RE: Who Homework - Go toss something!

["O'Neal, Kevin W." <Kevin.ONeal@vtmednet.org>]

>From: "Scott Schrade" <schrade@akrobiz.com>
>Subject: Re: Homework Assignment
>I don't know that it's fair to judge *any* drummer against LAL Keith!
>But give Zak credit for knowing the subtleties of WHO songs 

Zak, I give thee credit.

>That's something I never got from Simon Phillips.

I'm with *you*.  Really though, I'm a bit uncomfortable doing comparisons.
I was asked, so I gave my O.  I really, really like Zak's drumming with The
Who.  He fits, and he cares.  What more could we want today?

>Go ahead, Zak, kick it up a notch!  Get crazy!

Good advise for us all!

>I can't make the jump & say I like Pete's playing now better than the '69 &
>'70 stuff I've heard,

I'm pretty sure that's not what I was saying.  I don't know if I could
choose either.  I think what I mean is that he has "shored up" some of his
own admitted "weaknesses"?
I always think back to his quote "I've never been one too nimble of finger"
(can't remember if that was Pete or a friend of mine ;-) , but his
nimbleness is most evident these days.

>He's much more 'noodly' now.  Finger rolls, 16th notes, etc.  But he still
keeps
>all the pure expression of his past playing.

Yes, that's what I'm getting at!  But, his noodles don't get all twisted
these days. :-)

>I keep it's original feel & sentiment &, at the same time, uniquely freeze
it upon this
>frail, fleeting, yet divine moment 

= the definition of Pete Townshend.

>"This new album?" 

Yes?

>Have you heard it?! 

No.

>What's the cover like?

Don't believe it's been developed yet. But, who knows. ;-)

>Look at you!

I try to avoid that.

>You're practically at the store already, buying the thing! :-)

Damn straight amigo!

>OK, I didn't believe we'd ever get a 5-piece,

Uh huh.......

> electric Pete WHO tour,

Keep going......

> but I'll believe in a new album when I see it!

Will you? ;-)

>Oh my God, what your poor wife must put up with at times!  I bet there have
>been evenings, around 8 o'clock, maybe on a Saturday,

actually around 10 or so.

>when, noticing a certain look in your eyes

It's usually a pretty glassy one.,

>she says, "Oh no, Kevin, you're not gonna throw..........

I'm tellin' ya, it was one of the best times of my life. One of those
moments when there is total clarity (well, kind of ;).  It was being in
tune.
Late after a raging "good bye" party my wife and I threw right before moving
to VT.
KAA had been playing most of the night (didn't know the CD kept repeating.
Tells you how f-d up I was.  In a good way.).
Only a hand full of couples were left, and tented in our back yard.
There I was on the deck getting off!  I was tossing all sorts of stuff.
Hard!  I fell more than once, and kept popping back up to fuck some more
shit up. I went on for a good 5+ minutes! THE WHO WAS BLASTING! It was
FUCKING SHEER MAYHEM!!!  IT WAS ME!!!  IT WAS WHAT I'M (WE'RE) ALL
ABOUT!!!!!
It was pure ecstasy.  I kid you not.

The next morning, the tenters were like "what the hell was going on last
night??"

Oh man, it was *that* fucking good.  :-)

So, I've been there.  Have you (you in the general all inclusive sense)?

>We all know he now thinks he should've ended the band there, but still, it
makes 
>one wonder just why he decided to keep going.  Knee-jerk reaction?  Booze?
>Money?  Roger?  Do the opposite?

I can't figure that out either.  Scared to move on?  Love-hate relationship
with fame?
Who knows.  

>> But now, a
>> bit older and wiser and more confident, he's taken the lead and looks
like
>> he wants to keep running with it right to the top.  Now that Pete is
ready, look out.  
>> He's all serious.  He's guiding every move the band makes on stage.  He's
>> calculating.  He's into it.

>Sounds a bit harsh,

Harsh?  Oh, you mean my implication that Roger and John don't have any
input?
I don't believe that.  I was making a point.  Went a bit too far there,
sorry.
But, I think we can agree that Pete is and always has been the driving
creative force in the band.
Can we? ;-)

>He's realized he doesn't need
>Pino Pallidino or whatever the fuck that flawless but boring bass player's
name is.

Funny thing happened at the "Day in The Garden" show in 98.
Early on in the show, Pete began to "get into it", and was moving around.
He backed right up onto Pino-what's-his-face, who was also moving around.

Pete got pissed!!  It was blatant!
A bass player, playing with Pete, that moves??????
Who would have heard of such a thing????????
My buddy Stu yells in my ear, "if he knows what's good for him, he'll stay
put!".
He did, the rest of the show.
Pete even went so far as to draw an imaginary line on the stage.
I can't remember seeing that episode on the vid.  Hmmmmmmmmmmmmm?

>He doesn't need Peter Hope Evans dancing around like a monkey.  He doesn't
>need a keyboard player with a haircut from Tears For Fears.  

Baaahahaha!

>Let's hope this new found energy does indeed lead to a new studio album.

Uh oh!  Is that a bit of optimism peeking through??  :-D

>I'm pessimistic, though.

RATS!

>LONG LIVE THE FUCKING WHO!!!!!
>- - SCHRADE in Akron

The FUCKING WHO indeed!

>From: "Mark R. Leaman" <mleaman@sccoast.net>
>Subject: Who's Who?!?
>Kevin:
>I'd say Pete has always been a better acoustic player anyway, but I would
>then have to disagree with Mike (if it was Mike) because I think he's
damned
>powerful on acoustic.

I would never in a million years argue on this point. He's one of the
strongest and most respected acoustic players around.

>Take WGFA from Madison Square Garden `96. I felt every bit as much power
from the song as I had >in the two times I'd seen him do it electric.

Can't argue again.  Well, maybe a bit.  One word.  Feedback.  Ok, more than
one word.......guitar shaking, pounding, bashing, bending, thrusting........

>And even though it makes me feel as if I'm wrong for feeling this way, I'm
glad. I'm big on 
>moving forward, but it's OK to return to the core, I guess. Especially when
it's such a great
>core.

The Fucking Who Core.

>Gawd, I'm mellowing with age. Kill me now.

Nothing mellow about it.  I see it as kicking some fire into this n'synch,
goth, rock star wanna bee era we're stuck in.

>Oh, I HOPE not! Sorry if I offend anyone here, but that <Carlos's latest>
album bites.
>             Cheers                 ML


Wow, I thought I was the only person who really, really doesn't like that
album.
*THAT* after their original, or Abraxas???????
Please.
Those were the days.  It was all so fresh and vibrant and new.  An
exploration at every turn.
Will we ever see it again (general sense again)?
               
>From: Sigel James Civ 10 ABW/LGCW <James.Sigel@usafa.af.mil>
>Subject: Not again!!!
>Hasn't anyone read the Playboy interview with Pete (circa 1995) where he
>denies that he ever came out?
>Jim in Colo Springs

See what you started Keets?? ;-)  

>From: Jeff House <jjthandmeh@juno.com>
>Subject: Santana=Who Not/Blues to Manchester
>I have also been thinking that "Supernatural" might be a decent framework
for a new
>Who album.
> Jeff

Wait!!  You say also!!!  I'm not advocating that!!!  No, no no NOOOOOOOO!!!!
I was speaking strictly about distribution and marketing!
Please no guest anything!!!
Really though, that would be fine for a solo effort, but I don't see it
working with The Who.  

>Pete would *really* like to receive the kind of kudos and sales of
>Radiohead's "Kid A", which makes an all-original disc more attractive.

Phewwwwwww!  You had me worried there for a moment.  :-)

Stay in Tune,
Kevin in VT