ROCKS OFF - The Rolling Stones Message Board

Winterland, San Francisco - June 6th, 1972, 1st show
Thanks Stoneslib

[THE WET PAGE] [IORR NEWS] [SETLISTS 1962-2003] [THE A/V ROOM] [THE ART GALLERY] [MICK JAGGER] [KEITHFUCIUS] [CHARLIE WATTS ] [RON WOOD] [BRIAN JONES] [MICK TAYLOR] [BILL WYMAN] [IAN STEWART ] [NICKY HOPKINS] [MERRY CLAYTON] [IAN 'MAC' McLAGAN] [BERNARD FOWLER] [LISA FISCHER] [DARRYL JONES] [BOBBY KEYS] [JAMES PHELGE] [CHUCK LEAVELL] [LINKS] [PHOTOS] [MAGAZINE COVERS] [MUSIC COVERS ] [JIMI HENDRIX] [BOOTLEGS] [TEMPLE] [GUESTBOOK] [ADMIN]

[CHAT ROOM aka THE FUN HOUSE] [RESTROOMS]

NEW: SEARCH ZONE:
Search for goods, you'll find the impossible collector's item!!!
Enter artist an start searching using "Power Search" (RECOMMENDED) inside.
Search for information in the wet page, the archives and this board:

PicoSearch
ROCKS OFF - The Rolling Stones Message Board
Register | Update Profile | F.A.Q. | Admin Control Panel

Topic: Some Girls Vs Goat's Head Soup Return to archive Page: 1 2 3
11-08-03 11:49 PM
ComingDownAgain Goats Head but my favorite of all is Sticky Fingers.
11-08-03 11:54 PM
TheSavageYoungXyzzy I'd say IORR gets closer to Some Girls than Goat's Head Soup.

To say "You can't compare the Taylor albums to albums from any other era" is ridiculous. You compare Beggar's Banquet to Let It Bleed and Sticky Fingers all the time even though Beggar's Banquet is for all intensive purposes a four-Stone album like Black & Blue.

I'm beginning to think the second guitarist in the band is really a secondary thing to Keith's situation. Some Girls was the man refusing to believe he was irrelevent, Goat's Head Soup was him trying to live through the seventies with everything going wrong. Taylor puts in a fine effort on the album, but that doesn't save it from overall mediocrity. IORR is a much stronger record, but both of them lose out to Some Girls in my opinion, second guitarist be damned.

With much thanks to Voodoo, I have my copy of Micky T. playing at Salon 21 in Mexico City, and there's no doubting the man's an incredible guitarist. But I don't like 20-minute-long songs. I don't like extended instrumental jams that go nowhere after a long time waiting. "Knocking" and "Rambler" tend to be my limits in terms of songs like that. And to be honest, I think Taylor's live solo version of "Can't You Hear Me Knocking" that he did is pretty great... but I liked the version I heard on this tour better. There's no menace to the version Taylor does now. I mean, fine. It sounds like a real cool jazz-fusion-latin groove that's pretty awesome. If you like those kinds of songs over Chuck Berry and Little Richard, Taylor's the man for you. If you prefer balls-out crunch, naturally you're going to go towards either '68 or '75.

I understand why people think you can't compare Taylor days to any other days, because let's face it - the era when Taylor was in the band was the band's best era. Hands down. And I say this as the biggest proponent of the Ronnie Wood era on this board. The Taylor era, from 1969 to 1974, was unrivaled in terms of the new material they released. But the revitalization of the Stones had already started with Keith in 1968 with Beggar's Banquet and a little tune that went by the name "Jumping Jack Flash". Taylor was a perfect complement to that era, lending blues licks and a real commanding lead guitar to the records that he played on for the most part. But Keith had already begun moving in that direction. Taylor just helped him get there, with excellent success.

In the same way, Keith was moving towards a blended continuous guitar sound motivated in part by the new rock sounds coming out of the early seventies when he started fighting with Taylor, championed by the Faces, The Stooges and the rest of the disenchanted mod/rocker crowd that eventually became the punks and the glam rockers. He didn't want glitzy leads on his songs anymore - he wanted a crazy-good guitar crunch to blast through everything. So Taylor left because he wasn't needed for Keith's style anymore and in came Ronnie, who fit the bill perfectly. And the '75 tour, with its wild ups and downs, was a whole different triumph than the '69 and '72 tours.

I just think it's really about Keith more than Taylor or Ronnie when you get down to it. If Keith's in a bad stretch, of course the music's going to be bad. If Keith's on fire, of course the music's going to be good. I thought Keith was livid during Some Girls and lethargic during Goat's Head Soup, leaving only a few incredible tunes of his own ("Coming Down Again", "Heartbreaker") and Mick's pair of ballads ("Angie" and "Winter") to sustain a passable Exile-wannabe. The version of "Starfucker" on the '75 tour is infinitely better than the studio version because it sounds like a Chuck Berry song that Chuck always *wanted* to sing, while the studio version just kinda chugs along like it might want to do something fun, eventually, if that lead guitar would do something a little more grungy. Hence the phase-out of Taylor and the arrival of Ronnie.

In conclusion: You can compare Stones records all you like because there're two big factors that matter: Mick and Keith. Everything else is just window dressing. Some Girls is better than Goat's Head Soup in my opinion because it was when Keith was at the peak of one era while Goat's Head Soup was Keith 'coming down again' from the Exile era.

Just my opinion.

Now if only someone would make Keith angry again, or send him to jail or something, maybe he'd come out and write some rockers instead of leaving the job to Mick who is clearly incapable of writing one... only finishing one, and doing a fucking fantastic job of doing it.

Ronnie B. Damned! Someone fix up Keith!

-tSYX --- Yeah, I heard about your polaroids...
11-09-03 12:33 AM
KeithRichards210 Oh Savage one..I think you've said it better than anyone, including myself. Kudos to you..
11-09-03 08:11 PM
SHINE A LIGHT yes, well said... the second one above. the taylor era is priceless. and why are we comparing to start with?? taylor is taylor, ronnie is ronnie.....two different people/styles.
in the end, it's keith who says what's what.
11-09-03 10:13 PM
BILL PERKS WELL-IT'S A BIT COLD SO I GOT MY GHS DISC OUT AND PLAYED DANCIN,100 YEARS AND WINTER TONIGHT ON MY WAY TO THE LIQUOR STORE.IT SEEMS STRANGE THEY RECORDED SUCH A DARK RECORD IN JAMAICA.MUST BE THE DRUGS.
11-09-03 10:18 PM
KurtWaldheim Definitely GHS. IMO SG is the most overrated Stone's album out there. And Miss You is THE most single overplayed Stone's song out there. Everytime the Stone's are on TV they are playing that song. The NYC 9/11 concert, Mick's latest vanity record send off party, etc, etc. The last time that song sounded good was on the 81/82 tour, and then it was pure gold! I love the way Mick worked the crowd during that song - and the way Bill Wyman worked the bass. He had complete and utter mastery of the disco bass style -- as well as complete and utter mastery of the 12 bar-blues/Willie Dixon bass style. If you doubt my word just put on Ya Ya's, and bask in the glow of perfect bass lines. (Preferrably use the remastered Ya Ya's and a sound system that can make the floor shake AND produce crystal clear bass notes.) Some people mourn the passing of MT off the sound stage - I mourn the passing of Bill "Perky" Wyman who is 39 and holding. He may not possess the most likeable personality but he has few peers among pop musicians, when it comes to knowledge about the music they make. Listen to any live recording of the Stones when he was a member, and you will hear very tastefull, well done bass playing that rocks - whether disco or otherwise. By the by, "tastefull" is not a word you will hear often in a discussion of the Rolling Stones.

Reasons why I believe SG is overrated:
1) It sounds like a cleaned up remix of Exile, only with 2nd rate rockers this time.
2) All the rockers on here sound like Keith is stuck in a Chuck-Berry-boogie rut.
3) It sounds like the Stones are trying to be a punk/boy band a la the Sex Pistols.
4) It sounds like the Stones are trying too hard, period!
5) It marks the beginning of Mick's saliva spitting vocal style.

But still it's a great album and I love it.
11-10-03 02:41 AM
glencar I must commend the Savage Young One on his masterful post. Very wise he is.
11-10-03 12:51 PM
scratched
quote:
KurtWaldheim wrote:
2) All the rockers on here sound like Keith is stuck in a Chuck-Berry-boogie rut.



Sometimes I do find it a bit of a drag to listen to all those 'boogie' rockers. They are a bit too similar in style - pretty much all of them are in the key of A - though I try and think of them as variations on a theme.

Beast of Burden is sublime though.
11-10-03 12:55 PM
Zeeta Yeah the first 4 songs are in A albeit sometimes major or minor keys - Imagination being in major the rest in minor. I wonder if there is a reason for this?? Maybe just for ease!
11-10-03 01:06 PM
scratched
quote:
Zeeta wrote:
I wonder if there is a reason for this?? Maybe just for ease!



I reckon so - open position chords and whatnot. But why didn't they use capos this time as this would have been as just as convenient for the guitarists and would have given the album more harmonic variation?
11-10-03 01:25 PM
Zeeta Another theory why they are many are in A could be this;
Mick played on Whip, Respectable, Miss You and Some Girls all of which are in A and more importantly here were easier chords for Mick to play. For example when I started learning guitar open chords such as A E G and D chords were the simplist to play, a C and an F openly are a lot more difficult.
So maybe this is a factor also.
11-10-03 01:36 PM
scratched I never thought of that. Although at the point that they recorded Some Girls, Mick had been playing guitar for the best part of ten years and wasn't really a beginner. Still, I'd say that Mick is still probably the main reason for the key of A fixation though.
11-10-03 02:38 PM
jb MIck Taylor was responsible for many of the songs on both SG and TTY. He was simply the greatest.
11-10-03 04:26 PM
TheSavageYoungXyzzy
quote:
jb wrote:
MIck Taylor was responsible for many of the songs on both SG and TTY. He was simply the greatest.



Name them.

"Tops"
"Tops"
"Tops"

(it's an exaggeration, I know - some of Taylor's guitar *did* end up on Tattoo You, which made it interesting to hear Ronnie's overdubs when they showed up. But on Some Girls? Gimme a break.)

Ronnie:

"No Use In Crying"
"Respectable"
"Black Limousine"

(the list goes on awhile, depending on who you get it from. Those are the three most people acknowledge he at least co-wrote with Mick and/or Keith.)

-tSYX --- Well now lookatchyor face now bay-bah...
11-10-03 04:32 PM
jb Stop denying Taylor's greatness!!!
11-10-03 04:50 PM
Joey

Oh My GOD !!!!!!!! Poem alert .............GO !!! ..........NOW ! -- JOEY !!!!! :


Mick Taylor's fingers ,
They make me quiver when they deliver ;
I cry a river ,
With my gin soaked liver .......................
Whilst the notes ;
They slink and they slither .

-- Thank You

The Jacky , Established 1999 !

11-10-03 05:32 PM
kahoosier JB, give us a break. I have never seen anyone on this page deny MT his greatness...its you that refuse to recognize the value of anything that the group has done in nearly 30 years since his departure! I have never disparaged the man's ability to solo, his technique, or his virtuosity.

One of the posts above at great length puts it all into a great perspective, breaking it down into the reality of The Glimmer Twins and where they are in life. I went to see MT at the 100 club during the London Licks part 1. He was fantastic. I was totally enthralled with his ability. By the same token, a much greater percentage of people were sitting around and talking through his performance than I have ever seen even at a stadium show for the Stones, for Christ's sake, all the tables were full with people sitting at them! Certainly, there was none of the rabid fists pumping in the air crowd participation at the 100 club that you see at a club performance by the Stones.

And all of that is ok, because as they have said many tmes, both sides of the split, one of the biggest problems was a differnce in musical direction! I have never heard either MT or KR disparage the playing of the other. No one here is denying MT his ability or his influence.

But I for one cannot understand why anyone would post so often on a site so obviously concerned with the present if they did not feel the group had done anything of value in nearly 30 years. The way you and a few others talk, the 40th anniversary is useless since the group was only worthwhile from 1969 to 1974. Which is exactly what both Mick and Keith have never wanted to happen or publicly admit to, and have fought for years to prevent.
11-10-03 06:45 PM
glencar Kahoosier, jb's jsut pulling our collective leg. Pay no mind.
11-10-03 09:47 PM
Some Guy Black and Blue
11-13-03 02:46 PM
macawber the savage young xyzzy wrote:

"i'm beginning to think the second guitarist in the band is really a secondary thing to keiths situation"

and "the revitalization of the stones had already begun in 1968 with beggars banquet and a little tune called jumpin jack flash"

you sound like a typical fan who has read too many keith richards interviews.lets run it down-
jumpin jack flash-a riff written by bill on piano and picked up on by jagger.all the lyrics are written by mick.
not only does keith benefit from the other stones he's also "borrowed" heavily from others in the studio.look up ry cooders version of what went on during the let it bleed sessions.ry has said flat out that he wrote the riff to honky tonk women,listen to his playing sometime...hmmm,you tell me..
brown sugar-riff by mick,lyrics by mick.
its only rock and roll-ron wood/mick jagger
there's more but i think you get the point,we all love keith but the stones don't revolve around him as much as he would have people believe.
you really got me with the one about keith being influenced by early 70's rock like the stooges and faces and wanting to get a blended guitar sound and mick taylor had to leave since his leads were no longer needed...lol
brian and keith were playing that way in edith fucking grove,i doubt the stones needed a bad imitation of themselves for influence.by the way,they were totally blindsided by mick t's decision to leave.
11-13-03 03:31 PM
jb And have never been the same since...I still am shocked that they have never given this legend the credit he is due..I read the book "According to the Stones" and laugh at Keith's lamenting how unhappy he was with Taylor's plazying...gimme a feckin break..the guy nade you better than you ever were or have been since his departure...Can't you and Mick give him a couple of million from the vast fortune you made b/c of his contribution? And TSXY, you are far too young to contribute to this discussion...just b/c you purport to be a musician, does not make you an expert..!!!!!
[Edited by jb]
11-13-03 05:36 PM
glencar That's uncalled for Joshy! No wonder people attack you. Perhaps you should try to refute Izzy's post instead of attacking HIM.
11-13-03 07:16 PM
Jason P. Some Girls was/is basically a two chord album. Other than the beautiful Beast of Burden, which is a Keith-penned song.

Goat's Head Soup is very much a product of the heavy heroin
use, that Mick T. and Keith were partaking of during the sessions. They tried to rock, but never quite did.

As Mick J. said during the Nicaraguan Earthquake Benefit
concert, "Enough medium tempo!...". Heartbreaker tries to
gain some momentum but is so drastically edited from the full version and compressed-sounding it never achieves flight. As the late, great RSFAQ puts it (re: GHS) "The drums sound like cardboard..."

Comparing the Mick Taylor Stones to the Ronnie "Woodie" Wood
Stones is an invalid exercise. There is no comparison between the Greatest RnR Band in the World and the Ronnie Stones. The Stones have been on slow-fade since 1982, even
with Master Guitarist Ron Wood at the helm. Whatever the heck the Stones' helm is. Or was.

Seems most folks have a pretty short memory.
Page: 1 2 3