Which is the better band? UK or KC (SaBB era when they were a 4 pce like UK)

[A. Scherze]

Well, obviously Wetton and Bruford are pushes, so it comes down to the insanely great playing of Robert the Fripp versus the lackluster jazz noodlings of the EVIL, Svengali-like Holdsworthless, and the mere adequacy of D. Cross versus the immensely talented Eddie (gets the) Jobson. So, one for KC, and, one for UK.

In terms of material, the first side of SaBB is dispensible, SaBB is enjoyable, but only "Fracture" is a stand-out.
While "Mental Medication" should have been expunged, the rest of U.K. is fantastic.

So, verdict: UK.

[Zeuhlmate]

As much as I like the first UK album, the 3 KC albums + all the live albums (USA, The Great Deceicver, The Nightwatch) have given me many more hours of joy.

If you are not talking about the music. but judge them as a band, the time they stick together is also a parameter.

Musically it is apples and bananas to me.

[Richard]

There are very few bands UK could lose to (possibly Genesis or Marillion) therefore once again UK is the clear cut winner in this match.

[Sputnik]

If you're just putting up UK's first album against SaBB (the only one of the Wetton albums they are strictly a four piece), then I'd go with the UK album. If you count Larks and Red, then I think it becomes more difficult.

For me this "which band is better" doesn't come down to some "head to head match up" of the players, but to the music each band produced. I love the first UK album dearly, it really is an all time favorite of mine. And for me, SaBB is the weakest of the three Wetton albums, though I still like it a lot. So if that is the comparison, UK is an easy winner. But you add the other two Wetton albums, which have an incredible amount of great stuff, it gets much harder.

Add the "originality" factor, i.e. there may have been no UK without those KC albums paving the way, and I think KC emerges as the stronger, more innovative, more original, and more influential band, regardless of the fact that Jobson is a better violinist than Cross. So even if you don't like Wetton-era KC and do like UK, if you can be objective it's pretty clear KC looms far larger on the musical landscape (the same was basically true of the ELP vs. UK mark II comparison previously). But if you you take away some important comparison points, the UK albums starts to look better by comparison.

My verdict: KC, but the first UK album is still a masterpiece.

Bill

[NogbadTheBad]

This isn't even close KC kills UK in every area that matters to me. Seriously KC in the early 70s kills just about everyone let alone a Symph weenie band

[polmico]

Cross was more than adequate for what the music called.

I was listening to some of the healthier Crim blows from the 73-74 period recently and realized how great he was on Mellotron. He and Fripp pushed that instrument further than anyone else. He held his own in that band, and that couldn't have been an easy thing to do.

[NogbadTheBad]

There are very few bands UK could lose to (possibly Genesis or Marillion) therefore once again UK is the clear cut winner in this match.

I could probably list 40.

[Dave (in MA)]

the lackluster jazz noodlings of Holdsworthless

Well, at least you dropped the evil, svengali-like crap.

[Reginod]

Ummmmmm . . . . . . . . I like them both, based on their own merits?????

[Jeremy Bender]

Yikes, what's next?

Who's better, Yes or Starcastle?
Who's better, ELP or Triumvirat?

In the ELP v. UK thread, I wrote that ELP was better by the distance from my desk to the Crab Nebula. The Crab Nebula is 6,500 light years away, a light year is 5.9 trillion miles, my computer's calculator can't even do all the 0's for that.

The Boz/Collins/Wallace/Fripp version of King Crimson is better than UK by the distance etc., let alone the Bruford/Cross/Fripp/Wetton edition.

Please pick a better band than UK for these threads, please.

[A. Scherze]

Yikes, what's next?

UK Mk. 1 v. Focus (same line-up)

In the ELP v. UK thread, I wrote that ELP was better by the distance from my desk to the Crab Nebula.

Well ... UK can do the Kessel Run in less than 12 parsecs!!

[Phlakaton]

This subjective stuff makes me sleepy. In fact... good night. I'm going to bed and listening to some Gong.

[A. Scherze]

Well, at least you dropped the evil, svengali-like crap.

Thanks. Fixed.

[Dave (in MA)]

Thanks. Fixed.

[Painter]

Are you guys high? Crimson wins hands-down.

Nothing against UK, but this is without a doubt one of the more ridiculous questions asked on this forum. And that's saying something.

People here have entirely too much time of their hands to engage in this ridiculous "prog navel-gazing".

[emperorken]

KC, with their incessant and boring noodling-improv, does nothing for me. I'll take UK.

[WytchCrypt]

Ya, the same rhythm section in both bands and Bruford may be a push but Wetton was anything but. His bass playing in SaBB era Crimso was way more innovative than anything he ever did in UK...and I'll take Fripp/Cross over Holdsworth/Jobson any day

[A. Scherze]

Are you guys high? Crimson wins hands-down.

How can you say that?

UK IS Crimson with the bland Cross replaced by a true keyboard and violin virtuoso; and that robotic Fripp (who, only the Kool-Aid drinking cultists like) replaced by a real master of the guitar and improvisation, Holdworth!!!

[NogbadTheBad]

How can you say that?

UK IS Crimson with the bland Cross replaced by a true keyboard and violin virtuoso; and that robotic Fripp (who, only the Kool-Aid drinking cultists like) replaced by a real master of the guitar and improvisation, Holdworth!!!

UK don't have the tunes.

[A. Scherze]

UK don't have the tunes.

The first side of SaBB is not as good as the second side of Tarkus let alone anything from the first U.K. album.

[NogbadTheBad]

The first side of SaBB is not as good as the second side of Tarkus let alone anything from the first U.K. album.

In Your Humble Opinion, one I don't share. I'll take Great Deceiver, Lament & Night Watch over anything on side 2 of Tarkus & there's only a couple of tracks on UK - s/t even in with a sniff.

[Dave (in MA)]

Two of my favorite albums.

[GuitarGeek]

I'd definitely vote for King Crimson. Fripp's laser beam infinite sustain fuzz guitar soloing reigns supreme.

While Holdsworth is quite the virtuoso, I don't think he's better than Fripp. Holdsworth seems to play largely the same thing in every solo. Not note-for-note the same thing, but he seems to take the same approach song after song. Fripp liked to change it up, sometimes doing the strumming chordal thing, or the staccato clean toned thing, or the aforementioned laser beam fuzz tone setting. And he would change it up where he'd take different approaches on different versions of a given song, for instance, some versions of Easy Money have the staccato thing going, others have the laser beam thing, and sometimes he changes from one to other in mid solo.

I also think Fripp's melodicism on things like The Night Watch, Exiles, and the finale section of the 1974 live arrangement of Starless far out class most of Holdsworth's solos, or at least most of the ones I've heard.

And I still haven't a clue how Fripp played Fracture.

[Phlakaton]

Silly. All of this. Asking people to all like the same food as you do is the same thing. Who cares. I like both and listen to both. Why are we debating this?

[notallwhowander]

Ugh. I don't like U.K.

Maybe one day I'll come around, but I am bored to tears by that first album. At least King Crimson sounds like a band. U.K. sounds like a poorly fashioned result of a prog Lego set. The sum is far less than its the parts, IMO. While I've tried many times with "In the Dead of Night/By the Light of Day," only one time did that soup sounded anywhere near pleasant. Those keyboard sounds hit my ear worse than nails on a chalkboard. And the sonic quality of the album is the worst kind of sterile, it would work for Kraftwerk, but this just sounds like the musicians never sat in the same room.

These guys are up there with Trout Mask Replica for cult favorites that have yet to shine their light on me.