Tell Me :
Talk
The keefujahideen
it does kinda roll off the tongue...not sure which tongue, though.
Define a bluesman ? Tell me what is your criteria for a "bluesman", you can forget Keith for a minute and just tell me what is a " bluesman" in your opinion ?
I understand he quit smoking in 2003 or so, and that he indeed only puffs a cigarette when there's camera's in sight. When he smokes on stage, he blows a cloud of smoke and tosses the cigarette immediatly.
Not that a matters a bit of course, but the Stones are very aware of the brand 'Rolling Stones' and the brand 'Keith Richards', and they are just very good of marketing these brands.
Mathijs
How about "fanboy"?
It's a hyper-apologist who does just that. If you DARE speak objectively about the subject of their obsession, they'll take it personally and actually get hurt/angry/over-defensive, etc, challenging you at every turn while deliberately avoid the main issue of the critisicm.
These people have a delusion that they are part of something that they are not, and actually put their OWN value and esteem on their 'deity'. In other words, they need to get a life.
[thepowergoats.com]
I am not able to predict if they will do a tour. I think they all are truly aware of the fact that Richards is only a shadow of his former self. They ALL know that musically the Shine a Light movie is their absolute low point in their carreer. It will all come down to the fact whether Jagger would want to tour with the current state of Richards and the Stones. And that I actually doubt. I really doubt Jagger would want to do another tour with Richards and this incarnation of the Stones. Why would he? He doesn't need the money and there's no musical interest for him anymore.
The only way I see they can do it it to make it something truly extraordinairy, for example a short tour with just a few shows with Taylor and Wyman. In this way, Richards can pose with his guitar and do his 'Richards the Rock God' act, and Wood and Taylor can carry the show musically.
Mathijs
No, people who offer valid criticism are not bashers, no. - most of you dont seem to know the difference between criticism and bashing.
People who post stupid threads like "Keith never played any drums, so how dare he speak about drummers with his 50 year experience in the music" - that´s bashing. And so is "Keith cant play guitar anymore" - when he just did an album with Tom Waits and is working on a solo album of his own.
My favourite bashing post so far is when one person posted "Blues is Boring" at first and then decided to start bashing Keith for playing the blues" - How can you call it valid criticism if you find the whole genre of music boring in the first place. Hey, I could start critizing opera singers too for not playing rock n roll, but wouldnt that be just me bashing at them - I happen to hate opera. So who am I to say what´s good opera and what isnt.
It´s bashing when people say - "Keith cant rock, cause he played slow blues song" - that´s just bashing, it´s not valid criticism.
If what you call is valid "criticism" - then here´s some for you: You guys suck at making coffee, your coffee taste like piss, cause you didnt bring me any.
Maybe.
I havent heard taylor in years - so how would I know.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2012-02-26 19:20 by seitan.
Do I really have to repeat myself - could I ask you just read my previous posts.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2012-02-26 19:37 by seitan.
One should add one more category there: "bitching" - that's what I am told to do!(ask from with sssssssssssssoul more clear definition) >
<
- Doxa
kind of a chauvinistic name....i don't think it should be so gender-specific....however "fanperson" is definitely out....
i don't wanna party with you.
Doxa - I enjoy many of your posts, I think you dont ever seem to fall into that gategory of bashing, I may or may not agree with you - but you seem to have a valid points almost everytime..or at least you have some kind of point. Lot of people dont seem to have any point at all, they are just bashing around the ones (mainly Keef) they dont like. Hahah ..Bitching is fun, by the way.><
jamesfdougla, - Feel free to say whatever you think.
I will do the same.
This is what I think and I repeat myself in case you are slow reader or something: No, people who offer valid criticism are not bashers, no. - most of you just dont seem to know the difference between valid criticism and bashing.
There is nothing valid in threads like "Keith never played any drums, so how dare he speak about drummers with his 50 year experience in the music" - It´s just silly. It´s bashing - there´s no valid point - with 50 year experience in music - keef can talk about any instrument he wants to, so can anyone with that kind of experience.
"Keith cant play any guitar anymore" - when everybody knows that he just did an album with Tom Waits and played guitar on it, and he's working on a solo album of his own. Had someone said " I @#$%& hate that Spoonful version on the Apollo theatre it would have been a matter of an opinion, a matter of musical taste, but when you say that he cant play guitar anymore judging by that video - when it´s obvious that he plays guitar on the very video in question and dont make any mistakes - it´s not valid anymore, it´s bullshit - in other words - just Keef bashing. It´s not valid if you forget that he didnt get up on stage to answer our questions about his playing - he went up there to respect Hubert Sumlins memory and he did that, nothing more, nothing less.
Thanks Mathijs...that is exactly what I think will happen as well.
I love a good straw man argument though.
but i think seitan drew the short straw
If we've moved to todger talk now...he has only himself to blame, after all it was his seitanic majesties request.
The bashers and the riffers
and lest we forget: there's valid enjoyment as well, and objective enthusiasm.
(oh and for the term-search: the opposite of a basher is a gusher.)
I wanted to say that as well to all who are worried because Mick was out of breath. Run for 3 minutes and than stand still and hold a speech WITHOUT being out of breath - not possible.
Cheers daaahhhlin'
-------------------
Keep On Rolling
Perhaps I missed that one but it seems to me that Keith would know a little bit about the drums since he's played with drummers for most of his career. That lends to "knowing" about the drums, their purpose and the purpose of a playing style. Whether Keith can actually play the drums is both moot and a whole other point that has nothing to do with playing music.
Well, in this instance, you gotta let a little slack out. What is (most likely) meant and not windedly said is Keith can't play like he used to (enter the rest here, year, etc). He certainly can play the guitar, true. What is also true is he can't play the guitar...the way he used to. Which is obvious why. That's not bashing, that's just observational fact. Not to get into the minutuae of it but starting in 1989 he had a somewhat new and shortened way of soloing that continued to get improved upon that has lead to less and less notes and actual playing over the years of solos. That could be a number of things - one of them his evolution as a guitar player doing something new/different. I'll leave it at that.
Talk about your favorite band.
For information about how to use this forum please check out forum help and policies.
Re: Who is in better shape Mick or Keith? For a Tour..
Posted by:
steel driving hammer
()
Date: February 26, 2012 18:25
I think for once, Ronnie's in better shape than all of them.
Except for Mick of course.
Except for Mick of course.
Re: Who is in better shape Mick or Keith? For a Tour..
Posted by:
SweetThing
()
Date: February 26, 2012 18:27
Quote
StonesTod
people who offer valid criticisms of keith are bashers, apparently. what we need to find is a proper word for those who praise him to the heavens despite his obvious incompetence. please submit your entries by EOD and we'll select a winning bid with a prize suitable for posing....
The keefujahideen
Re: Who is in better shape Mick or Keith? For a Tour..
Posted by:
Chris Fountain
()
Date: February 26, 2012 18:32
Hey Hey - Folks we're not talkin about a college basketball game or track meet. It's simply a concert.
Re: Who is in better shape Mick or Keith? For a Tour..
Posted by:
StonesTod
()
Date: February 26, 2012 18:38
Quote
SweetThingQuote
StonesTod
people who offer valid criticisms of keith are bashers, apparently. what we need to find is a proper word for those who praise him to the heavens despite his obvious incompetence. please submit your entries by EOD and we'll select a winning bid with a prize suitable for posing....
The keefujahideen
it does kinda roll off the tongue...not sure which tongue, though.
Re: Who is in better shape Mick or Keith? For a Tour..
Posted by:
seitan
()
Date: February 26, 2012 18:51
Quote
jamesfdouglasQuote
seitanQuote
HonestmanQuote
seitan
...
if you would listen to what he does, instead of just bash him - very simple old school blues...but cool and fine...
I just think that some of us don't bash Keith but just say what they thought about a guitarist who don't play guitar, you get the nuance ??? ...
- You dont get it - He does play a guitar. If you watch the video posted above - he even plays a solo at the end of Spoonful - Most of you are bashing, when you say that he dont play..naah, he cant play...Bullshit!!! - It´s right there in front of you - Keith´s main focus is on the vocals, yes - but if you actually watch him on that video and LISTEN - you can even see and hear a solo at the end of Spoonful with no fuckups.
Sorry man, that's not what I call 'playing'. That doesn't cut it. I'm not "bashing" Keith. I'm just stating the sad fact that as a musican on any professional level, I believe that Keith is finished. Keith is no blues man, and that video made me very, very sad.
Define a bluesman ? Tell me what is your criteria for a "bluesman", you can forget Keith for a minute and just tell me what is a " bluesman" in your opinion ?
Re: Who is in better shape Mick or Keith? For a Tour..
Posted by:
Mathijs
()
Date: February 26, 2012 18:58
Quote
Big AlQuote
Mathijs
He quit smoking years ago actually. He only smokes to keep his public image of bad boy alive, on photo shoots etc.
Mathijs
So, Keith gave up smoking, yet still smokes to keep up his 'public image'? A very poorly articulated statement, there.
I understand he quit smoking in 2003 or so, and that he indeed only puffs a cigarette when there's camera's in sight. When he smokes on stage, he blows a cloud of smoke and tosses the cigarette immediatly.
Not that a matters a bit of course, but the Stones are very aware of the brand 'Rolling Stones' and the brand 'Keith Richards', and they are just very good of marketing these brands.
Mathijs
Re: Who is in better shape Mick or Keith? For a Tour..
Posted by:
jamesfdouglas
()
Date: February 26, 2012 19:07
Quote
StonesTod
people who offer valid criticisms of keith are bashers, apparently. what we need to find is a proper word for those who praise him to the heavens despite his obvious incompetence.
How about "fanboy"?
It's a hyper-apologist who does just that. If you DARE speak objectively about the subject of their obsession, they'll take it personally and actually get hurt/angry/over-defensive, etc, challenging you at every turn while deliberately avoid the main issue of the critisicm.
These people have a delusion that they are part of something that they are not, and actually put their OWN value and esteem on their 'deity'. In other words, they need to get a life.
[thepowergoats.com]
Re: Who is in better shape Mick or Keith? For a Tour..
Posted by:
Mathijs
()
Date: February 26, 2012 19:12
Quote
seitan
Time will tell, let´s see...no point in giving statements like " They Wont Tour" - they might youknow, nothing stopped from keith getting up on stage to pay his respects to Hubert, so he might as well pay his respects to The Rolling Stones fans too, by doing a tour with the Stones, who knows...We will see and you´ll be the one to buy everyone around of drinks if they do.
I am not able to predict if they will do a tour. I think they all are truly aware of the fact that Richards is only a shadow of his former self. They ALL know that musically the Shine a Light movie is their absolute low point in their carreer. It will all come down to the fact whether Jagger would want to tour with the current state of Richards and the Stones. And that I actually doubt. I really doubt Jagger would want to do another tour with Richards and this incarnation of the Stones. Why would he? He doesn't need the money and there's no musical interest for him anymore.
The only way I see they can do it it to make it something truly extraordinairy, for example a short tour with just a few shows with Taylor and Wyman. In this way, Richards can pose with his guitar and do his 'Richards the Rock God' act, and Wood and Taylor can carry the show musically.
Mathijs
Re: Who is in better shape Mick or Keith? For a Tour..
Posted by:
seitan
()
Date: February 26, 2012 19:17
Quote
StonesTod
people who offer valid criticisms of keith are bashers, apparently. what we need to find is a proper word for those who praise him to the heavens despite his obvious incompetence. please submit your entries by EOD and we'll select a winning bid with a prize suitable for posing....
No, people who offer valid criticism are not bashers, no. - most of you dont seem to know the difference between criticism and bashing.
People who post stupid threads like "Keith never played any drums, so how dare he speak about drummers with his 50 year experience in the music" - that´s bashing. And so is "Keith cant play guitar anymore" - when he just did an album with Tom Waits and is working on a solo album of his own.
My favourite bashing post so far is when one person posted "Blues is Boring" at first and then decided to start bashing Keith for playing the blues" - How can you call it valid criticism if you find the whole genre of music boring in the first place. Hey, I could start critizing opera singers too for not playing rock n roll, but wouldnt that be just me bashing at them - I happen to hate opera. So who am I to say what´s good opera and what isnt.
It´s bashing when people say - "Keith cant rock, cause he played slow blues song" - that´s just bashing, it´s not valid criticism.
If what you call is valid "criticism" - then here´s some for you: You guys suck at making coffee, your coffee taste like piss, cause you didnt bring me any.
Re: Who is in better shape Mick or Keith? For a Tour..
Posted by:
seitan
()
Date: February 26, 2012 19:20
Quote
MathijsQuote
seitan
Time will tell, let´s see...no point in giving statements like " They Wont Tour" - they might youknow, nothing stopped from keith getting up on stage to pay his respects to Hubert, so he might as well pay his respects to The Rolling Stones fans too, by doing a tour with the Stones, who knows...We will see and you´ll be the one to buy everyone around of drinks if they do.
I am not able to predict if they will do a tour. I think they all are truly aware of the fact that Richards is only a shadow of his former self. They ALL know that musically the Shine a Light movie is their absolute low point in their carreer. It will all come down to the fact whether Jagger would want to tour with the current state of Richards and the Stones. And that I actually doubt. I really doubt Jagger would want to do another tour with Richards and this incarnation of the Stones. Why would he? He doesn't need the money and there's no musical interest for him anymore.
The only way I see they can do it it to make it something truly extraordinairy, for example a short tour with just a few shows with Taylor and Wyman. In this way, Richards can pose with his guitar and do his 'Richards the Rock God' act, and Wood and Taylor can carry the show musically.
Mathijs
Maybe.
I havent heard taylor in years - so how would I know.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2012-02-26 19:20 by seitan.
Re: Who is in better shape Mick or Keith? For a Tour..
Posted by:
jamesfdouglas
()
Date: February 26, 2012 19:28
seitan, how is watching that Apollo video, having my own personl gut-reaction to it and expressing disappointment or sadness... how is that bashing Keith?
Keith is a performer, he put himself out there, and we can all view and listen for ourselves and come to our own conclusions and varied as they are.
Not everyone is happy or impressed by it, in fact it seems quite the opposite. But how is talking about it 'bashing' Keith?
[thepowergoats.com]
Keith is a performer, he put himself out there, and we can all view and listen for ourselves and come to our own conclusions and varied as they are.
Not everyone is happy or impressed by it, in fact it seems quite the opposite. But how is talking about it 'bashing' Keith?
[thepowergoats.com]
Re: Who is in better shape Mick or Keith? For a Tour..
Posted by:
seitan
()
Date: February 26, 2012 19:37
Quote
jamesfdouglas
seitan, how is watching that Apollo video, having my own personl gut-reaction to it and expressing disappointment or sadness... how is that bashing Keith?
Keith is a performer, he put himself out there, and we can all view and listen for ourselves and come to our own conclusions and varied as they are.
Not everyone is happy or impressed by it, in fact it seems quite the opposite. But how is talking about it 'bashing' Keith?
Do I really have to repeat myself - could I ask you just read my previous posts.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2012-02-26 19:37 by seitan.
Re: Who is in better shape Mick or Keith? For a Tour..
Posted by:
jamesfdouglas
()
Date: February 26, 2012 19:41
I have read them, that's why I'm asking you. I thinki you confuse "objective criticism" with "bashing". They're not the same thing.
"Keith sucks" - that's bashing. It's baseless and mean.
"Judging by recent vdeos, Keith doesn't seem to be able to play well anymore" - that's an observation.
[thepowergoats.com]
"Keith sucks" - that's bashing. It's baseless and mean.
"Judging by recent vdeos, Keith doesn't seem to be able to play well anymore" - that's an observation.
[thepowergoats.com]
Re: Who is in better shape Mick or Keith? For a Tour..
Posted by:
jamesfdouglas
()
Date: February 26, 2012 19:41
Re: Who is in better shape Mick or Keith? For a Tour..
Posted by:
Doxa
()
Date: February 26, 2012 19:52
Quote
jamesfdouglas
I have read them, that's why I'm asking you. I thinki you confuse "objective criticism" with "bashing". They're not the same thing.
"Keith sucks" - that's bashing. It's baseless and mean.
"Judging by recent vdeos, Keith doesn't seem to be able to play well anymore" - that's an observation.
One should add one more category there: "bitching" - that's what I am told to do!(ask from with sssssssssssssoul more clear definition) >
<- Doxa
Re: Who is in better shape Mick or Keith? For a Tour..
Posted by:
StonesTod
()
Date: February 26, 2012 20:40
Quote
jamesfdouglasQuote
StonesTod
people who offer valid criticisms of keith are bashers, apparently. what we need to find is a proper word for those who praise him to the heavens despite his obvious incompetence.
How about "fanboy"?
kind of a chauvinistic name....i don't think it should be so gender-specific....however "fanperson" is definitely out....
Re: Who is in better shape Mick or Keith? For a Tour..
Posted by:
StonesTod
()
Date: February 26, 2012 20:41
Quote
seitanQuote
StonesTod
people who offer valid criticisms of keith are bashers, apparently. what we need to find is a proper word for those who praise him to the heavens despite his obvious incompetence. please submit your entries by EOD and we'll select a winning bid with a prize suitable for posing....
No, people who offer valid criticism are not bashers, no. - most of you dont seem to know the difference between criticism and bashing.
People who post stupid threads like "Keith never played any drums, so how dare he speak about drummers with his 50 year experience in the music" - that´s bashing. And so is "Keith cant play guitar anymore" - when he just did an album with Tom Waits and is working on a solo album of his own.
My favourite bashing post so far is when one person posted "Blues is Boring" at first and then decided to start bashing Keith for playing the blues" - How can you call it valid criticism if you find the whole genre of music boring in the first place. Hey, I could start critizing opera singers too for not playing rock n roll, but wouldnt that be just me bashing at them - I happen to hate opera. So who am I to say what´s good opera and what isnt.
It´s bashing when people say - "Keith cant rock, cause he played slow blues song" - that´s just bashing, it´s not valid criticism.
If what you call is valid "criticism" - then here´s some for you: You guys suck at making coffee, your coffee taste like piss, cause you didnt bring me any.
i don't wanna party with you.
Re: Who is in better shape Mick or Keith? For a Tour..
Posted by:
seitan
()
Date: February 26, 2012 21:03
Quote
DoxaQuote
jamesfdouglas
I have read them, that's why I'm asking you. I thinki you confuse "objective criticism" with "bashing". They're not the same thing.
"Keith sucks" - that's bashing. It's baseless and mean.
"Judging by recent vdeos, Keith doesn't seem to be able to play well anymore" - that's an observation.
One should add one more category there: "bitching" - that's what I am told to do!(ask from with sssssssssssssoul more clear definition) >
- Doxa
Doxa - I enjoy many of your posts, I think you dont ever seem to fall into that gategory of bashing, I may or may not agree with you - but you seem to have a valid points almost everytime..or at least you have some kind of point. Lot of people dont seem to have any point at all, they are just bashing around the ones (mainly Keef) they dont like. Hahah ..Bitching is fun, by the way.>
<jamesfdougla, - Feel free to say whatever you think.
I will do the same.
This is what I think and I repeat myself in case you are slow reader or something: No, people who offer valid criticism are not bashers, no. - most of you just dont seem to know the difference between valid criticism and bashing.
There is nothing valid in threads like "Keith never played any drums, so how dare he speak about drummers with his 50 year experience in the music" - It´s just silly. It´s bashing - there´s no valid point - with 50 year experience in music - keef can talk about any instrument he wants to, so can anyone with that kind of experience.
"Keith cant play any guitar anymore" - when everybody knows that he just did an album with Tom Waits and played guitar on it, and he's working on a solo album of his own. Had someone said " I @#$%& hate that Spoonful version on the Apollo theatre it would have been a matter of an opinion, a matter of musical taste, but when you say that he cant play guitar anymore judging by that video - when it´s obvious that he plays guitar on the very video in question and dont make any mistakes - it´s not valid anymore, it´s bullshit - in other words - just Keef bashing. It´s not valid if you forget that he didnt get up on stage to answer our questions about his playing - he went up there to respect Hubert Sumlins memory and he did that, nothing more, nothing less.
Re: Who is in better shape Mick or Keith? For a Tour..
Posted by:
treaclefingers
()
Date: February 26, 2012 21:06
Quote
MathijsQuote
seitan
Time will tell, let´s see...no point in giving statements like " They Wont Tour" - they might youknow, nothing stopped from keith getting up on stage to pay his respects to Hubert, so he might as well pay his respects to The Rolling Stones fans too, by doing a tour with the Stones, who knows...We will see and you´ll be the one to buy everyone around of drinks if they do.
I am not able to predict if they will do a tour. I think they all are truly aware of the fact that Richards is only a shadow of his former self. They ALL know that musically the Shine a Light movie is their absolute low point in their carreer. It will all come down to the fact whether Jagger would want to tour with the current state of Richards and the Stones. And that I actually doubt. I really doubt Jagger would want to do another tour with Richards and this incarnation of the Stones. Why would he? He doesn't need the money and there's no musical interest for him anymore.
The only way I see they can do it it to make it something truly extraordinairy, for example a short tour with just a few shows with Taylor and Wyman. In this way, Richards can pose with his guitar and do his 'Richards the Rock God' act, and Wood and Taylor can carry the show musically.
Mathijs
Thanks Mathijs...that is exactly what I think will happen as well.
Re: Who is in better shape Mick or Keith? For a Tour..
Posted by:
treaclefingers
()
Date: February 26, 2012 21:07
Quote
StonesTodQuote
seitanQuote
StonesTod
people who offer valid criticisms of keith are bashers, apparently. what we need to find is a proper word for those who praise him to the heavens despite his obvious incompetence. please submit your entries by EOD and we'll select a winning bid with a prize suitable for posing....
No, people who offer valid criticism are not bashers, no. - most of you dont seem to know the difference between criticism and bashing.
People who post stupid threads like "Keith never played any drums, so how dare he speak about drummers with his 50 year experience in the music" - that´s bashing. And so is "Keith cant play guitar anymore" - when he just did an album with Tom Waits and is working on a solo album of his own.
My favourite bashing post so far is when one person posted "Blues is Boring" at first and then decided to start bashing Keith for playing the blues" - How can you call it valid criticism if you find the whole genre of music boring in the first place. Hey, I could start critizing opera singers too for not playing rock n roll, but wouldnt that be just me bashing at them - I happen to hate opera. So who am I to say what´s good opera and what isnt.
It´s bashing when people say - "Keith cant rock, cause he played slow blues song" - that´s just bashing, it´s not valid criticism.
If what you call is valid "criticism" - then here´s some for you: You guys suck at making coffee, your coffee taste like piss, cause you didnt bring me any.
i don't wanna party with you.
I love a good straw man argument though.
Re: Who is in better shape Mick or Keith? For a Tour..
Posted by:
StonesTod
()
Date: February 26, 2012 22:05
Quote
treaclefingersQuote
StonesTodQuote
seitanQuote
StonesTod
people who offer valid criticisms of keith are bashers, apparently. what we need to find is a proper word for those who praise him to the heavens despite his obvious incompetence. please submit your entries by EOD and we'll select a winning bid with a prize suitable for posing....
No, people who offer valid criticism are not bashers, no. - most of you dont seem to know the difference between criticism and bashing.
People who post stupid threads like "Keith never played any drums, so how dare he speak about drummers with his 50 year experience in the music" - that´s bashing. And so is "Keith cant play guitar anymore" - when he just did an album with Tom Waits and is working on a solo album of his own.
My favourite bashing post so far is when one person posted "Blues is Boring" at first and then decided to start bashing Keith for playing the blues" - How can you call it valid criticism if you find the whole genre of music boring in the first place. Hey, I could start critizing opera singers too for not playing rock n roll, but wouldnt that be just me bashing at them - I happen to hate opera. So who am I to say what´s good opera and what isnt.
It´s bashing when people say - "Keith cant rock, cause he played slow blues song" - that´s just bashing, it´s not valid criticism.
If what you call is valid "criticism" - then here´s some for you: You guys suck at making coffee, your coffee taste like piss, cause you didnt bring me any.
i don't wanna party with you.
I love a good straw man argument though.
but i think seitan drew the short straw
Re: Who is in better shape Mick or Keith? For a Tour..
Posted by:
treaclefingers
()
Date: February 26, 2012 22:13
Quote
StonesTodQuote
treaclefingersQuote
StonesTodQuote
seitanQuote
StonesTod
people who offer valid criticisms of keith are bashers, apparently. what we need to find is a proper word for those who praise him to the heavens despite his obvious incompetence. please submit your entries by EOD and we'll select a winning bid with a prize suitable for posing....
No, people who offer valid criticism are not bashers, no. - most of you dont seem to know the difference between criticism and bashing.
People who post stupid threads like "Keith never played any drums, so how dare he speak about drummers with his 50 year experience in the music" - that´s bashing. And so is "Keith cant play guitar anymore" - when he just did an album with Tom Waits and is working on a solo album of his own.
My favourite bashing post so far is when one person posted "Blues is Boring" at first and then decided to start bashing Keith for playing the blues" - How can you call it valid criticism if you find the whole genre of music boring in the first place. Hey, I could start critizing opera singers too for not playing rock n roll, but wouldnt that be just me bashing at them - I happen to hate opera. So who am I to say what´s good opera and what isnt.
It´s bashing when people say - "Keith cant rock, cause he played slow blues song" - that´s just bashing, it´s not valid criticism.
If what you call is valid "criticism" - then here´s some for you: You guys suck at making coffee, your coffee taste like piss, cause you didnt bring me any.
i don't wanna party with you.
I love a good straw man argument though.
but i think seitan drew the short straw
If we've moved to todger talk now...he has only himself to blame, after all it was his seitanic majesties request.
Re: Who is in better shape Mick or Keith? For a Tour..
Posted by:
KRiffhard
()
Date: February 26, 2012 22:14
Quote
jamesfdouglas
I have read them, that's why I'm asking you. I thinki you confuse "objective criticism" with "bashing". They're not the same thing.
"Keith sucks" - that's bashing. It's baseless and mean.
"Judging by recent vdeos, Keith doesn't seem to be able to play well anymore" - that's an observation.
Re: Who is in better shape Mick or Keith? For a Tour..
Posted by:
Munichhilton
()
Date: February 26, 2012 22:21
Quote
StonesTod
people who offer valid criticisms of keith are bashers, apparently. what we need to find is a proper word for those who praise him to the heavens despite his obvious incompetence. please submit your entries by EOD and we'll select a winning bid with a prize suitable for posing....
The bashers and the riffers
Re: Who is in better shape Mick or Keith? For a Tour..
Posted by:
charlie62
()
Date: February 26, 2012 22:49
Have you ever tried talking after singing a whole song, it's very difficult at any age, as for Keith let's wait and see.
Re: Who is in better shape Mick or Keith? For a Tour..
Posted by:
with sssoul
()
Date: February 26, 2012 23:02
Quote
seitan
people who offer valid criticism are not bashers, no - most of you just dont seem to know the difference between valid criticism and bashing.
and lest we forget: there's valid enjoyment as well, and objective enthusiasm.
(oh and for the term-search: the opposite of a basher is a gusher.)
Re: Who is in better shape Mick or Keith? For a Tour..
Posted by:
elunsi
()
Date: February 26, 2012 23:14
Quote
charlie62
Have you ever tried talking after singing a whole song, it's very difficult at any age, as for Keith let's wait and see.
I wanted to say that as well to all who are worried because Mick was out of breath. Run for 3 minutes and than stand still and hold a speech WITHOUT being out of breath - not possible.
Re: Who is in better shape Mick or Keith? For a Tour..
Posted by:
Rolling Hansie
()
Date: February 26, 2012 23:23
Quote
with sssoul
and lest we forget: there's valid enjoyment as well
Cheers daaahhhlin'-------------------
Keep On Rolling
Re: Who is in better shape Mick or Keith? For a Tour..
Posted by:
WeLoveToPlayTheBlues
()
Date: February 26, 2012 23:27
Quote
seitan
There is nothing valid in threads like "Keith never played any drums, so how dare he speak about drummers with his 50 year experience in the music" - It´s just silly. It´s bashing - there´s no valid point - with 50 year experience in music - keef can talk about any instrument he wants to, so can anyone with that kind of experience.
Perhaps I missed that one but it seems to me that Keith would know a little bit about the drums since he's played with drummers for most of his career. That lends to "knowing" about the drums, their purpose and the purpose of a playing style. Whether Keith can actually play the drums is both moot and a whole other point that has nothing to do with playing music.
Quote
seitan
"Keith cant play any guitar anymore" - when everybody knows that he just did an album with Tom Waits and played guitar on it, and he's working on a solo album of his own.
Well, in this instance, you gotta let a little slack out. What is (most likely) meant and not windedly said is Keith can't play like he used to (enter the rest here, year, etc). He certainly can play the guitar, true. What is also true is he can't play the guitar...the way he used to. Which is obvious why. That's not bashing, that's just observational fact. Not to get into the minutuae of it but starting in 1989 he had a somewhat new and shortened way of soloing that continued to get improved upon that has lead to less and less notes and actual playing over the years of solos. That could be a number of things - one of them his evolution as a guitar player doing something new/different. I'll leave it at that.
Re: Who is in better shape Mick or Keith? For a Tour..
Posted by:
charlie62
()
Date: February 26, 2012 23:40
Rubbish like your car
Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.
Online Users
BowieStone , erad , hockenheim95 , jmd , JMoisica , marclaff , Nankstone , Nellcote1971 , Quique-stone , S.T.P , stargroover , stereomanic , thetiger
Guests:
1556
Record Number of Users:
206
on June 1, 2022 23:50
Record Number of Guests:
9627
on January 2, 2024 23:10