The Who To Tour In 2006!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Exactly!

 

Actually, what I meant was hearing a studio release, not live. Of course, either way.....not the Who. In my opinion.

Greg

 

Gee, I'm sure Pete would be so hurt to know some people don't think he should call his band The Who. He only started the group, wrote all the songs, played lead guitar and sang a bunch of the songs as well. Yeah, I'm sure all you purists used to go to Who shows to revel in Entwhistle's bass leads. You're insulted? Get over it. And don't go.
Page & Plant changed names more because the music was totally different from their old Led Zep days. You think if John Paul Jones was in the band again and they tok off for a hard rock tour they wouldn't call it Led Zeppelin? Like any drummer is irreplaceable. So maybe if Ringo quit the Beatles and they reforned they'd have to change the name.
Townshend could buy a country by now. Somehow I don't think he's going out on tour because he needs the dough. Fans of his music couldn't care less what it says on the ticket.

 

I was expecting that
but as long as the Who's performance is true and strong, I'd go

 

Zak and Rabbit (Bundrick) have toured with the group for so long they may as well be considered members at this date.

Count me in for tickets, as I have found their last five farewell tours to be more enjoyable than those of other bands.

 

I've seen The Who over a dozen times since 1974, and The Who don't exist anymore. Without Keith and John, it isn't the Who.

But they are the only way to see Roger Daltrey and Pete Townshend, both former Who members, live in 2006.

So, I hope that Zak is on, and that Pino is feeling edgy, and I'll go see my favorite living vocalist, and my favorite guitar player.

It won't be THE WHO, but it might be glorious none the less.

 

They could always call themselves the Daltrey/Townshend Band and call it "THE WHO TOUR". . .same difference, no?

 

I'm not sure what you mean by "greatest hits show" but to me that term connotes a show which is 90% or more oldies. All of the Who's shows prior to 1975 consisted of at least 50% new material (ie, stuff from their most recent album/singles), so I wouldn't call any of them greatest hits shows. The formula from 1975 to 1982 was "mostly oldies with 2-4 new songs sprinkled in" so I guess you could call those greatest hits shows. And I would call everything they've done since 1982 (including the 1989 Tommy shows) "greatest hits shows", with maybe the exception of the 1996-97 Quadrophenia tour.

 

Have you ever listened to the Pete Townshend demos of the Who material? You know, Scoop, volumes 1, 2, and 3? It's astonishing to hear. Pete Townshend IS the Who! Always was in fact, after the first two albums. He had everything figured out, down to the detailed arrangements. Some more evidence is on the demos on Tommy Deluxe that came out a couple years ago. Exceptions would be the handful of songs Entwhistle wrote. Much as I liked Entwhistle and Moon's playing, they actually added little to the overall composition and feel on a lot of the tunes. Plus, I've always liked Pete's singing better than Roger's anyway. I wish he would just go all solo and forget about "The Who". They've run their course, IMO.

 

You are quite right about Pete having *all* of The Who's music in his head, that the music was complete without the other performers.

During their heyday, I still think that the other members created an energy level in that music that no one performer could have sustained, particularly in concert. And Pete would be the first to admit that he cannot play bass like John, or drums like Keith.

However, the heyday was long ago. And I believe Pete misses Keith and John terribly. And for all the bickering between Roger and Pete, I'm not sure that Pete would bother at all if Roger wasn't encouraging (nudging?) him.

Recent posts by Pete on his site indicate that he's just learning to enjoy these shows now.
I think he's found Roger's attitude contagious, and that 2006 could be *very* special.

It just won't be THE WHO of 1976....

 

"I hope I die before I get old."

 

Well, all 6. Remember Rabbit who has been on tour with them forever and Simon Townshend has been on tour at last the past one or two.

Frankly, these past few tours are ultimatly better than the "experience" tours of 1989 and Quadrophenia with the masses of extra people IMHO Sure without John there the dynamic changes a bit, but Pino has said himself he's not trying to *be* John.

 

My problem with the Who touring, despite the increasing amount of the dead, is the fact they've been practically a tribute band for the past what.... twenty years or so?

In the end though if the kids go out and get a kick out of the show I'll hold no grudge... not to mention when I tried to voice my opinions my phone calls went unreturned.

 

No, that would make no sense of course, but it isn't the same situation. Entwhistle and Moon didn't create the music, they played their instruments. John and George are irreplaceable because of their compositions, arrangements, and singing styles.
And of course Entwhistle and Moon are replaceable. Zak is a very good drummer to step into Moon's shoes, and they still sound like the Who. The bass playing is a kind of foundation and as long as the bassist gets the chords and notes more or less the same it will sound OK. Not nearly as dynamic and exciting as the Ox, but still...

 

considering the amount of Who threads and fans in this forum, i'm surprised so many forum members partaking in this thread seem down about this tour and the possibility of a greatest hits type show....besides there was an announcement of new material....so they're sure to play some of that...

The could call it Who's Left i suppose but if Petes there, its the Who as far as I'm concerned. An earlier post nailed it on the head, listen to Scoop, you know who the WHO really is anyway...

I miss the mighty rhythm section, none the less, I'm sure to hit a NY area show if they're coming.

 

"Two's Missing" really does have meaning. It was an accurate prediction of the future.

Me thinks they should go on until "Three's Missing".

 

Count me among those who just can't support Pete and Roger touring as The Who. I respect the opinion of those who feel differently, but, to this Who fan at least, John and Keith are irreplaceable.

 

A significant difference between The Who and The Beatles in that regard is that The Who was an active band at the time of Moon and Entwistle's respective deaths, and they carried on without them immediately. For Paul and Ringo to regroup as The Beatles 35 years after their band's breakup is not at all the same thing.

 

Brilliant!

 

If Daltrey and Townshend want to call themselves "The Who", they have every right to. And you'll notice that all promo material features just those two, and that they are not trying to pass off the other onstage players as "members". Zak does a great job on drums, and while Pino does not possess the fire that Entwistle's playing had, he is a fair substitute.


Evan

 

I love the Who too as much as anyone, but I agree with this post. They should not tour as The Who. Its all been about money lately, as I've heard them more than ever selling out for TV commercials, shows, and the like.

 

Perhaps that's a stretch. From 1965 to 1982 the Who were an active band. From 1982 to 2005/2006 (which is a couple of years longer) they are no more than a tribute band going out every couple of years playing similar sets. At least the Stones pretend to offer up a new record now and again.

 

I'm a Who fan and that means I want to see and hear this music live!!!!! I saw them with Keith and he is my idol, but he had a hard time keeping up that night. I saw them with Kenny and they sucked. I saw them with Zak and it rocked my world. I got a few live cd's from that tour and they are rockingly excellent with great jamming and transistions like they hadn't done in ages. And let me say it again -- Zak Starkey absolutely *channels* Keith Moon. Plus it's great to see Pete playing electric again, and obviously enjoying the hell out of it, and Roger has lost nothing with the years.

For those of you on your high-horse about this, I think you should seriously reconsider. Life is too short to deny yourself a great experience. But I'm kinda glad so many fans are so purient about it. It'll be easier to get tickets.

 

If you were in their shoes, what would you do? Sit at home and watch the leaves turn? It's Pete's music, he can do what he wants with it. If he wants to let CSI use it, so be it. Same for commercials. Why NOT cash in if you can? If I was in their shoes, I would do it unless it was such a horrible product push (i.e. "My Generation" being used for, say, Depends).

The reality, like Queen + Paul Rodgers, is that the Who puts asses in the seats. Billing it as Pete & Roger won't do the same. If Queen billed themselves as Brian May, Roger Taylor, Paul Rodgers, & some guys, no one would come out.

It's just branding.