Quote
DandelionPowderman
If you listen to what Keith plays live, Doxa - especially when Mick is singing "don't need no virgin priest"/"it is a game for fools" etc., you'll find that Keith plays exactly the same as on the studio recording, only with a slight delay.

The stuff he plays there, is what I repeatedly has claimed to be trademark Keith.

Apparently, no one else agrees...

'

I actually agree 100%. The fills are very typical of Keith. That's him alright. I do think the "riff" the strumming part is something Taylor played and Keith repeated/followed, it sounds like a guitar following or adding to another guitar.

Quote
DandelionPowderman
If you listen to what Keith plays live, Doxa - especially when Mick is singing "don't need no virgin priest"/"it is a game for fools" etc., you'll find that Keith plays exactly the same as on the studio recording, only with a slight delay.

The stuff he plays there, is what I repeatedly has claimed to be trademark Keith.

Apparently, no one else agrees...

I fully agree with you, as I have stated over the various threads over the years, and in the beginning of this post. I just don't see any reason to continue discussing this for over 8 pages. It is Keith on rhythm guitar and there's really not a lot more to say.

Mathijs

Quote
Mathijs

Quote
DandelionPowderman
If you listen to what Keith plays live, Doxa - especially when Mick is singing "don't need no virgin priest"/"it is a game for fools" etc., you'll find that Keith plays exactly the same as on the studio recording, only with a slight delay.

The stuff he plays there, is what I repeatedly has claimed to be trademark Keith.

Apparently, no one else agrees...

I fully agree with you, as I have stated over the various threads over the years, and in the beginning of this post. I just don't see any reason to continue discussing this for over 8 pages. It is Keith on rhythm guitar and there's really not a lot more to say.

Mathijs

Some of us are not so self-secure as you are, Mathijs...

- Doxa

Quote
DandelionPowderman
If you listen to what Keith plays live, Doxa - especially when Mick is singing "don't need no virgin priest"/"it is a game for fools" etc., you'll find that Keith plays exactly the same as on the studio recording, only with a slight delay.

The stuff he plays there, is what I repeatedly has claimed to be trademark Keith.

Apparently, no one else agrees...

I can see (hear) the similarities in those parts you point out. Keith - Hampton version is in my mind - emphasizes those fills in changing the chords, and which, me thinks, are essential to the feel of the song. He seemingly 'knows' what he is doing. Yeah, in a way, it is 'signature Keith', especially when we are listening to the live versions. However, the original, me thinks, is not very idiosyncratic in the sense that some else might have not come up with. It's very basic and obvious stuff in 'playing' with the chords. One not needs to be Keith Richards to invent that...

- Doxa

Quote
Doxa

Quote
DandelionPowderman
If you listen to what Keith plays live, Doxa - especially when Mick is singing "don't need no virgin priest"/"it is a game for fools" etc., you'll find that Keith plays exactly the same as on the studio recording, only with a slight delay.

The stuff he plays there, is what I repeatedly has claimed to be trademark Keith.

Apparently, no one else agrees...

I can see (hear) the similarities in those parts you point out. Keith - Hampton version is in my mind - emphasizes those fills in changing the chords, and which, me thinks, are essential to the feel of the song. He seemingly 'knows' what he is doing. Yeah, in a way, it is 'signature Keith', especially when we are listening to the live versions. However, the original, me thinks, is not very idiosyncratic in the sense that some else might have not come up with. It's very basic and obvious stuff in 'playing' with the chords. One not needs to be Keith Richards to invent that...

- Doxa

Some of those notes were invented by him earlier - on Paint It Black...

It's hard to spot, but they're played the same way, and within the same scale - with a very different effect

Quote
Doxa

However, the original, me thinks, is not very idiosyncratic in the sense that some else might have not come up with. It's very basic and obvious stuff in 'playing' with the chords. It's very basic and obvious stuff in 'playing' with the chords. One not needs to be Keith Richards to invent that...

- Doxa

Unbiased judgement.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2014-10-16 13:27 by LuxuryStones.

Quote
DandelionPowderman



Some of those notes were invented by him earlier - on Paint It Black...

It's hard to spot, but they're played the same way, and within the same scale - with a very different effect

That's interesting. I need to say that I can't get the analogy here. Please, could you point out more specifically the similarities?

- Doxa

Quote
Doxa

Quote
DandelionPowderman



Some of those notes were invented by him earlier - on Paint It Black...

It's hard to spot, but they're played the same way, and within the same scale - with a very different effect

That's interesting. I need to say that I can't get the analogy here. Please, could you point out more specifically the similarities?

- Doxa

The similarities are more academical than musical

When you do runs in the C/Am scale down where you do the C or Dm root chords, you play with open strings. Keith does that on WOAF, TIOMS, PIB, RAAHP and on other songs.

I didn't mean that what he did on WOAF sounds the same as he did on PIB - merely that he plays some of the same notes in that scale..



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2014-10-16 13:40 by DandelionPowderman.

Okay, I get the point now. Yeah, that is something one could say being signature to him, but then again, I wouldn't call that very idiosyncratic, that is, like he is the only guitarist in the world doing that. It is not that distinguishable or rare. But, of course, if one hears someone doing that in a Rolling Stones recording, most likely it is him...

- Doxa

Quote
Doxa
Okay, I get the point now. Yeah, that is something one could say being signature to him, but then again, I wouldn't call that very idiosyncratic, that is, like he is the only guitarist in the world doing that. It is not that distinguishable or rare. But, of course, if one hears someone doing that in a Rolling Stones recording, most likely it is him...

- Doxa

Nicely summed up, yes

Quote
Doxa
Okay, I get the point now. Yeah, that is something one could say being signature to him, but then again, I wouldn't call that very idiosyncratic, that is, like he is the only guitarist in the world doing that. It is not that distinguishable or rare. But, of course, if one hears someone doing that in a Rolling Stones recording, most likely it is him...

- Doxa

That's true, since Keith was doing the most rhythm playing during the Taylor years, but it doesn't say anything about the feeling that is involved. Sow the assumption that Richards played that WAOF part is based on duties or statistics so to speak, not on feeling or creativity, or something like that.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2014-10-16 14:21 by LuxuryStones.

Then again, Keith has lifted some phrases off Taylor before

Quote
LuxuryStones

Quote
Doxa
Okay, I get the point now. Yeah, that is something one could say being signature to him, but then again, I wouldn't call that very idiosyncratic, that is, like he is the only guitarist in the world doing that. It is not that distinguishable or rare. But, of course, if one hears someone doing that in a Rolling Stones recording, most likely it is him...

- Doxa

That's true, since Keith was doing the most rhythm playing during the Taylor years, but it doesn't say anything about the feeling that is involved. Sow the assumption that Richards played that WAOF part is based on duties or statistics so to speak, not on feeling or creativity, or something like that.

But it is the more intricate stuff, not the plain rhythm playing we're talking about here. Anyone could have played the chords.

Like I've said countless times before, I think Taylor would have done more with the phrasing on this guitar track, if it were him that played it.

Quote
DandelionPowderman

Quote
LuxuryStones

Quote
Doxa
Okay, I get the point now. Yeah, that is something one could say being signature to him, but then again, I wouldn't call that very idiosyncratic, that is, like he is the only guitarist in the world doing that. It is not that distinguishable or rare. But, of course, if one hears someone doing that in a Rolling Stones recording, most likely it is him...

- Doxa

That's true, since Keith was doing the most rhythm playing during the Taylor years, but it doesn't say anything about the feeling that is involved. Sow the assumption that Richards played that WAOF part is based on duties or statistics so to speak, not on feeling or creativity, or something like that.

But it is the more intricate stuff, not the plain rhythm playing we're talking about here. Anyone could have played the chords.

Like I've said countless times before, I think Taylor would have done more with the phrasing on this guitar track, if it were him that played it.

I do know what you are talking about : the intricate stuff that you are bringing up all the time is not trademark Keith either, it's just as basic as the strumming.

Quote
LuxuryStones

Quote
DandelionPowderman

Quote
LuxuryStones

Quote
Doxa
Okay, I get the point now. Yeah, that is something one could say being signature to him, but then again, I wouldn't call that very idiosyncratic, that is, like he is the only guitarist in the world doing that. It is not that distinguishable or rare. But, of course, if one hears someone doing that in a Rolling Stones recording, most likely it is him...

- Doxa

That's true, since Keith was doing the most rhythm playing during the Taylor years, but it doesn't say anything about the feeling that is involved. Sow the assumption that Richards played that WAOF part is based on duties or statistics so to speak, not on feeling or creativity, or something like that.

But it is the more intricate stuff, not the plain rhythm playing we're talking about here. Anyone could have played the chords.

Like I've said countless times before, I think Taylor would have done more with the phrasing on this guitar track, if it were him that played it.

I do know what you are talking about : the intricate stuff that you are bringing up all the time is not trademark Keith either, it's just as basic as the strumming.

I just underlined it, since you wrote this:

<That's true, since Keith was doing the most rhythm playing during the Taylor years>

The chords could be anyone, but I believe the other stuff sounds more like something Keith would have done. However, I don't doubt Taylor being capable of doing this - if that's what you believe. More like he's not exactly having a history of "limiting" himself (yeah, I know there are a couple of exceptions - which I don't find so similar, btw) to this kind of simple playing

So, let me sum up our discussion, the dilemma is: the strumming is too ordinary and every-man-like to be Keith (a good argument for Taylor), but the one-string stuff/riffing is too simple and primitive to be Taylor (a good argument for Richards)...

Probably the over-all a bit shaky and fragile way the whole thing is played is an argument for Richards...

"Absent-minded Taylor or stoned Richards" or how it was...><

- Doxa



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2014-10-16 15:13 by Doxa.

There are examples were Mick plays those single string fills just like WOAF, just don't have the time or feel the need to search and make a compilation. And I'm not fanboy enough anymore to bother wheter it's Keith or Mick, I liked both players, when they were in the Stones playing together. I just would like to know who it is actually, out of some sort of obsession or curiosity.... no one here convinces me musically. Probably it's just a bloody ego-thing.

Quote
LuxuryStones
There are examples were Mick plays those single string fills just like WOAF, just don't have the time or feel the need to search and make a compilation. And I'm not fanboy enough anymore to bother wheter it's Keith or Mick, I liked both players, when they were in the Stones playing together. I just would like to know who it is actually, out of some sort of obsession or curiosity.... no one here convinces me musically. Probably it's just a bloody ego-thing.

It's a fan-thing

Any Buddhists aboard?

Quote
Doxa
So, let me sum up our discussion, the dilemma is: the strumming is too ordinary and every-man-like to be Keith (a good argument for Taylor), but the one-string stuff/riffing is too simple and primitive to be Taylor (a good argument for Richards)...

Probably the over-all a bit shaky and fragile way the whole thing is played is an argument for Richards...

"Absent-minded Taylor or stoned Richards" or how it was...><

- Doxa

Nothing on WAOF is too primitive to be Taylor, and to me Richards usually plays as solid as a rock. That would plea for Taylor: He also has the lucid moments to play some strumming and single notes in between. So whe would end up arguing about 4 or 5 notes and it's interpretation on this board. Statistics is the Key Word. Even Jagger's memory cannot help that.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2014-10-16 18:21 by LuxuryStones.

Geez. W@ho cares

Quote
alhavu1
Geez. W@ho cares

You don't care about who's playing on your favourite band's records?

Quote
DandelionPowderman
If you listen to what Keith plays live, Doxa - especially when Mick is singing "don't need no virgin priest"/"it is a game for fools" etc., you'll find that Keith plays exactly the same as on the studio recording, only with a slight delay.

The stuff he plays there, is what I repeatedly has claimed to be trademark Keith.

Apparently, no one else agrees...

I've always thought it was Keith, especially with the way that it digs into the C from the B, that bottom lilt up, and then that bit of swank bentness dirty lick at the end of the entire run each time.

Quote
LuxuryStones

Quote
Doxa
So, let me sum up our discussion, the dilemma is: the strumming is too ordinary and every-man-like to be Keith (a good argument for Taylor), but the one-string stuff/riffing is too simple and primitive to be Taylor (a good argument for Richards)...

Probably the over-all a bit shaky and fragile way the whole thing is played is an argument for Richards...

"Absent-minded Taylor or stoned Richards" or how it was...><

- Doxa

Nothing on WAOF is too primitive to be Taylor, and to me Richards usually plays as solid as a rock. That would plea for Taylor: He also has the lucid moments to play some strumming and single notes in between. So whe would end up arguing about 4 or 5 notes and it's interpretation on this board. Statistics is the Key Word. Even Jagger's memory cannot help that.

But it doesn't SOUND like Taylor at all. It's not his sound, his touch, his sense of melodics, his timing, his guitar sound, his right-hand phrasing.

It just doesn't sound like anything Taylor has ever done or played. It's just not him.

Mathijs

Yes but it doesnt sound like Keith either, it is probably Keith but I bet he's following another main rhythm guitar, Taylors, the one Mick erased. Which would explain why Taylor said he was on the track and whould be credited. Keith plays the rhythm like Taylor would play an acoustic or a low volume electric.

Quote
Mathijs

Quote
LuxuryStones

Quote
Doxa
So, let me sum up our discussion, the dilemma is: the strumming is too ordinary and every-man-like to be Keith (a good argument for Taylor), but the one-string stuff/riffing is too simple and primitive to be Taylor (a good argument for Richards)...

Probably the over-all a bit shaky and fragile way the whole thing is played is an argument for Richards...

"Absent-minded Taylor or stoned Richards" or how it was...><

- Doxa

Nothing on WAOF is too primitive to be Taylor, and to me Richards usually plays as solid as a rock. That would plea for Taylor: He also has the lucid moments to play some strumming and single notes in between. So whe would end up arguing about 4 or 5 notes and it's interpretation on this board. Statistics is the Key Word. Even Jagger's memory cannot help that.

But it doesn't SOUND like Taylor at all. It's not his sound, his touch, his sense of melodics, his timing, his guitar sound, his right-hand phrasing.

It just doesn't sound like anything Taylor has ever done or played. It's just not him.

Mathijs

Since there's only 2 tracks available to me with one guitar on it, I estimate 50% Taylor - 50% Richards, it's very basic. It was usually Richards who played those parts at the time, that pleas for him, but the feeling says Taylor to me. No one knows for sure though.. regardless who played it, I like the tune a lot.







Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2014-10-17 16:10 by LuxuryStones.

It is one and only one guitar, not two. You can 50/50 it all you want, it's pointless.

Quote
GasLightStreet
It is one and only one guitar, not two. You can 50/50 it all you want, it's pointless.

Yes, I know it's one guitar, but two outtakes, one with Jagger's official released voice and the falsetto one, as far as I know.

Skippy has a good point, regarding the B/C-thing. Keith does that a lot.

There's only one guitar. Not two. One. On all of the 6 or 7 outtakes there's only one electric guitar. There are 2 outtakes with overdubbed (in 1981 that is) 6 and 12-string acoustics, but these were erased.

It could be that they recorded 30 takes of WOAF, of which 29 featured Taylor on blistering slide solo's and jazz fusion experiments on the electric oboe, but the one version that was chosen to overdub on in 1981, and the only version available to us, does not feature Mick Taylor.

It's the same with Brown Sugar: Taylor played on the original take, Taylor did several overdubs, but in the end all of his parts were erased and overdubbed by Keith, so there is no Mick Taylor on Brown Sugar.

Mathijs