|
Post by HollyH on Aug 9, 2008 21:15:07 GMT -5
I vote for Mick Taylor, but what do I know?
|
|
|
Post by Wakeup on Aug 9, 2008 21:33:22 GMT -5
Mick. Sorry, Ronnie.
|
|
|
Post by Smiley on Aug 10, 2008 0:49:57 GMT -5
Mick Taylor, without a doubt. No sorries to Ronnie.. it's a fact! Although, the most versatile musician had to be Brian Jones.
|
|
|
Post by complicatedlife on Aug 10, 2008 3:36:28 GMT -5
Mick, although Ronnie rates very high amongst 18-year old Russian barmaids.
|
|
|
Post by sixtiesfan on Aug 10, 2008 5:08:07 GMT -5
Mick Taylor - without a doubt.
|
|
|
Post by uncleson on Aug 10, 2008 16:46:05 GMT -5
Yep.
|
|
|
Post by franklima on Aug 10, 2008 16:52:00 GMT -5
Technically speaking Mick, but in rock and roll technically speaking does not transform in to best, in fact it may be a detremental factor..without a doubt Keith's guitar and his playing and image make the Stones the Stones...just like noone could replace Dave in the Kinks, and there could never be a Kinks without Dave, there could never be a a Stones without Keith. Had Brian lived a little longer into the Stones career it might have been another story, he was Keith's equal at the very least up to that point in time.
|
|
|
Post by sixtiesfan on Aug 11, 2008 1:58:18 GMT -5
Yeah, I often wonder if Keith's guitar was allowed to be heard more during Stones concerts when he's busy doing his bluesy "thing" whether people might be saying Keith's a great guitarist, but I guess Mick got it turned down as no-one ever knew how out of it Keith might be each night, so he was left to being a great rhythm guitarist.
|
|
|
Post by franklima on Aug 11, 2008 9:11:00 GMT -5
Yeah but it's Keith's Berry like chug-a-lug- rhythm guitar that is the steam power behind the Stones and what makes the Stones the Stones second only to Mick's unique voice and then Charlie with his distinctive ( and great ) drumming! Charlies is the most underated of the Stones to me!
|
|
|
Post by HollyH on Aug 11, 2008 11:29:07 GMT -5
I agree about Charlie. Actually, I agree with what you say about Keith, too. Rhythm is more important in some ways than melodic virtuosity.
|
|
|
Post by sixtiesfan on Aug 11, 2008 11:43:52 GMT -5
Yeah but it's Keith's Berry like chug-a-lug- rhythm guitar that is the steam power behind the Stones and what makes the Stones the Stones second only to Mick's unique voice and then Charlie with his distinctive ( and great ) drumming! Charlies is the most underated of the Stones to me! Oooh I like that phrase "chug-a-lug-rhythm guitar" it really suits Keith, he really is the power behind the Stones. Charlie seems to have chosen to be in the background in the Stones, but I think he's highly rated as a drummer.
|
|
|
Post by davek729 on Aug 12, 2008 23:48:35 GMT -5
I love Mick Taylors ferocious leads, but Keith is a pivotal figure in rock'n'roll history and a tremendously influential guitarist. He's also provides much of the creative spark that drives the Stones musically. He's not a conventional lead player, but he is without a doubt a great guitarist. I loved the Stones with Mick T in the band and who knows how things would have played itself out if he stayed.
I agree with all of the Charlie Watts aficionados.
|
|
|
Post by ginnie on Aug 14, 2008 18:11:13 GMT -5
Hmm...the Stones wouldn't be the Stones without Keith. So he's untouchable.
That said, among the other three (Jones, Taylor or Wood), I would have to pick Mick Taylor. They recorded some of their best albums with him in the band. Even Keith admits this. Now that may have to do with the maturing of Keith and Jagger, but I can't help but think that the fresh sound of a new guitar player had a bit to do with it. On "Get Your Ya-Ya's Out" you can really hear what Mick did to their sound. Only live Stones album worth having in my opinion.
|
|
|
Post by martin53 on Aug 15, 2010 7:53:32 GMT -5
Mick Taylor - definitely.
|
|
|
Post by Mr Songbird on Sept 21, 2010 8:37:29 GMT -5
Mick too !
|
|