Do later mediocre albums diminish better ones?

Zero effect on me and for the most part I don't buy/own later albums by ELP, Yes, Genesis....if they are stinkers.

Richard Tyson wrote: My first album was Abacab when it came out: my second was Trespass: it really was chalk and cheese but I took to early Genesis very quickly.

A giant step forward by going backwards. Cheers.

My first album was Abacab when it came out: my second was Trespass: it really was chalk and cheese but I took to early Genesis very quickly.

Like most contributors to this thread, I feel that mediocre or even outright bad albums do not diminish the appreciation of earlier good albums in any way. Why should, for instance, Close to the Edge be a less excellent album just because there are such things as 90125 (not a bad album, but not on a par with the classics)? That's just nonsense. Often, as in this example, the bands are not even the same because people have joined and others have left in the meantime. And even the greatest artists may sometimes goof up a work - but why bother if there is good stuff to listen to?

 

CPicard wrote: The Dark Elf wrote: Listening to bands is like having relationships. You listen quite attentively for awhile until the conversations become tedious. Then you ditch the b*tch. Classy.

The Dark Elf wrote: Listening to bands is like having relationships. You listen quite attentively for awhile until the conversations become tedious. Then you ditch the b*tch.

You're my hero.

Listening to bands is like having relationships. You listen quite attentively for awhile until the conversations become tedious. Then you ditch the b*tch.

emigre80 wrote: Cristi wrote: emigre80 wrote: Actually, I can think of a good example of this happening, but it's not prog. (The purists can now stop reading this post). I was a huge U2 fan in the mid 80s to mid 90s, even though I thought the band themselves were, shall we say, a bit burdened by excessive self-regard. I was able to forgive that because they seemed so obviously sincere, particularly in their political beliefs. In the early 90s, they released a couple of albums which even showed some signs of irony, which I thought was a good sign because it might leaven their sense of self-importance.   The in the late 90s, U2 released an album called Pop which was the most coldly calculating pseudo-hipsterish piece of trash I ever heard, and it really spoiled listening to the earlier albums for a long time. Although I listen to them again now, I haven't really bothered to hear any of their new stuff for 20 years. I was just appalled that they sold out so thoroughly in an attempt to gain some kind of imaginary hipster rep.   hipsters in 1997? I've always liked Pop. Nothing wrong with it if you ask me.   I thought it was total rubbish. I'm not disputing your enjoyment of it. I thought it was very cynical and I loathed it.

oh yes, it was definitely cynical... and I can see how that album could ruin whatever image their fans built around the band's aura between albums like Fire and Achtung Baby...

But I wouldn't call it rubbish either...

I guess that after Achtung, the band was stuck, not really knowing where to go: Zooropa and the "Passenger thing" here anything-goes experiences and should not have been taken seriously (IMHO, anyways) in the band's discography

Thing is that while the band straightened out their discourse in their next few albums, but they were simply never at their level again since.





Edited by Sean Trane - September 03 2016 at 01:16

emigre80 wrote: Actually, I can think of a good example of this happening, but it's not prog. (The purists can now stop reading this post). I was a huge U2 fan in the mid 80s to mid 90s, even though I thought the band themselves were, shall we say, a bit burdened by excessive self-regard. I was able to forgive that because they seemed so obviously sincere, particularly in their political beliefs. In the early 90s, they released a couple of albums which even showed some signs of irony, which I thought was a good sign because it might leaven their sense of self-importance.   The in the late 90s, U2 released an album called Pop which was the most coldly calculating pseudo-hipsterish piece of trash I ever heard, and it really spoiled listening to the earlier albums for a long time. Although I listen to them again now, I haven't really bothered to hear any of their new stuff for 20 years. I was just appalled that they sold out so thoroughly in an attempt to gain some kind of imaginary hipster rep.

well, later cruddy albums don't affect the way I look at the early masterpieces, but it certainly affects my view about the reasons and ethics of the surviving band members keeping the band going well pas its prime.