For information about how to use this forum please check out forum help and policies.
Quote
rambler44
Very poor form by Mick and Keith. I agree with someone else who said cut Taylor a check and send him home. No need to treat him like this for the rest of the tour.
Quote
71Tele
To those who think we should be content with the token one-song MT appearance:
What the entire music world could have been talking about now is the amazing musical renaissance of the Rolling Stones, creatively using their three guitarists to breathe new life into old tired arrangements, and take us on a new trip. This is what top-tier musicians do when presented with this kind of opportunity. Instead they have chosen to play it safe, throw the Taylor-era fans a bone, and put on the usual greatest hits show.
So in a way it's a debate by those of us hungering for new musical daring and risk-taking by the Rolling Stones (in which the payoff could be wonderful), vs. those who are perfectly saitisfied to roll out the hits again with one or two minor tweaks.
Quote
MisterDDDDQuote
71Tele
To those who think we should be content with the token one-song MT appearance:
What the entire music world could have been talking about now is the amazing musical renaissance of the Rolling Stones, creatively using their three guitarists to breathe new life into old tired arrangements, and take us on a new trip. This is what top-tier musicians do when presented with this kind of opportunity. Instead they have chosen to play it safe, throw the Taylor-era fans a bone, and put on the usual greatest hits show.
So in a way it's a debate by those of us hungering for new musical daring and risk-taking by the Rolling Stones (in which the payoff could be wonderful), vs. those who are perfectly saitisfied to roll out the hits again with one or two minor tweaks.
And the entire music world could also be talking about the surviving Beatles doing a concert with Lennon's and Harrison's sons standing in.
Or they could be talking about Led Zeppelin's reunion tour.
Or..
But they're not.
They're talking about the Stones tour and most of them about how amazing it is.
Because that's real. The rest is fantasy.
Quote
71TeleQuote
MisterDDDDQuote
71Tele
To those who think we should be content with the token one-song MT appearance:
What the entire music world could have been talking about now is the amazing musical renaissance of the Rolling Stones, creatively using their three guitarists to breathe new life into old tired arrangements, and take us on a new trip. This is what top-tier musicians do when presented with this kind of opportunity. Instead they have chosen to play it safe, throw the Taylor-era fans a bone, and put on the usual greatest hits show.
So in a way it's a debate by those of us hungering for new musical daring and risk-taking by the Rolling Stones (in which the payoff could be wonderful), vs. those who are perfectly saitisfied to roll out the hits again with one or two minor tweaks.
And the entire music world could also be talking about the surviving Beatles doing a concert with Lennon's and Harrison's sons standing in.
Or they could be talking about Led Zeppelin's reunion tour.
Or..
But they're not.
They're talking about the Stones tour and most of them about how amazing it is.
Because that's real. The rest is fantasy.
Your comparison to those things is idiotic. It is not "fantasy" to say that the Stones now could be doing something musically challenging and interesting instead of rolling out the hits one more time. It is simply a choice they have made.
Quote
GRNRBITWQuote
clance65
I'd rather have a bit more of Mick Taylor. I'm happy to for whatever The Rolling Stones can give us.
Before this tour the argument didn't really exist. It didn't seem a possibility. Now that The Stones offer us a chance to see Mick Taylor perform with them again, it isn't enough?
I am a life long Rolling Stones fanatic. Last Sunday I attended my 36th show since 1981. The first record I ever bought was "Some Girls".
The guitarist I grew up with is Ronnie Wood. He's been there 38 years....since I was 10 yrs old. HE IS The Stones to me. The 2nd best showman on that stage. The perfect compliment on stage.
The "performance" is why I love these guys! Ronnie is so critical to the performance.
I love the Taylor era records and songs, but I grew up on the Wood interpretation.
I'd like a bit more Taylor involvement the same way I'd like to hear 2 more Keith songs, and have the set list run to about 40 songs or so, with deep cuts or tunes that haven't been played since ??, etc...
More of everything would be great. But man, I got to see Taylor on stage. I got to hear Mick's falsetto on Emotional Rescue. I'm happy. I'm content. I'm grateful.
whiner. you don't fool me.
Quote
sonomastoneQuote
71TeleQuote
MisterDDDDQuote
71Tele
To those who think we should be content with the token one-song MT appearance:
What the entire music world could have been talking about now is the amazing musical renaissance of the Rolling Stones, creatively using their three guitarists to breathe new life into old tired arrangements, and take us on a new trip. This is what top-tier musicians do when presented with this kind of opportunity. Instead they have chosen to play it safe, throw the Taylor-era fans a bone, and put on the usual greatest hits show.
So in a way it's a debate by those of us hungering for new musical daring and risk-taking by the Rolling Stones (in which the payoff could be wonderful), vs. those who are perfectly saitisfied to roll out the hits again with one or two minor tweaks.
And the entire music world could also be talking about the surviving Beatles doing a concert with Lennon's and Harrison's sons standing in.
Or they could be talking about Led Zeppelin's reunion tour.
Or..
But they're not.
They're talking about the Stones tour and most of them about how amazing it is.
Because that's real. The rest is fantasy.
Your comparison to those things is idiotic. It is not "fantasy" to say that the Stones now could be doing something musically challenging and interesting instead of rolling out the hits one more time. It is simply a choice they have made.
A choice they made years ago, I don't understand the focus on the number of
Mick Taylor songs.
Quote
SweetThingQuote
71Tele
To those who think we should be content with the token one-song MT appearance:
What the entire music world could have been talking about now is the amazing musical renaissance of the Rolling Stones, creatively using their three guitarists to breathe new life into old tired arrangements, and take us on a new trip. This is what top-tier musicians do when presented with this kind of opportunity. Instead they have chosen to play it safe, throw the Taylor-era fans a bone, and put on the usual greatest hits show.
So in a way it's a debate by those of us hungering for new musical daring and risk-taking by the Rolling Stones (in which the payoff could be wonderful), vs. those who are perfectly saitisfied to roll out the hits again with one or two minor tweaks.
Indeed. The Vegas Republican Guard on IORR would like us all to just shut up and stop "whining" and be treated to the same old thing we have enjoyed more or less since 1989 - plus this odd recurring cameo of Mick Taylor on Midnight Rambler.
But for most of us wanting "more" Taylor here, it is not a question of 1973 vs Vegas. And, its not a question of "Nostalgia" (ie Taylor) vs The Current Lineup, because The Vegas act is nothing more than nostalgia now in and of itself (albeit missing a bit of authenticity).
We can NEVER have 1973 back (even dropping Ronnie and reinstating Bill would not make that happen). Rather what most of us - at least you Tele, Doxa and others - is something "NEW" - WITH Ronnie and Taylor together on *some* of the older classics that are now a bit stale, and even, a few of the more recent works which just might work better with a hybrid ingredient. I fully understand it might be too much for them to deliver if they simply don't wish to do it, as may well be the case, but it shouldn't be terribly unreasonable for FANS (of the Stones, of Taylor and of Ronnie) to wish for. Don't forget, Ronnie was himself a fan - and that's inclusive of Brian Jones, Mick Taylor and their contributions, and probably no small part of his generosity of spirit from what we have seen at least.
Quote
71Tele
To those who think we should be content with the token one-song MT appearance:
What the entire music world could have been talking about now is the amazing musical renaissance of the Rolling Stones, creatively using their three guitarists to breathe new life into old tired arrangements, and take us on a new trip. This is what top-tier musicians do when presented with this kind of opportunity. Instead they have chosen to play it safe, throw the Taylor-era fans a bone, and put on the usual greatest hits show.
So in a way it's a debate by those of us hungering for new musical daring and risk-taking by the Rolling Stones (in which the payoff could be wonderful), vs. those who are perfectly saitisfied to roll out the hits again with one or two minor tweaks.
Quote
71Tele
Unfortunately every time we try to say something some idiot who hates Mick Taylor says something else.
Quote
stonesrule
Tell us in one paragraph here what it is you would like others to support.
Quote
MunichhiltonQuote
71Tele
Unfortunately every time we try to say something some idiot who hates Mick Taylor says something else.
Who could possibly hate Mick Taylor?
Point them out...I'll ruff em up...
Quote
71Tele
Unfortunately every time we try to say something some idiot who hates Mick Taylor says something else.
Quote
Max'sKansasCityQuote
71Tele
Unfortunately every time we try to say something some idiot who hates Mick Taylor says something else.
It is possible to like the Rolling Stones Sans-Mick Taylor, WITHOUT hating Mick Taylor and without being an idiot.
Quote
71TeleQuote
Max'sKansasCityQuote
71Tele
Unfortunately every time we try to say something some idiot who hates Mick Taylor says something else.
It is possible to like the Rolling Stones Sans-Mick Taylor, WITHOUT hating Mick Taylor and without being an idiot.
Yes, it is. Unfortunately given some of the comments around here recently, I was beginning to wonder.
Quote
stoneheartedQuote
71TeleQuote
Max'sKansasCityQuote
71Tele
Unfortunately every time we try to say something some idiot who hates Mick Taylor says something else.
It is possible to like the Rolling Stones Sans-Mick Taylor, WITHOUT hating Mick Taylor and without being an idiot.
Yes, it is. Unfortunately given some of the comments around here recently, I was beginning to wonder.
Yes, I'm surprised at the widespread indifference to Mick T as well. He's a former Rolling Stone who played on many classic songs and provided a signature sound for a few of their most glorious years. Why aren't more people glad to have him back and wish for him to have more extensive involvement with the band? I thought part of being a Rolling Stones fan was about respecting their history and the figures who contributed to it.
It makes me think that if Brian Jones were alive that many here just wouldn't care about him as well.
Apparently people here only like you if you played on Dirty Work through ABB--those must be the favorite albums of anti-Taylorites (or those who are indifferent to Taylor).
Quote
Max'sKansasCityQuote
stoneheartedQuote
71TeleQuote
Max'sKansasCityQuote
71Tele
Unfortunately every time we try to say something some idiot who hates Mick Taylor says something else.
It is possible to like the Rolling Stones Sans-Mick Taylor, WITHOUT hating Mick Taylor and without being an idiot.
Yes, it is. Unfortunately given some of the comments around here recently, I was beginning to wonder.
Yes, I'm surprised at the widespread indifference to Mick T as well. He's a former Rolling Stone who played on many classic songs and provided a signature sound for a few of their most glorious years. Why aren't more people glad to have him back and wish for him to have more extensive involvement with the band? I thought part of being a Rolling Stones fan was about respecting their history and the figures who contributed to it.
It makes me think that if Brian Jones were alive that many here just wouldn't care about him as well.
Apparently people here only like you if you played on Dirty Work through ABB--those must be the favorite albums of anti-Taylorites (or those who are indifferent to Taylor).
There is no need to subdivide the Stones into sections, eras or albums made. I view The Stones as The Stones.... all one thing, one long lasting, great musical thing running from 1962 to infinity and beyond.
Cheers my friend!Quote
stoneheartedQuote
Max'sKansasCityQuote
stoneheartedQuote
71TeleQuote
Max'sKansasCityQuote
71Tele
Unfortunately every time we try to say something some idiot who hates Mick Taylor says something else.
It is possible to like the Rolling Stones Sans-Mick Taylor, WITHOUT hating Mick Taylor and without being an idiot.
Yes, it is. Unfortunately given some of the comments around here recently, I was beginning to wonder.
Yes, I'm surprised at the widespread indifference to Mick T as well. He's a former Rolling Stone who played on many classic songs and provided a signature sound for a few of their most glorious years. Why aren't more people glad to have him back and wish for him to have more extensive involvement with the band? I thought part of being a Rolling Stones fan was about respecting their history and the figures who contributed to it.
It makes me think that if Brian Jones were alive that many here just wouldn't care about him as well.
Apparently people here only like you if you played on Dirty Work through ABB--those must be the favorite albums of anti-Taylorites (or those who are indifferent to Taylor).
There is no need to subdivide the Stones into sections, eras or albums made. I view The Stones as The Stones.... all one thing, one long lasting, great musical thing running from 1962 to infinity and beyond.
I'll drink to that....
Quote
Sighunt
Scott Sigel Open letter to Mick Jagger re: Mick Taylor