top 100 prog bands

Threefates wrote:

and I really dislike IQ, which usually sound like a watered down version of Genesis.

Agree with you, and to be honest most Neo Prog' groups sound like a light version of Genesis to me, maybe except Pavlov's Dog which is unique because of David Surkamp's voice and Pendragon that has something special.

Iván

ivan_2068 wrote: Wrath_of_Ninian wrote about Genesis: They are rubbish.  Nice to know another prog fan that dislikes them too. I can understand you don't like Genesis, it's a matter of personal taste, I don't like King Crimson very much or Mahavishnu Orchestra for example, but from there to call one of the most influencial bands in Progressive Rock history rubbish, is offensive. Genesis duiring the Gabriel and/or Hackett era created one of the most unique an imaginative atmospheric sounds, Steve Hackett is probably the most talented guitar player in Prog' and Peter Gabriel is one of the top vocalists, not to mention Tony Banks, who's style is the base for a whole sub genre of Progressive Rock like Neo Prog. When I give hard opinions about any band (including STYX or Boston ) I try to give a reason why, saying they are rubbish without explaining why, has no senses. This is a discussion forum and in order to have an intelligent discussion we should give reasons. It's ok if you say you dislike them and you give valid reasons, but I believe they and their fans deserve some respect. Iván

I did not mean to 'offend', and if you truly are upset, I apologise.  Being a prog fan, I thought you might be used to such comments, especially in the public arena, but clearly my devastating repartee ("they're rubbish") cut through the tendons and stuck spikes in your nerves. 

If you are genuinely seeking a debate about why I feel this way about Genesis, I'm afraid this response will be a disappointment, as I have no real intention of decrying a band I rarely listen to these days (although Turn It On Again was on in IKEA the other day).

To respond to your points individually however, firstly I would agree that they are one of the most influential bands in prog, though why this means we should all love them is beyond me.  In many ways they showed how prog bands can evolve into pop bands, and this is an influence I could have done without.  I notice you define clearly the 'good' era from the 'bad' era - but it all comes under the 'Genesis' banner as far as I concerned (you'll notice I didn't make this distinction).  Secondly, to simply praise the guitarist, singer and keyboard player is not really saying why they they command respect.  I could name many guitarists who I think are more effective than Steve Hackett, but didn't think it would convey what I was trying to get across in my simplistic statement. 

Finally, I think Genesis are 'rubbish' because I have not made it to the end of one of their albums (both eras) without at least one of the following occuring:

1. Falling asleep

2. Opening a Reader's Digest magazine

3. Turning On TV's 'Countdown' (Again...)

4. Getting really annoyed that all these people can produce (with all their talent and money) is mediocre, overlong slabs of complex but ultimately bland rock fodder, which cannot stimulate the slightest inkling of emotion in my being.  The reason this is the case is because I am ME - and NOT because all Genesis fans are wrong.

If you want to take this further, perhaps on another thread, I could try and borrow back the Lamb Lies Down On Broadway, and we can debate its merits in a civilised manner, without recourse to the word 'rubbish'.  In the meantime, I suggest you take my original post in the context in which it was written - it was a warm and no-harm-intended reaction to an earlier post denouncing the Top 100 chart, and in particular Genesis' positioning at No.3 (or whatever it was).  Similar, if less explicit comments were directed at other bands, without (may I add) the type of reaction I got from yourself. 

I hope this exchange has not tarnished your impression of me Ivan, as I try to be as honest and objective as I can.  I understand the point you are trying to make, and had I given such a response on a Genesis thread, then you would have a case.  In this instance however, you'll notice that virtually everyone else ignored the comment and got on with it. 

Best wishes

Arioch wrote: richardh wrote: The link doesn't work for me .Where did ELP finish? (and if not No 1 ...I will need to have words with whoever compiled this list) 4th....behind King Crimson, Yes and Genesis

Thanks...... I can live with that

Just read your post again Wrath of Ninian and you said:

Similar, if less explicit comments were directed at other bands, without (may I add) the type of reaction I got from yourself.

I can only answerfor myself, so I copied my post and as you can see the only hard term I use is cheap POP when talking about TOTO, even when it's hard I don't say it's rubbish or trash, only qualify it as POP and according to my personal opinion most pop is cheap.

Iván wrote:

Dream Theater Neo Prog? (Look at the right side) STYX before Anglagard, Rick Wakeman, PFM. The Strawbs, etc? Genesis N° 3??? Should be N°1 at least the Gabriel era. ASIA N° 21????? Should be at leat 210 TOTO Prog? I would say cheap POP instead. California Guitar Trio is an excelent band but not remotely prog. ELO N°12? Not really prog and one of the top in the list. Happy The Man Psychedelic??? (Again at the right)

All I do is to write what I believe are mistakes, bands that are not Psychedelic even remotely others which are not prog, etc, but there's not a single insult.

Now don't worry, I'm an old stubborn fart when talking about Genesis.

Iván

Ivan, I think you are taking this a little too far now, but in the spirit of politeness, I'll respond.  My comments are in bold.

First of all you objected:

"Rubbish: 1 : useless waste or rejected matter : TRASH

You don't need a reason to say you don't like Genesis, it's enough to say it's not suitable for your taste, but if you say it's rubbish, you're saying most of us in this place listen trash and this implies we have a terrible taste."

Quoting from your original complaint:

"saying they are rubbish without explaining why, has no senses. This is a discussion forum and in order to have an intelligent discussion we should give reasons.

It's ok if you say you dislike them and you give valid reasons."

Surely this is a contradiction? Do I need a reason or not? When you've decided, let me know.  As I said earlier, I'd be happy to provide some.

Secondly, dont quote dictionary definitions at me - they dont mean anything.  Language and its meaning are constantly evolving, and besides its patronising and inflammatory  

Finally, you wrote:

"All I do is to write what I believe are mistakes, bands that are not Psychedelic even remotely others which are not prog, etc, but there's not a single insult.

Now don't worry, I'm an old stubborn fart when talking about Genesis."

Clearly you are Genesis fan who has (contrary to all your previous correspondence) taken offence to me casually labelling them 'rubbish'.  I have apologised for the remark, I genuinely didn't think anyone would be in the slightest bit bothered (or interested) by it, and didn't even pause when writing it, but you have proved me wrong.  I suggest you track back through every other thread in search of similar confrontational prose, and bring other cuplrits to task. 

I must say, as a new member to this site, I have already had some intelligent exchanges, some hilarious comments made, and more importanly, I have found out about strands of prog that I knew nothing about.  Opinions are important, but so is enjoyment and interaction.  If someone wrote that Robert Wyatt was 'rubbish', I would laugh, and either ignore it or counter with something equally mindless.  Your enthusiastic rebuttal of what was a harmless remark, has reminded me that there some people out there who will always take things too far.  There was no malice intended against Genesis fans, or the band themselves - I know that my record collection will no doubt mirror the vast majority of Genesis fans' prog collections anyway - with the exception of Genesis of course.

I think you have already taken this too far, and I seek closure on the matter forthwith.  Besides, its boring for others who are genuinely interested in this thread.

Best wishes

Ivan you need to be more diplomatic like me!

Toto and more pop than anything, but I guess you could call them pop-prog, cuz they're alot like asia. They have SOME prog sensibilities to em.

Well Prog_Bassist, I see TOTO more like POP with some Jazzy moments, they are good in what they do but I don'tbelieve it's Prog'.

As an anecdote, I once had to go to Tacna (A small city in the frontier with Chile), being that the trip was planned for 2 days and it was by plane, I didn't take any music with me.

But there the company had some problems and I had to stay 2 weeks, so I rented a car that had cassette player (so I could cross the frontier to Arica - Chile the weekend and buy a cheap TV set), but Tacna is the f*cking a$$ of the world and coudn't get a decent cassete for the car, everything was salsa, Enrique Iglesias and Backstreet Boys and I hate all that music, but could buy a pirate compilation of TOTO in the market and hoped to buy anything better in Chile.

So I stayed one week with the damn TOTO cassette, in those days I learned to hate that band, when I crosse to Chile the first weekend, the situation wasn't much better and I bought In the Hot Seat, which I never heard before and learned to hate for another week.

That's one of the reasons why I don't like TOTO

Iván

Did you know that the guitarist from Toto played guitar on "In the Hot Seat"??

Didn't had the slightest idea Threefates, maybe he's the reason why the two albums were the only availlable in the zone.

Iván