It's on Chuck levell website here :
[www.chuckleavell.com]

Highlights :
- 50-60 songs have been rehearsed so far
- Best songs in Chuck opinion : RJ, SOL, BOMH, Rain Fall Down and Neo Con.
For the start of the tour, not all of these best songs 'll be performed but certainly RJ and SOL because they are on the air.
- Chuck is working hard on the choice of the songs to be choosen and performed during the Bigger Bang Tour. Very soon he'll work with Mick on this topic (that confirms that Chuck's opinion is extremely important for the daily setlist choice).




Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2005-08-02 19:48 by arizojp.

> Chuck is working hard on the choice of the songs to be choosen and performed during the Bigger Bang Tour. Very soon he'll work with Mick on this topic (that confirms that Chuck's opinion is extremely important for the daily setlist choice). >


eww!!
thats gross

Actually it's because of Chuck that we can hear the rarely performed or never performed songs.
You can say all bad things about his keyboard playing, but he's a good influence on the setlist.

I hope Chuck picks Start Me Up
His Casio Piano rocks that song!

SOL will bomb in stadiums

I met Chuck in Philly. Seemed like a real nice guy. I've also met Tim Ries a few times. Another cool guy. I'm not into Chuck bashing. I'll take few shots at Blondie but not Chuck. We're lucky to have Bobby. The rest is fine. Maybe they can get Al Kooper to play too.

Chuck is alright...but please bring back a real piano!

I really wonder whether Chuck has that drastic of an impact on the setlist. Seriously. I'd rather hear a setlist composed of Keith's picks any day.

But the best news of course is that we get the exect same sidemen as every tour since 1851. Man....I can't wait....what a thrill...

Mathijs

A setlist compiled by Keith would be great.
But he's even too lazy to play guitar, so why would he write the setlists?

I don't understand why people complain about Chuck Leavell all the time. He is doing lots of stuff on stage like keeping things rolling, sort of the glue in the system. And even if I don't know him personally, he don't act like a spoiled rock star. He is always polite and willing to talk if you meet him on tour. And Blondie? How on earth can you say bad things about a guy that is also nice whenever you meet him, do some great stuff on stage and even have a great memory?

I think the Stones are lucky to have generous people in the band and on stage. Just like their security. They don't knock you down or tell you to get lost. They respect you even if you are a crazy fan who just have one thing in your mind at the moment... the Stones... Well call it luck, or just admit it - these guys have deserved their positions.

Bjornulf

BV, your absolutely right.

completely agree---bV

Everybody here knows the complaints about Chuck by now, but still every time his name appears, people have the need to bash him. It's a drag really! Just let the guy play and bash Mick or Keith for hiring him. Chuck isn't the worst guy.

Mathjis, You're absolutely right.

And the son-in-law has the possibility of just walking into rehearsal whenever he wants!! I bet he ain't even a Stones fan!!! How unfair :-(

I don't like HIS PLAYING, or his overplaying, & his position in the mix. I had similar problems w/ Preston by '75 - 76 (maybe not the mix part)-He may be a nice guy. But he's imo intrusive, and it matters not whether that's because of Mick, KR, or RW. No probs w/ Blondie, Bernard, Lisa, who are not intrusive, and who have taste. So it looks like I wont be hearing much new material at Fenway, damnit.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2005-08-02 22:44 by john r.

The extra musicians must not come in the way for the stones - they are just supposed to add some colours to the music. IMHO I don't need all the horns, the background vocals and a keyboard player counting 1,2,3,4 before they start playing.

thanks for the post, BV. the chuck bashing is ridiculous, IMO. the guy is first-rate all the way. the stones couldn't have hired a guy more perfectedly suited to the many tasks they demand of him. similar kudos to blondie, whose resume is impeccable.

I agree that I would prefer to here the crew four, not the back up, and that 1-2-3-4 from the keyboard does at times unnerve me as a surrender of power by Keith. However bashing Chuck and the others for their prominenec and positions i the cliche of killing the messenger for bad news.They are only doing what they are told. No one could be sweeter when met or more unassuming about her position, or overwhelmed by her luck to have it then Lisa, she does nothing more than waht she is asked to do, yet people are starting to bash her.

if they hired some1 other than Chuck or Lisa to do what they do,,,that would be a downgrade..

McGlagan definitely would not be a downgrade.SOL would be one of the few songs that would bomb if they played it in my yard.

Typically, whenever BV comes in to bash bashers 90 % of the following reactions agrees with him...! The thread turns around then.
LOL

Theif in the Night Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> McGlagan definitely would not be a downgrade.

It's McLagan. But, he could never play all the roles that Chuck does. I love Mac (love his band, too), but his style is much narrower and I would presume his ability to "fill the gaps" in the other roles that Chuck plays is lesser. I'm sure the Stones wouldn't want to find out the hard way at this late stage of the game....

You may bash anyone you like but I think it is clever to say WHY you don't like someone. Like saying you don't like someone because of the way he plays is ok. It is a serious opinion. But to run campaigns against people is really not very serious. Be creative. And if you use hate words every btime a name comes up that is pure hate and that is neither serious nor acceptable. Would you like to have other people running campaigns about YOU? For no reason, or because of some way you play or something special you do? You may use violence physically or mentally but that does not bring any sense into the world. PS. By "you" I do not mean any particular person really. It is just a term to point at anybody. An example.

Bjornulf

C'mon folks - its the Rolling Stones,
and please keep in mind that they always cared for, who is welcome to the inner cicle. If there was a musicaly or personal dislike, you would never see that person again. Its not up to the fans to vote somebody out of the band.

BTW, cool pictures of Chuck

- Koen.

kahoosier Wrote:
... and that 1-2-3-4 from the
> keyboard does at times unnerve me as a surrender
> of power by Keith...


to play in a band is teamplay -and has nothing to do with surrendering.
If a song needs to be counted in - then there must be a wish of another bandmember to do so. Its not a gimmick or joke.

Ians Great ,,but levell wins by a nose,,ill take Jessica my favorite Levell tune,,, over Memphis Tenn...my fav Mcglagen tune...those 89 & 90 stones boots Levell really shines

I doubt this would ever happen but, in a perfect world McLagan could take over the playing part and let Leavell keep his other jobs.The gaps, I believe could be mostly avoided if the guitarists focused a little less on the big screens and more on their playing.This is possible as evidenced by this year's press conference.

ya levell did a ton of clapton tours,,,everybody & their brother wants him on the ivory,,,,butI think the stones r the highest bidder when it comes to chuck,,