Who is the Greatest Musical Talent in the Rolling Stones
 

Who is the greatest musical talent in the Rolling Stones -- Mick Jagger or Keith Richards?

Feel free to add your reasons ... or not.

Bill Wyman.

This bassline alone immortalises Bill Wyman:

Sounds like we have
Bill Wyman - 2 votes
Mick Jagger - 0
Keith Richards - 0

Interesting...

Having a stand out musician would ruin them, The beauty with the Stones is it's the band as a unit that makes it work.

Well said. They were both equally essential, amounting to more than any individual could achieve. I view Jagger as the adventurous spirit, and Keef as the one more interested in doing the subtle variation. It just goes to show how very talented they were, completely overshadowing one of the greatest bassists, ever. People rarely talk about how extraordinary Wyman was.

Yeah, he actually is a good bassist, rhythm is an important part of the RS sound in which bass certainly plays a part, virtually everyone overlooks him and I dunno why when The Stones are as popular as they are.

I've always loved the drumming style of Charlie Watts, very controlled and smooth.

Ronnie and Keith.

Hell, if I look at it this way, everyone contributes alot to make the band what they are.

like Urban said, it's them as a unit that makes them work. i know i wouldn't buy a solo album of any of the guys as opposed to the band itself

Keith Richards and whoever the piano player might have been at the time(ian stewart/nicky hopkins). Wyman, Watts are pretty good too. I just see mick jagger as a twat with a good voice who can dance.

In my opinion, the greatest musical talent of the Rolling Stones was found floating in his pool about 40 years back.

I'd say Keith Richards, someone who can play their instrument well is more talented than a frontman, even a very good front man like Mick Jagger.

I agree with the comments that the Stones are a unit. Like John and Paul, there isn't much sense choosing between Keith and Mick, because the contrast, chemistry, love and hatred between them are what made the band.

It's hard to know for sure, but I don't think they would have survived the 60s without Brian's influences, pushing them beyond rock, blues, and integrating other instruments. At the same time, when Brian burned out, I think the strong, talented, rootsy guitar sound of Taylor came along at just the right time. From what I've seen, Keith's playing at the time wasn't good enough without Taylor to help drive their sound along; and I don't think the raw, dirty sound of their classic run from @68-@73 would have had the same impact without him.

I agree with the comments saying Wyman was underrated. Keith has often been credited with their best riffs, but some of their highest impact songs like Miss You, Sympathy..., Bitch, and Live With Me--just to name a few--were bass-driven.

Agreed 100%! The Rolling Stones are one of the tightest bands in music history, and every single part of their makeup contributes to the whole. I have to admit I love Keith Richards' guitar style, but really, without the rest of them he'd just be another good guitar player.

Brian Jones. It's no coincidence that 95% of all their good material was made before his departure.

He didn't write anything though

But he influenced what musical direction the band was taking.

i see the song Sympathy For The Devil is him at his best

Agreed. The Stones as singles artists have never been my cup of tea. Together, they have the feel that makes the groove that is the Rolling Stones. Oh, well. It's only Rock n Roll.......but I like it.:hphones:

I'd have to agree that the band as a unit is it's greatest asset. And their output between about 1965 and 1972 was pretty tight.

I'd say Keith if we're going individual players,but I agree with all the sentiments expressed that the band's main appeal is how tight and kinetic they were as players up till '73 or so(Especially on Let It Bleed and longer workouts like Can't You Hear Me Knocking which really showed how capable they were as musicians),when the drugs etc started to take their toll.