Customer Discussions > Music forum

Need A Little Help From A Rolling Stones Fan


Sort: Oldest first | Newest first
Showing 1-25 of 90 posts in this discussion
Initial post: Mar 13, 2013 2:27:40 PM PDT
I'm collecting the greatest rock albums of all time and just got 5 Beatles albums.
Revolver
The Beatles
Rubber Soul
Sgt. Pepper's
Abbey Road
I figure it's only right to get the 5 best Stones albums. I just got Exile On Main Street and would like to get at least 4 more.
Does anyone have some Recommendations? Thanks in advance.

In reply to an earlier post on Mar 13, 2013 2:38:55 PM PDT
Johnny Bee says:
It's Only Rock n' Roll
Sticky Fingers
Let It Bleed
Beggars Banquet

In reply to an earlier post on Mar 13, 2013 3:15:29 PM PDT
I would replace It's Only Rock N' Roll, possibly with Some Girls.

Posted on Mar 13, 2013 3:18:48 PM PDT
Does anyone know if the remastered CD's are that much better?

In reply to an earlier post on Mar 13, 2013 3:19:16 PM PDT
Not everyone agrees about the Top 4, but enough do that they're practically a given. I think there's a noticable dropoff between Exile, Sticky, Beggars, and Let It Bleed....and any other Stones album. This was their peak period and is indicative of their best work.

The album that comes in at No. 5 is highly debatable and you're not likely to find much concensus on that. The ones most often mentioned are probably Aftermath and Some Girls. Some Girls is their most consistent album after Exile (chronologically), though there's nothing on it as classic as Aftermath's Paint It Black and Under My Thumb.

Maybe the best thing to do is to go to iTunes, look at track lists, and play samples.

In reply to an earlier post on Mar 13, 2013 4:08:39 PM PDT
Johnny Bee says:
Could've gone either way, HFTM.

Did consider Some Girls and, on reflection, it probably is the better album.

Posted on Mar 13, 2013 4:31:46 PM PDT
eastrich2010 says:
1968- 72 was the Stones peak.Beggars Banquet,Let It Bleed,Get Yer Ya-Ya's Out (their best live disc),Sticky Fingers,and Exile On Main Street are the albums to get.

In reply to an earlier post on Mar 13, 2013 5:45:24 PM PDT
onsenkuma says:
Jon,
At the risk of sounding like, um, a broken record...I have to agree with those who identify the essential Stones albums as those released between '68 and '72:

BEGGARS BANQUET
LET IT BLEED
STICKY FINGERS
EXILE ON MAIN STREET

My personal 5th album would have to be THEIR SATANIC MAJESTIES REQUEST (1967) but it's one of the least favourite of their catalog for most fans. Unlike others here I now prefer GOATS HEAD SOUP to anything that came afterward, including SOME GIRLS. I didn't much like it when it came out, but I've since grown to like it a lot. A great 5th album from the earlier years, and the most obvious choice, is AFTERMATH.

Hey Jon, let's put it this way: You CAN'T lose! Cheers...

Posted on Mar 13, 2013 5:59:14 PM PDT
Sticky Fingers, Let It Bleed, Aftermath and Englands Newest Hitmakers. I selected ENH because I think one, the early albums are underrated and two, it's a good representation of this early period showing the Stones as more of a blues/ R and B band. They treat the covers with lots of energy and it's just cool to be reminded of what the band was like back then.

Posted on Mar 13, 2013 10:11:51 PM PDT
My four to add to "Exile" would be "Aftermath", "Beggar's Banquet", "Let It Bleed", and "Sticky Fingers". "Between The Buttons", "Satanic Majesties", "Goats Head Soup", "Some Girls" and "Tattoo You" are all also very fine albums if you want to do more exploring after that.

In reply to an earlier post on Mar 13, 2013 10:44:18 PM PDT
...what Topper said...

Posted on Mar 14, 2013 8:23:14 AM PDT
vivazappa says:
If you see Mick Taylor on the credits...get it!

Posted on Mar 14, 2013 8:39:30 AM PDT
Last edited by the author on Mar 14, 2013 8:39:43 AM PDT
Bill Wyman, holds his bass in a funny way....

Posted on Mar 14, 2013 9:28:14 AM PDT
Blues Junkie says:
agreed that Exile, Beggars Banquet, Let It Bleed & Sticky Fingers have to be the top 4. I'd go with Some Girls at #5 if you're sticking to studio albums, but you might also go live & go with Get Your Ya-Ya's Out as your 5th. come to think of it, a limit of 5 might make sense for the Beatles since they were active for less than 10 years, but you might want to dig deeper into the Stones

Posted on Mar 14, 2013 3:53:34 PM PDT
@Blues Junkie: The Beatles may have been active for less than ten years, but the Stones were only actively *good* for about 15. ;)

In reply to an earlier post on Mar 14, 2013 4:08:15 PM PDT
Last edited by the author on Mar 14, 2013 4:09:56 PM PDT
I know what you mean, but you have to be careful with semantics if you want an accurate portrayal. This may sound picky, but I don't think you make a good case with that statement. I do think it just might be the particular phrasing you used.

The Stones are my favorite band ever, and IMO they were sort of an average band from about 1978 until 1997. (I'm thinking you consider them good from their inception through Some Girls.) I consider them to have retired as a studio band after Bridges to Babylon, only recording a few things after that to support new releases, tours, or because they were expected to and had the time to do it. But no real albums after that.

So if you can accept that for 17 years they were an average band (unless you'd call them "below average") putting out releases that were uneven but with some high points and selling reasonably well -- not by their own standards, but by general standards -- is it really fair to say that they were no longer "actively good"?

I think you've got to be at least a "good" band to do what they did after 1978. Not great, not my favorite period of Stones' Music, and a shadow of their former greatness to be sure..... but not less than "good."

Posted on Mar 14, 2013 4:34:02 PM PDT
Last edited by the author on Mar 14, 2013 4:37:37 PM PDT
@zapatos espinados: First off, I was partly joking with that comment. However, only partly, so:

"But no real albums after that."

What, "A Bigger Bang" wasn't an album?

"So if you can accept that for 17 years they were an average band (unless you'd call them "below average") putting out releases that were uneven but with some high points and selling reasonably well -- not by their own standards, but by general standards -- is it really fair to say that they were no longer "actively good"?"

I should have said "actively *great*", ie. on a par to The Beatles, since that was the original comparison. In that sense, the Stones were really only on that super-stratospheric level IMO from 1965-72, about as many years as The Beatles were magnificent (that's still quite a few years to be operating at such a high level, and it is the justifiable basis for their legend). From 1973-78 I'd consider them a well above-average band but not a legendary one (no, not even "Some Girls"). And I don't consider anything they did from 1980-1997 (or later) to even be "good", outside of *at most* two-three cuts per album (outside of "Tattoo You", which was essentially an album of 70s outtakes). So, the difference here is mainly that, yes, I disagree with you on how good (or not) they were post-1978; I believe the vast majority of that period was definitely below-average (live is another matter entirely). I could happily live without any album after "Tattoo You". *Happily*. I could possibly make one decent (not spectacular, but good) forty-minute album compiled from the six studio albums and assorted "new" tracks (on hits albums, deluxe editions, etc) they've put out since then.

Posted on Mar 14, 2013 4:37:13 PM PDT
Last edited by the author on Mar 14, 2013 4:38:51 PM PDT
Porcupine D says:
Sticky Fingers
Exile On Main Street
Beggars' Banquet
Let It Bleed
Get Yer Ya Ya's Out (Essential live album, IMO)
It's Only Rock & Roll

Posted on Mar 14, 2013 5:01:08 PM PDT
Grandpa Tom says:
My nominations:

Out of Our Heads (US) * If one greatest hits album is allowed, substitute Big Hits (High Tide and Green Grass)
Get Your Ya-Ya's Out
Let It Bleed
It's Only Rock and Roll

All the best,
GT

In reply to an earlier post on Mar 14, 2013 5:14:53 PM PDT
Dee Zee says:
I saw on video their December 15 2012 show in New Jersey. Some of the best live performances ever by this band.like Steven Spielberg once said something like "you can only be the Rolling Stones in 1965. After that you're a touring band."

Posted on Mar 14, 2013 5:18:14 PM PDT
After Tatoo you, you could take the best song from each album, and you still would not come up with anything as good as their early albums. Decembers Children, Out Of Our Heads, Englands Newest Hitmakers, 12 x 5, and on are all very fine albums.

In reply to an earlier post on Mar 14, 2013 5:42:51 PM PDT
RE: I could happily live without any album after "Tattoo You".

I can happily live without any album after "Some Girls" as long as I can have maybe 12-15 tracks from the '80-'97 period. I don't think as much of "Tattoo You" as many do. And yeah, I forgot about "A Bigger Bang"....I have the DVD set and forgot about the album, which I do not have.

But I still think they qualify as "good" overall in that era. I don't think you can even put out albums with 2-4 good songs on them without being at least "good." I think our differences lie in that we probably have different interpretations of what "good" is in this particular context.

Posted on Mar 14, 2013 5:52:18 PM PDT
@zapatos espinados: "I don't think you can even put out albums with 2-4 good songs on them without being at least "good."

I lean more towards two good songs per album than four, in that period. Four per album would start to qualify for minimum goodness, probably.

Live, they were almost always able to still deliver the goods, as the 50th anniversary shows attested. So, they are still "good" in that area. Two good (and I'm saying these songs are OK, *not* great) songs per album, though--three at best--is not "good" in my view, however.

In reply to an earlier post on Mar 14, 2013 5:58:00 PM PDT
Hinch says:
Aftermath/Beggar's Banquet/Let It Bleed/Sticky Fingers/Some Girls/Voodoo Lounge

Posted on Mar 14, 2013 6:18:08 PM PDT
Steve says:
The SACD remasters are excellent, btw. The recent remasters of Exile and Some Girls are great for the extras as well.
‹ Previous 1 2 3 4 Next ›
[Add comment]
Add your own message to the discussion
To insert a product link use the format: [[ASIN:ASIN product-title]] (What's this?)
Prompts for sign-in
 


Recent discussions in the Music forum

Discussion Replies Latest Post
Short but impactful careers in music 24 5 minutes ago
Song Game...10 songs where.... 4821 13 minutes ago
Most compelling line in a song. 2626 53 minutes ago
The Music Of Our Lives 6367 57 minutes ago
Favorite 2014 Albums? 174 1 hour ago
Musical Mt. Rushmore 30 1 hour ago
What Are You Listening To? (Volume Three) 4049 2 hours ago
Who Ruled the 70's: The Eagles, Fleetwood Mac or Steely Dan? 492 7 hours ago
Top Artists on iPod Device? 28 8 hours ago
Christmas Playlists! 28 8 hours ago
Long Careers in Music 41 9 hours ago
Your favourite novelty songs 101 13 hours ago
 

This discussion

Discussion in:  Music forum
Participants:  28
Total posts:  90
Initial post:  Mar 13, 2013
Latest post:  Mar 16, 2013

New! Receive e-mail when new posts are made.
Tracked by 2 customers

Search Customer Discussions