Quadrophenia

["Gary M. Gillman" <garyg@inforamp.net>]

I`m as dedicated a Who fan as any, I believe, but I must confess some
surprise to see all the interest in the Quad reissue, which testifies to
much (obviously sincere) interest in and love for that album. I must
dissent, however. I respect the tremendous narrative achievement it
represents, as it is better thought out and written than Tommy, but the
music - for me always the essence of the Who - doesn`t make it as a rock
record (although I think it would make a great stage concept). It`s a flawed
masterpiece, unlike Tommy, LAL and WN, which are nearly perfect. Let me
explain: first, the album has, by and large, no visible means of guitar
support - a real problem for a Who record. The guitars we do hear on the
songs are generally weak, e.g., on LROM they sound light (for the Who), and
"patched in". The orchestration sounds contrived for the most part, and
doesn`t blend well with the basic sound of the band. (PT later got better at
this, e.g., New Song, or Street In The City). The harmonies sound loose and
ragged to me, and on many songs Daltrey was clearly beyond beyond his range.
Mo was just okay, although I agree JAE was brilliant. To me, Quad was the
beginning of a long slide for the Who as a tight, powerful rock ensemble,
just as Exile was for that other band. On the other hand, I always liked
Quad live, where its  power showed up much better, and I would buy a live
Quad release any day. I don`t mean to offend anyone - taste is personal -
but wish only to state my opinion, and wonder if anyone agrees with me. BTW,
my favourite album of all time is LAL, followed by Tommy, and then WN. I
believe in time those records will be regarded as among the finest popular
(for lack of a better term music  recorded in the second half of the 20th
century.