Phil Collins (the Drummer) - Progressive Rock Music Forum

more of an early Phil vocal performance rather than showing his mastery of drums. And neither song is presented complete. Still. Masterliness.

Also, just btw, speaking of great drummers I saw some old footage of Keith Moon and again realized how completely brilliant he was as a drummer, which unfortunately got overshadowed a lot. He was just a maniac behind the kit.

3, Good start of solo-career

4, Emberesingly bad solo-career

4, The destroyer of Genesis

8, Hope he retiers completely and disapears completely out of existence

3, Good start of solo-career

Agreed

4, Emberesingly bad solo-career

Not half as embarrassing as your spelling......

4, The destroyer of Genesis

....or your counting

5, Duller drummer

He's still good but obviously not a spring chicken anymore.

6, Worse singer

He sounded pretty good in 2007 to me. I couldn't care less if songs are dropped a couple of semitones.

7, Dull person

Sorry, I didn't know that you know him.

8, Hope he retiers completely and disapears completely out of existence

How old are you? 12?

Edited by Nov - May 08 2009 at 11:42

I would say this differently ...

Robert Redford had a line about a movie he did where he got criticised for taking some 20 million to be there 5 minutes, deliver five lines and get major billing ... and you know what he said?

"I'm an actor. I would be a fool not to accept it. So would you!"

In Phil's life, and he has seen hundreds of bands and friends come and go, he has seen many people that did not make it and lost their cool, and did not have the chance or opportunity to play or sing ... and Phil, who had become the replacement voice for Peter Gabriel, simply could not do both and do them justice ... no one could ...

But also saying that he is not a good vocalist is grossly unfair. He may have not drummed as well or as much but he did some nice things, albeit you and I seem to prefer the Genesis material instead of the hit song stuff ... but for crying out loud ... give him some credit ... if he had not done the first one, and eventually "Against All Odds" .. he might still be drumming full time ... but he would be a bigger fool than all of us not to take that shot ... and you might call it stardom ... I just call it a bit of artistic freedom ...

What we don't know is how much he was a part of the vocal style that became Gabriel and that was Collins ... which might very well have defined Genesis in the first place. We have no idea!

But I do think, and will say it again that ALL of Phil's best drumming is not even in a Genesis album ... start looking around ... you will be surprised! That's not to say that he does not do some nifty things in there with Genesis, mind you ...

For some reason, the perpetuation of music via vinyl, cassette, cd and then internet, has made all of us ... "experts" ... and this is forcing the ol' philosophical debate to re-define the old axiom ... "what is art?" ... and "what is an artist?" ...

I'm not going to try and define it ... but I will tell you some stories along the way ...

1. I do think, when compared to a lot of literature, that there is some rock/pop music and lyricism (words) that stands up well to the history of literature. I also think that the majority of the popular music stuff is of lesser quality and does not have 1/10th the strength/direction/care/beauty/conceptualnature/whateverthereason that many of those other, more famous works have. So sorry ... but how do we compare Rush lyrics to Faulkner, or Steinbeck, or even Ayn Rand? There is no comparison to be made and a professor in school might not like it much either.

2. Philosophical discussion about artists, and historical information is a dead end here. Almost none of these people have ever heard those names, much less ever bother to pick up an encyclopaedia and find out what you meant by mentioning it.

... snip

And so, friends, does Progressive Rock! Among all forms of rock this form has probably most often championed a non-authoritarian humanist view, or a view that at least offers interesting challenges to the powerful and the elite. Do we stop often enough to consider that it may just be this, and not the sound, that is most responsible for attracting us in the first place to this genre?

I think that is way too simplistic a statement ... we managed to make all this stuff be way more meaningful that most of it really is ... and then we sit here and want to create justifications for it?

For my part, and 40 years of music enjoyment and history ... I can say this ... there is music that moves me and then there is radio stuff. The majority of the "progressive" stuff listed in the top 100, is, FOR MY EARS ... the same thing, and a copy of the same thing, and the majority of them lack the originality to even be considered ... important.

Now, that is not to say that a person who wrote a and b, or those 2 albums is not an "artist" ... only time will tell, but I am of the opinion that in general, more than one piece should help judge the veracity and quality of the work.

In this day and age, with the advent of the internet and the media controls, the line that defines "art" and "sh*t" (as I like to say ... pardon the pun ... ) is blurred ... why? Advertising ... and you can see it on the blockbuster films and how so many people think they are good ... and supposedly meaningful ... when they are compared to literature, they are "light" ... and from a literary stand point ... way too many holes! ... but from a drawing/creative artistry stand point ... yeah .. very good ... but movie ... for me NOT! And you can see Hollywood all over this and the power of money ... it's all it is about and has been for 75 years ... who do we think we are to think that we can change the world? ... (you ready?) ... specially when the last man that did it got his ass crucified. (Henry Miller!) ... if you get the chance see Warren Beatty's film Reds. You will appreciate the historical perspective by really big names in the history of the 20th century!

... snip...

They used to "do whatever they wanted" in the 70s, which was somehow prog, then they changed their minds all by themselves with no influence from the industry or other considerations... to doing... whatever they wanted. Really? I thought I observed a period of upheaval and rebellion followed by one of complacency by more than a few. But wait, that's too unfair of me - artists after all are not supermen. But I do know that the record industry, seen as a money making apparatus purely, must have been thrilled with the singles era of the 50s and 60s, far less so with the progressives and other album-length makers (anti-single) of the 70s and part of the 80s, and thrilled again (for a time) with what followed. ... snip ...

Every artistic period has soem sort of a "let go" moment ... that triggers a lot more. I am still of the opinion that very little "prog" music has its direct roots in music itself any more than it does in the other arts around it. However, the 60's, like VietNam, were the very first MEDIA ... events ... it was in the 60's that TV blew up and blew out ... and that is the comment that Tim Leary was really making ... just like watching a tv show ... you tune in, you tune out ... you go get the old lady and drop out for the night and go to sleep! (... with lots of literary license of course!!!) ...

But the weird thing to me, is that as huge as so much of this was, many of the folks that "supposedly" know and define "prog" ... are afraid to look at things around the music, lest it blows out the real story that created it all ... for crying out loud ... get teh video "Tonite We All Love in London" ... if you don't get in 5 minutes what the exploration was and how it helped create music ... you missed it ... forget all the philosophy and ideas ... go watch and experience like so many others did ... and you can see how it became important. But, above all ... it was the first time anyone had seen anything like it ... and it was live on the tv! And as such it's impression was huge .... can you imagine eskimos seeing this? ... or the hillbillies in whereever? ... or someone in Mongolia? ... it was the first time that the world became the world (PFM wrote the song ... hehehe!) ...

...

Money justifies everything? What of ethics? Does that sound pretentious? Well, turn again to the bulk of your artists. ... snip ... If they don't mean what they say, why not sing about cars and chicks? You know the answer, just remember you know it.

The "media" thing, for now, is all about how someone looks better than you, and smiles more, and of course makes more money.

Thus, it is easy to assimilate some success with the money and (for a time!!!) consider it the root of all evil ... oooppps ... the root of all law and definition ... and, as you well know, there is a lot of success (and $$$$$$$$) and in this world the law of the jungle has always been the one to make the rules ... America, in a way is super nice because you DO have a chance to get mighty and make some money ... whereas many other places in the world, if you are poor ... you will stay poor and die poor ... your chances are so minimal ... and you can see why some wars and skirmishes out there in other places are so brutal and people don't give a darn ... you can hire them off the streets because they are hungry and any revolution is better than none ... what else is new? How many times have you seen this in movies and TV ... be honest now!

It may not be the favorable thing or ideal ... but trust me ... it's a lot better than the alternative!

... snip ...

Collins will tell you: divorcing three wives can prove expensive. ... snip ...

I hardly think that is his reason for doing music ... it might just be a cynical or sensitive issue with him that after all these riches he can not enjoy/share it with a loved one ... that's another story ... and sometimes the downside of fame ... and it doesn't matter if you are a musician, football player or comedian or actor.

3, Good start of solo-career

4, Emberesingly bad solo-career

4, The destroyer of Genesis

8, Hope he retiers completely and disapears completely out of existence

Excellent drummer all his life (I used to play drums and know about this)
Very capable backing vocalist
Good debut as vocalist but:

His voice is flat with no variations, good for soft stuff
When he reaches too high ranges uses two cheap tricks

Just shouts as in Mama
Changes the lyrics to hide his limits for examp,e (Ande the Lamb...Lamb, Lamb, Lamb)

Was an important part in the destruction of artistic Genesis, as a fact I believe the leader, even when Tony and Mike have his share of respónsability
Horrendous boring adult contemporary career, reached a low peak working for Disney in Tarzan

Terrible composer, unless you like boring and bland love songs.
I hope the best for him.

Iván

Changes the lyrics to hide his limits for examp,e (Ande the Lamb...Lamb, Lamb, Lamb) Dead

You may be right, but I was also thinking of something else. Last week I was listening in my car to some of Genesis' live versions from the second Archives box (the post-Gabriel years), and it struck me that a lot of times Collins was changing the moment within a song where he was singing a particular phrase. A bit later, a bit earlier, etc. It became irritating to hear to be honest.

My theory is that Collins has a habit of changing tempo's in songs where he is not happy with the lyrics, or with the songs as a whole. It often sounds as if he feels distanced, just singing because he has to. Because he has to do something to fill his time, he plays with the way he performs the songs, as if he is otherwise bored by singing them. He doesn't do that with '80's and '90's Genesis songs, but I hear him do it with for instance The Lady Lies. On Seconds Out he also sings Willow Farm as if he thinks the lyrics are just quite odd. Warning: that is just a theory of mine.

I have the feeling that the same goes for The Lamb Lies Down On Broadway (the song). Still, in the latter case, you might be right, Iván. I never thought of his limitations as a singer.

Ivan_Melgar_M wrote:

Horrendous boring adult contemporary career, reached a low peak working for Disney in Tarzan Dead

Terrible composer, unless you like boring and bland love songs.

You're entitled to your opinion, of course, and I myself, in general, prefer early Genesis to later Genesis, and Genesis in general to Phil Collins solo. Still, I can enjoy Collins' solo songs, even the ones from the Tarzan movie.

Yes, the amount of progressiveness is zero point zero. As a lyricist I wouldn't rate him high either. But he seems to have an enormous talent for inventing a multitude of songs, that are highly melodious and always natural sounding: never his compositions seem to be forced or artificial.

Ivan_Melgar_M wrote:

I hope the best for him.

So do I

I have the feeling that the same goes for The Lamb Lies Down On Broadway (the song). Still, in the latter case, you might be right, Iván. I never thought of his limitations as a singer.

I noticed that in the late 70's, I used to play drums and sing a couple of tracks (still didn't smoked), and one of the few Prog tracks we played (on jamming sessions because the audience would had killed us) was The Lamb.

God!, it's very hard to keep the note for more than two or three seconds exactly in the part where Phil repeats the words.

Then listening some albums of classic vocalists noticed that when the time passed and they were loosing the voice, some singers lower the tone, others spoke in certain sections, others shouted and the last group were really a shame.

All of this are valid tricks when you can't hit a pitch, but some have more imaginative resources. Peter Gabriel for example has the same problem, he has a low raspy voice, so he created that semi yodel at the end of he phrases so usual in him, of course sometimes is more evident as in Biko, the guy had limits but used those limits to create something original.

I don't like Phil's resource, but in his defense, he was singing a track that the band was used to play for the range and style of a different singer, before a demanding audience that always compared them, and that's hard.

Peter Gabriel for example has the same problem, he has a low raspy voice, so he created that semi yodel at the end of he phrases so usual in him, of course sometimes is more evident as in Biko, the guy had limits but used those limits to create something original.

I never thought of that either. So the yodels are Peter Gabriel's way of coping with his limitations as a singer! Amazing.

He did a good job, because the thought that he was compensating a vocal shortage never crossed my mind. And he is a great singer, even with his limitations. My favourite vocal Gabriel part would be Broadway Melody Of 1974, because of all the things he does with his voice.

But now I'm going too far off topic.

This page was generated in 0.188 seconds.