ROCKS OFF - The Rolling Stones Message Board

Ed Caraeff
[Ch1: Sike-ay-delic 60's] [Ch2: Random Sike-ay-delia] [Ch3: British Invasion]



Search for goods, you'll find the impossible collector's item!!!
Enter artist an start searching using "Power Search" (RECOMMENDED) inside.
Search for information in the wet page, the archives and this board:


ROCKS OFF - The Rolling Stones Message Board
Register | Update Profile | F.A.Q. | Admin Control Panel

Topic: FIRE RONNIE Return to archive Page: 1 2 3 4
02-20-02 09:03 PM
SatisfactionUK Imagine how good they would sound again with a kick ass guitar player working with Keith? They could do just like Daryll Jones when Bill left...all the songs would be so sweet and Gimme Shelter would rock! That would sound great on a new album too with a guitarist like Mick Taylor or someone that sounds similar. All Ronnie wants to do anymore is party and screw around its time to oust him. Ronnie, you're fired!
02-20-02 10:26 PM
Im_Shattered Your not the first to say that, and yes it would kick ass!
02-20-02 11:52 PM
Happy Motherfucker First of all, Daryll Jones does not make The Stones sound better. Bill's playing much better suites this style of music. While his playing is not fancy in the least, it has the thump-a-thump that left it's mark on many tunes. As for Ronnie, forget it. The game is to far along to be changing players. Yeah, Ronnie is a slacker sometimes but I would bet a stack of Vages chips that he is a Stone until the end. I think his playing will be better this time around. This tour is a BIG deal and I believe he will get back to true form. Maybe Keith needs to slap him around a little!
02-21-02 12:00 AM
SatisfactionUK What if they kept Ronnie but got another guitar player that kicked ass? Someone who played really fast and was cool like Keith. Then Ronnie could get in a few licks amid his air guitar concert and the other player could do a lot of the work. They could break it to him in a way that was not saying they need a new younger player for the sake of a younger Ronnie wouldnt feel inadequate.
02-21-02 03:00 AM
Mathijs Satisfaction UK: they already have someone to cover Ron...On B2B it is Waddy Wachtel you hear on 80 of the tracks as second guitar, not Ronnie. Ronnie hardly plays anything on the album. On the European leg of the B2B tour Blondie Chaplin could be seen doubling Ron's Slide guitar on Let It Bleed backstage in Poland.

Taylor is not an option -talk with him for five minutes and you know why he will never rejoin the Stones. Slash could be cool....he is a Taylor and Wood fan...and is the best guitar player of the 90's!

The Rolling Stones in Review

Bootlegs for Sale
The Lowdown on the Guitars of Keith Richards
Bootleg Reviews
Brussels Affair 1973
Vinyl Gang Productions / The Swingin' Pig
02-21-02 08:37 AM
TT It gets on my nerves that some motherfuckers want Ronnie to leave. Fuck you. You are all living in the fucking early 70īs. You want clean stones? You must be very glad since Chuck Leavell took the keyboards and Darryl joined. There are 100 reasons why Keith is the one who gets worse, or Mick or Charlie. but thatīs not the point. Ronnie has to be where he is. Fire Leavell and turn up Ronnieīn Keithīs volume!!
02-21-02 09:07 AM
lucasd Ronnie is only part of the problem with the Stones guitar sound....Keith is the BIG problem...He doesn't play half the time..he's too busy kicking his legs and flailing his arms to actually strum anymore...when he does play, his playing is choppy and sporadic...mostly just a lick here and there...the Keith of old was a rhythm monster...his playing was fierce and relentless...his guitar was ALWAYS big gaps in the music where nothing is can be good, but there's more space in their guitar sound now than there is in the universe
02-21-02 10:39 AM
moy fire who? zzzzz zzzzzz zzz zzzzzzzz zzz zzzzzzz zz z zzzz
02-21-02 11:45 AM
Happy Motherfucker The above statment is very true reguarding Keith's playing. I mean he is still the "larger then life rock guitarist" when he hits the stage. Trench coat, shades and bouncing around like a wild animal,but,his playing is just not consistant anymore. It's still Keith all the way, but if you listen to the way he played in the 60's and early 70's, there is a noticable difference. I know that you always mature as a guitarist, and that's a good thing, but when you simply stop playing as much and leave those huge spaces in songs that is just lazyness. I know damn well Keith could rip it up like the old days if he really wanted to. Maybe he has just got a little to comfortable and does'nt feel he has to work as hard for it. I don't know, only Keith knows the answer to that one. Maybe since we are hearing that there will be some kind of reenactments from the past on this tour, Keith's playing will reflect that also. Turn it up Keith and Let It Rock!!!!!!!
02-21-02 12:46 PM
HandofFeet They should do like the Beach Boys and break into several groups with only one original member each. Then, they could all tour and play the hits and we'd get four times the satisfaction!
02-21-02 03:26 PM
sway How about if Charlie, Keith and Mick quit the Stones and join Mick Taylor's band?
02-21-02 10:17 PM
sway wrote:
How about if Charlie, Keith and Mick quit the Stones and join Mick Taylor's band?

Excellent idea Sway!
02-21-02 11:01 PM
sway wrote:
How about if Charlie, Keith and Mick quit the Stones and join Mick Taylor's band?

What about Woody?

Mick Taylor and his Rolling Stones
02-22-02 01:00 AM
yellow1 The saddest part of this of course is that Ronnie USED to be a decent player, as featured on the 75/76 tour. While the overall musicianship of the Stones has improved with each tour since (not the least Mick's singing), Ronnie's been declining rapidly. '89 was poor, '94 was worse, '97 was lower yet and '99...well you get the picture.
WTF is going on with him ?!
I was also going to point to Waddy Wachtel's omnipresence on B2B, but Mathiijs beat me to the mark ! It's er...sad that he's been getting into quite a lot of trouble lately. Too bad they didn't take him on the road at the time, that would have been a treat for the fans and maybe kept his ass out of trouble !

PS - I disagree about Keith's playing and those who witnessed a fabulous Midnight Rambler in San Jose on April 19th 1999 know what I mean !
02-22-02 09:20 AM
lucasd If you don't think that Keith's playing has deteriorated over the years, then you're deaf or you're not for Keith's playing during Midnight Rambler at San Jose, yes it was great...he actually played during the small stage set on the NO SECURITY tour...but that was just three or four songs per show...the rest of the time, he coasted like he's done for over 20 years now...he's become a bigger poser on stage now than Jagger...he prisses, prances, kicks his legs, flails his arms, punches Ronnie and Charlie on the arm...just about everything except play his guitar
02-22-02 12:35 PM
sandrew Happy Mofo, LucasD --

I must be deaf, then. His playing hasn't exactly improved over the years, but I don't think it's fair to say it's deteriorated. Keith has never been a technically adept player. The killer guitar crunch of "Ya Yas" was due more to the gear used on that tour, not the playing itself. I miss the Les Pauls and the SVTs too. (His reliance on the standard-tuned Telecaster on the last tour probably accounts for the thin sound you don't like.)

Equipment aside, his playing has become more diverse, subtle. I'm thinking particularly of his solo on "Almost Hear You Sigh" and the other nylon-stringed stuff from the '89 tour - "Ruby Tuesday," "Play With Fire," "Paint It Black." Some of his playing on "Stripped" was also very fine.

I think, too, that you get a different Keith live than you what you hear on the records. Precision is out the window when he's on stage. The fact that he gets little to no help from Ronnie - whose contribution has become negligible at best - is a also a problem. Keith has basically become the primary lead player for the Stones, a role that doesn't really suit him - and one he probably doesn't even want.
02-22-02 01:35 PM
Happy Motherfucker First of all I never said that I did'nt like Keith's sound on the last tour, far from it. And the gear has nothing to do with it either. Even on the 81' tour his playing was more consistant then it is now. Don't get me wrong, Keith is still a great guitarist and my all time favorite. I'm saying that the intensity of his playing is not as it use to be. I'm sure he could whip his Gibson out and maybe a Marshell and get that fat sound that he had in say 72', that is not going to change the way he approaches the music unless HE chooses to do so. When you listen to his playing then, he was more focused, more on it. There is just a lot of gaps in there now. If Keith consciously is trying to do this, then more power to him, he has every right to play as he feels. At the same time, I'm sure he knows the difference in the over all sound and approach. It's up to him. He is his on man and I love him either way. Now there is one way for him to turn it back up a notch, and that is to get rid of all the extra people on stage. To much shit going on. Scrap the back-up singers and horn section. No wonder he just coast sometime. When you've got all that stuff going on to take up the space, it is easy to do. Their over all sound was much better prior to 89' when it was just The Stones on stage along with Ian and Bobby. Get rid of that and I believe it would force keith to put a little more into it. Keef, you're still the man, let it Rock!!
02-22-02 01:37 PM
lucasd >>>>>I think, too, that you get a different Keith live than you what you hear on the records. Precision is out the window when he's on stage. The fact that he gets little to no help from Ronnie - whose contribution has become negligible at best - is a also a problem. Keith has basically become the primary lead player for the Stones, a role that doesn't really suit him - and one he probably doesn't even want.

Once again, someone else who refuses to put ANY blame on Keith or acknowledge the fact that he doesn't play as well as he used to...there is no way you can honestly say that he plays as well live now as he did in the late 60's and early 70's...ABSOLUTELY NO WAY!!! Back then, he was constantly strumming those big pauses or gaps in the music where nothing was going on...and don't bring up the Taylor excuse--that he allowed him to focus on what he did best--rhythm guitar...that's crap...he still played like that during the first couple of Woody tours and he could still play rhythm like that if he wanted to...he's just gotten too lazy...that kind of relentless rhythm attack takes a lot of effort and energy...just listen to his playing from Brussels or any other live stuff from that him on LADIES AND GENTLEMAN...he was a rhythm monster...his arm was always moving--quickly and like a buzzsaw...fingers constantly strumming...he created such a rock solid foundation---a complete rhythm guitar wall of sound--that anything Taylor played on top of it sounded great...his rhythm playing could stand on its own...just listen to YA YA's or anything else from that period and turn off the speaker with Taylor playing in it...Just listen to Keith....his guitar was always there--driving the music...Taylor's leads were just icing on the cake...Your arugument about him having to cover Ronnie and do the leads makes no sense...most of the old Stones classics don't have much lead work anyway...they could perform "Brown Sugar" or "JJF" with no lead--just Keith's rhythm and it would sound great...if he played with energy and enthusiasm like he used to....back then, his rhythm was nearly always there and he played half the lead solos during the Taylor era...The ONLY times you didn't hear Keith's rhythm buzzing away was when he took a solo...then Taylor took over the rhythm....that could be done today with Ronnie....all Keith would have to do is play that rhythm like he did 30 years ago, and let Ronnie cover for him when he takes the occassional solo...if Ronnie can't do that, then let the bass player play the rhythm...John Entwistle's been doing that for Townshend for 40 years...Obviously, playing like that is just too much work for Keith now.....he's content to pose for the crowd--playing up to his rebel badass persona and barely play guitar...just check him out during "Happy." He hasn't actually played that song since the '78 tour....his hands and arms are draped over the microphone during most of the song or they're flailing about wildly over his head...he only plays at the end of the song when it comes time for his his spastic arm jerk movements during "Tumbling Dice" where he hits the strings every ten seconds or so and lets the horns play the rhythm part the rest of the time...Ditto for his playing on 90% of the live performances's a rare treat when the KEith of old actually shows up at a Stones show--"Street Fighting Man" from STRIPPED, "Factory Girl" from FLASHPOINT, "Gimme Shelter" from the Paradiso show on the VL tour, or his "Midnight Rambler" performances from the NS tour on the small stage...he can still do it, he just doesn't do it nearly enough
02-22-02 02:09 PM
yellow1 I'm not a Keith worshipper, but I do credit him (and I think he actually credits himself for that too in interviews) for putting some "air" in the music.
It's actually quite enjoyable to have "gaps" in the music, it give the ensemble room to grow.
His playing is MUCH more subtle than it used to be. Listen to the way he plays HTWomen now and in 1975 for instance. In 1975 it was just this big thumo, now you've got all these nice notes coming out of nowhere.

PS - I've never been terribly impressed with the playing on th 1969 tour...Ya-Ya's was decent but that was mainly because most of it was rerecorded in the studio...
Listen to the Hyde Park Concert and you'll see what I mean about "unimpressive" guitar playing !
02-22-02 02:29 PM
lucasd I'm not a Keith worshipper, but I do credit him (and I think he actually credits himself for that too in interviews) for putting some "air" in the music.
It's actually quite enjoyable to have "gaps" in the music, it give the ensemble room to grow.
His playing is MUCH more subtle than it used to be. Listen to the way he plays HTWomen now and in 1975 for instance. In 1975 it was just this big thumo, now you've got all these nice notes coming out of nowhere

Space is fine IF the original studio recording had space....AC/DC has always had lots of guitar space on their studio tracks, so they do it on the live renditions too...Many of Keith's solo tracks have had lots of space too..."Will But You Won't" is one example...the space is there on the studio recording and it should be there on the live rendtions too...but there is virtually no space on the greatest Stones songs from their greatest period--1968-1972...That period of music and that style of playing during those years is what made KEith the guitar legend he is today....certainly not what he's been doing for the past 20 years...tell me where the space and gaps are on studio recordings like "Jumping Jack Flash, Street Fighting Man, Brown Sugar, Tumbling Dice, Happy, All Down The Line, Rocks Off????" Just listen to the studio recording of "Gimme Shelter." That guitar never stops....Again, where are the pauses and gaps??? Where is the space??? Those songs wouldn't be what they are if they were full of space....Keith USED to play those songs in concert the way they were meant to be, it's like he's trying to do jazz renditions of those songs....he sounds like B.B. King or something...just a lick every now and then...that is not how those songs are supposed to sound...damn Chuck Berry for telling him he plays some pretty chords...I don't want pretty from Keith and I don't want space....I want KEEF RIFFHARD...I guess it's like Mick said, "You Can't Always Get What You Want" and I'm afraid the guitar player is too "Torn and Frayed" to let it steal my heart away anymore....
02-22-02 03:07 PM
HandofFeet Keith's focus and approach has just changed- which most of you even admit. How does that make him a weaker guitar player? Does it really surprise you that someone who has ALWAYS talked about a song's evolution doesn't want to repeat what he did 30 years ago?

Go watch The Who instead. They'll do their best to go through the same motions they used to and the old guys will go nuts. Just two different approaches, neither better nor worse.

But I seriously doubt Keith's too torn n' frayed to pull it off anymore. He mainly plays acoustic when off-stage, so there's no way his chops are weak.
02-22-02 03:32 PM
yellow1 Yep , in spite of his conservative tastes in music, Keith's been able to take his guitar playing to a different level over the years. More subtle, more skeletal in a way...but that goes with the ring no ?!
02-23-02 12:09 AM
robbluedog I saw the Stones live on the Voodoo Lounge tour in Sydney. I'm a guitar player myself, and obviously have learnt much of the Stones repetoire, listened to it and absorbed it over the last thirty years that I've been into them. So I feel safe in saying I know exactly what I'm talking about.

My verdict of that particular gig? Well they exceeded all my expectations, playing with great energy, not coasting at all. Keith was really cooking. [Mick and Charlie were also great - Ronnie tended to be down in the mix in a more supportive role. Bobby Keyes also replicated his recorded parts to perfection. (Why don't they feature him on the new albums anymore???) They'd have run bands half their age into the ground on that night.]

Keith was definitetly right on the money - he replicated both the playing and the sound he got on many of the records. For instance 'Monkey Man' - he used the Les Paul Junior for that. He used a Les Paul Standard for 'Satisfaction' and also 'Shattered'. The right sounds. For 'Happy' he used his open G tuned Tele capoed at the 4th fret - he played it like he did on Exile - with the right sounds.

Keiths first big solo of the evening was with the Les Paul Standard on a long version of 'Satisfaction' and was probably the best solo I've ever heard him play. Fluid and inspired. Then during a short onstage break both Keith and Ronnie appeared to have what could have been a joint each. Soon after they played 'Sympathy' with Keith changed to the Les Paul Junior again but unfortunately this time his solo was kind of aimless! Nevertheless his rhythm playing remained flawless - for the whole evening. The band even got themselves and the audience into that kind of rhythm magic other worldly trance state they get into, towards the end of the show, if you know what I mean.

So what gives? Maybe they vary a lot from gig to gig these days, who knows? They can still do it if they want......

02-26-02 07:33 AM
Maxlugar Keith's abilities have not changed. His approach has.

Strumming a guitar, no matter how relentless the strumming, does not take massive amounts of energy. Working on the loading docks or construction does.

He and Ronnie have taken that "listen to the notes I'm not playing" too far, is all.

Get rid of the horns and Chuck Leavell and FORCE them to fill in those holes and you'll see Keith stop with the arms flayling and leg kicking real fast.

The backup singers can stay as far as I'm concerned. They are there to make up for Keith's signing, which has also developed into a "listen to the notes I'm not singing" situation. Although in the case of his singing, I think that really is gone.

Anyway, I'm very much looking forwrd to the new tour and I have a feeling it will be a departure from the '89, 94, 97-99 shows. Just a feeling.


02-26-02 10:45 AM
T&A I agree with Maxlugar's last comments. And, for my money, Keith is a much better guitar player than he was in the 60's and 70's. No, he doesn't create the "wall of sound" with his rhythms anymore - that's no longer the sound he's looking for, nor are the Stones. This is a very different band from that one. Things move forward or they die. The Stones are moving forward. Keef's skills have not diminished one iota. Ronnie? That's a very different kettle of fish....
02-26-02 02:02 PM
lucasd Yes, Keith has changed the way he plays...yes, he can play like he did in the 60's and 70's if he wants to...NO, NO, NO does his current style sound as good as his old style...if you say his current style is as good, either you love Keith so much you can't say anything negative about him, you're lying, you're deaf, or your taste in rhythm guitar sucks
02-26-02 05:34 PM
T&A I ain't lying...I'm testifying. Different doesn't mean better or worse, necessarily. I'm glad Keith has evolved his playing. I can still listen to all the old recordings anytime...why would I want to hear him playing the songs the same way he did 30 years ago?! I think Keith is a much more "mature" player than he was in the 70's. For that reason, I think he is a better player now than then. I don't know whether the "difficulty factor" was greater in the 60s/70s, and I really don't Hound Dog Taylor once said so eloquently, "I can't play shit, but I can sure make it sound good." Richards playing sure sounds good to me!
02-26-02 05:39 PM
T&A lucasd - sounds like you are just a tad hung-up on the past. Gotta let it go. People change or they perish. I think the fact that Keith has changed - for my money, for the better (just my opinion - and, no I don't think my taste in guitar sucks, thank you) - is great. He's not a museum piece. You can take your ACDC - playing the same songs the same way for 30 years - I'll take a dynamic, evolving musician/band anyday.
02-26-02 10:15 PM
yellow1 Same here, I think Keith's playing has matured well.
I was listening to some unbooted DW outtakes today's playing was really pretty bad, much better these days !
02-27-02 11:08 AM
lucasd You people will always make excuses for Keith, no matter's painfully obvious that the man coasts most of the time nowadays on stage...he knows that the horns and keyboards will fill in the gaps when he's not playing...he knows that 90% of the people in the audience won't notice...they're too caught up in the moment of seeing the Stones playing live to really listen or to care....he also knows that the people like me who REALLY listen to his playing today at the shows and on the live recordings are few and far he just plays half the time or less....and you suckers eat it up....make excuses like his playing has evolved--his playing is more subtle now, etc...get a clue!!! Your evolution/subtle comments are not INSIGHT....just blind're "blinded by love" for Keith's image...
Page: 1 2 3 4

On June 16, 2001 the hit counter of the WET page was inserted here, it had 174,489 hits. Now the hit counter is for both the page and the board. The hit counter of the ITW board had 1,127,645 hits when it was closed and the Coolboard didn't have hit counter but was on line only two months and a half.