April 30, 2008 11:15 AM
Roger Waters / Keith Emerson smackdown
Uh oh. Some fans over at a progressive rock messageboard picked up on Roger Water's comment that some '70s music like Emerson, Lake & Palmer were "fey" and "a construct in order to sell records."
He went on to say that "it didn't have its roots in somebody's passionate belief in human life. It had its roots in wanting to be successful in pop music in the 1970s"(read Roger's complete interview here).
Now Keith Emerson himself has weighed in, posting a comment on ELP's archivist's MySpace page, complaining that Waters' music is "morbid dronings" and "publicity stunts."
Furthermore, he wrote, "Either become a politician or a musician. Although he made a lot of money with his mono tonal ramblings on the latter I think he should stick to the former as long as he preaches his politics in some remote area like a worm sanctuary in Siberia."
Ouch.
You can read Emerson's full response here.
You can read the complete discussion (and reconfirm what a jackass I am for even asking the question) here at Progressive Ears.
What say you in the battle of the rock stars? You can comment below or over at Rocky Talk Live. And don't forget to check the Thursday News for the review of Water's show at the Pepsi Center.
May 1, 2008
2:50 AM
Bjorn Are writes:
I can't fathom why Waters would say anything like that. He for one should know that the bands emerging from the London underground scene in the late 60's (like also Floyd) were rather concerned with making music and not "selling out".
Living through those days, it was not difficult to see that quite other bands than ELP (or Pink Floyd) were making "pop music".
Get real, these were the days of The Osmonds, David Cassidy, Jackson Five etc.!
May 1, 2008
3:40 AM
Lance Starbrdge writes:
Yawn. Erm. Sorry.
Nothing to see here folks, Proggies have about the most insecure musical tastes across the genres. Sturgeon's Law applies to all genres, including prog.
Keith should've just let it die.
May 1, 2008
5:24 AM
Josh L writes:
I could care less about terms like progressive rock and art rock or what on earth a "proggy" is. If music critic Mark Brown and more so Roger Waters, the chief writer in 70's Pink Floyd, can't spot Keith and ELP's concern for humanity in their music--you should really re-listen. You both are missing some great musical messages. If you don't like the music itself, read the lyrics to Battlefield, Knife Edge or Karn Evil 9. Brilliant stuff. By the way, Keith has new music coming out this year and I'm stoked.
May 1, 2008
5:58 AM
Sean writes:
I guess the bigger question is why you brought ELP up to Waters in the first place, Mark. Not how he or Keith reacted.
May 1, 2008
6:43 AM
Linda writes:
Knowing Roger's personality over the years, I don't think I've ever heard him say anything nice about anybody. And he's lucky some folks like his lyrics, because his talent as a musician couldn't even be in the same ballpark as any members of ELP. But I agree Mark, that your original statement about ELP's music being dated is only your opinion... and should of been stated so. Personally I don't find that true at all.
May 1, 2008
8:20 AM
Eddie writes:
Pink Floyd is the sell out, they were my favorite band until dark side came out, thats when they sold out. I stopped listening to them when that happened, but give them credit for the light show and the PA systems they made. When it comes to playing ability ELP and Yes are the best out there. You should be able to have an interview without saying how bad someone or a group is, thats RW being insecure. Interview about your own merrit not your opinion of someone else.
May 1, 2008
9:10 AM
Marty writes:
It shows a lack of character in Water's case, when you have to cut someone else down in order to prove your own worth. DSOTM is a great, yes, but why not discuss the reasons, rather than say everyone just sucks, and that's why I'm better.
Keith has a new album coming out in June which I look very forward too, he's very much still of interest and relevance.
May 1, 2008
9:33 AM
Eric writes:
I thought Mark really lobbed ELP into Roger's wheelhouse. I agree that there is a lot more lyrical and musical weight behind Floyd (which partly lends to Floyd's sustained popularity), but I thought it was really weird for ELP to be accussed of pandering to popular music...maybe Roger got ELP and ELO mixed up?
May 1, 2008
9:39 AM
Bill writes:
Kudos to Keith Emerson for putting Waters in his place. I've always been much more of an ELP found and agree with Emerson that much of Floyd's music consist of "morbid dronings". ELP's music (musically if not lyrically) is much more complex and up-beat. Kudos also to his telling Waters to "shut up and sing". All of these musicians who feel that we give a flying fig what their opinions on politics are should get a reality check.
May 1, 2008
10:33 AM
Bill writes:
When you read the actual interview with Waters, it's clear that Mark Brown orchestrated the entire "Smackdown" for his own personal ends. Waters said that a lot of music of the time was "fey". It was Mark, who suggested ELP existed in that category. Waters then made a few comments about ELP directly.
I'm a big fan of ELP (at least old ELP) and Waters, but one thing is clear. Waters has something ELP lacks -- HEART. ELP may have had profound lyrics in the early days, but their real motivation became clear when they thoroughly sold out with "Love Beach." This is not a matter of musicianship, it's a matter of values and corruption of the soul.
I saw ELP again in 2000 touring with Deep Purple. They bit the big one. At one point Keith Emerson sunk so low as to "jack off" his keyboard sending sparks out into the audience. (In stark contrast, Deep Purple sounded better than ever.)
I saw Waters last night in Denver, and the power and soul of his music had not waned. I realized that he is a man with a mission--to keep a light going for this world. And as long as he stays true to his values, his music will continue to be good.
Actually, reflecting on the two (Waters and ELP), I think we're comparing apples and oranges. I would put Waters in the category of "poet" or "artist", whereas Emerson is much more of a "virtuoso musician" or "rock star."
May 1, 2008
12:14 PM
David writes:
Um, Keith was doing the schtick with the ribbon controller LONG before 2000 - I guess you would probably frown on the even more dated organ wrestling / knives-in-the-keys-for-feedback showmanship as well?
And anybody who thinks the music of ELP lacked heart just doesn't get the music of ELP.
Lastly - be it Waters or anybody else - I'm in that "shut up and play" camp as well. Start prattling any kind of political propaganda and it's a guarantee you're not going to get revenue from my ticket sale in the first place. In that regard, KE's comment about being an entertainer is dead-on point for me.
May 1, 2008
1:35 PM
Steve writes:
Who really cares about keith Emerson right now? Are people really offended by Roger Waters' comments? This is hilarious.
I always crack up when people get mad for bands "selling out". What does that mean anyway? I work at Music Television station and see struggling bands all the time. Trust me, if they were talented enough to "sell out", they'd be first in line. I bet Keith Emerson wished he could "sell out". Congrats to Keith though. This is probably the first time he's been mentioned in a news article in 30 years. Sell out!
May 1, 2008
2:21 PM
Bill writes:
"Who really cares about keith Emerson right now? Are people really offended by Roger Waters' comments?"
No, more likely they are offended that the interviewer tossed ELP into the proceedings at all. I could care less what Waters or Emerson thinks, though they both come from bands that were based on huge spectales, they have more in common than not.
Both live in the same "rock ballpark" and both were considered pop in the 70s. Back when pop really was diverse. Shame it isn't now!
Next time at least mention a band that was unlike Floyd instead of one that was like it. Both were overblown, pompus stadium sized spectacles. One had a pig, the other shot firey "jizz" from his crotch via his controller. What's the difference?
Both seem silly now and small potatos compared to some concert spectacles that have come along since.
May 1, 2008
2:26 PM
Bill writes:
Potatoes! Yeah, it's me Dan Quayle. I finally found spell check a minute too late.
May 1, 2008
5:45 PM
Roger writes:
Roger Waters had Cindi Lauper sing Another Brick In The Wall, if that's not a pop sell-out, and an abomination of musical art, I don't know what is.
Keith likes to keep it real. And I'm sure his new album will the celebrate art of music, rather than just make angry noise as Roger's last few have done. I know which has more substance, but you do the test yourself, and see what you discover.
May 1, 2008
5:47 PM
Roger writes:
Roger Waters had Cindi Lauper sing Another Brick In The Wall, if that's not a pop sell-out, and an abomination of musical art, I don't know what is.
Keith likes to keep it real. And I'm sure his new album will celebrate the art of music, rather than just make angry noise... as Roger's last few have done. I know which has more substance, but you do the test yourself, and see what you discover.
May 1, 2008
11:17 PM
bill writes:
I don't know what you folks is rantin' about. All I know is that people is people. And some of 'em got certain talents, and some of 'em got others. Then there're a lot of em who is scardicats and just sit back and comment like they know something, but r really deep down afraid to expose their naked souls.
Keith Emerson is made outa the same divine stuff as Roger Waters n Cindy Lauper. Question is whether at some or many points in time they're able to tap into it and bring it out.
At any rate, these folks got a lot more guts than the smug sitting-on-the-sidelines kibbitzin blog heads who hide and judge, but never expose either their vulnerability or their virtuosity. They don't give nothin'--they just take n judge.
May 2, 2008
8:21 AM
Jimmy writes:
Speak for yourself, buddy. We were asked to comment. Did you miss that part?
May 3, 2008
1:32 AM
woffman writes:
Wow Mark I am really surprised that you felt it was necessary to throw Emerson under the bus in the first place.
I thought your review after the concert was spot on and most of your interview while predictable (Pink Floyd reunion crap) some of it was interesting and fresh. So again why the hatred toward ELP? They had some very good music took some huge chances and pulled off some amazing concerts. Brain Salad Surgery Tour with Mahavishnu Orchestra opening is still one of my favorite concert memories. I know you listen to some Prog - you have given positive reviews to other Prog bands that have come to town. Peter Gabriel comes to mind, so what's up? Emerson has survived a Heart Attack and Major Hand surgery and still plays and more importantly records new music. How many other artists from this era are milking the glory days and producing nothing new? I would say most of them.
May 5, 2008
3:08 PM
Mark Brown writes:
I don't think saying that some of ELP's music sounds "dated" is throwing anyone under a bus. Even some of ELP's biggest fans on the messageboards agree that some of their work didn't age well. And at the risk of being called a synchophant yet again, I think Dark Side has aged remarkably well -- including the fact that my 16-year-old loves it.
May 6, 2008
5:25 AM
Cengiz VARLIK; Burak CAGLAR writes:
Hi Keith,
Very recently, we have read an interview with Mr. Roger Waters made by Mr. Mark Brown for Rocky Mountain News, dated April 25, 2008.
No question whatever he spoke about his and Pink Floyd's music, the below quotation has infuriated us:
--------------------------
Some music from your classic era sounds timeless, like Dark Side or John Fogerty's anti-war songs. But some music from that era sounds dated and silly. You managed to avoid that with Dark Side and The Wall. Why is that?
It's because they're truthful and they spring from a passionate attachment to political and philosophical ideals that are based in the experience of others. If you were to name something that you now consider silly . . . not that I want to knock other artists, but you'd probably find the subject matter is fey in some way.
I'm thinking music like Emerson, Lake & Palmer.
Well, that wasn't about anything . . . it was a construct in order to sell records. It didn't have its roots in somebody's passionate belief in human life. It had its roots in wanting to be successful in pop music in the 1970s.
-------------------------
Now that you personally and Emerson Lake and Palmer, as being the milestones of 20th century music and even the whole music history, we are extremely disappointed with the words of Mr. Waters. To our opinions, ELP has been the key figure of rock music scene and timeless. Conclusion of your music as "having no root in somebody's passionate belief in human life" means Mussorsky had no passionate, Rodrigo had no passionate, Ginastara had no passionate, Dylan had no passionate, too. Please be aware that we will ask Mr. Waters, whom we appreciate due to his and Pink Floyd's "timeless" music, if he had ever listed to Karn Evil, or Trilogy, or Abbadon's Bolero. If he had been at Montreal Olimpic Stadium in 1974. We will remind him what Pink Floyd was producing when you and The Nice had composed Five Bridges Suite.
If we should consider the music of ELP as pop music as Mr. Waters referred, how should we describe the music of Michael Jackson? If we listen to Pictures at an Exhibition or Fugue or Abbadon's Bolero, by considering that they are pop music; should we evaluate the music of Mussorskyi J.S. Bach or Maurice Ravel from the same point of view?Or, should we push the music of Shostokovich into a corner because "there are not political or philosophical ideals" in his symphonies but consisting of just musical notes in a mathematical and logical order?
We believe that ELP is modern representatives of traditional classical music dating back from Bach to Mozart, Mozart to Beethoven, Beethoven to Brahms, and Brahms to Mahler.
All the best,
Burak CAGLAR ; ekipc@csrb.com.tr
Cengiz VARLIK ; relayer@ttmail.com
Istanbul, TURKEY
May 8, 2008
9:40 AM
Bryan Roberts writes:
An interesting debate indeed! I saw Roger Waters and band last year in Sydney and, having seen the Gilmour-flavour of Pink Floyd, realised that Waters was the primary artistic force behind that band - it was a very good concert. A politician Waters is not though...as we know from his lyrics. The music of ELP is vastly underrated - sadly for the youth of today, you just had to be there in the 70's to have experienced the power and majesty of their live concerts - I don't exagerate - they were absolutely stunning. Unfortunately there aren't really any recordings that can do justice to the 'huge' sound they generated, especially in the quadrphonic concerts. Having seen both ELP and Pink Floyd on many occasions, there is no doubt that at their peak, ELP were peerless in concert - the energy, virtuosity and sheer excitement of their shows is something I haven't seen since those days. A key factor in that excitement was the fusion of classical music themes with the new and futuristic sounds of the Moog Synthisizer - again, that sense of something new and fantastical would be lost on the youth of today, unless they are willing to dive into the historical context. Lyrically, both ELP and Pink Floyd explored fairly doom-laden themes, but ELP often lightened things up with 'fun' songs like 'Benny the Bouncer' and with the music itself. For those reasons, ELP provided a more rounded listening experience than Pink Floyd. Both art, both exceptional, but live, ELP in the 70's will always take the honours IMO. I'm really looking forward to Keith's new album.
May 20, 2008
7:00 PM
Jeff writes:
Thing is, most people would consider the need to plug into the historical context to be a point against ELP's music. (Fortunately in this "post-modern" era, that's easier than ever--classic rock's revenge on the punk era, I suppose.) I wonder if it's not simply a matter of production and arrangement--*The DSOTM* is certainly better-produced than most ELP albums, from both a technical and an artistic standpoint. However, from a purely musical standpoint I prefer ELP, even given the superiority of Roger Waters' lyrics. No value system, no philosophy, no political platform will make music good unless it's already good on its own.
As for "real motivations": Well, I don't like *Love Beach* either. That doesn't mean the earlier music was "dishonest"--they just had a moment of weakness at a time when they thought the chips were down commercially. Come to think of it, it seems none of them really wanted to make that record; it was to an extent a contractual obligation matter. Greg Lake, on the other hand, apparently really did want to make those pop songs on Side 1, for whatever reason, and that dovetailed with Atlantic Records' desire for a "commercial" record. Maybe Greg's just not that good a pop songwriter, or the production stinks.
Anyway, musicians "sell out" mostly because, well, it beats workin'; that's something lots of listeners forget. Sure, maybe ELP were beyond that (though considering all the money they shoveled into those tours, I'm not so sure), but I guess when you've tasted the high life after years of struggle, the prospect of keeping it up when you do after all have a repertoire built up that you can be proud of is terribly tempting. In any case, a few transgressions are forgivable, I suppose. But it never seems to end there, does it?
May 30, 2008
9:59 PM
M.Costanza writes:
The bottom line is KEITH ,GREG AND CARL COULD DO PINK FLOYD MUSIC WITH THEIR EYES CLOSED
BUT I CAN'T IMAGINE PINK FLOYD DOING TARKUS OR KARN EVIL 9
I NAMED MY SON KEITH --AFTER KEITH EMERSON-THAT'S THE IMPACT ELP HAD ON MY LIFE
July 10, 2008
3:01 PM
Dan Kleiber writes:
I have seen ELP many many times. Every time I have seen them they just blew me away. Their music has so much fullness considering it is made by only three musicians. I have seen Yes many times and love them too. I have also seen Pink Floyd (without Roger Waters) a few times and also Roger Waters band. When I saw Roger Waters band they played Pink Floyd originals. THey were just OK sounding. His other band members don't have the feel of the original Floyd tunes. When I saw Pink Floyd (without Waters) playing the original Floyd tunes it sounded better than when Waters band played them. Waters should let go of his anger and resentment and make ammends with Gilmore and start again making brilliant music together. Yes I have to agree Waters was the main man behind Pink Floyd but I wish I could see him playing with the rest of the original band....