The Rolling Stones On Air In The Sixties Book and Album

Discussion in 'Music Corner' started by joe1320, Jul 6, 2017.

  1. detroit muscle

    detroit muscle Forum Resident

    I had thought about doing that - any issues ?
     
  2. Carl80

    Carl80 Forum Resident

    Location:
    United Kingdom
    The Rolling Stones store are all over the place, ridiculous how many issues people are having with them and that’s just on this forum.

    I’ve had a few issues with them in the past, one item I received from them was unsealed and you could tell it had been opened by someone else and probably sent back cause it wasn’t in new condition.
     
  3. Dee Zee

    Dee Zee Forum Resident

    Nope and the sound quality is more consistent when arranged chronologically by date. Much bette flow for my ears.
     
  4. tmccool1

    tmccool1 New Member

    Location:
    Lafayette, Indiana
    My previous order went smoothly, no problems. I ordered a No Filter key fob in October. Arrived within 2-4 weeks window. Before that was 1 1/2 years ago, ordered Zip Code tour merch. Again, went smoothly, no issues. So the slowness of this most recent On Air yellow vinyl order is concerning, but I'm not ready to blow it up just yet.
     
    Carl80 likes this.
  5. tmccool1

    tmccool1 New Member

    Location:
    Lafayette, Indiana
    You won't believe this, but maybe you will. After posting this yesterday, I went home and arrived just as my mail was being delivered, including my copy of On Air. The yellow vinyl is beautiful, I must say.
     
  6. Captain Leo

    Captain Leo Well-Known Member

    Location:
    Queens, New York
    Did anything from the 60s get released?
     
  7. Chemguy

    Chemguy Forum Resident

    Unassailable arguement. Well said.
     
    WonkyWilly likes this.
  8. WonkyWilly

    WonkyWilly Forum Resident

    Location:
    Paradise, PA
    Quoted for truth.

    This release still stinks to high heaven, no matter what the "official release butt-kissers" think.
     
    Davido likes this.
  9. douglas mcclenaghan

    douglas mcclenaghan Forum Resident

    Now that the dust has settled, a gentle bump for this thread. How are people thinking now? I really enjoy this set and hope that sales have been good enough to warrant a second volume - and not have to wait an eternity like the Beatles' Beeb second volume. And speaking of them , how do people compare the two releases, On Air and At the BBC? I am glad there's no dated and corny "banter" on the Stones' release. I think the Stones are more consistently exciting but the Beatles seem more polished. Both, needless to say, are excellent. I don't skip tracks with the Stones but do with the Beatles.
     
  10. shadlet

    shadlet Forum Resident

    Location:
    PA
    I just compared the new On Air set to The Complete British Radio Broadcasts 1963-65 on London Calling. The Calling set does vary in SQ greatly but there are 59 tracks (in chronological order) on that one.
    When matching the tracks on the Calling set to On Air, the new set does add some weird echo to the vocals. It's almost as if a band is playing the instrumentals in front and the Stones are singing from the next room.
    The new set does add consistency to the varying quality of the tracks though and cleans up some tape fade, on It's All Over Now - Joe Loss '64 for example. But you do loose a sense of immediacy with On Air and the lack of chronological order is aggravating.
     
    GetRhythm likes this.
  11. Tommyboy

    Tommyboy Forum Resident

    Location:
    New York
    The Beatles BBC sets are better in terms of SQ and packaging. Regarding SQ, pseudo stereo effects (demixing) weren’t utilized and thankfully so.
     
    Last edited: Feb 3, 2018
    douglas mcclenaghan likes this.
  12. fmfxray373

    fmfxray373 Forum Resident

    Location:
    san diego
    But still rather disappointing. The energy is just not there. I was listening to the BBC Beatles volume 2 about a month ago. The dialog sequences at the end of each cd got my interest more than the any of the songs to be honest.
    I paid about $12 for two CD On Air set; that is about 3 dollars in 1977 money. It is sloppy and messed with by engineers. But still more fun than the Beatles at the BBC to me. By a mile.
     
  13. Tommyboy

    Tommyboy Forum Resident

    Location:
    New York
    Volume 2 contains the leftover tracks that didn’t make them original set. The first Beatles BBC set would be a much better comparison, which is just as fun and if not more energetic than the Stones CD. So, I couldn’t disagree more with your assessment.
     
    Man at C&A likes this.
  14. John Fell

    John Fell Forum Survivor

    Location:
    Undisclosed
    The Beatles sets are better in sound quality but the Stones set is more interesting in performance to me. It is interesting that they edited out the dialog on the Stones release. It is all there on the bootlegs.
     
    laf848 and fmfxray373 like this.
  15. WonkyWilly

    WonkyWilly Forum Resident

    Location:
    Paradise, PA
    What second volume? Almost everything that exists is on this set. A second volume would be an EP.
     
  16. John Fell

    John Fell Forum Survivor

    Location:
    Undisclosed
    There would be different versions of songs that already appear on the first volume on the second volume if they released one.
     
    douglas mcclenaghan likes this.
  17. Tommyboy

    Tommyboy Forum Resident

    Location:
    New York
    Don’t fully agree. They’re certainly more sloppier in some cases.
     
  18. John Fell

    John Fell Forum Survivor

    Location:
    Undisclosed
    Maybe but to me the Stones performances are more interesting. If the songs sound just like they are on the album then what is the point. The Stones BBC version of Come On is better than the studio version for example.

    It is also cool to have the cover tunes that did not appear on any of their studio albums even though Down In The Bottom AKA Meet Me In The Bottom was omitted from the official release.
     
    Last edited: Feb 3, 2018
    douglas mcclenaghan likes this.
  19. Tommyboy

    Tommyboy Forum Resident

    Location:
    New York
    Yes, Come On is an excellent performance and betters the official version, IMHO.

    Most of the Beatles songs on the first set are covers and are energetic and tight performances. Certainly not uninteresting. Let’s agree to disagree and leave it at that.
     
    revolution_vanderbilt likes this.
  20. John Fell

    John Fell Forum Survivor

    Location:
    Undisclosed
    The Dean of American Rock Critics Robert Christgau reviews The Rolling Stones' 'On Air.'

    The Rolling Stones: On Air (Deluxe Edition) (Polydor/Abkco/Rolling Stones)

    Exploiting the surprise sales spike of their 2016 Christmas album Blue & Lonesome, their 2017 Christmas album purportedly revisits the band's early-'60s blues beginnings, which in fact were no such thing.

    Chuck Berry, who wrote six of these songs, was not a blues artist, and neither was Bo Diddley, who gets three including the previously bootleg-only "Cops and Robbers" playlet (theirs is fine, Bo's better).

    Billed "R&B" as they started playing out in 1963, the Stones were catchier and quicker than blues, and on these 32 radio transcriptions they sound like the premier bar band of their time if not ever.

    Where Blue & Lonesome is a sodden thing—many old rockers have recorded sharper, spunkier, wiser music—this collection proves what world-beaters they were even before they got serious about songwriting.

    True, the unperfected "Satisfaction" some hedger stuck in sounds pretty good—how could it not? But "2120 Michigan Avenue," the instrumental they concocted to celebrate recording at Chess, is the closer because it oughta be.

    A-
     
  21. Dee Zee

    Dee Zee Forum Resident

    Once I put the songs in chronological order, I enjoy this set a lot. Crank it up.
     
  22. ShockControl

    ShockControl Forum Resident

    Location:
    USA
    My wife picked this up and we are listening now. We just heard "Memphis, Tennessee," and I'm pretty sure that George was filling in for Keith on the guitar solo. ;)
     
  23. Man at C&A

    Man at C&A Forum Resident

    Location:
    England
    Playing this for the first time now. I'm enjoying it a lot. I have never heard the Rolling Stones BBC sessions before so I have nothing to compare it to. The glitch on The Last Time is awful though. It also sounds like it wouldn't have been difficult to fix.
     
  24. Shaddam IV

    Shaddam IV Forum Resident

    Location:
    Ca
    Not surprising as this wasn't really the Stones "thing". Most of them simply weren't witty or interesting enough to pull the banter off. The Beatles on the other hand, it's part of their act. They're good at it. Some of the banter is the highlight of their BBC set. And there's nothing dated about it... It's still funny, still entertaining, and it would still go over on any modern show. All the late night TV shows would eat it up, for instance.
     
    Last edited: Apr 20, 2018
    Matthew Tate likes this.
  25. hallucalation

    hallucalation Forum Resident

    Location:
    Russia
    There's really very little banter that survives from Stones BBC sessions unlike Beatles.
     

Share This Page