Are all non-classic Rolling Stones records underrated?

"Fans have been abuzz this fall with word that famed rock band the Rolling Stones have made a “good” album (Tattoo You), as opposed to a “bad” album (such as last year’s Emotional Rescue). Buzz aside, however, no one has been able to explain why Tattoo You is a “good” album, save that it is generally agreed to sound “pretty good”. Announcing the Rolling Stones current American tour at an August 26 Philadelphia press conference, lead singer Mick Jagger denied that the good/bad consensus pointed to a “new artistic rhythm” in the work of the band. “Chacun a son gout, but really”,he said. “All right, Some Girls was good, Emotional Rescue was bad, this one’s good, I agree – though this one’s nowhere nearly so good as Some Girls. But don’t forget – between Exile on Main Street, which was a great album, and Some Girls, we came up with four bad albums, and a couple of those were terrible. Consumer Protection Agency investigations, class action suits, the whole bit. But anyway, “Jagger went on, “everybody will have forgotten about this one in six months. Sure it sounds ‘pretty good’, and it’s even got a ‘rockin’ side, and a ‘dreamy’ side, just like those ‘oldies but goodies’ lps, but I defy anyone to find a single song – what’s it called again? Oh yeah, Tattoo You, thanks – with a , as Sartre would have said, raison d’etre. L’enfer, c’est les autres, you know? We could have done these songs, or we could have not done them. Who’s know the difference? What people want is product. To assert that a tune carefully constructed out of half forgotten Rolling Stones hits for the sole purpose of assuaging the listener with a sense of familiarity disguised as high-tech contemporaneity could possibly be compared in terms of emotional impact or social metaphor to a record on the level of Elmore James’ ‘Done Somebody Wrong’ is merely to reify the sort of false consciousness that may well make revolution in our time impossible,” said Jagger, demonstrating the breath control that has made him a singing sensation on five continents.
Pulling himself together, Jagger pointed out that “the eighties are here”, and that he was therefore abandoning his “oldfashioned sixties habit” of dropping pretour hints that “this time” the Rolling Stones might surprise their huge audience with something “new and different”. “We’re going to do what we’ve always done”, Jagger said, “and when we’re finished, we’re going to do it again. Forever.”
The Response of KMET, the Los Angeles FM radio outlet that was broadcasting Jagger’s words live, was all too real. The station immediately scheduled an eight hour “Stones Special” for August 28 – a marathon that, at least for the two hours during which I remained within its signal range, was characterized principally by a nearly complete avoidance of any material more than five years old. This policy was perhaps predicated on demographic research indicating that a good proportion of KMET’s audience was not born when the Rolling Stones began recording in 1963 – there being no reason to clutter the airwaves with music that, might serve only to confuse many clear-thinking young men and women with unfamiliar sounds, arcane references, or outmoded values."

You cld slice off the gd songs from Keith's solo recs to make a pretty decent Stones lp, or compile a really gd 'best of' from the 'Steel Wheels' and after albs.

So they kind of retrenched, Mick and Keith apparently had a kind of rapprochement, and they got down to putting more effort into the songs, and attempted to use a little imagination in the arrangements. It may have ended up giving Steel Wheels a more "adult" patina or something - I'll grant you that while not giving a shit. It makes for a more sonically rich and rewarding record. And as long as Charlie's playing drums the records will retain some bite. And like I said, Ron's been working on his playing (his slide playing on "The Worst" is just beautiful).

"Some Girls" is pretty weak, too, I never understood why it was called a classic. The terrible production ruins it for me. "Tattoo You" seems lazy, I'll agree with that assessment. Though "Waiting On a Friend" is a classic.

I have "It's Only Rock and Roll" and "Voodoo Lounge", those are my favorites from this era.

I wonder...if the Stones had debuted in '73, never having released anything pre-"Goat's Head Soup", how would they be regarded? I think as a reasonably competent rock band, but nothing special overall. And probably playing festivals with Savoy Brown or something...

All you people in New York Cityah! I know you're all goin' broke! Yah HOTTT.

Side one took a longer to grow on me. I'll agree w/ the "lazy, tossed off" charge but that's kind of what i dig about it. I've got these "Paris outtakes" from the SomeGirls/ Emotional Rescue era full of great songs (sketches, really). I've always lamented the fact that none benefitted from proper studio treatment . I guess some of TY reminds me of those ("Slave" comes to mind), except fully realized.

My primary misgivings with the Stones post- Tatoo You* are production-related. It just doesn't sound good, in my infinitely humble opinion. Did they have weak tunes prior to 1980? Sure. But the irksome production (Im thinking more Dirty Work, Bridges to Babylon than Voodoo Lounge here) of their more recent works only exacerbates their weaknesses.

*I'll reserve judgement on Undercover, as I've only heard "She Was Hot" and the title track...

Now. Somebody show some love for Some Girls . Best pool hall juke box record ever...

"Emotional Rescue", "Black and Blue", "Undercover", "Tattoo You", "Dirty Work" etc are not without the odd gem... but they are few and far between. And looking for them can be hard work...

As a long-time Stones fan I've always been rather partial to "Mixed Emotions" from "Steel Wheels". One of the best late-era Stones songs.

steve - "Faraway Eyes" was one of the songs I was thinking of in disparaging Some Girls! Really, though I was just being "provocative". Something about the thread just bummed me out, because no one had really mentioned the 90s stuff and everyone had just accepted the thread's premise that Some Girls and Tattoo You were just obviously classic. Who decided that? Anthony DeCurtis or something? What happened to examining received rock-crit norms? Those two records house their biggest post-Exile hits, sure! But do they really hold up as albums you want to throw on and enjoy all the way through? Anyway, I tried to throw out a couple thoughts to add to thread, only to be followed up with a dismissive "they aren't worth discussing." I apologize for snapping at Roger, but I honestly wonder if he's examining his own opinions at times.

Of course I don't think Some Girls "sucks", but it is true that I never play it. I suppose that could be partially due to overexposure, sure. Still, "Miss You" and "Shattered" were fresh and inspired and still sound great to me. "Beast of Burden" I've never liked though. Ever. I just don't like Mick's vocal or the lyrics, and christ it seems like it goes on forever. "Just My Imagination" is an ok performance but it's yet another Motown cover so that's lazy. Even taken as a rocker, "Some Girls" just plods and needless to say sounds embarassing today. When the Stones did "Dear Doctor" and "Country Honk" they sounded lively and novel; "Dead Flowers" and "Torn and Frayed" were poignant and affecting; but "Far Away Eyes" just sounds pointless and parodic.

I don't know. It's still a great record - "When the Whip Comes Down" KILLS - I just never feel like listening to it.

Props to sucka! You and I seem on the same wavelenght w/r/t these guys. Though I usually avoid Undercover for most of the reasons you like it. But that's cool man - you know why you like it! Good on ya. I often just find the record suffocating, but I occasionally find it enjoyable to bathe in all that bile, to get into the vicious headspace of that record... And yeah, "Emotional Rescue" is one of my all time favorite songs of theirs as well.

Plus, The Stones are not the kinda band I get white-knuckled about either way, and if the imminent carpal tunnel syndrome can be held off a bit by me not replying frivolously to every debate, so be it.

Part of the reason I like Black and Blue so much is it sounds as clear as glass. For something taped almost 50 years ago it's extra impressive - I feel it should be some sort of yardstick for analogue recording idk.

I agree. Kudos to that mix. Charlie and those guitarists sound great!

It also really helps in why I think Cherry Oh Baby works, in its admittedly obtuse way. Charlie has clear problems relaxing for a reggae beat but if that's the case you might as well heighten this contrast until (hopefully) the effect becomes something else. Every beat of the drum, slide of the cymbal, sounds so sharp-edged that it suits the stiffness well, and pronounces the sudden silences and rhythmic dropouts even further. Mechanical reggae years before On-U Sound !

God, "Hand of Fate" is a sexy-ass song.

haha that G Marcus quote upthread is amazing

Part of the reason I like Black and Blue so much is it sounds as clear as glass. For something taped almost 50 years ago it's extra impressive - I feel it should be some sort of yardstick for analogue recording idk.

as someone born the year this record came out, this post briefly hurt me to my core to be reminded of the number of years that has passed.

I recently realised I unconsciously take about ten years off everything whose distance in time feels wrong. Because 38 years makes more sense than 48.

Pretty sure “Black and Blue” is my most listened to Stones album at this point. It’s kind of the perfect barbecue in backyard background music. “Hand of Fate” is upper echelon material.

Just spun it thinking of it as chill BBQ/Khruangbin/Mdou Moctor grooves, and yeah! I'd forgotten that it's annoying that there's no track list on the jacket or sleeve, only on the label. But that underscore that they're not crafting songs so much as vibes.