Quote
Mathijs

Quote
Stoneage
I'm sure he meant much to the band, 24FPS. Especially in the beginning when they were starting out. He seemed to be somewhat of a father, or older brother, to them. But to the overall sound of The Stones I don't think his generic, toned down piano playing in the back contributed that much. Certainly not live, maybe more so in the studio though.

? Ian is feautured quite prominenently on all tours from '69 to '82. All the barrelhouse boogie woogie piano is truly instrumental to the Stones.

Mathijs

Ian set the template for what piano on a Stones record should sound like.

His playing on the Title Track of Let It Bleed is my favorite piece of music from him.

Brings Zep's 'Rock n Roll' to life too.

"I'll be in my basement room with a needle and a spoon."

Quote
Braincapers
I was listening to Zep's Rock & Roll and Boogie with Stu and enjoyed some lovely piano from Ian and it occured to me that I couldn't off hand think of any Stones tracks that really showed off Stu's talents.

Any recommendations?

I posted this back in Dec 2010 and I still can't think of a Stones song that shows Stu off as well as Boogie with Stu did.

Quote
stonesrule
Yes, I've often thought about that.
He hated watching Keith decline with all these ghastly enablers in every country they toured in. My impression was that Stu tried to stay away from Keith as much as possible because it was too terrible to see how he had changed.

Did you know Stu, stonesrule? or how do you know "he hated watching Keith with all these ghastly enablers in every country they toured in"? And what led you to the impression "Stu tried stay away from Keith as much as possible because it was too terrible to see how he had changed"?

Not an attack, just wondering how you came to the above.

-swiss

Quote
Doxa

I wish he had been around later. He would have come and said to them: "What a hell you think you are? A Vegas Orchestra?".

- Doxa

+1

Quote
Svartmer
Here´s a short interview with the man. It´s from Gothenburg 1982. (The first minute there´s an introduction in Swedish)

[sverigesradio.se]

Awesome to hear Stu talk this much - thanks so much for posting this!
-swiss

Here's the percussion-only track of My Obsession, featuring some great Stu!

Quote
NICOS
Nobody on this board will overlook this.

OK, I will. He was not an important member and I dont believe for a second that his opinion mattered. I think he's part of their story, the antithesis of Brian with truckdriver looks, the "'onest 'ard working bloke". Keiths working class alibi. Great piano player and very important to their sound in 1964/1965. Actually his piano riff on Can I Get a Witness was the first riff I learned to play. I love his bluesy sound.

Quote
swiss
Here's the percussion-only track of My Obsession, featuring some great Stu!

What a freakin cool pic of Brian from the JJF video. Awesome. Yes, Stu is underrated of course. He wasnt just great in 1964/1965 but on those first two records he's important to their sound.

Again Nicky Hopkins is the stones piano sound

Quote
GOO
Again Nicky Hopkins is the stones piano sound

Yup. Stu was great but Nicky is much more important. Take SFTD or anything from 1967-1974 really. And live... one shining diamond.

Quote
GOO
Again Nicky Hopkins is the stones piano sound

Again, I respectfully disagree.

video: [youtu.be]

Been 40 years since his passing. Finest boogie piano player of all time (to my ears). Stones haven't sounded the same since he left us.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2025-12-13 14:51 by bv.

RIP, remember reading the news in "Libé", big shock...

--------------
IORR Links : Essential Studio Outtakes CDs : Audio - History of Rarest Outtakes : Audio

calling Ian Stewart "OT" is a bit disrespectful, I am sure many here will agree

It was sad and it is sad. I can't believe it is already 40 Years ago!
In this perspective, let us enjoy the next tour and the new album!
For me it doesn't matter if it will be a new no.1 album, or if the new tour will be big and successful, as long as I like it.
Let's be honest, the End is in sight!

It`s nice to be here, .....

Quote
Mathijs

Quote
Vocalion

Quote
warthog
I think Ian Stewart was such an important part of the Stones sound. It's easy to over look this, but they always sounded much sweeter with him on keys. That's why the Some Girls stuff sound so good in my opinion

Dude, zero songs on Some Girls feature Ian Stewart.....

Stu is on Shattered.

Mathijs

I asked the question is Ian on Shattered and some answers from AI say Yes and some say NO. I listened to the track very attentively and I don't hear a piano. If it is there it is buried very deep so deep that it is not there.

Stu was their from the start with his van and playing great piano on so many Stones songs till 80s

My own personal opinion is that without Ian we may not even have had the rich history of the Stones. He was like the "fixer" to a degree. Miss him.

The band was never the same after Stu's passing. The "boogie woogie" feel was gone.

Once Chuck became the keyboard player the songs lost the vibe, and the tempo was different.

There are some great clips of Stu on the Hampton video.

I guess there have been, so to speak, many parameters about this band, the Rolling Stones. Ian Stewart one of them.

Those are almost all of them, all the same, important aspects of variation of what is still one collective unit, the Rolling Stones.

[You seemed to agree on that point, His Majesty. You would have been able to expound on that idea so much more than I can. I would so much like to see you do so. Once you contributed so much here.]

As far as I know, Ian Stewart was a moral authority within the Stones and seems to have suggested bringing in Chuck Leavell when the band needed a stable, technically solid, and disciplined keyboard player. For Jagger and Richards, a suggestion from Stewart carried almost sacral weight: Stewart was “the guardian of the temple,” the guarantor of the Rolling Stones’ ethos. If he said “this one,” there was no debate.

That is why Leavell came in and never left. Not as an official member, but as a structural pillar of the live shows and of the post-1982 sound. For many fans, that suggestion was not a blessing but a problematic turning point. Why:

Leavell is excessively clean, academic, professional.
He introduces a more polished, almost “corporate” sound.
He marks the shift from an unpredictable band to a perfectly oiled machine.

Stewart was thinking about saving the band, but many fans feel that with Leavell they lost risk, grime, and danger. Leavell represents the end of the Stones as a threat and their consolidation as a global institution.

Where I’m getting at is this: for many fans, Ian S. made a mistake.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2025-12-14 00:52 by emotionalbarbecue.

Quote
rollmops

Quote
Mathijs

Quote
Vocalion

Quote
warthog
I think Ian Stewart was such an important part of the Stones sound. It's easy to over look this, but they always sounded much sweeter with him on keys. That's why the Some Girls stuff sound so good in my opinion

Dude, zero songs on Some Girls feature Ian Stewart.....

Stu is on Shattered.

Mathijs

I asked the question is Ian on Shattered and some answers from AI say Yes and some say NO. I listened to the track very attentively and I don't hear a piano. If it is there it is buried very deep so deep that it is not there.

But AI is getting the answers from websites like IORR, so what answer do you expect?

Mathijs

Quote
Mathijs

Quote
rollmops

Quote
Mathijs

Quote
Vocalion

Quote
warthog
I think Ian Stewart was such an important part of the Stones sound. It's easy to over look this, but they always sounded much sweeter with him on keys. That's why the Some Girls stuff sound so good in my opinion

Dude, zero songs on Some Girls feature Ian Stewart.....

Stu is on Shattered.

Mathijs

You are right about AI; maybe AI should do what I did and check out Nico Zentgraf website ; line-up for Shattered on (June/9/78)does not include Ian regarding Nico.

I asked the question is Ian on Shattered and some answers from AI say Yes and some say NO. I listened to the track very attentively and I don't hear a piano. If it is there it is buried very deep so deep that it is not there.

But AI is getting the answers from websites like IORR, so what answer do you expect?

Mathijs

You are right with AI; AI should do like I did and check out Nico Zentgraf's website.On June 9 1978 the line-up for the recording of Shattered does not include Ian.

A lot of lineups are educated guesswork. Sometimes even the players don’t remember who played on what.

For instance, Nicky Hopkins is listed on Potted Shrimp but it sounds more like Stu (even Stephen Stills or Bobby Whitlock)

Quote
TravelinMan
A lot of lineups are educated guesswork. Sometimes even the players don’t remember who played on what.

For instance, Nicky Hopkins is listed on Potted Shrimp but it sounds more like Stu (even Stephen Stills or Bobby Whitlock)

Listed where? By fans? Yes, fans do educated guess work. And as with science, it keeps evolving due to new information. The idea that Bobby Whitlock plays on more than one track is fairly new, the 'fact' that Hopkins wasn't available for much of the 1970's sessions is fairly new. Robert A. Johnson playing on a couple of tracks instead of Wayne Perkins is new as well, as before the B&B Deluxe release nobody knew who he was....

I think that's what's makes this website and the work of the Zentgraff's and the McPherson's of this world so nice.

Mathijs



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2025-12-15 11:16 by Mathijs.

Quote
ROLLINGSTONE
Brings Zep's 'Rock n Roll' to life too.

...and ” Boogie with Stu ”..

Look here - Stu had refused to play on SG

Read