I think that Mick Taylor's first album has been unfairly overlooked. It was virtually ignored at the time and dismissed by Rolling Stone magazine in its review. But with all the discussions here about songwriting and what Taylor might have contrbuted, it is useful to point out the quality of songs like "Broken Hands", "SW5", "Baby I Want You", any of which would have fit nicely onto a Rolling Stones album. Mick proved he could write and sing, and I think this record is still among the best of any solo Stones disc. Some thinly veiled barbed references to his former colleagues here in "Leather Jacket", and he sneaks in the "brown Sugar" riff in the fade.


<object width="560" height="315"><param name="movie" value="

?version=3&amp

Here's another one I really like, featuring a great vocal and his distinctive slide.

<object width="560" height="315"><param name="movie" value="

?version=3&amp

When "Mick Taylor" came out in '79, it sounded like he hadn't left the house since 1974.

Back then, five years was an eternity in pop music. Funk, disco, punk, new wave had happened since he left the Stones. And parts of this record sounded like they were recorded two weeks after IORR. The music on the album may have been fine, but sadly, at the time it was perceived as yesterday's papers.

it wasn't ignored when it came out. it was essentially five years in the making and stones fans and critics ate it up.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2011-12-11 22:06 by StonesTod.

Never heard them before...sound nice........as Loogdroog mentiond not sure if I feel the same in '79

__________________________

Quote
StonesTod
it wasn't ignored when it came out. it was essentially five years in the making and stones fans and critics ate it up.

it peaked in the US at #119 , I think that is pretty damn close to being completely ignored by everybody but the most hardcore fans, also I thought most critics savaged it when it first came out?

Rolling Stone dismissed it with the comment: "Mick Taylor is an instrumentalist best heard on other people's records". I still remember it. Yes, the music was out of fashion in 1979, but that doesn't diminish the quality of the material. Many things that were in fashion in 1979 are an embarrassment now.

there was plenty of praise...and charting at 119 ain't that bad...like i said, stones fans ate it up. let's not rewrite history here...over there, fine...but not here...

Quote
StonesTod
there was plenty of praise...and charting at 119 ain't that bad...like i said, stones fans ate it up. let's not rewrite history here...over there, fine...but not here...

Stones fans, maybe. General public and critics? Not so much.

Well, I think Mick Taylors solo albums is as least as good as David Knopflers or Tom Fogertys...

2 1 2 0

Quote
71Tele

Quote
StonesTod
there was plenty of praise...and charting at 119 ain't that bad...like i said, stones fans ate it up. let's not rewrite history here...over there, fine...but not here...

Stones fans, maybe. General public and critics? Not so much.

general public has rarely picked up on stones solo stuff. as to critics - i recall the majority of them giving micky t a big thumbs up...

Quote
StonesTod

Quote
71Tele

Quote
StonesTod
there was plenty of praise...and charting at 119 ain't that bad...like i said, stones fans ate it up. let's not rewrite history here...over there, fine...but not here...

Stones fans, maybe. General public and critics? Not so much.

general public has rarely picked up on stones solo stuff. as to critics - i recall the majority of them giving micky t a big thumbs up...

Ok, not in the mood to argue today. I just like the album.

Quote
71Tele

Quote
StonesTod

Quote
71Tele

Quote
StonesTod
there was plenty of praise...and charting at 119 ain't that bad...like i said, stones fans ate it up. let's not rewrite history here...over there, fine...but not here...

Stones fans, maybe. General public and critics? Not so much.

general public has rarely picked up on stones solo stuff. as to critics - i recall the majority of them giving micky t a big thumbs up...

Ok, not in the mood to argue today. I just like the album.

ok, i won't rewrite your mood, then...

I just checked allmusic.com -- they give it 4 1/2 stars (out of 5); a higher rating than the attending review would seem to warrant:

Mick Taylor's self-titled debut album is rather different than one would imagine for an ex-Rolling Stone and former Bluesbreaker. As to whether this is due to the conformist sound of the lighter numbers ("Leather Jacket," "Baby I Want You," etc.) or the fact that his singing voice is so much more average than Jagger or Mayall's is debatable. In any case, Mick Taylor is an undeniably attractive and often surprising album. The highlight and thrust of the album is Taylor's astounding guitar playing. His fusion of blues and rock styles, and, of course, his slide guitar work, is constantly impressive. "Slow Blues," "Giddy-Up," and "Spanish/A Minor" feature some particularly gob-smacking guitar solos. Lyrically, Mick Taylor is a little lightweight, but at worst competent. Similarly, some of the music is at times cheesy, attempting to blend in with the sound of the time. Nevertheless, Mick Taylor's first attempt at a solo recording is a fine effort and one that improves with time.

[www.allmusic.com]

Besides taking 5 years to complete and release, the real crime as far as I'm concerned is that nothing was done (that I know of) to promote the record. It wasn't until late '86 that Taylor played anything off of it. Earlier in '86 (when Taylor was playing in a poor man's version of the Bluesbreakers), the audience was very aware of this album and requesting songs from it. But those songs were not to played until the next version of Taylor's band appeared late that year.

I recall that the label pushed it with a full page ad in Billboard at least.

Of course nearly every album put out by a major label got that treatment back then it's true - but most of those landed in the top 100.

Agree the music does sound dated for 1979, but it doesn't seem too many people got to hear it to even make that judgement.

As a kid, I held off buying this one for ages. I'd bought Ronnie and Bill's albums long before Taylor's. By the time I finally picked it up in the late eighties, I was struck by the fact that it is a much better album than I expected. It's always reminded me a bit of David Gilmour's first solo album from the same era. They're not really commercial albums, but they offer first-rate musicianship. Anyone who loves Taylor's playing with the Stones should own this album. Inevitably, a couple of the tracks always leave me wishing these had Jagger vocals.

Inevitably, a couple of the tracks always leave me wishing these had Jagger vocals.

...Yep William that's what was needed ...



ROCKMAN

>it doesn't seem too many people got to hear it to even make that judgement.

Who was prevented from buying it?

Quote
StonesTod
there was plenty of praise...and charting at 119 ain't that bad...like i said, stones fans ate it up.

It was eaten up by only a small minority of Stones fans. Ronnie's "Gimme Some Neck", released just a few weeks earlier, peaked at #45. Of course, Ronnie had the benefit of having people buy his album as a souvenir of the New Barbarians tour. I'm sure if MT had toured in '79, his album would have sold much better.

Quote
tatters

Quote
StonesTod
there was plenty of praise...and charting at 119 ain't that bad...like i said, stones fans ate it up.

It was eaten up by only a small minority of Stones fans. Ronnie's "Gimme Some Neck", released just a few weeks earlier, peaked at #45. Of course, Ronnie had the benefit of having people buy his album as a souvenir of the New Barbarians tour. I'm sure if MT had toured in '79, his album would have sold much better.

stones fans ARE a small minority. why are you arguing with me?

Was this album recorded with the Stones Mobile Studio?

Quote
71Tele
I think that Mick Taylor's first album has been unfairly overlooked. It was virtually ignored at the time and dismissed by Rolling Stone magazine in its review. But with all the discussions here about songwriting and what Taylor might have contrbuted, it is useful to point out the quality of songs like "Broken Hands", "SW5", "Baby I Want You", any of which would have fit nicely onto a Rolling Stones album. Mick proved he could write and sing, and I think this record is still among the best of any solo Stones disc. Some thinly veiled barbed references to his former colleagues here in "Leather Jacket", and he sneaks in the "brown Sugar" riff in the fade.


<object width="560" height="315"><param name="movie" value="

?version=3&amp

Ronnie, Keith, Bill and Charlie solo albuns are much better than MT solo album.

Quote
carlostones10

Quote
71Tele
I think that Mick Taylor's first album has been unfairly overlooked. It was virtually ignored at the time and dismissed by Rolling Stone magazine in its review. But with all the discussions here about songwriting and what Taylor might have contrbuted, it is useful to point out the quality of songs like "Broken Hands", "SW5", "Baby I Want You", any of which would have fit nicely onto a Rolling Stones album. Mick proved he could write and sing, and I think this record is still among the best of any solo Stones disc. Some thinly veiled barbed references to his former colleagues here in "Leather Jacket", and he sneaks in the "brown Sugar" riff in the fade.


<object width="560" height="315"><param name="movie" value="

?version=3&amp

Ronnie, Keith, Bill and Charlie solo albuns are much better than MT solo album.

I don't agree. Most of Ron's albums after the first one (which was great) are the sort of thing you like if you like that sort of thing. Only Keith's first one was very good. I do have a soft spot for Bill's "Monkey Grip", however.

Is this album out of print?

It's so very lonely, you're 2,000 Light Years from home

It was recently reissued.

Quote
WilliamPatrickMaynard
It's always reminded me a bit of David Gilmour's first solo album from the same era. They're not really commercial albums, but they offer first-rate musicianship.

Yes, and also there was a Robby Krieger album in the early 80s called 'Versions', all instrumental, that reminded me of the instrumentals on the Taylor album. I wish Taylor had done an all instrumental album like this.






Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 2011-12-12 07:34 by tatters.

Its a good album and to be honest, Jagger is the only one that can sing and Taylor is the only one that can write a decent instrumental, I didn't enjoy Woods or Richards solo albums but enjoyed Jagger and Taylor's efforts.

Woods"I've got my own album to do"
and
Richards"Talk is cheap"

are the best efforts out of the Stones camp

May be Jaggers "Alfie" was a good attempt too.

Quote
jamesjagger
Woods"I've got my own album to do"
and
Richards"Talk is cheap"

are the best efforts out of the Stones camp

May be Jaggers "Alfie" was a good attempt too.

Woods"I've got my own album to do" before the stones .(nitpicking, i know)


Richards"Talk is cheap" is really expensive for one song " you dont move me " which is great , the others ....

we can only speculate what the glimmers could have done with the tracks on richards and taylors first solo albums,and maybe one of jaggers later ones.
( unless you can find one on she's the boss)
a LOT of potential there . possibly a GREAT lost stones album like tattoo you.