Posted by Ben on April 28, 2000 at 08:13:37:
In Reply to: Re: Re: 1966 was The Rolling Stones Greatest Year posted by Fleabit Peanut Monkey on April 27, 2000 at 18:08:03:
: I agree. Their output in 1966 was astonishing, mainly because Brian was still a fully functioning member of the band and was at the height of his multi-instrumental explorations. It all still sounds great, but it's the amount of growth they showed that is so stunning. A long way from '65.
: Not only that, but they were the coolest LOOKING band in the world in 1966.
: Only Bob Dylan looked cooler or had a more impressive year recording-wise.
Really, Brian was leading the way in 1966 with his experimentation. That and the fact that Mick and Keith were really becoming masters at writing great 3-minute rock songs with interesting lyrics and catchy tunes. That Mick-Keith-Brian triangle, however pyschically complex and troubled, was never more productive. As far as the Beatles go, even with the brilliant "Revolver," I think the Rolling Stones were at the top of the heap that year. Brian's musical experimentation predated most of the Beatles' exotic dabblings. Also, the Stones were a vital touring act in 1966 (cf. "Got Live If You Want It"), whereas the Beatles by that time were burned-out and indifferent. (They weren't rioting Albert Hall without a reason; the Stones elicited incredible energy from their audiences, and, "Got Live" exclusive of the studio tracks sounds pretty damn good--a very intense concert show.)
Finally, I left out a few tracks even. It was for them or any band probably the most fertile year in the recording studio, IMO.
Post a Followup