For information about how to use this forum please check out forum help and policies.
Quote
CousinC
You always have to consider the times.
In late 60s/ early 70's Rock music it was all about lead guitar playing.
I remember critics from 1970 shows writing of "just uninspired, simple RocknRoll without any virtuoso performance".
A few years later with punk it all changed.
Woody coming in at the right time again.
Ask Charlie Watts what he thinks about your comment.Taylor was incredible on stage at Brussels.He wasn’t noodling.His playing off Keith perfectly.And on songs like Rambler and Street Fighting Man he helps contribute to performances of incredible energy ,passionand rhythm.And it is not a knock on Wood .I think his playing with the Stones at times has been great also,just differentQuote
straycatuk
I find it unlistenable due to Taylor's endless noodling.
sc uk
Quote
Taylor1Ask Charlie Watts what he thinks about your comment.Taylor was incredible on stage at Brussels.He wasn’t noodling.His playing off Keith perfectly.And on songs like Rambler and Street Fighting Man he helps contribute to performances of incredible energy ,passionand rhythm.And it is not a knock on Wood .I think his playing with the Stones at times has been great also,just differentQuote
straycatuk
I find it unlistenable due to Taylor's endless noodling.
sc uk
Quote
DandelionPowderman
What do you wanna hear when you hear Brown Sugar - «yeah, yeah, yeah, whooo», or a guitar that constantly does runs. Isolated, what he plays is great there, but he's not playing off Keith (or the band, for that matter)
Quote
DoxaQuote
Taylor1
I was just listening to Midnight Rambler from Brussels without the vocals to focus on the guitars and Taylor and particularly Keith are on fire.Anyone who says Keith wasn’t playing well on that tour should listen to Rambler .His playing including his solos are ferocious and perfectly rhythmic
I personally think that that particular performance of "Midnight Rambler" is Keith's biggest hour as a guitar player (not that he doesn't shine many other times in that number and others, but this Brussells one is an ultimate performance, THE peak moment, perfect by all means). His rhythm work is simply transcendental and touching levels no any guitar player ever has done. The band altogether is an incredible form, each doing about best they ever can, but to me Keith is the star of that performance. He makes everyone fly ('I shine when the band shines' - bloody hell Keith - you more than do that!)
- Doxa
I want to hear Taylor.That is not even true about his runs.His runs don’t slow down or speed up those songs.They perfectly help propel the music forward.By their counterpoint to Keith’s playing, they actually enhance Keith’s rhythmic playing and enhance the groove .If all you have is Keith’s chords on some of these songs the groove sounds unexciting..Try listening to All Down the Line or Street Fighting Man circa 1972 -1973 without Taylor’s guitar and tell me the “groove”is enhanced.Quote
Big AlQuote
DandelionPowderman
What do you wanna hear when you hear Brown Sugar - «yeah, yeah, yeah, whooo», or a guitar that constantly does runs. Isolated, what he plays is great there, but he's not playing off Keith (or the band, for that matter)
Well put; and I agree. Brown Sugar is all about the combined energy of the band. Taylor's a fabulous player and brought so much to a live-setting, but songs such as Brown Sugar and Tumbling Dice rely more on a groove.
Quote
DandelionPowdermanQuote
Taylor1Ask Charlie Watts what he thinks about your comment.Taylor was incredible on stage at Brussels.He wasn’t noodling.His playing off Keith perfectly.And on songs like Rambler and Street Fighting Man he helps contribute to performances of incredible energy ,passionand rhythm.And it is not a knock on Wood .I think his playing with the Stones at times has been great also,just differentQuote
straycatuk
I find it unlistenable due to Taylor's endless noodling.
sc uk
On songs like Brown Sugar, JJF and Happy that is simply not true.
What do you wanna hear when you hear Brown Sugar - «yeah, yeah, yeah, whooo», or a guitar that constantly does runs. Isolated, what he plays is great there, but he's not playing off Keith (or the band, for that matter)
Quote
DoxaQuote
DandelionPowdermanQuote
Taylor1Ask Charlie Watts what he thinks about your comment.Taylor was incredible on stage at Brussels.He wasn’t noodling.His playing off Keith perfectly.And on songs like Rambler and Street Fighting Man he helps contribute to performances of incredible energy ,passionand rhythm.And it is not a knock on Wood .I think his playing with the Stones at times has been great also,just differentQuote
straycatuk
I find it unlistenable due to Taylor's endless noodling.
sc uk
On songs like Brown Sugar, JJF and Happy that is simply not true.
What do you wanna hear when you hear Brown Sugar - «yeah, yeah, yeah, whooo», or a guitar that constantly does runs. Isolated, what he plays is great there, but he's not playing off Keith (or the band, for that matter)
If the case is a band being in such a form as The Rolling Stones in 1973 I gladly hear the both.
Actually I listened all those three songs you mentioned in BRUSSELS AFFAIR and, honestly, I really can't see or hear what is the problem there. First of all, Keith plays in each track like a monster, and the band breathes his riffs 110 percent, making such a groove no one knows. Probably I have never heard Keith sounding better or stronger than that. Keith doesn't need any help there: he leads the band and the songs with his determinate and powerful riffing. Then, secondly, we have Taylor icing the cake, adding there an exciting dimension of lyricism - and what is arrangementwise thrilling especially in "Brown Sugar" is how he starts to play more and more runs as the song starts to reach the climax. Just perfect - a good drama, a good story. (Actually in "Flash" Taylor almost downplays if compared to the crazy but genius counter stuff to the riff he does in LADIES AND GENTLEMEN version a year earlier). Taylor is like Brian in the old days: adding a different voice to MIck and Keith show which makes the outcome - at least to my ears - musically richer and more exciting.
So my humble question is: What actually is the problem here? That of not able to listen two different guitars at the same time doing incredible stuff, although varying by role and style? One cannot listen great lead and rhythm guitar work simultanously?
- Doxa
I know this is not related to this topic, Mathijs, but you seem to know more about music than meand most people here,, what is your opinion of Goddess in a Doorway. People hate it so much, but Ilike it and it seems Mick was trying to do something differentQuote
Mathijs
I think the original Brussels boots, with the London versions of Happy, Heartbreaker, Gimme Shelter and SFM, is really the best ever music the Stones ever recorded. I find Taylor's and Richards work just to be utterly incredible.
That said, the second Brussels show as officially released is less enjoyable due to the mix, but I still think a very good show. Other good shows are Birmingham, the Rotterdam shows, the London shows, Berlin.
It was really the middle part, with Munich and Essen etc, that are quite sloppy and uninspired, with slow tempo's, and Taylor indeed sounding bored and often sounding more like he's doing scale exercises than really properly giving his best.
Mathijs
Quote
Mathijs
I think the original Brussels boots, with the London versions of Happy, Heartbreaker, Gimme Shelter and SFM, is really the best ever music the Stones ever recorded. I find Taylor's and Richards work just to be utterly incredible.
That said, the second Brussels show as officially released is less enjoyable due to the mix, but I still think a very good show. Other good shows are Birmingham, the Rotterdam shows, the London shows, Berlin.
It was really the middle part, with Munich and Essen etc, that are quite sloppy and uninspired, with slow tempo's, and Taylor indeed sounding bored and often sounding more like he's doing scale exercises than really properly giving his best.
Mathijs
I think Taylor's best playing was with Dylan in 1984. With Dylan he used his guitar playing to show off the songs. When playing with the Rolling Stones in the 1970s he used the songs to show off his guitar playing. I love his playing on the 1969 tour, though.Quote
DandelionPowdermanQuote
Taylor1Ask Charlie Watts what he thinks about your comment.Taylor was incredible on stage at Brussels.He wasn’t noodling.His playing off Keith perfectly.And on songs like Rambler and Street Fighting Man he helps contribute to performances of incredible energy ,passionand rhythm.And it is not a knock on Wood .I think his playing with the Stones at times has been great also,just differentQuote
straycatuk
I find it unlistenable due to Taylor's endless noodling.
sc uk
On songs like Brown Sugar, JJF and Happy that is simply not true.
What do you wanna hear when you hear Brown Sugar - «yeah, yeah, yeah, whooo», or a guitar that constantly does runs. Isolated, what he plays is great there, but he's not playing off Keith (or the band, for that matter)
Quote
DandelionPowdermanQuote
DoxaQuote
DandelionPowdermanQuote
Taylor1Ask Charlie Watts what he thinks about your comment.Taylor was incredible on stage at Brussels.He wasn’t noodling.His playing off Keith perfectly.And on songs like Rambler and Street Fighting Man he helps contribute to performances of incredible energy ,passionand rhythm.And it is not a knock on Wood .I think his playing with the Stones at times has been great also,just differentQuote
straycatuk
I find it unlistenable due to Taylor's endless noodling.
sc uk
On songs like Brown Sugar, JJF and Happy that is simply not true.
What do you wanna hear when you hear Brown Sugar - «yeah, yeah, yeah, whooo», or a guitar that constantly does runs. Isolated, what he plays is great there, but he's not playing off Keith (or the band, for that matter)
If the case is a band being in such a form as The Rolling Stones in 1973 I gladly hear the both.
Actually I listened all those three songs you mentioned in BRUSSELS AFFAIR and, honestly, I really can't see or hear what is the problem there. First of all, Keith plays in each track like a monster, and the band breathes his riffs 110 percent, making such a groove no one knows. Probably I have never heard Keith sounding better or stronger than that. Keith doesn't need any help there: he leads the band and the songs with his determinate and powerful riffing. Then, secondly, we have Taylor icing the cake, adding there an exciting dimension of lyricism - and what is arrangementwise thrilling especially in "Brown Sugar" is how he starts to play more and more runs as the song starts to reach the climax. Just perfect - a good drama, a good story. (Actually in "Flash" Taylor almost downplays if compared to the crazy but genius counter stuff to the riff he does in LADIES AND GENTLEMEN version a year earlier). Taylor is like Brian in the old days: adding a different voice to MIck and Keith show which makes the outcome - at least to my ears - musically richer and more exciting.
So my humble question is: What actually is the problem here? That of not able to listen two different guitars at the same time doing incredible stuff, although varying by role and style? One cannot listen great lead and rhythm guitar work simultanously?
- Doxa
This is a matter of taste, of course.
However, for me, it goes back to what I was trying to emphasise on MR: The brilliant interplay between Taylor and Keith – where they are complementing each other, and adding something based on what the other guy is doing. They're making music together.
On the other examples I gave, one guy is trailblazing through parts, where there is vocals and a whole band-sound that I would have preferred shone through.
But that's me
Quote
Erik_SnowQuote
Taylor1
I was just listening to Midnight Rambler from Brussels without the vocals to focus on the guitars and Taylor and particularly Keith are on fire.Anyone who says Keith wasn’t playing well on that tour should listen to Rambler .His playing including his solos are ferocious and perfectly rhythmic
Of course he's perfect at Brussels, but the thing is that there times that he was so wasted that it spoiled everything, especially in Switzerland. I always feel so bad for Mick when listening to the 2 first Swiss shows.
Quote
DoxaQuote
Erik_SnowQuote
Big AlQuote
Captain TeagueQuote
straycatuk
I find it unlistenable due to Taylor's endless noodling.
sc uk
No one seems to have 'bitten' on this comment!
Yet, i 'get' the point. Taylor really did overplay at times. Many, here, evidently really enjoy the noodling, but it detracts from the raucousness of Keith's rhythm-work a little. I suppose there is an occasional sense of overkill on Taylor's part. I, personally, prefer his performances from what I've heard of the '69 U.S.A. tour; Ya-Ya's and Louder Than You'll Ever Be.
To each own, but I love Taylor's "noodling", he's the brilliant guitarplayer I know, after Hendrix and Clapton. But I see that can go over the line like in Frankfurt 1973, for some.
To each own indeed, but I neither ever have had problems with so called "noodling" by Taylor. I think what he does fits perfectly to the over-all sound of the Stones at the time. The whole European tour 1973 was such a guitar fiesta the Stones ever have had, both Taylor and Keith just doing what they do best: Keith mastering the riff and rhythm section the way only he can do, while Taylor taking care of the laed guitar duties, and playing like a star pupil of that British 'guitar god' class he is, mostly whole gas on, with no use for brakes. Surely there were some off nights (especially in the case of Keith), but I over-all think that the way those two guys interact, that's the outcome of the experience having played some years together, both sticking to what they know best, and trusting 100% each other.
To me the idea of Taylor with his supposed 'over-playing' somehow prevents Keith's guitar to distinguish enough or something like that, sounds odd. I never have thought the Stones should emphasize somehow some singular instrument by the cost of the others. Or that all these Joneses, Taylors and Woods should be downplay in order to the the art of Keith's guitar to shine clear and distinct. No, I think the Stones, if anything, are a band of team-play, all the contributors making such a funny noise together, in which the sum is more than its parts. I think the balance between the guitarists was perfect in 1973 - Keith and Taylor are supporting each other - and more important: the over-all sound of the band. Especially when I listen to the magnificiant Brussels version of "Midnight Rambler" - the peak of anything - I find it just thrilling, even mind-blowing to 'follow' what the hell happens in the guitar section. Both having a crucial role in making the over-all impression. The interplay between the two powerful guitarists is just so breath-taking.
- Doxa