Quote
Taylor1
You are a great reserve of knowledge about the Stones.But I think it’s presumptuous to say only Wood of all the guitarists in the world could have played on those songs.We have the example of Waddy on Bridges as a guitarist who could have.And in my opinion those songs other than SMU are pretty average .If Taylor played on Honky Tonk Women, Bitch,Live With Me, why couldn’t he have played on those songs?And what great songs did Wood write with the Stones? Maybe One Hit?

That's not what I said. I said that Wood changed the sound of the Stones, and that SG could not have been made without the influence of Wood. With Taylor, Mandell Perkins the sound of the Stones would have remained the same throughout the 1970's, and I don't think the Stones would have remained in fashion during the disco and punk period.

Wood was the perfect fit: bluesy enough to let the Stones remain a credible blues based band, sufficient as a lead guitarist to take up a solo like on YCAGWYW, but mostly much more modern than Taylor ever could be.

Mathijs

Quote
TravelinMan


How did Wood "make him drop Open G"? Richards. He never stopped playing lead; in fact he plays lead on 6/10 of the songs on IORR, and contributes lead on Black and Blue.

When I think of Miss You and Start Me Up I do NOT think about Ron Wood! C'mon now, you cannot be serious.

Concerning open G: on SG there's only one real open G track, BTMMR. On ER: zero. TY: two, but one is from 1972 and one from 1977. Undercover: one new one in Wanna Hold You, and one from 1975, Too Tough.

Wood's rhythm guitar on Miss You and SMU is fantastic! It makes the groove, it is what Jagger dances to! They are booth fantastic examples of the ancient weaving with both guitars trading licks and bouncing off of each other. It's what makes the Stones so great! Especially with SMU it is so difficult to come up with an original counter part to Keith's open G riff, and Wood's part is utterly fantastic!

Mathijs

<He never stopped playing lead; in fact he plays lead on 6/10 of the songs on IORR, and contributes lead on Black and Blue.>

He was their sole lead guitarist (sans slide). His role changed drastically during the Taylor years. One of the reasons was of course him discovering the open tunings.

However, the amount of leads on IORR probably had to do with Taylor's absence from the sessions. Same with BAB, they recorded a lot, without other guitarists present. Fool To Cry is one example.

It's pretty evident to me that Keith developed as a lead guitarist (again) after Ronnie joined – during the 75/76-tours, and even more after.

Quote
DandelionPowderman


He was their sole lead guitarist (sans slide). His role changed drastically during the Taylor years. One of the reasons was of course him discovering the open tunings.

However, the amount of leads on IORR probably had to do with Taylor's absence from the sessions. Same with BAB, they recorded a lot, without other guitarists present. Fool To Cry is one example.

It's pretty evident to me that Keith developed as a lead guitarist (again) after Ronnie joined – during the 75/76-tours, and even more after.

It's a myth Richards ever stopped playing lead. He plays lead on every single Stones record with Taylor. He just gave Taylor some solos here and there, and he also wiped a lot of Taylor's lead guitar and replaced it on Exile according to Rose Taylor.

Wood took over the Taylor role live, so they didn't change any arrangements until Billy Preston was let go.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2025-10-02 16:09 by TravelinMan.

Quote
Mathijs

Quote
TravelinMan


How did Wood "make him drop Open G"? Richards. He never stopped playing lead; in fact he plays lead on 6/10 of the songs on IORR, and contributes lead on Black and Blue.

When I think of Miss You and Start Me Up I do NOT think about Ron Wood! C'mon now, you cannot be serious.

Concerning open G: on SG there's only one real open G track, BTMMR. On ER: zero. TY: two, but one is from 1972 and one from 1977. Undercover: one new one in Wanna Hold You, and one from 1975, Too Tough.

Wood's rhythm guitar on Miss You and SMU is fantastic! It makes the groove, it is what Jagger dances to! They are booth fantastic examples of the ancient weaving with both guitars trading licks and bouncing off of each other. It's what makes the Stones so great! Especially with SMU it is so difficult to come up with an original counter part to Keith's open G riff, and Wood's part is utterly fantastic!

Mathijs

I don't see any evidence Richards moving away from Open G was due to Ron Wood. He milked it for a decade and decided to move on.

Miss You is one of my all-time favorite Stones songs and that song is 1/2) Wyman & Watts 3) Jagger 4) Sugar Blue 5)Mel Collins. Outside of the main riff, the guitars are an afterthought. I am not a fan of guitars playing licks over top of one another while the singer is trying to do their job lol. But to each their own.

Start Me Up is one of the greatest rock riffs of all-time. The counter guitar is not memorable IMO. To say it makes the song is a huge stretch.

The fact is the Stones would have made a great record (Some Girls) without a second guitarist. The material is all Jagger/Richards. I think it's a fun album, but it's a bit overrated in their entire canon, mainly by late era Stones fans who believe the band started in 1978.

Quote
TravelinMan

Quote
DandelionPowderman


He was their sole lead guitarist (sans slide). His role changed drastically during the Taylor years. One of the reasons was of course him discovering the open tunings.

However, the amount of leads on IORR probably had to do with Taylor's absence from the sessions. Same with BAB, they recorded a lot, without other guitarists present. Fool To Cry is one example.

It's pretty evident to me that Keith developed as a lead guitarist (again) after Ronnie joined – during the 75/76-tours, and even more after.

It's a myth Richards ever stopped playing lead. He plays lead on every single Stones record with Taylor. He just gave Taylor some solos here and there, and he also wiped a lot of Taylor's lead guitar and replaced it on Exile according to Rose Taylor.

Wood took over the Taylor role live, so they didn't change any arrangements until Billy Preston was let go.

I'll let you believe that.

Quote
Mathijs

Quote
Taylor1
You are a great reserve of knowledge about the Stones.But I think it’s presumptuous to say only Wood of all the guitarists in the world could have played on those songs.We have the example of Waddy on Bridges as a guitarist who could have.And in my opinion those songs other than SMU are pretty average .If Taylor played on Honky Tonk Women, Bitch,Live With Me, why couldn’t he have played on those songs?And what great songs did Wood write with the Stones? Maybe One Hit?

That's not what I said. I said that Wood changed the sound of the Stones, and that SG could not have been made without the influence of Wood. With Taylor, Mandell Perkins the sound of the Stones would have remained the same throughout the 1970's, and I don't think the Stones would have remained in fashion during the disco and punk period.

Wood was the perfect fit: bluesy enough to let the Stones remain a credible blues based band, sufficient as a lead guitarist to take up a solo like on YCAGWYW, but mostly much more modern than Taylor ever could be.

Mathijs

A lot of people prefer the Taylor /Richards duo, or as much as Wood.In fact if you ask most people here in the USA or comb the internet most fans think the Taylor /Richards duo was the best.Including guitarists like Peter Frampton.Bill Wyman said the Taylor band live was a band no one could match on stagein1972.Jagger even said in a 1995 interview that “a lot of people think the Taylor Stones were the best version of the band”.When asked to refute that, by Jann Wenner, he wouldn’t.If you read some of Charlie’s statements he said the Taylor years were a “peak”.I appreciate greatly learning a lot of technical stuff about guitar playing you lay out here, but I am not of the opinion like you that Wood -Richard was better than Taylor/Richards.They were and are terrific.And we will never know how Taylor would have gotten more “ modern” in his playing had he stayed.And is modern the same as better?



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2025-10-02 16:30 by Taylor1.

Quote
DandelionPowderman

Quote
TravelinMan

Quote
DandelionPowderman


He was their sole lead guitarist (sans slide). His role changed drastically during the Taylor years. One of the reasons was of course him discovering the open tunings.

However, the amount of leads on IORR probably had to do with Taylor's absence from the sessions. Same with BAB, they recorded a lot, without other guitarists present. Fool To Cry is one example.

It's pretty evident to me that Keith developed as a lead guitarist (again) after Ronnie joined – during the 75/76-tours, and even more after.

It's a myth Richards ever stopped playing lead. He plays lead on every single Stones record with Taylor. He just gave Taylor some solos here and there, and he also wiped a lot of Taylor's lead guitar and replaced it on Exile according to Rose Taylor.

Wood took over the Taylor role live, so they didn't change any arrangements until Billy Preston was let go.

I'll let you believe that.

You'll let me believe the truth? Um, thank you? Like I said, he plays lead on every single record with Taylor.

Quote
TravelinMan

Wood took over the Taylor role live, so they didn't change any arrangements until Billy Preston was let go.

Taylor never was a rhythm guitar player, Wood was a fantastic rhythm guitar player. With Taylor, the guitar parts were much more divided in lead and rhythm guitar. How many solo's did Keith have on the 1972 or 1973 tour? Bitch, HTW, @#$%&, Bye Bye Johnnie, and Taylor did the other 20 tracks....With Wood it was much more weaving, much more playing licks off of each other, trading little lead lines with each other.

The arrangements for the 1975 tour were completely different than on the 1973 tour -and they both had Billy Preston.

Mathijs

I'm really glad that Wayne Perkins didn't join the Stones.

Quote
Taylor1

Quote
Mathijs

Quote
Taylor1
You are a great reserve of knowledge about the Stones.But I think it’s presumptuous to say only Wood of all the guitarists in the world could have played on those songs.We have the example of Waddy on Bridges as a guitarist who could have.And in my opinion those songs other than SMU are pretty average .If Taylor played on Honky Tonk Women, Bitch,Live With Me, why couldn’t he have played on those songs?And what great songs did Wood write with the Stones? Maybe One Hit?

That's not what I said. I said that Wood changed the sound of the Stones, and that SG could not have been made without the influence of Wood. With Taylor, Mandell Perkins the sound of the Stones would have remained the same throughout the 1970's, and I don't think the Stones would have remained in fashion during the disco and punk period.

Wood was the perfect fit: bluesy enough to let the Stones remain a credible blues based band, sufficient as a lead guitarist to take up a solo like on YCAGWYW, but mostly much more modern than Taylor ever could be.

Mathijs

A lot of people prefer the Taylor /Richards duo, or as much as Wood.In fact if you ask most people here in the USA or comb the internet most fans think the Taylor /Richards duo was the best.Including guitarists like Peter Frampton.Bill Wyman said the Taylor band live was a band no one could match on stagein1972.Jagger even said in a 1995 interview that “a lot of people think the Taylor Stones were the best version of the band”.When asked to refute that, by Jann Wenner, he wouldn’t.If you read some of Charlie’s statements he said the Taylor years were a “peak”.I appreciate greatly learning a lot of technical stuff about guitar playing you lay out here, but I am not of the opinion like you that Wood -Richard was better than Taylor/Richards.They were and are terrific.And we will never know how Taylor would have gotten more “ modern” in his playing had he stayed.And is modern the same as better?

I do not care about who prefers what, as that is not the point here.

The point I am making is that if Taylor would have stayed with the Stones they likely would not have survived the 1970's. Wood really saved the band, with his energy, style, spirit, talents and diversity.

Mathijs

Quote
Mathijs

Quote
TravelinMan

Wood took over the Taylor role live, so they didn't change any arrangements until Billy Preston was let go.

Taylor never was a rhythm guitar player, Wood was a fantastic rhythm guitar player. With Taylor, the guitar parts were much more divided in lead and rhythm guitar. How many solo's did Keith have on the 1972 or 1973 tour? Bitch, HTW, @#$%&, Bye Bye Johnnie, and Taylor did the other 20 tracks....With Wood it was much more weaving, much more playing licks off of each other, trading little lead lines with each other.

The arrangements for the 1975 tour were completely different than on the 1973 tour -and they both had Billy Preston.

Mathijs

The arrangements were definitely not that much different. In place of every Taylor solo is a Wood solo. In fact, the new songs added follow very much the same formula as 1973. Richards was playing in Open G and the songs were treated in very much the same way.

Quote
Mathijs

Quote
Taylor1

Quote
Mathijs

Quote
Taylor1
You are a great reserve of knowledge about the Stones.But I think it’s presumptuous to say only Wood of all the guitarists in the world could have played on those songs.We have the example of Waddy on Bridges as a guitarist who could have.And in my opinion those songs other than SMU are pretty average .If Taylor played on Honky Tonk Women, Bitch,Live With Me, why couldn’t he have played on those songs?And what great songs did Wood write with the Stones? Maybe One Hit?

That's not what I said. I said that Wood changed the sound of the Stones, and that SG could not have been made without the influence of Wood. With Taylor, Mandell Perkins the sound of the Stones would have remained the same throughout the 1970's, and I don't think the Stones would have remained in fashion during the disco and punk period.

Wood was the perfect fit: bluesy enough to let the Stones remain a credible blues based band, sufficient as a lead guitarist to take up a solo like on YCAGWYW, but mostly much more modern than Taylor ever could be.

Mathijs

A lot of people prefer the Taylor /Richards duo, or as much as Wood.In fact if you ask most people here in the USA or comb the internet most fans think the Taylor /Richards duo was the best.Including guitarists like Peter Frampton.Bill Wyman said the Taylor band live was a band no one could match on stagein1972.Jagger even said in a 1995 interview that “a lot of people think the Taylor Stones were the best version of the band”.When asked to refute that, by Jann Wenner, he wouldn’t.If you read some of Charlie’s statements he said the Taylor years were a “peak”.I appreciate greatly learning a lot of technical stuff about guitar playing you lay out here, but I am not of the opinion like you that Wood -Richard was better than Taylor/Richards.They were and are terrific.And we will never know how Taylor would have gotten more “ modern” in his playing had he stayed.And is modern the same as better?

I do not care about who prefers what, as that is not the point here.

The point I am making is that if Taylor would have stayed with the Stones they likely would not have survived the 1970's. Wood really saved the band, with his energy, style, spirit, talents and diversity.

Mathijs

Those characteristics and attributes you subscribe to Wood are not facts, only probably good opinions.And Keith and Mick didn’t fire Taylor because he lacked the characteristics andattributes you attribute to Wood.The only undisputed fact is Taylor quit.Had he stayed on , we don’t know what would have happened.Do you really believe the Stones would have broken up shortly after Taylor quit if they had picked a different guitarist than Wood? In 1982 Mick almost fired Wood according to what I have read.If Mick’ssolo albums in the 1980s had been huge hits, maybe he would have ended the band then.Wood being in the band would not have stopped that.It is kind of silly to say the band was saved by Wood joining.Mick and Keith have never said that.The band is Mick and Keith.They have decided whether it continues.



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 2025-10-02 22:38 by Taylor1.

There are dozens of guitarists who could have transcended the Stones' post-blues direction.
Much better than Ronnie, with brilliance, dedication, and talent.
Mick Taylor, among others, if he hadn't left the band.
The Stones deserved better musically.

Quote
roby
There are dozens of guitarists who could have transcended the Stones' post-blues direction.
Much better than Ronnie, with brilliance, dedication, and talent.
Mick Taylor, among others, if he hadn't left the band.
The Stones deserved better musically.

What is "musically"? A guitar virtuoso? That would not work. Another composer or musical director? Would not work either. Ronnie fitted perfectly.

What a useless conversation to me.

Quote
TheflyingDutchman
What a useless conversation to me.

I never understood this type of post. If you don’t care, why comment?

I’m not here to bash Wood, but I’m not going to put him on a pedestal as some sort of savior. No, that’s Sir Mick freaking Jagger. He saved the band by importing punk and disco into the sound. He has always had his finger on the pulse of what’s happening.

Yeah thats it ..... Mick's a full on drivin' wheel



ROCKMAN

I really rather enjoy reading the Wood/Taylor debates. Studio-wise, I prefer the 'Taylor years', but live, I like both equally: The '69 Tour is a favourite; the Steel Wheels/Urban Jungle Tour is, too. I tend to agree that Taylor was somewhat 'of his time' I'm not sure how he'd have fitted-in with the song-writing style of Some Girls. Ronnie was a great fit, and I'm very glad the likes of Mandel and Perkins were, ultimately, overlooked.

Jo Wood pictures a nice view on the relationship of Richards and Wood. She describes that Wood appeared as Richards' little brother, and how they would spent days on end in the 1970's listening to music, driving Jo nuts. 1950's music, RnR, reggae, soul, disco, the music of the day. And on how Richards spent days on end in Wood's New York basement in the 1980's, playing guitar, listening to music.

And this is something I never heard of Taylor doing, and I don't see Taylor doing this. By the mid 1970's Richards was estranged from the jet setting Jagger, and according to many was mainly by himself, doing drugs, hardly communicating. It is Wood's biggest feat that he became great friends with Richards, and got him out of isolation and back to writing and playing again, also with Jagger.

Mathijs

My opinion is that Ronnie Wood was the best pick for the Rolling Stones.I remember in the late 70's, the " long hair progressive rock experts" criticizing Ronnie as the replacement. From the start I felt that Ronnie was the guy, I still do. Taylor and Perkins are great musicians.

And to add a couple of things :
- Mick credits Ronnie for teaching how to play guitar. Even Keith said in the 80s that people would be surprised how often the "Stones guitar" they take for Keith is in fact played by Mick.
- Bill credits Ronnie for breathing new life into the band

Like anyone I love the "Taylor years" and was stunned when I saw him "fall out of the clear blue sky" 3 feet away from me at the O2/1 in 2012 and have been repeatedly saddened to see Wood's sometime very subpar performances on stage from 1978 to 2007 but credit where credit's due !

--------------
IORR Links : Essential Studio Outtakes CDs : Audio - History of Rarest Outtakes : Audio

Ronnie Wood was absolutely the right choice: the look, the attitude; comradery with Keith. Not to mention his guitar-chops and style of playing that meshed wonderfully with Keith’s own. Of course, there have been ups-and-downs – both in the studio and live – and yet, generally, Ronnie has proven to be a roaringly successful addition. I, for one, simply cannot imagine a post-1974 Rolling Stones without him.

Quote
Mathijs
Jo Wood pictures a nice view on the relationship of Richards and Wood. She describes that Wood appeared as Richards' little brother, and how they would spent days on end in the 1970's listening to music, driving Jo nuts. 1950's music, RnR, reggae, soul, disco, the music of the day. And on how Richards spent days on end in Wood's New York basement in the 1980's, playing guitar, listening to music.

And this is something I never heard of Taylor doing, and I don't see Taylor doing this. By the mid 1970's Richards was estranged from the jet setting Jagger, and according to many was mainly by himself, doing drugs, hardly communicating. It is Wood's biggest feat that he became great friends with Richards, and got him out of isolation and back to writing and playing again, also with Jagger.

Mathijs

100% agree. Wood is a bit older than Taylor too.

My original point was not about Taylor or Mandel or Beck or Rory Gallagher or any of them. It was Wayne Perkins, who was a great player and got along smashingly with Keith Richards. I never thought of him as a rhythm guitarist, but then I heard Cellophane Trousers and thought about his legacy in reggae music. I understand why he would have been the choice had the Faces not cancelled shows and split.

Quote
TravelinMan

Miss You is one of my all-time favorite Stones songs and that song is 1/2) Wyman & Watts 3) Jagger 4) Sugar Blue 5)Mel Collins. Outside of the main riff, the guitars are an afterthought. I am not a fan of guitars playing licks over top of one another while the singer is trying to do their job lol. But to each their own.

Start Me Up is one of the greatest rock riffs of all-time. The counter guitar is not memorable IMO. To say it makes the song is a huge stretch.

The fact is the Stones would have made a great record (Some Girls) without a second guitarist. The material is all Jagger/Richards. I think it's a fun album, but it's a bit overrated in their entire canon, mainly by late era Stones fans who believe the band started in 1978.

I don't feel Some Girls is over-rated at all, and I'm not a late era Stones fan.

~"Love is Strong"~

No one questions Ronnie's human qualities and his role as the glue that holds the band together.
I respect him, he is a great guy, but for me he was never a satisfactory choice for the Stones.

once the heated discussions between the taylorites and the woodies are over do go and see that nice documentary about Wayne Perkins

Quote
Whale
once the heated discussions between the taylorites and the woodies are over do go and see that nice documentary about Wayne Perkins

Great, you’re basically inviting in the Perkinsians

Quote
Whale
once the heated discussions between the taylorites and the woodies are over do go and see that nice documentary about Wayne Perkins

Nice guy but not rock and roll star material; nothing wrong with that, Great musician very talented rock guitar player. Charlie was not interested in rockstar status although his excentric personality and the fans forcefully made him one and that is a rare occurrence in the rock business. For the chemistry of the band to hold,the stones were going to do better with an outgoing/rockstar fifth member, me think.

Quote
rollmops

Quote
Whale
once the heated discussions between the taylorites and the woodies are over do go and see that nice documentary about Wayne Perkins

Nice guy but not rock and roll star material; nothing wrong with that, Great musician very talented rock guitar player. Charlie was not interested in rockstar status although his excentric personality and the fans forcefully made him one and that is a rare occurrence in the rock business. For the chemistry of the band to hold,the stones were going to do better with an outgoing/rockstar fifth member, me think.

Why would anyone care if he was playing great guitar.No one cared that Taylor was not rock star material.How do you know what his personality would have been.