I'm waiting to read about Townshend tearing his ACL after trying to jump at one of the shows.

I think I'm going to wait until the album comes out.

Actually, I'll probably end up waiting until like tomorrow because I can't wait a full month.

[QUOTE=Lunch;13292470]I'm waiting to read about Townshend tearing his ACL after trying to jump at one of the shows.[/QUOTE]
Townshend tore what when? where did this news come from? and i hope it doesn't keep him from jumping a month and a half from now :(

[QUOTE=JXD;13295211]Townshend tore what when? where did this news come from? and i hope it doesn't keep him from jumping a month and a half from now :([/QUOTE]

Haha, sorry to worry you man, I meant hypothetically. As far as I know he's still action Townshend.

damn! that is a relief. guys are getting old. you never know. i was trying to imagine him sitting on a stool and windmilling. wasn't really working for me :(

I absolutley love "Tea and Theatre." It's beautiful, and they're closing their sets with it now. I think it's a fitting way to end.

I've heard "It's Not Enough" on the radio a few times. It's okay, nothing special. I find that what I heard from "Wire and Glass" and several other new songs live are better.

I like Tea And Theatre as well. Its really nice. I agree about I've Had Enough. Its good enough. Fairly ordinary Who song. Will fit nicely on the album, of course. And does anyone think Pete and Roger sound especially good harmonizing together these days? They just sound great together.

In other news I got my ticket today. Hollywood Bowl. I lucked out with an aisle seat because i'm going solo. This way I won't be sandwiched between strangers and if the people in my row are idiots i can just wander out a bit. This is going to be GREAT!

before i go to work just wanted to say they now have the Tommy/Quadrophenia live set available seperately. saw them at Tower records yesterday when i got my Who ticket. each one is only $15. they were out of the Quad disc, but will have more in tuesday. which i will pick up. the drawback is neither has the third disc of bonus material of the original set, which is substantial, and from what i've heard very desireable. its just the performance with a couple of bonus "features" on the same disc. but its also $20 cheaper for those who are just interested in one or the other (Tommy or Quad) of the performances.

We should direct Pete here.

He might take some interest in the site.

>_>

Even I would recommend picking up just the Quadrophenia disc, the Tommy performance is so over the top with all the added musicians. It seems so cheesy.

[QUOTE=fwqhgads;13308427]We should direct Pete here.

He might take some interest in the site.

>_>[/QUOTE]

dude, that would totally be insane. It would be so insane, that no one would believe it was him posting here!

He'd probably make fun of my original article. Then I would cry.

i think he would do it. wonder if he has? perhaps i can exploit the sputnik name to our advantage. i can put out an email letter. but to whom? you know i can put 'hi i'm so and so from sputnik music and i thought you would like to know blah blah blah'. after all i am a "Staff Writer" lol. so i can lay on the BS. then i can mention the forums. that way we can get pete to check them out. he always talks about how he visits the boards and blogs to lurk around and see what people are saying. but what are the chances he would actually sign up and chat a while? not much, i would say.

meh, forget it. maybe it would be cool to know he actually read some of it. seriously, this has to be one of the biggest Who threads on the net. but we would never know. :(

i wanna meet pete! :upset:

Yea, but even if he's ever read this it would be cool. I mean, MX is one of the largest Music forums around last I heard, so if he does indeed check these things it's not all that unthinkable that he could show up here.

[QUOTE=Lunch;13308902]Even I would recommend picking up just the Quadrophenia disc, the Tommy performance is so over the top with all the added musicians. It seems so cheesy.[/QUOTE]
I disagree. First of all, you can tell that they're waaayyy more accustomed and comfortable playing Tommy on stage. Roger sounds so much better in the 89 show than he does in the 96 one. In the Quadrophenia show he is really straining which bothers me a bit, seeing as 1973 performances of it live sound so much better. Plus there's a lot of annoying backing vocals in that show, which put Love, Reign O'er Me and Dr. Jimmy off balance, because those two demand a strong lead vocal performance. Also, noone will ever sing Bell Boy like Keith! :p The guest stars in Quadrophenia just don't seem to fit like they do in Tommy; they seem to really bring those songs down. Whereas Phil Collins doing Fiddle About and Tommy's Holiday Camp give it a comical flavor, uhh who is it Simon Townshend? makes The Dirty Jobs a chore to listen to because I love Roger's performance in that song. Same thing with that P.J. Proby.

But then again, Tommy performed 1969/70 ****s all over both those performances, and so does the 1973 Quad shows, however technically challenged they were, they could make it sound good.

Yea but the Tommy performance is in the 80's, and it shows. Just looking at Roger's hair makes me cringe.

Hello Posters of Sputnik. :wave:

I have been reading this thread for a couple weeks now on and off in between shows and other things. After reading that last conversation I knew I had to sign up and say hello to you guys.

-Pete

Hahaha.

Mr. Townsend, I need to ask for some proof.

[QUOTE=Lunch;13311377]Yea but the Tommy performance is in the 80's, and it shows. Just looking at Roger's hair makes me cringe.[/QUOTE]
Yeah, Roger's hair used to be beautiful in the early 70s.

But it's better than his hair in 96. Or lack thereof

I'm all for mullets, but there's a limit. Roger shouldn't have one. Short hair works well for him, it represents more his style then his long hair ever did. Even though as we've discussed in the past, I like his image during the hippie/Tommy era too.

[QUOTE=Pete Townsend;13311433]Hello Posters of Sputnik. :wave:

I have been reading this thread for a couple weeks now on and off in between shows and other things. After reading that last conversation I knew I had to sign up and say hello to you guys.

-Pete[/QUOTE]

hahaha, I don't think he would use a :wave: unless he's that hip

[QUOTE=Lunch;13311533]I'm all for mullets, but there's a limit. Roger shouldn't have one. Short hair works well for him, it represents more his style then his long hair ever did. Even though as we've discussed in the past, I like his image during the hippie/Tommy era too.[/QUOTE]
I think his long curly hair worked best for him. But then again, I think I probably associate that hairstyle with the expansion of his vocal style, but really, that's just how he is in my mind. Like, in those shows from 79 or whenever where he's got short hair again, he looks so odd. I think it's an essential part of his image.

:chug:

Yea I'm not denying that it was essential for his image with the Who, put he was originally a tough-guy fighter growing up, and his aggression was a really cool part of what the Who delivered when they started. And that aggresion was still used in Young Man/Summertime Blues, etc. later on.

[QUOTE=Lunch;13311516]Hahaha.

Mr. Townsend, I need to ask for some proof.[/QUOTE]
apparently pete has forgotten how to spell his own last name :(

IMPOSTER! REVEAL YOURSELF! :smash:

[QUOTE=Street_Fighting_Man;13311330]I disagree. First of all, you can tell that they're waaayyy more accustomed and comfortable playing Tommy on stage. Roger sounds so much better in the 89 show than he does in the 96 one. In the Quadrophenia show he is really straining which bothers me a bit, seeing as 1973 performances of it live sound so much better.

Plus there's a lot of annoying backing vocals in that show, which put Love, Reign O'er Me and Dr. Jimmy off balance, because those two demand a strong lead vocal performance. Also, noone will ever sing Bell Boy like Keith! :p The guest stars in Quadrophenia just don't seem to fit like they do in Tommy; they seem to really bring those songs down. Whereas Phil Collins doing Fiddle About and Tommy's Holiday Camp give it a comical flavor, uhh who is it Simon Townshend? makes The Dirty Jobs a chore to listen to because I love Roger's performance in that song. Same thing with that P.J. Proby.

But then again, Tommy performed 1969/70 ****s all over both those performances, and so does the 1973 Quad shows, however technically challenged they were, they could make it sound good.[/QUOTE]
i've viewed the Quad disc and will be reviewing it for sputnik today. needless to say i love it. the things you don't like about it i like quite a lot. i thought the guest performers for the Tommy disc seemed ill suited and tacked on. they just strolled on, intruded on the show, and strolled off. i like the way they were presented on the Quad disc, and feel Idol did a great job. and simon and pete singing together for The Dirty Jobs? they sounded great! and i felt the camera captured them nicely. i also like the way the DVD captured the show by showing the film clips using the actual concert sound and screen. And while Daltrey does strain throughout, thats nothing new for him in his career. and watching him give it a go is kind of inspiring, IMO. such a powerful singer.

Tommy performed with such a big band was kind of a disappointment because The Who had mastered it for stage long before. Quadrophenia needed this, IMO. it really brought the album to life. The Who did this because they could not do it in the '70's, and full performances of Quad were soon scrapped because the backing tapes needed and musical granduer necessary simply made it impossible for The Who to do. These performances fixed all that, IMO. And Quad got the treatment it has long deserved. Its really exciting for me to watch. And the DVD looks and sounds great.

Hello Again

I should have made it clear that the username "Pete Townshend" had already been taken thus I had to leave the "h" out of Townshend. Hope it doesn't bother you. Anyways I hope you guys/girls are all coming out to our North American Tour.

-Pete

Mr. Townsend, nobody will believe that it's you on an internet forum. And i'm already going :)

oic, pete. and i see you have a little rep already, too. pretty good for a n00b.

tell me pete, where did you get the windmill from? was it bowling? no. if you are the real pete you will know the answer to this...

:shifty:

he can just wikipedia this, dude

wiki doesn't know what i know :cool:

Gehe, so reallyPete Townshend? Tell me what did Roger got thrown at his body and where @ hyde park calling? And how did the press liked that show?

good job with your mix of 1st and 3rd person perspective

[QUOTE=JXD;13313190]
Quadrophenia needed this, IMO. it really brought the album to life. The Who did this because they could not do it in the '70's, and full performances of Quad were soon scrapped because the backing tapes needed and musical granduer necessary simply made it impossible for The Who to do. These performances fixed all that, IMO. And Quad got the treatment it has long deserved. Its really exciting for me to watch. And the DVD looks and sounds great.[/QUOTE]
Yeah, that's what The Who will say, and that's what Who history says, but have you actually heard Quadrophenia from that time period? With Daltrey in top form, Moon singing Bell Boy like a champ, and Townshend being more prominent, the performance just blows away the 96 show. Regardless of what the general attitude is to the early Quadrophenia shows, they DID have some good ones.

So you're trying to say that the Tommy DVD is better because the older Quadrophenia performances were better than the performance on the Quad DVD? You mentioned yourself that the Tommy tours from 1969-1970 blew away their other years, so I don't see the point you're making.

wow, a Who thread. They're my favorite band of all time.

[QUOTE=Lunch;13315484]So you're trying to say that the Tommy DVD is better because the older Quadrophenia performances were better than the performance on the Quad DVD? You mentioned yourself that the Tommy tours from 1969-1970 blew away their other years, so I don't see the point you're making.[/QUOTE]
No, I was responding to his point that the Quadrophenia shows in 96 were somehow superior to what Quadrophenia live in the 70s was, which I disagree with. I don't think they needed the extra band and the backup singers to pull it off.

I think that the earlier performances of both of these rock operas were better, but that's given, and I already explained why I thought Tommy was better on the DVD.

Fair enough. I like Tommy much more than Quadrophenia, but still I just don't buy into the performance on the DVD. The Quad performance was just much more effective, to me.

Fair enough, for the record, Pete's performance of Drowned on that DVD is way cool.

[QUOTE=Seafroggys;13314985]good job with your mix of 1st and 3rd person perspective[/QUOTE]

Ooops


But it wouldbe cool if it really was Townshend

[QUOTE=User Name;13315501]wow, a Who thread. They're my favorite band of all time.[/QUOTE]

cool! They're my second favorite!