Quote
sonomastone
personally i'd prefer it if the Mick Taylor campaign moved to the Stones facebook page, which has much more public visibliity and is without a doubt actively monitored by Stones underlings.

did you notice the iorr homepage ?

[www.iorr.org]

Quote
shortfatfanny

Quote
sonomastone
personally i'd prefer it if the Mick Taylor campaign moved to the Stones facebook page, which has much more public visibliity and is without a doubt actively monitored by Stones underlings.

did you notice the iorr homepage ?

[www.iorr.org]

what's your point?

Now it's sticky!

Should we move all the Taylor-threads in here, Bjørnulf?

:-)

Thank you Bjornulf ..........

[ I want to shout, but I can hardly speak ]

Quote
sonomastone

Quote
shortfatfanny

Quote
sonomastone
personally i'd prefer it if the Mick Taylor campaign moved to the Stones facebook page, which has much more public visibliity and is without a doubt actively monitored by Stones underlings.

did you notice the iorr homepage ?

[www.iorr.org]

what's your point?

...for example.

We want Mick Taylor on more than two songs, please ...

agreed.
And on more threads !

Quote
RobertJohnson
We want Mick Taylor on more than two songs, please ...

There is a thread named that already

Yeah, great to have this one sticky again!

What I was about to say... oh yeah... MORE TAYLOR PLEASE!!

- Doxa

Quote
Doxa
Yeah, great to have this one sticky again!

What I was about to say... oh yeah... MORE TAYLOR PLEASE!!

- Doxa

correct!
the great man is playing with the band again...that in itself is amazing.

Not using Mick Taylor on Love in vain, Times waits for no one, Sway and Can't you hear me... makes me totally puzzled. But, it is also a set list problematic...

Obviously, the band (Mick) don't want to play those songs... at the moment.

Quote
roby
Not using Mick Taylor on Love in vain, Times waits for no one, Sway and Can't you hear me... makes me totally puzzled. But, it is also a set list problematic...

Obviously, the band (Mick) don't want to play those songs... at the moment.

Those songs are obscure or totally unknown for 80% of the audience.

i think the problem is rehearsing !!
i dont think the band does much of this at all !!

it's clearly evident from what I have heard from the special guests.

to think they have a fit and healthy Mick Taylor on stage, you would think they would try some of these treasures...??
Unfortunately, the lure of easy money without even trying cancels this possibility out.
Unless of course, with the backlash of the ticket prices, they pull their fingers out and include Taylor on more songs, in particular the ones you mention above!

we can only hope...

Quote
DandelionPowderman

Quote
roby
Not using Mick Taylor on Love in vain, Times waits for no one, Sway and Can't you hear me... makes me totally puzzled. But, it is also a set list problematic...

Obviously, the band (Mick) don't want to play those songs... at the moment.

Those songs are obscure or totally unknown for 80% of the audience.

indeed, much as we don't like it, if you check out the stones' facebook page there are a bunch of comments about the set list. the vast majority of them are asking for "wild horses" "beast of burden", etc. "more war horses" would be the summary of what the stones facebook fans are asking for.

Yes, I know. That's why I speak about a set list problematic / equation.

Quote
DandelionPowderman

Quote
roby
Not using Mick Taylor on Love in vain, Times waits for no one, Sway and Can't you hear me... makes me totally puzzled. But, it is also a set list problematic...

Obviously, the band (Mick) don't want to play those songs... at the moment.

Those songs are obscure or totally unknown for 80% of the audience.

Quote
sonomastone

Quote
DandelionPowderman

Quote
roby
Not using Mick Taylor on Love in vain, Times waits for no one, Sway and Can't you hear me... makes me totally puzzled. But, it is also a set list problematic...

Obviously, the band (Mick) don't want to play those songs... at the moment.

Those songs are obscure or totally unknown for 80% of the audience.

indeed, much as we don't like it, if you check out the stones' facebook page there are a bunch of comments about the set list. the vast majority of them are asking for "wild horses" "beast of burden", etc. "more war horses" would be the summary of what the stones facebook fans are asking for.

One More Shot and Doom and Gloom are probably obscure for 90% of the audience, yet they don't have any problem trotting them out every night. At least split the difference and have one new obscurity vs one older one.

Quote
StonesCat

Quote
sonomastone

Quote
DandelionPowderman

Quote
roby
Not using Mick Taylor on Love in vain, Times waits for no one, Sway and Can't you hear me... makes me totally puzzled. But, it is also a set list problematic...

Obviously, the band (Mick) don't want to play those songs... at the moment.

Those songs are obscure or totally unknown for 80% of the audience.

indeed, much as we don't like it, if you check out the stones' facebook page there are a bunch of comments about the set list. the vast majority of them are asking for "wild horses" "beast of burden", etc. "more war horses" would be the summary of what the stones facebook fans are asking for.

One More Shot and Doom and Gloom are probably obscure for 90% of the audience, yet they don't have any problem trotting them out every night.

Checkmate.

Ditch the new songs? Well, I guess someone will complain whatever they do

Quote
RobertJohnson
We want Mick Taylor on more than two songs, please ...

The more Mick Taylor the better but let's not get greedy. We asked for more and they delivered! We are getting roughly 15 to 20 minutes of Mick Taylor per show. Not bad at all.

I've given up hope, now I am getting rid of the rest of my tickets.

Quote
StonesCat

Quote
sonomastone

Quote
DandelionPowderman

Quote
roby
Not using Mick Taylor on Love in vain, Times waits for no one, Sway and Can't you hear me... makes me totally puzzled. But, it is also a set list problematic...

Obviously, the band (Mick) don't want to play those songs... at the moment.

Those songs are obscure or totally unknown for 80% of the audience.

indeed, much as we don't like it, if you check out the stones' facebook page there are a bunch of comments about the set list. the vast majority of them are asking for "wild horses" "beast of burden", etc. "more war horses" would be the summary of what the stones facebook fans are asking for.

One More Shot and Doom and Gloom are probably obscure for 90% of the audience, yet they don't have any problem trotting them out every night. At least split the difference and have one new obscurity vs one older one.

They may not believe this but they could trot out at least a couple more new songs per show and the audience would be just fine. The crowd doesn't need to be in a frenzy until the grand climax anyway. As long as they get JJF and Satisfaction at the end they are going home pleased no matter what.

Quote
DandelionPowderman
Ditch the new songs? Well, I guess someone will complain whatever they do

Not a bad idea really. Pretty sure that Don't Stop was the only one of the four new songs from Forty Licks that was played live on that tour.

Quote
uhbuhgullayew

Quote
DandelionPowderman
Ditch the new songs? Well, I guess someone will complain whatever they do

Not a bad idea really. Pretty sure that Don't Stop was the only one of the four new songs from Forty Licks that was played live on that tour.

+ new covers like Love Train and many others. I think the new songs work fine in the set.

Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2013-06-18 00:31 by His Majesty.

What I think would be really cool is when Mick takes his break and Keith does his two songs bring out Mick Taylor and do a blues jam that could start with You Got the Silver and goes whever they want it to go.

Well Ronnie has sure made the case for Taylor on YCAGWYW from some of the clips I've seen, lol. It seems a little petty to give Taylor two of the weirder songs to solo over: MR is very dynamic with lots of speed changes, and Satisfaction is a riff song chugging along at 50 mph to end the show. Neither of those songs is just your normal "solo over the verse/chorus section" like all of the songs people are suggesting he play on.

I think he'll crack 3 songs a night soon. And I also think MJ has plans for him in the future Stones shows after July. I don't see MJ spending time and effort getting Taylor acclimated to what a Stones' tour is like nowadays for just 20 gigs playing 1-2 songs a night.

Stones are MJ KR CW RW. BW said he will never play again with them since he hoped to play on more than 2 songs. But they cannot sack Darryl.
Ronnie is the lead guitar. You can consider several guitars on stage but it would work only with each one having its parts to play and duels like yesterday with Mayer.

"we know it's a bit late but we hope you don't mind if we stay"

More than one. More than two. More than many... How greedy can we be? And how great is chockolate and beer if you get endless unlimited supplies?

Bjornulf

Quote
bv
More than one. More than two. More than many... How greedy can we be? And how great is chockolate and beer if you get endless unlimited supplies?

Chocolate and beer in unlimited quantities ? Hmm ....... probably not that good really, apart from anything else it would make you awfully FAT !!! But, Mick Taylor on perhaps THREE songs, now that would definitely NOT make you fat, and it would inevitably sounds bloody great.

To answer your question, and in fact you yourself voiced this opinion in your opening post on this thread, two or three songs would be a good number for Taylor to contribute to ......... any more than three and I personally would say that the RS would be most generous, and we the audience would be very lucky.

[ I want to shout, but I can hardly speak ]