Side by side with Aerosmith - John's sound...
O'Neal, Kevin W.
Kevin.ONeal at vtmednet.org
Tue Jun 22 08:52:38 CDT 2004
>From: Alan McKendree <amck at thenetdr.com>
>Subject: Re: Side by side with Aerosmith
>I don't see it, except in the broadest sense that The Who are competing
>against Aerosmith for the public's limited entertainment dollar.
Maybe I need to shape this a little better.
Any time a band goes on stage, particularly in a festival type
arrangement, they want to outperform the other bands. They want to come
away as "the shit".
Now, that doesn't mean that The Who want to knock Aerosmith down or
anything (nothing against Aerosmith), but they logically would want to
come away as "the shit" and thus benefit from such an accomplishment.
>But in that sense they're competing against Brittany Spears, L'il Bow
Oh, I don't now about that.
Bichany and Lil Poop Poop aren't exactly in the same genre as The Who
>I'd say that The Who appeals to a relatively small (in a global
>sense) market niche, as does classic rock in general,
I dunno. The dollar amounts that tour 2002 brought in compared to all
concerts that year was pretty high.
But, granted, the music scene these days isn't exactly what The Who is
Thank God (or some scientific explanation thereof...)
>and only in a
>very few cases is it the case that dollars spent on The Who will
>directly be taken away from Aerosmith, and vice versa.
Yeah, but that's not what I'm going on about. I don't believe that a
Who blow out in Japan will adversely effect Aerosmith's standing and
But, really, the potential is there.
Albeit in non-traceable or provable amounts.
>I doubt that the press needs Japan to know what The Who's about.
No, but this is the first time in.....decades(?) that The Who has gone
head-2-head with another big name.
Simply holding their own <snicker> against Aerosmith (EU) will raise
their standing in rock land.
....looking in his crystal ball....
"Nick Loder here for MTV....yesterday saw a clash of the past and
present at the Yokahama Festival in Japan as The Who and Aerosmith
brought the festival to a climax. The Who, touring in support of their
new CD "Then and Now" surprised attendees by showing Aerosmith and fans
that their "Now" is just as explosive and powerful and their "Then."
When asked, Aerosmith front man Steven Tyler admitted the difficulty in
following an act as dominating as The Who."
Steven: "Man, that was hard. To see Pete Townshend and Roger Daltrey
doing their thing and conjuring up images of their hey-day, and holding
that crowd in the palm of their hands like that was incredible. I was
in awe. Then, after they finished, someone had to tap me on the
shoulder and remind me that I had to go on next! I didn't want to go!"
Nick Loder: "It shouldn't come as a surprise that The Who, after 4
decades, still has the juice and power to please. Their classic rock
stapeles cover the airwaves in both radio and also TV. Advertisers are
clamoring for a piece of their selling power, and major networks are
also cashing in on the draw that these Woodstock headliners are bringing
Look for a new album, the first since 1982, sometime next year, and much
more attention now that their awakening is being felt across the
That has a ring, doesn't it?
It *could* happen.
Look at the reviews from IOW?
Did *anyone* think The Who would dominate the reviews of IOW the way
>have been many chances for a writer to see The Who in the last two
>years for those who care.
Not side-by-side with an MTV (current music scene) staple.
>I still see no shame in writing that Aerosmith and The
>Who both presented kickass shows (assuming they did).
No, there's no shame.
But, it sho would be nice to hear a review as seen in my Crystal Ball.
There's no shame there, but it elevates The Who.
>Case in point,
>many reviews of the Isle of Wight gave large props to both The Who and
>Bowie, without penalizing one for the merits of the other.
But, The Who received more attention.
That's a *GOOD* thing, that isn't necessarily a bad thing for Bowie
(whom I've always liked).
>Assuming Aerosmith gives their typical show, simple
>honesty should require that they did a good show as well, which will
>please their fans and still let them make a fair chunk of change.
I'm not arguing against that.
(Alan likes Aerosmith better than The Who!
Alan likes Aerosmith better than The Who!
Alan likes Aerosmith better than The Who! ;-)
>Then I think it's very possible that an injustice will be done to a
>good Aerosmith show.
Why are you focusing so hard on the negative impact to Aerosmith?
If it happens, it happens. How can it be an injustice?
As John H. points out, if you ain't there, you can't judge. ;-)
Let the chips fall where they may.
The Who has so much to gain by the "crystal ball" scenario.
Aerosmith is already "on top".
The Who is fighting to get there, or at least higher then they are.
Is it that you don't believe that?
Given the history of competition *within* the band, the only logical
conclusion is that such a competitive streak exists vs. other bands as
I think history proves that too.
I don't believe that Roger and Pete are doing all this work to stay in
the shadows of other bands.
They want to reclaim their rightful place in the industry.
And, I think they have gone a very long way at doing that already.
This could be an important *BIG* step on that road. Particluarly on the
"eve" of releasing a new CD, the first in 20+ years.
>I just don't see it as a zero-sum game; I think there's plenty of
>recognition, honor, respect and bucks to be had and made by both bands
>if they do their jobs.
I'm not sure it's a zero-sum game either.
But, The Who definitely has much to gain.
>From: "L. Bird" <pkeets at hotmail.com>
>Subject: Re: MYOB and turn up da bass !
>That was John playing at Watford. Derek mentioned that John had
>sound before the planned 2002 tour.
But, you were wrong somewhere in there.
Regarding sound change...
I've never noticed an overall "change."
I have noticed from song to song there can be a change, and a more
trebly "metalic" sound.
But, I've heard that sound in boots from back 'in the day.'
When John was here with JEB, his sound changed throughout the show.
>From: "L. Bird" <pkeets at hotmail.com>
>Subject: Re: What's in a name?
>Hey, that's pretty cool, Kevin. I see you've got a more standard
Ok, it's a rear entry...??
Keets, are you trying to divulge your sexual preferences to the list?
Is that really appropriate, here?
Mind the youngsters!
Kevin in VT
This message, and any attachments, may contain information that is confidential, privileged, and/or protected from disclosure under state and federal laws that deal with the privacy and security of medical information. If you received this message in error or through inappropriate means, please reply to this message to notify the Sender that the message was received by you in error, and then permanently delete this message from all storage media, without forwarding or retaining a copy.
More information about the TheWho