Tell Me :
Talk
"So intense?" Ugh, get a grip.
Jagger is 71 and has the best hobby in the world where he sings for a few hours a week, basks in the love of adoring audiences all over the world, screws 20-something dancers and then gets a fat check for hundreds of millions after a few months work. Do you seriously think he's so intensely frustrated with Keith or his band because they can't do more obscurer songs?? This is a 50+ year old band--an institution--a traveling museum. Mick and the guys are just satisfied that they can even still do this.
The setlists issue has been an issue for ages...it has nothing to do with Keith. It's about the audience. Sorry to say but it's not as if Jagger nails the obscure tunes any better than Keith when they perform them: "Sway" "Silver Train" were just okay performances by Jagger in the past; nothing indicates that he's more dedicated than the rest of the band on these tunes.
As for the topic itself: in a way the entire band have become sidemen. The Rolling Stones as a brand and more importantly the LEGEND has become bigger than all of them. They are doing today what the legend demands of them: go out and play the hits until people stop showing up. It's one dimensional but it is seriously the very least they could (and in many way, are able) to do.
one of the silliest posts...ever
Which made me think about the business end of this. I wonder if Mick ever talks to his **son about the business or maybe discusses with him getting a business education and taking over the empire when the band actually becomes what a lot of people accuse it of right now.
The money made on this brand in the future when the really no longer exists (because no matter what he naysayers claim it is still an operating band) could dwarf what it is making today.
I wonder if Mick thinks about handing the keys of the kingdom over to his **son?
Elvis, Michael Jackson and Marilyn Monroe have made more money since they passed away than thye did while they were alive. I imagine with proper management the Roling Stones brand could be bigger than of them, until the year 2200.
anyway... it will be another 20-30 years... but it was just a thought.
All the cool kids in 2055 will be wearing shirts with the Stones tongue on them... when they go to the hologram stones show?
EDIT- **And of course I mean his daughters too.
Edited 3 time(s). Last edit at 2015-05-07 23:20 by Leonioid.
While not an altogether horrible concept, it's still pretty scary to think of.
Between "Wheels On The Bus" videos, and thoughts of Keith as lead vocalist of the Stones, IORR.org is a pretty scary place for my brain & ears to be today!
Peace,
Mr DJA
LOL!
Walk towards the light Mr DJA, walk towards the light...
ignore the voices singing the wheels on the bus go round and round
The rope is tied firmly around my waist! Trying to avoid the evil clown and tennis balls!
Peace,
Mr DJA
"Keith Richards, DAMNED GLAD TO MEET YA"
Avoid the slime!!
;)
"No dope smoking no beer sold after 12 o'clock"
When you think about it, this is pretty much what he has done since the Stones started. I mean, it is only recently that setlists even had to be planned every night. They used to be fixed at the start of each tour. So, even in 1969, he would "show up, play what he is told and go home".
I think it's a silly thread as well, but how is 1969 different from 2015, or has he always been a "sideman", like Blondie Chaplin?
you can't be serious...Keith led the band up until the Vegas years. Chuck is now the band leader, there is a world of difference between then and now, not even taking into account playing ability.
But I don't know why we get all worked up over this. Times change, people get old, get sober, and roles are modified.
Doesn't matter, as a unit they still have it together, just enjoy it.
That photo is actually disturbing to me. It's better than some others of recent vintage because for one, Keith's smile seems genuine. It IS a good image..very vibrant no doubt to begin with before the saturation levels were pumped up to the stratosphere...if it were a one-off it would be fine, but it isn't. And, Keith Seems to always have those sun glasses on...inside. They look like Fvkcing KISS in their costumes.. of course we have decades of promotional images..and it IS showbiz after all..but somethings don't age as well as others. Their music, much of of it at least, has stood the test of time thus far, and I think may continue to do so... but the "badass" is at least looking like a mascot at times.. I was really really sad to read in LIFE where Keith says he considers himself to be more of an entertainer than a musician these days.. but I suppose its a vestige of Keith's old honesty that crept through there...and shows up now and again. NO..Keith is no "sideman". That is overstating it..and Yes its a minor miracle how well he is playing.... I guess it is fair to say I have mixed emotions about the whole enterprise in this probably final stage... Maybe they'll record again..
Yes but those were perhaps awkward moments (can't actually think of any but of course they exist) in an otherwise superb class act performance by one of the greatest guitar players ever. Today I look for the opposite, something,a note a tone, a chord - anything from an old (yes he's older) hero of mine. Anything really that in some way reminds me of why I became a fan.
Disturbing? Really?
Well, heck I didnt think a lot about it,
I just liked seeing them looking happy and ready to go.
But then again they say all pictures are viewed differently by the beholder and our view indicates something about ourself. You guys see disturbing KISS? Really? I wonder what that means? [www.rorschach.com]
What do you see in this picture?
How about this one?
And now this one?
and finally this one?
Your results may vary...
bullshit
I must say... you are passing this test with flying colors!!
:)
Try this on for size. I consider it a signature Keith showcase.
After he totally nailed it, he does that little triple ring again as if to say "keef out!"
Adorably awesome. Then on to Fogerty's "solo" for contrast ><
Sad bat, angry bat, horny bat,hung over bat. Run over bat.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2015-05-08 12:27 by Redhotcarpet.
MM yeah Keith is not bad on this one, here's its Mick who sings it that boring way (sorry I can't stand it) and Ronnie who's been told to play those notes every time all thru the song. Ronnie probably could come up with some new refreshing thing to it but i don't think he's allowed.
Talk about your favorite band.
For information about how to use this forum please check out forum help and policies.
Re: Has Keith become a mere sideman for the band?
Posted by:
mr_dja
()
Date: May 7, 2015 22:56
Drop-out better than (and far different than) fail-out.
Peace,
Mr DJA
Peace,
Mr DJA
Re: Has Keith become a mere sideman for the band?
Posted by:
Justin
()
Date: May 7, 2015 22:58
Quote
shawnriffhard1Quote
jazzbassQuote
shawnriffhard1
It boggles the mind thinking of what could have been.
Tell me what could've been? Seriously?
Listen, I've been a fanatic since the spring of 81 as a 12 year old. I built many of my points of view on Keith's words and actions. To say I love the guy doesn't really begin to get it, but his playing and writing ability, and mindset have been tremendously affected by his self abuse as has Ronnie's Are you really disagreeing with me here? MJ has worked hard keeping himself in shape and it shows. Keith has not and it too shows. He has exhibited all the classic self delusions that any alcoholic/addict shows in terms of denial and bullshitting himself, talking about, "It's my iron constitution", and other such nonsense while people tell him how great he is. I know the arthritis is a major issue, but it's the only problem by a long shot.
Before the 50th anniversary tour started, Keith's ability to make a go of it was very much in question. If you recall, MJ talked about Keith's health being an impediment and he said, "There are no miracles in life." I don't think we need a crystal ball to understand what he was saying. I take no pleasure in pointing this out just as many, many folks here have (to say nothing of the casual tourists who are astounded how much his ability and awareness has dropped off).
And yes, Jazzbass, seriously, if he had the dedication to his art like MJ has shown, who knows how much more studio work could have transpired, how much more excellent the performances could have been, how much better MT and RW (playing wise and life wise in MT's case) could have been and how much better the MJ relationship could have been. Imagine being forced to be a babysitter for years while you're being responsible and dedicated and your partner is drunk and high all the time. I used to be very down on MJ as the calculating one while Keith was the "real Rolling Stone". I don't see it like that anymore. Keith has said that he still has a 15 y.o. inside that he protects, but I now see that as just an excuse.
Lastly, I think folks are kidding themselves about the stale setlists being down to Mick and Chuck being boring and unimaginative. They pick the tunes that they safely feel Keith can get through. The frustration must be so intense for MJ after playing with someone like Jeff Beck or Stevie Salas or Joe Satriani. I don't prefer any of those guys to Keith by a hundred miles, but they can at least play the tunes without huge, glaring mistakes or even worse, just flat out not playing and the posing and smoking routine. All of this leads me back to where's MT, but......
"So intense?" Ugh, get a grip.
Jagger is 71 and has the best hobby in the world where he sings for a few hours a week, basks in the love of adoring audiences all over the world, screws 20-something dancers and then gets a fat check for hundreds of millions after a few months work. Do you seriously think he's so intensely frustrated with Keith or his band because they can't do more obscurer songs?? This is a 50+ year old band--an institution--a traveling museum. Mick and the guys are just satisfied that they can even still do this.
The setlists issue has been an issue for ages...it has nothing to do with Keith. It's about the audience. Sorry to say but it's not as if Jagger nails the obscure tunes any better than Keith when they perform them: "Sway" "Silver Train" were just okay performances by Jagger in the past; nothing indicates that he's more dedicated than the rest of the band on these tunes.
As for the topic itself: in a way the entire band have become sidemen. The Rolling Stones as a brand and more importantly the LEGEND has become bigger than all of them. They are doing today what the legend demands of them: go out and play the hits until people stop showing up. It's one dimensional but it is seriously the very least they could (and in many way, are able) to do.
Re: Has Keith become a mere sideman for the band?
Posted by:
DandelionPowderman
()
Date: May 7, 2015 22:59
We should be glad he dropped out. Or else Keith would perhaps have taken over the vocal duties 
Re: Has Keith become a mere sideman for the band?
Posted by:
pt99
()
Date: May 7, 2015 23:07
Quote
ROPENI
From his latest interviews,you may assume that his role as one of the leaders of The Stones has diminished a great deal,the songs to be played are decided by Mick and Chuck,so, basically Keith just shows up,plays what he is told and goes home....Your opinion....
one of the silliest posts...ever
Re: Has Keith become a mere sideman for the band?
Posted by:
Leonioid
()
Date: May 7, 2015 23:08
Masters degree from the Jagger school of hard knocks...Quote
DandelionPowderman
Wasn't he a drop-out?
Which made me think about the business end of this. I wonder if Mick ever talks to his **son about the business or maybe discusses with him getting a business education and taking over the empire when the band actually becomes what a lot of people accuse it of right now.
The money made on this brand in the future when the really no longer exists (because no matter what he naysayers claim it is still an operating band) could dwarf what it is making today.
I wonder if Mick thinks about handing the keys of the kingdom over to his **son?
Elvis, Michael Jackson and Marilyn Monroe have made more money since they passed away than thye did while they were alive. I imagine with proper management the Roling Stones brand could be bigger than of them, until the year 2200.
anyway... it will be another 20-30 years... but it was just a thought.
All the cool kids in 2055 will be wearing shirts with the Stones tongue on them... when they go to the hologram stones show?
EDIT- **And of course I mean his daughters too.
Edited 3 time(s). Last edit at 2015-05-07 23:20 by Leonioid.
Re: Has Keith become a mere sideman for the band?
Posted by:
mr_dja
()
Date: May 7, 2015 23:11
Quote
DandelionPowderman
We should be glad he dropped out. Or else Keith would perhaps have taken over the vocal duties
While not an altogether horrible concept, it's still pretty scary to think of.
Between "Wheels On The Bus" videos, and thoughts of Keith as lead vocalist of the Stones, IORR.org is a pretty scary place for my brain & ears to be today!
Peace,
Mr DJA
Re: Has Keith become a mere sideman for the band?
Posted by:
DandelionPowderman
()
Date: May 7, 2015 23:15
Quote
mr_djaQuote
DandelionPowderman
We should be glad he dropped out. Or else Keith would perhaps have taken over the vocal duties
While not an altogether horrible concept, it's still pretty scary to think of.
Between "Wheels On The Bus" videos, and thoughts of Keith as lead vocalist of the Stones, IORR.org is a pretty scary place for my brain & ears to be today!
Peace,
Mr DJA
LOL!
Re: Has Keith become a mere sideman for the band?
Posted by:
Leonioid
()
Date: May 7, 2015 23:15
Quote
mr_djaQuote
DandelionPowderman
We should be glad he dropped out. Or else Keith would perhaps have taken over the vocal duties
While not an altogether horrible concept, it's still pretty scary to think of.
Between "Wheels On The Bus" videos, and thoughts of Keith as lead vocalist of the Stones, IORR.org is a pretty scary place for my brain & ears to be today!
Peace,
Mr DJA
Walk towards the light Mr DJA, walk towards the light...
ignore the voices singing the wheels on the bus go round and round
Re: Has Keith become a mere sideman for the band?
Posted by:
mr_dja
()
Date: May 7, 2015 23:23
Quote
Leonioid
Walk towards the light Mr DJA, walk towards the light...
ignore the voices singing the wheels on the bus go round and round
The rope is tied firmly around my waist! Trying to avoid the evil clown and tennis balls!
Peace,
Mr DJA
Re: Has Keith become a mere sideman for the band?
Posted by:
Bsebastian
()
Date: May 7, 2015 23:30
look at the photo on the home page of iorr.org and tell me if you think keith richards is a "mere sideman".
Re: Has Keith become a mere sideman for the band?
Posted by:
Leonioid
()
Date: May 7, 2015 23:47
YEAH!!Quote
Bsebastian
look at the photo on the home page of iorr.org and tell me if you think keith richards is a "mere sideman".
"Keith Richards, DAMNED GLAD TO MEET YA"
Re: Has Keith become a mere sideman for the band?
Posted by:
Leonioid
()
Date: May 7, 2015 23:48
Quote
mr_djaQuote
Leonioid
Walk towards the light Mr DJA, walk towards the light...
ignore the voices singing the wheels on the bus go round and round
The rope is tied firmly around my waist! Trying to avoid the evil clown and tennis balls!
Peace,
Mr DJA
Avoid the slime!!
;)
Re: Has Keith become a mere sideman for the band?
Posted by:
ROPENI
()
Date: May 8, 2015 02:24
Well its your prerogative to think as u please,but there are many other folks here who have taken the time to give their opinion on this silly post as you called it,so as you can see different strokes for different folks....Quote
potus43Quote
ROPENI
From his latest interviews,you may assume that his role as one of the leaders of The Stones has diminished a great deal,the songs to be played are decided by Mick and Chuck,so, basically Keith just shows up,plays what he is told and goes home....Your opinion....
one of the silliest posts...ever
"No dope smoking no beer sold after 12 o'clock"
Re: Has Keith become a mere sideman for the band?
Posted by:
drbryant
()
Date: May 8, 2015 04:50
Quote
ROPENI
From his latest interviews,you may assume that his role as one of the leaders of The Stones has diminished a great deal,the songs to be played are decided by Mick and Chuck,so, basically Keith just shows up,plays what he is told and goes home....Your opinion....
When you think about it, this is pretty much what he has done since the Stones started. I mean, it is only recently that setlists even had to be planned every night. They used to be fixed at the start of each tour. So, even in 1969, he would "show up, play what he is told and go home".
I think it's a silly thread as well, but how is 1969 different from 2015, or has he always been a "sideman", like Blondie Chaplin?
Re: Has Keith become a mere sideman for the band?
Posted by:
treaclefingers
()
Date: May 8, 2015 04:57
Quote
drbryantQuote
ROPENI
From his latest interviews,you may assume that his role as one of the leaders of The Stones has diminished a great deal,the songs to be played are decided by Mick and Chuck,so, basically Keith just shows up,plays what he is told and goes home....Your opinion....
When you think about it, this is pretty much what he has done since the Stones started. I mean, it is only recently that setlists even had to be planned every night. They used to be fixed at the start of each tour. So, even in 1969, he would "show up, play what he is told and go home".
I think it's a silly thread as well, but how is 1969 different from 2015, or has he always been a "sideman", like Blondie Chaplin?
you can't be serious...Keith led the band up until the Vegas years. Chuck is now the band leader, there is a world of difference between then and now, not even taking into account playing ability.
But I don't know why we get all worked up over this. Times change, people get old, get sober, and roles are modified.
Doesn't matter, as a unit they still have it together, just enjoy it.
Re: Has Keith become a mere sideman for the band?
Posted by:
SweetThing
()
Date: May 8, 2015 06:29
Quote
LeonioidYEAH!!Quote
Bsebastian
look at the photo on the home page of iorr.org and tell me if you think keith richards is a "mere sideman".
"Keith Richards, DAMNED GLAD TO MEET YA"
That photo is actually disturbing to me. It's better than some others of recent vintage because for one, Keith's smile seems genuine. It IS a good image..very vibrant no doubt to begin with before the saturation levels were pumped up to the stratosphere...if it were a one-off it would be fine, but it isn't. And, Keith Seems to always have those sun glasses on...inside. They look like Fvkcing KISS in their costumes.. of course we have decades of promotional images..and it IS showbiz after all..but somethings don't age as well as others. Their music, much of of it at least, has stood the test of time thus far, and I think may continue to do so... but the "badass" is at least looking like a mascot at times.. I was really really sad to read in LIFE where Keith says he considers himself to be more of an entertainer than a musician these days.. but I suppose its a vestige of Keith's old honesty that crept through there...and shows up now and again. NO..Keith is no "sideman". That is overstating it..and Yes its a minor miracle how well he is playing.... I guess it is fair to say I have mixed emotions about the whole enterprise in this probably final stage... Maybe they'll record again..
Re: Has Keith become a mere sideman for the band?
Posted by:
Naturalust
()
Date: May 8, 2015 07:51
That photo is actually disturbing to me.
Glad I'm not the only one. Hoping Bjornulf changes it soon. He's taken some excellent shots of the band in action, much prefer one of those.
peace
Glad I'm not the only one. Hoping Bjornulf changes it soon. He's taken some excellent shots of the band in action, much prefer one of those.
peace
Re: Has Keith become a mere sideman for the band?
Posted by:
slewan
()
Date: May 8, 2015 08:18
the paradox is: he is an integral part of the Stones – as a symbol, as a legend, as a mascot, as a part of the band's history etc while at the same time he's just a sideman musically. He does (or tries to do) his signature (opening) riffs and then his guitar is usually turned low in the mix and Ronnie does most of the guitar work.
The band is able to perform without Keith since he doesn't add much these days,but on the other hand the Stones won't work (nor sell any tickets) without him. Thus he can't be replaced - even if he was just standing on stage doing hardly anything…
The band is able to perform without Keith since he doesn't add much these days,but on the other hand the Stones won't work (nor sell any tickets) without him. Thus he can't be replaced - even if he was just standing on stage doing hardly anything…
Re: Has Keith become a mere sideman for the band?
Posted by:
Redhotcarpet
()
Date: May 8, 2015 08:28
Quote
DandelionPowderman
I can't see how you can interpret my post that way?
What I said was that the awkward moments have always been there
Yes but those were perhaps awkward moments (can't actually think of any but of course they exist) in an otherwise superb class act performance by one of the greatest guitar players ever. Today I look for the opposite, something,a note a tone, a chord - anything from an old (yes he's older) hero of mine. Anything really that in some way reminds me of why I became a fan.
Re: Has Keith become a mere sideman for the band?
Posted by:
Leonioid
()
Date: May 8, 2015 08:40
Quote
Naturalust
That photo is actually disturbing to me.
Glad I'm not the only one. Hoping Bjornulf changes it soon. He's taken some excellent shots of the band in action, much prefer one of those.
Disturbing? Really?
Well, heck I didnt think a lot about it,
I just liked seeing them looking happy and ready to go.
But then again they say all pictures are viewed differently by the beholder and our view indicates something about ourself. You guys see disturbing KISS? Really? I wonder what that means? [www.rorschach.com]
What do you see in this picture?
How about this one?
And now this one?
and finally this one?
Your results may vary...
Re: Has Keith become a mere sideman for the band?
Posted by:
Rockman
()
Date: May 8, 2015 09:11
That photo is actually disturbing to me.
Awwww stop being girly breathes ... what friggin' disturbing about it???
ROCKMAN
Awwww stop being girly breathes ... what friggin' disturbing about it???
ROCKMAN
Re: Has Keith become a mere sideman for the band?
Posted by:
z
()
Date: May 8, 2015 09:26
Number 2 is a Hell's Angel on a motorcycle.
Re: Has Keith become a mere sideman for the band?
Posted by:
keefed
()
Date: May 8, 2015 09:28
Quote
slewan
The band is able to perform without Keith since he doesn't add much these days,but on the other hand the Stones won't work (nor sell any tickets) without him. Thus he can't be replaced - even if he was just standing on stage doing hardly anything…
bullshit
Re: Has Keith become a mere sideman for the band?
Posted by:
z
()
Date: May 8, 2015 09:43
Number 4 is two baby elephants riding a Vespa.
Re: Has Keith become a mere sideman for the band?
Posted by:
Leonioid
()
Date: May 8, 2015 09:47
Quote
z
Number 4 is two baby elephants riding a Vespa.
I must say... you are passing this test with flying colors!!
:)
Re: Has Keith become a mere sideman for the band?
Posted by:
Nikkei
()
Date: May 8, 2015 11:23
Quote
Redhotcarpet
Today I look for the opposite, something,a note a tone, a chord - anything from an old (yes he's older) hero of mine. Anything really that in some way reminds me of why I became a fan.
Try this on for size. I consider it a signature Keith showcase.
After he totally nailed it, he does that little triple ring again as if to say "keef out!"
Adorably awesome. Then on to Fogerty's "solo" for contrast >
<Re: Has Keith become a mere sideman for the band?
Posted by:
DandelionPowderman
()
Date: May 8, 2015 11:26
Doesn't it ring a bell when you watch this, Carpet? @ 0:54
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2015-05-08 11:28 by DandelionPowderman.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2015-05-08 11:28 by DandelionPowderman.
Re: Has Keith become a mere sideman for the band?
Posted by:
Redhotcarpet
()
Date: May 8, 2015 12:25
Quote
LeonioidQuote
Naturalust
That photo is actually disturbing to me.
Glad I'm not the only one. Hoping Bjornulf changes it soon. He's taken some excellent shots of the band in action, much prefer one of those.
Disturbing? Really?
Well, heck I didnt think a lot about it,
I just liked seeing them looking happy and ready to go.
But then again they say all pictures are viewed differently by the beholder and our view indicates something about ourself. You guys see disturbing KISS? Really? I wonder what that means? [www.rorschach.com]
What do you see in this picture?
How about this one?
And now this one?
and finally this one?
Your results may vary...
Sad bat, angry bat, horny bat,
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2015-05-08 12:27 by Redhotcarpet.
Re: Has Keith become a mere sideman for the band?
Posted by:
Redhotcarpet
()
Date: May 8, 2015 12:29
Quote
DandelionPowderman
Doesn't it ring a bell when you watch this, Carpet? @ 0:54
MM yeah Keith is not bad on this one, here's its Mick who sings it that boring way (sorry I can't stand it) and Ronnie who's been told to play those notes every time all thru the song. Ronnie probably could come up with some new refreshing thing to it but i don't think he's allowed.
Re: Has Keith become a mere sideman for the band?
Posted by:
andrewt
()
Date: May 8, 2015 15:14
Any Stones fan knows Keith is not a sideman, Keith is why they need sidemen. (Rimshot).
Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.
Online Users
Guests:
1353
Record Number of Users:
206
on June 1, 2022 23:50
Record Number of Guests:
9627
on January 2, 2024 23:10