| Author |
 Topic Search  Topic Options
|
Icarium 
Forum Senior Member
VIP Member
Joined: March 21 2008
Location: Tigerstaden
Status: Offline
Points: 34055
|
 Posted: June 19 2012 at 15:58 |
|
I still think Ummagumma (studion version ) is VDGG related in terms of dissonence
|
|
|
 |
ProgEpics
Forum Groupie
Joined: September 05 2010
Location: Georgia
Status: Offline
Points: 92
|
Posted: June 19 2012 at 17:28 |
|
VDGG is obviously very talented but I don't feel moved by their music in any way. It just has a forced sound to it.
|
|
Come on you target for faraway laughter,
Come on you stranger, you legend, you martyr, and shine!
|
|
rogerthat
Prog Reviewer
Joined: September 03 2006
Location: .
Status: Offline
Points: 9869
|
Posted: June 19 2012 at 22:17 |
 irrelevant wrote:
Dayvenkirq wrote:
rogerthat wrote:
Waters's strained vocals sound like nails to a chalkboard on large parts of Wall. Especially The Trial.
|
Maybe it has to be that way to go along with the concept, kind of complete the album. |
The Trial is still terrible.  |
Yeah, I know what the context is but it still makes me cringe. I felt Waters over-reached himself as a singer in that album, though it also has some of his memorable moments where his demented high pitched whining actually works very well - like One of My Turns.
|
|
rogerthat
Prog Reviewer
Joined: September 03 2006
Location: .
Status: Offline
Points: 9869
|
Posted: June 19 2012 at 22:24 |
Gandalff wrote:
- Pink Floyd always had a genuine guitar and bass.
- They had three quite acceptable singers, VdGG has only one, although excellent, but, frankly, somewhat polarizing singer (as someone said above, after all).
- Pink Floyd had much memorable melodies, how many VdGG's ones anyone can able to sing?
- Pink Floyd had truly better and more colorful wizard behind the keyboard.
To be fair, the drummer from Van der Graaf Generator is obviously better. |
Haven't you heard...memorable melodies are banned in prog as they are too commercial and easy (and apparently have absolutely nothing to do with compositional skill). I don't blame buck, though, because Hercules likes to dismiss VDGG's influence without basis. It is quite true that they are one of the few prog rock bands that are considered hip in punk circles (not that I am inclined to attach any special importance to that because PF are also placed in roughly the same category as Who, LZ, Doors in terms of importance and if that is commercial, so be it  )
|
|
Gandalff
Forum Senior Member
Joined: September 07 2007
Location: Middle-Earth
Status: Offline
Points: 4214
|
Posted: June 19 2012 at 22:42 |
rogerthat wrote:
Gandalff wrote:
- Pink Floyd always had a genuine guitar and bass.
- They had three quite acceptable singers, VdGG has only one, although excellent, but, frankly, somewhat polarizing singer (as someone said above, after all).
- Pink Floyd had much memorable melodies, how many VdGG's ones anyone can able to sing?
- Pink Floyd had truly better and more colorful wizard behind the keyboard.
To be fair, the drummer from Van der Graaf Generator is obviously better. |
Haven't you heard...memorable melodies are banned in prog as they are too commercial and easy (and apparently have absolutely nothing to do with compositional skill). I don't blame buck, though, because Hercules likes to dismiss VDGG's influence without basis. It is quite true that they are one of the few prog rock bands that are considered hip in punk circles (not that I am inclined to attach any special importance to that because PF are also placed in roughly the same category as Who, LZ, Doors in terms of importance and if that is commercial, so be it )
|
I hope you did think in hyperbole because other Prog Rock icons such as King Crimson, Yes or Genesis (well, those early with Gabriel) have also a lot of memorable melodies and yet are not "commercial".
|
|
A Elbereth Gilthoniel
silivren penna míriel
o menel aglar elenath!
Na-chaered palan-díriel
o galadhremmin ennorath,
Fanuilos, le linnathon
nef aear, sí nef aearon!
|
|
rogerthat
Prog Reviewer
Joined: September 03 2006
Location: .
Status: Offline
Points: 9869
|
Posted: June 20 2012 at 04:15 |
Gandalff wrote:
rogerthat wrote:
Gandalff wrote:
- Pink Floyd always had a genuine guitar and bass.
- They had three quite acceptable singers, VdGG has only one, although excellent, but, frankly, somewhat polarizing singer (as someone said above, after all).
- Pink Floyd had much memorable melodies, how many VdGG's ones anyone can able to sing?
- Pink Floyd had truly better and more colorful wizard behind the keyboard.
To be fair, the drummer from Van der Graaf Generator is obviously better. |
Haven't you heard...memorable melodies are banned in prog as they are too commercial and easy (and apparently have absolutely nothing to do with compositional skill). I don't blame buck, though, because Hercules likes to dismiss VDGG's influence without basis. It is quite true that they are one of the few prog rock bands that are considered hip in punk circles (not that I am inclined to attach any special importance to that because PF are also placed in roughly the same category as Who, LZ, Doors in terms of importance and if that is commercial, so be it )
|
I hope you did think in hyperbole because other Prog Rock icons such as King Crimson, Yes or Genesis (well, those early with Gabriel) have also a lot of memorable melodies and yet are not "commercial". |
Oh, dear. That was sarcasm. With that told, Floyd is even more 'straight up' than those bands you mentioned. Which is one of the reasons they are also considered classic rock.
|
|
bucka001
Forum Senior Member
Joined: November 16 2005
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 864
|
Posted: June 20 2012 at 05:28 |
Gandalff wrote:
bucka001 wrote:
Gandalff wrote:
- Pink Floyd are much more famous (actually, along with Genesis, the most famous prog band).
- Their music is generally more palatable.
- They have more real "masterpieces". Van der Graaf Generator have only one in fact - Pawn Hearts.
- But VDGG are leading over Pink Floyd at the moment. What paradoxes!
(I voted for Floyds, of course.) |
Point by Point:
1. Famous doesn't mean better. And before prog forums started up, no one I knew ever considered Floyd prog (it's more like blues rock dressed up with weird sound effects and stereophonic hijinks; a lot of burnouts in high school and yoga teachers thought it was heavy stuff). Genesis became really famous during the Phil Collins 'greatest hits' era. Then you had millions working their way back through the catalog and discovering the prog stuff. So they owe their mega-fame to 'Invisible Touch,' 'We Can't Dance,' etc rather than 'Supper's Ready.'
2. A matter of taste, but fair enough.
3. A matter of taste; yours is misguided and wrong in my eyes, but mine would be in yours. Just opinions, eh? You should hear Godbluff & Still Life, though. Many consider them masterpieces as well (although you won't read about it in Rolling Stone or Spin)
4. Maybe the reason that VdGG is doing well is that Pink Floyd (after their brilliant first few albums, i.e. Piper, Saucerful, etc) became really boring. Johnny Rotten called them 'music for sheep', and I'm inclined to agree. Not to piss anyone off, it's just my opinion. And I totally get and respect how people can hate VdGG and Hammill. That's the thing, though. I can see where people would find VdGG like nails on a chalkboard and truly hate them [which, paradoxically, is a 'positive' in my eyes]; I cannot see where PF would inspire that reaction because they're worse than hate-inspiring -- they're just bland / boring. One poster described them as 'chill' and I can see where that's coming from. VdGG was never 'chill.' They were more like the dark side of prog, hair-tearing, psychotic panic. Soundtracks for nightmares. You either loved it or hated it.
Pink Floyd was more successful, but it's similiar to how Spielberg will always be more "successful" than Fellini. It's easier to digest for the masses, but it doesn't mean it's a greater artistic success. John Anthony, by the way, is the legendary British producer who has amongst his credits Genesis, Queen, Roxy Music, Al Stewart, The Tubes, Ace (he did their mega-single 'How Long'), and of course Van der Graaf.
|
Well. You're huge VdGG fan, as we can see from your avatar. Maybe therefore you're somewhat biased. I'm not a fan of both listed bands, but Dark Side Of The Moon was my first real touch with the kind of a Prog Rock in my age about 10. I should add more reasons why I prefer Pink Floyd over Van der Graaf Generator:
- Pink Floyd always had a genuine guitar and bass.
- They had three quite acceptable singers, VdGG has only one, although excellent, but, frankly, somewhat polarizing singer (as someone said above, after all).
- Pink Floyd had much memorable melodies, how many VdGG's ones anyone can able to sing?
- Pink Floyd had truly better and more colorful wizard behind the keyboard.
To be fair, the drummer from Van der Graaf Generator is obviously better. |
Well, yeah I'm a fan... I wrote a book on 'em and they're my friends! I will say that Richard Wright and Nick Mason are my two fave Floyds (Waters and Gilmour not so much). I think RW is pretty great and would take his "architect of the total music" style over Wakeman/Emerson's synth flashiness any day. But Hugh Banton is pretty incredible; brilliant actually. If you see him live, and watch his feet... he's playing impossibly complex stuff on the manuals, and his feet are dancing these great bass lines at the same time. I still don't know how he does it (he's also one of the few rock organists who covers on bass pedals, as VdGG has no bass gtrst). He, too, plays to the architecture and textures of the total music, rather than appearing as a mega-flash soloist. My main issue in these polls is when someone like Hercules (who does seem like a good enough guy in his posts otherwise) and you (no offense) profess amazement that a moderately succussful band could do well in a poll against a mega-superstar band, and that the success of the one band automatically means they're "better" (whatever that is). Here's the thing... this is a prog forum. A lot of people on here are going to know and be familiar with VdGG because it's a prog forum. If this same poll were done on a classic rock forum or 'general music' forum, it'd be no contest (for every one VdGG fan, there are a thousand Floyd fans). But this is a specialized forum and here bands like VdGG, Magma, Gentle Giant, Camel, etc, are just as known as the 'biggies' so mainstream success doesn't play into the outcomes of polls. So I don't get the befuddlement. And I think we'd all agree (at least I thought we would) that mainstream success doesn't neccessarily equal quality, or ensure "superiority." Otherwise we'd all agree that Madonna is better than Yes (she certainly has sustained her A-level success for longer than Yes; I'm not a fan but she's definitely still mega-huge).
|
|
jc
|
|
bucka001
Forum Senior Member
Joined: November 16 2005
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 864
|
Posted: June 20 2012 at 05:40 |
rogerthat wrote:
I don't blame buck, though, because Hercules likes to dismiss VDGG's influence without basis. It is quite true that they are one of the few prog rock bands that are considered hip in punk circles (not that I am inclined to attach any special importance to that because PF are also placed in roughly the same category as Who, LZ, Doors in terms of importance and if that is commercial, so be it )
|
Yeah, that's pretty much it (and VdGG's cred / influence extends beyond just the punks / post punks, by the way  ). I'm fine with people hating VdGG. That's not BS, I really can see where they wouldn't be someone's cup of tea. When I first heard Hammill's harsh singing I wasn't sold (hardly), although I did love is smoother vocals on the first few albums (he developed the harshness later). I've actually heard some detractors come up with stuff that I had to laugh at when they described Hammill's voice. I had to admit I knew where they were coming from, even though I still loved The Voice. One guy wrote at one time, "It sounds like some old guy shouting at kids to get off his lawn." (!!) Awesome! And I was used to great technique and virtuoso soloing (I grew up with old Genesis, ELP, Yes, etc) and VdGG didn't seem interested in solo-ing, etc, so I thought they weren't as good. (I've revised that opinion). So, yes, I have no problem with Herc (and others) absolutely despising the band. Fair enough. But his hatred has him saying things that I think he wishes were true, rather than are true. Saying that VdGG aren't respected anywhere but on this particular forum is as ludicrous as me saying "Early Floyd was never considered psychedelia by anyone except people on this forum." (By the way, early Floyd stuff is some of my fave music ever... it's only around DSOTM and forward that they lost the plot for me... the rest of the world didn't seem to have a problem with it though!).
|
|
jc
|
|
rogerthat
Prog Reviewer
Joined: September 03 2006
Location: .
Status: Offline
Points: 9869
|
Posted: June 20 2012 at 06:16 |
bucka001 wrote:
(By the way, early Floyd stuff is some of my fave music ever... it's only around DSOTM and forward that they lost the plot for me... the rest of the world didn't seem to have a problem with it though!). |
And even if they didn't, Roger Waters seems to agree when he says that Dark Side basically finished the band. 
|
|
-Radioswim-
Forum Senior Member
Joined: December 15 2005
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 331
|
Posted: June 20 2012 at 15:56 |
Can't we all agree that it's subjective 
|
Dust in the Kitchen
|
|
gazagod
Forum Groupie
Joined: June 04 2012
Location: babylon
Status: Offline
Points: 55
|
Posted: June 20 2012 at 22:01 |
vdgg and hamill are definitely an acquired taste for, well, anyone... and I've listened to everything from Schoenberg to Albert Ayler to Graveland and enjoyed them all... once you 'get' the band, though, a whole new experience and appreciation of the music and lyric opens up... I think the same thing can happen with other bands with unconventional vocal deliveries(from the point of view of mainstream rock)...but both bands have reflective lyrics as well, though VDGG are quite a bit more personal to me
I Love Pink Floyd, but they are about as conventional (instrumentally) as one can get and still be considered 'prog'... ah well, maybe not...(the live at pompeii-and the other early stuff- has a psych freakout or two) i never have understood 'prog as genre' and i doubt anyone else does either- witness the endless pedantic debates on these bbs... hey it's all good fun... and a catchall that successfully(?) binds an eclectic array of sonic narratives
Im not able to vote yet and fine with that because I couldnt rank one over the other... both delivered years of listening pleasure
|
|
we only know that we do not know
|
|
The Dark Elf
Forum Senior Member
VIP Member
Joined: February 01 2011
Location: Michigan
Status: Offline
Points: 13065
|
Posted: June 20 2012 at 22:28 |
bucka001 wrote:
Gandalff wrote:
- Pink Floyd are much more famous (actually, along with Genesis, the most famous prog band).
- Their music is generally more palatable.
- They have more real "masterpieces". Van der Graaf Generator have only one in fact - Pawn Hearts.
- But VDGG are leading over Pink Floyd at the moment. What paradoxes!
(I voted for Floyds, of course.) |
Point by Point:
1. Famous doesn't mean better. And before prog forums started up, no one I knew ever considered Floyd prog (it's more like blues rock dressed up with weird sound effects and stereophonic hijinks; a lot of burnouts in high school and yoga teachers thought it was heavy stuff). Genesis became really famous during the Phil Collins 'greatest hits' era. Then you had millions working their way back through the catalog and discovering the prog stuff. So they owe their mega-fame to 'Invisible Touch,' 'We Can't Dance,' etc rather than 'Supper's Ready.'
2. A matter of taste, but fair enough.
3. A matter of taste; yours is misguided and wrong in my eyes, but mine would be in yours. Just opinions, eh? You should hear Godbluff & Still Life, though. Many consider them masterpieces as well (although you won't read about it in Rolling Stone or Spin)
4. Maybe the reason that VdGG is doing well is that Pink Floyd (after their brilliant first few albums, i.e. Piper, Saucerful, etc) became really boring. Johnny Rotten called them 'music for sheep', and I'm inclined to agree. Not to piss anyone off, it's just my opinion. And I totally get and respect how people can hate VdGG and Hammill. That's the thing, though. I can see where people would find VdGG like nails on a chalkboard and truly hate them [which, paradoxically, is a 'positive' in my eyes]; I cannot see where PF would inspire that reaction because they're worse than hate-inspiring -- they're just bland / boring. One poster described them as 'chill' and I can see where that's coming from. VdGG was never 'chill.' They were more like the dark side of prog, hair-tearing, psychotic panic. Soundtracks for nightmares. You either loved it or hated it.
Pink Floyd was more successful, but it's similiar to how Spielberg will always be more "successful" than Fellini. It's easier to digest for the masses, but it doesn't mean it's a greater artistic success. John Anthony, by the way, is the legendary British producer who has amongst his credits Genesis, Queen, Roxy Music, Al Stewart, The Tubes, Ace (he did their mega-single 'How Long'), and of course Van der Graaf.
|
Point by point rebuttal:
1) Floyd not prog? What makes VdGG prog? The insipid whining vocals? The fact you can't even hum along to a song, or find a memorable tune? Oh, I know, the fact that no one in the U.S. ever even heard of the band in 70s (but they were big in Italy  ). If I look at an album like Animals or Wish You Were Here, I think distinctly prog. As far as your misguided knock on Genesis, two of their albums with Gabriel were top ten in the UK ( SEbtP and The Lamb Lies Down on Broadway) and two more were top ten while Hackett remained in the Band ( Trick of the Tail and Wind and Wuthering). In the U.S., all four of those albums were in the top 70 or better - all before their "commercial success". That's something VdGG couldn't even dream of in their heyday. Well, they never had a heyday, actually.
2) A matter of taste, yes. I would suggest that, growing up in the 70s, a huge swathe of young listeners in every demographic (including plenty of punks that I knew, as well as hippies, rockers, metalheads, college radicals, etc. ) enjoyed Floyd. And still do.
3) This matter of taste thing is getting repetitive. I would say rightly that DSotM is acclaimed as one of the greatest albums ever recorded by nearly every rock reviewer on the planet, not by a few oddball eccentrics who wish to prove their decadency. The same sort who would make the sodden claim that The Beatles were overrated.
4) Johhny Rotten holds about as much musical weight with me as Gary Glitter. Or Tiny Tim. Rotten is a loudmouth novelty act with safety pins and bad hair. If we were looking at the sheer amount of bands that counted them as influences, Floyd would simply crush VdGG. Not just us bourgeois listeners, mind you, but bands. That sell albums. Something VdGG never could quite manage. Except in Italy. As far as Floyd being bland, I guess you've never seen one of their concerts. I suppose you've never heard, as I have, 70,000 people all singing "Wish You Were Here" along with the band. Chilling, yes. There aren't 70,000 people on the planet who even know who VdGG are. And once they heard them, they would indeed be horrified.
Edited by The Dark Elf - June 20 2012 at 22:32
|
|
...a vigorous circular motion hitherto unknown to the people of this area, but destined
to take the place of the mud shark in your mythology...
|
|
gazagod
Forum Groupie
Joined: June 04 2012
Location: babylon
Status: Offline
Points: 55
|
Posted: June 20 2012 at 22:37 |
|
|
|
we only know that we do not know
|
|
The Dark Elf
Forum Senior Member
VIP Member
Joined: February 01 2011
Location: Michigan
Status: Offline
Points: 13065
|
Posted: June 20 2012 at 22:44 |
Conversely, argumentum non populum (they are not popular; ergo, they must be great) is specious. Perhaps even fallatious!
|
|
...a vigorous circular motion hitherto unknown to the people of this area, but destined
to take the place of the mud shark in your mythology...
|
|
bucka001
Forum Senior Member
Joined: November 16 2005
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 864
|
Posted: June 21 2012 at 00:29 |
The Dark Elf wrote:
1) Floyd not prog? No, none of us considered them so in the 70's. Blues rock dressed up with sound fx that burnouts and granola eaters thought was heavy. Very popular, though, no doubt.
What makes VdGG prog? The insipid whining vocals? The fact you can't even hum along to a song, or find a memorable tune? Maybe you can't.
Oh, I know, the fact that no one in the U.S. ever even heard of the band in 70s. You and your mainstream loving friends didn't know them. Several heads who were hip to the underground knew of them. They sold out NYC's Beacon Theater on their one and only U.S. appearance (over two thousand fans) in '76 and were played on import programs (and on college stations) across the country. But yeah, they wouldn't have been in Rolling Stone.
(but they were big in Italy ). And Holland. And Belgium. And France. And French Canada. And had a big cult following in Britain (remember, they appeared on the cover of Melody Maker as Britain's most fashionable band). Oh, and a snotty right back at you (and your blog sucks )
If I look at an album like Animals or Wish You Were Here, I think distinctly prog. I don't.
As far as your misguided knock on Genesis (I wasn't knocking them, so you're misguided), two of their albums with Gabriel were top ten in the UK (SEbtP and The Lamb Lies Down on Broadway) and two more were top ten while Hackett remained in the Band (Trick of the Tail and Wind and Wuthering). In the U.S., all four of those albums were in the top 70 or better - all before their "commercial success". But the OP stated that they, along w/PF, were one of the two biggest prog bands in existence. Not until the PC hits came along and people worked their way back (Yes and ELP were bigger in the 70's, that I remember well). That's what I was addressing, I wasn't knocking Genesis in that statement.
That's something VdGG couldn't even dream of in their heyday. Well, they never had a heyday, actually. When you, Mr Elf, are gigging with a band that gets huge critical acclaim, is namechecked by a bewildering array of artists (musicians, authors, film directors), gets fantastic coverage in the British/European music press (you've seen the Hammill article in the latest Mojo then?), and can fill audtitoriums in several countries with crowds ranging from 1,200 - 3,000 (or more in some cases), then I'll take your comments seriously.
2) A matter of taste, yes. I would suggest that, growing up in the 70s, a huge swathe of young listeners in every demographic (including plenty of punks that I knew, as well as hippies, rockers, metalheads, college radicals, etc. ) enjoyed Floyd. And still do. And many can't stand them and find them boring. Music for sheep. We hung in different crowds and read different journalists, obviously. Fair enough. Still think the Syd stuff, and late '60s stuff of Floyd's is pretty outstanding though.
3) This matter of taste thing is getting repetitive. I would say rightly that DSotM is acclaimed as one of the greatest albums ever recorded by nearly every rock reviewer on the planet, not by a few oddball eccentrics who wish to prove their decadency. The same sort who would make the sodden claim that The Beatles were overrated. The Beatles weren't over-rated, but Dark Side is (it is acknowledged as an important 'classic' by most, but it's also held up by tons of musicians as everything that's wrong with classic rock. To me, it's worse than crap because it's not even offensive... it's bland and dull (but, again, great sound fx that really had the masses thinking they were hearing something heavy, maaaaan).
4) Johhny Rotten holds about as much musical weight with me as Gary Glitter. Well, you are on the wrong end of history there. There's no convincing you of his importance (historically w/the SP's, but musically moreso with PIL) so I won't try. But those same critics you talk of biggin' up Dark Side will also speak of JR's mega-importance in the history of rock (even mainstream slop like Rolling Stone and Spin big up JR).
Rotten is a loudmouth novelty act with safety pins and bad hair. Get off my lawn you punks or I'll call the cops *shakes stick*... don't mess with the Dark Elf!!
If we were looking at the sheer amount of bands that counted them as influences, Floyd would simply crush VdGG. But there are tons of noted/famous musicians who'd prefer VdGG over Floyd and I like them better than the artists who like Floyd (Phil Collins and Peter Gabriel would be two; I rememeber Phil having some very unflattering things to say about Floyd in the press, but he's a VdGG fan, especially of Guy Evans [when I talked to Phil a few years back, he went on about how close he and Guy were back in the day and about what a great drummer he was [and is, although I know Phil hasn't seen Guy in years])
Not just us bourgeois listeners, mind you, but bands. That sell albums. Something VdGG never could quite manage. VdGG sold quite a few albums in Europe and even The Least broke Britain's top fifty (they did quite a lot better than that in other countries). The most recent VdGG album made number 13 on Britain's 'Indy Charts' and the label head told me that if the Amazon sales/rankings were counted (which they've now started to do) then it would have made the mainstream rock charts. I've seen the band several times since they've reformed in places like the Royal Festival Hall, Liverpool Philharmonic, Leicester De Montford Hall (where Genesis Live was recorded), Amsterdam's Paradiso, Manchester's Bridgewater Hall, London's Sheperd's Bush Empire, etc, and they were a huge draw (so, around 1,500 - 3,000 at each gig). And they've drawn more than that in Montreal, Quebec City, Moscow, Rome (well, everywhere in Italy naturally), etc. That's at least respectable. Wouldn't you say?
Except in Italy. As far as Floyd being bland, I guess you've never seen one of their concerts. I suppose you've never heard, as I have, 70,000 people all singing "Wish You Were Here" along with the band. Chilling, yes. Oh brother. Spare me. Were they raising their lighters and giving each other back rubs? With tears in their eyes because of the heaviness of the 'scene'? Kill me.
There aren't 70,000 people on the planet who even know who VdGG are. And once they heard them, they would indeed be horrified. Good one... |
Edited by bucka001 - June 21 2012 at 18:02
|
|
jc
|
|
Stool Man
Forum Senior Member
Joined: January 30 2007
Location: Anti-Cool (anag
Status: Offline
Points: 2689
|
Posted: June 21 2012 at 08:39 |
|
Pink Floyd have been my favourite band for about forty years - I didn't even listen to any other prog album until the late 70s. Didn't start listening to VDGG until this century. They're ok I suppose...
|
|
rotten hound of the burnie crew
|
|
digdug
Forum Senior Member
Joined: July 13 2005
Location: Canada
Status: Offline
Points: 4707
|
Posted: June 21 2012 at 08:50 |
|
Flooooooooyd
|
|
Prog On!
|
|
geogkrt
Forum Newbie
Joined: April 13 2012
Location: UK
Status: Offline
Points: 39
|
Posted: June 21 2012 at 11:08 |
|
Pink Floyd is mostly pretty boring. Van Der Graaf Generator wins.
Well I do really like Wish You Were Here and Animals, but the other albums range from mediocre to...well mediocre. They haven't made anything particularly bad, I just find them bland. And I don't think Dark Side of the Moon is anything special, either.
Edited by geogkrt - June 21 2012 at 11:10
|
|
-Radioswim-
Forum Senior Member
Joined: December 15 2005
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 331
|
Posted: June 21 2012 at 18:28 |
geogkrt wrote:
Pink Floyd is mostly pretty boring. Van Der Graaf Generator wins.
Well I do really like Wish You Were Here and Animals, but the other albums range from mediocre to...well mediocre. They haven't made anything particularly bad, I just find them bland. And I don't think Dark Side of the Moon is anything special, either.
|
I wouldn't consider them medicre, but I still to this day (and probably never will) understand Pink Floyd's absolutely massive commercial appeal.
VDGG is the clear winner for me though.
|
Dust in the Kitchen
|
|
The Dark Elf
Forum Senior Member
VIP Member
Joined: February 01 2011
Location: Michigan
Status: Offline
Points: 13065
|
Posted: June 21 2012 at 22:10 |
bucka001 wrote:
The Dark Elf wrote:
1) Floyd not prog? No, none of us considered them so in the 70's. Blues rock dressed up with sound fx that burnouts and granola eaters thought was heavy. Very popular, though, no doubt.
Us? Who is us? Your little clique? First, you try to make three people sound like a veritable tidal wave of VdGG fandom, and now those same three somehow make a plurality or majority in regards to your limited definition of prog.
What makes VdGG prog? The insipid whining vocals? The fact you can't even hum along to a song, or find a memorable tune? Maybe you can't.
Melody is not a VdGG forte. But the obscurant lyrics are interesting to read.
Oh, I know, the fact that no one in the U.S. ever even heard of the band in 70s. You and your mainstream loving friends didn't know them. Several heads who were hip to the underground knew of them. They sold out NYC's Beacon Theater on their one and only U.S. appearance (over two thousand fans) in '76 and were played on import programs (and on college stations) across the country. But yeah, they wouldn't have been in Rolling Stone.
My "mainstream loving" friends? That's rich. We've seen Camel. We've seen Gentle Giant. Seen Mclaughlin, Miles Davis , Capt. Beefheart, Tom Waits and King Crimson. I'm not sure what you mean by mainstream, but sorry, we stopped at high-pitched, tormented arias. A whole 2000 people saw VdGG? Gosh, such a high water mark in rock history. How many got free tickets or a Pete Hamill bobblehead?
(but they were big in Italy ). And Holland. And Belgium. And France. And French Canada. And had a big cult following in Britain (remember, they appeared on the cover of Melody Maker as Britain's most fashionable band). Oh, and a snotty right back at you (and your blog sucks )
Wow! The Benelux countries? And Quebec? Woot! Those are some real feathers in their caps. What next, are they going to conquer Uzbekistan? Or Rwanda? My blog sucks? Well, since it's not a Pete Hamill Teenbeat Blog with big VdGG logos plastered on it, I can understand why it wouldn't hold your attention.
If I look at an album like Animals or Wish You Were Here, I think distinctly prog. I don't.
You're wrong.
As far as your misguided knock on Genesis (I wasn't knocking them, so you're misguided), two of their albums with Gabriel were top ten in the UK (SEbtP and The Lamb Lies Down on Broadway) and two more were top ten while Hackett remained in the Band (Trick of the Tail and Wind and Wuthering). In the U.S., all four of those albums were in the top 70 or better - all before their "commercial success". But the OP stated that they, along w/PF, were one of the two biggest prog bands in existence. Not until the PC hits came along and people worked their way back (Yes and ELP were bigger in the 70's, that I remember well). That's what I was addressing, I wasn't knocking Genesis in that statement.
As far as Genesis, you inferred that their commercial success in the 80s was the reason their earlier albums have sold. That was not the case as I pointed out; ergo, you are misguided.
That's something VdGG couldn't even dream of in their heyday. Well, they never had a heyday, actually. When you, Mr Elf, are gigging with a band that gets huge critical acclaim, is namechecked by a bewildering array of artists (musicians, authors, film directors), gets fantastic coverage in the British/European music press (you've seen the Hammill article in the latest Mojo then?), and can fill audtitoriums in several countries with crowds ranging from 1,200 - 3,000 (or more in some cases), then I'll take your comments seriously.
Considering you have done nothing but act as a shill for your pet cult band, and you have not filled small municipal auditoriums either, then that discounts your opinion as well. I love how you use the phrase "bewildering array of artists" like VdGG was important. Like Elmore James, or Elvis, or Chuck Berry or The Beatles. Or PINK FLOYD.
2) A matter of taste, yes. I would suggest that, growing up in the 70s, a huge swathe of young listeners in every demographic (including plenty of punks that I knew, as well as hippies, rockers, metalheads, college radicals, etc. ) enjoyed Floyd. And still do. And many can't stand them and find them boring. Music for sheep. We hung in different crowds and read different journalists, obviously. Fair enough. Still think the Syd stuff, and late '60s stuff of Floyd's is pretty outstanding though.
As far as "many" not standing Floyd, they have sold over 250 million albums worldwide (like Floyd has outsold VdGG in Italy and Belgium for instance). I'd be willing to bet that even the majority of your beret-wearing, clove cigarette-smoking nihilist friends have worn out and replaced countless Floyd albums and upgraded from vinyl to 8-track to cassette to CD and so on just like millions of others (that's more than the "many" you refer to, which I assume, again, amounts to three). That's what great bands do - they get repeat business and add generations of fans.
But truthfully, I think VdGG would've been a great instrumental band. They probably would have sold more albums in Liechtenstein and San Marino without the obnoxious singing.
3) This matter of taste thing is getting repetitive. I would say rightly that DSotM is acclaimed as one of the greatest albums ever recorded by nearly every rock reviewer on the planet, not by a few oddball eccentrics who wish to prove their decadency. The same sort who would make the sodden claim that The Beatles were overrated. The Beatles weren't over-rated, but Dark Side is (it is acknowledged as an important 'classic' by most, but it's also held up by tons of musicians as everything that's wrong with classic rock. To me, it's worse than crap because it's not even offensive... it's bland and dull (but, again, great sound fx that really had the masses thinking they were hearing something heavy, maaaaan).
You would be in the minority on a planet of one, Little Prince. Again, you use the words "tons of musicians", but there are plenty of musician polls that rate DSotM and Pink Floyd extremely high, whereas VdGG is a footnote beneath a citation on the back side of a food stamp.
4) Johhny Rotten holds about as much musical weight with me as Gary Glitter. Well, you are on the wrong end of history there. There's no convincing you of his importance (historically w/the SP's, but musically moreso with PIL) so I won't try. But those same critics you talk of biggin' up Dark Side will also speak of JR's mega-importance in the history of rock (even mainstream slop like Rolling Stone and Spin big up JR).
Sorry, for someone so keen on apparent musicianship, your idolization of Rotten seems tragically misplaced. But Rotten did say Alice Cooper's 'Killer' was the greatest album of all time, so I guess he isn't all bad. Funny thing, Rotten didn't say that about a VdGG album. 
Rotten is a loudmouth novelty act with safety pins and bad hair. Get off my lawn you punks or I'll call the cops *shakes stick*... don't mess with the Dark Elf!!
Once I saw Iggy and the Stooges and the MC5 in the early 70s, the later punk scene seemed like a joke. And far too late.
If we were looking at the sheer amount of bands that counted them as influences, Floyd would simply crush VdGG. But there are tons of noted/famous musicians who'd prefer VdGG over Floyd and I like them better than the artists who like Floyd (Phil Collins and Peter Gabriel would be two; I rememeber Phil having some very unflattering things to say about Floyd in the press, but he's a VdGG fan, especially of Guy Evans [when I talked to Phil a few years back, he went on about how close he and Guy were back in the day and about what a great drummer he was [and is, although I know Phil hasn't seen Guy in years])
Again with the "tons" reference. Let's see, a ton is 2000 pounds. Are you saying four or five really fat bass players prefer VdGG? I would suggest, from a pure "tonnage" aspect, more musicians prefer Floyd by weight. Yeah, Phil Collins is a virtual paragon of musical integrity. Sing me Su-su-sudio.
Not just us bourgeois listeners, mind you, but bands. That sell albums. Something VdGG never could quite manage. VdGG sold quite a few albums in Europe and even The Least broke Britain's top fifty (they did quite a lot better than that in other countries). The most recent VdGG album made number 13 on Britain's 'Indy Charts' and the label head told me that if the Amazon sales/rankings were counted (which they've now started to do) then it would have made the mainstream rock charts. I've seen the band several times since they've reformed in places like the Royal Festival Hall, Liverpool Philharmonic, Leicester De Montford Hall (where Genesis Live was recorded), Amsterdam's Paradiso, Manchester's Bridgewater Hall, London's Sheperd's Bush Empire, etc, and they were a huge draw (so, around 1,500 - 3,000 at each gig). And they've drawn more than that in Montreal, Quebec City, Moscow, Rome (well, everywhere in Italy naturally), etc. That's at least respectable. Wouldn't you say?
Look, you trot out the same tired statistics and quotes, and then act like I should be impressed by a band managing to fill a 1500 seat hall. I've seen local bands that can do that. Who cares? You really love VdGG. I mean, it's almost a creepy, stalking kind of love that would have a girl seeking a restraining order. But hey, to each his own.
Except in Italy. As far as Floyd being bland, I guess you've never seen one of their concerts. I suppose you've never heard, as I have, 70,000 people all singing "Wish You Were Here" along with the band. Chilling, yes. Oh brother. Spare me. Were they raising their lighters and giving each other back rubs? With tears in their eyes because of the heaviness of the 'scene'? Kill me.
I've seen hundreds of concerts in my life by every band from Alice Cooper to Frank Zappa. I've never seen a better show than a Pink Floyd concert (and Floyd isn't even my favorite band). Sorry if that doesn't fit in with your little clique, but I don't smoke clove cigarettes or wear a beret.
There aren't 70,000 people on the planet who even know who VdGG are. And once they heard them, they would indeed be horrified. Good one...
Again, I really do like VdGG from a musicianship standpoint. If they could erase the god-awful caterwauling that accompanies it, I would listen more often. |
|
Edited by The Dark Elf - June 21 2012 at 22:23
|
|
...a vigorous circular motion hitherto unknown to the people of this area, but destined
to take the place of the mud shark in your mythology...
|
|
/PAlogo_v2.gif "Progarchives.com Homepage")
Van der Graaf Generator vs Pink Floyd
