Remember all these guys grew up listening to little Richard and the Beatles, and they had pop music in their veins. A lot of the greatest 70s prog like Roundabout and the Lamb are hugely catchy. There’s an interview of Tony Banks where he says he uses the same crossover hand technique on the Lamb Lies Down on Broadway and No Reply At All. It’s all cut from the same cloth. And also remember that 10 years in the industry in their years was an eternity, so bands had to adapt. I think Rush did it the best but I absolutely love Duke and Abacab and think those are as prog as anything they’d ever done, even if their sound continued to change. Great rant!
Hi Davey, I agree with your points made and I kind of prefer the Phil Collins era over the Peter Gabriel era just slightly more but I love them both the same!! 😄👍
I knew this Rant was coming and I support it 100%! I love 80s Genesis. IMO the quality level was still high overall. Maybe a few songs here and there not up to snuff like Whodunnit or Illegal alien but other than that I am all in.
I saw many Genesis concerts in the 80s and 90s. There are many interviews with Phil, Tony and Mike about this subject. Tony said that when they each went off and made their own music and albums independently, they came back together because they wanted to continue as a group making music. Tony said that, yes, there were songs that were influenced by each member's ideas, but that some songs that are called "Phil" songs are indeed not "Phil" songs and were actually written by another band member. Tony seemed irritated at the idea that the group became more "Phil". Genesis wanted to keep trying new things and they did, collaborating together.
Hey Davey, I appreciate your analysis and I think you've got a great channel going. But I do have a small disagreement when I hear defenses of eighties albums by classic prog bands. The argument seems to be that they were playing in a seventies style in the seventies and then naturally progressed to an eighties style in the eighties. This sounds reasonable, but I think there's a bit of a false equivalence there. You see, in the eighties they did indeed follow the eighties trends, whereas in the seventies, they were not following seventies trends; in the seventies they SET the trends. In the seventies, they were simply doing their own thing, and it became popular and successful because it was good. They brought the audience along with them rather than following the audience, as they later did in the eighties. What say you? P.S. Huge Duke fan here, since 1980.
Thanks for watching and commenting, Dan. I’m merely speaking from my point of view on the subject. I came into Genesis with the 80s spate of albums. I think the first one I bought was Abacab on vinyl, but the first songs l heard were from Duke. I didn’t hear anything from the Gabriel era until 1988. The only Prog band l really knew, liked and followed in the late 1970s was Yes. The first album l bought by them in real time was Drama. I already had some of their earlier records by 1980, specifically The Yes Album, Fragile, Close to the Edge and Yessongs. I really think that when you come into a band affects your thoughts on your catalog. For example, l love Queen’s The Game record since it was the first one l ever purchased. A lot of Queen fans think that was the beginning of the end of the band. No one is right and no one is wrong, it’s all up to their personal tastes. I’m just provoking conversation on our favorite bands and if someone doesn’t like 80s Genesis, that’s fine. I still find plenty of good music after Duke, with some bad and bland songs mixed in. (For example: “I Can’t Dance,” “Whodunnit” and “Hold on My Heart.) As for your last theory about leaders and followers, there is definitely some truth there. But times and scenes change and sometimes you have to go with the flow, or perhaps even lose your record deal/contract if you can’t put mortals in the seats or songs on the charts.
@@daveycretin664 I agree that the timing of when you discover a band matters--especially if you discover it at a tender age. Duke, for instance, imprinted on me as a 15-year-old in 1980 (in Nassau County, by the way,) though I already know a few of their earlier albums. But I'm also a big fan of later works by classic artists--just not usually the 80's stuff. For instance, The Ladder and Magnification are both in my top 5 or 6 Yes albums. People often don't give these kinds of albums enough attention or credit.
I believe that the band always was evolving you know how much I know the band. I believe that the their use of analog keyboards was key in the album self titled genesis. Mama is progressive. In the past nobody cared if song were long. The DJ played what ever he wanted. Phil Collins was very talented. Give credit to him. Mike Rutherford had small creeps day Tony banks had a lot of unconventional classical sources. You should mention the b sides Can you say that the post fish era of Marillion is progressive?
Thank you very much for watching and sharing your thoughts! I feel that the band always retained a slight progressive bent, but some disagree with my opinion and that’s fine. Not everyone has to agree on everything. I’m just stating my opinion and others may think differently. Mike Rutherford’s Smallcreep’s Day is excellent, like a lost late 70s Genesis album. There are so many Genesis b-sides that they probably could have released an extra album or two just featuring them! Instead, they added them to the trilogy of box sets that the band released. I’ve heard them all, but don’t have total recall of them. However, there are some great ones on the Spot the Pigeon EP and side four of the original American release of Three Sides Live. As for the Marillos post-Fish, well… perhaps that’s the subject for a future video. Hmmm 🤔… Cheers!
Hello Davey, I completely disagree with your point of view. I am a fan of PG's era Genesis, not the PC's one. I appreciate they did a very hard work in order to reach their '80's platinum status. But, after "And Then There Were Three..." 1978 album they didn't moved an inch progressively in compositional terms at least. "Progressive Rock" is not only about long structured songs or the advanced use of technology. Because, every musician does just that ; Music itself goes forward and hand in hand with the help of technology. Always and forever. Genesis, started as a "Prog Rock" band on 'Trespass", then they gradually moved into more progressive pop realms from "Selling England By The Pound" and on. They simplified the song structures from "A Trick Of The Tail" and finally mutated to the '80's AOR/Pop giant we all know. Some "prog spices" into their '80's output here and there don't make a song "progressive". Alan Parsons did it. Journey and numerous others did it too. Even if "Abacab" or "Mama" are "okayish" songs. Phil Collins, owns a pop voice ; late Genesis albums are completely undistinguished and similar with his solo works. The last Genesis "hurrah" as a valued prog band was with their "And Then There Were Three" album. At least, the approach in both "Prog" and "Pop" was more unified and balanced there, the songs more atmospheric and introspective than later. They bridged the two worlds nicely. Both Genesis and Yes went pop in the '80's with mostly uninteresting, boring and ultimately lifeless songs for me. So, no. They weren't prog in the '80's. Not more than Toto were.
They did sell out on Invisible Touch although it sold big it still is one of the worst albums from their catalog. I'll take Trick of the Tail, Duke and Abacab any day of the week.
Thanks for watching and commenting! I’m surprised that you don’t like that album more, since it’s very commercial with many catchy hits. And “Domino” and the instrumental “The Brazilian” aren’t sell out songs to me. I don’t particularly agree with them selling out for this record. I always thought that almost every musician wants to sell their songs and records in order to earn a living. I put out videos to have people see them and to provoke chat about certain subjects. I definitely don’t want to have zero views on my videos. I think most musicians want to share their music and build a following. I think that Maynard James Keenan said it best in the lyrics to the Tool song entitled “Hooker with a Penis.” Cheers!
~ They changed, somewhat appropriately, for the times. They still had some Prog credentials with longer songs such as “Abacab,” “Dodo/Lurker,” “Home by the Sea/Second Home by the Sea” and a few others. However, Li’l Philly Cheese Steak was SOOOO omnipresent during the 1980s - with parallel careers in Genesis, as well as his solo work - l can easily see how he rubbed people the wrong way. Just put it down to overexposure. Thanks for watching and commenting.
![Lp. Сердце Вселенной #60 РОЖДЕНИЕ ЛОЛОЛОШКИ [Финал] • Майнкрафт](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/YoR0pAV9FVQ/mqdefault.jpg)
Remember all these guys grew up listening to little Richard and the Beatles, and they had pop music in their veins. A lot of the greatest 70s prog like Roundabout and the Lamb are hugely catchy.
There’s an interview of Tony Banks where he says he uses the same crossover hand technique on the Lamb Lies Down on Broadway and No Reply At All. It’s all cut from the same cloth.
And also remember that 10 years in the industry in their years was an eternity, so bands had to adapt. I think Rush did it the best but I absolutely love Duke and Abacab and think those are as prog as anything they’d ever done, even if their sound continued to change.
Great rant!
The thing about the 80s that gets forgotten is either adapt or die
Hi Davey, I agree with your points made and I kind of prefer the Phil Collins era over the Peter Gabriel era just slightly more but I love them both the same!! 😄👍
I knew this Rant was coming and I support it 100%! I love 80s Genesis. IMO the quality level was still high overall. Maybe a few songs here and there not up to snuff like Whodunnit or Illegal alien but other than that I am all in.
I saw many Genesis concerts in the 80s and 90s. There are many interviews with Phil, Tony and Mike about this subject. Tony said that when they each went off and made their own music and albums independently, they came back together because they wanted to continue as a group making music. Tony said that, yes, there were songs that were influenced by each member's ideas, but that some songs that are called "Phil" songs are indeed not "Phil" songs and were actually written by another band member. Tony seemed irritated at the idea that the group became more "Phil". Genesis wanted to keep trying new things and they did, collaborating together.
They actually progressed.
Hey Davey, I appreciate your analysis and I think you've got a great channel going. But I do have a small disagreement when I hear defenses of eighties albums by classic prog bands. The argument seems to be that they were playing in a seventies style in the seventies and then naturally progressed to an eighties style in the eighties. This sounds reasonable, but I think there's a bit of a false equivalence there.
You see, in the eighties they did indeed follow the eighties trends, whereas in the seventies, they were not following seventies trends; in the seventies they SET the trends. In the seventies, they were simply doing their own thing, and it became popular and successful because it was good. They brought the audience along with them rather than following the audience, as they later did in the eighties. What say you?
P.S. Huge Duke fan here, since 1980.
I don’t understand your point of view. Progressing is using new technology to advance the music didn’t Genesis do that?
Thanks for watching and commenting, Dan. I’m merely speaking from my point of view on the subject. I came into Genesis with the 80s spate of albums. I think the first one I bought was Abacab on vinyl, but the first songs l heard were from Duke. I didn’t hear anything from the Gabriel era until 1988. The only Prog band l really knew, liked and followed in the late 1970s was Yes. The first album l bought by them in real time was Drama. I already had some of their earlier records by 1980, specifically The Yes Album, Fragile, Close to the Edge and Yessongs.
I really think that when you come into a band affects your thoughts on your catalog. For example, l love Queen’s The Game record since it was the first one l ever purchased. A lot of Queen fans think that was the beginning of the end of the band. No one is right and no one is wrong, it’s all up to their personal tastes.
I’m just provoking conversation on our favorite bands and if someone doesn’t like 80s Genesis, that’s fine. I still find plenty of good music after Duke, with some bad and bland songs mixed in. (For example: “I Can’t Dance,” “Whodunnit” and “Hold on My Heart.) As for your last theory about leaders and followers, there is definitely some truth there. But times and scenes change and sometimes you have to go with the flow, or perhaps even lose your record deal/contract if you can’t put mortals in the seats or songs on the charts.
@@daveycretin664 I agree that the timing of when you discover a band matters--especially if you discover it at a tender age. Duke, for instance, imprinted on me as a 15-year-old in 1980 (in Nassau County, by the way,) though I already know a few of their earlier albums. But I'm also a big fan of later works by classic artists--just not usually the 80's stuff. For instance, The Ladder and Magnification are both in my top 5 or 6 Yes albums. People often don't give these kinds of albums enough attention or credit.
I believe that the band always was evolving you know how much I know the band. I believe that the their use of analog keyboards was key in the album self titled genesis. Mama is progressive.
In the past nobody cared if song were long. The DJ played what ever he wanted.
Phil Collins was very talented. Give credit to him.
Mike Rutherford had small creeps day
Tony banks had a lot of unconventional classical sources.
You should mention the b sides
Can you say that the post fish era of Marillion is progressive?
Thank you very much for watching and sharing your thoughts! I feel that the band always retained a slight progressive bent, but some disagree with my opinion and that’s fine. Not everyone has to agree on everything. I’m just stating my opinion and others may think differently. Mike Rutherford’s Smallcreep’s Day is excellent, like a lost late 70s Genesis album.
There are so many Genesis b-sides that they probably could have released an extra album or two just featuring them! Instead, they added them to the trilogy of box sets that the band released. I’ve heard them all, but don’t have total recall of them. However, there are some great ones on the Spot the Pigeon EP and side four of the original American release of Three Sides Live.
As for the Marillos post-Fish, well… perhaps that’s the subject for a future video. Hmmm 🤔…
Cheers!
No
Hello Davey,
I completely disagree with your point of view.
I am a fan of PG's era Genesis, not the PC's one.
I appreciate they did a very hard work in order to reach their '80's platinum status. But, after "And Then There Were Three..." 1978 album they didn't moved an inch progressively in compositional terms at least.
"Progressive Rock" is not only about long structured songs or the advanced use of technology.
Because, every musician does just that ; Music itself goes forward and hand in hand with the help of technology. Always and forever.
Genesis, started as a "Prog Rock" band on 'Trespass", then they gradually moved into more progressive pop realms from "Selling England By The Pound" and on.
They simplified the song structures from "A Trick Of The Tail" and finally mutated to the '80's AOR/Pop giant we all know.
Some "prog spices" into their '80's output here and there don't make a song "progressive". Alan Parsons did it. Journey and numerous others did it too. Even if "Abacab" or "Mama" are "okayish" songs.
Phil Collins, owns a pop voice ; late Genesis albums are completely undistinguished and similar with his solo works.
The last Genesis "hurrah" as a valued prog band was with their "And Then There Were Three" album. At least, the approach in both "Prog" and "Pop" was more unified and balanced there, the songs more atmospheric and introspective than later. They bridged the two worlds nicely.
Both Genesis and Yes went pop in the '80's with mostly uninteresting, boring and ultimately lifeless songs for me.
So, no. They weren't prog in the '80's. Not more than Toto were.
They did sell out on Invisible Touch although it sold big it still is one of the worst albums from their catalog. I'll take Trick of the Tail, Duke and Abacab any day of the week.
I disagree why put domino and the Brazilian in the album
Thanks for watching and commenting! I’m surprised that you don’t like that album more, since it’s very commercial with many catchy hits. And “Domino” and the instrumental “The Brazilian” aren’t sell out songs to me. I don’t particularly agree with them selling out for this record. I always thought that almost every musician wants to sell their songs and records in order to earn a living. I put out videos to have people see them and to provoke chat about certain subjects. I definitely don’t want to have zero views on my videos. I think most musicians want to share their music and build a following. I think that Maynard James Keenan said it best in the lyrics to the Tool song entitled “Hooker with a Penis.” Cheers!
The singles sound like Phil’s solo material. Doesn’t sound like Genesis.
@@rockshowcritique440 ~ l think Phil’s solo material sounds like Genesis. Which came first, the chicken or the egg? 🥚 🐓
My answer? No, they became a wimpy pop band in the 80's. Not a fan of Phil Collins at all.
~ They changed, somewhat appropriately, for the times. They still had some Prog credentials with longer songs such as “Abacab,” “Dodo/Lurker,” “Home by the Sea/Second Home by the Sea” and a few others. However, Li’l Philly Cheese Steak was SOOOO omnipresent during the 1980s - with parallel careers in Genesis, as well as his solo work - l can easily see how he rubbed people the wrong way. Just put it down to overexposure. Thanks for watching and commenting.