That's bad prejudice. The album was released in 1986

quote tonymo: "On the Faces 'Open To Ideas' you'll notice at 1:59 / 2:00 one can hear Rod Stewart saying 'Mick Taylor'. This is probably a signal for Ron Wood to try and play something Mick Taylor-ish... which of course the former couldn't (it's surprised Rod Stewart even tried) and what follows is the typical sub-par unscholarly Ron Wood effort."

And ya call yerself a musician???? He says MIDDLE 8, the same as bridge.

Bu**er off if ya just wanna slag off Ronnie and then ya can't even hear/understand what Rod means.

Bloody sad.

I think TonyMo is joking, MadMax

Look at his signature, and his statement about kleerie and the violin earlier

OTDP, what happenend to MKC? Has he signed off here? I can't find his posts.)

I don't know... I saw that he wasn't deactivated, at least. I tried to make a thread about him (I know, it's not allowed) the other day, but it disappeared in a wink.

Quote
DandelionPowderman
I don't know... I saw that he wasn't deactivated, at least. I tried to make a thread about him (I know, it's not allowed) the other day, but it disappeared in a wink.

You mean his post history is deleted? Odd.

Quote
DandelionPowderman

Many people like Ronnie's solos, and I will keep posting them as long as there are good solos to post.

In that case you really could have posted none of them.

Ah, stop it!

i really don't think he was hired to be a solist.

this thread is kind of like a thread with the topic "the greatest KR bass lines": it's evaluating someone for their second or third job.

woody's job was to be keith's mate and not make too many waves, and he's done a superb job of that.

Quote
DandelionPowderman

Quote
Redhotcarpet

Quote
DandelionPowderman
<where Jagger's microphone malfunctions at times.>

This one? It's indeed a showcase of brilliant weaving, imo.

You listened to the solo? He does some normal licks during the verses. Nothing outstanding. And then he tries to solo and fails.

He doesn't fail, he does it differently. I like it

LOVE this solo. I don't quite see the brilliance in the rest of the rhythm/riffing, but it is a straight up RW 78 performance, which I like alot.

Quote
DandelionPowderman
<but you are just wrong.>

No, I'm not. Taylor plays on top of Keith's solo lick at 2:55.

Stonesburst asked a more specific explanation, and this is a good example.

Taylor has a tendency to trailblaze (like here), while Ronnie listens (to what Keith is playing) and makes room, while playing rhythm guitar.

The result in Satisfaction from 69 isn't weaving, it becomes more like a breaking through a sound wall-contest, imo.

But we really should devote another thread to this, and not waste a Ronnie solo-thread.

Bard, I don't quite agree with your view here. I hear the part you're talking about. First off, up till that part there hs been some great rgythm weaving going on.
But That very part you mention after that lead break, and on..I think a lot of that has to do with the times, the amps, the way of things. PA's had just really been discovered. this was the first R&R tour of the modern era; the starting point for all after. So, yes there was still a good bit of experimenting going on. How does this work with two cranked distorted guitars? How much can the Blues handle? To be honest: I think it is actually pretty brilliant what Taylor plays against the riff. because Keith picks up on it.
Another thing is that IMO Keith and Ron spent way more hours playing together with 2 guitars in zillion different circumstances than MT and Keith at that point. There was still a lot of getting to know each other going on. And probably some power plays too. Plus - Keith still solo-ed a lot more in 69. And he solo'ed way differently than he did in 78.
These are just assumptions of mine, but I think pretty fair.
I really don't get that a hard Stonesfan can't appreciate both Taylor and Ron both all the way.
IMO it goes against the spirit of the Stones to be able to just get off once Taylor left.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2014-05-06 03:04 by Palace Revolution 2000.

LOL, good ole Ronnie. I heard 1234 today. What a mess! A GREAT mess! I love that album. If there is one mix that rivals "Gimme Some Neck" for sheer awfulness, it is 1234. Haha.. but what a rocking album. I was digging "Down to the Ground".

Quote
Palace Revolution 2000

Quote
DandelionPowderman
<but you are just wrong.>

No, I'm not. Taylor plays on top of Keith's solo lick at 2:55.

Stonesburst asked a more specific explanation, and this is a good example.

Taylor has a tendency to trailblaze (like here), while Ronnie listens (to what Keith is playing) and makes room, while playing rhythm guitar.

The result in Satisfaction from 69 isn't weaving, it becomes more like a breaking through a sound wall-contest, imo.

But we really should devote another thread to this, and not waste a Ronnie solo-thread.

Bard, I don't quite agree with your view here. I hear the part you're talking about. First off, up till that part there hs been some great rgythm weaving going on.
But That very part you mention after that lead break, and on..I think a lot of that has to do with the times, the amps, the way of things. PA's had just really been discovered. this was the first R&R tour of the modern era; the starting point for all after. So, yes there was still a good bit of experimenting going on. How does this work with two cranked distorted guitars? How much can the Blues handle? To be honest: I think it is actually pretty brilliant what Taylor plays against the riff. because Keith picks up on it.
Another thing is that IMO Keith and Ron spent way more hours playing together with 2 guitars in zillion different circumstances than MT and Keith at that point. There was still a lot of getting to know each other going on. And probably some power plays too. Plus - Keith still solo-ed a lot more in 69. And he solo'ed way differently than he did in 78.
These are just assumptions of mine, but I think pretty fair.
I really don't get that a hard Stonesfan can't appreciate both Taylor and Ron both all the way.
IMO it goes against the spirit of the Stones to be able to just get off once Taylor left.

Good comments, Palace. Speaking only for myself the issue is not that I can't enjoy Wood. I have pointed out several things with him that I adore, mostly from the Some Girls - Tattoo You era. The issue for me is he cannot come close to doing anything remotely as interesting as Taylor on the Taylor-era songs. It's often sort of "Taylor-lite". I won't repeat more as I have already made this point in this thread.

The right and proper thing for the Stones to do now is have Mick Taylor play the Taylor-era songs and Ron Wood play the Wood-era, with both of them on some stuff. Now, they won't do this, of course, but this is a show I would love to see. To have Mick Taylor backstage cooling his heels while Ron takes another swipe at his ADTL slide solo is just...wrong.

Quote
71Tele

Quote
Palace Revolution 2000

Quote
DandelionPowderman
<but you are just wrong.>

No, I'm not. Taylor plays on top of Keith's solo lick at 2:55.

Stonesburst asked a more specific explanation, and this is a good example.

Taylor has a tendency to trailblaze (like here), while Ronnie listens (to what Keith is playing) and makes room, while playing rhythm guitar.

The result in Satisfaction from 69 isn't weaving, it becomes more like a breaking through a sound wall-contest, imo.

But we really should devote another thread to this, and not waste a Ronnie solo-thread.

Bard, I don't quite agree with your view here. I hear the part you're talking about. First off, up till that part there hs been some great rgythm weaving going on.
But That very part you mention after that lead break, and on..I think a lot of that has to do with the times, the amps, the way of things. PA's had just really been discovered. this was the first R&R tour of the modern era; the starting point for all after. So, yes there was still a good bit of experimenting going on. How does this work with two cranked distorted guitars? How much can the Blues handle? To be honest: I think it is actually pretty brilliant what Taylor plays against the riff. because Keith picks up on it.
Another thing is that IMO Keith and Ron spent way more hours playing together with 2 guitars in zillion different circumstances than MT and Keith at that point. There was still a lot of getting to know each other going on. And probably some power plays too. Plus - Keith still solo-ed a lot more in 69. And he solo'ed way differently than he did in 78.
These are just assumptions of mine, but I think pretty fair.
I really don't get that a hard Stonesfan can't appreciate both Taylor and Ron both all the way.
IMO it goes against the spirit of the Stones to be able to just get off once Taylor left.

Good comments, Palace. Speaking only for myself the issue is not that I can't enjoy Wood. I have pointed out several things with him that I adore, mostly from the Some Girls - Tattoo You era. The issue for me is he cannot come close to doing anything remotely as interesting as Taylor on the Taylor-era songs. It's often sort of "Taylor-lite". I won't repeat more as I have already made this point in this thread.

The right and proper thing for the Stones to do now is have Mick Taylor play the Taylor-era songs and Ron Wood play the Wood-era, with both of them on some stuff. Now, they won't do this, of course, but this is a show I would love to see. To have Mick Taylor backstage cooling his heels while Ron takes another swipe at his ADTL slide solo is just...wrong.

Great frekin idea. Really. The Stones seem to have an aversion to any kind of structured gig with a theme though; anything that would make a little sense. LOL, That is why they are the Stones.

Quote
Palace Revolution 2000

Quote
DandelionPowderman
<but you are just wrong.>

No, I'm not. Taylor plays on top of Keith's solo lick at 2:55.

Stonesburst asked a more specific explanation, and this is a good example.

Taylor has a tendency to trailblaze (like here), while Ronnie listens (to what Keith is playing) and makes room, while playing rhythm guitar.

The result in Satisfaction from 69 isn't weaving, it becomes more like a breaking through a sound wall-contest, imo.

But we really should devote another thread to ths, and not waste a Ronnie solo-thread.

Bard, I don't quite agree with your view here. I hear the part you're talking about. First off, up till that part there hs been some great rgythm weaving going on.
But That very part you mention after that lead break, and on..I think a lot of that has to do with the times, the amps, the way of things. PA's had just really been discovered. this was the first R&R tour of the modern era; the starting point for all after. So, yes there was still a good bit of experimenting going on. How does this work with two cranked distorted guitars? How much can the Blues handle? To be honest: I think it is actually pretty brilliant what Taylor plays against the riff. because Keith picks up on it.
Another thing is that IMO Keith and Ron spent way more hours playing together with 2 guitars in zillion different circumstances than MT and Keith at that point. There was still a lot of getting to know each other going on. And probably some power plays too. Plus - Keith still solo-ed a lot more in 69. And he solo'ed way differently than he did in 78.
These are just assumptions of mine, but I think pretty fair.
I really don't get that a hard Stonesfan can't appreciate both Taylor and Ron both all the way.
IMO it goes against the spirit of the Stones to be able to just get off once Taylor left.

That's all right, Tony. We have some minor differences in taste when it comes to rhythm playing. No big deal.

To clarify: I too love WHAT Taylor is playing where Keith also plays licks. It just loses some of its effect at that very place in the song, imo.

But back to Ronnie. The Lexington version shows a different approach to extending what Keith is playing that I like more. That's all.

PS: From 75 and on, Keith would both riff and solo way more, as well as play mostly in standard tuning.

Quote
71Tele

Quote
Mathijs

Quote
71Tele
No, it isn't just about taste when Mathijs repeatedly claims Taylor can't play, his playing his mis-timed, he can only do "simple chordal work", etc. As for Satisfaction in 1969, you may be not able to listen to it (too bad for you) but you are just wrong. It isn't just soloing, it's Keith and Taylor doing interlocking parts> Listen especially from 2:55. Compare this to any recent live version. There is nothing like the tension and excitement in the two guitars that exist in this version. Simple chordal work, my ass.

That bit from 2:55 on is fantastic, it sure is. It really is one of the best live bits ever. But the first 2 minutes isn't fantastic at all: that bloody rhythm playing by Taylor is just frigging annoying! Listen from 0:45 on: I can stand that belting out plain, simple chords. It's boring, and interferes with the fantastic groove had. Taylor then picks it up with lead guitar, which sure is great. As we expect from Taylor.

Mathijs

Well there you go. I think it's the opposite of boring. What they have been doing for the last 20 years on this song, however, is the very definition of boring. No tension. They just play a rough version of the studio version except keith usually can't be bothered with the most distinctive part of the studio version - the fuzz tone on the riff. In '69 they borrowed a bit of the Otis Redding version, vamped on the riff while jagger improvised, and the guitars did something slightly different each night. And you find that boring. OK.

I am not interested in the Stones after 1990. I don't care for them live at all.

On good nights on the 1969 tour they where the best band in the world, with the MSG gigs the absolute highlights. Taylor was amazing on many tracks -but also boring and sloppy on some other tracks, or just playing something that's not my taste. I never liked I'm Free for example: that song drags, and I don't like Taylor's approach to it.

And even with the majestic MSG gigs, I don't think they where great due to Taylor. I think Watts, Richards and Jagger where at their peak, with Taylor adding some great solo's. But I just don't enjoy his rhythm work all that much. His straight up chords on Midnight Rambler and Satisfaction, his Boogie approach on Carol and Queenie -I just don't think it fits the Stones very well.

Mathijs

Quote
Mathijs
His straight up chords on Midnight Rambler and Satisfaction, his Boogie approach on Carol and Queenie -I just don't think it fits the Stones very well.

Mathijs

And I get that but I disagree on Rambler and I dont think Ronnie has done anything better on these songs. And there's a huge difference between 1969 and 1972. Or 1973. Or studio. If theres anything Id agree on it's his guitar sound in 1969 when playing rhythm and probaby because he wasnt supposed to play rhythm during Keiths power rhythm.

Is this an overdub by Keith or is it Taylor? On rhythm the uptempo bit



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2014-05-06 10:57 by Redhotcarpet.

Quote
71Tele

Quote
Palace Revolution 2000

Quote
DandelionPowderman
<but you are just wrong.>

No, I'm not. Taylor plays on top of Keith's solo lick at 2:55.

Stonesburst asked a more specific explanation, and this is a good example.

Taylor has a tendency to trailblaze (like here), while Ronnie listens (to what Keith is playing) and makes room, while playing rhythm guitar.

The result in Satisfaction from 69 isn't weaving, it becomes more like a breaking through a sound wall-contest, imo.

But we really should devote another thread to this, and not waste a Ronnie solo-thread.

Bard, I don't quite agree with your view here. I hear the part you're talking about. First off, up till that part there hs been some great rgythm weaving going on.
But That very part you mention after that lead break, and on..I think a lot of that has to do with the times, the amps, the way of things. PA's had just really been discovered. this was the first R&R tour of the modern era; the starting point for all after. So, yes there was still a good bit of experimenting going on. How does this work with two cranked distorted guitars? How much can the Blues handle? To be honest: I think it is actually pretty brilliant what Taylor plays against the riff. because Keith picks up on it.
Another thing is that IMO Keith and Ron spent way more hours playing together with 2 guitars in zillion different circumstances than MT and Keith at that point. There was still a lot of getting to know each other going on. And probably some power plays too. Plus - Keith still solo-ed a lot more in 69. And he solo'ed way differently than he did in 78.
These are just assumptions of mine, but I think pretty fair.
I really don't get that a hard Stonesfan can't appreciate both Taylor and Ron both all the way.
IMO it goes against the spirit of the Stones to be able to just get off once Taylor left.

Good comments, Palace. Speaking only for myself the issue is not that I can't enjoy Wood. I have pointed out several things with him that I adore, mostly from the Some Girls - Tattoo You era. The issue for me is he cannot come close to doing anything remotely as interesting as Taylor on the Taylor-era songs. It's often sort of "Taylor-lite". I won't repeat more as I have already made this point in this thread.

The right and proper thing for the Stones to do now is have Mick Taylor play the Taylor-era songs and Ron Wood play the Wood-era, with both of them on some stuff. Now, they won't do this, of course, but this is a show I would love to see. To have Mick Taylor backstage cooling his heels while Ron takes another swipe at his ADTL slide solo is just...wrong.

+1

Quote
Mathijs

Quote
71Tele

Quote
Mathijs

Quote
71Tele
No, it isn't just about taste when Mathijs repeatedly claims Taylor can't play, his playing his mis-timed, he can only do "simple chordal work", etc. As for Satisfaction in 1969, you may be not able to listen to it (too bad for you) but you are just wrong. It isn't just soloing, it's Keith and Taylor doing interlocking parts> Listen especially from 2:55. Compare this to any recent live version. There is nothing like the tension and excitement in the two guitars that exist in this version. Simple chordal work, my ass.

That bit from 2:55 on is fantastic, it sure is. It really is one of the best live bits ever. But the first 2 minutes isn't fantastic at all: that bloody rhythm playing by Taylor is just frigging annoying! Listen from 0:45 on: I can stand that belting out plain, simple chords. It's boring, and interferes with the fantastic groove had. Taylor then picks it up with lead guitar, which sure is great. As we expect from Taylor.

Mathijs

Well there you go. I think it's the opposite of boring. What they have been doing for the last 20 years on this song, however, is the very definition of boring. No tension. They just play a rough version of the studio version except keith usually can't be bothered with the most distinctive part of the studio version - the fuzz tone on the riff. In '69 they borrowed a bit of the Otis Redding version, vamped on the riff while jagger improvised, and the guitars did something slightly different each night. And you find that boring. OK.

I am not interested in the Stones after 1990. I don't care for them live at all.

On good nights on the 1969 tour they where the best band in the world, with the MSG gigs the absolute highlights. Taylor was amazing on many tracks -but also boring and sloppy on some other tracks, or just playing something that's not my taste. I never liked I'm Free for example: that song drags, and I don't like Taylor's approach to it.

And even with the majestic MSG gigs, I don't think they where great due to Taylor. I think Watts, Richards and Jagger where at their peak, with Taylor adding some great solo's. But I just don't enjoy his rhythm work all that much. His straight up chords on Midnight Rambler and Satisfaction, his Boogie approach on Carol and Queenie -I just don't think it fits the Stones very well.

Mathijs

Well, there you go. I thought I'm Free was fantastic, and I love what Taylor did with it. I also think his rhythm work was fine, and way more interesting than what Ronnie did on rhythm on the very same songs later on, which was quite one-dimensional. We can certainly agree though, that the 1969 greatness was not just due to Taylor. The whole band was in peak form, even with Keith being out of tune so often!

Quote
Mathijs
I never liked I'm Free for example: that song drags, and I don't like Taylor's approach to it.
Mathijs

One has to be rather cold blooded not to feel or at least not to understand the musical warmth / melodic romance Taylor is adding here.

Taylor is playing the first half of the solo in the major scale and the second part in the pentatonic scale. How groundbreaking.

Quote
Bärs
Taylor is playing the first half of the solo in the major scale and the second part in the pentatonic scale. How groundbreaking.

So does John Mc'Laughlin half the time. Not that I want to compare them technically or harmonically, but just give it an emphatic thought.

Quote
Bärs
Taylor is playing the first half of the solo in the major scale and the second part in the pentatonic scale. How groundbreaking.

Yeah, he was a lousy guitarist. Thank god they got Ronnie after him, he improved the guitar section immensely.

Let's get this race horse back on track

Quote
Mathijs

Quote
71Tele

Quote
Mathijs

Quote
71Tele
No, it isn't just about taste when Mathijs repeatedly claims Taylor can't play, his playing his mis-timed, he can only do "simple chordal work", etc. As for Satisfaction in 1969, you may be not able to listen to it (too bad for you) but you are just wrong. It isn't just soloing, it's Keith and Taylor doing interlocking parts> Listen especially from 2:55. Compare this to any recent live version. There is nothing like the tension and excitement in the two guitars that exist in this version. Simple chordal work, my ass.

That bit from 2:55 on is fantastic, it sure is. It really is one of the best live bits ever. But the first 2 minutes isn't fantastic at all: that bloody rhythm playing by Taylor is just frigging annoying! Listen from 0:45 on: I can stand that belting out plain, simple chords. It's boring, and interferes with the fantastic groove had. Taylor then picks it up with lead guitar, which sure is great. As we expect from Taylor.

Mathijs

Well there you go. I think it's the opposite of boring. What they have been doing for the last 20 years on this song, however, is the very definition of boring. No tension. They just play a rough version of the studio version except keith usually can't be bothered with the most distinctive part of the studio version - the fuzz tone on the riff. In '69 they borrowed a bit of the Otis Redding version, vamped on the riff while jagger improvised, and the guitars did something slightly different each night. And you find that boring. OK.

I am not interested in the Stones after 1990. I don't care for them live at all.

On good nights on the 1969 tour they where the best band in the world, with the MSG gigs the absolute highlights. Taylor was amazing on many tracks -but also boring and sloppy on some other tracks, or just playing something that's not my taste. I never liked I'm Free for example: that song drags, and I don't like Taylor's approach to it.

And even with the majestic MSG gigs, I don't think they where great due to Taylor. I think Watts, Richards and Jagger where at their peak, with Taylor adding some great solo's. But I just don't enjoy his rhythm work all that much. His straight up chords on Midnight Rambler and Satisfaction, his Boogie approach on Carol and Queenie -I just don't think it fits the Stones very well.

Mathijs

So Richards peaked twice? You always rave about his peak being in 1975 also.

I have always thought the 1969 was the band's best..simply due to everyone clicking by the MSG shows and being pure rock n roll.
Taylor is given alot of freedom here also which is what makes some of the songs simply stunning..eg Satisfaction.
I agree with you with Im Free I also find it a bit of a drag. The Hyde Park version is more to my taste.

Back to Ronnie, Faces and 1975/76 Stones are his peak..but I wouldn't go out of my way to find a decent RW solo to listen to...wouldn't be easy to find either...

<I have always thought the 1969 was the band's best..simply due to everyone clicking by the MSG shows and being pure rock n roll.>

If the tour had been as good and consistent as that show (some Ya Yas-songs are from Baltimore, though), I'd probably agree.

However, if you've listened to many bootlegs from this tour, you'll know that this wasn't the case.

The had a magic week with excellent shows on the east coast, though

Was this already posted?
I always liked the way Ronnie played and sung this:

video: [www.youtube.com]







Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2014-05-06 16:48 by matxil.

Don't think the studio version has been posted. It is indeed great

Quote
DandelionPowderman
That's bad prejudice. The album was released in 1986

Oh shit! That's quite the flub on my part, I guess it just feels like it's pained me for longer.