Quote
dcba

Quote
His Majesty

The golden period of 1963 - 1968

Golden really? Not to me. Silver at best.
I hear a bunch of talented promising kids warming up for the bigger things (68-72). They make great music but they haven't reached their apex.

There's no such thing as a Rolling Stones Bible or 10 commandments, there are only opinions. But there are believers and preachers here, the middle ages aren't over yet. And I plea guilty as well.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2018-07-18 16:39 by TheflyingDutchman.

Quote
dcba

Quote
His Majesty

The golden period of 1963 - 1968

Golden really? Not to me. Silver at best.
I hear a bunch of talented promising kids warming up for the bigger things (68-72). They make great music but they haven't reached their apex.

Yes golden. We agree on 1968.

The first 10 years is a golden run of singles and albums that most bands would kill for.

Quote
TheflyingDutchman


There's no such thing as a Rolling Stones Bible or 10 commandments, there are only opinions. But there are believers and preachers here, the middle ages aren't over yet. And I plea guilty as well.

Well, there is nothing like the real thing, the original Rolling Stones.

Quote
diverseharmonics
I love Dirty Work. One of the few-but it got me thru a weird time--just out of the Marine Corps.-my girlfriend also loved it--when we broke up I told her-i'll take you to the Stones if and when they tour-fast forward to October 89--she was there ..rockin!..I was between her and my new girl..HEAVEN!! L A Coliseum 10-21-89 and we loved it ---they played ONE HIT!! I don't know about The Stones .....but NO REGRETS FOR ME!!!

That's COOL, diverseharmonics.
Thumbs up & kudos to you!

I agree with you for the most part but they have song gems that stand beside the "Taylor" era. Shattered is a masterpiece. There is at least one great song an album since Taylor that is just as good....IMHO

Quote
KevinLocksPerm
I think they regret:

Too many Mick solo projects;
Not enough Keith solo projects;
The who Superheavy Project;
Ticket prices;
Not making Chuck Leavell a full member;
Not releasing an affordable CD version of Brussels Affair;
Not buying a VW Voodoo Lounge Limited Edition Golf;
The artwork on Dirty Work;
Never being able to eclipse the Beatles;
Never having the chance to see The Sons OF The Beatles;
Opening the door to the police at Redlands.

This sounds like something from alternative universe in a galaxy far way in a time long ago (cue the John Williams theme)

_



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2018-07-18 23:07 by TheflyingDutchman.

Quote
TheflyingDutchman

You play no bum notes.

Jeebus, folks should follow another band if that's a thing.

Quote
His Majesty

Taylor brought a distinctive sound and upped the musicality of everyone involved...

Yes, and thankfully it was he who brought his distinctive classy unique style to the band. After his stint in the Bluesbreakers, Taylor was destined for greatness one way or another, and thankfully he ended up shining in the Rolling StonesHad Ronnie, Jeff Beck, Clapton or any other capable guitarist been brought into the mix to replace Brian, yes it still probably would have been golden, but it would have been totally different - especially if it was Ronnie as his skills are completely different to all those mentioned above.

From Classic Rock magazine Mick Taylor:

"But few would contend Wood was in the same league as a guitarist. Drummer Charlie Watts had admitted that “the Mick Taylor period was a creative peak for us. A tremendous jump in musical credibility.” Mick Jagger stopped just short of an enormous self-made hole when telling Rolling Stone about Taylor in 1995: “He was a very fluent, melodic player, which we never had, and we don’t have now… Some people think that’s the best version of the band that existed.” Asked if he agree with those people, Jagger replied: “I obviously can’t say if I think Mick Taylor was the best, because it sort of trashes the period the band is in now.”

From same article:

Richards admits he was sometimes in awe of Taylor’s playing - “the melodic touch, a beautiful sustain and a way of reading a song”

And one more from Taylor himself:

“I had an influence on them. I mean, would Sway have existed without my contribution? Probably, but not the way it does. And the same goes for Moonlight Mile"

As for the '63-'68 - yes it was also golden...had they completely stopped in '68 they still would be in the history books imo - Satisfaction alone has guaranteed that.
As for the post MT era, seems clear that more bad than good has happened for whatever reason. No question Ronnie added some greatness (especially on Some Girls), but after Tattoo You everything started going down hill. If there were two golden periods, and maybe a silver period the first few years after Ronnie joined, this latter era after Tattoo You can best be described as the bronze period at best, but dirt clod period seems more fitting.

_____________________________________________________________
Rip this joint, gonna save your soul, round and round and round we go......

Yet, even with all that praise, they still included a Ry Cooder recording on Sticky Fingers, mixed Taylor low or cut short solos and replaced some of his guitars on Ya-Ya's.

Funny bunch those stones.

The main "creative peak" source is Mick and Keith being inspired, confident and focused as song writers. Taylor lucked out in that he joined in the midst of that. Ronnie was not so fortunate in that he joined when there was a notable lull in inspiration.



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 2018-07-18 21:53 by His Majesty.

Yeah not blaming Ronnie for all the lows of the latter period as it seems the well had nearly run dry amidst the squabbling, solo ventures, etc.

Imagine though if they had brought Mick Taylor back after Tattoo You...would it have made much of a difference?
Would have been different for sure in certain aspects, but better or worse? Interesting to ponder....

_____________________________________________________________
Rip this joint, gonna save your soul, round and round and round we go......

Different for sure.

However, things are as they are, Taylor was clearly not the kind of musician who was going to stick around in the band for that long. When it got predictable and something apparently more interesting came along away he went.

Ronnie the reliable tradesman will never leave the stones! Unless, perhaps, it's something he knows would please his bosses.

Quote
His Majesty
Yet, even with all that praise, they still included a Ry Cooder recording on Sticky Fingers, mixed Taylor low or cut short solos and replaced some of his guitars on Ya-Ya's.

Funny bunch those stones.

The main "creative peak" source is Mick and Keith being inspired, confident and focused as song writers. Taylor lucked out in that he joined in the midst of that. Ronnie was not so fortunate in that he joined when there was a notable lull in inspiration.

If you're interested in Taylor with the Stones, listen to the live recordings. Songs like Sway, Moonlight Mile and a 100 hundred years ago don't have Richards on guitar, but they still sound 100 % like the Stones. you could use Keith as a songwriter, and leave the guitar playing to someone that could do a similar job ilke Keith, they are out there in England. Just look in the mirror man, your musical statements about Taylor are as useless and humiliating as mine on Richards.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2018-07-18 22:47 by TheflyingDutchman.

Quote
TheflyingDutchman
... they still sound 100 % like the Stones.

A very apt way of putting it, they sound like...

Quote
His Majesty

Quote
TheflyingDutchman
... they still sound 100 % like the Stones.

A very apt way of putting it, they sound like...

100%. ><

Quote
TheflyingDutchman


100%. ><

Better to hear the real thing.

[youtu.be]

Keith regrets his 2007 moustache.
Mick regrets not shaving it off while Keith was sleeping.

Quote
His Majesty



The sound and vibe of the Circus era stones with just about any suitabley competent bluesy guitarist in place of Brian would produce much the same sound as this...

[www.youtube.com]

The solos would be different, but not much else. That goes whether it's Taylor, Wood, or some unknown from Shropshire.

At worst it would maybe be a bit less distinctive, but golden still as it is even with Brian not wanting to be there.


[www.youtube.com]

I think the '69 version sounds completely different than the RRC version. This is not the most interesting example you could bring up.
What do you expect Taylor to play? A blistering or an "inappropriate "Jeff Beck solo ?

Quote
TheflyingDutchman

I think the '69 version sounds completely different than the RRC version. This is not the most interesting example you could bring up.
What do yo expect Taylor to play? A blistering or an "inappropriate "Jeff Beck solo ?

It's not that different.

This is all in reply to "can you imagine the golden era without taylor?"

We don't need to imagine it because there is a good chunk of music from that period without him.

To bring the magic of the golden era onstage they just needed someone who was willing and able to play guitar. As if to prove the point even further, it's golden onstage even with Brian not bothering to really play.

Taylor is a distinctive inclusion, but not a make or break one. The greatness was already in place.

Beggars Banquet
Rock & Roll Circus
Most of Let It Bleed

Keith:
Getting busted in Canada
Climbing the coconut tree

Quote
His Majesty

Quote
TheflyingDutchman

I think the '69 version sounds completely different than the RRC version. This is not the most interesting example you could bring up.
What do yo expect Taylor to play? A blistering or an "inappropriate "Jeff Beck solo ?

It's not that different.

This is all in reply to "can you imagine the golden era without taylor?"

We don't need to imagine it because there is a good chunk of music from that period without him.

To bring the magic of the golden era onstage they just needed someone who was willing and able to play guitar. As if to prove the point even further, it's golden onstage even with Brian not bothering to really play.

Taylor is a distinctive inclusion, but not a make or break one. The greatness was already in place.

Beggars Banquet
Rock & Roll Circus
Most of Let It Bleed

The greatness of he compositions is there. I myself am not that impressed by te RRC performance. I think that being a RS fan of a certain era, or being an admirer of a certain player is the crucial part of what makes the Stones great. It works on an individual level. No need to generalize.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2018-07-20 13:03 by TheflyingDutchman.

Quote
TheflyingDutchman


The greatness of he compositions is there. I myself am not that impressed by te RRC performance. I think that being a RS fan of a certain era, or being an admirer of a certain player is the crucial part of what makes the Stones great. It works on an individual level.

Their continued success says it all. As does the celebrated 'golden era' including Beggars Banquet and Let It Bleed. Two albums done mostly without either Jones or Taylor playing guitar.

That's down to the songs, but also the core four of Mick, Keith, Bill and Charlie finding a way to remain great despite problems with Brian and changes to that member position.

I think that they should regret that they broke up the band after the 81/82-tour and didn't perform for seven years. When they came back in 1989 they had lost something. I think this impact on the band
is larger than people acknowledge. After the break-up they were never really able to recreate the "magic" of before. They were doomed to produce mediocre albums and do large scale revival tours.

Quote
His Majesty

Quote
TheflyingDutchman


The greatness of he compositions is there. I myself am not that impressed by te RRC performance. I think that being a RS fan of a certain era, or being an admirer of a certain player is the crucial part of what makes the Stones great. It works on an individual level.

Their continued success says it all. As does the celebrated 'golden era' including Beggars Banquet and Let It Bleed. Two albums done mostly without either Jones or Taylor playing guitar.

That's down to the songs, but also the core four of Mick, Keith, Bill and Charlie finding a way to remain great despite problems with Brian and changes to that member position.

It's a combination of splendid PR, Nostalgia, Charisma, Designer sloppiness performance/producing etc. Musically I have my doubts over the last decades. Crowd Psychology fodder.

Animated graphics will be deleted. In any thread. IORR is not a Xmas tree. Thanks for your understanding.

Bjornulf

Quote
bv
Animated graphics will be deleted. In any thread. IORR is not a Xmas tree. Thanks for your understanding.

< ?

Please do not use IORR as a private gladiator ring. If you make a verbal fight with somebody online, after the 3rd or 4th comment or quote back and forth, ask yourself if you are doing a private fight rather than adding public comments interesting to others than yourself. Then - just like in the street - it is time to go home, take a rest, take a hike, think about something else, rather than fighting folr days like small kids.

There are two cats in my near neighborhood. One of them - the red cat - claim "my territorry" i.e. my lawn and everything around my house. The other one - the white cat - claim my neighbours land. Both claims are on fooreign land i.e. houses they do not live at. Year in and year out they argue about these two territories. They scream at nights and days, and they fight at times. None of them live here but they live nearby. Yesterday the red cat - who claim my land - tried to claim the white cat's territorry for the 100th time, my neightbours land. We had half an hour of cat screaming and dueling like an endless IORR Mick Taylor like/dislike thread. In the end, the red cat said enouth is enough, it left with the tail between it's legs, the discussuion was over, the land control was in status quo.

I think humans should be able to accept different opinions whithout acting like cats fighting for territory. Please, if you disagree, please accept the fact that people may disagree. No reason to quote quote quote forever on the same subject. It makes no sense, it just look like a catfight.

Bjornulf

Classic bv.

I for one as reader find much interest in such "duels" between certain outspoken posters with differing outlooks on eras of Rolling Stones greatness. To me they enrich the site. Currently there seem to be present fewer posters with their particular stance than formerly as well. It would be sad to lose them. And in between I discover some sentences that clearer than on earlier occasions formulate important aspects of their otherwise more or less known positions. One such example in bold below.

I hope the editorial intervention here, bv, will not lead to a reduction of discussion about themes of this kind.

Quote
His Majesty

Quote
TheflyingDutchman


The greatness of he compositions is there. I myself am not that impressed by te RRC performance. I think that being a RS fan of a certain era, or being an admirer of a certain player is the crucial part of what makes the Stones great. It works on an individual level.

Their continued success says it all. As does the celebrated 'golden era' including Beggars Banquet and Let It Bleed. Two albums done mostly without either Jones or Taylor playing guitar.

That's down to the songs, but also the core four of Mick, Keith, Bill and Charlie finding a way to remain great despite problems with Brian and changes to that member position.

Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2018-07-21 09:50 by Witness.

I am purring due to your post and my latest land grab victory.



Here's Mick, Keith (with resonator guitar) Bill and Charlie doing their thing with assistance of Ry Cooder on far left.

Recording Sister Morphine, spring 1969.







[youtu.be]



Edited 5 time(s). Last edit at 2018-07-21 14:37 by His Majesty.