Yeah it's just a small subset of people that like Blood on the Tracks and Pet Sounds, just like with Lopalco.

It's just like that. Obvious connection.

For someone so humourlessly literal, you really should have been able to see that post referred to the trio as a collective, and that the inclusion of Lapalco is precisely what ties that particular collective to that "small subset of people".

Why y'all wrassling with a pig?

I'm just sitting back marveling at the logistical gymnastics this guy pulls off in order to construct his hilarious jokes.

Which unfortunately I'm too humourlessly* literal to ever appreciate.

*Nice spelling on this one, btw, you British Columbian, you.

Newsflash: Amurica is the only English speaking country to have removed the "u" from that spelling, mainly because your founding Puritans were too fucking dumb and lazy to include an extra letter in their texting.

Dropping wholly unnecessary letters from words is hardly the kind of American practice I'm ashamed of.

Far more than 50% of the English speakers in the world speak it as their second (or third) language. In the last 40 years most EFL speakers learn, want to learn, American English... and have dropped more than the "u."

And shouldn't it be "rasslin'" with a pig, not "wrassling?"

Glad we are talking about the Rolling Stones... or Rollin' Stones.

We've reached the point in the Stones discography where it's better for all if we talk about anything but.

jesus christ, save it for the Dylan thread which now must happen sooner than later.

Perhaps it's indicative of the "steam" that the Stones, and their works, lost in the 80's, 90's and now. Ya know, I love the Stones, but after a point neither they nor I have that much jam.

Oh definitely, I don't disagree. The inevitable Dylan thread is clearly going to be the best one yet.

these colours don't run.

So your position is that the board can and will survive a "Dirty Works" listening party? Or do you care to give us a link now to a new board that will house this dylan thread?

With all the Dylan albums in existence, if you started a thread tomorrow, I'd likely be pining for the fjords by halftime.

Let me preface this by saying that there is no right answer and I realize that everyone has their own perspective but I disagree with the take that the Stones haven't put out a good record.

I mean, why is that this is "Stones, Inc" and not "Dylan, Inc" at this point. I'll admit that Mick has certainly courted the adoration and fame but the band hasn't. Dylan has followed his own muse, which is commendable, but I've gotten more enjoyment out of "Emotional Rescue" and "Tattoo You" than ANYTHING that Dylan did in the 80's.

I wasn't there. I didn't watch the Stones go through their many incarnations but I don't see anything wrong with the give the people what they want stance that the Stones have lived on the last 15 years. I find both artists output in the last 20 years to be pretty uneven but enjoyable.

Goddamn, Derris. Voice of fucking reason.

Dylan doesn't do huge stadium tours sponsored by Budweiser with Budweiser commercials featuring his music, while putting out a new greatest hits compilation every tour, while stretching ticket price records.

Dylan's not a saint or anything, but he's not as brazenly commercial as the stones.

that said, I still want to see the stones live, in any incarnation

So when can we do this Dylan thread?

And, Love and Theft fucking SUCKS. Time Out of Mind is listenable, and a good album, but nothing near his sixties output.

And Mick could have done a fucking duet with Madonna and it would not have been half as bad as anything from 1977-1997 that Dylan did.

As Derris said, both are part of my DNA, but goddamn, at least you get one or two unfuckwithable songs per Stones album.

And, we have RONNIE WOOD solo albums to listen to long before we get to any hog wrasslin Dylan thread.

what about all of Bob Weir's solo projects

I'll go so far as to say that any Dylan after about 1990 is completely unpalatable for me. I can't imagine anyone listening to Infidels (83? 84?) and calling it shit. As for Mick & Madonna on a duet, it might have been better than anything he did as a Rolling Stone.

**edit-that Mick statement above should not have been left without being period-specific- in other words, like from, ohhh, about 1985 or so to the present.**

What about 'em? Ratdog puts on a pretty good show.

I saw Bob and Rob Wasserman twice

So, we've now reached the point in discussing both careers that it has moved from who has the greatest album to which albums suck the least?

That basically makes me think the best idea is to just ignore all recent output from either.