RIP Charlie Watts | Page 2 | The Boneyard

RIP Charlie Watts

Chin Diesel said:
I'm with you.

For people of a certain age the Beatles had a huge cultural influence before the Stones came around. Musically The Stones crush the Beatles. Lennon is probably seen by most as a better song writer than Jagger or Richards but Stones were so much more versatile. Beatles are for the boomers sucking on herbal tea and Starbucks. Stones are for the boomers sucking on bourbon and marlboros.
Expand ...
Worst. Take. Ever.
 
8893 said:
Worst. Take. Ever.
Expand ...
Bad, but not worst. And we all know bourbon sucks.

I've only owned one Stones LP - Through the Past Darkly, Vol II. I did play the crap out of that and probably enjoyed it more than any Beatles album but Abbey Road. However, as I've said numerous times here, IMHO, Stones should've hung it up after Exile. Not much good after that.
 
Last edited:
Chin Diesel said:
I'm with you.

For people of a certain age the Beatles had a huge cultural influence before the Stones came around. Musically The Stones crush the Beatles. Lennon is probably seen by most as a better song writer than Jagger or Richards but Stones were so much more versatile. Beatles are for the boomers sucking on herbal tea and Starbucks. Stones are for the boomers sucking on bourbon and marlboros.
Expand ...
Swing and a miss.
 
.-.
Chin Diesel said:
I'm with you.

For people of a certain age the Beatles had a huge cultural influence before the Stones came around. Musically The Stones crush the Beatles. Lennon is probably seen by most as a better song writer than Jagger or Richards but Stones were so much more versatile. Beatles are for the boomers sucking on herbal tea and Starbucks. Stones are for the boomers sucking on bourbon and marlboros.
Expand ...


Totally agree with this... Stones >>>>>> Beatles
 
nomar said:
It matters as much as any music- (or sports-) related opinion of a random person on the internet matters.

It's a decades-long debate.

I like both, too, but I have a preference, as do you.

Tangent: We recently moved into a new house. Before moving, I told the seller she could leave the books on the shelves, and we'd go through them. We were recently sorting through them and I found what I thought was my own copy of Keith Richards' autobiography, Life. But in fact it was the seller's daughter's copy (per a card inside), and it's signed by Keith.
Expand ...
Nice! "Life": a real "Guy's Book"
 
8893 said:
Always loved the John Hiatt line in "Slow Turning,"

Now I'm in my car
I got the radio down
And I'm yellin' at the kids in the back
'Cause they're bangin' like Charlie Watts

The 2:00 mark in this great performance:

Expand ...

Great lyric.
Great song.
Great artist
 
Sad news. RIP Charlie. A big part of the sound that made the Rolling Stones the Rolling Stones.
 
CW was a cool dude. Always thought his class/demeanor elevated the Stones persona. His groove was the glue that held their music together despite the other talent around him.

A Life well-lived on his terms. About as good as it gets. RIP.
 
.-.
Waquoit said:
The Stones were great when they came to The Rent.
Expand ...
IIRC that was the tour when they played theaters, arenas and stadiums and had a different show planned for each: the theater shows featured rarities; the arena shows each featured several songs off one album; and the stadium shows were greatest hits.

I saw one theater show, at the Orpheum in Boston, and the stand-outs included "Parachute Woman," "Hand of Fate" (a gem from Black and Blue with some searing guitar licks) and a great cover of Solomon Burke's "Everybody Needs Somebody to Love." Hotter than hell that night, and what a show.

Saw two arena shows, at the Civic Center and MSG, featuring Let It Bleed and Exile on Main Street, respectively, which are my two favorite Stones albums; and the Rent greatest hits show.

Nice run!
 
Chin Diesel said:
I'm with you.

For people of a certain age the Beatles had a huge cultural influence before the Stones came around. Musically The Stones crush the Beatles. Lennon is probably seen by most as a better song writer than Jagger or Richards but Stones were so much more versatile. Beatles are for the boomers sucking on herbal tea and Starbucks. Stones are for the boomers sucking on bourbon and marlboros.
Expand ...

Bah, nonsense. Lennon is a good songwriter, but McCartney may be the greatest of all time, and they are both better singers than Mick (yet neither was close to as entertaining as a front man). They aren't similar bands. I'm not sure why we compare them except that they were part of the early British Invasion. I can't say one is "better" than the other, but certainly people could like one more than the other. Longevity is a big part of what made the Stones epic, they are the last band standing from that era. The Beatles were gone before I got to Kindergarten. Zeppelin didn't last through my HS graduation. The Kinks made it to 1997. The Who, not sure how much I count what they did after 1982. Likewise, the real Beach Boys haven't been together in a long time, Dennis died in 1983.
 
8893 said:
FYI for fellow Sirius subscribers: Deep Tracks is Rolling Stones Radio until Labor Day.
Expand ...

Nice. Just added it to the favorites on the app on my phone. Hitting the links in 2 hours. That should make for some good golf music.
 
Rush is a Band Blog: Rush comments on the passing of legendary Rolling Stones drummer Charlie Watts



... A short, older man stepped up to me, sticking out his hand and saying something I couldn't hear. Thinking "Now who's THIS?" I took out one of my ear monitors and said "Sorry, I couldn't hear you."

He spoke again, smiling, "Hello, I'm Charlie Watts."

"Oh!" I said, taken aback, "Hello." And I shook his hand.

He asked if we were going on soon, and I said yes, any minute, and he said, with a twinkle, "I'm going to watch you!"

I suppose if I could have felt more pressured, that might have done it, but I was already at maximum intensity - there was no time to think of Charlie Watts and the Rolling Stones, watching them on The T.A.M.I Show or Ed Sullivan when I was twelve-and-a-half, hearing Satisfaction snarling down the midway at Lakeside Park, Gimme Shelter at the cinema in London, listening to Charlie's beautiful solo album, Warm and Tender, so many times late at night in Quebec, or any of the other million times Charlie Watts and his band had been part of my life.

Geddy e-mailed me later and mentioned that scene:

"BTW, I will never forget that moment before we went onstage when Charlie Watts came over to shake your hand (at the worst possible moment!) and watching your face go through all the motions of... a. who is this old guy? b. what does he want? c. oh for god's sake it's Charlie Watts!" ...
 
Saw them in Boulder-Outdoor concert setting at Folsom Field.. Heart opened up-when they were looking really good.

Mick bouncing around in a pink Spandex jumpsuit with knee pads working the stage.

Had to be there. Can't make this "stuff" up.
 
Last edited:
Chin Diesel said:
Lennon is probably seen by most as a better song writer than Jagger or Richards but Stones were so much more versatile.
Expand ...
Versatile? I realize musical taste is subjective, but this is demonstratively false. The White Album alone is more versatile than the entire Rolling Stones' catalog.

And the Beatles are for everyone.

This from a big Stones fan.
 
.-.
Chin Diesel said:
Nice. Just added it to the favorites on the app on my phone. Hitting the links in 2 hours. That should make for some good golf music.
Expand ...
'That should make for some good golf music.'
first tee?


some of those long 4's can certainly make a grown man cry.
hit 'em straight. lol.
 
I always thought the Beatles-Stones thing was mostly about the Stones rocking harder and one's personal preference associated with that.
 
Waquoit said:
I always thought the Beatles-Stones thing was mostly about the Stones rocking harder and one's personal preference associated with that.
Expand ...
I think that's certainly the popular perception, which was aided in great part by the Stones' carefully-cultivated image as the "bad boys of rock-n-roll," in contrast to the more charming and witty image the Beatles cultivated.

Funny I put all my Stones' tunes on shuffle for my evening run yesterday and, aside from "Sympathy for the Devil," which I chose manually as the first tune to get me started, there was nary a rocker among the rest for the rest of my run. I didn't mind because I love it all, but I thought it was interesting how much of their great material actually consists of slower songs that don't rock at all.

And here's one that came on on my drive home after the run, which I love because it's such a slow burn--although it really rocks once it gets cooking when they get close to the 3:00 minute mark:

 
8893 said:
I think that's certainly the popular perception, which was aided in great part by the Stones' carefully-cultivated image as the "bad boys of rock-n-roll," in contrast to the more charming and witty image the Beatles cultivated.

Funny I put all my Stones' tunes on shuffle for my evening run yesterday and, aside from "Sympathy for the Devil," which I chose manually as the first tune to get me started, there was nary a rocker among the rest for the rest of my run. I didn't mind because I love it all, but I thought it was interesting how much of their great material actually consists of slower songs that don't rock at all.

And here's one that came on on my drive home after the run, which I love because it's such a slow burn--although it really rocks once it gets cooking when they get close to the 3:00 minute mark:

Expand ...


Nice.

When I used to run, I had a loop/route through the neighborhood. Back in the old iPod days, I had my running music set and All Down the Line was always set up for the penultimate song on the run. Puddle of Mudd Away from Me was always the finisher.

Bob Seger Taveling Man / Beautiful loser was always hitting leadoff.
 
8893 said:
I think that's certainly the popular perception, which was aided in great part by the Stones' carefully-cultivated image as the "bad boys of rock-n-roll," in contrast to the more charming and witty image the Beatles cultivated.

Funny I put all my Stones' tunes on shuffle for my evening run yesterday and, aside from "Sympathy for the Devil," which I chose manually as the first tune to get me started, there was nary a rocker among the rest for the rest of my run. I didn't mind because I love it all, but I thought it was interesting how much of their great material actually consists of slower songs that don't rock at all.

And here's one that came on on my drive home after the run, which I love because it's such a slow burn--although it really rocks once it gets cooking when they get close to the 3:00 minute mark:

Expand ...


Angie and Wild Horses are some epic headbangers...easily a match for Norwegian Wood. Fool to Cry, Ruby Tuesday...the list of mellow tunes is long.

I do think Heartbreaker and Gimmie Shelter rock pretty hard. I just think the Stones are more jazzy/funky than the Beatles. That may mostly be because they survived into the 70s. Who knows what the Beatles would have done?
 
.-.
You can put me firmly in the camp of the Stones were at their best with Mick Taylor. Perfect complement to Keith.

The studio version of Can't You Hear Me Knocking is so good with Bobby Keys and Mick's instrumentals but this gives a hint of what 25 more years of Mick could have meant for the live shows.

Also, much like Bruce Springsteen was born to play the Meadowlands, the Stone and Glastonbury are perfect.

 
Fairly recent, still a nice rendition of Honky Tonk Woman. This is a style of song that set the Stones apart. Never really thought of Sheryl Crow as attractive but um...yeah, I suppose so.

 
HuskyHawk said:
Fairly recent, still a nice rendition of Honky Tonk Woman. This is a style of song that set the Stones apart. Never really thought of Sheryl Crow as attractive but um...yeah, I suppose so.

Expand ...


That's an odd take.
 
If you want to do the female vocalists plays off Mick Jaggar, there's this version of Gimme Shelter and then there's the rest.

 
HuskyHawk said:
Fairly recent, still a nice rendition of Honky Tonk Woman. This is a style of song that set the Stones apart. Never really thought of Sheryl Crow as attractive but um...yeah, I suppose so.

Expand ...

I listened to the original studio version last night and was thinking that it may be the most recognizable opening drum beat of all time. Not many songs open with an unaccompanied drum for the first several beats.
 
.-.
You must log in or register to reply here.

Forum statistics

Threads
168,479
Messages
4,577,252
Members
10,488
Latest member
husky62


Top Bottom