Quote
dcba

Quote
Roadster32

I can't say. Never heard him on drums to a Stones song so far.

You never listened to "Dirty Work"? Jordan is all over that one!

Quote
rbk
It’ll be interesting to see how Steve Jordan gets along with Chuck Leavell. Both are, discretely, the “musical directors” of the Winos/solo Keith and the Stones, respectively.

Quote
spoonful2

Quote
floodonthepage
A couple things seem clear to me...

1. Charlie wants this, according to the RS article. It sounds like HE asked Steve to do this, which makes a different for me.

2. The fact that theses shows are going forward doesn't (for me) mean that Keith or anyone else still doesn't feel the "No Charlie, No Stones" phrase. It means that the pandemic/contracts/insurers have them "in a spot", a spot that includes the livelihood of many a crew member. Charlie and everyone in the band are helping those people in many ways by going forward, not the least of which financially.

Less clear to me is....

3. The door does seem open for Charlie to come back during the tour, if not later in this tour then down the road with whatever plans they have that we are not aware of...that said, those plans may not include anymore US dates, and with that in mind do I want my (possibly) last Stones show to be w/o Charlie or do I skip the tour...knowing that if I (and enough other people) do that it may in some fashion hurt the larger/extended Stones family (the crew, etc.). I work with someone now who worked on their crew for Licks, and I can imagine what it means to people like him that the "show goes on"....not to mention what if (pie in the sky) Charlie comes back mid-tour...to experience that would be outstanding.

Lastly and ultimately, I think if this truly were a "Charlie is out" scenario, as in done with touring or worse.....if he had passed...then the "No Charlie, No Stones" would take hold and the band would stop. I could be wrong about that (as was exampled by the Who with Entwistle which has been pointed out was likely a contractual jam as well) but I'd like to think I'm right about that.

Charlie did not ask Steve Jordan to play for him, that was Mick and Keith. He was the obvious choice anyway.

Quote
Big Al
I only know of Jordan's drumming with Keith. How is his style going to fit the Stones'? I suppose he will be studying Charlie's live technique and and will attempt to replicate it. Truthfully, I don't particularly like what I've heard from him.

Quote
floodonthepage

The RS article indicated Charlie asked Steve. "I asked my great friend Steve....." something like that.

Quote
TooTough
I always thought that we don´t have to explain the importance
of Charlie as a drummer and for Stones´ sound on a Stones site.
Some are getting over these bad news very fast.

People who don´t have a problem with replacing Charlie
wouldn´t have a problem replacing Ronnie with...Waddy Wachtel?
Or Jimmy Rip?

This is not Dylan´s never ending tour with Matt Chamberlain
replacing George Recile on drums.

I think that we see the very last Stones chapter now. There´s
only a few pages left.

Quote
slewan
I wonder if they'd replace Charlie if they hadn't already postponed the US tour several times (and I guess they're obliged by contract to do the US tour before they are allowed to do another tour)

Quote
Topi

Quote
Maindefender
Another chapter. 60 years, we have been so fortunate. Rumour is the band will be back in the states next year. Healing vibes to Mr. Watts

Back in the States next year? Where did you hear that?

Quote
Rokyfan

Quote
Big Al
I only know of Jordan's drumming with Keith. How is his style going to fit the Stones'? I suppose he will be studying Charlie's live technique and and will attempt to replicate it. Truthfully, I don't particularly like what I've heard from him.

I don't remember when it was, decades ago, that I realized all great rock bands had a great drummer with a distinctive sound. Same thing in jazz. This seems basic and indisputable.

What an insult to Charlie to say that it will make little difference to the sound with Jordan on the drums. The substitution of the drummer will have an effect on the music magnitudes greater than that of any other instrument, other than Jagger's voice.

Yet, Glimmer Girl, who (1) is an attorney, and (2) knows real insiders with real info, is undoubtedly correct that there are only two essential Stones for contractual purposes. Thus, they must play on. As she noted, they could refuse to go on without Charlie, but the result would be litigation.

I think the idea that Charlie is going to return is fantasy. He's not traveling to the US at his age in the covid era and I don't blame him, regardless of any surgery.

I agree with you, Al, I never liked Jordan's drumming with the Winos. It always seemed the opposite of Charlie's approach to the music.

Duke: it don't mean a thing if it ain't got . . . .

Sad.

Quote
Big Al
I only know of Jordan's drumming with Keith. How is his style going to fit the Stones'? I suppose he will be studying Charlie's live technique and and will attempt to replicate it. Truthfully, I don't particularly like what I've heard from him.

Quote
MisterDDDD

Quote
spoonful2
There was no "emergency surgery", I knew about this 9 days ago. Don't rule out him jumping back on the tour at some point, but don't be surprised if he doesn't.

Nowhere does it state or imply that the emergency surgery happened in the last few days.
Clearly, others have known, - but to say "there was no emergency surgery" unless you have more info than your posting, doesn't ring true.

Quote
DandelionPowderman

Quote
spoonful2

Quote
floodonthepage
A couple things seem clear to me...

1. Charlie wants this, according to the RS article. It sounds like HE asked Steve to do this, which makes a different for me.

2. The fact that theses shows are going forward doesn't (for me) mean that Keith or anyone else still doesn't feel the "No Charlie, No Stones" phrase. It means that the pandemic/contracts/insurers have them "in a spot", a spot that includes the livelihood of many a crew member. Charlie and everyone in the band are helping those people in many ways by going forward, not the least of which financially.

Less clear to me is....

3. The door does seem open for Charlie to come back during the tour, if not later in this tour then down the road with whatever plans they have that we are not aware of...that said, those plans may not include anymore US dates, and with that in mind do I want my (possibly) last Stones show to be w/o Charlie or do I skip the tour...knowing that if I (and enough other people) do that it may in some fashion hurt the larger/extended Stones family (the crew, etc.). I work with someone now who worked on their crew for Licks, and I can imagine what it means to people like him that the "show goes on"....not to mention what if (pie in the sky) Charlie comes back mid-tour...to experience that would be outstanding.

Lastly and ultimately, I think if this truly were a "Charlie is out" scenario, as in done with touring or worse.....if he had passed...then the "No Charlie, No Stones" would take hold and the band would stop. I could be wrong about that (as was exampled by the Who with Entwistle which has been pointed out was likely a contractual jam as well) but I'd like to think I'm right about that.

Charlie did not ask Steve Jordan to play for him, that was Mick and Keith. He was the obvious choice anyway.

Most likely Keith and Ronnie's choice. Btw, do you have sources for this and the surgery-thing?

Quote
saltoftheearth
If they invited Mick Taylor and made him part of the band they would still have four original members on stage.

Quote
TooTough

I think that we see the very last Stones chapter now. There´s
only a few pages left.

Quote
franzk

Quote
TooTough

I think that we see the very last Stones chapter now. There´s
only a few pages left.

I couldn't count how many I've read this sentence on this board since 2002.

However we must accept that at this age things happen. Charlie's surgery, Mick's surgery, Ronnie's two battles with cancer. It all happened recently. They're around 80. It's inevitable.