I apologize one of the main reasons I made this thread was because I love saying Frippless.

But I am generally curious. Could a Frippless Crimson have ever existed? The original lineup broke up in december of 69 and went their seperate ways. By the end of 1970, Robert Fripp was the only original member. As it stands, every King Crimson album features him, and since the initial breakup, it is he who controls who stays and who goes. I'm not exactly sure how it got to this point, as I don't know much about the history of this band, although I've been a fan for some time and have all of their studio albums and several live albums.

A few years ago 3 of the 4 original members of King Crimson (minus Fripp) formed a band called the 21st Century Schizoid Band. Obviously, they couldn't call the band King Crimson because Fripp was not present, and he had the rights to the name. This got me thinking, legal issues aside, could this band be King Crimson? It's sort of like the Pink Floyd legal dispute in 1985 in which Waters tried to sue for the name. Did Waterless Floyd have the right to be Pink Floyd? I think they did. A similar thing also happened with Steppenwolf, and also with Yes/Anderson Bruford Wakeman Howe.

And here's another interesting question. If Fripp were to, say, join 21st Century Schizoid Band (highly unlikely but entirely possible). Could it then be called King Crimson? Fripp classifies King Crimson more as a way of doing things than as a specific sound, or specific musicians. In fact, he often says that the actual musicians are unimportant to the process. By this logic, King Crimson could technically be Frippless, and I believe he even has alluded to this in some of his interviews, but I doubt very much that it ever would be.