i'm not a musician but his playing it sounds so un natural. is it his playing style or is it the keyboards he uses? i know nothing much about him but seems like the guy belives he is an official member of the stones.

he seems to be a nice guy, but you're right: he always sounds a bit like a keyboardteacher at a bandworkshop...somehow a bit "stiff" and the pianosound is too "produced" for my taste....

Because you like STU! (So do I)

But thank god he is not Matt Clifford. While Chuck is no Stu or even Nicky, he is quite a good pianist going back to his days with the Allman Brothers Band. His solo on 'Jessica' may be one of th ebest piano solo ever recorded.

my 2 cents worth.

jjflash73

A real piano and more tactful playing would have done the works. Instead, he's too prominent and doesn't really suit the stones, imo. Grea hammond player, though.

Time Out for Taylor/Wood ?

I think that Keith & Mick rely on Chuck a little too much to be the glue that holds everything together -as a result of that, Chuck tends to overplay.

I wish they'd get Ian MacLagan to play with them again, but due to his being a drinking buddy of Ronnie's, Mick probably would never let that happen.

If wishes were horses.....Stu is gone, Nicky is gone and I loved them too BUT Chuck is not the monster folks make him out to be. I personally like him, I met him in Philly at a party for the band at the Four Seasons a few years ago and he couldn't have been nicer. He is so unaffected, not a ego-maniac, very sweet man. As a musician, he is GREAT! If the Stones thought that he was too prominent in the mix, they'd turn him DOWN! Maybe on a rare occasion he seems a bit much but those nights are rare, not the norm. ( Seen him with the Stones 30 times and don't ever recall thinking " WOW, that piano is horrible!).
I think that many of you long for the past, and I do too at times, but the reality is the Stones could do a lot worse than Chuck... plus he lobbies for deep cuts! He is responsible for the band trying new songs because he works on the set list with Mick. If it were left up to Mick alone we'd never hear SWAY!! I think he should be MORE pushy if we ever see another tour!

I have never thought that piano-players is important musicians for a rock'n'roll band, but that's me. Anyway, why not phone Fats Domino if he's still around...

Nothing personal, but...

I can´t stand Chuck Leavell because of his appearance. He´s looking like a happy Mr. Curly-good-2-shoes on the piano and trying to be rock and roll on stage! It annoys me to see his face! LOL


Again, Chuck is a good piano player and he may be a nice dude. But again, I miss Stu, Nicky, Billy...

Quote
DiamondDog7
Nothing personal, but...

I can´t stand Chuck Leavell because of his appearance. He´s looking like a happy Mr. Curly-good-2-shoes on the piano and trying to be rock and roll on stage! It annoys me to see his face! LOL


Again, Chuck is a good piano player and he may be a nice dude. But again, I miss Stu, Nicky, Billy...

It's ironic that this is probably the exact same feeling Andrew had about Stu back in the day! LOL

Chuck does too much typical white-guy-playing-blues on the piano. There's no dirt to it, there's no soul to it, it's all tinkly pretty clean perfectly played garbage - like his clothes, hair and beard. I'm sure he's a nice guy but we're talking about his playing. He is the antithesis of what the Stones sound like, regardless of the era (Vegas or any other).

That is probably why you don't like him.

And he also just doesn't fit in.

Quote
skipstone
Chuck does too much typical white-guy-playing-blues on the piano. There's no dirt to it, there's no soul to it, it's all tinkly pretty clean perfectly played garbage - like his clothes, hair and beard. I'm sure he's a nice guy but we're talking about his playing. He is the antithesis of what the Stones sound like, regardless of the era (Vegas or any other).

That is probably why you don't like him.

And he also just doesn't fit in.

what a complete load of baloney...

OK, I'll edit it:

Chuck does too much typical white-guy-playing-blues on the piano. There's no dirt to it, there's no soul to it, it's all tinkly pretty clean perfectly played garbage. He is the antithesis of what the Stones sound like, regardless of the era (Vegas or any other).

Quote
skipstone
OK, I'll edit it:

Chuck does too much typical white-guy-playing-blues on the piano. There's no dirt to it, there's no soul to it, it's all tinkly pretty clean perfectly played garbage. He is the antithesis of what the Stones sound like, regardless of the era (Vegas or any other).

edited garbage now. thanks.

I guess you like the garbage sound of The Rolling Stones with Chuck Leavell then. That makes sense.

You're forgetting Skip that the Stones are white boys....playing black blues...so to be technical, they are copying the sounds of black singers...doing it damn well, for sure but you get my point.
As far as Chuck being authentic, we can go back and forth all day about whether or not he's qualified to play with the Stones. I do know what you mean about the " clean" playing and I do agree with that. He will never be that boogie-woogie soulful Stu because he's not STU. I just wonder who would be overall such a fit with the Stones.
TumblinDice, that was an astute comment!! Stu sure did not " fit" as far as appearances go. He looked like a construction worker or a lorry driver! If folks don't like Chuck because of how he LOOKS, that's not relevant and it's so superficial.

Quote
skipstone
I guess you like the garbage sound of The Rolling Stones with Chuck Leavell then. That makes sense.

lots of folks think the stones are the best-ever garbage band...oh, wait, that's garage. nevermind.

Agree with skip here. Chuck is just the wrong style for the Stones. No edge. He plods and plinks. he plays big fat boring midrange chords like a piano teacher, when they need someone who can give you that shiver up your spine with bluesy runs way up at the top. Plus he doesn't even play a real piano. This is the Rolling Stones, not a gig at the Holiday Inn. They need Chuck because he is the Musical Director. Who cares about his solo on "Jessica" a million years ago? It's sorry indeed when that has to be constantly brought up in his defense. What has happened to his playing style since then?

Quote
71Tele
Agree with skip here. Chuck is just the wrong style for the Stones. No edge. He plods and plinks. he plays big fat boring midrange chords like a piano teacher, when they need someone who can give you that shiver up your spine with bluesy runs way up at the top. Plus he doesn't even play a real piano. This is the Rolling Stones, not a gig at the Holiday Inn. They need Chuck because he is the Musical Director. Who cares about his solo on "Jessica" a million years ago? It's sorry indeed when that has to be constantly brought up in his defense. What has happened to his playing style since then?

i think chuck's style is a fabulous combination of all those before him. he's basically a nicky hopkins disciple and can boogie like stu when needed. and he's a master organ grinder - a shame the stones don't allow him to play more of that, imo....

Quote
StonesTod

Quote
71Tele
Agree with skip here. Chuck is just the wrong style for the Stones. No edge. He plods and plinks. he plays big fat boring midrange chords like a piano teacher, when they need someone who can give you that shiver up your spine with bluesy runs way up at the top. Plus he doesn't even play a real piano. This is the Rolling Stones, not a gig at the Holiday Inn. They need Chuck because he is the Musical Director. Who cares about his solo on "Jessica" a million years ago? It's sorry indeed when that has to be constantly brought up in his defense. What has happened to his playing style since then?

i think chuck's style is a fabulous combination of all those before him. he's basically a nicky hopkins disciple and can boogie like stu when needed. and he's a master organ grinder - a shame the stones don't allow him to play more of that, imo....

Whether it's his choice to not play better (or differently) because of his role in the band, or it's the Stones who won't let him, the result is the same.

Quote
StonesTod

Quote
71Tele
Agree with skip here. Chuck is just the wrong style for the Stones. No edge. He plods and plinks. he plays big fat boring midrange chords like a piano teacher, when they need someone who can give you that shiver up your spine with bluesy runs way up at the top. Plus he doesn't even play a real piano. This is the Rolling Stones, not a gig at the Holiday Inn. They need Chuck because he is the Musical Director. Who cares about his solo on "Jessica" a million years ago? It's sorry indeed when that has to be constantly brought up in his defense. What has happened to his playing style since then?

i think chuck's style is a fabulous combination of all those before him. he's basically a nicky hopkins disciple and can boogie like stu when needed. and he's a master organ grinder - a shame the stones don't allow him to play more of that, imo....

I for one have no interest in seeing Chuck grind his organ.

Quote
71Tele

Quote
StonesTod

Quote
71Tele
Agree with skip here. Chuck is just the wrong style for the Stones. No edge. He plods and plinks. he plays big fat boring midrange chords like a piano teacher, when they need someone who can give you that shiver up your spine with bluesy runs way up at the top. Plus he doesn't even play a real piano. This is the Rolling Stones, not a gig at the Holiday Inn. They need Chuck because he is the Musical Director. Who cares about his solo on "Jessica" a million years ago? It's sorry indeed when that has to be constantly brought up in his defense. What has happened to his playing style since then?

i think chuck's style is a fabulous combination of all those before him. he's basically a nicky hopkins disciple and can boogie like stu when needed. and he's a master organ grinder - a shame the stones don't allow him to play more of that, imo....

Whether it's his choice to not play better (or differently) because of his role in the band, or it's the Stones who won't let him, the result is the same.

i agree with you there - we just disagree on what that result is...

Quote
StonesTod

Quote
71Tele

Quote
StonesTod

Quote
71Tele
Agree with skip here. Chuck is just the wrong style for the Stones. No edge. He plods and plinks. he plays big fat boring midrange chords like a piano teacher, when they need someone who can give you that shiver up your spine with bluesy runs way up at the top. Plus he doesn't even play a real piano. This is the Rolling Stones, not a gig at the Holiday Inn. They need Chuck because he is the Musical Director. Who cares about his solo on "Jessica" a million years ago? It's sorry indeed when that has to be constantly brought up in his defense. What has happened to his playing style since then?

i think chuck's style is a fabulous combination of all those before him. he's basically a nicky hopkins disciple and can boogie like stu when needed. and he's a master organ grinder - a shame the stones don't allow him to play more of that, imo....

Whether it's his choice to not play better (or differently) because of his role in the band, or it's the Stones who won't let him, the result is the same.

i agree with you there - we just disagree on what that result is...

Fair enough.

Ok, who cares that Keith played Satisfaction, Brown Sugar, Midnight Rambler and Jumpin Jack Flash because that was million years ago?

I do.

I hear your opinion but the track record can prove what a guy is capable of right?

Someone wrote Chuck fits in because he as a little Stu and Nicky in him (his style). I agree and I know he pushes the envelope on the setlists.

He could go a little more funky and soulful for me though.
And the HTW solo is wore out.

Quote
jjflash73
And the HTW solo is wore out.

yeah, but the whole damned song is, too....

When Chuck plays piano in the studio (I'm not talking about live), is it a real one or not?

well who would you rather have on keyboards? I'm just asking, for anyone...

Have you people ever listened to Brothers and Sisters by the Allman Brothers?

Just asking.

Quote
Zack
Have you people ever listened to Brothers and Sisters by the Allman Brothers?

Just asking.

the allmans, like most of their jam-band brethren, never made much of a splash on the other side of the pond...but, i'm sure most red-blooded american stones fans know this album well...chuck helped revitalize the brothers after duane and berry perished. and his work with his own band, sea level, later in the decade still impresses. the man's incredibly gifted. the bashing he often takes here baffles me at times....