Author Topic: What good bands' first four albums aren't that great  (Read 1644 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline KevShmev

  • EZBoard Elder
  • *****
  • Posts: 27805
  • Gender: Male
What good bands' first four albums aren't that great
« on: June 07, 2018, 06:29:33 PM »
Relative to the rest of their material.

Seems like the great majority of bands do their best work early on and their best album is often among the first few, but sometimes a band takes a while to really hit their stride.

In that regard, I will offer these bands whose first four albums aren't that great, based on my terms:

Pink Floyd
Styx
King Crimson


Offline Kattelox

  • Cart Corral Crusader
  • Posts: 4052
Re: What good bands' first four albums aren't that great
« Reply #1 on: June 07, 2018, 06:32:37 PM »
Journey maybe? I don't at all care for their first three but Infinity is where the goodness happens, so I'm conflicted.
RYM || Last.FM
"No Christ, God, nor religion gave me the answers I was looking for" - Timo Tolkki

Offline Parama

  • Six Roaming Owls
  • Posts: 15061
  • Official Fanclub President
Re: What good bands' first four albums aren't that great
« Reply #2 on: June 07, 2018, 06:34:00 PM »
The first Opeth album I have reasonably positive feelings for is Blackwater Park, tbh, so let's go with that

Thrice would be here if just the first three tho, but Vhiessu is great

Offline Phoenix87x

  • From the ashes
  • Posts: 5706
  • Gender: Male
  • The Phoenix shall rise
Re: What good bands' first four albums aren't that great
« Reply #3 on: June 07, 2018, 06:37:35 PM »
The first 4 pink floyd albums do nothing for me.

I also don't like the first 4 anathema albums
Don't play with me, cause you're playing with fire


Online Puppies_On_Acid

  • MP.com Refugee
  • Posts: 1214
  • Gender: Male
Re: What good bands' first four albums aren't that great
« Reply #4 on: June 07, 2018, 06:42:39 PM »
Porcupine Tree, if Tarquin's Seaweed Farm and The Nostalgia Factory count as the first 2 albums. On the Sunday of Life and Up the Downstair do almost nothing for me.

Online Snow Dog

  • Posts: 531
Re: What good bands' first four albums aren't that great
« Reply #5 on: June 07, 2018, 06:43:53 PM »
Porcupine Tree.  Things don't get interesting for me until Stupid Dream.

Dammit, beaten by a minute!  Haha

Offline KevShmev

  • EZBoard Elder
  • *****
  • Posts: 27805
  • Gender: Male
Re: What good bands' first four albums aren't that great
« Reply #6 on: June 07, 2018, 06:52:58 PM »
I can't agree with Porcupine Tree.  The Sky Moves Sideways (3rd studio album) and Signify (4th studio album) are both fantastic and could easily be argued as being amongst their best.

Offline Stadler

  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 13130
  • Gender: Male
  • Pointing out the "unfunny" since 2017!
Re: What good bands' first four albums aren't that great
« Reply #7 on: June 07, 2018, 08:03:00 PM »
I'll buy Pink Floyd for a dollar.   I do not agree with King Crimson, though.  The first two albums I like very much, and the first is a classic.

Deep Purple missed it by THAT MUCH, unless you count the live Concerto album; I love all that stuff because I'm a Blackmore fanatic, but it doesn't hold a candle to In Rock through Stormbringer. 

One could argue that the Beatles and the Rolling Stones fall into this category, unless you prefer the early albums, heavy with covers of classics and standards. 

Online TAC

  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 28835
  • Gender: Male
  • Just a decent, normal metal-head fellow
Re: What good bands' first four albums aren't that great
« Reply #8 on: June 07, 2018, 08:06:25 PM »
Thin Lizzy
would have thought the same thing but seeing the OP was TAC i immediately thought Maiden or DT related
Winger Theater Forums................or WTF.  ;D

Offline Stadler

  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 13130
  • Gender: Male
  • Pointing out the "unfunny" since 2017!
Re: What good bands' first four albums aren't that great
« Reply #9 on: June 07, 2018, 08:08:45 PM »
Does Nirvana count? 

EDIT:  No, they only have three albums, and I don't want to count the MTV Unplugged disk, which is excellent.

Offline Kwyjibo

  • Worse troll than Blabbermouth
  • Posts: 3683
  • Gender: Male
Re: What good bands' first four albums aren't that great
« Reply #10 on: June 08, 2018, 01:25:50 AM »
Can't agree on King Crimson, the first is an absolute great record.

Pink Floyd certainly

Journey, I quite like the first records but with Steve Perry they are lifted to another level

and

.
.
.

Metallica *ducks and runs*

Offline Elite

  • The 'other' Rich
  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 11976
  • Gender: Male
  • Inventory!
    • Overhaul
Re: What good bands' first four albums aren't that great
« Reply #11 on: June 08, 2018, 02:13:06 AM »
I can't agree with Porcupine Tree.  The Sky Moves Sideways (3rd studio album) and Signify (4th studio album) are both fantastic and could easily be argued as being amongst their best.

Absolutely. Signify is my favourite PT album and TSMS is easily in the top 5. I also love Up the Downstair.


Does Nirvana count? 

:lol

in that same vein: let me offer Guns 'n Roses.
« Last Edit: June 08, 2018, 02:32:14 AM by Elite »
Hey dude slow the fuck down so we can finish together at the same time.  :biggrin:
Squ
scRa are the resultaten of sound nog bring propey

Offline MirrorMask

  • Posts: 5843
  • Gender: Male
Re: What good bands' first four albums aren't that great
« Reply #12 on: June 08, 2018, 02:14:54 AM »
Easy pick: Pantera? they were glam for the first records.
I use my sig to pimp some bands from Italy! Check out Elvenking (Power / Folk metal), Folkstone (Rock / Medieval metal), Arcana Opera (Gothic/Noir/Heavy metal) and the beautiful voice of Elisa!

Offline RoeDent

  • Posts: 4465
  • Gender: Male
Re: What good bands' first four albums aren't that great
« Reply #13 on: June 08, 2018, 02:17:28 AM »
I disagree about Porcupine Tree. UTD, TSMS and Signify are top drawer, and OTSOL is not a bad album by any means. It's a diverse set of tracks, a 90s equivalent to The White Album.
And you may ask yourself, "How do I work this?"

Offline Lowdz

  • Posts: 7893
  • Gender: Male
Re: What good bands' first four albums aren't that great
« Reply #14 on: June 08, 2018, 04:10:34 AM »
Can't think of many bands I like where the first four aren't great. First couple maybe but not four.

I would have said Scorpions but recently I've found a big appreciation for the UK I years.


Offline Fritzinger

  • Posts: 759
  • Gender: Male
    • Fritzes Musikblog
Re: What good bands' first four albums aren't that great
« Reply #15 on: June 08, 2018, 04:31:49 AM »
King Crimson, seriously? In The Court Of The Crimson King??  :rollin
Lizard was VERY weird but also a masterpiece for me.
I also don't agree with Pink Floyd. More is very underrated imo. Piper and Saucerful don't represent the band's later style, but they were released in 67/68!! To me, they are very good, experimental psychedelic pop albums.

The Beatles' first albums were good, but they got even better with their later ones.
Same with The Who.
me desperté en un mundo con dos tipos de gente: la mas y la menos extrema

Offline Elite

  • The 'other' Rich
  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 11976
  • Gender: Male
  • Inventory!
    • Overhaul
Re: What good bands' first four albums aren't that great
« Reply #16 on: June 08, 2018, 04:38:59 AM »
Yeah, I didn't get the King Crimson nomination either.
Hey dude slow the fuck down so we can finish together at the same time.  :biggrin:
Squ
scRa are the resultaten of sound nog bring propey

Offline Train of Naught

  • I sympathize, with a cockroach
  • Posts: 7019
  • Gender: Male
  • .....and a cockroach
Re: What good bands' first four albums aren't that great
« Reply #17 on: June 08, 2018, 04:40:30 AM »
I think King Geezy & the Leezy Deezy belong here. Most of their best material is on the albums they released last year + Nonagon Infinity
I nosedive, to the FURNAAACE

https://rateyourmusic.com/~Lvialviaquez

Offline jingle.boy

  • DTF's resident deceased dictator
  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 24369
  • Gender: Male
  • The changing of the worrd is inevitabre!!!
Re: What good bands' first four albums aren't that great
« Reply #18 on: June 08, 2018, 05:07:34 AM »
Pink Floyd is the most logical answer.
I didn't know I could handle another 10 inches and it was rough but in the end I'm glad I did it.
warflwwcesfw.
That's meme-speak for "We are really f*****g lazy when we can't eve say full words".

Offline Destiny Of Chaos

  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 12269
  • Gender: Male
Re: What good bands' first four albums aren't that great
« Reply #19 on: June 08, 2018, 05:09:44 AM »
Pink Floyd and Opeth.... although I do like MAYH more than Blackwater Park.

Offline ZKX-2099

  • Posts: 2955
  • Gender: Male
  • The Drifting Drifter
Re: What good bands' first four albums aren't that great
« Reply #20 on: June 08, 2018, 05:20:06 AM »
Tool

Offline Zantera

  • the Flood
  • DTF.org Member
  • *
  • Posts: 12051
  • Gender: Male
  • Feedback overload
    • http://parisinthespring.bandcamp.com/
Re: What good bands' first four albums aren't that great
« Reply #21 on: June 08, 2018, 05:20:19 AM »
I think King Geezy & the Leezy Deezy belong here. Most of their best material is on the albums they released last year + Nonagon Infinity

I think this is broken by Float Along - Fill Your Lungs which is definitely one of their best albums (top5 easily) and has some really strong songs and one of their best - Head On/Pill. The first album is kinda alright, second album is my least favorite from them and then Oddments doesn't rank very highly for me either. So it's close, but I think because of the strength of Float Along they don't quite fit in here.

Offline Destiny Of Chaos

  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 12269
  • Gender: Male

Offline WildRanger

  • Posts: 227
Re: What good bands' first four albums aren't that great
« Reply #23 on: June 08, 2018, 05:39:26 AM »
Am I the first one who will say RUSH?!

Many people mentioned Pink Floyd here, but their debut and A Saucerful of Secrets can wipe the floor with Rush debut, Fly by Night or Caress of Steel anytime.
I always found 2112 an overrated album due to its mediocre and forgettable side 2(side 1 is great without a doubt, though).  ;D

Offline KevShmev

  • EZBoard Elder
  • *****
  • Posts: 27805
  • Gender: Male
Re: What good bands' first four albums aren't that great
« Reply #24 on: June 08, 2018, 05:46:29 AM »
I knew I'd get some push back on King Crimson, but I have never considered the debut album to be that great. It is a good record, but I wouldn't put it in their top tier of records. And I have no use for their 2nd, 3rd and 4th albums.

Offline Fritzinger

  • Posts: 759
  • Gender: Male
    • Fritzes Musikblog
Re: What good bands' first four albums aren't that great
« Reply #25 on: June 08, 2018, 06:18:52 AM »
Pink Floyd is the most logical answer.

This post almost makes me angry  ;D How can you say that, just generalizing it like that?

Tool

This post actually makes me angry  ;D

Am I the first one who will say RUSH?!

Many people mentioned Pink Floyd here, but their debut and A Saucerful of Secrets can wipe the floor with Rush debut, Fly by Night or Caress of Steel anytime.
I always found 2112 an overrated album due to its mediocre and forgettable side 2(side 1 is great without a doubt, though).  ;D


And I wish I had written this post. Yes, why didn't I think of that?? I personally (*preparing to get tracked down and beaten up*) don't find the first side of 2112 THAT great. It is a good track, but imo it has nothing, and I mean NOTHING, on tunes like Close To The Edge, Tarkus, Supper's Ready, or even Hemispheres.
me desperté en un mundo con dos tipos de gente: la mas y la menos extrema

Offline Kattelox

  • Cart Corral Crusader
  • Posts: 4052
Re: What good bands' first four albums aren't that great
« Reply #26 on: June 08, 2018, 07:15:51 AM »
Rush's first 4 albums are freaking fantastic, wtf  :omg:

The debut is fantastic. Fly By Night has like two songs that aren't that hot. Caress of Steel is the best of the first 4. 2112 is the weakest of them all easily, but far from bad (it's leagues ahead of AFTK, that's for sure).
RYM || Last.FM
"No Christ, God, nor religion gave me the answers I was looking for" - Timo Tolkki

Offline jingle.boy

  • DTF's resident deceased dictator
  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 24369
  • Gender: Male
  • The changing of the worrd is inevitabre!!!
Re: What good bands' first four albums aren't that great
« Reply #27 on: June 08, 2018, 07:22:34 AM »
Pink Floyd is the most logical answer.

This post almost makes me angry  ;D How can you say that, just generalizing it like that?

Name one song that gets any airtime in classic rock radio stations.  Until Meddle, they were an obscure prog band at best.  Outside of the UK, they made no impact.  And would anyone say they'd rather listen to any of the first 4 (or 7) in the discography before pretty much any album in the DSOTM-Division Bell run?  RIAA certifications were all over the place for the first 7 albums (the first three weren't even RIAA certified); EVERY album from DSOTM on was multi-Platinum.  I could go on if you'd like.

Name me another band that made such a MONUMENTAL jump in one album (DSOTM), and then sustained it for the next 6 albums (The Final Cut notwithstanding).
I didn't know I could handle another 10 inches and it was rough but in the end I'm glad I did it.
warflwwcesfw.
That's meme-speak for "We are really f*****g lazy when we can't eve say full words".

Offline Elite

  • The 'other' Rich
  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 11976
  • Gender: Male
  • Inventory!
    • Overhaul
Re: What good bands' first four albums aren't that great
« Reply #28 on: June 08, 2018, 07:49:59 AM »
Pink Floyd is the most logical answer.

This post almost makes me angry  ;D How can you say that, just generalizing it like that?

Name one song that gets any airtime in classic rock radio stations.  Until Meddle, they were an obscure prog band at best.  Outside of the UK, they made no impact.

in the Netherlands, 'See Emily Play', which was only released as a single and not even on an album

and from their first couple of albums there's quite some songs that touch a soft spot with fans (Astronomy Domine, Bike, One of These Days etc.)
Hey dude slow the fuck down so we can finish together at the same time.  :biggrin:
Squ
scRa are the resultaten of sound nog bring propey

Offline Stadler

  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 13130
  • Gender: Male
  • Pointing out the "unfunny" since 2017!
Re: What good bands' first four albums aren't that great
« Reply #29 on: June 08, 2018, 09:48:16 AM »
King Crimson, seriously? In The Court Of The Crimson King??  :rollin
Lizard was VERY weird but also a masterpiece for me.
I also don't agree with Pink Floyd. More is very underrated imo. Piper and Saucerful don't represent the band's later style, but they were released in 67/68!! To me, they are very good, experimental psychedelic pop albums.

The Beatles' first albums were good, but they got even better with their later ones.
Same with The Who.

The problem with The Who is that people don't realize how FEW studio  albums they really have.  Tommy is their fourth album.  I agree on their first one, but I  kinda like "A Quick One" and "Who Sell Out" is a really underrated masterpiece.   I find that to be far more creative and interesting than Tommy, even if Tommy is more cogent and streamlined as a story.    (Plus you can argue that "Sell Out" has the seeds of "The Lamb Lies Down On Broadway").   

I bought a "Who" lot on eBay, 10 or so disks, and man oh, man, I had NO idea they were that influential.   I listened chronologically, starting with A Quick One, then Sell Out then Odds and Sods then Tommy...  just about every other song I was like "Wow, so THAT'S where So-and-so got that!"

Offline ChuckSteak

  • Posts: 1242
Re: What good bands' first four albums aren't that great
« Reply #30 on: June 08, 2018, 09:51:52 AM »
If some sissy says Anathema, I will punch him in the face. I'm waiting...  ;D

I can't think of a band whose first four albums I don't enjoy.

And whoever said Pink Floyd: please die!  :tup

Offline Stadler

  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 13130
  • Gender: Male
  • Pointing out the "unfunny" since 2017!
Re: What good bands' first four albums aren't that great
« Reply #31 on: June 08, 2018, 10:10:39 AM »
The problem with Floyd is that if you're not into Syd's thing - and I am most certainly not - then it's not really appealing.    I like the early instrumentals, but almost always when expounded upon by Gilmour later.  The first Floyd song I really, truly love is "Let There Be More Light", and  the first album that really grabbed me was "More" (I LOVE "The Nile Song").   Ummagumma would have made an awesome stand alone live album, but the studio tracks, eh.   

Offline Kattelox

  • Cart Corral Crusader
  • Posts: 4052
Re: What good bands' first four albums aren't that great
« Reply #32 on: June 08, 2018, 10:14:44 AM »
I have never been more confused by a band than when I first heard Floyd's earliest stuff. I was sure I got the wrong band. That is some weird music, and not in a good way for me. It's incredible how much they transformed.
RYM || Last.FM
"No Christ, God, nor religion gave me the answers I was looking for" - Timo Tolkki

Offline Train of Naught

  • I sympathize, with a cockroach
  • Posts: 7019
  • Gender: Male
  • .....and a cockroach
Re: What good bands' first four albums aren't that great
« Reply #33 on: June 08, 2018, 10:17:11 AM »
If some sissy says Anathema, I will punch him in the face. I'm waiting...  ;D
Yeah. I haven't familiarized myself with all their early material yet, but The Silent Enigma is insane.
I nosedive, to the FURNAAACE

https://rateyourmusic.com/~Lvialviaquez

Offline kingshmegland

  • defender of the brew!
  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 39648
  • Gender: Male
  • Take that Beethoven, you deaf bastard!!
Re: What good bands' first four albums aren't that great
« Reply #34 on: June 08, 2018, 10:21:56 AM »
If some sissy says Anathema, I will punch him in the face. I'm waiting...  ;D

I can't think of a band whose first four albums I don't enjoy.

And whoever said Pink Floyd: please die!  :tup

I'm your huckleberry.
“I don't like country music, but I don't mean to denigrate those who do. And for the people who like country music, denigrate means 'put down'.” - Bob Newhart

So wait, we're spelling it wrong and king is spelling it right? What is going on here? :lol -- BlobVanDam