[SPOILERS] GENESIS 2021 setlist discussion

  • Taylor Swift started out primarily as a country singer-songwriter and then expanded more generally into pop.


    The song in question had a very nice country cover done by Vince Gill and Alison Krauss. You can find a video of it on Youtube (won't post it to avoid the spoiler).

  • martinus

    Changed the title of the thread from “GENESIS 2021 setlist discussion” to “[SPOILERS] GENESIS 2021 setlist discussion”.
    • Official Post

    I have added a general spoiler warning to this whole thread, seeing that people refer not very obliquely to songs mentioned (no criticims, it's hard to refer to a song without referring to the song). And seeing that having two parallel threads about the very same topic (one with, one without spoiler warnings) will only cause confusion and redundancy.


    So there. Do not read this thread if you want the whole Last Domino setlist to be a surprise.

  • Ok . . . Interesting nugget in the interview regarding the acoustic set. Also that they are gonna play a couple of songs they haven’t played since the 1980s. I’m thinking Abacab for sure. Maybe Squonk and hopefully Apocalypse in 9/8. Kind of a bummer that Daryl made a point of saying certain songs are off limits because they sound so dated, but it is what it is.

  • Kind of a bummer that Daryl made a point of saying certain songs are off limits because they sound so dated, but it is what it is.

    That is a shame, because it needn't be the case. I mentioned in the Crimson thread, Fripp's rule for the recent years of touring is all the music is new regardless of when it was written. They come to all the songs, including ones from the first album, completely fresh. Having seen a number of their gigs these last few years I can say the approach pays off. Very early stuff I was never keen on has at times been stunning. OK they're a different sort of band and I'm not an advocate of that "these bands do this, why can't this band do it too" way of thinking. But I don't think it'd be unreasonable for Genesis to take a similar approach to revisiting parts of their work without sacrificing some crowd-pleasing hits.


    Of course there's also the possibility there are some songs they're so out of love with they have no interest in doing anything with them.

    Abandon all reason

  • That is a shame, because it needn't be the case. I mentioned in the Crimson thread, Fripp's rule for the recent years of touring is all the music is new regardless of when it was written. They come to all the songs, including ones from the first album, completely fresh. Having seen a number of their gigs these last few years I can say the approach pays off. Very early stuff I was never keen on has at times been stunning. OK they're a different sort of band and I'm not an advocate of that "these bands do this, why can't this band do it too" way of thinking. But I don't think it'd be unreasonable for Genesis to take a similar approach to revisiting parts of their work without sacrificing some crowd-pleasing hits.


    Of course there's also the possibility there are some songs they're so out of love with they have no interest in doing anything with them.

    Funny thing is In the Cage might fit that description (too dated) if they hadn’t played it on virtually every tour since 1978. On the comparison with King Crimson, the only “out” I guess one can give Genesis is that they hit a level of pop stardom in the 80s well beyond any sort of commercial success achieved by KC. I get it that for Genesis there is a certain core list of songs that meet the dual criteria of being band favorites and fan favorites. Fortunately that list extends beyond songs like Invisible Touch to include less commercial songs (HBTS/SHBTS; Domino; Carpet Crawlers; Los Endos). Still throwing a few more crumbs to those of us who harken back to the prog era would be nice.

  • Did he say which ones? Because apart from Illegal Alien I can't think of any, other than the obvious production of the time.

    No, but my take on it was he was talking more about some of the 70s prog stuff. BTW re: Illegal Alien I stumbled across a review yesterday from the New York Times of the Mama tour. Interestingly the reviewer mentioned Illegal Alien as a highlight of the show. He also liked Mama, That’s All, and Home by the Sea. Funny thing he never mentioned a single title for any of the older stuff they played that night, simply complimenting Phil for using banter to lighten up the heaviness of the band’s “art rock” songs. I honestly got the impression that the guy’s knowledge of the band’s music began with Abacab.

  • No, but my take on it was he was talking more about some of the 70s prog stuff. BTW re: Illegal Alien I stumbled across a review yesterday from the New York Times of the Mama tour. Interestingly the reviewer mentioned Illegal Alien as a highlight of the show. He also liked Mama, That’s All, and Home by the Sea. Funny thing he never mentioned a single title for any of the older stuff they played that night, simply complimenting Phil for using banter to lighten up the heaviness of the band’s “art rock” songs. I honestly got the impression that the guy’s knowledge of the band’s music began with Abacab.

    Sounds like Patrick Bateman (American Psycho) lol.

  • No, but my take on it was he was talking more about some of the 70s prog stuff. BTW re: Illegal Alien I stumbled across a review yesterday from the New York Times of the Mama tour. Interestingly the reviewer mentioned Illegal Alien as a highlight of the show. He also liked Mama, That’s All, and Home by the Sea. Funny thing he never mentioned a single title for any of the older stuff they played that night, simply complimenting Phil for using banter to lighten up the heaviness of the band’s “art rock” songs. I honestly got the impression that the guy’s knowledge of the band’s music began with Abacab.

    It kind of makes me laugh that they talk about "dated" material. The "freshest" material is 30 years old! To me, all of Invisible Touch sounds dated but others might disagree. Just play what you feel like playing and in a nod to your fans, balance the setlist between "old" and "really old" material. The (spoiler) set mentioned is a great opportunity to play or reimagine stuff that they haven't touched in a long time. I also wouldn't mind never hearing In the Cage again. It was stunning in '78 (and weird as a standalone track - that was my thought during the show I attended), great in '80 but then it got old really quickly. My quick thoughts.

  • Last post on the "who played guitar live" thread got me thinking the Keep It Dark would be a nice setlist surprise from the later era. Analogous to Squonk from days of yore. I think Squonk is much more likely to feature though.

  • Last post on the "who played guitar live" thread got me thinking the Keep It Dark would be a nice setlist surprise from the later era. Analogous to Squonk from days of yore. I think Squonk is much more likely to feature though.

    Thanks for recognizing my post dude. Indeed it would be nice to hear live. Unfortunately those notes in the latter part of the chorus are pretty high even for Phil so I doubt it

    • Official Post

    Thanks for recognizing my post dude. Indeed it would be nice to hear live. Unfortunately those notes in the latter part of the chorus are pretty high even for Phil so I doubt it

    I would love to hear Squonk too. The majority of the song is in a pretty high range though. Dodo/Lurker is another one I think would be great to hear.

  • What songs would qualify as dated? Like sonically? Subject matter wise?

    Well, every single Genesis song written before the year 2000 qualifies as dated. But isn't that the exact reason to go to a Genesis concert? To see and hear and enjoy all the nostalgia. Personally, I do not need any modernization in how they present the songs since they are not touring every year so I would need any refreshments. I would not even mind if they play the same setlist as in 2007.

    Only change accepted would be In Too Deep for Hold On My Heart. ;)


    Another big question is:

    Does any tour make any sense anymore, now that ZZ Top lost Dusty Hill?

    So, we reached end of time while I've been waitin' for the bus.

    No!

  • That's always my biggest (and expected)fear with all the bands that I loved and listened to in the '70s. They're all getting very old (as am I cough cough) so my hope is always to hear them one last time. I"m actually shocked that Genesis is touring as I was sure 2007 was "it" (pardon the pun).

  • I just listened again to part of Nic Collins’ interview from March of this year. Sounds like Duchess and Mama are sure things, and likely Firth of Fifth. He really emphasized that Apocalypse in 9/8 and Los Endos were the hardest pieces to try to learn and play, leading me to believe now (contrary to my previous comment) that Apocalypse probably didn’t make the final setlist. He also mentioned SHBTS as being difficult. Interestingly he also talked about music from 1971, but didn’t get specific. Maybe he was just throwing a random year out as a sort of generic reference to older material. Given the state of Phil’s voice I have a hard time believing that the Musical Box is in the set (of course I would have thought that about Mama as well).