Just listen to Inside and Out. If that isn't Hackett channeling Howe in his solo, I don't know what is....
The only other thing I could think of is Hackett’s rerecording of “When the Heart Rules the Mind” from a few years back
Posts by Snowbound
-
-
I’m sure if I took the song “Eleventh Earl of Mar” off W&W, and advocated putting it on there, someone would say, “nahhh. It’s too over the top for WW. Those flamboyant guitars and blaring keyboards. Bad fit!” Or if you never heard “Your Own Special Way,” you’d think it’s way too lovey-dovey pop bubble gum for WW. Strummy guitar tune aimed at chicks thirsty for ballads. You could argue, “Blood on the Rooftops doesn’t belong on WW. It’s too cynical and about contemporary issues of the 1970’s while the other songs are more historical. Bad fit.” You could argue “All in a Mouse’s Night” is too comical, too goofy, not dignified like the other songs.”
I dare say we could argue anything could be removed. The titular Abacab may have a bit of a crunchy synth sound, but it seems that Hackett liked it as his favorite post-Hackett song, so it has something Hacketty to it. I think it had an energy to it that would fit fine. But he’ll, what do I know!? 🤣Abacab doesn’t remind me much of W&W BUT Eleventh Earl was the song that immediately came to my mind as well as the song most like it... if that makes sense. In terms of it being Hacketty... a lot of Mike’s guitar playing in Genesis demonstrates inspiration from hackett, especially early on. I don’t personally hear much Hacketty going on w/ Abacab but I respect that you do.
Hackett has mentioned that he could’ve added slide guitar and that would’ve been very interesting. There’s lots of Genesis tribute bands out there but are there any that try to explore what an 80s 5 or 4 man genesis would sound like? I would love to hear someone try a Hackett slide guitar arrangement of Abacab.
-
Possible, yes, but unless one of them came out and said that's what it's about, I would be guarded about making such a claim.
I have made it very clear in my previous point that I am not claiming that anyone in Genesis had an affair during or prior to the writing of Abacab:
Tbc I ain’t accusing the trio of infidelity.... Again not accusing anyone of anything but I think it’s in the realm of possibility
It is very possible the song is about an affair but it is not a reflection of anything that was happening in the band’s personal lives. That said if the song is about a real affair and they’ve kept their mouths shut for this long... I don’t think their gonna start yapping now. Plus if only one member wrote the lyrics it is possible that the rest of band thinks it really is a song about nothing.
-
Wow. This is top-level contortionism. Nicely done!
Thanks, I think? Lol
But I kind of like that fans of a band will wring meaning from a song the band themselves have said doesn't really mean anything. In a sense, why not - all creative arts should be open to interpretation. It's just that in this case I can't imagine they intended any of the stuff suggested above.
There's also the notion that even if the writer isn't actually aiming for specific meaning, there may be some unintended significance given a creative person expressing themselves will always in some way shape that expression. (See also the brouhaha I was involved in regarding Walrus in the Beatles thread).
I wanna make clear that I was never suggesting that I had the true interpretation of Abacab or anything. There are certain songs in the Genesis cannon where lyrics are very important then there are songs like Abacab, and Firth of Fifth where the lyrics aren’t that important (to me) and are almost solely tonal poems. So when I listen to Abacab I’m not engaging w/ the lyrics to the extent I would on Supper’s Ready instead I’m mainly listening to the instrumentation. My guess on Abacab’s potential meaning was less a theory and more half-baked thoughts I was curious if anyone else had. Even if Abacab was intentionally a nonsense song I agree that works of art can have “unintended significance”
Leaving aside the contortionism, it also doesn't follow that any alleged 'infidelity' in the lyrics is about a member of the band.
To quote the incumbent President of the US “C’mon Man”: You don’t think it’s POSSIBLE that rock stars would be having affairs. Tbc I ain’t accusing the trio of infidelity. I’m just saying I’ve always thought it was possible that whoever wrote the lyrics to Abacab was having an affair and it unintentionally was reflected in what were supposed to be nonsense lyrics in a song about nothing. Especially given the fact that Phil Collins literally had an affair during his 2nd marriage. Again not accusing anyone of anything but I think it’s in the realm of possibility
-
Display MoreI always thought it was about infidelity
"cause you've taken someone else's girl"
"..when they answer the telephone, don't you think they'll find out?"
All the stuff about their being a crack in the mirror, a hole in the window pane, I took as being metaphorical for something being wrong at home / in the relationship.
That being said, I expect Rutherford wrote the lyrics mainly stream-of-consciousness style. But I feel like the infidelity idea was the hook he hung the words on
I also thought the song was about infidelity. If that was the band’s intent I could see them deciding not to reveal that... for personal reasons.
That said, in recent years I’ve also wondered if the song isn’t about an affair but instead about moving on from Peter Gabriel and creating a new identity for the band. The line “Tell me, do you think I'm to blame?” Could be about the public’s (incorrect) assertion that Phil forced Peter out. “Cause you've taken someone else's girl“ Maybe the band itself is the “girl” in the song and even though Peter left they associate him with it (reflection of someone else's name). This left the band feeling trapped (Wake and find you're covered in cellophane) and desperate to poke a “hole” in the public’s image of Genesis to stylistically move on -
But if he had that confidence in his new stuff he'd tour it properly, he wouldn't choose to do a token couple of tracks and get them hurriedly out of the way before focusing on an entire 44-year old album by his old band.Initially you were saying that Hackett had no conviction in his new material and now you’re saying he has no confidence in it and, to me, that’s two different things. If you’re trying to say that Hackett isn’t CONFIDENT he will make enough money touring just his solo material than I think you’re probably right. But If you’re saying that Hackett does not have personal CONVICTION in his new material ie he does not think his new songs are good...then I think you are coming to that conclusion based off your personal negative views of his recent albums and arrangements. to claim that Second’s Out taking up 2/3rds of his set means he lacks conviction in the remaining 1/3rd is a logical fallacy. It would be like saying that Yes’ Masterworks tour is proof that Yes only has conviction for their long songs. For both tours there are multiple other factors that went into why that theme was chosen be they financial, artistic or nostalgic. Also keep in mind that Hackett fans have grown accustomed to his tours including old solo songs. So for that remaining 1/3rd he was left with a predicament as each new song he plays takes up space that could have gone to an older fan favorite. In my opinion if Hackett had no conviction in his new album than he wouldn’t have played ANY songs from it and just stuck to what he KNOWS works live. But that’s the thing: this is just my opinion and if you’ve just been saying your opinion than I respect that and I sympathize with ur disappointment as, like I’ve previously stated, I would also prefer more solo material live. But if you were seriously trying to analyze Hackett’s decision making then I strongly disagree with your conclusions.
-
I'm guessing the setlist didn't change on the third night in Birmingham either? That, I believe, was the only chance that they would introduce new songs on this British tour. I think that Jesus He Knows Me and Hold On My Heart are ready to go if necessary but probably won't be played unless they change it up slightly for the American tour. I think it may have been decided since last November's rehearsals that neither Abacab nor the Musical Box would be in the set this tour since they weren't printed on the T-Shirts. I still can't believe they did that as well as released the cd with nearly the same setlist order. I am still so disappointed that Abacab didn't make it since it is/was so popular and gives the set another harder rock song. It actually is still one of the songs that is played on classic rock stations here in America. If they did rehearse it though, I fear that it would be the edited version since that again is what is on the CD set. That to me would be worse than not playing it at all.
I've been looking at the setlist and I thought that it seemed shorter than past ones but it still says it is 140 minutes, which is already over the 2 hours we expected them to play. I really don't know what they would consider dropping to swap another song in. I'm stuck on this.
I’m also disappointed they didn’t play Abacab. To be blunt tho I’m not surprised. Mike hasn’t had the inclination to play guitar with any fucking energy for decades. The man who recorded “Out into the daylight” is on his way “out to the pasture”... I kid. Mike is doing a great job from the videos I’ve seen; ESPECIALLY when he’s slappin da bass. But his GUITAR playing has mellowed with age.
-
Are any of these lives streams still up? From the videos I’ve seen Phil’s voice isn’t great but it’s not BAD. WAAAY better than the PBS doc. Setlist would be fine for me if they just added Abacab and SOMETHING from A Trick of the Tail. I was hoping for Dance On A Volcano to replace Los Endos cuz in 1992 Phil used a vocal effect on the song so it wouldn’t be too demanding for him. Honestly I wouldn’t mind them dropping the abridged Tonight, Tonight, Tonight and replacing it with DOAV. I think Dance would work well transitioning into Invisible Touch. Although mike would have to give Daryl guitar duty on IT for that to work. I’m surprised that the pic of the rehearsal setlist reveals they even tried doing Los Endos. Not at all shocked it was dropped cuz it’s really a two drummer song... but then again Hackett has been doing it w/ one drummer for years. I think Nic could’ve pulled it off. I suspect it was dropped cuz it was understandably too hurtful for Phil to sit out ANOTHER instrumental he used to drum on. Frankly we’re LUCKY he’s being a good enough sport to allow the boys to do Cinema Show AND 2nd HBTS AND Firth of Fifth
-
Seems to me like he's saying he'll be done. By extension of course that means Genesis, unless Tony and Mike decide to do something extremely unlikely. I needn't point out here that the band has two other front men they *could* call upon if they wanted.
And if Tony and Mike REALLY don’t want to bring Peter or Ray back they could always get Martin Levac. The fella sounds exactly like Phil. Not saying that I want them to do that, just pointing out that they COULD. How would y’all feel if they got Levac? I’d personally prefer a Gabriel and Hackett reunion with Chester on drumming duty.. regardless I don’t think either’s gonna happen
-
Par for the course for him now. Do a new album, then play a couple of tracks from it on tour in a show otherwise comprising a Genesis album and a handful of his own old stuff.
It smacks of having no conviction in his own new material but most fans probably don't care. The shows are popular and I don't begrudge him or the fans that but I do think it's a shame in some ways.
I think it has less to do with him having “no conviction in his own new material” and more to do with the fact that Second’s Out takes up the majority of the set. TBH I have mixed feelings on the second’s out tour. On the one hand I missed his initial Genesis Revisited tours so I’m looking forward to seeing him in the states next year. On the other hand I would prefer more of his solo material... or at least if he were to do mostly Genesis stuff I’d rather he didn’t follow the order of Second’s Out. Imo Second’s Out has a terrible flow due to the space limitations of vinyl. I find afterglow by itself to be particularly egregious as I feel the songs works best being transitioned into. I would prefer a set where he plays all the songs from Second’s Out but changes the order to flow better. This would be my ideal set for the tour:
SquonkCarpet Crawlers
Every Day
Held In The Shadows
Robbery, Assault and Battery
Cinema Show
The Lamb Lies Down On Broadway
The Musical Box
Shadow of the Hierophant (instrumental)
The Air Conditioned Nightmare (to celebrate Cured’s anniversary)Afterglow
I Know What I Like
The Devil’s Cathedral
Firth of Fifth
Supper’s Ready
Dance On A VolcanoLos Endos (w/ Myopia intro + Slogans interlude)
-
Whilst we could not comment on the Fukoka Show. There was a full show recorded in Singapore, this is sat in Phil's archive.
TGA
I recall someone from Phil Collins’s social media/management team publicly stating that there are no recordings from the Both Sides tour. I’m not arguing with u; I suspect you’re right. I just wonder why Phil and Genesis are letting so much archival material collect dust. Steve Hackett has commented that there’s live stuff he would like released but that it’s not up to him
-
Am I the only one who thinks "Abacab" is a bizarre choice for a show closer?
I seem to be the only person that wouldn’t mind if Abacab was the show closer. Honestly my main concern is that the encore will be a low energy affair like it was in 2007. Ending with Carpet Crawlers was super moving on that tour but I don’t think it would be as emotionally effective this time. I also really don’t want them to close with Fading Lights. Fading Lights is a powerful song about accepting mortality but I personally would want the show to end on an energetic song like Abacab that leaves the audience wanting more... whereas Fading Lights would leave the audience depressed lol
-
Sweet! I never really heard the “country” elements in this song in the Genesis version, despite Phil introducing it as a country & western song during the Mama tour. Now I get it!
I’ve always loved “That’s All” because it sounded, to me ,like a country song done as an 80s synth pop song. I also hear some Beatles and jazz influence in the track as well. That’s All almost reminds me of Aja era Steely Dan because like Aja, That’s All has many genre influences and they all seamlessly meet in the middle
-
One more prediction. I think there will be an intermission and “No Son of Mine” will open the 2nd set. Maybe an intermission would allow the show to be longer?
-
I’m going to make a couple predictions based off the track listing from the box set:
1. Based on the songs following Home By The Sea in the tracklisting of the box set I suspect that Home By The Sea is going to be the start of a medley. I think they may cut the song’s vocal reprise at the end and instead play a snippet of “Fading Lights”. Fading Lights could lead into the instrumental section of Cinema Show which then goes into Afterglow. This sounds like it might be too long for these guys now so they might do these songs but shortened and in a different order or just end HBTS with the Fading Lights snippet.
2. I am 99% positive that the acoustic set will be: That’s All, In Too Deep, Follow You Follow Me & Duchess. we can guess when the acoustic set starts in the set from the song locations in the boxset since we know they are doing an acoustic version of That’s All. However there’s additional reasons to suspect these songs. They wanted to do ITD on the 2007 tour but it was too difficult vocally. If they do the song in an acoustic arrangement augmented with backing vocalists I think Phil could pull it off. Phil and Mike did an acoustic version of FUFM in 2019 so that makes it a likely inclusion in the acoustic set. Given that we know they have been working on a new arrangement of Duchess it makes sense that it would be acoustic. I think The Lamb Lies Down On Broadway, Afterglow and I Can’t Dance are also possibilities.
3. The Encore will be Dancing with the moonlit knight’s intro, The Carpet Crawlers and Abacab
-
Welp I’ve posted multiple predictions on this thread so I figure one more couldn’t hurt:
- Duke’s Intro/Turn It On Again
- No Son of Mine
- Land Of Confusion
- Old Medley: In The Cage-Cinema Show(instrumental)-Apocalypse in 9/8-Carpet Crawlers OR Afterglow
- Follow You Follow Me
- Home By The Sea-Second Home By The Sea
- (New) Duchess
- Abacab
- Mama
- Throwing It All Away
- Domino
- Fading Lights (short version)
- Invisible Touch
Encore:
- I Can’t Dance
- Firth of Fifth (solo) - I Know What I Like
-
Abacab hasn't made the cut in ages. It's unlikely it will resurface now.
I thought Nic said they were rehearsing Abacab at one point? Even if I am recalling that correctly it dosen’t necessarily mean that Abacab made it into the final show. One thing to keep in mind tho is that while it’s been 35 years since they played abacab, that was only 2 tours ago for this lineup of Genesis (3 if you include CAS). And of all the “long dead” songs that Genesis could revive, Abacab is pretty likely because it was a hit (peaking at #9 in the UK & #26 in the US)
-
Display MoreMy Invisible Touch playlist is:
Do The Neurotic
Land Of Confusion
Tonight Tonight Tonight
Throwing It All Away
Feeding The Fire
Domino
Anything She Does
The Brazilian
problem is: I have lost the album title
You have inspired me to make my own version of Invisible Touch. However mine is an extended CD version that also utilizes live recordings and covers to present these songs in what I consider to be the best possible light:
1. Land Of Confusion
2. In Too Deep (Martin Levac trio - A Visible Jazz Touch of Genesis vol 3)
3. Do The Neurotic (outtake)
4. Tonight, Tonight, Tonight (single version)
5. Invisible Touch (The Way We Walk: the shorts)
6. Feeding the Fire (outtake)
7. Anything She Does
8. Domino (Wembly 1987)
9. I’d Rather Be You (outtake)
10. Throwing It All Away (Wembly 1987)
11. The Brazilian (Wembly 1987)
Mike Rutherford has mentioned that despite “Invisible Touch” being their poppiest album that their live show remained more evenly distributed between long and short songs. Thus I tried to make this CD resemble the flow of their live show. Think of this as Genesis’s take of Bruce Springsteen’s “The River” (a double album meant to use new compositions to capture the energy of his live performances). I open with the studio version of “Land Of Confusion” and follow it up with the Martin Levac Trio’s cover of “In Too Deep”. For a long time I hated “In Too Deep” which I viewed as overly corny. This changed a few years ago when I saw Daryl Stuermer perform a spellbinding rendition of the song with an orchestra. Unfortunately I don’t think he ever recorded it. Luckily, IMO Martin Levac’s low key Jazz arrangement of In Too Deep is the song’s definitive version AND Levac sounds just like Phil! No more covers going forward, I promise. I follow this up with “In Too Deep’s” B-side (in the UK that is) “Do The Neurotic” which reminds listeners that Genesis could still write a kickass prog instrumental. Now, I have a feeling this is a real unpopular opinion in these parts but I prefer the single version of “Tonight, Tonight, Tonight”. The instrumental parts of TTT are too jammy and just don’t move me. Next is the live version of “Invisible Touch” from “The Way We Walk: the shorts”. Here’s something odd I can’t fully explain: I hate the original version of “Invisible Touch” but I love this live version of the track largely because it’s in a lower key. Usually when Genesis lowers a song’s key live it hurts the track but here I think it improves it. The original version just sounded too obnoxious and in-your-face to me (which is also due to the song’s production but I do think the higher key contributes.) I would be interested if anyone here who knows music better than me could weigh in on if changing a song’s key can radially change a song and/or justify why I feel this way about IT. For the rest of the tracks I just tried to create a good flow. Additionally any song that was performed at the 1987 Wembly gig uses that live version. Domino in particular was just spectacular that night!
-
No, this is not our Ant.
He would also promote such a release in his website and social media
Thanks
I thought it wasn’t Ant for the reason you mention but I just wanted someone else to confirm it just so I’d know I wasn’t crazy.
-
According to spotify Ant has some new songs, but the guy on the cover looks a good deal younger than OUR Ant. Is this a different artist with the same name? I listened to the song and they’re actually pretty good. The voice sounded different but I’m not familiar with Ant’s new stuff so his voice could’ve changed over 40 years.