Yes, I think we hear that on ARCHIVE 1976-1992.
I heard that but in my memory there were only two voices instead of three. I will have to listen to it again, I might be wrong.
Posts by Fabrizio
-
-
Display More
I'm sure that's true up to a point, but notice this:
SECONDS OUT: A few songs have backing vocals by Tony & Mike.
THREE SIDES LIVE: There are hardly any backing vocals at all. (I think only "Abacab" has any.)
THE WAY WE WALK: Several songs have backing vocals by Tony & Mike (& Daryl).
I guess Tony & Mike got a little more confident with backing vocals after singing on their own solo albums?
Fair point. I would need to review the songs, I for instance I don't count those on Abacab as backing vocals, they are integral to the vocals, only the lead singer doesn't sing them but yes, you have a point there. Did they ever play Entangled live with the three-part vocal harmony?
-
A well made video can make a great song even more enjoyable. On the other hand, the best made video cannot lift a song, that is crap.
I think you mentioned the right examples, videos which are still remembered today, I would say ''iconic'' but it's another term being tossed around too much. Then of course, it's not that I disagree, because I don't think it is an area where you can agree or less, it's just personal. I would say that a good video, certainly helps promoting the song but personally, none of the abovementioned, outstanding videos change my perception, appreciation or enjoyment of the song itself. I don't think much of Take on me, for instance, aside from the nostalgia factor, I was in my 20s after all. The video was really great but it didn't really made me buy their record. As for the Sledgehammer, had the video been bad, I would certainly have bought Peter's new album all the same.
-
I'd agree the PG thing is total nonsense. I do like the lines "Too much thinking about the future/And what the people might want". This is tenuous, I completely acknowledge, but it somehow preludes their own near-future path, as something to not do. Indeed it's already flagged in the song as a mistake made by the protagonist.
Not so tenuous, I think the lyrics are every artist's familiar territory and dilemma, particularly when they enjoy a long career, spanning over different decades, it gets sooner or later to a point when you have to sit down and really think hard about the next steps. There had already been hints of that on ATTW3 and I guess with a new decade looming and new bands emerging it was incumbent upon them too, to think about the future and what people might want. Truly a great song, no question.
-
Yeah that's why I said what I did - it's just one of those things we all have that irritates you a bit even if you don't really know why, which is so in this case. Of course singers play around with the exact words, in general I like that, even if in this case it bugged me for some reason.
I meant to say, thanks for the note about this being largely a Banks song, which I hadn't known and will now have to add into my Who Wrote What thread.
On the original, the sequence after the final "...we waited for" when the song breaks down and phases back into the drum-machine instrumental, is for me a really wonderful little segment. The way it happens is perfect, you hear the various layers coming away, the textures fade leaving the piano, then into the melancholy Guide Vocal which is a nice little piece anyway but sounds so good flowing on from the opening double-salvo of BTL and Duchess. Is it their only other sub-2 minute song other than Absent Friends?
It can't be helped I guess, sometimes we just find some little things annoying and we can't put our finger on it.
Tony has always been very proud of Duchess not only because it' s a good one but also because it is really one off for him, really drifting away from familiar paths and structures of the songs he is generally known for. As for the lyrics, there were some unfounded speculations they were about Peter but I guess they were just BS. Duchess has also its fair share of detractors, fans who find the chorus in general pretty unspectacular compared to other Tony's songs, I obviously disagree.
The segment you are referring to is imo a thing of beauty but I guess I already counted with it getting a bit ''lost in translation'' live.
I cannot think of any other Genesis sub-2 minutes songs. Aisle of Plenty perhaps? If you consider it a stand alone song and it is in fact under 2 minutes?
-
Yes! That "all the children cried" thing always bugged me. A disproportionate reaction I'm sure, but there it is.
I am so glad you said that because I was actually thinking the same:-) I noticed it of course but it didn't really affect me. Artists do sometimes slightly change the lyrics live, personally, not a big deal, particularly considering how minor the people/children variation is. It remains somewhat ''messianic'', doesn't it?
-
The 3SL Duchess fades a bit brutally, I think it segued into The Lamb on that tour so I assume they needed to edit that off.
I wish they would have considered fading it into Guide vocal. I love that one.
-
But it's been reported they couldn't be bothered, has it?! Blimey. That said, they weren't strong backing vocalists so probably wouldn't have been able to give it the extra depth it needed. PC did his best with having to sing it unaccompanied by other voices, but my main issue with the live version is what I've already said above rather than his vocal specifically. We've agreed before that his vocals on 3SL generally reflect how well his live singing had developed by that point - I know Seconds Out is revered by many but I prefer 3SL, the vocals being one of the main reasons.
The 3SL Duchess fades a bit brutally, I think it segued into The Lamb on that tour so I assume they needed to edit that off.
No, it hasn't been reported or to my knowledge, it hasn't in this particular case. Sorry, if I misled anyone. I just noticed that the better Phil sang live, the less they seemed to care to contribute to the backing vocals. I agree they weren't really strong singers but they had experience and even sang on their records so, at least in some songs, they probably could have done better. Duchess in particular, doesn't seem to be all that difficult after all, it's really about adding extra layers of voices, no tricky harmonies involved, I am sure we all hummed along that chorus sometimes. Phil was feeling extremely confident on 3SL, rightly so imo and I guess that confidence led him to some improvisations and mannerisms which rubbed some fans the wrong way. I was fortunate enough to see them live during that period and he was on fire, they all were actually but he really stood out. My preference towards either SO or 3SL varies according to my mood. SO is in my mind much more intimate and ethereal, much more winter time. 3SL is more powerful and energetic, summertime. As for Phil's singing, it's quite OK on SO, Peter's material suffers a bit, whereas he is absolutely world class on 3SL and he delivers in the cage like a boss.
-
I always thought the THREE SIDES LIVE version was really inferior. Phil ruins it by changing words ("all the children cried") and by how he sings some parts ("and the sleep, and the o-o-o-odds"). And it's just not the same without the multiple voices on the chorus.
I don't agree of course but I do believe Tony and Mike could have backed Phil with the chorus a bit more. Apparently they couldn't be bothered and Phil carried it on his shoulders, or throat alone. Superbly imo.
-
It's probably a generational thing, videos weren't simply an issue when I began listening to music and in that particular period, artists were really about the music, Genesis too, Peter's costumes notwithstanding. Videos for me don't stand in the way, don't add anything either. I also happen to think Genesis weren't particularly good at or perhaps interested in them. I struggle to remember a really good Genesis but it never had an impact on my appreciation, or less, of the song in question.
-
Am i the only one who was never really interested in a Genesis video? I don't even think I can remember a good one and I really never cared. There we many things that made Genesis appealing to me, their videos though were not on the list.
-
Interesting, we know it's a Banks, or at primarily one do we?
We actually do. He has said it on more than an occasion. Now, given how most of the music was generated on Duke, in a collaborative way, I cannot discard some input from the others but it is mainly his baby
-
14 for me. One of Tony's best and quite uncharacteristic of him I might add. Simple and powerful at the same time. Love the 3SL version, Phil is simply magnificent on it.
-
Although I share the view that The Mechanics' stuff tends to shift towards blandness sometimes, Beggar was a fine album, perhaps my second favorite after Smallcreep's day. This song in particular though doesn't too much for me, it's just OK. A 9 perhaps.
-
Making Movies-Dire Straits. Very fond memories….
-
Love the song, didn't know exactly how to grade it so I took ITAT as a reference, that's a 15 in my book, this one's a 12. One of the few songs, perhaps two, on an album I could never really stomach.
-
Well, I wouldn't claim that FACES was the first rock foray into "world music," just that it preceded the much-publicized GRACELAND.
I recall hearing part of a GRACELAND song (I wouldn't know which one), and it sounded almost exactly like part of "Matilda."
Graceland was indeed highly-publicized and imo rightly so. It is a fantastic album, hardly a weak song there. Being the massive success it was, it did a lot to encourage musicians to go down that path.
-
We should, perhaps, take it as a first... foray into the area of world music.
I remember how Paul Simon's GRACELAND got credit for being a "pioneering" foray into world music --
fourtwo years after Steve had done something similar with FACES.Well, if we want to go there, Peter has already started toying with that on PG3&4.Wasn't the highly financially unsuccessful WOMAD Festival in 82?
-
A very good one, musically atypical for Genesis and I think it was one the first attempts to be more ''powerful''. I like the drums but Phil was never really satisfied with them, I can see why, he was trying to channel Bonzo and he didn't quite get it right. I personally love the lyrics, they work on several levels. Phil does a fine job vocally but perhaps the song was a bit too big for him back then. He was clean, crisp and professional but I feel more could have been done with it and later live versions convinced me of that even more. A solid 12 for me.
-
Ooh-er. I didn't realise I was going to touch such a sensitive nerve!
In some ways I agree with you, artists should do what they feel they wish to do and when, and it's up to fans to go along with them or not. But as a fan of an artist who has so often been so forward-looking, I am frustrated by his retrospection since the last album especially as he indicated that a reason for declining the Genesis reunion was the need to focus on new work, none of which has surfaced bar a few sporadic new songs.Re Hackett, touring seems to be the main moneyspinner for musicians and in his case I presume it does indeed pull in more punters when he does tours with some kind of Genesis focus. As I said above, I totally get why it has such appeal. The lure of Spectral Mornings material was almost enough to pull me in on this next tour but then I remembered last year's show and Nad Sylvan, and the possibility he might sneak Hierophant in yet again, so no I'm well out of this one.
Not all, I made my peace with it long ago I guess when it happened. I guess was still in that fan- phase when your idols can do no wrong either artistically, or personally but he sort of lost me with how he handled, that reunion thing, the meeting in Scotland and subsequent not very clever remarks. Not because he didn't go with the flow and abided by what fans expected from him but because he was being incoherent and quite high-handed.
Then there was the Live 8 thing where again he was imo simply cantankerous.
I don't judge Steve for wanting to lure more people and milk Genesis for that purpose, fans enjoy it and why shouldn't they? I just think we could avoid the : ''keeping the flame alive'' and such sort of comments. This is a group he left because he wasn't given much space and his contribution was heavily underappreciated and undermined. He had to fight to squeeze in some guitar parts and then not to be buried in the final mix. I cannot know for sure but I have the feeling if he could avoid playing that, he'd do it.
