Hmmm not that many echoing the old Robin Hood troop, but Terreno Baldio came very close - perhaps too close for some reviewers:

One of my favorite albums! I also love Island, Gnidrolog, Cardiacs! The best!!!!

So strange to see this ... specially when Gary Green has been on record saying that they never composed anything ... they just played, which in some pieces, it has a tendency to really look off kilter, (and many people thought so at the time, btw!!!!!!!) and make it a harder experience all around for many folks to appreciate.

Buried in all this, is something that was being taught in schools and universities at the time, point/counterpoint in a lot of modern music, and the complete dismantling of melody, into something that is harder to listen to, however, in the end, it has its "own" melody, and this is tougher all around.

GG, is not the only group at the time doing odd stuff ... you can go to Henry Cow and Art Bears at the time to realize that these folks were "prime students" in music, and not just your average rock'n'roller that only knew 3 chords and a (supposed!) solo over it!

I, personally, think that in their first 5 albums or so, that a lot of its material was just done as is, and there was no changes, or additions that took away some of its innate beauty and design. AND, this is important, and something that nowadays, with DAW's, is not appreciated and too many bands are simply changing it in the studio (or the home!) to supposedly make it better, and all they are doing is taking out the subtlety that helped create the piece in the first place ... and this is where some bands, as is the case of DT, suffers when it's rather clear that the lyrics were added on, and not a natural part of the development of the music, that continues on, regardless of lyrics or not ... as if they didn't matter anyway! Too many "metal" bands are doing that, and it's not hard to find and tell.

I would wish that we think of these things as "musical" styles. We can look at the 20th century, and find Stravinsky, Berg, Britten, Orff, Davies, Russell, and so many more ... and we do NOT think in terms of styles. So, in the end, an audience thinking that "styles" are important, in the end, they are limiting their listening content and thinking that what they like, or attuned to better, is more music than anything else is!

I just don't see the "maturity" that we would have after so many years of listening to these things ... GG is not a personal favorite of mine, but I will never EVER, think that this is an incredible group of folks that were not afraid to do things musically that most of us would not consider or even try ... EVER. And then, their musicianship alone, is enough to leave one breathless ... and btw, the concert I saw their ENCORE was 20 minutes long and in that time, they all played the drums, the guitars, the keyboards, the recorders ... and sang ... so do we really want to discuss their musical abilities? And then wonder how/why they did something like that?

Tom Ozric wrote: Spock’s Beard have ventured into GG-like territory on many tracks ; Gibberish is one that comes to mind instantly. I gotta say that SB are one of my favourite Prog bands these days.

 

Thoughts

I would almost say that GRYPHON is totally classically oriented ... like Richard Harvey was not a master student in music with a very high degree in it. The fact that they had a sound that came off as being from another time, is not exactly a coincidence, but if you take those instruments out, and just pen the work, it is not exactly a rock piece of music at all ... extremely classical in its design! SHADOWFAX, for my ears, also fits in the same mold as GRYPHON, although they were placed somewhere between Fusion and New Age ... two of the worst and most confusing definitions EVER.