Genesis the most influential prog band?

Ivan_Melgar_M wrote:   For God's sake, even Camel has Genesis influences. I'm not saying Genesis is the most influential band, but surely is among the most influential along with Pink Floyd, Yes, King Crimson and even ELP.

Really?I' ve never noticed that.... Camel is totally apart from all the other bands you mentioned.For me,Pink Floyd stands out as the most influential prog band,simply because of their monstrous worldwide success.Genesis arrive just after along with Yes,i guess.

^I must agree on the influence on Camel, if I have to recomend some Genesis lover a classic Prog band, Camel is definitely one of them, Mirage and Snow Goose specially. Then the obvious intro of Lunar Sea ala Watcher of the Skies, and then in Nod and a Wink the song Fox Hill has a very similar keyboard style.

Dick Heath wrote: cacho wrote: ^ I know you're joking Mike, this is if the OP really considers Fish as a Gabriel clone. I listened to the entire Script tons of times, and I just can't find similarities. Fish? Hammill maybe...   For goodness sake why are there so many semantic abuses of the English language. Nearly every time I read 'Influential' or 'influence' as a thread title, I also go "here we go ahead" , mainly because the words are employed incorrectly or imprecisely. Now here we go with 'clone' - I can think of 3 singers who have or still employ Peter Gabriel-like inflections, intonations (deliberate or otherwise), including the aforementioned Fish, Francis Dunnery, Shaun Guerin. However, play their tunes  them side by side  and the differences are most evident, and these guys are their own men. Compare that against  the zillions doing Elvis P impersonations either  professionally or as amateurs.

Edited by Chelsea - February 09 2009 at 12:45

Chelsea wrote: Dick Heath wrote: cacho wrote: ^ I know you're joking Mike, this is if the OP really considers Fish as a Gabriel clone. I listened to the entire Script tons of times, and I just can't find similarities. Fish? Hammill maybe...   For goodness sake why are there so many semantic abuses of the English language. Nearly every time I read 'Influential' or 'influence' as a thread title, I also go "here we go ahead" , mainly because the words are employed incorrectly or imprecisely. Now here we go with 'clone' - I can think of 3 singers who have or still employ Peter Gabriel-like inflections, intonations (deliberate or otherwise), including the aforementioned Fish, Francis Dunnery, Shaun Guerin. However, play their tunes  them side by side  and the differences are most evident, and these guys are their own men. Compare that against  the zillions doing Elvis P impersonations either  professionally or as amateurs.     You are all wrong and me being in my twenties having to tell you who it is kind of ironic.   What sparked that original creative spark that became prog rock?   Bill Buford: "The Beatles. They broke down every barrier that ever existed. Suddenly you could do anything after The Beatles. You could write your own music, make it ninety yards long, put it in 7/4, whatever you wanted".   In their time, they were revolutionary. Look at something like "Happiness Is A Warm Gun", and listen to how many times it changes time signatures. That type of thing was unheard of in pop music in the 60s. Yeh they were not the greatest instrumentalists but people have had 40-45 years of technology to catch up to them.  Many of their arrangements and melodies were revolutionary for their time. Sure, it can be your opinion that they weren't, but all that shows is that you really don't know what you're talking about

Yeah guys, you all are fools for thinking otherwise. The expert is in the house now.

fil karada wrote: If we begin to travel to the past we'll see that all music came from the cavemen of course. So I just need to know one thing to answer that question: when does jazz/pop/classical/younameit music becomes prog? If someone tells me that I'll answer.

Edited by himtroy - February 09 2009 at 19:45

Well, the new folks like to start new discussions to go over what has been previously discussed and I wouldn't want to deny them their fun.  I do get that deja vu feeling from time to time and I'm certain it comes from repeating myself.

Slartibartfast wrote: I'm certain it comes from repeating myself.

Hi

Geezus, 5 pages.
No offense to anyone, but I can't believe anyone really cares enough to stretch this out to 5 pages.
Oh well, nevermind me.

A general entreaty here:  can you guys stop bringing up Marillion every time there is a Genesis thread for God's sake?  I mean, even when the topic of their influence on neo prog comes up, can we stop bringing up the Fish-Gabriel comparisons for sometime and maybe cite some other neo prog band to demonstrate Genesis' influence?   I like both Fish's stint with Marillion and the five man and four man Genesis albums and it is painful to see people resort to calling one band a magpie (Marillion) and another overrated and boring(Genesis) just to score points off each other. Yes, yes, I have the option not to read it which for your information is what I would have exercised in this thread too had it not been for my own participation in it at a brief juncture when it was made more interesting by some insightful posts from micky. And likewise, you folks have the option to not reduce the level of discourse to such petulant, immature levels either.  Internet is serious business, lolz?  Then why bother if someone says Fish sounds like Gabriel or no, that he sounds like Hamill?   In all fairness, this time, it wasn't so bad as my post might make it out to be, but I am afraid by now my patience has worn thin. 

*End of rant* Feeling better now!