what a stupid post

If Ronnie is such a terrible guitarist, why did he play so well in Chicago ? I guess he was just having a good night...

And why have the reviews of: MSG, Hartford, Moncton, Milwaukee, Giants Stadium, Albany, etc. all been so positive ???

It's amazing to me that the Stones can be blowing up one stadium after the other with such a hopeless guitarist.

Is the rest of the band carrying him, or... just suppose... the Ronnie haters don't have a clue what they're talking about.

ohnonotyouagain Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> How many chanes does one guy get? His substance
> abuse has been a major problem since at least
> 1981.


Yeah, they've had to deal with this before with Brian. Now Stu (RIP) there's a guy who got treated like shite - just because he didn't look rock and roll. No, warm and fuzzy our Glimmer Twins are not!

ISleptWithLisaFischer Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> what a stupid post

uh, huh, and your post was incredibly intelligent and well written, don't you think?

And Charlie had a substance abuse problem in the 80's and Keith was hooked on heroine in the seventies. I dont hear many people taking Keith to task for his heroine abuse which left Jagger and Taylor in the crap position of covering for him. Sure there is the precedent of tossing out Jones, but he became essentially non-functional, unwilling to work with the band, and had McCartney-like ambitions of being greater than what brought him to fame. And the Stones were still a young, vital act. Now they are in their sixties. Do you think they would honestly toss out Ronnie? What would be the point? And whatever conflicts might be underway between Wood and Jagger, they are a far cry from those involving Taylor.

davido Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Camper -nope I got it right!

I'm referring to the original use of discretion is the better part of valour in Shakespeare's Henry IV, Part 1.
-- 'The better part of valour is discretion; in the which better part I have saved my life.' Said by Falstaff, in an act of cowardice.

bigbang Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> ohnonotyouagain Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > How many chanes does one guy get? His
> substance
> > abuse has been a major problem since at
> least
> > 1981.
>
>
> Yeah, they've had to deal with this before with
> Brian. Now Stu (RIP) there's a guy who got treated
> like shite - just because he didn't look rock and
> roll. No, warm and fuzzy our Glimmer Twins are
> not!
>

OMG! Stu "didn't look rock and roll??" Might we say the Rock and Roll was just coming into sight at that time??

JamesBurton Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> And Charlie had a substance abuse problem in the
> 80's and Keith was hooked on heroine in the
> seventies. I dont hear many people taking Keith to
> task for his heroine abuse which left Jagger and
> Taylor in the crap position of covering for him.
>

Because one does not take God to task.

Hi Camper! In poli sci was used differently
when applied to diplomacy for the greater
good, not quite what Falstaff was
referring too I guess! ;-)

hell why dont we just replace the whole band

i dont really understand the fuss with ronnie is about it seems like most people on this board is negitive about the stones.read w the tour reports.people who have been to the shows so far think ronnie is playing well.

There's really no point in discuss this topic....it will NEVER, EVER happen. Ronnie's here to stay barring death or serious illness.

What a stupid topic!

ohnonotyouagain Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I should have said "and his replacement can't be
> Mick Taylor" because you know that is never going
> to happen. Too much water under the bridge. Still
> , vote for Taylor if you want, but I'd still like
> to know your second choice.
>
> Is Taylor even still a decent player? Haven't
> heard anything he's done since that Dylan album
> and tour 20 years ago. He was quite good on that,
> and of course awesome back in the day. Keith would
> never have him back, do you think?


I heard a liveversion with Mick taylor band a couple of years ago.. man he can still play the ass of Ronnie anytime!

Jimmie Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> ohnonotyouagain Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
>
>
>
> I heard a liveversion with Mick taylor band a
> couple of years ago.. man he can still play the
> ass of Ronnie anytime!
>

And he can play the ass off Keith too! Perhaps we should have him replace Keith! Of course this is absurd what Mick CANNOT do is "outplay" Ronnie and Keith TOGETHER and that's how Ron & Keith play... as a team.

It's a much different way of playing than Keith & Mick Taylor, IMO.

Ron was great at Fenway,He kept things together in Jersey when the going got a little ragged and He was top notch in Albany. I don't get it. Why can't we just wish this guy well and be happy that the group is on tour and that the cd is pretty good!It's really something on how each guy gets beat up in these posts,1st Chuck, then Ronnie and even Keith.
Enough from me already.You folks might not like Ron but I'm looking for my next ticket! Cheers...

Waddy's playing with Keith, the stones and Bob Dylan has been pretty standard IMO. I know he's good (live shows), but when he plays with Keith, it seems like he gets that weird idea that he should play like the master himself - any views?

Listen to:

How I Wish (thought it was Keith at first).
Handy Dandy (Bob Dylan - Under A Red Sky).



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2005-09-21 14:14 by DandelionPowderman.

Keep Ronnie. Better than Taylor.

JumpingKentFlash

Hey, Ronnie haters, have you seen any show of this tour? Ronnie is VERY GOOD. It's rediculous to talk about Taylor in 2005...

This topic is an amazing showcase of how people seem to be talking about a certain subject but effectively talk about different things.

Speaking for myself, I always loved Brian Jones as a Stones guitar player. And I always loved Mick Taylor as a Stones guitar player. And even if as early as in 1975/1976 certain people claimed that Ronnie Wood "is not as good as Taylor", I always loved Ronnie as a guitar player. Of course, his playing was different from Brians and Taylors playing. But it fitted perfectly back then, leading the Stones in new directions which weren't bad at all. I've just recently watched Wild Horses from the Knebworth 1976 video - Ronnie did a killer solo.

Listening to Ronnie now can be pretty painful at times. He still has good moments, but overall his playing is not what it used to be. I simply wonder what exactly happened. It's not that I prefer Taylor. It's just that I ask myself what the @#$%& happened to Ronnie's playing and if there's a chance at all to see him reaching the standart of guitar playing again that he was capable of when he joined the Stones in the mid-seventies until, let's say 1989 or even 1994/1995.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2005-09-21 14:59 by retired_dog.

along with lisa, bernard and chuck. Clean house just have mick and keith and charlie. By the way mccartney could play bass. People are nuts

black n blue Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> along with lisa, bernard and chuck. Clean house
> just have mick and keith and charlie. By the way
> mccartney could play bass. People are nuts

Ronnie stays, no question. Instead of Chuck they could bring in Jerry Lee Lewis, he also likes to drink a lot. If that sounds a bit weird then crank up Keith's amp so he can lay some heavy solo rhythm down.

Me, the Captain, will then shove some bass up Sir Paul's mouldy back on the B-stage.

JumpingKentFlash Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Keep Ronnie. Better than Taylor.


Ronnie is better than Mick Taylor when it comes to posing, not playing the guitar.
Mick Taylor is unfortunately not with the band anymore so we just have to go with the second best,
i.e Ronnie. Ron's been playing well lately and he's sort of here to stay. Btw, Mr Wood looks really cool on stage IMO,
much cooler than Taylor does nowadays while playing at various joints.

You must be kidding! He's an important part of the band. The one that can weave his guitar together with Keith's, so not even the two of them can hear who's playing what... Takes years to replace such a feeling. They don't have that. I love Waddy, but in the Winos. It's a cool side dish, but don't even dare thinking about touching my MAIN COURSE. Ronnie's a Stone. Even we hard-liners must admit he's become more than "the new guy", and he's kind of the glue that keeps everything together, even though sparks can fly now and again. Woody's staying! AMEN.

The Stones Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> JumpingKentFlash Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > Keep Ronnie. Better than Taylor.
>
>
> Ronnie is better than Mick Taylor when it comes to
> posing, not playing the guitar.
> Mick Taylor is unfortunately not with the band
> anymore so we just have to go with the second
> best,
> i.e Ronnie. Ron's been playing well lately and
> he's sort of here to stay. Btw, Mr Wood looks
> really cool on stage IMO,
> much cooler than Taylor does nowadays while
> playing at various joints.


I like that Shitehawk Taylor has to wake up every morning and think: "OH MY GOD!!!! I QUIT THE STONES!!!! I must really be dumb".

PS: Still like Ronnie better.

JumpingKentFlash

Is playing was still ok in 94/95.
Since the B2B tour, it is completely unbelievable to see someone playing the guitar like that. I mean that ANY average and motivated guitarist would do a better job.
I cannot understand why so many of you are still supporting Ronnie. He does not
deserve it.

i tend to believe anyone posting these ridiculous comments have not seen any shows on this tour yet?ronnie has been stellar.playing better than ever.

john scialfa

never happen......i liked him better when he was a parier.....no doubt...i hate areosmith they suck now that they are"clean"

STOP IT!!

stickydion Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Hey, Ronnie haters, have you seen any show of this
> tour? Ronnie is VERY GOOD. It's rediculous to talk
> about Taylor in 2005...


Hey man, it was a joke.

Of course it's absurd to wish that Taylor would rejoin the Stones, I was just making a nostalgic joke based on all of the comments you see hear with fans who are in love with the past, uncertain about the present and afraid of the future. Like all things one day that Stones will be no more. Can't we joke about our fear of death and loss? C'mon lighten up (hey, I'm joking again).

Backstreetboy!

I suppose a lot of Ronnie haters, Keith bashers, setlist complainers and other moaners about anything (Chuck, Daryl, Bernard etc.) haven't seen any show on this tour or ever at all.