Quote:
Originally Posted by Strummer521
It's not cohesive. Therefore, although pretty much all of the songs are very good, I don't think it's so great of an album. The tracks could have been in a completely different order and the effect would be the same, therefore structurally, it's not really a piece of art like the others. It seems like the songs were recorded and compiled without any thought as to assembling songs that worked well together as a unit. That's not terribly surprising, since the album was only just starting to take off as a distinctive statement of the artist's style and intent, rather than a collection of songs being released on one disc when Experienced came out. Jimi caught on to the trend pretty quickly anyway.
An example of my point: Exile on Main Street is often considered the Stones best album, but most would agree it doesn't have any individual songs that stand equal to "Sympathy for the Devil" or "Gimme Shelter". The level of an album's quality should be measured in how well all of the songs fit together.
I like how this thread is suddenly taking a new direction.
|
WTF, the songs in AYE? fit together perfectly, and even if they didn't, putting a little diversity in a album never hurts anybody.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Music Man
The Beatles never sold out. They made kick-butt albums like Abbey Road right up to the end.
|
They did sell out, but unlike the Stones, they had the sense to sell out on their very first album, they were
always a mainstream band, even during their experimental period.
So unlike the Stones, The Beatles never lost any credibility during the span of their career, unless you count the whole "more popular than Jesus Christ" thing.
Another thing is that The Beatles were wise enough to quit during their prime, as opposed to The Rolling Stones, who should have quit over 40 f*cking years ago.