I need some help
The problem is this: the Rolling Stones have always been a sore spot for me. I've never understood how they are consistently put on the level of The Beatles, whose influence is far beyond any other band in the history of rock. Yes, they have some good stuff, but can they really be considered ON PAR with the Fab Four? I think not.Like I said, they have some good stuff and there are quite a few songs I genuinely love: "Mother's Little Helper," "19th Nervous Breakdown," "I Am Waiting," and basically all of Her Satanic Majesty's Request. But a lot of the other stuff I've heard really grates the hell out of me.
So here's what I need from all you Stones lovers out there: based on what I like as listed above, what other Stones songs/albums do you think might be worth a shot? And God help you if you mention Goat's Head Soup or Some Girls.
posted by Cor1nth1an at 8:25 AM
1 Comments:
Kid, you came to the right spot. But in all honesty, based on what I'm hearing it doesn't sound like you're destined to become a Stones fan.
As to their best albums, I always felt their golden age started with '68's Beggars Banquet, followed by Let it Bleed ('69), Sticky Fingers ('71), and Exile on Main Street ('72), all of which ooze well-crafted rock with a heavy blues influence. Plus, their earlier stuff is also quite good, but you're right in saying they started to tank with Goats Head Soup. I like Some Girls, though -- sue me.
As to the Stones being put on the same level as the Beatles... For me, the answer to “Beatles or Stones?” will always be “Stones.” Almost exclusively because of the song “Sympathy for the Devil.” But I don’t see the Stones as being more innovative or influential as the Beatles. More talented? I’d call that a draw. Ultimately, I think it’s kind of like, whether a person believes in [INSERT PREFERRED CREATOR NAME HERE] or [INSERT PREFERRED CREATOR-OPPONENT NAME HERE], chances are they still believe that the creator is more powerful and influential than (and may have in fact created) the opponent.
I didn't live through the '60s, so I can't speak for the hippies, but that's how I've always viewed their rivalry: the Beatles were yang, and the Stones were yin. People just kind of go with whatever vibe they like the most. And yes, the Beatles were probably a more groundbreaking group than the Stones… but you’d be hard-pressed to prove they were cooler.
Post a Comment
<< Home