Was Exile On Mainstreet Their White Album.....
 

There are always pitfalls in making a double album. One has to have enough interesting songs to make the listener want to play the entire thing. In this day and age of cherry picking your songs off I Tunes it is probably not the case, but when one use to sit down and let the needle drop on the record you were in for the long haul till the arm lifted off the record!
Similar to the Beatles White album the Rolling Stones offered a stunning amount of varied songs on their album. Rock, pop, gospel, country and so on. I do not think that there was a concerted effort to make a flow through out the album which is also similar to the Beatles just a huge collection of thought provoking tunes. The album if released with all the extra material would have been 28 tracks long just shy of two compared to the Beatle's album. Upon it's release the album was met with mixed reviews, but today it is considered a rock masterpiece.

I don't think Exile on Main St. is nearly as varied as The Beatles' white album. I think all they have in common is that they're double albums.

I think the White Album is pretty bad, so I assume the White Album is the Beatles Tattoo You.

I've actually found that many people have a divided opinion on The White Album alone. While some claim that it is a creative masterpiece, others have said that it feels like an album that was thrown together, that it was incohesive and that it captures the sound of the band coming apart.

Personnaly, I think that both albums certainly showcase the creativity of each band at the time but I'd have to say I much prefer the White Album. That said, there are quite a few songs on that album that I would usually skip (e.g. Revolution #9) when listening to it all the way through. Exile was certainly a great accomplishment for the Stones but there's just something about the White Album..

It all comes down to preferance though doesn't it?

Well to be honest there is a collection of "country, hard rock, blues, gospel and island style" music on Exile which I think is a close equal to the Beatle's country, blues and pop offerings.

I guess what I'm saying is that regardless of the genres, The Stone's album is a pretty coherent listening experience, while The Beatles' is a bit all over the place - for better or worse.

I'm not really a fan of either album. The Stones did so much better. The Beatles did so much better. Although, out of the two I like the White Album more. But I agree with Hurricane...it's an interesting listen simply because it captures them coming apart. Ultimately, I think that's the reason it was a double album...so every member could throw their songs on there.

Exile is just kind of boring to me.

I think the 2 records are as different as night & day.

The White album is The Beatles trying to be everything they're not and as a result it just sounds like 4 guys in a studio with no direction other than making some awful art school hipster turd of a record for the sake of making it.

On the other hand Exile is the Stones going back to their roots and making an album that is 100% them and and all their various influences and as a result I think the songs are better, the album is much more cohesive and it's a much tighter record because of it.

It's kind of like one band goofing around in a studio and one band playing something that they've lived with their whole lives and I think it shows.

I've only ever met 2 types of people who don't rate Exile, and that's Beatles fanboys and people who don't really have much interest in blues & early rock n roll anyway.

I completely agree with this, but honestly can't say much about the Beatles albums because I am really not a fan or interested in listening to them.

I love blues and early rock n roll, I'm not a Beatles fanboy, and I still don't think too highly of Exile.

Though you have challenged me to revisit it.

Yes I can totally see that. I mean by then the Beatles were pretty much calling it in and I read somewhere that for most of that album they were not even all together when recording the songs. I think they all just brought a sachel of their own songs into the studio and said right I've written this one so now lets record it...

You got that right!

As much as I love The Beatles, I think the White album sounds like a collection of left over songs the band just threw together for the sake of putting an album out.

So why is it boring?

This man has the exact words.

Because it sounds like a tired version of the influences it is drawing from.

In some countries, they'd have you hanged in public for saying such blaspheme.

:laughing:

Well, if it's a crime to not like Yellow Submarine, hang me now.

Well you just picked the worst song they've ever made, so you're safe.

:laughing:

I know. :p:

Personally I thought in the context of what the Beatles were trying to accomplish at the time Yellow Submarine was a perfect fit. The song that left me scratching my head was All Together Now. Never liked the lyrics and never liked the music.

I'm not a huge fan of Exile either. It would be a lot better as a single album - and even then, they'd have better albums.

I don't see how it would be better as a single album.
Each of the 4 sides of the album have very different character and even as a double album it barely reaches over an hour in length.

To me it's 15 minutes of rock followed by 15 minutes of country followed by 15 minutes of blues followed by 20 minutes of everything mixed together.

I don't really see how it can be considered boring.

Exactly because of the reason I stated...

It's 15 minutes of half assed rock followed by 15 minutes of half assed country, etc.

Stones albums are better when they are consistent and focused.

Well, it was recorded in a kitchen and they only turned up the vocals if they thought the lyrics merited it. So would you prefer that they had Bob Rock produce it? Or would you prefer that they made Sticky Fingers pt. 2?

When you say boring, it kills the discussion. What was boring about it? In addition to what Urban said, its also got soul and gospel in there.

Can you give me a comparably boring album? Trying to figure out what aspect bores you is like pulling teeth.

I don't think I said anything about the production at all.

What exactly do you want from this? I think saying it sounds like second rate versions of the styles they are trying to pull off is fairly specific. Do you want a song by song analysis of this thing?

I think I left plenty of room for more discussion. How about you tell me why you DON'T think they are half assed versions of their influences? Did they add to them in some meaningful way? Was the nostalgia factor enough to keep you interested? Because for me they weren't. There's a topic right there. Proceed.

It is interesting that you mentioned that because I read all the time that when asked people express the notion that the White album would have been more focused and perhaps better if it had been a single album. George Martin even suggested it to them......

Exile on Main Street came out in '72 about 2 year after The Beatles threw in the towel, it was a more edgier brand of Rock - considering what The Beatles did. The Beatles played more of 60's style of Country, where when the Stones played more 70's style of Country, even though some of it was tongue in cheek. The Rolling Stones owned The Beatles when it came to the Blues. I don't know what you mean a close equal to The Beatles.

Why don't I think they were half-assed versions? Because what do the songs on Exile sound like from previous albums? Also, its absurd to ask if there was a nostalgia-factor involved since I was born well after the album came out. I assume you were as well.

To me, the music on Exile was less pop and more raw, which given the topics seemed to lend itself to the material. Songs like Sweet Virginia was the sloppy that defines the stones. The tight, polished, upbeat tempo of things like Brown Sugar or Jumping Jack Flash were gone. Off of My Cloud and Paint it Blacks pop sheen were gone. This was the stones in the grime that made them the stones.

When you hear Shine a Light, its as if the Allman Brothers had sex with Ray Charles in a bathtub full of Scotch and Sweet Tea. If I were looking for the closest sounding big track to compare it to, I guess I'd say "Can't always get what you want" but to suggest its the same thing is reaching (IMO).

Tumbling Dice I guess is comparable to maybe Honky Tonk Women or Wild Horses, but it comes with a funked out soul groove that the other two just don't have. If the Stones had previously been in Nashville or Chicago on other records, Exile is in New Orleans.

I would like to point out that a lot of the songs that were left off Exile On Main Street would have made some great options for future albums. In my opinion some of them are even better then what ended up on the album! Plundered My Soul, Good Time Woman, etc etc it's all there in glowing black and white.

:laughing:

If The Clash would have stripped Sandinista! to a double burger, The Beatles "White Album" would have had a better comparison. Both are all over the place, showing a band going into creative overdrive with a number of classic tracks and a lot of WTF moments mixed in together.