It can't be only the fact that they are making music for more then 40 years now.
There are more (live- ) bands out there that last at least for 2 decades or more, and also are making some great music.
Fact is that the Stones are the only ones that, time after time, gives me that special feeling I can't describe every time I see them on stage.
For the first time in 1982, still in 2003 ( and inbetween ) and I'm sure they will do that again in 2006 !
And how can it be that so many people complain about the age-thing and Riff-mistakes, while the Stones are still the only band in the world who can sell out so many shows as they do and give people so much pleasure as they do.
Could it be Magic ?
It must be.
Please enjoy the magic this and next year while you still can !

amen.

Keith

The Stones rank up there with Elvis, Sinatra, Garland, Beatles.....and you can't buy a ticket to see any of them...sorry, but Paul is not the Beatles. See them while you can and stop bitching.

of course. But, Sinatra and Elvis (and Garland, judy? Jeffreys{I love him]) didn't write songs.

Judy, Judy, Judy.........

Mickmickmick, just the same, some kinda girls

Yea and it's his strength.

Great!

thank's !

MICK IS THE MAGIC! The rest falls into place because HE puts it all into place!

dont agree.

Its the combination of all four which makes "the magic". The sum of the band outweighs the four individual parts that make it up. A hidden ingredient or Factor X, if you like.

Mick on his own has never been a big draw commercially or creatively. He found that out the hard way in the late 80's when he saw his future more as a solo artist and not as a Stone.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2005-07-25 15:18 by Gazza.

Agree !
I like some Jagger solo-songs, also like some Richards solo-songs, but they are not the Stones.
That's something else.
I never went te see Mick or Keith live solo, but I can't count the concerts of the Stones i've been to so far.
I told you before, it must be magic.

For me it's the time span if my youth and I am still fortysix years young today.
I ran away from home when I saw them the first time in 76, I went nearly nuts in Frankfurt in 81 and I remember Basel 90 when heaven (thunder and lightning) first came down to earth to present the one and only Band, I enjoyed 95, but got ass in 97-99 (to overloaded by point of taste) and I was 17 again during Licks tour went wild (even my wife did) and am still thrilled and eagerly look forward to be ON STAGE.
Tell me any band or artist who did the same to you in such a time span?????

I'm not talking about Mick as a solo artist, I'm saying that as a STONE, he is the driving force, and not just creatively. I know that much of his solo material has bombed, to put it nicely but as a member of the Stones, I think he gets them all going in the tour mode and gets them into the recording studio. And it's NOT that he's BETTER than Keith, Ron or Charlie, that isn't what I'm saying! I am saying Mick is the spark, the magic intangible that gets them to become the band we know as the STONES.

[orangecow.org]

Billy318124, the joke is getting old.......

Vilhelm
Nordic Stones Vikings

Debra you are absolutely right: When Mick's on stage the sparks will fly.
Or did I get you wrong.....??

Debra Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I'm not talking about Mick as a solo artist, I'm
> saying that as a STONE, he is the driving force,
> and not just creatively. I know that much of his
> solo material has bombed, to put it nicely but as
> a member of the Stones, I think he gets them all
> going in the tour mode and gets them into the
> recording studio. And it's NOT that he's BETTER
> than Keith, Ron or Charlie, that isn't what I'm
> saying! I am saying Mick is the spark, the magic
> intangible that gets them to become the band we
> know as the STONES.


I know you werent talking about him as a solo artist, Debs, although I agree with part of what you've just said.

See what I'm saying about the "sum being worth more than the individual parts", though.

They're only 'special' as a band in that they work better with each other to bounce ideas off.

I'd argue that Keith if anyone is the driving force in a recording studio, but again theres an energy that he needs from the others to make that into something special.

That makes the band 'special' is the chemistry or mix that they have. Mick or Keith might generate the sprk you speak of when working with someone else but it simply doesnt have the same results.

Debra Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> he is the driving force,
> I think he gets them all going in the tour mode and gets them into the
> recording studio.

Strange, Mick was the one that went solo first, and almost was the cause of the Stones split up in the 80's.
I think Keith is the real driving force behind the Stones, he can not do without the stage.

Charlie Watts!!!

[orangecow.org]

Gazza wrote :

"The sum of the band outweighs the four individual parts that make it up. A hidden ingredient or Factor X, if you like. "

So it is Mick + Keith + Brian + Bill +Charlie + Taylor. Houps : I counted 6 individuals ( 3 of them must be in the very near proximity ).

So strange that Bill left........they lost something when he departed. You could always say that the Stones had 4 of the five original members as long as Wyman was around. Even though Ronnie has been with them for 30 years....he still isn't an original member.

Ronnie as far as I am concerned has never be a RS. Just a go-between beween Keith and Mick( what is important or was important ata certain point of time), even though he has got for sure some talent. But definitively not a Stone, not in his mind. A Faces....Yes.

"What is making the Stones so interesting and great ?". Hmm, good question...
I think is

(a) the talent and the good "sense of smell".

(b) the fact that their music is intoo the hard core of rock and roll and so it never sounds truly old- fashioned. Think, 5 years ago Dandy Warhols had a huge success with "Bohemian Like You" just stealing the riff of Brown Sugar. The whole career of Soup Dragons was the cover of "I'm Free". The first Primal Scream's great song, "Loaded", is written on the rythm of SFTD...

(c) The magic touch that they still have on stage.

(d) the good balance between opposite elements. The "dinosaur Keith" and the "chameleon MicK". The egoisms and the team spirit. The passion and the money. The music and the music industry. That was always rock and roll!

(e)They always make something, albums, tours or both. Their longer breaks were 7 years without doing a tour (1982-89) and 8 years wihout a new album (1997-2005). That means nothing, if you think that we are talking about a career of 43 years.

(f) The high standards and the quality, whatever they are doing. A lot of other groups are dying for making an album not as "Exile", but as "Diry Work" or "Undercover"...

And so, "you have the sun, the moon, the air and the Rolling Stones"!

I agree with most of your points, Gazza my dear, especially the fact that the magic chemistry lies hidden in the wonderful blending of all 4 members! I'm not sure who said that Keith is their driving force, pointing to Mick's need to do solo cds; I have to remind him that Keith did several solo projects because he wanted to and I do not think Mick was upset by that. On the other hand, when Mick stepped out to do his thing,, all of a sudden it became a real issue. And the Stones solo stuff has nothing really to do with WHO is the real driving force behind the entire Stones Machine. Mick, I believe drives that train. If you read the issue of Fortune Magazine, Sept of 2002 with Mick&Keith on the cover you'd see who calls the shots. It very clearly detailed who makes all of the major decisions. Keith Sure does have equal say in the song selections I believe, but it seemed clear after reading Fortune Magazine that Mick has his hands in all of the Stones pies! From the stage set up, merchandising, set lists, schedule, negotiating the contracts and hiring road crews! This is not me being a know-it-all, just sharing what I read.

HappyRambler Wrote:

> Strange, Mick was the one that went solo first,
> and almost was the cause of the Stones split up in
> the 80's.
> I think Keith is the real driving force behind the
> Stones, he can not do without the stage.

Mick was actually the last to do anything apart from the Stones. Keith had the New Barbarians with Ronnie and released his own single. Ronnie had a few solo albums at this point, Bill had been making solo albums for years and Charlie had his jazz thing, not sure if he released anything at this point. Not counting Memo From Turner.

run RUDOLPH run

I like that the band has a touch of madness to it