Quote
His Majesty

Quote
duffydawg

Quote
His Majesty
Yah don't like Ronnie and yah don't like Keith so why not just go see Taylor in a solo show? You can sit with fellow taylorites and muse on his "virtuoso solos" all night and not feel like you've been ripped off in the process.

I am sorry you and a handful few have issues with MT. All this thread is about is having MT on more songs. All the long time Stones fans I know want MORE not less of Mick Taylor. Look at 7:18 of the Staples Center CYHMK video...he is basically teaching Ronnie how to play the guitar. Lucky for Ronnie MT left the band and he won the lottery. But when it comes to actual talent, even Ronnie knows. But you seem to be protesting too much...as Shakespeare would say...

You sound like Sour Grapes dude.

I have issues with the whole band, heh, but they are playing good this tour.

Not sure where you are coming from other than that you feel ripped off and have not good to say about the actual Rolling Stones guitarists.

Quote
Stoneage
After 57 pages of posting: Do we still really want Taylor to play on more songs? I'm talking about the 2013 version of Mick Taylor. Not the 1972 version. Would the band look better with Taylor on on all songs?

Quote
Stoneage
After 57 pages of posting: Do we still really want Taylor to play on more songs? I'm talking about the 2013 version of Mick Taylor. Not the 1972 version. Would the band look better with Taylor on on all songs?

Quote
DandelionPowderman

Quote
Stoneage
After 57 pages of posting: Do we still really want Taylor to play on more songs? I'm talking about the 2013 version of Mick Taylor. Not the 1972 version. Would the band look better with Taylor on on all songs?

I'd say he could get a couple of more songs, but then again the Stones really would have to choose the songs carefully. Because, looking past the romantic side of it, he must add something to the songs as well.

Midnight Rambler
CYHMK
Shake Your Hips
I Got The Blues
Can You Hear The Music

Quote
DandelionPowderman

Quote
His Majesty
Yah don't like Ronnie and yah don't like Keith so why not just go see Taylor in a solo show? You can sit with fellow taylorites and muse on his "virtuoso solos" all night and not feel like you've been ripped off in the process.

Quote
MarkSchneider
The defence may now speak.

Quote
svt22

Quote
His Majesty
Yah don't like Ronnie and yah don't like Keith so why not just go see Taylor in a solo show? You can sit with fellow taylorites and muse on his "virtuoso solos" all night and not feel like you've been ripped off in the process.

It's not corrrect to blame the Stones for MT's playing.

The Ventilator Blues'72 version posted by DP is sloppy as well, but they all play great. Taylor maybe lost 10% of his technique these days. Every guitarist knows that you don't have to play 3 hours a day to have Taylor's 7-tees technique, so age has nothing to do with it.
His feeling is something he was born with though, call it talent. The same goes for Richards, but despite his arthritis or whatever he still has 100% the same feeling like back in the days. What makes me sad is that Taylor maybe lost 60% of his feeling, so it is obvious to me that he doesn't give a shit anymore, lost his true love with the guitar, apart from the few moments he's up there, in the moment, either with the Stones or his own band.

Time to retire, he deserves it after almost 50 years as a professional player.

Quote
Stoneage
After 57 pages of posting: Do we still really want Taylor to play on more songs? I'm talking about the 2013 version of Mick Taylor. Not the 1972 version. Would the band look better with Taylor on on all songs?

Quote
MarkSchneider
They were playing good at that time but magic had gone.

Quote
DandelionPowderman

Quote
MarkSchneider
They were playing good at that time but magic had gone.

Taylor, you mean

Seriously, some of you guys sound more like Taylor fans than Rolling Stones fans.

For me that's unfathomable. Who wrote the songs? Who made the sound? Who made them the best rock'n'roll band on the planet, already back in 1964?

It sure wasn't Mick Taylor, although he played lots of wonderful stuff in his few years with the band.

Things need to be put in the right context, imo.



The magic is still there, albeit in smaller doses than before:

Quote
svt22

Quote
DandelionPowderman

Quote
MarkSchneider
They were playing good at that time but magic had gone.

Taylor, you mean

Seriously, some of you guys sound more like Taylor fans than Rolling Stones fans.

For me that's unfathomable. Who wrote the songs? Who made the sound? Who made them the best rock'n'roll band on the planet, already back in 1964?

It sure wasn't Mick Taylor, although he played lots of wonderful stuff in his few years with the band.

Things need to be put in the right context, imo.



The magic is still there, albeit in smaller doses than before:

Yes, the right context..

I think Taylor contributed a lot to the sound that made the Stones a great band, on stage in particular; he was a part of the Stones' DNA imo, but I get your point.

There are better examples than the post above -lady Jane- a great song from the Jones era, but with all respect: it's Jagger and the keys that do the magic here. The guitar playing here could be done by you or any decent player as well, DP, it's no trademark guitarplaying if you get my point... and yes and I know Keith or Mick wrote it.

Quote
svt22

Quote
DandelionPowderman

Thanks for posting. Great memories!

Quote
MarkSchneider
I used to love the Rolling Stones, at the beginning. IMHO, they have awfully faded after 1971 (LPs) and 1973 (live performances). Actually a bore.

Since last fall, I'm enthrilled with MT's comeback. Unrealistically, I wish he could play on some RnR warhorses. I don't pay attention to ballads, "Angies" and so on. This requires rehearsals, fair interactions within the band, not simply a "take your guitar, set the volume to 10% and have fun with us on Satisfaction and join in the final bow". And a minimum of time...

MT could handle, even at 75% (which is splendid) of what he used to be. But time is running short.
Unrealistic.

Quote
kpl
Agree completely. The magic and quality left with MT in 74. His presence on the 50th anniversary tour has been great. His playing sounds really excellent. Not getting the comments about his skills deteriorating? Are they listening to the same clips of the shows? Attached review of the 2nd Chicago show-maybe the MT haters should review the Britany Speers tour. We are celebrating MT reentry into the tour and band. The best comments in the review (appropirately so) are reserved for Mick Taylor.

Rolling Stones pare down for Chicago: set list
Mark GuarinoThe Christian Science Monitor
June 2, 2013
Share on emailEmail Print Text Size-A+A
Before the band took the stage, a video played, revealing clips of famous faces telling the audience why the Rolling Stones – a band now in its 51st year – is worthy of our attention after all this time.

RELATED:
Were Mick Jagger and David Bowie lovers?
“Kind of dangerous,” said filmmaker Martin Scorsese.

Oh, really.

The Stones didn’t need the endorsements, nor did they seem to play a show that reveled too much in self-serving accolades. Instead, the band, which played the United Center in Chicago Friday, the second of a three-night engagement that ends Tuesday, performed a show that was, in many ways, much more revitalized and lean than any of their mega-blockbuster extravaganzas in recent decades.

To be sure, the hit machine did due diligence – the customer is always right when they pay more than $600 for a seat. But along the way, the band seemed to have paused when it came to the requisite shenanigans of the past (pyrotechnics, inflatables, an army of auxiliary players) to create a show that was, instead, one that thrilled through ample musicianship.

The Rolling Stones embarked on this tour late last year to celebrate the 50-year milestone, a party that continues to roll this summer in North America and Europe.

For veteran bands of their era, mining the past for fresh incentives to tour is not new; what makes this road show unique, especially for the Stones, is how it leans back to emphasize, not just what makes them familiar after all these years, but what makes them endure.

The approach brings focus to Mick Taylor. The guitarist only spent five years in the band, but they were an essential five years: the golden period of creativity between 1969 and 1974, when Mr. Taylor’s contribution as a virtuoso guitarist created both inspiration and competition within the band.

Taylor’s reunion with his bandmates amounted to almost a third of the two-hour, 30-minute show, and each stepping out rotated the stage immediately into his direction.

For someone with an apparently lax stage personality, Taylor took command of the stage each time he appeared, as the band seemed to huddle around him for cues.

On “Can’t You Hear Me Knocking,” he played jazz improvisation, counterbalancing the song’s defiant swagger. Taylor disappeared into his playing, illuminating songs from the band’s repertoire, even refusing to stop after everyone had – at one point, Keith Richards, the Stones’ principal guitarist, had to touch him on the shoulder to let him know it was time to move along.


Taylor proved a needed counterpart to Mr. Richards, who hung back coloring in songs through simple chords, or sticking to what he often refers in interviews as “guitar weaving,” which involves interspersing his playing against another guitarist, usually Ron Wood, who delivered power chord riffs on command, but shined most adding a slide to his playing, giving songs that threaten to sound too polished an unkempt racket.

While the three guitarists played three distinct roles but at the same time, they all interacted with Mick Jagger, who at age 69, did not show any signs of burning out or fading away.

He demanded the audience stay with him, and if his constant stream of finger commands didn’t work, he tried wiggling each of his legs in several directions; in one moment, he slid across the stage so effortlessly, it created the impression it was atop nothing but air.

While Mr. Jagger’s tight relationship with Richards is legendary, he often looked more magnetized to Taylor. Both men started “Midnight Rambler” bunched tightly together – Jagger on harmonica – and the lengthy blues looked back to the band’s Chicago roots.

Quote
Jesse
Great to see how many of you now realize that MT is inconsistant and shouldn't be playing on more than 3 songs. He can't be trusted not to screw up. If Jagger seems to be zeroed in on him, it's because he's watching for his f-ups or for him trying to change what audiences want. With the exception of one particular MR in Chicago, MT drags these concerts down. If KR looks a little bored, it's because he has to pretend to love what MT is doing. Poor Ronnie, he's just being polite.

Dawg, don't go crazy 'cause I speak the truth.

Dawg, you lost this thread argument. No -- MT's playing lost it for you!

Quote
svt22

Quote
Jesse
Great to see how many of you now realize that MT is inconsistant and shouldn't be playing on more than 3 songs. He can't be trusted not to screw up. If Jagger seems to be zeroed in on him, it's because he's watching for his f-ups or for him trying to change what audiences want. With the exception of one particular MR in Chicago, MT drags these concerts down. If KR looks a little bored, it's because he has to pretend to love what MT is doing. Poor Ronnie, he's just being polite.

Dawg, don't go crazy 'cause I speak the truth.

Dawg, you lost this thread argument. No -- MT's playing lost it for you!

I think Taylor's current level suits the Stones perfectly well.