MR

According to a new report by Australian website Undercover the legendary drummer -- who has had a waning interest in the group in recent years -- has left the band after nearly 47 years of service.

"Charlie Watts has quit the band," a source within the Stones inner-circle reveals. "He will never record or tour with the band." It's little secret that Keith Richards had to coax Watts into participating in the band's 2005 album 'A Bigger Bang' and its subsequent global tour. But now the aforementioned source insists Watts is gone for good.

"The Stones are looking to Keith's Expensive Winos drummer Charlie Drayton to fill the void in all future callings." Often considered by many the backbone of the Rolling Stones, the 68-year old drummer -- who joined the group in January 1963 -- could be ready to enjoy his retirement.

If it's true, it makes perfect sense. After the success of the band's last tour, which ran from August 2005 to August 2007 and was the highest grossing trek of all time, it's hard to imagine Watts is in short supply of cash.

UPDATE: The Rolling Stones' spokesperson has denied that Watts has left the band.

He looked like he should have been in a retirement home back in 1985

Andrew wrote:He looked like he should have been in a retirement home back in 1985

That's true, but Keith Richards looks like he's been dead since 1985.

Andrew wrote:He looked like he should have been in a retirement home back in 1985

True, but even on the last tour, he kept the groove as good as ever.

I've seen a lot of musicians/drummers kind of mock what he does and the way he plays, yet in all the times I've heard (or been a part of) Stones covers, no one has ever come close to emulating his feel on the drums. One of the greats....it's not how fancy your groove is, it's whether you make everyone else in the band sound better because of it.

Mick Jagger made the Stones. If anyone other than Mick left the band, they could continue on without a hitch. But if Mick left, the Stones would be washed up because they don't have a Neal Schon in the band to keep it going after Mick retires. Any session drummer off the street could fill Charlie's shoes... it definitely wouldn't take a Neil Peart.

Andrew wrote:He looked like he should have been in a retirement home back in 1985

Voyager wrote: Any session drummer off the street could fill Charlie's shoes... it definitely wouldn't take a Neil Peart.

Ouch! (but so true..haha)

Voyager wrote:Mick Jagger made the Stones. If anyone other than Mick left the band, they could continue on without a hitch. But if Mick left, the Stones would be washed up because they don't have a Neal Schon in the band to keep it going after Mick retires. Any session drummer off the street could fill Charlie's shoes... it definitely wouldn't take a Neil Peart.

what no one in the band knows how to use youtube???

WalrusOct9 wrote:

Andrew wrote:He looked like he should have been in a retirement home back in 1985

True, but even on the last tour, he kept the groove as good as ever.

I've seen a lot of musicians/drummers kind of mock what he does and the way he plays, yet in all the times I've heard (or been a part of) Stones covers, no one has ever come close to emulating his feel on the drums. One of the greats....it's not how fancy your groove is, it's whether you make everyone else in the band sound better because of it.

The three drummers that I've heard criticized the most by other drummers over time are Charlie Watts, Rikki Rokkett and Lars Ulrich. Each definitely has their own style, but I get the impression there must be something that bugs people about their general skills or technique.

Me personally, I love Charlie Watts in the Stones, and he's just as much a part of their sound as anyone else. But this is exactly what he always reminded me of:

Peartree12249 wrote:

Andrew wrote:He looked like he should have been in a retirement home back in 1985

That's true, but Keith Richards looks like he's been dead since 1985.

So's watts. In fact, Think half that band died in the riots that occurred at Altamont. They've just been replacing those members with stand ins as they died. This is probably the 3rd or 4th time they've replaced watts...

As long as The Glimmer Twins are still there, the Stones roll on.
That said, this smacks of total rumor to me. Keith would never let it happen, Charlie would not want to let Keith down like that, and above all based on things he's said I think it's in Charlie's (and all their) nature to keep going provided there's always a few year hiatus in between.
My only question is will there be another album or simply a tour, which Licks was for all intents and purposes, 40 Licks compilation aside.
IF I'm wrong and it's true, Ex-Pensive Winos drummer Charlie Drayton is The Stones' new drummer.

Voyager wrote:Mick Jagger made the Stones. If anyone other than Mick left the band, they could continue on without a hitch.

So wrong it;s not even funny.
They would not be accepted without Richards any more than they would be w/out Mick. In Doomsday scenarios Charlie and to a lesser extent Ronnie would be expendable but make no mistake: no Keith and there is absolutely no Stones.

Red13JoePa wrote:

Voyager wrote:Mick Jagger made the Stones. If anyone other than Mick left the band, they could continue on without a hitch.

So wrong it;s not even funny.
They would not be accepted without Richards any more than they would be w/out Mick. In Doomsday scenarios Charlie and to a lesser extent Ronnie would be expendable but make no mistake: no Keith and there is absolutely no Stones.

Only playfully arguing...but how do you support a severed journey but not a severed stones?

strangegrey wrote:

Red13JoePa wrote:

Voyager wrote:Mick Jagger made the Stones. If anyone other than Mick left the band, they could continue on without a hitch.

So wrong it;s not even funny.
They would not be accepted without Richards any more than they would be w/out Mick. In Doomsday scenarios Charlie and to a lesser extent Ronnie would be expendable but make no mistake: no Keith and there is absolutely no Stones.

Only playfully arguing...but how do you support a severed journey but not a severed stones?

When did Neal (or Cain) leave and why wasn't I notified?????

Red13JoePa wrote:

Voyager wrote:Mick Jagger made the Stones. If anyone other than Mick left the band, they could continue on without a hitch.

So wrong it;s not even funny.
They would not be accepted without Richards any more than they would be w/out Mick. In Doomsday scenarios Charlie and to a lesser extent Ronnie would be expendable but make no mistake: no Keith and there is absolutely no Stones.

While I totally agree w/you on ^^^^this, I also felt the same way
about Queen, Journey and VH....but WTH, it happens!!!

Red13JoePa wrote:

strangegrey wrote:

Red13JoePa wrote:

Voyager wrote:Mick Jagger made the Stones. If anyone other than Mick left the band, they could continue on without a hitch.

So wrong it;s not even funny.
They would not be accepted without Richards any more than they would be w/out Mick. In Doomsday scenarios Charlie and to a lesser extent Ronnie would be expendable but make no mistake: no Keith and there is absolutely no Stones.

Only playfully arguing...but how do you support a severed journey but not a severed stones?

When did Neal (or Cain) leave and why wasn't I notified?????

I'm curious to see if the Rolling Stones have a defibrillator on their tour rider, after all, didn't they all die 15 years ago.

ebake02 wrote:I'm curious to see if the Rolling Stones have a defibrillator on their tour rider, after all, didn't they all die 15 years ago.

They will probably need walkers on their next tour.

LADIES AND GENTELMAN OF THE VILLAGES RETIREMENT CENTER... PLEASE WELCOME THE ROLLING STONES..heard on their next tour in 2010... sponsored
by The Villages and AARP....

R

Voyager wrote:

ebake02 wrote:I'm curious to see if the Rolling Stones have a defibrillator on their tour rider, after all, didn't they all die 15 years ago.

They will probably need walkers on their next tour.

Or maybe one of those rascal motorized scooters.

Red13JoePa wrote:

Voyager wrote:Mick Jagger made the Stones. If anyone other than Mick left the band, they could continue on without a hitch.

So wrong it;s not even funny.
They would not be accepted without Richards any more than they would be w/out Mick. In Doomsday scenarios Charlie and to a lesser extent Ronnie would be expendable but make no mistake: no Keith and there is absolutely no Stones.

I don't know JoePa, Charlie Watts is 68 years old. He certainly doesn't need the money. How much longer should he continue? Seriously, does anyone here really want to see a 70 year old rock musician up there playing? Personally I wouldn't. The thought of watching a bunch of bony assed, dried up , wrinkled (or botoxed) old men way past their expiration date up up on a stage playing rock music holds no appeal for me whatsoever. I'd much rather listen to their cd's and watch concert videos of them performing when they were in their prime. Now... it's just sad.