How patrician are The Who?

Quadrophenia and Live at Leeds are pretty patrician.

Early Who: yes
Middle Who: sort-of
Later Who: not
Post-Moon: gtfo

Up to Quadrophnia yeah

>>73456836
Up through Face Dances, yes.

>>73456836
literally who?

>>73457021
This, The Who Sell Out is their best shit

>>73457269
Face Daces is brutally underrated imho. I think it's better than Who Are You.

File: Piero Scaruffi.jpg (141KB, 770x1027px) Image search: [Google]

141KB, 770x1027px

The Who were one of the great British bands of the 1960s. Few bands embodied the rebellious spirit of the young urban misfits like the Who, the most celebrated of the "mod" band. On the way to erect the myth of their generation, they also invented a music anchored to colossal guitar riffs, pounding drums and operatic vocals, which ten years later will be renamed "heavy-metal". While the Rolling Stones, the Animals and the Kinks were rooted in the past (whether rhythm and blues or musichall), the Who invented a style that was the future of rock and roll.

If you believe Christgau, they were only patrician in the British Invasion days and turned into massive prog rock sellouts with Tommy.

>>73457385
That's only because Christgau has a hate boner for Prog

>>73457395
>Christgau has a hate boner for Prog
Why?

>>73457395
He thinks they peaked with The Who Sell Out and it was all downhill from there. I mean, yeah, the proto-pop punk Who of the 60s were a lot different from the bloated stadium rock version of the band after 1969.

>>73457409
He only likes basic three-chord punk rock from the streets of NYC or something like that.

>>73457423
Well, i think Sell Out is their best, but i dont think Tommy, Who's Next and Quadrophenia can be called "going downhill", they're pretty great too.

Big, bloated yacht rock was just the direction the industry was going in as the 70s started, the Rolling Stones were equally guilty of it.