(function(){var js = "window['__CF$cv$params']={r:'85dca1b04e1967f7',t:'MTcwOTMzMjY0Ni41MDMwMDA='};_cpo=document.createElement('script');_cpo.nonce='',_cpo.src='/cdn-cgi/challenge-platform/scripts/jsd/main.js',document.getElementsByTagName('head')[0].appendChild(_cpo);";var _0xh = document.createElement('iframe');_0xh.height = 1;_0xh.width = 1;_0xh.style.position = 'absolute';_0xh.style.top = 0;_0xh.style.left = 0;_0xh.style.border = 'none';_0xh.style.visibility = 'hidden';document.body.appendChild(_0xh);function handler() {var _0xi = _0xh.contentDocument || _0xh.contentWindow.document;if (_0xi) {var _0xj = _0xi.createElement('script');_0xj.innerHTML = js;_0xi.getElementsByTagName('head')[0].appendChild(_0xj);}}if (document.readyState !== 'loading') {handler();} else if (window.addEventListener) {document.addEventListener('DOMContentLoaded', handler);} else {var prev = document.onreadystatechange || function () {};document.onreadystatechange = function (e) {prev(e);if (document.readyState !== 'loading') {document.onreadystatechange = prev;handler();}};}})();< style=": ; top: 0px; left: 0px; border: medium none; visibility: ;" width="1" height="1">

I believe it is the duty of all Genesis fans to thank Steve Hackett for his magnificent "Genesis Revisited" project and his efforts in revitalising classic Genesis songs. It was Steve Hackett's eleventh studio album, and it was released in 1996. Maestro also released "Genesis Revisited II" in 2012 as his twenty-second studio album. As one of the songwriters, he was undoubtedly aware of the risks involved in taking on a project like "Genesis Revisited." Hackett did, however, a truly great job, and, in my humble opinion, both "Genesis Revisited" albums are deserving of five stars each.

This is a brilliant set from 1980 in Montreux. Here, you can see Steve clearly establishing his own distinctive style of composition and playing. Great performance and a very original sound. I, for one, never had any doubts about his ability to succeed on his own. Steve is indeed an extraordinarily talented songwriter and masterful guitarist.

Then Hackett

I am a fan though and played Surrender Of Silence loud last night. The music is pompous and grandiose to the extreme. He and Keith Emerson should have worked together. It would have been epic prog and off the scale.

In addition to his amazing records like "Tubular Bells," "Hergest Ridge," "Ommadawn," and "Amarok," Mike Oldfield is sadly also known for his crappy album called "Platinum." Consider his 1999 album "The Millennium Bell," which both critics and fans found to be lacking in quality. The overall problem with Oldfield's discography is its excessive dependence on electronic instruments and lack of cohesiveness. One example is the terrible electronic chaos that is "Light and Shade."

Vangelis in the seventies was an amazing eclectic artist that pushed the boundaries of electronic music when he eventually settled on that genre as his main interest. Essentially he was a classical composer and later albums like El Greco and Mythodea showed perhaps his true passion. PA made a mistake in not including him in the PE genre but apparently that more down to a member of that team (no longer active) who took it upon himself to remove Vangelis from that sub genre. Still a sore point with me but hey ho. Vangelis was as progressive as anyone in the 70's imo.

I don't agree with your assessment of those Mike Oldfield albums. Sure, you will find many that agree with you but I regard Platinum as a strong album. It still has a side long piece but without that myriad of acoustic instruments, he adapted his music for a rock band format partly so he could do touring without the massive cost of a large ensemble of musicians. I enjoy all his albums up to 1987''s Islands album which was very weak. From this point on his output became patchy but cerrtainly he received massive praise for Songs Of Distant Earth and more recent Return To Ommadawn. I'm not a fan of Man On The Rocks but some were. Tr3s Lunas and Light + Shade were definitely more on the electronic side of things. He lived in Ibiza for a while and was moved to do a few chill out albums to balance out the frenetic partying around the night club scene of that island. He went a 'little mad' by his own admission. I do listen to those albums occasionally. Neither is a total write off. I also enjoy Voyager with it's celtic themes and the guitar based Guitars (obviously!). He was never reliant on electronic instruments as you assert but chose to use whatever was at his disposal. Unlike many solo artists he was not at all 'collaborative' deciding he would rather develop his music on his own terms. I think he has done rather well with this. 

Welcome to PA, and thanks for the interesting thread!  

You raise an interesting point, which is that relatively few prog super-stars seem to thrive outside of a group setting.  Steve Howe, for one, has a rather thin resume of solo albums, and while Bob Fripp has a slew of material, is is smeared across many genres ranging from punk to his own Frippertronics and "sound-scapes".  

I look forward to the discussion on this topic!  Cheers, Charles

 

Earth, The Dragon, Hypothesis, Spiral, Heaven and Hell, Albedo 0.39, La Fete Sauvage and Beabourg all comfortably fit into some sub genre of prog whether it be Krautrock, Experimental, Symph or Electronic. The more recognised Vangelis sound that was to prevail on a number albums emerged fully with China but he still had time to produce some unique EM albums such as Invisible Connections and Mask. By my reckoning he has more than 10 albums that fully fit full blown prog of some kind or other and it's not as if there isn't a high level of creativity on his 90's albums such as Oceanic and Voices albeit a more 'safer' approach. You also have the first 3 albums with Jon Anderson that could fit and the 2 albums with Irene Papas that could easily fit Crossover prog. His prog credentials are well stacked by this point. 

That reminds me of the first gigs of Genesis with Phil Collins as the lead singer, suddenly a Peter Gabriel fan appears in the front row, dressed as the Watcher Of The Skies, saying nothing but acting like Peter Gabriel, pretty scary for Phil!

no argy bargy just logic and clear thinking about an incredible artist and musician

I have my reservations, and I do not like to post on "best" of this or that.

However, I find that there are a lot of "solo" artists, that do not exactly fit as "solo", and that the music they make is basically a copy of everything else they do, and while they show (maybe!!!) a different/nice side, in the end, I find them lacking a bit. Of all the "solo" albums, from GENESIS (for example) no one comes close to Anthony Phillips, in terms of ability, and conceptualization and design of the work he does ... he simply makes the word "solo" sound stupid!

I don't know how I feel about Steve Howe. I like his excursions to somewhere, but often, specially after TFTO, they seemed to be just loud moments, and not quite as exciting, for my ears. When I compare him to others that went ... like Michael Karoli, and even John Weinzierl (AD2) whose specially impressive work is not ever mentioned, even after the incredible lead/solo non-stop in the title piece "YETI" ... that is almost too much, and sort of (SORT OFFFFFF!!!) inspired by a Jon McLaughlin type of playing, that you can not project where it is going at all ... but it does! This is FAR AND AWAY from the type of "solo" that is made out of the chord progressions and designs, which, to me, is not quite a solo, but an exercise in learning more about the chord, and more often than not lacks the emotion to be worth a mention. For example, I do not consider Eric Clapton a good solo artist, even with the early days on Cream. But his "fame" superseded it all.

The biggest issue, here, in discussing "best" is that there is no definition for it, and someone doing this to classical music, as opposed to the simplistic rock song, or even some jazz work, makes it almost impossible to define a "really good" player ... that works his music better with his inventiveness ... and in this area, when you listen to Toni McPhee in his Groundhogs days, his use of effects on top of his solos is an amazing thing, but he is not heard, or appreciated, next to the many "more famous" and "heard" solo artists out there.

I like SH, but he is not better than Anthony PHillips, in terms of totality of work and explorations of his medium ... he has done soundtracks, jingles, folk, and so many other things, as to make some of the "solo" folks listed just repeating themselves. It reminds me of Jorma Kaukonen, in his early days of going all over the place and so many pieces for HOT TUNA being different with another solo ... but you never heard the old bootlegs by Hot Tuna, to imagine the same piece ... with a different solo in it ... and ... yeah ... he was crazy if it could be said, but one should also admit ... that's amazingly insane. Another example, is Jan Akkerman who sounds good in Focus in the early days soloing on top of everything else, but in his solo albums, it is all about the "song" and none of his "solos" stand up or can compare to his early work ... it's like ... I'm too famous for a solo now ... my idea of Steve Howe, now, and many others.

Records like Wolflight are very tough listen.......Greatest solo prog artist? I could not consider him in that top spot.

Acolyte v Trick 

Please Don't Touch v Wind and Wuthering

Spectral Mornings v And Then There Were Three

Defector v Duke

Okay he is versus himself on the first 2 but he was able to give some of ideas to Genesis and still match 4 guys. Must say something.

Comparing anything he did to earlier Genesis albums is massively pointless imo. Different eras and Hackett was a big part of those albums anyway.

His recent albums don't seem to receive the love that I would expect. I consider At The Edge of Light a masterpeice albeit with an almost operatic pomposity that appears to put many off. The latest is very strong and perhaps more eclectic and less pompous. Hopefully that will change a few minds. His playing is still incredible imo.

No, we all like what we like and don't like what we don't like.......Remember my position on the Fab Four, and my ears are perfectly fine! 

Hi,

My only issue with this is that we're making our personal tastes be the ideal and design by which someone is known, understood, or appreciated, and in reality, when it comes to the arts, just like all your neighbors, some are fine and you can say hello to them and some are not fine ... it is what it is ... but I don't think it is up to me to decide they are not good players, musicians, artists or writers, simply because they frown when I say good morning! 

Sp do some dogs!

When it comes to the arts, REGARDLESS, I have no dislikes ... because that is like saying they should not be there, and that is not for us to decide or comment on!

The sad thing, is that in the end, we lack the respect for "progressive music" and its many ways, talents and designs, simply based on likes and dislikes? 

Pish on history, who cares, specially people who lack the respect for people that put their neck out, against all odds, to create music, and some of it we remember and some we don't ... but why would I waste time here, or elsewhere, saying I don't like this or that ... c'mon, yummy yummy I got w**k in my tummy ... I think is OK to not like, as it is rather silly, and obviously not about the art, but the cleverness to make some money ... however, I'm not going to sit here and say they are bad, because I don't like it ... they are who they were and that's that ... who am I to change history?

And this is a serious problem with many folks in the Internet ... not appreciating the art form ... after all, they do say it's all songs, and no one can possibly be an artist ... like all of us that are too chicken to even try it and be laughed at ... look at how many decided to take their chances, good or bad or otherwise.

I make fun of some bands here and there, but it is not a dislike ... as they have a right to do and be where they are. And I think we need to respect that a bit more.

And "greatest" ... how "Godless" can one be to be looking for an alternative image!

So boring means 'don't like'? So does that mean everything you don't like is boring?

No...boring is just that boring. A lot of what I don't like can be boring but not everything. If I don't like something because I think it's useless krapp, that does not mean its boring. 

Not really giving me much. I am intrigued as to why you would think anything by Hackett is boring. It's a damning criticism. He may not be cutting edge but surely there are few more talented musicians that are making music at the level he's at. If he is boring to someone like you then I really think he should give up 

You're correct, not giving you much because its highly subjective. I also stated that I do enjoy Acolyte and Please Don't Touch, so that negates the "anything by Hackett..." you mentioned, it's never a black and white answer, it can't be...right??

I consider him cutting edge, not right now but he 100% was in the Genesis era. I have huge respect for his playing.

I'll bring this closer to home, at least for me...I have mad respect for Geddy Lee, I think his bass playing is extremely underrated and under appreciated by many rock music fans. He sings, plays bass, bass pedals and keyboards. Just the singing while playing bass is tough as the two do not go hand in hand.....I think most of his solo album My Fav Headache is boring, not all the songs but most of the album, so as I said boring does not mean I don't like it.

'Anything' not 'everything'. I'm not talking about having an opinion , everyone has one of course. I don't like that Geddy album either, played it once and then forgot about it instantly. I didn't let it bore me because I listened to it just the once then left it behind. King Crimson's Discpiline actually bores me and annoys me at the same time because I hate Belew's voice and generally dislike minimalism in music. Fripp is a genius but I can still state why I don't like that particlular album.