Top 10 Genesis tracks

    Oh, I like me some pop!


    I think I see a pattern emerging: in our Crimson discussion, you said you like Beat, "despite it being quite commercial-sounding".


    Unsurprisingly, I don't much care for Seconds Out. I think their performances, and PC's vocals, further improved with time and I prefer the overall vibe of 3SL. There's something too produced about SO, like it has a sort of sheen to it, and PC's voice hasn't matured properly yet.


    I realise I'm swimming against the tide; I think I'm in the minority in not much liking that era.

    Abandon all reason

    Like 1

    My only criticism of Seconds Out really is that Hackett is somewhat mixed down. The drums and keyboards come to the foreground quite dramatically. It was clear the band was trying to forge a new sound, and emphasise how powerful their live performances could be. I love those dynamics though, and call me a philistine ;) but I think the versions of Firth of Fifth and Cinema Show are superior to the originals (although Gabriels vocals were obviously better)

    Quote from Blacksword

    Please Don't ask...should have been left for a Collins solo album.

    It was recorded for Face Value but, when he presented it to the band, they opted to include it on Duke ("Surprisingly high marks from the keyboard player" as Phil once commented with respect to Tony's opinion of the track). Whilst it might seem incongruous to hear such a personal lyric on a Genesis album, I think its strength lies in its immediacy (you mention Misunderstanding, a boy-meets-girl-boy-loses-girl lyric to which a larger audience can relate) and it shows that, more than ten years after Genesis began, they were willing to stretch out and embrace other genres of music.

    I love pop, too. I don't see what the problem is. The Beatles were a pop band, after all.


    I also agree that there's more grit to Three Sides Live than Seconds Out. When Phil took over as the singer, of course his voice was much more in harmony with the music than Peter's because Phil is a naturally gifted musician. But he sang in a mannered style ("polite" as Phil put it), concerned more with how the lyrics sounded than what they actually meant. Compare his performance of, say, Supper's Ready on the Wind And Wuthering tour to his performance at The Marquee in 1982; it's much more convincing in '82. I think once Phil emerged as a lyricist in his own right, so he became more assured as a singer.


    I wouldn't worry about being in the minority with your opinion, Backdrifter. If you tell people here that Genesis's records sold in much greater quantities in the eighties, they'll be quick to tell you "just because a lot of people liked it doesn't make it good" so clearly minority opinions are valued highly round this 'ere parts!

    So what is your number 10, Backdrifter? I’ve trawled through your postings found lots of interesting comment and analysis but nothing that you’ve pinned your shirt to. I’m aware that this whole top 10 business is likely to be in a state of constant flux, but, hey, it’s fun isn’t it, even if you inwardly scream, ‘No, wrong choice!’ The moment you hit the ‘send’ button.

    ~ My talents may not be obvious but they are always...always...delicious! ~

    Whilst on the topic, and though I’m in danger of hijacking my own thread here, the reason I’ve started this ‘Top 10’ countdown (apart from the fun we’ll all have awaiting each other’s choices - wonder when we’ll get the first Munch-like ‘Scream’ ) is that I have finally girded up my arthritic loins and abandoned ‘albums’ for playlists. The reason being, is that apart from a handful of exceptions, most albums contain the odd track of utter dross! Also, how do you rate an album with say, 1 or 2 gems amongst a pile of rubble as compared to another full of semi-precious stones but with nothing that really sparkles? A playlist gets rid of this dilemma and, in Genesis’ case also frees you up from the interminable bore that is the ‘Gabriel v Collins v Hackett’ spat.

    Quote from IndieBrindie

    So what is your number 10, Backdrifter? I’ve trawled through your postings found lots of interesting comment and analysis but nothing that you’ve pinned your shirt to. I’m aware that this whole top 10 business is likely to be in a state of constant flux, but, hey, it’s fun isn’t it, even if you inwardly scream, ‘No, wrong choice!’ The moment you hit the ‘send’ button.

    Sorry but I don't think I'll be participating. I don't have a 1 to 10 in order of preference. I can list 10 chronologically but couldn't say "this is my 10th favourite, this is my 9th favourite...." etc. I probably have a fair idea of what would be my one absolute favourite Genesis song, but ranking them after that from 2 to 10, I'd draw a blank.

    Abandon all reason

    Quote from StillCan'tDance

    I love pop, too. I don't see what the problem is. The Beatles were a pop band, after all.


    I also agree that there's more grit to Three Sides Live than Seconds Out. When Phil took over as the singer, of course his voice was much more in harmony with the music than Peter's because Phil is a naturally gifted musician. But he sang in a mannered style ("polite" as Phil put it), concerned more with how the lyrics sounded than what they actually meant. Compare his performance of, say, Supper's Ready on the Wind And Wuthering tour to his performance at The Marquee in 1982; it's much more convincing in '82. I think once Phil emerged as a lyricist in his own right, so he became more assured as a singer.


    I wouldn't worry about being in the minority with your opinion, Backdrifter. If you tell people here that Genesis's records sold in much greater quantities in the eighties, they'll be quick to tell you "just because a lot of people liked it doesn't make it good" so clearly minority opinions are valued highly round this 'ere parts!

    Nicely said. No, I never worry about being in a minority, which I frequently seem to be in most walks of life! I suppose I'm just a marginal guy. But that fine.

    Abandon all reason

    Like 1
    Quote from IndieBrindie

    Blacksword / Backdrifter .... your comments are TOTALLY what I want to hear. Amazingly insightful and so refreshing to someone like me who gets a shrug from the Mrs whenever I mention the band or a vague ‘that’s a nice toe-tapper’ from mates who think they’re OK-ish....BUT... can you hold them back and drop them as context to your Top -10 choices?

    Thanks for those kind comments. I might not be fully in tune with your top ten survey but any time you want to wax lyrical about anything, I'm your man.

    Abandon all reason

    Quote from StillCan'tDance

    I love pop, too. I don't see what the problem is. The Beatles were a pop band, after all.


    I also agree that there's more grit to Three Sides Live than Seconds Out. When Phil took over as the singer, of course his voice was much more in harmony with the music than Peter's because Phil is a naturally gifted musician. But he sang in a mannered style ("polite" as Phil put it), concerned more with how the lyrics sounded than what they actually meant. Compare his performance of, say, Supper's Ready on the Wind And Wuthering tour to his performance at The Marquee in 1982; it's much more convincing in '82. I think once Phil emerged as a lyricist in his own right, so he became more assured as a singer.


    I wouldn't worry about being in the minority with your opinion, Backdrifter. If you tell people here that Genesis's records sold in much greater quantities in the eighties, they'll be quick to tell you "just because a lot of people liked it doesn't make it good" so clearly minority opinions are valued highly round this 'ere parts!

    I also like pop music. I just don't want to hear Genesis making pop music, because I think they were better as a rock band. It's all down to personal taste. There were many pop bands in the 80's who were far better at making pop music than Genesis were, in my humble opinion of course.

    Quote from Blacksword

    I also like pop music. I just don't want to hear Genesis making pop music, because I think they were better as a rock band. It's all down to personal taste.

    I feel the same, nothing wrong with pop but it is not what I want to hear from Genesis. Obviously a matter of taste but I would dispute they wrote good pop songs. I am more likely to turn up the volume and sing along while driving if, say Wham or Abba come up but Invisible Touch or Misunderstanding? No thanks.

    Quote from Backdrifter

    PC's vocals, further improved with time and I prefer the overall vibe of 3SL. There's something too produced about SO, like it has a sort of sheen to it, and PC's voice hasn't matured properly yet.

    I agree, while Phil did a lovely job on all albums up to Duke, there was no way to predict he would have progressed the way he did. He basically became a very different singer, discovering a power in his voice nobody, including himself I reckon, knew he had. On SO he wasn't really quite there yet imo and Gabriel's material suffers a lot with the exception perhaps of Carpet Crawlers. A very different take but that pure voice works equally fine.

    Phil makes a very good point in his autobiography about pop and Genesis. He states that Mike and Tony wrote songs that they wanted to get on the radio. When Genesis started, pop was not such a bad thing. As Tony says, you could hear Acker Bilk, Burt Bacharach and The Beatles hits in the top ten and you'd have no problem with any of them. Pop was not such a dirty word and being on Top Of The Pops was considered a big achievement back in the day.


    It's interesting that the two most successful bands to have come out of progressive rock are Genesis and Pink Floyd, both of whom started out as pop bands. And both of whom, funnily enough, were not happy about being labelled progressive rock. "I saw more substance in our music" says Phil while David Gilmour says (paraphrasing Groucho) "I don't want to belong to a club that will have me as a member". By comparison, look at Yes, a band who positively revel in their prog rock status and have been performing to ever diminishing returns since...well, since I don't know when.


    I'm not saying, though, that commercial success is the only defining aspect of a band's worth. I love King Crimson, Frank Zappa and Miles Davis, none of whom could be considered commercial artists.


    I think the issue with Genesis and pop is not so much that they made pop songs, it's the subject matter of those songs. Harold The Barrel is a pop song but the lyrical content is considerably more left-field than that of In Too Deep. I Know What I Like is a pop song but, again, it's a million miles away from the content of Follow You Follow Me.


    Anyway, as far as I'm concerned, an artist's work should not be dictated by its fanbase and if a band want to stretch out into other areas of music I think that's a positive move, not a negative one.

    I agree in principle, I just don't think Genesis wrote very good pop music after Gabriel left, with the exception of a few songs here and there. There was far better pop music around in the 80's. I think for me, knowing just how talented Genesis were, to hear them reduced to Invisible Touch and Illegal Alien was deeply depressing.

    I think while not exactly a favourite IT is an excellent pop song. Illegal Alien on the other hand.... it's frustrating as I really like the music but married to that terrible lyric and the horrible cod-Mexican accent, it makes me shudder.

    Abandon all reason

    Quote from Backdrifter

    I think while not exactly a favourite IT is an excellent pop song. Illegal Alien on the other hand.... it's frustrating as I really like the music but married to that terrible lyric and the horrible cod-Mexican accent, it makes me shudder.

    Indeed. To my ears it's awful and was at the time.

    Quote from Blacksword

    Invisible Touch and Illegal Alien was deeply depressing.

    I have to agree, no matter the issues I might have wit the material on Abacab, it was still edgy and energetic. The first side of Shapes put the band on a course they should have followed imo. IT was just too blatantly light-coke, MOR, poppy and bland for my taste. I felt they went too far. Stuff like the title track, Anything she does and Into Deep were really subpar for me.

    Quote from Backdrifter

    I think while not exactly a favourite IT is an excellent pop song..

    I wonder if the fact I detest that song so much it's because it's Genesis' and how I would have reacted, had been by another artist. Perhaps it would grate me less but I still think it wouldn't be on my radar. Fact is that I find the kind of 'evolution' they had insincere for lack of better words. Mama is pop, so is FYFM or even Keep it Dark and I don't have a problem with those. Misunderstanding as I said, is something else, to me it is simply ugly and they don't have a problem admitting that they included it because it had single potential. It doesn't have anything to do with the rest of the album. IT though doesn't have the same problem, it is sleek, smooth, polished….Just too much. The Beatles went from She Loves you to a Day in the Life and it makes sense but Genesis.... To me it was simply odd to hear a group of Musicians who had been around for almost two decades and were pushing 40, suddenly discovering pop, that kind of pop. Ultimately, IT charted and was very successful and THAT makes it a good pop song, taste, quality and subjectivity notwithstanding. Is it an excellent pop song? I really wouldn't know, I think, as pop songs go, Mike wrote better. Anyway, I know that it does nothing for me.

    Mike wrote Alone Tonight. The fact that so many columns of text have been dedicated to the supposed failings of Invisible Touch and Misunderstanding while the dreary Alone Tonight has been left completely alone reinforces the old adage that there really is no accounting for taste.