Quote
Doxa
I can not call something genious or awesome or groundreaking if it is not. Is this really so hard to grasp? Or do I need to start doing some fan boy bullshit?

- Doxa

No, that would be silly, but so much music and musicians are called genius and groundbreaking when really they aren't.

So called genius, groundbreaking music would be nothing without the supporting musicians who are part of it. Anyway, who say's music has to be this ego driven, groundbreaking thing at all times!?

I'm telling yah, musically it's the hardest thing in the world to put ego aside and mainly do the subtle and supportive things well. It's all too easy to let your ego take over and start getting all bombastic with your playing and/or lose sight of purpose in a musically ego driven environment.



Edited 3 time(s). Last edit at 2012-02-20 15:06 by His Majesty.

Quote
kleermaker

Quote
His Majesty

Hey, I dislike much of what they did post 1972,

Surprising for me to read that you like much of them after Let It Bleed until 1973/GHS. Or is that a wrong conclusion?

I had the impression that your dislike of all post Brian stuff and Mick Taylor was growing every month.

Personally I've tried very hard to get into the 'Wood stuff' since the release of the Live in Texas DVD and Hampton official, but I didn't succeed very well. Now I think I don't like rock music, since almost everybody says they rock so hard on those releases. Or maybe too much treble for my ears.

In my perception the Stones are no typical rock & roll band until let's say 1978.

If it's just the sound quality this is much more palatable..... [www.iorr.org] ............not totally redeemed as CaptainAcid says but a lot easier on the ears...........btw welcome back..the more the merrier........

Quote
jamesfdouglas

Quote
treaclefingers

Quote
jamesfdouglas

Quote
bestfour
SIMPLE.... He's still the ENGINE, the DRIVING force of the band the minute they hit the stage OR studio, based on 50 years rocking, compared to himself

Up to and including the Voodoo Lounge Tour, sort of.

So, we're in agreement Keith is to blame for Dirty Work. I just want that clear.

They're all to blame for that dud. Even the cover photographer.

I agree...just pointing out they're ALL team efforts!

Quote
Doxa

He does nice things here and there. But I can't write off anything more of that. I can not call something genious or awesome or groundreaking if it is not. Is this really so hard to grasp? Or do I need to start doing some fan boy bullshit?

- Doxa

Is that the only alternative you have?

Of course you don't have to say you like Ron Wood if you don't. But the fact that you don't find anything "genious or awesome or groundreaking" doesn't mean that Ron Wood was not "genious, awesome and groundreaking" in the things he did.

So why not follow the way HM suggested at the beginning of the thread: be positive. Why don't you say I don't understand why so many people think Ron Wood is "genious, awesome and groundreaking", but hell, if so many beautiful minds think he is, he very well might be!

One day you will eventually see the light, I'm sure.

Latins say "in vino veritas". And they were absolutely right! You do enjoy old Ronnie after a good drink, don't you? That mean means that you were able to put aside the rational part of you - the part that will never find a convincing justification for you to like Ronnie - and let the guts decide what grooves and what does not.

As it should be!

Cheers!



C

Quote
bestfour
SIMPLE.... He's still the ENGINE, the DRIVING force of the band the minute they hit the stage OR studio, based on 50 years rocking, compared to himself

But...they haven't been rocking for 50 actual years. They haven't played for 4 years and 6 months (approximately) for one so what 'driving' force is there? Who's 'driving' them to tour right now? You know, the done deal and all that's been going on for a while?

I think it's close to 21 years without any touring...less years if you include original LP releases, slightly less if you include compilations...

Quote
liddas

Quote
Doxa

My argument simply is that Ronnie Wood is not talented enough - write good enough songs - to really shine in the Stones, or lead the band anywhere. He can't be anything else but playing a second fiddle to Keith Richards. Keith Richards is THE man.

- Doxa

But what kind of argument is this? How many songs did Charlie write for the stones? Or Bill? Since when song writing is teh bench mark to be acknowledged as an essential part of the stones etc. You said it yourself: with Ron Wood in the band they played the best rock and roll guitar ever done (I take full responsibility for canceling the "probably" in your quote).

Do you think it all started because one day Keith saw the light after reading a knitting magazine at the hairdresser and then pronounced the infamous words "let's weave!"?!

Truth is that all bands where Ronnie played were great bands. Only a coincidence?

By these standards, one should conclude that Brian Jones was even more irrelevant of Ronnie. HORROR!!!

Fact is that the world if full of people who have the chops and skills to play with the stones. But very few have the artistic personality to actually have an impact on the band.

But above all, what has all this got to do with the appreciation of Ronnie as an artist?


C

I think you misunderstood me. Kleermaker asked something about Ronnie's solo albums, and I gave my opinion. I keep those albums as an evidence of Ronnie's abilities as a song-writer and all-over visualist as a musician. He supposed the man in charge in those things, right?. I rank him alongside Bill Wyman. Neither of them being any profilic song-writer, and I think their solo albums don't gather much other interest than some Rolling Stones fan curiosity.

But like I said I think he is a perfect Rolling Stones guitarist and a second fiddle player to Keith Richards. That includes some sparring of both Mick and Keith's muse. He did really wonderful job during 1975-1983. But because I appreciate that - his contribution to The Rolling Stones - should I love his mediocre solo albums that I find extremily dull? Because I love Bill Wyman's contribution to the Rolling Stones, should I also like MONKEY GRIP? Not by my logic. Besides why Ronnie's albums be some kind of holy cows that are beyond criticism? If it is alright to criticise Rolling Stones albums, I think some critical word can be also directed to albums that are artistically far cries from the worst Rolling Stones albums. Just to put the things in perspective.

I don't get your point about Brian Jones.

- Doxa

Quote
His Majesty

Quote
Doxa
I can not call something genious or awesome or groundreaking if it is not. Is this really so hard to grasp? Or do I need to start doing some fan boy bullshit?

- Doxa

No, that would be silly, but so much music and musicians are called genius and groundbreaking when really they aren't.

So called genius, groundbreaking music would be nothing without the supporting musicians who are part of it. Anyway, who say's music has to be this ego driven, groundbreaking thing at all times!?

I'm telling yah, musically it's the hardest thing in the world to put ego aside and mainly do the subtle and supportive things well. It's all too easy to let your ego take over and start getting all bombastic with your playing and/or lose sight of purpose in a musically ego driven environment.

I don't find this post, and none of your posts about Ronnie Wood, in contradiction to what I have said. I think Ronnie is a perfect guy to serve the function he does. Especially his famous "personality" is probably the only way to cope with the egos of Mick and Keith. But we were talking about his solo albums where he is not a "supporting musician" but the man in charge. And I find that not to be his strong point. I don't find his musical visions and intuitions, nor his song-writer capacities strong enough to carry the burden. One could say that he is not Keith Richards. With the Faces I think he was "poor man's Keith Richards" and I think that part of his career was actually his highlight as a musician if the amount or responsibility and the quality of the output is weighted. With the Stones his responsibilities decreased but the quality of the music just increased. With his solo albums his responsibities are enermous but the quality next to nothing.

- Doxa



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2012-02-21 10:32 by Doxa.

Doxa, there are huge differences in songwriting quality on IGMOATD, Now Look compared to 1234 and Not For Beginners, for instance.

The two former have songs which are impressively written and performed, and do not fit your description of Ronnie's abilities as a songwriter, imo.

The songs on 1234 are loose jams, and not even very good, imo.

Quote
DandelionPowderman
Doxa, there are huge differences in songwriting quality on IGMOATD, Now Look compared to 1234 and Not For Beginners, for instance.

The two former have songs which are impressively written and performed, and do not fit your description of Ronnie's abilities as a songwriter, imo.

The songs on 1234 are loose jams, and not even very good, imo.

Yeah it could be that 1234 and GIMME SOME NECK - I can't recall which was the first one I heard - corrupted my ears so badly that my respect of Ronnie's song writing abilities just disappaered, maybe for good. I recall though when I listend to I'V GOT MY OWN ALBUM TO DO that "shit, that guy actually can write songs!". Without doubt I find that his strongest album. I have heard all the others - and own most of them - but I think he couldn't reach that level quality ever since. So I find his first solo album a kind of oddity. How the hell that happened? Was he so inspired with his new cool friends? Or gave those friends him quite a lot of helping hand? Or was he in the height of his creativity since he was the musical heart of The Faces, and full of self-confidence? Or did he just fvxked up his brains with the drugs ever since and lost the ability? Or did Keith and the rest of the big boys just kicked the balls out of him and made him a chicken?

- Doxa

Quote
Doxa

Quote
DandelionPowderman
Doxa, there are huge differences in songwriting quality on IGMOATD, Now Look compared to 1234 and Not For Beginners, for instance.

The two former have songs which are impressively written and performed, and do not fit your description of Ronnie's abilities as a songwriter, imo.

The songs on 1234 are loose jams, and not even very good, imo.

Yeah it could be that 1234 and GIMME SOME NECK - I can't recall which was the first one I heard - corrupted my ears so badly that my respect of Ronnie's song writing abilities just disappaered, maybe for good. I recall though when I listend to I'V GOT MY OWN ALBUM TO DO that "shit, that guy actually can write songs!". Without doubt I find that his strongest album. I have heard all the others - and own most of them - but I think he couldn't reach that level quality ever since. So I find his first solo album a kind of oddity. How the hell that happened? Was he so inspired with his new cool friends? Or gave those friends him quite a lot of helping hand? Or was he in the height of his creativity since he was the musical heart of The Faces, and full of self-confidence? Or did he just fvxked up his brains with the drugs ever since and lost the ability? Or did Keith and the rest of the big boys just kicked the balls out of him and made him a chicken?

- Doxa

Well, both Slide On This and I Feel Like Playing are good recent albums.

But first and foremost, you need to put on Now Look! IMO, his best album.

Quote
DandelionPowderman

Quote
Doxa

Quote
DandelionPowderman
Doxa, there are huge differences in songwriting quality on IGMOATD, Now Look compared to 1234 and Not For Beginners, for instance.

The two former have songs which are impressively written and performed, and do not fit your description of Ronnie's abilities as a songwriter, imo.

The songs on 1234 are loose jams, and not even very good, imo.

Yeah it could be that 1234 and GIMME SOME NECK - I can't recall which was the first one I heard - corrupted my ears so badly that my respect of Ronnie's song writing abilities just disappaered, maybe for good. I recall though when I listend to I'V GOT MY OWN ALBUM TO DO that "shit, that guy actually can write songs!". Without doubt I find that his strongest album. I have heard all the others - and own most of them - but I think he couldn't reach that level quality ever since. So I find his first solo album a kind of oddity. How the hell that happened? Was he so inspired with his new cool friends? Or gave those friends him quite a lot of helping hand? Or was he in the height of his creativity since he was the musical heart of The Faces, and full of self-confidence? Or did he just fvxked up his brains with the drugs ever since and lost the ability? Or did Keith and the rest of the big boys just kicked the balls out of him and made him a chicken?

- Doxa

Well, both Slide On This and I Feel Like Playing are good recent albums.

But first and foremost, you need to put on Now Look! IMO, his best album.

Sorry I can't share your opinion... unless I'm not drunk enough!

- Doxa

LOL!

@ Doxa

Quote
liddas
Latins say "in vino veritas". And they were absolutely right! You do enjoy old Ronnie after a good drink, don't you? That mean means that you were able to put aside the rational part of you - the part that will never find a convincing justification for you to like Ronnie - and let the guts decide what grooves and what does not.

As it should be!

Cheers!



C

Actually, at the moment I am really looking for that when I can enjoy listening Ronnie's stuff...

- Doxa

Hats of for kleermaker I must say, one or two posts from him and were back to the same old negative vibes.
Wauw almost a miracle, but this time round I am gonna enjoy it..

Ofcourse its just a nice discussion I know