Quote
DoomandGloom
Mick T. was not a rugged touring guy like the rest of the group.

Quote
DoomandGloom
Smokey, That is 3 months so there's no point made. I was trying to be polite in my assessment of why Taylor left and the dreary condition he was in by the time he exited.. After all the cancellation of tour plans should have opened him to other projects including his own, all this without quitting, according to Keith himself... Instead he made some token contributions with Olfield, Little Feat and Gong. Eventually crashing and burning playing along side Jack Bruce he ended up on a scrap heap until he was outed by the press, living like Aqualung... The Stones may have screwed him royally but being ultra detached from the cruelties of the real world it's likely they could never imagine these results. 50+ may have seemed inadequate for us Taylorites but 2 things are certain, our man is better off and The Stones are trying to give something back to a great member.

Quote
DandelionPowderman
Keep in mind that the Mayall tours were fitness camps, compared to a Stones tour.

Mayall didn't drink, and expected sobriety from his musicians, according to Claptions bio.

Quote
His Majesty
I was surprised by the taylortite thing here when I joined.

Quote
howled

Quote
His Majesty
I was surprised by the taylortite thing here when I joined.

Yeah, I wasn't expecting it either.

When I first heard the Stones in the 70s, I heard Satisfaction first and was captured by the riff and then I heard Jumpin' Jack Flash and Brown Sugar, so I eventually bought some old used Stones albums and Sticky Fingers.

To me, the 60s has a sound and the earlier Stones stuff just sounded to me like the Stones in the 60s and Sticky Fingers sounded like the Stones in the 70s.

I heard a fair bit of the earlier stuff, "Under The Boardwalk", "Little Red Rooster" etc on those used albums I bought.

I thought "The Last Time" was great and very 60s with a great riff, and I still do (even though a lot of it was borrowed).

I saw Brian and Taylor on the covers of some albums but that was about it.

I bought a Stones music book to play the songs on guitar and most of the songs had Jagger/Richards on them and not Jones or Taylor or Wyman.

I also seem to have been influenced by some of Mick Taylor's playing along with a fair few other players around in the 70s.

I don't have a Taylor/Jones preference thing myself, as they are both different and from different times when Rock/Pop was changing from the 60s into the 70s.

Quote
smokeydusky

Quote
DandelionPowderman
Keep in mind that the Mayall tours were fitness camps, compared to a Stones tour.

Mayall didn't drink, and expected sobriety from his musicians, according to Claptions bio.

What's the point?

The fact remains he had done more touring during that time.

There is only speculation that he was not tour rugged.

By the way, "expected sobriety" seems to be an overstatement

McVie was fired in October for the first (but not last) time
because of his excessive drinking. Teetotaler Mayall smoked cigarettes but did
not tolerate any substance abuse in his band if the music suffered as a result.
It was rumored that one fateful night when returning from a gig up north, Mayall
ejected a vomit-prone McVie from the touring van and left him on the side of the
M1 motorway, miles from anywhere. Mayall himself now recalls that this parting
of ways happened more mercifully in central London.


[www.allmanbrothersband.com]

Quote
DandelionPowderman

Quote
smokeydusky

Quote
DandelionPowderman
Keep in mind that the Mayall tours were fitness camps, compared to a Stones tour.

Mayall didn't drink, and expected sobriety from his musicians, according to Claptions bio.

What's the point?

The fact remains he had done more touring during that time.

There is only speculation that he was not tour rugged.

By the way, "expected sobriety" seems to be an overstatement

McVie was fired in October for the first (but not last) time
because of his excessive drinking. Teetotaler Mayall smoked cigarettes but did
not tolerate any substance abuse in his band if the music suffered as a result.
It was rumored that one fateful night when returning from a gig up north, Mayall
ejected a vomit-prone McVie from the touring van and left him on the side of the
M1 motorway, miles from anywhere. Mayall himself now recalls that this parting
of ways happened more mercifully in central London.


[www.allmanbrothersband.com]

"Rugged", as in used to really hard touring, was my point.

Quote
kleermaker

Quote
DandelionPowderman

Quote
smokeydusky

Quote
DandelionPowderman
Keep in mind that the Mayall tours were fitness camps, compared to a Stones tour.

Mayall didn't drink, and expected sobriety from his musicians, according to Claptions bio.

What's the point?

The fact remains he had done more touring during that time.

There is only speculation that he was not tour rugged.

By the way, "expected sobriety" seems to be an overstatement

McVie was fired in October for the first (but not last) time
because of his excessive drinking. Teetotaler Mayall smoked cigarettes but did
not tolerate any substance abuse in his band if the music suffered as a result.
It was rumored that one fateful night when returning from a gig up north, Mayall
ejected a vomit-prone McVie from the touring van and left him on the side of the
M1 motorway, miles from anywhere. Mayall himself now recalls that this parting
of ways happened more mercifully in central London.


[www.allmanbrothersband.com]

"Rugged", as in used to really hard touring, was my point.

O I thought you meant 'drugged'.

Quote
Doxa

Quote
howled

Quote
His Majesty
I was surprised by the taylortite thing here when I joined.

Yeah, I wasn't expecting it either.

When I first heard the Stones in the 70s, I heard Satisfaction first and was captured by the riff and then I heard Jumpin' Jack Flash and Brown Sugar, so I eventually bought some old used Stones albums and Sticky Fingers.

To me, the 60s has a sound and the earlier Stones stuff just sounded to me like the Stones in the 60s and Sticky Fingers sounded like the Stones in the 70s.

I heard a fair bit of the earlier stuff, "Under The Boardwalk", "Little Red Rooster" etc on those used albums I bought.

I thought "The Last Time" was great and very 60s with a great riff, and I still do (even though a lot of it was borrowed).

I saw Brian and Taylor on the covers of some albums but that was about it.

I bought a Stones music book to play the songs on guitar and most of the songs had Jagger/Richards on them and not Jones or Taylor or Wyman.

I also seem to have been influenced by some of Mick Taylor's playing along with a fair few other players around in the 70s.

I don't have a Taylor/Jones preference thing myself, as they are both different and from different times when Rock/Pop was changing from the 60s into the 70s.

Me three. Before IORR I couldn't believe that Taylor has such a strong admiration and following among hardcore Stones fans. And I need to say that the years spent here at IORR have also helped me to realize not just his greatness but also his significance for the band in those important years.

Personally for me Taylor always was the most oddest contributor among the Stones members. At the time I got hooked - early 80's - that was the heyday of Keith/Ronnie axis ("Ancient art of viewing"), and the way they played pretty much defined my understanding of Stones guitar sound. And that was, of course, the time when the low-profile Keith Richards was the coolest rock and roll star in the world, a real hero, and the band basically "his band" (Jagger's star was going downhill fast). Ronnie was like a little brother of him, making more "Keef" feeling in the band.

Accidently, after the recent albums (TATTOO YOU, STILL LIFE, EMOTIONAL RESCUE, SOME GIRLS) - or with them - I get to know their 60's stuff (of course through some hit collections first). Brian Jones was there, and easy recognizable. Somehow in my imagination the early stuff clicked very well with the recent stuff. For example, STILL LIFE and GOT LIVE IF YOU WANT IT! sounded funnily similar - the guys just having got older and sounding more mature. Neither 'version' didn't sound at all like a 'typical' rock band, with flashy lead guitars, etc.

So the Taylor years was the last phase I get to know. I recall buying BEGGARS BANQUET and EXILE at the same time (by mail), and by that time being awere that they probably were their best albums. Listening them against each other, I could have never thought that they 'represent' different eras. I think both of them were jut great Jagger/Richards song efforts, and the band contributing with their funny, unique sound to the songs (and always the policy: the songs come first, the individual instrumental spotlights second). And neither sounding like a 'typical' rock band, but having that unique noise atmosphere created by the whole band, with no any striking or emphasized guitar solos or anything.

It was however, hearing first time GET YER YA-YA'S OUT! (after both STILL LIFE and GOT LIVE!) that I recall first time hearing something different: the band sounding like a 'typical' rock band, and in that, incredibly amazing. It was a mesmerizing experience: are they really this good if they play according to a 'normal scheme', having great guitar solos and all (especially "Love In Vain" and "Sympathy" made a huge impression to me in that sense). It really sounded like a different band, so damn tight, professional and everything.

It was also YA-YA'S that make me actually recognize that there is that guy called Mick Taylor - the almost forgotten guy between Jones and Wood - who needs to have a heavy hand there (like he had). Anyway. Listening to studio albums - soon I get all of them - Taylor was not so easy recognizable, and if he was, I wasn't so impressed (the jam part of "Can't You hear Me Knocking" sounded boring and artificial, and not ecen "Moonlight Mile" warmed me up - what they pretend to be? Prog band or Santana?). Of course, I do think think differently now.

Okay, the live bootlegs offered a new world to me in seeing Taylor's greatness, and my taste 'cultivated' among the years (I hope), but honestly, it still was a surprise for him to see how much he is admired, loved and missed when I started visiting places like IORR. And I don't see anything bad at all in it.

- Doxa

Quote
kleermaker

Quote
Doxa

Quote
howled

Quote
His Majesty
I was surprised by the taylortite thing here when I joined.

Yeah, I wasn't expecting it either.

When I first heard the Stones in the 70s, I heard Satisfaction first and was captured by the riff and then I heard Jumpin' Jack Flash and Brown Sugar, so I eventually bought some old used Stones albums and Sticky Fingers.

To me, the 60s has a sound and the earlier Stones stuff just sounded to me like the Stones in the 60s and Sticky Fingers sounded like the Stones in the 70s.

I heard a fair bit of the earlier stuff, "Under The Boardwalk", "Little Red Rooster" etc on those used albums I bought.

I thought "The Last Time" was great and very 60s with a great riff, and I still do (even though a lot of it was borrowed).

I saw Brian and Taylor on the covers of some albums but that was about it.

I bought a Stones music book to play the songs on guitar and most of the songs had Jagger/Richards on them and not Jones or Taylor or Wyman.

I also seem to have been influenced by some of Mick Taylor's playing along with a fair few other players around in the 70s.

I don't have a Taylor/Jones preference thing myself, as they are both different and from different times when Rock/Pop was changing from the 60s into the 70s.

Me three. Before IORR I couldn't believe that Taylor has such a strong admiration and following among hardcore Stones fans. And I need to say that the years spent here at IORR have also helped me to realize not just his greatness but also his significance for the band in those important years.

Personally for me Taylor always was the most oddest contributor among the Stones members. At the time I got hooked - early 80's - that was the heyday of Keith/Ronnie axis ("Ancient art of viewing"), and the way they played pretty much defined my understanding of Stones guitar sound. And that was, of course, the time when the low-profile Keith Richards was the coolest rock and roll star in the world, a real hero, and the band basically "his band" (Jagger's star was going downhill fast). Ronnie was like a little brother of him, making more "Keef" feeling in the band.

Accidently, after the recent albums (TATTOO YOU, STILL LIFE, EMOTIONAL RESCUE, SOME GIRLS) - or with them - I get to know their 60's stuff (of course through some hit collections first). Brian Jones was there, and easy recognizable. Somehow in my imagination the early stuff clicked very well with the recent stuff. For example, STILL LIFE and GOT LIVE IF YOU WANT IT! sounded funnily similar - the guys just having got older and sounding more mature. Neither 'version' didn't sound at all like a 'typical' rock band, with flashy lead guitars, etc.

So the Taylor years was the last phase I get to know. I recall buying BEGGARS BANQUET and EXILE at the same time (by mail), and by that time being awere that they probably were their best albums. Listening them against each other, I could have never thought that they 'represent' different eras. I think both of them were jut great Jagger/Richards song efforts, and the band contributing with their funny, unique sound to the songs (and always the policy: the songs come first, the individual instrumental spotlights second). And neither sounding like a 'typical' rock band, but having that unique noise atmosphere created by the whole band, with no any striking or emphasized guitar solos or anything.

It was however, hearing first time GET YER YA-YA'S OUT! (after both STILL LIFE and GOT LIVE!) that I recall first time hearing something different: the band sounding like a 'typical' rock band, and in that, incredibly amazing. It was a mesmerizing experience: are they really this good if they play according to a 'normal scheme', having great guitar solos and all (especially "Love In Vain" and "Sympathy" made a huge impression to me in that sense). It really sounded like a different band, so damn tight, professional and everything.

It was also YA-YA'S that make me actually recognize that there is that guy called Mick Taylor - the almost forgotten guy between Jones and Wood - who needs to have a heavy hand there (like he had). Anyway. Listening to studio albums - soon I get all of them - Taylor was not so easy recognizable, and if he was, I wasn't so impressed (the jam part of "Can't You hear Me Knocking" sounded boring and artificial, and not ecen "Moonlight Mile" warmed me up - what they pretend to be? Prog band or Santana?). Of course, I do think think differently now.

Okay, the live bootlegs offered a new world to me in seeing Taylor's greatness, and my taste 'cultivated' among the years (I hope), but honestly, it still was a surprise for him to see how much he is admired, loved and missed when I started visiting places like IORR. And I don't see anything bad at all in it.

- Doxa

Nice story Doxa, how you finally got to see the light.
But seriously, things would have been very different if they had released a live recording from the 1972 and/or 1973 tour. But due to copyright issues that never happened and only the boots were available. But not known by the masses of course, or the new, younger fans. The latter had to discover everything like you did so succesfully.

Quote
DandelionPowderman

Quote
kleermaker

Quote
Doxa

Quote
howled

Quote
His Majesty
I was surprised by the taylortite thing here when I joined.

Yeah, I wasn't expecting it either.

When I first heard the Stones in the 70s, I heard Satisfaction first and was captured by the riff and then I heard Jumpin' Jack Flash and Brown Sugar, so I eventually bought some old used Stones albums and Sticky Fingers.

To me, the 60s has a sound and the earlier Stones stuff just sounded to me like the Stones in the 60s and Sticky Fingers sounded like the Stones in the 70s.

I heard a fair bit of the earlier stuff, "Under The Boardwalk", "Little Red Rooster" etc on those used albums I bought.

I thought "The Last Time" was great and very 60s with a great riff, and I still do (even though a lot of it was borrowed).

I saw Brian and Taylor on the covers of some albums but that was about it.

I bought a Stones music book to play the songs on guitar and most of the songs had Jagger/Richards on them and not Jones or Taylor or Wyman.

I also seem to have been influenced by some of Mick Taylor's playing along with a fair few other players around in the 70s.

I don't have a Taylor/Jones preference thing myself, as they are both different and from different times when Rock/Pop was changing from the 60s into the 70s.

Me three. Before IORR I couldn't believe that Taylor has such a strong admiration and following among hardcore Stones fans. And I need to say that the years spent here at IORR have also helped me to realize not just his greatness but also his significance for the band in those important years.

Personally for me Taylor always was the most oddest contributor among the Stones members. At the time I got hooked - early 80's - that was the heyday of Keith/Ronnie axis ("Ancient art of viewing"), and the way they played pretty much defined my understanding of Stones guitar sound. And that was, of course, the time when the low-profile Keith Richards was the coolest rock and roll star in the world, a real hero, and the band basically "his band" (Jagger's star was going downhill fast). Ronnie was like a little brother of him, making more "Keef" feeling in the band.

Accidently, after the recent albums (TATTOO YOU, STILL LIFE, EMOTIONAL RESCUE, SOME GIRLS) - or with them - I get to know their 60's stuff (of course through some hit collections first). Brian Jones was there, and easy recognizable. Somehow in my imagination the early stuff clicked very well with the recent stuff. For example, STILL LIFE and GOT LIVE IF YOU WANT IT! sounded funnily similar - the guys just having got older and sounding more mature. Neither 'version' didn't sound at all like a 'typical' rock band, with flashy lead guitars, etc.

So the Taylor years was the last phase I get to know. I recall buying BEGGARS BANQUET and EXILE at the same time (by mail), and by that time being awere that they probably were their best albums. Listening them against each other, I could have never thought that they 'represent' different eras. I think both of them were jut great Jagger/Richards song efforts, and the band contributing with their funny, unique sound to the songs (and always the policy: the songs come first, the individual instrumental spotlights second). And neither sounding like a 'typical' rock band, but having that unique noise atmosphere created by the whole band, with no any striking or emphasized guitar solos or anything.

It was however, hearing first time GET YER YA-YA'S OUT! (after both STILL LIFE and GOT LIVE!) that I recall first time hearing something different: the band sounding like a 'typical' rock band, and in that, incredibly amazing. It was a mesmerizing experience: are they really this good if they play according to a 'normal scheme', having great guitar solos and all (especially "Love In Vain" and "Sympathy" made a huge impression to me in that sense). It really sounded like a different band, so damn tight, professional and everything.

It was also YA-YA'S that make me actually recognize that there is that guy called Mick Taylor - the almost forgotten guy between Jones and Wood - who needs to have a heavy hand there (like he had). Anyway. Listening to studio albums - soon I get all of them - Taylor was not so easy recognizable, and if he was, I wasn't so impressed (the jam part of "Can't You hear Me Knocking" sounded boring and artificial, and not ecen "Moonlight Mile" warmed me up - what they pretend to be? Prog band or Santana?). Of course, I do think think differently now.

Okay, the live bootlegs offered a new world to me in seeing Taylor's greatness, and my taste 'cultivated' among the years (I hope), but honestly, it still was a surprise for him to see how much he is admired, loved and missed when I started visiting places like IORR. And I don't see anything bad at all in it.

- Doxa

Nice story Doxa, how you finally got to see the light.
But seriously, things would have been very different if they had released a live recording from the 1972 and/or 1973 tour. But due to copyright issues that never happened and only the boots were available. But not known by the masses of course, or the new, younger fans. The latter had to discover everything like you did so successfully.

You mean back then? They have released official live recordings from both 1972 and 1973.

Quote
kleermaker

Quote
DandelionPowderman

Quote
kleermaker

Quote
Doxa

Quote
howled

Quote
His Majesty
I was surprised by the taylortite thing here when I joined.

Yeah, I wasn't expecting it either.

When I first heard the Stones in the 70s, I heard Satisfaction first and was captured by the riff and then I heard Jumpin' Jack Flash and Brown Sugar, so I eventually bought some old used Stones albums and Sticky Fingers.

To me, the 60s has a sound and the earlier Stones stuff just sounded to me like the Stones in the 60s and Sticky Fingers sounded like the Stones in the 70s.

I heard a fair bit of the earlier stuff, "Under The Boardwalk", "Little Red Rooster" etc on those used albums I bought.

I thought "The Last Time" was great and very 60s with a great riff, and I still do (even though a lot of it was borrowed).

I saw Brian and Taylor on the covers of some albums but that was about it.

I bought a Stones music book to play the songs on guitar and most of the songs had Jagger/Richards on them and not Jones or Taylor or Wyman.

I also seem to have been influenced by some of Mick Taylor's playing along with a fair few other players around in the 70s.

I don't have a Taylor/Jones preference thing myself, as they are both different and from different times when Rock/Pop was changing from the 60s into the 70s.

Me three. Before IORR I couldn't believe that Taylor has such a strong admiration and following among hardcore Stones fans. And I need to say that the years spent here at IORR have also helped me to realize not just his greatness but also his significance for the band in those important years.

Personally for me Taylor always was the most oddest contributor among the Stones members. At the time I got hooked - early 80's - that was the heyday of Keith/Ronnie axis ("Ancient art of viewing"), and the way they played pretty much defined my understanding of Stones guitar sound. And that was, of course, the time when the low-profile Keith Richards was the coolest rock and roll star in the world, a real hero, and the band basically "his band" (Jagger's star was going downhill fast). Ronnie was like a little brother of him, making more "Keef" feeling in the band.

Accidently, after the recent albums (TATTOO YOU, STILL LIFE, EMOTIONAL RESCUE, SOME GIRLS) - or with them - I get to know their 60's stuff (of course through some hit collections first). Brian Jones was there, and easy recognizable. Somehow in my imagination the early stuff clicked very well with the recent stuff. For example, STILL LIFE and GOT LIVE IF YOU WANT IT! sounded funnily similar - the guys just having got older and sounding more mature. Neither 'version' didn't sound at all like a 'typical' rock band, with flashy lead guitars, etc.

So the Taylor years was the last phase I get to know. I recall buying BEGGARS BANQUET and EXILE at the same time (by mail), and by that time being awere that they probably were their best albums. Listening them against each other, I could have never thought that they 'represent' different eras. I think both of them were jut great Jagger/Richards song efforts, and the band contributing with their funny, unique sound to the songs (and always the policy: the songs come first, the individual instrumental spotlights second). And neither sounding like a 'typical' rock band, but having that unique noise atmosphere created by the whole band, with no any striking or emphasized guitar solos or anything.

It was however, hearing first time GET YER YA-YA'S OUT! (after both STILL LIFE and GOT LIVE!) that I recall first time hearing something different: the band sounding like a 'typical' rock band, and in that, incredibly amazing. It was a mesmerizing experience: are they really this good if they play according to a 'normal scheme', having great guitar solos and all (especially "Love In Vain" and "Sympathy" made a huge impression to me in that sense). It really sounded like a different band, so damn tight, professional and everything.

It was also YA-YA'S that make me actually recognize that there is that guy called Mick Taylor - the almost forgotten guy between Jones and Wood - who needs to have a heavy hand there (like he had). Anyway. Listening to studio albums - soon I get all of them - Taylor was not so easy recognizable, and if he was, I wasn't so impressed (the jam part of "Can't You hear Me Knocking" sounded boring and artificial, and not ecen "Moonlight Mile" warmed me up - what they pretend to be? Prog band or Santana?). Of course, I do think think differently now.

Okay, the live bootlegs offered a new world to me in seeing Taylor's greatness, and my taste 'cultivated' among the years (I hope), but honestly, it still was a surprise for him to see how much he is admired, loved and missed when I started visiting places like IORR. And I don't see anything bad at all in it.

- Doxa

Nice story Doxa, how you finally got to see the light.
But seriously, things would have been very different if they had released a live recording from the 1972 and/or 1973 tour. But due to copyright issues that never happened and only the boots were available. But not known by the masses of course, or the new, younger fans. The latter had to discover everything like you did so successfully.

You mean back then? They have released official live recordings from both 1972 and 1973.

Indeed I mean back then. The releases you mention are not widely known either.

Quote
DandelionPowderman

Quote
kleermaker

Quote
DandelionPowderman

Quote
kleermaker

Quote
Doxa

Quote
howled

Quote
His Majesty
I was surprised by the taylortite thing here when I joined.

Yeah, I wasn't expecting it either.

When I first heard the Stones in the 70s, I heard Satisfaction first and was captured by the riff and then I heard Jumpin' Jack Flash and Brown Sugar, so I eventually bought some old used Stones albums and Sticky Fingers.

To me, the 60s has a sound and the earlier Stones stuff just sounded to me like the Stones in the 60s and Sticky Fingers sounded like the Stones in the 70s.

I heard a fair bit of the earlier stuff, "Under The Boardwalk", "Little Red Rooster" etc on those used albums I bought.

I thought "The Last Time" was great and very 60s with a great riff, and I still do (even though a lot of it was borrowed).

I saw Brian and Taylor on the covers of some albums but that was about it.

I bought a Stones music book to play the songs on guitar and most of the songs had Jagger/Richards on them and not Jones or Taylor or Wyman.

I also seem to have been influenced by some of Mick Taylor's playing along with a fair few other players around in the 70s.

I don't have a Taylor/Jones preference thing myself, as they are both different and from different times when Rock/Pop was changing from the 60s into the 70s.

Me three. Before IORR I couldn't believe that Taylor has such a strong admiration and following among hardcore Stones fans. And I need to say that the years spent here at IORR have also helped me to realize not just his greatness but also his significance for the band in those important years.

Personally for me Taylor always was the most oddest contributor among the Stones members. At the time I got hooked - early 80's - that was the heyday of Keith/Ronnie axis ("Ancient art of viewing"), and the way they played pretty much defined my understanding of Stones guitar sound. And that was, of course, the time when the low-profile Keith Richards was the coolest rock and roll star in the world, a real hero, and the band basically "his band" (Jagger's star was going downhill fast). Ronnie was like a little brother of him, making more "Keef" feeling in the band.

Accidently, after the recent albums (TATTOO YOU, STILL LIFE, EMOTIONAL RESCUE, SOME GIRLS) - or with them - I get to know their 60's stuff (of course through some hit collections first). Brian Jones was there, and easy recognizable. Somehow in my imagination the early stuff clicked very well with the recent stuff. For example, STILL LIFE and GOT LIVE IF YOU WANT IT! sounded funnily similar - the guys just having got older and sounding more mature. Neither 'version' didn't sound at all like a 'typical' rock band, with flashy lead guitars, etc.

So the Taylor years was the last phase I get to know. I recall buying BEGGARS BANQUET and EXILE at the same time (by mail), and by that time being awere that they probably were their best albums. Listening them against each other, I could have never thought that they 'represent' different eras. I think both of them were jut great Jagger/Richards song efforts, and the band contributing with their funny, unique sound to the songs (and always the policy: the songs come first, the individual instrumental spotlights second). And neither sounding like a 'typical' rock band, but having that unique noise atmosphere created by the whole band, with no any striking or emphasized guitar solos or anything.

It was however, hearing first time GET YER YA-YA'S OUT! (after both STILL LIFE and GOT LIVE!) that I recall first time hearing something different: the band sounding like a 'typical' rock band, and in that, incredibly amazing. It was a mesmerizing experience: are they really this good if they play according to a 'normal scheme', having great guitar solos and all (especially "Love In Vain" and "Sympathy" made a huge impression to me in that sense). It really sounded like a different band, so damn tight, professional and everything.

It was also YA-YA'S that make me actually recognize that there is that guy called Mick Taylor - the almost forgotten guy between Jones and Wood - who needs to have a heavy hand there (like he had). Anyway. Listening to studio albums - soon I get all of them - Taylor was not so easy recognizable, and if he was, I wasn't so impressed (the jam part of "Can't You hear Me Knocking" sounded boring and artificial, and not ecen "Moonlight Mile" warmed me up - what they pretend to be? Prog band or Santana?). Of course, I do think think differently now.

Okay, the live bootlegs offered a new world to me in seeing Taylor's greatness, and my taste 'cultivated' among the years (I hope), but honestly, it still was a surprise for him to see how much he is admired, loved and missed when I started visiting places like IORR. And I don't see anything bad at all in it.

- Doxa

Nice story Doxa, how you finally got to see the light.
But seriously, things would have been very different if they had released a live recording from the 1972 and/or 1973 tour. But due to copyright issues that never happened and only the boots were available. But not known by the masses of course, or the new, younger fans. The latter had to discover everything like you did so successfully.

You mean back then? They have released official live recordings from both 1972 and 1973.

Indeed I mean back then. The releases you mention are not widely known either.

Ladies And Gentlemen is widely known.

Quote
His Majesty
Can we stop quoting the whole thing?

A cinema release of a 1972 concert is not something you can listen to at home, so it being released back then was as something fleeting like the concert itself.

As someone born in 1975, my first exposure to Ladies and Gentlemen was the brief glimpse of Midnight Rambler in 25X5.

Let's not forget Hyde Park though, that was available on video since 80's?

Hyde Park and Ya-Ya's have been the only really generally available, officially released Taylor era live stuff until fairly recently.

The Jones era only really had Got Live album.

Quote
His Majesty
Can we stop quoting the whole thing?

A cinema release of a 1972 concert is not something you can listen to at home, so it being released back then was as something fleeting like the concert itself.

As someone born in 1975, my first exposure to Ladies and Gentlemen was the brief glimpse of Midnight Rambler in 25X5.

Let's not forget Hyde Park though, that was available on video since 80's?

Hyde Park and Ya-Ya's have been the only really generally available, officially released Taylor era live stuff until fairly recently.

The Jones era only really had Got Live album.

Quote
His Majesty
Can we stop quoting the whole thing?

A cinema release of a 1972 concert is not something you can listen to at home, so it being released back then was as something fleeting like the concert itself.

As someone born in 1975, my first exposure to Ladies and Gentlemen was the brief glimpse of Midnight Rambler in 25X5.

Let's not forget Hyde Park though, that was available on video since 80's?

Hyde Park and Ya-Ya's have been the only really generally available, officially released Taylor era live stuff until fairly recently.

The Jones era only really had Got Live album.

Quote
DandelionPowderman

Quote
smokeydusky

Quote
DandelionPowderman
Keep in mind that the Mayall tours were fitness camps, compared to a Stones tour.

Mayall didn't drink, and expected sobriety from his musicians, according to Claptions bio.

What's the point?

The fact remains he had done more touring during that time.

There is only speculation that he was not tour rugged.

By the way, "expected sobriety" seems to be an overstatement

McVie was fired in October for the first (but not last) time
because of his excessive drinking. Teetotaler Mayall smoked cigarettes but did
not tolerate any substance abuse in his band if the music suffered as a result.
It was rumored that one fateful night when returning from a gig up north, Mayall
ejected a vomit-prone McVie from the touring van and left him on the side of the
M1 motorway, miles from anywhere. Mayall himself now recalls that this parting
of ways happened more mercifully in central London.


[www.allmanbrothersband.com]

"Rugged", as in used to really hard touring, was my point.

Quote
kleermaker

Nice story Doxa, how you finally got to see the light.
But seriously, things would have been very different if they had released a live recording from the 1972 and/or 1973 tour. But due to copyright issues that never happened and only the boots were available. But not known by the masses of course, or the new, younger fans. The latter had to discover everything like you did so succesfully.

Quote
His Majesty
Hyde Park and Ya-Ya's have been the only really generally available, officially released Taylor era live stuff until fairly recently.

Quote
smokeydusky

Quote
His Majesty
Hyde Park and Ya-Ya's have been the only really generally available, officially released Taylor era live stuff until fairly recently.

The movie Gimme Shelter was rebroadcast on PBS stations regularly.

Probably at least as "generally available officially" as Hyde Park,
and much more so before the VHS era.

There also were midnight showings of Stones movies in movie theatres.

Quote
DandelionPowderman
During GS?

Quote
DoomandGloom

Doxa I agree recent shows including the last year will age very well, mainly because Mick is spectacular these days. Keith may not be able to step it up due to arthritis but I would not be surprised to see his hands wake up with the medicine, money and desire we know they still carry...