Hey , How come no Phil Collins

Norbert wrote: Most of the solo efforts of Phil Collins are simply pop, not even plain rock. Of course, he's better than Michael Jackson, but this is not enough reason to his inclusion.

That should be the ONLY reason for inclusion

Phil Collins' solo stuff is Porn Pop (that kinda' pop who perfectly fits in Porn movies ) and absolutely NOT prog, or prog related!!

 

pero wrote: ivan_2068 wrote: Phil hasn't written a single Progressive note in any of his solo albums, he's included as a member of Genesis (Despite his crimes against Prog ). But as a soloist, he should be in the Pop Atchives. Iván No way

Ok pal, name a single Prog' song in Phil's solo career?

If not, then send him to Pop Archives, because that's the music he was playing as soloist.

Iván

Phill Collins sold himself to Disney

The only compromise I could suggest on Phil Collins is making an entry for him with a biography that clearly states his contributions to progressive rock with links pointing to Genesis and Brand X. Mention he had a solo career that consisted only of pop albums and that reviewing pop albums is beyond the scope of Prog Archives. If adventurous, list his solo discography in the biography. Disable the ability of users adding albums to the page.

Just an idea.  Sometimes I wonder about my brain.

PROGMAN wrote: I've heard "Face Value", "No Jacket Required" and "But Seriously" and must say it is American Radio freindly POP with Ballads, Jazzy Pop, and Electro Elements but no more than that, PROG no way o - zay.

 Do you mean No way jose?

PhilPhan wrote: well, couldn't one argue that genesis did indeed progress. doesn't the term progressive mean change ? what did you want them to do, redo "Firth of fifth" or "cinema show" again and again.

No. Changing does not mean progressing.

Progress involves change, but it also involves moving forward. Moving to pop is not moving forward.

Change, on the other hand, does not need moving forward. It can go backward, stay where it is, or go forward, aka, progressing.

Yanns wrote: But Ivan, it would just be to show his contribution. Not about his albums done in his solo career.

No Yanns, he has contributed as a Genesis and Brand X member, so it's fair to be mentioned in Genesis and Brand X only.

• Peter Gabriel is mentioned because he did Art Rock and Proggy world music albums
• Steve Hackett is mentioned becaise he made aa great number of excellent solo Prog albums
• Ant Phillips made a Prog'  masterpiece called The Geese and the Ghost plus a few good proggy albums
• Tony Banks made a Prog album and a classical one (The ones deserved to be mentioned).
• Mike Rutherford never made a Prog album and i can't understand why he's mentioned well, maybe Smalcreep's Day is Prog related

They (Except Mike) deserve to be mentioned as Genesis members and as soloists

As a soloist Phil Collins never contributed to Prog, not an album, not a song, not a chord and not even a note so he shouldn't be mentioned as soloist

He dserves credit? I don't know, honestly I can't care less for his albums, but doeshe dserves to be in a Prog page? NO WAY JOSÉ!!!!!

PhilPhan wrote:

well, couldn't one argue that genesis did indeed progress. doesn't the term progressive mean change ? what did you want them to do, redo "Firth of fifth" or "cinema show" again and again.

Hey pal:

Evolution and progress work like this:

 

            

     From: The Knife to  Musical Box  and to  Supper's Ready

 

Genesis "change" worked like this:

 

             

From The Knife to Musical Box, to Supper's Ready and way back to  Illegal Alien

Read Darwin, things go from simple to complex not in the other way.

Iván              

Edited by ivan_2068

COLLINS IS POP!! END OF STORY!

Kid-A wrote: andYouandI45 wrote: Becuase he is not prog. He is pop, and he did in fact ruin the greatest prog band ever. Maybe he would be in Prog-Related but scince he like literally destroyed Genesis, screw him.   Am I the only one getting tired of this mindless phil collins bashing? You think Banks and Rutherford had no say in them turning pop? ALL of the blame gets put on Phil Collins, which is rediculous. And what is wrong with making pop music in the 80's? If you don't like it just ignore it. How exactly does this ruin the band? It's not like he destroyed Genesis' back catalogue or anything. Or would you rather if they just went on and made un-inspired progressive music they didn't want to be making? I think Phil Collins should be added to progarchives, just cause he's quite an important character in prog history.

I believe Eddie Offord and Tony Stratton Smith (Charisma Records) are 1,000 times more important to Prog than Phil Collins will ever be, without them Yes, Genesis and VDGG would never had a chance to reach the heights they reached, and they don't have a place here because they didn't released Prog' albums as musicians.

1. Prog Archives is a place for musicians with Prog Discography
2. Phil Collins is a musician who doesn't have a single Prog song (Should we ad him for Sussudio?)

ERGO: Phil Collins doesn't deserve to be here.

I believe Tony Banks and Mike Rutherford are almost as responsible for Genesis debacle, but they have at least Prog related albums, so they have more right to be here.

Iván

BTW: Yes you are one of the few, because bashing Phil Collins is the national sport here and in any Prog place.

Edited by ivan_2068