Tell Me :
Talk
All right my friend! I knew I couldn't be the only one who feels this way! No, I don't have Handsome Girls but I do have a recording of a radio broadcast of Memphis '78 that's pretty damn good. '78 was also the 1st time I saw the Stones. And for all the Wood bashers, I'll say this: He is inconsistent. On a bad night he can be sloppy and blow it. On a good night he can be amazing. And yes, in general he meshes much better with Keith.
Hey sd60.
This is a different show than what you have been hearing since the 70's, so it is new to you. Carry on.
Just as long as the guitar plays, let it steal your heart away
Waiting for a post elaborating The Stones destroyed their own essence.
Always.
Forever.
Archives can be kept closed....
I too agree with much of that.
I wouldn't for one second want to belittle MT's exquisite recorded work with the band... but he persistently overplayed live,often with little feel for the structure of the song.
A wonderful musician...but one who needed guidance [and sometimes restraint] to give of his best.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2011-12-23 15:26 by Spud.
Then the Stones were destroying themselves, because MT was a Stone. In contrary some people think that he influenced essentially the strongest and best records the Stones ever made, studio and live. MR on Ya Ya's without MT? Can't imagine this. Further, if you have ears, you can hear Keith on many tracks of Brussels very well (@#$%&; Dancing with Mr. D., YCAGWYW, Honky Tonk, JJF).
Songs like Midnight rambler and YCAGWYW have the greatest rhythm guitar playing which I have ever listened to on record - and it was not Mick Taylor! What always blew me off since I listened first to the Brussels recording back in 1977 was the overall great sound, the brillant recording. Charlie's drums never sounded better, Bill is great as usual, the interplay between Keith and Mick Taylor is simply incredible, even if they did not change in playing rhythm and lead, Jagger was on top form, and there were hardly any overdubs if you compare it with audience recordings from that tour. It is the Stones at their peak, and any band could only be happy about such a great album
However, I am convinced that Ron Wood suited them better later on as guitarist, and I do appreciate some live recordings from that era very much but nothing could match Brussels or some other recordings from 1973. But one of the reasons why Mick Taylor left in 1974 could have been that he saw no possibility of topping his achievements on the 1973 tour. Therefore Ron was a good choice, and I have always regarded any Taylor OR Wood discussions as rather ridiculous.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2011-12-23 17:34 by saltoftheearth.
A summary of some pros and cons. I totally buy the prons ( § 1 of your mail), but don't get to the §2 of of your mail regarding Wood suited them later. But that type of discussion will never end.
I don't want to burn you at the stake. I just feel rather sorry for you. It's not about Taylor in '73, it's about the intensity of the band's performance. Not only does Live Licks not have Taylor, it doesn't have Wyman. So what you really are saying is you prefer the Vegas-era Stones to the Stones at their peak with five actual members. Your right to prefer it, but your statements that Brussels is about lead guitar are completely off base, imo.
That's it!
and Charlie? Charlie's peak is 1969...but when comparing Brussels to later Charlie was better than Charlie...and Jimmy Miller
Well, I can't bother the Taylor-Wood discussion...you like Taylor, or you like Wood, or both
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2011-12-23 19:42 by Sacke.
Bollocks! Wyman was way better later in the 70s and in the early 80s, imo.
And there is no doubt Keith developed strongly as a player during the 70s. We´ve got the recordings to prove it.
BTW, I think there is a huge difference between Taylor in 69 and Taylor in 73. In 69 he was well integrated in the band musically, in 73 he sometimes overrode or played to himself, imo.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2011-12-23 20:02 by DandelionPowderman.
"Keith developed strongly as a player". Really? He's on fire on that rhythm in '72 and (especially) '73. But his playing on the three non-El Mocambo sides of Love You Live put the lie to what you say. He is a much-diminished player on that record. Personally, I think he peaked in '73 and has never been as good since.
There certainly is a difference between Taylor in '69 and Taylor in '73. but as I have said before, this had as much to do with Richards' desire to play open-G rhythm in '73 as any musical choices Taylor made. Richards' choice to play more rhythm necessitated Taylor playing a more traditional lead guitarist role - yet Taylor is constantly criticized here for "overplaying".
Talk about your favorite band.
For information about how to use this forum please check out forum help and policies.
Brussels 1973 - Some More Thoughts
Posted by:
stonesdan60
()
Date: December 23, 2011 11:35
OK - I finally downloaded The Brussells Affair and have been listening to it a lot. It's not radically new to me as I've owned a bootleg since the mid seventies. As a guitar player myself, I used to judge music by the talent of the lead guitar player. I loved The Stones and thought Mick Taylor was a god. Later on I grew to realize there's more to music than the guitar solo. What I really love is a great song, great performance and the overall ESSENCE of the music. Having said that, I have some thoughts that will probably get me burned at the stake by many here. That's OK. Cyber-fire doesn't hurt as much as real fire. I much prefer the Stones with Ron Wood. Listening to Brussels, my current impression is that Mick Taylor, as technically great as he was stepped all over the ESSENCE of the Stones sound and vibe. As one writer - who's name I forget - wrote in a review once: "The sound of the Stones is the sound of CHORDS." Yes, those crashing crunching, gritty Keith chords in front of the rest of the band supporting Jagger's live interpretations of their great songs. Don't get me wrong. Brussells is a smoking hot performance and Mick Taylor is awesome if lead guitar is what you like most in a band. He's certainly way better technically than Wood. What I don't like is that Taylor treats the bulk of every song as if it's all a guitar solo. His riffs - brilliant as they are- seem like they're stealing the show from the vocals and Keith's playing, which should be the more prominent backing to Mick's vocals. With Ron Wood, it stopped being about the guitar solos, and I'm glad. It once again became about the SONGS, and the ESSENCE of the sound- that gritty chordal interplay between the guitars. That's the sound I prefer. So prepare to burn me at the stake here: I just listened to Brussells again. Right now I'm listening to Live Licks. I'm enjoying Live Licks much more. If I'm in the mood for great lead guitar I'll listen to Eric Clapton or Jeff beck. If I'm in the mood for great live Stones, I'll put on something from the Ron Wood era. Personally, I think Live Licks and the Shine A Light soundtrack is some of the best live Stones out there. (Although I haven't had a chance to see or hear Some Girls Live In Texas yet). Note: My all time favorite live Stones is Ya Yas, but at that point, Taylor had not yet started to over-ride everything with non-stop lead playing. So get a stake and some kindling wood for the burning. Tie Me Up. Flip The Switch.
Re: Brussels 1973 - Some More Thoughts
Posted by:
MadMax
()
Date: December 23, 2011 12:55
StonesDan60 you are 95% spot on! I agree that Ronnie is a much better companion than Taylor but surely you must have Handsome Girls?? Stones Tour of '78 is the peak of Rock N Roll overall.
Taylor destroyed the essence of what The Stones was LIVE. Just check out Brown Sugar especially in '72. CAN'T HAVE BEEN TOO MUCH FUN FOR KEITH TO GO OUT TO THAT STAGE AND KNOW THAT A LITTLE (WELL TALLER) 22-YEAR OLD WOULD DESTROY A BUNCH OF BABIES THAT HE HAD BEEN WORKING FOR SO LONG (Even if BS mostly is Jagger's)You can hardly hear Keith's strat in all the Les Paul mess Taylor causes. On record he was held in a proper leash and rightly so. Thanks God Ronnie was invited to join the band.
Taylor destroyed the essence of what The Stones was LIVE. Just check out Brown Sugar especially in '72. CAN'T HAVE BEEN TOO MUCH FUN FOR KEITH TO GO OUT TO THAT STAGE AND KNOW THAT A LITTLE (WELL TALLER) 22-YEAR OLD WOULD DESTROY A BUNCH OF BABIES THAT HE HAD BEEN WORKING FOR SO LONG (Even if BS mostly is Jagger's)You can hardly hear Keith's strat in all the Les Paul mess Taylor causes. On record he was held in a proper leash and rightly so. Thanks God Ronnie was invited to join the band.
Re: Brussels 1973 - Some More Thoughts
Posted by:
Anonymous User
()
Date: December 23, 2011 13:17
Taylor destroyed the essence of what The Stones was LIVE. <MadMax>
Your name says it all.
Your name says it all.
Re: Brussels 1973 - Some More Thoughts
Posted by:
stonesdan60
()
Date: December 23, 2011 13:23
Quote
MadMax
StonesDan60 you are 95% spot on! I agree that Ronnie is a much better companion than Taylor but surely you must have Handsome Girls?? Stones Tour of '78 is the peak of Rock N Roll overall.
Taylor destroyed the essence of what The Stones was LIVE. Just check out Brown Sugar especially in '72. CAN'T HAVE BEEN TOO MUCH FUN FOR KEITH TO GO OUT TO THAT STAGE AND KNOW THAT A LITTLE (WELL TALLER) 22-YEAR OLD WOULD DESTROY A BUNCH OF BABIES THAT HE HAD BEEN WORKING FOR SO LONG (Even if BS mostly is Jagger's)You can hardly hear Keith's strat in all the Les Paul mess Taylor causes. On record he was held in a proper leash and rightly so. Thanks God Ronnie was invited to join the band.
All right my friend! I knew I couldn't be the only one who feels this way! No, I don't have Handsome Girls but I do have a recording of a radio broadcast of Memphis '78 that's pretty damn good. '78 was also the 1st time I saw the Stones. And for all the Wood bashers, I'll say this: He is inconsistent. On a bad night he can be sloppy and blow it. On a good night he can be amazing. And yes, in general he meshes much better with Keith.
Re: Brussels 1973 - Some More Thoughts
Posted by:
Munichhilton
()
Date: December 23, 2011 15:12
Quote
stonesdan60
It's not radically new to me as I've owned a bootleg since the mid seventies.
Hey sd60.
This is a different show than what you have been hearing since the 70's, so it is new to you. Carry on.
Re: Brussels 1973 - Some More Thoughts
Posted by:
SwayStones
()
Date: December 23, 2011 15:21
Quote
stonesdan60
Right now I'm listening to Live Licks. I'm enjoying Live Licks much more. .
Re: Brussels 1973 - Some More Thoughts
Posted by:
marcovandereijk
()
Date: December 23, 2011 15:21
Just as long as the guitar plays, let it steal your heart away
Re: Brussels 1973 - Some More Thoughts
Posted by:
shortfatfanny
()
Date: December 23, 2011 15:21
Quote
MadMax
Taylor destroyed the essence of what The Stones was LIVE.
Waiting for a post elaborating The Stones destroyed their own essence.
Always.
Forever.
Archives can be kept closed....
Re: Brussels 1973 - Some More Thoughts
Posted by:
SwayStones
()
Date: December 23, 2011 15:22
Quote
MadMax
.
Taylor destroyed the essence of what The Stones was LIVE. . Thanks God Ronnie was invited to join the band.
Re: Brussels 1973 - Some More Thoughts
Posted by:
Spud
()
Date: December 23, 2011 15:25
Quote
stonesdan60
Listening to Brussels, my current impression is that Mick Taylor, as technically great as he was stepped all over the ESSENCE of the Stones sound and vibe. As one writer - who's name I forget - wrote in a review once: "The sound of the Stones is the sound of CHORDS." Yes, those crashing crunching, gritty Keith chords in front of the rest of the band supporting Jagger's live interpretations of their great songs. Don't get me wrong. Brussells is a smoking hot performance and Mick Taylor is awesome if lead guitar is what you like most in a band. He's certainly way better technically than Wood. What I don't like is that Taylor treats the bulk of every song as if it's all a guitar solo. His riffs - brilliant as they are- seem like they're stealing the show from the vocals and Keith's playing, which should be the more prominent backing to Mick's vocals. With Ron Wood, it stopped being about the guitar solos, and I'm glad. It once again became about the SONGS, and the ESSENCE of the sound- that gritty chordal interplay between the guitars. That's the sound I prefer. So prepare to burn me at the stake here: I just listened to Brussells again. Right now I'm listening to Live Licks. I'm enjoying Live Licks much more. If I'm in the mood for great lead guitar I'll listen to Eric Clapton or Jeff beck. If I'm in the mood for great live Stones, I'll put on something from the Ron Wood era. Personally, I think Live Licks and the Shine A Light soundtrack is some of the best live Stones out there. (Although I haven't had a chance to see or hear Some Girls Live In Texas yet). Note: My all time favorite live Stones is Ya Yas, but at that point, Taylor had not yet started to over-ride everything with non-stop lead playing. So get a stake and some kindling wood for the burning. Tie Me Up. Flip The Switch.
I too agree with much of that.
I wouldn't for one second want to belittle MT's exquisite recorded work with the band... but he persistently overplayed live,often with little feel for the structure of the song.
A wonderful musician...but one who needed guidance [and sometimes restraint] to give of his best.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2011-12-23 15:26 by Spud.
Re: Brussels 1973 - Some More Thoughts
Posted by:
RobertJohnson
()
Date: December 23, 2011 15:56
Quote
MadMax
StonesDan60 you are 95% spot on! I agree that Ronnie is a much better companion than Taylor but surely you must have Handsome Girls?? Stones Tour of '78 is the peak of Rock N Roll overall.
Taylor destroyed the essence of what The Stones was LIVE. Just check out Brown Sugar especially in '72. CAN'T HAVE BEEN TOO MUCH FUN FOR KEITH TO GO OUT TO THAT STAGE AND KNOW THAT A LITTLE (WELL TALLER) 22-YEAR OLD WOULD DESTROY A BUNCH OF BABIES THAT HE HAD BEEN WORKING FOR SO LONG (Even if BS mostly is Jagger's)You can hardly hear Keith's strat in all the Les Paul mess Taylor causes. On record he was held in a proper leash and rightly so. Thanks God Ronnie was invited to join the band.
Then the Stones were destroying themselves, because MT was a Stone. In contrary some people think that he influenced essentially the strongest and best records the Stones ever made, studio and live. MR on Ya Ya's without MT? Can't imagine this. Further, if you have ears, you can hear Keith on many tracks of Brussels very well (@#$%&; Dancing with Mr. D., YCAGWYW, Honky Tonk, JJF).
Re: Brussels 1973 - Some More Thoughts
Posted by:
Spud
()
Date: December 23, 2011 16:47
The 73 tour was first show I ever saw [Manchester]...and I have to admit that MT's overplaying didn't seem a problem at the time.
It's a bit like bloopers and bum notes though .
Live, they're gone in a second and don't detract from the experience ..but you don't want to hear them again every time you play the record.
That's why I've never had a problem with overdubs and "repair work" for live albums.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2011-12-23 16:54 by Spud.
It's a bit like bloopers and bum notes though .
Live, they're gone in a second and don't detract from the experience ..but you don't want to hear them again every time you play the record.
That's why I've never had a problem with overdubs and "repair work" for live albums.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2011-12-23 16:54 by Spud.
Re: Brussels 1973 - Some More Thoughts
Posted by:
liddas
()
Date: December 23, 2011 17:00
I myself prefer the RW stones, but I also admit I love MTs overplaying in 72/73. On most of those songs it worked. And I am happy that there was such a phase in the Stones evolution. It was great.
C
C
Re: Brussels 1973 - Some More Thoughts
Posted by:
saltoftheearth
()
Date: December 23, 2011 17:08
Mick Taylor did not overplay in 1972/73. He just did what they expected from him, in an era when every group was proud of a great lead guitarist.
Although I paid for the Brussels show I did not manage to download it. Why don't they release at least a small number of CDs? Then you know what you have...
Although I paid for the Brussels show I did not manage to download it. Why don't they release at least a small number of CDs? Then you know what you have...
Re: Brussels 1973 - Some More Thoughts
Posted by:
saltoftheearth
()
Date: December 23, 2011 17:34
Quote
stonesdan60
What I don't like is that Taylor treats the bulk of every song as if it's all a guitar solo. His riffs - brilliant as they are- seem like they're stealing the show from the vocals and Keith's playing, which should be the more prominent backing to Mick's vocals.
Songs like Midnight rambler and YCAGWYW have the greatest rhythm guitar playing which I have ever listened to on record - and it was not Mick Taylor! What always blew me off since I listened first to the Brussels recording back in 1977 was the overall great sound, the brillant recording. Charlie's drums never sounded better, Bill is great as usual, the interplay between Keith and Mick Taylor is simply incredible, even if they did not change in playing rhythm and lead, Jagger was on top form, and there were hardly any overdubs if you compare it with audience recordings from that tour. It is the Stones at their peak, and any band could only be happy about such a great album
However, I am convinced that Ron Wood suited them better later on as guitarist, and I do appreciate some live recordings from that era very much but nothing could match Brussels or some other recordings from 1973. But one of the reasons why Mick Taylor left in 1974 could have been that he saw no possibility of topping his achievements on the 1973 tour. Therefore Ron was a good choice, and I have always regarded any Taylor OR Wood discussions as rather ridiculous.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2011-12-23 17:34 by saltoftheearth.
Re: Brussels 1973 - Some More Thoughts
Posted by:
phd
()
Date: December 23, 2011 18:14
Quote
saltoftheearthQuote
stonesdan60
What I don't like is that Taylor treats the bulk of every song as if it's all a guitar solo. His riffs - brilliant as they are- seem like they're stealing the show from the vocals and Keith's playing, which should be the more prominent backing to Mick's vocals.
Songs like Midnight rambler and YCAGWYW have the greatest rhythm guitar playing which I have ever listened to on record - and it was not Mick Taylor! What always blew me off since I listened first to the Brussels recording back in 1977 was the overall great sound, the brillant recording. Charlie's drums never sounded better, Bill is great as usual, the interplay between Keith and Mick Taylor is simply incredible, even if they did not change in playing rhythm and lead, Jagger was on top form, and there were hardly any overdubs if you compare it with audience recordings from that tour. It is the Stones at their peak, and any band could only be happy about such a great album
However, I am convinced that Ron Wood suited them better later on as guitarist, and I do appreciate some live recordings from that era very much but nothing could match Brussels or some other recordings from 1973. But one of the reasons why Mick Taylor left in 1974 could have been that he saw no possibility of topping his achievements on the 1973 tour. Therefore Ron was a good choice, and I have always regarded any Taylor OR Wood discussions as rather ridiculous.
A summary of some pros and cons. I totally buy the prons ( § 1 of your mail), but don't get to the §2 of of your mail regarding Wood suited them later. But that type of discussion will never end.
Re: Brussels 1973 - Some More Thoughts
Posted by:
Who's Driving Your Plane?
()
Date: December 23, 2011 18:14
Shine a light soundtrack...Really?
Re: Brussels 1973 - Some More Thoughts
Posted by:
stillife
()
Date: December 23, 2011 18:28
Well i have a tottaly different opinion. Mick Taylor give the Stones the peak for their live performances. I dont get bored to listen to Brussels Affair but rarely listen to some songs of the studio album that were performed in 1973.
Were not only MT, the all band was on fire. But where can u get the zenith achieved then in the Ron Wood era? For me, Midnight Rambler played in Brussels Affair is the best live performance that I ever heard.
Were not only MT, the all band was on fire. But where can u get the zenith achieved then in the Ron Wood era? For me, Midnight Rambler played in Brussels Affair is the best live performance that I ever heard.
Re: Brussels 1973 - Some More Thoughts
Posted by:
BroomWagon
()
Date: December 23, 2011 18:32
Late sixties and especially early seventies must have been the advent of the guitar gods, Clapton, Page, again, you look around and see what else was going on.
Brussels affair has been my favourite, Midnight Rambler is definitely one of my favorite all time live tracks.
Brussels affair has been my favourite, Midnight Rambler is definitely one of my favorite all time live tracks.
Re: Brussels 1973 - Some More Thoughts
Posted by:
24FPS
()
Date: December 23, 2011 18:44
Taylor lifted the Stones to another level. He did overplay at times. Ron Wood had a few good years with the band but kind of peaked out, although 'Rough Justice' was pretty good recently. Love You Live (excepting the El Mocambo side) is a mess. In the studio the Stones eventually missed the musicianship of Taylor, and then the final blow, Bill Wyman's retirement. Brussels Affair might be Mick Taylor's peak.
Re: Brussels 1973 - Some More Thoughts
Posted by:
71Tele
()
Date: December 23, 2011 19:00
When comparing Brussels to later, not only was Taylor better than Wood, Richards was better than Richards, and Wyman was better than Wyman and Jagger was better than Jagger.
Re: Brussels 1973 - Some More Thoughts
Posted by:
71Tele
()
Date: December 23, 2011 19:04
Quote
stonesdan60
OK - I finally downloaded The Brussells Affair and have been listening to it a lot. It's not radically new to me as I've owned a bootleg since the mid seventies. As a guitar player myself, I used to judge music by the talent of the lead guitar player. I loved The Stones and thought Mick Taylor was a god. Later on I grew to realize there's more to music than the guitar solo. What I really love is a great song, great performance and the overall ESSENCE of the music. Having said that, I have some thoughts that will probably get me burned at the stake by many here. That's OK. Cyber-fire doesn't hurt as much as real fire. I much prefer the Stones with Ron Wood. Listening to Brussels, my current impression is that Mick Taylor, as technically great as he was stepped all over the ESSENCE of the Stones sound and vibe. As one writer - who's name I forget - wrote in a review once: "The sound of the Stones is the sound of CHORDS." Yes, those crashing crunching, gritty Keith chords in front of the rest of the band supporting Jagger's live interpretations of their great songs. Don't get me wrong. Brussells is a smoking hot performance and Mick Taylor is awesome if lead guitar is what you like most in a band. He's certainly way better technically than Wood. What I don't like is that Taylor treats the bulk of every song as if it's all a guitar solo. His riffs - brilliant as they are- seem like they're stealing the show from the vocals and Keith's playing, which should be the more prominent backing to Mick's vocals. With Ron Wood, it stopped being about the guitar solos, and I'm glad. It once again became about the SONGS, and the ESSENCE of the sound- that gritty chordal interplay between the guitars. That's the sound I prefer. So prepare to burn me at the stake here: I just listened to Brussells again. Right now I'm listening to Live Licks. I'm enjoying Live Licks much more. If I'm in the mood for great lead guitar I'll listen to Eric Clapton or Jeff beck. If I'm in the mood for great live Stones, I'll put on something from the Ron Wood era. Personally, I think Live Licks and the Shine A Light soundtrack is some of the best live Stones out there. (Although I haven't had a chance to see or hear Some Girls Live In Texas yet). Note: My all time favorite live Stones is Ya Yas, but at that point, Taylor had not yet started to over-ride everything with non-stop lead playing. So get a stake and some kindling wood for the burning. Tie Me Up. Flip The Switch.
I don't want to burn you at the stake. I just feel rather sorry for you. It's not about Taylor in '73, it's about the intensity of the band's performance. Not only does Live Licks not have Taylor, it doesn't have Wyman. So what you really are saying is you prefer the Vegas-era Stones to the Stones at their peak with five actual members. Your right to prefer it, but your statements that Brussels is about lead guitar are completely off base, imo.
Re: Brussels 1973 - Some More Thoughts
Posted by:
71Tele
()
Date: December 23, 2011 19:05
Quote
24FPS
Taylor lifted the Stones to another level. He did overplay at times. Ron Wood had a few good years with the band but kind of peaked out, although 'Rough Justice' was pretty good recently. Love You Live (excepting the El Mocambo side) is a mess. In the studio the Stones eventually missed the musicianship of Taylor, and then the final blow, Bill Wyman's retirement. Brussels Affair might be Mick Taylor's peak.
Re: Brussels 1973 - Some More Thoughts
Posted by:
NICOS
()
Date: December 23, 2011 19:13
I think the problem with Brussels is that the lead is too much in mix and when you finished playing Brussels the lead is still echoing in your ears for an hour... I think I have a Déjà vu....didn't we discus-thing this over and over in the past 
Brussels their second bast Live album
__________________________
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2011-12-24 18:42 by NICOS.
Brussels their second bast Live album
__________________________
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2011-12-24 18:42 by NICOS.
Re: Brussels 1973 - Some More Thoughts
Posted by:
Sacke
()
Date: December 23, 2011 19:37
Quote
71Tele
When comparing Brussels to later, not only was Taylor better than Wood, Richards was better than Richards, and Wyman was better than Wyman and Jagger was better than Jagger.
That's it!
and Charlie? Charlie's peak is 1969...but when comparing Brussels to later Charlie was better than Charlie...and Jimmy Miller
Well, I can't bother the Taylor-Wood discussion...you like Taylor, or you like Wood, or both
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2011-12-23 19:42 by Sacke.
Re: Brussels 1973 - Some More Thoughts
Posted by:
ChrisM
()
Date: December 23, 2011 19:46
In an era where extended guitar solos and virtuosity were de rigueur, Mick Taylor was the perfect guitarist for the Stones. To say he destroyed their live sound is a gross exaggeration and insult to a brilliant musician. If either Jagger of Richards thought this was the case the would have put a stop to it. The fact they did not and that Wood played extended guitar solos during the '75 and '76 tours says alot I think. Having said that, I love the stuff Wood contributed, especially between '77 and '81. At that point in the Stones career, he was he right guitarist for them.
Re: Brussels 1973 - Some More Thoughts
Posted by:
DandelionPowderman
()
Date: December 23, 2011 20:00
Quote
71Tele
When comparing Brussels to later, not only was Taylor better than Wood, Richards was better than Richards, and Wyman was better than Wyman and Jagger was better than Jagger.
Bollocks! Wyman was way better later in the 70s and in the early 80s, imo.
And there is no doubt Keith developed strongly as a player during the 70s. We´ve got the recordings to prove it.
BTW, I think there is a huge difference between Taylor in 69 and Taylor in 73. In 69 he was well integrated in the band musically, in 73 he sometimes overrode or played to himself, imo.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2011-12-23 20:02 by DandelionPowderman.
Re: Brussels 1973 - Some More Thoughts
Posted by:
LieB
()
Date: December 23, 2011 20:09
Tele71 said it. It's not just about the lead guitar or second guitarist. I agree that the "essence" is important, which to me means the songwriting, the performances, sounds, looks, feel, mood, etc. And all of that was way better in 1973 than 2003. The essence of Brussels just smokes the essence of Live Licks or Sh!te A Light.
Re: Brussels 1973 - Some More Thoughts
Posted by:
71Tele
()
Date: December 23, 2011 20:22
Quote
DandelionPowdermanQuote
71Tele
When comparing Brussels to later, not only was Taylor better than Wood, Richards was better than Richards, and Wyman was better than Wyman and Jagger was better than Jagger.
Bollocks! Wyman was way better later in the 70s and in the early 80s, imo.
And there is no doubt Keith developed strongly as a player during the 70s. We´ve got the recordings to prove it.
BTW, I think there is a huge difference between Taylor in 69 and Taylor in 73. In 69 he was well integrated in the band musically, in 73 he sometimes overrode or played to himself, imo.
"Keith developed strongly as a player". Really? He's on fire on that rhythm in '72 and (especially) '73. But his playing on the three non-El Mocambo sides of Love You Live put the lie to what you say. He is a much-diminished player on that record. Personally, I think he peaked in '73 and has never been as good since.
There certainly is a difference between Taylor in '69 and Taylor in '73. but as I have said before, this had as much to do with Richards' desire to play open-G rhythm in '73 as any musical choices Taylor made. Richards' choice to play more rhythm necessitated Taylor playing a more traditional lead guitarist role - yet Taylor is constantly criticized here for "overplaying".
Re: Brussels 1973 - Some More Thoughts
Posted by:
LieB
()
Date: December 23, 2011 21:03
Tele71 said it again. Taylor's "overplaying" was partly due to Keith's simplified approach to rhythm. Keith's playing became a little more varied in '75.
But personally, I think Keith peaked already in '69, at least on a technical level. He still hasn't surpassed his playing on Beggars Banquet, Let It Bleed and Ya-Ya's, although he perfected his open G style on Sticky Fingers and Exile.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2011-12-23 21:18 by LieB.
But personally, I think Keith peaked already in '69, at least on a technical level. He still hasn't surpassed his playing on Beggars Banquet, Let It Bleed and Ya-Ya's, although he perfected his open G style on Sticky Fingers and Exile.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2011-12-23 21:18 by LieB.
Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.
Online Users
a bigger nut , BeastyBurdeny , eibert , henrik87 , mariano , MonkeyMan2000 , Nobbi82 , P@py , RollingFreak , stone3009 , Stoneswolf , tinnitus
Guests:
1333
Record Number of Users:
206
on June 1, 2022 23:50
Record Number of Guests:
9627
on January 2, 2024 23:10