Quote
DandelionPowderman

Quote
Mathijs

Quote
DoomandGloom
Mathijs you are one consistent anti-Taylorite....

Er, he? Wot? I name three tracks that really blow my socks off, and than I am a anti-Taylorite?

He's done a ton of fantastic things (TD and Angie solo from Brussels, Heartbreaker from London, Sympathy from Ya Ya's, Love in Vain and YCAGWYW in 1972), but these three really spring in mind first of mind-boggling solo's he's done. These are carreer defining in my opinion.

And no, I don't think he made Keith a better player (Ronnie did that, from 1975 to 1982 on), and no I don't think Taylor was a good rhythm guitar player, and yes I do think his role in the Stones is very much overrated. But that all doesn't take anything away from these three stand-out moments.

Mathijs

"Anti-Taylorite" or "Anti-Taylor"?

DoomAndGloom probably hasn't been around here long enough to catch the hundreds of positive posts about Taylor you've shared with us...

Anti-Taylorite was a slip but it's fitting. Mathijs clearly is not anti Taylor just the fuss made over him. There is no doubt Taylor upped the guitar game and made Keith a better blues player. WH is just one example of Taylor's great rhythm skills. I am surprised there is any question regarding Mick's right hand and skills as an all around player but we are comparing the world's elite and should not forget the league these guys are in.

Quote
kleermaker

Quote
DandelionPowderman

Quote
Mathijs

Quote
DoomandGloom
Mathijs you are one consistent anti-Taylorite....

Er, he? Wot? I name three tracks that really blow my socks off, and than I am a anti-Taylorite?

He's done a ton of fantastic things (TD and Angie solo from Brussels, Heartbreaker from London, Sympathy from Ya Ya's, Love in Vain and YCAGWYW in 1972), but these three really spring in mind first of mind-boggling solo's he's done. These are carreer defining in my opinion.

And no, I don't think he made Keith a better player (Ronnie did that, from 1975 to 1982 on), and no I don't think Taylor was a good rhythm guitar player, and yes I do think his role in the Stones is very much overrated. But that all doesn't take anything away from these three stand-out moments.

Mathijs

"Anti-Taylorite" or "Anti-Taylor"?

DoomAndGloom probably hasn't been around here long enough to catch the hundreds of positive posts about Taylor you've shared with us...

Come on Dandie, don't try to seem ignorant. Our dear friend Matthijs is the contrary of a Taylorite, in fact he's the informal leader of the anti-Taylor lobby here.
As for you yourself, I think you're at least ambiguous on this matter.

Like I said, kleerie, we've been discussing the Stones here since 1996/97. Since then, very few have posted more praisal for Taylor here than Mathijs.

But we all grow up (at least some of us), and there comes a time when guitar solos or lead playing isn't necessarily the barometer for how great a song is - even for guitar players

Despite our age difference, I'm pretty certain I've heard tons more Taylor than you have. That comes with my part-time profession, and inspiration for what I do. People think I'm nuts, listening to this "mediocre" band, but that's what I love - and have learned so much from.

If IORR hadn't crashed in 2005, I'm pretty sure many would have had a different view of both myself and Mathijs when it comes to Taylor.

We all love Mick Taylor on this board, there simply isn't a "Anti-Taylor-movement" around.

But when people whine about a release, because a lead guitar isn't loud enough in a few places, important differences in the concept of music and perception arise. That should be debatable.

And we are allowed sometimes, to take a moment and ask ourselves if we're on thin ice on certain subjects - I know I certainly should - how about you?

Quote
DoomandGloom

Quote
DandelionPowderman

Quote
Mathijs

Quote
DoomandGloom
Mathijs you are one consistent anti-Taylorite....

Er, he? Wot? I name three tracks that really blow my socks off, and than I am a anti-Taylorite?

He's done a ton of fantastic things (TD and Angie solo from Brussels, Heartbreaker from London, Sympathy from Ya Ya's, Love in Vain and YCAGWYW in 1972), but these three really spring in mind first of mind-boggling solo's he's done. These are carreer defining in my opinion.

And no, I don't think he made Keith a better player (Ronnie did that, from 1975 to 1982 on), and no I don't think Taylor was a good rhythm guitar player, and yes I do think his role in the Stones is very much overrated. But that all doesn't take anything away from these three stand-out moments.

Mathijs

"Anti-Taylorite" or "Anti-Taylor"?

DoomAndGloom probably hasn't been around here long enough to catch the hundreds of positive posts about Taylor you've shared with us...

Anti-Taylorite was a slip but it's fitting. Mathijs clearly is not anti Taylor just the fuss made over him. There is no doubt Taylor upped the guitar game and made Keith a better blues player. WH is just one example of Taylor's great rhythm skills. I am surprised there is any question regarding Mick's right hand and skills as an all around player but we are comparing the world's elite and should not forget the league these guys are in.

Which rhythm guitar on WH are you referring to, the 12-string or the Nashville-tuned one?

The only Taylor inspiration I've ever heard in Keith's soloing is the ending of Star Star on GHS. He might of course have picked up something, but it's hard to tell what that could be, really.

Taylor plays a decent rhythm guitar, but he is impatient and rarely sticks to a basic or locking rhythmic groove, imo. Bitch might be the best he ever did with the Stones rhythm-wise.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2014-04-10 17:35 by DandelionPowderman.

Quote
DandelionPowderman

Quote
kleermaker

Quote
DandelionPowderman

Quote
Mathijs

Quote
DoomandGloom
Mathijs you are one consistent anti-Taylorite....

Er, he? Wot? I name three tracks that really blow my socks off, and than I am a anti-Taylorite?

He's done a ton of fantastic things (TD and Angie solo from Brussels, Heartbreaker from London, Sympathy from Ya Ya's, Love in Vain and YCAGWYW in 1972), but these three really spring in mind first of mind-boggling solo's he's done. These are carreer defining in my opinion.

And no, I don't think he made Keith a better player (Ronnie did that, from 1975 to 1982 on), and no I don't think Taylor was a good rhythm guitar player, and yes I do think his role in the Stones is very much overrated. But that all doesn't take anything away from these three stand-out moments.

Mathijs

"Anti-Taylorite" or "Anti-Taylor"?

DoomAndGloom probably hasn't been around here long enough to catch the hundreds of positive posts about Taylor you've shared with us...

Come on Dandie, don't try to seem ignorant. Our dear friend Matthijs is the contrary of a Taylorite, in fact he's the informal leader of the anti-Taylor lobby here.
As for you yourself, I think you're at least ambiguous on this matter.

Like I said, kleerie, we've been discussing the Stones here since 1996/97. Since then, very few have posted more praisal for Taylor here than Mathijs.

But we all grow up (at least some of us), and there comes a time when guitar solos or lead playing isn't necessarily the barometer for how great a song is - even for guitar players

Despite our age difference, I'm pretty certain I've heard tons more Taylor than you have. That comes with my part-time profession, and inspiration for what I do. People think I'm nuts, listening to this "mediocre" band, but that's what I love - and have learned so much from.

If IORR hadn't crashed in 2005, I'm pretty sure many would have had a different view of both myself and Mathijs when it comes to Taylor.

We all love Mick Taylor on this board, there simply isn't a "Anti-Taylor-movement" around.

But when people whine about a release, because a lead guitar isn't loud enough in a few places, important differences in the concept of music and perception arise. That should be debatable.

And we are allowed sometimes, to take a moment and ask ourselves if we're on thin ice on certain subjects - I know I certainly should - how about you?

First of all we should avoid the qualification 'whiner', because that kills any discussion. For the rest anything is debatable. But regardless of quantity (of having listened certain music), it's obvious that personal preferences and taste are of great importance. But they shouldn't be mixed up with facts.
As for being on thin ice, that's a rather obscure expression - what do you mean by it?

Quote
LieB
Mick T was never a big rhythm guitar player, but he sure did have his moments, especially early in his Stones time.

Does that imply he more or less forgot how to play rhythm after his early Stones time ?
There are enough recordings were he proves quite the opposite: '72 things he did with the Stones, Bruce, Dylan, and his own records.Taylor always was a very competent/ effective rhythm player... he's just not that cranked up Keith Open G player, or Pete Townsed, the archetypes of R&R rhythm guitar. One windmill in a band is enough.

As for Kleers initial question I would say: Mention 3 solos I don't like.

Quote
LuxuryStones
One windmill in a band is enough.

As for Kleers initial question I would say: Mention 3 solos I don't like.

So true! Hard to pick favorites. But Taylor's Love in Vain solos from L&G slay me every time.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2014-04-10 19:15 by moonlightaffair.

I'm with Mathijs.

Gimme Shelter, London, September 9, 1973

Quote
Richard from Canada
I'm with Mathijs.

Gimme Shelter, London, September 9, 1973

Is this the version on the "unofficial" Brussels Affair boot?

Quote
kleermaker

Quote
DandelionPowderman

Quote
kleermaker

Quote
DandelionPowderman

Quote
Mathijs

Quote
DoomandGloom
Mathijs you are one consistent anti-Taylorite....

Er, he? Wot? I name three tracks that really blow my socks off, and than I am a anti-Taylorite?

He's done a ton of fantastic things (TD and Angie solo from Brussels, Heartbreaker from London, Sympathy from Ya Ya's, Love in Vain and YCAGWYW in 1972), but these three really spring in mind first of mind-boggling solo's he's done. These are carreer defining in my opinion.

And no, I don't think he made Keith a better player (Ronnie did that, from 1975 to 1982 on), and no I don't think Taylor was a good rhythm guitar player, and yes I do think his role in the Stones is very much overrated. But that all doesn't take anything away from these three stand-out moments.

Mathijs

"Anti-Taylorite" or "Anti-Taylor"?

DoomAndGloom probably hasn't been around here long enough to catch the hundreds of positive posts about Taylor you've shared with us...

Come on Dandie, don't try to seem ignorant. Our dear friend Matthijs is the contrary of a Taylorite, in fact he's the informal leader of the anti-Taylor lobby here.
As for you yourself, I think you're at least ambiguous on this matter.

Like I said, kleerie, we've been discussing the Stones here since 1996/97. Since then, very few have posted more praisal for Taylor here than Mathijs.

But we all grow up (at least some of us), and there comes a time when guitar solos or lead playing isn't necessarily the barometer for how great a song is - even for guitar players

Despite our age difference, I'm pretty certain I've heard tons more Taylor than you have. That comes with my part-time profession, and inspiration for what I do. People think I'm nuts, listening to this "mediocre" band, but that's what I love - and have learned so much from.

If IORR hadn't crashed in 2005, I'm pretty sure many would have had a different view of both myself and Mathijs when it comes to Taylor.

We all love Mick Taylor on this board, there simply isn't a "Anti-Taylor-movement" around.

But when people whine about a release, because a lead guitar isn't loud enough in a few places, important differences in the concept of music and perception arise. That should be debatable.

And we are allowed sometimes, to take a moment and ask ourselves if we're on thin ice on certain subjects - I know I certainly should - how about you?

First of all we should avoid the qualification 'whiner', because that kills any discussion. For the rest anything is debatable. But regardless of quantity (of having listened certain music), it's obvious that personal preferences and taste are of great importance. But they shouldn't be mixed up with facts.
As for being on thin ice, that's a rather obscure expression - what do you mean by it?

Good! Then we agree. What's wrong with a little whining, btw? You have been constantly complaining about a release lots of other posters treasure, keep that in mind

Being on thin ice means being on unsafe ground. In this case, it has to do with being dead sure about something one might not have the total knowledge of...

Quote
moonlightaffair

Quote
Richard from Canada
I'm with Mathijs.

Gimme Shelter, London, September 9, 1973

Is this the version on the "unofficial" Brussels Affair boot?

It's on the bootleg called Brussels Affair-Definitive Edition.
And here you have it:

Quote
DandelionPowderman

Quote
kleermaker

Quote
DandelionPowderman

Quote
kleermaker

Quote
DandelionPowderman

Quote
Mathijs

Quote
DoomandGloom
Mathijs you are one consistent anti-Taylorite....

Er, he? Wot? I name three tracks that really blow my socks off, and than I am a anti-Taylorite?

He's done a ton of fantastic things (TD and Angie solo from Brussels, Heartbreaker from London, Sympathy from Ya Ya's, Love in Vain and YCAGWYW in 1972), but these three really spring in mind first of mind-boggling solo's he's done. These are carreer defining in my opinion.

And no, I don't think he made Keith a better player (Ronnie did that, from 1975 to 1982 on), and no I don't think Taylor was a good rhythm guitar player, and yes I do think his role in the Stones is very much overrated. But that all doesn't take anything away from these three stand-out moments.

Mathijs

"Anti-Taylorite" or "Anti-Taylor"?

DoomAndGloom probably hasn't been around here long enough to catch the hundreds of positive posts about Taylor you've shared with us...

Come on Dandie, don't try to seem ignorant. Our dear friend Matthijs is the contrary of a Taylorite, in fact he's the informal leader of the anti-Taylor lobby here.
As for you yourself, I think you're at least ambiguous on this matter.

Like I said, kleerie, we've been discussing the Stones here since 1996/97. Since then, very few have posted more praisal for Taylor here than Mathijs.

But we all grow up (at least some of us), and there comes a time when guitar solos or lead playing isn't necessarily the barometer for how great a song is - even for guitar players

Despite our age difference, I'm pretty certain I've heard tons more Taylor than you have. That comes with my part-time profession, and inspiration for what I do. People think I'm nuts, listening to this "mediocre" band, but that's what I love - and have learned so much from.

If IORR hadn't crashed in 2005, I'm pretty sure many would have had a different view of both myself and Mathijs when it comes to Taylor.

We all love Mick Taylor on this board, there simply isn't a "Anti-Taylor-movement" around.

But when people whine about a release, because a lead guitar isn't loud enough in a few places, important differences in the concept of music and perception arise. That should be debatable.

And we are allowed sometimes, to take a moment and ask ourselves if we're on thin ice on certain subjects - I know I certainly should - how about you?

First of all we should avoid the qualification 'whiner', because that kills any discussion. For the rest anything is debatable. But regardless of quantity (of having listened certain music), it's obvious that personal preferences and taste are of great importance. But they shouldn't be mixed up with facts.
As for being on thin ice, that's a rather obscure expression - what do you mean by it?

Good! Then we agree. What's wrong with a little whining, btw? You have been constantly complaining about a release lots of other posters treasure, keep that in mind

Being on thin ice means being on unsafe ground. In this case, it has to do with being dead sure about something one might not have the total knowledge of...

Qualifying someone as a whiner and/or a complainer comes down to disqualifying him. I criticized the sound quality of the official BA, delivering a strong and verifiable argument. So what if lots of posters treasure it or not? Is that of any relevance to the discussion? I don't think so. Or do you mean that is the running doctrine here?

Of course I know the meaning of the expression, but in this context it was and still is obscure to me, because I'm "dead sure" about something which is a fact.

He he, kleerie That's exactly what I'm talking about..

My point was that if other people love something, repeated, hard criticism of it may come across as whining.

No one's disqualified from anything, I don't see the logic in that?

Good to see that your mixing/mastering education paid off

I enjoyed everything he did in the Stones. It is hard to choose favorites, really unfortunate his solo efforts received lackluster reviews.

Quote
DandelionPowderman
He he, kleerie That's exactly what I'm talking about..

My point was that if other people love something, repeated, hard criticism of it may come across as whining.

No one's disqualified from anything, I don't see the logic in that?

Good to see that your mixing/mastering education paid off

Wait until you're able to listen to Kevin's improvement of the official BA. People who treasure it already will go crazy.

Surprised nobody has included this........

Taylor showing the world he is still Mick Taylor, during the fantastic 12 minute performance of Midnight Rambler in Shanghai earlier this year.

The screeching by a member of the audience at 6:40 sums the performance up completely

The Stones absolutely on fire!





What a drag it is gettin' old



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2014-04-10 22:23 by 68to72.

Quote
68to72
Surprised nobody has included this........

Taylor showing the world he is still Mick Taylor, during the fantastic 12 minute performance of Midnight Rambler in Shanghai earlier this year.

The screeching by a member of the audience at 6:40 sums the performance up completely

The Stones absolutely on fire!

Absolutely incredible! Thanks for posting this!

i find the stones and mick taylor fairly indulgent in their live performances in the 70s, i can't listen to them.

i am a big mick taylor fan though. my favourites are i) stray cat blues on ya yas b) sympathy for the devil on ya yas and iii) no expectations with the rhythm kings.

all of those are amazin' and keef can only watch in awe



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2014-04-11 16:13 by asinandalie.

Quote
asinandalie
i find the stones and mick taylor fairly indulgent in their live performances in the 70s, i can't listen to them.

i am a big mick taylor fan though. my favourites are i) stray cat blues on ya yas b) sympathy for the devil on ya yas and iii) no expectations with the rhythm kings.
all of those are amazin' and keef can only watch in awe

Not only Keith but the entire band and audience are in awe. I think Keith loves his playing as does Ronnie.

Quote
kleermaker

Quote
moonlightaffair

Quote
Richard from Canada
I'm with Mathijs.

Gimme Shelter, London, September 9, 1973

Is this the version on the "unofficial" Brussels Affair boot?

It's on the bootleg called Brussels Affair-Definitive Edition.
And here you have it:

Thanks Kleermaker.

All gems!

And what about this wah wah special one? ( 2'10"-3'30" )






Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 2014-04-14 11:11 by MarkSchneider.

And this phenomenal MT's guitar work/solos on Gimme Shelter (Virginia 1972), unfortunately betrayed by the audio quality:






Edited 3 time(s). Last edit at 2014-04-14 14:25 by MarkSchneider.

Quote
asinandalie
i find the stones and mick taylor fairly indulgent in their live performances in the 70s, i can't listen to them.

i am a big mick taylor fan though. my favourites are i) stray cat blues on ya yas b) sympathy for the devil on ya yas and iii) no expectations with the rhythm kings.

all of those are amazin' and keef can only watch in awe

He is playing, too, right?

Keith played fantastic, as always. With MT, he definitely met (and is still meeting) his perfect musical match.

Quote
MarkSchneider
Keith played fantastic, as always. With MT, he definitely met (and is still meeting) his perfect musical match.

All three guitar players have been a great musical match for Keith (for different reasons).

Lucky Keith who found utmost match!

Mick Taylor (guitar)
Mick Jagger (song writing)
Brian Jones (arrangement)
Charlie Watts (rythm)
Ron Wood (mate)

Lucky Keith who found utmost match!

Mick Taylor (guitar) - true - for a while
Mick Jagger (song writing) - for a while, Mick was the lucky one
Brian Jones (arrangement) - For a while, a brilliant guitar partner
Charlie Watts (rythm) - true
Ron Wood (mate) - for a while, his best guitar PARTNER



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2014-04-14 15:33 by DandelionPowderman.

Quote
DandelionPowderman
Lucky Keith who found utmost match!

Mick Taylor (guitar) - true - for a while
Mick Jagger (song writing) - for a while, Mick was the lucky one
Brian Jones (arrangement) - For a while, a brilliant guitar partner
Charlie Watts (rythm) - true
Ron Wood (mate) - for a while, his best guitar PARTNER

Are we talking about talent/skill here, or personal taste?

Quote
LuxuryStones

Quote
DandelionPowderman
Lucky Keith who found utmost match!

Mick Taylor (guitar) - true - for a while
Mick Jagger (song writing) - for a while, Mick was the lucky one
Brian Jones (arrangement) - For a while, a brilliant guitar partner
Charlie Watts (rythm) - true
Ron Wood (mate) - for a while, his best guitar PARTNER

Are we talking about talent/skill here, or personal taste?

Are we talking about taste here?

Quote
LuxuryStones

Quote
DandelionPowderman
Lucky Keith who found utmost match!

Mick Taylor (guitar) - true - for a while
Mick Jagger (song writing) - for a while, Mick was the lucky one
Brian Jones (arrangement) - For a while, a brilliant guitar partner
Charlie Watts (rythm) - true
Ron Wood (mate) - for a while, his best guitar PARTNER

Are we talking about talent/skill here, or personal taste?

OK. Keith was nothing but lucky, SF isn't better than IORR, Brian couldn't play, Charlie is good tonight and the Stones didn't have a revival with SG and TY.

I get it

Just wanted to show how it looks if you say controversial things, purely based on taste like Mark did.

At least, I had some facts thrown in there somewhere

So why isn't GS from Mobile 72 mentioned in this thread?