[SPOILERS] GENESIS 2021 setlist discussion

Quote from MoonlitKnight

Isn’t debating “until we are blue in the face” about such things one of the most enjoyable aspects on this board?

Yes, indeed :).

Quote from BassAnd12Man

We can all argue until we're blue in the face with respect to what they could have played. The reality is that they were dealing with a major limiting factor (Phil) so they picked the songs (even ratcheted down 1-2 steps) that Phil could somewhat handle. That has to have been the main factor that determined the content of the setlist. Plus, this is the "trio" version of the band so I would have been a little shocked to hear Harold the Barrel lol. That being said, minor tweaks could have been made the setlist a bit more rounded in terms of their history (this is the last hurrah after all). Yes, I think it's a shame that none of Supper's Ready was included - that is their calling card. Could they have done the instrumental section (only) from the end of Willow Farm to the beginning of As Sure As Eggs Is Eggs? Yes, probably, though Phil would have been twiddling his thumbs for 10+ minutes. One thing I really wish they would have done is the intro/outro of Watcher of the Skies as they did in '76 (never liked the '82 version as it's in "E" - way too low compared to the original F# key) as an opener, as opposed to the omnipresent Behind the Lines. Also, 1 song from Trick. Again, it is what it is but I think they could have done a tiny little bit better, even acknowledging the tight parameters within which they were operating.

Loved the 2 shows I saw. Would have loved them more if something from Supper's Ready was included. What I was thinking was that they could have nixed the Cinema Show instrumental after Fading Lights and launched into the instrumental part of Apocalypse-no vocals whatsoever. Then take the tubular bells part right at the end right into Afterglow. Seems reasonable to me-time wise, no vocals to protect Phil and appealing to the 30% hardcore fans. Thoughts?

Quote from BassAnd12Man

I would much prefer looking at "time spent" playing songs from various albums in the current setlist as this is a much better indicator of representation. Three brief snippets from SEBTP aren't even close to 4-5 full songs from '80s albums.

Then why don't you make that list so we can compare?

Quote from raeltheduke

Why bother with such a long breakdown? All you need to do is go to setlist.fm pick your concert date and scroll down to "Songs on Albums" to see the graphic and songs from each album:

https://www.setlist.fm/setlist…l-qc-canada-338a7821.html

Invisible Touch was the highest with 5 (not my most liked album unfortunately) followed by Genesis Mama and Selling England with 4 each.

Maybe he would prefer to do it his way? I thought it was a better, more detailed list than the one you linked to and I enjoyed reading it!

Not a huge fan of the IT album either, but I can forgive the title track being in the set. It actually sounds better live than on the record, the drums drive it along far better than the rather tepid drum sound on the record....ironic since Hugh Padgham started out wanting to record drums that sounded like you're sitting next to the drummer and not "like so many 70s records, where it sounded like the drummer was in a cardboard box". It's also their biggest US hit, and is well known in the UK. Phil has always enjoyed it.

But another song Phil really enjoys is Supper's Ready. He wanted to play it on the WCD tour for it's 20th anniversary. We know they rehearsed it from Apocalypse onwards in 2020, Nic stated this on many occasions and he enjoyed it. I have a feeling Mike doesn't like it these days. Not wishing to denigrate Mike but his opinion on a lot of the earlier stuff is now the most negative within the band.

People confidently said Phil couldn't possibly sing Mama and he's done it. Albeit at a different key. We don't know what changes they made to the original or whether they tried doing an instrumental but Phil has done a heck of a lot better than most people thought he would.

Quote from absinthe_boy

People confidently said Phil couldn't possibly sing Mama and he's done it. Albeit at a different key. We don't know what changes they made to the original or whether they tried doing an instrumental but Phil has done a heck of a lot better than most people thought he would.

Totally agree. The snarl bit is genuinely like something from a horror movie in the lower key, and is heart stopping. Combined with the visuals, it was a definite highlight of the set. Huge credit to Phil for taking it on (and pulling it off).

Quote from absinthe_boy

Not a huge fan of the IT album either, but I can forgive the title track being in the set. It actually sounds better live than on the record, the drums drive it along far better than the rather tepid drum sound on the record....ironic since Hugh Padgham started out wanting to record drums that sounded like you're sitting next to the drummer and not "like so many 70s records, where it sounded like the drummer was in a cardboard box". It's also their biggest US hit, and is well known in the UK. Phil has always enjoyed it.

i agree with you, invisible touch gets much better when played live.

drum machines should be used only for beats that can't be made with acoustic drums, like those on duchess, me and sarah jane, in the air tonight or mama.

Quote from absinthe_boy

Not a huge fan of the IT album either, but I can forgive the title track being in the set. It actually sounds better live than on the record, the drums drive it along far better than the rather tepid drum sound on the record....ironic since Hugh Padgham started out wanting to record drums that sounded like you're sitting next to the drummer and not "like so many 70s records, where it sounded like the drummer was in a cardboard box".

HP has since said the drums on the album make him cringe now and he wishes they could remaster the album to include acoustic drums.

I totally agree with Phil on "Mama"; I was one of those who said he could never pull it off properly but he nailed it at MSG. The new key is great and works perfectly with the hellish crimson lighting. I like it much better than the 2007 version.

Quote from Backdrifter

HP has since said the drums on the album make him cringe now and he wishes they could remaster the album to include acoustic drums.

Ah the 80s: electric drums, synth horns, those ridiculous looking mini-guitars (I don’t care how good they may or may not sound, they look ridiculous), and Tony and Mike in their Miami Vice suits while Phil sports the business casual look onstage in his cotton Dockers and white dress shirt. Embarrassing.

Quote from MoonlitKnight

Ah the 80s: electric drums, synth horns, those ridiculous looking mini-guitars (I don’t care how good they may or may not sound, they look ridiculous), and Tony and Mike in their Miami Vice suits while Phil sports the business casual look onstage in his cotton Dockers and white dress shirt. Embarrassing.

Amid various period revivals I was once convinced the 70s was one phase that'd never possibly be revisited, so naff were the looks and fashions. Well that turned out to be completely wrong so I expect the terrible 80s styles you describe will no doubt be back-back-back at some point and very much 'in'. Given I'm not exactly an arbiter of such things, for all I know 80s styles have already come back into fashion then gone back out again.

Puffball skirts and the aforementioned baggy jackets - WITH THE SLEEVES PUSHED UP! - were among the worst.

Yes all that clattery shiny top-end tinny instrumentation really defined that decade's music, sadly. Electronic percussion tracks sounding like a cutlery drawer being rattled, quick stabs of synth brass peppering everything... Gated drums of course, which sounded so great and so stark on PG3 but eventually got ridiculously overused.

Quote from MoonlitKnight

Ah the 80s: electric drums, synth horns, those ridiculous looking mini-guitars (I don’t care how good they may or may not sound, they look ridiculous), and Tony and Mike in their Miami Vice suits while Phil sports the business casual look onstage in his cotton Dockers and white dress shirt. Embarrassing.

Those "mini" guitars (sorry, that made me laugh) were Steinberger guitars and were quite pricey back on the day (made out of graphite). I never liked them also but they seemed so fitting given how sucky the '80s were generally, not just fashion. We could have along chat about that, As far as the '70s go, I'll take my bell bottom jeans and platform shoes any day over those hideous Sergio Valente jeans and upper jackets lol.

Quote from BassAnd12Man

Those "mini" guitars (sorry, that made me laugh) were Steinberger guitars and were quite pricey back on the day (made out of graphite). I never liked them also but they seemed so fitting given how sucky the '80s were generally, not just fashion. We could have along chat about that, As far as the '70s go, I'll take my bell bottom jeans and platform shoes any day over those hideous Sergio Valente jeans and upper jackets lol.

And let’s not forget Phil’s mullet lol.

Could I possibly have included more typographical errors in my post? Post Christmas drag lol.

Quote from Backdrifter

HP has since said the drums on the album make him cringe now and he wishes they could remaster the album to include acoustic drums.

This is good to know.

Kind of in his defence, a lot of records sounded like that at the time. Though given his desire to make records that sounded like the listener is sitting next to a drummer.....it's an odd choice. IT wasn't out of place for 1986 but it has aged very badly. Maybe they really could redo it with Nic replacing Phil's drums, keeping everything else original and *not* brickwalling it. I'd buy it.

Drum machines, especially in the 80s, had a fresh and new sound and could be programmed by non-drummers to make demos and records. They could also sometimes do things real drum(mers) couldn't. Electric drums, as used by Phil and Bill Bruford in the mid 80s, have not stood the test of time in my opinion.

Quote from absinthe_boy

This is good to know.

Kind of in his defence, a lot of records sounded like that at the time. Though given his desire to make records that sounded like the listener is sitting next to a drummer.....it's an odd choice. IT wasn't out of place for 1986 but it has aged very badly. Maybe they really could redo it with Nic replacing Phil's drums, keeping everything else original and *not* brickwalling it. I'd buy it.

Drum machines, especially in the 80s, had a fresh and new sound and could be programmed by non-drummers to make demos and records. They could also sometimes do things real drum(mers) couldn't. Electric drums, as used by Phil and Bill Bruford in the mid 80s, have not stood the test of time in my opinion.

I disagree a bit on how IT has aged. Yes, IT the song doesn't sound as good in 2022, but TTT sounds incredible - even by today's standards. Domino is in the middle - it doesn't sound bad, but doesn't sound good either.

One thing I noted is Phil's drumming with electronic drums. Did anybody make them sound better back then?

Seems his drumming came down a few pegs on WCD.

It suddenly struck me while watching a clip on YouTube of Cinema Show on this tour that Daryl is “mimicking” Tony’s keyboard solo during the first part of the instrumental section. He’s playing along with Tony until the break in the middle of the “solo.” As far as I can recall that is not how the song was played in 2007 (and certainly not on earlier tours). Am I imagining things or is this correct?

You are correct that for the "main" refrain section of Cinema Show (the part in A that gets repeated), Daryl joins Tony in unison the second time through:

However, Daryl did this also on the 2007 tour:

Prior to that, on the Mama tour Daryl joined in the repeat section playing arpeggiated chords:

He did the same on the Three Sides Live tour. I can't detect him doing anything on the full version of Cinema Show from the Mirrors tour, unless he is simply doubling Mike on the A chord rhythm part the second time through.

I noticed that too. And I really don't know why he does it that way now. I like the arpeggios he played in 1981-1983...

For 1978, I think he is just doubling Mike, as you said. I'm not a guitar player, but I think he plays some F# chord, just here (it goes quite fast and the picture is quite blurry), so we can assume that he does the same thing during the A major part too. I think it's why Mike's part sounds so "full" on this tour. There may be two players :

Another difference I noticed, with the exact same elements : For Behind The Lines Intro, during the B Major modulation, there is a DMaj/C | CMaj chord sequence repeated 4 times, during which Tony plays a little synth line which goes "A G F# D E F#, A G F# D E G F# D A(below the D)".

For this tour, Daryl plays that line alone with volume swells, Tony doesn't play it, he plays just the chords and doubles the bass with his left hand. On the studio version as well as in 1980, 1981, 1983 and 2007, the little line was played on his Prophet synth. In concert, Daryl was arpeggiating the chords (clean sound, or distorted in 2007).

(notice the slower tempo, too, haha)

(more energy, thanks Nic !)

Thanks for pointing that out. I hadn't realized they had changed that bit.