Tell Me :
Talk
The actual mess is that Keith, Ronnie, Charlie and Mick are sidemen of Chuck. And that since 89.
No worries Leonioid, I still say the Stones have enough complexity and depth in their 50+ years of playing to allow fans to interestingly discuss their music and performances of the past as well as their current work, critical discussion is a natural part of that. A great majority of the discussions here are about songs and performances from many years ago, since they are still playing many of those tunes, I imagine it's hard not to make comparisons for some people.
I also recall many people actually commenting on how good Keith appeared to be playing on the recent tours, the same people who earlier complained when he wasn't.
But basically my point is that I personally don't mind honest discussions about the band and it's music, recent or ancient, and while I may not agree with people who complain to the point of insult, they are certainly entitled to their opinion, and hopefully they temper their negativity with some good examples of what they love about the Stones. I accept that there are people who are currently RS fans who, unlike you, aren't huge fans of the current Stones, With the long life and many changes this band has been through it's bound to be the case.
As long as the discussions are honest opinions about the Stones and their music, fine with me. But judging Stones fans, why they are here and insulting and complaining about them, saying they have nothing better to do, is pretty close to doing the same thing about the band....
peace
Yeah, but I am sure I like the band and that the band is worthy...
as I keep seeing the usual suspects showing up to bash on Keith, which is a good indicator of where they are at... which is what I said to start with, threads like this are a good way to see who is what and where they are at.
Ha ha - too true!
Yeah, probably to an extent, but what is great in that thread is that there is damn good discussion going on, and the subject matter there - Mick Taylor - seems to inspire a lot of insightful posts (quite generally, many times the most insteresting, thorough-going musical discussions here at IORR seems to touch Taylor). Of course, there are also those "get over it, he is a quitter" spoilers - many times same justinbieberists as here - trying to kill the conversation.
Are there many Taylorites, Dandie, who refuse to accept that Taylor is not like he used to be? I don't think that never has been a problem in that thread. And neither the point of this thread - no matter waht justinbieberists say - has not to claim that recent Keith Richards, no matter what his role or condition is like compared to the past, cannot perform enough well to bring happiness to countless people.
- Doxa
Well I agree the band is still amazing and awesome and Keith is still the heart and soul of the enterprise...but I'm probably just less interested in seeing who is what and where they are at, or defending any Stones, I know where I stand. Btw: I have talked with Neil about the Stones before and he made some jokes which would probably put him in the list of fans you are judging
...but you never know with him because with his dry wit and unique sense of humor, the jokes usually on you. 
peace
But unlike you, Max, they don't tend to insult and bash fellow contributors who might have a different opinion than you. Some people actually appeciate other's right to express their opinion without being bashed. I need to say that in this thread I am not one of those, and as guilty as you to this stupid fellow fan-bashing. Let's say I simply lost my temper, since I see the course of discussion going into direction, in which a real discussion, changing thoughts, goes impossible. You do your best to spoil the discussion, and I don't like that. Sorry.
I wanted to say something on the subject matter, but shit, lost my humour for that... No fun.
- Doxa
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2015-05-07 20:50 by Doxa.
I would not presume to know why each one of us is here. Nor to judge whether that reason is legitimate or not.
I have little to no interest in the current incarnation of The Rolling Stones, and yet I try to stop by here once a day or so, just to see what dollops of historical info I might glean about my favorite r'n'r band.
I understand people getting excited about another tour and wish them all well on their outings. And, just for the record, many of the "current things I actually enjoy" are artists, painters, writers, and musicians who are "currently" producing their best work.
Stating it like that, it looks like you don't want to discuss this 'taboo' subject either.
So, forget it.
- Doxa
There is a huge difference between making an off the cuff comment about a band saying how one feels about it... and going on and on and on and on and on ad infinitum, writing paragraph after paragraph about how much someone knows this band used to be great but now it sucks... and doing it day after day after day...
I said if/when I ever feel that way about a band I do not be stick around to write endless unhappy dissertations about it... I have no idea why anyone would... but I suppose it has someting to do with, and says more how they feel about themself, than how they feel about a band.
Rock and roll is for fun... it is not meant to be dissected.
The Rolling Stones and Keith Richards have recently been playing to rave reviews all over the globe, the proof is in the pudding... and I am excited to go see them live again... it is going to be a blast.
And all the naysaysers can sit at home and proudly keep typing about how much they suck now, and no way they would go see them now, but they used to be good, but now they are not as good, but they used to be good when that other guitar player was in the band, and lamenting how they should bring him back and then they would be better but still not as good as they used to be but a lil bettter, but not as good as they used tomdmdksjkfaskfhaflkhadnncblahblahblah
Ah yes...this brings back great memories.
(as I live updated)
Re: Toronto-1 May 25 Stones show live updates
Posted by: andrewt ()
Date: May 26, 2013 04:25
By request.....Street Fighting Man. No MT but Keith sounds pretty crunchy!
Good tempo
Posted by: andrewt ()
Date: May 26, 2013 04:26
Okay this is GOOD. Guitars just got WAY louder. Like loud as fvck
Re: Toronto-1 May 25 Stones show live updates
Posted by: andrewt ()
Date: May 26, 2013 04:29
WOW Keith in the zone on SFM. Highlight so far. Crowd really in now.
At about the :50 mark of this Mick comes over to where I wassitting rocking out. I'm probably a just a row or two up out of the frame.
video: [www.youtube.com]
Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 2015-05-07 21:31 by andrewt.
He sure did, all the posts are still there and can be read where a lot of naysayers on this board had Keith never coming back again. I was very disappointed to see so many make those statements.
The stupid MSM has been trying to call Keith dead and gone for 40 years and Keith proved them wrong repeatedly... but did Keith get credit for being a bad ass and for keep on keeping on from the naysayers? Nope... they were ready to toss him out at the first chance and trample on his memory, just like they did Chuck Berry.
I am not Pollyanna... if when Keith and/or the rest of the band start putting on weak bad poor sad performances over and over, as we have seen many others artists in decline do, I will not keep on saying they are great, I will quietly move on...
...but the naysaysers will probably stick around and yak and yak and yak about how smart they are and how they knew this all along... just like they trampled all over Chuck Berry when it became sadly obvious what the facts were... and the naysayers reveled in discussing it in minutiae, note for note.
Chuck Berry is a rock God, he deserves better.
HEY!!!
I remember reading your comments that night... you were the MVP keeping the board up to date blow by blow... and I will say you did that better than anyone before or since, you did awesome!! Thanks again :) CHEERS!!!
EDIT- and if I recall correct you did not have high expectations before hand, but once you were in there you related to us something like "sure enough, in the magic of the moment the same old songs/setlist sound pretty freekin great" or something like that... and then you got another beer.
I smiled at all of that
Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 2015-05-07 21:31 by Leonioid.
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:
RobertJohnson
()
Date: May 7, 2015 19:25
Quote
DoomandGloom
Everyone is Keith's sideman including MJ.
The actual mess is that Keith, Ronnie, Charlie and Mick are sidemen of Chuck. And that since 89.
Re: Has Keith become a mere sideman for the band?
Posted by:
MingSubu
()
Date: May 7, 2015 19:30
Sidemen check out, the Stones keep rolling. If Keith checks out, the Stones are done.
Re: Has Keith become a mere sideman for the band?
Posted by:
MileHigh
()
Date: May 7, 2015 19:43
Keep in mind it's not a band anymore. It's a "concert summit" by a bunch of wealthy old men that get together once in a while. It's been like that for years.
I mean no disrespect when I say this. It's just the reality.
I mean no disrespect when I say this. It's just the reality.
Re: Has Keith become a mere sideman for the band?
Posted by:
Doxa
()
Date: May 7, 2015 19:50
Jeez, what a thread. The issue in hand is relevant, even though a bit provocatively stated. Everyone who a bit has followed The Rolling Stones along the years, has seen that the role of Keith Richards has changed. He is not any longer the musical dynamo and leader of the band as he used to be. There are insightful posts here stating the obvious, even though the extent of Keith's 'decrease' musically and leadershipwise is a question not easily to be determined in precise terms (but open for a interesting, critical discussion). Then there is that army of justinbieberists, for whom facing the reality and coming to terms with it seems to an impossible task. Sometimes it sounds pretty ackward that even though most probably the majority of people here are rather grown up people, what one can see is like some group of teenager fan boy/girls just crying out their eternal love and loyalty and whatever for their idols. And of course, for them those who dare to discuss this factual, but seemingly taboo subject are "complainers" and "not real fans" or whatever. Jeez.
- Doxa
Edited 4 time(s). Last edit at 2015-05-07 19:56 by Doxa.
- Doxa
Edited 4 time(s). Last edit at 2015-05-07 19:56 by Doxa.
Re: Has Keith become a mere sideman for the band?
Posted by:
Naturalust
()
Date: May 7, 2015 20:02
Quote
LeonioidQuote
Naturalust
I think most everyone posting on IORR is an "actual" Rolling Stones fan.
That is your opinion and my opinion is threads like this are good to gauge who seems to be here because they have nothing better to do than complain about a band they no longer enjoy.
I am still here because I am currently a fan of The Rolling Stones and this coming tour. I still enjoy this band and their music and if/when that is no longer the case I will be gone. I have better things to do than hang around a meassage baord insulting a band, complining about how they are no longer as good as they used to be or lamenting some band member who quit a long long time ago. I will move on to talking about current things I actually enjoy.
And indeed most of us are lucky that we will never have message boards written about us IF/when we turn 70, with people on them constantly nagging, complaining and insulting us... ORspeculatingstating as fact about how we will never again do what we do because our hands can no longer work...
BUT THEN KEITH COMES BACK AS GOOD AS EVER... but none of the nagging specualators ever post anything like "Well I guess I was wrong about Keith and his hands, he seems to be playing fine"... nope... they just move on to the next thing, complaining about his jacket color, or his glasses, or his posing or how mean he is because he won't invite back band members who quit 40 years ago, or they will nag and complain about this... or that... or the other... etc etc etc...
No worries Leonioid, I still say the Stones have enough complexity and depth in their 50+ years of playing to allow fans to interestingly discuss their music and performances of the past as well as their current work, critical discussion is a natural part of that. A great majority of the discussions here are about songs and performances from many years ago, since they are still playing many of those tunes, I imagine it's hard not to make comparisons for some people.
I also recall many people actually commenting on how good Keith appeared to be playing on the recent tours, the same people who earlier complained when he wasn't.
But basically my point is that I personally don't mind honest discussions about the band and it's music, recent or ancient, and while I may not agree with people who complain to the point of insult, they are certainly entitled to their opinion, and hopefully they temper their negativity with some good examples of what they love about the Stones. I accept that there are people who are currently RS fans who, unlike you, aren't huge fans of the current Stones, With the long life and many changes this band has been through it's bound to be the case.
As long as the discussions are honest opinions about the Stones and their music, fine with me. But judging Stones fans, why they are here and insulting and complaining about them, saying they have nothing better to do, is pretty close to doing the same thing about the band....
peace
Re: Has Keith become a mere sideman for the band?
Posted by:
DandelionPowderman
()
Date: May 7, 2015 20:03
You could copy/paste your post for the Taylor thread as well, Doxa 
Re: Has Keith become a mere sideman for the band?
Posted by:
Leonioid
()
Date: May 7, 2015 20:09
Quote
Naturalust
As long as the discussions are honest opinions about the Stones and their music, fine with me. But judging Stones fans, why they are here and insulting and complaining about them, saying they have nothing better to do, is pretty close to doing the same thing about the band....
Yeah, but I am sure I like the band and that the band is worthy...
as I keep seeing the usual suspects showing up to bash on Keith, which is a good indicator of where they are at... which is what I said to start with, threads like this are a good way to see who is what and where they are at.
Re: Has Keith become a mere sideman for the band?
Posted by:
Beast
()
Date: May 7, 2015 20:13
Quote
DandelionPowderman
You could copy/paste your post for the Taylor thread as well, Doxa
Ha ha - too true!
Re: Has Keith become a mere sideman for the band?
Posted by:
ChelseaGirls
()
Date: May 7, 2015 20:18
You have better things to do than complaining? Good for you. Congratulations! But why do you complain about our complaints?
Re: Has Keith become a mere sideman for the band?
Posted by:
Leonioid
()
Date: May 7, 2015 20:19
...while some others seem to be here to get the attention they can not get elsewhere in life, do not care at all about this band, but have learned that making insulting posts on a message board where people are passionate about something is a good place to get attention, no matter what kind of attention it is.
Re: Has Keith become a mere sideman for the band?
Posted by:
Doxa
()
Date: May 7, 2015 20:24
Quote
DandelionPowderman
You could copy/paste your post for the Taylor thread as well, Doxa
Yeah, probably to an extent, but what is great in that thread is that there is damn good discussion going on, and the subject matter there - Mick Taylor - seems to inspire a lot of insightful posts (quite generally, many times the most insteresting, thorough-going musical discussions here at IORR seems to touch Taylor). Of course, there are also those "get over it, he is a quitter" spoilers - many times same justinbieberists as here - trying to kill the conversation.
Are there many Taylorites, Dandie, who refuse to accept that Taylor is not like he used to be? I don't think that never has been a problem in that thread. And neither the point of this thread - no matter waht justinbieberists say - has not to claim that recent Keith Richards, no matter what his role or condition is like compared to the past, cannot perform enough well to bring happiness to countless people.
- Doxa
Re: Has Keith become a mere sideman for the band?
Posted by:
Leonioid
()
Date: May 7, 2015 20:26
LOL!!
Re: Has Keith become a mere sideman for the band?
Posted by:
Naturalust
()
Date: May 7, 2015 20:28
Quote
LeonioidQuote
Naturalust
As long as the discussions are honest opinions about the Stones and their music, fine with me. But judging Stones fans, why they are here and insulting and complaining about them, saying they have nothing better to do, is pretty close to doing the same thing about the band....
Yeah, but I am sure I like the band and that the band is worthy...
as I keep seeing the usual suspects showing up to bash on Keith, which is a good indicator of where they are at... which is what I said to start with, threads like this are a good way to see who is what and where they are at.
Well I agree the band is still amazing and awesome and Keith is still the heart and soul of the enterprise...but I'm probably just less interested in seeing who is what and where they are at, or defending any Stones, I know where I stand. Btw: I have talked with Neil about the Stones before and he made some jokes which would probably put him in the list of fans you are judging
...but you never know with him because with his dry wit and unique sense of humor, the jokes usually on you. peace
Re: Has Keith become a mere sideman for the band?
Posted by:
ChelseaGirls
()
Date: May 7, 2015 20:28
Armchair psychology time! Yeah you are right, I am a freak who never goes out.... I even kill cats during my spare time, because I don't have anything else to do... 
Re: Has Keith become a mere sideman for the band?
Posted by:
DandelionPowderman
()
Date: May 7, 2015 20:29
But are there many who refuse to accept that Keith isn't better than ever here? I haven't seen any such posts.
The topic was whether Keith had been downgraded to an ordinary band member, and functions only as a mascot, more or less.
That isn't true, of course.
The topic was whether Keith had been downgraded to an ordinary band member, and functions only as a mascot, more or less.
That isn't true, of course.
Re: Has Keith become a mere sideman for the band?
Posted by:
24FPS
()
Date: May 7, 2015 20:31
Ronnie is more important as a guitarist at this point for what's left of the band. If I want to hear Keith being great I've got the TAMI Show DVD or Hampton. The great Rolling Stones are a thing of the past. Bill knew when to exit, after their first and best Greatest Hits Tour, Steel Wheels/Urban Jungle. A little resurgence on No Security, and that's it. I don't know why people insist Keith is anywhere near what he was. No one else is, with only Jeff Beck even close.
Re: Has Keith become a mere sideman for the band?
Posted by:
DandelionPowderman
()
Date: May 7, 2015 20:35
On the last half of the set it is Keith who is the most important guitarist.
The problem is that some fans are tired of those songs. Most concert-goers aren't, though.
The problem is that some fans are tired of those songs. Most concert-goers aren't, though.
Re: Has Keith become a mere sideman for the band?
Posted by:
Doxa
()
Date: May 7, 2015 20:36
Quote
Leonioid
...while some others seem to be here to get the attention they can not get elsewhere in life, do not care at all about this band, but have learned that making insulting posts on a message board where people are passionate about something is a good place to get attention, no matter what kind of attention it is.
But unlike you, Max, they don't tend to insult and bash fellow contributors who might have a different opinion than you. Some people actually appeciate other's right to express their opinion without being bashed. I need to say that in this thread I am not one of those, and as guilty as you to this stupid fellow fan-bashing. Let's say I simply lost my temper, since I see the course of discussion going into direction, in which a real discussion, changing thoughts, goes impossible. You do your best to spoil the discussion, and I don't like that. Sorry.
I wanted to say something on the subject matter, but shit, lost my humour for that... No fun.
- Doxa
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2015-05-07 20:50 by Doxa.
Re: Has Keith become a mere sideman for the band?
Posted by:
LongBeachArena72
()
Date: May 7, 2015 20:40
Quote
LeonioidQuote
Naturalust
I think most everyone posting on IORR is an "actual" Rolling Stones fan.
That is your opinion and my opinion is threads like this are good to gauge who seems to be here because they have nothing better to do than complain about a band they no longer enjoy.
I am still here because I am currently a fan of The Rolling Stones and this coming tour. I still enjoy this band and their music and if/when that is no longer the case I will be gone. I have better things to do than hang around a meassage baord insulting a band, complining about how they are no longer as good as they used to be or lamenting some band member who quit a long long time ago. I will move on to talking about current things I actually enjoy.
I would not presume to know why each one of us is here. Nor to judge whether that reason is legitimate or not.
I have little to no interest in the current incarnation of The Rolling Stones, and yet I try to stop by here once a day or so, just to see what dollops of historical info I might glean about my favorite r'n'r band.
I understand people getting excited about another tour and wish them all well on their outings. And, just for the record, many of the "current things I actually enjoy" are artists, painters, writers, and musicians who are "currently" producing their best work.
Re: Has Keith become a mere sideman for the band?
Posted by:
Doxa
()
Date: May 7, 2015 20:46
Quote
DandelionPowderman
The topic was whether Keith had been downgraded to an ordinary band member, and functions only as a mascot, more or less.
That isn't true, of course.
Stating it like that, it looks like you don't want to discuss this 'taboo' subject either.
So, forget it.
- Doxa
Re: Has Keith become a mere sideman for the band?
Posted by:
DandelionPowderman
()
Date: May 7, 2015 20:50
What is it that you wanna discuss? I dont get it.
Is Keith a mere sideman nowadays? No, I don't think so, for the reasons I mentioned in my earlier post.
Is he still vital in their greatest hits show? I'd say he is. That doesn't mean he hasn't lost skills etc, like most 71 year olds do.
Is Keith a mere sideman nowadays? No, I don't think so, for the reasons I mentioned in my earlier post.
Is he still vital in their greatest hits show? I'd say he is. That doesn't mean he hasn't lost skills etc, like most 71 year olds do.
Re: Has Keith become a mere sideman for the band?
Posted by:
Leonioid
()
Date: May 7, 2015 20:53
Quote
Naturalust
I have talked with Neil about the Stones before and he made some jokes which would probably put him in the list of fans you are judging
There is a huge difference between making an off the cuff comment about a band saying how one feels about it... and going on and on and on and on and on ad infinitum, writing paragraph after paragraph about how much someone knows this band used to be great but now it sucks... and doing it day after day after day...
I said if/when I ever feel that way about a band I do not be stick around to write endless unhappy dissertations about it... I have no idea why anyone would... but I suppose it has someting to do with, and says more how they feel about themself, than how they feel about a band.
Rock and roll is for fun... it is not meant to be dissected.
The Rolling Stones and Keith Richards have recently been playing to rave reviews all over the globe, the proof is in the pudding... and I am excited to go see them live again... it is going to be a blast.
And all the naysaysers can sit at home and proudly keep typing about how much they suck now, and no way they would go see them now, but they used to be good, but now they are not as good, but they used to be good when that other guitar player was in the band, and lamenting how they should bring him back and then they would be better but still not as good as they used to be but a lil bettter, but not as good as they used tomdmdksjkfaskfhaflkhadnncblahblahblah
Re: Has Keith become a mere sideman for the band?
Posted by:
Nikkei
()
Date: May 7, 2015 21:06
Considering what was said and written about Keith from 2007 to 2012, we must conclude that he presented a much higher game than most expected.
Chucks arrangements to the songs are set up as a safety net for him, that actually underlines his importance to the show.
Chucks arrangements to the songs are set up as a safety net for him, that actually underlines his importance to the show.
Re: Has Keith become a mere sideman for the band?
Posted by:
andrewt
()
Date: May 7, 2015 21:22
Quote
BeastQuote
DandelionPowdermanQuote
LeonioidQuote
Naturalust
I think most everyone posting on IORR is an "actual" Rolling Stones fan.
That is your opinion and my opinion is threads like this are good to gauge who seems to be here because they have nothing better to do than complain about a band they no longer enjoy.
I am still here because I am currently a fan of The Rolling Stones and this coming tour. I still enjoy this band and their music and if/when that is no longer the case I will be gone. I have better things to do than hang around a meassage baord insulting a band, complining about how they are no longer as good as they used to be or lamenting some band member who quit a long long time ago. I will move on to talking about current things I actually enjoy.
And indeed most of us are lucky that we will never have message boards written about us IF/when we turn 70, with people on them constantly nagging, complaining and insulting us... ORspeculatingstating as fact about how we will never again do what we do because our hands can no longer work...
BUT THEN KEITH COMES BACK AS GOOD AS EVER... but none of the nagging specualators ever post anything like "Well I guess I was wrong about Keith and his hands, he seems to be playing fine"... nope... they just move on to the next thing, complaining about his jacket color, or his glasses, or his posing or how mean he is because he won't invite back band members who quit 40 years ago, or they will nag and complain about this... or that... or the other... etc etc etc...
sideman schmideman
AND NOW A SONG... from my favorite band
Posts like this! Hear hear!
+1
Ah yes...this brings back great memories.
(as I live updated)
Re: Toronto-1 May 25 Stones show live updates
Posted by: andrewt ()
Date: May 26, 2013 04:25
By request.....Street Fighting Man. No MT but Keith sounds pretty crunchy!
Good tempo
Posted by: andrewt ()
Date: May 26, 2013 04:26
Okay this is GOOD. Guitars just got WAY louder. Like loud as fvck
Re: Toronto-1 May 25 Stones show live updates
Posted by: andrewt ()
Date: May 26, 2013 04:29
WOW Keith in the zone on SFM. Highlight so far. Crowd really in now.
At about the :50 mark of this Mick comes over to where I was
video: [www.youtube.com]
Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 2015-05-07 21:31 by andrewt.
Re: Has Keith become a mere sideman for the band?
Posted by:
Leonioid
()
Date: May 7, 2015 21:24
Quote
Nikkei
Considering what was said and written about Keith from 2007 to 2012, we must conclude that he presented a much higher game than most expected.
.
He sure did, all the posts are still there and can be read where a lot of naysayers on this board had Keith never coming back again. I was very disappointed to see so many make those statements.
The stupid MSM has been trying to call Keith dead and gone for 40 years and Keith proved them wrong repeatedly... but did Keith get credit for being a bad ass and for keep on keeping on from the naysayers? Nope... they were ready to toss him out at the first chance and trample on his memory, just like they did Chuck Berry.
I am not Pollyanna... if when Keith and/or the rest of the band start putting on weak bad poor sad performances over and over, as we have seen many others artists in decline do, I will not keep on saying they are great, I will quietly move on...
...but the naysaysers will probably stick around and yak and yak and yak about how smart they are and how they knew this all along... just like they trampled all over Chuck Berry when it became sadly obvious what the facts were... and the naysayers reveled in discussing it in minutiae, note for note.
Chuck Berry is a rock God, he deserves better.
Re: Has Keith become a mere sideman for the band?
Posted by:
Leonioid
()
Date: May 7, 2015 21:27
Quote
andrewt
Re: Toronto-1 May 25 Stones show live updates
Posted by: andrewt ()
Date: May 26, 2013 04:25
By request.....Street Fighting Man. No MT but Keith sounds pretty crunchy!
Good tempo
Posted by: andrewt ()
Date: May 26, 2013 04:26
Okay this is GOOD. Guitars just got WAY louder. Like loud as fvck
Re: Toronto-1 May 25 Stones show live updates
Posted by: andrewt ()
Date: May 26, 2013 04:29
WOW Keith in the zone on SFM. Highlight so far. Crowd really in now.
HEY!!!
I remember reading your comments that night... you were the MVP keeping the board up to date blow by blow... and I will say you did that better than anyone before or since, you did awesome!! Thanks again :) CHEERS!!!
EDIT- and if I recall correct you did not have high expectations before hand, but once you were in there you related to us something like "sure enough, in the magic of the moment the same old songs/setlist sound pretty freekin great" or something like that... and then you got another beer.
I smiled at all of that
Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 2015-05-07 21:31 by Leonioid.
Re: Has Keith become a mere sideman for the band?
Posted by:
andrewt
()
Date: May 7, 2015 21:33
Quote
LeonioidQuote
andrewt
Re: Toronto-1 May 25 Stones show live updates
Posted by: andrewt ()
Date: May 26, 2013 04:25
By request.....Street Fighting Man. No MT but Keith sounds pretty crunchy!
Good tempo
Posted by: andrewt ()
Date: May 26, 2013 04:26
Okay this is GOOD. Guitars just got WAY louder. Like loud as fvck
Re: Toronto-1 May 25 Stones show live updates
Posted by: andrewt ()
Date: May 26, 2013 04:29
WOW Keith in the zone on SFM. Highlight so far. Crowd really in now.
HEY!!!
I remember reading your comments that night... you were the MVP keeping the board up to date blow by blow... and I will say you did that better than anyone before or since, you did awesome!! Thanks again :) CHEERS!!!
EDIT- and if I recall correct you did not have high expectations before hand, but once you were in there you related to us something like "sure enough, in the magic of the moment the same old songs/setlist sound pretty freekin great" or something like that... and then you got another beer.
I smiled at all of that
Re: Has Keith become a mere sideman for the band?
Posted by:
mr_dja
()
Date: May 7, 2015 21:45
Hasn't he ALWAYS been a sideman? I mean if Jagger's the FRONT man, wouldn't Keith and the other guitarist (whoever it happened to be at the time) be sidemen while Charlie is/was a behind-man or back-man if you prefer? Maybe, because there are generally two people on Keith's side of the stage, Keith was/is the INSIDE-side-man while Bill/Daryl would be the outside-side-man. Depending on your point of view, Keith could also be the right-side man or the left-side man depending if your point of view was from or of the stage.
Maybe the answer is in Keith's own words... If I'm not mistaken, wasn't it he who said, "Mick's Rock, I'm Roll" or something along those lines? Assuming that is actually the case, it sounds like without one or the other there is no Rock & Roll in the Rolling Stones. Two guys on either side of an ampersand.
The things this board decide to argue about amaze me sometimes.
Peace,
Mr DJA
Maybe the answer is in Keith's own words... If I'm not mistaken, wasn't it he who said, "Mick's Rock, I'm Roll" or something along those lines? Assuming that is actually the case, it sounds like without one or the other there is no Rock & Roll in the Rolling Stones. Two guys on either side of an ampersand.
The things this board decide to argue about amaze me sometimes.
Peace,
Mr DJA
Re: Has Keith become a mere sideman for the band?
Posted by:
stonehearted
()
Date: May 7, 2015 22:35
How can an original core member be relegated to sideman status? Charlie doesn't make up the set lists either and also just shows up, plays what he's told and leaves. Does that make him a sideman too?
As far as leadership status goes, Keith was one of the leaders when there was a bona fide Jagger/Richards songwriting team collaborating to determine the direction of the Stones' music, so his role in that regard diminished after 1972.
Since 1989, but more so especially now with no new music as part of their output, the Stones have been a business, so it makes sense that Stones Incorporated should be run by a business man, a CEO if you will, and there's only one band member with enough business schooling in his background to qualify him for the position.
As far as leadership status goes, Keith was one of the leaders when there was a bona fide Jagger/Richards songwriting team collaborating to determine the direction of the Stones' music, so his role in that regard diminished after 1972.
Since 1989, but more so especially now with no new music as part of their output, the Stones have been a business, so it makes sense that Stones Incorporated should be run by a business man, a CEO if you will, and there's only one band member with enough business schooling in his background to qualify him for the position.
Re: Has Keith become a mere sideman for the band?
Posted by:
DandelionPowderman
()
Date: May 7, 2015 22:50
Wasn't he a drop-out? 
Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.
Online Users
AntoineParis , armin944 , CaptainCorella , frankotero , NeddieFlanders , Nobbi82 , O2 , piotrek , S.T.P , SummerStones , syrel , Topi , waterrats , werner67976
Guests:
1690
Record Number of Users:
206
on June 1, 2022 23:50
Record Number of Guests:
9627
on January 2, 2024 23:10