Tell Me :
Talk
Myself, I have nothing against Chuck or his playing--however, I find the deep divide over his playing and presence both hilarious and entertaining. I would like to take this opportunity to speculate on what so annoys certain people about him.
It's got to be that fixed perma-grin facial expression, like he's just eaten the world's largest steak dinner and now he's repaired to the living room easy chair with a king-size can of beer for a satisfying interlude of dreaming and farting.
A smile is the most attractive of human traits, but people who smile constantly are just plain annoying--and it's also not very rock n roll.
This is a band that has [I Can't Get No] Satisfaction in it's repertoire, and there's the keyboard player whose perma-grin makes the Cheshire Cat look grumpy.
The Rolling Stones sing You Can't Always Get What You Want, but The Rolling Chuck grins as though he is wanting for nothing--what he needs is to stop smiling so damn much. What the fans need is the occasional angry, menacing Chuck.
The Cheshire Cat is OK as far as Alice in Wonderland goes, but for some inexplicable reason people tend to become decidedly annoyed when a Cheshire Cat is sitting behind an electric piano onstage playing them rock n roll.
I'm sure if Chuck took some smirking lessons from Charlie Watts, people would hate him a whole lot less--at least Charlie could teach him to grin with more mischief as befits a rock musician.
Charlie Watts never grins like the Cheshire Cat.
If being a nice guy was mandatory for being a Stone, then who would be a fan?
Just as long as the guitar plays, let it steal your heart away
Good point, but the "nice guy-card" is always played when someone criticise whether he fits the Stones sound or not...
It was Nicky who played on the album version. Billy or Stu could have done just as could had they played the same arrangement live on those tours. Chuck did all right on Sympathy the first years. The last tours is a bit too loose, imo.
Nicky was great - he took the best Stones songs to another level.
At the time, I was glad when they didn't include Billy anymore on tour or recordings. But I've learned to appreciate his contribution too.
(Am I in danger of being too positive for IORR? I'll get all cynical later on another thread...)
thank you and bless you. there will be a reward in the next life for souls like yours.
chuck can out-nicky nicky.
there's a special place in hell waiting for souls like yours, btw.
Chuck was a big big fanboy of Nicky's and did a whole lotta work to emulate his style and tempo...cheers to Chuck for that.
Spot on.
and don't forget he can boogie like stu, too...
you suck
One of the gripes seems to be that he's too treacly or something, but if the Stones could strip it down live maybe he could do what he does best. I mean, maybe Chuck's not the problem: maybe its the over production in their live shows. Chuck is the last thing that I notice in a 17-man band of all-over-the-place back-up singers and triangle players.....
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2013-03-30 18:26 by stupidguy2.
Talk about your favorite band.
For information about how to use this forum please check out forum help and policies.
Re: Chuck Leavell Appreciation Thread
Posted by:
DoomandGloom
()
Date: March 28, 2013 23:01
Stones fans should be happy they have a band. I run a band and when I replace someone great there's always an adjustment period and a sad resignation missing that person. The Brian people question Taylor, Woody will never be as good as either, it goes on and on. Billy Preston, Nicky, two in a trillion billion.., once in a lifetime. The only other guys that come to mind, would be Leon Russell or Bruce Hornsby but Chuck could do just as well on a grand piano. Sometimes his 50th anniv. piano sound was cheesy, I don't know what's going on there.Quote
mickschix
Loved your post GLOOM&DOOM, and I think that he has had to follow the likes of the beloved Ian Stewart and Nickie Hopkins....not easy to follow those two. Chuck has a different style but I have had the pleasure of chatting with him for quite some time during No Security and the man is classy and very modest.
How can anyone not love his playing on " Honky Tonk Woman"? I thought he was especially brilliant during the 50th Anniversary shows, HTW was just one highlite.For you, Chuck!
Re: Chuck Leavell Appreciation Thread
Posted by:
stonehearted
()
Date: March 28, 2013 23:41
Quote
SweetThingQuote
GRNRBITWQuote
71TeleQuote
DoomandGloom
People here resent him because he so genuinely happy to be on stage. Haters despise real emotion and the notion that he's just a fan, like us.
Maybe some people don't like his playing. Why try to find ulterior motives for that?
your misery is showing again.
Well, for myself, I may or may not be miserable, but I feel Chuck is quite likable. Doesn't stop me from preferring what I heard from the other musicians that had his place before him though. IF.... that is actually the fault of Mick and/or Kieth, it is no less disappointing. Maybe more so really.
I also understand (I think) the desire to perhaps "defend" Chuck either as a musician or simply a good guy, or both, in light of the alternating mirthful and occasionally venomous abuse heaped upon him on this board.
What I might be unclear about is just how many here actually like what Chuck plays with the Stones *better* than what his predecessor brought to the Stones. Any takers there?
Myself, I have nothing against Chuck or his playing--however, I find the deep divide over his playing and presence both hilarious and entertaining. I would like to take this opportunity to speculate on what so annoys certain people about him.
It's got to be that fixed perma-grin facial expression, like he's just eaten the world's largest steak dinner and now he's repaired to the living room easy chair with a king-size can of beer for a satisfying interlude of dreaming and farting.
A smile is the most attractive of human traits, but people who smile constantly are just plain annoying--and it's also not very rock n roll.
This is a band that has [I Can't Get No] Satisfaction in it's repertoire, and there's the keyboard player whose perma-grin makes the Cheshire Cat look grumpy.
The Rolling Stones sing You Can't Always Get What You Want, but The Rolling Chuck grins as though he is wanting for nothing--what he needs is to stop smiling so damn much. What the fans need is the occasional angry, menacing Chuck.
The Cheshire Cat is OK as far as Alice in Wonderland goes, but for some inexplicable reason people tend to become decidedly annoyed when a Cheshire Cat is sitting behind an electric piano onstage playing them rock n roll.
I'm sure if Chuck took some smirking lessons from Charlie Watts, people would hate him a whole lot less--at least Charlie could teach him to grin with more mischief as befits a rock musician.
Charlie Watts never grins like the Cheshire Cat.
Re: Chuck Leavell Appreciation Thread
Posted by:
GRNRBITW
()
Date: March 28, 2013 23:44
you may be onto something. i know tele will argue til the cows come home that he just doesn't like chuck's playing, but he says it so much that you can't take him seriously anymore...
Re: Chuck Leavell Appreciation Thread
Posted by:
uhbuhgullayew
()
Date: March 28, 2013 23:56
Quote
stonehearted
Re: Chuck Leavell Appreciation Thread
Posted by:
GravityBoy
()
Date: March 28, 2013 23:59
No one can be this insanely happy and be a Rolling Stone.
It's a law, like one of Newton's.
It's a law, like one of Newton's.
Re: Chuck Leavell Appreciation Thread
Posted by:
Munichhilton
()
Date: March 29, 2013 00:04
Look at all those huge pot trees!
Re: Chuck Leavell Appreciation Thread
Posted by:
GravityBoy
()
Date: March 29, 2013 00:08
Look... a squirel.
Re: Chuck Leavell Appreciation Thread
Posted by:
dcba
()
Date: March 29, 2013 12:49
This thread is not complete without this :
SEA LEVEL
March 3, 1978 Friday
Orpheum Theatre,
Boston, Ma. USA
opening set for The Outlaws
Audience Stereo Sony ECM-99A > Sony TC-153SD
FOB, microphone hand-held
Nakamichi MR-1 > Tascam DA-20 > Tascam CD-RW900
Master Cassette > DAT > CD > EAC secure > FLAC
Azimuth aligned; Dolby B decoded, no processing or EQ
Total Time - 51:58
Recorded by Charlie Macasay
Transfer and encoding by Steve Hopkins
1. Tidal Wave 8:00
2. Every Little Thing 4:51
3. Rain In Spain 6:04
4. That's Your Secret 5:46
5. Midnight Pass 8:48
6. Country Fool 5:13
7. Grand Larceny 7:55
Encore
8. Statesboro Blues 5:21
Randall Bramlett - keyboards, saxophone, vocals
David Causey - guitar
Jaimo - percussion
Chuck Leavell - keyboards
Jimmy Nalls - guitar
George Weaver - drums
Lamar Williams - bass
with guest David Dix (of the Outlaws) - percussion
[www.dimeadozen.org]
You Chuck naysayers you all know you need this show!
SEA LEVEL
March 3, 1978 Friday
Orpheum Theatre,
Boston, Ma. USA
opening set for The Outlaws
Audience Stereo Sony ECM-99A > Sony TC-153SD
FOB, microphone hand-held
Nakamichi MR-1 > Tascam DA-20 > Tascam CD-RW900
Master Cassette > DAT > CD > EAC secure > FLAC
Azimuth aligned; Dolby B decoded, no processing or EQ
Total Time - 51:58
Recorded by Charlie Macasay
Transfer and encoding by Steve Hopkins
1. Tidal Wave 8:00
2. Every Little Thing 4:51
3. Rain In Spain 6:04
4. That's Your Secret 5:46
5. Midnight Pass 8:48
6. Country Fool 5:13
7. Grand Larceny 7:55
Encore
8. Statesboro Blues 5:21
Randall Bramlett - keyboards, saxophone, vocals
David Causey - guitar
Jaimo - percussion
Chuck Leavell - keyboards
Jimmy Nalls - guitar
George Weaver - drums
Lamar Williams - bass
with guest David Dix (of the Outlaws) - percussion
[www.dimeadozen.org]
You Chuck naysayers you all know you need this show!
Re: Chuck Leavell Appreciation Thread
Posted by:
DandelionPowderman
()
Date: March 29, 2013 13:19
I´d have preferred Chuck on keyboards (not the Casio piano!), say wurlitzer and/or hammond organ. His keyboard work is much more tasteful, imo.
His piano playing is too "Southern/honky tonk" for the Stones.
I know he´s a nice guy and a brilliant musician, but so is Jeff Beck - and he is certainly not a good fit for the Stones.
His piano playing is too "Southern/honky tonk" for the Stones.
I know he´s a nice guy and a brilliant musician, but so is Jeff Beck - and he is certainly not a good fit for the Stones.
Re: Chuck Leavell Appreciation Thread
Posted by:
Elmo Lewis
()
Date: March 29, 2013 14:38
Georgia Outdoors "In
Tune with the Trees"
Premieres, Friday,
March 29, 8:30 PM
Host
Sharon Collins visits with legendary keyboardist and Georgia Music
Hall of Fame
member Chuck Leavell in "In Tune with the Trees,"
premiering Friday, March 29
at 8:30 PM. In addition to his work as a musician, Leavell is a strong
supporter of sustainable forestry, conservation and environmental
protection.The
show encores Saturday, March 30 at 6 PM and Sunday, March 31 at 7:30
PM. Check out the promo here:
Georgia Outdoors In Tune With Trees Video
[gpb.convio.net]
Tune with the Trees"
Premieres, Friday,
March 29, 8:30 PM
Host
Sharon Collins visits with legendary keyboardist and Georgia Music
Hall of Fame
member Chuck Leavell in "In Tune with the Trees,"
premiering Friday, March 29
at 8:30 PM. In addition to his work as a musician, Leavell is a strong
supporter of sustainable forestry, conservation and environmental
protection.The
show encores Saturday, March 30 at 6 PM and Sunday, March 31 at 7:30
PM. Check out the promo here:
Georgia Outdoors In Tune With Trees Video
[gpb.convio.net]
Re: Chuck Leavell Appreciation Thread
Posted by:
marcovandereijk
()
Date: March 29, 2013 14:39
Quote
DandelionPowderman
I know he´s a nice guy and a brilliant musician, but so is Jeff Beck - and he is certainly not a good fit for the Stones.
If being a nice guy was mandatory for being a Stone, then who would be a fan?
Just as long as the guitar plays, let it steal your heart away
Re: Chuck Leavell Appreciation Thread
Posted by:
DandelionPowderman
()
Date: March 29, 2013 18:26
Quote
marcovandereijkQuote
DandelionPowderman
I know he´s a nice guy and a brilliant musician, but so is Jeff Beck - and he is certainly not a good fit for the Stones.
If being a nice guy was mandatory for being a Stone, then who would be a fan?
Good point, but the "nice guy-card" is always played when someone criticise whether he fits the Stones sound or not...
Re: Chuck Leavell Appreciation Thread
Posted by:
Angus MacBagpipe
()
Date: March 30, 2013 02:31
Chuck makes a great contribution to "Sympathy" live - Billy Preston or even Stu couldn't do that.
Plus he always look you in the eye, smiles and waves when he goes past on his way to and from the b-stage. The guy is happy to be there, just like us!
Plus he always look you in the eye, smiles and waves when he goes past on his way to and from the b-stage. The guy is happy to be there, just like us!
Re: Chuck Leavell Appreciation Thread
Posted by:
DandelionPowderman
()
Date: March 30, 2013 03:07
Quote
Angus MacBagpipe
Chuck makes a great contribution to "Sympathy" live - Billy Preston or even Stu couldn't do that.
Plus he always look you in the eye, smiles and waves when he goes past on his way to and from the b-stage. The guy is happy to be there, just like us!
It was Nicky who played on the album version. Billy or Stu could have done just as could had they played the same arrangement live on those tours. Chuck did all right on Sympathy the first years. The last tours is a bit too loose, imo.
Re: Chuck Leavell Appreciation Thread
Posted by:
Angus MacBagpipe
()
Date: March 30, 2013 03:29
Quote
DandelionPowdermanQuote
Angus MacBagpipe
Chuck makes a great contribution to "Sympathy" live - Billy Preston or even Stu couldn't do that.
Plus he always look you in the eye, smiles and waves when he goes past on his way to and from the b-stage. The guy is happy to be there, just like us!
It was Nicky who played on the album version. Billy or Stu could have done just as could had they played the same arrangement live on those tours. Chuck did all right on Sympathy the first years. The last tours is a bit too loose, imo.
Nicky was great - he took the best Stones songs to another level.
At the time, I was glad when they didn't include Billy anymore on tour or recordings. But I've learned to appreciate his contribution too.
(Am I in danger of being too positive for IORR? I'll get all cynical later on another thread...)
Re: Chuck Leavell Appreciation Thread
Posted by:
GRNRBITW
()
Date: March 30, 2013 17:06
Quote
Woz
Chuck ROCKS!
thank you and bless you. there will be a reward in the next life for souls like yours.
Re: Chuck Leavell Appreciation Thread
Posted by:
Richard from Canada
()
Date: March 30, 2013 17:10
The Stones need Chuck more than he needs them. He's a cool guy.
Re: Chuck Leavell Appreciation Thread
Posted by:
crumbling_mice
()
Date: March 30, 2013 17:23
The sad fact is, we are never going to see the Stones without Chuck Leavell. I'm sure he is a brilliant musician and arranger and seemingly an all round good old boy, all of this is great, but of course none of it means he should be in the Stones.
His playing style simply does not add anything to Stones songs, even on basic stuff like Faraway Eyes he manages, somehow to add that little bit of 'Chuck' which is too flamboyant for the song. I wonder if he has ever sat down and listened to what Hopkins did and just for once, tried to inject something similar?
Rock n ROll's own version of Liberace and they should have jettisoned him way back. There are plenty of talented keyboard players who could have added to the Stones sound in a good way, rather than the flamboyant over kill approach by Leavell. His work on Sympathy is truly atrocious, same with Honky TOnk Women. I simply hate his style of playing. Stuck with him I'm afraid as the band see him as a musical security blanket. Chuck Leavell is just not rock n roll.
His playing style simply does not add anything to Stones songs, even on basic stuff like Faraway Eyes he manages, somehow to add that little bit of 'Chuck' which is too flamboyant for the song. I wonder if he has ever sat down and listened to what Hopkins did and just for once, tried to inject something similar?
Rock n ROll's own version of Liberace and they should have jettisoned him way back. There are plenty of talented keyboard players who could have added to the Stones sound in a good way, rather than the flamboyant over kill approach by Leavell. His work on Sympathy is truly atrocious, same with Honky TOnk Women. I simply hate his style of playing. Stuck with him I'm afraid as the band see him as a musical security blanket. Chuck Leavell is just not rock n roll.
Re: Chuck Leavell Appreciation Thread
Posted by:
GRNRBITW
()
Date: March 30, 2013 17:28
Quote
crumbling_mice
I wonder if he has ever sat down and listened to what Hopkins did and just for once, tried to inject something similar?
chuck can out-nicky nicky.
there's a special place in hell waiting for souls like yours, btw.
Re: Chuck Leavell Appreciation Thread
Posted by:
Munichhilton
()
Date: March 30, 2013 17:37
Quote
GRNRBITWQuote
crumbling_mice
I wonder if he has ever sat down and listened to what Hopkins did and just for once, tried to inject something similar?
chuck can out-nicky nicky.
there's a special place in hell waiting for souls like yours, btw.
Chuck was a big big fanboy of Nicky's and did a whole lotta work to emulate his style and tempo...cheers to Chuck for that.
Re: Chuck Leavell Appreciation Thread
Posted by:
Natlanta
()
Date: March 30, 2013 17:53
at last, a new and fascinating debate.
Re: Chuck Leavell Appreciation Thread
Posted by:
uhbuhgullayew
()
Date: March 30, 2013 17:58
Quote
crumbling_mice
The sad fact is, we are never going to see the Stones without Chuck Leavell. I'm sure he is a brilliant musician and arranger and seemingly an all round good old boy, all of this is great, but of course none of it means he should be in the Stones.
His playing style simply does not add anything to Stones songs, even on basic stuff like Faraway Eyes he manages, somehow to add that little bit of 'Chuck' which is too flamboyant for the song. I wonder if he has ever sat down and listened to what Hopkins did and just for once, tried to inject something similar?
Rock n ROll's own version of Liberace and they should have jettisoned him way back. There are plenty of talented keyboard players who could have added to the Stones sound in a good way, rather than the flamboyant over kill approach by Leavell. His work on Sympathy is truly atrocious, same with Honky TOnk Women. I simply hate his style of playing. Stuck with him I'm afraid as the band see him as a musical security blanket. Chuck Leavell is just not rock n roll.
Spot on.
Re: Chuck Leavell Appreciation Thread
Posted by:
GRNRBITW
()
Date: March 30, 2013 18:05
Quote
MunichhiltonQuote
GRNRBITWQuote
crumbling_mice
I wonder if he has ever sat down and listened to what Hopkins did and just for once, tried to inject something similar?
chuck can out-nicky nicky.
there's a special place in hell waiting for souls like yours, btw.
Chuck was a big big fanboy of Nicky's and did a whole lotta work to emulate his style and tempo...cheers to Chuck for that.
and don't forget he can boogie like stu, too...
Re: Chuck Leavell Appreciation Thread
Posted by:
GRNRBITW
()
Date: March 30, 2013 18:06
Quote
uhbuhgullayewQuote
crumbling_mice
The sad fact is, we are never going to see the Stones without Chuck Leavell. I'm sure he is a brilliant musician and arranger and seemingly an all round good old boy, all of this is great, but of course none of it means he should be in the Stones.
His playing style simply does not add anything to Stones songs, even on basic stuff like Faraway Eyes he manages, somehow to add that little bit of 'Chuck' which is too flamboyant for the song. I wonder if he has ever sat down and listened to what Hopkins did and just for once, tried to inject something similar?
Rock n ROll's own version of Liberace and they should have jettisoned him way back. There are plenty of talented keyboard players who could have added to the Stones sound in a good way, rather than the flamboyant over kill approach by Leavell. His work on Sympathy is truly atrocious, same with Honky TOnk Women. I simply hate his style of playing. Stuck with him I'm afraid as the band see him as a musical security blanket. Chuck Leavell is just not rock n roll.
Spot on.
you suck
Re: Chuck Leavell Appreciation Thread
Posted by:
stupidguy2
()
Date: March 30, 2013 18:24
Quote
Denny
His playing (and singing!) of Statesboro Blues in the original post is just brilliant - if you were in the Rolling Stones and heard him play the blues like that, you'd immediately want him to play with your band, too! Unfortunately, the "lads" don't make much of that sort of music anymore, so the arrangements overall will be a bit more middle of the road - including Chuck's parts. But he is clearly a top player in the very style that the Stones' music comes from, and seemingly a real cool dude, too.
One of the gripes seems to be that he's too treacly or something, but if the Stones could strip it down live maybe he could do what he does best. I mean, maybe Chuck's not the problem: maybe its the over production in their live shows. Chuck is the last thing that I notice in a 17-man band of all-over-the-place back-up singers and triangle players.....
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2013-03-30 18:26 by stupidguy2.
Re: Chuck Leavell Appreciation Thread
Posted by:
stonesrule
()
Date: March 30, 2013 18:29
"last thing I notice..." Couldn't agree more.
I didn't feel this way with Stu or Nicky.
I didn't feel this way with Stu or Nicky.
Re: Chuck Leavell Appreciation Thread
Posted by:
Title5Take1
()
Date: March 30, 2013 18:38
Chuck interviewed in today's Wall Street Journal
Paint It Green, You Devil
How to make money on a journalism website and play keyboards for the Rolling Stones.
By HOLMAN W. JENKINS, JR.
A Rolling Stone may have gathered some insight into the media challenge of the digital age: how to make money from "free" content.
Our body-language meter indicates, though, that what Chuck Leavell is really psyched about is the prospect of hitting the road one more time with the four principals of the "world's greatest rock 'n' roll band." To my suggestion that the prospect must fill his aging bones with dread, Mr. Leavell nearly pops out of his chair.
"Look, how much more time does this band truly have? Fifty years is phenomenal," he says. "A band that has not just stayed together but continued to write songs, be creative. I'd really like to see this go forward because I think the band has proved they're still better at it than anybody."
He will get his wish. Apparently a decision has come down in favor of an 18-city U.S. tour starting in May.
Readers may remember Mr. Leavell as a self-educated tree farmer and spokesman for forestry owners, an enthusiastic promoter of subsidies and trade protectionism on behalf of his industry, like any red-blooded American.
Mr. Leavell played with the Allman Brothers in his youth, supplying a memorable touch to the instrumental classic "Jessica." He and a partner, a veteran Atlanta ad man Joel Babbit, lately have gotten into the media business with their website, MNN.com, known as Mother Nature Network.
Mini moguls, they just scooped up rival TreeHugger.com, owned by Discovery Communications, making Discovery a minority shareholder in their company. CNN is also a minority investor and sharer of content.
Now this can't be right: They're making a profit on a website devoted to news—gentle, apolitical coverage of the environment and lifestyle issues. On a recent day, headlines included "Why we get excited about giant pandas," "N.Y. auto show dazzles with clean tech" and (irresistibly) "Lone seal pup found wandering in forest."
If MNN were a normal news website, auctioning off ad space and counting eyeballs, it would be lucky to have one-fifth of its current revenue, says Mr. Babbit. "There's no way any content site, of any size, unless you're CNN.com or one those big guys, can make any money to pay your staff."
MNN doesn't sell ads. Each of its 30 "channels" is offered for sale to corporate sponsors for a flat $300,000 a year. Georgia-Pacific sponsors the "Recycling" channel. AT&T T +0.19% sponsors "Gadgets & Electronics."
Mr. Babbit and I go back and forth on whether MNN has a specifically "southern" vibe—he allows that its journalism tends to be upbeat, nonconfrontational, apolitical. Marketing whizzes have yet to settle on an acronym for the target audience he and Mr. Leavell are focused on—an ungainly term, Lohas, for "lifestyles of health and sustainability," has been used by some.
MNN.com prefers "responsible consumer." Mr. Leavell ticks off qualities describing his adult daughter, who lives in Atlanta: concern for the environment, fitness, community involvement, simple and efficient living—you get the idea.
"The media is still demographically driven in terms of both marketing and advertising," says Mr. Babbit. "It's men or women of this age or that age, of this income or that income. This is a different way. The guy might be 60 and make $300,000 a year or he might be 20 and just out of college. But they have these shared values."
Messrs. Leavell and Babbit are convinced of their proposition and planning more news sites aimed at the "responsible" consumer.
Mr. Leavell is still running a forestry plantation near Macon, Ga., and still struggling in the timber business, though a bright spot lately has been shipping wood pellets to Europe's biomass projects.
He's also involved with reviving the American chestnut, "a very important American icon, from the wood, which is gorgeous, and from the nuts, which are used by wildlife and by humans, especially in Appalachia in the 1800s."
The tree has been all but extinguished in North America by an Asian blight, but attempts to cross-breed a new variety for resistance are starting to pay off.
Besides playing keyboards for the Stones, he's the band's musical director and, as he tells it, the one often pressing the risky suggestion of injecting some of the band's more obscure songs amid the requisite classics. "The hardcore fan would like to hear all the weird stuff and they're not so concerned with hearing 'Jumpin' Jack Flash' for the umpteenth time. I'm constantly pushing Mick, hey, let's do 'Loving Cup.' C'mon man, not everybody may know that song but there's a lot of people who are going to get really excited about hearing a song like that."
I liked the Allman Brothers growing up and his own fusion band Sea Level (a pun on C. Leavell), so I'm a sucker for his PR guy. Like the Allmans in their day, Mr. Leavell demonstrates why so much that is still exuberant and creative in America originates south of the Mason-Dixon line. And, this time, we avoid all discussion of trade policy.
Paint It Green, You Devil
How to make money on a journalism website and play keyboards for the Rolling Stones.
By HOLMAN W. JENKINS, JR.
A Rolling Stone may have gathered some insight into the media challenge of the digital age: how to make money from "free" content.
Our body-language meter indicates, though, that what Chuck Leavell is really psyched about is the prospect of hitting the road one more time with the four principals of the "world's greatest rock 'n' roll band." To my suggestion that the prospect must fill his aging bones with dread, Mr. Leavell nearly pops out of his chair.
"Look, how much more time does this band truly have? Fifty years is phenomenal," he says. "A band that has not just stayed together but continued to write songs, be creative. I'd really like to see this go forward because I think the band has proved they're still better at it than anybody."
He will get his wish. Apparently a decision has come down in favor of an 18-city U.S. tour starting in May.
Readers may remember Mr. Leavell as a self-educated tree farmer and spokesman for forestry owners, an enthusiastic promoter of subsidies and trade protectionism on behalf of his industry, like any red-blooded American.
Mr. Leavell played with the Allman Brothers in his youth, supplying a memorable touch to the instrumental classic "Jessica." He and a partner, a veteran Atlanta ad man Joel Babbit, lately have gotten into the media business with their website, MNN.com, known as Mother Nature Network.
Mini moguls, they just scooped up rival TreeHugger.com, owned by Discovery Communications, making Discovery a minority shareholder in their company. CNN is also a minority investor and sharer of content.
Now this can't be right: They're making a profit on a website devoted to news—gentle, apolitical coverage of the environment and lifestyle issues. On a recent day, headlines included "Why we get excited about giant pandas," "N.Y. auto show dazzles with clean tech" and (irresistibly) "Lone seal pup found wandering in forest."
If MNN were a normal news website, auctioning off ad space and counting eyeballs, it would be lucky to have one-fifth of its current revenue, says Mr. Babbit. "There's no way any content site, of any size, unless you're CNN.com or one those big guys, can make any money to pay your staff."
MNN doesn't sell ads. Each of its 30 "channels" is offered for sale to corporate sponsors for a flat $300,000 a year. Georgia-Pacific sponsors the "Recycling" channel. AT&T T +0.19% sponsors "Gadgets & Electronics."
Mr. Babbit and I go back and forth on whether MNN has a specifically "southern" vibe—he allows that its journalism tends to be upbeat, nonconfrontational, apolitical. Marketing whizzes have yet to settle on an acronym for the target audience he and Mr. Leavell are focused on—an ungainly term, Lohas, for "lifestyles of health and sustainability," has been used by some.
MNN.com prefers "responsible consumer." Mr. Leavell ticks off qualities describing his adult daughter, who lives in Atlanta: concern for the environment, fitness, community involvement, simple and efficient living—you get the idea.
"The media is still demographically driven in terms of both marketing and advertising," says Mr. Babbit. "It's men or women of this age or that age, of this income or that income. This is a different way. The guy might be 60 and make $300,000 a year or he might be 20 and just out of college. But they have these shared values."
Messrs. Leavell and Babbit are convinced of their proposition and planning more news sites aimed at the "responsible" consumer.
Mr. Leavell is still running a forestry plantation near Macon, Ga., and still struggling in the timber business, though a bright spot lately has been shipping wood pellets to Europe's biomass projects.
He's also involved with reviving the American chestnut, "a very important American icon, from the wood, which is gorgeous, and from the nuts, which are used by wildlife and by humans, especially in Appalachia in the 1800s."
The tree has been all but extinguished in North America by an Asian blight, but attempts to cross-breed a new variety for resistance are starting to pay off.
Besides playing keyboards for the Stones, he's the band's musical director and, as he tells it, the one often pressing the risky suggestion of injecting some of the band's more obscure songs amid the requisite classics. "The hardcore fan would like to hear all the weird stuff and they're not so concerned with hearing 'Jumpin' Jack Flash' for the umpteenth time. I'm constantly pushing Mick, hey, let's do 'Loving Cup.' C'mon man, not everybody may know that song but there's a lot of people who are going to get really excited about hearing a song like that."
I liked the Allman Brothers growing up and his own fusion band Sea Level (a pun on C. Leavell), so I'm a sucker for his PR guy. Like the Allmans in their day, Mr. Leavell demonstrates why so much that is still exuberant and creative in America originates south of the Mason-Dixon line. And, this time, we avoid all discussion of trade policy.
Re: Chuck Leavell Appreciation Thread
Posted by:
crumbling_mice
()
Date: March 30, 2013 19:03
After watching and listening to music for many decades and seeing the Stones since the 70's I think I am in a good position aurally to make a judgement on CHuck Leavell. For those who are still deluded and distracted by his connections with the Allmans, watch the live tracks from the 81/82 tour, particuarly the ones where Stu is belting it out on an old piano.
Leavell, simply can't or refuses to take up this style. The comparisons with Hopkins are similar. I think the root cause of the problem is the respective parties history. Hopkins and Stu came out of England around the same time - they were rooted in London music scene. Leavell comes from the USA with a very different musical history. The two styles simply don't connect and rather than CHuck moving towards the English pub rock style, he has dragged the rest of the band over to his Liberace over flamboyant style. Listen to 40 licks live and his ridiculous intro to Sympathy. There is absolutley no need for that, and it puts a wholly different slant on the song from there on.
I've accepted we are stuck with him (he doesn't even look rock n roll ffs) but I think he has largely been a huge mistake from day one. Even his playing on Stripped makes me want to vomit.
Leavell, simply can't or refuses to take up this style. The comparisons with Hopkins are similar. I think the root cause of the problem is the respective parties history. Hopkins and Stu came out of England around the same time - they were rooted in London music scene. Leavell comes from the USA with a very different musical history. The two styles simply don't connect and rather than CHuck moving towards the English pub rock style, he has dragged the rest of the band over to his Liberace over flamboyant style. Listen to 40 licks live and his ridiculous intro to Sympathy. There is absolutley no need for that, and it puts a wholly different slant on the song from there on.
I've accepted we are stuck with him (he doesn't even look rock n roll ffs) but I think he has largely been a huge mistake from day one. Even his playing on Stripped makes me want to vomit.
Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.
Online Users
bakersfield , doubledoor , hasenfuss , hot stuff , manu3121 , snarf2014 , syrel , TW2019 , usetobesampeg , voodoodrew , YUQURMH
Guests:
1676
Record Number of Users:
206
on June 1, 2022 23:50
Record Number of Guests:
9627
on January 2, 2024 23:10