Charlie wanted Daryl because he'd played with Miles Davis and had jazz sensibilities. That's all fine and good, but like Dylan said, they became more of a funk band (I would say r&b, actually) and lost the 'drive' Bill brought. It did allow them to lay back a bit in their old(er) age, and they had to get somebody to play bass. I've never heard any real consensus on who would've been the 'ideal' fit, though.

Anyways, even though Daryl's tenure is technically longer than Bill's, he has always remained a 'hired gun' both in the eyes of most fans, and the band as well.

Quote
mosthigh
like Dylan said, they became more of a funk band

That claim of Dylan is such BS. Why should a rock'n'roll band become a funk band when the get a jazz bassist...

But Darryl has been with them until 2024...He wasn't on Hackney Diamonds and we don't know if he's on the new album. Both released tracks have Keith on bass.

If the Stones do not play live again Bill will remain the longest playing bassist with the Stones.

Mathijs

Quote
Mathijs
But Darryl has been with them until 2024...He wasn't on Hackney Diamonds and we don't know if he's on the new album. Both released tracks have Keith on bass.

If the Stones do not play live again Bill will remain the longest playing bassist with the Stones.

Mathijs

You haven’t seen the Foreign Tongues trailer? Darryl is in there multiple times

Quote
Dan
I am sure Bill still has more total working days

Absolutely! The Rolling Stones played more than 1000 gigs in their five first years alone.

Quote
Mathijs
But Darryl has been with them until 2024...He wasn't on Hackney Diamonds and we don't know if he's on the new album. Both released tracks have Keith on bass.

If the Stones do not play live again Bill will remain the longest playing bassist with the Stones.

Mathijs

Darryl is on the album.

I thought Ronnie played bass on RAT and ITS?

Quote
DandelionPowderman

Quote
Mathijs
But Darryl has been with them until 2024...He wasn't on Hackney Diamonds and we don't know if he's on the new album. Both released tracks have Keith on bass.

If the Stones do not play live again Bill will remain the longest playing bassist with the Stones.

Mathijs

Darryl is on the album.

I thought Ronnie played bass on RAT and ITS?

Is Darryl on HD? I thought not.

The bass on RAT and ITS sound like Keith to me, but I haven't listened to it in such detail.

Mathijs

Quote
Mathijs

Quote
DandelionPowderman

Quote
Mathijs
But Darryl has been with them until 2024...He wasn't on Hackney Diamonds and we don't know if he's on the new album. Both released tracks have Keith on bass.

If the Stones do not play live again Bill will remain the longest playing bassist with the Stones.

Mathijs

Darryl is on the album.

I thought Ronnie played bass on RAT and ITS?

Is Darryl on HD? I thought not.

The bass on RAT and ITS sound like Keith to me, but I haven't listened to it in such detail.

Mathijs

I read in the credits Ron Wood plays bass on both tracks.

Quote
gimme_shelter

Quote
Mathijs

Quote
DandelionPowderman

Quote
Mathijs
But Darryl has been with them until 2024...He wasn't on Hackney Diamonds and we don't know if he's on the new album. Both released tracks have Keith on bass.

If the Stones do not play live again Bill will remain the longest playing bassist with the Stones.

Mathijs

Darryl is on the album.

I thought Ronnie played bass on RAT and ITS?

Is Darryl on HD? I thought not.

The bass on RAT and ITS sound like Keith to me, but I haven't listened to it in such detail.

Mathijs

I read in the credits Ron Wood plays bass on both tracks.

Alsof jij kan lezen.

Mathijs

Quote
Mathijs

Quote
DandelionPowderman

Quote
Mathijs
But Darryl has been with them until 2024...He wasn't on Hackney Diamonds and we don't know if he's on the new album. Both released tracks have Keith on bass.

If the Stones do not play live again Bill will remain the longest playing bassist with the Stones.

Mathijs

Darryl is on the album.

I thought Ronnie played bass on RAT and ITS?

Is Darryl on HD? I thought not.

The bass on RAT and ITS sound like Keith to me, but I haven't listened to it in such detail.

Mathijs

I meant he's on FT.

Darryl does a good job, BUT he's no Bill Wyman.

Darryl = technically brilliant
Bill = da groove

"No Anchovies, Please"

It's not about skills (Darryl is probably a more versatile musician than Bill), it's about style. Darryl's "home" is soul, jazz, funk, fusion. Bill's home is...rock and roll. Hence the difference.

Seems I might be in the minority here put I prefer Darryl. Darryl swings much more to me while Bill played very straight.

I often wish Darryl was more audible. He's always very drowned out in concert.

Quote
StonedRambler
Seems I might be in the minority here put I prefer Darryl. Darryl swings much more to me while Bill played very straight.

I often wish Darryl was more audible. He's always very drowned out in concert.

I think most will argue it is the other way around.

Quote
NilsHolgersson

Impressive chart. Where did you get that, Nils?
I ever discover Stones member : Colin Golding....

Carlo Little + Ricky Fenson... I believe Keith praised a lot this short-living rhymic section... A different groove compared with Charlie+ Bill, nonetheless very good.

Quote
The Joker

Impressive chart. Where did you get that

It's from [en.Wikipedia.org] .

Quote
The Joker

Quote
NilsHolgersson

Impressive chart. Where did you get that, Nils?
I ever discover Stones member : Colin Golding....

Carlo Little + Ricky Fenson... I believe Keith praised a lot this short-living rhymic section... A different groove compared with Charlie+ Bill, nonetheless very good.

It is impossible to know with 100 % certainty who played bass and drums on certain gigs before Bill and Charlie. Colin Golding played on a few gigs between November 1962 and January 1963. Golding used to play bass for a band called The Presidents that played their gigs at Red Lion's Pub in Sutton. On some nights, Presidents and Stones were on the same bill meaning that Golding often played bass for both bands in the same evening. Glyn Johns was a good friend of the guys in The Presidents (the first band he ever recorded BTW, doing so at IBC Studios) and it was at the Red Lion's Pub that he first saw The Rolling Stones. Ian Stewart was also part of the same circle of musicians gathered at the Red Lion's.

Contrary to what that chart shows, Ricky Fenson (also named Ricky Brown in some sources) is likely to have played a more gigs with Stones than Golding (in and about the same period: late 62, early 63). Apparantly both Carlo Little and Ricky Fenson joined The Stones for a gig at Crawdaddy on the 15th of July 1963, even though Carlie and Bill had both joined the band (and recorded Come On) by then.



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 2026-05-09 21:07 by The Worst..

Darryl of course played on all the HD songs played live.

Anyone had the time to compare the songs .

Played in his own style or he re-creates the recorded version?

Lets be real. I like Darryl just fine. But... Bill Wyman is Bill Wyman.

Bill Wyman is one of the original members. He made it through the starving days early 60's. Back then they loaded their own gear and Ian drove the van and things were quite different from the 70's and on.

Bjornulf

According to touringdata.org the Stones played about 1.700 gigs. About 1.000 of them with Bill, and around 700 with Darryl.

It is a personal taste whether you like the one or the other. It is art so none of them is better than the other. I like them both as I like all my children. Sometimes one of the them better, next day is different.

If Wyman replaced Jones people would say the opposite. "where did get this stiff" "He's no D Jones. "I hate this new sound... Blah blah blah.

Nobody knows who's playing bass on the newest albums until they read the credits.

If it said Danny Partridge when it was Paul McCartney people would beleive it.

Quote
schwonek
According to touringdata.org the Stones played about 1.700 gigs. About 1.000 of them with Bill, and around 700 with Darryl.

It is a personal taste whether you like the one or the other. It is art so none of them is better than the other. I like them both as I like all my children. Sometimes one of the them better, next day is different.

These numbers are a bit inacurate. They have played more than 2000 shows.

They played ca. 1000 gigs in the period 1962-1967 alone.
The total number of concerts with Bill is somwehere about 1350-1400.

Since Bill left, they played about 730 concerts (I don't have the exact number in my head, but that's easy to find out).

Sure, but "gigs" between 1962-1967 were about 30-40 minutes long as opposed to the "modern" 130-140 minutes format. On the other hand they did 2 gigs a day - so it evens out...

Quote
The Worst.

Quote
StonedRambler
Seems I might be in the minority here put I prefer Darryl. Darryl swings much more to me while Bill played very straight.

I often wish Darryl was more audible. He's always very drowned out in concert.

I think most will argue it is the other way around.

Yep. Darryl seems to be under orders from the Glimmer Twins to not play anything intrusive or off-the-cuff...probably told to just keep it simple and not outshine anyone. That is the impression I always got from his playing with the Stones. He seems a bit dull and lifeless on most live tracks, and studio stuff isn't exactly amazing. I know he's good, but not a good fit. Bill could swing and knew what was coming before it came, Jones just following orders. And most assuredly intentionally low in the mix.

I am of the opinion that when the Stones were in their prime the true secret to their sound was the rhythm section of Wyman and Watts. And the more I focus on Wyman the more I am amazed by his sense of rhythm and melody -listen to the Brussels bootleg with the Wembley tracks and just focus on Watts and Wyman, its just incredible. It's lazy, it's simply played but complex to replicate, there is a swing, wobble and push and pull that is just unbelievable. Listen to Dancing With Mr. D: that's a masterclass of bass and drums.

Mathijs

Quote
Rumbleblutz

Quote
The Worst.

Quote
StonedRambler
Seems I might be in the minority here put I prefer Darryl. Darryl swings much more to me while Bill played very straight.

I often wish Darryl was more audible. He's always very drowned out in concert.

I think most will argue it is the other way around.

Yep. Darryl seems to be under orders from the Glimmer Twins to not play anything intrusive or off-the-cuff...probably told to just keep it simple and not outshine anyone. That is the impression I always got from his playing with the Stones. He seems a bit dull and lifeless on most live tracks, and studio stuff isn't exactly amazing. I know he's good, but not a good fit. Bill could swing and knew what was coming before it came, Jones just following orders. And most assuredly intentionally low in the mix.

His solos on Miss You, Emotional Rescue and Stray Cat Blues are the exceptions that prove the rule, then?

Start Me Up is a song that sounds very, very simple on the surface. But no cover bands will ever get it right. It is impossible to copy the way that Stones did it with Bill and Charlie. It's a completely unique rhtyhm section.

Quote
Stoneage
Sure, but "gigs" between 1962-1967 were about 30-40 minutes long as opposed to the "modern" 130-140 minutes format. On the other hand they did 2 gigs a day - so it evens out...

I don't know if its a meaningful debate, but I don't think it evens out. When Charlie said 5 years of work and 20 years hanging around, he was referring to those first 5 years of hard work. Yes, gigs were shorter, but they had to get to and from the gigs, and rig all the euipment themselves. No private jets, limousines, security, catering, money or 5 stars hotels. In 1963 they played more than 300 gigs, and they all drove in Stu's van. (Bill has admitted that he cheated by faking that he got easily car sick, so that he would always sit next to Stu the driver whilst the rest were crammed in the back.) It was hard work for little pay, that would eventually pay off. It's incredible to think when they released Satisfaction in mid 1965, they had already played about 700 gigs. In other words, they could back up the hype and sudden world fame with strong live performances because they were already a very experienced live band despite being young. I don't want to take anything away from Darryl, but he was privileged to be invited to the most organized, profitable, and luxurious touring party in history where every minor detail is facilitated and taken care of.

Quote
Rumbleblutz
Yep. Darryl seems to be under orders from the Glimmer Twins to not play anything intrusive or off-the-cuff...probably told to just keep it simple and not outshine anyone.

That's also just because that's what the band became. They became a "brand" and the only person I've seen play "off-the-cuff" since 1989 is when they had Mick Taylor back to guest. Its the only time I feel Mick and the band didn't have absolutely everything planned to a T and know every single note of the show. That was cool, but I also get why it changed. They got older, it became more of a "show" and it was no longer the 70s where you didn't know how long a musical break was gonna last. Now people pay top dollar to see songs performed well and accurate, and largely the same show to show. Yes, Keith will make his obvious mistakes, but its not like a song is going to be longer one night and shorter another. There's no more "exploring" the songs, its just plug and play. So Darryl is doing what all the rest of them is doing.

As for his place in the band, its not his fault he came in 30 years into the tenure. They were no longer an active force in the studio writing stuff they wanted to last a lifetime. He can be in the band for 50 years, he will always be a hired hand because, out of his control, he'll never contribute to anything of actual consequence that will be remembered by the masses. I firmly believe, if he even JUST played on Start Me Up, he'd be considered more of a "real member" to many of us. But he didn't. He was a guy hired to plug a hole in the ship so it could keep going. That's not a criticism of him, its just a fact, and one that he knows. I don't even think he'd disagree, or wakes up every morning thinking he's a "Rolling Stone". The ones who know they are a Stone know.