Tell Me :
Talk
Spoken like true guitar players.......peace
I would say spoken like musicians who understand a real sound from a fake one, but that's just me. I don't want to hear sampled acoustic guitars either.
Next time you're in the music store I encourage you to stop by the keyboard section (I know it's hard with that vintage ES-335 calling your name) and actually try out some of the new high end keyboards. They may not be perfect but they are far from "telltale "plink-plink". Especially when connected to a decent speaker system.
I've hung with David Newman (Randy's cousin) in his LA studio and he's turned me onto some custom made samples he uses for his extensive movie soundtrack work.....they are truly amazing and VERY difficult to discern from the real thing. Basically I'm just suggesting you keep an open mind and try not to be too influenced by the less than stellar piano sampling technology we've all heard in the past. As Bob said: The times they are a changin'. peace
I am glad to see I am not the only one thoroughly confused by the title. I was thinking maybe Stu was on ecstasy hence the 'roll' reference. Or m bybe he was into sushi back in 75!
Hey, NL: I actually own a Nord Electro 4. Great Farfisa, Hammond, Melotron, and several piano samples. Love it. STILL wish the Stones were using a real piano, at least for some stuff. Cheers.
If this is true, someone should tell Chuck!
"Leavell started with the Stones in 1993, playing a miked acoustic piano. Now he uses a digital Yamaha CP300 Stage piano, "which allows us to recreate an acoustic piano, almost better than what a real piano sounds like. There's no worry about it going out of tune. The sound is cleaner and better."
Check his 1993 performances, can you tell the difference? peace
Wow. I love all those keyboards. The Nord has some awesome patches. I'm curious which Hammond, I'm guessing not a B3 or you would have said so, and the Farfisa is classic! I hereby acknowledge your good taste in keyboards and even agree with you that some Stones tunes could benefit from an acoustic piano ....even if we disagree on Chuck's playing.
No, it is a B3 and it even has real drawbars! I also forget to mention the Vox Continental patch, so I am covered on all my Steve Nieve Elvis Costello and 60s stuff. My one complaint is that it's pretty hard to change sounds on the fly and go back to the ones you like. Like everything else these days, it's laid out for tech geeks more than musicians, but the patches are amazing!
As far as I can remember (1990) Chuck never used a real piano on stage with the Stones. In 1993 there was no tour. In 1990 he was already using an electric plinkplonker
[www.youtube.com]
(see from min 3 23)
C
I'm no musician but that plink is distracting even to my ears.
Even when I'm in the cheap seats.
When I hear the studio cut of All Down The Line, I can't tell you what piano is being played or even what notes, but I get an image of a honky tonk saloon in my mind. When I hear it live now, I get an image of a department store.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2014-11-27 16:18 by andrewt.
Yep, just listen to any Stones live album since 1991...
That is a huge part of the problem with Chuck. The dirtiness of a real piano is not necessarily a "good" sound, hence why it sounds so good with a rock'n'roll band. An excellent sounding shitty piano has soft high notes even, not plinky mall muzak dental probing tool sounding high notes.
And that is what the problem is with Chuck. It's so clean that the plink-plink-plink sounds like it has an S and a T in it that is the sound of over compressed bullshit.
How can a sampled keyboard sound "almost better"? That's blasphemy!!!!! That's equal to being 'sort of pregnant'.
lol. I think the fact that it is always in tune is one obvious reason. The fact that it doesn't rely on microphone placement is another. If you've ever heard a poorly mic'ed out of tune piano you could easily say the CP300 actually sounded better, not just almost.
Btw, the above quote was taken from a Chuck site and doesn't necessarily represent my views, but I understand what he was trying to say.
Arguably, Stu would probably be happily playing on Chuck's rig these days if he was still around to do so, for the few songs he choose to play on. peace
Yep..and added nothing other than extra rubbish.
Complete copy of what elton john was doing.
Jesus jagger was f#$cked in the head at this time.
Give me Stones pure anytime
NL, your passionate and persistent defense of Chuck is admirable, but your musical arguments are not persuasive. It is precisely the anomalies of a real piano that give it a natural sound. A perefectly balanced, perfectly in-tune digital piano may be more consistent, but it is certainly not "better" in a musical sense, anymore than a digital download of music sounds "better" than a vinyl record.
A tube guitar amp has many inefficiencies, yet it is those very inefficiencies (how tubes distort when they get hot, etc) that make for a great electric guitar sound. I don't think you would argue that Keith should use one of those modeling amps, where all the possible amp sounds are perfectly modeled and you would just dial them in on the amp. We all would agree that would suck. Yet those amps are way more "efficient" and predictable. The only difference between the guitar amp and piano situations are size and portability.
So it seems to me that there are no musical arguments for Chuck continuing to use the Holiday Inn Lounge plink-plonk device. It is merely a matter of convenience (for him, and perhaps for the Stones). All other arguments are rationalizations.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2014-11-29 19:31 by 71Tele.
Yes a perfectly in tune piano tends to sound off and flat but an out of tune piano sounds bad and can throw off the other musicians performances. And yes I agree that tube amps tend to sound better than modeling amps although I'm sure Keith could make one sound great. As he says, It's all in the fingers.
The musical arguments for Chuck using his CP300 are that it stays in tune and probably cuts through the mix a bit better (probably precisely why you don't like it since you admittedly don't like his playing). Another important musical argument is that it's what the piano player feels most comfortable with, allowing him to concentrate on the music instead of being distracted by technical problems that are inherent in bringing an acoustic piano into a loud stage environment. A great sounding solo acoustic piano is not necessarily the best instrument to play in a loud live rock band, there are too many sympathetic vibrations set up and it tends to dominate the entire frequency range with it's "natural", albeit warm sounds, and of course, it's the final mix of all the instruments that counts
But probably the most important musical argument concerns Mick and Keith. They are obviously happy with Chuck's keyboard sound and playing. This no doubt allows them to play and sing at their best. And had been pointed out in this thread Mick may well be using the piano exclusively for his singing cues. Would they be just as happy with Chuck playing an acoustic piano? Possibly, but I think the consistency of the sound coming from Chuck is something that they have come to rely on to put them in their own comfort zones.
As I said before, if you like the way Mick and Keith are sounding these days, you've got to give some of that credit to Chuck, because like it or not, he has become the musical bed that these two lie in. peace
since when did Charlie ever need a kick up the ass?
I know in the early years he used to TOTA lot of their gear to gigs in his van.
Talk about your favorite band.
For information about how to use this forum please check out forum help and policies.
Re: Stu's roll during TOTA
Posted by:
Naturalust
()
Date: November 26, 2014 20:04
Quote
71TeleQuote
DandelionPowderman
<Besides they didn't have electronic piano's with decent piano sounds in 1975.>
They still don't have that.
+1...I can always tell the telltale "plink-plink" from the real thing, no matter what kind of digital sample is used.
Spoken like true guitar players.......peace
Re: Stu's roll during TOTA
Posted by:
71Tele
()
Date: November 26, 2014 20:37
Quote
NaturalustQuote
71TeleQuote
DandelionPowderman
<Besides they didn't have electronic piano's with decent piano sounds in 1975.>
They still don't have that.
+1...I can always tell the telltale "plink-plink" from the real thing, no matter what kind of digital sample is used.
Spoken like true guitar players.......peace
I would say spoken like musicians who understand a real sound from a fake one, but that's just me. I don't want to hear sampled acoustic guitars either.
Re: Stu's roll during TOTA
Posted by:
Naturalust
()
Date: November 26, 2014 21:13
Quote
71TeleQuote
NaturalustQuote
71TeleQuote
DandelionPowderman
<Besides they didn't have electronic piano's with decent piano sounds in 1975.>
They still don't have that.
+1...I can always tell the telltale "plink-plink" from the real thing, no matter what kind of digital sample is used.
Spoken like true guitar players.......peace
I would say spoken like musicians who understand a real sound from a fake one, but that's just me. I don't want to hear sampled acoustic guitars either.
Next time you're in the music store I encourage you to stop by the keyboard section (I know it's hard with that vintage ES-335 calling your name) and actually try out some of the new high end keyboards. They may not be perfect but they are far from "telltale "plink-plink". Especially when connected to a decent speaker system.
I've hung with David Newman (Randy's cousin) in his LA studio and he's turned me onto some custom made samples he uses for his extensive movie soundtrack work.....they are truly amazing and VERY difficult to discern from the real thing. Basically I'm just suggesting you keep an open mind and try not to be too influenced by the less than stellar piano sampling technology we've all heard in the past. As Bob said: The times they are a changin'. peace
Re: Stu's roll during TOTA
Posted by:
DandelionPowderman
()
Date: November 27, 2014 02:19
Quote
NaturalustQuote
71TeleQuote
DandelionPowderman
<Besides they didn't have electronic piano's with decent piano sounds in 1975.>
They still don't have that.
+1...I can always tell the telltale "plink-plink" from the real thing, no matter what kind of digital sample is used.
Spoken like true guitar players.......peace
Re: Stu's roll during TOTA
Posted by:
flacnvinyl
()
Date: November 27, 2014 02:40
Quote
swissQuote
djangoQuote
1967fan
What is TOTA?
Welcome newbie!
I didn't know what it meant. I'm not a newbie. Plus the OP says Stu's "roll" -- I thought he meant
some kind of piano term called a "roll," rather than Stu's ROLE on the tour.
I am glad to see I am not the only one thoroughly confused by the title. I was thinking maybe Stu was on ecstasy hence the 'roll' reference. Or m bybe he was into sushi back in 75!
Re: Stu's roll during TOTA
Posted by:
71Tele
()
Date: November 27, 2014 03:00
Quote
NaturalustQuote
71TeleQuote
NaturalustQuote
71TeleQuote
DandelionPowderman
<Besides they didn't have electronic piano's with decent piano sounds in 1975.>
They still don't have that.
+1...I can always tell the telltale "plink-plink" from the real thing, no matter what kind of digital sample is used.
Spoken like true guitar players.......peace
I would say spoken like musicians who understand a real sound from a fake one, but that's just me. I don't want to hear sampled acoustic guitars either.
Next time you're in the music store I encourage you to stop by the keyboard section (I know it's hard with that vintage ES-335 calling your name) and actually try out some of the new high end keyboards. They may not be perfect but they are far from "telltale "plink-plink". Especially when connected to a decent speaker system.
I've hung with David Newman (Randy's cousin) in his LA studio and he's turned me onto some custom made samples he uses for his extensive movie soundtrack work.....they are truly amazing and VERY difficult to discern from the real thing. Basically I'm just suggesting you keep an open mind and try not to be too influenced by the less than stellar piano sampling technology we've all heard in the past. As Bob said: The times they are a changin'. peace
Hey, NL: I actually own a Nord Electro 4. Great Farfisa, Hammond, Melotron, and several piano samples. Love it. STILL wish the Stones were using a real piano, at least for some stuff. Cheers.
Re: Stu's roll during TOTA
Posted by:
strat72
()
Date: November 27, 2014 03:07
Quote
NaturalustQuote
71TeleQuote
NaturalustQuote
71TeleQuote
DandelionPowderman
<Besides they didn't have electronic piano's with decent piano sounds in 1975.>
They still don't have that.
+1...I can always tell the telltale "plink-plink" from the real thing, no matter what kind of digital sample is used.
Spoken like true guitar players.......peace
I would say spoken like musicians who understand a real sound from a fake one, but that's just me. I don't want to hear sampled acoustic guitars either.
Next time you're in the music store I encourage you to stop by the keyboard section (I know it's hard with that vintage ES-335 calling your name) and actually try out some of the new high end keyboards. They may not be perfect but they are far from "telltale "plink-plink". Especially when connected to a decent speaker system.
I've hung with David Newman (Randy's cousin) in his LA studio and he's turned me onto some custom made samples he uses for his extensive movie soundtrack work.....they are truly amazing and VERY difficult to discern from the real thing. Basically I'm just suggesting you keep an open mind and try not to be too influenced by the less than stellar piano sampling technology we've all heard in the past. As Bob said: The times they are a changin'. peace
If this is true, someone should tell Chuck!
Re: Stu's roll during TOTA
Posted by:
Naturalust
()
Date: November 27, 2014 03:25
Quote
strat72Quote
NaturalustQuote
71TeleQuote
NaturalustQuote
71TeleQuote
DandelionPowderman
<Besides they didn't have electronic piano's with decent piano sounds in 1975.>
They still don't have that.
+1...I can always tell the telltale "plink-plink" from the real thing, no matter what kind of digital sample is used.
Spoken like true guitar players.......peace
I would say spoken like musicians who understand a real sound from a fake one, but that's just me. I don't want to hear sampled acoustic guitars either.
Next time you're in the music store I encourage you to stop by the keyboard section (I know it's hard with that vintage ES-335 calling your name) and actually try out some of the new high end keyboards. They may not be perfect but they are far from "telltale "plink-plink". Especially when connected to a decent speaker system.
I've hung with David Newman (Randy's cousin) in his LA studio and he's turned me onto some custom made samples he uses for his extensive movie soundtrack work.....they are truly amazing and VERY difficult to discern from the real thing. Basically I'm just suggesting you keep an open mind and try not to be too influenced by the less than stellar piano sampling technology we've all heard in the past. As Bob said: The times they are a changin'. peace
If this is true, someone should tell Chuck!
"Leavell started with the Stones in 1993, playing a miked acoustic piano. Now he uses a digital Yamaha CP300 Stage piano, "which allows us to recreate an acoustic piano, almost better than what a real piano sounds like. There's no worry about it going out of tune. The sound is cleaner and better."
Check his 1993 performances, can you tell the difference? peace
Re: Stu's roll during TOTA
Posted by:
StonedAsia
()
Date: November 27, 2014 03:29
June 26, 1978 Greensboro, NC. I was up front, practically on the stage, when Ian came out to mess around with the piano (pre-show). I called out his name and he turned and grinned, nodded slightly, tickled a few keys and went back stage.
Re: Stu's roll during TOTA
Posted by:
strat72
()
Date: November 27, 2014 03:31
Chuck's keyboard sounds like shit! Plink-Plink is a perfect way to describe it!
Also Chuck started playing with The Stones in 81-82!
Also Chuck started playing with The Stones in 81-82!
Re: Stu's roll during TOTA
Posted by:
Naturalust
()
Date: November 27, 2014 05:20
Quote
71TeleQuote
NaturalustQuote
71TeleQuote
NaturalustQuote
71TeleQuote
DandelionPowderman
<Besides they didn't have electronic piano's with decent piano sounds in 1975.>
They still don't have that.
+1...I can always tell the telltale "plink-plink" from the real thing, no matter what kind of digital sample is used.
Spoken like true guitar players.......peace
I would say spoken like musicians who understand a real sound from a fake one, but that's just me. I don't want to hear sampled acoustic guitars either.
Next time you're in the music store I encourage you to stop by the keyboard section (I know it's hard with that vintage ES-335 calling your name) and actually try out some of the new high end keyboards. They may not be perfect but they are far from "telltale "plink-plink". Especially when connected to a decent speaker system.
I've hung with David Newman (Randy's cousin) in his LA studio and he's turned me onto some custom made samples he uses for his extensive movie soundtrack work.....they are truly amazing and VERY difficult to discern from the real thing. Basically I'm just suggesting you keep an open mind and try not to be too influenced by the less than stellar piano sampling technology we've all heard in the past. As Bob said: The times they are a changin'. peace
Hey, NL: I actually own a Nord Electro 4. Great Farfisa, Hammond, Melotron, and several piano samples. Love it. STILL wish the Stones were using a real piano, at least for some stuff. Cheers.
Wow. I love all those keyboards. The Nord has some awesome patches. I'm curious which Hammond, I'm guessing not a B3 or you would have said so, and the Farfisa is classic! I hereby acknowledge your good taste in keyboards and even agree with you that some Stones tunes could benefit from an acoustic piano ....even if we disagree on Chuck's playing.
Re: Stu's roll during TOTA
Posted by:
71Tele
()
Date: November 27, 2014 05:49
Quote
NaturalustQuote
71TeleQuote
NaturalustQuote
71TeleQuote
NaturalustQuote
71TeleQuote
DandelionPowderman
<Besides they didn't have electronic piano's with decent piano sounds in 1975.>
They still don't have that.
+1...I can always tell the telltale "plink-plink" from the real thing, no matter what kind of digital sample is used.
Spoken like true guitar players.......peace
I would say spoken like musicians who understand a real sound from a fake one, but that's just me. I don't want to hear sampled acoustic guitars either.
Next time you're in the music store I encourage you to stop by the keyboard section (I know it's hard with that vintage ES-335 calling your name) and actually try out some of the new high end keyboards. They may not be perfect but they are far from "telltale "plink-plink". Especially when connected to a decent speaker system.
I've hung with David Newman (Randy's cousin) in his LA studio and he's turned me onto some custom made samples he uses for his extensive movie soundtrack work.....they are truly amazing and VERY difficult to discern from the real thing. Basically I'm just suggesting you keep an open mind and try not to be too influenced by the less than stellar piano sampling technology we've all heard in the past. As Bob said: The times they are a changin'. peace
Hey, NL: I actually own a Nord Electro 4. Great Farfisa, Hammond, Melotron, and several piano samples. Love it. STILL wish the Stones were using a real piano, at least for some stuff. Cheers.
Wow. I love all those keyboards. The Nord has some awesome patches. I'm curious which Hammond, I'm guessing not a B3 or you would have said so, and the Farfisa is classic! I hereby acknowledge your good taste in keyboards and even agree with you that some Stones tunes could benefit from an acoustic piano ....even if we disagree on Chuck's playing.
No, it is a B3 and it even has real drawbars! I also forget to mention the Vox Continental patch, so I am covered on all my Steve Nieve Elvis Costello and 60s stuff. My one complaint is that it's pretty hard to change sounds on the fly and go back to the ones you like. Like everything else these days, it's laid out for tech geeks more than musicians, but the patches are amazing!
Re: Stu's roll during TOTA
Posted by:
liddas
()
Date: November 27, 2014 12:42
Quote
Naturalust
"Leavell started with the Stones in 1993, playing a miked acoustic piano. Now he uses a digital Yamaha CP300 Stage piano, "which allows us to recreate an acoustic piano, almost better than what a real piano sounds like. There's no worry about it going out of tune. The sound is cleaner and better."
Check his 1993 performances, can you tell the difference? peace
As far as I can remember (1990) Chuck never used a real piano on stage with the Stones. In 1993 there was no tour. In 1990 he was already using an electric plinkplonker
[www.youtube.com]
(see from min 3 23)
C
Re: Stu's roll during TOTA
Posted by:
DandelionPowderman
()
Date: November 27, 2014 13:02
And on the 93/94 STUDIO version of So Young, he's playing his solo with his "plinkplonker"
And, yes, there IS an audible difference from Stu's original solo.
And, yes, there IS an audible difference from Stu's original solo.
Re: Stu's roll during TOTA
Posted by:
andrewt
()
Date: November 27, 2014 16:14
Quote
TheGreekvery good ears !Quote
71TeleQuote
DandelionPowderman
<Besides they didn't have electronic piano's with decent piano sounds in 1975.>
They still don't have that.
+1...I can always tell the telltale "plink-plink" from the real thing, no matter what kind of digital sample is used.
I'm no musician but that plink is distracting even to my ears.
Even when I'm in the cheap seats.
When I hear the studio cut of All Down The Line, I can't tell you what piano is being played or even what notes, but I get an image of a honky tonk saloon in my mind. When I hear it live now, I get an image of a department store.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2014-11-27 16:18 by andrewt.
Re: Stu's roll during TOTA
Posted by:
GasLightStreet
()
Date: November 28, 2014 17:48
Quote
71TeleQuote
DandelionPowderman
<Besides they didn't have electronic piano's with decent piano sounds in 1975.>
They still don't have that.
+1...I can always tell the telltale "plink-plink" from the real thing, no matter what kind of digital sample is used.
Yep, just listen to any Stones live album since 1991...
Re: Stu's roll during TOTA
Posted by:
GasLightStreet
()
Date: November 28, 2014 17:52
Quote
71TeleQuote
TheGreekvery good ears !Quote
71TeleQuote
DandelionPowderman
<Besides they didn't have electronic piano's with decent piano sounds in 1975.>
They still don't have that.
+1...I can always tell the telltale "plink-plink" from the real thing, no matter what kind of digital sample is used.
You can fake some of the atmospherics of an acoustic piano with samples, but you really can't capture the entire sound of the piano's hammers, combined with the wood box, combined with the sound waves moving through the air. You can only get what I would call a "snapshot" of it. I don't want to start Chuck-bashing again, but it is a sound I miss from the Stones' recent performances. Even on the upper range notes that Stu plays on Ya Yas (which are way down in the mix) you can tell it's a real piano.
That is a huge part of the problem with Chuck. The dirtiness of a real piano is not necessarily a "good" sound, hence why it sounds so good with a rock'n'roll band. An excellent sounding shitty piano has soft high notes even, not plinky mall muzak dental probing tool sounding high notes.
And that is what the problem is with Chuck. It's so clean that the plink-plink-plink sounds like it has an S and a T in it that is the sound of over compressed bullshit.
Re: Stu's roll during TOTA
Posted by:
GasLightStreet
()
Date: November 28, 2014 17:55
Quote
NaturalustQuote
strat72Quote
NaturalustQuote
71TeleQuote
NaturalustQuote
71TeleQuote
DandelionPowderman
<Besides they didn't have electronic piano's with decent piano sounds in 1975.>
They still don't have that.
+1...I can always tell the telltale "plink-plink" from the real thing, no matter what kind of digital sample is used.
Spoken like true guitar players.......peace
I would say spoken like musicians who understand a real sound from a fake one, but that's just me. I don't want to hear sampled acoustic guitars either.
Next time you're in the music store I encourage you to stop by the keyboard section (I know it's hard with that vintage ES-335 calling your name) and actually try out some of the new high end keyboards. They may not be perfect but they are far from "telltale "plink-plink". Especially when connected to a decent speaker system.
I've hung with David Newman (Randy's cousin) in his LA studio and he's turned me onto some custom made samples he uses for his extensive movie soundtrack work.....they are truly amazing and VERY difficult to discern from the real thing. Basically I'm just suggesting you keep an open mind and try not to be too influenced by the less than stellar piano sampling technology we've all heard in the past. As Bob said: The times they are a changin'. peace
If this is true, someone should tell Chuck!
"Leavell started with the Stones in 1993, playing a miked acoustic piano. Now he uses a digital Yamaha CP300 Stage piano, "which allows us to recreate an acoustic piano, almost better than what a real piano sounds like. There's no worry about it going out of tune. The sound is cleaner and better."
Check his 1993 performances, can you tell the difference? peace
How can a sampled keyboard sound "almost better"? That's blasphemy!!!!! That's equal to being 'sort of pregnant'.
Re: Stu's roll during TOTA
Posted by:
Naturalust
()
Date: November 28, 2014 22:44
Quote
GasLightStreetQuote
NaturalustQuote
strat72Quote
NaturalustQuote
71TeleQuote
NaturalustQuote
71TeleQuote
DandelionPowderman
<Besides they didn't have electronic piano's with decent piano sounds in 1975.>
They still don't have that.
+1...I can always tell the telltale "plink-plink" from the real thing, no matter what kind of digital sample is used.
Spoken like true guitar players.......peace
I would say spoken like musicians who understand a real sound from a fake one, but that's just me. I don't want to hear sampled acoustic guitars either.
Next time you're in the music store I encourage you to stop by the keyboard section (I know it's hard with that vintage ES-335 calling your name) and actually try out some of the new high end keyboards. They may not be perfect but they are far from "telltale "plink-plink". Especially when connected to a decent speaker system.
I've hung with David Newman (Randy's cousin) in his LA studio and he's turned me onto some custom made samples he uses for his extensive movie soundtrack work.....they are truly amazing and VERY difficult to discern from the real thing. Basically I'm just suggesting you keep an open mind and try not to be too influenced by the less than stellar piano sampling technology we've all heard in the past. As Bob said: The times they are a changin'. peace
If this is true, someone should tell Chuck!
"Leavell started with the Stones in 1993, playing a miked acoustic piano. Now he uses a digital Yamaha CP300 Stage piano, "which allows us to recreate an acoustic piano, almost better than what a real piano sounds like. There's no worry about it going out of tune. The sound is cleaner and better."
Check his 1993 performances, can you tell the difference? peace
How can a sampled keyboard sound "almost better"? That's blasphemy!!!!! That's equal to being 'sort of pregnant'.
lol. I think the fact that it is always in tune is one obvious reason. The fact that it doesn't rely on microphone placement is another. If you've ever heard a poorly mic'ed out of tune piano you could easily say the CP300 actually sounded better, not just almost.
Btw, the above quote was taken from a Chuck site and doesn't necessarily represent my views, but I understand what he was trying to say.
Arguably, Stu would probably be happily playing on Chuck's rig these days if he was still around to do so, for the few songs he choose to play on. peace
Re: Stu's roll during TOTA
Posted by:
Eleanor Rigby
()
Date: November 29, 2014 16:49
Quote
MathijsQuote
OzHeavyThrobber
Never understood the point of Ollie being there.
He turned a show into a party, kicked Charlie up the ass and added groove and funk.
That's quite a point.
Mathijs
Yep..and added nothing other than extra rubbish.
Complete copy of what elton john was doing.
Jesus jagger was f#$cked in the head at this time.
Give me Stones pure anytime
Re: Stu's roll during TOTA
Posted by:
71Tele
()
Date: November 29, 2014 19:23
Quote
Naturalust
lol. I think the fact that it is always in tune is one obvious reason. The fact that it doesn't rely on microphone placement is another. If you've ever heard a poorly mic'ed out of tune piano you could easily say the CP300 actually sounded better, not just almost.
Btw, the above quote was taken from a Chuck site and doesn't necessarily represent my views, but I understand what he was trying to say.
Arguably, Stu would probably be happily playing on Chuck's rig these days if he was still around to do so, for the few songs he choose to play on. peace
NL, your passionate and persistent defense of Chuck is admirable, but your musical arguments are not persuasive. It is precisely the anomalies of a real piano that give it a natural sound. A perefectly balanced, perfectly in-tune digital piano may be more consistent, but it is certainly not "better" in a musical sense, anymore than a digital download of music sounds "better" than a vinyl record.
A tube guitar amp has many inefficiencies, yet it is those very inefficiencies (how tubes distort when they get hot, etc) that make for a great electric guitar sound. I don't think you would argue that Keith should use one of those modeling amps, where all the possible amp sounds are perfectly modeled and you would just dial them in on the amp. We all would agree that would suck. Yet those amps are way more "efficient" and predictable. The only difference between the guitar amp and piano situations are size and portability.
So it seems to me that there are no musical arguments for Chuck continuing to use the Holiday Inn Lounge plink-plonk device. It is merely a matter of convenience (for him, and perhaps for the Stones). All other arguments are rationalizations.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2014-11-29 19:31 by 71Tele.
Re: Stu's roll during TOTA
Posted by:
Naturalust
()
Date: November 29, 2014 21:35
Quote
71TeleQuote
Naturalust
lol. I think the fact that it is always in tune is one obvious reason. The fact that it doesn't rely on microphone placement is another. If you've ever heard a poorly mic'ed out of tune piano you could easily say the CP300 actually sounded better, not just almost.
Btw, the above quote was taken from a Chuck site and doesn't necessarily represent my views, but I understand what he was trying to say.
Arguably, Stu would probably be happily playing on Chuck's rig these days if he was still around to do so, for the few songs he choose to play on. peace
NL, your passionate and persistent defense of Chuck is admirable, but your musical arguments are not persuasive. It is precisely the anomalies of a real piano that give it a natural sound. A perefectly balanced, perfectly in-tune digital piano may be more consistent, but it is certainly not "better" in a musical sense, anymore than a digital download of music sounds "better" than a vinyl record.
A tube guitar amp has many inefficiencies, yet it is those very inefficiencies (how tubes distort when they get hot, etc) that make for a great electric guitar sound. I don't think you would argue that Keith should use one of those modeling amps, where all the possible amp sounds are perfectly modeled and you would just dial them in on the amp. We all would agree that would suck. Yet those amps are way more "efficient" and predictable. The only difference between the guitar amp and piano situations are size and portability.
So it seems to me that there are no musical arguments for Chuck continuing to use the Holiday Inn Lounge plink-plonk device. It is merely a matter of convenience (for him, and perhaps for the Stones). All other arguments are rationalizations.
Yes a perfectly in tune piano tends to sound off and flat but an out of tune piano sounds bad and can throw off the other musicians performances. And yes I agree that tube amps tend to sound better than modeling amps although I'm sure Keith could make one sound great. As he says, It's all in the fingers.
The musical arguments for Chuck using his CP300 are that it stays in tune and probably cuts through the mix a bit better (probably precisely why you don't like it since you admittedly don't like his playing). Another important musical argument is that it's what the piano player feels most comfortable with, allowing him to concentrate on the music instead of being distracted by technical problems that are inherent in bringing an acoustic piano into a loud stage environment. A great sounding solo acoustic piano is not necessarily the best instrument to play in a loud live rock band, there are too many sympathetic vibrations set up and it tends to dominate the entire frequency range with it's "natural", albeit warm sounds, and of course, it's the final mix of all the instruments that counts
But probably the most important musical argument concerns Mick and Keith. They are obviously happy with Chuck's keyboard sound and playing. This no doubt allows them to play and sing at their best. And had been pointed out in this thread Mick may well be using the piano exclusively for his singing cues. Would they be just as happy with Chuck playing an acoustic piano? Possibly, but I think the consistency of the sound coming from Chuck is something that they have come to rely on to put them in their own comfort zones.
As I said before, if you like the way Mick and Keith are sounding these days, you've got to give some of that credit to Chuck, because like it or not, he has become the musical bed that these two lie in. peace
Re: Stu's roll during TOTA
Posted by:
BILLPERKS
()
Date: November 30, 2014 01:58
STU JUST ROLLED OVER IN HIS GRAVE... THE HORROR.......THE HORRORQuote
NaturalustQuote
GasLightStreetQuote
NaturalustQuote
strat72Quote
NaturalustQuote
71TeleQuote
NaturalustQuote
71TeleQuote
DandelionPowderman
<Besides they didn't have electronic piano's with decent piano sounds in 1975.>
They still don't have that.
+1...I can always tell the telltale "plink-plink" from the real thing, no matter what kind of digital sample is used.
Spoken like true guitar players.......peace
I would say spoken like musicians who understand a real sound from a fake one, but that's just me. I don't want to hear sampled acoustic guitars either.
Next time you're in the music store I encourage you to stop by the keyboard section (I know it's hard with that vintage ES-335 calling your name) and actually try out some of the new high end keyboards. They may not be perfect but they are far from "telltale "plink-plink". Especially when connected to a decent speaker system.
I've hung with David Newman (Randy's cousin) in his LA studio and he's turned me onto some custom made samples he uses for his extensive movie soundtrack work.....they are truly amazing and VERY difficult to discern from the real thing. Basically I'm just suggesting you keep an open mind and try not to be too influenced by the less than stellar piano sampling technology we've all heard in the past. As Bob said: The times they are a changin'. peace
If this is true, someone should tell Chuck!
"Leavell started with the Stones in 1993, playing a miked acoustic piano. Now he uses a digital Yamaha CP300 Stage piano, "which allows us to recreate an acoustic piano, almost better than what a real piano sounds like. There's no worry about it going out of tune. The sound is cleaner and better."
Check his 1993 performances, can you tell the difference? peace
How can a sampled keyboard sound "almost better"? That's blasphemy!!!!! That's equal to being 'sort of pregnant'.
lol. I think the fact that it is always in tune is one obvious reason. The fact that it doesn't rely on microphone placement is another. If you've ever heard a poorly mic'ed out of tune piano you could easily say the CP300 actually sounded better, not just almost.
Btw, the above quote was taken from a Chuck site and doesn't necessarily represent my views, but I understand what he was trying to say.
Arguably, Stu would probably be happily playing on Chuck's rig these days if he was still around to do so, for the few songs he choose to play on. peace
Re: Stu's roll during TOTA
Posted by:
flacnvinyl
()
Date: November 30, 2014 03:57
Page 3 and no one has brought up Chuck's terrible synth sounds! Forget the piano!
Re: Stu's roll during TOTA
Posted by:
melillo
()
Date: November 30, 2014 04:06
Quote
MathijsQuote
OzHeavyThrobber
Never understood the point of Ollie being there.
kicked Charlie up the ass
Mathijs
since when did Charlie ever need a kick up the ass?
Re: Stu's roll during TOTA
Posted by:
Naturalust
()
Date: November 30, 2014 06:11
From an interview with Chuck:
What’s your main piano for composing?
"At home I have a Yamaha C7—a wonderful piano that I love to play. I also have a Young Chang YP208, in another building on our plantation. And in my office I have a P-200 digital Yamaha. I’m never far from something that makes a piano sound. For live performance, to play rock ’n’ roll in this day and time, it makes sense to use a digital instrument. It just cuts through the mix so
much better, and cuts down on problems with feedback and bleeding. For the last couple of tours I’ve used a Yamaha CP-300. I’s a great instrument. I’m always on the lookout for something new and exciting, but so far I’m hanging with the Yamaha. And let’s not forget the Hammond B3. I’ve got a special MIDI’d Hammond B3 that’s especially helpful when playing with the Stones. I’ve also used it with Eric Clapton and George Harrison. What’s convenient about it is that,
because it’s MIDI’d, I can put the piano down on the lower manual, and play piano with the left hand, while using the right hand for the organ. At the same time I can use a foot switch for the Leslie to turn fast or slow. That gives me a nice bit of range."
Hopefully while on the lookout for something new and exciting he can find something that satisfies the folks here who are unhappy with his tone.
Here is a link to the whole article where he discusses what Ian Stewart told him what his role in the band is and how he feels "Shine a Light" and "Stripped" were a couple of the few recordings where he personally was happy with the keyboard mix. I think those records do indeed have better piano sounds so quite possibly Chuck is not to blame for most of the recorded piano sounds/mixes that seem to irritate some.
[www.chuckleavell.com]
peace
What’s your main piano for composing?
"At home I have a Yamaha C7—a wonderful piano that I love to play. I also have a Young Chang YP208, in another building on our plantation. And in my office I have a P-200 digital Yamaha. I’m never far from something that makes a piano sound. For live performance, to play rock ’n’ roll in this day and time, it makes sense to use a digital instrument. It just cuts through the mix so
much better, and cuts down on problems with feedback and bleeding. For the last couple of tours I’ve used a Yamaha CP-300. I’s a great instrument. I’m always on the lookout for something new and exciting, but so far I’m hanging with the Yamaha. And let’s not forget the Hammond B3. I’ve got a special MIDI’d Hammond B3 that’s especially helpful when playing with the Stones. I’ve also used it with Eric Clapton and George Harrison. What’s convenient about it is that,
because it’s MIDI’d, I can put the piano down on the lower manual, and play piano with the left hand, while using the right hand for the organ. At the same time I can use a foot switch for the Leslie to turn fast or slow. That gives me a nice bit of range."
Hopefully while on the lookout for something new and exciting he can find something that satisfies the folks here who are unhappy with his tone.
Here is a link to the whole article where he discusses what Ian Stewart told him what his role in the band is and how he feels "Shine a Light" and "Stripped" were a couple of the few recordings where he personally was happy with the keyboard mix. I think those records do indeed have better piano sounds so quite possibly Chuck is not to blame for most of the recorded piano sounds/mixes that seem to irritate some.
[www.chuckleavell.com]
peace
Re: Stu's roll during TOTA
Posted by:
mighty stork
()
Date: November 30, 2014 06:57
Quote
winterQuote
DandelionPowdermanQuote
treaclefingersQuote
DandelionPowderman
TOTAlly wrong, that that song was about Stu.
Your tone is a bit TOTAlitarian if you don't mind my saying.
Who do you think you are, TOTAnkh Amon?
TOTA, we're not in Kansas anymore...
I know in the early years he used to TOTA lot of their gear to gigs in his van.
Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.
Online Users
andrea72 , armin944 , bobo , Broesel2404 , crawdaddy , diddleydad , edopao , erad , IsakSun , Nellcote1971 , snarf2014 , Stonesfan2146 , WorriedAboutYou
Guests:
1968
Record Number of Users:
206
on June 1, 2022 23:50
Record Number of Guests:
9627
on January 2, 2024 23:10