Pete's Voice, continued

[Cheryl <otter@execpc.com>]

Mark wrote:

> Since how music affects us is all subjective anyway, I'd have to say
> you
> make THE point here...what I find in a song may be completely
> different
> than what you see in it, however both POV's are equally legitimate.
> In regard to the voices, I love Rog's for its "blood and thunder" as
> well as Pete's for it's smooth, fragile bearing. The difference in
> their
> voices is also one of the many elements which make The Who so
> unique...they work very well together.

I agree with you.  Rich makes a similar point in his posting.

Rich wrote:

> Pete probably CAN achieve "plaintive and yearning" more effectively
> than
> Roger, but that's NOT what is primarily called for in many, many Who
> songs
> (My Gen, I Can See For Miles, Pinball Wizard, Won't Get Fooled Again,
> The
> Real Me, Who Are You, Cry If You Want, et al).  Yes, Pete's demo for
> "Behind Blue Eyes" is haunting.  Roger's vocal is different, and gives
> such songs a power and anger that Pete's voice generally can't.

I enjoy both Pete's and Roger's versions of these songs (except for
"Cry", which I have never heard in demo form).  Each of their voices
gives the songs a very different quality, and I find power in both
versions.

>  Geez, I hope I'm not gonna have to quote rock critics to back me up
> on this...

No, Rich, no experts, other than you, are necessary!  I agree with both
you and Mark; the differences in vocal quality between Pete and Roger
are a compelling and necessary part of The Who's music, live or
studio-recorded.  BUT, it is still absolutely true that Pete's voice
pierces my soul, and Roger's, although wonderful, does not.

Rich continued:

> I'll agree that they illuminate later versions.  And even _I_ can get
> caught
> up and swept away every once in awhile when listening to a SET of
> Pete's
> demos for a particular album (kind of like being in an alternate
> universe--you know, like on Sliders! <g>).  But I just don't have much
> of an
> interest in frequently listening to Scoop and Another Scoop because of
> their
> randomness--whereas I'd listen to ANY random assortment of WHO tracks
> anytime!

I also prefer the album demos, such as those for "Tommy" and "Who Are
You", to the Scoops.  But, the Scoops were edited and compiled by a
non-Who fan, and Pete admits this.

> For your penance, go listen to Rhino's "Martyrs And Madmen" CD twenty
> times
> in a row.   ; )

Have I been naughty *again*?????

- --Cheryl