Gazza wrote on Jun 7
th, 2011 at 6:19am:
Roostah wrote on Jun 7
th, 2011 at 12:23am:
His influence has been responsible for the recent live set lists which in some cases were less than desirable.
i'm confident that he quashed some real treats that could have been included in the last few tours.
Not the case. He's on public record as saying that he pitches left-field ideas to Jagger all the time, and that Mick is rarely interested in taking chances anymore. Only one ballad per show, next to no non-warhorses from the Brian Jones era, stuff like that. Keith's excuse is that while he'd like to mix things up more, he's happy to defer the final say to Mick, as he's the one who has to sing 'em.
Blame the 'greatest performer in the world' for lack of challenging setlists, because it appears he doesnt have the confidence in keeping the attention of the sort of corporate blow-ins who make up a Stones audience in the 21st century.
If anything, if it wasnt for Leavell we'd have got next to nothing other than disc 2 of '40 Licks' on the last tour.
I stand corrected. But, I would much rather listen to Blondie filling in the guitar licks that Keith can no longer play rather than listen to Leavell's keyboard 'fill in' on the band's great music. Even if it boils down to a less adventurous Mick who balks at giving the fans what they want, Chucky still sucks hired hand or not.
The corporate audience feeds Jagger's present station in life while he plays lip service to the loyal Stones fan, I agree, he doesn't care.
Why can't he realize mortality and bring back Bill and Micky T for a rousing finale?
His ego is deeper than the lines on his face and it is sad that this won't happen.
These two were both in it for the music.
Charlie even feels the same as I do about Leavell
Pages: 1 2
Should the Stones have quit after Bill left? (Read 2,972 times)
