Most Overrated Band of the 'Big Six'

Here are the average number of stars higher or lower that the average my ratings are:-

Yes -0.11

Genesis -0.71

King Crimson +0.19

Jethro Tull -0.15

ELP -0.95

Pink Floyd -0.19

So I rate ELP roughly one star lower than average so they are my personal most overrated. Genesis come in second for me nearly 3/4 of a star lower than average.

These kinds of misunderstandings always occur any time anyone brings up the big six anywhere online. Lots of people seem to read it as an explicit endorsement on the part of the OP. It's frustrating, because for all its flaws, the big six is a genuinely useful concept when examining the commercial and cultural impact of first wave UK prog, but any time it comes up someone is guaranteed to start suggesting bands that "ought" to be included, thus completely missing the point of the concept.

Oh, well, I agree

(with the exception of King Crimson - Pink Floyd? Hmmm).

bardberic wrote: I went to a record store and overheard some woman talking to her daughter about the "underrated band, Pink Floyd," and that their most "underrated album is Animals." During my first year at university, in my required writing 101 class, there was a student who wrote an essay on "Pink Floyd, the most underrated band ever" and how Animals is "their absolute most underrated album." Ad f**king infinitum.

I agree that it's silly to call Pink Floyd, one of the most popular bands in the history of music, underrated. But one thing to consider is that Pink Floyd is know by almost everyone for their radio-friendly output, e.g., those couple singles from The Wall, the title track on WYWH, Money, etc. There's probably many people who don't know much Floyd beyond this, and I certainly get the impression that, despite being an album in their most popular era, Animals isn't that well known among the average non-fan, unlike the other albums from 1973-1979. I've had people react surprised when I put on some more unknown Floyd ("really? that's Pink Floyd?"). Also, you could definitely call their 60's output underrated, IMO.

I mean, I still wouldn't call Floyd underrated obviously.

It also doesn't help that most Pink FLoyd fans are like Tool fans - they don't stfu about the artist and will relentlessly call them the greatest band ever. Music that changed their life. Etc.

Yeah, exactly. They're a more acquired taste, and as such, you're going to have more people who just can't stand them. You probably won't find as many people who absolutely can't stand Genesis, Floyd or Renaissance or what have you. Some artists when people don't like them they just feel ambivalent or bored, and some it's more of an active dislike. Like, I'm a huge Zappa fan, but I'm not going to pretend there's probably a lot of people who won't be able to stand the majority of his stuff. Some artists are just like that.

As the discussion went on without including my reply to richardh ("lost" at the bottom of the previous page):

Saperlipopette! wrote: richardh "Can showing off never serve the music in any way?" -Probably from your perspective, but maybe not for me? I'm only speaking from my point of view - which Im fully aware I is pretty much the same angle most everyone criticizes ELP from btw. It's not even critique. I was mainly explaining where I'm coming from and that I'm not hopping on a "pile on ELP-trend". As you already know these two different kinds of progfans, isn't anything new. Showing off on your instrument, taking up too much space while contributing with nothing of substance or whatever - has always rubbed me the wrong way. Whether it's John McLaughlin, Jaco Pastorious or Keith Emerson doing it. I guess maybe in classical music I let it pass easier - as I take less notice of it (but I don't really listen to Mozart much either).

Showing off serves the music for those who enjoy listening to artists showing off. I like many, don't belong in the former group of fans. I find flashy solos bothersome and annoying, if not always - say nine out of ten times. It's about preferences, so neither richardh or I am wrong - or right.

^ Because Mike could pluck a mean string and Davy was cute as a button. 

But I agree, enough with the Monkees around here... and why are they in RIO/Avant ?

I guess this is just the reason I love Hammill!