4000 Posted February 8, 2010 Share Posted February 8, 2010 [quote name='JTUK' post='739430' date='Feb 8 2010, 09:28 PM']I am never going to like The Who as I couldn't stand Entwhitsle or Moon... but, nobody can capture their 'feel' because nobody would really want to play all of the place...with dodgy timing and everything.[/quote] FWIW I haven't watched the performance in question, but although I'll admit that I'm not really interested in them without John, I don't see how a dodgy performance somehow means that [i]all[/i] their performances must be dodgy. Maybe they had a bad day. Maybe the sound was crap. Anyone ever played a gig where the sound was crap? Rhetorical question BTW, just in case. To all those who say they should give up, I hope people are saying the same about you when you're they're age (if not preferably before). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wolverinebass Posted February 8, 2010 Share Posted February 8, 2010 It's not the Who anymore. I had the privelige of seeing them in Glasgow in November 2000 and that's the best gig I will ever see unless someone re-invents the musical wheel in my lifetime. When I watched them on TV playing Glastonbury a few years ago, I was almost sick. Nothing has changed since, but for opinions here are my own. Zak Starkey is about as close as anyone will ever get to replacing or emulating Keith Moon. But Pino? Err, no. I have nothing against him as clearly he's a talented player, but for the Who it's in the "Kenney Jones was the wrong drummer" syndrome transposed to bass. The tone is all wrong (bland in the extreme) and he just plays sooooo simply (otherwise you wouldn't need a 2nd guitar player to fill all those gaps would you?) and frankly I think they should have quit on the spot 27th June 2002. I'm sure that there are people on this forum who could stylistically give something more to the Who than Pino ever will. To me it's a safe, boring and utterly wrong choice probably instigated by Roger who can now tell Pino to "turn down" as the bass player is now the hired help as opposed to an equal. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
4000 Posted February 8, 2010 Share Posted February 8, 2010 (edited) [quote name='Wolverinebass' post='739500' date='Feb 8 2010, 10:32 PM']I'm sure that there are people on this forum who could stylistically give something more to the Who than Pino ever will. To me it's a safe, boring and utterly wrong choice probably instigated by Roger who can now tell Pino to "turn down" as the bass player is now the hired help as opposed to an equal.[/quote] Sadly I have to agree that this is probably true. Pino is a very good player, but I wish they'd got someone more flamboyant. Surely that's what the Who was all about? They do however have the right to keep playing if they so wish; I think they've earned that. If people don't like it, don't watch them. I don't really watch anything by them these days and I wouldn't go to a gig again (saw them twice with JAE), but I absolutely respect their right to keep playing. Edited February 8, 2010 by 4000 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
obbm Posted February 8, 2010 Share Posted February 8, 2010 [quote name='chris_b' post='739302' date='Feb 8 2010, 07:33 PM']Mark Knopfler toured and recorded as Dire Straits with only 2 of the originals and no one bothered to complain, Tower of Power toured for years without Francis Rocco Prestia, Pink Floyd have been as just good for more than 25 years without Roger Waters, Genesis survived the loss of Peter Gabriel, Queen are out there successfully gigging without Freddie, the Blockheads don't have Ian Dury and Little Feat don't have Lowell George so why should The Who need anyone other than their singer and songwriter? All these guys are out there making good live music. Thank God for that! What an irritating thread this is turning into!!!![/quote] Agree with your last comment Chris. I enjoyed it. There are quite a few members here who are contemporarys of Roger and Pete and, in some cases, older. According to most of you who posted criticism it seems that anyone in their later years of life should pack up gigging. In your dreams sunshine. Long may they continue, I know I shall. As for bands without all their original members how about The Rolling Stones, Bad Company, The Yardbird, and Doctor Feelgood have none of the originals. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
garethox Posted February 9, 2010 Share Posted February 9, 2010 [quote name='chris_b' post='739302' date='Feb 8 2010, 07:33 PM']Mark Knopfler toured and recorded as Dire Straits with only 2 of the originals and no one bothered to complain, Tower of Power toured for years without Francis Rocco Prestia, Pink Floyd have been as just good for more than 25 years without Roger Waters, Genesis survived the loss of Peter Gabriel, Queen are out there successfully gigging without Freddie, the Blockheads don't have Ian Dury and Little Feat don't have Lowell George so why should The Who need anyone other than their singer and songwriter? All these guys are out there making good live music. Thank God for that! What an irritating thread this is turning into!!!![/quote] Amen to that! The Who are my favourite band and I've seen them countless times. It is amazing how, by watching one stage managed show on TV, (which was by no means indicitive of a typical Who concert) many have an opinion on why they should stop. Age has nothing to do with it AT ALL. The Who are about fire, passion, belief and power - something they still possess in spades. When Townshend hits that guitar after nearly 50 years of playing and his fingernails fly off - it means he has passion and belief and that he gives everything to the audience and to his performance. Likewise Roger. Christ, Who songs have to be amongst the most difficult to sing EVER and he still does it, wants to do it and gives everything. At the IndigO2 concerts a year or so ago I witnessed grown men weeping during 'Tea and Theatre' - such was the power and emotion Roger put into that song. In the days of sh*te Factor and manufactured pop and rock, The Who are still refreshing to watch in concert and I think references to them being no better than a 'pub rock band' are more than a little insulting and provacative for comments sake. I'll be at the Royal Albert Hall on March 30th to watch the greatest live band ever to grace the stage play Quadrophenia and I can't wait. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
garethox Posted February 9, 2010 Share Posted February 9, 2010 [quote name='riff raff' post='739309' date='Feb 8 2010, 07:37 PM']other than queen, who toured as paul rodgers and queen, don't all the others still release original music? when was the last original stuff released by the who? thats why its cabaret.flogging a dead horse in my opinion.[/quote] 2006 with a new album on the way.... quite the norm for groups nowadays. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OldGit Posted February 9, 2010 Share Posted February 9, 2010 [quote name='Spook' post='739205' date='Feb 8 2010, 06:05 PM']I read somewhere Pino has his basses custom built, NOT by Fender, but I can't recall which British builder it was[/quote] BGM this month: Sei made a few. Not P basses though. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JTUK Posted February 9, 2010 Share Posted February 9, 2010 On the subject of should bands like this give up... well, depends if they can cut it anymore, IMV. Do they remain a creditable act..and that might be a bit rich with the like of reality bands/shows creating artists but then who relates to most of them anyway...?? Are the Who past it..?. yep, I'd say so..deffo. His vocals have gone but they have fans to please and accountants who want to have the money still rolling in. I don't blame bands for that...I just wouldn't bother to go and see them. The Who are old pros who can still put on a bit of a show but they are trading on past glories and are a nostalgia show. Only a very few artists can re-invent themselves and stay relevant artistically over the years...Bowie, for one. The rest is a rehash and we either accept it and go to the concerts or don't.. I'd take the latter option... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
4000 Posted February 9, 2010 Share Posted February 9, 2010 In classical, blues, latin or jazz circles this wouldn't even be an argument.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MacDaddy Posted February 9, 2010 Share Posted February 9, 2010 [quote name='obbm' post='739576' date='Feb 8 2010, 11:35 PM']Agree with your last comment Chris. I enjoyed it. There are quite a few members here who are contemporarys of Roger and Pete and, in some cases, older. According to most of you who posted criticism it seems that anyone in their later years of life should pack up gigging. In your dreams sunshine. Long may they continue, I know I shall. As for bands without all their original members how about The Rolling Stones, Bad Company, The Yardbird, and Doctor Feelgood have none of the originals.[/quote] I think the criticism has been of the performance rather than the age. The singer in my favourite band is 55 yet still puts in a hyper dynamic performance at every gig. [quote name='garethox' post='739652' date='Feb 9 2010, 07:56 AM']When Townshend hits that guitar after nearly 50 years of playing and his fingernails fly off - it means he has passion and belief and that he gives everything to the audience and to his performance[/quote] or it means he needs to refine his guitar technique (or up the sanatogen!) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OldGit Posted February 9, 2010 Share Posted February 9, 2010 [quote name='4000' post='739933' date='Feb 9 2010, 01:16 PM']In classical, blues, latin or jazz circles this wouldn't even be an argument....[/quote] True but the point here isn't "should they stop because they are old" (old??) but "should they stop because they can't do it live any more?". There's a difference. Jazzers slow down and modify what they do (Check out Ornette now) and bluesmen start out sounding 100 years old anyway.... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wombatboter Posted February 9, 2010 Share Posted February 9, 2010 [quote name='Spook' post='739205' date='Feb 8 2010, 07:05 PM']if they'd played like that in my local pub they'd have been thrown out![/quote] I would gladly be in that pub if they would perform like that...:-) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.