GENESIS - The Last Domino? Tour

  • Fine, let's continue here.


    The Farmer: I do like Fading Lights, and the We Can't Dance album. But they're just not on the same plane as the classics.


    PG and SH leaving the band... That was so long ago that I don't even quite remember how I reacted on hearing the news. Not with shock, though, I'm pretty sure of that: I was into a lot of other bands as well.


    What I do resent, however, is Banks, Rutherford and Collins sh*tting all over their legacy by not having Gabriel (who probably can't be arsed anyway) and Hackett (who'd probably say yes and who never stopped playing the stuff that matters) on board for this last go round the live circuit.


    You assume I've been both coolly winding you guys up and jumping up and down with frustrationcan't have both ;)


    I'm doing neither of those things. I'm just a proghead (hate that term) with a long (and cool, if uncool) view of things. Never thought I'd push so many buttons with such a few posts. Have to say I assumed that so late in the game most people here would have come to realise where the abovemention lad... er legacy lies.

  • Yes I can . You like WCD.?!!! So you like them then. And you sound cross they did it at the same time . You really do. And also you sound angry that three guys that get on well together want to do something together again as they get into their seventies. Are you sure you're not winding anyone up?? Very sad that SH isn't there but can't see how he could fit in if they wanted to anything from their last 6 albums.

  • Doesn't mean I have to be blind to the fact that the music suff... er changed beyond recognition

    hence my tendency to see the three-man Genesis as a different band.

    And again I might be inclined to agree with you, it's the complete and utter rejection of their global output that smacks me of integralism, together with the fact that you arbitrary draw a line, after which everything is crap. I love W&W but it might very well be argued that it is a formulaic album, they did something that worked on Trick and tried to replicate it with Wind, there is, what can be defined as a sappy love ballad on it, why does that album still count as pure, what makes you think they they were still heeding their muses more than say, on Duke?

    Edited once, last by Fabrizio ().

  • You assume I've been both coolly winding you guys up and jumping up and down with frustrationcan't have both ;)

    I'm doing neither of those things.

    Yes you are, which is why others are reacting as such. You post winking emoji-splattered comments that can clearly be potentially read as provocative - acting like the arbiter of Genesis truth, calling people indiscriminating fanboys, telling them they're dogmatic and need perspective - which are unsurprisingly interpreted as wind-ups. While also posting unwinky comments such as "the band died in 1977", mass-dismissing everything post-77 as crap and by not the same band, and saying you "resent (RESENT!) Banks, Collins and Rutherford shitting all over their legacy by touring without Gabriel and Hackett" and yet people aren't meant to see you as hopping about with your fist in the air like an irate cartoon character.


    So you clearly think you can have both, while telling the rest of us we can't interpret it that way. Hmmm.


    Elsewhere, Fabrizio suggested you think about how you debate and express your views. I've not seen any evidence you can or are willing to do that, but his counsel is wise.

    Abandon all reason

    Edited 2 times, last by Backdrifter ().

  • I'm sorry that I derailed this thread. I do resent hearing about a new tour by an incarnation of the band that has lost absolutely everything that made me cherish it in the first place, but there has to be a better place to hold the current discussion.


    Can a moderator split the thread so that we can continue without spoiling it for those who'd rather talk about this latest reunion? Is it even possible on this board?


    Thanks in any case.

    Why the resentment though? I have no interest in that tour either, I said it so many times and I really never liked these kind of patched up things, with somebody's son, cousin or whatever playing instead of somebody who cannot do it anymore. There is no way Phil can sing Genesis decently right now and I really, really don't want to hear it but try this: they meant a lot to me, if you are around I assume the same applies to you, I'm sure they are loaded as it is, so money cannot be the only catalyst for doing this now, at their age, they still enjoy each other's company, they are all 70 or more now, I guess, if they feel like doing it, why not? I don't understand why you feel like they are defiling something. Haven't they earned the right to do as they please? I'm happy Phil is out there, doing what he likes, with mates, instead of sulking at home or worse drinking again, how he does it, at this stage, is completely beside the point. Don't they deserve a bit of affection from us as persons, apart from the sheer admiration as musicians? I don't know about you but they have given me a lot. Sure they will be people saying that Phil sounded great, like in the old times, some fans, surely tone deaf, have said that about his last tour and I reserve the right to take issue with that but if they like to hear stuff like IT, WCD or Abacab, songs I personally abhor one last time, what exactly bothers you about that? I don't mean to be necessarily provocative here but I wish you'd realize that, when it comes down to their first albums you appear to be guilty of the same attitude you push onto other; a fanboysh reverence.

  • Why the resentment though? I have no interest in that tour either, I said it so many times and I really never liked these kind of patched up things, with somebody's son, cousin or whatever playing instead of somebody who cannot do it anymore. There is no way Phil can sing Genesis decently right now and I really, really don't want to hear it but try this: they meant a lot to me, if you are around I assume the same applies to you, I'm sure they are loaded as it is, so money cannot be the only catalyst for doing this now, at their age, they still enjoy each other's company, they are all 70 or more now, I guess, if they feel like doing it, why not? I don't understand why you feel like they are defiling something. Haven't they earned the right to do as they please? I'm happy Phil is out there, doing what he likes, with mates, instead of sulking at home or worse drinking again, how he does it, at this stage, is completely beside the point. Don't they deserve a bit of affection from us as persons, apart from the sheer admiration as musicians? I don't know about you but they have given me a lot. Sure they will be people saying that Phil sounded great, like in the old times, some fans, surely tone deaf, have said that about his last tour and I reserve the right to take issue with that but if they like to hear stuff like IT, WCD or Abacab, songs I personally abhor one last time, what exactly bothers you about that? I don't mean to be necessarily provocative here but I wish you'd realize that, when it comes down to their first albums you appear to be guilty of the same attitude you push onto other; a fanboysh reverence.

    As someone who has come to them reasonably recently, the news of this reunion was a shining light in what has been a dark couple of years. I won't go any further than that. If anyone derailed this thread it was me, because I responded to the HBTS thing.

  • As someone who has come to them reasonably recently, the news of this reunion was a shining light in what has been a dark couple of years. I won't go any further than that. If anyone derailed this thread it was me, because I responded to the HBTS thing.

    Just me but the Forum is languishing, again, normal considering the band is long gone, so personally I have nothing against threads hijacking if it keeps the conversation alive, as or the rest, musically this tour does nothing for me, it can only tamper with nostalgia, in a bad way but if someone out there can enjoy it, by all means...

    Edited once, last by Fabrizio ().

  • I saw the penultimate Black Sabbath show at the NEC a couple of years back. Ozzy was just not the lead he used to be. In his late sixties. He hasn't looked after himself in his life as much as maybe he could have ( or as well as everyone else on the planet !)

    He doesn't move as well, he doesn't sing sing as well as he used to. He does however know how to entertain. He still works the crowd harder than anyone else. His voice holds up. Just. He is great fun . The band sounded great the show was brilliant. They all knew what they were doing. The crowd loved it . There was a very warm feeling all round. Even if Phil doesn't sing as well he used to I have every confidence that Genesis will not let us down and it will be a great show. ( In April of course)

  • I saw the penultimate Black Sabbath show at the NEC a couple of years back. Ozzy was just not the lead he used to be. In his late sixties. He hasn't looked after himself in his life as much as maybe he could have ( or as well as everyone else on the planet !)

    He doesn't move as well, he doesn't sing sing as well as he used to. He does however know how to entertain. He still works the crowd harder than anyone else. His voice holds up. Just. He is great fun . The band sounded great the show was brilliant. They all knew what they were doing. The crowd loved it . There was a very warm feeling all round. Even if Phil doesn't sing as well he used to I have every confidence that Genesis will not let us down and it will be a great show. ( In April of course)

    I've never been a Sabbath fan, I didn't like them in their prime, I don't rate Ozzy as a singer and I haven't seen them during their last tour, so there's nothing I can say about that. Phil's voice has been changing and deteriorating for some years now, even on his last albums he sounded very nasal and he has been progressively losing power. I saw a couple of his interviews and was saddened to notice that even his speech is blurred. I have too much respect for them and I'm sure they are going to give their very best, what I'm saying is that their current very best is not enough for me and I prefer to remember them, the way they were. Some fans just want to see them, for reasons apparently not entirely related to the quality of the music they can generate or let's just say, this element takes backseat and that's perfectly fine, I only have to something to say when people say stuff like: '' Oh. he sounded great, just like before''. It's objectively not true and it doesn't do justice to what he was. BTW, it looks like I'm dumping on Phil but if either Mike or Tony suffered from arthritis, I'd say the exact same things. The only thing that would have made sense for me and would have enticed me, would have been an acoustic, unplugged set, re-arranging the songs into mellower, more subdued versions. Perhaps with an orchestra.

    All seated, like in the beginning and like Phil does now.

  • I honestly feel it’s a simple thing regarding this tour, if they as a group felt they couldn’t pull it off it wouldn’t be happening at all. I’m sure that the three of them wouldn’t want to be the object of ridicule or a laughing stock. As I have said before they have a reputation to uphold and as proud as they are I’m sure they wouldn’t want to go out with bad reviews. For me I’m thinking this is going to be great, I am sure it will be great!. I went to see them at Old Trafford and I thought that was marvellous even though I was sat well back. I loved it and will love this if it happens!.

    They don’t need the money and don’t need the hassle of been classed as past it!, look what happened to poor Keith Emerson people ridiculed his later work and it tipped him over the edge. Musicians are only human and I’m sure if there was any chances it’s not going well in rehearsal the plug would be pulled and it would be cancelled. I do think a small test Concert may happen just to Be doubly sure it’s going to work out - which it will!.

    Edited 2 times, last by Wayne ().

  • It is not surprising to me that it is the 3-man group that is mounting the tour. They were together as a unit longer than the previous incarnations and it makes sense that they could have the strongest sense of connection with each other. A 3-man configuration is also the most straightforward to put on tour.


    If they were to do a tour as the 5-man or 4-man line-up, there are a number of complexities to consider. Would they focus only on the earlier repertoire, which some fans would love? I'm not clear that Tony, Mike, and Phil would want to ignore their later repertoire. They have all talked about how much they like their later repertoire, so I can't imagine them agreeing to not play any of it. Also, if Peter were to somehow agree to a 5-man tour focusing on earlier repertoire, what would Phil be doing, other than back-up vocals? It would be at best a 4.5-man tour


    Alternatively, they could cover a broader range of repertoire, but then how would Steve and Peter be involved? Would Steve be OK covering Mike's guitar parts on the later songs with Mike playing bass? Would Mike be OK with this? What would Peter do? They could do something that The Eagles did on their History tour, splitting the show into two parts - first part 5-man or 4-man, second part 3-man. But would Peter and Steve want to be part of a tour in which they only played on half of the setlist?

  • It is not surprising to me that it is the 3-man group that is mounting the tour. They were together as a unit longer than the previous incarnations and it makes sense that they could have the strongest sense of connection with each other. A 3-man configuration is also the most straightforward to put on tour.


    If they were to do a tour as the 5-man or 4-man line-up, there are a number of complexities to consider. Would they focus only on the earlier repertoire, which some fans would love? I'm not clear that Tony, Mike, and Phil would want to ignore their later repertoire. They have all talked about how much they like their later repertoire, so I can't imagine them agreeing to not play any of it. Also, if Peter were to somehow agree to a 5-man tour focusing on earlier repertoire, what would Phil be doing, other than back-up vocals? It would be at best a 4.5-man tour


    Alternatively, they could cover a broader range of repertoire, but then how would Steve and Peter be involved? Would Steve be OK covering Mike's guitar parts on the later songs with Mike playing bass? Would Mike be OK with this? What would Peter do? They could do something that The Eagles did on their History tour, splitting the show into two parts - first part 5-man or 4-man, second part 3-man. But would Peter and Steve want to be part of a tour in which they only played on half of the setlist?

    Both the 5 and 4 man line ups present far too many challenges at this stage, they are really not a realistic option , that said a cameo could be squeezed in for Peter and Steve, one or two songs at the end of the final show, for instance.

  • Both the 5 and 4 man line ups present far too many challenges at this stage, they are really not a realistic option , that said a cameo could be squeezed in for Peter and Steve, one or two songs at the end of the final show, for instance.

    I agree that cameos or one-off 4 or 5-man shows are more realistic.

  • I agree that cameos or one-off 4 or 5-man shows are more realistic.

    I said show and not shows mainly for Peter, I think Steve would enjoy it and would be happy to pop up at several different venues. Peter? not so much, it would be a huge undertaking and uphill stuff to talk him into showing up for the encore on the final show. I love Peter and it would be great to see the boys together one last time but I think after the stunt he pulled off last time, he might have tried everybody's patience.

  • ......what I'm saying is that their current very best is not enough for me and I prefer to remember them, the way they were. Some fans just want to see them, for reasons apparently not entirely related to the quality of the music they can generate or let's just say, this element takes backseat and that's perfectly fine, I only have to something to say when people say stuff like: '' Oh. he sounded great, just like before''........

    Well you are right . It won't be for me just and only the quality of music. We all.have our reasons for going or not. I must admit I did feel a goodbye was said at Old Trafford and thought that was it . It did take me several hours to decide to go ! I understand feeling that there was a completeness and it doesn't need to be revived. I really don't.know what to expect..I don't actually want it to be the same. Seen it. I have doubts about Phil doing his tambourine routine!! I hope for a great atmosphere and a spectacular show. Phil always had great stage presence and I doubt that has gone. I also expect that they know any limitations and account for that. They're not not going to make themselves look foolish. I hope for for a couple of memorable nights.. In April. Also I think I said before , SOTB was full of mistakes but it was one of the best shows I have ever been to. So for me there is a lot more to it than pure quality of music. Though again am sure it will sound great. We'll see. If I don't go I'll never know what I would have missed

    I promise not to say that he sounded just like he did before . It's unlikely, after all he's not in his late 50 s anymore.😉

  • Phil always had great stage presence and I doubt that has gone. I also expect that they know any limitations and account for that. They're not not going to make themselves look foolish.

    Hard to have a strong stage presence when you have to seat through every song but you have a valid point; I trust they respect themselves enough not to look or sound foolish. Be s it may, enjoy it, I mean it.

    Edited 2 times, last by Fabrizio ().

  • i have got my head round the fact that it wont be like Phil of old...but hopefully the others can help out. Mike is used to leading a band. Am sure the stage show will make it for it...if they can borrow the huge U2 screen then could start be great! 😊

  • Hard to have a strong stage presence when you have to seat through every song but you have a valid point; I trust they respect themselves enough not to look or sound foolish. Be s it may, enjoy it, I mean it.

    Phil's stage presence was never his moving jumping dancing .He can't dance. He did the tambourine thing and funny walk. His skill was his connection with the crowd. A great entertainer I'm sure even he he is down he will.maintain his connection and sense of fun. Maybe even more so. What with that the stage show , sound , and of course songs my enthusiasm for seeing them again remains undiminished.

  • my enthusiasm for seeing them again remains undiminished.

    And that of course is key and what really matters, as for the rest, we'll have to agree to disagree or at least to differ over preferences and priorities.

    A performer/frontman IMHO needs to be able to offer something in terms of voice and/or stage presence. The former is plainly not there, as for the latter I guess it depends on the songs.

    Sinatra didn't certainly dance, neither did , say. Aznavour and they certainly could sit down for a couple of songs, a couple, not all of them, their repertoire allowed that and their voices and stage presence were intact and more than commanding. Genesis' catalogue is slightly different though, isn't it? Vocally demanding and here's no way around it, you don't need to jump all over the place but stuff like in the cage or Mama and several others seated, would be simply off. To me at least.

    Edited 2 times, last by Fabrizio ().

  • And that of course is key and what really matters, as for the rest, we'll have to agree to disagree or at least to differ over preferences and priorities.

    A performer/frontman IMHO needs to be able to offer something in terms of voice and/or stage presence. The former is plainly not there, as for the latter I guess it depends on the songs.

    Sinatra didn't certainly dance, neither did , say. Aznavour and they certainly could sit down for a couple of songs, a couple, not all of them, their repertoire allowed that and their voices and stage presence were intact and more than commanding. Genesis' catalogue is slightly different though, isn't it? Vocally demanding and here's no way around it, you don't need to jump all over the place but stuff like in the cage or Mama and several others seated, would be simply off. To me at least.

    I completely get this and fair do's to all who share this view.


    For me, quite simply it's Genesis - yes, different from before but it's them and I want to be there. I just don't think that when I am it'll be 5 months from now.

    Abandon all reason