well ssoul you cant bully me. i love the stones and i love this site. please cut me some slack. its 3 times in 3 days you have asked me to go elsewhere. i have not come here to cause trouble. i apologise if i have said something wrong. its strange how it can upset me like that because its not like i know any of you. have a nice day people..

All good, keefriffhards

PS: But there's bound to be confusion if you think I'm a woman and that With sssoul is a man. Just saying...

Quote
nellcote'71
The bullying is normal from sssoul.
She has a very condescending, know it all attitude but for some reason it's been tolerated for years around here.

Nah, come on now, folks. Sister Sssoul provided this board with some of the most funny,
interesting and mind blowing posts you'll ever find on the whole internet. That's why
she's not just tolerated, she's adored!
Look at the famous Ratbag Boogie thread, and you'll learn more about guitars and equipment
used by the band then anywhere else on this world.
She's the Ron Wood, Mick Taylor AND Brian Jones of IORR. Not everything she posts is
loved by everybody, but there's something to love in her posts for everybody.

Just as long as the guitar plays, let it steal your heart away

Quote
with sssoul

Quote
liddas
He's expressing himself perfectly well, and he is absolutely right ...

Liddas darling, he disagreed with everything Dande and I said before he changed his mind and said yes that makes sense thank you.
And providing the link to Ask Keith wasn't nasty - it was meant to be helpful.
Some questions can't be answered by anyone but the man himself,
especially if speculative replies are deemed unsatisfactory.
All is well now, I hope. Carry on.

i did not change my mind i just did not read the post through properly. (im painting lol ) then i reacted to the comment. im cool with dande i agree with lots she says. go to the keith solo album post. why do you have to wade in like that.

Quote
keefriffhards
i did not change my mind i just did not read the post through properly. (im painting lol ) then i reacted to the comment.
im cool with dande i agree with lots she says. go to the keith solo album post. why do you have to wade in like that.

Mercy - I didn't "wade in", nor did I tell you to go elsewhere. I provided some potentially helpful links.
If you didn't read a post through properly before responding that could be a cause of misunderstandings, right?

Just for clarity: Dandelion Powderman is a male. I'm a she-sssoul.
Thanks for the encouraging words, marcovandereijk.

Quote
with sssoul

Quote
keefriffhards
i did not change my mind i just did not read the post through properly. (im painting lol ) then i reacted to the comment.
im cool with dande i agree with lots she says. go to the keith solo album post. why do you have to wade in like that.

Mercy - I didn't "wade in", nor did I tell you to go elsewhere. I provided some potentially helpful links.
If you didn't read a post through properly before responding that could be a cause of misunderstandings, right?

Just for clarity: Dandelion Powderman is a male. I'm a she-sssoul.
Thanks for the encouraging words, marcovandereijk.

cool. it all makes sense now lol why do you assume i am a man hehe
thats one of my faults i dont read things through properly. its funny really, getting carried away over nothing. cheers babe

Quote
Roll73
There was a concerted effort apparently to keep Woody away from Keith in terms of playing/ touring in the run up to Talk is Cheap (and before that with the Chuck Berry project)- instigated in no small part by Jane Rose. Bill German covers it in his book - and recalls that he asked Keith at the time and he said that if he was going to do a solo project it should really be Stone-free so to speak.

this is the answer to the question-and therein lies the answer to many of the stones problems over the years.

people in the "keith camp" and the "mick camp" who,if mick and keith ever get in lockstop again,become expendable.

can you imagine jane rose actually telling keith to not work with ronnie? and he actually listened.it's like the guy in the wino's who told keith to "write about mick" when he couldnt come up with a song-a vested interest in keeping them apart for their own self interest.

and i'm sure mick has some losers following him around doing the same shit,but yeah roll73 has the right answer here.

Quote
lem motlow

Quote
Roll73
There was a concerted effort apparently to keep Woody away from Keith in terms of playing/ touring in the run up to Talk is Cheap (and before that with the Chuck Berry project)- instigated in no small part by Jane Rose. Bill German covers it in his book - and recalls that he asked Keith at the time and he said that if he was going to do a solo project it should really be Stone-free so to speak.

this is the answer to the question-and therein lies the answer to many of the stones problems over the years.

people in the "keith camp" and the "mick camp" who,if mick and keith ever get in lockstop again,become expendable.

can you imagine jane rose actually telling keith to not work with ronnie? and he actually listened.it's like the guy in the wino's who told keith to "write about mick" when he couldnt come up with a song-a vested interest in keeping them apart for their own self interest.

and i'm sure mick has some losers following him around doing the same shit,but yeah roll73 has the right answer here.

agreed. its a good theory.. we will never know the truth.. i personally think that keith will always put his loyalty with the stones. i think ww3 as he puts it took its toll on keith. mick thought he could be a megastar without the stones. it did not work out. he came back to keith just as keith went solo. thank god or we would have no rolling stones.. ultimately keith probably new if he branched off with Ronnie and some other guys that would of been the end of the stones.

So how come Keith working with Ronnie in 1987 on Aretha's album? And Bobby? Ivan Neville? Not the most sober persons to hang around...

maybe because he wanted to play with other people and have new experiences and so do a break with all the stones' world for the sake of being together and changed (in better ) some years later

Quote
DandelionPowderman
So how come Keith working with Ronnie in 1987 on Aretha's album? And Bobby? Ivan Neville? Not the most sober persons to hang around...

Again - in Bill German's book, he alludes that Ronnie pretty much invited himself to the Aretha recording session and Jane Rose was the one who purposely kept him in the shadows. Just look at the cover image and publicity shots for the Jumpin Jack Flash single - Ronnie nowhere in sight.

DP - Don't think Bobby Keys involvement was an issue as it wasn't so much an attempt on Jane Roses's part to keep Keith on the straight and narrow - but more an effort to promote him as a solo artist in his own right. Ronnie's presence would have kept things too 'Stones orientated'. Having Bobby involved obviously wouldn't have distracted the attention anywhere near as much.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2015-06-23 23:35 by Roll73.

That sounds plausible, Roll73.

Lots of stuff bubbling under on this one.

For starters, it wasn't 1979 any more. Ronnie was unable to land a major label in the mid-eighties nd never would have found backing for an arena tour again after The New Barbarians debacle. And I do mean debacle, much as I love the Barbarians, Ronnie and Columbia Records lost a bundle on that tour. The reality post-DIRTY WORK is that Ronnie's album AUTOMATIC was shipped around to all the major labels and everyone passed. The stronger material was reworked for SLIDE ON THIS. Ronnie's painting sideline, the book with Bill German, the Miami nightclub, and the tour with Bo Diddley were how the man made ends meet with his accepted lifestyle until the Stones reunited. .

Keith, post-DIRTY WORK, was being reshaped from the brain damaged stoner to a new marketable image. That's why Jane Rose managed to get his face on the picture sleeve of an Aretha single as it was a duet. The Chuck Berry project was another example of presenting Keith as coherent and talented elder statesman/viable producer musical force who, unlike Ronnie, could still land a major solo deal. Jane Rose's strategy worked well.

Now, is there any truth to speculation about keeping Ronnie and Keith away from one another to keep them clean? If so, the handlers in question must have been amused by the intake of the Winos. It was business as usual according to those who were around. What's more likely is that with a Stones reunion always as an end goal (if not a guarantee in those days), keeping Ronnie out of Keith's project was wise. Some may recall Mick had Ronnie and Charlie on solo demos, but never his albums. Likely for the same reason. The band shouldn't appear to take sides. A sideman gig for Aretha's JJF cover isn't the same thing.

Quote
Rocky Dijon
Lots of stuff bubbling under on this one.

For starters, it wasn't 1979 any more. Ronnie was unable to land a major label in the mid-eighties nd never would have found backing for an arena tour again after The New Barbarians debacle. And I do mean debacle, much as I love the Barbarians, Ronnie and Columbia Records lost a bundle on that tour. The reality post-DIRTY WORK is that Ronnie's album AUTOMATIC was shipped around to all the major labels and everyone passed. The stronger material was reworked for SLIDE ON THIS. Ronnie's painting sideline, the book with Bill German, the Miami nightclub, and the tour with Bo Diddley were how the man made ends meet with his accepted lifestyle until the Stones reunited. .

Keith, post-DIRTY WORK, was being reshaped from the brain damaged stoner to a new marketable image. That's why Jane Rose managed to get his face on the picture sleeve of an Aretha single as it was a duet. The Chuck Berry project was another example of presenting Keith as coherent and talented elder statesman/viable producer musical force who, unlike Ronnie, could still land a major solo deal. Jane Rose's strategy worked well.

Now, is there any truth to speculation about keeping Ronnie and Keith away from one another to keep them clean? If so, the handlers in question must have been amused by the intake of the Winos. It was business as usual according to those who were around. What's more likely is that with a Stones reunion always as an end goal (if not a guarantee in those days), keeping Ronnie out of Keith's project was wise. Some may recall Mick had Ronnie and Charlie on solo demos, but never his albums. Likely for the same reason. The band shouldn't appear to take sides. A sideman gig for Aretha's JJF cover isn't the same thing.

that's really interesting thanks for that rocky