It's Hard

Jim M NakedI at
Fri Nov 19 16:35:14 CST 2004

----- Original Message ----- From: "O'Neal, Kevin W."

> Ok, how bloody good is this live EF off of It's Hard re-issue.
> I've never purchased either the IH or FD re-issues.
> Do I really *need* to go out and get this, or can I be reasonably happy
> without them, and listen to studio EF?

I'm surprised there hasn't been any reaction to this question today.

My advice would be, it's not worth buying the It's Hard remaster just for 
Eminence Front.  While it does have some advantages over the other avalable 
live versions of the song, mainly the presence of Entwistle, overall it's 
disappointing right from the ra-tat-a-tat, tat-a-tat of Kenney's lame 
opening salvo to Pete's whiny guitar solos.  Frankly, the studio version of 
the song blows the live version away.  What the hell is Kenney doing?  Did 
someone steal his kit and leave him with only a snare?  Is that Roger 
playing the repeating riff?  It seems to almost, but not quite, disappear 
when Pete starts soloing.  I'd actually rate this version no higher than the 
one on Join Together.

I never really thought of EF as an Entwistle song, but listening to the 
studio version, I can see why you say that.  It sounds like he laid down two 
bass tracks.  There's the low, sustained notes that hum along most of the 
time.  Then there are the signature Entwistle flourishes, some of which are 
fantastic.  That makes it impossible to duplicate live.  This is one of 
those Who songs that is best in its original studio version.  Especially 
Pete, who plays stuff on it he'd never try live.  On the new (2002/04) live 
versions he lets it rip more than the '82 one, but his playing on the studio 
version is much more complex and intricate.  Oh, and why do they chop off 
the start of the synth intro when they play it live?

Hey, this could be a good thread.  Who songs that are better on albums than 

Jim M 

More information about the TheWho mailing list