the GENESIS story...

[addisleighpark]

I am happy to see Genesis come back together, however playing hits from their last three albums is more about a corporate payday than a money making venture for the band members themselves. These guys don't need the money, as I'm sure their royalty checks would attest. But if anyone has noticed the trend out there for "reunion tours" of older groups, those tours are designed to help out a floundering industry that has been folding in on itself economically for quite some time. Music fans have had to endure lousy record after lousy record for almost 30 years now....as if a corporate coup happened, and we now have executives with no musical background telling trained musicians that catering to the lowest common denominator is the wave of the future. I find it ironic that these same executives have to reach back to the past for bands that were successful on their own musical terms before the "coup" (just another of my music industry conspiracy theories) in order to bail out an industry that's having a hard time financially right now.

[Rick and Roll]

Originally Posted by addisleighpark

I am happy to see Genesis come back together, however playing hits from their last three albums is more about a corporate payday than a money making venture for the band members themselves. These guys don't need the money, as I'm sure their royalty checks would attest.

Hi addis, good to see you on board...

Who really knows? Is one musician more wealthy than another? Who has wasted their money, who has invested, and so on.

All I know is that Genesis is touring, and the tickets are priced too high at venues I don't care to go to. So I won't go. I don't have a care about who gets what, etc. If they can get it, get it. Let them get it.

They may make More money by playing the really old stuff. Why not? I'd bet they get just as many purchases. It's all supply and demand.

When a product comes out that I feel is worth it, I will obtain it. It doesn't concern me who benefits. This isn't the Ohio Players in 1973 who got screwed out of their money or John Fogarty, who couldn't play his own songs for 25 years. Genesis is established, and they should do what they want.

As long as I can see 2 shows a month, and I can see high-quality bands in tiny venues, I'm good. I have Crack the Sky in front of 500 tonight, Frogg Cafe/Rare Blend for 50 on Dec 2, and saw Tunnels with 20 (!) people last week at $15 a pop (Ain't NOBODY making money there).

They're only one band....they haven't done anything worthwhile live since 1982, so what are we losing out on?

[Hawksun]

Originally Posted by addisleighpark

Music fans have had to endure lousy record after lousy record for almost 30 years now....

I presume that by "Music fans" you mean yourself, because the last 30 years (or from 1976 onwards, if you prefer) have seen some great records being released, a trend which still continues to this day.

And Rick pretty much summed up why we shouldn't care about Genesis being rich or not.

[wildk]

Wow! A lots been said here. My view is this Genesis can do what they want. It's their music, their call. However, it appears to me that somehow the BIG THREE do not seem to appreciate their place in music history. Genesis prog of the 70s was unique. It was prog but with a firm basis in good songwriting. This is something some prog bands seem to bypass. What I'd like to see is Genesis perform with Gabriel, with Hackett playing their strongest stuff. Pete might only dress up for the encore.

I saw Genesis in 77' - Collins was amazing but he wants to forget his Tolkeinisque dwarf look as if it never happened. What shook me was the immensity of the show (Boeing 747 landing lights as I remember. REAL dry ice. Bass Pedals that sent you to the gents) Musically, faultless and a feast for the eyes that stays with me today. There was no over the top showing apart from IKWIK tambourine routine.

The Knebworth show 1978 was good too.

I'm sure this will not happen. Perhaps it never can. Perhaps it's best left to what's left of my memory.

Wildk

[ivan_2068]

Originally Posted by addisleighpark

These guys don't need the money, as I'm sure their royalty checks would attest.

There's nothing as don't need the money, Phil is in the middle of a divorce that could cost him 50% of his earnings and when so much money is ibnvolved, things are more expensive for the wealthy guy.

Probably his wife lawyers are working in base of a "Cuota Litis", in other words they will charge her a percentage of whatever they get, so she probably is not investing a dime.

On the other hand, if you are sued and you can loose a hunbdreed millions, no lawyer will work for free, they will charge Phil Collins a percentage of what he can loose with a very high advance payment.

Mike and Tony have not done any really profitable thing in the last 13 or 14 years and when you have more money, you expend much more.

I don't believe they are in bankrupt but their huge fortunes may be in risk of becoming simply small fortunes and when you're rich enough, this must be terribly fightening.

And even if they are rich, everybody wants to be richer, look at Bill Gates, he has enough money for him and probably ten more generations but still he's working for more.

Iván

[RogorMortis]

And even if they are rich, everybody wants to be richer, look at Bill Gates, he has enough money for him and probably ten more generations but still he's working for more

That's a very dangerous postulation as the majority here would say he's never worked in his life. Gates is more of a bastard than genius as he's trodden on so many and Microsoft is "shit". I use Microsoft products and would have like to have "killed" Gates several times for the faulty stuff they put out. Too much of a monopoly.

Music fans have had to endure lousy record after lousy record for almost 30 years now...

Interesting theory - although I don't agree as such but it depends from what you compare from. The best prog years are 1970-1975 and if you compare from there then you will get a load of lousy records but the standard from the last 8 years has improved greatly.

I'll go along with Rich but don't come here. Denmark is a prog desert for live acts. I have to go very far to see anything and it gets expensive and it drives me crazy.

[VAXman(Admin)]

Originally Posted by RogorMortis

That's a very dangerous postulation as the majority here would say he's never worked in his life. Gates is more of a bastard than genius as he's trodden on so many and Microsoft is "shit". I use Microsoft products and would have like to have "killed" Gates several times for the faulty stuff they put out. Too much of a monopoly.

Billzebub has done more harm to the computing industry than he has done good. What people have had to endure with Micro$oft products just did not have to be. Other vendors were able to foresee the problems Billzebub has introduced but Billzebub's arrogance and greed blinded him too much to look at what his predecessors had already learned. Those whom are too stupid to heed history's warnings are doomed to repeat them.

Originally Posted by RogorMortis

I'll go along with Rich but don't come here. Denmark is a prog desert for live acts. I have to go very far to see anything and it gets expensive and it drives me crazy.

But you do have topless traffic control which more than evens the playing field!

[Methem]

Originally Posted by RogorMortis

I use Microsoft products and would have like to have "killed" Gates several times for the faulty stuff they put out.

http://www.tranquileye.com/cyber/197...hobbyists.html

Check the last sentence on that... Pretty ironic.


-Methem

[Rick and Roll]

Originally Posted by ivan_2068

There's nothing as don't need the money, Phil is in the middle of a divorce that could cost him 50% of his earnings and when so much money is ibnvolved, things are more expensive for the wealthy guy.

Probably his wife lawyers are working in base of a "Cuota Litis", in other words they will charge her a percentage of whatever they get, so she probably is not investing a dime.

On the other hand, if you are sued and you can loose a hunbdreed millions, no lawyer will work for free, they will charge Phil Collins a percentage of what he can loose with a very high advance payment.

Mike and Tony have not done any really profitable thing in the last 13 or 14 years and when you have more money, you expend much more.

I don't believe they are in bankrupt but their huge fortunes may be in risk of becoming simply small fortunes and when you're rich enough, this must be terribly fightening.

And even if they are rich, everybody wants to be richer, look at Bill Gates, he has enough money for him and probably ten more generations but still he's working for more.

Iván

I really don't believe that they are touring for the money. And I don't believe that they write songs to make hits.

The three of them (again, all are responsible) have made the music you dislike for over 25 years. This is just what they do. Call it what you will, but it's not a commercial pursuit with musical overtones. It's music that is commercially successful. There's a difference.

There is no Monopoly here. What Genesis is doing has zero effect on the purchase habits for any other artist.

How did Bill Gates get in the conversation? I find the analogy irrelevant.

[ivan_2068]

Respéctfully Disagree Rick and this are my arguments:

Originally Posted by Rick and Roll

I really don't believe that they are touring for the money. And I don't believe that they write songs to make hits.

I do believe they went commercial and that they wrote songs with the purpose of reaching the charts because:

POP MUSIC: For popular music (music produced commercially rather than art or folk music),
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pop_music

1.- They changed complex structures to simple ABAB (Verse - Chorus - Verse - Chorus) mainly.

The basic form for pop music is the song and usually a song consisting of verse and repeated chorus.
http://top40.about.com/od/popmusic101/a/popmusic.htm

2.- They went for a shorter lenght of songs in order to have radio airplay.

Most often the songs are between 2 1/2 minutes and 5 1/2 minutes in length. There have been notable exceptions. The Beatles' "Hey Jude" was an epic 7 minutes in length. However, in many cases, if the song is abnormally long, an edited version is released for radio airplay such as in the case of Don McLean's "American Pie." It was edited down from its original 8 1/2 minutes length to just over 4 minutes for radio airplay.
http://top40.about.com/od/popmusic101/a/popmusic.htm

3.- The lyrics passed from ambituos and elegant to simple and mnore romantic oriented in some cases.

It's evident that since "Follow You, Follow Me" reached the charts and they received a lot of cash, they changed for a more commercial approach.

Originally Posted by Rick and Roll

The three of them (again, all are responsible) have made the music you dislike for over 25 years. This is just what they do. Call it what you will, but it's not a commercial pursuit with musical overtones. It's music that is commercially successful. There's a difference.

IMO and as I explained in the previous point, they went fopr a cokmmercial approach.

Pop music is a genre of popular music distinguished from classical or art music and from folk music [1]. The term indicates specific stylistic traits, but the genre also includes elements of rock, hip hop, dance, and country, making it a flexible category. The expression "pop music" may also be used to refer to particular subgenres (within the pop music genre) that are in some cases referred to as soft rock and pop/rock. The pop music genre also often involves mass marketing and consumer-driven efforts by major record companies, which makes it an often scorned genre by non-mainstream musicians.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pop_music

Reminds me of late Genesis

Originally Posted by Rick and Roll

There is no Monopoly here. What Genesis is doing has zero effect on the purchase habits for any other artist.

Agree with you in this point.

Originally Posted by Rick and Roll

How did Bill Gates get in the conversation? I find the analogy irrelevant.

It's only an example that there's not such thing as "I have enough money", the more people have, the more they want, that's part of human nature.

But again it's only my opinion and subject to error.

Iván