Tell Me :  Talk
Talk about your favorite band. 

Previous page Next page First page IORR home

For information about how to use this forum please check out forum help and policies.

Goto Page: Previous1234Next
Current Page: 2 of 4
Re: Bill Wyman Talks
Posted by: His Majesty ()
Date: September 2, 2016 01:23

There is only what happened. It took that particular run of events for things to happen, change one thing and they all might have ended up remaining in or fading back in to the london smog.

Its's Mick meeting Keith, it's Brian meeting Alexis, it's Brian playing at Ealing club with Mick, Keith and Dick Taylor in audience, it's the advert being placed,
it's meeting ALO, it's the nudge to write songs etc etc.

There's nothing to show that Mick and Keith or any of them would have been successful with out those events. The view that M&K would have is way too influenced by what actually happened.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2016-09-02 01:49 by His Majesty.

Re: Bill Wyman Talks
Posted by: His Majesty ()
Date: September 2, 2016 01:31

Quote
Koen
Would Charlie ever have hooked up with Mick and Keith without Brian?

Looking at interview posted in another thread, Mick reckons he only joined because it was the only band that would have him. grinning smiley

Re: Bill Wyman Talks
Posted by: chop ()
Date: September 2, 2016 18:14

I'm no doctor, but I think it's pretty clear that despite his immense talent, Jones likely suffered from depression and/or bipolar disorder, which I think is to blame for alot of his bizarre and unpredictable behavior. It was only exacerbated by the extreme drug use.

Re: Bill Wyman Talks
Posted by: annajulia ()
Date: September 21, 2016 18:57

Quote
umakmehrd
Quote
stanlove
Quote
duke richardson
e
never does he fail to remind everyone that Keith and Mick had nothing to do with starting the Stones.

r.

I never get why people care who started the Stones. The Stones are what they are because of Jagger and Richards period. Jones is only remembered because he started a band that had Jagger and Richards in it.

Well said....


………… are you serious ?? brian played a huge role in even getting the band gigs in the earlier days and starting the foundation which mick and keith then took by writing songs, and all their greatest hits and masterpiece albums have brian all over them. like is this a joke i'm not getting ??

holy shit the disrespect here is overwhelming and i honestly don't know how you can say your rolling stones fans when you think that brian wasn't important. he was and still is.

Re: Bill Wyman Talks
Posted by: frankotero ()
Date: September 21, 2016 19:24

From my perspective I've enjoyed The Stones more without Brian. However, there's no denying his importance or the fact that he was the bands founder. I do love all the 1960s music, but it just so happens overall I like the rest of their history more. Maybe this is because my first album was Tattoo You when it was new. Anyhow I am also put off by people's rude comments about Brian as well as Mick T. and Bill. They were all very important in my opinion. Perhaps some folks don't like former members of anything? Just a thought. I'm not a genius or anything.

Re: Bill Wyman Talks
Posted by: 24FPS ()
Date: September 21, 2016 20:11

If the Stones had never progressed past being the world's greatest cover band, and didn't create jagger/Richards material, they would still have left quite a legacy. And a big part of the legacy was the extraordinary talents that just happened to have come together. Brian was the spark and a lot of things that happened early on helped set the image and sound. He was the best dressed, way beyond Mick, and even Charlie. The darkness we attribute to songs like Midnight Rambler were well tucked into his rhythm playing. Listen to his slide on the live I'm Moving On and you hear a maniacal, keening sound.

Let's not minimize every Stone's contribution through Taylor and Wood. You do not get to be a Rolling Stone without something magical in your resume.

Re: Bill Wyman Talks
Posted by: Koen ()
Date: September 21, 2016 22:26

I think they were just bloody lucky to be at the right place at the right time.

Re: Bill Wyman Talks
Posted by: Maindefender ()
Date: September 21, 2016 23:37

Quote
Koen
I think they were just bloody lucky to be at the right place at the right time.

And so were we……

Re: Bill Wyman Talks
Posted by: lem motlow ()
Date: September 21, 2016 23:41

if just one thing was off the magic wouldn't be there-just that name THE ROLLING STONES.

i know it was off the top of his head but if brian did nothing more than come up with that name he was amazing- and he did it while on the phone booking the band a gig.add all the instruments he added to the early work,it's really important.brian was great and he didn't have 45 years of interviews to tell his side of the story to the public.

imagine getting fired up for the tour by the "jagger/richards band" or the "bluesboys" doesn't quite get it does it?

Re: Bill Wyman Talks
Posted by: Redhotcarpet ()
Date: September 22, 2016 00:31

thumbs up

Re: Bill Wyman Talks
Posted by: Redhotcarpet ()
Date: September 22, 2016 00:36

Quote
annajulia
Quote
umakmehrd
Quote
stanlove
Quote
duke richardson
e
never does he fail to remind everyone that Keith and Mick had nothing to do with starting the Stones.

r.

I never get why people care who started the Stones. The Stones are what they are because of Jagger and Richards period. Jones is only remembered because he started a band that had Jagger and Richards in it.

Well said....


………… are you serious ?? brian played a huge role in even getting the band gigs in the earlier days and starting the foundation which mick and keith then took by writing songs, and all their greatest hits and masterpiece albums have brian all over them. like is this a joke i'm not getting ??

holy shit the disrespect here is overwhelming and i honestly don't know how you can say your rolling stones fans when you think that brian wasn't important. he was and still is.

The importance of Brian, his image huge influence on their music, other artists, on Mick, their image etc is percieved as a threat to some groups of fanboys/fangirls who believe every word from Keith or Mick and the tale of the Glimmer Twins. Amazing PR.

Re: Bill Wyman Talks
Posted by: HonkeyTonkFlash ()
Date: September 22, 2016 03:46

Brian was very important in starting the Stones but he was eclipsed by the song-writing and star-appeal of Mick and Keith. We also can't knock Brian's musical contributions to the early albums. However, for many fans the golden era of the Stones was the Mick Taylor years. I know that the success of the Stones had to do with a whole constellation of fortunate circumstances involving Brian, etc. but I still think one writer whose name escapes me had a valid theory that if Brian, Bill, and Charlie had never existed, Mick Jagger and Keith Richards may very well have created a band that looked and sounded very much like The Rolling Stones. Brian may have gotten the ball rolling, but Mick and Keith turned out to be the prime movers.

"Gonna find my way to heaven ..."

Re: Bill Wyman Talks
Posted by: SweetThing ()
Date: September 22, 2016 04:15

Quote
His Majesty
There is only what happened. It took that particular run of events for things to happen, change one thing and they all might have ended up remaining in or fading back in to the london smog.

Its's Mick meeting Keith, it's Brian meeting Alexis, it's Brian playing at Ealing club with Mick, Keith and Dick Taylor in audience, it's the advert being placed,
it's meeting ALO, it's the nudge to write songs etc etc.

There's nothing to show that Mick and Keith or any of them would have been successful with out those events. The view that M&K would have is way too influenced by what actually happened.

This is exactly right. The Glimmers may have made it otherwise, but that is pure speculation... Mick did an interview not too many years ago with Larry King stating that there are many people that are "good" at what they do, and many more even that work hard...but the key ingredient, in terms of fame, success (and longevity I think he may have implied as well) is LUCK. As in lucky and/or serendipitous circumstances. And, luck has much to do with all those instances sited by His Majesty..and there were much more luck involved as well. Maybe someone can post that interview if its kicking around..

Re: Bill Wyman Talks
Posted by: Koen ()
Date: September 22, 2016 05:56


Re: Bill Wyman Talks
Posted by: His Majesty ()
Date: September 22, 2016 08:01

Quote
HonkeyTonkFlash
a valid theory that if Brian, Bill, and Charlie had never existed, Mick Jagger and Keith Richards may very well have created a band that looked and sounded very much like The Rolling Stones.

It's not a valid theory, or better to say it's just as valid to say they would have attended Ealing club, but with no Brian there to inspire them nothing developed further than Mick having some vocal slots with Blues Incorporated.

Seeing nothing was happening, Mick decided to focus on his studies, Keith went back to Dartford and became a cleaner at the very station he re-met Mick at.

Re: Bill Wyman Talks
Posted by: Redhotcarpet ()
Date: September 22, 2016 10:36

thumbs up

Re: Bill Wyman Talks
Posted by: Redhotcarpet ()
Date: September 22, 2016 10:38

Mick would never ever in a zillion years have continued with Keith anywhere. Brian is the reason this band existed.

Re: Bill Wyman Talks
Date: September 22, 2016 10:40

Quote
Redhotcarpet
Mick would never ever in a zillion years have continued with Keith anywhere. Brian is the reason this band existed.

That's why they moved together (without Brian) after Edith Grove?

Re: Bill Wyman Talks
Date: September 22, 2016 10:45

Quote
stanlove
Quote
duke richardson
e
never does he fail to remind everyone that Keith and Mick had nothing to do with starting the Stones.

r.

I never get why people care who started the Stones. The Stones are what they are because of Jagger and Richards period. Jones is only remembered because he started a band that had Jagger and Richards in it.

I agree; someone has got to start it. Big deal. You can say it as many times as you want: "Brian started the band". But if Mick and Keith hadn't come along, that very band would have folded what? in about 6 months?
Yes, Bill always has a hard time saying nice things about M&K. But I do believe that comes from them never saying anything nice about him, LOL

Re: Bill Wyman Talks
Posted by: Redhotcarpet ()
Date: September 22, 2016 11:16

Quote
DandelionPowderman
Quote
Redhotcarpet
Mick would never ever in a zillion years have continued with Keith anywhere. Brian is the reason this band existed.

That's why they moved together (without Brian) after Edith Grove?

The band existed by then.

Re: Bill Wyman Talks
Posted by: HonkeyTonkFlash ()
Date: September 22, 2016 11:18

Quote
DandelionPowderman
Quote
Redhotcarpet
Mick would never ever in a zillion years have continued with Keith anywhere. Brian is the reason this band existed.

That's why they moved together (without Brian) after Edith Grove?

Good point. People who are partial to Brian perhaps try too hard to beatify him for his role in starting the band. People partial to the Glimmers may overemphasize their role. It took all of them but without Mick and Keith's star appeal (mostly Mick at first) and writing ability, the band would not have made it so big. Without Mick and Keith, Brian may have succeeded at forming an admirable blues band, but we likely may have never heard of them. I see too much of the Brian devotees discrediting Mick and Keith. Without them, the legendary band we love today would not exist. And it probably wouldn't exist without Brian's role in the early days, so let's give everyone proper credit. The rise of The Rolling Stones was a whole set of fortunate circumstances and the chemistry of the right people. Mick, Keith, Brian, Bill, Charlie, Stu...they all played vital roles as did Mick Taylor and Ron Wood as the saga unfolded.

"Gonna find my way to heaven ..."

Re: Bill Wyman Talks
Posted by: Spud ()
Date: September 22, 2016 12:47

Essentially, they all wanted to be in a Blues band...

...then it all got rather silly !



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2016-09-22 14:27 by Spud.

Re: Bill Wyman Talks
Posted by: midimannz ()
Date: September 22, 2016 13:47


Re: Bill Wyman Talks
Date: September 22, 2016 14:12

No Stones without Jagger&Richars. Obvious.

No Stones without Watts&Wyman in the background. Obvious (except for a minority).

No truth about the band without Wyman's memory. Obvious.

No Stones without Brian (who started everything and was, by far, the most clever among them and at the same time the most hopeles for fame).

All roles equitably awarded. Jagger and Richards (Keith craftily hides it better than Mick) know it and hate it (specially for Wyman...).

Re: Bill Wyman Talks
Date: September 22, 2016 14:18

Quote
emotionalbarbecue
No Stones without Jagger&Richars. Obvious.

No Stones without Watts&Wyman in the background. Obvious (except for a minority).

No truth about the band without Wyman's memory. Obvious.

No Stones without Brian (who started everything and was, by far, the most clever among them and at the same time the most hopeles for fame).

All roles equitably awarded. Jagger and Richards (Keith craftily hides it better than Mick) know it and hate it (specially for Wyman...).

That minority has filled stadiums for 26 years, though..

I'm not sure if Brian was the most clever guy in the group, either.

Re: Bill Wyman Talks
Posted by: Spud ()
Date: September 22, 2016 14:39

I've occasionally wondered whether Brian was one of those people with incredible talents and abilities...but zero interactive & social skills.

[some might call it "borderline autistic".]

Re: Bill Wyman Talks
Posted by: Redhotcarpet ()
Date: September 22, 2016 15:02

Quote
HonkeyTonkFlash
Quote
DandelionPowderman
Quote
Redhotcarpet
Mick would never ever in a zillion years have continued with Keith anywhere. Brian is the reason this band existed.

That's why they moved together (without Brian) after Edith Grove?

Good point. People who are partial to Brian perhaps try too hard to beatify him for his role in starting the band. People partial to the Glimmers may overemphasize their role. It took all of them but without Mick and Keith's star appeal (mostly Mick at first) and writing ability, the band would not have made it so big. Without Mick and Keith, Brian may have succeeded at forming an admirable blues band, but we likely may have never heard of them. I see too much of the Brian devotees discrediting Mick and Keith. Without them, the legendary band we love today would not exist. And it probably wouldn't exist without Brian's role in the early days, so let's give everyone proper credit. The rise of The Rolling Stones was a whole set of fortunate circumstances and the chemistry of the right people. Mick, Keith, Brian, Bill, Charlie, Stu...they all played vital roles as did Mick Taylor and Ron Wood as the saga unfolded.

Star appeal? Brian WAS the star appeal in the 60s with Mick climbing that latter quickly. Brian was the one who wanted to make it, he was the driving force.

Regarding Mick and Keith moving in together - Keith moved in with Brian later on. ALO wanted to create a Lennon/McCartney within the band.

Re: Bill Wyman Talks
Posted by: frankotero ()
Date: September 22, 2016 15:08

Mick and Keith deserve an enormous amount of praise, no doubt. But I would not like to see history be rewritten. That's my two cents for what its worth.

Re: Bill Wyman Talks
Date: September 22, 2016 15:17

Quote
Redhotcarpet
Quote
HonkeyTonkFlash
Quote
DandelionPowderman
Quote
Redhotcarpet
Mick would never ever in a zillion years have continued with Keith anywhere. Brian is the reason this band existed.

That's why they moved together (without Brian) after Edith Grove?

Good point. People who are partial to Brian perhaps try too hard to beatify him for his role in starting the band. People partial to the Glimmers may overemphasize their role. It took all of them but without Mick and Keith's star appeal (mostly Mick at first) and writing ability, the band would not have made it so big. Without Mick and Keith, Brian may have succeeded at forming an admirable blues band, but we likely may have never heard of them. I see too much of the Brian devotees discrediting Mick and Keith. Without them, the legendary band we love today would not exist. And it probably wouldn't exist without Brian's role in the early days, so let's give everyone proper credit. The rise of The Rolling Stones was a whole set of fortunate circumstances and the chemistry of the right people. Mick, Keith, Brian, Bill, Charlie, Stu...they all played vital roles as did Mick Taylor and Ron Wood as the saga unfolded.

Star appeal? Brian WAS the star appeal in the 60s with Mick climbing that latter quickly. Brian was the one who wanted to make it, he was the driving force.

Regarding Mick and Keith moving in together - Keith moved in with Brian later on. ALO wanted to create a Lennon/McCartney within the band.

No, he had two women and babies to take care of. Read Phelge's book.

Re: Bill Wyman Talks
Posted by: His Majesty ()
Date: September 22, 2016 15:28

Quote
Palace Revolution 2000

... if Mick and Keith hadn't come along, that very band would have folded what? in about 6 months?

But this is just meaningless.

No one knows what would have happened if (insert scenario that didn't actually happen).

There is only what happened. grinning smiley

Goto Page: Previous1234Next
Current Page: 2 of 4


Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.

Online Users

Guests: 192
Record Number of Users: 184 on May 17, 2018 22:46
Record Number of Guests: 3948 on December 7, 2015 15:07

Previous page Next page First page IORR home