Quote
opentuning
One of the options on the poll for June 21 Philadelphia is Moonlight Mile. I think it would be a bit of a slap in the face if Taylor didn't get to play on a song he supposedly co-wrote.

Goddamn, I can't decide. CYHMK or MM?

Quote
Hound Dog
He also said nothing was decided and that they'd figure it out in rehearsals.

That actually paints a whole different side, then why did they not have him rehearse with them until they were all ready to go and invite him at the end to only rehearse a few songs. If they had ideas of having the 3 guitar layered effect than at least let the guy rehearse with the band more.[/quote]

I'll bite...

Uhh.. Because maybe THAT'S what THEY worked out in rehearsals??

Or if you must, maybe even PRE rehearsals.Maybe they called it a meeting.Or a get together. Or over coffee. Or tea? Would that be OK with you if they went behind your back and did something like that? And rest assured, it appears they did that AFTER Keith's admitted "speculating"..



Dude.
It's THEIR band.

I'm going to start a fire here.....I recently moved, so my stuff is all boxed up, and I can't reference before I speak, but.....If memory serves me correct, the L&G version of LIV pales to the GYYY version. The first solo with slide is just off, it lacks in technique. The second solo, without slide is better. His vibrato is much better than his slide playing, which IMO, is more of an indictment of his slide playing, than a compliment to his finger style.......This ought to be worth a page or two of ripping. Just my opinion.

My guess is its already decided....Fool To Cry with Aaron Neville.

Quote
Thrylan
I'm going to start a fire here.....I recently moved, so my stuff is all boxed up, and I can't reference before I speak, but.....If memory serves me correct, the L&G version of LIV pales to the GYYY version. The first solo with slide is just off, it lacks in technique. The second solo, without slide is better. His vibrato is much better than his slide playing, which IMO, is more of an indictment of his slide playing, than a compliment to his finger style.......This ought to be worth a page or two of ripping. Just my opinion.

I don't think so. Taylor, Maybe not as technically precise but Jagger's crescendo more than makes up. Honestly, I love the Capitol Connection version better than GYYYO.

You maybe correct. Being a guitar geek, amongst other guitar geeks who are not all Stones freaks like myself, I tend to judge things by the guitar playing going on. I also like to bounce Stones stuff off of non Stones fans for honest criticism. Mistakes happen in live music, and that is why I like it.

Quote
fleabitmonkey
My guess is its already decided....Fool To Cry with Aaron Neville.

And if it is, that also gives them a 100% bombproof excuse for not playing CYHMK or Moonlight Mile - yah, boo, sucks, we would have but you didn't vote for it...

The trouble is that Fool To Cry would sound good with Aaron Neville - but I just wish they wouldn't put us through this charade of having to appear to "choose", so that when they play only one of three good possibilities, it becomes our fault and not theirs.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2013-06-21 08:26 by Green Lady.

Quote
Thrylan
You maybe correct. Being a guitar geek, amongst other guitar geeks who are not all Stones freaks like myself, I tend to judge things by the guitar playing going on. I also like to bounce Stones stuff off of non Stones fans for honest criticism. Mistakes happen in live music, and that is why I like it.

Without exceptions the non-Stones fans say the Stones sound way too standard and boring.

I've given up converting some of the guitar players I know...

Quote
SweetThing

Quote
DandelionPowderman
Didn't he get an expanded role? I don't remember any sway, cyhmk or s with Taylor in London last year. That's all Keith said, really...

On that late night TV show, Keith started talking about all the layering of guitar parts in most of their songs, and how it would be so great to have Taylor so more of the actual song can be played with THREE guitars. That implied, to me, there was a plan, a legitimate use for having Taylor on stage with them.

Instead, for most attending the concert, the "expanded" role Taylor got, was a cameo on Satisfaction.

Not that it really matters much now.

Exactly! And he said that they would TRY to work it out, and see what happened as well.

My point is that many (including me) fans were assuming that Taylor would get many songs, but that was not what Keith said at all. It was simply our expectations running away with us...

Quote
DandelionPowderman

Quote
Thrylan
You maybe correct. Being a guitar geek, amongst other guitar geeks who are not all Stones freaks like myself, I tend to judge things by the guitar playing going on. I also like to bounce Stones stuff off of non Stones fans for honest criticism. Mistakes happen in live music, and that is why I like it.

Without exceptions the non-Stones fans say the Stones sound way too standard and boring.

I've given up converting some of the guitar players I know...

I Know..... I do have one close friend who I consider a true, "fan of music", who's opinion I always consider. You are correct though favorite story. A Stones bashing friend in a cover band, comes to me, "hat in hand", ' man, can you show me HTW, I can't figure out all those little licks'....Yes, yes I can.....(Big Smile)

Quote
LookoutMountain
Hear you loud and clear schilid. By coincidence a friend just posted the 1972 version of LIV from Ladies & Gentleman to me. I was fortunate to hear it at the Echoplex. I hope they do it again instead of other slow songs like Wild Horses.

I still can't get over how the younger Stones were TOTALLY TRANSPORTED by what they were doing. Maybe there were drugs involved; but you see and hear the blues, the spirit of it. You FEEL it.

Fast forward to 2013. In lieu of watching new Sways or Knockings I had another look at MR from Philly 1 and the synergy is still there, musically, but also chumming. MT is part of the "weaving" rhythm engine but has that little duet with MJ which is actually touching in its intimacy.

When the two Micks go head to head I see it as a nod to the collaborations between them in the past, where there was a call and response (Hide Your Love comes to mind). I'm not that familiar with their live performances so I wonder if it's unusual for MJ to have that kind of prolonged exchange with one of his band-mates, as he does with MT on Rambler today.

It struck me that it's kind of an honor for MT to have this special spotlight with Jagger,in tribute to their former collaborations. Of course I hope for more participation. But as it stands, it's pretty "symbolic" and pretty great.

Tell us more about the Love In Vain at the Echoplex!! How was it?

Quote
DandelionPowderman

Quote
LookoutMountain
Hear you loud and clear schillid. By coincidence a friend just posted the 1972 version of LIV from Ladies & Gentleman to me. I was fortunate to hear it at the Echoplex. I hope they do it again instead of other slow songs like Wild Horses.

I still can't get over how the younger Stones were TOTALLY TRANSPORTED by what they were doing. Maybe there were drugs involved; but you see and hear the blues, the spirit of it. You FEEL it.

Fast forward to 2013. In lieu of watching new Sways or Knockings I had another look at MR from Philly 1 and the synergy is still there, musically, but also chumming. MT is part of the "weaving" rhythm engine but has that little duet with MJ which is actually touching in its intimacy.

When the two Micks go head to head I see it as a nod to the collaborations between them in the past, where there was a call and response (Hide Your Love comes to mind). I'm not that familiar with their live performances so I wonder if it's unusual for MJ to have that kind of prolonged exchange with one of his band-mates, as he does with MT on Rambler today.

It struck me that it's kind of an honor for MT to have this special spotlight with Jagger,in tribute to their former collaborations. Of course I hope for more participation. But as it stands, it's pretty "symbolic" and pretty great.

Tell us more about the Love In Vain at the Echoplex!! How was it?

Dandelion, it was thrilling to watch Mick Taylor come on stage and play that one right out of the gate. I was up front on Ronnie's side with a good view and wanted to etch every detail in my brain but was so wrung out from a day of lottery madness, only three things stand out:

It was gorgeous -- but in the spirit of a warm-up show, there were a couple of surprises.

When the first break came Taylor gave the lead to Ronnie. He just nodded amicably, "Here mate, you take it." I was not sure if that was generosity or "an understanding." Ronnie did a fine version of MT's solo but that was a little frustrating with MT standing there.

The second break was Taylor's. He was searching for his slide -- could not find it in his pocket, and he looked around and either the tech or Ronnie showed him it was on the drum riser. I'm sorry to say I do not remember if he found it in time to use it on the second solo, which he did take. The distraction did not bother me. Because of the kind of show that it was, I found it very real and interesting, and his playing was fantastic, even if he might have been a little nervous. In truth, I think they all were a little nervous!

I wish I could confirm both of these memories with a video, or someone else's recollection.

Mick T is brilliant at slow blues so it's interesting they considered but then dropped the idea of playing LIV. Swapped out with Sway or Knocking, it would be pure delight.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2013-06-21 11:33 by LookoutMountain.

Quote
Thrylan
I'm going to start a fire here.....I recently moved, so my stuff is all boxed up, and I can't reference before I speak, but.....If memory serves me correct, the L&G version of LIV pales to the GYYY version. The first solo with slide is just off, it lacks in technique. The second solo, without slide is better. His vibrato is much better than his slide playing, which IMO, is more of an indictment of his slide playing, than a compliment to his finger style.......This ought to be worth a page or two of ripping. Just my opinion.

Taylor never had an incredible technique, so didn't Hendrix or Clapton. Their forte was their lyrical abilities, their sense of melodies, their creativeness, their power to convey emotion.

That said, I do think Taylor was a very good slide guitarist, with a very good technique. It is quite difficult to sound so precise as he does on thin (09) strings with very low action like he always had. Never a bum or dead note, that's no mean feat.

Mathijs

Quote
LookoutMountain

Quote
DandelionPowderman

Quote
LookoutMountain
Hear you loud and clear schillid. By coincidence a friend just posted the 1972 version of LIV from Ladies & Gentleman to me. I was fortunate to hear it at the Echoplex. I hope they do it again instead of other slow songs like Wild Horses.

I still can't get over how the younger Stones were TOTALLY TRANSPORTED by what they were doing. Maybe there were drugs involved; but you see and hear the blues, the spirit of it. You FEEL it.

Fast forward to 2013. In lieu of watching new Sways or Knockings I had another look at MR from Philly 1 and the synergy is still there, musically, but also chumming. MT is part of the "weaving" rhythm engine but has that little duet with MJ which is actually touching in its intimacy.

When the two Micks go head to head I see it as a nod to the collaborations between them in the past, where there was a call and response (Hide Your Love comes to mind). I'm not that familiar with their live performances so I wonder if it's unusual for MJ to have that kind of prolonged exchange with one of his band-mates, as he does with MT on Rambler today.

It struck me that it's kind of an honor for MT to have this special spotlight with Jagger,in tribute to their former collaborations. Of course I hope for more participation. But as it stands, it's pretty "symbolic" and pretty great.

Tell us more about the Love In Vain at the Echoplex!! How was it?

Dandelion, it was thrilling to watch Mick Taylor come on stage and play that one right out of the gate. I was up front on Ronnie's side with a good view and wanted to etch every detail in my brain but was so wrung out from a day of lottery madness, only three things stand out:

It was gorgeous -- but in the spirit of a warm-up show, there were a couple of surprises.

When the first break came Taylor gave the lead to Ronnie. He just nodded amicably, "Here mate, you take it." I was not sure if that was generosity or "an understanding." Ronnie did a fine version of MT's solo but that was a little frustrating with MT standing there.

The second break was Taylor's. He was searching for his slide -- could not find it in his pocket, and he looked around and either the tech or Ronnie showed him it was on the drum riser. I'm sorry to say I do not remember if he found it in time to use it on the second solo, which he did take. The distraction did not bother me. Because of the kind of show that it was, I found it very real and interesting, and his playing was fantastic, even if he might have been a little nervous. In truth, I think they all were a little nervous!

I wish I could confirm both of these memories with a video, or someone else's recollection.

Mick T is brilliant at slow blues so it's interesting they considered but then dropped the idea of playing LIV. Swapped out with Sway or Knocking, it would be pure delight.

Thanks, Lookout!

Quote
Mathijs

Quote
Thrylan
I'm going to start a fire here.....I recently moved, so my stuff is all boxed up, and I can't reference before I speak, but.....If memory serves me correct, the L&G version of LIV pales to the GYYY version. The first solo with slide is just off, it lacks in technique. The second solo, without slide is better. His vibrato is much better than his slide playing, which IMO, is more of an indictment of his slide playing, than a compliment to his finger style.......This ought to be worth a page or two of ripping. Just my opinion.

Taylor never had an incredible technique, so didn't Hendrix or Clapton. Their forte was their lyrical abilities, their sense of melodies, their creativeness, their power to convey emotion.

That said, I do think Taylor was a very good slide guitarist, with a very good technique. It is quite difficult to sound so precise as he does on thin (09) strings with very low action like he always had. Never a bum or dead note, that's no mean feat.

Mathijs

I wouldn't underestimate Hendrix, when is comes to plain guitar technique.

Quote
svt22

Quote
Mathijs

Quote
Thrylan
I'm going to start a fire here.....I recently moved, so my stuff is all boxed up, and I can't reference before I speak, but.....If memory serves me correct, the L&G version of LIV pales to the GYYY version. The first solo with slide is just off, it lacks in technique. The second solo, without slide is better. His vibrato is much better than his slide playing, which IMO, is more of an indictment of his slide playing, than a compliment to his finger style.......This ought to be worth a page or two of ripping. Just my opinion.

Taylor never had an incredible technique, so didn't Hendrix or Clapton. Their forte was their lyrical abilities, their sense of melodies, their creativeness, their power to convey emotion.

That said, I do think Taylor was a very good slide guitarist, with a very good technique. It is quite difficult to sound so precise as he does on thin (09) strings with very low action like he always had. Never a bum or dead note, that's no mean feat.

Mathijs

I wouldn't underestimate Hendrix, when is comes to plain guitar technique.

I agree, but he did more "easy" mistakes, and could be downright sloppy. However, at his best level he was incredible.

Quote
Mathijs

Taylor never had an incredible technique, so didn't Hendrix or Clapton. Their forte was their lyrical abilities, their sense of melodies, their creativeness, their power to convey emotion.

Mathijs

Totally agree as for Taylor and Hendrix. That's what music is all about: to convey emotion. That's what I miss so badly after Taylor's departure, especially on stage, where the real thing is happening: making music in the moment.

Quote
svt22

Quote
Mathijs

Quote
Thrylan
I'm going to start a fire here.....I recently moved, so my stuff is all boxed up, and I can't reference before I speak, but.....If memory serves me correct, the L&G version of LIV pales to the GYYY version. The first solo with slide is just off, it lacks in technique. The second solo, without slide is better. His vibrato is much better than his slide playing, which IMO, is more of an indictment of his slide playing, than a compliment to his finger style.......This ought to be worth a page or two of ripping. Just my opinion.

Taylor never had an incredible technique, so didn't Hendrix or Clapton. Their forte was their lyrical abilities, their sense of melodies, their creativeness, their power to convey emotion.

That said, I do think Taylor was a very good slide guitarist, with a very good technique. It is quite difficult to sound so precise as he does on thin (09) strings with very low action like he always had. Never a bum or dead note, that's no mean feat.

Mathijs

I wouldn't underestimate Hendrix, when is comes to plain guitar technique.

He had very long fingers making things easier for him than for you and me. But there isn't much he played that is very difficult to copy, except for the feedbacking etc with two 100 watt Marshall amps on full.

Mathijs

Quote
kleermaker

Quote
Mathijs

Taylor never had an incredible technique, so didn't Hendrix or Clapton. Their forte was their lyrical abilities, their sense of melodies, their creativeness, their power to convey emotion.

Mathijs

Totally agree as for Taylor and Hendrix. That's what music is all about: to convey emotion. That's what I miss so badly after Taylor's departure, especially on stage, where the real thing is happening: making music in the moment.

yeah yeah yeah, you have stated that now in at least 374 posts. Thank you, we know it by now. Impress yourself, and move on.

Mathijs

Quote
Mathijs

Quote
kleermaker

Quote
Mathijs

Taylor never had an incredible technique, so didn't Hendrix or Clapton. Their forte was their lyrical abilities, their sense of melodies, their creativeness, their power to convey emotion.

Mathijs

Totally agree as for Taylor and Hendrix. That's what music is all about: to convey emotion. That's what I miss so badly after Taylor's departure, especially on stage, where the real thing is happening: making music in the moment.

yeah yeah yeah, you have stated that now in at least 374 posts. Thank you, we know it by now. Impress yourself, and move on.

Mathijs

It can't be repeated enough.

Mostly agree. Hendrix was sloppy, but VERY creative. To me "restrained" Clapton is the best Clapton. I also would agree that MT was an ace slide player, but as I recall, LIV on L&G was a little off, I think he even looked frustrated. Funny you mention his technique, my trusted guitar guru always laughs when playing his licks, "only some damn British guitarist would play it that way!" Thanks for the input.

LIV on L&G contains two of Taylor's best solos. He doesn't look frustrated but concentrated. There's a moment when Watts makes a mistake. Both Jagger and Taylor notice that, but no frustration whatsoever. Have a look and a listen. Taylor at his best.

Yes....much better than I remember. I do like the second solo better though......killer vibrato for a guy who did at times lack subtle technique.

Beware of confining Mick Taylor in slow songs and ballads.

IMHO, Mick Taylor's contribution to the super sound of the Rolling Stones lied mostly in the R'n'R titles and big hits during live performances. This is where the Rolling Stones used to be great.

Slow songs bring the evidence of MT's talent. Those are good to hear for sure. But first of all, I consider that Keith + the 2 Micks were the perfect match for the UNSURPASSABLE ROCKnROLL SOUND OF THE ROLLING STONES. This made the Rolling Stones different.

Many dream to hear something of that kind (2-3 hits with the "big sound" of MT's era) before the RS say goodbye in London.

Quote
Mathijs

Quote
svt22

Quote
Mathijs

Quote
Thrylan
I'm going to start a fire here.....I recently moved, so my stuff is all boxed up, and I can't reference before I speak, but.....If memory serves me correct, the L&G version of LIV pales to the GYYY version. The first solo with slide is just off, it lacks in technique. The second solo, without slide is better. His vibrato is much better than his slide playing, which IMO, is more of an indictment of his slide playing, than a compliment to his finger style.......This ought to be worth a page or two of ripping. Just my opinion.

Taylor never had an incredible technique, so didn't Hendrix or Clapton. Their forte was their lyrical abilities, their sense of melodies, their creativeness, their power to convey emotion.


That said, I do think Taylor was a very good slide guitarist, with a very good technique. It is quite difficult to sound so precise as he does on thin (09) strings with very low action like he always had. Never a bum or dead note, that's no mean feat.

Mathijs

I wouldn't underestimate Hendrix, when is comes to plain guitar technique.

He had very long fingers making things easier for him than for you and me. But there isn't much he played that is very difficult to copy, except for the feedbacking etc with two 100 watt Marshall amps on full.

Mathijs

There's only one musician who supposedly had more physical abilities on his instrument (a semitone): American Jazz pianist Art Tatum, and even that is not sure. As for Hendrix: He might have had long fingers, but that doesn't make it easier for you or whomever to play the guitar. Guitarist Andres Segovia had relatively short fingers, but he played classical compositions you and Hendrix only could dream of. But Hendrix technique and creativity was amazing as a (rock) guitarist, considering the era he lived in. But I agree, he was no John McLaughlin or Steve Vai from a technical point of view.

Quote
svt22

There's only one musician who supposedly had more physical abilities on his instrument (a semitone): American Jazz pianist Art Tatum, and even that is not sure. As for Hendrix: He might have had long fingers, but that doesn't make it easier for you or whomever to play the guitar. Guitarist Andres Segovia had relatively short fingers, but he played classical compositions you and Hendrix only could dream of. But Hendrix technique and creativity was amazing as a (rock) guitarist, considering the era he lived in. But I agree, he was no John McLaughlin or Steve Vai from a technical point of view.

Without a doubt it is easier to play certain chords and voicings when you have longer fingers, just as it is to play piano. But having shorter fingers does not prevent anyone from becomming a great guitarist, or in the case of Django: having only 2 fingers did not prevent him from becomming one of the best ever.

Mathijs

I must say- I do want Taylor or more songs; however, we have to be happy with what we are getting. I have not seen a press conference or interview lately with the band. If they did, they would have to answer the question as to why he is not playing more. I think it is true- Jagger does not want the songs to sound like the 69-74 era because after the tour, they may not want to ask MT to stick around. What they have done for him is help him get his life back, his friends back. He has lost a considerable amount of weight- hanging with Ronnie has probably helped him stay sober and he is getting some financial reward that will allow him to go back and do small club gigs for fun instead of needing the money.

He has not played on a 2 song or 3 song run yet on tour has he? This might be that he cannot play a long set for whatever reason. When he played the 4 songs in LA, they were spread out weren't they?

Personally, I would love to see him play 5 of the 20-22 songs each show. While he would raise Gimme Shelter, All Down the Line, Tumbling Dice, Brown Sugar, and YCAGWYW to another level, I do not think Jagger is prepared to say the mistake was not having him return earlier (like the 90s).

Quote
Mathijs

Quote
svt22

There's only one musician who supposedly had more physical abilities on his instrument (a semitone): American Jazz pianist Art Tatum, and even that is not sure. As for Hendrix: He might have had long fingers, but that doesn't make it easier for you or whomever to play the guitar. Guitarist Andres Segovia had relatively short fingers, but he played classical compositions you and Hendrix only could dream of. But Hendrix technique and creativity was amazing as a (rock) guitarist, considering the era he lived in. But I agree, he was no John McLaughlin or Steve Vai from a technical point of view.

Without a doubt it is easier to play certain chords and voicings when you have longer fingers, just as it is to play piano. But having shorter fingers does not prevent anyone from becomming a great guitarist, or in the case of Django: having only 2 fingers did not prevent him from becomming one of the best ever.

Mathijs

I think the key to Hendrix is he was more into creating and pushing than perfecting. It's fairly common amongst creative people to "climb a mountain until you see the peek," and then get bored and move on.Some of those nasty licks in Voodoo Child(Slight Return), still kill me. The pull off on the low E, straight into the hammer/pull on the D string(D,E,D,E...etc) sounds wicked and simple.....now do it. Awesome.

Quote
Mathijs

Quote
Thrylan
I'm going to start a fire here.....I recently moved, so my stuff is all boxed up, and I can't reference before I speak, but.....If memory serves me correct, the L&G version of LIV pales to the GYYY version. The first solo with slide is just off, it lacks in technique. The second solo, without slide is better. His vibrato is much better than his slide playing, which IMO, is more of an indictment of his slide playing, than a compliment to his finger style.......This ought to be worth a page or two of ripping. Just my opinion.

Taylor never had an incredible technique, so didn't Hendrix or Clapton. Their forte was their lyrical abilities, their sense of melodies, their creativeness, their power to convey emotion.

That said, I do think Taylor was a very good slide guitarist, with a very good technique. It is quite difficult to sound so precise as he does on thin (09) strings with very low action like he always had. Never a bum or dead note, that's no mean feat.

Mathijs

You are right about that! One of Taylor's trademarks was (is?) to play really lyrical and precise slide in standard tuning. Any guitar player can tell you how difficult that is. I remember reading an article in some guitar magazine decades ago where Taylor challenges players to play slide in standard tuning. You can get away with a certain amount of slop in open G, open E, etc., but not in standard.

I agree, it's what I have been focusing on lately......no cheating or easy ways out in standard tuning.