Re: comparing most talented

["L. Bird" <pkeets@xxxxxxxxxxx>]

Isn't it always comparing apples to oranges, though?  You vote for Pete 
because you're a Who fan.  Clapton fans will always argue that he's the best 
because he's who they like.  The fine points of judging talent are very 
subjective.

I agree, of course, that Pete is extremely talented, but he also had 
excellent complements within The Who that cloud the issue.  Pete is 
interesting because he's such a jack-in-the-box.  You never know what to 
expect from him.

keets



> Well, I can stack up Pete as superior to all of the people you mentioned. 
> Pete may not be known for the pure guitar skill of Hendrix or Clapton, but 
> is a much better singer AND songwriter than both of them.  Pete also would 
> kick both of their asses on other instruments.  Look at all the things Pete 
> has played on albums, such as keyboards, banjo (sq box), and I think he 
> played bass on someone else's solo album, or another band's.  As for John, 
> while he is #1 on anyone's bassist list, Pete had a much better voice, was 
> a better songwriter, and had far more stage presence.  John would equal or 
> even surpass Pete in pure musical skill (John also played multiple 
> instruments
> well), but Pete wins in the end with ALL things considered.  I really 
> wasn't looking to pit Pete vs John, but you brought it up.  It's all in 
> fun, however. :))
>
> mc
>
> "Just fucking listen and shut up!"- Pete Townshend live in Long Beach 1971



_________________________________________________________________
Send and receive Hotmail on your mobile device: http://mobile.msn.com