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

Re: The Who as an influence



In a message dated 97-04-28 18:27:35 EDT, mleaman@sccoast.net writes:

<< Now, on to Wally...
 
My gosh. I didn't think you were going to write me a book. You must have a
lot of free time on your hands.

 > It was an Eddie Cochran song first, was it not?
 
> It was, but listen to the Cochran version then the Who version, and then
 tell me which Blue Cheer was doing.

Maybe The Who was doing the Blue Cheer version? The Who version was
apparently more popular, but that doesn't discount that other bands,
including Blue Cheer may have done it that way first, then The Who liked it
and copied it.

> Oh, every Rock musician who heard it (which would be most of them, I
 think). Look at music before MG (Chuck Berry/Blues) even by The
 "fabulous and original" Beatles, and then see how different it was after
 December 1965 (or perhaps it would be more accurate to put it even a bit
 earlier, since surely Lennon/McCartney had seen The Who perform before
 MG was released).

Do you really believe that all the popular bands of the time heard The Who
performing in these small clubs and decided to change their styles based on
that? Wishfull thinking perhaps, but not very likely.

> As for Beatles music itself, as any Beach Boys fan of the time could
 tell you, it wasn't quite as original as it may appear while watching
 retrospective Beatles films/video.
 
The Beatles had 4 albums out by the end of 1964 (that's prior to the 1965
release of My Generation). What exactly is your point?

> Have you heard the Marquee Club "import" from 1964? You can hear the
 difference in The Who's music that early (as opposed to everyone
 else's), even when they're jamming off a Kinks riff.

They actually sounded like other bands of the period, who were trying to do
the same thing. What bands are you comparing them to?
 
> The proof is there for anyyone to hear. It might take some younger
 people a bit of research for the dates, but that's time well spent
 anyway. The musical environment around The Who's career is very
 important when discussing their music. It can tell one, for instance,
 that while WHO ARE YOU wasn't one of the band's stellar releases, it was
 still superior to the majority of what was released that
 year...especially if you focus on their peers.
 
Now you are talking about quality of the music. What does this have to do
with influences? I asked you to back up what you were saying, and you are
triying to change the subject. Try harder.

>  Musicians, of course. The casual record-buying public are a poor way to
 measure good music or influence...or do you feel that Snoop Doggy Dog,
 Kiss, Madonna, Oasis (and so on) are important, influential acts? Do you
 credit every band who've outsold The Who with more influence? I doubt
 it, and even if you do I certainly don't. Record sales mean nothing but
 how much money a performer has made or how popular they are. The same is
 true with concert sales.
 
Record sales are only the point where they matter in reaching the intended
audiences. You make it sound that the Who influenced everyone in the world
with My Generation and my point was that most of the people you claim in
influenced, probably never heard it back then since it did so poorly in the
charts and wasn't exactly popular. People can't be influenced by things that
they can't here. Understand?

>BTW, it was QUAD the influenced me more than any other Who music, not
 MG. Unless you count LAL securing The Who as my favorite band...
 
I'm glad you were influenced. But this has nothing to do with the original
discussion. Unless you want to consider Quadrophenia as a double album and
you decided to write a double post as a poor attempt to get your point
across. 

> I'd have to say that The Who influenced The Beatles...Paul has admitted
 as much, albeit just lately. If ANY Beatles album influenced The Who, it
 could have been REVOLVER (arguably their best album). Maybe.

The word "influenced" can be very wide or narrow in the scope of it's
intended use. The Beatles were pretty much doing there own thing, and almost
done with it by the time The Who started making real noise. What exactly did
Paul admit to? Have you had personal conversations with Paul McCartney and
Pete Townshend? Or, are these all speculations, assumptions and fantasies on
you part? Anyone can take a news clip, a blurb or part of an interview out of
context. Apparently, this is the basis for your theories. Certainly not on
any factual material, since you haven't quoted any.

> There again, Harrison's Taxman sounds remarkably like a Who song...don't
you
 think?
 
Yes, I think. I hope you do too. However, Taxman sounds nothing like a Who
song.

>Apparently Paul Weller thought so.
 
There you go. You mentioned a guy who's a big Who fan and even covered a few
Who songs. The Eurythimics (who began as the Tourists) were also influenced
by The Who, can you extrapolate any Who in their music?

> Not exactly the sort of influence I was thinking about.

Hard to know exactly what you were thinking about, since you haven't
expressed yourself very well, or backed up your theories with anything but
speculation and wishful thinking.

> I meant the music itself.

The title which you created says "The Who as an influence", if you sincerely
meant that, you should have changed the title, or been specific as to your
types of influences. However, that being said, The Beatles had influenced The
Who, as well as most of the other British bands at the time, by being
successful with their own compositions. Ultimately, Pete Townshend's song
writing was of much greater importance to the band's success, than how well
they can do an R&B cover. You should get your thoughts a bit more straight
before you pick and chose what it is that you mean to make a point about and
also have an ability to defend the same.

> As for the influence you're citing here, The Beatles
 opened the door for a lot of bands, sure...but The Who smashed through
 the doorframe and surrounding wall when they came through, you know.
 They invented Punk (Anyway Anyhow Anywhere, MG) and Heavy Metal (so
 would Zep even existed if not for The Who?). Did The Beatles do this? Or
 anyone else, for that matter?

You make the bold assumption that without The Who, these other styles of rock
music would not exist. While the Beatles may not have developed these styles,
certainly other bands of the time (i.e. Cream) may have. Bands also have the
ability to develop without the influence of another band before or parallel
to them. Led Zep may have done their thing with or without The Who. After
you've spoken to Townshend and Plant, can you let us know what they have to
say on the matter?

> Look, I like The Beatles. They were a fine band, if somewhat less
 substantial than others (the song My Generation says more in three
 minutes than The Beatles said on their first four albums). I like Zep,
 too, or did until PRESENCE was released. But I think both of them have
 gotten much of the credit that should have gone to The Who. TANJ (There
 Ain't No Justice)!
 
It's awfully noble of you to be looking out for the band's welfare and
reputation, but I think they've done fine all this time on their own. At the
same time, your assumptions are purely speculative and just because you
believe them to be true, doesn't make them so. If and when you decide to
offer a reply, please be prepared to quote actually sources, rather than
simple opinion so as we don't waste anyone's time further than we already
have.

Cheers,

*Wally*