Tell Me :
Talk
His girlfriend, but why should she confirm if hes really an addict?
post of the day..this is exactly how i see it..
well bill wyman is the only stone to have a number one single as a solo artist so there you go!
i think its always been quite clear that wyman is the brains behind the stones operation.. the jagger/richards songwriting credits just a ploy... its really wyman writing all the songs.. unfortunately when its time for the credits to be handed out he's always with the young girls and therefore jagger and richards sign for him...its no surprise that since wyman lost interest in the stones (even before his exit) the music just hasn't been that great...
Are these:
1. people who are not married
2. people who are not married and don't know the joys their missing
3. people who've married
4. people who are married and are content
5. people who are married and are happy to the point of stupidity about it
6. people who are married and refer to each other by their pet names in front of others
7. people who are married, but should not be
8. people who are married, but should not be and do not realize it
9. people who are married, but should not be, do realize it and don't do anything about it
10. something else?
By the way, as far as we know, Mick T is not married.
Every three months when this whole songwriting stuff is rehashed, someone asks this. How about:
1. Almost all pop songwriters have periods of exceptional creativity. Only a few have longstanding careers of continual productivity. Consider the careers of The Who, The Kinks, Led Zeppelin, Paul McCartney, Rod Stewart, etc. How long has it been since any of them wrote a song that captured the public's interest like they did in the 70s. That's not even to mention all the one hit or one year wonders.
2. Some songwriters function particularly well with a particular team or in a particular environment. Do you listen to The Doors, but not Ray Manzarek's post-Door's stuff?
3. The context of the song matters. If Winter were on a non-Stones album and sung by Carla Olson would you appreciate it as much? The Stones brand (including its image and history) may count for a lot in the appreciation of a song. The flip side of the coin is that a musician in the pop field without a strong brand or promotional machinery can readily be perceived as a weaker performer notwithstanding a devoted fan base.
4. While Taylor did contribute to various Stones songs, he may have little interest in writing "those types of songs", which may have been part of his reason for leaving the band.
I am aware of Wyman's claims for one of the JJF riffs and the organ pedals on PIB, so I am curious about what he has claimed with regard to "songwriting credit". Incidentally, I think musicians learn fairly quickly that riffs need not be the basis for songwriting credit. There even is the infamous instance of Wally Bryson receiving a songwriting credit for the riff on Go All the Way, only to lose it later when it was "discovered" that riffs don't merit the credit. On the other hand, some bands have simply decided to split all songwriting royalties (and credits or regardless of the credits).
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2008-07-18 03:33 by Smokey.
Many thanks, Rocky.
This is a very good observation! I never recognized the connection before this. And JAMMING WITH THE EDWARD is one of those recordings that asks for a rational reason why it is released. Namely, if they want to release some of their jams, it is not surely the best one. There are dozens of better bootlegs, even of those very same highly creative times, of it teh actual album is a very bad repsrentation. Now it sounds reasonable. Heh, one could even put the sticker on it: this is how poor the Stones sound without the musical direction and turbin of Keith Richards. The Ry Cooder case is resolved in some way or other with this release.
And now when just thinking about: without any better reason how coherent it would have been for the other guys to say to Keith that "Hi pal, we decided to release a record in our new label of the sessions you couldn't make". "Oh, thanks, mates. I love you, too..."
- Doxa
It's called a 'sponge' job. It is said Ry played on some of the basic tracks for Let It Bleed. Keith re-did Ry's guitar parts note fore note and then wiped Ry's contribution. The fact that Keith never really played slide guitar before this album and basically didn't again after is telling.
As regards MT's contributions, I remember reading a guitar magazine article some years ago (which I now don't have). In this article Mick listed some of the songs he felt he should have been given part credited for. It wasn't just Moonlight Mile or TWFNO either. There were a few more but I think it was songs from GHS and IORR.
I have never read anything where Mick or Bill for that matter have said they wrote a track completely. It was about not being given part credit. Bill says he wrote the riff for Jumpin' Jack Flash. Without that riff there is no song. Therefore, IMO, he deserves part credit. It is not as simplistic as the song being the words and the melody (though often it is).
If you see the Swinging 60s doco, some guy on it claims As Tears Go By was wqritten by Jagger and another individual (maybe Jack Nitsche but I can't remember exactly.) Basically the point was KR had nothing to do with the composition.
Thanks for that, terraplane. That's what I'd been led to believe as well.
Being somewhat new to this board he does seam like a know it all. i think he's just frustrated.
With all respect, I think that is nonsense.
Talk about your favorite band.
For information about how to use this forum please check out forum help and policies.
Re: Mick Taylor songs ???
Posted by:
alimente
()
Date: July 17, 2008 23:56
Quote
AmsterdamnedQuote
alimente
and why should Marlies know?
You know who she is?
His girlfriend, but why should she confirm if hes really an addict?
Re: Mick Taylor songs ???
Posted by:
Anonymous User
()
Date: July 18, 2008 00:01
-
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2010-12-31 02:07 by Amsterdamned.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2010-12-31 02:07 by Amsterdamned.
Re: Mick Taylor songs ???
Posted by:
Mathijs
()
Date: July 18, 2008 00:02
Quote
Amsterdamned
I'm not going to ask anybody (certainly not Marlies (hi!)), But Taylor isn't such a wreck he is these days due to Coke Zero.
MathijsQuote
Why not ask her?You better do,cause there is not a grain of truth in it!
Your approach to Mr Taylor as a person is below zero Mathijs ,to say the least
Shall I ask her for you?
She's one of the persons who keeps rewriting Taylor's history.
And don't accuse me of a "below zero" approach, you absolutely have no idea what you're talking about.
Mathijs
Re: Mick Taylor songs ???
Posted by:
gimme_shelter
()
Date: July 18, 2008 00:24
"the Rainman of rock 'n' roll"
hahaha, good one!
hahaha, good one!
Re: Mick Taylor songs ???
Posted by:
Anonymous User
()
Date: July 18, 2008 00:31
-
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2010-12-31 02:08 by Amsterdamned.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2010-12-31 02:08 by Amsterdamned.
Re: Mick Taylor songs ???
Posted by:
stoned in washington dc
()
Date: July 18, 2008 01:06
Quote
Rocky Dijon
We've been through this a bunch of times and it never fails to amaze me. Writing songs isn't like writing a book. No one believes Mick Taylor walked in with a completed composition (words and music) and presented it to the band. He contributed during recording sessions. He added solos that changed the shape of songs and made them more memorable. If Mick and Keith were "good guys," would they have given him songwriting credit for his contributions then or now? Sure. Are Mick and Keith mean, greedy bastards so embittered by being ripped off by others that they will take advantage of whoever they can? Yeah, I imagine so. Do I honestly believe Mick Taylor sits around all day knowing he could walk in a solicitor's office and present legal documents that would make him millions? Of course not. Many musicians are not that businesss savvy, but they're also not conjugal idiots. If Taylor is bright enough to know these alleged documents exist and show proof to someone posting here, he would also be bright enough to do something about it. It may strike some as romantic to think Mr. Taylor's integrity is so great, he will wait for the Glimmers to do right by him even if it takes till the end of his life. I prefer to think that along with being an exceptionally talented guitarist, Mick Taylor possesses enough intelligence to function. This isn't Syd Barrett we're talking about. This is a bit like the people who believe Brian Jones picking the band's name from a Muddy Waters song gives his heirs intellectual property rights. The sad truth is, if Mick Taylor sued for songwriting royalties, the courts would say too much time has elapsed. He could have tried it in 1974, maybe even in 1981, but not in 2008. Was he taken advantage of? Yep. Does he really have any kind of claim? Of course not, unless someone can prove to me the guy is the Rainman of rock 'n' roll.
post of the day..this is exactly how i see it..
Re: Mick Taylor songs ???
Posted by:
Voja
()
Date: July 18, 2008 02:35
I read this very carefully and have to add some words :
1. Mr. Lighting have apsolutely right about Promogroup and about sharing profits.
2. Mr. R. Dijon explained very well how problem about song credits begins.
3. My question is : How Bill Wyman (he said that he nearly wrote JJF and PI
and Mick Taylor never repeat in theirs solo works this amazing moments of creativity? They wasn't with Stones < I know but JJF, PIB, CYHMK, Sway, Winter are masterpices. Why they didn't repeat little bit (slightly)???
1. Mr. Lighting have apsolutely right about Promogroup and about sharing profits.
2. Mr. R. Dijon explained very well how problem about song credits begins.
3. My question is : How Bill Wyman (he said that he nearly wrote JJF and PI
and Mick Taylor never repeat in theirs solo works this amazing moments of creativity? They wasn't with Stones < I know but JJF, PIB, CYHMK, Sway, Winter are masterpices. Why they didn't repeat little bit (slightly)???Re: Mick Taylor songs ???
Posted by:
stoned in washington dc
()
Date: July 18, 2008 02:55
Quote
Voja
I read this very carefully and have to add some words :
1. Mr. Lighting have apsolutely right about Promogroup and about sharing profits.
2. Mr. R. Dijon explained very well how problem about song credits begins.
3. My question is : How Bill Wyman (he said that he nearly wrote JJF and PI
well bill wyman is the only stone to have a number one single as a solo artist so there you go!
i think its always been quite clear that wyman is the brains behind the stones operation.. the jagger/richards songwriting credits just a ploy... its really wyman writing all the songs.. unfortunately when its time for the credits to be handed out he's always with the young girls and therefore jagger and richards sign for him...its no surprise that since wyman lost interest in the stones (even before his exit) the music just hasn't been that great...
Re: Mick Taylor songs ???
Posted by:
Barn Owl
()
Date: July 18, 2008 03:05
I don't wish to make things any more complicated than they already are, but it's perhaps worth mentioning the legal dispute that Ry Cooder had with the Stones regarding the recording of his six weeks of jamming sessions with them, and how he hadn't been made aware of this at the actual time.
In the absence of anybody here shedding light upon the specific nature of Cooder's dispute, am I right to assume, by implication at least, that Jagger and Richards were quite literally stealing his ideas?
i.e. is this some sort of trait?
In the absence of anybody here shedding light upon the specific nature of Cooder's dispute, am I right to assume, by implication at least, that Jagger and Richards were quite literally stealing his ideas?
i.e. is this some sort of trait?
Re: Mick Taylor songs ???
Posted by:
stoned in washington dc
()
Date: July 18, 2008 03:11
i think people take ideas all the time..its how you synthesize them that makes a hit ...
if cooder's ideas were so great he'd be the one who would have released exile or let it bleed or what have you! his "ideas" which dont' belong to him by the way are not what makes a hit.
if cooder's ideas were so great he'd be the one who would have released exile or let it bleed or what have you! his "ideas" which dont' belong to him by the way are not what makes a hit.
Re: Mick Taylor songs ???
Posted by:
Smokey
()
Date: July 18, 2008 03:30
Quote
Rocky Dijon
conjugal idiots
Are these:
1. people who are not married
2. people who are not married and don't know the joys their missing
3. people who've married
4. people who are married and are content
5. people who are married and are happy to the point of stupidity about it
6. people who are married and refer to each other by their pet names in front of others
7. people who are married, but should not be
8. people who are married, but should not be and do not realize it
9. people who are married, but should not be, do realize it and don't do anything about it
10. something else?
By the way, as far as we know, Mick T is not married.
Quote
Voja
My question is : How Bill Wyman (he said that he nearly wrote JJF and PI
Every three months when this whole songwriting stuff is rehashed, someone asks this. How about:
1. Almost all pop songwriters have periods of exceptional creativity. Only a few have longstanding careers of continual productivity. Consider the careers of The Who, The Kinks, Led Zeppelin, Paul McCartney, Rod Stewart, etc. How long has it been since any of them wrote a song that captured the public's interest like they did in the 70s. That's not even to mention all the one hit or one year wonders.
2. Some songwriters function particularly well with a particular team or in a particular environment. Do you listen to The Doors, but not Ray Manzarek's post-Door's stuff?
3. The context of the song matters. If Winter were on a non-Stones album and sung by Carla Olson would you appreciate it as much? The Stones brand (including its image and history) may count for a lot in the appreciation of a song. The flip side of the coin is that a musician in the pop field without a strong brand or promotional machinery can readily be perceived as a weaker performer notwithstanding a devoted fan base.
4. While Taylor did contribute to various Stones songs, he may have little interest in writing "those types of songs", which may have been part of his reason for leaving the band.
I am aware of Wyman's claims for one of the JJF riffs and the organ pedals on PIB, so I am curious about what he has claimed with regard to "songwriting credit". Incidentally, I think musicians learn fairly quickly that riffs need not be the basis for songwriting credit. There even is the infamous instance of Wally Bryson receiving a songwriting credit for the riff on Go All the Way, only to lose it later when it was "discovered" that riffs don't merit the credit. On the other hand, some bands have simply decided to split all songwriting royalties (and credits or regardless of the credits).
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2008-07-18 03:33 by Smokey.
Re: Mick Taylor songs ???
Posted by:
Rocky Dijon
()
Date: July 18, 2008 04:51
I would imagine JAMMING WITH EDWARD where Mr. Cooder shares songwriting credits alongside his credited and compensated work as a session guitarist on LET IT BLEED and STICKY FINGERS (albeit two years after the fact in the latter case) settled the legal requirements Mr. Cooder had with the Stones following the PERFORMANCE soundtrack sessions. All that's left is Mr. Cooder's perhaps justified bad feelings that tracks like "Honky Tonk Women" and "Midnight Rambler" bear his imprint. You can't sue for influence and you can't prove you originated something that doesn't exist. Its the old success has many fathers, failure is an orphan scenario. I don't doubt Mick and Keith take everything they can from others. When enough people claim it, there's bound to be truth somewhere. I do doubt they do it in a fashion that anyone could legally contest and win. Again, with so many wronged collaborators out there (Brian, Bill, Mick T., Ronnie, Ry, Gram, Dr. John, etc.) someone somewhere would have taken action and won.
Re: Mick Taylor songs ???
Posted by:
Smokey
()
Date: July 18, 2008 08:04
From somewhere on the Internet:
On the contrary though, there is a quote from one in the Stones circle that Cooder didn't do very much and then left.
On the contrary though, there is a quote from one in the Stones circle that Cooder didn't do very much and then left.
Re: Mick Taylor songs ???
Posted by:
Anonymous User
()
Date: July 18, 2008 09:49
-
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2010-12-31 02:08 by Amsterdamned.
Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2010-12-31 02:08 by Amsterdamned.
Re: Mick Taylor songs ???
Posted by:
skipstone
()
Date: July 18, 2008 10:07
Songwriting 101:
Hanging out with some friends, one of them said Ahhhh she's a sock monkey, she's got x's for eyes she oughta go home!
For some reason, I took that and (barely) expanded it and turned it into a song. The original riff or guitar hook or whatever you want to call it was stupidly and for shits and giggles based on that song Now You're Messin' With A Son Of A Bitch - which, as you can tell, I have no idea what the real name of the song is. It was more of a mish-mash of that and Aerosmith's Walk This Way only really dumpy. It has since changed from being played constantly on the road and then being recorded by the band I am in. You'd never know that its beginning was the SOB riff/lick/guitar melody/Aerosmith tune.
I wrote the song. Nobody else did. It's not my problem he didn't copyright it or make it his own song. I heard something, used it, made it into a song. My friend influenced the subject matter. He gave me the inspiration, something to work with. But he didn't write it. And there is no Black And Blue 'inspiration' bit. It's coming out in the fall on an album.
Hanging out with some friends, one of them said Ahhhh she's a sock monkey, she's got x's for eyes she oughta go home!
For some reason, I took that and (barely) expanded it and turned it into a song. The original riff or guitar hook or whatever you want to call it was stupidly and for shits and giggles based on that song Now You're Messin' With A Son Of A Bitch - which, as you can tell, I have no idea what the real name of the song is. It was more of a mish-mash of that and Aerosmith's Walk This Way only really dumpy. It has since changed from being played constantly on the road and then being recorded by the band I am in. You'd never know that its beginning was the SOB riff/lick/guitar melody/Aerosmith tune.
I wrote the song. Nobody else did. It's not my problem he didn't copyright it or make it his own song. I heard something, used it, made it into a song. My friend influenced the subject matter. He gave me the inspiration, something to work with. But he didn't write it. And there is no Black And Blue 'inspiration' bit. It's coming out in the fall on an album.
Re: Mick Taylor songs ???
Posted by:
Barn Owl
()
Date: July 18, 2008 11:07
Quote
Rocky Dijon
I would imagine JAMMING WITH EDWARD where Mr. Cooder shares songwriting credits alongside his credited and compensated work as a session guitarist on LET IT BLEED and STICKY FINGERS (albeit two years after the fact in the latter case) settled the legal requirements Mr. Cooder had with the Stones following the PERFORMANCE soundtrack sessions. All that's left is Mr. Cooder's perhaps justified bad feelings that tracks like "Honky Tonk Women" and "Midnight Rambler" bear his imprint. You can't sue for influence and you can't prove you originated something that doesn't exist. Its the old success has many fathers, failure is an orphan scenario. I don't doubt Mick and Keith take everything they can from others. When enough people claim it, there's bound to be truth somewhere. I do doubt they do it in a fashion that anyone could legally contest and win. Again, with so many wronged collaborators out there (Brian, Bill, Mick T., Ronnie, Ry, Gram, Dr. John, etc.) someone somewhere would have taken action and won.
Many thanks, Rocky.
Re: Mick Taylor songs ???
Posted by:
Voja
()
Date: July 18, 2008 11:11
Knowing Bill Wymans position on top list. It proves nothing. (and Napoleon XIV was on lists)
But I agree with R. Dijon again. ''Jamming With Edvard'' is perfect example for my words. One moment K. Richards was away, and all others made almost nothing. Same could be when M. Jagger is not present.
(Almost same is when MJ is with Red Devils or KR with Barbarians < This thing, The Rolling Stones, is much bigger then them!)
And B. Wyman and M. Taylor with their works didn't confirm that they made PIB, JJF, CYHMK, Winter... You could made book about Shagal, but not JJF again. Only you could adding little pedals on....
But I agree with R. Dijon again. ''Jamming With Edvard'' is perfect example for my words. One moment K. Richards was away, and all others made almost nothing. Same could be when M. Jagger is not present.
(Almost same is when MJ is with Red Devils or KR with Barbarians < This thing, The Rolling Stones, is much bigger then them!)
And B. Wyman and M. Taylor with their works didn't confirm that they made PIB, JJF, CYHMK, Winter... You could made book about Shagal, but not JJF again. Only you could adding little pedals on....
Re: Mick Taylor songs ???
Posted by:
Doxa
()
Date: July 18, 2008 11:21
Quote
Rocky Dijon
I would imagine JAMMING WITH EDWARD where Mr. Cooder shares songwriting credits alongside his credited and compensated work as a session guitarist on LET IT BLEED and STICKY FINGERS (albeit two years after the fact in the latter case) settled the legal requirements Mr. Cooder had with the Stones following the PERFORMANCE soundtrack sessions. All that's left is Mr. Cooder's perhaps justified bad feelings that tracks like "Honky Tonk Women" and "Midnight Rambler" bear his imprint. You can't sue for influence and you can't prove you originated something that doesn't exist. Its the old success has many fathers, failure is an orphan scenario. I don't doubt Mick and Keith take everything they can from others. When enough people claim it, there's bound to be truth somewhere. I do doubt they do it in a fashion that anyone could legally contest and win. Again, with so many wronged collaborators out there (Brian, Bill, Mick T., Ronnie, Ry, Gram, Dr. John, etc.) someone somewhere would have taken action and won.
This is a very good observation! I never recognized the connection before this. And JAMMING WITH THE EDWARD is one of those recordings that asks for a rational reason why it is released. Namely, if they want to release some of their jams, it is not surely the best one. There are dozens of better bootlegs, even of those very same highly creative times, of it teh actual album is a very bad repsrentation. Now it sounds reasonable. Heh, one could even put the sticker on it: this is how poor the Stones sound without the musical direction and turbin of Keith Richards. The Ry Cooder case is resolved in some way or other with this release.
And now when just thinking about: without any better reason how coherent it would have been for the other guys to say to Keith that "Hi pal, we decided to release a record in our new label of the sessions you couldn't make". "Oh, thanks, mates. I love you, too..."
- Doxa
Re: Mick Taylor songs ???
Posted by:
terraplane
()
Date: July 18, 2008 14:15
Quote
Barn Owl
In the absence of anybody here shedding light upon the specific nature of Cooder's dispute, am I right to assume, by implication at least, that Jagger and Richards were quite literally stealing his ideas?
It's called a 'sponge' job. It is said Ry played on some of the basic tracks for Let It Bleed. Keith re-did Ry's guitar parts note fore note and then wiped Ry's contribution. The fact that Keith never really played slide guitar before this album and basically didn't again after is telling.
As regards MT's contributions, I remember reading a guitar magazine article some years ago (which I now don't have). In this article Mick listed some of the songs he felt he should have been given part credited for. It wasn't just Moonlight Mile or TWFNO either. There were a few more but I think it was songs from GHS and IORR.
I have never read anything where Mick or Bill for that matter have said they wrote a track completely. It was about not being given part credit. Bill says he wrote the riff for Jumpin' Jack Flash. Without that riff there is no song. Therefore, IMO, he deserves part credit. It is not as simplistic as the song being the words and the melody (though often it is).
If you see the Swinging 60s doco, some guy on it claims As Tears Go By was wqritten by Jagger and another individual (maybe Jack Nitsche but I can't remember exactly.) Basically the point was KR had nothing to do with the composition.
Re: Mick Taylor songs ???
Posted by:
Barn Owl
()
Date: July 18, 2008 15:42
Quote
terraplaneQuote
Barn Owl
In the absence of anybody here shedding light upon the specific nature of Cooder's dispute, am I right to assume, by implication at least, that Jagger and Richards were quite literally stealing his ideas?
It's called a 'sponge' job. It is said Ry played on some of the basic tracks for Let It Bleed. Keith re-did Ry's guitar parts note fore note and then wiped Ry's contribution. The fact that Keith never really played slide guitar before this album and basically didn't again after is telling.
Thanks for that, terraplane. That's what I'd been led to believe as well.
Re: Mick Taylor songs ???
Posted by:
skipstone
()
Date: July 18, 2008 18:44
Let me interrupt this wonderful shit throwing contest:
I completely forgot about Angie! Because...I skip it, don't play it, won't listen to it. EVER.
And I loved this line:
"These people keep rewriting Taylor's wikipedia entry"
Now, regardless of who it's about, it's what it says that is true - Wikipedia is garbage. There are truths in it but none of it is dependable.
I completely forgot about Angie! Because...I skip it, don't play it, won't listen to it. EVER.
And I loved this line:
"These people keep rewriting Taylor's wikipedia entry"
Now, regardless of who it's about, it's what it says that is true - Wikipedia is garbage. There are truths in it but none of it is dependable.
Re: Mick Taylor songs ???
Posted by:
Zack
()
Date: July 18, 2008 19:08
Mathijs, I thought Moonlight Mile was based on a demo from Keith called "Japanese thing," though he didn't play on the session. (Is that demo in circulation?)
Re: Mick Taylor songs ???
Posted by:
scottkeef
()
Date: July 18, 2008 20:14
Zack, I've heard the "Japanese thing" reference too but I thought Keith was just commenting on MT's doodling. BUt I could be mistaken.
On the subject of Keiths slide playing on Bleed, I always thought it was unusual to say the least how Keith picked up the slide style in the middle of his career(at the time) so to speak but I think everyone would admit its pretty basic slide work! Not that hard to duplicate although it is elegant in its simplicity.IMO
Just a thought-didnt Keith use slide on the rythm of HAPPY? I know he doesnt now but I coulda swore on the 72 footage it shows him using a slide on stage and didnt he use a slide on the No Security You got the Silver performances?
On the subject of Keiths slide playing on Bleed, I always thought it was unusual to say the least how Keith picked up the slide style in the middle of his career(at the time) so to speak but I think everyone would admit its pretty basic slide work! Not that hard to duplicate although it is elegant in its simplicity.IMO
Just a thought-didnt Keith use slide on the rythm of HAPPY? I know he doesnt now but I coulda swore on the 72 footage it shows him using a slide on stage and didnt he use a slide on the No Security You got the Silver performances?
Re: Mick Taylor songs ???
Posted by:
DandelionPowderman
()
Date: July 19, 2008 23:05
< didnt Keith use slide on the rythm of HAPPY? >
He did. And he did it live too - for some tours.
He did. And he did it live too - for some tours.
Re: Mick Taylor songs ???
Posted by:
Steen G
()
Date: July 19, 2008 23:36
Hand of Fate and Broken Hands are basically build from the same riff. I guess this is something MT brought to Stones but as you can hear it ended up being different songs.
Re: Mick Taylor songs ???
Posted by:
More Hot Rocks
()
Date: July 19, 2008 23:40
Quote
Amsterdamned
And don't accuse me of a "below zero" approach, you absolutely have no idea what you're talking about.
[Mathijs]
Calling someone a coke addict since 1972,and calling him a wreck,and some more "nice" things about M.Taylor,and not even accepting that somebody doesn't agree on this?
Who are you then,the king of this site?
Being somewhat new to this board he does seam like a know it all. i think he's just frustrated.
Re: Mick Taylor songs ???
Posted by:
barbabang
()
Date: July 19, 2008 23:42
Quote
Steen G
Hand of Fate and Broken Hands are basically build from the same riff. I guess this is something MT brought to Stones but as you can hear it ended up being different songs.
With all respect, I think that is nonsense.
Re: Mick Taylor songs ???
Posted by:
Sohoe
()
Date: July 20, 2008 00:07
<<Jagger thought Ronnie was a nice guy but had his doubts about him as a guitarist>>
According to Stu in the '75 Creem Magazine interview, it was Mick that wanted Ronnie and Keith who had his doubts.
Read the interview here: [www.iorr.org] [The 'Ronnie comment' is just above the middle of the page]
According to Stu in the '75 Creem Magazine interview, it was Mick that wanted Ronnie and Keith who had his doubts.
Read the interview here: [www.iorr.org] [The 'Ronnie comment' is just above the middle of the page]
Re: Mick Taylor songs ???
Posted by:
LOGIE
()
Date: July 20, 2008 00:41
Keith was also very supportive of Mick Taylor, and it was he who fought long and hard with Jagger for MT's solo at the end of 'Time Waits for No One' to be kept on.
In fact when Taylor left the Stones, Keith sent him a telegram containing the following:
"Really enjoyed playing with you for the last five years.
Thanks for all the turn ons.
Best Wishes and Love."
According to Mick Taylor's wife, he just read it and started crying, saying that those words had really got to him as it reflected entirely how he felt about them.
In fact when Taylor left the Stones, Keith sent him a telegram containing the following:
"Really enjoyed playing with you for the last five years.
Thanks for all the turn ons.
Best Wishes and Love."
According to Mick Taylor's wife, he just read it and started crying, saying that those words had really got to him as it reflected entirely how he felt about them.
Sorry, only registered users may post in this forum.
Online Users
britstones , crawdaddy , curt , DiegoGlimmerStones , Knellz , makemeburnthecandle , micha063 , philrock90 , powerage78 , riffhard1860 , rsvp2000 , sheldi , spiderman , spidey39 , spunky , stoned52 , Stonesfan2146 , stoneslib , stonesmuziekfan , TW2019 , UGK56
Guests:
2367
Record Number of Users:
206
on June 1, 2022 23:50
Record Number of Guests:
9627
on January 2, 2024 23:10