So Genesis and Fleetwood Mac both have a similar background. They both started out very different from the eventual pop band they became in the mid 70's. Both had more progressive songs rooted in psychedelic rock, prog rock, blue grass, and even metal. Both had singers that had huge solo success outside of the band. And both eventually went for a more pop/rock sound that gave them huge success. So why are Genesis pop hits seen as ''selling out'' and Fleetwoods are still very respected and loved to this day.

Don't get me wrong i love both bands and both eras but they are similar in beginnings, middles, and ends. Stevie Nicks had a very synthed up and poppy solo career just like Phil Collins. But FM fans never turn on her like they did Philly boy. Why do you think Fleetwoods pop work is seen and more respected then when Genesis did it?

I'd never thought about that before... you have a point.

.

There's obviously a big audience for Genesis' pop stuff, they didn't become a stadium band on the Peter Gabriel era stuff. But yeah there does seem to be a sense that FM made artful pop records after being a run of the mill blues band, where Genesis went from being impressive high art to being a bunch of sellouts.

.

I dunno. Rock and roll people have to ruin everything don't they. I guess my answer is... there are fewer Peter Green-era FM fans than Gabriel Genesis fans.

.

I'm still mad at Mick Fleetwood for getting the Rotters single "Sit On My Face Stevie Nix" pulled from the shelves of LA record stores so I'm in no mood to defend them. And I am definitely one of the people who think Gabriel Genesis is way WAY better than Collins Genesis. And neither one is even close to the majesty of Bachman Turner Overdrive, who had no prog/ blues roots and are only remembered for their success, and being overweight.

.

That's my story and I'm sticking to it.

It's the same like people have done with other acts:

.

Van Halen vs Van Hagar

early Journey vs Steve Perry era

early Elvis Presley vs Vegas Elvis

1970s Chicago vs 1980s power ballad era Chicago, same with REO Speedwagon and Heart

Jefferson Airplane vs Starship

1970s Commodores vs Lionel Richie solo

1970s blues ZZ Top vs 1980s MTV era ZZ Top

big band Cameo vs. 3 member Cameo

Atlantic Starr: Sharon Bryant era vs Barbara Weathers era

pre-1980 Stevie Wonder vs post-1980

blues Eric Clapton vs 1990s adult contemporary Eric

early Rod Stewart vs later (especially the American Songbook era)

Because Genesis is always a prog rock band to the core fanbase. Both bands have intricate and complex arrangements and engaging melodies and hooks. But FM is still a straight ahead rock band. Genesis is an art prog rock band. For me, it's apples and onions.

I think this thread should also be about which band had better individual members.

Genesis didn't become a pop band in the mid-70s.

The 3-4 first Genesis albums with Phil Collins are a continuation of the same thing they did with Peter Gabriel. Basically, Phils Collins was using his voice for doing Peter Gabriel impersonations when he became the lead singer. Sure, some of the melodies on the "post-Gabriel" records were crafted to the taste of pop listeners ("Ripples", "Snowbound", "Follow You, Follow Me"), but they still included plenty of prog material on their records. The change didn't really occur until Phil Collins started making his own solo material and the influence spread to the Genesis records. He wasn't really that involved in the songwriting process in the 70s version of Genesis.

[Edited 9/21/16 3:46am]

novabrkr said:

Genesis didn't become a pop band in the mid-70s.

The 3-4 first Genesis albums with Phil Collins are a continuation of the same thing they did with Peter Gabriel. Basically, Phils Collins was using his voice for doing Peter Gabriel impersonations when he became the lead singer. Sure, some of the melodies on the "post-Gabriel" records were crafted to the taste of pop listeners ("Ripples", "Snowbound", "Follow You, Follow Me"), but they still included plenty of prog material on their records. The change didn't really occur until Phil Collins started making his own solo material and the influence spread to the Genesis records. He wasn't really that involved in the songwriting process in the 70s version of Genesis.

[Edited 9/21/16 3:46am]

.

Yeah the Collins Genesis first few albums are similar in style to the ones before. I guess Follow You Follow Me could be the beginning of their FM radio pop-band beginning, at the very end of the 70s. They're a few years behind FM in selling out or buying in or whatever you want to call it.

bobzilla77 said:

Yeah the Collins Genesis first few albums are similar in style to the ones before. I guess Follow You Follow Me could be the beginning of their FM radio pop-band beginning, at the very end of the 70s. They're a few years behind FM in selling out or buying in or whatever you want to call it.

The Genesis sound mainly started to change after Steve Hackett left, more than when Peter left. Peter had more involvement in the lyrics than the music, so it wasn't that much of a difference when he quit. It's been said that Tony Banks had the most influence on Genesis sound after Anthony Phillips left and he was part of the reason Peter & Steve left in the first place. If you listen to Brand X, where Phil was the drummer, it was less pop than Follow You Follow Me or his later solo records. Also Mike + The Mechanics was more soft rock/AC than Phil, but Phil gets the blame for ruining Genesis sound.

MickyDolenz said:

bobzilla77 said:

Yeah the Collins Genesis first few albums are similar in style to the ones before. I guess Follow You Follow Me could be the beginning of their FM radio pop-band beginning, at the very end of the 70s. They're a few years behind FM in selling out or buying in or whatever you want to call it.

The Genesis sound mainly started to change after Steve Hackett left, more than when Peter left. Peter had more involvement in the lyrics than the music, so it wasn't that much of a difference when he quit. It's been said that Tony Banks had the most influence on Genesis sound after Anthony Phillips left and he was part of the reason Peter & Steve left in the first place. If you listen to Brand X, where Phil was the drummer, it was less pop than Follow You Follow Me or his later solo records. Also Mike + The Mechanics was more soft rock/AC than Phil, but Phil gets the blame for ruining Genesis sound.

I suppose it's how you define "ruined". Prince doesn't sound anything like Controversy. Did Brownmark ruin that, because he was new to the band by then? Off The Wall sounds nothing like Dangerous. The list goes on.

While I get that Genesis went from an art prog-rock band to a top 40 band - many did the same in the 80s. However, not every song on something like We Can't Dance or Invisible Touch is top 40 radio friendly. I think any fanbase of a band that's stayed under the commercial radar gets upset when the mainstream discovers them and embraces them. Someone's going to be blamed. In this case, it's Phil. Lionel got blamed for changes in Commodores mainly when they did more ballads. But those were some of their biggest hits, too. People still debate Roth vs. Hagar.

I think any band's sound progresses. It's unrealistic from a human and artist standpoint to expect a band to stick to one thing forever. I mean, thank God not every Prince album sounded like For You. Frankly, thank God not everyone sounded like Purple Rain. Phil has a great talent in writing a great song, as evidenced by his own solo discography, much less Genesis' back catalog.

I sometimes wonder if Genesis every really found their footing and sound as a band.

bobzilla77 said:

there are fewer Peter Green-era FM fans than Gabriel Genesis fans.

Probably the most known Peter Green era song, Black Magic Woman, was made really popular by another group (Santana), similar to more people know about Aretha Franklin's Respect than Otis Redding's. But Fleetwood Mac had several singers after Peter Green and before the Rumous lineup. The original lineup was more blues than the more famous lineup.

MotownSubdivision said:

TrivialPursuit said:

MickyDolenz said:

The Genesis sound mainly started to change after Steve Hackett left, more than when Peter left. Peter had more involvement in the lyrics than the music, so it wasn't that much of a difference when he quit. It's been said that Tony Banks had the most influence on Genesis sound after Anthony Phillips left and he was part of the reason Peter & Steve left in the first place. If you listen to Brand X, where Phil was the drummer, it was less pop than Follow You Follow Me or his later solo records. Also Mike + The Mechanics was more soft rock/AC than Phil, but Phil gets the blame for ruining Genesis sound.

I suppose it's how you define "ruined". Prince doesn't sound anything like Controversy. Did Brownmark ruin that, because he was new to the band by then? Off The Wall sounds nothing like Dangerous. The list goes on.

While I get that Genesis went from an art prog-rock band to a top 40 band - many did the same in the 80s. However, not every song on something like We Can't Dance or Invisible Touch is top 40 radio friendly. I think any fanbase of a band that's stayed under the commercial radar gets upset when the mainstream discovers them and embraces them. Someone's going to be blamed. In this case, it's Phil. Lionel got blamed for changes in Commodores mainly when they did more ballads. But those were some of their biggest hits, too. People still debate Roth vs. Hagar.

I think any band's sound progresses. It's unrealistic from a human and artist standpoint to expect a band to stick to one thing forever. I mean, thank God not every Prince album sounded like For You. Frankly, thank God not everyone sounded like Purple Rain. Phil has a great talent in writing a great song, as evidenced by his own solo discography, much less Genesis' back catalog.

I sometimes wonder if Genesis every really found their footing and sound as a band.

Prince experimented with different styles, but it all sounded like it came from the same guy. For You sounds like stuff that came from the same guy that did Chaos & Disorder. Just compare "For You" to "Had U", "I'm Yours" to the rockier tracks on C&D, or the slower early tracks like "Baby" to "I Will". Even his voice sounded pretty much the same throughout the years.

Now, compare Prince's changes in sound to something like "Dancing With The Moonlit Knight" to "No Son Of Mine" by Genesis. It just doesn't like the same band at all. It just sounds like a different bunch of guys did the music. I really can't think of any other band that would have changed so much as Genesis, as far as the overall sound of the band is considered.

MichaelJackson5 said:

MotownSubdivision said:

^They're an exception to the rule; they had the hipster crowd on lock. If every artist or group could make non-pop music and sell millions of albums easily then there would be less artists who make pop music. It's not even like Genesis made terrible pop anyway. Their arrangements and melodies are quite complex and are very well-crafted examples of pop music.

Illegal Alien sure isn't going to be remembered as a pop classic. Compared to a song such as Mama, the average listener wouldn't believe these two songs were made by the same band. While being enormously successful 80s pop music, most Genesis and Phil solo songs are barely mentioned nowadays. The stuff sounds dated and disposable. That's what happens when the aim is to make radio-friendly hits for a particular point in time. Once Phil remade You Can't Hurry Love, the selling out process began.

I think songs like "In The Air Tonight" and "Land Of Confusion" are still favourites among many and get played a lot on the radio.

Professional critics seem to approve of them too.

MichaelJackson5 said:

MotownSubdivision said:

No but there are other reasons besides that in terms of why Genesis and Phil Collins aren't mentioned more today; superficial ones that revolve around Collins' personal life which stem from the direction he helped take Genesis as well as his very own music which despite sounding very 80's still holds up well enough.

I don't think many people care about Phil's private life, if Ted Nugent still has a career. What has Phil done in his life that is so bad that would make people disinterested in him? I imagine John Lennon has done worse and so has many other entertainers. John & The Beatles are still considered by many in the rock press to be the best act and The Beatles still sell pretty well. Vince Neil from Mötley Crüe was involved in a car accident in which someone was killed. It didn't hurt his career that much. Mötley Crüe just finished a successful farewell tour earlier this year. Look at all the things Ozzy Osbourne has done. He has a TV show now on the History Channel with his son Jack. James Brown has done bad things, but he had a biopic and a documentary released in 2014 by a major studio. Even Lionel Richie got beat up by his ex-wife Brenda. People don't really care about that today other than maybe comedians making jokes about it. Phil was never really a critic's darling, just like Bryan Adams wasn't and Bryan was really popular back then. So of course they're not going to talk about him today. Peter Gabriel was the critics choice and he's credited with popularizing so-called "world music".

MickyDolenz said:

MotownSubdivision said:

I'm not saying Phil was a bad person but still, besides the music he made, it's his many divorces and political affiliation from what I've read that people rag on him for. It's petty stuff but that's exactly what we as people do: be petty and focus on petty things. The inclusion of personal lives affect professional lives differently. Some fans will overlook or let some things go with certain people but harp on and never get over things done or said to be have been done by others.

I think Liz Taylor got him beat there. People rag on Bono but some still praise U2's music. Critics have never really been friendly to acts who made light rock or adult contemporary music. How many critics praise Kenny G, Whitney Houston, Debby Boone, Captain & Tennille, or Michael Bolton? To them Phil fits in that group, doesn't have anything to do with his life. I don't think the rock press cares about Phil's divorces, when the whole motto of rock was "sex, drugs, and rock n roll" and people like Gene Simmons bragging about sleeping with over 2000 women. Going by that, then Phil had a 'goody two shoes' image compared to some of his peers. I don't think a divorce really rates high in the rock press, maybe it does with People Magazine. I've never heard anyone mention Phil's marriages other than that rumor about the fax.

[Edited 9/22/16 11:27am]

Anyone that dares to speak negative about Phil Collins, musically speaking, do not know jackshit about good music production. At least Phil knew how to come up with his own sound in the long-term.

TonyVanDam said:

Now that's tough.......I like both groups

MichaelJackson5 said:

TonyVanDam said:

Anyone that dares to speak negative about Phil Collins, musically speaking, do not know jackshit about good music production. At least Phil knew how to come up with his own sound in the long-term.

What unique sound? This 70s hit by Seals and Croft could easily be mistaken for a Collins or Genesis ballad: [Edited 9/25/16 20:51pm]

Songs like "In The Air Tonight" were very influential on how the pop / rock drums in the 80s came to sound. Some people credit him with the invention of "gated drums" in general.

I'd say that the first Phil Collins solo album had a very forward-thinking sound to it, for the era considered. It kind of got watered down already on the second one though.

He seemed to always appreciate well-done arrangements in any case.

MichaelJackson5 said:

Anyone that dares to speak negative about Phil Collins, musically speaking, do not know jackshit about good music production. At least Phil knew how to come up with his own sound in the long-term.

What unique sound? This 70s hit by Seals and Croft could easily be mistaken for a Collins or Genesis ballad: [Edited 9/25/16 20:51pm]

And those haters better not be speaking negative about Seals & Croft neither!

[Edited 9/26/16 11:00am]

Gunsnhalen has issues.

2freaky4church1 said:

Gunsnhalen has issues.

What happened to him? He said he got to see GunsnRoses and then he disappeared.

Here's a recent performance by Phil and his teen son Nic is on drums