I saw the who last night in Chicago and I gotta say honestly, they were better than the stones. They played non-stop (save for a brief encore break) for 2 and half hours. In that time the energy didnt seem to waiver at all, and Rogers voice was strong throughout. Pete windmilled, lept about and played with great intensity. As always Starkey was in great form, playing with a nice but ferocious sound. However most amazing was Pino Palladino on bass. Since replacing Entwistle 3 and half years ago, Palladino has really come into his own. WHile not as flashy as Entwistles playing (but then again who could be?) Palladino is solid and loud. This was the first show where i could literally feel his presence.
Overall a great show (even if the surrounding audience was rather lethargic and security were being pricks). Highlights for me included a great version of Naked Eye (a song id been hoping to see for awhile) a great jam on My Generation and the Tommy section. If given the chance, go see these guys, they still rock!

They obviously played like they still have something to prove; like they care... or like they're being bootleged!

Great to hear that. Not too surprised by how great they're doing. I always sensed that Pete and Roger were two serious musicians that were incredibly focused. Pete if anything is pretty hard to distract, it seems. Pete is extremely serious on and off the stage...Keith is a bit of screwball (compared to Pete). Keith can try his ultimate best but as he gets older has found it harder to maintain that zone for the entire 2 hours.

Pete's still an artist. Keith's an "ol' scruffy pal - aww, idn't 'e neat? Greadabe anywhehh, mah, he he heh... eehhh... Commere mah, gimme sume o geeeehrrhhhhhh"

hey they kicked the stones ass at the circus, they kicked the stones ass at live aid and they kicked the stones ass at the concert for newyork, yeah i know at the later two the stones were not at full force, but would it really have mattered

The Stones didn't play at Live Aid but your point is taken

i just said they werent at full force didnt i

Did they play We're not gonna take it from Tommy?

I'm going Friday night.

ChrisM Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> The Stones didn't play at Live Aid but your point
> is taken


they didnt play at the Concert for NY either

Its a moot point saying the Who were better than what was basically a solo performance with a guest act

For what its worth, as a big Who fan, I thought they were terrible at Live Aid. Such a letdown.

its not the whos fault that the stones couldnt pull it together at those two shows, the stones went with what they had and got beat

i love the who; i am surprised and delighted that this version of who2 seems to be kicking ass and delighting fans...i can appreciate some of the keith/pete comparisons and comments, but i don't get how the who having a great night out makes the stones any lesser...interesting thread and all...but ya know?
i mean there are nights the who weren't active, or were 'off' in shows when the stones were kicking it seriously fine...that wasn't a comment on the who...and vice versa...u know what i mean...it's a good for everybody the more really good rock concerts are available from the last of this incredible breed of rockers...it gives the whole scene a postive kick in the ass i think. they're all old friends thru thick and thin from waaay back...it's good they're all out there this summer...very cool. very. again, especially delighted and a little surprised that the who are getting such continuous raves here and elsewhere in the culture. u know that can't be bad

I had a great night when I saw the Who last year in Brighton and they were fantastic - and I hope to see them again very soon. But for me, the excitement which they generated was no way comparable to what the Stones pull off. The two shows are different kettles of fish. I have always loved the Who but given the choice I know who I'd still always go and see first.

melillo Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> its not the whos fault that the stones couldnt
> pull it together at those two shows

correct. A missed opportunity for sure.

, the stones
> went with what they had

Not correct. Neither show was a "Stones" performance, so how could they 'go with what they had' ?. They were both Mick Jagger solo performances (in both cases he conveniently had a new solo album out) as the Stones declined to play as a band, only for Keith to have a last minute change of mind and decide to show up as an unannounced guest at each event. To compare both "bands" performances is irrelevant as one of the bands simply werent there. You may as well compare them to the performances at each event by The Beatles, who also werent at either show, although McCartney was, and playing Beatle songs.

>and got beat

it was a competition? Jagger was better than the Who were at Live Aid anyway.



Edited 1 time(s). Last edit at 2007-03-07 03:05 by Gazza.

The Who are a great band
But so are the stones
I'd love to see the Who,
but, if given another chance to choose
between the stones and the Who again...
i would probley pick the stones xD
I had a great time
but im sure The Who
would be awesome.

[[FEAR; BUILDS WALLS.]]

melillo Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> its not the whos fault that the stones couldnt
> pull it together at those two shows, the stones
> went with what they had and got beat

No it's not the Who's fault but the Who outplaying the exhausted Stones at the Rock And Roll Circus, outplaying Mick Jagger solo at Live Aid, and outplaying Jagger/Richards at The Concert For New York, doesn't equate to the Who being a better live band than the Stones.

I heard a quote from Roger Daltry the other day were he said The Who is the greatest rock band in the world and The Rolling Stones are the greatest Rock & Roll band in the world. Huh. I don't quite get the distinction. I have always liked Stones music better than The Who. I have seen some very good Who shows over the years. But I think at this stage of thier careers,the Stones are much better than The Who in studio and live. And I can do a pretty good comparison since both have recently released new material and I have seen both bands live fairly recently.

jagger was great at live aid up until that sillyness with tina, that takes away a bit from his otherwise great performance, but the who were solid throughout imho, others may differ, now zep on the otherhand were downright awful

1981 - First saw the Stones - Highlight of my life to that point (excepting sex)
1982 - The Who blew the Stones asses away

The Stones have since reclaimed the title (Charlotte 1999, among others), but the Who were truly awesome the only time I've seen them.

JaggerFan Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> They obviously played like they still have
> something to prove; like they care... or like
> they're being bootleged!



or filmed for a DVD.

the shoot 'em dead, brainbell jangler!

'who' are we talking about?

I just saw them last week in San Diego, a great show, powerful. I hadn't really thought about comparing the two, it would be a bit difficult.

I made my comments in another post a few days ago about Why Does the Who Do Things the Stones Can't or Won't. One thing I did not mention was that at a fair number of times, Daltrey's voice seemed hoarse, but at other times fine (he nailed the final scream in Won't Get Fooled Again).

I love them both 1)Stones and 2)Who and hope to see them both in their hometown this summer.

Plexiglass

They are my two favorite bands of all time - the only thing is I haven't seen the Who live since 1982 in Birmingham......even now they are skipping Memphis (a basketball game conflict, no doubt) but I have tickets to Little Rock....after reading this thread I am ready to start bouncing off the walls!

Stuffing some Who music on the ol' iPod as we speak......

is this the farewell for now tour?

Last time I saw them was their last tour with Entwhistle, where they toured with The Black Crowes and Jimmy Page. They were incredible!

Happy Jack Wrote:
-------------------------------------------------------
> I saw the who last night in Chicago and I gotta
> say honestly, they were better than the stones.
> They played non-stop (save for a brief encore
> break) for 2 and half hours. In that time the
> energy didnt seem to waiver at all, and Rogers
> voice was strong throughout. Pete windmilled, lept
> about and played with great intensity. As always
> Starkey was in great form, playing with a nice but
> ferocious sound. However most amazing was Pino
> Palladino on bass. Since replacing Entwistle 3 and
> half years ago, Palladino has really come into his
> own. WHile not as flashy as Entwistles playing
> (but then again who could be?) Palladino is solid
> and loud. This was the first show where i could
> literally feel his presence.
> Overall a great show (even if the surrounding
> audience was rather lethargic and security were
> being pricks). Highlights for me included a great
> version of Naked Eye (a song id been hoping to see
> for awhile) a great jam on My Generation and the
> Tommy section. If given the chance, go see these
> guys, they still rock!

I guess you're the same Happy Jack as on the Who's forum?
Good to hear they are carrying the momentum...I saw them a couple of times last year, and am due to see them a couple of times this year too (Albert Hall & Wembley).
As for other's comments about which is the better band...well, that's just down to personal preference, isn't it? Who cares?

Personally I'm hoping the Stones play London again in June, a few days before or after the Who, that will make a week to remember....

Lee

I saw The Who in Indy last night and was blown away! I know there are several factors or excuses in play here...but while watching Pete last night I thought "Hey Keith and Ronnie, check Mr. Townsend out. He's had his share of demons to deal with in his life too but he still has his chops! Seriously, just to get to watch Pete play as only he can to 2+ hours is worth the price of admission.

Have not seen the WHO since 2002 @ MSG in NYC. A really great show - one of the best.

I am seeing the WHO again tomorrow night at the Verizon Center in Washington, D.C.

Thanks for the positive review.

Looking even more forward to seeing the show tomorrow night in DC.

The Who has lost its original drummer and bass player. The two surviving Beatles are the drummer and the bass player.

These two bands should merge. They could call themselves the Wheatles.

Or . . . the Boo.

lmatth8461 wrote:
"I guess you're the same Happy Jack as on the Who's forum?"

No he is not, I am.