Tell Me :
Talk
As guests for a little while...
No one replaced Ian, no one replaced Bill. Their positions were filled.
It's safe to say that the band felt him to be good addition, or at least some in the band. Filled might be a better description but the media takes liberties with titles.
Talk about your favorite band.
For information about how to use this forum please check out forum help and policies.
Chuck Leavell replaced Stu, but could Dickie Betts have replaced Mick Taylor?
Posted by:
The Sicilian
()
Date: March 31, 2016 04:03
The Stones seemed to buy into the Allman Brothers style with the addition of Chuck Leavell after Ian Stewart's passing, but I think a real nice fit would have been Dickie Betts joining the band after Mick Taylor abruptly left.
Listening to and watching some retro videos of the the Allman Brothers lately, I've wondered if Dickie Betts would have been a good replacement for Mick Taylor? He is a very good guitarist with a very similar style to Mick Taylor. He is pretty much a stand still player that does not dominate the stage with posing, instead with some hard bluesy playing, and he sings quite well. Like Keith, Betts has his moments of self indulgence. Maybe they would have been too good for each other.
Can you imagine their sound weaving together? Betts would have brought an edge to the Stones. But could he have survived with a very subtle and conservative Jagger? Could Dickie Betts and Keith Richards meshed like Betts and Duane Allman did?
Listening to and watching some retro videos of the the Allman Brothers lately, I've wondered if Dickie Betts would have been a good replacement for Mick Taylor? He is a very good guitarist with a very similar style to Mick Taylor. He is pretty much a stand still player that does not dominate the stage with posing, instead with some hard bluesy playing, and he sings quite well. Like Keith, Betts has his moments of self indulgence. Maybe they would have been too good for each other.
Can you imagine their sound weaving together? Betts would have brought an edge to the Stones. But could he have survived with a very subtle and conservative Jagger? Could Dickie Betts and Keith Richards meshed like Betts and Duane Allman did?
Re: Chuck Leavell replaced Stu, but could Dickie Betts have replaced Mick Taylor?
Posted by:
BILLPERKS
()
Date: March 31, 2016 05:28
English band yo. Woody perfect fit.
Re: Chuck Leavell replaced Stu, but could Dickie Betts have replaced Mick Taylor?
Posted by:
Cooltoplady
()
Date: March 31, 2016 05:39
This topic has to be the biggest laugh of all time. What do you suggest next? Adding Weird Al on accordion?
Re: Chuck Leavell replaced Stu, but could Dickie Betts have replaced Mick Taylor?
Posted by:
dmay
()
Date: March 31, 2016 05:41
Betts would have to have been sober and straight to be with the Stones. Don't get me wrong. I love Betts playing with the ABB and some of his solo stuff from the early daze and when he's been on the wagon. Otherwise, no. Betts playing lends itself well to long solos/jams based on jazz/blues improvisation, but as for fitting into the Stones sound and song structures, well, no. Betts, in his prime, would have outplayed Keith regarding guitar, but they would have never been simpatico. Ego and all that sh*t. Go listen to some of the early ABB stuff, especially Elizabeth Reed. Whole different thing than the Stones.
Re: Chuck Leavell replaced Stu, but could Dickie Betts have replaced Mick Taylor?
Posted by:
Brstonesfan
()
Date: March 31, 2016 05:47
No...he is a great player but not like MT.
Re: Chuck Leavell replaced Stu, but could Dickie Betts have replaced Mick Taylor?
Posted by:
boogaloojef
()
Date: March 31, 2016 05:48
Dickey Betts would probably have punched Jagger's lights out if Mick Jagger tried to tell him what to do and order him around.
Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 2016-03-31 05:51 by boogaloojef.
Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 2016-03-31 05:51 by boogaloojef.
Re: Chuck Leavell replaced Stu, but could Dickie Betts have replaced Mick Taylor?
Posted by:
Hairball
()
Date: March 31, 2016 06:04
Dicky Betts = great guitar player > wouldn't gel with Stones.
_____________________________________________________________
Rip this joint, gonna save your soul, round and round and round we go......
_____________________________________________________________
Rip this joint, gonna save your soul, round and round and round we go......
Re: Chuck Leavell replaced Stu, but could Dickie Betts have replaced Mick Taylor?
Posted by:
StonedAsia
()
Date: March 31, 2016 06:34
Silly topic. Though Betts is a great guitarist, he's not Stones material. Wouldn't gel, doesn't have the look nor the personality. Chuck, love him or hate him, is a not an out-front guy nor is he 'officially' a Stone. He's backup.
Re: Chuck Leavell replaced Stu, but could Dickie Betts have replaced Mick Taylor?
Posted by:
The Sicilian
()
Date: March 31, 2016 07:25
So let me ask this, if Betts replaced Taylor, what type of record and sound would the Stones have released? Black n Blue? Goats Head Soup?
Re: Chuck Leavell replaced Stu, but could Dickie Betts have replaced Mick Taylor?
Posted by:
Brstonesfan
()
Date: March 31, 2016 07:41
Harvey Mandel and Wayne Perkins did fine..
Re: Chuck Leavell replaced Stu, but could Dickie Betts have replaced Mick Taylor?
Posted by:
DandelionPowderman
()
Date: March 31, 2016 08:57
Quote
Brstonesfan
Harvey Mandel and Wayne Perkins did fine..
As guests for a little while...
Re: Chuck Leavell replaced Stu, but could Dickie Betts have replaced Mick Taylor?
Posted by:
DandelionPowderman
()
Date: March 31, 2016 10:26
«Betts, in his prime, would have outplayed Keith regarding guitar»
Is that what you guys are hearing, when Keith plays with a flashy lead player – that he is outplayed?
That's interesting. I don't hear that. Because of Keith's sound and approach to playing, he can play with anyone and still sound like Keith Richards.
And I sincerely doubt Betts would outplay anyone when there is more than one string involved at a time – love his playing, though, but he needs time and space. He's a jam band-guitarist.
Is that what you guys are hearing, when Keith plays with a flashy lead player – that he is outplayed?
That's interesting. I don't hear that. Because of Keith's sound and approach to playing, he can play with anyone and still sound like Keith Richards.
And I sincerely doubt Betts would outplay anyone when there is more than one string involved at a time – love his playing, though, but he needs time and space. He's a jam band-guitarist.
Re: Chuck Leavell replaced Stu, but could Dickie Betts have replaced Mick Taylor?
Posted by:
Come On
()
Date: March 31, 2016 10:43
I wished for Lennon to take Taylors Place back then 1974...
2 1 2 0
2 1 2 0
Re: Chuck Leavell replaced Stu, but could Dickie Betts have replaced Mick Taylor?
Posted by:
Stoneburst
()
Date: March 31, 2016 11:28
Dickey Betts is one of the all-time greats, but this wouldn't have worked for a couple of reasons:
1) There is an Allman Brothers-ish side to MT's playing, but there isn't really a Stonesy side to Dickey's, so far as I've heard.
2) Dickey is (or at least was) a more prolific composer than MT, and the Stones wouldn't have given him an outlet for his own work.
3) Like boogaloojef said, he is and was too big a deal in his own right to fit in with Mick and Keith.
4) He's had addiction problems as bad as / possibly worse than Ronnie's for years, and unlike Wood he's never really dealt with them.
1) There is an Allman Brothers-ish side to MT's playing, but there isn't really a Stonesy side to Dickey's, so far as I've heard.
2) Dickey is (or at least was) a more prolific composer than MT, and the Stones wouldn't have given him an outlet for his own work.
3) Like boogaloojef said, he is and was too big a deal in his own right to fit in with Mick and Keith.
4) He's had addiction problems as bad as / possibly worse than Ronnie's for years, and unlike Wood he's never really dealt with them.
Re: Chuck Leavell replaced Stu, but could Dickie Betts have replaced Mick Taylor?
Posted by:
pepganzo
()
Date: March 31, 2016 11:41
Quote
Stoneburst
Dickey Betts is one of the all-time greats, but this wouldn't have worked for a couple of reasons:
1) There is an Allman Brothers-ish side to MT's playing, but there isn't really a Stonesy side to Dickey's, so far as I've heard.
2) Dickey is (or at least was) a more prolific composer than MT, and the Stones wouldn't have given him an outlet for his own work.
3) Like boogaloojef said, he is and was too big a deal in his own right to fit in with Mick and Keith.
4) He's had addiction problems as bad as / possibly worse than Ronnie's for years, and unlike Wood he's never really dealt with them.
Re: Chuck Leavell replaced Stu, but could Dickie Betts have replaced Mick Taylor?
Posted by:
TheGreek
()
Date: March 31, 2016 13:54
my exact sentiment can you imagine the turmoil ? it would have been a soap opera for sure daily fodder for the rags !!!Quote
boogaloojef
Dickey Betts would probably have punched Jagger's lights out if Mick Jagger tried to tell him what to do and order him around.
Re: Chuck Leavell replaced Stu, but could Dickie Betts have replaced Mick Taylor?
Posted by:
loog droog
()
Date: March 31, 2016 17:23
Imagine the response from Dickie if he were in Ronnie's place during the '78 SNL performance when Mick gave him a tongue-lashing on live TV....
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2016-03-31 17:23 by loog droog.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2016-03-31 17:23 by loog droog.
Re: Chuck Leavell replaced Stu, but could Dickie Betts have replaced Mick Taylor?
Posted by:
RobertJohnson
()
Date: March 31, 2016 17:31
I do not accept your proposition that Chuck Leavell replaced Ian Stewart. Rather he turned the typical raw Stones style into the smooth Vegas style of an Oldie band of their own.
Re: Chuck Leavell replaced Stu, but could Dickie Betts have replaced Mick Taylor?
Posted by:
Koen
()
Date: March 31, 2016 17:34
I can already imagine Jagger introducing him at every show, "and on guitaaaaar, we have Dickieeee, who plays faster than he shoots" 
Re: Chuck Leavell replaced Stu, but could Dickie Betts have replaced Mick Taylor?
Posted by:
24FPS
()
Date: March 31, 2016 19:28
Quote
RobertJohnson
I do not accept your proposition that Chuck Leavell replaced Ian Stewart. Rather he turned the typical raw Stones style into the smooth Vegas style of an Oldie band of their own.
No one replaced Ian, no one replaced Bill. Their positions were filled.
Re: Chuck Leavell replaced Stu, but could Dickie Betts have replaced Mick Taylor?
Posted by:
The Sicilian
()
Date: March 31, 2016 22:38
Quote
RobertJohnson
I do not accept your proposition that Chuck Leavell replaced Ian Stewart. Rather he turned the typical raw Stones style into the smooth Vegas style of an Oldie band of their own.
It's safe to say that the band felt him to be good addition, or at least some in the band. Filled might be a better description but the media takes liberties with titles.
Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.
Online Users
a bigger nut , britstones , ChrisL , EddieByword , exilestones , irishjohnnie , JMoisica , jumpingjackflash5 , keefmick , letitloose6 , Mabru , makemeburnthecandle , Martin90 , micha063 , MisterDDDD , MisterO , NashvilleBlues , philrock90 , Racca1962 , rastakeith , spunky , teleblaster , TooTight , TumblinDice76 , TW2019 , UGK56 , usetobesampeg
Guests:
2117
Record Number of Users:
206
on June 1, 2022 23:50
Record Number of Guests:
9627
on January 2, 2024 23:10