[ht.ly]

nice guy!

I've never understood why some people slam Leavell so hard.

He may not have the "look" of a Stone, but he does his job well.

Quote
Edith Grove
I've never understood why some people slam Leavell so hard.

Because his sound and approach to piano playing do not fit the Stones.

And he has a neatly trimmed beard. There's nothing less R&R than a neatly trimmed beard.

And his clothing fashion is dreadful. Brightly coloured shirts, tucked into his pants.

Mathijs

Compare it to Billy Preston on LA Friday and his MR-interpretation. His playing fits exactly to the dangerous atmosphere of this song. Contrawise hear the tinkling honky tonk orgy on MR by the piano nice guy Chuck on Tokyo 90. The difference is immense. Never understood why the Stones castrated their music and let Chuck the lead on stage actually. He is the head of the Rolling Stones Big Band orchestra in the post '81 era.

Quote
Mathijs
And he has a neatly trimmed beard. There's nothing less R&R than a neatly trimmed beard.

And his clothing fashion is dreadful. Brightly coloured shirts, tucked into his pants.

Like a hotel piano-bar player ?

I'd agree with that, but looks don't count for everything.

Quote
Mathijs

Quote
Edith Grove
I've never understood why some people slam Leavell so hard.

And his clothing fashion is dreadful. Brightly coloured shirts, tucked into his pants.

Mathijs

Oh of course - and Jagger's taste in atire is always impeccable.

Maybe Chuck could find some more appropriate threads on Keith's "floordrobe"

Quote
Edith Grove
I'd agree with that, but looks don't count for everything.

yes, they do.

Quote
gimme_shelter

Quote
Edith Grove
I'd agree with that, but looks don't count for everything.

yes, they do.

Ah! Then let's see your mug !

Quote
Edith Grove
I've never understood why some people slam Leavell so hard.

He may not have the "look" of a Stone, but he does his job well.

I agree! And correct me if I'm mistaken, but I always thought it was about the music! If you're going by the way a person dresses.....how does Charlie fit in? Oh right, he's a brilliant drummer.

by far the best musician in the band. chuck rocks and rules.

I have not said a word...get off me.

Quote
Mathijs

Quote
Edith Grove
I've never understood why some people slam Leavell so hard.

Because his sound and approach to piano playing do not fit the Stones.

And he has a neatly trimmed beard. There's nothing less R&R than a neatly trimmed beard.

And his clothing fashion is dreadful. Brightly coloured shirts, tucked into his pants.

Mathijs

Stupid, stupid post. Go look in a mirror. I bet we can a lot of fun with you.

He is a fine, fine piano player. If you don't agree, you don't know very much about piano playing. But yes, he's never been a very good fit for the Stones sound. He has his moments, but his happy, new-agey sounding plinking on "Gimme Shelter" is a disgrace to the memory of Nicky Hopkins' dark, ominous textures on the original version. And the country-fried rolling piano licks on 'Start Me Up'- come on, fellow, it's not an Allman Bros. song.

Quote
Cocaine Eyes

Quote
Edith Grove
I've never understood why some people slam Leavell so hard.

He may not have the "look" of a Stone, but he does his job well.

I agree! And correct me if I'm mistaken, but I always thought it was about the music! If you're going by the way a person dresses.....how does Charlie fit in? Oh right, he's a brilliant drummer.

I'm not a big Leavell fan, but I don't think his looks matter. Sure, Mick, Keith, Brian and Ronnie have always had a rock 'n' roll kind of look, but still the Stones have always had a pretty loose dress code, to say the least. In between Charlie's suit and Mick's Hey Negrita promo video attire, or Brian's Monterey wardrobe there's room for pretty much anything ...

If you want to compare the way someone looks how come Matt Clifford never comes up when talking about Leavell's looks?

Chuck's playing style does not fit the Stones period. He plays tinkly plinkly dinkly notes that make the Rolling Stones sound pretty. Like the Beach Boys.

And that is not cool. They need Mac.

His sound and approach do not fit the Stones? Yet the Stones themselves hire him tour after tour? hmmmmm So is Chuck the only key player they can get?

WTF,Mick Jagger thinks that he is the perfect fit for The Stones,and has kept him on board for 20+ years,so whether some here like him or not he is part of The Rolling Stones,and if they play again he will be there....

"No dope smoking no beer sold after 12 o'clock"

Why the hell are you guys hating Chuck and completely ignoring the people that hired him in the first place? If anyone should receive the criticism, it's The Stones and not Chuck. Clearly The Stones enjoy playing with him.

Quote
Mathijs

Quote
Edith Grove
I've never understood why some people slam Leavell so hard.

Because his sound and approach to piano playing do not fit the Stones.

And he has a neatly trimmed beard. There's nothing less R&R than a neatly trimmed beard.

And his clothing fashion is dreadful. Brightly coloured shirts, tucked into his pants.

Mathijs

All true, but the first one is what matters.

If anyone here has had the pleasure of seeing him rip off Jessica with the Allman Brothers back in the day you would see another side, it is in my top 10 live songs I have seen.

I also have a boot copy of the entire Stones show at the Toronto Sars concert. This boot is a sound board that sounds like it was not mixed or touched by Stones. It is mixed like any other band and you can clearly hear every lick, piano rip, horn, it is amazing to hear what the Stones realy soundlike before they cloudy it up. You can realy appreciate the R&R and classic bits Chuck puts in. On the down side you can actualy hear every sound Keiths fingers make as his fingers randomly hit and miss notes, it is truly a great example of how they clean up and over dub before the public release of the three songs they bothered to do for the official video.

Quote
5string
His sound and approach do not fit the Stones? Yet the Stones themselves hire him tour after tour? hmmmmm So is Chuck the only key player they can get?

You're talking about the Vegas Era Stones, when it became only about the money and rote by-the-numbers performances. Chuck fits that perfectly.

Quote
ROPENI
WTF,Mick Jagger thinks that he is the perfect fit for The Stones,and has kept him on board for 20+ years,so whether some here like him or not he is part of The Rolling Stones,and if they play again he will be there....

Yeahhhhh. Well, some people actually think Streets Of Love is a good song. So there you go. Chuck is the Vegas Stones piano player. You are right, he is a perfect fit for the Vegas Stones.

Quote
Des
If anyone here has had the pleasure of seeing him rip off Jessica with the Allman Brothers back in the day you would see another side, it is in my top 10 live songs I have seen.

I also have a boot copy of the entire Stones show at the Toronto Sars concert. This boot is a sound board that sounds like it was not mixed or touched by Stones. It is mixed like any other band and you can clearly hear every lick, piano rip, horn, it is amazing to hear what the Stones realy soundlike before they cloudy it up. You can realy appreciate the R&R and classic bits Chuck puts in. On the down side you can actualy hear every sound Keiths fingers make as his fingers randomly hit and miss notes, it is truly a great example of how they clean up and over dub before the public release of the three songs they bothered to do for the official video.

But it's been 10 years since then...I'm sure Keith has had time to practice and get better.

One problem for Leavall is the shadows of predecessors-Stu, Nicky, Billy P. and even Mac loom so large and the fact each were so distinctive sounding, really puts Leavell at a disadvantage. He is not distinctive sounding but instead, as Greg Allman says in regards to Leavell's playing, "tasteful and tasty." That's all well and good but in my opinion, that's not enough if you're going to be keyboardist of the Stones. The fact that he's been the "Vegas Years" keyboardist doesn't help either.

Chuck doesn't have that swing like Stu did. Nicky was OK, but Stu had a better groove. Billy had a lot of soul in his sound; he was great.

He doesn't have any roll... unlike Ben Waters.

Quote
treaclefingers

Quote
Des
If anyone here has had the pleasure of seeing him rip off Jessica with the Allman Brothers back in the day you would see another side, it is in my top 10 live songs I have seen.

I also have a boot copy of the entire Stones show at the Toronto Sars concert. This boot is a sound board that sounds like it was not mixed or touched by Stones. It is mixed like any other band and you can clearly hear every lick, piano rip, horn, it is amazing to hear what the Stones realy soundlike before they cloudy it up. You can realy appreciate the R&R and classic bits Chuck puts in. On the down side you can actualy hear every sound Keiths fingers make as his fingers randomly hit and miss notes, it is truly a great example of how they clean up and over dub before the public release of the three songs they bothered to do for the official video.

But it's been 10 years since then...I'm sure Keith has had time to practice and get better.

Ha, ha, you are a "spaßvogel".