stoopid

Making my case for Stain as their best album should be relatively easy. The album is brutal. Just look up the lyrics and read along. Metal, funk, rock, and hip hop. There isn't an unintended note or lyric on their entire album. Here's the first track. Yes, they started the album off with this. lol GO AWAY What is the point of suffering? What is the purpose of joy? Is it true that the winner dies With the most toys? A lifetime spent for a dollar A lifetime twisting in pain A lifetime gone in an hour A lifetime playing the game I see the starving Africans on TV I feel it has nothing to do with me I sent my twenty dollars to live aid I've aided my guilty conscience to go away Now go away Now go away Now go away Go away I don't want anybody to touch me I think everybody has aids What's the point in caring for you? You're gonna die anyway A lifetime searching for something A lifetime going insane A lifetime running from nothing A life looking for someone to blame I see the starving Africans on TV I feel it has nothing to do with me I sent my twenty dollars to live aid I've aided my guilty conscience to go away Now go away Now go away Now go away Go away

I'm sure the darker tone of their later albums played at least a small part in why they lacked fan support and sales [Collideoscope was also mostly poorly produced/recorded]. The songs that had similar attitude and variety of styles to those on Vivid (remember I'm replying based on relatively old memory of the albums) but were not particularly interesting and were often 'weirded up' (electronics being added, etc) in a way that didn't seem to support the music, melody, or message. In comparison, Stain has plenty of (heavier, sometime weird) songs that flat out rock and a few slower songs (like Nothingness) that are emotive and expertly executed. The rodney king song I posted earlier in the thread is a great example of what they *didn't* do on the later albums - capture the energy and anger, unleashing it into the music in one concise and clearly felt/understood form. Cult of Personality was just as edgy as Never Satisfied at the time of release; even though they're only 5 years apart they sound very different (at least to these ears). But comparing Never Satisfied to even the hardest track on their later releases it feels raw and gritty, and with the flood gates thrown open in the music world (thanks internet) musical success almost demands something exceptional, whether it be a 180 degree to the 'roots' of a genre or pushing the envelope. There just isn't anything exceptional on either of their last two albums. You mentioned Flying earlier and it's probably my favorite track off the last two records. It's at least clever.

If you actually go out and find info and track down what few reviews remain on the internet they're not "best album" or album of the year level 'good' reviews, they're the same general 'please send us more music in the future' it was good enough reviews. I was also very into reviews at the time these albums were released, and there wasn't a lot of praise in the music circles as well as music forums at the time. Rock fans get excited but as soon as the music hit their ears they moved on, and they only moved on because there wasn't much to compel anyone to raise the LC banner high in praise of the recordings. Happens a lot more than albums get embraced. Most albums are forgotten within months of release, even the better ones. I can look through my own collection and easily half of it hasn't been played in the past year, and a good chunk of those in several years (including those LC albums we're discussing). Why play music you don't enjoy? And you have to figure you can't be completely alone on the planet in enjoying the album. They sold at least 2800 of Chair In the Doorway, there must be at least 2 or 3 people who still play the album once a year. ;) My point with taking this stance isn't to annoy you, it's to add some perspective your post lacked on the quality of those recordings. I'm glad for you and LC that someone still enjoys them, but as rock recordings they very much fell short especially by LC's own previously established artistic and commercial standards.

You're not entirely correct on that. Your opinion is certainly important, even if it's wrong (ie - just an opinion). So let's remove mine and your opinions from the discussion. Collideoscope and Chair in the Doorway were commercial failures (Colleoscope didn't even chart, and Chair in the Doorway *barely* charted on release week). That's a severe fall from grace for a platinum selling band. Reviews were mixed. Time since has neither album drawing any attention, in retrospect the albums are basically lost in time due to being bleh. There's no compelling reason for any rock music fan to dig them up/out and listen to them, largely because there's a glut of much better music made before and since. I'm sure you've thought some albums great that were commercial failures. That's not much of a test of anything other than popularity. While it's probable that if more LC fans had liked them they'd have done betters, it's also true that a great many LC fans had no idea they'd released anything at all after Stain, so there's the question of how the record was handled. Regardless, Collideoscope was brilliant and is a must have. :) I'm completely guilty of losing track of LC after the Stain album and hiatus/breakup. I'll have to give their followup albums a listen. I just hope I'm not the only one who loved Collideoscope. Almost starting to wonder about it. :) I don't mean to be disparaging about trying it, but please don't actually BUY it. :P

You're not entirely correct on that. Your opinion is certainly important, even if it's wrong (ie - just an opinion). So let's remove mine and your opinions from the discussion. Collideoscope and Chair in the Doorway were commercial failures (Colleoscope didn't even chart, and Chair in the Doorway *barely* charted on release week). That's a severe fall from grace for a platinum selling band. Reviews were mixed. Time since has neither album drawing any attention, in retrospect the albums are basically lost in time due to being bleh. There's no compelling reason for any rock music fan to dig them up/out and listen to them, largely because there's a glut of much better music made before and since. I'm sure you've thought some albums great that were commercial failures. That's not much of a test of anything other than popularity. While it's probable that if more LC fans had liked them they'd have done betters, it's also true that a great many LC fans had no idea they'd released anything at all after Stain, so there's the question of how the record was handled. Regardless, Collideoscope was brilliant and is a must have. :) I'm completely guilty of losing track of LC after the Stain album and hiatus/breakup. I'll have to give their followup albums a listen. I just hope I'm not the only one who loved Collideoscope. Almost starting to wonder about it. :) By all accounts you are. I doubt even those who reviewed it upon release have listened to it since. My copy was given a very fair 15 or 20 listens when it came out, and VERY few since. More music than time to listen to stuff that just isn't very good.

You're not entirely correct on that. Your opinion is certainly important, even if it's wrong (ie - just an opinion). So let's remove mine and your opinions from the discussion. Collideoscope and Chair in the Doorway were commercial failures (Colleoscope didn't even chart, and Chair in the Doorway *barely* charted on release week). That's a severe fall from grace for a platinum selling band. Reviews were mixed. Time since has neither album drawing any attention, in retrospect the albums are basically lost in time due to being bleh. There's no compelling reason for any rock music fan to dig them up/out and listen to them, largely because there's a glut of much better music made before and since.

I can save everyone time... do NOT buy those albums. :P No really, one or two good tracks on each and the rest very forgettable. Sad really, many other bands resurrect their careers and sound great (Big Wreck, Soundgarden, AIC, Rush(?)).

Someone needs to be the focus for our impotent rage. And why NOT them? ;)

I still haven't voted... it's tempting... lol Dont google beyonce booty before voting Like telling a child to not stare into the sun. :P

They will both give you diarrhea if consumed in large quantities, but at least the gummies won't make you want to vomit as well.

I still haven't voted... it's tempting... lol

"Hot" because they were female and in your general proximity? ;)

This

He was the reason I ever picked up the bass, play(ed) with a pick, and sometimes run my tone a bit on the grittier side. Easily my biggest influence.

Please... not the nuts!!! :outtahere:

Segue, I'm glad you've crawled out from under the rock you've been under to join us in this thread. While you're out, head over to Youtube and check out some Living Colour. :P

Awesome poll. :) Both bands and songs are critical to my music evolution. Epic is one of my earliest memories of music that was truly out there (at the time) that I connected with. Meaning - not really radio friendly. As a song and recording - it still has some of that attitude. Cult is timeless in a different way, it has the underpinnings of all the best rock-feel you can possibly stuff into one relatively easy progression. Unfortunately the 'list' lyrics kinda ruin it for me today, it sounds phoned-in. But at the time, partly thanks to MTV and a bunch of gnarly looking brothers in dreads bringing-it, this was really radical in your face shit. As a band, LC are tremendous song writers and I never connected emotionally with anything FNM produced. Musically FNM was more complex, but songwriting was much better on most LC songs/albums. Stained is still one of my all time favorite rock albums. It's a punch to the face and kick to the gut. It was a ballsy album then and still is.

It seemed like the fairest comparison, since they were/are both equally successful at the pinnacle of prog back in the 70s, their albums often thought of as the most influential and heard (on the radio) of the genre. I suppose in a revisionist sense, King Crimson has garnered a lot of respect over the years and their later output solidified their place among the prog greats. For a long time 21st Century was KC's only crowning achievement and commercial success. Since then Red, Discipline, and THRAK have been hugely popularly among prog fans. So I guess in terms of prog *today*, Yes and King Crimson are probably a stronger match. I still think it would end up the same. Is there any prog band that can compete with Yes? [bearing in mind Rush are, by their own definition, Hard Rock] Is Pink Floyd really prog, or more like Rush - prog on a few albums, radio rock the rest of the time?

What say you? Is this section getting too overrun with these polls?

The third option was conceived just for you. ;)

As a kid first hearing "progressive rock", these were the two bands that most represented the genre in my mind and the minds of others. I later became a King Crimson fan as well, but really feel like these were the bands with most notoriety and raw virtuosity. They also far outsold KC during the early '70s.

Yes, Craig is doing the drumming on the new album (Craig also did the tracks for 4.5, the last Steven Wilson EP). I agree that Craig might not be of the same vein as Marco or Gavin, but certainly prog band worthy and creative in his own ways. He also drums for Frost*, a band I've come to truly love in the past year. His work on "Falling Satellites" is at times stellar. I have no doubts we will enjoy what he contributes on SW's next album.

Have you heard anything from their last 3-4 albums?

I think SW's solo career has been long enough now we can actually attempt such comparisons.

Underrated/appreciated? Perhaps. 'Better' than Pearl Jam? Not on a single measurable or subjective level. None.