OK, I finally figured out one example. Mick Taylor played on several Ron Wood solo albums. I'll need to do more research to figure out other examples.
I think the original premise of this thread is band members collaborating, who were never in the band at the same time. So the examples above of The Beatles and of The Eagles are different - those members were in the band at the same time. I was trying to look up if Bernie Leadon had ever collaborated with Joe Walsh or Timothy B. Schmidt, but came up with nothing (I know they toured together for the History of Eagles tour). Otherwise I can't come up with anything yet.
Carry On Matron starred Bernard Breslaw as Ernie Bragg who later went on to play Cyclops ( that's Bernard Breslaw not Ernie Bragg who was fictional) in the fantasy Krull directed by Peter Yates who also directed the classic Bullitt staring Steve McQueen who starred in the fantastic The Great Escape and The Magnificent Seven both also starring Charles Bronson who starred in Death Wish which was directed by Michael Winner who also directed The 1983 re make of The Wicked Lady which had a soundtrack by Tony Banks who is also a member of Genesis.😁
That's like, what, 6-7 degrees of separation? I can't keep track.
Thanks for the recs. I agree it is not earth-shattering, but it is certainly solid and enjoyable.
When I suggested they'd both been truncated I wasnt thinking of the running time in fact, I was referring to them both having bits chopped out. In the case of CC99 isn't verse 4 not included? (I'm starting to doubt it now).
Anyway, thanks for allowing me that one. I'll try to come up with something.
Yes, I was assuming you meant that the verse had been chopped.
Although I have been aware of Gram Parsons's Grievous Angel, I had not actually listened to it until recently. I was inspired after watching the Ken Burns documentary Country Music, which I highly recommend if you have 16+ hours to spare. It has introduced me to or given much more perspective on many artists. I liked the snippet I heard of Gram Parsons in the documentary and the album itself doesn't disappoint.
Sorry for the delayed response; I've been offline for a few days.
Anyway, I'm not sure I know how to respond because a couple of you have hinted at the correct answer but I haven't seen it stated quite correctly.
So here's a big hint: The things that hint at the correct answer are the mentions of (1) WOTS as a single; and (2) Carpet Crawlers 1999.
Didn't Backdrifter already get this in terms of both being rerecorded as singles in shortened versions?
Stilted, mannered movements certainly form a big part of her live act for sure but I don't think of it as attempted coolness rather than an artifice in the same way flower masks and surreal stories are.
I never got the impression that St. Vincent tries to be "cool". She does like changing personas and playing with the image she presents, similar to Bowie, Madonna, etc. But I find that as an artist overall she has a lot of integrity. I don't actually like listening to everything she has done, but I do have significant respect for her work.
No idea either. There are probably others on this forum that might be in the know.
On top of which, didn't they say the sequence suggested by ABACAB was quickly rearranged during rehearsals? So the finished song bore no resemblance to it anyway!
On a tangent - isn't that pretty much the structure lots of songs follow? Verse, chorus, verse, middle, verse, chorus. Actually, no it isn't. It's usually verse, chorus, verse, chorus, middle bit, chorus chorus chorus. ABABCBBB - "doesn't really care...."
If we ignore the intro and the outro jam, then the structure is ABABCAB, so yes, that is a common structure for many songs.
That's it. Over to you!
Yes - but it looks like Dr. John snuck in literally 1 minute before you with the correct answer.
EDIT - unless of course he gratiously cedes to you as he set up the thread and asked the first question!
Simon1967, please pose the next question!
If they changed the key of Abacab, would they have to change the name as well?
Well, not really as the letters refer to sections of the song, not the keys. A clever joke nonetheless.
There are many kinds of live records.
Some are essentially greatest hits packages with some crowd noise - the performances sound very similar to the original studio versions. These are often the ones that have significant studio "repair", so they seem to be a little too perfect. I generally have little interest in these as they add almost nothing new to the original studio recordings.
Some are greatest hits packages, but the live versions are more powerful, assured, and capture the artist performing the songs once they have really gotten to know them. Genesis falls into this category and it is generally why I love their live albums. The Band is another example of this.
And then there are the artists for whom live performances transform their songs into something else. The live versions are often distant cousins to the original studio recordings, due to new arrangements and reimagining of what makes the song tick. Perhaps the best example of this is The Who's Live At Leeds, perhaps my pick for the best live rock record. Substitute is closest in structure to the original single, but is brutally powerful in comparison. Magic Bus turns a slight single into a lurching journey. My Generation veers off into an inspired jam that is the centrepiece of the album. And Young Man Blues, Summertime Blues, and Shaking All Over are covers that are light years away from their originators. The Allman Brothers' Live at Fillmore East is another example of this kind of live album. Springsteen is a bit of a mixture of this and the second category - some live versions are just better than the studio versions and some completely reinvent the song (Thunder Road on Live 75-85).
I might be being a bit mean here, because you are essentially right, but there is a very specific additional factor that applies to each of those performances which is the key part of the answer.
Oh, I wasn't sure if you had picked those tours specifically. So it is the first live performances with at least one new musician in the line-up: Bill Bruford, Chester Thompson, Darryl Stuermer, and then Ray/Nir/Anthony.
I like punk. Even though I don't enjoy all of the music, I do respect the spirit and underlying principles. It was very much a reaction to the complexity and increasing grandiosity of some of 70s rock music. It was about attitude, politics, and a in-your-face lack of virtuosity. Although some writers and some punk musicians may have believed that they were going to create a whole new musical order, I don't think that was the heart of the movement. It was more about challenging the status quo musically and politically, which is always a good thing.
Many of the key bands in the punk era actually had a lot of admiration for the "dinosaurs" of stadium rock. The Sex Pistols (which were really a manufactured punk boy band) were Who fans, as were The Clash. The Ramones had all kinds of nods to 50s and 60s rock and pop.
And punk has had important impact on the music of subsequent decades. I'm not just talking about more current punk bands, most of which I can't name. I'm talking about chart-topping artists that wouldn't always be viewed as punk but definitely had punk influences: Nirvana, Red Hot Chilli Peppers, Green Day (also big Who fans), Foo Fighters, etc. So punk served as an important challenge and stimulus to 70s rock and then influenced a newer generation of artists, who then further influence others.
Leads me to a thought though: With many of the songs tuned down in a different key for Phil's voice, did anyone else enjoy any of the songs more that way? I have to say I quite like the lower key of IKWIL, something about it feels better than the original, at least in that setting. In a weird way it seemed to fit the nostalgia trip with the videos behind the band in that key.
I have perfect pitch, so changing the key alters how the song sounds to me significantly. It's hard to explain, but each key has a particular "character" and associations. It's like changing the colour of a room - it all feels very different.
Sometimes this worked. For me Dm is a more brooding and solemn key than Em, so that enhanced Mama to some extent (and also helped Phil hit the top notes better). D is sunnier, happier, less pastoral than E. So Ripples seemed a little less poignant. But it also allowed Phil to sing it with a gentleness and flow that would not have been possible in the higher key, so I went with it. Dbm is definitely darker than Ebm, so that worked for In the Cage. D worked best for Invisible Touch, with that sunny sound providing interesting juxtaposition with the bitter lyrics.
The key change worked less well for me with TIOA - B is a brighter, sharper key than A, so the song seemed to have less edge. And IKWIL seemed to lose a bit of pep going from A to G.
On a tangent, the change that bugged me the most was Tony taking the main Cinema Show melody down an octave. That changed a soaring high melody into something muddling through the middle.
This is possibly too easy but I wanted to try moving it away from albums and songs so:
What links these Genesis gigs?
26/03/76 London Arena, London, Canada
01/01/77 Rainbow Theatre, London, UK
28/03/78 Broome County Veterans Memorial Arena, Binghamton, US
26/08/97 Telecom Tower, Berlin, Germany
First performances for each of the respective tours. The CAS one though wasn't really the first proper gig as it was more for TV than in a concert setting.