Quote
Rocky Dijon
First off we're judging by what circulates which is a couple takes only when these guys spent months in the studio cutting countless versions with different overdubs in 1972/73 and 1979/80/81. Look to Brown Sugar and Miss You as examples. The saxophone solo replaces a discarded guitar solo. Listen to the amazing soaring jazz notes on Waiting on a Friend. The likely inference is that Taylor recognized his creative contribution when he heard Sonny Rollins' saxophone solo.

That's what I've been thinking all along: That Rollins's solos were influenced by Taylor's playing.

Quote
DandelionPowderman

Quote
Rocky Dijon
First off we're judging by what circulates which is a couple takes only when these guys spent months in the studio cutting countless versions with different overdubs in 1972/73 and 1979/80/81. Look to Brown Sugar and Miss You as examples. The saxophone solo replaces a discarded guitar solo. Listen to the amazing soaring jazz notes on Waiting on a Friend. The likely inference is that Taylor recognized his creative contribution when he heard Sonny Rollins' saxophone solo.

That's what I've been thinking all along: That Rollins's solos were influenced by Taylor's playing.

Lot's of people have brought up that idea many years ago already. I myself think that a top Jazz player like Rollins didn't need Taylor's notes -again if there where any- to inspire him and play a solo, and the other way around, Taylor being too smart and an admirer to accuse a monster player like Rollins for "borrowing" his notes. I can imagine that Rollin's solo reminds us of Taylor's solo on TWFNO, as it is the same progression as WAOF, and both Taylor's and Rollins' solos starting of with a warm sounding major scale pattern. But Rollins "ripping Taylor off" musically? That's pathetic, imo.

Not the notes, but a variation on Taylor's theme could be possible.

Quote
DandelionPowderman
Not the notes, but a variation on Taylor's theme could be possible.

Yes, that's what I'm trying to say, using Taylor's ideas. Point is that Ive never heard any recording with more than one guitar on WAOF no matter how hard I tried to get it. That makes this discussion a bit meaningless/ frustrating to me. Maybe Rocky Dijon can post it because he refers to it.

Quote
with sssoul

Quote
Rocky Dijon
The saxophone solo replaces a discarded guitar solo. Listen to the amazing soaring jazz notes on Waiting on a Friend.
The likely inference is that Taylor recognized his creative contribution when he heard Sonny Rollins' saxophone solo.

Oh my, Rocky Dijon - would you really bring in Sonny Rollins and tell him "play what that guy played"?!

I imagine it happened as Sonny described with Mick dancing and miming what he wanted. I'm not saying Taylor was ripped off or that a soaring Taylor guitar solo deserved a songwriting credit. I'm just suggesting that was what Taylor reacted to when he heard the song - the saxophone was in the place where he had originally played something and it's a version that has not circulated. There must be hundreds of takes of familiar songs we have never heard.

Quote
Naturalust

Quote
GasLightStreet
The official release sounds like Keith on guitar - and only Keith. If Taylor played on it it's not in the mix, just as it sounds on the bootlegs. Maybe Taylor played so much on it that it was messy and they kept it out.

Maybe he didn't play on it.

His demand to be paid for the LP version that he's not on was most likely dismissed since he was already paid for the original session. Once you're paid for recording you don't get paid for not being on the final version. Has he ever stated specifically what he did? I've not ever seen it.

Yeah yeah yeah there are tracks without Keith on them that are just Mick T and Mick T and Mick J on guitars. But there are other tracks without Mick T on them, like Happy and Tumbling Dice and Soul Survivor and Coming Down Again and It's Only Rock'N'Roll and Luxury.

Actually Taylor played bass on Coming Down Again and Tumbling Dice and played slide on Soul Survivor. Apparently Taylors suit was settled, not dismissed, a pretty good indication he indeed played on the released version. And the Stones don't get paid for their sessions, recording is on the expense side of the balance sheet.

And as Taylor got paid an equal share for all record sales when he was an equal member, it didn't matter one bit whether he was on all the tracks or not. Of course the writers got their publishing money but that is different. The fact that this was released on a record after Taylor was gone is the reason he demanded to get paid for it, and rightly so, imo. This coupled with the fact we have never heard Keith talking about his contribution to the track and that he has never really played it live exactly like the released version, the subtle hammers and licks that he often exploits on other tunes he played on, makes me think this one is all Taylor.

Yeah, he played bass on those tracks. Point remains though, he didn't play guitar on every song while he was in the band. Of course, there are some that were released while he was in the band that were done before he was in the band...

If you listen to the guitar in this song it does this raunchy lick throughout the tune. That's what makes me think it's Keith and not Mick. But your point about Keith not talking about what he did... that is an interesting part of it. It may be another tune without Keith on it at all for all we know.

Quote
GasLightStreet
If you listen to the guitar in this song it does this raunchy lick throughout the tune. That's what makes me think it's Keith and not Mick.

Not sure which lick you are talking about but check out the live versions of the tune and see if you hear Keith playing that raunchy lick the same way as on the record. He was never one not to exploit a raunchy lick once it made the recording.

Quote
Rocky Dijon
First off we're judging by what circulates which is a couple takes only when these guys spent months in the studio cutting countless versions with different overdubs in 1972/73 and 1979/80/81. Look to Brown Sugar and Miss You as examples. The saxophone solo replaces a discarded guitar solo. Listen to the amazing soaring jazz notes on Waiting on a Friend. The likely inference is that Taylor recognized his creative contribution when he heard Sonny Rollins' saxophone solo.

I don't believe that at all. The outtakes with the various Sonny Rollins overdubs (sorry, not all of them are in wide circulation) prove that Rollins was not playing after a certain idea, but he was really just jamming and finding ideas by himself. If there is a form of inspiration it is in the piano by Hopkins. If there was a lead guitar of sorts, it would have been available on these tapes as well. Also, Rollins is not the kind of player you would tell to copy anything....

Mathijs

Quote
Mathijs

Quote
Rocky Dijon
First off we're judging by what circulates which is a couple takes only when these guys spent months in the studio cutting countless versions with different overdubs in 1972/73 and 1979/80/81. Look to Brown Sugar and Miss You as examples. The saxophone solo replaces a discarded guitar solo. Listen to the amazing soaring jazz notes on Waiting on a Friend. The likely inference is that Taylor recognized his creative contribution when he heard Sonny Rollins' saxophone solo.

I don't believe that at all. The outtakes with the various Sonny Rollins overdubs (sorry, not all of them are in wide circulation) prove that Rollins was not playing after a certain idea, but he was really just jamming and finding ideas by himself. If there is a form of inspiration it is in the piano by Hopkins. If there was a lead guitar of sorts, it would have been available on these tapes as well. Also, Rollins is not the kind of player you would tell to copy anything....

Mathijs

I agree on that statement, Rollins can play for himself like I posted before, plus Taylor (imo) would never accuse a top player like Rollins for using or copying his guitar lines. Having said that I still don't know who played the original electric rhythm track, because there is no source apart from people's (biased) opinions.

Edit: I have been listening to some live versions from different tours, it was a tough job and the guitars (3 actually, Keith, Ron and Jagger) are not coming near the oirginal, so who knows? He he, over and out.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2016-02-01 13:39 by DancelittleSister.

Perhaps Taylor played the high notes Mick sings in the intro on guitar?

Quote
thijs1981
Perhaps Taylor played the high notes Mick sings in the intro on guitar?

Rollins's playing is based on those very notes. Notice how he starts a new phrasing + how the sax enters the first time.

The rest sounds like pure improvisation, of course.

However, had Taylor played a figure with those notes (or something similar), which Mick sings (falsetto) and Rollins use as the framework for his playing, I could understand him being grumpy for them to wipe his stuff.

Nobody noticed that Keith IS indeed playing the stuff that's played on the studio version in concert?

The difference is that he has two other guitars to play off. Mick is doing the straight rhythm of the studio version with his acoustic. Ronnie is doing some phrasing. But Keith is indeed doing the three different licks that (albeit somewhat sloppier) you'll find on the studio version. He plays more, yes, but that's because he has two other guitars to interplay with.

But the three main licks are there.

The Cmaj7 single string-stuff (b and e-strings in this case) is something Keith loves to play, and has done countless times in different variations – no matter if the song is in A minor or C.

Here's a comparison between the studio version and Hampton 1981:





[www.youtube.com]



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2016-02-01 15:03 by DandelionPowderman.

Quote
thijs1981
Perhaps Taylor played the high notes Mick sings in the intro on guitar?

You mean that boot with the falsetto? Best theory so far. I always suspected Jagger to be a part time member of the Sistine Chapel.

Quote
DancelittleSister

Quote
thijs1981
Perhaps Taylor played the high notes Mick sings in the intro on guitar?

You mean that boot with the falsetto? Best theory so far. I always suspected Jagger to be a part time member of the Sistine Chapel.

The falsetto is also on the studio version. Rollins starts his solo with Mick's first notes before he wails away

Well those comparisons just support the case that it was probably Taylor who played on the track, imo. In any case people are forgetting that Taylor sued the Stones for this track specifically and received a settlement. Do you truly think he would have bothered if his guitar work was wiped off the track and replaced with Keith's or if he hadn't played on the track at all? I think this is the best evidence we have for such things, we all know Taylor isn't a sue-happy kind of guy and could have probably launched more litigation on a number of other issues and has refrained for whatever reason.

The bottom line at this point is that is sounds like it could have been either of them but we have direct evidence it was Taylor based on the lawsuit. Why people are having a hard time accepting this and go to great lengths to prove otherwise is comical really. Is it really so important to give Keith yet more credit for Stones songs than he already has?

Yaaaaaaaawn...

I don't know what's wrong with you, but I thought of these comparisons as a valid contribution – especially after you falsely commented that Keith didn't do the licks live.

If people don't listen, they might actually believe what you're saying.

I don't care who plays on WOAF. I thought for years that Jagger played the guitar, but eventually I concluded that some of the phrasings in there are nothing like I've heard him play before – a bit above his level.

I've never heard Taylor play the licks right before the chorus, either, but Ronnie (Yes, I know it was before his time) and Keith have played them a zillion times.

Are you mixing up the ALLEGED lawsuit about royalties that the Stones stopped paying Taylor – with him going to court over WOAF? You've been reading too much speculations on Hoffman's, surely..

Look, I know that you want attention, and I know that you enjoy being funny on other people's expense. But you really need to step up your game. This is lame



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2016-02-02 11:42 by DandelionPowderman.

Quote
DandelionPowderman
Nobody noticed that Keith IS indeed playing the stuff that's played on the studio version in concert?

The difference is that he has two other guitars to play off. Mick is doing the straight rhythm of the studio version with his acoustic. Ronnie is doing some phrasing. But Keith is indeed doing the three different licks that (albeit somewhat sloppier) you'll find on the studio version. He plays more, yes, but that's because he has two other guitars to interplay with.

But the three main licks are there.

The Cmaj7 single string-stuff (b and e-strings in this case) is something Keith loves to play, and has done countless times in different variations – no matter if the song is in A minor or C.

Here's a comparison between the studio version and Hampton 1981:





[www.youtube.com]

Taylor uses a lot of HO and PO as well, very often in his solos, so why not between chords? Who knows. WTH. We can debate until the seas run dry. Let's enjoy the music.

Quote
DancelittleSister

Quote
DandelionPowderman
Nobody noticed that Keith IS indeed playing the stuff that's played on the studio version in concert?

The difference is that he has two other guitars to play off. Mick is doing the straight rhythm of the studio version with his acoustic. Ronnie is doing some phrasing. But Keith is indeed doing the three different licks that (albeit somewhat sloppier) you'll find on the studio version. He plays more, yes, but that's because he has two other guitars to interplay with.

But the three main licks are there.

The Cmaj7 single string-stuff (b and e-strings in this case) is something Keith loves to play, and has done countless times in different variations – no matter if the song is in A minor or C.

Here's a comparison between the studio version and Hampton 1981:





[www.youtube.com]

Taylor uses a lot of HO and PO as well, very often in his solos, so why not between chords? Who knows. WTH. We can debate until the seas run dry. Let's enjoy the music.

Of course he does And in later years he has actually been playing that open string stuff in C/Am (CYHMK Glastonbury, for instance) a lot more than he did back in the day (where he was using the scale and more strings, like on TWFNO).

I just had to lay the statement about Keith not playing those licks live to rest. I've heard my share of 1981-shows, at least enough to know very well that he was indeed playing those licks.

Another element: With the extremely loose and free form-ish playing that Keith did live on WOAF, would he have bothered to copy Taylor's licks?

I don't know. The funny thing I noticed is that Keith is using a capo as well on the studio clip, in that club in NY, and in Hampton '81. On the original outtake with one guitar only there's no capo to be heard.

Quote
DancelittleSister
I don't know. The funny thing I noticed is that Keith is using a capo as well on the studio clip, in that club in NY, and in Hampton '81. On the original outtake with one guitar only there's no capo to be heard.

That's true. Live, they played WOAF in another key. On videos, Keith has never bothered to make it look even remotely like how he played on the track they're filming. He's doing windmills on Emotional Rescue, for instance

Quote
Naturalust

Quote
GasLightStreet
If you listen to the guitar in this song it does this raunchy lick throughout the tune. That's what makes me think it's Keith and not Mick.

Not sure which lick you are talking about but check out the live versions of the tune and see if you hear Keith playing that raunchy lick the same way as on the record. He was never one not to exploit a raunchy lick once it made the recording.

Listen right when Mick sings 'standing in a doorway'.

There is percussion and bass on the track that Taylor may have played. It doesn't have to be guitar ya' know?

Quote
Naturalust
Well those comparisons just support the case that it was probably Taylor who played on the track, imo. In any case people are forgetting that Taylor sued the Stones for this track specifically and received a settlement. Do you truly think he would have bothered if his guitar work was wiped off the track and replaced with Keith's or if he hadn't played on the track at all? I think this is the best evidence we have for such things, we all know Taylor isn't a sue-happy kind of guy and could have probably launched more litigation on a number of other issues and has refrained for whatever reason.

The bottom line at this point is that is sounds like it could have been either of them but we have direct evidence it was Taylor based on the lawsuit. Why people are having a hard time accepting this and go to great lengths to prove otherwise is comical really. Is it really so important to give Keith yet more credit for Stones songs than he already has?

Those precise jangly notes... very clean, very simple, straight forward, not heave or thrust behind them: that sounds like Taylor.

Taylor's rhythm playing is very reserved and clean. But Keith has done that as well - just listen to @#$%& Angie.

This is hilarious: [forums.stevehoffman.tv]

There are some good points in that discussion at Hoffman: not so much that Taylor was/isn't on WOAF but that it was released after he was not in the band. As Teddy B states, "The Stones took a position that he wasn't part of the record contract for Tattoo You and Taylor's was that the songs were recorded under the Atlantic contract he was a party to."

I finally hear the acoustic guitar - it's comes in before the run of sax notes at the end.

Quote
GasLightStreet

Those precise jangly notes... very clean, very simple, straight forward, not heave or thrust behind them: that sounds like Taylor.

Taylor's rhythm playing is very reserved and clean. But Keith has done that as well - just listen to @#$%& Angie.

That's true, but listen to @#$%& Philly GS '72 or Bitch or Bye Bye Johny, Dance little Sister etc etc, that's as bad ass as Richards. We don't know.

the most interesting theory to me is, that someone played the guitar part that we know as an overdub to earlier parts that had been wiped out. The riff is simple and complicated at the same time, the player was probably hearing something else whilst inventing it that we don`t hear on the released track. That`s the feeling I get when I play it myself.
I`m wondering why no one in this discussion considers the possibility that it was neither Mick T nor Keith - some engineer or guitar roadie might have snapped up the idea, enjoyed the fact that everybody around was too stoned to take care, and ended up on the finished track. And, before he could sue for credit, died. Or forgot all about it.
(Like you should probably forget this theory. But still, stranger things have happened)

brilliant track, closing a brilliant suite of slow songs, and a classic album. beautiful.

Quote
Night Manager

I`m wondering why no one in this discussion considers the possibility that it was neither Mick T nor Keith

Because it seems to be first hand info, very hard to digest for Keith fans?

Keith is more involved with this song than has been reported. This is how close Keith and Mick were and still are. Mick was covering for a very shy Keith when he said that he wrote the lyrics which he considered "very gentle and loving about friendships in the band." Actually Keith was the one who wrote the lyrics about "standing in the doorway waiting for a friend, someone to protect". I was there when Keith wrote it. We'd been standing in a doorway in NYC where I thanked him for protecting me from a violent situation involving a mutual friend, a drunken young guitarist. They filmed the video a block from my apartment. To me Tattoo You meant Thank You Too. It was exciting.

Always loved this song along with the video. What's not to like????

John N