Quote
soulsurvivor1
Have You Tried Listening To anything from 63-72...I cant Be Satisfyied, Little Red Rooster, Down Home Girl, Confessing The Blues, Heart Of Stone, What A Shame, Cry To Me, Look What You've Done, Good Times Bad Times, Pain In My Heart,No Expectations, Parachute Woman, I'm A King Bee, Love In Vain, Doncha Bother Me...

.I could go on...But

Not The Blues?

SOULSURVIVOR

Have you ever tried listening to The Allman Brothers?

Pale imitations, most of those you've listed (with the exception of their original songs you listed - those just sound like watered-down white-boy blues.
Face it. Many, many lesser-known artists wipe the floor with the Stones for blues playing. The Stones simply aren't musicians at that type of level. Only ex-Stones Mick Taylor can even me mentioned in blues circles without eye-rolling or snickering. Amongst Stones fans, The Stones are "blues-based". Amongst hard-core blues fans, The Stones' attempts at blues are not considered seriously at all.

[thepowergoats.com]

And all of the great bluesmen would´nt be so great if it wasn´t for the Stones

The Stones introduced a lot of people to the blues but wouldn't you have found out about the blues from other sources anyway? From Eric Clapton, for example.

The Blues is the last music to be about musicianship. It's about feeling, which the Stones have in abundance. The Allman Brothers (with Duane) were indeed on a whole 'nother level. But their music was far from the raw Delta Blues, bordering on jazz.

My first taste of the Blues was Zed Zeppelin's 1st album, the summer of '69. I had to go back and discover the early Stones album one by one in the early 70s and it sounded like a whole different band. I think the Jones era Stones had a legitimate blues sound, with Brian's dexterity and feel on slide kicking them over the top. I think of Mick Taylor as an extremely talented sideman who drove the Stones to new technical heights. This whole conversation vexes me. I mean Look What You've Done:

Quote
jamesfdouglas
Face it. Many, many lesser-known artists wipe the floor with the Stones for blues playing. The Stones simply aren't musicians at that type of level. Only ex-Stones Mick Taylor can even me mentioned in blues circles without eye-rolling or snickering. Amongst Stones fans, The Stones are "blues-based". Amongst hard-core blues fans, The Stones' attempts at blues are not considered seriously at all.

Unfortunately I need to say that you are right. Not that I agree with it, but the fact is that The Stones are not considered any big shot - or any shot - at all in 'real' blues circles. Of course, their significance - such as introducing the genre to bigger audience (and mostly to most blues fans of today) - but that's a different thing than being actually appreciated as a 'blues act'. They are 'pre-school' stuff, 'populists'. Taylor, like you noted, is an expection.

The idea that The Stones are a great blues band is basically a fantasy by The Stones fans - for us they are that. When Keith Richards speaks himself as "blues man" and sits down and plays a "Little Red Rooster", yeah, that's great for us - but that surely wouldn't impress any blues fan. It is not a great blues man there playing "Little Red Rooster", but Keith Richards - the rock star - playing his version of a blues song. And most likely only the Stones fans see something significant or good there.

But but but....

For me The Stones are the best white blues band ever - since they did something no one else did better: develop the music form (blues) into something original and outstanding - something we nowadays call 'rock music'. I think that should make Muddy etc. proud: passing the torch and giving the inspiration for something that great and novel.

So I really don't care what 'blues circles' nowadays think or say, or how they define what is good blues or not. That's just another form of nerdism in just another speciliazed museum-like dead genre. The 'real' blues happened and was alive back in the 1920's to the 1950's...

Damn, when I listen to The Stones doing "I Just Want to Make Love To You" or "Confessin' The Blues" or "Stop Breakin' Down", I actually think they understand Muddy, Robert Johnson etc. better than any white guys ever did. And when I put "Midnight Rambler" on, I can see the delta guys, starting from Charley Patton, smiling there in heaven/hell...

- Doxa



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2012-11-07 20:25 by Doxa.

Quote
Doxa
Damn, when I listen to The Stones doing "I Just Want to Make Love To You" or "Confessin' The Blues" or "Stop Breakin' Down", I actually think they understand Muddy, Robert Johnson etc. better than any white guys ever did. And when I put "Midnight Rambler" on, I can see the delta guys, starting from Charley Patton, smiling there in heaven/hell...

They sure understand Muddy and Robert Johnson while being flown around the world in a private plane like a king. Come on. Do you honestly think the Stones truly understand what the blues is about? Sure they can play a 12 bar blues well, and Mick Taylor is good at soloing and Mick plays the harmonica great, but did they ever feel the pain and suffering that black people did in the deep south? They will never understand that. What is pain and suffering to Mick and Keith? When their steak isn't as rare as they like it to be? Just because you can play the blues doesn't mean you *get* the blues or understand it. And that's why I refuse to put The Stones on a blues pedestal. There's more to the blues than just 12 bars.

Quote
GumbootCloggeroo

Quote
Doxa
Damn, when I listen to The Stones doing "I Just Want to Make Love To You" or "Confessin' The Blues" or "Stop Breakin' Down", I actually think they understand Muddy, Robert Johnson etc. better than any white guys ever did. And when I put "Midnight Rambler" on, I can see the delta guys, starting from Charley Patton, smiling there in heaven/hell...

They sure understand Muddy and Robert Johnson while being flown around the world in a private plane like a king. Come on. Do you honestly think the Stones truly understand what the blues is about? Sure they can play a 12 bar blues well, and Mick Taylor is good at soloing and Mick plays the harmonica great, but did they ever feel the pain and suffering that black people did in the deep south? They will never understand that. What is pain and suffering to Mick and Keith? When their steak isn't as rare as they like it to be? Just because you can play the blues doesn't mean you *get* the blues or understand it. And that's why I refuse to put The Stones on a blues pedestal. There's more to the blues than just 12 bars.

That's the same sort of elitism that makes the jazz and classical crowds such a bunch of snobs. Well, if you can't play the blues unless you're dirt poor and socially repressed, then you're not qualified to listen to it either.

B.B. King gave his stamp of approval to Clapton and Cream, so that's good enough for me. I'm sure Chuck Berry isn't complaining about all those royalty checks The Stones generated for him either. Hey, even cowgirls get the blues, sometimes....

Quote
GumbootCloggeroo

Quote
Doxa
Damn, when I listen to The Stones doing "I Just Want to Make Love To You" or "Confessin' The Blues" or "Stop Breakin' Down", I actually think they understand Muddy, Robert Johnson etc. better than any white guys ever did. And when I put "Midnight Rambler" on, I can see the delta guys, starting from Charley Patton, smiling there in heaven/hell...

They sure understand Muddy and Robert Johnson while being flown around the world in a private plane like a king. Come on. Do you honestly think the Stones truly understand what the blues is about? Sure they can play a 12 bar blues well, and Mick Taylor is good at soloing and Mick plays the harmonica great, but did they ever feel the pain and suffering that black people did in the deep south? They will never understand that. What is pain and suffering to Mick and Keith? When their steak isn't as rare as they like it to be? Just because you can play the blues doesn't mean you *get* the blues or understand it. And that's why I refuse to put The Stones on a blues pedestal. There's more to the blues than just 12 bars.

I should hope then that you refuse to put ANY white artists that came out of the 60's who played blues on any pedestal...The Stones, Cream, Allman Brothers, Zeppelin, Jeff Beck, Mayall & Blues Breakers, Paul Butterfield or Johnny Winter? If the Stones don't "get" the blues then I don't see how Clapton or anyone else really did better. They were both just as successful and pampered as any of their other white peers playing the blues.

People can take this uppity "high society" road all they want trying to make endless classifications to create division upon division in their music but it's all too complicated than it needs to be. I don't need to go straight to the original source in order to legitimize a song I'm listening to as blues or country or whatever. If I hear the elements that make up a blues song and they complement each other effectively: then it's a blues song. Period. I like my blues to be a variety of emotions: powerful, painful, danceable and most of all: full of restraint. The Stones succeed most of the time in all those criteria.

Some people equate "the best" blues guitar playing to the typical guitar acrobatics/shredding..which is why Clapton, Beck and Joe Bonamassa are so popular. I don't get this logic because Muddy Waters wasn't really a guitar God that outplayed anyone off the stage. So I don't know, how we went from modest playing full of restraint and passion to long, inflated, wailing ROCK solos. No doubt Hendrix lit that fuse.

I don't need to remind people (or do I?) that Keith is foremost, a rhythm player. He is at his best when he sticks to rhythm. Even when he plays blues, his rhythm playing is impeccable. His instincts of swirving from rhythm to lead work on a blues song is most always on target...and that alone is the foundation for the constantly mentioned and often mocked: "ancient form of weaving." The blues taught Keith that. Keith, in my book, is one of the best blues players because he exercises restraint and respects the music to know when how much is too much. Few people are able to make that distinction.

Quote
GumbootCloggeroo

Quote
Doxa
Damn, when I listen to The Stones doing "I Just Want to Make Love To You" or "Confessin' The Blues" or "Stop Breakin' Down", I actually think they understand Muddy, Robert Johnson etc. better than any white guys ever did. And when I put "Midnight Rambler" on, I can see the delta guys, starting from Charley Patton, smiling there in heaven/hell...

They sure understand Muddy and Robert Johnson while being flown around the world in a private plane like a king. Come on. Do you honestly think the Stones truly understand what the blues is about? Sure they can play a 12 bar blues well, and Mick Taylor is good at soloing and Mick plays the harmonica great, but did they ever feel the pain and suffering that black people did in the deep south? They will never understand that. What is pain and suffering to Mick and Keith? When their steak isn't as rare as they like it to be? Just because you can play the blues doesn't mean you *get* the blues or understand it. And that's why I refuse to put The Stones on a blues pedestal. There's more to the blues than just 12 bars.

I don't care so much of that 'being poor, and suffering, and feeling the burden of slavery on one's shoulders, etc', when we are talking about music. The Stones never been trying to be 'blues' like that - that's hypocracy of highest sort. And not any more any Allman Brothers, or Claptons, are 'blues' like that, even though knowing how to play every damn blues lick ever produced.

What excites me in the Stones is how they transformed creatively those almost transcendental musical elements - slide guitars, howling harmonicas, funky Chicago drum beats, and the strong, no bullshitting lyrics - into radically different living envirovment. It is the power of the music itself - not the context of the players - which matters. The blues music offers strong feelings - be that drinking hard, your damn wife/girlfriend dumping you, feeling horny, the world pissing you off, etc - which is especially and strongly reflected in the music itself (lyrics aside). In a sense blues speaks rather universal, simple language as a musical form.

The Stones, I think, hit straight to the idea of that music, and once studied it by heart, they transformed it to an art form of their own - their own type of rock music. For example, listening to Muddy Waters Chicago band recordings from the 50's - the way the bands works 'holistically' together, filling the air together - is exactly the method the Stones would later master in their own sound; there were no any flashing guitar solos or anything like that - just a HUGE sounding groovy band making a helluva noise. I don't think any other white r&b or a rock band understand so clearly the majestic sound of Muddy Water's band as they did. Most of them, Claptons and Greens 'just' followed the guitar heroes a'la BB & Freddie King, Buddy Guy, etc. The Stones not. Be it Brian or whoever, I think they somehow always understood better the musical core of the blues than its (many times) flashy and 'formal' ´outfront. For that reason I think it was easier for the Stones to develop their own sound and change their style, since they were not so 'formally' oriented ever. Their 'purism' in the early days was more spiritual than stylistical.

And reflecting that feeling compotent, of which blues is so well-known and easily recognizable, so strongly in their music, The Stones always had carried the blues torch to new horizons. I think especially the 'golden era' material, from BEGGARS to EXILE, is an incredible manifestation of that. That output alone is a proof that they did understand the blues better than any white rock band or blues musician ever. When Keith Richards was strumming out "Gimme Shelter" from his guitar and soul, he was probably more close to Robert Johnson than any so called modern day blues musician - who know all his Johnsons from note to note - ever is. Much nearer. The same damn 'devil's music' in a different context.

So I think the Stones got pretty much better than anyone the living, vital element in blues, and developed it further. This is much more exciting to my eyes than any modern day 'pure' blues musician - black or white - doing his 1000th version of 12 bar blues, adapting the style of, say, John Lee Hooker, Stevie Ray Vaughan, or whoever, and adding some little make up of his. And still today, whenever the Stones happen to play 'basic' twelve bar blues - very rarely - they seem to enjoy doing it rather much, it goes 'naturally', even though usually not taking it too seriously (which is good!). Surely they are technically a garage band there (in today's blues terms), but still they tend to sound more authentic than most of 'real' blues bands who are filling the bills of blues festivals. Still I think that is a sign that The Stones understand something essential in the blues music probably better than most of the bands copying the form much better.

Besides, Jagger is a natural born blues singer.

- Doxa



Edited 3 time(s). Last edit at 2012-11-07 23:26 by Doxa.

Miles Davis grew up in an upper middle class home, his father being a dentist. Is Miles less funky? Did he not face the same racism?

Duke Ellington's father worked in the White House and did quite well for his day.

Did the Stones not suffer (a little) from the way they were treated by the elder media?

Thank god for the Stones. The blues might have died if they hadn't played it. Is there a Blues Hall of Fame? Brian Jones better be in it. He, and Mick to a degree, was the blues fuse that introduced America's own art form to itself.

Quote
24FPS
Miles Davis grew up in an upper middle class home, his father being a dentist. Is Miles less funky? Did he not face the same racism?

Duke Ellington's father worked in the White House and did quite well for his day.

Did the Stones not suffer (a little) from the way they were treated by the elder media?

Thank god for the Stones. The blues might have died if they hadn't played it. Is there a Blues Hall of Fame? Brian Jones better be in it. He, and Mick to a degree, was the blues fuse that introduced America's own art form to itself.

Yes, started in 1980 by the Blues Foundation. But it does not include Brian Jones, who has been included instead in the Rock HOF along with The Stones in 1989.



www.blues.org/halloffame/

Quote
Doxa

Quote
jamesfdouglas
Face it. Many, many lesser-known artists wipe the floor with the Stones for blues playing. The Stones simply aren't musicians at that type of level. Only ex-Stones Mick Taylor can even me mentioned in blues circles without eye-rolling or snickering. Amongst Stones fans, The Stones are "blues-based". Amongst hard-core blues fans, The Stones' attempts at blues are not considered seriously at all.

Unfortunately I need to say that you are right. Not that I agree with it, but the fact is that The Stones are not considered any big shot - or any shot - at all in 'real' blues circles. Of course, their significance - such as introducing the genre to bigger audience (and mostly to most blues fans of today) - but that's a different thing than being actually appreciated as a 'blues act'. They are 'pre-school' stuff, 'populists'. Taylor, like you noted, is an expection.

The idea that The Stones are a great blues band is basically a fantasy by The Stones fans - for us they are that. When Keith Richards speaks himself as "blues man" and sits down and plays a "Little Red Rooster", yeah, that's great for us - but that surely wouldn't impress any blues fan. It is not a great blues man there playing "Little Red Rooster", but Keith Richards - the rock star - playing his version of a blues song. And most likely only the Stones fans see something significant or good there.

But but but....

For me The Stones are the best white blues band ever - since they did something no one else did better: develop the music form (blues) into something original and outstanding - something we nowadays call 'rock music'. I think that should make Muddy etc. proud: passing the torch and giving the inspiration for something that great and novel.

So I really don't care what 'blues circles' nowadays think or say, or how they define what is good blues or not. That's just another form of nerdism in just another speciliazed museum-like dead genre. The 'real' blues happened and was alive back in the 1920's to the 1950's...

Damn, when I listen to The Stones doing "I Just Want to Make Love To You" or "Confessin' The Blues" or "Stop Breakin' Down", I actually think they understand Muddy, Robert Johnson etc. better than any white guys ever did. And when I put "Midnight Rambler" on, I can see the delta guys, starting from Charley Patton, smiling there in heaven/hell...

- Doxa

Nice that I can quote both of you at once as I think you all both made excellent points. The Stones are advocates of the blues but to say they could be considered a good blues band would be a strech for anyone who really knows blues music. Doxa, your last paragraph I think nails it. They understand it.

Part of the problem for the Stones is the fact that they're the Stones. No matter what they touch, it becomes The Stones version of what they're doing be it country, funk, blues, regge, etc. Although I think I would enjoy a Stones blues album, what I think I would enjoy even more would be a Stones blues OUTTAKES album. Give me Keith, Mick & Charlie just hanging out playing some blues tunes as opposed to the finished product. Kind of like the recordings of Keith doing country music at the farm they rehearsed at in '81. Once they rehearse, arrange & polish the magic's too easy to lose. I don't want to hear Mick perform the song, I just want to hear Mick sing it. For real.

Although there have been wonderful glimpses over the years of what The Stones could do with the feeling and power of the blues (ex. Rambler live) I don't think they've collectively ever really allowed themselves to really just play the blues. They've always been to burdened with being the Stones.

At least I think that's what I mean...

Peace,
Mr DJA

Oh... And to the poster who thinks that the blues has anything to do with race, economics or location, I honstly pitty you. You're missing out on a great experience because you obviously haven't allowed yourself to get it. The blues are a universal feeling that some poor, black, southern men & women first put music & melody to. Consider yourself lucky if you have lived such a sheltered life that you don't believe your life's suffering to have been bad enough to feel the blues. Consider yourself blessed the day you realize that your blues are just as real as anyone else's and that the power of the music is actually able to ease some of that pain and & suffering.

Quote
Justin
Keith, in my book, is one of the best blues players because he exercises restraint and respects the music to know when how much is too much. Few people are able to make that distinction.

it helps when your limitations provide you no other choice.

Quote
Doxa
And reflecting that feeling compotent, of which blues is so well-known and easily recognizable, so strongly in their music, The Stones always had carried the blues torch to new horizons. I think especially the 'golden era' material, from BEGGARS to EXILE, is an incredible manifestation of that. That output alone is a proof that they did understand the blues better than any white rock band or blues musician ever. When Keith Richards was strumming out "Gimme Shelter" from his guitar and soul, he was probably more close to Robert Johnson than any so called modern day blues musician - who know all his Johnsons from note to note - ever is. Much nearer. The same damn 'devil's music' in a different context.

So I think the Stones got pretty much better than anyone the living, vital element in blues, and developed it further. This is much more exciting to my eyes than any modern day 'pure' blues musician - black or white - doing his 1000th version of 12 bar blues, adapting the style of, say, John Lee Hooker, Stevie Ray Vaughan, or whoever, and adding some little make up of his. And still today, whenever the Stones happen to play 'basic' twelve bar blues - very rarely - they seem to enjoy doing it rather much, it goes 'naturally', even though usually not taking it too seriously (which is good!). Surely they are technically a garage band there (in today's blues terms), but still they tend to sound more authentic than most of 'real' blues bands who are filling the bills of blues festivals. Still I think that is a sign that The Stones understand something essential in the blues music probably better than most of the bands copying the form much better.

What I learned from the Stones (before venturing out to study the actual sources where this music came from) was that they allowed the music to breathe. Through the seemingly wide space between Charlie, Bill and Keith, there was such a airy quality to the blues that allowed for Mick to ever so gently (and aggressively) sneak in with that dead-on vocal. Those early recordings, Mick is so obviously ripping off all his heroes. He nails every inflection and pronounciation to the last detail. The guitars were almost an after thought to all that was already happening.

What the Stones did better than almost every other white artist/group was that they respected the rules of the blues better than anyone. The blues legends left behind a list of "unwritten" rules for everyone to use and the Stones honored them even when they were pushing their own written music forward. Other groups, I tend to hear a blues guitar player being backed by a rock band. When the Stones play blues, each one of them will revert back to their childhood studies of the great ones. It is the perfect example of them working as a unit.

Quote
StonesTod

Quote
Justin
Keith, in my book, is one of the best blues players because he exercises restraint and respects the music to know when how much is too much. Few people are able to make that distinction.

it helps when your limitations provide you no other choice.

Maybe so. But compared to whom? SRV? Hendrix? I am personally not desperate to hear bloated 20 minute solos to prove a guitar player's worth as a blues/country or whatever player. John Lee Hooker was a fine guitar player but he couldn't really outplay Clapton, could he? I'm not sure why Hooker's limitations are justified yet Keith's aren't?

Quote
Justin

Quote
Doxa
And reflecting that feeling compotent, of which blues is so well-known and easily recognizable, so strongly in their music, The Stones always had carried the blues torch to new horizons. I think especially the 'golden era' material, from BEGGARS to EXILE, is an incredible manifestation of that. That output alone is a proof that they did understand the blues better than any white rock band or blues musician ever. When Keith Richards was strumming out "Gimme Shelter" from his guitar and soul, he was probably more close to Robert Johnson than any so called modern day blues musician - who know all his Johnsons from note to note - ever is. Much nearer. The same damn 'devil's music' in a different context.

So I think the Stones got pretty much better than anyone the living, vital element in blues, and developed it further. This is much more exciting to my eyes than any modern day 'pure' blues musician - black or white - doing his 1000th version of 12 bar blues, adapting the style of, say, John Lee Hooker, Stevie Ray Vaughan, or whoever, and adding some little make up of his. And still today, whenever the Stones happen to play 'basic' twelve bar blues - very rarely - they seem to enjoy doing it rather much, it goes 'naturally', even though usually not taking it too seriously (which is good!). Surely they are technically a garage band there (in today's blues terms), but still they tend to sound more authentic than most of 'real' blues bands who are filling the bills of blues festivals. Still I think that is a sign that The Stones understand something essential in the blues music probably better than most of the bands copying the form much better.

What I learned from the Stones (before venturing out to study the actual sources where this music came from) was that they allowed the music to breathe. Through the seemingly wide space between Charlie, Bill and Keith, there was such a airy quality to the blues that allowed for Mick to ever so gently (and aggressively) sneak in with that dead-on vocal. Those early recordings, Mick is so obviously ripping off all his heroes. He nails every inflection and pronounciation to the last detail. The guitars were almost an after thought to all that was already happening.

What the Stones did better than almost every other white artist/group was that they respected the rules of the blues better than anyone. The blues legends left behind a list of "unwritten" rules for everyone to use and the Stones honored them even when they were pushing their own written music forward. Other groups, I tend to hear a blues guitar player being backed by a rock band. When the Stones play blues, each one of them will revert back to their childhood studies of the great ones. It is the perfect example of them working as a unit.

Quote
StonesTod

Quote
Justin
Keith, in my book, is one of the best blues players because he exercises restraint and respects the music to know when how much is too much. Few people are able to make that distinction.

it helps when your limitations provide you no other choice.

Maybe so. But compared to whom? SRV? Hendrix? I am personally not desperate to hear bloated 20 minute solos to prove a guitar player's worth as a blues/country or whatever player. John Lee Hooker was a fine guitar player but he couldn't really outplay Clapton, could he? I'm not sure why Hooker's limitations are justified yet Keith's aren't?

not a big fan of hooker's playing...but oh, man...that voice could make a man kill....

Indeed...truly haunting!

THe Stones, The Animals and The Yardbirds are responsible for introducing an entire generation of white listeners to the blues..Muddy Waters & Howling Wolf Agree. If you are comparing the original Early 60s & Early 70s Stones to the later versions I agree that they lost their touch on the blues But the 60s & 70s Stones played the Blues...Listen to the records & you will agree...You may not like their version of the blues..But they were a Blues band

SOUL

Probably pretty hard to do a convincing job of the blues when you're old, white and have more money than god.

But I agree, the stones were convincing at one point.

They could play it like the back of their hand.

I think Stones are one of the greatest blues bands ever, - the best white blues band ever, - I dont believe in any rasict nonesense about blues having to be music played by the black people and black people only, that's nonesense.

I love the Stones when they play the blues: from the early days to songs like Midnight Rambler, Love In Vain - the best Robert Johnson cover version ever , Back Of My Hand, Still A Fool, Parachute Woman, Since You Been Gone, Prodigial Son, You Gotta Move, etc - all killers, no fillers. Love it. - I'm one of those people that really wish that Stones would make a blues album. It could be one of the greatest albums ever.

I wonder how many great blues songs are still in the vaults:







Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2012-11-08 12:01 by seitan.

Quote
Justin

Quote
Doxa
And reflecting that feeling compotent, of which blues is so well-known and easily recognizable, so strongly in their music, The Stones always had carried the blues torch to new horizons. I think especially the 'golden era' material, from BEGGARS to EXILE, is an incredible manifestation of that. That output alone is a proof that they did understand the blues better than any white rock band or blues musician ever. When Keith Richards was strumming out "Gimme Shelter" from his guitar and soul, he was probably more close to Robert Johnson than any so called modern day blues musician - who know all his Johnsons from note to note - ever is. Much nearer. The same damn 'devil's music' in a different context.

So I think the Stones got pretty much better than anyone the living, vital element in blues, and developed it further. This is much more exciting to my eyes than any modern day 'pure' blues musician - black or white - doing his 1000th version of 12 bar blues, adapting the style of, say, John Lee Hooker, Stevie Ray Vaughan, or whoever, and adding some little make up of his. And still today, whenever the Stones happen to play 'basic' twelve bar blues - very rarely - they seem to enjoy doing it rather much, it goes 'naturally', even though usually not taking it too seriously (which is good!). Surely they are technically a garage band there (in today's blues terms), but still they tend to sound more authentic than most of 'real' blues bands who are filling the bills of blues festivals. Still I think that is a sign that The Stones understand something essential in the blues music probably better than most of the bands copying the form much better.

What I learned from the Stones (before venturing out to study the actual sources where this music came from) was that they allowed the music to breathe. Through the seemingly wide space between Charlie, Bill and Keith, there was such a airy quality to the blues that allowed for Mick to ever so gently (and aggressively) sneak in with that dead-on vocal. Those early recordings, Mick is so obviously ripping off all his heroes. He nails every inflection and pronounciation to the last detail. The guitars were almost an after thought to all that was already happening.

What the Stones did better than almost every other white artist/group was that they respected the rules of the blues better than anyone. The blues legends left behind a list of "unwritten" rules for everyone to use and the Stones honored them even when they were pushing their own written music forward. Other groups, I tend to hear a blues guitar player being backed by a rock band. When the Stones play blues, each one of them will revert back to their childhood studies of the great ones. It is the perfect example of them working as a unit.

Quote
StonesTod

Quote
Justin
Keith, in my book, is one of the best blues players because he exercises restraint and respects the music to know when how much is too much. Few people are able to make that distinction.

it helps when your limitations provide you no other choice.

Maybe so. But compared to whom? SRV? Hendrix? I am personally not desperate to hear bloated 20 minute solos to prove a guitar player's worth as a blues/country or whatever player. John Lee Hooker was a fine guitar player but he couldn't really outplay Clapton, could he? I'm not sure why Hooker's limitations are justified yet Keith's aren't?

I agree with Justin here !!