Let It Bleed was Jones' last recording and has always been my favorite Stones record.
actually, brian jones had very, very little involvement in the
let it bleed sessions, as he was often far too strung out on drugs or out of it to participate, & was mostly supplanted by session musicians. i recall a story where brian jones came into the recording studio at one point & asked, "what can i play?" to which mick jagger replied, "i don't know, brian, what
can you play?"
beggar's banquet was really brian's last gasp.
I think the San Francisco scene is full of a LOT of heart and soul... I mean, look at what it did with politics. It was actually quite similar to the London scene (it inspired the Beatles to change, and for the better) it was just a bit more blatant in its advocation of drugs... Which really shouldn't be a problem in rock music. But, San Francisco innovated the guitar, and use of politics in music. And the overall sound produced is brilliant to me.
it was actually the burgeoning folk scene (& particularly bob dylan, who was blurring the lines between folk, pop & rock) which inspired the beatles, & the san francisco scene, to delve into the realm of politics - especially in the beatles' case. bob dylan has been extensively noted to have been at the heart of inspiration for both pop music's immersion in political music, & the beatles' immersion into folk-rock & introspection. so, if anybody is going to get the credit for this, it's zimmy. furthermore, the
sound of the scene - along with the completely blatant, clunky, cretin-like lyrics - is what turns me off so much; it sounds like a bunch of overwrought, in-your-face, unsophisticated hippie bullshit to me.
Floyd are actually one of my favorite artists of all time. Roger Waters is most deffinately a mad genius. I actually see them as the opposite of pretentious, up until Roger Waters realized he's talented, and decided to go ape-shit insane. Which is funny, because I find rock music of the 70s and 80s to be incredibly pretentious, which is something I both love and hate about it at the same time (thank the lord or Darwin for punk rock, or we'd probably still be stuck in that mindset). I understand Floyd's live performances can appear a bit pretentious, but I think they serve the opposite purpose. Floyd's always had the intention of distracting the audience from the members of the band, and focusing more so on the music by using other elements to enhance the atmospheric experience of their songs, as they've said again and again in interviews. Furthermore, I feel like so many people overlook Waters' lyrics as nothing relevent. I think the idea of many of his lyrics, that being to write about little things that go unnoticed or ignored by the human race, is brilliant... But I think more so, people miss some of the political meaning to his lyrics, just because he's so subtle... Or very subtle compared to other artists of the time. It's just no surprise that the general public don't think of Floyd as a political band, while "Animals" is probably the most overlooked and most political album released during their "mainstream" period.
this is partially why i am fascinated by music - it's amazing to me how i could look at pink floyd (post-syd) & see the most pretentious band in the world, & someone else can look at them & see the complete opposite. albums like
the wall &
animals are textbook examples to me of over-the-top, super-pretentious, uber-serious, bombastic arena prog rock. his lyrics may have some relevancy to the real world - which, in this case, may turn out to be his fatal flaw - but they're delivered with no compassion, & little empathy; it's self-indulgence with no sense for self-ordainment, restraint thrown out the window, & forced metaphors that make his nastiness seem callow rather than inspired.
& don't get me wrong, i like post-syd pink floyd well enough - i just think they're possibly the most over-rated band to ever grace pop music.
animals is actually my favorite post-syd work, even if - along with
the wall - it's probably their worst in the aforementioned areas. i guess the reason is because i don't
like it as much as i'm
fascinated by it; it's still lifeless & void of compassion (although the bookending "pigs on the wing" songs do their best to battle this issue), so over-the-top in its completely overwrought message that i can't help but be marveled by how far he can go.
And the Grateful dead revolutionized the live performance and song structure in rock music.
again, i see the complete opposite here - i feel like their meandering, aimless, self-indulgent jams actually completely obliterated the rock & roll song structure, making it more pompous & affected than it needed to be. this sense of bloated pretense gave free reign to other rock acts to do the same, & tah-dah, out birthed (or at least inspired) progressive rock - the most overblown genre of music to ever have been created.
