Fragile is Superestimated?

moshkito wrote: Big Sky wrote: ... Even among enthusiasts of Progressive Rock, it has been my experience that RIO and Zeuhl genres of Prog Rock, for example, are just a bridge to far for them. I'm one that doesn't really like the bands in those categories, but I don't dismiss them as untalented hacks. Some of the artists in these genres I have great respect for even if I don't like much of their music. Frank Zappa would be foremost among those artists. ... Liking or not liking is interesting. I have not, for over 30 years found any music, I did not enjoy, and the "like" and "dislike" thing that modern users love to agree on (gives them more of a socialist feel being in agreement with others!!!) is not something that I indulge in, or appreciate. ART, of any kind, is about appreciating the human spirit, and its expression, thus not liking this or that, is simply an emotional perception on our own, and HAS NOTHING TO DO with the art work, generally speaking! That there are different genres, or ideas or styles, is not a problem ... unless you think that everyone has to sound the same, and then ... you would not belong in a progressive therapy group like PA. You, at least, say you appreciate their talent ... but I think that your comments would be much different if that were true, though ... I might be wrong here, but the tone is not favorable in my reading this. Big Sky wrote: ... In my opinion, only ELP at that time was putting out music like Yes that was uncompromising and displayed top level musicianship but sold in the millions and made them a top touring band. King Crimson never had that level of success. ... Strange that you mention KC and don't realize that no band has had more changes and experiments (even on stage) than you have suggested. ELP was not as much of a lack of compromise on stage, because a lot of what they did was difficult and required timing and attention. You don't do a Copland on an empty stadium so beautifully without knowing what you are doing and being detailed and attentive to the work you are doing ... though I think that there are/were moments that were left open for a ween bit of improvising or stretching the piano or the guitar. YES, in my book, quit after TFTO and kinda copied RW's comments, that the curry was better than the music. For me, RELAYER was a finger to a lot of fans, and SH going nuts, was probably another finger ... because he had a few moments that he flew in TFTO that folks did not like! The stunning part of it, was that the album did magnificently and they ate crow from it, and ended up having to play it! By then, I had already fallen off YES, because it wasn't exactly about the music, but about (supposedly) being really hip and cool and SELLING! [QUOTE=Big Sky] ... Pink Floyd never displayed the levels of musicianship that other Prog bands did and generally, their music was more digestible, being much less complex. One can see how they hit it big. ...

Starting with DSOTM, PF was NEVER about the musicianship show off that rock'n'rollers cheap bands like to showcase ... with solos that supposedly make them better than all the others.

With DSOTM, PF was able to add their sound bites and bits together with the music, and create a sort of "musical", which was a problem ... in one thought/idea. The show ended up being mechanical so it could stay/follow the movie and all the effects and not get disjointed and looking bad. As such, it took away the freedoms for improvising and having more fun, and you had to stay attentive to be "right there" where you needed to be. AND, in a few years time, the visuals created a complete show ... called THE WALL.

You can not define PF without finding out about their history with bits and sound bites which went right back to the first days after Syd Barrett, whose many sound bites were used A LOT ... scream your last scream old fan without a basket!!!!! And then realize how much of a story these visuals became. Sadly, you would not know about this ... unless you had the PF bootlegs at the time, which included all the bits between the pieces of music ... my thoughts are that the keyboards, and early synths and equipment, were being setup for the next piece ... PF was (probably) quite ahead in terms of the technology of things, or a DSOTM and following work, would just have been another song!

Sadly, if all one can do is look at PF as a bunch of songs, the rest of its history is not necessary or important!
...

One last note. I think your evaluation of a bands stature is strange, and it was not the same everywhere. Paris, London, LA, NY would have very different ideas, and sold differently. TFTO did really well in the East Coast because it was appreciated. Here in the West Coast it was trashed, and YES only got an ovation at the Long Beach Arena (TFTO show I saw!) when they played the first bars of Roundabout ... which was SICK. I started crying and left the arena ... the MUSIC was not important, because only the song mattered ... the sickest moment in my whole life, right up there with the locusts and idiots that were fighting for pieces of the pig at Anaheim Stadium ... and PF should have stopped the show and request those fans be removed ... they were not there for the music ... PERIOD.

Yo have to draw a line somewhere ... if you're not there for the music and what it inspires you inside, what are you there for?

Trashing FRAGILE is really sad ... and not necessary, unless folks think that bands are their toilet paper and nothing else!
[/QUOTEto "

Moshkito,

I think you miss the point of my post, nor was I attempting to address every issue with each band. Some responses to your points.

1) The Art / Music / etc question. I don't enjoy certain types of music or movies or art. Art is entirely subjective whether you "like" it or not. I don't care for rap or most country music. There are some tracks that I have "liked", but those are two types of music I don't usually "enjoy" to listen to.

Among movies, musicals and love stories are not something I generally enjoy. My wife doesn't like most sci-fi movies. My son and I are big into sci-fi. This has nothing to do with the "appreciation" of the arts or your reference to "socialist feel." It's just not my cup of tea. I really don't care if it's something you will not "indulge" in or "appreciate." Seriously I don't care.

2) I'm quite aware that King Crimson has had many changes to their lineup. That has nothing to do with my post. Yes had quite of few lineup changes too. My mention of Crimson was only they did not achieve near the level of success, in popularity or music sales of albums, that Yes or ELP enjoyed. Yes and ELP were selling out large arenas such as Madison Square Garden or filling out football fields. Their album sales dwarf King Crimson. They were doing this while recording music that was for the most part not radio friendly.

3) Pink Floyd. I was not attempting to define their music. I was not making a point about their use of experimenting with technology, their history or whether Syd Barrett was off his rocker. My only point was that it's understandable why Floyd became popular. Their music was not nearly as complex as most of their Prog bretheren. As a band, they did not have the musical chops associated with Prog and therefore that was never a highlight of their music.

It was songs, such as Money, Have a Cigar, Run Like Hell and Comfortably Numb that most people heard on the radio and gravitated to. My wife bought DSOTM long ago ( late 80s when she was in high school) before we ever met. I just asked her why she bought DSOTM. Friend of hers liked Floyd and played their music in the car often. In particular, she said she liked the song "Time" and "Money." Found out those songs were on DSOTM and bought the CD. Nothing more or less.

4) You have a different opinion on Yes than I do. It seems that with Tales going forward you had "fallen off Yes" and did not "like" their music going forward. I'm fine with that. No philosophical puffery needed to explain why.

5) Popularity was addressed only in a general sense. In the US, Prog artists usually have been more popular in the NE of the United States than other sections of US. The US is quite large though. By comparison, Great Britain is about the same size as Oregon. Many reasons why music ( or any interest) may be more popular in one region or country. In sports, NASCAR has long been more popular in the South. Lacrosse was for much of it's history popular only in the Mid-Atlantic States and Long Island. Cricket is not even a thought in the US. But, it is quite popular in India, Pakistan, Australia, New Zealand and Great Britain to name a few.

verslibre wrote: But is Fragile supercalifragilisticexpialidocious?

I'd say it's more supercalifragilisticexpialidocious than it is southernplayalisticadillacmuzik