Tell Me :
Talk
Since you responded to my post, I'll do the same. I think most would agree Dean Goodman has been honest in his assessment of Keith's shortcomings on this tour. I've specifically looked to Dean's reviews of each show to give me a balanced view from someone who was actually there. He could hardly make a definitive statement that Mick cut the song short because Keith screwed up since he can't be sure that's what went through Mick's head. It was speculation and being a professional journalist, Dean noted what it looked like but avoided the pitfall of claiming he knew what Mick was thinking. That's the difference between what all of us do on a message board and what a professional does when their reputation is on the line (and their subject's reputation as well). I give him credit for that. I don't see it as cowardly or being muzzled by censorship.
Yes, a couple slide leads like Red Rooster and I Can't Be Satisfied, but generally his guitar work didn't stand out unless he was playing the rare lead riff like It's All Over Now.
I pick on Matt Clifford a lot and yes, he's Mick's "guy" as you say. That said, we wouldn't have had "Can't Be Seen" come back last year or last time around in Euroe without him. Keith isn't completely against him or he wouldn't be there. Songwriting and "pre-production" might be another matter, but why blame the employee hired to collaborate? Matt isn't to blame if Mick prefers him to writing with Keith.
As for Chuck, Keith looked out for Chuck when Matt played on the first set of British Grove sessions in December 2015 and made sure he ended up contributing to BLUE AND LONESOME in a special overdub session last year. Chuck was rather public about his criticism of Matt playing piano on the blues numbers and not him (before his overdub). Does that mean Chuck dislikes Matt personally? No, it means he felt he was slighted and after over 30 years recording and touring with the band, he spoke up...and they corrected the situation.
That said, do I think he looks goofy? Only when they give him a close up like in HAVANA MOON.
Our Soc drank hemlock. Terry (Rockman) did warn him it was the sort of thread BV doesn't like. I enjoyed Soc's creativity and madness and found it interesting. I kind of hoped if it was contained to one OT thread, he would be okay, but all of us knew it was risky. Even Soc's posts showed that. At the end of the day, it's Bjornulf's house. If he doesn't want any OT threads that go so far off tangent, he doesn't. I think we've seen other times where his patience is thin when he's on tour because of lack of time. It's easier to pull the trigger.
Hopefully Soc returns. Hopefully everybody returns. I guess it's a case of amazingly interesting character using the wrong forum to express himself. Wish I had a private email to continue with him, but I suspect he thrives on an audience and doesn't want to chat one on one.
Still Terry's Taylor Taylor joke remains and that was a gem.
Weird.
I can kind of understand shutting down the Taylor Swift thread (even though it seemed harmless), but kicking someone off the board for that?
Like LongBeach, I saw no personal attacks on anyone and he was always polite...but again maybe I missed something...
_____________________________________________________________
Rip this joint, gonna save your soul, round and round and round we go......
I've been critical of Chuck's over-cooked plinking, but the man is a consummate professional and holds the band together onstage. He's very organized and is practically the band archivist at this point. He's earned his status in the band.
Are you referring to the roar of people whining here on IORR, or the song itself? Or maybe both?
But seriously, keefriff99 might be on to something (or maybe not). That semi-recent video of Mick and Keith alone on acoustic playing Sweet Virginia...stripped down without any bells and whistles...yes it's a simple acoustic jam, but one of the best sounding performances in this latter era IMO. Throw Charlie, Ronnie, and Darryl in to the room and it still might have sounded great "unplugged"! Might even be room for Karl to do a sax solo. Not sure how that would all translate with an electrified rocking tune in front of tens of thousands of people in a giant stadium though, but it would be nice to hear them try? But without Chuck keeping the tempo, etc, I reckon everything would go haywire and turn in to a train wreck. For better or worse, he really has become the backbone of their live sound, and has been for many years. It's not Keith or Charlie...it's Chuck.
_____________________________________________________________
Rip this joint, gonna save your soul, round and round and round we go......
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2017-10-02 04:54 by Hairball.
Simple acoustic songs are one thing...I think full electrified rock songs in an arena environment would be highly dangerous. How long has it been since Keith or Charlie were the taskmasters onstage for counting in, setting tempos, etc.? Would they even want to take on those responsibilities again at their ages?
That would be '78 Tour, minus a great bass player, and two fantastic keyboard players. Plus 39 years.
not suggesting cowardice or censorship...just that we know that there are egg shells...it feels like people are avoiding stepping on them...and that's well...impossible at this point...impossible if we're being honest.
The expensive Winos seemed to pull it off very well without Chuck. The fact that Keith refuses to play with the Winos live now might answer that question.
I mean Keith didn't play one song off Crosseyed Heart live anywhere.
Keith would struggle i think. He likes the safety net, he needs it i think.
What i think Keith could still do very well is play acoustic numbers and sing all those lovely ballads. Throw in a few Rockers, yeah Keith could still survive outside Chucksville !! Not sure about the Stones though.
The Stones need Chuck, he's incredible reliant and always has a good attitude. There's a rehearsal clip of Brown Sugar from 2005 without Chuck which rocks senseless, but they won't take a risk like that now.
Mick won't take a risk like that now, result = Keith gets complacent.
Well i liked that performance with Waddy, although it wasn't exactly keith's finest hour, not sure what you are saying actually. You are contradicting yourself.
You said on an earlier post we couldn't bare the sound of iorr without Chuck.
Yet you enjoyed GS and Happy - Chuck
Yes i see how i come across in that post, i mean now Keith is older it's easier for him to tour with chuck and the Stones because of the safety net they provide.
I don't think that safety net is good for Keith or anyone for that matter, because it has helped Keith to become complacent.
I'm sorry but you reading into that, and concluding that i think Keith did'nt tour with the winos for that reason could not be further from the truth, it's not how i see it. I think Keith Ronnie And Charlie would all be much better off without Chuck.
What i did hopefully infer was that Mick prefers Chuck because it makes him feel safe. This is Micks band.
Result is Keith gets complacent. Sorry if i didn't explain myself very well.
I just mean its a vicious circle when you become reliant on someone like Chuck.
And yes i am very aware Chuck is a lovely caring individual.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2017-10-02 20:10 by stone4ever.
Keith will improve even more, I promise when he plays SFTD without any major mistakes people will start complaining about the setlist again. Overall I think the band already sounds way more exciting and focused than last year.
Talk about your favorite band.
For information about how to use this forum please check out forum help and policies.
Re: Keith Richards guitar playing comments
Posted by:
Rocky Dijon
()
Date: October 1, 2017 23:47
Quote
Rip This
what reviews?....the ones which are tempered to deflect criticism of the criticism?....yikes.....
Dean Goodman:
"Maybe folks at home have already discussed this, but "Satisfaction" seemed to go wobbly towards the end during some Keith soloing, forcing Mick to cut short a stint on the catwalk to return to the stage and monitor its progress. This is not a criticism,"
Since you responded to my post, I'll do the same. I think most would agree Dean Goodman has been honest in his assessment of Keith's shortcomings on this tour. I've specifically looked to Dean's reviews of each show to give me a balanced view from someone who was actually there. He could hardly make a definitive statement that Mick cut the song short because Keith screwed up since he can't be sure that's what went through Mick's head. It was speculation and being a professional journalist, Dean noted what it looked like but avoided the pitfall of claiming he knew what Mick was thinking. That's the difference between what all of us do on a message board and what a professional does when their reputation is on the line (and their subject's reputation as well). I give him credit for that. I don't see it as cowardly or being muzzled by censorship.
Re: Keith Richards guitar playing comments
Posted by:
24FPS
()
Date: October 1, 2017 23:49
Quote
RedhotcarpetQuote
24FPS
I've been listening to Blue & Lonesome lately. Of course it hearkens back to their earliest recordings. The difference is of course that the bass means nothing now and Brian's old role is played by Keith. Ronnie does all the heavy lifting as far as guitar goes (like Keith did), and Keith, in a reduced role, now plays the little rhythm fills (like Brian did). Mick plays a haunting harmonica (like Brian did before). The best thing is that it's slowed down enough that Charlie can still excel, which he does on Blue & Lonesome. The glory days are gone and the band plays on.
Well Brian actually had a very leading role on the blues numbers.
Yes, a couple slide leads like Red Rooster and I Can't Be Satisfied, but generally his guitar work didn't stand out unless he was playing the rare lead riff like It's All Over Now.
Re: Keith Richards guitar playing comments
Posted by:
Rocky Dijon
()
Date: October 2, 2017 00:03
Quote
keefriff99
Oh I know Matt is very much Mick's guy. I'm sure he and Keith have nothing in common. Again...I'm sure he's a nice guy and he's doing exactly what Mick wants him to do onstage, but he just looks out of place.
I pick on Matt Clifford a lot and yes, he's Mick's "guy" as you say. That said, we wouldn't have had "Can't Be Seen" come back last year or last time around in Euroe without him. Keith isn't completely against him or he wouldn't be there. Songwriting and "pre-production" might be another matter, but why blame the employee hired to collaborate? Matt isn't to blame if Mick prefers him to writing with Keith.
As for Chuck, Keith looked out for Chuck when Matt played on the first set of British Grove sessions in December 2015 and made sure he ended up contributing to BLUE AND LONESOME in a special overdub session last year. Chuck was rather public about his criticism of Matt playing piano on the blues numbers and not him (before his overdub). Does that mean Chuck dislikes Matt personally? No, it means he felt he was slighted and after over 30 years recording and touring with the band, he spoke up...and they corrected the situation.
That said, do I think he looks goofy? Only when they give him a close up like in HAVANA MOON.
Re: Keith Richards guitar playing comments
Posted by:
MonkeyMan2000
()
Date: October 2, 2017 00:06
Keith's timing was on point yesterday, as can be heard on BS and YGMR. The songs really start to drag if Keith isn't paying attention with his rhythm playing, but yesterday he was the driving force again on some songs.
Re: Keith Richards guitar playing comments
Posted by:
Rocky Dijon
()
Date: October 2, 2017 00:13
Quote
keefriff99
BV posted in the Taylor Swift thread before he closed it...he seemed quite annoyed that it even existed for some reason.
Our Soc drank hemlock. Terry (Rockman) did warn him it was the sort of thread BV doesn't like. I enjoyed Soc's creativity and madness and found it interesting. I kind of hoped if it was contained to one OT thread, he would be okay, but all of us knew it was risky. Even Soc's posts showed that. At the end of the day, it's Bjornulf's house. If he doesn't want any OT threads that go so far off tangent, he doesn't. I think we've seen other times where his patience is thin when he's on tour because of lack of time. It's easier to pull the trigger.
Hopefully Soc returns. Hopefully everybody returns. I guess it's a case of amazingly interesting character using the wrong forum to express himself. Wish I had a private email to continue with him, but I suspect he thrives on an audience and doesn't want to chat one on one.
Still Terry's Taylor Taylor joke remains and that was a gem.
Re: Keith Richards guitar playing comments
Posted by:
Hairball
()
Date: October 2, 2017 01:22
Quote
stone4everQuote
keefriff99This is RIDICULOUS. For what?? The Taylor Swift thread?? That was just a little harmless fun. This is getting out of hand.Quote
stone4ever
Socrates gone.
I just can't see what rule he broke, surely we can't learn anything from these terminations without some kind of explanation.
Weird.
I can kind of understand shutting down the Taylor Swift thread (even though it seemed harmless), but kicking someone off the board for that?
Like LongBeach, I saw no personal attacks on anyone and he was always polite...but again maybe I missed something...
_____________________________________________________________
Rip this joint, gonna save your soul, round and round and round we go......
Re: Keith Richards guitar playing comments
Posted by:
keefriff99
()
Date: October 2, 2017 01:35
Damn, I didn't know about the Chuck and Matt drama on B&L.Quote
Rocky DijonQuote
keefriff99
Oh I know Matt is very much Mick's guy. I'm sure he and Keith have nothing in common. Again...I'm sure he's a nice guy and he's doing exactly what Mick wants him to do onstage, but he just looks out of place.
I pick on Matt Clifford a lot and yes, he's Mick's "guy" as you say. That said, we wouldn't have had "Can't Be Seen" come back last year or last time around in Euroe without him. Keith isn't completely against him or he wouldn't be there. Songwriting and "pre-production" might be another matter, but why blame the employee hired to collaborate? Matt isn't to blame if Mick prefers him to writing with Keith.
As for Chuck, Keith looked out for Chuck when Matt played on the first set of British Grove sessions in December 2015 and made sure he ended up contributing to BLUE AND LONESOME in a special overdub session last year. Chuck was rather public about his criticism of Matt playing piano on the blues numbers and not him (before his overdub). Does that mean Chuck dislikes Matt personally? No, it means he felt he was slighted and after over 30 years recording and touring with the band, he spoke up...and they corrected the situation.
That said, do I think he looks goofy? Only when they give him a close up like in HAVANA MOON.
I've been critical of Chuck's over-cooked plinking, but the man is a consummate professional and holds the band together onstage. He's very organized and is practically the band archivist at this point. He's earned his status in the band.
Re: Keith Richards guitar playing comments
Posted by:
wonderboy
()
Date: October 2, 2017 01:52
I suspect Keith gets along with Chuck just fine and respects him. I bet Keith gets along with Matt just fine, too. They wouldn't stick around if the felt Keith didn't want them there, imo.
Despite Keith's cranky rep, he seems like he gets on with other musicians just fine. He doesn't really tell people what to play. He might go back later and erase their parts (ha!), but I don't think he's difficult in person when you're playing with him.
To the extent that Keith says anything bad about Matt, he's really talking to Mick, probably.
...
The bans are a bit weird. My guess is the Stones (as well as the tour is going) are a bit fragile right now and any criticism isn't appreciated by those around them.
Hopefully everybody is back after the tour or when this dies down.
Despite Keith's cranky rep, he seems like he gets on with other musicians just fine. He doesn't really tell people what to play. He might go back later and erase their parts (ha!), but I don't think he's difficult in person when you're playing with him.
To the extent that Keith says anything bad about Matt, he's really talking to Mick, probably.
...
The bans are a bit weird. My guess is the Stones (as well as the tour is going) are a bit fragile right now and any criticism isn't appreciated by those around them.
Hopefully everybody is back after the tour or when this dies down.
Re: Keith Richards guitar playing comments
Posted by:
Rocky Dijon
()
Date: October 2, 2017 01:54
From [roseandchucktourdiary.blogspot.com]
February 22, 2016 entry:
There were already several members of our staff there, and soon after we arrived, Keith and Patti Richards came in and joined us at our table. We had a fine time talking about all kinds of things...about how Sao Paulo has changed, about how well the tour is going and how well the band is playing. We talked about our families and how they are all doing....and we also talked about recording possibilities. The band has laid down some blues tracks back in December in London...and Keith told me to come to his room sometime soon and listen...and that he wanted me to overdub on them at some point. All good.
March 7, 2016 entry:
We went down to the restaurant area, where several others in our group gathered to have a drink and explore the food possibility. Keith and Patti were there, Tim Ries and a few others. We sipped our cocktails and talked for a bit, then Patti came over to tell us we should come up to their room to listen to the stuff the Stones recorded in London in Dec. Keith had invited me to do so a few times before, but somehow we either missed his message or were out of the hotel. So this was the chance to hear it. The band had gone to London to “mess around” and see if there could be any material to come out of it. I had not been invited, which had hurt my feelings...especially knowing that Matt Clifford was there. But I was in no position to force myself into the mix, so I had no choice but to stay out of it. But to make things worse, what had happened was that while they apparently explored trying to do some new material, they wound up playing some blues tunes. One thing led to another, and they wound up with 9 or 10 tracks of blues. For them to do that without me there tore me up. But I took it as best I could, and at some point Keith, Ronnie and Charlie had expressed that they wanted me to overdub on some of it. Mick has not mentioned a word about it to me. Anyway, this night was finally the time to go up to Keith’s room and give it all a listen. Rose Lane went with me, and Tim Ries also came, and Darryl. Darryl was on the sessions, and had told me some about it. We all gathered in his sitting area, and he put the music on. It sounded really great...and as Keith pointed out several times, this is why the Stones started playing together in the first place. They loved the blues and that was most of their repertoire...with perhaps some Chuck Berry thrown in. The mixes we listened to had Matt’s part either way down in the mix or not there at all for the most part. But from what I could hear of him, most of the parts he played sounded benign to me for the most part. This is a delicate thing...I like Matt, and part of me is glad he was there....but I know if I had been there it would have come out more authentic. Anyway, Keith wants me to have a shot at it at some point. I truly hope that comes about, but there are challenges to make it happen. First, what about Mick? How does he feel about it? Second...where and when would we work that out? Well...hopefully it will be done. Obviously I want to do it and will do everything I can to sort it out.
Keith had some other “sketches” of ideas that he played...that Matt was also on. They were not even demos of yet....just sort of jams and riff ideas. So I don’t know what the band will do about it all coming together...will the blues thing be a stand alone project? Will it be a part of some new stuff that they will eventually finish? Whatever happens, I certainly want to be a part of it. We’ll see how the whole thing turns out in time.
We were there fairly late...until 2am or so. Then left, giving Keith accolades about all of it and letting him know that I’m ready whenever he is for me to get in on it.
August 29, 2017 entry:
Yet another Rolling Stones Tour. Rehearsals are underway, and everyone is in top form. There has been some recording during the past year. Chuck was called in to play on the Blues CD and another trip to London to put some tracks on a new musical project which will come out in the winter months.
February 22, 2016 entry:
There were already several members of our staff there, and soon after we arrived, Keith and Patti Richards came in and joined us at our table. We had a fine time talking about all kinds of things...about how Sao Paulo has changed, about how well the tour is going and how well the band is playing. We talked about our families and how they are all doing....and we also talked about recording possibilities. The band has laid down some blues tracks back in December in London...and Keith told me to come to his room sometime soon and listen...and that he wanted me to overdub on them at some point. All good.
March 7, 2016 entry:
We went down to the restaurant area, where several others in our group gathered to have a drink and explore the food possibility. Keith and Patti were there, Tim Ries and a few others. We sipped our cocktails and talked for a bit, then Patti came over to tell us we should come up to their room to listen to the stuff the Stones recorded in London in Dec. Keith had invited me to do so a few times before, but somehow we either missed his message or were out of the hotel. So this was the chance to hear it. The band had gone to London to “mess around” and see if there could be any material to come out of it. I had not been invited, which had hurt my feelings...especially knowing that Matt Clifford was there. But I was in no position to force myself into the mix, so I had no choice but to stay out of it. But to make things worse, what had happened was that while they apparently explored trying to do some new material, they wound up playing some blues tunes. One thing led to another, and they wound up with 9 or 10 tracks of blues. For them to do that without me there tore me up. But I took it as best I could, and at some point Keith, Ronnie and Charlie had expressed that they wanted me to overdub on some of it. Mick has not mentioned a word about it to me. Anyway, this night was finally the time to go up to Keith’s room and give it all a listen. Rose Lane went with me, and Tim Ries also came, and Darryl. Darryl was on the sessions, and had told me some about it. We all gathered in his sitting area, and he put the music on. It sounded really great...and as Keith pointed out several times, this is why the Stones started playing together in the first place. They loved the blues and that was most of their repertoire...with perhaps some Chuck Berry thrown in. The mixes we listened to had Matt’s part either way down in the mix or not there at all for the most part. But from what I could hear of him, most of the parts he played sounded benign to me for the most part. This is a delicate thing...I like Matt, and part of me is glad he was there....but I know if I had been there it would have come out more authentic. Anyway, Keith wants me to have a shot at it at some point. I truly hope that comes about, but there are challenges to make it happen. First, what about Mick? How does he feel about it? Second...where and when would we work that out? Well...hopefully it will be done. Obviously I want to do it and will do everything I can to sort it out.
Keith had some other “sketches” of ideas that he played...that Matt was also on. They were not even demos of yet....just sort of jams and riff ideas. So I don’t know what the band will do about it all coming together...will the blues thing be a stand alone project? Will it be a part of some new stuff that they will eventually finish? Whatever happens, I certainly want to be a part of it. We’ll see how the whole thing turns out in time.
We were there fairly late...until 2am or so. Then left, giving Keith accolades about all of it and letting him know that I’m ready whenever he is for me to get in on it.
August 29, 2017 entry:
Yet another Rolling Stones Tour. Rehearsals are underway, and everyone is in top form. There has been some recording during the past year. Chuck was called in to play on the Blues CD and another trip to London to put some tracks on a new musical project which will come out in the winter months.
Re: Keith Richards guitar playing comments
Posted by:
keefriff99
()
Date: October 2, 2017 02:05
Interesting.
Here's a thought experiment: how would the Stones sound without Chuck onstage? Just our boys and Darryl...five people, no safety net, no backup singers.
Here's a thought experiment: how would the Stones sound without Chuck onstage? Just our boys and Darryl...five people, no safety net, no backup singers.
Re: Keith Richards guitar playing comments
Posted by:
Rocky Dijon
()
Date: October 2, 2017 02:20
You couldn't bear the sound of IORR if that were to come to pass.
Re: Keith Richards guitar playing comments
Posted by:
Hairball
()
Date: October 2, 2017 04:53
Quote
Rocky Dijon
You couldn't bear the sound of IORR if that were to come to pass.
Are you referring to the roar of people whining here on IORR, or the song itself? Or maybe both?
But seriously, keefriff99 might be on to something (or maybe not). That semi-recent video of Mick and Keith alone on acoustic playing Sweet Virginia...stripped down without any bells and whistles...yes it's a simple acoustic jam, but one of the best sounding performances in this latter era IMO. Throw Charlie, Ronnie, and Darryl in to the room and it still might have sounded great "unplugged"! Might even be room for Karl to do a sax solo. Not sure how that would all translate with an electrified rocking tune in front of tens of thousands of people in a giant stadium though, but it would be nice to hear them try? But without Chuck keeping the tempo, etc, I reckon everything would go haywire and turn in to a train wreck. For better or worse, he really has become the backbone of their live sound, and has been for many years. It's not Keith or Charlie...it's Chuck.
_____________________________________________________________
Rip this joint, gonna save your soul, round and round and round we go......
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2017-10-02 04:54 by Hairball.
Re: Keith Richards guitar playing comments
Posted by:
keefriff99
()
Date: October 2, 2017 04:58
Lol, that's what I was getting at. Chuck is the crutch that everyone leans on for tempos and cues nowadays.Quote
HairballQuote
Rocky Dijon
You couldn't bear the sound of IORR if that were to come to pass.
Are you referring to the roar of people whining here on IORR, or the song itself? Or maybe both?
But seriously, keefriff99 might be on to something (or maybe not). That semi-recent video of Mick and Keith alone on acoustic playing Sweet Virginia...stripped down without any bells and whistles...yes it's a simple acoustic jam, but one of the best sounding performances in this latter era IMO. Throw Charlie, Ronnie, and Darryl in to the room and it still might have sounded great "unplugged"! Might even be room for Karl to do a sax solo. Not sure how that would all translate with an electrified rocking tune in front of tens of thousands of people in a giant stadium though, but it would be nice to hear them try? But without Chuck keeping the tempo, etc, I reckon everything would go haywire and turn in to a train wreck. For better or worse, he really has become the backbone of their live sound, and has been for many years. It's not Keith or Charlie...it's Chuck.
Simple acoustic songs are one thing...I think full electrified rock songs in an arena environment would be highly dangerous. How long has it been since Keith or Charlie were the taskmasters onstage for counting in, setting tempos, etc.? Would they even want to take on those responsibilities again at their ages?
Re: Keith Richards guitar playing comments
Posted by:
Rocky Dijon
()
Date: October 2, 2017 05:01
What I actually meant was IORR (the site) would implode between half of us going nuts claiming this is what they always wanted and the other half going nuts insisting the band was tarnishing their legacy and need to retire immediately.
Re: Keith Richards guitar playing comments
Posted by:
keefriff99
()
Date: October 2, 2017 05:16
Right...initially I thought you meant the song, but then I realized you were referring to this site.Quote
Rocky Dijon
What I actually meant was IORR (the site) would implode between half of us going nuts claiming this is what they always wanted and the other half going nuts insisting the band was tarnishing their legacy and need to retire immediately.
Re: Keith Richards guitar playing comments
Posted by:
24FPS
()
Date: October 2, 2017 06:59
Quote
keefriff99
Interesting.
Here's a thought experiment: how would the Stones sound without Chuck onstage? Just our boys and Darryl...five people, no safety net, no backup singers.
That would be '78 Tour, minus a great bass player, and two fantastic keyboard players. Plus 39 years.
Re: Keith Richards guitar playing comments
Posted by:
Rip This
()
Date: October 2, 2017 15:23
Quote
Rocky DijonQuote
Rip This
what reviews?....the ones which are tempered to deflect criticism of the criticism?....yikes.....
Dean Goodman:
"Maybe folks at home have already discussed this, but "Satisfaction" seemed to go wobbly towards the end during some Keith soloing, forcing Mick to cut short a stint on the catwalk to return to the stage and monitor its progress. This is not a criticism,"
Since you responded to my post, I'll do the same. I think most would agree Dean Goodman has been honest in his assessment of Keith's shortcomings on this tour. I've specifically looked to Dean's reviews of each show to give me a balanced view from someone who was actually there. He could hardly make a definitive statement that Mick cut the song short because Keith screwed up since he can't be sure that's what went through Mick's head. It was speculation and being a professional journalist, Dean noted what it looked like but avoided the pitfall of claiming he knew what Mick was thinking. That's the difference between what all of us do on a message board and what a professional does when their reputation is on the line (and their subject's reputation as well). I give him credit for that. I don't see it as cowardly or being muzzled by censorship.
not suggesting cowardice or censorship...just that we know that there are egg shells...it feels like people are avoiding stepping on them...and that's well...impossible at this point...impossible if we're being honest.
Re: Keith Richards guitar playing comments
Posted by:
EasterMan
()
Date: October 2, 2017 15:41
The Stones has always been a songwriters band, it's never been about flawless academical musicianship. If I want to hear odd time signatures and shredding and I can listen to Dream Theater or something like that.
Keith isn't done or incapable of playing he's still shining just like the others, and Ronnie is better than 15 years ago. A few bum notes here and there doesn't ruin a concert.
Keith isn't done or incapable of playing he's still shining just like the others, and Ronnie is better than 15 years ago. A few bum notes here and there doesn't ruin a concert.
Re: Keith Richards guitar playing comments
Posted by:
stone4ever
()
Date: October 2, 2017 18:45
Quote
keefriff99
Interesting.
Here's a thought experiment: how would the Stones sound without Chuck onstage? Just our boys and Darryl...five people, no safety net, no backup singers.
The expensive Winos seemed to pull it off very well without Chuck. The fact that Keith refuses to play with the Winos live now might answer that question.
I mean Keith didn't play one song off Crosseyed Heart live anywhere.
Keith would struggle i think. He likes the safety net, he needs it i think.
What i think Keith could still do very well is play acoustic numbers and sing all those lovely ballads. Throw in a few Rockers, yeah Keith could still survive outside Chucksville !! Not sure about the Stones though.
Re: Keith Richards guitar playing comments
Posted by:
EasterMan
()
Date: October 2, 2017 19:04
Quote
keefriff99
Interesting.
Here's a thought experiment: how would the Stones sound without Chuck onstage? Just our boys and Darryl...five people, no safety net, no backup singers.
The Stones need Chuck, he's incredible reliant and always has a good attitude. There's a rehearsal clip of Brown Sugar from 2005 without Chuck which rocks senseless, but they won't take a risk like that now.
Re: Keith Richards guitar playing comments
Posted by:
stone4ever
()
Date: October 2, 2017 19:20
Quote
EasterManQuote
keefriff99
Interesting.
Here's a thought experiment: how would the Stones sound without Chuck onstage? Just our boys and Darryl...five people, no safety net, no backup singers.
The Stones need Chuck, he's incredible reliant and always has a good attitude. There's a rehearsal clip of Brown Sugar from 2005 without Chuck which rocks senseless, but they won't take a risk like that now.
Mick won't take a risk like that now, result = Keith gets complacent.
Re: Keith Richards guitar playing comments
Posted by:
Rocky Dijon
()
Date: October 2, 2017 19:24
deleted
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2017-10-06 18:01 by Rocky Dijon.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2017-10-06 18:01 by Rocky Dijon.
Re: Keith Richards guitar playing comments
Posted by:
stone4ever
()
Date: October 2, 2017 19:37
Quote
Rocky DijonQuote
stone4ever
The expensive Winos seemed to pull it off very well without Chuck. The fact that Keith refuses to play with the Winos live now might answer that question.
I mean Keith didn't play one song off Crosseyed Heart live anywhere.
Keith would struggle i think. He likes the safety net, he needs it i think.
What i think Keith could still do very well is play acoustic numbers and sing all those lovely ballads. Throw in a few Rockers, yeah Keith could still survive outside Chucksville !! Not sure about the Stones though.
Right after the release of CROSSEYED HEART, Keith played "Gimme Shelter" and "Happy" at The Apollo Theater backed by Waddy, Willie Weeks, Steve Jordan, and Ivan Neville. Karl Denson was among the horn players. RollingStone.com had both performances on the web the next day. Keith did fine. It was rough, but the Winos were always rough.
Well i liked that performance with Waddy, although it wasn't exactly keith's finest hour, not sure what you are saying actually. You are contradicting yourself.
You said on an earlier post we couldn't bare the sound of iorr without Chuck.
Yet you enjoyed GS and Happy - Chuck
Re: Keith Richards guitar playing comments
Posted by:
Rocky Dijon
()
Date: October 2, 2017 19:45
deleted
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2017-10-06 18:01 by Rocky Dijon.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2017-10-06 18:01 by Rocky Dijon.
Re: Keith Richards guitar playing comments
Posted by:
HonkeyTonkFlash
()
Date: October 2, 2017 20:00
Nice to hear comments that Keith is playing better at this point in the tour. He's always taken a few gigs to find his groove, which is kind of a shame now that they only do shorter tours.Given that fact, I hope they don't attempt one-offs or mini-tours like the Desert Trip / Vegas thing. They never had a chance to warm up. I gotta admit some clips I saw and heard from the first couple gigs had me worried. I saw an early clip of Slipping Away and Keith could barely manage those opening chords. Also saw some clips of other songs where he seemed to be noticeably dragging behind the band. Reports from Amsterdam have been much more positive. I thought he was very good in Cuba, which wasn't that long ago. I would hate to think he fell apart as bad as some are saying in the short time since then. He may still surprise us pleasantly as this tour progresses.
"Gonna find my way to heaven ..."
"Gonna find my way to heaven ..."
Re: Keith Richards guitar playing comments
Posted by:
stone4ever
()
Date: October 2, 2017 20:02
Quote
Rocky Dijon
You said you didn't think Keith would play with the Winos because he's not comfortable playing without Chuck. I just pointed out he did play with the Winos, albeit only two songs.
I didn't contradict myself. I said in response to the Stones performing with no keyboards (just Darryl and the four of them as a five-piece), IORR would collapse from half of us saying it was great and the other half considering it tarnishing their legacy.
Yes i see how i come across in that post, i mean now Keith is older it's easier for him to tour with chuck and the Stones because of the safety net they provide.
I don't think that safety net is good for Keith or anyone for that matter, because it has helped Keith to become complacent.
I'm sorry but you reading into that, and concluding that i think Keith did'nt tour with the winos for that reason could not be further from the truth, it's not how i see it. I think Keith Ronnie And Charlie would all be much better off without Chuck.
What i did hopefully infer was that Mick prefers Chuck because it makes him feel safe. This is Micks band.
Result is Keith gets complacent. Sorry if i didn't explain myself very well.
I just mean its a vicious circle when you become reliant on someone like Chuck.
And yes i am very aware Chuck is a lovely caring individual.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2017-10-02 20:10 by stone4ever.
Re: Keith Richards guitar playing comments
Posted by:
Rocky Dijon
()
Date: October 2, 2017 21:08
deleted
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2017-10-06 17:59 by Rocky Dijon.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2017-10-06 17:59 by Rocky Dijon.
Re: Keith Richards guitar playing comments
Posted by:
EasterMan
()
Date: October 2, 2017 21:15
Quote
HonkeyTonkFlash
Nice to hear comments that Keith is playing better at this point in the tour. He's always taken a few gigs to find his groove, which is kind of a shame now that they only do shorter tours.Given that fact, I hope they don't attempt one-offs or mini-tours like the Desert Trip / Vegas thing. They never had a chance to warm up. I gotta admit some clips I saw and heard from the first couple gigs had me worried. I saw an early clip of Slipping Away and Keith could barely manage those opening chords. Also saw some clips of other songs where he seemed to be noticeably dragging behind the band. Reports from Amsterdam have been much more positive. I thought he was very good in Cuba, which wasn't that long ago. I would hate to think he fell apart as bad as some are saying in the short time since then. He may still surprise us pleasantly as this tour progresses.
Keith will improve even more, I promise when he plays SFTD without any major mistakes people will start complaining about the setlist again. Overall I think the band already sounds way more exciting and focused than last year.
Re: Keith Richards guitar playing comments
Posted by:
Hairball
()
Date: October 2, 2017 21:27
Hoping Keith continues to improve as I'd much rather complain about the setlists than our dear Keith!
_____________________________________________________________
Rip this joint, gonna save your soul, round and round and round we go......
_____________________________________________________________
Rip this joint, gonna save your soul, round and round and round we go......
Re: Keith Richards guitar playing comments
Posted by:
EasterMan
()
Date: October 2, 2017 21:36
Quote
Hairball
Hoping Keith continues to improve as I'd much rather complain about the setlists than our dear Keith!
Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.
Online Users
Guests:
1621
Record Number of Users:
206
on June 1, 2022 23:50
Record Number of Guests:
9627
on January 2, 2024 23:10