Quote
Stoneburst

Quote
Stoneage
You might say that the Rolling Stones are stuck in time. There is some truth in that. With Mick Taylor you get this feeling even more. If the late 60s bluesrock scene is your cup of tea then that is fine. I guess...

I think Taylor's quite into the idea of being an itinerant bluesman. None of his heroes when he was a kid - save BB King, I guess - were megastars; they all had to play clubs for a living, picking up local musicians as they toured. (Clapton is into this idea as well, but his decades of pop success mean that he's not convincing in this role; ironically, Taylor's lack of commercial success is in some ways his greatest asset.)

With a few more albums under his belt, maybe the touring situation would have been different for Taylor? I'm not pointing at the lack of commercial success, merely that his followers would have had more music to enjoy, and hence would turn up at more gigs + that he could have gained more fans? Just a thought..

How about Mick Taylor and the Sons of The Beatles. Or the Sons Of The Beatles featuring Mick Taylor?

Quote
DandelionPowderman

Quote
Stoneburst

Quote
Stoneage
You might say that the Rolling Stones are stuck in time. There is some truth in that. With Mick Taylor you get this feeling even more. If the late 60s bluesrock scene is your cup of tea then that is fine. I guess...

I think Taylor's quite into the idea of being an itinerant bluesman. None of his heroes when he was a kid - save BB King, I guess - were megastars; they all had to play clubs for a living, picking up local musicians as they toured. (Clapton is into this idea as well, but his decades of pop success mean that he's not convincing in this role; ironically, Taylor's lack of commercial success is in some ways his greatest asset.)

With a few more albums under his belt, maybe the touring situation would have been different for Taylor? I'm not pointing at the lack of commercial success, merely that his followers would have had more music to enjoy, and hence would turn up at more gigs + that he could have gained more fans? Just a thought..

I agree that Taylor's management of his own career leaves a hell of a lot to be desired, but I've always thought that by the very nature of his music he appeals to a) guitar nerds and b) Stones fans of a certain age. You might offer Jeff Beck as a counterargument - he doesn't even have the Stones connection to trade off, but he can fill the O2. Then again, Beck's music is progressive in a way Taylor's isn't, and his well-known influence on guys like Satriani and even Slash means he attracts fans of more recent guitar music. I don't know.

Quote
exhpart
Don't think I'd plan for a Mick Taylor concert...saw him at the Queen Elizabeth Hall South Bank London in I think 2008 and it was all a bit of a mess. He seemed to lose his temper with Mitch Mitchell on drums. He went out for a cigarette and disappeared for 15 minutes. The sound wasn't right etc etc. And I believe he also has a history of postponements and cancellations. If he was round the corner for £15 tonight I'd go but I don't think I'd make big plans.

Iorr thread on that gig here: [www.iorr.org]

Quote
Stoneburst

Quote
DandelionPowderman

Quote
Stoneburst

Quote
Stoneage
You might say that the Rolling Stones are stuck in time. There is some truth in that. With Mick Taylor you get this feeling even more. If the late 60s bluesrock scene is your cup of tea then that is fine. I guess...

I think Taylor's quite into the idea of being an itinerant bluesman. None of his heroes when he was a kid - save BB King, I guess - were megastars; they all had to play clubs for a living, picking up local musicians as they toured. (Clapton is into this idea as well, but his decades of pop success mean that he's not convincing in this role; ironically, Taylor's lack of commercial success is in some ways his greatest asset.)

With a few more albums under his belt, maybe the touring situation would have been different for Taylor? I'm not pointing at the lack of commercial success, merely that his followers would have had more music to enjoy, and hence would turn up at more gigs + that he could have gained more fans? Just a thought..

I agree that Taylor's management of his own career leaves a hell of a lot to be desired, but I've always thought that by the very nature of his music he appeals to a) guitar nerds and b) Stones fans of a certain age. You might offer Jeff Beck as a counterargument - he doesn't even have the Stones connection to trade off, but he can fill the O2. Then again, Beck's music is progressive in a way Taylor's isn't, and his well-known influence on guys like Satriani and even Slash means he attracts fans of more recent guitar music. I don't know.

Good point! But he was sort of getting there with his first album, but for some reason he chose not to explore that progressive route any further.

We could clearly hear that he still had the prog things down, when he picked up CYHMK with the Stones in 2013, though.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2015-02-26 14:01 by DandelionPowderman.

Quote
DandelionPowderman
But he was sort of getting there with his first album, but for some reason he chose not to explore that progressive route any further.

I always wished he had done that.Talent was not the problem.

Quote
stonehearted
Jeff Beck has too much storm and thrash, there would be no room for Taylor to breath. When Jeff Beck is around, there is only one lead guitarist, and that is Jeff Beck.

Well he co-toured with SRV in 1989 and he duetted with him on "Going Down" night after night.
So yeah the beast can be tamed... ><

This is from 1984 but you get the idea...






Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2015-02-26 14:44 by dcba.

What does "progressive" mean in this context?

Quote
RomanCandle
What does "progressive" mean in this context?

Fusion elements.

Thanks

Taylor is obviously a bit funny in the head. A potential genius that squandered and wasted his talent for too many years. He is now a shadow of his former self and miles away from what he could have been.

He seems to behave like a spoilt child far too often. Quite unlike the hard living, hard working bluesmen some are comparing him to in that he has been handed great opportunities so many times, but he walks away after awhile or doesn't go for it fully.

What a waste!

Quote
fuzzbox
Taylor is obviously a bit funny in the head. A potential genius that squandered and wasted his talent for too many years. He is now a shadow of his former self and miles away from what he could have been.

He seems to behave like a spoilt child far too often. Quite unlike the hard living, hard working bluesmen some are comparing him to in that he has been handed great opportunities so many times, but he walks away after awhile or doesn't go for it fully.

What a waste!

genius by definition means you aren't like other people..people refer to Keith as 'genius'

eccentric may be a better word for Taylor.

Keith sure got a pass, for a lot of behavior that would have killed most people, or gotten the band in far more legal trouble than they wanted.

Hey, I love this forum, you have the right to delete anything you want but we both know who is behind this. He can hide behind buffers but I know you know the truth...

Quote
fuzzbox
Taylor is obviously a bit funny in the head. A potential genius that squandered and wasted his talent for too many years. He is now a shadow of his former self and miles away from what he could have been.

He seems to behave like a spoilt child far too often. Quite unlike the hard living, hard working bluesmen some are comparing him to in that he has been handed great opportunities so many times, but he walks away after awhile or doesn't go for it fully.

What a waste!

Nothing is obvious or funny with his head. He's a rock star from the 1960's and has accomplished more in his lifetime than the majority of musicians. It's just not right to analyze a guy like this even if you knew him which you clearly don't. Substance abuse, trials and tribulations, falling down, rising up, that's all part of the road of life for most of us. He's earned and and re-earned our respect for his splendid playing, show it.

IMO he should STOP touring.

Mick is far better as a sideman in a band. I like the idea of him playing with Mayall. He could even play in Bill's band. He is not a leader.

Mick's first solo album I think did pretty well. The song "leather Jacket"
Received Lots of AirPlay in the Chicago area. Unfortunately a long time ago though...My opinion is the worst thing for Mick would be to stay idle. There will
Be other opportunities besides the stones but maybe only if he is working and staying in shape - health wise and musically. Example: maybe he could feature a stones album in his set. This, I think, would create a lot of interest among
Fans.

To be honest, if Taylor was looking for a quick buck he'd get himself a Jagger lookalike who could blow a bit of harp and occasionally hit the right notes, then some reprobate with a Telecaster in open G, and tour with his own Stones show. Hell, I'd pay to see that. But he has too much self-respect to do it, and I think the more of him for that. Even when he breaks out Can't You Hear Me Knocking in his solo shows, it's not meant to be a crowd-pleaser: the way he does it bears only a passing resemblance to the Stones' album cut.

Doom and Gloom, you are so right. He has earned and re-earned EVERYBODY's respect...What did Keith say when they were jamming out on Rambler one night? He looked over at MT and was like..."where the hell have you been"? Well, he was back, the Stones wasted an opportunity to use him more and if they stick to their guns and don't invite him back, I'm not going to any more shows...

I disagree..I thought the Iridium shows were awesome and he was a fine leader!!

He could also sit in with The Dead in Chicago at the July shows...he was great with them when he played Little Red Rooster and West LA Fadeaway...

Quote
ronkeith72
Doom and Gloom, you are so right. He has earned and re-earned EVERYBODY's respect...What did Keith say when they were jamming out on Rambler one night? He looked over at MT and was like..."where the hell have you been"? Well, he was back, the Stones wasted an opportunity to use him more and if they stick to their guns and don't invite him back, I'm not going to any more shows...

I'll still go. I am a big time Taylor fan and think he is one of rock's greatest soloists but i love The Stones and won't punish myself for something that happened in 1974. I was at The Brooklyn show which oddly had no Taylor and MR was the best tune of the night. Taylor with Little Feat

Taylor had a solo gig that night, or the night before, if memory serves.

Quote
DoomandGloom
Nothing is obvious or funny with his head. He's a rock star from the 1960's and has accomplished more in his lifetime than the majority of musicians. It's just not right to analyze a guy like this even if you knew him which you clearly don't. Substance abuse, trials and tribulations, falling down, rising up, that's all part of the road of life for most of us. He's earned and and re-earned our respect for his splendid playing, show it.

It obvious that you are an overly sensitive a fanboy.

Quote
fuzzbox

Quote
DoomandGloom
Nothing is obvious or funny with his head. He's a rock star from the 1960's and has accomplished more in his lifetime than the majority of musicians. It's just not right to analyze a guy like this even if you knew him which you clearly don't. Substance abuse, trials and tribulations, falling down, rising up, that's all part of the road of life for most of us. He's earned and and re-earned our respect for his splendid playing, show it.

It obvious that you are an overly sensitive a fanboy.

well this is a fan site... personally I find the armchair psychiatrist's public diagnosis of anybody in poor taste.

Quote
DoomandGloom
well this is a fan site... personally I find the armchair psychiatrist's public diagnosis of anybody in poor taste.

Yet, you do it yourself.

Quote
fuzzbox

Quote
DoomandGloom
well this is a fan site... personally I find the armchair psychiatrist's public diagnosis of anybody in poor taste.

Yet, you do it yourself.

That's the other me.

Quote
DoomandGloom

Quote
fuzzbox

Quote
DoomandGloom
well this is a fan site... personally I find the armchair psychiatrist's public diagnosis of anybody in poor taste.

Yet, you do it yourself.

That's the other me.

peace

He could open for the Stones

Quote
MrThompsonWooft
How about Mick Taylor and the Sons of The Beatles. Or the Sons Of The Beatles featuring Mick Taylor?

Well, I don't know about that...but if Rod Stewart would return a favor and take him out with Ronnie Wood and Kenny Jones and someone with a keyboard, doing old Faces and Stones tunes, I would be glad to go....