|
San Jose Mercury News posts the following article:
The Rolling Stones and the Who each formed in London more than 40 years ago. Next week, the Stones (with three original members) and the Who (with two) will perform in the Bay Area.
Each band clearly has earned its place in the rock pantheon. The Stones have become the template for countless down-and-dirty rock 'n' roll bands, from the New York Dolls to the Black Crowes , while the classic lineup of the Who created a one-of-a-kind ruckus that can never be duplicated.
Do you think Who's better, Who's best? Or do you believe time is on the Stones' side? We've broken it down to help you make the call:
The singer (not the song)
Roger Daltrey is a better singer. Mick Jagger, however, is a larger-than-life front man who held his own with James Brown in 1965 (in the film 'The T.A.M.I. Show') and today, in his 60s, still commands arenas.
Advantage: the Stones.
Guitar heroes
Pete Townshend is the all-time master of guitar calisthenics, but bassist John Entwistle was the real 'lead guitarist' of the Who. If you're sticking with the six-stringed variety, though, nothing can top the Stones' 1969-74 combo of Keith Richards and Mick Taylor. Advantage: the Stones.
Mr. Bassman
It's gotta be the Ox. Advantage: the Who.
A big bass drum (or two)
Charlie Watts is as steady as they come, but Keith Moon was the most exciting instrumentalist rock has ever known. Quite a fun drinking buddy, too, by all accounts.
Advantage: the Who.
Fabulous babes
The Stones have passed time with Marianne Faithfull , Anita Pallenberg , Jerry Hall, Bianca Jagger , Patti Hansen and even, in a kinky twist, 13-year-old model Mandy Smith. The Who? No one you've heard of.
Advantage: the Stones. Big time.
Deaths
When recently ousted Stones guitarist Brian Jones died in his swimming pool in 1969, the death of a rock star was a relatively new phenomenon. By the time hard living caught up to the Who's Moon and Entwistle, sadly, the novelty was way gone. Timing is everything.
Advantage: the Stones.
Songs
Townshend writes great Who songs, but Jagger and Richards' output over the years is simply staggering. Nobody, not even the Beatles, has written more great rock 'n' roll tunes than the Glimmer Twins.
Advantage: the Stones.
Rolling Stones Rock 'n' Roll Circus
The Stones thought they were the stars of this event in 1968 -- until the Who delivered a jaw-dropping version of 'A Quick One.' By the time the Stones, who included a visibly damaged Brian Jones, limped on stage at 4 a.m., it was all over. Jagger was so humbled that he kept the film in the can for 30 years.
Advantage: the Who.
Live Aid
A very rusty Who apparently decided not to rehearse before playing in front of a billion people at the televised mega-event in 1985. Meanwhile, Richards and Ron Wood played out-of-tune acoustic guitars with Bob Dylan and Jagger hammed it up with Tina Turner on the lame 'State of Shock.'
Loser: the fans.
Got live if you want it
Each group released one of the all-time best live rock albums: the Stones' 'Get Yer Ya-Ya's Out' from 1969 and the Who's 'Live at Leeds' from 1970. 'Ya-Ya's' is great, but you can live without it if you've already got the Stones' late '60s studio albums. 'Leeds' is essential.
Advantage: the Who.
Real-life reels
Both the Stones and the Who made it to the big screen in classic documentaries. The chilling 'Gimme Shelter' leaves a deeper mark than the collected clips that make up 'The Kids Are Alright,' especially since the latter clearly shows Moon's sad decline (except in weight).
Advantage: the Stones.
They sing, they act!
Mick Jagger actually acted in some decent movies -- 'Performance,' 'The Man From Elysian Fields' -- while Who front man Roger Daltrey starred in Ken Russell's ridiculous 'Lisztomania.'
Advantage: the Stones.
Music must change
The Who might be rock's most innovative band -- pioneers of feedback, the rock opera, the synthesizer and sequencing. The Stones flirted with psychedelia and disco, but innovation has never been their passion.
Advantage: the Who.
Dirty Work ethic
The Stones haven't produced a classic album since 1978's 'Some Girls' (or 1972's 'Exile on Main Street' if you really want to be tough), but they kept cranking out albums every few years, and they've always taken care of business live. The Who took a 24-year break between 'It's Hard' and the new 'Endless Wire' and have a checkered live history since Moon's death.
Advantage: the Stones. Whom do you prefer, the Stones or the Who? And why? Weigh in at www.mercextra.com/music. Source San Jose Mercury News |
