deluxe double disc delivered day of release (delayed)

howdy pop pickers

so yes, then, another look back on a day of release what was delivered but is only being written of now. as opposed to speculative writing on one which has yet to come, look you see. in this instance, it is the deluxe, double disc edition of Goats Head Soup by The Rolling Stones, which was indeed posted to me in such a manner (or fashion) that it arrived (in the post) on the intended day of (re)release. this is unlike the single (as in one track disc) Living In A Ghost Town, which they only posted out on the intended day of release. 

credit, indeed, to whoever (or whomever) it was that went full tilt in pressing the improbability infinity drive button for the year 2020. no, as this somewhat complex year commenced, i did not suspect or expect that two (not just one, or thus far as many as three) releases off of the Stones would magnetically attract my coins of money. 

many of  you, i appreciate, shall be in a rush to just establish whether or not (or if) this release is any good, and further if it is worth getting. there shall be some considerable waffle written around the pictures what i have taken and added, so to cut to the chase, yes, this deluxe version (or edition) of the album Goats Head Soup is absolutely worth getting. for a band (brand, perhaps) somewhat noted (to say notorious feels wrong) for not giving too much away as "extras", this is a generous and stunning release. 

immediate further questions you may have may well concern two factors here. one would be about if this edition includes the "uncensored" version of Star Star, whilst the other would be are the three songs which have not officially been released before worthwhile. yes and yes. to be honest i do not recall ever hearing the 'censored' version of Star Star (and a clue to the censorship at hand would be that i believe the song was originally titled Star F****r), but what here has Sir Mick saying as many profanities as you may wish to hear across three or so minutes. as for the three previously unreleased songs, well, with their track record for digging out and using older compositions for albums (as many artists do), it is most surprising that none of these ever turned up as album tracks proper over the course of the last four or five decades. 

quite a wonderful thing to do, if like me you are prepared to spend an inordinate amount of time giving consideration to such, is to assess the current status of any petty squabbles within the inner circle of the Stones. this is a carefully guarded place, of course, so hints and who thinks what of who are always rather interesting. interesting in a way (indeed) that no present day band, and few since the dawn of the Stones era, have ever come close to being near to inspiring. 

to this end (or effect), it would seem that, close on 30 years later, it is almost the case that Bill Wyman has very nearly been forgiven for having the temerity to be only the second person to dare quit the Stones and remain alive. one establishes this by virtue of the fact that a number of pictures in the booklet feature Bill Wyman in a clearly visible way. yes sure, one of the pictures seems to see him in a state of subordination to Sir Mick, apparently looking towards him in the hope that he is not causing either distress or displeasure. 

alas, despite indications of (some) forgiveness and healing during all that 50th anniversary stuff, it seems that Mick Taylor is once again out of favour. this conclusion is drawn from the fact that the above image (outside of the original artwork) is just about the only one which shows him, as a then full member of The Stones, in a way he can easily be identified. he famously initially caused some distress by being the first ever person to quit The Stones alive, and then disgraced himself somewhat by having the (by Stones logic) unusual idea of expecting to be paid for work that he did and the band went on to use for profit. refer, mostly, to Tattoo You for this. 

still, lots of images of Keith, as per the above (which i think looks most excellent in Commodore 64 mode). he looks quite tired and emotional in a few of them, probably due to his selfless sacrifice to the altar of rock indulgence. quite a few pictures of Sir Mick, too, including a class one of him in flares. no, not too many images of Charlie Watts, but that would probably be because Charlie Watts instructed them not to use images of Charlie Watts. with his formidable track record for instilling discipline and understanding in various band members by punching them square in the face, i would have every reason to suspect that he just simply "asks" (as in tells them) such things these days and they are most agreeably compliant. 

oh, the music? yes, i suppose i should mention some of it here. best, probably, to start with what one would call the "album proper" before delving into the extras. 

coming to the album (ostensibly) again, i confess that i was only immediately familiar with three songs. they are Angie, which at times the band have confirmed and denied pertains to a former (not that she mentions it much) Mrs Bowie, Heartbreaker, in which the band discover the wah-wah pedal for guitars, and (somewhat obviously) Star Star, the partial nod to groupies which caused a little bit of a stir. also, of course, the originally intended quite more literal artwork for the record, and the subsequent image(s) used, which give a mock suffocation look but are simply the band behind a think pink veil. 

if i were to say those three remain the strongest songs on the album (which i am saying) that's not to say the remaining (or other) seven are poorer or weaker. far from it. this is as solid, indeed as exceptional, a set of ten songs as you would find on any Rolling Stones album. in terms of being an album which comprises consistently excellent songs, this ranks right up there (for me, in my opinion, etc) with Let It Bleed and Tattoo You. 

but great songs alone do not a classic album make. to somewhat depart in conversation here, let me throw out something which might be "controversial" and may cause someone somewhere to argue with me. my sense is that at no point (yet) in their illustrious career is it so that The Rolling Stones have released what has come to be referred to as a "classic" album. 

please don't misinterpret that. in terms of recognition, or iconic status, the only peer they have (in terms of percentages, etc) comes in the form of The Beatles. further, they have been responsible for some of the greatest, most gifted and genius pieces of rock and pop music, ever. as the (officially) unreleased songs on Goats Head Soup emphasise, they have discarded songs which if released would have been greater than what many bands have managed to release in the last (north of) 50 years. this is The Rolling Stones we are speaking of (or i am writing about and you are reading). as Keith Richards once pointed out, there are a couple of generations to have only had three constants in their entire existence - The Sun (star, not solar system), Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth II and The Rolling Stones. do not be so sure you know which one shall cease to be a constant first. 

rather hear me out, then. a "classic album" by my understanding is one that comprises more that the sum of its parts, no matter how superb the parts in isolation may be. this doesn't necessarily mean a classic album needs to be as overt as a concept album (or rock opera), but still, a thematic thread (or threads) weave through the album entire to give one singular experience, rather than hearing a sequence of songs in themselves. if that makes sense. probably not. 

still with me? good. examples of what i am talking about which come to mind are The Joshua Tree, Automatic For The People and of course, arguably (except there is not much debate) the greatest of them all, Rumours. there are many, many 'great' albums (such as, for instance, Goats Head Soup) which just lack that extra step. the closest, i suppose, the Stones came to this was Let It Bleed, bookended as it is with Gimme Shelter and You Can't Always Get What You Want. a case exists for the sellotaped together outtake album that is Tattoo You, but then you would have to credit the lad who went through all the stored tapes to find the songs for putting that together, rather than the band themselves. 

a recent interview, given in furtherance of promotion of Goats Head Soup and pertaining to the previously (not officially) unreleased songs on the deluxe edition, Sir Mick gave some incidental insight into the construction of a Stones album. this was something of an accidental confession, i suppose, or if you wish to view as such. basically, it would seem that as soon as eight to ten songs were done, dusted and polished, that was it, album done, and anything not quite ready was just left to one side. by their own admission, then, no great consideration went into the composure or construction of an album as such; the focus was just to bang out x amount of songs which reached a satisfactory standard and get on with it. considering the estimated, assumed and known wealth of all bar one member who has a penchant for messy (costly) divorces and a somewhat ambivalent understanding of what is and what is not a good investment, financially this approach appears to have worked out all fine for them. 

yes that is the (presumably) originally intended album artwork for Goats Head Soup. presented, of course, in the greater glory of Commodore 64 mode. this was the second time they got knacked for album art, the time before being that Sticky Fingers caused some distress in some nations. rather than stand their ground, though, the Stones have always been flexible to change so as to ensure the flow of money comes from what they do. quite right, too - there is little point making a record and then making it so that no one can buy it. like, for instance, how the Bowie Estate has just done with ChangesNowBowie, making it an artificial limited edition and i forgot to order it so i guess that one shall remain missing off my collection. 

it would be rather difficult not to infer some sort of satanic, pagan or similar connotation to both the album name (which i have not found a reasonable explanation of the provenance of) and the artwork. songs such as Dancing With Mr D appearing on the record indicate similar. undoubtedly such references find a happy home with Mr Richards and his perpetual blues / Robert Johnson / Crossroads deal with the devil kick, and it is unlikely that Sir Mick would rally too much against anything which provided good marketing. 

how about the ostensible selling point of this re-release, which would be the three "rare" tracks? the band have wisely avoided using the term "previously unreleased", as they seem aware that rather rampant bootlegging of some of the stuff has happened. how that happened i know not, maybe an error or such from the time when that one lad had access to all the tapes to construct Tattoo You. 

whereas it would be misleading to suggest that the three "new" songs here - Scarlet, Criss Cross and All The Rage - are in any way forms of lost or forgotten classics, they are three really, really good songs. knowing their penchant for grabbing and finishing off previous songs, it is rather incredible that none of these ever surfaced on any of the albums they did in the 70s, 80s, 90s or 00s. or, maybe not. it is known that Sir Mick has a fondness for Stones records to "sound relevant" to their time, so the waca waca ooompah jazz fusion odyssey wah wah delights of Criss Cross and to an extent All The Rage would have sounded rather dated if released as anything but the way they are here; reflecting a time rather than being passed off as "new". with regards to Scarlet, that thing in 1981 where Mick Taylor sought (and got) royalties for the songs they used on Tattoo You probably put paid to it ever getting used, since, as has widely been celebrated, this song features one Jimmy Page on guitar. 

ostensibly, Scarlet is exactly what it says on the box. which is the fruits of a jam session between some unquestionably talented musicians. one may assume something like "wow, Richards (or Richard if American, i have never understood that) and Page on the same record, this will be the greatest thing ever", but it isn't, as both have done considerably better. it's a solid enough rock song, but also nothing about it says we have been denied the chance to (legally and approved release wise) hear a great moment in rock history all these years. 

for me it is easily the case that the best aspect of Scarlet is the provenance. going on what is known, and this is radio interviews by Sir Mick and the unlikely to ever be knighted Jimmy Page, the tune was recorded in the basement (or cellar) of wherever it was that a certain Ronnie Wood resided at the time. this was prior to him (Ronnie) being taken on by the Stones as the work experience kid; an era when he was still the great lead guitarist with Faces. what causes me inexplicable (and irrational) humour is that Ronnie does not feature on the record. one has to assume that he was present when they did it, what with it being his house, but for some reason he wasn't permitted to "jam" or play along. maybe he was getting cups of tea (or similar) for his guests as they knocked this out, or perhaps h was just told to sit in a corner and let the grown ups do their thing. 

the other seven (7) tracks on the "bonus" disc two (2) of the deluxe Goats Head Soup set are variations of stuff on the album. i am absolutely not qualified to pick up on differences, but the "Glyn Johns" and "Alternative" mixes listed don't really sound all that different to my ears than what is on the album proper. bonus points, however, for the Heartbreaker casually listed as an "instrumental". as it turns out, this is a predominantly acoustic take of the track, presumably from early on in the composure stage and well before anyone thought to drown it in maxed out amps and dozens of wah wah pedals. the finished song itself is a masterpiece, but to hear how the basics of the groove were laid down is if not a revelation then certainly interesting. 

ultimately, this is a Stones record which i shall (from time to time) pick up and play from start to finish. the only others of theirs i am inclined to do similar with would be Let It Bleed and Tattoo You. other than that, playing some Stones would usually mean a greatest hits or best of thing, or one of the better set out live albums they have done. take that as you will, really. 

swathes of the record industry (perhaps correctly) see little value in any "new" music, for it is dire, for the most part streamed, unprofitable and decidedly disposable. maybe this deluxe Goats Head Soup is how things will work, then. after years of having repeated re-issues of known classic albums, it may well be time to revisit a record like this - one that isn't immediately named by anyone as an all time great, but that the years have been kind to and is full worth discovery or rediscovery. 

be excellent to each other!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!