Quote
71Tele

Quote
kleermaker

Quote
71Tele
OK, I don't pretend to know what actually happened, but here is the evidence so far:

- MT himself said he played on one track.
- Several other sources have reported MT put new guitar overdubs on.
- Jagger and Was' statements implied that Taylor played (they simply would have denied outright if there was no truth to it.).
- The one person who said he did not play? Keith!

Let's just say that considering the above and Keith's well known, um, elastic relationship with the truth over the years, I chose to believe that Taylor did in fact contribute.

You forgot to mention this:

<Re: Keith says No new MT overdubs!
Posted by: kensbro ()
Date: May 6, 2010 16:51

At Northampton MA, one week ago, MT was asked directly what he had recently overdubbed for the new EOMS release.

I heard him say, simply: "Plundered My Soul".>

I didn't forget. That's why I said "MT himself says he played on one track".

But you didn't mention what track, and that's not unimportant.

John Phillips related the story about Keith's remark upon hearing Taylor's solo on "Oh, Virginia" in his autobiography. Until recently that's the only place I've ever heard it referenced.

Of course, the story has much more sting when you spin it as coming from a Stones session.

Quote
Rocky Dijon
I believe your "100 Years Ago" story, Amsterdamned. And then Jagger patted his sobbing friend Keith on the back and said, "There, there...we'll get all the royalties for all these albums Taylor brilliantly composes for us." And they rubbed their greedy hands together and cackled maniacally.

And Taylor labored away, a genius unmoved by ego or financial renumeration and lo when the great god Taylor stepped out on his own in December 1974, his muse mysteriously deserted him.

Here endeth the lesson.

What ever! I don't care about royalties, gossip etc,but Taylor certainly put his stamp on the RS.He deserted,got off the rails, and the Stones went into showbizz and rapidly lost their muse.

Quote
kleermaker

Quote
71Tele

Quote
kleermaker

Quote
71Tele
OK, I don't pretend to know what actually happened, but here is the evidence so far:

- MT himself said he played on one track.
- Several other sources have reported MT put new guitar overdubs on.
- Jagger and Was' statements implied that Taylor played (they simply would have denied outright if there was no truth to it.).
- The one person who said he did not play? Keith!

Let's just say that considering the above and Keith's well known, um, elastic relationship with the truth over the years, I chose to believe that Taylor did in fact contribute.

You forgot to mention this:

<Re: Keith says No new MT overdubs!
Posted by: kensbro ()
Date: May 6, 2010 16:51

At Northampton MA, one week ago, MT was asked directly what he had recently overdubbed for the new EOMS release.

I heard him say, simply: "Plundered My Soul".>

I didn't forget. That's why I said "MT himself says he played on one track".

But you didn't mention what track, and that's not unimportant.

OK, you're right, but I wasn't concerned with that in my post.

Quote
Gazza

Quote
JumpingKentFlash
If neither Was, Jagger or Richards confirmed that Taylor did overdubs, and Taylor said he did, why would people believe Taylor? Is it because people don't like the Stones media machine and just disagrees with it for the sake of it and because it's too spin-doctory, or do they have any hard evidence (your ears don't count) that there actually was a recent session with Taylor doing overdubs?

Its got nothing to do with spin doctoring or media machines. Although if you want to open that can of worms with regard to Stones announcements in recent years which turned out to be untrue, it could be a long evening! The only spin I see seems to come from people who take everything Keith says at face value. I couldnt give a bollocks whether Taylor added overdubs or not, personally.

One guy says he played on a record, one other guy - who was 3,000 miles away - says the claim isnt accurate and that there's been no contact with him for years (which is untrue in itself) and two other guys who were most involved with mixing the record wont DENY it when theres no logical reason for them to do so.

And BEFORE anything was confirmed about what was happening with bonus material, one poster on this site mentioned inside info that Taylor HAD been given some material to overdub. Before it was even a rumour. It was dismissed by some as highky unlikely. Yet a couple of months later here we are with various band members unable to get a story straight about whether he did or not - and the subject himself claiming that he did (when he has nothing to gain by confirming or denying it).

So Taylor has nothing to gain you say? Would that be apart from more people at his concerts and boosted music sales?

JumpingKentFlash

Quote
JumpingKentFlash

Quote
Gazza

Quote
JumpingKentFlash
If neither Was, Jagger or Richards confirmed that Taylor did overdubs, and Taylor said he did, why would people believe Taylor? Is it because people don't like the Stones media machine and just disagrees with it for the sake of it and because it's too spin-doctory, or do they have any hard evidence (your ears don't count) that there actually was a recent session with Taylor doing overdubs?

Its got nothing to do with spin doctoring or media machines. Although if you want to open that can of worms with regard to Stones announcements in recent years which turned out to be untrue, it could be a long evening! The only spin I see seems to come from people who take everything Keith says at face value. I couldnt give a bollocks whether Taylor added overdubs or not, personally.

One guy says he played on a record, one other guy - who was 3,000 miles away - says the claim isnt accurate and that there's been no contact with him for years (which is untrue in itself) and two other guys who were most involved with mixing the record wont DENY it when theres no logical reason for them to do so.

And BEFORE anything was confirmed about what was happening with bonus material, one poster on this site mentioned inside info that Taylor HAD been given some material to overdub. Before it was even a rumour. It was dismissed by some as highky unlikely. Yet a couple of months later here we are with various band members unable to get a story straight about whether he did or not - and the subject himself claiming that he did (when he has nothing to gain by confirming or denying it).

So Taylor has nothing to gain you say? Would that be apart from more people at his concerts and boosted music sales?

you gotta be kidding, kent.

Quote
StonesTod

Quote
JumpingKentFlash

Quote
Gazza

Quote
JumpingKentFlash
If neither Was, Jagger or Richards confirmed that Taylor did overdubs, and Taylor said he did, why would people believe Taylor? Is it because people don't like the Stones media machine and just disagrees with it for the sake of it and because it's too spin-doctory, or do they have any hard evidence (your ears don't count) that there actually was a recent session with Taylor doing overdubs?

Its got nothing to do with spin doctoring or media machines. Although if you want to open that can of worms with regard to Stones announcements in recent years which turned out to be untrue, it could be a long evening! The only spin I see seems to come from people who take everything Keith says at face value. I couldnt give a bollocks whether Taylor added overdubs or not, personally.

One guy says he played on a record, one other guy - who was 3,000 miles away - says the claim isnt accurate and that there's been no contact with him for years (which is untrue in itself) and two other guys who were most involved with mixing the record wont DENY it when theres no logical reason for them to do so.

And BEFORE anything was confirmed about what was happening with bonus material, one poster on this site mentioned inside info that Taylor HAD been given some material to overdub. Before it was even a rumour. It was dismissed by some as highky unlikely. Yet a couple of months later here we are with various band members unable to get a story straight about whether he did or not - and the subject himself claiming that he did (when he has nothing to gain by confirming or denying it).

So Taylor has nothing to gain you say? Would that be apart from more people at his concerts and boosted music sales?

you gotta be kidding, kent.

Why would I be? You don't think that the more you associate yourself with a band like The Stones, the more money you will get? Let me tell you one thing: Many of my friends can name all of The Stones' members, but haven't got a clue who Mick Taylor is. If Taylor played in my city, and I went with friends, do you think they'd be more reluctant to see him or not? If they know he is a former Stone, they'll go. If they know nothing about the man, they'll see it as yet another boring blues concert, and don't go.

JumpingKentFlash

i tend to agree with you...It sure would help open a lot of doors for you...A former Rolling Stone is better then a John Doe that nobody knows!

Quote
JumpingKentFlash

Quote
StonesTod

Quote
JumpingKentFlash

Quote
Gazza

Quote
JumpingKentFlash
If neither Was, Jagger or Richards confirmed that Taylor did overdubs, and Taylor said he did, why would people believe Taylor? Is it because people don't like the Stones media machine and just disagrees with it for the sake of it and because it's too spin-doctory, or do they have any hard evidence (your ears don't count) that there actually was a recent session with Taylor doing overdubs?

Its got nothing to do with spin doctoring or media machines. Although if you want to open that can of worms with regard to Stones announcements in recent years which turned out to be untrue, it could be a long evening! The only spin I see seems to come from people who take everything Keith says at face value. I couldnt give a bollocks whether Taylor added overdubs or not, personally.

One guy says he played on a record, one other guy - who was 3,000 miles away - says the claim isnt accurate and that there's been no contact with him for years (which is untrue in itself) and two other guys who were most involved with mixing the record wont DENY it when theres no logical reason for them to do so.

And BEFORE anything was confirmed about what was happening with bonus material, one poster on this site mentioned inside info that Taylor HAD been given some material to overdub. Before it was even a rumour. It was dismissed by some as highky unlikely. Yet a couple of months later here we are with various band members unable to get a story straight about whether he did or not - and the subject himself claiming that he did (when he has nothing to gain by confirming or denying it).

So Taylor has nothing to gain you say? Would that be apart from more people at his concerts and boosted music sales?

you gotta be kidding, kent.

Why would I be? You don't think that the more you associate yourself with a band like The Stones, the more money you will get? Let me tell you one thing: Many of my friends can name all of The Stones' members, but haven't got a clue who Mick Taylor is. If Taylor played in my city, and I went with friends, do you think they'd be more reluctant to see him or not? If they know he is a former Stone, they'll go. If they know nothing about the man, they'll see it as yet another boring blues concert, and don't go.

of course - but you honestly think whether he played or didn't play new licks on an old EOMS-era track is going to have any impact on number of people going to one of his little shows? get real....

Mick has not to my knowledge played on his history with the stones........Do his concert posters say "ex rolling stone" or "former member of the greatest rn r band" etc. etc.so why would he do the overdubs just to promote his status ?

He just does what he does. GET WELL SOON MICK.


sc uk

it suprises me that people expect the stones to remember who played what on material that was recorded nearly 40 yrs ago. that's like asking someone what they had for breakfast on july 10th 1971. a person's memories can be part truth and part fiction or at times a few memories can be blended into one.

Quote
Rocky Dijon
John Phillips related the story about Keith's remark upon hearing Taylor's solo on "Oh, Virginia" in his autobiography. Until recently that's the only place I've ever heard it referenced.

Of course, the story has much more sting when you spin it as coming from a Stones session.

That's a cheap remark.
I'am rather convinced it was with the RS,but if not it doesn't change it's impact.

>> if not it doesn't change its impact <<

... not even these parts?

Quote
Amsterdamned
When Taylor was doing all guitars and backing vocals (Keith didn't participate at all) ...
... Credits: Jagger & Richards

Taylor didn't do all the guitars and backing vocals on Oh Virginia;
Keith did play and sing on it; and the songwriting credit reads: John Phillips



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2010-05-06 20:44 by with sssoul.

Quote
with sssoul
>> if not it doesn't change its impact <<

... not even these parts?

Quote
Amsterdamned
When Taylor was doing all guitars and backing vocals (Keith didn't participate at all) ...
... Credits: Jagger & Richards

Taylor didn't do all the guitars and backing vocals on Oh Virginia
and the songwriting credit on it reads: John Phillips

I'am talking about "a hundred years ago".

Mick Taylor was a member of the Stones and all over the web site of a small club in Pa. usa it proclaimed that Mick Taylor was a former member of the Stones....And Mick even plays many of the Stones songs at his concerts.
Now he has every right to...He was a member...And that does SELL tickets
I think all Kent is saying is that more people would come and see him play if they knew he was a member of the Rolling Stones.
If he was just a no name old white blues guitar player from england no one would ever come...But say he's a former member
of the Rolling Stones then even i would pay to see him..

Quote
Amsterdamned
I am talking about "a hundred years ago".

well but the story you cited is from the Oh Virginia sessions.
so what is it that you're trying to say about A Hundred Years Ago?

Quote
ghostryder13
that's like asking someone what they had for breakfast on july 10th 1971.

fruit loops and oj

Keith did say to Mick Taylor (according to Glyn or Andy Johns) something like "You're good live but f*cking useless on the studio" during the IORR sessions and ordered him to get out of the studio while they were mixing the album...the interview was posted here some time ago.

Quote
hot stuff
Mick Taylor was a member of the Stones and all over the web site of a small club in Pa. usa it proclaimed that Mick Taylor was a former member of the Stones....And Mick even plays many of the Stones songs at his concerts.
Now he has every right to...He was a member...And that does SELL tickets
I think all Kent is saying is that more people would come and see him play if they knew he was a member of the Rolling Stones.
If he was just a no name old white blues guitar player from england no one would ever come...But say he's a former member
of the Rolling Stones then even i would pay to see him..

As far as I know Mick doesn't play "many of the Stones songs at his concerts".
Mick himself doesn't use his former and important membership of the RS as propaganda for his gigs. I can imagine those club do. But suggesting that Taylor is lying about his overdub activities for the Exile rerelease in order to attrack a larger audience and in the end to 'earn' more money is simply plain madness.

Quote
hot stuff
Mick Taylor was a member of the Stones and all over the web site of a small club in Pa. usa it proclaimed that Mick Taylor was a former member of the Stones....And Mick even plays many of the Stones songs at his concerts.
Now he has every right to...He was a member...And that does SELL tickets
I think all Kent is saying is that more people would come and see him play if they knew he was a member of the Rolling Stones.
If he was just a no name old white blues guitar player from england no one would ever come...But say he's a former member
of the Rolling Stones then even i would pay to see him..

there's nobody disputing that. but to suggest that he'd be talking up playing new licks on an old stones track would somehow promote his own ticket sales is ridiculous.

Oh..I agree with that...I do think if he were to play on a entire new stones album that would get him new fans..
bu just doing 1 over dub won't get him any new fans unless its a huge hit...
Plus Taylor wouldn't play on one song or album just to sell a few more tickets anyway..(jagger would)..ha..

Amsterdamned, with sssoul made the same point I tried to make using sarcasm.

There is a world of a difference between the two stories.

The story in John Phillips' autobiography, PAPA JOHN is about a session for a song he wrote "Oh, Virginia" - produced by Mick and Keith who sang and played on the track - that features a stunning Taylor solo - and Keith's comic reaction to it. I stress comic because the remark about hating Taylor isn't said with malice. Is it an admission of envy? Sure, who expects two guitarists - especially former bandmates - not to be competitive? Was it good natured? Yes, a session Mick and Keith produced for an artist they signed to their own label featuring an ex-bandmate who was still very much part of their professional circle 1975-1977 wasn't likely to be ill-met.

Contrast that with the story you heard (not sure of your source) where the same remark is made during the GOATS HEAD SOUP sessions about "100 Years Ago" a song credited to Jagger/Richards where you claim Richards doesn't contribute anything to the song and that it is all Taylor.

Seriously, you can't see the difference? Yet I'm guilty of making a cheap remark in pointing it out. Go figure.

When did the interview with Keith take place?

Quote
with sssoul

Quote
Amsterdamned
I am talking about "a hundred years ago".

well but the story you cited is from the Oh Virginia sessions.
so what is it that you're trying to say about A Hundred Years Ago?

That a Stones Song can
be great with Taylor on guitar only and without Keith.Difficult he?
"You're good live but f*cking useless on the studio" makes Keith remarks even worse.
in this case.

Might as well throw in my two cents on the "Plundered My Soul" debate. My ears don't detect Keith's playing on the track, but I could certainly be wrong. I think the opening is Jagger via Pro Tools. I hear Taylor throughout and can belive Taylor did the overdub in January 2010 as some have claimed.

That said, would Taylor overdubbing on a new Stones single boost concert attendance? Of course it would, just as his solo on Joan Jett's "I Hate Myself For Loving You" earned him attention 20-odd years ago. I don't think he's lying about his contribution personally, but he has every reason to spread it word of mouth among fans because he can use the buzz it will generate, however small. There's also the small matter that he likely is legally prevented from stating his involvement in any press interviews.

I quite believe what the source who broke the story alleged - Don Was told him not to repeat the Taylor story because Keith would be furious. Keith and Mick played the outtakes. Keith agreed legally to Mick writing new lyrics and cutting vocals, but didn't want anything more than light musical overdubbing. If Taylor did an eleventh hour overdub on "Plundered My Soul" with Jagger and Was, it was without Keith's knowledge and legal permission. Had they approached Keith to do it, he would have been tied up working with Steve Jordan, Waddy Wachtel, and Patti Smith on the Johnny Depp film, HAPPY at the time and Jagger and Was couldn't delay any longer in wrapping the project up so they resolved to leave Keith out of the loop.

Some people here claim to have heard an earlier mix with a Taylor line that was the most obvious overdub and are puzzled by its removal. I think they answered their question by stating it was an obvious overdub. Others have called Keith a liar or out of touch/uninvolved because he denied Taylor overdubbed for the project. Rubbish, he said what he thought was the truth. This isn't one of his Keith-isms where he rambles on giving you a good story. He said no to Taylor's involvement and that he would know. Legally, he should have. He was lied to and that was the story the insider who broke the news relayed here months ago. Is Keith aware of it now? Most likely and there's probably been some action between Jane Rose and Jagger if not Keith and Jagger as a result.

Quote
ghostryder13
it suprises me that people expect the stones to remember who played what on material that was recorded nearly 40 yrs ago. that's like asking someone what they had for breakfast on july 10th 1971. a person's memories can be part truth and part fiction or at times a few memories can be blended into one.

in those days i doubt they could've told you who played on a track the next day!

Quote
Rocky Dijon
That said, would Taylor overdubbing on a new Stones single boost concert attendance? Of course it would,

explain? i don't get how this would work. assuming he resumes his touring in a couple of weeks, there's correlation betwen his involvement in PMS and the number of people attending the shows? i really doubt it - those who know who MT is/was will be there accordingly.....

Quote
kissinc***incannes

Quote
ghostryder13
it suprises me that people expect the stones to remember who played what on material that was recorded nearly 40 yrs ago. that's like asking someone what they had for breakfast on july 10th 1971. a person's memories can be part truth and part fiction or at times a few memories can be blended into one.

in those days i doubt they could've told you who played on a track the next day!

Well, Mick has on occasion played with the press about such things.

Paint It Black was just going to be like a beat group number. If you'd been at the session it was like one big joke. We put Bill on piano and Bill plays in this funny style. He goes bi-jing, bi-jing, bi-jing, and all that sort of stuff and we went running about going bi-jing, bi-jing, bi-jing and that's how it all started. It was just one big joke. It was in Los Angeles. And we just stuck the sitar on because some geezer came in. He was in a jazz group playing sitar in his pyjamas. And we said Oh, that'll sound good because it's got this thing that goes "g-doing, doing, doing", etc.

- Mick Jagger, 1966

Quote
straycatuk
Mick has not to my knowledge played on his history with the stones........Do his concert posters say "ex rolling stone" or "former member of the greatest rn r band" etc. etc.so why would he do the overdubs just to promote his status ?

He just does what he does. GET WELL SOON MICK.


sc uk

The only time I saw him 4 years ago, the poster said "Mick Taylor - Ex Rolling Stones"

JumpingKentFlash

Quote
Rocky Dijon
Amsterdamned, with sssoul made the same point I tried to make using sarcasm.

There is a world of a difference between the two stories.

The story in John Phillips' autobiography, PAPA JOHN is about a session for a song he wrote "Oh, Virginia" - produced by Mick and Keith who sang and played on the track - that features a stunning Taylor solo - and Keith's comic reaction to it. I stress comic because the remark about hating Taylor isn't said with malice. Is it an admission of envy? Sure, who expects two guitarists - especially former bandmates - not to be competitive? Was it good natured? Yes, a session Mick and Keith produced for an artist they signed to their own label featuring an ex-bandmate who was still very much part of their professional circle 1975-1977 wasn't likely to be ill-met.

Contrast that with the story you heard (not sure of your source) where the same remark is made during the GOATS HEAD SOUP sessions about "100 Years Ago" a song credited to Jagger/Richards where you claim Richards doesn't contribute anything to the song and that it is all Taylor.

Seriously, you can't see the difference? Yet I'm guilty of making a cheap remark in pointing it out. Go figure.

Well let me put it this way:I can hear the difference.Cannot You? And that's no sarcasm.