Quote
His Majesty
He was good, but I really don't think he is up there with the giants like Hendrix etc, his playing is just too bog standard - british blues to be deemed distinctive.
I agree. It would be unjust to equalize him to people like Hendrix - Taylor has a nice, distinguished style ("vibrato"), but he is way too limited and unprofilc to be said to be 'most distinctive". Even in the category of British blues guitarists, I would say Eric Clapton is a head above of him, not to mention Jeff Beck.
Even in the context of The Stones, I don't think he is the most distinctive - that's Keith Richards. With this I mean nothing of professional skills - Taylor is surely the best in terms of those - but if we think the style to be recognized Keith has created very unique and well-known one. Like said, the Stones tune will be recognized from his trademark guitar playing (or that IT IS KEITH RICHARDS playing there). (Also this can be said of Chralie Watts and Bill Wyman, but it is most clear with Keef.)
Perhaps in the world of rock music, Taylor is a bit too under-valuated, but perhaps a bit too over-valuated by some Stones fans. The latter I think is due to the fact that Taylor is the only so called virtuoso the band ever seen; it is easy to 'shine' with such wonderful carage musicians... but then again: the secret of the band - the reason why it is loved so much - does not rely on any skillful instrumentation. For this reason, the loss of their biggest technical player ever, was not very drastic move at all (expect to some die-hard Tayloroties, bless them!). Taylor's skills, even though they were highly important, especially in 1969 when they hit the road again, never turned out to be the core or the substance of the band. Finally, he was icing the cake (as Brian's flutes or sitars did before him). Taylor was the right guy at the right time (when a hot solo guitarist was an essential part of any credible band), but like Brian, the band was able to continue without him. The last is not an opinion, but a historical fact.
I think the biggest contribution Taylor ever did to The Stones is the one mentioned by Charlie Watts: he brought them "professionalism". I take this not only mean his own guitar contributions, but that he effected to the others to find a new geer from their engine. He forced the others to play better, more tightier. The effect of this was the birth of The Greatest Rock and Roll band (together with the great material Mick and Keith created in 1968-69 - totally independent of Taylor). I think this is quite analogical to effect Brian Jones had in his days of leader of the band (prior ALO took over): Brian pushed them forward, and to believe on the band and of its future. But in both cases, the actual greatness was not done by Jones or Taylor, but the rest, the actual core of the band. They - Mick, Keith, Bill, Charlie - made it happen. When Taylor left, I don't think there was much for him to contribute anymore - the band had enough professionalism to carry on; his post was actually quite easily to be replaced with a new quy - the core which would keep the sound of the band great would go on. And it is true that having Ronnie onboard also gave them a new fresh kick (and they were better armed to face the punk movement of the late 70's when the egoist solo guitarists were more than "passe".)
The touring years with Taylor are my - like many others - favourite ones. But it is not solely thanks to his wonderful guitar playing, but also due to the fact that all of them were in the peak of their career at the time. Even more grateful as what the rest should be toward Taylor of those years, I think even more grateful - and lucky - Taylor should feel for having the chance to play with Mick and Keith and the rest when they happen to be in height of their powers.
- Doxa
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2008-08-08 11:46 by Doxa.