Quote
Rocktiludrop

Quote
Doxa

Quote
Rocktiludrop

Quote
Doxa

Quote
dennycranium
No more painfully slow versions of songs.
It's not a criticism of Charlie's playing,

Well, that's exactly what it is.

By the way, it is always Keith who wants the tempo to be slower, Mick the faster.

- Doxa

Just unbelievable, you are loosing the plot, so because Charlie was fantastic and unique we can't give credit to Steve and Keith for the incredible job they are doing to hold this thing together without you coming out with silly comments like Keith wants tempos slower, Mick is faster.
Well the reason the tempos are faster is down to Keith and Steve not Mick.
I don't know if you have noticed but Mick sings and Keith and the band takes care of the music, Mick moves and dances to Keith's guitar for best part of the show, and Micks looking great because Keith, Ronnie, Steve and the rest of the band are providing a solid up tempo musical backdrop.

Haha. That's funny. You don't know a shit about the Stones dynamics. For a a self-decralw Stones fan and expert, that kind of ignorance is, well, something..

- Doxa

You don't know the first thing about what this music means or represents to the listener, you dissect it then analyse the individual pieces and try to intellectualise about it in essay after essay, you really don't get it do you, you can't open them up to see what makes them tick. It's just about the feel of it in the moment, and no two songs or shows are ever the same, go watch The Eagles in your natural habitat.

Sure, but the point about Mick speeding up songs and Keith slowing them down comes from mr. Richards himself. Part of his 'not the rock, but the roll' talk. But what does he know...

- Doxa

I know the "Mick's Rock, I'm Roll" quote but I ask again when did Keith ever voice an intention to slow the songs down?

Quote
Nikkei
I know the "Mick's Rock, I'm Roll" quote but I ask again when did Keith ever voice an intention to slow the songs down?

Not many years ago he explicitly mentioned that his business is to slow things down, since Mick has the tendency to play songs too fast. I also recall Mick saying something similar (that there is always that little tension between him and Keith in regard the tempo). Sorry, too difficult to locate the exact sources at the moment.

- Doxa



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 2021-11-08 16:45 by Doxa.

Quote
Doxa

Quote
Nikkei
I know the "Mick's Rock, I'm Roll" quote but I ask again when did Keith ever voice an intention to slow the songs down?

Not many years ago he explicitly mentioned that his business is to slow things down, since Mick has the tendency to play songs too fast. I also recall Mick saying something similar (that there is always that little tension between him and Keith in regard the tempo). Sorry, too difficult to locate the exact sources at the moment.

- Doxa

Tumbling Dice was the core of the conflict, if memory serves. Keith likes it slower, Mick wants it faster.

Quote
Doxa

Quote
Nikkei
I know the "Mick's Rock, I'm Roll" quote but I ask again when did Keith ever voice an intention to slow the songs down?

Not many years ago he explicitly mentioned that his business is to slow things down, since Mick has the tendency to play songs too fast. I also recall Mick saying something similar (that there is always that little tension between him and Keith in regard the tempo). Sorry, too difficult to locate the exact sources at the moment.

- Doxa

Yes but i don't think Keith is referring to playing live songs like JFK slower, i think Keith means that the Stones are a Rock and Roll band as opposed to a Rock band, in more recent decades it would be fair to say Keith is responsible for perhaps writing the slower tunes over the years, that is evident, but does Keith want to play Stones songs at a slower pace live, no i see no evidence of that.

Did the Stones play live tracks a little slower in recent years to help Charlie ?? Yes it would appear that way given that the tempos are faster in 2021.

Quote
Rocktiludrop

Quote
Doxa

Quote
Nikkei
I know the "Mick's Rock, I'm Roll" quote but I ask again when did Keith ever voice an intention to slow the songs down?

Not many years ago he explicitly mentioned that his business is to slow things down, since Mick has the tendency to play songs too fast. I also recall Mick saying something similar (that there is always that little tension between him and Keith in regard the tempo). Sorry, too difficult to locate the exact sources at the moment.

- Doxa

Yes but i don't think Keith is referring to playing live songs like JFK slower, i think Keith means that the Stones are a Rock and Roll band as opposed to a Rock band, in more recent decades it would be fair to say Keith is responsible for perhaps writing the slower tunes over the years, that is evident, but does Keith want to play Stones songs at a slower pace live, no i see no evidence of that.

Did the Stones play live tracks a little slower in recent years to help Charlie ?? Yes it would appear that way given that the tempos are faster in 2021.

Blasphemous rumours...

That is simply not true. In 1969 he was probably at the peak of his ability. He kept that up for many years. In 1981 he was still good but sometimes sloppy. He came back in good style in 1989.
The sloppiness was gone. He had sharpened up. But from 1994 and onwards it's a slippery slope. Never bad but never better either. And, of course, it is unjust to compare 1969 with 2021. Or 25 with 77...

Quote
retired_dog

Quote
Rocktiludrop

Quote
Doxa

Quote
Nikkei
I know the "Mick's Rock, I'm Roll" quote but I ask again when did Keith ever voice an intention to slow the songs down?

Not many years ago he explicitly mentioned that his business is to slow things down, since Mick has the tendency to play songs too fast. I also recall Mick saying something similar (that there is always that little tension between him and Keith in regard the tempo). Sorry, too difficult to locate the exact sources at the moment.

- Doxa

Yes but i don't think Keith is referring to playing live songs like JFK slower, i think Keith means that the Stones are a Rock and Roll band as opposed to a Rock band, in more recent decades it would be fair to say Keith is responsible for perhaps writing the slower tunes over the years, that is evident, but does Keith want to play Stones songs at a slower pace live, no i see no evidence of that.

Did the Stones play live tracks a little slower in recent years to help Charlie ?? Yes it would appear that way given that the tempos are faster in 2021.

Blasphemous rumours...

Don't you think Charlie was much more vibrant and forceful in say 2005-2006 compared to the 50 and counting years, don't you think it's fair to say he slowed down a bit in his 70s, it's understandable at that age, happens to us all, Mick has slowed down, it's not blasphemous, it's inevitable.

Peak in 1969? 1999!

Perhaps, Björn. The real downhill started in 2006 I guess. Up until that he still kept it up pretty good. I still think the 1968 to 1972 era was his best though. As it was for the band itself.

Quote
Stoneage
Perhaps, Björn. The real downhill started in 2006 I guess. Up until that he still kept it up pretty good. I still think the 1968 to 1972 era was his best though. As it was for the band itself.

Totally agree, in 2003 he was still a force of nature, what happened between 2003 to 2005 is anyone's guess, we know the head injury was a major blow in 06' although there were nights like the Beacon Theatre and Austin Texas where he was pretty good.

Up to a few shows ago i actually thought Keith was back to 2003 form.

Quote
Rocktiludrop

Quote
Stoneage
Perhaps, Björn. The real downhill started in 2006 I guess. Up until that he still kept it up pretty good. I still think the 1968 to 1972 era was his best though. As it was for the band itself.

Totally agree, in 2003 he was still a force of nature, what happened between 2003 to 2005 is anyone's guess, we know the head injury was a major blow in 06' although there were nights like the Beacon Theatre and Austin Texas where he was pretty good.

Up to a few shows ago i actually thought Keith was back to 2003 form.

Wait a minute... wasn't that the very show that needed guitar overdubs by Pierre de Beauport to turn it into releasable quality?



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2021-11-08 21:01 by retired_dog.

As has been stated by many, Keith has been in gradual decline since the Voodoo Lounge tour. It’s been a slow, but steady deterioration. With each subsequent tour, his abilities have been hampered by worsening heberden’s nodes - his finger condition. Whilst going through this, his continuing alcoholism only hindered him further. The improvements in very recent times are down to his sobriety; or at least, severely cutting-back on the alcohol consumption. I haven’t analysed his performances to the extent some have, but he does certainly seem more focused now.

Cologne 99, end of the real game for Keith.
After it's fun but it's another story

1981-82, just listen Wembley stuff

Quote
retired_dog

Quote
Rocktiludrop

Quote
Stoneage
Perhaps, Björn. The real downhill started in 2006 I guess. Up until that he still kept it up pretty good. I still think the 1968 to 1972 era was his best though. As it was for the band itself.

Totally agree, in 2003 he was still a force of nature, what happened between 2003 to 2005 is anyone's guess, we know the head injury was a major blow in 06' although there were nights like the Beacon Theatre and Austin Texas where he was pretty good.

Up to a few shows ago i actually thought Keith was back to 2003 form.

Wait a minute... wasn't that the very show that needed guitar overdubs by Pierre de Beauport to turn it into releasable quality?

Don't know about that but Micks vocals definitely sound overdubbed.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2021-11-08 22:52 by Rocktiludrop.

Quote
Rocktiludrop

Quote
retired_dog

Quote
Rocktiludrop

Quote
Stoneage
Perhaps, Björn. The real downhill started in 2006 I guess. Up until that he still kept it up pretty good. I still think the 1968 to 1972 era was his best though. As it was for the band itself.

Totally agree, in 2003 he was still a force of nature, what happened between 2003 to 2005 is anyone's guess, we know the head injury was a major blow in 06' although there were nights like the Beacon Theatre and Austin Texas where he was pretty good.

Up to a few shows ago i actually thought Keith was back to 2003 form.

Wait a minute... wasn't that the very show that needed guitar overdubs by Pierre de Beauport to turn it into releasable quality?

Don't know about that but Micks vocals definitely sound like overdubed.

Keith played as good in 2005 and first half of 2006 as he did on the licks tour

Quote
Rocktiludrop

Quote
retired_dog

Quote
Rocktiludrop

Quote
Stoneage
Perhaps, Björn. The real downhill started in 2006 I guess. Up until that he still kept it up pretty good. I still think the 1968 to 1972 era was his best though. As it was for the band itself.

Totally agree, in 2003 he was still a force of nature, what happened between 2003 to 2005 is anyone's guess, we know the head injury was a major blow in 06' although there were nights like the Beacon Theatre and Austin Texas where he was pretty good.

Up to a few shows ago i actually thought Keith was back to 2003 form.

Wait a minute... wasn't that the very show that needed guitar overdubs by Pierre de Beauport to turn it into releasable quality?

Don't know about that but Micks vocals definitely sound overdubbed.

But as a "Stones expert" you should know your stuff; in this case, just look at the liner notes of the Biggest Bang DVD release, which, by the way, mention no overdubs by Mick, just:

"Additional Recordings – Dave Rouze, Pierre De Beauport"

Please stop the nagging. It's a bad thing.

Quote
Stoneage
Please stop the nagging. It's a bad thing.

I know, but sometimes certain people seem to beg for it. But ok.

Speaking of Additional Recordings
what ever happened to – Dave Rouze .... where did he go to ???



ROCKMAN

Quote
Rockman
Speaking of Additional Recordings
what ever happened to – Dave Rouze .... where did he go to ???

Last I heard is that he works (worked?) as guitar tech for Brad Paisley.

Quote
Rocktiludrop

Don't know about that but Micks vocals definitely sound overdubbed.

Yes, Mick's vocals was definitely overdubbed for some songs on the Austin 2006 concert. Just listen to Satisfaction: [youtu.be]

Quote
TheBlockbuster

Quote
Rocktiludrop

Don't know about that but Micks vocals definitely sound overdubbed.

Yes, Mick's vocals was definitely overdubbed for some songs on the Austin 2006 concert. Just listen to Satisfaction: [youtu.be]

Funny how at 2:57 his real live vocals briefly comes back, and then at 3:01 it's overdubbed again. It's a bit of a Frankenstein project.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2021-11-09 12:35 by RaiseTheKnife.

On Keith.

Another factor I consider plays some role in this debate along with the ‘vividness effect’ I mentioned upthread (on p. 5) — ‘wishful thinking’. People don’t wanna see their hero decline. He does. Slowly or not, but surely. He is human. Like us. Like everybody else. Time waits for no one.

Where is my 1978-82 Leí??

Quote
retired_dog

Quote
Rocktiludrop

Quote
retired_dog

Quote
Rocktiludrop

Quote
Stoneage

Perhaps, Björn. The real downhill started in 2006 I guess. Up until that he still kept it up pretty good. I still think the 1968 to 1972 era was his best though. As it was for the band itself.

Totally agree, in 2003 he was still a force of nature, what happened between 2003 to 2005 is anyone's guess, we know the head injury was a major blow in 06' although there were nights like the Beacon Theatre and Austin Texas where he was pretty good.

Up to a few shows ago i actually thought Keith was back to 2003 form.

Wait a minute... wasn't that the very show that needed guitar overdubs by Pierre de Beauport to turn it into releasable quality?

Don't know about that but Micks vocals definitely sound overdubbed.

But as a "Stones expert" you should know your stuff; in this case, just look at the liner notes of the Biggest Bang DVD release, which, by the way, mention no overdubs by Mick, just:

"Additional Recordings – Dave Rouze, Pierre De Beauport"

Yes compared to you I'm definitely an expert, i don't need to read album covers to know who has had overdubbs and where, my ears tell me, not words on paper.

Either that or Mick just happened to come up with his greatest live vocal just as the cameras were rolling, what are the chances.

Quote
RisingStone
On Keith.

Another factor I consider plays some role in this debate along with the ‘vividness effect’ I mentioned upthread (on p. 5) — ‘wishful thinking’. People don’t wanna see their hero decline. He does. Slowly or not, but surely. He is human. Like us. Like everybody else. Time waits for no one.

Yes true but what was revealing this tour was that it wasn't Keith's age responsible for his decline, it must have been something else because up until a few shows ago he played better and with more energy and focus than he had since 2006.

Quote
Rocktiludrop

Quote
RisingStone
On Keith.

Another factor I consider plays some role in this debate along with the ‘vividness effect’ I mentioned upthread (on p. 5) — ‘wishful thinking’. People don’t wanna see their hero decline. He does. Slowly or not, but surely. He is human. Like us. Like everybody else. Time waits for no one.

Yes true but what was revealing this tour was that it wasn't Keith's age responsible for his decline, it must have been something else because up until a few shows ago he played better and with more energy and focus than he had since 2006.

I don’t think the decline is as steady as you depict it. There have been better or worse shows each tour. Keith played very well at some of the 2013 shows, for example, and was up and down over the past few years.

He played with more consistent focus at the beginning of this tour, but the energy level wasn’t as high as many of the earlier tours the past decade.

Quote
bam

Quote
Rocktiludrop

Quote
RisingStone
On Keith.

Another factor I consider plays some role in this debate along with the ‘vividness effect’ I mentioned upthread (on p. 5) — ‘wishful thinking’. People don’t wanna see their hero decline. He does. Slowly or not, but surely. He is human. Like us. Like everybody else. Time waits for no one.

Yes true but what was revealing this tour was that it wasn't Keith's age responsible for his decline, it must have been something else because up until a few shows ago he played better and with more energy and focus than he had since 2006.

I don’t think the decline is as steady as you depict it. There have been better or worse shows each tour. Keith played very well at some of the 2013 shows, for example, and was up and down over the past few years.

He played with more consistent focus at the beginning of this tour, but the energy level wasn’t as high as many of the earlier tours the past decade.

Yes Keith was spot on at the Fonda gig.

I think we've all worked out by now that Keith's inconsistency is down to drinking, hangovers etc, I'm just surprised he gets away with it, he's still in good health.

It's obvious that off and on he still drinks to varying degrees. Crazy but amazing at the same time, Keith definitely likes to do life and touring the hard way, basically he's a shy man, it's hard to be that Keith Richards in front of 60,000 people without something to alter his consciousness.
If you really thought about it it would paralyse you facing those kind of audiences knowing how easily it is to @#$%& up with those fingers.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2021-11-09 19:12 by Rocktiludrop.