[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Tape sound quality...



At 07:25 AM 6/20/96 -0400, WFang01@aol.com wrote:
>Yellow, re:
>
>> Perhaps there are some people who, in their relentless efforts to have the
>world's biggest most perfect Who audio collection (or whatever it is that
>they are doing) have lost the thrill of simply owning a recording of their
>favorite band live. 
>
>Having higher standards and maintaining "the thrill" are not mutually
>exclusive. For example, I was "thrilled" (as you call it) with the new "Live
>At Leeds". After hearing that, it made it very difficult to enjoy similar
>material at much lessor quality. While the performances may be somewhat
>different and nice to listen to occasionally, there really is no "substitute"
>for quality...
>
>-wf
>
>

I also have to agree with -wf here. I have hundreds of Who records and have
heard a hundred live recordings. I'll take "Live at Leeds" over any tape I have.

Also it seems that the farther that Roger got from the original release the
more he messed with the structure of the song (one of my pet peeves).

Joe