For information about how to use this forum please check out forum help and policies.
Quote
Turner68
are MT and Keith weaving on the live version of HTW on ya-ya's?
Quote
NaturalustQuote
DandelionPowderman
You just don't get it, Naturalust. Their style is different and has little to do with rhythm guitar playing, no matter how beautifully one can weave strings, brass sections or rhythm guitars together, which is not the question here.
You need to listen more to the topic you're so opinionated about. That is obvious.
Start with the bootleg Place Pigalle.
Dandie, with all due respect my friend, I do understand what you are saying (I get it) but I think your narrow, highly opinionated definition of weaving is just that. I suggest you watch Keith and Ronnie play at a modern Rolling Stones concert and then come back and tell me Keith and Ronnie aren't weaving rhythm parts. With both guitars so loud and up front this past tour it was obvious to me they were weaving rhythm parts and well as single note fills and other stuff that might be characterized as lead.
As I said, I accept your definition of weaving (it is weaving!) but think you need to open your mind a bit to understand that not everyone is going to accept your narrow definition. Better to define it more broadly so everyone is right, imo. I think that's pretty obvious from others comments on this thread, no? Keith and Ronnie's style is not that much different that thousands of other bands with 2 or 3 guitarists. Of course they have developed a style over years which compliments each other and gives each other room to be out front but they didn't invent the concept or limit it to "lead" playing.
Quote
HMS
Mick Taylor was never a weaver, always a noodler.
Keith n Ronnie are the true masters of weaving.
Quote
DandelionPowdermanQuote
NaturalustQuote
DandelionPowderman
You just don't get it, Naturalust. Their style is different and has little to do with rhythm guitar playing, no matter how beautifully one can weave strings, brass sections or rhythm guitars together, which is not the question here.
You need to listen more to the topic you're so opinionated about. That is obvious.
Start with the bootleg Place Pigalle.
Dandie, with all due respect my friend, I do understand what you are saying (I get it) but I think your narrow, highly opinionated definition of weaving is just that. I suggest you watch Keith and Ronnie play at a modern Rolling Stones concert and then come back and tell me Keith and Ronnie aren't weaving rhythm parts. With both guitars so loud and up front this past tour it was obvious to me they were weaving rhythm parts and well as single note fills and other stuff that might be characterized as lead.
As I said, I accept your definition of weaving (it is weaving!) but think you need to open your mind a bit to understand that not everyone is going to accept your narrow definition. Better to define it more broadly so everyone is right, imo. I think that's pretty obvious from others comments on this thread, no? Keith and Ronnie's style is not that much different that thousands of other bands with 2 or 3 guitarists. Of course they have developed a style over years which compliments each other and gives each other room to be out front but they didn't invent the concept or limit it to "lead" playing.
I never said they weren't weaving rhythm parts. Almost all bands do that.
What Ronnie and Keith did in the Pathe Marconi era was weaving LEAD parts. That's what made this era different from the Taylor era! That's what we have talked about here on IORR since the mid-90s, before you now are calling it some kind of emperor's new clothes.
Put simple: This thing is in reality to trade licks. Watch Imagination from Hampton 1981 and you will (eventually) get it.
How patronizing to call it my definition of weaving, btw. Sometimes, I wonder how long you have been a Stones fan?
Quote
DandelionPowderman
Put simple: This thing is in reality to trade licks. Watch Imagination from Hampton 1981 and you will (eventually) get it.
How patronizing to call it my definition of weaving, btw. Sometimes, I wonder how long you have been a Stones fan?
Quote
His MajestyQuote
DandelionPowderman
Put simple: This thing is in reality to trade licks. Watch Imagination from Hampton 1981 and you will (eventually) get it.
How patronizing to call it my definition of weaving, btw. Sometimes, I wonder how long you have been a Stones fan?
Musical tennis, grass or table depending on their mood.
Quote
DandelionPowderman
What about clay and hard court?
Quote
Turner68
when i hear keith and MT alternating what i think of as "lead" licks i think that is weaving, where am i wrong?
Quote
DandelionPowdermanQuote
NaturalustQuote
DandelionPowderman
You just don't get it, Naturalust. Their style is different and has little to do with rhythm guitar playing, no matter how beautifully one can weave strings, brass sections or rhythm guitars together, which is not the question here.
You need to listen more to the topic you're so opinionated about. That is obvious.
Start with the bootleg Place Pigalle.
Dandie, with all due respect my friend, I do understand what you are saying (I get it) but I think your narrow, highly opinionated definition of weaving is just that. I suggest you watch Keith and Ronnie play at a modern Rolling Stones concert and then come back and tell me Keith and Ronnie aren't weaving rhythm parts. With both guitars so loud and up front this past tour it was obvious to me they were weaving rhythm parts and well as single note fills and other stuff that might be characterized as lead.
As I said, I accept your definition of weaving (it is weaving!) but think you need to open your mind a bit to understand that not everyone is going to accept your narrow definition. Better to define it more broadly so everyone is right, imo. I think that's pretty obvious from others comments on this thread, no? Keith and Ronnie's style is not that much different that thousands of other bands with 2 or 3 guitarists. Of course they have developed a style over years which compliments each other and gives each other room to be out front but they didn't invent the concept or limit it to "lead" playing.
I never said they weren't weaving rhythm parts. Almost all bands do that.
What Ronnie and Keith did in the Pathe Marconi era was weaving LEAD parts. That's what made this era different from the Taylor era! That's what we have talked about here on IORR since the mid-90s, before you now are calling it some kind of emperor's new clothes.
Put simple: This thing is in reality to trade licks. Watch Imagination from Hampton 1981 and you will (eventually) get it.
How patronizing to call it my definition of weaving, btw. Sometimes, I wonder how long you have been a Stones fan?
Quote
NaturalustQuote
DandelionPowdermanQuote
NaturalustQuote
DandelionPowderman
You just don't get it, Naturalust. Their style is different and has little to do with rhythm guitar playing, no matter how beautifully one can weave strings, brass sections or rhythm guitars together, which is not the question here.
You need to listen more to the topic you're so opinionated about. That is obvious.
Start with the bootleg Place Pigalle.
Dandie, with all due respect my friend, I do understand what you are saying (I get it) but I think your narrow, highly opinionated definition of weaving is just that. I suggest you watch Keith and Ronnie play at a modern Rolling Stones concert and then come back and tell me Keith and Ronnie aren't weaving rhythm parts. With both guitars so loud and up front this past tour it was obvious to me they were weaving rhythm parts and well as single note fills and other stuff that might be characterized as lead.
As I said, I accept your definition of weaving (it is weaving!) but think you need to open your mind a bit to understand that not everyone is going to accept your narrow definition. Better to define it more broadly so everyone is right, imo. I think that's pretty obvious from others comments on this thread, no? Keith and Ronnie's style is not that much different that thousands of other bands with 2 or 3 guitarists. Of course they have developed a style over years which compliments each other and gives each other room to be out front but they didn't invent the concept or limit it to "lead" playing.
I never said they weren't weaving rhythm parts. Almost all bands do that.
What Ronnie and Keith did in the Pathe Marconi era was weaving LEAD parts. That's what made this era different from the Taylor era! That's what we have talked about here on IORR since the mid-90s, before you now are calling it some kind of emperor's new clothes.
Put simple: This thing is in reality to trade licks. Watch Imagination from Hampton 1981 and you will (eventually) get it.
How patronizing to call it my definition of weaving, btw. Sometimes, I wonder how long you have been a Stones fan?
My God, lighten up guys. It IS your definition of weaving Dandie. You are very specific in your definition and have even had the gall to call other definitions false. It has nothing to do with Keith and Ronnie's definition, imo. Now you question how long I've been a Stones fan? Jeezus, what are we, back in Jr. High School, what does that have to do with anything. I see now that riffhards has chosen to join the discussion it will deteriorate into personal crap that has nothing to do with the topic at hand. I assure you I'm not here to teach you anything dude. It's about interesting discussion for me and I see I've engaged a topic which is strangely so important it defies reasonable discussion.
I find it patronizing that you assume others don't "get it". I have said three times I understand what you are talking about with your definition of the concept, why would you assume I don't get it? Are you truly so stubborn and close minded to assume than your understanding of something like weaving is the only one and everybody else doesn't "get it", perhaps because they haven't been a Stones fan long enough? lol C'mon man we are talking about rock and roll music here, not atomic physics, diverse views and opinions were welcome and respected last time I checked. Or perhaps you prefer a forum where everyone who comments must conform to single way of thinking and be certified to be a fan for at least as long as you are to have any say.
One of the reasons you are hearing more trading licks starting with the Pathe Marconi era is because the sonic landscape has less side musicians in the mix and Keith and Ronnie are more audible and needing to fill the space up. They clearly entered a new phase of what the Stones should sound like with a less cluttered instrumentation and chose to call what they were doing 'weaving" about that time. It's nothing new, I assure you. Keith did plenty of weaving with himself on earlier records and even Mick Taylor was doing it.
Let's not get hung up or personal about it. I accept and understand what you are saying, hopefully that is enough to make you happy.
Quote
keefriffhards
If that's you not being personal god help us
you just have a patronising way about you, i feel like you look down on me because i'm not articulate and i don't understand all the technical developments in production etc
I go from thinking your cool to you reminding me of my music teacher lol
Lighten up man its only R & R dont take it all so seriously
Quote
keefriffhards
On a brighter note i thought Keith and Ronnie were weaving better than ever these last 2 years
SA here they come, Rock it out boys
Quote
NaturalustQuote
keefriffhards
If that's you not being personal god help us
you just have a patronising way about you, i feel like you look down on me because i'm not articulate and i don't understand all the technical developments in production etc
I go from thinking your cool to you reminding me of my music teacher lol
Lighten up man its only R & R dont take it all so seriously
No worries riffhards, to tell you the truth I have never looked down on you and have no idea how much you know about technical stuff or production. Never thought you were articulating yourself poorly. I was just responding to you making some strange and rather negative judgments about my posting. I am generally a person that welcomes all comments, if I disagree I try to stay on topic and not take it to a personal level, sorry if I slipped a bit there.
Dandie, I was responding to your narrow definitions of the weaving concept, you saying it was purely a lead guitar thing, didn't involve any rhythm guitar, and that other definitions were "false", etc. It has little importance really, and has little to do with who has studied that era, I have already given up trying to open your mind to other definitions. I get it. I truly do. Perhaps someday you will realize that there are other ways of looking at things that aren't so black and white. Over and Out on this issue.
Quote
DandelionPowderman
I said that the weaving Keith and Ronnie developed was a lead guitar thing that made Bill shine even more. That's what started this. I never said one can't weave with rhythm guitars, it's just that that wasn't what they did.
And it's not my definition. Their style may be narrow to your ears, but not less true because you think so.
Quote
DandelionPowderman
But by all means, bring on the people who claim that it was weaving of rhythm guitars Keith on Ronnie developed between 1977-1982.
Quote
HMS
Mick Taylor was never a weaver, always a noodler.
Quote
What interested me about Chuck Berry was the way he could step out of the rhythm part with such ease, throwing in a nice, simple riff, and then drop straight into the feel of it again. We used to play a lot more rhythm stuff. We'd do away with the differences between lead and rhythm guitar. You can't go into a shop and ask for a "lead guitar". You're a guitar player, and you play a guitar.
Quote
NaturalustQuote
DandelionPowderman
But by all means, bring on the people who claim that it was weaving of rhythm guitars Keith on Ronnie developed between 1977-1982.
Ok since you asked I will just support my assertion that it was lead and rhythm from others comments on the forum, your contention that is is all lead parts is indeed your opinion and not universally supported by other members of this forum. Your Stones knowledge is deep and I respect your comments but just wish you would admit that some of your descriptions like that weaving is purely a lead guitar phenom are very subjective and not universal facts, of course they are your educated opinion.
"the "ancient art of weaving" as Keith puts it such that the dichotomy between the lead and rhythm is blurred, that they go back and forth, one playing lead and one rhythm and then switching back and forth even within any given song
"that guitar style was predominant with lead and rhythm played simutaneously"
" I hear much the same thing in the Wood era I did during the Taylor era...Keith playing mostly rhythm and main riffs, taking the solo on certain songs (Bitch, for example)"
perhaps most directly from Mathijs:
"Wood and Richards had a unique interaction from '77 to '82, where they both would be playing rhythm guitar, and basically being so connected that they finished or started each others rhythm parts or riffs. This constant bouncing back and forth is quite unique in my opinion. Check out Burden from Hampton or Let's Spend movie, or Whip and Imagination from '78. They both play the main theme, but they fill it in freely. Of course, the presence of Bill Wyman was crucial here as he filled in all holes left by the guitars."
There are many more but I think you get the idea...weaving as done by Ronnie and Keith includes much rhythm playing too in more peoples opinion than my own.
Let's end this on something we can agree on...The weaving Keith and Ronnie do is pretty amazing and we both love it! peace brother.