Did the Stones have a say in how their pre-1967 albums were released?

Why not just get the US albums? Most of the oddball UK tracks are on More Hot Rocks.

 

And the UK Aftermath instead of the US for the long "Out Of Time" and you're done.

 

I think we should all forget the UK/US thing altogether. See, that market strategy was over by 1968. People who are sentimentally attached to those early albums the way they were probably have them already and would not even need to buy them.
Regarding possible income for ABKCO, original albums on physical format are just for a niche target. Instead, they have a better chance at money by adding bonus tracks, doing "anniversary " releases or sorting out their back catalog for future generations.
They can always release a physical Box Set of those US albums.
It's no more a matter of 'getting all of their songs', it's about listening to their early stuff without annoying repetitions. Take the Mono Box Set as an example: it could be so much better if they could forget about the whole UK/US thing!!

Just my 2 cents, of course.

 

If anyone is still listening to early Stones in 2019, beyond the hardcore fans, it is primarily people who want to hear the early hits. Most of them are listening on Spotify. If anyone wants to dig a little deeper, having the original albums on Spotify at least provides listeners with some historical perspective and context. However, most of these listeners are going to create their own playlists - as well they should, given that the early albums all contain a few duds.

Now, if we're talking about physical media, you could kill two birds with one stone (sorry) by issuing three CDs of their pre-Aftermath material.

Disc 1 can have England's Newest Hitmakers, plus "Mona" from the UK LP, plus early singles and EP tracks.
Disc 2 could have 12 x5 and Now, and if you throw in "I Can't be Satisfied," this also gives you their second UK LP.
Disc 3 could have Out of Our Heads (US) and December's Children, and this would also give you the UK Out of Our Heads.

As for Aftermath and Buttons, you could make an expanded edition of each, containing the US and UK tracks.

That would wrap things up neatly, except for the fact that CDs are more or less dead.

 

But the point is to try and keep the original albums, specifically the UK, intact as they are ala Beatles catalogue. ABKCO can't change original album configurations anyway.

 

I have no idea what ABKCO can or can't do. As for the UK albums, there is no reason that they should be the default, as Oldham compiled both the US and UK versions. With the US albums, you at least get the singles and several exclusive tracks.

 

Iam still Sitting On The Fence.

 

Not sure if that can actually be verified. I doubt Oldham said for example, "hey lets leave off Mona from the US release of the first album" (one of its best tracks)! Oldham didn't even know the US market at that stage...if he ever did...so he might have had some say, but the Stones were not enamoured of collections like Decembers Children for example and if it was just Oldham they could have intervened. Of course this will come down to what one grew up with. I still think US Beatles and Stones albums are illegitimate and always will. There will never be anything done about this, so the point is moot anyway.

 

Great and timely post.
Oldham sure but I don't buy the Stones picking all the tracks for their pre Majesties US Long Players.

 

Nah me neither. I mean with the Beatles comparative might, they couldn't do anything about the exploitation of their UK albums, why would the Stones be any different?

 

Funny thing is that in Australia for example - it was a UK/US hybrid...
The Rolling Stones (UK)
12x5 (US), Now (US), Out of Our Heads (US version)
Aftermath (UK) - then UK on...
EPs as UK, plus custom ones for Australia.

I have a feeling Decca in Australia just went with 12x5 because it came out before No 2 in UK and because of the overlap they went with US until they could find a release similar enough to return to UK catalogue (Yet strangely enough, 5x5 UK EP also had an Australian release so made 12x5 somewhat redundant as well). Then again, I have no idea, and have never heard why this anomaly exists.

 

Good post.

I had always assumed that London Records took control, but I've read a few things in recent years confirming that the group were involved. And the Stones recorded hit-and-run when they were touring; as others have said, they didn't have focused album sessions until Aftermath.

12X5 and The Rolling Stones Now! are great albums; I'm very happy to have those two rather than RS No.2 only. And American fans got songs on LP before they saw the light of day in England. December's Children is particularly muddled, including two live recordings and You Better Move On from their early-64 EP. I still love the core "new" songs from that album and Side Two is great.

With the MONO Box I compiled chronological CDRs of the group's early output... it helped me make sense of it all. I always loved the Stones' early/earliest recordings, but it's good to hear them in order, more-or-less.

 

It was more hybrid than you think as without looking iam virtually certain that "I Can't Be Satisfied" was unique to the Aus Now LP for just one example.
Look I was not exactly brought up with either a UK or US Stones album catalogue as my sentimental compass and I enjoy both but should the UK represent the norm (as that is what the band members intended), you bet it should.

 

I started a thread on this; my track listing for the three CDRs is the first post:
Rolling Stones: first 3 Decca vs. 5 London albums
I played around with the third disc and I think I prefer the revision that starts with tracks 1-7 as listed > 20-24 > 8-19 (the UK OOOH)... singles first, album second.

I tinkered with those track listings. The third disc ends with Look What You've Done from December's Children, even though it was recorded at Chess Studios in 1964. Later on, I bounced it to the 24X5 disc, retitled 25X5.

 

Yeah, as you'd know... they had to put I Can't Be Satisfied in place of Mona as that was on first album...but my feelings are similar to yours.

 

Ah nice one...OK I'll have a look now. Hmmm, you are missing some stuff, like I've Been Loving You Too Long, UK Got Live EP...US Everybody Needs Somebody to Love, someone pointed out My Girl...

 

Some good points and I too really enjoy the chronological playback also which I used to do from 63'-65' across two C-90 cassette tapes.

That said and bearing in mind Oldham's email, Keith himself has expressed surprise at what was released on LP in the US going as far as to say there were cuts released that were first rejected by the band.

 

It comes down to content.

If we were forced to go one way or the other, I think it would make sense to use the UK Aftermath and Buttons.

But for the material before that, it makes sense to the US albums. Do you want 3 albums or 5? There is only a single track on those first three Stones UK albums that is not on a US album. On the other hand, there is a ton of stuff on the US albums that is not on the UK albums.

You're more than welcome to think that, but the two situations were different.

 

I used to use cassettes to make chronological track lists of various 60s acts I liked. I used the recent mono box download to do the same thing as a flac file. It is great to have a physical product of the original USA and UK albums though.

 

I've Been Loving You (Too Long To Stop Now) is on the 1965 disc. I didn't want to include the live EP or US LP. I prefer the long, UK version of Everybody Needs Somebody to Love... no need for two versions of the song on one CDR. I really don't like the Stones version of My Girl. I could have put it in there, but I decided not to. It doesn't sound any better with the OOOH/December's Children material than it does on Flowers.

Y'know, it's just for my personal listening pleasure.

 

No the Beatles and Stones albums were chopped up by the US record companies to make more product. This is a fact. The situations are one and the same.

 

Fair enough - sorry I overlooked I've Been Loving You.

 

Except that Andrew Loog Oldham sequenced the US albums. Big difference.

 

No they aren't because The Stones did not deliver complete albums for the UK market unlike the other group. They recorded songs that were then released in different configurations.

 

I think it had to do more with releasing saleable product.

If the Stones and Beatles had released their UK catalogues in the US, and kept all of the singles standalone, fans would have been baffled. I don't think that the albums would have sold as well. I was born in 1954 and kids wanted and expected the BIG HITS to be on the LP's. I recall hesitating long and hard about buying Rubber Soul because We Can Work It Out and Day Tripper weren't on the album. OOOH without Satisfaction and The Last Time? No way. It's also important to remember that albums were relatively cheap in the USA so the 'value for money' paradigm that drove UK marketing was a non-starter.

In many cases, Capitol and London could have done a better job with it than they did, but it was about more than just releasing more product. They understood the market, as did Oldham.