The Who

1. doubt they were lipsynching. they would have picked better vocals since they (roger and pete) weren't together nor were they hitting the higher notes (or very many other notes).

2. the audience was giving them a lot of support singing verses and refrains in the background, so they knew the band's tunes. but then, the majority of fans were probably a bunch of rich ol' farts like they are.

3. be satisfied. it could have been the jonas brothers or rihanna.
 
but little girl fans of b spears don't spend much money, and no one outside of this area have heard of any austin bands nor would they be interested in hearing them.

a super bowl half time performance isn't an "american idol" audition.
 
I like The Who, but that halftime show was embarrassingly awful. Very foul.

And I have to say, if I ever get to the "music hasn't been good since xxxx" phase, I hope someone puts a bullet between my eyes.
 
I'm a big fan. Worked out today by running 3 miles to a several Who songs off their best hits CD. Didn't care for the performance tonight, though. I thought Daltrey was fine, but a young female (20s) who was watching the game at a neighbor's house where I saw the game, said he sounded horrible. Townshend was not very good. His falsettos were bad, his one foray into a lead was really bad, and his guitar sounded out of tune at one point. My 12 year old kid laughed and said that maybe the super bowl will hire Metallica when they're in the 60s.

Let's see, maybe the SB can get Ozzy back with Black Sabbath at Jerry World?
 
Since a few have asked for this disclosure, I'll give it ahead of time: I'm 25.

I grew up on the Who, the Rolling Stones, Led Zeppelin, Lynyrd Skynyrd, Stevie Ray Vaughan, etc, etc. I now like Metallica as much as I like Mozart, but the stuff I listen to most is still old rock 'n roll. The Who is without a doubt in that upper echelon for me. I should've been born 30 years earlier.

Even with that high regard I have for The Who, this performance was just bad. The band selection was good. The song selection was good. They just performed badly. I dunno if it was a one-time thing tonight only, or if it's possible they're just getting too old for this kind of thing. If they are, their music will live on anyway. But tonight they just didn't sound very good.
 
"# of people in stadium: 75,000
# of people watching on TV: 100,000,000

The show wasn't for the people in the stadium."

So I was off a little. From a survey, nearly 50% of Super Bowl viewers were over the age of 45.

The Link

SUPER BOWL VIEWERS - DEMOGRAPHICS
Compared to Bowl Championship Series Viewers

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Demographic
Super Bowl
% of Viewers
BCS
% of Viewers

Male
47%
60%

Married
65%
62%

Age under 18
4%
2%

Age 18-44
50%
46%

Age 45+
46%
52%

Kids in Home
40%
31%

Graduated High School or less
46%
36%

Some College
22%
21%

Graduated College or more
32%
43%

Household Income under $25,000
18%
14%

Household Income $25-74,999
63%
59%

Household Income $75,000+
19%
27%
 
Happy to post my age. 60. Still think the music should be contemporary. What are they going to do next? Bring back the Lawrence Welk band?
 
I'm 29, and I thought that show was the best since the U2 show in 2002. Good songs and the laser & LED light show was incredible.

Loved that there were no dancers, no gimmicks. It was great
 
"The Who lipsyncing like a bunch of jerkoff backstreet boys. I was embarrassed for them"

-- I heard them interviewed on XM on Saturday. According to Daltry and Townsend, the singing and playing were all live. They had considered lip-synching, and declined.
 
I'm 52 (turn 53 next week) and I don't get lit up by The Who, except for "Tommy." I will always love that album.

I didn't watch the halftime show; I did some housework instead, but I could hear it in the other room. It sounded pretty weak to me.

I can't remember -- did they play "My Generation"? Because that would have been a hoot -- a bunch of geriatrics singing about how no one "understands" their generation ...
 
You know, I don't think Americans know what actual LIVE music sounds like anymore. They never see any or hear any. So anything that's not grid-perfect, slickly layered and over-produced sounds "off" somehow.

I also don't think Americans know what the human voice sounds like. My girlfriend loves the show "Glee" and I can't stand the sound of the songs because the vocals are wildly hyper-pitch-corrected. It sounds so synthetic and phony... it really hurts my brain. She's probably tired of hearing me say, "That's not what the human voice sounds like!" every time the show is on.

It's rock music, people... and the Who have always done it well. Yes, they're old men now. Yes, some of the notes were pitchy. So what?

I also thought the drum kit sounded unusually good for a live performance. Ringo's kid was killing it.

More on this topic
 
I 2nd the nomination for AC/DC!!!

I really liked the stage. The fact that they can move it in and set it up in 7 minutes really blows my mind. I was on the road for 15+ years setting up stages/lights/sound systems and it usually takes a day or 2. Yet they can move it in and out in minutes. Transformers?
smile.gif


I enjoyed watching Pete. Roger didn't look so good. Its sad really because in his day he was a god.

But altogether I enjoyed the show.

oh, 38 going on 12.
 
I loved the Who in their day. I'm 56. But I like a lot of today's music and there are so many relevant contemporary acts who would be great selections for a Superbowl halftime show it isn't funny. I just don't like this trend of recent years; the "suits" have been running scared ever since the Wardrobe Malfunction.
 
I enjoyed it, and based on what most of you listen to, I'll take your criticism with a grain of salt. Sure, they weren't what they were in 1970, but it is also hard for any band to roll out portable stages in four minutes and put on a great 12 minute show-how many great super bowl halftimes have there been? We hear the same comments every year.
 
U2 in 2002 ago was awesome. A current act at the top of their game. Their show was very powerful, very much a tribute to the victims of 9/11. That halftime show set the standard, and no one has come close since.
 
Always liked the Who. I thought the show started strong and faded late. Should have ended with a different song. I'd still give em a B+ and the music sounded great.

In reply to:
Click to expand...
 
i didn't think they were lipsynching.

Plus, my 3 1/2 year old provided mucho entertainment, dancing around and windmilling on his air guitar. Unprompted!

Even with that cuteness in abundance, it would have been nice to have a group that was an actual functioning band putting out relevant music, rather than dusting off 40 year old tunes played by 60 year old men for the over 50 crowd.

demographics rule and the boomers love their nostalgia.
 
Back to the important, essential and generation-spanning issue of Pete smashing his guitar:

He was on Letterman about twelve years ago. Townsend sat on a stool and sang a gentle song accompanied only by his own acoustic guitar. Great performance. The audience enthusiastically applauded. Pete stood up and pulverized his guitar on the studio floor. Very funny.

I'm an old fart, baby-boomer. I find the generational sniping sort of sad. Plenty of good new music going on these days. The interesting thing to me is that there has not been a big genre change from the 60s to now. Nothing like Big Band to Swing to Rock. Hip Hop has shown staying power, but it has not replaced rock/pop variations.

In a full concert, it'd be interesting to see the Who do Smells Like Teen Spirit or Seven Nation Army or some other later artist's music.

Like I said, I enjoyed the show and the lights. I was hoping for "My Generation" for the irony as well. I want that song played at my wake. The intentional, annoying stutter has always killed me.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Weekly Prediction Contest

* Predict HORNS-AGGIES *
Sat, Nov 30 • 6:30 PM on ABC

Recent Threads

Prediction Results Threads

2024 Schedules

Back
Top