FW: Bite your tongues you infidels!!!!

["Sigel, James J" <jsigel@kpmg.com>]

Dave, Dave.  We must define "greatness" in order to avoid one of these
pointless arguments.  You aren't the only one on this list who's of the
opinion that Pete isn't a great solo guitarist.  I agree that Pete is a far
superior rhythm player than a lead player, but he is IMHO, a "great" lead
player.  My definition of great is noted below.  I agree with you too about
his soloing skills as compared to Hendrix (who had the feel AND the
vituosity), Clapton and SVR, but Jimmy Page???  C'mon, just listen to The
Song Remains the Same; Page could NEVER recreate the riffs he did in the
studio in a live setting.  Basically, he's an awful live guitar player
compared to his studio work.  Pete did it both live and in studio making him
a better player all in all than Page.  Again, IMHO.  I think we're banging
our heads against a wall here, and it really comes down to each individual's
musical taste, but the reason I started this banter ("something wrong with
my banter, chaps?") is in reply to the statement that Pete isn't a great
player.

>OK, so we don't "all know" but people who know the guitar know that Pete's
lead guitar/soloing skills are shall we say >"limited" Would you put his
"lead" or soloing skills with Hendrix, Clapton, SRV, Page??  I think not!
>Thats why the lead player in the band had always been Moon and not Pete.

>Pete can play rhythm better than anyone. His forte is chord work.
>Granted, now he is playing better than he has been in a long time but hear
him do a solo and it does not flow from him the >way other players perform
solo/lead work. Its just not him and its not the Who. Pete is the first to
say it too.  I love Pete >style of play but you gotta say, lead guitar work
is just not his strongest suit. (can't believe I've been drawn into this
>>whole "weakness" crap) Its the friggen Who for Christs sake! Just enjoy!
>
>Peace and love and all that other crap
>
>Dave
>
>>> "Sigel, James J" <jsigel@kpmg.com> 05/03/00 09:25AM >>>
>Well we all know that Pete was never a great lead guitarist but he is the
best rhythm guitarist.
>
Speak for yourself, Dave!  Whaddya mean "we all know..."???  All right,
kids...

All of you who claim that Pete isn't a "great" lead player go turn up your
Eddie Van Halen flashy crap real loud, put your head in your respective
lieus or toilets, and FLUSH!!!  Shame, shame, shame.  Time for a lesson:

Uh-hem...  

There is sooooo much more to playing a lead than "shuffling along the
fretboard".  Vituosity is nice, but without the FEEL or soul, you can flash
all you want (see Eddie Van Halen reference above) but I'd still rather hear
Pete lead any day.  You mean to tell me that Pete isn't a great lead player?
One listen to ANY Keith era version of Young Man Blues ought to make you
hang your silly heads in shame.  Naked Eye from Isle of Wight doesn't give
you chills?  You're dead from the neck down if so.  

There are other great guitar players that are not vituoso (say in the Steve
Howe class) like Neil Young, Dave Davies and Keith Richards, but they play
from their hearts and souls.  I'd rather hear any one of them do a solo over
say... (Eddie not withstanding) Jimmy Page or Joe Satriani.  It's NOT about
the flash or the speed or the tricks, it's about the music.  And as our very
own avatar Mr. Townshend once said - it's can be all about ONE NOTE!  Loose
translation but you get the idea.  

Shame on all of you nonbelievers.

Jim in Chicago

"We were the first band to vomit in the bar and find their distance to the
stage too far..."

****************************************************************************
*
The information in this email is confidential and may be legally privileged.
It is intended solely for the addressee. Access to this email by anyone else
is unauthorized. 

If you are not the intended recipient, any disclosure, copying, distribution
or any action taken or omitted to be taken in reliance on it, is prohibited
and may be unlawful. When addressed to our clients any opinions or advice
contained in this email are subject to the terms and conditions expressed in
the governing KPMG client engagement letter.         
****************************************************************************
*

*****************************************************************************
The information in this email is confidential and may be legally privileged.
It is intended solely for the addressee. Access to this email by anyone else
is unauthorized. 

If you are not the intended recipient, any disclosure, copying, distribution
or any action taken or omitted to be taken in reliance on it, is prohibited
and may be unlawful. When addressed to our clients any opinions or advice
contained in this email are subject to the terms and conditions expressed in
the governing KPMG client engagement letter.         
*****************************************************************************