Progarchives.com has always (since 2002) relied on banners ads to cover web hosting fees and all. Please consider supporting us by giving monthly PayPal donations and help keep PA fast-loading and ad-free forever.
Joined: March 21 2008
Location: Tigerstaden
Status: Offline
Points: 34063
Topic: Bass only:Peter Cetera vs Michael Rutherford Posted: August 19 2012 at 10:35
who is your favourte bass player of the two and who posessed the best bass player chops in the haydays of Genesis and Chicago when both were at the creative hights, who is the players player, who would impress most newbies if you played bass lines by Peter or by Michael, who have most impressive bass lines
Joined: March 12 2005
Location: Neurotica
Status: Offline
Points: 166183
Posted: August 19 2012 at 20:59
Rutherford
Dig me...But don't...Bury me I'm running still, I shall until, one day, I hope that I'll arrive Warning: Listening to jazz excessively can cause a laxative effect.
Rutherford, hands down. I personally love his bass playing, and that tone, wow. A lot of people, I find, tend to dismiss his playing, but he's one of my favourites.
Joined: December 13 2011
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 2111
Posted: August 25 2012 at 01:22
Sheavy wrote:
Ruthorford was in Genesis so he has to be the best right?
Chicago's first album is better than anything Genesis ever did. . Cetera easily. The bass line at the begining of I'm A Man is epic.
It's Rutherford not Ruthorford. I don't care anything about Chicago. Rutherford wins this easily. He had the best basslines and he was apart of the one of the greatest and most influential progressive rock bands of all-time.
“Music is enough for a lifetime but a lifetime is not enough for music.” - Sergei Rachmaninov
Joined: March 21 2008
Location: Tigerstaden
Status: Offline
Points: 34063
Posted: August 25 2012 at 01:30
yes Genesis is my favouite band and love them darely, but i find Chicago more intriguing and daring, more energetic and brighter. two are great bands who both changed the face of rock for ever, in an almoust equal amount of degree, i would not say Genesis is more influentual the fusion era Chicago, couse Chicago influenced a hell of alots of bands, in the 70s and 90s, both in rnb, AOR, i bet even some later prog bands were influenced by them.
Joined: December 13 2011
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 2111
Posted: August 25 2012 at 01:45
aginor wrote:
yes Genesis is my favouite band and love them darely, but i find Chicago more intriguing and daring, more energetic and brighter. two are great bands who both changed the face of rock for ever, in an almoust equal amount of degree, i would not say Genesis is more influentual the fusion era Chicago, couse Chicago influenced a hell of alots of bands, in the 70s and 90s, both in rnb, AOR, i bet even some later prog bands were influenced by them.
But when we stictly talk about progressive rock, who do we talk about more: Chicago or Genesis? I WOULD say Genesis have been more influential than Chicago. How many prog bands that came after Genesis didn't in some way owe a debt to them?
“Music is enough for a lifetime but a lifetime is not enough for music.” - Sergei Rachmaninov
Joined: March 21 2008
Location: Tigerstaden
Status: Offline
Points: 34063
Posted: August 25 2012 at 02:29
Mirror Image wrote:
aginor wrote:
yes Genesis is my favouite band and love them darely, but i find Chicago more intriguing and daring, more energetic and brighter. two are great bands who both changed the face of rock for ever, in an almoust equal amount of degree, i would not say Genesis is more influentual the fusion era Chicago, couse Chicago influenced a hell of alots of bands, in the 70s and 90s, both in rnb, AOR, i bet even some later prog bands were influenced by them.
But when we stictly talk about progressive rock, who do we talk about more: Chicago or Genesis? I WOULD say Genesis have been more influential than Chicago. How many prog bands that came after Genesis didn't in some way owe a debt to them?
i can't say i have ever heard any bands of prog site Chicago, but i am sure with their first three albums, of such ambitous nature they had, they had to be noticed, not only by mainstreem rock groups or jazzy bands, but i would be interested if any of the later american prog bands opions about early Chicago, what do members of Kansas think of Chicago Transit Authority f.ex. im sure they influenced some bands in US that are linked to prog,
Joined: December 13 2011
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 2111
Posted: August 25 2012 at 10:28
aginor wrote:
Mirror Image wrote:
aginor wrote:
yes Genesis is my favouite band and love them darely, but i find Chicago more intriguing and daring, more energetic and brighter. two are great bands who both changed the face of rock for ever, in an almoust equal amount of degree, i would not say Genesis is more influentual the fusion era Chicago, couse Chicago influenced a hell of alots of bands, in the 70s and 90s, both in rnb, AOR, i bet even some later prog bands were influenced by them.
But when we stictly talk about progressive rock, who do we talk about more: Chicago or Genesis? I WOULD say Genesis have been more influential than Chicago. How many prog bands that came after Genesis didn't in some way owe a debt to them?
i can't say i have ever heard any bands of prog site Chicago, but i am sure with their first three albums, of such ambitous nature they had, they had to be noticed, not only by mainstreem rock groups or jazzy bands, but i would be interested if any of the later american prog bands opions about early Chicago, what do members of Kansas think of Chicago Transit Authority f.ex. im sure they influenced some bands in US that are linked to prog,
So Genesis weren't ambitious? The Lamb Lies Down On Broadway is more ambitious than anything I've heard from Chicago. Essentially, though, we're comparing apples and oranges because Chicago weren't apart of the same genre as Genesis and both bands styles couldn't be more different. I don't even like Chicago so I suppose it's just my own personal bias rearing it's head here more than anything.
“Music is enough for a lifetime but a lifetime is not enough for music.” - Sergei Rachmaninov
Joined: March 28 2010
Location: Alabama
Status: Offline
Points: 2866
Posted: August 25 2012 at 17:39
I don't think he has better basslines (over his whole career), and we aren't strictly talking about prog in the general music section are we? And Chicago is here (rightfully) under the Jazz-rock, Fusion section. If the poll was about who was greater, I might potentially go with Rutherford, but I personnaly go with cetera because I really like Cetera's bass.
My favorite bass in a Genesis song is The Knife, but thats probably because It's my favorite song by Genesis, and Trespass is my fav genesis album.
Joined: March 21 2008
Location: Tigerstaden
Status: Offline
Points: 34063
Posted: August 25 2012 at 17:50
Mirror Image wrote:
aginor wrote:
Mirror Image wrote:
aginor wrote:
yes Genesis is my favouite band and love them darely, but i find Chicago more intriguing and daring, more energetic and brighter. two are great bands who both changed the face of rock for ever, in an almoust equal amount of degree, i would not say Genesis is more influentual the fusion era Chicago, couse Chicago influenced a hell of alots of bands, in the 70s and 90s, both in rnb, AOR, i bet even some later prog bands were influenced by them.
But when we stictly talk about progressive rock, who do we talk about more: Chicago or Genesis? I WOULD say Genesis have been more influential than Chicago. How many prog bands that came after Genesis didn't in some way owe a debt to them?
i can't say i have ever heard any bands of prog site Chicago, but i am sure with their first three albums, of such ambitous nature they had, they had to be noticed, not only by mainstreem rock groups or jazzy bands, but i would be interested if any of the later american prog bands opions about early Chicago, what do members of Kansas think of Chicago Transit Authority f.ex. im sure they influenced some bands in US that are linked to prog,
So Genesis weren't ambitious? The Lamb Lies Down On Broadway is more ambitious than anything I've heard from Chicago. Essentially, though, we're comparing apples and oranges because Chicago weren't apart of the same genre as Genesis and both bands styles couldn't be more different. I don't even like Chicago so I suppose it's just my own personal bias rearing it's head here more than anything.
when did I say genesis were not Ambitious, Lamb is my favourite Genesis album of all time, and i find it a treat, but i also feal Chicago just had better songwriting, hooks, vocals, were more dissonant, mulitiple genres on albums, almost ecelctic at times, Chicago (second album) have one of the greatest multi section songs in prog one true gem of composition, (i also like Suppers Ready so don't feal like im lowgrading Genesis, it is my favourite prog band, but Chicago is one of my favourite all-time rock/jazz/prog bands overall also, i like them almost equal, and fine value in both bands and i learn alot as a bass player, musician, from both bands, I find both bands to be among the best in rock regarding level of songwriting, fewer bands then Chicago and Genesis, have som many really good songwriters, Genesis had Gabriel, Banks, Hackett, Collins, Rutherford, Ant Phillips, all are superb songwriters, in both pop, prog, fusion, new wave, etc, Chicago have Cetera, Lamb, Kath, Pankow, Loughane, all tremendous songriters players, Parazider, wounderfull musican, much one of hte strongest bands vocaly ever in rock, Chicago is what i would call solid,, but also Genesis is also very solid, so NEVER say i diss any of the band COUSE I dont, i pretty fair agianst both
Joined: December 13 2011
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 2111
Posted: August 25 2012 at 22:55
aginor wrote:
Mirror Image wrote:
aginor wrote:
Mirror Image wrote:
aginor wrote:
yes Genesis is my favouite band and love them darely, but i find Chicago more intriguing and daring, more energetic and brighter. two are great bands who both changed the face of rock for ever, in an almoust equal amount of degree, i would not say Genesis is more influentual the fusion era Chicago, couse Chicago influenced a hell of alots of bands, in the 70s and 90s, both in rnb, AOR, i bet even some later prog bands were influenced by them.
But when we stictly talk about progressive rock, who do we talk about more: Chicago or Genesis? I WOULD say Genesis have been more influential than Chicago. How many prog bands that came after Genesis didn't in some way owe a debt to them?
i can't say i have ever heard any bands of prog site Chicago, but i am sure with their first three albums, of such ambitous nature they had, they had to be noticed, not only by mainstreem rock groups or jazzy bands, but i would be interested if any of the later american prog bands opions about early Chicago, what do members of Kansas think of Chicago Transit Authority f.ex. im sure they influenced some bands in US that are linked to prog,
So Genesis weren't ambitious? The Lamb Lies Down On Broadway is more ambitious than anything I've heard from Chicago. Essentially, though, we're comparing apples and oranges because Chicago weren't apart of the same genre as Genesis and both bands styles couldn't be more different. I don't even like Chicago so I suppose it's just my own personal bias rearing it's head here more than anything.
when did I say genesis were not Ambitious, Lamb is my favourite Genesis album of all time, and i find it a treat, but i also feal Chicago just had better songwriting, hooks, vocals, were more dissonant, mulitiple genres on albums, almost ecelctic at times, Chicago (second album) have one of the greatest multi section songs in prog one true gem of composition, (i also like Suppers Ready so don't feal like im lowgrading Genesis, it is my favourite prog band, but Chicago is one of my favourite all-time rock/jazz/prog bands overall also, i like them almost equal, and fine value in both bands and i learn alot as a bass player, musician, from both bands, I find both bands to be among the best in rock regarding level of songwriting, fewer bands then Chicago and Genesis, have som many really good songwriters, Genesis had Gabriel, Banks, Hackett, Collins, Rutherford, Ant Phillips, all are superb songwriters, in both pop, prog, fusion, new wave, etc, Chicago have Cetera, Lamb, Kath, Pankow, Loughane, all tremendous songriters players, Parazider, wounderfull musican, much one of hte strongest bands vocaly ever in rock, Chicago is what i would call solid,, but also Genesis is also very solid, so NEVER say i diss any of the band COUSE I dont, i pretty fair agianst both
savey
You should really start using a spell checker. Anyway, I'm done arguing with you about this because it's really pointless: I don't like Chicago, you do. Let's move on. Oh, and Rutherford is a more accomplished bass player. A man that can weave in and out of styles like master illusionist. In other words, Rutherford's versatility is dully noted by me.
Edited by Mirror Image - August 25 2012 at 22:59
“Music is enough for a lifetime but a lifetime is not enough for music.” - Sergei Rachmaninov
Joined: March 21 2008
Location: Tigerstaden
Status: Offline
Points: 34063
Posted: August 26 2012 at 17:16
Mirror Image wrote:
aginor wrote:
Mirror Image wrote:
aginor wrote:
Mirror Image wrote:
aginor wrote:
yes Genesis is my favouite band and love them darely, but i find Chicago more intriguing and daring, more energetic and brighter. two are great bands who both changed the face of rock for ever, in an almoust equal amount of degree, i would not say Genesis is more influentual the fusion era Chicago, couse Chicago influenced a hell of alots of bands, in the 70s and 90s, both in rnb, AOR, i bet even some later prog bands were influenced by them.
But when we stictly talk about progressive rock, who do we talk about more: Chicago or Genesis? I WOULD say Genesis have been more influential than Chicago. How many prog bands that came after Genesis didn't in some way owe a debt to them?
i can't say i have ever heard any bands of prog site Chicago, but i am sure with their first three albums, of such ambitous nature they had, they had to be noticed, not only by mainstreem rock groups or jazzy bands, but i would be interested if any of the later american prog bands opions about early Chicago, what do members of Kansas think of Chicago Transit Authority f.ex. im sure they influenced some bands in US that are linked to prog,
So Genesis weren't ambitious? The Lamb Lies Down On Broadway is more ambitious than anything I've heard from Chicago. Essentially, though, we're comparing apples and oranges because Chicago weren't apart of the same genre as Genesis and both bands styles couldn't be more different. I don't even like Chicago so I suppose it's just my own personal bias rearing it's head here more than anything.
when did I say genesis were not Ambitious, Lamb is my favourite Genesis album of all time, and i find it a treat, but i also feal Chicago just had better songwriting, hooks, vocals, were more dissonant, mulitiple genres on albums, almost ecelctic at times, Chicago (second album) have one of the greatest multi section songs in prog one true gem of composition, (i also like Suppers Ready so don't feal like im lowgrading Genesis, it is my favourite prog band, but Chicago is one of my favourite all-time rock/jazz/prog bands overall also, i like them almost equal, and fine value in both bands and i learn alot as a bass player, musician, from both bands, I find both bands to be among the best in rock regarding level of songwriting, fewer bands then Chicago and Genesis, have som many really good songwriters, Genesis had Gabriel, Banks, Hackett, Collins, Rutherford, Ant Phillips, all are superb songwriters, in both pop, prog, fusion, new wave, etc, Chicago have Cetera, Lamb, Kath, Pankow, Loughane, all tremendous songriters players, Parazider, wounderfull musican, much one of hte strongest bands vocaly ever in rock, Chicago is what i would call solid,, but also Genesis is also very solid, so NEVER say i diss any of the band COUSE I dont, i pretty fair agianst both
savey
You should really start using a spell checker. Anyway, I'm done arguing with you about this because it's really pointless: I don't like Chicago, you do. Let's move on. Oh, and Rutherford is a more accomplished bass player. A man that can weave in and out of styles like master illusionist. In other words, Rutherford's versatility is dully noted by me.
, thanks it was healthy with some nice arguing, music is for sharing, tastes is to broaden or to understand each others sides and look into others ways of approaching music, and i respect that,
also yes , my eagerness is coming away for my non-native english tone, but i will be better at spelling, one can never be to outlearned, when you find you know stuff, you constantly find out there is a tonn more to learn in turn , i don't see any arguing pointles, just lack of agreement, but not pointless, it bare fruits, and we both have learnd, (I have atleast, i nead to learn how to be better at arguing or to discuss things without getting carried away, or to selfabsorbd, (but im not lone in that ), hah
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot create polls in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
This page was generated in 0.172 seconds.
Donate monthly and keep PA fast-loading and ad-free forever.
/PAlogo_v2.gif "Progarchives.com Homepage")
Bass only:Peter Cetera vs Michael Rutherford
Topic Options
. Cetera easily. The bass line at the begining of I'm A Man is epic.
Sheavy wrote:
, thanks it was healthy with some nice arguing, music is for sharing, tastes is to broaden or to understand each others sides and look into others ways of approaching music, and i respect that, 
, i don't see any arguing pointles, just lack of agreement, but not pointless, it bare fruits, and we both have learnd, (I have atleast, i nead to learn how to be better at arguing or to discuss things without getting carried away, or to selfabsorbd, (but im not lone in that 
), hah