Your top 10 favorite prog albums (studio and live)

Hi,

The one thing that folks don't know about, or seem to understand about those days, is that those bootlegs were recorded on the simplest of things, and that they "survived" to be heard by more folks is a testament to the QUALITY OF THE MUSIC in them, not the quality of the recording.

I think we fail to understand and realize that. A bad recording can not EVER destroy a superb concert, and this was the case in a lot of Led Zeppelin concerts. Lousy quality on the bootlegs, but the feeling and quality of the shows was insanely strong! Bands nowadays can't even do that other than play loud!

For me, music has always stood out first, and if you get the "feel" for it, it won't matter how different, remixed or remastered it can get done ... the "feel" will always be there, and this is the thing that surprised me when I heard some of the redone material on KC and GG and what I found was ... the original "feel" was still there, and it didn't matter that this was "digital" and the original was "analog" ... which to me suggests that the listening is being done on a technical level, not on an emotional level that all arts (specially music!) want you to live and flow and fly with and by!

Mostly agree I think. You reminded me that I forgot Led Zeppelin's How The West Was Won when I made my selection. Not technically a 'bootleg' but a fantastic document of them playing in the States 1971. It does have the 'feel' that you talk about. Very few live albums by modern bands are worth jack but both of us are of course fully paid up members of the 'old farts' club!

Hi,

The only sad things about "bootlegs" is that the record industry tried hard to bury them ... except when it came to The Grateful Dead who encouraged it, and guess what? People still trade shows today, which says something about the band's material and appreciation in concert which was not the same experience as the band on the record!

But with the "boots" taken out, a lot of history is thrown away, and I suppose that these "direct" memories might show a side or two that many folks don't like. 

Roger still talks trash of the early days. PF's story is very different from the books (which likely were "approved"!)  in that you get to see the use of the sound vignettes that were a MAJOR part of their "QUADRAPHONIC" concert experience that went on for a while, and eventually a couple of years later developed into DSOTM. And the use of visuals became more important, and eventually became THE story (TW).

The LZ folks won't discuss those days much, likely to avoid getting questions they don't want to answer. But there were very well known stories that have been circulated that were much different than the simplified BS that Ms. PdB has given us as some kind of matron and important member of an exclusive club! I doubt that we will ever realize how much some of those things were important to what LZ did, or Robert's movements and singing of their earlier material is really meaningless ... c'mon ... right down to orgasms and slightly out of breadth! Today, we can't even imagine that about so many singer rock stars that are trying to get you to "imagine" the real thing. With LZ and you can see it on some videos, it was raw and right out front. With the majority of rock bands since, it's been plastic by comparison. Even my girlfriend said that LZ was "sexy" and for her it meant it had a lot of the feeling many of us want to feel!

Some bootlegs were not very good. FZ's were always different and the band was great. I don't think I have ever heard a bad one in boots or actual recording, and sadly this was the side of things that Dweezil did not understand! Their getting blown out by RTF is inexcusable, and you know what Frank would say about that!

The worst bootlegs ... Genesis sounded awful. YES did not sound very good on the boots, and other than the TFTO concert, anything else I have heard from them, including the record releases, is not as good as the original. The TFTO is one for the ages, were it not for the fans that only wanted the hits and couldn't give a damn about the rest of the music! Bob Dylan's boots were always the treat because in the early days he was known for changing the lyrics and say things differently. In later years, his attitude is partially there, although we don't get to see it as much! Chicago bootlegs were a bit on the odd side, and if they were "on", it was really fine. If they were not, it was not fine! One bootleg from Big Brother was not very good, but that would be one that I really think the recording quality was awful to the point of making it difficult to make a good distinction about the show. Quicksilver was known to trip out big time. Hot Tuna had more bootlegs than albums sold! Jefferson Airplane and later Starship were not very good and as usual the mechanics of the egos was a problem.

One last issue ... someone complaining about the fans and the noise. There would not be a show without it, and someone is complaining because the person next to you sneezed and ruined the show for him/her. I find that selfish and not exactly about the show itself. AND THIS IS THE MOST IMPORTANT FACT OF THE BOOTLEGS. It's about the show itself. This is rock music and THERE WILL ALWAYS BE FANS, despite too many LIVE albums making a point of hiding the audience! But the main difference? In those early days, hearing the sound vignettes by PF, would cause you to be quiet and listen since there was so much going around in the Quad system, which went around the whole venue, not just a quick show in front of the stage which is the case in almost all concerts.

It's all about the REALITY of it all ... and these live shows give us more of the reality than the synthetic and Clorox version that we find in most albums!

I can listen to most everything in whatever quality if I find the music interesting enough, but I'm also somewhat "into sound" in ways I get the impression you dissapprove of. I couldn't care less really. It's who I am and I'm certainly not you. I'm often completely indifferent to whatever words are sung, or what kind of message the artist is trying to get across. I prefer not to find out-or know, really. Wordless singing is always welcome. I get these ASMR-like braingasms listening to several 1960's jazz recordings (often "perfectly" engineered by Rudy Van Gelder - and it doesn't hurt if a young Tony Williams is the one sitting behind the drumkit). I like patterns, the breaking of patterns and puzzles for my braincells, as much as being all emotional about art. Of course you can't really seperate one from the other, and needless to say I enjoy both. The soundspaces created with abstacted tones from vibes, bass, percussion, pianos, horns, flutes... etc on various Grachan Moncur III, Andrew Hill, late Eric Dolphy, early Cecil Taylor records etc... sends tingly sensations from brain to my spine - in a way that I won't get from someone in the audience farting over an overlong and overindulgent guitarsolo somewhere further back in the soundtrack:) At least it hasn't happened yet.

-It doesn't matter if the music isn't conventionally beautiful. Quite the contrary. I suppose sterile and cold will do just fine too. I mean why would anyone not have their Klaus Schulze or Kraftwerk more or less crystal clear - if they can choose? Anyways, a similar sensation may also happen when I listen to say Gentle Giant, Univers Zero, Weather Report and several other bands and artists under the prog umbrella. I get none of that from the very real audience recordings I've heard. At best it makes me wish I was there, but more often it simply makes want to turn it off and reach for that synthetic Clorox version (if such a thing exists) instead.