Marcus Surrealius bushchoked at
Thu Aug 19 08:03:55 CDT 2004

> You're kidding right?


Me? Kid?

>I've never been a big fan of
Journey. Don't hate them, just don't keep up with them
much. I'm embarrassed
to admit I did not even know Steve Perry was replaced.

Why, if you don't care. I know lots about bands I
don't like because I have a music store. Fans of the
band keep me up to date on this stuff whether I like
it or not.

> But, did he (Perry) die or just not want to sing
with them anymore, or
couldn't sing with them anymore? I think that's an
important distinction.

I can't counter that arguement. Apparently Perry had
some medical problem and couldn't tour, but he isn't
dead. I don't make a distinction there. The perception
is still the same: they replaced original members with
sound-alikes or, in the case of The Who, somewhat
inferior players. 

> Did a lot of hard core Journey fans move along with
the new lineup or reject

It's mixed, just like we are here. Some accepted it,
some ridicule it.

> It doesn't mean a whole lot to me.

A-HA! And therein lies the difference. If they did,
you'd feel differently...or so you imply. Journey is a
nothing band...but you expect more from The Who! And
rightly so!

> However, what about AC/DC?

Right, same thing. And as you list the bands, you see
now that The Who having done this ends up in this list
of more mediocre bands.

> What about
Pink Floyd? Wasn't that a controversial name to tour
under at some point?

Yeah, and they lost a lot of respect by doing so.
Split the fans. Tarnished their reputation.

> Did
that touring unit have the right to retain the name?

A legal right? I guess so.

> And isn't there a difference between the death of a
member, and the voluntary change of lineup?

In the eyes of "most people?" No.

> hey, let's not forget KISS who's touring with
replacements for ace frehley 
and peter criss. same makeup, just different guys
wearing them. 

See? Surely you don't feel comfortable with The Who
being lumped in with Kiss and Journey etc.

> and in case ya don't know, Judas priest is back with
rob halford, the original frontman. 

And they're touring on the Ozfest this year.

> No Tommy, no Quad, and probably no Who's Next
because after Tommy's rejection 
Pete would never have tried Lifehouse.


You are utterly wrong. First of all, Bowie was a Mod
and a Who fan, his band opened for them early on.
Second his writing tended toward concept albums (Ziggy
Stardust, Diamond Dogs, Outside). Thirdly he certainly
would have been a part of Tommy! If you knew ANYTHING
about his writing, that would be obvious. Fourth he's
a SF fan and that would have worked in regard to
Lifehouse. Fifth, Quad would have been a slam
dunk...try LISTENING to the man's music sometime, like
for instance London Boys which is about the same
subject as Quad!!!
Bowie is the single artist I can point to who had
about as much influence on Rock music as The Who. If
he had been in the band, it would have been
different...but not worse. And Townshend/Bowie
collaborations might have been pretty incredible.
For future reference, knowing your subject is always a
good idea when you sit down to write about it.

"What is life choices about?"
   George "they tell me what to do" Bush

Cheers         ML

Do you Yahoo!?
New and Improved Yahoo! Mail - Send 10MB messages! 

More information about the TheWho mailing list