king crimson

BasedProgger wrote: Yes but it seems like most of these magazines are biased against anything unpopular. King Crimson is at best ignored outside prog rock. You may remember Rolling Stone ranked Court as the 2nd greatest prog album at once but left out that album in both the 500 greatest albums (all versions) and the 100 greatest debuts.

BasedProgger wrote: Rexorcist wrote: Streaming will do that.  This is a massive generation of nerds who will keep educating themselves in the more creative areas of music and be able to do it with ease thanks to YouTube, RYM, Spotify, etc.  And what with KC effectively pioneering the genre formerly demonstrated by Moody Blues and Deep Purple, it's no surprise.  These days, it might not even matter as much if they're an artsier band.  It's easy to say you want more good music recommendations.  All you have to do is get interested in the idea of an album, go to a place like Rolling Stone magazine and then YouTube.  Remember when it was impossible to find KC on streaming?  While I'm definitely happy about the accessibility, a part of me misses the challenge. I never trusted Rolling Stone magazine with their bias against prog and other genres. I remember when King Crimson was impossible to find on streaming, and it may have been better that way if it encouraged people to go out and buy the albums on a physical format.

The Power To Believe is very very good tho

^ To piggyback off what you are saying I think the rate your music website has helped their popularity since ITCOTCK is in the top ten album list on there. That must carry over on to spotify, youtube etc.

Almost any classic rock band is best remembered for their classic run, in King Crimson's case, 1969-1974 (although Discipline is of comparable quality and could also be included here). Sure many of these bands including KC released good material later on in their careers, but albums like The Power to Believe, Clockwork Angels, and Mirror to the Sky aren't comparable to Court of the Crimson King, Moving Pictures, Close to the Edge, and other classic masterpieces. Those albums are all timeless classics, anything released later on will at best seen as a nostalgia-fueled comeback that'll just end up forgotten. There might be exceptions but timing is very important. Who knows what people would think of albums like THRAK and The Power to Believe if they had been released in the 70s or early 80s instead of the 1995 and 2003 respectively.

I don't think King Crimson ever released a bad studio album, and of their last three albums, I think THRAK is comparable some to their 70s output in quality (ITWOP, Lizard, and Islands). They managed to evolve their style while retaining their identity (unlike some bands) and I think King Crimson may be more popular now than they ever were in the 70s or 80s.

The opinions on Prog are vast and many times contradicting of your own ( whether somewhat fact based or documented in history as important or not), that is human life and the natural ability for a person to hear something in the music that you don't. People find dissatisfaction in life because someone else's viewpoint differs from their own...not unlike two ten year old children in 1966 arguing who is better...The Beatles or The Rolling Stones..

The Beatles are the nice guys in suits and the Rolling Stones are the bad boys photographed dressed in drag or pushing a baby carriage over a cliff. People have a tendency to apply a band's image or vibe to their own agenda. The question is...does any of that have real value? The Beatles and the Stones were important to Rock Music regardless of how they dressed or influenced people to dress.

In Progressive Rock there's a lot of harsh judgment toward certain bands and it all develops into disagreement between people. Someone might say that the band SKY had no soul and then turn around and state that YES DRAMA is great. This is too far out in left field for anyone to conceive short of being their preference. Music critics are often guilty of summing up a particular Prog album based solely on their opinion of it...in other words their taste in music.

It is unfortunate that a critics taste in music overrules the mention of facts. Details often get left out or perhaps mentioned in a very subtle way while all the emphasis on presenting the album as "suck" dominates the subject matter..which is why...in the end the newcomers to Prog must sample a full album on YouTube to ultimately decide . Especially KING CRIMSON!



Edited by Jacob Schoolcraft - January 23 2025 at 18:03

Logan wrote: I don't know if King Crimson is underappreciated during the last stretch of its career, but I would not expect that to be as appreciated as its first stretch (1969 through 1974). Radical Action (To Unseat the Hold of Monkey Mind) is a highly regarded modern KC live album.

King Crimson aren't underrated. Maybe among non prog fans but they are typically one of the first prog bands people discover these days (or any day).

I don't know about during that 95-03 period, but The Power to Believe has become one of their best rated albums. Also, at the very last stretch of their career, during the 2010's touring, they were indeed very greatly appreciated... by prog fans, that is.

I'm not so keen on Power to Believe and ConstruKction. I like Thrak a lot though, and particularly I am very happy having seen their 2010s-2020s incarnation with the three drummers live on stage. OK they played mostly old material, but the rearrangements were something very special. The live albums from this period are also very good as far as I know them, so 1995-2003 should definitely not be called "final stretch of their career" (good work was also still coming from ProjeKcts), and I prefer their "final final stretch" if that was actually final. 

Edited by Lewian - December 10 2024 at 05:46