Author |
Topic Search Topic Options
|
Cristi
Special Collaborator
Crossover / Prog Metal Teams
Joined: July 27 2006
Location: wonderland
Status: Online
Points: 43679
|
Posted: June 20 2009 at 15:35 |
BaldFriede wrote:
I am a bit surprised that there have been so many posts in this, but no-one mentions the situation the band was in when they changed their sound. Genesis were not only bankrupt, they were left with a big minus on their bank account from tours that turned out to be too expensive, and there was the next contractual album looming above them. What would YOU have done in that situation?
|
wow, I've never heard of that. it's well known that that they did not make a lot of money during their progressive era, but still never thought of them as being bankrupt.
|
|
akamaisondufromage
Forum Senior Member
VIP Member
Joined: May 16 2009
Location: Blighty
Status: Offline
Points: 6797
|
Posted: June 20 2009 at 16:05 |
Cristi wrote:
BaldFriede wrote:
I am a bit surprised that there have been so many posts in this, but no-one mentions the situation the band was in when they changed their sound. Genesis were not only bankrupt, they were left with a big minus on their bank account from tours that turned out to be too expensive, and there was the next contractual album looming above them. What would YOU have done in that situation?
|
wow, I've never heard of that. it's well known that that they did not make a lot of money during their progressive era, but still never thought of them as being bankrupt. |
Just morally bancrupt.
|
Help me I'm falling!
|
|
Blacksword
Prog Reviewer
Joined: June 22 2004
Location: England
Status: Offline
Points: 16130
|
Posted: June 21 2009 at 06:52 |
Cristi wrote:
BaldFriede wrote:
I am a bit surprised that there have been so many posts in this, but no-one mentions the situation the band was in when they changed their sound. Genesis were not only bankrupt, they were left with a big minus on their bank account from tours that turned out to be too expensive, and there was the next contractual album looming above them. What would YOU have done in that situation? |
wow, I've never heard of that. it's well known that that they did not make a lot of money during their progressive era, but still never thought of them as being bankrupt. |
They didn't break even until 'A Trick of the Tail' By the the time the Lamb came out they were in debt to Charisma to the tune of about £500,000, so I've read. But Trick, WAW, Seconds Out, ATTWT, and Duke were all big selling albums. They officially hit the BIG time with Duke, scoring bit hits both sides of the Atlantic.
I was not aware of them being 'bankrupt' as such. If they were 'bankrupt' their debts would have been written off under UK law. I think.
|
|
KingCrimson250
Forum Senior Member
Joined: October 29 2008
Status: Offline
Points: 573
|
Posted: June 21 2009 at 11:41 |
IIRC band politics had a fair bit to do with it as well. After Peter left, Tony became more or less the major creative force. At around the time of WAW the band was split because Tony and Mike, having tasted the success of ToTT, were very much interested in turning their music in a more commercial direction, while Phil and Steve were pretty adamant about staying the course. This pokes through a bit on WAW (Your Own Special Way...), but of course Steve wasn't very happy with the band and decided to quit, meaning that Tony and Mike now outnumbered Phil, and the more commercial avenue was set. Ironically enough, Phil was, of course, the one who would end up profiting the most from this new direction, but apparently he wasn't a fan originally. I'm trying to remember if that's something I saw in an interview or if it's just a piece of knowledge I picked up back when I used to bang around the official Genesis forums. Either way it may not be true, so if someone could confirm one way or the other that would be cool. Also, on a completely unrelated point, I heard Dancing With the Moonlit Knight on the radio today... they cut out the last two minutes or so though Actually I guess it's not totally unrelated, because I do think it's interesting how today 70s Genesis gets more airplay than 80s Genesis, at least around here
|
|
lazland
Prog Reviewer
Joined: October 28 2008
Location: Wales
Status: Online
Points: 13627
|
Posted: June 21 2009 at 12:58 |
KingCrimson250 wrote:
IIRC band politics had a fair bit to do with it as well. After Peter left, Tony became more or less the major creative force. At around the time of WAW the band was split because Tony and Mike, having tasted the success of ToTT, were very much interested in turning their music in a more commercial direction, while Phil and Steve were pretty adamant about staying the course. This pokes through a bit on WAW (Your Own Special Way...), but of course Steve wasn't very happy with the band and decided to quit, meaning that Tony and Mike now outnumbered Phil, and the more commercial avenue was set. Ironically enough, Phil was, of course, the one who would end up profiting the most from this new direction, but apparently he wasn't a fan originally.
I'm trying to remember if that's something I saw in an interview or if it's just a piece of knowledge I picked up back when I used to bang around the official Genesis forums. Either way it may not be true, so if someone could confirm one way or the other that would be cool.
Also, on a completely unrelated point, I heard Dancing With the Moonlit Knight on the radio today... they cut out the last two minutes or so though
Actually I guess it's not totally unrelated, because I do think it's interesting how today 70s Genesis gets more airplay than 80s Genesis, at least around here
|
KC250 is absolutely right about Hackett being cheesed off with the new direction evident on some of WAW, but I don't think that the ironical piece about Collins is, although I do stand to be corrected. My recollection of interviews with Collins at about the time of ATTWT and Duke was he fumed about Genesis being lumped together with so called dinosaur bands like ELP, Yes., and Floyd because he felt that Genesis were very different in that they were continually trying to redefine themselves and not staying stuck in one perceived place of music. He also, in the same interview I recall, defended the shorter pieces, saying that you did not have to make a piece of music lasting over 10 minutes for it to say something or be good. If anything, I recall interviews with Banks admitting that the second side of Genesis represented the worst music the band ever made and they had taken that direction way too far.
|
Enhance your life. Get down to www.lazland.org
Now also broadcasting on www.progzilla.com Every Saturday, 4.00 p.m. UK time!
|
|
pobben
Forum Newbie
Joined: April 16 2007
Location: Norway
Status: Offline
Points: 6
|
Posted: June 26 2009 at 02:50 |
One thing we all have to remember I think is when you are in a band or going solo, you make new music all the time. One album is a little different then the other one. You want as a musician play your new music at GIG's to show the fans and the audience what you have made new. And maybe when you tour the world or whatever. I would think the it's a bit " dissapointing" to hear all the time ...... Play this or play that ....I'm not a musician but i would have thought like that anyway.
Another thing about Genesis and the members. I agreed with you in some parts. That they maybe should have stayed to their roots. I lke the PG and SH era most. Some of the music after was a bit poppy for my taste. But if you take it for what it is. A step forward to the POP business to earn money. We can like it or not.
That said, if it's true what you said about PC shouting to the audience, it's not good off course, but maybe a bit frustation over what I earlier mentioned. Remember Roger Waters spitting on audience.
And one last thing, remember what happened to Bob Dylan after changing from Acustic to electric music. We as fans have our responsibilities to.
And just to mention it Michael Jackson died yesterday, that's sad even if we liked him or not
|
|
Donate monthly and keep PA fast-loading and ad-free forever.