Wow another DVD to come out with Taylor

[www.amazon.com]

this could be payback time for Taylor with L&G DVD, Stones in Exile, Reissue of Exile, a new generation of fans to discover MT as that guy who played those extended solos live and not the weavers.

play that guitar boy

Good ol' OpenG makes a return

It's been a long time

When is the "Ladies & Gentleman" DVD coming out?

Taylor, of course, is/was a great guitarist. I think his solos added a lot to the Stones sound, although I think most people were about tired of extended guitar solos by the time he left the band, so it was probably good timing from that point of view.

Since YaYas is the only widely available recording of his live soloing, I'm not sure many people have heard most of the work that the Taylorites love so much. Even if they did, most people don't care that much for guitar solos, especially "extended" ones...

Quote
texas fan

Since YaYas is the only widely available recording of his live soloing, I'm not sure many people have heard most of the work that the Taylorites love so much. Even if they did, most people don't care that much for guitar solos, especially "extended" ones...

Most people don't care that much for good music.

One needs only to listen to "Winter" as MT brilliantly ascends and decends the fretboard throughout the song leading to one of the best guitar solos on any Stones recording to date. This is exactly what many of us who actually play guitar refer to ( I think I speak for a few of us) which has sadly been missing since the 1970's.

One 99 minute dvd from Chrome Dreams. hmm....nothing that says it's just bits from GS, L&G, CSBlues or the YaYasbonus stuff. Nothing that says interviews only. Wonder what it is. Are we ramping up to MT standing by the horn players and playing on the 12-13 tunes a night from his era (that make up every setlist) while MJ, KR and RW prowl the planks and stage on the 2011=12 tour?

Quote
Midnight Toker
One needs only to listen to "Winter".

I disagree. Alot of people would be up shit's creek if they only took my advice and didn't factor in additional well-rounded opinions/facts from other posters here! But thanks Midnight T, that was very nice of you to say.

Quote
texas fan
Taylor, of course, is/was a great guitarist. I think his solos added a lot to the Stones sound, although I think most people were about tired of extended guitar solos by the time he left the band, so it was probably good timing from that point of view.

Since YaYas is the only widely available recording of his live soloing, I'm not sure many people have heard most of the work that the Taylorites love so much. Even if they did, most people don't care that much for guitar solos, especially "extended" ones...

I think that Taylor would have been able to travel along the music and its development by the years, don't you!

I feel that Mick Taylor still are the best guitarist along with Keith and I certainly hope they will bring him back again some time very soon!

Been Stoned since 1964 and still am!

Kleermaker, I think one can make the argument that the general public's appreciation for real music (a difficult term to define or defend) has declined steadily since the early - mid 70s. However, I think it's also true that the self-indulgent soloing was out of hand by then, and there is/was a lot to be said for the punk movement's emphasis on emotion and energy, and its criticism of pointless showing off. Anyway...

Fan Since 1964, I don't think we'll ever know if Taylor would have been able to stay with the music as it developed. Certainly, it would not have been beyond him, technically. Still, I question whether he would have been a good fit musically, primarily because I question whether he would have wanted to pursue that approach to music -- I think he wanted to do what he did. There may have been personality or business issues, but I think the musical issues are often overlooked.

Quote
texas fan
Kleermaker, I think one can make the argument that the general public's appreciation for real music (a difficult term to define or defend) has declined steadily since the early - mid 70s. However, I think it's also true that the self-indulgent soloing was out of hand by then, and there is/was a lot to be said for the punk movement's emphasis on emotion and energy, and its criticism of pointless showing off. Anyway...

Fan Since 1964, I don't think we'll ever know if Taylor would have been able to stay with the music as it developed. Certainly, it would not have been beyond him, technically. Still, I question whether he would have been a good fit musically, primarily because I question whether he would have wanted to pursue that approach to music -- I think he wanted to do what he did. There may have been personality or business issues, but I think the musical issues are often overlooked.

True! We don't and will not know! What I meant was that such a talented musician as MT, wouldn't have any troubles to adopt!

Been Stoned since 1964 and still am!

I say bring back Ry Cooder

____________________________________



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2010-06-12 06:03 by 71Tele.

Quote
texas fan
Taylor, of course, is/was a great guitarist. I think his solos added a lot to the Stones sound, although I think most people were about tired of extended guitar solos by the time he left the band, so it was probably good timing from that point of view.

Since YaYas is the only widely available recording of his live soloing, I'm not sure many people have heard most of the work that the Taylorites love so much. Even if they did, most people don't care that much for guitar solos, especially "extended" ones...

Taylor didn't solo all that much on Ya-Yas, let alone "extended" solos. It is a great document of his overall tasteful playing, and his playing against Keith. The solos on Carol, Queenie, Live With Me, and half of Sympathy were Keith. Taylor on Ya-Yas plays great rhythm, counter-rhythm and fills. His one really memorable solo was on Love In Vain.

People who think we prefer Taylor because of extended soloing don't get it, and I sometimes wonder if the people who constantly equate Taylor with extended soloing have actually listened to Stones records like Ya-Yas and Exile. How many "extended solos" did Taylor have on Exile? I would say none. And yet I can't imagine the album without his playing. It's overall taste, skill and nuance. That's what was great about Taylor in the Stones.



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 2010-06-12 05:51 by 71Tele.

Quote
71Tele
His one really memorable solo was on Love In Vain.

Have you even listened to Sympathy For The Devil on Ya-Ya's?

Quote
akgameboy

Quote
71Tele
His one really memorable solo was on Love In Vain.

Have you even listened to Sympathy For The Devil on Ya-Ya's?

A million times. Yes, the second solo on SFTD. I should have mentioned that.

Taylor is an incredibly skillful player, and you are dead right 71 Tele, it is all about taste, skill and nuance. I was watching Dead Flowers from the Ladies And Gentlemen film and it is all there to behold. It is sometimes the subtle little details Taylor brings to a song that gives me goosebumps as much as his soloing, although i could never imagine anyone topping his solo playing on Love In Vain. No wonder he seemed such an introverted player on stage, a lot of his playing requires such great skill and precision. And everything he played seemingly connected with the soul, he had an innate knack of truly stirring the senses. His playing was never simply about filling in a space between areas of a song, it was always about creating something of great beauty.

Quote
Edward Twining
Taylor is an incredibly skillful player, and you are dead right 71 Tele, it is all about taste, skill and nuance. I was watching Dead Flowers from the Ladies And Gentlemen film and it is all there to behold. It is sometimes the subtle little details Taylor brings to a song that gives me goosebumps as much as his soloing, although i could never imagine anyone topping his solo playing on Love In Vain. No wonder he seemed such an introverted player on stage, a lot of his playing requires such great skill and precision. And everything he played seemingly connected with the soul, he had an innate knack of truly stirring the senses. His playing was never simply about filling in a space between areas of a song, it was always about creating something of great beauty.

Yes, precision. Taylor has had a lot of bashing here because his style of playing is not deemed sloppy enough. Somehow, playing with taste and dynamics is considered "not rock & roll". What utter hogwash! The fact also seldom mentioned is that Keith played with a lot more discipline when Taylor was in the band. For example, he is just as on fire in '73 as Taylor is. His rhythm licks are really interesting and well-thought out. In later years "weaving" became a euphemism for sloppiness, IMO.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2010-06-12 10:31 by 71Tele.

The Stones never rocked harder than when Taylor was in the group, either. Just listen to those 1973 bootlegs from Australia and Europe. I think the punk era had a problem with musical sophistication, mainly because they couldn't reach that level of playing themselves. Keith was definitely more on the ball with Taylor in the group also. Creativity is the key word.

Quote
71Tele
Taylor didn't solo all that much on Ya-Yas, let alone "extended" solos. It is a great document of his overall tasteful playing, and his playing against Keith. The solos on Carol, Queenie, Live With Me, and half of Sympathy were Keith. Taylor on Ya-Yas plays great rhythm, counter-rhythm and fills. His one really memorable solo was on Love In Vain.

People who think we prefer Taylor because of extended soloing don't get it, and I sometimes wonder if the people who constantly equate Taylor with extended soloing have actually listened to Stones records like Ya-Yas and Exile. How many "extended solos" did Taylor have on Exile? I would say none. And yet I can't imagine the album without his playing. It's overall taste, skill and nuance. That's what was great about Taylor in the Stones.

Just to clarify -- Tele, I don't disagree with any of this. I used the phrase "extended solos" in response to OpenG, who started this thread and used that phrase, and I was talking about people generally tiring of extended solos by the mid 70s. I did not intend to say that Taylor took extended solos or that people were tired of him in particular.

In fact, I agree that Taylor obviously made it a point to fit in with the Stones sound. I think it would be good for Taylor to have that structure again. While i think it's accurate to say that he became less restrained at the very end (fall 73), he rarely overplayed and when (in my opinion) he did, it was not during solos, but during verses...

Quote
71Tele

Quote
texas fan
Taylor, of course, is/was a great guitarist. I think his solos added a lot to the Stones sound, although I think most people were about tired of extended guitar solos by the time he left the band, so it was probably good timing from that point of view.

Since YaYas is the only widely available recording of his live soloing, I'm not sure many people have heard most of the work that the Taylorites love so much. Even if they did, most people don't care that much for guitar solos, especially "extended" ones...

Taylor didn't solo all that much on Ya-Yas, let alone "extended" solos. It is a great document of his overall tasteful playing, and his playing against Keith. The solos on Carol, Queenie, Live With Me, and half of Sympathy were Keith. Taylor on Ya-Yas plays great rhythm, counter-rhythm and fills. His one really memorable solo was on Love In Vain.

People who think we prefer Taylor because of extended soloing don't get it, and I sometimes wonder if the people who constantly equate Taylor with extended soloing have actually listened to Stones records like Ya-Yas and Exile. How many "extended solos" did Taylor have on Exile? I would say none. And yet I can't imagine the album without his playing. It's overall taste, skill and nuance. That's what was great about Taylor in the Stones.

His soloing on Stray Cat Blues on Ya Ya's is one extended solo cut in pieces. But what a pieces and what a variation! I would call his soloing on this song here also memorable. As sharp as a knife. After Taylor the Stones fell off a cliff, as those English guys said when they talked about Exile, Taylor and live boots. They knew exactly what they were talking about.

Quote
texas fan

Quote
71Tele
Taylor didn't solo all that much on Ya-Yas, let alone "extended" solos. It is a great document of his overall tasteful playing, and his playing against Keith. The solos on Carol, Queenie, Live With Me, and half of Sympathy were Keith. Taylor on Ya-Yas plays great rhythm, counter-rhythm and fills. His one really memorable solo was on Love In Vain.

People who think we prefer Taylor because of extended soloing don't get it, and I sometimes wonder if the people who constantly equate Taylor with extended soloing have actually listened to Stones records like Ya-Yas and Exile. How many "extended solos" did Taylor have on Exile? I would say none. And yet I can't imagine the album without his playing. It's overall taste, skill and nuance. That's what was great about Taylor in the Stones.

Just to clarify -- Tele, I don't disagree with any of this. I used the phrase "extended solos" in response to OpenG, who started this thread and used that phrase, and I was talking about people generally tiring of extended solos by the mid 70s. I did not intend to say that Taylor took extended solos or that people were tired of him in particular.

In fact, I agree that Taylor obviously made it a point to fit in with the Stones sound. I think it would be good for Taylor to have that structure again. While i think it's accurate to say that he became less restrained at the very end (fall 73), he rarely overplayed and when (in my opinion) he did, it was not during solos, but during verses...

Saying Taylor is sometimes overplaying is something like saying you're sometimes 'oversexing'. Sounds like a strange problem to me.

Did Taylor "overplay" on the '73 tour? Even I thought so when I first heard the boots (around '76 I think) but I have revised my opinion since then. The whole band is on fire, and the intensity matched Taylor's "overplaying". Taylor IN a strong group made him better and forced him to play melodically around and within the strong structures. I would agree that it is true that once cut loose from the group he became "just another" blues-based guitar-hero type, and I find that aspect of his playing extremely boring, as I just personally don't enjoy that type of music. But his playing in the Stones helped them to scale new heights musically. Too bad it didn't last. At the time he left, he probably thought the group would self-destruct within a couple of years, given the state of the band and certain members.

Several people in this thread have pointed out that Taylor brought out the best in Keef. I could not agree more with this sentiment. Neither Woody or Keith were good for each other on any sort of musical level. Ron may have kept the group together with his "what me worry attitude." However, on any musical level - he brought out the worst in Keith Richards.

Quote
Shawn20
Several people in this thread have pointed out that Taylor brought out the best in Keef. I could not agree more with this sentiment. Neither Woody or Keith were good for each other on any sort of musical level. Ron may have kept the group together with his "what me worry attitude." However, on any musical level - he brought out the worst in Keith Richards.

Ron made Keith lazy by giving him a sidekick who he knew would never challenge him musically. At a number of shows I saw throughout the 90s, Keith's guitar was twice as loud as Ronnie's and Keith simply played whatever he wanted, whenever he wanted - good or bad. Ronnie had to find a few spaces to play on, and when he did you could barely hear him. That's also the period when Keith really stopped driving the band with his rhythm and started posing a lot, hitting a chord and then dangling is leg and throwing his arm up, all that sort of nonsense that was anything but musical. There were shows where they were like two bad boys at the back of the class, mainly concerned with lighting cigarettes and goofing. Maybe entertaining for a few minutes, but hardly providing long-lasting musical memories. I love Keith, but it's really a shame his ego couldn't abide another strong player. Taylor might have stayed in the band had this dynamic been different.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2010-06-12 23:40 by 71Tele.

I love the chemistry between Jagger and Taylor that gave rise to the albums Goat's Head Soup and It's Only Rock & Roll, These two albums are absolute jewels and (at my tastebutts at least) the best the Stones produced in the studio from 1969 onwards. It is said that Richards was not very prominent on these albums and that it was very much a product of the Jagger Taylor axes, if this is true, than clearly i'm more a Taylor man than i thought (provided Jagger is on the steering wheel). Having said so i do not agree with the above statement that Wood brought out the worst of Keith, that was Keith's own choice and no one else but Keith himself can be blamed for it. Apart from that the combination Wood Richards (again to my taste at least) actually brought out the best Stones guitar sound with Some Girls, which still beats the studio work of the Taylor years by far.

Quote
behroez
I love the chemistry between Jagger and Taylor that gave rise to the albums Goat's Head Soup and It's Only Rock & Roll, These two albums are absolute jewels and (at my tastebutts at least) the best the Stones produced in the studio from 1969 onwards. It is said that Richards was not very prominent on these albums and that it was very much a product of the Jagger Taylor axes, if this is true, than clearly i'm more a Taylor man than i thought (provided Jagger is on the steering wheel). Having said so i do not agree with the above statement that Wood brought out the worst of Keith, that was Keith's own choice and no one else but Keith himself can be blamed for it. Apart from that the combination Wood Richards (again to my taste at least) actually brought out the best Stones guitar sound with Some Girls, which still beats the studio work of the Taylor years by far.

OK, blame Keith for it, but it still happened, either way. Some Girls is great, but the excitement of that record (as well as the great guitar combinations) was never matched again, and they've had 32 years to try. As much as I like Some Girls, saying that one record beats the studio work of all the Taylor years is not credible to me.

With or without Mick Taylor they could never get to the point of intensity that was achieved in Street Fighting Man in the way they did that is on Ya-Ya's or tours after - what Taylor did on that is searing.

However, they have played SFM with intensity since then but only on the Licks tour.

And as far as if Taylor could have fit in with the musical direction that they took after he left, which is basically Some Girls onward, why would anyone assume such a thing? What makes anyone think they would have wound up with albums that sounded the way they did them if he was still in the band? That kind of thinking is off the charts.

Quote
skipstone
With or without Mick Taylor they could never get to the point of intensity that was achieved in Street Fighting Man in the way they did that is on Ya-Ya's or tours after - what Taylor did on that is searing.

However, they have played SFM with intensity since then but only on the Licks tour.

And as far as if Taylor could have fit in with the musical direction that they took after he left, which is basically Some Girls onward, why would anyone assume such a thing? What makes anyone think they would have wound up with albums that sounded the way they did them if he was still in the band? That kind of thinking is off the charts.

I don't know that anyone thinks this. Obviously the direction they took is at least partially the result of the players they had. We don't know what those albums would have sounded like or whether they would have been better or worse. I feel a little more confident in my opinion of the live shows, as we can compare apples to apples on many of the songs.