Posts by foxfeeder

    Of course, all this presumes that being the writer is be-all and end-all. Remember the days when almost no-one wrote all their own material? Even the Beatles. Does that mean no-one who was just a performer counted? I think not.

    Then of course, when people did start to perform their own songs, everyone hung up on who wrote what. Genesis: The absolute epitome of this mindset. Endless threads about who wrote what, who didn't write what, or even whether they did write at all. Never a moments consideration of the blurred lines between writing and arranging. Example: The Moody Blues most famous song (though not their best, IMO) Nights In White Satin. Written by Justin Hayward. Who freely admits the 7 note mellotron motif after the "Beauty I'd Always Missed" line was created by Mike Pinder, the Keyboard player. Mike backs this up. Both credit Hayward with the song, but both agree it transformed it too.

    Take the Police: Sting wrote almost everything (and all the hits) yet what defined the band's sound? Andy's guitar, and perhaps more so, Copeland's drumming. Every Breath You Take - Sting wrote it, but left Andy to finish it with "whatever guitar parts he saw fit". Those parts were an essential part of the song, even Sting says so.

    I'm no expert on Floyd, only have 1 album, the inevitable DSOTM, but I'd agree Gilmour and Wright are the ones who define the sound, by playing and composing, Mason could have been replaced by almost anyone, his style is lazy and unswerving, Phil would have brought much more life to the party. Hell, Mick Tucker from the Sweet would have been a step up. As bass player, Roger is at a disadvantage in being able to influence the sound from a playing point of view. It's not a lead instrument, so he can be good or bad, and if the others are on the ball, it won't matter so much. He seems to have issues, I guess anyone who loses a father in a war will be so afflicted. Do I like him? No, not really. Is he missed on PF records? I'd guess not. Would they have been the success they were if he had not been there? We will never know.

    Steve seems to have Rogers Waters syndrome.

    Well, given he doesn't claim to have written everything during his tenure (far from it) and given he is quite complimentary about songs others wrote, that seems unlikely. As your post in "Will Roger Waters ever shut up" seems to be a set-up for this one line comment, I think you might be clutching at straws.

    It's not a crime to have personality clashes with other members of bands, look at the Police as one example. I guess it's a bit like having to share a forum with people you can't choose to have as members. You can carry on regardless, or walk.

    Also not a fan of Kanye's! Though I used him as a convenience in another thread as someone else had already brought him up in that thread.

    I have a vague memory of listening to an album of his about 15 years ago, but it's possible it's another artist I'm thinking of. Whatever album it was, it had a couple of interesting dark EDM type songs but clearly it wasn't enough to suck me in.

    Using him as a convenience seems a bit strong, though iI guess we all get caught short sometimes. ^^

    Although I very much like TSW and TRS, Hounds of Love remains my favourite album. The songs on Side 1 are all strong and The Ninth Wave is an amazing suite that I still find magical.

    Going back to the comments about Rolling Stone and the R&RHoF, I was a faithful Rolling Stone reader from 1980 to about 2000. It has always had a very obvious bias towards American music and music that was either strongly influenced by or was a strong influence on American music. However, since I like a lot of American-based music, it still provided some excellent in-depth interviews and profiles that I learned a lot from. I found the writing became increasingly superficial, which is why I ultimately abandoned it.

    The R&RHoF reflects the same bias. So it makes sense that Eddie Cochran (who released only a few singles and one album but was hugely influential) is an inductee while many other artists who have had substantial careers and fan bases are not yet inductees. I'm actually a bit surprised that Genesis, Yes, Rush, and others have been inducted as they were consistently disparaged and ignored by Rolling Stone and most of the music critics for decades.

    The Ninth Wave is her best work, IMO.

    From what I can see scrolling back through the EPG it was 30mins long whereas everything else in their "Discovering" series appears to be 1 hour so maybe you got off lightly.

    (Coming up there's a different documentary strand with a much longer programme on the Moody Blues which foxfeeder might want to check for accuracy).

    I sometimes wonder if Genesis are the most marginalised mega-successful rock band.

    Classic Artists? I've got the DVD. All spot on, AFAIK. Yes, Jethro Tull and Cream are also in that series. Interestingly, Jimmy Saville appears in the DVD, which came out circa 2008, in an archive video clip from 1966. The Sky Arts version has edited him out.

    The Moody Blues were in Channel 5's 1970's hits last night, as was Rolf Harris, but his inclusion was very brief, and with a disparaging comment.

    Blimey, what a bizarre sudden outburst of... not sure what to call it. Comparison griping?

    I'm not convinced these citizens would in fact even be able to name songs by those two either, though they'd probably have at least heard of them.

    SR will answer for themselves I'm sure but how do you know they didn't intend to call themselves Sliver Rainbow?!

    To be more strictly accurate, "What a sudden outburst of.....finding the very first post by a new member to be disparaging criticism of a band member for no obvious reason. Not sure about you, but personally, if the first thing someone thinks to do on joining a new forum is to have a pop at one of the members of it's focus, I have to question their motives.

    Sure, he doesn't have to like all the members equally, some of them at all, but most of us (the reasonable ones) don't feel the need to slag one of them off ever, let alone post #1. I have my favourites, but I don't feel the need to criticize, for example, Tony, as he has had less solo success. Indeed, he's not my least fave member anyway, but I keep my comments within the bounds of constructive or comparative criticism, we all have our favourites but I'm not sure commercial success is a good reason to have one.

    More worrying is the fact that, as a long standing member, you should choose to back up said first time poster and his frankly uncalled for comment, rather than someone you have known for several years. I guess I know who to trust a little more in future.

    Owing to bad timing, I seem to have missed SR's answer, but since it has been removed by a moderator, I'm guessing it was rude, insulting or vulgar, all of which backs up my thought on their character. I stand by my comments.

    Was this a spoof version, like Thotch? :)

    If he wants to live off 6 years of work from a band he left 44 years ago that's his prerogative.

    Go into the street with a clipboard with £10 on it and ask them to name a hackket solo song.

    You will keep your £10.

    And yet those same people will likely be able to name a song by Kanye West, Rihanna, or any one of a 1000 other talentless autotuned computer-accompanied muppets. Just goes to show, you can fool some of the people all of the time.

    1 K, 2 T's! Jeez, you can't even spell your own userid. ^^

    David Amess was involved in working for better conditions for the members of the National Hospital Radio Association, which I was involved in 20-odd years back. As has been said elsewhere, he was a tireless worker for many things across party politics, and hopefully this lowlife terrorist scum will get a full life term and also hopefully, maybe parliament will get on top of the knife crime issue now it has affected them.

    That may be the case, technically. But there are quite a few Genesis tribute bands, and one of them is led by former member Steve Hackett. I saw a Genesis Revisited show by Hackett when he was in Stockholm a few years ago and it was a great experience, and I think I've managed to buy all live CDs he as issued during recent years. However, I definitely prefer the contemporary Genesis playing songs from their own past. In plain text Genesis in 2021 has three musicians who have been with the group for more than 50 years plus Daryl (40+ years). This means that when Genesis perform their songs there is the personal and emotional bond to these songs, that can't be achieved by putting together a tribute band. There's certainly nothing wrong when a solo artist performs songs from his former band, but it will always be a solo concert with things being a lot different than the mother band.

    Technically, accurately, Steve's band is a spin-off, not a tribute.