|
|
| sandrew |
Good Lord, will you lighten up? |
|
|
| TomL |
Ronnie will die a STONE. Leave the poor boy alone. |
|
|
| T&A |
Lighten up, indeed. You don't seem to be respectful of differing opinion. You have one; I have one. I don't agree with yours. But, I don't think you don't have a clue. You're just apparently in the minority of opinion...that doesn't make you wrong. I understand the Stones and Keef's playing as well as the next guy, including yourself. I think he's a better player than he was in, say, 1972. End of story. |
|
|
| lucasd |
sandrew wrote: Good Lord, will you lighten up?
No, I won't...I believe one of the reasons that Keith continues to "coast" on stage is that fans continue to take his lack of playing lightly....always eager to jump on Mick's case for everything they believe to be wrong in Stoneworld, while praising Keith for everything they believe to be right....put Mick under a microscope and blow every misstep out of proportion....overlook Keith's faults, ignore his lazy guitar playing....continue to believe that everyting Keith does is wonderful because he's the cool-- rebel--outlaw--badass they want to be |
|
|
| Maxlugar |
I hear ya Lucasd.
Hows about when Mick was constantly criticized for jet setting in the 70's?
Now I see Keith at more movie premiers than Roger friggin' Ebert.
He's at more Hollywood parties than the E Entertainment channel.
But it's cool if Keith does it!
|
|
|
| lucasd |
Maxlugar wrote: Hows about when Mick was constantly criticized for jet setting in the 70's? Now I see Keith at more movie premiers than Roger friggin' Ebert. He's at more Hollywood parties than the E Entertainment channel. But it's cool if Keith does it!
Right on...In the 70's, Mick was criticized for his jet setting, but rarely got credit for keeping the band together during Keith's darkest heroin days....Keith, on the other hand, spends half the decade in a drugged out, dunken stupor and his behavoir is glamorized, romanticized, and glorified...
Right on again about Keith and the parties...if he attends a party, he's there to have a good time....if Mick goes, he has a secret agenda, self promotion, etc...if Keith attends a well-publicized, high celebrity profile movie premiere, he's just taking Patti out for a night at the picture show...if Mick does it, he's jet setting again...If Keith attends a tribute show or presents an award, he's sincere and only there to pay respect...if Mick does it, he's insincere and just there to promote himself or some new product he's putting out...
It's always been this way with the hard core Stones fans...the double standards are staggering...
|
|
|
| Maxlugar |
Word, my brother.
Don't tell the others this, but you are my favorite poster.
Maxy! |
|
|
| Cardinal Ximinez |
You guys are wrong about some of us "hard core" fans. I think a lot of us have our eyes open wide. Perhaps we see things a little differently, I think that come from being individuals. We all have different likes and dislikes. You and I may like the some same things, and we may like some different things.
I happened to really NOT like the new Jagger album...or most of the publicity blitz that went with it. Not because it was Mick. It was because I thought the music wasn't very good, and his PR machine was turning him into a cartoon. I love Mick. I could care less where he's jetting off to, or who he's fucking. Shit, I hope he's having a blast! I was so pissed at his PR machine because they were making him look pathetic! He's NOT pathetic, he's MICK FUCKIN' JAGGER! He doesn't need pretty faces hired to be in the front rows at his shows! He doesn't need help from Lenny Kravitz and Rob fuckin Thomas to write songs! And just for the record....I don't really care for Keiths solo stuff either. All those solo projects sound like they are missing something......like the Rolling Stones! Oddly enough, I really like Ronnie's solo work. I don't know why, I just do.
Now as for blind devotion to Keith. Yeah, I can see why you'd think something like that. Keith is a sympathetic soul, and he plays the image up to the hilt. Is being a junkie cool? Fuck no. I know it isn't cool because I send out the ambulances to pick up the bodies. I send the police to help a mother whose son is stealing the family TV to pay for his next fix. No, I know EXACTLY how uncool being a junkie is. What is cool is the fact that Keith SURVIVED at all.....There's an awful lot of his junkie pals who DIDN'T survive. He survived, got clean, and remained, for the most part, intact. Yeah, THAT is cool. To be that far down, and to come all the way back, that's beyond cool...it's a minor miracle. Maybe we do cut Keith too much slack...IMO he deserves it...he deserves it for just being alive.
I think the double standard goes back to the early days of Andrew Oldham. Andrew wanted to forment an outlaw aura about the band. I think the band bought into that aura, except for Mick. Mick was never quite as grubby as the rest of the guys. Brian and Keith lived the life, Mick played his part. There's a difference. Yeah Mick got busted. For pills that were legal in Italy, where he bought them. He had them in a coat that he hadn't worn in months....and he'd forgotten about them. Hey, I've found money in a coat that I hadn't worn in months....same thing. Mick seemed to have the appearance of POSING at the life, but not being committed to it. I'm not saying it was right or wrong. I'm just saying that I think THIS is where the double standard started. The perception was that Mick was just show, and Brian & Keith were the real deal. Maybe the guitar player mystique had something to do with it as well. It's just cooler to play a guitar than it is to play a harmonica.
So what would you guys have us do? How do you expect the average fan to just dismiss 35 years of myth and legend? Real, hard core fans know what the real deal is. Mick's fingerprints are all over the band. In the darkest times he pulled the band together. But you know, he's also tried to break the band apart as well. Keith never tried to do that. Keith is content with being known as "the guy who plays guitar for the Stones". Mick has never been content with being "the guy who sings for the Stones". Mick wants to be known as a star in his own right, independent of the Stones. There's nothing wrong with that. But it does signify the difference between Keith & Mick. Rules don't apply to Keith because he never played by them. Rules mean nothing to Keith, except as something to break. So why foist rules on Keith? It wouldn't do a bit of good anyhow. Mick, on the other hand, has almost ALWAYS played by the rules....or at least his version of them. Ergo, people feel like they can place constraints on Mick. It might not be right, but it happens.
So what's the deal Maxy, lucasd? You think you are gonna change the way anyone feels by telling them how wrong they are? Or by telling them how deaf they are? If you think that's gonna work, I got some great real estate in Arkansas that you might be interested in! |
|
|
| T&A |
Right on, CJ. Well said. Back to the music, for a minute. We all have our opinions on the music. Lucasd thinks Keith is slacking off; I say he's maturing. Nobody's right or wrong--everyone has a well-formed and well-informed opinion. Let's just be respectful of each other's opinion, is all I ask. As CJ says - nobody's going to sway anyone else here anyway. I say the fun is in the debate, but when it gets to calling names and such, the fun go outs the door. |
|
|
| Maxlugar |
Hey I'm just trying to even up the scales there Xims.
They both have things they can be criticized for. Keith does not get his fair share of it among us hard core fans.
That's a fact.
MAXY!
|
|
|
| Cardinal Ximinez |
Gee...I think I said he was pretty uncool for being a junkie, and that I don't like his solo stuff....I happen to like the way Keef played 30 years ago better too....but he ain't gonna play that way again. No amount of bitching on our part is gonna change that. Same with Ronnie, bitch about him as much as you like, he's still gonna be a guitar player for the Stones. It just seems like a useless effort to me.
I'm happy to take whatever they decide to give us.
Now, go sweat to the Stonesies! |
|
|
| Nasty Habits |
A Midnight Ramble
When the chips come down, it's all about how they sound on record and how they sound live.
And live, they could both use a little work.
I love Mick. Mick is my favorite Rolling Stone and favorite performer ever, but when I listen to 90s live Stones, I don't hear any more willingness to just get lost and gone in his vocals any more than I hear Keith constantly tearing up an exciting fit on guitar.
Keith HAS gotten slack in his, ah, maturity. And because he can, because of all the extraneous instruments, but Mick lies back because of the backup singers. He's not as intense or as funny as he used to be.
In concert from the beginning to '81, Mick, like Keith, never stopped making ridiculous noises during the songs. I love listening to him slobber all over Dartford in '81, it makes me all giddy and happy inside. Personally, I think he needs to drink more before he goes out onstage. He also really needs to loosen up and connect with his songs and sing them like he means them.
Mick also needs to connect with his inner Mick. He needs to act more real, get into his persona bag and come up with something new. I think he should get up, shake his model fucking, Multi-Media-Conglomerate-Mogol-In-the-Making, Rolling Stone review stacking, ass cleavage model hiring, Altamont encouraging, Mick Being ass, get up there like the devil he is, and LAUGH LAUGH LAUGH at all of us lesser human beings. As long as he royally rocks and rolls as he does it.
I just got a copy of the Rattlesnake CD "Shine a Light" from Aneheim '99. The sound is weird - the guitars come up and down - the song starts out w/Keith really loud and then backs him off to near inaudability when the rest of the band comes in. And Darryl Jones is really loud in the mix. Which, as you well know, is not conducive to helping things sound like the Rolling Stones. And while I'm sure it would have been fun to be there, it does not make for particularly spectacular extracurricular live rock and roll CD listenage.
The first seven tracks are, and it pains me to say this, just kind of boring. There's so much space between the instruments and no chemistry in the playing. It's not big, tremendous and exciting, it's just kind of wide, and not very swinging. And kind of, well, holey. It is depressing. I do like it when Mick says, "Shut Up, already, Damn!" on "You Got Me Rockin'", but other than that, my heart is sad. It longs for the ROLLING STONES.
Some Girls is cool because it's the core band playing with some organ and Jagger sounds like he means it. And if he had suspect and cynical motives for sticking it in there to get extra press, it was a super smart move and the kind of thing that he should do more of when selecting a 40th Anniversary set list. What to make of changing the color of the girls who want to get fucked all night? Is it playing the percentages in the audience? Surely Mick would not be giving in to OPRAH'S WORLD - right?
You Got the Silver is the absolute shit. Now THAT'S what I'm talkin' about! That guy is IN the moment, "Turn it down, bud . . . It'll be alright. . .That's no fuckin' big surprise". Wow.
When I saw them in Charlotte on that tour I was taken up and lofting in the rafters while he sung this one, and I beheld a vision that this song was about MICK, and that all Keith wanted from Mick was for Mick to come back to the fun and good times of making music for the music and for the glory of making the best music ever. "Hey, baby, what's in your eyes?" Keith asks, and I see the vacant stare of Mick as he wobbles back and forth during the St. Louis Bridges to Babylon pay per view, holding his arms up stiffly like he's landing an airplane from the ground. "You got the silver, you got the gold . . " Got PLENTY of that. "You got my heart, you got my soul . . " what more could you want? You won, OK? Now come back down and dig your victory, onstage with me! You know, dig it, man . . . Then the song ended and I descended from the rafters.
Anyway, back to Anaheim. There's a seriously Keith-lacking Out of Control (not Keith's fault, he sounds like he's making rude noises all over the place, but the mix is wack), which is a shame, because, well, you know. That song is awesome. And to be perfectly fair to another MEMBER OF THE ROLLING STONES, Ronnie plays like a badass on it.
And then, when they go to the small stage . .. Suddenly, to what to my wondering ears should appear? Could it be, in all of this basically boring professional show business blahdy blah? It sounds like . . . YES! IT IS! It's the Rolling Stones! Right before my very ears! Playing Route 66! Mick sounds like he means it! Keith is playing constantly and is just ROARING! They're making a bunch of horrible noise! YAY! Life suddenly becomes very good! No more mix issues, because there's no other stupid instruments to get in the way. I don't dance like a clown. I dance like a monkey.
They can still do it! They can still rock your balls off! Oh I am so relieved. I think I can go on living.
Whip whoops ass like a good whip should and Midnight Rambler is evil. They sound bigger and more wonderful than they could with a hundred back up musicians.
The boys need to bump each others' elbows to churn out proper rock and roll.
If I don't see a club date on this tour I think I shall jump in the river and die.
This tour really needs to wag its tongue wag it high.
Jah not so wonderful but Jah is not dead.
Good night.
|
|
|
| Maxlugar |
Still, Xims, over the years Mick has gotten a lot more shit than Keith on these boards. That's the only point I'm trying to make here. You're words speak the truth but not many speak them.
And about Mick's vocals live, yes I have been saying that too for a long time. He never lets it go down from the gut anymore. Live that is. In the studio all the time. So I can only believe he is unable to do it over a long span of tour dates. I bet he can't. Listen to him tear those vocal chords up on all those boots from the 70's. I bet he's got some major issues going on in that throat. |
|
|
| ulfk |
RON WOOD is no doubt the most versatile artist in the band
I have listened thru all concerts during the B2B-NS tour and
he is often kept far too low in the mix for som� reason.If you sharpen your senses though the �statement above is obvious.
The Stones need Ron but Ron doesn't need the Stones.He is not that married to the guitar as Keith which is almost sick but �looks upon it as one way of expressing himself,art another.
He has a relaxed attitude towards the whole thing.
And if he is gonna be mistreated by being kept low in the mix next time around I think he should leave in the midst of the tour.If he wanna play on do it with the Faces a new band or himself........
ULF
|
|
|
| sandrew |
Then he better improve his guitar chops because, I'm sorry, his painting sucks. |
|
|
| lucasd |
Plain and simple....the Stones need to start sounding like the Stones again...
LIVE PERFORMANCES--drop all the horn players, except Bobby Keys...one keyboard player at the most--none would be better...drop the background singers and get Keith to do background/harmony vocals again....get Keith to start playing again and keep his guitar the loudest instrument in the mix, not just for the intros
STUDIO PERFORMANCES--get Mick to stop overenunciating words and oversinging at times....get him to sound more like the white bluesmaster he once was...go back to the classic Stones mix....vocals buried, drums farther back, and guitars way up front....bring back the guitar intros, and drop the Charlie intros of the last few albums....bring back the great percussion sounds of the Jimmy Miller era |
|
|
| Cardinal Ximinez |
I agree lucasd...the Stones need to get back to being a Rock band. I don't think it will happen though, and here's why.
We are gonna get charged out the ying-yang for tickets. For the type of bucks that we will be paying, the Stones absolutely MUST put on a good show. Now what you and I are talking about here, means that each of the boys MUST be on top of his game EVERY night for the entire show, during the entire tour. That just ain't gonna happen. See, maybe back in '72 they could afford to have a couple of off shows...the economics of today however, do not allow for off nights. You say they were more consistent back then? I say no fucking way. They could be brilliant one night, and the next sound like a third rate garage band. Hell, that could happen from song to song! You see, with all the extra people to cover up for them, they don't have to be "on" to still sound good TO THE MASSES. Look, people like you and I make up an extremely small percentage of the ticket buying public. You and I really CARE about it, you know? 90% of the people at any given show know the "Hot Rocks" stuff and that's it. I mean, I can't even begin to tell you about some of the ridiculous shit I've heard in the crowd before, during, and after Stones shows. "Yeah, I really liked that "it's just a shot away" song". "You Got Me Rocking, that's on Tatoo You, right?" "Did you see Keith play the piano during Honky Tonk Woman? I didn't know he could play like that!" The stupidest comment came on opening night of the '94 tour, right after the first song "Not Fade Away" the dickwad behind me yells "Play some oldies!". I mean, the song was released in 1963, how much older did he want? If it was just us hard core fans going to shows, they could do a tour of large theatres. They'd get about 5 or 6 thousand a night. But they fill stadiums of 65,000 people for multiple nights in the same city. Like it or not, you and I are NOT the audience anymore. They can't afford to play to us anymore. They have been painted into a corner, and the only way out is to churn out the warhorses in the same way every night. The lights and effects and shit are programmed, they CAN'T vary how a tune gets done, Mick has to hit his blocking marks on the stage, if they don't the show looks bad. They are slaves to the "show". Yeah they can still be the Rolling Stones for 3 songs a night on the small stage. But then the have to go back to being a "show" band again, to keep all the Hot Rocks fans happy.
It sucks, but that's the way it has been since 1989, and that's the way it will stay.
Like I said before, I'll take whatever they can give me, and I'll be happy for it. Honestly, there's lots more important things to get upset about.
L8r |
|
|
| Nasty Habits |
The Cardinal speaks hard truths. Second night in Chicago '97 everyone around me wanted to know what album "Sister Morphine" was on. The vast majority of the audience doesn't want to be turned into slobbering, seething, dancing monkeys by the power of rock and roll. They want to be served what they expect to be served.
That's what happens when you turn your band into the McDonald's of rock and roll.
Doesn't hurt to dream, however.
From lucasd:
>LIVE PERFORMANCES--drop all the horn players, except Bobby
>Keys...one keyboard player at the most--none would be
>better...
They've had piano from the beginning and even if they kicked Stu out piano is still important to their sound. There is no need for "lead piano" on Midnight Rambler or whatever, but keybs can be ok as long as they're understated and part of the accompaniment, and as long as they're not played by a guy named Chuck. Chucks and Charlies should play guitars and drums. Ians play piano.
> STUDIO PERFORMANCES--get Mick to stop overenunciating words >and oversinging at times....get him to sound more like the
>white bluesmaster he once was...go back to the classic
>Stones mix....vocals buried, drums farther back, and guitars >way up front....
Yes indeed. Most importantly, KILL DON WAS, or at least ban him from the studio. All of his productions sound like saran wrap. Also: NO MORE LYRIC SHEETS.
|
|
|
| Cardinal Ximinez |
Well, one thing that would certainly help, above anything else, in the studio is for the songs to be true Jagger/Richards songs....songs written by BOTH of them, working TOGETHER, as a real songwriting team. Stop all this, it's a Mick song, or it's a Keith song..how about let's have an album of STONES songs.
Now along the lines of the slaying of Don Was....how about they keep the same producer for the ENTIRE album. B2B sounded like a pair of mismatched solo efforts, with production values careening all over the place. Let's have the next one having a uniformed sound, and a uniform theme...
Oh yeah, how about playing some ROCK & ROll while they are at it. That would help....or am I lost in a dream? |
|
|
| sandrew |
I don't mind Was's production. It's fairly no-nonsense. And it was definitely head and shoulders above the rest of B2B: Danny Saber, the Dust Brothers, am I missing anyone else? Card X is right. They need to pick someone and stick with him. Mick likes to work with different people, and B2B - not to mention Goddess in the Doorway - suffered as a result.
There's nothing wrong with tackling different styles, but the production has to be somewhat uniform, I think. "Wandering Spirit" was all over the map, but Rick Rubin's production made it all sound tight; it made thematic sense.
What do you guys think of Kevin Shirley? He's worked with Aerosmith and produced the Black Crowes' "By Your Side." The production on the latter was loud, massive, and balls-to-the-wall. |
|
|
| T&A |
Some excellent points are being raised here. The potential salvation to what many of us hardcore fans are whining about may be the rumor we're hearing about more small club gigs. I have to believe that if they actually schedule some of these, that the focus will be on "paring back" the production and players to something closer to the '78 or '81 editions...and obviously smaller venues mean you can experiment with lesser-known material. Personally, I hope they get Mac back in the fold, but I don't expect it. God helps us all if Matt Clifford returns (I'm a little worried because Mick used him so heavily on GITD). |
|
|
| T&A |
Producers? What the hell ever happened to the Glimmer Twins?!! |
|
|
| sandrew |
Um, nothing. I guess we all just assume they'll be involved. |
|
|
| sandrew |
...and Matt Clifford is disastrous. That guy belongs in Madonna's band, or with Neil Diamond - not the Rolling F'n'g Stones. |
|
|
| T&A |
As Glimmer Twins, I don't mean involved as people, I mean be the producers. Seems to me Some Girls and Black and Blue, to name a couple of projects, didn't exactly suffer with the Glimmer Twins at the helm. Who the hell needs a Don Was or anybody else figuring out how the Stones should sound? Bob Dylan just PRODUCED arguably his best record since 1975. If Mick and Keith don't know what they should sound like after 40 years in the business, the band is in serious trouble. |
|
|
| sandrew |
Well, they're always at the helm and always get a production credit. Having a third person to bounce ideas off of doesn't necessarily mean they're clueless about the direction of their music.
[Edited by sandrew] |
|
|
| T&A |
I didn't mean to say they were clueless. I just don't understand the need for the 3rd person. It certainly wasn't missed during their run of 70's albums. My point is that Mick and Keith must surely have a pretty good idea of the sound they are looking for...how a Don Was or a Daniel Lanois and any other hot-shot producer could add to their own sense of the Stones sound is questionable. I think the use of the third person has been mostly at the request of Mick due to his pre-occupation with keeping the Stones sound "current." He needs to get over that and realize that the Stones "sound" transcends currency. Some Girls sounds as good today as it did 24 years ago. 20 years from now it still will, whereas B2B will sound dated. A lesson is to be learned here. |
|
|
| Cardinal Ximinez |
OK, I think some people aren't gonna like hearing this....
IMO, there are a couple of big reasons why the Glimmers use a 3rd producer. The first, and main reason is that, I don't think Mick and Keith really want to spend THAT much time in the control booth. I really don't think that either one of them are nearly as committed to the band as they were 25 years ago. I really believe that they are through spending 18 hour days in the studio. I'm pretty sure you could talk Keith into doing it, but there's no way you'll get Jagger to live in a studio again. And we all know that there's no way that one will produce without the other. So each of them tosses ideas into the 3rd guys lap, and let him make the best of it....
Secondly, I think Mick and Keith have drifted so far apart from each other musically, and probably personally, that there isn't any way that the 2 of them could sit in a control room for 10 hours a day without killing each other. They need the 3rd guy as a sort of compromise broker, diplomat, and peacemaker.
All this being said, my express wish is for the Glimmer's to get their shit together, get tight again, get on the same page, get committed, and start writing and working TOGETHER. Oh yeah, and start to ROCK again. I really think the key to the Phoenix rising is for the Stones to start playing fuckin' ROCK & ROLL!
Just my opinion, I now return you to your regular programming... |
|
|
| CocaBuena |
I don't have time to read what you have been writting about "Wodsy" - even why there's alot of stuff, but the guy who made Slide On This, Gimme Some Neck and I've Got My Own Album To Do, among others, can't be bad.
Actually, luv Ronnie.
I think if some of you miss Mick Taylor, well, then you should start to cry by Brian Jones too.
Ronnie is the most nice Rolling Stone - he even stop to talk to you!!! When Jagger stops is because he's thinking in how to sale more records. Woodsy stops only because he is nice. Period.
|
|
|
| hoobler |
anyone who thinks wood should be canned is touched. |
|
CHAT ROOM aka THE FUN HOUSE] [
RESTROOMS]