For information about how to use this forum please check out forum help and policies.
Quote
Palace Revolution 2000Quote
matxil
Haha..you found the wineglass!
Whoa, what has happened to this thread??!
Quote
35love
I see a LOT of generalizing in your post ycagwyw.
Are you speaking solely of Bill’s marriage to Mandy?
No way am I defending it, but from her, he waited and then married her at 18.
All the RS were there, her parents, whatever.
As for all the rest, you are generalizing about ‘all the young girls.’
Yes, it makes me vomit, predatory child sexual abuse.
I say, be very careful with whom you so loosely attach that with.
I’m out of Bill’s thread.
Quote
35love
I see a LOT of generalizing in your post ycagwyw.
Are you speaking solely of Bill’s marriage to Mandy?
No way am I defending it, but from her, he waited and then married her at 18.
All the RS were there, her parents, whatever.
As for all the rest, you are generalizing about ‘all the young girls.’
Yes, it makes me vomit, predatory child sexual abuse.
I say, be very careful with whom you so loosely attach that with.
I’m out of Bill’s thread.
Quote
Stoneage
Yep, to exaggerate or speculate is one thing but to conceal or diminish isn't much better. I think facts are quite clear here. Not one hundred percent but pretty close. You don't even need Ockham's razor...
Quote
TheflyingDutchmanQuote
24FPSQuote
TheflyingDutchmanQuote
24FPSQuote
TheflyingDutchman
Darryl's equalizer settings and timing might be a bit different, but he has the essential skills, just like Bill: backing it up, and don't walk in the way. If they asked Darryl to sound like Bill, he could do it with one finger in his nose. Dandelion Powderman's post of "Live with Me" (the LiB sound in this thread) is a perfect example. Having said that, I like most of Bill's playing with the Stones.
Interesting theory. So you're saying Darryl chooses to play meandering, emotionless bass that doesn't drive the music or contribute to its artistic presentation? Okay.
Some people say Ron Wood is horrible, others think he's a genius. In the end it's a matter of taste, or even nostalgia.
Below the first 45 seconds you hear Charlie Watts talking about Bill and Darryl:
Charlie on Bill/Darryl
Charlie didn't get Bill's playing until he had to go over parts with Darryl and suddenly Charlie understood how clever Bill was. I just don't think Charlie really gets rock music. My dad was a jazz drummer and he never did. Their ears are clouded, like mine are for most rap. It all sounds the same, not hip hop, but rap. I don't think Ronnie is a genius, like Mick Taylor was at his peak, or Brian all around, but he's quite good and there simply wouldn't be a modern day Stones without him. He was great on Blue & Lonesome. I think Charlie and Bill were just two work mates who got on well. Bill was the one who came from 50s rock and roll. He could make his electric guitar play like a 50s standup. Charlie was in his own world, following Keith. All that Charlie understood about Bill is, 'That the whole damn bottom of the band fell out when he would stop playing'.
I never understood that musical theory about "Charlie following Keith timing-wise". Anyway, one might question the different opinion about Bill"s playing between Keith and Charlie i.e. Bill's replacement, and how it affected the atmosphere in the band.
Keith on Bill, he gets a bit emotional:
Keith on Bill
Quote
Dan
The thing is they barely qualify as a real band since the mid-1980's.
In that case they aren't much different than most other classic rock bands on the road today. You get the classic name and catalog if not the lineup that made them great.
Quote
HonkeyTonkFlash
I miss him a lot. D. Jones is very good but the loss of Bill, as well as Stu was the end of the classic Stones sound - at least to my ears. They're still great, but it's not the same.
Quote
georgie48Quote
HonkeyTonkFlash
I miss him a lot. D. Jones is very good but the loss of Bill, as well as Stu was the end of the classic Stones sound - at least to my ears. They're still great, but it's not the same.
Everybody changes over years. Bill in the 60s, Bill in the 70s and so on. But I disagree that "the classic Stones sound" got lost. How about Blue and Lonesome?
Yip, no Brian Jones, no Stu, no Bill, but definitively Rolling Stones. They can do it still, any time they want. When I listen to their first 60s albums, off course there is a difference, but would we want "the simplicity" of their music then instead of something like Blue and Lonesome now? 20 years "old" young men developed into 70+ old "old" men. How about lucky us. We can just pick a record/CD anywhere from the early 60s to (so far) 2015 as we like. The choice is ours. Man, aren't we privileged?
Quote
The SicilianQuote
Olly
It's unfortunate for Wyman's legacy that the beginning of the Stones' best era as a live act coincided with him leaving the band.
Would we have had those swaggering, uninhibited performances during 1994/5 with a motionless Wyman onstage?
Bill's departure seemed to release the Stones back to their roots.
A capable bassist, but Darryl Jones is a far better fit for the band.
Wrong on all four counts. You managed to make four incredibly bad statements in one post.