The Camel appreciation thread

noni wrote: O666 wrote: I am a huge fan of Camel. Unfortunately Camel is underrated band and I don't know why?! Kingsnake wrote: Camel is absolutely not underrated. Who underrates Camel? Almost anyone into progrock knows the band, and have at least one favorite album. I really don't like the term 'underrated'. I agree with Kingsnake, while references are often used in rating other bands new music with their reviews in DPRP and on this site Prog/Archives,  you will always see Camel mostly used.   Had Camel been more popular in the 70s and should of been on Top of the Pops or other TV shows as regular guests, I'm sure a lot more people would know more about this band.  Genesis were not that popular, until they kept being seen on TV shows and became world wide success with loads of hits.  The same goes with Yes, King Crimson and ELP.  All these bands had huge hits and appeared on TV shows.  Camel never made a hit and stayed with their albums , they only appeared in 2 common UK shows.  So not being able to have the common radio airing as with the other bands I mentioned.  It's a shame really,  had they made a few hits, Camel would be known by more people and even hear their music on local radio stations.

I don't think  Ice is one of the best tracks.

O666 wrote: I am a Camel HUGE fan and ofcourse I like Camel's vocalists . I like to know opinions about :   Why they don't have big number of fans in PA ?! Many of Progressive Rock fans ignore Camel easily. Many of Prog fans never count Camel as a "Great Band" or "Prog Giant" in Prog history , bands like King Crimson , Genesis , Yes , ELP , Pink Floyd , ... and I don't know WHY?!.  Camel is not a "Mid Level" band . They are a "High Level" band IMO. They impressed Prog Rock music scene during their career. They deserve to known more than now.

Don't get me wrong; I love Camel. There's a kind of melancholic, soothing mood or atmosphere to their music that makes them very dear to me. But as to why they may not be considered a "prog giant" in the same sense that King Crimson or Yes undoubtly are - its really no mystery. Debuting in 1973 they were late comers to the scene, three, four maybe five years after the bands that had established the sound and mindset to what we now have come to know as progressive rock. And their music, great as it is didn't really bring anything new to the table. Look to any other genres or musical development throughout history and you'll find the same mechanisms and logic at work. Regardless of what you think of A Love Supreme, Revolver, In The Court..., Bitches Brew or Autobahn, bands and artists inspired by these revolutionary albums won't have the same impact or historical importance. I that light Camel has done really well compared to almost any band comparable that I can think of.

I would agree that Camel are highly esteemed in the world of prog while never achieving the album sales of the likes of Yes, etc.  Camel were relative late-comers with their first album being released in 1973.  Here in the UK, Camel were badly exposed by the punk explosion that started by the time 'Moonmadness' appeared although that proved to be their best selling album.

Saperlipopette! wrote: O666 wrote: I am a Camel HUGE fan and ofcourse I like Camel's vocalists . I like to know opinions about :   Why they don't have big number of fans in PA ?! Many of Progressive Rock fans ignore Camel easily. Many of Prog fans never count Camel as a "Great Band" or "Prog Giant" in Prog history , bands like King Crimson , Genesis , Yes , ELP , Pink Floyd , ... and I don't know WHY?!.  Camel is not a "Mid Level" band . They are a "High Level" band IMO. They impressed Prog Rock music scene during their career. They deserve to known more than now.  Don't get me wrong; I love Camel. There's a kind of melancholic, soothing mood or atmosphere to their music that makes them very dear to me. But as to why they may not be considered a "prog giant" in the same sense that King Crimson or Yes undoubtly are - its really no mystery. Debuting in 1973 they were late comers to the scene, three, four maybe five years after the bands that had established the sound and mindset to what we now have come to know as progressive rock. And their music, great as it is didn't really bring anything new to the table. Look to any other genres or musical development throughout history and you'll find the same mechanisms and logic at work. Regardless of what you think of A Love Supreme, Revolver, In The Court..., Bitches Brew or Autobahn, bands and artists inspired by these revolutionary albums won't have the same impact or historical importance. I that light Camel has done really well compared to almost any band comparable that I can think of.

Saperlipopette! wrote: Don't get me wrong; I love Camel. There's a kind of melancholic, soothing mood or atmosphere to their music that makes them very dear to me. But as to why they may not be considered a "prog giant" in the same sense that King Crimson or Yes undoubtly are - its really no mystery. Debuting in 1973 they were late comers to the scene, three, four maybe five years after the bands that had established the sound and mindset to what we now have come to know as progressive rock. And their music, great as it is didn't really bring anything new to the table. Look to any other genres or musical development throughout history and you'll find the same mechanisms and logic at work. Regardless of what you think of A Love Supreme, Revolver, In The Court..., Bitches Brew or Autobahn, bands and artists inspired by these revolutionary albums won't have the same impact or historical importance. I that light Camel has done really well compared to almost any band comparable that I can think of.

Very well explained.
And if we look at the performance in polls at PA, Camel and their albums and songs do extremely well. Camel may lose tightly against Pink Floyd in band vs. band but other than that I've seen them winning all kinds of things here.

I first saw Camel live in 1976 and more or less seen every London gig since, and have every studio album ever recorded. I used to love the early LPs when I first got into them, but as each album was released, thought they were even more majestic. That I would say is up until Stationary Traveller where I witnessed soon after it's release my no.1 gig of all time (by any band), the Hammersmith Odeon concert of 1984. I really like Dust and Dreams too but I think the albums since aren't at the same high standard. There are some excellent individual tracks, however, with the trademark Latimer guitar making them all still enjoyable. My top 3 albums are: I can see your house from here, Nude and Stationary Traveller. Anyone got any news of a new studio album?

I like "Echoes" , "Summer Lightning" and "Down on the Farm" more. 

Camels music inspired by the Snow Goose is the only Prog I can actually remember from my primary school days way back in the 70's.One of our teachers was rather Hip and played this kind of music in PE or when we were getting into art stuff.It wasn't unusual for him to suddenly pull his guitar from the side of his desk and suddenly break into some sort of song/ditty. Such a wonderful teacher. Magical times.

Son.of.Tiresias wrote: Magnum Vaeltaja wrote: Dellinger wrote: There may be many prog bands with better vocalists than Camel... but Camel's vocals have never bothered me. Their limitations can actually make them rather charming. I have heard songs from them (from the 80's, I think) with Chris Rainbow (who I have heard with Alan Parsons Project and really liked how he sang, but didn't really sound the same with Camel anyway), whom I guess most would agree is a better singer than Latimer (Latimer himself would agree, I suppose). However, the songs just don't work, they lost their charm. Actually, I like Camels vocals more than John Wetton's or Peter Gabriel's, and I believe there would be people saying they prefere them over Jon Anderson or Peter Hamill... or even Phil Collins. Honestly, I'm not sure why people really complain about the vocals on the classic Camel records; they give exactly what the music asks for. Could you imagine a voice like Jon Anderson trying to sing The White Rider or Peter Gabriel trying to belt out Song Within A Song? I'm laughing just thinking about how ridiculous that would sound. Latimer is a perfect singer for the band. His voice is every bit as smooth and subdued as the music he sings on top of. Exactly. Stiil, I couId imagine Jon Anderson doing a couple of the most beautiful tunes, he did make Paul Simon´s "America" stellar. But Roger Waters singing "Lullabye" ? Ain´t gonna happen ?

Actually, now that you mention it, I guess it would be hard to imagine Jon Anderson or Gabriel singing these parts... but it came into my mind that perhaps Peter Hamill could do it succesfully. I mean, if he restrained himself from going all over the place with his antics, but he is a really polifacetic singer, and if he sang as in the beginning of Darkness or Plague it might have worked.