In defense of Kansas (a rant on the 80’s)

dream_orchestra wrote: I don't see anyone from the UK or Europe agreeing....................yet?

I'm from Africa, and I agree.  And the last time I checked, the UK was part of Europe.

yargh wrote: Here's the problem with Kansas:  In the 1970s (their prime, in the minds of those who consider the band to have had one) their sound was lifted from the better UK bands; thus, arguing that their '80s material was good because the bands they copied had moved on doesn't make any sense to me.  The '70s prog movement died in the late 1970s.  There was still progressive music to be made in the '80s, but by and large it was not to be made out of the same materials as the symph-prog bands of the 1970s.

What a load of utter hogwash.

Which UK bands did Kansas bite from?

Please name them.

Gimmie a specfic example.

Like say... well this part from "Icarus" sounds a whole lot like this part
from "Heart of the Sunrise".

Gee.. heck.. gosh... darn... golly... this part from "Song for America"
sounds a whole lot like "Fracture".

Get real.

Total revisionist history.

Kansas FAILED with the US proggers on the first 3 records because they
decidedly DID NOT sound much of ANYTHING like the UK prog bands of
the day.

Go back and read my first post on the subject and learn something.

Concentrate on the 'rock' and 'riff' thingies.

They cut their own little niche with the kids who OUTGREW Journey and
Styx when they watered down the compositional soup starting on POKR,
and finally "crossed over" to FM radio rock... which was the plan of that
evil little troll Don Kirshner from day one, and reason why he SIGNED the
band.

Hilariously... they actually still wrote a bunch of fairly decent 'prog-pop'
stuff.... something the vast majority of their now wishy-washy English
prog contemporaries, like GTR and Asia failed miserably at.... Which,
without actually saying EXACTLY as much.... is kinda what the original
poster was driving at.

Anyhoo.

There ya have it. Yer totally in the dark.

SM.

Edited by SlipperFink

Finally Kansas are awful, nowhere near as good as bands from the two countries, one principallity and one provence that make up the UK.

No just honest, and have an opinion that doesn't mean ever time i hear our (exceedigly boring) national anthem that i should feel patriocism., or feel my chest.

  Playing with trolls is so fun...  

You present your opinion as undisputed fact, and then use nothing but more personal opinion to back it up.  I'd perhaps take your thoughts more seriously if you had a better reason than "I'm from Europe, and I'm better than you!"

Most of my favorite bands are from Europe.  Still, there are some American bands that I see as just as good.

Ever heard Proto-Kaw's 70's output?

SlipperFink wrote: yargh wrote: Here's the problem with Kansas:  In the 1970s (their prime, in the minds of those who consider the band to have had one) their sound was lifted from the better UK bands; thus, arguing that their '80s material was good because the bands they copied had moved on doesn't make any sense to me.  The '70s prog movement died in the late 1970s.  There was still progressive music to be made in the '80s, but by and large it was not to be made out of the same materials as the symph-prog bands of the 1970s.    What a load of utter hogwash. Which UK bands did Kansas bite from? Please name them. Gimmie a specfic example. Like say... well this part from "Icarus" sounds a whole lot like this part from "Heart of the Sunrise". Gee.. heck.. gosh... darn... golly... this part from "Song for America" sounds a whole lot like "Fracture". Get real. Total revisionist history. Kansas FAILED with the US proggers on the first 3 records because they decidedly DID NOT sound much of ANYTHING like the UK prog bands of the day. Go back and read my first post on the subject and learn something. Concentrate on the 'rock' and 'riff' thingies. They cut their own little niche with the kids who OUTGREW Journey and Styx when they watered down the compositional soup starting on POKR, and finally "crossed over" to FM radio rock... which was the plan of that evil little troll Don Kirshner from day one, and reason why he SIGNED the band. Hilariously... they actually still wrote a bunch of fairly decent 'prog-pop' stuff.... something the vast majority of their now wishy-washy English prog contemporaries, like GTR and Asia failed miserably at.... Which, without actually saying EXACTLY as much.... is kinda what the original poster was driving at. Anyhoo. There ya have it. Yer totally in the dark. SM.

Kansas failed with US audiences BECAUSE they were just ripping off the UK bands.  The US audiences who were into prog were at least smart enough to know the real thing from a fraud.  Kansas had to become an AOR band to capture middle America (metal-lovin' clods who also boogied to Styx and Journey) and, with Leftoverture, they became that AOR band. 

Symphonic prog was born in the UK.  Kansas copied the elements and added bluesy/folksy touches that stamped them as being from the US.  I need not point out passages that were lifted from Yes to know that Kansas owed their existence to Yes. 

There ya have it, ya big headbangin', AOR lovin' brute! 

There's nothing like a retread, and Kansas sure were a bunch of retreads.    

I never seem to get arguments from this sdie of the Atlantic?

 

Other than that the first two albums sound almost exactly like Yes, except for the violin? 

This review excerpt puts it fairly well: "Being a hard-core Yes fan at the time, and largely naïve to the existence of other prog rock bands, I was transfixed. The music was so convincing of the Wakeman/Squire/Bruford axis, I initially thought that there was still some unreleased Fragile-era material out there that had somehow escaped me."

That pretty much says it all.