The True Adventures of The Rolling Stones - Stanley Booth

 I recently finished reading Stanley Booth's book "The True Adventures Of The Rolling Stones". I had been aware of this tome for some time, and had the opportunity to experience it after being given a copy by a relative.

The book was first published in the mid-1980s, although the settings and the actual subject matter rarely go beyond the early Seventies. The chapters alternate between the author's recollections of the Stones' 1969 American tour and more general "biographical" material and interviews. We also gain some insight into Booth's own travails and struggles in getting his project off the ground.

There is a fly-on-the-wall flavour to the chronicle of the 1969 tour, and this helps to create a warts-and-all idea of the chaos which apparently prevailed within the Stones' organisation around that time. The numerous colourful tales and anecdotes are given a higher sharpness because of the author's poetic and idiosyncratic writing style.

The "counter-cultural" outpourings of all concerned seem hopelessly dated to 21st century sensibilities, but this does ensure that the work serves as a rich time-capsule. This was what 1969 was like for the in-crowd, if not necessarily for ordinary people. I would like to think that the participants in the drama of the tour have grown up and learned something from how the sojourn ended.

Not surprisingly, Charlie Watts and Bill Wyman come across as the most grounded and likeable of the Stones, with the then new boy Mick Taylor barely visible for the most part. 

The biographical-historical sections of "The True Adventures....." contain some interesting points and revelations, especially concerning the role and attitudes of Brian Jones. These observations are given added weight because they arise from quotes by members of the Stones circle (Wyman, Keith, Ian Stewart etc.). My interpretation is that Brian became estranged and "difficult", in a meaningful way, at quite an early stage. 

For me it is difficult to escape the suspicion that Jagger and Richards, even in the late 1960s, were playing up to a role and an identity which was expected of them, although Mick in those days appears to have been rather difficult to pin down or appraise. Wyman and Watts often had more interesting and insightful (and honest) things to say about their lives and the band's status and progress. Bill and Charlie appear to have had a detached relationship to the rest of the group, and to have enjoyed a measure of autonomy.

Booth's accounts of life in Los Angeles just prior to the '69 tour are entertaining and quite evocative. The comings-and-goings of the various participants, hangers-on, journalists, roadies and so forth are depicted in a highly absorbing manner. It is striking just how haphazard, even amateurish, concert tours still were at that point in history. The ultra-professional, buttoned-down methods which we know today were still quite a distant prospect.

Mick Taylor, as ever, emerges as an enigmatic figure, and as alluded to previously, gets comparatively little attention, even as the highly talented new addition to the line-up. Looking back, it should not really surprise us that he rarely looked as though he "belonged". I think he came out of it with honour and dignity. I don't blame him if he felt uncomfortable, and even embarrassed, by some of the things going on around him. His legacy remains in the elegant and tasteful contributions which helped to elevate the Stones' recordings, especially in the early 1970s.

Despite some early misgivings, I increasingly warmed to this book and its atmosphere and tone, coming to realize that the author was not as opinionated or as naive as I had first assumed. Booth seems as disorientated and confused as anyone else close to the Stones at that time. Ultimately I feel that his perspective is one of realism, resignation even.

Towards the close of the work there is a vivid and quite chilling account of the disastrous free concert at Altamont. The writer wisely refrained from indulging in any prolonged agonizing or philosophizing about the debacle; the description spoke for itself.

The over-riding achievement of this book is in capturing what the Rolling Stones were all about at the time when they were at their most visceral, "dangerous" and relevant. It is a very worthwhile read.

The Rolling Stones - Exile On Main St. - album review

The apotheosis of the Rolling Stones' 1968-1972 purple patch, Exile On Main St., released in 1972, is for many the ultimate rock n roll album of its type, encompassing most of the styles which had inspired the group, and exuding an inimitable swagger and gritty authenticity.

This may or may not have been the musical blend which the Stones had always coveted, and whether it was arrived at consciously is open to question. I prefer to believe that the circumstances under which it was recorded, added to a myriad of other personal and musical factors, combined to create this compelling and effervescent vibe. Above all, they were not trying too hard, but just playing music and seeing where things took them.

People have often asserted that this is "Keith's" album, citing the evidence of his musical and "spiritual" footprint throughout the record. It is true that the mood and the direction bear the hallmarks of Keith, but I would argue that Mick Jagger and the supporting cast all contribute handsomely towards realizing the intoxicating mix. The fragmented nature of the sessions, together with the fact that the usual, conventional Stones unit did not play together on all the tunes, also played a role.

Exile On Main St. commences with as stark a statement of intent as could be imagined, in the form of the tracks "Rocks Off" and "Rip This Joint". Both songs exemplify the spirit behind the project, and introduce us to the murky mix and endearingly "ragged" sound which permeate so much of the record.

The running order is astutely arranged in order to illustrate the full diversity of roots genres on display - blues, soul, country and so forth. The album also benefits from having few "famous" numbers or hit singles on it. It is an album in the true sense, and not a collection of catchy tunes supported by filler. Despite the variety of styles which we hear, there is also a uniformity of "groove", difficult to describe in words, which is one of the keys to the album's greatness.

The impression of spontaneity which emerges is heightened by the naturalness of the singing and vocal harmonies on many numbers. "Sweet Virginia" is a good exemplar of this trend, a song which one could envisage being sung around a camp-fire....

Several other ingredients embellish the picture. Rarely has the undemonstrative, laconic brilliance of Charlie Watts' drumming been more clearly captured, and Mick Taylor has ample opportunity to exhibit his finesse and versatility on guitar.

Some of the songs on "Exile" are among the most substantial and emotionally gripping in the Stones' catalogue, but these songs do not loom that largely in the wider public consciousness. I am thinking of the likes of "Let It Loose", "Soul Survivor" and "Shine A Light".  "Soul Survivor" is searing and defiant, and appropriately closes out what was the band's most fertile phase, "Let It Loose" a haunting ballad which musically dwarfs other such Stones efforts.

It is possibly true that, individually, some of the lesser songs on this LP are not as strong as their counterparts elsewhere in the Stones' oeuvre. However, this misses the point. The various curios and minor items fit perfectly into the framework of "Exile" (a double album when issued on vinyl)  and thereby endow it with its distinctive character. 

"Loving Cup" has always been a favourite of mine; I adore the melody as well as Keith's heartfelt harmonies. Everybody I suspect has their own favourite tunes from this record, and the fact that opinion is divided on many of them is a strength rather than a weakness.

Of the track listing, "Tumbling Dice" is almost certainly the best-known. Here, it is just another song, and somehow for those who were familiar with it before hearing all of the album, it almost seems out of place, guilty of having puts it head above the parapet and stood out from the crowd....

The outward confidence and unity depicted by Exile On Main St. could be said to be illusory, as the Stones were never to scale these heights again. Circumstances helped create the chemistry which triumphed here, but it could not last. Like so many albums whose reputation and appeal endures, it was met with mixed reviews when it first came out. If anybody asks me these days what the Rolling Stones were, and still are, all about, I would recommend that they listen to this captivating and joyous album.

Sticky Fingers - The Rolling Stones - album review

Sticky Fingers, released by the Rolling Stones in 1971, is deserving of its place in the company of the other great studio albums issued by the group between 1968 and 1972. Of the albums from that era Sticky Fingers has the lowest emotional pull for me, even though it contains some truly great tracks, and it has also stood the test of time well.

The reason why it doesn't chime as richly as the others is that it is rather "neat and tidy". It is in fact a stylistically diverse record, but is structured in such a way that it feels very orderly. So it serves more as a collection of songs rather than an overall musical or philosophical statement. Saying that it lacks the social relevance of Beggars Banquet and Let It Bleed is not wholly fair. One could argue that Sticky Fingers reflects the jaded resignation and stagnation of the early Seventies. Whilst in the late Sixties people were seeking to change the world, or to vent their anger, by 1971 the trend was towards looking inwards or numbing the pain.

The opening number on the LP, "Brown Sugar", is one of the band's signature tunes, although I have heard it so often that its impact has become progressively dulled, and there is a danger that it can begin to feel like a self-parody or "Stones-by-numbers". Viewed objectively, it is a musical tour-de-force, although the lyrics are dated to put it kindly, regardless of how much tongue might have been embedded in the collective cheek of the musicians. Keith Richards' riffs and Charlie Watts' drumming are still worth hearing, no matter how much familiarity has eaten away at the song's freshness.

This was the first Stones studio album to feature Mick Taylor throughout as a full member, and it is noticeable how his presence and abilities augment the group's palette. "Sway" is one instance of this, his guitar prowess adding much subtlety and melodic texture, as it does on other numbers.

"Wild Horses" is one of the band's most enduring and heartfelt ballads, benefiting from one of Mick Jagger's most impressive and underrated vocals. Keith's electric guitar flourishes are very evocative and significantly enhance the mood of the piece.

I find "Can't You Hear Me Knocking" to be quintessential early Seventies Stones, at least in its early stages. The angry rhythm, the lyrical subject matter, the murky vocal harmonies in the chorus, nicely buried slightly in the mix. The closing instrumental section is slightly untypical of the Stones, but is beautifully executed, with significant contributions from Bobby Keys and Mick Taylor. These passages have a vaguely Latin feel, and are in keeping with the laid-back, "decadent" feel of much of the record.

"You Gotta Move" in some respects harks back to the stylistic territory covered by Beggars Banquet and Let It Bleed, and it is another showcase for the talents of Mick Taylor.  The song "Bitch" is so wonderfully taut, urgent and airless that it can almost pass by unnoticed. It has some nicely ragged vocal harmonies and effective brass parts.

The influence of the Stax sound is clearly evident on "I Got The Blues", most conspicuously in its horn arrangement and the organ playing of Billy Preston.  Another fine Jagger vocal here, and although overall the song is relatively "minor", it is just too good to be deemed filler.

"Sister Morphine", co-written by Mick and Keith with Marianne Faithfull, is a haunting creation, and it also sounds like a hangover from the material of the late Sixties, which is not surprising when one realizes that this version was recorded during the Let It Bleed sessions. The slide playing of Ry Cooder is a key element of the song's power. Of course the subject of the words was a theme which ran through Sticky Fingers, in one form or another...

The penultimate track on the album, "Dead Flowers", is one which I suspect divides opinion. One of the band's first overt excursions into the world of country-rock. It may be tongue-in-cheek lyrically, and to some degree musically,although not without its merits. The chorus harmonies are quite stirring, and the song helps to lighten the mood amidst the weightier and more earnest material which surrounds it.

"Moonlight Mile" deserves its reputation as one of the most effective album-closers in rock music. Atmospherically and spiritually it complements the rest of the record, and it arguably encapsulates where the wider music scene was in 1971. Mick's vocal shows some versatility and range, and strengthens the view that this album is one of those which displays his voice at its strongest and most flexible. Strings are employed judiciously, and other instrumental touches accentuate the tone and ambience of the song.

So in summary it takes a little work to absorb and appreciate the strengths of Sticky Fingers. It can be seen as a summation and a rounding up, or polishing, of what had gone immediately before. As an entity in itself it may be perceived as less iconic and "important" than the other classic Stones releases of the period, but on closer examination it is as substantial as any of them, and arguably contains less in the way of lightweight material.

The music is still earthy and authentic, but also focussed and self-assured. A very fine album.

Mean Streets - movie review

"Mean Streets", the 1973 movie directed by Martin Scorsese, and starring Harvey Keitel and Robert De Niro, is one of those films which I think for many people is strangely elusive in its nature. Not a cult movie as such, but equally not one which would be easily described as a mainstream blockbuster. It has a charm all of its own.

The great use of music, a feature of several Scorsese films, is evident from the outset, even in the opening titles. This is just one of those elements which lifts "Mean Streets" well above the mundane. Throughout we are treated to assorted 50s and 60s classics (The Ronettes, The Rolling Stones etc) as well as opera and Italian songs.

The plot centres on mobster Charlie (Harvey Keitel), and his efforts to protect his wayward friend Johnny Boy (Robert De Niro), mostly from loan sharks and their depredations. This task becomes more fraught as Johnny Boy's behaviour grows increasingly abrasive and confrontational. There is some suggestion that Charlie, in pursuing this course, is striving for the redemption which he cannot attain through his religious faith.

De Niro's performance is outstanding, combining impishness and self-confidence with a certain vulnerability. He never allows the character of Johnny Boy to lapse too far into caricature.

"Mean Streets" succeeds in part because it is not weighed down by heavy and momentous themes. The screenplay and the quality of the acting carry any moral messages along with them. To my mind there is a heavy emphasis on telling a story, rather than constantly dwelling on profound issues. This way, the themes themselves are allowed to breathe naturally.

The aesthetic of "Mean Streets" has similarities to previous films;"The French Connection" springs to mind, but the atmosphere is nowhere near as gloomy and austere as other pictures of the genre. The music certainly helps, as does the variety in the locations and the visuals;there is even a scene at the beach. The scenes in assorted sleazy bars and clubs are each given a personality of their own, by the good use of lighting, music and so forth. Yes, it is still a gritty movie, but it also possesses a certain warmth. The dialogue contains some humour amidst the menace.

Due to the format of the film, and the mood which is built up, the viewer develops an empathy for, and an interest in, the destiny of the individual characters on a human level. The emotions are engaged, and this has more to it than merely a tale about mobsters. More depth, even allowing for the sobering and gruesome ending.

"Mean Streets" has been cited as highly influential by many people, both in its visual and narrative feel, and in areas technical such as camerawork and editing. However, it should be judged as an engaging film in its own right, with a distinctive tone stemming from a combination of potent but subtly employed ingredients. The movie may be overshadowed to a degree by the films which later came to define the Seventies in cultural terms, but it is absorbing, powerful and imaginative.

Let It Bleed - The Rolling Stones - album review

Of the four "classic" studio albums released by the Rolling Stones between 1968 and 1972, Let It Bleed, their 1969 effort, has traditionally inspired the most mixed feelings in me.  Made during a time of turmoil in the band, with the decline and subsequent death of Brian Jones, it has commonly been described as one of the cultural artefacts which most cogently captures the close of a decade and its attendant idealism.

Much has been made of how vividly the record evokes the disillusioning tail end of the Sixties, but I often thought in the past that this has hampered an objective appraisal of the album's musical merits. Just lately, however, I have come to realize that my own views about its perceived sociopolitical weight has clouded my own judgement on the artistic offerings contained within. Some concentration and analysis is required to fully appreciate it.

The album is not as uniformly "rustic" as Beggars Banquet, and this can make it seem disjointed. I would go so far as to conclude that Let It Bleed actually contains less filler than its 1968 predecessor, although strangely there are also fewer memorable or "classic" songs here. Only "Gimme Shelter" truly resonates these days.

Whereas the underlying mood before was part anger, part confusion, part defiance, here there is more a sense of fear, ennui and resignation. Many of the songs almost drift by unnoticed rather than grabbing the listener by the throat and demanding attention.

"Gimme Shelter" looms ever larger as one of the group's towering achievements, both for its relevance and for its musical power. The multiple parts performed by Keith Richards, including the oft-overlooked thundering rhythm guitar, Charlie Watts' drumming, the dramatic vocal intervention of Merry Clayton and Mick Jagger's harsh harmonica interludes.

It is easy to disregard the fact that the stylistic thrust of Let It Bleed is not fundamentally different from that which characterized the previous record made by the band. A country-blues ambience is clearly evident on such tracks as "Love In Vain", "Country Honk" and "You Got The Silver". However, the sound is somewhat "cleaner" than before, and this can mislead one into thinking that there had been a profound departure between 1968 and 1969.

A couple of tracks situated in the middle of the album help to lighten the mood, for different reasons. "Live With Me" can seem like a lightweight item, but its danceability and aggressive rigour are welcome in a contextual way. On the other hand, "Let It Bleed", the title track, instills levity with its risque lyrics and ebullient, almost tongue-in-cheek register.

For a long time I had a blind spot about the studio version of "Midnight Rambler", as it appeared clearly inferior to the version later included on Get Yer Ya-Ya's Out, and the production felt cloudy and muddy. However, I now consider that this is one of those tracks which requires real listening, and the clinical and cold feel here is actually highly appropriate. "Monkey Man" serves a similar purpose to "Live With Me", in its injection of energy, although it has an added drama and menace which makes it one of the more underrated cuts on this LP.

"You Can't Always Get What You Want" is the other popularly "iconic" song on the album, forming a potent pair of bookends along with "Gimme Shelter".  I must admit that I prefer the "single" versions, though, as they are shorn of the "choral" introduction...

Of course, Let It Bleed marked the debut of Mick Taylor on a Rolling Stones album, and although his role is limited, his slide guitar touches, even though low in the mix, indicate the way in which his talents would enhance the sonic tapestry of the band in the four or five years ahead.

So, Let It Bleed is prone to be misunderstood. It can seem a forbidding prospect, but if one gets past the mildly unwelcoming exterior it is revealed as a substantial, intriguing and entertaining collection, and it should not be regarded as in any major way inferior to the other works in the Stones' golden 68-72 run.

Beggars Banquet - The Rolling Stones - album review

One or two critics have asserted that Beggars Banquet, released by The Rolling Stones in 1968, is the greatest album of the Sixties. I might not go that far myself, but it is certainly a wonderful album, and one which helped to usher in the band's most creative and turbulent period.

The group, clearly ill-at-ease during the psychedelic era, appeared to be much more at home in 1968's changing cultural and social climate.  They were also more comfortable performing rootsier music, and these sounds somehow more closely reflected and complemented the uneasy or revolutionary sentiments which were supposedly prevalent in '68.

Beggars Banquet also witnessed a solidifying of the Jagger-Richards axis, as their songwriting became ever more prolific and and focused, and Brian Jones' influence gradually diminished.  Did the image of Keith Richards as the "heart and soul" of the Stones arise from necessity, as he was obliged to perform many of the functions previously undertaken by Jones?

In the past, I have tended to view some of the songs on this record as trite or lacking in cultural finesse, trying a little too hard to reflect the tenor of the times. However, after repeated scrutiny I would say that surprisingly little of it sounds corny or misjudged nowadays. I wasn't around in 1968, so I can't comment on how it might have sounded in the context of what was "going on" in those days.  The Beatles did seem to evoke the uncertainty and edginess of the time more acutely on "The White Album", with a minimum of effort and the conspicuous absence of any soap-box, but then again popular perception would have expected the Stones to put out a more overtly "angry" and visceral commentary.

The sound and production have a distinctly earthy flavour to them, redolent of honest toil, and therefore in keeping with the ethos which may or may not have been underpinning the project. Whether this was a conscious effort is difficult to say; what is certain is that the album would not have had the same gravitas and vigour had it been given a smoother and more polished sheen. The guitars (both electric and acoustic) sound splendid throughout.

As opening tracks go, "Sympathy For The Devil" takes some beating, and does kind of set the tone, both musically and atmospherically. The Stones had hinted at such "menace" in the past, but here was its most vibrant and stark manifestation. Opinions may vary as to precisely what Mick and Keith were getting at here, but none can deny that it captures the essence of the album and the popular image of 1968.

If "Sympathy For The Devil" is seen as being a standard-bearer for the spirit of Beggars Banquet, then tracks such as "No Expectations" and "Dear Doctor" are its DNA, with their acoustic bluesy rawness. The former features one of Brian Jones' last notable musical contributions as a member of the Rolling Stones, in the form of his haunting slide guitar part. The rendition of "Prodigal Son" is in a similar vein.

Of course, another song which attracted, and continues to attract, much attention is "Street Fighting Man", with its nicely ambivalent lyrical outlook and its blistering acoustic guitars. What it perhaps lacks in melodic subtlety it more than makes up for in power and robustness, and the instrumentation is pleasingly fuzzy.

I used to dismiss "Jigsaw Puzzle" as superior and stylish filler, but over time it has grown on me. The lyrics sound less and less like a poor man's Bob Dylan the more I listen to them, and the melody is deceptively vibrant and clever. Some more good slide guitar here, and nice separation between the instruments ensures that the rhythm section and the piano can be appreciated with some clarity.

Some people might dismiss "Stray Cat Blues" as a mere prototype for future Stones endeavours, or even "Stones by numbers", but in my view it is one of their finest and most formidable album tracks. Many elements coalesce to make it memorable, including the riffs and feline guitar lines, Charlie Watts' muscular drumming, and Jagger's lascivious vocal delivery.

The set is concluded with the two most obviously "blue collar" and "proletarian" items, "Factory Girl" and "Salt Of The Earth". "Factory Girl" is a rather charming and unpretentious number.  The song which follows it is musically strong, although the "anthemic" choruses can be grating, and the excessive second half of the song rather spoils the effect for me . Very much "of its time", and it is therefore churlish to be too harsh forty-seven years later.

I would say that Beggars Banquet ranks very high for me as far as Stones albums are concerned, second only to Exile On Main Street I would say.  There is very much a demarcation between what was recorded in 1968 (we should include the single "Jumping Jack Flash" in such deliberations) and what had gone before. This record is not as immediately enjoyable or accessible as Sticky Fingers, Some Girls or even Let It Bleed, and it might seem like hard work to begin with, but soon enough its abrasive self-confidence becomes evident.  Essential to an understanding of the Stones and the evolution of their music.

Books About Music

In recent times I have got out of the habit of reading books about music, concentrating instead on history and fiction. However, the arrival of the New Year may persuade me to dust off some of the music-related titles on my shelves. Here are a few of my favourites.

One of the best reference works I have encountered is the fairly monumental AllMusic Guide To Rock, which summarizes the works of a huge diversity of rock, pop and soul artists, giving album ratings as well as brief reviews. Each act is also accorded a brief biography, and there is also an effort to summarize each genre and sub-genre. The sort of book in which to become happily immersed, both to rekindle old tastes and to develop new ones.

As far as scholarly works are concerned, Ian MacDonald's "Revolution In The Head" has a deservedly high reputation. Basically an analysis, song-by-song, of the music of The Beatles, cross-referenced with the social upheavals of the Sixties, it is a riveting read, and it fully merits the acclaim which it has been afforded.

Another Beatles-related book of some import is "The Complete Beatles Chronicle", written by Mark Lewisohn.  Meticulously researched, it basically lists, in chronological order and in remarkable detail, what the Fab Four were doing on each day during their career, whether it was a concert, a recording session, a radio show , a television appearance or something else. Lavishly illustrated, this is another engrossing read, and a reminder of just how frenetic the Beatles' schedule was, especially in the period 1962-1964.

Also well worth seeking out is "Waiting For The Sun", a chronicle of the Los Angeles music scene by Barney Hoskyns. It does not just concentrate on the "obvious" artists, but explores the development of various musical sub-cultures, the careers of influential people, and also the changing character of the music industry itself.

As far as biographies are concerned, Johnny Rogan's books out Neil Young and The Byrds are hugely comprehensive and enjoyable.  Recommended too are Philip Norman's book about The Rolling Stones, and Barney Hoskyns' work dealing with the story of The Band.

Dave Marsh's "The Heart Of Rock & Soul - The 1001 Greatest Singles Ever Made" is a strident and thought-provoking work, not for the faint-hearted, but impossible to put down once begun. It probably helped to jolt me out of some of my musical complacency and inertia, even if I didn't agree with all of the author's opinions.

Now if you'll excuse me, I'm off to do some reading....

Protest Songs

The early years of rock & roll were primarily notable for songs about the pleasures of the flesh or youthful rebellion. However, as the Sixties wore on, and the social and inter-generational atmosphere grew more febrile and unstable, the frontiers of rock expanded, and lyrics became more diverse, experimental and profound. The protest song genre was very much part of this overall pushing back of the boundaries. I have lately embarked on an intensely "political" phase, and this subject therefore came to the forefront of my mind.

 

Protest songs take several forms, all of which have their own virtues and hallmarks. The most overtly powerful, but also the most ephemeral, is the song written on the spur of the moment, often in a spontaneous outpouring of rage, indignation or dismay, and in reaction to a traumatic or tragic incident. An example which springs to mind instantly is "Ohio" by Crosby, Stills, Nash and Young. Songs such as this make up in rawness and sincerity what they may lack in long-term universal anthemic potential. Even if some of the precise cultural references may mean less these days, they are formidable period pieces, with a unique appeal.

 

The track which for me stands out as the ultimate protest number is "Fortunate Son" by Creedence Clearwater Revival.  Clearly addressing an emotive and topical theme of 1969, but also espousing many sentiments which have remained common ever since. The clinching factor is the fact that "Fortunate Son" is, in purely musical terms,  a rip-roaring piece of rock & roll. John Fogerty could be singing about washing-up liquid and it would still be a great record.  However, the lyrics elevate it to something else again, the frenetic pace of the arrangement ideally complementing the anger being expressed.

The other "Vietnam era" protest song which still packs a real punch, and stands up well, is "Draft Morning" by The Byrds. An ethereal vibe pervades this one, punctuated by sound effects depicting the horrors of war. A different approach to "Fortunate Son", but still highly effective and memorable.

Creedence Clearwater Revival recorded one or two other excellent protest records. "Bad Moon Rising", to the uninitiated, could be open to several interpretations, but now it seems clear that it was a lament about the political events of the late 1960s in the United States. "Who'll Stop The Rain" is a more wide-ranging, if equally forthright, commentary on the ills and turmoil of those times. John Fogerty's passionate songs had an honesty, directness and clarity which was sometimes lacking in the "social commentary" and posturing of the psychedelic and singer-songwriter crowds.

Jackson Browne, initially renowned for his introspective and personal lyrics, grew more overtly concerned with social and political issues as his career developed. In his case, I always found the satirical approach more convincing than his direct "protest" material. "The Pretender", from 1976, was eerily shrewd in its assessment of where the wind was blowing, and prescient about the careerism and economic rapaciousness which would fully emerge in the decade which followed, even raising concern about "work/life balance".  "Lawyers In Love", released in the early 1980s, is a cynical, if astute and amusing, take on the Cold War and cultural imperialism. If not "protest songs" in the conventional sense, both "The Pretender" and "Lawyers In Love" deliver a thought-provoking and coherent message without sounding either self-righteous or corny.

Then there is the carefully researched campaigning song, bringing an injustice to wider attention, as perfectly exemplified by Bob Dylan's "Hurricane".  The Rolling Stones delivered their own distinct, and sometimes ambiguous, verdict on the upheavals of the late 60s with songs such as "Street Fighting Man" and "Gimme Shelter".

These are just examples from what may loosely be termed the "classic rock" era, and of course other musical genres have been equally prolific in commenting on political matters. The concept of "the protest album" is most popularly encapsulated by Marvin Gaye's magnificent "What's Going On".  Of course, protest and activism is in the very DNA of folk music and folk-rock.

An interesting debate would be whether the protest song is less prevalent and favoured than it used to be, in "mainstream" music at least?  Did the financial crisis of a few years ago produce any great protest songs, or is the music scene now so fragmented that such tracks do not gain widespread recognition?

 

Some Girls - The Rolling Stones - album review

Much misty-eyed mythology surrounds the recordings which the Rolling Stones made during the period 1968-72, and indeed those prior to that, and it is commonly asserted that much of the band's existence since then has been spent living off past glories, and that their albums have often been made on auto-pilot. However, the 1978 record "Some Girls" emphatically gives the lie to this view, and stands comparison in its own way with anything in the Stones' catalogue.

There were numerous reasons for this sudden re-invigoration.  Personal problems, creative inertia and a changing musical landscape appeared to be conspiring against the Stones as the Seventies moved towards their conclusion. People were asking whether the Stones were still relevant,and if they had run out of steam artistically.  This tight and zestful set was an resounding response to such misgivings.

Being perceived as having their backs to the wall, the defiance shines through on "Some Girls", as if they were simultaneously putting a metaphorical two fingers up to the world, and revelling in the refuge and escape offered by music. It has often been said that this was the point where Mick Jagger began to stake a claim to de facto leadership of the band, but the sentiments were collective.

The focus, energy and strength of purpose could not present a starker contrast with the relative lethargy and nebulousness of the previous three studio albums. Yes, the emergence of punk and disco did contribute to the album's mood and content, but not to the extent that the Stones simply wrote and recorded "punk and disco songs". They absorbed the ethos and vitality of those two genres, and the consequences revealed themselves naturally within a broadly familiar framework. This is still very much a "Rolling Stones album".

One of the most startling features of "Some Girls" is the dearth of instrumental padding and decoration. Many of the songs are performed at a hefty rate of knots, reflecting perhaps a mixture of anger, frustration and even liberation from the directionless and torpor of the years which went before. The modern Stones sound is taking shape, seen in the guitar interplay and the nature of the riffs.

The resolve possessed by the band is amply displayed on the album's opener, "Miss You". Much has been made of its "disco" leanings, but I would also argue that it is part of the broader trend of rock bands in the Seventies to embrace more rhythmic and funky patterns (Little Feat, Steely Dan). The sleazy electric piano and guitars, and punchy rhythm section, allied with a sneering Jagger vocal, give it its potency

The breathless immediacy which pervades most of "Some Girls" really kicks in on the second number, "When The Whip Comes Down". Freshness in abundance.

The pace is maintained with the cover "Just My Imagination (Running Away with Me)". This is not a straight cover version, and the Stones' rendering shows a strong power pop/new wave sensibility.  It has a spontaneity to it, as if it was being performed at a sound check a few hours prior to a gig. This is not a criticism, and a lack of the over-reach and artifice often associated with cover versions is a joy to behold.

Moving on to the title track, and leaving aside the controversial lyrics, this son typifies the approach and mood on the album. Very bluesy and raw, accentuated by the harmonica and the ragged vocal harmonies. The Stones' "bad boy" image and notoriety was kept flickering by songs like this. The melody is simple and straightforward, but powerfully delivered.

"Lies" is stripped down, frenetic, almost minimalist.  "Meat and potatoes" one could say, but a statement of intent, and far from dull or pretentious. "Respectable" is similar in character, but is marginally more tuneful, and lyrically more decipherable, if not containing much in the way of emotional or psychological depth!

Of all the Stones' excursions into the domain of country music, "Far Away Eyes" is one of the most authentic and sincere, but equally one of the least entertaining or memorable. Some relief is introduced by "Before They Make Me Run", forming the usual Keith-on-lead-vocals slot, with what appear to be semi-autobiographical lyrics.

"Beast of Burden" is one of the most durable of Rolling Stones songs. High quality pop/rock which has stood the test of time. This one contains more intricate guitar work, and a more considered and complex melody. The album closes with "Shattered", another quick and sparse rocker, exhibiting a vaguely 50s flavour, and redolent of some of the New Wave sounds which would appear in the years ahead. A slightly odd choice to conclude the album?

So there we have it, "Some Girls" by the Rolling Stones. No-nonsense rock n roll, packing a considerable punch, and exuding the restless vigour of the those times. After this, the Stones enjoyed a new lease of life, and it was both a symptom and a cause of their continuing strength. Above all, it is an enjoyable and important collection of songs.

It's Only Rock N Roll - The Rolling Stones - album review

Following on from my blog post regarding the Rolling Stones' 1973 album Goats Head Soup, it seemed logical to then take a look at the record which followed immediately afterwards, namely 1974's It's Only Rock 'n' Roll. 

Some of the elements merely hinted at on Goats Head Soup are developed, projected and exploited further.This record feels a touch more ebullient and gaudy than its predecessor, and less nebulous and reflective. The production is not as murky and hesitant.

The opening track, "If You Can't Rock Me", sets the tone, with its purposefulness and intensity, and the overall freshness which it exudes. It also sounds curiously "modern", as if it had been recorded in an ensuing decade, whilst still exhibiting that certain 1970s flavour and vibe.

"Ain't Too Proud To Beg" strikes me as a rather pointless and incongruous cover version, even if it is an affectionate nod to Motown etc. Those with uncharitable inclinations may insinuate that its presence on this LP is indicative of a general dearth of quality original tunes. Despite these reservations, this rendition does have some conviction about it, and the Stones always sound reasonably comfortable when performing songs in this genre.

The title track, to some observers inextricably linked with its accompanying promotional video, is playful, frivolous even, but hugely infectious. Again, it displays a bite and vitality and lacks the aimlessness of some of the Stones' "rockers" of this particular vintage.

I suppose that "Till The Next Goodbye" qualifies as a "ballad", of the type which the band appeared capable of churning out almost at will. A middling melody is flattered or redeemed by acoustic guitars, harmonies and some above-average lyrics. The song gains in power and effect as it progresses.

The next number, "Time Waits For No One" carries distinctly Seventies traits, with its guitar treatments and flourishes, and a mildly unsettling eeriness. This track lingers a little too long, and becomes almost wearisome.   Musically it strongly reminds me of Stephen Stills' Manassas.

"Luxury" lends further weight to suspicions that the weaker songs were concentrated in the middle of the running order, although in mitigation it does contain glimpses of Mick Taylor's prowess and finesse, and some pleasing vocal harmonies.

"Dance Little Sister" is another prosaic if meaty rocker, largely devoid of inspiration.  The words formulaic and pedestrian also come to mind!

The quality begins to climb again when we reach "If You Really Want to Be My Friend".  An appealing and deceptively rich melody is augmented by some deft instrumental touches.  This one holds the attention well, and Mick Jagger's vocal is delivered with some pugnacity and intent.

The penultimate item, "Short and Curlies", betrays shades of Exile on Main Street, with Jagger and Keith Richards doing their joint vocal thing to considerable effect, and some diverting chord changes. Impossible to dislike....

Matters are concluded with "Fingerprint File", which is very much a rhythmic "feel" track, shining a torch on some of the excursions to be pursued by the Stones later on.  A bit of improvisation here too. The tune is just about substantial and coherent enough to prevent this descending into a meandering jam.

On reflection, it is fair to say that It's Only Rock 'n' Roll contains as much, if not more filler, than Goats Head Soup, but the better material carries genuine enthusiasm, spirit and drive, which lift it.  Even if it is artistically patchy and uneven, it is more "in your face", and feels like an "event", primarily because of the decadent sheen of the Stones circa 1973/74.  A fascinating and intriguing document and souvenir of an era....

Goats Head Soup - The Rolling Stones - album review

A little while ago I wrote an article about what, by common consent, was the most fruitful and inventive period in the illustrious career of The Rolling Stones, namely 1968 to 1972:-

The Rolling Stones 1968-1972


The first thing to acknowledge is that the Stones faced a quandary in the aftermath of Exile On Main Street.   Should they try to match or emulate their magnum opus, consciously move in a different direction, or just see where things naturally took them?  On balance, they appear to have followed the latter option, perhaps sensing that the first would invite disaster, and that the second would impose a straitjacket.

The first album which the band released after "Exile" was Goats Head Soup, which unsurprisingly betrays most signs of the comedown from the fertile and productive days of 68-72.  Just as it is often proclaimed that the classic 1972 double album is largely a "Keith album", then at first glance its follow-up shows up more of Mick Jagger's fingerprints, stylistically as well as lyrically.

A certain "fog" and pall hangs over this record, symptomatic of fatigue and jadedness, the effect being similar to a hangover  (which, in career terms, this album essentially was).  The emphasis of the lyrics has changed from the vibrant mixture of "Exile" to an overall, almost sinister, gloominess. The tone is set with the opening number, "Dancing With Mr D".  Electric piano and wah-wah guitar abound, making this LP distinctly "of its time", an accusation that can not be as easily levelled at "Exile".

It has often been asserted that Exile On Main Street represented the culmination of everything which the Stones had been striving towards for the previous decade. After scaling the metaphorical peak, the 1973 follow-up sees them wearily, if happily, descending, seemingly not taking too much trouble over the precise route down, or the style in which it was accomplished.

After the menace of the aforementioned "Dancing with Mr D", we move on to the languid "100 Years Ago". It is driven by electric piano, and contains just a trace of the magic of earlier albums, possessing a melodic shape and sense of purpose, but at the same time, it is also very typical of what was to characterise the mid-70s output.  In these respects it feels like a hinge between eras.  Similar sentiments could be applied to the song which follows, "Coming Down Again".

"Doo Doo Doo Doo Doo (Heartbreaker)" is possibly the strongest and most memorable track on the album, having genuine drive and abundant drama. The lyrics complement the music, and greatly contribute to the overall effect.  This is one of the songs on Goats Head Soup on which the band sounds truly interested, focused and motivated.  It has also proved very effective in the concert environment.

I imagine that "Angie" has the knack of dividing opinion among Stones fans, but looking at things objectively it is a fine and strong pop/rock composition, featuring a confident and authoritative Jagger vocal.  The song also serves to anchor an album which can feel rather lacking in direction and purpose.

"Silver Train" borders on "Stones by numbers", and is the rootiest number on the record, largely by dint of the slide guitar flourishes. Although a touch bland, and "meat and potatoes", it does inject some welcome relief in the context of what surrounds it. The next item, "Hide Your Love", is another track which although in itself unremarkable, does hark back vaguely to the glories of 1968-72.

Another ballad-like track follows in the shape of "Winter".  Largely unexceptional, it seeks to project itself as an epic, but ends up doing very little and going almost nowhere.  The run of superior mediocrity continues with "Can You Hear The Music" which, although equipped with a reasonably promising melodic base, is let down by a failure to accentuate and exploit its strengths.  A missed opportunity, methinks....

When people refer to the Stones descending into self-parody, "Star Star" could be presented as Exhibit A. It is difficult to ascertain what is and what is not intentionally tongue-in-cheek, and this song comes dangerously close to being the fly in the ointment. In a strange way, it is an apt way to close this album and presage the Stones' future career.

Having gone through Goats Head Soup track by track,  my conclusion is that it contains some decent songs, and flashes of excellent musicianship, but the overall effect is diminished by the sense of inertia, and a shortage of energy and inspiration. It is by no means a bad album, and it has a kind of semi-kitsch period charm of its own, exemplifying the sluggish hedonism which coloured much of the Stones' work for some time afterwards.

White Light - Gene Clark - album review

When Gene Clark's solo albums are evaluated, his 1974 magnum opus No Other is regularly cited as some kind of high point, if nothing else because it is regarded as a concept album of sorts, and because it symbolises something crucial about the period during which it was recorded.  However, after giving it due attention, I would venture to suggest that his 1971 work White Light deserves to be awarded similar acclaim, if for differing reasons.

White Light does not have any particular sonic or philosophical thread running through it, but song-for-song it is consistently superb, and proved a revelation to me, even within the context of Gene's formidable repertoire. The songs are recorded and captured in glorious clarity and freshness, allowing the vocals and acoustic guitars in particular to stand out.  There is none of the outlandishness or semi- superfluous packaging to be found on  No Other.

On occasion, I have heard people remark that some of Gene's acoustic numbers are "samey".  This is a very debatable point in itself, but they are invariably so compelling, engrossing and beautiful that such notions hardly seem to matter anyway.  There is a power and finesse about his voice and the melodies; indeed so much so that it is sometimes quite easy to overlook the lyrics...

Don't get the impression that this album is standard, "meat and potatoes" country-rock or folk troubadour fare.  Many of these songs are infused with a certain soulfulness, which is also characteristic of much of Gene Clark's other work. Care is taken with the arrangements, in order to ensure that there is some variety and colour to augment the tunefulness.

One of the notable virtues of White Light is the consistent excellence of the songs.  There was genuinely not a weak song on the originally released LP, and this means that the listener's attention is held throughout.

Uniformly strong the album may be, but there are some tracks which do stand out.  The opener, "The Virgin" is distinctive in its flavour and ambience. 

"For A Spanish Guitar" may be the the most famous song on the album, and is memorable for its tempo and intricate guitar parts.

"One In A Hundred" has a superb melody and touching lyrics, although many will prefer the more "Byrdsian" rendering which was recorded at a later date. 

"Because Of You" sounds deceptively simple at first, but it has a real charm and warmth about it, accentuated by the subtle organ part.

"Where My Love Lies Asleep" is another lovely tune, carrying some echoes of the Rolling Stones' "No Expectations", with its pleasing slide guitar flourishes.

Gene Clark made lots of wonderful music both before and after White Light, but there is reason to think that much of the continuing affection, admiration and esteem in which Gene and his music are held stems from this great, and under-rated, record.

Stephen Stills and Manassas

Some years ago, I embarked on a journey through the California rock movement of the 60s and 70s, encompassing country-rock, the singer-songwriter movement, and the tangentially connected "scenes".

One day in my favourite record store, I discovered the 1972 debut album by Stephen Stills' group Manassas. To my shame, I had not previously even been aware of the existence of the record or the band. I distinctly recall standing in the shop, gazing at the cover of the CD, with the names of the group members in white lettering, and thinking that this was almost too good to be true.  I had no internet access back then, and so without undertaking any additional research, purchased the album, feeling reasonably certain that it would accord with my tastes.

As soon as I played the album, I "got it".  A bunch of accomplished and skilled musicians, performing songs embracing a number of styles - blues,country,folk,Latin,R&B and straight rock, these genres often being amalgamated.  The record instantly appeared diverse,funky and broad in its scope, almost an embarrassment of riches, the music equivalent of a delicious plum pudding!  Having not heard of the Manassas project before, it was akin to discovering a box of hidden treasure.

Another thing which occurred to me right away was the lack of artifice or self-indulgence on the album, in spite of the calibre of the musicians featured on it.  Manassas is almost entirely founded on concise songs.  Tentative parallels may perhaps be drawn with another double-album issued in 1972, Exile on Main Street by the Rolling Stones.  Both exuded rootsiness, and the joy of a group of guys making music almost for the hell of it.  Of course, Stephen Stills had some links with the Stones around this time, and Bill Wyman makes a guest appearance on Manassas.

Mercifully, in digital formats (those which I have heard, anyway), the music retains its essentially organic and earthy ambience, the emotion and grit not being sucked out by over-zealous remasterings. The sounds are permitted to breathe....

In addition to the presence of Stills himself, other elements go towards making this such a fine album. The pedal steel of Al Perkins injects vital nuance, soul and novelty throughout.  The variety of guitar sounds adds depth, with Perkins complementing Stills' own prowess. Joe Lala's percussion adds a certain funkiness and rhythmic vigour to many of the songs.

The role of Chris Hillman is also crucial, his harmonies being an important, but underplayed, element. To describe him as Stills' right hand man here may be inaccurate, but his input and presence add a subtly different dimension to things; a welcome counterweight to the other participants.

On an album which is so uniformly enjoyable, it is a tough task to select highlights, but I'm going to do it anyway!  "So Begins The Task" has an enigmatic, ethereal and haunting quality about it, with a tasteful backing track overlaid by some affecting and inventive pedal steel. The vocal harmonies in the chorus are perhaps the most impressive on the album.

"It Doesn't Matter" features some languid vocals.  This track is almost "Byrdsian", but with a seductive and hedonistic "Seventies" feel, mostly by virtue of the glitzy guitar parts.  Another deceptively strong melody.  On Manassas, many of the songs are subsumed into the whole, seemingly not wishing to draw attention to themselves. 

A powerful, driving core is at the heart of "Right Now", with quite a breathless riff holding things together.  The track is propelled along by the efforts of the whole musical combo.

The penultimate number, "The Treasure", contains what could be loosely termed a "guitar jam", but it is a strong song in its own right, with some pleasing changes and hooks.  When the guitars do kick in, some variety and invention at least partially answer any charges of excess. 

One of the delights of Manassas is its ability to offer up hidden gems, and for the beauty and charm of some of the songs to reveal themselves gradually. Even many years after first hearing it, I am still constantly discovering hitherto neglected corners and depths.  Is it probably true to say that none of the individual songs are outright masterpieces, but this is to miss the point.  This is an album, in the truest sense, with a real vitality about it. 

The running order is arranged astutely, divided into four sides (as per the original vinyl LP), each one nominally covering a musical style, or the subject matter.  This itself is not immediately conspicuous, but the scheduling works well in practice.  There is some "light and shade", and this all helps to keep the listener intrigued.

The Manassas combination released a second album, "Down The Road", in 1973, and although this possessed its stylish, entertaining and appealing moments, it could not fully recreate the magic and zest of its predecessor. 

A contentious point, I know, but the Manassas album might just be the most fully realised, coherent work which Stephen Stills ever committed to record.

Led Zeppelin

One of the more curious and puzzling characteristics of those within these shores is our tendency to overlook and neglect the most worthy accomplishments and qualities of our countrymen. We seem to be embarrassed sometimes by things which are instantly and staggeringly successful, especially if such success is achieved by means which are seen as "different" or "too good to be true".

I often feel that Led Zeppelin were victims of this phenomenon in their homeland. From the outset they were more appreciated and valued abroad, particularly in the United States.  Popular acceptance in Britain always seemed grudging and apathetic.  The masses at home never really took Zeppelin to their hearts.

Led Zeppelin always possessed a certain mystique which set them apart from their contemporaries, and this may explain their failure to connect emotionally with some in their home country. The refusal to release singles in the UK, their unorthodox career path generally, and the wilful misrepresentation of their music by much of the media all played a part.

Although these idiosyncracies helped to ensure that Zeppelin were never perhaps "loved" by the public  like the Stones or the Beatles, they were some of the principal reasons for the band's unique appeal, and place in rock history. The methods which they employed to record and put together their albums, their stylistic diversity and their self-contained, almost reclusive, status, all also contributed to this trend.

It is a frustrating, but nonetheless necessary task for those of us who love Led Zeppelin to regularly dispel the myths and misconceptions which surround them, and continue to cloud and distort their reputation.

First of all, the most irksome one, the notion that Led Zeppelin were merely a "heavy metal" band.  If people would take the trouble to listen properly to their catalogue, they would swiftly realise that this is a nonsensical charge.  Not only was Zeppelin's repertoire varied and eclectic, but even the louder and heavier numbers could hardly be dubbed "heavy metal"; more like experimental blues-rock, expanding on what had been done by the Yardbirds (who spawned Zep), Cream and others.  I would argue that "heavy metal", in its truest form, was pioneered by Black Sabbath and their ilk.

Some of the "trendy" music press, and a certain group of musicians who emerged around 1976/77, often charged that Led Zeppelin were "corporate", and epitomised everything that was grasping, avaricious and "corporate" about the music industry.  Well, Zeppelin certainly made lots of money, largely through their own talent and shrewd management.  In fact, they bucked many trends, defied much conventional wisdom on promotion, and generally refused to "play the game".  I would also ask people to seek out interviews with Jimmy Page or Robert Plant, and see how their love of music for its own sake shines through.

With some observers, Zeppelin acquired a reputation for being somewhat arrogant and aloof.  Some of the tales and anecdotes were doubtless inflated and exaggerated, calculated to embellish the mystique which we have already touched on.  This perceived lack of "media-friendliness" also partially helps to explain the detached and nebulous image which the group still has for some.

Enough about the myths and the criticisms.  What were some of the secrets and virtues which made Led Zeppelin so special?

Well, the make-up of the band, and the chemistry which this engendered, was certainly instrumental. Both Jimmy Page and John Paul Jones were steeped in the British music scene of the preceding period. Endless session work meant that, for their relatively tender years, they had accumulated considerable knowledge of production and arranging.  Also, this had helped them to work any bad habits out of their systems.  Because of these elements, the nascent Led Zeppelin was equipped to hit the ground running.

Because of the background of Page and Jones, it was easier to harness and focus the awesome raw talent of the two comparative novices, Plant and John Bonham. This environment also assisted them in smoothing off their rough edges.

We have already referred to the "self-contained" nature of the group.  This was jealously guarded, and the inner circle made sure that no great entourage of hangers-on or guest musicians was involved. Consequently, they were never really part of any movement, or "scene", developing on their own terms, and not being diluted or compromised, or falling prey to outside influences.

Another hallmark of Zeppelin was their willingness to be experimental and unconventional when it came to recording their material.  Many sessions were by all accounts informal and spontaneous, and there is very much a vibrant "live" feeling to many of their tracks, particularly on Led Zeppelin III and Physical Graffiti.  This was accentuated by careful use and placing of microphones and amplifiers in the studio.

So how are Led Zeppelin perceived today.  I sense that they still not as "fashionable" or "establishment" as their contemporaries.  However, they should be proud of refusing to sacrifice their integrity or selling their souls simply to court more acceptance or adulation.  They did things on their own terms, and not everyone can honestly claim that.  New artists do not regularly name-check them as an influence, but I hardly think that the surviving band members lose much sleep over this.  Above all, they should be proud of their achievements, and their body of work.

Stay tuned for some reviews of individual Led Zeppelin albums in the future!

The Rolling Stones 1968-1972

Some artists or groups have a fairly regular and consistent career path, with occasional peaks and troughs along the way.  However, I struggle to think of an act whose time of greatest creativity and zest is so clearly defined as the Rolling Stones are by their output in the period 1968-1972.

During this four or five year span, the Stones fashioned their most consistent and coherent creations, and their records immediately preceding and succeeding it sound anaemic and uninspired by comparison. The band released four studio albums, with a stellar live set (Get Yer Ya-Yas Out) neatly sandwiched in between.  Each of those albums has a distinct character, reflecting not just developments within the Rolling Stones, but also in the wider world.

So what was the background to this vibrant phase? 

From the start of their recording career, the Stones had leavened their gutsier, bluesier persona with more pop-orientated material. The psychedelic experimentation immediately prior to 1968 may have met with ambivalence and even incredulity, but it did see the consolidation of the Jagger/Richards axis, and the diminishing role and influence of Brian Jones. The Stones were being re-shaped, but for what future purpose was not yet totally clear.

As 1968 dawned, however, it became clear that "flower power" was losing much of its urgency and lustre. As it turned out, this shift worked in the Stones' favour.  Rock music was preparing to move in a more rootsy direction (Bob Dylan, The Byrds, The Band), and other artists looked to embrace this to some degree or other. The Stones were no exception.

In this climate of social and political ferment, the stage was ideally suited to the Stones' edgier, rebellious, anti-establishment take.  The vogue for stripped-down and less elaborate sounds in a time of upheaval was not entirely coincidental.  Many were disenchanted with the naivete of 1967, and were looking to alternative methods and agendas.  The artifice of much psychedelic music seemed incongruous against this backdrop.

Above all, the Stones must have felt liberated from the need to conform and compromise, as they had done for much of the previous two years.  They could be "themselves" once more....

The first fruits of this rebirth came with the single "Jumping Jack Flash".   Even from the scuzzy opening guitar chords, and the sinewy riff which follows, once can feel that this is a new, more purposeful Rolling Stones. The recruitment of producer Jimmy Miller helped to sculpt this new sound.

The same groups of recording sessions spawned the Beggars Banquet album. Few albums before or since have defined their times as pertinently as this one did.  The edginess, uncertainty, menace, belligerence even, are palpable. The idealism and optimism of 1967 had given way to realism and cynicism.

It is open to debate whether Beggars Banquet should be regarded as the soundtrack to a year, as it was released in December of 1968, but the Stones slotted seamlessly into their role.  Country blues sounds are prominent on the album, and the earthiness and sincerity are perfectly in tune with the mood. 

The widespread use of acoustic guitars on the album adds to the authenticity, grit and immediacy. They seem more "proletarian" than vulgar electric ones!  And no attempt is made to conceal finger noises and other imperfections.  This "warts and all" approach is one of the secrets to the power of Beggars Banquet.

"Sympathy For The Devil", epic and sinister, sets the tone as the opening track.  Engagingly and defiantly different and percussive, this song and its message seem symbolic of the shift in the Western mindset around that time. A shrewd choice with which to commence proceedings.

Another linchpin of the album is "Street Fighting Man", which has been the focus of heated debate down the years. More acoustic guitars, and what seems an ambivalent, sardonic and slightly mocking view of the year's events.  Whichever interpretation we place on this song, it remains a powerful piece, lyrically and musically.

Two of the numbers on the album, "Parachute Woman" and "Jigsaw Puzzle", with its sub-Bob Dylan words, would normally be filed under "filler", but here they blend into the whole, so their mediocrity is less conspicuous. "Stray Cat Blues" is a nod to traditional Stones territory, and fits in musically, even if its lyrics are out of place.

Beggars Banquet closes with two paeans to blue-collar values, "Factory Girl" and "Salt of The Earth".

By the time the Stones commenced recording Let It Bleed, Brian Jones was a peripheral figure at best, and appears on only two tracks.

In places, Let It Bleed is indeed apocalyptic and incendiary, but to these ears is nowhere near as uniformly strong or cohesive as Beggars Banquet.  This may have been partly intentional, and the traumas being undergone by the Stones also played a role, but I would say that Let It Bleed's reputation is ever so slightly out of proportion to its aesthetic merit.

In spite of my mild misgivings, I still rate some of the songs on Let It Bleed.  "Gimme Shelter" , as well as being au courant for the end of the 1960s, is one of the outstanding slabs in the Stones catalogue, and indeed the whole of rock music, and "Love In Vain" is one of their most effective covers, but the rest is uneven and patchy. 

There is something vaguely tired and listless about much of Let It Bleed, and I am still not fully convinced by the efforts of some critics to talk these things up as if they represent virtues. It might have sounded relevant and important in 1969, but to more dispassionate modern ears it is by far the weakest of the four studio albums released during the period which we are looking at.

Many changes had occurred by the time of the 1971 release of Sticky Fingers. The world was a different place, much of the revolutionary fervour having evaporated.  Mick Taylor was now fully integrated into the set-up, rather than being a hired hand.

Sticky Fingers is civilised, well-structured and shrewdly produced.  It lacks the rambling, informal quality of Exile on Main Street, but the material is strong and memorable.  The lyrical spotlight is firmly on the hedonistic, reflecting perhaps the jaded resignation characteristic of the young decade.

When listening, it is immediately noticeable how much Mick Taylor's guitar flourishes add to the palette, complementing the de facto rhythm section of Keith Richards and Charlie Watts.  There is more texture and depth than before, and the addition of Taylor also facilitates more instrumental virtuosity and experimentation, as evidenced by the closing section of "Can't You Hear Me Knocking?". The sound on Sticky Fingers is accessible and clear, but the trademark Stones grittiness is not sacrificed.

There is a sensible balance between rockers and ballads.  The album, though, is almost entirely devoid of social commentary, and therefore verges on the one-dimensional lyrics-wise. This may be where Sticky Fingers acquired its reputation as the one which most embodies the fabled Stonesy "swagger".   "Brown Sugar" is an absolute gem, but could also be termed "Rolling Stones by Numbers".

Exile On Main Street is often cited as the culmination of everything that the Stones had been working towards, but I'm not altogether sure about this.  The 1972 release should be seen as a unique entity, or a tangential work, because of the conditions under which it was recorded, and its groove.  If you're looking for the "quintessential" Stones album, you might be better stopping off at Sticky Fingers.

No, I tend to regard "Exile" as a project all by itself, differing in vibe and sound from those which came before, less concise and less concerned with structure and form.  It could almost qualify as a compendium of American "roots" music (blues,country, R&B,soul,gospel), but that was unlikely to have been the intention.

I know that some people, on their initial listen, can find "Exile" a touch alienating, because of its slapdash nature and the "foggy" sound. Persevere, though, and these are the things which you will find most endearing about the project. 

Exile on Main Street begins and ends with some of its most recognisable tracks ("Rocks Off", "Rip This Joint","Soul Survivor"), but in between is an eclectic blend of offerings, some of them on the surface sounding like lightweight afterthoughts, but forming an appetising whole.

In comparison to the more considered sheen of Sticky Fingers, "Exile" almost feels like a series of "demo" versions of new songs, but it is to the Stones' credit that they resisted the temptation to go for the easy option in 1972, and come up with more of the same.  Above all, it sounds like the Stones and their entourage had a swell time putting these songs together, and this exuberance oozes from every chord.

We have mentioned the raw and loose playing on the album, and this is all held together with a glorious soulfulness, most clearly found on such songs as "Let It Loose", "Shine A Light" and "Loving Cup".  Hard to define, but very much there.

The Stones made great records before 1968-1972, and some great ones since, but never again did they recapture that "sweet spot", that intangible spirit which informed their music during their halcyon period. 

Rather than lament the relative lack of inspiration in the post-1972 catalogue, I think that we should just enjoy and savour these four albums......

The White Album - The Beatles - album review

Between the end of 1967 and the early months of 1968, the Beatles underwent some changes, and it can be argued that this period represented a watershed in their career.

They began 1968 by recording the single "Lady Madonna", and then decamped to a spiritual retreat in India.  Meanwhile, plans were being laid for the the formation of the Apple company.

Both during the sojourn in India, and in the immediate aftermath, the band members composed lots of new songs, and many of these found their way onto the eponymous double album more commonly referred to as The White Album.

The recording sessions for this work revealed the first hairline cracks in the Beatles facade, cracks which gradually developed into fissures. However, for me The Beatles is one of the most fascinating, if enigmatic, areas of the group's catalogue.

Many rock historians have interpreted the content and atmosphere of The White Album as a retreat from the psychedelic excesses of the previous two years, a trend also reflected by the Rolling Stones' Beggars Banquet, and the output of the likes of Bob Dylan, The Byrds and The Band around the same time. Many of the songs have an acoustic, rustic feel to them, and this is also a product of the circumstances under which they were written in India.

In addition to the stripped down nature of some of the numbers, there are also signs of a return to the band's rock n roll roots on "Back in the USSR", "Birthday" and "Everybody's Got Something to Hide Except Me and My Monkey".  Notwithstanding this general return to a simpler and rootsier sound, the experimental was not totally abandoned, as evidenced by some of the contributions of John Lennon, notably "Revolution 9".

I see The White Album as one of the crucial stepping stones in the transition from "pop" to "serious" rock music. That said, the lyrical content of the tracks on this album varies from the esoteric ("Happiness Is A Warm Gun") to the downright banal ("Rocky Raccoon").  The eclecticism is a large part of the LP's charm, and I think that those who said that a condensed single album would have been a better option are missing the point.  The vignettes and fragments are the glue which hold things together.

Underlying many of the songs is a certain darkness,menace, ennui even; symptomatic perhaps of the tensions within the Beatles, and also of the social and political climate which was prevalent in 1968. Largely absent is the ebullience and levity of Sgt. Pepper and Magical Mystery Tour. Rarely has an album been as apposite and illustrative of its times as The White Album.  Its tenor seemed to be in tune with the then nascent counter-culture.

The internal group dynamics are also worth discussing.  After Paul McCartney's pre-eminence through most of the 1967 recordings, John Lennon's re-asserts himself as a songwriter on this double album, and his contributions are arguably the most substantial.  The continuing emergence of George Harrison's writing and performing prowess is a also a central feature.

Whilst The Beatles is an "album" in the truest sense of the word, this does not mean that there are not highlights.  "Dear Prudence", with its pastoral and joyous air, is one of the hidden gems in the Beatles' oeuvre, and features Paul McCartney on drums, after Ringo Starr temporarily left the group.

"Martha My Dear", although lyrically less than profound, is wonderfully tuneful, and appears to have influenced the Electric Light Orchestra melodically. 

"While My Guitar Gently Weeps" was one of Harrison's most substantial efforts to date, although the spine-tingling acoustic "demo" version is superior.

The White Album is not as instantly likeable as the Beatles' previous releases, or even what was to follow, but it is essential to an understanding of the group's artistic progression, and  the musical, social and cultural landscape of 1968.