Quote
whitem8
Well there is a bit between Chuck and Keith...Chuck was might pissed that Keith testified for Johnny Johnson, and Keith didn't feel too good about what he thought as Chuck taking advantage of Johnny by not giving co-writing credits (funny! Reminds me of another guy that didn't get credits)...and since that trial they haven't performed much Chuck, I know they did Little Queenie at the Double Door gig in Chicago, but nothing since then if I am not mistaken.

Quote
skipstone

Quote
whitem8

Mick Taylor has nothing - at all - to do with the success of The Rolling Stones, unlike Johnnie Johnson with Chuck Berry.

Correct.

Quote
Max Volume!!!
Bye, Bye Johnny just SMOKES

Quote
Carnaby

Quote
CBII

Quote
Edith Grove
Quite honestly, I'd rather hear more Chuck Berry covers than some of their most recent choices for covers.

Ouch!

Hi CB. CBII, have to ask you- How are you with the Duck Walk?

Quote
CBII

Quote
Max Volume!!!
Bye, Bye Johnny just SMOKES

Good god yes! They ripped the hell out of that number at Madison Square Garden.

Quote
whitem8
Well there is a bit between Chuck and Keith...Chuck was might pissed that Keith testified for Johnny Johnson, and Keith didn't feel too good about what he thought as Chuck taking advantage of Johnny by not giving co-writing credits (funny! Reminds me of another guy that didn't get credits)...and since that trial they haven't performed much Chuck, I know they did Little Queenie at the Double Door gig in Chicago, but nothing since then if I am not mistaken.

Quote
behroez
Well the one song the Stones should defenitly play on their last tour is their first single Come On, but more as Chuck actually recorded it, yes with horns and Jagger in duet with Lisa Fisher (as Chuck sang it with his wife), they'll break the house down i'm sure.

Quote
CBII

Quote
behroez
Well the one song the Stones should defenitly play on their last tour is their first single Come On, but more as Chuck actually recorded it, yes with horns and Jagger in duet with Lisa Fisher (as Chuck sang it with his wife), they'll break the house down i'm sure.

The female singer was not my mom. It was either my aunt Lucy or Etta James.

Quote
CBII

Quote
whitem8
Well there is a bit between Chuck and Keith...Chuck was might pissed that Keith testified for Johnny Johnson, and Keith didn't feel too good about what he thought as Chuck taking advantage of Johnny by not giving co-writing credits (funny! Reminds me of another guy that didn't get credits)...and since that trial they haven't performed much Chuck, I know they did Little Queenie at the Double Door gig in Chicago, but nothing since then if I am not mistaken.

Whoa! Let's replay that one. 'Pissed' is certainly the wrong word to describe what dad's opinion was. Astonished and amazed are terms more fitting. We all were blown away when that law suit came about and had every confidence who would prevail. Keith's comments in Hail! Hail! Rock N Roll started all that speculation. Someone (not Keith) with a bankroll heard Keith's words and ran with it. These guys were REAL friends and it's unfortunate to have had some of the few whispering in his ear about this or that. The real vindication my father received was not when the suit was thrown out of court but when Johnny sat in at a show at Blueberry Hill here in Saint Louis. All he wanted to do was to play music with one of his oldest friends again. I was there and had the honor of playing on the same stage with him and my father. If I remember correctly, Johnny passed away within six months of that show.

As to my dad and Keith's relationship, dad holds nothing against him. We know the real dynamics of how that law suit started. I just provided a snippet of the back story to that part of time none of you are aware of. Keith did what he did on the information supplied to him, and what he assumed to be fact not on any direct knowledge of what actually transpired (how could he, he was not there). In my opinion a mistake on his part. We all still have a great deal of respect for Keith including my father. Johnny did deserve his place in the Rock n Roll Hall of fame and Keith's efforts is what helped him get there. My dad also wrote something to assist Johnny take his place on the hallowed ground.

The one infamous scene in Hail! Hail! Rock N Roll did exactly what it was supposed to do, get you on the edge of your seat looking for that first drop of blood. Taylor Hackford executed his directorial task brilliantly. No question, there was an issue with the sound guys messing with dad's amp. Here's the twist, it was in fact his amp, in his studio, on his farm, playing music he wrote and in a movie being made about him. Just how many people are going to tolerate someone telling them, you're playing your music wrong? Kinda makes a person wonder huh? There's been famously documented disagreements between Mick and Keith however, at the end of the day, the fence is mended and they kept right on making music and money.

As to not playing my dad's music anymore that's up to the Rolling Stones. This is not the first thread on IORR or for that matter other places that have suggested they play more of his music. No other band can get essence of dad's music like them.

Even if Keith has blocked playing my dad's songs on stage, he's still doing it nearly every time he picks his guitar up and starts playing it. They don't need to play anyone else's music, there's PLENTY of their own to entertain us. I certainly would not be mad if they DID play dad's stuff live.

Quote
Amused

Quote
CBII

Quote
behroez
Well the one song the Stones should defenitly play on their last tour is their first single Come On, but more as Chuck actually recorded it, yes with horns and Jagger in duet with Lisa Fisher (as Chuck sang it with his wife), they'll break the house down i'm sure.

The female singer was not my mom. It was either my aunt Lucy or Etta James.

has Ingrid been featured on any recordings?
she was great in H!H!RnR.

Quote
StonesTod

Quote
CBII

Quote
whitem8
Well there is a bit between Chuck and Keith...Chuck was might pissed that Keith testified for Johnny Johnson, and Keith didn't feel too good about what he thought as Chuck taking advantage of Johnny by not giving co-writing credits (funny! Reminds me of another guy that didn't get credits)...and since that trial they haven't performed much Chuck, I know they did Little Queenie at the Double Door gig in Chicago, but nothing since then if I am not mistaken.

Whoa! Let's replay that one. 'Pissed' is certainly the wrong word to describe what dad's opinion was. Astonished and amazed are terms more fitting. We all were blown away when that law suit came about and had every confidence who would prevail. Keith's comments in Hail! Hail! Rock N Roll started all that speculation. Someone (not Keith) with a bankroll heard Keith's words and ran with it. These guys were REAL friends and it's unfortunate to have had some of the few whispering in his ear about this or that. The real vindication my father received was not when the suit was thrown out of court but when Johnny sat in at a show at Blueberry Hill here in Saint Louis. All he wanted to do was to play music with one of his oldest friends again. I was there and had the honor of playing on the same stage with him and my father. If I remember correctly, Johnny passed away within six months of that show.

As to my dad and Keith's relationship, dad holds nothing against him. We know the real dynamics of how that law suit started. I just provided a snippet of the back story to that part of time none of you are aware of. Keith did what he did on the information supplied to him, and what he assumed to be fact not on any direct knowledge of what actually transpired (how could he, he was not there). In my opinion a mistake on his part. We all still have a great deal of respect for Keith including my father. Johnny did deserve his place in the Rock n Roll Hall of fame and Keith's efforts is what helped him get there. My dad also wrote something to assist Johnny take his place on the hallowed ground.

The one infamous scene in Hail! Hail! Rock N Roll did exactly what it was supposed to do, get you on the edge of your seat looking for that first drop of blood. Taylor Hackford executed his directorial task brilliantly. No question, there was an issue with the sound guys messing with dad's amp. Here's the twist, it was in fact his amp, in his studio, on his farm, playing music he wrote and in a movie being made about him. Just how many people are going to tolerate someone telling them, you're playing your music wrong? Kinda makes a person wonder huh? There's been famously documented disagreements between Mick and Keith however, at the end of the day, the fence is mended and they kept right on making music and money.

As to not playing my dad's music anymore that's up to the Rolling Stones. This is not the first thread on IORR or for that matter other places that have suggested they play more of his music. No other band can get essence of dad's music like them.

Even if Keith has blocked playing my dad's songs on stage, he's still doing it nearly every time he picks his guitar up and starts playing it. They don't need to play anyone else's music, there's PLENTY of their own to entertain us. I certainly would not be mad if they DID play dad's stuff live.

thanks for the informative post, cbii. personally, i can't help but believe the issue has everything (or at least something) to do with why they've stopped playing your dad's songs (and, yeah, ain't it funny that basically keith plays your dad on practically every lead he plays nowadays? the timing here is too coincidental for me to believe it doesn't have something to do with it.

Quote
whitem8
Well there is a bit between Chuck and Keith...Chuck was might pissed that Keith testified for Johnny Johnson, and Keith didn't feel too good about what he thought as Chuck taking advantage of Johnny by not giving co-writing credits (funny! Reminds me of another guy that didn't get credits)...and since that trial they haven't performed much Chuck, I know they did Little Queenie at the Double Door gig in Chicago, but nothing since then if I am not mistaken.

Quote
CBII

Quote
StonesTod

Quote
CBII

Quote
whitem8
Well there is a bit between Chuck and Keith...Chuck was might pissed that Keith testified for Johnny Johnson, and Keith didn't feel too good about what he thought as Chuck taking advantage of Johnny by not giving co-writing credits (funny! Reminds me of another guy that didn't get credits)...and since that trial they haven't performed much Chuck, I know they did Little Queenie at the Double Door gig in Chicago, but nothing since then if I am not mistaken.

Whoa! Let's replay that one. 'Pissed' is certainly the wrong word to describe what dad's opinion was. Astonished and amazed are terms more fitting. We all were blown away when that law suit came about and had every confidence who would prevail. Keith's comments in Hail! Hail! Rock N Roll started all that speculation. Someone (not Keith) with a bankroll heard Keith's words and ran with it. These guys were REAL friends and it's unfortunate to have had some of the few whispering in his ear about this or that. The real vindication my father received was not when the suit was thrown out of court but when Johnny sat in at a show at Blueberry Hill here in Saint Louis. All he wanted to do was to play music with one of his oldest friends again. I was there and had the honor of playing on the same stage with him and my father. If I remember correctly, Johnny passed away within six months of that show.

As to my dad and Keith's relationship, dad holds nothing against him. We know the real dynamics of how that law suit started. I just provided a snippet of the back story to that part of time none of you are aware of. Keith did what he did on the information supplied to him, and what he assumed to be fact not on any direct knowledge of what actually transpired (how could he, he was not there). In my opinion a mistake on his part. We all still have a great deal of respect for Keith including my father. Johnny did deserve his place in the Rock n Roll Hall of fame and Keith's efforts is what helped him get there. My dad also wrote something to assist Johnny take his place on the hallowed ground.

The one infamous scene in Hail! Hail! Rock N Roll did exactly what it was supposed to do, get you on the edge of your seat looking for that first drop of blood. Taylor Hackford executed his directorial task brilliantly. No question, there was an issue with the sound guys messing with dad's amp. Here's the twist, it was in fact his amp, in his studio, on his farm, playing music he wrote and in a movie being made about him. Just how many people are going to tolerate someone telling them, you're playing your music wrong? Kinda makes a person wonder huh? There's been famously documented disagreements between Mick and Keith however, at the end of the day, the fence is mended and they kept right on making music and money.

As to not playing my dad's music anymore that's up to the Rolling Stones. This is not the first thread on IORR or for that matter other places that have suggested they play more of his music. No other band can get essence of dad's music like them.

Even if Keith has blocked playing my dad's songs on stage, he's still doing it nearly every time he picks his guitar up and starts playing it. They don't need to play anyone else's music, there's PLENTY of their own to entertain us. I certainly would not be mad if they DID play dad's stuff live.

thanks for the informative post, cbii. personally, i can't help but believe the issue has everything (or at least something) to do with why they've stopped playing your dad's songs (and, yeah, ain't it funny that basically keith plays your dad on practically every lead he plays nowadays? the timing here is too coincidental for me to believe it doesn't have something to do with it.

It could have everything to do with it. Like I said though, he's doing it anyway. The best tributes don't always come in the form of monetary compensation.

Quote
Gazza

It was omitted at a few shows that were being broadcast. I read at the time (not sure if its true, because its quite evident from CBII's posts on here that there are a few misconceptions about Stones/Chuck disagreements being peddled as 'facts') that the reason was that they considered Chuck's demand for royalties for broadcasted performances of his songs to be excessive.

Quote
Doxa

Quote
Gazza

It was omitted at a few shows that were being broadcast. I read at the time (not sure if its true, because its quite evident from CBII's posts on here that there are a few misconceptions about Stones/Chuck disagreements being peddled as 'facts') that the reason was that they considered Chuck's demand for royalties for broadcasted performances of his songs to be excessive.

I quess that is correct but isn't somehow funny that the richest rock and roll band of the world, very much inspired by Chuck Berry in the first place, does not have "afford" to pay royalties for him (even if he would ask a bit more than usual)... Well, that's business, but... really?

- Doxa

Quote
Gazza

Quote
whitem8
Well there is a bit between Chuck and Keith...Chuck was might pissed that Keith testified for Johnny Johnson, and Keith didn't feel too good about what he thought as Chuck taking advantage of Johnny by not giving co-writing credits (funny! Reminds me of another guy that didn't get credits)...and since that trial they haven't performed much Chuck, I know they did Little Queenie at the Double Door gig in Chicago, but nothing since then if I am not mistaken.

They played it at almost every show on the 1997-98 tour.

It was omitted at a few shows that were being broadcast. I read at the time (not sure if its true, because its quite evident from CBII's posts on here that there are a few misconceptions about Stones/Chuck disagreements being peddled as 'facts') that the reason was that they considered Chuck's demand for royalties for broadcasted performances of his songs to be excessive.

Quote
Gazza
You're too diplomatic.

Quote
NICOS
the reason was that they considered Chuck's demand for royalties for broadcasted performances of his songs to be excessive.

Then he is more stupid then I thought he was.

Because of the Stones I know who Chuck Berry is and bought some records of him, he would have made more money commercially if he let them play his songs for free

Quote
Dali
Chuck Berry's interview in 2007

(1:50) Who is your favorite guitar player?

There's no favorite. From Keith Richard...

(2:11) How is your relationship with Keith Richard right now?

You know, we weren't angry. We don't get angry with each other. We slap each other's face but we don't get angry with it. Anyway, it's not what you really see at all.

Quote
CBII

Quote
Dali
Chuck Berry's interview in 2007

(1:50) Who is your favorite guitar player?

There's no favorite. From Keith Richard...

(2:11) How is your relationship with Keith Richard right now?

You know, we weren't angry. We don't get angry with each other. We slap each other's face but we don't get angry with it. Anyway, it's not what you really see at all.

Like I was said...

Quote
NICOS

Quote
CBII

Quote
Dali
Chuck Berry's interview in 2007

(1:50) Who is your favorite guitar player?

There's no favorite. From Keith Richard...

(2:11) How is your relationship with Keith Richard right now?

You know, we weren't angry. We don't get angry with each other. We slap each other's face but we don't get angry with it. Anyway, it's not what you really see at all.

Like I was said...

Like I was said too...........No Rolling Stones No Chuck Berry (for me)