Hey Yapper, you're not looking to sell copies of Ronnie's first two solo albums or either official version of the John Phillips album from the mid-sevenites, are ya? Cause the collaboration is there as well as on TALK IS CHEAP.

Nothing against MLC or any other hardcore Taylorite (I love that phrase, so close to sodomite to be worth a giggle), but I think the issue is the Stones post-Taylor and nothing else. TATTOO YOU using old Taylor tracks doesn't count. Kansas City '81 doesn't count. Taylor guesting on solo albums and side projects doesn't count. Keith at a Taylor show doesn't count. Its all about Taylor back with the Stones. No mockery in pointing that out, I just see that as the key issue in these posts. Its a matter of validation that runs as deep as hardcore Brian fans' indignation toward Mick and Keith and it certainly runs deeper than the folks who slag off Daryl Jones for not being a Wyman clone. Those five years are everything to these guys, not just a creative peak like most Stones fans would view it.

Personally, I'm caught in the middle. I find a lot to criticize in the modern Stones (2002 on), but a lot of recent Stones stuff I love (VOODOO LOUNGE and BRIDGES TO BABYLON). I think Taylor got screwed out of songwriting royalties more than Wyman or Brian did (just my opinion). I think Taylor is still a fantastic player and would love to see him (and Wyman) onstage with the Stones again (for a Stones song, not a showcase for the horn players and back-up singers like most of the blues or R&B covers are these days). That said, I don't think Taylor is very good as a singer-songwriter on his own (yes, I like Keith solo better and used to rate Ronnie higher - I'm definitely not a NOT FOR BEGINNERS fan - the jury's out on Ronnie until MORE GOOD NEWS surfaces). Jagger solo has highs (WANDERING SPIRIT and "Old Habits Die Hard") and lows (pretty much everything else). The fact that A BIGGER BANG is my least favorite Stones album ever certainly colors my perspective despite liking a few songs quite a lot. The lows were lower than I ever expected from them, but in keeping with Mick's latterday work as a solo artist. The exceptions are there, but they are few and far between.

Quote
yapper
Hey MLC, just wondering. If Ronnie Wood got Mick Taylor to play on one of his solo albums would you still hate him?

And I don't mean just a solo or two, I mean every song. Would that change your opinion of Ronnie then?

Interesting question! AND actually its already happened as MT plays all kind of instruments all over Rons first two albums.

Yap - Do you know who to READ??? I just stated that I don't hate Ronnie's playing, will give him his due when his efforts warrant it. Was a fan of the
Faces - don't like Ronnies cheap shots at Taylor when they are suppose to be
"friends" from wayback. Still think he's being Jagger's mouthpiece for those
blasts at Taylor... that lower's my opinion about Ronnie more than the times
his playing is sub-par..

MLC

Quote
Rocky Dijon
I won't argue whether Taylor is a better player, because it isn't about that. If this was twenty years ago or more, touring with him would be feasible. Not now and that's a reflection on Taylor's career, not his ability as a player. The closest shot he has is a one-off blues cover as was considered in 2003. Taylor allegedly turned up, but couldn't go through with it because he hasn't been on large stages in years (I don't think he's ever played larger than an arena) and had a bad case of nerves over it. That may be why he suggested recording with them, while I would love to see it - I doubt it will happen because twenty years on, he's largely sunk to cult obscurity.

Ehm, Rocky ? This is a totally nonsensical statement. I was there and I know exactly what happened that night.
It was actually Jagger that sabotaged MT's chance to sit in. There had been some serious problems with Ronnie on that tour. A week before the London Astoria he had been on a horrible bender in Amsterdam. At the Astoria he was treated like a puppy that had been naughty by the whole band. I saw how Jagger totally ignored him when he tried to communicate with him during the show.
Taylor was there and was in good shape, having just returned from a Canadian tour where he had played well. He had seen the band at their hotel in the afternoon. He had chosen to watch the first half of the show from upfront and was waiting in the wings for his turn.
The show started off badly with a couple of major screw ups from Ronnie. Jagger, who is always very PR aware, didn't want to reignite the discussions about the Taylor era being superior to the current incarnation, especially not when he was playing in front of his home crowd. (Everyone was there and there had already been a lot of speculation in the press about this subject). With the state that Ronnie was in, this was certainly a realistic risk.
Halfway the show Jagger started rushing through the songs, there was no feel in the performance anymore and he looked like he just wanted to get things over with as soon as possible. I also noticed he was making gestures at Chuck Leavell that he was having a problem with his throat again (a show in Amsterdam had been cancelled for this reason, not long before).
Taylor was there, ready to walk on and was totally comfortable with that (I spoke with him and a representative for the band). For your information, Taylor has played the Astoria several times as a solo artist. The Astoria is a rather small venue and he regularly plays at festivals etc where stages tend to be larger, so your suggestion that the size of the stage was in any way intimidating to him is laughable.

All of a sudden the song that was going to be used for the guest appearance (Rock Me Baby) was wiped off the plexi glass. Taylor was there till the end of the gig, then left with a couple of friends via the main exit where he politely answered questions from journalists and signed autographs to fans, before going back to his hotel. He said to friends afterwards that he thought that Keith was the one that kept the band together that night by playing really tight and much more focused than he'd sometimes seen him in the past.



Edited 3 time(s). Last edit at 2009-06-04 15:40 by Lightnin'.

Quote
MCDDTLC
Yap - Do you know who to READ??? I just stated that I don't hate Ronnie's playing, will give him his due when his efforts warrant it. Was a fan of the
Faces - don't like Ronnies cheap shots at Taylor when they are suppose to be
"friends" from wayback. Still think he's being Jagger's mouthpiece for those
blasts at Taylor... that lower's my opinion about Ronnie more than the times
his playing is sub-par..

MLC

Sure I know how to read.....I have read all the cheap shots you throw at Ron Wood everytime a Taylor thread comes up. Every thread about Taylor you go into conspiracy theory mode. Soon Open G will be along to laugh about the YCAGWYW solo from 4 Flicks.

You two are so predictable.

Yap - Well so are you - (predictable) Jagger/Woods ass-kisser

I only give my honest opinion about what I'm "hearing or seeing" regarding
these guys and on many an occasion, have been critical of Taylor too...

So I guess we'll leave it at that - MLC

Oh I would love to see those posts where you are critical of Mick Taylor. Point me to the posts you are talking about.

Quote
Lightnin'

Quote
Rocky Dijon
I won't argue whether Taylor is a better player, because it isn't about that. If this was twenty years ago or more, touring with him would be feasible. Not now and that's a reflection on Taylor's career, not his ability as a player. The closest shot he has is a one-off blues cover as was considered in 2003. Taylor allegedly turned up, but couldn't go through with it because he hasn't been on large stages in years (I don't think he's ever played larger than an arena) and had a bad case of nerves over it. That may be why he suggested recording with them, while I would love to see it - I doubt it will happen because twenty years on, he's largely sunk to cult obscurity.

Ehm, Rocky ? This is a totally nonsensical statement. I was there and I know exactly what happened that night.
It was actually Jagger that sabotaged MT's chance to sit in. There had been some serious problems with Ronnie on that tour. A week before the London Astoria he had been on a horrible bender in Amsterdam. At the Astoria he was treated like a puppy that had been naughty by the whole band. I saw how Jagger totally ignored him when he tried to communicate with him during the show.
Taylor was there and was in good shape, having just returned from a Canadian tour where he had played well. He had seen the band at their hotel in the afternoon. He had chosen to watch the first half of the show from upfront and was waiting in the wings for his turn.
The show started off badly with a couple of major screw ups from Ronnie. Jagger, who is always very PR aware, didn't want to reignite the discussions about the Taylor era being superior to the current incarnation, especially not when he was playing in front of his home crowd. (Everyone was there and there had already been a lot of speculation in the press about this subject). With the state that Ronnie was in, this was certainly a realistic risk.
Halfway the show Jagger started rushing through the songs, there was no feel in the performance anymore and he looked like he just wanted to get things over with as soon as possible. I also noticed he was making gestures at Chuck Leavell that he was having a problem with his throat again (a show in Amsterdam had been cancelled for this reason, not long before).
Taylor was there, ready to walk on and was totally comfortable with that (I spoke with him and a representative for the band). For your information, Taylor has played the Astoria several times as a solo artist. The Astoria is a rather small venue and he regularly plays at festivals etc where stages tend to be larger, so your suggestion that the size of the stage was in any way intimidating to him is laughable.

All of a sudden the song that was going to be used for the guest appearance (Rock Me Baby) was wiped off the plexi glass. Taylor was there till the end of the gig, then left with a couple of friends via the main exit where he politely answered questions from journalists and signed autographs to fans, before going back to his hotel. He said to friends afterwards that he thought that Keith was the one that kept the band together that night by playing really tight and much more focused than he'd sometimes seen him in the past.

i'm going with this version. has a "ring of truth" about it.... ;-)

I like this one too....If Woodie was in bad shape, it could have turned into a bigger mess bringing Taylor on stage....Jagger just wanted the day to end!!

Quote
MCDDTLC
Yap - Do you know who to READ??? I just stated that I don't hate Ronnie's playing, will give him his due when his efforts warrant it. Was a fan of the
Faces - don't like Ronnies cheap shots at Taylor when they are suppose to be
"friends" from wayback. Still think he's being Jagger's mouthpiece for those
blasts at Taylor... that lower's my opinion about Ronnie more than the times
his playing is sub-par..

MLC

can you please tell me about the CHEAP SHOTS that ronnie has taken at mick taylor?

Ahhh, its good to be back. Taylor V Wood. Who's have thought it....

I don't dispute Lightnin's version, I just take exception with the failure to notice the word "allegedly" that I used for a specific reason. A few posts on I also supplied the source for the story when MLC very politely questioned it. I didn't relate something as gospel, I wrote what I read or heard from a band member that appears in print or on video.

As to whether Ligthnin's version is correct or not, I would say it sounds plausible if perhaps slightly biased in Taylor's favor, but the basic facts make more sense than Ronnie's statement. The most interesting fact is that I didn't recall the site was the Astoria and, as Lightinin' correctly states, Mr. Taylor has played the Astoria several times which would seem to shoot down the stage fright story.

While it would have been a nice gesture, I think it would have left fans wanting. Again, if you're going to bring Taylor on stage, then let him play on something from his era and not just be the Generic Blues Guest. To be perfectly honest, I was disappointed in Taylor's contribution to "I Could Have Stood You Up." I don't mind the song (apart from the corny censored chorus), but there were no sparks between Keith and Taylor generated and it stands as one of the weaker tracks on a very strong album as a result. Imagine if they really worked at the guitar interplay so that you had something approximating "Little Queenie" on YA-YA's. TALK IS CHEAP is a very fine album, but had Taylor and Keith's reunion been more than an apparent one-take overdub, it would have been that much better. Keith produced and financed a demo of "Blind Willie McTell" for Mick to submit to Virgin Records at the time of the session so its a pity they didn't play together longer or better.

Micky can't get on a big stage, right? So he'll never play with the Stones again. If they wanted him to play with them in the studio that's one thing. If he wanted to record with them in the studio is a whole other.

I'm sure there are more unreleased MT era songs they could cull together for some kind of release if they wanted to release something 'new' with MT on it.

But nothing like that has happened since 1981. The only other way, it seems, that it could happen is some kind of box set or anthology or a digital box set or maybe a term we haven't heard of yet.

Think of how funny it is though, what Rocky pointed out. Stones hard cores throwing bottles at Justin Timberlake during Miss You. Monkey Man I could see but Miss You? Nothing hard core about that. That's like an FM radio Pokemon there.

Quote
Taylor Era
"If Taylor ever wants to contribute with the Stones again either onstage or in the studio he needs to create a buzz about himself as a solo artist or as a contributor on a world wide stage, like paying guitar for Bowie on a tour or Roger Waters or someone of that stature."
.

I think it't the other way arround fellow.
You cannot compare the instrumental level of the Stones with or Roger Waters or Bowie
Their music is too simple for that!

Quote
Amsterdamned

Quote
Taylor Era
"If Taylor ever wants to contribute with the Stones again either onstage or in the studio he needs to create a buzz about himself as a solo artist or as a contributor on a world wide stage, like paying guitar for Bowie on a tour or Roger Waters or someone of that stature."
.

I think it't the other way arround fellow.
You cannot compare the instrumental level of the Stones with or Roger Waters or Bowie
Their music is too simple for that!

The music of Waters and Bowie is not really very complex, not that it matters. Identifying music as "simple" or "complex" tell us nothing about whether it is good...

Besides that, I think Taylor Era was addressing non-musical issues, like whether the Stones would think people would be interested in having him play -- would it sell more tickets, build more excitement, or whatever...

I can't see how having Taylor back could or would sell more tickets? Like most hard core fans, We are coming weather its Bill, woodie and or Taylor is back.And many young fans never saw or may never of even heard of Mick Taylor..
I do think having Taylor back in the studio could add to the excitment of a new album. Get everyone pumped up...Could push Keith and Ronnie to play..Pump them up and make a better Stones album!

Thanks Lightnin' for your take on the Astoria gig. I have never grasped what really happened there, or was the intended Taylor appearance just a result of wishful imagination without any actual base. To be true, I still find it a bit hard to believe that Jagger really was worried about any Wood vs. Taylor-era speculations, but more of his throat (and perhaps really pissed about Ronnie's condition) and for that reason just wanted to get the gig done.

I remember Taylor commenting afterwards that Mick and Keith are as arrogant as ever - so he was probably referring to the way his guest spot was handled?

But what about the stories him missing or being late for the rehearsals or something?

- Doxa

Yapper - Look for the most recent post of Taylor's US tour stops. I mentioned
I'm not going due to Taylor lack of setlist change. And there have been a couple
of other post's of Video's of him playing live the last few years that I didn't
like and said so...

Greek - Examples of Ronnie taking shot's at Taylor (but never to his face)

The 1981 KC gig - Ronnie was the mouthpiece that said Taylor didn't play well
that night, he was too loud, didn't fit in,etc. - all due to Taylor not plugged
into the soundboard or the Stones mountain of Amps. They just plugged him into a
little amp on stage where Taylor had to turn it up full blast to hear himself.

Ronnie's blast that Taylor slipped him a note saying he (Taylor) was broke
and had lost his confinance. Taylor said that didn't happen.

Ronnie saying back when they were young, Taylor was too shy to play sometimes
and asked Ronnie to play for him numerous times, again Bull-crap as Taylor
had the balls to ask John Mayall to let him sit-in when Eric Clapton was a
no-show one night with the Bluesbreakers. Which Taylor did and Mayall never forgot.

How's that for starters. MLC

Quote
Doxa
Thanks Lightnin' for your take on the Astoria gig. I have never grasped what really happened there, or was the intended Taylor appearance just a result of wishful imagination without any actual base. To be true, I still find it a bit hard to believe that Jagger really was worried about any Wood vs. Taylor-era speculations, but more of his throat (and perhaps really pissed about Ronnie's condition) and for that reason just wanted to get the gig done.

I remember Taylor commenting afterwards that Mick and Keith are as arrogant as ever - so he was probably referring to the way his guest spot was handled?

But what about the stories him missing or being late for the rehearsals or something?

- Doxa

Jagger doesn't like journalists getting heavy about comparisons with the Taylor era. That is a fact.
I don't think anyone part of the crew or otherwise involved with the band will question that Jagger was in a very bad mood that night. Whether this was brought on by a sore throat, Taylor appearing at the hotel and being pally with the guitarists or Ronnie falling off the wagon and being a total liability for the group (maybe hard to imagine but the the opinion of the music critics does not leave Jagger cold) is hard to say. Most likely it was a combination of the three.
It seems to annoy Jagger when everyone is talking about Taylor and his contributions.
Same thing happened at the Kansas City concert in '81. Keith and Ronnie wanted to hang out with Taylor at their hotel and then suggested he play with them on stage. They went to the venue together. Jagger hardly acknowledged Taylor's presence and stayed in his own dressingroom while everyone else was socialising. Ronnie and Keith went over to Jagger and asked: "Can Mick play with us ?" Jagger didn't quite know how to react and then said: "I suppose it's okay. As long as he's not just going to stand there and pose".
I mean, come on, I don't know if there is any guitarist that does LESS posing than Mick Taylor.

The interview in which Taylor was asked to comment on Jagger and Richards was done 1 or 2 days before them meeting up in London, so what he said about their arrogance is nothing to do with how the Astoria gig turned out.
As far as a soundcheck goes: Nobody ever mentioned beforehand that Taylor was required to show up for that. So it looks to me like this was something that was invented afterwards, because they had to come up with some kind of reason why it didn't happen.

One more point. Rocky commented he didn't think Taylor had played larger venues than arenas. Does 200.000 to 450.000 still qualify as an arena, or do you call that a stadium ? He played with Bob Dylan in (sold out) places with that capacity. I have a 90 min DVD with footage from the European tour. There's no sign that this is bothering Taylor in the slightest and his playing is fantastic.

I do agree with you on something, Rocky. In terms of the choice of song for Taylor to play on, "Rock Me Baby" would not have been the best one to pick. But you know, Jagger would not like him to steal the limelight so I doubt he would allow Taylor to join in for a song he can really cut loose on.

Quote
Lightnin'
I do agree with you on something, Rocky. In terms of the choice of song for Taylor to play on, "Rock Me Baby" would not have been the best one to pick. But you know, Jagger would not like him to steal the limelight so I doubt he would allow Taylor to join in for a song he can really cut loose on.

bingo. had he played on it, you can bet it would have been for a quick 12-bar solo and out. it would have made mick and the boys shudder if the audience had actually got to witness mick tearing it up as he well could have. same deal with buddy both times i saw him join the stones on stage (orpheum '02 and beacon '06) - he toned it down bigtime so as not to show anyone up.

Quote
MCDDTLC
Yapper - Look for the most recent post of Taylor's US tour stops. I mentioned
I'm not going due to Taylor lack of setlist change. And there have been a couple
of other post's of Video's of him playing live the last few years that I didn't
like and said so...

Greek - Examples of Ronnie taking shot's at Taylor (but never to his face)

The 1981 KC gig - Ronnie was the mouthpiece that said Taylor didn't play well
that night, he was too loud, didn't fit in,etc. - all due to Taylor not plugged
into the soundboard or the Stones mountain of Amps. They just plugged him into a
little amp on stage where Taylor had to turn it up full blast to hear himself.

Ronnie's blast that Taylor slipped him a note saying he (Taylor) was broke
and had lost his confinance. Taylor said that didn't happen.

Ronnie saying back when they were young, Taylor was too shy to play sometimes
and asked Ronnie to play for him numerous times, again Bull-crap as Taylor
had the balls to ask John Mayall to let him sit-in when Eric Clapton was a
no-show one night with the Bluesbreakers. Which Taylor did and Mayall never forgot.

How's that for starters. MLC

thanks for the info, as far KC 81 ,i have the soundboard and taylor played like the guitar great that he is ,and what super great special to hear mick taylor vibrato .to me this is a holy grail moment in stones history .to have taylor, richards ,and wood all together on one stage is truly special to me !!!!!!!!!

I agree Dylan played many arenas in Europe 1984 (if they were stadiums, mea culpa). I have also posted dozens of time on this board that Mick's playing on the Dylan tour is every bit as good as it was on the 1969 tour so no carps there. That said, even if Mick played stadiums in 1984, he could have developed stage jitters if he hadn't played to a large crowd like that in twenty years or so, right? However, instead of arguing what is plausible and isn't, if you'll go back and read my last post in this thread I noted that you successfully shot down the stage fright story Ronnie told as bullshit. Not sure how many other ways I can say I agree with you.

The only part of your last post that makes me uncomfortable is the way you seem to know what was said backstage by various bandmembers. Also, I always thought the KC gig was part of the out of court settlement over TATTOO YOU royalties and not just Mick being in the right place at the right time, but I don't know for sure. I think your theory on the Astoria 2003 is the most plausible I've heard, but I wouldn't call your educated guesses as to Jagger's unspoken sentiments about Taylor facts as if the man told you himself. Personally, I'm more apt to think the snubbing of Taylor is because his star isn't riding high these days. If Taylor were Clapton, he'd have an invite every tour for guest spots. Its not about ability, its about status.

As far as comparisons with the past go and how Keith and Ronnie would look next to Taylor - I'm sure the media would have a go at them for it (God knows the fan sites would), but Keith and Ronnie never even try to rise to the challenge when they play with guest guitarists - they seem to stay back and let 'em have the spotlight for the duration of the song. Watch them with Clapton, Bo Diddley, Robert Cray, Hubert Sumlin, Buddy Guy, Angus & Malcolm Young, etc. and you'll see what I mean. Its all about grins and body language to convey camaraderie, there's no attempt to take it up a notch. That's what made 1969-1974 so special and its just not part of the picture today. Generally speaking (there are of course exceptions), Keith plays much better outside the Stones in the last twenty years. He can convey a passion on stage or in the studio that is often lacking with the band. Personally, I think it has more to do with Mick's concept of following tightly arranged and choreographed shows where the keyboard player functions as band leader. No matter how much arthritis and the wear and tear of his lifestyle has diminished Keith's abilities, he still has passion for music, but you just see it less and less with the Stones. There are, naturally, splendid exceptions that the faithful can point to - but overall that's my take on that particular angle.

I guess at the end of the day, I would like to see the Stones make an album as a band and not just overdubbing onto Jagger's computer tracks like faceless sidemen. I think of Ronnie as part of the band, not Taylor. I would love to see Taylor play a show with them and get a nice stretch of 6-8 numbers (rehearsed, not spontaneous) like "Love in Vain," "All Down the Line," all from his era that showcased what the band was. I think that would be better than the club or small theater shows in 1995 and 2002-2003 that otherwise stand as the live highlights of the band in the last two decades.

I would love to see Keith and Ronnie work with Taylor outside of the Stones and really play as they are capable of still making amazing music together. Back in December 1974, Jagger said he hoped to work with Taylor as a solo artist. That never happened outside of the John Phillips sessions and I'm sure it won't, but its truly sad. Jagger has worked with some amazing guitarists since launching his solo career in the mid-eighties and from my perspective only Jimmy Rip lived up to any promise of what sort of role a guitarist should have with a singer like Jagger. As an afterthought, I would note that all of these posts are predicated on the idea of what we'd love to see captured while they're all still around to do it. In a way, that's what being a fan is about I suppose.

<the music of Waters and Bowie is not really very complex, not that it matters. Identifying music as "simple" or "complex" tell us nothing about whether it is good...>



In the context I mentioned it I think it matters...

Quote
hot stuff
I like this one too....If Woodie was in bad shape, it could have turned into a bigger mess bringing Taylor on stage....Jagger just wanted the day to end!!

Or Taylor would have walked on an made Woody look like an amateur. I felt sorry for Ronnie that night. Jagger was visibly angry with him. He was having a hard time and looked insecure about his position in the band and his pleas with Jagger (after his mistakes) were falling on deaf ears.

Jagger knew all too well that the crowd could have gone wild if Taylor had come on stage. Plus there would have been rich pickings for the journalists that were eager to write about the contrast between "the golden era" and the post Taylor period.
Rather than taking any risks with this *nightmare scenario*, Jagger just wanted to go home with his pet giraffe.

Quote
Rocky Dijon
I agree Dylan played many arenas in Europe 1984 (if they were stadiums, mea culpa). I have also posted dozens of time on this board that Mick's playing on the Dylan tour is every bit as good as it was on the 1969 tour so no carps there. That said, even if Mick played stadiums in 1984, he could have developed stage jitters if he hadn't played to a large crowd like that in twenty years or so, right? However, instead of arguing what is plausible and isn't, if you'll go back and read my last post in this thread I noted that you successfully shot down the stage fright story Ronnie told as bullshit. Not sure how many other ways I can say I agree with you.

I'm not having a go at you or something. Just wanted to explain why Taylor being nervous about the size of a stage is complete and utter baloney and your version of the events at the Astoria does not add up. The "stagefright theory" was unfortunately invented by Ronnie - don't forget that he still feels like he can not truly compete with Taylor and that's why he feels compelled to keep repeating this. I'm sure at some level Ronnie knows that it's not true but it's down to his own insecurity that he does this sometimes.

Oh everything I write is in good fun (just often questionable taste). No, I'm happy you blew the stage fright deal out of the water cause that would truly be tragic, if true. I agree 100% about Ronnie's insecurity. The lie about Hyde Park and Ronnie being first choice when Brian left is also utter rubbish and another great example of this.

Funny to see how the topic of this tread change into a live gig.
I think that Keith, Ronnie and Mick T do have a great respect for each other.
Playing on a new album is a wishfull thinking.

Bringing Taylor back, at least for an Exile set in the middle of the show, would be the most musically and commercially viable thing they could do for a new tour. Keith's skills MAY have eroded to the point where Taylor and Wood would be the guitar tandem. I would love to see Keith come back - but age, lifestyle, and arthritis may have the best of him.

Great Idea Shawn!!! - who knows..

And wild horse - think the respect thing is more for Taylor & Richards
they seem to express more admiration for each other then Ronnie does for
Taylor, unless Taylor's in front of him.

MLC

Reading Ronnie`s book he says that Mick T is a brilliant guitar player!
Sometimes we read something in the press that is not allways the truth, you know that and i know that.