Tell Me :  Talk
Talk about your favorite band. 

Previous page Next page First page IORR home

For information about how to use this forum please check out forum help and policies.

Goto Page: 12345678Next
Current Page: 1 of 8
Has Keith become a mere sideman for the band?
Posted by: ROPENI ()
Date: May 7, 2015 01:41

From his latest interviews,you may assume that his role as one of the leaders of The Stones has diminished a great deal,the songs to be played are decided by Mick and Chuck,so, basically Keith just shows up,plays what he is told and goes home....Your opinion....

"No dope smoking no beer sold after 12 o'clock"

Re: Has Keith become a mere sideman for the band?
Date: May 7, 2015 01:48

Nothing is played before Keith has signed the setlist, although Chuck and Mick pick the numbers out.

And he has his own solo slot with two songs.

Nuff said.

Re: Has Keith become a mere sideman for the band?
Posted by: vertigojoe ()
Date: May 7, 2015 02:19

More of a mascot I'd say.
He certainly relinquished his musical director/dynamo role a long time ago.
He embodies the outlaw/drugs/bad boy side of the bands imagine that they still trade off.
He does 2 songs so Jagger can have a break. End of.

Re: Has Keith become a mere sideman for the band?
Posted by: Stoneage ()
Date: May 7, 2015 02:19

Yeah, that's probably it. And maybe a reason to the stale setlists as well. I guess Sir Michael does 80 percent of the work load in the Rolling Stones. The other ones just shows up for rehearsal and gigs.

Re: Has Keith become a mere sideman for the band?
Posted by: Munichhilton ()
Date: May 7, 2015 02:23

Keith has drawn more ticket sales on this bloated tour than any other zoo animal in N. America.

Monkey Man needs to catch up

Re: Has Keith become a mere sideman for the band?
Posted by: nightskyman ()
Date: May 7, 2015 02:28

I just can't imagine Keith ever being a 'sideman' for anyone. Even in this case (current 2015 'zip code' tour). In short, I disagree



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2015-05-07 02:28 by nightskyman.

Re: Has Keith become a mere sideman for the band?
Posted by: Stoneage ()
Date: May 7, 2015 02:31

Maybe not a sideman, Nightskyman, but not a leader neither.

Re: Has Keith become a mere sideman for the band?
Posted by: shawnriffhard1 ()
Date: May 7, 2015 02:45

Sadly, tragically, I agree with the mascot statement. Not only from a playing standpoint, but his lack of knowledge about what's going on at the office is particularly distressing. Not knowing about MT on PMSoul, MT is sick, etc. Sad stuff, but really makes you look back and realize how much damage his drugging and drinking have caused to himself and by influencing MT & RW. It boggles the mind thinking of what could have been.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2015-05-07 02:50 by shawnriffhard1.

Re: Has Keith become a mere sideman for the band?
Posted by: 71Tele ()
Date: May 7, 2015 02:52

Mascot is perhaps too cruel. "Symbol" or "figurehead" seems closer.

Re: Has Keith become a mere sideman for the band?
Posted by: vertigojoe ()
Date: May 7, 2015 02:53

Fair enough I didn't mean it cruelly. Just that his musical contribution has diminished so much..

Re: Has Keith become a mere sideman for the band?
Posted by: ROPENI ()
Date: May 7, 2015 02:56

Quote
shawnriffhard1
Sadly, tragically, I agree with the mascot statement. Not only from a playing standpoint, but his lack of knowledge about what's going on at the office is particularly distressing. Not knowing about MT on PMSoul, MT is sick, etc. Sad stuff, but really makes you look back and realize how much damage his drugging and drinking have caused to himself and by influencing MT & RW. It boggles the mind thinking of what could have been.
Have to agree with you,it seems they just wind him up for a couple of hours on stage and that's it....

"No dope smoking no beer sold after 12 o'clock"

Re: Has Keith become a mere sideman for the band?
Posted by: palerider22 ()
Date: May 7, 2015 03:03

Keith is usually a bit more resilient than most people think. I doubt he's been diminished that much...

Re: Has Keith become a mere sideman for the band?
Posted by: vertigojoe ()
Date: May 7, 2015 03:06

Quote
palerider22
Keith is usually a bit more resilient than most people think. I doubt he's been diminished that much...

I'm afraid from a guitar playing point of view he's about 80% diminished.

Cue DP...

Re: Has Keith become a mere sideman for the band?
Posted by: treaclefingers ()
Date: May 7, 2015 03:08

Quote
vertigojoe
Quote
palerider22
Keith is usually a bit more resilient than most people think. I doubt he's been diminished that much...

I'm afraid from a guitar playing point of view he's about 80% diminished.

Cue DP...

you're in for a world of hurt once DP gets a hold of this.

Re: Has Keith become a mere sideman for the band?
Posted by: chatoyancy ()
Date: May 7, 2015 03:10

Keith has been putting most of his energy into his solo album. As for the Stones tour song selection, Keith has said many times that he lets Mick choose the songs because Mick is the one who has to sing them. As long as Keith's favorites Midnight Rambler, Jumping Jack Flash, Gimme Shelter are played, Keith is Happy.

Re: Has Keith become a mere sideman for the band?
Posted by: vertigojoe ()
Date: May 7, 2015 03:15

Quote
treaclefingers
Quote
vertigojoe
Quote
palerider22
Keith is usually a bit more resilient than most people think. I doubt he's been diminished that much...

I'm afraid from a guitar playing point of view he's about 80% diminished.

Cue DP...

you're in for a world of hurt once DP gets a hold of this.

Tell me about it..

Re: Has Keith become a mere sideman for the band?
Posted by: kish_stoned ()
Date: May 7, 2015 03:16

for keith another gig any place any time and @#$%& the intro for start me up ,played million times bu him and guitar playing has gone down ,not like 1972 where he was running the band sad but he is still here and kicking as good as he can.
ITS ONLY ROCK-ROLL BUT WE LIKE IT

Re: Has Keith become a mere sideman for the band?
Posted by: indystonesfan ()
Date: May 7, 2015 03:20

Uh, no.

First, he is not a sideman. He has said before that Mick and Chuck organize a preliminary list because Mick has to sing them and his voice may not be up for certain songs on certain nights under certain conditions, etc. then Keith sees it, makes suggestions, changes, and signs off on the list.

Second, Keith would like the world to think he's out of it and has no idea what's up at Rolling Stones, Inc. but rest assured he knows damn well what is happening and where things are going. It's part of his persona and role in the band to not sweet every detail but he has his moments when it will be his way or no way at all.

You can try to shout me down all you want but those in the know and the band themselves just laugh at your feeble attempts to belittle Mr. Richards. And that's ok, too because it helps protect him. Mick could not give flying whatever what you think. It's a band like no other anyway and how they operate is their business and theirs alone.

Re: Has Keith become a mere sideman for the band?
Posted by: 2120Wolf ()
Date: May 7, 2015 03:26

It is not really Keith on stage or Mick or Charlie or Ronnie.
What you see on stage are 22 year old musicians with Hollywood FX Special effects mask...Yep thats right they started doing this in 94' for Voodoo Lounge.
I apologize that I spoiled the illusion.

Please stay home...Do not attend the shows....Don't waste your $$$...



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2015-05-07 03:28 by 2120Wolf.

Re: Has Keith become a mere sideman for the band?
Posted by: Stoneage ()
Date: May 7, 2015 03:29

Being the second banana is maybe not so bad after all? Charlie never had a problem with that. You don't have to bother about the planning and managerial parts of doing a tour like Sir Michael.
You just have to show up at decided dates and premises. Everything else is handled by someone else.

Re: Has Keith become a mere sideman for the band?
Posted by: Naturalust ()
Date: May 7, 2015 04:10

If Keith is a sideman, what does that make Ronnie? winking smiley

Yeah he isn't the musical leader of the band as much as he used to but he's still the heart and soul, imo.

peace

Re: Has Keith become a mere sideman for the band?
Posted by: jazzbass ()
Date: May 7, 2015 04:27

Quote
shawnriffhard1
It boggles the mind thinking of what could have been.

Tell me what could've been? Seriously?

Re: Has Keith become a mere sideman for the band?
Posted by: flacnvinyl ()
Date: May 7, 2015 04:33

Keith is not the driving force in the band that he once was. Mick is 100% behind the business decisions, which is exactly what the band is viewed as. To Mick's credit we would not have the Stones in their current state if it were not for his decisions. In many ways Keith is along for the ride.

Re: Has Keith become a mere sideman for the band?
Posted by: duke richardson ()
Date: May 7, 2015 04:39

hey we should be glad Keith is still playing at all.

and watch him, nobody's having more fun than Keith.

but I bet he misses Bobby.. and Stu..and Mac

Re: Has Keith become a mere sideman for the band?
Posted by: Sighunt ()
Date: May 7, 2015 04:54

I have a little different take on Keith's role in the band. After reading Bill German's book on the Stones (which is probably one of the most accurate accounts of inside the Stones from some who infiltrated and got out), by the time they re-convened for the Steel Wheels tour, Bill G. observed that Keith gave up more control to Mick J. in order to keep the Stones together and running, and therefore, as per the cliche "picked and chose his battles." So what I think posters on this board are alluding to regarding Keith's role may have started back in '89 and continued (and maybe have escalated) to this day.

Re: Has Keith become a mere sideman for the band?
Posted by: TeddyB1018 ()
Date: May 7, 2015 04:54

The Plundered My Soul thing was kept from Keith and he decided not to go public and blow things up to keep the peace and eventually allow the Stones to get back together. So it's not all from disinterest. It's more like big time politics and at this point he's basically just got to filibuster, unless Mick includes him.

Re: Has Keith become a mere sideman for the band?
Posted by: Leonioid ()
Date: May 7, 2015 06:18

I suppose it is a good idea to lay these types of threads out here mainly to see who here is still an actual Rolling Stones fan and who posts here mainly because they have nothing better to do...

...and the "nothing better to dos" probably also spend a lot of time on U2, One Direction, Madonna, Oakland Raiders, Britney Spears, KISS, Barry Manilow, etc, etc message boards saying the same typs of things to get a rise out of people posting there.

Re: Has Keith become a mere sideman for the band?
Posted by: Rockman ()
Date: May 7, 2015 06:32

saying the same typs of things to get a rise out of people posting there.

Gimmie a copy of Hustler anyday ... Haaaaaaaaaaaaaaa



ROCKMAN

Re: Has Keith become a mere sideman for the band?
Posted by: Leonioid ()
Date: May 7, 2015 06:35

me too ;)

Re: Has Keith become a mere sideman for the band?
Posted by: Rockman ()
Date: May 7, 2015 06:44

ya dirty sex-maniac !!!!....



ROCKMAN

Goto Page: 12345678Next
Current Page: 1 of 8


Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.

Online Users

Guests: 2721
Record Number of Users: 206 on June 1, 2022 23:50
Record Number of Guests: 9627 on January 2, 2024 23:10

Previous page Next page First page IORR home