A treasury and a place to meet people of all ages with various interests from all over the World
Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  

News:

PLEASE READ OUR FORUM RULES HERE

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 10
 21 
 on: Yesterday at 04:18:42 AM 
Started by peregrine9 - Last post by peregrine9
Kent Online
8/31/2014
Yoko Ono set to visit First World War memorial arch opened by Prince Harry in Folkestone as Triennial arts festival opens

http://www.kentonline.co.uk/folkestone/news/artist-yoko-to-visit-war-22559/

Pages Six
8/29/2014
Yoko Ono’s publicist sues Eataly for $20M after bouncer ‘beatdown’

http://pagesix.com/2014/08/29/yoko-onos-publicist-sues-eatalys-birreria/

Ken Online
8/30/2014
Yoko Ono provides greeting for people arriving at Folkestone Triennial arts festival

http://www.kentonline.co.uk/folkestone/news/message-of-peace-as-festival-22643/




 22 
 on: Yesterday at 03:02:36 AM 
Started by Hombre_de_ningun_lugar - Last post by stevie
I agree. I always say that a main difference between the Who and Led Zeppelin, for example, is the songwriting. The Who were an unusual combination of virtuosity and great songwriting.

Love both bands but always felt that Zep's one weakness was their lyrics. Often shallow and about nothing but the strength of the music always covered any weaker lyrics. The Who on the other hand sometimes sounded less well produced as a whole but their lyrics were usually pretty good.

 23 
 on: Yesterday at 02:59:58 AM 
Started by Hombre_de_ningun_lugar - Last post by stevie
One of the best albums in history. I recall first hearing it in about 1977 at a mates place. He used to play his older brothers stuff.

Behind Blue Eyes is one of the best ever songs written too. Love My Wife too though the vocals are mixed a bit low.

Keith's drumming on WGFA is among the best of all time too.

 24 
 on: August 31, 2014, 08:43:57 PM 
Started by Hombre_de_ningun_lugar - Last post by Hombre_de_ningun_lugar
Agree with that completely. The Who of My Generation are untouchable. Like The Small Faces they were good at three minute bursts of energy. I  find 70's The Who over wrought and pompous.  Each to their own though.

I think only Quadrophenia showed certain pomposity, though I still like it. In my opinion, the essence of Who's Next belong more to the late 60's than the 70's. The Who By Numbers is anything but a pompous album. And Who Are You is hard rock with some experimentation, recorded during the height of disco music.

 25 
 on: August 31, 2014, 08:33:43 PM 
Started by Hombre_de_ningun_lugar - Last post by Hombre_de_ningun_lugar
I think the Who were one of the few bands who could be hard rock while maintaining interesting songwriting elements. Too many hard rock bands to me went for songs of three or four major chords. Little variation or substituting interesting chords. That can be fine for a few songs but gets tedious pretty quickly.

I agree. I always say that a main difference between the Who and Led Zeppelin, for example, is the songwriting. The Who were an unusual combination of virtuosity and great songwriting.

 26 
 on: August 31, 2014, 05:00:42 PM 
Started by Euan Buchan - Last post by Badgirl66
On the Way September/November 2014.....

The Apple Years 1968-75 by George Harrison

and Macca Deluxe Boxes Venus And Mars/At The Speed Of Sound

German Book/A Cellerful Of Noise by Brian Epstein

 27 
 on: August 31, 2014, 01:28:57 PM 
Started by McLennon - Last post by Kevin
I can see the big attraction to mid sixties Dylan. He's a punk on a street corner with his guitar, snarling at the world. How many kids heard him and thought I cando that! That Dylan showed you didn't need a "good" voice or be technically proficient at your instrument is a revelation. His impact upon popular music is, as with The Beatles and Elvis, beyond measure.
I can see why Beatle fans don't like him. There's no jangling guitar or sweet harmonies, and his lyrics can be a little inaccessible. But over-rated! Dylan! I cannot agree.

 28 
 on: August 31, 2014, 08:56:44 AM 
Started by Hombre_de_ningun_lugar - Last post by Kevin
There's a logic to going heavy.
You play in huge (American) stadiums, you've got to be more expansive/theatrical/loud/brash.
And that is going to translate to your records.
I just don't like it!

 

Agree with that completely. The Who of My Generation are untouchable. Like The Small Faces they were good at three minute bursts of energy. I  find 70's The Who over wrought and pompous.  Each to their own though.

 29 
 on: August 30, 2014, 11:02:35 PM 
Started by Hombre_de_ningun_lugar - Last post by Moogmodule
That may be true, but I just see the Who as a hard rock band, and this album in particular is hard rock embellished with artistic issues.

I think the Who were one of the few bands who could be hard rock while maintaining interesting songwriting elements. Too many hard rock bands to me went for songs of three or four major chords. Little variation or substituting interesting chords. That can be fine for a few songs but gets tedious pretty quickly.


 30 
 on: August 30, 2014, 08:49:49 PM 
Started by Mrs JWL - Last post by In My Life
Oh Kathy...why couldn't they just leave our illusions alone??

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 ... 10

Page created in 1.199 seconds with 22 queries.