RE: The Who Digest Vol 2 Num 323

["Danehy-Oakes, Dan'l (djdaneh)" <DJDANEH@pbsrv09.isp.PacBell.COM>]

I wrote:

>>Roger -- Robert Plant is a fairly obvious choice; he's always
>>been a Roger Daltry wannabee.

And Scott replied:

>This is a prime example of the bias that develops within hardcore fans of
>music groups-- pretty soon everybody is imitating your favorite band.
>
>Robert Plant was NEVER a Roger Daltry wannabee.

Uhhhhh. . . Listen to "Black Dog." First time I heard it, I thought it
*was* Daltry -- though I wondered if he'd got his nuts caught in a nipper
or something; his voice was too high.  'Course that whole song is ripped
off from "Young Man Blues," but that's another issue. . .

Seriously, it's not just Plant; instead of the "New Yardbirds" they were
originally claiming to be, Zep spent their whole career trying to remake
"Live at Leeds."

This isn't Who-mania on my part.  I've been listening to rock'n'roll for
25 years, and I don't think that there has *ever* been a time when, if
someone had held a gun and asked me to name my favorite band, I would have
said the Who.  First there was CTA, then there was Genesis, then Gabriel's
solo act, then the Clash. . .   The most that can be said of me as a "hard
core Who fan" is that they are the only band to *consistently* be in my
fav'rit five bands since they first snuck in in '74 or so.


*******************

Then regarding replacing Moon, Matt "Man...or Astro-Man?" wrote:

>I might be mistaken, but I believe Jethro Tull 'A' did come out in '78.

1980.  (Gad, I'm a walkin' encyclopedia!)  '77 -- SONGS FROM THE WOOD,
'78 -- HEAVY HORSES, '79 -- STORMWATCH or NORTHSEA OIL or whatever it
was called, I never much liked that album, '80 -- "A", the last Tull
album I *really* liked (partly because of the awesome presence of Edwin
Jobson on keyboards and electric violin).  The concerts from that tour
were amazing, too, with Jobson and Barre riffin' at each other.

>it was either that or '77.  That was the album that Anderson basically
>dropped the entire band w/ the exception of Martin Barr and himself.

To which Jim Jackson replied:

>I think 'fired' is a better word than 'dropped.' Probably so that they
>could keep most of the $$.

Well, it's a little more complicated than that -- Anderson decided to do
a solo LP, then decided that it was Tull material, called the band back
together, and Barre was the only one who'd come in on short notice.  So
he canned the others and put together a new Tull, which lasted in that
form for one tour, as Jobson went off to attempt a solo career and has
basically not been heard from since.


* * * * * **

I wrote:

>Oh, yes.  I recommend a bootleg called RAW if you can get it.

And Da Fangly Guy wrote:

>You must really hate the guy for recommending that bomb!

Context, man, context.  We were talking about how S'Box came
out live; crappy though the sound on that boot is, I maintain
that the "Squeeze Box" on it is the best I've ever heard.

Fang also quoted me about reissues:

>Meanwhile, about the WBN reissue -- am I the only one who has
>trouble believing that there's *nothing* to put on it?  Check
>out the quote after the signature -- it's a clue.

And replied:

>Oh, they'll put something on it. I just think they were a bit stumpted and
>burnt out. I faxed the 4 key people all the ideas from the "digest". I'm 
sure
>several of them will be adopted. Meanwhile, they're still mixing the damn
>thing! They've got plenty of time...

Well, yeah, I'm sure they'll put 'something', too -- the question in my mind
was whether there were outtakes to be (ab)used.  Which was the point of the
quote from "Success Story"; I would find it *really* hard to believe that 
the
album which elicited that particular whine from Entwistle had *no* outtakes
of any value. . .



 --dan'l

the incense burned away and the stench began to rise
and lovers now estranged avoided catching each others' eyes