Is King Crimson the best rock music has to offer?

[Josquin des Prez]

I mean in terms of complexity and invention (i'll leave aesthetics for another day).

[Bonehelm]

No.

[Josquin des Prez]

No.

Care to elaborate?

[Bonehelm]

Care to elaborate?

When you say rock do you count metal too? coz you know, metal evolved from rock...and if you do..there are certainly TONS of bands that are way more complex. Technical death metal, symphonic power metal, hair metal...opeth..stratovarius...even Megadeth has tons of complex guitar solos in their Rust in Peace album. Marty Friedman is a virtuoso.

[Josquin des Prez]

When you say rock do you count metal too? coz you know, metal evolved from rock...and if you do..there are certainly TONS of bands that are way more complex. Technical death metal, symphonic power metal, hair metal...opeth..stratovarius...even Megadeth

None of that stuff even remotely approaches King Crimson in any of the criteria used to define musical complexity and novelty of invention, not even close. 

To think i expected a real answer. NEXT.

[Bonehelm]

None of that stuff even remotely approaches King Crimson in any of the criteria used to define musical complexity and novelty of invention, not even close. 

To think i expected a real answer. NEXT.

What's your criteria then? You obviously haven't heard any of those bands if you think they're not complex. Either that, or you need an ear check.

[PSmith08]

What about Rush, for example? Working within the confines of "rock," they managed to do some innovative and creative things.

Granted, King Crimson is a solid band, but - often - I see them leaving "rock" music and going off into other genres.

So, with your original question, regarding "rock music," I have to say "no." That honor is divided many, many ways.

[bwv 1080]

Frank Zappa is another obvious example

[RebLem]

I don't give a third of a turkey turd.

[The new erato]

Complexity in my opinion concerns factors as variety and inventiveness of instrumental color and orchestration, structure of songs and albums, originality of melody lines etc....and I haven't heard any metal even close to Crimson in that departement. Certainly Crimson at their peak are close to the top of the heap (but Yes may be as good). But whether it's pop, rock, or whatever I don't really know. Classifying Crimson as popular music sounds a little strange. Superb (though variable) band and a major part of my musical upbringing

[Daverz]

So where does one start with this group?  I've looked for some of their earlier stuff on vinyl, but it's hard to come by.  The later stuff seems easy to find.

[Sergeant Rock]

I mean in terms of complexity and invention (i'll leave aesthetics for another day).

Slumming today, Mr. Prez? I'm surprised to see you curious about the common man's music. 

Seriously, I have trouble with all the progressive rock bands. Seems an oxymoron to me. In the attempt to elevate rock into "serious art" they emasculate the form. The "rock" part (as in rock 'n' roll) gets buried or lost entirely.

I think there are many rock artists and groups that make complex music without any arty pretentiousness; music that retains the energy and animal excitement of the genre: The Who, the Grateful Dead and Van Morrison are three that come instantly to mind. Try Van Morrison's Astral Weeks.

Sarge

[Daverz]

The Who, the Grateful Dead and Van Morrison are three that come instantly to mind. Try Van Morrison's Astral Weeks.

All of whom could get very pretentious indeed.  The Dead are infamous for endless noodling jams, the Who wrote rock "operas" and appeared in Ken Russel films, and there must be a picture of Van Morrison next to the dictionary definition of pretentious.

However, I don't think arty pretension necessarily leads to bad results at all.  The music should be judged on its own merits.

[greg]

What about Rush, for example? Working within the confines of "rock," they managed to do some innovative and creative things.

yep, I was about to say them, too. Slightly different harmonically, but interesting rhythms sometimes, like the opening to YYZ.

But.... if you really want a taste of complexity, here you go. 

Michael Angelo Batio's "To Alpha Sector 2". Throughout almost the whole song, he does nothing but mix it up with /8 meters, like 6/8, 5/8, 11/8, 15/8, etc. Interesting chord progressions, the usual fast as anyone soloing, and at the end, after the whole spacey song seems to be over, he plays something that sounds like bluegrass mixed with a synthesizer that sounds like an ambulance. 

man, you're gonna get me playing this song again, it's too fun to play, i can't stop 

[Sergeant Rock]

All of whom could get very pretentious indeed.  The Dead are infamous for endless noodling jams, the Who wrote rock "operas" and appeared in Ken Russel films, and there must be a picture of Van Morrison next to the dictionary definition of pretentious.

However, I don't think arty pretension necessarily leads to bad results at all.  The music should be judged on its own merits.

I think the level of pretentiousness depends on what the artist originally intended to do; it also depends on the actual outcome: what does the music sound like, and does it still rock?

The Dead weren't pretentious: they were just high   Seriously, I know what you mean, Dave, but the Dead's end results were still rock 'n' roll. The prog rock groups were deliberately trying to invent a rock version of classical music and I'm not sure what they invented: some hideous misshapen beast, neither fish nor fowl. That's what I object to (less today than thirty years ago when I firmly believed music shouldn't cross genre boundaries).

I don't object to anyone liking it, or listening to Yes or Crimson or Genesis: it just ain't rock 'n' roll to me and so my answer to this thread's title and question is a resounding, No! In this forum I'm not going to get any support of course. We'd have to take the question to a non-classical forum to find people who share my opinion.

Sarge

[Daverz]

The Dead weren't pretentious: they were just high

To me they were always just plain boring.  I just didn't get it.

ain't rock 'n' roll

Luckily not one of my criteria for music, whatever it might label itself.

[Mark G. Simon]

I've always been partial to Yes from their most ambitious period. Tales from Topographic Oceans, Relayer, Drama, these represent to me the best rock has to offer. Rock critics like to call this music pretentious, but "pretentious" only means something ambitious that failed. Something ambitious that succeeds is called "great". Yes is great half the time and pretentious the other half. Their great stuff has a structural complexity that really hangs together in a symphonic sort of way (though admittedly never as structrually tight as the symphonic masters we discuss here most of the time). I'm specifically talking about the first two sides of Tales of Topographic Oceans. You have thematic contrast, development, synthesis, and a certain amount of noodling too, but not too much. My brother listened to this and said "do these guys know about Mahler?"

The very end of The Gates of Delirium is one of the most imaginatively elaborated plagal cadences in all music. The chords spiral upwards around E flat, C minor, F minor, but if you listen to the persistent C in the bass you know it's already arrived at where it's going to end up.

Into the Lens is built around a "trompe l'oeill" rhythmic ostinato that somehow fits into the context of 4/4 as in 6/8.

[Mark G. Simon]

More recently I've been impressed by Brian Wilson's Smile. If he'd released this in 1967 there might be a whole series of albums like this. Unfortunately, this effort is probably going to remain unique. I wish all rock was like Smile. The songs are grouped into three continuously running suites with a satisfying variety of moods and textures within a consistent style, and a complex web of thematic cross-references. Heck, I wish more contemporary serious music was like Smile.

[karlhenning]

So where does one start with this group?  I've looked for some of their earlier stuff on vinyl, but it's hard to come by.  The later stuff seems easy to find.

Really?  I think the whole of the originally-vinyl catalogue has been digitally remastered for the "30th-anniversary edition"

[karlhenning]

I've always been partial to Yes from their most ambitious period. Tales from Topographic Oceans, Relayer, Drama, these represent to me the best rock has to offer.

Yes, especially Drama.