Quote
sonomastone

Quote
triceratops
KR even took MT's solo time on Satisfaction for himself. Blame this on Keith's residual druggie mentality, this also casts doubts on his version of events in his book Life

Keith Richards is the creator and co-writer of Satisfaction. The song was recorded 4 years before Mick Taylor joined the band. For you to call it MT's solo is a great example of everything that's wrong with the Taylor extremists. I am of the opinion that, in writing and recording the song, Mr. Keith Richards has earned the right to decide for himself who solos on it, and not Triceratops.

Quote
DandelionPowderman

You've been around here long enough to remember my thorough criticism of Ronnie in the 90s, Keith on the Licks tour and on or even my beef with Mick's thinner and more mannered voice. Nobody runs clear of criticism.

However, when Taylor gets criticism, it's almost like an army of ants are coming out of their hives to rescue. Why is that? Is it a thorn in their pride that he quit? Do they desperately want to persuade people with a different view on thing? Do they feel superior, because THEY know he was the best, and hence the band sounded the best when he was in the band?

Listen to what people say, don't over-analyze everything and take some criticism with a grain of salt - because it might be enhanced by some because of repeatedly counter-attacks.

Quote
Doxa

Quote
DandelionPowderman

You've been around here long enough to remember my thorough criticism of Ronnie in the 90s, Keith on the Licks tour and on or even my beef with Mick's thinner and more mannered voice. Nobody runs clear of criticism.

However, when Taylor gets criticism, it's almost like an army of ants are coming out of their hives to rescue. Why is that? Is it a thorn in their pride that he quit? Do they desperately want to persuade people with a different view on thing? Do they feel superior, because THEY know he was the best, and hence the band sounded the best when he was in the band?

Listen to what people say, don't over-analyze everything and take some criticism with a grain of salt - because it might be enhanced by some because of repeatedly counter-attacks.

I've been here long enough to remember many things - and most of I say about these issues derives from listening people. What you seem to describe "army of ants" acting like half-idiots, is for me people who have a certain view of the band and of its graetness, and I am grateful to have learned to know that voice here. In many cases these are fans who were there then when the band truely was the hottest of the hottest, people who grew up with albums like STICKY FINGERS and EXILE ON MAIN STREET, and the latest Rolling Stones single in the radio being "Honky Tonk Women" or "Brown Sugar", perhaps catching them live 1973. It is something, Dandie, you and I only learn from the history books. That they didn't find the band any longer so good with Wood or even albums like SOME GIRLS or singles like "Miss You" or "Start Me Up" inspiring, that's their right. Which doesn't make them any lesser Stones fans. They have every right to voice their opinion. Are we fans who have get to know the band during Woodie's presence, and appreciate the band from that point of view, any better? Can we say we 'know' better? Surely not.

What I don't like here is the way "Taylorites" - or "Brian Era Fans" (not many of them, unfortunately) - are treated with the implicit attitude like you do in your posts - putting them like to some garbage box, under the label of "idiots", needing for a therapeutist, because you don't like their point. I react to that attitude. I am sure you don't mean that but that some of your words imply that. If what buggers you is the "Taylorites", me buggers the reaction towards them.

The fact that Mick Taylor and his era - five years of fifty - is so much discussed here is alone a sign of how significant that era is for a Rolling Stones hardcore fanbase.

Already finished REAL LIVE?

- Doxa

Quote
Doxa
I've been here long enough to remember many things - and most of I say about these issues derives from listening people. What you seem to describe "army of ants" acting like half-idiots, is for me people who have a certain view of the band and of its graetness, and I am grateful to have learned to know that voice here. In many cases these are fans who were there then when the band truely was the hottest of the hottest, people who grew up with albums like STICKY FINGERS and EXILE ON MAIN STREET, and the latest Rolling Stones single in the radio being "Honky Tonk Women" or "Brown Sugar", perhaps catching them live 1973. It is something, Dandie, you and I only learn from the history books. That they didn't find the band any longer so good with Wood or even albums like SOME GIRLS or singles like "Miss You" or "Start Me Up" inspiring, that's their right. Which doesn't make them any lesser Stones fans. They have every right to voice their opinion. Are we fans who have get to know the band during Woodie's presence, and appreciate the band from that point of view, any better? Can we say we 'know' better? Surely not.

What I don't like here is the way "Taylorites" - or "Brian Era Fans" (not many of them, unfortunately) - are treated with the implicit attitude like you do in your posts - putting them like to some garbage box, under the label of "idiots", needing for a therapeutist, because you don't like their point. I react to that attitude. I am sure you don't mean that but that some of your words imply that. If what buggers you is the "Taylorites", me buggers the reaction towards them.

The fact that Mick Taylor and his era - five years of fifty - is so much discussed here is alone a sign of how significant that era is for a Rolling Stones hardcore fanbase.

Already finished REAL LIVE?

- Doxa

Quote
sonomastone

Quote
triceratops
KR even took MT's solo time on Satisfaction for himself. Blame this on Keith's residual druggie mentality, this also casts doubts on his version of events in his book Life

Keith Richards is the creator and co-writer of Satisfaction. The song was recorded 4 years before Mick Taylor joined the band. For you to call it MT's solo is a great example of everything that's wrong with the Taylor extremists. I am of the opinion that, in writing and recording the song, Mr. Keith Richards has earned the right to decide for himself who solos on it, and not Triceratops.

Quote
DandelionPowderman

Quote
Doxa

Quote
DandelionPowderman

You've been around here long enough to remember my thorough criticism of Ronnie in the 90s, Keith on the Licks tour and on or even my beef with Mick's thinner and more mannered voice. Nobody runs clear of criticism.

However, when Taylor gets criticism, it's almost like an army of ants are coming out of their hives to rescue. Why is that? Is it a thorn in their pride that he quit? Do they desperately want to persuade people with a different view on thing? Do they feel superior, because THEY know he was the best, and hence the band sounded the best when he was in the band?

Listen to what people say, don't over-analyze everything and take some criticism with a grain of salt - because it might be enhanced by some because of repeatedly counter-attacks.

I've been here long enough to remember many things - and most of I say about these issues derives from listening people. What you seem to describe "army of ants" acting like half-idiots, is for me people who have a certain view of the band and of its graetness, and I am grateful to have learned to know that voice here. In many cases these are fans who were there then when the band truely was the hottest of the hottest, people who grew up with albums like STICKY FINGERS and EXILE ON MAIN STREET, and the latest Rolling Stones single in the radio being "Honky Tonk Women" or "Brown Sugar", perhaps catching them live 1973. It is something, Dandie, you and I only learn from the history books. That they didn't find the band any longer so good with Wood or even albums like SOME GIRLS or singles like "Miss You" or "Start Me Up" inspiring, that's their right. Which doesn't make them any lesser Stones fans. They have every right to voice their opinion. Are we fans who have get to know the band during Woodie's presence, and appreciate the band from that point of view, any better? Can we say we 'know' better? Surely not.

What I don't like here is the way "Taylorites" - or "Brian Era Fans" (not many of them, unfortunately) - are treated with the implicit attitude like you do in your posts - putting them like to some garbage box, under the label of "idiots", needing for a therapeutist, because you don't like their point. I react to that attitude. I am sure you don't mean that but that some of your words imply that. If what buggers you is the "Taylorites", me buggers the reaction towards them.

The fact that Mick Taylor and his era - five years of fifty - is so much discussed here is alone a sign of how significant that era is for a Rolling Stones hardcore fanbase.

Already finished REAL LIVE?

- Doxa

Finished

When Bjørnulf makes a sticky thread about Taylor, and all of a sudden there pop up 12 (!) Taylor threads, some of them downright mean (Should Ronnie sit it out) - then they ARE behaving like idiots, imo.

You're wrong about me labeling any Stones fans. It is the extremes I'm talking about. People who stalks you, because they don't agree with your views - even threatening you - people who desperately are trying to convince you - people who aggressively try to get your attention - unpleasant.

I may sound determined about some matters, but I only try to discuss what I think about my favourite band, like you.

Quote
Doxa

Quote
DandelionPowderman

Quote
Doxa

Quote
DandelionPowderman

You've been around here long enough to remember my thorough criticism of Ronnie in the 90s, Keith on the Licks tour and on or even my beef with Mick's thinner and more mannered voice. Nobody runs clear of criticism.

However, when Taylor gets criticism, it's almost like an army of ants are coming out of their hives to rescue. Why is that? Is it a thorn in their pride that he quit? Do they desperately want to persuade people with a different view on thing? Do they feel superior, because THEY know he was the best, and hence the band sounded the best when he was in the band?

Listen to what people say, don't over-analyze everything and take some criticism with a grain of salt - because it might be enhanced by some because of repeatedly counter-attacks.

I've been here long enough to remember many things - and most of I say about these issues derives from listening people. What you seem to describe "army of ants" acting like half-idiots, is for me people who have a certain view of the band and of its graetness, and I am grateful to have learned to know that voice here. In many cases these are fans who were there then when the band truely was the hottest of the hottest, people who grew up with albums like STICKY FINGERS and EXILE ON MAIN STREET, and the latest Rolling Stones single in the radio being "Honky Tonk Women" or "Brown Sugar", perhaps catching them live 1973. It is something, Dandie, you and I only learn from the history books. That they didn't find the band any longer so good with Wood or even albums like SOME GIRLS or singles like "Miss You" or "Start Me Up" inspiring, that's their right. Which doesn't make them any lesser Stones fans. They have every right to voice their opinion. Are we fans who have get to know the band during Woodie's presence, and appreciate the band from that point of view, any better? Can we say we 'know' better? Surely not.

What I don't like here is the way "Taylorites" - or "Brian Era Fans" (not many of them, unfortunately) - are treated with the implicit attitude like you do in your posts - putting them like to some garbage box, under the label of "idiots", needing for a therapeutist, because you don't like their point. I react to that attitude. I am sure you don't mean that but that some of your words imply that. If what buggers you is the "Taylorites", me buggers the reaction towards them.

The fact that Mick Taylor and his era - five years of fifty - is so much discussed here is alone a sign of how significant that era is for a Rolling Stones hardcore fanbase.

Already finished REAL LIVE?

- Doxa

Finished

When Bjørnulf makes a sticky thread about Taylor, and all of a sudden there pop up 12 (!) Taylor threads, some of them downright mean (Should Ronnie sit it out) - then they ARE behaving like idiots, imo.

You're wrong about me labeling any Stones fans. It is the extremes I'm talking about. People who stalks you, because they don't agree with your views - even threatening you - people who desperately are trying to convince you - people who aggressively try to get your attention - unpleasant.

I may sound determined about some matters, but I only try to discuss what I think about my favourite band, like you.

I wonder how many words we have exchanged during the years... Sorry if I pushed too hard (now and here and then), but somehow I have the feeling that you somehow know me and tolerate my bad habits...

- Doxa

Quote
DandelionPowderman
WHAT, doxa!!! I just noticed you tried to pin on me that I treat Brian era fans with an "implicit attitude, putting them in some garbage box"???

WHERE DID YOU GET THAT FROM???

And that goes for fans of all eras as well...

Quote
DandelionPowderman

But the "Brian-trick" was kinda cheap...

Quote
Doxa
(Wonderful we have His Majesty here!).

- Doxa

Quote
cn854
Just before Taylor quit, Keef was a full blown Junkie.

Ever been around a Junkie, they are NOT nice people to be around....PERIOD

Quote
His Majesty
It's usually Taylor Vs Wood, but it's interesting that the Jones era usually seems to get left out of such heated debates.

Quote
PhillyFAN
I don't often comment on IORR. I have seen the Stones live since 1969 in Philly - both with Taylor and Wood. Ron Wood is an excellent guitarist. I have seen the Faces live as well. Wood has to play what Jagger and Richards composed, and he does not get the chance to write. In the Faces Wood was his own man and played some really blazing and gritty guitar. He had to replicate Taylor's solo parts in the Stones, which is nearly impossible to do. Taylor is also brilliant and amazing but created the stunning solo's that Wood has to play. We never really talk about the horrors of heroin addiction that both Richards and Taylor endured. Taylor left probably because of it - among other reasons. Injection drug use is a nightmare not to mention blood born disease transmission such as Hepatitis C and HIV. Keith has admitted to having Hepatitis C. It literally attacks the liver. Thankfully there are treatments now, But as we compare and argue periods of who played what better and why, let's consider that people addicted to heroin are not thinking about much else other than getting the next fix so they don't become sick. No one makes rational choices and decisions under the influence and control of heroin. I am happy they are both alive, clean and standing on the same stage playing together.

Quote
sonomastone

Quote
triceratops
KR even took MT's solo time on Satisfaction for himself. Blame this on Keith's residual druggie mentality, this also casts doubts on his version of events in his book Life

Keith Richards is the creator and co-writer of Satisfaction. The song was recorded 4 years before Mick Taylor joined the band. For you to call it MT's solo is a great example of everything that's wrong with the Taylor extremists. I am of the opinion that, in writing and recording the song, Mr. Keith Richards has earned the right to decide for himself who solos on it, and not Triceratops.

Quote
Doxa

Quote
His Majesty
It's usually Taylor Vs Wood, but it's interesting that the Jones era usually seems to get left out of such heated debates.

Yeah it does, but Brian Jones alone is a difficult topic of its own... For many people it seems way too difficult to get through the moralistic stand in regards man's non-musical doings, and some repeated myths, and to deal the musician and his contributions fairly.

For that reason I spent years in Brian Jones boards. The conspiration theories plus some devoted Mick and Keith hate-agenda and other extremism made it sometimes difficult to cope with, but along the heated debates and whatever crap I got a lot of intersting and insightful info, and a great view of how the things look like from "Brian's side". It widened up at least my thinking. I remember many of the regulars there saying to have gone to those boards since they felt like it was impossible to discuss Brian in boards like IORR. A great contributor from LARS, Mock Jogger, nowadays occasionally writes here, which is great. Usually I don't agree with him, but shit his detailed, careful arguments are tough ones to refute!

- Doxa

Quote
His Majesty

We sure all know how to get ridiculous here! Nothing wrong with passion for the things you love.

Quote
DandelionPowderman
Seriously, I think we have compared enough, but that's me. All eras have their ups and downs.

Doom and Gloom: I can't hear Taylor on guitar on Torn And Frayed.

Quote
Doxa

Quote
DandelionPowderman
WHAT, doxa!!! I just noticed you tried to pin on me that I treat Brian era fans with an "implicit attitude, putting them in some garbage box"???

WHERE DID YOU GET THAT FROM???

And that goes for fans of all eras as well...

No, that reference was not directed at you - only the Taylorites is your concern, and even there you are way too mild and moderate to label you as an "anti-Taylorite".. (I would only critizise some of yours views concerning the song-writing issues during Brian era, but that's another discussion, and let us not go there now...)

Like Green Lady above mentioned, bad habits of Taylorites - and Woodists as well - is to see it as a sort of "primitive ara", or "pre-history"m and the real action started with "Jumpin Jack Flash". There is not enough Brian Era Fans to make big fuss about it, or to cause aggressive reaction. So the whole era is almost ignored. (Wonderful we have His Majesty here!).

- Doxa

Quote
DandelionPowderman
Taylor plays fine on Torn And Frayed in Vancouver 72, btw.

Quote
His Majesty


I wonder how many Taylorites wish Brian had managed to sort himself out and remain in the band he kick started?

Quote
kleermaker

Objection your Honour! Three famous Taylorians here - pmk251, VT22 and myself - are stubborn Brian-era lovers. So are many other Taylorians.

Quote
Munichhilton

Quote
His Majesty

We sure all know how to get ridiculous here! Nothing wrong with passion for the things you love.

You don't really feel that way...you're just pretending...