Yes Vs Genesis

Yes Stonebeard, I must agree that Hackett never had the chance to shiine in Genesis as he deserved to shine, but that has a reason.

Steve Hackett said on an interview that he notived that Genesis didn't need long solos, but a very dark and haunting atmospheric work.

Peter Gabriel said in the same interview that many talented guitar players auditioned for Anthony Phillips job, but each and every one was trying to be the new Hendrix, and they didn't need that, they wanted a guy who could play with Tony Banks almost as one instrument.

A real virtuoso knows what a band needs, and he provides this if he's capable. Many virtuoso players have failed in doing what Hackett did, he was the master of the atmospheres, only Gilmour was close to create that special surrounding sound, but of course nobody easily notice a musician that doesn't jump through the stage and makes endeless solos, even worst when he sits on a chair and doesn't rise his head from the guitar eevn when Gabriel was making a hell of a show, but people only recognized Steve's value when he left.

Voyage of the Acolyte is IMHO far better than any post Gabriel album even than the excellent ATOTT, because he had the freedom to create, he even made the magical Midsummer Night Dream only for aClassical guitar fans of the fantastic To Watch the Storms, so he had his chance to shine with his own merits,

But you haven't heard that

Iván

BTW, you asked:  Is it required that I listen to every song written by an artist before I make a judgement on them? I am only saying that Hackett did not have a chance to shine in Genesis

I believe you don't need to in order to make a judgement ABOUT WHAT YOU HAVE LISTENED, but in order to say "Nobody from Genesis was a virtuoso" (literal quote), you need to listen at least a signifcant part of their work, you're making a statement about every Genesis member including Steve Hackett without having heard a single note by him.

What would you believe of aguy who just has heard 90125 or Big Generator and gives such a hard opinion about Squire or Anderson?

Please read your own quote, you never said during their career in Genesis or something similar you clearly said no one in Genesis was a virtuoso musician without having enough fundaments to say that.

Edited by ivan_2068

ivan_2068 wrote: BTW, you asked:  Is it required that I listen to every song written by an artist before I make a judgement on them? I am only saying that Hackett did not have a chance to shine in Genesis I believe you don't need to in order to make a judgement ABOUT WHAT YOU HAVE LISTENED, but in order to say "Nobody from Genesis was a virtuoso" (literal quote), you need to listen at least a signifcant part of their work, you're making a statement about every Genesis member including Steve Hackett without having heard a single note by him. What would you believe of aguy who just has heard 90125 or Big Generator and gives such a hard opinion about Squire or Anderson? Please read your own quote, you never said during their career in Genesis or something similar you clearly said no one in Genesis was a virtuoso musician without having enough fundaments to say that.

1. I've since clarified my stance on this issue. If you want to keep refering to that perticular quote to try and discredit me, go ahead.

2. I'd tell the guy to listen to Close to the Edge, as you have told me to listen to Hackett's solo work.

3. Refer to 1.

ivan_2068 wrote: No discredit pretended, what would I win with that? I'm only tired of listening that same thing about Genesis musicians everywhere. Iván

I don't know, but what do you say we agree do disagree and end this?

floydaholic   You can definitely argue King Crimson>Yes. [/QUOTE wrote: What a load of sh*t!

What a load of sh*t!

floydaholic wrote:

Assuming King Crimson didn't exist.

[/QUOTE]

I have read just about every prog band encyclopedia, aotobiography, biography ect and not once have I read that King Crimson influenced any band or genre! In fact it beats the sh*t out me why anyone can compare this mediocre band with the true prog greats, ie. ELP, Yes, Genesis ect!!!!!!!!!!

Let's not forget that Genesis were only a second division prog band in the 70's, they didn't get promoted to the premier league until the 80's.

Yes are and always will be better than anything Genesis ever did or do!

YES

Progger wrote: Let's not forget that Genesis were only a second division prog band in the 70's, they didn't get promoted to the premier league until the 80's. Yes are and always will be better than anything Genesis ever did or do! YES

 Probably that´s the reason why YES decided to make 80 minutes of filler in 1973 not caring what others were about to issue in the same year. It didn´t matter whether Genesis was about to record the best prog album of 1973 or not....As you say, YES would always be better than anything Genesis wrote.

 They didn´t even care Genesis were about to produce the best concept album in prog just one year after (The Lamb), they still thought that making an album like "Relayer", with cacophonic middle sections as in "Gates", with simplistic 10 minute songs (To be over) and pointless jamming (Sound chaser..with stupid "CHACHAS") would be better than anything because they still were a first division prog band.....

 The only moment YES has been more original, creative and has had better songwriting than Genesis, was in 1969. Still, originality is to be argued as the best two songs in "YES" are cover songs; "Every little thing" and "I see you".

Phil wrote: I am a big Yes fan and they got my vote but that's a matter of personal preference......comments about Genesis not being as vituoso miss the point...yes, (sic), Yes were/are more flash and are probably better soloists but Genesis are no slouches either and in particular Steve Hackett is a great instrumentalist, Collins too. Anyhow being virtuoso isn't everything - look at Pink Floyd. Having said that it sometimes grates with me how high Tony Banks comes up in keyboard polls...he's an excellent composer/arranger who plays keyboards but not (IMHO) deserving of his usual no 3 ranking behind RW & KE.

 Now, that´s a clever comment ¡¡.

You guys just need to really look at the facts. Lets just use this analogy, there can be joe smoe who can be the best keyboardest ever, but if he doesnt come out and play solos and such nobody would ever know if he was the best. Nobodys saying that banks, hackett,and collins arent viturso's. Its just the fact that all the members of Yes prided themselves on great solos. In my opinion banks never once showed off how good he was. Ive seen hackett on a number of occasions solo and hes great, theres no doubt about that. Collins also was a great drummer, but whoever said that collins was better than brufford, YOUR NUTS. Brufford is by far a better drummer.

Phil wrote: Having said that it sometimes grates with me how high Tony Banks comes up in keyboard polls...he's an excellent composer/arranger who plays keyboards but not (IMHO) deserving of his usual no 3 ranking behind RW & KE.

 

Both keyboardists are in a league that very few keybaordists can match.... But neither can touch Tony's compositional skills....

I personally rank him ahead of both in personal taste...

 

Charles