new who revue

[Sroundtable@xxxxxxx]

In a message dated 07/22/2002 12:55:35 PM Central Daylight Time, 
TheWho-Digest-Owner@igtc.com writes:


> I've never heard this New 
> Who Revue band play together before (I'm avoiding boots of the first leg).  
> 

I understand why many of you don't want to allow there to be a Who w/o John.  
But by that logic, there hasn't been a Who since 1978.  I know many of you 
say John was half the sound, but I don't buy it.  It is true that John was 
the one band member that was undeniably the best at his instrument in the 
world and gave the Who a tremendous advantage over other rock bands, but I 
don't think he was any more important than keith, and certainly not moreso 
than Pete and Roger.  Let's be honest, had the Who lost either Pete or Roger 
a tour would not have been possible.  Was Kenney Jones the drummer for a Who 
revue, or was it the Who?  If Pete and Roger and John said it was the Who, 
and they put the name on IH and FD, then it was the Who.  The loss of John, 
though awful for everyone, was not greater than the loss of Keith.  If Pete 
and Roger want it to remain the Who, then I think it's unfair for us not to 
respect that.  I saw the west coast shows, and I was blown away and  so was 
everyone else who saw them.  Brilliant performances.  And, IMHO, it was 
different but was still the Who.

mc

"Just fucking listen and shut up!"- Pete Townshend live in Long Beach 1971