Bjornulf, you are the biggest Stones booster I know and I commend you for it and this site but I can't understand how you can hear Ronnie play and not recognize that his playing is seriously not up to scratch. This has nothing to do with if Elvis is alive or if there is a man on the moon or it rains because of all the fish in the atmosphere, it has to do with with listening objectively. There must be a reason the subject comes up so often on this board and it has nothing to with myth or hating Ronnie but because there must be some merit to it.

I love Ronnie and the music he has made with Stones, and for those of you who say he played great at whichever show you attended I'm glad you caught him on a good night, but as StonesTod points out, after having heard him at the 2nd SF show (and many recordings from this tour) can any one truthly say that he is playing well?

He would be better in a more relaxed atmosphere.
Maybe he bloom again after 70, at club gigs.

well to be honest i like the stones to be stoned 1964_1988 but we all have to become sober some day if we can do it, cause i remember going wild without the booze and shit over the stones el

its a fact lots off us is not clean when listening and going to the stones is that a shame?

And i want the stones, alive elvis can get no pills the stones out live all of us

Rooster, I'm not sure what is you are trying to say. Could you clarify or use your native tongue?

Ok chris,i rather see ron clean then dead! I love the stones stoned and clean!!!IT does not matter, the fact is if one is gettin sober, one is gettin down first and then get up!!!!!Thats the reason of that marley cover!(i love it!)

No argument about wanting Ronnie alive. I think most of us can agree on that .(Hopefully all of us) You also wrote "its a fact lots off us is not clean when listening and going to the stones is that a shame?" Well, that's as maybe but the Stones aren't paying us to see them but rather the reverse. One of the reason I love the Stones is because they have been a great guitar band and when one of their chief instrumentalists is not playing up to the level I know he can then I feel compeled to comment on it, for better of for worse.

when i say stuff about ronnie i'm not trying to belittle or rip him. i'm concerned for his and the stones future. i never had that feeling that this could be it before.

I heard that the Stones won't play Iowa because there are so many meth labs there due to all the "white buffalo" propane tanks...

They know that if Ronnie gets within 100 miles of a meth lab he will fall off the wagon.

"It's just that demon life has got me in it's sway..."

>> can any one truthly say that he is playing well? <<

sure. comments like yours and StonesTod's make it pretty scary to say that - like now i'm proving myself an ignoramus in public -
and i haven't heard the SF show, but yes, i have heard some nice stuff from Ronnie on this tour. so have a bunch of other people.
is he consistently *on*? no. but he ain't consistently "off" either.

ChrisM my dear, i'm curious if you see what i meant in my earlier post about how anyone who wants to come off as a connoisseur
knows it's "hip" (and/or "safe") to criticize Ronnie. i don't mean you're this kind of "erzatz connoisseur" -
i'm talking about a general phenomenon of "when in doubt, rip Ronnie". and i'm just curious if you know what i mean or not.


"What do you want - what?!"
- Keith



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 2005-11-20 21:10 by with sssoul.

Ronnie's guitar work has been minimized within the band on this tour at least so far. Mostly fills and rhythm. Nothing like the early Fall 2002 shows. Ronnie's playing as evident by CD's and DVD's regressed throughout the 2002/2003 shows.

I hope Ronnie is okay and that his playing improves as the tour moves along because I hope to attend several more shows this year and next year.

Unfortunately Ronnie's playing is only rated on his solo's. If Keith's playing was only rated on his solo's he would be hit with the same criticism.
I think Ronnie's rythmn/riff playing is a great accent to Keith's. It is the Stones sound. Neither are great lead players any longer.

Hardcore fans will hear a rough lead by Ronnie and consider the whole song crap.
Most regular fans will love the whole song and may or may not make note of the mistake in the lead.

Markdog Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> >
> Unfortunately Ronnie's playing is only rated on
> his solo's. If Keith's playing was only rated on
> his solo's he would be hit with the same
> criticism.
>

wrong on both points. i watched/listened to RW closely both SF shows - he didn't play a decent lick at all - sure it's most notable during his infrequent solo opportunities - but the guy has become a total hack. there are 1000's of amateurs in the bay area alone that could outplay him right now.

And, I was actually marginally impressed with Keith's breaks - his repetoire becomes increasingly limited over the years, but at least he plays what he intends to play.

Ms Sssoul, I always welcome you intelligent and keen comments and in response to your post I have to say that I take no pleasure in criticising Ronnie, and when I do so it is not out of any desire to be 'hip' or fashionable. The idea of doing so never occured to me, but having been a fan of his guitar work since his days with the Faces and having listend to and attended some shows on this tour I felt compelled to comment on what I precieve to be an obvious (to me) decline in his playing. I want nothing but the best for him and the band but when I see something amiss I can't stand by and say nothing. Do you follow my meaning? I hope so.

I have no idea if Ronnie is clean or sober. Doesn't really matter to me, I just hope he lives a long and happy life either way.

As for his playing, I have heard most of the boots from this tour. He has had a few bad moments, but I think overall he is playing well. The band sounds great and Ronnie is not holding them back in any way as far as I can hear.

Just goes to show that two different people can listen to the same thing and form two different opinions about it. But those who aren't happy with Ronnie's playing seem to be in the minority. The concerts certainly continue to be well attended and well reviewed by various newspapers and magaazines.

so i keep hearing about folks saying ronnie is playing well on this tour. let's be specific - cite a specific song/venue. i've yet to hear anything (and I've heard all the recordings available) that impresses me.

I come from the perspective of a guitarist and so my view is very much colored by that but even so a bad solo is a bad solo and like StonesTod I have yet to hear anything that Ronnie has done on this tour that approaches his seemingly former brilliance.

> Again, I don't see how the following 2 things can
> BOTH be true:
>
> 1) Ronnie has "checked out" on the tour AND
>
> 2) The stones are putting on some incredible
> shows

My perspective on this is follows:

Yes, both 1 can be true and 2 somewhat true

I have seen the stones 6 times now. Caught them on the Steel Wheels tours when I was 13, just when I was getting into all things rock. From that first concert I was hooked. Lifetime Stones addict ... no cure and I don't want one.

Now to Ronnie's playing on the current tour. I caught them in Chicago at Soldier Field. Consensus on this board is that was one of the Stones better nights this tour, and I agree. But, Ronnie wasn't great that night.

My perspective was from sitting around the 50 yd line in 2nd level seats. The whole show just had fantastic energy, and I was completely satisfied with the performance and then some. Throughout the concert, I swapped between just watching the show at eye's view and seeing what was going on the big screen. I remember Ronnie’s solo’s during TD and YCAGWYW were substandard (ie those limited note compilations ending in an one note, off key, blur out). These are the only distinct impressions I have of him playing that show. For everything else, he just blended into the background and what a brilliant background it was. Yes, I suppose the concert would have been even better if Ronnie ripped off powerful solos during these two featured takes. But, the show was still great. This is still the best rock show out there, bar none. In sum, yes Ronnie is blowing some solos, but for the large majority of the audience who can’t (nor doesn’t want to) concentrate on each and every note being played, his playing is just fine. He is a Stone through and through and he is part of that still undeniable magic that happens when the boys take the stage.




Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 2005-11-20 07:06 by Steel_Wheels.

Given: The Stones are the Greatest Rock n Roll Band of all time.
Given: The Stones are on a level today, at 60+ years of age, that nobody can match.
Given: They put on a great show.
Given: We shouldn't expect too much of this band after all they've given us.
Given: Bigger Bang is a great album - one we had no right to expect.
Given: Criticism of individual members of the band misses the bigger picture.

HOWEVER: Ronnie did not play well at the S.F. Sunday night show. Ronnie only made a cursory attempt at scratching out a TD solo, and on YCAGWYW, where he gave up soloing years ago, he couldn't even be bothered with a lead in to the bridge. Perhaps it was an off night - that's allowed. And I don't expect much from him, just some tasty accents, fills, and the occasional solo. I say this out of concern for his health.

Steel_Wheels Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> > Again, I don't see how the following 2 things
> can
> > BOTH be true:
> >
> > 1) Ronnie has "checked out" on the tour AND
> >
> > 2) The stones are putting on some incredible
>
> > shows
>
> My perspective on this is follows:
>
> Yes, both 1 can be true and 2 somewhat true
>

>
> Now to Ronnie's playing on the current tour. I
> caught them in Chicago at Soldier Field. Consensus
> on this board is that was one of the Stones better
> nights this tour, and I agree. But, Ronnie wasn't
> great that night.
>

I saw that gig and we must have seen 2 separate shows.

Where have you ever seen Satisfaction or Jumpin' Jack Flash played better ?

And were you "overall disappointed" with the entire show ?

If so, you were sure in the minority... and that's what I just can't see, that you can attend a "great" stones gig and the lead guitarist not be playing really well... both things can't happen. Maybe this song or that song could be played "more spirited", but overall the lead guitar has to work for the stones to put on a memorable show, IMO.

"It's just that demon life has got me in it's sway..."



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2005-11-20 07:37 by BornOnTheBayou.

"""saw that gig and we must have seen 2 separate shows.

Where have you ever seen Satisfaction or Jumpin' Jack Flash played better ?

And were you "overall disappointed" with the entire show ?

If so, you were sure in the minority... and that's what I just can't see, that you can attend a "great" stones gig and the lead guitarist not be playing really well... both things can't happen. Maybe this song or that song could be played "more spirited", but overall the lead guitar has to work for the stones to put on a memorable show, IMO.""""


I disagree. You may have a much more fine tuned Stones concert ear than me (and probably have seen many more shows), so you have a different standard of "great" (apparently for you all the stones need to be hitting on all cylinders for a show to qualify as “great” )

For me, the soldiers field show was "great" despite the two noted missteps in Ronnie's playing I mentioned in my previous post. I certainly was not "overall disappointed" in the show, quite the opposite. The show was "great" for me because the energy was there from band and crowd. Ronnie is part of that energy and thus the Stones can still put on a "great" show for me despite the "lead" guitarist not blowing me away because, in a Stones show, the lead guitarist does not need to blow me away (again, this is the perspective from someone who has been to 6 stones shows. I entirely respect the opinion of fans who have been to many more shows who are looking for superior performance from Ronnie as a necessary component to qualify a show as "great").



I want to add one more thing. Suppose you could wave a magic wand and bring in some "lead" guitarist that could absolutley nail every solo. Well, if you did this you would no longer have Ronnie and you would no longer have the "Stones". The sum is greater than its parts.



Edited 5 time(s). Last edit at 2005-11-20 08:34 by Steel_Wheels.

I have not seen or heard the current tour but I think some critism is fair if he is not playing well. But i will say this. Ronnie is really limited by what Mick and keith want him to do. He may be standing there, jumpin around and playin the fool , but it is not his fault. He is told to do that. He is really Mick and Keiths puppet (in the nicest way) and they pull the strings. Would that not get you down? I mean it is easy to critise being a guitar player, but the Stones would swallow most of us up! I am sure I would have my ideas, but not being my band I would respect and do as I'm told. I mean Metallica could play SFTD or any of the solo's with their teeth, but they too were swallowed up by the Stones machine!

Having said that if he is botching simple solo's that he has played a thousand times maybe he is trying to say something?

meth...really...of all the things that I have heard rumoured, never have I heard that Ronnie played with meth. Though he may be the world record holding freebaser.

I just spent 5 weeks following the Stones (and others)on the mainland. I was Ronnie side at two shows, row 8 Anaheim, and like Bjorn, pool circle Hollywood Bowl #2. You could not get closer to Ronnie then I did at the bowl, there was no security, no aisle...absolutely nothing between us and the stage. Indeed like a 60's dream you could place you elbows on the stage, tho you were quickly discouraged by men in suits who were otherwise amazingly unobtrusive. I have extensive professional experience with intoxicated people and an unfortunate amount of personel experience. I would wager a good portion of my life's saving that MR WOOD was stone cold sober at those shows, and more alive and active then I have seen him in a decade. He never even lit a ciggie! He interacted with fans, talked to a few of us, handed out picks, smiled, and best of all looked healthy for someone so ridiculously thin. He certainly was a lot more vibarnt than some of the shows I saw from up close in Europe on the licks tour.

When you listen to a boot you are not getting it all, and being there up close you get a few surprises. For instance on She's So Cold...it is Ronnie that starts the song and carries the damn rythym, and that it is Keith that is in the background doing fills. Mr. Wood is fine and he is giving the CROWD, but not us handful of fanatics, what they want from him.

Taylor would take a solo, close his eyes, stand at the side of the stage and play. If not for the nusical quality, it would have been boring. You can see something like that from Al Dimeola or at any jazz concert. Even BB King moves more than MT. Like it or not, the majority of people at the shows today are there for spectacle. Notice, in the past it was a concert, today it is a show. Ronnie takes solos...he is out there, in the spotlight, mugging as the detractors say. Today he is less a muscisin and more a performer, and he is doing it well. Hell, he was walking the retaining wall at the bowl, a narrow srtip of cement waste high seprearting areas. I have never seen RW fail to get the audience going, even if I agree that at times he is doing it with excruciating guitar noise. I have also seen him do wonderful slide work while Keith is out front posing, and in those moments if you listen he is doing all right. In fact, I think if Ron wanted to play seriously he still could, but the status of everey member in the group changes with time, as does the way they fulfill their roles. There was a time when MJ's vocals were buried in the mix and his slur was so pronounced that rumour was he had bit off the end of his tongue. Listen to the music now vs say EOMS era; it is the loudest single instrument on stage and on the CD and his enuncaition is painfully clear at points ( that x at the end of fox on RJ carried out as an endless sibulent.) We are hearing a different version of the same group that has cahnged over and over over forty plus years.

The probelm with Ronnies playing, the set list, Keiths posing, and on an on is again most complainers on the board fail to realize that we people here, and at shidobbee and Rocks Off, are only the tiniest minority of the people at these events. We all want something special never ever realizing that for 95% of the people there. those people who may see 1 or 2 shows per tour, each show is special. The Stones are still out there because they are, right now, exactly what the overwhelming majority of ticket buyers want them to be, an exciting rough and ready tuff old bastards giving a ragged show of thrills and excitement. It is the energy, not the music, that sells the tickets now days.

ChrisM Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I come from the perspective of a guitarist and so
> my view is very much colored by that but even so a
> bad solo is a bad solo and like StonesTod I have
> yet to hear anything that Ronnie has done on this
> tour that approaches his seemingly former
> brilliance.


Well said ChrisM.

From listening to about 10 shows from this Tour Ronnie is much worse than he was on the Licks Tour....and that is saying something!!

But you wouldn't sack him....maybe just let him play more rythm guitar bits and less of the out-of-tune solos that make no sense at all..??

Concerned.

About being clean:
How many of you did not touch alcohol for 30 days?

About what I like:
Don't tell ME what I like or dislike. It is an insult to me.
I have my own likes and dislikes. I am grown up and can take
care of myself. Don't count me in on this stupid guitar
expert club where the value of a person is measured by
the technical skills on the guitar.

About the band:
Mick, Keith, Charlie, Ronnie.
Got it?

About guitar players:
I am sure there are 100 guitar players out there who can play a zillion times technically better than our boys but I don't want to hear Metallica or David Gilmour or anything else. So that is not an issue.

To all those who have serious complaints about the Stones guitar playing. What is your plan B? Replace them all?

- Mick is mixing up the words
- Keith does false starts on Brown Sugar
- Ronnie is not Mick Taylor
- Charlie leaves his drums during Sympathy playback

So if you don't get it why don't you start your own cover band that is superior to the Stones, so that we can buy tickets at 25 rather than 250 dollars, and at the same time listen to how a guitar is supposed to be played, according to the book?

Again, what is your plan B?




Bjornulf

mmm....can't remember the last time I didn't touch alcohol for 5 days let alone 30!!!!

Is Mick Jagger Mick Jagger when he puts on that disgraceful head-set microphone ??? Now that's another topic !!!!
Still can't believe that - I reckon that is more important than Ron !

good for you bv! three cheeers!

btw i have been listening to some boots of SFTD from this tour. MJ and KR in the spotlight. Now lsiten...here the second guitar lead up high in the scale? That Is RW when he is not muggin and it sure sounds fine to me, a lot less ragged than KR out there workin the crowd and even on some boots damn near the original studio line.

give it up, these guys are pros and know what they are doing and there ain't a one of us that could have acheived the career they have. the proof is in the earnings.

Yo... has anyone heard those "It Won't Take Long" boots ???? Ronnie and Keith have NEVER sounded better.... this song is a major guitar weave....

"It's just that demon life has got me in it's sway..."

Maybe someone wrote it before, if so, i'm sorry but:

if i listen to the boots, for example the latest Dead Flowers (philadelphia maybe), there's something i don't understand. During the verse ronnie plays of course with some mistakes, but he plays fast, quite exciting licks, technically more difficult stuff. Then, when it comes to the solo: he's out, plays only non-sense, shit. So the argument, he is not able to play is wrong: just listen to the verse-part. Maybe he is shy, he feels pressure when 50 000 people are watching him and listening mainly to his lines. Of course he knows, he's not anymore the RW of the '70-s, maybe that causes his fears. It's just an easy theory, maybe I'm not right, but there is a f***ing huge gap between his background-playing and soloing. What do you think, what's the reason behind it?