For information about how to use this forum please check out forum help and policies.
Quote
DandelionPowderman
I'm amazed by reading that people who have been playing for 30 years think that starting off a song, and then free-ride through it, has ANYTHING to do with leading a band musically
Quote
DandelionPowderman
I'm amazed by reading that people who have been playing for 30 years think that starting off a song, and then free-ride through it, has ANYTHING to do with leading a band musically
Quote
71TeleQuote
DandelionPowderman
I'm amazed by reading that people who have been playing for 30 years think that starting off a song, and then free-ride through it, has ANYTHING to do with leading a band musically
Let's face it: You just have a point of view about Keith's role that most (or many) of us don't agree with. I am amazed that anyone can compare Keith Richards' playing from 1973 to 1975 and think 1975 is better, but there you go.
Quote
DandelionPowderman
I never said he didn't play good in 1973. I said he didn't lead the band musically, and that he took place in the background of the soundscape.
Quote
DandelionPowderman
The reason for bringing up the 73 tour in particular, is that it is the only tour (maybe 72 as well) where he took on that role. It's interesting for me musically, but obviously not for the majority here
Quote
Doxa
Is there any other rock and roll band that would have such an exciting stories to tell of the importance in the change of guitar dynamics?
- Doxa
Quote
Erik_SnowQuote
DandelionPowderman
The reason for bringing up the 73 tour in particular, is that it is the only tour (maybe 72 as well) where he took on that role. It's interesting for me musically, but obviously not for the majority here
The role of....? Of "following the band" ? Didn't quite catch what you meant, DP. You have a broken sentence there
Quote
Erik_SnowQuote
Doxa
Is there any other rock and roll band that would have such an exciting stories to tell of the importance in the change of guitar dynamics?
- Doxa
Wood and Richards doesn't have much else to talk about, other bands could have even more to tell. They talk about the "weaving"......might as well talk about don't giving a hoot about what role they each have.
Quote
DandelionPowdermanQuote
Erik_SnowQuote
DandelionPowderman
The reason for bringing up the 73 tour in particular, is that it is the only tour (maybe 72 as well) where he took on that role. It's interesting for me musically, but obviously not for the majority here
The role of....? Of "following the band" ? Didn't quite catch what you meant, DP. You have a broken sentence there
The more passive role, the straight rhythm role - contrary to the LEADING rhythm role we know from YaYas, LYL, Some Girls Live In Texas and so on...
Quote
DandelionPowderman
Doxa, I'm not talking about what is better. The rest of you have already established that Keith was on top of his game, and that his playing never has been better.
Quote
DandelionPowdermanQuote
Erik_SnowQuote
DandelionPowderman
The reason for bringing up the 73 tour in particular, is that it is the only tour (maybe 72 as well) where he took on that role. It's interesting for me musically, but obviously not for the majority here
The role of....? Of "following the band" ? Didn't quite catch what you meant, DP. You have a broken sentence there
The more passive role, the straight rhythm role - contrary to the LEADING rhythm role we know from YaYas, LYL, Some Girls Live In Texas and so on...
Quote
LieB
Being "on top of it" is a quite vague statement. I think he was, in the sense that he was still the band's engine with his (mostly) rhythm playing. But I don't think he was on top of his own level, so to speak, because his playing was definitely a little pedestrian compared to what he did around 1969, when he mixed more lead and rhythm, invented new riffs, played overall more dynamically, and dabbled with acoustics and slide. Which I think is what Dandelion is talking about, more or less.
There are dynamic highlights of Keith in '73 as well, like Angie, Star Star and Midnight Rambler.
I do think Mick Taylor was a rather large factor in this. Him + drugs made Keith drift more into simple chord playing. When Brian was semi-absent (which occured when the Stones happened to be really creative around '68-69), Keith tried all sorts of things and it probably pushed him into being more productive because he was the only guitar player, although he has said that he didn't enjoy that. When Mick T left, Keith had to take charge a bit once more. But now I'm repeating myself...
Quote
DandelionPowderman
And Keith had had that leading role between 64-70, so yes, it was natural[....]
Quote
DandelionPowderman
I'm talking about the leading instrument on stage in this period. That wasn't Keith? I must have been listening to another band, then?
Don't worry, mate. These are just opinions
Quote
DandelionPowderman
I suggest we all have a listen at JJF from Ya Yas and JJF from L&G, and calm down
Quote
DandelionPowderman
Erik, we're almost like on different planets when it comes to views on band leadership