Quote
clapton71
They did seem to be enjoying themselves. I thought Pete assisted more w/the lyrics.Light show was awesome. I'm happy they didn't have the wannabe's around the stage making spectacles of themselves. Cool concept.

I agree, it was great that they didn't have all those "hired fans" waving their hands in the air. That always looks so phony. The round stage with all the lights was a fantastic idea. Too bad they can't use something like that at an actual show.

Everyone seemed to be rooting for the Saints!! After Porter intercepted Peyton the entire end zone crowd was going crazy when he scored. What a great game!!!!

haha, hilarious!

"They've played together for a 100 years. It's the same fake look they always have.""

We are on a Rolling Stones forum aint we?

Quote
tatters

Quote
Gazza
Horrible sound mix as always in the half time show. Really dont know why these bands can be bothered.

They can be bothered because the audience numbers in the hundreds of millions and results in a temporary 500 to 600 percent increase in catalog sales.

The Stones jump in sales in the week after THEIR appearance was barely noticeable, oddly enough - and that was despite a pretty decent performance.

Their all over the Who's performance here in the states. The morons would rather see somebody who is alot younger than Pete and Roger

Go listen to barry manilow then, if you're not interested in seein and listening too rock n roll.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2010-02-08 18:22 by black n blue.

Waited half the night to tape The Who before I went to bed. When it came - it was not syncron!!

Per-Arne

this is shitty rock´n roll, shitty songs, performed in a shitty way too. no thanks.

The should have three fast numbers then
Can't explain
Kids are allright
Substitute

They looked great with lots of energy and power. Great stage and lights. I think this worked for the casual fan. I have caved in on the purist approach to the superbowl. I think they have to use the tapes and with the length of their songs the medley is understandable. It seemed like lots of Roger's vocals were on tape but I was pleased to hear him sounding better than some of the things I have seen recently. I thought the rhythm of the band was off a little but hard to hear the Who with two guitars. From other things I have seen Pete seems to be playing as good as ever and I am not sure the second guitar helps the sound more than it hurts it. I missed Roger twirling the mike. I thought when he had a corded mike he would do that for sure. maybe they cut out the part of the songs where he could fit that in if he still does this.

Quote
black n blue
Their all over the Who's performance here in the states. The morons would rather see somebody who is alot younger than Pete and Roger

Same no matter who it is.

Works both ways....had it been someone a third of their age, the likes of us would be moaning about how they cant play live, have no decent songs etc.

No matter how popular any act or genre is, they're always going to only appeal to a small minority of the public.

Hardly worth getting worked up about. The half time show is a cheesefest thats almost as far removed from rock n roll as its possible to get. Its 12 minutes of prime time family entertainment, where the performer is merely a side attraction to the main event. Nothing more.

this is shitty rock´n roll, shitty songs, performed in a shitty way too. no thanks.

Precise, thoughtful and insightful post. How do you do it?

You can't please everybody. The post that I see in the states is that their OLD!

i was ok.....c'mon its a spectacle.......the Romans would be happy

Roger didn't lip sync very good. There were a couple of really obvious moments where his mouth stopped moving while there was singing going on.

Overall, it was good. Not great, but good. For me though it's more funny that The Who played the Who Dat Bowl.

Just seen the Who's performance on Youtube.

...absolutely fantastic!!!!!!!

I am reading a lot of comments from people slamming the Who about their age. What exactly is too old for people. 30? 40? 50? Most of the super famous performers out there are in their 40's at least! IF these people want "acts" in their 20's it's gonna be UGLY having to hear Britney,Christina,Jonas,Gaga,Kanye. YUCK!

Quote
sweetcharmedlife
The Who was bloody awful and I love their music. The vocals were clearly taped and Daltrey's voice still sounded strained. Roger and Pete seemed out of sync. The sound was awful. Pete did play a few nice solos. AS far as they looked like they were enjoying themselves. They've played together for a 100 years. It's the same fake look they always have.

Yeah, I love The Who but I was kind of embarrassed for them. It may have been audio problems on my television, but I thought it was mixed poorly, especially during Pinball Wizard and Who Are You. It all appeared to be out of synch too. The audio didn't appear to match the video which causes one to think the audio is dubbed. Aside from those distractions, I liked it.

I think they did pretty good. Certainly a lot different than The Who I saw in '68 at the singer Bowl in queens NY, but this was not the embarrassment that was predicted.

I doubt the vocals were dubbed. The part where Roger harp at the end looks like it was

The sounds thru my old Klipsch KG-4 sounded great

Quote
Ket

Quote
Elmo Lewis
Congrats to Skip and EG. I thought The Who were great! Best halftime show ever.

you have to be joking, it was horrible

Of course he was kidding !!! It was a joke .....

Unfortunately for me, I didn't attend to the Super Bowl half-time show !

IMO ,the "Who" sounds horrible .
I loved the Who on live many years ago .



I am fed up with the " look like that felt good" comments "
Always the "politically correct" sentences ,hey ???

NO,the band didn't feel so good !!
Even the Stones were better at the time of the SB...



I am a Frenchie ,as Mick affectionately called them in the Old Grey Whistle Test in 1977 .

The onside kick was a brilliant tactic. In order to defeat a savy opponent, venom must be shown!! Especially WhoDat venom!

Sunday's Super Bowl is most-watched program ever (in the US)

Wow! Everyone rooting for New Orleans....

[www.msnbc.msn.com]

The Who didnt cut it for me. Sorry. I would rather see a younger band. They have the "classic rock" bands play because 75% of the audience at the Super Bowl are older fat white guys.

Sorry but it;s the truth.

Did you see Steve Winwood? Awful.
The Who sounded pretty lame. Maybe it was the mix. Roger seemed out of breath. I don;t know....It was more like Pete/Roger vs. the Who. I havent enjoyed the Who since Who Are You anyway so....


I think that they should have newer acts up there myself. I would rather see someone on par with Green Day than a classic rock band like The Who.The Who are past their prime, let's see bands that are in their prime. there are a lot of really good rock bands out there that could use that exposure. What about putting a JAck White band up there, ot Black Rebel Motorcycle Club, The Donnas,even Brian Setzer


THE SAINTS were great!! I wonder if Edith Grove made it home yet.

Quote
Rochdale3
Sunday's Super Bowl is most-watched program ever (in the US)

Wow! Everyone rooting for New Orleans....

[www.msnbc.msn.com]

As it should be... However, CBS production broadcast was horrific. For example the noisy jingle musical effects for player introductions, halftime and CBS TV promotions, and the poor field position graphics were too much for the nerves. Commercials before and after each kickoff return?

However the announcers were solid (Nantz and Simms).

I was disappointed. They looked flat compared to the Concert For New York City, 8 years ago.

The light set-up and distance from the audience probably diminished their effectiveness. They feed off the energy of the audience, like at NYC and that was lacking here.

They did well but the stage set-up and camera panning in and out diminished their peformance.

The Concert for New York City was stolen by the Who. They put on one of the greatest rock performances ever. [url=

]



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2010-02-08 21:26 by fuwa.

>>I wonder if Edith Grove made it home yet.<<


Just barely.

I mean, what do you expect? Roger is 65 and Pete is 64. Try screaming at the top of your lungs a few thousand times as in "Wont get fooled again" and see if your voice sounds strained. Yea they've played together for a 100 years..what group other than "The Stones" have been together that long. I understand it's a business relationship..but other groups couldn't even get along when it came to business.....



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2010-02-08 21:43 by reg thorpe.

Just seen the Who gig at Superbowl with a big thankyou to shortfatfanny and I thought the Who were great !! Last time I saw them was at Indigo 2 at the O2 which was a terrific show and despite all the razamatazz and commercialism of the US of A they were on top form as usual.I love this band as much as the Stones but the only moan I have is that they are going after the big bucks now since I seen their ticket prices for RAH. I know it's for charity but I saw their last gig there a couple of years ago for the same charity.As was normal for the Who at the time,it was affordable for most fans but I will not pay £200 for decent tix,charity or not!!!

Quote
Chris Fountain
The onside kick was a brilliant tactic. In order to defeat a savy opponent, venom must be shown!! Especially WhoDat venom!

[nfl.cpa.delvenetworks.com]