Any question about who was a better live band between The Who and Queen can be answered by watching the Live Aid DVD.
True, The Who were truly off that day...and ALSO, even Led Zeppelin as well, EVEN NOW were so put off by how bad their own performance also was, they wouldn't allow Bob Geldof to the rights to release the footage on the Live Aid DVD...Page & Plant instead donated money to the Live Aid charity.
Hard to believe that The Who, Zeppelin, even Bob Dylan, all of these so called GREATS who were more than used to playing to live crowds in the thousands or more...BLEW it at Live Aid...but ONE band ONLY...WON the day...the majestic Queen, who continued to play live shows to perfection until Freddie had to stop doing live shows.
Queen were brilliant live from their earliest days in the 1970's until their last show in 86 at Knebworth.
Actually, it's fairly easy to believe, considering The Who hadn't played in 3 years, Led Zep since 1980, and Bob Dylan changed his set list minutes before going onstage, leaving Ronnie Wood and Keith Richards in the lurch.
I forced myself into liking Tommy and have since worked my way from there (The Who Sell Out, Quadrophenia et al). Damn good thing I did too. Same with 'The Beatles' (the album). I used to loathe Side 1 but now love it! Aiee!
Pete fell over at Live Aid because he was out of his face and, when he went to throw his leg up and over his vocal mic (as is one of his trademarks - see Charlton '74 or TKAA for reference), he clipped the top of it and lost his balance. I think that mistake, infront of such a vast audience, was one of the turning points for Pete and finally kicked himself up the ass to give up the booze (he was already off heroin by that stage).
Going back to the original point, don't you think Brian's opinion is a generational thing? As The Who are that bit older as a band and one of his major influences as a live act, he's just expressing the same feelings that all musicians have concerning their early heroes. It's like the Stones being knocked out by meeting Muddy Waters at Chess, or Dylan and Woody Guthrie.
Bri's also commented before on the sense of danger at a Who gig - never knowing whether it was going to touch the stars or fall flat on its face - and that's not something that I associate with Queen (not necessarily a bad thing of course).
I think it would have been shitty of Brian to say Queen were better than The Who. I HATE egotistical bands. I know Roger is a big fan of The Who, also. No matter how big a band become, they should always still enjoy the other artists who they loved. Never think they are better than those who inspired them. BTW: The Who are better than Zeppelin and The Stones. There's way more diversification in Townshend's writing than either of those 2 bands.
While you're doing some of your journalistic research there, you might want to check out peoples' opinions of the Concert For New York in 2001, when The Who came on and completely wowed the audience. There were firefighters with tears in their eyes as they were singing along to The Who's performance, and the general consensus was that they were the best band of the day, period.
And, having watched that performance when it first aired, I would have to wholeheartedly agree.
I watched that performance live as well. It was amazing! Firemen were dancing, singing & crying in the isles! Daltry was in excellent voice. Pete was playing w/ energy he hasn't displayed in decades! He soloed all over the place. Technical ability is great but can't hold a candle to raw emotion & attytude (S. Philly representing)!I got chills watching it! Entwhistle was solid as ever. I was glad to witness his final live performace ever, even if only on tv. They played the perfect set; Who Are You, Behind Blue Eyes, Babba O'Riley & Won't Get Fooled Again. They clearly stole the show & Mr McCartney couldn't come close to shining their shoes that night. Even w/ Clapton on guitar.
Im back. I can see where Brian is coming from although im not a fan of the who either you have to admit they are incredibly talented i mean i never saw a drummer as good as Keith Moon apart from Lars Ullrich and John Entwhistle was the best bass player ever so maybe Brian is talking about the talent the who possessed compared to Queen. But the who like Led Zeppelin in my view underachived both live and on particular albums wheras Queen are without doubt the best live act ever and some of the best songs ever recorded.
Just for the reciord, that WASN'T Entwistle's final performance ever.
The guys played three very small shows in January of 2002 - two at The Guildhall, Portsmouth 27th & 28th (1500 capacity) and 1 at The Coloseum, Watford 31st (1300 capacity) and then two further shows at The Royal Albert Hall 7th & 8th February.
I spent the whole time with the band and they were so incredibly up for thetour in the US of that summer - John especially was excited that so many galleries had taken the punt on displaying his artwork. They had planned to develop the setlist from what had been played in 200 and then those early whows of that year.
We were treated to Summertime Blues, Baby Don't You Do It, Young Man Blues and a 20 minute Tommy Medley. They had rehearsed stuff like John's When I Was A Boy and the stunning In A Hand Or A Face too.
Sadly, events prevented all this happening. But his funeral and the memorial service in London were truly fitting tributes.
<font color=#FF399> Linda Of The Valley wrote:
Mr.Jingles79 wrote:
U2 needs two live stages to perform, one for the band and the other one for Bono's ego.
Yes, cause Freddie didn't have a big ego? Queen didn't have a big ego? Fuck off! :P
Chill out girl. You gotta admit, that Bono is madly in love with himself, and he's ego just keeps getting bigger and bigger.
...and yes, Freddie was incredibly cocky as well in the early days but his arrogance started to wear off through the years mainly because I think Freddie realised that Queen's greatness should speak for itself.
I think it would have been shitty of Brian to say Queen were better than The Who. I HATE egotistical bands. I know Roger is a big fan of The Who, also. No matter how big a band become, they should always still enjoy the other artists who they loved. Never think they are better than those who inspired them. BTW: The Who are better than Zeppelin and The Stones. There's way more diversification in Townshend's writing than either of those 2 bands.
I always found Led Zeppelin to be incredibly overated throught their first 3 albums (which many consider their best). IMO they were way too bluesy, and not very original.
I think that Led Zepellin found their true potential on the albums they made from 'Led Zeppelin IV', through 'Houses Of The Holy' and I'd have to say their best was bsolutely 'Physical Graffiti'. Led Zep's originality and creativity was at it's peak on those 3.
Yep - sound-checked at Watford. John was so keen to play it but it got pulled at the last minute by Pete who decided that (as usual) one Entwistle song per show was enough at that time. And we'd ALL rather have heard that than Behind Blue Eyes or You Better You Bet, wouldn't we?
