[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Who's Next



"Michael D. Mullins" <mullins@ecn.purdue.edu> wrote:

About Pure And Easy...
> 2.  The "un-polished" quality of the other version is one of the reasons I
> like it better, I think.  I've often heard it said that the first take of a
> song is always the best, because the more takes you do, the more you loose
> in terms of the "soul" of the performance, even while perhaps gaining
> technical execution.  I think this is true here: I can tell the "Odds and
> Sods" version is a more accomplished progression of the song, but it's the
> "rawness" of the earlier version that I like.  And it's a bit faster....

I think my biggest problem with the sound of the earlier NY version on the
new WN is the drums, which sound too "tin canish" for my taste.


> 3.  I don't know.  I think the new "Pure and Easy" sounds really good
> programmed right after "Baba 'O Riley."  

Maybe it's the placement of the songs rather than the change in sound that
makes the additions seem "tacked on".  I don't know.  In any case, the new
work definitely does not flow well, IMO.


> Oh well... hopefully, we'll get a good reissue of "Odds and Sods," and
> then we'll both be happy!

I hope so!


Dave Elliott