swleary Posted May 20, 2011 Share Posted May 20, 2011 IMO I think the Stones need to retire and stop being so greedy. Let me explain that one. Mick Jaggar wanted $5 000 000 to do a benefit concert in Toronto ,Ontario, Canada because of people that died from an outbreak of Sars. Mich would not got on stage for a penny less. That's just greed because , hello..it's a benefit ...geez What did look good on the Stones was AC/DC stole the show lmao Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BigKahune Posted May 20, 2011 Share Posted May 20, 2011 . It's not personal. It's just business. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
swleary Posted May 20, 2011 Author Share Posted May 20, 2011 . It's not personal. It's just business. True however it should never be business when you're trying to help your fellow man. Greed kills.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
S t e v e Posted May 20, 2011 Share Posted May 20, 2011 the stones are/were so overated!, mick jagger can't sing to save his life and keith richards is a retarded moron who can barely put 3 chords together...talk about being in the right place at the right time both talentless hacks, as my old guitar teacher once said to me..."it's not what you know it's who you know" in the music biz Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BigKahune Posted May 20, 2011 Share Posted May 20, 2011 True however it should never be business when you're trying to help your fellow man. Greed kills.... It's always business. Even if you decide to play for free, it's a business decision. Public relations is part of a good business strategy. Some need PR more than others. The Stones don't need it. Business 101 is now over. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
swleary Posted May 20, 2011 Author Share Posted May 20, 2011 I bet Metallica would've made a business decision and did it for free...that's what I would've done :) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
S t e v e Posted May 20, 2011 Share Posted May 20, 2011 I bet Metallica would've made a business decision and did it for free...that's what I would've done :) on the other hand, keith richard is a better player than both hetfield and hammet Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
swleary Posted May 20, 2011 Author Share Posted May 20, 2011 on the other hand, keith richard is a better player than both hetfield and hammet Is that because he can hold a bottle of vodka, hit a fan and never miss an OPEN C chord? darn maybe I'll email Metallica and tell them to only use five strings...that's the key lol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
S t e v e Posted May 20, 2011 Share Posted May 20, 2011 and never miss an OPEN C chord? maybe rocky4 should contact him regarding some lessons? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
swleary Posted May 20, 2011 Author Share Posted May 20, 2011 maybe rocky4 should contact him regarding some lessons? OH SNAP!!!!!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DAS44 Posted May 20, 2011 Share Posted May 20, 2011 the stones are/were so overated!, mick jagger can't sing to save his life and keith richards is a retarded moron who can barely put 3 chords together...talk about being in the right place at the right time both talentless hacks, as my old guitar teacher once said to me..."it's not what you know it's who you know" in the music biz Matter of opinion at play here. Might do you well to be a bit less brazen Steve, you might get a lot more flak for that post. I for one love the Stones. I'm not going to say more, it'd take too damned long. On another note, calling Keith Richards a "retarded moron" doesn't really make you come off as all too credible (if not for the falsehood, then for the word choice itse;f) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
S t e v e Posted May 20, 2011 Share Posted May 20, 2011 Matter of opinion at play here. Might do you well to be a bit less brazen Steve, you might get a lot more flak for that post. I for one love the Stones. I'm not going to say more, it'd take too damned long. On another note, calling Keith Richards a "retarded moron" doesn't really make you come off as all too credible (if not for the falsehood, then for the word choice itse;f) das, it's just my personal opinion...that's all B) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BigKahune Posted May 20, 2011 Share Posted May 20, 2011 .... richards is a retarded .... I'm offended by your use of the word "retarded". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DAS44 Posted May 20, 2011 Share Posted May 20, 2011 Matter of opinion at play here. das, it's just my personal opinion...that's all B) Oh really? I didn't say that or anything :P Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
S t e v e Posted May 20, 2011 Share Posted May 20, 2011 Oh really? I didn't say that or anything :P ok so my opinion is a bit "brazen" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DAS44 Posted May 20, 2011 Share Posted May 20, 2011 ok so my opinion is a bit "brazen" Your wording was, it was very harsh. Your opinion (which I respect) could have been worded in a more mild manner. Brazen -> Marked by contemptuous boldness. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stein Posted May 20, 2011 Share Posted May 20, 2011 I personally would not judge Mick on that one. Speaking of business and PR, it is VERY common for these shows marketed as a 'benefit' to be more of a way to make money, and the actual business arrangements of the concert don't give much at all to the cause compared to how much is made by others as a business venture. In many cases in the past, the promoters actually make more from these because after paying the minimum amount to the cause to be able to call it a benefit, they have made more than what they gave because of the "benefit" tag for the promoting, and because they got out of paying the bands who gave their time for free or less money. I don't pretend to know if this is the case here or what the real story is, but I know that as far as these things go, Mick himself knows about as much about it as anyone. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
S t e v e Posted May 20, 2011 Share Posted May 20, 2011 Your wording was, it was very harsh. Your opinion (which I respect) could have been worded in a more mild manner. Brazen -> Marked by contemptuous boldness. it happens, lets move on :) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stein Posted May 20, 2011 Share Posted May 20, 2011 I seen a LOT of poeple play (as much of ya'll have I'm sure), and I am easily entertained but not easily star struck. And seeing KEEF and the stones literally kicked my ***. I can point out one moment in time- the opening riff to MIDNIGHT RAMBLER played through a single p-90 on a junior at full volume. When a guitarist can do what he does or we get some bands that can kick *** like the stones and make them not worthwhile, then it may make sense to ask them to retire. But so long as these old Gramps continue to show us how it's done, not a moment sooner. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EVOL! Posted May 20, 2011 Share Posted May 20, 2011 Richards and Wyman carried that band after Brian Jones died. And now that Wyman is out, it's just Richards. Mick is the king of hanger-ons. Yeah, he had the business sense, but what good is marketing if your product is crap. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chase1410 Posted May 20, 2011 Share Posted May 20, 2011 Richards and Wyman carried that band after Brian Jones died. And now that Wyman is out, it's just Richards. Mick is the king of hanger-ons. Yeah, he had the business sense, but what good is marketing if your product is crap. Never been a fan of Mick...I find his dancing disgusting, and his voice annoying...Kieth Richards on the other hand, I have nothing but respect for, and really dig him as a person as well... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gypsyseven Posted May 20, 2011 Share Posted May 20, 2011 Never been a fan of Mick...I find his dancing disgusting, and his voice annoying...Kieth Richards on the other hand, I have nothing but respect for, and really dig him as a person as well... +1 on that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
damian Posted May 20, 2011 Share Posted May 20, 2011 Oh yeah, it must be Friday..........just sayin'......... :unsure: .... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
swleary Posted May 20, 2011 Author Share Posted May 20, 2011 Oh yeah, it must be Friday..........just sayin'......... :unsure: .... Yes it is Friday and the start of the long weekend here in Canada....Damian...you know you luv me lmao Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mojorule Posted May 20, 2011 Share Posted May 20, 2011 Richards and Wyman carried that band after Brian Jones died. And now that Wyman is out, it's just Richards. Mick is the king of hanger-ons. Yeah, he had the business sense, but what good is marketing if your product is crap. Wyman carried the Stones, EVOL? Please explain. I thought he mainly carried on in a well-reported dubious relationship. Really, truly great Stones basslines to compare/contrast with those truly great McCartney lines for the Beatles, please? 'Jumping Jack Flash' is something of an exception in that it has a good (not great) bass line, but it is the interplay of Jones and Richards that really makes it musically. That and Jagger's vocal - I get shivers when he gets to the bit about being raised by a two-bit skinny hag and schooled with a strap right across his back. Jagger has always been Richards' writing partner and is therefore so much more than a hanger-on. All those epoch-defining lyrics. His vocal style is unique, and while revisiting them recently has made me more aware of his limitations than I used to be, it still is more a part of their sound than anything Bill Wyman ever did. 'Not Fade Away'? Wyman was never really in the mix in the first place. If anybody has carried the post-Jones Stones in tandem with Richards, it has to be the truly great and still easily forgotten Charlie Watts. Better, more versatile drummer than Ringo by several thousand leagues (however perfect Ringo may have been for his group). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.