Tell Me :
Talk
Yes, I see. I have to state more precisely what I mean: There is a lack both of creating new songs (ten years since A Bigger Bang) and of being ready to go off beaten tracks on stage, even if Mick Taylor is there and tries to animate or encourage him for some improvisations, what MT obyiously did during his first new appearences with the band, particularly during MR. I refuse to blame for that his age (see McCartney e.g.) or his supposed physical problems. Django Reinhardt used to play with three fingers after his accident. I don't speculate what the reason is, I'm stating only what I see and hear or in a better sense: not hear.
But the combination of arthritis ( which did for Scotty Moore ) and loss of muscle memory after the accident and a long period of lack of practice do all leave their mark ( different from early loss of fingers ask in DR and Toni Iommi for example )
Yes, yes, and yes. Throw in some mean-spirited comments about how he doesn't give a sh-t anymore and he's just dragging the rest of the band down and you've hit the nail on the head.
Your point is that he can still hold it together sometimes on some songs? That sometimes he can get through a solo without bum notes, playing through all the bars and not just posing for half? True enough; he is not totally played. But he used to be Keith Richards, he used to be somewhere between OK (on a bad night) and searing hot, on a given night. Now Ok is as good as it gets.
And you're not Ok with that?
I'm fine with it. It's inevitable, due to the passage of time the arthritis and everything else. If anybody has earned the right to go on tour and be a "mascot," if that is what he is (not my word), he has. i guess the people who notice such things are not "fans" to some people.
Yes, yes, yes, yes and yes and usually when I read all these people who feel compelled to complain and grumble and over-analyze this and that and the other about Keith it seems like they are more are talking about themselves than Keith.
sideman schmideman
you are talking about the boston bomber or that isis leader who chopped off the dudes head,right? if not you are one sick little puppy.
ChelseaGirls, no matter how you feel, those comments are seriously inappropriate and offensive on a RS fan board. If you are interested at all in staying a member here I suggest you edit them promptly.... maybe you are just trying to be banned in which case you're well on your way. Statements like that make me wonder why you're here in the first place.
Too late...you've been quoted...seeya!
peace
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2015-05-12 21:51 by Naturalust.
3 Replies in 14 minutes. Still wondering why she's here? I hate that I'm allowing myself to be part of the reason she's here but, let's face it, she's here because WE are. As long as she keeps getting replies we're going to have to read her crap. Next time bv asks for suggestions on how to improve IORR.org I'm going to ask for the ability to filter out certain user's comments. She'll be at the top of my list.
Peace,
Mr DJA
I'll ask for the ability to filter out all the current RS-related content.
I don't think we'll have to worry about that filter in this case. That's about the most horrid post I've ever seen here, pretty sure Bjornulf will rightfully pull a Dirty Harry when he next checks in. And I don't think it's a "she", I believe this is a guy who was recently banned and is here raising hell because he's pissed about it. Ok enough energy expelled over this idiot, just trying to simmer down.
peace
No, my point was what I wrote. He is still leading the band on the classics AND he plays way more solos than in 1973.
No Chuck counting on JJF, MR and many other classics. Just Keith's rhythm and riffing, the way we like it.
I don't know what you're disagreeing with, as these things are pretty evident.
Me too.
Keith is no spring chicken and we all know about the health issues and the palm tree and some things that were said about his fingers... and a lot of people were counting him out to ever tour again (check some posts around here about 2009-2011)... and then BOOM!!!
He comes out and kicks ass on tour and I respect him so much for that/this. MOST people in the world retire at 60-65 (for a reason) but Keith said forget that and has kept on rolling because that is what he does.
When the going gets tough, the tough get going. GO KEITH GO!!!
And I keep on laughing at people who say he does it only for the money.
Does anyone really believe another 20-30 million Dollars will change his life style one bit?
Of course they have to tempt him to get him out on the road, I dont think he wiould get off the couch without the BIG money, but it is not the reason he is doing it. I think he likes playing show and I think he likes helping out 100s and 100s of people by giving them jobs running this circus, I would bet those people have nothing but nice things to say about one of the main people helping them get a pay check, a damn nice pay check, for 100s of people. If Keith stops so does their paycheck and who enjoys looking for another job?
+1 on all of that!!
Great! Show me the Chuck versions of MR, JJF, GS, IORR, SMU and Satisfaction, because I haven't heard them
The band looks at Keith on these songs as well.
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 12, 2015 17:57
Quote
treaclefingersQuote
RobertJohnsonQuote
BsebastianQuote
GetYerAngieQuote
Doxa
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
I disagree. Asking if Keith has become a mere sideman is almost like asking if McCartney is a mere sideman when he tours, or if Elton John is a mere sideman, etc. There is no Rock without Roll; the fans are there to see Keith, no matter how diminished his playing is.
The fact is that no one aks if McCartney is a mere sideman or Elton John. At least McCartney has still an abundance in creating new music, his bass or guitar playing is now better than at Beatles times. Mac is just a true musician through and through while Keith pretends only to be a real Rock'n Roller ... It is a bit of sad Don Quixotism ...
You can't be serious. Even if we agree his playing has diminished, which it obviously has, how is that the same as saying he's not a true musician.
No opinion is better than an uninformed opinion.
Yes, I see. I have to state more precisely what I mean: There is a lack both of creating new songs (ten years since A Bigger Bang) and of being ready to go off beaten tracks on stage, even if Mick Taylor is there and tries to animate or encourage him for some improvisations, what MT obyiously did during his first new appearences with the band, particularly during MR. I refuse to blame for that his age (see McCartney e.g.) or his supposed physical problems. Django Reinhardt used to play with three fingers after his accident. I don't speculate what the reason is, I'm stating only what I see and hear or in a better sense: not hear.
Re: Has Keith become a mere sideman for the band?
Posted by:
LuxuryStones
()
Date: May 12, 2015 19:27
As long as Keith doesn't end up playing like Chuck Berry it's fine with me.
Re: Has Keith become a mere sideman for the band?
Posted by:
EJM
()
Date: May 12, 2015 19:37
Quote
RobertJohnsonQuote
treaclefingersQuote
RobertJohnsonQuote
BsebastianQuote
GetYerAngieQuote
Doxa
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
I disagree. Asking if Keith has become a mere sideman is almost like asking if McCartney is a mere sideman when he tours, or if Elton John is a mere sideman, etc. There is no Rock without Roll; the fans are there to see Keith, no matter how diminished his playing is.
The fact is that no one aks if McCartney is a mere sideman or Elton John. At least McCartney has still an abundance in creating new music, his bass or guitar playing is now better than at Beatles times. Mac is just a true musician through and through while Keith pretends only to be a real Rock'n Roller ... It is a bit of sad Don Quixotism ...
You can't be serious. Even if we agree his playing has diminished, which it obviously has, how is that the same as saying he's not a true musician.
No opinion is better than an uninformed opinion.
Yes, I see. I have to state more precisely what I mean: There is a lack both of creating new songs (ten years since A Bigger Bang) and of being ready to go off beaten tracks on stage, even if Mick Taylor is there and tries to animate or encourage him for some improvisations, what MT obyiously did during his first new appearences with the band, particularly during MR. I refuse to blame for that his age (see McCartney e.g.) or his supposed physical problems. Django Reinhardt used to play with three fingers after his accident. I don't speculate what the reason is, I'm stating only what I see and hear or in a better sense: not hear.
But the combination of arthritis ( which did for Scotty Moore ) and loss of muscle memory after the accident and a long period of lack of practice do all leave their mark ( different from early loss of fingers ask in DR and Toni Iommi for example )
Re: Has Keith become a mere sideman for the band?
Posted by:
Bsebastian
()
Date: May 12, 2015 20:13
The discussion of "sideman" has nothing to do with musical prowess.
Indeed, for many acts, their "sidemen" are far better musicians than they are, especially when they got older.
A sideman is someone who didn't write the songs, isn't one of the core members of a band, and is a hired hand.
Is there anyone on this board who truly thinks Keith Richards is a sideman in the Rolling Stones? I don't think so. It's just another way for people to complain that he's gotten older and doesn't play the way he used to and maybe for some to get in a couple digs about how they wish MT was on the tour.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2015-05-12 20:18 by Bsebastian.
Indeed, for many acts, their "sidemen" are far better musicians than they are, especially when they got older.
A sideman is someone who didn't write the songs, isn't one of the core members of a band, and is a hired hand.
Is there anyone on this board who truly thinks Keith Richards is a sideman in the Rolling Stones? I don't think so. It's just another way for people to complain that he's gotten older and doesn't play the way he used to and maybe for some to get in a couple digs about how they wish MT was on the tour.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2015-05-12 20:18 by Bsebastian.
Re: Has Keith become a mere sideman for the band?
Posted by:
Naturalust
()
Date: May 12, 2015 20:15
Hopefully his new record will show that he is still both capable of writing good new tunes and playing them well, at least in the context of the studio where he has the luxury of taking his time to get it right.
I think Keith is a bit pampered by the other musicians in his role in the Stones these days which probably contributes to his increasing ability to do less than he used to do and get away with it. Watching him in concert these days he's obviously having more fun than he is concentrating on the hard work it would take to carry the band like he did years ago. He's earned it so I'm OK with it but it does leave one wondering exactly where his skills are at this point, whether it's a physical a mental or a chosen thing that his right hand isn't blazing away like most of us have seen before.
Love to witness the rehearsals where it would be really obvious exactly where Keith is in the musical leadership of the Stones and how his guitar playing skills are. Pretty sure we'll never again get that opportunity again but I'll still bet his enthusiasm, personality and love for the music still inspires the rest of the band to do their best and that's a form of leadership in itself.
peace
I think Keith is a bit pampered by the other musicians in his role in the Stones these days which probably contributes to his increasing ability to do less than he used to do and get away with it. Watching him in concert these days he's obviously having more fun than he is concentrating on the hard work it would take to carry the band like he did years ago. He's earned it so I'm OK with it but it does leave one wondering exactly where his skills are at this point, whether it's a physical a mental or a chosen thing that his right hand isn't blazing away like most of us have seen before.
Love to witness the rehearsals where it would be really obvious exactly where Keith is in the musical leadership of the Stones and how his guitar playing skills are. Pretty sure we'll never again get that opportunity again but I'll still bet his enthusiasm, personality and love for the music still inspires the rest of the band to do their best and that's a form of leadership in itself.
peace
Re: Has Keith become a mere sideman for the band?
Posted by:
latebloomer
()
Date: May 12, 2015 20:25
Quote
Bsebastian
The discussion of "sideman" has nothing to do with musical prowess.
Indeed, for many acts, their "sidemen" are far better musicians than they are, especially when they got older.
A sideman is someone who didn't write the songs, isn't one of the core members of a band, and is a hired hand.
Is there anyone on this board who truly thinks Keith Richards is a sideman in the Rolling Stones? I don't think so. It's just another way for people to complain that he's gotten older and doesn't play the way he used to and maybe for some to get in a couple digs about how they wish MT was on the tour.
Yes, yes, and yes. Throw in some mean-spirited comments about how he doesn't give a sh-t anymore and he's just dragging the rest of the band down and you've hit the nail on the head.
Re: Has Keith become a mere sideman for the band?
Posted by:
DandelionPowderman
()
Date: May 12, 2015 20:28
Keith's a trooper.
Re: Has Keith become a mere sideman for the band?
Posted by:
KeithNacho
()
Date: May 12, 2015 20:49
Quote
lem motlow
of course keith isn't a sideman,thats just being silly.he's the co-leader of the band.
i can't think of any sidemen who do a two song solo set in the middle of a show.
Billy Preston was a sideman who had two songs solo set in the middle of the show of the best r&r band ever
Re: Has Keith become a mere sideman for the band?
Posted by:
Rokyfan
()
Date: May 12, 2015 20:53
Quote
DandelionPowdermanQuote
BsebastianQuote
GetYerAngieQuote
Doxa
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
I disagree. Asking if Keith has become a mere sideman is almost like asking if McCartney is a mere sideman when he tours, or if Elton John is a mere sideman, etc. There is no Rock without Roll; the fans are there to see Keith, no matter how diminished his playing is.
This is correct.
Another point is that Keith still leads the band on the very same songs some posters here were hailing him for back in the day (MR, Satisfaction, BS, TD, HTW, GS and others).
The difference is that the same posters now are tired of those songs
Before giving a thumbs up for Keith being a mere sideman, I suggest that people revisit Midnight Rambler, YGMR, JJF and IORR from recent tours. Who starts the songs? Who keeps the rhythm down? Who is band members looking at?
And before you jump the gun... Yes, you CAN lead a band and play a little bit poorer at the same time
Your point is that he can still hold it together sometimes on some songs? That sometimes he can get through a solo without bum notes, playing through all the bars and not just posing for half? True enough; he is not totally played. But he used to be Keith Richards, he used to be somewhere between OK (on a bad night) and searing hot, on a given night. Now Ok is as good as it gets.
Re: Has Keith become a mere sideman for the band?
Posted by:
Nikkei
()
Date: May 12, 2015 20:57
Quote
Rokyfan
Now Ok is as good as it gets.
And you're not Ok with that?
Re: Has Keith become a mere sideman for the band?
Posted by:
Naturalust
()
Date: May 12, 2015 21:01
Who starts the songs?
Chuck.
Who keeps the rhythm down?
Charlie and Darryl.
Who [are] band members looking at?
Mick.
But....Who is the audience looking at?
Keith
peace
Chuck.
Who keeps the rhythm down?
Charlie and Darryl.
Who [are] band members looking at?
Mick.
But....Who is the audience looking at?
Keith
peace
Re: Has Keith become a mere sideman for the band?
Posted by:
Rokyfan
()
Date: May 12, 2015 21:04
Quote
NikkeiQuote
Rokyfan
Now Ok is as good as it gets.
And you're not Ok with that?
I'm fine with it. It's inevitable, due to the passage of time the arthritis and everything else. If anybody has earned the right to go on tour and be a "mascot," if that is what he is (not my word), he has. i guess the people who notice such things are not "fans" to some people.
Re: Has Keith become a mere sideman for the band?
Posted by:
Leonioid
()
Date: May 12, 2015 21:10
Quote
latebloomerQuote
Bsebastian
The discussion of "sideman" has nothing to do with musical prowess.
Indeed, for many acts, their "sidemen" are far better musicians than they are, especially when they got older.
A sideman is someone who didn't write the songs, isn't one of the core members of a band, and is a hired hand.
Is there anyone on this board who truly thinks Keith Richards is a sideman in the Rolling Stones? I don't think so. It's just another way for people to complain that he's gotten older and doesn't play the way he used to and maybe for some to get in a couple digs about how they wish MT was on the tour.
Yes, yes, and yes. Throw in some mean-spirited comments about how he doesn't give a sh-t anymore and he's just dragging the rest of the band down and you've hit the nail on the head.
Yes, yes, yes, yes and yes and usually when I read all these people who feel compelled to complain and grumble and over-analyze this and that and the other about Keith it seems like they are more are talking about themselves than Keith.
sideman schmideman
Re: Has Keith become a mere sideman for the band?
Posted by:
ChelseaGirls
()
Date: May 12, 2015 21:39
I am not a troll I really hope he'll die soon ........ I am not in favor of death penalty but if he could die of natural causes it would be better for everyone.......
Re: Has Keith become a mere sideman for the band?
Posted by:
lem motlow
()
Date: May 12, 2015 21:47
Quote
ChelseaGirls
I am not a troll I really hope he'll die soon ........ I am not in favor of death penalty but if he could die of natural causes it would be better for everyone.......
you are talking about the boston bomber or that isis leader who chopped off the dudes head,right? if not you are one sick little puppy.
Re: Has Keith become a mere sideman for the band?
Posted by:
Naturalust
()
Date: May 12, 2015 21:48
ChelseaGirls, no matter how you feel, those comments are seriously inappropriate and offensive on a RS fan board. If you are interested at all in staying a member here I suggest you edit them promptly.... maybe you are just trying to be banned in which case you're well on your way. Statements like that make me wonder why you're here in the first place.Too late...you've been quoted...seeya!
peace
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2015-05-12 21:51 by Naturalust.
Re: Has Keith become a mere sideman for the band?
Posted by:
mr_dja
()
Date: May 12, 2015 21:54
Quote
Naturalust
Too late...you've been quoted...seeya!
peace
3 Replies in 14 minutes. Still wondering why she's here? I hate that I'm allowing myself to be part of the reason she's here but, let's face it, she's here because WE are. As long as she keeps getting replies we're going to have to read her crap. Next time bv asks for suggestions on how to improve IORR.org I'm going to ask for the ability to filter out certain user's comments. She'll be at the top of my list.
Peace,
Mr DJA
Re: Has Keith become a mere sideman for the band?
Posted by:
Leonioid
()
Date: May 12, 2015 21:55
Didnt you guys see that story about the thing that thrives and grows on negative waves and bad vibes? That is trolls, they dont care if what they say to attract it, they just need attention and negative attention is easier to get.
Stop giving trolls attention and they will wither and move along to another board.
Stop giving trolls attention and they will wither and move along to another board.
Re: Has Keith become a mere sideman for the band?
Posted by:
nightskyman
()
Date: May 12, 2015 22:01
See, it's been years since the Stones have released a new album. So who is responsible for that? Keith?
Anyway, clearly the Stones like to keep things secret (so if they have anything at all you'll know it when it happens).
Anyway, clearly the Stones like to keep things secret (so if they have anything at all you'll know it when it happens).
Re: Has Keith become a mere sideman for the band?
Posted by:
ChelseaGirls
()
Date: May 12, 2015 22:02
So when you say something negative you do this to "get attention"?
Re: Has Keith become a mere sideman for the band?
Posted by:
swimtothemoon
()
Date: May 12, 2015 22:03
My observation is Keith is now concentrating more on his playing and less on
The posing. At least this is what I took away from the 2013 shows I attended.
The arthritis must be frustrating for him though and I assumed this is why he is concentrating more.
The posing. At least this is what I took away from the 2013 shows I attended.
The arthritis must be frustrating for him though and I assumed this is why he is concentrating more.
Re: Has Keith become a mere sideman for the band?
Posted by:
ChelseaGirls
()
Date: May 12, 2015 22:04
Quote
mr_djaQuote
Naturalust
Too late...you've been quoted...seeya!
peace
3 Replies in 14 minutes. Still wondering why she's here? I hate that I'm allowing myself to be part of the reason she's here but, let's face it, she's here because WE are. As long as she keeps getting replies we're going to have to read her crap. Next time bv asks for suggestions on how to improve IORR.org I'm going to ask for the ability to filter out certain user's comments. She'll be at the top of my list.
Peace,
Mr DJA
I'll ask for the ability to filter out all the current RS-related content.
Re: Has Keith become a mere sideman for the band?
Posted by:
Naturalust
()
Date: May 12, 2015 22:06
Quote
mr_djaQuote
Naturalust
Too late...you've been quoted...seeya!
peace
3 Replies in 14 minutes. Still wondering why she's here? I hate that I'm allowing myself to be part of the reason she's here but, let's face it, she's here because WE are. As long as she keeps getting replies we're going to have to read her crap. Next time bv asks for suggestions on how to improve IORR.org I'm going to ask for the ability to filter out certain user's comments. She'll be at the top of my list.
Peace,
Mr DJA
I don't think we'll have to worry about that filter in this case. That's about the most horrid post I've ever seen here, pretty sure Bjornulf will rightfully pull a Dirty Harry when he next checks in. And I don't think it's a "she", I believe this is a guy who was recently banned and is here raising hell because he's pissed about it. Ok enough energy expelled over this idiot, just trying to simmer down.
peace
Re: Has Keith become a mere sideman for the band?
Posted by:
lem motlow
()
Date: May 12, 2015 22:15
i really like keith,when i look at my ipod most of the stuff on it is music i learned about from keith.roots rock,blues,reggae all sorts of stuff.
his family seem like nice people,i watched marlon grow up from afar just by following his dad for so long.
and yes,playing with those hands in that condition has got to be one hell of a task.you always give credit to a guy who plays hurt-maybe he's not 100% but you give them credit for the guts to not go and sit down.
i hope we'll be seeing keith richards for a long.long time to come.
his family seem like nice people,i watched marlon grow up from afar just by following his dad for so long.
and yes,playing with those hands in that condition has got to be one hell of a task.you always give credit to a guy who plays hurt-maybe he's not 100% but you give them credit for the guts to not go and sit down.
i hope we'll be seeing keith richards for a long.long time to come.
Re: Has Keith become a mere sideman for the band?
Posted by:
ChelseaGirls
()
Date: May 12, 2015 22:19
When someone writes that my post was the most horrid post he has ever seen I can't stop laughing... When Keef takes pics with Clinton or when he plays for Carmignac now that is horrid and offensive...
Re: Has Keith become a mere sideman for the band?
Posted by:
DandelionPowderman
()
Date: May 12, 2015 22:20
Quote
RokyfanQuote
DandelionPowdermanQuote
BsebastianQuote
GetYerAngieQuote
Doxa
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
I disagree. Asking if Keith has become a mere sideman is almost like asking if McCartney is a mere sideman when he tours, or if Elton John is a mere sideman, etc. There is no Rock without Roll; the fans are there to see Keith, no matter how diminished his playing is.
This is correct.
Another point is that Keith still leads the band on the very same songs some posters here were hailing him for back in the day (MR, Satisfaction, BS, TD, HTW, GS and others).
The difference is that the same posters now are tired of those songs
Before giving a thumbs up for Keith being a mere sideman, I suggest that people revisit Midnight Rambler, YGMR, JJF and IORR from recent tours. Who starts the songs? Who keeps the rhythm down? Who is band members looking at?
And before you jump the gun... Yes, you CAN lead a band and play a little bit poorer at the same time
Your point is that he can still hold it together sometimes on some songs? That sometimes he can get through a solo without bum notes, playing through all the bars and not just posing for half? True enough; he is not totally played. But he used to be Keith Richards, he used to be somewhere between OK (on a bad night) and searing hot, on a given night. Now Ok is as good as it gets.
No, my point was what I wrote. He is still leading the band on the classics AND he plays way more solos than in 1973.
No Chuck counting on JJF, MR and many other classics. Just Keith's rhythm and riffing, the way we like it.
I don't know what you're disagreeing with, as these things are pretty evident.
Re: Has Keith become a mere sideman for the band?
Posted by:
Leonioid
()
Date: May 12, 2015 22:21
Quote
swimtothemoon
My observation is Keith is now concentrating more on his playing and less on
The posing. At least this is what I took away from the 2013 shows I attended.
The arthritis must be frustrating for him though and I assumed this is why he is concentrating more.
Me too.
Keith is no spring chicken and we all know about the health issues and the palm tree and some things that were said about his fingers... and a lot of people were counting him out to ever tour again (check some posts around here about 2009-2011)... and then BOOM!!!
He comes out and kicks ass on tour and I respect him so much for that/this. MOST people in the world retire at 60-65 (for a reason) but Keith said forget that and has kept on rolling because that is what he does.
When the going gets tough, the tough get going. GO KEITH GO!!!
And I keep on laughing at people who say he does it only for the money.
Does anyone really believe another 20-30 million Dollars will change his life style one bit?
Of course they have to tempt him to get him out on the road, I dont think he wiould get off the couch without the BIG money, but it is not the reason he is doing it. I think he likes playing show and I think he likes helping out 100s and 100s of people by giving them jobs running this circus, I would bet those people have nothing but nice things to say about one of the main people helping them get a pay check, a damn nice pay check, for 100s of people. If Keith stops so does their paycheck and who enjoys looking for another job?
Re: Has Keith become a mere sideman for the band?
Posted by:
Leonioid
()
Date: May 12, 2015 22:22
ME TOO !!Quote
lem motlow
i really like keith,when i look at my ipod most of the stuff on it is music i learned about from keith.roots rock,blues,reggae all sorts of stuff.
his family seem like nice people,i watched marlon grow up from afar just by following his dad for so long.
and yes,playing with those hands in that condition has got to be one hell of a task.you always give credit to a guy who plays hurt-maybe he's not 100% but you give them credit for the guts to not go and sit down.
I hope we'll be seeing keith richards for a long long time to come.
+1 on all of that!!
Re: Has Keith become a mere sideman for the band?
Posted by:
DandelionPowderman
()
Date: May 12, 2015 22:22
Quote
Naturalust
Who starts the songs?
Chuck.
Who keeps the rhythm down?
Charlie and Darryl.
Who [are] band members looking at?
Mick.
But....Who is the audience looking at?
Keith
peace
Great! Show me the Chuck versions of MR, JJF, GS, IORR, SMU and Satisfaction, because I haven't heard them
The band looks at Keith on these songs as well.
Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.
Online Users
Guests:
2293
Record Number of Users:
206
on June 1, 2022 23:50
Record Number of Guests:
9627
on January 2, 2024 23:10