Keith Richards

[Avante]

Just started his book....LIFE. I had no idea this guy was as deep deep into music as he obviously is. He talks about hanging out in Mississippi juke joints with just him the only white guy there and how cool that was. He talks about Furry Lewis, Bukka White, Robert Johnson, Elmore James*** (he actually mentions a good 30 old blues cats) and his main guitar inspiration Scotty Moore, Moore was Elvis'a lead guitarist. He talks about not being able to play some lick that Scotty had mastered.

I highly recommend this book to anyone into music, a great read!

"Finally I'm in my element! An incredible band is wailing on a stage with phosphoresant paint, the dance floor is moving as one, so does the sweat and the ribs cooking out back. The only thing that makes me stand out is that I'm white. Wonderfully, no one notices this aberration. I am accepted. I'm made to feel so warm. I am in heaven"

Keith Richards

*** Brian Jones was obsessed with slide guitar master Elmore James. Jones actually called himself Elmo Lewis before starting the Rolling Stones (they got that name from a 1951 Muddy Waters tune "Rolling Stone" )

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4T2hygHu8CI


Elmore James
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gMrElD7mgWo

[Big Empty]

I like how they got their name off a muddy waters tune. Love rolling stones ill have to get the book

[Avante]

I like how they got their name off a muddy waters tune. Love rolling stones ill have to get the book

Well then let me also recommend....

The Rolling Stones: Life on the Road

Bill Wymans Blues Odyssey

The Sound of the City

Must haves for any serious music freak.

There is no "famous" rock band more deeply entrenched in those primitive blues than The Stones.

[Twisted_Dawg]

Keith also learned Memphis tuning in 1964 when the Stone were playing in San Antonio from a member of George Jones band.

[mrsmaalox]

Keith also learned Memphis tuning in 1964 when the Stone were playing in San Antonio from a member of George Jones band.

Well that is the only interesting bit of trivia I've ever seen in an Avante thread. :toast

[Sportcamper]

What I like about Keith is how genuine he is…He talks about his drug abuse & need for a complete blood transfusion to be able to perform in Canada…He is not bragging he is just explaining how messed up he was…

Without Keith Richards The Stones would be like the Beatles…Just another boys band…

[Chris]

Looks like a monster to me

http://therockerblog.files.wordpress.com/2009/12/keith_richards_dpa.jpg



Few quotes from his new book:

"I don't want to see my old friend Lucifer just yet. He's the guy I'm gonna see, isn't it? I'm not going to the other place, let's face it. I've given up everything now - which is a trip in itself."

"I'm probably more aligned to Lucifer and the dark side."

[mingus]

What I like about Keith is how genuine he is…He talks about his drug abuse & need for a complete blood transfusion to be able to perform in Canada…He is not bragging he is just explaining how messed up he was…

Without Keith Richards The Stones would be like the Beatles…Just another boys band…

I love the Rolling Stones. I've all of their albums and listen to them daily and been to a couple of their concerts.

But the Beatles just another boy band? really? Their musicianship is off the charts.

[Avante]

Keith also learned Memphis tuning in 1964 when the Stone were playing in San Antonio from a member of George Jones band.

The more I read about this guy the more stunned I become. I had no idea he was so knowledgeable about the roots of it all. He's far far more than just a rock guitar player.

[Avante]

Well that is the only interesting bit of trivia I've ever seen in an Avante thread. :toast

I don't even enter your threads, yep...zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz.

[Avante]

What I like about Keith is how genuine he is…He talks about his drug abuse & need for a complete blood transfusion to be able to perform in Canada…He is not bragging he is just explaining how messed up he was…

Without Keith Richards The Stones would be like the Beatles…Just another boys band…

Back in the 60s I was too young/dumb to really get The Beatles. I think a lot of people were like that. Now that I get it The Beatles are totally amazing. There deserve all the props they get and are without question one of the top three/four muscical acts of all time.

The Dirty White Boys, The Silencers etc etc are ....just another boys band.

Mick Jagger the real force behind the Stones.

[mrsmaalox]

What I like about Keith is how genuine he is…He talks about his drug abuse & need for a complete blood transfusion to be able to perform in Canada…He is not bragging he is just explaining how messed up he was…

Without Keith Richards The Stones would be like the Beatles…Just another boys band…

The Beatles were amazing songwriters/poets, good vocalists but just marginal musicians.

[mrsmaalox]

I don't even enter your threads, yep...zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz.

And I thank you.

[mingus]

The Beatles were amazing songwriters/poets, good vocalists but just marginal musicians.

You can't be a marginal musician and compose Eleanor Rigby, I am the Walrus, Here Comes the Sun, Martha My Dear, You Never Give Me Your Money, For the Benefit of Mr. Kite etc.

They didn't "show off" like Richards, Jimmy Paige, Slash, Hendrix etc. on guitar like those guys did, but that just wasn't their style.

Their earlier stuff, sure.

[mrsmaalox]

You can't be a marginal musician and compose Eleanor Rigby, I am the Walrus, Here Comes the Sun, Martha My Dear, You Never Give Me Your Money, For the Benefit of Mr. Kite etc.

They didn't "show off" like Richards, Jimmy Paige, Slash, Hendrix etc. on guitar like those guys did, but that just wasn't their style.

Their earlier stuff, sure.

Yup, that's what great songwriters do!

[xmas1997]

Someone on here said the Beatles were just "marginal" musicians, and that just shows this persons' ignorance, because it is widely known and accepted that they were very exceptional musicians.
Maybe in the early stages, and before they played in Germany, this could be said, but the same could be said of every musician that ever played.

As for Richards, I have posted in other threads much of this already about him, plus about the efforts he is making finding these great old blues musicians, and doing what he can to help rehabilitate them, get them settled and off living on the streets, and laying out a lot of his personal funds to do this.
But this can be a two edged sword in that a lot of these old blues musicians are what they are due to the trials, tribulations, and suffering they have had to endure.

[mingus]

Yup, that's what great songwriters do!

Right. And you've got to have a better than marginal understanding of the piano, violin, guitar, bass etc. to write them, too.

I've never heard anyone call the Beatles marginal musicians. But if that's what you believe suite yourself.

[xmas1997]

About the only Beatle you say is marginal, is possibly Ringo Starr and that would have to be because of his songwriting, but definitely not because of his drumming and percussion.
The other three were widely considered to be geniuses in musical ability and songwriting by their peers and the general musician populace.

[Chris]

Yeah that was bad take, Beatles were incredible musicians. Paul equivocated playing bass and singing to dialing two different phone numbers on two different phones at the same time. It's incredibly difficult and requires a lot of talent.

[G-Nob]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=fwLt2uipMTE

[Sportcamper]

:lol Ringo Star…
:lol Drum by numbers…
:lol Was so awful he was not allowed to record for the albums…

[Sportcamper]

:lol Rocky Raccoon
:lol Why Don’t We Do it in the Road
:lol Stoner White Album
:lol Ripping off Chuck Berry

[xmas1997]

:lol Ringo Star…
:lol Drum by numbers…
:lol Was so awful he was not allowed to record for the albums…

The question I have is, are you laughing at others for saying something truly uninformed and stupid like the above quote?
Or are you laughing because the above quote is what you think and believe?

And as for the second quote, you do realize who wrote those songs, and what sarcasm and humor are, don't you?

[Sportcamper]

Grandpa complimenting Ringo on his drumming talents…:lmao

[xmas1997]

Grandpa complimenting Ringo on his drumming talents…:lmao

A child, trying to make competent and knowledgeable comments about subjects they have no conception of, and probably never will.
That is what is truly funny!
You give truth to the old saying, "kids should be seen, and not heard".
Get back to us when you have something that really is intelligent to say, and maybe then, just maybe, you won't look like such a fool.
:lmao:rollin

[Sportcamper]

Grandpa pretending to be intelligent…:lmao
Thinks Ringo was a great drummer... :lmao

[xmas1997]

Grandpa pretending to be intelligent…:lmao
Thinks Ringo was a great drummer... :lmao

I rest my case. ^ Open mouth, insert foot! ^
:lmao

[CavsSuperFan]

Personally I like the Beatles & their influence on similar bands that followed.
Without the Beatles we may never have had Back Street Boys, Menudo, The Go Go’s or Nossa. :smokin

[Spur-Addict]

It's amazing how many people overrate the Beatles.

[cantthinkofanything]

It's amazing how many people overrate the Beatles.

I guess it depends on what they are being rated on. Over 600,000,000 albums sold. They obviously did something that a lot of people liked.

[Spur-Addict]

I guess it depends on what they are being rated on. Over 600,000,000 albums sold. They obviously did something that a lot of people liked.

Quantity isn't necessarily quality. And don't get me wrong, I'm not saying they weren't an exceptional group, but people talk as if everything they shat out was gold and they can walk on water.

[cantthinkofanything]

Quantity isn't necessarily quality. And don't get me wrong, I'm not saying they weren't an exceptional group, but people talk as if everything they shat out was gold and they can walk on water.

I agree with that. My point was that if they are being judged by songwriting, which is probably best gauged by sales, then they are at the top. But yeah...all this talk about their exceptional technical skills...is ridiculous.

[xmas1997]

Quantity isn't necessarily quality. And don't get me wrong, I'm not saying they weren't an exceptional group, but people talk as if everything they shat out was gold and they can walk on water.

Of course no one is saying everything they put out was gold, but if you go by record sales alone, then that is not an exaggeration, it is as close to being accurate as you can get when it comes to the music world.
But no one writes perfectly, and no one is a perfect musician.

[Spur-Addict]

Of course no one is saying everything they put out was gold, but if you go by record sales alone, then that is not an exaggeration, it is as close to being accurate as you can get when it comes to the music world.
But no one writes perfectly, and no one is a perfect musician.

Sales is as close to being accurate as you can get in the music world? I have to agree significantly. Tons of shit music moves like McDonalds shit burgers.

[xmas1997]

Sales is as close to being accurate as you can get in the music world? I have to agree significantly. Tons of shit music moves like McDonalds shit burgers.

But very few competent and accomplished musicians criticized their music or abilities. That says a lot.
Plus their music has stood the test of time so far. That also says a lot.
Yes, there has been a lot of crappy stuff that has come out posing as music, but also selling like hot cakes, yet it is also criticized by the competent and accomplished musicians of the world for the crap that it is.

[Sportcamper]

:lol Yea so I guess McDonald burgers are the best on account that they sell the most…
:lol Ringo, accomplished drummer…
:lol Crazy Stoners defending Boy's Band...

[Spur-Addict]

But very few no competent and accomplished musicians criticized their music or abilities. That says a lot.
Plus their music has stood the test of time so far. That also says a lot.
Yes, there has been a lot of crappy stuff that has come out posing as music, but also selling like hot cakes, yet it is also criticized by the competent and accomplished musicians of the world for the crap that it is.

Why should I as a musician criticize a group who has sold so much and actually alienate my own fan base? Makes a lot of sense. Nobody is beyond criticism, you're making a claim that you cannot substantiate.

Stood the test of time? I never said they're a bad group. Actually said the opposite. And how do you define, "Standing the test of time"? Hmmm? More record sales? People influencing others and saying how great they are to spread the propaganda? Nobody said that good musicians haven't sold records, I'm just saying that's a poor way to go about judging a good musician(s).

[xmas1997]

Why should I as a musician criticize a group who has sold so much and actually alienate my own fan base? Makes a lot of sense. Nobody is beyond criticism, you're making a claim that you cannot substantiate.

Stood the test of time? I never said they're a bad group. Actually said the opposite. And how do you define, "Standing the test of time"? Hmmm? More record sales? People influencing others and saying how great they are to spread the propaganda? Nobody said that good musicians haven't sold records, I'm just saying that's a poor way to go about judging a good musician(s).

If you are indeed an accomplished musician, then you already know exactly what I mean.

[Spur-Addict]

If you are an accomplished musician, then you already know exactly what I mean.

What are you resorting to? Mysterious, "If you are on the inside" arguments?:lol I take that as a sign that you no longer have anything substantial to say about the matter.

[mrsmaalox]

It's amazing how many people overrate the Beatles.

I think it's because people tend to equate their innovation and timing with talent/musicianship. No doubt that they changed the music scene and have probably influenced EVERY musician since their time. No doubt they are the greatest songwriters EVER. But as far as technical music talent goes, they were average at best. The 2 posters who first took issue with my comment, both qualified their responses with "their earlier stuff" and "in the beginning". Did the Beatles really improve that much? Or did they reap the benefits of the timing of the technological advances of those years? Did their meteoric success avail them the funds to pay for technology few had access to at the time?

The song Eleanor Rigby was cited as an example of their greatness earlier. And I do not contest the fact that it is a GREAT song. But to attribute its greatness as the result of the musical skills of the 4 Beatles is not accurate. This is from wiki (sorry I can't direct link right now):

""Eleanor Rigby" does not have a standard pop backing. None of the Beatles played instruments on it, though John Lennon and George Harrison did contribute harmony vocals. [28] Like the earlier song "Yesterday", "Eleanor Rigby" employs a classical string ensemble—in this case an octet of studio musicians, comprising four violins, two cellos, and two violas, all performing a score composed by producer George Martin."

I'm not knocking that the Beatles were an amazing phenomenon and remain so to this day. They were as amazing as the talent and support they could afford to surround themselves with.

[Spur-Addict]

I think it's because people tend to equate their innovation and timing with talent/musicianship. No doubt that they changed the music scene and have probably influenced EVERY musician since their time. No doubt they are the greatest songwriters EVER. But as far as technical music talent goes, they were average at best. The 2 posters who first took issue with my comment, both qualified their responses with "their earlier stuff" and "in the beginning". Did the Beatles really improve that much? Or did they reap the benefits of the timing of the technological advances of those years? Did their meteoric success avail them the funds to pay for technology few had access to at the time?

The song Eleanor Rigby was cited as an example of their greatness earlier. And I do not contest the fact that it is a GREAT song. But to attribute its greatness as the result of the musical skills of the 4 Beatles is not accurate. This is from wiki (sorry I can't direct link right now):

""Eleanor Rigby" does not have a standard pop backing. None of the Beatles played instruments on it, though John Lennon and George Harrison did contribute harmony vocals. [28] Like the earlier song "Yesterday", "Eleanor Rigby" employs a classical string ensemble—in this case an octet of studio musicians, comprising four violins, two cellos, and two violas, all performing a score composed by producer George Martin."

I'm not knocking that the Beatles were an amazing phenomenon and remain so to this day. They were as amazing as the talent and support they could afford to surround themselves with.

Very well articulated.

[xmas1997]

What are you resorting to? Mysterious, "If you are on the inside" arguments?:lol I take that as a sign that you no longer have anything substantial to say about the matter.

No, I am not going to argue the point because it is the epitome of idiocy to do so.
Only a complete and total moron would make the statements that he did, and that you are trying to argue.
No competent and accomplished musician ever would. They would be laughed off the stage.
It is like saying that da Vinci or van Gogh were terrible painters.
This is beyond dumb, it is imbecilic, and totally laughable to the point of ignorance.

[Spur-Addict]

No, I am not going to argue the point because it is the epitome of idiocy to do so.
Only a complete and total moron would make the statements that he did, and that you are trying to argue.
No, competent and accomplished musician ever would. They would be laughed off the stage.
It is like saying that da Vinci or van Gogh were a terrible painters.
This is beyond dumb, it is imbecilic, and totally laughable to the point of ignorance.

So, this is your style of posting? Casual insults attempting to aggravate others while not even substantially addressing the major flaws in your argument? Nice.

[xmas1997]

So, this is your style of posting? Casual insults attempting to aggravate others while not even substantially addressing the major flaws in your argument? Nice.

My style of posting has nothing to do with the point.
Try telling any accomplished musician what you are saying here and see what their response will be.
Totally ridiculous.

[Spur-Addict]

My style of posting has nothing to do with the point.
Try telling any accomplished musician what you are saying here and see what their response will be.
Totally ridiculous.

They'll say that record sales is an accurate indicator of ability? They'll say exactly what I said in response initially. "Well, well, millions of people like the Beatles". SO what, millions of people like Nelly. You can't even articulate "standing the test of time", your own claim. You sir, are the epitome of idiocy.

[cantthinkofanything]

Sales is as close to being accurate as you can get in the music world? I have to agree significantly. Tons of shit music moves like McDonalds shit burgers.

Sales is a good indicator of how well received their music is. People liked the music. But with the Beatles, there is also the testimony of how many future artists they influenced. So I think it adds some validity to their "greatness".

McDonald's isn't a great analogy because there's a pretty big price gap between them and quality food. Also a convenience and availability factor.

[xmas1997]

They'll say that record sales is an accurate indicator of ability? They'll say exactly what I said in response initially. "Well, well, millions of people like the Beatles". SO what, millions of people like Nelly. You can't even articulate "standing the test of time", your own claim. You sir, are the epitome of idiocy.

Don't throw your BS at me, especially when you obviously don't know what you're talking about when it comes to musical creativity and ability.
And then try to sidetrack it by talking about my writing style, because your credibility is not aided by that tactic.
Like I said, go tell another accomplished musician what you and the other laughable poster said and see what occurs, you will be laughed off the stage.
Plus I never said they were perfect musicians, rather I said they weren't and that no one is.

[Spur-Addict]

Sales is a good indicator of how well received their music is. People liked the music. But with the Beatles, there is also the testimony of how many future artists they influenced. So I think it adds some validity to their "greatness".

McDonald's isn't a great analogy because there's a pretty big price gap between them and quality food. Also a convenience and availability factor.

Oh yeah? I can walk to a top rated (on Zagat) steakhouse on Long Island and get a lunch within 4 dollars of a McDonalds meal. So that's absolutely not true.

[cantthinkofanything]

Oh yeah? I can walk to a top rated (on Zagat) steakhouse on Long Island and get a lunch within 4 dollars of a McDonalds meal. So that's absolutely not true.

Do they have a drive through? Can your meal in 2 minutes? Are there similar restaurants available through the U.S.? And even still...with a family of 4, that's $16.

[Spur-Addict]

Do they have a drive through? Can your meal in 2 minutes? Are there similar restaurants available through the U.S.? And even still...with a family of 4, that's $16.

Now we're equating speed with quality? Speed is about convenience, so is the drive through. And if there's restaurants like this in one of the biggest markets in the world, lets not act like there aren't others across this nation. And actually, I wasn't even considering the Burger and fries which is 12 dollars. And the fries are homemade :lol---Keep stretching this out, I don't really care.

[cantthinkofanything]

Now we're equating speed with quality? Speed is about convenience, so is the drive through. And if there's restaurants like this in one of the biggest markets in the world, lets not act like there aren't others across this nation. And actually, I wasn't even considering the Burger and fries which is 12 dollars. And the fries are homemade :lol---Keep stretching this out, I don't really care.

no...you equated high record sales with McDonald's high sales. It's not any more expensive or less convenient for me to listen to "quality" music over something I think is crap. In the case of McDonald's, their high sales figures are a result of 1) inexpensive food, 2) widely available, 3) consistency, 4) convenience, etc.

You get the fundamental difference between food and digital products don't you?

[Spur-Addict]

no...you equated high record sales with McDonald's high sales. It's not any more expensive or less convenient for me to listen to "quality" music over something I think is crap. In the case of McDonald's, their high sales figures are a result of 1) inexpensive food, 2) widely available, 3) consistency, 4) convenience, etc.

You get the fundamental difference between food and digital products don't you?

Actually that depends. Some groups put out overrated double discs, or something that has some ridiculous bullshit additive and charge more for it. And some groups that think their shit doesn't stink will charge more despite having the same amount of time on the record because they know it'll sell. So, to imply there isn't a difference in music price is definitely not true. In fact, try getting a Beatles vinyl compared to another artist or group on vinyl. There can be a massive disparity at times.

[cantthinkofanything]

shit...you got me. I suspected after your previous post. Bastard. :lol

[Chris]

Don't throw your BS at me, especially when you obviously don't know what you're talking about when it comes to musical creativity and ability.
And then try to sidetrack it by talking about my writing style, because your credibility is not aided by that tactic.
Like I said, go tell another accomplished musician what you and the other laughable poster said and see what occurs, you will be laughed off the stage.
Plus I never said they were perfect musicians, rather I said they weren't and that no one is.

You're arguing with a brick wall. Everyone knows the Beatles were incredible musicians.

[Spur-Addict]

shit...you got me. I suspected after your previous post. Bastard. :lol

:lol All in good fun

[xmas1997]

They'll say that record sales is an accurate indicator of ability? They'll say exactly what I said in response initially. "Well, well, millions of people like the Beatles". SO what, millions of people like Nelly. You can't even articulate "standing the test of time", your own claim. You sir, are the epitome of idiocy.

Believe whatever you want to believe, but to me your argument is the most preposterous dumbest things I have heard in a long long time, rivaling even some of kobyz posts, and probably worse.
Go ahead and live in your fantasy world.
And don't forget to tell it to a REAL musician sometime.
I only wish I could be there when you do that is if you have the guts to do it.
:rollin
'nuff said.

[Spur-Addict]

https://i.chzbgr.com/maxW500/1280766208/h0D70AA08/

[xmas1997]

https://i.chzbgr.com/maxW500/1280766208/h0D70AA08/

Child.
Don't make me come in there!
:lmao

[Avante]

I've heard a ton of stuff over the years and am deep deep into what came before I did. I can start back way before rock and roll and work my way to what we are hearing right now. When it comes to talent The Beatles are right there at the very top, right there with Sinatra, Ray Charles, Elvis.

You put on the headphones and really listen and I can't think of a better .....band. They really were totally amazing.

I do prefer the Rolling Stones because of their blues feel but they were not as talented.

Sargeant Peppers about as good as it gets.

[xmas1997]

I've heard a ton of stuff over the years and am deep deep into what came before I did. I can start back way before rock and roll and work my way to what we are hearing right now. When it comes to talent The Beatles are right there at the very top, right there with Sinatra, Ray Charles, Elvis.

You put on the headphones and really listen and I can't think of a better .....band. They really were totally amazing.

I do prefer the Rolling Stones because of their blues feel but they were not as talented.

Sargeant Peppers about as good as it gets.

I much prefer the early Stones albums over the latter Stones, but most of those songs were written by blues artists.

[Avante]

I much prefer the early Stones albums over the latter Stones, but most of those songs were written by blues artists.

Not that those songs were written by blues cats, that Stones sound was strongly influensed by those old blues cats. As time went on they began to get away from that into a more ...rock groove.

Exile On Main Street.....as good as they ever got, in my opinion.

[mingus]

I think it's because people tend to equate their innovation and timing with talent/musicianship. No doubt that they changed the music scene and have probably influenced EVERY musician since their time. No doubt they are the greatest songwriters EVER. But as far as technical music talent goes, they were average at best. The 2 posters who first took issue with my comment, both qualified their responses with "their earlier stuff" and "in the beginning". Did the Beatles really improve that much? Or did they reap the benefits of the timing of the technological advances of those years? Did their meteoric success avail them the funds to pay for technology few had access to at the time?

The song Eleanor Rigby was cited as an example of their greatness earlier. And I do not contest the fact that it is a GREAT song. But to attribute its greatness as the result of the musical skills of the 4 Beatles is not accurate. This is from wiki (sorry I can't direct link right now):

""Eleanor Rigby" does not have a standard pop backing. None of the Beatles played instruments on it, though John Lennon and George Harrison did contribute harmony vocals. [28] Like the earlier song "Yesterday", "Eleanor Rigby" employs a classical string ensemble—in this case an octet of studio musicians, comprising four violins, two cellos, and two violas, all performing a score composed by producer George Martin."

I'm not knocking that the Beatles were an amazing phenomenon and remain so to this day. They were as amazing as the talent and support they could afford to surround themselves with.

Okay. That's one song. I mentioned others. You still going to act like an average pianist composed Martha My Dear? Or that an average guitarist/pianist composed You Never Give Me Your Money?

[boutons_deux]

https://www.google.com/search?q=keith+richards+young+and+old&rlz=1C1CHFX_enUS578US578&es_sm=93&tbm=isch&imgil=tqcsW2OnxXg9IM%253A%253Bhttps%253A%252F%252F encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com%252Fimages%253Fq%253Dtbn%253AANd9 GcSmNtromyP5hBK3eTh8zAcRjazjWnQSakJhVgL5Z7PWKCHsEv fe%253B590%253B350%253BxyG-PLEyVU6cYM%253Bhttp%25253A%25252F%25252Fwww.virgin media.com%25252Fmusic%25252Ffeatures%25252Flive-fast-look-old.php%25253Fpage%2525253D5&source=iu&usg=__YdWXrnG-yJo_fL7ZkK5TnOPJ4lc%3D&sa=X&ei=I_nPU72BHYGj8AGepoDQBg&ved=0CCMQ9QEwAQ&biw=1920&bih=979#facrc=_&imgdii=_&imgrc=tqcsW2OnxXg9IM%253A%3BxyG-PLEyVU6cYM%3Bhttp%253A%252F%252Fwww.virginmedia.co m%252Fimages%252Flive-fast-look-young-keith-richards2-then-590x350.jpg%3Bhttp%253A%252F%252Fwww.virginmedia.c om%252Fmusic%252Ffeatures%252Flive-fast-look-old.php%253Fpage%253D5%3B590%3B350

[boutons_deux]

https://www.google.com/search?q=keith+richards+young+and+old&rlz=1C1CHFX_enUS578US578&es_sm=93&tbm=isch&imgil=tqcsW2OnxXg9IM%253A%253Bhttps%253A%252F%252F encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com%252Fimages%253Fq%253Dtbn%253AANd9 GcSmNtromyP5hBK3eTh8zAcRjazjWnQSakJhVgL5Z7PWKCHsEv fe%253B590%253B350%253BxyG-PLEyVU6cYM%253Bhttp%25253A%25252F%25252Fwww.virgin media.com%25252Fmusic%25252Ffeatures%25252Flive-fast-look-old.php%25253Fpage%2525253D5&source=iu&usg=__YdWXrnG-yJo_fL7ZkK5TnOPJ4lc%3D&sa=X&ei=I_nPU72BHYGj8AGepoDQBg&ved=0CCMQ9QEwAQ&biw=1920&bih=979#facrc=_&imgdii=_&imgrc=tqcsW2OnxXg9IM%253A%3BxyG-PLEyVU6cYM%3Bhttp%253A%252F%252Fwww.virginmedia.co m%252Fimages%252Flive-fast-look-young-keith-richards2-then-590x350.jpg%3Bhttp%253A%252F%252Fwww.virginmedia.c om%252Fmusic%252Ffeatures%252Flive-fast-look-old.php%253Fpage%253D5%3B590%3B350

daughter

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/tvshowbiz/article-2589394/Were-loving-right-Keith-Richards-daughter-Alexandra-says-Rolling-Stones-big-family-trying-cope-death-LWren-Scott.html

[Leetonidas]

The beatles suck balls

[xmas1997]

I am a jack ass who sucks balls

[mingus]

I don't get the sentiment that the Beatles "suck balls".

I realize it all comes down to personal taste. I think Metallica and Led Zeppelin suck relative to what a lot of people think about them so I get it though. I think the latter is one of the most overrated bands ever.

[Leetonidas]

:lol

[Leetonidas]

I don't get the sentiment that the Beatles "suck balls".

I realize it all comes down to personal taste. I think Metallica and Led Zeppelin suck relative to what a lot of people think about them so I get it though. I think the latter is one of the most overrated bands ever.

Pretty much. At the time perhaps what they did was "revolutionary" but looking back they were merely, imo, a poppy boy band that started doing drugs at some point and tried to make meaningful music which was just noise really, tbh

Just like you said though. I love Led Zeppelin and I can understand why someone would think they're overrated but it's all good. imo people arguing over music is retarded considering they're arguing over what someone else made as if it is personal to them and defines them :lol but I feel the way about the beatles you probably feel about zepp. Don't matter in the end but tbh imo fwiw the beatles are crap

elanor rigby is a good song though

[mingus]

Mostly I listen to shit I can play on acoustic. That's what resonates with me. Some of Zeppelins stuff is great. Ramble On and Over the Hills and Far Way are great, fun song to play on acoustic guitar for example. The Beatles have a bunch of awesome acoustic shit like Dear Prudence, I Will, Mother Nature's Son etc.

[Avante]

The beatles suck balls

Once ya start shaving you'll change your mind.

[xmas1997]

Once ya start shaving you'll change your mind.

:lmao
No competent accomplished musician would ever in a million years diss the Beatles, only a very ignorant child would, and very few of those.

[mingus]

:lmao
No competent accomplished musician would ever in a million years diss the Beatles, only a very ignorant child would, and very few of those.

Truth is there are much better musicians out there (eg Henricks, Paige, Clapton, Elton John etc etc), but I agree that calling them average musicians, their music "noise" or merely a boy band is outlandish.

They dabbled in everything. In the White Album, there's the Carribean inspired Oobla dee obla Da, the heavy rock/metal Helter Skelter, plain rock songs like Back in the USSR, pyschadelic stuff like Dear Prudence & Happiness is a Warm Gun, anthems like Revolution, Old Western song like Rocky Raccoon, Blues song Yer Blues, ballads like I Will, Mother Nature's Son and Julia, psychedelic rock with While My guitar gently weeps, and even 20s ball room music with Honey Pie.

they were given full artistic freedom on that album.

I can call bands I don't particularly like out without calling there music trash or anything. Like Zeppelin, I don't particularly like them, but they're great musicians.

Maybe it's relative tho. I know a few goth metal guys or whatever who call Zeppelin's music pop or equivalent to boy band. I think it's hyperbole.

[xmas1997]

Truth is there are much better musicians out there (eg Henricks, Paige, Clapton, Elton John etc etc), but I agree that calling them average musicians, their music "noise" or merely a boy band is outlandish.

They dabbled in everything. In the White Album, there's the Carribean inspired Oobla dee obla Da, the heavy rock/metal Helter Skelter, plain rock songs like Back in the USSR, pyschadelic stuff like Dear Prudence & Happiness is a Warm Gun, anthems like Revolution, Old Western song like Rocky Raccoon, Blues song Yer Blues, ballads like I Will, Mother Nature's Son and Julia, psychedelic rock with While My guitar gently weeps, and even 20s ball room music with Honey Pie.

they were given full artistic freedom on that album.

I can call bands I don't particularly like out without calling there music trash or anything. Like Zeppelin, I don't particularly like them, but they're great musicians.

Maybe it's relative tho. I know a few goth metal guys or whatever who call Zeppelin's music pop or equivalent to boy band. I think it's hyperbole.

Excellent take.

[Avante]

If we took The Beatles and The Rolling Stones hits, what other two bands could compare?

[Twisted_Dawg]

:lmao
No competent accomplished musician would ever in a million years diss the Beatles, only a very ignorant child would, and very few of those.

I saw an interview with Keith where he was asked about several other musicians and he was just so complimentary, respectful and appreciative of each and every one of them no matter what type of music they played. Keith had nothing but love for every musician that he was asked about and it was a diverse range. He talked about how honored he was when George Jones asked him to play with him at the Grand Ole Opry.

[Avante]

I saw an interview with Keith where he was asked about several other musicians and he was just so complimentary, respectful and appreciative of each and every one of them no matter what type of music they played. Keith had nothing but love for every musician that he was asked about and it was a diverse range. He talked about how honored he was when George Jones asked him to play with him at the Grand Ole Opry.

I was amazed to see just how much he knows about it all. Sure most can talk Muddy Waters but Furry Lewis...nay!

Finding out Scotty Moore was a huge influense on his guitar playing, whoa!