Was Roger Daltrey really needed in the Who?

[sloopjohnc]

Jagger is an absolute tit.

Speaking of Jagger and w/o a new thread, here is Mick himself calling into the WTF podcast the other day to talk with Mark, an absolute fan. Have a listen. Not so tittish IMO.

Yeah, I'd agree. He hardly sounds like a 70 year-old guy either. Not like his songwriting partner, who sounds 170.

[naughty boy]

Jagger is an absolute tit
And Daltrey is a dullard

[The Slider]

As true today as it ever was.
Please do not neglect the qualifier, though:

"But neither band would have been anything like as great without them."

[joels344]

I couldn't imagine the likes of Quadrophenia, Who's Next, or Live at Leeds being as lively without his vocals. So yeah, I believe he was an essential member and important rock vocalist during that era.

[Quaco]

Thinking yesterday about bands where there is no distinct "I" voice. Sometimes it's due to the writer and the singer being different people. The thought came up because of King Crimson, where there are lyricists (Sinfield, Palmer-James), singers (Lake, Wetton), and an impartial arbiter over it all (Fripp), and so when the word "I" appears in the lyrics, as if often does, there is no particular person it refers to.

The Who is another case of this. There are some songs where the "I" is Pete Townshend (generally the ones he sings, but a few of the ones on By Numbers as well); it's almost never Daltrey (the closest are the early bragging songs by James Brown); but it's usually neither.

[Diamond Dog]

I couldn't imagine the likes of Quadrophenia, Who's Next, or Live at Leeds being as lively without his vocals. So yeah, I believe he was an essential member and important rock vocalist during that era.

That's a good point. I think Daltrey was massively important from "Tommy" onwards - before that, virtually anyone that could hold a tune could have been that guy. There was no particular image or vocal style I think of with Daltrey up until that point. But - and I think Pete actually said this, didn't he?- from "Tommy" onwards, Roger found his voice and he became that persona (nstage and in the studio, at least).

[Quaco]

Yes - at first, he wasn't necessarily going to be the character Tommy, just sing the songs as the band's singer. Somewhere along the way, RD decided he wanted to be that character, even if it meant PT singing more songs (as narrator). It has been said that RD was most comfortable portraying characters, and that finding Tommy was the key to realizing that.

[joels344]

I couldn't imagine the likes of Quadrophenia, Who's Next, or Live at Leeds being as lively without his vocals. So yeah, I believe he was an essential member and important rock vocalist during that era.

That's a good point. I think Daltrey was massively important from "Tommy" onwards - before that, virtually anyone that could hold a tune could have been that guy. There was no particular image or vocal style I think of with Daltrey up until that point. But - and I think Pete actually said this, didn't he?- from "Tommy" onwards, Roger found his voice and he became that persona (nstage and in the studio, at least).

True. While I like the music from their earlier albums, such as, My Generation and The Who Sell Out, it seems that Roger Daltrey lacked the confidence, flair, and persona found on their albums from Tommy onward. I've always argued there was a drop in music quality after Quadrophenia (their pinnacle), though. However, by point, he had become a proper rock n' roll frontman and continued to deliver, even carrying the band to some degree. What could've been standard hard rock songs were turned into well-known classics and brought to life by Daltrey's voice.

[Quaco]

And yet there is a point where I stop liking Daltrey's voice. Somewhere around "New Song".