Quote
Stoneburst

Quote
71Tele

Quote
liddas

Quote
71Tele
I differ from some Taylorites in that it is my view that Taylor needed the Stones to shine. Without them he is just one of many very, very good British blues-based guitarists. But the Stones needed him too. On the records, there is an extra sparkle to the tracks he played on, and it's not just soloing - it's musicianship. And live there was something about the combination of him and Keith that was magical, even early on when the rhythm/lead structure they would later develop hadn't happened yet.

I agree (maybe with the only exception of MTs tour with Dylan). The way I see it is that MT when playing alone or with a "normal" second guitar tends to have a "lazy" timing, while with Keith's strong presence in the beat, there is more "tension" in his playing as if he was "pushed forward".

(Note: by "lazy" timing I don't mean to criticize MT at all. It's my way of describing a certain attitude that is common with blues soloist).

C

For the record, I agree about his work with Dylan (both on Infidels and live). Taylor thrives when he has great material to work with from top-flight artists. He is much less interesting playing Stones material with other people or fairly generic blues lead guitar as a solo artist.

Liddas's point is an interesting one, definitely - Taylor is much less prone to doing that Albert King / Clapton thing of dropping slightly behind the beat when Keith is there. I'd never really thought about it like that but it's true.

Quote
Stoneage
Whatever Taylor has to contribute to the Stones should have been contributed years ago. Ufortunatelly it didn't work out that way. Instead Ronnie took his place. For better or for worse.
Now he's very much a has been, even more so than the bad itself. And the band is to old and stale to be able to conform to his insignificant contribution anyway. Time waits for no one.

Quote
palerider22
I could live with a special tribute show for Sticky Fingers with MT. That's an interesting compromise to get out of the dilemma of whether to invite him or not. I like it...but would it overshadow the rest of the tour. Well, maybe not...

Quote
DoomandGloom

Quote
Dreamer

Quote
treaclefingers

Quote
DoomandGloom

Quote
Stoneburst
I get that Keith's role as a rhythm guitarist is different and much more 'leading' than that of most bands' rhythm guitarists, I just don't think that this makes him a 'lead guitarist' (as that term is normally understood). Lots of Who fans like to claim that John Entwistle was their lead guitarist. He wasn't, he was the bass player, albeit a much more aggressive and melodic bass player than most. We use terms of convenience because they're convenient, you know?

I still don't see what this has to do with Mick Taylor and your claim that he spent entire songs soloing. He didn't. He played solos where he was meant to and played fills around the end of the vocal lines.

Keith is a lead guitarist. His sympathy solo is The Stones most well known solo perhaps. The concept of a guy being a lead or rhythm guitarist is for fans and amateurs.

point taken, so does that make you a fan or an amateur?

><

I had to really consider this as I should be able to back up my statements, even ones I make when hung over, bitter and full of doom... As a guitarist in the classic rock style I know that the line between lead and rhythm changes by the moment on stage. I don't consider myself an amateur although I admittedly am only a professional musician by a stroke of luck. My band and singer are much better than I... Still I am a fan, even working for them when I was a kid hasn't changed my giggly admiration for them. As a fan I guess I'll always consider Keith the lead guitarist. Not because of a count of solos but he is the leader no matter which role he is playing on the guitar.

Quote
DandelionPowderman

Quote
Stoneburst
I don't follow. Doesn't that mean that virtually every song they ever did was a long Keith solo, by your logic?

I mean that Keith's approach to rhythm guitar is different than the traditional term. If you forget the "solo-part" for a second, and start focusing on what really is the leading instrument on tracks like Brown Sugar, JJF, HTW and others, you'll probably know what I mean? The riffing is not just about keeping the rhythm down or the groove, it's a lead guitar on its own, with both melodies and a groove. If you take that away from the songs...

Quote
71Tele
I differ from some Taylorites in that it is my view that Taylor needed the Stones to shine. Without them he is just one of many very, very good British blues-based guitarists. But the Stones needed him too. On the records, there is an extra sparkle to the tracks he played on, and it's not just soloing - it's musicianship. And live there was something about the combination of him and Keith that was magical, even early on when the rhythm/lead structure they would later develop hadn't happened yet.

Taylor's solo and collaborative projects don't interest me at all. But neither do the Rolling Stones playing songs without him that he helped define. I am not saying those versions are necessarily bad, I am saying they are never as good. Whereas Taylor took songs he was not on on the record (Gimme Shelter, I'm Free, Love In Vain and many more) and gave them an extra dimension live, Ron Wood has done the opposite with songs in which he was not on the record, often playing parts I would describe as "Taylor-lite". That's the difference between them as musicians, and therefore we cannot help draw comparisons. I don't say that to "bash" Wood, and I don't think it's unfair to compare them. After all, it is the Rolling Stones who have decided to present this material (and charge a lot of money for the privilege of hearing it), so it is perfectly fair to judge the product.

Ron Wood is a great guitarist for a certain Stones sound (I can't imagine the Some Girls period without him), but as long as there are Stones fans with ears and memories, this debate will go on.

Sorry for the edits - hadn't had my coffee yet!

Quote
gripweed
The YCAGWYW clip is from the Sutton United Football Club, March 12, 2004

Quote
backstreetboy1
anyone who thinks ronnies going to bass is on crack.more taylor i agree,atleast 3 to 4 songs.

Quote
PhillyFAN


No one wants Ronnie to be regulated to just bass.

Quote
Stoneburst
With thanks to Kleerie for the video, were the Stones to take the time to work with Taylor and let him play on, say, Beast of Burden, here's what it might sound like. We can always dream, right?

Quote
kleermaker

Quote
PhillyFAN


No one wants Ronnie to be regulated to just bass.

I do.

Quote
Stoneburst

Quote
kleermaker

Quote
PhillyFAN


No one wants Ronnie to be regulated to just bass.

I do.

Kleerie, you are irrepressible as always.

Quote
DoomandGloom

Quote
Stoneburst

Quote
kleermaker

Quote
PhillyFAN


No one wants Ronnie to be regulated to just bass.

I do.

Kleerie, you are irrepressible as always.

That WOOD be impossible, I'm sure you both know it. When Ronnie played great bass with Jeff Beck he was a youngster and pretty much muscled through it with powerhouse drummers Micky Waller \ Aynsley Dunbar. Bass is physically demanding, the strings are big and it takes developed physical strength in both hands and forearms. Anyhow who's going to hold the guitar section together? Keith and Taylor are very much alike in one aspect, they don't give a damn or an inch. This reckless approach was great when they were great but as a pair now they'd have to show some respect for the song and each other. Jagger has it tough enough entering verses,

Quote
DoomandGloom

Quote
Stoneburst

Quote
kleermaker

Quote
PhillyFAN


No one wants Ronnie to be regulated to just bass.

I do.

Kleerie, you are irrepressible as always.

That WOOD be impossible, I'm sure you both know it. When Ronnie played great bass with Jeff Beck he was a youngster and pretty much muscled through it with powerhouse drummers Micky Waller \ Aynsley Dunbar. Bass is physically demanding, the strings are big and it takes developed physical strength in both hands and forearms. Anyhow who's going to hold the guitar section together? Keith and Taylor are very much alike in one aspect, they don't give a damn or an inch. This reckless approach was great when they were great but as a pair now they'd have to show some respect for the song and each other. Jagger has it tough enough entering verses,

Quote
Stoneburst
With thanks to Kleerie for the video, were the Stones to take the time to work with Taylor and let him play on, say, Beast of Burden, here's what it might sound like. We can always dream, right?

Quote
MCDDTLC

Quote
Stoneburst
With thanks to Kleerie for the video, were the Stones to take the time to work with Taylor and let him play on, say, Beast of Burden, here's what it might sound like. We can always dream, right?

Hey Stonie - I provided this recording to Kleerie - was at the 1st show!! Taylor was on fire!! if you could hear a good recording of SWAY - only one out there is a boot - Carla said she might release the 1st show - some day.. MLC

Quote
Stoneage
Taylorites are a hardened species it seems. They don't give in that easy. You'll have to give them credit for that...

Quote
Stoneburst

Quote
Stoneage
Taylorites are a hardened species it seems. They don't give in that easy. You'll have to give them credit for that...

This is a thread about Mick Taylor. What were you expecting?

Quote
Stoneage
Taylorites are a hardened species it seems. They don't give in that easy. You'll have to give them credit for that...

Quote
DoomandGloom
.video: [www.youtube.com] Let's put a stop to this Mick Taylor invented country rock soloing before Clarence White spins in his grave..

Quote
Stoneburst

Quote
DoomandGloom
.video: [www.youtube.com] Let's put a stop to this Mick Taylor invented country rock soloing before Clarence White spins in his grave..

That was my fault - no disrespect intended to Clarence White, Jesse Ed Davis or anyone else: what I meant was more that Taylor was (as far as I know) the first guy to take those steel guitar licks and play them in a rock context without actually being a country player.

Quote
DoomandGloom
I'd think there were plenty of guys that did this before Taylor, including Keith. Elvin Bishop and Mike Bloomfield in Butterfield Blues Band have to be considered too. Bloomfield with Dylan at Newport that's where it really began. He and Taylor have many similarities, Les Paul, great vibrato, fearless improvisors. I bet if we asked Taylor he listened to plenty of Bloomfield. Taylor did take the concept over the top as did The Allman Brothers. Taylor with Duane and Dickey, that would have been something to hear.