Genesis - The Last Domino? tour

[hiram.k.hackenbacker]

32 minutes ago, EssentialTension said:

 

I only recall that it was six shillings so I presume that was January before the D-day in February. Did the tour last right into the autumn?

 

 

Well, technically a different tour (Nursery Cryme) and they played the Town Hall again on 27/10. 
Would love to have seen one of those early gigs. Great memories for you there.

[4000]

1 hour ago, Woodinblack said:

Fair enough, and yes I know some people can't separate the music and the people, and for the it matters, so I suppose the music really does die.

luckily for me I would take the second option, the music is far more important to me than the personalities.

But the music is a product of the personalities. That’s the point. Maybe it’s different for me because I was a painter long before I was a musician and come from a fine art background. A Van Gogh is a Van Gogh because he painted it and put a great deal of himself into it. I see music the same, but then I always have. 

As for the comment about the music dying, I said in my previous post that’s stretching it. As with now-deceased classical composers, there will come a time when Genesis (for instance) are long gone and all we have - if they are remembered at all - are interpretations of their music. That’s fine. But at the moment, we’ve still got them and I personally would sooner see the band themselves, given the option. Don’t get me wrong, The Musical Box (another for instance) have been fantastic when I’ve seen them. But I’d still sooner see Mike, Phil and Tony (and Peter and Steve if available) play the material. 

[4000]

1 hour ago, Stub Mandrel said:

I fully understand, but that's about something more than just musicality, dare I say there's more than a touch of nostalgia involved.

 

Me too, but some of the best versions of Meet on the Ledge don't include Richard Thompson (who wrote it) and what about Matty Groves, originally a cover and some of the later Fairport arrangements by very different lineups knock the Liege and Lief version into a cocked hat.

Nostalgia, or rather emotional attachment, is often a big part of why we like anything, and I’m sure you’re no different. Because music evokes an emotional reaction (or should IMO). Separating music from the emotions it evokes completely defeats the object for me. But if I’d only just heard an album by a band and really liked it, I’d want to go and see that band, not another band playing those songs. There’s no nostalgia there at all. 

And I refer back to BigRedX’s point about the few occasions where a cover may be considered better is often because it’s more familiar. Of course I exclude covers of Bob Dylan, simply because I can’t stand his voice. 😉😂

As an example of a wonderful cover, I put forward Todmobil’s version of Awaken by Yes. It’s wondrous, glorious, uplifting. But it wouldn’t be the same without Jon.

Interesting referring to Matty Groves as a cover. 😉 😁With regards to traditional songs, we often don’t have the original, so we go with what we’ve got. My point in my previous post refers. And later versions are not necessarily   improving on the original because L&L’s version isn’t the original. Would the “original” version of Banks of the Nile have been better than Fotheringay’s? I’ve no idea. I’d have been interested to find out though, but sadly I don’t have the option. Of course Fotheringay’s features Sandy, so I could be slightly biased.😉

I have to say, I don’t agree about Meet on the Ledge, but there you go. We’re all free to enjoy and interpret as we see fit, in the way that best suits us, and if we disagree, thats fine.

 

 

[Woodinblack]

25 minutes ago, 4000 said:

But the music is a product of the personalities. That’s the point. Maybe it’s different for me because I was a painter long before I was a musician and come from a fine art background. A Van Gogh is a Van Gogh because he painted it and put a great deal of himself into it. I see music the same, but then I always have. 

I see your point but then it is a one off. The painting is made once, and will never be made again. You wouldn't go and see Van Gogh and say 'oy Vanny, do me another one of them sunflower pictures you did for trevor'.

Frankly whether he did another sunflower, or someone as talented did another sunflower, it would still be a copy of the original.

25 minutes ago, 4000 said:

As for the comment about the music dying, I said in my previous post that’s stretching it. As with now-deceased classical composers, there will come a time when Genesis (for instance) are long gone and all we have - if they are remembered at all - are interpretations of their music.

Well, all they can do is an interpretation of their music. Whereas I am sure they can remember when they sat down to write ripples for instance, they are certainly not the same people who did it, and they don't feel the same as they do then. Especially in that case as one of them is missing so they don't have his interpretation. 

For you it appears that their interpretation is more important, for me the music is more important. And I understand it, as I said, you are connecting hte music to the people in the same way that my wife does. There is loads of music she won't listen to because she didn't like the people who did it, and some she likes that isn't her style, because she liked the people who did it. I don't really have that connection as much.

25 minutes ago, 4000 said:

But at the moment, we’ve still got them and I personally would sooner see the band themselves, given the option. Don’t get me wrong, The Musical Box (another for instance) have been fantastic when I’ve seen them. But I’d still sooner see Mike, Phil and Tony (and Peter and Steve if available) play the material. 

I understand that. My connection between the person that made some music and the person performing that music is not anywhere near as connected as yours. Maybe it was starting out in classical music where everyone was already dead (and frankly, they didn't play it anyway), or maybe people just interpret these things differently.

DOn't get me wrong, I would like to have seen them perform it if they were as good as they were when they were normally touring, but they weren't, and for me, as I realised when I had the option to go and see Rush do their last tour, I would not only rather not see it at all than see them do it badly.

[4000]

1 minute ago, Woodinblack said:

I see your point but then it is a one off. The painting is made once, and will never be made again. You wouldn't go and see Van Gogh and say 'oy Vanny, do me another one of them sunflower pictures you did for trevor'.

Frankly whether he did another sunflower, or someone as talented did another sunflower, it would still be a copy of the original.

Well, all they can do is an interpretation of their music. Whereas I am sure they can remember when they sat down to write ripples for instance, they are certainly not the same people who did it, and they don't feel the same as they do then. Especially in that case as one of them is missing so they don't have his interpretation. 

For you it appears that their interpretation is more important, for me the music is more important. And I understand it, as I said, you are connecting hte music to the people in the same way that my wife does. There is loads of music she won't listen to because she didn't like the people who did it, and some she likes that isn't her style, because she liked the people who did it. I don't really have that connection as much.

I understand that. My connection between the person that made some music and the person performing that music is not anywhere near as connected as yours. Maybe it was starting out in classical music where everyone was already dead (and frankly, they didn't play it anyway), or maybe people just interpret these things differently.

DOn't get me wrong, I would like to have seen them perform it if they were as good as they were when they were normally touring, but they weren't, and for me, as I realised when I had the option to go and see Rush do their last tour, I would not only rather not see it at all than see them do it badly.

But the song is a one-off. It can be reinterpreted, but it’s a singular piece of art, and I prefer, given the option (certainly in the majority of instances), to hear it performed by the original artist. Yes, it may be an interpretation of their original intent, but it’s still likely to be far closer to their original intent than someone else’s. Like BigRedX, I’m a songwriter first and foremost, so I perhaps see music differently. 

I’m surprised by the example you quote connecting my view with your wife’s. That’s not it at all. There are doubtless songwriters who are absolute knobs who have written wonderful songs and vice versa. What someone is like as a person has absolutely no bearing on whether or not I like what they’ve written. 

Well, I guess the proof will be in the pudding re Genesis. Interesting that you should mention Rush as I saw them twice (Moving Pictures and Roll the Bones) and they were disappointing both times. But they were still Rush, and I’d sooner have seen them than anybody else doing a bunch of Rush covers. 

 

[Woodinblack]

10 minutes ago, 4000 said:

But the song is a one-off. It can be reinterpreted, but it’s a singular piece of art, and I prefer, given the option (certainly in the majority of instances), to hear it performed by the original artist. Yes, it may be an interpretation of their original intent, but it’s still likely to be far closer to their original intent than someone else’s. Like BigRedX, I’m a songwriter first and foremost, so I perhaps see music differently. 

I get that you do, you have been saying that.

Just to me the music is a thing in its own right, outside of the creator of that music. Yes, I to would prefer to hear it done by the original artist assuming that they could do it ok, for sentimental and connection reasons, but I don't see it as 'theirs' - I see it as something made by them, that is the difference for me. 

And yes, you clearly see music differently, you seem to see it as something connected to an individual where I don't necessarily.

 

10 minutes ago, 4000 said:

I’m surprised by the example you quote connecting my view with your wife’s. That’s not it at all. There are doubtless songwriters who are absolute knobs who have written wonderful songs and vice versa. What someone is like as a person has absolutely no bearing on whether or not I like what they’ve written. 

Yet they are tied up intrinsically with their music?

10 minutes ago, 4000 said:

Well, I guess the proof will be in the pudding re Genesis. Interesting that you should mention Rush as I saw them twice (Moving Pictures and Roll the Bones) and they were disappointing both times. But they were still Rush, and I’d sooner have seen them than anybody else doing a bunch of Rush covers. 

I saw them a few times and they were great a few times and dissapointing once. However, there is no way I would have paid to see the last tour as Geddy Lee could no longer sing the songs, and I couldn't have listened to it. Yes, I would prefer to hear rush doing rush songs rather than someone doing a bunch of covers, but I would have rather have not heard him doing the songs the way he was doing them at the end at all. 

Whereas someone doing a bad cover version rarely damages a song*, an original artist really can.

I hope you enjoy genesis and you get something positive out of it. I really couldn't.

 

*Apart from Zombie, by the cranberries being done in a montreal subway by someone who couldn't speak english. 

[spectoremg]

2 hours ago, Woodinblack said:

I get that you do, you have been saying that.

Just to me the music is a thing in its own right, outside of the creator of that music. Yes, I to would prefer to hear it done by the original artist assuming that they could do it ok, for sentimental and connection reasons, but I don't see it as 'theirs' - I see it as something made by them, that is the difference for me. 

And yes, you clearly see music differently, you seem to see it as something connected to an individual where I don't necessarily.

 

Yet they are tied up intrinsically with their music?

I saw them a few times and they were great a few times and dissapointing once. However, there is no way I would have paid to see the last tour as Geddy Lee could no longer sing the songs, and I couldn't have listened to it. Yes, I would prefer to hear rush doing rush songs rather than someone doing a bunch of covers, but I would have rather have not heard him doing the songs the way he was doing them at the end at all. 

Whereas someone doing a bad cover version rarely damages a song*, an original artist really can.

I hope you enjoy genesis and you get something positive out of it. I really couldn't.

 

*Apart from Zombie, by the cranberries being done in a montreal subway by someone who couldn't speak english. 

Didn't this thread used to be about the Genesis reunion?

[dmccombe7]

I think musically Genesis should be ok. The only doubts were Phils vocals and perhaps his mobility. The music itself i expect will be pretty close to what they've always done,

I simply grudge the ridiculous prices being charged but i also don't like huge venues where the band can be so far away it could be anyone on that stage. 

Many people have been asking for a Genesis reunion for years and the guys probably thought this might be their last chance to do it and keeping in mind that they were together as a band for many years so they will have a fair bit of Nostalgia for everyone.

For anyone that goes i reckon you just need to accept that things might be a little different from their last tour but its still Genesis. 

Dave

[Woodinblack]

31 minutes ago, dmccombe7 said:

I simply grudge the ridiculous prices being charged but i also don't like huge venues where the band can be so far away it could be anyone on that stage.

In all honestly, I would be happier paying more money in a smaller venue. You think by economies of scale, it should be cheaper in the O2 or another arena.

[dmccombe7]

14 minutes ago, Woodinblack said:

In all honestly, I would be happier paying more money in a smaller venue. You think by economies of scale, it should be cheaper in the O2 or another arena.

Maybe the arena venues are just adding a higher cut and bumping up the ticket prices.

Don't think i've ever seen an arena or stadium gig that i thought was excellent apart from Floyd in Earls Court 1980 doing the Wall but that's a full on show. Some have been good but never great.  

Venues that hold up to 5k i find have a better atmosphere.

Dave

[wateroftyne]

I've rationalised this in my own mind.

Genesis has given me a huge (and I mean HUGE) amount of pleasure since I was a kid. They're etched into my DNA.

All that enjoyment has cost me... what? A few hundred quid over the years? That's a bargain. I don't mind paying another 80 (which I appreciate is a substantial amount of money) to say ta-raa.

 

[hiram.k.hackenbacker]

6 hours ago, wateroftyne said:

I've rationalised this in my own mind.

Genesis has given me a huge (and I mean HUGE) amount of pleasure since I was a kid. They're etched into my DNA.

All that enjoyment has cost me... what? A few hundred quid over the years? That's a bargain. I don't mind paying another 80 (which I appreciate is a substantial amount of money) to say ta-raa.

 

Yes, very much the same for me. I was a bit p'd off at the prices in the pre-sale for what I consider reasonably decent seats.

There were no seats left this morning for London other than VIP and that wasn't going to happen.

I thought I would wait until the general sale and see what they had available. I had already decided we weren't going up in the gods again as Mrs H is not that keen.

I've just managed to get a couple of tickets on the arena floor in a similar position to you actually @wateroftyne, so I'm Happy The Man.

Edited March 6, 2020 by hiram.k.hackenbacker

[Stub Mandrel]

10 hours ago, 4000 said:

Of course I exclude covers of Bob Dylan, simply because I can’t stand his voice. 😉😂

I deliberately avoided mentioning Dylan as he's the epitome of the outstanding songwriter and poet whose work has often been delivered superlatively by others (including Fairport, who were verging on being a Dylan tribute at one point 🙂 ).

That said, I still enjoy Dylan's own work - you don't need to be an outstanding performer to entertain and be enjoyable if the material is good (which is why cover can bands exist).

[dmccombe7]

Looks like Glasgow standard tickets (x2) sold out. Can get a single seat for £138 or a VIP package for 2 at £799 but i get access to the VIP merchandise ......to buy something.

The £138 seat is at the very back section of the Glasgow Hydra arena in the gods.

Def not happening for me now.

Dave

Edited March 6, 2020 by dmccombe7

[Paddy515]

Well someones buying the tickets as theyve just added more dates to the same venues

[hiram.k.hackenbacker]

8 minutes ago, Paddy515 said:

Well someones buying the tickets as theyve just added more dates to the same venues

Yeah, I thought that might happen.

[BigRedX]

15 hours ago, Stub Mandrel said:

I feel that it would be terribly sad if all music faded or died after the original performance. Personally, I think every performance or rendition of a song has the potential to be better than the first; I don't see anything magical about the first effort, and indeed many songs have benefited from a revisit by the original artist.

To list examples of songs where I believe a cover, re-recording or live performance is better would be pointless as it's entirely subjective. In many cases - where a song switches genre, for example, it's greatly influenced by social and cultural factors.

But since the 50s the music doesn't die after the original performance. There's the recording which is very often (IME) far superior to the live version. That can be enjoyed at any time. Besides there's always exciting new bands appearing to replace those that have died, split up or simply can't cut it live or in the studio any more. Or than as a personal preference there is simply no need to be living in the past.

To get back on track with the OP...

I ought to start by saying that I'm not and never have been a Genesis fan. Their music has always been at odds with what I wanted to listen to, and unlike some of their contemporaries I still haven't come to appreciate them retrospectively.

Also I don't really buy into the nostalgia trip. Because of the music I am currently playing I get to see quite a lot of bands that I was very much into "back in the day", because I am playing support to them, and I have to say that so far not one of them has been close to replicating what I enjoyed about seeing them in the 80s. It makes no difference where it is still the original/classic line-up or one so far removed that it might as well be a tribute act, I almost always come away having enjoyed the newer bands on the bill more.

I can completely understand why they are doing it though. Given the opportunity there are a couple of bands from my past that I would resurrect in a flash, and I wouldn't even need to truck load of money to convince me to do it. However as an audience member I'd rather keep my memories of seeing bands back when they were still young, hungry and exciting, and for those I never got the chance to see at the time, I'll stick with the records. They won't let me down.

[4000]

6 hours ago, Woodinblack said:

I get that you do, you have been saying that.

Just to me the music is a thing in its own right, outside of the creator of that music. Yes, I to would prefer to hear it done by the original artist assuming that they could do it ok, for sentimental and connection reasons, but I don't see it as 'theirs' - I see it as something made by them, that is the difference for me. 

And yes, you clearly see music differently, you seem to see it as something connected to an individual where I don't necessarily.

 

Yet they are tied up intrinsically with their music?

I saw them a few times and they were great a few times and dissapointing once. However, there is no way I would have paid to see the last tour as Geddy Lee could no longer sing the songs, and I couldn't have listened to it. Yes, I would prefer to hear rush doing rush songs rather than someone doing a bunch of covers, but I would have rather have not heard him doing the songs the way he was doing them at the end at all. 

Whereas someone doing a bad cover version rarely damages a song*, an original artist really can.

I hope you enjoy genesis and you get something positive out of it. I really couldn't.

 

*Apart from Zombie, by the cranberries being done in a montreal subway by someone who couldn't speak english. 

As you say, we obviously see things differently. And yes, the artist -  for me - is intrinsically connected with their art as its creator, but there’s no way I would stretch that to say I have to like the person to like the music. There’s no logic to that, IMO. 

Unfortunately, there’s little worse for me than bad cover versions. Here again we differ. I’d sooner hear the original artist do a poor rendition of a song than someone else. It’s their song, after all. 

Interesting and enjoyable discussion, for me at least. Maybe not so much for everyone else. 😂
 

Anyway, back to the thread!

[4000]

6 hours ago, hiram.k.hackenbacker said:

Yes, very much the same for me. I was a bit p'd off at the prices in the pre-sale for what I consider reasonably decent seats.

There were no seats left this morning for London other than VIP and that wasn't going to happen.

I thought I would wait until the general sale and see what they had available. I had already decided we weren't going up in the gods again as Mrs H is not that keen.

I've just managed to get just bought a couple on the arena floor in a similar position to you actually @wateroftyne, so I'm Happy The Man.

If I’m honest I’d have been happier on the arena floor, but my mate jumped the gun somewhat!

[4000]

4 hours ago, hiram.k.hackenbacker said:

Yeah, I thought that might happen.

I must admit, the amount of interest has surprised me. Not as much as the prices though!😉

[afterimage]

Not for me Guys    they have had their time 

[Hobbayne]

1 hour ago, afterimage said:

Not for me Guys    they have had their time 

Maybe I would have been interested a few years ago, but I'm afraid they have left it far too long IMHO.

[Stub Mandrel]

19 hours ago, 4000 said:

Interesting and enjoyable discussion, for me at least. Maybe not so much for everyone else. 😂

The discussion was far more intersting the first time I took part, even if this iteration explores the issues in greater depth 🙂

[4000]

6 hours ago, Stub Mandrel said:

The discussion was far more intersting the first time I took part, even if this iteration explores the issues in greater depth 🙂

Did I miss that one? 

[Buzzy]

After watching them being interviewed  I wonder if Phil Collins is fit enough for a tour.