[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Who's Next
- To: thewho@mpath.comSun Dec 7 13:17:06 PST 1997
- Subject: Who's Next
- From: Dave Elliott <dae@cbcosmos.att.com>
- Date: Wed, 17 Jan 96 8:59:36 EST
- Mailer: Elm [revision: 70.85]
- Original-From: Dave Elliott <cbcosmos!dae>
- Sender: owner-thewho
"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