Quote
LieB
Both are definitely worth reading, being packed with hard facts (although they do contain errors, despite Wyman's famous penchant for journals and accuracy). His first book, Stone Alone, was criticised for being dry, whereas Rolling With The Stone feels more trivial with its abundance of pictures, fact boxes and memorabilia.

The latter has a fair amount of info on Mick Taylor scattered throughout the pages that are relevant, but certainly not a huge amount. It's dominated by the 60s, probably because the Stones worked most intensely during that period. I also get the feeling that Wyman is more fond of the 60s than the 70s, perhaps because he was absent during some of the most legendary drug-fuelled moments. If you're looking for tons of rock 'n' roll debauchery, his books are not for you.

Stone Alone has almost nothing about Taylor, since it only covers the time up until Hyde Park '69, but instead a fair amount of stories relating to Brian Jones. I believe Bill had the outspoken goal to give Brian what he felt was some well-deserved redemption visavi the "unholy trinity" Jagger-Richards-Oldham.

Myself, I'm looking forward to Bill's next book, if it is in fact true that he's working on a true followup to Stone Alone that should pick up at mid-1969 and cover the rest, dryly written or not.

Quote
DandelionPowderman
"Tuesday there was €135.243 on my bank account"...

Quote
ryanpow
He needs to come out with a coffee table book that turns into a coffee table.

Quote
duke richardson
he is really an amazing person ...
an innovator musically and grasped technology particularly computers very early. Innovative musically, I guess you could just say he's unique. Plus he understood bass sound and musicality and made his sensibility work for the Stones. And he had all the equipment ready for them.
Then I remember reading I think in Stanley Booth's book where he imagined a tuner like is common now, but that was in 1969 when he was talking about it ...

Quote
CousinC
Having worked in publishing sectors/books I always collected them.
With books about the Stones - like Beatles and Elvis - it just never stops. Always new ones coming.

Bill's Stone Alone was a bit dry and book-keeping. But I'd still have loved to read his recollections of the wild 70's.

Quote
LieB
Both are definitely worth reading, being packed with hard facts (although they do contain errors, despite Wyman's famous penchant for journals and accuracy). His first book, Stone Alone, was criticised for being dry, whereas Rolling With The Stone feels more trivial with its abundance of pictures, fact boxes and memorabilia.

The latter has a fair amount of info on Mick Taylor scattered throughout the pages that are relevant, but certainly not a huge amount. It's dominated by the 60s, probably because the Stones worked most intensely during that period. I also get the feeling that Wyman is more fond of the 60s than the 70s, perhaps because he was absent during some of the most legendary drug-fuelled moments. If you're looking for tons of rock 'n' roll debauchery, his books are not for you.

Stone Alone has almost nothing about Taylor, since it only covers the time up until Hyde Park '69, but instead a fair amount of stories relating to Brian Jones. I believe Bill had the outspoken goal to give Brian what he felt was some well-deserved redemption visavi the "unholy trinity" Jagger-Richards-Oldham.

Myself, I'm looking forward to Bill's next book, if it is in fact true that he's working on a true followup to Stone Alone that should pick up at mid-1969 and cover the rest, dryly written or not.

Quote
duke richardson
he is really an amazing person ...
an innovator musically and grasped technology particularly computers very early. Innovative musically, I guess you could just say he's unique. Plus he understood bass sound and musicality and made his sensibility work for the Stones. And he had all the equipment ready for them.

I second that Bill is a amazing person.

Quote
SweetThing
Stone Alone, while dry, is really essential reading for the Stones fan.

I feel that way for several reasons, chief among them, as mentioned previously here, Bill provides a balanced, or at least sympathetic, perspective on Brian we don't get from many other sources, and all those dates and details really bring to light just how hard the Stones worked - for YEARS. Reading it, in certain spots, I start to get (just a little bit) bored and then it just hits me and I think, when do these guys get a DAY OFF.... and they don't, or just barely, for really long stretches.
is
But there is other stuff... tons of it. Like how on earth Keith Richards, (in 1977 was it?) simply left alone in his room with no minders about at all, such that Bill has to go get the heroin for Keith himself.

You find out Jagger is crying when sentenced to prison. You learn, when Bill goes seeking some modest help from the "Stones office" for a solo project, that its really the Mick and Keith office. They are too busy arranging a baby sitter for Keith & Anita, or dinner reservations for Jagger or whatever. You find out when Bill objects or asks questions about Alan Klein, Keith admonishes him to stop being "greedy". No doubt that is followed up with another update of there only being three hundred dollars in his bank account next time he checks. All good stuff!!