Tell Me :
Talk
It would not sound right.
It would sound better.
It really wouldn't.
I do not want to defend the Stones or Keith, but I agree with the view "no Keith no Stones". Keith being just a decoration is not thinkable. And as much as I have always loved Mick T, I don't think he is the man. So, I suspect the only way is the way they have chosen and when it will become too bad, it will be the end.
Some time ago, Mick Taylor playing on Streets Of Love was also not thinkable!
Touche!
Keith would not just be a decoration if Ron And Mick T were to handle the lead guitar parts. Keith would play rhythm. Keith would play what his arthritis and overall health allow him to play well enough. There is a differance.
If it comes to this, it would be a tribute band...
That is laughable. Of Course not. They would sound incredible!
This could be what Jack Nicholson refers to as the "last-word freak" in the film As Good As It Gets?
but where does it get you?
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2014-06-30 00:55 by Nikkei.
Oh well. There you go again. LOL!
Best two post on this topic.
+1
Folks who think that Keith's guitar is no longer fundemental to the band's live sound are plain wrong.
It remains the unique syncoptation of Keith's timing against the drums and other instruments that defines the imimitable sound of the Rolling Stones.
Talk about your favorite band.
For information about how to use this forum please check out forum help and policies.
Re: The way forward for Keith?
Posted by:
DandelionPowderman
()
Date: June 29, 2014 21:17
Quote
deadegadQuote
Turning To GoldQuote
deadegad
[[/quote]
You are spot on!
Reading through this thread, I see the same old 'defend The Stones at any cost' defense mecanism.
A permanent three man guitar line up with Ron and MT playing all leads is the way to go. The music will sound so much better.
There's no doubt, they could even put Wood on rhythm guitar in "open G" for certain songs, Mick Taylor on lead,and have Keith on acoustic or singing backup at the same mic with Mick (which everyone seems to always want) or playing a "second" lead part out on the catwalks and on the video screens. Ron Wood is more than capable of handling Keith's parts, in an open tuning. Listen to Berlin over in Hot Stuff, just the audio. There may be "no Keith, no Stones,' but they are already turning Kieth's guitar down to the point of being inaudible, for HUGE chunks of the set!
That is indeed the way forward for The Stones to sound their best. It is simple. It is true.
Sentimentality, and, uderstandable sympathy, aside.
Imagine SFTD with Ron and Mick playing the lead while Keith plays his best rhythm?
It would not sound right.
Re: The way forward for Keith?
Posted by:
deadegad
()
Date: June 29, 2014 21:31
Quote
DandelionPowdermanQuote
deadegadQuote
Turning To GoldQuote
deadegad
[[/quote]
You are spot on!
Reading through this thread, I see the same old 'defend The Stones at any cost' defense mecanism.
A permanent three man guitar line up with Ron and MT playing all leads is the way to go. The music will sound so much better.
There's no doubt, they could even put Wood on rhythm guitar in "open G" for certain songs, Mick Taylor on lead,and have Keith on acoustic or singing backup at the same mic with Mick (which everyone seems to always want) or playing a "second" lead part out on the catwalks and on the video screens. Ron Wood is more than capable of handling Keith's parts, in an open tuning. Listen to Berlin over in Hot Stuff, just the audio. There may be "no Keith, no Stones,' but they are already turning Kieth's guitar down to the point of being inaudible, for HUGE chunks of the set!
That is indeed the way forward for The Stones to sound their best. It is simple. It is true.
Sentimentality, and, uderstandable sympathy, aside.
Imagine SFTD with Ron and Mick playing the lead while Keith plays his best rhythm?
It would not sound right.
It would sound better.
Re: The way forward for Keith?
Posted by:
Bastion
()
Date: June 29, 2014 21:33
Quote
deadegadQuote
DandelionPowdermanQuote
deadegadQuote
Turning To GoldQuote
deadegad
[[/quote]
You are spot on!
Reading through this thread, I see the same old 'defend The Stones at any cost' defense mecanism.
A permanent three man guitar line up with Ron and MT playing all leads is the way to go. The music will sound so much better.
There's no doubt, they could even put Wood on rhythm guitar in "open G" for certain songs, Mick Taylor on lead,and have Keith on acoustic or singing backup at the same mic with Mick (which everyone seems to always want) or playing a "second" lead part out on the catwalks and on the video screens. Ron Wood is more than capable of handling Keith's parts, in an open tuning. Listen to Berlin over in Hot Stuff, just the audio. There may be "no Keith, no Stones,' but they are already turning Kieth's guitar down to the point of being inaudible, for HUGE chunks of the set!
That is indeed the way forward for The Stones to sound their best. It is simple. It is true.
Sentimentality, and, uderstandable sympathy, aside.
Imagine SFTD with Ron and Mick playing the lead while Keith plays his best rhythm?
It would not sound right.
It would sound better.
It really wouldn't.
Re: The way forward for Keith?
Posted by:
MartinB
()
Date: June 29, 2014 21:33
Quote
DandelionPowdermanQuote
deadegadQuote
Turning To GoldQuote
deadegad
[[/quote]
You are spot on!
Reading through this thread, I see the same old 'defend The Stones at any cost' defense mecanism.
A permanent three man guitar line up with Ron and MT playing all leads is the way to go. The music will sound so much better.
There's no doubt, they could even put Wood on rhythm guitar in "open G" for certain songs, Mick Taylor on lead,and have Keith on acoustic or singing backup at the same mic with Mick (which everyone seems to always want) or playing a "second" lead part out on the catwalks and on the video screens. Ron Wood is more than capable of handling Keith's parts, in an open tuning. Listen to Berlin over in Hot Stuff, just the audio. There may be "no Keith, no Stones,' but they are already turning Kieth's guitar down to the point of being inaudible, for HUGE chunks of the set!
That is indeed the way forward for The Stones to sound their best. It is simple. It is true.
Sentimentality, and, uderstandable sympathy, aside.
Imagine SFTD with Ron and Mick playing the lead while Keith plays his best rhythm?
It would not sound right.
I do not want to defend the Stones or Keith, but I agree with the view "no Keith no Stones". Keith being just a decoration is not thinkable. And as much as I have always loved Mick T, I don't think he is the man. So, I suspect the only way is the way they have chosen and when it will become too bad, it will be the end.
Re: The way forward for Keith?
Posted by:
Rip This
()
Date: June 29, 2014 21:42
Legendary guitarist Eric Clapton has again said that he is thinking of quitting touring, attributing his decision to the road being “unbearable” in addition to “odd ailments” that may force him to put down his guitar permanently
Read More: Eric Clapton Says Touring Has Become ‘Unbearable,’ Confirms Retirement Plans | [ultimateclassicrock.com]
I hope that KR...the Stones.... continue to play as long as they are having fun....that's what it's all about anyway.
Read More: Eric Clapton Says Touring Has Become ‘Unbearable,’ Confirms Retirement Plans | [ultimateclassicrock.com]
I hope that KR...the Stones.... continue to play as long as they are having fun....that's what it's all about anyway.
Re: The way forward for Keith?
Posted by:
alimente
()
Date: June 29, 2014 21:58
Quote
MartinB
Keith being just a decoration is not thinkable.
Some time ago, Mick Taylor playing on Streets Of Love was also not thinkable!
Re: The way forward for Keith?
Posted by:
deadegad
()
Date: June 29, 2014 23:41
Quote
alimenteQuote
MartinB
Keith being just a decoration is not thinkable.
Some time ago, Mick Taylor playing on Streets Of Love was also not thinkable!
Touche!
Keith would not just be a decoration if Ron And Mick T were to handle the lead guitar parts. Keith would play rhythm. Keith would play what his arthritis and overall health allow him to play well enough. There is a differance.
Re: The way forward for Keith?
Posted by:
MartinB
()
Date: June 30, 2014 00:16
Quote
deadegadQuote
alimenteQuote
MartinB
Keith being just a decoration is not thinkable.
Some time ago, Mick Taylor playing on Streets Of Love was also not thinkable!
Touche!
Keith would not just be a decoration if Ron And Mick T were to handle the lead guitar parts. Keith would play rhythm. Keith would play what his arthritis and overall health allow him to play well enough. There is a differance.
If it comes to this, it would be a tribute band...
Re: The way forward for Keith?
Posted by:
deadegad
()
Date: June 30, 2014 00:27
Quote
MartinBQuote
deadegadQuote
alimenteQuote
MartinB
Keith being just a decoration is not thinkable.
Some time ago, Mick Taylor playing on Streets Of Love was also not thinkable!
Touche!
Keith would not just be a decoration if Ron And Mick T were to handle the lead guitar parts. Keith would play rhythm. Keith would play what his arthritis and overall health allow him to play well enough. There is a differance.
If it comes to this, it would be a tribute band...
That is laughable. Of Course not. They would sound incredible!
Re: The way forward for Keith?
Posted by:
Nikkei
()
Date: June 30, 2014 00:28
my oh myQuote
BastionQuote
deadegadQuote
DandelionPowdermanQuote
Turning To Gold
The music will sound so much better.
It would not sound right.
It would sound better.
It really wouldn't.
Re: The way forward for Keith?
Posted by:
deadegad
()
Date: June 30, 2014 00:41
Quote
Nikkeimy oh myQuote
BastionQuote
deadegadQuote
DandelionPowdermanQuote
Turning To Gold
The music will sound so much better.
It would not sound right.
It would sound better.
It really wouldn't.
This could be what Jack Nicholson refers to as the "last-word freak" in the film As Good As It Gets?
Re: The way forward for Keith?
Posted by:
DandelionPowderman
()
Date: June 30, 2014 00:45
The thing is, many fans think the Stones sound better without Keith's guitar. That deserves the "my oh my". Sad, Sad, Sad indeed.
It's fun and great-sounding when Mick Taylor and Ronnie Wood play together outside the Stones. But it doesn't sound like the Stones. Far from it.
A very few single songs sound great without Keith on records, but those are the exceptions.
IORR or HTW without Keith's licks? Shhh...
It's fun and great-sounding when Mick Taylor and Ronnie Wood play together outside the Stones. But it doesn't sound like the Stones. Far from it.
A very few single songs sound great without Keith on records, but those are the exceptions.
IORR or HTW without Keith's licks? Shhh...
Re: The way forward for Keith?
Posted by:
Nikkei
()
Date: June 30, 2014 00:54
hey look, he's got it!Quote
deadegadQuote
Nikkeimy oh myQuote
BastionQuote
deadegadQuote
DandelionPowdermanQuote
Turning To Gold
The music will sound so much better.
It would not sound right.
It would sound better.
It really wouldn't.
This could be what Jack Nicholson refers to as the "last-word freak" in the film As Good As It Gets?
but where does it get you?
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2014-06-30 00:55 by Nikkei.
Re: The way forward for Keith?
Posted by:
DoomandGloom
()
Date: June 30, 2014 00:54
Quote
DandelionPowderman
The thing is, many fans think the Stones sound better without Keith's guitar. That deserves the "my oh my". Sad, Sad, Sad indeed.
It's fun and great-sounding when Mick Taylor and Ronnie Wood play together outside the Stones. But it doesn't sound like the Stones. Far from it.
A very few single songs sound great without Keith on records, but those are the exceptions.
IORR or HTW without Keith's licks? Shhh...
Re: The way forward for Keith?
Posted by:
Nikkei
()
Date: June 30, 2014 00:56
the guys who want lead guitar wizardry are Rockfans, not Rolling Stones Fans. in my opinion.Quote
DandelionPowderman
The thing is, many fans think the Stones sound better without Keith's guitar. That deserves the "my oh my". Sad, Sad, Sad indeed.
It's fun and great-sounding when Mick Taylor and Ronnie Wood play together outside the Stones. But it doesn't sound like the Stones. Far from it.
A very few single songs sound great without Keith on records, but those are the exceptions.
IORR or HTW without Keith's licks? Shhh...
Re: The way forward for Keith?
Posted by:
deadegad
()
Date: June 30, 2014 01:02
Quote
Nikkeihey look, he's got it!Quote
deadegadQuote
Nikkeimy oh myQuote
BastionQuote
deadegadQuote
DandelionPowdermanQuote
Turning To Gold
The music will sound so much better.
It would not sound right.
It would sound better.
It really wouldn't.
This could be what Jack Nicholson refers to as the "last-word freak" in the film As Good As It Gets?
but where does it get you?
Oh well. There you go again. LOL!
Re: Keith
Posted by:
RockinJive
()
Date: June 30, 2014 03:25
Quote
geordiestoneSpot on. Leave Keith be, it's a small miracle ANY of them are still up there doing it. Does everyone have a great time at a Stones show? Yeah, i thought so. That's all we should care about. If Keith wants and feels able to do it still then good for him and good for us too. Everyone's a winner.Quote
More Hot Rocks
No Stones no life as we know it
Best two post on this topic.
Re: Keith
Posted by:
DoomandGloom
()
Date: June 30, 2014 05:01
Yup.. It is what it is and pretty great at that.Quote
RockinJiveQuote
geordiestoneSpot on. Leave Keith be, it's a small miracle ANY of them are still up there doing it. Does everyone have a great time at a Stones show? Yeah, i thought so. That's all we should care about. If Keith wants and feels able to do it still then good for him and good for us too. Everyone's a winner.Quote
More Hot Rocks
No Stones no life as we know it
Best two post on this topic.
Re: The way forward for Keith?
Posted by:
Plink
()
Date: June 30, 2014 11:29
I’ve read only a fraction of this thread and found several of the posts to be quite beyond the pale. For the record, I do like MT but I find the notion that he should “step in” while Keith hangs back strumming the occasional open chord and singing back up for Mick to be ridiculous, and in response, an analogy popped into my head. Below are my thoughts – it’s too lengthy, I know, but I guess I just had to get this off of my chest:
Memo from the producers of Hamlet to Sir Lawrence Olivier:
Dear Mr. Olivier,
Ticket sales have been strong. Reviews written by professional entertainment critics for legitimate news outlets have been overwhelmingly positive, and not one has singled you out as a weak link. Audiences have great affection for you. Before your big soliloquy they yell, “LLAAAARRRRYYYYY!” and clearly appreciate your output as a performer. They leave the show on a high, having been thoroughly entertained. However… there is a tiny fringe group called The Miniscule Coterie of Armchair Critics who believe you just can’t hack it anymore. They scrutinize your every word, every syllable, every dramatic pause. Sometimes your voice cracks – you just can’t project like you could 42 years ago. You’ve also been known to flub a line now and then. While it is true that such gaffes either go unnoticed or are a non-issue for the vast majority of the audience (whom The Coterie deem to be either clueless dimwits or in denial about your woefully diminished capabilities), the harsh reality is that The Miniscule Coterie of Armchair Critics deems ALL gaffes to be utterly unacceptable. That said, they still retain some measure of affection and respect for you and your body of work. After much message board brainstorming, they have proposed a solution to resolve their serious issues with your ever-diminishing skills as a thespian. Convinced by their loud and fervent declarations of your shortcomings, we have opted to implement their remedy. It will solve all of the performance issues that we didn’t even know existed until they were brought to our attention.
So, here’s what we’re going to do: You’re co-star’s role will stay as is. Now here’s the genius part – we’re going to get the guy who was in a production of Hamlet with you briefly, decades ago, to step into the title role so you can relax and kick back on stage while he does all the work that The Coterie believes is now beyond your grasp. You remember him, right? He’s the one who didn’t have an abundance of charisma but was quite good in his role back in the day. The one who bolted without warning and left the production in the lurch. The same guy who said publicly that “Hamlet” wasn’t really his cup of tea. The guy who left to pursue his own artistic inclinations but has proven to be a lackluster commercial draw in the 40 years following his abrupt departure from the Hamlet cast as a young man. While extensive market research indicates that an estimated 95% of the theater-going audience is unfamiliar with this actor, The Coterie has made a compelling case that only he can save this production of Hamlet from the embarrassing sinking ship that you, Sir Lawrence Olivier, have become. So he’s taking over the lead and you’ll be reassigned. Not to worry, Larry, you’ll still be onstage, holding a spear, with the odd line here and there - so people can see The Legend. It’s a Win-Win!
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2014-06-30 11:38 by Plink.
Memo from the producers of Hamlet to Sir Lawrence Olivier:
Dear Mr. Olivier,
Ticket sales have been strong. Reviews written by professional entertainment critics for legitimate news outlets have been overwhelmingly positive, and not one has singled you out as a weak link. Audiences have great affection for you. Before your big soliloquy they yell, “LLAAAARRRRYYYYY!” and clearly appreciate your output as a performer. They leave the show on a high, having been thoroughly entertained. However… there is a tiny fringe group called The Miniscule Coterie of Armchair Critics who believe you just can’t hack it anymore. They scrutinize your every word, every syllable, every dramatic pause. Sometimes your voice cracks – you just can’t project like you could 42 years ago. You’ve also been known to flub a line now and then. While it is true that such gaffes either go unnoticed or are a non-issue for the vast majority of the audience (whom The Coterie deem to be either clueless dimwits or in denial about your woefully diminished capabilities), the harsh reality is that The Miniscule Coterie of Armchair Critics deems ALL gaffes to be utterly unacceptable. That said, they still retain some measure of affection and respect for you and your body of work. After much message board brainstorming, they have proposed a solution to resolve their serious issues with your ever-diminishing skills as a thespian. Convinced by their loud and fervent declarations of your shortcomings, we have opted to implement their remedy. It will solve all of the performance issues that we didn’t even know existed until they were brought to our attention.
So, here’s what we’re going to do: You’re co-star’s role will stay as is. Now here’s the genius part – we’re going to get the guy who was in a production of Hamlet with you briefly, decades ago, to step into the title role so you can relax and kick back on stage while he does all the work that The Coterie believes is now beyond your grasp. You remember him, right? He’s the one who didn’t have an abundance of charisma but was quite good in his role back in the day. The one who bolted without warning and left the production in the lurch. The same guy who said publicly that “Hamlet” wasn’t really his cup of tea. The guy who left to pursue his own artistic inclinations but has proven to be a lackluster commercial draw in the 40 years following his abrupt departure from the Hamlet cast as a young man. While extensive market research indicates that an estimated 95% of the theater-going audience is unfamiliar with this actor, The Coterie has made a compelling case that only he can save this production of Hamlet from the embarrassing sinking ship that you, Sir Lawrence Olivier, have become. So he’s taking over the lead and you’ll be reassigned. Not to worry, Larry, you’ll still be onstage, holding a spear, with the odd line here and there - so people can see The Legend. It’s a Win-Win!
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2014-06-30 11:38 by Plink.
Re: The way forward for Keith?
Posted by:
Nikkei
()
Date: June 30, 2014 12:42
Quote
Plink
I’ve read only a fraction of this thread and found several of the posts to be quite beyond the pale. For the record, I do like MT but I find the notion that he should “step in” while Keith hangs back strumming the occasional open chord and singing back up for Mick to be ridiculous...
...Not to worry, Larry, you’ll still be onstage, holding a spear, with the odd line here and there - so people can see The Legend. It’s a Win-Win!
Re: The way forward for Keith?
Posted by:
PhillyFAN
()
Date: June 30, 2014 17:11
The Rolling Stones are not the Rolling Stones without Keith. No way no how. I cannot imagine a "Keith-less" Rolling Stones, nor do I want to.
I had always hoped Keith, Ronnie, and Taylor could alternate on bass. They are all good bass players, and we could have an all Stones core band once more. I have nothing at all against Darryl's bass playing.
I had always hoped Keith, Ronnie, and Taylor could alternate on bass. They are all good bass players, and we could have an all Stones core band once more. I have nothing at all against Darryl's bass playing.
Re: The way forward for Keith?
Posted by:
deadegad
()
Date: June 30, 2014 17:36
The Olivier analogy is a bad one. Keith playing what his health allows him too while Ron and Mick play more competent leads is not a Keith-less Rolling Stones nor does it may them their own Tribute-Band.
What it does do, however, is make what comes out of the speakers during a concert sound a lot better. Keith's lead on SFTD . . .. For quite sometime now . . .. Has been not very good. .
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2014-06-30 17:46 by deadegad.
What it does do, however, is make what comes out of the speakers during a concert sound a lot better. Keith's lead on SFTD . . .. For quite sometime now . . .. Has been not very good. .
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2014-06-30 17:46 by deadegad.
Re: The way forward for Keith?
Posted by:
DandelionPowderman
()
Date: June 30, 2014 17:49
Sometimes "better" won't be as good as it should be.
If I wanted "better" musicians I wouldn't be listening to the Stones at all.
What Keith plays on IORR, HTW, SFTD, S, Respectable , IAON, YGMR or GS comes from him. It's his tone, and his music.
The minute someone else plays it, the whole thing would be a parody, imo. Keith played horrible solos in 1969 already, if one bothers to listen through the live shows from that tour (and not only MSG or Oakland).
I bet people didn't ask him to sit it out or pose with an acoustic, doing back up vocals back then? Neither did they do it in 78, 81, 82 and so on...
If I wanted "better" musicians I wouldn't be listening to the Stones at all.
What Keith plays on IORR, HTW, SFTD, S, Respectable , IAON, YGMR or GS comes from him. It's his tone, and his music.
The minute someone else plays it, the whole thing would be a parody, imo. Keith played horrible solos in 1969 already, if one bothers to listen through the live shows from that tour (and not only MSG or Oakland).
I bet people didn't ask him to sit it out or pose with an acoustic, doing back up vocals back then? Neither did they do it in 78, 81, 82 and so on...
Re: The way forward for Keith?
Posted by:
geordiestone
()
Date: June 30, 2014 18:25
Yes i've made that point a few times, would these people prefer someone like Brian May for example playing instead of Keith? As the great man said, You can't have the Rock without the Roll! And Keith still rolls pretty damn good!Quote
Nikkeithe guys who want lead guitar wizardry are Rockfans, not Rolling Stones Fans. in my opinion.Quote
DandelionPowderman
The thing is, many fans think the Stones sound better without Keith's guitar. That deserves the "my oh my". Sad, Sad, Sad indeed.
It's fun and great-sounding when Mick Taylor and Ronnie Wood play together outside the Stones. But it doesn't sound like the Stones. Far from it.
A very few single songs sound great without Keith on records, but those are the exceptions.
IORR or HTW without Keith's licks? Shhh...
Re: The way forward for Keith?
Posted by:
EJM
()
Date: June 30, 2014 18:28
Where would the excitement be without wondering if it's going to be a car crash or something almost wonderfulQuote
geordiestoneYes i've made that point a few times, would these people prefer someone like Brian May for example playing instead of Keith? As the great man said, You can't have the Rock without the Roll! And Keith still rolls pretty damn good!Quote
Nikkeithe guys who want lead guitar wizardry are Rockfans, not Rolling Stones Fans. in my opinion.Quote
DandelionPowderman
The thing is, many fans think the Stones sound better without Keith's guitar. That deserves the "my oh my". Sad, Sad, Sad indeed.
It's fun and great-sounding when Mick Taylor and Ronnie Wood play together outside the Stones. But it doesn't sound like the Stones. Far from it.
A very few single songs sound great without Keith on records, but those are the exceptions.
IORR or HTW without Keith's licks? Shhh...
Re: The way forward for Keith?
Posted by:
lem motlow
()
Date: July 1, 2014 02:38
mick could've have sold a keith-less rolling stones to the public back in the 1980's.
with ron and mick taylor on guitar and charlie and bill on bass it would've sold millions of tickets.
if the glimmers hadn't patched it up this actually could have happened,and it would've sucked.
i saw pink floyd in the 70's and then again in ,i think 87 when roger waters had left and it was a joke.they 87 band played every note perfectly and the huge stadium crowd loved every second of it,i was beside myself.the whole soul of the band,all of it's weight and gravitas was gone.just a shell of once was.
some things you just can't define,they just are.keith fcking up notes is still the stones,if he's gone the band is gone.end of story.
with ron and mick taylor on guitar and charlie and bill on bass it would've sold millions of tickets.
if the glimmers hadn't patched it up this actually could have happened,and it would've sucked.
i saw pink floyd in the 70's and then again in ,i think 87 when roger waters had left and it was a joke.they 87 band played every note perfectly and the huge stadium crowd loved every second of it,i was beside myself.the whole soul of the band,all of it's weight and gravitas was gone.just a shell of once was.
some things you just can't define,they just are.keith fcking up notes is still the stones,if he's gone the band is gone.end of story.
Re: The way forward for Keith?
Posted by:
Athena
()
Date: July 1, 2014 08:06
the way forward is to keep on rollin'! 
Greek Goddess of Wisdom, Skill...& War
Greek Goddess of Wisdom, Skill...& War
Re: The way forward for Keith?
Posted by:
DandelionPowderman
()
Date: July 1, 2014 09:10
Quote
lem motlow
mick could've have sold a keith-less rolling stones to the public back in the 1980's.
with ron and mick taylor on guitar and charlie and bill on bass it would've sold millions of tickets.
if the glimmers hadn't patched it up this actually could have happened,and it would've sucked.
i saw pink floyd in the 70's and then again in ,i think 87 when roger waters had left and it was a joke.they 87 band played every note perfectly and the huge stadium crowd loved every second of it,i was beside myself.the whole soul of the band,all of it's weight and gravitas was gone.just a shell of once was.
some things you just can't define,they just are.keith fcking up notes is still the stones,if he's gone the band is gone.end of story.
+1
Re: The way forward for Keith?
Posted by:
Spud
()
Date: July 1, 2014 12:09
Quote
DandelionPowderman
The thing is, many fans think the Stones sound better without Keith's guitar. That deserves the "my oh my". Sad, Sad, Sad indeed.
It's fun and great-sounding when Mick Taylor and Ronnie Wood play together outside the Stones. But it doesn't sound like the Stones. Far from it.
A very few single songs sound great without Keith on records, but those are the exceptions.
IORR or HTW without Keith's licks? Shhh...
Folks who think that Keith's guitar is no longer fundemental to the band's live sound are plain wrong.
It remains the unique syncoptation of Keith's timing against the drums and other instruments that defines the imimitable sound of the Rolling Stones.
Re: The way forward for Keith?
Posted by:
GJV
()
Date: July 1, 2014 13:07
Keith's guitar playing is the sound of the Stones.
Yeah, there are better guitarists on this planet, but none can get the real Stones sound, like Keith can.
Think about Jagger's solo tour. Satriani is an exellent player, one of the best in the field, but did it sound right? Don't think so!
Yeah, there are better guitarists on this planet, but none can get the real Stones sound, like Keith can.
Think about Jagger's solo tour. Satriani is an exellent player, one of the best in the field, but did it sound right? Don't think so!
Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.
Online Users
adamw3405 , Bastion , gativubi , guytout59 , P@py , PaintMonkeyManBlack , Rambler62 , snarf2014 , Spud , StonedRambler , Stonesfan2146 , terukun , Topi , TURB0 , Whale
Guests:
1641
Record Number of Users:
206
on June 1, 2022 23:50
Record Number of Guests:
9627
on January 2, 2024 23:10