Hmmm---ever keith was my fab..----but since"shine a light!--He was just bad

under the boardwalk---down by the sea

Quote
Havo
Hmmm---ever keith was my fab..----but since"shine a light!--He was just bad

I'm not sure what your point is Havo. Are you suggesting the Stones should tour without Keith Richards?

Isn't Keith the one who's been pushing to tour? Stones--if you cant-----let Keith roll.

[www.non-filters.com]

havo, if u can-----let the mouth shut

There is no Rolling Stones without Keith so let's not talk stupid.

Quote
Rickster
There is no Rolling Stones without Keith so let's not talk stupid.

You know that you are talking about image, but not about music, not?

I would say that there is no Stones without Keith in top or at least good form. Otherwise it makes no sense. Touring with Keith in bad form makes absolutely no sense.

Quote
Rickster
There is no Rolling Stones without Keith so let's not talk stupid.

seconded. No keith (or Mick or Charlie) = no stones

This is nonsense, it wouldn't be the Rolling Stones without Keith...if he can't play, let him stay on stage and do his noodling with a back up guitarist. Ronnie is playing fine andknows all Keith's parts...so, bring Taylor in - if his health can take it that is!

No Keith no Stones period the end!

Gimme a break, will ya! It's a no-go if the riff master is not on board the Stones pirate ship

when its time to sail away and get busy again. After all, Mick is rock and Keith is roll.

again and again same old threads..

Quote
Bitches Brew
again and again same old threads..

And your point is??

Bring in Jeff Beck

Quote
pgarof

Quote
Bitches Brew
again and again same old threads..

And your point is??

pgrof

and your ppoint is??

i can see bitches brews point more clearly then yours

Quote
mtaylor
Bring in Jeff Beck

No, that's a bad idea (I think), but I enjoyed the clip very much. Somehow, I had not seen that thanks.

this has top 5 idiotic threads of the year honors already! 2 weeks in!!!

All you're really asking for is a Mick solo tour. I don't object to that in principle, but let's not call it the Stones.

Utter stupidity: if Mick, Keith or Charlie ain't involved, it ain't the Rolling Stones. If any one of them can't participate, GAME OVER!

No, they all go out together with this last tour and all the more reason to include Bill and Mick T.

Havo is a great fan and I value his contributions here. I agree that his suggestion is a bad idea, but let's not go out of our way to hurt his feelings.

-



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 2011-01-16 19:56 by Amsterdamned.

Quote
texas fan

Quote
mtaylor
Bring in Jeff Beck

No, that's a bad idea (I think), but I enjoyed the clip very much. Somehow, I had not seen that thanks.

Thanks for posting, quite a sleazy couple of players.
And yup, Jeff, the perfect swine.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2011-01-16 20:03 by Amsterdamned.

I had a dream the other night that I was at a Stones show...they were playing a small school theater or something, a very small place. It was just them, without Chuck and all the backup singers, horn section, and extra musicans. But there was no Keith, somebody else was filling in for him. I woke up feeling very bummed out, and even though the show was still very good, it felt like a nightmare!

havo--------------if you can--------------leave it alone----------------------stones won't roll-----------------nor will keith solo---------------arthritis---------------problem----------------------maybe----whatever----------------------or they will roll----when----------no---------------one-------------truly-----------knows---------------doesn't---------------matter--------------does------------------it---------------now.

I agree with those who say that they are not the Stones without Keith, or Mick.

Yet Keith's age, health, etc., have interfered with the quality of the music as has
Ronnie's lack of sobriety.

I Mick T can tour he should be include in a three guitar line up, front and center, or another great lead guitar player. The music would sound a lot better. Keith could play simpler parts.

It takes a man to admit when time has seriously affected you and you pass the torch to another who can more competently represent that awesome catalog of songs.

Just think of how good the next tour could sound. . ..

If it offends, sorry, but were paying for it.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2011-01-17 06:08 by deadegad.

Yeah, ok, fine, but Keith has already toured solo. TWICE. And he hasn't done it since. He's had PLENTY of opportunity to do so.

There you go.

That's how the "Stones" without Keith would sound. Do you really want that?

Quote
alimente

Quote
Rickster
There is no Rolling Stones without Keith so let's not talk stupid.

You know that you are talking about image, but not about music, not?

I would say that there is no Stones without Keith in top or at least good form. Otherwise it makes no sense. Touring with Keith in bad form makes absolutely no sense.

Touring without him makes even much less sense

Mick Jagger sure looks good in that clip with long, full hair, lots of energy and he's pretty much
doing a perfect version of JJF. But we don't want no Jimmy Rip, it's gotta be Keef who's delivering the goods.