They paid tribute to Ray Charles in 2006, to James Brown in 2007. Mick made a point of paying tribute to Rev Solomon Burke in 2011. Blue And Lonesome can be read as a tribute to Little Walter. It would have been the most natural thing to play a Chuck Berry number in 2017. I have heard that they stopped playing Little Queenie on the B2B tour for some petty reason having to do with royalties or whatever. Yet in 2012 Around And Around was in the setlist at least once. They could of course still do something, but it would be an afterthought as it was due in 2017. It seems a glaring omission the more I think about it.

Shame on the them - maybe that's why Ronnie is releasing a tribute album.

_____________________________________________________________
Rip this joint, gonna save your soul, round and round and round we go......

That's what makes it even more peculiar... Ronnie like "Guess it is up to me" but he isn't really the one who owes him

Ring, ring goes the bell ………



ROCKMAN

Quote
Nikkei
That's what makes it even more peculiar... Ronnie like "Guess it is up to me" but he isn't really the one who owes him

Keith paid tribute to Chuck on various occasions during his lifetime and got treated like toilet paper for his trouble.

I’ll say this though – unless they start playing at least 4 or 5 Berry songs per night I’ll never again pay to see them live. Cuz they can't play their own songs worth a dime anymore (except MR of course but I'm sick of that serial killer).

When someone hits the global spotlights mostly (!) thanks to others (read Beatles and Stones) and then gets the attitude that those others (read Beatles and Stones) should be very greatful to him (read Berry) and starts to act like that (asking rediculous amounts of money) and "putting down" his very (IMHO most) important musical companion Johnny Johnson. What can you say?
He completely lost track of himself in many ways and needed to be ignored. Instead Keith put the spotlights on him even more, making him an even more arrogant person. Hail hail rock and roll, but it smells a lot.
Anyway, he can't hurt Ronnie. He makes us enjoy Berry's (and Johnny Johnson's) great contribution (musically) to rock and roll in his own way.

Georgie48, that's an interesting perspective. Though I'm a huge Chuck Berry fan I suspect you're right. And somehow Ronnie is not stuck inside this situation, so he's free to do as he likes.

Ronnie has said this is the first of three tributes....bb king maybe...dylan as then third

What a complex issue no doubt , and the Stones can never pay enough tribute to Chuck Berry as his sound is so intertwined and weaved thru the DNA and fingerprints of the Stones . I get Chuck Berry's position as well as the Stones and more so Keith . Would it have killed the Stones to invite Chuck to join them on stage once in a blue moon ? No, and actually acknowledge the King of Rock and Roll Guitar ! I get how Chuck probably felt very bitter about having his riffs lifted and never properly compensated , but those were the times and are still the times . You have to admit Chuck Berry is da man !!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Basically it is not a big stretch for them seeing how they've had tunes of his in their set for the better part of their career. Sentimentality doesn't even need to play into it, they're all professionals. How decent a person he was or wasn't, also shouldn't matter in that regard.

Quote
TheGreek
Would it have killed the Stones to invite Chuck to join them on stage once in a blue moon ? No, and actually acknowledge the King of Rock and Roll Guitar !

The Stones did invite him to join them onstage for their 1997 Pay-per-View special from St. Louis. Doing so meant clearing home video and possible live album rights. They weren't able to come to terms financially as they had done with John Lee Hooker and Bo Diddley previously.

When Chuck Berry passed away, Mick and Keith released statements. Courtesy of
http://timeisonourside.com/chron2017.html


(March 18, 2017):

Mick: I am so sad to hear of Chuck Berry's passing. I want to thank him for all the inspirational music he gave to us. He lit up our teenage years, and blew life into our dreams of being musicians and performers. His lyrics shone above others & threw a strange light on the American dream. Chuck you were amazing & your music is engraved inside us forever.

(March 24, 2017):

Keith: (Over the years, we've) deliberately tried not to “do a Chuck Berry,” so to speak. But on every one, Chuck’s influence is there, for sure. And I love the fact that he could vary his music. When you listen to [You] Never Can Tell, he had a handle, he was very interested in various kinds of music. He used country music....[and] he was a great admirer of Hank Williams. We used to sit around talking about country writers.

I look upon (his signatory guitar introductions) as sort of a clarion call, his way of saying, I’m here. That’s why those famous intros for Johnny B. Goode, Carol, and Little Queenie are sort of the same. It was almost his own personal monogram on the damn thing before he would start.

People try and pick out things that are similar. Like Jimmy Reed - you want to talk about a guy who played the same song and beautifully! It’s not that - it’s the variations on the theme that count. Also the effortless ease of that rhythm he could produce, which everybody else pumps away at. People don’t realize Chuck used his whole body to play that riff, he doesn’t just use his wrists. I’m still working on it.

Everything was syncopated and synchronized to his body movements. We all know the duck walk — that’s the famous one, and it’s a good one too. But if you look at old footage of him, playing in those times, those early movies, Jazz on a Summer’s Day, you see a sort of almost demonic power going on in that rhythm and his delivery of it. It always fascinated me.

There is a certain part of me that still has my Chuck Berry niche, especially on the rhythm end, more than anything. I’ve learned more and more from him over the years of how to sling the hash.

(April 9, 2017):

Keith: At the moment I sense the same feeling I had at 15 years old when Buddy Holly died. A sickening thud to the guts and a feeling of losing a member of the family. For me the world went from black to white to glorious Technicolor when I first heard Little Queenie. There was no doubt in my mind: It was obvious what I had to do and I haven’t changed since. The effortless ease with which he laid down the rhythm makes a mockery of countless grimacing lip biting agonizing imitators. I’m still working on it.

He brought joy to us; the feeling for a fifteen year old guitar player that there was more to life than seemed possible. With the exuberance, he brought a casual ease and a rhythm that makes bits of your body move you didn’t know you had. In essence, he was a revelation. I ain’t 15 no more but the joy remains.

Quote
frankotero
Georgie48, that's an interesting perspective. Though I'm a huge Chuck Berry fan I suspect you're right. And somehow Ronnie is not stuck inside this situation, so he's free to do as he likes.

No doubt it's great to be a Chuck Berry fan. I like his music too. But I like to add that the Berry input into the Stones recording repertoire mainly came from Keith.
Brian was much more authentic blues oriented, Mick had a broader view, Charlie, of course, was jazz.
The first powerful Stones records were Not Fade Away, It's All Over Now, Little Red Rooster, Route 66, I'm a Kingbee, I just Wanne Make Love to you.
In my country they released quite some EPs and adding up the first two albums you find Carol, Around and Around, Bye Bye Johnny, and You Can't Catch Me as (surely damn good) Berry songs.
So the Rolling Stones wouldn't have made it big without Berry songs? They would have made it big anyway

Cheers georgie48! Those are some nice words Keith said about Chuck in the above excerpts. However, I'm left divided on Mick's comments. Seems a little scripted, maybe I'm wrong. Anyhow, thanks to influences like Chuck we have been able to enjoy The Stones for a very long time. There's several chapters to them, not all great but somehow it ties in together perfectly. Maybe there's something for Chuck down the road apiece?

Quote
Rocky Dijon

Quote
TheGreek
Would it have killed the Stones to invite Chuck to join them on stage once in a blue moon ? No, and actually acknowledge the King of Rock and Roll Guitar !

The Stones did invite him to join them onstage for their 1997 Pay-per-View special from St. Louis. Doing so meant clearing home video and possible live album rights. They weren't able to come to terms financially as they had done with John Lee Hooker and Bo Diddley previously.

When Chuck Berry passed away, Mick and Keith released statements. Courtesy of
http://timeisonourside.com/chron2017.html


(March 18, 2017):

Mick: I am so sad to hear of Chuck Berry's passing. I want to thank him for all the inspirational music he gave to us. He lit up our teenage years, and blew life into our dreams of being musicians and performers. His lyrics shone above others & threw a strange light on the American dream. Chuck you were amazing & your music is engraved inside us forever.

(March 24, 2017):

Keith: (Over the years, we've) deliberately tried not to “do a Chuck Berry,” so to speak. But on every one, Chuck’s influence is there, for sure. And I love the fact that he could vary his music. When you listen to [You] Never Can Tell, he had a handle, he was very interested in various kinds of music. He used country music....[and] he was a great admirer of Hank Williams. We used to sit around talking about country writers.

I look upon (his signatory guitar introductions) as sort of a clarion call, his way of saying, I’m here. That’s why those famous intros for Johnny B. Goode, Carol, and Little Queenie are sort of the same. It was almost his own personal monogram on the damn thing before he would start.

People try and pick out things that are similar. Like Jimmy Reed - you want to talk about a guy who played the same song and beautifully! It’s not that - it’s the variations on the theme that count. Also the effortless ease of that rhythm he could produce, which everybody else pumps away at. People don’t realize Chuck used his whole body to play that riff, he doesn’t just use his wrists. I’m still working on it.

Everything was syncopated and synchronized to his body movements. We all know the duck walk — that’s the famous one, and it’s a good one too. But if you look at old footage of him, playing in those times, those early movies, Jazz on a Summer’s Day, you see a sort of almost demonic power going on in that rhythm and his delivery of it. It always fascinated me.

There is a certain part of me that still has my Chuck Berry niche, especially on the rhythm end, more than anything. I’ve learned more and more from him over the years of how to sling the hash.

(April 9, 2017):

Keith: At the moment I sense the same feeling I had at 15 years old when Buddy Holly died. A sickening thud to the guts and a feeling of losing a member of the family. For me the world went from black to white to glorious Technicolor when I first heard Little Queenie. There was no doubt in my mind: It was obvious what I had to do and I haven’t changed since. The effortless ease with which he laid down the rhythm makes a mockery of countless grimacing lip biting agonizing imitators. I’m still working on it.

He brought joy to us; the feeling for a fifteen year old guitar player that there was more to life than seemed possible. With the exuberance, he brought a casual ease and a rhythm that makes bits of your body move you didn’t know you had. In essence, he was a revelation. I ain’t 15 no more but the joy remains.

Great post ! Thank you for reminding me about the PPV St. Louis invitation , and also Mick and Keith's heartfelt comments in memoriam to Chuck Berry .

I love Chuck Berry and wish they'd play more, but the thing is I always want to hear things that aren't the core songs from setlists for decades. We're at a point where that is a true rarity. "Around and Around" and the snippet of "Come On" were nice surprises a few years back.

Quote
Hairball
Shame on the them - maybe that's why Ronnie is releasing a tribute album.

agree here totally.

Did Chuck Berry heap as much praise on Johnnie Johnson as The Stones did on Chuck, especially from Keith? Did Chuck Berry have many good things to say about The Stones? I am a Chuck Berry fan too.

The thing with Johnny Johnson is that he actually delivered essential musical parts to the songs, allowing Chuck to add (great!) lyrics. Lyrics as such don't neccesarily result into great (musical) songs. So Johnson/Berry (or Berry/Johnson) credits would have been nice (and decent) in cases.

Quote
georgie48
The thing with Johnny Johnson is that he actually delivered essential musical parts to the songs, allowing Chuck to add (great!) lyrics. Lyrics as such don't neccesarily result into great (musical) songs. So Johnson/Berry (or Berry/Johnson) credits would have been nice (and decent) in cases.

It's a difficult one, Georgie. No doubt Chuck let himself be inspired of licks from Johnnie, Louis Jordan etc. However, what he did with it was to create a template for his songs, musically. And none of these guys had the patent on 12 bar boogie. Those 12 bars (with THAT lick) became a vehicle for adding melodies and lyrics.

I don't know what would be right: Crediting Johnnie on every song, or simply some of the first songs?

Like I said, it's difficult



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2019-10-05 15:26 by DandelionPowderman.

Quote
georgie48
The thing with Johnny Johnson is that he actually delivered essential musical parts to the songs, allowing Chuck to add (great!) lyrics. Lyrics as such don't neccesarily result into great (musical) songs. So Johnson/Berry (or Berry/Johnson) credits would have been nice (and decent) in cases.

Completely agree. It's my understanding after Chuck left The Johnny Johnson Trio,
Johnny J was basically tossed aside and forgotten by Chuck--until Hail Hail.

Quote
Rocky Dijon
I love Chuck Berry and wish they'd play more, but the thing is I always want to hear things that aren't the core songs from setlists for decades. We're at a point where that is a true rarity. "Around and Around" and the snippet of "Come On" were nice surprises a few years back.

I was at that Toronto show...50th anniversary of Come On's release. It was such a mind blow, so unexpectedly great.

Quote
MKjan
It's my understanding after Chuck left The Johnny Johnson Trio,
Johnny J was basically tossed aside and forgotten by Chuck--until Hail Hail.

That's the way HAIL HAIL tells the story and it makes for a good movie. In truth, Johnnie is playing piano on the following Chuck Berry studio albums: AFTER SCHOOL SESSION (1957), ONE DOZEN BERRYS (1958), CHUCK BERRY IS ON TOP (1959), ROCKIN' AT THE HOPS (1960), NEW JUKE BOX HITS (1960), CHUCK BERRY TWIST (1962), CHUCK BERRY ON STAGE ("fake" live LP 1963), ST. LOUIS TO LIVERPOOL (1964), FRESH BERRY'S (1965), CHUCK BERRY'S GOLDEN HITS (re-recordings 1967), FROM ST. LOUIE TO FRISCO (1968), SAN FRANCISCO DUES (1971), and ROCKIT (1979) all before HAIL HAIL ROCK 'N' ROLL (1987).

The unappreciated forgotten genius reduced to being a bus driver is a great story. In truth, Johnnie even played shows in the 1980s with Chuck before the 60th Birthday concerts in 1986. Movies aren't reality and Keith is known for telling "pork pies" (as Mick called them using Cockney rhyming slang). He's a great storyteller, but they're still stories. Just ask Muddy when he comes down from painting the ceiling at Chess because he's not making any more gold records like he did in the 1950s.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2019-10-05 18:48 by Rocky Dijon.

Quote
Rocky Dijon

Quote
MKjan
It's my understanding after Chuck left The Johnny Johnson Trio,
Johnny J was basically tossed aside and forgotten by Chuck--until Hail Hail.

That's the way HAIL HAIL tells the story and it makes for a good movie. In truth, Johnnie is playing piano on the following Chuck Berry studio albums: AFTER SCHOOL SESSION (1957), ONE DOZEN BERRYS (1958), CHUCK BERRY IS ON TOP (1959), ROCKIN' AT THE HOPS (1960), NEW JUKE BOX HITS (1960), CHUCK BERRY TWIST (1962), CHUCK BERRY ON STAGE ("fake" live LP 1963), ST. LOUIS TO LIVERPOOL (1964), FRESH BERRY'S (1965), CHUCK BERRY'S GOLDEN HITS (re-recordings 1967), FROM ST. LOUIE TO FRISCO (1968), SAN FRANCISCO DUES (1971), and ROCKIT (1979) all before HAIL HAIL ROCK 'N' ROLL (1987).

The unappreciated forgotten genius reduced to being a bus driver is a great story. In truth, Johnnie even played shows in the 1980s with Chuck before the 60th Birthday concerts in 1986. Movies aren't reality and Keith is known for telling "pork pies" (as Mick called them using Cockney rhyming slang). He's a great storyteller, but they're still stories. Just ask Muddy when he comes down from painting the ceiling at Chess because he's not making any more gold records like he did in the 1950s.

Thanks, I didn't realize he played on those records. I wonder if he was a hired hand or participated in the artist royalty. Was he ever a bus driver? The lawsuit makes me think he felt he was unappreciated, but I can also imagine he may have been pressured into filing it. Any writing credits ever given? The suit was dismissed so I guess his case wasn't convincing, or he took too long to file it, I don't remember.

According to what Johnnie wrote in his book (or told his co-author), he was on salary through 1973. After that he was just paid like any sideman or session musician. However, the recording artist and credited songwriter on all those records was Chuck Berry, there were no royalties to receive just because you play on someone's sessions or gigs. I don't believe he ever played with Chuck again once he sued him in 1991.
It's a tough situation. Chuck took those piano runs and converted them to guitar and created a unique sound, but it's not like Johnnie had a bunch of completed compositions and Chuck stole them. Did he deserve credit for at least some songs as a co-writer? Probably, but moral arguments are not a matter of breaking the law. Even if it hadn't been over thirty years after the fact when Johnnie finally sued, I doubt very much Chuck broke the law in calling himself the songwriter. Sadly, an opportunistic lawyer likely saw a chance to take advantage of the situation and Johnnie went along with it after getting advice from his handlers.

I look at it like by the time is was all said and done, Keith deserved that black eye from Chuck or, perhaps more accurately, had Chuck never punched Keith; he probably would have kept working on and off with Johnnie for the rest of his life as he had done. As for the question of did he really drive a bus, I imagine he did. Chuck wasn't selling out stadiums or arenas and the hits had long since dried up. I doubt Johnnie was getting rich working as an occasional sideman for Chuck in the seventies and eighties.

ROCKMAN

Quote
Rocky Dijon

Quote
TheGreek
Would it have killed the Stones to invite Chuck to join them on stage once in a blue moon ? No, and actually acknowledge the King of Rock and Roll Guitar !

The Stones did invite him to join them onstage for their 1997 Pay-per-View special from St. Louis. Doing so meant clearing home video and possible live album rights. They weren't able to come to terms financially as they had done with John Lee Hooker and Bo Diddley previously.

When Chuck Berry passed away, Mick and Keith released statements. Courtesy of
http://timeisonourside.com/chron2017.html

(March 24, 2017):

Keith: (Over the years, we've) deliberately tried not to “do a Chuck Berry,” so to speak. But on every one, Chuck’s influence is there, for sure. And I love the fact that he could vary his music. When you listen to [You] Never Can Tell, he had a handle, he was very interested in various kinds of music. He used country music....[and] he was a great admirer of Hank Williams. We used to sit around talking about country writers.

I look upon (his signatory guitar introductions) as sort of a clarion call, his way of saying, I’m here. That’s why those famous intros for Johnny B. Goode, Carol, and Little Queenie are sort of the same. It was almost his own personal monogram on the damn thing before he would start.

People try and pick out things that are similar. Like Jimmy Reed - you want to talk about a guy who played the same song and beautifully! It’s not that - it’s the variations on the theme that count. Also the effortless ease of that rhythm he could produce, which everybody else pumps away at. People don’t realize Chuck used his whole body to play that riff, he doesn’t just use his wrists. I’m still working on it.

Everything was syncopated and synchronized to his body movements. We all know the duck walk — that’s the famous one, and it’s a good one too. But if you look at old footage of him, playing in those times, those early movies, Jazz on a Summer’s Day, you see a sort of almost demonic power going on in that rhythm and his delivery of it. It always fascinated me.

There is a certain part of me that still has my Chuck Berry niche, especially on the rhythm end, more than anything. I’ve learned more and more from him over the years of how to sling the hash.

In a way without meaning to, Keith just described AC/DC.

Whatever the reasons are for the Stones to stop playing Chuck's songs as they did in 1969 and 1978 the way they did (I can't recall at the moment if there were other tours they did aside from the odd performance, like on the BRIDGES tour with Little Queenie, I think) it's too bad because they did a killer job of it.

Maybe Chuck was a jerk and demanded a higher performance royalty rate of the Stones covering his songs - perhaps Mick would've pointed out to him that the Stones made him more famous so pipe down, mate.

Perhaps obviously not. So be it.

I think you can play anybody’s song live and the royalty is the same. Jagger prob tired of it.

Ron Wood doing a Berry tribute album is a laugh laugh laugh. Seriously? Does he know who his counterpart is?

[youtu.be]

Quote
DandelionPowderman

Quote
georgie48
The thing with Johnny Johnson is that he actually delivered essential musical parts to the songs, allowing Chuck to add (great!) lyrics. Lyrics as such don't neccesarily result into great (musical) songs. So Johnson/Berry (or Berry/Johnson) credits would have been nice (and decent) in cases.

It's a difficult one, Georgie. No doubt Chuck let himself be inspired of licks from Johnnie, Louis Jordan etc. However, what he did with it was to create a template for his songs, musically. And none of these guys had the patent on 12 bar boogie. Those 12 bars (with THAT lick) became a vehicle for adding melodies and lyrics.

I don't know what would be right: Crediting Johnnie on every song, or simply some of the first songs?

Like I said, it's difficult

It's difficult indeed, DP.
I try to look at it this way. Selfishness is a common thing among people (and animals alike ...). Many felt that Brian should have been credited for Ruby Tuesday. Based on how the song developed (Keith's own words) he should have been. With Johnnie Johnson I think it is similar. Berry was clearly inspired, as was Keith. When a contribution has a clearly recognisable impact on a song that contribution should be credited.
Mick and Keith learned from their mistake(s). Pierre de Beauport was credited!