Roger Daltrey: Rolling Stones a Mediocre Pub Band

[ancoats]

if there was a market and people bought the records of the rolling stones then they was doing something right.
i hate all the big headed stuff by other bands that claim to be the best or better than somebody else ? respect the industry and the people you work in.

so many bands of that time stood the test of time and many never got the credit
The Dave Clark Five. Herman's Hermits. even the Small faces never got the credit and was over looked.
roger-daltrey and the who should have stopped after moon's death ? did they really offer anything much more then a back catalogue to milk the fans for so many years ?

 

[Bill Walker]

I liked all the bands mentioned, I think The Kinks and Stones suffered from only one singer and in the case of The Kinks only one songwriter. The Who had a mesmeric Rhythm section, Moon and John Entwistle were awesome. They were a powerhouse. Love Ray Davies songs, love early Stones records, love early Fleetwood Mac and early Pink Floyd. But Im a Beatles geek. For me no-one comes close. Im obsessed with The White Album and Revolver.

 

[GaudinoMotors]

Daltrey also said he was a "hater of the internet," explaining: "I never thought any good would come of it, and I still don't think anything good's come of it. I think if we're not careful it's probably the end of our civilization."

Apart from Bluemoon, what's the The internet ever done for us?





Christ if he thinks that about the Stones - what must he think of today's shite?

 

[Resurrection Joe...]

I liked all the bands mentioned, I think The Kinks and Stones suffered from only one singer and in the case of The Kinks only one songwriter. The Who had a mesmeric Rhythm section, Moon and John Entwistle were awesome. They were a powerhouse. Love Ray Davies songs, love early Stones records, love early Fleetwood Mac and early Pink Floyd. But Im a Beatles geek. For me no-one comes close. Im obsessed with The White Album and Revolver.

Moon could get around a kit allright...couldn't hold a beat. Townshend kept time for the live shows, Moon had to follow him.

 

[bobmcfc]

The Doors were better than both of them

 

[Protein Junkie]

The Who
The Stones
Zeppelin
Who am I missing Foggy? ;-)

Yes.

 

[Onholiday(somemightsay)]

Moon could get around a kit allright...couldn't hold a beat. Townshend kept time for the live shows, Moon had to follow him.

That's part of the beauty - he played the drums (as well as the rest of the band) as a lead instrument. The Who are like a great experiment that shouldn't have necessarily worked...............but their best live output was as good as any

 

[FogBlueInSanFran]

The Kinks were better than The Who n’all. The Who are nowhere near the level of the three you mention.

It’s like talking about City, Chelsea and Paris and then comparing Spurs to those three.

The Who have less than a handful of classic tracks and used to play really loud and heavy live back when they first came on the scene which was unheard of at the time. That’s about it though, nothing special. If they’d come out in any other era they’d be just another band.

The Stones, The Beatles and Led Zep are miles ahead. I’d put The Who at the level of The Animals and The Yardbirds.

Another Anglocentric view, and I'm just going to say it -- if you didn't matter in America, you didn't matter as much as someone who did.

Not that they should have, but they invented the rock opera. They invented the Marshall stack. They invented instrument smashing. They invented the synth as a rhythm instrument. And if they didn't de facto invent these things, they popularized them.

They were at Woodstock. They've outsold The Kinks 2-1 worldwide. There's no way in the world more bands cite The Kinks as an influence than The Who, though I can't prove it.

You want to put Pink Floyd in there instead of The Who, fine. To say they are on the the level of The Animals or The Yardbirds is simply factually incorrect.

But let's try this -- without looking, name everyone who was ever in The Who. Now name everyone who was ever in The Beatles, Led Zep and The Stones. And, fine, Pink Floyd.

Now name everyone who was ever in The Kinks.

Now describe the playing style of everyone in The Kinks. Now do it for The Who.

I like The Kinks. That The Who were more important and influential is supported by evidence. And, IMO, were better.

 

[Manc in London]

whilst I agree completely with your opinion re Stones vs Who, the Stones performed and recorded many many blues covers throughout their career and continue to do so (if you haven't already check out their 2015 album blue and lonesome). Little Red Rooster for example was a Willie Dixon cover (they did quite a few of his) from 1964. Other covers by Howlin Wolf, Otis Redding, Wilson Pickett to name just a few.

Fair enough. @Ancient Citizen said something similar to you too. My view was that they were more rock/pop rather than Blues early on. Okay, more of a mix. I tend to think of 'Mothers Little Helper', 'Paint it Black', 'Let's Spend the Night Together' and 'Ruby Tuesday' were prime examples of their pop/rock approach. But later on they were appeared more Blues focused from about 1970 with the likes of 'Honky tonk Woman' and 'Brown Sugar' being typical. I just didn't like that kind of stuff as much. Saying that, my guilty pleasure is their cover of 'Rolling Stone', as Blues as you like. Think it was around 1995.

 

[Manc in London]

As well as The Incredible String band you forgot Ten Years After and The Keef Hartley Band.

The Who were voted the 2nd best band on there though, after Hendrix.

Whoops :) My mistake. I may use these facts for our team Christmas quiz.

As for The Who being second best, I don't take much notice of popularity contests with bands. The Spice Girls would probably finish above the likes of Led Zep, Beacch Boys, Smiths etc..