Re: Who influenced who(m)

["Schrade, Scott" <sschrade@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

> > ....simply "borrowed" Pete's raunchy *guitar sound* from LAL.

> Actually, I'd put it a bit earlier than that, like say 1964. 

You may be jumping the gun a bit.  That's seems a little early to
me.  I don't think The Who's live sound really started influencing
other bands until after 1967.  Maybe 1966.

> I never said it was just Pete, I said it was The Who. That means 
> the unit,....

I should think so.  That's why I'd like to be shown more Who influ-
ences other than just: so-and-so's guitar sounded like Pete's or
so-and-so used feedback, etc.

> > should say, "Jimmy Page's guitar sound was influenced by Pete 
> > Townshend's live guitar sound." Wouldn't that be more accurate?

> No. It's actually LESS accurate. Page was more influenced by Blues
> guitarists. 

We're talking guitar *sound* here, not guitar *style.*  If I under-
stand correctly, people seem to feel Pete's LAL guitar *sound* influ-
enced Page's guitar *sound* in Zeppelin.  No one said anything about
style of play....until you.

> And how much ICSFM sounds like a Zep song before Zep existed. 

ICSFM sounds like Zeppelin, too?!  You gotta be kidding me.  You're
joking, right?  Are there any Who songs that *weren't* precursors to
Led Zeppelin?  This whole discussion is starting to make me sick.

> It's like everywhere you look!

Must be another switch I don't have on.

> The man wrote Silly Love Songs. Nuff said. 

He's right about the importance of Buddy Holly & the Crickets, though.

> Well, the obvious...you know, the use of feedback (which Hendrix 
> was NOT doing before he went to England and then "suddenly" he was)

True, but just another example of stealing from Pete's guitar sound
which seems to be the majority of what people are supplying as evid-
ence of Who influence.

> and Mitch Mitchell being the most credible Moon-type drummer of the 
> time. 

Perhaps, but Mitch Mitchell's style was already developed by the mid-
60's.  His blend of jazz & rock drumming, while somewhat flamboyant,
wasn't so similar to Moon's style as many think.  Mitch Mitchell was
fast & "all over his set" like Moonie but he played much lighter &
without the thrusting bombast of Keith's attack.

> Again the three man format. And so on, and so forth.

Yeah, the three-man format.  If it wasn't for The Who Rock bands would
have 2, 5, 6, 7, or 8 members.  Notice also how a lot Rock singers 
use *microphones* just like Daltrey did.  And they wore pants, too.

> > other musicians stole from The Who's live show. And that's got 
> > more to do with band competition rather than artistic influence. 

> How's that? These bands saw The Who live, in England especially 
> (note that most of the bands we're talking about are also from 
> England), even if they didn't actually OPEN for The Who.

Right, that's what I'm saying.  Most of these "influences" are stolen
aspects of The Who's live set.  I'm looking for other influences (and 
not finding many).

> I never said I wasn't. I think it's pretty clear, given the lyrics 
> and the impossibility at the time of actually mentioning sex in a 
> song. 

But I think Zeppelin ushered in much of the crassness in sexual lyrics.
We went from intelligent, coy, innuendoes to Zeppelin's women who need-
ed love "way down inside."  And all the dumb people yelled, "Hey, I
know what *those* lyrics mean! Fuck all that deep-meaning intellectual
bullshit! Zeppelin rules!! C'mere, baby! You need some lovin'!"  

> (Benny) Hill just sucks. Take away Yakkity Sax and he's nothing.

(!) Benny Hill is one of the greatest comic geniuses of our time, IMO.

> Well, you know, these things come in handy when you're trying to 
> understand music and where it came from.

I don't know if my bank account could handle me delving into classical
music.  I've only just recently begun scratching the surface of jazz.

> According to the legend of Who Are You, the two Pistols said to Pete 
> "Don't break up The Who, they're our favorite band." 

Yeah, Pete said they were talking like idiots, almost patronizing him,
& it pissed him off.  They didn't give a rat's ass about The Who & Pete
saw right through the fake bastards.

> and Strummer was reported to also be a great admirer. I think that 
> goes beyond "accepting."

Maybe, but where's the musical influence?  No one's denying that some
of these artists *like(ed)* The Who.  We're looking for evidence of
musical influence.

> Entwistle used the first Marshall, which helped John M. fund his com-
> pany. Who history, there, my friend.

But Marshall probably didn't get paid by The Who until 1970!

> But taking a gun to school and blowing ones' brains out is a tad more 
> dangerous, I think.

Whatever.  It's got nothing to do with me.  

> I'd rather look at Pat Benatar any day. 

Yikes!  Enjoy.


- SCHRADE in Akron