| Author |
 Topic Search  Topic Options
|
raindance2007 
Forum Senior Member
Joined: February 21 2007
Status: Offline
Points: 184
|
 Posted: September 30 2007 at 05:13 |
Moonmadness, Raindances, Breathless, Nude, Camel-5 fine prog albums 
|
 |
Cheesecakemouse
Forum Senior Member
Joined: April 05 2006
Location: New Zealand
Status: Offline
Points: 1751
|
Posted: September 30 2007 at 05:02 |
|
|
|
Raff
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: July 29 2005
Location: None
Status: Offline
Points: 24429
|
Posted: September 30 2007 at 05:00 |
 Atavachron wrote:
though I'm not a big Camel fan, I see how tight and skilled they were.. not as ambitious as Yes or Rush but a very refined group
|
Very well said!  Their Seventies albums are always a great listen, mellow and relaxed without being too 'easy', and musically very valid indeed. It's a pity they didn't make better use of Richard Sinclair when he briefly joined the group... Andy Latimer is a great guitarist (IMHO even better than Gilmour, to whom he's often compared), but his vocals leave much to be desired, and Sinclair's voice would have been perfect for the band's sound.
|
|
andu
Forum Senior Member
Joined: September 27 2006
Location: Romania
Status: Offline
Points: 3089
|
Posted: September 30 2007 at 04:47 |
|
|
|
Atavachron
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: September 30 2006
Location: Pearland
Status: Online
Points: 65266
|
Posted: September 30 2007 at 04:44 |
|
though I'm not a big Camel fan, I see how tight and skilled they were.. not as ambitious as Yes or Rush but a very refined group
|
|
Cheesecakemouse
Forum Senior Member
Joined: April 05 2006
Location: New Zealand
Status: Offline
Points: 1751
|
Posted: September 30 2007 at 04:38 |
|
|
|
andu
Forum Senior Member
Joined: September 27 2006
Location: Romania
Status: Offline
Points: 3089
|
Posted: September 30 2007 at 04:16 |
Remember, you're talking to the guy who says all prog post 1983 is boring... 
|
|
zachfive
Forum Senior Member
Joined: November 13 2005
Location: Kitsap WA
Status: Offline
Points: 770
|
Posted: September 30 2007 at 04:02 |
|
This site turned me onto Camel, and for that I'm grateful. As to which tier do I think they belong...... not premier, but an honorable mention is deserved.
|
|
Cheesecakemouse
Forum Senior Member
Joined: April 05 2006
Location: New Zealand
Status: Offline
Points: 1751
|
Posted: September 29 2007 at 23:44 |
rileydog22 wrote:
Damn...you went as far as self-quoting to maintain the quote pyramid. You guys are determined to make this thread difficult to read, aren't you?
|
 I had more to add I've fixed it so its no longer appears as a self quote
Edited by Cheesecakemouse - September 29 2007 at 23:47
|
|
rileydog22
Forum Senior Member
Joined: August 24 2005
Location: New Jersey
Status: Offline
Points: 8844
|
Posted: September 29 2007 at 23:43 |
|
Damn...you went as far as self-quoting to maintain the quote pyramid. You guys are determined to make this thread difficult to read, aren't you?
|
|
|
|
Cheesecakemouse
Forum Senior Member
Joined: April 05 2006
Location: New Zealand
Status: Offline
Points: 1751
|
Posted: September 29 2007 at 23:40 |
Cheesecakemouse wrote:
raindance2007 wrote:
Cheesecakemouse wrote:
raindance2007 wrote:
Cheesecakemouse wrote:
raindance2007 wrote:
Cheesecakemouse wrote:
raindance2007 wrote:
Cheesecakemouse wrote:
Cheesecakemouse wrote:
micky wrote:
raindance2007 wrote:
micky wrote:
raindance2007 wrote:
[QUOTE=Cheesecakemouse] 2nd or 3rd league, pretty non offensive non challenging music that rode the tide of prog than rather define it, I always have a problem with Camel being so over rated when great groups like Henry Cow and Faust get barely a mention.
As far as I'm concerned the Snowgoose sounds more like a covers album than anything original, while Moonmadness just rode the tide. Come on people! there are far more important and innovative bands out there, hasn't it occured to you why Camel being accessible (unlike Henry Cow Faust etc) never made it big?
They were a second to third tier prog band for a reason they never dared challenge the genre like RIO, Yes (remeber Tales and Relayer) or King Crimson, Camel just played it safe.
|
I'd take Moonmadness anyday over Relayer. The only Crimson album that matches Moonmadness would be Posiedon imo. None of the Wetton albums are as good |
you are talking apples to his oranges.... love the albums if you want... but Cheesy is dead on. There are those who broke ground and defined prog.. and those that rode the coattails
|
Just because Yes and Genesis started before Camel doesn't mean they are better. I never said the earlier the better, Univers Zero formed after Camel and they were broke more ground Camels songs are are all their own ideas and their first 8 year period is probably better than the first 8 years of Yes. I don't believe in boundaries being broken if they don't sound that great. Someone could fart on a recording and it would be considered breaking boundaries. There's large parts of Relayer that sound like the band is running out of ideas. I only really rate the first 5 minutesof gates highly, but the remainder of that song is just filler imo. I don't believe prog is about breaking boundaries, it's just about mixing rock with jazz or classical and being clever about it. That style of music did break boundaries in the late 60s though. The whole purpose of progressive rock is to break ground and make your own idiosyncratic sound thats where the term "PROGRESSIVE" came from.
|
hell brother... I don't argue musical taste.. if you think Camel was a better group than Yes.. more power to you. But you missed my point competely.... better or best has nothing to do with it... Magma ... M.O. ... Zappa...could be argued to be better bands. The point is those bands who are generally recognized to be the heavies of prog.. instant name recognition.. those who defined the genre.. and if you think Camel did... then you live on another plane of existence from the rest of us.. and my cellphone doesn't have that good of coverage. 
|
Again I agree with you Micky, I would also add that If a band doesn't break ground that means they're not very original; my rationale is that a good a band is defined if they have their own voice, an original voice is created by breaking ground, therefore if a band doesn't break ground they're not original; that is the big problem facing rock today and why many don't consider it any good, whats the point writing your own songs if they're not going to break ground and therefore be original. This is also precisely the problem with Cmael they are not original, so why rate them so highly if you consider them as good as Genesis, then you must equate tribute bands on the same level, since they're pretty much doing what Camel does; copy the better bands.
|
As for your argument about the most popular band isn't necessary the best ;Raindance2007, thats the problem with Camel, they have too much attention and popularity for a second, or third rate band. Get some real prog, check out Mike Oldfield and Caravan as well as Curved Air, and non prog - The Who, Camel ripped off all thoise bands - thats why I think the Snowgoose is a covers album, I'm sure it should be placed under tributes or compilations.
|
Camel didnt rip off anyone. Caravan only have 1 strong album-Grey and Pink  |
Just listen to those albums and you'll see what I mean, Gray and Pinks epic 12 feet underground was ripped off by Camel in the Snowgoose, while some of Moonmadness synth pieces are identical to the Who's -Who's next. Whether you accept it or not doesn't bother me, but Camel did rip off these bands and are nothing special. Listen to something unique, have you heard Henry Cow - In praise of Learning, now that is progressive.
|
Moonmadness sounds nothing like the who. I don't even like the Who much at all. Moonmadness is one of the great prog albums |
Just compare the sytnth lines on the two albums, Moonmadness has one that is a direct rip off from Who's next.
|
lol. Who's next is just an average rock album. Moonamdness sounds absolutely nothing like it and is a much better album too |
Just to them, and the Caravan one I mentioned as well as some Mike Oldfield, another reviewer did say they ripped off Curved Air, Rileydog is right Camel is just a recording of cliches and thats why they're not great, they fit more inline with bands like Triumverant (which was a little too similar to ELP), and Starcastle (a little too similar to Yes).
Enjoy Camel, but just don't try and tell me that they are anything special, because they're not.
|
1973-1981 Camel sound nothing like other prog bands apart from maybe 2 songs which remind me a bit of Floyd. Other than that they are a much better band than Floyd. Latimer is probably my fave guitarist and the bands vocals are fine. I find Gabriel to be annoying vocalist at times though. Rough voice and struggles to sing high notes, very strange lyrics |
Bargain is the song they ripped off the Who on, listen to that one Moonmadness its identical to one on Who's Next, listen to much more prog and you'll hear for yourself how average Camel is. Actually try Steve Hackett's Voyage of the Acolye that album is everything that Camel tried to be and imitate.
Edited by Cheesecakemouse - September 29 2007 at 23:46
|
|
rileydog22
Forum Senior Member
Joined: August 24 2005
Location: New Jersey
Status: Offline
Points: 8844
|
Posted: September 29 2007 at 23:38 |
Sorry for breaking the quote pyramid. I'll hop back on next time I need to post, cause it really makes everything easier to read. 
|
|
|
|
Cheesecakemouse
Forum Senior Member
Joined: April 05 2006
Location: New Zealand
Status: Offline
Points: 1751
|
Posted: September 29 2007 at 23:36 |
raindance2007 wrote:
Cheesecakemouse wrote:
raindance2007 wrote:
Cheesecakemouse wrote:
raindance2007 wrote:
Cheesecakemouse wrote:
raindance2007 wrote:
Cheesecakemouse wrote:
Cheesecakemouse wrote:
micky wrote:
raindance2007 wrote:
micky wrote:
raindance2007 wrote:
Cheesecakemouse wrote:
2nd or 3rd league, pretty non offensive non challenging music that rode the tide of prog than rather define it, I always have a problem with Camel being so over rated when great groups like Henry Cow and Faust get barely a mention.
As far as I'm concerned the Snowgoose sounds more like a covers album than anything original, while Moonmadness just rode the tide. Come on people! there are far more important and innovative bands out there, hasn't it occured to you why Camel being accessible (unlike Henry Cow Faust etc) never made it big?
They were a second to third tier prog band for a reason they never dared challenge the genre like RIO, Yes (remeber Tales and Relayer) or King Crimson, Camel just played it safe.
|
I'd take Moonmadness anyday over Relayer. The only Crimson album that matches Moonmadness would be Posiedon imo. None of the Wetton albums are as good |
you are talking apples to his oranges.... love the albums if you want... but Cheesy is dead on. There are those who broke ground and defined prog.. and those that rode the coattails
|
Just because Yes and Genesis started before Camel doesn't mean they are better. I never said the earlier the better, Univers Zero formed after Camel and they were broke more ground Camels songs are are all their own ideas and their first 8 year period is probably better than the first 8 years of Yes. I don't believe in boundaries being broken if they don't sound that great. Someone could fart on a recording and it would be considered breaking boundaries. There's large parts of Relayer that sound like the band is running out of ideas. I only really rate the first 5 minutesof gates highly, but the remainder of that song is just filler imo. I don't believe prog is about breaking boundaries, it's just about mixing rock with jazz or classical and being clever about it. That style of music did break boundaries in the late 60s though. The whole purpose of progressive rock is to break ground and make your own idiosyncratic sound thats where the term "PROGRESSIVE" came from.
|
hell brother... I don't argue musical taste.. if you think Camel was a better group than Yes.. more power to you. But you missed my point competely.... better or best has nothing to do with it... Magma ... M.O. ... Zappa...could be argued to be better bands. The point is those bands who are generally recognized to be the heavies of prog.. instant name recognition.. those who defined the genre.. and if you think Camel did... then you live on another plane of existence from the rest of us.. and my cellphone doesn't have that good of coverage.
|
Again I agree with you Micky, I would also add that If a band doesn't break ground that means they're not very original; my rationale is that a good a band is defined if they have their own voice, an original voice is created by breaking ground, therefore if a band doesn't break ground they're not original; that is the big problem facing rock today and why many don't consider it any good, whats the point writing your own songs if they're not going to break ground and therefore be original. This is also precisely the problem with Cmael they are not original, so why rate them so highly if you consider them as good as Genesis, then you must equate tribute bands on the same level, since they're pretty much doing what Camel does; copy the better bands.
|
As for your argument about the most popular band isn't necessary the best ;Raindance2007, thats the problem with Camel, they have too much attention and popularity for a second, or third rate band. Get some real prog, check out Mike Oldfield and Caravan as well as Curved Air, and non prog - The Who, Camel ripped off all thoise bands - thats why I think the Snowgoose is a covers album, I'm sure it should be placed under tributes or compilations.
|
Camel didnt rip off anyone. Caravan only have 1 strong album-Grey and Pink |
Just listen to those albums and you'll see what I mean, Gray and Pinks epic 12 feet underground was ripped off by Camel in the Snowgoose, while some of Moonmadness synth pieces are identical to the Who's -Who's next. Whether you accept it or not doesn't bother me, but Camel did rip off these bands and are nothing special. Listen to something unique, have you heard Henry Cow - In praise of Learning, now that is progressive.
|
Moonmadness sounds nothing like the who. I don't even like the Who much at all. Moonmadness is one of the great prog albums |
Just compare the sytnth lines on the two albums, Moonmadness has one that is a direct rip off from Who's next.
|
lol. Who's next is just an average rock album. Moonamdness sounds absolutely nothing like it and is a much better album too |
Just to them, and the Caravan one I mentioned as well as some Mike Oldfield, another reviewer did say they ripped off Curved Air, Rileydog is right Camel is just a recording of cliches and thats why they're not great, they fit more inline with bands like Triumverant (which was a little too similar to ELP), and Starcastle (a little too similar to Yes).
Enjoy Camel, but just don't try and tell me that they are anything special, because they're not.
|
1973-1981 Camel sound nothing like other prog bands apart from maybe 2 songs which remind me a bit of Floyd. Other than that they are a much better band than Floyd. Latimer is probably my fave guitarist and the bands vocals are fine. I find Gabriel to be annoying vocalist at times though. Rough voice and struggles to sing high notes, very strange lyrics |
Bargain is the song they ripped off the Who on, listen to that one Moonmadness its identical to one on Who's Next, listen to much more prog and you'll hear for yourself how average Camel is.
Edited by Cheesecakemouse - September 29 2007 at 23:38
|
|
rileydog22
Forum Senior Member
Joined: August 24 2005
Location: New Jersey
Status: Offline
Points: 8844
|
Posted: September 29 2007 at 23:36 |
|
By the late seventies the reason that Camel didn't sound like any other prog band was because they were no longer prog. In the early-mid seventies they were good, but they were just a mix of Focus, Genesis, and a little bit of Yes.
|
|
|
|
raindance2007
Forum Senior Member
Joined: February 21 2007
Status: Offline
Points: 184
|
Posted: September 29 2007 at 23:34 |
Cheesecakemouse wrote:
raindance2007 wrote:
Cheesecakemouse wrote:
raindance2007 wrote:
Cheesecakemouse wrote:
raindance2007 wrote:
Cheesecakemouse wrote:
Cheesecakemouse wrote:
micky wrote:
raindance2007 wrote:
micky wrote:
raindance2007 wrote:
Cheesecakemouse wrote:
2nd or 3rd league, pretty non offensive non challenging music that rode the tide of prog than rather define it, I always have a problem with Camel being so over rated when great groups like Henry Cow and Faust get barely a mention.
As far as I'm concerned the Snowgoose sounds more like a covers album than anything original, while Moonmadness just rode the tide. Come on people! there are far more important and innovative bands out there, hasn't it occured to you why Camel being accessible (unlike Henry Cow Faust etc) never made it big?
They were a second to third tier prog band for a reason they never dared challenge the genre like RIO, Yes (remeber Tales and Relayer) or King Crimson, Camel just played it safe.
|
I'd take Moonmadness anyday over Relayer. The only Crimson album that matches Moonmadness would be Posiedon imo. None of the Wetton albums are as good |
you are talking apples to his oranges.... love the albums if you want... but Cheesy is dead on. There are those who broke ground and defined prog.. and those that rode the coattails
|
Just because Yes and Genesis started before Camel doesn't mean they are better. I never said the earlier the better, Univers Zero formed after Camel and they were broke more ground Camels songs are are all their own ideas and their first 8 year period is probably better than the first 8 years of Yes. I don't believe in boundaries being broken if they don't sound that great. Someone could fart on a recording and it would be considered breaking boundaries. There's large parts of Relayer that sound like the band is running out of ideas. I only really rate the first 5 minutesof gates highly, but the remainder of that song is just filler imo. I don't believe prog is about breaking boundaries, it's just about mixing rock with jazz or classical and being clever about it. That style of music did break boundaries in the late 60s though. The whole purpose of progressive rock is to break ground and make your own idiosyncratic sound thats where the term "PROGRESSIVE" came from.
|
hell brother... I don't argue musical taste.. if you think Camel was a better group than Yes.. more power to you. But you missed my point competely.... better or best has nothing to do with it... Magma ... M.O. ... Zappa...could be argued to be better bands. The point is those bands who are generally recognized to be the heavies of prog.. instant name recognition.. those who defined the genre.. and if you think Camel did... then you live on another plane of existence from the rest of us.. and my cellphone doesn't have that good of coverage.
|
Again I agree with you Micky, I would also add that If a band doesn't break ground that means they're not very original; my rationale is that a good a band is defined if they have their own voice, an original voice is created by breaking ground, therefore if a band doesn't break ground they're not original; that is the big problem facing rock today and why many don't consider it any good, whats the point writing your own songs if they're not going to break ground and therefore be original. This is also precisely the problem with Cmael they are not original, so why rate them so highly if you consider them as good as Genesis, then you must equate tribute bands on the same level, since they're pretty much doing what Camel does; copy the better bands.
|
As for your argument about the most popular band isn't necessary the best ;Raindance2007, thats the problem with Camel, they have too much attention and popularity for a second, or third rate band. Get some real prog, check out Mike Oldfield and Caravan as well as Curved Air, and non prog - The Who, Camel ripped off all thoise bands - thats why I think the Snowgoose is a covers album, I'm sure it should be placed under tributes or compilations.
|
Camel didnt rip off anyone. Caravan only have 1 strong album-Grey and Pink |
Just listen to those albums and you'll see what I mean, Gray and Pinks epic 12 feet underground was ripped off by Camel in the Snowgoose, while some of Moonmadness synth pieces are identical to the Who's -Who's next. Whether you accept it or not doesn't bother me, but Camel did rip off these bands and are nothing special. Listen to something unique, have you heard Henry Cow - In praise of Learning, now that is progressive.
|
Moonmadness sounds nothing like the who. I don't even like the Who much at all. Moonmadness is one of the great prog albums |
Just compare the sytnth lines on the two albums, Moonmadness has one that is a direct rip off from Who's next.
|
lol. Who's next is just an average rock album. Moonamdness sounds absolutely nothing like it and is a much better album too |
Just to them, and the Caravan one I mentioned as well as some Mike Oldfield, another reviewer did say they ripped off Curved Air, Rileydog is right Camel is just a recording of cliches and thats why they're not great, they fit more inline with bands like Triumverant (which was a little too similar to ELP), and Starcastle (a little too similar to Yes).
Enjoy Camel, but just don't try and tell me that they are anything special, because they're not.
|
1973-1981 Camel sound nothing like other prog bands apart from maybe 2 songs which remind me a bit of Floyd. Other than that they are a much better band than Floyd. Latimer is probably my fave guitarist and the bands vocals are fine. I find Gabriel to be annoying vocalist at times though. Rough voice and struggles to sing high notes, very strange lyrics
|
|
rileydog22
Forum Senior Member
Joined: August 24 2005
Location: New Jersey
Status: Offline
Points: 8844
|
Posted: September 29 2007 at 23:30 |
|
Raindance, did you even read his post? He said there was a SYNTH LINE IN COMMON, not that the whole albums sound alike.
Edited by rileydog22 - September 29 2007 at 23:31
|
|
|
|
Cheesecakemouse
Forum Senior Member
Joined: April 05 2006
Location: New Zealand
Status: Offline
Points: 1751
|
Posted: September 29 2007 at 23:30 |
raindance2007 wrote:
Cheesecakemouse wrote:
raindance2007 wrote:
Cheesecakemouse wrote:
raindance2007 wrote:
Cheesecakemouse wrote:
Cheesecakemouse wrote:
micky wrote:
raindance2007 wrote:
micky wrote:
raindance2007 wrote:
Cheesecakemouse wrote:
2nd or 3rd league, pretty non offensive non challenging music that rode the tide of prog than rather define it, I always have a problem with Camel being so over rated when great groups like Henry Cow and Faust get barely a mention.
As far as I'm concerned the Snowgoose sounds more like a covers album than anything original, while Moonmadness just rode the tide. Come on people! there are far more important and innovative bands out there, hasn't it occured to you why Camel being accessible (unlike Henry Cow Faust etc) never made it big?
They were a second to third tier prog band for a reason they never dared challenge the genre like RIO, Yes (remeber Tales and Relayer) or King Crimson, Camel just played it safe.
|
I'd take Moonmadness anyday over Relayer. The only Crimson album that matches Moonmadness would be Posiedon imo. None of the Wetton albums are as good |
you are talking apples to his oranges.... love the albums if you want... but Cheesy is dead on. There are those who broke ground and defined prog.. and those that rode the coattails
|
Just because Yes and Genesis started before Camel doesn't mean they are better. I never said the earlier the better, Univers Zero formed after Camel and they were broke more ground Camels songs are are all their own ideas and their first 8 year period is probably better than the first 8 years of Yes. I don't believe in boundaries being broken if they don't sound that great. Someone could fart on a recording and it would be considered breaking boundaries. There's large parts of Relayer that sound like the band is running out of ideas. I only really rate the first 5 minutesof gates highly, but the remainder of that song is just filler imo. I don't believe prog is about breaking boundaries, it's just about mixing rock with jazz or classical and being clever about it. That style of music did break boundaries in the late 60s though. The whole purpose of progressive rock is to break ground and make your own idiosyncratic sound thats where the term "PROGRESSIVE" came from.
|
hell brother... I don't argue musical taste.. if you think Camel was a better group than Yes.. more power to you. But you missed my point competely.... better or best has nothing to do with it... Magma ... M.O. ... Zappa...could be argued to be better bands. The point is those bands who are generally recognized to be the heavies of prog.. instant name recognition.. those who defined the genre.. and if you think Camel did... then you live on another plane of existence from the rest of us.. and my cellphone doesn't have that good of coverage.
|
Again I agree with you Micky, I would also add that If a band doesn't break ground that means they're not very original; my rationale is that a good a band is defined if they have their own voice, an original voice is created by breaking ground, therefore if a band doesn't break ground they're not original; that is the big problem facing rock today and why many don't consider it any good, whats the point writing your own songs if they're not going to break ground and therefore be original. This is also precisely the problem with Cmael they are not original, so why rate them so highly if you consider them as good as Genesis, then you must equate tribute bands on the same level, since they're pretty much doing what Camel does; copy the better bands.
|
As for your argument about the most popular band isn't necessary the best ;Raindance2007, thats the problem with Camel, they have too much attention and popularity for a second, or third rate band. Get some real prog, check out Mike Oldfield and Caravan as well as Curved Air, and non prog - The Who, Camel ripped off all thoise bands - thats why I think the Snowgoose is a covers album, I'm sure it should be placed under tributes or compilations.
|
Camel didnt rip off anyone. Caravan only have 1 strong album-Grey and Pink |
Just listen to those albums and you'll see what I mean, Gray and Pinks epic 12 feet underground was ripped off by Camel in the Snowgoose, while some of Moonmadness synth pieces are identical to the Who's -Who's next. Whether you accept it or not doesn't bother me, but Camel did rip off these bands and are nothing special. Listen to something unique, have you heard Henry Cow - In praise of Learning, now that is progressive.
|
Moonmadness sounds nothing like the who. I don't even like the Who much at all. Moonmadness is one of the great prog albums |
Just compare the sytnth lines on the two albums, Moonmadness has one that is a direct rip off from Who's next.
|
lol. Who's next is just an average rock album. Moonamdness sounds absolutely nothing like it and is a much better album too |
Just to them, and the Caravan one I mentioned as well as some Mike Oldfield, another reviewer did say they ripped off Curved Air, Rileydog is right Camel is just a recording of cliches and thats why they're not great, they fit more inline with bands like Triumverant (which was a little too similar to ELP), and Starcastle (a little too similar to Yes). Enjoy Camel, but just don't try and tell me that they are anything special, because they're not.
|
|
raindance2007
Forum Senior Member
Joined: February 21 2007
Status: Offline
Points: 184
|
Posted: September 29 2007 at 23:26 |
Cheesecakemouse wrote:
raindance2007 wrote:
Cheesecakemouse wrote:
raindance2007 wrote:
Cheesecakemouse wrote:
Cheesecakemouse wrote:
micky wrote:
raindance2007 wrote:
micky wrote:
raindance2007 wrote:
Cheesecakemouse wrote:
2nd or 3rd league, pretty non offensive non challenging music that rode the tide of prog than rather define it, I always have a problem with Camel being so over rated when great groups like Henry Cow and Faust get barely a mention.
As far as I'm concerned the Snowgoose sounds more like a covers album than anything original, while Moonmadness just rode the tide. Come on people! there are far more important and innovative bands out there, hasn't it occured to you why Camel being accessible (unlike Henry Cow Faust etc) never made it big?
They were a second to third tier prog band for a reason they never dared challenge the genre like RIO, Yes (remeber Tales and Relayer) or King Crimson, Camel just played it safe.
|
I'd take Moonmadness anyday over Relayer. The only Crimson album that matches Moonmadness would be Posiedon imo. None of the Wetton albums are as good |
you are talking apples to his oranges.... love the albums if you want... but Cheesy is dead on. There are those who broke ground and defined prog.. and those that rode the coattails
|
Just because Yes and Genesis started before Camel doesn't mean they are better. I never said the earlier the better, Univers Zero formed after Camel and they were broke more ground Camels songs are are all their own ideas and their first 8 year period is probably better than the first 8 years of Yes. I don't believe in boundaries being broken if they don't sound that great. Someone could fart on a recording and it would be considered breaking boundaries. There's large parts of Relayer that sound like the band is running out of ideas. I only really rate the first 5 minutesof gates highly, but the remainder of that song is just filler imo. I don't believe prog is about breaking boundaries, it's just about mixing rock with jazz or classical and being clever about it. That style of music did break boundaries in the late 60s though. The whole purpose of progressive rock is to break ground and make your own idiosyncratic sound thats where the term "PROGRESSIVE" came from.
|
hell brother... I don't argue musical taste.. if you think Camel was a better group than Yes.. more power to you. But you missed my point competely.... better or best has nothing to do with it... Magma ... M.O. ... Zappa...could be argued to be better bands. The point is those bands who are generally recognized to be the heavies of prog.. instant name recognition.. those who defined the genre.. and if you think Camel did... then you live on another plane of existence from the rest of us.. and my cellphone doesn't have that good of coverage.
|
Again I agree with you Micky, I would also add that If a band doesn't break ground that means they're not very original; my rationale is that a good a band is defined if they have their own voice, an original voice is created by breaking ground, therefore if a band doesn't break ground they're not original; that is the big problem facing rock today and why many don't consider it any good, whats the point writing your own songs if they're not going to break ground and therefore be original. This is also precisely the problem with Cmael they are not original, so why rate them so highly if you consider them as good as Genesis, then you must equate tribute bands on the same level, since they're pretty much doing what Camel does; copy the better bands.
|
As for your argument about the most popular band isn't necessary the best ;Raindance2007, thats the problem with Camel, they have too much attention and popularity for a second, or third rate band. Get some real prog, check out Mike Oldfield and Caravan as well as Curved Air, and non prog - The Who, Camel ripped off all thoise bands - thats why I think the Snowgoose is a covers album, I'm sure it should be placed under tributes or compilations.
|
Camel didnt rip off anyone. Caravan only have 1 strong album-Grey and Pink |
Just listen to those albums and you'll see what I mean, Gray and Pinks epic 12 feet underground was ripped off by Camel in the Snowgoose, while some of Moonmadness synth pieces are identical to the Who's -Who's next. Whether you accept it or not doesn't bother me, but Camel did rip off these bands and are nothing special. Listen to something unique, have you heard Henry Cow - In praise of Learning, now that is progressive.
|
Moonmadness sounds nothing like the who. I don't even like the Who much at all. Moonmadness is one of the great prog albums |
Just compare the sytnth lines on the two albums, Moonmadness has one that is a direct rip off from Who's next.
|
lol. Who's next is just an average rock album. Moonamdness sounds absolutely nothing like it and is a much better album too
|
|
Cheesecakemouse
Forum Senior Member
Joined: April 05 2006
Location: New Zealand
Status: Offline
Points: 1751
|
Posted: September 29 2007 at 23:17 |
rileydog22 wrote:
raindance2007 wrote:
Cheesecakemouse wrote:
raindance2007 wrote:
Cheesecakemouse wrote:
Cheesecakemouse wrote:
micky wrote:
raindance2007 wrote:
micky wrote:
raindance2007 wrote:
Cheesecakemouse wrote:
2nd or 3rd league, pretty non offensive non challenging music that rode the tide of prog than rather define it, I always have a problem with Camel being so over rated when great groups like Henry Cow and Faust get barely a mention.
As far as I'm concerned the Snowgoose sounds more like a covers album than anything original, while Moonmadness just rode the tide. Come on people! there are far more important and innovative bands out there, hasn't it occured to you why Camel being accessible (unlike Henry Cow Faust etc) never made it big?
They were a second to third tier prog band for a reason they never dared challenge the genre like RIO, Yes (remeber Tales and Relayer) or King Crimson, Camel just played it safe.
|
I'd take Moonmadness anyday over Relayer. The only Crimson album that matches Moonmadness would be Posiedon imo. None of the Wetton albums are as good |
you are talking apples to his oranges.... love the albums if you want... but Cheesy is dead on. There are those who broke ground and defined prog.. and those that rode the coattails
|
Just because Yes and Genesis started before Camel doesn't mean they are better. I never said the earlier the better, Univers Zero formed after Camel and they were broke more ground Camels songs are are all their own ideas and their first 8 year period is probably better than the first 8 years of Yes. I don't believe in boundaries being broken if they don't sound that great. Someone could fart on a recording and it would be considered breaking boundaries. There's large parts of Relayer that sound like the band is running out of ideas. I only really rate the first 5 minutesof gates highly, but the remainder of that song is just filler imo. I don't believe prog is about breaking boundaries, it's just about mixing rock with jazz or classical and being clever about it. That style of music did break boundaries in the late 60s though. The whole purpose of progressive rock is to break ground and make your own idiosyncratic sound thats where the term "PROGRESSIVE" came from.
|
hell brother... I don't argue musical taste.. if you think Camel was a better group than Yes.. more power to you. But you missed my point competely.... better or best has nothing to do with it... Magma ... M.O. ... Zappa...could be argued to be better bands. The point is those bands who are generally recognized to be the heavies of prog.. instant name recognition.. those who defined the genre.. and if you think Camel did... then you live on another plane of existence from the rest of us.. and my cellphone doesn't have that good of coverage.
|
Again I agree with you Micky, I would also add that If a band doesn't break ground that means they're not very original; my rationale is that a good a band is defined if they have their own voice, an original voice is created by breaking ground, therefore if a band doesn't break ground they're not original; that is the big problem facing rock today and why many don't consider it any good, whats the point writing your own songs if they're not going to break ground and therefore be original. This is also precisely the problem with Cmael they are not original, so why rate them so highly if you consider them as good as Genesis, then you must equate tribute bands on the same level, since they're pretty much doing what Camel does; copy the better bands.
|
As for your argument about the most popular band isn't necessary the best ;Raindance2007, thats the problem with Camel, they have too much attention and popularity for a second, or third rate band. Get some real prog, check out Mike Oldfield and Caravan as well as Curved Air, and non prog - The Who, Camel ripped off all thoise bands - thats why I think the Snowgoose is a covers album, I'm sure it should be placed under tributes or compilations.
|
Camel didnt rip off anyone. Caravan only have 1 strong album-Grey and Pink |
Just listen to those albums and you'll see what I mean, Gray and Pinks epic 12 feet underground was ripped off by Camel in the Snowgoose, while some of Moonmadness synth pieces are identical to the Who's -Who's next. Whether you accept it or not doesn't bother me, but Camel did rip off these bands and are nothing special. Listen to something unique, have you heard Henry Cow - In praise of Learning, now that is progressive.
|
Moonmadness sounds nothing like the who. I don't even like the Who much at all. Moonmadness is one of the great prog albums |
QUOTE PYRAMID LOL!
Seriously, Camel is pretty cliche. The music is solid, but I'd say second tier. I'll take a groundbreaking band over one of those hey-look-its-another-band-that-sounds-like-yes-and-genesis bands any day.
|
Right on brother!
|
|
rileydog22
Forum Senior Member
Joined: August 24 2005
Location: New Jersey
Status: Offline
Points: 8844
|
Posted: September 29 2007 at 23:15 |
raindance2007 wrote:
Cheesecakemouse wrote:
raindance2007 wrote:
Cheesecakemouse wrote:
Cheesecakemouse wrote:
micky wrote:
raindance2007 wrote:
micky wrote:
raindance2007 wrote:
Cheesecakemouse wrote:
2nd or 3rd league, pretty non offensive non challenging music that rode the tide of prog than rather define it, I always have a problem with Camel being so over rated when great groups like Henry Cow and Faust get barely a mention.
As far as I'm concerned the Snowgoose sounds more like a covers album than anything original, while Moonmadness just rode the tide. Come on people! there are far more important and innovative bands out there, hasn't it occured to you why Camel being accessible (unlike Henry Cow Faust etc) never made it big?
They were a second to third tier prog band for a reason they never dared challenge the genre like RIO, Yes (remeber Tales and Relayer) or King Crimson, Camel just played it safe.
|
I'd take Moonmadness anyday over Relayer. The only Crimson album that matches Moonmadness would be Posiedon imo. None of the Wetton albums are as good |
you are talking apples to his oranges.... love the albums if you want... but Cheesy is dead on. There are those who broke ground and defined prog.. and those that rode the coattails
|
Just because Yes and Genesis started before Camel doesn't mean they are better. I never said the earlier the better, Univers Zero formed after Camel and they were broke more ground Camels songs are are all their own ideas and their first 8 year period is probably better than the first 8 years of Yes. I don't believe in boundaries being broken if they don't sound that great. Someone could fart on a recording and it would be considered breaking boundaries. There's large parts of Relayer that sound like the band is running out of ideas. I only really rate the first 5 minutesof gates highly, but the remainder of that song is just filler imo. I don't believe prog is about breaking boundaries, it's just about mixing rock with jazz or classical and being clever about it. That style of music did break boundaries in the late 60s though. The whole purpose of progressive rock is to break ground and make your own idiosyncratic sound thats where the term "PROGRESSIVE" came from.
|
hell brother... I don't argue musical taste.. if you think Camel was a better group than Yes.. more power to you. But you missed my point competely.... better or best has nothing to do with it... Magma ... M.O. ... Zappa...could be argued to be better bands. The point is those bands who are generally recognized to be the heavies of prog.. instant name recognition.. those who defined the genre.. and if you think Camel did... then you live on another plane of existence from the rest of us.. and my cellphone doesn't have that good of coverage.
|
Again I agree with you Micky, I would also add that If a band doesn't break ground that means they're not very original; my rationale is that a good a band is defined if they have their own voice, an original voice is created by breaking ground, therefore if a band doesn't break ground they're not original; that is the big problem facing rock today and why many don't consider it any good, whats the point writing your own songs if they're not going to break ground and therefore be original. This is also precisely the problem with Cmael they are not original, so why rate them so highly if you consider them as good as Genesis, then you must equate tribute bands on the same level, since they're pretty much doing what Camel does; copy the better bands.
|
As for your argument about the most popular band isn't necessary the best ;Raindance2007, thats the problem with Camel, they have too much attention and popularity for a second, or third rate band. Get some real prog, check out Mike Oldfield and Caravan as well as Curved Air, and non prog - The Who, Camel ripped off all thoise bands - thats why I think the Snowgoose is a covers album, I'm sure it should be placed under tributes or compilations.
|
Camel didnt rip off anyone. Caravan only have 1 strong album-Grey and Pink |
Just listen to those albums and you'll see what I mean, Gray and Pinks epic 12 feet underground was ripped off by Camel in the Snowgoose, while some of Moonmadness synth pieces are identical to the Who's -Who's next. Whether you accept it or not doesn't bother me, but Camel did rip off these bands and are nothing special. Listen to something unique, have you heard Henry Cow - In praise of Learning, now that is progressive.
|
Moonmadness sounds nothing like the who. I don't even like the Who much at all. Moonmadness is one of the great prog albums |
QUOTE PYRAMID LOL! Seriously, Camel is pretty cliche. The music is solid, but I'd say second tier. I'll take a groundbreaking band over one of those hey-look-its-another-band-that-sounds-like-yes-and-genesis bands any day.
|
|
|
|
/PAlogo_v2.gif "Progarchives.com Homepage")
no I think Mars Volta, Radiohead and some post rock is good, just the 70s were the golden years, anyway thats a digression.
Camel - 2nd Division or Premier League?
