Quote
ablett
or perhaps he's happy with his lot and fed up of the same question after 30 odd years???

Quote
misterfrias
Not sure he is, ablett:

[www.dailymail.co.uk]

Quote
slew
Can the Mick Taylor hero worship PLEASE STOP!!!! Enough already every thread has a comment about how much better they were with Mick. Mick is gone he is not coming back we are stuck with Ronnie let's leave it at that!!

Quote
bernardanderson
some people put Taylor up on a pedestal like he's some sort of super awesome guitarist, but to me he's a good player but not super awesome, like John McLaughlin or countless others.

Quote
Jack Flash
I, for one, am extremely excited to see him live for the first time on May 4th. In other people's experiences, has he been approachable after to shows to talk to and sign items?

Quote
kleermaker

Quote
Jack Flash
I, for one, am extremely excited to see him live for the first time on May 4th. In other people's experiences, has he been approachable after to shows to talk to and sign items?

I've read on the Dutch Stonesforum he is. I'll take a look there and see if I can find some pictures of MT meeting his fans. Have some patience please.

Quote
bassplayer617
A friend of mine admitted the truth about the whole Taylor business: he isn't a Stones fan, he's a Mick Taylor fan.../quote] That's only his perspective bassplayer and does and cannot apply to everyone. I'm a Taylor fan yes, but I'm also a Stones fan, a Keith fan and so on. It is overly simplistic to group those who sing the praises of one musician in a band as a fan only of that musician or of band during the period that musician was in the band.

Quote
kleermaker

Quote
Jack Flash
I, for one, am extremely excited to see him live for the first time on May 4th. In other people's experiences, has he been approachable after to shows to talk to and sign items?

I've read on the Dutch Stonesforum he is. I'll take a look there and see if I can find some pictures of MT meeting his fans. Have some patience please.

Quote
MCDDTLC
I'm just hoping that the rumor about Jagger having Taylor come in to overdub
some of the music for the re-release of: IORR is true...

MLC

Quote
MCDDTLC

But Albett and the rest of you Taylor-haters can't come!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

MLC

Quote
Edward Twining
slew, i hope as with Taylor one day the fans open their eyes and become aware of the fabulous contributions that Brian brought to the group, although i also get the feeling that it's most unlikely, partly because the music live and in the studio lacked a little of the sophistication of later years,and Mick and Keith weren't quite firing on all cylinders where songwriting consistency was concerned. However, that was certainly a time where their musical style was possibly at its most varied, thanks to the versitility of Brian. I also believe that Ronnie has been made the scapegoat for the Stones musical shortcomings all too frequently in recent years, when actually the decline in the Stones performances has pretty much included every member of the group. By contrast Mick Jagger seems to get off most likely, despite the fact it is him who seems intent on parodying himself to an extent wher he is turning the Stones into strictly a nostalgia act, by his intention of wanting to appear young and vital forever, but without ever touching on the true musical facets that originally made himself and the group such a formidable musical force. Taylor was and still is a tremendous guitarist, and he did transcend much of what he played to a thing of great beauty. I heard the term melancholy used in relation to his playing in one of the posts and it's true, his playing undoubtedly gave the Stones music that extra dimension, that sensitivity that has been missing ever since. Listening to a track like Dead Flowers live at the Marquee in 71 is such a treat because it's really Taylor that makes the song breathe with his beautiful guitar lines - listening to the later renditions always seems a little flat by comparison. Taylor still seems in good form from what i can see, however,whether he is as consistent as he was remains to be seen, but he's still more than capable of giving me goosebumps. Taylor was never really well equipped to be a star because he is naturally rather shy and retiring, and as others may have noted he works better when surrounded by fellow musicians, when he is not the centre of attention, and when perhaps he can contribute to someone else's output rather than create his own work as in being a solo artist. His playing contains rare sensitivity, perhaps because he's very sensitive and conscientious himself. Ronnie was good on the 78 and 81-82 tours and contributed greatly to the feel of the Some Girls album, and his highpoints within the band certainly where his playing is concerned has very much coincided with the groups highpoints as a whole, and his less inspired moments have also very much been in conjunction with the rest of the band. I don't think Taylor was missed greatly until more recent years - since the Las Vegas era Stones - because he represents a time when the Stones were truly at a peak, but i'm not sure any late participation by him would ever be likely to save them, it's like him being asked singlehandedly to save a sinking ship, however, that's not to say there would not be glimmers of pleasing results in the process. Ronnie worked well with the Stones during the punk and immediate post punk era, because the style of the time represented a more back to basics approach which suited Ronnie's style. Some Girls, the 78 and 81-82 tours and perhaps Emotional Rescue were contemporary sounding offerings at a time when the Taylor era Stones sound would have seemed pretty much out of step. However, that doesn't stop me believing that the Taylor era was the best and most satisfying in retrospect, from pretty much every perspective. Ronnie has always been a functional guitarist, but never transcendent.

Quote
Doxa
Re SOME GIRLS

I think Ronnie's contribution to the greatness of SOME GIRLS album is sometimes over-rated by "Ronnie apologists" The kick to that album didn't come from Ronnie but from the change of the climate, thé punk movement especially. SOME GIRLS if any album is the most Jaggerian album ever. I guess Johnny Rotten has mose causal impact to the nature of the album than Ronnie had. But Ronnie was a good side kick, of course, to accomplish the kind of things Jagger wanted. But I take that Ronnie following the orders - "faster, faster, faster!" - than other way around. And seemingly all those simple two/three chord rockers - going usually from A - are Mick's, with Ronnie and Keith giving a nice weaving support (even though I have sometiems the impression that the band from Charlie to Keith is not quite in terms with their vocalist's drive and hurry; perhaps Ronnie more is...). Not sure abou the origin of the riff of "Shattered" - is that probably Ronnie's?

But behind that - the true musical gems of the album that gives the depth to the album and makes it a classic - "Miss You" was written with Billy Preston and "Beast of Burden" and "Before They Make me Run" are Keith's musical ideas.

The claim (made in some of these threads - there are some many of them I lost the track...) that Ronnie had a bigger impact on SOME GIRLS than Taylor to his era albums is bullshit. Maybe to DIRTY WORK but I wouldn't shout that too loud if I were Ronnie...

- Doxa

Quote
kleermaker

Btw: Angie live 1973 is preferable to the studio version imo. But that concerns so much other stuff, like Brown sugar for instance. On SF rather boring, live thrilling when MT was still on stage.

Quote
kleermaker
I know that Brown sugar is a bit holy because of its nice beginning (let's not exaggerate it), but there's surprisingly few surprise in it. Except if you're fond of sax.