shorter shows



Sroundtable at aol.com Sroundtable at aol.com
Tue Aug 10 22:43:54 CDT 2004


In a message dated 8/10/2004 4:35:56 AM Central Daylight Time, 
thewho-request at igtc.com writes:
This view may not be popular, but The Who have become a lounge act.  The
author stopped short of calling them just that, but they are.  Their shows
are getting shorter and shorter (I am surprised that this only gets a
cursory mention here) and even more predictable than what we expected.  
Both shows I attended in CA were in excess of 2 hours.  The 2002 shows were 2 
hrs 15 minutes with 21 songs.  These two shows were almost that with 19 
songs.  They jammed out more this time around.  I didn't feel in any way cheated.  
I saw Aerosmith and they were actually under 2 hours and left out some 
significant hits.  I would certainly rather the performances I just witnessed at 2 
hrs plus than 3 hrs of Pete and Roger running through obscure songs and just 
playing the notes faithfully.  After all, they ARE 60 years old, and it's not as 
if they have abandoned the physical nature of a Who show.  They give us 
everything they have on stage.  What I witnessed was not a lounge act.  Aerosmith 
has to swing from trapezes and wear wild outfits and shower the crowd with 
confetti.  The Who speak with their performance.  Hollywood Bowl was absolutely 
spectacular.

Mc



More information about the TheWho mailing list