If you say so. "Why?" and "Who Gives a Rat's Ass" as title suggestions aren't meant to imply you're questioning "Why make a new album" or "Who gives a rat's ass about a new album?" My mistake.
I don't give a 'rat's ass' what the album is called. I like the album cover, a nod to the past is appropriate for a band as young as The Who. What I do give a 'rat's ass' about is the fact The Who are recording and releasing new music and going off what I've heard, they are recording and releasing GOOD new music.
Kind of off topic but it's funny that people keep saying this is "good music" (not that it isn't, it's fine)--but was Endless Wire that bad of an album? "Real Good Looking Boy" and "Old Red Wine" were also both really good songs. I mean, there were definitely some duds on Endless Wire, and it was kind of a weird, confusing, overly ambitious (maybe) album, but it had some quality stuff on it--"Mike Post Theme", "Black Widow's Eyes", "It's Not Enough". The problem with that album is, in my opinion, not that it's bad but that a lot of it is forgettable. I just reviewed the track listing and I cannot remember half of the songs. Do you think it would have been a stronger album if "Wire and Glass" was a separate release? Endless Wire could have just been a non-concept collection of unrelated songs+"Real Good Looking Boy", "Old Red Wine", maybe "How Can I Help You Sir?"
Ball & Chain is up on Tidal. Sure sounds like The Who, so no need for a question mark methinks I also noticed that the full Woodstock '69 set was available.
My problem with Endless Wire was that it was essentially a Pete Townshend solo album with vocals by Roger. Pete played most of the instruments, and on the songs that he didn't (Black Widows Eyes, It's Not Enough, most of Wire & Glass) where there was a full-band performance, it finally started to sound cohesive. Everything else, while good (for the most part), just sounded like glorified demos.
It seems some people here are getting upset with other people’s views- which is sad. Of course the title does not mean the music is bad but my point was it shows a lack of imagination or even interest and they couldn’t come up with anything better than that. Let’s hope the music doesn’t suffer from the same. peace and love✌Dave
But does it really show a lack of imagination and even interest? They coulda tacked on the usual Who's "whatever." Which to me woulda been the same old same old. Instead it's just "Who". I way prefer that. It could mean a lot of things, and nothing at the same time. And sure, if people wanna think it's a dumb title, than absolutely, plenty of opinions out there. I just dont think it's really fair (or even our place) to accuse them of being unimaginative or lacking interest.
No, it's not bad at all ..... especially if a few select tracks are pruned (I'm looking at you, "Trilby's Piano" ) and a bit of re-ordering happens.... Obviously, it's not what it could have been, what with Zak being on only one song, etc .... It wasn't the band album we'd prefer ... as I wrote last year... The Who's "Endless Wire" is 6 years old. What do you think of it now?
The amount of love for the generic and slight-sounding “Detour” is baffling. This album comes off as a possible final strong statement by a legendary band, not some flimsy, off-the-main-road nonsense. “Ball and Chain” is the first genuinely interesting Who song since “Eminence Front.” I like the callback cover by Blake. It reminds me of Bowie’s smart The Next Day cover. If they want to call it WHO, good for them if these songs are worth a listen. It’s an apropos title with some punch. At least they didn’t call it Old Sock, for cryin’ out loud. You better you bet, Bill
Note: evidently there’s a “deluxe” version soon to be released, as well. Apple Music has Who (with Ball and Chain activated) and Who Deluxe with a 14-song track list. Tracks 12-14 aren’t named.
Maybe after you hear Detour the record, song, final recording.. In its early stages playback on the album vlogs, 1-it wasn't slight & 2-even in the embryonic stage it was hooky, commercial, sounded like The WHO circa 65 & circa 82, had Zak's lively tasteful drumming, & a lot of earmarks of a classic, we'll see. It's natural to like some songs more than others, subjective to taste, but it's best for us to hear the album & then decide imo.
I'm baffled by the suggestion that Ball & Chain is an interesting song. It is a blues, a I IV V, pentatonic-based blues song. Roger even sings the first line of each verse twice, as has been the norm in blues music for nearly 100 years. I'll admit the pauses in the music are a deviation, and of passing interest. I'll also agree that the subject matter is unusual - though dated, it would have been au courant if on Endless Wire. Is it a good blues, or a bad blues - that's for each individual listener to decide; what moves ya, moves ya. But I do struggle with the idea that a pretty generic blues song can still be deemed interesting.
I think it’s the production that keeps it interesting. That’s why I prefer it to the Townshend solo version.
I can’t decide whether I should get tickets. Wife wants to go. That’s over £300 for both of us just for the tickets...
Yeah. I think the lead guitar, the piano in the background, and whatever that kind of oscillating, undulating thing is (synth?--it's more apparent on Townshend's version) are cool. Townshend's guitar makes the song, for me at least.
I've never understood the love for "Eminence Front". Maybe it was cool in the 1980s but it sounds dated, boring, and way overplayed now, in my opinion. You're not into "Real Good Looking Boy"/"Old Red Wine"? You're right, Old Sock isn't a good album title--but perhaps it could have been Odds and Socks??? Or Ox and Socks...okay, now I'm depressed...
Cool post. Thanks for sharing. I don't remember how "Tribly's Piano" sounds...so obviously it didn't leave an impression on me. I've always viewed Endless Wire as more of a Townshend solo album featuring Daltrey on some songs. Maybe I'd like it more if Entwistle were on it (well, not maybe, I would).
Yep, you were indeed mistaken. In retrospect, I can see how my comments might be taken the wrong way, but that wasn't my intention. Think about it this way: if the Who titled their own album "Who Cares" or "Who Gives a Rat's Ass" it would not be a negative comment on the album's contents, it would be an indication that they don't care what anyone thinks, which is how I meant it.