They had to go and make it longer, didn’t they? The Rolling Stones couldn’t leave the legacy of the sprawling Exile on Main Street alone. In this newly remastered, expanded edition rock’s most notorious tax exiles add 10 previously unreleased/unfinished tracks. Shotgun-worthy Don Was helped shepherd these outtakes into the 21st century, with Mick Jagger writing new lyrics and adding new vocal parts, in some cases. Considering that the Stones have been reviving leftover jams as new material for more than half their career (eg, “Start Me Up” had been sitting around for 6 years before being revised and released as the band’s modern-day theme song), why didn’t they just release these tracks as a new Stones album and do the necessary work of trimming Exile on Main Street down from a flabby double album to killer EP it essentially is? Lord knows this collection of 10 revived tracks, kicking off with the funky “Pass the Wine (Sophia Loren)” and the pleading “Plundered My Soul,” would have been the band’s “best album since Exile.”
OK, the newest “best Stones album since Exile” wouldn’t have been that easy to concoct – some of these outtakes are early versions of eventual songs from the album. I especially dig “Good Time Woman,” an early sketch of what would become the sublime “Tumbling Dice,” a song I could bring to my lab and never cease to find fascinating in the way each part contains the code for the whole of the song. Surely there would be dozens of sketches left on the floor of Compass Point Studios for them to fill out side two. Then the Stones could have really shaken up the rock world by taking a washcloth to the abundance of blackface greasepaint smeared across the two LPs of the original release.
Considering how much slack I’ve cut lesser bands over the years, it may be unfair to find fault the Stones for dragging down what could have been the greatest EP in the history of rock with a bunch of overblown gospel-blues jams and fun rave-ups, but we really need to spend any more time stoned and nodding along to Bobby Keys’ sax solo on “Casino Boogie?” Does making it through “Sweet Virginia” earn us a hole-punch on our Educated, White, Middle-Class Dude Who Really Digs American Traditional Music card? How many times does that card need to be punched before we’re awarded an actual album of American traditional music?
q_agsyWjY-8]
I was so excited the day I finally purchased this album in high school and dropped the needle on “Rocks Off!” The charms of “Rip This Joint” and “Shake Your Hips” were undeniable. But then the album required frequent needle-lifting. Who was I joking, I already owned actual Leon Russell albums; I didn’t need to hear my Rolling Stones – the greatest singles band of the ’60s – do phony Southern rock like “Torn and Frayed.” I’d rather listen to The Allman Brothers. Hell, I’d rather listen to the stoner in my high school who led a Southern rock band of his own with his brother and a couple of other long-haired guys. They even included “Honky Tonk Women” in their set! “Sweet Black Angel” sounds cool, especially on this remastered edition, but it’s essentially one of a series of hokey, sensitive folk songs Jagger had been singing since “Back Street Girl” through “Factory Girl.” I’ve got to admire the lengths to which Jagger went in turning on the ladies. The man takes a 360 approach.
Another song that wouldn’t have appeared on my dream EP edition of Exile is “Loving Cup.” Again, I’ll admit that with the parts sounding so distinct on this remastered edition that this isn’t a complete waste of time, but imagine sitting at rehearsal as a non-songwriting member of the Stones. You’ve already been learning the aforementioned keepers as well as the rip-snorting “Happy” and the poor man’s restatements of the album’s rocking tracks, “All Down the Line” and “Stop Breaking Down,” and now Mick and Keef want to play you “Loving Cup.” If you could have seen into the future you might have suggested that they save this song for that 2010 reclamation project, you know, the latest “best album since Exile.”
I3pW2REprYE]
Lord knows I’ve tried. I’ve gotten stoned and chugged from a shared bottle of Jack Daniels while singing backing vocals around a single mic with my best mates. I’ve stared at the freaks on the album cover and the details of handwritten studio notes, letting the authenticity wash over me. Each time I put on this album, however, I find myself lifting the needle to the songs that do what I feel the Stones do best. I’d be an idiot to say that this is anything but a classic album, but it’s a classic album the way Derek and the Dominos‘ Layla and Other Assorted Love Songs is an excellent album. Those of you too young to think of Eric Clapton as anything but the feather-haired, tweed jacket-wearing tool whose career started with the Michelob “After Midnight” ad are already sniggering, right? Believe me, Clapton also swilled from the shared bottle of Jack while making a heartfelt double album. If I have to choose one of these albums over the other I’ll choose Layla because that was the best that band was capable of giving. The Stones already did better and would do better again, when they finally put an end to their minstrel show and got back to making the sharp, urban R&B-informed rock ‘n roll of Some Girls. There, I said it, I prefer a Ron Wood-era Stones album to Exile on Main Street.
For the record, as much as I enjoy making this argument to rile people up I truly believe what I say about the album. I really wish I liked it better. I’d be a much cooler person – seriously, much less of the tight-ass that I am. But that’s the way god made me.
I’ll probably never get this argument for three reasons:
1. Exile is a love letter to American music/culture. You can’t mess with it without losing the overall theme that unifies the cover art, track list, and overall feel of the record.
2. Yeah I know Tumbling Dice is a great song. But it still seems like it’s part of the Stones-lite song list: safe for radio play, safe for the mainstream. What I love about Exile is how non-mainstream it is, how, even, dangerous. Again changing anything on the record would be Disney-fying it.
3. Most art has some dull moments. Often these moments contribute to its pace. Would you cut out the non-action scenes in Shakespeare? Cut down some of the chapters in Moby Dick where Melville goes on and on about the whales? In short, I really can’t imagine the experience I would have listening to a trimmed-down Exile, and if I could imagine it, it would terrify me.
I love Exile and was looking forward to this release, but this pisses me off. The normal remastered version is very reasonably priced — $7.99 for an Amazon download, my preferred format. ($9.99 hard copy.) But the version with the extra tracks is $18.06! $22.99 for the double CD! It feels like they’re trying to soak the real fans. So I haven’t bought it yet.
The reissue sounds excellent as far as I’m concerned. Like I said, some of the songs I haven’t liked over the years are more interesting with the bit of clarity that’s been added. And the balance of instruments seems pretty true to how I’m used to hearing things – I’m not hearing some overdubbed tambourine, for instance, a lot louder than it was intended to be because some engineer was able to make it ring out more clearly.
Dr. John, to your points:
1. Huh??? If this affair is true, that’s between the Stones and American music/culture. Why should that matter to me? To me there’s a lot more to American music and culture than that jive-rock that bogs down side 2. The Stones shouldn’t have rented a room for that side. I want nothing of it.
2. What’s this “safe” thing? It’s a great song! Airplay isn’t about safety nor is it about danger. I’m sure it’s liberating for some fans to hear them stretch out, but why hold that against “Tumbling Dice” or diminish the song because it’s perfect?
3. Well, I can easily imagine it being a lot better if half the songs were cut. We’re talking rock ‘n roll by the (occasionally) world’s greatest rock ‘n roll band. I want them to do what they do best. I want to hear Jagger at the fore, with all his attitude and humor. Jagger is an afterthought on much of this album. I know he’s not as cool, man, as Richards, but he’s the voice of that band. He’s going through the motions on half of this album. American music/culture may not get all the lovey-dovey stuff, but they don’t hear with my ears.
Steve, the price will come down fast. I remember when Zeppelin’s How The West Was Won hit stores at $29.99 (for three CDs). I found it within weeks all over the place at $19.99 and $14.99.
I can’t believe they left the best song of the sessions off of the new edition!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X83QM-FknII
KingEd, even though I think you’re mostly way off track here, I am glad you brought this up–all week I have had in my mind doing something on the “new” Exile.
Before getting at your main points, I would like to express my non-surprise, yet disappointment at the “bonus disc.” It’s not that the “new” old songs are bad. They are not. They are pretty good, although they sound about as connected with Exile as Voodoo Lounge. I mean, the whole sound of “Plundered My Soul” smacks of Don Was production, has nothing of the sound of Exile whatsoever. So, I agree with you that these songs don’t belong here but could form the basis of a good latter day Stones album made in the traditional manner of using leftovers from earlier, more inspired times. I mean, why not just go the extra distance?
As for the outtakes/alternate takes per se, Good Time Women and Loving Cup have been in circulation though not in great sound quality. I think they are great. The “Keith” Soul Survivor is cooler in concept than in reality.
The fact is that there are good quality alternate takes of All Down the Line, Shine a Light, Hip Shake, Sweet Virginia, Stop Breaking Down, Loving Cup (in addition the one here), and maybe others that I don’t know about. Frankly, as much as I enjoy hearing these alternates, none is exactly revelatory; but, nonetheless, there’s no reason why they couldn’t have been released.
There is a great outtake that is usually listed as an Exile outtake–which only means it was recorded sometime between 69-71, of course–called Travellin’ Man that should be here. If you don’t know it, check it out http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=US3fczvs6pQ&feature=related
But only a fool would be shocked that the Stones failed to put out the best available material.
Now, turning to KingEd’s “less is more” critique and the idea that Exile calls for “frequent needle lifting,” I comprehend this even less than the similar (or identical) argument made about The White Album.
As the years go on, I find that the Exile songs that resonate for me more and more and which make it a unique record are precisely those that are less obvious in their appeal. Take “Casino Boogie.” (‘Yes, you take it!’ KingEd might say.) I understand that there is no room for such a song on Let It Bleed or Sticky Fingers. But the fact that Exile has room “Casino Boogie” and “Torn and Frayed” and “Let It Loose” enriches it and gives it depth that a pared down single album (or, worse still, an EP!) would not have.
Some years ago it hit me that possibly what I like most about Exile, what sets it apart, is one of the things KingEd criticizes: he wants Jagger to the fore, whereas I love the fact that on so much of Exile he and Keith are (literally or figuratively) at the mic together. Never again would Keith sing with Mick so much. I would contend that despite the shuffling of personnel (Wyman isn’t on numerous songs, etc.) the Stones never before and certainly never again would sound so much like a band, as opposed to a marketing concept. I am quite willing to accept the idea that I am concocting or buying into a mythology of the Stones as Band of Brothers that is pure bs, but sometimes mythology tells us something fundamentally true.
And no song epitomizes this cohesiveness more than Loving Cup. The interplay of Jagger and Richards’ vocals, the Nicky Hopkins piano, the surge in the song coming out of the middle section–spectacular. Doesn’t make a bit of difference to me that it wasn’t recorded anywhere near the dank basement of Nellcote nor even in the same year.
Last word from me: what a shame they did not seize this opportunity to put out Ladies and Gentlemen, the Rolling Stones, highlighting them at their best as a live band. Alas.
Thanks for agreeing with me – on something, regarding this reissue, misterioso. The offlist support I’ve been getting for my views only goes so far. That “Travelin’ Man” song is a good one. Never heard it before. I’d much prefer having that on the album than some of the songs I’ve noted.
I like how you characterize our differences between them sounding like a “real band” (or what people often call “organic”) vs sounding like a marketing concept. I guess I’m all for the marketing campaign approach they usually take. As someone who’s usually pretty cynical, I’m dazzled when they get all the pieces working together and tiny Mick is the sexually ambiguous-yet-cock-rocking, larger-than-life prince of rock. Their best records don’t need the inflatable lips and amazonian women or whatever they’ve been putting on stage since the early ’80s. Their best records ARE a huge cock and set of tits. The music IS Satan and JFK.
To me Exile seems way behind the curve of the “bearded” album phenomenon that took root in 1968-1969. Think of all the British bands that followed The Band’s lead, grew beards, moved to a wooded area to record, got in touch with their suppressed folk upbringing. It’s like they first wanted to “go bearded” on Beggars Banquet but couldn’t commit. They should have done so then, brought in Stevie Winwood and bearded Steve Marriott to jam with them… Perhaps the fact that the Stones sucked at growing beards was too much to overcome. (I think Mod wrote something on that subject last year.)
I don’t know, I’m not a big fan of hearing the Stones “life size.” I don’t think they had a lot to offer as an “organic,” bearded rock band. Only Mick Taylor would have been considered to have the chops for jamming, and he often doesn’t fit with the Stones. Jagger never seems that involved on Exile. Wyman’s not there. Watts doesn’t use the “freedom” and looseness of these sessions to finally display his supposed dedication to jazz. It’s too much free-flowing Keef, if you ask me. That’s what the New Barbarians and X-Pensive Winos were supposed to allow. I want my Stones to MAKE A STATEMENT. I mean, when is the last time you got excited to read or hear and interview with mumbling Mick and Keef? Too often Exile’s like hearing a chat with those guys. They can do that on their own time. I want to be dazzled when I’m spending time with a Rolling Stones record.
KingEd to your points:
1. You’re begging the question here. Why should that matter to you? Well, for starters, you’re missing out on a lot of what Exile has to offer. The myth of the band as drugged-out rockers overlooks the fact that they had a remarkable sensitivity to the American culture they were experiencing. “Sweet Black Angel” and “Sweet Virginia” are as critically sharp as “Gimme Shelter.”
2. Sounds like you really want to make the case for the Stones as a singles band. If so, why don’t you get that best-of comp released a couple of years ago, and be done with it? Only don’t complain about Exile like you really care.
3. I do agree, though, with you here. Jagger has said he pretty much hates Exile, and I must admit I probably like the record for all the reasons Jagger doesn’t. For one, while released in the 70s, it has no pop ballads on it (like “Angie”); Exile for me may be the last moment before things “mellowed” out–something Jagger couldn’t wait to do, once Richards was out of it enough for him to take full control.
Just to point out: The Band’s anti-image was as much of a marketing concept as the Stone’s marketing concept approach.
And just as The Band’s non-decisive stance would lead them into an artistic dead-end, so would the Stones become prisoners of their image.
Music can never be solely organic or marketing campaign–it’s always a mixture of both.
Where did you learn this about The Band’s anti-image? Beside Robertson, it always seemed to me like those guys were pretty much the real deal in terms of being low-key, rural types. I agree with you regarding the artistic dead-ends that each band’s image led them.
I pretty much agree with KingEd on this album – no surprise to a number of you, I’m sure. I’m enjoying watching where the discussion is going.
Well, The Band made this film, with Marty Scorcese . . .
But if that doesn’t tell you all you need to know about how The Band was marketed, read Barney Hoskyn’s biography, Across the Great Divide.
If people are so sure Exile would be better trimmed-down, could the same not be said for any/all of the Stones’ 70s output: Sticky Fingers? Goat’s Head Soup? Some Girls? Black and Blue?
My recollection is that Scorscese made a film with The Band…at the end of their career. Whatever. I have little problem with artists being marketed. I don’t see how that applies here.
As for the other ’70s Stones album you mention, sure they all could have been condensed to 3 albums. Goat’s Head Soup blows. Black and Blue has two or three worthwhile songs. I think Sticky Fingers kind of sucks too. I like Some Girls a lot, but I acknowledge that it’s got some throwaway songs – at least they’re not long. Beside Sticky Fingers, which I know a lot of people like, would more than 1 in 10 rock fans disagree that those albums could have been cut in half?
The Stones were a great singles band. Does a case need to be made for that? Why should I not “complain” about Exile, when it’s so promising and the Stones are a band I grew up loving?
A few things that may or may not be on topic:
Why does everyone think “Happy” is like the greatest Stones song ever? It’s catchy and all, but the lyric is really lame. I’ve always found the adulation of Richards distasteful on a zillion levels, but I would hope even his biggest fans would admit that he didn’t exactly have a way with words.
The album is 66+ minutes, so more like an album and a half than a double, and while the stuff on sides two and three doesn’t always succeed, in my opinion, I’m not sure exactly what I’d want to live without, except for “Ventilator Blues,” which always struck me as a big waste.
Does anyone else think this album has striking thematic similarities to SANDINISTA? They try to prove they can do just about any style, and they prove it, but in doing so they split their fans into two groups: 1) those who think they’re geniuses for doing so, and 2) those who would rather have them be great at their own style of music than very good at a bunch of other ones. (I’m in camp #2, though morseo for the Clash than the Stones.)
BLACK AND BLUE is the worst Stones album ever, imo. It’s a bunch of unfinshed, unfocused jams that are nothing but vehicles for auditioning a new guitarist. The only three real songs are the two ballads (which I admit to liking a whole lot) and “Hand Of Fate,” which is the kind of song wannabe hip people claim is one of their favorite Stones’ songs even though it actually sounds just like every other Stones’ rocker but not as good.
As to the question about SOME GIRLS aand GOAT’S HEAD SOUP and IT’S ONLY ROCK AND ROLL, yes, most of them could be cut in half, or more. SOME GIRLS is the best of them, but if you like “Far Away Eyes” you have no business dissing “Sweet Virginia” or “Torn And Frayed.” GOAT’S HEAD does have one great forgotten Stones song, “Winter,” but as with BLACK AND BLUE it’s unsettling that the best songs are the ballads.
I still think STICKY FINGERS is their best album….no way could that have been cut.
Mod wrote: “I think Sticky Fingers kind of sucks too.”
Mod, put the crack pipe down, slowly, and back away. You’re among friends here.
Getting back to Exile. One thing I do not buy is that Exile is so great because it is “Keith’s” lp and not “Mick’s” and that Keith is the soul of authenticity and Mick is a plastic fake. That line doesn’t go anywhere. I think the Stones’ “golden era” is so rich not because of Mick Taylor (I like his work just fine for those years, though), who is also present for Goats and Only R&R, which are not my idea of a golden anything; but rather because from 68-71 the Stones achieved a perfect balance of power between the creative forces in the band, Mick and Keith.
After Exile, for various reasons, that did not happen again. That doesn’t mean they didn’t make good music anymore but it is why those of us who set apart the Beggars through Exile period do so.
Of the Stones’ “classic” albums, I always thought Exile was the connoisseurs’ choice, the one you had to seek out. “Tumbling Dice” was the only song off the album I remember hearing on classic rock radio when I was young, and you heard it a lot less than “Satisfaction,” “Gimme Shelter,” “Sympathy,” “You Can’t Always Get What You Want,” “Brown Sugar,” etc. etc. etc.
So this giant marketing campaign for the reissue is really weird to me. CNN ran a Larry King-hosted special about the album, this despite the fact that I strongly doubt Larry King has heard a note of this or any Stones album. It’s pretty impressive that someone can have a 100-year career as broadcaster and behave like a complete idiot the whole time. Anyway. I realize Rolling Stone and MOJO magazines have been laying the tracks for this type of deification of the album for years now.
The really strange thing is that, while I have no desire to buy the reissue, the ad campaign has sent me back to my own copy of Exile — the Columbia/CBS CD from the ’80s or so. Sounds fine to me!
You guys are really so pressed for time that you can’t listen to a whole album? Download the hits from Itunes and join the people who are destroying music.
Wait I thought it was the kids who never listened to albums anymore. I’m confused.
Seriously any good album is a mixture of hot tracks and the tracks that hold the vibe together.
The double album does not work well on a CD, flipping the record over, putting on the 1st one OR the 2nd one is how this was meant to be experience. Yes, Exile, Tommy, White Album, etc suffer in 80+ minute gapless formats.
I’d like to make four cds, each with a single side of exile on it and see if this adds to the listening experience (of course I could play the vinyl at the house as well)
I would not say there are throw aways on this record, like on basically any stones record AFTER this (you can cut three songs off of any post exile stones record and create a stronger record)
Played the new songs one time, might play them again in a few weeks, didnt jump out at me…….
DID find a soundboard of a show from MSG of Goats Head soup tour…. now THAT got the hairs on the back of my neck to stand up
After their first two albums, The Band, arguably, were already out of gas–the film just confirmed it. Don’t want to harp on this, Mod, but the film at times really bugs me for how it plays up how “authentic,” how “non-commercial” they were.
This, I admit, however, may well be my issue, not yours.
As for the Stones (until Black and Blue), I’ll pretty much accept, lovingly, any throwaway tracks as long as they retain that kind of, you know, alchemy (Goat’s Head Soup, for example).
And when you get to their “comeback record,” Some Girls, there just seems to be too much cynicism behind their “reinvention.” It seems like they’re doing it just to stay trendy, not as a real artistic choice. Then again, if anyone else released Some Girls, I’d probably think it was a masterpiece.
Why diminish my not liking a chunk of the album by making this a case of my being “pressed for time?” To my ears a lot of the album is boring, and not in a “vibe-holding” way. I get the “vibe” thing with a number of albums, but at what point am I fooling myself to buy into the whole “love letter to American culture” nonsense?
I once wrote a girl who broke up with me one final, long love letter. It was heartfelt and beautifully written. I’m pretty sure a couple of teardrops fell on the paper as I wrote. It didn’t matter to her. We were done, as far as she was concerned.
Dr. John wrote:
Aha, we’re on common ground, my man! This is how I would feel about Exile if, say, Faces or some other band from that era made it!
I just wish it could be the best Stones album that *I* would want the Stones to have released at that point. I really do dislike some of those songs, especially those on side 2, but there are enough decent rockers and rave-ups to keep me interested for 40 of the 66 – did someone say? – minutes.
I’d also like to point out that my copy of Exile did not come with the pamphlet of Greil Marcus jerk-off talking points about the Stones’ fealty to American roots music. I guess everyone else’s did, and they inundated KingEd with said talking points until he was mad as hell and not going to take it anymore.
Really, is this album all that more American roots-oriented than Beggars’ Banquet (which I think Mr. Mod likes even less than Exile, if you can believe)?
BTW, here’s how I rank the ’68-’72 studio albums
Exile
Let it Bleed
Beggars’ Banquet
Sticky Fingers
“CNN ran a Larry King-hosted special about the album…”
Oh, dear God. Tell me that’s a joke and I’m a sucker to have believed it.
One more overarching point: At the beginning of the CD era, pre-’68 Stones albums were tied up in a lot of weird rights issues, probably Allen Klien’s fault, right? Like, you could only get the U.S. versions — stuff like Flowers — on CD. I think that’s maybe why ’68-’72 became the anointed best era of the Stones. This is all based on half-memories. But at the very least, there was a perception that Hot Rocks was all you needed of the pre-’68 years.
Here you go, misterioso
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SaYeQu0c2uQ
Oats: “I’d also like to point out that my copy of Exile did not come with the pamphlet of Greil Marcus jerk-off talking points about the Stones’ fealty to American roots music. I guess everyone else’s did, and they inundated KingEd with said talking points until he was mad as hell and not going to take it anymore.”
Goddamn, that’s funny. Well said.
For myself, I don’t give a damn about the Stones fealty to anything but their own music. I don’t care who they are supposedly imitating or ripping off, since 9 times out of 10 they excel their sources. (Seriously, for example, listen to their version of Shake Your Hips and then compare it to Slim Harpo’s. They leave the original in the dust.) I don’t care about the hype, either at the time or as a retroactive construction of Exile as the ultimate authenticity trip. I only really care about the sheer joy of listening to it. I certainly don’t need everyone else to share that joy, not Larry King and not people whose attention span is too short for a rock and roll album, of all things.
I’m sure that when you first experienced this album will have some effect on your appreciation for its stylistic appropriations. When I first got into it, I knew a little about the blues, much less about country. So for the most part I wasn’t judging it against the work of the masters, though as I’ve learned more my appreciation for Exile hasn’t dimmed but deepened. If you came at it after having listened more to the album’s inspirations, your opinion of it would be affected.
And of course if you don’t much like American roots music in the first place, or if you think non-Americans can’t be trusted to play it anyway, you probably won’t like Exile much.
jungleland2 said:
DID find a soundboard of a show from MSG of Goats Head soup tour…. now THAT got the hairs on the back of my neck to stand up
I say:
I want!
’68-’72 LPs in order:
Sticky Fingers
Exile
Let It Bleed
Beggar’s Banquet
’68-’72 LPs in order:
Exile
Beggar’s Banquet
Sticky Fingers
Let It Bleed
But it’s really like choosing between the original Charlies Angels in 7th grade. Sure, you might prefer Kate to Jaclyn, but weren’t you just happy that they all existed?
Oats wrote:
Zinger! I didn’t get that booklet either.
That’s a good question. I’m not sure which one I like less (not that I dislike either, just that I find myself doing a lot of needle-lifting over the jive-rock numbers).
Here’s how I rank them:
Let it Bleed
Beggars’ Banquet
Exile
Sticky Fingers
I guess I like Exile a little less than Beggars’ Banquet. Sticky Fingers is one of the only Stones albums I DON’T own among their releases up to Emotional Rescue.
Mod wrote: “Sticky Fingers is one of the only Stones albums I DON’T own among their releases up to Emotional Rescue.”
Mod, the crack pipe, the crack pipe!
BigSteve, you tried to cover so many bases on reasons why someone may not like Exile that your head must have exploded. Beside knowing that it existed, I had little knowledge of or interest in the blues and country, when I bought that album. I not only didn’t think English musicians couldn’t play American music, I felt like they often played it better. I already loved my Rolling Stones albums. I simply find most of those songs in the middle of the album boring. I’m put off by the way Jagger sings most of that stuff. He sounds to me like he’s trying to strike a pose that may fit in. It’s like when Paul McCartney sings “Rocky Raccoon” or “Why Don’t We Do It in the Road.” It’s a little embarrassing to hear the coolest singer in rock try to put on a more ridiculous accent than necessary – and NOT in the service of humor, as he would later do on that fine country song from Some Girls, “Girl With Faraway Eyes.” I listened to the entire album on my ride home today. Some of the songs eventually go somewhere I like musically, but the vocals are usually a complete waste of time. Those songs – to me – sound like mediocre Flying Burrito Brothers songs with more balls. I’d rather stick with the mediocre Flying Burrito Brothers songs. Their best songs aren’t SO MUCH BETTER than the deep cuts that I feel like I had to excuse the band for the lesser cuts.
misterioso, I’ll have to revisit Sticky Fingers for you one of these days. When I used to listen to my friend’s copy in high school and college days there were a couple of jazzy/country ballads that really bummed me out. Is that “Moonlight Mile” song on Sticky Fingers? It was something like that that made me realize I’d be better off waiting for the couple of rockers to play on the radio.
Musically, I feel like Sticky Fingers has a slickness that the other three don’t. Lyrically it’s still seedy, but I kinda feel its the album that sorta points the way to stuff like Steel Wheels.
I’m listening to Let it Bleed and while I love love love “Monkey Man,” there’s a couple embarassing lyrics in there. That’s one of the reasons I like how low Mick is in the mix of Exile.
Mod, I’m TEMPORARILY letting you off the Hear Factor hook, in order that you might give “Sticky Fingers” another listen. Honestly, I find your feelings about that album mind-boggling.
This is starting to sound more like “I want the Stones to do only x, and I hate it when they do y and z.” We all do this with artists we’re interested in, but I’m glad the Stones’ albums don’t all consist of endless Stonesy rockers.
One of the things I like abount Exile is that I don’t think there’s a big difference in quality or interest among the songs. There’s no Brown Sugar jumping out at you. The big single on it, Tumbling Dice, sounds more like a deep cut than a hit.
This was always Mick’s knock on the album, that he didn’t see why some people loved it so much, seeing as how it lacked hits. It’s been interesting to hear him in recent interviews praising the album, because he’s spent decades poo-pooing it.
hrrundi, thanks, man, that means a lot! Oats just mentioned what I remember not liking about the album. It’s got a bunch of jazz-blues chords and electric piano, from what I remember.
BigSteve, I liked it best when the Stones played SONGS, when they weren’t trying to sound “Stonesy.” That’s why I always stand behind the Brian Jones-era recordings. I love those first few forays into “Stonesy” rock ‘n roll, but after a while I get tired of it. One of the reasons I like Some Girls so much, of their post-Brian albums, is that despite the countless E-to-A filler jams they return to some well-crafted SONGS.
It’s a shame that Mick has sold out on his years of leveling Exile to what KingEd and I know the album is. Now it’s just two of us willing to speak the truth:)
Before I forget, while reading these comments, BigSteve – Target is selling just the bonus cd for ten bucks. I’m sure you have Exile, and all you really need is that. Had I not been quite as fanatical as I am about the whole thing, that’s the route I’d have taken.
I like the bonus songs, and I’m not under the impression that they’re anything but a separate thing from Exile itself. They’re on a separate cd and they don’t impinge on my love of Exile at all. Plunder My Soul has that nice, Exile era feel, but it’s a little too much like Tumbling Dice to have made the album. I love how Mick sings the line, “I thought you wanted my loving…..But it’s my heart that you stole” with that hanging space after “loving” and then the next line he sings it straight through, “I thought you wanted my money but you plundered my soul.” Very Exile sounding.
I know people are bitching that these songs aren’t true Exile outs, but the thing is, Exile was recorded over a period of years and other things were recorded and released at the same time, but some things just seem to go on Exile and not on the other albums. I like that Jagger finished several of the tracks, and while its obvious that the man that singing on Exile isn’t even the same human as the one that wrote the lyrics to Following the River, it’s nice to have it.
Don Was’ remastering leaves me cold. The source he used was multi tracks on a hard drive from what I’ve read, and it sounds like it. The bass is kind of mushy, and there’s something about the drums I’m not a fan of. The backup singers also seem louder than Mick in some points. I think Virgin’s 94 remaster is much better (though I still like the vinyl rip and clean up a guy called Mickboy did the best). Don Was just adds nothing to The Stones’ sound, new or old.
As for the merits of Exile and cutting it’s length, that’s just ridiculous to me. I can’t imagine it any other way. It’s the only album I would ever give a 10 to if I rated albums, and nothing else is even close. It’s fucking perfect and no one else has ever been that perfect.
I find Exile wearisome. Mick’s blackface routine reached the breaking point with this album and Keith’s self-indulgence took care of the rest. Mick is the effing Al Jolson of rock and roll.
Beautiful, bostonhistorian! Concise and to the point! I should have been so direct in my review. You will be sure to receive a promo copy of the eventual EP reissue.
Exile wearisome?
You like The Beatles, don’t ya?
Went out in search of backstory on various Stones albums, and found this absolutely killer quote from Keef:
Undercover of the Night, Emotional Rescue, these are all Mick’s calculations about the market. And they’re not the best records we’ve made. See, Mick listens to too much bad shit.
Nope. If anything, I like the Beatles less. More talented wasted on juvenalia, especially later on. The White Album is almost unlistenable.
Could the complaints about Exile be said of the double-album format in general? Is there a studio double lp that has better/less filler than Exile?
Yes, dr john, London Calling is, in my opinion (of course) a much stronger double album. There are only a couple of songs I get little pleasure hearing. Obviously any double album is likely to have stuff on it that even an artist’s hardcore fans don’t like.
Blonde on Blonde is a strong double album too, although it’s not often I listen to the entire side with “Sad-Eyed Lady of the Lowlands.”
I knew, Mod, you would suggest London Calling. Close, but the record doesn’t have anything as strong as “Rocks Off” and “Tumbling Dice” (and, for the record, I never said that I didn’t like this song).
I think Blonde on Blonde is probably a better double-record than Exile–despite “Sad-Eyed Lady of the Lowlands,” which I kind of like; it is a well-written song, with lots of cool little peaks and a great descending riff on the chorus.
Anyone want to challenge Blonde on Blonde?
For the record, I’m greatly relieved that you didn’t say you disliked “Tumbling Dice.” That would have been a bummer:)
I will not challenge Blonde on Blonde!
Electric Ladyland.
Physical Graffiti.
Best live double: Bring On The Night.
Blonde on Blonde and some of the others mentioned are fine albums, but their asses have been soundly kicked by Exile for decades.
hrrundivbakshi wrote: Went out in search of backstory on various Stones albums, and found this absolutely killer quote from Keef: ‘Undercover of the Night, Emotional Rescue, these are all Mick’s calculations about the market. And they’re not the best records we’ve made. See, Mick listens to too much bad shit.’
I mean, I get it, and probably true. But are ALL of the bad records Mick’s fault? Really?
2000Man: Look, I’m with you pretty much all the way on Exile, but no record has ever kicked, soundly or otherwise, Blonde on Blonde’s ass, metaphorically or otherwise. Period. Ain’t happened. That’s not really a line of argument that strengthens the case for Exile’s greatness.
Why is it that any discussion of the Stones always seems to eventually end up with someone insulting the Beatles?
Please let the record show I insulted both the Stones *and* the Beatles, although for different reasons.