No Subject

> We've had this discussion on what is and is not rock music before, but I 
> think they've transcended it here.  WAY is unclassifiable.

Keets:

I'd say they transcended Rock with WN, defined it with QUAD, but by WAY
Pete was just sort of "tinkering." Seeing what he could do with it.

> You don't like MAD DOG?  It's one of my favorite John albums because of
that

I must say that apart from the first two and TLTH, JAE's solo efforts
haven't done much for me.

> coming particularly close to being a flame war,
> doggone it.

Rich:

OK, YOU BASTARD!

There, I hope that helps. And now back to our regularly scheduled mania.

> Maybe musically, but I don't know if I'd agree lyrically.

I have to agree with you, although I'd also have to say that musically
would have to go to the early stuff.

> I'd say this was the actual problem.  I don't have so many complaints
about 
> the content on IT'S HARD, as the implementation.  The songs have  enough 
> depth and meaning that you can dig through them and the album concept is 
> fine, but for the most part the sound on Pete's songs is strained and 
> uncomfortable.

Keets:

For one thing, it's the case of Pete's diminishing electric guitar. His
instrumental presence lessened with each album after LAL.

> To change the subject.

Kevin:

Ah, man!

> Last Night was beautiful In New York City.

Nice story...all I can say is having visited NYC exactly once, for Quad
night 2 in 1996, I found it to be a very Who-friendly city. While I wasn't
actually listening to any Who at the time (unless playing it in your head
counts), my dream image is when returning on the Staten Island Ferry after
dark, with the city lit up and reflecting in the bay. I'll never forget it,
and always think of NYC in this way.


       Cheers                  ML