7
Jan 05

THE ROLLING STONES – “It’s All Over Now”

Popular26 comments • 2,293 views

#173, 18th July 1964

When it comes to the blues, I’m an outsider. I don’t enjoy it much, I don’t know a lot about it, and life being short I’m likely to stay that way. So if you are a blues fan, feel freer than ever to ignore me. My brushes with the blues – or to be fairer, with the way people talk about blues – leave me little wiser. On the one hand, the blues is a genre built around certain structures, certain components, certain ways of playing or singing. On the other, the blues is a feeling. And yet again, the blues is a music rooted in and inseparable from its social, racial and national origins.

All of these are surely ‘right’, and they all hint at an underlying question – who gets to play or sing the blues? Blues-as-a-genre allows for an entirely open door policy – if blues is just rubbing chord X against tuning Y, a robot can sing it. If you want blues to mean something more than that, then the threshold of performer legitimacy starts to rise.

Actually you can spot these different discourses, and that nasty question, in almost any strain of popular music, but the blues makes the issues particularly stark. What does it actually mean to say that a sharecropper in Alabama and a public schoolboy in Surrey are playing this same type of music? You can reach for the utopian answer, of course – music is music, the great unifier. But even then a sly hierarchy creeps in: the sharecropper is not after all being assessed on how much they remind one of the schoolboy.

And here is my ‘problem’ with suburban English boys singing the blues. It’s not that they can’t or shouldn’t sing them – of course they can. I have never heard a record by John Mayall’s Bluesbreakers, but I am sure that if I did I would have a completely authentic blues experience. But in choosing to sing the blues the risk is that these boys end up defining themselves perpetually as pupils – aiming to be just like something or someone else. The problem isn’t that their quest is doomed to fail, it’s that they’re all too likely to succeed.

So the question isn’t, “can posh suburban boys do the blues?”, it’s “what can posh suburban boys do for the blues?”. And the answer is The Rolling Stones, or more specifically Mick Jagger. Jagger is instantly, utterly distinctive on their first No.1, he immediately has more front than anyone else. If you thought the blues were all about profound emotion, here is a singer who sounds shockingly blasé. If you thought the blues were founded in heartbreak, here is a man who is almost joyfully dismissive of his jilted woman. If you thought the blues was tough and swaggering, here is a band who are light on their feet and know how to make their music bounce as well as strut. In fact, “It’s All Over Now” might not be blues at all. But like I say, I wouldn’t really know.

7

Comments

  1. 1
    wildheartedoutsider on 4 Jun 2009 #

    One of the musical subjects which has fascinated me most over the years is the so-called “British Invasion” of the U.S. in the Sixties.

    It has always confounded me how the British Beat groups took America by storm in the early/mid-Sixties and helped kill off most of the ‘native talent’ – especially when so much of the material the British Beat groups performed was borrowed from those same American artists! Along with The Beatles, The Rolling Stones were of course the chief protagonists of that ‘invasion force’ and although “It’s All Over Now” wasn’t nearly as big a hit in America as it was in the UK, it was one of the first songs which established them across the Atlantic and is therefore a prime example of the way in which the Brits re-branded a distinctly American concept and sold it back to its originators as something new!

    As my collection of American R&B artists expanded over the years I was constantly amazed to realise how many songs which I had always associated with British Beat Groups had originally been recorded by lesser-known U.S. artists. I was also struck by how consistently I found the U.S. originals to be FAR BETTER than their British counterparts. I really don’t think this was just some sort of musical snobbery on my part – where the British recordings tended to have thin, plastic instrumentation backing them, the American ones generally seemed to have a depth and warmth; while the vocals on the British recordings often sounded half-hearted and twee, the American originals invariably had vocals that were powerful and soulful. This led to a sense of injustice within me that these classic recordings had been overlooked and undermined as a result of what felt to me like inferior cover-versions.

    After a while, as is my tendancy when I’m trying to “prove a musical point”, I put together a CD to “explain my theory” – well, actually two CDs – one with the US originals and the other with the British covers in exactly the same order for comparison! (track-listing for anyone who’s intersted is below!) Listening to both underlined my belief that the US versions were better and yet the glaringly obvious fact is that in every case the British covers were more successful – which is, after all, what defines ‘popular music’. I’d like to think this wasn’t all down to the question of race although it is an inescapable fact that there are only three white artists included in my personal ‘top-30 US originals’ below (Jackie DeShannon, Evie Sands and Barry Mann) whereas all of the British artists involved were of course white. I’d like to think that it was just a case of a style of music from one culture being played by those from a very different culture with different accents and ‘gaining something in translation’ – as far as the American record-buyers were concerned, at least. (A similar thing happened around the same time in Jamaica when local artists tried playing New Orleans R&B in their own style and created Ska in the process.) I’d LIKE to think that but I’m not convinced.

    Don’t get me wrong I do like a lot of those British Beat groups as well – and obviously some of them out-grew their American R&B roots to create styles of music which were unique – but it just seems a shame that they did so at the expense of those who had inspired them. But then I guess that’s often the way in music.

    1 The Exciters: Doo Wah Diddy [Diddy] (Manfred Mann)
    2 Jackie DeShannon: Needles And Pins (The Searchers)
    3 The Isley Brothers: Twist And Shout (The Beatles)
    4 Irma Thomas: Time Is On My Side (The Rolling Stones)
    5 Evie Sands: I Can’t Let Go (The Hollies)
    6 The Shirelles: Baby, It’s You (The Beatles)
    7 Bessie Banks: Go Now (The Moody Blues)
    8 Barry Mann: We’ve Gotta Get Out Of This Place (The Animals)
    9 Earl-Jean: I’m Into Something Good – (Herman’s Hermits)
    10 The Drifters: Sweets For My Sweet (The Searchers)
    11 The Shirelles: Boys (The Beatles)
    12 Betty Everett: You’re No Good (The Swinging Blue Jeans)
    13 The Valentinos: It’s All Over Now (The Rolling Stones)
    14 Sam Cooke: Bring It On Home To Me (The Animals)
    15 Jackie DeShannon: When You Walk In The Room (The Searchers)
    16 The Cookies: Chains (The Beatles)
    17 Maxine Brown: Oh No, Not My Baby (Manfred Mann)
    18 The Contours: Do You Love Me? (Dave Clark Five)
    19 Barbara Lewis: Someday We’re Gonna Love Again (The Searchers)
    20 Nina Simone: Don’t Let Me Be Misunderstood (The Animals)
    21 Smokey Robinson & The Miracles: You’ve Really Got A Hold On Me (The Beatles)
    22 Maurice Williams & The Zodiacs: Stay (The Hollies)
    23 The Clovers: Love Potion Number Nine (The Searchers)
    24 The Marvelettes: Please, Mr Postman (The Beatles)
    25 Patti Labelle & The Bluebelles: Groovy Kind Of Love (The Mindbenders)
    26 The Shirelles: Sha La La (Manfred Mann)
    27 Sam Cooke: Wonderful World (Herman’s Hermits)
    28 Barrett Strong: Money (The Beatles)
    29 Chuck Berry: Come On (The Rolling Stones)
    30 Chan Romero: The Hippy Hippy Shake (The Swinging Blue Jeans)

    (* Most of these records were hits in the U.S. for the British groups but I make no apologies for having included some songs which were only covered on album by The Beatles and The Rolling Stones since they spearheaded the ‘invasion’ and therefore deserved to feature prominently. I should also point out that a few selections (e.g. “Can’t Let Go”, “You’re No Good”, and “Oh No, Not My Baby”) were big hits in the UK for the artists who covered them and so are still examples of groups that were part of ‘The British Invasion’ reworking American material, even if they didn’t enjoy the same chart success in the U.S. with those particular songs! Also, if I’m going to get fussy about this (…and let’s face it – I AM) I should mention that The Isley Brothers version of “Twist And Shout” was not technically the ‘original’ (which was by Derek Martin’s Top Notes) but this was clearly the version which inspired The Beatles’ cover!)

  2. 2
    wichita lineman on 5 Jun 2009 #

    All most intriguing. I’ve never heard Barry Mann’s We’ve Gotta Get Out Of This Place, but I’d love to, having always had a problem with the weedy chorus (where’d the guitars go??) on the Animals’ take. Never heard the Valentinos’ It’s All Over Now, either, which has to be one of the most obscure covers ever to reach no.1 in Britain.

    It’s an interesting point, and the depth and warmth of most American originals is undeniable. What the beat groups brought to the table was energy. Compare the Maurice Williams’ version of Stay with the Hollies – it’s a rolling, soupy doo-wop which is literally taken at half the pace of the Hollies’ cover (it was also the bigger hit). Graham Nash’s insanely high voice also gives their storming version of I Can’t Let Go a quality which Evie Sands’ thoughtful, sadder version doesn’t have. I think it’s down to climate, certainly in the 60s when central heating was rare. Play fast and hard, keep warm.

    So I don’t think there are many instances of direct rip-offs on this list. The Searchers and Hollies, especially, stamped their sound on whatever they covered (Love Potion no.9 is a pissweak album track, granted, but their Be My Baby is great, almost shoegazy in its white-out washiness).

    For what it’s worth, looking through the list I can only find 2 cases where I reckon the British cover is superior (Twist And Shout, Sweets For My Sweet), and 14 outright US winners. But I’ve got 12 as ties, where the UK version offers enough to stand up in its own right. I have an ingrained suspicion of people who are sniffy about Boston’s More Than A Feeling – I feel the same about anyone who says the Moody Blues’ Go Now is worthless once you’ve heard Bessie Banks’ version. Stone great, either version.

  3. 3
    wildheartedoutsider on 5 Jun 2009 #

    Hi – I do agree with most of what you’re saying, but a few points in response:

    There’s an interesting bit about “It’s All Over Now” in the sleeve-notes to “Sam Cooke’s SAR Records Story” (the label on which the original version was released): “When the record was released in the spring of 1964, it immediately caught on and, through the efforts of New York DJ Murray the K, captured the interest of the Rolling Stones. They recorded it at the Chess studio in June and hit the charts in July taking all the wind out of the Womack’s sails. Bobby was furious, but Sam [Cooke] hastened to reassure him that it would all work out for the best. “He said ‘This will be history.’ He said ‘Bobby, man, this group will change the industry. They ain’t like the Beatles, they’re ghetto kids. They gonna make it loose for everybody.'” Bobby didn’t particularly like the way they sang the song: “Well, I was partial to our version, cause I thought, naturally, ‘No one can beat me singing my song'” …I understand that he started to see Sam Cooke’s point when he received his first royalty cheque after the Rolling Stones’ version hit the top of the charts!

    To be honest, “We’ve Gotta Get Out Of This Place” does fall into a sligthly different category to the other originals as Barry Mann’s version was recorded primarily to demo his song – which listening to his version I would assume he was hoping to pitch to the Righteous Brothers (and given the success they’d had with his ‘You’ve Lost That Lovin’ Feelin’ that’s understandable, I guess!) In fairness I’d say that this is one of the ones – along with (as you rightly point out) “Twist And Shout” and “Sweets For My Sweet” – where the British version compares the most favourably. You are right about the tempo being faster on the British versions – I hadn’t really considered that simple difference – but then you could argue that faster isn’t always better …especially if you consider the idea that “Rock n Roll” is a euphemism for sexual acts! (although this may be indicative of the differences between Afro-American and white British males in that department also!!!)

    I do agree with you that the Searchers’ cover of “Love Potion No. 9” is a ‘pissweak album track’ by the way… which makes it all the more bizarre that it was a Number 3 Smash Hit in America (easily the Searchers’ biggest song over there!) and, as such, serves as a perfect example of the strange phenomenon of the British Invasion!

    Anyway… I’ve uploaded the original versions of “It’s All Over Now” and “We’ve Gotta Get Out Of This Place” to the address below (you may need a Multiply account to play them but it’s pretty quick and painless to get one if you don’t already have one!):

    http://wildheartedoutsider.multiply.com/music/item/7

  4. 4
    wildheartedoutsider on 5 Jun 2009 #

    …and you could of course argue that “It’s All Over Now” is one of the most obscure covers ever to reach Number 1 in Britain precisely BECAUSE the Rolling Stones released their version so soon after the Valentinos had recorded theirs. If the Valentinos’ version had been given time to reach the UK audience prior to the Stones’ cover I think the original would have stood a fair chance of becoming a hit in the UK and would therefore not have been so obscure!

    P.S. I think “Two Little Boys” might top this for obscure originals – I don’t believe many who bought that in 1969 would have been familiar with the 1903 version!

  5. 5
    Mark M on 5 Jun 2009 #

    Re 3/4: There’s obviously a distinction to be made between the contemporaneous covers; like It’s All Over Now or Time Is On My Side or Cilla’s Anyone Who Had A Heart, and those of songs from several years before, like Money or Wonderful World – in latter cases there is clearly no question of the singers of the originals losing out.
    I think you’d have to have a awful lot of historical evidence on your side to argue out the cases in which the original artists genuinely lost out. We’re not just talking about Britishness or whiteness pushing the covers forward, but the idea of being a young beat group at the time when that was generally felt to be the most exciting thing around. And the wider audience may well have liked faster and tinnier at that moment – the British invasion hits probably sounded more instant coming out of a transistor radio. What I’m stumbling towards is saying we have to be careful about not confusing what COULD have been a hit in other circumstances and (the Lexian fallacy) what we may feel SHOULD have been a hit [if there was any justice in this world].

  6. 6
    wildheartedoutsider on 5 Jun 2009 #

    #5 I think that’s a valid distinction between contemporaneous covers and retrospective ones – I don’t think anyone would claim that Rolf Harris deprived Billy Murray (or whoever recorded the first version of “Two Little Boys”) from having a hit by releasing a version sixty-six years later! However I would ‘guestimate’ that the vast majority of the covers I’m talking about in the sixties were pretty instantaneous (certainly the same year) – there were a few British acts (Manfred Mann, Cliff Bennett & The Rebel Rousers, etc) which pretty much made careers out of trying to be the first acts to track down, record and release the latest hot single to come out of the U.S. And of course the music industry of the Sixties was very much set up to allow those rush releases (after all if something wasn’t released THAT week it ran the risk of being out of date – or of somebody else releasing it first!)

    I would also make a big distinction between the impact of covers where the original U.S. artist WROTE the song and those where they were only performers. Clearly Bobby Womack didn’t suffer too greatly from a financial point of view by having the Rolling Stones take a song he’d written to Number 1 in Britain (even if the launch of his artistic career may have been temporarily delayed!)… And what I’M stumbling towards here is that of course it was the non-writing U.S. artists and the writing/publishing set-up at the Brill Building which suffered most in the aftermath of the British Invasion and its groups’ in-house writing teams (…even though those writing teams had learnt their crafts by listening to the very artists and writers they helped displace!) Perhaps that’s just natural selection in progress!?

    Interesting point about tinnier music sounding better on tinny transitors… I’d never thought of it like that before.

  7. 7
    wildheartedoutsider on 5 Jun 2009 #

    …and talking of Cilla Black, the Rolling Stones’ manager Andrew Loog Oldham famously took out adverts in the British music papers imploring everyone to go out and buy the Righteous Brothers’ original of “You’ve Lost That Lovin’ Feelin'” – rather than Cilla Black’s contemporaneous cover. Curious that he didn’t do the same for the Valentinos’ version of “It’s All Over Now”!!!

  8. 8
    wichita lineman on 6 Jun 2009 #

    Re 6: Before the album era, records were cut to sound great on transistor radios. It’s a happy coincidence that they also sound great on more modern equipment! The Who’s singles are maybe the greatest example of this, all splashing cymbals and no bottom end.

  9. 9
    lonepilgrim on 6 Jun 2009 #

    ♯8 I seem to recall reading somewhere else on Popular where it was claimed that the WHo had to rerecord many of their earlier hits at a later date for contractual reasons so, for example, the version of My Generation we are familiar with is not the original release.

    As for the earlier discussion of what sounds better – the original or the copy? This must surely be in the ear of the beholder. The conventional wisdom is that Florence Ballard of the Supremes had a more soulful voice than Diana Ross but, to my ears, it is the relative thinness of DRs voice that gives the Supremes hits their particularly appealing pop quality. It may have been a similar story with the Brit invasion acts. Add to this that the Brit acts were perceived/marketed as ‘dishier’ and/or less conventional than the original acts (longer hair/funny accents/cheeky personas).

  10. 10
    wichita lineman on 6 Jun 2009 #

    Pretty sure that’s not true about the Who. They had to escape from their Brunswick deal by screwing around with song titles (Circles aka Instant Party and Graham Bond’s Waltz For A Pig are b-sides on different pressings of Substitute) but I think that’s as far as it went.

    I love Flo Ballard’s voice, but Diana Ross’s voice – as has been mentioned on other Popular posts – has a frequency that cuts through on transistor radios unlike almost any other. Quick nod to Mary Wilson’s breathy whisper (most prominent on Floy Joy and Automatically Sunshine). The three Supremes all had voices that matched their personalities: squeaky and too eager to please; tough and intense but lotsa fun; very soft and very sexy.

  11. 11
    wichita lineman on 6 Jun 2009 #

    Thanks wildhearted. There’s a story behind We’ve Gotta Get Out Of This Place which I assumed might be hooey until I heard Barry Mann’s original. Mickie Most was on a songfinding trip to the States when Mann played him an acetate of his forthcoming single. ‘Very nice’ said Mickie, ‘sounds like a hit. good luck’. Mann didn’t give him a copy but within a few days Most had cut it with the Animals from memory! Sure enough, there are considerably different lyrics (the entire second verse for a start, and the Animals’ version lacks the optimistic end) plus the neat minor chords at the end of the chorus are new to me. Barry Mann was extremely pissed off about this – after all, he did want to launch his solo career and this was a pretty much guaranteed hit. Great bit of archeological digging, thanks!

    As for It’s All Over Now, Bobby Womack might have been miffed at the Stones, but Chuck Berry can’t have been too pleased to hear Memphis Tennessee given a thin lick of paint by Bobby Womack! For me, the best parts of the Stones’ version are the intro and the slashing chords on the coda, which I now know are all Keith Richards’ work. Beats the Valentinos’ version hands down I reckon.

  12. 12
    wildheartedoutsider on 8 Jun 2009 #

    #11 I’d never heard that story about “We’ve Gotta Get Out Of This Place” before but it DOES seem to fit the evidence. I know what you mean about those chords at the end of the chorus on Barry Mann’s version… there’s shades of Brian Wilson/Pet Sounds about them I feel. (albeit prematurely!)

    Yes, of course there is something very Chuck Berry-esque about the Valentinos’ recording – presumably that’s what made the Rolling Stones sit up and pay attention when they heard it! Personally I love the proto-funky drumming and the gospel-tinged vocals most about the Valentinos’ version, but if the things you like most about “It’s All Over Now” are in the Stones’ version but not in the original then it’s a no-brainer that you SHOULD love the cover more!

    ___________________________________________________________________________________________________

    Personal footnote… when I wrote my previous message in this thread I’d been unemployed for the last five months and with no hint of where the next money would be coming from.

    Today I completed the first day of my new career (having heard on Saturday afternoon that I’d got the job!). OK, so I won’t be selling records or cassettes or even CDs this time – I won’t be making my money from selling music… but perhaps that’s not a bad thing!

    Maybe it’s OK for music to be the fun IN BETWEEN making the money which affords me the luxury of having fun!

    It feels as though it really IS all over now… but in a good way this time.

  13. 13
    Paulito on 23 Mar 2010 #

    “….The answer is The Rolling Stones, or more specifically Mick Jagger.” Tom has hit part of the nail on the head here regarding what gives legitimacy to this middle-class, white, British cover of an American blues. Certainly, Jagger’s sneering, insouciant delivery radiates confidence and gives the recording an instant magnetism. But the rest of the band are equally confident and sound utterly natural – these boys have a feel for uptempo blues that matches any of the Stateside bluesmen they so idolised. And, even at this early stage of their career, their technique is second to none. Watts and Wyman lay down a faultlessly steady and unfussy groove, leaving plenty of space for the intertwining leads of Richards and Jones, both of whom are exceptional here. The former barks out dark, spiky chords in simultaneous contrast and complement to the latter’s laid-back country-tonk jangling, the two styles blending beautifully before Brian breaks out into his wild, visceral solo. Keef rounds off the (unusually long for the time) instrumental coda with a series of booming, growling licks that ooze a kind of gleeful malice; for me, this is the first Stones track to bear the sinister edge that makes their best output so unique and compelling.

    Delicious stuff, and none of it in slavish imitation of their heroes – the Stones are already doing it their way.

    It’s a pity that this and other early Stones stuff is generally overlooked these days: to me, it’s a symptom of how ver blues, once such a venerated genre, seems to have become as antiquated as ’50s rock’n’roll in the popular mind – and even in the minds of critics with broad and eclectic tastes such as Tom. The blues inspired a huge, and hugely successful, musical movement in Britain throughout the 1960s, but any direct influence on latter-day British rock is virtually impossible to detect. While the progressive blues-based rock of Cream, Hendrix and Zeppelin is still widely popular (though less and less influential), the earlier iterations – yer Howlin’ Wolfs and Muddy Waterses – have become museum music, the preserve of purists and ‘old-timers’.

  14. 14
    wichita lineman on 23 Mar 2010 #

    Weren’t “yer Howlin’ Wolfs and Muddy Waterses” museum music by 1964? They were in urban black America. It was white British blues purists like Brian Jones and John Mayall who were listening to this stuff at the time and thus pushing things like Smokestack Lightning and Dimples into the British charts.

  15. 15
    punctum on 23 Mar 2010 #

    What do you mean by “museum music”?

    Given that a panoply of (largely urban) American musicians at the time from Archie Shepp to John Fogerty were learning and absorbing from Wolf and Waters – not to mention the not inconsiderable fact that both were still alive, touring and making records – your assertion does not seem evidentially grounded.

  16. 16
    wichita lineman on 23 Mar 2010 #

    Alive, touring and making records doesn’t necessarily make them the sound of 1964. Blues sounded old, rootsy, and that was half the appeal to someone like Brian Jones (I like to imagine serious young Americans with bowlcuts listening to Florrie Forde or Marie Lloyd). Smokestack Lightning was recorded 8 years before it charted in Britain, and Howlin’ Wolf only made it onto Shindig that year because the Stones insisted.

    “Museum music” was a quote from Paulito, not mine, but as I said I don’t think old-time blues meant much to record buyers in 1963/64 America; they had Bobby Bland, The Impressions, Stax and Motown creating new magic with the R&B template. The R&B charts had become intriguingly mixed up with acts like The Four Seasons and Lesley Gore (produced by Quincy Jones scoring no.1s, and there was no need to put singers from a bygone era centrestage. Of course, I’m glad the Stones, John Fogerty were influenced by it and inspired to take southern blues in a new direction. I just don’t think it sounded ‘modern’ in 1964.

    I also don’t think of it as a “museum piece” today any more than Merseybeat or first generation R&R – there will always be another generation to rediscover it and start a cellar bar somewhere to play the original vinyl.

  17. 17
    Mutley on 24 Mar 2010 #

    Re discussion on “museum music”. I think that for the more general UK teenage public (as opposed to blues fans)in the UK in the pre-Beatles early 60s, the original US blues singers were bundled in with folk/calypso/trad jazz. If I can make a crude generalisation, we saw all these categories as middle class music from the past – despite the origins of the blues singers – and therefore I suppose it was (although I don’t recall anyone using the term) “museum music” – rock’n’roll was working class and up-to-date, and was the music of the Beatles-led revival. Even the Rolling Stones’ very earliest hits were Chuck Berry/Beatles/Buddy Holly numbers.

    Muddie Waters and others toured in the UK with Chris Barber in late 50s/early 60s.I recall seeing Sonny Boy Williamson on the BBC Tonight Programme in late 1963. It was “The One Show” of its day and generally featured folk singers, such as Robin Hall and Jimmy McGregor.

  18. 18
    Billy Smart on 28 Jul 2010 #

    TOTPWatch: The Rolling Stones twice performed It’s All Over Now on Top of the Pops;

    1 July 1964. Also in the studio that week were; Brian Poole & The Tremeloes and The Animals. Alan Freeman was the host.

    15 July 1964. Also in the studio that week were; Dusty Springfield, Manfred Mann, The Barron Knights and The Nashville Teens. Pete Murray was the host.

    Neither edition survives.

  19. 19
    thefatgit on 13 Jul 2012 #

    So it’s 50 years since The Rolling Stones first got together and started bashing out Howlin’ Wolf covers. Perhaps there should have been some sort of flurry of reissues or something to mark the occasion, no?

  20. 20
    hectorthebat on 24 Mar 2014 #

    Critic watch:

    1001 Songs You Must Hear Before You Die, and 10,001 You Must Download (2010)
    New Musical Express (UK) – The Top 100 Singles of All Time (1976) 71
    Rolling Stone (Germany) – Top 100 Songs by The Rolling Stones (2005) 49
    Gilles Verlant and Thomas Caussé (France) – 3000 Rock Classics (2009)
    Hervé Bourhis (France) – Le Petit Livre Rock: The Juke Box Singles 1950-2009
    Toby Creswell (Australia) – 1001 Songs (2005)

  21. 21
    lonepilgrim on 28 Jun 2014 #

    Bobby Womack R.I.P.

  22. 22
    lonepilgrim on 19 Mar 2015 #

    what I find endlessly fascinating about the Stones are the tensions between the various members of the band that means that the music never quite settles. Left to Keith Richards and Brian Jones they might well have stayed a bunch of Blues purists but with Jagger and Andrew Loog Oldham in the mix they embraced more popular styles but with a sense of disdain or irony. For me this gives them a huge advantage over more ‘sincere’ performers like Eric Burdon. IAON sounds as raw as ‘House of the Rising Sun’ but also sounds more modern and alive.

  23. 23
    Erithian on 14 Jan 2016 #

    It’s all over now for Giorgio Gomelsky, owner of what became the Crawdaddy Club and a prime mover in the Stones’ early career. RIP.

  24. 24
    Phil on 14 Jan 2016 #

    Also in the Soft Machine’s (very) early career. Made it to 81, which isn’t so bad – this month especially.

  25. 25
    Paulito on 16 Jan 2016 #

    The Season of Death marches grimly onward.

  26. 26
    Lazarus on 18 Jan 2016 #

    It certainly does – Eagle Glenn Frey the latest to succumb.

Add your comment

(Register to guarantee your comments don't get marked as spam.)


If this was number 1 when you were born paste [stork-boy] or [stork-girl] into the start of your comment :)

Required

Required (Your email address will not be published)

Top of page