Re: New Who for you

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

> have a lot to do with this current Who revival, as Pete may be using The
Who
> to work out and promote his Broadway ideas, but who cares about his
motives?
>   It works.

Keets:

Does it? Where's that new album? Oh, he's working on a Broadway version of
Quad instead? Or sailing? I guess then it doesn't work.

> Nah.  Roger wants to sing.  Well okay, maybe he could stand writing
another
> song or two for The Who, but heaven forbid that he has to sit there and
> listen to all that old music.  ;)

I think you're dead wrong on this one. Roger is the one who has brought back
the old music every time. Wasn't it his symphony tour that made Pete want to
reform and tour Quad?
I still maintain that Roger is the "Mike Love" of the band, content with
doing and redoing the oldies while Pete always wanted to move forward...and
John doesn't care either way, as long as they tour it.

> People move their mouths and nothing comes out?

It has to get that bad first. Don't you know people who don't realize their
deaf?

> Maybe it should be directed at MCA instead of TED.

I've never been a fan of MCA. In fact, I usually refer to them as being less
efficient than monkeys with pens.

> reemphasized: Elton John hasn't done anything worthwhile since the ROCK OF
> THE WESTIES album in 1975.

Captain Fantastic was where he lost me, and I never really liked Bennie And
The Jets for that matter.

> "Lion King" rules!!

Jeff:

It's apples and oranges. As a Rock writer, Elton is a great writer for
soundtrack music. So is Sting, which is a real shame and a loss IMHO. Phil
Collins, on the other hand, makes lousy music no matter what it's for.

I do NOT want Pete to fall into this particular category.

> adults may be a little uncomfortable that rock is now music for children,
> but there it is.

Keets:

Apparently you haven't heard any Korn or Tool or Rob Zombie or Marilyn
Manson or Metallica or...

> projects that go beyond just making music.  Like Pete said, The Who is
> something of a brand name these days--a band can't be vehicle enough for
all
> the ideas they have.

Keets:

Pete may feel that way, but I don't agree...The Who have always been about
change; they changed with every album from the first until Quad. They could
do anything, from the Gateway mix of Who Are You to a Rockabilly version of
Shaking All Over...they are the only ones holding themselves back.

> I always thought the Woodstock set was very solid.  Tight, fast, &
aggressive.
> The worst "mistake" is "Do You Think It's Alright"  in which Pete's guitar
is
> out of tune because he had just whacked Abbie Hoffman with it.  Apart from
> that, I never noticed any other glaring mistakes.  What problems do you
hear?

Scott:

It's a very short set...no Overture, for instance. If we're going to get
another Tommy live, I'd rather it was Leeds or another more complete one.


"Neither in French nor in English nor in Mexican."
     George "Waco Jawaka" Bush

               Cheers                 ML