Quote
71Tele

Quote
MightyStonesStillRollin50

Quote
71Tele

Quote
lem motlow
“I enjoyed the book but in some ways it’s like reading about a completely different person, a mythological Keith, Keith the actor. Other people who know him have said the same. When I knew Keith, he was a very quiet guy. He was shy, that’s why he got into heroin — which was probably true for me but much later.
“What surprised me was the competitiveness, all that competing for women. He’s a guy in his late sixties and he sounds like an 18-year-old talking about his 18-year-old buddy.”


wow.it really is a bit strange to see mick taylor say the exact same thing many of us have been saying.i still cannot figure out what in the hell happened to keith.its like he read so many of his own press clippings that he become the guy they were writing about and the real keith just disappeared.

The "real Keith" disappeared somewhere around 1968.

I will take the present day Keith any old day of the week. People evolve. Keith is far more entertaining today. Who cares about whether someone can play a friggen guitar. The world is full of guitarists. None of them come close to being as entertaining as Keith Richards, the pirate rock 'n' roll rebel!

Well, we know where you stand...But I wasn't at all talking about his playing abilities.

The person Keith Richards - the guy with big ears who used to grin awkwardly and endearingly during performances - was replaced by the character "Keith Richards" (or Richard). This character was the Riffmeister, the "most elegantly wasted man in the world", the prince of cool. This was done with the help of heroin, which allows one to be removed from almost all things, people and situations. It's the character we see in "Life", showing the blade, shooting at dealers, telling Mick Jagger he can't play guitar. Yes, it's quite an entertaining character, I'll admit. But sometimes I wonder where that other guy went.

Keith is as straight as an arrow today and looks better than he has in years. He has overcome a lot. Going to be fun watching him enjoying himself again. Doing what he loves most. May be the last time, who knows?



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2012-06-27 18:47 by MightyStonesStillRollin50.

Quote
DandelionPowderman

Quote
kleermaker

Quote
howled
This Times interview is not that much different from the Daily Mail interview [www.dailymail.co.uk]

When I brought up the Daily Mail interview a few months ago and mentioned that one of the things that led Mick Taylor to leave the Stones were drug problems, I just got flamed by some Mick Taylor fan/dork who apparently knew everything about Mick Taylor and dismissed the Daily Mail as trash (which it might indeed be).

Now it's also in the Times, so now that Mick Taylor fan/dork has to dismiss 2 interviews basically saying the same thing.

It's all in the nuance. Taylor doesn't talk so much about his drug problems in The Times' article.

Quote from The Times:

"Taylor left in 1974, unhappy about 1) a lack of songwriting credits, 2) bored by the band’s inactivity as Richards sank deeper into heroin use, and 3) worried about his own drug habits.

Those are the reporter's words, though.

Technically true, Dandy. But the following sentence "Regrets? None, he insists." suggests that Taylor has said that too.

Excellent article. Thanks for sharing.

<It is probably the tenth time I've read a Taylor-interview where he is praising Mick. What do you mean "speak so little of eachother"?>

Jagger rarely mentions Taylor or what it was like working with him; or working with him on the Exile project. In that RS interview he is asked why Taylor left and Jagger cuts off the line of questioning with an abrupt answer. Sure Taylor talks about the band all the time. How can he not? But I was talking about the dynamics between Taylor and Jagger (and Taylor and Keith for that matter)(or Taylor, Jagger and Keith) and I still think the subject is rather vague after all these years. You read this and that, but I am not satisfied on the issue. I think Taylor and Jagger were close, but you do not actually hear that directly said.

Taylor's road manager told me about Taylor going back stage at a London show. This event would have been more than 10 years ago. He said Jagger was "cool" (like in cold) to Taylor. I wonder why Jagger was still carrying a grudge.

Quote
pmk251

Taylor's road manager told me about Taylor going back stage at a London show. This event would have been more than 10 years ago. He said Jagger was "cool" (like in cold) to Taylor. I wonder why Jagger was still carrying a grudge.

Just one of many Micks you might catch on any given day. As I understand he becomes somewhat unapproachable during most of his shows. I wouldn't take his coolness to mean much,certainly not a grudge, it has been reported by many, including his significant others. Contrast that with the Jagger that sent his man to find out about Mick's health this past year and offered to help. I've no doubt it was Sir Mick's money that paid for a mouthful of new teeth for MT at a cost of over $10,000.

If anything the Mick Taylor story speaks volumes on the disaster that is herion addiction and the poor state of the music industry that allows only a few with good timing and luck to make any serious money. Taylor shouldn't be complaining much, he is certainly able to book good gigs at more than reasonable fees these days, doing what he loves to do and getting paid. peace

Quote
pmk251
<It is probably the tenth time I've read a Taylor-interview where he is praising Mick. What do you mean "speak so little of eachother"?>

Jagger rarely mentions Taylor or what it was like working with him; or working with him on the Exile project. In that RS interview he is asked why Taylor left and Jagger cuts off the line of questioning with an abrupt answer. Sure Taylor talks about the band all the time. How can he not? But I was talking about the dynamics between Taylor and Jagger (and Taylor and Keith for that matter)(or Taylor, Jagger and Keith) and I still think the subject is rather vague after all these years. You read this and that, but I am not satisfied on the issue. I think Taylor and Jagger were close, but you do not actually hear that directly said.

Taylor's road manager told me about Taylor going back stage at a London show. This event would have been more than 10 years ago. He said Jagger was "cool" (like in cold) to Taylor. I wonder why Jagger was still carrying a grudge.

I fully agree. And I wonder what role Ron Wood has played in the whole story. Maybe Jagger thought he could 'mess around' a bit with Taylor, using him just the way he wanted and when it suited him, without having much eye for Taylor himself and dropping him if he thought he didn't need him.

But I'm pretty sure Taylor's quitting has always been a pain in Jagger's ass. He surely must have missed him a lot, especially on stage.

Anyway, we can't do much more than guessing, also because Keith's and Jagger's story about the 'triangle' wouldn't cast much light on it.

Quote
pmk251
<It is probably the tenth time I've read a Taylor-interview where he is praising Mick. What do you mean "speak so little of eachother"?>

Jagger rarely mentions Taylor or what it was like working with him; or working with him on the Exile project. In that RS interview he is asked why Taylor left and Jagger cuts off the line of questioning with an abrupt answer. Sure Taylor talks about the band all the time. How can he not? But I was talking about the dynamics between Taylor and Jagger (and Taylor and Keith for that matter)(or Taylor, Jagger and Keith) and I still think the subject is rather vague after all these years. You read this and that, but I am not satisfied on the issue. I think Taylor and Jagger were close, but you do not actually hear that directly said.

Taylor's road manager told me about Taylor going back stage at a London show. This event would have been more than 10 years ago. He said Jagger was "cool" (like in cold) to Taylor. I wonder why Jagger was still carrying a grudge.

Citation J Wenner / Mick J about Mick T. influence and leaving:
"WENNER: What about the contribution of Mick Taylor to the band in these years?

JAGGER: I think he had a big contribution. He made it very musical. He was a very fluent, melodic player, which we never had, and we don’t have now. Neither Keith nor [Ronnie Wood] plays that kind of style. It was very good for me working with him. Charlie and I were talking about this the other day, because we could sit down – I could sit down – with Mick Taylor, and he would play very fluid lines against my vocals. He was exciting, and he was very pretty, and it gave me something to follow, to bang off. Some people think that’s the best version of the band that existed.
WENNER: What do you think?
JAGGER: They’re all interesting periods. They’re all different. I obviously can’t say if I think Mick Taylor was the best, because it sort of trashes the period the band is in now."


WENNER: Why did Mick Taylor leave?
JAGGER: I still don’t really know.
WENNER: He never explained?
JAGGER: Not really. He wanted to have a solo career. I think he found it difficult to get on with Keith.
WENNER: On musical issues?
JAGGER: Everything. I’m guessing.

Article here: [www.jannswenner.com]

Quote
latebloomer

Quote
Naturalust


On the article, it sounds a bit to me like he is kissing up to Jagger a bit more than what might be genuine. Obvious potential payouts for that kind of behaviour. Perhaps Keith isn't the only actor here. When did MT start having this dripping love affair with MJ? Why haven't we heard anything about it for 36 years. peace

I had the same reaction. It sounds to me like Taylor maybe feels flattered by the attention from Mick and wants it to continue. As to his comment, “What surprised me was the competitiveness, all that competing for women. He’s a guy in his late sixties and he sounds like an 18-year-old talking about his 18-year-old buddy", well it is a memoir and he wrote about it happening in the past when he was young, not as if it were going on now.

Overall a nice article though, thanks for posting it proudmary.

Well, here's my problem with that line of reasoning. As much as I have turned into a "Richards basher" in recent years, the truth is I'd love to be able to give Keith "a pass" and defend him occasionally, but once again I can't do it.

This is not a case of Taylor being obtuse in his reading of Richards' book when declaring there is an adolescent quality to it. Case in point, Richards states that it really didn't matter (too much) who screwed who's girlfriend back in those days, but then barely catching a breath, Keef adds that he has "paid back" Jagger "in spades". Now why would that have been necessary back then (when supposedly it didn't matter?), or is that Richards is NOW paying Jagger back with that book of his??

Look, we all know Richards is obviously no fool. But he seems to me like a self absorbed idiot in his later years. So much so, I am really torn in my feelings towards the Stones performing again. I'd love another CD of new material, but on stage it will be hard to watch if Richards once again spends the whole showing posing instead of playing. If that's the case, then the only thing that would save it for me, is the inclusion of Wyman and Taylor.

Quote
Naturalust

Quote
pmk251

Taylor's road manager told me about Taylor going back stage at a London show. This event would have been more than 10 years ago. He said Jagger was "cool" (like in cold) to Taylor. I wonder why Jagger was still carrying a grudge.

Just one of many Micks you might catch on any given day. As I understand he becomes somewhat unapproachable during most of his shows. I wouldn't take his coolness to mean much,certainly not a grudge, it has been reported by many, including his significant others. Contrast that with the Jagger that sent his man to find out about Mick's health this past year and offered to help. I've no doubt it was Sir Mick's money that paid for a mouthful of new teeth for MT at a cost of over $10,000.

If anything the Mick Taylor story speaks volumes on the disaster that is herion addiction and the poor state of the music industry that allows only a few with good timing and luck to make any serious money. Taylor shouldn't be complaining much, he is certainly able to book good gigs at more than reasonable fees these days, doing what he loves to do and getting paid. peace

Minor quibble on your music industry comment (though the industry is certainly a disgrace). It is the musicians who were also songwriters who have always made money because they get paid for publishing, which is far more lucrative. Hence Taylor's past bitterness about being denied songwriting credits is more than an ego thing, it means (if he raelly contributed to those songs) that he was denied the opportunity to make a huge amount of money.

sure hope he will benefit somehow from this 50th stuff...he's been through hell.

Quote
SweetThing

Quote
latebloomer

Quote
Naturalust


On the article, it sounds a bit to me like he is kissing up to Jagger a bit more than what might be genuine. Obvious potential payouts for that kind of behaviour. Perhaps Keith isn't the only actor here. When did MT start having this dripping love affair with MJ? Why haven't we heard anything about it for 36 years. peace

I had the same reaction. It sounds to me like Taylor maybe feels flattered by the attention from Mick and wants it to continue. As to his comment, “What surprised me was the competitiveness, all that competing for women. He’s a guy in his late sixties and he sounds like an 18-year-old talking about his 18-year-old buddy", well it is a memoir and he wrote about it happening in the past when he was young, not as if it were going on now.

Overall a nice article though, thanks for posting it proudmary.

Well, here's my problem with that line of reasoning. As much as I have turned into a "Richards basher" in recent years, the truth is I'd love to be able to give Keith "a pass" and defend him occasionally, but once again I can't do it.

This is not a case of Taylor being obtuse in his reading of Richards' book when declaring there is an adolescent quality to it. Case in point, Richards states that it really didn't matter (too much) who screwed who's girlfriend back in those days, but then barely catching a breath, Keef adds that he has "paid back" Jagger "in spades". Now why would that have been necessary back then (when supposedly it didn't matter?), or is that Richards is NOW paying Jagger back with that book of his??

Look, we all know Richards is obviously no fool. But he seems to me like a self absorbed idiot in his later years. So much so, I am really torn in my feelings towards the Stones performing again. I'd love another CD of new material, but on stage it will be hard to watch if Richards once again spends the whole showing posing instead of playing. If that's the case, then the only thing that would save it for me, is the inclusion of Wyman and Taylor.

OK SweetThing, I see your point. I wasn't looking at Taylor's comment in relation to the entire tone of the book, just the bit about competing for women when they were young. With respect to the tone of the book, there is an adolescent strain there, but Richards has always had that going. I think all of them are somewhat emotionally stunted, when you have that much money, coddling, from an early age it has to effect the ability to mature. I read the book carefully, several times and what I see is a man who is a mass of contradictions, at once warm, loving, and wise and then mean, nasty, and immature. People talk about Keith Richards shyness, but what struck me more was how emotional he often is and how badly he handles that. As to Mick Taylor's comment that the Richards he knew was very different than the one in the book, I am sure that's true. But it doesn't mean he can't be both, most people present themselves very differently to those they work with, live with, and hang out with. It's just much more exaggerated in some, including Keith. I don't admire a lot of his personal traits, but it doesn't make me angry or disapointed in him. I've known a lot of people much worse, some in my own family. Keith is just one of those people who creates scenerios to fit his views, otherwise maybe he'd find it hard to live with some of the things he's done. As my Dad used to say, "don't confuse the issue with facts." That about sums up Mr. Richards, but what the heck, I still love the guy and I'll go see them if they tour again, and even enjoy the posing, cause soon enough it'll be gone.

WENNER: Why did Mick Taylor leave?
JAGGER: I still don’t really know.
WENNER: He never explained?
JAGGER: Not really. He wanted to have a solo career. I think he found it difficult to get on with Keith.
WENNER: On musical issues?
JAGGER: Everything. I’m guessing.

I've seen this quote before and it strikes me as bull, it wasn't just Keith. Jagger had to know that one of the reasons Mick Taylor left was he was upset about songwriting credits, which is something Mick Jagger could have done something about if he really want to try to get him to stay in the band.

Quote
latebloomer
WENNER: Why did Mick Taylor leave?
JAGGER: I still don’t really know.
WENNER: He never explained?
JAGGER: Not really. He wanted to have a solo career. I think he found it difficult to get on with Keith.
WENNER: On musical issues?
JAGGER: Everything. I’m guessing.

I've seen this quote before and it strikes me as bull, it wasn't just Keith. Jagger had to know that one of the reasons Mick Taylor left was he was upset about songwriting credits, which is something Mick Jagger could have done something about if he really want to try to get him to stay in the band.

Well if you read between the lines "solo career"="songwriting credits" so maybe he was alluding to it.

Hey Tele, if Mick was so pissed he didn't get songwriting credits for Moonlight Mile and Sway why didn't he make a bigger fuss in 1971 when that record was released? Probably too rolling stoned to realize the significance of the whole deal and at some point said "OK, I can live with giving those two away, now where is the gold AMEX card, I need to buy something". So in reality his decisions about that were likely made shortly after the record was released. Because of that I have to say....spilled milk. peace

Quote
latebloomer
WENNER: Why did Mick Taylor leave?
JAGGER: I still don’t really know.
WENNER: He never explained?
JAGGER: Not really. He wanted to have a solo career. I think he found it difficult to get on with Keith.
WENNER: On musical issues?
JAGGER: Everything. I’m guessing.

I've seen this quote before and it strikes me as bull, it wasn't just Keith. Jagger had to know that one of the reasons Mick Taylor left was he was upset about songwriting credits, which is something Mick Jagger could have done something about if he really want to try to get him to stay in the band.

Sorry for the poor editing, got interrupted.

I wonder if the unpaid/uncredited issue regarding Taylor will be addressed in this forthcoming documentary.

to me its tragic, both for Taylor and for the apparent lack of concern and unfairness it shows Mick and Keith capable of.

Quote
kleermaker
I wonder what role Ron Wood has played in the whole story.

He's mainly the middle man in personal communications between Mick and Keith in the latter-day Stones, the glue that holds them together. If the passive MT had been in the band from the 80s on, MJ and KR would have been and would still be at each other's throats even more.

They were jamming with Woody in the early 70s, long before he joined the group. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I read somewhere that Woody was the original choice to replace Brian Jones, but that Woody was more committed to Rod Stewart at the time. Woody's guitar sound in the Faces days is sure very Stonesy. And both in terms of looks and personality, Ron Wood is more of a Rolling Stone than Mick Taylor.

Quote
pmk251
<It is probably the tenth time I've read a Taylor-interview where he is praising Mick. What do you mean "speak so little of eachother"?>

Jagger rarely mentions Taylor or what it was like working with him; or working with him on the Exile project. In that RS interview he is asked why Taylor left and Jagger cuts off the line of questioning with an abrupt answer. Sure Taylor talks about the band all the time. How can he not? But I was talking about the dynamics between Taylor and Jagger (and Taylor and Keith for that matter)(or Taylor, Jagger and Keith) and I still think the subject is rather vague after all these years. You read this and that, but I am not satisfied on the issue. I think Taylor and Jagger were close, but you do not actually hear that directly said.

Taylor's road manager told me about Taylor going back stage at a London show. This event would have been more than 10 years ago. He said Jagger was "cool" (like in cold) to Taylor. I wonder why Jagger was still carrying a grudge.

It was probably at the Astoria in 2003. Taylor was supposed to join in on Rock Me Baby, but Mick cancelled it the last minute because of throat problems or something. So they skipped the song and Taylor´s guest spot as well..

Royalties or not, Mick Taylor has dealt his hand rather poorly since he left the Stones. If you are a world known guitarist and you can't afford the dentist or paying your gas bill or even a car wash - something must have gone wrong somewhere down the line.

Quote
DandelionPowderman

Quote
pmk251
<It is probably the tenth time I've read a Taylor-interview where he is praising Mick. What do you mean "speak so little of eachother"?>

Jagger rarely mentions Taylor or what it was like working with him; or working with him on the Exile project. In that RS interview he is asked why Taylor left and Jagger cuts off the line of questioning with an abrupt answer. Sure Taylor talks about the band all the time. How can he not? But I was talking about the dynamics between Taylor and Jagger (and Taylor and Keith for that matter)(or Taylor, Jagger and Keith) and I still think the subject is rather vague after all these years. You read this and that, but I am not satisfied on the issue. I think Taylor and Jagger were close, but you do not actually hear that directly said.

Taylor's road manager told me about Taylor going back stage at a London show. This event would have been more than 10 years ago. He said Jagger was "cool" (like in cold) to Taylor. I wonder why Jagger was still carrying a grudge.

It was probably at the Astoria in 2003. Taylor was supposed to join in on Rock Me Baby, but Mick cancelled it the last minute because of throat problems or something. So they skipped the song and Taylor´s guest spot as well..

No, it would have been before that. I was told the story by Taylor's former road manager, Claude, and that would have been in the Bay Area (SF) in '00 or '01 at the latest. According to him Taylor was back stage, Ronnie and Keith were friendly, Charlie was Charlie (whatever that means) and Jagger was cool to him. Taylor was invited to a party, but did not show. Ronnie called him up later and asked why did he not go. That's what I recall of the conversation.

There was no tour in 00 or 01. That doesn't sound plausible at all.

Quote
Stoneage
There was no tour in 00 or 01. That doesn't sound plausible at all.

I recall the story Dandy is referring to here, just exactly as he stated it. I suppose the years must be off, but I agree with Dandy that I understood it to be a separate incident/case - obviously I wasn't there of course.

Taylor played the Great American Music Hall in SF in January '00. The band played London the summer before and I assume that is the time period of the story. But now that I think of it the story could have been told to me when we followed Taylor around from NYC to Atlantic City to Springfield, VA in July '99. I met Claude in SF in March of '99. But I think I heard the story at GAMH.

Quote
kleermaker

Quote
DandelionPowderman

Quote
kleermaker

Quote
howled
This Times interview is not that much different from the Daily Mail interview [www.dailymail.co.uk]

When I brought up the Daily Mail interview a few months ago and mentioned that one of the things that led Mick Taylor to leave the Stones were drug problems, I just got flamed by some Mick Taylor fan/dork who apparently knew everything about Mick Taylor and dismissed the Daily Mail as trash (which it might indeed be).

Now it's also in the Times, so now that Mick Taylor fan/dork has to dismiss 2 interviews basically saying the same thing.

It's all in the nuance. Taylor doesn't talk so much about his drug problems in The Times' article.

Quote from The Times:

"Taylor left in 1974, unhappy about 1) a lack of songwriting credits, 2) bored by the band’s inactivity as Richards sank deeper into heroin use, and 3) worried about his own drug habits.

Those are the reporter's words, though.

Technically true, Dandy. But the following sentence "Regrets? None, he insists." suggests that Taylor has said that too.

That is also technically true, but then again - we'll never know exactly what Taylor is not regretting

Quote
duke richardson



man he sure looks sad in that pic.

Finally someone who noticed this.
Let's wish him lots of power.

Quote
Naturalust

Quote
latebloomer
WENNER: Why did Mick Taylor leave?
JAGGER: I still don’t really know.
WENNER: He never explained?
JAGGER: Not really. He wanted to have a solo career. I think he found it difficult to get on with Keith.
WENNER: On musical issues?
JAGGER: Everything. I’m guessing.

I've seen this quote before and it strikes me as bull, it wasn't just Keith. Jagger had to know that one of the reasons Mick Taylor left was he was upset about songwriting credits, which is something Mick Jagger could have done something about if he really want to try to get him to stay in the band.

Well if you read between the lines "solo career"="songwriting credits" so maybe he was alluding to it.

Hey Tele, if Mick was so pissed he didn't get songwriting credits for Moonlight Mile and Sway why didn't he make a bigger fuss in 1971 when that record was released? Probably too rolling stoned to realize the significance of the whole deal and at some point said "OK, I can live with giving those two away, now where is the gold AMEX card, I need to buy something". So in reality his decisions about that were likely made shortly after the record was released. Because of that I have to say....spilled milk. peace

I don't know - you should ask him. He's probably been wondering about that himself for the past 35 years. According to what I've heard those were not the songs in question, he was promised credits for songs on IORR and felt betrayed when he didn't get them.

Quote
Stoneage
Royalties or not, Mick Taylor has dealt his hand rather poorly since he left the Stones. If you are a world known guitarist and you can't afford the dentist or paying your gas bill or even a car wash - something must have gone wrong somewhere down the line.

...and something did.

Quote
71Tele

Quote
Naturalust

Quote
latebloomer
WENNER: Why did Mick Taylor leave?
JAGGER: I still don’t really know.
WENNER: He never explained?
JAGGER: Not really. He wanted to have a solo career. I think he found it difficult to get on with Keith.
WENNER: On musical issues?
JAGGER: Everything. I’m guessing.

I've seen this quote before and it strikes me as bull, it wasn't just Keith. Jagger had to know that one of the reasons Mick Taylor left was he was upset about songwriting credits, which is something Mick Jagger could have done something about if he really want to try to get him to stay in the band.

Well if you read between the lines "solo career"="songwriting credits" so maybe he was alluding to it.

Hey Tele, if Mick was so pissed he didn't get songwriting credits for Moonlight Mile and Sway why didn't he make a bigger fuss in 1971 when that record was released? Probably too rolling stoned to realize the significance of the whole deal and at some point said "OK, I can live with giving those two away, now where is the gold AMEX card, I need to buy something". So in reality his decisions about that were likely made shortly after the record was released. Because of that I have to say....spilled milk. peace

I don't know - you should ask him. He's probably been wondering about that himself for the past 35 years. According to what I've heard those were not the songs in question, he was promised credits for songs on IORR and felt betrayed when he didn't get them.

I've read an interview (the funny one) here with Taylor from this year wherein he said he cowrote Moonlight Mile with the other Mick. Which seems probable, because Keith isn't in it. The same with Sway. I think it's more logic that he took that for granted because of his age and his relatively short staying in the band in 1971. But when IORR was made, he was 25 years old, expected some credits for songs on IORR (Time for instance), didn't get them and got pissed. Which seems logic to me.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2012-06-28 20:24 by kleermaker.

Quote
71Tele

Quote
Stoneage
Royalties or not, Mick Taylor has dealt his hand rather poorly since he left the Stones. If you are a world known guitarist and you can't afford the dentist or paying your gas bill or even a car wash - something must have gone wrong somewhere down the line.

...and something did.

I know that 71Tele. He left the band some 38 years ago. What I mean is, song credits and royalties apart, he could have done better for himself. He wasn't a nobody, he had a reputation as one of the worlds best rock guitarists.

Quote
71Tele
According to what I've heard those were not the songs in question, he was promised credits for songs on IORR and felt betrayed when he didn't get them.

Imo, this is backed up by that shit stirring Nick Kent article around the time of the release of IORR. It atleast captures Taylors surpsise about some credits on the album, something Nick seems to enjoy.

It's in here somewhere: [s51.photobucket.com]

Quote
Stoneage

Quote
71Tele

Quote
Stoneage
Royalties or not, Mick Taylor has dealt his hand rather poorly since he left the Stones. If you are a world known guitarist and you can't afford the dentist or paying your gas bill or even a car wash - something must have gone wrong somewhere down the line.

...and something did.

I know that 71Tele. He left the band some 38 years ago. What I mean is, song credits and royalties apart, he could have done better for himself. He wasn't a nobody, he had a reputation as one of the worlds best rock guitarists.

I was agreeing with you Stoneage...The "something" that happened was heroin, bad career choices, bad luck, and perhaps a lack of self-confidence.