Oh, I just now re read your post. I didn't mean just this thread. I mean the boards in general. If I said thread I apologize. I meant this board in several threads. If you search the boards there are several posts in which people have implied the show goes on regardless. But I'm not here to argue or copy and paste other's posts or opinions.

Quote
Witness

Quote
The Sicilian

Quote
Witness

Quote
The Sicilian
People that know I'm a fan have been reaching out to talk about Charlie Watts and the Stones and get a measure on my thoughts. I've been clear to say that I really think they should cancel the mini tour out of respect for Charlie and because of COVID issues. Put it off until next year and take time to reflect and see how it feels after the holidays. It's the right thing to do IMO. The music world is watching to see how they react. You can bet on it.

I will say that a couple people have told me that if the Stones are out there playing in a couple weeks then it disrespects Charlie and his family and proves they are only in it for the money, especially with the outrageous ticket prices being charged even for "cheap seats."

As to motives, do you yourself share the viewpoint in bold, set forth in this special context? Or are you only a witness over remarks listened to?

Well, conversations usually start out with "hey did you hear about Charlie Watts" and the discussions eventually come to the tour, will they play or will they cancel. I have to admit that a few people have come right out and said what I wrote above. Some just don't even mention it. As far as I'm concerned, Keith made his thoughts known back when Charlie was ill. Older people that say things like that mean it. I can't see why they would do the shows other than for the money. So yes, I would agree. Otherwise what's a few months to take off then collaborate and decide if it's the right thing to carry on. COVID is also creating issues everywhere too. The governor of Oregon just ordered masks to be worn outdoors by everybody no exceptions.

One thinkable other motive is simply that they are musicians. That to play as the Rolling Stones is something that they live for. In the same manner that a novelist needs to write novels. In addition, it is about experiencing the special communication between the band on the stage and the audience, with a kind of intoxication involved. Everything then related to their long history, which all this is built in.

Something Charlie died for. What about this special communication between Charlie and everyone else? Do you just fill the chair and move on? Apparently so if you have a ticket. I hope they step back, for Charlie Watts.

i hope mick keith and ronnie keep playing and recording together for many years to come



just not as the rolling stones

Shows go on... and will have tributes to Charlie. [www.the-sun.com]

A Day That We All Wished Would Never Come + GOD BLESS CHARLIE WATTS ON HIS JOURNEY HOME + Our Thoughts and Prayers Are With His Family and Friends + GOD BLESS THE ROLLING STONES + ... Thank You For The Sound Track of Our Lives ~ ... Eternally With Our Wandering Spirits.

It is Now Time to Tour as The Glimmer Twins ~

The end of this Stones era is over and done with. Charlie was our darling and can never be replaced, but I will continue to go and see the upcoming shows and actually buy even more tickets because this could be the last of the stadiums tours. Maybe they will scale down and move in another direction, but I don't think it will stop but I do think it will change. It has to.

A new version of The Rolling Stones without Charlie Watts could be playing in my local park and I wouldn't go. Sadly,8/24/21 was the day the band ended.

Quote
The Sicilian

Quote
Witness

Quote
The Sicilian

Quote
Witness

Quote
The Sicilian
People that know I'm a fan have been reaching out to talk about Charlie Watts and the Stones and get a measure on my thoughts. I've been clear to say that I really think they should cancel the mini tour out of respect for Charlie and because of COVID issues. Put it off until next year and take time to reflect and see how it feels after the holidays. It's the right thing to do IMO. The music world is watching to see how they react. You can bet on it.

I will say that a couple people have told me that if the Stones are out there playing in a couple weeks then it disrespects Charlie and his family and proves they are only in it for the money, especially with the outrageous ticket prices being charged even for "cheap seats."

As to motives, do you yourself share the viewpoint in bold, set forth in this special context? Or are you only a witness over remarks listened to?

Well, conversations usually start out with "hey did you hear about Charlie Watts" and the discussions eventually come to the tour, will they play or will they cancel. I have to admit that a few people have come right out and said what I wrote above. Some just don't even mention it. As far as I'm concerned, Keith made his thoughts known back when Charlie was ill. Older people that say things like that mean it. I can't see why they would do the shows other than for the money. So yes, I would agree. Otherwise what's a few months to take off then collaborate and decide if it's the right thing to carry on. COVID is also creating issues everywhere too. The governor of Oregon just ordered masks to be worn outdoors by everybody no exceptions.

One thinkable other motive is simply that they are musicians. That to play as the Rolling Stones is something that they live for. In the same manner that a novelist needs to write novels. In addition, it is about experiencing the special communication between the band on the stage and the audience, with a kind of intoxication involved. Everything then related to their long history, which all this is built in.

Something Charlie died for. What about this special communication between Charlie and everyone else? Do you just fill the chair and move on? Apparently so if you have a ticket. I hope they step back, for Charlie Watts.

Do you ask me about myself, or are you referring to no one in particular?

(Myself I am Scandinavian and was last in the audience in Stockholm, I think it was in the fall of 2017. One concert only, due to the largely unchanged setlists. Last tour in Europe, I did not go to any concert, out of the same reason, and then it was too soon for me with more or less the same setlists. What I would do, if the band with Jordan on drums were to play in Europe in 2022, depends. Among other things, will the Stones have released the studio album that for so long has been under way? Would they play songs from that album during concerts? An announced farewell tour, however, with largely unchanged setlists, I probably would find too much steeped in "last time" sentimentality. - I apologise if this was not asked for in any way.)

Quote
stevecardi


For so many years, the public thought the Stones were Mick and Keith. But the real fans--the diehards--know the Stones are a three-legged stool when it came to the fundamentals: Mick, Keith and Charlie. Take one of those legs away, and it's just not the Stones anymore. I'm not saying Mick, Keith and Ronnie won't still make great music, but it's just not the Stones.

The three legged stool was Keith/Bill/Charlie. That was the foundation of the Golden Age Stones. Brian, then Mick T, then Ronnie, added the filigree to the sound. No one in Charlie's passing has mentioned what used to be a common phrase, 'Wyman and Watts, the best rhythm section in rock and roll.'

If they still enjoy it, if they can still play, and if the fans still want to attend the shows, then I think the Stones should continue for as long as they like. Whilst I respect the other opinions on this forum, I don't buy into this 'no Charlie, no Stones' stuff. Mick, Keith and Ronnie have earned the right to still tour and record as The Rolling Stones. RIP Charlie.

In my mind, it’s over. Sorry but a major part of the band is gone. Cancel all shows & release what you have in the vaults. That’s my opinion. Come on lads, go out out tastefully. Otherwise it’s a money grab.

Only Mick, Keith & Ronnie know what has been happening for the last few weeks. It seems they made some plans accordingly with Charlie’s blessing (Steve Jordan) so we don’t know what other plans may have been made.

Quote
Paddy
Only Mick, Keith & Ronnie know what has been happening for the last few weeks. It seems they made some plans accordingly with Charlie’s blessing (Steve Jordan) so we don’t know what other plans may have been made.

Yep, it's possible they've made an agreement as to what would happen to the band if someone died or retired.

The upcoming US tour was going ahead anyway and I understand the contractual reasons for doing so.

I would also like to see them mark their 60th with a few shows and I wouldn't see that as a money grab.

These shows could honour Charlie and be done in his name. And then that's it.

The Rolling Stones can continue as a band / brand in terms of expanded re-releases, unreleased live material, (such as Knebworth if possible), and hopefully whatever they already have in the can for a new album.

For me it’s all about what Ronnie, Keith and Mick are feeling like doing. And what kind of talk or blessing Charlie might have given them.

I think they have the option of first of all doing this preplanned tour. And then tour Europe next year with Jordan as a 60 year goodbye tour.

It also depends on how well Jordan does the job. I think it’s an interesting thing to watch how he solves this seemingly impossible job. If he doesn’t find that swing I’d see them one last time for nostalgia. If he find a way to solve the challenge I’d be interested in seing more shows for sure.

While mourning the death of Charlie some seem to forget that Mick, Keith, Ronnie, Darryl and others are human beings and they are alive and have their plans and opinions. The Rolling Stones are not us. We don't have any right to decide what they should do. If they want to continue they will. They've been doing this for almost 60 years now and who are we to tell them to stop? It's like saying to someone who has lost their spouse not to remarry. It's cruel and selfish. If you don't accept Stones without Charlie don't buy tickets to the shows and don't listen to the new music if they release it. Simple as that.

oops



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2021-08-26 13:03 by Naturalust.

Quote
Witness
Addressing Naturalust's post: According to that logic, the band that set out with Mick Taylor as solo guitarist, ought to have changed their name. At least one prominent poster here seems to be of that opinion.

I understand your interpretation of my logic but Brian was not contributing to the music or the business so replacing him was a respectable business and creative decision. My logic, flawed as it may be, thinks that a band of musicians is truly an entity defined by the importance and contribution to the music and the brotherhood chemistry required to make the music, collectively.

I have never liked Darryl, Ronnie or Chucks addition to the band! Perhaps they have not been "allowed" to make real musical changes, and creative contributions to the music. But they haven't (much) and to me are hired guns, not Rolling Stones. I could have accepted Nick Hopkins or Billy Preston as Stones because they contributed ALOT to the music, but perhaps this is why they were never asked to be Stones!

Charlie is unquestionably the motor that has driven all Stones songs and a HUGE contributor to the music and the ongoing brotherhood. Anyone who has played in a rock band knows how subtle changes by the drummer can lead the band in both energy and tempo but also in dynamics and emotion. A simple fill may be taken for grated by a casual listener (or a super fan!) but it sets up the next few bars to either work or fail.

Charlie was like Columbo (the tv show detective). He played the simple "I'm just the drummer, talk to Mick or Keith about the songs", but he was smiling the whole time because the jokes on anyone who believes that. He never overplayed and said the perfect beat for the song. It's the difference between the pros and masters and everybody else. The prize for musicianship is based on how good you can make everybody else sound with the FEWEST notes or beats! Real musicians are constantly looking for ways to make the space talk instead of themselves. Charlie was a master. He knew that Rock is all about the backbeat so he learbed how to play it with only the snare by lifting his hihat stick on the back bearts. It's awkward and counterintuitive.

An example of where Charlie can say so much with a SINGLE drum beat, listen to the last chorus of Dead Flowers and see if you can pick out the single strike which leads the entire band forward. Is it obvious to you? It's my favorite beat in the song...lol.

Sorry for the lenghty reply but I hope you understand my view. You were kind enough to reply to mine and witness I have respected the way you think for years. peace

Quote
24FPS

Quote
stevecardi


For so many years, the public thought the Stones were Mick and Keith. But the real fans--the diehards--know the Stones are a three-legged stool when it came to the fundamentals: Mick, Keith and Charlie. Take one of those legs away, and it's just not the Stones anymore. I'm not saying Mick, Keith and Ronnie won't still make great music, but it's just not the Stones.

The three legged stool was Keith/Bill/Charlie. That was the foundation of the Golden Age Stones. Brian, then Mick T, then Ronnie, added the filigree to the sound. No one in Charlie's passing has mentioned what used to be a common phrase, 'Wyman and Watts, the best rhythm section in rock and roll.'

1000percent correct. Keith Bill and Charlie gave it that unique sound

Quote
Naturalust

Quote
Witness
Addressing Naturalust's post: According to that logic, the band that set out with Mick Taylor as solo guitarist, ought to have changed their name. At least one prominent poster here seems to be of that opinion.

I understand your interpretation of my logic but Brian was not contributing to the music or the business so replacing him was a respectable business and creative decision. My logic, flawed as it may be, thinks that a band of musicians is truly an entity defined by the importance and contribution to the music and the brotherhood chemistry required to make the music, collectively.

I have never liked Darryl, Ronnie or Chucks addition to the band! Perhaps they have not been "allowed" to make real musical changes, and creative contributions to the music. But they haven't (much) and to me are hired guns, not Rolling Stones. I could have accepted Nick Hopkins or Billy Preston as Stones because they contributed ALOT to the music, but perhaps this is why they were never asked to be Stones!

Charlie is unquestionably the motor that has driven all Stones songs and a HUGE contributor to the music and the ongoing brotherhood. Anyone who has played in a rock band knows how subtle changes by the drummer can lead the band in both energy and tempo but also in dynamics and emotion. A simple fill may be taken for grated by a casual listener (or a super fan!) but it sets up the next few bars to either work or fail.

Charlie was like Columbo (the tv show detective). He played the simple "I'm just the drummer, talk to Mick or Keith about the songs", but he was smiling the whole time because the jokes on anyone who believes that. He never overplayed and said the perfect beat for the song. It's the difference between the pros and masters and everybody else. The prize for musicianship is based on how good you can make everybody else sound with the FEWEST notes or beats! Real musicians are constantly looking for ways to make the space talk instead of themselves. Charlie was a master. He knew that Rock is all about the backbeat so he learbed how to play it with only the snare by lifting his hihat stick on the back bearts. It's awkward and counterintuitive.

Sorry for the lenghty reply but I hope you understand my view. You were kind enough to reply to mine and witness I have respected the way you think for years.

Thank you for your rich answer. It has been good, Naturalust, recently to see you posting again on Tell Me,

I have learnt to appreciate Ronnie as to how he has lived up to being left with the great challenge to recreate the contributions of his two predecessors. Darren to me is somehow anonymous in his loyalty. I have to admit that I am quite reserved to Chuck each time when I hear him ( plonk, plonk).

You remain silent in your presence, Doxa, may I ask about your thoughts and feelings now?

Quote
franzk
While mourning the death of Charlie some seem to forget that Mick, Keith, Ronnie, Darryl and others are human beings and they are alive and have their plans and opinions. The Rolling Stones are not us. We don't have any right to decide what they should do. If they want to continue they will. They've been doing this for almost 60 years now and who are we to tell them to stop? It's like saying to someone who has lost their spouse not to remarry. It's cruel and selfish. If you don't accept Stones without Charlie don't buy tickets to the shows and don't listen to the new music if they release it. Simple as that.

Exactly. No one has a right to tell Mick, Keith, and Ronnie to retire. People who do so should ask themselves when they intend to 'pack it in. And it's not a 'money grab' if they continue touring. It's what they do. It's a money grab only to the people who think they are entitled to a lower ticket price.

Quote
Father Ted

Quote
Paddy
Only Mick, Keith & Ronnie know what has been happening for the last few weeks. It seems they made some plans accordingly with Charlie’s blessing (Steve Jordan) so we don’t know what other plans may have been made.

Yep, it's possible they've made an agreement as to what would happen to the band if someone died or retired.

@Father Ted: There's just no way they haven't done that. It's a big business and surely they have prepared for circumstances like this. What the plans are, remains to be seen.

@Paddy: perhaps it should be pointed out that hiring Jordan did not require Charlie's "blessing" per se, as the clause allowing for a replacement drummer in case of Charlie's illness has been in their contracts/insurance policy for some time now. Naturally, all 4 band members had signed off on it so it that sense everybody had already given it their "blessing". But a new/separate one wasn't needed.



Edited 4 time(s). Last edit at 2021-08-26 13:33 by Topi.

Do the right thing

You know, something very positive could come out of this.

It could bring Mick and Keith closer together. And their stalwart gypsy friend.

It could make them resolve to take it to the limit in his honour.

And Mick might be penning words to a song as I write; or in due course. And not out of comercial interest.For love of a friend. And/or Keith. Together would be great.

And the Who continued without Moon.No-one questioned that. Not the same.

Still the Who.


ps pardon if similar sentiments already psted above



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 2021-08-26 14:27 by Four Stone Walls.

Quote
Witness
You remain silent in your presence, Doxa, may I ask about your thoughts and feelings now?

I guess I am still shocked, so I really can't say anything about my feelings about the future of the band. Such an empty feeling. But they do like they decide to do, like they always have done, and it is my task to cope with it or not.

My bet is that they will go on (also after this American tour). That surely what Charlie would have wanted them to do - but then again, Charlie's the last person to acknowledge his significance to the band and how the band sees him... Of the band members I am most worried about Keith and how he will take this. The professionalism, keeping up appearances, big money and contract deals aside, I think there was an unique bond between Keith and Charlie, and not just musically. Keith's admiration of Charlie was real - aside his wife, there probably aren't many (if any) people in the world that have that kind of relationship - true equalness - to Keith. After 'brother' Mick, Charlie most probably was his oldest friend alive. Probably having another friend, colloborator and a trusted man Jordan on drums saves a lot in this sad situation. But I gotta say that for Jordan to have this dream job of any dream drum jobs it is not going to be easy either; it is another thing occasionally fill his shoes than everyone knowing that Charlie's gone for good... Take all the news, articles, rememberings and tributes all over the world now pointing out the uniqueness and importance of the Giant - see, if in the past for many 'casual fans' Charlie was taken as for granted and not much reflected further, now all of them are forced to recognice his essential role. And after a few weeks Jordan will be there - a wrong man - doing the job that is impossible to copy by principle...

But yeah, there is a huge hole in Rolling Stones Touring Machine - impossible to fill in - but in the end I guess the best way for them to appreciate Charlie and his memory is to play as good as they can. So at least for the upcoming US Tour the hidden agenda - both for the band and us fans - might be 'Let's do this for Charlie' - not that I think they will too much press that on upfront . That's not their cup of coffee (or old-fashioned English morning tea) - just a few words by Mick (and Keith) plus a big photo of Charlie for a moment or something. But otherwise business as usual: "Are you feeliing gooood?!" And most likely, we do.

- Doxa



Edited 6 time(s). Last edit at 2021-08-26 14:53 by Doxa.

Thanks for sharing your perspective, Doxa!

Quote
Witness
Thanks for sharing your perspective, Doxa!

I second that.

Nicely said, Doxa. Just my cup of tea here, hehehe ...

Maybe, during the introductions, Steve could come up front, applauding Charlie's portrait on the screen above the stage, then turn around and take the bow to the audience. Could work quite nice under the given circumstances.

My pleasure, Witness - and thanks for asking it!

- Doxa

Yes, they have to stop. If the engine (and the glue in the band) is out, the car doesn't ride anymore. Or are they going the way like The Who?