liddas...totally agree...i also love it when he bends the notes and adds the vibrato onto that...sounds just beautiful man, really sends shivers through me

on the Gimme Shelter from the Brussels disc *london show* i love how he does the trilling then launches into that mega solo

even one of my friends, who is heavily into all that EMO, post-punky stuff admitted when i was listening to it "jesus..thats some monster soloing, who the hell is that?!"..first he couldnt believe it was the Stones and second he couldnt believe he had never heard of Taylor

just goes to show that with a little effort, you can open people up to his guitar playing pretty easily!

It's just sad that nothing of any consequence came along as a vehicle for MT's huge talent after he left the band.

Spud Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> It's just sad that nothing of any consequence came
> along as a vehicle for MT's huge talent after he
> left the band.


As I said many times, Keith was MT's best vehicle. I am sure that MT himself did not realise it. Keith's playing is very strong. He feels the beat his own way, and allows his fellow guitarist a very precise place to play his notes.

Did you ever notice how sharp and aggressive MT's solos were during the Stones era? It all comes from his timing, which very much depended on Keith rhythm. MT's palying back then was like as if he was surfing the huge wave of sound created by Keith / Bill / and CW.

Once he left the stones, MT's playng became more "relaxed" (always in terms of tempo). As I see it he could have given much more, but needed someone to kick his arse to do so.

A great example of this are his versions of Red House. Jimi was a genious, his sense of time was huge. Well, Jimi's versions are sharp. MT's chops are there but his versions are flat.

No wonder he ended up playing what he does now. Good music, sometimes great, he still swings, but he somehow lost the rock

C

liddas Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Spud Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > It's just sad that nothing of any consequence
> came
> > along as a vehicle for MT's huge talent after
> he
> > left the band.
>
>
> As I said many times, Keith was MT's best vehicle.
> I am sure that MT himself did not realise it.

Dito Keith. He complained about Taylor playing too loud and didnt really want Taylor in the band it seems. I dunno but that seems pretty obvious.



> Keith's playing is very strong. He feels the beat
> his own way, and allows his fellow guitarist a
> very precise place to play his notes.
>
> Did you ever notice how sharp and aggressive MT's
> solos were during the Stones era? It all comes
> from his timing, which very much depended on Keith
> rhythm. MT's palying back then was like as if he
> was surfing the huge wave of sound created by
> Keith / Bill / and CW.
>
> Once he left the stones, MT's playng became more
> "relaxed" (always in terms of tempo). As I see it
> he could have given much more, but needed someone
> to kick his arse to do so.
>
> A great example of this are his versions of Red
> House. Jimi was a genious, his sense of time was
> huge. Well, Jimi's versions are sharp. MT's chops
> are there but his versions are flat.
>
> No wonder he ended up playing what he does now.
> Good music, sometimes great, he still swings, but
> he somehow lost the rock
>
> C

yeah, he was an aggressive SOAB soloist back then wasn't he?

did anyone get the chance to listen to Billy Preston's European Tour 73 c.d?
i'd really like to know what MT's playing is like on there..by all accounts he was playing with fury??

liddas Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Spud Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > It's just sad that nothing of any consequence
> came
> > along as a vehicle for MT's huge talent after
> he
> > left the band.
>
>
> As I said many times, Keith was MT's best vehicle.
> I am sure that MT himself did not realise it.
> Keith's playing is very strong. He feels the beat
> his own way, and allows his fellow guitarist a
> very precise place to play his notes.
>
> Did you ever notice how sharp and aggressive MT's
> solos were during the Stones era? It all comes
> from his timing, which very much depended on Keith
> rhythm. MT's palying back then was like as if he
> was surfing the huge wave of sound created by
> Keith / Bill / and CW.
>
> Once he left the stones, MT's playng became more
> "relaxed" (always in terms of tempo). As I see it
> he could have given much more, but needed someone
> to kick his arse to do so.
>
> A great example of this are his versions of Red
> House. Jimi was a genious, his sense of time was
> huge. Well, Jimi's versions are sharp. MT's chops
> are there but his versions are flat.
>
> No wonder he ended up playing what he does now.
> Good music, sometimes great, he still swings, but
> he somehow lost the rock
>
> C


ok, but i will always maintain that MT's Sway solo on the Roxy 1990 outing with Mac and Carla was his BEST ever....by a fair margin. goosebumps on the goosebumps....

StonesTod Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> ok, but i will always maintain that MT's Sway solo
> on the Roxy 1990 outing with Mac and Carla was his
> BEST ever....by a fair margin. goosebumps on the
> goosebumps....


i forgot about THAT solo! it is sweet as! some really impressive fretwork...and that slide guitar tone is so thick, you could cut it with a knife...

casinoboogie Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> StonesTod Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > ok, but i will always maintain that MT's Sway
> solo
> > on the Roxy 1990 outing with Mac and Carla was
> his
> > BEST ever....by a fair margin. goosebumps on
> the
> > goosebumps....
>
>
> i forgot about THAT solo! it is sweet as! some
> really impressive fretwork...and that slide guitar
> tone is so thick, you could cut it with a knife...

yup. as my buddy still calls it - "MT's revenge on the stones." Ronnie can only dream....

A young guy that wanted to show us...annoying..of course....

2 1 2 0

How on earth do the stones ever manage without Mick Taylor?

Come On Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> A young guy that wanted to show us...

just like Elvis is 56, Stones in 63, Hendrix in 66, Angus Young in 74, among others



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2007-09-06 18:57 by Erik_Snow.

ablett
Swimmingly..IMO

ablett,

they struggle on.......!!!!!!!!!!

Liddas,

MT's "aggressive" lead style did not depend on Keith. Just listen to the opening track of Dylan's Euro '84 concerts, (Highway '61). And others on that tour. Many of them.

And besides, in fact a BIG BESIDES, I believe the quality of MT's playing raised the standard of Keith's rhythm work. They were good for each other, musically.

And if he is louder in the mix on the '73 tour - don't shoot the guitar player. The glimmers and the sound crew would decide on the balance. That ws an era that favoured loud lead guitars. But I'm sure MT wasn't complaining!



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2007-09-07 00:14 by Four Stone Walls.

ablett Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> How on earth do the stones ever manage without
> Mick Taylor?


Badly.

LOGIE Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> ablett Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > How on earth do the stones ever manage without
> > Mick Taylor?
>
>
> Badly.

rubbish! they got better after MT quit,

They got a lot worse.

Go to the Knebworth thread and compare SFM there to the '73 version later in the same thread.

The difference is mainly due to Keith - but the whole band dynamic has gone.

Four Stone Walls Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> They got a lot worse.
>
> Go to the Knebworth thread and compare SFM there
> to the '73 version later in the same thread.
>
> The difference is mainly due to Keith - but the
> whole band dynamic has gone.


I don't think it's right to compare with Knebworth, or any other 1976 concerts, as all tours 60s-80s are better than 76.
1975 and 1978 are more appropriate to compare with - nevermind a few bumshows...like the "LA video" show of 75.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2007-09-07 00:18 by Erik_Snow.

I don't think any gig after '73 is better than a '73 gig. There are certainly many far better than Knebworth though.

I've heard nothing from '75 0r '78 that compares with '73. I'm not madly nostalgic about it. It's just that they peaked about then, give or take a year.

I couldn't agree with you more Four Stone Walls.

ablett Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> How on earth do the stones ever manage without
> Mick Taylor?


They got Ronnie!

Couldn't you at least try?

Erik_Snow Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> ChrisM Wrote:
> --------------------------------------------------
> -----
> > There seems to be a variety of opinons here but
> > isn't that always the case on any subjec? It
> > doesn't really matter to me what anyone else
> > thinks about Mick Taylor's playing on Brussels
> or
> > any other show. To my ears it is among the
> > greatest electric guitar playing I've ever
> heard.
> > His playing on this recording is beautifully
> > melodic and soulful and his phrasing and tone
> are
> > magical. His solo at the end of Brown Sugar
> makes
> > me want to shout with joy at its sheer
> brilliance
> > and the break on Tumbling Dice is primer on
> great
> > phrasing . Any words I write here fail to
> > adequately express the greatness of his playing
> > quite honestly, but thats just me
>
>
> Well put! Couldn't agree more.

yeh me too; thanx Chris.

I've heard the band live with taylor many times and there was an explosive organic BALANCED perfect uninimity or however that's spelled; unity of purpose, sound, effort, attitude...Taylor was totally a real Stone from top of head to bottom of boots; never a syncophant but always humble, always consistent; brought them back from the dead at hyde park and ya-ya's...and his legacy with the band stands, to this very day, as their far and away most long lasting, depsite anyone's personal favorites from whatever period.
That sense of total chaos and perfectly calm controlled center of wyman and taylor anchoring their respective sides of their stage with fingers just flying flying flying all over the place, both of them...

'69 was the first time they worked with a dang professional PA system for Godsake. Taylor was an originator powerhouse in a very seminal way; from basic track riffs and leads all the way up and out to the mega millions...and this music is eternal and will never die.

...that band worked on every cylinder almost all the time. Taylor very aware of everything that was going on, but never played footsies with keith; totally held his own and moved keith to the highest standard he's ever achieved with that kind of consistency anyway.

i don't think mick has ever had that much of a solid rhythm behind him since those days either. he used to count on it and physically lean into it.

i'd give with sssoul's observation some credence as sometimes, for me very occasionally toward the end, he seems almost bored, or let's say pushing pushing the envelope with the setlists and his guitar figures; which sometimes on sound boards DOES sound unbalanced and annoying; and sometimes jettisons the whole band into another level of impossible performance and presence.

I'd say that's extremely rare; his dancing notes and brilliant triplets and the riffs he wrote and the riffs he wrote on top of those riffs were brilliant and absolutely defining. Believe me, you wouldn't want to imagine a Rolling Stones without "live with me" "country honk" from bleed; all of ya-ya's, stick fingers, exiles on main street; even ghs and i really like iorr...
...including each tour taylor played on. Taylor is the least annoying thing in the history of the Rolling Stones. Every thing about the gentleman; the virtusoso, the soulful powerhouse of deep groove and angelic imagination and twice the technique of any of the other greats. I love that picture of hendrix backstage at msg, holding and examining taylors SG...strumming it a little...the respect was obvious and overwhelming. One of my favorite memories and pix. hendrix all like (in my imagination anyway) "that mutha gets all that out of this!!? hmmmm, maybe i'll go gibson haha.

I'm not here to diss ron's contributions or any of the great '78 or '81 boots I enjoy so much...(been listening to 'down the road a piece' over and over in my car and just can't believe the rockin' energy of '81)...
...but imo, the only thing annoying about mick taylor was that they got him annoyed enough to leave.

msg '75, at least the first show...was so totally different, and not in a good way, from the msg '72 when i had last seen them...and not just because of taylor's absence...because the whole thing seemed to go blooey and showbizzy and cokie or something...

I'm guessin' a lot of fans here would have a better true perspective had they been at a stones show with both micks as well as all the one's with ronnies...but time waits for no one and that's not to be; thems back in the day...so what we get now is what we get now.
...oh taylor fit right in alright, and blasted them to heights still unapproached in rock and roll history; as serious players, visionaries and a brutal natural force one could always always count on. imo.
i wrote a sorta review of the msg '72 thing i posted here somewhere in the archives probably. I say this with true open heart, and also as someone who loves and respect ron, i wish you younger fans could have been to a couple of shows with taylor; then you'd know it in the flesh, ears and heart...
It's a solid shame, a definite smudge on their own legacy that they never released an 'official' live taylor product, other ya-ya's and l&g films, (and ya ya's album) which all TOTALLY KILL!
There be a great live album of '72/73 officially released. Jaws would drop all over the world with fascination and surprise. It really sucks they never got around to that, especially with 'love you live' and other second tier efforts being so proliferate. thattsa showbiz...god The Rolling Stones with Mick Taylor were so totally awesome. that would be the word; not 'annoying' but 'awesome'.

i'm a huge fan of that brussels show...adtl was never better ever. never hotter or more freaking amazing.
several others too...and i'm sure there are great '73 shows that i haven't heard yet but am looking forward to...



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2007-09-07 01:45 by Beelyboy.

liddas Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------

> Did you ever notice how sharp and aggressive MT's
> solos were during the Stones era? It all comes
> from his timing, which very much depended on Keith
> rhythm. MT's palying back then was like as if he
> was surfing the huge wave of sound created by
> Keith / Bill / and CW.
>
> Once he left the stones, MT's playng became more
> "relaxed" (always in terms of tempo).

I think he had an incisive, rhythmic approach with the Bluesbreakers before he joined the Stones. Listen to Driving Sideways from his first album with the Bluesbreakers. Though he is not playing "on the beat", you can always tell what the rhythm is just from listening to his solo. After the Stones, you can hear this in his work with the better bands he played and rehearsed with, whether Dylan, the reunited Bluesbreakers, or even Carla Olsen. What is so phenomenal about this aspect of his playing is that you don't "hear" the bars when listening to his playing, but you can feel them. I can't begin to imagine how such a thing could be taught, but he must have spent considerable time learning from the three Kings, among others.

OTOH, I sense that he sometimes does not have the same incisive rhythmic attack post-Stones when he plays with his fingers rather than with a pick.



liddas Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Gotta say that the soloing over vocals thing is
> something that I like a lot.
>
> In the context of the song it works more or less
> like the comp of a string ensemble, but since the
> Gibson LP has a more ballsy sound than a string
> ensemble, as I see it fits well.
>
Yes, thoughout Brussels, whether the lead lines during the verses of RTJ or hornlike accompaniment during TD, it all seems to work great.


with sssoul Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> >> soloing over vocals <<
>
> smile: what's *really* annoying is singing over
> guitar solos :E

I don't recall Taylor ever saying that was a reason for leaving the band
However, his solo breaks sometimes did compete with Jaggers spontaneous vocals (not just in the form of Jagger's signal to start or end), strings (Sway), etc.

A separate point:
The GS from London, which also appears on a lot of Brussels discs, has Taylor playing an ascending phrase during the "rape/murder" verse. Jagger does not have Clayton's pipes, so it sounds "right" to have a lead tearing up the song at this point similar to the way Clayton tears it up. Whatever you think of Taylor's execution though, it wasn't his idea. A similar ascending phrase was played by (what sounds like) Richards in the same spot in the song in '69--I believe at Altamont. The point? Taylor would not have been soloing so much if Jagger and Richards did not want it, and, at least in this instance, it was something Richards seems to have passed along to Taylor (as he did much of the live soloing responsibility over the course of '69 through '73).

By the way, there a few Brussels discs in which Taylor is considerably lower in the mix.

Brilliant post, Beelyboy.

As ever...

I find Keith's out of tune guitar on Angie more annoying.

ablett Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> How on earth do the stones ever manage without
> Mick Taylor?


Just listen how/what they are playing today. That should answer your question.

Gimme shelter Philadelphia 72 spectrum arena

the song is transcended thanks to Taylor. And Mick is perfectly in tune with him

amazing

Beelyboy Wrote:

> I've heard the band live with taylor many times

(...)

> i'm a huge fan of that brussels show...adtl was
> never better ever. never hotter or more freaking
> amazing.
> several others too...and i'm sure there are great
> '73 shows that i haven't heard yet but am looking
> forward to...


Wow Beelyboy - GREAT solo!!



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2007-09-07 12:24 by Greenblues.

Greenblues Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> Beelyboy Wrote:
>
> > I've heard the band live with taylor many times
>
> (...)
>
> > i'm a huge fan of that brussels show...adtl was
> > never better ever. never hotter or more
> freaking
> > amazing.
> > several others too...and i'm sure there are
> great
> > '73 shows that i haven't heard yet but am
> looking
> > forward to...
>
>
> Wow Beelyboy - GREAT solo!!


Guys! That ADTL solo is amazing, how Taylor switches so effortlessly between slide and fingers..you almost miss the swap..and then he sounds as if his fingers are gonna seize up he's playing that fast (okay so he isn't shredding blah blah - but this is classy, tasty, fiery blues rock fast playing!)

<> How on earth do the stones ever manage without
> Mick Taylor?


Badly.>

Well, they made my favourite Stones-album (Some Girls), and they made the two best selling records in the band's history (SG and TY)...