Mick Taylor vs Ronnie Wood

Do talk back
User avatar
Walk In My Shadow
Hello Laydeez
Posts: 38415
Joined: 23 Jul 2003, 20:02
Location: The Good, the Bad, both ugly
Contact:

Mick Taylor vs Ronnie Wood

Postby Walk In My Shadow » 28 Sep 2021, 17:51

OK, so we all know Brian Jones was the main man.

Brilliant guitarist Mick Taylor put some fire back in the Stones during his short 5 year tenure with the band.

Ronnie Wood was not taken in for his musical contributions but rather as a jester and buddy to Keef. He also fit their imago better.

Do you agree? They should have kept Taylor.
Beneluxfunkmeisterlurvegod


Image

User avatar
GoogaMooga
custodian of oldies
Posts: 28288
Joined: 28 Sep 2010, 05:23
Location: Denmark

Re: Mick Taylor vs Ronnie Wood

Postby GoogaMooga » 28 Sep 2021, 18:20

Mick Taylor was the best guitarist, but Brian Jones was the founder and the soul of the band. Didn't Taylor quit because he tired of the stadium touring and wanted to play pure blues? I saw him live at a small venue in the late 90s. He didn't play any Rolling Stones songs, except the cover, "Little Red Rooster".
"When the desert comes, people will be sad; just as Cannery Row was sad when all the pilchards were caught and canned and eaten." - John Steinbeck

Positive Passion
Posts: 1788
Joined: 05 Jul 2017, 23:05

Re: Mick Taylor vs Ronnie Wood

Postby Positive Passion » 28 Sep 2021, 18:30

You only have to listen to the live version of Beast of Burden from 1981 (I have it on a "Rarities" compilation but I think it is on Sucking in the 70s) to recognise the Keith/Ronnie combo as the Stones in full glory.

User avatar
mudshark
Posts: 830
Joined: 25 Jul 2003, 03:51

Re: Mick Taylor vs Ronnie Wood

Postby mudshark » 28 Sep 2021, 18:46

Mick Taylor was their guitarist on Let It Bleed, Exile and Sticky, which are their best post-Brian albums. Most records with Wood on it are shit. No argument here. With Taylor they were a much better band. But I agree that Ronnie is a better fit personality-wise.
There's a big difference between kneeling down and bending over

User avatar
The Slider
Self-Aggrandising Cock
Posts: 47623
Joined: 16 Jul 2003, 19:05
Location: I'm only here for the sneer
Contact:

Re: Mick Taylor vs Ronnie Wood

Postby The Slider » 28 Sep 2021, 18:52

They were a better *band* with Wood but they only made one good record with him.
The five they made with Taylor would have been better if Wood had been in the band.
Less noodly wanking.
and meanwhile I'm still thinking

User avatar
Matt Wilson
Psychedelic Cowpunk
Posts: 31171
Joined: 16 Jul 2003, 20:18
Location: Edge of a continent

Re: Mick Taylor vs Ronnie Wood

Postby Matt Wilson » 28 Sep 2021, 18:57

:lol:

User avatar
OUTPLAY
hounds people off the board
Posts: 19907
Joined: 24 Apr 2007, 23:21

Re: Mick Taylor vs Ronnie Wood

Postby OUTPLAY » 28 Sep 2021, 19:08

Matt feels lost when facing non-consensual opinions
GoogaMooga wrote:I don't know who it is that is throwing plastic bags overboard from ships, but it certainly isn't me, and I've never met anyone who does that.

User avatar
Matt Wilson
Psychedelic Cowpunk
Posts: 31171
Joined: 16 Jul 2003, 20:18
Location: Edge of a continent

Re: Mick Taylor vs Ronnie Wood

Postby Matt Wilson » 28 Sep 2021, 19:20

Image


Still smarting over the other day, Johnny?
Last edited by Matt Wilson on 28 Sep 2021, 20:08, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
robertff
Posts: 7446
Joined: 20 Jul 2003, 06:59

Re: Mick Taylor vs Ronnie Wood

Postby robertff » 28 Sep 2021, 19:30

mudshark wrote:Mick Taylor was their guitarist on Let It Bleed, Exile and Sticky, which are their best post-Brian albums. Most records with Wood on it are shit. No argument here. With Taylor they were a much better band. But I agree that Ronnie is a better fit personality-wise.




Really don't agree with that statement.

Brian Jones was a spent force at the end of his tenure and his contribution to the Stones was virtually nil by the end of it. Aftermath saw his greatest contribution but he didn't write one song for the album, in fact in didn't write anything for the Stones at all, I really don't count Nanker/Phelge. He has almost become a deity regarding the early Stones but the Stones survived his loss and his contribution pretty easily because he didn't write the songs. As sad as I was when it was announced firstly, that he was booted out of the Stones and then that he had died, in truth he had become an albatross and a drag around their collective neck. The next four albums proved it.

Mick Taylor was not their first choice as a replacement, there were others in line before him Ronnie Wood himself apparently so he revealed recently, although Ronnie Lane wouldn't allow the Glimmers to approach him. He brought a different dimension to the Stones' music, a virtuoso which enabled the Stones to take a different more successful path for a while. The songs would have been written with or without him, his contribution was as a player. Would those albums have been as good without him, who knows, they might have been different, even better perhaps?

And then Ronnie came along. The announcement that he was joining was one of the worst kept secrets in popular music everyone knew that he was going to join the Stones, the question was why he hadn't joined sooner? Again he brought something else to the Stones he was a really good fit, as was mentioned earlier but to say that every record he has been on has been 'shit' is just unfairly dismissive.


.

User avatar
slightbreeze
Can I Get To Widnes?
Posts: 10701
Joined: 03 Sep 2003, 20:07
Location: facing the computer
Contact:

Re: Mick Taylor vs Ronnie Wood

Postby slightbreeze » 28 Sep 2021, 21:15

Mick Taylor :. Fine guitarist, wrong band. Ron Wood. :. Adequate guitarist, right band

User avatar
Mike Boom
Posts: 3751
Joined: 02 Sep 2005, 03:49

Re: Mick Taylor vs Ronnie Wood

Postby Mike Boom » 28 Sep 2021, 23:47

Mick Taylor by a long shot

User avatar
Charlie O.
Posts: 43087
Joined: 21 Jul 2003, 19:53
Location: In-A-Badda-La-Wadda, bay-beh

Re: Mick Taylor vs Ronnie Wood

Postby Charlie O. » 29 Sep 2021, 00:43

Listen to The Slider at this point.

Actually, I'm not sure their '69-'72 output would have been "better" with Wood instead of Taylor (we wouldn't have had "Moonlight Mile", for one thing). But Taylor generally seemed like an "add-on", and I do love the way Woody and Keith play together. Any post-Taylor - post-Exile, really - failings are in my opinion largely down to inconsistent (to put it charitably) songwriting and Mick's increasingly dreadful singing.
Image

User avatar
Mike Boom
Posts: 3751
Joined: 02 Sep 2005, 03:49

Re: Mick Taylor vs Ronnie Wood

Postby Mike Boom » 29 Sep 2021, 02:01

Nah , Woodie is a fine guitarist but he’s very much Keef mark II . They mesh together well , but I prefer them with Mick Taylor were there was a more defined rhythm / lead divide.
Ronnie Wood would never have managed something like the solo in Time Waits for No one.

User avatar
Six String
Posts: 22477
Joined: 16 Jul 2003, 20:22

Re: Mick Taylor vs Ronnie Wood

Postby Six String » 29 Sep 2021, 18:24

Yes, it was the contrast between Mick and Keith that made the sound of the band work. As already stated, Ron is too close to Keith’s sound which makes the band less interesting to my ears.
The future is not what it used to be?
Mickey Newbury

User avatar
Matt Wilson
Psychedelic Cowpunk
Posts: 31171
Joined: 16 Jul 2003, 20:18
Location: Edge of a continent

Re: Mick Taylor vs Ronnie Wood

Postby Matt Wilson » 29 Sep 2021, 18:31

Careful, you guys are espousing consensual opinions!