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

No Subject



>From: "L. Bird" <pkeets@hotmail.com>
>Subject: Re: meltdown/comeback
>There's a lot of variation in the shows, though.  They tinkered with the 
>production as they went along.  There was also a big difference based on
who 
>was playing lead guitar.

DING, DING, DING!!!!!  There's the word that keeps running through my head
as I read this thread. Production.
The last two tours before 2000 were productions.  2000 was free-form within
perameters.  Funny, I've been thinking about the similarities of 89 and Quad
lately.  While watching a vid from Quad, I kept thinking, "Pete has the same
serious scowl (that could be misinterpreted as lack of interest) on his face
that he had in 89".  I came to the conclusion that it is his "game face".
I'll bet you he had the same expression at Saddlers.  Pete obviously likes
the grand production.  Hence Tommy, Quad, Broadway, etc..   He obviously
also likes the free-form jamming concerts that allow the band to just play
and let happen what will happen.  There is a difference, at least in my
book. He takes both very seriously, but I believe he takes a "production"
much more seriously than a free-form concert.  Hell, a production is much
more complicated, and would require rehearsal to be able to coordinate
everything.  Didn't Pete even say as much at Saddlers.  Something to the
effect that he was playing accoustic so he could concentrate more on all
that was taking place around him???  '89 was to be the farewell tour.  Pete
was in production mode.  He wanted to present one last polished "show" as a
way to say goodbye.   With Quad, Pete wanted to finally get it right, and
thus presented us with another finely polished production.  2000?  We're
back to the "let's just go have some fun with our fans."  Is that a
"rekindling"?  I don't see it that way.  It's just a different way of
presenting music.  Just happens to be the way most rock fans like it.  Plus
hell, Pete was all electric!!!!!
I have a hard time labeling one as better than the other.  I love
productions, and greatly respect Pete for his ability to master this
difficult medium.  But I also love, and probably prefer, seeing The Who or
Pete or John simply being musicians and playing their ass(es) off, bantering
back and forth on stage, messing with the fans, etc.
Apples and Oranges in my book.
  
>Nah.  Not a real meltdown.

I don't see it as such either.

>Definitely the relationship sputtered along for 
>a while

Yep, and as Mark (I think) said, the long periods of inactivity contribute
to the "meltdown" perception.

>and it didn't go in the direction that fans wanted

Thank God!  Although, it's nice when dreams come true (Dave, I don't write
that to needle you, it just fits :) like they did in 2000.

Kevin in VT