about Top 100 ... we will always disagree, maybe one of our fav albums will never reach top 100, but for us it deserves to..

it`s only relative

  I posted a similar thread a few months back for exactly the same reasons . I started with 'MODERN MASQUERADES' not long after its release and it's one of my favourite albums, despite its low-key melodic feel. 'Gormenghast' and 'Sheba's song' are absolutely two of my most favourite songs. It's hard to imagine prog enthusiasts not enjoying these, except perhaps for those who like their prog heavy.

 

 I have gone back to their earlier releases and although I enjoy them, MM remains my favourite. It seems among FRUUPP fans there is some division as to whether they were a better band prior to Steve Houstons departure. As you might have guessed, in many ways i feel that the sound and feel of the band improved with John Masons influence. His Fender Rhodes (?) solo in 'Sheba's Song' I think provides a good illustration. Then again I always enjoy a jazz inluence in my prog which I think Mason provided. He is also underrated imo and it remains a major disappointment that they broke up when they did.

But I also agree with AVESTIN that they are mostly "unknown" rather than "underrated". Maybe it's because they came out at the same time as many other great bands who overshadowed them.

Talking about "underrated", I would immediately name "The Enid". Comparing what they actually achieved musically with their popularity, I believe "this world is totally fugazi"!

 

I think you have your answer in your statement.

 

These guys were completely derivative and do not have much of a personality

 

Read all of your posts in this thread << you spend your time finding them analogies, similarities and influences

 

that is already 3/4 of the problem  >> simply too derivative

 

All I kept is a one cdr compilation from all four cds and I still find myself relatively annoyed at how bland these guys were

 

 

 

funny this thread should come about a week after I re-wrote my review, though

 

  I'm interested to know in what way you find them derivative.They released 4 albums between 73 and 76 culminating in 'Modern Masquerades' which was quite different to 'Prince of.....', which in turn was quite different to the earlier 2. So, this co-incided with the 'Selling England....', 'Wind and Wuthering' era in Genesis terms and the 'In a Glasshouse' era in GG terms. In my view they were developing in tandem with such bands and I fail to see how they can be described in this context as derivative . I'd be interested in examples or to hear more of your arguments to support this.

 

  Also I've read lots of positives about Vincent McCusker's playing and style, with which i agree , Steve Houston was certainly highly regarded as both a player and writer and Farrelly was quite an accomplished bass player and an acceptable vocalist. John Mason only added to the band's musicianship in my view. Ian McDonald was also prepared to collaborate with the band to a considerable extent on MM which, again ,imo, is not consistent with them being a bunch of dervative , personality lacklustres. I believe they were likely to achieve much more had it not been for their untimely demise, but this ,of course, is speculative--not derivative.

 

  Needless to say they make my top 100.

 

 

 

Fruupp as I state in my reviews IS derivative. I still make a difference between a group under influencesz anda copycat/clone as Druid was to Yes

 

Although you are right to state that Fruupp was in "parallel" time wrap to Yes and Genesis, it must be noted that they started much later than those two groups (and endede much earlier too).

 

McCusker is the main songwriter (over 80% of the tracks were composed by him) and as a guitarist in a prog band, this is generally not excellent news (as opposed to the possibilities of composing intricate songs on a KB), but Vincent holds his own. Too bad he is not more helped by Houston (whom I find greatly underused his wind instruments capacities) and the other on the last album (he actually gives a different sound to the band)

 

 

 

But running a contemporary career does not mena you are not greatly influenced by  contemporary groups >> look at Druid with Yes and Starcastle with Yes and Kansas

   It's certainly true to say that contemporaneity with the great bands of the era doesn't mean that your not influenced by them in your sound, songwriting, instruments employed in the band etc.. With FRUUPP, I have trouble hearing similarities with other bands of that time. Certainly their sound is derived from the sounds of the prog movement of the 70s, but I would have thought that was true of most prog bands of that era. I guess this all sounds pretty esoteric, but I'm struggling to understand it. I'll check out some of the reviews if they are still posted and see if that helps.