Tell Me :
Talk
I would believe about the intro if Keith himself told me so, I do not recognize his playing in particular though, but wtf.
A guitar part is never insignificant to me, be it a second or half an hour, unless someone is playing garbage. That's more important and respectful to me, regardless the player's identity.
You are a piece of work. I really don't know what you are getting at here. He is almost inaudible, for christ 's sake!!!
I would like to fart on your face.
Mathijs
That's the funniest reply to a post I've read here yet. Cheers!
You would regret it, but no doubt your smell is unbearable...
I can't see why describing an almost inaudible guitar track has to do with HATING anyone??
1. It is NOT Taylor doing the intro on WOAF.
2. His guitar part on the released track is NOT very important because we can barely hear him
3. Why don't you just listen to the track again?
4. Taking this (which isn't Taylor-criticism at all) personally is NOT a very "normal" reaction, imo.
5. What you and Mathijs do on your spare time is YOUR business. Leave me out of it...
What's normal these days...you have made your musical points on this song a zillion times already, but that's not what I am interested in, I can think and listen for myself.
When it comes to Mathijs, just pulling your leg, as you would say it.. You both ( you to a lesser extend) have some Taylor criticism in common, when it comes to the importance of his musical role in the Stones in general, put him down in a smelly way I don't like, if you haven't noticed it by now. At least that's how I read it, and I am not stupid. Lets leave it at that.
Enjoy your day.
As you once wrote: "I'm almost not listening to Mick Jagger when I listen to the Stones, only Taylor".
That's some of the difference between you and me. If you bother, you'll find lots of my criticism toward ALL band members during the years, Taylor included.
You enhance him like a holy saint - he's not.
And your way of putting Ron Wood down (playing garbage for 35 years) is nothing but cheap. Clean up in your own house first, before you start pickin' on others.
Have a GREAT day yourself.
At least I am no hypocrite.
I saw you called me that in another thread.
I thought it was so stupid it didn't even deserve a comment. However, angee understood.
Again your lack of comprehension are playing tricks on you. Read the dictionary, especially the first meaning of the word. After that, I strongly advice you to take it back.
PS: If not, I'm not wasting more time commenting on your posts, like it or not (probably the former).
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2012-12-28 12:28 by DandelionPowderman.
Now you start making sense.
maybe it's just me, but i don't think either of you really wants the other to have a great day...in fact, i think you both secretly want the other to have a very crappy day.
oh. well, in that case, have a great day...or something.
And there it is, the but, straight after the denial>
<
Hate?
what's wrong with fighting?
Which is a matter of perception and taste of course.
Talk about your favorite band.
For information about how to use this forum please check out forum help and policies.
Re: Waiting on a Friend with Mick Taylor...
Posted by:
TheGreek
()
Date: December 27, 2012 19:43
mick taylor rocks!!!!!!!!!!Quote
MathijsQuote
VT22Quote
MathijsQuote
VT22Quote
MathijsQuote
liddas
My guess is that Taylor is the guitar low in the mix doing the arpeggios
C
Correct. Taylor's part is farily insignificant on this track, there's half a dozen guitars dubbed over it by Jagger and Richards.
Well, the GUITAR part is insignificant, isn't it? No matter who plays it. This track is all about Hopkins' piano, the vocal melody, the sax by Sonny Rollins. The main guitar part is Richards, and Taylor adds little fills here and there. But that could even be one guitar part, by either Jagger, Richards or Taylor. It doesn't really matter because it is just strumming G, F, C and Aminor chords.
If it was Jimi Hendrix on guitar I would have said it was an insignificant Jimi Hendrix guitar part.
Mathijs
Mathijs
Mathijs
Taylor's guitar intro is fairly significant though. What's a nice house without a beautifull doorbell, bugger?
The intro isn't Taylor.
Mathijs
Sounds Mick Taylor to me, but the intro is just nice and frienly neutral strumming, so it might as well be Keith, or anybody, I don't care, but that's not really my point.
My point is that your statement: "Taylor's part is farily insignificant on this track" is your usual Taylor bullshit talk.
Re: Waiting on a Friend with Mick Taylor...
Posted by:
VT22
()
Date: December 27, 2012 22:30
Quote
MathijsQuote
VT22Quote
MathijsQuote
VT22Quote
MathijsQuote
liddas
My guess is that Taylor is the guitar low in the mix doing the arpeggios
C
Correct. Taylor's part is farily insignificant on this track, there's half a dozen guitars dubbed over it by Jagger and Richards.
Mathijs
Taylor's guitar intro is fairly significant though. What's a nice house without a beautifull doorbell, bugger?
The intro isn't Taylor.
Mathijs
Sounds Mick Taylor to me, but the intro is just nice and frienly neutral strumming, so it might as well be Keith, or anybody, I don't care, but that's not really my point.
My point is that your statement: "Taylor's part is farily insignificant on this track" is your usual Taylor bullshit talk.
Well, the GUITAR part is insignificant, isn't it? No matter who plays it. This track is all about Hopkins' piano, the vocal melody, the sax by Sonny Rollins. The main guitar part is Richards, and Taylor adds little fills here and there. But that could even be one guitar part, by either Jagger, Richards or Taylor. It doesn't really matter because it is just strumming G, F, C and Aminor chords.
If it was Jimi Hendrix on guitar I would have said it was an insignificant Jimi Hendrix guitar part.
Mathijs
I would believe about the intro if Keith himself told me so, I do not recognize his playing in particular though, but wtf.
A guitar part is never insignificant to me, be it a second or half an hour, unless someone is playing garbage. That's more important and respectful to me, regardless the player's identity.
Re: Waiting on a Friend with Mick Taylor...
Posted by:
DandelionPowderman
()
Date: December 27, 2012 22:51
Quote
VT22Quote
DandelionPowdermanQuote
VT22Quote
MathijsQuote
VT22Quote
MathijsQuote
liddas
My guess is that Taylor is the guitar low in the mix doing the arpeggios
C
Correct. Taylor's part is farily insignificant on this track, there's half a dozen guitars dubbed over it by Jagger and Richards.
Mathijs
Taylor's guitar intro is fairly significant though. What's a nice house without a beautifull doorbell, bugger?
The intro isn't Taylor.
Mathijs
Sounds Mick Taylor to me, but the intro is just nice and frienly neutral strumming, so it might as well be Keith, or anybody, I don't care, but that's not really my point.
My point is that your statement: "Taylor's part is farily insignificant on this track" is your usual Taylor bullshit talk.
When he is barely audible on the song, wouldn´t it be ok to say he´s "fairly insignificant"? What´s wrong with you, and why are you taking the fact that it isn´t Taylor playing the basic strumming on the intro so personal?
I think Mathijs can speak for himself, but I am sorry to read that you miss the emphahtic side of my remark. Feel free to lick anyone's arse though.
You are a piece of work. I really don't know what you are getting at here. He is almost inaudible, for christ 's sake!!!
Re: Waiting on a Friend with Mick Taylor...
Posted by:
Mathijs
()
Date: December 27, 2012 23:15
Quote
VT22
A guitar part is never insignificant to me, be it a second or half an hour, unless someone is playing garbage. That's more important and respectful to me, regardless the player's identity.
I would like to fart on your face.
Mathijs
Re: Waiting on a Friend with Mick Taylor...
Posted by:
stonesnow
()
Date: December 27, 2012 23:21
Quote
MathijsQuote
VT22
A guitar part is never insignificant to me, be it a second or half an hour, unless someone is playing garbage. That's more important and respectful to me, regardless the player's identity.
I would like to fart on your face.
Mathijs
That's the funniest reply to a post I've read here yet. Cheers!
Re: Waiting on a Friend with Mick Taylor...
Posted by:
VT22
()
Date: December 27, 2012 23:33
Quote
MathijsQuote
VT22
A guitar part is never insignificant to me, be it a second or half an hour, unless someone is playing garbage. That's more important and respectful to me, regardless the player's identity.
I would like to fart on your face.
Mathijs
You would regret it, but no doubt your smell is unbearable...
Re: Waiting on a Friend with Mick Taylor...
Posted by:
lapaz62
()
Date: December 28, 2012 04:35
VT22, you go girl, all the Taylor haters can suck my farts too.
Re: Waiting on a Friend with Mick Taylor...
Posted by:
VT22
()
Date: December 28, 2012 09:49
Quote
VT22Quote
DandelionPowderman
You are a piece of work. I really don't know what you are getting at here. He is almost inaudible, for christ 's sake!!!
I'm perfectly normal, but maybe you can arrange something with Mathijs, he's into things..well you read it.
Re: Waiting on a Friend with Mick Taylor...
Posted by:
DandelionPowderman
()
Date: December 28, 2012 10:43
Quote
lapaz62
VT22, you go girl, all the Taylor haters can suck my farts too.
I can't see why describing an almost inaudible guitar track has to do with HATING anyone??
Re: Waiting on a Friend with Mick Taylor...
Posted by:
DandelionPowderman
()
Date: December 28, 2012 10:51
Quote
VT22Quote
VT22Quote
DandelionPowderman
You are a piece of work. I really don't know what you are getting at here. He is almost inaudible, for christ 's sake!!!
I'm perfectly normal, but maybe you can arrange something with Mathijs, he's into things..well you read it.
1. It is NOT Taylor doing the intro on WOAF.
2. His guitar part on the released track is NOT very important because we can barely hear him
3. Why don't you just listen to the track again?
4. Taking this (which isn't Taylor-criticism at all) personally is NOT a very "normal" reaction, imo.
5. What you and Mathijs do on your spare time is YOUR business. Leave me out of it...
Re: Waiting on a Friend with Mick Taylor...
Posted by:
DoomandGloom
()
Date: December 28, 2012 11:12
Is Taylor's part the one doing country riffs bouncing off the C ? If so that's cool and it's plenty loud. Seems that some guitarists here are supercritical of the great Rolling Stones guitarists. It should be the furthest thing from anyones mind here to slam Mick Taylor or Brian Jones... Q. What's the difference between a guitarist and a puppy?
A. The puppy will stop whining after a couple of months.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2012-12-28 11:13 by DoomandGloom.
A. The puppy will stop whining after a couple of months.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2012-12-28 11:13 by DoomandGloom.
Re: Waiting on a Friend with Mick Taylor...
Posted by:
lapaz62
()
Date: December 28, 2012 11:44
There are a lot of posters who's default position is to bag Taylor and it gets tiresome very quickly.
Re: Waiting on a Friend with Mick Taylor...
Posted by:
VT22
()
Date: December 28, 2012 11:47
Quote
DandelionPowdermanQuote
VT22Quote
VT22Quote
DandelionPowderman
You are a piece of work. I really don't know what you are getting at here. He is almost inaudible, for christ 's sake!!!
I'm perfectly normal, but maybe you can arrange something with Mathijs, he's into things..well you read it.
1. It is NOT Taylor doing the intro on WOAF.
2. His guitar part on the released track is NOT very important because we can barely hear him
3. Why don't you just listen to the track again?
4. Taking this (which isn't Taylor-criticism at all) personally is NOT a very "normal" reaction, imo.
5. What you and Mathijs do on your spare time is YOUR business. Leave me out of it...
What's normal these days...you have made your musical points on this song a zillion times already, but that's not what I am interested in, I can think and listen for myself.
When it comes to Mathijs, just pulling your leg, as you would say it.. You both ( you to a lesser extend) have some Taylor criticism in common, when it comes to the importance of his musical role in the Stones in general, put him down in a smelly way I don't like, if you haven't noticed it by now. At least that's how I read it, and I am not stupid. Lets leave it at that.
Enjoy your day.
Re: Waiting on a Friend with Mick Taylor...
Posted by:
DandelionPowderman
()
Date: December 28, 2012 11:53
Quote
VT22Quote
DandelionPowdermanQuote
VT22Quote
VT22Quote
DandelionPowderman
You are a piece of work. I really don't know what you are getting at here. He is almost inaudible, for christ 's sake!!!
I'm perfectly normal, but maybe you can arrange something with Mathijs, he's into things..well you read it.
1. It is NOT Taylor doing the intro on WOAF.
2. His guitar part on the released track is NOT very important because we can barely hear him
3. Why don't you just listen to the track again?
4. Taking this (which isn't Taylor-criticism at all) personally is NOT a very "normal" reaction, imo.
5. What you and Mathijs do on your spare time is YOUR business. Leave me out of it...
What's normal these days...you have made your musical points on this song a zillion times already, but that's not what I am interested in, I can think and listen for myself.
When it comes to Mathijs, just pulling your leg, as you would say it.. You both ( you to a lesser extend) have some Taylor criticism in common, when it comes to the importance of his role in the Stones and in general, put him down in a smelly way I don't like, if you haven't noticed it by now. At least that's how I read it, and I am not stupid. Lets leave it at that.
Enjoy your day.
As you once wrote: "I'm almost not listening to Mick Jagger when I listen to the Stones, only Taylor".
That's some of the difference between you and me. If you bother, you'll find lots of my criticism toward ALL band members during the years, Taylor included.
You enhance him like a holy saint - he's not.
And your way of putting Ron Wood down (playing garbage for 35 years) is nothing but cheap. Clean up in your own house first, before you start pickin' on others.
Have a GREAT day yourself.
Re: Waiting on a Friend with Mick Taylor...
Posted by:
VT22
()
Date: December 28, 2012 12:01
Quote
DandelionPowderman
And your way of putting Ron Wood down (playing garbage for 35 years) is nothing but cheap. Clean up in your own house first, before you start pickin' on others.
Have a GREAT day yourself.
At least I am no hypocrite.
Re: Waiting on a Friend with Mick Taylor...
Posted by:
DandelionPowderman
()
Date: December 28, 2012 12:27
Quote
VT22Quote
DandelionPowderman
And your way of putting Ron Wood down (playing garbage for 35 years) is nothing but cheap. Clean up in your own house first, before you start pickin' on others.
Have a GREAT day yourself.
At least I am no hypocrite.
I saw you called me that in another thread.
I thought it was so stupid it didn't even deserve a comment. However, angee understood.
Again your lack of comprehension are playing tricks on you. Read the dictionary, especially the first meaning of the word. After that, I strongly advice you to take it back.
PS: If not, I'm not wasting more time commenting on your posts, like it or not (probably the former).
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2012-12-28 12:28 by DandelionPowderman.
Re: Waiting on a Friend with Mick Taylor...
Posted by:
VT22
()
Date: December 28, 2012 12:29
Again your lack of comprehension are playing tricks on you. Read the dictionary, especially the first meaning of the word. After that, I strongly advice you to take it back.
No!
PS: If not, I'm not wasting more time commenting on your posts, like it or not
Great!
No!
PS: If not, I'm not wasting more time commenting on your posts, like it or not
Great!
Re: Waiting on a Friend with Mick Taylor...
Posted by:
Mathijs
()
Date: December 28, 2012 12:57
Taylor hater? What a bollocks. But it is true that I am of the opinion that the second guitarists Jones/Taylor/Wood all are of much lesser importance than many on this board would like to believe. The Stones really are Watts/Jagger/Richards, and added with Bill Wyman live. I think Taylor was brilliant on the 72 and 73 tour, had a tendency to really overplay on the 69 to 71 tours, and had very limited input on the records they produced. I like the Wood years more, but not because of Wood or because Taylor was gone -I just find the band a much better, tighter and more aggressive band from 75 to 81.
Mathijs
Mathijs
Re: Waiting on a Friend with Mick Taylor...
Posted by:
DandelionPowderman
()
Date: December 28, 2012 13:04
Re: Waiting on a Friend with Mick Taylor...
Posted by:
VT22
()
Date: December 28, 2012 13:40
+++++++++++++++++++
Re: Waiting on a Friend with Mick Taylor...
Posted by:
DandelionPowderman
()
Date: December 28, 2012 14:16
Re: Waiting on a Friend with Mick Taylor...
Posted by:
VT22
()
Date: December 28, 2012 14:23
Quote
DandelionPowderman
Now you start making sense.
Re: Waiting on a Friend with Mick Taylor...
Posted by:
StonesTod
()
Date: December 28, 2012 14:36
Quote
DandelionPowdermanQuote
VT22Quote
DandelionPowdermanQuote
VT22Quote
VT22Quote
DandelionPowderman
You are a piece of work. I really don't know what you are getting at here. He is almost inaudible, for christ 's sake!!!
I'm perfectly normal, but maybe you can arrange something with Mathijs, he's into things..well you read it.
1. It is NOT Taylor doing the intro on WOAF.
2. His guitar part on the released track is NOT very important because we can barely hear him
3. Why don't you just listen to the track again?
4. Taking this (which isn't Taylor-criticism at all) personally is NOT a very "normal" reaction, imo.
5. What you and Mathijs do on your spare time is YOUR business. Leave me out of it...
What's normal these days...you have made your musical points on this song a zillion times already, but that's not what I am interested in, I can think and listen for myself.
When it comes to Mathijs, just pulling your leg, as you would say it.. You both ( you to a lesser extend) have some Taylor criticism in common, when it comes to the importance of his role in the Stones and in general, put him down in a smelly way I don't like, if you haven't noticed it by now. At least that's how I read it, and I am not stupid. Lets leave it at that.
Enjoy your day.
As you once wrote: "I'm almost not listening to Mick Jagger when I listen to the Stones, only Taylor".
That's some of the difference between you and me. If you bother, you'll find lots of my criticism toward ALL band members during the years, Taylor included.
You enhance him like a holy saint - he's not.
And your way of putting Ron Wood down (playing garbage for 35 years) is nothing but cheap. Clean up in your own house first, before you start pickin' on others.
Have a GREAT day yourself.
maybe it's just me, but i don't think either of you really wants the other to have a great day...in fact, i think you both secretly want the other to have a very crappy day.
Re: Waiting on a Friend with Mick Taylor...
Posted by:
VT22
()
Date: December 28, 2012 14:43
Oh no, actually we can get along very well, it's all show you know. 
Re: Waiting on a Friend with Mick Taylor...
Posted by:
StonesTod
()
Date: December 28, 2012 14:44
Quote
VT22
Oh no, actually we can get along very well, it's all show you know.
oh. well, in that case, have a great day...or something.
Re: Waiting on a Friend with Mick Taylor...
Posted by:
lapaz62
()
Date: December 28, 2012 14:51
Quote
Mathijs
Taylor hater? What a bollocks. But it is true that I am of the opinion that the second guitarists Jones/Taylor/Wood all are of much lesser importance than many on this board would like to believe. The Stones really are Watts/Jagger/Richards, and added with Bill Wyman live. I think Taylor was brilliant on the 72 and 73 tour, had a tendency to really overplay on the 69 to 71 tours, and had very limited input on the records they produced. I like the Wood years more, but not because of Wood or because Taylor was gone -I just find the band a much better, tighter and more aggressive band from 75 to 81.
Mathijs
And there it is, the but, straight after the denial>
<Re: Waiting on a Friend with Mick Taylor...
Posted by:
DandelionPowderman
()
Date: December 28, 2012 15:04
Quote
lapaz62Quote
Mathijs
Taylor hater? What a bollocks. But it is true that I am of the opinion that the second guitarists Jones/Taylor/Wood all are of much lesser importance than many on this board would like to believe. The Stones really are Watts/Jagger/Richards, and added with Bill Wyman live. I think Taylor was brilliant on the 72 and 73 tour, had a tendency to really overplay on the 69 to 71 tours, and had very limited input on the records they produced. I like the Wood years more, but not because of Wood or because Taylor was gone -I just find the band a much better, tighter and more aggressive band from 75 to 81.
Mathijs
And there it is, the but, straight after the denial>
Hate?
Re: Waiting on a Friend with Mick Taylor...
Posted by:
punkfloyd
()
Date: December 28, 2012 15:35
Uh, people. I mean, who's fighting and what for? Brothers and sisters. Everybody just cool out! Something very funny always happens when we start that number.
Why are we fighting? Why are we fighting?
We don't want to fight. Come on.
Why are we fighting? Why are we fighting?
We don't want to fight. Come on.
Re: Waiting on a Friend with Mick Taylor...
Posted by:
StonesTod
()
Date: December 28, 2012 15:45
Quote
punkfloyd
Uh, people. I mean, who's fighting and what for? Brothers and sisters. Everybody just cool out! Something very funny always happens when we start that number.
Why are we fighting? Why are we fighting?
We don't want to fight. Come on.
what's wrong with fighting?
Re: Waiting on a Friend with Mick Taylor...
Posted by:
VT22
()
Date: December 28, 2012 16:46
Quote
Mathijs
Taylor hater? What a bollocks. But it is true that I am of the opinion that the second guitarists Jones/Taylor/Wood all are of much lesser importance than many on this board would like to believe. The Stones really are Watts/Jagger/Richards, and added with Bill Wyman live. I think Taylor was brilliant on the 72 and 73 tour, had a tendency to really overplay on the 69 to 71 tours, and had very limited input on the records they produced. I like the Wood years more, but not because of Wood or because Taylor was gone -I just find the band a much better, tighter and more aggressive band from 75 to 81.
Mathijs
Which is a matter of perception and taste of course.
Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.
Online Users
Guests:
1784
Record Number of Users:
206
on June 1, 2022 23:50
Record Number of Guests:
9627
on January 2, 2024 23:10