Re: WAY, ELP, Psychic Hotline, Who Sez?

["L. Bird" <pkeets@hotmail.com>]

>He had three freaking years! Some bands actually put out an album a 
year, and more.

Other bands don't.  I saw some guy on VH1 who said it generally took him 
a year to write one song.  


>I don't think so. You need something more definite to go with. 
Otherwise you just devalue the meaning of "concept album."

This still doesn't pin down the requirements.  Is this something that's 
individual opinion again?


>> How many people are?  But then, you don't much like what PT's been 
>> putting out either, do you.
>
>Ever put any thought into starting a Psychic Hotline? I'd advise 
against it, because you read me (at least) wrong each time! PSYCHO was 
one of his best solo albums, although I'd say WC was THE best.

Then are you applying different standards to judge what he did with The 
Who and what he did for himself?  Those albums don't exactly sound like 
Quad, or LAL.  They're much more quiet and introspective.  Would you 
accept The Who if they sounded like that?


>> It's different, true, but it's actually better in some ways.
>
>If that's not a rationalization I've never seen one! It's weaker and
>hoarse, but in some ways I can't imagine it's "better." 

>> Actually RD never did have much of a voice. 
>
>BLASPHAMY! He had one of if not THE greatest Rock voice of all, for a
>while. The scream in WGFA is the stuff of legends.

And that's the gauge of a good voice?  

Starting off, RD had a strong voice and a wide range and that's about 
it.  It was a really plain voice, almost uninteresting at best and too 
sharp at worst--compare to Elton John, for example, who really did have 
a lot to work with.  It's not the voice that's considered one of the 
best in rock music, but the vocalist--it's Roger who makes it do all 
those things.   

These days RD's voice doesn't have that knife-edged clarity any more, 
but it still sounds pretty smooth.  Instead, it's developed a terrific 
resonance and some really nice overtones.  And he's still got control of 
it. 


>> You said PT peaked at Quad, didn't you?  And that nothing was as good 
since?
>
>That's true. But "not as good" doesn't always translate into "bad." And 
that is not to say he can't top it still.

Then why in the world are you hoping he'll go with the 1970's model 
"Lifehouse" and not an updated something that could include new 
material?


>Nor I, but by that logic he should abandon Lifehouse and do some solo
material. All he's done since he started working on PSYCHO is redoing 
his old material. Which is his right, however redoing the material in an 
inferior way only tends to tarnish his image. I prefer to see it remain 
untarnished, you see. I'm not into the "oldies show" mentality.

But maybe everybody doesn't think it's inferior.


>> If one was a jazz fan, mightn't it be considered a positive 
progression?
>
>Not if there IS no progression, only imitation, no. I wouldn't imagine, 
at least...although I'm a big fan of certain Jazz artists I am hardly a 
Jazz fan. In my mind, at least, copying what someone else has already 
done isn't progression.

Who has he copied?  Do you think PT is imitating jazz?  I rather think 
he has a distinctive sound, regardless of what he's written.


>Do you think PT progressed Jazz to any degree with WAY?

I don't think it sounds like jazz.  PT couldn't really turn The Who in 
that direction until after KM died.  KM was NOT a jazz drummer.  He 
would never have done what Kenney Jones did.


>No, but the negotiations for the BBC "Lifehouse" didn't spring into 
>> existence the instant you said the magic words.
>
>Who sez?

Okay.  Maybe they did.  Ask for a tour next.  ;)


keets
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com