I love Mick Taylor first of all for his work with John Mayall (not only on Crusade) and THEN for his works with the Stones.

I also like his albums BUT I think that now he is not good for the Stones. They changed their sound, they have a different image, they are a different group, they play in a different way.

From the other hand I was happy when I saw him during the 2012 tour or during the 2013 one: it's just an emotional reason BUT I remember just two great moments (from a musical point of view) with MT:


[www.youtube.com]

[www.youtube.com]

And the RS, when He was with them, were something else.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2015-07-12 20:32 by pepganzo.

Ha-ha, nice to keep this idea alive. As a cynic I believe the only possibility to bring back Mick Taylor (because big fans love him, me too) is some kind of pay off for Mick and Keith. They won't have it any other way. That's what I believe. Maybe I'm wrong? Anyhow it's nice to see Ronnie is shining. He's a great Stone after all.

Quote
Olly

Quote
stone4ever


but woods guitar has no identity

I disagree. Wood's guitar playing has a different identity to Taylor's, certainly.

wood ruined the stones for over 30 years with terrible efforts

how did he get away with it

outrageous

Zilch possibility, it would seem. And there's already a thread going on 150 pages about all things Mick Taylor. No need to keep flogging a dead horse by starting yet another thread on the same theme when the message has already been delivered loud and clear.

zero

Quote
stone4ever

Quote
Olly

Quote
stone4ever


but woods guitar has no identity

I disagree. Wood's guitar playing has a different identity to Taylor's, certainly.

wood ruined the stones for over 30 years with terrible efforts

how did he get away with it

outrageous

Are you able to offer any examples?

.....

Olly.

I was bummed when the Tour was announced that Taylor was no longer touring with the band. I was never a fan of Ronnie with the Stones. His playing, live, was a mess. Blown leads, Too loose. Tinny kind of tone. Loved how work with the Faces and thought from 1975 on that he was not the right guy for the Stones. Certainly no Mick Taylor.

I went to the show last night and saw a seemingly sober Ronnie and Keith just KILL it on stage. The band was back to being guitar-driven and Ronnie's leads were tight and focused. His take on CYHMK was just amazing. First time I have heard it sounds good live....and it was not just good, it was fantastic.

I still think Ronnie sucked for 30+ years. And Keith's playing was spotty at best. Not anymore.

Do they need Taylor? Not if Ronnie and Keith keep playing like they did yesterday (totally the opposite of what I would have said 2 days ago)

Quote
Olly

Quote
stone4ever

Quote
Olly

Quote
stone4ever


but woods guitar has no identity

I disagree. Wood's guitar playing has a different identity to Taylor's, certainly.

wood ruined the stones for over 30 years with terrible efforts

how did he get away with it

outrageous

Are you able to offer any examples?

he plays ok now

over the last 30 years he has sucked on so many occasions

cant list them all or would be here all night

its like with wood the lights were on but no one was home

proof is on most performances between 78' to 07'

at least kr managed to still play well out of it

woody missed his parts and fluffed his solos for many many years



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2015-07-12 21:40 by stone4ever.

Quote
buffalo7478
I was bummed when the Tour was announced that Taylor was no longer touring with the band. I was never a fan of Ronnie with the Stones. His playing, live, was a mess. Blown leads, Too loose. Tinny kind of tone. Loved how work with the Faces and thought from 1975 on that he was not the right guy for the Stones. Certainly no Mick Taylor.

I went to the show last night and saw a seemingly sober Ronnie and Keith just KILL it on stage. The band was back to being guitar-driven and Ronnie's leads were tight and focused. His take on CYHMK was just amazing. First time I have heard it sounds good live....and it was not just good, it was fantastic.

I still think Ronnie sucked for 30+ years. And Keith's playing was spotty at best. Not anymore.

Do they need Taylor? Not if Ronnie and Keith keep playing like they did yesterday (totally the opposite of what I would have said 2 days ago)

Yeah buffalo, thanks for your review on the live show thread too. Your thoughts pretty much mirror mine. Regardless of the whole Taylor issue, it's just impossible not to acknowledge the great guitars on this tour. The leads may not be as fluent or fantastic as when MT is playing them but this current band is really hot. Ronnie is the key, imo, I think he is inspiring everyone to play better and he is just an absolute workhorse during these shows. I'm glad I'm not the only one noticing this, it's great to see.

Quote
stone4ever

Quote
Olly

Quote
stone4ever


but woods guitar has no identity

I disagree. Wood's guitar playing has a different identity to Taylor's, certainly.

wood ruined the stones for over 30 years with terrible efforts

how did he get away with it

outrageous

if this is what a ruined career as a rock musician looks like, sign me up. i won't mind you guys posting about how you think i should drop miss you from the set list lol.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2015-07-12 22:07 by Turner68.

Quote
Turner68

Quote
stone4ever

Quote
Olly

Quote
stone4ever


but woods guitar has no identity

I disagree. Wood's guitar playing has a different identity to Taylor's, certainly.

wood ruined the stones for over 30 years with terrible efforts

how did he get away with it

outrageous

if this is what a ruined career as a rock musician looks like, sign me up. i won't mind you guys posting about how think i should drop miss you from the set list lol.

they continued to amaze all those years despite him not because of him

Agreed!... Yeah for Ronnie!

Quote
stone4ever

Quote
Olly

Quote
stone4ever


but woods guitar has no identity

I disagree. Wood's guitar playing has a different identity to Taylor's, certainly.

wood ruined the stones for over 30 years with terrible efforts

how did he get away with it

outrageous

My god here we go again with that Taylor VS. Wood talk. How rude can someone be? Ruined the stones sound? Pathetic, if it wasn´t for Woody none of us would have had any shows to attend past 30 years. Cut the craptalk thank you.

Quote
stone4ever

Quote
Olly

Quote
stone4ever

Quote
Olly

Quote
stone4ever


but woods guitar has no identity

I disagree. Wood's guitar playing has a different identity to Taylor's, certainly.

wood ruined the stones for over 30 years with terrible efforts

how did he get away with it

outrageous

Are you able to offer any examples?

he plays ok now

over the last 30 years he has sucked on so many occasions

cant list them all or would be here all night

its like with wood the lights were on but no one was home

proof is on most performances between 78' to 07'

at least kr managed to still play well out of it

woody missed his parts and fluffed his solos for many many years

Can you list one or two?


I have an easier time understanding the argument that Wood is an industrious, reliant but ultimately less accomplished player than Taylor.

But you seem to suggest he has, over a '30 year' period, been inadequate and actively detrimental to the band.

.....

Olly.

Quote
stone4ever

Quote
Turner68

Quote
stone4ever

Quote
Olly

Quote
stone4ever


but woods guitar has no identity

I disagree. Wood's guitar playing has a different identity to Taylor's, certainly.

wood ruined the stones for over 30 years with terrible efforts

how did he get away with it

outrageous

if this is what a ruined career as a rock musician looks like, sign me up. i won't mind you guys posting about how think i should drop miss you from the set list lol.

they continued to amaze all those years despite him not because of him

so are they or are they not ruined by him?

Quote
Turner68

Quote
stone4ever

Quote
Turner68

Quote
stone4ever

Quote
Olly

Quote
stone4ever


but woods guitar has no identity

I disagree. Wood's guitar playing has a different identity to Taylor's, certainly.

wood ruined the stones for over 30 years with terrible efforts

how did he get away with it

outrageous

if this is what a ruined career as a rock musician looks like, sign me up. i won't mind you guys posting about how think i should drop miss you from the set list lol.

they continued to amaze all those years despite him not because of him

so are they or are they not ruined by him?

not ruined

hampered

diminished shall we say

olly every bit of footage out there shows that wood was bellow par on various shows to varying degrees in the past

the fact that he is great now proves it

the contrast in his playing is the proof

Quote
Olly
Can you list one or two?


I have an easier time understanding the argument that Wood is an industrious, reliant but ultimately less accomplished player than Taylor.

But you seem to suggest he has, over a '30 year' period, been inadequate and actively detrimental to the band.

From 1975 to the 1990s I would say it's more the former. But there were numerous shows on the Licks and Bigger Bang tours which were marred by Wood playing dreadfully. Although the reviews posted on this site were generally the more positive ones, the bootlegs are all out there, and it was widely discussed on IORR for many years. He was having major addiction issues, but a lot of fans were thoroughly fed up with it. Even Wood's most eloquent advocates on this board, including Mathijs and DandelionPowderman, were very critical at the time. Personally, much as I like Wood and am glad that he's playing well and seems to have his life sorted out these days, I feel that the traditional invective against myopic, obsessive Taylorites around here misses the point. For years, Mick Taylor was a hot topic on this board almost entirely because Wood was playing so badly.

Quote
Stoneburst

Quote
Olly
Can you list one or two?


I have an easier time understanding the argument that Wood is an industrious, reliant but ultimately less accomplished player than Taylor.

But you seem to suggest he has, over a '30 year' period, been inadequate and actively detrimental to the band.

From 1975 to the 1990s I would say it's more the former. But there were numerous shows on the Licks and Bigger Bang tours which were marred by Wood playing dreadfully. Although the reviews posted on this site were generally the more positive ones, the bootlegs are all out there, and it was widely discussed on IORR for many years. He was having major addiction issues, but a lot of fans were thoroughly fed up with it. Even Wood's most eloquent advocates on this board, including Mathijs and DandelionPowderman, were very critical at the time. Personally, much as I like Wood and am glad that he's playing well and seems to have his life sorted out these days, I feel that the traditional invective against myopic, obsessive Taylorites around here misses the point. For years, Mick Taylor was a hot topic on this board almost entirely because Wood was playing so badly.

Thanks for the insight, Stoneburst, particularly with regards to the historiography of Wood's place within the band.

.....

Olly.

Quote
JumpinJeppeFlash
No thank you, Mick Taylor is not a member of Rolling Stones.

Neither is Matt Clifford or Chuck Leavell and we have to endure them.

71Tele,

My previous post appears to have been lost in a thread merge, but I was interested in any response you might have. See below.

Olly.


Quote
Olly

Quote
71Tele
What more to be said is there? If the Stones wished to still challenge themselves and their audience musically, it would be quite simple for them to do. They have proved time and again that they have no such interest. They have a formula that works, and they are not willing to alter it even by bringing back a celebrated band member to play on shows supposedly centered aroud one of their most celebrated albums. This is a nostalgia show - pure and simple. Anyone wanting anything different has basically been told where they can stick it.



Respectfully, can you not see that including a previous member of the band who left forty years ago will only serve to contribute to the nostalgia you mention?


I infer from your post that you dislike the band being 'nostalgi[c],' suggesting you would like to see the opposite - a version of the band that is forward-looking.


Answer me this: how is it possible to be looking both forwards and forty years into the past simultaneously?


The Stones are less of a 'nostalgia' act without Taylor.

Olly.

Quote
Olly
71Tele,

My previous post appears to have been lost in a thread merge, but I was interested in any response you might have. See below.

Olly.


Quote
Olly

Quote
71Tele
What more to be said is there? If the Stones wished to still challenge themselves and their audience musically, it would be quite simple for them to do. They have proved time and again that they have no such interest. They have a formula that works, and they are not willing to alter it even by bringing back a celebrated band member to play on shows supposedly centered aroud one of their most celebrated albums. This is a nostalgia show - pure and simple. Anyone wanting anything different has basically been told where they can stick it.



Respectfully, can you not see that including a previous member of the band who left forty years ago will only serve to contribute to the nostalgia you mention?


I infer from your post that you dislike the band being 'nostalgi[c],' suggesting you would like to see the opposite - a version of the band that is forward-looking.


Answer me this: how is it possible to be looking both forwards and forty years into the past simultaneously?


The Stones are less of a 'nostalgia' act without Taylor.

Olly.

I agree with Tele ultimately. And just to bypass all the Wood vs Taylor stuff...for me, in a perfect world, we wouldn't be settling for a nostalgia show whether it was emphasizing 1973 or 1978. I think the Glimmers and their audience would be best served by bringing Taylor on full time, taking Ronnie off his leash, and letting those two breath a brand new life into the band to write a spectacular final chapter with something we've never seen before. But its all a fantasy unfortunately.

Quote
stone4ever

Quote
Olly

Quote
stone4ever


but woods guitar has no identity

I disagree. Wood's guitar playing has a different identity to Taylor's, certainly.

wood ruined the stones for over 30 years with terrible efforts

how did he get away with it

outrageous

I'm a big fan of Ronnie, if your sentence is referring to some of his performances, I can agree, if it is related to his career in the Stones I can not agree. Ronnie was crushed in some periods by Keith and his addiction to alcohol and drugs did the rest, but @#$%& how can you argue that the Paradise of amsterdam such did not sound right? [www.youtube.com]

In the real world, Mick Taylor is underrated, in the IORR world, he is vastly overrated.

He runs scales nicely, and occasionally really caught fire, but...... I can't stand outtakes or live versions of TD from them Taylor era; Amazing how one man can rip the soul out of a great, raunchy tune.

You give me Sway, CYHMK and TWFN, and I'll give you 3 songs that don't really feel like Stones songs..........Ronnie would have nailed TD first take.....he gets it.

Quote
stone4ever

Quote
Naturalust

Quote
DoomandGloom
Wood played poorly for decades, he is playing pretty good now and that is terrific. It is not the fans fault he performed so poorly for so long. I noticed in CYHMK the band rave up and support Wood's playing, very musical and really something they have missed for a while. Bravo RS.

Well said D&G. The improvement is astonishing and very welcome, imo.

but woods guitar has no identity

yup he's generic Clapton at his best. Still the show and guitar playing has improved. I will say as fact Taylor lit a fire under their lazy butts, he is a ghost or shadow over the band. Also fact, when I listen to MT my solos get more melodic. Not really a subjective thing, Taylor is very special, Wood after 40 years has learned to grab a moment or two in a stadium show. Fans had to endure this clumsy ride, life ain't fair.

Quote
Turner68

Quote
DoomandGloom
They became too self aware to escape into songwriting. Also fans are aware of them beyond their persona. "I was born in a crossfire hurricane", people here would say, "no he wasn't." Time takes away the part of mystique needed to convey a creative message. Both D&G and OMS were written direct from Mick and Keith, shouting opinions and cleverisms, it is hard to Get Back a sense of distance and story. Of course they could still make amazing blues style stuff if MT was on board, instead they prefer to be a Rock and roll band which ultimately is their correct course.

well put.

the most honest/real music i have heard from them in the past 30 years has been keith's ballads about "losing my touch".. "slipping away"... etc. he has actually provided the tale of his journey from explosive creativeness to a mere mortal. nothing people write about their diminished skills on this board would surprise him - he provided the warning to us on Steel Wheels.

even "one more shot" can be read as being in this theme, although it obviously isn't quite as honest (it suggests that with one more shot something might change) and more a re-hash of the theme, dressed up as a pseudo-commercial sounding rocker. perhaps that's because mick and not keith was singing it.

yes but we know KR's saga, what more can he say? Mick too, Michael Stipe warned the end of REM would come once fans got familiar with him. Before the Beatles composers were separate from the performers, The Stones are first generation of this phenomena of being both. There is no road map, I hope they rediscover their inspiration.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2015-07-13 06:22 by DoomandGloom.

Quote
GasLightStreet

Quote
treaclefingers
anything's possible, but if there's been any bad blood that's been generated by his uninviting on this leg, I'd say chances are slim.

Anything is not possible. That means the Stones could cure cancer or stop hurricanes or improve the colour of water and on and on and on.

wouldn't you feel like a tool if they announced tomorrow that they found a link to the remission of bowel cancer when dancing to Emotional Rescue.

I have not checked this thread in a long time so I apologize if this has already
Been discussed. My question is - has anyone heard what Mick Taylor is doing now?
Does he have any touring plans?

Quote
swimtothemoon
I have not checked this thread in a long time so I apologize if this has already
Been discussed. My question is - has anyone heard what Mick Taylor is doing now?
Does he have any touring plans?

no, there is no new news.

Quote
Turner68

Quote
swimtothemoon
I have not checked this thread in a long time so I apologize if this has already
Been discussed. My question is - has anyone heard what Mick Taylor is doing now?
Does he have any touring plans?

no, there is no new news.

Thanks. So not a peep from the Taylor camp at all?

Quote
swimtothemoon

Quote
Turner68

Quote
swimtothemoon
I have not checked this thread in a long time so I apologize if this has already
Been discussed. My question is - has anyone heard what Mick Taylor is doing now?
Does he have any touring plans?

no, there is no new news.

Thanks. So not a peep from the Taylor camp at all?

only complaining.