Jump to content

Who had the best of these 1969 albums?


Which is best?  

35 members have voted

  1. 1. or your favorite?

    • The Beatles - Abbey Road
    • The Kinks - Arthur (Or The Decline And Fall Of The British Empire)
    • The Rolling Stones - Let It Bleed
    • The Who - Tommy


Recommended Posts

These four bands all released some of their most renowned albums in 69, but who had the best one, or did the beatles, or the kinks, or the stones? :P

 

and why?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

For me it's looking like

 

Abbey Road > Arthur > Let It Bleed > Tommy

 

Really can't beat Abbey Road, but I just got Arthur and it's been consistently interesting and catchy and inventive all the way through. Let It Bleed might be my favorite Stones album, though it has a filler track or two. And Tommy is great in theory, but the concept was a little ahead of it's time for the production and it really shows today. Quadrophenia achieves better what Tommy sets out to do imo.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

These four bands all released some of their most renowned albums in 69, but who had the best one, or did the beatles, or the kinks, or the stones? :P

 

and why?

 

Why we think our choice is the best album, or why was 1969 such a notable year for albums?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I had to go with Let It Bleed. It's like a 10/10 or 11/10 for me where Abbey Road and Tommy are 9/10. The Kinks record is one I'm not very familiar with; I have a few favorites among their albums and I haven't spent much time listening to the rest.

 

Let It Bleed has such wonderful layers of sound and what I think are masterpieces- Gimme Shelter; You Can't Always Get What You Want; Midnight Rambler.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

These four bands all released some of their most renowned albums in 69, but who had the best one, or did the beatles, or the kinks, or the stones? :P

 

and why?

 

Why we think our choice is the best album, or why was 1969 such a notable year for albums?

 

the first one

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I went with Let It Bleed

 

The Stones are the only band here that I feel connected with and that I have a passion for

 

Tommy and Abbey Road are total classics and are incredible landmark albums, but I just never felt the bond with The Who or The Beatles that I do with Mick, Keith and The Stones - and The Kinks even less ..

 

The first few seconds of both Monkey Man and Gimmie Shelter send shivers thru me every time I listen, and Can't Always Get What You Want is a classic amongst classics

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I went with Let It Bleed

 

The Stones are the only band here that I feel connected with and that I have a passion for

 

Tommy and Abbey Road are total classics and are incredible landmark albums, but I just never felt the bond with The Who or The Beatles that I do with Mick, Keith and The Stones - and The Kinks even less ..

 

The first few seconds of both Monkey Man and Gimmie Shelter send shivers thru me every time I listen, and Can't Always Get What You Want is a classic amongst classics

I find the Stones to be more of singles band. They've got some great songs but I've yet to find a Stones album that I can listen to all the way through. There's too many songs that are either fake country, pseudo RnB, pop pap, morose ballads etc. And even the songs that rock don't rock hard enough! I like some Stones songs like that but I wish they had more balls, especially in the guitar department.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I went with Let It Bleed

 

The Stones are the only band here that I feel connected with and that I have a passion for

 

Tommy and Abbey Road are total classics and are incredible landmark albums, but I just never felt the bond with The Who or The Beatles that I do with Mick, Keith and The Stones - and The Kinks even less ..

 

The first few seconds of both Monkey Man and Gimmie Shelter send shivers thru me every time I listen, and Can't Always Get What You Want is a classic amongst classics

I find the Stones to be more of singles band. They've got some great songs but I've yet to find a Stones album that I can listen to all the way through. There's too many songs that are either fake country, pseudo RnB, pop pap, morose ballads etc. And even the songs that rock don't rock hard enough! I like some Stones songs like that but I wish they had more balls, especially in the guitar department.

 

I have similar feelings. I can see the appeal of full Stones albums, but often there are tracks, many tracks, that I can't help but perceive as filler and just not nearly on par with their singles. Some Girls and maybe Sticky Fingers are probably the exceptions for me. I haven't heard Sticky Fingers in full in a long time because my CD glitches out on me and cuts some tracks short, but what I recall was engaging all the way through. And Some Girls has so many hits that the album cuts almost can't fail. There's some bluesy number Keith sings that I'm just okay with and the rest is pretty much gold. From the title cut, to the cover tune, to the endlessly entertaining Girl with Faraway Eyes.

 

Also Tattoo You can make a convincing case for having a bit of a concept (upbeat side one, slower side two) and for having extremely consistent album cuts (almost indistinguishable at times) bookended by stone cold classics (plus it's much shorter than the similarly consistent sounding Exile, which just goes on and on sometimes).

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I went with Let It Bleed

 

The Stones are the only band here that I feel connected with and that I have a passion for

 

Tommy and Abbey Road are total classics and are incredible landmark albums, but I just never felt the bond with The Who or The Beatles that I do with Mick, Keith and The Stones - and The Kinks even less ..

 

The first few seconds of both Monkey Man and Gimmie Shelter send shivers thru me every time I listen, and Can't Always Get What You Want is a classic amongst classics

I find the Stones to be more of singles band. They've got some great songs but I've yet to find a Stones album that I can listen to all the way through. There's too many songs that are either fake country, pseudo RnB, pop pap, morose ballads etc. And even the songs that rock don't rock hard enough! I like some Stones songs like that but I wish they had more balls, especially in the guitar department.

 

The one thing that I can point to that doesn;t really work well for me with The Stones is the fake country thing .. The other stuff I love - Fool To Cry, Angie, Hot Stuff - that would probably be the pop pap, morose ballad, pseudo R&B category but I love those songs ..

 

Dead Flowers is a song I would like a lot better if Mick hadn't hammed it up

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I went with Let It Bleed

 

The Stones are the only band here that I feel connected with and that I have a passion for

 

Tommy and Abbey Road are total classics and are incredible landmark albums, but I just never felt the bond with The Who or The Beatles that I do with Mick, Keith and The Stones - and The Kinks even less ..

 

The first few seconds of both Monkey Man and Gimmie Shelter send shivers thru me every time I listen, and Can't Always Get What You Want is a classic amongst classics

I find the Stones to be more of singles band. They've got some great songs but I've yet to find a Stones album that I can listen to all the way through. There's too many songs that are either fake country, pseudo RnB, pop pap, morose ballads etc. And even the songs that rock don't rock hard enough! I like some Stones songs like that but I wish they had more balls, especially in the guitar department.

 

The one thing that I can point to that doesn;t really work well for me with The Stones is the fake country thing .. The other stuff I love - Fool To Cry, Angie, Hot Stuff - that would probably be the pop pap, morose ballad, pseudo R&B category but I love those songs ..

 

Dead Flowers is a song I would like a lot better if Mick hadn't hammed it up

I don't know why they do that fake country stuff at all, makes no sense.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I went with Let It Bleed

 

The Stones are the only band here that I feel connected with and that I have a passion for

 

Tommy and Abbey Road are total classics and are incredible landmark albums, but I just never felt the bond with The Who or The Beatles that I do with Mick, Keith and The Stones - and The Kinks even less ..

 

The first few seconds of both Monkey Man and Gimmie Shelter send shivers thru me every time I listen, and Can't Always Get What You Want is a classic amongst classics

I find the Stones to be more of singles band. They've got some great songs but I've yet to find a Stones album that I can listen to all the way through. There's too many songs that are either fake country, pseudo RnB, pop pap, morose ballads etc. And even the songs that rock don't rock hard enough! I like some Stones songs like that but I wish they had more balls, especially in the guitar department.

 

The one thing that I can point to that doesn;t really work well for me with The Stones is the fake country thing .. The other stuff I love - Fool To Cry, Angie, Hot Stuff - that would probably be the pop pap, morose ballad, pseudo R&B category but I love those songs ..

 

Dead Flowers is a song I would like a lot better if Mick hadn't hammed it up

I don't know why they do that fake country stuff at all, makes no sense.

 

Duck, you've heard Michael Schenker talk about how he was asked to join The Stones back in 1974-75, right ??

 

I can;t imagine how that would have worked -- but I can somehow hear Mick Jagger singing "Let It Roll" !!

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I went with Let It Bleed

 

The Stones are the only band here that I feel connected with and that I have a passion for

 

Tommy and Abbey Road are total classics and are incredible landmark albums, but I just never felt the bond with The Who or The Beatles that I do with Mick, Keith and The Stones - and The Kinks even less ..

 

The first few seconds of both Monkey Man and Gimmie Shelter send shivers thru me every time I listen, and Can't Always Get What You Want is a classic amongst classics

I find the Stones to be more of singles band. They've got some great songs but I've yet to find a Stones album that I can listen to all the way through. There's too many songs that are either fake country, pseudo RnB, pop pap, morose ballads etc. And even the songs that rock don't rock hard enough! I like some Stones songs like that but I wish they had more balls, especially in the guitar department.

 

The one thing that I can point to that doesn;t really work well for me with The Stones is the fake country thing .. The other stuff I love - Fool To Cry, Angie, Hot Stuff - that would probably be the pop pap, morose ballad, pseudo R&B category but I love those songs ..

 

Dead Flowers is a song I would like a lot better if Mick hadn't hammed it up

I don't know why they do that fake country stuff at all, makes no sense.

 

Duck, you've heard Michael Schenker talk about how he was asked to join The Stones back in 1974-75, right ??

 

I can;t imagine how that would have worked -- but I can somehow hear Mick Jagger singing "Let It Roll" !!

He would have made them into an essential band for true music fans and not just posers who pretend to like music. It's just that MOST people are posers who pretend to like music so there's more money to be made from them.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Beatles - Abbey Road: A marvelous album where the sum is greater than its parts. The Beatles pull together odds and ends and leftovers and pull off a magical ride with side two.It shouldn't work but it does. It is never boring. What holds it all together? Great arrangements, great sequencing, great melodies, great vocals and some of the Beatles' best instrumental performances. I think a lot of future prog epics benefited from what the Beatles accomplished with side two. Side one suffers from the inclusion of two novelty songs that, to me, prove to be a distraction. Take one of them off and give George another slot (Not Guilty?) and I feel the album would improve significantly. [9/10]

 

The Kinks - Arthur (Or the Decline and Fall of the British Empire): The Kinks' weakest album in a brilliant late 1960s run. The Kinks at their best are the best, but I feel Arthur is bogged down by its concept and, quite frankly, the best songs on the album don't hold up to the best songs on other Kinks albums. A very good album that is inferior to what came before it and after it. [7/10]

 

The Rolling Stones - Let It Bleed: A transitional album for the Stones. Something about it feels incomplete to me, it's probably related to losing Brian Jones and waiting for Mick Taylor's arrival. But the highs reach the very top. Gimme Shelter! Midnight Rambler! You Can't Always Get What You Want! Wow. [9/10]

 

The Who - Tommy: I always felt Tommy was incredibly overrated. I find it a chore to listen to beginning to end. I feel the Who went on to release much better albums. Personally, I would rate it lower, but I can't ignore its influence and popularity. [8/10]

 

It's between Abbey Road and Let It Bleed. I'm a Beatles guy, so the Fab Four it is. By the way, I think the Band's The Band is the best album of 1969.

Edited by ReRushed
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Abbey Road is in the running for my favorite Beatles' album of all, so it gets the nod. Next would be Let it Bleed, which is near the beginning of a run of albums (Beggars Banquet to Goats Head Soup) that were so amazing. I like Tommy, but I'm a mild Who fan, I like them when I hear them but I don't remember ever feeling the urge to listen to them for a few days in a row. The Kinks album I've never heard.
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Beatles - Abbey Road: A marvelous album where the sum is greater than its parts. The Beatles pull together odds and ends and leftovers and pull off a magical ride with side two.It shouldn't work but it does. It is never boring. What holds it all together? Great arrangements, great sequencing, great melodies, great vocals and some of the Beatles' best instrumental performances. I think a lot of future prog epics benefited from what the Beatles accomplished with side two. Side one suffers from the inclusion of two novelty songs that, to me, prove to be a distraction. Take one of them off and give George another slot (Not Guilty?) and I feel the album would improve significantly. [9/10]

 

The Kinks - Arthur (Or the Decline and Fall of the British Empire): The Kinks' weakest album in a brilliant late 1960s run. The Kinks at their best are the best, but I feel Arthur is bogged down by its concept and, quite frankly, the best songs on the album don't hold up to the best songs on other Kinks albums. A very good album that is inferior to what came before it and after it. [7/10]

 

The Rolling Stones - Let It Bleed: A transitional album for the Stones. Something about it feels incomplete to me, it's probably related to losing Brian Jones and waiting for Mick Taylor's arrival. But the highs reach the very top. Gimme Shelter! Midnight Rambler! You Can't Always Get What You Want! Wow. [9/10]

 

The Who - Tommy: I always felt Tommy was incredibly overrated. I find it a chore to listen to beginning to end. I feel the Who went on to release much better albums. Personally, I would rate it lower, but I can't ignore its influence and popularity. [8/10]

 

It's between Abbey Road and Let It Bleed. I'm a Beatles guy, so the Fab Four it is. By the way, I think the Band's The Band is the best album of 1969.

 

Arthur is my first Kinks album and so far I think I'm really digging it, maybe even loving it. What would you recommend next from them?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Beatles - Abbey Road: A marvelous album where the sum is greater than its parts. The Beatles pull together odds and ends and leftovers and pull off a magical ride with side two.It shouldn't work but it does. It is never boring. What holds it all together? Great arrangements, great sequencing, great melodies, great vocals and some of the Beatles' best instrumental performances. I think a lot of future prog epics benefited from what the Beatles accomplished with side two. Side one suffers from the inclusion of two novelty songs that, to me, prove to be a distraction. Take one of them off and give George another slot (Not Guilty?) and I feel the album would improve significantly. [9/10]

 

The Kinks - Arthur (Or the Decline and Fall of the British Empire): The Kinks' weakest album in a brilliant late 1960s run. The Kinks at their best are the best, but I feel Arthur is bogged down by its concept and, quite frankly, the best songs on the album don't hold up to the best songs on other Kinks albums. A very good album that is inferior to what came before it and after it. [7/10]

 

The Rolling Stones - Let It Bleed: A transitional album for the Stones. Something about it feels incomplete to me, it's probably related to losing Brian Jones and waiting for Mick Taylor's arrival. But the highs reach the very top. Gimme Shelter! Midnight Rambler! You Can't Always Get What You Want! Wow. [9/10]

 

The Who - Tommy: I always felt Tommy was incredibly overrated. I find it a chore to listen to beginning to end. I feel the Who went on to release much better albums. Personally, I would rate it lower, but I can't ignore its influence and popularity. [8/10]

 

It's between Abbey Road and Let It Bleed. I'm a Beatles guy, so the Fab Four it is. By the way, I think the Band's The Band is the best album of 1969.

 

Arthur is my first Kinks album and so far I think I'm really digging it, maybe even loving it. What would you recommend next from them?

Village Green.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

None of these compare to the 1969 releases that aren't mentioned.

 

Starting with Led Zep I and II, Chicago Transit Authority, In the Court of the Crimson King...

 

I was going to rant about excluding Hendrix, but he didn't have any 1969 albums. But I'm pretty sure he was active in 69 in more than one way.

Edited by HemiBeers
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

None of these compare to the 1969 releases that aren't mentioned.

 

Starting with Led Zep I and II, Chicago Transit Authority, In the Court of the Crimson King...

 

I was going to rant about excluding Hendrix, but he didn't have any 1969 albums. But I'm pretty sure he was active in 69 in more than one way.

Sure they do.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...