Funny how opinions can differ - I really wanted to like that new Who album and had high expectations, but just like Debra I did not really manage to listen to the whole thing even once. And I tried more than once. Live they are amazing, I am sure - saw a couple of DVDs and do rock, Pete is excellent on guitar still and Zak is a great drummer'

I'm sorry...i got the who in 1971 but today they don't speak to me...all i hear is tired, pedantic, self-important non-rock

all this about them being better than the stones ...they were never close...

must concur w/ texas - a friend played it for me once, and 'pedantic' is just right. The music is too fussy, as is the case on Pete's solo albums post "Rough Mix", and this need to be relevent, quote unquote, feeles deeply strained and makes the whole thing seem overwrought. It's the problem I always had with the Who - a great band that seemed so misdirected on record except on their classic singles and "Who's Next" or "By Numbers". Pete's songs too often feel INTENDED to resonate, uplift, Tell Truths, and Be Art. The real art is on "Anywhere Anyhow Anyway" and "I Can See For Miles".

Right, I did it wrong regarding post placement. But like the front page of the vegas paper & someone here said, they aren't even in the same leauge.

I must admit that I have been a Who fan since their beginning and yet I find it a struggle to listen to Endless Wire ..... it does nothing for me and leaves an expectation unfilled. Oh well ..........

"aren't even in the same league"?? "they were never close"???

Does anyone fit that description then?

john r Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
It's the problem
> I always had with the Who - a great band that
> seemed so misdirected on record except on their
> classic singles and "Who's Next" or "By Numbers".


I would strongly recommend a relisten to Quadrophenia.

I think ABB, EW and Other People's Lives are all worthy efforts by aging rockers but I would put ABB and OPL on a different level. They all have a lot of good songs but IMO EW doesn't have any songs that really stand out unlike the other too.

"Lyin' awake in a cold, cold sweat. Am I overdrawn, am I going in debt?
It gets worse, the older that you get. No escape from the state of confusion I'm in.

i love the who,but the album is a huge dissapointment.they were great live this summee and the endless wire stuff sounded pretty darn good live.it falls way short in the studio.abb is a million times better,case closed.

john scialfa

I love the Who.

I had so much hope for EW but it doesn't make the grade.

And Townsend's voice sounds like someone gargling diaretic toilet water. There is a reason he is a God guitarist and songwriter - he has a shit voice. For example, "Trilby's piano" or whatever it's called is repugnant - mainly due to his putrid voice.

The 'mini opera' (along with "2000 years") for the most part is the highlight of the album. Plenty of great starts to possibly great songs and they're not finished.

The opening track "Fragments" is the poor cousin of "Baba O'Riley" - it then returns for reasons unknown in the mini opera - the song ain't worth a reprise.

ABB kills it.

Lyrically I admit Jagger could have put more thought into it but I guess he tires of carrying the load of everything both studio and live.

That said, it's an album of extremes lyrically - one end of the spectrum being the maturity of SOL and LIND as opposed to the puerilty of OONYA and RJ - but musically the latter two stand well as Stones rockers so I guess we really shouldn't care anyway.

kyle m

Have you ever lent somebody $20 and never seen them again? It was probably worth it.

I like both albums. I m just glad they are still producing good music.