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: Previous1234Next
Current Page: 2 of 4
Re: Keith - what has changed really?
Posted by: skipstone ()
Date: August 13, 2010 20:10

The arthritis bit doesn't cut it. If he can play the wrong notes with arthritis, he can play the right notes with arthritis.

That was worse than the 1994 Miami Sympathy For The Devil solo!

Re: Keith - what has changed really?
Posted by: still ill ()
Date: August 13, 2010 20:44

Quote
Dali


This sums up 2007 Stones to me,Keith was as bad at the two shows i saw,just terrible really.It also shows what a professional Mick is,putting on a great show for the crowd when he knows what's going on around him is a total mess.

Re: Keith - what has changed really?
Date: August 13, 2010 20:49

You were unlucky, He was great in Oslo. Read the reviews. The HTW thing is due to the B-stage problem.

Re: Keith - what has changed really?
Posted by: still ill ()
Date: August 13, 2010 21:00

Quote
DandelionPowderman
You were unlucky, He was great in Oslo. Read the reviews. The HTW thing is due to the B-stage problem.

Glad you got a good show,i enjoyed the shows i saw in 2006 but at the shows at the O2 in 2007 he was shocking B stage or not.Have a listen to the intro to Beast of Burden from the first show,and that's just one example.Ronnie was playing guitar for two that night.

Re: Keith - what has changed really?
Posted by: Slick ()
Date: August 13, 2010 21:11

Quote
Slick
Quote
NedKelly
Keith - what has changed really?
he got clean. then he lost his glare and started smiling all the time. then he started posing instead of playing.
then he became more accessible to the masses, along with the rest of them... losing a lot of their coolness. separation + distance = true rock royalty. can you imagine them doing an organized meet-&-greet before a 1969-1982 show? it could only happen in the vegas years. sure wont see dylan doing that bs lol.

Re: Keith - what has changed really?
Date: August 13, 2010 21:15

Quote
still ill
Quote
DandelionPowderman
You were unlucky, He was great in Oslo. Read the reviews. The HTW thing is due to the B-stage problem.

Glad you got a good show,i enjoyed the shows i saw in 2006 but at the shows at the O2 in 2007 he was shocking B stage or not.Have a listen to the intro to Beast of Burden from the first show,and that's just one example.Ronnie was playing guitar for two that night.

Yeah, I heard he had off nights in London. YGMR was awful, as well.

Re: Keith - what has changed really?
Posted by: Rip This ()
Date: August 13, 2010 22:25

....it's a long time since his accident....it's a long time that he has had the opportunity to rebound....and he has access to the best care....I think he'll surprise people next tour.

Re: Keith - what has changed really?
Posted by: jamesfdouglas ()
Date: August 13, 2010 23:13

Quote
Slick
separation + distance = true rock royalty.

separation + distance = out of touch with your fans, and reality in general.

[thepowergoats.com]

Re: Keith - what has changed really?
Posted by: crumbling_mice ()
Date: August 13, 2010 23:27

another let's knock the @#$%& out of Keith thread...I won't argue that he has played some lousy gigs, but he also played pretty lousy on Hyde Park - long before medical problems kicked in. I think it's more likely the B-stage syndrome, coupled with the fact that he enjoys himself a little too much on stage these days. In the heroin years, he still used to @#$%& up and play awful solos, and even get the chords wrong...it's just more easily seen these days, every fan has a mobile to record it, bootlegging is massive and the tv is never far away. He also knows he has a massive backing band and prefers the posing around more than the focussing on his playing. Fair play to him, for decades he didnt interact, he's just getting his share now. Don't knock him, when he's gone you'll all be wishing he was still here playing bum notes lousy solos and starting songs in the wrong key. It's rock n roll not the x factor!


Re: Keith - what has changed really?
Posted by: Pelle ()
Date: August 13, 2010 23:28

I'd guess that he is being old/slow in the fingers but that he still got it.

Re: Keith - what has changed really?
Posted by: Rockman ()
Date: August 14, 2010 00:29

he hasn't played anything in 3 years - so he's been very consistent during this recent stretch

Lee Perry .... Sheryl Crowe ... Merle Haggard .... Jack White

you are so easily pleased. very annoying, really.

Nothing to do with easily pleased Tod... Just some the artists he's been involved with recently



ROCKMAN

Re: Keith - what has changed really?
Posted by: StonesTod ()
Date: August 14, 2010 00:36

Quote
Rockman
he hasn't played anything in 3 years - so he's been very consistent during this recent stretch

Lee Perry .... Sheryl Crowe ... Merle Haggard .... Jack White

you are so easily pleased. very annoying, really.

Nothing to do with easily pleased Tod... Just some the artists he's been involved with recently

yeah, i know. sigh. you're no fun anymore.

Re: Keith - what has changed really?
Posted by: Midnight Toker ()
Date: August 14, 2010 00:37

I fell off of my chair and smashed my head after that version of HTW. Awful.!!!
What had changed with Keith? It is simple. He is hampered with serious arthritis in his hands. Secondly, he is more of a machine as a player after playing the same songs live tour after tour. There is less feel to his playing and more pssing for the audience. He looks cool but seriously misses notes and chords where they are supposed to be played with greater frequency. In 1975-1981 we got less posing and alot more playing. He was at his apex in 1994 on the BtoB tour when he took IORR to another level. He was ripping riffs left and right like the Keith we came to love. After that, his playing became more spotty and more inconsistent. He had some great nights and nights where he botched easy chords and simple riffs. Not paying attention to the task at and.
Let's face it, most guitar players lose a little something over time. Jimmy Page isn't the same player he once was, but he doesn't need a guy like Blondie to fill in the gaps during a live performance.
The Stones should put their collective tails between their legs,bring back MT for the last tour and recording and exit with the biggest bang. They need an injection of freshness like a old pond needs fresh water.

Re: Keith - what has changed really?
Posted by: Rockman ()
Date: August 14, 2010 01:07

you're no fun anymore.

Ahhhhhhh they said Australia was safe ... don't tell me it's spreadin' down here now....



ROCKMAN

Re: Keith - what has changed really?
Posted by: theimposter ()
Date: August 14, 2010 04:08

Jesus Christ and Judas Priest, I believe I am unable to father a child after hearing Keith's playing on HTW. People can be apologists and blame arthritis all they want, but arthritis isn't going to cause him to play entirely in the wrong key (unless his ears have arthritis as well), to start to early and generally play an entirely different song than the rest of the band.

Re: Keith - what has changed really?
Posted by: Sipuncula ()
Date: August 14, 2010 05:09

Wasn't that around the time Patti was diagnosed with cancer and he didn't think she was going to make it? Hopefully that somewhat explains it.

Re: Keith - what has changed really?
Posted by: keefed ()
Date: August 14, 2010 11:18

This Blondie covering Keith thing is BS.

A couple of years ago there was a qoute here, someone found it embarrasing that Blondie covering Keef's part in Satisfaction - well, Blondie played acoustic (chords) and Keiths played electric (riffs). That's it.

If you see someone playing guitar onstage beside Keef or Ronnie that doesn't mean he is covering parts of them. Listen to recordings carefully and you will see(hear) that Blondie's part usually an additional guitar part, not covering.

Re: Keith - what has changed really?
Posted by: Jos ()
Date: August 14, 2010 11:38

That start of HTW is eerily similar to what happened in the Goffert in 2007 with Happy (on the main stage btw). I thought he had totally lost it. Very sad to see that happen. Very awkward. Fortunately he was back on later. Must have to do with his medication at the time. The brain is not something to @@@@ around with.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2010-08-14 11:38 by Jos.

Re: Keith - what has changed really?
Posted by: 71Tele ()
Date: August 14, 2010 11:45

Quote
crumbling_mice
another let's knock the @#$%& out of Keith thread...I won't argue that he has played some lousy gigs, but he also played pretty lousy on Hyde Park - long before medical problems kicked in. I think it's more likely the B-stage syndrome, coupled with the fact that he enjoys himself a little too much on stage these days. In the heroin years, he still used to @#$%& up and play awful solos, and even get the chords wrong...it's just more easily seen these days, every fan has a mobile to record it, bootlegging is massive and the tv is never far away. He also knows he has a massive backing band and prefers the posing around more than the focussing on his playing. Fair play to him, for decades he didnt interact, he's just getting his share now. Don't knock him, when he's gone you'll all be wishing he was still here playing bum notes lousy solos and starting songs in the wrong key. It's rock n roll not the x factor!

I don't wish to knock him at all, but I totally disagree with your reasoning. It's not that he didn't mess up before, it's the whole spectrum of his playing has deteriorated: his timing and fluidity. At least before we had brilliance with occasional mistakes. What we have had recently is something else entirely.

Re: Keith - what has changed really?
Posted by: Bimmelzerbott ()
Date: August 14, 2010 12:18

Keith was a mess on the three BB shows I've been to. Not even amateur status. It was embarrassing. Really.

Re: Keith - what has changed really?
Posted by: NedKelly ()
Date: August 14, 2010 12:26

Quote
71Tele
Quote
crumbling_mice
another let's knock the @#$%& out of Keith thread...I won't argue that he has played some lousy gigs, but he also played pretty lousy on Hyde Park - long before medical problems kicked in. I think it's more likely the B-stage syndrome, coupled with the fact that he enjoys himself a little too much on stage these days. In the heroin years, he still used to @#$%& up and play awful solos, and even get the chords wrong...it's just more easily seen these days, every fan has a mobile to record it, bootlegging is massive and the tv is never far away. He also knows he has a massive backing band and prefers the posing around more than the focussing on his playing. Fair play to him, for decades he didnt interact, he's just getting his share now. Don't knock him, when he's gone you'll all be wishing he was still here playing bum notes lousy solos and starting songs in the wrong key. It's rock n roll not the x factor!

I don't wish to knock him at all, but I totally disagree with your reasoning. It's not that he didn't mess up before, it's the whole spectrum of his playing has deteriorated: his timing and fluidity. At least before we had brilliance with occasional mistakes. What we have had recently is something else entirely.


I totally agree with crumbling_mice and totally disagree with 71Tele.
I want to say that this thread was not posted to knock Keith in any way. I just wanted to know if anyone really knows what made the changes in his playing. Unfortunately there's always someone who ruins the threads around here with personal feelings or just mean postings to butcher our guys. But by some of the posts in this thread it's easy to see that the change to Keiths playing is a complex one.
He has arthritis.
He has had a serious brain injury.
He can't use the drugs he is used to, but instead some other medication.
His wife has been very ill.
He is just getting older.
He's played the songs thousands of times and might be bored or unconsentrated.
The Stones do change the arrangements on the songs from time to time(Not that the changes include the mistakes he makes, but it shows in the fact that he plays them differently and that Blondie does his thing)
He spends more time posing, which is good for the main part of the audience.

I think I've got my answer, and this thread can be closed. Thanks everybody for posting.

I think we still got Keith in great shape, willing to tour and I'm sure he and his band will give us a lot more rock'n roll music to enjoy on the next tour. I sure am looking forward to seeing him, Ronnie, Mick, Charlie, Darryl, Chuck, Lisa, Blondie, Bernard, Bobby and the rest next year.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2010-08-14 12:28 by NedKelly.

Re: Keith - what has changed really?
Posted by: redsock ()
Date: August 14, 2010 16:46

I'm thinking that when the Stones finally do the LAST tour, Keith will cut the BS and go out with a bang. That will help with the posing, but not with the physical limitations of a (roughly) 70-year-old man whose body has endured more abuse than most.

Re: Keith - what has changed really?
Posted by: skipstone ()
Date: August 14, 2010 16:52

Do you mean to tell me it's like WWL - a commercial interrupted by talk radio? Keith's mistakes interrupted by accurate playing? That's how he is now? He bombed HTW pretty good but I find it hard to believe he'd do that for an entire show. Although some of those other videos, like You Got Me Rocking, are amazing.

It had to be the meds. Arthritis doesn't make you play wrong notes or get completely lost in a song that only has 3 chords in it.

Re: Keith - what has changed really?
Posted by: winter ()
Date: August 14, 2010 17:36

It's not that the arthritis just makes it harder to move his fingers; the bulges at his knuckles make it unlikely that he can even make a one-finger barre chord and have all the notes ring out clearly, which is probably why he does alot of single note noodling instead of his signature open G barre chords.

Re: Keith - what has changed really?
Posted by: More Hot Rocks ()
Date: August 14, 2010 18:08

Everybody talk about your liver, your lungs, your looks when you abuse liquor and drugs. Yup. Don't forget Keiths brain. I've seen people in their twenty's that are now sober but are spent because their brains are fried from years of abuse.

Re: Keith - what has changed really?
Posted by: drummer_dude ()
Date: August 14, 2010 18:25

Well I have epilepsy and I take Dilantin to control my seizures, been taking it since i was 11 years old and still today. Yes memory loss is a factor. I am a drummer sometimes I don't remember some of my licks but it comes with playing just takes a little while to recall, but I am ok.

i can understand Keith's problem. You don't want him to pass out while playing


Keith still rocks!

drummer_dude

Re: Keith - what has changed really?
Posted by: mckalk ()
Date: August 14, 2010 18:54

Quote
ROPENI
Now he needs Blondie to cover up for him in his playing...

Is Blondie audible back there? In 2005 it looked like he was strumming up a storm at times, but I am a very rudimentay musician, so I was not sure. Is he playing rhythm, doing any fills?

It seems like Keith was almost doing the BB King thing at times with tasty little bursts and solos and then pauses. I guess that would make sense if he has advanced arthritis. Repetitive motion is the killer.

Re: Keith - what has changed really?
Posted by: bustedtrousers ()
Date: August 15, 2010 13:53

Quote
DandelionPowderman
That's the usual B-stage trouble. Sounds horrible. Lose the B-stage!

Yeah, that's what the problem was in that HTW clip. It had nothing at all to do with Keith's playing, it was just crappy sound, and getting rid of the B stage will solve everything. Right.

Look, we can debate this forever, but all you have to do is take a look at that video (and there's many others too), listen to the tapes of shows, and the eyewitness accounts of audience members from the past few years. Something is up with Keith's playing ability. Even at his junked out worst in 75, he didn't f-uck up like that.

After all he has been through, and put himself through, at least some of his ability is gone, at least his ability to be fairly consistent is, and it's likely never coming back. And like someone else said in response to his waving off Mick and Darryl's concern in that clip, it's sad.

Re: Keith - what has changed really?
Posted by: stoneswashed77 ()
Date: August 15, 2010 14:01

Quote
Mathijs
After doing heroin, coke. LSD and whatever since '67, and then replacing it all with sumptious amounts of hard liquor, your brain goes "kgggggggggggggggg" when you're '60. And so it did.

Mathijs

exactly what i think, but it started long before 60. it´s the brain not arthritis.
a crying shame and good example of how not to live your life.

Re: Keith - what has changed really?
Posted by: stoneswashed77 ()
Date: August 15, 2010 14:04

Quote
tumbled
what has happened is a serious knock on the head, a brain injury causing aneurysm and long term prone to seizures and having to take dilantin which leads to memory loss and various side effects of the drug. He is lucky to be alive

the knock on the head too, i don´t believe the medication theory though.

Goto Page: Previous1234Next
Current Page: 2 of 4


Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.

Online Users

Guests: 1935
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