Review
Brussels Official Release
Pacific Coast Branch


As the second chorus of Honky Tonk Women finishes, and Keith's seminal solo begins, Mick Taylor gets caught noodling. And what does he do, having to suddenly abort another superfluous, note-filled run? Does he shit-kick the hell out of some honky-tonk rhythm while Keith (finally) gets a chance to lay down a solo? No. Mick Taylor definitely doesn't do that. Instead he meekly strums the most minimal rhythm imaginable until the end of Keith's solo, when he suddenly perks up and plays a thousand ill-fitting notes.

Such was the way things seem to have been during the Stones '73 tour of Europe. In lieu of a song-by-song review, lets rank the players instead:

Billy Preston: B. A solid performance with some excellent, rocking piano and cool organ which is occasionally marred by an ill advised, over the top, casio-esque effect.

Trevor Lawrence (Sax): B. Some nice, soaring, soloing in YCAGWYW offsets the fact that he can't provide the grittier, more rhythmic sax that Bobby Keys so excelled at.

Steve Madaio (Trumpet, Fugelhorn): B. The horn section lacked the swing of the Keys/Price pairing, but was tasteful nonetheless.

Mick Taylor: C-. Here's the deal; the guy just doesn't fit most of time. Also, he's hardly flawless; his rhythm playing is tepid and he gets caught fairly often trying to cram too many notes in at the end of a run. Until the slower, middle part of Rambler, he barely plays anything. Keith is driving the song like a @#$%&, and because Taylor can't find any room to solo, he sits it out until the middle of the song. Then, of course, he plays a series of stand alone licks and runs which sometime work, and sometime don't. Also, he doesn't play anything even remotely helpful in Star Star. Clearly a pretty boy prima donna.

Charlie Watts: B-. Not one of Charlie's best gigs. I should preface this by saying the live '72/'73 Watts is my least favorite. To my ears, he relies too much on the "and 2, and 4" bass drum pattern to drive the up tempo songs. It worked to great effect on the studio version of Rocks Off, but building two tours off of it is a bit much. During this show, he also has a few moments where his playing collapses onto itself, which is probably a result of occasional fills being played at a slightly slower tempo than the rest of the song. Obviously, I love Charlie, but his live drumming from '75-'82 kicked the shit out of what he was doing in '72/'73. His playing on YCAGWYW and Rambler is, however, incredible.

Mick Jagger: A-. He's singing the @#$%& out of songs and he's speaking in french. I prefer my Mick a bit ruder and/or saucier, but you can't argue with a man who can belt songs out while controlling an entire crowd with his every move.

Bill Wyman: A. Excellent show from Mr. Perks.

Keith Richards. A. If he wanted Taylor gone, I can understand why. Keith is getting very little/no help from Mr. Solo throughout the entire show. While Keith drives every song, and propels the rhythm behind every Taylor solo, he's out there all alone when it's his turn to solo in Star Star and Honky Tonk Women. Even though Keith is carrying the band, he still gets off an astonishing number of insanely cool licks. His playing in Rambler is incredible. If nothing else, this concert made me realize that I prefer Keith's playing onstage in '73 to his playing onstage in '72.

Other than that, the middle part of the show is a bit of a dud. Star Star is reduced to one guitarist playing both rhythm and lead. Dancing With Mr. D is pretty weak. Heartbreaker gets into a nice groove at the end, but isn't exactly strong before then. Angie sounds good. Jagger sings the @#$%& out of it and Taylor's soaring guitar actually works with Keith's great rhythm, instead of against it.

Brussels Overall Grade: B.

A good show, but the concept that this somehow represents the Stones at their peak is delusional. Taylor proves a massive distraction and the block of "new songs" are hardly on par with Black and Blue, Some Girls or Tattoo You.

Whatever dude....Vermont hugh?

Sounds like a whiner (quote) to me


"As we say in England, it can get a bit trainspottery"

Oh my... I think I have a pretty good idea WHERE this kids view is from...

who's the author? I disagree with this

Quote
vermontoffender
Review
Brussels Official Release
Pacific Coast Branch


As the second chorus of Honky Tonk Women finishes, and Keith's seminal solo begins, Mick Taylor gets caught noodling. And what does he do, having to suddenly abort another superfluous, note-filled run? Does he shit-kick the hell out of some honky-tonk rhythm while Keith (finally) gets a chance to lay down a solo? No. Mick Taylor definitely doesn't do that. Instead he meekly strums the most minimal rhythm imaginable until the end of Keith's solo, when he suddenly perks up and plays a thousand ill-fitting notes.

Such was the way things seem to have been during the Stones '73 tour of Europe. In lieu of a song-by-song review, lets rank the players instead:

Billy Preston: B. A solid performance with some excellent, rocking piano and cool organ which is occasionally marred by an ill advised, over the top, casio-esque effect.

Trevor Lawrence (Sax): B. Some nice, soaring, soloing in YCAGWYW offsets the fact that he can't provide the grittier, more rhythmic sax that Bobby Keys so excelled at.

Steve Madaio (Trumpet, Fugelhorn): B. The horn section lacked the swing of the Keys/Price pairing, but was tasteful nonetheless.

Mick Taylor: C-. Here's the deal; the guy just doesn't fit most of time. Also, he's hardly flawless; his rhythm playing is tepid and he gets caught fairly often trying to cram too many notes in at the end of a run. Until the slower, middle part of Rambler, he barely plays anything. Keith is driving the song like a @#$%&, and because Taylor can't find any room to solo, he sits it out until the middle of the song. Then, of course, he plays a series of stand alone licks and runs which sometime work, and sometime don't. Also, he doesn't play anything even remotely helpful in Star Star. Clearly a pretty boy prima donna.

Charlie Watts: B-. Not one of Charlie's best gigs. I should preface this by saying the live '72/'73 Watts is my least favorite. To my ears, he relies too much on the "and 2, and 4" bass drum pattern to drive the up tempo songs. It worked to great effect on the studio version of Rocks Off, but building two tours off of it is a bit much. During this show, he also has a few moments where his playing collapses onto itself, which is probably a result of occasional fills being played at a slightly slower tempo than the rest of the song. Obviously, I love Charlie, but his live drumming from '75-'82 kicked the shit out of what he was doing in '72/'73. His playing on YCAGWYW and Rambler is, however, incredible.

Mick Jagger: A-. He's singing the @#$%& out of songs and he's speaking in french. I prefer my Mick a bit ruder and/or saucier, but you can't argue with a man who can belt songs out while controlling an entire crowd with his every move.

Bill Wyman: A. Excellent show from Mr. Perks.

Keith Richards. A. If he wanted Taylor gone, I can understand why. Keith is getting very little/no help from Mr. Solo throughout the entire show. While Keith drives every song, and propels the rhythm behind every Taylor solo, he's out there all alone when it's his turn to solo in Star Star and Honky Tonk Women. Even though Keith is carrying the band, he still gets off an astonishing number of insanely cool licks. His playing in Rambler is incredible. If nothing else, this concert made me realize that I prefer Keith's playing onstage in '73 to his playing onstage in '72.

Other than that, the middle part of the show is a bit of a dud. Star Star is reduced to one guitarist playing both rhythm and lead. Dancing With Mr. D is pretty weak. Heartbreaker gets into a nice groove at the end, but isn't exactly strong before then. Angie sounds good. Jagger sings the @#$%& out of it and Taylor's soaring guitar actually works with Keith's great rhythm, instead of against it.

Brussels Overall Grade: B.

A good show, but the concept that this somehow represents the Stones at their peak is delusional. Taylor proves a massive distraction and the block of "new songs" are hardly on par with Black and Blue, Some Girls or Tattoo You.

Good stuff, thanks. I agree with some and disagree with some . . .

Must have been listening to a different set.

'Clearly a pretty boy prima donna'

Wow, just wow.

I've always wondered what it'd be like to be tone deaf...





Btw, the band themselves don't share your view of this period.

Thanks for the review, Ronnie!

Maybe a tad hard on Taylor, but nice to hear a different perspective.

...actually this guys review sounds a lot like the peeps who are ripping apart Some Girls deluxe....

Hey Vermonto, have you ever seen the Rolling Stones perform?

What Stones vinyl, CDs, boots do you own?

Who are your favorite musicians at present?

Everyone is entitled to an opinion...where I come from, that is called a minority opinion.

The performance described here doesn't sound like the same show I have been listening to over the last few days. For instance, the reviewer states:

"Until the slower, middle part of Rambler, he barely plays anything. Keith is driving the song like a @#$%&, and because Taylor can't find any room to solo, he sits it out until the middle of the song." I can hear Mick clearly through whole of Rambler, sometimes doubling Keith's rhythm, or augmenting it with a counter riff. So he is clearly not sitting out.

The reviewer goes on to say "Also, he doesn't play anything even remotely helpful in Star Star. Clearly a pretty boy prima donna." and "Star Star is reduced to one guitarist playing both rhythm and lead". I heard some good rhythm playing and nice fills by Mick as he backed up Keith during his fills and solo. The pretty boy prima donna comment is mean spirited and vindictive. One can make a good critique without resorting to such commentary.

I could go on but I won't bother...



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2011-11-22 04:05 by ChrisM.

BS review.

I don't say this lightly. But this guy--vermontguy--has consistently viewed Keith through rose-colored glasses while disparaging anybody or anything that can even possibly be interpreted to take the spotlight off of the divine and sublime contributions of Mr. Sir Fuckup-the-Solo-in-SFTD.

Listen to Taylor play rhythm guitar on, say Bye Bye Johnny from NY '72. Keith wishes he could play rhythm so well. And ya know what? That's not a slam on Keith. He DOES play rhythm so well on about everything else from that period. But when he gets the chance to "solo" (if you can call those Berry runs on BBJ "solos" ), MT more than picks up the slack.

Are you Keith's neighbor, relative, just an apologist, or Keith himself masquerading on this board? Or are you on his payroll? One thing's certain: you would make a grade-A sycophant. Keith, I'm sure, loves your efforts at embroidering his myth.

Note to all on IORR, if you haven't figured it out already...Vermont-head-up-KR's-ass is a little biased, unobjective, and seemingly incapable of saying one nice thing about MT, or one critical thing about Count Ziggenfuss. And you know what else? I happen to think to RW's playing on WTWCD from Detroit '78 matches anything MT did. So I'm no MT disciple. And I LOVE Keith. He is PHENOMENAL on Brussels. But come on. This review is petty, and it just doesn't even seem honest. However, if you truly feel this way, I do apologize for being so harsh. I can't believe you really feel this way, though. You come across as "Keith can do NO wrong" so often that it makes it hard to take any of your reviews seriously.

As Butthead would say, Go away or something...

Your screed against Taylor (C minus, really?) is obviously some kind of personal grudge or agenda, and bears no relationship to the amazing music on this album.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2011-11-22 06:28 by 71Tele.

Quote
vermontoffender
A good show, but the concept that this somehow represents the Stones at their peak is delusional.

This is true though. It's a bootleg with a professional mix, but not THE album of albums.

There are also too many slightly amateurish mistakes going on to convince sceptical doubters about their abilities as musicians.

It's a great and interesting listen för fans, but perhaps not more that - except for some songs that stand out in execution.

Taylor did a great show, but I've heard him better on some songs. His solo sound is awesome, his rhythm sound is so so in places.

What matters here is that we got this fantastic Rolling Stones-gig. It is really a great document of the Stones anno 1973. I love it!

I've listened to the show about 20 times already. Now I'm buried in the fantastic SG Super DeLuxe-box.

Quote
Bärs

Quote
vermontoffender
A good show, but the concept that this somehow represents the Stones at their peak is delusional.

This is true though. It's a bootleg with a professional mix, but not THE album of albums.

There are also too many slightly amateurish mistakes going on to convince sceptical doubters about their abilities as musicians.

It's a great and interesting listen för fans, but perhaps not more that - except for some songs that stand out in execution.

NOTHING about this show makes me doubt their abilities as musicians. If it's mistakes you want, there's plenty to chew over from later eras, but this band was TIGHT in '73.

The hard rock- blues rock-guitar virtuosos version of the Rolling Stones was at its best in the 1973 tour.
Of course they made mistakes, then and now.

If you like hard guitar soloing, this is a gem. But maybe too much soloing.

The Stones have always made mistakes.

The Stones have always made mistakes.


.......... All of us have .... That's life...



ROCKMAN

Quote
Rockman
The Stones have always made mistakes.


.......... All of us have .... That's life...

LOL! Yeah, you're right.

However, the Stones might have done more mistakes than other bands during the years, but that's part of their style and charm, imo.

With flaws and all, this document to me is the most important and best release since Exile, really. Sure, we could nit-pick about the first show being the better one, Charlie makes some mnistakes, Keith is quite out of tune on several tracks, and I agree to some extent that Taylor isn't the best rhythm guitarist on earth -but man, if this show doesn't rock your balls, you just don't have them!

Mathijs

Quote
DandelionPowderman
The Stones have always made mistakes.

LOL, and please explain DP!

The pie is so good and so far beyond any other band could even dream of that I don´t care about the taste of each ingredient separately. Brussels is a non stop flash. It seems to me very difficult to understand why some fans (who are undoubtedly expert bona fide fans) don´t let themselves carry by the flood bursting from the loudspeakers.

Quote
71Tele

Quote
Bärs

Quote
vermontoffender
A good show, but the concept that this somehow represents the Stones at their peak is delusional.

This is true though. It's a bootleg with a professional mix, but not THE album of albums.

There are also too many slightly amateurish mistakes going on to convince sceptical doubters about their abilities as musicians.

It's a great and interesting listen för fans, but perhaps not more that - except for some songs that stand out in execution.

NOTHING about this show makes me doubt their abilities as musicians. If it's mistakes you want, there's plenty to chew over from later eras, but this band was TIGHT in '73.

So you feel that you're included in the category of sceptical doubters?

I can argue a lot if I want, but since this board is about a rock'n'roll band it's not worth the effort. Just shove up your straw man somewhere and everything will be fine.

The recording is great. End of story.

i'm delighted to have this splendid release - to my ears the mix is absolutely great,
that gloriously raunchy engine room is so freakin hot it makes me weep for joy,
and that frontman cat is just plain something else!

they play good is what i mean to say - but i can relate to some of what the vermontoffender wrote.
i've always preferred the Australasian 73 tour to the European one because on the European tour
the combination of Billy Preston, Mick T and the new horns gets overdoodly too often for my tastes


but that's a minor point. i'm happy. thanks & praises Rolling Stones



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2011-11-22 16:14 by with sssoul.

Worth buying purely for the 'manic' street fighting man finale! Fantastic show.