Wait... Who mon?

[QUOTE=Lunch]That's how Tommy is for me. It always has really moved me and I actually feel like I've gone somewhere (not physically of course) after listening to the album. I love the whole feel of Tommy, the light touch combined with The Who's natural style creates an great mix of the two I love.[/QUOTE]

Well Lunch, I gave it a go. Listened to the whole of Tommy last nite before I went to sleep and again shortly after I woke up, and I just don't get it. The concept, the story, the lyrics, the music, everything about it just seems like an aberration of sorts. At least to my ears and sensibilities. I much prefer the live versions because I can enjoy the music in stripped down form. But the album itself I just cannot grasp. I mean I understand it. I know what it's about and I appreciate the range and scope of it, but it just leaves me scratching my head. Dare I say I find it boring and pretentious? I hate to say that, but that's what I hear. I like the way it starts. And it finishes well, too. But the meat in the middle does nothing for me. I literally find myself thinking "What the hell?" I just can't get into it.

For me it's always been the same with The Who. There is The Who before Tommy and The Who after Tommy. Both of which I love. And then there is Tommy itself. Which still leaves me scratching my head. So i guess I'll continue to admire Tommy from afar and listen to it as part of the Live at Leeds and Isle of Wright discs. Because I do find it somewhat compelling live. But the studio version just leaves me cold. Awhile back I thought maybe I could warm up to it. But I guess not. Perhaps I'll give it another go in a couple of months. I really want to hear it like many Who fans do. But it just isn't happening for me.

I don't understand that at all, I've always been in love with it. The story is much less relevant than that of Quadrophenia, maybe that has something to do with it? But I just always found the music perfect on that album. There is light and shade (as Led Zeppelin would say). The music is heavy without being loud, there are emotions without being too drawn out. Moon is all over the kit yet is never out of place. Entwistle plays lead without competing for space in the group. They work so nicely together without having to use volume (though obviously they used it live). Roger sings great vocals without pushing, rather they are softer and more melodic. Its really a much different Who than all their other albums (whether they be before or after Tommy).

Quadrophenia gets old for me too fast. There are standout tracks and it is consistently good, but after a little bit, it's too much. Whether it be too much piano, too many horns, too many rain sounds, whatever. Not that Tommy didn't use the studio to effect, but it certainly wasn't to the point where they could not reproduce it live. Quadrophenia doesn't have that same live suppliment to its credentials. Tommy never gets old to me. I can listen to it on loop, it doesn't matter.

And you won't convince me that Tommy is more pretentious than Quadrophenia.

Edit: This isn't to lash out against you or anything like that, I completely respect your views. I just find it interesting how two huge Who fans react this differently to their albums.

[QUOTE=Lunch]I don't understand that at all, I've always been in love with it. The story is much less relevant than that of Quadrophenia, maybe that has something to do with it? But I just always found the music perfect on that album. There is light and shade (as Led Zeppelin would say). The music is heavy without being loud, there are emotions without being too drawn out. Moon is all over the kit yet is never out of place. Entwistle plays lead without competing for space in the group. They work so nicely together without having to use volume (though obviously they used it live). Roger sings great vocals without pushing, rather they are softer and more melodic. Its really a much different Who than all their other albums (whether they be before or after Tommy).

Quadrophenia gets old for me too fast. There are standout tracks and it is consistently good, but after a little bit, it's too much. Whether it be too much piano, too many horns, too many rain sounds, whatever. Not that Tommy didn't use the studio to effect, but it certainly wasn't to the point where they could not reproduce it live. Quadrophenia doesn't have that same live suppliment to its credentials. Tommy never gets old to me. I can listen to it on loop, it doesn't matter.

And you won't convince me that Tommy is more pretentious than Quadrophenia.

Edit: This isn't to lash out against you or anything like that, I completely respect your views. I just find it interesting how two huge Who fans react this differently to their albums.[/QUOTE]


Of course it's all understood. I think when it comes to The Who and fans like us thier have always been two distinct camps when it comes to what there best album is. Or At least most favored. Many feel it's Tommy. No question. While others point to Quadrophenia as the pinnacle of all things Who. Still others point to Who's Next. Which is excellent, but just isn't quite enough for me to call it there best. So you keep giving Quad a try and I'll keep plugging away at Tommy. And maybe one day our minds will meet. If only halfway, it's still something. :)

The Real Me is enough to keep me coming back to Quadrophenia, don't worry about that.

And even if I never fully get into it, I'll always have an upmost respect for it.

What was that album that they started on, but thought that it was getting way too pretentious and then quit? Behind Blues Eyes came from it, I believe.

I think you're talking about the Lifehouse project (which ended up being Who's Next after it fell through). The original idea was something along the lines of a science fiction story where Rock and Roll saves the world and creates a Utopian society (that's what I've gathered; I could be completely off. I never cared much about whole Who's Next story). Basically it was getting too complex and then spiraled out of control, causing Townshend to have a nervous breakdown. When he recovered, The Who were looking just to get back on their feet and took some of the projects and scrapped together Who's Next, jokingly known as "the greatest failure in Rock history".

[QUOTE=Lunch]The Real Me is enough to keep me coming back to Quadrophenia, don't worry about that.[/QUOTE]

And I've always got Overture, 1921, Amazing Journey and Sparks. Not to mention Sally Simpson, Sensation and Christmas. So we still have a bit of hope for one another, I would say. :p

[QUOTE=JohnXDoe]And I've always got Overture, 1921, Amazing Journey and Sparks.[/QUOTE]

Speaking of that, the first side of Tommy is absolutely incredible. My father and I put it up there with the alltime best sides of albums.

This may have something to do with the fact that we both consider Amazing Journey the pinnacle of rock music.

[QUOTE=Lunch]I think you're talking about the Lifehouse project (which ended up being Who's Next after it fell through). The original idea was something along the lines of a science fiction story where Rock and Roll saves the world and creates a Utopian society (that's what I've gathered; I could be completely off. I never cared much about whole Who's Next story). Basically it was getting too complex and then spiraled out of control, causing Townshend to have a nervous breakdown. When he recovered, The Who were looking just to get back on their feet and took some of the projects and scrapped together Who's Next, jokingly known as "the greatest failure in Rock history".[/QUOTE]

Yep, that's it. That's the one that I was thinking about. Yep

[QUOTE=Lunch]Speaking of that, the first side of Tommy is absolutely incredible. My father and I put it up there with the alltime best sides of albums.[/QUOTE]

Oh yeah. No doubt. It is seamless. Dare I say near perfect. I enjoy that part immensely. And you are right on about Who's Next. It was a very ambitious project that Pete just couldn't quite pull off. He had an idea for a film and everything. Part of the whole concept was as you said, rock n roll as savior and liberator. And the search for the "perfect note" that would unify the world. Or something like that. In The Song Is Over at the very end is the line "There once was a note/Pure and easy/Playing so free/Like a breath/Rippling by. Or something like that? That was part of the longing search for the "note". And I believe the frantic end of Baba 'O Riley was supposed to be the climax of the film where everything just kind of implodes into one, while people dance frantically in some futuristic theater against an oppresive back drop. And through the dancing and frantic music they reach a sort of nirvana and simply leave there bodies and ascend to a higher place. Pretty heady stuff, if you ask me. It's no wonder Pete couldn't pull it off. But the rest of us got a fine album out of it.

Yea I only had the basic overview, never knew all the details. The concept sounds a little bit cheesey to me anyway. I'm glad he ended up tackling the concept/double album idea again on Quadrophenia, with a much more workable and relevant idea.

Wasn't there actually a couple of live performances of Lifehouse? I dunno....

I know Bargain was also part of the original concept. Thats a cool song. I love the little bridge part where its just the synth playing the little melody and Moon stomping on the bass drums and cymbals.

Behind Blue Eyes is my favorite song off of Who's Next.

I've always preferred Tommy. Q is kind of overproduced at some points. It's a great album to listen to once in a while, but I feel it sometimes gets old, whereas I could listen to Tommy everyday and not ever get bored.

^^ I feel Townsend achieved much more on Quadrophenia musically, though. The only problem is that they couldn't reproduce the album on stage, and therefore it never became as popular as Tommy, which they performed every night for some time.

[QUOTE=Lunch]The original idea was something along the lines of a science fiction story where Rock and Roll saves the world and creates a Utopian society ".[/QUOTE]

That sounds like the best thing ever.

[QUOTE=rockinbass17]^^ I feel Townsend achieved much more on Quadrophenia musically, though. The only problem is that they couldn't reproduce the album on stage, and therefore it never became as popular as Tommy, which they performed every night for some time.[/QUOTE]

This is of course one the bigges totally nonsense bogus things people still claim.
It worked fine and would have worked even better if they hadn't (and still are) been so lazy....

I haven't actually got Quadrophenia, only Tommy. I've heard tracks from the former, and I think they're all outstanding. As for the story of Tommy, I sat through Ken Russel's film adaptation, so it makes a little more sense to me. Loooong movie, though.

As for Lifehouse, there are alot of themes from it you can find in Who's Next. The most obivious being the part in The Song is Over that JohnXDoe mentioned, and then the song Pure And Easy, which comes straight from Lifehouse, and is included with the bonus tracks on the Who's next CD.

Also, the last chords on Won't Get Fooled Again are the "perfect note" that they speak of.

As for live recordings, you can find some live versions of Who's Next songs on some deluxe two disc edition of Who's Next. They might have been recorded at the Young Vic, where they did Lifehouse, but I don't know for sure.

[QUOTE=drugstore cowboy]I haven't actually got Quadrophenia, only Tommy. I've heard tracks from the former, and I think they're all outstanding. As for the story of Tommy, I sat through Ken Russel's film adaptation, so it makes a little more sense to me. Loooong movie, though.

As for Lifehouse, there are alot of themes from it you can find in Who's Next. The most obivious being the part in The Song is Over that JohnXDoe mentioned, and then the song Pure And Easy, which comes straight from Lifehouse, and is included with the bonus tracks on the Who's next CD.

Also, the last chords on Won't Get Fooled Again are the "perfect note" that they speak of.

As for live recordings, you can find some live versions of Who's Next songs on some deluxe two disc edition of Who's Next. They might have been recorded at the Young Vic, where they did Lifehouse, but I don't know for sure.[/QUOTE]

Yes, they were at the Young Vic.

[QUOTE=drugstore cowboy]I haven't actually got Quadrophenia, only Tommy. I've heard tracks from the former, and I think they're all outstanding. As for the story of Tommy, I sat through Ken Russel's film adaptation, so it makes a little more sense to me. Loooong movie, though.[/QUOTE]

I really wanted to see that movie, but I can't find it in my local Blockbuster or any video store. I think I'll end up ordering it online.

I saw a parts of it at the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame exhibit on Tommy, which was awesome.

I just found Quadrophenia in my garage, which never seems to stop revealing album after album

It's a very bizarre movie, but I guess that's what you'd have to expect after hearing the album. Some good cameos by Elton John, Eric Clapton, Tina Turner, and the rest of the Who, as Roger plays Tommy.

It continues on after "Listening to you..." and there are other songs that aren't on the album. I guess it's a must for diehard Who fans. :p

[QUOTE=Walrus Gumboot]I just found Quadrophenia in my garage, which never seems to stop revealing album after album[/QUOTE]

I wish I had a garage like that.

The garage that permantly replenishes albums.

[QUOTE=Lunch]The garage that permantly replenishes albums.[/QUOTE]

Not just any albums, but classic vinyl albums.

The Who on vinyl > Who on CD.

[QUOTE=drugstore cowboy]Not just any albums, but classic vinyl albums.

The Who on vinyl > Who on CD.[/QUOTE]

I wouldn't know :upset:

[QUOTE=robo2448]I wouldn't know :upset:[/QUOTE]

That's rough, man, rough. I have Tommy, My Generation, and Meaty, Beaty, Big and Bouncy on vinyl. Tommy on vinyl is orgasmic.

keith moon is god

I actually have the soundrack from the movie on vinyl. Elton John sounds like he played his part really well. I also really dig the father's deep voice.