Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Entertainment and Arts > Music
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 07-11-2012, 07:09 AM
JPD
 
12,138 posts, read 18,298,453 times
Reputation: 8004

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by nighthouse66 View Post
i think keith has plenty of laurels of his own. i don't think its sour grapes.

you have to realize, keith has been doing this successfully far, far longer than the beatles did. period. i don't consider the beatles to be outstanding musicians either, nor do i consider the stones to be so. when the musical universe includes so many REAL players like bert jansch, charlie parker, charles mingus, even jerry garcia, the stakes are pretty high for pure musicianship. the beatles were good musicians, but what they really excelled in was songwriting. and when you consider that keith was influenced by and rubbed elbows with monsters like muddy waters, his standards are gonna be high.

the stones and the beatles had the feel, and they had talent. it was a whole package. in a way, that's harder to find. tho i will say, i do consider charlie watts to be one of the greatest drummers of all time. just saying. he swings.
You know, what it comes down to is that "musician" is not the same thing as "instrumentalist." Nobody has ever made the claim that any of the Beatles were among the upper echelon of instrumentalists on their respective instruments.

Nobody would ever ask Keith about instumentalism. It's not part of who he is or what he does. His entire being is the polar opposite of advanced instrumental technique. So, all this talk about whether or not the Beatles are excellent at playing their instruments (relative to Mingus, Ginger Baker, et al) is not relevant to what Keith was saying.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 07-11-2012, 09:26 AM
 
Location: Philaburbia
41,965 posts, read 75,205,836 times
Reputation: 66925
It's just his opinion. He is neither right nor wrong. Big deal.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-11-2012, 09:39 AM
 
640 posts, read 717,786 times
Reputation: 587
Quote:
Originally Posted by calipoppy View Post
The Beatles are overrated. Why is he wrong for saying it?
Because it's offensive to Boomers and Jann Wenner.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-11-2012, 12:13 PM
 
1,881 posts, read 3,353,365 times
Reputation: 3913
Quote:
Originally Posted by TVC15 View Post
hahaha, he just cleans the guys' clock and then gets back to the business at hand. KEEEEEEEEEEEIIIIITH. if keith ever needed a spare lung or a kidney, i'd give him mine. screw the lot of those who don't get him. he's the human riff!!!!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-11-2012, 12:17 PM
 
1,881 posts, read 3,353,365 times
Reputation: 3913
Quote:
Originally Posted by JPD View Post
You know, what it comes down to is that "musician" is not the same thing as "instrumentalist." Nobody has ever made the claim that any of the Beatles were among the upper echelon of instrumentalists on their respective instruments.

Nobody would ever ask Keith about instumentalism. It's not part of who he is or what he does. His entire being is the polar opposite of advanced instrumental technique. So, all this talk about whether or not the Beatles are excellent at playing their instruments (relative to Mingus, Ginger Baker, et al) is not relevant to what Keith was saying.
um, yeah it was, and that was what he meant. "instrumentalists?" having been a musician myself and hung out with some heavies, i have never, ever heard that word. having read other interviews with keith in which he goes on in the same vein regarding the beatles, its a safe assumption that that is what he meant. no musician i have ever read about has called themselves an instrumentalist. that sounds goofy. like something you would say in high school band. this is rock and roll.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 07-11-2012, 12:47 PM
JPD
 
12,138 posts, read 18,298,453 times
Reputation: 8004
Quote:
Originally Posted by nighthouse66 View Post
um, yeah it was, and that was what he meant. "instrumentalists?" having been a musician myself and hung out with some heavies, i have never, ever heard that word. having read other interviews with keith in which he goes on in the same vein regarding the beatles, its a safe assumption that that is what he meant. no musician i have ever read about has called themselves an instrumentalist. that sounds goofy. like something you would say in high school band. this is rock and roll.
You missed my point by a wide margin.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Entertainment and Arts > Music

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 05:16 PM.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top