I guess if your favourite band is Chicago then I can understand the claim of Steve's version being "vastly superior".
That kind of depends on what era of Chicago you're talking about! Post-1974 (and especially post-1980) seems to fit here.
Posts by DecomposingMan
-
-
Some claim that The Animals' Don't Let Me Be Misunderstood is in there, too, although I've never heard it.
I'm not too familiar with the actual song, but my understanding is that a riff from DLMBM is heard starting at 7:19 in IKWIL on SECONDS OUT.
-
in the Cage medleys on the 'holding still, pinned for kill' line, what does PC sing instead? I wondered if it was some in-joke as it sounds a bit like "[something] Phil, Chester [something]"
I clearly hear "Feel the fear, dressed to kill." I get the impression he was just modifying the lyrics a little.
-
since then, he has sang at least one song on each of his albums
Actually, he made 4 more non-orchestral albums after that but only sang 2 more songs, one on BANKSTATEMENT and one on STILL. And both vocals are better than anything on FUGITIVE.
-
This is the third poll about what I would call "Genesis's Most Hated Songs."
It seems that the only comments I've ever heard about "It" are along the lines of "it's an unsatisfying ending to TLLDOB."
Well, this is another one for my list of songs (like "Misunderstanding," "Your Own Special Way," and even "Who Dunnit?") that I never knew were bad until someone told me they were!
I always thought this song was a fine ending to TLLDOB. Sure, it doesn't make it clear how the album's story ends. But if you're depending on the songs alone to make the plot clear, without reading Peter's story that comes with the album, you're going to get confused anyway.
For the record, I think the music on LAMB is consistently amazing, but I never cared that much for the story (as creepily imaginative as a lot of it is).
-
Girls and boys who shout come out to play - Narnia (SH) (It's about time something from him was included here!)
-
[Mike's] album even used backing vocalists, unlike the other three.
Slight correction: I looked at the credits on Ant's album, and it has Rupert Hine credited with backing vocals. That surprised me because all the vocals seem to sound like Ant. So Rupert must be well-hidden in the midst of Ant's own backing vocals, unlike Mike's very up-front supporting singers.
-
Speaking of redeeming qualities, I do like Mike’s vocals on “Hideaway” – it is the only song on AVS that I actually do like.
That was also the only song Mike himself felt "really worked" on the album. Personally, I think he pulls off the verses fairly well, but not the choruses for the most part.
P.S.: I'll admit that my fondness for THE FUGITIVE is based on the original version without the 2 bonus tracks. They don't contribute to the high rating I give it, but they're also not enough to bring it down to 2nd place.
-
At various times between 1978 and 1983, each of the major non-lead-singing G-men basically said, "Hey, I'm going to try singing lead on a whole album."
If you've heard all four of the resulting albums, how would you rank them? (Taking into account all factors, not just the singing.) Here is my ranking:
1. Tony - THE FUGITIVE
The first solo albums by Tony & Mike (A CURIOUS FEELING and SMALLCREEP'S DAY) seem like they would often be compared to each other; each was fairly lengthy, fairly progressive, and used a guest vocalist throughout. In the same way, comparisons between THE FUGITIVE and ACTING VERY STRANGE also seem inevitable. While I prefer SMALLCREEP'S over CURIOUS to a definite extent, FUGITIVE positively blows ACTING away in my opinion. Tony's singing is somewhat stronger than Mike's, but it's the quality of the actual songs that makes the difference for me. One of my favorite Genesis-related solo albums.
2. Ant - WISE AFTER THE EVENT
Ant's albums don't get much more ambitious or progressive-rock-oriented than this one. To me, though, the quality of both the songs and the singing is a little uneven. In particular, Ant's little "creaking" effect damages some of the best songs here. He would do much better singing later on, especially on INVISIBLE MEN.
3. Steve - CURED
Steve is, of course, the only one of the four who went on to sing multiple vocal albums. On CURED he was just getting started and didn't quite seem to know what he was doing yet; in particular, he focuses a bit too much on the upper part of his range. Even at this point, though, he was the most confident-sounding of the four. Unfortunately CURED is brought down by drum machines and rather weak pop songwriting.
4. Mike - ACTING VERY STRANGE
What can I say? Not only are the songs mostly nothing special to begin with, but poor Mike doesn't manage even one passable lead vocal here. (I'd say he comes closest on "A Day To Remember.") His album even used backing vocalists, unlike the other three. At least he eventually gave us a passable vocal on "Making A Big Mistake." Too bad he didn't sound more like that on ACTING.
-
I find it rather phallic.
My avatar or the song?
-
Dr. John: "People will cite John saying that Ringo isn't even the best drummer of The Beatles. I'm pretty sure he was saying that in jest as all of them have spoke about how much better the band became when Ringo joined them."
FeelItComing: "Lennon did not say that about Ringo. English comedian Jasper Carrott said it."
Perhaps I got the wrong story but I always understood the "isn't even the best drummer in the Beatles" quote (note the wording) this way: John was referring to the fact that Paul also drummed, as he did on the first 2 "white album" tracks during Ringo's temporary walkout.
-
Off-topic: I just noticed your avatar is a 3 wheel car viewed from above. I've been seeing it as a zeppelin-type airship viewed from below!
LOL. That's a contemporary drawing of a rather obscure French car, the 1947 Aérocarène 700. I always thought it was wonderfully odd-looking, and at some point started using the picture as sort of a private signature. I've only seen one photo of the actual car, and it appears to be considerably less slick-looking than the drawing implies.
-
It was a radio hit for Steve Hackett with Paul Carrack when he covered it on Genesis Revisited in 1995. By radio hit, I mean it was on "heavy rotation on BBC Radio 2, the most listened to station in the UK.
Fair enough, Steve's version is vastly superior.
Steve's version is interesting because it changes the song so much. The verses are changed from 3/4 to 4/4, so that the transition between time signatures is eliminated, and there is no quiet solo section.
I don't know if I would have thought of this if someone else hadn't pointed it out, but Steve seems to have deliberately made it sound like a Mike + The Mechanics song!
-
This is the second poll about what I would call "Genesis's Most Hated Songs." (The first was for "Misunderstanding.")
There seems to be a lot of bad feeling toward this particular song. I like it myself, though. I think it fits the mood of W&W nicely. I don't think it's a particularly commercial song; its alternating between 3/4 & 4/4 pretty much takes care of that. And I think the lyrics are nicely poetic and not trite at all.
How do you feel about it?
-
I recall reading that Genesis were considering having a suite on SELLING ENGLAND consisting of Moonlit Knight, Cinema Show & Aisle of Plenty... but wanted to avoid comparisons to "Supper's Ready."
Then they considered having the "Duke suite" on DUKE (Behind / Duchess / Guide / Turn / Travel's / End)... but wanted to avoid comparisons to "Supper's Ready."
I guess they were really afraid to have anything get compared to "Supper's Ready," huh?
Of course, Mike's SMALLCREEP'S DAY did have that sidelong title suite... and of course it got compared to "Supper's Ready" (one reviewer said it sounded like "'Supper's Ready' warmed over").
-
"Little Nemo rubbed his eyes and got out of bed" (Scenes From a Night's Dream)
-
I first bought PDT in the early to mid-80s. I don't consider it a perfect album by any means but I like it quite a lot. Favorite track is probably "Narnia."
A few comments about the review linked to:
[Carry On Up The Vicarage:] "a female voice says something unintelligible"
I think that's actually a male "character" voice, apparently recorded from an arcade machine (as shown in some of the photos on the original vinyl inner sleeve), saying something like "I'm Bimbo the Clown. All you do to make me dance is push my buttons down."
[Carry On Up The Vicarage:] "he distorted his voice with a 'laughing gnome' effect (the voice is simultaneously pitched higher and lower)."
One of the vocals is pitched higher. The other one he apparently tries to make sound "lower" although it actually doesn't seem to be pitched artificially.
"One could almost think that Kim was one of Satie’s famous Gymnopédies."
Most certainly. I remember the first time I heard one of those Satie pieces (which I now have on SKETCHES OF SATIE); I was amazed by the stylistic resemblance to "Kim."
"Tony Banks praised the song [Hoping Love Will Last] in Chapter & Verse. He felt that it would have been good on A Trick Of The Tail."
He really said that??? Wow!
-
If any of you have made contributions to Wikipedia, I’m sure you’ve had all kinds of experiences. And I’m sure many of those have been negative ones. I’ve had some too, but for the most part I’ve managed to deal with them.
I find it fun to read Wikipedia, and to throw in tidbits of information that others have missed, particularly on the subject of music. I’m generally good about including citations, but at any rate I avoid posting anything that anyone should have a reason to question. Sometimes something I’ve posted will get removed, but if there’s a good reason for it I’ll accept that.
But some experiences I’ve had recently have taken all of the fun out of it for me. It seems that some Wikipedia pages have self-appointed “guardians” who, with all good intentions, go a little too far in dealing with what they see as “violations.”
The following isn’t a real-life example, but it sums up (without much of any exaggeration) what kinds of things I’ve been running into.
Let’s say the page for NURSERY CRYME gives an explanation for “The Fountain of Salmacis” that’s rather confusing and misleading. Being a stickler for accuracy, I change the entry to point out that the song is about the myth of Hermaphroditus. I include a link to the “Hermaphroditus” page.
Then someone comes along and undoes my change, saying that I need to give a citation for my claim.
ME: Um, why does this need a citation? The song mentions Hermaphroditus by name and recounts the myth in detail.
HIM: It may be obvious to YOU that the song is about Hermaphroditus. But then it’s “obvious” to some people that “In The Air Tonight” is about Phil Collins seeing someone refuse to save a person from drowning, which of course is wrong!
ME: Um… that’s not the same thing at all. “Fountain” is clearly about Hermaphroditus. It’s not like that “In The Air Tonight” legend. It’s more like how, say, “Return to Pooh Corner” by Kenny Loggins is about Winnie-The-Pooh.
HIM: And how do you know that song is actually about Winnie-The-Pooh?? It could be about something else called “Pooh”!
ME: Um…
Here’s another odd thing I’ve run into. On a page about a certain album I added a short paragraph, regarding a CD reissue, that (1) was clearly and objectively observable by any listener; (2) involved things that fans might want to know about; and (3) was not something the artist or label was likely to call attention to.
Well, some guy added the big “This section needs citations or it may be removed!” header to this. I disagreed, so I removed the header. He put it back.
In an attempt to compromise, I replaced my paragraph with a single line that glossed over the details but seemed less likely to be questioned. He said “sorry, that’s not good enough”… and put back my original paragraph, along with the “may be removed!” header.
Finally, I just removed my paragraph altogether. Again, he put the whole thing back, still with the notice that it “may be removed!” OK, whatever.
Maybe these guys are right, and I’m not playing by the Wikipedia rules strictly enough. But it doesn’t feel like they’re right.
-
as a typical Genesis fan, I probably didn't even have a girlfriend!
Wait, what are you saying about typical Genesis fans?
Anyway...
Unlike you I have been divorced, although I can't say I can relate to much of what Phil has written in that regard. My experience was less like, say, "Please Don't Ask" than it was like some bizarre nightmare. Still, a few lines of "I Don't Care Anymore" have always jumped out at me:
...I don't play the same games you play...
...I remember all the times I tried so hard / And you laughed in my face 'cause you held the cards...
...I won't be there anymore...
...All I want of you is just to let me be...
-
it wasn't "cool" to be a fan of either as a teenager
I was never a fan of any band when it was "cool" to be. I guess it would go against my nature.
