mine came perfect from Amazon, clean them in my ultrasonic and used rice paper sleeves, no complains, all sounds great

I got mine perfect for half price because somebody returned it. It's perfect Thanks for returning!

Everyone else paying big bucks for this 15 album box set already know what to expect, as far as musical content goes. Anyone not sure about 12X5 or December’s Children being their cup of tea would have listened to those albums on Spotify or Apple Music first. That you chose to audition those titles on a costly box set like this…you’re telling the world that you have no common sense.

@juliosanchez95

Ай бұрын

Auditioning these titles with Amazon's easy return policy is great and also telling the world you are an idiot,

@SamWesting

Ай бұрын

It’s this kind of irresponsible consumer behavior that increases the price of the vinyl hobby for everyone. Proud of yourself?

I don’t think the early Stones material is as bad you think it is, but agree 100% on the quality of sleeves, booklet, etc.

Early Rolling Stones songs are fantastic Mercy Mercy and Hitch Hike are excellent. YOU are not a real Fan… Please Stop complaining 🎉

@juliosanchez95

Жыл бұрын

I guess I'm a "fake" fan and thanks for clicking on a video with rant in the title and then complaining about it

Their early songs, for me, give you historical perspective of how the band progressed...their fascination with blues and rhythm and blues.

@juliosanchez95

Жыл бұрын

They never really out grew their fascination.

@anthonyaswe4174

19 күн бұрын

@@juliosanchez95 Yes they did--I understand that there is a 'straighter line' to the progression of the Stones as writers/composers than some others, but the notion that they're 'just an r 'n b/blues cover band' is a lazy reaction that doesn't recognize the broad and wide range of great material they've produced. In fact, what may be most striking about their earlier work is how much more REAL their blues music became by '68-'69--the blues they were playing by then seemed strikingly 'lived in' for a group of 24 year-olds.

I can't complain, the only thing I did was change the inner sleeve to the one's I like I'm keeping mine

Your subscribers missed you Mr Sanchez glad you’re back

I' m really happy with my box. No seamsplit whatsoever, plan gorgeous vinyls and the sound is great to my ears. Didn't hear one positive word during whole video. Obviously you're not a Stones fan, you can tell by seeing this video. You compare everhing to The Beatles, so odd...

I agree, they should have done a hard covered book with better articles and more pictures. There are tons of music journalists who could have contributed for a better book. Second, they did the bare minimum packaging. Bare minimum packaging to be "green"....but then energy is wasted when all the people have to ship their damaged sets back. They did make an attempt at protecting it, but the foam inside the shipping box was about half the thickness of the Beatles Box and the outer cardboard was the thinnest cardboard I've ever seen. Ridiculous. My box did come undamaged, but I think I was just lucky, considering what I've seen here on youtube.

To me beggars is better in mono. Even if its a fold it just a better experience for me. However thats just me and as patrick swayze said in the movie road house, “ opinions vary”. You have make a good argument for not wanting this set.

I agree with most of your points, although I don't think that there are any bad tracks on the first Stones albums, but I'm a fan... My biggest beef with this box, as you also mentioned, is the inclusion of US and UK versions of the same album. I would have much preferred to only have the UK LPs plus a bonus disc with all the single tracks from the US versions as well as single-only tracks such as Jumpin' Jack Flash. That way, instead of 16 we would have been given 9 LPs, which could have made the price considerably lower. It's a money grab. But even rather than having only the box set with these mono LPs I would have liked to have the opportunity to buy each LP individually, but it seems they don't make them available. I assume it's because then there would be considerably less people wanting to buy the whole box set. Let's say you only want seven of the albums because you already own the others or are not interested in them, calculating a price of 30 bucks for an individual LP, it would only cost you 270 instead of over 300 or 400 bucks, depending on your location. Like I mentioned before, it's a money grab. Having said all that, I'm quite happy with the sound quality of my discs and that's my main reason for getting them. Yes, there are some warped LPs in my box as well, for which I use a record clamp, and I immediately exchanged the paper inner sleeves with polylined sleeves, but at least these things don't impact the listening experience.

I bought the first issue (black vinyl) of this as an Amazon pre-order from the UK. When it arrived (from overseas), the outer box was trashed, probably because some genius had tossed it into an over-sized shipping box with NO protection other than a few shreds of bubble wrap. I contacted Amazon and demanded a replacement AND that they waive any requirement that I return the box. They agreed and sent a replacement, which arrived in perfect condition (and, no seam splits either). So I ended up with two copies of the LPs, and one damaged box. AND it all cost a lot less than what the candy-coloured new version is going for...

Man that sucks man, sorry to hear that.

Recently have bought five new half-speed masters of Stones albums --- all of which were dish-warped. Two of those were bought from the official Roliing Stones site! They seem to have some kind of problem at the moment. But 99% of all new vinyl is warped -- due to the trend of shrink-wrapping (whilst the vinyl is still soft). But what are you going to do? :0/

Few of the 1960's originals had flipback sleeves.

Okay, this is a little too whiny, dude. This box set is pretty damn great. It was well packaged, the music (almost entirely) sounds fantastic, the covers are sturdy and the artwork looks pretty damn good despite not having the negatives for most of them, and the decision to include both the US and UK versions is pretty damn solid. I wish we had that for the Beatles. And yes, I agree that it sucks to not have the lenticular cover, but I guess they want people to get the 50th anniversarie one or something. The Stray Cats double LP is cool, though. It's great to scoop up all the songs that were left hanging in the ether. I can't believe you got me repping for fucking ABKCO out of all companies. Soundwise, the only issue I encountered was a little bit of surface noise with the "gold" colored vinyl. I think that giving it that speckled look may have affected it. The silver LP only had a bit of surface noise on the first track, the rest played fine. The single version of "Street Fighting Man" from Stray Cats sounds horrible. I don't think they have the master of that particular mix. Even the streaming version sounds like that. But all in all this is a fantastic colored re-issue of the 2016 box. Lastly, Beatles maniacs are in deep need of a reality check. The Stones wrote "As Tears Go By" a whole damn year before "Yesterday"; the Kinks experimented with raga way before the Beatles; the Stones released a psychedelic song as a single ("Paint It Black") before the Beatles; "Play with Fire" from Out of Our Heads and "Lady Jane" from Aftermath had that Elizabethan bullshit English bands were going for way before Paul really went into his granny music phase to try and do the same; and Between the Buttons with its psychedelic pop sound came months before John and Paul inserted themselves with their pop take of the genre. What's the fucking point of all this? Simply, that the narrative that the Stones were following the Beatles is just that, a narrative by fanatics of the latter based on nothing. And I'm not saying the Beatles were following the Stones either. All of these bands were existing in the same scene and they were all influencing each other to a certain extent. There's even a musicologists that has posted his college lectures about the era here on KZread, and in them you can clearly see when songs were recorded and released. The only thing that fake-ass narrative does is annoy people like myself, so congrats on that, I guess, because it annoyed the hell out of me.

@juliosanchez95

Жыл бұрын

Why would you click on a video that has "rant" in the title and then whine about it.

I agree with you totally.

I have been collecting vinyl since the 70s and in the mid-80’s went to CDs. I returned to vinyl in 2009 and have been lately becoming increasingly frustrated with the quality control of vinyl and as a result am abandoning the format and returning to CDs. The record companies are screwing over the consumer and bravo to you for returning your disappointing boxset.

@jimhines5145

Жыл бұрын

Returning to CDs? That format is pretty much dead me thinks.

We NEVER buy our vinyl from Amazon. We would rather buy from an independent record store-period. First of all, we know we’ll get it, second, we can inspect it before we buy and third-we’re shopping LOCAL. As far as this box set-pass. Although we are sympathetic regarding your experience, how disappointing. Thanks for sharing brother.🎧

I bought this the first time it was issued since I'm a huge Stones fan and have seen them live more than any other band. That said, this release was pretty much panned during that release due to many of the issues you bring up. Probably the biggest complaint was that the Beatles mono was sourced from analog with no digital step as opposed to this having a DSD step. I tend to agree that the Beatles mono set is by far the best of the 2 releases. Since then however there has been some kind of mystique around this set and it exploded in value on the secondary market. That hype probably spurred the release of this color variant.

I remember that in the 2016 edition several persons have done comparison with the Beatles box and I decided not to go forward to added it to my collection. Now i’m regretted, because as mentioned in several places original mono copies of this are extremely hard to get and the prices absolutely nuts. I could catch this at 310 € at Fnac Portugal (with a 25% discount), and for me it’s a steal! Where can I get this for this value!? Nowhere…

I heard that many of the tracks were stereo fold downs not from the mono master tapes.

I have the black vinyl boxset.Their early albums are pretty much compilation.I was a child in the sixties.I still enjoy all their records.Beware of ABCKO.

Didn't you steal the chipmunks?

Set sounds great, but the quality control on packaging was completely absent. Filthy records, too. No noticeable warping for me. And I like getting the UK and the US editions in the set. Yeah, I agree that the cost was a bit much for what you get, but I'll be keeping mine because the records sound good.

Well, I could go on for a while myself, but, as a Stones loyalist, I was disappointed at elements of the package-mainly the quality of the artwork work. The reproduction that Abkco did for the SACDs in 2002 was extremely sharp and detailed. I don’t know why the cover pics on both the CD and vinyl box sets were so poor. Especially the first album and Between the Buttons-both striking, iconic images of the band that became grainy and poorly saturate’s on these box sets. I bought the black vinyl edition in 2016 and had no issue with damaged product or warping, and the inner sleeves were polylined white paper-the colored vinyl is paper only. And the booklet is disappointing too-yes, they should have done a hardcover book and had more interesting liner notes, rather than a run of the mill Wikipedia like entry from Dave Fricke. And if you think these sleeves are bad, they are solid compared to the flimsy cardboard used in the CD set-very thin, with the glued edge separating on several of mine, and no sleeve on the CD whatsoever-no mini poly sleeve, nor any attempt to reproduce the original inner sleeves. I don’t know why other than Abkco’s cheapness-the Stones themselves should really have ownership of that content. However I do not have a problem with including both versions of Aftermath-as they sound like very different albums to me. The US version is darker and more brooding, while the UK version has a poppier feel-plus I love the different pics each edition has, and find them both very striking in their own way. The fact that Jagger/Richards didn’t create an album of all original material until Aftermath-yet Lennon/McCartney reached that benchmark 18 months earlier-so be it. It’s not something I think they deserve to be trashed for, in and of itself. And yes, I’ve often had issues with their song choices on the early albums-especially since their live sets and early period demos had much tougher blues material in their repitoire, rather than the more commercial R ‘n B and soul covers they opted for. I don’t know if the motivation there was to keep the records more commercially sounding, or pressure from Andrew to include more popular material, since Jagger/Richards were just developing as songwriters. No, I really can’t stand their cover of Under the Boardwalk. You can throw in Good Times and Can I Get A Witness as well. But I cannot stand the Beatles covering drivel like ‘Til There Was You and Chains, as well. I mean, I have no use for a single measure of those tunes, either. So, I think it fair to acknowledge those first few Beatle albums were dinged with a few questionable clunkers as well. And I find Stray Cats an excellent listen! I mean, if you’re giving me Not Fade Away, Fortune Teller, 19th Nervous, Sad Day, Who’s Driving Your Plane, Bye Bye Johnny, Loving You Too Long (a superb soul cover), We Love You, and Dandelion, one of the most gorgeous expressions of baroque pop done by ANYBODY in that era??? Surely no complaints from me there.

Julio' you are better off buying the Mone CD Box Set just to have the Mono Remasters Abkco is so cheap on packaging their Box set specials I am Happy with original ' 1986 and 2002 - 2022 vinly releases . 👍👍

As I hear you I wonder why you have this set if the early stuff overall is not your taste. To me it's an era of the band that shows the start with for my taste good renditions of songs the Stones liked themselves of artists they respected. The damaged albumcovers are a pity and bad luck for you. I have a high number copy with better poly-lined innersleeves. I do agree about the booklet and about missing the lenticular "Satanic Majesties request" The Vinyl sounds great, I was lucky to have non warped . The heirs of Allen Klein/ABKCO could have done more to make the box to better or maybe perfectio. The boxes that the Rolling Stones put out themselves (Rolling Stones records label) are really great quality, higher level but still I'm happy with that mono-box because the early music suits me well. I hope you will have more luck and to enjoy maybe the 50 year edition of Their Satanic/Beggars/Let it bleed 👍💪👍

8 of my records was either warped or bowed 😠

The albums represent the UK and US output of the band before they had their own label. All of these albums are under the ownership and control of ABKCO. The Stones lost all the rights to Allen Klein in the sixties which guarantees none of these reissues are done with extra tracks or any further input from the band. This is why the collection stops with Let It Bleed.

@juliosanchez95

Жыл бұрын

It stops with Let it Bleed because thats the last mono (fold down) album

MR SANCHEZZZZZZZZ

If the box set is $375, like mine was, each album is $23. Not a bad price at all in 2023. The Beatles set was a similar price but also about 10 years ago. Not defending the flaws but more just defending the price. Especially compared to RECENT other box sets, like the Revolver set. THAT was overpriced for 4 records.

@juliosanchez95

Жыл бұрын

the problem is you are getting a lot of albums that repeat tons of songs and that you would probably not buy if sold individually (choosing to cherry pick the titles instead)

@sethallison5682

Жыл бұрын

@@juliosanchez95 yeah that’s a valid point. Me personally, I like to have the us and uk versions of everything (when applicable). I already do with the Beatles but was having a hard time finding everything in good shape with the stones. This for me is a perfect box set, but I get why it’s excessive for most. They really should also sell these albums individually.

blame ABKO

From what I have seen as far as unboxings and reviews you are in the minority which you have the right. Most I have see have been positive and pointed out minor things like the sleeves etc. other than that I have not seen or read anything else about it.

I think you're a little too harsh on the early Rolling Stones' albums. I play a few of them a lot. "The Rolling Stones, Now!", the UK "Out Of Our Heads" and "The Rolling Stones". They do have some filler, but not as much as some other '60's artists. I'd rather The Stones covered soul and blues songs, than terrible songs by the Brill Building writers. Even Mick Jagger himself once said that he wondered why people would listen to his covers of blues and soul songs, when the great originals are out there to hear. They aren't usually as good as the originals, but they're still great songs. Also, I don't think it's fair to compare The Rolling Stones to The Beatles. The Beatles had two of the greatest guys who ever made and wrote rock music. Of course they stand ahead of all other groups from that era. I'd compare The Rolling Stones to groups like The Beach Boys, The Byrds, The Lovin' Spoonful', The Who and The Animals. And The Rolling Stones' albums fall right in line with those groups. The Beatles were very special, they were far ahead of the pack. As for the "In Mono" box set itself, I got away pretty unscathed. No seam splits on any jackets or on the box. And all my records are perfect, except "The Rolling Stones No. 2". It's a little "dished". And that's a very common problem with the LP set. I agree that The Stones drastically jumped in quality, starting with "Beggars Banquet", but the earlier albums aren't as bad to me as you think. I think they're typical mid '60's rock albums.

The idea was to get every 60's Stones recording in mono in this box, hence the duplications of albums. But anyway, you knew that going in and if you didn't, that's on you. Personally, I love having both versions. If your package wasn't packed properly and arrived damaged, you have every reason to be annoyed. Is the intent of this video to trash the Stones or the box set or Amazon? Maybe all three. What a waste of whiney time.

@juliosanchez95

Жыл бұрын

Thank you for clicking on a video with "rant" in the title and then whining about it

@crichards1986

Жыл бұрын

@@juliosanchez95 There is a clear distinction between a rant and whining. You clearly fall in the latter. Go back on hiatus.

Got mine from ABCKO came in much better packaging no complaints but it’s not the Stones that had any say in this sorry to say

Dude, the two albums that you liked most BB and LIB werent even released as mono albums back in the day. The whole boxset somehow stinks. Instead of going back to original artwork and doing things right, they just throw together all they could find. And color vinyl just does not belong to a record that was issued first in the sixties. So it has something cheap to it, even at the price they charge. No comparison to the Beatles mono set. That was a work of love and passion. I got The Rolling Stones mono set as CD because of the rather good sound quality … And the songs? Well, yes, the RS were a Blues Cover Band in their early days, as John Lennon puts it.

@juliosanchez95

Жыл бұрын

agreed

This is so Lana del Rey kizzy grant vinyl

A lot of this criticism is legit. But ABKCO doesn't have a lot of options when it comes to a box set like this. Stones don't want to "help" the company at all and don't want any outtakes from the period released as long as ABCKO own these rights - they have a veto right! So ABKCO cannot re-arrange this period for a smarter release - they are stucked with UK/US albums where a lot of the material is released twice. Even if ABCKO wanted to do something about they can't without the bands blessing. For UK consumers it makes little sense to get the US albums even for US costumers it makes little sense because the "mother" albums are the UK albums - the US albums were like the Beatles US albums created to make more albums with less songs and sinle tracks included which neither Beatles nor Stones wanted to. And the groups weren't happy about that. It would make sense to make "Past Masters" albums like The Beatles had in 1987 when they had their first CD's released. About the artwork it's probably the same - ABCKO don't have a lot of the original artwork - The Stones probably have it but they are NOT helping - the whole thing is a conscious decision from the Stones from a business perspective - they screwed us - we're screwing them back as much as possible. Until they give us the rights back - or let us buy them back - we're not helping or lifting a finger - too bad for our fans. One must understand the level that Allen Klein screwed over the group back in the 60's. He stole their property - their music - the masters - the publishing - through all kinds of "smart business moves" so they were left without a penny in 1970 - they even had to leave UK because of tax problems. Since then they have tried to redeem the situation but to no avail - Allen Klein even had a lot of "Best of's" released without their consent (that stopped at a point) - and now it is Allen Kleins kids who own these stolen rights. And the deal they have with the Stones is they can release original "content" albums and singles wise. NOT compilations thet weren't released in 1964-69 and no outtakes etc. The Stones are releasing a lot of extras and boxsets from the period 1971 up until now because they own their own material from this point. But as long as ABCKO are owning the 1964-69 period the band aren't giving in. Understandable! And we are left with compromises like this box set which are not up to The Beatles standards! The difference is Beatles and EMI are working together - the Stones and ABCKO are not. So actually the "right" thing to do for Stones fans who wants better releases is to NOT buy any ABCKO products - and let them lose so much money that they would sell it back to the band!

@anthonyaswe4174

19 күн бұрын

Yeah but that may effect the 'anniversary editions' that were put out--which were completely devoid of any content to compliment those original albums. You basically got a redux of the original release. In the case of Satanic Majesties, they gave us both a stereo and mono mix--okay, big deal. At least we got the lenticular cover and a nice thick box. As for the mono box set, Abkco could have produced more sturdy sleeves and a better overall box itself--and commissioned a better book with more detailed notes and interesting original content--and reproduced the inner sleeves of the original releases. I don't think they need Jagger/Richards blessing to go the extra mile on that stuff.

That is the beauty of music and vinyl collecting....everyone has their own opinion. Seems like you already had your opinion set before you received the box set....you do not like the early Stones and do not like covers. Give me the Stones anyday...and yes I am being honest. At least they did not release albums here in the states with half the content being boring, lazy instrumental tracks (Hard Day's Night, Help, Yellow Submarine) half of a 28 minute record without vocals😂😠😂😠😂 Another big difference of the two bands is the Stones never released a truly bad song...originals not covers. As great as the Beatles were and they were great... they have a plethora of BAD songs....Revolution #9, Octopuses Garden, Yellow Submarine (Heck any Ringo song🤔) I Don't Want To Spoil The Party, Maxwell's Silver Hammer, Misery, Flying, Piggies, Honey Pie, Why Don't We Do It in The Road.....I could go on but my typing finger is starting to go numb...yes the Stones initial albums were all covers, and I respect you found fault on this compared to the Beatles recording their own material...I am in the minority but I love these records and I love their blues influence which was more mature than the Fab Fives pop, sock hop influence....more of an edge from the Stones. The big difference from me is my appreciation of Between the Buttons and Aftermath the last few years....both are much more solid than I remember and challenge Rubber Soul and Revolver note for note in my opinion. Lastly, I think Beggars Banquet and Let it Bleed are better than anything in the Beatles 60's catalog...and I am not even mentioning Sticky Fingers and Exile on Main street which are 2 of the best of all-time! I understand seam splits, noisy vinyl, poor packaging, paper sleeves are unacceptable and should be called out for that price. But as far as the music goes.....give me the Stones any day.... heck I am getting ready to put my OG Mono 12x5 on my Turntable now .... Cheers 🍸👍 🍺

@juliosanchez95

Жыл бұрын

Could not disagree with you more.

Everything is becoming more expensive and quality and value is dropping especially Vinyl

Just came across this “review” and I wish I could have this 15 minutes added back onto my life expectancy. Simply miserable. For the life of me, I can’t figure out why you bought it in the first place.

Good return the piece of crap...too much $$$, eff colored vinyl

In this rant you contradict yourself so many times. If they don't include UK 'Aftermath' then your 'Stray Cats' multi-disc will be even longer, and you don't want to listen to it at the length it is now. Also, boxed sets are for completists, they can't omit the cover tunes that nobody likes.

@juliosanchez95

Жыл бұрын

It would be longer but not by much and it would probably be a better listen with the inclusion of better songs. It's not a contradiction. I'm clear that I don't want cheap reproductions of both the UK and US albums. As for the quality of the stray cats set that is a whole other topic, but I would rather have it in one place then so much redundancy spread out over cheaply made albums (crappy jacket quality and GZ pressings).

@thomosburn8740

Жыл бұрын

@@juliosanchez95 If I buy a Beatles complete albums boxed set, I expect it to contain "Hold Me Tight" and "I'm Happy Just To Dance With You" (widely un-loved Beatles songs). If I buy a Doors complete albums boxed set, "My Wild Love" and "We Could Be So Good Together" better be on there even though they sucks! Taking the good and bad in a complete set is a necessary part of the experience. Back to your Stones set, two reviewers have already compared the colored set to the black vinyl set and the colored set pressed at GZ held up. Maybe you were just unlucky to get the warped discs . . . but no one before you mentioned this flaw.

@thomosburn8740

Жыл бұрын

@@juliosanchez95 forgot to add that these modern covers are far heavier than the covers that were on the original UK pressings.

Julio, loved this video and not really for your take on the mono box, which I wouldn’t have purchased anyway. Think your take on the band is just perfect. They are primarily a singles band. Other than three or four solid LPs, it’s mostly just filler. That doesn’t mean I don’t love Mick and Keith. Their output as a whole falls short of the Beatles, as well as many other contemporaries (the kinks, the small faces, the zombies, the who etc).

@juliosanchez95

Жыл бұрын

I agree, although I might like them more than some of the bands you mentioned.

@ArmandoMPR

Жыл бұрын

Exile and Sticky Fingers are better than anything the Beatles ever put out. The Stones also have Aftermath, Between the Buttons, Beggars Banquet, Let It Bleed, Some Girls, and Tattoo You as masterpieces. In fact, all their 70s albums are easily 5/5 stars. The Beatles gotta be the most overrated band ever.

@gratefuldawgs2738

Жыл бұрын

@@ArmandoMPR lolo get it 😂

Mr. Negative.

@juliosanchez95

Жыл бұрын

If having high standards for a high priced set ($465) is negative, then I am guilty as charged.

@michaellord9745

Жыл бұрын

@@juliosanchez95 I've got high standards too and I think the set is quite nice for the asking price. My set arrived in perfect condition. Every record is flat as a pancake so I find it hard to believe that half of your set was warped. Nobody forced you to buy the set and there were plenty of unboxing videos available on KZread to watch so it's not as if you had no idea to expect and far as the jackets are concerned and no poly lined inners. I inserted round-bottom poly inners into the hard stock paper sleeves and problem solved. You're just a dour, pissy, negative guy.

@michaellord9745

Жыл бұрын

@@steven3557 The president of the Mr. Negative fan club, obviously.

@juliosanchez95

Жыл бұрын

@@michaellord9745 If you think that those album jackets are high quality and the records press at GZ are too, then so be it.

@juliosanchez95

Жыл бұрын

@@michaellord9745 Wow! Michael, I hope you are ok.

Beatles they ain’t

Julio Sánchez, qué nombre tan español.

@juliosanchez95

Жыл бұрын

Dominicano