Quote
jbwelda
Nick Kent was an idiot with horrible musical taste.

IMO of course

jb

. Okay,Nick Kent is an idiot and had horrible taste in music so therefore the Stones sucked live in London 1973.Bill Wyman did say that there was no band as good as the Stones live in 1972-1973



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2021-03-30 19:44 by Taylor1.

You as usual make a giant leap of logic there Taylor. That was not the intention of what I wrote at all. But as we saw with a certain former prez, even a broken clock gets it right twice a day, and that's a good parallel with Mr Kent.

jb

Quote
jbwelda
Nick Kent was an idiot with horrible musical taste.

IMO of course.

jb

Well that's interesting.

He was a HUGE stones fan.

He had his own band.

And Keith really liked and respected him.

They spent time together.

Next?

Quote
Four Stone Walls

Quote
jbwelda
Nick Kent was an idiot with horrible musical taste.

IMO of course.

jb

Well that's interesting.

He was a HUGE stones fan.

He had his own band.

And Keith really liked and respected him.

They spent time together.

Next?

Kent claimed that Keith used capos on his guitars because he was too stoned to play without them.

It doesn't reek of profound knowledge there...

That was the first time I ever saw them so it is magical to me. On about the 10th row, the stage opening up like a lotus blossom, Mick swinging out on a rope over our heads. I was 21 years old and had been a fan since 1969. I couldn’t believe I was actually seeing them live. Still my favorite Stones show. Maybe not the best-played but to me the most memorable of all eleven times I’ve seen them since. Tickets were $10.
Went to see Nicky Hopkins play at a club afterwards.

I'm not a '75 aficionado, but I've always appreciated this tour and find it fascinating. I like LA Friday and the Boulder Show. It was funky and had a fun, party atmosphere. Billy Preston's spot helped create this. I like Mick's weird singing style on this tour, it was what he was feeling at the time and he just went with it.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2021-03-31 00:26 by ryanpow.

Quote
jbwelda
You as usual make a giant leap of logic there Taylor. That was not the intention of what I wrote at all. But as we saw with a certain former prez, even a broken clock gets it right twice a day, and that's a good parallel with Mr Kent.

jb

Please no politics, especially about thepresent occupant of the White House,especially since I assume you don't live here so wouldn't know what's going on

You okay jb .... ya seem ta be
a little bitter and twisted lately .....

Skull a beer and play Desperate Man LOUD .... that groove ya soul



ROCKMAN

Quote
jbwelda
You as usual make a giant leap of logic there Taylor. That was not the intention of what I wrote at all. But as we saw with a certain former prez, even a broken clock gets it right twice a day, and that's a good parallel with Mr Kent.

jb

You freaking people are obsessed. You "won". Give it a rest, PLEASE!

Quote
Taylor1

Quote
jbwelda
You as usual make a giant leap of logic there Taylor. That was not the intention of what I wrote at all. But as we saw with a certain former prez, even a broken clock gets it right twice a day, and that's a good parallel with Mr Kent.

jb

Please no p*******, especially about thepresent occupant of the White House,especially since I assume you don't live here so wouldn't know what's going on

Of course, you assume wrong. But, like the clock...



thanks though

jb

Quote
DandelionPowderman

Quote
Four Stone Walls

Quote
jbwelda
Nick Kent was an idiot with horrible musical taste.

IMO of course.

jb

Well that's interesting.

He was a HUGE stones fan.

He had his own band.

And Keith really liked and respected him.

They spent time together.

Next?

Kent claimed that Keith used capos on his guitars because he was too stoned to play without them.

It doesn't reek of profound knowledge there...

Yes he did claim something like that. He watched the show.

Those two hung out together. Kent was a guitarist as well as being a top journalist at The New Musical Express. Hugely respected.

I think he said that Keith had guitars ready for each song, or series of songs, which were handed to him as required.

Allowed the show to continue with minimum paise for thought.
For those shows were a musical tour de force moving almost seemlessly from one song to the next. Minimum intersong banter. Maximum momentum and build up.
From after Rambler the place was erupting - every one out of their seats and full-on grooving and moving to the end of Street Fighting Man.

Jagger introduced Rambler by saying, ' Have those geezers told you to sit down? Have you been told to sit down? ..... Ahhh, well I suggest you don't worries about it! ' And Keith immediately lurched into the opening chprds'

Sept 8th Second Show.


Understandably, anybody seeing the Stones live for the first time in '75, that would be pretty special too.

He was fired from NME. He was a heavy street junkie for years. Squandered what talent he had. I was appalled reading his autobio.

Just for reference, I thought Lester Bangs was a genius, and he was similar in style to Kent, actually the other way round because Kent worshipped the ground Bangs walked on.

This impression was from the time when this was current, not revised history. I followed Nick Kent's writings some but mostly thought he was off target most of the time. Did not know he was slipping into heroin.


And yeah Rockman, am feeling fine, the fanboy vibes get to me sometimes.

jb

The whole point of this thread is the discussion about the changing feel and performance of the '75 tour as it evolved from one of energy and excitement to lazy and sloppy. I would love for everyone to go listen to It's Only Rock and Roll and Fingerprint file on LYL both from June 17th in Toronto then listen to them on the LA Friday Vault release and see what the hell happened. Lots of great points have been made regarding this. It's incredibly disappointing to me. Such a promising start to a tour that really flamed out in the end. I blame Mick almost entirely for what I think is a substandard bunch of performances. Some are better than others over the course of the later part of the tour but overall he is the real problem. I think Keith was probably too drugged out to kick his ass and tell him to do better like he did with Ron Wood in '81 for doing crack on tour.

There has to be a point? Oh, sh*t.

Quote
DandelionPowderman

Quote
Four Stone Walls

Quote
jbwelda
Nick Kent was an idiot with horrible musical taste.

IMO of course.

jb

Well that's interesting.

He was a HUGE stones fan.

He had his own band.

And Keith really liked and respected him.

They spent time together.

Next?

Kent claimed that Keith used capos on his guitars because he was too stoned to play without them.

It doesn't reek of profound knowledge there...

Yeah that’s strange. Maybe he meant he kept different guitars with capos because he was too stoned to tune. Which was true during the Marquee show...unfortunately.

Quote
ryanpow
There has to be a point? Oh, sh*t.

Not really. Just a question!!!

I saw the Stones two nights in 69 at MSG, they were great, they had not toured the USA for a few years Mick Taylor was new and refreshing, probably at their best music wise, saw them in 72 also at MSG on Mick's birthday they were good but not great imo, they were playing pretty fast, like let's get this show over so we can "party". In 75 l saw all six shows also at MSG, their best stage the Lotus the opening number HTW was amazing,the rest of the shows were good but not to the level of the 69 shows, and l have to agree Mick and Billy bumping their asses on Preston's numbers were pretty lame,same for ollie's playing it took away from the essence of the band. My two cents...

"No dope smoking no beer sold after 12 o'clock"

Quote
ROPENI
I saw the Stones two nights in 69 at MSG, they were great, they had not toured the USA for a few years Mick Taylor was new and refreshing, probably at their best music wise, saw them in 72 also at MSG on Mick's birthday they were good but not great imo, they were playing pretty fast, like let's get this show over so we can "party". In 75 l saw all six shows also at MSG, their best stage the Lotus the opening number HTW was amazing,the rest of the shows were good but not to the level of the 69 shows, and l have to agree Mick and Billy bumping their asses on Preston's numbers were pretty lame,same for ollie's playing it took away from the essence of the band. My two cents...

Lot more than two cents!
Some epic shows.. were you around for the flatbed announcement?

Quote
MisterDDDD

Quote
ROPENI
I saw the Stones two nights in 69 at MSG, they were great, they had not toured the USA for a few years Mick Taylor was new and refreshing, probably at their best music wise, saw them in 72 also at MSG on Mick's birthday they were good but not great imo, they were playing pretty fast, like let's get this show over so we can "party". In 75 l saw all six shows also at MSG, their best stage the Lotus the opening number HTW was amazing,the rest of the shows were good but not to the level of the 69 shows, and l have to agree Mick and Billy bumping their asses on Preston's numbers were pretty lame,same for ollie's playing it took away from the essence of the band. My two cents...

Lot more than two cents!
Some epic shows.. were you around for the flatbed announcement?

No,l was not,when l heard it on WNEW,tried to get there but they were gone...

"No dope smoking no beer sold after 12 o'clock"

Quote
TravelinMan

Quote
dcba

Quote
Four Stone Walls


In '75 he was still largely playing like a Faces guitarist and he hadn't started to blend instinctively with Keith, in a way that MT did immediately in '69.

In 73 what jumps at you is the blending between Keef and MT is gone. Each man plays his part it's very cut and dried at times quite boring. Take "Gimme shelter" you know when MT's going to play his solo, what he's going to play when he's going to end and hand the torch back to Keef.
There's no interplay, it's like a stage play with 2 actors delivering their lines for the uptenth time. At least one of them (Keef naturally) tries to inject a bit of freshness into the whole thing.

Don't get me there but I think MT's departure was a good thing for the band. Otherwise the 75 tour would have a 1973 tour part two. A painfully cut-and-dried musical output (Keef on basic chords, MT on leads) and a 20-minute version of "Time Waits..." where MT soloes ad-lib while Jagger prances onstage.

God no!

But ‘75 was ‘73 part two, just with a stand-in instead of a lead actor. Wood didn’t have any time to develop new stuff and it’s obvious he listened to Taylor’s parts for influence. But he’s not a Taylor-type player. He would have never made it in the Bluesbreakers. And that’s FINE. There are still some great musical moments on the tour but to say it is vastly different from ‘73 just isn’t correct.

Like I said before, the Ron Wood era became unique with the Some Girls tour when they stripped everything back and started over.

Perhaps the criticism of Ronnie is a tad bit much regarding 1975/76. As much as it may seem that there was plenty of time, consider that they finished IORR, Taylor quit, then they recorded BLACK AND BLUE and had already planned a tour... and Ronnie was still dealing with The Faces.

One could read what Ronnie said about joining that tour and get a really good idea of what HE was dealing with regarding the past with being present:

I remember learning 150 of their repertoire (laughs). I gave up trying to remember which key each one was in or the chord sequence to a lot of them. I did a lot of it by feel in the end, you know. Had to, it's impossible to log all of those songs.

It was intense - to get hit with all of those Mick Taylor lines, to echo what Brian had done, then to add my own bluesy input to it all.

Even Mick had a good idea of what was going on regarding the lunacy of it all:

I wanted someone that was easy to get on with, you know, that wasn't too difficult and that was a good player and was used to playing onstage. It's quite a lot to ask of someone to come and do a big American tour with a band like the Stones, you know? I mean, not that I think the Stones are any really big deal, but it tends to be a bit of a paralyzing experience for people. You know what I mean? And I wanted someone that wasn't going to be phased out.

He can sing... a little. He'll probably say a lot about that! He can sing. He's starting to get it togehter... Onstage he's got a lot of style. And it's gotta be fun on the road. That's what it's all about, isn't it?

[timeisonourside.com]

I loved the six 1976 tour dates I saw. I know they get bad press for being sloppy in comparison to the 1972/73 shows but sloppy Stones is still a whole lot better than most bands.

To be honest...i really do like the 1975 Gimme Shelter from this tour...even though I could be categorized as a "taylorite"...

Quote
DandelionPowderman

Quote
Four Stone Walls

Quote
jbwelda
Nick Kent was an idiot with horrible musical taste.

IMO of course.

jb

Well that's interesting.

He was a HUGE stones fan.

He had his own band.

And Keith really liked and respected him.

They spent time together.

Next?

Kent claimed that Keith used capos on his guitars because he was too stoned to play without them.

It doesn't reek of profound knowledge there...

I am with you on this as this guy is now officaly an idiot for the Capo remark .

Quote
GasLightStreet

Quote
TravelinMan

Quote
dcba

Quote
Four Stone Walls


In '75 he was still largely playing like a Faces guitarist and he hadn't started to blend instinctively with Keith, in a way that MT did immediately in '69.

In 73 what jumps at you is the blending between Keef and MT is gone. Each man plays his part it's very cut and dried at times quite boring. Take "Gimme shelter" you know when MT's going to play his solo, what he's going to play when he's going to end and hand the torch back to Keef.
There's no interplay, it's like a stage play with 2 actors delivering their lines for the uptenth time. At least one of them (Keef naturally) tries to inject a bit of freshness into the whole thing.

Don't get me there but I think MT's departure was a good thing for the band. Otherwise the 75 tour would have a 1973 tour part two. A painfully cut-and-dried musical output (Keef on basic chords, MT on leads) and a 20-minute version of "Time Waits..." where MT soloes ad-lib while Jagger prances onstage.

God no!

But ‘75 was ‘73 part two, just with a stand-in instead of a lead actor. Wood didn’t have any time to develop new stuff and it’s obvious he listened to Taylor’s parts for influence. But he’s not a Taylor-type player. He would have never made it in the Bluesbreakers. And that’s FINE. There are still some great musical moments on the tour but to say it is vastly different from ‘73 just isn’t correct.

Like I said before, the Ron Wood era became unique with the Some Girls tour when they stripped everything back and started over.

Perhaps the criticism of Ronnie is a tad bit much regarding 1975/76. As much as it may seem that there was plenty of time, consider that they finished IORR, Taylor quit, then they recorded BLACK AND BLUE and had already planned a tour... and Ronnie was still dealing with The Faces.

One could read what Ronnie said about joining that tour and get a really good idea of what HE was dealing with regarding the past with being present:

I remember learning 150 of their repertoire (laughs). I gave up trying to remember which key each one was in or the chord sequence to a lot of them. I did a lot of it by feel in the end, you know. Had to, it's impossible to log all of those songs.

It was intense - to get hit with all of those Mick Taylor lines, to echo what Brian had done, then to add my own bluesy input to it all.

Even Mick had a good idea of what was going on regarding the lunacy of it all:

I wanted someone that was easy to get on with, you know, that wasn't too difficult and that was a good player and was used to playing onstage. It's quite a lot to ask of someone to come and do a big American tour with a band like the Stones, you know? I mean, not that I think the Stones are any really big deal, but it tends to be a bit of a paralyzing experience for people. You know what I mean? And I wanted someone that wasn't going to be phased out.

He can sing... a little. He'll probably say a lot about that! He can sing. He's starting to get it togehter... Onstage he's got a lot of style. And it's gotta be fun on the road. That's what it's all about, isn't it?

[timeisonourside.com]

That's a very good quote from Mick and very studious . Outstanding observation from Mick !

Quote
dcba

I agree. Imho in 75 the band (or Mick?) made one mistake : thinking they had to compensate for the loss of MT by playing much longer gigs.That led to gigs that sometimes lacked some energy (the punishing tour schedule didn't help...).

2Hrs top was more than enough for me. Leave the silly live marathons to Yes or Led Balloon.

They were just following the trend of the mid-70's -everybody was playing much longer than before. Zep was playing 4 hour shows, with half hour drum solo's and half hour Theremin bullshit...

The music industry simply became much more an entertainment industry instead of the art form it was before. People paid more for tickets, and expected to be entertained and get value. They started selling popcorn and soda in the isles of the 1975 shows!

Mathijs



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2021-03-31 15:09 by Mathijs.

Quote
Mathijs

Quote
dcba

I agree. Imho in 75 the band (or Mick?) made one mistake : thinking they had to compensate for the loss of MT by playing much longer gigs.That led to gigs that sometimes lacked some energy (the punishing tour schedule didn't help...).

2Hrs top was more than enough for me. Leave the silly live marathons to Yes or Led Balloon.

They were just following the trend of the mid-70's -everybody was playing much longer than before. Zep was playing 4 hour shows, with half hour drum solo's and half hour Theremin bullshit...

The music industry simply became much more an entertainment industry instead of the art form it was before. People paid more for tickets, and expected to be entertained and get value. They started selling popcorn and soda in the isles of the 1975 shows!

Mathijs

Mathijs

Same for 1973 Euro tour..
Taylor "overplaying" complaints by us grumpy old pricks were just the times back in 73

Yes, Taylor did become boring.

This idea that Taylor overplayed on the 1973 tour is nonsense.It was superb.And where is the evidence they were playing longer shows in 1975 to compensate for Taylor.If anything Jagger over sings and overgrunts on record and in concert in 1973

Quote
GasLightStreet

Quote
TravelinMan

Quote
dcba

Quote
Four Stone Walls


In '75 he was still largely playing like a Faces guitarist and he hadn't started to blend instinctively with Keith, in a way that MT did immediately in '69.

In 73 what jumps at you is the blending between Keef and MT is gone. Each man plays his part it's very cut and dried at times quite boring. Take "Gimme shelter" you know when MT's going to play his solo, what he's going to play when he's going to end and hand the torch back to Keef.
There's no interplay, it's like a stage play with 2 actors delivering their lines for the uptenth time. At least one of them (Keef naturally) tries to inject a bit of freshness into the whole thing.

Don't get me there but I think MT's departure was a good thing for the band. Otherwise the 75 tour would have a 1973 tour part two. A painfully cut-and-dried musical output (Keef on basic chords, MT on leads) and a 20-minute version of "Time Waits..." where MT soloes ad-lib while Jagger prances onstage.

God no!

But ‘75 was ‘73 part two, just with a stand-in instead of a lead actor. Wood didn’t have any time to develop new stuff and it’s obvious he listened to Taylor’s parts for influence. But he’s not a Taylor-type player. He would have never made it in the Bluesbreakers. And that’s FINE. There are still some great musical moments on the tour but to say it is vastly different from ‘73 just isn’t correct.

Like I said before, the Ron Wood era became unique with the Some Girls tour when they stripped everything back and started over.

Perhaps the criticism of Ronnie is a tad bit much regarding 1975/76. As much as it may seem that there was plenty of time, consider that they finished IORR, Taylor quit, then they recorded BLACK AND BLUE and had already planned a tour... and Ronnie was still dealing with The Faces.

One could read what Ronnie said about joining that tour and get a really good idea of what HE was dealing with regarding the past with being present:

I remember learning 150 of their repertoire (laughs). I gave up trying to remember which key each one was in or the chord sequence to a lot of them. I did a lot of it by feel in the end, you know. Had to, it's impossible to log all of those songs.

It was intense - to get hit with all of those Mick Taylor lines, to echo what Brian had done, then to add my own bluesy input to it all.

Even Mick had a good idea of what was going on regarding the lunacy of it all:

I wanted someone that was easy to get on with, you know, that wasn't too difficult and that was a good player and was used to playing onstage. It's quite a lot to ask of someone to come and do a big American tour with a band like the Stones, you know? I mean, not that I think the Stones are any really big deal, but it tends to be a bit of a paralyzing experience for people. You know what I mean? And I wanted someone that wasn't going to be phased out.

He can sing... a little. He'll probably say a lot about that! He can sing. He's starting to get it togehter... Onstage he's got a lot of style. And it's gotta be fun on the road. That's what it's all about, isn't it?

[timeisonourside.com]

I wasn’t criticizing him, I was cutting him some slack. He didn’t have a lot of time. I just want to know why they didn’t play the other 120 or so songs he claimed to learn!

Quote
bobo
Yes, Taylor did become bored.

Fixed it for you!