Am I reading this correctly?

But musically, I feel ELP was at times as much a victim of Keith's playing as it was defined by it. Unfortunately, he was more of a showman than an intellectual. Sometimes, virtuosity gets in the way of how others relate to your music. You want them to connect emotionally to it, not just go "Oh wow - can he play".

Anyway, I spent weeks learning to play Tarkus on the piano when I was 18. I was totally absorbed and awestruck by Keith for years. That he flashed and burned more noticeably than others takes nothing away from the brilliance of his unique approach to playing and his harmonic language. I only wish he had shown a little more restraint and crammed a little less of his cranial matter into his fingers. Sometimes, a band needs another member who can step back and play John Lennon alongside Liberace. Showmen by themselves can't always be relied upon to make artistic decisions regarding taste, etc.  

But I never like to see people trash anyone who went his own way rather than played it safe an imitated others. Keith just did what felt right to him. Whether ELP was "pure prog" or not is not even worthy of contemplating.  And ELP's legacy as a prog band doesn't matter to me as much as Keith's legacy as a keyboardist. Non keyboardists may shrug today when they listen to ELP. But I know young keyboardists really dig him still and want to learn how to play Tarkus, etc like I did. He is and always will be a legend to us. The problem is though that the most imitated bands set the standard by which young ears judge other music today. So that if it doesn't sound like King Crimson, Genesis or Pink Floyd, it sounds "funny" to them. Truth be told though - the ELP sound is less imitated yes - in part, due to poor artistic decisions they made at times, but also - it is less imitated because its so friggin' difficult! I do hear Keith imitators playing prog that otherwise sounds very little like ELP. Thats kind of what happens now, and while it sounds tame and watered down by comparison, it also is devoid of the excess and the filler songs that ELP detractors always bring up whenever they are comparing prog bands. I dunno - but Keith should have started a school where he taught others how he does it. And then maybe they could carry on that tradition, build on it and refine it. It beats us guys still trying to pic it all out note for note from listening (yeah, I know, you can buy Tarkus/ELP song books today, but anyway)...

aldri7

 

I would make a couple of points regarding the paragraph I have highlighted.

 

Firstly if Keith Emerson had shown 'restraint' then presumably the music would have been very different? I think fans love the ELP sections where they cut loose. For instance the Bab Yaga section on the Pictures from Lyceum is just one of the most wonderous things I ever heard. ELP in full throttle mood were awe inspiring at that time. Sorry but I don't want restraint!

 

Also I believe Greg Lake was the rudder in the band and helped make steer the band on making artistic decisions. He put his stamp on much of ELP's music although people for some reason will believe that he was a 'bit part' player in the band. ELP made music that was heavily weighted towards symphonic classical and keyboards orientated music because that was different and unique and put then apart from others. I don't see a problem. In general I think this kind of music fairs badly on the PA charts. Where are Rick Wakeman, Par Lindh, Glass Hammer, Greenslade and Refugee in the top 100. Answer - nowhere! ELP debut is probably the only keyboard based album in the top 100 so I believe this type of music represents a niche market and that the lack of ELP albums in the top 100 is not down to Keith Emerson making poor artistic choices at all.