I was thinking about this lately. 

Recently I have FINALLY managed to get into early Marillion. I do love Genesis albums from the Peter Gabriel era. 

The fact that they sound so much like those used to put me off. But this time, my brain was tricked into thinking "Well, turns out that there are more Genesis albums I didn't know about. Happy days!"

Someone on PA recommended Wobbler. Loved it, although they also sound quite a bit like early Genesis.

I feel the same way about, for example, Jesus & Mary Chain records and The Velvet Underground (think "Almost Famous") and even Oasis is alright with me even though they never bothered writing an original tune. :))

But, man, oh, man, do some bands like Greta van Fleet or Wolfmother annoy me. And I've tried giving them a fair shake too.

Having said that Led Zeppelin is my favorite band and a group that has flirted with prog I would say. 

Do I have a bias problem? 

And where do you stand on "clone bands"?

I do enjoy some Jesus & Mary Chain. But although inspired by... they don't sound much like Velvet Underground to me. They got their own spin and feel distinctly 1980's in the 1980's and 1990's in the 1990's. I don't really have a problem with "clone bands" if the song material is strong enough. That said I'd much rather a band scome across like they are part of a movement of the past, like Kosmischer Laüfer kind of feel like they made all their music in Berlin/Düsseldorf/Germany ca. 1973-1978 - or Needledrop that remind me of early 1970's Canterbury Scene. They feel like an extention of a familiar approach to making music rather than being a being copy of a specific band (like the Wolfmother or Greta van Fleet I've heard). The only reason I don't care for the lion's share of the bands you mention, is because I don't find what they bring to the table memorable or interesting enough. So I choose the original(s) over the copy 10 out of 10 times.

I will say I like the German band Kingdom Come which was ridiculed because they sounded like Led Zeppelin. (And yet a few bands in the 21 century sound like Zeppelin and they've got no ridicule, I don't get it). Kingdom Come's 1991 album Hands of Time is one of my favorite albums. 

For example the album "Somewhere but Yesterday" by Citizen Cain sounds very much like Gabriel-era Genesis, but now after many listens it is a favourite of mine.

The same with Fish-era Marillion, on first listen they sounded very much like Genesis, but now not anymore (to me at least).

Or Cathedral or Wobbler with respect to Yes.

Or Triumvirat with respect to ELP.

The existence of bands like The Darkness or Greta Van Fleet is positive at least in that they may awaken the interest of young people for classic Rock and make them discover the greats of the 70s.

Lots of so called Genesis clones out there especially IQ who are one of my favourite bands, but they kinda of represent a path that Genesis could have taken but decided not to. They took up the batten. Wobbler and Yes are similar but I guess we would rather Yes were doing what Wobbler do now!

^ Yes a lot of the "clone band"-thing is created by rock journalists and general a****le behaviour by people who seem to enjoy trying to hurt certain bands with certain sounds. I'm no saint myself, and probably been simliarly dismissive here on these boards at times. And while I'm not the biggest fan out there (because I'm not the world's biggest fan of Yes, I suppose) I surely prefer Wobbler over the four last decades of music by Yes.

I'd rather have a band with the feel, energy, musicality and groove of late 1960's Stones, early 1970's Tull, 1980's Metallica etc... over the current touring and album releasing version of any of them.

Btw: I have no issues with any of these ageing rockers still touring and recording. They've done this practically all their lives, so why not keep doing it until your heart stops. It' just that I personally choose their peak era. Most of them have sort of become their own clone bands anyway, haven't they?     

I do not think you have a bias, but more like an understanding between having an inspired sound from a band and being a rip off. Essentially speaking, Marillion, at least in the Fish era is a band that took the Genesis sound they knew and loved, and decided to give it their own spin, which evolved into something a lot more original by Misplaced Childhood. Greta Van Fleet, to put it bluntly is merely a group of wannabe glam rockers in ugly mullets claiming they are reviving rock (even though rock never really died anyways lol) and playing Led Zeppelin parody songs.

The Jesus & Mary Chain is my favorite non-prog band.   

Hi,

This is one issue with "tastes" and us specifying that we like one thing and we don't like another. In the end, that's unfair to the person/musician who worked what they did. Their expression, and ability to bring it to us, is a gift, whether we like it or not, and we should not "deprive" them of that ability.

Similarly to your comment is this ... does your bias extend to other music, like classical, jazz, you name it ... because if it does, then you are NOT listening to music. You are simply listening to the 5 or 10 things you like, and you will soon forget them!

You either like MUSIC or you don't. I admit that growls and metal are not my specialty but I don't have the heart to dislike them ... that's an important expression, like it or not!

Clones! Weird ... so all the orchestras and various groups playing classical music that is hundreds of years old are "clones"? It might be too soon to bring about many works that some of us were not around to see, or hear, but to not appreciate the beauty of the music and how it stands up, for you to learn about a different expression ... and you call it "clone"? Methinks you dislike music ... because you can't do it, or have it inside?

Please evaluate your discussion of music, now ... and remember that not liking Stravinsky or Beethoven has nothing to do with the music ... has to do with you! So liking/disliking something is, generally, very overrated ... it's just weird to see folks posting on it.