I'll probably get a lot of hell for this but sometimes Taylor's leads just don't seem to "fit" with the Stones sound...its kind of hard to explain. Don't get me wrong, his leads on Midnight Rambler and YCAGWYW are just about the greatest thing ever, but on other tunes--Gimme Shelter--the leads just seem a bit obtrusive...i'm still developing this thought, so work with me here....

i know what you are saying - but yes, a lot will disagree here..
maybe his sound at times is too melodic?.. it his unique style and he is a fantastic musician.
But i like woody better IMHO..

Dog

Yeah sometimes, I think Kent posted something a little while ago, to the effect that after listening to Brussels for a while he wanted to shout shut the fu&k up to Taylor!

I much prefer Keith's raw, chunky rythym on the boot any way.

yeah, there are certainly people who find the Europe 73 shows somewhat marred by overplaying.
one theory is that Mick T was getting audibly bored; and/or that the combination of Taylor & Preston was just too frilly
(either way, that's why i generally prefer the Australasia 73 shows)

On a lot of boots it's not what he plays that doesn't fit...it's the equalisation of his sound in the recording or his often being too high in the mix that causes the problems. As a result, the two guitar sounds ended up not complimenting each other or meshing as well as they should on a lot of old boots.
A lot of weird shit happens with boots. Folks don't think recordings can lie...but they certainly can !

Spud Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> On a lot of boots it's not what he plays that
> doesn't fit...it's the equalisation of his sound
> in the recording or his often being too high in
> the mix that causes the problems. As a result, the
> two guitar sounds ended up not complimenting each
> other or meshing as well as they should on a lot
> of old boots.
> A lot of weird shit happens with boots. Folks
> don't think recordings can lie...but they
> certainly can !


you have a good point - one that also leads me to say, i would have loved tho to have seen him live with the stones. Cos there nothing like being at the live show and a SB boot wouldnt compare...
yes, these sorts of things, - mixes certainly do matter..

Dog

On several '73 shows Taylor's soloing can be either over the top, or come across as bored noodling. In my opinion this is mainly due to the fact that he always seemed to be much louder than keith in the mix, and on several shows keith just sounds out of tune and a bit out of it.

But when a show was good, and the mix was good, I still think they were the best band ever. I find the Brussels concert on VGP's Europe '73 simply the best ever concert given by any band. Manchester, Berlin, London 8/9 first are also brilliant as well. It's the german shows in the middle of the tour that simply aren't that good IMO.

Mathijs

Absolutely no.

That was how they made music at the time. It all was well rehearsed. Of course everybody improvised, but the overall sound - the solid rythm vs. melodic lead scheme - was absolutely intentional. And also great, in its own way.

This cannot be a Taylor vs. Wood thread. I am damn sure that if Taylor had not quit, we would have had all the same something very similar to Some Girls.

That's the stones. A group that DID evolve (or involve, if you want).

Back to the 73 gigs, the obvious idea was that to empathise the melodical aspect of the songs with TAylor's leads. I like the idea. It fit those songs. Not something you could do with whip or respectable ...

C

liddas Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
>
> This cannot be a Taylor vs. Wood thread. I am damn
> sure that if Taylor had not quit, we would have
> had all the same something very similar to Some
> Girls.
>

I don't think so, I just can't picture the Stones playing the some girl songs with Taylor, its just not his style, maybe Far away eyes and just my imagination

it was a time when the Stones were more open too experimenting with their sound - after all, who could have expected Goats Head?
i feel that with IORR however, they set the wheels in motion for Taylor's departure - he wanted to experiment, Jagger and Richards wanted that raw rock n roll (im not saying one way is a better choice)
thus, a guy like Ron Wood was better for their sound

that said, the Taylor era is still ultimately my favourite (because i like melody, improvisation, which obviously means im a bore and dont "get" the Stones) and the live stuff really is incredible - i listened to SFM from the second disc of the "Ultimate" Brussels collection (the one without the bum notes at the end) and my God if you listen carefully enough to Taylor's soloing at the end - phew, he really was a guitar hero along the lines of Page and Clapton (not forgetting Keith's hacksaw rhythm though) - it still blows me away every time!
and don't even mention THAT version of Gimme Shelter - some of his bends and flurries send shivers up my spine!

Ket Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
>
> I don't think so, I just can't picture the Stones
> playing the some girl songs with Taylor, its just
> not his style, maybe Far away eyes and just my
> imagination

Why not?

Most of the songs came from Jagger anyway.

C

Well, does that make them more melodic?

JMoisica Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I'll probably get a lot of hell for this but
> sometimes Taylor's leads just don't seem to "fit"
> with the Stones sound...its kind of hard to
> explain. Don't get me wrong, his leads on
> Midnight Rambler and YCAGWYW are just about the
> greatest thing ever, but on other tunes--Gimme
> Shelter--the leads just seem a bit obtrusive...i'm
> still developing this thought, so work with me
> here....


But you are totally right. He has a sologuitarist - not at all into weaving. He wanted to show us all he could do with a guitar. Therefore that period is not the Stones' best live period. In studios, however, they managed to turn a little of his guitarwanking down. Sounded much better when he had someone holding his ears a little. Anyway - I'm very happy with the Keith and Ronnie-work. Both on stage and in the studio.

The 69-tour brought out the best of Taylor and the band IMO. Then his leads were shorter, and they switched more. SFTD on Ya Ya's is a good example.

gstone Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

> But you are totally right. He has a sologuitarist
> - not at all into weaving. He wanted to show us
> all he could do with a guitar. Therefore that
> period is not the Stones' best live period. In
> studios, however, they managed to turn a little of
> his guitarwanking down. Sounded much better when
> he had someone holding his ears a little. Anyway -
> I'm very happy with the Keith and Ronnie-work.
> Both on stage and in the studio.

You are totally wrong to say Mick Taylor was not into weaving. Listen to Bye Bye from the 72 tour, just about every Rambler, Bitch . . . the list goes on. He plays some of the greatest rhythm in the Stones catalgo. Who are you to say what he wanted to "show us"? "Guitarwanking"? Pffth!

He tries to play some rhythm on Brussels, but eg in Tumbling Dice it seems completely out of place to me. But yeah, maybe a bit lower in the mix it would have worked.

casinoboogie Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> it was a time when the Stones were more open too
> experimenting with their sound - after all, who
> could have expected Goats Head?
> i feel that with IORR however, they set the wheels
> in motion for Taylor's departure - he wanted to
> experiment, Jagger and Richards wanted that raw
> rock n roll (im not saying one way is a better
> choice)
> thus, a guy like Ron Wood was better for their
> sound
>
> that said, the Taylor era is still ultimately my
> favourite (because i like melody, improvisation,
> which obviously means im a bore and dont "get" the
> Stones) and the live stuff really is incredible -
> i listened to SFM from the second disc of the
> "Ultimate" Brussels collection (the one without
> the bum notes at the end) and my God if you listen
> carefully enough to Taylor's soloing at the end -
> phew, he really was a guitar hero along the lines
> of Page and Clapton (not forgetting Keith's
> hacksaw rhythm though) - it still blows me away
> every time!
> and don't even mention THAT version of Gimme
> Shelter - some of his bends and flurries send
> shivers up my spine!


I agree THAT version of Gimme Shelter is the best ever!

lol nanker phelge (its so good, its unmentionable)

i always thought Taylor was a fantastic rhythm guitarist too... any part of MR from Ya-Ya's, Live With Me, Bitch...the counterpoint during the verses of the live Gimme Shelter's...etc etc

Woody's just a Stone forever. And, he's so great. Ronnie, we love you !!! You're not for beginners.

Are you cr...cr...crazyyyyyy, the best Stones sound ever

__________________________

I agree that in places he was OTT and it becomes tiresome. Of particular note here is the unrelenting noodling on Street Fighting Man on Brussels Affair.

For this reason, I prefer the 72 boots where I think you here the band at the height of it's technical ability. OK so the 73 tour was a killer too, and some songs were certainly done better than ever, but overall I think the 72 tour was better balanced. Gimme Shelter is another example of where there is a fine line between genius and guitar graffiti. Some parts of the song make you woner if you will ever be able to play guitar like that, wheras in other parts you wish he'd learn a bit more decorum and turn it down for a bit.

Obvious exceptions - Angie solo by MT, wow!

MT was and is a guitar genius but as you rightly point out, he maybe had a bit to learn about the overall sound rather than only worrying about his own part.

sjs12 Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Of particular note here is the
> unrelenting noodling on Street Fighting Man on
> Brussels Affair.
>
> MT was and is a guitar genius but as you rightly
> point out, he maybe had a bit to learn about the
> overall sound rather than only worrying about his
> own part.

That's exactly what I'd say regarding these matters too.

Never. They are great. But it was good that he left and it would have been great if Ronnie could have played like he deos on LYL and some of the demos, boots and studiosongs in the 70s. Ronnie was good and even great sometimes.

And Ron is better now than he ever was. Thats my 50c.

Do Taylor's leads get annoying?

Yes.

Annoying? No. Especially not as annoying of wondering who is playing what guitar part as we do today. Is it Ron? Keith? Blondie?

Taylor's leads in '73 are a bit over-the-top and more melodic than the Stones would ever be again. I always thought of Taylor as simply carrying on the Brian Jones melodic tradition, which really manifested itself nicely on "Aftermath"

And IMHO, that's a good thing.

I think it is an understatement that I've grown tired of the tedious sound Keith and Ronnie developed for the last 30 years. Occasionally Ronnie would play some spectacular slide, or Keith would crank out some cool Chuck Berry licks, but 30 years of listening to droning stuff like "Respectable" and "Shattered" and their decidedly lesser cousin songs has made me yearn for something, anything, that reminded me of the Jones or Taylor versions of the band.

I love this band and love much of what they did after Mr. Taylor's departure, but I rank 1969-1973 as their most consistently excellent live era. The 1978 tour is close, but MSG 69, Leeds 71, Fort Worth 72, and Brussels 73 are a steady part of my diet. Annoying? No, that would be listening to actual soundboards from 75-76 before they removed Billy Preston's lightning effects on "Brown Sugar."

NICOS Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Are you cr...cr...crazyyyyyy, the best Stones
> sound ever

I second that

"on other tunes--Gimme Shelter--the leads just seem a bit obtrusive...i'm still developing this thought, so work with me here...."


Dear JMoisica - Taylor's work on GS London Sept. 9, 1973 is simply the best piece of rock I know! Happy listening!