Tell Me :
Talk
Yeah since that was totally out of Bill's comfort zone and not his thing at all I found that story quite touching. Bill the enabler....And from a purely personal perspective I'm glad he came through because we wouldn't have got the great El Macambo recordings without his help. Strangely, Keith says it's the closest he ever felt to Bill or some such thing, that's actually pretty sad.
peace
Yeah, thanks for Dandie showing the source. He's been quoting that bit quite regularly, and it has always amazed me...
But I do recall reading the interview, but somehow that bit didn't stick to my memory. Probably it was just too absurd to take seriously, or even try to interpret reasonably. For the latter I guess what you Naturalust say here makes sense. So I can't say I was shocked, more like amused...
- Doxa
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2015-04-17 08:22 by Doxa.
Well, that sounds exactly the way you would like to hear him to say....
But that said, he actually was earlier describing "Time Waits For No One", and talking about his contribution there (and how the song is extraordinary for both them and himself). Unfortunately he kind of stops there before saying something even more accurateor specific, and goes to that odd line.
- Doxa
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2015-04-17 10:36 by Doxa.
The funny thing about those maj-chords is that they indeed had been playing them quite a lot the years prior to IORR. Coming Down Again and Waiting On A Friend come to mind.
Well, he says "which aren’t chords the Stones used that much", which is a rather vague expression, as is "quite a lot" as well. Where goes the strict boundary between them, especially when it is a question of describing things loosely out of memory, and not based on years research?
To me it only means that "Time Waits For No One" seems to an important and memorable song for him personally, and it, as its creation, has left for him a bigger impact than many other Stones songs do (for example, "Coming Down Again" or "Waiting On A Friend"), He sounds like he really need to put some special effort on that one, and he also sounds rather pleased with the results. And rightly, me thinks!
- Doxa
Absolutely right. But hey, the occasional surrealist fiction can lighten up the day, if only for its comic effect.
Yeah, but it is a strange thing to say, when the Stones have been exploring those chords in their songwriting for the past two or three years.
I'm certain TWFNO was more important for him personally than a song he only played bass on and a song he didn't play on
Aah, the whole point was that of proving how little Mick Taylor contributed to the Rolling Stones. I should have known. Woodists, and their ever-going war against Taylorites, they never sleep, never missing a chance to belittle Taylor....><
A quick Taylor-Dandie dictionary:
most of = all
not that much = quite a lot
- Doxa
Nonsense
I think Jimmy Reed, Ron Wood and Mick Taylor have a lot to do with the history of the Rolling Stones
And this is a Taylor thread, so what could be more appropriate than posting a recent full show here? It is indeed excellent.
While I'm writing this I'm revisiting one of my favourite shows: Mobile 72. "A few strings busted, a few hearts broken. That's not a lot – between friends".
Love it! ><
No one touches Keith. Still my favourite guitar player of all time.
You probably meant apart from Keith
I'm cool man - just having some fun... Dandie and I have a long history, and I don't think the thread is closed because of what we say to each other... But okay, since I can see that it has been happened before due to the very issue, I can understand your worries... So I try to behave! (Say that to my buddy Dandie as well for not aweking my Taylorite instincts...)
I need to admit that I haven't ever taken the whole Wood/Taylor controversy very seriously. I have always found the arguments funny and entertaining... and probably I sometimes make fun of it, which not might be always translated too well, or might not be fair to people having stronger stances... sorry for that.
- Doxa
Well I dont think it's absurd. My guess is he wrote a lot more with Jagger. Jagger has always cowritten songs with others which sometimes means someone else writes the music and Mick does the lyrics and is active in the production. If he by ballads meant the typical Taylorish sounding ballads like Winter, TWFN, maybe WOAF etc then who knows. Maybe just maybe thats the thing. Maybe he really cowrote a lot more and maybe he actually gave chord patterns for Mick to sing to. Maybe that's part of what Jagger meant when he said Taylor and he had a good collaboration and brought out the best in Jagger.
The whole T-W thing stands of course for something bigger: not the men but their eras.
In other words: some think the essential (or to say it in Tele's words: quintessential) Rolling Stones is the Stones during the T-era, others deny that and think the real thing came into being during the W-era, being the era that was the real 'heir' of the fundamental B-era, which those who praise the T-era deny the loudest.
The T-people accentuate the resemblance in musicality and blues oriented style, tending to experimental live performances, stretching the music from the B-era to a higher level, while the W-people argue that the punky style was the dominant resemblance between the B- and the W-era, and also of course the "not song serving" noodling but so called "weaving". Both camps accept the unconditional importance of the B-era, so in that respect there's no difference. And then we have the omnivores, but they don't play a role in this whole thing.
You can, but that makes you an "Omnivore" in this thread.
lovely sweeping statement that puts everything into very black and white terms...thanks for clarifying.
Seems decided then that it is the Taylorites that have the problem.
Yeah, this is a provocative and unproven statement. But it's Dandy stating it, so it's okay.
Excellent point.
First comes the riff... then the solo. Got that? Now repeat.
First comes the riff... then the solo.
Good. Now you can go back to your little debates about Wood and Taylor.
Yes.
The songs post-Taylor are simply not as good. You can make the argument that the very presence of Taylor helped inspire the quality of the Jagger-Richards output ... but ultimately it's MUCH less about a comparison between the two guitarists and much MORE about the fracturing of the personal relationship and the decline of the artistic collaboration between the band's two songwriters.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2015-04-17 21:51 by LongBeachArena72.
Talk about your favorite band.
For information about how to use this forum please check out forum help and policies.
Re: Mick Taylor Talk - what's on your mind right now...
Posted by:
stonehearted
()
Date: April 17, 2015 05:33
<<i think i even remember bill helping out and getting keith drugs so he could lay low. although that seems crazy-come to think of it,did that bill thing really happen?>>
Bill writes about it in Stone Alone and Keith recalls it in Life.
Bill writes about it in Stone Alone and Keith recalls it in Life.
Re: Mick Taylor Talk - what's on your mind right now...
Posted by:
Naturalust
()
Date: April 17, 2015 07:43
Quote
stonehearted
<<i think i even remember bill helping out and getting keith drugs so he could lay low. although that seems crazy-come to think of it,did that bill thing really happen?>>
Bill writes about it in Stone Alone and Keith recalls it in Life.
Yeah since that was totally out of Bill's comfort zone and not his thing at all I found that story quite touching. Bill the enabler....And from a purely personal perspective I'm glad he came through because we wouldn't have got the great El Macambo recordings without his help. Strangely, Keith says it's the closest he ever felt to Bill or some such thing, that's actually pretty sad.
peace
Re: Mick Taylor Talk - what's on your mind right now...
Posted by:
Doxa
()
Date: April 17, 2015 08:21
Quote
Naturalust
Thanks Dandie, now I can be a bit shocked. It sure seems a strange statement especially in light of the seemingly other somewhat benign and accurate information in that interview. I'm going to assume it was taken out of context and that he meant "I wrote the lead parts on the ballads" or something like that because otherwise it absolutely makes no sense.
Anyway, I was always more of a Guitar Player mag reader than a Guitar World guy. But thanks again for the link, I hadn't read that interview.
peace
Yeah, thanks for Dandie showing the source. He's been quoting that bit quite regularly, and it has always amazed me...
But I do recall reading the interview, but somehow that bit didn't stick to my memory. Probably it was just too absurd to take seriously, or even try to interpret reasonably. For the latter I guess what you Naturalust say here makes sense. So I can't say I was shocked, more like amused...
- Doxa
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2015-04-17 08:22 by Doxa.
Re: Mick Taylor Talk - what's on your mind right now...
Posted by:
DandelionPowderman
()
Date: April 17, 2015 10:04
I've quoted this interview a few times, first and foremost to poke some fun. I never took this seriously, nor did I think he said it like that.
Yeah, he probably said something like "for the ballads which had extended solos, I mostly did the lead guitar work" – or something
Yeah, he probably said something like "for the ballads which had extended solos, I mostly did the lead guitar work" – or something
Re: Mick Taylor Talk - what's on your mind right now...
Posted by:
Doxa
()
Date: April 17, 2015 10:35
Quote
DandelionPowderman
I've quoted this interview a few times, first and foremost to poke some fun. I never took this seriously, nor did I think he said it like that.
Yeah, he probably said something like "for the ballads which had extended solos, I mostly did the lead guitar work" – or something
Well, that sounds exactly the way you would like to hear him to say....
But that said, he actually was earlier describing "Time Waits For No One", and talking about his contribution there (and how the song is extraordinary for both them and himself). Unfortunately he kind of stops there before saying something even more accurateor specific, and goes to that odd line.
- Doxa
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2015-04-17 10:36 by Doxa.
Re: Mick Taylor Talk - what's on your mind right now...
Posted by:
DandelionPowderman
()
Date: April 17, 2015 10:40
Quote
DoxaQuote
DandelionPowderman
I've quoted this interview a few times, first and foremost to poke some fun. I never took this seriously, nor did I think he said it like that.
Yeah, he probably said something like "for the ballads which had extended solos, I mostly did the lead guitar work" – or something
Well, that sounds exactly the way you would like to hear him to say....
But that said, he actually was earlier describing "Time Waits For No One", and talking about his contribution there (and how the song is extraordinary for both them and himself). Unfortunately he kind of stops there before saying something even more accurateor specific, and goes to that odd line.
- Doxa
The funny thing about those maj-chords is that they indeed had been playing them quite a lot the years prior to IORR. Coming Down Again and Waiting On A Friend come to mind.
Re: Mick Taylor Talk - what's on your mind right now...
Posted by:
Doxa
()
Date: April 17, 2015 10:57
Quote
DandelionPowdermanQuote
DoxaQuote
DandelionPowderman
I've quoted this interview a few times, first and foremost to poke some fun. I never took this seriously, nor did I think he said it like that.
Yeah, he probably said something like "for the ballads which had extended solos, I mostly did the lead guitar work" – or something
Well, that sounds exactly the way you would like to hear him to say....
But that said, he actually was earlier describing "Time Waits For No One", and talking about his contribution there (and how the song is extraordinary for both them and himself). Unfortunately he kind of stops there before saying something even more accurateor specific, and goes to that odd line.
- Doxa
The funny thing about those maj-chords is that they indeed had been playing them quite a lot the years prior to IORR. Coming Down Again and Waiting On A Friend come to mind.
Well, he says "which aren’t chords the Stones used that much", which is a rather vague expression, as is "quite a lot" as well. Where goes the strict boundary between them, especially when it is a question of describing things loosely out of memory, and not based on years research?
To me it only means that "Time Waits For No One" seems to an important and memorable song for him personally, and it, as its creation, has left for him a bigger impact than many other Stones songs do (for example, "Coming Down Again" or "Waiting On A Friend"), He sounds like he really need to put some special effort on that one, and he also sounds rather pleased with the results. And rightly, me thinks!
- Doxa
Re: Mick Taylor Talk - what's on your mind right now...
Posted by:
matxil
()
Date: April 17, 2015 10:58
Quote
lem motlow
this narrative that has emerged of keith richards as this sort of marginalized junkie after 72 is not only untrue it's ridiculous.
i happen to have been as much of a fan in 73 as i am now.back then,instead of going on the internet you read magazine articles.and the writers didnt do 5 minute interviews by phone and ask prearranged questions,they flew to where the band was,hung out with them for awhile and wrote about it.
and i read everything-crawdaddy,rolling stone,cream,new musical express,hit parader,you name it.alot of times these guys would be in the studio with the band and i can tell you from the first hand accounts,keith richards ran those recording sessions.period.
he would sit with his guitar and just jam for hours and hours.as bill wyman later said "we would just hang out sometimes,go have a smoke or whatever while keith messed with his guitar."
and i'm talking about goats head,iorr,black and blue,some girls,it didnt matter.when he was onto something the band would join him with mick sort of mumble-scat singing half written lyrics over keith playing with the band following along.
this is how the songs were created,like an artist slowly molding something from clay.and not just the ones we ended up with on the records but many others that we have heard from bootlegs and hours and hours of jams we may never hear.
most of you have heard about mick taylor telling jagger he was leaving at robert stigwoods party.jagger was shell-shocked telling ron wood "i dont know what to do,can you maybe help out" think of the long process of replacing mick taylor-months of auditions and wondering what to do.
now imagine that being keith-the band would've stopped dead in its tracks.
the idea of calling in a session player and just just moving on without him -no,just forget it. mick jagger has never had a thought go though his head anywhere near that level of stupid -
even after ww3 and as mad as they were at each other mick never considered a wood-taylor-wyman-watts line-up he had to work with keith again no matter what.jaggers not a dummy,he knows what we know-without keith richards there is no rolling stones.it is that way today and it was that way in 1973.
Absolutely right. But hey, the occasional surrealist fiction can lighten up the day, if only for its comic effect.
Re: Mick Taylor Talk - what's on your mind right now...
Posted by:
DandelionPowderman
()
Date: April 17, 2015 11:01
Quote
DoxaQuote
DandelionPowdermanQuote
DoxaQuote
DandelionPowderman
I've quoted this interview a few times, first and foremost to poke some fun. I never took this seriously, nor did I think he said it like that.
Yeah, he probably said something like "for the ballads which had extended solos, I mostly did the lead guitar work" – or something
Well, that sounds exactly the way you would like to hear him to say....
But that said, he actually was earlier describing "Time Waits For No One", and talking about his contribution there (and how the song is extraordinary for both them and himself). Unfortunately he kind of stops there before saying something even more accurateor specific, and goes to that odd line.
- Doxa
The funny thing about those maj-chords is that they indeed had been playing them quite a lot the years prior to IORR. Coming Down Again and Waiting On A Friend come to mind.
Well, he says "which aren’t chords the Stones used that much", which is a rather vague expression, as is "quite a lot" as well. Where goes the strict boundary between them, especially when it is a question of describing things loosely out of memory, and not based on years research?
To me it only means that "Time Waits For No One" seems to an important and memorable song for him personally, and it, as its creation, has left for him a bigger impact than many other Stones songs do (for example, "Coming Down Again" or "Waiting On A Friend"), He sounds like he really need to put some special effort on that one, and he also sounds rather pleased with the results. And rightly, me thinks!
- Doxa
Yeah, but it is a strange thing to say, when the Stones have been exploring those chords in their songwriting for the past two or three years.
I'm certain TWFNO was more important for him personally than a song he only played bass on and a song he didn't play on
Re: Mick Taylor Talk - what's on your mind right now...
Posted by:
Doxa
()
Date: April 17, 2015 11:22
Quote
DandelionPowderman
Yeah, but it is a strange thing to say, when the Stones have been exploring those chords in their songwriting for the past two or three years.
I'm certain TWFNO was more important for him personally than a song he only played bass on and a song he didn't play on
Aah, the whole point was that of proving how little Mick Taylor contributed to the Rolling Stones. I should have known. Woodists, and their ever-going war against Taylorites, they never sleep, never missing a chance to belittle Taylor....>
<A quick Taylor-Dandie dictionary:
most of = all
not that much = quite a lot
- Doxa
Re: Mick Taylor Talk - what's on your mind right now...
Posted by:
DandelionPowderman
()
Date: April 17, 2015 11:29
Quote
DoxaQuote
DandelionPowderman
Yeah, but it is a strange thing to say, when the Stones have been exploring those chords in their songwriting for the past two or three years.
I'm certain TWFNO was more important for him personally than a song he only played bass on and a song he didn't play on
Aah, the whole point was that of proving how little Mick Taylor contributed to the Rolling Stones. I should have known. Woodists, and their ever-going war against Taylorites, they never sleep, never missing a chance to belittle Taylor....>
A quick Taylor-Dandie dictionary:
most of = all
not that much = quite a lot
- Doxa
Nonsense
Re: Mick Taylor Talk - what's on your mind right now...
Posted by:
Doxa
()
Date: April 17, 2015 11:39
A very good concert, but not much to do with the history of The Rolling Stones...
- Doxa
- Doxa
Re: Mick Taylor Talk - what's on your mind right now...
Posted by:
DandelionPowderman
()
Date: April 17, 2015 11:48
Quote
Doxa
A very good concert, but not much to do with the history of The Rolling Stones...
- Doxa
I think Jimmy Reed, Ron Wood and Mick Taylor have a lot to do with the history of the Rolling Stones
And this is a Taylor thread, so what could be more appropriate than posting a recent full show here? It is indeed excellent.
While I'm writing this I'm revisiting one of my favourite shows: Mobile 72. "A few strings busted, a few hearts broken. That's not a lot – between friends".
Love it! >
<Re: Mick Taylor Talk - what's on your mind right now...
Posted by:
Naturalust
()
Date: April 17, 2015 11:53
Hey Doxa with much due respect, and possibly even agreement, please lighten up on the whole W-T thing because I'd like to be sure we continue to have this thread to discuss the best guitarist the Stones ever had...I'm sure you understand. Thanks man.
peace
peace
Re: Mick Taylor Talk - what's on your mind right now...
Posted by:
DandelionPowderman
()
Date: April 17, 2015 11:57
Quote
Naturalust
Hey Doxa with much due respect, and possibly even agreement, please lighten up on the whole W-T thing because I'd like to be sure we continue to have this thread to discuss the best guitarist the Stones ever had...I'm sure you understand. Thanks man.
peace
No one touches Keith. Still my favourite guitar player of all time.
You probably meant apart from Keith
Re: Mick Taylor Talk - what's on your mind right now...
Posted by:
Doxa
()
Date: April 17, 2015 12:20
Quote
Naturalust
Hey Doxa with much due respect, and possibly even agreement, please lighten up on the whole W-T thing because I'd like to be sure we continue to have this thread to discuss the best guitarist the Stones ever had...I'm sure you understand. Thanks man.
peace
I'm cool man - just having some fun... Dandie and I have a long history, and I don't think the thread is closed because of what we say to each other... But okay, since I can see that it has been happened before due to the very issue, I can understand your worries... So I try to behave! (Say that to my buddy Dandie as well for not aweking my Taylorite instincts...
)I need to admit that I haven't ever taken the whole Wood/Taylor controversy very seriously. I have always found the arguments funny and entertaining... and probably I sometimes make fun of it, which not might be always translated too well, or might not be fair to people having stronger stances... sorry for that.
- Doxa
Re: Mick Taylor Talk - what's on your mind right now...
Posted by:
Naturalust
()
Date: April 17, 2015 12:33
It's not you or Dandie I'm worried about, it's the more mentally challenged folks who tend to jump in real serious like and...well you know the story.
peace
peace
Re: Mick Taylor Talk - what's on your mind right now...
Posted by:
Redhotcarpet
()
Date: April 17, 2015 15:34
Quote
DoxaQuote
Naturalust
Thanks Dandie, now I can be a bit shocked. It sure seems a strange statement especially in light of the seemingly other somewhat benign and accurate information in that interview. I'm going to assume it was taken out of context and that he meant "I wrote the lead parts on the ballads" or something like that because otherwise it absolutely makes no sense.
Anyway, I was always more of a Guitar Player mag reader than a Guitar World guy. But thanks again for the link, I hadn't read that interview.
peace
Yeah, thanks for Dandie showing the source. He's been quoting that bit quite regularly, and it has always amazed me...
But I do recall reading the interview, but somehow that bit didn't stick to my memory. Probably it was just too absurd to take seriously, or even try to interpret reasonably. For the latter I guess what you Naturalust say here makes sense. So I can't say I was shocked, more like amused...
- Doxa
Well I dont think it's absurd. My guess is he wrote a lot more with Jagger. Jagger has always cowritten songs with others which sometimes means someone else writes the music and Mick does the lyrics and is active in the production. If he by ballads meant the typical Taylorish sounding ballads like Winter, TWFN, maybe WOAF etc then who knows. Maybe just maybe thats the thing. Maybe he really cowrote a lot more and maybe he actually gave chord patterns for Mick to sing to. Maybe that's part of what Jagger meant when he said Taylor and he had a good collaboration and brought out the best in Jagger.
Re: Mick Taylor Talk - what's on your mind right now...
Posted by:
kleermaker
()
Date: April 17, 2015 15:42
Quote
Naturalust
It's not you or Dandie I'm worried about, it's the more mentally challenged folks who tend to jump in real serious like and...well you know the story.
peace
The whole T-W thing stands of course for something bigger: not the men but their eras.
In other words: some think the essential (or to say it in Tele's words: quintessential) Rolling Stones is the Stones during the T-era, others deny that and think the real thing came into being during the W-era, being the era that was the real 'heir' of the fundamental B-era, which those who praise the T-era deny the loudest.
The T-people accentuate the resemblance in musicality and blues oriented style, tending to experimental live performances, stretching the music from the B-era to a higher level, while the W-people argue that the punky style was the dominant resemblance between the B- and the W-era, and also of course the "not song serving" noodling but so called "weaving". Both camps accept the unconditional importance of the B-era, so in that respect there's no difference. And then we have the omnivores, but they don't play a role in this whole thing.
Re: Mick Taylor Talk - what's on your mind right now...
Posted by:
DandelionPowderman
()
Date: April 17, 2015 15:46
Without starting that debate again, it is very often the Taylorites who don't appreciate the Stones's output from ALL eras – something people who like Wood often do.
Re: Mick Taylor Talk - what's on your mind right now...
Posted by:
lphz
()
Date: April 17, 2015 17:43
Before one of you charming but flawed longtime posters purposely says something nasty about one of your unlike minded cohorts in an effort to get BV to close down this thread for good, I want to put in my 2 cents.
I am a casual fan and an IORR lurker and I just want to make it clear that there are other people than the diehard Taylorites (correct usage?) who would like to see MT on the next RS tour. A Sticky Fingers themed tour without MT? Even a casual fan knows that there is something wrong in that. I will spare you my 2 pages of justification; it has been better said by many of you.
Sadly, I know that you will set your differences aside and all come together collectively on this one point: You will assure me that your beloved band will never include MT on the upcoming tour. OK ........ but, I still wish they would. The music would be better ... in my opinion.
I am a casual fan and an IORR lurker and I just want to make it clear that there are other people than the diehard Taylorites (correct usage?) who would like to see MT on the next RS tour. A Sticky Fingers themed tour without MT? Even a casual fan knows that there is something wrong in that. I will spare you my 2 pages of justification; it has been better said by many of you.
Sadly, I know that you will set your differences aside and all come together collectively on this one point: You will assure me that your beloved band will never include MT on the upcoming tour. OK ........ but, I still wish they would. The music would be better ... in my opinion.
Re: Mick Taylor Talk - what's on your mind right now...
Posted by:
Shawn20
()
Date: April 17, 2015 17:45
I never for one minute thought the Taylor / Wood debate was mutually exclusive. You can be huge fans of both guitarist. However, there is no denying that Wood blended more into the background of their guitar sound as opposed to Taylor whose contributions were astonishing. I am a huge fan of every guitar player who ever strapped it on for the Rolling Stones!
Re: Mick Taylor Talk - what's on your mind right now...
Posted by:
Nikkei
()
Date: April 17, 2015 17:48
Quote
Shawn20
You can be huge fans of both guitarist.
You can, but that makes you an "Omnivore" in this thread.
Re: Mick Taylor Talk - what's on your mind right now...
Posted by:
treaclefingers
()
Date: April 17, 2015 17:53
Quote
DandelionPowderman
Without starting that debate again, it is very often the Taylorites who don't appreciate the Stones's output from ALL eras – something people who like Wood often do.
lovely sweeping statement that puts everything into very black and white terms...thanks for clarifying.
Seems decided then that it is the Taylorites that have the problem.
Re: Mick Taylor Talk - what's on your mind right now...
Posted by:
StonesCat
()
Date: April 17, 2015 17:55
Yeah, there's a lot of people who don't really dig the Stones music from part of "Wood's era", but that's not really down to him, it's just the fact that the music's not as good. He's been marginalized so much since the 80s, that maybe a larger role from him would have done something positive for their output.
Re: Mick Taylor Talk - what's on your mind right now...
Posted by:
kleermaker
()
Date: April 17, 2015 18:14
Quote
treaclefingersQuote
DandelionPowderman
Without starting that debate again, it is very often the Taylorites who don't appreciate the Stones's output from ALL eras – something people who like Wood often do.
lovely sweeping statement that puts everything into very black and white terms...thanks for clarifying.
Seems decided then that it is the Taylorites that have the problem.
Yeah, this is a provocative and unproven statement. But it's Dandy stating it, so it's okay.
Re: Mick Taylor Talk - what's on your mind right now...
Posted by:
DandelionPowderman
()
Date: April 17, 2015 18:54
It's true anyway. But you guys are right, one doesn't have to be a Taylorite to want Taylor back with the band. I do too, as I have stated many times.
It's the unconditional worshipping and constant belittling of fans who enjoy ALL eras I usually react on. Calling guitar solos others enjoy "garbage" etc.
Personally, I think Mick never should have told his lawyer to make that call.
It's the unconditional worshipping and constant belittling of fans who enjoy ALL eras I usually react on. Calling guitar solos others enjoy "garbage" etc.
Personally, I think Mick never should have told his lawyer to make that call.
Re: Mick Taylor Talk - what's on your mind right now...
Posted by:
Naturalust
()
Date: April 17, 2015 21:16
Wish we could just ban the term Taylorite. It indeed tends to box lovers of the bands music with MT in a bit. I think there are very few of us who are actually well described by it.
I too like plenty of Stones music from all the eras. I like the records from 1968-1978 best and the live performances from 1969-1973 best with a few obvious later exceptions. The most common guitar thread is actually Keith with a heavy emphasis on the Keith-Taylor combo. Though often implied or assumed , these discussion often don't give Keith enough specific credit for both the awesome music during those periods or the decline of the music since then, imo.
I also strongly believe discussion and critique of the music should not get anyone so concerned, it should even be encouraged. If someone wants to call a guitar solo that some enjoy garbage, fine, that's just their opinion. It doesn't belittle the fans to have a strong divergent view on such a thing as a guitar solo. Yes it sometimes goes a bit far when people say everything so and so has played is garbage but it has more credibility and interest to me when they discuss specific, songs, performances or even solos and phrases. Nothing wrong with critique, plenty of posters with different views here to balance it all out.
I do take issue with people who post direct attacks on other posters for their tastes and opinions. That's a completely different thing...calling Taylor lovers cultists and the the like, telling people to move on, all that stuff has nothing to do with the music and everything to do with personal judgments of other Stones fans, not cool. Posts about Taylorites often fall into this category and as Stones fans we have too much in common to make divisions among us with derogatory and personal comments.
peace
I too like plenty of Stones music from all the eras. I like the records from 1968-1978 best and the live performances from 1969-1973 best with a few obvious later exceptions. The most common guitar thread is actually Keith with a heavy emphasis on the Keith-Taylor combo. Though often implied or assumed , these discussion often don't give Keith enough specific credit for both the awesome music during those periods or the decline of the music since then, imo.
I also strongly believe discussion and critique of the music should not get anyone so concerned, it should even be encouraged. If someone wants to call a guitar solo that some enjoy garbage, fine, that's just their opinion. It doesn't belittle the fans to have a strong divergent view on such a thing as a guitar solo. Yes it sometimes goes a bit far when people say everything so and so has played is garbage but it has more credibility and interest to me when they discuss specific, songs, performances or even solos and phrases. Nothing wrong with critique, plenty of posters with different views here to balance it all out.
I do take issue with people who post direct attacks on other posters for their tastes and opinions. That's a completely different thing...calling Taylor lovers cultists and the the like, telling people to move on, all that stuff has nothing to do with the music and everything to do with personal judgments of other Stones fans, not cool. Posts about Taylorites often fall into this category and as Stones fans we have too much in common to make divisions among us with derogatory and personal comments.
peace
Re: Mick Taylor Talk - what's on your mind right now...
Posted by:
indystonesfan
()
Date: April 17, 2015 21:23
Quote
DandelionPowdermanQuote
Naturalust
Hey Doxa with much due respect, and possibly even agreement, please lighten up on the whole W-T thing because I'd like to be sure we continue to have this thread to discuss the best guitarist the Stones ever had...I'm sure you understand. Thanks man.
peace
No one touches Keith. Still my favourite guitar player of all time.
You probably meant apart from Keith
Excellent point.
First comes the riff... then the solo. Got that? Now repeat.
First comes the riff... then the solo.
Good. Now you can go back to your little debates about Wood and Taylor.
Re: Mick Taylor Talk - what's on your mind right now...
Posted by:
LongBeachArena72
()
Date: April 17, 2015 21:40
Quote
StonesCat
Yeah, there's a lot of people who don't really dig the Stones music from part of "Wood's era", but that's not really down to him, it's just the fact that the music's not as good. He's been marginalized so much since the 80s, that maybe a larger role from him would have done something positive for their output.
Yes.
The songs post-Taylor are simply not as good. You can make the argument that the very presence of Taylor helped inspire the quality of the Jagger-Richards output ... but ultimately it's MUCH less about a comparison between the two guitarists and much MORE about the fracturing of the personal relationship and the decline of the artistic collaboration between the band's two songwriters.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2015-04-17 21:51 by LongBeachArena72.
Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.
Online Users
Guests:
2058
Record Number of Users:
206
on June 1, 2022 23:50
Record Number of Guests:
9627
on January 2, 2024 23:10