Quote
ovalvox
As for Bill? He's always wanted his day in the sun but it's hard to get around the most famous front line in music history.

Bill reminds me of the certain type of person, when after a long weekend of fun, a great BBQ, partying, a life band, sex, booze, drugs, rock n roll, beautiful landscape, a swimming pool, cocktails, everything, when you ask him: "how did you like the weekend?" will reply wryly: "The teabags were not my favourite brand". And I admit, there is humour in that, but still...

...On a lighter note: I'm gonna make a T-shirt out of this one.
Anybody has this in high-res, suitable for print?

Plenty of interesting T-shirts when RoughJusticeOnYa is available.

Quote
RoughJusticeOnYa
...On a lighter note: I'm gonna make a T-shirt out of this one.
Anybody has this in high-res, suitable for print?

+1

that's a great idea. i'd buy one.

Quote
Nikkei
Plenty of interesting T-shirts when RoughJusticeOnYa is available.

...?? I don't really get that, Nikkei...?!

P.S.: I'm not going into commercial retail with it, guys - just wanna make one for myself.
But I guess we can all do that, can't we? - just as long as we (each) have a high-res image of it... !?

I just paraphrased Brians "interesting work" quote because you always helped me with shirts
I also have some print ideas myself and didn't think about going into business

Quote
Nikkei
I just paraphrased Brians "interesting work" quote because you always helped me with shirts
I also have some print ideas myself and didn't think about going into business

...Oh - did I really? Well - OK! 'Point taken', then.

P.S.: yeah; that was the line that cracked me up (too) & pulled me over to the idea of making a T-shirt out of this one... "Plenty of interesting work available." ><

Still looking for the 'high-res' image, though.
Anybody got an idea?

(I'm sure I have that ad in one of the many books I own; but I'm not sure about the quality of my scanner, for this.)

Quote
lem motlow
THANK YOU!!-

anyone who wants to learn anything about the rolling stones needs to read every word bill wyman says. read his books,his interviews,radio broadcasts,all of it.

why?-because bill doesnt bullshit.he'll tell you exactly what happened and when and he wont sugarcoat it or spin it because he's trying to create some image for himself.

mick,keith and ronnie are completely full of it-one figures out ten ways to say nothing,one makes up things out of the blue and the other took so many drugs he thinks he was asked to replace jimmy page in led zeppelin.
not the guys i want to learn history from.

Bill's the best bet for historical accuracy, and I too love how he has always kept the others honest. However, it's also fun to read all of their accounts to see how each remembers the past.

Quote
StonedInTokyo

Quote
lem motlow
THANK YOU!!-

anyone who wants to learn anything about the rolling stones needs to read every word bill wyman says. read his books,his interviews,radio broadcasts,all of it.

why?-because bill doesnt bullshit.he'll tell you exactly what happened and when and he wont sugarcoat it or spin it because he's trying to create some image for himself.

mick,keith and ronnie are completely full of it-one figures out ten ways to say nothing,one makes up things out of the blue and the other took so many drugs he thinks he was asked to replace jimmy page in led zeppelin.
not the guys i want to learn history from.

Bill's the best bet for historical accuracy, and I too love how he has always kept the others honest. However, it's also fun to read all of their accounts to see how each remembers the past.

I respectfully disagree. He quite regularly comes off as bitter & spiteful, to my ears; with a kind of 'hidden agenda', still trying to settle some old scores... etc.
It kinda 'blurs' his historical accuracy, to say the least.

Still: that's just me.

Quote
RoughJusticeOnYa

Quote
Nikkei
I just paraphrased Brians "interesting work" quote because you always helped me with shirts
I also have some print ideas myself and didn't think about going into business

...Oh - did I really? Well - OK! 'Point taken', then.

P.S.: yeah; that was the line that cracked me up (too) & pulled me over to the idea of making a T-shirt out of this one... "Plenty of interesting work available." ><

Still looking for the 'high-res' image, though.
Anybody got an idea?

(I'm sure I have that ad in one of the many books I own; but I'm not sure about the quality of my scanner, for this.)

This is a good one too, this one: ...

Quote
Naturalust

"You may want to pay attention – this one gets a little complicated. In 1989, Bill Wyman, 52, the bassist for the Rolling Stones married Mandy Smith. 18. They were married until 1993 after Patsy Smith, Mandy’s mother, gave her full consent to the May-December romance. That same year, Mandy’s mother Patsy Smith, 49, married Stephen Wyman, Bill’s 31 year old son. That makes Patsy Smith the Mother-In-Law and Daughter-In-Law of Bill Wyman. This bizarre Mother-In-Law pairing would not last however as Bill and Mandy divorced in 1993 and Patsy and Stephen’s marriage ended in 1995."

Some more twisted food for though about those strange pairings:

Bill Wyman became his son’s son-in-law, because he married to his son’s stepdaughter. Mandy Smith became Stephen Wyman’s mother because she was his father’s wife. By virtue of his marriage to Mandy’s mother, then Stephen Wyman was both Mandy’s son and father. Likewise, Patsy Smith was Mandy’s daughter as well as her mother.

Of course, things get real interesting if both couples had decided to have children.

If Patsy Smith had a son, the child would be Bill Wyman’s brother-in-law and Stephen Wyman’s uncle because he would be the brother of this stepmother, Mandy Smith. If Mandy had a son, the child would be Stephen Wyman’s brother as well as his grandchild because the baby would be the son of his daughter.

It then follows that Patsy Smith would be her husband’s grandmother because she was his mother’s mother. Stephen Wyman would be both his wife’s husband and grandchild. And since the husband of a person’s grandmother is his grandfather, Stephen Wyman would be his own grandfather!

peace

"Confused? You won't be after this episode of Soap".

Confused? You Won't Be...

Brian started the band. And thank god he got Keith hooked on Jimmy Reed or there wouldnt be any Gimme Shelter (also thanks to S. Wonder)

I am a writer and a reader and I admire Bill's books a lot...highly recommend
them. There may be a few minor mistakes but Bill is the real deal as a bass player and he went through a lot personally for awhile but he's got his head
on straight and he is not-mean spirited. Charlie has always been a close friend and admirer of Bill and he and Mick and Keith are still in touch.

Quote
Redhotcarpet
Brian started the band. And thank god he got Keith hooked on Jimmy Reed or there wouldnt be any Gimme Shelter (also thanks to S. Wonder)

So you wanna credit some Gimme Shelter to Brian, Jimmy Reed, Stevie Wonder, anyone but Keef?

Quote
stonesrule
I am a writer and a reader and I admire Bill's books a lot...highly recommend
them. There may be a few minor mistakes but Bill is the real deal as a bass player and he went through a lot personally for awhile but he's got his head
on straight and he is not-mean spirited. Charlie has always been a close friend and admirer of Bill and he and Mick and Keith are still in touch.

that means a lot. thank you for that endorsement. it's always nice to know someone's perspective who actually has one based on fact!

Quote
Nikkei

Quote
Redhotcarpet
Brian started the band. And thank god he got Keith hooked on Jimmy Reed or there wouldnt be any Gimme Shelter (also thanks to S. Wonder)

So you wanna credit some Gimme Shelter to Brian, Jimmy Reed, Stevie Wonder, anyone but Keef?

No but Keith credits it partly to Jimmy Reed. And the chords are I dont know why which was released in 1968. And covered by the Stones in 1969. Gimme Shelter should be credited to Jagger/Richards/Miller.

Miller I'd have liked to see credited on YCAGWYW but what do I know

Quote
RoughJusticeOnYa

Quote
StonedInTokyo

Quote
lem motlow
THANK YOU!!-

anyone who wants to learn anything about the rolling stones needs to read every word bill wyman says. read his books,his interviews,radio broadcasts,all of it.

why?-because bill doesnt bullshit.he'll tell you exactly what happened and when and he wont sugarcoat it or spin it because he's trying to create some image for himself.

mick,keith and ronnie are completely full of it-one figures out ten ways to say nothing,one makes up things out of the blue and the other took so many drugs he thinks he was asked to replace jimmy page in led zeppelin.
not the guys i want to learn history from.

Bill's the best bet for historical accuracy, and I too love how he has always kept the others honest. However, it's also fun to read all of their accounts to see how each remembers the past.

I respectfully disagree. He quite regularly comes off as bitter & spiteful, to my ears; with a kind of 'hidden agenda', still trying to settle some old scores... etc.
It kinda 'blurs' his historical accuracy, to say the least.

Still: that's just me.

I agree with you a little. I think he gets tired of certain myths being repeated, when, in his eyes, they're total crap. I thought in that 20 minute video interview he did for his new album he came off as someone who understands how lucky his life has been. He mentioned all the people he'd admired in the public eye that he got to know personally. And the list of people who've recorded on his RKs albums, like Clapton and Harrison, show he must be a likeable guy. It's not like the bass player of every British rock group gets the heavyweights to hang out with him.

Besides, he's known Mick, Keith and Charlie since they were all nothing. He has an almost family like relationship with them, and that can be argumentative. If you watch the 1995 Beatles Anthology, George, Paul & Ringo fall into this irritated brother thing that goes back to when they were teenagers.

Bill took a piece of the Stones with him when he left that Daryl Jones doesn't have a clue how to fill, and he never has, no matter how big a deal they make of his solo on Miss You. Just pull out a DVD of Bill playing Miss You in '78, '81, or on the Europe '82 bootleg. They make a show out of congratulating Daryl for noodling around a bit. They don't even acknowledge what Bill is doing. They don't have to.

well said.

Quote
24FPS

Quote
RoughJusticeOnYa

Quote
StonedInTokyo

Quote
lem motlow
THANK YOU!!-

anyone who wants to learn anything about the rolling stones needs to read every word bill wyman says. read his books,his interviews,radio broadcasts,all of it.

why?-because bill doesnt bullshit.he'll tell you exactly what happened and when and he wont sugarcoat it or spin it because he's trying to create some image for himself.

mick,keith and ronnie are completely full of it-one figures out ten ways to say nothing,one makes up things out of the blue and the other took so many drugs he thinks he was asked to replace jimmy page in led zeppelin.
not the guys i want to learn history from.

Bill's the best bet for historical accuracy, and I too love how he has always kept the others honest. However, it's also fun to read all of their accounts to see how each remembers the past.

I respectfully disagree. He quite regularly comes off as bitter & spiteful, to my ears; with a kind of 'hidden agenda', still trying to settle some old scores... etc.
It kinda 'blurs' his historical accuracy, to say the least.

Still: that's just me.

I agree with you a little. I think he gets tired of certain myths being repeated, when, in his eyes, they're total crap. I thought in that 20 minute video interview he did for his new album he came off as someone who understands how lucky his life has been. He mentioned all the people he'd admired in the public eye that he got to know personally. And the list of people who've recorded on his RKs albums, like Clapton and Harrison, show he must be a likeable guy. It's not like the bass player of every British rock group gets the heavyweights to hang out with him.

Besides, he's known Mick, Keith and Charlie since they were all nothing. He has an almost family like relationship with them, and that can be argumentative. If you watch the 1995 Beatles Anthology, George, Paul & Ringo fall into this irritated brother thing that goes back to when they were teenagers.

Bill took a piece of the Stones with him when he left that Daryl Jones doesn't have a clue how to fill, and he never has, no matter how big a deal they make of his solo on Miss You. Just pull out a DVD of Bill playing Miss You in '78, '81, or on the Europe '82 bootleg. They make a show out of congratulating Daryl for noodling around a bit. They don't even acknowledge what Bill is doing. They don't have to.

...Well said indeed; and I agree 100% with "Bill took a piece of the Stones with him when he left". And sure; he's probably "tired of certain myths being repeated, when, in his eyes, they're total crap"; and because of their life- (or better: carreer-)long relationship, and being in the frontline with them from day one, he has quite the account to tell about - I'm not questioning his musical nor testimonial qualities.

It's more like his overall attitude that makes me question his 100% 'believability' (Let's not forget that, a couple of posts above here, he was hailed as the oracle par excellance, the pinacle of Truth when Rolling Stones history is concerned... - that's what inflicted my reaction.)

Apart from him being at least a bit self centered - like almost all people that make it in arts & showbizz, especially of that generation; so I'm not gonna hold thàt against him... - he IS the guy that complains about not finding the right brand of picallily when living in the South of France. If there's ever been a whiner in Stonesland, it has to be Bill. We here at IORR are just passing the torch.

But mostly: he rarely has ànything positive to say about the band other than that the music was 'quite good' and 'very succesful'; that Mick & Keith are 'good songwriters' and Mick is 'a 'great frontman' All stuff that would make him down right weird if he'd find it in his heart &/or mind to deny even thàt. (P.S.: I'm not quoting him, here; just parafrasing - and I'm not gonna look for quotes in order to prove my point... I don't find it all thàt important. Just my sentiment when reading and/or listening to his words...)

Again, I don't want to evaluate Bill as a musician (he's brilliant!!) nor as a person (I'm not suitably placed for that), and I'm not questioning his position in the band & its history (a completely different and, - no way around it - unmistakenably 'lesser' band since he left). I'm just putting his words, and his alledged 'historical accuracy', into a bit of (admittedly: my personal) perspective.


Personally, if you want the 100% BS-free truth, I'd only believe Charlie.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2015-06-20 12:01 by RoughJusticeOnYa.

Quote
Redhotcarpet

Quote
Nikkei

Quote
Redhotcarpet
Brian started the band. And thank god he got Keith hooked on Jimmy Reed or there wouldnt be any Gimme Shelter (also thanks to S. Wonder)

So you wanna credit some Gimme Shelter to Brian, Jimmy Reed, Stevie Wonder, anyone but Keef?

No but Keith credits it partly to Jimmy Reed. And the chords are I dont know why which was released in 1968. And covered by the Stones in 1969. Gimme Shelter should be credited to Jagger/Richards/Miller.

IDKW was released in 1975, recorded in 1969 with Taylor and has very little to do (if anything at all) with GS musically.

Try Under My Thumb instead for the chord pattern.

Under my thumb yes but also I dont know why (Wonder 1968). It has quite a lot to do with GS actually, more so than Under my thumb.

Quote
Redhotcarpet
Under my thumb yes but also I dont know why (Wonder 1968). It has quite a lot to do with GS actually, more so than Under my thumb.

I really wonder why?

Quote
DandelionPowderman
Brian missing gigs was later (65/66, especially 66).

Collecting extra $ was very early on. More like 1962 than 1964.

He was NOT happy with playing rhythm & blues and Berry stuff, which dominated the setlist.

Brian didn't miss any gigs after November 1964. He missed approximatley 13 in total. They played 1023 gigs between 1962 - 1967.

The extra money fuss relates to when they were first touring the UK with Andrew Loog Oldham/Eric Easton as managers in 1963.

Nuts to say he wasn't happy playing rhythm & blues.