Estranged Reality Posted April 7, 2008 Share Posted April 7, 2008 The Stones are all over every magazine this month, and I was reading an interview with Keith in Mojo today, and he's asked what kind of music he listens to. He says mainly country and blues but nothing new, and then goes on to say he thought Oasis and the Sex Pistols sucked. He says "all those British bands were fucking awful." Led Zeppelin's reunion is brought up and he says: "Oh, they had a reunion? Well good for Robert, good on him." He's being sarcastic though because in the next sentence he says he thinks Led Zeppelin are terrible as well and would rather listen to Muddy Waters, and he says "Robert knows what I'm talking about" in terms of listening to real blues music rather than Led Zeppelin. I'm paraphrasing but you get the general idea.Great musician, but what an arrogant asshole. I'm not a huge fan of those bands either but to dismiss them with such malice when you're promoting your own work - when you are a British band - is amusing to say the least. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dan H. Posted April 7, 2008 Share Posted April 7, 2008 Kieth sucks all the Stones are is black blues turned rock n' roll, big deal. They're not particuarly creative too they're way overrated Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Randy Lahey Posted April 7, 2008 Share Posted April 7, 2008 (edited) Some interviewer should bring up the fact that The Stones haven't sounded nearly as good since Mick Taylor left them. Edited April 7, 2008 by Randy Lahey Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bax Posted April 7, 2008 Share Posted April 7, 2008 Some interviewer should bring up the fact that The Stones haven't sounded nearly as good since Mick Taylor left them.I love the Stones, but Keith is being an idiot here. Granted Zeppelin ripped off blues material, but they did a lot of material that was way more original than the Stones ever have.I totally agree about Mick-they haven't sounded anywhere near as good since that era. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Axlin08 Posted April 7, 2008 Share Posted April 7, 2008 It's amazing that Keith is bashing Led Zeppelin for following the same templete as The Stones did.He is REALLY starting to lose his mind. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris Axl Posted April 7, 2008 Share Posted April 7, 2008 Zeppelin are WAY better than Stones... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Estranged Reality Posted April 7, 2008 Author Share Posted April 7, 2008 Zeppelin are WAY better than Stones...I don't think so. Not even close. But it's silly to bash a band for doing the same thing you did, essentially (blues-rock stolen from past artists). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
metallic ko Posted April 7, 2008 Share Posted April 7, 2008 Good. He's right. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Randy Lahey Posted April 7, 2008 Share Posted April 7, 2008 (edited) What brings down Zeppelin is Robert Plant's shitty lyrics. All the Ohh Baby shit he does is annoying. Jimmy, JPJ, and Bonzo smoke their counterparts in the Stones however... other than Mick Taylor. The Stones were better songwriters though, so that's the deciding factor for me. Edited April 7, 2008 by Randy Lahey Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
moreblack Posted April 7, 2008 Share Posted April 7, 2008 Zeppelin are WAY better than Stones...I'm with you there, I can't listen to the Stones for more than a few songs at a time. To me they don't do anything that some other bands didn't do as well or better.But I can play Zeppelin's entire catalogue front to back without skipping a song. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Estranged Reality Posted April 7, 2008 Author Share Posted April 7, 2008 What brings down Zeppelin is Robert Plant's shitty lyrics. All the Ohh Baby shit he does is annoying. Jimmy, JPJ, and Bonzo smoke their counterparts in the Stones however... other than Mick Taylor. The Stones were better songwriters though, so that's the deciding factor for me.I like Zeppelin a lot but I hate most of their lyrics. The problem is Plant and Page were both into folklore and mysticism (and Page was even into satanism wasn't he? Didn't he buy Crowley's mansion and live there for a while?) and some of the lyrics are really cheesy. If you're into metal then you may enjoy it because much of modern metal owes its lyricism to Zeppelin - mysticism is nothing new to the genre. But to me it seems kind of disconnected. When he's singing about Gollum and Mordor it ruins the flow of the song for me. I prefer songs about things I can relate to. I like Stairway a lot but "there's a bustle in my hedgerow" is probably one of the worst lyrics ever.That's just me. I'm not saying other people can't like them. I still love Zeppelin really but prefer their more direct songs. "Rock & Roll" is my favourite.By the way - I forgot a specific thing Keith said about Zeppelin. He said: "Stairway to Heaven? That doesn't fucking do it for me, sorry." That was the lead-in to his comment about Robert ripping off blues singers or whatever. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chris Axl Posted April 7, 2008 Share Posted April 7, 2008 (edited) The Battle Of Evermore is one of the best songs ever Edited April 7, 2008 by Chris Axl Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wasted Posted April 7, 2008 Share Posted April 7, 2008 He's playing the elitist authentic blues card?On himself? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Midnight Rambler Posted April 7, 2008 Share Posted April 7, 2008 This isnt the first time he's said hes disliked zeppelin, but i dont really care anyway, i love zeppelin and the stones, though i love the stones a little more, just fantastic songwriters, ruby tiesday, paint it black, lets spend the night togther, jumpin jack flash, fuckin the lyrics to sympathy for the devil, fukin amazing stuff, also little gems like the dylanesque she smiles sweetly and you got the silver. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wasted Posted April 7, 2008 Share Posted April 7, 2008 Surely he's taking some kind of swipe at the Stones themselves. Or Mick's version of the Stones. I'm sure Keith would do a less commercial version of the Stones. I always thought that Keith did sort of live in his own world about what he thinks the Stones are. Not just in this interview but in previous interviews he always seems to distance himself from the commercial side of Stones and sort of puts it off on Mick. Like him and ronny are the rebellious kids in the Stones who know what good music is. Same with Charlie, its like they are in a secret band in their heads and then just do commercial hits for radio so they can make money.It's not necessarily a bad thing.He's coming from a grounded level, saying that Muddy Waters or all the unknown real muscians are more authentic. But he must know they are rock band by now? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Estranged Reality Posted April 7, 2008 Author Share Posted April 7, 2008 Surely he's taking some kind of swipe at the Stones themselves. Or Mick's version of the Stones. I'm sure Keith would do a less commercial version of the Stones. I always thought that Keith did sort of live in his own world about what he thinks the Stones are. Not just in this interview but in previous interviews he always seems to distance himself from the commercial side of Stones and sort of puts it off on Mick. Like him and ronny are the rebellious kids in the Stones who know what good music is. Same with Charlie, its like they are in a secret band in their heads and then just do commercial hits for radio so they can make money.It's not necessarily a bad thing.He's coming from a grounded level, saying that Muddy Waters or all the unknown real muscians are more authentic. But he must know they are rock band by now?Well, I've read four interviews with Keith in the last couple days (Mojo, Rolling Stone, Maxim, Uncut) and in each one he slags off Jagger and the other bandmembers. He makes fun of Ronnie and says his new book is "50% bullshit" (claiming amongst other things Ronnie never pulled a gun on him) and that he laughed so hard at some of the stores in Ronnie's book that he stopped reading partway through. An interviewer asks him about Mick and his reply is: "I don't know if he ever took it up the shitter, but a lot of that was for show. He was camp." But he reiterates that he isn't sure whether he ever had gay relationships but thinks he might have. He later refers to Mick as a control freak and the interviewer asks about scenes from Scorsese's film where Jagger refuses to give Marty the setlist and Keith says this is a perfect example of why he's a "prima donna." He apparently also once called Mick's solo album a "piece of shit."He's not afraid to take swipes at his bandmembers. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wasted Posted April 7, 2008 Share Posted April 7, 2008 Surely he's taking some kind of swipe at the Stones themselves. Or Mick's version of the Stones. I'm sure Keith would do a less commercial version of the Stones. I always thought that Keith did sort of live in his own world about what he thinks the Stones are. Not just in this interview but in previous interviews he always seems to distance himself from the commercial side of Stones and sort of puts it off on Mick. Like him and ronny are the rebellious kids in the Stones who know what good music is. Same with Charlie, its like they are in a secret band in their heads and then just do commercial hits for radio so they can make money.It's not necessarily a bad thing.He's coming from a grounded level, saying that Muddy Waters or all the unknown real muscians are more authentic. But he must know they are rock band by now?Well, I've read four interviews with Keith in the last couple days (Mojo, Rolling Stone, Maxim, Uncut) and in each one he slags off Jagger and the other bandmembers. He makes fun of Ronnie and says his new book is "50% bullshit" (claiming amongst other things Ronnie never pulled a gun on him) and that he laughed so hard at some of the stores in Ronnie's book that he stopped reading partway through. An interviewer asks him about Mick and his reply is: "I don't know if he ever took it up the shitter, but a lot of that was for show. He was camp." But he reiterates that he isn't sure whether he ever had gay relationships but thinks he might have. He later refers to Mick as a control freak and the interviewer asks about scenes from Scorsese's film where Jagger refuses to give Marty the setlist and Keith says this is a perfect example of why he's a "prima donna." He apparently also once called Mick's solo album a "piece of shit."He's not afraid to take swipes at his bandmembers.He does drink quite a lot.I think he's just jovially joking. Never a truer word said in jest.He seems the most embarrassed out of the Stones.There's a total divide between what Mick sees as the Stones and what Keith thinks.Mick doesn't even think Exile is a good record.He likes the Miss You -era stuff.Charlie, I have no idea what he thinks. He's obviously insane. It's like he's the puppet master."I'm not your drummer. You're my singer." Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Randy Lahey Posted April 7, 2008 Share Posted April 7, 2008 If Izzy or Slash had the personality of Keith than the real GnR would still be around. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
pain cake Posted April 7, 2008 Share Posted April 7, 2008 listening to real blues music rather than Led Zeppelin.Same goes for country with the Rolling Stones Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wasted Posted April 7, 2008 Share Posted April 7, 2008 If Izzy or Slash had the personality of Keith than the real GnR would still be around.But in a way CD-era has been a more successful mid-period of a career than The Stones-mid-career slump?If GNR finally reform then they could have a pop career?The thing is Mick didn't have a change of direction, he didn't discover Punk and try to overhaul the sound. They did Some Girls in '78 and that's just taking the piss out of punk. pop country?Keith just wants to do more Rip this Joint than Miss You - which isn't even really very Stones. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wasted Posted April 7, 2008 Share Posted April 7, 2008 listening to real blues music rather than Led Zeppelin.Same goes for country with the Rolling Stones or even disco?But I don't see how going back to the band before the ones you like makes them more authentic.It's like before Muddy Waters, there was what Robert Johnson and before that. Then trace it back to African jungles. Which is actually the record Keith just got off, he was in the jungles recording some bongo album recently.I thought it was funny when he fell out of a coconut tree in Thailand or whereever. That's what they do on Vay-cay - get pissed and climb up coconut trees. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vincent Vega Posted April 7, 2008 Share Posted April 7, 2008 If Izzy or Slash had the personality of Keith than the real GnR would still be around.But in a way CD-era has been a more successful mid-period of a career than The Stones-mid-career slump?If GNR finally reform then they could have a pop career?The thing is Mick didn't have a change of direction, he didn't discover Punk and try to overhaul the sound. They did Some Girls in '78 and that's just taking the piss out of punk. pop country?Keith just wants to do more Rip this Joint than Miss You - which isn't even really very Stones.Actually Mick did. Not in Some Girls, but in Emotional Rescue and Undercover. There's a lot of new wave, dance and disco elements in there that Keith didn't want or like; it was a power struggle between Mick and Keith, now that Keith was off heroin. Mick wanted to go one way, which was go with whatever was trendy at the moment, like disco, new wave, etc., whereas Keith wanted to go with what was tried and true for them (hard rock, country elements etc). This musical difference, added to the death of their long-time pianist and road manager and ''6th Stone'', Ian Stewart in 1985, led to a gradual breakdown of their friendship which stopped functioning all together between 1985 (They produced a shitty album, Dirty Work, in 86 but worked separetly and Jagger's attention was focussed on his solo album) and 1989. Keith and Mick have never been as close as they were before 85 since then, I mean they got back together but really probably only for the money. Idk. But Steel Wheels was heralded as their comeback album and tour.In fact, if you read any Stones books, Keith refers to the early and mid 80s as "World War III", the Stones stopped talking by late '85. and were broken up. It was really only the failures of Mick and Keith's solo careers that brought them back together in '89. Mick actually wrote a note to the other guys basically saying he didn't need them and was done with them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wasted Posted April 7, 2008 Share Posted April 7, 2008 (edited) Actually I think I saw those albums not as a change of direction from Mick but just really poor albums from the Stones. A breakdown in a relationship and they couldn't be bothered to do a proper album. After the 60s it seemed like they more more jokey.I feel like they lost the rock but still see some of those albums as very Keith, sort of like his solo records, simple chuck berry songs. I can see how the albums changed from the 70s to the 80s. But still on those albums, quite a lot of it seems like very simple Keith songs. Before they Make Me Run for example. It's not late 60s Stones but it sounds more like Keith than Mick influence. I can't see Keith having problem with Some Girls, Black N Blue, Undercover (that whole album has very rock n roll songs - Too Much Blood is disco tho) but I've never ventured into Emotional Rescue, New Tatto, Dirty Work. I sort of rejoined after Steel Wheels.Bigger bang is like a 78 Stones record with some Mick ballads thrown in. So Keith has won out but I think he wants to get back to Exile style material??? Edited April 7, 2008 by wasted Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ffrankwhite Posted April 7, 2008 Share Posted April 7, 2008 (edited) god bless Keith. by the way, The Who beat Zeppelin & The Stones standing. The Sex Pistols were awful? yes, yes they were :)!! fucking awful!! i cant be mad at Keith Richards, he's done too much musically that absolves him of wrong-doing. albums like Beggars Banquet for example Edited April 7, 2008 by ffrankwhite Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wasted Posted April 7, 2008 Share Posted April 7, 2008 I've only got one tape of the Who. I like that song Legal Matter.The best music I've heard from a rock band is either ELO or Starship.Prince's Emancipation is pretty great record as well. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.