"Keith arrived for the recording sessions of the next Stones album, Dirty Work, with 27 songs, which went under titles such as Fight, Had It With You and Knock Your Teeth Out."

Read more: [www.dailymail.co.uk]

Seemes like Keith was really in to making the album with lots of stuff and it became the worst Stones album ever - says a bit about Keith's ability....

Quote
bolexman
I watched the Live Aid DVD again the other day. That set with Ronnie/Bob/Keith seemed evern worse than the last time I watched the DVD..! Such a depressing scene, bewildering even.

I will go with bewildering...I remember watching it like it was yesterday, not knowing who the surprise guest was going to be, seeing Dylan with Keith & Ronnie, and being all excited.

Then they played...what an anticlimactic moment.

Absolutely correct, MTaylor. DIRTY WORK says a lot about Keith's ability. "Satisfaction," JJF, HTW, SFM, "Start Me Up" - those mean nothing.

I'm with you. If someone so much as says the word Brussels in my presence, there's instantly a warm puddle beneath my feet.

Vi-vi-vi-vibrato!

I thought JJF was inspired by Bill and other good people )

Absolutely. Not sure who the other good people were, but Wyman's subsequent songwriting efforts more than speak for his being the TRUE author of JJF.

Don't say it...BRUSSELS!...ahh! That feels nice.

Vi-vi-vi-vibrato!

Quote
Rocky Dijon
Absolutely. Not sure who the other good people were, but Wyman's subsequent songwriting efforts more than speak for his being the TRUE author of JJF.

Don't say it...BRUSSELS!...ahh! That feels nice.

Vi-vi-vi-vibrato!

Well, his solo efforts were not the worst ones - neither solo nor the one with Willie and the Poor Boys - matter of taste. Musically at least he has done a good job.
And most here on the board recognize his good job as bass player in the band.

I'm among them - if we're talking about Bill with the band. I agree that music is a matter of taste, but it's highly unlikely Bill could have been signed to major labels had he not been a Stone. There's only so many people that would find his novelty songwriting and vocals appealing. However, that isn't what prompted me to respond. It was the usual Keith-bashing. Believe it or not, I actually like Taylor and consider his era their musical peak. I just can't resist being a smart ass when confronted with the same old posts in one thread after another.

My point was in respect to the thread, that Keith could have substituted Mick with Daltrey. The basis of Stones is the chemistry between Keith and Mick and not separated or substitued by another
Keith and Mick did / do great songs together - among the ones you mentioned. One did more than the other on each song - some more Keith other ones more Mick.
Mentioning DW was because of being a Keith record much more than a Mick record and it didn't turn out very well. Of course Mick had also his crappy songs on the record as well, BTZ just to mention one.

Well then sorry for yanking your chain unfairly. You didn't deserve it. I've enjoyed a great number of your posts, but thought wrongly you were trying to bait people with a "Keith contributed nothing ever" post.

No problem - rather free discussion than censorship

Quote
susannewortmann
Mick is one of the main shareholders, so is Keith and so are Ronnie and Charlie. Ronnie only since somewhere last decade I believe. I guess they mourne that decision now. Artistically Jagger could tour with any artist under the Stones banner, like he did in the mid 80's with his solo tour in japan and Australia. It was like a Stones set/tour as all the people want to see, especially in the US was/is Mick. A few die hards fo Keith, Ronnie and Charlie. But all people think of is when they hear the Stones is MICK JAGGER!

So Keith can replace Mick by ANYONE,in HIS band! But no one cares who's in keith's band. His Expensive Winos Tours and albums were great but not commercially! Steve Jordan was the crown jewel in that band!!!

Interesting take -- Thank goodness nobody told Jagger how successful his solo venture was.

Like Keith COULD replace Mick even if he wanted to! Give me a break! He had no power to do that on his own! I would imagine the other Stones would have to unanimously want him out, and even then, if Mick wanted to STAY, he'd stay. Can you imagine the law suits that would come in to play, not to mention how long that would drag on...and Keith would not WANT to replace Mick THAT BAD! It would end HIS career.

Lots of bands go on after kicking out or losing a founder/vocalist or more...just that most do it badly. AC/DC is one of the very few to do it successfully.

Those that didn't:
Creedence Clearwater Revisited: bass player and drummer from the original with a few other guys. Basically a cover band, that somehow still attracts people
THe Guess Who: They played near Niagara Falls the other night to a huge crowd, but are missing Burton Cummings and Randy Bachman...but they still tour as The Guess Who with just 2 original members
Yes and Journey: Soundalike replacement lead singers found on You Tube. Both weird and embarrassing.

And band that loses an integral part, like Mick or Keith should not go on under the same name. Go on if they want to, but change the name.

Quote
buffalo7478
Lots of bands go on after kicking out or losing a founder/vocalist or more...just that most do it badly. AC/DC is one of the very few to do it successfully.

Those that didn't:
Creedence Clearwater Revisited: bass player and drummer from the original with a few other guys. Basically a cover band, that somehow still attracts people
THe Guess Who: They played near Niagara Falls the other night to a huge crowd, but are missing Burton Cummings and Randy Bachman...but they still tour as The Guess Who with just 2 original members
Yes and Journey: Soundalike replacement lead singers found on You Tube. Both weird and embarrassing.

Guns n' Roses too, probably the worst modern example of this.

This sounds like Keith talking out his butt. Was Roger Daltrey aware of this, or was he just going to do what Keith wanted.

I hope the information that I'm reading about Keith's forthcoming book are mostly untrue rumors. So far what I'm reading sounds pretty lame. Keith wanting Roger Daltrey to replace MIck; Keith critisizing Mick's drug use; etc.

Don't assume that tabloids re-hashing 25 year old tabloid stories is the actual content of Keith's book. I would be shocked if the Daltrey thing is mentioned because it was total fabrication on the part of idiotic journalists back in the mid-eighties. Judge Keith's book on its own merits when it comes out, not by ragtrade stories from third rate journalists. Addicted has read most of Keith's manuscript. I seriously doubt she has read anything remotely like what the tabloids are churning out trying to stir up trouble and reader interest.

Quote
Edith Grove
So Mick thought about replacing Keith in the late seventies, now Keith talks about wanting to replace Mick in the early eighties.

Tit for tat?

Didn't Mick actually replace Keith with Joe Satriani in the eighties? Sure he did :-)

Quote
Rocky Dijon
Don't assume that tabloids re-hashing 25 year old tabloid stories is the actual content of Keith's book. I would be shocked if the Daltrey thing is mentioned because it was total fabrication on the part of idiotic journalists back in the mid-eighties. Judge Keith's book on its own merits when it comes out, not by ragtrade stories from third rate journalists. Addicted has read most of Keith's manuscript. I seriously doubt she has read anything remotely like what the tabloids are churning out trying to stir up trouble and reader interest.

I hope you're right.

In the end it was just a HOT STORY in the Daily Sun or something, copied by numerous world wide journalists since it was well uh NEWS?? Don't know if anyone remembered but a totally different subject but David Bowie was mentioned as the follow up to Roger Moore as James Bond after A View To A Kill....I actually talked to Bowie doing an interview for a German music magazine back in 2002 and we discussed this but he was NEVER asked for James Bond. It was a story blown up by a reporter about some James Bond resemblence in Merry Xmas Mr Lawrence in which Bowie starred!

Quote
originalstones

Quote
Rocky Dijon
Don't assume that tabloids re-hashing 25 year old tabloid stories is the actual content of Keith's book. I would be shocked if the Daltrey thing is mentioned because it was total fabrication on the part of idiotic journalists back in the mid-eighties. Judge Keith's book on its own merits when it comes out, not by ragtrade stories from third rate journalists. Addicted has read most of Keith's manuscript. I seriously doubt she has read anything remotely like what the tabloids are churning out trying to stir up trouble and reader interest.

I hope you're right.

I hope so too. I haven't paid much attention to this book but am intrigued by all these conversations on here about it. I never thought about why I don't read autobiographies, but now I've realized why. But, I am curious as to why he's writing this book, I was hoping it would be written to inspire others but it doesn't sound like it. Hopefully it'll be something he can be proud of.

Well, easy answer is he's writing it because Jane Rose is now tied to William Morris. A Keith autobiography or PIRATES OF THE CARIBBEAN cameo would have been unthinkable 20 years ago. Now its a good career move at his stage of life. Jane Rose is doing what she's always done - protect her client and make him as marketable as possible. The Keith legend thing is just a role he plays. The real guy is someone else entirely.


And in the eighties, Mick replaced Keith with Jimmy Rip. Satriani was standing in for Jeff Beck and Mick Taylor, respectively.

Quote
Rocky Dijon
Well, easy answer is he's writing it because Jane Rose is now tied to William Morris. A Keith autobiography or PIRATES OF THE CARIBBEAN cameo would have been unthinkable 20 years ago. Now its a good career move at his stage of life. Jane Rose is doing what she's always done - protect her client and make him as marketable as possible. The Keith legend thing is just a role he plays. The real guy is someone else entirely.


And in the eighties, Mick replaced Keith with Jimmy Rip. Satriani was standing in for Jeff Beck and Mick Taylor, respectively.

So, is money the driving force for the book?

Money is the driving force for every album or tour. The book is no different. If they did it purely for love, they would have played live at the SHINE A LIGHT premieres or on NBC while promoting EXILE or at Cannes to promote STONES IN EXILE. They play live when they are well compensated and otherwise can't be bothered when a simple appearance will suffice. Consider that Keith's last concert performance was behind closed doors for Johnny Depp's documentary HAPPY. It's unlikely there was an audience as no word has leaked of what was played. All that is known is that Keith entered the building with a guitar. Patti Smith confirmed she shared vocals with him and Steve Jordan and Waddy Wachtel were in the back-up band. Other musicians unknown. No one saw it who's willing to post online info. It takes an awful lot of money to engage these guys. The rest is living the legend. The more rare the performances become, the higher the price tag will become. In truth, it's always been about the money, but the older they get, the more blatant it becomes.

I distinctly remember a report in the late 80's on CNN that Richards was considering replacing Jagger with Roger Daltrey. I have it on tape somewhere.

Around the same time (around 1987) Bill Wyman made a comment to Rolling Stone Magazine about bringing in Terrence Trent Darby (they played together at some concert) to take Jagger's place in the band. At the time Darby was the "hot" singer of the moment.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but weren't there even reports about Rod Stewart replacing Jagger?

Quote
punkfloyd
According to this write up on Keith's book!

[www.dailymail.co.uk]

That piece is actually the journalist's own review of Mick and Keith's relationship, patched together from various gossip down the years.

Nowhere does it suggest or state that Keith says in his autobiography that he tried to replace Mick with Roger Daltrey.

CNN may have reported the rubbish story. The truth is in the late eighties had STEEL WHEELS not happened, Keith and the Winos were discussing European and Japanese tours (obviously smaller scale). That was Michael Cohl's back-up plan.
Jagger would have made an album with Satriani and Jimmy Rip as was also reported. There wouldn't have been a Rolling Stones. Why people can't understand Mick or Keith would have to quit to be replaced, I don't know. They can't be voted out by the other.

Wyman organized and played a concert in London for his charity, AIMS in early 1988. Terence Trent d'Arby was one of many guests. This prompted gossip that D'arby would replace Mick. At the time, the band's future was uncertain. It was May 1988 before they met to discuss an album and tour. In March 1988, Mick was touring Japan as a solo artist with plans to expand his tour later in the year (Which he did, but not as widely as thought). Wyman, at the time, was reeling in disappointment that none of his AIMS artists that he produced turned out chart hits, his solo LP (STUFF) was shopped to labels with zero interest, he had just signed a book deal for STONE ALONE which gave him an advance, but Mandy was still a threat to be reckoned with. The guy was not in any position to announce Jagger was replaced legally or otherwise.

<Jagger would have made an album with Satriani and Jimmy Rip as was also reported>

He made an album with Flea and Rip eventually

Quote
Rocky Dijon
Money is the driving force for every album or tour. The book is no different. If they did it purely for love, they would have played live at the SHINE A LIGHT premieres or on NBC while promoting EXILE or at Cannes to promote STONES IN EXILE. They play live when they are well compensated and otherwise can't be bothered when a simple appearance will suffice. Consider that Keith's last concert performance was behind closed doors for Johnny Depp's documentary HAPPY. It's unlikely there was an audience as no word has leaked of what was played. All that is known is that Keith entered the building with a guitar. Patti Smith confirmed she shared vocals with him and Steve Jordan and Waddy Wachtel were in the back-up band. Other musicians unknown. No one saw it who's willing to post online info. It takes an awful lot of money to engage these guys. The rest is living the legend. The more rare the performances become, the higher the price tag will become. In truth, it's always been about the money, but the older they get, the more blatant it becomes.

I'll wait to pass judgement on this until it comes out, but if it's for money, I still wonder why....what's the slant of this book and why write a book instead of doing something musically. I mentioned before, I was hoping it would be something positive to read, but he can be quite negative, so we'll see.

...well if the autobiography is as inflammatory as some suggest perhaps Keith can/will try Daltry...

Keith's advance for the book is likely more than any label would give him for a solo contract. Which would you pick if you were pushing 70?