| Author |
 Topic Search  Topic Options
|
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?
|
 |
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. 
|
|
|
|
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.
|
|
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
|
|
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?
|
|
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?
|
|
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
|
|
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"
|
|
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
|
|
erlenst
Forum Senior Member
Joined: May 17 2005
Location: Denmark
Status: Offline
Points: 387
|
Posted: January 24 2006 at 13:44 |
|
|
|
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."
|
|
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
~~~~~~
|
|
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]
|
|
iguana
Forum Senior Member
Joined: July 01 2005
Location: Germany
Status: Offline
Points: 825
|
Posted: January 24 2006 at 12:55 |
i dont blame collins. i blame
YOU 
|
|
progressive rock and rural tranquility don't match. true or false?
|
|
akin
Forum Senior Member
Joined: February 06 2004
Location: Brazil
Status: Offline
Points: 976
|
Posted: January 24 2006 at 12:47 |
|
I don't think he is the only person to blame. I just think that he
accelerated the whole process. I think Genesis would become popier with
or without Collins, even with Gabriel and Hackett. But maybe not so
pop. Squire and Anderson couldn't prevent Yes being pop, Ian Anderson
who composed almost all Jethro Tull songs made Under Wraps. King
Crimson became worse in 80's. The Moody Blues made two great
albuns in eighties, but went pop too, even with Patrick Moraz and all
the others. ELP didn't record as ELP, but To the power of the Three is
ridiculous (Emerson and Palmer), Emerson, Lake & Powell is better,
but far from what ELP once was.
So it was almost inevitable. Only few bands resisted, most of them not
mainstream (like Hawkwind). The difference is that Yes for
example made some weak efforts but not so pop like Genesis ones
(although the 1983 album has some interesting songs).
|
|
Prog_Bassist
Forum Senior Member
Joined: August 29 2004
Location: Canada
Status: Offline
Points: 830
|
Posted: January 24 2006 at 12:33 |
|
there's nothing wrong with collins, he is good in every type of music he has played.
|
|
|
|
SlipperFink
Forum Senior Member
Joined: September 12 2005
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 230
|
Posted: January 24 2006 at 12:14 |
richardh wrote:
SlipperFink wrote:
richardh wrote:
Banks was
the mastermind in Genesis. |
ONLY from a compositional
standpoint. In the 'classic' line-up, you have the arch-typical "chemistry
group". Remove ANYTHING and the equasion suffers. SM. |
The compositional standpoint is the only one that matters.Its the music
that has lasted and Banks work in the band provided the cornestone.No
doubt that Collins and Hackett provided the instrumental clout but did
they really contribute that much from a writing point of view? All
successfull bands have a chemistry but you can usually pick one member
from any band that is vital.I would argue for:
King Crimson - Fripp
Rush - Peart
ELP -Emerson
Yes - Howe
Pink Floyd - Waters
Genesis - Banks |
Nope.
Rock music's(even PROGROCK music's) strongest suit is ENDEARMENT.
Period.
En Masse subscription to any of the genres secondary or incidental elixirs
is folly.
It is no different than folk or blues in this way.
What's charming, and quite remarkable, is the way a bunch of white
English kids twisted an indiginous Black American musical form around to
make it resonate properly with the fabric of their life experiences....
But THAT'S what happened.
The ROCK and JAZZ in ProgRock comes from THIS SIDE of the pond. And
it holds the POWER OF ENDEARMENT that is/was sorely lacking the the
"Rehash the Dead White guy" forms the European kids were bringing to
the table.
Face it. Without the "rock".... Most progrock is utterly dreadful.
SM.
|
|
NetsNJFan
Prog Reviewer
Joined: April 12 2005
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 3047
|
Posted: January 24 2006 at 10:32 |
ivan_2068 wrote:
van'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.
You're quoting 5 songs in 4 albums, anyway, IMO those songs have no artistic value anyway, but the sound the atmosphere was the same as in Collins solo albums-
Those Are great songs, IMO. Dodo rivals anything the band did with Gabriel IMO.
And there is very little like Sussudio
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.
For me sounds almost exactly the same as for many Genesis fans, go and ask how many people believe that Genesis made Sussudio and you will have your answer.
Ivan, you pride yourself on being a good debater.
I don't take a pride in anything, as Popeye said I am what I am.
Never said I was a good debater, I only said that I enjoy debating, which is different. I enjoy baseball, but I can't play in the major leagues.
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?
I don't want anything, I just buy or not buy their music and give my honest opinion, for me it sucks and that's all.
Original is making something different to the rest, making mainstream music is just being part of the mediocre musical industry in MOST of the cases.
1983? 1990?
I thought the idea of progressive music was to -- progress?
You think wrong, the adjective Progress has no relation with Progressive Rock.
agreed in most cases
And even if it was. Going from Musical Box to Ilegal Alien or Who Dunit is not Progression, it's regresion.
Please you are intelligent ebough to understand that after Duke, no Genesis album was remotely Prog'.
There were still some great moments on later records. Agreed, after Duke, they weren't a prog band. But Me & Sarah Jane, Dodo/Lurker, Abacab, Mama, The Brazilian, Domino, Tonight, Tonight, Tonight, Fading Lights --- all great PROG ROCK songs.
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?
- Michael Jackson
- Prince
- Maddonna
- New Kids on the Block
- Britney
- Donna Summer
- Celine Dion
- Lionel Ritchie
- N'Synk
- Eminem
- All the Rappers
- All the Hip Hoppers
Yes, anybody with or without talent but with good lookscan make a multi million selloing Pop career, it depends on luck more than in skills.
I could use 100, 1,000 or even more examples.
Don't forget Ivan, even the least talented, unmusical of that list had good songrwriters behind them who knew how to write hits. Not everyone can write good pop. Look at all the prog bands that fialed in the late 70s/80s, but Genesis succeeded because they wrote good, intelligent pop. There is such a thing.
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 ...
- UK
- King Crimson
- Jethro Tull
- Rush
Kept faithful to their style ansucceses.
Neo Prog appeared during the 80's and despite most bands of this genre are not as skilled as the old ones, at least they made great music.
Pfff...Neo-Prog....Genesis never made anything remotely as insipid as "Kayleigh"
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.
Fallacy, Phil Collins mever did two different sryles of music, he never CREATED Prog music, he was only part of a band that created Prog.
Phil Collins only made crappy POP.
Iván
Ever heard of Brand X. Quite a bit of that was written or co-written by Phil Collins, and it is pure prog. I think you underestimate his contributions to prog genesis as well, I think he had a lot to do with the Lamb's music since that was written more communally.
|
|
Ivan, I really do think sometimes that you let your dissapointment of Gabriel and Hackett leaving cloud your judgement of later Genesis. So what, its no perfect prog, its still very good music. I really do reccomend you listen to the Three Sides Live album (which I think is their best live) and tell me those songs aren't prog (most of them).
|
|
|
|
NutterAlert
Forum Senior Member
Joined: June 07 2005
Location: In transition
Status: Offline
Points: 2808
|
Posted: January 24 2006 at 10:27 |
"oh there must be some misunderstanding
There must be some kind of mistake........"
|
|
Proud to be an un-banned member since 2005
|
|
Ivan_Melgar_M
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: April 27 2004
Location: Peru
Status: Offline
Points: 19557
|
Posted: January 24 2006 at 10:18 |
van'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.
You're quoting 5 songs in 4 albums, anyway, IMO those songs have no artistic value anywat, but the sound the atmosphere was the same as in Coillins 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.
For me sounds almost exactly the same as for many Genesis fans, go and ask how many people believe thatGenesis made Susudio and you will have your answer.
Ivan, you pride yourself on being a good debater.
I don't take a pride in anything, as Popeye said I am what I am.
Never said I was a good debater, I only said that I enjoy debating, which is differemt. I enjoy beisball, but I can't play in the major leagues.
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?
I don't want anything, I just buy or not buy their music and give my honest opinion, for me it sucks and that's all.
Original is making something different to the rest, making mainstream music is just being part of the mediocre musical industry in MOST of the cases.
1983? 1990?
I thought the idea of progressive music was to -- progress?
You think wrong, the adjective Progress has no relation with Progressive Rock.
And even if it was. Going from Musical Box to Ilegal Alien or Who Dunit is not Progression, it's regresion.
Please you are intelligent ebough to understand that after Duke, no Genesis album was remotely Prog'.
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?
- Michael Jackson
- Prince
- Maddonna
- New Kids on the Block
- Britney
- Donna Summer
- Celine Dion
- Lionel Ritchie
- N'Synk
- Eminem
- All the Rappers
- All the Hip Hoppers
For God's sake, Milly Vanilly made millions and the even couldn't thing a fu**ing note.
The Olsen twins have made more than 100 millions selling CD's (Plus almost 1,000 millions acting (???)) and they can't sing a note.
Yes, anybody with or without talent but with good lookscan make a multi million selloing Pop career, it depends on luck more than in skills.
I could use 100, 1,000 or even more examples.
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 ...
- UK
- King Crimson
- Jethro Tull
- Rush
Kept faithful to their style and never failled.
Neo Prog appeared during the 60's and despite most bands of this genre are not as skilled as the old ones, at least they made great music.
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.
Fallacy, Phil Collins mever did two different sryles of music, he never CREATED Prog music, he was only part of a band that created Prog.
Phil Collins only made crappy POP.
Iván
|
Edited by ivan_2068
|
|
|
|
/PAlogo_v2.gif "Progarchives.com Homepage")
Why do you blame collins?
