Social media is just one of many sources I am getting my information from. However, if you are getting your info from mainstream media you might also want to be as suspicious of that as you are whatever you believe my sources to be.
Segregation? Between those who chose to have the vaccine, and the anti-vaccine muppets. Bring it on. Frankly, if ejecting them from the planet was an option, I'd go for that.
So you are pro-segregation and if you had your choice we non-vaxxed human beings would be what, killed? Round up in a camp and sent away somewhere? Correct me if I'm misunderstanding your sentiment because from here it is quite insulting and honestly frightening.
I really don’t want to make this a political thread but care to actually offer some evidence to support your claims? What treatments have been banned? Information suppressed? If you’re going to just throw stuff out there, how about backing it up?
What exactly does “led possibly to more deaths” mean? I mean isn’t the exact opposite “possibly” true as well?
The banned treatment of ivermectin is one such treatment that was shown to save lives and for super cheap. A treatment like that could probably have ended the pandemic months ago, or at least gotten society back to normal.
Loads of information is being suppressed. I have never seen such blatant censorship of information. Regular people's negative reactions to the vaccine have been deleted from social media. Reporters are being told not to report certain information and are starting to come out. Social media platforms are suppressing vaccine hesitancy posts. We have whistleblowers coming out from different places letting us know about these things. I could go on and on...
My "possibly led to more deaths" comment is said because I believe it did lead to more deaths, but given the fluid nature of how we report stats anymore during this pandemic we can't even really be sure of anything statistically. But the idea that the politicalization of the issue could have possibly led to less deaths as I think you are implying is unlikely no matter what you believe.
Maybe denying entry to things people REALLY want to do will encourage improved vaccination rates. People refuse to believe that this was a deadly disease that needs to be curbed through a combination of vaccination and unfortunately herd immunity. All this politicalization has led to ignorance. The right to decide is everyone’s god given right, but let’s be smart about it and realize science is on our side. The positivities rates dropping around the country is the proof in the pudding, as they say.
I would say the politicalization of the issue has led possibly to more deaths. There have been treatments banned, alternative views and information suppressed, all in the name of making this thing into more of a nightmarish scenario than it should be in reality. I know many folks don't believe this because it isn't "mainstream" thinking, but when freedoms are being quickly eroded it makes me think about the reasons why and what impact will this have on our future, both for us and future generations. And for the record, I am not a pro-Trump person.
In the US here, Madison Square Garden now has a policy of "no shot, no entry" basically, which means you can't attend any event without proof of a vaccine. This is a very dangerous path as far as I am concerned. This is a path toward segregation of the population which definitely rubs me the wrong way. I hope other venues choose differently.
I agree with those saying how much his voice changed over the years. Hard to imagine him now singing those falsetto notes behind Peter. It's like his vocal powers increased and hit a peak 1981-1985 where he would scream through some of the material with such a tone and control and could give otherwise amazing vocal performances of lighter material as well. I love that period of his singing. A Mama tour show is worth listening to for his performance alone.
Once he got to 1986 he seemed to lose just a tad of that power. He couldn't scream out every tune and lost his range that one time during Suppers Ready early in the tour and it was scrapped soon after. Even by his own Serious tour they were lowering the key of at least one tune.
Slowly his range decreased but he still had some power to a degree. In 2007 he was still fine to sing even if with less power, but the last decade has been rough on him physically and it shows in his voice. Good for him to say screw it and keep going. I wouldn't be looking for great vocal performances on the coming tour, but likely at least impassioned performances at least.
Makes me wonder why his voice lost the power as it did. I mean, obviously age, but maybe too much screaming and touring? Did the steroid shots have an impact? Who knows, but it's an interesting case.
Good idea, I'm fairly sure that's the one I have and that Witchwood is right that it''s the best available. Side-note - I actually saw the gig listings in Sounds that week with the Marquee itinerary listing 'The Garden Wall' as playing that night. Saw it, and made no connection.
For anyone who doesn't know, the London Marquee was a famous club where many high-profile acts played in their early days. When Genesis played this gig (September...? 1982) its official capacity was 700. The gig wasn't officially announced as part of the tour, but as I just mentioned, for those sharper of eye and mind than I was, it was in the previous week's music publications as a gig by The Garden Wall.
I like that they used to do some smaller gigs back then, even when they were well established. The smaller theatre shows during Duke, the Savoy in NY during Abacab, this gig.... They even did one during WCD which from the boot sounded like a very different experience than the stadium show they had been doing. I don't suppose they would do a small gig nowadays, but I'm betting it was fun to attend.
Their artistic peak to me was probably the Lamb, but this wasn't their live peak as far as I am concerned. I'd say their live peak was Duke tour to Mama tour. By that point they were on fire blazing through their material with such energy. They were all at their playing peak with a lot of confidence, and Phil was at his vocal peak. After the Mama tour things seem to drop off a bit to me in terms of live performance and energy.
For sheer power and excitement just listen to this band play through the Duke Suite from that famed Lyceum gig. Hard to beat that at any other point of their career.
Songwriting peak was probably Duke also. They were blending their earlier adventurous side with a more straightforward delivery and hadn't yet sunk into the repetitive song structures seen later.
the long awaited wild west suite of Virgil, Motherlode, Driving the last Spike and Roof is leaking should be a real treat!
Followed by Duke suite and show done
I thought I had heard Ballad Of Big was being thrown in there too!
That Voice Again
We Do What We're Told
I've seen several others express the same view about Secret World. It seems to be a widely held view and I'm probably in the minority in that I get more of an adrenaline rush from the studio version. The bass is more prominent and the build-up in that song is driven by that bottom end.
I certainly agree with you, though, on WOTW. It's similar to me as Here Comes The Flood.
Virtually every live version I've heard seem more heart-wrenching than the original.
I will agree on the bass on the original. The brilliance of Tony Levin shines through on that version, something that is missing from the live version. Overall though I find it lacking in other areas vs the live version, but definitely a good point on the bass.
Come Talk To Me
Washing Of The Water
Same as Srendi actually. Would have chosen Love To Be Loved if I had a 4th option.
I will say that every one of the tracks on this album, the three above included, I think are vastly superior on Secret World Live. Not even close, and I much prefer Paula Cole on Come Talk To Me than anyone else I have heard sing it with PG.
I like Illegal Alien too, but it has not aged well. Maybe it was always inappropriate, I'm not sure. As Backdrifter pointed out, the accents and especially the video... Eek.
Actually, now that I think of it, is it the mama tour video where a bunch of people appear on stage at the end of the song singing along? Am I remembering this right? Who were those people?
Yes, that's the Mama tour video. I don't remember if any of them looked familiar except Phil's wife-to-be. I wonder if they were family and friends gathered for the show at the end of the tour?
What do your think about the slow version of Doesn’t Anybody Stay Together Anymore during the Serious tour?
I used to like it more than I do now. I now find it to drag on too long at the end.
We Can't Dance
On flipside of this, I think IT is their worst. The logo is uninteresting and the artwork is like an old computer program called KidPix. Shapes was pretty lax too, but at least there was a logo to go along with it.
I went with 3SL (my favorite of the bunch) and Seconds Out by the smallest of margins over Live. Seconds Out has that version of Cinema Show so...
This was actually pretty hard. I went with Sky Blue, Signal to Noise, and I Grieve. Though I'll say I like the film soundtrack version of I Grieve better than the album version myself.
The first 5 songs on this album are brilliantly placed one after the other, I could have picked any of them really. And Signal To Noise gets better every time I hear it, even 20 years later.
My guess is the fans who go to see them in 2021 would agree with you. But the band themselves seem to have always labored under the assumption that concert goers will riot if they don't hear all of the band's biggest hits, treating them on some level like Rick Astley fans expecting to hear Never Gonna Give You Up. Maybe there are a handful of attendees who remember IT on the radio and decide to bumble along for the fun. But I doubt that will be the majority.
See also the multitude of rants I have posted about setlists that don't vary in a tour, which greatly restricts the scope to throw in deep cuts for longer term fans. Let them play ICD and HOMH, but why every night?
I agree. I think by now their full career has been given a listen by much of the attendees of their current day concerts. Back maybe in the 80s and 90s when they were the big radio and MTV stars, you could see why they would lean towards playing those songs for the average assumed concert goer. But now with so much time elapsed since then and a more accepted universal view of their career, not to mention an entirely new generation of fans who never saw them play before, they should realize there is an equal (if not greater) appetite for non-hits and pre-Invisible Touch material.
They have such a large selection to choose from that they should be able to mix it up nightly, even if just in a few instances.
I'm pretty sure that is Daryl playing lead on the Knife, at least from boots I've heard. It has his tone and style.
Not sure about Daryl playing lead on Burning Rope though. It sounds an awful lot like Mike's tone and he sounds ever so hesitant as it was back in the beginning of his playing lead. Can anyone confirm, I'd be curious as I always thought it was Mike?