So what? ... Since when are "critics" the "RULE" as to what is good or bad? Further more, the critics are never remembered in history ... except maybe Salieri,. but he came over to this side for a while!

 

Let's see ... we can add Ravel, Debussy, Stravinsky, Mahler, Tchaikovsky (but a rich woman liked him!) ... you want more? ... where "fans" and "classicos" and "idiots" and "morons" (want more?) decided they did not like the music and thought it was bad ... ooohhhh by the way, guess who is remembered in the history of music?

 

So, tell me, you gonna suck it up to the critics? They really knnnnnnooooo music, I bet!  Including me! ... you have to learn and live by yourself, not anyone else's ideas or thoughts!

 

G'night! Sleep tight! Dream and enjoy the music! And forget the critic!

 

(Now you know why I do not consider myself a "critic" ... because I am a person with feelings, not a critic!

 

Trespass is rarely thought of in these circles as a low point in Genesis' career.  Quite the contrary, it is generally well-liked. 

 

Hmmm.  I love Abacab, like Calling All Stations and the Final Cut.  Post-Tormato Yes was definitely hit or miss, but there were some great ones (Drama, 90125, Talk, Keys To Ascension) and some real duds (Open Your Eyes). Do like 80's Rush a lot, except for Hold Your Fire (it's too soft rock for me).  And post-Fish Marillion has done some amazing stuff.   

Pink Floyd's Final Cut is just weak for me, my friend tries to convince me that MLOR and The Division Bell are greater than Meddle and Wish You Were Here, but I can't see it. I personally love the late 80s rush like Grace Under Pressure and some of Hold Your Fire. I can't stand post-Tormato Yes up until Fly From Here. Kansas's Audio Visions and up is good but lacking, and I can't get into the post-Fish Marillon or Post-Neal Spock's Beard

I've never considered Genesis sellouts just for making pop albums anyway.  They always had a bit of pop music in their approach and once they lost Gabriel and Hackett, they ran out of options.  On the other hand, other bands like Renaissance did admit to believing they needed to emulate the commercial success of a hit single or album (in this case Northern Lights) and that's what I call selling out.  And I don't condemn that choice either because it's not for me to, but that would mean that the bands were not true to themselves which tends to reflect on their work (and could be legitimately classified as the dark side of their discography).  In KC's case, it's more about the name King Crimson than anything else.  It doesn't even matter if anybody other than Fripp continues in the lineup and whether the work bears any resemblance to what they did before.  I could understand that he would resent having to work more in the collaborative set up of a band than pursue a solo career but I am not sure he was under pressure to make pop music at any point of time.

 

It doesn't matter ... even Pink Floyd got lucky ... and so did many others ... so not having to work as hard, or studying a bit more, or working to make it more important ... was no longer an issue ... you didn't need the money anymore!

 

Reminds me of Robert Fripp having to say ... that doing King Crimson ... helps pay the bills! ... the sad side being that it eats away at him like a cancer ... and only made him more and more bitter and took him further away from us ... because we are so damn greedy and such an incredible group of vampires that would rather suck a life into death than we would in appreciating a person, and his complete list of works!

 

I guess that Beethoven's Bagatelles, don't count as music, and is the dark side of his discography! ... and Mozart had more bagatelles than anyone else!

 

It wasn't meant that way ... the fact is that we do not feel that a lot of this music will have any affect on the history of music at all ... in fact, including all these posts, we do not believe it at all, except for one or two goons!

 

I, for one, believe, that all the "electric" stuff, IS the history of music for the 2nd half of the 20th Century and at least the first half of the 21st  Century ... it IS ... just about ALL the music that people are seeing these days ... with an occasional "unplugged" somewhere ... but look at the "classic music concerts" in most campus' these days ... not even selling out and only a handful of those folks can you even name today! ... think about it!  That will have a massive influence in the history of music, even if a section is considered "popular music", or "popular idioms" ... but if that happens, the likes of "progressive" music loses out ... because some of the compositional values, of a lot of the music we love is considerably better developed musically, that a vast majority of classical music of the last 1000 years!

 

Either that, or we are real slaves to avertising and not intelligent enough to hear anything else except the grub that we are fed!

 

That is NOT very "progressive" at all, and you might want to check out the theme and the ideas behind the words in just about "everything" that we consider "progressive" at the start, and how much we love them!

 

I would never blame Genesis for all of a sudden selling a million albums, when they struggled for 6 or 7 years to buy food, a house for their children or even a decent meal! I would have said ... "it's about time!".

1.  No Son of Mine

2.  Jesus He Knows Me

3.  Driving the Last Spike

4.  Dreaming While You Sleep

5.  On the Shoreline

6.  Living Forever

7.  Fading Lights

Amazingly bad ? 

 

IMO, THE best ballad by JT, with great verses.

[TUBE]2rz_lNdgvO4[/TUBE]

I second this. It's my favorite Tull album together with Aqualung

 

Too Old To Rock 'N' Roll: Too young To Die the album, in its entirety, is really a masterpiece, and one of the best albums by Jethro Tull.

 

 

Also, I love Going for the One by Yes as much as Close to the Edge and Relayer, and I think that Abacab is probably the best album in that post Gabriel era Genesis' catalogue; same thing with Shamal by Gong.

 

 

 

 

 

Most underrated indeed.

And most people like Duke, so it doesn't really count as the "dark side" of Genesis' discography, but it is missing Gabriel, which according to some is almost as bad as a 3rd world war would be. 

 

What I believe you are not seeing is that in the 20th century the music "history" and "control" was taken completely off the upper classes. As such, the history of music will change and some of these popular things will make it in the history of music ... and there is no doubt in my mind that jazz, rock and its derivatives will be a major part of music history!

 

The discussion is not pointless ... it's just that we do not see the difference, or are capable of looking at music history, and how they used to make fun of pedestrian and street music ... which no longer happens as much, and even the professors and idiots in colleges and universities are no longer saying things like that ... and then lose their tenure for being insensitive to the multitude of students they have and the things they listen to ... since almost no one they teach music to, ever listens to anything they are talking about!

 

The comparison is pointless in terms of the physical details of the music ... but then, that's like saying that the "progressive music" definition even comes close to making sense musically, or in its own wording, when it is taken completely out of context with the history of the time and place that helped develop it!

 

But what you are suggesting is that Beethoven, Tchaikovsky and Stravinsky and Brahms and many others were not "popular" in their time? ... hmmm ... methinks that the comparative nature of your idea is out of kilter!

I think that Comparing Beethoven to the Beatles/Floyd is a bit pointless...Beethovens work is considerably more complex in it's composition than the simplistic yet pleasing fundamentals of these two 4/4 merchants......Popularity = brilliance in todays musical currency. I disagree....

 

The point was not to "censor", but there was no other word ... I said, this thread was starting to sound like ... what happened in those days! Not that it is!

 

Back then, the media would make that person look bad, and soon, the fascist would show up at your door, and then pull a gun to the child's head ... and tell you ... you wanna write another poem? Or song? ... os say anything anymore?

 

Obviously, here is not bad ... but you have to look at an artist's listing as its totality ... you like the 5th better than the 9th or similar, but all it tells you is that the composer is great and you still listen to it ... so saying that This Wall gets 1 mark, but That Wall gets 2 mark, and The Wall gets a different mark, is no different than the different symphonies ... it's still the same "artist" and "composer".

 

For all intents and purposes, it's almost like we're intentionally not giving a person the right to be an artist ... that he/she deserves. Pink Floyd, Beatles and such will be the Beethovens, Bachs and such in music history in another 50 years ... but we're not capable of seeing that larger picture ... (I think) mainly because it would render a lot of things we like worthless and not good enough! And none of us wants to feel stupid and not with it, the day that happens!

 

History will decide these things ... not you and I ... your opinion on This/That/The Wall is just like you plugging a finger into the Atlantic Ocean ... might be felt on the other side and make history someday ... and only time will tell ... and in the meantime, at least give those folks the credit they deserve.

I think so...Surely it's not worse than this

or this

or this

Let's stop here...I have a number of albums of this kind in mind....

Well, I was exaggerating a bit. :)

Still, I can't stand that album except for (MAYBE) On the Turning Away.

You forgot to add "in Pink Floyd's discography".