Love them both, they both brought something to the Stones. Ronnie may have brought more to the actual group where as Taylor may have brought more to their sound. Both were needed to make the Stones what they are.
Taylor or Wood? I don't think that question is so interesting, the important thing is that there will be a new tour and that Jagger, Watts and Richards will participate. These three gentlemen cannot be replaced.
Re: how much are we who don't care of mick taylor ?
Posted by:
Anonymous User
()
Date: January 4, 2005 00:05
Sounds like Sir Mick, and sometimes Keith, (when he's moody). Sorry, but I think 30 years worth means that Ronnie is a true STONE, (In every sense of the word) and a hell of a lot more important than MT ever was.
I LOVE THE REAL STONES...Brian, Keith, Mick, Bill, Charlie, and Ronnie and, in that order./SB
One thing can be said for sure. There was no comparison between the sound of the band on the '72" tour with Mick, compared to the "75" (?) tour with Ronnie. I saw both and they were different bands totally. A zenith had been reached and not reclaimed. (My opinion).
bring back geoff bradford--he is the REAL stones guitarist!!!....maybe bob beckworth can come back to play maracas too!!??... sigh...RW vs MT......yikes!!!....lets start a ricky fenson VS bill wyman thread maybe....
STONES JAM!! MICKEYS RULES!!! (burp) NADER IN 2016!!!!! GO GIANTS!!
T&A Wrote: ------------------------------------------------------- > Isn't it wonderful during these "down" times with > the band? We get to immerse ourselves in such > rare subjects as Woody vs. MT....
LOL. I know you're kidding. Never mind "down time" - this stuff goes on week in week out even when they ARE on tour.
The subject should have it's own website and message board, then everyone can go round in circles 365 days a year to their heart's desires....