The Rolling Stones

this is a banger of a debut album. good shite

Why did the Rolling Stones turn into one of the biggest bands in the world? Could it be that in 1964 they came out rocking with some really solid R&B influenced music and not the sappy sweet pop or boring as shit folk of the day? This isn't their best album by far but you can hear the great things to come here.

Debut album. Didn't know they started out doing blues covers but it sounded good

Favourite tracks: route 66; I just want to make love to you; mona; carol

Even this early stuff shows great promise of what was to come…

A decent rocking half hour. And fun to hear where this larger than life band started out!

Mostly covers, but a solid debut album

Album 183 of 1001 The Rolling Stones - The Rolling Stones Rating : 4 / 5 Favorite Track : Route 66 Most likely, if The Rolling Stones had never released another album after this I wouldn't rank it the same...but they did. This album is often panned because it is just cover tunes. That doesn't really matter to me. It is an enjoyable record. This was at a point of time where a lot was going on in the music world. Give a band a break for trying to find their place. Their cover of Route 66 is one of my favorites of all time. Quite comfortable putting this album up there with those I find most enjoyable. Nobody is talking about giving them writing awards for this. It is just good bluesy entertainment.

very good

As this is an album almost entirely of covers, I expected it to be a bit underwhelming and not a touch on some of the original blues tracks on which the songs are based. That wasn't really the case. There's enough personality and unique flavour here, and also hints of what's to come, that it's a thoroughly enjoyable album on its own merits.

Few bangers and a history lesson

One of the best Stones albums. Some bands are just better when they are limited. More money led to more bloat for the Stones, whereas this raw album is full of life and excitement. Would have five stars bit for a lot of cover versions!

히히히

Nice

Dirty, lo-fi Stones are great. Love the track Honest I Do. KR stands out on most of their future albums as the powerhouse behind the band, but MJ really shines with his limitless energy and full-tilt range on this. The bud of a future rockstar... and backed up with some down and dirty guitar ... great album.

A great debut by The Rolling Stones. It's great to hear how far have they come from their true blues roots with this album and the changes that they made in moving onto their later albums. Not to mention how clean-cut they look on the cover of the album! Whilst the album is mainly covers, you can see how they were able to capture the zeitgeist of the youth of the 60s. Bringing a fresh spin on blues classics, with more of a guitar heavy feel, such a great vibe. Best: Route 66 Worst: Little By Little 4.5 Stars

This is a good album but not really sure why it's included on this list, unless it's just because it was the Stones' debut album. They do a great job with these covers but that's mainly all this has on it. Their one original wasn't the strongest. I'm a big Rolling Stones fan and I'm still rating this higher because it's an enjoyable album but still not sure why it would be one of the top 1,001. Standout Tracks: Route 66, Mona (I Need You Baby), Little By Little, Can I Get a Witness, Walking the Dog

I enjoyed this one quite a lot. A legendary and influential rock band for the ages.

Toen de Stones nog meer blues waren. Goeie plaat

Not a terrible blues album, not my thing

5/12, 42%

Blues'rock

Too new and young to be impressive, but one star for the youth and energy.

The earliest Stones stuff barely sounds like the version of the band we’ll know and love, most notably since they didn’t write most of it- only one Jagger/Richards contribution, and it’s no “Paint it Black”. Still pretty charming 60s rock and roll, but I’d take what they would do a couple of years later anyday. B-

Early Stones. This shit rocks. Each and every track shows why the band has longevity in the business and is a testament to 1960s rock n roll.

Man, I could listen to this over and over again. In terms of the British blues boom, this feels like it's near the top of tree. Great song selection and variety, the band sounds tight, but best of all is Mick Jagger. It may be their first album but already he sounds slithery, fey and dangerous. 'Tell Me' is probably the weakest joint here but it's fine, if slightly generic 60s beat pop. There are great versions of 'Carol', 'Route 66' and personal highlight, 'I'm a King Bee' - so yeah, four, verging on five stars.

Mostly with Alex on this one (though I like “Tell Me”!) in that this is all about Jagger. It’s easy to imagine superior versions of these songs being performed by Little Richard or Jerry Lee Lewis or somebody else from the 50’s, but… there is something about what Jagger’s doing here that makes these versions unique enough to stand apart. His whole approach to this type of music is just different, almost like he doesn’t belong at the table at first but then somehow wins you over. Really wonder what the old school American blues heads must’ve thought of this guy and this band when they first broke. Must’ve been an interesting time. Anywho, really liked “Can I get a Witness” and did not like “Now I’ve got a Witness.” It’s weird that they sequences the latter before the former on the record, but hey man it was the 60s man.

Pretty solid but I've heard too much music that sounds just like it to give it a 5. I'm aware that's my problem and not the album but

Route 66, I Just Want To Make Love To You, Mona, King Bee, Carol (best song), Can I Get A Witness (Hell yeah brother) and Walking the Dog. Like the early Beatles, just covers but great. A couple aren’t as in par with others but very enjoyable to me. 9/10

more bowlcut british pop. the length of the album is respectful of my finite time on this earth. none of my favorite rolling stones songs are on this. it grew on me and i like it better than the beatles. weak 4 I'm a king bee, walking the dog

Genres: Blues rock, British R&B Formed: London, England in 1962 Run time: 12 songs, 32 min, 56 sec The debut studio album by the English rock band. Spotify: Least popular song: over 1.3M Most popular song: almost 10M plays. Not a massively popular album, given just how influential they would become in Rock. There were two original compositions on the album and the other ten were covers of Blues/R&B standards. They were responsible for bringing predominantly black Blues/R&B music to white British listeners. And we must thank them (and others) for doing that. Most of the tracks on this are covers and have subsequently been covered by lots of artists since. It’s hard to imagine the significance of this album today, but given that the Stones are still around it must have been the start of something special. They have just kept evolving and producing amazing tracks and albums since. They are still touring and this album will be 60 years old next year!!! Listen Again?: Possibly My Rating: ****

This album just screams the 60's in a great way

Vier opgeschoten Engelse knullen die vooral covers brengen van Amerikaanse voorbeelden? Dat kan toch nooit wat worden. Maar het voorgaande jaar bewezen de makers van het album 'Please please me' dat zoiets verkocht als warme broodjes. Dus wilde de platenmaatschappij het wel proberen met Mick Jagger en de zijnen. En de rauwe energie spat eraf, ook al zijn het voornamelijk covers, met Amerikaans klinkende dictie en al. Kun je rustig meerdere keren luisteren, het is niet zo zwijmelig als de collegas van EMI-Parlophone ('Mag ik je hand vasthouden?'). En hierna zou al snel blijken dat ze heren ook zelf nummers konden schrijven.

What a treat. Rolling Stones first album, as far as I can tell.

Today's record is the debut studio album by The Rolling Stones. I don't know any of the songs on this record (at least their versions anyways, with most of them being covers of old blues/R&B hits). Even though this is an album of 95% blues covers, The Rolling Stones were instrumental in introducing this blues music to a younger audience. These guys had the "cool rock star" appearance, and were only ~21 years old during the recording of this album. The Beatles had the appearance of preppy school boys, whereas the Stone's looked like a biker gang. Many of the kids that were listening to these guys in their formative years had never heard of blues music before, and were looking to rebel against their parents neat, clean cut, acoustic music of the 50's. From here, it caused a chain reaction, which resulted in so many acts to come such as: The Allman Brothers Band, The Kinks, and Aerosmith to name a few. Overall, maybe not an amazing debut album as far as creativity is concerned, but absolutely important as the beginnings of something huge to come. Favourite songs: Carol, I Just Want To Make Love To You, Walking the Dog, Route 66, You Can Make It If You Try Least favourite song: Honest I Do 4/5

Best rolling album 4

The debut album from the "Greatest Rock 'n' roll band" is a solid introduction to the band and though it's comprised many of covers, it showcases the raw, enthusiastic sound of a promising bunch of scruffy lads that would make a huge impact on the music history. The performance of these covers is adequate, but the look and sound of the band was unique, and the Stones don't really take off artistically until they find their own style and start writing and performing their own songs. This is a good sampling of their potential and an important album historically and it's an essential listen to hear the band at the beginning before you tackle the rest of their long (and sometimes uneven) discography.

Mick Jagger started to become Mick Jagger already on this album...

Bello! Molto classico!

Loved it!!!

Solid blues rock

En extra poäng för lite banbrytande inom genren

4.0 - I guess I’m a sucker for bright-eyed, bushy-tailed Rolling Stones. No, they didn’t write these songs. Yes, it’s white kids capitalizing on black music. But I like it.

classic

Good basic blues rock. If it was some other band, the album wouldn't be on this list, but I suppose it has historical significance since it is the first Stones album. My favorite track is probably I'm a King Bee (I'm just a fan of this song in general).

Great tunes but did they rip off Black American artists, or bring them to attention? Rock n roll.

I imagine at the time this came out it would have been pretty revolutionary. It is fun and it rocks

What a listener! Great to hear these old blues tracks where the stones got their fame with

Increíble

Genre: Classic rock Review: The origins of one of the best artists ever. And it shows. The tracks here are quite crude and u unassured but the Rolling Stones sound is clearly there. Can't wait to get into more of their albums, sure to come up in upcoming recommendations. Rating: 8/10

7/10. Ah, the Rolling Stones before they gathered any moss.

Our fifth Rolling Stones album and the fourth one I give 4 stars. Again, it's a lot bluesier than their best-known hits and it makes for a very solid, enjoyable album. But it's not amazing either. More of a great background listen than a real headturner.

It's quite bare bones and slight in its way, but you can sense the power and the fun behind all of it. The first Jagger-Richards song is great, and their reading of some of the Blues classics is near-faultless.

Great start to something truly amazing

very 60s rock, seemingly sans the usual psychedelic influences prevalent in the era. I have, embarrassingly, not listened to TRS' early music but do not find it surprising to see them start their discography strongly. Its always refreshing to see an album almost entirely composed of songs just over the two minute mark. no faff no filler, just a group of guys jamming out in the recording studio with raspy vocals, twangy guitar and a healthy amount of harmonica usage. 7/10 'Route 66' & 'I just want to make love to you' - upbeat and vibey, strong openers to an album. 'now I've got a witness' - nice instrumental piece 'little by little' & 'Carol' - some standouts through the album with 'Carol' Being my favourite after 'Route 66'. the album makes me want to be on a road trip, windows down, music blaring driving under the summer sun.

This album was a lot of fun! It was blusier than I expected in some portions, while also sounding more like the beach boys than I expected in others.

Heartfelt covers and all, but the most promising thing here is the Jagger/Richards original "Tell Me." Almost sounds like it could be an outtake from "Aftermath" or "Between The Buttons."

Rolling Stones do Blues/R&B. If this was a one-off band you'd go "Hey Rolling Stones, they did that one album that was pretty good Blues Rock." Unfortunately we know they have much higher trajectory ahead of them, but standalone it's solid and enjoyable. Route 66 is probably the best track.

The only 60s British group that understood the soul of American blues, which was the seed to their understanding of what rock n roll was supposed to be. Loved this collection of blues and rock tunes.

Enjoyable blues/rock and roll album with catchy songs and a great runtime

classic

Lots of Chuck Berry influence (some doo wop and soul as well) in the Rolling Stones' first album. Though most of this album is covers, they are clearly students of the blues. Where the Beatles are polished (and writing their own songs) the Rolling Stones are loose and more interested in getting across a certain attitude. Once again, we see English students influenced by Black American music which is pretty great considering the racial tensions in the US at the time.

Good album.

Classic, old school rock. Didn't hear a song i disliked.

There is something insidious about this British Invasion boys becoming famous off of black music. That said this is fine/good

I really enjoyed this album. Proper old school.

It's a demo tape where they play R&B tunes from other folks. You can hear what they're going to be, but they're not breaking new ground yet. Best track: Walking the Dog

that was easily the best rolling stones album we've had. which is weird because it's basically a covers album.

Episode 15: Scott meets up with Zeb in Thailand. The two of them go out hunting for lady boy fun.

Rating: 7/10 Best songs: I just wanna make love to you, Can I get a witness

This is very cool 60s debut from the Rolling Stones. It's packed with covers though aside from one original track, I don't love this but it was standard in the 60s. One thing I cannot understand is why they put Now I've Got a Witness before Can I Get a Witness??? Haha! Is it just to make people think about their album more? I Just Want to Make Love to You is obviously a banger to the max and I love their version of it in fact I now don't know if I even know a different/original version of that song. The instrumental moments are excellent it's so tight and crisp and I want to dance. Good fun!

An early classic - I kind of like the innocence of this album, its definitely more youthful than later stuff. A great array of originals and covers, bluesy and rocky numbers. Can imagine this was so exciting in 1964 when released!

I loved this. I don't think I've listened to their early stuff much to be honest and this was just really fun

Beginnings of a great bad

Excellent

This was a fun listen! I didn't give it a higher rating because it's all cover songs and I really prefer The Stones' later originals like Let It Bleed and Beggar's Banquet, but it is nice to see how they got their start in becoming music royalty.

I’m intimately connected to this record, and I love what the Stones became but this is all a bit too nice, lacking in menace and threat. They would grow from this and it is far ahead of many 60s debuts at this remove I’m asking where is the edge I love about the Stones?

It's crazy to think that just 4 and a half years later, the Rolling Stones would kick off the best four album run in music history with Beggar's Banquet. Because honestly, there's very little notable about this collection of very straightforward R&B covers. They have no identity of their own yet, no Jagger persona, no Keith groove, no songwriting chops to speak of. This is pre-Stones Stones. Still, its not without merit as a historical curio, but lets be honest, no one *needs* to hear this.

Gran debut, grandes canciones insignia desde un principio Cómo Route 66 que es una gran canción Es un rock and roll clásico con el que de fijo se pasa un excelente rato! No hay más que decir que disfrutarlo de principio a fin, se pasa muy rápido, es un buen álbum, no está lo mejor de los Rolling Stones acá pero de nuevo es un inicio muy cautivador y ya proyectaban en lo que se iban a convertir

It's a classic. Not as memorable as their rivals' debut. But the Stones would definitely find their groove on subsequent releases.

It was alright. Good opener for a new band but not a whole lot of re-playability, 3 stars

Blues rock and rhythm & blues built from raw guitars, driving rhythms, harmonica flourishes, and energetic vocals feels like walking into a crowded pub where an enthusiastic local band is tearing through its favorite records—spirited, authentic, and enjoyable, but rarely transcending its influences. The album captures youthful energy and affection for American blues exceptionally well. As a statement of identity it works; as a collection of songs it can feel more enthusiastic than distinctive.

Such fresh-faced young men on that album cover. Hard to believe Beggars Banquet was only 4 years away. I was never a big Stones guy outside of Let It Bleed and Exile On Main Street (we'll see how I feel about everything in here) and this is kind of an inoffensive debut. It's pure British Invasion but not nearly as captivating as the Beatles. "Mona (I Need You Baby)" opens like "How Soon Is Now" so that makes it my favorite track by default here.

on one hand, this is a fascinating document of how blues and R&B music influenced a new generation of British artists in the 60s in a way that you can really see lead to the development of some true talent and some absolutely classic music. on the other hand, this is an okay covers album.

A breeze of a listen. Understated compared to later albums, and that's just fine.

550+ albums in and this is the first Rolling Stones album I've received. Better yet, it's the very first Rolling Stones album and one I have not yet heard before. Compared to other bands, the Stones debut isn't very remarkable. Before starting this project I never realized how popular blues music was in England in the mid 60s. Most of it, this album included, is inferior to the more authentic blues from the US. Thankfully Jagger and the boys would go onto to do better things but unfortunately their debut just doesn't belong here. Favorite track: Route 66 2.5/5

Joya!

Aight

637/1001 2026.06.16 🌕🌕🌗🌑🌑

this was fine but not as good as their other albums

Def some standard 60's pop, but they've got the stones' edge even if behind bubblegum pop. A just fine start to a great career - even if they just wanted to be the beatles soo bad.

Will there be ten Rolling Stones’ albums on this list? My rough rankings put this debut as the Stones’ tenth best record. It is a solid start for the group, with hints of their greatness, but nothing especially startling. With bands as great as The Rolling Stones, I suppose starting at the beginning is needed for 1,001 Records before you die, however fairness says someone else deserves a chance. The album contains two Stones originals that fit squarely in British Invasion pop. I love “Tell Me”, but a very un-Stonesy track for Mick and Keith’s album debut. “Little by Little” disappeared from all but the most hardcore Stones’ fans minds. The covers run the gamut of nearly every post-WWII blues style, plus early rock and soul. The R&B covers of “Walking the Dog” and “Can I Get a Witness?” are serviceable at best. “Mona” and “Carol” follow the originals quite closely. The band handles the blues numbers better. Musically, hard to find signs of their famed riffs and menacing guitar work. Jagger showed a great ability at louche mid-tempo singing with “Honest, I Do” and “I’m a King Bee.” The latter displayed Jagger’s affinity for Slim Harpo tunes, which came up later in his career. The record outshines nearly all early British Invasion albums, but really why is it here?

An average rock album. In comparison to other Stones records, specifically the prior one on this list (Let It Bleed), this one does not match the power and creativity of those albums. It feels rather basic, which makes sense for a debut album, but doesn't fit with others on this list. You definitely hear attributes that will feature on later Stones greats, but here it's mostly plain to me. Maybe because it's a collection of covers, rather than something original content that builds into a cohesive piece. The only song I found fantastic was "Walking the Dog" while the other songs were good, but much like Please Please Me has something like "Twist & Shout" it also has "Chains" which I think a debut album is supposed to have. More often than not, when a debut album hits it out of the park, it's hard to measure up in the following records. So, I guess, it's good this is lackluster by comparison.

Well… I guess you gotta start somewhere.

It had a hit and was overall a decent listen

This is ok to listen to. But they recorded better records shortly after this one. For historical reasons it’s ok to have it in here.

They definitely got better over the course of their careers Very interesting debut, I’m always a sucker for blues so even though this is basically just a cover album it’s definitely my vibe. Good guitar parts, good song structures, I think they picked a good variety of blues songs where it feels like they actually care about the music rather than cheaply ripping someone off Main problem with this one is do you really prefer Mick Jagger’s vocals over any of the artists that originally did these songs? Like obviously they’re great songs but why wouldn’t I just listen to the originals while the Rolling Stones were still finding their footing? I’m not gonna dock points for it but there’s like 2 original songs in here so it feels less like a debut and more like “here’s a bunch of songs you know in our style” I know these guys get way better over the course of their career, so it’s hard to rate this one too high, but it’s a solid enough display of their talent. Always cool to see where these guys got their start, and even though this wasn’t my favorite album, I really do have a lot of respect for this group and what they do for the genre

Perfectly embodies my feelings about the British Invasion, at least in the early years... English bands get hold of American rock-'n'-roll records, fall in love with the music, and rerecord them. America falls in love with it. Stones big fans of American Rock and blues (hell, they're named after a Muddy Waters song) and that's on display here. Muddy Waters, Bo Diddly, Chuck Berry, and more. Album could have been called Rolling Stones Do An Internship At Chess Records... I especially love Route 66, where it's exceedingly clear Jagger doesn't know the names of the cities in the song he's singing and doesn't have access to a map of the American Southwest. Kinda funny, since A) the song is a classic, and B) it's getting a ton of play right now due to the Route 66 centennial. Stones always loved American music, and you can hear it when they "go back" to their roots on Let It Bleed and Sticky Fingers and others. Not bad, not great.

Not my bag, not at all. I feel like the Rolling Stones definitely have better albums to listen to and this one has nothing to it in all honesty.

Okay, here’s the thing, I expected that there were going to be a few Rolling Stones albums on this list. With this debut album, each member is technically efficient in their respective right from the beginning, and on some level as a Stones fan it was cool to hear the humble beginnings of this group. But that leads us to an undeniable truth, that this is a debut album consisting mostly of cover songs of the blues artists they were influenced by early on in their career, broken up by two original songs that admittedly aren’t well remembered. Technically good and flattering, but not something worth listening to before you die given what the Stones have accomplished in the latter half of the 60s onward. I’d say this album is definitely for the diehard Stones fans. The ones who know what this band are capable of and want to further explore their roots. I know we got some true classics from them coming up on this journey, and this debut unfortunately doesn’t hold a candle to the rest of their career.

Not a huge fan of the group but it's good

Probably not my favorite Stones album, but has some great classics. Being their first album, you get shades of what they will eventually become. I like it well enough to enjoy listening to it, but it doesn't drive me to relisten like some of their other albums or those from other bands at the time.

This is only on the list because of what they became- on its own it’s a mediocre album with a bunch of covers

Fine, but all but one of the songs are covers, and being honest, it probably would be nowhere near this list if it wasn’t for the careers the Rolling Stones went on to have

More Rolling Stones. Never been a huge fan so this didn't really change my mind. Don't really see why it's on the list to be honest as it doesn't feel representative of what the Rolling Stones would become, and they get plenty of other spots on the list to show who they are.

Fine. Nothing special.

Some good stuff

(4/7) average 60s

I actually enjoyed this album and didn't think I would. It's just the classic rock vibe

I'm not sure I get the Rolling Stones. This album is a fine album of mostly blues rock cover versions. Nothing in here, their debut album, to indicate they'd become such superstars. As I write this review, having listened to the album earlier in the day, and given a re-listen to their 2 albums which previously appeared on the list for me, Sticky Fingers & Beggars Banquet to see if I'm judging them unfairly (I'm not) a new Rolling Stones song is playing on the radio, around 60 years later! It's quite hard to fathom. But this album is where it all began, 3 stars from me.

Primarily covers, pleasant enough.

okay

I guess we should all thank Chuck Berry, Ray Charles, Muddy Waters, Little Richard, Isleys etc for spawning all these British bands that wanted to be them in the 60s. Just like I said on Sticky Fingers, they do better than other brit rock acts at playing the blues in a way that doesn't come out limp and soggy. The more r&b/early rock and roll stuff on this album is pretty good too. I think it also ends up at a 3. I very slightly prefer their early stuff to their 70s stuff if this album is any indication. Lotta harmonica, maybe a tad less next time.

It is a lot of cover versions that are not the greatest versions of the originals.

Sure, sounds like the Stones.

Decent enough but forgettable. Looking forward to a more finished article Stones album. 2.5/5.

I enjoyed the songs itself, but most of them I like the original better

Really cool to see the foundation put in place for what they'd become. Seems like a lot of cover songs if I'm not mistaken but they clearly had a little bit of swagger by this point already. Clear to see them getting massive not too much longer after this

Fairly generic blues I think. Quite enjoyed it but I'd say youd struggle to predict these guys would be filling stadiums in 60 years later after hearing this for the first time

Considering this is the Stones, it’s surprising how naive they sound. It’s hilarious to listen to these young guys sing about Route 66, having never been there. They clearly have charm. A sign of things to come. An interesting historical document.

Clasico rolling. Muy bueno

the rolling stones are a blues band. honestly pretty swell tho. favorite song is Tell Me, belongs in some 80's movie's emotional climax. soft 3

Better than I remembered, a bit too jangly for my tastes

well it's the rolling stones. i actually liked it a fair amount but apart from a view songs i never find them very memorable

Nothing of note here really.. it’s fine

Hard to believe these guys are still making new music today. This album sounds ancient.

Nice debut

Vad bra Mick Jagger sjunger, aldrig tänkt på.

Bang average

It was not their best album imo

Very early Stones indeed, before they matured and really found their sound. It’s ok considering it’s primitive rock & roll. Probably my favourite track was Mona, but more out of familiar with the Craig McLachlan version.

The white boys sing the black blues. Look, cool to see how Mick, Keith and Brian got it all started but doesn’t belong in the book.

A solid if unspectacular debut album from one of the greatest bands of all time. Some good standard covers--wow, the Stones only wrote one song on here but it's the best one on the album--that would lead to better things (and albums). Top tracks: "Tell Me (You're Coming Back)," "Route 66," "I Just Want to Make Love to You," "Little by Little"

This is a fine blues album by white British guys, but where’s the Howlin’ Wolf or Muddy Waters on this list?

Turns out all of the Rolling Stones songs I like were on different albums

There are hints of what the Stones will become here but their first album is pretty mediocre. It's mostly covers too so rather uninteresting.

I had no idea they started off so Americana? Kind of embarrassing the Brit’s made the US an influential album?

Hold jeres børn for ørerne! Og for øjnene også! Det her sørens pigtrådsmusik er Djævelens værk! Håret er for langt til at kunne sidde på en god, kristen dreng, der selvfølgelig sover med hænderne over dynen. Debuten fra verdens længstlevende rock-n-roll-band skuffer ikke. Utroligt, der er gået 62 år. Det er altid lettest at forholde sig komparativt til samtiden. Og når vi gør det, så er det her sgu bare mere råt end Beatles. Altså, Keith Richards der agerer arrig bi på 'I'm a King Bee' er sgu da fedt. Der er noget næsten magisk ved at forstille sig en 1,5 watt rørforstærker, der tager livet af en Pioneer Super Tweeter® på fars højttaler. Hør lige guitarens første strum på 'Tell Me'. Jeg gav Rubber Soul (1965) 3.2. Derfor fortjener de rullende sten: 3.5 Det ligger i marginalerne

Hard for me to highly rank albums that consist primarily of covers. Sure, the musicianship is great and the blues sound is, well, perfectly bluesy. Jagger sounds excellent and Keith Richards’ guitar and Watts’ drumming are all awesome. The Stones are a seminal blues rock band and are deserving of all the praise. But again, this album is mostly covers. They show off their talent and you can tell they are bound for greatness on this debut record, but can’t give it anything more than a 3 because it’s mostly not their own.

Solid rhythm and blues inspired rock and roll. I've heard it done by so many other people it lacks the power I am sure it had at the time. I would rather have a Dr Feelgood album.

A good selection of R ‘n’ b covers. Nothing spectacular (and not in the same league as the Beatles debut) but still quite reasonable.

Certainly not their best work and they all covers, but vocals are unmistakably Stones. Dated, but I enjoyed it.

Ils étaient si fougueux, il y a cent ans. 3.49999999 étoiles

Fav- Route 66 3/5

Too many covers to be essential.

Probably the album that first cemented American R&B in British blues rock. Essentially a covers collection show-casing the guitar interplay of Keith Richards and Brian Jones. A portent of what was to come, music shaking the British establishment.

Pretty decent performances of, mostly, rock n roll covers. Clearly trying to work out their identity, in '64 it might have been called a tribute to the original performers. But in today's language there' s just a slight whiff of appropriation. 3*

Classic, and innovative rock and roll. You can definitely tell how each and every one of these tracks have left an influence on the rock genre in general, but me personally I still found it a little uninteresting. But I can still appreciate it for what it is. 6/10. Favorite Song: I'm a King Bee

funny that this is eponymous when it's mostly covers. it's fine. w/e

mostly boring 60s blues rock by white guys but at least it was mercifully short. route 66 is the only song i'd heard going into this and it's also extremely fine. favorites: route 66, i just want to make love to you, carol

We all start somewhere. Blues tracks stolen from the original artists. This album captures a part of the bands roots that many are not aware. Good stuff, but I'm not likely to revisit it. I do wish I could experience it when new, before rock expanded, to get a feel for what it was like to hear at that time.

There are at least 2 better Stones albums to pick than this one. Personal enjoyment: 3/5 Relevance to this list: 3/5

Alright. Jagger’s charisma is undeniable and makes this a lot more fun than it could be.

Mediocre blues rock. I suppose it is included in the 1001 Albums list because their performance was tighter than other bands at the time.

Bunch of kids doing covers

Pretty solid debut. Not too bad considering the year and time and all that. A lot of what feels like covers of Mississippi delta OGs.

A little simplistic but it’s fine. Their later stuff is a lot better.

They’re a pretty good covers band. The originals are better though. Undoubtedly Thor most consistent album

Canciones que están correctas, supongo. Muy de la época. Falta mucha maduración en los Rolling Stones para acercarse a un sonido propio.

Das Debut - noch ziemlich 60er Rock Sound, etwas schrullig 3/5

Eh. It’s cool, but I’m not a big stones guy

Todos os álbuns da época parecem com chuck berry

Roll my stone twin

Yeah, I mean, not super exciting. The songs that they covered ARE real good songs, but there's nothing really original added to it. I think you can sense the Stones sound in this one a little, but this did not really deserve an entry. If we're looking at like significance, sure, but this is not something everyone should hear. It's okay, but the originals are waaaay better. Low 3

It's a lot of mediocre covers. It's fine, and I'm sure it's interesting in the context of the evolution of The Rolling Stones' sound, but on it's own it's only ok.

it's like reviewing an album by the glee cast; it's an album full of covers. perfectly fine covers.

yummy stuff

I have very much the same thoughts as for the debut Beatles album, important in the history of the band more than anything, and thus I question its inclusion on the list. Perhaps there is a debate to be had that the band are important to the history of music and thus, so is their debut but with better albums represented, I’m not sure it’s a strong enough case, particularly as this contains a lot of covers. It’s perfectly fine to listen to but even though I would happily listen again, I won’t be rushing back.

Perfect album for stealing someone’s girl over a milkshake with two straws. Always amazing to see where some of these bands get their start before the psychedelic narcotics kick in.

This was fun to swe how the Stones got their start. Definitely a different sound that what they'd become

s'alright. Decent covers of classic blues songs.

The stones as a covers band - interesting in a historical sense but there’s a lot better in their catalog

Mostly covers on this record, but I can see the appeal of the Stones. Never been a huge fan of them, but also I need to hear some more. Funny that the only Mick and Keith track on the LP is the weakest. Sounds like a response to what was cool or appealing at the time.

Launched the Rolling Stones with a hit album & 62 years later holds up very well. A classic.

This doesn't have any of my favourite tunes from the stones. I'm not a great fan of all the cover versions people used to do back in the day. This was great though as you could hear the craziness of keith richards guitar playing and the incredible range of mick jaggers vocals which is what went on to help them create so many classic tunes

Joo.

love how they sing “baby”..the rest is just ok

its still so incredible to hear TRS and then think... man those guys are still touring. pretty wild that they were part of the original British Invasion of the 60's, and yet they're still here and rocking out. overall, a pretty good album. especially it being their debut. it was fun to listen to, and it was short and sweet. definitely would listen again.

I'm not sure if I was just frustrated when I listened to this album or what, and even though I knew these early British rock groups did nothing but play covers initially, but this album being mostly covers really had some negative influence on my review. Its nice and quick, but with only one original composition, its hard to say this is truly a debut from The Stones. That being said, its still enjoyable and in the sweet spot for length. A two is way too low, but a three seems too high.

Always cool to see where bands got there start. It's not a huge step onto the scene, but more like a demo album. You can here that Rolling Stones sound coming through, but overall there's nothing to write home about on this album.

A pretty vanilla Stones album. It’s loaded with covers, and not particularly great ones at that. The album as a whole isn’t bad, but it doesn’t really inspire much either.

Album 142. The Rolling Stones (https://open.spotify.com/album/0bJMFJ2XQwpO5nKTrYdUtX?si=Np8okdSARE6w1KefJG9xbQ) — The Rolling Stones (1964) Their debut album, hmm. It's okay, a very pleasant listen. Historically interesting, but no real quality value in this. Especially because all but one are covers. 3/5 No liked songs

Ég er meiri Steinaaðdáandi en Bítlaaðdáandi en ég hafði aldrei heyrt þessa plötu. Hún er augljóslega fyrsta platan og þeir ekki búnir að finna hljóminn sinn alveg en það er vottur af honum. Ég mun samt frekar hlusta á seinni plötur með þeim.

It’s important because it’s the first album by the Stones. That said…there are so many better Stones records! Shit, put Goats Head Soup in the book, it’s a much more interesting and enjoyable listen. That said, this album is totally fine and I do like it.

I’m Too Forgiving Of Anything That Comes From The 60s™️ But for real. Every 60s pop band who made it big had an album (or two) where they ripped off blues and music from black musicians who did it 100x better. This is a particularly milquetoast offering from a band who is definitely better than whatever this is. I don’t want to know how many drugs were involved to make Mick Jagger think he should sing blues. This just doesn’t work, and it verges on comical. I’m actually shocked the Beatles had more soul, but at least their attempts at blues didn’t make me cringe. This definitely doesn’t need to be on the list unless it’s a lesson in what not to do from that era. I’m probably being too generous with my rating because it’s The Rolling Stones, but so be it. I’m full of contradictions.

Surprisingly weak.

This was alright

If someone asks Beatles or stones and you prefer Beatles compare this album to please please me. One is miles and above better in my opinion and it’s not this one. This isn’t a terrible album it’s just got a good bit of filler and covers for me. I do like Route 66 cover but not as good as the original and walking the dog is pretty good

It's not bad, but all the classics are not in there. Honestly, I wouldn't listen to it again. 2,5/5.

Another case of putting the debut of a famous UK band I guess because it’s their debut? It’s fine, but nothing special especially in comparison to their later work.

An English Rock band from London, England that seemingly won't ever retire.

Цей альбом має більше історичного значення, ніж якогось новаторського в музиці. Якось пройшов абсолютно повз

You know I haven't listened to the Stones as much as I have the Beatles, and I thought by the time I'd listened to this I would have a better answer in the debate. But sadly I do not. I'm not sure which one I like more even less than ever

Not even close to their best album, but leads shows the blueprint of their musical growth and how far rock transforms through them as a band.

Good

This was decent but I just think The Rolling Stoens aren’t my thing, as much as they are for other people. The production is definitely dated thin, almost skeletal, but there’s something I like about it, how direct and unpolished it is. Mick isn’t fully Mick Jagger yet but you can hear him figuring it out in real time, which is interesting. I didn’t really clock the covers while listening, which says a lot about how naturally they work within this blues sound. Their version of “Route 66” is the one that actually sticks and I enjoyed. Overall it’s cool, historically important, but more of a stepping stone than something I’d return to regularly.

debiutancki krazek stonesow z 64, nie pamietam zebym wczesniej go slyszal, ani nawet kojarzyl jakiegos traka z niego, chyba ze route 66, ktory otwiera plyte gdzies mi sie obil o uszy, ale jest to 32 minutowa kompilacja coverow popularnych kawalkow r&b zza wielkiej wody, chyba nie zabrzmi to zle, jesli powiem, ze jest to dobra translacja czarnej muzyki stworzona przez stonesow, z 12 trakow 11 to covery, a jedynym orinalnym utworem jest tell me autorstwa dueto jaggerowo-richardsowego, dobrze sie tego sluchalo, nawet pomimo niebieskiego odcienia w jakim zostaje czlowiek po takich harmonijkach, ale warto bylo poznac od czego zaczynali jako zespol, bo juz tutaj slychac charakterystyczna energie, ktora czuc zwlaszcza na jaggerowych wokalach i wykorzystaniu mniej oklepanych instrumentow, ktore jednak sa nieodlacznym elementem czarnego brzmienai r&b, ktore zostalo tutaj ladnie oddane, na plejke dodam openingowy route 66 i wspomniany tell me

really interesting to listen to their first - do you judge b/c they are awesome later? or do you evaluate on a run of the mill blues album by some brits. was this groundbreaking in the day or just a first step? anyway, nice to listen to but no need to do more than once.

Speaking from a strictly historical perspective, I think this is kind of a neat listen. I think its status as the first Rolling Stones album is the only thing reason that it is included on the list though. While still a fun listen, this album wasn't anything groundbreaking or special. Just a fun, folksy little album.

Follows the same model as the early Beatles albums but I find it far less interesting. Perhaps it's just that the blues influence is less compelling or sounds more old fashioned. Either way, I'm not sure the first Rolling Stones album is a must-listen. I'm also not a fan of the harmonica

Album #40: The Rolling Stones Genre (W): Blues rock, British R&B Singles: Not Fade Away, Tell Me I have listened to this album once before. Thoughts?: This is the band that would eventually become one of the greatest bands of all time, but here’s their first record, primarily covers aside from “Tell Me”. I’m mainly listening for what makes this album stand out from other British Invasion records around the time. In this album especially, the Stones are sticking to a rock ‘n’ roll root. Good album, however, I know later ones are where the Stones shine. Favorite songs: Now I’ve Got a Witness, Little by Little, Carol, Tell Me

Some solid bluesy covers and interesting to hear the early Stones. Not something I would ever feel the need to return to, though. RYM: N Saved a song: N

Much more enjoyable than some of their later albums. I'm starting to feel like Jagger and Richards are actually a bit overrated as far as songwriting goes, as the covers here are much more enjoyable than a lot of their stuff. Does feel more like a demo than a polished LP, but that's probably half the vibe. It's rough and ready, but gives some impression of why they were popular. Would I choose this over any of the artists they covered? Probably not, but it gets a 3, which is more than I gave Exile on Main St.

none of the songs really stood out to me

Did not believe this was the Rolling Stones at first - so different than the songs I know from them. Loved the cover of Route 66!

Solid blues fare….but adjusted to a 3.5 rounded down because it’s a bunch of covers

It's pretty middle of the road.

Great debut but better things were to come

yeah, alright. the inaugural album from the stones is certainly an album you should listen to before you die

Never heard The Rolling Stones first album? Beatles vibes for sure, fun to listen to! Also, the Rolling Stones wrote I Just Wanna Make Love to You?!

If you've spent any time listening to the blues music that inspired this album (more on that in a moment), it's impossible not to hear this as a cleaned up version of some things that were already going on in America (and had been for a few decades). That it's almost all covers is, at least, somewhat direct and honest. And it's a damn sight more true than any of the shite than hacks like Pat Boone turned out. On the one hand, it's telling that the British (original) version of this contains 'Mona', by Bo Diddley, rather than 'Not Fade Away', the Buddy Holly song that it inspired. That clavé beat (a triplet followed by a couplet, all spanning two bars) came to the US by way of Cuba and underpins a huge amount of rock & roll. The Jagger-Richards song that features on this one ('Tell Me') is kind of boring. Very Mamas And The Papas or maybe the Byrds. It's fine but serves as a strange prelude to what would ultimately be a prolific songwriting partnership of distinctly different works. Anyway, as an album, it's OK. I'd recommend looking for the original versions of all these songs. I don't hate covers -- the tradition of iterating songs profusely has served the folk, jazz and blues traditions very well. You can absolutely read this album as being in conversation with the American Blues tradition, I just think it's an inferior brand in most of the instances on display here. As an artifact of the evolution of an important band from the last half of the 20th century, it's essential listening. I'd say that they get better at loosening up and 'feeling' the blues on later albums. 'Mona' feels the best, among all of these (and, to wit, sounds like later, better Stones). Overall, this sounds a bit like some British school boys heard some great blues records and tried to play those sounds 'properly' according to their formal training. There's a little truth to that. On the other hand, it did help to bring Blues music to a wider audience, so we'll not leave that part off. I promise, the Stones get better. 3/5

I loved hearing this ancient relic. The Rolling Stones have come a long way. I would definitely choose to listen to a later album.

Of its time, the covers generally are good versions or in some cases improved versions of the originals and the 1 Jagger/ Richard’s song is one of the stronger on the album but I just can’t get excited about this era of British Invasion rhythm and blues. Objectively a good album but not my wheel house. 2.8

It's ok. There are other stones albums I would far rather listen to though.

i need to admit i've always thought the rolling stones was like a 70's-80's glam rock-y band so listening to this album has probably saved me from some future trivial humiliation. that being said i don't MIND the rock and roll/blues-y vibes but it's generally just not really my cup of tea

1 Lied fand ich gut (Tell me), ansonsten nichts besonderes.

Wie das erste Beatles Album wäre es vllt nicht auf der Liste, wenn die Band danach nicht so explodiert wäre. Aber der Sound ist voll i.O.

des sons iconiques, mais pas du tout mes favoris de leur part

The humble beginnings.

Not my favorite 1964 debut album. But it's good. Stones have always been kinda meh but this is just a good blues rock album.

Had never heard a full album before, just the hits. Better than expected, though I much prefer The Doors if we’re talking rock of this era.

Селфтайтл альбом-сборник каверов в качестве дебютника - это интересно, необычно и точно стоит того, чтобы послушать ради ознакомления и понимания, чем вдохновлялись Ролинги на старте.

I like this. pretty classic.

Their “Not Fade Away” kicks Grateful Dead ass. And “Tell Me” has an uncharacteristic doo woo vibe that made it perfect for the Mean Street soundtrack. ButMick himself said it was pointless to listen to him doing “I’m A King Bee” when you could listen to Slim Harpo. Same for Jimmy Reed, Muddy Waters and Marvin Gaye. Better things ahead

I think the most interesting thing about this is it happens to be by the rolling stones. Nothing particularly special otherwise 2.5*

Pretty good but also pretty forgettable.

I mean it’s alright

This album didn't seem too original. Feels like they hadn't found their sound yet.

5/10

Hey, you Iickle witty bitty baby stones, you’re so cute koothchie kootchie koo. Sounded good for what it was.

British prep school brats sing the blues!

I didn't think i'd like this album as much as i did. It genuinely surprised me how fun it was. route 66 is a banger.

i mean its the stones, not the best of the stones but the stone nonetheless

First rolling stone album I’ve heard not bad, definitely a different type of vibe than what I am used to but I liked it. It’s definitely that 60s rock style

Debiera conocer más de la época en la que este álbum salió para entender si estamos ante un rock novedoso como no se hacía hasta ese entonces, o es algo más del montón. Porque de momento me parecen buenas canciones de rock y ya. Asi que, mientras tanto, 6/10

it is a good album but not something i would usually listen to

Not one of the Stones albums I thought would come up, of course it's important and shows their influences through the tracks they covered along with their first self penned song Tell Me. This is the UK version so it doesn't include Not Fade Away (shame). Therefore there's much in the way of originality here, but there is a well drilled great band obviously obsessed with the music they are finding and finding. Soon they will be writing some even better songs themselves, and that is what we really have to hear before we die.

Solid album of mostly blues and R&B covers. Nowhere near their best

If it’s good enough for the Beatles to debut with an album of mostly covers, then it’s good enough for the Stones. Raunchy and raucous it makes for a good time. It’s mostly fun if ultimately slight.

rock, 1964 -> 3

An overall solid debut, I suppose, but it's impossible to listen to this without thinking about the 60 years that came after it (including original, genius Rolling Stones songs). Is there a single song on here that would be in the "Rolling Stones Top 100 songs"?

Cool album art, but not sure what an album of average cover songs adds to the ecosystem

The recording sounds old, but some of their earlier tracks were still great. Some tracks have a bit of a doo-wop sound. The album was pretty OK overall.

Album of rock covers - no real evidence of the iconic band that would soon emerge

3,4 - Das Album hat schon mega Klassiker, aber auch viel Gedöns. Man kann aber schon erahnen, in welche Richtung sich die Band entwickelt. Highlights: Carol, Tell Me

It wanders through a style. At times it’s enjoyable, at others it overstays. Wonder what some variation would sound like.

Like the beatles early albums, lots of early rock and roll drawn straight from 50s rock standards and people like Fats Domino. Solid but probably won't be on my usual listens.

The Rolling Stones was a decent little album. It is pretty easy to tell that this is the first album by this band especially seeing as a good majority of the songs here are covers by various R&B artists. I thought that these songs worked pretty well with The Rolling Stones' psychedelic rock style. It also does really seem to have that rough 60s production style which i thought sounded fine here. Some of the songs did get a bit samey but thankfully, since there is not many of them and they are all pretty short mostly clocking in at 2 or 3 minutes, i didn't find this to be too much of an issue. I thought this album was a pretty good start for this band. Best Song: Carol Worst Song: I Just Want To Make Love To You

Cool to hear these early days. Some good songs for sure

Glad the days of record executives co-opting other people’s songs and making white kids play them are over

Feel like this one didn’t need to be here, they’re just doing rock and roll / blues standards, sounds pretty good sure low 3

buncha damn songs

This album mainly contains covers. That's a good thing. Not so many sub-par songs like on their own albums (besides obviously also a handful of absolutely great songs). It's more blues than most rock 'n roll and more rock 'n roll than most blues from that time. It must have been the sweet spot back in the day. It's OK, but no one NEEDS to hear this today.

Proto Stones.

The Rolling Stones' debut is honestly a pretty underwhelming experience considering that only 5 years later they would go on to release some of the most important records in rock history. But they started out in much the same position as The Beatles, making a short but sweet album of covers that's mildly entertaining and actually quite fun, but nowhere near the standard of what they would manage to achieve later in their career.

3.5

This thing just deleted my review! Damn! Ok - so. This is totally fine. The performances are generally good - though Mick sounds painfully bashful at times, and Keith completely squanders a couple of solos here and there. Their only original composition is pretty lame. But yeah. A bunch of British dudes cosplaying as Chicago bluesmen works better than you'd think it would. THREE STARS

Clearly released before they were famous

This probably made it on to the list for its historical significance. But surely only white blues purists/those people who insist Brian Jones was the real genius of the outfit/professional contrarians would argue this was the best Stones’ album?

who does this guy think he is

It was fine. Nothing special

Not their best album by a big margin

British band making kinda bad American sounding music for some reason

This is getting a generous 3 because of the influence. The Stones have much better and more creative work.

I like the album but it's just covers so I can't give it any higher than a 3

Not what I was expecting but not bad

OG rock album. Not sure I love the Rolling Stones. Don't really know why either. Not a bad album, but I also don't need to listen to it again or buy it.

3.0 / 5 This is the second Stones album in this list for us. Humble beginnings for one of the biggest bands to ever do it. I knew this album before, so it's nothing new to me that all songs but one are covers. Given that many Blues songs have been covered by a barrage of people over the decades, it's honestly not the worst move since the songs were already known. Keep in mind that many famous groups started out like this. Musically it's not as easy to rate as you might think. Since it's basically all cover songs, you can't really judge the writing and lyrics, but only the execution. That in itself isn't bad, but doesn't sound special for anything made in '64 either. The Stones' later albums carry much more individualistic motives, but this one is pretty okay as a debut album. All in all the quintessential 3.0 / 5, not bad and you can listen to it pretty well in the background, but nothing groundbreaking either. Basically a sort of gatekeeper for Blues music that separates the good albums from the bad ones.

It sounds like older 1950s or 1960s rock. Very like early Beatles almost.

3.5

War okay

early days, very bluesy!

On the surface I really enjoyed listening to this. I love the overload on the vocals that gets to that natural overdrive. I really like Richard’s guitar. He has such a great feel and solid riffs. BUT tough to go too high when this is essentially an album of covers. Similar to a greatest hits or live album, how do you rate that? For that I’m going lower. Will be interesting if Metallica garage days shows up and how I’ll feel about that 🤔 2.75

Pure rock

Like it 3/5

when they learned black music

Classic blues which formed the basis for some fabulous rock and roll over the years and original songs , however this album in my opinion is not their best work and any number of their albums should have been picked over this one

The band started out as a blues cover band, but it worked.

It stood out to me how close the sound to prime Stones right out of the gate. A little less swagger from the Glimmer twins but you can tell they’ve got something special. The production really hurst the album, they sound like they’re performing in a tin can. It would be interesting to hear them do the same songs 3 or 4 years later properly produced.

2.6 I ended up just going through the original versions of the songs that were covered. The stones didn't do any favours really to those. I guess it just made it a bit more accessible for us white folks. Never listened to slim harpo before so that was a good avenue to go down. I cant listen to Carol and not think of the scene from Hail, Hail Rock and roll, watching chuck berry get all pissed off at Keith Richards over the intro

Giving beach boys / beetles but good!

tame/lame

Pretty good album, I'm sure there are better rolling stone albums I have not listened to extensively yet. Still a good listen

Good, raw rnb good guitar and jagger. Their first album.

Nothing more then you'd expect from a band like this. Its value lies in its historical influence. If you like the genre you'll find the core of it here, otherwise it'll be a boring listen in 2025. 3/5 Route 66 - Good vibes but nothing crazy. 6/10 I Just Want To Make Love To You - Energetic, the musicianship of the group shows here. Not my cup of tea but I definitely love to hear it on the radio today. 6/10 Honest I Do - Intresting slower song, but in the end basically the same stuff as the other songs. 7/10 Mona (I Need You Baby) - Different from the other songs. I think willingly repetitive and with a leitmotiv that today seems kinda boring. Respect but nothing much. 6/10 Now I've Got A Witness - Stereotypical?. Maybe influential at the time, but reviewing it now I think its value is in its historical relevance maybe. 6/10 Little By Little - Still rock and roll?, nothing to add. 6/10 I'm A King Bee - More intresting guitar and bass work here, still same rythmic work. 7/10 Carol - same?. 6/10 Tell Me - I like this one, kind of a ballad (?), maybe not (?). 7/10 Can I Get A Witness - Same as all the others. 6/10 You Can Make It If You Try - in the "slower" category of songs in this albums, less intresting. 6/10 Walking The Dog - Funny. 8/10

01) Route 66 - 7,5 02) I Just Want to Make Love to You - 7,5 03) Honest I Do - 6,5 04) Mona (I Need You Baby) - 7,0 05) Now I've Got a Witness (Like Uncle Phil and Uncle Gene) - 5,5 06) Little by Little - 6,5 07) I'm a King Bee - 6,0 08) Carol - 6,0 09) Tell Me (You're Coming Back) - 7,5 10) Can I Get a Witness - 6,0 11) You Can Make It If You Try - 6,0 12) Walking the Dog - 6,0 TOTAL: 6,50 (65/100) Current ranking: 505/725

This isn't bad, but the only thing that makes this album important is that it's the debut album by The Rolling Stones. It's almost entirely covers, and none of them are bad, but they're also nothing to write home about either. It's a perfectly cromulent album of coversongs performed by a bunch of musicians who went on to create much more interesting and important music later on in their career.

Bueno

A lot of pleasant songs

Not bad, but I’d guess it’s not their best either. Just okay.

Route 66 was a standout on this mediocre album.

meh

Whilst its interesting as a starting point to see where they began and clearly they would go onto to much better things i am not sure what is largely a covers album should on the list.

The Rolling Stones It’s not brilliantly recorded, the covers are (from today’s perspective) pretty routine, it doesn’t stand up that well to the Beatles, the Who and even in parts the Kink’s debuts, and if you didn’t know what they would become you might struggle to differentiate this from many of the other also rans in the blues boom. However it does have charm. You can hear them all feeling their way and finding their feet, and you can see that the elements so integral to success are there; Charlie’s drumming, Mick’s louche vocal delivery and charisma, and the interplay of two guitars. And their reverence for the blues singers (and Chuck Berry) they cover is clearly apparent. I love Tell Me, and as the one proper original it hints at their songwriting to come, eschewing the blues on the rest of the album for some loose pop-folk-rock with a sinister hint to it, and I love the backing vocals in the chorus, a bit all over the shop but they offer a peek at the woozy dishevellement to come in later years. As an historical document it's interesting, as 30 minutes of music it is definitely patchy, some of the covers are great, but some are a little forgettable, but it all slides by with a nice, naive charm, with some interesting things happening around the edges. I think that all leads to it being a solid 3 . 🪨🪨🪨 Playlist submission: Tell Me

This primarily offers artefactual interest rather than lasting musical value. This is all a tribute rather than creating anything new. That being said, most tracks have a great early blues sound with crisp production, making this superior to the work of many bluesicians of the time. But the album content is a far cry from the output of The Beatles or even The Kinks. It took The Stones a long time to catch up; the Jagger/Richards partnership didn't truly hit its stride until Aftermath in 1966. ​The album's original compositions are weak. Keef is primarily focused on mimicking Chuck Berry, and had not yet discovered the defining open-G tuning. ​Although there are few signposts of the songwriting prowess to come, the album definitely possesses a freshness in its sound, demonstrating the work of a very tight band finding its voice.

It's crazy that the first Stones song on the first album is so mid. Overall this was good and definitely showed peeks at the legends they would become. This album was pretty good, but doesn't really feel like a "classic"

I like early Stones more than early Beatles. This is totally fine, if a bit braindead at times.

Yeah, it's the Rolling Stones.

What's with all the covers lately? Sheesh! 3

More than any of the Stones' other records, their debut suffers from being very, very derivative. The fact isn't helped by nearly all tracks being covers – and some of the covered artists being better choices than others. (A Phil Spector original? Seriously?) And due to the very short track lengths, you start to feel the sluggish pace of the album before you've even hit the halfway point. Every song has the same outdated rock feel that the vast majority of British Invasion bands clung to (or maybe it's just the only British sound that sold well to the Americans in the early 60s). One thing's for sure: if all their records had been this bog-standard, the Stones absolutely wouldn't have made it big. They really stepped up their creative game in the latter half of the decade, but in '64, the band clearly relied on marketing to make it to the big leagues. Even the album's alternative title, "England's Newest Hit Makers", leaves a bad taste in the mouth. Not only are they not "making" the hits at all (in contrast to the Beatles' A Hard Day's Night album released around the same time), but they're being touted as the latest new fad before they're a fad at all. Feels a little tacky. Route 66 is just a standard blues rock number, but Jagger delivers it with enough passion to make it a standout. Pretty obvious why it's the most streamed song on the Spotify album. Now I've Got A Witness is essentially the instrumental version of Route 66, harmony-wise, though it's worth pointing out the rapid, soft guitar arpeggi in the first half, replaced by a twangier electric guitar solo halfway through. Cool stuff. (I'm surprised Nanker Phelge – a.k.a. the band itself – was able to claim songwriter credit on a standard blues instrumental. Don't thousands of other 50s and 60s releases sound near-identical?) Mona (I Need You Baby) has a distinctive percussion-guitar combo that creates an interesting sort of proto-psychedelia feel. It provides some relief from the surrounding tracks that act as a constant barrage of bluesy blueness. Annoyingly, though, some of that barrage is genuinely really strong. Carol, despite being a carbon copy of Roll Over Beethoven and countless other Chuck Berry(+contemporaries) numbers, is great. There's a reason the song style is copied so much. 3/5 Key tracks: Route 66, Mona (I Need You Baby), Carol