Why many people dislike The Flower Kings

King Crimson776 wrote: TMV also do, but I think that their sound is just homoginized salsa punk with some Rush

All who think that homogenized salsa punk with some Rush should be made into a new Progarchives subgenre please raise your hands.

micky wrote: TFK? .. hmmm don't dislke at all..... they committed the greater sin to me of simply being boring and derivative. any one who wants a NM- copy of Space Revolver just PM me.. send me a few bucks for postage.. and I'll mail you damn thing.. It doesn't  even sit with my prog albums.. right now is right between Fleetwood Mac and The Vince Guaraldi Trio

King Crimson776 wrote: You guys, The Flower Kings are a great band, way better than any band with pretensions of being progressive like The Mars Volta or Muse. The bands I just mentioned just homoginize old sounds and try to act like their music is something new, whereas TFK let their influences show. TFK can do this because they are actually a far more original band than TMV (I just like to pick on them) or many other new bands, in my opinion, and they sound better to me because of this. TFK use alot of jazz influence in their music, primarily in the bass and their use of horns. TMV also do, but I think that their sound is just homoginized salsa punk with some Rush whereas TFK use the jazzy parts as ends in themselves; because jazz just sounds good. Afterall, when can we stop progressing? When have all the boundries been broken? Are we never free to do whatever we want, must we keep moving forward and shun all music that uses a proven formula and puts their own spin on it? To dislike TFK is fine, but to use the fact that they are not trying to progress rock music is not an argument. Many bands (like the ones I mentioned) aren't doing it either, they just want to seem like they are. But that is again beside the point, the percieved differences in the progressiveness of bands like TFK and bands like TMV is caused by the fact that TMV have the mindset that it is necessary to always move forward (or seem like you are, for fear of people finding out about your band's complete lack of musical substance), to never be at the point when anything can be done and bands are not dillusionally criticised for simply making great sounding music.

TFK? .. hmmm


don't dislke at all..... they committed the greater sin to me of simply being boring and derivative.

any one who wants a NM- copy of Space Revolver just PM me.. send me a few bucks for postage.. and I'll mail you damn thing.. It doesn't  even sit with my prog albums.. right now is right between Fleetwood Mac and The Vince Guaraldi Trio


Edited by micky - November 14 2007 at 20:59

You guys, The Flower Kings are a great band, way better than any band with pretensions of being progressive like The Mars Volta or Muse. The bands I just mentioned just homoginize old sounds and try to act like their music is something new, whereas TFK let their influences show. TFK can do this because they are actually a far more original band than TMV (I just like to pick on them) or many other new bands, in my opinion, and they sound better to me because of this. TFK use alot of jazz influence in their music, primarily in the bass and their use of horns. TMV also do, but I think that their sound is just homoginized salsa punk with some Rush whereas TFK use the jazzy parts as ends in themselves; because jazz just sounds good.

Afterall, when can we stop progressing? When have all the boundries been broken? Are we never free to do whatever we want, must we keep moving forward and shun all music that uses a proven formula and puts their own spin on it? To dislike TFK is fine, but to use the fact that they are not trying to progress rock music is not an argument. Many bands (like the ones I mentioned) aren't doing it either, they just want to seem like they are. But that is again beside the point, the percieved differences in the progressiveness of bands like TFK and bands like TMV is caused by the fact that TMV have the mindset that it is necessary to always move forward (or seem like you are, for fear of people finding out about your band's complete lack of musical substance), to never be at the point when anything can be done and bands are not dillusionally criticised for simply making great sounding music.

^ sounds like a long series of misunderstandings ... the biggest being about Wallstreet Voodoo. Just because it's not prog doesn't mean it's commercial.

i have listened only adam and eve,it's a great album,i love it.i do not support the idea that all the new bands are genesis yes pink floyd elp...clones.i just can say that new ones maybe are influenced by these giants ,but ifluenced. not copied from them. 

I've only heard Adam and Eve, which sounds very bland to my ears.  I don't hear anything new or original, but sadly, recycled music with an updated polished sound.  And the singer tries way too hard to sound dramatic, overemphasizing his words and oversinging in the process.

Edited by Flip_Stone - December 29 2006 at 16:57

Hey, I think Wizards review is not bad at all, even if I disagree with it. I think Paradox Hotel is one of their best (if not their best) album and I would give it 4.5 stars.

Some well-written negative reviews on highly praised albums can be quite influential in purchasing an album. I wrote one for "passion Play" with I think I gave it 1.5 stars and later someone wrote an excellently detailed negative review on that album a day or two ago and I loved reading about the "hare that lost its spectacles" which for me is IMHO horrible stuff and negative comments about it are needed. Hey, I could give a 2-star album for that argus album which doesn't interest me at all and as long as I write the reasons why I don't like it, it's not a bad review.

It's hard to believe that the accessibly and melodically strong paradox hotel would get a 1-star well-written review, but everyone has different tastes.



Edited by Zitro - December 26 2006 at 17:42

I found 'Paradox Hotel' to be the most accessible album I've heard of theirs. It has very little filler, imo, which is a bit of a rarity for them. When I get around to reviewing it, it would definitely be a 4 star album- interestingly, I also prefer the maligned 'Adam and Eve' to 'Unfold The Future', too.

I think 1 stars is a bit strong, but otherwise The Wizard's review isn't what I'd call a 'bad review'.