Re: Quadrophenia

[mleaman@sccoast.net (Mark Leaman)]

>I wouldn't call ANY album reaching #2 on the charts a "commercial failure",
>would you?

WF:

First of all, I seem to recall IT'S HARD being called the highest charting
Who album, and I KNOW it charted at #2. Exactly where did you find QUAD at
#2? Not Billboard! Could you mean the UK charts? How long was it ON the
charts, at any level?

I remember at the time the impact of QUAD being panned, not bought in
droves, and written off. OK? I was there with the most incredible Rock album
I had ever heard, and even the most respected mags were calling the album
worthless and unlistenable. It brought headlines like: The Who's Big
Failure. This is what happened. You can question it if you must...

>As for the single charts, your facts are out of order:
>1st single: "Love Reign O'er Me", 11/73. 76 in the charts, weeks in chart: 5
>2nd single: "The Real Me": 1/74. 92 in the charts, weeks in the chart: 3

I would hardly call #92 & #76 "charting," but I suppose it was. Barely, and
for a very short time then. You might recall a bit of Who History...I Can
See For Miles was considered a failure at #10 in the UK.

>>From the "Quadrophenia" soundtrack:

Who was talking about the bloody soundtrack???

>Keep in mind a few other factors. "Quadrophenia" was released October, '73, a
>month BEFORE the 1st single.  And the soundtrack was released September, 79. 

There was no relation in when the singles were released. The commercial
potential of the singles, maybe. The album wasn't bought merely because few
wanted to wade through the music to find out what was really going on.
Comments at the time: "Murky..." "...swamped The Who..." "Daltrey's vocals
are strained and often buried in the mix..." "...dense..." "...is not very
accessable..." 
And there were comments about the lack of diversity..."every song sounds the
same..." and other comments of that nature. I believe that may have been the
point when I decided that most critics knew nothing about music. Either that
or they listened once and wrote their reviews (something I never did). Even
then, it's hard for me to believe that anyone hearing the entire QUAD could
completely write it off (as they did). No, they wanted music that was easy
to listen to, songs that didn't challenge or intrigue. Me, I want more.
After the rave reviews LEEDS and WN got, QUAD was panned. And that certainly
contributed to the lack of success. The fact that it's been realized as
great now certainly is welcome, but that doesn't change what happened when
it was released.
I often said of QUAD that it was ahead of its time, and that it painted
motifs that were the seeds of music yet to come (much like ABBEY ROAD, in
its time). Now, with some perspective, that much is obvious.

              Cheers                        ML