Maybe not in the way Mick Taylor transformed songs like I'm free, GS, YCAGWYW with his signature soloing, but Ronnie's best live contributions are as much 'classic' Stones for me (this comes from a big Taylor fan). Listen to the best songs of the '81 tour, in which the art of weaving which got so much beating on this board the last months came to perfection. The two guitars echoing, mimicking, bouncing of eachother on BoB, Imagination, WoaF, Whip just make for an incredible groove. Two guitars sounding like one played by four hands: much rarer also than the ttraditional rhythm/lead divison. In a way it's more exiting too because you never know what notes, licks or riffing you'll hear the next second. For me this forms as much the heart of the Stones as STP '72.

Which one of the two guitarists was or fitted the best is a discussion that should be eternally banned from this board imo. It's The Eternal Apples And Pears Debate.

----------------------------
"Music is the frozen tapioca in the ice chest of history."

"Shit!... No shit, awright!"

The whole weaving concept is great for keith to give to the rock magazines and
cover up for the bands lack of improvisation since Taylor left.

What great licks did Ronnie ever play live any attempt at a extended solo Ronnie
always hides behind his slide or pedal steel instead of playing a single note
solo in front of the crowd.I understand alot has to do with Keith and always
keeping Ronnie low in the mix.Ronnie has no fluidity and has difficulty playing
when the band gives him his space.

How often did he use sustain,hammers and pulloffs with his playing.HIs answer
to bend the strings is to GRIMACE with his FACE.

The art of weaving is extinct NOW, but it was REAL in '81. One could even make a point saying there was more instant improvisation then - the guitars reacting on and bouncing of eachother every tenth of a second - than in '73, when Taylors solos often sounded like they had been mixed in in the studio. Fluidity and soloing indeed is not Ronnies strengh but that wasn't my point.

And listen to Hampton, it has Ronnie louder in the mix than Keith.

----------------------------
"Music is the frozen tapioca in the ice chest of history."

"Shit!... No shit, awright!"

similiar playing - I love keith but he has played the same angular chuck berry
riff and pattern for 40 years in different tunings and I am bored.

Are you guys and gals tired of those same notes and patterns he plays.and RW
does the same thing in standard concert tunings mimicks keith and no improvisation with the 2nd guitar.



The stones miss improvisation with that 2nd guitar keys and leavell are not
the answer for me to carry the band.

Havent't contributed very much to this MT vs. RW debate lately..

But I think MT brought with himself very much professionalism and true skills that were very much needed to make the band convincing around the late 60's, with acts like Hendrix, The Who, Zeppelin etc. around (the Beatles vs Stones pop battle was already dated).

As somebody said that MT was a key player in an important transformation from a studio pop band into raunchy live blues or rock band.. True is that the transformation has already happened in the studio without MT.. Beggars Banquet is not just maybe the band's most important album ever, but still to this date VERY mature sounding and convincing.. the Muddy Waters cover band have found their own original blues sound. But the problem was still that the group couldn't transform this absolutely peaky new Jagger-Richards material into a live format. Rock&Roll Circus is a great proof of that.. Although the band looks @#$%& great and cool, and Jagger is maybe doing his best performace ever, one can not be without noticing the thinness of the sound of Jagger's "background band" (that what it really seems to be); especially the lack of the guitar work is outstanding (comparing to the following year's performances in Hyde Park or American tour, and GYYO! with MT). Keith is doing his best maybe, but for god sake, he is not any Jimi Hendrix, or even Pete Townshend, to keep the whole thing in his shoulders. There is not help from Brian - expect some rare moment of great slide playing (heh, like some other Stones guitarist very many years later...). MT was exactly the right man to the job and to fill the empty space. The Stones were lucky to have him, and MT was lucky one to join in the band who were just releasing or about to release the best material ever done in the history of rock and roll.

Well, later RW was a very right guy to replace him, but that's another story, and belongs to another phase in the history of the greatest rock and roll band in the world. (And of course, Brian Jones was more than the right man to do the job in the beginning). Jagger and Richards have always been very lucky or talented to find the exactly right people in the exactly the right time, and take absolutely everything they need from them - for their own and to their band's (and to ours) benefit. After their "come back" (Mach IV) Chuck Leavell (and his side musicians) is their latest ace to fill the empty space (left by sloppy and lousy guitar work), and make the thing musically professional...

- Doxa



Edited 2 time(s). Last edit at 2005-01-10 17:48 by Rorty.

Hey people - us Taylor fan's are not "going to get over it" until Taylor is
"invited" back to play a set with these guys to see what they could do with songs like: Sway, Time waits for no one, Hide your love, CYHMK, etc.

Hell if Cream can re-form, why not bring Taylor back, at least for one gig,
for all us "old" Stones fans who saw them in their prime, and would like to
see how close they can come to what the produced in the 70's. From what I've seen
lately, (that HBO special) they "need" someone like Taylor - I couldn't watch
their latest concert all the way thru.... sad - MLC

I have mixed emotions about MT. He might have been the right person at the time, but I'm not sorry he left.

I love a lot of his solos, but on my live boots he sometimes gets annoying when he fills every slot with the same kind of notes. A bit like Chuck does on his piano nowadays.

Sometimes I prefer the combination of Ronnie and Keith. It' like Keith says: 'It's not about How many notes you play... No one can keep a rythm down like me'

Fred Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
It' like Keith says: 'It's not about How many notes you play...


Good precison regarding Ronnie, during some shows he almost doesn't play at all lol !

The problem with Rock n Roll circus is also that Keith mixed out Brians guitar. He did play at the concert but you can't hear him. It's Keiths guitars on YCAGWYW.

I would rather hear many notes which in Taylor's defense is nonsense then BUM
notes from the weavers.

Taylor is a solist and can played around any jagger/richard chord progression
that they wrote and brought into the studio.Taylor never got in the way in the
studio or live.All those notes you hear are alot of times Taylor would use rapid
fire hammers/Also Taylor played alot of asending and desending patterns up and
down the fretboard adding the extra notes with the major scales.Watch Dead Flowers on LAG he gives you a textbook lesson on proper techinque and fluidity
all over the fretboard.

The notion that Taylor would of got in the way on Some Girls is crazy.Taylor
went from playing 12 bar blues with Mayall and played country,rock,blues,reggae
with the stones as they experimented with all kinds of music.Imagine Taylor
doing a solo on BEAST OF BURDEN with all that space or any other post Taylor
record that needed that BLAST from the PAST.

Greg Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> The art of weaving is extinct NOW, but it was REAL
> in '81. One could even make a point saying there
> was more instant improvisation then - the guitars
> reacting on and bouncing of eachother every tenth
> of a second - than in '73, when Taylors solos
> often sounded like they had been mixed in in the
> studio. Fluidity and soloing indeed is not Ronnies
> strengh but that wasn't my point.
>
> And listen to Hampton, it has Ronnie louder in the
> mix than Keith.
>
> ----------------------------
>
> "Shit!... No shit, awright!"


Right on the spot Greg. Just check Let It Bleed from New Orleans 12.05.81 or Hang Fire from Largo 12.09.81 both on [www.rockpassion.com]. Fantastic spontaneous guitars.

OpenG wrote;

Imagine Taylor
doing a solo on BEAST OF BURDEN with all that space or any other post Taylor
record that needed that BLAST from the PAST.


Some songs don`t need a solo at all.

I remember reading an interview with Woody in (I think) Guitarist Magazine where he said that guitar solos are a thing of the past. I think this was about the time of Bridges to Babylon.

I'll leave it to others to interpret this.

<Imagine Taylor
doing a solo on BEAST OF BURDEN with all that space or any other post Taylor
record that needed that BLAST from the PAST.>

He did that at The Kemper Arena, Kansas City in December 1981. Completety without succeeding. He hadn't rehearsed, but anyway...