There are many days when The Who are my favorite band of all time. Yes, The Beatles had them beaten in the consistency department (not least because they had three great songwriters to the one for The Who). Yes, The Rolling Stones were at or near the top of their game longer and for more albums than The Who, and their late-period touring had more "respectability" than The Who's had in many ways. And yes, I have an obsession with both Yes and Genesis, and with top-notch prog rock in general that a lot of people would consider disturbing. Yet for all of the little nit-picking I could do (much of it very justifiable, I might add), my love for the band is undeniable, and while some might dismiss this as just me following in the footsteps of others, giving them a ***** is as close to a no-brainer as I could imagine.

The funny thing is, there was a long time where I thought I hated The Who, and I tended to notice that the band didn't get that much respect in general. Sure, Rolling Stone has always regarded them as the third band in the great British triumvirate (the other two, obviously, are The Beatles and The Rolling Stones). And sure, they have always gotten a ton of radio play, especially since Who's Next is probably one of the three most played albums on classic rock stations (the others are Dark Side of the Moon and Led Zeppelin IV). Yet, alas, the majority of my generation has seemed to take a more cynical view of them, and part of why I know this is that, until less than a year before I started my website, I was one of those people. Based on all I had read and seen and heard about them, my opinion of them was basically such: they were that band with the big-nosed guitarist that only knew how to play two or three chords and had written that annoying Pinball Wizard song. They played abnormally loud and would jump all over the stage and break their instruments to disguise the fact that they really had very little in the way of talent, and this was the only way they could entertain. Eventually, they had gotten into using synths a lot, which they used to write horrifically overblown pieces before their drummer died, after which they turned to crap, broke up, and kept reuniting to suck more money away from gullible ex-hippies. I think that about covers it.

As I eventually tried to give them more of a serious shot, though, I soon realized that the band had three traits that couldn't help but guarantee them a place as one of my favorite bands of all time:

1. An extremely high level of playing/performing talent at every position. This apparently isn't as blindingly obvious as I once thought, as there are plenty of people who have been willing to argue with me on this point, but to me it's just oh so true. For starters, while it may seem at first listen that he was just rather sloppy, I can't help but still consider Keith Moon as close to the greatest rock drummer ever. His playing was almost pure catharsis, with insanely fast and powerful bashing and crashing all around his 16 drum set, giving The Who a dimension that a normal drummer couldn't have even come close to providing. Yet he had a clear sense of rhythm as well; I can think of very, very few cases where, in the course of bashing around, he ever undermined the rhythm of the song. The man had a natural knack for implying the rhythm of a song, even when he wasn't explicitly setting it. And he (almost) never played drum solos! Rather, he treated his drums as a lead instrument at all times, a critical helpmate to the riffage and the bass lines.

And how about those bass lines anyway? Intensely melodic, yet powerfully driving notes were the forte of John (The Ox) Entwistle, the greatest rock bassist who ever lived. Yeah, that's right, all you Geddy Lee fans out there, I said the greatest. It is only a tribute to Entwistle that almost every single studio albums The Who ever released has been called one of the top 5 bass albums by some major music publication or another. And I can't dispute any of them! It is possible to contend that he wasn't the most technically proficient bassist ever (though even that is very dubious; watch footage of him in action if you have doubts), but he chose his notes better than I can really express (and after all, in the end, an instrumentalist is only as good as the notes he plays). But John was not just a terrific instrumentalist; no, he was also one of the finest backing vocalists in the business for almost 15 years. If nothing else, he was amazingly versatile as a support vocalist, whether he was harmonizing, chipping in a falsetto (which he did disturbingly well) or using one of his "funny" voices, and he could always be counted on to keep the audience entertained.

Meanwhile, although this would have seemed totally improbable in 1965, lead singer Roger Daltrey distinguished himself as one of the greatest vocalists of the 70's, putting on amazing performances for short singles and epic grandiose projects alike. He sang loudly, yet clearly; he growled, and yet could, on occasion, show great tenderness when he had to. In other words, basically anything that was asked of him, any interpretation that he or another felt should be made, he could deliver in ways that continue to boggle my mind. And, unlike his contemporary, Robert Plant, his voice got better, not worse, as the years went by (although it somewhat gave out in the 80's and 90's, but that's still far longer than Robbie lasted). He had somewhat limited range range, but for POWER, Daltrey is my main bet.

And last, but certainly not least, was guitarist/expert-noisemaker/occasional lead vocalist Pete Townshend. I can honestly say that, if I were given the gift to play guitar like any one person, it would be to play like Pete, who is, on many days, my favorite guitarist of all time. Yes, compared to some of his contemporaries, his soloing abilities weren't spectacular from a technical perspective (though he could occasionally come up with some solos that would put Jimmy Page to shame). Yet he was one of the greatest rhythm guitarists in the history of rock, and I'd dare say that none, save possibly Keith Richards, were able to pound out clever riffage with the power and ease that Pete was able to. And, when he would choose to stretch out, he had as much talent at interweaving interesting, powerful and emotional guitar lines with his riffage as I could only imagine, and as such he is responsible for many of my favorite guitar parts ever. Plus, let's not forget his historical importance as a guitarist, either: he's often cited as the one who discovered guitar feedback, back in 1963, well before Syd Barrett or Hendrix or The Beatles with I Feel Fine. And, of course, he had a really good voice (very different from Roger's, and a good balance), and he was primarily responsible for the band's second great trait:

2. Fantastic songwriting. Pete Townshend was a songwriting genius, pure and simple. In fact, I would say that only Lennon and McCartney exceeded him in melody-making ability. He was remarkably diverse in what he produced, too, both on the song and on the album level; he excelled with songs both short and long, soft and loud, and there's something to be said for the fact that, by the end of the 70's, the band was amongst the forefathers of both punk rock and art rock. He also had a wonderful sense of how to properly use synths, realizing in the early 70's that they could be used just as effectively for texture and for counterpoint (not in the pure technical sense, but as a foil for the other melodies) as they could for wanking around. Although he became tired of the group as the years went on, and his songwriting became more erratic, he still had the ability to pull out a good tune, even if he didn't always give them to the rest of the group (I'm in particular looking at their last two albums) and saved them for himself. But I ramble. For you see, Townshend eventually getting sick of The Who and probably trying to sabotage their reputation is an example, albeit somewhat negative, of the third trait that makes the band such a favorite of mine:

3. Distinct, interesting, and barely compatible personalities in each member. This group was almost always about 20 minutes from self-destructing, and Daltrey practically made a career out of punching the lights out of his bandmates, producers, and various hangers-on. More often than not, though, this was actually beneficial for the group, as Pete had the ability to channel his frustrations into his songs, which added an even more human dimension to his work. Meanwhile, they were all, at heart, rock-and-rollers, or to be more accurate, punk-rockers (come on, don't EVEN tell me that I Can't Explain and My Generation aren't at the core of proto-punk) . All the cliches of the punk movement (smashing instruments on stage, trashing every hotel room, living horribly debauched lives) were, if not started by these guys, then taken to ridiculous extremes that made them legends in their own time. Heck, they were banned for life from Holiday Inn in '66 or '67 when, for Moon's 21'st birthday, they managed to get a car (I believe it was a Volkswagen Beatle) into the 5th floor swimming pool. A time before that, Moon got completely drunk and dove into a empty pool head first, and there are a zillion other stories of this type. If you have any, I would love it if you, the reader, would send me some.

But that is not why you have hit this page. You're here for the albums, and so, without further ado, "Ladies and gentleman, a nice rock and roll band, from Sheperd's Bush London, The 'Oo."

What do you think about the Who?

Barry Allen Schnorr (bas29@cornell.edu)

I have to agree with your general evaluation of the Who. I had a similar bad first impression from the radio and from the first 2 albums I heard, which happened to be Face Dances and By Numbers. I'd ask, "Why such short, dippy songs? Where's the _science_?" and dismiss them with a remark of "feh" and a swat from the back of my hand. And I liked Elton John's remake of Pinball Wizard better than the original.

It takes a little while for the appeal of simple but well-done riffing to catch on (to me, anyway, maybe I'm just slow). In terms of writing, Townsend was up there with Keith Richards, BUT with a much more talented rhythm section (and vocalist, for that matter) to back him up. I think that calling Moon the greatest drummer of all time is a bit of a stretch. He did not make his drumming stand out--not as if that's strictly a bad thing, because it gets annoying if drummers crave attention so much that they insist on stupid drum solos, for instance--but nothing about Moon's playing really stands out from my point of view. (Maybe he was better live.) Otherwise, excellent explanation of why the Who was so good.

But...what's this nonsense about suggesting the Beatles may have been thebest rock band of all time? Have you been brainwashed by the Beatle troopers? Just because they were popular doesn't mean YOU have to like them. The Bee Gees were pretty popular too.

Marylin Johnson (MJohn59958@aol.com)

I have enjoyed listening to the Who since high school (Can't Explain). During my college years, my boyfriend's (now my husband) roommate had the album Tommy and I loved to listen to it when a guest in their apartment ( I bought the album myself quite a few years later). The song Won't Be Fooled Again was very timely when it was released in the '70's ( I was doing my student teaching in an urban high school at a time of social turbulence and the song struck me as being both inciteful and satiric). Behind Blue Eyes impressed me as a beautiful and soulful song. My favorite Who albums are Tommy and Who's Next.

Button8950@aol.com

I just wanted to say thanks for all the reviews. I'm a new Who fan, and there are so many good albums I didn't know where to start. These reviews really helped, just to see what one person has to say. Thanks!

Pierre Robert (probert@lure.u-psud.fr)

Few words.
First, please forgive my bad english, my excuse is : I am French (nobody's perfect).

I recently took a look on your page about the WHO. To the old fan that I am (I'm 43) it was like a pomade on my heart reading your words. Definitely yes, the WHO were (and still are to my very own regard) the greatest rock band all over the world.

Four members, each one so different with the others and so brillant in his own part, could provide in a grace's state several monuments of rock music that still make references today (for exemple : Tommy, live at Leeds, who's next, meaty beaty big & bouncy, quadrophenia, ^Å).

About these four members there is so much to say that you already know, let's do shortly.

Roger DALTREY, amazing singer, deep and loud voice but also delicate, enormous charisma.

John ENTWISTLE, a bass virtuoso, a stone to hang on up to on stage that garanty the equilibrium of the whole thing.

Keith MOON, a very own caracter himself, the greatest rock drummer I ever heard.

Pete TOWNSHEND, so intelligent, a pure genius.

I saw them several times on stage. Oh boy I remember each one, it was amazing performances and surely the best rock shows I ever saw until now. I'd like to say so much more but my english is not enough good.

Bravo for right comments on the WHO. Long live rock!

Robert Grazer (xeernoflax@jack-the-ripper.com)

For a long time I had a debate with myself on who was the most overrated band in the history of rock music. Although many 90s bands are pretty overrated, I firmly believe (and hope) that in thirty years or so that no one will care or remember about crap like Nirvana or *Nsync. So to find the most overrated band we must look in the past. U2 is pretty overrated, but still too recent. So I looked even further back. Look what I found, The Rolling Stones, The Beatles, and The Who. Well, I can immediately dismiss the Beatles because not liking them is either extremely close-minded or downright inhuman. So, we are left with The Who and The Rollong Stones. It ends up being that the Rolling Stones are more overrated as far as musical qality goes and The Who is more overrated as far as talent with their instruments goes.

The Who proves that the term "greatest (insert rock instrument here) ever" no longer means the one who has the most talent with their instrument. I mean Kieth Moon is a decent drummer, but he can't touch Jayson Sherlock, John Rutsey or Billy Cobham but the who is more popular than those other bands there so we'll ignore the simple fact that there are plenty of drummers better than Kieth Moon and blindly slap the title of the greatest ever on the drummer for one of our favorite bands.

And John Entwistle as the greatest bassist of all time!? COME ON! I can name five off of the top of my head who are better: Steve Harris, Greg Lake, Chris Squire, Rick Laird, and even Geddy Lee. But we like The Who better than Yes, ELP, Mahavishnu, or Rush, so we'll give the title of best bassist to Mr. Entwistle. Give me a break!

Pete Townshend is a pretty good guitar player, but I wouldn't dream of putting him on the top 10 guitarrists. I mean he doesn't deserve to be up there with Keaggy, Becker, Howe, McLaughlin, or about a dozen or so 80s metal guitarrists I could probably list, but I won't.

Ok, now that I have finished that little speech there, I would like to say two things. First, I have not heard EVERY song that The Who has ever done so if any feels the need to, feel free to send me the names of a few songs where The Who's talent is shown and If I've heard them I'll reply and if I haven't, I get a copy of the song and then reply. Only if you want to, I really don't care much. But also get a copy of the song "One Word" by The Mahavishnu Orchestral; it makes Moon and Entwistle look bad.

Second is that as far as good songwriting goes, The Who really isn't too bad. Although I've never cared much for some of their hits like "Squeeze Box" or "My Generation" and "Magic Bus," they've got some classics like, of course, "Won't Get Fooled Again" and "Christmas." Plus, Tommy is one of the greatest album I've ever heard.

So The Who isn't the most overrated band of all time, but they're up there. I don't hate them, but sometimes I grow tired of everyone loving them so.

(author's note): THIS is not going unanswered. First of all, Robert is right about one thing - I do NOT define "best ever" as "person with the most talent." Raw, God-given talent is vastly important, but it is not the criterium I use. My criteria are essentially as follows (sure, there are others, but they can all essentially be written as permutations of the following):

- How much does the performer contribute to the enjoyment of the listener in the context of any given song? In other words, how entertaining is it to listen to one of his parts?

- How important is he to the general sound of the group, and would the nature of the group be altered beyond repair without him?

If we use these as our requirements, then both Moon and Entwistle slaughter the competition you have brought up. (Well, if you consider complexity and speed of the parts your sole requirement, maybe they don't, but I often dig subtlety. I mean, Steve Hackett is one of my favorite guitarists, and nobody would accuse him of being able to take on Howe in a shred-fest). Both Squire and Lee are high on my list (but Greg Lake? Come on!!), but part of the reason is that they are always mixed very high and as such it is easy to focus on them. John was almost always content to not be the central figure of any given song, but take him away from almost ANY Who song, and you will feel the difference. And, as one astute commentator on the Starostin site pointed out, John was the force that kept the Who's live act from descending into complete chaos. Pete and Keith would be doing whatever, and John would always be able to bridge the gap between them to keep the sound coherent.

And as for Moon, well, could you possibly imagine the rollicking sound of The Who without Moon? The man's ability to drum around and through the beat without, again, falling into complete chaos was equalled only by Bill Bruford (my co-number one).

As for Pete, well, I will admit that it's hard to really get a grasp for what he's doing on any given studio record, as the band always went for a more quiet, subtle approach. Only on an acoustic paradise like Tommy do things really become clear. But that's why we have albums like Leeds and Wight. In both cases, but especially on Wight, Pete absolutely annhilates the listener with the simultaneous crispness and enormous volume of his riffing. And even though he could never solo like a madman, his solos almost ALWAYS fit into the songs perfectly and controlled the tension and mood of the song in such a way as to floor whoever heard it (the best example is his work on the Wight version of We're Not Gonna Take It.)

So, yeah. Somebody can have all of the talent in the world, but if they don't entertain me at all, I couldn't care less.

Thought09@aol.com

I sent a couple of emails that kinda disagreed with you on a couple albums, but I don't want to come of as a total jerk. I absoultely love your opening paragraphs on the site explaining why the who are underappriciated in our era. Wonderful writing I loved it. Also, I agree w/ you completely on your comments to that prog-rock obsessed guy about the who as musicians....You kick ass...

(author's note): To quote the great Kevin Spacey, "I rule!"

LONG LIVE THE WHO! Daniel

Robert Grazer (xeernoflax@jack-the-ripper.com)

Ok now, after such a vicious author's note (although I was a little on the hostile side too), I feel obligated to respond. You gave your criteria for the title of greatest and that gives me a somewhat better understanding of where you are coming from. But the title of greatest to me has always been a statement of a fact. For example, Billy Cobham is a better drummer than Kieth Moon. But from there the opinion enters the picture. You enjoy Kieth Moon's drummming more than Billy Cobham's. At times I'd agree with that. But then (to me at least) the title is no longer who is the greatest, it is who is your favorite. Another example would be the fact that John Enwistle is not as good of a bassist as Steve Harris. But then the opinion is that you like Entwistle's bass playing better than Harris'. Then the second thing you have brought up is how important are they to the sound of the group. Again, this is opinion. Entwistle may be a vital part of The Who's sound, but there are probably those out there who think that he takes away from the sound and overall quality of the group. (Hey, there's always one or two who thinks like that.) I again compare him to Steve Harris. Harris make great contributions to Iron Maiden, his sound is necessary for the band (not to mention his songwriting) to always feel like Iron Maiden. But is he as important to Iron Maiden as Entwistle is to The Who? You'd say no because you are a huge fan of The Who, but I bet there are some huge Iron Maiden fans who could debate Harris vs. Entwistle with you for hours. The same goes for Lee and Squire.

A personal example of these points I could make would be my opinions of David Gilmour. I love the guy's guitar playing and I doubt anyone could fit the Floyd sound better than he does. He would easily fit on to my top 10 favorite guitarists. However, although he has had a few great solos, he could never compare to the talent of John McLaughlin. Therefore he does not deserve a position on the top 10 best guitarists.

As for blending in and not being "the central figure of any given song," it never bothered me when Lee and Squire have emphasis put on them. I mean, what are guitar solos for anyway? To let the guitarist have the spotlight for a portion of the song. The same goes for drum solos, bass solos, flute solos (i.e.Thick as a Brick) and violin solos. Hey, I can even sit for nine and a half minutes enjoying Jason Becker showing off in "Speed Metal Symphony." The point is that I really don't mind the focus on a single member of the band unless they are terrible at their instruments and are playing crap.

I guess I've made a little too much fuss for what I consider to be a poor choice of words. But I hope that this helps follow up the things I have said.

NOTE: About Greg Lake, while I am really impressed with his work on "Only Way," a few more listens to Quadrophenia showed me that I was in error whe I said he was better than John Entwistle.

didier Dumonteil (dbdumonteil@wanadoo.fr)

I think that you've got a lot of nerves to mention the Who in the same breath as the Beatles.THe Who's music hasn't that much worn well ,compared to that of the Byrds of the Velvet  and even the Stones ..

And to deny the white album and Abbey Road a 10 is unbearable.

(author's note): Boy, you'd think that writing the explanation of the ratings in giant, bold capital letters would have done the trick. Guess not.

Frankly,sport,the Who can't be compared with LMc,Dylan,Wilson,Reed , Young .

Outside the Who and Jethro Tull (who cares nowadays anyway) a nice site!

Keith Neely (keith213@webtv.net)

The Who were an embodiment of the true spirit of rock and roll. The first real punks. One only needs to listen to "My Generation" to hear the brashness, attitude, ferocity and rebelliousness of their music. These guys had REAL attitude.

Aside from that, they were fortunate enough to have one of the few absolute geniuses of rock and roll in Pete Townshend. The sheer amount of quality music the guy has written is staggering.

When future generations ask "What was Rock and Roll?", they will only have to watch a tape (or whatever they will be using) of The Who on a good night.

I could go on and on about the talents of the individual band members, particular tracks and albums etc., but that would take entirely too long. I'll just say God Bless The Who, because I've had many a spiritual experience listening to their music. But you must check out "Uneasy Street" from Coolwalking-Best of Pete Townshend. Wow!! An absolutely dynamite and thought-provoking tune.

I just want to briefly touch on this "he's number one or he's not in the top ten bass/drum/ guitar" bullshit. It's the diversity of the music and the players that make rock and roll such a beautiful and free form of expression. And besides, the first three simple, crashing chords in "Baba O'Riley" mean more than all the notes Malmsteen, Becker, MacAlpine and all those other shred-meisters ever played put together. That shit ain't even rock and roll!!!!

Peace be with you all.

Ryan (Ryan.Kasper@colorado.edu)

    First and foremost, I would like to thank you for making it known that The Who are underappreciated.  If we were to exist in some parallel dimension where The Who had never existed, this country would be further pussified (I use this word compliments of George Carlin) by such bands as N'Sync, Backside Boys, etc.  The problem these days is (and maybe I'm just getting old... but I'm only twenty) that this country has absolutely no spirit anymore.  Its like when you were in high school.  You become jaded and you just stopped giving a shit.  You just settled for the situation you were in and dealt with it (or, unfortunately you may go nuts and decide it would be a good idea to shoot some people).  My point here is that this country seems to be settling for Pussified nonsense and cheap imitations.  It thrills me to death that Pearl Jam are performing Who songs, and Eddie Vedder and Pete Townshend have played together.  Because I like Pearl Jam and I think they have integrity, I will buy and grow to like anything they come out with.

    Enough about that.  I enjoy the fact that you base your reviews on some requirements that may seem quite subjective as far as interperetation goes.  I mean honestly, who wants to hear some ass that rates everything "objectivley" based on a list of requirements someone else has made.  Bravo!  I like your take on this stuff.  This is the best question a critic can ask: Is this stuff meaningful to me?  Nice work on keeping it real in this department.  One can review computers objectivley, but interpretation of music is lost when one attempts such blasphemy.

    Another thing.  I am also not a Beatles fan per se.  I mean I like the stuff I've heard, but it never really grabbed anything inside of me that made me cherish any work in particular.  The way Quadrophenia sends you on an emotional rollercoaster through teenage life is what attracted me to it when I was 14.  And it still applies to me.  It always will.  Can you help explain to me why they receive more praise today?  Are there songs I absolutely must listen to?  Is there any way in hell they have the same creative genius and manpower as Pete Townshend alone?  Not to mention the other three members of The Who.  Just wanted to get another point of view on this stuff.

    The music of The Who expresses more emotionally, spiritually and ideologically than anything I've ever heard.  Additionally, it is my belief that The Who are the band that originated rock as we know it today (and I am referring to real rock, and punk too).  Any evidence against this?  I know The Who had influences too, but their impact in my eyes is astounding.  Nice job on the page.

    Sincerely,

        Ryan Kasper

JohnnyB8@aol.com

Wow! What a great reveiew on this band. The Who, Beatles, and the Hendrix Experience are my favorite groups of all time, and i have heard every album ever made by each group (and what a bore it was to sit through Band Of Gypsies , but whatever. BTW, I know that that isn't the Experience). I found no flaws in your special paragraph. I would, however like to respond to the comments from Mr. Robert Grazer. Mr. Grazer, i do realize that the Who is overrated, but you cant overlook their talent because of it. I mean, next to Lennon/McCartney, Townshend is probably the greatest songwriter of all time. Yeah, i know all you Stones fans are going to throw Jagger/Richards at me, but they are a couple of feet behind Townshend. Mr. Grazer, why dont you grab a copy of Who's Next, Who By Numbers, or Live at Leeds (probably the greatest live album ever, although they did cut out all of the Tommy performance except for Amazing Journey-Sparks) or howabout......oh yes....you all know what i'm talking about.......QUADROPHENIA!!! So, thats all that i have to say until the next review.

richard (richard@dpbayley.freeserve.co.uk) (11/12/01)

There is not much too add to what has already been said. Certainly never has so much talent been packed into a band. They never used filler fodder on their albums. Everything meant something. The best who track ever? 'Won't Get Fooled Again' live at Shepperton Studios from The Kids Are Alright CD.

Jared Lentz (ddjlentz@hotmail.com) (11/25/01)

Hi! I really enjoyed reading your Who album opinions! I was a lot like you at first- didn't really get into the Who until I listened to them for a while. I have always thought Led Zeppelin to be the best band ever, but I have second doubts now- the Who are just simply amazing. I think the deluxe edition of Live at Leeds makes the album nothing short of a 10 rating. That is the absolute best record, ever. Pete can really put out his power chords and even go off on a nice solo. His notes have so much bite to them. It's hard, bone-crunching music but its amazing how polished and bright it is at the same time. It is never grungy or muddy. It's fantastic.

Kevin Saliba (raylomas@euroweb.net.mt) (5/24/02)

Hi John,

             I am a great fan of The Who and of The Beatles (among many others).

  I found a comment on The Who unofficial offical site. It states the following:

  "Let's get one thing straight right now: Paul McCartney---the most innovative bass player EVER. John Lennon---more intellectual and acidic than Pete Townshend ever could have been. George Harrison---the third best songwriter in the Beatles and yet wrote better stuff than Townshend did. Ringo Starr---the best rock drummer ever. He didn't have to show off to make his point---he served the songs. Four hundred years from now, people will still be discussing the Beatles and their impact on music, society, etc. The Who will be a footnote. Think about it, lads---there wouldn't even BE a Who without the Beatles."

  I won't go into details, but I just have to point out that these statements are among the most stupid comments I ever read. Anyway, what do you think about this dork? (this might be a good topic for your 'lengthy debate page").

(author's note): I think this is basically overreacting. The Beatles are the greatest group ever, imo, but that doesn't make them the be-all/end-all of greatness. To me, this is the kind of overreacting that causes people to cultivate anti-Beatles biases in the first place.

Jeff Rosenthal (JeffR714@comcast.net) (8/13/02)

BARRY

THE BEATLES ARE CREAM OF THE CROP FOR SURE THERE'S NO DOUBT ABOUT THAT BUT IF I HAD TO PICK BETWEEN THE ROLLING STONES AND THE WHO I WOULD HAVE TO GO WITH THE WHO I'M 38 BUT STARTED LISTENING TO THE WHO AT 12 YEARS OLD (BELIEVE IT OR NOT) AND THAT WAS 1975 JUST AFTER THE WHO BY NUMBERS WAS RELEASED WHICH BY THE WAY IS HAILED AS A CLASSIC WHO PIECE AS FAR AS "THE BAND ITSELF IS CONCERNED"

BUT THEN YOU HAD THE CLASSIC QUADROPHENIA! BY THIS TIME I WAS TRADING ALBUMS WITH THE OLDER GUYS IN THERE MID TO LATE TWENTIES AND I REMEMBER GOING OVER TO THIS GUY THAT LIVED AROUND THE BLOCK I FORGET WHAT WE WERE TRADING FOR BUT HE PUT QUADROPHENIA ON AND HAD SAID JEFF THIS IS ONE OF THE BEST ALBUMS I EVER LISTENED TO OF COURSE BEING SOMEWHAT FAMILIAR WITH THE WHO I SAID MAKE ME A COPY AND THRU ALL THE YEARS SINCE THE HAVE BEEN SECOND FAVORITE...I'M LISTENING TO TALES FROM THE WHO WHILE I'M TYPING ANOTHER CLASSIC THAT WAS RELEASES UNDERGROUND IN RED & BLUE VINYL ALL I HAVE IS THE SILVER CD....BUT THE WHO

FABULOUS, AMAZING, TIMELESS.....JEFF ROSENTHAL

Peter Wingert (pwingert@wscu.com) (9/24/02)

I had the pleasure of growing up, listening to the "OO since the early sixties, when they were competing with early Stones and the sound of the day that was the Beatles.

I fell in love with their singles like Can't Explain, My Generation, Pictures of Lily. In fact all the songs from Meaty Beaty Big and Bouncy are probably their best material.And so I thought until I heard Live at Leeds. The bombastic drumming and heavy three chord work of Townsend and steady rythmic basslines of the Quiet One opened my eyes to the live act. The Who visited my town in '68 and never again till 1980 when I saw them.I caught them in Chicago in December 1979, not long after the disaster in Cincinnati. The show is videotaped on Maximum R &B. If you look closely directly to the left of the stage, thirty rows back, that's me dressed in a suit. I just flew into town two hours earlier on a business trip. Five concerts later, they remain my all time favourites. I love these guys.

PurpIeStain@aol.com (2/26/03)

The Who is the best band to come out of Britain. Yeah the stones are ok, Zeppelin rocks, and we all know that the Beatles changed rock. But Tommy is the best album I have ever heard. The members of the Who are musical geniuses. They are totally overlooked and underplayed on the radio and its really a shame to deprive everyone of their music.

I love the Who. Wish I could have seen them live.

Thats what I think about them.

PS cool site

john hildebrand (luckyluke@ihug.co.nz) (9/30/03)

Settle down mate you are going a bit to far, sure The Who are a good band but to start screaming there 'the greatest" this and "the best that"   is a bit over the top. And its no reason to say there better than others, "The Who" preform great together and that is what makes tham a good band, you can't shout out things just because thats the way you feel, compare  Roger daltrey to Jim Morrison , Robert Plant , Ozzy , Roger Walters , Chris Cornell. Can you compare them. . . . . . . .  no you cant because there all completly different singers from different era's. You say you've been listening to "The Who" for a year now, so how long will it be before you find youre next craze and start a new web site and saying how great they are.Look im a who fan as well but i think Pete Townshend will even tell you they wornt quite the greatest. And hey I dont mean to hack you down, I see you have some good taste in music.

Howell (l.howell@ntlworld.com) (11/17/03)

Your site asks, what do we think of The Who?

  Quite simply...the greatest rock 'n' roll band in the world.

  Enough said.

  Loved the site, many thanks

  Dave Howell

Angelmo645@aol.com (4/29/04)

The Who....hmmm....what can I say what hasn't already been said before?

I freakin' worship these guys.  I love their music, I love their personalitites, I love them despite every one of their flaws as a band (and believe me, there are plenty!). 

Although each band member was important in their own way, I mainly direct my thanks towards Mr. Pete Townshend.  I believe that the word "genius" is overused these days, so instead I want to thank Pete for what he is: a complex, complicated, sensitive, arrogant, stubborn, talented, spiritual, beautifully flawed human being and artist.  His music had gotten me through some of the difficult and lonliest times of my life.  Until I discovered The Who, I don't think there was any kind of music out there that I could truly relate to.  Pete writes about important things like the lonliness and frustration of adolecence, he writes on a spirtitual level and although it can come off as pretentious at times, most of the time I find it beautiful and exhilerating.

Long live Pete and long live THE WHO

"MikeCalla" (mikecalla1975@yahoo.ca) (11/23/04)

You may or not put this up on your site but I had a good time writing it - very cathartic – thank you... Stating the obvious now would be redundant. So I will state what I know. You could pick hundreds - nay thousands of musicians far more capable than any member of The Who. But that is not what music about. If it were, I would never listen to a pianist other that Oscar Peterson. Or listen to a drummer other that Buddy Rich. Or a composer other than Bach. The list could go on, and on. – No, I listen to music to invoke a sense of emotion, whether it is elation or wonderment, or whatever. Of course we can listen to the mechanics of a musician, or song and pick it apart, but we can also listen for those little quirks and mistakes that remind us that some musicians are not THE best - but human. The first time I heard “Live At Leeds” (the original, six song album) I thought – this is what rock and roll is supposed to be. I am 29 now, but I heard that album before I was 10. I didn’t give a damn how good or bad the bands musicianship was. At that time I couldn’t differentiate if Keith Moon was better or worse than Ringo Starr, but I swear I knew Keith made me feel different – in a good way. I liked how that album made me feel. Visceral. Made my hands turn into fists. Made my eyes squint when Pete would hang a chord and it would slowly but surely breath fire as feedback. And you what know what, it invokes that response in me to this day. Sure I get other fantastic – awe inspiring responses from other musicians – i.e.; the beauty of Debussy’s Clair De Lune or a Billie Holiday throaty impersonation of liquid butter. Throw in a Steve Howe lick and I have my “Stranded On An Island Collection”. But that is what music is supposed to do. Kudos to John for a damn good essay on his love for a band, I wish there were more sites like this!!

Now here come my opinions and contradictions. The Who? Best band ever? Yep!! Seeing Pete and John play live was like no other concert experience - and I’ve been to tons!!! – seen them all - new bands – old classic rock bands – jazz bands etc, etc, hell I even saw Oscar Peterson play a private concert in front of a dozen people. Any way…. Now I’ve seen both Pete and John as solo musicians and together as The Who. All I can say is wow. Very, very powerful, even in their golden years. I saw John, in a small club here in Toronto Canada. I stood at his feet. I’m a bassist, so for me this was comparable to a one year long orgasm. My God that man was powerful. That bass was screaming from pain. He was running up and down that neck with such constrained reckless abandon - and then - so delicate at times… I couldn’t play bass for month. Once again visceral! Now for Pete – Now I’m fairly young so my music tastes vary quite a lot – in high school I saw some seriously heavy b ands play live. Punk bands, metal bands and whole lot of others - Then I saw Pete play. I had seen him before; first solo – actually the first date of his first solo tour ever, mostly acoustic(still very powerful). Then I saw him do the Quadrophenia thing – my brother begged me not to go – he said “It’s gonna ruin it for you!” And it did! They had like a dozen and a half musicians on stage. Horns, percussion, a whole lotta of other crap too. Not The Who I wanted to see. Then in Dec 2001, I believe, once again their “last concert ever” here in Toronto. I saw The Who I knew once existed. Granted Keith was not there, but growing up as a kid I realized I would never hear him live, but sadly John had just passed away. Too Bad. But Pete, Pete made up for it. He was possessed. That guitar was bending under his hands. I could see the neck warp under his power chords. That made all those young guitarists with all their rage and attitude seem like kittens- really, cute little kittens. They couldn’t hold a candle to his emotion. I’ve never seen anyone put that much passion in to their guitar. It was total commitment – maybe a glimpse of what it was like to see Moonie live. – Ahh I could write all day about this band – now I wanna go listen to them – maybe Live At Leeds – My Generation I think.

SolomonsOther@aol.com (03/15/05)

Behold... a great band with a ton of great songs. However, much like Genesis or Pink Floyd, the major problem lies in the question: Do you dig the early work or the later work? Are you in it for the hilarious 60s jingles or the heart-wrenching 'proggy' experiments a la Quadrophrenia? I'm ignoring Tommy because I own the Live at Isle of Wight 1970 DVD, where they play Tommy live. I had never heard the original studio album and when I bought it, I couldn't stand still because I missed the energy that was put into the live performances. But Quadrophrenia strikes me as somewhere on the border between Genesis's dark psychological parables (The Lamb Lies Down on Broadway) and Led Zepplin's cock-ballsy meanderings on.... well, anything that doesn't sound like Stairway to Heaven. I consider it to be their best 'rock opera,' though the best ALBUM per se would without a doubt have to be The Who Sell Out. Incomplete albums like Who's Next get on my nerves. Otherwise... a 5 star band all the way.

SteeleAndDavid@cs.com (04/16/05)

I haven't even read about the albums, but as a long-time Who lover, well, you pretty much took the words out of my mouth.  Townshend's a lyrical genius, Entwistle is/was an insane vituoso, Moonie is/was beyond savant gifts and Daltrey has one of the most powerful and awesome voices in rock and roll.  The Who are #1 always and forever!

bob dufton (robert@dufton1.fsnet.co.uk) (09/25/05)

Hi, My group ' The Templars ' played many a support band to The Who in the mid 1960's, whenever they played ' Up North ' i.e. Warrington Co-op Hall,Parr Hall, Stamford Hall and lots more. I decided to buy a marshall amp. on the strength of this, and quickly had it top boosted, after hearing  Pete, and also the Small Faces. who we also supported many times

My gretch guitar would stay on feed back forever,wow, bloody exciting in it's day, especially with my ' Sperrin Fuzz Box . !!

More nostalga 2 cum.

Bob.

TIMOTHY MCCULLEN (tmccullen2004@yahoo.com) (10/12/05)

Everybody is comparing Moon and Entwistle to other players in other bands.You have to remember, these two individuals invented their crafts, techniques ect. Everyone else just tried to model themselves around The Who. Even to me I thought The Who could blow any one off the stage, old and new! Especially Entwistle.

"McGruer, Chris" (cmcgruer@owensound.library.on.ca) (02/11/06)

Well, first and foremost I think we have to ackknmoledge that "The Who"  were one of the BEST and GREATEST live acts to come out of the rock/pop genre.

Although one may quibble about their studio recordings and wonder where they rank compared to other bands, after veiwing "Live at the Isle of Wight" there is no doubt that at the top of their game they kicked the beatles and the stones ass in the arena.  They rank at the top of thec class for live bands and in my books this ranks them at the top of the heap in the rock pantheon.

Erik Jørgensen (erik.jorgensen@vip.cybercity.dk) (05/28/06)

Nice site and a well written essay with many good points. Listening to The Who was simply the defining moment in my life as a lover of music. Never had I heard such music. The most beautiful noise in the World.

mark flanagan (mark@pelletizer.com) (09/03/06)

My admiration for the band runs in streaks. Sometimes I love them, yet it's not something I can sustain.

Most bands I admire, even when I go through a stage of not listening to them, I always remain a fan. With The Who I either love them and hear their genius, or I can't stand them. It's weird.

I have a hard time rating The Who vs Zeppelin. I feel The Who were a better band, but I'd rather listen to Zeppelin most of the time. Know what I mean?

Please don't go knocking Plant vs Daltry.

If all you have is daltry "lasted longer" than forget it. Plant just had something going for him. Despite all the campy mannerism's he had "IT" in a way Daltry could only dream of.

Pete Townshend, as you pointed out, had an amazing gift for being able to write songs, transcendental songs, for another person to sing. That's not easy.

I agree that no single man outside of the Beatles could run with him in the rock music game.

Entwistle and Moon were as good a rythym section as ever graced a rock stage. Again the competition seems to come from Zeppelin. John Paul Jones and John Bonham were also very good but I give an edge to The Who duo.

james.malmstrom@ubs.com (01/13/07)

Of course The WHO rule - agreed that they are deserving of the title the BEST ROCK 'N ROLL BAND IN THE WORLD. Your point that The WHO could reach highs that the Stones could only dream of is correct insofar as Townshend's songwriting, and their performances, from '67-1973 was and were absolutely untouchable. As for the greatest bass player debate please inform Mr. Grazer that evaluating bass players is best done by their peers. Bass Player magazine has always considered Entwistle the greatest of all-time. It's really not even that close. Moon? Brilliant and also untochable in the early years but his play suffered terribly near then end when he became a bloated, drunken shell of his former self.

Skye Reding (LuvAndPeace2U@webtv.net) (03/30/07)

Generally I agree with everything you said about The Who. The Beatles have always held the most special place in my heart. I don't mind at all mentioning The Who in almost the same sentence. They were 2 different bands. I always thought it was awesome the way it appeared all these British groups from the time of the British Invasion- my very favorite time in history of music personally- all seemed to admire eachother. And applaud eachother's accomplishments. I remember being 7 years old - about 11 yrs after the release of My Generation and hearing it on the radio and instantly understanding that this was considered an edgy song in it's day! I LOVED it! I could easily understand-even at 7 years old- that The Who were influential to the punk scene. Which was barely any kind of a movement in certain parts of America at the time. I remember hearing Who Are You loving the "who who who who" part of the song. I may have been a little girl but I knew cool music when I heard it. My cousin and I loved to listen to I Can See For Miles. Singing the " miles and miles and miles...." part of the song much longer than we should have and thinking it was funny. Cut me some slack after that comment. We were little girls after all. And listening to The Who no less! We loved that song. Which made us pretty hip for our age when you think about it. Older more experienced girls still consider The Who too wild for them. The instrument smashing, hotel trashing, and sheer loudness of their music made The Who more of a man's band in many ways. Certainly not for little girls. The Who always seemed to be playing on the radio. Magic Bus became a song I'd recognise when the first chords of the music started. And I looked forward to it. I realised even at my young age at the time these 4 musicians from England were very important to music and it's history. That people would be talking about them for years and years to come. I was correct in that observation. And that's not bad for a little seven year old girl sitting in the kitchen listening to the radio before school. I consider kids from my generation pretty lucky even though I would gladly have been a teen in the early 60s or so. Kids my age still got to hear groups like The Stones, The Beatles, The Who on the radio and NOT on some classic rock station. Music today pales miserably by comparison. The musicians were amazing back then and The Who are proof of that. Keith Moon blows me away! I'm in awe of him. His facial expressions while he plays and twirls his drum sticks and moves his arms around like a wind mill. It's mesmerising. Just watch his performance in The Kids Are Alright on The Rolling Stones Rock-n-Roll Circus and you'll see what I mean! Pete Townsend's song writing is just phenomenal! An endless flow of music and lyrics must be going through his brain at all times and it comes to him with ease! I'm jealous is all I can say! He is second only to Lennon and McCartney in my book. John Enwistle. Gotta love the man for his demeanor onstage with the other 3 acting like they could all explode at any time. Despite his cool reserve onstage John always appeared as entertained by the other 3 showing off as the audience most likely was. Listen to John's playing on Sparks off the Tommy album and dig the man. He was a dedicated and talented musician and it showed! I admire him for that! Roger Daltrey voice is right next to Robert Plant in my opinion. You could feel the breeze from his voice blowing your hair back everytime you heard a Who song! It was that powerful! And the way Roger would swing his microphone around on stage and catching it in the nick of time with much ease still leaves me dumbfound and wondering how many times one of his band mates got clocked in the head when he first decided he was gonna do that little trick.

Well, I could go on and on but I will quit here. The Who are in a class by themselves. Thanks for reading and letting me express my opinion about one of my favorite bands....

Kolby Kramer (gkkramer@gmail.com) (05/03/07)

I hate to be the bearer of bad news, but contrary to what everyone thinks, Keith Moon DID play drum solos.  And he was awful at them:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hngmb0pTcMY&mode=related&search=

Eesh, pots and pans, anyone?

Patrick Dermody (pdermody@twcny.rr.com) (04/29/08)

I just wanted to comment on what Kolby Kramer showed to prove.  I'm no expert on drumming, but that video didn't seem too bad.  He's banging the heck out of his kit and is making it very rhythmic and enjoyable.  Just my opinion.

Scott Harrison (harrison_sw@msn.com) (10/05/08)

John, first off I would like to say I absolutely love your site. I agree with a lot of your thoughts about Jethro Tull (also love Stand Up), Yes, ELP and The Who among others; other times, we aren't exactly seeing eye to eye (I personally love Benefit), but your thoughts are always great to hear. I would suggest early Allman Brothers, Phish, jam bands and jazz fusion and would love to hear your thoughts on those bands and genres. Now about The Who.

Firstly, The Who are my favorite band. I have been seriously listening to music for a good four years now (I am 17), and The Who has always been among those groups I absolutely adore. I would also like to mention that I listen to a wide range of music, everything from rock, jam bands, jazz, prog and metal (a bit). it is not a matter of me not knowing what else is out there musically; in fact, i am always trying to find new music. so when I say that The Who are my favorite group, that is not mere adrenaline or underexposure. I feel there will never be a time when I am sick of hearing the music of Pete, Roger, Keith and John.

I wouldn't give anything to see The Who circa 1964-1973; however, there is no doubt in my mind, that from 1969-1973 there was something The Who had that no other band had. It seems to me that in these five years there was absolutely nothing above these four musicians (much like the new york yankees from 1949-1953). many people will only rememeber joe dimaggio and yogi berra from those great yankee teams (seasoned baseball fans might recognize whitey ford). what made the yankees better in those five years? Chemistry. That is what the The Who had from 1969-1973. Even if they were not the best at their respected instruments, they were better as a respected whole than any other group during this period (A period which I would say amounts to 75% of what I listen to).

George Starostin has defended Keith Moon's drumming on his own site and on this site as well. His arguments in support of Keith's drumming allign with my own in many ways. I will not label Keith as the greatest drummer ever (Buddy Rich, Max Roach, Billy Cobham, Bill Bruford, Carl Palmer, Tony Williams among countless others I have a strong admiration and respect for have just as equal a claim to the greatest drummer). Again, is there a universal ideal for a drummer? This problem has been brought about in the posts above. If there is, then certainly Keith Moon must fall into that ideal (along with the aforementioned and countless others). However, if there is no ideal, then certainly Moon pushed the boundaries of what a drummer could do, paving the way for a new generation of drummers such a John Bonham, Neil Peart, Dan Carey and Mike Portnoy.

To me, the fact that no other drummer sounded that way in a Rock band (Buddy certainly had the flair in a jazz setting) up to that point in time confirms my attitude that Moon's playing is certainly groundbreaking. As a drummer, I feel that if one can easily copy another drummer's playing then that drumming is either not difficult or the student is extremely gifted. Nobody attempts to copy the styles of Rich, Cobham and Moon. It is virtually impossible. To me, that defines their drumming as exceptional. If Moon just copied Rich, Krupa and Roach; he would have sounded just like them. Instead, he developed his own style and truly transcended the standards of the day. Moon's pounding on the double bass is just as inventive today as it was in the 60's. If you listen to any generic metal band with their idiotic drummers wailing on the double bass, it sounds so foreign and alien. It lacks an understanding of groove, rythmn and melodicism. Never did Moon attempt to play in overdrive like these timekeepers- simply put he played with dexterity and quickness. Moon's double bass work has an understanding of groove, back beat and syncopation amid his chaotic attack. Some may argue he is out of control. I would say simply they do not understand what they are talking about. The mere fact that he can keep time and play in such a fashion, repeatedly and without exhaustion is a testament to his supreme control as a drummer. And yes, I will be the first to attempt that he couldn't play a drum solo to save his life, that video is just pots and pans.

Another sidenote, I would agree that there is a difference between a drummer's skill and his notoriety. Take John Bonham and Jon Fishman. Talk to the normal music fan about Bonzo "Oh John Bonham!Yeah the guy was the greatest ever." The only reason he is considered the greatest is because he played for that semi- obscure underground unit known as Led Zeppelin. To my ears, Jon Fishman (Phish) is a better drummer than John Bonham. His skill matches Bonzo's and excedes it in every category with the exception of the volume he reaches. Bonzo pounded the hell out of the drums, Fishman plays with a skill and finesse- jumping from one style to another- that far outweighs Bonzo's merits. When you mention drummers, Fishman probably won't be discussed because most people have only heard of Phish through the delicious seafood creature or the Ben & Jerry's Flavor. I mean Moon is popular for the same reasons as Bonham, I am just using an example to show that there are amazing drummers all over the place and to say one is the greatest is pure stupidity.

Moving on to John Entwhistle. I enjoy the man's playing. He invented the art of playing the bass guitar. However, I will admit that there are others that are just as fluid and dynamic of the bass (Jaco, Stanley Clarke, Wetton, Squire and Harris- having heard Stanley Clarke in person I have no doubts about his skill as a bassist). To me the ryhtmn section of Entwhistle and Moon made The Who, without them it seems like Roger and Pete noodling around going through the motions.

From 1969-1973, The Who were the best Rock band. The Rolling Stones laid claim to the title, The Who however, played to the title. Their is an arrogance and swagger, yet a self-doubt and self reflection in their music. It has a spiritual context that is universal, which make it music to be listened to from here until the end. Add that to the fact the Pete Townshend was the Rock composer. His writing is unmatched in my eyes, from a musical and vocabulary standpoint (Rough Mix anyone?). The breadth of his work is remarkable. I have an utmost respect for this band and its leader, but also question them. I have no desire to see Roger and Pete in concert as The Who. None whatsoever. However, I would be willing to throw out $50 to see them playing as Peter Townshend & Roger Daltrey. What else do they have to prove as The Who? Wasn't 'Who Are You' enough?

SSmith@swtimes.com (12/13/08)

Great writeup about The Who and Pete Townshend, but I have to peacefully, respectfully disagree. You say the Stones were at the top or near the top of their game longer than The Who? No way. The Stones' high point was from 1965 to 1972, ending with "Exile." I have always felt that the two Mick Taylor records that followed were subpar, and as much as I love Ron Wood (I'm a bigger Faces fan), the Wood-era Stones is patchy with some good (Still Life and Steel Wheels) and overrated (the bulk of Some Girls, Black & Blue and all of Emotional Rescue). I feel The Who were at the top, from My Generation in 1965 to the mid-1970s, and they've always been at the top as a live band, even now. The best show I ever saw was The Who in 2000 (my first Who show) when John Entwistle was still alive. I have the CD of that show, amazing. Some of my friends think it's a boot of the 1975/76 tours, I kid you not.

Anway, thanks for the writeup of The Who. I like the Stones too, it's just that for me, The Who is tops followe by The Beatles and Pink Floyd.

"caresm6" (caresm6@wfu.edu) (11/13/09)

Your Who page is already clogged with reader comments both adoring and disparaging, but I’d really like to add my own thoughts to the mix (I hope you aren’t already exhaling in resignation). I’ll preface all that follows with the specific disclaimer that I’m only attempting to explore my own relationship with this band, not to argue with or knock anyone else for their opinions. Now then…

Like you, I come at the Who from a bit of a different perspective than many classic rock fans. When I first became seriously interested in music, my love for the Beatles and the Stones blossomed pretty much instantaneously and has only deepened over the years. But when it came to the Who, things weren’t so simple. (Sidenote: I don't believe this is related to my being female but, then again, Pete himself once pointed out that the Who are the rare '60s band who never had a fanbase predominantly made up of teenage girls!) I actually remember turning to my dad once and saying, “Why do people always list the Who third? I like so many bands better than them.”

I’m now in my early 20s and it’s only within the last year that I’ve truly fallen in love with the Who. I’ve had many of their albums since I was 14 or 15 and I’ve always enjoyed them to some extent, but I just wasn’t feeling /love/. That’s all changed. I’m now quite proudly obsessed with them and rank them among my very favorite artists of all time, right alongside the Beatles and the Stones. Getting to this point was a strange journey.

Since early high school, I’ve had an insatiable musical appetite. As soon as I found the Beatles (age 14), that was it. I spent most of high school burning through all the Big Guys—Zeppelin, Pink Floyd, Yes, Dylan, Clapton, etc. etc. College was a different story. I became absolutely restless and went off the rails exploring everything from hardcore punk to alternative electronica. For a few years there, I didn’t listen to much classic rock at all. I still counted the Beatles and the Stones as my favorite artists, but I rarely actually /listened/ to them. The thing was, this crazy musical journey of mine wasn’t all that fulfilling. I was getting a huge knowledge and familiarity with a lot of different genres and styles of music, but it simply wasn’t as soul-satisfying as those days when I was 16 and collecting every single Neil Young album and listening all the way through with lyrics-booklets spread out before me.

At 21, my insatiable musical appetite has led me right back to where I started: the iconic British Invasion bands who started it all. With a few exceptions, they are really the only artists I listen to who remain as rewarding today as they were the first day I heard them. And, much to my surprise, the Who suddenly make absolute sense to me. It was as though I had to grow into them. It’s now crazy for me to listen to their catalog and remember that I used to feel quite lukewarm about them. How?! An album like “Live at Leeds” quite simply knocks my socks off these days. The Who possessed an amazing combination of incredible, powerful playing (especially live) and beautiful songwriting from Pete Townshend. Many other bands have had one or the other quality but I’m not sure any band has ever combined the two so intriguingly and successfully.

It actually really interests me that so many commentators (on this site and in the general world of music criticism) gravitate towards discussing the band in terms of its individual players. Personally, I think folks can get so caught up in discussing the relative merits of Keith Moon versus other drummers or John Entwistle as a rhythmic anchor, that they overlook those things that are even more important: particularly chemistry. It wouldn’t matter if Moon was the best drummer in the world or not if the band didn’t have “it,” which they fortunately did.

To this point: critics love to compare the Who with Zeppelin on a player-by-player basis (Daltrey vs. Plant, Moon vs. Bonham, etc.). Through this method, some have come to the conclusion that Zeppelin was the superior band. For me, this logic is extremely faulty. Setting aside for the moment that I actually much prefer all Who members, especially Townshend to the often-sainted Page on guitar, since when was a band’s greatness determined solely on the technical merits of its individual members? It isn’t, or at least it shouldn’t be.

The Who most certainly had a supremely talented player at all four positions, but they also excelled in many of the more intangible but even more important areas: wit, charisma, showmanship, innovation, emotional power…and on and on. I recently watched “The Kids Are Alright” again and the band came off as just spectacular—practically vibrating with greatness in every single segment, barely holding it together and still managing to deliver over and over again. They were unique. They were intelligent and emotional. They were violent and out of their minds. They were extraordinary.

Finally, this band possesses one quality that I’ve come to appreciate more and more as the years have gone by and as I’ve grown bored with some lesser artists: depth. The greats all have catalogs with rich and deep quality. You fall in love with them for the classic singles but you stick around for the deep cuts, rarities and album tracks. Pete, God bless him, made every record a complete statement worth listening to from start to finish. It’s a quality this band shares with the Stones (the all-time great deep cuts band, for me). And it’s something that a band like Zeppelin lacks. It’s also part of the reason I’m getting antsy at the increasing trend for critics to move the Who down on their lists of all-time greats and move up everyone from Zeppelin to Nirvana to the Ramones (inferior bands all).

I guess I just wanted to let you know that your Who reviews were a great touchstone for me. I read them back in the early ‘’00s when I was first falling for music and appreciated your enthusiasm but somehow couldn’t share it. I’ve just re-read them and now I’m right there with you leading the parade. The Who may not have immediately grabbed me as a 14 year-old scruff, but they’ve been the soundtrack of my college years and I have no doubt that they will remain in my overall Top Five for the rest of my days—completely the equal of the Beatles and the Stones. So much of the music I’ve listened to over the years was easy to like but just as easy to dismiss. For me, the Who have been the most rewarding challenge in my entire (huge) catalog.

Pete Townshend, wherever you are, thanks a million for never making it easy.

And you, John, thanks for seeing the light much more quickly than I did and so eloquently shining that light on the band for many willing readers. Your dedication and passion have ensured that I’ve regularly visited your site for almost a decade. :-)

---

The Who Sings My Generation - 1965 MCA
9 (12)

Best song: My Generation

Send me your thoughts

David Uskovich (dau@mail.utexas.edu)

Have you seen the cover for the U.K. release of "My Generation?" It's way cooler than the U.S. cover. It's got the band, in their pop art outfits (Union Jack coat etc.), photographed from a bird's eye view. They stare up at the camera all snotty and punk. I found the album on vinyl about 15 years ago, and I still kick myself for not buying it. I guess that photo has gotten exceedingly rare, because I can't even find it on the Internet.

Gene Kodadek (g_kodadek@hotmail.com)

I took this one to the used record store. I love My Generation, but there's little else to recommend the album. I agree that the attitude is certainly there, and at least SOMEBODY in the mid sixties had something better to write about than their girlfriend. But the songs just aren't very good.

Eric Benac (benac@voyager.net) (5/31/03)

you should get the deluxe reissue of this album that was recently released: it contains the british cover that guy was raving about and it is quite cool. plus it comes with a shit load of bonus tracks: but hte best part ist he improved sound. except on my generation, the song: it seems neutered somehow. nevermind: it's good.

---

A Quick One - 1966 MCA
7 (10)

Best song: Boris The Spider

Send me your thoughts

Elliot J Huntley (elliot@ejhuntley.f9.co.uk)

No comments as such, I can't write record reviews but I was wondering could anyone tell me why Daltrey only ended up writing one song for the album? Indeed could anyone tell me why, to the best of my knowledge he only received a writing credit on 4 songs in his entire Who career. I can't believe that he had no ideas to contribute or that he wasn't allowed - Moon certainly was allowed much more album space.

Thought09@aol.com

Yes, i'd have to agree that this album is subpar, but c'mon, "let's pretend this one never existed" ? This album has to be one of the top 10 of '66 at least....maybe top 5. Yeah, it was a dumb idea to have all the members write songs for it, but I don't think the songs are that bad. I admit that I was a little dissapointed in this album when I first got it, but in retrospect it's great fun. I would still rate this album higher than any who album post who by numbers.

(author's note): Well, I might have underrated this album, but top five of '66??!! The year of Revolver, Blonde on Blonde, Pet Sounds, Aftermath, Fifth Dimension ... ?

Run Run Run is a kick ass r&b rock song that has an awesome crunch to it. I mean no one had this kind of punk-rock groove back then. Boris and Whiskey Man start the tradition of John's rather weird songwriting style; absolutely classic. Cobwebs and Strange is AWESOME!!!! What other bit of recorded music can convey what a loon moon was....PSYCHO!! british patent exploding drummer... So Sad About Us is one of the greatest examples of a british 60s power pop song ever --- awesome. I personally think they shoulda used this as their single and not happy jack (even though Jack was successful).....and what of the title track? Every keeps noting how this started Pete on his rock opera trend....but c'mon, this is a far cry from the grandiose concepts of tommy....this is pure who humor and sillyness. Rock should never take itself too serious (even PT suffered some from that) and this tune was just a freakin' hoot.

You have to remember that the who of 'a quick one' and the who of everything post 'sell out' are really two completely different groups. Pete said himself in the mid 60s that the who didn't have any talent or substance, it was just pure sensationalism...of course we know that's bullshit...but you have to realize that even to the members of the group the feeling, appearance, volume, and radicalism of what they were doing were more important than the individual songs. I listen to this album and experience the WHO circa 1966, not writing the rock-will-save-the-world stuff of lifehouse, but just being a hard rocking fuckin rock and roll band busting onto the scene.

(author's note): At the same time, though, I would much rather listen to the group's singles from the same era, as I think they convey the hard rocking aspect of this era of the Who much better.

Gene Kodadek (g_kodadek@hotmail.com)

This one blows.

Trfesok@aol.com (11/06/04)

I tend to enjoy this one a bit more every time I put it on, but not much. It's clear that they were trying to come up with their own Revolver. It rivals that album for diversity, to be sure. But not in songwriting, to be sure of that, too. "Run, Run, Run" and "So Sad About Us" wouldn't be much without the band's instrumental prowess behind them. "Cobwebs and Strange" and the title track are interesting, kind of fun experiments, but they aren't entirely successful, either. I find that John's songs (including the bonus tracks, especially the hilarious hypochondria of "Doctor, Doctor") are actually consistently stronger here than anyone else's. And the cover songs are pretty much filler as well.

  I think I would enjoy the songs, though, if the album had been recorded better by new producer Kit Lambert. On the remaster, Keith's careening drums and John's loopy bass come through clearly, but the tinny guitar and high voices sound really weak. You wouldn't know this was the same band that was coming up with legendarily loud and powerful live shows ("A Quick One," in particular, is incomparable in live versions). Unfortunately, they wouldn't resolve the inconsistencies in the studio for a few years yet, with this album suffering the most.

Nathan Schulz (nschulz4537@gmail.com) (04/25/06)

Hi John, I'm a young man with ambitions of possibly starting my own review site, so I thought I'd post my "A Quick One" review which I wrote for my possible site.  Here 'tis:

This is one unexpectedly shitty album.  Before recording their second album, The Who were strapped for cash, and what that meant was that every member would have to contribute original material, they'd have to record the shittiest sounding cover ever done by anyone, the whole album would have to sound like it was recorded and mixed in about a half hour, and there'd be no cello.   The results are often dreadful:  Heatwave is so fuckin' out of tune you wouldn't believe it.  "Cobwebs and Strange" sounds like four people walking around a room bashing toys together, which is essentially what it is.   And have you ever listened to Moon's lyrics and singing to "I Need You"? "Knowing:  Is what people tell you,"   just despicable stuff, really.  It certainly doesn't take The Who to write material of this caliber.  I'm not sure who you are, but trust me, you could've done better than that.

However, the non-Moon non-Cover songs are better.  Three of the four songs Townshend wrote aren't particularly exciting, and don't really sound too different from the lesser material on the debut.  The title track is pretty ambitious though, a nine-minute multi-parted rock opera that predates any concept album I can think of.  My favorite part of the song is when Ivor the old engine driver has "relations" with the protagonist.   Good song, good song.  You know what else is a good song?  See My Way.   Yeah, in spite of all its flaws, I can't help but sing along "Some way, Some day, I'll find a way, To make you see my way!"  Although the tune rhymes "way" with "day," and then with "way," and then with "way" again, you can't help but love it.   Oh, and also Entwistle's groovy psychedelic surf-rocker "Boris the Spider" is easily the best thing on here, and "Whiskey Man" isn't really that bad.

Even though I can't say I enjoy this album, it is a little admirable.  This album is blessed with a newly found sense of rudimentary experimentation and diversity but plagued by horrid production and songwriting.   It's totally excusable though, as they badly needed money, and would dramatically improve in quality hereafter.

Oh, there's also some bonus tracks, but I'm not listening to anything that was rejected from this album any time soon, so you're on your own there.

How's that then?

---

The Who Sell Out - 1967 MCA
9 (14)

Best song: I Can See For Miles

Send me your thoughts

Barry Schnorr (jpmorgan@imsa.edu)

What an amazing album. I do disagree with you about some of the relative stronger and weaker tracks on it, though. Sunrise and Mary-Anne With The Shaky Hands fail to thrill me--I really like the formers guitar line, but the singing is just too sappy. But Relax, while not the best song theyve ever pressed, is kind of catchy.

And I really dig Rael. Its a little weird hearing that guitar line "again" after getting used to it on Tommy, but Im not complaining! The playing is, if not amazing, at least rousing and powerful. I hear in this not only of Tommy, but also of ELPs Karn Evil 9 Impression 3, like in those rolling "Now Captain listen to my instructions..." lines and the ideas of betrayal and chaos. Exactly what it has to do with Israel Im not sure (this was around the time of the 6-day war) but its a great story anyway.

Dont skip on those bonus tracks either! Jaguar, Girls Eyes, Hall Of The Mountain King (they could even do sound effects to the level of Pink Floyd when they wanted to--cool), Glow Girl, Early Morning Cold Taxi--all are great. Some of the others are somewhat weak, but its impressive that outtakes of this quality are the stuff left OFF the albums.

Oh and psst: You spelled "Tattoo" wrong, and there is no such word as "persay" or "per say". "Per se" is the phrase, Latin for "itself" or "of itself".

Rich Bunnell (richbunnell@home.com)

To Barry Schnorr: Actually, "per se" literally means "through itself." "Of itself" would be "Sui." Yeah, the root of the word "suicide."

JohnnyB8@aol.com

I love this album. And i only got it yesterday! (2/18/01) My favorite songs are probably Silas Stingy (I know, not an original, but still great harmonies "Money, money, moneybags, money, moneybags there goes mingy stiiingy..." and I Can't Reach You. Rael is a good song and Daltrey's Early Morning Cold Taxi isn't too bad. I have a question, though. Is that Keith Moon and John Entwhisle singing lead on Keith's Girls Eyes? I know that they wrote all of the commercials together, but they sing really good together if its them. So, someone, if you know for sure, post a message here at the site or send me an email at JohnnyB8@aol.com. thanx alot. seeya.

(five minutes later)

in your review, you have just a little mistake...the Rael lines aren't from Sparks, the Sparks lines are from Rael. heehee

Gene Kodadek (g_kodadek@hotmail.com)

Probably the most fun Who album. The extra tracks on the re-release should have remained on the cutting room floor.

Joe H (jcjh@home.com) (11/25/01)

Incredible record. Everyones pretty much hit the mark with this already so i wont say much. The concept and the commericals are hilarious to me though, and "Odorono" is an awesome song for a song about deodorant!! Im really glad Townshend sang these ballads too, like the amazing "Our Love Was", "Sunrise", and "I cant reach you", cuz sometimes i just tend to prefer his voice to Daltreys, and i couldnt imagine him singing them either! I love this album, and i hope you will too. I'd definatly give this a 9/10.

Trfesok@aol.com (11/06/04)

The concept itself is probably the most realized of any of the 1967 concept albums (with the possible exception of Days of Future Passed), but it's definitely the one with the best sense of humor. The Who don't take it too seriously, fortunately. "I Can See For Miles" definitely stands head and shoulders above everything else here, but the rest of the songwriting, I agree, is stronger than on the last album. Kit Lambert's production is still pretty weak, though.

  I also think that you underrate the bonus tracks. "Early Morning, Cold Taxi" and "Melancholia", I think, have much better vocals from Daltrey than anything on the album proper, as his style begins to develop towards what he'd achieve on Who's Next. The latter song is an interesting find -- according to the liner notes from Scoop, Pete didn't even remember playing the demo for the band, never mind recording it with them!

  Another nitpick, is (just as the original "Happy Jack" should have been on the reissue of A Quick One), "Substitute," "Call Me Lightning," "Pictures of Lily" and "Magic Bus" should have been included among the bonuses. Great A-sides that were also recorded during this period. But I guess that would have led to a double CD..

---

Tommy - 1969 MCA
9 (14)

Best song: We're Not Gonna Take It

Send me your thoughts

Nick Karn (glassmoondt@yahoo.com)

Here's a thought I have dealing with what occurs at the beginning... the opening lines of the album are, "Captain Walker didn't come home, his unborn child will never know him." To me that implies that he was murdered or died in some tragic accident. So what is the deal with Tommy 'seeing his father murder his father's lover'? I'm not sure what happened, as I guess Pete purposely left things obscure, but the opening line rules out that possibility IMO.

(author's note): I have responded to Nick on this and have explained my justification for my viewpoint of the story. At some later point in time, I may or may not attach a link to a FAQ of sorts with regards to the story.

This album pisses me off, though, because there's so much great stuff here that, if it was consistent enough, it could be one of my favorite albums of all time, but I hate "Underture" (a HUGE blight here.. boring beyond words), "Welcome", "Tommy Can You Hear Me?" and other stupid corny short bits as much as I love "Go To The Mirror!" (what a melody), "Overture", "1921" and "Sally Simpson". So that's how I came up with the 8. I need to go get Quadrophenia and Who's Next. You and George have talked me into getting more Who stuff. :)

"Lutz, Leonard" (llutz@ADESTA-ITS.com)

Tommy Walker sees his father murder his mother's lover,

"Captain Walker did'nt come home, his unborn son will never know him"

Robert Grazer (xeernoflax@jack-the-ripper.com)

My favorite Who album. While the story is downright stupid the music and some lyrics are fantastic. There are too many tracks to go into individually, but I'll mention a few. "I'm Free" is one of the standouts. It's very simple, but very good. The popular "Pinball Wizard" is great even if it's somewhat overrated. "1921" is an excellent song on here, and so is "We're Not Gonna Take It." I think I'll stop there before I name every song on the album. No, I'll mention one more. I LOVE "The Acid Queen." BEST TRACK: MAYBE "Christmas," but I don't really know because they're are all pretty even.

COMPLAINTS: While no songs are completely bad, a few of them have some very bad parts. Nothing that significant that needs to be mentioned in detail, but just know that they exist.

RATING: My Scale ***** John McFerrin's Scale: *10(14)*

Thought09@aol.com

I know not why everyone on this page bashes the story of tommy. Put simply enough, all it's about finding your inner peace and spirituality. Ok, it's a little more complex than that, but the point is that you don't need to pay attention to all the little specific bits that happen in the storyline. Sparks is tommy...I mean, more can be explained though those notes of the point of the tommy concept than anyone set of lyrics, IMO. Which is why I don't mind Underture. Yeah, it's a little long and repetitive, but I can listen to it and just get into a trance of what tommy's feeling inside his soul. I mean the fact that tommy's deaf dumb and blind is just a cover for what townshend felt about himself and others at that time....the feeling that people are deaf dumb and blind to their soul. Pete, around '68, was starting to shun the rock star lifestyle that he was involved in with all the acidheads and whatnot, and was seeking spirtuality like many people do at one point in their lives. There were other points to tommy, like the fact that if you try to find easy answers to life's problems and just join the trend or follow blindly with the group, you may well be crushed and realize that it was all a hoax...but basically finding your inner peace is the point...not 'well tommy was born, then his dad died, then he was abused, and they couldn't find help for his condition...etc, etc...

JohnnyB8@aol.com

Ok, look. Before I start, i just want to say that, as most of you know, the beginning of the story can be easily explained through A Quick One, While He's Away.  So, based on what i've read, heard, and seen in the movie and play, here is the story, step-by-step (i'll put it in chapters) And i hope that you like to read because im going song-by-song as well:

Chapter 1 (Overture~It's A Boy)

      Captain Walker is sent to war while his wife is pregnant. Apparently, he dies during this time. Tommy is born at the end of the war, however, it appears to be too late because Capt. Walker is dead.

Chapter 2(You Didn't Hear It or 1921)

      Tommy's mother meets a nice guy who really isn't a bad character (Ivar or Ivan the Engine Driver from A Quick One, While He's Away), or so we think. Tommy, his mother and her lover live together for a while. Some time passes and Tommy grows to like this new man. One night, before Tommy goes to sleep, a shadowy-like figure appears in the hallway. It's Captain Walker. He takes a look at his son before he enters the mother's room. When he gets to the mother's room,he sees her with the lover and then either he is killed by captain Walker or captain Walker is killed by the lover, but ill go with the liner notes, which says that Captain Walker killed the lover. (This means that either the liner notes or Ken Russel is wrong.) Now, Tommy had followed his father (Captain Walker) into the room and saw the whole thing. Tommy's Mother (who i will refer to as just Mother) and Captain Walker (who i  will just refer to as Father) pull Tommy aside and tell him that he saw nothing, he heard nothing, and won't tell anyone about the incident. Tommy goes deep inside of himself and becomes deaf, dumb, and blind.

Chapter 3 (Amazing Journey~Sparks)

      Now, i believe that this song should not even be on the album, basically because the second half (Sparks) is the second half of Rael 1. Dont get me wrong, its an awesome song but it just doesnt belong on this album. If i could take it off and put another song on the album, it would be Heaven and Hell, but it would be at the end (I'll explain that at the end of my story here). But basically, this song should be after the Hawker~Eyesight to the Blind, and im rambling so ill stop and just say what i have to say. This song is about what Tommy sees inside and what he is feeling. Tommy sees himself inside his body and is just flying through different visions in his little head. Then, Sparks is what he is. Tommy is Sparks. Tommy feels Sparks. Tommy sees Sparks. Tommy hears Sparks. It's hard to explain, but that is the basic outline of the song.

Chapter 4 (The Hawker or Eyesight to the Blind)

      Ok. This song is pretty easy. The Hawker is a preist or minister of some sort. His church is that of the religion of Pop Culture. The members of the religion rely on their gods (musicians, actors, actresses) to cure their illnesses. So, Tommy's mother took him to to the church/temple/whatever to try to cure him. Well, Tommy ends up accidentally destroying the church, oh, and by the way, he isn't cured.

Chapter 5 (Christmas)

      Well, its that wonderful time of year again. Where everyone is getting wonderful presents and such. Sucks for Tommy. Since he can't hear, see, or talk, he has no idea about anything thats going on.. By this time, Tommy has his whole family  wondering about him. Wondering what is going on inside his head. Wondering if he really can tell whats going on, but he just doesn't know how to respond.

Chapter 6 (Cousin Kevin)

      Another easy chapter. Tommy's parents have to go somewhere, so they leave him with Cousin Kevin, family meanie. After Tommy's parents leave, his Cousin puts him through hell. He leaves him outside in the rain, pushes him down the steps, and ducks his head under water. Tommy's parents come back, but there is no sign of any harm done to Tommy because Kevin fixes him up.

Chapter 7 (The Acid Queen)

      What a weird one this was...Tommy's father takes him to a drugged out dancer who thinks that she can cure him. He is subjected to all types of crap, none of which can cure him. That's it.

Chapter 8 (Underture)

      This really doesn't need an explanation. Its much like Sparks. Its what Tommy is feeling deep inside of himself. Basically a continuation of Sparks.

Chapter 9 (Do You Think Its Alright?~Fiddle About)

      Ok look. There is more to this than just " OOH!Tommy got raped by his uncle!". Tommy's mother and father, i guess, realized that Cousin Kevin wasn't the best babysitter, and besides, he was just a teenager like Tommy. So, they decided to leave him with a responsible adult, enter "Wicked" Uncle Ernie. It comes time for Tommy to go to bed and uncle Ernie really isn't with it. He molests Tommy. Tommy's father then comes in the room...

Chapter 10 (Pinball Wizard)

      Tommy begins to have visions again and he sees himself. He follows himself to the middle of a junkyard and finds a pinball machine. He teaches himself to  play the game and ends up defeating the local champ. He makes the news and Tommy is everywhere. Its Tommy-Mania as the people of the town go crazy for him. Tommy becomes a mega-star teen idol-like character.

Chapters 11 & 12 (There's a Doctor Ive Found and Go To The Mirror, Boy)

      Tommy's father finds out that there is a doctor in the town who can cure him. The mother, father, and Tommy get there and the doctor tells them that there is no hope at all for Tommy. He tells them that Tommy will be in that condition forever. But, Tommy's father is wondering about him. He doesn't really think that Tommy is Deaf dumb and blind.

Chapters 13 & 14 (Tommy Can You Hear Me and Smash the Mirror)

      Tommy's mother, i guess, loses her mind and starts to beg Tommy to answer her and listen to her. She yells at Tommy because he has no idea. She then accidentally hits Tommy with a mirror in a rage.

Chapter 15 (Sensation)

      Tommy, somehow, is woken up from his disabilities and can suddenly see, speak, and hear. He is telling everyonr about his being introduced to the world (or as he would say "i became aware this week").

Chapter 16 (Miracle Cure)

      Just a little bit about Tommy being cured. It is about a newsboy who is letting the world know about Tommy being cured.

Chapter 17 (Sally Simpson)

      This is a story in its own. This is the story of the girl who let rock and roll run her life. Sally's father was one of the men who feared rock music. He was a preacher who was very much against against it. His daughter, Sally, admired Tommy. Like i said, by this time, Tommy was like any other Donny Osmond or David Cassidy:All the girls loved him. Sally was forbidden by her father to go to Tommy's performance, but she decided to sneak out and go anyway. She got there and tried to reach Tommy. She jumped onto the stage to touch him, but was thrown off the stage (which is even obvious without the movie because it actually tells you that someone threw her.) by a uniformed man. She hit a chair on the way to the ground and split her cheek open. She needed 16 stitches to close the gap and her father just sat back and thought "I Told you so". Sally ended up marrying a rock musician and basically ruined her life. The moral of the story? "Mothers, dont let your boys grow up to be cowboys."

Chapter 18 (I'm Free)

      Tommy is letting the world know that he is no longer a prisoner of himself and wants everyone to join him. He wants everyone to see his way and join him in his way of life. He is asking the world to follow him in the pinball lifestyle.

Chapter 19 (Welcome)

      All of Tommy's followers have shown up at his camp and he is welcoming them. It seems as though there is not enough room to keep them all ("There's more at the door......We need more room, build an extension....") so he brings them all to the holiday camp.

Chapter 20 (Tommy's Holiday Camp)

      A short, annoying, stupid addition to the album by Keith that explains Uncle Ernie all cleaned up and helping Tommy at the camp. Most of Tommy's followers show up here.

Chapter 21 (We're Not Gonna Take It)

      Ahh. The grand finale'! This is it. Now, based on the movie, Tommy apparently has everything under control, that is until his followers turn his advice against him and start to rebel. They kill Tommy's parents and run him out of the camp in chaos. Riots are breaking out and people are going crazy. Ha. Ken Russel is a very imaginative man. Now, unless that is the way Pete intended the story to be, this is all wrong. According to the liner notes, Tommy has everyone under control and the people who followed him learned to   play pinball and were cured. Everyone then listened to what Tommy had to say and everyone lived happily ever after alleluia amen.    

MY OPINOINS

      Earlier, you read that I thought that Heaven and Hell should have been a part of this opera. Even though it wasn't written yet, it still has a lot to do with the story, well the movie anyway. Yes, if the opera is supposed to be like the movie, where Tommy's parents get killed, I would have him sing Heaven and Hell instead of the "listening to you..." thing that goes on and on. The reason for this would be because he would be so upset that his parents died, and he was deaf, dumb, and blind for most of his life, and there were other people with his condition. He would be wondering "Why can't we have eternal life, and never die? Never die..." I mean, when you think about it, and according to the movie, Tommy had a pret-ty crappy life. He was deaf dumb and blind for a while, his parents were killed, he saw his mother's lover kill his father, his followers rebelled against him, his cousin tourtered him, his uncle raped him, and some nutty, drugged-out "Acid Queen" tried to give him a cure by sticking him in a coffin and turning him into all types of crap. Wheew. That's alot for some dude to have to go through. There are some songs that really don't need to be on the album, but its like "well, if i take them away, the album makes no sense at all." So here would be my single-album "Tommy"---

SIDE 1
Overture~Its a Boy
You Didn't Hear It (1921)
Christmas
Cousin Kevin
Underture

SIDE 2
Pinball Wizard
There's A Doctor Iv'e Found (My favorite song on the album)
Go To The Mirror, Boy
Smash The Mirror
Miracle Cure
I'm Free
Welcome
We're Not Gonna Take It(~Heaven and Hell)

KK. I hope that this cleared up the story for you guys. If it didn't, and the movie didn't, and the play didn't, then just forget it because you will never get it. Sombody up there kinda put out the whole idea of the story, which is about inner peace and spirituality. So thats it. Thanx for listenin and, oh yeah remember.....ITS JUST AN ALBUM!!! Thank You.

Gene Kodadek (g_kodadek@hotmail.com)

Dumb story, great music. I have arranged several of these songs for fingerstyle guitar, and they're some of the strongest in my repertoire. Great, timeless stuff.

Stephen B Marseille (sbm82@columbia.edu) (7/21/01)

One basic correction that many Tommy fans are mistaken about: Tommy is NOT the world's first full length rock-opera. That honor goes to The Pretty Things's "S.F. Sorrow," which came out the year before and features a not too different story line. In fact, Pete T. has been quoted on the matter as saying it was VERY influential to him in making the album. Tommy is more consistently good, but I think the best songs on S.F. Sorrow beat all of Tommy... like "Baron Saturday," "S.F. Sorrow is Born," and "I See You." (The song titles alone should help point out some of the story similarities).

Hugh Trimble (8/15/01)

I'd say that besides The Who Sell Out, this is the best Who album I've heard.  I like it a tremendous lot, but I actually don't think that it is as accomplished as Sell Out - there is more variety and wit there. In Tommy, though, there is stunning musicianship throughout by all members - Daltrey's sheer range of styles, demonstrated superbly on Christmas, in which he jerks between belting out 'Tommy doesn't know what day it is...' and the hauntingly beautiful 'See me... feel me... touch me... heal me', is truly incredible. 

    I actually enjoy Underture a lot, and although it is just an extended version of Sparks, which is an extended version of Rael, it works well in the context of the album and thoroughly rocks - unless, of course, you're desperate to get to 'Fiddle About' (a rather indescribable song - imagine child molestation performed by a camp Disney villain while singing 'Heinz Baked Beans'... in fact I have been known to burst into song in the company of... anyone very much, and let rip with 'I'm your wicked Uncle Ernie!', only to be met with truly disturbed faces when I return from my gleeful sing-song.  Okay, I've worried everybody now.)

    The most important thing that I can say about this album, however, to people who may want to buy it but are put off by the story, is this:  to me, the story is completely unimportant.  The whole style never makes the story seem disturbing or portentous - it says it all that the songs about bullying and child molestation are handled, albeit a little tastelessly, by the man who brought you 'Boris the Spider' - and I totally ignore the story for at least the first three sides, each time.  In fact, when I read your interpretation of the beginning - I have never seen the film or the show - I was rather alarmed.  There is nothing in the lyrics which directly implies murder or anything to my mind - hey, maybe he saw his parents having sex or something.  That's the beauty of the album... the story is dumb, but you can think about it if you want.  It's never forced down your throat, as in The Wall, at least until the last quarter of the album.

    It's this last quater (maybe the last third) that I'm critical of, though.  The first two-thirds of the album, are fantastic, but there are too many pointless songs in the second 'act' - Miracle Cure, anybody? - and when Tommy is (totally implausibly) cured from his autism (autism explains Tommy's problem quite well... I'm no expert but I understand that it severely hinders the ability to communicate and express oneself... coupled with Tommy's psychological internship, this could lead to people's belief that he is deaf, dumb, and blind... heck, there I go - I said the story wasn't important but you can think about it if you like) Roger Daltrey's singing, coupled with the lyrics, just get annoying to me.  In fact, that may well be the point.  When it comes to 'We're not gonna take it', after the tedium of Sensation, I'm Free, and Welcome, I find myself agreeing with the crowd, thinking "Yeah, shut up, you great Nancy.  Let's rock!"

    However, the few duff songs, made worse by bunching them together, can be totally forgotten during 'We're not gonna take it'.  The build up, from the whispered dissent We're not gonna take it... right to the totally visceral later chanting and threats (even then, not disturbing: 'gonna rape you' (that's figurative, btw) is again just a cheery, rocking line like the others) is exhilerating, and when it all slows right down and returns to the masterful Listening to you reprise a shiver runs down my spine.  It's great stuff.

    All in all, Tommy is a superb, likeable, and thoroughly enjoyable album.  If the story appeals to you, then great, buy it.  If the story in fact puts you off completely, as it did me before I recieved the album as a gift, then buy the album and forget the story.  Whatever you expected to be disturbing or depressing is enjoyable and entertaining (even if the Uncle Ernie episode is a little sick) and as a whole the album is thoroughly uplifting.

    This is one of my all-time favourite albums, even though I don't think it's actually as good as some of the Who's other works, I find it more likeable.  And that's the main thing. 9 out of 10

It loses a point for Tommy's post-Miracle Cure whining.

Shut up, you great Nancy!

Trfesok@aol.com (11/06/04)

OK, pinball as a means to enlightenment is not the religious path to follow -- the allegory doesn't entirely work.  But as a statement that people want an easy path to Nirvana is crystal clear. Aside from the concept, it's musically excellent. I actually have the two-CD version, pre-remastering, and it still sounds wonderful. The CD transfer does help to compensate for the still-wimpy production of Lambert. Roger's singing is the best yet ("Sally Simpson" shows him handling the melody quite well),although the power of his live performances had yet to be captured. "Underture" seems to be padding to flesh the record out to double album length -- you're right, it didn't need to be 10 minutes long. Otherwise, no filler. Still, I do think that the public overrated it, especially when compared with a lot of what came after it.

---

Meaty Beaty Big And Bouncy - 1971 MCA
9 (15)

Best song: I Can See For Miles (well, all of them actually)

This is the greatest compilation ever (or at least tied for first with Past Masters 2). It was out of print for a long time, and supplanted by other compilations with most of these songs (mine was My Generation: The Very Best of the Who), so it may be easier just (as suggested below) to buy one of those and rearrange the song ordering to match this compilation. Still, if you can find this, you should buy it, as it's a perfect compilation both in terms of material and of song order.

Six of the songs are found regular Who albums, and all of them great, so I will focus on the remaining eight. I Can't Explain was the band's first big hit single, and it combines a simple-but-genial riff (which would be stolen and reused by future hard rock and punk bands many times, with only small alterations) with great lyrics about teenage emotional confusion. I especially dig the fun contrast between the aggressive instrumental parts and the high-pitched vocals, particularly the backing ones.

After The Kids are Alright comes Happy Jack, a weird song about a social outcast where the drums are shoved into the front of the mix, effectively carrying the song while the guitar and bass establish the melody lightly in the background. Following (sans post-song commercial) I Can See For Miles, we come to Pictures of Lily, a delightful tale of a teenager fantasizing over a pinup model named Lily, only to find out she's been dead for decades. Aside from the amazing melody and fun harmonies, it has a great naughty mid-section where John's French Horn parts can't help but evoke walking the parapet.

Following My Generation, we come to The Seeker, the only song on the album to sound like it belongs more in the Who's Next era than in the 60's. The production is stronger, the guitar sound is better than in the 60's, and Roger has erupted into the louder-than-hell frontman that he'd only shown in live performances in the years previous. The lyrics are great, too, depicting a young man trying to find his place in life and some greater meaning to go along with it. Then it's way back to the past with Anyway, Anyhow, Anywhere (co-written by Roger), an aggressive power-pop song with a great anthemic opening strum, some effective feedback in the middle, and lyrics about thinking you can take on the whole world with just your bad self.

After three more album cuts (Pinball Wizard, A Legal Matter, Boris the Spider), we finish off the album with three of the best songs the band wrote during the 60's. Magic Bus is a fun play on the "Bo Diddley rhythm," with fun psychedelic-laced lyrics about a guy wanting to buy a magic bus so he can go visit his girlfriend. I have no idea whether this is a loose metaphor for drugs, or if it's just silly trippy fun, but the song is a great one, taking everything great about The Who during that period and putting it into a form the band hadn't tried yet. Following this is Substitute, driven by a monster bassline and containing lyrics about things in life not being the way they seem on the surface. The line "I look all white but my dad was black" caused some controversy for the band, forcing them to change the line in some performances, but that's just one of many great lines to be found here.

And finally there's I'm a Boy, a "micro-opera" about a young boy whose mother wanted four daughters but instead had three daughters and a son, and who makes him play the part of her desire. It would be tragic if the song weren't so fun; the contrast between what the son wants to do in life, with what his mother makes him do, is especially sad. I should note, by the way, that the song is presented in a different version here than in other places I've heard the song; it's extended, with sweeter harmonies and humorous horn parts.

Simply put, you cannot call yourself a Who fan and not own these songs. If you can't get this album, then get the songs somewhere else, but to me, this is where they belong.

Send me your thoughts

TheRubberCow@aol.com (1/16/02)

or find it in a used record store. I see the vinyl copies on sale for under $10 all the time.

Jeff Blehar (jeffblehar@hotmail.com) (02/23/05)

Even better, you can go and buy the 2-CD The Ultimate Collection, which includes all the tracks on Meaty, Beaty, Big And Bouncy plus a full disc more. Then program the sequence in yourself if you must. I agree with you though, this was one of the most formidable greatest hits collections in rock for a very long time, and it's because it actually just gives us what we want: all the great singles (plus one great album cut, "Boris The Spider"), and arranged in an appealing running order. No fat. No "skip" tracks. No excuse for not owning all of these songs.

Martin (cdmx@gmx.de) (11/02/05)

The CD is still available for cheap in Canada! one of the best sounding compilations - mastered by Steve Hoffman. Don't forget to order his 80's Who's Next CD from Canada, too - budget price without bonus tracks. Stunning!

daniel penner (dzpenner@hotmail.com) (05/03/07)

on your recommendation i got this on lp for 6$ that i found at a used store, and is along with quad and who's next of course, the only who record that ever gets put on (actually i love sell out as well, but i haven't had the fortune of crossing its path yet). it's just astonishing how well sequenced this is, and i agree, that with past masters, this is the greatest comp. i've ever heard. it's very difficult to even tell that this isn't its own album. I'd sure be fooled!

Trfesok@aol.com (01/19/08)

This introduced a lot of people to the early Who, and it really was a nice little collection. All of these songs are also  available on the boxset, though, and I think that's a better value. However, as you pointed out, the longer version of "I'm A Boy" is here (the boxset has the  UK single version), and it's tons better, with Entwistle's eerie horn lines. I don't know if anyone would want to pick up this just to get that, but based on the rest of these classic songs, you won't get ripped off if you do.

---

Live at Leeds - 1970 MCA
9 (15)

Best song: My Generation

Send me your thoughts

Gene Kodadek (g_kodadek@hotmail.com)

This album (the version reviewed here, not the much shorter original), was my introduction to The Who, and a glorious introduction it was. One of my all-time favorites!

No1Yanks23@aol.com

Ok to get the Live at Leeds thing out of the way, yeah it's excellent, "Heaven and Hell" rules and it deserves a perfect score, being the second greatest live album ever. On to my next subject You said, "For while it may be disputed how good their studio work was and how they rank among the greats, there is little or no doubt that The Who are the greatest live rock and roll band ever."

There is a huge doubt. How could you not even consdier the Stones? Have you heard Get Yer Ya-Ya's Out. That's the best live album ever and there are dozens of Stones bootlegs that are better. Let's compare Ya-Ya's with Leeds, and I know people have been arguing about this subject, I've decided to add to it.

The Who's playing is great on here, it's really amazing, but the fact is The Stones made better songs (unless you like the Who's songs better of course :) ). Would you rather take "I Can't Explain", "My Generation", "Summertime Blues", "I'm a Boy" and say, "Substitute" over "Sympathy for the Devil", "Midnight Rambler", "Street Fighting Man", "Honky Tonk Woman" and "Jumping Jack Flash"? I really doubt it. Also if you have Napster you should download "You Can't Always Get What You Want" and "Midnight Rambler" from the Brussels concert in 1973. Compare the bands at their live peak, I believe the Stones were much better. So yes there is doubt, and millions of people think the Stones are better live. You should check them out.

Sorry to sound like a snob, just trying to prove a point.

kramer (bkramer2000@hotmail.com) (10/11/01)

Check out the new deluxe version of The Who's Live at Leeds.  They add the entire set of Tommy which is absolutely fantastic.  In fact, with that addition, this puts Leeds ahead of Isle of Wight which I liked more (probably because it was longer and more live Who is by definition, great!).  You still get the greats (Young Man Blues (My Favorite Live Who Song Ever!), Heaven and Hell, Summertime Blues, Amazing Journey/Sparks(on the Tommy part ofcourse), And the phenominal My Generation).  The Tommy Part doesn't compare to the original.  Like Isle of Wight, Leeds' version of Tommy is loud, raw, and energetic.

Ken Toops (spootnek@hotmail.com) (10/16/02)

This is a great live album one of the best! I have the 14 track CD! I'm listening to it now & I noticed it had track stops in the wrong places! Track 2 "I Can't Explain" ends with the Intro for "Fortune Teller" Who is the MORON that sequences the CDs? The Inrto for "Fortune Teller" should be at the beginning of Track 3 "Fortune Teller"!

Trfesok@aol.com (01/19/08)

Ignoring the live vs. studio debate (this doesn't beat Who's Next, IMHO), the only debate is whether this one or ..Isle of Wight is better. This performance does sound sharper and more focused than that one to me. Pluses are the extended medley after "My Generation", one of the few instances when jamming doesn't sound self-indulgent (the Grateful Dead or the Allman Brothers, anyone? -- this has anything they did beat); "A Quick One" -- the only reason that the Rock & Roll Circus/The Kids Are Alright version is better is that they goof around a bit too much here; "Magic Bus" -- a full, complete performance; and "Tattoo", which is one song I wouldn't have thought they would do live.  Of course, the sheer volume of material on ..Wight (Tommy and post-Tommy material) puts this one at a slight disadvantage. As with ..Wight, I'm going to complain about the covers. Unlike the Stones or the Beatles, they never had major success with covers, and I could care less about their "influences" when they still had tons of better originals they could have added to the setlist. Otherwise, you really can't go wrong with either of these live albums.

David Sheehan (davidasheehan@gmail.com) (05/13/09)

I gotta add my two cents in on the Leeds vs. Isle of Wight debate. I find that Leeds is firmly the better of the two, and I'll tell you why I think so (in no particular order): 1) The extended My Generation jam section. 2) A Quick One (While He's Away) instead of Water. Both are great, but really, by the time of this recording, they had A Quick One honed to absolute perfection, and it's at least as good as the performance on Rock and Roll Circus (or The Kids are Alright). 3) Entwistle is higher in the mix (score!) 4) I think the fact that it's an indoor venue (it was indoors, right?) gives it a fuller sound. They easily fill the room with sound while it's tough to fill the outdoors, even for The Who.

But they're both fan-flippin'-tastic. Oh, and that second disc on the deluxe version does sound different (worse) than the first disc, but not enough to detract from the score. A perfect 15, easily.

---

*Live at the 1970 Isle of Wight Festival - 1996 Columbia*
10 (15)

Best song: We're Not Gonna Take It

Send me your thoughts

Paul Walker (seraphim7s@yahoo.com)

My father went to this Isle of Wight festival at the tender age of 17. According to him, he walked round the whole time and NEVER saw any trouble. The disturbances were confined to a very small part of the venue. When he returned home he was shocked when people asked him "Did you see any of the trouble?" because it was blown out of proportion by the press. I suppose it was something to do with the media's views on Rock Music and youth culture at the time. Anyway, I just wanted to put the record straight on my Dad's behalf!

Gene Kodadek (g_kodadek@hotmail.com)

Possibly the greatest live album ever. Sloppy in places but who cares? Daltrey in particular is at his peak here. The best renditions of I Don't Know Myself, Naked Eye, or Water that I have heard yet. Why the HELL did these three songs not make it onto Who's Next? They certainly beat the hell out of My Wife, Going Mobile, or Getting In Tune.

Trfesok@aol.com (11/14/04)

Well, the performance isn't as precise as on Leeds, but I have to agree that it's excellent. Of course, subtlety goes out the window when it comes to the live Who -- loud is the modus operandi here.. But the Who was one of the few groups that could combine noise with melodicism, so even their jamming isn't dull. My only beef is that I could have done without their oldies covers - -by now, the band had plenty of original material (where's "A Quick One.."?) to fill a 2 hour set. Still, a great addition to Leeds.

---

Who's Next - 1971 MCA
9 (14)

Best song: Won't Get Fooled Again

Send me your thoughts

David Tomany (dtomany1@maine.rr.com)

American photographer Ethan Russell is responsible for "Who's Next" cover photo,not to mention "Quadrophenia" LP photographic insert,which if you own an early pressing of record,is a collecters item.Anyhoo,Russell put out a book of his work entitled "Dear Mr. Fantasy" back in the mid-eighties(out of print I beleive)that contains his work plus great text.He ripping through the English countryside with Townshend behind the wheel of his Mercedes,rest of band entourage in their own cars as well,doing 110 mph attempting to find a muse for "The Who's" album cover.Hilarious recollection from Ethan as Townshend drove his car like a madman scaring the shit out of the photographer.Anyway,they happend by that slag heap pictured on the record sleeve.It was a rural dump.Concrete pillars are used to prevent the ground from shifting.The initial idea was for the band to approach the pillar like something out of Stanley Kubrick's 2001.But one of the band, probably Keith,promptly took a leak on it.An amusing aside,some of the band were not able to piss on cue and what looks like piss on the concrete is actually film cans of rain water.The perfect looking sky on the cover was superimposed by Russell as the actual weather was overcast.

Awake600@aol.com

I wouldn't rate this album quite as high as you would, but it still rules. The first two songs (Baba O' Riley, Bargain), the middle one (Song Is Over) and the last two (Behind Blue Eyes, Won't Get Fooled Again) are pretty much Who classics, especially "Won't Get Fooled Again", one of the best rock anthems ever written, and of course I don't even have to mention Roger's scream near the end of the song, fully deserving of all 8:32 of its' time for sure - is there anyone who DOESN'T think it's the best song on this album? I've never heard otherwise...

"Baba O' Riley" best demonstrates Pete's effective synthesizer usage and his ability to create simple, but oh so powerful and original, riffs, and is definitely a classic, and its' followup "Bargain" gives it a run for its' money demonstrating his talent for melody writing and the band's rocking power. "Song Is Over" and "Behind Blue Eyes" are incredible ballads with hard-hitting emotion, the former with an amazing chorus that I don't consider overblown for a second (which is true for anyone else here).

The remaining tracks, though, are a little ordinary in the presence of such classic material - "Love Ain't For Keeping" just kinda comes and goes lthough it is nice, I'm not a fan of "My Wife" mostly because of Entwistle's vocals, and the infamously hated by Prindle "Goin' Mobile" is a good and catchy, but normal rock song. And while I don't exactly hate "Gettin' In Tune" (the verses are quite powerful), I will say the chorus is somewhat annoying and repetitive, leaving a lot to be desired compared to the rest of the song. Still, the remaining material is so excellent that this definitely deserves a 13.

BTW, about "2112" being a ripoff of the Lifehouse concept, that song is more a direct parallel to Ayn Rand's short story "Anthem", and it probably goes much less deeper than what Pete came up with. The Who's influence was probably apparent on Rush in the riffing (along with Zep), though, and the ending riff to the third part of "The Necromancer" is even a little similar to the opening riff of "Baba O' Riley" with a few more notes added on to it.

Echo Albarn (whoneedsthisreality@hotmail.com)

It is important to note that this album was re-released in 1995 with nearly an album-full amount of additions, most of which came from the Lifehouse project (Which Pete "mostly" finished this previous year). Bonuses include "Pure and Easy" (one of the linchpins of the Lifehouse concept), "Water", "Naked Eye", and the original mix (featuring a nice little Hammond part) of "Behind Blue Eyes".

Thought09@aol.com

This may be my favorite album of all time. It's the first who album I ever got and started on that road to wholiganism. I love every song on it...EVERY FUCKING SONG. My Wife is a great tune, but seems a little out of place w/ all the lifehouse tracks. The original album is great, but the double sized 95 reissue is what makes it so amazing.....EVERY SINGLE ONE OF THOSE SONGS are perfect as well...just priceless, enough said. Oh, and as a comment to the guy who said he's never heard anybody say they think 'wont get fooled again' isn't the greatest on the album...well here's me. I'd rate it in the top 5 on the album for sure, but not #1. Oh, and I love 'love ain't for keepin'"...pure rock and roll folks...and yes the version on odds and sods rules...

Gene Kodadek (g_kodadek@hotmail.com)

This album would be perfect but for three quibbles: Getting In Tune, Going Mobile, and My Wife. Given some of the other material that Townshend had lying around, there' no excuse for this.

Craig Stevens (dmc.stevens@ns.sympatico.ca)

I always thought that the cover was a nuclear pylon left over from a nuke going off and the who were pissing on it as a sort of 60s protest. But then when i herd it in 1981 I was under sedation from a hallucinogenic accident to the extent that the synthisizers werealmost like a religeous experiance and audibaly communicative to the point of auditorial hallicination as was the hole album.

Joe H (jcjh@home.com) (11/25/01)

Definate 9/10. They've really branched out here, and now they are a full blown, mature rock band, even though i prefer Tommy and Sell Out. All the songs are really great, "Baba O Riley", "Behind Blue Eyes" and "Wont get Fooled Again" are absolute classics, and the rest of the songs are great too. I find Moon's drumming awesome and even hilarious at times, with those funny, complex drum fills and such.

Trfesok@aol.com (12/09/04)

Oh, no. only a 9? This IS the Who's best album. The first, and best, example of the group finally bringing its live power to the studio. First, it sounds fantastic. Especially for 1971 -- Glyn Johns gave the band the clarity it needed without sacrificing its power. The early versions of songs like "Pure and Easy" and "Behind Blue Eyes," with Kit Lambert producing, don't compare with Johns' work.  And everyone is at his peak as a musician. Daltrey, in particular, stands heads above any of his previous performances. And every song is great - Townshend hit the top as a songwriter. Its too bad there wasn't room for more Lifehouse songs, but we did get to hear more as time progressed. Not overrated in the least -- the band's real classic.

Jeff Blehar (jeffblehar@hotmail.com) (02/23/05)

Count me as one of those who think this album suffers from its over-seriousness. But before I get to that, I want to point out what an amazing transformation The Who have made in the studio. It's practically a caterpillar-chrysalis-butterfly sort of change. Townshend & Co. were last seen in the studio with Tommy, and before that The Who Sell Out. Now both of those albums featured lush melodicism and excellent ensemble performances, but they were still relatively “light” in many ways: they sounded like extremely creative kids giving it their all. On Who's Next, they've clearly become men, for better and worse. Townshend is now writing epic songs and gaining newfound mastery over his lyrical “voice,” Moon's drumming is wild as before but with a new sense of discipline, and Entwistle is brazenly virtuoso on the bass. And then there's Daltrey. On Tommy Roger Daltrey still sounded like a teenager; from his first words on “Baba O'Riley” it's clear that he's jumped into another plane vocally - he sounds immeasurably more mature, and he has that leonine ROAR that you heard some of on Live At Leeds.

Unfortunately, when The Who grew out of their adolescence and into musical adulthood they also seem to have lost one of the things which made them so effortlessly lovable: their uniquely goofy sense of humor. Entwistle still had his black sensibility (“My Wife” is an anti-romantic classic), but Pete was so consumed by his spiritual seriousness and his musical ambition that Who's Next noticeably sags under the weight of Lifehouse's (ultimately rather flaky) search-for-the-lost-chord pretensions. The truth is that Townshend had matured immeasurably as a lyricist, songwriter, and production innovator (note the pioneering work with synths and tape loops) by 1971, but not enough for his grasp to equal his conceptual reach.

“The Song Is Over” hurts the most from this, but “Getting In Tune” and even “Behind Blue Eyes” are marked by it as well. “Going Mobile” has actually always been a favorite of mine precisely because it offers temporary relief from all these Big Philosophical Statements. Then again, sometimes the Big Philosophical Statements come out as timeless as masterpieces: “Baba O'Riley” is nothing short of a declaration of purpose, both in its disorientingly innovative structure (hypnotic synthesizer-loop introduction, haunting fiddle conclusion) and in its anthemically skeptical lyrics. No youth revolution for him: in an age where the Boomers were lost in a reverie of narcissistic self-regard and mindlessly conformist politics, Townshend declares “I don't have to fight to prove I'm right/I don't need to be forgiven” and dismisses an entire generation of psychedelic revolutionaries and cosmic protesters as “teenage wastelamd.” “Won't Get Fooled Again” is practically a conservative anthem when you think about it: spit in the eyes of the Maoists and Marxists, Yippies and Hippies, rioting '68ers and Weathermen, and all those who dreamed of revolution. In a single iconic statement - “Meet the new boss. Same as the old boss” - Townshend was at once less equivocal, more eloquent, and far wiser than John Lennon ever was on the subject.

Austin (zinzam@dejazzd.com) (12/13/08)

This is one of my favorite albums of all time. Although not the best album ever or even The Who's best, as some would say, this is still an amazing album. Despite its flaws, I'd probably still have to give it a 15. "Baba O'Riley," "Bargain," "My Wife," "The Song is Over," "Behind Blue Eyes," and "Won't Get Fooled Again" are such amazing songs that it would be impossible for me to give this anything but a 15. And contrary to popular belief, I actually find "Baba O'Riley" better than "Won't Get Fooled Again."

Oh, by the way, John:
Hard as it may be to believe, "Naked Eye" and "Water" have nothing to do with Lifehouse. Neither does "Long Live Rock." Unless you were just talking about songs that were around at that time, in which case you'd be right.

---

Quadrophenia - 1973 MCA
9 (15)

Best song: Sea And Sand, The Rock or Love Reign O'er Me

Send me your thoughts

Robert Grazer (xeernoflax@jack-the-ripper.com)

Ok. This may be tough. Quadrophenia is good, but nothing more. Entwistle proves himself as one of the top 10 bassists, and Daltrey is impressive as well. In fact those two are really great on here, and Kieth and Pete are good as well. My problem is that the quality of the songs is unpredictable from track to track. They range from excellent to really really bad. For example, "The Punk and the Godfather" is excellent, one of the best Who songs ever. However the previous track, "Helpless Dancer" is a pretty bad song. None of the songs on here are complete failures; John prevents that. Some come close though. "Sea and Sand" could be the worst on the album, despite the talent displayed. "5:15" is hurt by the horns. I usually like orchestrations or horns in songs, but it didn't work here. Oops. I'm sorry, I was wrong. The worst song on this album is "Helpless Dancer." UGH! Not a complete failure; as I said there are no complete failures on this album. But it is pretty close to one.! Even though it is a good ending to the album "Love Reign O'er Me" is too short. This could have been a complete classic if it was five or six minutes instead of three.

Now despite all that I've said, there are some really great tracks on here. How about "Drowned?" Can John get much better than that? I doubt it. Not too many bassists could. The previously mentioned "The Punk and the Godfather" is the first great song on the album. "I've Had Enough" is another classic. Still, inferior to Tommy.

BEST SONG: "Doctor Jimmmy" is the song that show the best of this album. Great in every way. Even though I generally prefer "See Me, Feel Me" to "Is It Me," I will say that the version of "Is It Me" in "Doctor Jimmy" is better than any version of "See Me, Feel Me."

COMPLAINTS: I said them all already.

RATING: My Scale: ***1/2 John McFerrin's Scale: 7(10)

Gene Kodadek (g_kodadek@hotmail.com)

Magnificent. I don't agree with you on the filler; I think everything on here is terrific. The story is only slightly better than Tommy, but who cares?

Tim Eimiller (ClashWho@aol.com) (1/08/02)

A beginning-to-end masterpiece. I think this is the greatest album ever made. Lyrically and musically it's a powerhouse performance. Every member shines. But the thing that really puts this album over the top is the passion, the sheer emotion, leaking out of your speakers.

Jimmy is every-teen. You watch him slowly fall apart as all the rugs are pulled out from under him, only for you to witness his epiphany, his salvation, at the end with "Love, Reign O'er Me." When I listen to that song in the context of the album I am simply overwhelmed every time.

The anger, the guilt, the pain that Jimmy feels is palpable. All the angst that every teen feels on his path to adulthood is expressed here with great conviction and amazing empathy. Thank you, Pete Townshend, for this album.

Charles Allison (charlie@cwallison.fsnet.co.uk) (8/26/03)

For any drummer and admirer of Keith Moon, BELL BOY is one of the greatest tracks of all time - especially when the songs returns after the ludicrous moody quiet bit to those crashing drums (I can do that bit!!!)

Not as good as WHO'S NEXT but a classic nonetheless.

Live (I only saw them once) they were unsurpassed and bloody loud too. The stones were never as good as these guys at their best.

Charlie Allison

Simon Brigham (slb23@shaw.ca) (4/07/04)

Quadrophenia is my favourite album by The Who, and one of the greatest double albums of all time. Pete is great as usual on guitars and synthesizers, Roger is in top form vocally, John is amazing on bass, and Keith is just wonderful throughout the album.

I first listened to it in 2000. I must admit I didn't like side three ("5:15", "Sea and Sand", "Drowned", "Bell Boy")  as much as the other sides, but it grew on me. The four main musical themes (though really great) get kind of repetitive at some points, but it has an arguably better (and more realistic) story than Tommy, and the music (IMO) rocks harder than the music on Tommy, also.

Best songs: "The Real Me", "Cut My Hair", "I'm One", "Dirty Jobs", "Is It In My Head?", "I've Had Enough", "5:15", "Drowned", "Doctor Jimmy", "Love, Reign O'er Me".

Rating: 9 (14)

Jeff Blehar (jeffblehar@hotmail.com) (02/23/05)

It's the greatest rock album of all time. I don't think there's any higher praise I can offer it than that. I've spent my money on thousands and thousands of CDs, covered the entire spectrum of popular music from metal to ambient to folk to country to prog to pop to you-name-it, and Quadrophenia still stands out for me as the most ambitious and fully realized project anyone's ever pulled off in the genre at large. Moreover, it does something that I think all truly profound art ought to: it deeply involves the listener emotionally. Lots of intellectually impressive music and art keeps its audience at an enforced distance (it seems to be the modern aesthetic), but Quadrophenia engages you in both your head and your heart without ever being cheap or manipulative. There's a term for what this album evokes, and uncoincidentally it's also what both Townshend and his creation Jimmy are searching for: the experience of the sublime.

And man, that's no mean feat. Townshend was writing about the early '60s "Mod" youth culture over a decade later AND from the point of view of an outsider, and yet his lyrics (and liner notes - brilliant character writing) are miraculously free of cliches or patronization. They're not poetic in the same way as Dylan's could be, but then Townshend's not writing about psychedelic jesters and two-wheeled gypsies, but rather about a lower-middle class malcontent kid. And they depict the emotionally chaotic mind of a moody, dreamy, confused adolescent with alternately sharp and subtle strokes. ("Cut My Hair" in particular is underappreciated in this regard: it captures the poignantly real ambiguity in Jimmy's relationship with his parents; they're NOT monsters - which is how most lyricists writing the same song would portray them - and Jimmy recognizes this even as he fights with them.)

I could spend all day raving about how perfect Townshend's lyrics are on this album - he's working on levels most lyricists can only dream of attaining - but I have to pay tribute to the music as well, which expresses Townshend's baroque thematic and structural ideas brilliantly WHILE carrying the weight of the emotionally searing storyline AND WHILE also, y'know, totally f***in' rocking. "The Real Me," "The Punk And The Godfather," "5.15," "Drowned," and (the underrated) "I've Had Enough" are the true heirs of the musical breakthroughs of "Won't Get Fooled Again" and "Bargain." Of the four musical themes which stand in both for aspects of Jimmy's fragmented personality and members of The Who, only Roger's "Helpless Dancer" is less than perfectly suited to its placement and the album's overall mood - and even then, the "Helpless Dancer" theme returns to form an integral part of the instrumental finale. And that finale, "The Rock," really encapsulates for me all the ways in which this album is Townshend's triumph. To be sure, Daltrey sings brilliantly, Moon gives his final hurrah as the world's greatest rock drummer, and Entwistle plays bass as effortlessly as light plays upon the water. But "The Rock," which reprises each of the four themes and then brings them together in a fusion of four into one, is microcosm of all the emotional highpoints and climaxes of what's come before, and is a tour-de-force in terms of writing AND arranging.

When I think about how Quadrophenia comes together in so many different ways, how it simultaneously engages the listener on so many different intellectual, musical, and emotional levels, and how it manages to gracefully execute so many tricky conceits solely at the service of a larger spiritual and narrative purpose ... well, it's at times like that I begin to toss around the much-abused word "genius" with respect to Pete Townshend. He clearly suffered for his art, both before, during, and after (he clearly burned out in a major way after Quad), but not in vain. 10/10, 15/15, whatever - it's simply the most treasured thing in my entire collection.

David Dickson (ddickso2@uccs.edu) (08/30/07)

Reading the very last paragraph of this review, John, all I can say is this: Thank God you don't have an essay on this site akin to Starostin's "Rock Music is Dead" shpiel of bull (no offense, George). I would have had to call you a name. Preferably "Proghorn."

All joking and name-calling aside, though (call me DICKS!), I agree with you that this is an excellent album--the best of the Who's career by an immensely, ridiculously, and crapaciously long shot. Call Tommy and Who's Next what you want, but from a pure entertainment standpoint, I think the Kinks and Led Zeppelin had this band beat HARD into the ground during 1969 and 1971, respectively. The Kinks were far better pop songwriters on Arthur, and frankly, no one beat Led Zeppelin for pure hard rock until the punk era. So what if the Who came first? They were never masters of atmosphere (or singing, for that matter--but that's really a matter of personal taste). Plus they nearly always wore their classical influences on their sleeve. Hence, when they attempted to sound RAWKISH (a la "Out in the Street," "I Can See For Miles," "My Wife," etc.), they merely sounded twee.

So it's only when they ignored rhythm n blooze and played that "classical" card to the HILT that we have greatness!! Aka, Quadrophenia, virtually the only Who album on which the band allows themselves unfettered bombast (as opposed to the "dinner theater" of Tommy and the misplaced YEAAH! approach of Who's Next). Sixteen songs, 80 minutes, all dramatic, all befitting. Whereas Tommy was really more intriguing from an intellectual standpoint than an emotional one (and yeah, I include "See Me Feel Me Touch Me Taste Etc." in that), Quad plays the emotional card from start to finish, resulting in such splendiferous emotional arcs as the "The Real Me/Quadrophenia" suite, the transition from "Is it In My Head" to "I've Had Enough," and the entirety of side four, one of the most sublimely operatic pieces of music in all of classic rock. (and believe you me, I've heard ALL classic rock ever recorded, so what I just said makes a lick of sense. . . )

Aaaaanyway, it's that "emotional arc" thingamajig that causes me to ferociously defend the two albums you lambast in your final paragraph. To be honest, I think the Wall is a hair lower in quality than Quadrophenia, and it's true it probably wouldn't exist if not for the Who's work, but to call it a "pale imitator" misses the mark, I think. Sure, it may be a ripoff of Tommy, Schoolboys in Disgrace, and Quadrophenia, but only in the same sense that Joyce is a ripoff of Conrad, Ibsen, and Yeats--in the end, who cares. Actually, it's probably more accurate to call The Wall a ripoff of Bowie's Ziggy Stardust, in the sense of the themes it expounds upon--namely, rock and roll suicide. That's a matter for another reader comment, though--my opinion is, it may not be as consistent musically as Quadrophenia, but it is for damn sure more diverse and unpredictable. In a way, I'd say that mostly makes up for its compositional shortcomings and nasty thematics.

Mellon Collie, though, is a personal pet peeve of mine, one that I seem unable to see eye-to-eye on with anyone over the age of 26. The general objection I get to that album ranges from "Sellouts. . . careerists. . . capitalists. . . I smell bad!" (all indie fans)to "Modern music. . . goshdarn kids. . . doodly diddly!" (Starostin, Flanders, old people) to "His voice stinks" (Mark Prindle) to "The lyrics stink" (professional critics) to "Quadrophenia is better" (present company).

My response: So it's not the ultimate statement of teen angst or the first double album ever made--big deal. It's also not a rock opera or a concept album, either--so you can wash that "pale imitator" accusation right out of your hair (South Pacific, Act II, 1949). It's just 28 songs released in 1995 written in the musical style of the time. And, in my solitary opinion, despite its whiny voice and shabby lyrics, its 2 hours of musical excess hold together more cohesively than most so-called concept albums one-third its length. I may be alone in this opinion, John, but I think if you give that monstrosity another 122 minute and 6 second chance, you'll find it to be the glorious culmination of the art of the double LP, not the degeneration. But then again, I was born in 1982, and I also like Queensryche.

Trfesok@aol.com (02/02/08)

I like the album a lot, with several really classic songs. However, it reminds me, in a sense of The Lamb Lies Down on Broadway. The "philosophy" behind the album is entirely different, of course. However, like Gabriel/Genesis, Townshend/The Who overreached here. For one thing, the concept is too tied in with a specific, time place and culture -- specifically, the mods of early 60's Britain. Of course, I'm a bit too old for teen angst, but even so, the references are a bit too obscure and off-putting (or, you can't figure out what's going on every now and then, as in "The Punk and the Godfather"), so that you can't always relate to the character. The split personality business doesn't work, either. I mean, for example, Pete says "Helpless Dancer" is Rogers' theme, but why? It's easy for Pete -- he knows the Who, so it makes sense to him, but it doesn't to an outsider. Only "Bell Boy", piggybacking on Keith's wild man reputation, works in this regard.

  The biggest beef I have is with the production. I like big and bombastic, of course, but (again, like The Lamb..), it's a bit too much. On Who's Next,  the big production complemented the lyrical themes and the band's playing perfectly. Here the increased synth and horn overdubs, sometimes, overwhelm the songs too much. The fact that the group's attempt to play the album live with backing tapes ended in disaster proves the point. The big arrangements, to a certain extent, undermine the down-to-earth subject matter of the lyrics. For some reason, as Pete got less surrealistic, the music got bigger. A more stripped down approach, like on ..By Numbers, might have been more appropriate.

  Even so, there is some great material here '' The Real Me", "The Punk and the Godfather" (even with those weird lyrics), "5:15" (the horns provide a great hook), "Dr. Jimmy." I would also go with "Love, Reign Over Me" as top tune. In this case, the big production underscores Roger's passionate vocal and the more universal lyrical message. It (along with "Is it in My Head?") were actually recorded before the album concept even existed, so it totally works outside of the album's context. On the whole though, even though I enjoy it while it's on, I don't think it has quite the staying power of ..Next.

---

Odds and Sods - 1974 MCA
8 (11)

Best song: Pure And Easy or Naked Eye

Send me your thoughts

Glenn Wiener (Glenn.Wiener@Entex.com)

Hi,

Looks like you have a nice website going here. Hope you expand it more.

Anyway, I'm glad you recognize Odds and Sods as a very good recording. Truthfully its the sleeper in the Who's collection. I really like Little Billy as its my personal fave. Too Much Of Anything is beautifully written and sung. You don't sem to recognize it. Pure And Easy has one great guitar solo in the middle. In general, they are all good tracks that is the original recordings.

Trfesok@aol.com (12/09/04)

I could have done without most of  the early stuff (especially the covers), but most of the post-Tommy material is really good. Particularly the Lifehouse outtakes : "Too Much of Anything" , "Pure And Easy" (different, and better, versions than the bonus tracks on Who's Next -- Glyn Johns does it again for the group!), the hard-rocking "Love is for Keeping," "Put the Money Down" and the fantastic "Time is Passing." There are a couple of great B-sides (Daltrey's "Here's for More," from 1970 and Entwistle's 1972 "When I Was a Boy") that I would have liked to see here. On the whole, though, a fun collection for anyone into the Who at all.

Matthew Teplitz (eteplitz@wideopenwest.com) (02/23/05)

Hi,

  Glad you recognize Odds and Sods as a good recording, as it is too often overlooked.  However, the released version of the CD is actually shorter than what MCA had originally planned!  Here are some tracks that were going to be released, or here are some problems with existing tracks, or just tracks I think they should have included:

  Under My Thumb doesn't have the electric guitar mixed in - easily heard on Who's Missing and bootlegs.  Also, why include Under My Thumb when The Who's cover of (This Could Be) The Last Time is superior to the Stones version? 

  Young Man Blues, while disputed, is either (or both) 1. Slowed down around 7.5% (don't remember the exact, read it somewhere) - making it more lethargic than what's intended and 2. They used the wrong take while making the album.  The original can be found on bootlegs or the extremely rare multiartist The House That Track Built vinyl released in I believe 1970.  Unsure about how this compares to the one found on the Tommy Deluxe Edition.

  Signal 30 - an instrumental performed I believe 1966/67, great energy, plenty of distortion, feedback, etc. from Pete - it was going to be on the reissue, but they ran out of room!  Can be found on various bootlegs - look for the magnificent Pop Goes Art bootleg for A Quick One/Sell Out era recordings. My version is on The Who '66 bootleg.

  Here For More - I can't honestly say I've heard this song (yet), it was a B-side from 1970/71 I believe, but should have been put on just cause it's one of the very few songs Daltrey wrote!

  Waspman - a truly off-the-wall song written by Moon the Loon, B-side to "Relay".

  Here 'Tis - a Bo Diddley (Ellas McDaniel) number covered by The Who when they were still the High Numbers, it's one of the very few (4? - I'm The Face, Zoot Suit, Leaving Here, Here 'Tis) recordings done under the High Numbers, not exactly their best, but IMHO, all the High Numbers recordings should have been put on - more for historical value than anything.  This is excluding the bootleg of a 1964 performance at the Marquee - which has surprisingly good sound for a 1964 audience (?) recording.

  Dogs - okay, not The Who's best moment, but it really didn't deserve to tank as a single - IMO, it was probably designed as more of a humorous recording than a serious one.

  Dogs, Part Two - only heard part of this instrumental written by Keith Moon, released in 1969, though it was recently released on Disc 2 of the Tommy Deluxe Edition, so it's really pointless now.

  Dr. Jekyll & Mr. Hyde - another one of The Ox's truly morbid recordings! 

  Circles - not to be confused with the so-called "Shel Talmy version" found on My Generation and My Generation Deluxe Edition, but this was the so-called "Who" version (self-produced) recorded in duophonic sound, making it sound more proto-psychedelic than ever before.  I first heard it on The Who '66 bootleg.

  Okay, that's enough of my nitpicking of a truly great album of rejects (these "rejects" top many bands' best material!).  Some of these recordings are made a bit easier to find thanks to reissues with bonus tracks, but some of these tracks can only be found on rarities albums like Who's Missing (a Canadian import still going for a reasonable $20), Two's Missing (skyrocketing, I've seen as low as $45, as high as $75), and Rarities Vols. 1 & 2 (Japanese import goes for ~$25).  Some of these (Signal 30) can only be found on bootlegs, which is a shame, people should be able to hear these "rejects" more easily.  I know I'm sort of sounding like a music/Who snob, but I'm not and the only reason I know of these tracks is through bootleg trading :).  Plus, I'm sure there's even more alternate takes and stuff from The Who's vaults, but John made some really good decisions for the album. 

Eh, I was never too enthusiastic about this album when I had it in its original configuration, and I'm still not too excited about it even now. So they added a lot of bonus tracks: great. But WHY OH WHY DIDN'T THEY PUT THE MISSING B-SIDES ON? Look, I'm far more interested in having a remastered version of songs like “When I Was A Boy” (a great Entwistle B-side that was his lone contribution to the Lifehouse project) or “Here For More.” And where are “Circles” (the “Substitute” B-side version), “Dr. Jekyll & Mr. Hyde,” or “Waspman?” The live “Baby Don't You Do It?” THESE are the tracks that any hardcore trainspotting Who fan has been dying to get good CD copies of, not yet another frickin' version of “Leaving Here” or the WRONG VERSION of the studio “Young Man Blues” (the right take, originally released on a Track Records sampler in 1970, was finally released on the new Deluxe Edition Remaster of Tommy) or THE SAME version of “Summertime Blues” that was also released on the BBC Sessions disc.

Okay, rant over. Wait - there's more. So they decided to resequence the album chronologically. Fine. But if you're gonna do that you damn sure better get the chronology right and not make amateurish mistakes that even mid-level fans would notice. They clearly wanted “Naked Eye” rather than “We Close Tonight” (which is actually the latest song on the new remastered Odds And Sods) to close the album, so they misstated its provenance. In truth, it doesn't date from 1973, it's really a Lifehouse outtake that was recorded immediately after the Live At Leeds period. “Now I'm A Farmer” and “Postcard” (which sounds completely different in its remixed form) actually come from 1969, not 1973.

This time I promise the rant's over. There's some very nice stuff on this disc that deserves to be checked out, my bitching aside. “Glow Girl” was also included on the remaster of The Who Sell Out, but here it doesn't have a crossfaded beginning and sounds a little brighter. “Faith In Something Bigger” has terribly clumsy lyrics (aw, Pete was so cute when he was desperately sincere!) but gorgeous singing and songwriting, while “Little Billy” is a stone riot! (Did you know they actually performed this song live? There's a great-sounding bootleg floating around out there of their 1968 Fillmore East show where they debut this song and actually rock the hell out of it. I'll have to send that to you.) Everybody else hates “Now I'm A Farmer,” but dammit, I enjoy The Who's dopey humor. This is the spiritual brother of “Dogs,” and I have a large soft spot for the late '60s self-deprecating Who. “Naked Eye” is a great song in any version, and I actually prefer this to the live performance. I'll give this disc a 6 or a 7 out of 10 for these bright spots, while still screaming about how the record label is keeping those rarities out of my hands.

---

The Who By Numbers - 1975 MCA
7 (10)

Best song: Dreaming From The Waist or Blue Red And Grey

Send me your thoughts

Gene Kodadek (g_kodadek@hotmail.com)

This one is better than most people (you included) give it credit for. Yeah, it's kind of depressing. But a lot of the music is just gorgeous. I actually think Dreaming From The Waist is kind of a loser, but I absolutely adore Imagine A Man and They Are All In Love. Great stuff.

Eric B. (sonicdeath10@hotmail.com) (11/09/03)

the title of this album seems fitting at first. it seems like the band is going by the numbers. but that's not true! it also seems like there's a lack of craft and care in these songs. that's not true! in fact, pete is STILL a great song craftsman: a quick listen to any song from this album compared to early (still brilliant) who songs confirms his growth.

  i agree the melodies are hard to find. i think this is partially because pete doesn't SLAM them down with power chords. he tends to play quietly, or using major, minor chords. he doesn't go for catchy: he goes for beautiful. and most of this album is that. especially nicky hopkins piano work. brilliant.

  success story is the funniest one on here though. there's a hilarious bit on the kids are alright movie where john shoots a bunch of gold records while this song plays in teh background. he even gets the tommy (no pun intended) out!! when asked how he could shoot all those gold records, he said "it doesn't matter, they're roger's any ways." funny thing is, roger said it was probably true!! funny guy, that entwistle.

any ways, i would have agreed with you about this album if i rated it like a year ago. time has made me come to love it. hell i love all their albums (to various degrees: lately face dances and even it's hard grew on me! mostly face dances, it's hard is still weak, but not horrible).

---

Who Are You - 1978 MCA
9 (12)

Best song: Who Are You

Send me your thoughts

Gene Kodadek (g_kodadek@hotmail.com)

I didn't like this one very much. I actually thought Enwhistle's songs were the best here (905 and Trick Of The Light are both awesome), and I liked Sister Disco well enough, but I actually found the title track to be way overrated. A letdown.

Eric B. (sonicdeath10@hotmail.com) (11/09/03)

one of the first who albums i got. it's also one of the best really. pete combiines the RAWK who and the "subtle keyboard who" of the next two albums perfectly. THREE john songs, each a winner even if "trick of the light" has inane lyrics i've never heard a bass sound like his does on this track! guitar and pen MIGHT be a bit weaker for reasons i can't explain.

Dane J. Hitt (dane.j.hitt@gmail.com) (07/31/05)

FINALLY! Someone who recognizes the beauty of "Love Is Coming Down." This album is Roger's shining moment if you ask me, at a point where Keith and Pete are both on downward spirals, Roger still shines bright.

Trfesok@aol.com (12/02/07)

The best since Who's Next, and they haven't done better since. All the tunes are solid, and a few are great. The return to synths is very creative and continues to advance (especially on the title track), without overwhelming the songs as they did sometimes on Quad.  Roger is sounding more gruff, but still putting the fire into his vocals. I also like "Love is Coming Down" -- Roger tends to be underrated as a singer of ballads. I don't really hear a big downturn in Keith's performances, despite the liner notes and everyone's complaints -- the songs themselves call for a bit more restraint. "Music Must Change" is a bit pretentious, but the jazzy sound is unusual for the Who. I agree that "Guitar and Pen" gets to be a tad annoying (and two mixes are entirely unnecessary), and I got sick of "Had Enough" after hearing it on the radio too much before the album was released in the US (a UK import single came out first), but, on the whole, it's a classic, the last great Who record, and their most essential, after Next.

---

Soundtrack to the film The Kids are Alright - 1979 MCA
9 (13)

Best song: Young Man Blues or See Me Feel Me

Send me your thoughts

Marco Ursi (marco_ursi@hotmail.com)

I've always thought this was an odd record. The song selection is all over the place but there's enough good stuff to warrant purchasing it. The coolest part of the whole album comes during "A Quick One While He's Away". If you listen closely, you can hear Keith Moon let out a big scream every time he goes into a big drum fill! Great stuff!

Kerry & Kayoko Canfield (k2canf@SpiritOne.com)

The version of "My Generation" on the first side of this album actually occurred--not on the British "Ready Steady Go"--but on the American "Smothers Brothers Comedy Hour." For those not old enough to have seen the original '60s TV show, the Smothers Brothers were Tommy and Dickie, who played guitar and standup bass, respectively, on satirical renditions of "tranditional" folk tunes; Dickie was the "straight man" of the duo. The introduction to the Who here is from Tommy Smothers, whose character was defined by (what must have been deliberate because it was so brilliantly timed) scattered ineptitude when announcing and going off on hilarious, erroneously based tangents (similar to the later "Saturday Night Live" Roseanna Roseannadanna character of Gilda Radner). If anyone is not familiar with this, by all means see the film, which opens with this clip. The film excerpt then closes with Townsend smashing Tommy's guitar and Tommy then requesting to borrow Dickie's bass (which exchange is not included on the recording), harking back to the ongoing sibling rivalry between the two brothers (which of course was just another aspect of their shtick). Incidentally, the TV show was cancelled by the network carrying it because of the brothers' refusal to tone down its sociopolitical content!

As for the "Rolling Stones Rock and Roll Circus" rendition of "A Quick One," one also has to see the film of the show to appreciate the power of this performance (however silly this "mini-opera" itself may be). Basically, the Who adopted a take-no-prisoners attitude and stole the show from everybody else appearing in it, including its stars. Keith Moon especially is maniacally messy and brilliant, and the shots of him encapsulate perfectly his irreplaceable contribution to the band.

---

Empty Glass (Pete Townshend) - 1980 Atlantic
9 (13)

Best song: A Little Is Enough or Empty Glass

Send me your thoughts

JohnnyB8@aol.com

I like this album. I mean, its really not as good as All The Best Cowboys Have Chinese Eyes, but that doesn't make it bad. I like Jools and Jim the best. To me, it sounds like two kids who are still young enough to change their lives, but they just go around and turn their backs on rock and roll. Its like Pete said "They don't give a     s--- Keith Moon is dead." Its about little kids who don't appreciate rock's predecessors, like the  Stones, Beatles, The Who, Led Zepplin and The Jimi Hendrix Experience. Now, although he probably didn't think that it would go too far, it did. Kids today go around talkin about Papa Roach, Green Day, and Nirvana like they are something great. Like they are original. And i should know because i am a kid and it ticks me off that all the kids that i know treat old rock and roll like crap, and the oldest rock that they know is the Police. They think that Nirvana invented rock and roll and all they did was crap it up. Nirvana sucks and i don't give a flyin hoot whatt anyone says. Whenever i have to sit in my friend's car, his mom cranks it up and it makes me want to tear my nipples off. And don't get me started on Rock and Rap. What in the hell is that? Eminem, Limp Bizkit and Korn. More white guys just tryin to be from the ghetto. They talk about the ghetto like its somethin special. like they came from there and got famous and their proud. If you are proud that you came from some dirty, nasty, afraid-to-step-outside-of-your-house-cause-you're-gonna-get-killed neighborhood, then stay away from me cuz you are just damn weird. These guys are sickening. as Mark Prindle would say "I heard some song at HMV the other day and it was the worst song that ive ever heard in my life. It was some guys singin "I won't give a f--- about you until you give a f--- about me and my generation. Who is that guy? Somebody kick him in the balls for me." he is right. the guy does need to be kicked in his balls because that is the worst song i have ever heard and its sickening that it has to share the same name as the Who's song. Ans kids look up to these idiots. They are like "Wow! This guy is singin about killing his wife! I gotta try that! And look! This guy is talkin about slitin his wrists! Gotta try that one!" Then some kid will get   killed and some stupid moron who told him to do it in a  song will come out and say "Oh. It was just a song i didn't mean for him to do it." then he'll get sued for a million bucks, but he won't lose because the judge will rule that the music didn't force the kid to do it. he just took the music the wrong way. So all im tryin to say is that little kids are impressionable and that they should learn to respect older music. thank you.

Trfesok@aol.com (12/02/07)

It's not the best album the Who never made, but it is tons better than the Who album that would follow, that's for sure. One thing that I think you overlook is a spiritual quality in a number of the lyrics -- the title track, "And I Moved", "I Am an Animal", even "Jools and Jim" (although it's juxtaposed against some anger in that one.) This is nice, because Pete gets personal without indulging in the annoying whining that brought down the last couple of Who albums a bit. And the rockers are a lot of fun. "Let Me Love Open the Door" may be cheesy, but I get the feeling that Pete doing this one entirely with tongue in cheek. The production is a bit too smooth -- the mix could have brought the guitars a bit more forward. The vocals, on the other hand, are great - Pete fully explores his range.  A nice start to Pete's 80's solo career.  

---

Face Dances - 1980 MCA
5 (8)

Best song: You Better You Bet

Send me your thoughts

Peter Just (pjust@mindspring.com)

A quick note about Kenney Jones, his history and why Pete brought him into the band. Jones was the drummer for The Small Faces, The Who's East London counterpart Mod band. The Small Faces members' included Steve Marriot and Ronnie Lane (PT's "Rough Mix" album). After Marriot left to form Humble Pie, The Small Faces turned into The Faces with Rod Stewart on vocals and Ron Wood on guitar. Kenney Jones had a long association with The Who because of the two bands shared Mod backgrounds, shared billings for shows in 1966-67, his work on the Tommy soundtrack and friendship with all the Who members, especially Keith.

Jones and Townshend have mentioned in interviews that he became the most logical replacement for Moon because of this shared heritage. Bill Curbishley has mentioned that, at that time in the fall of 1978, after Keith died, Kenney Jones was "the best drummer availble" in England. If you have a chance to listen to live Kenney Jones drumming from Faces and 1979 Who shows, you'll actually get an entirely different view of Jones. Unfortunately, Face Dances and It's Hard didn't employ the same drumming style that he brought into the band circa 1979.

Also, see your mistake regarding release of Empty Glass...EG came out in 1980 before the release of Face Dances.

JSmith2549@aol.com

I have enjoyed reading your reviews of the recordings up until this point. I like Face Dances. This record contains many examples of great song writing and is well produced. I will never understand the negativity that this recording has generated among the true Who fans. Simply stated, my opinion is that this is the best Who recording since Quadrophenia. Remind yourself, that every Who studio recording offers something completely different. That being said, there is no comparison between Face Dances and Who's Next. The Who's sound is not measured by their studio recordings as much as by their live concerts.

Some people say Face Dances is nothing more than a Townsend solo recording; I disagree. By Numbers and Who Are You contain just as much solo material as Face Dances if you are judging by the personal aspect of the lyrics or any other measure.

(author's note): Actually, it's not just the lyrics - solo Pete is distinctly different in musical style from Who Pete.

You tend to place some blame on Roger Daltrey's vocals; I find his vocals to be as competant as ever with the only exception being Don't Let Go the Coat where he is just off key. The stupid Broadway style of singing you mention applies to every Who album. Roger was over the top and bombastic on every album.

(author's note): Yes, but the difference between the songs on here and the songs on, say, Quadrophenia, is that those songs almost required Daltrey to be over-the-top bombastic. These songs call for a soft, trembling sissyish voice. Like, say, PETE'S.

What the Who did in the studio throughout their career did not accurately reflect their live performances. Bootlegs I have from early 1981 confirm to me that the songs from Face Dances are among the most refreshing and powerful concert performances at that time (ie. Tricky Day, Did You Steal... and Quiet One). You also make the comment that this album just fell into the category of generic 80's pop. This record was nothing like what was going on in the 80's at that time.

It is not worth the time to debate whether the Who should have continued with or without Keith Moon; I will say this, isn't it nice to finally hear some drums on a Who record again? You know the drums are virtually nonexistant on the previous two albums; yes there are some token moments for the drums but not the backbone the Keith should have been providing. Face Dances confirms to me that Keith was just a performer, not a musician. Not that that is a bad thing, but don't make any comparisons.

JSmith2549@aol.com

I have never considered Pete's voice to be soft trembling sissyish. I considered his voice to be high, emotional, charged, and always in key. Daltrey's vocals on Face Danes are no different from Quadrophenia, other than the mix is better (brighter).

As I said, there are some token moments from Keith on the prior two albums; Who Are You is a prime example, as you mention. But if not for the record of his live perfromances, Keith's drumming is, as you say, non-descript in the studio, more so than Kenny's is.

I think Face Dances is a solid effort by the Who; no less than the prior two albums.

ChrisTr@frontiersoftware.com.au (3/29/02)

I realise this is by now, a fairly old argument, so please indulge me as I too enter the fray with this rather lengthy discourse.

It would seem that many fans of the Who simply never forgave Pete Towsnshend for not writing variations on 'Who's Next' for the rest of the band's career. This is a great shame as it creates a stifling environment for both the artist and the listener. One of the admirable qualities of the greatest recording artists of any era has been their ability to grow and mature. This often leads them into genres vastly different from where they stared. Indeed, imagine if the Beatles kept to their "I Want To Hold Your Hand' formula for the remainder of their career. The average teenage fan would have outgrown them in a couple of years and the public at large would have missed out on some of the most amazing music of our era. This is true of any enduring act during popular music's history and is, in this case, especially true with regard to The Who.

When one sits down and plays every recorded work by The Who, back to back (assuming you had the time), the listener would realise that each album is vastly different to that of its predecessor. Whilst each album is instantly recognisable in regard to the singing, playing and energy of the band, the general tone, or vibe if you will, differs. With 'My Generation' it was the raw R&B feel, with 'Sell Out' it was the humour and with 'Face Dances' it's the sense of having grown up.

Admittedly one could say that after the demise of Keith Moon, the time would have been right for Townshend to call it a day for The Who. However Townshend has always stated to the press in subsequent years that he didn't want the fans to think that Keith's death was directly responsible for the break-up of the band. This was also a period, after a lengthy sabbatical, of much activity for The Who which the members understandably didn't want to curtail after so much time and effort.

Face Dances saw The Who launched, amid a barrage of publicity, as the New Who. Indeed the addition to their live act of Kenny Jones, keyboardist John 'Rabbit' Bundrick and even a brass section on some dates are attest to that.

The logical conclusion to this introduction of a New Who was to produce a new album which we now know as 'Face Dances'. Whilst being a massive commercial success, and my introduction (along with 'The Kids Are Alright' soundtrack) to The Who, the album was soon heavily derided by the critics and the bulk of the hardcore Who fans. The main reasons being that Kenny was not Keith and the songs weren't 'Who's Next'.

Whilst I can't commit to any one album by The Who as being my favourite, I must admit that 'Face Dances' is a good album and is often found on either my turntable or cd player. Firstly the production on this album by producer Bill Szymczyk is masterful. The sound is crisp and clear to the extent that you can finally hear John Entwistle's trebly tone without having to strain and the use of effects are tasteful. The full frequency spectrum is represented faithfully and fully from the thump of Kenny' kick drum to the highs of the guitar and vocals. That is to say that the production does not carry any of the muddiness nor tinniness inherent in their recordings of the sixties. Keep in mind too that this was 1981, well before the advent of digital recording - although there are many arguments to be had concerning digital vs. analog, which will be omitted from this arena.

The cover artwork too has always been noteworthy to me. The individual portraits of the band members, painted by noted artists of the day, coalesce into a spectacular collage of colour to entertain the eye. Only the artwork of Quadrophenia, from a design point of view, stands above it.

The main point of any criticism of 'Face Dances' is levelled at the playing and songwriting. One factor as mentioned above was that Kenny wasn't Keith.

Whilst I can say without reserve that Keith Moon was the most unique drummer around (and still is), Kenny was certainly no slouch. In terms of time keeping Kenny Jones was a more reliable player which gave John the unique opportunity of concentrating on the groove rather than having to watch Keith's feet and hands to see where the beat would land. Creatively Kenny was able to make a contribution of note. A quick listen to his playful and subtle shift of the beat on 'You Better You Bet' whilst still maintaining the 4/4 drive of the song never fails to impress me.

Pete's guitar work, whilst more subdued than his previous efforts is still enjoyable. One of my favourite moments on this album is the country style fingerpicking in the solo on 'Daily Records'. Pete displays admirable retraint on this album by allowing space for the guitar to breathe rather than trying to fill every niche with a wall of sound.

John's bass work is faultless and tasteful in it's interplay with the other instruments and his ingenious use of changing the feel of a song by alternating from driving eighth notes to employing arpeggios and back again. Indeed John has struck a balance between his trademark, blistering playing and holding back to serve the song, which works well and displays a growing maturity in his work.

Much has been said about Roger's vocal ability on this and the follow up record 'It's Hard'. Once again the band displays evidence that it had no wish to rest on its laurels, but to attempt to chart new territory. On 'Face Dances' Pete encouraged Roger to abandon the mid-Atlantic style for which he was noted in favour of a much gruffer English delivery. Again, in 1981 English bands such as The Jam and The Clash were very popular in the U.K. and were attracting a growing audience worldwide (albeit slowly) thus influencing many British artists to return to a quintessential English sound. This gruffer delivery works to a large extent throughout this album the best examples being 'You Better You Bet', 'You' and 'Did You Steal My Money' whereby the listener can almost feel Daltrey's anger confronting the listener. Admittedly there are some moments where Roger's bluster would be better tempered by Pete's gentler vocal like on 'Cache Cache' or 'Don't Let Go The Coat'.

Speaking of vocals, the backing vocals are by far the best ever on this album throughout and John's singing on his autobiographical 'The Quiet One' is first rate.

As stated, whilst not perfect, 'Face Dances' is a wonderful and brave record which represents the band at a period of great change. No longer chained to previous expectations Pete was now free to experiment with new sounds and address issues as a man in his mid thirties that he would not be able to tackle at age twenty. To the astute listener, many of these changes were in evidence on the 'Who Are You' disc which ironically, many fans at the time considered a return to form for The Who.

Eric B. (sonicdeath10@hotmail.com) (11/09/03)

should they have broken up? probably. still, i enjoy these songs for what they are: great little keyboard songs. yes, roger can sound annoying. there's next to no guitar. the drumming is weak. but i dunno these songs are cool for reasons that are impossible for me to explain. in all reality i should dislike this album but i don't. like a 7 or an 8.

---

All The Best Cowboys Have Chinese Eyes (Pete Townshend) - 1982 Atlantic
7 (11)

Best song: Slit Skirts

I originally savaged this album, giving it a low 6/10, and it was only that high because I really loved the closing Slit Skirts (which I still do, even more than before). Time seriously improved my attitude towards it, though (even if I still can't give this higher than a solid 7), so when looking at the comments below, remember that anything from before mid-2008 is from when I said I didn't really like this.

The big thing about this album is that it's a really easy one to seriously dislike. It's full of lyrical imagery that's opaque to a degree Pete had never before shown, not even on Quadrophenia. It's full of cheeseball synths, with guitar parts only coming out in force in brief stretches. It's full of melodies that don't have easily discernable hooks. A few of the songs feature Pete reciting his confusing lyrics instead of singing them. In a lot of ways, this is the kind of album that gives "pretentious" music a bad rap, because there are a lot of places where the main thing supporting the ambition is just more ambition, without sufficient substance.

That said, while I still hear a lot of these faults (even if many people would disagree with me about them, which is their perogative), I have to admit that most of these songs have at least something to make me like them. Stop Hurting People sounded absolutely ridiculous to me the first few times I listened to it, what with the recitations and the overabundance of synths, but there is definitely an interesting effect in the song, and the "People stop hurting people" chorus (and even the main synthesizer riff) is quite entrancing. And so it goes with most of these songs. I still find Stardom in Acton rather dull from start to finish, and a couple of others don't thrill me, but I'm fond of a lot of these songs. The Sea Refuses No River is a total callback to Quad, not just in the style and in the melodic guitar work, but also in the imagery of water as a symbol of the self. Prelude is a pleasant throwaway, but while Face Dances Part 2 starts sounding like the dumbest, plinkiest track ever, the parts that go, "I can only stare, you make me feel, like I don't care" are freaking gorgeous.

Exquisitely Bored is aptly titled, but not because it's boring itself; rather, it's because the feel of the song strongly conjures up what it feels like, well, to be sitting around bored out of your mind. Communication is a messy-as-hell track, but it's a case where the messiness becomes so INSANE (how else to describe Pete's "comma comma comma comma" warblings) that it really becomes involving. Uniforms (Corps D'Esprit) has a rather moving chorus (it's a little dull otherwise, but you can't have everything), North Country Girl is a welcome change of pace from the rest of the album (it's a traditional folk song kinda shoehorned into the 80's feel of the rest of the album, but even a little traditional folk is useful here), and Somebody Saved Me ... well, I like it more than I used to. It's a full-out "confessional" ballad, and in some ways it's duller than dirt, but the lyrics are rather moving in places, and I do sorta like the heavenly chorus.

The big highlight, though, is most definitely the closer. Slit Skirts is simply one of the best expressions of the frustrations of getting old that I can possibly imagine. I used to feel a little unsettled by the striking opposition between the non-metric rantings of the verses and the incredibly catchy and resonant chorus, but over the years I've come to think that the two really emphasize the power of the other. The lyrics are really good (especially in the verse that ends with "and it's she who has to beg"), and the seven second guitar solo near the end is the album's best testament to Pete's low-key mastery of his instrument.

In the end, though, while I basically like most of the songs, I find this album is well less than the sum of its parts. I much prefer to listen to these songs individually than to hear them in context, and I definitely suspect that's the opposite of what Pete intended. Still, if somebody really liked Empty Glass, they'd probably like this at least somewhat, if only for Slit Skirts. Tread with caution, though.

Send me your thoughts

Brian Meyer (brimeyerhofer@hotmail.com) (6/25/02)

Ok, i'll be the one to step to the plate for ATBCHCE.  one of the best solo records by a modern musician.  that's all...

  alright, the spoken word stuff does seem odd, especially at first, but when you delve into it, it totally captures pete's thoughts and colors in a new and amazing way. 

  track by track, and i don't have the album handy by the way, People Stop Hurting People is a good starter because it gets the spoken stuff right up front to let the listener know this is different.  It also embodies the style and slant from the lyrical and message viewpoint.  I tend to take a broader stance about the message whereas pete drives from the personal perspective.  all in all the track mainly sets up...

  The Sea Refuses No River. 

  Just read the title, that's a thing of beauty in itself.

  Like most great songs this one comes and goes for about 4 plays,  and then one day, when you least expect it bam! brilliant! how could i've missed this! catharsis!  ok you get the idea...Pete released a new live version in 2001 and he omits the best line...he knows how to keep us wanting...

  Prelude could be pete's most beautiful soft song.   Again, in the right time at the right place, this can send you...

  Face Dances takes the tempo up and i thought the video was neat, but the audio is the thing...

  back down with Bored in CA...which sets up...

  Communication,  didn't read much of what you said on this except for the insane thing, which this song is only partially, comma, comma comma, reminds of course of Generation except it's a nervous pete trying to comm comm communicate?  or is it something else, community?  commas as in punctuation? word play galore here...

Stardom brings back the energy and the anger..cheesiness in the sound? have you heard the cd? what a band, it's the big country clan, stewert RIP... 

  Uniforms is a gem, i saw a video of this one with pete as a waiter in uniform, another gem.   get the guy some new cloths.

  NC girl, pete does Dylan's version on his recent live stuff, much better, but it does set up....

  Somebody Saved Me. Pete's homage to Keith, ostensibly, what more can be said...

  Slit Skirts line "there must be something learned' is transcendental to those inspired by Pete....and we finally get a guitar solo only to be faded out, put on live "sparks" quick!

  anyway, read your review, and calling Saved shamefully dull means you've missed the style of the record.   I liked your analysis of Slit Skirts and i think Pete is trying to deliberate mix and contrast on this record, poetry and music, intellect and impulse, exuberence with wisdom, i could go on and on, let me know if i should, definately one needs to take their time with this one.  When the 999th time of Baba is getting stale, it's time to turn to this one...

---

It's Hard - 1982 MCA
4 (7)

Best song: Emminence Front

Ugh. Chinese Eyes wasn't a perfect album, but it showed that Pete still had both some creative spunk and some strong songwriting abilities. I kinda suspect that, prior to release, there were many hardcore fans anxiously awaiting this album, hoping for a comeback. BOY were they probably disappointed.

There is one great song on here, and it clearly better belongs on a solo Townshend album than on here. Emminence Front is no less than an 80's classic, and it's a song that would have never worked with Roger singing or (dare I blaspheme) Keith drumming. The jazzy synth loop, the popping basslines, the simple guitar lines and the robotic (in a good way) drumming combine with Pete's singing into a song that shows a man just completely tired of life, and the effect is amazing. It used to strike me as rather average, but I now think it's incredibly powerful, and there's a surprising amount of depth in the sound that can only be uncovered with good speakers or headphones.

Too bad none of the other songs come close. A lot of it actually kinda sounds like classic Who, if you disregard the unexciting drumming, but it's a boring, stiff, uninspired version of the band. Roger sounds closer to his classic style here than on Face Dances, but his efforts are wasted on really bland lyrics and melodies, and the effect is bad. Hearing Roger belt out "People are suffering! I'll say it again. People are suffering! I'll say it again," in a completely earnest way, like he was singing something off Quadrophenia, makes me fidget every time, and the album is full of instances like that. The title track starts off with a really moving guitar line, but by the time the chorus comes around, with Roger bellowing, "It's hard! It's really really really really haaaard!!!" while Pete awkwardly harmonizes, I just want the song over. Roger does a decent enough job with I've Known No War, but again, he just can't save an overlong, underwritten bore like this. Why Did I Fall for That almost sounds like the theme song of an early 80's sitcom, and A Man is a Man, aside from one interesting part in the middle, just goes in one ear and out the other. Add in that John's three songs are all easily disposable (the last one, One at a Time, is a little better written than the others, but then again it also features John singing, and he sounds no better here than on The Quiet One), and that there are some other boring songs on here, and it's no wonder I give this a low rating.

Still, there are a couple of songs other than Emminence Front that are worth keeping. I used to hate the opening Athena, but other than the "she's a bomb!" exclamations from Pete in the chorus, I find the song kinda fun. Roger's singing suits the song decently, there are well-placed horn parts, and Pete's "She's just a girl just a girrrrrl" interlude, as underwritten lyrically as it may be, has some quiet emotional dignity to it. I'm also increasingly fond of the closing Cry If You Want, which shows the band essentially doing a war march. The main hook of the verses, the frantic way in which Roger sings the verses, is basically lifted directly from Communication on Chinese Eyes, giving strong credence to the idea of It's Hard just being rejected material from Pete's solo albums, but the band does a good job with what it's been given. Roger provides just the right amount of grit in his singing, and Pete's repeated "oooooooooooooooh cry if you want" is a pretty decent hook in the end.

While I like this album more than I used to, I still find it kinda pathetic and sad. Let me best explain my feelings about it using a personal analogy: when I was a teenager, my family had a dog, a miniature schnauzer named Chester, who I loved to death. He was the stupidest dog who ever lived (he would bark at snow), but he was a playful, energetic pile of love and fur. I missed much of his life because I was off living in school dormitories, first in high school (at IMSA) and then in college (at UIUC), but when I could come home he was always delighted to see me, and I him. Anyway, in 2003, when he was 10 and I was off in Berkeley for graduate school, I found out that he had been mauled by a pit-bull in the neighborhood, to the point that part of his scalp had been ripped off and there was brain tissue exposed. Well, he was stitched up, but it ended up weakening him considerably. Soon after I graduated in spring of 2004, his health had become so poor that he would need to be put down. I came to visit my parents on his last weekend alive, so I could spend time with him. By this point, his vision was clouding over (his peripheral vision was totally shot), his sense of smell was pretty much gone, his stomach was slightly distended (from the gas building up from putrification, meaning his liver and kidneys had stopped functioning, which was why he was being put down), and he was more lethargic than I'd ever seen him. He was so tired by the end that he couldn't make it up the single step from the garage to the door into the house on his own. I loved him, and he loved me, but he had to be put down.

This album, as far I'm concerned, is the aural equivalent of my dying dog. Some goodness left, but encased in a body that just couldn't function at a top level anymore. After a farewell live tour (ha), Pete had the good sense to break up the band, at least until Roger and John needed money.

Send me your thoughts

Thought09@aol.com

The thing is, the who of face dances and it's hard is a completely different band, not literally, but pretty much...It's not the WHO!!! it's the who. Pete's songwriting was 360 degrees from what he was writing back in the days of tommy and who's next. Instrumentally, these tracks just don't have the sonic glory of days past, but they are still better than the other shit that came out around that time. Pete's life was in a low ebb during this era and the sadness is reflected in the tunes...I still consider these fairly good albums to listen to....it's just not THE WHO. ages from live at leeds

Eric B. (sonicdeath10@hotmail.com) (11/09/03)

why don't i hate this album? not sure.it was one of the first who albums i got (hey it was one of hte only one's available to me). it can be hard to listen to some times (hehe!) but it's not THAT bad. a 6 or 7 really. i think the main advantage i have is that roger's voice doesn't annoy me like it does you on this album. so my enjoyment is helped.

davepas136@comcast.net (03/12/06)

you can't dismaiss the who's last 2 albums as easily as you did...

  i've known no war---great
cook's county---good
cache cache---good
daily records---fun
why did i fall for that---fun
a man is a man---great, sounds like who by numbers material, it is great hearing townsend and daltrey singing together
cry if you want---great
how can you do it alone---feel is great, melody is great, vocals a bit silly but not to bad

    ps i don't remember seeing townsends solo albumn iron man... although it is a crappy albumn one of his greatest melodys appear on the song 'is their life'... great song

---

White City (Pete Townshend) - 1985 Atco
7 (10)

Best song: Give Blood

Send me your thoughts

---

Join Together - 1990 MCA
7 (11)

Best song: Love Reign O'er Me

An alarmingly enjoyable late-period reunion live album. By most tenents of logic, this 2-cd set should utterly suck like few things can. Daltrey and Entwistle needed money; Pete didn't really want to do it but decided to take the opportunity to use it to prop up his solo career, not to mention that he was half-deaf by this time (which is why he's mostly relegated to acoustic guitar); there's tons of backing musicians, including two drummers, a horn section, a keyboardist and a small choir (not to mention some random yutz playing electric guitar, contributing metallish lines where once was regular hard-rock crunch). Yup, everything was in place to make this the most excruciating two-hours imaginable, and yet this doesn't happen.

The division of material places a complete Tommy performance on the first CD, with other material from the band's past (as well as some Pete solo cuts) on the second CD. Now, I've never seen video footage of the Tommy shows, so maybe there was something about the visuals that cause people to seriously groan about this (not to mention that the big-band feel makes it more like the musical version than the good ole rock opera), but I have a hard time disliking this performance. I would never say that what we have here is better than Wight, but just because this adaptation of Tommy is worse than in the early 70's doesn't mean it's bad.

Indeed, one may dislike the addition of other players (I believe that Pete jokingly referred to this tour as "The Who on ice" because of this factor) but the fact is the performances are just plain good. Daltrey's vocals have aged slightly, but they're unquestionably still as effective in this performance as they were back in the early 70's (just taking on a slightly different character). One may also gripe about the slightly metallish feel to the guitar work, but hey, Pete's playing on Wight was easily "proto-metallic," so this really just takes the next logical step. Add in that Pete's acoustic playing has seemingly only gotten better with time (have you EVER heard somebody strum as fast as he does during his short spotlight in Overture?), and you have a perfectly enjoyable experience. And of course, there's John - the basslines here (as well as during the rest of the album), especially during Sparks, are utterly MINDBLOWING in their hard-rock-groove intensity. And hey, the drumming isn't Keith, but it's not like it gets in the way or anything.

The second disc is also surprisingly good, mainly because it doesn't even pretend to be a greatest hits package. Sure, sure, Behind Blue Eyes and Won't Get Fooled Again make appearances at the end (Pete even plays electric on the last one), and the rousing performance of Love Reign O'er Me distinguishes itself as the best track on the whole package, but the rest is hardly predictable. 4 solo tunes (Face the Face from White City, Rough Boys and A Little is Enough from Empty Glass, and an actual Who song from Iron Man in Dig), an all-but-solo-tune (Emminence Front), and a bunch of tunes otherwise unavailable live. I Can See For Miles isn't as impressive as the stunning original, but both 5:15 and Trick of the Light work well in this setting (thanks to the big band in the former and the metallish guitar and killer basslines in the latter), while the rare Join Together and the clever You Better You Bet come across just fine live.

In short, if any major problem can be conjured for this release, it's that it's not really "essential" from the standpoint of being revelatory. Everything here is good, but with some exceptions (like Sparks and Dig) nothing really overshadows what came before. But really, that's fine - this is a good live album, and one that the band shouldn't really be ashamed of. Even if many fans seem to think otherwise.

Send me your thoughts

---

The BBC Sessions - 2000 MCA
7 (10)

Best song: Relay

Send me your thoughts

---

Endless Wire - 2006 Universal
7 (10)

Best song: It's Not Enough, maybe

Send me your thoughts

---

Rarities 1966-1972 Vol. I & II - 1991 MCA
8 (12)

Best song: uh

Send me your thoughts

The band's unofficial official website

Back to the main page