How about that for a mad idea!
I mean the band doesn't have the proper bass player anyway (Daryll is great but he's not a member) plus Macca is their age and he could sing those great back vocals that Keith doesn't do anymore.
The tour would probably be their best selling ever (and that's pretty hard to be)!!
And maybe they could give Paul time to sing one or two of his songs while Mick has a break!!
ahahhha!

Oh Yeah I can see Mick going craaaaaaazy on OB LA DI BLA DA BABY I GIVE YOU ALL MY MONEY YEAAAAAAAH !

I CAN'T GET NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO OBLADIBLADAAAAAAAAAAAA !!! Though I try, and I try AND TRY !!!

Macca- that name cracks me up. Sort of like Jacko.

yeah Im having a laugh ahahaha!

Would sir Paul be more appropriate? ahhahahaha!!

An interviewer from Q (i think) Magazine, asked Mick this in late 1992/early '93, when Jagger was promoting Wandering Spirit....but he (the interviewer) wasn't serious. This was a time when Wyman was seriously rumored to be quitting the Stones....if memory serves, the Q Magazine interviewer also speculated about Red Hot Chilli Peppers bassist Flea joining the Stones.

maybe there should just be a band with the stones ,macca,the boss and u2 then they cover every major touring act out there

Just imagine the opener... Mick yelling through the night "START ME OBLADIBLADA !!!", immediately followed by "She's so OBLADIBLADA", and "Rough Obladiblada"...

Hum, I'm being heavy now...

well yeah nevermind the jokes but paul has written some of the best stuff ever-it would be nice when they would be doing I wanna be your man together!

I Know that guy is great, I saw him in Paris on his "Driving Rain" tour.

The idea makes me throwing up....

As a musician Macca isn't anything special - BW / DJ are way better bass-players than Macca....

In fact non of the Beatles are / were more than average musicians....

McCartney has never been "anybody's" bass player since the Beatles and probably never will. Sad, methinks - it would have done him good - but true.

Keep him away from our boys!
It was bad enough Mick almost sharing a stage with him at Live8.

country honk Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> The idea makes me throwing up....
>
> As a musician Macca isn't anything special - BW /
> DJ are way better bass-players than Macca....
>
> In fact non of the Beatles are / were more than
> average musicians....

Are you saying the Stones are?

what an horrifc idea

i could only be worse if you replaced Ronnie with Claptout as well

please stop

it's a joke,don't take it so hard!
(but I think that paul is great bass player)

Just think of Paul playing bass for our boys. We could have a medley of Let It Bleed and Let It Be! LMAO

Just kiddin'...

macca made oblashit oblada, but the stones made The Comper or Gomper or whatever

Ket Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> maybe there should just be a band with the stones
> ,macca,the boss and u2 then they cover every major
> touring act out there


Yeah, and they can have the reunited Pink Floyd open for them and charge $5000 for a ticket and play 5-hour long shows. Get a grip.

llaushin Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
plus Macca is their age and he could sing
> those great back vocals that Keith doesn't do
> anymore.
>

Keith diliverse the voice on Sweet Virginia!! Look on RS.com at the latast video

I don't wanna miss the Keith set for a minute!!!!!!!!

I won't sleep tonight. I'm afraid of the nightmare that waits for me.

I seen paul in philly on 9/22 and the stones in philly on 10/12........Now keep in mind I love paul but in my opinion He would not be able to keep up with the stones.....They totally rocked non stop for 2 hours and I doubt very much if paul is up for that!!

Besides Paul (me me me) Mcartney would never want to be upstaged by Jagger, Richards and Company!

Never happen

"country honk Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> The idea makes me throwing up....
>
> As a musician Macca isn't anything special - BW /
> DJ are way better bass-players than Macca....
>
> In fact non of the Beatles are / were more than
> average musicians....

Are you saying the Stones are?"

If you take them one by one - yes they are....

Fx. - Compare Charlie to Ringo and you would see the enourmous difference - Ringo is no drummer, he is the biggest joke that walks on two legs...

Besides that Macca is a great bass player and musician (though you don't have to like his music) he wouldn't play with the Stones (why should he??).

BTW. saw on a setlist that Macca played in nearly 3 hours 40 songs incl. a lot of very old songs.... wish our boys could provide that!

After 40 years, the old argument still rages, but now it must be phrased, "The Beatle or the Stones?".

For the record, if anyone cares, I was a Beatles fan before I became a Stones fan, and I like them both (of course, I'm a Gemini, as is Sir Paul, so my split personalities can argue amongst themselves about who is better LOL).

"There will be an answer-- let it bleed?"

Would he want to take the huge pay cut? He draws almost as many people as the Stones do and he's a solo act. He plays for well over 2 hours in concert and because alot of the old Beatles songs are short, you get to hear upwards of 30 songs.
I'm not a huge Beatles fan but hey, they have sold alot more albums than the Stones have and McCartney is the richest musician in the world. I believe his net worth is more than all four Stones combined.
I thought it was good that he invited Mick and Keith to perform at the New York City tribute show in Oct 01.

stonesfan70 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Ket Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > maybe there should just be a band with the
> stones
> > ,macca,the boss and u2 then they cover every
> major
> > touring act out there
>
>
> Yeah, and they can have the reunited Pink Floyd
> open for them and charge $5000 for a ticket and
> play 5-hour long shows. Get a grip.


sonesfan70, it was meant as a joke, I do have a grip on reality, Those ego's together would probably cause a imbalance in the earth's rotation

The Beatles were good musicians. George and Macca certainly were. Macca would rock as a Stones bassplayer. More than Bill or Darryll anyway. And I think it's too lame to use the example of Obladi Oblada. What about all the good stuff he made? Typical that narrowminded people use the worst examples, instead of pointing out the good stuff. Helter Skelter is cool. Why not pick that??? OH YEAH: If we did we couldn't bash Macca. That's narrowminded IMO.

JumpingKentFlash

Agree with your entire post, JKF. + Lennon I think was a much better musician, even technique-wise, than most people usually think of him (poet/punk/avant-garde/anarchist, etc.). One must also consider Get Back as played during that freezing, windy open air concert that made it on the record we all know.
When I got the BBC sessions, I think I realized for the first time then just how great they actually were as live musicians (which includes being vocalists in fact).