Re: (TV) Ray / Marc /Ziggy

[eric s gregory <esgregory@uswest.net>]

alright, alright...before somebody dies of coniption....i didn't say "who's next"
was a lesser work...merely said it was overrated (a la the beatles in toto)...AND
I SAID IT AS A MERE SIDEBAR....my point being that the who (or townshend) of the
60s thru "who's next" could rank alongside (or maybe even better) beatles &
kinks...
& not to belabor the point, but lennon himself said he'd never have written the
songs he had for "rubber soul" had it not been for dylan's previous pathfinding &
influence.
& george martin was as responsible for all the symphonic pretense of the later
records.
blame george harrison for the sitars & "ragas".

& props to sam for spelling out with detailed conviction why ray davies was so
important.

OwenGwilliam@cs.com wrote:

> In a message dated 5/22/00 8:38:08 PM Eastern Daylight Time,
> esgregory@uswest.net writes:
>
> > thing is, we could make as equally a compelling argument for the who from
> the
> > debut thru "who's next" (an overrated album, if there ever was one).
>
> I've been laying low on this thread, but I've got to chime in here.
>
> WHO'S NEXT may have been played to death by FM radio (specifically "Baba
> O'Riley", "Bargain", and "Won't Get Fooled Again"), but despite that, the
> songs hold up masterfully. If you ignore the number of times you heard it
> before and listen to build up in "Baba O'Riley" from the pulsing synth, to
> the piano, to the rest of the band ... it's just magnificent. And the closer,
> "Song Is Over", is one of Townshend's finest. Overrated? Not even close.
> Easily in the "top 10 all time". Personally, I prefer QUADROPHENIA, but WHO'S
> NEXT is definitely the masterpiece. About the only fault with the record is
> that it wasn't a double to make room for stuff like "Pure And Easy", "Join
> Together" and "The Relay".
>
> Dylan vs. The Beatles. I think the Beatles may be taking an extra bashing
> here because of familiarity. Did I read in the thread that The Beatles
> weren't as innovative as Dylan? That's ridiculous. The Beatles went from no
> frills pop group in '64 to a classic like REVOLVER by '66 and PEPPER by '67.
> Once they hit RUBBER SOUL, their sound kept changing and innovating. Dylan
> was definitely ballsy for putting electric guitars into folk, no question,
> and Dylan is also a tremendous songwriter, but more innovative than the
> Beatles? I don't see it.
>
> I'm not even that big a Beatles fan, but you've got to give them their due.
> Yes, it's been said to death, and yes, everyone gets compared to the Beatles,
> but it wasn't pure serendipity and timing. That helped, but the music is/was
> there.
>
>     -- Owen
>
> Owen Gwilliam
> http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/otg
> http://shadowy.brainiac.com (The Shadowy Page On A Shadowy Web)
>
> "America is such a powerful country that everyone in the world ought to be
> able to vote for President. But you'd never allow that because you know that
> if that happened, the next President of the United States would be Frank
> Zappa." -- Billy Connolly, 1988
> --------------
> To post: Mail tv@obbard.com
> To unsubscribe: Mail majordomo@obbard.com with message "unsubscribe tv"

--------------
To post: Mail tv@obbard.com
To unsubscribe: Mail majordomo@obbard.com with message "unsubscribe tv"