I DARE you to doubt the progginess of Kansas.
Printed From: Progarchives.com
Category: Progressive Music Lounges
Forum Name: Prog Music Lounge
Forum Description: General progressive music discussions
URL: http://www.progarchives.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=27177
Printed Date: April 24 2024 at 19:46
Software Version: Web Wiz Forums 11.01 - http://www.webwizforums.com
Topic: I DARE you to doubt the progginess of Kansas.
Posted By: Man Overboard
Subject: I DARE you to doubt the progginess of Kansas.
Date Posted: August 10 2006 at 17:00
|
http://youtube.com/watch?v=qCYIiHAhIdo Unfortunately it's not the highquality video I had before, but...  ------------- https://soundcloud.com/erin-susan-jennings" rel="nofollow - Bedroom guitarist". Composer, Arranger, Producer. Perfection may not exist, but I may still choose to serve Perfection. Commissions considered. |
Replies:
Posted By: The Miracle
Date Posted: August 10 2006 at 17:05
I have seen. It's prog allright and nicely performed, yet I fail to enjoy their overall sound.
------------- http://www.last.fm/user/ocellatedgod" rel="nofollow - last.fm |
Posted By: Certif1ed
Date Posted: August 10 2006 at 17:21
|
OK then... ... Only kidding  ------------- The important thing is not to stop questioning. |
Posted By: Masque
Date Posted: August 10 2006 at 18:42
|
it is time to come clean ... Kansas is my favourite prog band for a reason and its their progressive side clearly displayed time and time again in the 70`s ... Yet some people refuse to accept the fact that Kansas were First class prog ... it is their loss ;) ------------- |
Posted By: stonebeard
Date Posted: August 10 2006 at 18:47
I shall doubt. 
Doubt. ------------- http://soundcloud.com/drewagler" rel="nofollow - My soundcloud. Please give feedback if you want! |
Posted By: bhikkhu
Date Posted: August 10 2006 at 18:55
|
O.K., you've got me. I guess i am pretty ignorant about the total proggitude of Kansas. I always did consider them progish, but never on the same level as their contemporaies. What is their most full blown prog release? ------------- a.k.a. H.T. http://riekels.wordpress.com" rel="nofollow - http://riekels.wordpress.com |
Posted By: E-Dub
Date Posted: August 10 2006 at 19:22
|
Man, "The Pinnacle" is such a great tune!! They're more prog than the majority on this site. Much proggier than my favorite--Marillion. I'd put these guys up against some of the heavy hitters any day. E ------------- 
|
Posted By: E-Dub
Date Posted: August 10 2006 at 19:22
|
Most proggy? I'd say "Leftoverture" or "Song For America". "Masque" is up there, too. E -------------
|
Posted By: E-Dub
Date Posted: August 10 2006 at 19:25
|
Man, and Walsh in his prime was unstoppable. Great video in terms of showcasing his vocals. Definitely one of the best in progressive music. E -------------
|
Posted By: WaywardSon
Date Posted: August 10 2006 at 19:30
|
I wouldnīt dare!
Like Masque, Kansas is my favourite prog band.
|
Posted By: ClemofNazareth
Date Posted: August 10 2006 at 19:53
 Proud to be from Kansas!------------- "Peace is the only battle worth waging." Albert Camus |
Posted By: Tony R
Date Posted: August 10 2006 at 20:21
|
I think Kansas have created their own niche within the Prog Rock umbrella. There is no one quite like them; well apart from Proto-Kaw and that big-eared,in-bred boy in Deliverance,so I doff my cap to them. Gord luv 'em. |
Posted By: Teaflax
Date Posted: August 10 2006 at 20:43
|
Not bad, as long as they shut up. However...those vocals are just
Rawksville in both style and performance. It's like splicing Police
Academy footage into The Big Lebowski. -------------  
|
Posted By: WaywardSon
Date Posted: August 10 2006 at 21:18
How absolutely hilarious
 |
Teaflax wrote:Posted By: Arrrghus
Date Posted: August 10 2006 at 21:43
|
Kansas... aren't they that AOR band... I love a bunch of their albums, and Leftoverture is one of the best prog albums ever. ------------- 
|
Posted By: micky
Date Posted: August 10 2006 at 21:51
hahah.... you all have an interesting state tree up there.... shame they were supporting telephone wires and power lines... ------------- The Pedro and Micky Experience - When one no longer requires psychotropics to trip |
Posted By: mickstafa
Date Posted: August 10 2006 at 21:51
|
I was highly let down from Leftoverture. After hearing about how great and proggy it was, I bought it. Kansas' music in itself is amazing, but man, when Walsh opens his mouth, the entire song is ruined. They've got that awful "driving down the country road on a hot day listening to a bad AM radio station" vibe. I was completely blown away by their great song structures and music. But Walsh's vocals completely ruin it; If they'd released an instrumental album, I'd be all over it! Kansas is there with Journey and Foreigner... sorry, I hate to say it, but it's true. |
Posted By: WaywardSon
Date Posted: August 10 2006 at 21:55
|
Garion and Ivan will be here soon, they will nail some sense into this thread!
|
Posted By: mickstafa
Date Posted: August 10 2006 at 22:00
|
Believe me, I hate it when I am let down by an album I've bought, especially when it is prog (or at least labeled prog ). If anyone can let me in on any "secrets" for getting joy out of Leftoverture, I'd welcome some advice. I will have to say, that Magnum Opus song or whatever towards the end of the album is quite a good song. If only the rest of the album was like that.... And I think that dreaded Walsh doesn't open his mouth on that track either.... |
Posted By: Equality 7-2521
Date Posted: August 10 2006 at 22:01
|
I don't exactly know why you find it an insult to have Kansas be consiedered lesser prog. It speaks nothing of their song quality.
They have their moments when I find them undoubtedly prog, but at other times, mostly dealing with the vocals, I hear AOR. Before finding this site I always considered them AOR as did all my friends. I can remember who the best AOR band was: Kansas, Boston or Journey. As far as I know, most people outside of this site also rank Boston, Journey and Foreigner as their contemporaries. ------------- "One had to be a Newton to notice that the moon is falling, when everyone sees that it doesn't fall. " |
Posted By: Teaflax
Date Posted: August 10 2006 at 22:08
-------------
|
Posted By: Teaflax
Date Posted: August 10 2006 at 22:18
See, it's not that there is such a thing as a heavily AOR-leaning Prog-like band that's the problem, but that their Rawking AOR side isn't mentioned as a warning to those of us who cannot abide by that kind of music. If a band were to be equally proggy but their vocal sections all sounded like Irish folk music, there is no way that "Celtic-souding" wouldn't be noted in every review or recommendation. I had the same thing happen with SB as mickstafa had with Kansas; I made a hugely disappointing purchase based upon unreserved ranting about their supreme progginess, without noting that there's great swathes of mainstream US Rock buried in there. You're welcome to like it or love it, but for God's sake, don't pretend it's anything but what it is; a fusion of Prog and AOR-style Blues Rock. -------------
|
Posted By: E-Dub
Date Posted: August 10 2006 at 22:18
|
<<I was highly let down from Leftoverture. After hearing about how great and proggy it was, I bought it. Kansas' music in itself is amazing, but man, when Walsh opens his mouth, the entire song is ruined. They've got that awful "driving down the country road on a hot day listening to a bad AM radio station" vibe. I was completely blown away by their great song structures and music. But Walsh's vocals completely ruin it; If they'd released an instrumental album, I'd be all over it! Kansas is there with Journey and Foreigner... sorry, I hate to say it, but it's true.>> Refraining from saying something completely uncalled for on PA. This statement is completely ludicrous, however. E -------------
|
Posted By: Teaflax
Date Posted: August 10 2006 at 22:30
" Surely, you can hear influences in Kansas' music from a few Prog. Rock bands, and also of a bluesy American punch rock." "KANSAS had created a dialectic interpretation of what was originally a European phenomenon, adding country elements that included twangier vocal harmonies, fiddling and "bible belt" sentiment to prog's mystical soup." ", a special contamination between the best American tradition of classic rock and an epic progressive msic" "it is closer in sound to Boston, the songs rarely stretch beyond 5 minutes; It's not a pure Prog Rock album, but it's about as close to Prog Rock as you're going to get on the West side of the Atlantic during the 1970s," The key words in the last graph; "close to" (although it's not entirely true, you had both Hands and Happy The Man at that time, both of which are pretty unadulterated). -------------
|
Posted By: WaywardSon
Date Posted: August 10 2006 at 22:34
|
At the end of the day itīs Progressive rock music, I like the rock element in my prog.
Steve Walsh was asked to audition for Yes, so he canīt be all that bad a vocalist.
Name a Boston or Journey song that comes close to "The Pinnacle" "Journey from Mariabronn" "Song for America" "No one together" etc
Why arenīt Boston and Journey included in the prog archives?
Simple, they arenīt as prog as Kansas.
|
Posted By: ClemofNazareth
Date Posted: August 10 2006 at 22:38
Clearly these are cultural sentiments as much as they are objectively critical ones. Each of the quotes listed above brings nationality into the equation. Aside from Kansas (and occasionally Rush), nationality rarely comes into play in most reviews here. Quite interesting phenomenon IMHO. ------------- "Peace is the only battle worth waging." Albert Camus |
Posted By: bhikkhu
Date Posted: August 10 2006 at 23:25
So, what I am seeing here is that my original asessment was correct. They have their moments, but are more tied to the AOR I always considered them to be. ------------- a.k.a. H.T. http://riekels.wordpress.com" rel="nofollow - http://riekels.wordpress.com |
Posted By: Masque
Date Posted: August 11 2006 at 00:40
You have made so many negative comments about Kansas in the last few months to me you are nothing more than a Troll !
 I have put up with your outspoken negative personality for long enough its time I spoke ... whatever the cost  ------------- |
Posted By: Australian
Date Posted: August 11 2006 at 03:04
I agree, Kansas is first class prog. ------------- 
|
Posted By: Sacred 22
Date Posted: August 11 2006 at 03:21
|
Of course Kansas is progressive rock. Considering where they are from (mid-western USA), it's a wonder they made it at all.
|
Posted By: richardh
Date Posted: August 11 2006 at 03:35
|
The first 2 albums are full of first class symphonic prog but then after that they started to morph into a typical American AOR band although it took a few albums to fully get there.I actually don't like the track Magnum Opus.It feels like a tacked on prog epic that lacks any real musical flow.Compared to Death Of Mother Nature Suite I would say its poor.I do like the song 'Dust In The Wind' though.At the end of the day for me though there are many better prog bands than Kansas.If Kansas had stuck at it longer then maybe I'd feel different. |
Posted By: aprusso
Date Posted: August 11 2006 at 04:26
| total masterpiece! |
Posted By: E-Dub
Date Posted: August 11 2006 at 08:40
|
<<Why is it ludicrous? it's what he hears, It's what I hear.>> You know what? As it's your right to have an opinion and voice it, it's my right as well? I find that to be a ridiculous statement. Talk until you're blue in the face, but I'm not budging. You aren't either. E -------------
|
Posted By: mickstafa
Date Posted: August 11 2006 at 08:55
|
Ug. A classic thread of the great Prog Archives.... People's opinions get personal and then all hell breaks loose. Look, I know most of the "battles" in this thread are aimed more at teaflax and not me, but all I was saying is that I don't like this band very much because of the vocals. I even praised everything else about them. And if you look up there at my previous posts, I asked for you Kansas fans to give me tips on what the heck I'm supposed to be listening for on Leftoverture that makes you think this ranks with Thick as a Brick, Close to the Edge, and the other greats. So, let's stop saying "that is utterly rediculous" or "yeah that band you like in reality sucks" and get back to the music. My point: I don't like Kansas very much, except for a few hurrahs on Leftoverture. What is it about this band you love so much? Go. |
Posted By: E-Dub
Date Posted: August 11 2006 at 09:14
|
<<What is it about this band you love so much? Go.>> 1. Musicianship that is both complex, but It's not over indulgent. 2. Phil Ehart - Quite possibly music's most underrated drummer. The man keeps a great beat, but can wow you with a superb drum fill or a time change in the blink of an eye. 3. Kerry Livgren - The primary creative force behind Kansas. The man penned some true masterpieces, and then proceeds to play either the guitar, synths, or both like a top notch professional 4. The music itself - I love music that soars. It's the type of progressive music that I'm drawn to (i.e. Neal Morse, Marillion, Transatlantic, Flower Kings, or even Riverside). Just enough synths and keys to lay out this beautiful base, but doesn't overpower or drown out the music. 5. Lastely, Steve Walsh - I remember being drawn to his voice as a little kid. The man has great range, tenderness when he wants it to be, but can all out rock (listen to "Relentless" and you'll hear both). Before we get too comfy in our ivory tower, I defy you to hold your tongue if somebody came out and took shots at Thick As A Brick (which could be easy for me because I loath Jethro Tull), Close To The Edge, or a group that means a lot to you. Maybe I should've kept my emotions in check; however, when it's something I'm pretty passionate about, I can only hold it in so much. Sorry, but that's my nature. Hell, it could be human nature. E -------------
|
Posted By: WaywardSon
Date Posted: August 11 2006 at 09:14
|
Mickstafa, if you donīt like Leftoverture, maybe try Point of Know Return (Good to listen to on headphones) or The Ultimate Kansas.
What makes Kansas great IMO are the spiritual lyrics (during the 70īs Kerry Livgren was searching for spiritual enlightenment) and the way Walsh sings those lyrics (from the soul)
If songs like Cheyenne Anthem donīt move you, then Kansas isnīt for you.
|
Posted By: Raff
Date Posted: August 11 2006 at 09:33
I agree with your first statement (and you know how much of a rocker I am ), but I would also like to play devil's advocate a little bit. Steve Walsh's got a great voice, but his style reminds me more of traditional AOR singers like Steve Perry of Journey than of classic prog singers like Jon Anderson or Greg Lake.That said, I also think Kansas are prog, at least their first albums are (if they became AOR later on, they did nothing different from what Genesis did after Hackett left...). They were one of the very few bands who brought traditional American elements into prog (together with Dixie Dregs), and I think they should be valued for that. |
Posted By: E-Dub
Date Posted: August 11 2006 at 09:42
|
<<Name a Boston or Journey song that comes close to "The Pinnacle" "Journey from Mariabronn" "Song for America" "No one together" etc Why arenīt Boston and Journey included in the prog archives? Simple, they arenīt as prog as Kansas.>> Yes, let's please toss aside the Kansas/Journey/Boston comparisons. The only basis is because Kansas was on the radio here. Well, I might add that Yes was (and is) all over rock radio. Yes may have had more hit singles than Kansas, when you think about it. E -------------
|
Posted By: Guests
Date Posted: August 11 2006 at 09:43
|
<You're welcome to like it or love it, but for God's sake, don't pretend it's anything but what it is; a fusion of Prog and AOR-style Blues Rock.> This is aptly put, especially the first part. One should remember though that prog was, at the time of Kansas' firt two or three albums (the tune in the video being from their third), an AOR phenomemon. I was introduced to Genesis (Gabriel era) , Yes, ELP, Gentle Giant, Jethro Tull, and King Crimson from your basic run of the mill FM radio stastion of the early / mid 1970s. At that time Boston, Journey, Foreigner, and Styx were lumped in with all of the above mentioned bands as AOR. All AOR stands for is "Album Oriented Rock" and in those days that's all it was. After just few more years passed radio began to be more rigidly formatted and songs like "The Pinacle" were rplaced by "hits" like Owner of A Lonely Heart" or "That's All". Strangely, Kansas tried and failed to be successful in THAT AOR market. What does that say abuot them with repesct to the others mentioned who DID succeed. Different bands allow and embrace a differing level of pentatonic blues influence. Kansas embraced it and used in within classical music structures. It was (and remains) interesting to see how they were able to do that. Kansas from a musical point use more classical structure than many other symphonic bands (particularly Genesis whose structural style is more of a meandering or episodic one than it is one that follows classical forms). Singer's voices are a peculiar matter of taste and I find mine to be much wider in tolerance than some people's. If you don't like Steve Walsh you won't like Kansas. I see the same comments laid on everyone from VDGG to Dream Theater to Yes, etc. etc.. Kansas' Lonely Street is a rather amazing piece of 6/4 proto prog metal that they rarely get credit for. And I see DT fans heap criticism on Steve Walsh's vocals which I find amusing to some extent. Saying that Kansas meld AOR with prog might be misleading. At that time everyong was melding something with something else. Kansas melded classical forms and sclassical spirit with blues scales and did it effectively. Jethro Tull used the same pentatonic blues scales pretty extensively as well, but combined them with Celtic folk influences. Yes used them as well but combined them with both Jazz and classical influences. Gentle Giant mixed blues scales into the crazed soup of renaissance music and folk music that they drew from. Genesis and KC are probably the least blues influenced of all the 70's prog headliners. Good progressive rock takes from all those (and more) sources of influence that the collective musicians in the bands bring to the table and adds the one common element called rock to the mix. The collaboration may be why prog solo albums often fall a bit flat. (there are several exceptions so there's no need to start naming them). The point is that prog isn't a "thing". It is ever and always a mix of things. If, as listeners, we don't like the "things" that went into the stew we probably won't like the stew. I don't particularly like Dream Theater or Pain of Salvation and I did buy them on recommendations. I don't count them bitter disappointments, its more like education. Now I know something I didn't know before. I don't like prog metal much. At the same time I won't say it isn't progressive (I think it sounds more AOR than Kansas), but it still is progressive music; just progressive music I don't care for. I wish that we did not feel the need to be so defensive of our positions. I do think we shoud educate ouselves and be open to learning about exactly what is giong on in this music and the how and why of it. Then we might find a way to separate and tolerate muscal taste from musical fact. |
Posted By: WaywardSon
Date Posted: August 11 2006 at 09:54
|
Good post Composer.
As for defending Kansas, this all started after Teaflax started with his baiting.
|
Posted By: Raff
Date Posted: August 11 2006 at 09:56
Well, I'm listening to "Journey to Mariabronn" from the "Two for the Show" live album, and if that's not prog, I don't know what is....
|
Posted By: Guests
Date Posted: August 11 2006 at 10:00
|
I've said it before. I think that some definitions of the various trerms should be undertaken to prevent (some) problems. AOR seems to be one that requires definition. The really cool thing about AOR in it's classic times was you never knew what you'd hear. Genesis could be followed by The Marshall Tucker Band, Foghat, and Johnny Winter. Some of it you liked and some you didn't. That was part of what made the whole thing work as a community. With the "splintrification" of progressive rock I would like to think that community could still exist. Maybe not. Maybe I'm in the wrong place to find open-minded thinking people.. |
Posted By: Teaflax
Date Posted: August 11 2006 at 10:14
I'll get back to composer on Sunday, because his points are more well-considered, if in my view somewhat skewed towards excusing Rock influences as almost inevitable. -------------
|
Posted By: WaywardSon
Date Posted: August 11 2006 at 10:15
|
Maybe you should come up with some interesting polls or threads then? Besides they (Foreigner and Mellencamp) were in the non prog section and have nothing to do with this thread at all.
Get off your high horse!
|
Posted By: Rushman
Date Posted: August 11 2006 at 10:35
|
I just listened to "The Spider" off of POKR, and there is no doubt in my mind (which is all that really matters, isn't it?) that it is an all-out prog instrumental.
I don't need any one elses opinion to validate my own.
|
Posted By: Sean Trane
Date Posted: August 11 2006 at 10:43
|
Topic: I DARE you to doubt the progginess of Kansas.
Should this thread not go go to the non-prog music forum due to the topic's weak and twee subject?
  To deny that Kansas have a strong AOR tendancy is like saying chocolate is disgusting >>> not really credible for the vast majority.
I personnaly like the debut and still can agree to (max three per album) some tracks until Leftoverture. In my personal compilation (which excludes the first album since it is the only one I want to have in full), I went as far as including one track of POKR. Did not go farther.
Kansas has that typical FM-radio-friendly sound right from their debut album. and all of their songs however intricate, long, and whatever other prog qualities one can find, the all have huge chorus line which are repeated at frequent intervals. (exactly the kind of features which bother me to the point of changing radio stations when I was younger and a Kansas song came on) This is most clear in their shorter songs. I do not think Kansas made any qualms about trying to get radio airplay in order to move albums. And they succeeded fairly well, untilmthe turn of the 80's.
Does the fact that they tried for a fairly commercial sound make them any less prog? I don't really think so.
But from POKR onwards it became clear the were just an FM-radio friendly band (which is one of the main characteristic of AOR, this whether your FM rock sound does not get played over the airwaves. >>> then you lose on all counts
 ------------- let's just stay above the moral melee prefer the sink to the gutter keep our sand-castle virtues content to be a doer as well as a thinker, prefer lifting our pen rather than un-sheath our sword |
Posted By: Guests
Date Posted: August 11 2006 at 10:47
|
Rock isn't the excuse, it's the reason. If it weren't for Elvis, Chuck Berry, Little Richad and Jerry Lee Lewis, we wouldn't even have this music (prog) to discuss. I'm pushing 50 have a BA in Music Composition, am completing my Master's in the same fierld, and teach a History of Rock class at my local University so I have done a LOT of research into how music in all it's forms and specifically into how rock got to all the different places it has, including prog. Prog is NOT a unique music that dropped out of the air with a specific set of conventions. It most definitely is a sub-genre of rock and roll that evolved, and thankfully, continues to evolve in many different ways. The Mars Volta are just one example of the many types of rock infuence that can be assimilated into Progressive rock music. Discussions about what bands are progressive or not are more accurately discussions about degrees of complexity and what the preference for complexity is of that particualr listener. Yesterday I watched a documentary on the brief reunion of The New York Dolls during which Bob Geldorf sl*gged off what he called "ELP and all that prog rock Ruubish". That's a shame for him because "I Don't Like Mondays" was one of the most complex singles ever to hit Pop radio and he wrote it, played the piano and sang it. Our lack of understanding and possibly lack of appropriatley wide musical experience narrows our field of vision proportionately. When I was 18 or 19 and I was getting into this music I felt the same way as some of the opinions I see here. I thought this music was completely radical and totally unique and that NOTHING like it had ever been done. But as I get older and listen to more and more music of all kinds, my old viewpoint seems a bit quaint, and a bit like believing that babies come from mom swallowing a watermelon seed. |
Posted By: Teaflax
Date Posted: August 11 2006 at 11:43
-------------
|
Posted By: Teaflax
Date Posted: August 11 2006 at 12:04
Yes, but it evolved away from specifically the conventions of Rock, whether it be structurally, texturally or compositionally. I don't hear much of, say, Chuck Berry, The Rolling Stones or The Eagles in any of the major players of Prog.
The problem is so many of the fans of AOR-Prog bands seem to know little about music outside the Rock arena, so they don't really notice those elements as being quite prevalent to their sound. These are people who probably look more to Dylan, Springsteen and Blackmore as interesting songwriters than to Burt Bacharach, George Gershwin or Irving Berlin. I would argue that the latter work on a level of sophistication and detail that is much closer - if no more than tangentially related - to the work of the Prog pioneers, who used periods, melodic lines and chord sequences that were at least as far from standard Rock as those composers. Now, if you like standard Rock tropes, it's obviously not going to bother you that Kansas et.al. traffic extensively in such, but I don't understand the constant need to deny that it's there and that it makes the music markedly and significantly different from the music that defined the genre. Just like Canterbury is a distinct substyle of Prog because of its heavy and easily identifiable Jazz component - something which would obviously bother someone who does not like Jazz - I don't see why there is such opposition to acknowledging that there is a quite clear subset here (certainly far more defined and distinct than "Italian Symphonic"). -------------
|
Posted By: sm sm
Date Posted: August 11 2006 at 12:15
|
The two main songwriters in Kansas were Steve Walsh and Kerry Livergren.
I have one of Steve Walsh's solo albums, the first one, and have heard his Streets band, both are rock with prog elements.
On the other hand, Livegren's band, Prokow, is very prog.
The reformed Kansas with Livergren, somewhere to nowhere, was prog.
Some Kansas recordings without Livergren, like the one with the dogface on the cover (I forget the title) was prog as well, but Walsh had minor input
Lets just say Kansas is far more a prog band with Livergren is contributing most of the material, or Walsh is staying out of the mix.
Personally, I think his voice is gone, and if he was responsible for Violinist Steinhart leaving, who added a lot of prog elements to Kansas, then it maybe advisable to show Walsh the door and get a keyboardist/vocalist who writes in a progressive style.
|
Posted By: WaywardSon
Date Posted: August 11 2006 at 12:16
|
Teaflax,You should also have stated "The problem is a few prog elitists seem to know little about the rock arena"
You go out of your way to diss artists like Kansas, Spockīs Beard, TFK, Neil Young, Springsteen etc etc...
What is the point?
|
Posted By: WaywardSon
Date Posted: August 11 2006 at 12:23
|
sm sm, you are right, his voice is pretty shot now. They should really think of getting a new vocalist and leaving Walsh on keyboards.
The vocalist for Enchant would make a great replacement.
|
Posted By: Equality 7-2521
Date Posted: August 11 2006 at 12:23
A few prog elitists? From the opinions expressed in this thread, and via reviews, it seems quite a good deal of the prog fans here find this element in their music. Nobody is saying it reduces the quality of the output, we're just trying to state that the influence is in fact there. Teaflax in particular doesn't like the element, I like it to some degree and do enjoy listening to Kansas, others like yourself enjoy it very much. Nobody is trying to say that because they have an AOR influence, they cannot release material on par with pure prog bands. ------------- "One had to be a Newton to notice that the moon is falling, when everyone sees that it doesn't fall. " |
Posted By: Teaflax
Date Posted: August 11 2006 at 12:28
As for knowledge of Rock music (or most any form of popular music bar pure chart stuff and House/Techno), I'll put mine up against most people's any day of the week. When I worked as a Rock radio DJ, I was the one the other DJ's turned to for little facts and nuggets of info they could drop about the bands they would play in their sets. So, it's not that I don't know much about it - rather the opposite, I would argue; I've heard way too much of it. Added: Just as a data point; I really don't like ELP particularly, but would I call them "less Prog" because of that? No. And again; I love It Bites, but I sure don't consider them a pure Prog band. -------------
|
Posted By: WaywardSon
Date Posted: August 11 2006 at 12:30
|
Equality I agree with you 100%
Thanks for the nuggets of info Teaflax
|
Posted By: Teaflax
Date Posted: August 11 2006 at 12:35
-------------
|
Posted By: WaywardSon
Date Posted: August 11 2006 at 12:42
Peace...er.(clears throat)..Brother
 |
Posted By: Guests
Date Posted: August 11 2006 at 13:28
|
Gershwin, Bacharach, et. al. were / are PURE POP writers and far closer cousins to Springsteen and Dylan than to King Crimnson or Genesis. Their primary if not only concern was getting the music played by folks who could sell it in the millions, if it didn't sell it was "bad". They use(d) more conventional periodic structures and verse/chorus/verse/chorus/bridge/chorus type structures than anyone before or since. It was those Tin Pan Alley Composers who by and large took the blues out of Rock & Roll in the early 60's. They did use more sophisticated chord voicings BUT the progressions themselves were just as simple. I - IV -V -I is still the same when it's done as I7 - IV add 4th - Vb5-I6. The actual progression is still the same. In that way the progressive bands were more classical than pop and are probably closer in attitude to Stravinsky than to Cole Porter. They, like Stravinsky's use of Jazz in classical music, put embellished blues based scales (Tull, Yes, ELP, Kansas, Gentle Giant, Eloy< Grobschitt, PFM, etc.) together with classical forms and rock band volume, instrumentation and attitude to create a sub-set of rock that was more complex and more musically satisfying to THEM. There was considerably less importance placed on how well it would sell until the end of the 70's when sales became an overwhelming issue and severely limited the amount of progressive music available to us for the next decade or so. So no, the Tin pan Alley composers you mention are not more closely related to prog than The Stones or The Eagles, the comparison is more or less equal or not to be made at all. What conventions are we talking about that are NOT pre-Prog? Folk? Jazz? Celtic? Blues? Metal? Part of a definition of prog would state that Prog was/is a symbiotic music fusing different elements from different styles. If that is the case there can be nothing BUT pre-prog conventions. The only difference is in what conventions were chosen and in what ways and to what degrees they are used. I certainly don't deny that they are there and I don't think I have given that impression. My point is that those same conventions are "there" in all the classic prog bands. There are varying degrees to which some of these elements are emphasized in terms of songwriting, and that is the big issue. It is not whether something is or isn't there. It is. It is the degree to which each listener will tolerate certain pre-prog conventions. The "Degree Of Complexity" factor if you will. Teaflax wants more others are less rigind in that area. The first three Kansas LPs did not deal extensively in the area of traditional pop song structures. They were quite varied and complex structuarly. They were easliy the equal of The Yes Album, Octopus or Trilogy in that way. After Masques they streamlined their approach and lost some of the magic they had begun with (for me). On those early records Kansas used classical forms (of which the trope is one; a Liturgical chant in the early Catholic Church, not a pop song form. The word I believe you're looking for is strophe which loosley translates to the modern "verse"), to which they added a healthy (or unhealthy as your taste may be) dose of blues based melodic material. I don't think that the goal of early progressive rock was to break all the rules or abandon all the pre-prog conventions. If that was the goal they failed miserably. I think the goal was to strech and expand the possibilities of rock music by incorporating other ideas from other musical styles. In this respect rock has shown itself to be the most flexible musical style in history. It is unique in its ability to take in other musical elements and still retain its identity as rock. Complexity is a continuum.and every person finds a different place along its length. Musical complexity can be like any other type of writing. If you have a good idea that is all you need (rock). If you dress it up in different ways it can be made more exciting to some people (prog). If you over-complicate it too much it loses the meaning it had to begin with and no-one understands it. There is no clear-cut point between the last two statements. That's where the continuum lies. Classical music in the 20th century all but lost its audience completely by over complicating itself. My classical compositions (a few are available on my website below) are sometimes criticized for being too simple, but classical music afficianadoes are fmuch more accepting of higher levels of complexity than most of the music buying public. My efforts in that area are deliberately aimed at broadening the audience base by keeping things simple. I guess what I don't understand is how we can say that the basic pre-prog rock conventions are NOT present in virtually all prog as well, or how the fact that those elements are there can make one prog band markedly and significantly different. Kansas IS one of the bands that defined the genre. |
Posted By: pogoowner
Date Posted: August 11 2006 at 13:30
This is due to the fact that Magnum Opus was, in actuality, little more than a group of leftover, unused song parts and ideas tacked together. It was originally titled "Leftoverture" (and the album was "Magnum Opus"), but they switched the names.
To those who later made comments about Steve Walsh's voice being shot, I think he still sounds great. His voice is more of an acquired taste now, but he still has great command of it. And responding to another comment, he's not responsible for Robby Steinhardt's leaving the band. He was asked to leave because he didn't have the motivation to keep his violin skills up to par, keep his voice in good shape, or remember song lyrics. Robby wasn't enjoying what he was doing anymore. ------------- And it might as well be raining, 'cause the sunlight hurts his eyes, And his ears will never hear the children's cries |
Posted By: Padraic
Date Posted: August 11 2006 at 13:35
Amen, sister. What a great live album!  |
Posted By: Guests
Date Posted: August 11 2006 at 13:39
| As soon as we know what the specific "conventions of rock music" are that you refer to we can talk about 'em. Until then.... |
Posted By: Ivan_Melgar_M
Date Posted: August 11 2006 at 13:47
|
I love this discussions about Kansas being AOR specially when brought by people who arent able to understand that AOR IS A FORMAT, NOT A SOUND, STYLE, ATMOSPHERE, GENRE OR SUB-GENRE. AOR stands for ALBUM ORIENTED ROCK and nothing else, those who claim its Adult Oriented Rock are simply wrong, this is a bast@rdization (Please somebody fix this censor of language Now, back to the issue: 1. All Progressive Rock is AOR: Thats a fact that nobody can deny, I explained it on a previous post and a member who had studied communications confirmed his. Before FM was popular, the old AM stations played one song and commercials, there was no room for full albums and mostly didnt mattered because the bands purpose was mostly releasing one or two singles and then a bunch of songs to go with it.
2. Kansas is an AOR Band but as Yes, Genesis or King Crimson: Yes, because their production is based in an album format, their first hit singles (The only two real hit singles) came in Point of Know Return and this is their fifth album if Im not wrong, before they were barely known by the non Prog world.
3. Kansas is not an AOR band as Journey or Boston: This is a common mistake, this bands started as mainstream bands but released in AOR format, Kansas started in 1971 releasing their first album a couple of years later with clear Symphonic structure and a rich mixture of sounds and genres. They copied nobody, Kansas was there when the pioneers started creating their own and unique blending of styles, while the other bands based their sound in complex keyboards, they sent keys to the back and composed around the violin, they dared to be different. I understand that the average Joe (Who doesnt know Peter Gabriel ever sung in Genesis or believes that Emerson Lake & Palmer is a Law Firm) can place Kansas, Boston, Journey and STYX in the same sack, because most surely the first and only song that they ever heard was Dust in the Wind, so their brain identifies Kansas with the late 70s, USA and that popular song, but I cant understand a person who knows that Kansas, Song for America and Masque were released long before the term AOR can insist that they represent those bland bands that played mainstream in AOR format. A a fact (And I disagree with Raffaella in this point, she said AOR I said plain POP), Kansas never played what we describe as AOR as an insult, they passed from playing elaborate and rich Progressive Rock to play Christian POP.
In this era they never released albums as popular as Boston or Journey when Walsh and Steinhardt left, John Elefante and Kerry Livegren used Kansas as a vehicle to promote their new faith and they failed, because Kansas ceased to be popular among anybody (It was so clear that Livegren and Elefante escaped to search a more profitable preaching vehicle, leaving Phil Ehart and Rich Williams with a contract to honor and no band, they told Walsh that Liveghren and Elefante were no longer members of Kansas and he joined immediately), so they never were an AOR band in the same sense as Boston and Journey. So please, when mentioning Kansas use the same respect as when mentioning Yes or Genesis, they were playing when all the pioneers started, they sunk in the depth of POP (As Genesis or Yes) but they were able to come back again and still are playing with a great fan base. Iván ------------- 
|
Posted By: Raff
Date Posted: August 11 2006 at 13:49
NOOOOO.... Not Ivan, please! We'll never hear the end of it.... Oops... it seems he's already been here... Boss, what do you disagree with me about? The AOR thing? OK, I swear I'll never say anything about Kansas again... Just don't fire me from the team, please! |
Posted By: Guests
Date Posted: August 11 2006 at 13:55
| Ivan reads my mind but uses fewer words. |
Posted By: WaywardSon
Date Posted: August 11 2006 at 13:55
Ivan Melgar M is a true Symphonic Prog Specialist!!![[=D>]](http://www.progarchives.com/forum/smileys/smiley32.gif) (Unlike those other shady horsemen!
|
Posted By: Raff
Date Posted: August 11 2006 at 13:58
WHAT?!?  Heads will roll because of that... At least, I don't listen to Barbra Streisand! |
Posted By: WaywardSon
Date Posted: August 11 2006 at 14:02
|
I donīt have the heart to expose you and another certain "Horseman" before their peers Raffaella Also on the subject of Kansas, I was looking at the album reviews for"Works in progress" and it says there are already two ratings, but no reviews? What is going on?
 |
Posted By: Garion81
Date Posted: August 11 2006 at 14:51
|
WOW a four page Kansas thread and I haven't posted.
I agree with most of what Ivan says (Also, The Composer puts into musical terms the things I could not should have listened to my piano teachers more
) except for a couple of historical things regarding the demise of the band in the mid 80's. The truest statement is that Kansas and Kerry Livgren specifaclly was doing experimental music as far back as 1970 and doing it without the aide of synthesizers and mellotrons (They had no money for such). If you listen to the Early Recordings of Kansas 1971-1973 by Proto-Kaw
http://www.progarchives.com/Progressive_rock_discography_CD.asp?cd_id=5526 - http://www.progarchives.com/Progressive_rock_discography_CD.asp?cd_id=5526
you will hear VDGG and KC and Jethro Tull as well as some Chicago and yes even a little Kansas.
Kansas is a symph prog band as in evidence of such songs as Journey to Mariabronn, Apercu/Death of Mother nature Suite, Song for America, Lamplight Symphony, Incomudro-Hymn to the Atman, Icarus-Born on wings of Steele, The Pinnacle, Miracles out of Nowhere, Cheyenne Anthem, Opus Insert, Magnum Opus, The Spider, Paradox, Closet Chronicles, No Ones Home, Hopelessly Human, No One Together, Crossfire, Icarus-II, Myriad and Distant Visions.
Kansas is a blues band as evidenced in such songs as- Bringin it Back(Cover), Down the Road, Lonely Street, What's on my Mind, How my Soul Cries out for you, Stay out of Trouble,
Kansas is a straight hard rock band as evidenced by such songs as- Can I tell You, Devils Game, Child of Innocence, Mysteries and Mayhem, Carry On, Sparks of the Tempest, Portrait, Lightnings Hand, On the Other Side, Got to Rock On, Back Door, Relentless.
Kansas is a ballad band as in evidence of such songs as- Lonely Wind, Dust In the Wind, Reason to Be, Hold On, The Coming Dawn
Kansas is a pop band as in evidence of such songs as- It takes a Woman's Love, Point of Know Return, Away from You, Play the Game Tonight, Fight Fire with Fire, All I wanted, The Preacher
I am sure someone could add a few to each category I missed. The point is the band had a number of different sides to it and they were proud of the fact they could not be pigeon holed. Quoting Steve Walsh from the interviews on the Sail On DVD he said
" We were signed on a four song demo we sent to Don Kirshner Kerry wasn't even in the band yet we were still White Clover. Kerry is the symphonic element in Kansas. SO when we start recording They Have Can I tell you on one Hand and The Death of Mother Nature Suite on the other and they had no idea how to market us. They never could pigeon hole us."
So to say they sound like Boston and Foreigner to some then they do. To others they sound like the early prog fathers then that is correct too. To say they sounded like Lynard Skynard and The Allman Brothers band well that is true too. You can find all of those elements in different songs. It is the people who look past all the influences an hear a unique sound only to the this band that get the full gratification. Live they are one of the best of any of the 70' prog bands and I have seen most all of them.
Steve Walsh's voice is the last thing I will touch upon. In his prime Walsh could sing over several octaves equally well unlike Jon Anderson or Greg Lake or Peter Gabriel (I love all of these singers. This is a comparrison of their range) . If you want an example of that listen to the bridge section of No One Together off Audio Visions. He is without a doubt one of the most versatile vocalists I have ever heard.
-------------  "What are you going to do when that damn thing rusts?" |
Posted By: WaywardSon
Date Posted: August 11 2006 at 15:18
| IMHO I would consider Walsh the best prog vocalist of the 70īs. |
Posted By: Raff
Date Posted: August 11 2006 at 15:23
Walsh undoubtedly had awesome range and power, probably more so than most British prog singers. However (and don't hate me for that...), to my ears he sounds a bit too "American" - it's an indefinable quality, not a flaw, but something different indeed. This is why I made that comparison with Steve Perry. European (particularly British) vocalists do sound different... I can't even say why, but they do. And this is in no way a value judgment. |
Posted By: micky
Date Posted: August 11 2006 at 16:28
hmmm ... just what does an american sound like.. ------------- The Pedro and Micky Experience - When one no longer requires psychotropics to trip |
Posted By: Teaflax
Date Posted: August 11 2006 at 16:29
And I've promised not to get into it with Ivan, but suffice it to say that he's as off as usual about AOR. It was a radio format, it is now a genre classification and though there is some overlap they are nowhere near synonymous, and the same goes for Progressive Rock, as I have proven numerous times, even though Ivan has chosen to ignore it. -------------
|
Posted By: Garion81
Date Posted: August 11 2006 at 16:42
Rock music has always been a genre of pop music certainly from an industry standard. While it not what is popular right now it was pop, evidenced by the chart listings of these songs then, very much so.
------------- "What are you going to do when that damn thing rusts?" |
Posted By: Guests
Date Posted: August 11 2006 at 17:02
| Pop and blues / rock both build on basic common practice toanl musc theory. Both repeatedly use basic I - IV - V progressions as the priomary building blocks for all their striucture. they both use the same basic strophic song structure pioneered by Schubert in the 1830s. There's nothing of note in musical structure that is radically different between them. The differences are superficial window-dressing. You've proved nothing. You've stated an opinion that runs contrary to facts and "proved" it by stating over and over again. That won't make it true. |
Posted By: erik neuteboom
Date Posted: August 11 2006 at 17:22
For me it's very simple: Kansas made captivating, very distinctive heavy progressive rock in the Seventies, their trademark was the amazing interplay between the fiery guitar, the often bombastic vintage keyboard sound and the majestic violin work and the dynamics and excellent singing  ! I bought all their Seventies albums (and later CD's). But then it was over for me, too polished, bye Kansas..  ...
|
Posted By: WaywardSon
Date Posted: August 11 2006 at 17:23
He sounds a bit too "American"?
Thatīs like saying Ian Andersen sounds a bit too English.
Maybe the difference is that Walsh can also sing the blues and has a lot of soul (Listen to Lonely Street). Not trying to start a war, but can you imagine John Anderson singing the blues?
IMHO a lot of the British vocalists (not including vocalists like Sir Ian Gillan) have rather thin voices and that is something that puts me off bands like Yes.
BUT
Before I get flamed, Yes are first class musicians.
|
Posted By: ClemofNazareth
Date Posted: August 11 2006 at 17:32
I've tried to imagine Anderson singing "Bringing It Back" and that was humorous enough for me!
And yes I know - that was just Steinhardt singing. Picture "Miracles Out of Nowhere" featuring anyone besides Walsh!
And speaking of "Bringing It Back" - I have to believe any fan of Kansas can listen to that one and just picture the euphoric look of pure satisfaction on the band's faces after they wrapped that one in the studio. That's a sound you won't find under a Dean album cover!
------------- "Peace is the only battle worth waging." Albert Camus |
Posted By: Ivan_Melgar_M
Date Posted: August 11 2006 at 19:18
-------------
|
Posted: June 26 2006 at 17:27Posted By: E-Dub
Date Posted: August 11 2006 at 22:16
|
<< However (and don't hate me for that...), to my ears he sounds a bit too "American" - it's an indefinable quality, not a flaw, but something different indeed.>> Not sure I like this statement. I know you haven't come out and said that's the reason you don't like him (due to the fact that he sounds like an 'American' vocalist...whatever the @#$&! that means). Paul Rogers of Bad Company is one of the best rock vocalists I've ever heard; however, for a Brit, he sure sounds American. Where you're from shouldn't have anything to do with it. E -------------
|
Posted By: mickstafa
Date Posted: August 11 2006 at 22:48
|
Guys..... While I can't speak for TeaFlax, I can say that PERSONALLY SPEAKING, I don't like Kansas very much because of Walsh's style of singing. It sounds like pop 70s vocals with a hint of country to me. I can't help that. Hell, I don't even like Genesis very much. People loathe my favorite bands as well. It is a part of taste. This whole "what is prog, what is AOR" thing is getting off topic -- those of us who are completely shut out by the vocals of this band all understand that there is this kind of dreadful sound reminicent of cheesy 70s AM radio pop hits that keep us from enjoying what may be a great band. The title of this thread is "I dare you to doubt the progginess of Kansas." What I think is interesting is how I really do enjoy the instrumental and song structure of this band, yet the vocals alone ruin it all for me. Same thing happens with people and Rush, I'm sure. People don't like Geddy Lee's voice because of it. It is completely useless to talk about what is prog and what isn't prog. I've heard their stuff, and they are prog. Genesis is prog. I don't like either band very much, not suprisingly because of their respective vocalists. We as listeners are very stubborn about our vocalists; it usually is what turns us off from an album or band. I absolutely hate it when I think to myself, "man if only they made this album instrumental" or "man I wish they had another person audition for the band." So yes, they are prog, but are they good? Who cares what I think? Well someone must because people care about that kind of thing around here. So yeah I hate the vocals of Kansas. I'm glad some people like them. |
Posted By: WaywardSon
Date Posted: August 11 2006 at 23:47
| Mickstafa,Just as a matter of curiosity, which vocalists do you like? |
Posted By: Guests
Date Posted: August 11 2006 at 23:54
|
Mick, I think there were two different discussions going on at the same time here that may have become entangled. Teaflax was making some assertions about some characteristics in Kansas' music which he never linked to the vocals. Some other folks were commenting on Steve walsh's style and relative effectiveness, etc. The vocal aspects were not, I think part of what Ivan and I were trying to get across. You put it quite appropriately when you made it clear that that aspect of Kansas did not appeal to you. That is quite correctly a matter for personal taste to decide. I don't particularly care for Magma or DT in part for the same reasons. Others here have a harder time separating fact from opinion. |
Posted By: mickstafa
Date Posted: August 12 2006 at 00:07
|
Cool man. And I do respect those of you who like Kansas. I sure do hate it when some punk comes on the threads and disrespects a band; it is one thing to respectably dislike a band and offer constructive criticism... it is another to tear it apart and its fans. So yeah even though Kansas isn't my cup of tea, I'm glad you like it! And Wayward, my favorite vocalists are Jon Anderson and Ian Anderson. I also like the usuals, Greg Lake, Annie Haslam, Shulman of GG.... Suprisingly, I do like Peter Hammil too. I also like vocalists that grow on you, like the crazy lead singer of Yezda Urfa. I don't like Gabriel too much because it is a bit too theatrical (but I love Ian Anderson and Hammil, go figure!) and I don't like Walsh for reasons I already mentioned. For those of you familiar with Glass Hammer (I did some animation work with them on their latest DVD!) I actually prefer their Chronomotree vocals (a one time stint from that lead singer) to their other albums. Some of the mp3s I download from this site though sound so good until the vocals start. I forgot the names of the bands; most are secondary or tertiary prog bands. Hmmm could be the start of another interesting thread, although something tells me "favorite vocalist" threads have shown up here one time or another! |
Posted By: WaywardSon
Date Posted: August 12 2006 at 00:12
|
Ian Anderson is also one of my favourites. But I have a problem with Jon Anderson.
Itīs all personal opinion at the end of the day I suppose.
I must check out some Glass Hammer.
|
Posted By: mickstafa
Date Posted: August 12 2006 at 00:16
| Oh man!! You NEED to know Glass Hammer! They LOVE Kansas! In fact, you need to get their Live at Nearfest CD -- the guitarist dude from Kansas joins them on stage and they do a Kansas cover together. I'm suprised you didn't know this! |
Posted By: WaywardSon
Date Posted: August 12 2006 at 00:17
| Kerry Livgren or Rich Williams, do you remember the name? |
Posted By: mickstafa
Date Posted: August 12 2006 at 00:20
| Rich Williams. They sing a song called Portrait (He Knew). Good song! |
Posted By: WaywardSon
Date Posted: August 12 2006 at 00:25
|
Sounds good!
Glass Hammer are mentioned here, plus Iona, and a lot of other great stuff (I think it shows the DVD you worked on!)
http://home.att.net/~virtuosity/ - http://home.att.net/~virtuosity/
|
Posted By: Guests
Date Posted: August 12 2006 at 00:25
|
Wayward, You might start with Glass Hammer's latest,The inconsolable Secret. The Kansas connection is to my ears strongest on that release, although Shadowlands has it in spades as well. If you like the idea of Kansas influence also check Salem Hill's Mimi's Magic Moment. It could BE Kansas from the Leftoverture style production (particularly the drum and bass sounds). Neal Morse's cameo vocal appearance is pretty cool if you like him. He trades lines with their singer in a Steinhardt / Walsh sort of way. It's great stuff for a retro fix. |
Posted By: stonebeard
Date Posted: August 12 2006 at 00:27
|
Yes, the Inconsolable Secret is very good, and the 70s influences, while perceivable, are not obstructive or degrading to the music. Excellent production too, I must say. ------------- http://soundcloud.com/drewagler" rel="nofollow - My soundcloud. Please give feedback if you want! |
Posted By: mickstafa
Date Posted: August 12 2006 at 00:28
| Lex Rex and Chronomotree are my favs from Glass Hammer.... |
Posted By: WaywardSon
Date Posted: August 12 2006 at 00:29
Thanks guys! I will definitely look into Glass Hammer and Salem Hill.
|
Posted By: mickstafa
Date Posted: August 12 2006 at 00:33
Yep, that is a great site by the way. I'm glad others make the same kind of spiritual connection to prog as I do. And yep, that is the same DVD I worked on! It is great, I highly recommend it! |
Posted By: verslibre
Date Posted: August 12 2006 at 00:38
Same here. Chronometree is the last great CD they put out (or maybe their only 'great' CD) they put out. GH's sound has become much too homogenized... ------------- https://www.ebay.com/sch/i.html?_ipg=50&_sop=1&_rdc=1&_ssn=musicosm" rel="nofollow - eBay |
Posted By: Sean Trane
Date Posted: August 12 2006 at 06:00
|
I sense that After ELP, DT, Yes, Tool, Kansas threads are going to become the next most heated type of threads. This polarizationabout this second-league group (in terms of Camel ands Caravan or Gong popularity) is getting tiresome.
As is the AOR debate.
If one does not hear AOR gradually seeping more and more in Kansas successive albums, then there is not much hope to get the dispute settled.
------------- let's just stay above the moral melee prefer the sink to the gutter keep our sand-castle virtues content to be a doer as well as a thinker, prefer lifting our pen rather than un-sheath our sword |
Posted By: E-Dub
Date Posted: August 12 2006 at 08:18
|
<<For those of you familiar with Glass Hammer (I did some animation work with them on their latest DVD!) I actually prefer their Chronomotree vocals (a one time stint from that lead singer) to their other albums.>> This discussion has definitely become a topic of personal tastes. Pretty much all of the vocalists you like I tend to stay away from. Nothing wrong with that. What really solidified this finding for me are your views of the singer on GH's Chronometree. I love Glass Hammer, but quite simply put, I could not deal with the lead singer's delivery. Maybe it's because my 3 1/2 year old daughter is going through a whining phase, but I didn't want to hear it in my music. WS, definitely look into Glass Hammer! I'd start off with Shadowlands (My personal favorite. They even do a great version of Dan Fogelberg's "Longer"), Lex Rex and/or Live At NEARFest (As mentioned, they do a version of "Portrait (He Knew)" with Rich Williams). Within the past 5 years or so they've added in female vocalists, which really adds a beautiful flavor to the mix. They use 3 on their discs, but only 1 is a full time member (Susie Bogdanowicz...who is quite easy on the eyes!). I like The Inconsolabe Secret, but it tends to drag out a bit too much and would've worked better as a single disc. It's still very good, but not my favorite. I also have their most recent live DVD called Live At The Belmont. Vocalist/guitarist Walter Moore is gone, but they've brought in Carl Groves of Salem Hill, and guitarist David Wallimann, who can flat out fly. Good performance, but the DVD is a bit too short. I think you'd really like this group. Definitely one of those bands I'm going to follow. E -------------
|
Posted By: Raff
Date Posted: August 12 2006 at 08:31
Greg, as I said, sounding American is by no means a value judgment - and what you said is very likely to be what I meant, at least partially. Steve Walsh has got that big, soaring voice that reminds me (though it's far better) of more typically AOR singers, even of JL Turner, who's of course a far inferior option. It is all about the singing style, which is more suited to music like that played by Kansas, with its obvious traditional American influences. And no, I can't imagine Jon Anderson singing the blues - and yes, a lot of the British vocalists have 'thin' voices - that is, voices that are not as rich and powerful as Walsh's, but suited to each band's individual sound. I don't know if I have managed to convey the meaning I wanted to, but I hope you understand that I did never mean to disparage Walsh. I like his vocals a lot, but I have to admit I prefer a more "European" style. |
Posted By: WaywardSon
Date Posted: August 12 2006 at 08:53
|
I understand exactly what you mean, maybe itīs a "symph horsemen thing"
Please donīt mention J L Turner in the same breath as Walsh!!
 A bit off topic, I saw Blackmoreīs Nightīs latest release in the sales bin at our local CD shop, and it features the dreaded JLT! |
Posted By: Raff
Date Posted: August 12 2006 at 09:19
The horror, the horror.... Don't worry, I won't do that again! It's just that I was trying hard to find an example of "American-style" singing, and I couldn't think of anything else... |
Posted By: ClemofNazareth
Date Posted: August 12 2006 at 09:44
I would say Walsh's "American style" is a mix of - Ronnie James Dio's range Stevie Wonder's soul Warren Zevon's insight Sammy Hagar's showmanship Just my opinion. ------------- "Peace is the only battle worth waging." Albert Camus |