Guys, I've been wrong the whole time. Keith is playing awesome and the Stones are sounding better than ever. Need proof?

Watch this:





Much better than this hackjob of a version:

OUCH!!!!!!!!!!!

mmmmmm????????????

wipeacdc@hotmail.com
never too old or young to rocknroll!!!!!!

I dont think he was bad on the song , he just did an enlargement.
I didnt see it as if he forgot his licks

wipeacdc@hotmail.com
never too old or young to rocknroll!!!!!!

Deuce, you never make a mess of anything I take it?

Yeah...ouch.
But ok, we would also find a bad version from the 70ies...

Yes, quite remarkable, but yesterdays reports from Lyon are more positive about Keith. I don't think the 1972 form will ever return though, for all of them btw.

Wilco

I love Keef but something is happening to him.

yep, we had this discussion already: [www.iorr.org]

Keith pausing to accommodate Charlie (who came in wrong after the hiccup in the intro)
is i guess what was widely interpreted as Keith being "lost"; to me he seems quite aware
of what's going on and the fact that someone's got to adjust to someone here.
(but of course "lost" or "not lost" are interpretations, not facts.)
the rest of the number sounds real fine to me, and he sings it great.

is the 82 Wembley She's So Cold on youtube anywhere?
Charlie and Keith trip over one another pretty good at the start of that one too, and it's a riot :E



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2007-06-20 00:54 by with sssoul.

Hope it gets better...my God :-(

Think what happened was that he is waiting for charlie to come in on the right time. He is listening to charlie. That is good news. He is aware of what's going on around him in that song.His bodylanguage is different than before though.
It's like he is moving in slowmotion, hope that will change some what.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2007-06-20 01:19 by barbabang.

I was there and recorded it....it was like a outlaw on the run wanted luck....you know i like the version!!

vudicus Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Deuce, you never make a mess of anything I take
> it?

I am really tired of all the rationalizing and sniveling apologists on this board. Keith has made an obscene amount of money off us fans and we have every right to call a spade a spade, and that "performance" was an atrocity. If Keith wasn't a rockstar and performed like that in any other white- or blue-collar job, he'd have been fired by now.

I don't know if Keith is sick or drunk/stoned...

If it's the former, then I feel terrible for him and his family, but I would hope to hell that the Stones retire sooner rather than later before he degrades their legacy any further.

If it's the latter, then screw him. I will always love Keith, but if he's so goddamned narcissistic, and shows such contempt for his fans that he can't sober up for 2 hours a day, then I'm finished with this band. I won't waste any more time or money having my wonderful memories of the Stones ruined by Keith's decline.


And for all you saying that the Stones have always been mistake-prone...

...there's a HUGE difference between the gloriously sloppy/ragged performances that the Stones are known for, and the out-to-lunch guitar work that has sadly been marring the Stones' recent shows.


I know a lot of you will want to fight over my post, but please, save it. I'm a huge Stones fan but I can't figure out why you bend over backwards to excuse such poor performances. I feel bad for Keith, but worse for Mick and Charlie, who keep the show rolling as best they can.

WilcoMick Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I don't think the 1972 form will ever return though, for all of them btw.
-------------------------------------------------------
Neither will the 1972 form ever return for me :-)

-------------------
Keep On Rolling

Why can we not fight over your post Keefriff99????

i agree with keefriff99.

if keith is playing sloppy cos he is drunk or on drugs than that is unforgivable.

he is being well paid to do what he is good at.

people are paying a lot of money, in my case money i can ill afford, to see the stones.

the least we can ask for is a bit of respect from the band in return.

Where's the proof it's drink or drugs???
It's just speculation!!!

The more you pay the better the drugs!!

it 's pretty fair to confront an almost-official video recording of a show with a snip from a cell in the era of the instant multi video botlegging of every show,
isn'it it?

i could answer to that pointing at a snippet of keith intro to happy on saturday @the stade de france, have you seen it? shivering! more than that 72 version

it happens
shit happens
shivers happen

and yes i believe keith has become of all things the quintessential of the lazy man

but I consider that MHO and not the ultimate diagnostic Truth

Santa Maria! How mnay threads on the same topic or variations thereof, do we have going here?

Lorenz Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Yeah...ouch.
> But ok, we would also find a bad version from the
> 70ies...


Like this one:




- Doxa

keefriff99 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
>
> I know a lot of you will want to fight over my
> post, but please, save it. I'm a huge Stones fan
> but I can't figure out why you bend over backwards
> to excuse such poor performances. I feel bad for
> Keith, but worse for Mick and Charlie, who keep
> the show rolling as best they can.


Well I totally agree with you.
If his bad performances is due to alcohol or drugs...well then he hasn't got any respect for the audience.
But I don't really know for sure, I havn't seen them this year. Last years show was great, but I don't like most of the reports I've read this time around.
Let's hope the reports from Paris is the standard we'll get for the rest of the tour, coz they look quite promising :-)

Man that '72 version rocks!!!

You just can't compare two versions that are played 35 years apart from eacht other IMHO, apart from that Keith at Nijmegen was shockingly bad, the you tube clip was better than what i saw at Nijmegen so maybe i saw something different at the time... Let's hope so.

Cheers,
Wuudy

keefriff99 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
>>
> ...there's a HUGE difference between the
> gloriously sloppy/ragged performances that the
> Stones are known for, and the out-to-lunch guitar
> work that has sadly been marring the Stones'
> recent shows.
>


Ya know, I agree with this 110%

But I rarely notice how bad they can sound when I am actually at the event. I mean I do notice a screw-up or 2 BUT watching Biggest Bang as well as well as the videos on YouTube and hearing a few boots of the tour I have to say - and I HATE to say but Keef is really falling apart in front of our eyes. Of course Keefs screw-ups are more noticable when Ronnie is having an off night.

Sloppy has its charm, but much of what I have seen and heard as of late is far beyond sloppy... it is borderline incompatant.

Bash aways at me if you must, but it hurts to say this.

I defend the Stones constantly, I will ALWAYS find a way to see at least one show per tour no matter if they are good, bad or ugly.... but they need some time off or something, I don't know. IMO this aint the same band that started this tour in '05.


on the other hand, I think Jagger has been really good and is carrying the band (along with Charlie).

get a life deuce

glimmer twin 81 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> get a life deuce


For Christ's sake, why is there people in this forum who can't accept, that people make comments on bad performances of the band.
If you've got ears it's quite clear, that that clip sounded like shit!!!
And believe me...I'm a great fan of the band, BUT it must be possible to discuss the quality of their shows.
Something has been rotten in some of these shows and we can only hope it gets better.
I don't wanna read reviews telling us that the shows have been fantastic, if they have been bad.
Maybe they've lost it or maybe they'll be back in big style over the next few shows. But let's discuss it anyway

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.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2007-06-20 02:03 by deuce.

svendborg Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> glimmer twin 81 Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > get a life deuce
>
>
> For Christ's sake, why is there people in this
> forum who can't accept, that people make comments
> on bad performances of the band.
> If you've got ears it's quite clear, that that
> clip sounded like shit!!!
> And believe me...I'm a great fan of the band, BUT
> it must be possible to discuss the quality of
> their shows.
> Something has been rotten in some of these shows
> and we can only hope it gets better.
> I don't wanna read reviews telling us that the
> shows have been fantastic, if they have been bad.
>
> Maybe they've lost it or maybe they'll be back in
> big style over the next few shows. But let's
> discuss it anyway


That's the thing, this board can't handle negativity

I was there and it was embarrassing to watch, mainly the seconds of 'freezing'. But this vid shows and tells what I didn't notice whilst standing there at the back: that Charlie is indeed a wee bit early. Although Keith's intro is certainly not very directive to Charlie, it is a comforting explanation that this might not have been Keith' fault altogether. (The '75 version of the song as posted above from the LA Forum is indeed an even larger wreck which has always amazed me. And there, everything that went wrong in that song was his fault.) The 'freezing' seconds might indeed have been an attempt to count in, redirect, and try to hear the beat. A few seconds of utter concentration maybe. The rest of the song was very much alright. We jumped to it anyway.

The looks and motion are more bothering than the playing. 'Happy' at least is a song on which he sings and plays at the same time.
I guess in that respect we'll have to accept that this is one other phase of Keith' abrupt change in looks (Like in 81, 93, 97 and 02). He bends a bit, and has a double chin. Especially when looked at from the side this seems a bit worrying. In general, he's a little fatter. I see this as a result from the renewed interest in his personality over the last few months, with the Pirates hype, which he must have thoroughly enjoyed (as can be seen in various footage). This good life might have made him gain a few pounds but also loose some fitness and it might have been more difficult than usual to get back on the road.

Evidently, this is when getting older shows, and when it gets harder to stay young. I don't expect his Voodoo Lounge jumping anymore. Not only his face, but also his motorics change, as happens to all people. But with Keith, these things have always been quite abrupt. He might get back to his "Rio '06" physique a bit when he gets used to the road again. But just a bit.

*****

Deuce, I think the problem people have is not your critisism but your sarcastic approach of this concept, which is very humiliating. We all know in '72 they did a better version than this Nijmegen clumsiness, no need for this contrast with the ironic title to the post. If I were Keith and were judged in that way, chances are I'd be deeply hurt. Good thing he's probably an internet dummy.

Keith is 63...the only revelation that should shock any of you is that the guy is finally showing the process of age. The tour has been on for more than a year and a half.

We've been spoiled because we've been fortunate enough to have them in great health and energetic for the past 3 tours, in their older age. Now that the day has come when Keith is showing his age...we should accept it and not freakin' crucify him and look down on him.

I laugh at posters that say get angry at Keith because his playing is slipping. And then I also laugh at the ones who post over and over: "Keith is playing better than ever!...He still plays like the old days!" Both groups are wrong.

Group one has to accept the fact that this is the beginning of the aging process for our Keith. This is it. And it's ok. It sucks like hell. But that's how life goes. We all are getting old. But you have to lower your standards and comes to terms with the reality that if you allow the bar to remain high...you expecatations for Keith from here on out will not be fullfilled.