[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Drinking with Rick James
>From: "Jim M"
>Subject: Re: Drinking with Rick James
>> Hey, you talkin' to me, or you talkin to Mark?
>You. Scott, too.
I knew that. I wasn't serious.
This is where my joke began, because you both had opposite views on
>> Good. Then, you also have to admit that with Pete's solo career taking
>> it generated much interest in The Who at the time.
>I never said there wasn't. Just not the most *ever*.
Yes you did!!!
I know you didn't! No worries!
>Yes, PLEASE, can we move off in a tangent. *Any* tangent.
*Any* ? ;-)
> I can see why you'd be angry, but I'd rather embrace the
>wonderful music Pete made outside of The Who.
Well, so would I. Of course.
But, that doesn't mean the anger isn't there, and can't co-exist with the
appreciation.........however much surprised it is.
>> (ouch, where did that long surprised anger come from?)
Surprised <above> is spelled correctly, which means only one thing......
I fucked up on the spelling of Supressed, and then hit "change" when
surprised popped up.
> Ok, there are clearly two sides to this debate.
>Hardly as divided as, say, the Arabs
Yeah, and what the fucks up with them anyway?
ENOUGH ALL FUCKING READY!
>> Obviously if one tour is completely sold out, than that would have to be
>> taken into consideration.
I don't know. I'm sure it's easily researchable on who.net.
I had always assumed that Who shows were *always* sold out, until I
witnessed the miserable attendance in the DC area in 96, 97, and 2000.
>>>But, did the people who bought the albums actually *like* the albums.
>> Irrelevant for purposes of comparison.
>> Both eras could fall subject to that.
>Huh? You're not actually suggesting that people who bought Face Dances and
>It's Hard may have *liked* them as well as people who bought Tommy and
>Next, are you?
No, of course not.
But, I think word of mouth on new albums spreads and effects album/CD sales
by X amount.
What X is, is anyone's guess.
But, it's X none the less.
Obviously (without any statistics to support my thinking) I think WN
garnered more sales than FD or IH.
It's one statistic that must be considered *if* we were to continue to
bother with this.
> I contend that a good many people bought those albums and
>went to those tours, even though they didn't like what the band was doing
>much as they used to.
And, I contend that they did it because they knew the end was near....and
That's why Pete wanted out.
>I bought a bunch of albums when CDs first came out
>that I stopped listening to very shortly thereafter (hello, Steel Wheels
I'm a waiter. I need to feel some excitement brewing before I spend the
>liked or approved <a very popular girl>" You and Scott seem to be defining
>it some other way.
Ok, now I'm really confused.
That's exactly how Scott was defining it.
That's how *I* was defining it.
>>>Me too! CHART RATINGS, LP SALES, size of venues.
>> Ummmm, JIM!
>Yes? Oh, I see, you're suggesting that because Mark and I disagree on this
>point, that it means our shared opinion about which era was The Who's peak
>is wrong, is that it?
No, not suggesting that at all! (I'm so misunderstood...)
Just reveling at the rift in the alliance.
I need to go re-read Pete's diary.
Kevin in VT