Quote
PhillyFAN
Are the Stones still great? Damned right. Would they be incredible with MT? Damned right. It would be wonderful to use him more and give the predictable songs a freshness that has actually been missing for decades. It is the music that is most important at this stage of the Stones career. Many of us looked forward to MT playing after Keith Richards say on Jimmy Fallon that he would. I don't pretend to understand planning shows or how these things are done, but I just listened to Brussels Tumbling Dice and was completely knocked out by MT as well as his playing on the entire concert. Let him enhance Ronnie and Keith's already brilliant work!

Quote
71Tele
I personally would have skipped this tour entirely if not for the comments by Keith and others that led us to believe MT would be a greater part of the show. So, here I am in Oakland, after spending hundreds of dollars and traveling then finding it may just be "Midnight Rambler" - again. The underutilization of Taylor is quite bizarre, unless it has to do with Jagger's perverse refusal to give people the satisfaction of seeing the 1972-era lineup again and making comparisons (hence no Taylor and Wyman at the same time in London). Yet, we get novelty "special guests" like Lady Ga Ga and Gwen Stefani in a continuing losing battle to appear "relevant" and "contemporary". These artists may be fine in their own right, but have zero relationship to the Stones.

I wonder what it must be like for MT to have to sit backstage while the band plays "Wild Horses", "Tumbling Dice", and "Brown Sugar" - all songs he recorded with them? He should be on that stage.

Quote
uhbuhgullayew

Quote
71Tele
I personally would have skipped this tour entirely if not for the comments by Keith and others that led us to believe MT would be a greater part of the show. So, here I am in Oakland, after spending hundreds of dollars and traveling then finding it may just be "Midnight Rambler" - again. The underutilization of Taylor is quite bizarre, unless it has to do with Jagger's perverse refusal to give people the satisfaction of seeing the 1972-era lineup again and making comparisons (hence no Taylor and Wyman at the same time in London). Yet, we get novelty "special guests" like Lady Ga Ga and Gwen Stefani in a continuing losing battle to appear "relevant" and "contemporary". These artists may be fine in their own right, but have zero relationship to the Stones.

I wonder what it must be like for MT to have to sit backstage while the band plays "Wild Horses", "Tumbling Dice", and "Brown Sugar" - all songs he recorded with them? He should be on that stage.

MT probably has been wondering what it would have been like for the last few decades - only he was not backstage during Stones tours - he was elsewhere. His choice.

Quote
71Tele

Quote
uhbuhgullayew

Quote
71Tele
I personally would have skipped this tour entirely if not for the comments by Keith and others that led us to believe MT would be a greater part of the show. So, here I am in Oakland, after spending hundreds of dollars and traveling then finding it may just be "Midnight Rambler" - again. The underutilization of Taylor is quite bizarre, unless it has to do with Jagger's perverse refusal to give people the satisfaction of seeing the 1972-era lineup again and making comparisons (hence no Taylor and Wyman at the same time in London). Yet, we get novelty "special guests" like Lady Ga Ga and Gwen Stefani in a continuing losing battle to appear "relevant" and "contemporary". These artists may be fine in their own right, but have zero relationship to the Stones.

I wonder what it must be like for MT to have to sit backstage while the band plays "Wild Horses", "Tumbling Dice", and "Brown Sugar" - all songs he recorded with them? He should be on that stage.

MT probably has been wondering what it would have been like for the last few decades - only he was not backstage during Stones tours - he was elsewhere. His choice.

...and irrelevant to the thread, which is not about whether he quit, why he quit, whether it was a good idea to quit, etc. Taylor is with the band now, so the only question is whether or not he is used effectively.

Quote
Doxa

Quote
Blackdog

Quote
terraplane
When Taylor plays, everything seems to kick up a notch. Let him play on everything.

Exactly. You can feel the energy.

I also get the same impression. The irony is that both Keith and Roonie play better than they have for ages, and in a way if one is used to that guitar department - as I suppose most of us have done - there should not be anything to complain about, but by contrary: to be happy. For that reason Keith was wrong when saying that "Ronnie and I need Taylor".

But the very fact that Mick Taylor actually is now "there" and "available" makes it all different. He is adding a possible dimension to their sound that is something EXTRA to anything we have experienced for ages now. I was convinced of that when I saw the first version of "Midnight Rambler" with Taylor at London. It was almost shocking to my eyes to hear the difference to the sound I'm used to hear from them for ages. Nothing to complain about Richards/Ronnie axis - and all their safe belts - but at least to myself I have heard enough of that during all these Vegas years. To my ears they have milked any possible fresh idea of that concept, or from them as players. And even now when Keith is more focused, it is still the same old, the same old.

But with Taylor there is a novelty factor, something freshness in their sound. Taylor adds something to tHe Rolling Stones sound no one else can do. No, it won't bring them back to 1972, but it won't keep ourselves either in the premises of 1989/99, but helps forming a new Rolling Stones sound AD 2012/3. I truely hope it will not be only for one song/show.

- Doxa

Quote
Lostbrook
Random thoughts from a first time poster:

It's always in the power of fans/consumers/citizens to create change. Maybe we MT supporters are in the minority these days, but well-organized, vocal minorities can make their voices heard. Imagine if several thousand showed up at an upcoming gig wearing home-made MT t-shirts. Imagine if they all chanted "Bring back Mick!!" after Midnight Rambler. Imagine if they did this during and after EVERY song and refused to stop. Imagine if leaflets were handed out before the gig and thousands more joined in. Obviously, this would require a great deal of leadership and planning.

Imagine...

Quote
uhbuhgullayew

Quote
71Tele

Quote
uhbuhgullayew

Quote
71Tele
I personally would have skipped this tour entirely if not for the comments by Keith and others that led us to believe MT would be a greater part of the show. So, here I am in Oakland, after spending hundreds of dollars and traveling then finding it may just be "Midnight Rambler" - again. The underutilization of Taylor is quite bizarre, unless it has to do with Jagger's perverse refusal to give people the satisfaction of seeing the 1972-era lineup again and making comparisons (hence no Taylor and Wyman at the same time in London). Yet, we get novelty "special guests" like Lady Ga Ga and Gwen Stefani in a continuing losing battle to appear "relevant" and "contemporary". These artists may be fine in their own right, but have zero relationship to the Stones.

I wonder what it must be like for MT to have to sit backstage while the band plays "Wild Horses", "Tumbling Dice", and "Brown Sugar" - all songs he recorded with them? He should be on that stage.

MT probably has been wondering what it would have been like for the last few decades - only he was not backstage during Stones tours - he was elsewhere. His choice.

...and irrelevant to the thread, which is not about whether he quit, why he quit, whether it was a good idea to quit, etc. Taylor is with the band now, so the only question is whether or not he is used effectively.

True, I wish he was on stage and playing for the whole show.

Enjoy the show tonight Tele & hope you get to see MT playing more than MR.

Quote
71Tele

Quote
uhbuhgullayew

Quote
71Tele

Quote
uhbuhgullayew

Quote
71Tele
I personally would have skipped this tour entirely if not for the comments by Keith and others that led us to believe MT would be a greater part of the show. So, here I am in Oakland, after spending hundreds of dollars and traveling then finding it may just be "Midnight Rambler" - again. The underutilization of Taylor is quite bizarre, unless it has to do with Jagger's perverse refusal to give people the satisfaction of seeing the 1972-era lineup again and making comparisons (hence no Taylor and Wyman at the same time in London). Yet, we get novelty "special guests" like Lady Ga Ga and Gwen Stefani in a continuing losing battle to appear "relevant" and "contemporary". These artists may be fine in their own right, but have zero relationship to the Stones.

I wonder what it must be like for MT to have to sit backstage while the band plays "Wild Horses", "Tumbling Dice", and "Brown Sugar" - all songs he recorded with them? He should be on that stage.

MT probably has been wondering what it would have been like for the last few decades - only he was not backstage during Stones tours - he was elsewhere. His choice.

...and irrelevant to the thread, which is not about whether he quit, why he quit, whether it was a good idea to quit, etc. Taylor is with the band now, so the only question is whether or not he is used effectively.

True, I wish he was on stage and playing for the whole show.

Enjoy the show tonight Tele & hope you get to see MT playing more than MR.

Thanks! Much appreciated.

Quote
71Tele

Quote
uhbuhgullayew

Quote
71Tele

Quote
uhbuhgullayew

Quote
71Tele
I personally would have skipped this tour entirely if not for the comments by Keith and others that led us to believe MT would be a greater part of the show. So, here I am in Oakland, after spending hundreds of dollars and traveling then finding it may just be "Midnight Rambler" - again. The underutilization of Taylor is quite bizarre, unless it has to do with Jagger's perverse refusal to give people the satisfaction of seeing the 1972-era lineup again and making comparisons (hence no Taylor and Wyman at the same time in London). Yet, we get novelty "special guests" like Lady Ga Ga and Gwen Stefani in a continuing losing battle to appear "relevant" and "contemporary". These artists may be fine in their own right, but have zero relationship to the Stones.

I wonder what it must be like for MT to have to sit backstage while the band plays "Wild Horses", "Tumbling Dice", and "Brown Sugar" - all songs he recorded with them? He should be on that stage.

MT probably has been wondering what it would have been like for the last few decades - only he was not backstage during Stones tours - he was elsewhere. His choice.

...and irrelevant to the thread, which is not about whether he quit, why he quit, whether it was a good idea to quit, etc. Taylor is with the band now, so the only question is whether or not he is used effectively.

True, I wish he was on stage and playing for the whole show.

Enjoy the show tonight Tele & hope you get to see MT playing more than MR.

Thanks! Much appreciated.

Quote
Doxa


I also get the same impression. The irony is that both Keith and Roonie play better than they have for ages, and in a way if one is used to that guitar department - as I suppose most of us have done - there should not be anything to complain about, but by contrary: to be happy. For that reason Keith was wrong when saying that "Ronnie and I need Taylor".

But the very fact that Mick Taylor actually is now "there" and "available" makes it all different. He is adding a possible dimension to their sound that is something EXTRA to anything we have experienced for ages now. I was convinced of that when I saw the first version of "Midnight Rambler" with Taylor at London. It was almost shocking to my eyes to hear the difference to the sound I'm used to hear from them for ages. Nothing to complain about Richards/Ronnie axis - and all their safe belts - but at least to myself I have heard enough of that during all these Vegas years. To my ears they have milked any possible fresh idea of that concept, or from them as players. And even now when Keith is more focused, it is still the same old, the same old.

But with Taylor there is a novelty factor, something freshness in their sound. Taylor adds something to tHe Rolling Stones sound no one else can do. No, it won't bring them back to 1972, but it won't keep ourselves either in the premises of 1989/99, but helps forming a new Rolling Stones sound AD 2012/3. I truely hope it will not be only for one song/show.

- Doxa

Quote
latebloomer
I think one song Taylor at the LA show may have had something to do with Jagger's comfort level. Keith has said that the band is there to support Mick, the frontman. Mick is probably much less inclined at his age to want any surprises in tempo and playing from the band. Yes, they rehearsed with Taylor, but the first few shows are the ones where they, Mick especially, are probably the most nervous and therefore less inclined to rock the boat, no pun intended. The other guests are there to amp up the publicity, especially when they need to sell more tickets.

I think as they get into the groove of the tour, we will see more of Taylor. Personally, I don't care either way, I'm just excited to be able to see them twice in Philly.

Quote
triceratops

Quote
Doxa


I also get the same impression. The irony is that both Keith and Roonie play better than they have for ages, and in a way if one is used to that guitar department - as I suppose most of us have done - there should not be anything to complain about, but by contrary: to be happy. For that reason Keith was wrong when saying that "Ronnie and I need Taylor".

But the very fact that Mick Taylor actually is now "there" and "available" makes it all different. He is adding a possible dimension to their sound that is something EXTRA to anything we have experienced for ages now. I was convinced of that when I saw the first version of "Midnight Rambler" with Taylor at London. It was almost shocking to my eyes to hear the difference to the sound I'm used to hear from them for ages. Nothing to complain about Richards/Ronnie axis - and all their safe belts - but at least to myself I have heard enough of that during all these Vegas years. To my ears they have milked any possible fresh idea of that concept, or from them as players. And even now when Keith is more focused, it is still the same old, the same old.

But with Taylor there is a novelty factor, something freshness in their sound. Taylor adds something to tHe Rolling Stones sound no one else can do. No, it won't bring them back to 1972, but it won't keep ourselves either in the premises of 1989/99, but helps forming a new Rolling Stones sound AD 2012/3. I truely hope it will not be only for one song/show.

- Doxa

Pretty much sums it up. At minimum MickT should be strumming along on numerous tunes. Not dominating (which he did in his prime and which I liked. I mean he took songs like Satisfaction and Dead Flowers and made them his own_) but just supplementing the guitar mix. Then stepping out for 2-3-4 tunes a night where he would be more noticeable. Such as Sway or Dead Flowers. For me Midnight Rambler is a traffic jam done live and not interesting

Quote
Sighunt
For people who are interested, my open letter on Facebook is posted, it is half-way down the page under Scott Sigel open letter to Mick Jagger. If you have an account on Facebook, go to the Rolling Stones page, AND IF YOU AGREE with my thoughts regarding using Mick Taylor more, add a reply or comment to it. Thanks, Scott.

Quote
duffydawg
I bought tickets to both shows in Chicago because I thought Jagger was fairly clear that MT was going to have an expanded role. Not just a singular special guest. I am so screwed. Without MT this is the same crap I have been hearing for 40 years. What a joke.

I should have waited on the tickets. They aren't selling out anyways at $600 a pop but foolishly they have my money already.

They have to know what their customers really want. Move Wood to Bass or do a three guitar attack.

Also, WTF is KR and RW sitting around during MR. They look bored like this is just a bad retrospective for one song. How about trading leads with MT. It is all so friggin hokey.

Quote
triceratops

Quote
Doxa


I also get the same impression. The irony is that both Keith and Roonie play better than they have for ages, and in a way if one is used to that guitar department - as I suppose most of us have done - there should not be anything to complain about, but by contrary: to be happy. For that reason Keith was wrong when saying that "Ronnie and I need Taylor".

But the very fact that Mick Taylor actually is now "there" and "available" makes it all different. He is adding a possible dimension to their sound that is something EXTRA to anything we have experienced for ages now. I was convinced of that when I saw the first version of "Midnight Rambler" with Taylor at London. It was almost shocking to my eyes to hear the difference to the sound I'm used to hear from them for ages. Nothing to complain about Richards/Ronnie axis - and all their safe belts - but at least to myself I have heard enough of that during all these Vegas years. To my ears they have milked any possible fresh idea of that concept, or from them as players. And even now when Keith is more focused, it is still the same old, the same old.

But with Taylor there is a novelty factor, something freshness in their sound. Taylor adds something to tHe Rolling Stones sound no one else can do. No, it won't bring them back to 1972, but it won't keep ourselves either in the premises of 1989/99, but helps forming a new Rolling Stones sound AD 2012/3. I truely hope it will not be only for one song/show.

- Doxa

Pretty much sums it up. At minimum MickT should be strumming along on numerous tunes. Not dominating (which he did in his prime and which I liked. I mean he took songs like Satisfaction and Dead Flowers and made them his own_) but just supplementing the guitar mix. Then stepping out for 2-3-4 tunes a night where he would be more noticeable. Such as Sway or Dead Flowers. For me Midnight Rambler is a traffic jam done live and not interesting