melillo Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> or wyman for that matter,but really what i mean by
> a world tour is that they play all over the world
> thats all, not every inch of it of course, all i
> know is when the stones go on the road its all
> over the place on the news, not so for those
> rythym kings


and you think Wyman cares? He left the Stones willingly and seems perfectly happy with his lot. Commendable attitude in many ways. It takes a lot of principle to walk away from that kind of money because you dont want to do it anymore, regardless of how much money is thrown at you.

I think his antipathy towards the band is taken way out of context anyway. If hes in the press at all, its because of what he used to be....and you can bet that if hes asked 20 questions about his life, his current music, his family, his hobbies and then gets asked one about what he thinks of the Stones since he left, THAT is going to be the one that gets quoted and distorted to make him look bitter. The reality is that hes still on good terms with most of the band.

I know he is , i like bill to, i just dont think its fair to compare the two thats all

Gazza Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> If hes in the press at
> all, its because of what he used to be....and you
> can bet that if hes asked 20 questions about his
> life, his current music, his family, his hobbies
> and then gets asked one about what he thinks of
> the Stones since he left, THAT is going to be the
> one that gets quoted and distorted to make him
> look bitter. The reality is that hes still on good
> terms with most of the band.


....which is exactly the case in this norwegian interview as well, as Wyman says he's still meeting the band - especially Charlie - and give eachother updates on their lives.
This thread is a good example of "making Bill Wyman seem bitter" indeed - just like the tabloids



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 2007-10-20 02:07 by Erik_Snow.

It also illustrates how important we can be as individual fans.
What we say aint always useless.
Wight your words before you type is good (or so I've heard ;O) .. )

But why does he reduce the Stones all the time? He quit, fine. Let them be.

Guess the media vultures throws him fleshy meat bones all the time?
But why must he bite?

Svartmer Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> But why does he reduce the Stones all the time? He
> quit, fine. Let them be.


And what about Rolling Stones...airbrushing him out of the Rarities cover...hrmf

how pathetic! they airbrushed him out! hoo...what desperate old girls...
they erase taylor and bill, real actual stones, and we get threads on lisa...
haaa...yeh, bill; you're an eternal stone; you been there before it happened and made it happen and every step of the way...except the long decline, many would say, into hyper commericalization and mostly mediocre product...
can they still make it happen live? yes, i'm still a fan, but i'm not gonna listen to anybody take shots at bill here without piping up quick...

nobody calls the band ferocious since wyman's gone, for whatever reasons..

oh i guess on some nights they certainly are ferocious force...but it's not like they even chose a replacement who understood boogie, the blues or rock and roll; i'm glad they're still out there and hope they never stop. I never confuse darryl with being a rock and roll bass player. Ever. I've tried.
Makes Bill's brilliance and his absence all the more evident in some ways...

alla this about when bill left and why and so forth; it might be interesting history to some but not to me very much; i understand it was a personal decision. hope to God he's enjoying life and loving his kids; he's given the world so much; so very much excitement...so much. thank you bill!!

what must be always said about bill wyman, was he was an original stone and a total one...i am so blessed to have seen the stones circa bill many many times...
... and his absolute genius live and in the studio was a huge part of that big beat, already so evident in rt. 66 in 1964,,,and his presence in the mysterious electric glue that stuck those guys together for over a quarter of a century, and what they did during that time, is THE defining rock, boogie, pop, even country music in many ways, of the entire rock era...

that chugging, staggered, melodic, virtuoso amazing propulsive bottom was there for every gig those first twenty five years, the catalog they are still working from...and for every truly important stones album ever...except perhaps VL, which i like very much...

the tude, the look, the genuis originality of his approach; the deadly cannon firepower of the bottom of that whole mighty mighty machine...it took each member to make that band a band...
thru taylor and onto ronnie; but stopping there...

money and press and glory aside; bill probably did leave the band, after years of faithful steady service with no ego trips that put the band's schedule below top priority; or drug lapses...past, to put it kindly, the best of their prime...

why people who's favorite band in the world wouldn't bow down with great respect and love for bill is beyond me...maybe they never heard ya yas...or those first dozen albums or something...i dunno...hard stuff to miss...it's in every set.

i love mick so much; i really want to think that he's not the cyncial bastard that would have his panties in a knot over the brilliance of past members who moved on...gratitude and warmth would be more gracious, and more appropriate.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2007-10-20 03:32 by Beelyboy.

Gazza Wrote:

The reality is that hes still on good
> terms with most of the band.


"with most" of the band -- who is he not on good terms with and why?


Beyond that, what I and others witnessed with our own eyes not two months ago in London tells me he is on good terms with the band :

1) His very public appearance at the final show, eschewing the "luxury boxes" or some similar isolated seats and walking on the FLOOR to watch (at least part of) the show from the FRONT.

2) After the show, whilst we were waiting out front of the Savoy, here comes Bill walking down the street with a daughter on each arm. Simpson's was nearby where the band was having its post-tour bash. Bill was coming to spend some time with his old mates at the party.

Now, if he was really that bitter or angry against his old mates, would he have shown up at either??!!


Plexi



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2007-10-20 03:40 by timbernardis.

Yeah, I've read many Bill Wyman "quotes" and interviews since he left the Stones and many comments were on the snide side. However his big coffee table book is written with fondness. Also, there are many reports, as mentioned in posts above that he is still friendly with the boys. Bill is old and he still tours with a band albeit not with the Stones and on a much smaller scale, but he still performs live in concert. Many contradictions over the years it seems...

I think Bill simply has his 'grumpy old man days' and the Stones don't take it too personally...at least it appears that way...

with sssoul Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

> what Keith is his own tombstone will read: "i told you
> i was sick!"


It was actually Spike Milligan that said that. I think it is actually even engraved on his gravestone.

It's quite funny (peculiar) that so many people in here are not afraid to voice an opinion on almost everything Stones - but at the same time will not allow one man - who was actually in the band! - to say ANYTHING??

He is entitled to his opinions - more so than the rest of us.

And I do not recall Bill Wyman saying he never wanted to play or tour again - he simply did not want to do it on the scale, that the Stones are doing. He's got two small daughters and - I believe I read this somewhere - doesn't want tours to last longer than two weeks top!

Also he has a fear of flying that prevents him from doing world wide tours, I believe.

I actually think it took a lot more guts to walk away from the money at the time he did than to just carry on. When he said his final goodbye in 1993 they were inking a new recording contract with Virgin and probably already lining up for the huge VL Tour. Money in the bank!!

But he did it!! Good for him!

...and good for the rest of us that the Stones chose to carry on or we would not have had "VL", "BtB" or "ABB" and the related tours ;-)

mofur Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> He is entitled to his opinions - more so than the
> rest of us.


absolutely right!!!!

if not Wyman, then who else?


and for those who believe that he is jealous towards his former bandmates because of their ongoing success and big money making: there were strong rumours that he was asked to rejoin for Bridges tour, but he declined. of course these were rumours, but in the end lets face one fact that he was NOT FIRED, it was his decision to go. he knew that the Stones would carry on without him and make big bucks, but he said NO MORE at a time when for, whatever reason, he felt like he did not WANT to be a Stone anymore - despite the fame and money.

one may agree or disagree with his opinion, but at least this deserves some respect. I cant stand that some people here treat him like an idiot, as if hes got nothing to say.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2007-10-20 12:18 by alimente.

>> It was actually Spike Milligan that said that. <<

smile: thanks. i knew it was a joke with some history on it,
but Keith has also made use of it.

timbernardis Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Gazza Wrote:
>
> The reality is that hes still on good
> > terms with most of the band.
>
>
> "with most" of the band -- who is he not on good
> terms with and why?
>
>

Bill and Keith have never been that close. So, I would doubt that they have much (if any) contact apart from when Bill occasionally attends a Stones gig. Not suggesting they hate each other, but theyre just not bosom buddies.

in other words no dinner parties at the wymans for keith

timbernardis Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Gazza Wrote:
>
> The reality is that hes still on good
> > terms with most of the band.
>
>
> "with most" of the band -- who is he not on good
> terms with and why?
>
>
> Beyond that, what I and others witnessed with our
> own eyes not two months ago in London tells me he
> is on good terms with the band :
>
> 1) His very public appearance at the final show,
> eschewing the "luxury boxes" or some similar
> isolated seats and walking on the FLOOR to watch
> (at least part of) the show from the FRONT.
>
> 2) After the show, whilst we were waiting out
> front of the Savoy, here comes Bill walking down
> the street with a daughter on each arm. Simpson's
> was nearby where the band was having its post-tour
> bash. Bill was coming to spend some time with his
> old mates at the party.
>
> Now, if he was really that bitter or angry against
> his old mates, would he have shown up at
> either??!!
>
>
> Plexi


You know, Plexi has a good point. But, isn't it possible to be on good terms with your old mates yet STILL think that their music isn't what it used to be and that they should stop playing?

Bill and his old mates could still disagree on that question yet remain on good terms -- isn't that possible without it degenerating into a negative emotional thing?


P

Pecman Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Well there are $558,000,000 worldwide reasons why
> Bill is wrong on this point.
>
> PECMAN

Is money everything to you?

-------------------------------------------------------
> timbernardis Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> You know, Plexi has a good point.


LoFL: always glad to hear you agree with yourself :E

is there an English version of the interview that started this thread?

Didn't Bill attend Keith's mother's funeral? I wouldn't think he would have if they were "frosty"

sc uk

bv Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> See the entire interview (in
> Norwegian): [www.p4.no]


Haha indeed, I've 'seen' the interview in Norwegian... :-)

Jelle

Wyman was great in his day. Great bass player, original member, in the band for 30 years. Love his books. But his bitterness these days does rub me the wrong way. He seems somewhat jealous that the band went on without him and has had great success. Although he has a point about them being an oldies act and a touring jukebox (not his exact words, obviously, but I think that's the point he's making) it smacks of sour grapes.

You'd think he'd be more gracious in public, saying they're doing their thing, I'm doing mine (Rhythm Kings, family life, etc.), it's all good. But he seems to have some bitterness built up from his days in the band. I think he feels he never got a fair shake from Mick and Keith (he did write that riff to JJF, after all) and it's coming out in his current comments. I suppose he has a right to still have hurt feelings, but you'd think he could let it go. The band and his contributions to it did make him rich and famous, after all.

Not to mention the babes!

"No Anchovies, Please"

Bill, Go dye your hair some more knucklead!

with sssoul Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > timbernardis Wrote:
> >
> --------------------------------------------------
>
> > You know, Plexi has a good point.
>
>
> LoFL: always glad to hear you agree with yourself
> :E

Lo F?? L

Now don't take the thing about not quoting someone's entire post too literally or you risk taking things out of context, as people are saying about Bill's words !!

But anyway, I was thinking about what I posted, when suddenly I disagreed with my self, then thought about it some more, and could see both points of view. So, i liked my new idea so much that I decided to qualify what I wrote by putting my new thoughts down!! But I still like my original idea too!!

I suppose I could start a whole thread, then keep posting/replying and arguing with myself or agreeing with myself as the case may be.

Hey, withsss, I may have asked before, but what does :E mean??!! It kind of drives me nuts with curiosity cuz i dont know.


Plexi

black n blue Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Bill, Go dye your hair some more knucklead!

yes, that's not a prob....
surely mick, ron and keith have quantities of that shoe polish from their own supply of (knuckle) head paint at any given moment.
lest u forget.

I suspect that some of the negative comments made by Bill from time to time are a bit tongue in cheek.
There is much evidence down the years since he left that he remains on good terms with everybody in the band [including Keith...who maybe had it in for him for a while, but it won't have lasted long. [about as long as the inconvenience of finding a new bass player lasted I would think ;^)]

Recording of Bill Wyman interview broadcast BBC Radio Scotland, 24 Oct.'07.
Edi Stark hosted The Radio Cafe's audience with Bill Wyman at an outside broadcast in the Eastgate Theatre, Peebles 18 October, 2007.

[rapidshare.com]

45 min., 64 kbps.

He doesn't seem to be very popular around here, but he comes across in the interview as an articulate, personable, contented, modest type of guy. As mentioned above, the financial sacrifice when he quit the band must have been enormous, but he's obviously got enough to live on, plus he's got his dignity and his peace of mind through doing what he wants to do.
He mentions that he was ,and still is, closest to CW, saying that MJ & KR, although they spoke with London accents, came from out in the sticks.
As for his image when he was touring with RS that he looked like someone who carries a knife in his pocket, he puts it down to shyness.
An interesting interview, and I was impressed by the guy. I think the interview took place on his 71st birthday.

Cheers.

All points of view are very valid. As much as I love seeing the Stones live now(and I never want them to quit!) it never compares to watching them for the first time on ed sullivan or seeing my first concert in ft. worth 72. It takes so much planning and money now plus having to contend with all the idiots at the concerts who only see it as a social event and never pay attention to the music. Thats why its so much pleasure to see Keith, Woody or Bill in a smaller and more intimate venue with their own bands. And Woody is actually the best at this to me. Mick is the only one who just can't seem to pull it off(at least for american fans).I would love to see the stones go out one time with only Ian Maclagan(come on!! compared to Leavell!) and Bobby K. and kick some ass. I don't even care if Mick can hit the notes or not-it's still Mick. But at least Bill seems to enjoy himself and plays decent shows. Who knows? Maybe if the Stones would "return to their roots" for a special event he might even guest?