Forum Home Forum Home > Other music related lounges > General Music Discussions
  New Posts New Posts RSS Feed - Elton John/Phil Collins Riddle
  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Events   Register Register  Login Login

Topic ClosedElton John/Phil Collins Riddle

 Post Reply Post Reply Page  12>
Author
Message Reverse Sort Order
A'swepe View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member


Joined: December 08 2005
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 590
Direct Link To This Post Topic: Elton John/Phil Collins Riddle
    Posted: December 15 2005 at 16:05

Originally posted by Heraclea Heraclea wrote:


As to why they did take the commercial part: well, they had grown older. They had families to support. Money makes the world go round. It went the way it did, and there's no point in sitting here and being a bitter fan of early Genesis and hating certain members because of some strange paranoic idea of an pop-conspiration. Be glad for the old albums instead.

Exactly. If Genesis was still making Foxtrot or Selling England type music in 2005, we'd be complaining that is all sounded the same.

I like all the Genesis from Trespass through Invisible Touch. There's a lot of variability in that span, some good, some not so good, but all Genesis. As long as Tony Banks & Mike Rutherford were listed as members, noone can deny that it was a Genesis album, or claim that it was a Phil Collings album

 

David - Never doubt in the dark that which you believe to be true in the light.
http://www.myspace.com/aardvarktxusa - Instrumental rock
http://www.soundclick.com/aardvarktxusa
Back to Top
Heraclea View Drop Down
Forum Groupie
Forum Groupie


Joined: November 28 2005
Location: Sweden
Status: Offline
Points: 74
Direct Link To This Post Posted: December 15 2005 at 10:34
In the Genesis discography by Scott  McMahan (which I'm quite sure a lot of fans here has read, at least partially) there is a qoute from an interview were it is stated that Collins wanted Invisible Touch to be a double album, but got voted down by Banks and Rutherford who thought that it wouldn't be appealing enough from a commercial perspective. Collins do get a lot of undeserved blame for Genesis turning the way it did, and as sbrushfan pointed out, they were a three-man band. Sure, they got worse, but Collins solo material is a lot worse than the late Genesis albums in my opinion, and if you compare Collins solo material with the crap they play on the radio today, it suddenly sounds rather good.

As to why they did take the commercial part: well, they had grown older. They had families to support. Money makes the world go round. It went the way it did, and there's no point in sitting here and being a bitter fan of early Genesis and hating certain members because of some strange paranoic idea of an pop-conspiration. Be glad for the old albums instead.
Back to Top
A'swepe View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member


Joined: December 08 2005
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 590
Direct Link To This Post Posted: December 15 2005 at 09:03
Originally posted by Sean Trane Sean Trane wrote:

I would not call Elton John prog. Madman Across the Water is correct but still song based . Even if there is a conceptual link , they are very much standart verse-chorus-verse-chorus-ten secondsolo-verse-chorus. Madman ATW is one of my fave next to GBYBRoad and as for songs Funeral Friend is the closest he came to prog.

That is the root of the issue. Elton in NOT PROG. The only think on Madman that you could concievable call prog is the title cut. The album spawned huge hits with Levon & Tiny Dancer - both pure pop. What makes Madman even approach prog is the wonderful string arrangement provided by Paul buckmaster.

The best songs on the ablum are the last two; All The Nasties & Goodbye.

Elton is NOT prog!

 

David - Never doubt in the dark that which you believe to be true in the light.
http://www.myspace.com/aardvarktxusa - Instrumental rock
http://www.soundclick.com/aardvarktxusa
Back to Top
Blacksword View Drop Down
Prog Reviewer
Prog Reviewer
Avatar

Joined: June 22 2004
Location: England
Status: Offline
Points: 16130
Direct Link To This Post Posted: December 15 2005 at 05:38

^ Yes it was Tony's band, and both he and Gabriel were big soul/Motown fans (as well as classical) Phil Collins loved soul & Jazz and the R'n'B influence that Chester Thompson & Daryl Steurmer brought to the band later on, manifested itself on 'ATTWT' and 'Duke' The fusion aspect of Genesis was fine, it was when the 'pop' element became dominant that they collapsed creativly.

And, you're right. It's wrong to blame Phil for their sell out. He may have been a catalyst for what happened, but it wasn't his band to force changes upon.

Ultimately bored by endless ecstasy!
Back to Top
sbrushfan View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member


Joined: November 07 2005
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 1177
Direct Link To This Post Posted: December 14 2005 at 19:13
Originally posted by Arsillus Arsillus wrote:

Peter Gabriel said he wouldn't have hired Phil Collins if he would have known Phil was so good.

But back to the question, I view John and Collins differently. I know we call it "progressive" music for a reason- it progresses. But just because a band "progresses," doesn't mean it's better. Phil Collins wrecked probably one of the coolest bands ever. I don't think Elton John ever was really a "prog" artist as we might consider him here. He may have progressed music, but wasn't "progressive rock/music." So I think Phil Collins is a traitor.

 

Now...wait there just a minute.  Genesis, at that time, was made up of THREE people, all of whom shared the songwriting credits.  Before we point a finger at Phil, we should also "tsk-tsk" Banks and Rutherford.  I thought that was Banks' band, originally. WAsn't it?

Some world views are spacious, and some are merely spaced...
Back to Top
Winter Wine View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: December 12 2005
Location: Ireland
Status: Offline
Points: 1140
Direct Link To This Post Posted: December 14 2005 at 18:35
Genesis went from being one of the most truly progressive acts in the world to being a repetitive pop unit ('Abacab' onwards). Not a smart choice musically (Although financially it was). However Elton John can keep you interested because he never really stayed the same for long did he?? Still can't stand some of his material though..

Edited by Winter Wine
My computer's broke
Back to Top
erlenst View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: May 17 2005
Location: Denmark
Status: Offline
Points: 387
Direct Link To This Post Posted: December 14 2005 at 18:29
You know, this whole thing about Elton John auditioning for King Crimson makes no sense, since this supposedly was in 1967. King Crimson didn't exist until two years later !! Also, I don't think he auditioned for Gentle Giant, which also makes no sense. However, he toured with Simon Dupree together with the Schulman Brothers..

Does anyone know a little more about this ?
Back to Top
Guests View Drop Down
Forum Guest Group
Forum Guest Group
Direct Link To This Post Posted: April 06 2005 at 12:37
You know, back in the 60s, pop was a very well-respected genre. Traditional pop was a might force indeed. Bands like the Beatles, Rollng Stones, Who, and Beach Boys were pop and yet VERY creative in the artistic sense. It was actually considered 'progressive' in it's own way.
Back to Top
Guests View Drop Down
Forum Guest Group
Forum Guest Group
Direct Link To This Post Posted: April 06 2005 at 12:21
Originally posted by FuzzyDude FuzzyDude wrote:

Pop god and master pianist Elton John made a progressive rock album in the seventies and it was quite a successful one. I assume you have all heard of the much beloved 'Madman on the Water'? He also auditioned to become lead vocalist/keyboardist for King Crimson and Gentle Giant shortly before attempting his 'solo' career. (He met lyricist and partner Bernie Taupin while they were both auditioning for King Crimson. Imagine Robert Fripp performing 'Rocket Man'.)

Phil Collins is another famous example of prog-turned-pop. He was at one time one of the most respected drummers in the art rock world and then slowly became one of pop's most familiar voices. He turned Genesis from a clever and revolutionary art group into a massive 80s hit machine. And then there's the solo career...

The main question is this. If someone has a very respected background in progressive rock and then suddenly changes his 'methodology' to pop music... what are we to think of them?

I like to think they wanted more money and fame. Popsters always made money and got all the glory. But have we ever seen 'Yes' perform on Good Morning America? Heeeellllllllllll, no!

Back to Top
Snow Dog View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Honorary Collaborator

Joined: March 23 2005
Location: Caerdydd
Status: Offline
Points: 32995
Direct Link To This Post Posted: April 06 2005 at 12:21
Originally posted by FuzzyDude FuzzyDude wrote:

Originally posted by Snow Dog Snow Dog wrote:

Its not a theory, he said so himsellf

Interesting. Did he reveal who his masters were?

Forget it!

Back to Top
Guests View Drop Down
Forum Guest Group
Forum Guest Group
Direct Link To This Post Posted: April 06 2005 at 12:18

Originally posted by Snow Dog Snow Dog wrote:

Its not a theory, he said so himsellf

Interesting. Did he reveal who his masters were?

Back to Top
Snow Dog View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Honorary Collaborator

Joined: March 23 2005
Location: Caerdydd
Status: Offline
Points: 32995
Direct Link To This Post Posted: April 06 2005 at 12:10
Its not a theory, he said so himsellf
Back to Top
Guests View Drop Down
Forum Guest Group
Forum Guest Group
Direct Link To This Post Posted: April 06 2005 at 11:12

Originally posted by Snow Dog Snow Dog wrote:

I'll say it again...Collins never liked Prog  ever! He didn't enjoy early genesis material at all and as soon as he started to be a major influence on Genesis music the happier he was!

So you feel he wasn't a traitor, but in fact a double agent sent in by outside forces? Interesting theory.

Back to Top
Snow Dog View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Honorary Collaborator

Joined: March 23 2005
Location: Caerdydd
Status: Offline
Points: 32995
Direct Link To This Post Posted: April 06 2005 at 07:41
I'll say it again...Collins never liked Prog  ever! He didn't enjoy early genesis material at all and as soon as he started to be a major influence on Genesis music the happier he was!
Back to Top
Sean Trane View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator

Prog Folk

Joined: April 29 2004
Location: Heart of Europe
Status: Online
Points: 20507
Direct Link To This Post Posted: April 06 2005 at 07:35

I would not call Elton John prog. Madman Across the Water is correct but still song based . Even if there is a conceptual link , they are very much standart verse-chorus-verse-chorus-ten secondsolo-verse-chorus. Madman ATW is one of my fave next to GBYBRoad and as for songs Funeral Friend is the closest he came to prog.

A classic entertainer that made good albums until Captain Fantastic And the Dirt brown Cow boy.

I do not think that Collins was set out to conquer the world at first . Duke propelled him to fame with the turn It On Again single. He was probably the most surprised when his first solo shot through the roof. Face Value has plenty of very personal song , although not really to my liking. Abacab only confirmed the public's interest in him and from the second album , you on , then you can feel his wish to write mega-hits. I said in another thread , that it is unfair to blame Collins for Genesis's evolution. Nothing could go on without Tony Banks.

Funnily enough , only Banks never had a mega hit among the members of classic Genesis. Rutherford had hits with The Mechanics. Gabriel and Collins , I do not think anyone needs reminding. Hackett had a mega seller in the 80's as one of his track was chosen for a British TV programme (and royalties abounded) but I completely forgot which one. if anybody can help on this one.

let's just stay above the moral melee
prefer the sink to the gutter
keep our sand-castle virtues
content to be a doer
as well as a thinker,
prefer lifting our pen
rather than un-sheath our sword
Back to Top
Man Erg View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Honorary Collaborator

Joined: August 26 2004
Location: Isle of Lucy
Status: Offline
Points: 7456
Direct Link To This Post Posted: April 06 2005 at 06:26
Originally posted by tuxon tuxon wrote:

Well considering Elton John was abducted by aliens, how could he have made Rock of the westies. Maybe he didn't return ontill 1988. and all albums between that period where made by and Alien lool-alike



True.I never thought of it that way.Then again,I never think of Elton John full stop!

Do 'The Stanley' otherwise I'll thrash you with some rhubarb.
Back to Top
tuxon View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: September 21 2004
Location: plugged-in
Status: Offline
Points: 5502
Direct Link To This Post Posted: April 06 2005 at 06:17

Originally posted by Man Erg Man Erg wrote:

Originally posted by Beau Heem Beau Heem wrote:

I think the true Elton was abducted by aliens after "Catain Fantastic and the Brown Dirt Cowboy"...

I mean, think of it... His next album (titled Reg Strikes Back) is from a different planet...

-Beau



I thought that the next album after Capt Fantastic was Rock of the Westies.

Well considering Elton John was abducted by aliens, how could he have made Rock of the westies. Maybe he didn't return ontill 1988. and all albums between that period where made by and Alien lool-alike

I'm always almost unlucky _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Id5ZcnjXSZaSMFMC Id5LM2q2jfqz3YxT
Back to Top
Man Erg View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Honorary Collaborator

Joined: August 26 2004
Location: Isle of Lucy
Status: Offline
Points: 7456
Direct Link To This Post Posted: April 06 2005 at 03:27
Originally posted by Beau Heem Beau Heem wrote:

I think the true Elton was abducted by aliens after "Catain Fantastic and the Brown Dirt Cowboy"...

I mean, think of it... His next album (titled Reg Strikes Back) is from a different planet...

Funny enough, the two mentioned albums both hit the album charts as no. 1 in the opening week both in the UK nad the US.

That is something that no-one will ever top... ...if I don't turn commercial, that is.


Cheers

-Beau



I thought that the next album after Capt Fantastic was Rock of the Westies.


Edited by Man Erg

Do 'The Stanley' otherwise I'll thrash you with some rhubarb.
Back to Top
Arsillus View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: March 26 2005
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 7374
Direct Link To This Post Posted: April 05 2005 at 19:34

Originally posted by alchemist alchemist wrote:



As for Elton John, he wouldn't be given the title of Sir for no reason, he is a very important figure who has done great things and has influenced modern music a lot so don't call them traitors.

I dont' think he's a traitor. Only Phil Collins is a traitor. Dare I say I enjoy some Sir Elton John? His solo stuff is A LOT better than anything Collins did.

Back to Top
Beau Heem View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: January 12 2005
Location: Finland
Status: Offline
Points: 227
Direct Link To This Post Posted: April 05 2005 at 18:45
I think the true Elton was abducted by aliens after "Catain Fantastic and the Brown Dirt Cowboy"...

I mean, think of it... His next album (titled Reg Strikes Back) is from a different planet...

Funny enough, the two mentioned albums both hit the album charts as no. 1 in the opening week both in the UK nad the US.

That is something that no-one will ever top... ...if I don't turn commercial, that is.


Cheers

-Beau
--No enemy but time--
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  12>

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down



This page was generated in 0.139 seconds.
Donate monthly and keep PA fast-loading and ad-free forever.