For information about how to use this forum please check out forum help and policies.
Quote
StoneburstQuote
TonyMoQuote
DandelionPowderman
No guitar player in the Stones has been more important for the Stones than Keith Richards. Please get that. When we say «best» in the Stones, it's AFTER Keith.
Mick Taylor, as nice as he once played, is a dime a dozen guitar player. Anything The Stones ever did wouldn't be diminished in the least had Keith played all the parts. My preference would have been Keith doing just that thus avoiding (for me) the tediousness of CYHMK & TWFNO; to name two.
Keith has always been the more clever player in the idiom...thankfully we were spared the tinkle tinkle arpeggio's that laid on Brown Sugar before clearer heads prevailed.
What MT could play was some credible blues; especially with a tube. That's where his jones was. Fantastic stuff, and perfect for a two guitar band.
Quote
Come OnQuote
DandelionPowdermanQuote
Come OnQuote
DandelionPowdermanQuote
Come On
No guitar player in the Stones has been more important for the Stones than Keith Richards. Please get that. When we say «best» in the Stones, it's AFTER Keith.
Hrrmm...!!!
I meant for the Stones's guitar sound.
Hrrmm...!!! again...don't forget the sound on 'Little red Rooster' and 'No Expectation'...that was only 2 of maybe 1000 examples...
We can count them (Brian and Keith's) if you want to...
OK, but Please, only the sound that could be defined as blues...
Quote
DandelionPowdermanQuote
Come OnQuote
DandelionPowdermanQuote
Come OnQuote
DandelionPowdermanQuote
Come On
No guitar player in the Stones has been more important for the Stones than Keith Richards. Please get that. When we say «best» in the Stones, it's AFTER Keith.
Hrrmm...!!!
I meant for the Stones's guitar sound.
Hrrmm...!!! again...don't forget the sound on 'Little red Rooster' and 'No Expectation'...that was only 2 of maybe 1000 examples...
We can count them (Brian and Keith's) if you want to...
OK, but Please, only the sound that could be defined as blues...
But... the Stones is not a blues band
Quote
DandelionPowdermanQuote
HearMeKnockinQuote
TeddyB1018
I don't like any of those guitarists named above very much and it was obvious to me how different the Stones were in '75 without Mick Tatlor. The only benefit was getting to hear Keith more. Woody contributed comsiderably to the studio sound they developed in the Some Girls era, but the band was inconsistent until '81, when they got it together. The Live in Texas show is terrific, but the shows I saw in '78 were not.
Of course the best Stones guitarist ever was Mick Taylor. They should let him back on the tour to play on a bunch of songs, but the Glimmers' egos won't let them allow such a thing... And they wouldn't want to hurt the delicate feelings of Ronnie, or risk improving the stage product...
No guitar player in the Stones has been more important for the Stones than Keith Richards. Please get that. When we say «best» in the Stones, it's AFTER Keith.
Quote
71TeleQuote
DandelionPowdermanQuote
HearMeKnockinQuote
TeddyB1018
I don't like any of those guitarists named above very much and it was obvious to me how different the Stones were in '75 without Mick Tatlor. The only benefit was getting to hear Keith more. Woody contributed comsiderably to the studio sound they developed in the Some Girls era, but the band was inconsistent until '81, when they got it together. The Live in Texas show is terrific, but the shows I saw in '78 were not.
Of course the best Stones guitarist ever was Mick Taylor. They should let him back on the tour to play on a bunch of songs, but the Glimmers' egos won't let them allow such a thing... And they wouldn't want to hurt the delicate feelings of Ronnie, or risk improving the stage product...
No guitar player in the Stones has been more important for the Stones than Keith Richards. Please get that. When we say «best» in the Stones, it's AFTER Keith.
Of course that's true. Bit for some of us the thrill is gone - even from his playing - when they are no longer challenging themselves musically.
Quote
DandelionPowdermanQuote
71TeleQuote
DandelionPowdermanQuote
HearMeKnockinQuote
TeddyB1018
I don't like any of those guitarists named above very much and it was obvious to me how different the Stones were in '75 without Mick Tatlor. The only benefit was getting to hear Keith more. Woody contributed comsiderably to the studio sound they developed in the Some Girls era, but the band was inconsistent until '81, when they got it together. The Live in Texas show is terrific, but the shows I saw in '78 were not.
Of course the best Stones guitarist ever was Mick Taylor. They should let him back on the tour to play on a bunch of songs, but the Glimmers' egos won't let them allow such a thing... And they wouldn't want to hurt the delicate feelings of Ronnie, or risk improving the stage product...
Obviously perspective and context are important. I don't begrudge others for enjoying the product. Glad they are still playing. That said, the stadium hits thing has no more appeal to me. Been there, done that.
No guitar player in the Stones has been more important for the Stones than Keith Richards. Please get that. When we say «best» in the Stones, it's AFTER Keith.
Of course that's true. Bit for some of us the thrill is gone - even from his playing - when they are no longer challenging themselves musically.
Fair enough. I haven't heard You Gotta Move from last night yet, though..
Keep in mind that for these old men performing is a challenge in itself...
Quote
71TeleQuote
DandelionPowdermanQuote
71TeleQuote
DandelionPowdermanQuote
HearMeKnockinQuote
TeddyB1018
I don't like any of those guitarists named above very much and it was obvious to me how different the Stones were in '75 without Mick Tatlor. The only benefit was getting to hear Keith more. Woody contributed comsiderably to the studio sound they developed in the Some Girls era, but the band was inconsistent until '81, when they got it together. The Live in Texas show is terrific, but the shows I saw in '78 were not.
Of course the best Stones guitarist ever was Mick Taylor. They should let him back on the tour to play on a bunch of songs, but the Glimmers' egos won't let them allow such a thing... And they wouldn't want to hurt the delicate feelings of Ronnie, or risk improving the stage product...
Obviously perspective and context are important. I don't begrudge others for enjoying the product. Glad they are still playing. That said, the stadium hits thing has no more appeal to me. Been there, done that.
No guitar player in the Stones has been more important for the Stones than Keith Richards. Please get that. When we say «best» in the Stones, it's AFTER Keith.
Of course that's true. Bit for some of us the thrill is gone - even from his playing - when they are no longer challenging themselves musically.
Fair enough. I haven't heard You Gotta Move from last night yet, though..
Keep in mind that for these old men performing is a challenge in itself...
Quote
DandelionPowdermanQuote
HearMeKnockinQuote
TeddyB1018
I don't like any of those guitarists named above very much and it was obvious to me how different the Stones were in '75 without Mick Tatlor. The only benefit was getting to hear Keith more. Woody contributed comsiderably to the studio sound they developed in the Some Girls era, but the band was inconsistent until '81, when they got it together. The Live in Texas show is terrific, but the shows I saw in '78 were not.
Of course the best Stones guitarist ever was Mick Taylor. They should let him back on the tour to play on a bunch of songs, but the Glimmers' egos won't let them allow such a thing... And they wouldn't want to hurt the delicate feelings of Ronnie, or risk improving the stage product...
No guitar player in the Stones has been more important for the Stones than Keith Richards. Please get that. When we say «best» in the Stones, it's AFTER Keith.
Quote
kleermakerQuote
71TeleQuote
DandelionPowdermanQuote
71TeleQuote
DandelionPowdermanQuote
HearMeKnockinQuote
TeddyB1018
I don't like any of those guitarists named above very much and it was obvious to me how different the Stones were in '75 without Mick Tatlor. The only benefit was getting to hear Keith more. Woody contributed comsiderably to the studio sound they developed in the Some Girls era, but the band was inconsistent until '81, when they got it together. The Live in Texas show is terrific, but the shows I saw in '78 were not.
Of course the best Stones guitarist ever was Mick Taylor. They should let him back on the tour to play on a bunch of songs, but the Glimmers' egos won't let them allow such a thing... And they wouldn't want to hurt the delicate feelings of Ronnie, or risk improving the stage product...
Obviously perspective and context are important. I don't begrudge others for enjoying the product. Glad they are still playing. That said, the stadium hits thing has no more appeal to me. Been there, done that.
No guitar player in the Stones has been more important for the Stones than Keith Richards. Please get that. When we say «best» in the Stones, it's AFTER Keith.
Of course that's true. Bit for some of us the thrill is gone - even from his playing - when they are no longer challenging themselves musically.
Fair enough. I haven't heard You Gotta Move from last night yet, though..
Keep in mind that for these old men performing is a challenge in itself...
Keith's guitar playing is just basic/rhythm/riff guitar, not best guitar. Taylor was by far the best guitar player, providing melody in an unknown and very special way in relation to both the rhythm section and the vocal melody.
Quote
Turner68Quote
kleermakerQuote
71TeleQuote
DandelionPowdermanQuote
71TeleQuote
DandelionPowdermanQuote
HearMeKnockinQuote
TeddyB1018
I don't like any of those guitarists named above very much and it was obvious to me how different the Stones were in '75 without Mick Tatlor. The only benefit was getting to hear Keith more. Woody contributed comsiderably to the studio sound they developed in the Some Girls era, but the band was inconsistent until '81, when they got it together. The Live in Texas show is terrific, but the shows I saw in '78 were not.
Of course the best Stones guitarist ever was Mick Taylor. They should let him back on the tour to play on a bunch of songs, but the Glimmers' egos won't let them allow such a thing... And they wouldn't want to hurt the delicate feelings of Ronnie, or risk improving the stage product...
Obviously perspective and context are important. I don't begrudge others for enjoying the product. Glad they are still playing. That said, the stadium hits thing has no more appeal to me. Been there, done that.
No guitar player in the Stones has been more important for the Stones than Keith Richards. Please get that. When we say «best» in the Stones, it's AFTER Keith.
Of course that's true. Bit for some of us the thrill is gone - even from his playing - when they are no longer challenging themselves musically.
Fair enough. I haven't heard You Gotta Move from last night yet, though..
Keep in mind that for these old men performing is a challenge in itself...
Keith's guitar playing is just basic/rhythm/riff guitar, not best guitar. Taylor was by far the best guitar player, providing melody in an unknown and very special way in relation to both the rhythm section and the vocal melody.
The band is all about the riffs. The guy who wrote and plays the riffs is the most important guitar player in the band.
Quote
kleermakerQuote
Turner68
The band is all about the riffs. The guy who wrote and plays the riffs is the most important guitar player in the band.
Pure nonsense. I love the tunes without a riff the most. Once the riff is played and the statement is made, it's in fact all repetition and no surprise anymore. Think about that.
Quote
71Tele
Kleermaker, even you must admit that Keith Richards' riffs and guitar style are the very backbone of the Stones' trademark sound, no?
Quote
DandelionPowderman
You must be even more bored by BB?
Quote
Naturalust
Breaking the songs down into riff ones and ones without riffs is obviously oversimplifying the Stones music experience, imo. So much else that makes the songs work (or not). Chord progressions, groove, interplay between instruments, lyrics, vocal melodies and harmonies, instrumentation, the way it is mixed, the way it is played live, etc, etc. There are plenty of tunes with a riff that still allow plenty of development in all those other areas.
I do understand, however that songs that rely too much on the riff tend to get boring in a hurry. Start Me Up is a perfect example of that for me. But Brown Sugar, while riff based, is all about the groove and the internal interplay of the instruments. It's probably why it still sounds good after 45 years while SMU makes me actually groan every time I hear the riff.
Taylor certainly wasn't all about the lead guitar he played in Stones music. He certainly added excitement in his attention to the dynamics and interplay within the songs in a way that has been missing in since his departure. No doubt Keith was very good at playing similar stuff against himself in the studio, obviously something he couldn't do playing live and Taylor provided the perfect pull to his push. That's why I value the live recording from the Taylor era more than anything that has been recorded afterward, it's not just about the riffs or the great lead playing, those are just one of many factors that make a truly good song.
peace
Quote
LongBeachArena72
It wasn't by any stretch of the imagination the band's best performance that year but my god there is a ridiculously beautiful solo by Taylor on "I'm Free."
I remember having the show on a bootleg 8-track tape back in the day and driving around with friends in the middle of the night and having that come on and we'd nearly have to pull off to the side of the road.
JJF and the Berry tunes, and Rambler, and SFTD, and SFM all rocked HARD that year ... but "I'm Free" was a haunting, dreamlike excursion, a trip the band took when they had the courage to slow it down, to PLAY, to create a mood other than the adrenaline-drenched rock they were so good at it.
Taylor on "I'm Free" is exquisite.
Quote
Turner68
Kleermaker, I really suggest you check out some of the jazz greats if you haven't (I'm sure you have.)
If what you're into is melodic inventiveness in relation to rhythm and other melodic lines, the Miles Davis Quintet (and many others) are the real deal. Davis on trumpet and Coltrane on sax deliver what you describe heads and shoulders above any of the British guitar players (beck, clapton, taylor, etc) from the 60s or 70s.
Quote
andrewt
Wow, now I'm conflicted. I parachute into this thread and what's this I read about riff songs being boring? I love fighting the good fight for MT but good lord, Keith's riffs are everything to me. Oh my word, I think I have a touch of the vapours...I need to sit down.