King Crimson vs. Camel

Hercules wrote: Snow Dog wrote: Hercules wrote: My favourite band versus one of my least favourites. Camel will undoubtedly lose this poll (this site has an abnormal number of KC (and VDGG) fanboys compared to the wider prog community) but they get my vote. Surely King Crimson has always had a bigger fanbase than Camel? After all King Crimson are premier league whilst Camel are second division. But I will probably vote Camel. I find it hard to decide these days. Not so, in fact. In the late 60s/early 70s, Crimson gained a lot of fans with their first album and lost them very quickly with their second and subsequent offerings. By the end of my time at Cambridge (1973), Crimson were a spent force - we thought about booking them but their gig attendances were too poor to justify it. Camel never quite made the first division in terms of sales but were much more popular than Crimson from 74 - 77. (They still are outside this site in the other prog communities I move in). Crimson were never ever up there with Genesis, ELP, Yes, Tull and ELP, the real 1st div.

Yep, an extremely knowing and true post

I've been listening to a lot of Camel lately, and will get round to a few reviews shortly. I find their music wondrous, and actually have been getting back in a big way into the later stuff, which, although not mighty sellers, were works of art and deserved a far bigger audience.

Hercules wrote: Snow Dog wrote: Hercules wrote: My favourite band versus one of my least favourites. Camel will undoubtedly lose this poll (this site has an abnormal number of KC (and VDGG) fanboys compared to the wider prog community) but they get my vote. Surely King Crimson has always had a bigger fanbase than Camel? After all King Crimson are premier league whilst Camel are second division. But I will probably vote Camel. I find it hard to decide these days. Not so, in fact. In the late 60s/early 70s, Crimson gained a lot of fans with their first album and lost them very quickly with their second and subsequent offerings. By the end of my time at Cambridge (1973), Crimson were a spent force - we thought about booking them but their gig attendances were too poor to justify it. Camel never quite made the first division in terms of sales but were much more popular than Crimson from 74 - 77. (They still are outside this site in the other prog communities I move in). Crimson were never ever up there with Genesis, ELP, Yes, Tull and ELP, the real 1st div.

My question is: was Genesis in the early days (Peter Gabriel era) really a "first division" prog band? From the little live footage I've seen from that era, they seemed to be playing the same kind of small to medium concert halls (1000-2000 people in capacity) that KC also played in. I know Genesis got big around 1975-77, but that's not what I'm interested in.

adace1 wrote: Is any one else a little annoyed by all the KC songs that are just random, unstructured experimentation?

Which songs do you speak of?  Only Starless and Bible Black has such tracks.  Larks Tongue in Aspic Part1, for instance, is neither random nor unstructured.  It may have emerged from experimentation/improvisation but the final output is quite carefully composed.   Of course, if you insist freeform is random and song is only the valid structure...

As for topic, if you vote for the highs, the absolutely brilliant moments, you will most probably vote for KC, which is what I did. If you are the kind who punishes a band so severely for a few bad moments that you would rather pick an only occasionally spectacular but consistently solid band, you will definitely vote for Camel.  Of course, it's also possible you don't like KC in general, which is a different story.


Edited by rogerthat - January 13 2011 at 12:13

Gandalff wrote: Jake Kobrin wrote: King Crimson have several albums that I would call masterpieces. Camel have a couple of really good albums, but that's it. There are times when I prefer Latimer's guitar work, however.  I´m sorry but Latimer´s guitar work knows to play Mr. Fripp with forefinger in his nostril.

It is true Latimer has many guitar skills that Fripp does not have. Latimer is a unique player with a very sensitive and subtle technique and he is way more capable of playing melodic solo's.

friso wrote: Gandalff wrote: Jake Kobrin wrote: King Crimson have several albums that I would call masterpieces. Camel have a couple of really good albums, but that's it. There are times when I prefer Latimer's guitar work, however.  I´m sorry but Latimer´s guitar work knows to play Mr. Fripp with forefinger in his nostril. It is true Latimer has many guitar skills that Fripp does not have. Latimer is a unique player with a very sensitive and subtle technique and he is way more capable of playing melodic solo's.

Fripp is definitely the superior technician but I do agree that Latimer is far superior at evoking emotions with his guitar playing, particularly his solos. Only Hackett imo matches/betters him in that respect in prog. Fripp doesn't really play solos in the generally understood sense of the word, not that that's necessarily a flaw.

I voted "Like them equally" because I like each for different reasons.  I like the melodicism and lyricism of Camel's music and think Andrew Latimer is a first-class guitarist and writer.  He can play extended guitar pieces, not jams, that keep the listener interested.  The late Peter Bardens was also one of my favorite keyboardists.  In a word, I really enjoy listening to Camel.  King Crimson I also enjoy, of course, and Fripp is one of the premier guitarists of our time.  Crimson, though comes to me as more a whole, or rather a series of wholes (an ocean of [w]holes?).  They have continually pushed the boundaries of Prog throughout their career and have created some of the most intriguing music in rock.  But note my terms here.  I enjoy them, yes, but what I am really saying here is that I appreciate them on an objective level.  Theirs is intellectual music which engages my rational mind.  So that brings me to the contrast: I have a more emotional appreciation of Camel, and a more rational appreciation of King Crimson. 

Hercules wrote: this site has an abnormal number of KC (and VDGG) fanboys compared to the wider prog community

So... Does this so-called  "wider prog community"  consider bands like KC and VDGG to be overrated??
Do they think that other legendary acts such as Yes, Genesis, and ELP are also undeservedly over-hyped??

I suppose all those REAL prog fans are too cool to hang around THIS site and enlighten us.
Do they have their own online community?  Can you pleeeeeeease post a link to their website?

I'm curious to hear about all the amazing revolutionary prog acts that THEY rightfully acknowledge as such. 
Thanks!

Padraic wrote: King Crimson, easily.

love both but listen to camel more often it' a fact except maybe in the court and island

One of these bands is in my top five and one isn't and it's probably not who you think it is.