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

RE: The Who Mailing List Digest V7 #64



Regarding the closing of the Pete Townshend site chat room; I personally
don't think that the volume of messages was excessive. I could skim through
a typical day's volume in about 15 minutes. I can't imagine that it could
have taken Matt much longer to do the same and pull out the "important
messages". I am very disappointed to see the chat room gone. Having a direct
line to Matt was a wonderful way to feel closer to Pete. I'm sure that
others will agree with me. Plus I just liked hearing what Matt has to say.

I hope that someone on this list like Brian C. or Derrick B. can maybe talk
to Matt and convey how disappointed we all are that the chat room is gone.
Maybe even find out a little more backround about why the chat room was
disbanded. 

We've lost a good conduit to information about Pete. What's gonna replace it
?

Phil Sevigny
-----Original Message-----
From: TheWho-Digest-Owner@igtc.com [mailto:TheWho-Digest-Owner@igtc.com]
Sent: Wednesday, March 08, 2000 8:53 AM
To: TheWho-Digest@igtc.com
Subject: The Who Mailing List Digest V7 #64



The Who Mailing List Digest
  Wednesday, March 8 2000  Volume 07 : Number 064



In this issue:

	RE: Pete site chat room closed
	Who's NOT the best
	Pete's chatroom closing.
	PT BB
	Re: Pete's chatroom closing.
	TKAA no.43
	Re: Who's NOT the best
	Re: Pete's chatroom closing.
	Re: PT BB
	Re: Pete's chatroom closing.
	Rog Down Under
	Re: Who's NOT the best
	Re: Japanese Bonus Gifts!
	Sad news
	Re: Who's NOT the best
	Re: TKAA no.43
	More Roger in Oz
	Re: Sad news
	Re: The Who Mailing List Digest V7 #63
	[none]
	So, lifehouse...
	Re: So, lifehouse...

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Tue, 7 Mar 2000 08:14:03 -0500 
From: "O'Neal, Kevin W." <Kevin.ONeal@vtmednet.org>
Subject: RE: Pete site chat room closed

	What do you all make of the closing of Pete's chat room??
	Very strange and sudden.
	Kevin in VT

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 07 Mar 2000 08:03:37 -0600
From: jeff <jdworks@execpc.com>
Subject: Who's NOT the best

>So in addition to powerful playing & singing and great
>lyrics, we've got an unconventional drummer, an
>unconventional bass player, and music composition that
>departs from the norm?  No wonder I worship this
>band!!  ----Rich B.

>What *is* wrong with these people who don't get The
>WHO like *we* get The WHO?  They have some kind of a block.  A barrier.
>Maybe they're afraid.  Like I heard Roger say in an interview:  "WHO music
>is too demanding for some people.  It *demands* that you listen to it.  It
says,
>'Come here, you !' "   --- SCHRADE in Akron

   Hey all:

   Obviously i agree with this to a certain extent (or i wouldn't be
receiving this list every day) but i have to point out, in defense of
plenty of intelligent, knowledgable music fans who aren't on this list that
you're not entirely "right". That is, your opinions (as stated here) are a
bit short-sighted.
   Some people prefer what i call background music. Which is not to imply
it's not challenging. i have a friend who listens to Miles Davis'
fusion-jazz alot. It's incredibly challenging writing and masterfully
performed. More so than the Who, to be fair. But the Who are more "in your
face".
   "In your face?" i have a friend who listens to Rage Against The Machine.
As "in your face" as you can get. More so than the Who, to be fair. But the
lyrics are pretty obvious, not as intelligent, humorous or personal as the
Who would do.
   Great lyrics? i have a friend that loves Bob Dylan, for that very
reason. The guy is a genius at turning a phrase, whether writing about
himself, telling a story, or making a joke. Even Pete would agree that Bob
Dylan can write a better lyric than Pete could. But The Who have Roger's
voice, unquestionably superior to Dylan's.
   Great singer? There are plenty of better singers out there than Roger,
it would be pointless to start squabbling because if you like a voice or
not is just opinion. Technical ability? Bobby McFerrin, Mariah Carey, Paul
Stanley, countless classically trained singers. And i'm sure there are
better bassists than John (Stanley Jourdan pops to mind), and better
drummers than Keith (okay, maybe not... but there COULD be).
   The REAL reason we like this band is that all four members are
technically great (as in they all perform well) and the music is
challenging, but not so challenging that it loses what we like about it.
WHat i mean is, Frank Zappa wrote alot of challenging music, but Pete's
hooks are more satisfying (to us). Likewise, some people find the Who TOO
challenging and prefer easier hooks (take any repetitive top 40 song for
example). 
   We're not right, they're not wrong. Music is just entertainment, and
what entertains you may not entertain the next guy. What seem like
"logical" reasons why a band is good or bad (technical ability,
credibility, poetic lyricism) all break down when studied too carefully...
that is why ALL rock critics are full of shit. 
   All that being said, i included the last line of this e-mail message to
see how many people skimming the list respond to that without reading the
rest of this rant (i love that band), and i love the balance of these four
characters fighting in the chaotic brilliance that is the Who's music. i
love the honesty, humor and intelligence of their lyrics. i love the fact
that this music has brains and brawn: Thoughtful Rock. It never fails to
wrestle emotion, never gets so progressive as to be dull or needlessly
complicated, and never fails to make me think about the music.  
   

   Oh and by the way, Led Zepp sucks.


   peace&anarchy,   jeffree

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 07 Mar 2000 06:10:34 PST
From: "Derick Bhupsingh" <circles01@hotmail.com>
Subject: Pete's chatroom closing.

It's very sudden and startling. I was part of a particular thread
which got a little out of hand but was nothing compared to some posts
that got a particular person banned. This thread of which I speak was
just a few people having fun really. no more. Some of you may have seen 
it.If that's the reason then I have to apologise to all of you.
however, I seriously don't think it is as the webmaster would have
surely stepped in with a warning or something. There was none.
Maybe more reasons will be given.
regards,
Derick.
______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 7 Mar 2000 09:27:55 -0500
From: "Mark R. Leaman" <mleaman@sccoast.net>
Subject: PT BB

>Matt says the BBS will close tomorrow at midday.  Sounds permanent.

Keets:

Yes, it seems so. Rather sudden, wasn't it? I haven't had a lot of time to
read it; did something happen which caused this? I'm not happy about it, but
I imagine only one person is.

                 Cheers                               ML

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 07 Mar 2000 10:30:04 -0500
From: Brian Cady <cadyb@home.com>
Subject: Re: Pete's chatroom closing.

I tend to think Matt just couldn't manage the chat room with his other
duties at Eelpie, whatever they are.  In any case, it wasn't handled
very well.

		-Brian in Atlanta

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 07 Mar 2000 15:47:51 GMT
From: "Jeremy Craine" <jcraine@hotmail.com>
Subject: TKAA no.43

just noticed in www.imdb.com top films of the 70's -
TKAA appears at no.43....
(Godfather is no.1)

JC
______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 07 Mar 2000 16:30:14 GMT
From: "L. Bird" <pkeets@hotmail.com>
Subject: Re: Who's NOT the best

>    Some people prefer what i call background music. Which is not to imply 
>it's not challenging. i have a friend who listens to Miles Davis' 
>fusion-jazz alot. It's incredibly challenging writing and masterfully 
>performed. More so than the Who, to be fair. But the Who are more "in your 
>face".

Music is wierd stuff.  Didn't somebody recently point out an article here 
regarding how the volume of rock music affects the brain?  And "background" 
music can do it, too.  Recall the recent research on how "classical" music 
can improve IQ for a brief period.  It's only certain types of classical 
music though.  Wagner falls into the "in your face," high volume category.

BTW, isn't most of Miles Davis' stuff improvisational?  I don't know that 
it's written.  There are recordings of him playing written work, say PORGY 
AND BESS, but I though it was mostly very complex jamming.


>    "In your face?" i have a friend who listens to Rage Against The 
>Machine.

>    Great singer? There are plenty of better singers out there than Roger, 
>it would be pointless to start squabbling because if you like a voice or 
>not is just opinion. Technical ability? Bobby McFerrin, Mariah Carey, Paul 
>Stanley, countless classically trained singers.

Roger's good.  He's never had a whole lot but a strong voice and a good 
range, and the rest of it is learned technique.  There isn't anybody any 
better at injecting drama and tension into a song.  He has a hard time with 
soft music, though.  It's really tough to fit his voice to it.


>And i'm sure there are better bassists than John (Stanley Jourdan pops to 
>mind),

This one would be hard to justify.


keets
______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 07 Mar 2000 16:47:25 GMT
From: "L. Bird" <pkeets@hotmail.com>
Subject: Re: Pete's chatroom closing.

I don't think it was that particular thread, but the volume in general.  
After considering it for a while, I've decided the problem was just as Matt 
said.  The number of messages made it nearly impossible to pick out things 
that were important, and I'll bet a couple of things slipped by during the 
rehersals that upset Pete.

One very recent item that disappeared with hardly a ripple was the report of

Roger's accident.  The Canberra concert was cancelled because of it, BTW.  
If the UK has the same news coverage as the US, Pete might well have read 
about it on the list three days late.

keets


>It's very sudden and startling. I was part of a particular thread
>which got a little out of hand but was nothing compared to some posts that 
>got a particular person banned. This thread of which I speak was just a few

>people having fun really. no more. Some of you may have seen it.If that's 
>the reason then I have to apologise to all of you. however, I seriously 
>don't think it is as the webmaster would have surely stepped in with a 
>warning or something. There was none.
>Maybe more reasons will be given.
>regards,
>Derick.

______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 07 Mar 2000 16:49:26 GMT
From: "L. Bird" <pkeets@hotmail.com>
Subject: Re: PT BB

>Yes, it seems so. Rather sudden, wasn't it? I haven't had a lot of time to 
>read it; did something happen which caused this? I'm not happy about it, 
>but I imagine only one person is.

Oh?  Who's that?

keets
______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 07 Mar 2000 09:19:57 PST
From: "Fiona P" <fionapp@hotmail.com>
Subject: Re: Pete's chatroom closing.

Keets,

What kind of things would upset Pete in that way..

The number of messages made it nearly impossible to pick out
>things
>that were important, and I'll bet a couple of things slipped by during the
>rehersals that upset Pete.
>


Fi
______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 7 Mar 2000 12:50:24 -0500
From: "Robert VanBuskirk" <vankirk@ix.netcom.com>
Subject: Rog Down Under

Hi Gang!

Excellent story, Denis!

Sorry about the show, but I'll bet meeting Rog was an ample fix!

Get well Roger!


Rob in Cincy

"Hitler's mother's pubic hair was all combed to one side."

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 7 Mar 2000 13:26:14 -0500 (EST)
From: Andreas J Athans <ajathans@cisunix.unh.edu>
Subject: Re: Who's NOT the best

For the fucking sake of list sanity, *DON'T* be an idiot and *DON'T* state
"Led Zepp sucks".  I and MANY others on this list love them just as much
as we all love the Who, so don't be a dipshit and start this thread
*again* (believe me, it's worse than the Beatles thread on Odds and
Sods). Remember, opinions are like assholes, we all have them and they al
stink!

Drew

Andreas J. Athans
UNH Chemistry Dept.
Lab room #209
1-(603)-862-4527
Parsons Hall
University of New Hampshire
Durham,NH 03824

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 7 Mar 2000 11:03:28 -0800
From: michael.demattei@milliman.com
Subject: Re: Japanese Bonus Gifts!

Arrrrrrrrrrrrrgh!!

Signed,

Green With Envy and Shirtless
(but I do have 12 nifty coupons!)


>I am the proud owner of a one-of-a-kind t-shirt and song index binder from
>Polydor Japan which I received in the mail today!  When Polydor Japan
>released the special Who cds last year they were also doing a special
>promotion whereby if one bought all 12 of the reissues and sent all 12
>"proofs of purchase" to Polydor in Japan by December 31, 1999 you would get
>this nifty t-shirt and a special laminated binder to hold all the "song
>indexes" that came with each Japanese cd.  None of the cds contained the
"A"
>index - that only came with the binder itself. The binder has band photos
on
>the front and back.
**********************************************************************
This communication is intended solely for the addressee and is
confidential. If you are not the intended recipient, any disclosure,
copying, distribution or any action taken or omitted to be taken in
reliance on it, is prohibited and may be unlawful.

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 07 Mar 2000 19:46:59 GMT
From: "L. Bird" <pkeets@hotmail.com>
Subject: Sad news

Forward from Kathy at the Daltrey list.  Most of you will recall Janet was 
on the igtc list, too.

keets

>I know that many many of you deserve individual e-mails but as I don't know

>everyone that is deserving of such and I don't want to slight anyone. I 
>thought it easiest to post this to the list and let anyone who wants to 
>talk in more depth to e-mail me.

One of our founding members, and one of my dearest friends passed away
yesterday.  Janet Payne will be sorely missed by myself and many
others.

Some of you may know that she had been having some health problems but
so far as we all knew it wasn't anything serious.  This obviously proved to 
be incorrect.  Yesterday at work she passed out and was unable to be 
revived. No cause of death is yet known but I believe there will be an 
autopsy and we should know more after that.

I don't know the address of the funeral home if anyone wishes to send
flowers there but she lived with her Son Chris and Grandfather(whom she 
considered to be more like her father) whose name I never knew(she
called him pop or pappy) and I'm sure that cards etc would be welcome to the

house.

The address is 958 East Paulding Drive, Dallas, GA  30157-2564.
______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com

------------------------------

Date: (No, or invalid, date.)
From: "Scott Schrade" <schrade@akrobiz.com>
Subject: Re: Who's NOT the best

>    Obviously i agree with this to a certain extent (or i wouldn't be
> receiving this list every day) but i have to point out, in defense of
> plenty of intelligent, knowledgable music fans who aren't on this list
that
> you're not entirely "right". That is, your opinions (as stated here) are a
> bit short-sighted.


My statement was meant to be taken with a grain of salt.  Of course I know
that not everybody is going to like The WHO.  Still, the fact that *I* see
the
beauty of The WHO where others cannot, does make me wonder.


> Technical ability? Bobby McFerrin, Mariah Carey, Paul
> Stanley, countless classically trained singers. And i'm sure there are
> better bassists than John (Stanley Jourdan pops to mind),


Errrrrr.  Wrong.  Stanley Jordan is NOT better than The OX just like
Eddie Van Halen is not better than Townshend.  Stanley Jordan is
unique & unquestionably talented but "he don't rock like no OX."


> What seem like
> "logical" reasons why a band is good or bad (technical ability,
> credibility, poetic lyricism) all break down when studied too carefully...
> that is why ALL rock critics are full of shit


Now who's being "short-sighted ? !"


>    Oh and by the way, Led Zepp sucks.
>    All that being said, i included the last line of this e-mail message to
> see how many people skimming the list respond to that without reading the
> rest of this rant (i love that band),


No, you were correct:  Led Zeppelin *does* suck.  White trash bullshit.



- - SCHRADE in Akron

------------------------------

Date: (No, or invalid, date.)
From: "Scott Schrade" <schrade@akrobiz.com>
Subject: Re: TKAA no.43

> just noticed in www.imdb.com top films of the 70's -
> TKAA appears at no.43....
> (Godfather is no.1)
>
> JC


Wow, no. 43?  That's pretty damn good.  Kinda surprising considering
how many fantastic movies were released in the 70's.  A lot of WHO
freaks must've voted.


- - SCHRADE in Akron

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 07 Mar 2000 23:38:38 +0000
From: dbowler@pcug.org.au
Subject: More Roger in Oz

It seems that the comment Roger made after his accident has upset at least
one reader of our local paper:

http://www.canberratimes.com.au/news2/opinion/opinion1.shtml
(you'll have to scroll down a bit to get to the letter in question).



Denis.

Visit The Who in Australia at: www.thewho.net/australia
*** Ultimate Rock Symphony touring in Feb/March 2000 ***

_________________________________________________
The simple way to read all your emails at ThatWeb
http://www.thatweb.com

------------------------------

Date: (No, or invalid, date.)
From: "Scott Schrade" <schrade@akrobiz.com>
Subject: Re: Sad news

> One of our founding members, and one of my dearest friends passed away
> yesterday.  Janet Payne will be sorely missed by myself and many
> others.


Jesus H.  I watched my uncle get buried this past weekend & now this.
Janet will definately be missed.


- - SCHRADE in Akron

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 7 Mar 2000 22:51:53 EST
From: SHAGGYKIT@aol.com
Subject: Re: The Who Mailing List Digest V7 #63

Reply to the Denis's story -

WOW!!! I can't believe you actually got to meet Roger.  How exciting.  I
only 
dream of that happening to me.  I am so glad to hear that he was so nice and

giving to his fans.  I thought he would be but you  know how you hear
stories 
from some people that say he wasn't.  I knew he was a nice guy.  Thanks for 
sharing your great story with us.

Gloria 

P.S. I also agree with why some people just don't "get" the Who's music.  I 
know I am trying to make some of my friends (guys and girls) get into their 
stuff, but it's hard when I am such a die hard fan and they act like they
are 
just another band....its frustrating.  But oh well what can we do????

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 08 Mar 2000 02:15:20 EST
From: "C P B" <moonshineboy99@hotmail.com>
Subject: [none]

 >Rob in Cincy
 >
 >"Hitler's mother's pubic hair was all combed to one side."

This is one of the funniest things i've ever read..... & i don't know why.

 >For the fucking sake of list sanity, *DON'T* be an idiot and   >*DON'T* 
state "Led Zepp sucks".  I and MANY others on this list love >them just as 
much as we all love the Who, so don't be a dipshit and >start this thread 
*again* (believe me, it's worse than the Beatles >thread on Odds and Sods). 
Remember, opinions are like assholes, we >all have them and they all stink!
>
>Drew

Well jeff, i guess you proved your point.  Although i have to agree with 
keets (i believe it was) that you'd be hard-pressed to find a better bassist

than JAE.

>No, you were correct:  Led Zeppelin *does* suck.  White trash >bullshit.
>
>- SCHRADE in Akron

Ouch!

- -cory

- -------------------------------------------------------------
Visit the Terry's Kid homepage:
http://drink.to/tkid
- -------------------------------------------------------------


______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 08 Mar 2000 09:32:50 GMT
From: "Oscar The Duck" <oscartheduck@hotmail.com>
Subject: So, lifehouse...

I was wondering (as I ain't bothered to look around) could any of you tell 
me, is lifehouse down as a who project or a solo one of Pete?
______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com

------------------------------

Date: Wed, 08 Mar 2000 09:52:44 GMT
From: "L. Bird" <pkeets@hotmail.com>
Subject: Re: So, lifehouse...

So far, it's Pete solo, but people who attended the concerts reported that 
Pete said TED would have performed if Roger hadn't been in Australia.  We 
may yet see Who involvement.

keets

>From: "Oscar The Duck" <oscartheduck@hotmail.com>
>To: thewho@igtc.com
>Subject: So, lifehouse...
>Date: Wed, 08 Mar 2000 09:32:50 GMT
>
>I was wondering (as I ain't bothered to look around) could any of you tell 
>me, is lifehouse down as a who project or a solo one of Pete?

______________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com

------------------------------

End of The Who Mailing List Digest V7 #64
*****************************************

To unsubscribe to The Who Mailing List, send mail to majordomo@igtc.com with
the following in the body of the message:

    unsubscribe thewho-digest

Back issues are available for anonymous FTP from ftp.igtc.com in
/pub/pmm/thewho.