What do you think of The Who?
I like them, but they are hard to love.
They were one of the top tier singles acts in the peak ’64-’68 UK pop period. But realistically, for every earth-shaking hit (My Generation, I Can See For Miles) there is at least one equal and opposite mis-step (Happy Jack, Boris the Spider). I don’t see them as consistent as the Kinks or the Stones in that period, for example.
Tommy in 1969 was a line in the sand, a grand statement of the intention to move from pop to rock. Not just rock, but overblown, progressive, theatrical rock. I like it and still listen to it from time to time, but it’s hampered by too many patchy filler songs and outright Freudian weirdness, making it an uneasy listen.
Live at Leeds was another line in the sand, an attempt to show they could rock just as hard as Zeppelin and the rising heavy bands. It’s the album of theirs I dip into the most (the full length version, not the original single LP), but despite it being a great performance it feels stylistically like they are all over the place, neither blues nor pop nor prog… they don’t seem to be sure what exactly they are. But I concede maybe that’s a strength and not a weakness, diversity instead of a pigeonhole.
After that, from the ’70s onward, they started getting too smooth and too “soft rock” for my tastes, although I realise that’s a big broom I’m using and there are undeniably standout anthems like Won’t Get Fooled Again and Love Reign O’er Me.
Somewhat controversially perhaps, I would say they were pretty much done by ’73. Since then. post-Quadrophenia, I feel they have been solidly heritage rock and have been retreading the same old ground. Going back to the Stones and Kinks comparison, it’s notable that they didn’t have a successful late period disco anthem like Miss You, nor an ’80s pop hit like Come Dancing.
No doubt there are Who aficionados on here who would argue for the merits of their post-’73 period, which is fair enough. I’d be interested to know if you think I am missing something.
On top of all that, I think their overall oddness is something I find hard to relate to. Keith Moon was crazy. Roger Daltrey seems like a nice chap but there has always been a faint naffness about him: unlike other great rock frontmen like Plant, Jagger, Morrison, etc, I CAN picture him in a 9-5 job, a bus conductor or welder or something. Pete Townsend is, by his own admission I think, a strange fish: and not in a weird, compelling, rock star way like Bowie or Syd Barrett, more just like someone you would avoid in the street and wouldn’t trust to look after your pets while you are on holiday. And John Entwhistle was an enigma.
Plus they are all pug ugly.
There is an idea of a Arthur Cowslip; some kind of abstraction. But there is no real Arthur: only an entity, something illusory. And though he can hide his cold gaze, and you can shake his hand and feel flesh gripping yours and maybe you can even sense your lifestyles are probably comparable… he simply is not there.
I had to google that. I actually really enjoyed the rock criticism sections of American Psycho!
š
First album (My Generation) is basically the live set, second album (A Quick One) is patchy.
Third album (Who Sell Out) is where the move from singles to albums (and possibly pretentiousness) started.
Tommy, Who’s Next, Quadrophenia – a very special 3 album run. If someone asks “Who is Who”, play em these 3.
After that though, Pete’s obsession with Lifehouse and Brandy clouded things a bit – Who By Numbers and Who Are You are good albums, but lack a bit of spark.
They probably knew the game was up in 77/78 when they started The Kids Are Alright project – delve back into the past and draw a line.
After Keith’s death (and probably mounting debt in the band) they continued with Kenney Jones (a great drummer, but not a Who drummer).
Face Dances and It’s Hard are very contractual obligation, but did contain an 80s hit in the shape of You Better You Bet. I think they knew the game was up though and put out a last Live album in 1984.
But they couldn’t stay away (plus big event tours gave John Entwhistle an income when he ran out of cash).
When new stuff did surface (Endless Wire), the old “a couple of fine songs mixed with filler and Pete’s seemingly unresolved concept” was on show.
Having said that, 2019s WHO is a pretty good listen
I’m not familiar with You Better You Bet, which is why I was of the impression they hadn’t had any 80s success. Is it any good or is it total moon sausage (c. Backwards7)?
Here you go – it’s not a duffer by any means, and a worthy addition to the cannon.
Kenney’s drums are right for this song though
Strange that @Arthur-Cowslip doesn’t know that, Was a big hit (and almost the only thing of worth to come from that album or after that album)
The name does ring a bell actually, but honestly that has totally passed me by until today.
Listening to it now, it’s kind of okay. If I was a big Who fan I would probably be fairly happy with that in the ’80s, as proof to some extent they have still “got it”.
Maybe just me, but in blind listening test if you had told me that was Meatloaf, I would have believed you.
Hmmm, well the lyrics are not “Steinmanesque” by any means.
I confess I didn’t listen to the lyrics really! More the production and the vocal style.
You Better You Bet” sounds like a track from Pete’s solo album “Empty Glass”. A record far better than any of the Who’s albums after Quadrophenia.
Agree that they were all done after ” Quadrophrenia”. But I think that’s true of many of the classic 70s bands and artists. Seems to me that a decade of an act is the natural life course unless they take new directions. If they are still doing the same-old same-old, it becomes, well, “samey”.
Yeah, very true.
Like them less than I used to, but in recent years have found more worth in their music again.
Prefer the original Live at Leeds myself, Tommy is way overrated and way over played. Still like it a bit, but prefer Sell Out, Leeds and Next. Townshend’s solo albums Empty Glass and …Chinese Eyes were superb. Quadrophenia grew on me and the live performance I saw with “The Two” 10 years ago was magnificent
First big live act I ever saw when I was 18 (without Moon), there will always be a place in my heart for them even though Townshend is a complete tosser, read his book and went off him for about 5 years
Buried Treasure – Rough Mix, wonderful album
John Hiatt’s wonderful dig at Pete Townshend’s outrageous smashing guitars shenanigans.
The thuggery of The Who was an ugly part of them, especially given PT makes out he’s such a bleeding heart. Same follows for all the other rock persons smashing kit up (Deep Purple), being “tough” (Sid Vicious waving a bike chain round, etc), trying to appropriate gang violence, etc. Tossers. At least Alice Cooper gets punished for it.
Meaty Beaty Big And Bouncy is one of the very few greatest hits collections that sounds like a greatest album.
After decades of half-hearted trying, I gave up on Tommy.
After decades of wilfully ignoring it, I love Quadrophenia, for the sound and the playing – the melodies don’t really register, but the chords do, and Moon’s drumming never sounded so fucking carnivorous.
Better than the Beatles, anyway.
I think Tommy is probably best represented in shortened live segments, like their turn at Woodstock.
I’ve got a greatest hits, The Story of The Who, where side three is entirely taken up by a run of songs from Tommy. It’s actually a really nice little condensed version of the album and I’d be hard pressed to name anything critical that is actually missing:
– Amazing Journey
– The Acid Queen
– Do You Think It’s Alright?
– Fiddle About
– Pinball Wizard
– I’m Free
– Tommy’s Holiday Camp
– We’re Not Gonna Take It
Good call, probably don’t need “Fiddle About” though, we just need to know it exists.
You could actually break Tommy down into a little 15 minute medley like A Quick One and it would sound fab.
Gosh I can agree with just about every word of this.
Always preferred them as a pop singles band, from the days before rock and pop got separated, so MBB&B is just perfect.
I’ve never taken to Tommy. Overblown with only a few properly-good tracks on it.
The Who Sell Out has never really grabbed me, though there’s some excitement there.
Live At Leeds[*], Who’s Next and Quadrophenia are good albums.
After that? Nah…
[*] The extended version is an improvement on an already-good album. The live Tommy that was packaged with it is no real improvement on the original.
I can definitely picture the young Daltrey as a bus conductor. Or a car mechanic.
Tommy is part of the extended Live at Leeds, there have been 3 (or even 4) different versions. I prefer the original 6 track album, all killer, no filler!
I think the Tommy songs on Live at Leeds are way better than the studio versions which sound hopelessly weedy. I don’t think I ever liked Tommy until I heard the live stuff.
Strange coincidence but I was thinking of posting something similar yesterday and this am.
For me they made two very good albums Who’s Next and Live at Leeds and a couple of very good singles – really love Squeezebox and I can See for miles. Tommy had its moments and I wanted to love Quadrophenia but there ain’t many tunes on it are there?
I don’t really like Townsends guitar playing that much except on Live at Leeds.
I like some of his acoustic strumming stuff on Tommy – he has a very unique feel I think. Live At Leeds seems to me to be very much about Townsend saying “Look! I can play like those other guys as well!”, and yes it has some great chunky riffing and “solos” on it.
Rog in a 9 to 5 job – he started as a sheet metal worker and Hammersmith Hardnut.
Sacked from The Who for fighting – allowed back on the condition he keep his fists in his pockets.
Iāve heard just about everything officially released – but the only ones I own and listen to are:
Meaty Beaty Big and Bouncy
Live at Leeds
Whoās Next
Erā¦
Thatās it.
Had a rummage this afternoon, I’ve also got Odds ‘n’ Sods (not a bad collection, actually) – but no rock operas, and no regular non-comp albums after Next.
Their highs are very high, and their lows are unfathomably low. Who’s Next is the definitive Classic Rock album, even though several songs have been flogged to death. Live at Leeds is the definitive Live Rock album, especially in its original stripped-down form. A good Best Of will capture the rest adequately. Meaty, Beaty etc is fantastic, if you don’t mind missing out on the four or five tracks post Who’s Next worth having.
Tommy and Quadrophenia are embarrassing cod stage-musical tosh, apart from a couple of great tracks on each. This exposes the weakness in The Who: they were a great pop/rock band helmed by someone who thought that writing great pop/rock songs was a waste of his talents. As mentioned by Dai, Rough Mix with Ronnie Lane is his best work post Who’s Next.
They were the first grown up band I loved, but came to them too late to see them live in their prime. Stylistically Live At Leeds (expanded) is all over the place, but I think that’s precisely the point about them. They kept veering from hard rock to power pop, prog and back.
There’s an inbuilt tension in Townshend’s soul-baring and off-the-wall writing and the band’s direct delivery, especially the way Daltrey simply pushes on through, regardless of the subject matter.
They were less prolific than other bands of the period and even their best albums don’t contain the best songs they wrote, or recorded, contemporaneously (eg Who’s Next).
Their music’s ingrained in me because I’ve listened to it since 1975. By Numbers is my favourite album (it demonstrates that contradiction between subject matter and performance perfectly), and
I think the late-period It’s Hard is actually underrated. Not convinced by their 21st century albums at all though.
Oh, and I absolutely agree that the Townshend/Lane Rough Mix album is a hidden gem.
Nothing wrong with Happy Jack, like proto Britpop but in a good way. Not mad about Daltrey as a singer. Too straight somehow. Other frontmen took more risks in their approach. It’s competent but there’s no abandon.
Live At Leeds seems pretty consistent in style. It’s got a raw, noisy intensity that you don’t get on studio albums. I might even go so far as to say incendiary guitar, which does it for me. It’s like Roger Walters, these people get hung up on important things to say about life and feelings but that’s not what makes the records good. It’s the sounds and noise, and groove.
Agree. Happy Jack is great, I like all the 60s/early 70s singles, most of which didn’t end up on albums. I think Daltrey came into his own as a singer in the 70s.
Happy Jack is wonderful and probably Keith Moon’s greatest drumming effort.
Interesting that they get pegged as dislikeable whereas the Stones get a free(r) pass despite Jagger, Wyman and Richards’ collective behaviour being as awful a collection of acts as theirs. Maybe they missed out on having a National Treasure like Charlie as counterbalance.
Agree with most of the above. Who’s Next is the only album to really knock it out the park. A band of great tracks, not all singles. Despite their inconsistency can enjoy the first and second albums, Quadrophenia and Who By Numbers. Tommy is a chore though
I donāt mind them. A few great songs. Wouldnāt go out of my way. Bit stodgy. Fathers to all later stodge-rock.
I think theyāre probably quite a bellwether band in that being a big Who fan is likely to reliably predict other tastes.
Ooh, an interesting theory! I like it. What “other tastes” do you mean in particular? Care to elaborate?
No thoughts, just vibes. I suppose if I were to try to sum it up, Iād guess a Who fan would also own a lot of Zeppelin, Little Feat, Pink Floyd, early Yes, Traffic, white electric blues of the Ealing persuasion, and at least one Humble Pie record.
Oh wait. Iāve just described David Hepworth, havenāt I? Yes. Heās basically what I mean.
I consider myself a Who fan:
Led Zep : Nope
Little Feat : Nope
Pink Floyd : somewhat
Yes : Nope
Traffic : a little
Humble Pie: Nope
I can play “Afterword True Confessions”!
The Who : Mostly boring
Led Zep : Mostly boring
Little Feat : Never heard anything by them
Pink Floyd : Best band ever
Yes : Mostly boring
Traffic : Only know Hole In My Shoe (I like Paul Weller’s Wild Wood though)
Humble Pie: Never heard anything by them
You like Floyd and have never heard any Feat. I honestly don’t know why Enrico stays with you (apart from the money, the honey and the bathing in milk)
Enrico the pool boy most certainly does not stay with me. I’m given to understand that he lives in some sort of underground hovel or something. Might be at the end of my garden, not sure.
I’ve seen Feat pop up on here a few times. I might have even given them a few seconds’ worth of my valuable ear time. They sort of reek of OGWT to me. Times have changed. I’m into beat-based drivel right now.
Spooky coincidence, I’ve just recently purchased a pair, no kidding. Bloody expensive they were too and the worst thing is I haven’t been arsed to wear them. A total waste of money so far. I should demand my money back. Also, they give a sort of metally sound (seen Sound of Metal? Not as bad as that) and anyway, most of the time I’m not much interested in hearing what’s going on.
An interesting thread idea this, I think. Name three acts you like and see if people can predict your taste in other music! I’ve save that for a future thread unless someone else posts it first.
*EDIT – ah screw it, I’ll post it now and risk the wrath of the mods for over-posting *
* EDIT EDIT – “Wrath of the Mods” – ooooh I like that title. Sounds a bit like a Who concept album.
I liked all of those combos between the ages of fifteen to eighteen and I have in recent years listened to a few of them again during the occasional bout of nostalgia just to see if they still held any interest for me.
In short none of them did.
Not. A. Single. One.
That’s part of me that is. Apart from the Little Feat.
I also like lots of other things as well!
I’ve always considered Daltrey’s voice to be a weak link or I would probably have enjoyed more of them. No emotional range, to my ears, ruling them out as really top flight.
The Lambert and Stamp film is a useful angle if, as I do, you hate Townshend, Brexit Rog and Entwistle, but have time for the other three.
I only covet one release, a collection of As and Bs from Zoot Suit to Pinball Wizard (see also: Sainted Dave), but I am not buying a 5-cd box set to satisfy this need.
Following a recent cull, only My Generation, Rarities and a 4-track EP bonus CD from a hits collection still reside on the shelf.
Meaty, Beaty Big & Bouncy was always their best singles compilation, and contains a version of I’m A Boy that doesn’t seem to be available anywhere else.
Introduced to them via Woodstock. At 14 they were simply stunning. Thrn onto Leeds etc.
only recently did I backtrack to their earlier work via a BBC sessions disc. Having the house to myself I cranked it and lo and behold they were really clever and quite individual singles they were putting out.
I know very little of The Who so my contribution in my best Partridge voice is….
The Jam, the band The Who could have been..
Actually I’ve just had a flashback to my brother owning Who Are You and being ridiculously excited by the “Aagh, who the fuck are you” line…
A great song
Recorded the day after Moonie carked it, as I recall.
Their version of Disguises was good too.
The Jam had the Batman Theme on their debut too – part of their live set but a debt to The Who as well.
Jam’s first single also nicked the title from a track off A Quick One.
Paolo Hewitt organised a meeting and interview with Pete Townshend and Paul Weller for Melody Maker in 1980 – under the title The Punk and The Godfather.
Good natured, but fair to say they didn’t truly get on and no lasting friendship was forged
Unlucky he never coined the term “the modfather” or he could have got in there over a decade early. Ironic that Weller himself ended up with that title.
I witnessed them live at Liverpool University in May 1971. On record their output is very patchy as others above have already mentioned but live they were a force of nature. Incredibly loud, Incredibly kinetic. To this day I’ve never seen any other band/musician work so hard on stage. At the end of a blistering set of almost three hours duration they and us were drenched in sweat and absolutely exhausted.
Tickets were Ā£1.00.
This. Tells you EVERYTHING you need to understand about the ‘oo. A band that were TOTALLY about the DYNAMIC. Rock personified. There has been no band since that could match them for pure adrenalin and commitment. None. No contenders. Nada.
Not even the Bizkit?
Personally, I think they are one of the most overrated bands thereās been. Thatās not to say I donāt like them. They did a few very good songs and one brilliant one, but Iāve always been somewhat bemused by their status. My Generation, I Canāt Explain and Substitute are great, Baba OāReilly is fantastic.
I have all their albums downloaded, but the only ones Iāve felt compelled to buy are WHOās Next (decent album), Live at Leeds (nowhere near the best live album ever!) and a greatest hits comp.
Daltrey has an okay voice, although a tendency to shout as he got older. I donāt like Townshend and cannot see how he got off so lightly from the paedophile episode. He was put on the register, for Godās sake, and had the most ridiculous excuse.
Keith Moon was a character, and reading about his exploits is probably more fun than listening to the music, but I think all this sways people when talking about āgreatest drummersā. Ringo, for example, gets the piss taken out of him, mainly because he wasnāt as talented as his ridiculously talented band mates, but heās far better than Keith Moon.
The Ox, however, was brilliant. One of the greatest rock bassists.
But as the big 60s British bands go, The Who are miles behind The Beatles, The Stones and The Kinks, and I even like more songs by The Hollies than The Who!
But then again, Iāve just put an Alvin Stardust single on, so what do I know!
You had me until Alvin Stardust.
….AW t-shirt
Hi Paul. This is cobblers.
I drifted off during “overrated”, as meaningless a term as “underrated”. Bands (what we’re talking about here) are neither, they’re just “rated” according to personal taste. “So-and-so are overrated” = “people who like them are wrong because I know better”. And then we typically get the “it’s all subjective, innit” argument, which states that anyone’s opinion is as valid as anyone else’s. And finally, when all hope is lost, we get hit with the “Iāve just put an Alvin Stardust single on, so what do I know!” clincher.
Concise and reflecting my sentiment exactly.
Thank you, Junes!
So much cobblers its hard to know where to begin. This is what I think and it’s right. Nobody serious in music takes the piss out of Ringo. For God’s sake… Cue ‘he’s not even the best drummer in the… ” malarkey. Moon and Ringo are not remotely similar as drummers and both were great in their bands because that’s what musicians do – they play with other musicians.
Townshend got off lightly? What, Paul, did you want to see happen? I’m quite serious. Did you want charges to be brought against him? He was arrested. Placed on a register. Reputation seriously damaged. What did you want to see happen?
I raise this because of the way in which we love to comment on matters about which we have no real idea. I don’t mean offence and I am writing more intensely than I intend but I don’t like the tone of a thread that likes to make judgments about great artists rather than wonder at what it is that the artist was seeking and trying to understand it. Tommy is an embarrassment somebody wrote. I wish I could have such an embarrassment.
For me, the 1969-72 era is the one – the various live documents, the non LP singles, Who’s Next, even Odds & Sods. I’ve always found Quadrophenia a load of stodge and as others have said, Tommy is a bit of a bore – Side 3 of ‘The Story of…’ comp (as said above) dispenses with the clutter.
I like a handful of 1975-78 tracks; never heard the 1980-82 albums; like a couple of the late-period tracks (but in the sense of ‘really wanting to find something to like’).
As a live entity in that golden age around 1970 they were a primal force – bigger than the sum of the parts, with a unique combination of pop / rock / prog / music hall whimsy / sonic attack etc.
Off the stage/in retrospect… Pete takes himself too seriously, Moon’s R&R antics are a bore, John was creepy, Roger’s roar now diminished has no real character to offset it (it’s just a grizzled husk of a roar).
The current with-orchestra tour, where Pete gets to do his thing on guitar for about 8 bars in every third (mercilessly ‘musical director-ed’) number, is utterly pointless on any artistic level. But if they finally got around to released the San Francisco 1971 concert (several tracks having trickled out here and there on comps for years) I’d buy it at once…
I donāt rate them, if itās a matter of the overall longevity of their career measured up against just how many great songs are there in their catalogue.
I imagine their reputation is (still) based to a large extent on them being an awesome & dynamic live act, who were had almost certainly the beefiest sound in the world at the time.
When Iām in the mood the odd track is just what the Dr ordered ( Wonāt Get Fooled Again, Substitute, Canāt Explain for example) but I can barely stick a whole album & avoid the āoperasā like the plague.
I am fond on them & they definitely deserve their place in the pantheon of the original ābigā rock acts, but if Iām honest, I donāt think theyāre all that.
A fabulous live act in their day. That day ended when Kieth Moon died.
I’ve seen them with Moon several times and with Kenny Jones once. Why they got him on board is a mystery to me. Totally unsuitable.
Zack Starky can do a decent impression of Moon, but with more precision and no fun.
Kenny Jones was known to them; he was a professional; he was completely different to Moon; he was available; Townshend liked playing with him ( Daltrey didnāt but after the fact). He might not have worked out for RD but I hope that has helped clear up the complete mystery. He also played on albums with less than top notch songs because they were on Townshend solo albums.
There was also an issue with Daltrey not wanting to pay Jones a share of a signing bonus (I think) shortly after he joined. Itās in Jonesā book.
Thanks for the explanation.
Interesting to hear all these comments about how explosive they were live in their prime.
I would certainly agree in relation to what I’ve seen of them. Their appearance on The Rock and Roll Circus in ’68 and then at Woodstock in ’69 were both stunning, and they really stood out next to their contemporaries. I might be wrong here, but I feel Live at Leeds indicated a bit of a change of sound at the turn of the decade, from a spikey pop sound to more of a heavy rock thing (big Marshall amp distortion, big bass, lots of wailing and roaring by Roger – as I’ve said above, in response I assume to Zeppelin and other heavy groups at that time). Am I wrong? Did they have that same heaviness in the years leading up to that as well?
I think some of that is technical – eg going out with bigger rigs than anyone else (hur) and miking up the drums which still wasn’t standard at the time. The whole band went to eleven.
They were pretty good live when in their prime. I remember seeing them headlining at The Oval and again at Swansea football ground. My big issue with them is that they build up the tension in their songs but rarely ever deliver the final thrust. A prime example is their performance of See Me at Woodstock. Daltrey looks good (especially when compared with some of the ādrippierā acts), Moonās drumming is amazing and so on. However, and unlike dance bands such as The Chemical Brothers, they build but never really hit āthe dropā. For me, itās frustrating. As for their records, I canāt think of one thatās good throughout, despite many highlights. If ever a group were in need of a good āmix tapeā then The Who are top of the list. Btw, at Swansea, Little Feat were the highlight for me. Loved them then, love them still.
Always build up tension but never deliver… I actually remember Noel Gallagher saying a very similar thing, specifically about the song I Can See For Miles. It feels like a verse in search of a chorus: all build up, no release. I thought that was quite an observant comment From Noel.
I wonder who wrote the review where he read it.
Ooooh. (Insert animated gif of that comedy sketch with someone holding up a handbag).
How are we pronouncing “gif”, Cowslip? Your life may depend upon it.
With a hard “g”, but I’m starting to think that’s an over-rated opinion.
Oh. Dear.
I am pretty sure the chorus is quite prominent “I can see for miles and miles etc…”
Noel…
I find it hard to put into words, but I do know what he means. The ‘I can see for miles…’ sounds like it is building to something, a bridge or something, but never reaches it. It doesn’t sound like a climax like a chorus should. I think it’s something to do with the fact the start of the chord progression at that bit (the word’ miles’) doesn’t start on the main root chord of the song.
But the more you think about it, if the chorus did just do that, it would actually sound quite boring, so maybe there’s a bit of genius to it after all.
Thinking of his other tunes, Sparks is a bit like that as well, constantly building to something but never getting there.
I’m starting now to think this is a strength of his songwriting and not a weakness.
I Can See For Miles is my favourite Who single. It dances on a razor’s edge (as somebody once said). Richie Unterberger described it best in Allmusic. Betrayed by a lover, it’s an exercise in controlled rage. The tension is deliberately wound tighter and tighter and never released. The drums are the lead instrument and nothing short of brilliant. Please point me to a better drum performance on a single. The harmonies and guitar soar on the chorus. The key changes rise dramatically in the last verse matching the height of the Eiffel Tower. Daltrey claimed the vocals “shit on The Beach Boys”. In 1967, that was perhaps understandable given that The Beach Boys bare!y troubled the charts that year. The lack of resolution is intentional. Townshend exits stage left still seething. It’s psychedelic with a palpable threat of violence. Paul McCartney was inspired to produce Helter Skelter.
Excellent. Noel’s got no idea. His songs go precisely where you know they will. Mostly dullsville.
I think Pictures Of Lily is also brilliant but not as daring as ICSFM.
Macca inspired to write HS without actually hearing it!
I agree, I think Townshend’s greatest composition, he was (justifiably) annoyed that it didn’t get to no. 1 everywhere
Of course Macca had heard it! He paid close attention to the charts and what the competition was doing. Number ten in late 1967. Helter Skelter written months later in 1968.
No he hadn’t, at least when he got inspired. He read a review about the song being the loudest thing ever or something and then wrote Helter Skelter without hearing it. That’s his story anyway. Of course he heard it after that
Hmm. *raised eyebrow face*
Interesting that Helter Skelter carries a similar sense of threat, has a minimal chorus and the tension builds without resolution until the blisters on the fingers.
“Umm, that came about just ’cause I’d read a review of a record which said, “and this group really got us wild, there’s echo on everything, they’re screaming their heads off.” And I just remember thinking, “Oh, it’d be great to do one. Pity they’ve done it. Must be great ā really screaming record.” And then I heard their record and it was quite straight, and it was very sort of sophisticated. It wasn’t rough and screaming and tape echo at all. So I thought, “Oh well, we’ll do one like that, then.” And I had this song called “Helter Skelter,” which is just a ridiculous song. So we did it like that, ‘cos I like noise”
Talk about damning with faint praise.
Plus they are all pug ugly.
When The Pretty One thread was a going thing, I checked with my big sister, who was a teenager in the 60s; she assured me that pretty or not, Keith Moon was considered quite fanciable by her and her contemporaries.
My ex adored Townshend
How do you feel about him now, then?
People were uglier in the 60s. Apart from Alain Delon. The good looking people don’t seem particularly good looking from a 21st century perspective.
It really depends if you like tattoos going up and around someone’s arse.
As I don’t, it’s the 21st Century wot has the ugs.
Back in London about a decade ago, I had narrowed beauty in women (if Beckham was considered the role model – ALL bets were off with regards to men) down to young Asian women (Indian, Pakistani, traditional tunic-type top, no advertising, with jeans) and older women (60s-upwards).
Now it is Fat Boy J’s Britain and it is made entirely in his image.
As long as it’s not my arse.
Interesting information though. It literally changes everything.
They are the epitome of what my wife calls “bloke bands” – I think you know what I mean here – and I totally agree with her. I have to, she’s my wife etc.
For me the best LP of theirs is when they (basically Townshend) were at their most vulnerable: Who By Numbers has them for the most part shedding the fist-pumping, neck-bulging act, and is a wonderful mix of self-loathing, drunk bombast and heartfelt sentimentalism.
Apart from that, they are are a great act to listen to when I actually want to vent some aggression and ShoutAlongARog.
E2A: it was a review by Tiggerlion that really opened my ears to WBN, so props to you, young man.
Another fan of WBN here. Vulnerable just about nails it.
Probably the last truly great song they did, The title track of Who Are You was in
the same vein.
Only got to see them the once – at Charlton in May 74 – my first āfestivalā albeit only a one-day affair.
I remember it as being pretty good, PT hated it.
Filmed for the BBC and some tracks are still up on YT.
As Dai ans someone else pointed out above, Rough Mix is a lovely little record
No one else has so it seems I am the Designated Aftetworder who really likes the Who Are You LP. I remember I bought a red vinyl copy back from a trip to the USA.
“Never spend your guitar or your pen” . Wise words mate.
Again, Who Are You is an absolute banger. But there’s a lot of mediocre stuff on the album as well.
It’s ok to think of them as a “bloke band” and I kind of agree. But Townshend was arguably the most sensitive songwriter from that era of UK bands and the most “feminine” in many ways. Examples such as I’m a Boy and A Quick One probably about some sort of childhood abuse, Pictures of Lily about masturbation and Happy Jack about bullying. They certainly paint a picture of a confused, sensitive guy which one didn’t really get from The Beatles or The Stones. Probably one gets it too from Ray Davies to some extent, but he hid behind characters more.
Thank you, Mr E.
By Numbers remains my favourite of theirs. It also highlights what a great acoustic guitar player Pete T is, probably only Keef is better. Lord knows he is capable of making a hell of a racket in his power trio but he does so much more with the electricity turned off.
Mmmmmm that’s dangerous talk there. Best acoustic guitar player?? Have you heard of Bert Jansch, Nick Drake, John Fahey, Ralph Mctell, or this guy called Paul McCartney? DONOVAN???
I’ll allow that Pete and Keef are two of the best of a certain school of propulsive, strummy playing. Both have a unique feel to their playing.
I meant in the context of Rock music
(I’d add Paul Simon to your list – pre injury)
Are you threatening to injure me if I don’t add Paul Simon??
He injured his hand badly (I think between Rhymin’ and Crazy). His guitar playing was significantly affected.
I didn’t know that. Makes sense actually. I don’t remember much pickin’ after Rhymin’. More strummin’ after that. What a shame.
Apparently, he fell off a bike (or hurt it playing basketball). There was some calcification in a finger. He tried playing left handed. He contemplated switching to piano.
His guitar playing is a major reason for my love of Paul Simon, the album. Play that, focussing on the guitar, then do the same with Still Crazy. The difference is marked and you will have spent an hour and a quarter listening to two magnificent albums.
Agree with this. A very blokey band. I quite like them and they were awesome when I saw them live.
But you know all their newer fans love Ocean Colour Scene and The Jam. The latter are the modern Who. Some quite good singles, no really good albums
The Jam are very modern, they only split up 40 years ago š¤
“Bloke band?”
I’d be amazed if a neighbour of mine (a 60-year-old white man), who sees everything through the prism of “ZEPPP!!!”, didn’t have The Who as one of his crew, but it would definitely be the Tommy/post-Tommy version.
In 67, I shouldn’t think any more males bought Pictures of Lily than bought See Emily Play, The Wind Cries Mary, or I Can Hear the Grass Grow.
I seem to recall Daltrey commenting that 90% of their audiences were blokes. But I may have got that wrong.
I spent a lot of time listening A Quick One and The Who Sell Out back in the day, since when MBBAB has been all I’ve needed. There are days when I think the best thing about Tommy is Ann Margret writhing around in baked beans and sludge.
I did see them live once in the early 70s. Like Pencil, I was absolutely gobsmacked by their power, not to mention the sheer volume. Made me think there wasn’t much point in listening to the records after that.
You spent a lot of time listening to A Quick One? Really? Pretty much the definitive example of a “patchy” album. In my case I find the title track utterly tedious which doesn’t help. Run Run Run is brilliant though.
Yes, spending a lot of time listening to an album called A Quick One seems to be somewhat paradoxical
If only it lived up to its name and finished after the first three minutes.
LEAVE AN OLD MAN HIS DREAMS FFS. You heartless bastards.
Guys, guysā¦give an old fart a break! We didnāt know any better, ok? Everything sounds good in a haze of dope. Youāre just jealous you werenāt there.
That’s the spirit, Mr. Thep! You give ’em what for!
@mikethep
I may well have been there myself.
The fact that I can’t remember for sure indicates
that I probably was
I plead with you!
LEAVE AN OLD MAN HIS BEANS FFS!
That Ken Russell was a card! I’ve just watched the clip.
Nominated for an Oscar in 1976 but she lost out to Louise Fletcher in Cuckoo’s Nest
“How different, how very different is the home life of our own dear Queen!”
I had a telly like that in the ā70s – the HP shop had to take it away, in the endā¦
You should have got Heinz instead.
….
I SAID YOU SHOULD HAVE oh never mind.
The extended version that came out on CD is much better. And I like title track a lot, but mainly live version
Those extended Who CDs are rare examples of longer = better.
@moose-the-mooche
I agree, especially Who Sell Out. The 1995 CD of Leeds is definitely better than the original, personally I find subsequent complete releases too much. The extras on AQO save it.
HP expected me to say something about knobs here – I’m talking about The Who, so still relevant as far as I ‘m concerned.
Knobs? Why?
…turning things up to eleven?
Just awful. I could live a happy life without ever hearing them again.
We’re talking about the who, not them.
I’ve never heard Them. Who is it we are talking about.
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=nZ5vspsNS1g
The Who somehow seem āimportantā rather than plain great. Pete Townsendās windmill guitar thing, Moonās drumming and Rogās shouty vocals seem to have set the template for what a ārockā band should be – you can easily see their influence over the many groups who followed in subsequent years. And in Animal from the Muppets, obviously.
A band to admire rather than like, I’ve always thought. They’re very good, but surprisingly dull in places. Look at this clip, as good as they ever got, if you ask me – Moon is extraordinary, like nothing before or since. But it’s relentless. Sometimes he and Entwistle could maybe… sort of… shut up a bit.
Those lyrics are at best dodgy!
And the music was shit.
That confirms my opinion that they made some great singles, Who’s Next is their bast album and beyond that I never need to venture anymore.
DVDs on sale on eBay tomorrow!
See, sometimes like this video I think “You know what , I’d rather be in this band than The Beatles”
No. It’s rubbish. And it’s so obviously filler, in the manner of the Stones’ contemporaneous Goin’ Home. “We need a quarter of an album here…”
For some songwriting royalties scam they were supposed to come up with 3 songs each or something, Moon and Daltrey managed one each, Entwistle 2 so Pete had to do the rest (and one cover). So maybe a touch of padding, but the live performance of A Quick One on Rock n Roll Circus is absolutely thrilling. One of the finest live performances ever filmed for me
And thay all got a new car out of it.
Daltrey got an Aston Martin that he lent to a mate when he went on tour. His mate crashed it, and when Rog got it back it was 6 inches shorter.
Moonies Cobwebs and Strange got re-used on Heinz Baked Beans from Who Sell Out
Yes, correction to my post, Moon managed 2
I went to the US for the first time in 1989 and I saw that The Who were playing nearby. I was amazed that they were still a going concern but fellow youngsters from New Jersey were not having that. They said they put on a great show.
Fast forward to 2001 and they are on the bill for the New York concert for firefighters, one month after 9/11. I watched the show for Macca really but ended up really enjoying The Whoās three songs. Amazed they still had it and, watching it again, yes they were magnificent and perfect for that show.
Yes, they were rather patchy and uneven at times. And admittedly they have been living on past glories for rather a while now. I haven’t heard a new song that has made an impression on me in donkeys’ years,
BUUUUUUTTTT!!
In their heyday they produced a series of songs that articulated the feelings of their contemporaries better than anyone: My Generation, Substitute, Won’t Get Fooled Again, Can’t explain….
They made one of the best live rock albums of their era: Live at Leeds.
Tommy and Quadrophenia may be quirky and uneven curate’s eggs. But when they are good , they are excellent. And they both dare to explore areas that were rather new in their day.
And the clincher for me is, in their heyday, there was not a band on the planet who could put on a more exciting show.
P.S.
An unexpected punchline. The first time I was at a Who concert was at the Isle of Wight. It had been a very long day and they came on in the very middle of the night. I took forty winks and woke up to discover to my horror that I’d slept through The Who’s entire set.
That was like waking up on Boxing Day to find out I’d missed Xmas.
As I imagine you’re not going to quote yourself, KFD, allow me:
“In their heyday they produced a series of songs that articulated the feelings of their contemporaries better than anyone.”
That’s it, right there. Direct Hits, untainted by irony or cleverness. Thoughtful lyrics, surprisingly great harmony singing, unmatched power.
A singles band for me. I love a bit of punchy high-energy rock, but I can only take it in small doses.
My Generation LP, Live at Leeds (I have the superb 3LP but mostly play the 1LP edit) and the Hits 50 double LP compo. I have the rest, but barely play them.
With only a dozen albums over 55+ years, you’d hope they would be a bit less patchy.
Cuh. You’d hope the Venus de Milo had more arms, an’ all.
I always wanted to like them more, especially as my mother, watching ToTP with me before they played Pinball Wizard, said how scruffy and dirty they looked. But I couldn’t. Their performances on film: Monterey and Woodstock, offered a promise they couldn’t deliver outside those cherry-picked moments. A few good songs and a handful of great ones do not a world class band make. The early singles, some of Tommy, Who’s Next and some of Quadrophrenia will do nicely. Skip the rest.
Most of you are missing the point. I saw The Who in 1971, 1974 and 1975 with Keith Moon. They were the most exciting and DANGEROUS band on the planet. Ask Abbie Hoffman. Visually spectacular too. A strikingly original sound to boot: it wasn’t until I saw them in person that I realised that huge guitar roar was coming from the bass and not Pete’s guitar. Keith’s drumming was not about keeping time either; he played drums as a lead instrument. He’ll never be equalled. They were all astonishing shows. And that’s the other point – The Who were a live band in excelsis. Tommy is weedy but worked better live. The LP of Live At Leeds is perfection. Less is more here: you just don’t need the full show. I have come to like Quadrophenia much more in recent years – the bass and drums are great. After that? Pfft.
Seen them a few times post Moonie. 1989 was shit, 1996 featured Gary Glitter, 2009 was dull. However I saw a show at the NIA in Brum circa 2001 and they were brilliant – because Pete was angry and the danger came back.
I witnessed Pete and Keith have a real fight in Leicester once. That’s the stuff of rock and roll.
PS I saw Led Zeppelin in their prime too. They were great, but they weren’t DANGEROUS!
Well said, Artery! Most modern rock bands are about as dangerous as the Teletubbies.
A few honourable exceptions. I don’t think I’d want to meet Rammstein in dark alley in Hamburg. And Slipknot are truly terrifying. It as though the Gates of Hell have swung open and pandemonium has broken out.
I clutched my Bible to my chest and prayed to the Lord for forgiveness.
I saw The Who at the Lyceum Ballroom back in the day. Ian Dury and Kilburn and the High Roads were the support act. All very civilised.
But then when The Who dashed onto the stage and launched into Can’t Explain, the whole audience went bananas. I have never been so terrified at a concert.. After three songs, they stopped completely and Daltrey suggested we all cooled down just a little.
“Then maybe we can get through the gig without too any fatalities!”
It worked.
I am seething with jealousy. Never saw them live.
Tommy is the classic case of a double LP that would be better as a single. The single is called Pinball Wizard.
Same is true of Quadrophenia, the single being 5:15
Quadrophenia isn’t really about songs, and that’s why it’s not well-liked. It clicked for me when I just let it (like the ocean) wash over me. The sound and the playing (the dynamics, if you lke) are everything Tommy lacked – it’s epic. Can’t you enjoy an album unbursting with hummable melodies? I can think of a good few that I return to.
I listen to a lot of tuneless albums. I do actually enjoy Quadrophrenia now and then. When I can get the images of Sting out of my head. Tommy annoys me because it is insultingly weedy in sound for such a powerful rhythm section.
The live rendition of Tommy on the extended Live At Leeds sorts the weedy sound issue out.
Why not, HP? They hardly confined themselves to short tours in tiny venues. I’ve seen them three times and I wouldn’t describe myself as an enthusiast. (They were phenomenal each time.)
Why haven’t I seen them? I haven’t been to that many gigs, that’s why. The list of bands I haven’t seen is shamingly long. But I did see your Beetles, Hendrix, Pink Floyd with Syd (and a few others), so I have no complaints.
Ladies & Gentlemen
I was turning out my attic and, notwithstanding my comments further up the thread, I found a CD copy of Quadrophenia, out of its box and in a plastic file.
If anybody wants it, just PM me – first come first served. I might request that you give a donation to your local hospice but, apart from that, it’s a freebie!
(@Mods: if you are in any way unhappy with this post, please delete it, thanks)
Not a tickle, 10 days laterā¦
I assume those who like it already have it – and those who donāt like it wouldnāt even have it as a nominal freebie. There used to be a third group: those who hadnāt heard it and were curious – this group no longer exist – due to Spotify, ver Tube and streaming in general.
I remember the first time I heard VdGG – I had read an interview with them in Sounds (Geoff Barton). I had no idea what they sounded like and no-one I knew had either heard them or, indeed, heard of them. I was curious enough, based on what Iād read, to buy a copy of Still Life and – eureka! – I found what would turn out to be my favourite band of all timeā¦what if Iād bought MM that weekā¦
..sorry, Proustian rush, nothing to do with the āOrrible āOo ā¦
My considered opinion is all you need is a best of with the singles and “Who’s Next”. Roger Daltry is a brilliant singer and front man though, never better than here:
Up to a point, Iād agree with this – but Iād want to add Live at Leeds; and Odds & Sodsā¦
Fair points.
And The Who Sell Out
You might, dai – I wouldnātā¦
Well, Iām going to go against the general direction of this thread – they are one of my top bands of all time. First saw them live in 1966, and Iāve probably seen them more than any band. The last occasion was the Royal Albert Hall on the 50th anniversary and they were still astoundingly good. No other band has ever given me that visceral experience. However, it is true that there isnāt a great, or even very good, album after Quadrophenia, but the albums in the period from Sell Out through to that are all essential. Daltrey has become irritating, and Townsendās insistent habit of over intellectualising everything has become tiresome, but I try to ignore that as I love the records! And yes, that includes Tommy, although the subsequently released Leeds version beats the original – I think that particular album (like Pepper) is far more favoured by people who were there at the time rather than by those listening retrospectively.
So many have become irritating and tiresome. Something that seems to come with age. Why must they all get so grumpy and reactionary?
Afterword t-shirt.
Daltrey was always grumpy and reactionary. Why must we always associate that with old age?
ā”This.
Same as the old bastard.
Good on yer, Nigelā¦
The Who’s main problem is that they are a completely different band live, as compared to in the studio. The first Who album I bought was ‘Meaty, Beaty, Big & Bouncy’, a great collection of their singles. When I bought ‘Live At Leeds’, they blew me away. The extended live version of ‘My Generation’ alone convinced me they were a great band. “Quadrophenia’ is their masterpiece. I listened to it again the other day and it again blew me away. The performance from the whole band on that album is magnificent.
I saw them live twice, at the Empire Pool and at Charlton Athletic football ground (the soaking wet rainy version). They were brilliant on both occasions. Then there’s that 20th century anthem ‘Won’t Get Fooled Again’, which is as relevant now as it ever was. The Who boring? Never in a million years – if you think that, then you’ve not been paying attention. You’ve not been listening.
Won’t Get Fooled Again
We’ll be fighting in the streets
With our children at our feet
And the morals that they worship will be gone
And the men who spurred us on
Sit in judgement of all wrong
They decide and the shotgun sings the song
I’ll tip my hat to the new Constitution
Take a bow for the new revolution
Smile and grin at the change all around
Pick up my guitar and play
Just like yesterday
Then I’ll get on my knees and pray
We don’t get fooled again
A change, it had to come
We knew it all along
We were liberated from the fold, that’s all
And the world looks just the same
And history ain’t changed
‘Cause the banners, they all flown in the last war
I’ll tip my hat to the new Constitution
Take a bow for the new revolution
Smile and grin at the change all around
Pick up my guitar and play
Just like yesterday
Then I’ll get on my knees and pray
We don’t get fooled again, no, no
I’ll move myself and my family aside
If we happen to be left half-alive
I’ll get all my papers and smile at the sky
For I know that the hypnotized never lie
Do you?
Yeah
There’s nothing in the street
Looks any different to me
And the slogans are effaced, by-the-bye
And the parting on the left
Is now parting on the right
And the beards have all grown longer overnight
I’ll tip my hat to the new Constitution
Take a bow for the new revolution
Smile and grin at the change all around
Pick up my guitar and play
Just like yesterday
Then I’ll get on my knees and pray
We don’t get fooled again
Don’t get fooled again, no, no
Yeah
Meet the new boss
Same as the old boss
Ian McNabb does quite a decent WGFA on the “charity” record, Disagreement of the People. Notable also as the album that alerted me to the joy of Chumbawamba.
When they’re truly great, they’re hard to beat, and when they’re navel gazingly pretentious and boring, they’re hard to beat on that front also.