Is ELP the Most Disliked Prog Band?

rogerthat wrote: giselle wrote: I even disagree with that. You're just being awkward for the sake of it, and I know what I'd like to say in return. But I'll leave that to the authorities. Now be a good boy and go away - I won't be conceding ANYTHING.   More of the same, simply stating that you disagree, with no attempt to justify or clarify or elaborate and on flimsy grounds at that.  Ok, listen up, what you choose to concede and don't is not my concern.  My point, for the nth time, is that if you ask from objectivity from others, you must be able to justify why you feel others are too biased in their views about a band, otherwise no purpose whatsoever is served by your saying so. If you say you were merely expressing your opinion, that, as I already put to you, is no different from others expressing their opinion on a band so inferring prejudice there is counterproductive.  There is absolutely nothing awkward about this, save the way you are approaching this.   I have gone through the reviews and ratings for Tarkus. Only 3% ratings are of 2 stars and only 15% of 3 stars.  However, 42% are 4 stars as opposed to 40% 5 star ratings.  Thus, there is no evidence at least in the review database of a strong anti-ELP bias which you have implied.     If you have anything to say which refutes either of above two paras, that would be welcome. If you are simply going to say "I disagree" may I please request you not to say so? I already know that and it seems to me you'd just as well append the words "I disagree" to my posts irrespective of what has been said, so please do not make that effort.    You don't need to repeat over and over that you disagree but don't concede anything. If you disagree but offer no refutation, I shall take the point as conceded, thank you kindly.

You must be joking. I couldn't define anything you've said as either quirky or bizarre. Now go away.

rogerthat wrote: giselle wrote: rogerthat wrote: Hmmm, so likening prog rock fans to boyband crowd behaviour and refusing to justify such a statement is such a sensible and objective approach?  Amen , if you say so,we shall agree to disagree.    We definitely disagree, even about leaving this subject alone for the good of ourselves and the forum. I'm trying to do us both a favour, even though nothing you've said is remotely making sense to me, There is no chance in a million of you winning an argument with me, and we can already see that you can't let it go either, but if I was to reply in depth, this would continue to degenerate into something only the administrators would stop. Having had that experience several times already, I wouldn't want to push my luck.     You make a big statement and then not only to refuse to back it up but keep hammering my position with such statements...what's the big deal?  If you've gone through this whole discussion, my comments are only of the nature of innocent inquiry initially and for reasons best known to yourself, you have resorted to a defensive-aggressive posture and chosen to make evasive responses.  If you cannot back up what you say with cogent arguments, please don't make such sweeping pronouncements. If you not only allege that people are extremely biased about ELP but also urge quality analysis, you have to be able to demonstrate how and in what way they are biased and I am sorry, THAT is not very difficult at all irrespective of the seriousness or not of the thread.  And sorry but your strongly worded opening salvo calls for adequate justification.  If you'll only state your belief and move on like a "hit-and-run", in what way is that different from people who say "X band s**ks" and disappear (which, I take it, is your bone of contention)? What precisely stops you from justifying your stand or would you rather I spell out that dreaded word based on what I infer it to be? If you cannot back up something you say, kindly take back your words, that's all, that is what you are supposed to do to end an argument, madam.  Ranting that "There is no chance in a million of you winning an argument with me" is neither here nor there.  Stop arguing with me, and instead please argue the point and if you have no arguments, please concede the point.   giselle wrote: For someone that's been around as long as you have, I would have thought you would be wise enough to know when to call it a day before we both say things we regret. Speak for yourself. I have steadfastly stuck to the boundaries of the discussion so I do not think that I'd have to resort to THAT at any event.  If you apprehend that you cannot mind your tongue, that is most definitely not my lookout.

I even disagree with that. You're just being awkward for the sake of it, and I know what I'd like to say in return. But I'll leave that to the authorities. Now be a good boy and go away - I won't be conceding ANYTHING.

giselle wrote: rogerthat wrote: Hmmm, so likening prog rock fans to boyband crowd behaviour and refusing to justify such a statement is such a sensible and objective approach?  Amen , if you say so,we shall agree to disagree.    We definitely disagree, even about leaving this subject alone for the good of ourselves and the forum. I'm trying to do us both a favour, even though nothing you've said is remotely making sense to me, There is no chance in a million of you winning an argument with me, and we can already see that you can't let it go either, but if I was to reply in depth, this would continue to degenerate into something only the administrators would stop. Having had that experience several times already, I wouldn't want to push my luck.

You make a big statement and then not only to refuse to back it up but keep hammering my position with such statements...what's the big deal?  If you've gone through this whole discussion, my comments are only of the nature of innocent inquiry initially and for reasons best known to yourself, you have resorted to a defensive-aggressive posture and chosen to make evasive responses.  If you cannot back up what you say with cogent arguments, please don't make such sweeping pronouncements. If you not only allege that people are extremely biased about ELP but also urge quality analysis, you have to be able to demonstrate how and in what way they are biased and I am sorry, THAT is not very difficult at all irrespective of the seriousness or not of the thread.  And sorry but your strongly worded opening salvo calls for adequate justification.  If you'll only state your belief and move on like a "hit-and-run", in what way is that different from people who say "X band s**ks" and disappear (which, I take it, is your bone of contention)?

What precisely stops you from justifying your stand or would you rather I spell out that dreaded word based on what I infer it to be? If you cannot back up something you say, kindly take back your words, that's all, that is what you are supposed to do to end an argument, madam.  Ranting that "There is no chance in a million of you winning an argument with me" is neither here nor there.  Stop arguing with me, and instead please argue the point and if you have no arguments, please concede the point.  

giselle wrote: For someone that's been around as long as you have, I would have thought you would be wise enough to know when to call it a day before we both say things we regret.

Speak for yourself. I have steadfastly stuck to the boundaries of the discussion so I do not think that I'd have to resort to THAT at any event.  If you apprehend that you cannot mind your tongue, that is most definitely not my lookout.


Edited by rogerthat - June 27 2011 at 19:38

rogerthat wrote: Hmmm, so likening prog rock fans to boyband crowd behaviour and refusing to justify such a statement is such a sensible and objective approach?  Amen , if you say so,we shall agree to disagree.

Ironically it was a music critic that got me interested in ELP and prog. The BBC aired a progamme around about 1976 that was about the history of rock music but it was taken from a revisionsist angle by someone clearly into Punk. ELP,Led Zeppelin and other classic rock acts were treated with contempt resulting in tons of fans jamming the switchboards to complain after the programme aired. Anyway the comment by the music critic that got me interested in ELP was ' I hate ELP because they play their music at a hundred miles an hour with no feeling'. I just had to get something by them after that

Edited by richardh - June 27 2011 at 14:04

giselle wrote: rogerthat wrote: giselle wrote: Nothing you've said is convincing to me either. My views are almost diametrically opposed to yours, I disagree with almost everything you've said in your last post and many of the posts before that. We could argue till doomsday and we'd never agree. On that basis,  I already said we should leave it where it is, as going further will only lead us into trouble with the prog authorities.   Objectivist beats a subjective retreat, much?    No, I'm trying to be sensible, unlike you. I personally don't want to be thrown out of the archives, even if you don't mind it happening to you. So let's just agree to disagree and leave it at that.

Hmmm, so likening prog rock fans to boyband crowd behaviour and refusing to justify such a statement is such a sensible and objective approach?  Amen , if you say so,we shall agree to disagree. 

When you are the biggest target you have more missiles headed in your direction. That is possibly the problem with ELP. There is no doubt that in the early 70's ELP were one of the biggest Prog Bands around and they possibly eclipsed many of the other acts then artistically and technically. "Brain Salad Surgery" is one of the albums that I hold in the highest regard in Prog Rock and in the foundation of what we here know and love today.

Nothing you've said is convincing to me either. My views are almost diametrically opposed to yours, I disagree with almost everything you've said in your last post and many of the posts before that. We could argue till doomsday and we'd never agree. On that basis,  I already said we should leave it where it is, as going further will only lead us into trouble with the prog authorities.

rogerthat wrote: [        Yeah, right, meaningful discussion by artificially imposing objectivity in a parameter where objective judement is not practicable?  It is unfortunate that you choose to browbeat it as semantics because it is very relevant.  If you suggest that people should apply objective quality analysis, you have to define what that means (or, alternatively, not assume that people are not doing so). If it is indeed an objective exercise, it should not be very difficult to establish so your reluctance to do is quite baffling. It’s not artificial, and objective judgement is practicable. Only not in your eyes.  I choose to browbeat it because it isn’t at all relevant. No, I don’t have to define what that means, it should be perfectly obvious, unless you keep looking under stones, then under the stones you find there as you do. It’s only baffling to you because you only want to believe in something you see written in stone. Even then, you’d be pedantic about that.   You cannot expect what I stated above with respect to opinions to be explained to you everytime merely because it is not your perception.   The reality is that people express opinions about bands with absolutely no intention of passing it for fact and you should not have to strive hard to take cognizance of said reality.  So, your allegation then is without basis.   People do sometimes express opinions that aren’t intended to be fact, and that’s fine. I have no gripes about that at all. But there is plenty of evidence that the opposite happens, and if you don’t think so, you’re either blind or being awkward for the sake it (which seems quite likely at the moment).     If you propose that objective quality analysis should be done with respect to ELP (with the implicit suggestion that because this is not done so, they get a bad rap), you must establish how an objective analysis would accrue more respect to them and less harsh opinions...possibly by doing an analysis of your own and putting forth the results. Otherwise, you are getting nowhere with what you have suggested.   If I was to write a full critique on ELP, then perhaps all that would come into it. But this isn’t the time or place for it, nor is it a serious enough discussion to warrant it, certainly not for one disgruntled beachcomber. It’s fine that you feel unhappy with my comment, I certainly don’t feel it’s going nowhere. For one thing, it’s kept you occupied for a while till you find something else to grizzle at. And I’m content to have said my piece, of which I would not subtract a word.     Influence does not equate or approximate indispensability. It is not necessary that bands influenced by ELP would do EVERYTHING that they did and should therefore attract the same criticisms. Besides, it's prog rock, so bands do diverge heavily even from their chief influences. Not as if it's thrash metal where bashing Metallica soundlly and heaping superlatives on Testament would make no sense. Which is not even the case with ELP as the average ratings on PA bear out. A Tarkus just doesn't have such a high rating as Red or SEBTP. I don't see that by dint of being one of the important prog rock bands alone, they earn that.

rogerthat wrote: giselle wrote: The discussion itself is somewhat absurd. Mere semantics, as I suggested. I don’t see any real difference in our points of view, only in the form of words we use to describe them.     Sorry, I don't see the difference between subjectivity and objectivity as semantic. By emphasising the importance of impartiality, I am on the other hand distinguishing between subjectivity and bias/prejudice.  Every subjective opinion is not necessarily biased or prejudicial which is what you seem to be driving at in the next para.  A subjective opinion is based on impressions and perceptions but it is important that they be consistent with the person's general perceptions of music. "Objective within a subjective viewpoint" in other words.   Equally sorry, but I totally disagree. And your obsession with nit-picking your way through these very semantics detracts totally from any meaningful discussion of the subject matter. I think you just enjoy digging for truffles to chew on, but you really should remove the paper first.   giselle wrote:     No I’m not inferring that people are often unable to stand apart from their whims, I’m stating it as a fact. And I do know that for a certainty, as the views expressed are often biased totally towards personal taste and delivered as purporting to be fact, not mere opinion. That doesn’t apply to everyone, but sometimes applies to all of us, including me. I’m having to re-state what I’ve already said to make that clear.  Eh?  Any qualitiative statement about a band is an opinion.  It does not become fact merely because the person omitted to say "in my opinion" because, in my opinion ,it should not even be necessary to say so expressly each and every time.  The only objective element of music is the notes and sounds and what we make it is, by implication, heavily dependent on our perceptions of music. The sooner listeners learn to live with this reality, the better.   That’s your opinion, it isn’t mine. I can live with anything I perceive to be a reality. The thing is to strive to see what that reality is. It doesn’t mean that the outcome is perfect by any means.   giselle wrote:  What I called for is balanced and fair criticism, a totally different thing. I certainly would never want to see any holy cows or untouchables, that would not be healthy at all.   In that case, please state what is it that you find it to be a biased and unfair criticism of ELP instead of firing a general dart at Prog rock Inc.  Otherwise, your argument would bound to be perceived as a holy cow syndrome.   giselle wrote:   To begin to define for others how I would conduct (or hope to conduct) an objective quality analysis would be, as I mentioned several times already, discussing definitions instead of dealing with the subject at hand. I feel no need to rationalise my actions or views in depth for you or anyone else. I could write a thesis on it, but it would be boring for everyone, including me.   So you prefer it remains a nebulous "objective" analysis that no one knows about?  I am really asking you this out of curiosity because I have never seen anybody successfully argue for how the quality of a piece of music could be objectively determined.  Please consider that it is not objective unless everybody agrees with the judgment.  If I signed on a dotted line, I am bound by contractual obligation to perform certain acts as per the fine print and such obligation can be enforced in court. THAT is objective. Merely you satisfying yourself that you conducted the analysis without prejudice in your perception is not enough to call it objective.   Nebulous is fine, especially as I don’t feel the need to justify myself in a discussion about generalities. I doubt that you would be convinced by anyone on this topic, perhaps because, as you’ve already said, you don’t think you’re capable of doing it yourself. Personally I’m perfectly happy with my definitions as they are.     giselle wrote:   Unsurprisingly, I also disagree with your view on the possibilities of analysis. I don’t personally think it’s at all impossible to make such a comprehensive and objective exercise.      That could only be if you apply limited and inaccurate parameters. And even the weightage of parameters moves depending on the music. Take an element like dynamics. It is far more important in jazz than in heavy rock.  You obviously then can't assign marks based on the level of dynamics in the same manner for a jazz group and a heavy rock band.  So you'd have to get into what level of dynamics qualitatively is desirable in heavy rock.  And so on...there's no end to how much you can drill down the details and find small but significant aspects to weigh...if you choose to do an objective quality analysis.   I don’t believe the parameters would be limited and inaccurate. I take your point about how you would apply the criteria, but that answers itself by the very question being raised. I think it would be an interesting exercise. But little to do with a general discussion about ELP.   giselle wrote:   Finally, I am not even a fan of ELP. I’m simply calling for a balanced view, something I don’t believe the band receives at present.   So, I repeat, what is the basis for that belief?  And balanced view from whom, general rock music crowd or prog rock fans? Why? Without these clarifications to such a statement, it is a shot in the dark.