Re: Keith is better than ever!
Date: June 20, 2007 07:35
deuce Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> FrankM Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > deuce Wrote:
> >
> --------------------------------------------------
>
> > -----
> > > glimmer twin 81 Wrote:
> > >
> >
> --------------------------------------------------
>
> > > -----
> > > > get a life deuce
> > >
> > > Aww, why...because I didn't wipe Keith's ass
> for
> > > him? As far as I'm concerned, this is a board
> to
> > > discuss the Stones..and I've done just that.
> >
> > Man you are one sarcastic snot. You would think
> > after years and years of making albums and
> touring
> > the globe the guy could be given a little
> slack.
> > How many other threads were already opened
> > relating to Keith and his recent problems? You
> had
> > to open another one just to get you name in the
> > limelight?
> >
> > How many shows has he truly been awful? All
> these
> > melodramatic threads started when the
> Europopean
> > tour started. If you don't like his
> performances
> > then stop going to the shows.
> >
> > The Stones will somehow find a way to carry on
> > without you in the audience. Trust me they
> won't
> > miss a fan like you one bit.
>
> Yeah, that's exactly why I made the post, to have
> my name in the "Limelight"....or not. Make the
> thread starter annonymous for all I care. I've
> gone on liking the Stones blindly for too long.
> They charge ticket prices so high, and still act
> like they've "got it"...and I'm sorry folks, but
> they don't. I know it may not seem this way, but I
> do want everyone to have a good time. If you still
> enjoy the shows and think Keith is playing great,
> then knock yourselves out.
>
> It's just, being a guitar player, I can see that
> he truly isn't playing well. Of course, 90% of you
> are automatically going to say "Who the hell are
> you to judge Keith Richards, who has made so many
> classic albums, etc...". Well folks, I'm a guitar
> player and I consider myself a good one. Better
> than Keith? Maybe. The point is, when I see him
> "play", I know what I'm actually looking at. Oh,
> and don't tell me that I'm not allowed to compare
> myself to Keith. If it was 1962 (when he was still
> pretty much unknown) and Keith came up to you and
> said "I'm just as good as Chuck Berry", you
> probably wouldn't believe him. And in regards to
> the "he has put out classics" argument....when's
> the last time he did this and why does that make
> him so untouchable? I'm not talking about the '73
> Keith, the '81 Keith, or hell, even the '97 Keith.
> I'm talking about the Keith now.
>
> One thing that I have a hard time digesting is how
> much his rhythm playing has gone down. The guy
> used to be a monster. You'd hear riffage all over
> the songs. Now, he hardly even plays rhythm. It's
> all these leads these days that usually don't even
> fit the songs just sprinkled randomly. I just
> don't see how people can defend him so much when
> he clearly as deteriorated. If it's his age, then
> maybe he's too old to be doing it. Age doesn't
> matter if you can still do it, but he can't. I
> just want to know why some of you grip onto this
> thing so tight. The Stones have had a 40+ year
> run, full of some of the greatest moments in rock
> and roll history. Everything needs to come to and
> end at some point, and your witnessing the end of
> the Stones. I want them to prove me wrong, but I
> know they won't.
Age has a lot to do with it. He can still do it, just not as well anymore. You're a guitar player...use your common sense. I'm a guitar player too and experienced enough to play any song that was given to me and to also notice Keith's issues as of late.
You know that time is a huge enemy on the fingers and its limberness...I dont care who you are...every person's abilities start to slip throughout age. How old are you, exactly? Are you 63? Do you know how that age feels? Do you know what guitar playing is like after 40 years? The boredom? Have you played the same songs for 40 years? How much fierceness can you really add when you've played them for thousands of times?
Every peformer who plays an instrument, sings, dances or does whatever...they all suffer the effects of aging. Clapton himself bluntly admits that he doesn't feel he plays as good as once did. Totally admits that the mechanics of it all..isn't what it used to be. The finger aren't there lately.
The end of the Stones? Well maybe in your book pal and to the rest of the posters who are preparing the band's tombstone. The people in this group have a standard and a bar that is set so high that the Stones of today...are dissapointing them. That's your own fault, not the Stones. The Stones are aging yet you demand them to sound like they're not 63 years old. The people who want the Stones to quit have a standard that is outdated and worn. The guys are getting older and the only way to enjoy them is to cut them some slack because of their age. Yet, there are people demanding things from men that cannot deliver it anymore.
There is a huge difference between realizing the issue and accepting it positively
Waiting for the Stones to prove you wrong? No shit they're going to prove you wrong. Thats like seeing clouds in the sky and telling people "its going to rain today...go ahead prove me wrong." You're not making any revelations here.