I would have to agree that the period with Mck Taylor were the best.  however, I did dig The Bigger Bang, a lot.  It was the first record since Black and Blue that Keith and Mick wrote songs together and it tells.  Although, there are good cuts on about every album since Mick Taylor left, just not whole albums of great songwritng and playing.  They were definitely in the zone, so too speak during the Taylor years. 

Singles were the bread and butter for those 60's bands, so when they'd throw an album together a shit load of the stuff WAS actually filler. I think the earlier singles are my favorites, but of course the full lengths hit their peak in the early/mid 70's.

Totally agreed. I'd much rather listen to their singles collection than those albums one after another.

Brother Panti-Christ said:

I own everything of the Stones made from the 60's and 70's. I think the Brian Jones years were amazing for their hit singles, but the full length albums from time weren't as convincing as the late 60's and early 70's LPs. Keith and Mick really hit their stride as songwriters on Beggar's Banquet and coasted into the 70's making some my favorite LPs of all time.

I own everything of the Stones made from the 60's and 70's. I think the Brian Jones years were amazing for their hit singles, but the full length albums from time weren't as convincing as the late 60's and early 70's LPs. Keith and Mick really hit their stride as songwriters on Beggar's Banquet and coasted into the 70's making some my favorite LPs of all time.

Yeah the moments from the '80's are sometimes comical, but I still love 'em.  I remember that video with Bette Midler for BOB...funny.  Tattoo You has some good stuff.

Like many have said, I too have a soft spot for the early stuff just due to how raw and bad ass it is...But I like it all really.

Definitely early Stones.  December's Children is my favorite

I think the early singles are pretty unbeatable, especially "I Wanna Be Your Man" and "Have You Seen Your Mother Baby". Not a big fan of their albums though - few good tracks here and there [mainly on "Aftermath" and "Satanic Majesties"], lot of filler in my opinion.

I also like "Some Girls," along with "It's Only Rock'n'Roll."  I love the title track on the latter, along with "Dance Little Sister," and I also like "Luxury" and "Time Waits for No One."  Aside from "Miss You" on the former, I thought that album was a great response to the punk rock explosion of the 70s.  I especially like "When the Whip Comes Down" and "Shattered," along with "Beast of Burden."  Yes, I know "Beast of Burden" is kind of cheesy, but I still like it. 

As for the 80s, they had their moments.  I like "She's So Cold" from "Emotional Rescue," along with "Hang Fire" from "Tattoo You."

enzo said:

I'm a huge fan of Emotional Rescue, myself.  The Stones are The Stones no matter what era-every album they put out in the '60's-'70's realm was great...Some Girls?  

They have a great '80's catalogue that still makes me crazy.  All About You/Waiting On a Friend-Keef's bio was a great read, too.

enz

I'm a huge fan of Emotional Rescue, myself.  The Stones are The Stones no matter what era-every album they put out in the '60's-'70's realm was great...Some Girls?  

They have a great '80's catalogue that still makes me crazy.  All About You/Waiting On a Friend-Keef's bio was a great read, too.

enz

My current preference is for out-of-the-gate Stones. I never owned The Rolling Stones Now! until recently and it really got me hammering on the early records again.  December's Children, 12X5, Ladies and Gentlemen The Rolling Stones, Aftermath, Flowers, Out of Our Heads.  All brilliantly raw.

I gotta agree and qualify my earlier statement.  I love the early Stones original stuff, most of their early covers left much to be desired.

Time For Tiffin said:

For me,with a few exceptions, the Jagger/Richards writin' style really came together in the later 60's.

The early RnB standards LP s are piss poor with so many other British RnB bands doing alot better job.

Aftermath?eerrmmmmmm........well the covers cool.

For me,with a few exceptions, the Jagger/Richards writin' style really came together in the later 60's.

The early RnB standards LP s are piss poor with so many other British RnB bands doing alot better job.

Aftermath?eerrmmmmmm........well the covers cool.

Hi!

I´m a great fan of this fabulous radio program, by the way it has been an inspiration to my radio program...:)

http://www.upv.es/pls/oreg/rtv_web.ProgRadioFicha?p_id=1694&p_idioma=c

I can´t listen to this episode neither download it...I apreciate so much if anyone can help me, thanks a lot.

Yeah, I know exactly what you mean.  When I first heard the Sonics' version, I thought, "How menacing, they sound like they really mean business!"

Mole said:

I dig the Kingsmen version, wonderfully raw and crude. Great recorded sound, pretty gutsy on the low end for white boys in '63! Sonics cut is cool too though, especially the way they change the chords and make it kinda meaner, know what I mean?

I dig the Kingsmen version, wonderfully raw and crude. Great recorded sound, pretty gutsy on the low end for white boys in '63! Sonics cut is cool too though, especially the way they change the chords and make it kinda meaner, know what I mean?

Totally!!! THat is a BITCHIN' version!!! Truly punk rock!!

Axel Björnsson said:

swamp rats

Saw these guys for the first time last night in St Louis.  All the above comments appear to be totally accurate.  Mary may be the best rhythm guitarist you could hope for.  Strong, crisp tone, tight.  Rachael was pricklie:  "I still don't know what I think of St Louis..." and ranting about the "pretty girls in the back" not dancing enough.  "What's it going to take to get you to have fun!?!"  Another couple of songs later she got snappy with 'her band' and I was out.  Way to ingraciate yourself to an audience.  The opening bands were really good though.  Not my normal cup of joe but Girl in A Coma was very strong.  All were very good musicians.  The bass player had an Epiphone "Jack Cassidy" hollowbody and she commanded it.  The drummer was what made the band so outstanding though.  not just chops but knew how to work a song to keep it interesting.  I bet within a year they're on Austin City Limits.  It seems like they would be ideal for each other.

The Beatles in mono is amazing, though I have a soft spot for lots of their stereo mixes. Back in the 80's I stumbled onto a mono version of the White Album and I was pleasantly surprised how much cooler it sounded then the stereo mixes I had heard my entire life. And back in the day they would spend a whole lot more time mixing the Mono versions since that was what would be played on radio and TV.

LOL!

Lord Muck!! said:

Does mono sound better in stereo...??

Does mono sound better in stereo...??

Mono generally. Seems more often the actual band are involved in a mono mix, whereas the stereo is done later by an engineer. Not always the case obviously, but generally. I guess later in the 60s people started to actually think more about stereo separation - advances in multitrack technology obviously makes a difference. 2 and 4 track stereo is pretty limited for obvious reasons.

Mono for DJing, Stereo for home listening. Having to hear a shitty 60's stereo recording in a club sucks, especially bands like Mitch Ryder and the Detroit Wheels, and a few Beatles songs are horrid when played in a club. But I do agree stereo did do wonders for some psychedelia.

Thanks for the replies. I'm hard on my gear too, and although it's a real pretty guitar it's not worth enough to spend big money on. Heard someone recommend putting a drop of superglue into cracks before, not sure if it'll make things worse in the long term though.

The checking or crazing (depends on what part of the world yer from) is caused by shrinkage of the lacquer. Don't kick yerself to hard cause it happened to yer baby.

Personally never meet a collector that wanted the finish to look like that. Any that do would want them real cheap so they could get them re-finished.

Find a luthier that specializes in respraying, not the guy who works outta the back of the local guitar shop, although he might be able to point you on the right direction.

Biggest question is do you want it as a piece to hang on the wall or as an instrument to play? You might really pissed off with yerself if you re-finished it and then scratched it on its first outing.

I wouldn't bother with re-finishing it if I was playing it live, but I am really hard on my instruments.