r/rollingstones

So, I'm skimming through Christopher Sandford's biography of the Rolling Stones, The Rolling Stones: Sixty Years, and he has this to say about Bridges to Babylon at pages 411 to 412:

Late September, Babylon: the Stones juggernaut rolls on, embracing basic rock and roll, hard-edged funk, slow-boiling reggae, maudlin pop and even a torchy spiritual. There are moments, as in the bullet-train beat of 'Flip the Switch', when the cocky young band of thirty years before reappears, and others when the fifty something muscians cut the testosterone level: a jazzy, mariachi flavour permeates 'You Don't Have to Mean It', and it's apparently Mick himself who needs the emotional rescue in 'Already Over Me', where he notes, 'I'm so hurt, so confused/I've been burned/I've been bruised''. Among several other treasures, the churchy 'Saint of Me' brings Billy Preston in from the cold after twenty years, and 'Always Suffering' similarly doffs a Stetson to Gram Parsons. The album closes with 'How Can I Stop', which sees Keith Richards in sentimental-gangster vein, singing about his various obsession in that familiar raspy burr, a voice that increasingly sounds as if Keith took it out and let it marinate in a casl of port in between records.

Not everything works quite as seamlessly...but most of the songs 'come off feral without sounding forced, contemporary without succumbing to modern-rock trendiness', in Rolling Stone's measured words...Bridges to Babylon was the best Stones album since Exile.

Now, I was not overly impressed when I first gave Bridges to Babylon a spin last week -- I thought 'Flip the Switch' was bouncy but meandering and apart from a few treasures like 'Saint of Me', 'You Don't Have to Mean It' [which, incidentally, I've heard described as reggae and mariaci but not ska, which is actually what it is!], 'Anybody Seen My Baby?', 'Out of Control' and 'How Can I Stop' was full of tired retreads of past glories -- 'Thief in the Night' as 'The Worst Part II', 'Always Suffering', following in the footsteps of 'Wild Horses' and 'Out of Tears' and 'Lowdown''s chorus ironically sounded suspiciously like the chorus for 'Anybody Seen My Baby?'.

But after some more time with the album, it's definitely grown on me. I really like 'Flip the Switch', 'Gunface' is an above-average, experimental rocker and 'Already Over Me' and 'Lowdown' are undeniably good, if not great, songs. So, in a very short span of I've jumped from enjoying 5/13 songs to 9/13 songs.

That said, the album suffers from its length -- I don't understand 90s music executives thinking the more songs, the more 'product' the better. Sure, you can say, 'The New Rolling Stones Album Has Over an Hour of New Music!" but that comes at the expense of the good reviews and good word-of-mouth you lose out on if you had produced a tighter album. Is it 'cocaine' logic or something?

Anyway, if Bridges to Babylon was cut down to ten or so songs, it would run to around 48-52 minutes and feel like a much tighter, cohesive listen. If so, would you agree with Mr Sandford and call it their best album post-Exile on Main Street?

Before I got far into this project, I made a prediction about all 29 artists. Which ones did I think would eventually make my Top 10. The Rolling Stones were an easy no.

I like them well enough. But they made the list only because you can’t have a serious classic rock list without them. So I added them. I didn’t think I liked them enough to survive all 329 albums I’m listening to.

The first few records overwhelmingly confirmed that.

Then I got to Between the Buttons. That was the first album where I felt like I was experiencing The Rolling Stones.

Their Satanic Majesties Request surprised me. And Beggars Banquet just blew me away.

They’re still only #21 overall right now, but consider the albums coming up!!

And now, for the first time, I’m thinking this prediction could turn out to be wrong.

Would they end up doing a few shows in select cities? Or would they tour Europe and/or South America (who rightfully its their turn to get concerts)

At what point would shows have to become shorter- would Keith still do 3 songs and perhaps song count is down to 18?

I am confident the quality would be there- 2024 was wonderful. I see some other artists in their 80's who should just gracefully bow out.

So underrated!

I'm not asking exactly whether you like it or not but considering the Stones were such a rough sounding band and had this bad boy image, doesn't it sound odd?

Yes I know it was the 60's but this is something else though I do like it.