Do you care for PG's solo career?

I was just wondering if any of you cared for peter gabriels solo stuff. Theres alot of talk about how big bad Phil sold out, not much about gabriel's popped out stuff. Do you like it? Do you consider it prog?

Just wondering

    This is the second time I have seen a reference to some of Gabriel music as pop, or a sell out. It may seem that way in retrospect. But I remember hearing each of his albums before they caught on. Each time I was pleased that his music sounded unlike anyone else's. I thought that the general public was guilty of having good taste for a change, and that is why he scored some big hits. (Pink Floyd and Yes were also able to do this.) His music may have been more world beat than prog, but it was still unique.

Hierophant wrote: I was just wondering if any of you cared for peter gabriels solo stuff. Theres alot of talk about how big bad Phil sold out, not much about gabriel's popped out stuff. Do you like it? Do you consider it prog? Just wondering

Edited by Ivan_Melgar_M - April 29 2006 at 22:57

since peter gabriel left genesis he has left them very far behind - his expertly crafted music is truly progressive in  modern terms, very deep and emotional, covering heartbeaking and topical themes, and mixing traditional rock with world music - very successfully in my opinion. i saw him live around 83/84 and he was absolutely awesome, one of the best gigs i have ever seen. in years to come he will be seen as one of the true pioneers of rock, and sound technology  well ahead of his time, and he continues to break new ground.

Edited by mystic fred - April 29 2006 at 05:00

He is absolutely amazing. His studio albums are amongst the best solo albums ever released (especially 3, 4, So, and Up), his sound tracks are interesting, and his live albums brilliant. A few of his songs are a bit more pop-oriented (what's wrong with that?), but still high class. My all-time favourite artist by quite some distance.

Edited by Dragon Phoenix - April 28 2006 at 03:01

In the early 80's - a period of musical decline -  Peter Gabriel was pushing the boundaries of rock and to me was the future of rock and the only one (besides King Crimson) I relied on making great, progressive music. Unfortunately he didn't fulfill my expectations after Birdy but continued to sporadically make some great albums - most recently, 'UP'. So, yes I very much care about his solo works, especially II-IV.

To be honest, I'd say the one album of his that really stood up, imo, was his superb eponymous 3rd album. Other than that, I find some of his albums rather disappointing. The compilation 'Shaking The Tree' is superb though- pretty much every track worth having is included on that, imo. I thought the sparse, piano and vocal only version of 'Here Comes The Flood' was a great improvement.

Prog pop perhaps?

I like his first three albums, but they dont exactly blow me away. Far superior to Collins solo efforts though.

Peter Gabriel is perhaps the unique musician/band whose '80's-'90's work I love even more than his '70's works... (Genesis period excluded, especially albums from Trespass to SEbtP are simply amazing....)

by the way, I believe he should be included in "Art Rock" section (of which he is a perfect example for the whole genre, along with Styx, Journey, Supertramp etc..) rather than the obscure "Prog Related"... I mean, if he's prog related just because he was an ex-Genesis member, why not include Phil Collins?!?? (let no one take this serious, please!)

If anyone has hard time understanding how PG is prog (and not just "related"), please listen to "Us" and "Secret World Live" albums once again, and once more for justification

Edited by Bilek - April 30 2006 at 12:38

Gabriels solo career stuff is totally worthwhile. He had the best solo career next to Steve Hackett. Regardless if it's "prog," "pop" or "prog pop," it's good. A true innovator.