimate rather than, etc. The early Stones were very bluesy as well as edgy (which I define as on the edge of what popular music, at the time, was about lyrically and subject-wise), much of that thanks to Brian Jones.

As far as a definitive album "change", that may be hard. There are many compilation albums in the Stones catalog that draw on past cuts and there are several later albums which have, IMO, individual cuts that are worthy vs the entire album. Once you get past "Let It Bleed", the ratio of individual cuts to complete album quality starts to shift.

[craigster59]

Always loved this video.....

[Dottore]

Originally Posted by ossiblue

Once you get past "Let It Bleed", the ration of individual cuts to complete album quality starts to shift.

That's a great way to summarize it. Absolutely right.

[KFC911]

Been a huge Stones fan all my life...essentially three different bands. Back in the 60s with Brian (the Hot Rocks compilation of all their "hits" sums that period up). The Mick Taylor era (my favorite, starting with Let It Bleed, Exile (my all time favorite), etc. through the early 70s. Then the new kid (Ronnie Wood) from '75 on. Lots of great albums (I've probably got 30+) from each version. Seen 'em a few times live, but don't get "into" stadium/arena tours, "much". They ain't the Stones anymore without Bill and Ian on keys anyways imo...YMMV. Keef is da man behind the music...for me anyways

[genrex]

Thank you for the replies. I really appreciate it.

I need to listen to their albums, especially their early stuff with which I'm basically completely unfamiliar. It won't be the same as growing up with the albums, and the knowledge and experience that comes with that, but still it will be good. Kinda like growing up all over again. I need to sit down and listen to each of their albums individually. Good times ahead. Thanks again!

Rog

_

[KFC911]

For the OP's question, yes...the dividing line (album wise) was "Let It Bleed" (mostly Keef though) and "Black & Blue" (Ronnie's first)...

[herr_oberst]

Originally Posted by ossiblue

Once you get past "Let It Bleed", the ration of individual cuts to complete album quality starts to shift.

It can be argued that "Some Girls" is a complete album. Sure, it's got it's disco flavoring, but the album is definitely 'of a piece' in my opinion. And it's a good album, too, also IMHO.

[KFC911]

"Some Girls" ('78) deffinitely was a "complete body of work"..."Tattoo You" (still good) was stuff they'd had "in the can" for a while as I recall...

[cairns]

Agree with the sentiments here. Apart from "Big Hits- High tide and Green Grass" Exile remains my favorite. Also really liked (though technically not a Stones album) Jamming with Edward. And I still get a chill hearing Paint It Black......

[Dottore]

Originally Posted by cairns

And I still get a chill hearing Paint It Black......

Isn't it great how music brings people together?

Hearing "Paint It Black" for the first time blew me away completely. That and Dylan's "Like a Rolling Stone".

That was about the time I realized that life wasn't really like a box of chocolates.

[aigel]

Do they have any concerts planned in the US?

G

[herr_oberst]

An old movie with Diane Keaton and Albert Finney ("Shoot the Moon") has a scene where Diane Keaton is in the sitting room with her (soon to be) lover, she goes over to the turntable. Starts "Play with Fire".

Wow. Perfect.