the fray

[Michael Papaleo J <cump10@uxa.ecn.bgu.edu>]

i need to enter the fray:
in light of the recent debates about live music versus studio.  yes, i
agree that live who performances capture the essence of their music music
better than the studio recordings. 

however, this is true for about every band.  do you think that the
grateful dead built a steady following for over thirty years because of
their excellent studio albums? no.  people listen to the dead because of
their electrifying live performances. 

as to musical influences.  i agree to an extent with the person who said
that the jimi hendrix experience stole the who's live show (the guitar
smashing and the lot).

however, in regard to playing style, the sounds are completely different.
hendrix and townshend have two completely different playing styles.  they
are uncompareable.  townshend is the greatest chordal guitar player ever.
hendrix on the other hand, was very blues-based.  his use of the tremelo,
and his soloing style is unparralled.

the j.h.e are not a who-clone.  entwistle blows away noel redding on the
bass.  moonie is an incredible drummer.  however, mitch mitchell is not
far behind (well, at least he's better than kenney jones).
i completly disagree with the person who stated that mitchell is a moonie
clone drummer.  just because he is good does not mean that he is moon'
clone.  their styles and personalities are totally different.  listen to
live at leeds, then listen to j.h.e live at winterland, and tell me if you
still think they sound alike.

i'm sorry, i just needed to add my two cents in.  i've been on this list
for about a year, and have never really felt the need to reply until now.
well, i gotta go.

- -mike