Posts by Dr. John

Quote from Fabrizio

The loss of power in his voice doesn't bother me much, sure, I wonder how he is going to cope but it applies to over 90% of the vocalists when aging, although it is admittedly dramatic with Phil. I concur that some songs can benefit from a softer approach, although not MoC imo, the dynamic of the song is based in that octave jump. It could work for softer songs, you mentioned Ripples I could add FYFM,

I guess it is how his voice transformed that rubs me the wrong way, it's just too nasal for me.

It is more nasal and I am not exactly sure why. Age sometimes deepens the voice, which often adds a really nice richness to compensate for the loss of range. Phil's voice has changed in tone in multiple ways over time. It was lighter and initially lacked heft early on, then became stronger and lost some of that light touch, it then became warmer, and then became lighter and a bit more nasally as you mention.

There are a number of songs that might fit his voice now. Some would be great to hear - e.g., Blood On the Rooftops, Inside and Out, the full Cinema Show (the high bits are falsetto). We'll have to see what the final setlist looks like.

I've watched many performances (online) from Phil's recent tour, hoping that with practice I might hear some strengthening of his voice. I haven't heard that happen. His range is less than it was for the 2007 tour, which wasn't bad but lacked the power in the upper register. Now he has both less range and power - which is fine and expectable for his age. So I do expect keys to be lowered for him as some were on the 2007 tour. I do expect the back-up singers to potentially cover or support passages that are harder. And I expect songs or sections of songs that benefit from an aggressive vocal to be either absent or at least modified in some way to accommodate where Phil is at.

This is why I was hypothesizing that they could do Man On the Corner without the aggressive octave jump. Sure it would change the song, but I am open to a reinterpretation. Ripples was lovely on the 2007 tour, where Phil took a much gentler approach to the chorus than say on the Duke tour. It still worked well. Many artists reinvent their songs live over time, both to accommodate aging and also because it keeps things fresh for them.

This is perhaps my favourite of his albums, or at least the first one I really got completely into so it holds that sway. I love that it has a unifying sound, partly from the extensive use of the Fairlight and from the drum sounds and lack of cymbals. So it was hard to narrow down to just 3:

The Rhythm of the Heat - this is all about music as drama; not really a standard song in terms of structure and flow.

San Jacinto - I love the rippling folding-on-itself pattern, the poignant lyrics, and a powerful vocal performance.

Lay Your Hands On Me - each verse starts off more experimental, spoken words in an uncertain atmosphere. It then progresses melodically into what almost sounds like an ecstatic religious ritual.

There are multiple peaks, depending on what quality you are focusing on.

Creatively they were coming up with great musical ideas as individuals around the Lamb. Creatively they were co-creating and co-writing as a unit best around 1981-1986. Live they were peaking in terms of overall energy and tightness around 1983-1986. In terms of Phil's drumming, he was perhaps more experimental in the mid-70s, but I actually thought his peak for me was the WCD tour - some appropriate restraint to serve the song best. In terms of singing, his peak power was 1983, but I prefer him also on the WCD tour, where he had more warmth and wasn't quite as shout-y. As mentioned, I can't really discern peaks for Mike and Tony, who have been pretty steady throughout.

Quote from Fabrizio

I'm actually curious to see whether ANYTHING from Abacab will be included in the setlist at all. I should go back and check but I believe that together with ATTW3, with the exception of FYFM, it is the least represented album live. I'm obviously not including prehistoric albums .

Beyond Abacab, I could see them doing Man On the Corner as most of it is gentle and well within Phil's current range. He would just have to not do the aggressive octave jump towards the end..

Thought this reaction and analysis to Firth of Fifth was interesting, if you like diving deep in terms of music theory and composition.

Although Behind the Lines works great as an opener, they may not choose that again given that it opened the 2007 tour.

Invisible Touch strikes me as a possibility for an opening song. It's upbeat and well-known, so while various of us on this board might groan inwardly, much of the audience might be energized. Phil was also doing it on his recent tour, so we know he was comfortable singing it (in a lower key).

Quote from raeltheduke

From 78-83 when Genesis were recording new albums followed by tours, they would start the show by playing a song from the previous tour/album. I can say that for the 1980 Duke tour started with Deep in the motherload from 1978 that was really cool. The same thing happened in 1981 during the Abacab tour they opened with Behind the lines from the 1980 Duke tour that was just as cool. And in 1983 Mama tour they played ABACAB as the opener from the previous album as well!

For the 1982 Three sides live tour opened with Dance on a Volcano that broke that trend. But also, that there was no studio album to promote.

But now it is a whole different approach especially since 14 years have passed. But if the stars align, Dance on a Volcano would be a perfect opener

They kept the trend going with the IT tour, opening with Mama from the previous album. Then the We Can't Dance tour opened with Land of Confusion from IT. The 2007 tour didn't follow this pattern as it wasn't promoting a current album. Since The Last Domino tour also has no album to promote, it is anyone's guess what they will use as the opener.

Quote from Witchwood

Canadian singer/songwriter, typically referenced as a political, folk artist but his music is much too eclectic to be pigeon-holed as strictly folk. Easily among my 10 favourite Canadian artists.

A fantastic guitarist as well.

Quote from Christian

St. Vincent is also one of my recent purchases

Also, let us know how the St. Vincent album is. I really like Masseduction.

Genesis has some great album covers. I went with Wind and Wuthering, because it perfectly captures that kind of autumnal, rainy, misty atmosphere that seems to pervade the album. Or maybe the album cover made me think of that atmosphere as I first listened to the record and forever biased my impressions.

I have not seen footage of this quality from this tour before. Makes me wonder what else is still out there.

A difficult choice for me, but I went with Seconds Out and 3SL.

I agree with Backdrifter to some extent that Seconds Out can be criticized for being a little too smooth. 3SL and definitely Live have way more grit. Songs like Squonk and TLLDOB lose their edge. I also agree that Phil's voice hasn't yet achieved the muscularity that made 3SL work so well, but his softer approach still is lovely for many songs. Overall I think the performances are still wonderful and I can overcome the smoothness by playing it extra loud.

3SL is great for the material, the energy, the rawness.

That said, I love Genesis live in any recording.

In terms of how they choose setlists, I think there are three factors that have played in over the years as various people have noted above:

1. They are genuinely more excited about their recent material. This makes sense. While they might have once been excited and invested in their early material at the time, this can fade over time for many artists. There are many examples of artists that admit they have grown tired of performing their older material, even though the fans love it.
2. The newer material is more popular and thus satisfies a much greater number of concertgoers. Thus, if you are playing to 20K people, it is likely that more of them will recognize and like Land of Confusion than The Knife or even Duchess. So it makes sense to have the setlist dominated by songs that will make the majority of the audience happy.
3. Related to point 2., playing to larger audiences is necessary if you want the tour to be profitable. With the kind of production values and crew that Genesis uses, a small theatre tour focusing on early material might not be able to break even. An arena tour or bigger might have more chance of being profitable, and even then it is often not until the last shows when it does become profitable. So targeting a broader audience with a setlist that emphasizes what the broader audience knows makes financial sense also.

I'm guessing that in addition to standard back-up/harmony parts, one of them can double up Phil on high notes. I've seen/heard this done with other singers. The lead singer might hit the high note briefly and then drop out. But the back-up singer also hits the same note (usually mixed back so it still sounds like the lead singer mainly) and hold the note longer so the effect is that the lead singer held the note longer. A bit sneaky, but it tends to work live, where there is so much going on. The other way this is done is that the lead singer never even goes for the high note, but instead hits the harmony note that the back-up singer normally would have sung while the back-up singer goes for the high note. In essence, they trade places harmonically for one note, which is not very noticeable unless you are specifically waiting for and focusing on the high note.

Quote from BobsYourUncle

If you're back in the Buffalo area you should try this place too:

https://www.charliethebutcher.com/locations-and-menus/

They make a pretty decent beef soup too.

We love Charlie the Butcher and stop there for beef on a weck every time we are in the Buffalo area.

Quote from drw4d

That Toronto show was fantastic! It had been raining all afternoon, but it turned into an absolutely beautiful evening for an outdoor show.

We were at the Toronto show too and agree it was a wonderful evening. I bought the CD of it and like listening to it, not because it was necessarily the best show of the tour, but because of the memories.

Toronto tickets were $279 including all fees. I didn't see a difference between floors and stands. I didn't check second level stands - those might have been cheaper. VIP packages started upwards of $300 and went up to at least $1800 for first few rows on the floor.

Going to see them (COVID-willing) November 25th at the Scotiabank Arena in Toronto. This will be my fourth time seeing them.

I too had the experience of clicking on tickets and then being told someone else snapped them up. So I had to try again.

I also saw tickets reappear. It might have been people getting timed out. It might have been people running several accounts and then picking their best option and then letting go of the others.

Got OK tickets for the Toronto show. I was behind 2000 people for the presale, so not a surprise. I wasn't going to pay the giant bucks for the VIP seats, of which there were some still available for floor seats within the first few rows.

I can understand people being passionate about the band and passionate about specific eras, based on their preferences. I have difficulty with people being passionate about an era where they seem to need to denigrate fans of other eras and the musicians themselves in those other eras. And I usually don't find their criticisms to hold up very well. They could simply say "I don't like the "X" era" and I would be fine with that. But instead they make overly simplistic and judgmental statements that are factually inaccurate, e.g., that Genesis sold out for the money, that Phil is wholly responsible for Genesis going pop, etc.

I wish everyone could be passionate about Genesis and let others like what they like about Genesis, even if they don't agree.