For information about how to use this forum please check out forum help and policies.
71Tele,l got no problem with your opinion,but whose fault is it,if he is allowed and paid very well to continue playing with the band? sounding as you put it "like crap"IMHO Mick and Keith are the culprits,for allowing it...Quote
71Tele
My take is that none of the things you mention make his keyboard playing with the Rolling Stones sound any better. I would pose a different question: Why the constant asking of why leavell isn't liked? It's simple: He sounds like crap with the Stones.
Quote
71Tele
My take is that none of the things you mention make his keyboard playing with the Rolling Stones sound any better.
Quote
1cdog
Please not again..........
Enough of beating a dead horse..........
Quote
Long John Stoner
STOP THESE KINDS OF THREADS ON LEAVELL NOW!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
ENOUGH!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Nat, l wasn't trying to be "misleading or "antagonistic",l was trying to ask a real question that has been bothering me for a while,just by reading some of the other threads that deal with Chuck,the level of dislike for him is huge,as well as he is almost always blamed for The Stones sounding bad according to some..Personally l think he fits perfectly with what the band has been doing for the last three decades...Quote
Naturalust
The thread title is misleading and antagonistic to me, Chuck is a true pro and as close to a Rolling Stone as anyone not named Jagger Richards Wood, Watts, Wyman or Taylor is ever likely to come.
No hatred from this camp, just alot of love. Yeah Nicky may have played better live and on record with them and I think Keith was driving him more than Mick at that point.
I think what people may pick up on is that Chuck has matured musically in a slightly different direction than the Stones. Like the rock guys who eventually come to play more jazz because they need to keep growing somehow, evn though they forget how to play simple rock somewhat.
But in reality I think he is trying to support and please Mick and Keith at the expense of picking up Stones fans on his own. Most people have learned that pleasing the boss is the best way to succeed in their jobs, Chuck is a professional side man, doing his job.
BTW the plink plink may be the only sonic space left for Chuck after all those other player (egos) are satisfied. He's certainly not hogging the mix as far as I can tell. I actually LOVE his style with the Stones on the few occasions he gets to be the main instrument like the BEGINNING jug band version of Tumblin Dice. Mick and Keith harmonizing over that piano is sweet.
The Vegas sounding intros on other tunes leave me somewhat empty but I can just hear Mick saying.."Chuck you just riff on the chords a while while we make our grand entrances and nothing too fancy or powerful because Keith's first chord has got to have some impact" peace
Quote
ROPENI71Tele,l got no problem with your opinion,but whose fault is it,if he is allowed and paid very well to continue playing with the band? sounding as you put it "like crap"IMHO Mick and Keith are the culprits,for allowing it...Quote
71Tele
My take is that none of the things you mention make his keyboard playing with the Rolling Stones sound any better. I would pose a different question: Why the constant asking of why leavell isn't liked? It's simple: He sounds like crap with the Stones.
Quote
Max'sKansasCity
and it goes back and forth... and the tide comes in... and the tide goes out.
Great pic.Quote
GravityBoyQuote
Max'sKansasCity
and it goes back and forth... and the tide comes in... and the tide goes out.
I blame the Moon.
Quote
Max'sKansasCity
And in the end, everyone thinks what they thought to start with.
Quote
71Tele
My take is that none of the things you mention make his keyboard playing with the Rolling Stones sound any better. I would pose a different question: Why the constant asking of why leavell isn't liked? It's simple: He sounds like crap with the Stones.
Quote
Max'sKansasCity
All of these "why the hate/dislike?" threads seem to run the same parallel course to each other. The only difference is who the act is and who is accused of being "a hater" and who is accused of being a "a supporter".
All these threads have alternating posts with some people bashing on the act and some people having the utmost respect for the act... and it goes back and forth... and the tide comes in... and the tide goes out.
And in the end, everyone thinks what they thought to start with.
Go Giants!! They are great!!... no wait... The Giants SUCK!!... no wait... The Giants are GREAT, Go Giants!!!! no wait....Quote
lunar!!!Quote
Max'sKansasCity
All of these "why the hate/dislike?" threads seem to run the same parallel course to each other. The only difference is who the act is and who is accused of being "a hater" and who is accused of being a "a supporter".
All these threads have alternating posts with some people bashing on the act and some people having the utmost respect for the act... and it goes back and forth... and the tide comes in... and the tide goes out.
And in the end, everyone thinks what they thought to start with.
i really hate hate threads...we can start another thread on a fresh topic instead....like...er....um....uhhh.....nevermind....How 'bout thoses Giants!?
Quote
ROPENI
Yes,this has been discussed Ad nauseam,many times before,but what the hell...
Chuck, has been with The Stones for 30 years,he is their musical director,and obviously enjoys the support of both Mick and Keith,yet folks here seem to see him as the person that has "destroyed" the Stones sound,he turned them into a "Vegas act"his playing is too "commercial",he wears "baggie pants",has a beard,and so on..My point, all that criticism should be directed at his bosses,Mick and Keith,l mean he is making a decent living playing with the band,he is doing what many of us would give an armn and leg to be doing,so all the nasty and vitrolic attacks to Chuck don't make sense to me......Your take...
Quote
WeLoveToPlayTheBlues
Tinkly plinkly.....
Quote
Title5Take1
I like him fine, but I do think some of the dislike is that he's just super super nice—no edge—and that's not very rock n roll. It's like if, say, Mr. Rogers played keyboards in the Who.
"Mama's got a squeeze box..."