The Rolling Stones

[Manning]

Has anyone else noticed that for the past decade or so, that whenever The Stones put out a new song or songs, they're always on a Greatest Hits compilation CD?

Do you think that's taking the easy way out, or do you think they've earned the right to do this?

[wkhanna]

I personally do not purchase 'greatest hits' or other such compilation albums due to the typically poor mastering/engineering/production quality I have experienced with the ones I have heard. If a group has attained a body of work popular enough to justify a ‘greatest hits’ status, then I most likely already have the albums those songs are from.
But back to the OP……..

I suppose if you have lasted (or merely survived in their case) as long as the Stones have, & continue to produce creative, high quality work…….well… maybe some rules just don’t apply.

I recently saw the show at the White House were an evening of music honoring the Blues was held. Mick Jagger did a few songs, some of them with Jeff Beck. Assign whatever platitude you wish, he is still one great entertainer possessing the same level of skill, talent & energy as ever.

While I have never seen the Stones live, I have talked with many who have, & not just within the last 20 years, either. None have ever said they were disappointed by the show.

[mjb]

I don't like to buy "greatest hits" albums either. I come from a time when tracks were in an order, and albums had a beginning, middle and end. Try playing The Wall in "shuffle" mode. Its confusing! IMO, its better to buy the original albums and listen to them how they were intended. If you're curious about an artist or band you can use iTunes or Amazon to preview a few tracks. No need to feed the greed by buying Greatest Hits anything.

[wkhanna]

No need to feed the greed by buying Greatest Hits anything.

Agreed.
It is more about marketing & easy profit.
Not the Music.

[Ovation]

To play devil's advocate, I have used "greatest hits" collections as a means to explore an artist/group and, quite often, have gone on to buy a lot more of their music. On the other hand, I've also steered clear of artists whose "greatest hits" did not impress me. Given the often low price for a "greatest hits" package, it has proven a relatively economical way for me to explore various sources of music. More recently, in the age of iTunes, I've used the ability to buy single songs, for even less money, for the same purpose (with the advantage of being able to sample songs that were not necessarily "hits").

Buying a "greatest hits" package today is less appealing to me in the age of iTunes, but it did serve a useful purpose until recently.

[wkhanna]

A V practical process.

I must admit, when I was much younger, I would purchase compilations of classical works. Being a novice to the genre at the time, they were valuable in learning the unfamiliar category.

[Ovation]

I have a few such classical compilations (for the same reasons), though I moved more quickly into full works in classical than in pop/rock or jazz. On the other hand, one of my favourite discs, all genres included, is a classical compilation--a collection of classical pieces reworked for soprano saxophone by Branford Marsalis. By almost any measure, it is surpassed by numerous other discs in my classical collection. However, it was one of the first classical CDs I ever bought (back in the 80s) and I return to it for late night listening on a regular basis (usually accompanied by a good single malt).

[Manning]

A V practical process.

I must admit, when I was much younger, I would purchase compilations of classical works. Being a novice to the genre at the time, they were valuable in learning the unfamiliar category.

Same here. I look at the covers in music stores and that's how I made my observation. With groups like the Stones though, they have such a huge catalogue they can group certain greatest hits songs together at different times and make "theme" type albums out of them. At least that would put an interesting twist on it.