Mick Taylor's legacy will only be fully appreciated when some live Stones performances are released to the general public - until then he will remain the forgotten Stone - undervalued and underappreciated.

I was listening to a radio broadcast the other day and someone had a rare momento of the Stones with their faces on. The owner said it included the blonde guitarist who followed Brian Jones but the DJs remarked only Ronnie followed Brian.
I think it's a poor state of affairs when even DJs don't know him.

poor premise. who would actually buy such recordings excepting those like you and me who already value his legacy?

Thats the problem the rock jouralists and historians will focus on the glimmer boys on stage in 72/73 and leave Taylor out of the reporting of the shows.But
Taylor had one big documentation the stage guys put the light on him when he took
all those great solos and all of us fans that grew up with thr woody era saw those footages(LAG,) and were blown away.Jagger cant take back that FLIMING and
he is left with Taylor on stage enriching the material and taking the stones
to another level.EVEN JAGGER SETS himself up when he tells us all on LAG -
PLAY THAT GUITAR BOY on DEAD FLOWERS.

Keith Richards was billed in rock reviews in the papers as the lead guitarist
of the RS touring the 72/73 tour in some articles. So far from the truth and reality of those great performances.

The term "lead" in the discussion of lead guitarists was often (and still is) used to identify "primary" guitar player - not necessarily who played leads vs. rhythm.

But the Mainstream fan does not know that and they would think Keith was playing
those wonderful solos without taking the time to realy find out.

No way Keith played harder then Taylor they both played their butts off
interchanging from rhythm to lead and that real DISTINCTION that KEITH hates
today and the whole weaving Idea was given to the rock magazines.

AND - I remember reading an interview with Keith back in the early 70's when he stated: I don't play LEAD Guitar!! - I tried but I can't, but I can play
rhythm guitar with the best of them!!!

That was back when Taylor was taking over the sound of the Stones during the
1972 European tour - the writer's were "noticing" Taylor's playing back then!

MLC

oops - I meant the 1973 tour - MLC

I would like to read Keith saying that because I can't picture him ever saying it. Especially since the Stones had two of their most successful albums (Let it Bleed and B where Keith was their only guitarist.

Sigh...Great Guy...Great Guitarrist...undervalued for sure, and probably not credited enough in print for what he added...BUT

T&A hits the nail on the head, the only people interested in these supposed rare vault recordings will be those people who already have them on boots. Especailly considering the sales of Live Licks, I think it is a bit unrealistic to think that the release of some concerts now over 30 years old will create a resurgence in record sales for the group.

I collect these old shows, maybe not as as avidly as some, but I can tell you , that just as today they had their bad days then also. I mean truely listen with an open and critical ear to the "lost" Marques tapes, when MT was with them. Does anyone really think that woud sell 10,000,000 copies, oer even a million? Keith has said that on any given night " the Greatest Rock and Roll Band in the World," can be any band. I think that the Stones may have had that title on many more nights than any one else even though some of that may be secondary to longevity. But the group had off nights and produced some crap songs even when MT was with them.

And of course historically it makes sense to look at a decades long BODY of work when considering artists, and not concentrate on a short time period. When Michealangelo started the Sistine he had minimal freco experience and hired some of the most well known and talented assistants of his day. And though they contributed greatly in the begginning not only teaching him, but doing some of the actual painting, it is he that is remembered. Fair or not, if the Stones have a historical legacy, it will be Mick and Keith that are remebered.

Yeah I remember that early 70's Keith interview where he said that he had tried but failed as a lead guitarist. He went on to say his true gift was as a rhythm guitarist and nobody could hold the rhythm down like he can. I'm pretty sure the interview was published in NME.

ROCKMAN

Mick Taylor is the Michael Angelo, then! (Wow, could that guy add some colour with his guitar). All black and white now.

Some stuff done before him and some since but nothing to compare etc. .....

(Just having fun, Kahoosier).



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2005-01-28 01:34 by Deidre.

Rockman - yep - that was the article

KaHoosier - It's not that I think the Taylor/Stones concerts would see big,
I would just like to see Ladies & Gents offically released and shown on a
venue like VH1.. Just to see what alot of the current Stones fans would think... MLC

I know a number of Stones fans who never buy bootlegs. I lent one Brussels Affair and he was really surprised at the way Mick Taylor played saying he was really brilliant.
Some fans believe the official live albums do represent the Stones at their very best and any bootleg is bound to be inferior.

Then join me Edward in a toast to their ignorance, we can listen to Perth 73, Brussels, something from 78 and the best theater shows from last time. There are some classic boots! Of course, there are some real stinkers too from every decade of the band.

I also, MCDDTLC, would love to see what you mentioned. I just want us all to grab a bit of reality and admit to ourselves that want WE want has little bearing on what would really sell in today's market.

When I fisrt heard a bootleg of a concert of the 73 tour I got the impression I was listening to another band. Something magical. Mick Taylor did that.

Vibrato

I reckon there could be demand IF the Stones advertise themselves properly

Imagine:

For instance live footage/audio:
4 DVD set:
1: 1964-1968
2: 1969-1973
3: 1975-1982
4: 1989---->

now any live tracks/footage...f*ck me, but if you reckon no fan would be keen - please take a piss and have a good look at yourself!!!! a.k.a. : kahoosier...et aL....

Esky

I think people would buy it, why wouldn't they. Look how many people buy the Zeppelin stuff that was released a few years back. Same goes for other older bands that release stuff from back in the day. I think that stuff would sell more than 4 Flicks.

...yep, agreed Hound Dog, I mean why do people buy FourFlicks......?

Yeah -I was about to mention that Led Zep (30 year old music) that was recently
released and sold mega copies!!!! - if the music's good enough and people get "exposed" - it will sell. I love to show video of or play boots to "current" Stones fans of the 70's music - most are blown away!! MLC

yeah - but LZ hadn't been flooding the market place with live drivel over the past decade like the Stones have. There was a pent-up demand for last year's year...the Stones wouldn't be so fortunate. It's all academic anyway - Mick would never allow a '72-era release whilst the band is still a band, for reasons that have been laid out a hundred times before...

..yep, I suppose, but when the band deceases (sorry everyone on this board), he might start thinking about getting cash (Jagger & cash...no way?!)!!! One good way would be to release some cool stuff from their vaults ! So what anyone says, there will be a time when it will be profitable....

Esky

there was never any debate whether it would profitable. the cost structure for such projects is negligle. the orginal question was whether it would create a new appreciation amongst new listeners for MT's contributions. and, I say it wouldn't for reasons I cited earlier in the thread.

It'll probably all be released when they have disbanded/died. Just a matter of time.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2005-01-28 23:04 by Deidre.

Yes Esky, hell of a DVD box, isn´t it??
/LesPaul

[www.stonesvikings.com]
lespaul@stonesvikings.com

It depends upon what we actually mean by a “legacy” as such.

Regardless of what he has or hasn’t done for the past thirty years, many would already argue that Taylor’s pivotal contribution to Ya-Yas, Fingers, Exile and GHS provides a testimony itself, to a great talent whose creativity during his time with the Stones, helped forge a symbiotic relationship that was as significant for the band themselves through this period, as it undoubtedly was for himself on a personal level.

Others, including myself, however, through some sense of injustice, believe that not until his truly great live work with the Stones is released for public consumption, will it be able to fairly and adequately acknowledge his place in rock history.

Of course, many on this site will be more than well aware that it’s not through a want of trying that Mick and Keith haven’t released this material in some form of official capacity, and it is to their credit that they at least got partly round Alan Klein’s copyright restrictions, by putting out the stupendous FM broadcasts from the 1973 tour. Thank God for the bootleggers! Where would we be without them? It is thanks to them that I managed to lose count many years ago, of the number of Stones fans whose introduction to the band came through a cassette tape made by myself from Bedspring Symphony or Nasty Music.

However, as for any belated official release of such material, Kahoosier is quite correct to offer concern as to the commercial viability of such a project, especially in a market with more than its fair share of Stones live product. Indeed he will have found for himself, an unlikely ally on this subject in so much that I agree in principle that any “legacy” must surely, beg some form of public approval, which in this case, can only be realistically gauged from respectable shipping figures, comparable to other archived releases from artists within this type of music.

As a non-contemporaneous act with hardly any live releases from any point in their career, sales comparisons with Led Zeppelin would not be fair however. Not that we should be too despondent. The critical acclaim afforded to Bob Dylan’s so-called “Bootleg Series”, and the ensuing healthy sales, may offer a better indication as to how the Stones circa 72/73 would be met on its release.

As for a lasting legacy? Perhaps it is that our grandchildren will pick up a Mojo or Uncut Rolling Stones special in 30 years’ time and read that such material is recommended above the likes of Love You Live, Still Life and the rest.

But would any of these listeners care one jot as to who was playing guitar? Sadly, probably not. Then again, in thirty years’ time, neither will I!

I placed a bet with myself that not having read this forum for a while that two things
would have not changed:
the incessant glorification of Mick Taylor by Edward Twining and good ole Open G.

Can't say I was surprised when I saw the title of this thread.
Didn't even bother to look at the author as I knew it would be one of the two.
Well I opened it and sure enough it was Ed baby closley followed by Open G.

Do the two of you have anything else to discuss other than the mind numbingly,
trite repetative garble that seems to never leave your thoughts re Taylor and his playing?

Yes the man was and is a brilliant player but please broaden your horizens.

'Vibrato' your grey matter in the hope either one or maybe both of you may
shake out a new idea.

Your thought processes are too transparent to bear.


ps - Esky when are we doing beers next?

kyle m

Have you ever lent somebody $20 and never seen them again? It was probably worth it.

Kyle! It's so good to hear from you, even if it's on a beating-on-a-dead-horse type of thread. Don't be a stranger, my friend.