[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Stones v. Who

In a message dated 3/31/04 5:54:38 PM, TheWho-Digest-Owner@xxxxxxxx writes:

<<The Stones are refined and calculating....<snip>....The Stones are refined 
and calculating. The Who are sloppy and real. >>

Hi Jon,

Just curious, when was the last time you were at a Stones concert?  The 
infrastructure of a Stones tour is a very tight ship - but anyone that has attended 
more than a few Stones concerts over the past forty years - can tell you the 
Stones patented sloppy and chaotic on stage.  When they're at their best live, 
the Stones are one note away from a musical meltdown.

There are a lot of a lot of differences between the Stones and the Who, but 
it's not because one band is more refined and one is sloppier.  Studio 
recording wise - the Who is probably the more polished band - less rough edges.  Live 
though, they both play with such an energy and abandon that they're one rail 
away from derailing the whole train.

Both are excellent bands that left their comtemporaries in the dust and each 
released a couple of albums that will still get radio play decades from now.  
When compared to Lennon/McCartney - neither Pete nor Jagger/Richards have been 
given the composing credit they deserve.  While both bands started out with a 
similar bent, they went into different directions with their sound.  There is 
no objective scale to rate which band's sound is better on the level they 
create and play at, it comes down to the individual listener's personal taste. 

I guess in my mind the major difference is the Stones have never left their 
garage band pick up roots, while the Who did.  Tommy and Quadrophenia are not 
garage band albums.  The other difference is the Who quit being a working band 
twenty years ago while the Stones did not.  The Who may have been right to do 
that.  Stones have had to complete with their earlier work and trying to top 
an Exile, Sticky Fingers, Some Girls, Who Are You, Who's Next, etc... can even 
be impossible for the band that created it.  But it's also been quite a loss 
not to have new material from the Who for so long.

One can prefer Coke or Pepsi without turning the other one into an evil twin. 
 It's also possible to like both.