Quote
His Majesty

Quote
TheflyingDutchman
Two guitars only I hear. Keiths intro guitar and onwards, the reverb or whatever effect is bouncing to the other channel. And the lead guitar. Don't get misled by the piano.

Yes and both quite scrappy when heard in isolation.

Hey it wouldn't be Keith if it wasn't scrappy

But that's just it, this music isn't about precision or anoraks or Keith wouldn't fall into the top 2 to 4 guitarists in the world year after year in RollingStone top 100 greatest guitarists.

We got Mick Taylor at number 37

Ronnie Wood doesn't even enter the top 100 as a little reality check.

Another reality check is Mick comes in at number 16 best singers.

Keith is the man when it gets away from train spotters on iorr.

[www.rollingstone.com]



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2019-03-07 16:37 by keithsman.

The list posted above is from 2015...
and most of those 100 guitarists are dead.

Long Live Ronnie Wood!

Quote
keithsman

Quote
His Majesty

Quote
TheflyingDutchman
Two guitars only I hear. Keiths intro guitar and onwards, the reverb or whatever effect is bouncing to the other channel. And the lead guitar. Don't get misled by the piano.

Yes and both quite scrappy when heard in isolation.

Hey it wouldn't be Keith if it wasn't scrappy

But that's just it, this music isn't about precision or anoraks or Keith wouldn't fall into the top 2 to 4 guitarists in the world year after year in RollingStone top 100 greatest guitarists.

We got Mick Taylor at number 37

Ronnie Wood doesn't even enter the top 100 as a little reality check.

Another reality check is Mick comes in at number 16 best singers.

Keith is the man when it gets away from train spotters on iorr.

[www.rollingstone.com]

But do you really want to reduce music and musicians to a ranking? Indecent!

Quote
keithsman

Hey it wouldn't be Keith if it wasn't scrappy

Indeed.

Quote
Kurt
The list posted above is from 2015...
and most of those 100 guitarists are dead.

Long Live Ronnie Wood!

Whatever, he's always in the top 5.
Let's face it, Hendrix is always number one and he's been dead for 50 years. Clapton is always number two and he became boring a long time ago, so that brings Keith up the ranking, because he is alive and kicking hard.

I got nothing against Ronnie, but man do people over rate him on iorr, must people can't stand him when i talk to other guitarists..



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2019-03-07 18:18 by keithsman.

Quote
Kurt
The list posted above is from 2015...
and most of those 100 guitarists are dead.

Long Live Ronnie Wood!

Matt Pike is the man. Though I love Wood as well.

Quote
Testify

Quote
keithsman

Quote
His Majesty

Quote
TheflyingDutchman
Two guitars only I hear. Keiths intro guitar and onwards, the reverb or whatever effect is bouncing to the other channel. And the lead guitar. Don't get misled by the piano.

Yes and both quite scrappy when heard in isolation.

Hey it wouldn't be Keith if it wasn't scrappy

But that's just it, this music isn't about precision or anoraks or Keith wouldn't fall into the top 2 to 4 guitarists in the world year after year in RollingStone top 100 greatest guitarists.

We got Mick Taylor at number 37

Ronnie Wood doesn't even enter the top 100 as a little reality check.

Another reality check is Mick comes in at number 16 best singers.

Keith is the man when it gets away from train spotters on iorr.

[www.rollingstone.com]

But do you really want to reduce music and musicians to a ranking? Indecent!

Well i know that, it's all a bit immature of me, if you Love Ronnie good for you, personally i love him playing with Keith, weaving as they do, especially last year.

Ronnie has really improved recently, and that's an amazing accomplishment for a 70 year old man, but when people start saying that he is a better player than Taylor and is the savior of the band,i mean come on, that's immature too, the guy barely saved himself.

Touche'

Viva La Difference!!!!

Let a thousand flowers bloom!

my 2 cents

Quote
keithsman

Quote
Testify

Quote
keithsman

Quote
His Majesty

Quote
TheflyingDutchman
Two guitars only I hear. Keiths intro guitar and onwards, the reverb or whatever effect is bouncing to the other channel. And the lead guitar. Don't get misled by the piano.

Yes and both quite scrappy when heard in isolation.

Hey it wouldn't be Keith if it wasn't scrappy

But that's just it, this music isn't about precision or anoraks or Keith wouldn't fall into the top 2 to 4 guitarists in the world year after year in RollingStone top 100 greatest guitarists.

We got Mick Taylor at number 37

Ronnie Wood doesn't even enter the top 100 as a little reality check.

Another reality check is Mick comes in at number 16 best singers.

Keith is the man when it gets away from train spotters on iorr.

[www.rollingstone.com]

But do you really want to reduce music and musicians to a ranking? Indecent!

Well i know that, it's all a bit immature of me, if you Love Ronnie good for you, personally i love him playing with Keith, weaving as they do, especially last year.

Ronnie has really improved recently, and that's an amazing accomplishment for a 70 year old man, but when people start saying that he is a better player than Taylor and is the savior of the band,i mean come on, that's immature too, the guy barely saved himself.

I can only tell you what I think, it is always stupid the comparison between guitarists, whether Wood, Clapton, Keith, Taylor and others ... each of them have arrived where they are because they are great guitarists. Then I can have a preference and you have another, but this does not change anything. The most stupid thing for me is the race to who is the best, music is art is not a sport, there is no winner in music.

Even as a massive Keith fan, I must say that a list in which a guy like Paco de Lucia isn't ranked higher than Keith hasn't got any credibility, when you look at it with a bit of distance. (Such lists don't make sense in art anyway, in my opinion)

Ronnie is a special player. Like many other famous guitarists he is recognizable from the first few notes. He's got a very eclectic style, changing rhythm patterns all the time and many times he seems to be a 16th note behind or ahead. This can be best heard in his Reggae and Funk playing. He sort of reminds me of the guitar work on Funkadelic/Parliament records: Sloppy but with a ton of groove. Like in his paintings (like them or not) his unbelievable energy comes though in his guitar playing, so it never gets boring listening to him even when or maybe most of all when he's just playing rhythm guitar.

Of course Ronnie might never touch me emotionally in a solo like Taylor: He is a completely different kind of player. I probably wouldn't love Time Waits For No One that much if Ronnie played on it. But I wouldn't love the whole of Some Girls as much if Taylor was the guitarist. This debate over who is better just doesn't make any sense. Taylor was great as an antipope when he played with Keith but I find it just as interesting when Ronnie and Keith play together; two players in love with the groove ;-)



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2019-03-08 00:54 by MonkeyMan2000.

Quote
MonkeyMan2000
Even as a massive Keith fan, I must say that a list in which a guy like Paco de Lucia isn't higher ranked than Keith hasn't got any credibility, when you look at it with a bit of distance. (Such lists don't make sense in art, in my opinion)

Ronnie is a special player. Like many other famous guitarists he is recognizable from the first few notes. He's got a very eclectic style, changing rhythm patterns all the time and many times he seems to be a 16th note behind or ahead. This can be best heard in his Reggae and Funk playing. He sort of reminds me of the guitar work on Funkadelic/Parliament records: Sloppy but with a ton of groove. Like in his paintings (like them or not) his unbelievable energy comes though in his guitar playing, so it never gets boring listening to him even when or maybe most of all when he's just playing rhythm guitar.

Of course Ronnie might never touch me emotionally in a solo like Taylor: He is a completely different kind of player. I'd probably wouldn't love Time Waits For No One that much if Ronnie played on it. But I wouldn't love the whole of Some Girls as much if Taylor was the guitarist. This debate over who is better just doesn't make any sense. Taylor was great as an antipope when he played with Keith but I find it just as interesting when Ronnie and Keith play together; two players in love with the groove ;-)

A great post.

Quote
windmelody

Quote
MonkeyMan2000
Even as a massive Keith fan, I must say that a list in which a guy like Paco de Lucia isn't higher ranked than Keith hasn't got any credibility, when you look at it with a bit of distance. (Such lists don't make sense in art, in my opinion)

Ronnie is a special player. Like many other famous guitarists he is recognizable from the first few notes. He's got a very eclectic style, changing rhythm patterns all the time and many times he seems to be a 16th note behind or ahead. This can be best heard in his Reggae and Funk playing. He sort of reminds me of the guitar work on Funkadelic/Parliament records: Sloppy but with a ton of groove. Like in his paintings (like them or not) his unbelievable energy comes though in his guitar playing, so it never gets boring listening to him even when or maybe most of all when he's just playing rhythm guitar.

Of course Ronnie might never touch me emotionally in a solo like Taylor: He is a completely different kind of player. I'd probably wouldn't love Time Waits For No One that much if Ronnie played on it. But I wouldn't love the whole of Some Girls as much if Taylor was the guitarist. This debate over who is better just doesn't make any sense. Taylor was great as an antipope when he played with Keith but I find it just as interesting when Ronnie and Keith play together; two players in love with the groove ;-)

A great post.

This Wood/Taylor thing is of course stupid. I prefer both. You can't criticize Wood for being Wood.

I think Wood has a very adaptable style. Which is, maybe, what made him still a Stone after 45 years in the band? I don't think his style is instantly recognizable though
(although I'm not a guitarist myself and tend to listen to the overall sound). Maybe in the years before he wasn't a Stone. Probably. I think he has adapted his style very close to Keith's.
Hence the weaving maybe? Wood is good enough. That is what counts in the end. And he's a vital ingredient in the Stones sound since 1974. It can't be that bad - can it?

Another thing is the hierarchy within in the band. I have a feeling Wood always had to walk one step behind Richards. I don't think he has been encouraged to develop his own style.
He's been the second banana to Keith. And we all know whom Keith has been the second banana to...

Chuck ?????



ROCKMAN

The worst part about the debate is it devalues Taylor’s unique rhythm chops and Wood’s unpredictable leads. Of course, Wood has a much much larger body of work with the Stones, so it’s really not fair to begin with. If Wood only played in the Stones from 95-2000, nobody would care about him at all.

Very well said and I agree 100%

I look at it this way in regard towards people saying Ronnie saved the Stones, or is the reason they stayed together. It's come to light that the reason Mick didn't tour after 82' until 89' and also a possible reason he went solo was because Charlie and Ronnie were in no fit state to tour, Mick is down as saying the Stones would have trouble crossing the road let alone tour.

Well Charlie and Keith got their act together for the 89' tour and throughout the 90's but Ronnie as we know. got worse and worse with his drinking, letting the band down especially with live performances.
As i say , the Stones stayed together in spite of him not because of him, although in recent years he is doing his best to pay them back with great performances i'm pleased to say.

God bless Ronnie Wood!!!!!
He added so much to the Stones, especially a second magic aera in recording and live performing. Without him the stones would probably ended in the seventies.

Thanx Ronnie!
Great guy!

God bless Mick Taylor

***
I'm just a Bad Boy Boogie

Kindergarten.

Quote
keithsman


Definitely the worst album imho, the Stones are better than the blues with it's limitations and it shows. They sang blues covers in the beginning because they couldn't write their own, and then they did it again all those years later with BAL for the same reason.
I literately played the single a dozen times and played the album through a few times, found it too one dimensional, Keith didn't even get to sing a track on it, boring and lonesome indeed.

Yeah, horrible to think that Mick and Keith already in 1962 had a terrible writer's block (probably Mick just trying to follow the trends, digging the latest hit single by Cliff Richard or somebody, while ignoring Keith's great ideas). Hitting the wall already then. It must have been the founder of the band, Ian Stewart, suggesting them to play some blues covers instead.

This is what the post-factual world looks like. Everything is based on subjective opinion, and we all have one of those, like arseholes.

- Doxa



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2019-03-08 13:34 by Doxa.

Quote
Doxa


Yeah, horrible to think that Mick and Keith already in 1962 had a terrible writer's block (probably Mick just trying to follow the trends, digging the latest hit single by Cliff Richard or somebody, while ignoring Keith's great ideas). Hitting the wall already then. It must have been the founder of the band, Ian Stewart, suggesting them to play some blues covers instead.

This is what the post-factual world looks like. Everything is based on subjective opinion, and we all have one of those, like arseholes.

- Doxa

Agreed. People that can't stand the heat should stay out of the kitchen.

Quote
keithsman
I look at it this way in regard towards people saying Ronnie saved the Stones, or is the reason they stayed together. It's come to light that the reason Mick didn't tour after 82' until 89' and also a possible reason he went solo was because Charlie and Ronnie were in no fit state to tour, Mick is down as saying the Stones would have trouble crossing the road let alone tour.

Well Charlie and Keith got their act together for the 89' tour and throughout the 90's but Ronnie as we know. got worse and worse with his drinking, letting the band down especially with live performances.
As i say , the Stones stayed together in spite of him not because of him, although in recent years he is doing his best to pay them back with great performances i'm pleased to say.

In my opinion you misunderstood that way of speaking, Ronnie entered the Stones at a time when the Stones seemed finished. Mick Jagger said "when Wood came we began to see in color". This was possible thanks to Wood's hilarious character, he became a friend of both Jagger and Richards and it was the one who tempered them when there was tension. In this Wood has played a role! I am convinced that other guitarists would have lasted only a few years with the Stones, Brian had his problems, Taylor left the Stones for drug problems too. As you can see it's not easy to be a Stones, I'm not surprised that even Ronnie has had his hard times, the difference is that Wood has remained and others have remained close to him in those moments, this also means being in a band!

Quote
MonkeyMan2000

Of course Ronnie might never touch me emotionally in a solo like Taylor: He is a completely different kind of player. I probably wouldn't love Time Waits For No One that much if Ronnie played on it. But I wouldn't love the whole of Some Girls as much if Taylor was the guitarist. This debate over who is better just doesn't make any sense. Taylor was great as an antipope when he played with Keith but I find it just as interesting when Ronnie and Keith play together; two players in love with the groove ;-)

Other way round for me!

Ronnie's solos are those that usually touch me emotionally.

Taylor's solos fascinate me for their impeccable formal perfection.

If I am allowed a gross comparison with classic composers, I would say that Wood is Chopin and Taylor Bach!

C

[www.kshe95.com]


Keith as you know thought about the idea of bringing back MT - not sure if he was serious or trying to dodge the whole weaving thing again in the interview.

Quote
Doxa

Quote
keithsman


Definitely the worst album imho, the Stones are better than the blues with it's limitations and it shows. They sang blues covers in the beginning because they couldn't write their own, and then they did it again all those years later with BAL for the same reason.
I literately played the single a dozen times and played the album through a few times, found it too one dimensional, Keith didn't even get to sing a track on it, boring and lonesome indeed.

Yeah, horrible to think that Mick and Keith already in 1962 had a terrible writer's block (probably Mick just trying to follow the trends, digging the latest hit single by Cliff Richard or somebody, while ignoring Keith's great ideas). Hitting the wall already then. It must have been the founder of the band, Ian Stewart, suggesting them to play some blues covers instead.

This is what the post-factual world looks like. Everything is based on subjective opinion, and we all have one of those, like arseholes.

- Doxa

Are you really that thick ?? you must know that i meant that before Mick and Keith even thought about writing their own songs they sang blues covers because they didn't have their own songs.
Nothing to do with writers block you sarcastic so and so.
And yes funny thing is when Don said they hit a wall they resort to old blues covers again.
If you love the blues you will love BAL, great, good for you, i prefer the songs Mick and Keith write, is that alright with you, hope i'm not being too subjective and receive the wrath of Doxa, no wonder DP left this place.

Quote
OpenG
[www.kshe95.com]


Keith as you know thought about the idea of bringing back MT - not sure if he was serious or trying to dodge the whole weaving thing again in the interview.

Gotta give credit to Keith for at least hoping and trying!

"I wanted to see if it would blossom into something else, like a three-guitar band. I realized that was just a hope, an idea.
The Stones are a two-guitar band, and I know that, really. But ‘Midnight Rambler’ over the last year or so (with Taylor guesting) has been amazing.
He’s a lot looser than he was the first time around. He’s got a lot more mileage under the belt and a better sense of humor about it all.”

It would have been INCREDIBLE to see and hear how the band might have blossomed...imagine Taylor on Blue and Lonesome...it would have definitely taken it to a superior level IMO.
And there's the possibility the new album of originals would have been finished a long time ago. Mick and Charlie both have claimed the MT years as a peak and something special - a shame they decided not to revisit that.

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

Quote
Hairball

Quote
OpenG
[www.kshe95.com]


Keith as you know thought about the idea of bringing back MT - not sure if he was serious or trying to dodge the whole weaving thing again in the interview.

Gotta give credit to Keith for at least hoping and trying!

"I wanted to see if it would blossom into something else, like a three-guitar band. I realized that was just a hope, an idea.
The Stones are a two-guitar band, and I know that, really. But ‘Midnight Rambler’ over the last year or so (with Taylor guesting) has been amazing.
He’s a lot looser than he was the first time around. He’s got a lot more mileage under the belt and a better sense of humor about it all.”

It would have been INCREDIBLE to see and hear how the band might have blossomed...imagine Taylor on Blue and Lonesome...it would have definitely taken it to a superior level IMO.
And there's the possibility the new album of originals would have been finished a long time ago. Mick and Charlie both have claimed the MT years as a peak and something special - a shame they decided not to revisit that.

The upsetting thing is it's not too late, Taylor is at home waiting for the call, just imagine the inspiration it would have given Jagger if Taylor was in the studio with the boys, and if they included him on this tour but on much more of the show it would be fantastic, it would have inspired all concerned.

Quote
keithsman

Quote
Hairball

Quote
OpenG
[www.kshe95.com]


Keith as you know thought about the idea of bringing back MT - not sure if he was serious or trying to dodge the whole weaving thing again in the interview.

Gotta give credit to Keith for at least hoping and trying!

"I wanted to see if it would blossom into something else, like a three-guitar band. I realized that was just a hope, an idea.
The Stones are a two-guitar band, and I know that, really. But ‘Midnight Rambler’ over the last year or so (with Taylor guesting) has been amazing.
He’s a lot looser than he was the first time around. He’s got a lot more mileage under the belt and a better sense of humor about it all.”

It would have been INCREDIBLE to see and hear how the band might have blossomed...imagine Taylor on Blue and Lonesome...it would have definitely taken it to a superior level IMO.
And there's the possibility the new album of originals would have been finished a long time ago. Mick and Charlie both have claimed the MT years as a peak and something special - a shame they decided not to revisit that.

The upsetting thing is it's not too late, Taylor is at home waiting for the call, just imagine the inspiration it would have given Jagger if Taylor was in the studio with the boys, and if they included him on this tour but on much more of the show it would be fantastic, it would have inspired all concerned.

Enjoyed MT at several shows when he guested.
Fantastic Rambler versions.. best I've witnessed.

By all accounts, there are good reasons he's sitting at home waiting for the phone to ring however.
Bit of a head-case may be putting it mildly. Good on the rest of the band for not calling him out on it too much though, and glad he was able to hold it together and sit in with them as long as he did.
Applies to both of his stints with them now that I think about it.