| October 28th, 2004 03:41 PM |
|
|
| F505 |
Pete Townshend is on position 1204 (just after Tiny Tim) |
| October 28th, 2004 03:41 PM |
|
|
| gypsy |
Don't argue with placement, nanky. |
| October 28th, 2004 03:42 PM |
|
|
| nankerphelge |
It's all about placement baby!
I know you know that! |
| October 28th, 2004 03:55 PM |
|
|
| Joey |
quote:
F505 wrote:
Pete Townshend is on position 1204 (just after Tiny Tim)
That's it !!!!!!
I'm leaving the board .
Bye Essessy's |
| October 28th, 2004 03:59 PM |
|
|
| F505 |
quote:
Joey wrote:
That's it !!!!!!
I'm leaving the board .
Bye Essessy's
wait a minute!!! I haven't composed that list!!! |
| October 28th, 2004 04:41 PM |
|
|
| Night Clerk |
Prince - he's not even on that list of the top 100. I think his performance at the RnR Hall of Fame concert where he took the guitar solo on "While My Guitar Gently Weeps" woke people up though. |
| October 28th, 2004 06:32 PM |
|
|
| Gazza |
you just beat me to it. he's a brilliant musician. |
| October 28th, 2004 06:51 PM |
|
|
| Mr. D |
quote:
Night Clerk wrote:
Prince - he's not even on that list of the top 100. I think his performance at the RnR Hall of Fame concert where he took the guitar solo on "While My Guitar Gently Weeps" woke people up though.
Yes, great point. Prince is an awesome guitarist...at the HOF ceremony, after he played, George Harrison's son seemed a bit taken back by how great he was. Prince stole the show. |
| October 28th, 2004 08:39 PM |
|
|
| i aint you |
lesley west |
| October 28th, 2004 09:51 PM |
|
|
| Soldatti |
Mick!!
He plays more guitar now than his partner...
[Edited by Soldatti] |
| October 28th, 2004 10:12 PM |
|
|
| VoodooChileInWOnderl |
Well, underrated is not the same that unknown but I think the best � unknown and underrated� guitarist is Shaun Baxter (http://www.shaunbaxter.com) |
| October 29th, 2004 02:11 AM |
|
|
| Cant Catch Me |
Roy Buchanan and Danny Gatton, hell yeah!! I prefer Gatton, though, because he could play virtually any style, while Buchanan was pretty blues-centric.
But both of 'em barely earned a living playing guitar, and that's what I call under-rated. The fact that both committed suicide doesn't earn any sympathy from me, though, since any chance of greater recognition died with them. Gatton especially because I had an invitation to see him play at a private party on a Saturday, and he killed himself just a few days prior. The bastard! |
| October 29th, 2004 04:04 AM |
|
|
| beer |
quote:
Mathijs wrote:
No, Taylor received just a tip for the entire 1972 tour. His house in the south of France of course was just a two-bedroom condo, and the Spider in front of it was a second-hand...
Mathijs
I seriously doubt Taylor ever saw millions of dollars. A summer tour in 1972 probably wouldn't have got him a ton of money, nor would playing on a handful of LP's, even if they were hugely successful. Bill's boring book "Stone Alone" sheds light onthe band members money, compared to MIck and Keef. |
| October 29th, 2004 05:01 AM |
|
|
| Gazza |
Yeah but that book only goes up to 1969.
the first tour after Taylor joined, the 1969 US tour, was the first really BIG tour from a business point of view (ie, playing arenas, high ticket prices for the time ($7!!)
Soon after that, they started their own record label and got a much better deal on royalties and of course they also left the UK for tax reasons.
The Stones never really started making money until the early 70's when they sorted out their financial and business affairs. Taylor was still there until the end of 1974 and I'd imagine would still to this day benefit considerably from royalty cheques due to the sales of their back catalogue for the period that he was in the band. |
| October 29th, 2004 05:10 AM |
|
|
| beer |
I don't know, Gazza, the Stones are notorious for being ruthless when it comes to money. wasn't Ronnie paid considerably less money than the others for many, many years?
I'm guessing if you asked Taylor if he made Millions of dollars from his time in the Stones, He'd probably laugh.
|
| October 29th, 2004 05:55 AM |
|
|
| Mathijs |
We have to see things in perspective I guess. The big money for the Stones came in 1989 -we're talking hundreds of million of dollars. But as early as 1965 (after Satisfaction) the Stones were already rock royalty, and absolute millionaires. Everytime Bill Wyman whines about the Stones not having any money in 1971, you should remember that Keith was able to rent Nellcote, one of the most exclusive and expensive villa's in the South of France. They were all driving Bentley's, could spend fortunes on hiring the Olympic studio for months in a row, could buy castles and vast estates in country-England and what more. Of course Taylor wasn't as rich as the original members, but as I said: his house in the South of France still suits any decent young millionair.
A sign of how rich the Stones were already in 1966: Ian McLagan descibes in his book the royalty the Small Faces missed due to bad contracts and whatever. If I remember correctly it was something like 8 million pounds. Well, if the Small Faces were worth this amount of money, it's actually scary to know what the Stones were worth.
Mathijs |
| October 29th, 2004 07:06 AM |
|
|
| Gazza |
quote:
beer wrote:
I don't know, Gazza, the Stones are notorious for being ruthless when it comes to money. wasn't Ronnie paid considerably less money than the others for many, many years?
I'm guessing if you asked Taylor if he made Millions of dollars from his time in the Stones, He'd probably laugh.
Ronnie also fucked up because, as far as I'm aware, when he joined he was offered the choice of a percentage on future earnings or a long time annual salary. He opted for a salary as he presumably must have felt that the deal he signed would have paid him a wage past the date that the band would presumably have kept together (after all, in 1976 most people wouldnt have imagined them lasting more than another five years at most). By committing himself to that deal, he lost out on millions and by the late 80's with the band pretty much existing in name only (just prior to the 1989 tour when he really DID start making some money) he was on the verge of bankruptcy - part of the reason why he started selling paintings, in fact.
But I concur with Mathijs. The Stones, during Taylor's time with them, were nowhere near as rich as they are today but still very rich by the standards or the vast majority of rock stars. Mick and Keith especially of course, but the others had all the material benefits of stardom as well. |
| October 29th, 2004 09:05 AM |
|
|
| Factory Girl |
Johnny Winter
Jerry Cantrell
[Edited by Factory Girl] |
| October 29th, 2004 09:54 AM |
|
|
| jpenn11 |
1. Pete Townsend was #50 on the RS list.
2. For those of you whining about Johnny Ramone, Lyndsey Buckingham and Paul Simon not being on the list here's another list:
"TOTAL GUITAR's Top 100 Guitarists
On 6th August 2002, Total Guitar announced their top 100 guitarists of all time. Voted for by thousands of readers worldwide and also by guitarists themselves, it makes for interesting reading:
1 Jimi Hendrix
2 Jimmy Page
3 Eric Clapton
4 Slash
5 Brian May
6 Joe Satriani
7 Eddie Van Halen
8 Dave Gilmour
9 Kirk Hammett
10 Steve Vai
11 Carlos Santana
12 James Hetfield
13 Tom Morello
14 Kurt Cobain
15 Mark Knopfler
16 Zakk Wylde
17 Gary Moore
18 Jeff Beck
19 Stevie Ray Vaughan
20 Angus Young
21 Randy Rhoads
22 Tony Iommi
23 Ritchie Blackmore
24 George Harrison
25 Dave Murray
26 John Frusciante
27 Keith Richards
28 Richie Sambora
29 Matt Bellamy
30 Noodles
31 The Edge
32 Mick Thomson
33 Pete Townshend
34 Yngwie Malmsteen
35 Jonny Greenwood
36 Chuck Berry
37 Wes Borland
38 Hank Marvin
39 Joe Perry
40 Dimebag Darrell
41 B.B. King
42 Rory Gallagher
43 Tom DeLonge
44 Steve Jones
45 Billy Corgan
46 James Dean Bradfield
47 Johnny Marr
48 Billie Joe Armstrong
49 Mike Einziger
50 Noel Gallagher
51 Dave Baksh
52 Dave Grohl
53 Daron Malakian
54 Adrian Smith
55 Kerry King
56 Peter Green
57 Alex Lifeson
58 Nick Drake
59 Robert Johnson
60 Paul Kossoff
61 Mick Ronson
62 Frank Zappa
63 Head
64 Mike McCready
65 John 5
66 Paul Weller
67 Nuno Bettencourt
68 Graham Coxon
69 Robert Fripp
70 Paul Gilbert
71 Eric Johnson
72 John Petrucci
73 Django Rheinhardt
74 John Squire
75 Chet Atkins
76 Stuart Adamson
77 John McLaughlin
78 Steve Morse
79 Tommy Emmanuel
80 Janick Gers
81 Dave Mustaine
82 Neil Young
83 Lyndsey Buckingham
84 Steve Howe
85 Lee Gaze
86 Robbie Krieger
87 Munky
88 Johnny Ramone
89 Walter Trout
90 Peter Buck
91 Marty Friedman
92 Rivers Cuomo
93 Richard Thompson
94 Paul Simon
95 Tom Verlaine
96 Kelly Jones
97 Deryck Whibley
98 Jeff Hanneman
99 Steve Cropper
100 Nile Rodgers"
I think the main reason to print these lists is that the magazines are assured of two hot selling issues. The one with the list, where folks buy it to evaluate the list; and then the next issue where the same folks buy the issue to see whether their complaint letters about placement got printed. (Dear Sirs, I represent the Jimi Hendrix estate and I'm appalled that Jimi appears as number 1 immediately above Jimmy Page. If Jimi is #1, then there should be no #2. That's how good Jimi was. Sincerely, Experience People)
3. I've heard rumors that Taylor signed away his royalties for a lump sum after leaving the band. Any truth to this?
4. Also, Keith's purchase of Nellcote doesn't really tell you what song-royalty-less Taylor was receiving. |
| October 29th, 2004 11:51 AM |
|
|
| Saint Sway |
I think Keith Richards is underated.
sure, his name comes up in most greatest guitarist lists, but he's widely just referred to as a great rhythem guitarist. The reason I think hes underated is bc there is NO OTHER GUITARIST with as lengthy and impressive catalog of killer riffs. His body of work - all those amazing songs and riffs - pales all other guitar players. Keef's underated because he's got the greatest catalog of riffs and somehow still has problems cracking the top ten on most guitar riffs. |
| October 29th, 2004 01:38 PM |
|
|
| stewed & Keefed |
Zoot Horn Rollo. |
CHAT
ROOM aka THE FUN HOUSE] [
RESTROOMS]