The Who : Classic or Dud

Read the feature in the last Rolling Stone where Roger Daltrey talks about how he had to make the song about Grenfell less 'political' because he's a fucking Tory wanker.

Fuck off.

My main gripe with Endless Wire was the production. It sounded exactly how it was recorded: casually pieced together during occasional spare moments on tour. The least effective songs are the ones that try too hard to be "Who" songs, like "It's Not Enough" and "Black Widow's Eyes." But it's far better than the '80s records, and it's got at least two solid classics ("Mike Post Theme" and "Tea and Theatre"). All of the songs (except, weirdly, for "Mike Post Theme," which was too restrained) sounded much stronger on the late-'06/early '07 shows.

this record is indeed surprising me, its fairly good…but… there has been no Pete solo record since 93. Daltrey sounds better than I thought he would, but he huffs and puffs in such a way that It seems like Pete has to write suitable shit for RD. It seems to me that the people that would want to listen to the first songs Pete has released in 13 years would hold Chinese Eyes and Empty Glass in high esteem; the thick necked yahoos of the sort you saw in the audience for the 9/11 concert aren't gonna fuck with this anyway…Tarfumes, you are the most expert Who person on this board… aren't you a little disappointed that Pete doesn't feel like its worth his time to make a solo record? What is stopping him from doing a record just the way he wants it, not having to deal with RD vetoing references to Grenfell and insisting on these heroic songs that can't measure up to his 70s standards?

I can't blame Pete for being somewhat relieved to play with rhythm sections that don't fill up every possible space…Oh, this song "I'll be back" is Pete singing, it's lovely yacht-rock unlike anything I've heard him do…

I think I would have liked Endless Wire a lot more if it were a Pete solo album.

It seems to me that the people that would want to listen to the first songs Pete has released in 13 years would hold Chinese Eyes and Empty Glass in high esteem; the thick necked yahoos of the sort you saw in the audience for the 9/11 concert aren't gonna fuck with this anyway…Tarfumes, you are the most expert Who person on this board… aren't you a little disappointed that Pete doesn't feel like its worth his time to make a solo record? What is stopping him from doing a record just the way he wants it, not having to deal with RD vetoing references to Grenfell and insisting on these heroic songs that can't measure up to his 70s standards?

I can't blame Pete for being somewhat relieved to play with rhythm sections that don't fill up every possible space…Oh, this song "I'll be back" is Pete singing, it's lovely yacht-rock unlike anything I've heard him do…

of all the guys of his generation, for him to say "I shouldn't release solo music because a few albums didn't do as well as I would have liked several decades ago" seems contrary to what kind of artist he is —or was. He's different than his peers, in that he engages with new forms of popular music. He used to say that having to do use his energy for the Who was something of a prison, which is why Empty Glass and Chinese Eyes were so refreshing (I don't think White City, Iron Man and Psycho were at all refreshing, since he insisted on using the concept album conceit, which had run outta gas and sucked anyway). He can surely figure out a way to make a record that lives up to his previous solo standards and not lose $$$…he doesn't seem like Stevie Nicks or Sheryl Crow, who say "if I can't make tons of $$$ off of big studio productions beffitting my stature, I'm not making records any more."

But…I attended a Who press conference in 2000 where he said "how do you know I haven't made any music since '93? Maybe I don't want you to hear it!"

This song on the new record "Got Nothing to Prove' sounds like a demo from the 60s. Does it ring a bell, Tarfumes?

He's different than his peers, in that he engages with new forms of popular music.

*cough* McCartney *cough* Robert Plant

*cough* Michael Nesmith *cough*

*cough* Neil Young *cough*

I prefer Young's career in toto but Plant has by far led the most fecund life post-band; he's rarely embarrassed himself and us.

I actually haven’t heard the new one yet! I ordered the special deluxe vinyl dealie (because of course I did), and it hasn’t arrived yet. I’m holding off so my first listen can be immediately post-shrink-wrap removal.

And I suspect it was less the commercial flop in and of itself and more the tour and promotional slog he undertook (still his only solo tour) that didn’t seem to affect sales at all. He probably figured he’s just as happy making demos without having to be part of the industry, while releasing the occasional new song on a reissue. And he’s also said that he prefers sailing to making records anyway.

But I would argue that the audiobook of his autobiography (which he reads himself) is his best “solo album” since All The Best Cowboys.

xxxp

fair points re: Plant, McC, less so Young, but it's still Pete that tries to fit Taylor, Sheeran, Ariana and hip hop writ large into a perhaps ill-advised notion of "rock," not those guys (I suspect McC did the Rihanna/ Kanye thing cuz someone told him he should, and it was shitty anyway) Whereas R Waters is almost defiant in being ignorant of anything past 1975, barring Young and Dylan, hasn't even listened to Radiohead, more than anyone the Floyd standard bearers. Or Keef, who sneers with blackish-brown phlegm at anything past, like, Peter Tosh.

not gonna argue about the McCartney/Kanye/Rihanna collab re: quality but Macca and Plant have always struck me as true, dyed-in-the-wool, adventurous music fans, eager to dabble in new technology and approaches. Young eh idk that seems like a stretch, although he does like playing with younger guys from time to time. Waters and Keef are insular jerks afaict.

Jagger otoh probably exceeds Townsend in the "gotta be down with the kids" dept

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MTF7T1Nw5OU
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vjIwmJMqrco
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TV0kr-SASzM

shit is awful, obviously

(couldn't find the Biz Markie song...?)

Wasn't joking: https://www.rollingstone.com/music/music-features/monkees-michael-nesmith-vaporwave-714253/

I didn't think you were!

Nesmith is a true weirdo. always been curious about his solo records in the 70s but that stuff is impossible to find.

it's been my impression that Neil has pretty much no idea what's going on in music

including his own lol

NO ONE TELL NEIL ABOUT SOUNDCLOUD

that song on the new album "got nothing to prove" is clearly a Pete demo from the 60s: my friend who is as least a big Who expert as Tarfumes listened to it today, agrees that it must date from the Who's early period (barring some horn parts that must have been added recently) but has never heard of it… it ain't like I've been scouring the innuhnet for info about this record, but it appears that no outlets have mentioned that this thing has a Who curio previously unknown to stans…

This new record is otherwise worth a fair hearing from ILXors and I would be keen to hear what you guys think!

it appears that no outlets have mentioned that this thing has a Who curio previously unknown to stans…

Nesmith is a true weirdo. always been curious about his solo records in the 70s but that stuff is impossible to find.

Yeah, OG vinyl of those albums is pretty tough to find (and most, if not all of it, was pressed on Dynaflex yuck). Sundazed recently reissued the three First National Band albums, and there's also a new-ish import CD box of all six of the RCA albums, which from what I've sampled on Spotify--sound way better than the tinny earlier Cd twofers I have. There's also one of those "Original Album Classics" sets of the first five lps, but those are probably the old masters.

yea it's a 60's demo, I'm pretty sure I read that confirmed somewhere but it's obvious while listening to it that it is. Good song! It does seem like Pete has always had control of his demo vault and things rarely if ever leaked, and he's been fairly generous on putting things out, from the Scoop albums through the deluxe versions. Wonder how many other finished songs like this he has stuck away.

"But I would argue that the audiobook of his autobiography (which he reads himself) is his best “solo album” since All The Best Cowboys."

Maybe I'll give that a listen, I didn't read the book yet. I do like his writing, Horse's Neck is underappreciated. I'm a massive White City fan as well.

Wonder how many other finished songs like this he has stuck away.

I don't know about '60s demos -- there are some that I've only read about but haven't heard, like the rock opera about a rabbit that ruled the world, and the Quads opera, which "I'm A Boy" was part of. But regarding '90s-'10s demos, I understand there are tons. Like, several boxed-sets' worth. Supposedly, one or two new Scoop volumes are coming out next year, mostly of '90s-'10s demos.

I'm a massive White City fan as well.

I feel like that was the last big solo project of his where everything worked. It's not my favorite of his records, but it has its moments, and the film is surprisingly tight and effective:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7iFtg4JFgzE

Isolated Moon on Don’t get fooled! Insane! Great!

https://youtu.be/KOeAe_LXrt0

Find us the isolated drums for "Bargain." Then we'll talk.

Sadly, the multitrack masters for “Bargain” are lost.

I actually tried the new one from last year. I've had virtually no desire to hear new Who or Townshend music since forever - I didn't listen to them until the late '90s - but I remembered some good word-of-mouth so curiosity and yet-another-pandemic-evening-at-home got the best of me.

There's definitely some bad shit on here ("Beads on One String" and "I'll Be Back" - I'm not alone in my dislike, but I'm stunned to see some reviews lavishing praise on them). But it's actually not a bad album, it's fairly decent, and even two of the bonus tracks are pretty decent. I'm not sure if it's for anyone outside of the converted, but for the most part, it's a nice footnote to their legacy. If it's indeed their last studio LP, it's a respectable way to go out, unlike It's Hard.

Is it actually from two years ago? There is also a deluxe version from last year with a live part.

This album is kind of meta, isn’t it

i like endless wire too

Bird doing the work of the people. Thank you

The new record is about what I expected: starts strong, sags in the middle (birdistheword otm re: "Beads On One String"), then closes on two near-classics. "She Rocked My World" is probably my favorite song on the record, and I realized they really had a knack for choosing album closers. As with Endless Wire, there's a couple of songs where Pete shows he can write arena-ready anthems in his sleep, but probably shouldn't.

The production is much improved over Endless Wire, but the autotune futzing is a little distracting; one of the bonus tracks ("Danny And My Ponies," sung by Pete) is squarely in the uncanny valley between autotun as a tool and autotune as an effect. It's neither, and just sounds wrong.

The live acoustic set from early 2020 on the recent deluxe edition is killer, and as birdistheword said about the studio record, if that turns out to be their last live performance, it's a (more than) respectable way to go out.

The first Who I ever loved was Meaty Beaty Big & Bouncy, and these days I find I really only love those early years, I guess up through Tommy. Never need to hear Who's Next again, and apart from "You Better You Bet" and "Eminence Front" I have no use for their post-Moon years at all. Gimme my mods, you can keep keep the sods.

I go back and forth on Who's Next, but basically agree.

I was talking to someone about this shift in recent years, where early Who and early Stones have sort of been steamrolled into relative obscurity compared to the '70s stuff. Like, when people generally think of the Who, I think they're thinking the arena rock sound of "Who's Next." When people think of the Stones, they're thinking of, like, "Brown Sugar," that sort of similar arena, Keith in open G riffing thing. The Beatles might have escaped this, but I'm trying to think of the last time I heard anything from their early records in the wild.

Personally, I'm good with "Live at Leeds" and "Quadrophenia."

It's more pronounced with the Who than the Stones, I feel like, because a lot of '60s Stones is still very much part of their agreed-on canon — "Satisfaction," "Jumping Jack Flash," "Paint It Black," "Sympathy for the Devil." Where with the Who, I feel like you'll very rarely hear anything pre-Tommy except maybe "My Generation." My issue with Who's Next and what comes after is I feel like they largely lost their sense of humor and absurdity, which was a defining element up until then.

(also I said "I feel like" 3 times there, so ... I guess that's just how I feel.)

Hmm, you're probably right about the Stones, though I do think that what people generally think of as a Stones "sound" is the later stuff.

For sure the Beggars-Let It Bleed-Sticky Fingers-Exile years are peak/ur Stones. I just don't think there's as sharp a cut-off for the earlier stuff.

I was talking to someone about this shift in recent years, where early Who and early Stones have sort of been steamrolled into relative obscurity compared to the '70s stuff. Like, when people generally think of the Who, I think they're thinking the arena rock sound of "Who's Next." When people think of the Stones, they're thinking of, like, "Brown Sugar," that sort of similar arena, Keith in open G riffing thing. The Beatles might have escaped this, but I'm trying to think of the last time I heard anything from their early records in the wild.

Personally, I'm good with "Live at Leeds" and "Quadrophenia."

That sounds like a US phenomenon.

You've got all that Classc Rock nonsense to put up with.

For sure. Classic rock radio in its current form pretty much ignores anything before 1970. (Even the early '70s are starting to get squeezed out, though things like Zep and Lynyrd Skynyrd will stay forever.)

Wait, so you don’t have that nonsense? And you hear the early Who singles played upon occasion?

I don't listen to the radio and I'm sure there are classic rock stations in the UK these days but it's not a something with any kind of history in the UK.

Generally speaking, then, how often do you hear those early Who songs without seeking them out?

I don’t want to get too sentimental like those others sticky Valentines whilst my immune system is fighting off the Rona, but I do often feel a sense of loss when I think about the way love the radio used to be when I could hear all the different decades of the rock era going back to the 50s with just a slight shift of the dial.