Wil1972 Posted March 21, 2016 Share Posted March 21, 2016 Keith was never known for his guitar "wizardry". A lot of regular players can play his stuff, but it was his style, his innovative tuning etc and his riffs. Put it all with his swagger and you have one of my all time faves. Calling him over-rated is kind of missing the point. He came up with some of the most famous guitar lines ever. He was innovative for awhile. I don't necessarily feel that "flash" equates to a great guitarist. I like more subtle players too like Lindsey Buckingham and The Edge. But Keith lost something. Those early years were great, but somewhere in the mid- to late '70s it got hit and miss. I felt like he was coasting. Even something like Start Me Up was actually an older song that was recycled for Tattoo You in '81. Like I said the early stuff was great. And Keith really did some good stuff. Classic stuff. But what has he done since Start Me Up that even comes close to Jumpin' Jack Flash, Brown Sugar, Satisfaction, or even It's Only Rock and Roll? But I wouldn't call him overrated either.Who doesn't eventually lose something? Especially after an artistic peak like the Stones had from 1968 to 1972? You mentioned the Edge (who I like), he hasn't done anything interesting with a guitar since 1987! I would disagree, the experimentation U2 did in the 90s was pretty interesting to me. He got some interesting sounds, and layers of sound on those albums. I will say that he has reverted to a more basic style of playing though lately. And yes guitarists do lose something. But should they lose the desire to innovate or experiment? At least try new things? Even if they fail, they are attempts. I think he tends to rest on that particular style and sound. Again, not knocking the Stones, I love them. Just making a point that I can see how some would call him overrated, or feel that he hasn't really done much for the instrument in a long time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ReRushed Posted March 21, 2016 Share Posted March 21, 2016 Keith was never known for his guitar "wizardry". A lot of regular players can play his stuff, but it was his style, his innovative tuning etc and his riffs. Put it all with his swagger and you have one of my all time faves. Calling him over-rated is kind of missing the point. He came up with some of the most famous guitar lines ever. He was innovative for awhile. I don't necessarily feel that "flash" equates to a great guitarist. I like more subtle players too like Lindsey Buckingham and The Edge. But Keith lost something. Those early years were great, but somewhere in the mid- to late '70s it got hit and miss. I felt like he was coasting. Even something like Start Me Up was actually an older song that was recycled for Tattoo You in '81. Like I said the early stuff was great. And Keith really did some good stuff. Classic stuff. But what has he done since Start Me Up that even comes close to Jumpin' Jack Flash, Brown Sugar, Satisfaction, or even It's Only Rock and Roll? But I wouldn't call him overrated either.Who doesn't eventually lose something? Especially after an artistic peak like the Stones had from 1968 to 1972? You mentioned the Edge (who I like), he hasn't done anything interesting with a guitar since 1987! I would disagree, the experimentation U2 did in the 90s was pretty interesting to me. He got some interesting sounds, and layers of sound on those albums. I will say that he has reverted to a more basic style of playing though lately. And yes guitarists do lose something. But should they lose the desire to innovate or experiment? At least try new things? Even if they fail, they are attempts. I think he tends to rest on that particular style and sound. Again, not knocking the Stones, I love them. Just making a point that I can see how some would call him overrated, or feel that he hasn't really done much for the instrument in a long time.I recently watch the Keith Richards documentary on Netflix. The man is still a creative artist. The footage of him playing was fantastic. And about the Edge, 1990s U2 coasted on the success of Achtung Baby, IMHO. U2 played around with sequencers and sampling, but it didn't make up for rehashed songs and guitar playing. Anyway, it only matters if the songs are good. I don't care how "innovative" one's guitar playing is, if the songs are shitty who cares about guitar wizardry? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wil1972 Posted March 21, 2016 Share Posted March 21, 2016 (edited) Keith was never known for his guitar "wizardry". A lot of regular players can play his stuff, but it was his style, his innovative tuning etc and his riffs. Put it all with his swagger and you have one of my all time faves. Calling him over-rated is kind of missing the point. He came up with some of the most famous guitar lines ever. He was innovative for awhile. I don't necessarily feel that "flash" equates to a great guitarist. I like more subtle players too like Lindsey Buckingham and The Edge. But Keith lost something. Those early years were great, but somewhere in the mid- to late '70s it got hit and miss. I felt like he was coasting. Even something like Start Me Up was actually an older song that was recycled for Tattoo You in '81. Like I said the early stuff was great. And Keith really did some good stuff. Classic stuff. But what has he done since Start Me Up that even comes close to Jumpin' Jack Flash, Brown Sugar, Satisfaction, or even It's Only Rock and Roll? But I wouldn't call him overrated either.Who doesn't eventually lose something? Especially after an artistic peak like the Stones had from 1968 to 1972? You mentioned the Edge (who I like), he hasn't done anything interesting with a guitar since 1987! I would disagree, the experimentation U2 did in the 90s was pretty interesting to me. He got some interesting sounds, and layers of sound on those albums. I will say that he has reverted to a more basic style of playing though lately. And yes guitarists do lose something. But should they lose the desire to innovate or experiment? At least try new things? Even if they fail, they are attempts. I think he tends to rest on that particular style and sound. Again, not knocking the Stones, I love them. Just making a point that I can see how some would call him overrated, or feel that he hasn't really done much for the instrument in a long time.I recently watch the Keith Richards documentary on Netflix. The man is still a creative artist. The footage of him playing was fantastic. And about the Edge, 1990s U2 coasted on the success of Achtung Baby, IMHO. U2 played around with sequencers and sampling, but it didn't make up for rehashed songs and guitar playing. Anyway, it only matters if the songs are good. I don't care how "innovative" one's guitar playing is, if the songs are shitty who cares about guitar wizardry? I can agree with you on that. Experimentation for the sake of it doesn't justify crap. But I liked the 90s U2. I like U2 in general anyway, but I dug the stuff they did on Zooropa and Pop. I didn't see it as coasting. But I see your POV as well. Edited March 21, 2016 by Wil1972 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ReRushed Posted March 21, 2016 Share Posted March 21, 2016 Keith was never known for his guitar "wizardry". A lot of regular players can play his stuff, but it was his style, his innovative tuning etc and his riffs. Put it all with his swagger and you have one of my all time faves. Calling him over-rated is kind of missing the point. He came up with some of the most famous guitar lines ever. He was innovative for awhile. I don't necessarily feel that "flash" equates to a great guitarist. I like more subtle players too like Lindsey Buckingham and The Edge. But Keith lost something. Those early years were great, but somewhere in the mid- to late '70s it got hit and miss. I felt like he was coasting. Even something like Start Me Up was actually an older song that was recycled for Tattoo You in '81. Like I said the early stuff was great. And Keith really did some good stuff. Classic stuff. But what has he done since Start Me Up that even comes close to Jumpin' Jack Flash, Brown Sugar, Satisfaction, or even It's Only Rock and Roll? But I wouldn't call him overrated either.Who doesn't eventually lose something? Especially after an artistic peak like the Stones had from 1968 to 1972? You mentioned the Edge (who I like), he hasn't done anything interesting with a guitar since 1987! I would disagree, the experimentation U2 did in the 90s was pretty interesting to me. He got some interesting sounds, and layers of sound on those albums. I will say that he has reverted to a more basic style of playing though lately. And yes guitarists do lose something. But should they lose the desire to innovate or experiment? At least try new things? Even if they fail, they are attempts. I think he tends to rest on that particular style and sound. Again, not knocking the Stones, I love them. Just making a point that I can see how some would call him overrated, or feel that he hasn't really done much for the instrument in a long time.I recently watch the Keith Richards documentary on Netflix. The man is still a creative artist. The footage of him playing was fantastic. And about the Edge, 1990s U2 coasted on the success of Achtung Baby, IMHO. U2 played around with sequencers and sampling, but it didn't make up for rehashed songs and guitar playing. Anyway, it only matters if the songs are good. I don't care how "innovative" one's guitar playing is, if the songs are shitty who cares about guitar wizardry? I can agree with you on that. Experimentation for the sake of it doesn't justify crap. But I liked the 90s U2. I like U2 in general anyway, but I dug the stuff they did on Zooropa and Pop. I didn't see it as coasting. But I see your POV as well.I don't want to come across as bashing a musician like the Edge. I just feel that most creative or innovative rock musicians make their stamp and usually don't progress afterwards. That doesn't mean they stop being creative. How many rock musicians actually step out of their box and become innovative in multiple ways? Jeff Beck, maybe? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wil1972 Posted March 21, 2016 Share Posted March 21, 2016 (edited) Keith was never known for his guitar "wizardry". A lot of regular players can play his stuff, but it was his style, his innovative tuning etc and his riffs. Put it all with his swagger and you have one of my all time faves. Calling him over-rated is kind of missing the point. He came up with some of the most famous guitar lines ever. He was innovative for awhile. I don't necessarily feel that "flash" equates to a great guitarist. I like more subtle players too like Lindsey Buckingham and The Edge. But Keith lost something. Those early years were great, but somewhere in the mid- to late '70s it got hit and miss. I felt like he was coasting. Even something like Start Me Up was actually an older song that was recycled for Tattoo You in '81. Like I said the early stuff was great. And Keith really did some good stuff. Classic stuff. But what has he done since Start Me Up that even comes close to Jumpin' Jack Flash, Brown Sugar, Satisfaction, or even It's Only Rock and Roll? But I wouldn't call him overrated either.Who doesn't eventually lose something? Especially after an artistic peak like the Stones had from 1968 to 1972? You mentioned the Edge (who I like), he hasn't done anything interesting with a guitar since 1987! I would disagree, the experimentation U2 did in the 90s was pretty interesting to me. He got some interesting sounds, and layers of sound on those albums. I will say that he has reverted to a more basic style of playing though lately. And yes guitarists do lose something. But should they lose the desire to innovate or experiment? At least try new things? Even if they fail, they are attempts. I think he tends to rest on that particular style and sound. Again, not knocking the Stones, I love them. Just making a point that I can see how some would call him overrated, or feel that he hasn't really done much for the instrument in a long time.I recently watch the Keith Richards documentary on Netflix. The man is still a creative artist. The footage of him playing was fantastic. And about the Edge, 1990s U2 coasted on the success of Achtung Baby, IMHO. U2 played around with sequencers and sampling, but it didn't make up for rehashed songs and guitar playing. Anyway, it only matters if the songs are good. I don't care how "innovative" one's guitar playing is, if the songs are shitty who cares about guitar wizardry? I can agree with you on that. Experimentation for the sake of it doesn't justify crap. But I liked the 90s U2. I like U2 in general anyway, but I dug the stuff they did on Zooropa and Pop. I didn't see it as coasting. But I see your POV as well.I don't want to come across as bashing a musician like the Edge. I just feel that most creative or innovative rock musicians make their stamp and usually don't progress afterwards. That doesn't mean they stop being creative. How many rock musicians actually step out of their box and become innovative in multiple ways? Jeff Beck, maybe? So you are arguing more from the POV of Keith as someone who found a "sound" that was unique to him and then stuck with it? I can see that. But as you said, what good is it if the music isn't good? And again, most of the Stones output over the past 30 years - to me - does not match their earlier years. I do think the songs were better then. But then I guess that could be said of anybody. Usually it's the earlier stuff that they are most known for. But I try to give everyone a chance - Stones included - and they still write decent songs, but nothing that rocks my world. And I guess that is rare. CA I found to be a really strong album, one that ranks quite high with me, higher than most of the stuff Rush have done post-Signals. Same with VT. Good late period album (to me anyway). But I don't usually hear many folks talk about late period Stones albums in the way they talk about Exile, or Beggar's Banquet or Some Girls, for example. I guess that was the point I was making. Maybe there was no point? Maybe I am still just loopy from my sinus meds. Edited March 21, 2016 by Wil1972 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GabesCavesOfIce Posted March 21, 2016 Share Posted March 21, 2016 When I think of outstanding tone I think of the following: David GilmourKeith RichardsMick TaylorDuane AllmanMarc FordSteve HackettBrian MayNeil YoungLindsey BuckinghamLee Underwood and Alex Lifeson's tone during the early period, definitely through 2112, and perhaps even through Hemispheres, was beautiful, back when it was nice and fuzzy and warm, and not so thin and processed as it eventually became. That is an awesome list! I would add Blind Melon's Rogers Stevens, who achieves an amazing multi layered tone in Tones of Home. Phenominal! . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Syrinx Posted March 21, 2016 Share Posted March 21, 2016 When it comes to Keith Richards, he doesn't need to play another note to be considered one of the all time greats. Even if you just take his mid 60's to early 70's stuff, there is enough there to put him near the top of any all time list. I personally don't care what he has or hasn't done after that time period - although the opening to Start Me Up is one of the most well known riffs of all time. He has enough of a body of work and has influenced so many players. In my opinion he is one of the greatest ever. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
custom55 Posted March 22, 2016 Share Posted March 22, 2016 (edited) Keith Keith Keith... Many historical R&R riffs came from Keith. I've seen The Stones more than any other band and I've seen the good/great and the bad/terrible with Keith. Unmistakable sound no doubt and too many riffs to name. Oh, never a sellout !!! http://youtu.be/-qnfPQQiQv0 Edited March 22, 2016 by custom55 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
custom55 Posted March 23, 2016 Share Posted March 23, 2016 Here's more of Bill's efforts... http://youtu.be/PTxQ601mlAY When I was younger I used to be able to sing along with the falsetto Mick does in this song. Now, not so much lol. Didn't they play this one recently for the first time? They did. I believe it only few years back... 2013/14 ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rick N. Backer Posted March 23, 2016 Share Posted March 23, 2016 Here's more of Bill's efforts... Some Girls was the first "real album" I bought myself. It remains one of my favorite albums of all time. I was so into the Stones after that. So I remember vividly when Emotional Rescue was released. It is not an underrated Stones album, but it is one that I personally still love dearly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ReRushed Posted March 23, 2016 Share Posted March 23, 2016 Hot Rocks 1964-1971 was my gateway to the Rolling Stones. A fantastic compilation and introduction. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Syrinx Posted March 24, 2016 Share Posted March 24, 2016 If you get the special edition cd of Some Girls, the second cd of session outtakes is amazing. They were still putting out some great music in that era. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
J2112YYZ Posted March 24, 2016 Share Posted March 24, 2016 If you get the special edition cd of Some Girls, the second cd of session outtakes is amazing. They were still putting out some great music in that era. Isn't Some Girls their biggest selling album too? Excellent record! 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
custom55 Posted March 24, 2016 Share Posted March 24, 2016 Some Girls... Great album and tour. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ReRushed Posted March 24, 2016 Share Posted March 24, 2016 I think Some Girls was the last consistently good Stones' album. A rebound from the post-Exile on Main St. releases. Post-Some Girls the Stones are highly inconsistent. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rick N. Backer Posted March 24, 2016 Share Posted March 24, 2016 If you get the special edition cd of Some Girls, the second cd of session outtakes is amazing. They were still putting out some great music in that era. The bonus discs for Some Girls and Exile are both fantastic. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ReRushed Posted March 24, 2016 Share Posted March 24, 2016 If you get the special edition cd of Some Girls, the second cd of session outtakes is amazing. They were still putting out some great music in that era. The bonus discs for Some Girls and Exile are both fantastic.And none made it on to Tattoo You! Go figure... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Syrinx Posted March 28, 2016 Share Posted March 28, 2016 This is the greatness of the Stones. Their outtakes are better than many other bands releases. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Powderfinger Posted April 1, 2016 Share Posted April 1, 2016 The guitar tones all over Sticky Fingers are sick. Listen to Can't You Hear Me Knocking on headphones. Mick and Keith sound so good together. Drums sound great on that album, too. Great snare sound, real roomy. Moonlight Mile has been a very important song in my life. Unmistakeable tone and signature sound? Mick TaylorNeil YoungDave GilmourDuane AllmanRich Robinson and Marc FordThe EdgeLifeson (sometimes)SantanaLindsey BuckinghamGeorge Harrison's slidework Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
stoopid Posted April 1, 2016 Share Posted April 1, 2016 BostonProng Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lorraine Posted July 26, 2019 Share Posted July 26, 2019 (edited) Thank you Mr. Not What do you know about how they produced their albums? Or about their producer/engineers? Yesterday I was on a Stones' kick and listened to a lot of their music and was amazed at their talent. I've said this before, but it's true, we took them so much for granted back then (much like the Beatles) that only after the lapse of so much time can I listen to them with "fresh ears." :) I don't know how they did it. Mick had quite the rep, Keith was on heroin and nodded out half the time - this is the song writing team. And having Nicky Hopkins on that piano ... without him so many of the songs wouldn't have been as great as they are. You Can't Always Get What You Want and Jigsaw Puzzle and Sympathy For The Devil - what tunes!!! I'm done gushing. I think. Edited July 26, 2019 by Lorraine 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Entre_Perpetuo Posted July 26, 2019 Share Posted July 26, 2019 Hot Rocks 1964-1971 was my gateway to the Rolling Stones. A fantastic compilation and introduction. Mine too! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
J2112YYZ Posted July 26, 2019 Share Posted July 26, 2019 Thank you Mr. Not What do you know about how they produced their albums? Or about their producer/engineers? Yesterday I was on a Stones' kick and listened to a lot of their music and was amazed at their talent. I've said this before, but it's true, we took them so much for granted back then (much like the Beatles) that only after the lapse of so much time can I listen to them with "fresh ears." :) I don't know how they did it. Mick had quite the rep, Keith was on heroin and nodded out half the time - this is the song writing team. And having Nicky Hopkins on that piano ... without him so many of the songs wouldn't have been as great as they are. You Can't Always Get What You Want and Jigsaw Puzzle and Sympathy For The Devil - what tunes!!! I'm done gushing. I think. I heard an interview with Jagger a long time ago where he said he usually comes up with the lyrics right before he's supposed to go to the studio and record them. His lyrics certainly have that spur of the moment vibe to them. I'm sure something like Sympathy For The Devil he took a little more time to do. But he just wing it with the lyrics on many songs. As for Keith, there was a post on the first page that talked about how he would record stuff on the road with a cassette recorder and an acoustic guitar. He probably recorded a bunch of stuff then pass out. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lorraine Posted July 26, 2019 Share Posted July 26, 2019 Thank you Mr. Not What do you know about how they produced their albums? Or about their producer/engineers? Yesterday I was on a Stones' kick and listened to a lot of their music and was amazed at their talent. I've said this before, but it's true, we took them so much for granted back then (much like the Beatles) that only after the lapse of so much time can I listen to them with "fresh ears." :) I don't know how they did it. Mick had quite the rep, Keith was on heroin and nodded out half the time - this is the song writing team. And having Nicky Hopkins on that piano ... without him so many of the songs wouldn't have been as great as they are. You Can't Always Get What You Want and Jigsaw Puzzle and Sympathy For The Devil - what tunes!!! I'm done gushing. I think. I heard an interview with Jagger a long time ago where he said he usually comes up with the lyrics right before he's supposed to go to the studio and record them. His lyrics certainly have that spur of the moment vibe to them. I'm sure something like Sympathy For The Devil he took a little more time to do. But he just wing it with the lyrics on many songs. As for Keith, there was a post on the first page that talked about how he would record stuff on the road with a cassette recorder and an acoustic guitar. He probably recorded a bunch of stuff then pass out. Poor Keith! But he's still alive. :codger: That's a miracle in and of itself. And he's still married to the same woman for how many years already? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
driventotheedge Posted July 26, 2019 Share Posted July 26, 2019 Thank you Mr. Not What do you know about how they produced their albums? Or about their producer/engineers? Yesterday I was on a Stones' kick and listened to a lot of their music and was amazed at their talent. I've said this before, but it's true, we took them so much for granted back then (much like the Beatles) that only after the lapse of so much time can I listen to them with "fresh ears." :) I don't know how they did it. Mick had quite the rep, Keith was on heroin and nodded out half the time - this is the song writing team. And having Nicky Hopkins on that piano ... without him so many of the songs wouldn't have been as great as they are. You Can't Always Get What You Want and Jigsaw Puzzle and Sympathy For The Devil - what tunes!!! I'm done gushing. I think.Don't forget Bobby Keys' sax work on some of their songs. Very important to those tunes. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now