God, I love DIRTY WORK,

...Straight from the heart!

Ya know, another thing that seals Ron, Ron, as a true STONE, in every sense of the word, is that he has more song credits than MT ever wished for on a STONES Album. And back in 1986 Keith was adamant that Ronnie get credits on Dirty Work and even said to Ronnie: "Do you realize, Ronnie, that you've been in the band longer than Brian was? Longer than Taylor?" Keith also said of Ronnie: He's got a very superficially flippant character, but he's got a lot more depth to him than people think." (KR)


Of course, Brian will always be up there as a real Stone because he started the Rolling Stones and named the band too. There will never be another Brian, but Ronnie really does well in the multiple instrument role, (the one Brian also filled).



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2005-01-30 10:26 by Demon.

Why didn't you entitle this post:

I LOVE RON WOOD. ?

And darling......B. Jones was a real Stone, Mick Taylor was a real Stone and Ron Wood was a real Stone, especially on DW. He currently borders on being a real Joke and bringing them into musical disrepute......so I'm not sure if he currently qualifies. But it's his lead that is the best and most memorable part of Don't Stop. Not a great song by their standards but he makes it more than tolerable, especially live. So, let's just keep hoping......





Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2005-01-30 12:48 by Deidre.

Just listened to the 2002 Detroit show yesterday. Man Ronnie was ON that night!

Deidra wrote:

"And darling......B. Jones was a real Stone, Mick Taylor was a real Stone and Ron Wood was a real Stone"


I believe that's what I wrote: that BRIAN JONES was/ "will always be a REAL STONE!"

Demon wrote:
"Of course, Brian will always be up there as a real Stone because he started the Rolling Stones and named the band too. There will never be another Brian, but Ronnie really does well in the multiple instrument role, (the one Brian also filled)."


Mick Taylor was not a REAL STONE like BRIAN, KEITH, MICK, BILL, CHARLIE, and RONNIE are! Taylor was like Darryl Jones is, a player, that's all. Taylor filled a space that was empty in the band until Ronnie could leave the FACES. I guess you don't believe Keith's take on this? You need to bone up on the history dear.

Btw, RONNIE "IS" a REAL STONE, not "was."
Think>>>>Ronnie wouldn't be with the Stones 30 years and counting if he wasn't doing his job See?



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 2005-01-30 22:34 by Demon.

Don't start this NONSENSE again, darling.

'History', especially in Keith's case, is a very subjective matter. You believe everything Keith says, as if he's some sort of Oracle?

When Keith was saying "it was always Ronnie", he was meaning once the Faces split. Ronnie was NOT NOT NOT a known guitarist until he'd cut his teeth with them.

You believe that Taylor was just a player. Most of us here and elsewhere would disagree. It's your opinion, it's not historical fact. So, would you please give us a rest.

There was already a very fulsome Dirty Work thread, if you'd wanted to contribute ideas about RW on Dirty Work.

You started this thread to praise Ronnie (and indirectly, it seems to me, to imply that MT was not a real Stone. Yawn).

Fine. Why not praise Ron. He's done some good stuff with the Stones, esp. on DW.

So why not start an actual Wood thread, along the lines of his 'best three solos', or 'the Wood legacy'? Don't you think he deserves it?

You may have noticed that MT gets much more critical acclaim on this site, 30 years after his departure (FACT) than RW does.

I wonder why that is. (No I don't).

Woof.

I believe I 'was' praising Ron, if you can read.

Also, I'll start my threads the way I wish.

Also>>Time speaks for itself, 30 years Ronnie, a REAL STONE, vs/ mt a player with the band, barely 5 years.

you bunch are "Blinded By Rainbows."

(Not to lesson Darryl's ability) but he's not a STONE either, he plays with the STONES, just like MT played with the STONES.

I don't like injustice.

I just think it is unfair of all the bashing that goes on around here concerning Ronnie's ability, and that a lot of you refuse to believe the truth. Like I mentioned before, Ronnie is doing his job or else he wouldn't be with the band "ALL THESE MANY YEARS."

Now, let's see how you twist this around Deidre. Better yet, why don't you go join MT's website and follow him around the world, he's so great, you think.

Once upon a time I held out hope for you Demon.
It is clear to me now that there is none.
There is something fundamentally wrong with your wiring.



kyle m

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

Here's howe I'll twist it around.

Firstly, without twisting, I love Ronnie's guitar. Mostly with Faces. He lost more of his distinctive character when he joined them. Was listening to Mahoney's Last Stand last night. Marvellous sound he has.

His best work with Stones was on Some Girls. His next major ionput was on DW. Then, some nice characteristic flourishes on SW. But he doesn't really feature on the last two albums. I think any guitarist could have done his "job". That's my point - it's a job he does now.

That was a digression - but was intended to show that I, like many 'Taylor fans' can appreciate Ronnie and his contribution. There is absolutely no contradiction in being a Stones' fan, a Taylor fan, and a Wood fan.

Back to the Twist.

I would like to point out that in the album credits from 1971- 1974 (possibly ya-Yas too), Taylor was in the band photos, and his name is one of the Five (count'em) names, in the description of band members. So, that's good enough for me.

Notice please that Daryll Jones' photo has not been on any album cover and in any formal descriptions of band members since Wynman's departure.

I rest my case.

But I'll do more than that. I'll later go and drag back a previous reply to you on this topic.

Re: my travels to see Taylor. Yes, thanks, I take every opportunity to see him and have done two flights so far to do so. I also travel by plane to see Stones. Also did the same to see our dear Ronnie play with McLagan last year.

Happy now?

I still believe that the most positive way you could champion Ronnie's cause would be to do a positive post on him, without resorting to reference to Taylor. Psychologists might have something to say about your current approach. I couldn't possibly comment.

And to tell this board's members that they should leave this site if they wish to discuss Taylor and his time with the STONES.......well, that's Diabolical, darling.

I am writing this for the benefit of Demon or anyone who might believe his rubbish.

Taylor did lots of songs with Mick. Sway, Moonlight, Ventilator, Time Waits, Winter, Hide Your Love, Can you Hear the Music. He'd written some of his own too. (Leather Jacket, Separately, Alladin Story(?)). He was creative. He got little, in fact no credit. Nor would he, ever. In '73, like Wyman, he started doing other projects, namely Tubular Bells. I don't know anything about the alleged "drugs problems" but am pretty sure that after working on GHS he found the Stones a bit limiting. Not Jagger, probably Keith. Certainly IORR album was Keith trying to go back to basics and it's just not that great. The best moments are Mick Taylor's bass line on Fingerprint File and his guitar on Time Waits.

I don''t think that when he joined he expected it to be temporary. And so what if he did? Who would have ever have thought they'd go on for so long? Not even them. Before he quit in December 1974 they had already had a group meeting to discuss their future plans as a group meeting to discuss their future plans as a group. What he didn't foresee was what a creative dead end it would become by the mid-seventies. He saw new opportunities with Jack Bruce and he took them.

NO REGRETS, Mr Rolli Polli Demon!

And lest we forget, it was Taylor's arrival in 1969 that transformed them into the Greatest Live Rock and Roll Band in the World. Mick and Keith just could not have believed their luck. Just take Jiving Sister Fanny or Travelling Man as examples of how he ignited their studio sessions. As Logie says (in an unstated way!) - can anyone possibly imagine Ronnie's scratchy, jaunty rhythm or spindly lead on Ya Yas? No! But it worked well for them post '77.

As for Ronnie - in 1969 he was a respected Bass player. Faces had just been formed. After early summer '71 Stones did not return live to UK until September 1973. What happened inbetween in the UK? David Bowie, T Rex ......AND in more credible Rock terms...the FACES. It was by 1973 that Ronnie had established himself as a raunchy little rockster with great spirit and slight eccentricity. That is when he caught the (party) attention of Mick and Keith.. As someone else pointed out above, Keith was talking about post Taylor era when he said " it was always Ronnie". Ofcourse he was a great social fit, but that has little to do with musical fit, does it?

Nevertheless he's done some great stuff with them, especially early on. And i think he has been responsible for some of their songs. He is less musically gifted than M Taylor and maybe less exploratory etc. which is why he's been happier to live within the Mick and Keith machine. Besides, he's done loads of solo stuff to keep himself creatively satisfied. Reluctantly I will say that he's been a lot more active on this front than Mick Taylor, even if some of Ronnie's stuff is slightly shoddy!

Anyway, the main point for my posting this was to quell the the STUPID myth that Demon likes to perpetuate:

That Taylor was never a committed member and that it was always Ronnie's job.

I've been a great Ronnie Fan (since before he joined the Stones) but he really has been a bloody disgrace to the name Rolling Stone in recent years far more than Mick Taylor was or would ever be. Mick Taylor did the decent thing at the right time.

Ronnie can rarely hack it as a guitarist now. But it's not funny and not something to be made fun of really. It's sad. And Mick Taylor, I'm sure, would also sympathise with Ronnie. Fancy not being part of the recording sessions last November. Will he just be invited in for some lead overdubs?

Being a Rolling Stone, Mr Demon, is about being a committed and creative musical force within the band. Taylor was this this until he left. Wyman was this until he left. I do not sense that Ronnie fulfills this role any more. Sure, he tours with them and plays some guitar on stage after a fashion. But I rather think he'd like to be more involved in the studio - eg last November's sessions. This must be Mick and Keith's decision. Will ronnie just accept it? Probably.

And......totally as an aside...for the benefit of Polli and his followers.....

Taylor can more than hack it as a solo performer. Infact he's often still outstanding. Live solo stuff I've heard from Ronnie since 2001 makes me cringe.

So one of them needs the Stones and the other doesn't. (But I DON'T LIKE TO KNOCK RONNIE!)


Addendum:

It was Mick who said, in 1970 or 1971 I think, "when I'm 30, I quit; I don't want to be a Rock and Roll star all my life".

Not even Jagger expected it to last much longer than 1973. So, even if your supposition about Taylor considering it a temporary thing were true, he would be in good company. The whole rock thing was considered a temporary young-person's thing - not a career. Back then if you were over 30 you were not really a credible part of rock culture which, until then had always been synonomous with youthfulness. (Hence Stones being rubbished as "old farts" by the punk generation).







Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2005-01-31 21:43 by Deidre.

mick taylor was a rolling stone and still is.. when they were put in the rock and roll hall of fame, mick taylor was there.. some of the very best rolling stones albums, let it bleed, exile, stick fingers, goat h.s. and iorr. in fact many of the tracks that made them so great were because of mick taylor.
but ronnie was mick jagger's first choice to replace brian.. he called ron up but he never got the call. you can read that in a interview with ronnie.

also, if ronnie is so bad today, why is rod stewart using him? why is woodie so busy with so many other people playing lead, slide & bass guitar? you see ronnie playing today with well know rock stars. but who is mick tayor playing with today? small clubs in sweden...so all i am saying is if ronnie was so bad, why is he so busy?
making stones records the tracks have always started with mick/keef then charlie to lay down the drums then bill and ronnie and others would join them. its always been that way.. ronnie then adds to the track..so in 2005 ron wood is not being left out because they don't want him or because they don't think he can play its because they don't need him at the time..he will be there and he will add to their sound..may even write a track.. just like m.t. did on exile, etc.

anyway i think the stones couldn't have made it without brian, m.taylor and ron wood.. jagger/richards/watts seem to use the talents that others have brought them and moved ahead. its like they eat their own, get what they need and throw them away...ha! mick taylor talks about that in a interview, how bad the stones sounded when he first went to play with them. i think he helped clean them up a little musically..

also no one wanted mick taylor to go.. the stones didn't fire him, like they did to brian. mick jagger always liked taylor.. i remember the fans were sad when taylor left..i was afraid the stones would brake up at the time! my 1st concert i saw live was in 1975 and i started to like the stones in 1972 and wanted to see taylor very much..

i love ronnie too.. but 2 of the worst stones albums they ever recorded was without mick taylor. dirty works, and black & blue. now i love all stones albums !

brian/taylor/wood all gave to the sound of the rolling stones and helped make them the greatest rock and roll band.. but it shows you how important jagger/rickards are to the heart of the rolling stones.. without these 2 you wouldn't have the rolling stones!

Just a thought

Deidre wrote:

"It was Taylor's arrival in 1969 that transformed them into the Greatest Live Rock and Roll Band in the World. Mick and Keith just could not have believed their luck"
---------------------------------------------

Who was the lucky one?. The Glimmer Twins taking Taylor within the Stones, or Taylor being taken to the Stones??? As much as I love Taylor's playing, we have to admit that without him being part of the Stones in their golden era, probably we wouldn't have been talking about him now. (Well, maybe OpenG would ). I mean the Golden Era, despite Taylor's wonderful playing, was due to the Glimmer Twins being in their best rather than the lead guitarist playing.

And BOTH Taylor and Ronnie are true Rolling Stones, mates...


[There'll be no wedding today...]

Yes, I agree. Taylor got lucky too though he was asked. But Taylor did transform them musically. And his playing must have inspired Keith. Also Mick. He challenged them musically I think. I don't think the Golden Age would have been so golden without him. Fool's gold perhaps?!

Did not know the Jagger calling Wood story. Does surprise me that Jagger would have heard much of Wood in 1969. Yet, I'll keep an open mind on that.

Ronnie with Rod Stewart. I saw them do Stay With Me on British TV. Wood was pretty bad. Why does Rod use him. Old times' sake? Rock credibilty? Don't know.

About Wood keeping busy. Yes, he does that. Always has. Much credit due for work ethic. But how's the quality? What drives him to have to be on everyone's act?

It hasn't always been Mick and Keith and then bring on the rest. Most ideas would originate with the glimmers and the band would jam them into shape,(Travelling Man again plus studio boots from various albums). I like DW cos RW and KR got it together and then brought in Jagger to finish it off! Wish they could make records like that now. Anyway....

Who is Taylor playing with today? Not with the latest fashionable, 'flavour of the month' rock acts. With 'lesser known' musicians - but musicians none the less - and ones who suit his musical taste/style. He does it for the love of the music. If he'd wanted fame and fortune he would have stayed put, wouldn't he?

All this Wood bashing will not stop. When Deidre says...

Being a Rolling Stoneis about being a committed and creative musical force within the band. Taylor was this this until he left. Wyman was this until he left. I do not sense that Ronnie fulfills this role any more. Sure, he tours with them and plays some guitar on stage after a fashion. But I rather think he'd like to be more involved in the studio - eg last November's sessions. This must be Mick and Keith's decision.

This was not always true. Bill was sometimes not around during recording sessions so I would not call him a creative musical force until he left the band. I think the creativity for the most part came from Mick and Keith. I also don't agree with you about the Gold Age of the Stones not occurring without Taylor. This also came from Mick and Keith, many different guitarists in 1969 could have jumped in and done the job, I don't think Taylor is why their records were so successful during this time.

Deidreddy Darling! (Woof!) How very eloquent you are! You made some very valid points, the logic of which I'm afraid were wasted on our Poli as he seems to be rather entrenched in his idee fix concerning monsieurs Wood and Taylor. It has always baffled me why he should display such an intense dislike for our Mick. I can only imagine that he was refused an auotgraph when he was younger, or some such thing. Still, I'll leave that for him and his professional brain care specialist to sort out. By the way, I liked Dirty Work too!



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 2005-01-31 22:56 by ChrisM.

Brain Jones is Dead, Mick Taylor is playing bars...Ronnie is the now,....any bad music they make (which I dont think is any) is the hands of Keith and Mick. they have the final say...so dont play blame Ronnie on the current music that is being made if you dont like it...blame the glimmer twins..
"got to get into a fight, cant get out of it"

I will not be ranked by voodoopug or anybody else



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2005-02-01 00:13 by BostonStrangler.

Hound Dog. I said " I do not sense that RW fulfills this role any more". My "evidence" is his relative absence on the last two albums. And his less than professional presence on stage on last two Tours.

The long tract above was from a Taylor thread started on 2nd January. Early on in that thread the Diabolical One found it necessary to start making anti-Taylor comments and his usual "not a real stone" garbage. My main purpose was to counter this non-sense - not to rubbish Wood.

That's enough from me. Have started a genuine RW post.

Hi Chris,

Will e-mail.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2005-02-01 00:13 by Deidre.

You see how Deidra twist any post around? She must always be right, mmmmm? Now, she has delegated Taylor to a higher status than Keith and Mick. Btw, here is the truth of the matter:

"The Rolling Stones were the Greatest Band In The World before "Shirley Temple Locks Taylor," came aboard, ...for the short time he was there, that is. Also. It's the number of years that set the record straight,

RONNIE>>>30 years and COUNTING....

MT>>>barely 5 years and NOT COUNTING, see?

Don't you think that people are able top make up their own minds on this?

Yes, Ronnie has been in the band longer than MT was. A Revelation. Marvellous historical research.

The longer tract above is out of context. It was taken from a thread entitled "Two reasons for MT leaving the band" started by The Joker, in which you found it necessary to start your well-worn (out) theory.

I mention this so that people can "enjoy" the full extent of your "arguments" and other peoples responses to them.

Incidentally, isn't it ironic that, biblically speaking, Demons are Truth- Twisters?

Sympathetically,

A Dirty Dame, ("Twisted Sister").



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2005-02-01 12:18 by Deidre.

I thought Keith, NOT MT played base on Fingerprint File?

C'mon people they are both intensley talented men. It may be fortune or misfortune that each will be greatly remembered by the work that they did with the Glimmer Twins. Each was the right man at the right time for the right job!

Me too. It doesn't sound like MT.

It is MT. I think it's in the credits too. (On the Vinyl sleeve).

Actually, is Keith credited with any bass on IORR? Will check. But I remember Nick Kent discussing this (MT bass on FF) in his original IORR album review in the New Musical Express. Nick Kent was a good pal of Keith's and on the 'inside'.

When I asked Taylor last year which tracks he played bass on on GHS he couldn't clearly remember (Keith plays many) - but he immediately said that he played bass on FF.

(RW plays it live on LYL).



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2005-02-01 15:59 by Deidre.

m.t. is credited by many as playing bass on f.f.
bill wyman was on synthesizers, along with m.t., playing around on it for the sound.. m.t. is all over iorr album...GREAT ALBUM..LISTEN TO TIME WAITS FOR NO-ONE..

im a fan of both,but ronnie has a current advavtage getting work with others because currently he is a stone,and a damn good one at that.but strically on a musical level as much as i love ron,he is not nor ever will be as accoplishewd player as mt,thats a fact,plain and simple.also mick did have an advantage because he was with the stones during there most creative writing period,last but not least why compare.there both great and have given millions of stones fans much enjoyment.

john scialfa

I was just pointing out facts. It's some misguided group of people that are causing the problem. They can't "see the numbers" as proof:

Ronnie 30 years a true STONE

mt a wannabee, merely 5 years.

Numbers add up to nothing in this case Poli. You seem fixated on the idea that length of tenure detemines if you were in the band or not. You also seem for some reason to wish to erase MT's contributions from the Stones legacy, at least in your own mind, but as far as I know you have never stated why. What is the source of your ire towards our Mick? Your disregard goes beyond mere dislike into sheer antipathy. Did he turn down an autograph request? Steal your girl friend or do you simply dislike tall blond guitarists?



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2005-02-01 23:32 by ChrisM.

Yep! That's right, time spent in a band means nothing...After all who is the true drummer of Spinal Tap?

ROCKMAN

Indeed!

No, I get it.

The Stones are real band because they've been together over 40 years, while the wannabee Beatles (not mentioning their dubious hair-styles) were NOT a REAL band cos they were only together for a measly 6 or 7 years.

Poor Hendrix. So unreal, man.

Cliff Richard.......Rock On!

Anyway, you are reasonably right about your arithmetic FACTS. You calculated that 1974-1969 = 5 and that 2005-1976= 29, (we'll be generous and round that one up to 30). What this proves is that you can COUNT.

Yippee!!!!

Now, on the digits of one hand, would you like to count for us, (take your time), the number of men walking down the steps on the cover of the It's Only Rock and Roll album? (Released in 1974).

Now, again, try and count the number of faces on the Goats Head Soup cover. (It's the yellow one from 1973).

And finally, for bonus marks, can you even calculate, (without electronic aids please), the number of men standing together, on the insert to 1971's Sticky Fingers album.

I've made two basic assumptions here:

1. That you have the usual number of digits on at least one hand, and would use that hand for counting. However, on the same assumption, toes would work equally well.

2. That you have seen, heard of, or possess one of the above three albums.

I'm also assuming you're not blind and can read........

that being the case....in each of the first two albums mentioned above you will find a list of band members, (followed by a list of assisting musicians). Notice that the two DIFFERENT lists are clearly separated. (This is also the case on a 1972 album called Exile on Maine St., whose cover might confuse you). See if you can count the number of players in the primary, (initial), list of each album. It should be the same in each case and equal the number of people you found illustrated on the albums from 1971, 1973 and 1974, (questions 1-3 above).

(Ignore the number of people in the secondary lists......they vary with each album and besides we'll stick to one concept at a time for today's lesson).

Good luck!

Your time starts now.





Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 2005-02-02 03:32 by Deidre.

Hmmmm, Deidreddy. After serious mathematical computations I conclude that the number in the case above is...wait a minute...5! That's right, isn't it? It is! Whew! that was a tough one. I need a nap!

Duuuhhhh! Chris, (you teacher's pet), that was a question for our Demon-witted friend!

You've given him the answer on a plate.

But you are right. And besides, he could never have worked it out himself.

At least now he will be aware that on those albums' band credits five, (5), members of the Rolling Stones. I think we can safely conclude that those are FACTS. I don't think that any of those band members were imaginary. They were all credited with either singing or playing certain instruments which can be heard on said albums. I'm prepared to take a very small step of faith and assume this is TRUE.

The next step in his Stones' history lesson will be a bit uncomfortable for him but for now we'll let him follow the process outlined above and fully digest the significance of the number five.

The important thing to realise is that it is one more than the number 4.

Pause.