| Author |
 Topic Search  Topic Options
|
Chris S 
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: June 09 2004
Location: Front Range
Status: Offline
Points: 7028
|
 Posted: January 24 2006 at 13:08 |
 Norbert wrote:
russellk wrote:
Ivan's continued attacks on Collins are tiresome. Read the literature:
Banks exerted the most influence throughout their career. And as for
saying that Genesis' albums sound almost exactly like Collins' solo
albums, go and listen again. There is nothing remotely like Tonight,
Tonight, Tonight or Duke's Travels or Domino or Fading Lights or Dodo/
Lurker on any of Collins' solo albums. And there is very little like Sissudio
or You Can't Hurry Love on any Genesis album -- one or two songs,
perhaps, not much more. Much of their Duke and beyond material was
more pop-oriented, with a number of saccharin ballads, I'll agree with
that. But, as others have said, that was in line with the times, as was the
1980s production sensibilities.
Ivan, you pride yourself on being a good debater. But listen to yourself.
You wanted Genesis to 'keep at least part of the original sound and
quality.' Really? And just when would it cease being original? 1983? 1990?
I thought the idea of progressive music was to -- progress?
And as for the claim: 'when they became POP they were just another band
giving the people simple music that anybody could make' -- how can you
argue that with a straight face? You really think multi-million selling pop
can be made by anybody? Anybody? Virtually every prog group who tried
it failed, and that includes virtually all of them! It seems to be an integral
part of progressive-snobbery to regard pop music as inferior, simpler,
beneath contempt. If it was that simple there'd be a lot more millionaires
around ...
Phil Collins was either a hero nor a villain. He was merely a talented
musician who experienced success in at least two separate forms of
music. I do not see how that makes him the object of invective and
exaggeration that he has become in this forum. |
The "progress" of the 80's Genesis is a regress.From Homo Sapiens to Australopithecus.
But I don't blame this on Phil Collins alone.
Multi-million selling pop can be made by anyone who is stupid enough. These "millioaire stars "are nothing more than tools and creatures of the record companies. With some support anyone could be the next Britney Spears.Musical talent is really not required for that.
|
What a load of drivel. Comparing Britney Spears to Phil Collins in terms of marketability. You have much to learn...but it is OK with a name like Norbert the world will forgive you.
|
|
<font color=Brown>Music - The Sound Librarian
...As I venture through the slipstream, between the viaducts in your dreams...[/COLOR]
|
 |
Atkingani
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator / Retired Admin
Joined: October 21 2005
Location: Terra Brasilis
Status: Offline
Points: 12288
|
Posted: January 24 2006 at 13:14 |
Threads about Collins exist in all progressive forums I visited (not only in English) with some defending him while others hit him. 
When the name Phil Collins is mentioned I remember that tape of REAL Genesis performing "Supper's ready", in 1973 or 1974, and Peter Gabriel doing the intro, talking about birds and worms and initiating a tune of 'Jerusalem bogie' asking: "Faster, Phil, faster...". The other members appear smiling, some ironically; for some reason I guess that Gabriel wouldn't ever ask Banks, Rutherford or Hackett to go faster or any other pace. The way Gabriel salutes Collins after the tune is much more like a nobleman gently greeting a peasant. 
These series of odd events associated with Phil's precocious baldness and short height (for British standards) provided the caldron were revenge was stewed. The greatest revenge was transform Genesis into a popish band - and I agree that they made pop in a higher level than the average. 
The fact is that Phil, the little drummer boy, the peasant still loves Gabriel, the thinker, the noble, a lot. 
Edited by Atkingani
|
|
Guigo
~~~~~~
|
|
bluetailfly
Forum Senior Member
Joined: January 28 2005
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 1383
|
Posted: January 24 2006 at 13:29 |
You know, that song "Take Me Home" is an excellent song, captures a sentiment perfectly. Collins is a powerful creative force, no doubt.
|
|
"The red polygon's only desire / is to get to the blue triangle."
|
|
erlenst
Forum Senior Member
Joined: May 17 2005
Location: Denmark
Status: Offline
Points: 387
|
Posted: January 24 2006 at 13:44 |
|
|
|
ken4musiq
Forum Senior Member
Joined: January 14 2006
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 446
|
Posted: January 24 2006 at 13:52 |
By 1974 most of the prog bands were in hiatus: ELP, Yes, Moody Blues, Procol Harum, Renaissance and King Crimson. The future of many of these bands was in question. There is that period between 1975 and 1977 where prog is virtually at a standstill. Sure some of the minor bands are still doing some fine, and even some of their best work. But for the most part, the heavies were taking a holiday to redefine the band. Most would emerge transformed. for example, the bluesy the title track for Going for the One was a real surprise. I don't think that it is any accident that Genesis released two albums in 1976. They were trying to tap into the American market, and make some money while the other bands were on holiday. Trick of the Tale really shows the influence of the American folk rock at the time: America, Eagles, though it is a little old by that time. Your Own Special Way is pure California mid-70's pop. With Follow You Follow Me they had found that synth pop sound that would dominate pop music for the next decade. They may have even been the first to be successful at it.
Edited by ken4musiq
|
|
Thufir Hawat
Forum Senior Member
Joined: January 09 2006
Location: Antarctica
Status: Offline
Points: 355
|
Posted: January 24 2006 at 17:34 |
Collins was also one of the key people in
The development of mellow 80’s pop, after
He killed a great band of course. Look on
The bright side a least Steve Hackett has
Had a good career.
|
|
"I can't see through my eye lids"
|
|
Rob_Miller
Forum Newbie
Joined: January 19 2006
Location: Canada
Status: Offline
Points: 9
|
Posted: January 24 2006 at 18:56 |
|
I think it was good that Collins led the band into becoming mostly pop
music because he wanted to secure his future by playing music more
people would like in order to gain money. He probably wanted to
have extra money for himself and the other band members so they can
continue writing music that they enjoy. Also, I think Phil
Collins is a very talented artist and is a very creative artist and
mixes alot of neat world themes and melodies with pop and rock.
Alot of his pop stuff also has progressive elements in it even until
this day (changes keys frequently, odd time signature fluctuations,
etc.), but still, that shouldn't make him a bad artist.. they
just happened to change the style of music. Also, do you really
think it was JUST his decision to make the band into an 80's pop/rock
band? If the others did not want the stlye of music to change,
they probably would have either a) kick him out of the band, or b) find
a new band... but they stayed. What does that hint?
|
|
“Music is the melody whose text is the world.” - Arthur Schopenhauer
|
|
walrus
Forum Senior Member
Joined: March 29 2005
Location: Mexico
Status: Offline
Points: 286
|
Posted: January 24 2006 at 19:25 |
Man Overboard wrote:
lucas wrote:
PC is a very fine drummer, one of my favourites, and he doesn't sing bad (especially on 'No jacket required') so please stop such childish discussion. He is one of the rare drummers who didn't record an album for the art of drumming. And he is not to blame in genesis' change of direction : other prog bands followed the same path (Le Orme, Yes, Banco, ELP, King Crimson, Renaissance, Jethro Tull and many more). And was PG still prog after he left Genesis : OBVIOUSLY NOT.
|
King Crimson never followed that path. Never.
|
Youre right, Crimson never fell down to popish music, crimson always had remain their standart of quality, some albums are better than others, but they never sell themselves to comerciality....
|
|
you and whose army?
|
|
walrus
Forum Senior Member
Joined: March 29 2005
Location: Mexico
Status: Offline
Points: 286
|
Posted: January 24 2006 at 19:38 |
ken4musiq wrote:
If you really know about prog music you should know that collins always was the mastermind of genesis. >>>
His presence was most profound on the first two albums.
Actually there are two Genesis, or Genesi in the Latin. The band that was post-Gabriel is a different band so comparing the two is probably faulted. From Trick of the Tail forward, it is obvious that the boys are going for the mainstream American audience, where the money was. I like the pop stuff. I've always loved Abacab and quite frankly, I could do nothing but give Collins my full respect for the way he was able to dominate the pop music industry in the 1980s. He certainly had more talent than Madonna.
Genesis was the quintessential Prog rock band. I could imagine that Genesis was quite special to the English audience that revered them in the early 1970s. Yes was a pop band; they were also Collins' favorite band. He hoped to audition for them back in 1971 when Bruford was first thinking of leaving. ELP was a supergroup; Jethro Tull was a blues band. Pink Floyd was a psychadelic band. Gentle Giant, Soft Machine and King Crimson were pseudo-jazz fusion bands. Whatever prog was, Genesis defined its purist manifestation.
|
Maybe you dont remember, King crimson invented the genre, and they are the only old progband who doesnt make crap music for sell millions.
Anyway, early genesis was a really great band, but for me, they didnt defined the purist manifestation of prog..
|
|
you and whose army?
|
|
ken4musiq
Forum Senior Member
Joined: January 14 2006
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 446
|
Posted: January 24 2006 at 20:39 |
Maybe you dont remember, King Crimson invented the genre, and they are the only old progband who doesnt make crap music for sell millions. >>>
The idea that prog was invented by KC is a myth, although it is a widely held and rather mainstream opinion. The term prog rock was being used by rock journalists as early as 1968. Procol Harum and The Nice were already doing prog before KC was even producing records. For early musicians of and enthusiasts of progressive rock in England, Genesis defined the aesthetic. King Crimson was too influenced by jazz to be purely prog rock and even Fripp stated that later KC was not to be associated with prog rock.
Edited by ken4musiq
|
|
Peter
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: January 31 2004
Location: Canada
Status: Offline
Points: 9669
|
Posted: January 24 2006 at 23:36 |
Well, that lipstick alone is a crime!
 
|
|
"And, has thou slain the Jabberwock?
Come to my arms, my beamish boy!
O frabjous day! Callooh! Callay!'
He chortled in his joy.
|
|
Cygnus X-2
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: December 24 2004
Location: Bucketheadland
Status: Offline
Points: 21342
|
Posted: January 24 2006 at 23:39 |
I will say one thing in the defense of Collins in the 80's... and that is he made a damn good Uncle Ernie during The Who's Tommy tour of 1989.
|
|
|
|
walrus
Forum Senior Member
Joined: March 29 2005
Location: Mexico
Status: Offline
Points: 286
|
Posted: January 24 2006 at 23:48 |
|
An advice, dont believe all that you read...
before crimson, some groups, even the beatles, did music that influenced the birth of the genre, but the group that take all that influences in a new and different musical direction was crimson....
|
|
you and whose army?
|
|
The Miracle
Prog Reviewer
Joined: May 29 2005
Location: hell
Status: Offline
Points: 28427
|
Posted: January 24 2006 at 23:50 |
erlenst wrote:
The Miracle wrote:
He was the one who made Genesis sell out. Once Hackett left, he really became the mastermind, and killed a great band. And his solo career was cheap pop too! |
EXPLAIN !!! NOW !! I am sick of people puking out stuff like this, when it actually makes no sense ! What was Banks and Rutherford then ? Mindless sheep ?? How will you explain their role in the process of selling out ?
|
"We thought, 'f*ck it, let's sell out" -Phil
They had, of course, some involvement, but Phil had the poppiest career, sand he was the songwriter, Banks and Rutherford were almost session musicians for him on the later albums They didn't do too well on their own either, but it was Collins who started it all.
|
|
|
|
CryoftheCarrots
Forum Senior Member
Joined: November 29 2005
Location: Australia
Status: Offline
Points: 674
|
Posted: January 25 2006 at 01:19 |
It seems no other performer in prog circles can incite as much passionate debate for or against as Phil Collins.Phil I salute you.Thanks for all your contributions good or bad over the years. 
Edited by CryoftheCarrots
|
|
richardh
Prog Reviewer
Joined: February 18 2004
Location: United Kingdom
Status: Offline
Points: 29079
|
Posted: January 25 2006 at 02:48 |
ken4musiq wrote:
Maybe you dont remember, King Crimson invented the genre, and they are the only old progband who doesnt make crap music for sell millions. >>>
The idea that prog was invented by KC is a myth, although it is a widely held and rather mainstream opinion. The term prog rock was being used by rock journalists as early as 1968. Procol Harum and The Nice were already doing prog before KC was even producing records. For early musicians of and enthusiasts of progressive rock in England, Genesis defined the aesthetic. King Crimson was too influenced by jazz to be purely prog rock and even Fripp stated that later KC was not to be associated with prog rock.
|
The first real prog rock album that I know of is In The Court Of The Crimson King.Maybe they didn't invent it exactly but that was an album that defined the genre very well.None of the other bands were close to Crimson at the time IMO.
|
|
Norbert
Forum Senior Member
Joined: October 20 2005
Location: Hungary
Status: Offline
Points: 2506
|
Posted: January 25 2006 at 03:04 |
Chris Stacey wrote:
Norbert wrote:
russellk wrote:
Ivan's continued attacks on Collins are tiresome. Read the literature:
Banks exerted the most influence throughout their career. And as for
saying that Genesis' albums sound almost exactly like Collins' solo
albums, go and listen again. There is nothing remotely like Tonight,
Tonight, Tonight or Duke's Travels or Domino or Fading Lights or Dodo/
Lurker on any of Collins' solo albums. And there is very little like Sissudio
or You Can't Hurry Love on any Genesis album -- one or two songs,
perhaps, not much more. Much of their Duke and beyond material was
more pop-oriented, with a number of saccharin ballads, I'll agree with
that. But, as others have said, that was in line with the times, as was the
1980s production sensibilities.
Ivan, you pride yourself on being a good debater. But listen to yourself.
You wanted Genesis to 'keep at least part of the original sound and
quality.' Really? And just when would it cease being original? 1983? 1990?
I thought the idea of progressive music was to -- progress?
And as for the claim: 'when they became POP they were just another band
giving the people simple music that anybody could make' -- how can you
argue that with a straight face? You really think multi-million selling pop
can be made by anybody? Anybody? Virtually every prog group who tried
it failed, and that includes virtually all of them! It seems to be an integral
part of progressive-snobbery to regard pop music as inferior, simpler,
beneath contempt. If it was that simple there'd be a lot more millionaires
around ...
Phil Collins was either a hero nor a villain. He was merely a talented
musician who experienced success in at least two separate forms of
music. I do not see how that makes him the object of invective and
exaggeration that he has become in this forum. |
The "progress" of the 80's Genesis is a regress.From Homo Sapiens to Australopithecus.
But I don't blame this on Phil Collins alone.
Multi-million selling pop can be made by anyone who is stupid enough. These "millioaire stars "are nothing more than tools and creatures of the record companies. With some support anyone could be the next Britney Spears.Musical talent is really not required for that.
|
What a load of drivel. Comparing Britney Spears to Phil Collins in terms of marketability. You have much to learn...but it is OK with a name like Norbert the world will forgive you.
|
What's this personal attack on me? Read the guidelines my friend. 
I don't believe that Collins and Spears are the same, I just wanted to point out that becoming
a famous pop star does not require any kind of special talent.
|
|
BiGi
Forum Senior Member
Joined: June 01 2005
Location: Italy
Status: Offline
Points: 848
|
Posted: January 25 2006 at 03:14 |
Norbert wrote:
I don't believe that Collins and Spears are the same, I just wanted to point out that becoming a famous pop star does not require any kind of special talent. |
No?
And what does it require?
I'm eager to know...
|
A flower?
|
|
russellk
Prog Reviewer
Joined: February 28 2005
Location: New Zealand
Status: Offline
Points: 782
|
Posted: January 25 2006 at 03:23 |
|
The problem, Norbert, is that you betray an appalling ignorance of how
the music industry works. They don't come up with 'sure things' and find
some faceless, talentless nobody to front them. It's quite the opposite:
thousands of nobodies fight each other for the chance to pitch their own
talents to record companies, who take a punt on them just in case they're
the next 'breakthrough' act.
I'm sorry to disillusion you, but it takes special talent to perform like
Spears or Madonna. There are the glorious exceptions, such as Milli
Vanilli, but these always get found out. To believe that pop stars are
talentless is a slur on yourself -- if they are talentless, why aren't you out
there making millions? Because you have less talent than they do, that's
why.
Lighten up on Phil Collins is what I'm asking. Forget your own sense of
betrayal, of what might have been. He didn't owe you four more albums
like Trick of the Tail. If, like me, you didn't enjoy his more recent work as
much as his earlier work, that's fine. Say so, I won't argue. Me, I admire
the man.
|
|
Norbert
Forum Senior Member
Joined: October 20 2005
Location: Hungary
Status: Offline
Points: 2506
|
Posted: January 25 2006 at 03:25 |
BiGi wrote:
Norbert wrote:
I don't believe that Collins and Spears are the same, I just wanted to point out that becoming a famous pop star does not require any kind of special talent. |
No?
And what does it require?
I'm eager to know... |
Of course I mean musical talent.
Ask any member of the Backstreet Boys or Britney Spears in person, they know surely more than an ignorant prog-snob like me who is stuck on uninteresting albums like Foxtrot or Pawn Hearts or Relayer and many more.
|
|
/PAlogo_v2.gif "Progarchives.com Homepage")
Why do you blame collins?
