Where do I start with the Rolling Stones discography-wise.
Rolling Stones , 5/10
Out Of Our Heads , 6/10
Aftermath (1966) , 7/10
Between The Buttons (1967) , 7.5/10
Their Satanic Majesties Request (1967) , 6.5/10
Beggar's Banquet (1968) , 7/10
Let It Bleed (1969), 6.5/10
Sticky Fingers (1971) , 7/10
Exile On Main Street (1972) , 8/10
All subsequent albums are 5/10 or less
>>64413611
How is it going Piero?
Beggars banquet, sticky fingers, let it bleed, exile on main st. then stop there
The London Years Singles Collection is my favorite release by them.
Between the Buttons, Let It Bleed, Sticky Fingers and Exile on Main Street are my favorite albums.
>>64413543
Start with aftermath>Beggar's Banquet>Let It Bleed>Sticky Fingers>black and blue>Some girls>Tattoo you.
>>64413611
clearly has never listened to the band.
Banquet through Exile, also Aftermath and maybe Some Girls. All albums after Tattoo You make nice drink coasters.
>>64413812
>skipping Between the Buttons and Exile on Main Street in favor of Some Girls
pls don't.
(can't talk for Black and Blue and Tatoo You since I haven't heard them myself)
>>64413896
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0l-W2r9Do2w
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m25Vv1ONkOA
Strange, everyone and their mother loves EOMS except Mick who says it's boring and has no memorable songs.
Why don't they have a single good definitive compilation album, most other rockers from back then have two or three by now.
>>64414185
>The London Years Singles Collection
>>64414163
>implying he just doesn't like Exile because it had no hit singles and he didn't make any money off of it
>>64414040
I don't like you sir... You ruin good b8
Aftermath.
"There's millions of people out there who love Black Sabbath and Metallica. I say they can keep 'em."
>>64414448
mmmuh roots rawk mmmuh blues
>>64414284
>what is tumbling dice
>>64414540
Pic related. This is you.
>>64414448
Sabbath like to claim they were the first guys to dispense with all that fruity hippie flower power music and do heavy, dark stuff but Beggar's Banquet and Let It Bleed say hi.
So who had the worse solo career? Mick or Keith?
Seriously just start with Hot Rocks 64-71.
>>64413543
Trust me
Aftermath then Let It Bleed then Sticky Fingers then Exile then fill in the rest however you like
>>64414988
Mick's solo albums were worse because he had one good record out of the four he did while Keith only had two solo albums but they were both fairly good.
The Stones should have just broken up in the 80s. Wandering Spirit does have some genuine, heartfelt moments on it while the post-reunion Stones records are just completely flat and soulless, nothing more than advertisements for a tour.
>>64413543
Hot Rocks, then go from Beggars Banquent through Exile on Main St. Then, and only then, listen to Get Your Ya-Yas.
>>64413543
all albums, which have brian jones on it.
forget the others "NO jones, No Stones!"
>>64414795
>Sabbath like to claim they were the first guys to dispense with all that fruity hippie flower power music
that was velvet underground
>>64413611
>let it bleed
>6.5
kys, my man
>>64417028
welp, it isn´t that good. most of the songs are pretty overrated.
>>64415945
Keith's stuff with Wino and Barbarian wasn't honestly too bad and also he toured in the US and Western Europe where it actually mattered while Mick hid in the Far East while touring Primitive Cool.
>>64417258
Too bad Keith was never going to be mainstream with his solo stuff because he didn't have a good pop sensibility.
>>64413611
>Exile being their best album
Scaruffi is full plen
