Quote
reg thorpe

Quote
Kurt
They have been running radio ads here in Detroit for the upcoming show, which is still selling horribly despite the ticket fire-sale.

(insert BIG ANNOUNCER VOICE here
THE WHO is finally MOVING ON!

Then they play Roger's classic Won't Get Fooled Again scream...
YEAHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH!
Full powered electric riffs that crash into MY GENERATION and Pinball Wizard.

Not a single mention of an orchestra.

You've been warned...

I appreciate the fact that The Who are trying something new and different by bringing an orchestra into the mix and they are in the process of producing a new album of material be it good/bad or mixed... I give them a pass; at least they are not sitting on their laurels by dragging out the old greatest hits package show done a million times before.

I agree but...
they should have the balls to advertise it that way too then.

Look at their setlists 2019. Of course they are sitting on their laurels. The play songs from Quad & Tommy, albums they are most famous for! Plus the well-known warhorses. Played by a torso that once was The Who and unfortunately the singing is.... very far from the days of old.

I appreciate the idea of releasing a new album but even if it would be 10 times better than disastrous Wire & Glass, it would be average at best... They released one album since 1982(!) but are touring since then, if that isn´t resting on their laurels, I don´t know what...

this HMS person seems to have an ae to grind with the who

Quote
keefriffhard4life
this HMS person seems to have an ae to grind with the who

I agree keefriffhard4life HMS does have an axe to grind with the who.

big risk for the who to tour with an orchestra.
ticket sales have been lackluster plus the cost of paying and transporting the orchestra to and from shows and to berate them for not having advertised that an orchestra would be playing with them as if they did that purposely to sell more tickets and to hoodwink the public is a bit far fetched imho

Quote
keefriffhard4life
this HMS person seems to have an ae to grind with the who

What Who? As far as I can see there are just two men pretending...

Quote
HMS

Quote
keefriffhard4life
this HMS person seems to have an ae to grind with the who

What Who? As far as I can see there are just two men pretending...

Pretending to be who?

Get it?!! ><

Quote
HMS

Quote
keefriffhard4life
this HMS person seems to have an ae to grind with the who

What Who? As far as I can see there are just two men pretending...

ok you have an axe to grind with roger and pete. sorry the band was broken up from 1983-1996 . they did 1 performance in 1985 and a 25th anniversary tour in 1989.in 1996 they did a tour specifically to help john who was practically broke at that point. they did a handful of new tunes from 1985-1992, "dig', "saturday nights alright for fighting" and "fire". since 1999 when they decided to full on do the who again they have released 1 album and 3 other new songs plus are about to release another album. guess what, since the year 2000 the rolling stones have also released just 2 albums and a few other tunes that were on hits releases. one of those albums are songs they didn't even write. are you going to knock them too for releasing 2 albums the last 20+ years?

Roger & Pete with xx don't = The Who.
Just as Mick & Keith don't = The Stones.


Went to their first farewell tour in the early eighties, saw them last at Desert Trip. Enjoyed both concerts very much. Some might say based on that I haven't ever seen The Who. I say I saw them once, but could easily see losing that debate.

Of course it is disappointing that the Stones did only record two albums since 2000. But at least the band is still rightfully able to call themselves The Rolling Stones (Roger/Pete are NOT since they lost core members that just can´t be replaced). Although the Stones are on a creative low level they still put on a show bursting with energy. Mick´s voice is more or less 85% what it used to be, Charlie is still a steady drummer, the guitar department is sometimes on, sometimes off just as ever. All in all they seem to be much fresher and less worn out & tired.

The group of musicians that travels as "The Who" is suffering from lack of energy, passion and last not least credibility. And their lead singer´s voice isn´t more than 35% of what it used to be (sad but true, listen to several live albums they released since 2000).

Btw, Pete nowadays sings horrible too. He´s rather bawling than singing.

Saw The Who in 2016...and guess what...it was a great show.
Stones original line-up changed to 3/5 ...and by HMS logic
they are not the Stones...
When Led Zeppelin did the 2007 show...was it really Led Zeppelin
without John Bonham ?
HMS made his point clear...more than once.
Message understood...but now you could give it a rest.

Quote
HMS

The group of musicians that travels as "The Who" is suffering from lack of energy, passion and last not least credibility. And their lead singer´s voice isn´t more than 35% of what it used to be (sad but true, listen to several live albums they released since 2000).

Btw, Pete nowadays sings horrible too. He´s rather bawling than singing.

Nobody cares...I saw them in 2016...stood up on the opening chord, didn't sit down till it was over. They were great. Pete is the soul of The Who...not Keith Moon or John Entwistle...

The Who in Vienna 2016....Was Great.... Ga in front of stage!!!!!!!

Quote
HMS
Of course it is disappointing that the Stones did only record two albums since 2000. But at least the band is still rightfully able to call themselves The Rolling Stones (Roger/Pete are NOT since they lost core members that just can´t be replaced). Although the Stones are on a creative low level they still put on a show bursting with energy. Mick´s voice is more or less 85% what it used to be, Charlie is still a steady drummer, the guitar department is sometimes on, sometimes off just as ever. All in all they seem to be much fresher and less worn out & tired.

The group of musicians that travels as "The Who" is suffering from lack of energy, passion and last not least credibility. And their lead singer´s voice isn´t more than 35% of what it used to be (sad but true, listen to several live albums they released since 2000).

Btw, Pete nowadays sings horrible too. He´s rather bawling than singing.

mick it practically talking the songs now instead of singing. the stones golden era was 1966-1975. there were 6 members of the stones through those years. 1/2 of them are not on stage with them anymore. 1/2 the who aren't on stage. whats the difference

Quote
steverogan
I saw The Who at MSG w/orchestra. I thought it was a great show. Here is Love Reign O'er Me.
[www.youtube.com]

Was potus43 there too?


plexi

Quote
HMS

Quote
keefriffhard4life
this HMS person seems to have an ae to grind with the who

What Who? As far as I can see there are just two men pretending...

You are exhausting!

It is true, Roger used his voice in a different way than Mick. The result is that his voice is ruined after all these years of heavy use. Roger´s voice is done since the early 80s.

Some say they have seen them and "it was great". First thing, you paid a lot to see them, how could you say it was a waste of money... so of course it was GREAT! Next thing is the live-atmosphere, totally different to listening to a live-album in your living room... Most important thing is: The songs are GREAT, b-u-t the performance is lame, weak and a pale shadow of former glory. You see them onstage, you hear the GREAT songs and think you are at a great concert, but you aren´t. All you get is a distant echo of the past. Roger´s voice live lasts for three or four songs (at best) then it´s done. The live atmosphere, uneven live-sound and nostalgia leads most people to a point where they don´t notice that. But there are also (many) voices who say it´s been a bad show. These are the voices of reason.

people who pay to see someone don't automatically say its great. I've seen tons of positive reviews about this tour compared to the 2004-2013 tours

I paid...
it was @#$%& terrible.

Forget it, HMS.
You don't get it.

Quote
HMS
...Most important thing is: The songs are GREAT, b-u-t the performance is lame, weak and a pale shadow of former glory. You see them onstage, you hear the GREAT songs and think you are at a great concert, but you aren´t. All you get is a distant echo of the past. Roger´s voice live lasts for three or four songs (at best) then it´s done. The live atmosphere, uneven live-sound and nostalgia leads most people to a point where they don´t notice that. But there are also (many) voices who say it´s been a bad show. These are the voices of reason.

Like 'shortandfanny' notes above, you don't get...and probably never will...Your argument is ageism at its worst. Years ago I saw John Lee Hooker when I was a teenager. He was "a pale shadow of his former self' but guess what....the performance was entertaining, gratifying and enjoyable. I didn't care what he was like 50 years earlier.. I'll grant that as an older fan now my appreciation is tinged with nostalgia but the young fans that were beside me playing air-guitar in 2016 thought it was a good show too. Stop age-shaming The Who...it will come back to haunt you....

All the ads I have seen reference the band having an orchestra, it's well publicized. I don'think anyone holding a ticket is unaware of the presentation.

Quote
keefriffhard4life
this HMS person seems to have an axe to grind with the who

Get him an ox to grind.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2019-05-23 21:32 by Woz.

Moving On! TV spot (with orchestra)

[www.youtube.com]

Get him an ox to grind....><.......And hope I get old before I die

Quote
bye bye johnny
Moving On! TV spot (with orchestra)

[www.youtube.com]

Interesting, they show a bit of the dubbed scream at the end of Fooled Again but cut away from the end where it would be obvious.

Quote
bye bye Johnny

Moving On! TV spot (with orchestra)

[www.youtube.com]

The visuals are from 2019, but the audio is from their 1970s studio recordings. It's a tad deceptive. This is what they look like now, but it's not what they sound like now.

Quote
tatters

Quote
bye bye Johnny

Moving On! TV spot (with orchestra)

[www.youtube.com]

The visuals are from 2019, but the audio is from their 1970s studio recordings. It's a tad deceptive. This is what they look like now, but it's not what they sound like now.

I won’t get fooled again...

I saw The Who with Keith, with Kenney Jones, without Keith and Jones but with Entwistle, and with just the two. When I saw them in ‘99 they were maybe 60% of what they’d been, but they were still ferocious and awesome.

Roger’s voice is much better than it was 10 years ago. In 2006, I saw him leave the stage in Chicago for oxygen, and Pete carried on alone.

The show can still be excellent. The songs are great, and Zak is great on the drums. Both Roger and Pete can still sing. Pete can still play, and play exceptionally well.

Like the Stones, the menace is gone. But the big changes to me are the absence of the Ox, and Pete’s insistence that the volume of the bass be turned down. The ferocious bass lines Entwistle played were often the melody. They always challenged and were intertwined with Pete’s guitar (and the drums). Without them, it’s a very different band—-no matter how good a night Pete and Roger (and Zak) are having.

Quote
bam
I saw The Who with Keith, with Kenney Jones, without Keith and Jones but with Entwistle, and with just the two. When I saw them in ‘99 they were maybe 60% of what they’d been, but they were still ferocious and awesome.

Roger’s voice is much better than it was 10 years ago. In 2006, I saw him leave the stage in Chicago for oxygen, and Pete carried on alone.

The show can still be excellent. The songs are great, and Zak is great on the drums. Both Roger and Pete can still sing. Pete can still play, and play exceptionally well.

Like the Stones, the menace is gone. But the big changes to me are the absence of the Ox, and Pete’s insistence that the volume of the bass be turned down. The ferocious bass lines Entwistle played were often the melody. They always challenged and were intertwined with Pete’s guitar (and the drums). Without them, it’s a very different band—-no matter how good a night Pete and Roger (and Zak) are having.

i think Pete has evolved into a fantastic lead guitarist. his playing is much different now than during the who's heyday. i think i would rather see Pete do a proper solo tour than a who show. i have always liked his voice, at times more than daltrey's.

I could care less what they call themselves --- call it Pete and Roger. I mean I didn't really care that they didn't call it Led Zeppelin when I saw Page & Plant.