I see so many request that Mick Taylor needs to play more the one song. After reading so many post of this nature, I felt it was time to start posting again. I use to be on here quite frequently a few years ago and stopped, but after going to my first Stones concert, which lucky for me was the 2nd show in Chicago, which is still getting amazing reviews, I've decided to make this thread!

First and foremost, the concert Friday night was incredible not only for my 1st show but also being a huge fan in general, I feel the Stones really owned the stage that night!

Secondly, seeing Mick Taylor was awesome as I have loved his work in the earlier years as well!

Now with all that being said...I feel as though,if Mick Taylor wasn't there, the show would have been just as incredible! I didn't buy my ticket to see the Mick Taylor show, I paid to see the Stones...one of the greatest bands of all time!
Yes, Mick Taylor is good, but lets not forget Mick was good for the Stones during his small time with the Stones in the early 70's.
He is the one who choose to leave them, not the other way around...so the fact they ask him to play on this tour as a special guest, should be an honor not only to the fans but Mick as well.

Mick Taylor is a part of the Stones's history, but he didn't not continue on the path that was paved by Keith, Jagger, Charlie & Ronnie...these four have made the Stones who they are today....

I was a huge fan of Taylor and his work and thought that Ronnie couldn't hold a Flame to him but now after watching Ronnie bust his a$$ on stage...I'm starting to have mixed feelings! I felt the long drawn out solos from Mick this past Friday, still couldn't hold a candle to Ronnie the whole night!

The Stones still played hell of great songs that night without Taylor, from Give Me Shelter, Gloom and Doom, Jumping Jack Flash and more...and had so much crowd enthusiasm, participation, and excitement if not more than when Taylor was on the stage!

I just can't believe I was able to see the Rolling Stones be the Rolling Stones we have all come to love throughout the years even without Taylor!

So would you have gone or go see the Stones 50th concert if Mick Taylor wasn't a special guest?

When I saw the Stones in 2005 I was very dissapointed in the peformance and disenchanted after years of Vegas stye tours and decided then I would not pay to see them again. Upon seeing the PPV last December I changed my mind. Hearing Mick Taylor, one my favorite guitarists, play with his old band again, seeing the band stripped down and Ronnie and Keith actual playing their guitars won me over. Really happy I got to see them in Oakland!

Yes - They played very well in Brooklyn in December without MT.

Yes. I enjoyed his presence but it had nothing to do with my attendance.

My reading of your post is that you are in the process of starting to take a Woodist stance in the discussion about who has been the most adequate guitarist of the Stones in addition to Keith Richards. With that as starting point you invite posters to answer if they would go (or have gone) to concert of this "50 Years and Counting"-Tour in case Mick Taylor had not been a special guest.

I myself rather take the history of the band's personnel as given, whether that guitarist, in addition to Keith, has been Brian Jones, Mick Taylor or Ron Woods. With that as basis, I would have gone to the concert(s) (which I shall on July 6th and 13th), even if Mick Taylor had not been a special guest. However, Mick Taylor playing on some songs is an extra attraction.

As to my own stance on another question: My dream is that Mick Taylor will be invited to work with the Stones full time in a three guitar approach after July 13th, hopefully starting in the studio.

Mick Taylor, and an $85 ticket were the only thing to get me to go this time around. I thought Mick and Ronnie sounded great on the PPV but Keith was lame. I thought I'd be seeing a lesser version of a tired stage show. Then I actually saw them and it was better than I thought it would be, especially Keith. But it was Mick Taylor who kicked the whole thing up a notch. They lazed through the first few songs and seeing Gimme Shelter with Lisa Fischer again was okay, but I've seen it too many times. The guest stars didn't do much. Emotional Rescue 'rescued' the first part of the show. It really wasn't until Taylor came out for Midnight Rambler that it felt like a real Stones show. The encore was great and Keith was dangerous on JJF.

This doesn't erase the problems. The whole Chuck, Darryl, Bernard and Lisa thing could be gone tomorrow and I wouldn't mind. Mick still needs to be a little more daring, and to not quit shoving a yawn worthy SFTD down our throats night after night.

I never would have paid top dollar for this tour, and I have for tours past. It doesn't have to be this way, but they'd have to mix it up some for me to interested. I'm sure it will all make a good DVD set at some point.

Absolutley. And not because of some faute de mieux feeling. But very enthusiastically.

Quote
Title5Take1
Absolutley. And not because of some faute de mieux feeling. But very enthusiastically.

Yup.

All are great points to be made...I must say I'm not putting one guitarist over the other or trying to compare Keith to Ronnie and Ronnie to Taylor ..that's like comparing apples to oranges all have different sounds and are deadly on the guitar!

It is a treat to see Taylor, but don't you think that Jagger, Ronnie, Charlie and Keith have stepped it up a notch? Yes, they are really only playing the warhorses, alternating one or two songs, but I feel they have put their years of experience, emotions of life as a Stone and time of rehearsal and countless takes into this tour and are truly showing us who the Stones are.....

If I were MT...I'd feel honored to think, WOW, they invited me to play after all this time and who they (the Stones) have become without me.

Nope- not at these prices! MT is what gives the Stones that extra lift. I have seen them enough already when there prices were far, far more reasonable.

Unfortunately despite being promised an "Expanded Role" - it really didn't happen and me and many of my friends feel a bit duped. Oh well.

I did before. I would again.

IF the damn things were affordable.

I would definitely buy a ticket if Mick Taylor weren't playing. I won't be going to as many shows due to the excessive ticket prices, but I'm there, with or without Mick Taylor.

...of course ....why not?



ROCKMAN

Of course. It's the Rolling F'ing Stones!

Of course. It's cool that MT is along but he's not the reason the show was so good. The band did its job and Keith has made a terrific comeback, but it's Mick Jagger who took that strong framework and elevated it this time.

yes, saw them in Brooklyn I left very happy. I am a Tailorite but I've got tickets for Boston 1 and Philly 1 so it appears I'll get the smaller Taylor sampler because of bad luck. I do have a problem with that but can't switch nights and still want to go. I have a funny feeling though that things may change as we approach Hyde Park, despite all the questions he still may play a complete show back in London. I so wish I could be there.

I was at the 2nd Chicago show too and it was Amazing!! Classic!!

I would not have past this show up even if Mick T. Wasn't playing.

I road tripped my ass to Chicago to see Mick/Keith/Charlie/Ronnie, The Rolling Stones!!

I am on both sides of the coin & here's why:

Mick Taylor on Midnight Rambler was magical! Pure & Simple! When I was watching/listening to them play & they finished the verse section to go into the first part of the jam it lit up and took off! It was brilliant! They were smoking & they knew it & as you were watching you knew it! It kicked serious ass! So did C.Y.H.M.K.! But nowhere as good as M.R.

Now, the other side, I also heard KILLER versions of G.S.,I.O.R.R,SMU & Happy!....and Taylor wasn't playing then! You know what I mean?

The Stones w/out Taylor sound really good, tight & mean..they haven't sounded this good in a long time!

These tours are so well planned out in advance, don't you think that the Stones themselves wouldn't know what it would mean to bring Taylor in on these shows?

You think Ronnie is going be upstaged by a 'guest'? He's been around longer than both Taylor & Jones put together, and he's still fighting for his due. Of course he's going to step up his game! And it showed Fri! His solo on Y.C.A.G.W.Y.W reminded me of the solo off L.Y.L! He sounds great.

They all do! They've all stepped up there game.

Taylor isn't MAKING the shows by himself! His solos wouldn't sound so great if the band wasn't good & tight for him to play over!!

Taylor's solos on M.R. & Knocking were good but they wouldn't sound nearly as good,if the Stones weren't playing like they currently are!

I completely disagree with your "long drawn out solos" comment, let them play as long as they want!

Taylor & The Stones are inspiring each other I think, because it is all a mix of show business, professional & personal rivalry, ego, w/ one upmanship & their tremendous legacy making for a hell of a tour & sound!

I expected a good show, but NOT this good!

I still would have gone w/ out Taylor

"Well my heavy throbbers itchin' just to lay a solid rhythm down"



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2013-06-03 08:02 by Marhsall.

great post. and i agree.

Yes I would. That is, the tickets I can afford. Mick Taylor's presence didn't encourage me to buy a ridiculously priced ticket, but with or without Taylor, if the price is right at around $85, I will buy tickets to the Stones. The way I see it, its a bonus that Taylor will be there. And I can say Taylor being there justifies me buying tickets to another Stones show, but realistically, I would have spend $100 if that was an option no matter what if the Stones are coming to town. They won't be around much longer and I can afford to spend $100 on them each time they come around.

I certainly don't think they're playing better than they have in the past. Keith has barely got it together enough to play adequately. There's not much snap to Charlie's playing. Ronnie is playing good, and Mick has actually gotten a little better than I remember. I think people are fooling themselves. Yes, they'll have a song come off really well and people will be excited, but it doesn't extend over the whole concert. It seems to take them half the concert just to warm up.

And they've done some really weird, off putting things. After the 2nd LA show it was assumed that Taylor would have more and more input. Then they immediately dashed those hopes, after telling us in interviews that there would be a three-guitar attack.

The $85 ticket started out as a great idea, but for every person who got a lottery ticket in the pit, there were a hundred more in LIMITED VIEW seats. And these are really bad LIMITED VIEW seats that are barely legal to sell. And, according to themselves, they were supposed to offer more on the day of the concert. That stopped in Anaheim. They were supposed to notify us on e-mail of when they'd be available. That never happened.

It's nice that they're playing and all, but it's not a real feel good tour. If you're wealthy, or stupid, I'm sure $600 or $450, or even $250 isn't that big a deal to you. But there's something that sticks in my craw that they would even ask for such prices, especially for a show that's their least imaginative in memory.

Yes, but would I still buy a ticket if Chuck Leavell wasn't on the tour?
Hardly!

2 1 2 0

Let me answer the question this way: I made sure I bought a ticket because Mick Taylor is on the tour, which makes the tour something special, more so than it would have been were it just another Stones tour despite the stripped-down stage arrangement.

It's a part of their history, and with Taylor on stage, they sound that much closer to the early 70s version of their former selves. Having not been around to take in a Stones show in the early 70s, I made sure I got a ticket because for the next tour Mick Taylor won't be with them. It's nice to witness that extra bit of Stones history, to make the show more memorable.

Also, on the next tour, even without Mick Taylor, I'll buy a ticket if they keep the stripped-down stage line-up, because they sound leaner and harder, more like The Stones, rather than having their sound softened by all those extra side players. Nothing against them personally, but if Blondie et al. are invited back, I'll just stay home next time.

How many Stones does it take to screw in a light bulb onstage? Answer: It should only take four (plus the bass and keys and Bobby Keys).

Dunno, I took a pass on all the 2003 to 2012 period because I wanted to stay with the memory of the fantastic 2002 Oakland Arena show and because, yes, there was nothing "new" really as has been pointed out above, well nothing "exciting". Having said that I don't think we knew for sure Taylor would be around when the O2 shows went on sale and I still got one, got lucky with a pit so I knew it would be a unique experience.

Then there was the Trabendo and the Bondy rehearsal and meeting all these great fans so I was hooked big time again. Seeing Taylor arrive on MR was truly something, totally elevated the show, but I'd go back to HP even if he wasn't there ;-)

How stripped down is it? Isn't Blondie pretty much the only missing ingredient from every tour since Voodoo? (There was even more on the Steel Wheels tour). Even on No Security they started out stripped down but eventually everybody ended up on stage.

i hadn't seen a show since Steel Wheels, but, as you mention, 2013 is wayy stripped down in comparison. also the guitars are mixed loud, IMO, which helps make it sound raw. chuck's keyboards and the backing vocals were usually barely audible.

I don't know enough about arena acoustics to know how much of that was simply related to where i sat.

<Would You Still Buy a Ticket if Mick Taylor wasn't on the Tour?>

Of course, it's the Rolling Stones!

Quote
Rockman
...of course ....why not?

+1

I love the Rolling Stones

Yes - Mick Taylor is a bonus, but he's not the only reason these shows have been worth seeing.

Regards the question of "are they playing better than in the past" - it depends which bit of the past you're talking about. Certainly much better than the recent past of ABB.

Quote
Green Lady
Yes - Mick Taylor is a bonus, but he's not the only reason these shows have been worth seeing.

Regards the question of "are they playing better than in the past" - it depends which bit of the past you're talking about. Certainly much better than the recent past of ABB.

I have heard the European fans complain about Keith on the 2007 leg of the ABB tour. I heard him in 2006, after the accident, and he was fine, although I don't remember much about his playing. I saw them at Dodger Stadium and it wasn't as much about the music as it was about the show. I've seen them on every tour since '89 and No Security is the best I remember Keith. I definitely don't think Keith is playing great on this tour, although there are moments. People seem to be satisfied when the guitars are right on a song.

Personally I think there's a lot of nostalgia on this tour, although they pulled it off better on Steel Wheels. We're a quarter of a century down the road from that tour. The 60s are even further back in our collective memory. Emotional Rescue feels like a long time ago now.

Quote
24FPS

Quote
Green Lady
Yes - Mick Taylor is a bonus, but he's not the only reason these shows have been worth seeing.

Regards the question of "are they playing better than in the past" - it depends which bit of the past you're talking about. Certainly much better than the recent past of ABB.

I have heard the European fans complain about Keith on the 2007 leg of the ABB tour. I heard him in 2006, after the accident, and he was fine, although I don't remember much about his playing. I saw them at Dodger Stadium and it wasn't as much about the music as it was about the show. I've seen them on every tour since '89 and No Security is the best I remember Keith. I definitely don't think Keith is playing great on this tour, although there are moments. People seem to be satisfied when the guitars are right on a song.

Personally I think there's a lot of nostalgia on this tour, although they pulled it off better on Steel Wheels. We're a quarter of a century down the road from that tour. The 60s are even further back in our collective memory. Emotional Rescue feels like a long time ago now.

He was very uneven in 2007. He was bad in Helsinki and in Stockholm, but was back in fine form in Oslo and in Copenhagen.