Been a member since 93, why not say he is a Rolling Stone.. Hey , you are allowed to join the band if there is a slot.. ie…… people leave one way or another .. just a thought...

i agree, he is a bass player, not as if the band never had a bass player before.


hes more than just a backing musician.

all this nonsense about, whos a full member, whos part member and whos just not a real member is a bit confusing. it was so simple in the beginning, 5 equal band members, why cant they make it simple now.

He's been there, not as a member, for 25 years. In that time, there's been a lot of touring, but only four studio albums. Of those four albums, only a few songs are in the live setlist. So in view of his relatively small contribution to new Stones music, I'd say no.

If they were going to make Darryl a member, they'd have to make Chuck one too. 36 years of service counts for something, plinky plonk notwithstanding. Stu was a member, until ALO pushed him out, and Chuck effectively replaced Stu.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2018-10-23 05:22 by ab.

Because after 1981 no one else was becoming a Rolling Stone. It really is as simple as that. Daryl is great but unfortunately joined the band once they'd stop being creative, so they don't consider him a "Stone". He joined a brand, not a band. But he's great. Often overlooked.

"He joined a brand, not a band."

Interesting statement. It could be said about a number of bands with a few original members and the rest all hired hands. Regarding it as a statement regarding the Stones, I think it hits the mark pretty well.

He’s a hired-hand; part of their touring ensemble. He was never considered Bill’s replacement. The Stones simply do not have a bassist as a member anymore.

Quote
buttons67
i agree, he is a bass player, not as if the band never had a bass player before.


hes more than just a backing musician.

all this nonsense about, whos a full member, whos part member and whos just not a real member is a bit confusing. it was so simple in the beginning, 5 equal band members, why cant they make it simple now.

I don't know if Stu thought it was "simple" in the beginning?

The treatment of some people by the Rolling Stones is not very nice, is it?

Brushing Bill Wyman out of an album cover, taking Mick Taylor on a world tour to play just on one or two numbers, and not accepting Darryl as a band member support that opinion.

And it is beyond marketing principles. I always thought Ian Stewart was pushed out of the band partly because a band with five members is easier to promote than a band with six members. But the bass player should be included, regardless who he is.

Heaven knows why they behave like this.

Quote
saltoftheearth
The treatment of some people by the Rolling Stones is not very nice, is it?

Brushing Bill Wyman out of an album cover, taking Mick Taylor on a world tour to play just on one or two numbers, and not accepting Darryl as a band member support that opinion.

And it is beyond marketing principles. I always thought Ian Stewart was pushed out of the band partly because a band with five members is easier to promote than a band with six members. But the bass player should be included, regardless who he is.

Heaven knows why they behave like this.

When did the brush Bill Wyman out of an album cover? I didn't know about this.

About Darryl Jones, it doesn't really matter anymore, right? They are not really a band anymore anyway, not artistically, not socially, not practically. They just occasionally tour and need a bass player for that. It wouldn't make much difference if they'd call him a Stone or not. Hell, I could even imagine if he preferred they didn't. Anyway, even when they were still a band, they didn't call Billy Preston or Bobby Keys a band member either.

Quote
matxil

Quote
saltoftheearth
The treatment of some people by the Rolling Stones is not very nice, is it?

Brushing Bill Wyman out of an album cover, taking Mick Taylor on a world tour to play just on one or two numbers, and not accepting Darryl as a band member support that opinion.

And it is beyond marketing principles. I always thought Ian Stewart was pushed out of the band partly because a band with five members is easier to promote than a band with six members. But the bass player should be included, regardless who he is.

Heaven knows why they behave like this.

When did the brush Bill Wyman out of an album cover? I didn't know about this.

About Darryl Jones, it doesn't really matter anymore, right? They are not really a band anymore anyway, not artistically, not socially, not practically. They just occasionally tour and need a bass player for that. It wouldn't make much difference if they'd call him a Stone or not. Hell, I could even imagine if he preferred they didn't. Anyway, even when they were still a band, they didn't call Billy Preston or Bobby Keys a band member either.

I know they brushed him out of the Rarities 1971–2003 cover. Any other occasions?

Quote
matxil

Quote
saltoftheearth
The treatment of some people by the Rolling Stones is not very nice, is it?

Brushing Bill Wyman out of an album cover, taking Mick Taylor on a world tour to play just on one or two numbers, and not accepting Darryl as a band member support that opinion.

And it is beyond marketing principles. I always thought Ian Stewart was pushed out of the band partly because a band with five members is easier to promote than a band with six members. But the bass player should be included, regardless who he is.

Heaven knows why they behave like this.

When did the brush Bill Wyman out of an album cover? I didn't know about this.

About Darryl Jones, it doesn't really matter anymore, right? They are not really a band anymore anyway, not artistically, not socially, not practically. They just occasionally tour and need a bass player for that. It wouldn't make much difference if they'd call him a Stone or not. Hell, I could even imagine if he preferred they didn't. Anyway, even when they were still a band, they didn't call Billy Preston or Bobby Keys a band member either.

Did you miss that?







Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 2018-10-23 11:09 by DandelionPowderman.

Rarities... Yeah, never knew about this album. But I stopped paying attention to all their those compilation albums they brought out since the 90s. This one looks interesting though.
And yes, deleting Bill Wyman from the picture is ugly and pathetic.

Putain, un CDD à rallonge, que fait la CGT?

Then they would have to bring in another spotlight rig, another 5th screen on the stage (today there are four), and there would be five persons at the band meetings with their lawyers, not four. It will not happen. The Rolling Stones are the four core members now. Then they have many great hired professional people supporting them of course.

Bjornulf

I was going to say it was more or less a business decision.

like a shareholder scenario.

I might be wrong but Ronnie became an official band member after Bill left in the early '90s if I remember correctly...

Quote
shortfatfanny
I might be wrong but Ronnie became an official band member after Bill left in the early '90s if I remember correctly...

He became a shareholder in 1993. He was already a band member, methinks.

Darryl is a great bass player, but I assume they will be able to find a new bass player if needed. Chuck Leavell I think is more important, but lately they have brought in Matt Clifford, so they do have a backup there in case they need it. But Ronnie is a must for the band. A hired gun might not replace Ronnie. I think that has been clear to the rest of the band for a long time.

Bjornulf

Bottom line is I'm sure Darryl is handsomely rewarded for what he does and must be happy enough to have hung about for all those years. Always gets a big cheer from the crowd when he does his funky solos.

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

Let's face it:

From a marketing perspective, the Stones are skinny white English dudes, and Darryl isn't any of those things.

Quote
keefriff99
Let's face it:

From a marketing perspective, the Stones are skinny white English dudes, and Darryl isn't any of those things.

And don't forget the best part of 20 years younger

Quote
ROLLINGSTONE

Quote
keefriff99
Let's face it:

From a marketing perspective, the Stones are skinny white English dudes, and Darryl isn't any of those things.

And don't forget the best part of 20 years younger

Very true.

Well, even though Keith has sported a gut of varying size over the past 10 years, he's never been exactly overweight.

Is Mick Jagger a Rolling Stone? I'd say he is.

Do Mick Jagger solo songs fit into the Stones? No.

Same goes for Darryl. He just don't fit by any means. I like the guy, and appreciate his work, but (despite the fact that keefriff99 brings up), if you close your eyes, those basslines are ok, but that's it.
Darryl plays too generic. For instance, Neighbours becomes an average tune con his fingers.
Miss You... it's so boring, reapeting over and over the same run.

I think after Stu's death, the Stones changed the criteria to hire musicians.

The sole fact of them hiring others is something I don't like that much.
And replacing rock and roll guys like Stu, Bobby or Billy Preston for these annoying people such as Chuck Leavell, Matt Clifford or Karl Denson... I sometimes can't stand it.

I blame Mick for that. I think he gave Leavell too much authority within the band.

Darryl is OK. I'd have a beer with him, sure.



Edited 3 time(s). Last edit at 2018-10-23 18:08 by EdubertoPalitroke.

It was Stu himself who recommended Chuck.

Quote
DandelionPowderman
It was Stu himself who recommended Chuck.

Damn right! So if anybody has a problem with Chuck you're mocking Stu. If anybody has a problem with Darryl, you're telling me you know more than Charlie.

Quote
DandelionPowderman
It was Stu himself who recommended Chuck.

... according to Chuck himself!

Its a bit like the UK Royal Family.
Its core members are 6:
Queen Elizabeth and hubbie Phillip
plus their 4 children..

The rest..ie wives/husbands/grandchildren are outside of The Inner Circle.And in some cases quite dispensible.

Quote
matxil
Rarities... Yeah, never knew about this album. But I stopped paying attention to all their those compilation albums they brought out since the 90s. This one looks interesting though.
And yes, deleting Bill Wyman from the picture is ugly and pathetic.

Yes, ugly and pathetic...has there ever been a reason given for this mysterious exclusion?
Considering he played on many of the included tracks, it really makes no sense.
As far as compilations go, it was a pretty good one and I'd recommend it despite the nastiness of excluding Bill's image.

Quote
keefriff99
Let's face it:

From a marketing perspective, the Stones are skinny white English dudes, and Darryl isn't any of those things.

He is a dude, but yeah....

_____________________________________________________________
Rip this joint, gonna save your soul, round and round and round we go......

Quote
DandelionPowderman

Quote
buttons67
i agree, he is a bass player, not as if the band never had a bass player before.


hes more than just a backing musician.

all this nonsense about, whos a full member, whos part member and whos just not a real member is a bit confusing. it was so simple in the beginning, 5 equal band members, why cant they make it simple now.

I don't know if Stu thought it was "simple" in the beginning?

Also, one of those 5 "equal" band members considered himself to be a bit "more equal" than the others and had himself paid as such.

Peace,
Mr DJA

Quote
dcba

Quote
DandelionPowderman
It was Stu himself who recommended Chuck.

... according to Chuck himself!

Keith said Stu recommended Chuck Leavell, but he also says he let's Mick decide the setlists, because he's the singer and he has to face the audience and this and that... I think he says that just to cover the fact that the CEO and his favourite employee decide what to play live and nobody, even Richards, has no say about it.

I don't buy the Charlie chosing Darryl story, either. I think it was a Leavell/Jagger decission.

If only Darryl would play SOME of the essential Wyman lines, I would be so happy.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2018-10-23 20:54 by EdubertoPalitroke.