What Happened to Decca "Rolling Stones #2" Album?

Just a quick question for you Rolling Stones experts...

I purchased Bill Wyman's new coffee table book (available at Costco for $28.00) and noticed that Decca released a Stones album called "The Rolling Stones #2". Why was that compilation not included in either Abkco's 1986 release or the recent SACD release? I realize that all of the tracks from that album are spread out among other U.S. albums (and are thus included in the SACD reissues), but it seems that historical accuracy would dictate the release of the original Decca album.

 

Well, as an Abkco press flak said in a statement to Ice(latest issue):

"The Rolling Stones and The Rolling Stones No. 2 were not released at this time because of the repetition of tracks."

Actually it was "A general ABKCO spokesperson," whatever that is--or, to put it another way, Jody Klein and his known minions didn't want their names attached to the statement. As for repetition, why go into the BETWEEN THE BUTTONS and FLOWERS repetitiousness, since that seemed okay to them? I guess they figured the rest of us wouldn't want the UK debut or NO. 2. Must be why I have vinyl copies of each; can't stand either of them, myself.

Have a wonderful holiday season,

ED

 

Thanks for the info Ed. Since I am now the proud owner of all 22 SACD's with loads of duplication, it bewilders me why they didn't just release #2. Also missing from the SACD reissues is a "British EP Collection" which would (should) include the EP "Got Live If You Want It".

 

I have pondered this question since the reissue release.

I grew up listening to the track order of this album. Three of the gems from this release are now scattered on compilation discs, "Everybody Needs Somebody To Love" (which should have been released in stereo), "Time Is On My Side" (guitar intro), and "I Can't Be Satisfied", one of the best cuts the Stones ever recorded.

On a similar note, the self titled first album doesn't seem right without "Mona" and the long version of "Tell Me".

ABKCO should have taken it's cue from the release of the Beatles catalog on cd by issuing all of the proper UK versions.

Perhaps the forum could consider, as a group project, a heartfelt request to Jody Klein to release the first two UK albums on disc.

Also, a dream disc for me would be to have all of the Chess sessions on one SACD. What a pleasure that would be to listen to.


Dr. Roberts

 

As opposed to the Beatles catalog, the Stones' is not as clean cut. The UK releases do not provide a complete collection either.

Check Rolling Stones Decca Output

 

Because it's the best early RS LP bar none, the only one over 30min long, and would make the others look like the cobbled together Frankensteins that they are.

 

IMHO, there's enough track repitition, so making a RS 1 & 2 would get fans nutty. You also realize that they've always been UK products, and Abkco thinks "American". :/

 

True, except for the UK OUT OF OUR HEADS, AFTER-MATH, BTB....I think they could have fit in 1 & 2 UK anyway, added a custom live package, and then they'd have had 25 remasters, a nice, uneven number, fitting for a most uneven series of redos.

ED

 

In England, The Stones and other British acts releases are quite clear cut. In the UK, it is quite obvious the pattern of releases makes sense and even seems to follow a plan on the part of the artist and the record company.

The only exception seems to be the artists and recordings produced by Mickie Most, who seemed to have an inclination to go 'American', if you will. Though there are probably other exceptions that can be noted.

That recordings were shipped to the USA to be released as the American company saw fit alway seemed to be more of a once the British company let it go, they lost control of what was done with the tracks (to the surprise of many artists once they saw their work while visiting or touring the USA).

At the same time, the same thing could be said of American recording artists and their releases in the UK. The UK label Stateside is a good example of this.

As an audience, individually or in a group, it can certainly be an issue of exposure and how that exposure sits with your brain's musical pleasure center.

I was one of those Americans who found out, in the early 60s, the differences and liked the British versions better. I went out of my way to purchase imports (it was a relatively new concept back then) and still do to this day.

So, in the scheme of things, I will usually follow the release pattern of an artist based on country of origin.

 

I received my copy of the January ICE today and my original question was answered.

I think that the very best way that they could have released the Rolling Stones collection was to release all of the original U.K. albums (including "Metamorphasis") along with the "Singles Collections" and a new, complete compilation "The U.K. EP Collection and other rarities" including "C***sucker Blues" etc..

 

Agree with you all the way; won't happen now, and a shame they just didn't go out and ask the collectors who've been writing for years(mostly about the C/P catalog on my part, but also the Stones)what they wanted. A 'Rarities' type collection would have been perfect; so would the french AROUND AND AROUND comp from '65 or so(remember that laughable cover photo? Mick's eyes were closed!)to include some mono left off the remastered 12x5. Missed opportunities everywhere, which is why I was left kind of laughing at the piece, what with the COA and Digi-Pak complaints(my only concern--period--was with the music and sound, screw the certificates and the packaging).

It's not too late for Abkco to slip UK 1 & 2 or a Rarities thing in, but the question is, how good are the sales really? Already I've seen quite a few copies of these redos turn up used(no one stands out, but looks like, at least in my area, most folks are keeping the comps; haven't seen any of those).

Isn't the bulk mail funny? A few members got theirs days ahead of me, and you got yours days after mine arrived. Typical of the U.S. Snail, I guess.

ED

 

Ed,

I just found a copy of the 12 LP "Rolling Stones Story" German Decca set. I haven't sat down and listened to it yet. It does have the LP "Around and Around" -- is this the same as the French LP that you referenced in your response? How "good" are the German Decca LP's in your opinion? I have the MoFi set, the SACD's, and now the German Decca set.

Personally, I rate the MoFi and SACD's about the same in terms of sound quality. I'm going to have a listening session tonight with the German LP's and compare them to the MoFi's. Hopefully, there'll be some interesting contrasts in terms of sound.

 

Excellent! Let me/us all know what you hear.

I have an old friend who bought the box set, but the problem was, IIRC, most of it had rechanneled sound for the albums that weren't stereo. I have a separate 'stereo' edition of A&A, but what I like about the concept of the Lp was that it all makes sense, from songs chosen to sequencing--just fabulous, and one of these days I'm going to make a CDR of the sucker from CD sources(mono, to keep in the spirit of '65, as it were), maybe with stereo bonus tracks just for fun. And, the back cover 'cop' photo is a real kick, as are the descriptions after the songs--'shake,' 'slop,' twist,' 'shuffle,' 'limbo,' 'blues').

As for the sound of the German set...for the stereo, I think it's very good (if not A1 top-notch)and it was a reissue project(I assume you have the red labels with small black Decca logo on top). I know this because I bought most of the single-Lp reissues and thought they played out really well; minimal noise, good range...when stereo. But even when fake stereo, it was generally of the mild kind as that sort of crap goes...

What I can tell you about the individual stereo Lp's is that, while they may not be up to an original, thick-vinyl Decca/UK original, they still play nice and I love the bass response on several....but then I tend to push the woofer a bit by nature. One caveat: my friend also told me a few of the Lp's run at a slightly faster tempo/speed than what he expected; it's also possible(haven't played these in many, many years)there's some 'reverse channel' effect too, where what's Rch should be Lch, or vice versa). Possible, but this is not the evening to be checking such things out, obviously. Don't doubt it, though: I've come across more than a few Decca Germany reissues that seem to run at a slightly faster speed than they should, with some odd sound to go with them.

Now that you have it, keep it; in VG+/NM condition, worth something, and not a lot were pressed, apparently. Finally, as for sound(stereo only), a hard choice: the vinyl, in all its incarnations, came first, including some of the very best, so I'm kinda prejudiced there. The MoFi CD masters line up most of the way, with the exception of AFTER-MATH: that's the widest separation we're ever gonna have for that[London/UK-Japan CD edition].
The current SACD, come to think of it, would line up separation-wise with the overseas vinyl, if only for the compression necessary for a 50+minute Lp from 1966.
Also, as per Luke & D's Stones FAQ, listen on SACD for the NR and shift of bass from one channel isolation to being heard in both; it's not something you catch at first. Also note the extra 'brightness,' if you will, of the SACD sound overall, yet at the same time some extra distinction in bass and drums/percussion; at times, impressive. Beyond the correct speed of BEGGARS BANQUET, it really is very impressive, just a shame the mono mix still has no CD home.

One other little thing: A&A had, I believe, the first appearance for the long version of "2120 South Michigan"; mono or rechanneled, though; the stereo would have to wait for the 12x5 SACD(so we don't have the original 'short' version in mono or stereo this time, I guess).

Better stop it right there. The noise is getting louder.

Happy listening,

ED

 

Ed wrote:

I have an old friend who bought the box set, but the problem was, IIRC, most of it had rechanneled sound for the albums that weren't stereo.


I reply:

Well, I've just started listening and the first album at least is in true mono (no evidence of electronically rechannelled stereo). I even plugged in a pair of headphones to verify that it is in mono Are you sure about your statement above?

Also, regarding the "It's About Time" album, the only thing that keeps it from being a great "collection" album is the lack of the track "Money" from the first EP.

I'll keep listening and post results of the "electronically rechannelled" issue.
So far, the German Decca first album sounds pretty darned good, much "more well balanced in terms of frequency response" than the MoFi album leading me to believe that perhaps the MoFi was "re-equalized"????