Band's early catalog is a mess.

I really like The Rolling Stones, but does anyone else feel their early catalog is messy as hell? The whole US and UK thing made them all feel undefinitive to me. The Beatles at least had their studio discography standardised since the release of their music on CD in 1987, so you have a grasp on their core records. The Stones' catalog on streaming services doesn't help as well, those covers look awful and the whole discography looks unapproachable.

What are your opinions on this matter? Which versions are "canon" to you. US or UK? As far as I know, UK versions are more what the band envisioned the albums to be like, but US versions cover more ground and have the singles. So if you go with UK versions you have to get a compilation like Hot Rocks or something? I swear, The Beatles handled this much better.