WHO'S NEXT

What's to say about this album that hasn't been said before? More than with Tommy, with Who's Next, The Who shows that of the big four in the 60's, they were the ones to have the biggest margin for improvement, admitting The Beatles had before their demise. This from a bunch of school under-achievers (street kids) that once claim their hatred of anything but themselves (the pissing artwork is a remain of this rebellion), the progression is absolutely phenomenal, partly because of Townsend's very broad ability to write interesting and arresting tracks, partly because the group had two very able singers, an incredible rhythm section etc.. but mostly because these guys just gelled as one person on record or on stage, the glue being their static bassist Entwistle as the other three were busy tearing the place down.

Nevermind the fact that The Who, like The Pretty Things or The Kinks wrote those "rock operas" (a sickening inflated superlative to describe a concept album), and that this very present album was also supposed to be another one of them (sort of glad it didn't though, with all due respect to Peter Townsend), but Who's Next is one of those top 10 most influential albums ever, well past the over-rated Tommy and the often over-looked Quadrophenia, both being too peculiar for real influences. The only thing that The Who really lacked (maybe) was a permanent keyboardist, with Hopkins, Arbus (of east Of Eden) and Townsend himself taking care of it

Who cares if The Who was/will-never-be a "Prog group", we have an album that has no weaker track (Entwistle's My Wife does stand a bit out of the rest, but remains a full Who tune) and most of them would've been a classic in any Stones or Zeppelin album. Townsend's songwriting approaches perfection in this album, taking full advantage of his rhythm section: Entwistle being one of the three bassist that wrote the rock bassist book (with Jack Bruce and Jack Casady), while Moon The Loon (Keith for the lesser acquainted) was simply the most immediate and fascinating drummer around, wiping the floor with many of his mainstream rock colleagues, out of his sheer feeling and inventivity. I mean this "allright kid" FEEEEEEEELS, even in a calm track like Song Is Over and Behind Blue Eyes. In fact Keith is the one who makes this album a masterpiece: his drumming never stopped fascinating as his constant rolls, his incredible sound, mixed the way all drums should be on almost any rock album.

From the overplayed Baba O' Riley (named for Terry Riley) and the goose-bumpsey Behind Blue Eyes (both tracks earning recent high-profile covers), to the dramatic epic Won't Get Fooled Again, this album rocks, rolls, bowls you around. A real classic.

Not going to start on a bunch of description of tracks, as no doubt fellow reviewers will spend time on; I'll take time to review the bonus tracks on the first remastered version. With only one alternate takes (another version of Behind Blue Eyes), most of these tracks bear little resemblance/kinship to the original album, even if the majority were written in that period of time. But some of them are actually still a bit stuck between the change of decades: Pure And Easy, the Diddley-esque Don't You Do It (a Marvin Gaye cover), while others could've fit on this album with more refining: the excellent (live recorded) Naked Eye, leading into interesting Water (this is a bit too reminiscent of their Live At Leeds album) and Too Much Of Anything. Overall, while these bonus tracks are very enjoyable, they belong elsewhere (some having seen releases in different versions or on the Odd & Sodds compilation) and therefore don't add much to the album original.

Very hard not to overstate this album's importance and greatness (it still sounds quite fresh today), this is the kind of album no proghead or straight rock fan can do without, even my parents had to admit not hating them. So in that case, why should you hesitate for a second?