Tell Me :  Talk
Talk about your favorite band. 

Previous page Next page First page IORR home

For information about how to use this forum please check out forum help and policies.

Goto Page: Previous12
Current Page: 2 of 2
Re: Billy Preston in '75 = horrible
Posted by: T&A ()
Date: June 26, 2009 19:34

dick york was the first darrin, no? sargent #2?

Re: Billy Preston in '75 = horrible
Posted by: Happy2 ()
Date: June 26, 2009 19:35

Ok then, just switch the names.

Re: Billy Preston in '75 = horrible
Posted by: Happy2 ()
Date: June 26, 2009 19:36

Its not like Mr. Fanatic will know the difference anyway.

Re: Billy Preston in '75 = horrible
Posted by: T&A ()
Date: June 26, 2009 19:42

Quote
Happy2
Ok then, just switch the names.

just switch dicks?

Re: Billy Preston in '75 = horrible
Posted by: Happy2 ()
Date: June 26, 2009 19:44

You'll have to ask Mr. Fanatic. I'm sure he has done that sort of thing before.

Re: Billy Preston in '75 = horrible
Posted by: Anonymous User ()
Date: June 26, 2009 19:47

<In 1975 / 1976 there is too much Billy in the shows , it just like it is Billy Preston and The Rolling Stones >.




And Taylor nowhere in '75 and '76. What a coincidence,someone has to fill the hole.. tongue sticking out smiley

Re: Billy Preston in '75 = horrible
Posted by: UrbanSteel ()
Date: June 26, 2009 20:14

X



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2018-08-19 19:47 by UrbanSteel.

Re: Billy Preston in '75 = horrible
Posted by: Anonymous User ()
Date: June 26, 2009 21:22

Quote
UrbanSteel
Quote
Amsterdamned
<In 1975 / 1976 there is too much Billy in the shows , it just like it is Billy Preston and The Rolling Stones >.




And Taylor nowhere in '75 and '76. What a coincidence,someone has to fill the hole.. tongue sticking out smiley

Yep , and Ronnie Wood did that , or did you not noticed that ? winking smiley
No!

Re: Billy Preston in '75 = horrible
Posted by: Turd On The Run ()
Date: June 27, 2009 01:07

I think a tour has to be always analyzed and judged in the context of its time. It is easy to criticize a tour in hindsight. One must remember that in the 1975/76 time frame, Preston was quite a star in his own right - with several top radio hits to his credit - and had been giving the Stones a sprinkle of his stardust since 1973, so he felt like he was part of the band.

I saw several shows on that tour - both in the U.S.A. and Europe - and Preston was an integral part of the Stones sound of that era...although he was not as dominant in the live arena as he was in the recorded output of that time (Goat's Head Soup really comes to mind). At the time (mid-1970's) his contributions were looked at in mostly very positive terms...and the Stones of that era seemed more open and rollicking and fun (and more keyboard-oriented) than the darker, blusier, more intense era(s) preceding it.

Another point was that at that time Keef was thought to be fading fast (at least on the Stone's recorded output) and Billy was seen as a tent-pole to hold up the sound (again, see Goat Head's Soup).

In retrospect, when I listen to bootlegs of that era, the keyboard sound does seem simultaneously intrusive and dated. But at the time it was the hip and funky new sound of the Stones. People dug it and the Stones thought they needed it.

A few years later Punk's challenge, Keef's resurgence, Ronnie's integration and Glam and Funk's relative declines made Preston expendable.

Goto Page: Previous12
Current Page: 2 of 2


Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.

Online Users

Guests: 1430
Record Number of Users: 206 on June 1, 2022 23:50
Record Number of Guests: 9627 on January 2, 2024 23:10

Previous page Next page First page IORR home