Did the Who "drop the ball" after Quadrophenia?

I've always wondered about this. I'm not the biggest Who fan in the sense that I haven't heard all their albums but I've always enjoyed them and even saw them once in the late eighties. It seems to me that they were never able to equal or surpass the success of Quadrophenia later on. You could even make the same argument about Who's Next. I heard Who's next once or twice and it was good but nothing as good as the earlier stuff and the same thing with Who by numbers. The two post Moon albums were even weaker than those imo but still had a few good songs on them. 

I'm not very familiar with WBN so no I don't know which song you are referring to. :)

Edited by AFlowerKingCrimson - April 21 2017 at 18:37

AFlowerKingCrimson wrote: I've always wondered about this. I'm not the biggest Who fan in the sense that I haven't heard all their albums but I've always enjoyed them and even saw them once in the late eighties. It seems to me that they were never able to equal or surpass the success of Quadrophenia later on. You could even make the same argument about Who's Next. I heard Who's next once or twice and it was good but nothing as good as the earlier stuff and the same thing with Who by numbers. The two post Moon albums were even weaker than those imo but still had a few good songs on them.

Mmmhhh!!!... You're probably mistaken about the dates uyou saw The Who on stage. AFAIK, they retired in 83 (I was at their last concert at Toronto's MLG of that Farewell tour) until.... whenever.
Outside (maybe) the Live Aid in 85, I don't think they took stage for at least 10 or 15 years

As far as their album discography is concerned, I never really cared about their 60's stuff - I like songs of the era, but the albums are generally weak.

Things changed quite a bit with Tommy, Leeds, Who's Next and Quadrophenia, where they simply couldn't go wrong. To these/my ears, they were the biggest rock band around, because much more ambitious than Zep & Stones and most big prog bands (Floyd will be their heir heir when DSOTM and Quadrophenia would

Post Quadro, I tend to think that WBN is more a miss than a hit (despite Slip Kid & Squeeze Box), as only two tracks (Dreaming From The Waist and How Many Friends) are worthy of Quadro or Next.

the following WAY is (much) better, IMHO, despite Moon's drumming being on its last leg, but the A-side is rather excellent, and if the flipside is weaker, the tt WAY finale is the most awesome track, since Next or Quad..  and the only one too .

The rest, I simply don't care for, even if I have some affinities with Eminence Front.

Michael P. Dawson wrote: I think Who By Numbers is a very underrated album. It's not huge and ambitious like Quadrophenia, but the songs are powerful and emotionally raw--except for that one goofy misstep; you know the one I mean--and are served well by the stripped-down approach. I would definitely not say they dropped the ball there.

agreed!  

hard to really consider the Who 'dropping the ball' per say... like most groups I suppose that any semblance of a long career.. they had a hit and miss formative phase...  creative high point(s)... and then a downhill phase 

Anyway...Quadrophenia is the burning sun that makes everything else pale by comparison

micky wrote: Michael P. Dawson wrote: I think Who By Numbers is a very underrated album. It's not huge and ambitious like Quadrophenia, but the songs are powerful and emotionally raw--except for that one goofy misstep; you know the one I mean--and are served well by the stripped-down approach. I would definitely not say they dropped the ball there. agreed!   hard to really consider the Who 'dropping the ball' per say... like most groups I suppose that any semblance of a long career.. they had a hit and miss formative phase...  creative high point(s)... and then a downhill phase

Edited by AFlowerKingCrimson - April 23 2017 at 10:08

I don't think so, Who's Next is a monster album that all but solidified The Who as a top rock band of the 70's. Quadrophenia is a huge album with minutes that falter at times, as do most concept albums. I liken it to The Wall, in that it was Pete's creation, so like The Wall there are some flaws.

Catcher10 wrote: I don't think so, Who's Next is a monster album that all but solidified The Who as a top rock band of the 70's. Quadrophenia is a huge album with minutes that falter at times, as do most concept albums. I liken it to The Wall, in that it was Pete's creation, so like The Wall there are some flaws. Please lets not state that Quadrophenia is progressive rock and because of this they "dropped the ball" on subsequent albums which are not progressive. The Who Rock!!! We don't say The Who Prog......

Absolutely The Who were not, are not, and never will be a progressive rock band. They were a rock band with extremely interesting art rock created by Townsend.

AFlowerKingCrimson wrote: I think there were times when the Who were more of a prog rock band than the Moody Blues. I think "won't get fooled again" among others could be considered prog and they probably have as much proggish material as Led Zeppelin.

Trouble is, of course, is that Led Zep were not a progressive rock band either

Catcher10 wrote: I don't think so, Who's Next is a monster album that all but solidified The Who as a top rock band of the 70's. Quadrophenia is a huge album with minutes that falter at times, as do most concept albums. I liken it to The Wall, in that it was Pete's creation, so like The Wall there are some flaws. Please lets not state that Quadrophenia is progressive rock and because of this they "dropped the ball" on subsequent albums which are not progressive. The Who Rock!!! We don't say The Who Prog......