the GENESIS story...

[ivan_2068]

Some interesting points and a lot to discuss as I love

Rick and Roll wrote:

Rarely are bands as prolific or good as when they start out. There's usually not a clear demarcation as to when bands decline, but it's inevitable.

I suggest that you may find that Genesis may have travelled the same road with Hackett on board.

Honestly I don't agree, they could have turned simpler, this was almost impossible to avoid in the late 70's but the reason why Hackett was harrassed and his contributions to Genesis systematically rejected is because he refused to take the easy way.

The relation Hackett - Banks was damaged since the release of Voyage of the Acolyte, Banks was the only Genesis member not involved in this album, so he placed pressure in the members to avoid solo careers (Hackett was the only one with a solid solo career at that point) but when Steve tried to add adventurous compositions to Genesis they were rejected because they wanted to do something simpler.

They had to change with or without Hackett is a fact but I'm sure Steve would have never participated in any post Duke album (Even when I don't like ATTW3 or DUKE, both have a couple good moments), that's for sure.

Rick & Roll wrote:

"Your Own Special Way" is a beautiful tune. But it's certainly pop.

The problem is not the POP "per se" there's good and booring POP, IMHO Genesis POP is of the second class.

Remember that Your Own Special Way is a pure Rutherford song added only because they didn't had enough material and Banks refused to add more Hackett stuff.

It's also important to notice that More Fool Me is in Selling England by the Pound and For Absent Friends in Nursery Cryme, there was some room for POP, but not to turn the band into a parody with 100% boring Adult Contemporary Pop.

If I want POP I buy a Fleetwood Mac or Cranverries album, I know what I'm paying for but I won0't buy a Genesis, Yes, King Crimson or VDGG album to listen POP

Rick and Roll wrote:

I'm not suggesting to see Genesis now. Personally iIwould not (arena setting, spoiled on good venues, price, etc). But I like some of the post-Duke material. If you don't like "Fading Lights" from "We Can't Dance", you have really just haven't given it a chance. It stands up to most of their great early material.

Honestly I hate everything they did after W&W including the insane mutilation of most Hackett parts in Seconds Out and that horrible Supper's Ready charicature by Collins.

Rick and Roll wrote:

And why does Gabriel get a free pass for "Sledgehammer"? Again personally I like the song. but it was as popular, overplayed, and trite as most of later Genesis.

Again, it's not one of Gabriel best moments but it's 1'000,000 times better than aberrations as Who Dunitt? or Illegal Alien.

And nobody says Gabriel alone made too much Prog, but all his projects are far more adventurous than anything Genesis did after Steve left.

Rick and Roll wrote:

Remember, I'm someone whose favorite Genesis record is Selling England, song is Musical Box, etc. i have no special interest in or affinity for post-Hackett Genesis. But take each record on its own merits.

I can't find a single merit in post Hackett Genesis, I could only wish they would have retired or at least had the decency to change the band name.

Rick and Roll wrote:

Yes can put out some less than stellar material. they don't seem to get the same treatment.

Well, 90125 and Big Generator are pretty horrendous also.

Iván

[Rick and Roll]

Originally Posted by ivan_2068

Honestly I don't agree, they could have turned simpler, this was almost impossible to avoid in the late 70's but the reason why Hackett was harrassed and his contributions to Genesis systematically rejected is because he refused to take the easy way.


Remember that Your Own Special Way is a pure Rutherford song added only because they didn't had enough material and Banks refused to add more Hackett stuff.

Honestly I hate everything they did after W&W including the insane mutilation of most Hackett parts in Seconds Out and that horrible Supper's Ready charicature by Collins.

I can't find a single merit in post Hackett Genesis, I could only wish they would have retired or at least had the decency to change the band name.


Iván

I was under the impression that Hackett was repressed from the beginning. this did not start after Gabriel left. Tony Banks and Mike Rutherford have always exerted the most imfluence.

Right about Rutherford. that's what I've been saying for years about Genesis. This isn't a Collins thing. Let's not forget he was in Brand X from 1976-1980. Banks and Rutherford are as much to "blame".

I saw them in 1982 do Supper's Ready. Pretty damn good.

There's a thousand other bands you could say the same thing about. Why should they change their name?

On a lighter note.....what's going on with this Peruvian erotic theme park?

[Roger -Dot- Lee(Admin)]

Dr. Dot does his best to get caught up, and enters the fray late in the game, much like the US during WWI

Originally Posted by Ivan_2068

Well, 90125 and Big Generator are pretty horrendous also.

And you're giving Union a pass? Or is it that it's just so bad that it doesn't deserve to be considered 'Yes'?

Originally Posted by Rick and Roll

Right about Rutherford. that's what I've been saying for years about Genesis. This isn't a Collins thing. Let's not forget he was in Brand X from 1976-1980. Banks and Rutherford are as much to "blame".

It's a funny thing about Genesis and their internal dynamics. Everyone is quick to point out how Banks and Rutherford had such influence, but look how drastically the band changed after the various departures: Hackett and Gabriel made a huge impact as is evidenced by how drastically the sound and band dynamics changed after their departures. They went from definitive prog to kinda prog in the early post-Gabriel/Hackett era and slid rapidly down to excessively pop right before Phil said goodbye. The final album was, to put it mildly, not worth the time to download, let alone worth the money to buy.

I've seen post Gabriel Genesis, and I've seen Phil on his own(*). I'll see Phil before I see Genesis.

Originally Posted by Vaxman, earlier

That song (Sledgehammer) was deplorably trite.

It goes well beyond deplorably trite. It poisoned me on Peter Gabriel for years, truthfully until I first logged in here, found "Blood of Eden" and thought "Hrm. Maybe Peter Gabriel isn't the pond scum that I thought he was, and maybe Biko wasn't a fluke afterall..."

But Jim's right: Stylistically, Peter Gabriel is all over the map. It seems he can't settle on one sound and stick with it and develop it past a single album.

But about Phil Collins: I was extremely fortunate enough to stumble upon a quick gig that allowed me to see him live with a '40s era big band. He had a full set and was in high form that night. I was helping a friend lay cables and the like and got to watch back stage. I found a nice perch up on the lighting fixtures (this was while I was still healthy enough to do such niceties as climb ladders and the like), just off stage and at about a 120 degree angle off his right shoulder. Best seat in the house, hands down. I can take or leave him as a singer, but anyone -- ANYONE -- would be hard pressed to top him on a full set. It made the climb well worth it, as well as the hassles of having to climb up on the light fixtures.

(*) I was with a drop dead gorgeous brunette (didn't work out, much to my chagrin) who was a big Phil fan. So yes, I had ulterior motives.

[ivan_2068]

Rick and Roll wrote:

I was under the impression that Hackett was repressed from the beginning. this did not start after Gabriel left. Tony Banks and Mike Rutherford have always exerted the most imfluence.

Well, in the Gabriel era the roles were clear in Genesis, Tony made 90% of the music and Peter did 90% of the lyrics, Hackett worked with Tony creating that atmosp´here that made Genesis famous, Rutherford and Collins almost did nothing except a couple of tracks left to them.

Everybody knew clearly what their role was, nobody asked for more.

When Peter left and specially after Voyage, Hackett realized that he could write in the same level as Banks so he wanted a piece of the cake, but Tony wasn't ready to leave his control so he preferred to divide it among the band (This would still leave Banks as the main songwritter and the rest) instead of leaving Hackett as an equal in the songwritting.

Get one of the ATOTT videos or Genesis In Concert with Collins singing and Bill Bruford on drums, you can see that the cameras don't care for Steve, it's like the three friends and the others, take alook if you have it, the cameras only follow Phil and Tomny, a bit less Mike but there's not a single close uop of Steve.

Rick and Roll wrote:

Right about Rutherford. that's what I've been saying for years about Genesis. This isn't a Collins thing. Let's not forget he was in Brand X from 1976-1980. Banks and Rutherford are as much to "blame".

That was only at the beginning of the three man era, the problem with Tony is that he's not a natural leader, he made his best or his most popular material when he had somebody pushing him (His solo career is a prove of that), ATTW3 and DUKE are mostly by Tony (Some form of hybrids) but in ABACAB Phil took the lead of the band, he started with the Phoenix Horns, Tony didn't wanted Earth Wind & Fire with them but Collins made a big issue and all had to accept, that was the end of the band it was Collins and his session musicians.

The later Genesis albums sound almost exactly as Phil's solo stuff, there's people that believe somgs loke Sussudio are Genesis tracks, it's simply depressive.

Roger-Dot-Lee wrote:

And you're giving Union a pass? Or is it that it's just so bad that it doesn't deserve to be considered 'Yes'?

I agree Onion is terrible also but at least there was hope seing Bruford, Wakeman and Howe back, Big Generator was the lowest point of Yes career.

Iván

[Rick and Roll]

Originally Posted by ivan_2068

Rick and Roll wrote:


Get one of the ATOTT videos or Genesis In Concert with Collins singing and Bill Bruford on drums, you can see that the cameras don't care for Steve, it's like the three friends and the others, take alook if you have it, the cameras only follow Phil and Tomny, a bit less Mike but there's not a single close uop of Steve.

The later Genesis albums sound almost exactly as Phil's solo stuff, there's people that believe somgs loke Sussudio are Genesis tracks, it's simply depressive.

I agree Onion is terrible also but at least there was hope seing Bruford, Wakeman and Howe back, Big Generator was the lowest point of Yes career.

Iván

I don't think the camera thing matters a lick. Come to think of it, Lamb side three, W and W, and trick have more Hackett than any other Genesis record. He wrote plenty.

I don't find the later Genesis similar to the solo Collins. If anything, a lot is similar to what Rutherford was writing at that time. Collins isn't responsible for the awful instrumental part of Abacab.

That people think Sussudio or whatever it's called is Genesis just don't know the band. They just recognize the vocals.

What about some of the goofy songs Gabriel used to sing for Genesis? Is that so much different? Some of Supper's Ready, Counting Out Time, etc, is that really prog? I prefer early genesis..I just don't get the blinders.

I like Union

I have to leave for the day, but Ivan bear in mind this is all friendly discourse...I always enjoy your comments and your passion for Genesis

[ivan_2068]

Rick and Roll wrote:

I don't think the camera thing matters a lick. Come to think of it, Lamb side three, W and W, and trick have more Hackett than any other Genesis record. He wrote plenty.

Yes it matters Rick, the band participates in the edition of the video, and you can clearly see there three friends (Collins, Banks and Rutherford) plus two guests Hackett and Bruford.

1/2 in serious 1/2 as a joke but Banks has said something like "Hackett left us so we deleted his parts from Supper's Ready".

Trick doiesn't really have that much of Hackett on the other had W&W has much more, but his best stuff (Added to his second and third albums) was rejected top place Wot Gorilla? and the horrendous YOSW.



Rick and Roll wrote:

I don't find the later Genesis similar to the solo Collins. If anything, a lot is similar to what Rutherford was writing at that time. Collins isn't responsible for the awful instrumental part of Abacab.

Honestly all the soft songs from ABACAB to We Can't Dance sound as Collins solo to me.

Rick and Roll wrote:

That people think Sussudio or whatever it's called is Genesis just don't know the band. They just recognize the vocals.

Well, the contemporary adult POP is present in both, the sound, arrangements are all similar and both as boring.

Rick and Roll wrote:

What about some of the goofy songs Gabriel used to sing for Genesis? Is that so much different? Some of Supper's Ready, Counting Out Time, etc, is that really prog? I prefer early genesis..I just don't get the blinders.

Suppers's Ready is prrobably the best epic ever, any joke is erased by the mind blowing There's an angel standing in the sun or the incredible solo.

BTW: ëter only made the lyrics for The Lamb, he didn't added a single note, so Counting Out Time is to be credited to Tony.

Rick and Roll wrote:

I like Union

It gave me hope but like it is a strong word


Rick and Roll wrote:

I have to leave for the day, but Ivan bear in mind this is all friendly discourse...I always enjoy your comments and your passion for Genesis

Thanks, I enjoy it also.

Iván

[VAXman(Admin)]

Originally Posted by ivan_2068

Trick doiesn't really have that much of Hackett on the other had W&W has much more, but his best stuff (Added to his second and third albums) was rejected top place Wot Gorilla? and the horrendous YOSW.

Like Blood on the Rooftops! I love Hackett's guitar in that and the poignant lyrics too.

[addisleighpark]

I am happy to see Genesis come back together, however playing hits from their last three albums is more about a corporate payday than a money making venture for the band members themselves. These guys don't need the money, as I'm sure their royalty checks would attest. But if anyone has noticed the trend out there for "reunion tours" of older groups, those tours are designed to help out a floundering industry that has been folding in on itself economically for quite some time. Music fans have had to endure lousy record after lousy record for almost 30 years now....as if a corporate coup happened, and we now have executives with no musical background telling trained musicians that catering to the lowest common denominator is the wave of the future. I find it ironic that these same executives have to reach back to the past for bands that were successful on their own musical terms before the "coup" (just another of my music industry conspiracy theories) in order to bail out an industry that's having a hard time financially right now.

[Rick and Roll]

Originally Posted by addisleighpark

I am happy to see Genesis come back together, however playing hits from their last three albums is more about a corporate payday than a money making venture for the band members themselves. These guys don't need the money, as I'm sure their royalty checks would attest.

Hi addis, good to see you on board...

Who really knows? Is one musician more wealthy than another? Who has wasted their money, who has invested, and so on.

All I know is that Genesis is touring, and the tickets are priced too high at venues I don't care to go to. So I won't go. I don't have a care about who gets what, etc. If they can get it, get it. Let them get it.

They may make More money by playing the really old stuff. Why not? I'd bet they get just as many purchases. It's all supply and demand.

When a product comes out that I feel is worth it, I will obtain it. It doesn't concern me who benefits. This isn't the Ohio Players in 1973 who got screwed out of their money or John Fogarty, who couldn't play his own songs for 25 years. Genesis is established, and they should do what they want.

As long as I can see 2 shows a month, and I can see high-quality bands in tiny venues, I'm good. I have Crack the Sky in front of 500 tonight, Frogg Cafe/Rare Blend for 50 on Dec 2, and saw Tunnels with 20 (!) people last week at $15 a pop (Ain't NOBODY making money there).

They're only one band....they haven't done anything worthwhile live since 1982, so what are we losing out on?

[Hawksun]

Originally Posted by addisleighpark

Music fans have had to endure lousy record after lousy record for almost 30 years now....

I presume that by "Music fans" you mean yourself, because the last 30 years (or from 1976 onwards, if you prefer) have seen some great records being released, a trend which still continues to this day.

And Rick pretty much summed up why we shouldn't care about Genesis being rich or not.

[ivan_2068]

Originally Posted by addisleighpark

These guys don't need the money, as I'm sure their royalty checks would attest.

There's nothing as don't need the money, Phil is in the middle of a divorce that could cost him 50% of his earnings and when so much money is ibnvolved, things are more expensive for the wealthy guy.

Probably his wife lawyers are working in base of a "Cuota Litis", in other words they will charge her a percentage of whatever they get, so she probably is not investing a dime.

On the other hand, if you are sued and you can loose a hunbdreed millions, no lawyer will work for free, they will charge Phil Collins a percentage of what he can loose with a very high advance payment.

Mike and Tony have not done any really profitable thing in the last 13 or 14 years and when you have more money, you expend much more.

I don't believe they are in bankrupt but their huge fortunes may be in risk of becoming simply small fortunes and when you're rich enough, this must be terribly fightening.

And even if they are rich, everybody wants to be richer, look at Bill Gates, he has enough money for him and probably ten more generations but still he's working for more.

Iván

[RogorMortis]

And even if they are rich, everybody wants to be richer, look at Bill Gates, he has enough money for him and probably ten more generations but still he's working for more

That's a very dangerous postulation as the majority here would say he's never worked in his life. Gates is more of a bastard than genius as he's trodden on so many and Microsoft is "shit". I use Microsoft products and would have like to have "killed" Gates several times for the faulty stuff they put out. Too much of a monopoly.

Music fans have had to endure lousy record after lousy record for almost 30 years now...

Interesting theory - although I don't agree as such but it depends from what you compare from. The best prog years are 1970-1975 and if you compare from there then you will get a load of lousy records but the standard from the last 8 years has improved greatly.

I'll go along with Rich but don't come here. Denmark is a prog desert for live acts. I have to go very far to see anything and it gets expensive and it drives me crazy.

[VAXman(Admin)]

Originally Posted by RogorMortis

That's a very dangerous postulation as the majority here would say he's never worked in his life. Gates is more of a bastard than genius as he's trodden on so many and Microsoft is "shit". I use Microsoft products and would have like to have "killed" Gates several times for the faulty stuff they put out. Too much of a monopoly.

Billzebub has done more harm to the computing industry than he has done good. What people have had to endure with Micro$oft products just did not have to be. Other vendors were able to foresee the problems Billzebub has introduced but Billzebub's arrogance and greed blinded him too much to look at what his predecessors had already learned. Those whom are too stupid to heed history's warnings are doomed to repeat them.

Originally Posted by RogorMortis

I'll go along with Rich but don't come here. Denmark is a prog desert for live acts. I have to go very far to see anything and it gets expensive and it drives me crazy.

But you do have topless traffic control which more than evens the playing field!

[Methem]

Originally Posted by RogorMortis

I use Microsoft products and would have like to have "killed" Gates several times for the faulty stuff they put out.

http://www.tranquileye.com/cyber/197...hobbyists.html

Check the last sentence on that... Pretty ironic.


-Methem

[Rick and Roll]

Originally Posted by ivan_2068

There's nothing as don't need the money, Phil is in the middle of a divorce that could cost him 50% of his earnings and when so much money is ibnvolved, things are more expensive for the wealthy guy.

Probably his wife lawyers are working in base of a "Cuota Litis", in other words they will charge her a percentage of whatever they get, so she probably is not investing a dime.

On the other hand, if you are sued and you can loose a hunbdreed millions, no lawyer will work for free, they will charge Phil Collins a percentage of what he can loose with a very high advance payment.

Mike and Tony have not done any really profitable thing in the last 13 or 14 years and when you have more money, you expend much more.

I don't believe they are in bankrupt but their huge fortunes may be in risk of becoming simply small fortunes and when you're rich enough, this must be terribly fightening.

And even if they are rich, everybody wants to be richer, look at Bill Gates, he has enough money for him and probably ten more generations but still he's working for more.

Iván

I really don't believe that they are touring for the money. And I don't believe that they write songs to make hits.

The three of them (again, all are responsible) have made the music you dislike for over 25 years. This is just what they do. Call it what you will, but it's not a commercial pursuit with musical overtones. It's music that is commercially successful. There's a difference.

There is no Monopoly here. What Genesis is doing has zero effect on the purchase habits for any other artist.

How did Bill Gates get in the conversation? I find the analogy irrelevant.

[SqualorMTL]

I was mildly excited when I first hear about this, then I read the fine print.......

The last tour I saw of them was during "Abacab". Good show but that was the end of my love affair with this band. They were partly the reason why I embraced punk rock in the early 80's.

I'd rather go see Musical Box (Quebec band) than the aging Genesis - lite that will be touring.

[ivan_2068]

Respéctfully Disagree Rick and this are my arguments:

Originally Posted by Rick and Roll

I really don't believe that they are touring for the money. And I don't believe that they write songs to make hits.

I do believe they went commercial and that they wrote songs with the purpose of reaching the charts because:

POP MUSIC: For popular music (music produced commercially rather than art or folk music),
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pop_music

1.- They changed complex structures to simple ABAB (Verse - Chorus - Verse - Chorus) mainly.

The basic form for pop music is the song and usually a song consisting of verse and repeated chorus.
http://top40.about.com/od/popmusic101/a/popmusic.htm

2.- They went for a shorter lenght of songs in order to have radio airplay.

Most often the songs are between 2 1/2 minutes and 5 1/2 minutes in length. There have been notable exceptions. The Beatles' "Hey Jude" was an epic 7 minutes in length. However, in many cases, if the song is abnormally long, an edited version is released for radio airplay such as in the case of Don McLean's "American Pie." It was edited down from its original 8 1/2 minutes length to just over 4 minutes for radio airplay.
http://top40.about.com/od/popmusic101/a/popmusic.htm

3.- The lyrics passed from ambituos and elegant to simple and mnore romantic oriented in some cases.

It's evident that since "Follow You, Follow Me" reached the charts and they received a lot of cash, they changed for a more commercial approach.

Originally Posted by Rick and Roll

The three of them (again, all are responsible) have made the music you dislike for over 25 years. This is just what they do. Call it what you will, but it's not a commercial pursuit with musical overtones. It's music that is commercially successful. There's a difference.

IMO and as I explained in the previous point, they went fopr a cokmmercial approach.

Pop music is a genre of popular music distinguished from classical or art music and from folk music [1]. The term indicates specific stylistic traits, but the genre also includes elements of rock, hip hop, dance, and country, making it a flexible category. The expression "pop music" may also be used to refer to particular subgenres (within the pop music genre) that are in some cases referred to as soft rock and pop/rock. The pop music genre also often involves mass marketing and consumer-driven efforts by major record companies, which makes it an often scorned genre by non-mainstream musicians.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pop_music

Reminds me of late Genesis

Originally Posted by Rick and Roll

There is no Monopoly here. What Genesis is doing has zero effect on the purchase habits for any other artist.

Agree with you in this point.

Originally Posted by Rick and Roll

How did Bill Gates get in the conversation? I find the analogy irrelevant.

It's only an example that there's not such thing as "I have enough money", the more people have, the more they want, that's part of human nature.

But again it's only my opinion and subject to error.

Iván

[wildk]

Wow! A lots been said here. My view is this Genesis can do what they want. It's their music, their call. However, it appears to me that somehow the BIG THREE do not seem to appreciate their place in music history. Genesis prog of the 70s was unique. It was prog but with a firm basis in good songwriting. This is something some prog bands seem to bypass. What I'd like to see is Genesis perform with Gabriel, with Hackett playing their strongest stuff. Pete might only dress up for the encore.

I saw Genesis in 77' - Collins was amazing but he wants to forget his Tolkeinisque dwarf look as if it never happened. What shook me was the immensity of the show (Boeing 747 landing lights as I remember. REAL dry ice. Bass Pedals that sent you to the gents) Musically, faultless and a feast for the eyes that stays with me today. There was no over the top showing apart from IKWIK tambourine routine.

The Knebworth show 1978 was good too.

I'm sure this will not happen. Perhaps it never can. Perhaps it's best left to what's left of my memory.

Wildk

[abmlober]

For me Genesis is just like three or four different bands not staying on the same feet, producing different styles. Each of their albums has a different value for me. Why have three albums with stuff like Supper's Ready? And missing some other stuff because of that? That would be like listening to "Status Quo" :-) I enjoy this long song because of its uniqueness.

I'll see the Frankfurt (Germany) show if nothing bad happens until next June/July. I got two ugly places in the back, but at least I got two!

I have seen them in Mannheim (Maimarkt Halle) at a small place that wasn't half full, playing their last album (Calling...). It was a sad moment, just to know to never have seen their big shows because I was to young then.

And now I just WANT to see them at any price. Be it good or bad.

[kirk]

Yeah...put me down for "moneygrab" also.

Have we all forgotten there was a post-Collins Genesis also ?
..Or is that a hysterical blindness kind of thing?
If Rutherford and Banks didn't need the bux, what the hell
was that about?

Pass on the tour. Bring Gabriel and Hackett into the equation,
then i'll go, arena or wherever.



K