Brian Jones

Or discipline.

 

Gram Parsons brought more to the Stones than Brian Jones.

 

....and in mono

 

No really a fair comparison, Brian Wilson was one of the greatest songwriters of the 20th century so the two cannot be mentioned in the same breath.

 

There is no doubt that Brian formed or was integral to forming the Stones, but they needed to evolve from being an R&B covers band and write their pwn original material or they would have gone the way of many of the beat bomb bands who had little of originality to offer. So Keith and Mick started to write songs, and then writing some great songs, from that moment on Brain was the Stones George, and not even that since even George could write a decent tune once in while and around 1969 actually wrote a LOT of good songs. It may well have been that realisation that Keith and Micks songwriting talent had sidelined him from 1965 that contributed to his downfall , but at the end of the day he just was not able to write songs...the people who seem to think Brian was the greatest Stone are, at least between 1965 -9, I am afraid deluded.

 

I don't think he was the greatest Stone. I think he was as great as Mick or Keith, and when they lost him they very quickly lost the eclecticism, the experimentation, and became a much narrower "rock 'n' roll" band. His talent was arrangements, colouring, musical embroidery, and in many instances his contributions make a good track special. It's pretty clear that he wasn't psychologically suited to fame, however much he craved the adulation. What I and I think many others don't like is the way he's been relegated to a footnote in the Stones' story when he deserves much more credit than that.

 

I'm only comparing how others almost 'bullied' the two guys taking advantage of their low self esteem, yes Brian W is a genius in my mind and Brian J was a great multi instrumentalist.

 

Well put

 

There is a case to be made there, but it is severely undercut by the fact that, obviously, Keith was in a heroin (and countless other substances) daze for years and years and years, which was tolerated. Talk about "toxicity." Keith was as toxic as toxic has ever been.

Also, the idea that Brian was "on the studio floor, reading a book about botany, stoned out of his blonde locks, while the rest of the band picked up instruments and worked out the songs" is undercut by the recordings themselves. Brian is all over them.

The fact that Andrew, Mick and Keith always talk about Brian being perpetually incapacitated does not necessarily make it true. While there is no question that Jones had major substance abuse problems, the recordings show a still-creative and brilliant force who made major contributions to Aftermath, Satanic Majesties, "Ruby Tuesday," "We Love You" and others.

 

Excellent post. I keep scratching my head when I read posts like what you responded to because I followed the RS album by album gazillion part thread and, in there, it recounts how there is at least an album (if not more) on which Richards is non-existent due to drug excesses. In that case, Jagger took on the load and carried him. In Jones' case? Cut him loose. Of course, I suppose that it is possible that the band learned from the earlier Jones era and decided that a perceived continuity and unity was important enough to hold onto at all costs.

 

Get out of town.

 

I agree. No question that Mick (and others, like Keith's son while on tour) carried a selfish, spaced-out Keith for years. Perhaps Keith's loyalty to the band had built up some goodwill over the years. Of course, this goodwill was almost exhausted during Keith's elegantly wasted junkie madman years. Brian, in contrast, seemed to garner a never-ending stockpile of ill-will and debts. Traveling alone while the rest of the band traveled together, and asking for more money, certainly did Brian no favors when it came to band camaraderie.

 

but Mick and Keith wrote the songs, and whilst I am certain his contribution prior to 68 was important just as George Harrisons was, without those songs the Stones would have stayed an R&B covers band and there was not much long term future in that...he became a footnote because he was not the songwriter.

 

but he did not wrote any of them....Mick & Keith did.

 

.......so- following this logic- Roger Daltrey, John Entwistle and Keith Moon are footnotes? Because they're not the songwriter? Because Townshend wrote the songs?

Every one of them was crucial to the original Who, songwriters or not.

IMHO Jones was as important as Jagger and Richards. Not more important. As important.

 

It's possible he brought more drugs to the Stones than Brian Jones, since he was probably more willing to share.

 

I am afraid I cannot agree, the songwriters always take precedence imho, footnote is a bit harsh but Townshend clearly is the single most important member of the who, followed by Daltry....songwriters exist on a more different level of creativity..

 

People keep mentioning that Brain got paid more; it was a whole freaking five pounds, equal to 2.5% of each of the Stones' salaries at the time! Brian was doing all the legwork in launching the group and teaching Keith and Mick to play. Just goes to show how absurdly petty these multi-millionaires still are. Only a greedy singer and an insecure guitarist would gripe about such a triviality.

 

When Brian was scarfing the extra fiver, five pounds was a lot of money to the rest of them, but the issue isn't so much the five pounds but that he was skimming it off the top and didn't tell anybody. He was basically robbing the petty cash till.

 

but it created a division in the band while they were still struggling. And he did it behind their backs.

 

He looks completely out of it during the latter parts of the Sympathy sessions though. He only ended up singing backup vocals on that song but at least he had some contribution, however minor. What a sad state he was in during that time.

 

Stupid thing to do. Brian was often his own worst enemy, and even his supporters/defenders like Bill Wyman freely admit that he could be a monumental pain in the ****. But he's hardly the only musician- or indeed human being- that's true of.

 

Most divisions in the band were deliberately created by their manager Andrew Loog Oldham, because he fancied or was more able to manipulate Mick. What really caused animosity was taking away the group writing credit Nanker Phelge and giving all the royaltie$ to Jagger-Richard.

 

There's a fair amount of anecdotal evidence of Jones, Wyman and Mick Taylor making substantial contributions to songs and getting no credit, which of course means no songwriting royalties, which is where I understand the real money is.

 

I wouldn't disagree that that was an issue, too (though I don't see how anyone on the outside could say that was "really" the issue and anything brian did was not). It was just that your post made it sound as if they were already multi-millionaires when all this was happening, which is inaccurate. It was still early days.