AMG Review of Genesis Archive 2

    The All Music Guide review of GENESIS ARCHIVE 2: 1976-1992 has long annoyed me more than any other album review I can think of. It makes a number of complaints about the set that just aren't reality-based, while completely missing the actual problems with it (2 non-LP tracks edited & others omitted; a running order that doesn't make sense). So I thought I'd take a moment and beat up on this review a little...


    The first Genesis Archive made sense. It covered the Peter Gabriel years, an era that was not only supremely creative for the band, but filled with rarities, forgotten tracks, outtakes, B-sides, BBC sessions, and live performances begging for a collection.

    For a start, the first Archive has one B-side. And don't "rarities," "forgotten tracks" and "outtakes" all mean pretty much the same thing?


    Its sequel, Genesis Archive 2: 1976-1992, attempts to fill the role for... the Phil Collins years, but the problem is, the Collins era was completely different from Gabriel's... the late '70s and '80s simply were not conducive to the kind of rarities that made the first Archive valuable. They didn't need to do BBC sessions, they didn't do non-LP rarities live...

    Actually, they did do a few non-LP rarities live; the performance of the uncut "It's Gonna Get Better" is (technically) one example of this. And, BTW, how many "live non-LP rarities" are on the first Archive? None!


    ...and their B-sides were often devoted to extended mixes for the dance club or live cuts. If there were outtakes, they were often left in the can because they simply didn't meet quality-control standards.

    Um, there are 16 studio B-sides & EP tracks on Archive 2, as compared to 3 live B-sides and 4 extended remixes. And most of those studio "outtakes" are good songs that were left off of albums due to lack of space, not a failure to meet "quality-control standards."


    Although there are some nice moments scattered throughout the record, it all winds up feeling rather unnecessary.

    Ask Genesis fans if it's all "unnecessary." At the very least, it has a number of studio tracks getting their first CD release.


    None of the remixes are particularly interesting and the live tracks, while listenable, are never revelatory -- and those wind up forming the bulk of the set.

    Well, the remixes and live tracks together make up 58% of it. (Yes, I did the math.) I'm not sure if that qualifies as the "bulk." And every one of the live tracks is a song that had never appeared on a live album. What exactly would it take for them to be "revelatory"?


    There's some value in the outtakes, but most of them are historical curiosities; only a handful, such as the Abacab leftover 'You Might Recall' and an early version of 'Paperlate,' are truly worthwhile.

    I'm sure many fans consider most of the "outtakes" to be quite worthwhile, thank you very much. And what made this reviewer think "Paperlate" is an "early version"?


    For anyone other than hardcore fans, this can easily be overlooked.

    For that matter, wouldn't it mainly be hardcore fans who'd be interested in the first Genesis Archive?


    There. Glad I got that out of my system.

    Agree that sets like Archive 1 and 2 are for hardcore fans, so the review should be focused with that in mind.


    My beefs with Archive 2 are what you have alluded to. Why did they not include the "full" It's Gonna Bet Better and Mama? Why did they not include other B-sides like the live version of Firth of Fifth from the Encore tour and many other live performances for that matter?

    This particular review does look plain lazy. I've long been irritated by reviews by journalists who clearly don't like the band they are reviewing or in this case the era. You don't want a totally biased review telling you everything is wonderful but in general a fan would rather read something from someone who admires a bands work to know whether it's worth buying or not. This review is a typical example of someone who dislikes the Collins lead vocal era. You can tell by the way he/she writes a few dots prior to saying ....Phil Collins. It's needless. So in typically they just have a go at the whole set, probably simply because they don't like that era. Or maybe it's more to do with the fact that that era Genesis was very unfashionable so they just decide to have a go. As Dr John pointed out from the outset both Archive sets were designed for hardcore fans and weren't cheap so I agree , a review aimed at hardcore fans with correct detail is needed. A2 we all know has its problems but there will be people put off getting this set foe the wrong reasons. Not many fans as are discontent with what's on it, it's whats missing we don't like . I've just had a had a look at Discogs and the reviews by owners A2 give fair reactions.

    I love allmusic.com, but accuracy is not always their strongest attribute. Before I sent in a correction many years ago, their review of Seconds Out mentioned Phil's fine keyboard solo in Robbery, Assault and Battery


    And there's this from their Lamb review (which they gave 5 stars)


    Quote


    . Even if the story is rather hard to piece together, the album is set up in a remarkable fashion, with the first LP being devoted to pop-oriented rock songs and the second being largely devoted to instrumentals.

    Um, no. There are all of 3 instrumentals on the 2nd LP, two of them being very brief interludes.

    Quote from thefarmer

    You can tell by the way he/she writes a few dots prior to saying ....Phil Collins.

    Actually, the writer didn't put in the "few dots." That's there because I edited out a few words when quoting the review. Otherwise, your comments are spot on.

    Quote from Henry Hamilton-Smythe

    Before I sent in a correction many years ago, their review of Seconds Out mentioned Phil's fine keyboard solo in Robbery, Assault and Battery

    Yes, I remember that. Thank you for getting them to fix it!

    Quote from Henry Hamilton-Smythe

    Before I sent in a correction many years ago, their review of Seconds Out mentioned Phil's fine keyboard solo in Robbery, Assault and Battery

    Ah, I can see exactly where they got that idea from :rolleyes:


    The drumming credits on Seconds Out are as follows:


    "All Drums Chester except:

    Robbery Assault and Battery - keyboard solo Phil

    Firth of Fifth - Phil & Chester......"


    They clearly misunderstood that to mean Phil was actually playing the keyboard solo, as opposed to drumming on his own during the keyboard solo.

    Correct. And AMG were almost certainly not the only ones to misinterpret the credits that way.

    I've pointed out how the AMG review of ARCHIVE 2 makes unrealistic complaints about it. At the same time, it also seems to be praising ARCHIVE 1 for being more than it actually is. There are things I would have liked to have seen done differently on ARCHIVE 1, and I'm sure I'm not alone in this. Here are the main items my list:


    (1) More of the live LAMB could have been put on disc 1 (like, say, the first three sides) so that more live stuff could have been included on disc 2 & there wouldn't have had to be so much stuff crammed on disc 3.

    (2) "Moonlit Knight" shouldn't have had to be edited (see #1 above).

    (3) Did 9 minutes of disc 3 have to be taken up with a BBC session version of "Stagnation" that's an almost note-for-note recreation of the original? There's nothing wrong with it per se, but given the limits on space (with #1 above not being the case) it's not interesting enough to really justify its inclusion.

    (4) Drums on "Hey!" should have been credited. Since they were most likely played by Chris Stewart, he seems to have been denied credit for his only appearance on the set.