Jacob Schoolcraft wrote: Bands like The Zombies and The Hollies had a unique style of their own...but several British Invasion bands were proliferate product.

I think The Zombies had the greatest potential and were in a league of their own (among the the bands that never really got huge). If the record company had faith in them, I'm certain we would have had at least a couple of classic albums more from them to enjoy. Their sophisticated, sometimes jazzy arrangements were as inventive and original as The Beatles.

I love The Hollies, but I love The Monkees too. And like The Monkees I don't think any of their biggest hits were crated by the band themselves. There's a huge differnce between having both written and recorded She's Not There and Time of the Season (or the whole Odessey & Oracle album) - compared to having Graham Goulding handing you Bus Stop and Look Through Any Window.

-I don't mean to be overtly negative to The Hollies. I just think that talent-or "stylewise, they don't belong in the same ballpark as The Zombies.

The Stones have been with me for the whole of my six decades on the planet.  The shelf is groaning with the Stones collection and I recommend 'em all, but if I needed a Stones fix right now, I'd go to the B side of Goat's Head Soup. 

David_D wrote: Sean Trane wrote: I'm afraid there is not much "to get" about The Stones Straight ahead rock band...  I'd say that Their Satanic Majesties Request is very psychedelic and quite experimental for 1967 being. Neither do I think of Sticky Fingers as just straight ahead Rock. - That's the two albums I'm most familiar with.

I prefer the Beatles but I really like the Stones. Let it Bleed, Beggars Banquet and Sticky Fingers are my favorite but I really enjoy Aftermath, Exile on Main Street and Their Satanic Majesties Request too. 

Sean Trane wrote: I'm afraid there is not much "to get" about The Stones Straight ahead rock band...

The Rolling Stones are a great band, but I'm not surprised that the Beatles receive more acclaim here.
Speaking for myself, I like most of the Beatles and some of the Stones.

Edited by someone_else - February 06 2025 at 16:07

I first heard The Rolling Stones in 1965. I began collecting their 45rpms until eventually buying the LP's.

They were DARK for the times! Not many bands had a doomsday look . The Rolling Stones were one of the first bands to do that which influenced quite a lot of American bands in the 60s to have a rough look ...Paul Revere & The Raiders, MC5, and others.

When I discovered the Stones there wasn't a Mick Jagger throwing buckets of water on the crowd ..or releasing

balloons...and running up and down the stage.

Mick Jagger in the early days danced behind a microphone stand and shook a tambourine.

Their album covers were DARK for the times. They appeared on the cover of December's Children sitting on steps or alleyway. They often wore dark jackets and looked disturbed or angered. They rarely smiled. They had a Punk vibe sometimes.

12 × 5 , Out Of Our Heads, Now!, Aftermath, and Between The Buttons presented them in a dark way. A much darker image than other bands of those times . Often dressed in black jackets standing off in the distance...or in the fog...or an alleyway..??

Would you let your daughter date a Rolling Stone? They offended the old school generation for sure. I recall seeing a Pic of the band pushing a baby carriage off a cliff ..I believe?? Which was dark for those times. A few times they dressed in drag. Probably around the time of "Stupid Girl" and American parents didn't handle that well.

Brian Jones played a variety of instruments which brought a unique sound to their music. "Paint It Black" , "Get Off My Cloud", "19th Nervous Breakdown" , Mother's Little Helper" were odd for the times. The lyrics and the music.

Beyond Some Girls, and besides Dirty Work, Voodoo Lounge seems mostly enjoyable too.

Hot Rocks & Live Licks - The Complete Rolling Stones