Why do I like King Crimson much less?

They are now a regular spin for me.....but I have to say I did not try to get into them, it kinda just happened.

There are many many bands I can't get into, and many I will never even try, I have enough music to keep me happy for the rest of my life, plus there is excellent new music to experience.

King Crimson are the archetypical intellectual band. Their anti-dance attitude says it all. Some of their stuff is intentionally cold and unfriendly, some is exploration and mapping rather than expression of feelings or connecting with the listener.

I'm a big King Crimson fan but then I have this analytic intellectual side in me that wants to be fed. I also like "controlled aggression" of which they have a lot. Power to the point, with Discipline. I can totally understand why they leave some people cold, makes absolute sense. That said they have some very emotional stuff that they play when they think that you're not paying attention...

I don't dislike any of their albums I'm just not nuts for any if that makes any sense. 

I am not sure I would call their whole approach during the Wetton era analytical at all.  The way they play on those albums is so much looser, so much more improvised than most other prog rock bands of their time, especially the big names.  I think what they 'lack' is something big, bright and goofy (even silly) that many of their contemporaries had.   Yes, ELP, GG all had a certain goofiness that came through in different degrees (the most for GG).  This was less the case with Genesis/JT but they could also frequently explore silliness in the search for a funny moment.  What KC really is is morose and dark.  And unlike VDGG (or Fish Marillion for that matter), the vocals rarely have a strong character about them.  Yes, I am saying that even the vocals Lake rendered on ITCOTCK are basically fit for purpose and don't transcend the music.  Which is fine, in this case, because the music works so well.  KC is a supposedly vocal oriented band where you have to shut off the vocals completely from your mind and focus on the music. This is no longer a problem for me but this may have been back when I too didn't really get them. 

Gully Foyle wrote: Art is subjective?

 

I don't believe though that all great music is Art as such. Badly played music is just bad music. Well played music can be dull and have no artistic qualities. I would rather music is just thought of as music. Sometimes an Abba tune will hit the spot that 20 minutes of spectacularly written and played music just can't reach.

dougmcauliffe wrote: For me the only albums of theirs I really revisit are Court, red and larks and the rest I can mostly leave behind. Every album atleast has a track I really like, and court and red in particular are some of my favorite albums ever. but their discography just doesn’t hold a light to some of the other top bands like genesis and VDGG imo. After belew became frontman they just never released another Starless or epitaph. Some good songs and some laughable ones but the fans eat it up either way.

 

that was the eighties though when no prog bands (inc those you mention) were releasing anything as good as their seventies stuff. I don't like eighties KC at all and not being a fan of Belew didn't help but at least they tried to carry on innovating. I don't have to like it and I don't!

Generally I think their discography stands up against all the other top prog bands extremely well and the fact they don't have a We Can't Dance or Big Generator in their back catalogue is a massive plus imo.

I stand by what I said. It's not a matter of "getting" KC, as I've listened to them since the early 70s. I own their catalog up to Red. I get them. The OP asked the question, "Why do I like King Crimson much less?" and from my standpoint it is their methodical nature. Fripp is either a mathematician who happens to play guitar or he is a high-functioning autistic. Neither is a deterrent to listening to them. I just happen to like them less the further one goes into their discography, as there seems to me an increasing sterility and lack of "warmth" for lack of a better term. 

Another poster brought up the fact Fripp has foregone using the acoustic guitar, so it would seem Fripp has made a conscious decision to disengage from what I liked most about their earliest albums. He also seems to have lost his funny bone altogether as well.