Re: Who Are You, anyway

["Mark R. Leaman" <mleaman@sccoast.net>]

> Sort of "Hi-De-Hi-De-Who?"

Brian:

OK, now I REALLY want to hear him do it!

> I'll stand with you on that one.  I'd rather hear the It's Hard LP over
the Who
> Are You LP anyday although there isn't a song on IH as good as the song
"Who Are
> You."

Agreed. I've always said WAY is half a great album. It's the other half
that bothers me.

> Come on, you guys can't be serious.

Keets:

Sometimes, when forced to be.

> "It's Hard" is a transition piece, 

Huh? Transition to what, nonexistence?

> and the new sound didn't come together for the album at all.  It took 
> TED the whole of the '82 tour to sort out how it ought to be played. 

I don't really understand what you mean here. I don't hear any difference
in the way they played it on the album and in Toronto, the "last show."

> Brian posted an article on O&S and somebody pointed out where Pete says 
> the WAY album is more of Lifehouse--about reliving the same experience 
> over and over again (something he was probably feeling about that time). 


Obviously. The thing is: what's the point of rehashing where he'd been?
He'd done it better the first time. As for Lifehouse, if WAY is another
Lifehouse it's a quite poor one compared to WN. I am aware that Pete
"announced plans" for finishing Lifehouse during this period, but he
"announces" a lot of things from time to time. I know the WAY songs were
not written for Lifehouse, and 905 was written for a completely different
SF story by Entwistle.

> >I don't agree with you on this. I think he leaned a bit more toward 
> Jazz with WAY, but whether that's actually "development" is the 
> question. 
> 
> It's not jazz and it's not rock.  It's mature composition.  He didn't 
> pick up the jazz sound until Kenney Jones came on board.

Look at what I said, repeated above: He LEANED toward Jazz. He certainly
plays some Jazz licks on the album. Especially during Music Must Change.
Still, it's Rock. Yes, definitely.
As for Jones...I found PT's music retrogressed after he joined. WAY is a
Rock album, no matter its leanings, but FD is Pop (except for Quiet One),
and hardly even Power Pop (as defined by Paul Weller). FD is much like AQO.
IH, on the other hand, sounds like second rate WN-type material. Neither
are what I'd call Jazz, or anything except Rock.

> Nope.  Didn't.  Townshend outgrew rock and roll with this album, and the 
> band did, too.  They nailed it.  Check with some eclectic music fans 
> instead of the bubblegum crowd.

Why need I consult anyone? After all, I've been a ROCK fan pretty much
since it was invented...and never really liked bubblegum (either the music
or the gum itself). My taste ranges far and wide, from XTC to Elvis...Dave
Brubeck to Pearl Jam...etc. etc. Get my drift? I've been studying Rock
music for more than 25 years now...not just listening, but studying it.
But I find your assertion that Townshend outgrew RnR without any substance;
if so, then why was he performing the `orrible Barefooting seven years
later? And it didn't seem to crop up elsewhere, either, after WAY. It would
have been MUCH easier for him to move toward or into Jazz once Keith was
gone, and he didn't. As a solo artist he could have done anything he
wanted, but his most "out there" projects were at least heavily grounded in
Rock...like Brooklyn Kids/Football Fugue/Street In The City or the songs
from the never-made Who album Siege, for instance.
I believe PT as a Rock artist can and has moved the genre forward, but
whenever he dabbles elsewhere it doesn't quite make it. IMHO, of course. I
also think he got too deep "into" synthesizer-work, as his last album
shows...makes it sound a bit out of date, it does.

> Both of them were outstanding.  Moon was perfect

No, Moon was FAR from perfect at this point. Check out the history of the
making of this album. They coud barely keep Moon together to record an
entire song. It is the least of his recorded work.
Daltrey was clearly hoarse and straining. Why didn't they do another take
and get it right? It's not like he had lost his voice, as he proved on the
next two albums.
Tell you what: listen to WAY and LAL back to back, and then tell me
honestly you can't hear the difference in Moon & Daltrey.

> and Roger did a 
> fantastic job with those weird melody lines.  It was tougher to sing 
> than Quad, I'll bet.

I don't know...he always complained about QUAD being outside his range.
However, I can't call the job he does in Had Enough and Love Is Coming Down
On Me "fantastic" or even more than mediocre. Especially in LICD, it seems
to be he's "doing himself" rather than honestly singing.

> <grin>  Wait 'til it's all put together; then we'll see what Lifehouse 
is.

Lifehouse is a different matter. We're talking about WAY here.

> melancholy for The Who.  What's going to be the finale, d'you think?  
> "Won't Get Fooled Again?"

The intended finale for Lifehouse was The Song Is Over. And while it's not
been confirmed anywhere, it's always been my impression (from the
storyline) that Join Together would have to be the song which comes before
it.

> Wondering if it would make any difference if you knew the lyrics were
"Turn
> on the radio/Love is proclaimed/Again and again and again/Join in and
> sing/Now, don't be ashamed..."  Certainly makes a difference to me :-)

Wouldn't change the fact that it's the best lyric section of the song. Or
that the rest of the song, including the music, is a poor (for PT, that is)
rehash.
But yes, I misquoted the song and for that I apologize. I also started a
sentence in the last note which I never finished, and sometimes I misspell
and never get the chance to fix it. Such is life when you're running a
store and frequently interrupted. The sentence was to be: Now I consider
QUAD the greatest Rock album of all time (at least so far).