For information about how to use this forum please check out forum help and policies.
Quote
DandelionPowdermanQuote
LongBeachArena72Quote
DandelionPowdermanQuote
ouroux58Quote
DandelionPowdermanQuote
LongBeachArena72
I would submit for general consideration the idea that there may be a difference between the mistakes engendered by the passion of youthful ferocity and the errors caused by age and decay.
The Stones do mistakes, people. Get over it. When you attend a show, these things happen so rarely that they don't take away from the total experience..
If you watch one song on YouTube, however, it might cause more irritation - I dunno.
Are you kidding? I think some guys expect to watch Keith's death on stage. Very good for his legend! Do you really see how he is on stage, no move, a lot of time, his body is bent, easier playing the chords I think!
They got a fantastic start in 63/64 but will get a catastrophic ending for the band they were. Very sad!
I reckon people were more worried about him in 1975.
Yes, I've seen him on stage. I attended the Hamburg-show! And I don't share your analysis. Not at all.
They are old. They can't do it like they were in their 20s anymore. Deal with it.
And the mistakes happen very rarely. It is a 2,5 hour-show.
There's nothing to "deal with," DP. We're almost all in agreement here:
1) The Stones are old
2) They make mistakes, and always have
Where some of us diverge is in our perspective on pt # 2. Many people feel that in spite of their current mistakes, they are still lovable and listenable and enjoyable and nothing's changed. One poster I think even said--and I may be badly paraphrasing here--that s/he didn't really care what notes Keith played ... he was still Keith and therefore still worth watching. Other people feel that their old age is beginning to impinge on the their abilities in a new, perhaps more pernicious way. There's nothing inherently unfair in asking whether people in their mid-70's can continue to drive a car effectively; why should someone asking whether Keith's 'bum notes" may be more than just charming sloppiness be excoriated?
I was replying to this:
Is that what you think as well, LongBeach?
Quote
LongBeachArena72
I would submit for general consideration the idea that there may be a difference between the mistakes engendered by the passion of youthful ferocity and the errors caused by age and decay.
Quote
LongBeachArena72Quote
DandelionPowdermanQuote
LongBeachArena72Quote
DandelionPowdermanQuote
ouroux58Quote
DandelionPowdermanQuote
LongBeachArena72
I would submit for general consideration the idea that there may be a difference between the mistakes engendered by the passion of youthful ferocity and the errors caused by age and decay.
The Stones do mistakes, people. Get over it. When you attend a show, these things happen so rarely that they don't take away from the total experience..
If you watch one song on YouTube, however, it might cause more irritation - I dunno.
Are you kidding? I think some guys expect to watch Keith's death on stage. Very good for his legend! Do you really see how he is on stage, no move, a lot of time, his body is bent, easier playing the chords I think!
They got a fantastic start in 63/64 but will get a catastrophic ending for the band they were. Very sad!
I reckon people were more worried about him in 1975.
Yes, I've seen him on stage. I attended the Hamburg-show! And I don't share your analysis. Not at all.
They are old. They can't do it like they were in their 20s anymore. Deal with it.
And the mistakes happen very rarely. It is a 2,5 hour-show.
There's nothing to "deal with," DP. We're almost all in agreement here:
1) The Stones are old
2) They make mistakes, and always have
Where some of us diverge is in our perspective on pt # 2. Many people feel that in spite of their current mistakes, they are still lovable and listenable and enjoyable and nothing's changed. One poster I think even said--and I may be badly paraphrasing here--that s/he didn't really care what notes Keith played ... he was still Keith and therefore still worth watching. Other people feel that their old age is beginning to impinge on the their abilities in a new, perhaps more pernicious way. There's nothing inherently unfair in asking whether people in their mid-70's can continue to drive a car effectively; why should someone asking whether Keith's 'bum notes" may be more than just charming sloppiness be excoriated?
I was replying to this:
Is that what you think as well, LongBeach?
I'm not sure I understand. Are you asking if I feel like Keith will die soon onstage?
Quote
DandelionPowdermanQuote
LongBeachArena72Quote
DandelionPowdermanQuote
LongBeachArena72Quote
DandelionPowdermanQuote
ouroux58Quote
DandelionPowdermanQuote
LongBeachArena72
I would submit for general consideration the idea that there may be a difference between the mistakes engendered by the passion of youthful ferocity and the errors caused by age and decay.
The Stones do mistakes, people. Get over it. When you attend a show, these things happen so rarely that they don't take away from the total experience..
If you watch one song on YouTube, however, it might cause more irritation - I dunno.
Are you kidding? I think some guys expect to watch Keith's death on stage. Very good for his legend! Do you really see how he is on stage, no move, a lot of time, his body is bent, easier playing the chords I think!
They got a fantastic start in 63/64 but will get a catastrophic ending for the band they were. Very sad!
I reckon people were more worried about him in 1975.
Yes, I've seen him on stage. I attended the Hamburg-show! And I don't share your analysis. Not at all.
They are old. They can't do it like they were in their 20s anymore. Deal with it.
And the mistakes happen very rarely. It is a 2,5 hour-show.
There's nothing to "deal with," DP. We're almost all in agreement here:
1) The Stones are old
2) They make mistakes, and always have
Where some of us diverge is in our perspective on pt # 2. Many people feel that in spite of their current mistakes, they are still lovable and listenable and enjoyable and nothing's changed. One poster I think even said--and I may be badly paraphrasing here--that s/he didn't really care what notes Keith played ... he was still Keith and therefore still worth watching. Other people feel that their old age is beginning to impinge on the their abilities in a new, perhaps more pernicious way. There's nothing inherently unfair in asking whether people in their mid-70's can continue to drive a car effectively; why should someone asking whether Keith's 'bum notes" may be more than just charming sloppiness be excoriated?
I was replying to this:
Is that what you think as well, LongBeach?
I'm not sure I understand. Are you asking if I feel like Keith will die soon onstage?
I tried to illustrate the level we've sunk down to when discussing this..
Personally, I don't care if someone plays badly whether they are wasted on drugs, have aching joints or are of old age. It's bad anyway.
Does it have to ruin a performance of my favourite songs? No, of course not. It didn't in the past, and not now either.
Heck, as long as I enjoy it, I don't even care if there are mistakes!
It's interesting, though, that grown men (who probably are pretty old themselves) don't know that old people do get aching joints, bad eyesight and that they can't (except for Jagger, that is) keep running like madmen on stage.
If the antics were what the Stones represented to them, that's okay. For me, it's still that charming, unpredictable and ragged band, playing my favourite songs.
Lots of people are celebrating a new tour, and love to share their exoeriences on this FAN forum, with others FANS.
They probably need a good chill-down, though – whether it's ridiculing, musical lessons or serious warnings about how Keith's death is near...
Quote
RoughJusticeOnYaQuote
DandelionPowdermanQuote
LongBeachArena72Quote
DandelionPowdermanQuote
LongBeachArena72Quote
DandelionPowdermanQuote
ouroux58Quote
DandelionPowdermanQuote
LongBeachArena72
I would submit for general consideration the idea that there may be a difference between the mistakes engendered by the passion of youthful ferocity and the errors caused by age and decay.
The Stones do mistakes, people. Get over it. When you attend a show, these things happen so rarely that they don't take away from the total experience..
If you watch one song on YouTube, however, it might cause more irritation - I dunno.
Are you kidding? I think some guys expect to watch Keith's death on stage. Very good for his legend! Do you really see how he is on stage, no move, a lot of time, his body is bent, easier playing the chords I think!
They got a fantastic start in 63/64 but will get a catastrophic ending for the band they were. Very sad!
I reckon people were more worried about him in 1975.
Yes, I've seen him on stage. I attended the Hamburg-show! And I don't share your analysis. Not at all.
They are old. They can't do it like they were in their 20s anymore. Deal with it.
And the mistakes happen very rarely. It is a 2,5 hour-show.
There's nothing to "deal with," DP. We're almost all in agreement here:
1) The Stones are old
2) They make mistakes, and always have
Where some of us diverge is in our perspective on pt # 2. Many people feel that in spite of their current mistakes, they are still lovable and listenable and enjoyable and nothing's changed. One poster I think even said--and I may be badly paraphrasing here--that s/he didn't really care what notes Keith played ... he was still Keith and therefore still worth watching. Other people feel that their old age is beginning to impinge on the their abilities in a new, perhaps more pernicious way. There's nothing inherently unfair in asking whether people in their mid-70's can continue to drive a car effectively; why should someone asking whether Keith's 'bum notes" may be more than just charming sloppiness be excoriated?
I was replying to this:
Is that what you think as well, LongBeach?
I'm not sure I understand. Are you asking if I feel like Keith will die soon onstage?
I tried to illustrate the level we've sunk down to when discussing this..
Personally, I don't care if someone plays badly whether they are wasted on drugs, have aching joints or are of old age. It's bad anyway.
Does it have to ruin a performance of my favourite songs? No, of course not. It didn't in the past, and not now either.
Heck, as long as I enjoy it, I don't even care if there are mistakes!
It's interesting, though, that grown men (who probably are pretty old themselves) don't know that old people do get aching joints, bad eyesight and that they can't (except for Jagger, that is) keep running like madmen on stage.
If the antics were what the Stones represented to them, that's okay. For me, it's still that charming, unpredictable and ragged band, playing my favourite songs.
Lots of people are celebrating a new tour, and love to share their exoeriences on this FAN forum, with others FANS.
They probably need a good chill-down, though – whether it's ridiculing, musical lessons or serious warnings about how Keith's death is near...
Well put, Dandee.
As always.
(Or should I say: as mostly... (cause I don't want to be labelled a "superfan", here. )
Not sure if I 100% agree with "I don't care if someone plays badly [if] It's bad anyway [...] Does it have to ruin a performance of my favourite songs? No, of course not."
I mean: there's 'bad' and there's 'bad'. I don't like 'bad' playing - and I've had my fair share, as music lover & concert goer over the past 30 years. But the ragged glory of the Rolling Stones - warts & all - especially the wonderful intuitive 'mistakes' from Keith?? Oh no. I don't mind that at all... In fact: it's one thing that got me into them. (What's a mistake, anyway... it' just makes for a different song, imo.)
Quote
1962
What a great show in Munich!
Thanks to Mick, Keith, Ronnie, Charlie and the others.
Thank you for the beautiful "new" blues numbers, the groovy Dancing With Mr. D & Beast Of Burden and of course the great classic Stones stuff.
Go and see them till you can!!!
What a band!
Quote
1962
What a great show in Munich!
Thanks to Mick, Keith, Ronnie, Charlie and the others.
Thank you for the beautiful "new" blues numbers, the groovy Dancing With Mr. D & Beast Of Burden and of course the great classic Stones stuff.
Go and see them till you can!!!
What a band!
Quote
laertisflash
And what does SZ say in summary? Unfortunately, some of us don't know the german language.
Quote
IrixQuote
laertisflash
And what does SZ say in summary? Unfortunately, some of us don't know the german language.
Google Translate helps: Süddeutsche Zeitung .
Quote
Cristiano Radtke
For some reason Google Translate it's not working with that website.
Quote
IrixQuote
Cristiano Radtke
For some reason Google Translate it's not working with that website.
Dunno what it is - maybe because Google Translate was started via https and Süddeutsche Zeitung only via normal http . That's what I've fixed.
If it doesn't work, simply copy the original link from Süddeutsche Zeitung into Google Translate ....
Quote
IrixQuote
Cristiano Radtke
For some reason Google Translate it's not working with that website.
Dunno what it is - maybe because Google Translate was started via https and Süddeutsche Zeitung only via normal http . That's what I've fixed.
If it doesn't work, simply copy the original link from Süddeutsche Zeitung into Google Translate ....
Quote
HairballQuote
IrixQuote
Cristiano Radtke
For some reason Google Translate it's not working with that website.
Dunno what it is - maybe because Google Translate was started via https and Süddeutsche Zeitung only via normal http . That's what I've fixed.
If it doesn't work, simply copy the original link from Süddeutsche Zeitung into Google Translate ....
Is there an original link anywhere?
Quote
Cristiano RadtkeQuote
HairballQuote
IrixQuote
Cristiano Radtke
For some reason Google Translate it's not working with that website.
Dunno what it is - maybe because Google Translate was started via https and Süddeutsche Zeitung only via normal http . That's what I've fixed.
If it doesn't work, simply copy the original link from Süddeutsche Zeitung into Google Translate ....
Is there an original link anywhere?
Yes, it was posted above by gipsy12 on this thread.
[www.sueddeutsche.de]
Quote
laertisflash
LongBeachArena72: «I would submit for general consideration the idea that there may be a difference between the mistakes engendered by the passion of youthful ferocity and the errors caused by age and decay».
With respect, that’s a bit like a “self – fulfilling prophecy”…
“Are they rotten”? “Yes and the proof is that they do mistakes”. “They did mistakes also in the so called glory years”. “Yes, but they were young then, so the reasons why they did mistakes were different”. “And why the hell the current mistakes have bigger spacific gravity than what they had in 1978 or in 1981?” “Due to the ace and decay”… Not exactly the epitome of the meaning of the word "logical"...
We could talk about their abilities and powers, mentioning - for days, weeks or even months - solos and links, team – work, energy, skill to cover up when it’s needed and many other factors which are referring to the general level of performances (that remains admirably high IMO, but that’s my opinion). We can discuss, agree and disagree on these. But mistakes??? Two, three or four during a 130 minutes gig?
Actually, never knows the exact reason behind a specific mistake. But since, let’s say, Keith is starting well the intro of a song, 20 times in a row after the night he “messed up” with the same intro, it’s obviously unreasonable every claim that Keith “is unable to play it anymore”… (There are many examples to talk about).
So, I could answer: Why on earth didn’t fans scream and moan about the so many mistakes of 1978 or 1981/82 performances??. I don’t think the answer can be , “because the Stones were young then”. To be honest that means nothing to me. I think the right answer is: «Maybe because the fans were young then and no one’s mood, no one’s soul was aged and decay”…
Quote
LongBeachArena72Quote
laertisflash
LongBeachArena72: «I would submit for general consideration the idea that there may be a difference between the mistakes engendered by the passion of youthful ferocity and the errors caused by age and decay».
With respect, that’s a bit like a “self – fulfilling prophecy”…
“Are they rotten”? “Yes and the proof is that they do mistakes”. “They did mistakes also in the so called glory years”. “Yes, but they were young then, so the reasons why they did mistakes were different”. “And why the hell the current mistakes have bigger spacific gravity than what they had in 1978 or in 1981?” “Due to the ace and decay”… Not exactly the epitome of the meaning of the word "logical"...
We could talk about their abilities and powers, mentioning - for days, weeks or even months - solos and links, team – work, energy, skill to cover up when it’s needed and many other factors which are referring to the general level of performances (that remains admirably high IMO, but that’s my opinion). We can discuss, agree and disagree on these. But mistakes??? Two, three or four during a 130 minutes gig?
Actually, never knows the exact reason behind a specific mistake. But since, let’s say, Keith is starting well the intro of a song, 20 times in a row after the night he “messed up” with the same intro, it’s obviously unreasonable every claim that Keith “is unable to play it anymore”… (There are many examples to talk about).
So, I could answer: Why on earth didn’t fans scream and moan about the so many mistakes of 1978 or 1981/82 performances??. I don’t think the answer can be , “because the Stones were young then”. To be honest that means nothing to me. I think the right answer is: «Maybe because the fans were young then and no one’s mood, no one’s soul was aged and decay”…
Clearly, I've done a piss-poor job of explaining myself. Let me try another tack:
I believe there is a difference between errors made you when you are trying to remember how to play something and errors made when you are so on fire and in the moment that you can barely control the poetry being produced by your fingers and the strings.
Keith Richards trying to torture out the opening to "Beast of Burden" in 2017 with arthritic hands may be charming to some and painful to others; Keith Richards blowing a change in "Street Fighting Man" in 1973 because he is so possessed he has reached the limits of how ferociously a rhythm guitarist can drive a song is a 'mistake' that one barely registers in the glory of what the guitarist is doing.
And OF COURSE it's unfair to compare the playing of someone in his 70's to what that same person could do in his 20's or 30's. I was simply trying to draw a distinction between errors which call competence into question and errors made while poetry is being made.
No one will ever be Keith. He is sui generis, a rock'n'roll treasure. And I completely understand people who still relish his every move and enjoy his 2017 performances. More power to you!
Quote
mr_djaQuote
LongBeachArena72Quote
laertisflash
LongBeachArena72: «I would submit for general consideration the idea that there may be a difference between the mistakes engendered by the passion of youthful ferocity and the errors caused by age and decay».
With respect, that’s a bit like a “self – fulfilling prophecy”…
“Are they rotten”? “Yes and the proof is that they do mistakes”. “They did mistakes also in the so called glory years”. “Yes, but they were young then, so the reasons why they did mistakes were different”. “And why the hell the current mistakes have bigger spacific gravity than what they had in 1978 or in 1981?” “Due to the ace and decay”… Not exactly the epitome of the meaning of the word "logical"...
We could talk about their abilities and powers, mentioning - for days, weeks or even months - solos and links, team – work, energy, skill to cover up when it’s needed and many other factors which are referring to the general level of performances (that remains admirably high IMO, but that’s my opinion). We can discuss, agree and disagree on these. But mistakes??? Two, three or four during a 130 minutes gig?
Actually, never knows the exact reason behind a specific mistake. But since, let’s say, Keith is starting well the intro of a song, 20 times in a row after the night he “messed up” with the same intro, it’s obviously unreasonable every claim that Keith “is unable to play it anymore”… (There are many examples to talk about).
So, I could answer: Why on earth didn’t fans scream and moan about the so many mistakes of 1978 or 1981/82 performances??. I don’t think the answer can be , “because the Stones were young then”. To be honest that means nothing to me. I think the right answer is: «Maybe because the fans were young then and no one’s mood, no one’s soul was aged and decay”…
Clearly, I've done a piss-poor job of explaining myself. Let me try another tack:
I believe there is a difference between errors made you when you are trying to remember how to play something and errors made when you are so on fire and in the moment that you can barely control the poetry being produced by your fingers and the strings.
Keith Richards trying to torture out the opening to "Beast of Burden" in 2017 with arthritic hands may be charming to some and painful to others; Keith Richards blowing a change in "Street Fighting Man" in 1973 because he is so possessed he has reached the limits of how ferociously a rhythm guitarist can drive a song is a 'mistake' that one barely registers in the glory of what the guitarist is doing.
And OF COURSE it's unfair to compare the playing of someone in his 70's to what that same person could do in his 20's or 30's. I was simply trying to draw a distinction between errors which call competence into question and errors made while poetry is being made.
No one will ever be Keith. He is sui generis, a rock'n'roll treasure. And I completely understand people who still relish his every move and enjoy his 2017 performances. More power to you!
So maybe YOU should explain to us the difference in the two types of mistakes as you're the one that believes there is a difference in the mistakes themselves. From what most of the replies to your theory (including mine) seem to be saying, I'd believe that most of us would say a mistake is a mistake but they can be caused by any number of reasons.
Where I think you are doing an inadequate job of expressing yourself is with what I think you're actually wanting people to discuss...
Although you keep saying you want to discuss the difference in the mistakes themselves, it really seems like you want people to discuss the concept of "should Keith be held more accountable for the mistakes he's making now that he's old than he was for the mistakes he made when he was younger?"
My thoughts on that are in the second post on page 25 of this thread.
Peace,
Mr DJA
Quote
LongBeachArena72
I can't say anymore than I already have. I wish I could. (No, I don't.) But I can't.
Quote
mr_djaQuote
LongBeachArena72
I can't say anymore than I already have. I wish I could. (No, I don't.) But I can't.
What a relief. Good riddance to bad rubbish.
Peace,
Mr DJA