Johnny Canuck3
Well-Known Member
phildwyer said:
You'd think that after playing drums for decades, that he might have picked up a few chops.
Rolling stones? Crap / not crap etc
- Thread starter DRINK?
- Start date
You'd think that after playing drums for decades, that he might have picked up a few chops.
blossie33
trailer trash
Definitely not crap. Love their 6os and 70s stuff, much prefered them to the Beatles, probably because of their more rebelious image but also because of the type of music they played.
Haven't seen them live for years so I can't comment on whether they should have retired or not. I do love Keith Richards atitude still (how could anyone expect him not to be smoking on stage still? Nice one
)
Haven't seen them live for years so I can't comment on whether they should have retired or not. I do love Keith Richards atitude still (how could anyone expect him not to be smoking on stage still? Nice one
)selamlar said:
i'm staggered that anyone ever doubts it.
Orang Utan
Maybe I like the misery
You read that, didn't you? Or you're passing off someone else's opinion as your own?phildwyer said:
it's bollocks as well. An old friend of mine is a really well respected London jazz drummer who does rock / pop session work for the dollar. He thinks Watts is a fine drummer. Watts also has a well-regarded jazz outfit himself, of course, which further demonstrates that Dwyer is gobbing off about things he knows nothing about again 
selamlar said:
oh, i dunno.. threads on here would suggest otherwise, sadly
eta: here you go http://www.urban75.net/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=101218&highlight=beatles+stones
the stones won..
strummerville
vinyl lover
Er Sympathy For the Devil? Fusing a bossa nova beat with samba and rock and roll, sounding like nothing gone before? Pretty good i thought.phildwyer said:
Meltingpot
Living in our pools we soon forget about the sea
killer b said:
He said in Q Magazine once that it made him paranoid to talk about himself, but he spent some time talking about Charlie "Bird" Parker instead. I get the impression that jazz is what really floats his boat, and he's in the Stones to pay his bills.
Dubversion said:it's bollocks as well. An old friend of mine is a really well respected London jazz drummer who does rock / pop session work for the dollar. He thinks Watts is a fine drummer. Watts also has a well-regarded jazz outfit himself, of course, which further demonstrates that Dwyer is gobbing off about things he knows nothing about again
Showing your ignorance again, Boss. My father is a jazz drummer, and I myself played drums for several rock bands. Charlie Watts cannot play the drums, period. If you think differently, cite me a track where you feel his performance justifies your view. If not, keep your mouth shut.
bouncer_the_dog
Well-Known Member
probably going to see them Sunday with luck.. never been to the Dome before either..
Leica said:
It's not "lacking," like I said he fits in perfectly with the Stones' sloppy, messy sound--and I like the Stones, at least up until the mid-70's. He's just not a good drummer, technically speaking. But technical ability is almost a drawback in rock drumming anyway.
bouncer_the_dog
Well-Known Member
ha! My Dad is a Jazz player and he says Charlie Watts is an excellent (rock) drummer - so you SUCK!! And so does your dad!!phildwyer said:
Crispy
The following psytrance is baṉned: All
What the fuck is this all about? Early stones are great. I listen to 60's and 70's pop music all the time, and I'm a metropolitan music elite. well maybe not elite. whatever. I've got an ipod, if that's what you were getting at. I'm proud of our musical heritage, and find much modern pop music fucking awful.if6were9 said:Have the Rolling Stones gone the way of Frank Sinatra and become incomprehensible?
I'd say it was a UK thing amongst metroplolitan music elites. If you go to Sao Paolo or Bucharest or Shanghai you could probably make a fair few quid busking out Ventilator Blues or Dead Flowers, but I wouldn't try it in a middle class inner London living room at 2am for fear of being killed by sneers
Its a great shame the UK cant unequivocally embrace the sheer beauty of its 60s and 70s pop music as all the rest of the world does rather than buckle rather peevishly under the weight of another generations achievement
Crispy said:
i think he was replying to a post that existed only in his head.
bouncer_the_dog
Well-Known Member
phildwyer said:
That is true, but I saw Charlie Watts at Ronnie Scotts and I thought he was pretty good, and in rock terms he is able to control the band pretty well. Usually whats happens is the crowd sing the words, forget the words, and Mick will be stuck - so Charlie goes mental with the drums and brings them all back in line. He carries the band excellently.
Dubversion said:
No, I wasn't
I too, was a metropolitan London music trendy
I just find it, well, a bit weird that fellow Brits will know and be proud to know some very obscure chicago house track and not want to immediately say Little Red Rooster or the opening sitar chords of Shes a Rainbow or the voices in Just Wanna See his Face on Exile is not worth sticking your hand up for and saying, woagh, that is great fucking music. Almost everywhere else its regarded as such, maybe its about being proud of your culture or something. Im not saying this in a right wing sense but in an affectionate one. In my experience people from outside the UK find it hard to understand why we dont love those bits of the Stones that are so quintessentially English and so bloody wonderful.
Johnny Canuck3
Well-Known Member
Dubversion said:
They can't really be compared. Both were excellent at what they do. The Beatles were trailblazers. The Stones were like the world's best bar band.
beesonthewhatnow
going deaf for a living
The Beatles engineers and producer were trailblazers, the band themselves? Nah.Johnny Canuck2 said:
Similar threads
