Phil Collins
#46
Originally Posted by honeymommy
I thought buster was a great movie actually..... 

#47
Originally Posted by tony_2003
You read the Sun as well then?
#48
BE Forum Addict






Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 1,398
From: California since 1997 now back in UK since July 2004











Originally Posted by rincewind
And you probably liked him in Miami Vice too 

LOL cute........ can't compare miami vice to buster now can we....
#49
Originally Posted by tony_2003
Phil was Genesis.
~SG
#50
Originally Posted by Lion in Winter
Peter Gabriel - whole different cup of tea from Phil Collins.
~SG
#51
I think at the end of the day, in the era of blueprint management boy/girl bands, that you have to respect anyone who can play/sing/write their own stuff. even if it isn't my cup of tea.
#52
Originally Posted by Manc
I think at the end of the day, in the era of blueprint management boy/girl bands, that you have to respect anyone who can play/sing/write their own stuff. even if it isn't my cup of tea.
One thing is for certain---both of these men are highly talented in their own ways, and worthy of respect for their individual talents.
~SG
#53
Originally Posted by Big Vern
Better blinded by the Sun than Tone Deaf.....(ouch!) 

#54
SecretGarden
My point was that your average onlooker would not even know Peter Gabriel was in Genesis. Most people on the street can't distinguish between a Phil Collins song and a Genesis song anyway. The Gabriel/Collins debate will go on for ever among Genesis fans...my stance is this.
Gabriel was a decent songwriter and they no doubt made some amazing and original stuff when he was on vocals. However he was never a front man. He's admitted this himself. To cut a long long long story short, yes they were more popier and commercial when Phil took over vocals and they lost a lot of fans, however I think the change made the band survive. Can you imagine trying to play 20 minute prog rock tracks in 1985? I'm not actually a fan of a lot of Collins work, his last two albums sucked in the extreme. If he chooses to write songs about his wife and kids then that's his prerogative. No one has to listen. As manc said in a world full of throw away pop, it is good that there are artists who can sit down and write their own material.
My point was that your average onlooker would not even know Peter Gabriel was in Genesis. Most people on the street can't distinguish between a Phil Collins song and a Genesis song anyway. The Gabriel/Collins debate will go on for ever among Genesis fans...my stance is this.
Gabriel was a decent songwriter and they no doubt made some amazing and original stuff when he was on vocals. However he was never a front man. He's admitted this himself. To cut a long long long story short, yes they were more popier and commercial when Phil took over vocals and they lost a lot of fans, however I think the change made the band survive. Can you imagine trying to play 20 minute prog rock tracks in 1985? I'm not actually a fan of a lot of Collins work, his last two albums sucked in the extreme. If he chooses to write songs about his wife and kids then that's his prerogative. No one has to listen. As manc said in a world full of throw away pop, it is good that there are artists who can sit down and write their own material.
#55
Originally Posted by tony_2003
What's your idea of good music then? 

Vivaldi
Giuliani
Joplin
Gershwin
Frank Sinatra
Miles Davis
John Coltrane
Chuck Berry
Elvis Presley
Jerry Lee Lewis
The Shadows
Bob Dylan
The Beatles
The Rolling Stones
The Beach Boys
The Byrds
The Move
Pink Floyd
Yes
Genesis (Pre-76)
Led Zeppelin
Iggy and The Stooges
Slade
Wizzard
Sex Pistols
The Clash
The Stranglers
Elvis Costello
XTC
Human League (Mk1)
Kraftwerk
Magazine
Talking Heads
The Wonder Stuff
The Stone Roses
Happy Mondays
Nirvana
Soundgarden
Blur
The Darkness ... and a million other great bands and artists who aren't Phil Collins.
Love the smiley...
#56
Can add these to the list?
Marillion (post 'Fish', although the old stuff is still good...Hogarth is much better)
Depeche Mode
De/Vision
Rammstein
Paradise Lost
I'll save the more extreme ones for another list
Marillion (post 'Fish', although the old stuff is still good...Hogarth is much better)
Depeche Mode
De/Vision
Rammstein
Paradise Lost
I'll save the more extreme ones for another list
#57
Originally Posted by tony_2003
SecretGarden
My point was that your average onlooker would not even know Peter Gabriel was in Genesis. Most people on the street can't distinguish between a Phil Collins song and a Genesis song anyway. The Gabriel/Collins debate will go on for ever among Genesis fans...my stance is this.
Gabriel was a decent songwriter and they no doubt made some amazing and original stuff when he was on vocals. However he was never a front man. He's admitted this himself. To cut a long long long story short, yes they were more popier and commercial when Phil took over vocals and they lost a lot of fans, however I think the change made the band survive. Can you imagine trying to play 20 minute prog rock tracks in 1985? I'm not actually a fan of a lot of Collins work, his last two albums sucked in the extreme. If he chooses to write songs about his wife and kids then that's his prerogative. No one has to listen. As manc said in a world full of throw away pop, it is good that there are artists who can sit down and write their own material.
My point was that your average onlooker would not even know Peter Gabriel was in Genesis. Most people on the street can't distinguish between a Phil Collins song and a Genesis song anyway. The Gabriel/Collins debate will go on for ever among Genesis fans...my stance is this.
Gabriel was a decent songwriter and they no doubt made some amazing and original stuff when he was on vocals. However he was never a front man. He's admitted this himself. To cut a long long long story short, yes they were more popier and commercial when Phil took over vocals and they lost a lot of fans, however I think the change made the band survive. Can you imagine trying to play 20 minute prog rock tracks in 1985? I'm not actually a fan of a lot of Collins work, his last two albums sucked in the extreme. If he chooses to write songs about his wife and kids then that's his prerogative. No one has to listen. As manc said in a world full of throw away pop, it is good that there are artists who can sit down and write their own material.
And how can you say Gabriel was not a front man?? How can someone who walks onto the stage wearing a floor length black cloak, white gloves and batwings sticking out of his head *not* be a front man? Or when he sang wearing a red dress and a fox's head? Or high-kicked his way across the stage wearing an enormous yellow flower on his head? Or wore a costume made up of "lumps and bumps and slimy humps" complete with inflatable testicles? Or when he leapt into the audience, dressed as Santa? Or sung the finale of a 24 minute epic suspended on wires above the stage, wearing a silver glittery suit with a crown of silver laurel leaves? Can any of this have "front man" attributed to it? He was absolutely a front man, to the extent that most of the fans and music papers alike thought that he was the only creative force in the band, and Banks, Hackett, Rutherford and Collins were just his personal backing musicians.
Your comment about the band being more commercial and pop-oriented after Collins took over is partly true, but it wasn't until Steve Hackett left the band that they shook off their jingly jangly progressive rock roots and went straight for the FM radio market. Far from losing a lot of fans, they gained *millions* of new fans - by the time Gabriel left, Genesis had achieved one minor hit and was teetering on the edges of bankruptcy.
Cheers,
Mr Pink
~and SecretGarden
~~ (sings) "I know what I like, and I like what I know..."
#58
Originally Posted by tony_2003
Phil was Genesis.
#59
Originally Posted by mrpink
Well, yes, but sort of no. Gabriel was indeed a decent songwriter, but so were all the others in Genesis, and the stress of having five talented songwriters compete for album space was one of the factors in Gabriel leaving the band.
And how can you say Gabriel was not a front man?? How can someone who walks onto the stage wearing a floor length black cloak, white gloves and batwings sticking out of his head *not* be a front man? Or when he sang wearing a red dress and a fox's head? Or high-kicked his way across the stage wearing an enormous yellow flower on his head? Or wore a costume made up of "lumps and bumps and slimy humps" complete with inflatable testicles? Or when he leapt into the audience, dressed as Santa? Or sung the finale of a 24 minute epic suspended on wires above the stage, wearing a silver glittery suit with a crown of silver laurel leaves? Can any of this have "front man" attributed to it? He was absolutely a front man, to the extent that most of the fans and music papers alike thought that he was the only creative force in the band, and Banks, Hackett, Rutherford and Collins were just his personal backing musicians.
It wasn’t as if these theatrical props complimented the music (as in for example a Floyd light show)...because half the time no bugger could hear what he was singing with those masks on. I have bootlegs from this era and the musical performances are appalling.
Fast forward to Collins and we have a man who has a brilliant rapport with the audience without the need for gimmicks. He cracks jokes with the crowd, takes the piss out of himself and generally has a great time. However much you may find stuff like "audience participation time" cheesy, the crowds loved it.
Your comment about the band being more commercial and pop-oriented after Collins took over is partly true, but it wasn't until Steve Hackett left the band that they shook off their jingly jangly progressive rock roots and went straight for the FM radio market. Far from losing a lot of fans, they gained *millions* of new fans - by the time Gabriel left, Genesis had achieved one minor hit and was teetering on the edges of bankruptcy.
Also Banks and Rutherford are not stupid people.
I seriously doubt Collins dragged them kicking and screaming into the pop market.
And to answer the other lady - I take back my earlier comment. Tony Banks was Genesis.
Last edited by tony_2003; Oct 1st 2004 at 1:38 pm.
#60
Originally Posted by tony_2003
Don't remember asking why he left, I know most of this already. Hackett left for the same reason later, his material was being left on the cutting floor. PG left because he needed 100% artistic control and he probably wanted to experiment more.
Yes well it takes more than silly costumes (however infamous they become) to keep an audiences attention. The whole reason he started doing the costume thing was because he had no rapport with the audience...who were to put it bluntly, bored with the shows. People then came to see the old mans mask, rather than for the music.
It wasn’t as if these theatrical props complimented the music (as in for example a Floyd light show)...because half the time no bugger could hear what he was singing with those masks on. I have bootlegs from this era and the musical performances are appalling.
Fast forward to Collins and we have a man who has a brilliant rapport with the audience without the need for gimmicks. He cracks jokes with the crowd, takes the piss out of himself and generally has a great time. However much you may find stuff like "audience participation time" cheesy, the crowds loved it.
I agree with most of that and it's what I tell the PG fans who are stuck in 1975 and blame PC for the bands direction. They would probably not have survived had the band not evolved or moved with the changing times. Marillion are still fairly prog, but they are hardly selling shedloads of albums.
Also Banks and Rutherford are not stupid people.
I seriously doubt Collins dragged them kicking and screaming into the pop market.
And to answer the other lady - I take back my earlier comment. Tony Banks was Genesis.
Yes well it takes more than silly costumes (however infamous they become) to keep an audiences attention. The whole reason he started doing the costume thing was because he had no rapport with the audience...who were to put it bluntly, bored with the shows. People then came to see the old mans mask, rather than for the music.
It wasn’t as if these theatrical props complimented the music (as in for example a Floyd light show)...because half the time no bugger could hear what he was singing with those masks on. I have bootlegs from this era and the musical performances are appalling.
Fast forward to Collins and we have a man who has a brilliant rapport with the audience without the need for gimmicks. He cracks jokes with the crowd, takes the piss out of himself and generally has a great time. However much you may find stuff like "audience participation time" cheesy, the crowds loved it.
I agree with most of that and it's what I tell the PG fans who are stuck in 1975 and blame PC for the bands direction. They would probably not have survived had the band not evolved or moved with the changing times. Marillion are still fairly prog, but they are hardly selling shedloads of albums.
Also Banks and Rutherford are not stupid people.
I seriously doubt Collins dragged them kicking and screaming into the pop market.
And to answer the other lady - I take back my earlier comment. Tony Banks was Genesis.
It's the "other lady" here...or I guess you could just refer to me as "Mr. Pink's Old Lady".....

This has turned into an interesting discussion but you're wrong on several points. Although it's certainly true that PG felt frustrated at the development of the group's song writing style (into a "committee" type process), it's a well known fact that the main issue pushing him to leave the band was the birth of his first daughter, Anna. She was born with health problems, which at the time were considered to be quite serious. He left the band at a very inconvenient time, but all things considered, decided to put his growing family first and stay by his (then) wife's side and take care of his daughter. Have you read the Bright bio? All of this is covered in that book and is authorized by PG, so one would have to assume that that is the true take on that subject.
Covered also in the Bright bio is the story behind all the "silly costumes" as you so eloquently put it. PG certainly wasn't the only musician to use the "silly costumes" idea in that era-----certainly you've seen some pictures of a certain Mr. Bowie dressed to the hilt complete with makeup and characterization, correct? After all, this was the era of "glam rock" and I don't think it's fair to assume that audiences were "bored" with Genesis' performances so they came to see the old man mask sing. In fact, the masks started because PG was, believe it or not, painfully shy and felt that acting like someone else would help him feel more comfortable in front of an audience. How many times have you heard famous actors claim that down deep they are truly insecure and shy people?
We've got all the bootlegs ever made, and yep, the sound quality certainly leaves quite a bit to be desired when compared to today's technology, but it's really two different things, isn't it? Singing behind a mask certainly doesn't help the vocals one bit, but neither does the level of sophistication of the instrumentation and production 40 years ago either.
As far as Phil having rapport with his audience, I wholeheartedly agree. It's simply in a different way. Neither my husband or I mentioned "audience participation" as being "cheesy", nor would we.......PG certainly tries to involve his audiences in the total experience of the show as well. Perhaps not in the same way, but neither way is better or worse, simply different. If you've ever watched video or heard recordings of Gabriel Era Genesis shows, then you will undoubtedly notice that he did indeed engage in cracking jokes (mostly self depracating), laughing with the band, commenting on the audience and laughing at himself when he screwed up the lyrics or the timing (which he invariably does, and part of why his fans find him so appealing).
The "audience rapport" style started in the early 70s as Gabriel realized he needed a way to "fill time" while the band got ready for the next song and occasionally attempted to repair malfunctioning equipment. He began telling long and complicated stories of his own making during change over periods. This was several years before the costumes started in Dublin in approximately 1973, IIRC.
So, Tony, we might just have to agree to disagree on this one---hubby and I have been down this road many, many times with many, many people in all walks of life and locations around the world. Phil is a fantastic drummer, and one has to have respect for a guy who's been around as long as he has. But ah well, to each his own. Give me my "out there genius" PG and I'm happy as a clam. Doesn't mean my foot won't occasionally tap to "Sussudio"
but I much prefer Peter for my listening pleasure.Thanks for the discussion! Time to put on So, transport myself back to 1986, bask in the wonder of PG's lovely velvet voice (like "cream poured over gravel") and go have a cocktail.
~SecretGarden (aka "the other lady")
~and Mr. Pink
P.S. Just a tip----"Genesis" was a *group*. Gabriel was Gabriel, Collins was Collins, Hackett---Hackett, and Banks---Banks. Well, you get the idea.



