just something thats been on my mind...

Dont get me wrong, i love Mick Taylor. he's in my opinion the best guitarist the stones have ever had...but wasnt it sort of obvious he was going to quit from the time he entered the band? i mean anyone with eyes could see he wasto technical of a player to be in a blues band. Keith is so free when he plays and spontanous, and Mick is..for lack of a better term..boring. in ladies & Gentelmen, you can see it in the close up scenes of MT. he is a great player, but he just doesnt feel it like a bluesman should. i have a feeling i'll get shot down for this, but somebody out there has to agree.

I won't shoot you up but I don't agree. I wasn't around at the time but I feel like there was no way to know how long the Stones were gonna continue at the point that he entered the band. And he joined, then they made tons of amazing albums. So in my head, after he participated in those amazing albums, he became the guitarist they were gonna try to keep. That would be the classic lineup of that band.

But its also impossible to tell whats gonna happen to a band or how long they'll stick around. I'm a fan of stable lineups so I figured I'd have assumed they'd try and keep that lineup for as long as possible, but saying that I didn't think he would be there 30 years later is the same as saying I didn't think Charlie would be there 30 years later. Anything can happen in a band that you can't predict. But I guess I disagree with the main point that the Stones was a "stepping stone" for him. I wouldn't have seen it in that light.

Well, well, you have a point, but Taylor should have had more success after he left!

well the MT era is in my opinion the best. i'm not saying he didnt make the band good or successful. i'm just saying for a blues band he was so technical. great player, just didnt fit the loop.

Quote
ripthisjoint908
well the MT era is in my opinion the best. i'm not saying he didnt make the band good or successful. i'm just saying for a blues band he was so technical. great player, just didnt fit the loop.

True but they were also making their best albums, IMO of course. So I see your point that he might not have fit in, but I figured if they were as successful as they had ever been they would have held onto that for as long as possible and not thought about losing him just because he didn't fit. Money was more important than band relations I would think.

Quote
RollingFreak

Quote
ripthisjoint908
well the MT era is in my opinion the best. i'm not saying he didnt make the band good or successful. i'm just saying for a blues band he was so technical. great player, just didnt fit the loop.

True but they were also making their best albums, IMO of course. So I see your point that he might not have fit in, but I figured if they were as successful as they had ever been they would have held onto that for as long as possible and not thought about losing him just because he didn't fit. Money was more important than band relations I would think.

agreed.

No disagreement here, but I also don't think he was the best guitarist the Stones ever had, and I don't thing the '69-'73 live period was their best, either. Also, also, the albums he had a significant role in, SF, EOMS, GHS, and IORR, are proof of the fact that he had very little to do with the quality of the studio output of the band. When Mick and Keith were absolutely ON (BB, LIB, SF, EOMS), the records were insanely good. When they weren't on (GHS, IORR), the records suffered. Taylor is a wonderful player, but I believe strongly that his importance to the Stones is vastly overrated by some people.

yea but thats all a matter of opinion. from a technical standpoint, i believe Mick was the best. Granted, i cant argue with the GHS and IORR, because those records could have been better, but personally the '69-'73 period will always be the best to me.

Remember Taylor never produced the records and in many cases was mixed down or never let fly, it would be interesting to hear the raw tapes and solo's that were rejected by the Producers.

Mick Taylor did what was expected of him the time he was a member of the band, namely played the guitar solos ...I suppose Taylor felt 1974 that he was more needed in improvisational music together with that kind of musicians...sad for him that the money was in pure rock'n'Roll...(that's what we like)

2 1 2 0

Page, Blackmore, Green and many others did little after leaving a succesful group, as many of us know who play for next to nothing, its still good fun, money or no money. Some musicians cry poor when their doen to their last million, poor guys.