First imagine and after answer:

How could have sounded Stones´ 80' and 90' songs played with Mick taylor instead of Ronnie Wood?

Can you imagine: highwire, undercover, she was hot, don´t stop, hold back, dirty work, sex drive, rock and a hard place, even respectable or before they make me run played by Richards and Taylor?

Of course, they had sounded different. More bluesy,...but more Stone sound?

No, i don't think it would be better!
Of course Taylor is a virtuos on the guitar but i think it only fitted good in the period he played with them and maybe 'till '76. After that i can't really imagine the songs with Taylor playing on them and that they would sounded better.
But i think open G will have a different opinion :-D


Cheers,
Wuudy

The Stones turned some decades into their music and they new exactly when was the time to be up with such and such tunes. They always knew how to respond to the actual mood and scenes especially in the 70ies and 80ies when they became a stadium rock band.
In that respect they new exactly what they wanted when they did Black and Blue and sorry to say, but Taylor didn't fit. If Ronnie fits that's another questionmark of the day. he fits in the concerts and that is what they made actually the last 15 years. Albums?... I can't even recall every song which I did before.....

Taylor would have helped any of those songs!!!!! MLC

Haven't you forgot Exile, Sticky Fingers, It's only Rock and Roll. Does compare to Dirty Work and Rock and a Hard Place.

rock and hard a hard place is the second coming of soul souvier

So is "It Must Be Hell". OpenG, I thought you'd have more to say on this thread as it's obvious Ronnie is no Taylor.

If Taylor had been with the Rolling Stones for the past 30 years, instead of Ron Wood, they would be playing places like the Who and Bob Dylan play...sheds, House of Blues, minor-league baseball parks. They'd also probably be on Sanctuary Records, like Robert Plant. End of story.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2005-05-26 22:37 by Jack Knife.

J- Knife- your so full of SHIT!!! - MLC

YAWN!

That fat Taylor does was he does best: playing the same 10 songs for years to all those who still live in the late 60s/early 70s.

FOR THE LOVE OF ALL THINGS HOLY, LEAVE RONNIE ALONE.

Point #1: Taylor left the band when he should have.

Point #2: If Taylor had played in the 80s everything would be way too 'fiddly'.

Point #3: The Stones are NOT about solos. Give up the ghost. Ronnie does a better weave with Keef ANY DAY over Taylor.

Point #4: Just imagine what would have happened if Taylor's personality rubbed off on the Stones. Suddenly we'd have everyone stagnant on stage, no facial expressions, looking down at the floor, just playing. It would be a perfect show I'm sure, but it would be boring as hell.

Point #5: Ronnie does a better job playing the old tunes than Taylor ever did. Little Queenie in 97 kicks 69-72's ass any day.

Point #6: Every song you mentioned in your original post (highwire, undercover, she was hot, don´t stop, hold back, dirty work, sex drive, rock and a hard place, respectable, before they make me run) sounds great with Ronnie. Ronnie can play ANYTHING. Taylor is alot like Eric Clapton or SRV in that they are CONSTANTLY busy and very 'fiddly'. Ronnie can riff well and knows the art of when NOT to play. Taylor did good work with the Stones, but it would have been way too 'busy' for the Ronnie era. Like I said, the Stones are not all about solos, its about the weave.

Point #7: Get over Mick Taylor. He was good, but became the most overrated guitarist the Stones have ever had. I'm just thankful their career didnt go anything like Taylor's. If the guy was really as brilliant as you all paint him, his career would have shot through the roof. Sorry to say I have all his solo material on vinyl, and I never play it. Its lackluster at best. Maybe he'll be inspired one day though. Who knows...

Ronnie Wood is the most underated guitarist of all time. I'm not saying he's tops, just that he's great for the Stones. My two cents, and then some.

Drake



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2005-05-27 00:17 by drake.

drake Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

> Point #2: If Taylor had played in the 80s
> everything would be way too 'fiddly'.

Actually, I find Ronnie's mandolin-like solos to involve many more notes and be more "fiddly".

> Point #3: The Stones are NOT about solos. Give up
> the ghost. Ronnie does a better weave with Keef
> ANY DAY over Taylor.

Richards says this. Alot. But he also solos alot. The last 10 years seem to be largely about Richards taking solo duties from Wood.

Taylor and Richards weaved when Richards wanted (MR) and didn't when Richards didn't want (Bitch--though the Aus '73 shows show some interesting weaving on this too).
>
> Point #4: Just imagine what would have happened if
> Taylor's personality rubbed off on the Stones.
> Suddenly we'd have everyone stagnant on stage, no
> facial expressions, looking down at the floor,
> just playing. It would be a perfect show I'm
> sure, but it would be boring as hell.

Or even worse: if Woods mugging and desultory playing rubbed off on Richards!

> Point #5: Ronnie does a better job playing the old
> tunes than Taylor ever did. Little Queenie in 97
> kicks 69-72's ass any day.

Little Queenie?

>
> Point #6: Every song you mentioned in your
> original post (highwire, undercover, she was hot,
> don´t stop, hold back, dirty work, sex drive, rock
> and a hard place, respectable, before they make me
> run) sounds great with Ronnie. Ronnie can play
> ANYTHING.

From what I've heard he could not play CYHMK, but different minds seem to disagree.

Taylor is alot like Eric Clapton or SRV
> in that they are CONSTANTLY busy and very
> 'fiddly'.

Clapton is CONSTANTLY fiddly? Have you heard his 70s stuff (Lay Down Sally)?

Taylor is CONSTANTLY fiddly? Stop Breaking Down? You Got to Move?

> Ronnie can riff well and knows the art
> of when NOT to play.

This is a great straight line, which I'm leaving for OpenG and MLC, because I cannot do it justice. And my aim is not to bash Wood.


> Taylor did good work with
> the Stones, but it would have been way too 'busy'
> for the Ronnie era.

If SG and EOMS were reversed in time, the same thing would be said about EOMS--Taylor would never fit in. The point is that the album where Taylor was constantly around for the music production--EOMS--he made a contribution of varied playing that fit in quite well with the sound.

In one of his odd moments, Taylor actually said that he thinks he did not change the sound of the Stones much--it would not have sounded much different without him and, had he stayed beyond '74, would not have sounded much different with him. We can disagree with his assessment (at least I do), but it's clear in his mind that the "sound" was largely determined by Jagger and Richards.

I agree.

I'm just tired of the constant Ronnie bashing. I appreciate every era of the Stones for different reasons and have difficulties with those who cant. 72 wasnt the last great year for the Stones and I wish people would get past that.

i don't think the Stones would still be together had Mick Taylor stayed in the group. Ron Wood has contributed to this band's longevity in more ways than his musicianship.the Stones have held Woody back. (look at his body of work before the Stones) his commitment to this band is highly commendable. i believe Mick and Keith are very aware of this.

"His commitment to this band is" awsome. GOD BLESS RONNIE!

Mick Taylor was in the right place at the right time, but through Goats Head and IORR he did not provide any energy or take any chances with his playing, for what ever reasons. His playing by then was very predictable. Had he stayed with the band I do not feel that he would be on the pedastel that some people here have placed him. That is not knocking his talent, it's to say that his sound would sound dated.

Ronnie showed up at the right place at the right time also. Keith and Mick contributed a lot to his solo albums and were already hanging out. KR finally had someone to really play with. Ronnies style of guitar and his ability to adapt to so many styles of music helped the Stones revive their sound and stay fresh. Its very silly to even compare MT and RW, they are both so talented it's not funny. Ronnie has proven to be more maliable. I do not believe that the band could have made Some Girls with MT. Even though his playing is on Tattoo, listen how fresh and energized KR & RW 's guitars sound and the entire band. What would MT have played on Hang Fire, Beast Of Burden, Miss You ? A bloated winding blues scale solo ? Where would he fit in on Emotional Rescue, Dirty Work or Voodoo with all the guitar interplay? Ronnie has played a lot of really good solos AND provided many a nasty lick through many songs.

The point is that MT plays a certain way that says "70's solo". Ronnie you realy can't nail down, his playing can vary so much from song to song.

Ron Wood has nothing to prove to anyone. His work with The Faces, Stewart, His solo stuff and The Stones speak for itself. In any other band he would be calling the shots (like he did with The Faces)

MT may have had that smooth sound......but Ron can play that way if he wants. You know how I know? I can play MT's solos!. MT could never play the way Ronnie does....loose, choppy, a lttle rough and raw, but he can play very gentle at times. Why he gets bashed so much is beyond me.

Milo, NYC
I'm Tired, Tired of doin what I'm told

I'm with you j-knife.....

I like Ronnie when he plays, not as a clown on stage.

Ron Wood brought a lot to the Stones but not as a musician. He was, I guess, sometimes a kind of go-between the glimmer twins. Mick Taylor is an unsurpassed blues-rock guitar player to the exception of Clapton. When he left the Stones he was not 30 years old and had the glimmer give him more credits to his songwriting he would have stayed many more years.

The assumption(make an ass out of you amd me) that taylor could not groove and
play on the trendy music jagger/richards elevated to in the late 70's and 80's
to keep alive their rock god status IMO is bullshit.Taylor came from a blues
environment and quickly adjusted to the glimmer compositions and enriched the
material live and in the studio.He PROVED he could play country,rock,blues, and
reggae and took the stones to another level live.

I can,t believe some here think Taylor could not lay down a beautiful solo on
Miss You and all the rest of the trendy music jagger pointlessly wrote instead
of staying to the spirit of Brian Jones.

Taylor and Richards were the greatest guitar duo ahead of Duane Allman and
Dicky Betts etc.Richards and Taylor Grooved and its on tape on all those boots.
I listened to Love You Live - Ron Wood's solo on YCAGWYW is sloppy and at times
you feel he has no clue where to go with all the space keith is giving him.

Taylor would of taken the space Keith laid down on Some Girls,Emotional Rescue
and all the rest and they would of rocked and grooved and the material would of
been Taylor stamped.

'Ron Wood's solo on YCAGWYW is sloppy and at times'...finally you got it! Its Rock n Roll!
MT was outstanding for the period whilst IMO the Stones would be as dead as a duck without the fresh input RW put in. Listen to Handsome Girls or Out on Bail....they sure ROCKED! Sod analysing the solos....as a gig it rocked! IMO Four Flicks still proved they ROCK.
But then it's not solely RW problem if the Stones have improved or deteriorated.
Its a group effort. As I said the stones have never been about one sole member and nor should they.

handsome girls has bum notes everywhere, notes not played and held like a
true musician should perform if they are billed the greatest rock and roll
band.I hate sloppy when you should strive for perfection as a musician.

But thats the whole point of Rock nRoll aint it? The Who were never note perfect, Zep, Chuck Berry, Little Richard name em? The whole point of the Punk movement was kids being bored of extended solos, note perfect performance. Its excitement, the thrill, the groove which makes Rock exciting.

Yes but with TAYLOR they had both thats the whole point us Taylorites want to
express here.They rocked and grooved and had perfection with Taylor as the true
lead guitarist.The Taylor FACTOR was never replaced and to me when you listen
to these 72/73 boots with Taylor you scream OUT they could of had the best of
both worlds.

I expect we'll have to agree to disagree.
I appreciate the MT years obviously but I personally prefer many aspects of the RW years.
I just can't imagine Some Girls etc with MT. What killed The Who for me was that they never progressed in the later years. Instead of re-inventing with the rise of Punk they squandered there time with the 'Who are you' album and crapping out on there legacy there after and IMO the Stones would have stummbled as well.
Good debate though...

Ronnie was terrific for them in '78-83 but in 75-76 I think they would have needed someone else, Wayne Perkins would have been great. I'dve loved to see and hear that.

Yes great that you get into woody but I get bored listening to many of the
stones records that came with the woody era and the songwriting declined as you
would expect as the glimmers aged and human nature is to live off your past glory.But as a fan going to the shows with woody I felt cheated that I was not
getting the best live experience for the dollars I paid.I wanted that SOARING
70's SOLO that I missed and I grew up with the woody era and later asked my
big brother who that good looking guy was on the sticky fingers promo shoot and
the pictures and the gloden era was there to discover.

Like I said we'll agree to disagree.....

I could not have written better on the " greatest guitar duo"

Aaaaah but which duo?.....