80's Genesis vs. 80's Yes

Tapfret wrote: Yes gets the credit for at least attempting to bring the prog/pop worlds together. 90125 had some very strong moments. Big Generator was revolting. Genesis had nothing for me once Hackett split.

Duke and Drama are really good albums IMO. Everything after that from both bands is completely awful, but the stuff from Genesis is even more disgusting. Mama, Abacab, and Invisible Touch are all unlistenable, but at least 90125 has some merit. 

J-Man wrote: Duke and Drama are really good albums IMO. Everything after that from both bands is completely awful, but the stuff from Genesis is even more disgusting. Mama, Abacab, and Invisible Touch are all unlistenable, but at least 90125 has some merit.

Hi,

Catcher10 wrote: J-Man wrote: Duke and Drama are really good albums IMO. Everything after that from both bands is completely awful, but the stuff from Genesis is even more disgusting. Mama, Abacab, and Invisible Touch are all unlistenable, but at least 90125 has some merit.    Without looking and comparing album sales...I feel safe to say those "unlistenable" albums made them gobs of money....It may not fit your taste or your feeling of what Genesis and Yes should have been recording in the 80's.......But I doubt Fragile or Foxtrot would have sold anything close to 90125 and Invisible Touch. IMO its good to look at and understand why a group may have done what they did......For me I appreciate the 70's stuff they did more because of the 80s stuff. But that is just me, I don't get stuck on a time period.....I usually listen to everything an artist records.

I agree with virtually every point you've made on this thread, Jose, but I would take small issue regarding album sales in the 70's. Don't forget that Yes were certainly one of the biggest bands on the planet, beaten only, I think, by the likes of Led Zep, The Stones, The Who. Fragile certainly would have shifted by the truckload. In terms of Genesis, though, you are absolutely spot on - Foxtrot was not a huge seller in the UK or US on its release, and the 80's output certainly shifted by the shedload.

The important point I think we would absolutely agree on is the fundamental one, that is that there was great merit in both bands post 1980 output.

Lozlan wrote: Ug.  I just threw up in my mouth a little. I'd have to say Yes.  My Phil Collins hate is too deep to permit the alternative.

Complete 80s albums of them are good but I feel Yes more succesful in prog and experimental essence.

Neither Drama nor Duke are 80s albums.  They are 70s albums.  

Ivan_Melgar_M wrote: Epignosis wrote: Neither Drama nor Duke are 80s albums.  They are 70s albums.   Maybe Duke, because it was recorded in 1979......But wasn't Drama recorded on April 1980 and released August 22, 1980? Iván

I was being a geek about the dates.  The year1980 is a part of the 1970s.  That's because we don't start the epoch on "year zero," we start on year one.  So a decade is years 1-10 (or 1971-1980).

http://www.timeanddate.com/counters/mil2000.html

This was a calendar reformed by a Pope, anyway.

I like 90125, haven't got around to Big Generator yet.  Pop Genesis is not my thing. As far as I am concerned, the life was sucked out of Genesis after Hackett left. Not for any sentimental reasons, simply because he was the only interesting player in the band, apart from Collins. And Collins would play less and less like his jazz-rock monster self and more and more like....   Banks is a great composer for sure, but mind I am talking about the playing, the things that Hackett does on guitar hold your attention even where the songs may be running out of steam a bit.   Rather than BAD, pop Genesis just sounds very bland and dull to me and I feel really unable to warm up to it for that reason. Good pop is supposed to be invigorating and irresistibly catchy, not bland.