Why do establised geniuses like Gabriel and Ferry suck now?

[vtx]

just listening to Family and the Fishing Net may have to rethink........

[Benedict]

Hi

This is obviously an emotive subject. I can't say I know the specific works you speak of but I know many others from that era and I agree many were special in a way nothing matches now.

The industry at that time was more able to put forward interesting things. The punters would buy prog stuff where before, and now, punters want the safe option and record co.s are only too happy to oblige. Fair enough.

I recently watched a show on Brian Wilson's missing "Smile" which people say is brilliant. Maybe it is. I thought it strange and nasty. "I Get Around", "Good Vibrations" & "Kokomo" were brilliant because they captured an essence of time and feeling.

I do find that there isn't a lot out there that's truly special in any new kind of way. It's easy to say Eminim or Beastie Boys are 'out there' if you're 13yo but they are only doing what Grand Master Flash was doing 20 years ago and not adding anything. Robbie Williams is perhaps the most striking example of someone who IS adding something to pop music.

Perhaps give Petie and Bryzie a break. Thank them for the special things that they gave us like "So" and "Boys & Girls", love what what you love and seek to create that same special something in your own work. Take those same chances and MP3.com can be full of good music rather than tired TB-303 clone workouts

Benedict
http://benedict.presetbank.net

[paul minot]

Ghettoblasters in the studio

I once read an interview with Sianspheric in which they mentioned that using ghettoblasters in the studio was a technique used by Daniel Lanois. Good way of building vague layers of sound.

To Paul, not trying to call names, but you seem to be a bit of a broken record on this. As though none of what's been mentioned in this thread has stuck with you. Ten years on from Lamb Lies Down, Peter Gabriel was still making interesting music. Maybe not to your tastes, but the stuff he did in the 80s was not devoid of invention. So that's a pretty good run by anyone's standards.

You're question seems to be "Why don't old rich men make me feel alive?" Well, I think you already have the answer.

Cheers,
Steve

Yeah, you're right about the broken record part. I feel like my fundamental questions have been answered. For the record, though, it's not that Gabriel wasn't making good records ten years after the Lamb--the third solo album was terrific, I quite liked "So", "Digging in the Dirt" was wonderful--it's the 30 years after I wonder about. And the fact that it's so debatable makes me feel better, since a lot of people hear think he's doing just fine. So his new album is not my cup of tea--too morose--but artistically valid nonetheless.

This thread has been helpful to me in understanding my own prejudices, and some of the conceptual explorations about the nature of "genius" were particularly interesting. I'll check out now and let it die with this last statement--EARLY ROXY MUSIC ABSOLUTELY ROOLZ!!!

[agincourtdb]

I don't grant the premise. I love PG's latest, UP, in fact I think it compares favorably with any of his work, Even the best of early with-gabriel-genesis like LLDOB or SEBTP or Foxtrot.

I just think it's different. Of course it's different: that's a good thing. If he was still doing the same thing after 30 years, that's how we would know he was a one-trick pony incapable of growth or maturity.

JMHO

[tahome]

What the hell happened to the guy that wrote and sang "Supper's Ready"? If this is "mature" progressive music, well it seems more like DEAD to me--give me the kid's stuff any day.

He's older, you're older and times have changed. That may be part of the problem.

--th

[tahome]

...and: he doesn't need the money anymore. Suffering often brings out the genius in us!

--th

[jens]

Gabriel and Genesis--not to be confused with Genesis after Gabriel, when they, well, sold out big time--is much more "of the time", when excessive musicianship and classical/romantic lyrical themes were accepted. Not "street" enough for contemporary ears. But still wondrous, in their own regrettably dated way. More melodic invention is packed into "The Lamb Lies Down on Broadway" than in a year's worth of Modern Rock chart releases. And most of that is really creditable to Tony Banks, not Gabriel. However, if a younger listener was interested in the potential of an alternative to the modern aesthetic, like some younger classic rock fans are, then Genesis' music would still stand up simply because there are few if any bands today that ever try anything of this sort. And even fewer who have the compositional chops and technical skills to pull it off. If you don't believe me, then listen to "The Lamia", or "In the Cage", or "Anyway", or "The Cinema Show"....

your arguing is - well it is...

[smp]

I quite liked "Up" myself. It got better with every listen. I have a similar opinion of "Long Walk Home" and "Us". And of "Nursery Cryme" for that matter (here ends my PG/Genesis collection but you get the point).

I don't see what the fuss is. You like something or you don't. It's not like anyone's forcing you to listen to it. No one says you have to like both eras, but is it such a crime if you happen to? Taste is such a subjective thing (case in point: System of a Down? )

I find it hard to believe that simple vibrations in the air are worth getting so worked up about, but go figure...

-s

[xoxos]

mebbe we're ready to stop believing in rock music? :p

i like some todd rundgren i've heard, on some airplane ~97 i got some big show "he's that amazing 70's guy you remember and you won't believe the hi-tech stuf he's up to now!"

well for sure. vurt makes cool sounds, so does the cat when he's perky, and there's this woodpecker that's pretty heartfelt up t' road, he;s got some hilarious f**king numbers man, but this whole 'let's make 50 million copies of it' is a bit, well, twatty, isn't it? like a sore thumb 50 million miles long, one day you're like, "oh.. there it is!"

[yul]

Whoever thinks PG isnt in anymore hasnt listened to
"I grieve" or other recent masterpieces like "Sky blue".

i also enjoyed his singing with Afro Celts.

Not all is top but some is very very good.

Its prolly oriented towards a more mature audience.

[flex42]

Why do establised geniuses like Gabriel and Ferry suck now?

The drugs were better in the 70s...

[Steven West]

So I'm fairly convinced that alot of these 'geniuses' were honing their own vehicle for whenever they got the chance... I'm sure Gabriel was toying with 'Games Without Frontiers' long before leaving Genesis... But he knew that would be one of his personal 'aces'.

I don't know, it's been my experience that you're never quite sure what your ace is, that the things you hold dear tend not always to be the ones held dear by others.

But I really think the notion of genius is a dirty simplification of life. Why must someone who's good at something be a genius, instead of just someone who's good at something?

In the past, I worked in corporate hell for several years, and a common meme there is the idea of the 'guru', the person who's shown an aptitude for a given task. But those who bandied the word around the most tended to be those most desperate to exploit that ability. "Steve, you're the security guru, can you look after this?"

I think a guiding principle through all this should be: when they sell it all back to you, don't believe a single word they say. I was watching a thing on TV the other day that gave a 22-minute history on the "Alternative explosion" in music in the early 90s. Not a single thing they said bore any resemblance to how I remember it. Every narrative was neat and tidy, and reinforced the commodified perspective of the whole thing. "Really, Nirvana single-handedly did it all, with a little help from REM in the 80s." What a load of arse.

There's a new 3000 page history of music recently released that I'm very interested to see. I've heard that it turns a lot of accepted notions on musical development through the ages on their ears. If so, it re-enforces the idea that just because someone told you so doesn't necessarily make it so. I firmly believe that the most prescient imperative of our times is "Don't believe the hype!"

Cheers,
Steve

Agreed Shamann - but just let me throw one more pudding of proof at you before you close your conclusion.... Phil Collins - No Jacket Required.
He says 'spur of the moment' 'cause of his gal in Vancouver or something that inspired him. But that's like Nigel from Spinal Tap saying he came up with 'Lick My Love Pump' while he was making a sandwich - you know what I mean?

Who finds the hype we can't believe in the first place.

[kab]

I need to post here more often... I'm seeing some interesting discussion here

Isn't it great how subjective and personal music is? It would be a safe guess to say that Peter Gabriel himself doesn't think his new music sucks, or he wouldn't have bothered.. hopefully.

People change, times and feelings change... so very often, artists and bands really do hit a "peak" with an absolutly brilliant piece of work. At that point, you can spend your time trying to recapture that, or move off to a different direction.

Other artists take a slower progression, and you can see a steady improvement in each release, but there is not this singular "moment".

Once you've been labelled in the music industry, it is extremely difficult to break out of that said genre. Sad really, that everything "demands" such categorization.

I can tell the poster here, that from experience, if you are in a situation where you're living/eating/sleeping/breathing your own music, it gets VERY tiring, far moreso than it does for the average music listener. The artist needs something new to keep him/herself going, while the listener is asking for more of the same thing.

Hmm, re-reading this post, I'm not sure if I brought anything new here, but oh well

[Steven West]

What gets up my butt in this new millenium is the fact a 12 year old knows who Peter Gabriel is - whether the child knows the music, influenced by mom and dad, or just sees a post like this at KVR et al.
And maybe, just maybe this child will search out Peter Gabriel and like him - or not?

But just thinking back to the 70's - I was the weirdo into 'electronic music' that couldn't wait for the new Tangerine Dream or Kraftwerk to come out. I was also interested in the new punk revolution and just the whispers of New York Dolls, Iggy Pop, Sham 69 and so on... And if someone older said 'Oh, I still think Dylan slays them all' or 'Mamas & The Papas were almost the first punk band when you think of it' - I'd break out laughing hysterically and call Dylan and the Mamas the worst things I could think of! And my punk buddies and techno pals would do likewise.

But now there's this acknowledged acceptance of all things past. All ages today can't say anything bad about Bob Dylan, Bob Marley, Pete Seeger, or Peter Gabriel... It's like they're forced by virtual attrition to be educated by them or something?

And call me a jaded futurist, but I think that's wrong. Great for us old farts to be nostaligic here... But there's no new 'revolution' that's going to ignorantly laugh at the mention of Bob Marley or Peter Gabriel for setting standards in rythem and sound.

It irks me a bit.

(Just to offer another side of the coin here. )

[shamann]

And if someone older said 'Oh, I still think Dylan slays them all' or 'Mamas & The Papas were almost the first punk band when you think of it' - I'd break out laughing hysterically and call Dylan and the Mamas the worst things I could think of! And my punk buddies and techno pals would do likewise.

See, I think both sides are wrong. Nowt wrong with admiring things past, just don't get stuck there.