My conversion to the joys of Radio 2 prompted several users to welcome me to the fold and even recommend particular DJs and shows. It's all rather cosy, isn't it? I think I might have to watch a cheap, exploitative documentary about obese kids to redress the balance.

Speaking of balance, by far the most popular subject of last month's mailbag was Eurovision. In a nutshell, you think it's gone beyond a joke, it's all political, and we shouldn't bother entering in future.

Oh, and with depressing inevitability, some of you took the chance to air some pretty unsavoury views on immigration. 

This about sums up the general consensus:

"The eurovision has always been more about whos whos friend than anything to do with a song competision ,but that  was ok it was fun and nobody took it to serious, but this year their was something dark about  the voting infact the whole event , it wasnt the fact no -one like the UK song that troubled me but the feeling we  the UK were not welcome or  any other country from west europe to the eastern european party.
Even Terry could not hide that the fun had gone and replaced with a clear message ,the west is not welcome."

One user came up with a possible solution:

"If GB are to stand any chance of winning ever again then we should do what Yugoslavia and Russia did and split into smaller states, i.e. England, Scotland, N.Ireland, Wales, Eire, Isle of Man, Isle of Wight, Scilly Isles, Channel Isles, Lundy Island, etc. where we can all vote for our immediate neighbours and watch the others sweat as we become a Euro Song Contest superpower once again, lol."

If you needed any further proof that the whole shebang is past its sell-by date, surely this was it:

"terry wogan made it worthwhile with his rightul opinions and predictions but as a fifteen year old, my time would have been better spent revisin!!!"

Lastly, just to clear up any confusion, I didn't actually write the Eurovision blog entry. If you look again, you will see that it's signed Tom Townshend. I wouldn't ordinarily point this out, seeing as I am quite comfortable taking the credit for other people's work. However, this last piece of feedback forced my hand:

"Just wondering if you knew that the girl singing for Albania is actually 16 years old. So your comments are quite pervy. Bye."

2008 is the year several rock and pop legends reach their 50th birthday - Michael Jackson, Prince, and Madonna being the most high profile.

It's obvious to even the casual observer that they've all spent unusually large amounts of time and money on their appearance over the years.

The results have been less than flattering. Prince looks the best of the three. He's well groomed and trim but you've got to wonder what he looks like underneath the mountain of slap he habitually wears.

Madonna's addiction to the gym has wrought havoc on her arms in recent years, while the less said about Michael Jackson the better.

It's enough to make you wonder if it's worth the pain and sacrifice, particularly when you consider the example of another musician who has just recently reached the half century mark.

I saw Paul Weller play a superb gig at the indigo2 last week and not only was he in fine voice, he looked great too. I don't know if he works out (I doubt it) or watches what he eats (probably, up to a point) but I do know he likes a drink and a cigarette.

More importantly, he appears not to be in denial about his age. Yes, he still clearly takes an active interest in clothes and his hair obviously requires a bit of maintenance but this seems to me to be the right side of vanity.

Beyond that he appears comfortable in his own aging skin.

Paul Weller reached his 50th the Sunday before last. I wasn't there but I bet his birthday celebrations were a damn sight more fun than those of his fellow celebrity half centurions.

For the third time this year, I am cat-sitting for a friend in Brixton. I don't get anything out of it other than a week's worth of pretending I live somewhere bigger than a shoebox. This is fine by me.

Anyway, maybe I'm doing something wrong but I can't get the telly to work. Well, I can just about get a picture but it's so bad that I've decided to give up and listen to the radio instead.

I've never been a big radio listener - just never got into the habit, I suppose - so it's a bit of a voyage of discovery for me. And this is what I have discovered: *

* at some point in the last few years, and without me knowing anything about it, I have become a Radio 2 target audience member

* Terry Wogan is actually quite brilliant in the mornings

* Mark Radcliffe (who I last listened to in the mid-1990s when he had the evening slot on Radio 1) has turned into the late John Peel - stuttering delivery, eccentric rambling, the works

* all of the above are strangely reassuring

I recently attended the opening night of Let It Bleed, an exhibition of photographs by a guy called Ethan Russell documenting The Rolling Stones' 1969 tour of the USA.

I'm not usually an art gallery type of guy but I was properly excited about this. You see, the thing is, whether The Stones are better than The Beatles or Led Zeppelin or whoever is  always up for debate (even in my own mind), but what this exhibition proves beyond question is that, for a few years at least, they were the coolest looking band ever to walk the face of the Earth.

What is interesting about this exhibition beyond the beautiful photographs themselves is that it captures the exact moment at which pop became rock. The '69 tour was the first time in three years that The Stones had taken their show on the road, during which time audiences had stopped screaming and started, you know, actually listening.

Technology had moved on in leaps and bounds in the meantime too, so where they had previously been at the mercy of a venue's (usually crappy) in-house sound system, they were now able to transport their own highly sophisticated set-up from city to city.

In short, in 1969 The Rolling Stones invented the modern rock tour.

Not many bands survived the transition. In fact, in terms of groups whose popularity was already established by 1966, perhaps only The Who pulled off the same evolution into a major touring band of the 1970s.

Anyway, I'm getting all rock historian here. Regardless of whether you give a monkey's about any of this stuff (and if not, thank you for still reading), Let It Bleed contains some of the most breathtakingly cool rock and roll photographs you will ever see.

Well, I think so anyway.

Let It Bleed runs until July 20 at London's Proud Gallery

* All images are © Ethan Russell - all rights reserved

* Visit www.proud.co.uk for more information about the Let it Bleed Exhibition

* Visit www.rhino.co.uk  for more information about the Let it Bleed book and other limited edition CDs and vinyl