As always with Bill, the tone of the article is ambiguous--"I couldn't wait to leave and quit playing with them"/"They were thrilled to have me back and then they didn't let me play enough." But it's all good publicity.

Quote
Munichhilton
Bill created a great foundation for the Stones music.
He was no doubt surprised that when he ripped out that foundation it did nothing to the band.

They did some foundation repair with Mr Jones and Suck On The Jugular was born...

Don't be mad Bill.
Bill, why you mad?

There's an interview with Bill Wyman on Youtue, before he left the band, and Bill states plainly and repeats himself that he is entirely replaceable in the band. The interviewer protests that it wouldn't be the same, hinting as good, and Bill says that wouldn't matter. And we see he was right. Its simply a brand... now

I always remember Bill saying he had developed a fear of flying as the primary reason why he left the band.

Bill crys alot. A few years ago he said he had to sell one of his homes for money. ONE of his homes.

After his 02 Arena performances with the Stones, Bill said Mick asked him, "Do you want to come over and play with us in Brooklyn?" at the Barclay's Center. And Bill said, "On just two songs? No." This article makes more sense of why Bill expected to do more than two songs.

Here's Bill's SEVENTEEN >>> [www.youtube.com]

Him and Mick Taylor quit, both probably thinking things were winding down, no room to complain.

Quote
relms
Thank you for staying Charlie Watts, you were in a similar position as Wyman and you stayed and I appreaciate you staying very much.

Read closely towards the end of this wiki article. I would say Charlie "adjusted" Mick's horizontal and vertical controls a bit to put it into 60's TV parlance....

Mike


[www.flickr.com]

Quote
Munichhilton
Inferior is laughable

Bill is great and perfect for 60/70s Stones but if you can't tell Darryl is dumbing it down to play the part you haven't been watching...or listening

Beautiful retort

Quote
MidnightDevilRambler

Quote
relms
Thank you for staying Charlie Watts, you were in a similar position as Wyman and you stayed and I appreaciate you staying very much.

Read closely towards the end of this wiki article. I would say Charlie "adjusted" Mick's horizontal and vertical controls a bit to put it into 60's TV parlance....

Skip to the good part, what does this mean?

This was not the way I heard it at the time. I heard none of the four Stones, including Charlie, were very pleased with Bill's behavior when they got together, and I was told this happened when they convened in the States for the Brett Morgen film shoot. This was from a very strong source, though I wasn't there myself so can't vouch any further than that. Maybe they conflated things, but this was right when it was happening.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2015-06-23 04:48 by TeddyB1018.

I agree Bill is talking Stones to get some PR for his record. The more Keith and Mick drama, the more widely published it will be.

I do however believe what he says is true from his perspective, Keith Mick and Darryl would all have a slightly different story to tell. Yes of course the Jagger/Richards songwriting partnership was a monopoly, they obviously didn't need much help for many years. The golden years songs were perfect without Bill's writing but as much as I'd like to believe Bill had some good songs for them post 1981, I doubt he actually did.

Quote
Naturalust
I agree Bill is talking Stones to get some PR for his record. The more Keith and Mick drama, the more widely published it will be.

I do however believe what he says is true from his perspective, Keith Mick and Darryl would all have a slightly different story to tell. Yes of course the Jagger/Richards songwriting partnership was a monopoly, they obviously didn't need much help for many years. The golden years songs were perfect without Bill's writing but as much as I'd like to believe Bill had some good songs for them post 1981, I doubt he actually did.

OT/ check Milwaukee thread.

-RS

Quote
71Tele
The treated him the same as Mick Taylor, vengefully and childishly, which is why I am no longer a fan of this band, at least in its current configuration.

100% correct..very disappointing that the band I love and have spent hundreds of thousands of dollars seeing the past 40 years, is lead by two (2) very mean spirited, petty, guys.

The current bassist in the band's name is Darrell Jones. Even if Bill wants to slam him he should still call him by name, certainly he knows it! Proof that Bill is no less a snob than the others. They are all the same.. Jones is a guy making a living, God only knows the pathetic pay he receives, Wyman, millionare, quitter, needn't be so punishing.

I miss his dancing.

Quote
DoomandGloom
The current bassist in the band's name is Darrell Jones. Even if Bill wants to slam him he should still call him by name, certainly he knows it! Proof that Bill is no less a snob than the others. They are all the same.. Jones is a guy making a living, God only knows the pathetic pay he receives, Wyman, millionare, quitter, needn't be so punishing.

They give Daryl a solo on"Miss You" and treat him with much more respect than Bill despite Daryl's complete screwing up of the true Stones grove. It's never been the same since Bill was essentially forced out because of Mick and Keith's treatment of him (as well as Brian and Mick Taylor).

Quote
Naturalust
I agree Bill is talking Stones to get some PR for his record. The more Keith and Mick drama, the more widely published it will be.

I do however believe what he says is true from his perspective, Keith Mick and Darryl would all have a slightly different story to tell. Yes of course the Jagger/Richards songwriting partnership was a monopoly, they obviously didn't need much help for many years. The golden years songs were perfect without Bill's writing but as much as I'd like to believe Bill had some good songs for them post 1981, I doubt he actually did.

There are a good many of the golden years songs Bill isn't even playing on.

All this bullshit about how they would not record Bill's or Mick T's songs. I've heard Wyman's songs, and Taylor's and they are shite. That's why they weren't recorded.

Quote
Stoneage
To be fair; he made his own choice.

So true. And so amazing how so many take this one point of view to conclude how horrible the rest of the Stones are. This is what misunderstandings are all about - probably from the Stones point of view, they were being generous ... by the way, they do have a regular bass player on board, is it that fair to say to him 'you can't play 5 songs'?

Quote
Brstonesfan

Quote
71Tele
The treated him the same as Mick Taylor, vengefully and childishly, which is why I am no longer a fan of this band, at least in its current configuration.

100% correct..very disappointing that the band I love and have spent hundreds of thousands of dollars seeing the past 40 years, is lead by two (2) very mean spirited, petty, guys.

So Taylor was treated that badly? ... I must not know a lot. I do know he quit, and he's come back as a guest many times recently -- seems very odd behavior for someone that was treated so badly.

Quote
strat72
All this bullshit about how they would not record Bill's or Mick T's songs. I've heard Wyman's songs, and Taylor's and they are shite. That's why they weren't recorded.

Another excellent point ... I 'like' some of Bill's stuff, but still most of it would be filler on a Stones album. Taylor's stuff is worse - yes he's a great guitar player but come on, the songs he's written are far below average.

Quote
strat72
All this bullshit about how they would not record Bill's or Mick T's songs. I've heard Wyman's songs, and Taylor's and they are shite. That's why they weren't recorded.

Agreed.......Bill had 3 years to write Satisfaction before Keith did, he didn't. Andrew locked Mick and Keith in the kitchen because Bill was presenting the band constantly with well written, hook filled ideas, and Andrew hated Bill......

Also, be real, Daryl, or "the bass player" can play any damn thing he wants to. It's like saying Zak Wylde can't play Johnny B Good properly.......Stop.

Quote
LeonidP

Quote
strat72
All this bullshit about how they would not record Bill's or Mick T's songs. I've heard Wyman's songs, and Taylor's and they are shite. That's why they weren't recorded.

Another excellent point ... I 'like' some of Bill's stuff, but still most of it would be filler on a Stones album. Taylor's stuff is worse - yes he's a great guitar player but come on, the songs he's written are far below average.

I disagree. You may not like them but in my opinion Taylor has written some better songs than the Glimmers in the last 35 years.

Quote
TravelinMan

Quote
LeonidP

Quote
strat72
All this bullshit about how they would not record Bill's or Mick T's songs. I've heard Wyman's songs, and Taylor's and they are shite. That's why they weren't recorded.

Another excellent point ... I 'like' some of Bill's stuff, but still most of it would be filler on a Stones album. Taylor's stuff is worse - yes he's a great guitar player but come on, the songs he's written are far below average.

I disagree. You may not like them but in my opinion Taylor has written some better songs than the Glimmers in the last 35 years.

Obviously to each their own ... but not even close

Quote
LeonidP
by the way, they do have a regular bass player on board, is it that fair to say to him 'you can't play 5 songs'?

On the occasion of the return of an original member to celebrate the 50th anniversary of the band, I'm sure Darryl would have understood.

Quote
treaclefingers

Quote
Munichhilton
Inferior is laughable

Bill is great and perfect for 60/70s Stones but if you can't tell Darryl is dumbing it down to play the part you haven't been watching...or listening

Beautiful retort

I guess I expected Mr. Jones to be better than he has been. What's kept him from playing his bass so good that he enhances these 'dumb' songs we all know and love? But he doesn't enhance, because he isn't there. I guess the Rolling Stones music is so far beneath him that he can't be bothered to display any emotion or create exquisite rhythms. Bill was washed up by the 80s? Start Me Up, Harlem Shuffle, Slipping Away? What about him effortlessly sliding into jazz mode for Terrifying?

I saw Daryl 'dumb down' Anybody Seen My Baby live in '97 to the point they practically had to stop the song because he'd screwed it up so bad. Why couldn't Daryl have been another brilliant musician passing one style to another in the Stones, but still fitting? Like going from the opposing geniuses of Nicky Hopkins and Billy Preston? I have a hard time believing that Daryl is just so scary good that we couldn't handle it if he really let loose.

Quote
DoomandGloom
The current bassist in the band's name is Darrell Jones. Even if Bill wants to slam him he should still call him by name, certainly he knows it! Proof that Bill is no less a snob than the others. They are all the same.. Jones is a guy making a living, God only knows the pathetic pay he receives, Wyman, millionare, quitter, needn't be so punishing.

Darryl is actually well paid and is on retainer. As for his style with the Stones, his jobs is to nail down a solid rhythm with Charlie, allowing Ron and Keith to slash in and out. The show is built to not fall apart. It is a different concept than the Stones up through 1982. This is not Darryl's fault. He's both funkier and rockier than he plays with the group.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2015-06-23 08:18 by TeddyB1018.

Selling his new CD is what the interview was for. I'm sure Bill feels exactly
what he stated. However, you can not quit the band and expect to be anymore than
a guest when you decide to play that particular day. That being said, I'm sure
this was a big let down for Bill and personally I would have operated differently
if I was Mick, Keith or Charlie. In the end it's a business with many paid employees to consider not to mention their worldwide legacy.

It truly isn't that hard to understand here. Many of this is black and white.

Bill didn't get his due on the 50th shows. Whether that was because of his bad behavior or because they just didn't want to use him for more than two, he didn't get his due. Honestly, his story seems a little overblown, but maybe that is how it happened. The bottom line is, he did end up playing on two songs that didn't show his talent or highlight the bass AT ALL, so his story about how they went about it sounds less far fetched because of this. Him and Taylor both should have gotten more time, and I still contend they should have done 2 songs with Wyman (better choices), 1 long Rambler with Taylor or 2 with him as well, and then 2 with that entire lineup (maybe 1 with Ronnie) to end the main set. I think that would have given them all their proper time and would have been a true celebration. In the end, Bill's not even asking to play through the whole encore. He's saying 5 songs, which in all fairness to Darryl who is at no fault here, and for a man who served 30 years in the band that seems very fair and right.

Also black and white, Bill Wyman DOESN'T have better songs than Mick and Keith. Maybe he had stuff that they weren't using, or maybe he is embellishing, but the bottom line is if he had good songs that weren't being used, we would know about them. They aren't on his solo albums. And this is coming from a guy that LOVES In Another Land. But come on, Bill clearly didn't have the chops the Glimmers did and what always gets lost in the shuffle is that Mick and Keith wrote ALL the songs. So yeah, maybe Bill had a tune or two lying around, but Mick and Keith had to fill entire albums largely on their own. To say Taylor and Wyman might have had some good ideas is all fine and dandy, but you can't let them off the hook for not being able to right full classic albums like Mick and Keith could and thats just the truth. Maybe Taylor has some classics. The Glimmers have albums worth of them and thats not because they wouldn't let others write, its because they have the gift the others wish they did.

We can't begin to find out what really happened behind the scenes. Were Mick and Keith @#$%&? Was Bill? Where people treated that way for a reason? Did Mick really say those things about Darryl right in front of Bill? We'll never know. The bottom line is Bill talks just like the others do. They are all old millionaires that are snobs. They think they deserve the best and whether they are right or wrong, it won't change what happens in the future. Taylor is a bit more humble, but honestly, why wouldn't he be? The guy's done about a year's worth of notable work in the 40 years he's been gone from the Stones. He only has stuff to lose by dishing out bad news about Mick and Keith so he might as well be as vague and complimentary as possible. The last fact I'll throw out here: THESE GUYS WERE GUESTS!!! They both quit on their own accord, and whether they deserved better is irrelevant. They left, the others didn't, and no matter what they get they should be thankful they were asked back. And if you get treated like crap, you do what Bill did and not humor them by not coming to America.

The whole O2 thing is Jagger's doing. And if you think otherwise, well, I don't know what to tell you. It's the same with Taylor. If Clapton said, "Hey, can I play 10 songs with you tonight?" Jagger would say, "Sure step right this way."
But if Bill said the same he'd get a "Uh, no, because, you see, Eric's coming,
and the lights and the soundcheck, and Beck's coming tomorrow..."