Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 4, 2015 9:40:32 GMT
 I chose this after watching The Who performance from Glastonbury last weekend and because this week saw the launch of a new orchestral version arranged by Rachel Fuller (Pete Townshend's partner) and starring Alfie Boe and Phil Daniels. The album up for vote is the original Who version and not the later film version which starred Mr Daniels. Frankly I have never owned that version and never seen the film all the way through. I remember buying the original album in 1973 after hearing tracks played on 'Sounds Of The Seventies'. It had a marvelous booklet that usually came partly detached before you got the records out the sleeve. Fortunately the original vinyl sounded great and still does (even more on better gear). The storyline is much more coherent than Tommy and follows the Story of a Mod called Jimmy. Musically it is pretty complex but certainly is well suited to being a proper orchestral piece. This is Pete Townshend's masterpiece but I will readily admit is not the easiest piece of Who music to get into. It takes time and many plays to fully appreciate it. There have been several reissues on vinyl and CD which have involved remixes that don't improve the sound or make things worse. The 2011 deluxe remix certainly gets a lot of criticism but I believe the latest EU vinyl reverts to the original mix but is cut from hi-res digital. The best reissue was from Classic Records (2007) and in many respects is even better than the original IMO. The bonus material from the deluxe edition CD is available on two vinyl discs titled Quadrophenia demos I & II. Please note - Spotify appears to have only the remixed / expanded versions. New Classical (orchestral) version. |
|
|
|
Post by ChrisB on Jul 4, 2015 11:26:02 GMT
Thanks for suggesting this, and also a big thank you for stepping in at short notice this month.
Here's a good excuse for me to play a great album!
|
|
|
|
Post by MikeMusic on Jul 4, 2015 12:03:09 GMT
Played it a couple of weeks back so fresh in my mind
Absolutely The Who's best album.
10/10
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 4, 2015 13:49:18 GMT
Sorry for me the Who are like Marmite. No denying the talent, just do not like them.
Odd really as Mr Entwhistle was a customer in a previous life, a real down to earth, no nonsense gent who loved the country. Great guy
|
|
|
|
Post by Slinger on Jul 4, 2015 14:10:11 GMT
I've heard several mixes of this album, including the "Platinum" SHM-SACD (which apparently used the 2012 DSD master which in turn was based on the UK original analogue tape) and the original '73 release still comes out on top. Whilst some other versions may be more "hi fidelity"and allow you to actually hear Moony's sticks displacing the air as they speed towards his drums (O.K. I made that bit up) the 1973 reading more than makes up for this with it's pure visceral, joyous sound and let's face it, that's the essence of Rock 'n' Roll. 9/10 purely because I can probably count on the fingers of one foot albums that I think rate 10/10. I bought the Alfie Boe version b.t.w. and I do quite like it. The Who at Glastonbury (on T.V.) was a bit Marmite for me. One minute I was thinkng "bloody Hell, Daltry's still got it" and the next it was "Gawd, Daltry sounds awful." Probably different if you were there. I thought the Stones sounded great in Hyde Park in '69, then I saw the video and they were completely crap.  |
|
mikeh
Rank: Soloist
Posts: 18 
|
Post by mikeh on Jul 5, 2015 17:14:13 GMT
Not only the best Who album, but also a great album by any measure. I think sides 3 & 4 are the finest recordings I've heard, but then again I am a huge Who fan. As for the Glasto set I thought Daltry actually looked ill towards the end.
Mike
|
|
|
|
Post by MikeMusic on Jul 5, 2015 17:31:34 GMT
Glastonbury was so so for me. Hey they are well into their 60s anyway
Still rate the album 10/10. That was then and no denying the wonderfulness of it
|
|
|
|
Post by John on Jul 5, 2015 18:57:10 GMT
The first gig I went to was the Who at Wembley I found them disappointing Neils Lofgren and AC/DC were good and the Stranglers were awful.
I cannot really get into this I should love as I love good 70s rock
Not sure how to vote its not that it is bad just for me I get no emotional connection to it
|
|
|
|
Post by ChrisB on Jul 5, 2015 20:02:45 GMT
This will be the Wembley gig John... Eight quid a ticket!  |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 5, 2015 21:16:48 GMT
Sorry, can't stand them so it's a 1 for me.
|
|
|
|
Post by Stratmangler on Jul 5, 2015 22:25:03 GMT
I never got into this at the time, and I've played it a good few times over the last few days.
And in my opinion it's a load of pretentious, self derivative, uninspired twaddle.
The only good song on it is 5:15 .
As an album it's not fit to tie the bootlaces of Who's Next or Tommy. If it were only 10% as good as these two other albums then Quadrophenia might be worth listening to.
It gets a three from me, but that's only because 5:15 is such a good song, albeit in a sea of drivel.
It gets a four from me too - it's never going to occupy another second of the remainder of my remaining time .....
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 6, 2015 9:45:55 GMT
The comments so far prove that this really is a marmite album. One reason why I chose it. Though I gave it 10 I much prefer Who's Next. The recording and arranging on Quad are pretty groundbreaking IMO even though some of the songs don't stand up out of the context of the album. Side 4 is pretty sensational both sound and music wise. They could never successfully transfer this to live performance at the time.
|
|
|
|
Post by MartinT on Jul 6, 2015 17:21:01 GMT
Great choice, Paul. I'm far more familiar with Who's Next (a serious 10/10 album) but need to revisit this, so I shall have a good listen.
|
|
|
|
Post by MikeMusic on Jul 7, 2015 12:07:29 GMT
Who's next is great
Quadrophenia edges it for me
|
|
|
|
Post by ChrisB on Jul 21, 2015 22:04:26 GMT
I've loved this album for a long time. It does take a little while to fully appreciate it though, I think. Some of the lyricism is a little unwieldy and awkward.
High points for me are '5:15', 'The Rock' and 'Love, Reign o'er Me'. At the end of that last track, I'm often reminded that this was the last of the best Who albums - downhill all the way from here!
Anyway, great album, it's a 9/10 from me.
|
|
|
|
Post by MartinT on Jul 22, 2015 6:14:55 GMT
I'm finally ready to vote on this, having had another blast this morning in the office. It's good Who, perhaps less memorable than some of their greatest tunes, but still very enjoyable listening to their style, and Love Reign O'er Me is wonderful. Because Who's Next is a better album, this gets an 8/10 from me.
|
|
|
|
Post by jamescg1972 on Aug 1, 2015 20:19:26 GMT
I've tried two or three times to listen to this over the month and have failed miserably to get into / through it. Not sure why, maybe lack of the time this month being away for two weeks. As I can't seem to get into it, having tried, I have to give it a 2.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Aug 2, 2015 5:48:59 GMT
I voted 9, never listened all the way through before as I don't own a copy but really enjoyed it.
|
|
|
|
Post by MikeMusic on Aug 3, 2015 11:46:51 GMT
It's a must to own
Fabulous album
|
|
|
|
Post by roxbrough on Aug 14, 2015 16:58:30 GMT
Unfortunately I don't own a copy of this record, so was once again forced to watch it on Spotify.
On my PC it keeps cutting out as my anti virus keeps blocking all the cookies and adverts.
I would love to hear it, but under the circumstances do not feel honestly able to vote.
|
|
