What do you think of ELP?

An important and often thrilling defining prog band, who recorded one of my favourite prog albums (their debut), but they are certainly not one of my very favourites, so I chose the third option.

I still can't warm to BSS's `Karn Evil 9', those circus lyrics make me cringe and drive me up the wall!

Love the debut, mostly really enjoy much of `Tarkus', `Trilogy', `BSS' and `E.L.Powell', but I can mostly leave the rest.

richardh wrote: Aussie-Byrd-Brother wrote: An important and often thrilling defining prog band, who recorded one of my favourite prog albums (their debut), but they are certainly not one of my very favourites, so I chose the third option. I still can't warm to BSS's `Karn Evil 9', those circus lyrics make me cringe and drive me up the wall! Love the debut, mostly really enjoy much of `Tarkus', `Trilogy', `BSS' and `E.L.Powell', but I can mostly leave the rest. Its a Carnival not a Circus

Point taken!

My favourite band so voted for the first option. And well played Richard for bravely fending off those ELP-dissing googlies and bouncers with such an effectively dead bat, you sir are the Chris Tavare of Progarchives! Wonder if there's a soul on here who'll get that reference?

richardh wrote: octopus-4 wrote: To me they are fundamental. It's a pity that they've been the first big band which has lost its quality leaving us only a bunch of excellent albums and at least the same amount of rubbish. I would argue that you could say that about almost any prog band. ELP produced some bad albums (In The Hot Seat and Love Beach) a few mediocre albums (Works 2 , ELPowell, Black Moon) on top of the classic early releases. I don't believe that put out a vast amount of crap. When things started going wrong they 'got out' rather than just plough an AOR /pop furrow for the whole of the eighties like Yes and Genesis pretty much did.

 




Edited by Rick Robson - September 08 2014 at 08:08

Nice to see some long-standing fans chiming in

I'll concur with others here in that there are distinct tracks and pieces of music by ELP that are absolutely stellar, but they never really made an entire album that I would place among my top albums.  I think they were always struggling to find an identity and never quite did so, i.e., I think Keith wanted the band to be a vehicle to highlight his playing and adaptations of various classical pieces, where Greg was more songwriting/pop focused.

Of course, whatever our collective criticism it sure didn't hurt their bank accounts in the 1970s.


Edited by Padraic - September 08 2014 at 09:30

I'm wondering what those who put down that they don't like ELP to one extent or another think of Gentle Giant. I'd say both bands were guilty of a lot of the same things(showing off, self indulgence, excessiveness etc).

I don't know the answer to this, but I wonder how much of the Keith-Classical vs Greg/song-based dichotomy was by design (for variety) and how much of it was truly a struggle for domination of the band's direction.  Any thoughts? In other words, was the band happy with this two sided identity, or was it merely a compromise?  And how about Carl?  He had his own side of the coin too, what with things like side 3 of Works and "Bullfrog" and stuff like that.


Edited by HolyMoly - September 08 2014 at 10:12

HolyMoly wrote: I don't know the answer to this, but I wonder how much of the Keith-Classical vs Greg/song-based dichotomy was by design (for variety) and how much of it was truly a struggle for domination of the band's direction.  Any thoughts? In other words, was the band happy with this two sided identity, or was it merely a compromise?  And how about Carl?  He had his own side of the coin too, what with things like side 3 of Works and "Bullfrog" and stuff like that.

I think compromise v. design.  Actually watched a documentary recently, when Keith presented Greg with Tarkus, Greg almost walked out; it wasn't the music or vision he had for the band, but it certainly was Keith's vision.  Somehow they coaxed him into embracing it.  Likewise, I think Keith was always sort of pissed off that "Lucky Man" was the "hit" of the debut, overshadowing all of his pieces somewhat.

Never quite sure what Carl wanted, but I guess maybe more the Keith vision as it allowed him to show off his chops better?  I think he just wanted to play, and the more complex the better.

I think of ELP as a very intelligent pop band. I don't want to argue over words, so let me explain why I'm making that comparison. When I listen to, say, N'Sync or something, there's obviously a tightness to the musicians and the production, and some good ideas, but nothing more. ELP is similar in that sense— their compositions are really tight and filled with interesting ideas (and obviously way more complex than N'Sync, just to clarify), but they don't satisfy those wanting more thematic and atmospheric content. If you try to look for it, you will be disappointed, as is my experience with ELP, especially with Tarkus. They're the kind of band that, when I listen to them, I go through alternating 10-second periods of "cool!" and "eww." Maybe it's their design to be a little bit cringe-y, but, if so, I still haven't figured out why.