Hi there



We've just put live this Bill Wyman interview, featuring some reflections on his new album, the Stones and Brian Jones...

[www.clashmusic.com]


Ta,


Clash

THANK YOU!!-

anyone who wants to learn anything about the rolling stones needs to read every word bill wyman says.
read his books,his interviews,radio broadcasts,all of it.

why?-because bill doesnt bullshit.he'll tell you exactly what happened and when and he wont sugarcoat it or spin it because he's trying to create some image for himself.

mick,keith and ronnie are completely full of it-one figures out ten ways to say nothing,one makes up things out of the blue and the other took so many drugs he thinks he was asked to replace jimmy page in led zeppelin.
not the guys i want to learn history from.
charlie will tell the truth but he doesnt talk enough to really get alot out of him.

i cannot believe the plaque at the dartford train station says mick and keith "started the rolling stones"-when bill said he wanted to "get a couple of heavies and go rip it down" i almost fell off my chair laughing.that is full on bill wyman in effect.

and just as he said,for the 2 of you who dont already know-brian jones created the band that is the rolling stones.period.
not mick,not keith,not stu.-brian jones.

Thanks...Looking forward to hearing Bill's NEW album.

well he says Brian created the band.

the songs had quite a lot to do with it too.

technically yes Brian was the driving force in the beginning.

Quote
lem motlow


mick,keith and ronnie are completely full of it-one figures out ten ways to say nothing,one makes up things out of the blue and the other took so many drugs he thinks he was asked to replace jimmy page in led zeppelin.
not the guys i want to learn history from.
charlie will tell the truth but he doesnt talk enough to really get alot out of him.

i cannot believe the plaque at the dartford train station says mick and keith "started the rolling stones"-when bill said he wanted to "get a couple of heavies and go rip it down" i almost fell off my chair laughing.that is full on bill wyman in effect.

and just as he said,for the 2 of you who dont already know-brian jones created the band that is the rolling stones.period.
not mick,not keith,not stu.-brian jones.

Yes but truth and accuracy can certainly get in the way of a good story. I think even Bill had periods of exaggeration concerning his sexual exploits. As much as I appreciate Bill's history from a purely factual perspective, it tends to be a bit dry. The fact that was never really one of the gang from a social standpoint pretty much guarantees he missed a lot of the narrative of The Rolling Stones. By the time the golden age started it seemed he was already somewhat marginalized by Mick and Keith.

Don't get me wrong I love his playing and miss his touch considerably, I just don't think he's necessarily in the best position to tell the story of the Stones, past 1966 or so anyway...too much he missed out on by being the straight guy in a group of party animals. Perhaps his memory is better as a result but his perspective probably wasn't in sync with Mick and Keith, and those two were driving the bus, so to speak.

Anyway, thanks for the post Clash.

peace

there was a rolling stones long before mick and keith started writing songs.

brian jones started a blues band that he called the rolling stones,they played blues cover tunes in bars and clubs,this is a well ducumented fact.

he wasnt "technically the driving force", whatever thats supposed to mean- he started the band.bill explains it to you in no uncertain terms and i've read this same account by many,many people not named mick and keith.

so yeah,the songs had alot to do with it-the muddy waters songs,the howlin wolf songs,the john lee hooker songs...

yes I know. They were on a mission. Brian did get it going. They established themselves and Brian and Keith learned how to play while living through the worst winter in a long time

Then Brian saw this band as his. Then he made moves that caused deep resentment. So much for thinking it was his band. It's sad though, and wrong that the plaque in Dartford is all about Mick and Keith ..

Quote
Naturalust
Yes but truth and accuracy can certainly get in the way of a good story. I think even Bill had periods of exaggeration concerning his sexual exploits.

that was never really one of the gang from a social standpoint pretty much guarantees he missed a lot of the narrative of The Rolling Stones.



peace

soooo...what information do you have that disputes bills acount of his sex life in any way shape or form? pray tell

he missed alot of the "narrative of the rolling stones"? what the fck does that even mean?

he was just playing onstage with them and recording albums but he wasnt shooting up in the bathroom so he missed ...what? i hate to tell you this but people who are screwed up on drugs are the ones who miss things,not the other way around.

if you read enough about the stones you realize that bills accounts of everything jibe perfectly with almost anyone who was around,anyone who wasnt trying to rewrite history in the way they wanted to be seen that is.

Bill has his own share of BS too. I recall in his book how he talks abou the early days, he & brian would go out and look to get laid, while Keith and Mick would be holed up writing new songs. And then later in his book he expresses bitterness over sharing of songwriting ... he should have thought of that early on, eh?

Quote
Naturalust

Quote
lem motlow


mick,keith and ronnie are completely full of it-one figures out ten ways to say nothing,one makes up things out of the blue and the other took so many drugs he thinks he was asked to replace jimmy page in led zeppelin.
not the guys i want to learn history from.
charlie will tell the truth but he doesnt talk enough to really get alot out of him.

i cannot believe the plaque at the dartford train station says mick and keith "started the rolling stones"-when bill said he wanted to "get a couple of heavies and go rip it down" i almost fell off my chair laughing.that is full on bill wyman in effect.

and just as he said,for the 2 of you who dont already know-brian jones created the band that is the rolling stones.period.
not mick,not keith,not stu.-brian jones.

Yes but truth and accuracy can certainly get in the way of a good story. I think even Bill had periods of exaggeration concerning his sexual exploits. As much as I appreciate Bill's history from a purely factual perspective, it tends to be a bit dry. The fact that was never really one of the gang from a social standpoint pretty much guarantees he missed a lot of the narrative of The Rolling Stones. By the time the golden age started it seemed he was already somewhat marginalized by Mick and Keith.

Don't get me wrong I love his playing and miss his touch considerably, I just don't think he's necessarily in the best position to tell the story of the Stones, past 1966 or so anyway...too much he missed out on by being the straight guy in a group of party animals. Perhaps his memory is better as a result but his perspective probably wasn't in sync with Mick and Keith, and those two were driving the bus, so to speak.

Anyway, thanks for the post Clash.

peace

Bill would probably say: 'Don't piss on my shoes and tell me it's raining.'

The others 'were driving the bus' while on camera or throwing a tv set out of the window because it was filmed. And while the 'party animals' were doing their stuff with reporters or people who were glad to tell a story the next day Bill was observing/writing things down that happened today or he was shaggin' probably more girls than M&K did all together. Not that this is an achievement but he just likes facts and hates the bs. And he likes girls yes

Ol' naturalust telling Bill Wyman "missed a lot of the narrative" because "he was
marginalized."...yeah.
You're trying to get on camera yourself.
Go catch a wave and try make yourself famous but don't do this to people who are not even trying to prove anything.

dreamer,i dont think nat meant anything bad by that.it's just that alot of the fans,probably most of the fans see the bands history through mick and keith.

it is a funny line "missed alot of the bands narrative"it shows how all the mythology around the rockstar life clouds a fans vision.

how on earth could one half of your rhythm section be "marginalized" in a band as reliant on rhythm as the rolling stones?
or be "missing alot of the narrative" when he's not only there but stone cold sober and writing everything down?

to my way of thinking,bill with 5 groupies in his room after a show is more rock and roll than keith sitting with his face in a tray of powder.

It's hilarious to read that Bill considered taking down the Dartford plaque. Imagine that now.

"Do you know that in Dartford Railway Station where [Mick and Keith] met, they’ve just put up a plaque now saying they created The Rolling Stones, which is totally out of order. I’ve had a few friends write to them and complain, saying: ‘It’s totally out of order. Brian Jones created The Rolling Stones, not Mick and Keith. They were invited into his band at later times,’ and they completely ignore it, because they want the accolade for Dartford. But it’s so wrong, and I hate stuff like that, where people try to rewrite history for themselves. It’s so wrong. I was thinking of getting a couple of heavies and going down there and just ripping it off, and getting back on the train back to London. I’ve really been thinking about the possibility of doing it, because it’s so wrong."

<<And then later in his book he expresses bitterness over sharing of songwriting ... he should have thought of that early on, eh?>>

He did, but did Mick and Keith, never mind ALO and Decca, release it let alone even bother to listen?

Ha! You guys are tough man. Perhaps I wasn't clear what I meant. It's not the throwing the TV out the window narrative or the Bill interviewing his next conquest or Keith with his hand in the medicine jar I'm really referring to here....more the inspiration and creative endeavors.

More the writing sessions in the kitchen, the South American ranch and in the village in Italy. The mixing sessions where Mick and sometimes Keith spent hours tweaking the recordings to produce their best work. The hours Keith spent at Nellcote with Gram polishing his feel for country styles, the amazing interaction between Mick and MT at Micks house that produced Sway and Moonlight Mile, the sessions where Keith was grunting out syllables for Mick to masterfully interpret and make into masterpieces. Just lots of intimate creative genius that seemed to happen without a huge Wyman presence. That is the true story of The Rolling Stones to me, the great songwriting.

Yeah we get the infrequent story from Bill about how he was playing a lick on the piano and Keith came in and stole it to make some song or another...but with his great memory for detail I'm sure we would have heard of every creation of Bill's by now and it just seems like there weren't too many.

Also the direction of the Stones business and music seemed to be highly driven by Mick and Keith. Charlie, Bill and Ronnie have all seemed somewhat to be along for the ride. Very important to the live sound and recordings but not ever really providing the map, navigating or driving. That's what I meant by Mick and Keith were driving the bus. Bill would probably be the first to admit this, imo, it has little to do with rock star lifestyle and the mythology surrounding it. My suggestion that Bill missed part of the story because he wasn't a party animal isn't about the party, it's just a likely reason he wasn't around when a lot of amazing stuff happened which tells the story of The Rolling Stones.

To suggest I'm trying to get on camera and make myself famous is truly bizzare, nothing could be further from the truth here. I just enjoy a good intellectual discussion about The Stones and their music really.

And yes I've read Stone Alone, detailed to a fault. But I'd rather hear about the inspiration behind Moonlight Mile and the writing of Wild Horses than how much money Bill had in his account when the Stones moved to France in 1971.

peace

Quote
lem motlow
dreamer,i dont think nat meant anything bad by that.it's just that alot of the fans,probably most of the fans see the bands history through mick and keith.

it is a funny line "missed alot of the bands narrative"it shows how all the mythology around the rockstar life clouds a fans vision.

how on earth could one half of your rhythm section be "marginalized" in a band as reliant on rhythm as the rolling stones?
or be "missing alot of the narrative" when he's not only there but stone cold sober and writing everything down?

to my way of thinking,bill with 5 groupies in his room after a show is more rock and roll than keith sitting with his face in a tray of powder.

Could be but but it is pretty stupid to read.
Especially since BW is known for being very interested in history in general and most certainly in the history of the RS. Even by the rest of those showers of shit: "which album is it from Bill?"
And it's also pretty obvious again in this interview how he cares "But it’s so wrong, and I hate stuff like that, where people try to rewrite history for themselves. It’s so wrong.": he's almost getting emotional about it because he just hates baloney like that.

Apart from having experienced enough substances myself I agree that having your face in a couple of groupies is a lot more R&R anyway. Especially when it's a combination of certain stuff from a guy I now in Mexico AND burying your nose in a mountain of curles...between legs I don't care if they're greek colums or second hand Steinways; what's between them is passport to heaven. I need a drink...
Yes lem we agree: there's only two syllables in this whole wide world worth hearing: pussy...

Where's Daphne? Let's get her down here.


two syllables in this whole wide world worth hearing: pussy

we better be careful or onlystones is gonna come back and join the thread...


anyway it sounds like he's describing dominique tarle photos.the wistful gram parsons sitting with keith...the truth is bill lived right down the street from nellcote,the entire band lived in the area and they were all working on exile.

most of the stones songs were written in the studio meaning mick and keith brought in an idea and the BAND sat for hours upon hours and molded it into something.
there's a reason why all the doors songs say "written by the doors" and not jim morrison.it's a matter of how much credit you want to give the guys who sat in the studio for days and helped build the songs into something.

if you watch one plus one you'll get a better idea of that.i think that the bill and charlie rhythm section was "driving" the stones as much as anything.

I like that song. He's not singing in a high voice, and that bass just hits where the bass is supposed to hit.

Quote
Naturalust
Ha! You guys are tough man. Perhaps I wasn't clear what I meant. It's not the throwing the TV out the window narrative or the Bill interviewing his next conquest or Keith with his hand in the medicine jar I'm really referring to here....more the inspiration and creative endeavors.

More the writing sessions in the kitchen, the South American ranch and in the village in Italy. The mixing sessions where Mick and sometimes Keith spent hours tweaking the recordings to produce their best work. The hours Keith spent at Nellcote with Gram polishing his feel for country styles, the amazing interaction between Mick and MT at Micks house that produced Sway and Moonlight Mile, the sessions where Keith was grunting out syllables for Mick to masterfully interpret and make into masterpieces. Just lots of intimate creative genius that seemed to happen without a huge Wyman presence. That is the true story of The Rolling Stones to me, the great songwriting.

Yeah we get the infrequent story from Bill about how he was playing a lick on the piano and Keith came in and stole it to make some song or another...but with his great memory for detail I'm sure we would have heard of every creation of Bill's by now and it just seems like there weren't too many.

Also the direction of the Stones business and music seemed to be highly driven by Mick and Keith. Charlie, Bill and Ronnie have all seemed somewhat to be along for the ride. Very important to the live sound and recordings but not ever really providing the map, navigating or driving. That's what I meant by Mick and Keith were driving the bus. Bill would probably be the first to admit this, imo, it has little to do with rock star lifestyle and the mythology surrounding it. My suggestion that Bill missed part of the story because he wasn't a party animal isn't about the party, it's just a likely reason he wasn't around when a lot of amazing stuff happened which tells the story of The Rolling Stones.

To suggest I'm trying to get on camera and make myself famous is truly bizzare, nothing could be further from the truth here. I just enjoy a good intellectual discussion about The Stones and their music really.

And yes I've read Stone Alone, detailed to a fault. But I'd rather hear about the inspiration behind Moonlight Mile and the writing of Wild Horses than how much money Bill had in his account when the Stones moved to France in 1971.

peace

Hey relax I'm cool with you. Got nothing to do with being tough or not. And being intellectual or enjoying an intellectual discussion about the inspiration behind MM and the writing of WH...? Why that idea? 'It zooms in the room' like KR said there's nothing intellectual about that. The discussion can be very interesting but it's not necessary to be intellectual to be part of that.
Where is being intellectual in the process of creating? Being creative is open to everyone.
I enjoy an insight. Coming from you or from anyone so you're welcome.
Call it smart or open or interested. Intellectuality is used too often by too many people who are confinced they are very intelligent. But that's something else.

Quote
lem motlow
we better be careful or onlystones is gonna come back and join the thread...

LOL, touché.

Je Suis un Rock Star ....

If David Beckham had a go at singing this how it would sound .,...



ROCKMAN

Quote
Dreamer
two syllables in this whole wide world worth hearing: pussy

Well Dreamer you're clearly on the wrong board then. I think the two syllables we mostly discuss here are music...Beside if Bill's head was often so buried, how could he notice what else was going on?

And Lem yes a photo is still worth a thousand words, those photos do indeed tell a story. Tarle admits she was a fly on the wall during that whole period and I'd bet if Bill had more of a presence he would have been in a few more of them. btw: I don't have any information disputing Bill's conquests other than my experience that those who are in it for the conquest and are openly telling about it are usually prone to exaggeration and that Keith mentioned in Life that Bill was spending an amazingly short time with each of the multiple ladies he was bringing into the hotel and seemed to count each one in his numbers game.

I recall Bill (or Andy John's?) saying he would often sit out until the song had the structure and groove and only then he would pick up his bass and start playing along. I also recall someone saying that when Bill finally cocked his bass to the appropriate angle and started earnestly playing along they knew they would be getting a take soon. He was obviously important to the whole process and finality of the songs but his contributions to the spark, arrangements, chord structure, melody and lyrics were minimal at best.

I love what he brought to the table, wish he was still playing with the band, don't mean to marginalize his contributions I just believe the story of The Rolling Stones is much more than Bill's history lessons can ever provide.

peace



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2015-06-16 00:47 by Naturalust.

One must remember that Bill has a new album he's tryin' ta plug ...



ROCKMAN

Quote
Rockman
One must remember that Bill has a new album he's tryin' ta plug ...

Well I guess he's got plenty of experience in the plugging game, should do fine.

peace

Quote
Naturalust
I also recall someone saying that when Bill finally cocked his bass to the appropriate angle and started earnestly playing along they knew they would be getting a take soon.
peace

that description you gave is hardly that of a person not important to the process,no? that hardly seems like someone not involved or just along for the ride.all of the stones had a role and they all make up the five fingers of the fist,that never changed no matter what outsiders thought they saw.

and natch,dominique tarle is a dude..

some guys have all the luck ............ hhhaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa



ROCKMAN

Quote
Naturalust

Quote
Dreamer
two syllables in this whole wide world worth hearing: pussy

Well Dreamer you're clearly on the wrong board then. I think the two syllables we mostly discuss here are music...Beside if Bill's head was often so buried, how could he notice what else was going on?

And Lem yes a photo is still worth a thousand words, those photos do indeed tell a story. Tarle admits she was a fly on the wall during that whole period and I'd bet if Bill had more of a presence he would have been in a few more of them.

I recall Bill (or Andy John's?) saying he would often sit out until the song had the structure and groove and only then he would pick up his bass and start playing along. I also recall someone saying that when Bill finally cocked his bass to the appropriate angle and started earnestly playing along they knew they would be getting a take soon. He was obviously important to the whole process and finality of the songs but his contributions to the spark, arrangements, chord structure, melody and lyrics were minimal at best.

I love what he brought to the table, wish he was still playing with the band, don't mean to marginalize his contributions I just believe the story of The Rolling Stones is much more than Bill's history lessons can ever provide.

peace

They (Dominique Tarlé et al) gave MJ&KR presence ...that was already going on for years and because fly on the wall #374 did exactly the same we have this result.
When he took pics of MJ&KR he missed the rest...

When the outcome was a book filled with pics of CW&BW playing their instruments and KR cooking with AP and MJ hanging out with Bianca the world would assume the rhythm section was most important and responsible for EOMS. In that case who knows what you said today...maybe that MJ&KR were not much around during the whole process.
So it's a matter of perspective. Like some very intelligent people like to see themselves as intellectual but can't evaluate themselves.
I'm not referring to you with that! Just bringing it back to any other form of discussion possible because I like your need to discuss things or exchange views as I would say.

Just as 'the story of The Rolling Stones is much more than Bill's history lessons can ever provide.' the music of the Rolling Stones is much more than the Glimmer Twins songwriting credits can ever provide.



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 2015-06-16 01:34 by Dreamer.

I'm glad Bill is speaking up for Brian.

Quote
Dreamer
When the outcome was a book filled with pics of CW&BW playing their instruments and KR cooking with AP and MJ hanging out with Bianca the world would assume the rhythm section was most important and responsible for EOMS. In that case who knows what you said today...maybe that MJ&KR were not much around during the whole process.
So it's a matter of perspective. Like some very intelligent people like to see themselves as intellectual but can't evaluate themselves.
I'm not referring to you with that! Just bringing it back to any other form of discussion possible.

Yes for sure, I can see that pictures can create their own story of a situation, not the whole story. But I have read and watched just about every book and video of that period I can get my hands on and one thing that stands out is that it has been the Mick and Keith show for a long time. I would welcome more information on just how much Bill was involved in the creation process, it's interesting stuff to me. Perhaps I'm just personally more interested in Mick and Keith's perspective than Bill's and that effects my understanding of the true story.

Quote
lem motlow

Quote
Naturalust
I also recall someone saying that when Bill finally cocked his bass to the appropriate angle and started earnestly playing along they knew they would be getting a take soon.
peace

that description you gave is hardly that of a person not important to the process,no? that hardly seems like someone not involved or just along for the ride.all of the stones had a role and they all make up the five fingers of the fist,that never changed no matter what outsiders thought they saw.

Yes that is actually why I included that recollection, and the words "he was obviously important to the whole process." I can easily hear what he added to the music....more than he typically gets credit for.

I would welcome another book from him actually, one that describes the musical collaborations more, with less rather boring business details and continues the story up until his departure.

But as the "odd man out" he seemed to be for so much of that period I guess I just believe he couldn't have the whole "story". I just don't know how else to say it.

peace

Quote
Turner68
I'm glad Bill is speaking up for Brian.

me too .

this is a young man with a vision who died when he was 27 years old-

think of that- he never had a chance to redeem himself,to apoligize or tell his side of the story.was he a fck up,yes. did he treat women badly and have children he didnt care for,yes.
but years change a person,you learn and grow.most of us are given the time to go back and make things right,brian never had that chance.
to have men in their 40's 50's and 60's speak about the way a young kid acted in certain situations and have him judged in that way is unfair.i believe a bit of perspective is order.

of all the tours i've seen and the footage of the band i've seen before my time i have to conclude my favorite era is actually from the early 60's.

charlie is my darling is my favorite-the actual,original rolling fckn stones.no war horses,no big stages just the original 5 stones out there killing it.it's really amazing how good they were.there's a spark there that can't be defined,it continues to this day,of course but it's still in alot of ways the band brian started back in london in the early 60's.

Quote
lem motlow
he started the band.bill explains it to you in no uncertain terms and i've read this same account by many,many people not named mick and keith.

I thought M and K had told the story dozens of times. I agree w/Bill that they should probably intervene if that Dartford story of Bill's is true, but I'm pretty sure the Stones are on record saying that they joined Brian's band.