Author |
Topic Search Topic Options
|
Horizons
Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: January 20 2011
Location: Somewhere Else
Status: Offline
Points: 16952
|
Posted: January 16 2013 at 22:25 |
Yea whoever posted that first though must have been crazy.
|
Crushed like a rose in the riverflow.
|
|
Dayvenkirq
Forum Senior Member
Joined: May 25 2011
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Status: Offline
Points: 10970
|
Posted: January 16 2013 at 22:30 |
|
|
rogerthat
Prog Reviewer
Joined: September 03 2006
Location: .
Status: Offline
Points: 9869
|
Posted: January 17 2013 at 10:30 |
Dayvenkirq wrote:
Dayvenkirq wrote:
Genesis. They were awesoming BIG TIME '69-'73 with four-five albums while Renaissance were awesoming a time not as big '73-'75 with only two-three albums. | Ah ... why should it even be about the math? I like both. Maybe not equally, but I like them. |
Well, you COULD extend their awesoming phase up to 78. But even then...not awesoming as much during that time as Genesis during their BIG TIME.
|
|
ProgMetaller2112
Forum Senior Member
Joined: December 08 2012
Location: Pacoima,CA,USA
Status: Offline
Points: 3145
|
Posted: March 12 2013 at 01:06 |
Junges wrote:
Renaissance. Genesis sucks. |
|
“War is peace.
Freedom is slavery.
Ignorance is strength.”
― George Orwell, Nineteen Eighty-Four
"Ignorance and Prejudice and Fear walk Hand in Hand"- Neil Peart
|
|
MonsterMagnet
Forum Senior Member
Joined: July 31 2010
Location: Liège, Belgium
Status: Offline
Points: 561
|
Posted: March 12 2013 at 09:37 |
Man With Hat wrote:
Genesis |
^ They are masters
|
|
chopper
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: July 13 2005
Location: Essex, UK
Status: Offline
Points: 19943
|
Posted: March 12 2013 at 11:09 |
As much as I love Renaissance, this is really no contest.
|
|
iamathousandapples
Forum Senior Member
Joined: December 14 2008
Status: Offline
Points: 344
|
Posted: March 13 2013 at 23:55 |
Putting me between a rock and a hard place, and as much as I try and get Renaissance noticed I just love Genesis too much to not vote for them
|
|
|
Mirkwood
Forum Newbie
Joined: March 14 2013
Status: Offline
Points: 25
|
Posted: March 15 2013 at 09:18 |
Sorry to say this, but the post-beard Phil Collins material is atrocious. Over 95% of it at least.
On the other hand, Renaissance's "Camera Camera" is not bad, quirky 1980s pop, but not bad at all. I haven't heard "Time-Line".
|
|
Guldbamsen
Special Collaborator
Retired Admin
Joined: January 22 2009
Location: Magic Theatre
Status: Offline
Points: 23098
|
Posted: March 15 2013 at 09:21 |
Big fan of Genesis, including a great deal of Collins era material, but I don't get along too well with Annie Haslam's vocals.
|
“The Guide says there is an art to flying or rather a knack. The knack lies in learning how to throw yourself at the ground and miss.”
- Douglas Adams
|
|
The Doctor
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: June 23 2005
Location: The Tardis
Status: Offline
Points: 8543
|
Posted: March 15 2013 at 09:23 |
Mirkwood wrote:
Sorry to say this, but the post-beard Phil Collins material is atrocious. Over 95% of it at least.
On the other hand, Renaissance's "Camera Camera" is not bad, quirky 1980s pop, but not bad at all. I haven't heard "Time-Line".
|
Some of their later stuff is fairly atrocious, however they also did some great prog songs and some great pop songs as well. Certainly, not over 95% of it. Maybe about 1/3 is bad. To answer the poll, as much as I like Renaissance, this one has to go to Genesis.
|
I can understand your anger at me, but what did the horse I rode in on ever do to you?
|
|
rogerthat
Prog Reviewer
Joined: September 03 2006
Location: .
Status: Offline
Points: 9869
|
Posted: March 15 2013 at 21:17 |
The Doctor wrote:
Mirkwood wrote:
Sorry to say this, but the post-beard Phil Collins material is atrocious. Over 95% of it at least.
On the other hand, Renaissance's "Camera Camera" is not bad, quirky 1980s pop, but not bad at all. I haven't heard "Time-Line".
|
Some of their later stuff is fairly atrocious, however they also did some great prog songs and some great pop songs as well. Certainly, not over 95% of it. Maybe about 1/3 is bad. To answer the poll, as much as I like Renaissance, this one has to go to Genesis. |
I'd probably take even the post-beard Collins material over Camera Camera but as far as Timeline goes, I have no doubt. One of the worst albums I've heard.
|
|
Rick Robson
Forum Senior Member
Joined: September 03 2013
Location: Rio de Janeiro
Status: Offline
Points: 1607
|
Posted: August 15 2015 at 22:03 |
Something that I can't understand and yet puts me off everytime I come back to any prog forum is this so much hallowed love for Genesis in the prog community. The only Genesis music that I (very occasionally) still listen to are Afterglow and Los Endos off the 'Seconds Out' show, and for me it's more than enough Genesis, their music sort of expired long ago due to my timeline changes in taste, I can't resonate with it anymore, alas. Renaissance by a thousand miles. It's one of the bands that I still go for when I want to listen to music rooted in a lesser degree to pop or pop rock.
|
"Music is a higher revelation than all wisdom and philosophy." LvB
|
|
Svetonio
Forum Senior Member
Joined: September 20 2010
Location: Serbia
Status: Offline
Points: 10213
|
Posted: August 16 2015 at 09:32 |
Genesis by a star mile.
|
|
Ivan_Melgar_M
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: April 27 2004
Location: Peru
Status: Offline
Points: 19535
|
Posted: August 16 2015 at 11:03 |
I always said that Renaisance is the most Symphonic of the Symphonic bands, the voice of Annie es marvelous, and Live at CH is beautiful, the rest is good but too sweet sounding for m taste.
Song of Sheherezade is as good as Supper's ready (SR never been a favorite of mine)...But Renaissance mixed terribly weak songs with great ones and let's be honest, after 2 songs I'm bored.
Genesis from Trespass to TLLDOB only recorded ONE weak song (More Fool Me), the rest is simply outstanding, they didn't have a band album from Trespáss to W&W (I like it more than Trick).
Genesis is with Yes the symbol of Symphonic, no other band of the sub-genre will ever get close to them.
So Genesis it is....Ad by far.
Edited by Ivan_Melgar_M - August 16 2015 at 11:05
|
|
|
Dellinger
Forum Senior Member
VIP Member
Joined: June 18 2009
Location: Mexico
Status: Offline
Points: 12608
|
Posted: August 16 2015 at 20:50 |
Ivan_Melgar_M wrote:
I always said that Renaisance is the most Symphonic of the Symphonic bands, the voice of Annie es marvelous, and Live at CH is beautiful, the rest is good but too sweet sounding for m taste.
Song of Sheherezade is as good as Supper's ready (SR never been a favorite of mine)...But Renaissance mixed terribly weak songs with great ones and let's be honest, after 2 songs I'm bored.
Genesis from Trespass to TLLDOB only recorded ONE weak song (More Fool Me), the rest is simply outstanding, they didn't have a band album from Trespáss to W&W (I like it more than Trick).
Genesis is with Yes the symbol of Symphonic, no other band of the sub-genre will ever get close to them.
So Genesis it is....Ad by far.
| For me, the problem with Genesis is that they always had songs I don't like in their albums... even songs I hate. The closest they got to a perfect album for me is Selling England, and even that one has Epping Forest, which I really dislike. Reniassance, at least in the 3 albums I got (Ashes, Turn of the Cards, ans Sheherazade) don't have any song I dislike as much as many Genesis songs, plus I like Turn of the Cards better than any Genesis album, as a whole. If I put my favourite songs from each band, it becomes really difficult for me to choose which one I like better... perhaps Genesis takes the edge.
|
|
rogerthat
Prog Reviewer
Joined: September 03 2006
Location: .
Status: Offline
Points: 9869
|
Posted: August 16 2015 at 22:06 |
^^^ Basically, Renaissance were more consistent within albums. Not hard when they set their sights quite a bit lower than Genesis and had Annie Haslam to take care of the rest. I think of you would probably sound incredibly boring with Gabriel's vocals. But Genesis's catalog is deeper and Ivan makes a great point there. From Trespass all the way to W&W is a long stretch of good-to-great albums. When the inevitable fall happened, it was steep and swiftly sent Renaissance into ignominy where Genesis adjusted to a pop sound and carried on. For sheer consistency, maybe only Camel matched or even surpassed them but they barely changed their sound from album to album whereas from SEBTP to Lamb Lies...is quite some journey. Gentle Giant too were very consistent but far less accessible and bound to polarise listeners with their style.
Edited by rogerthat - August 16 2015 at 22:11
|
|
Dellinger
Forum Senior Member
VIP Member
Joined: June 18 2009
Location: Mexico
Status: Offline
Points: 12608
|
Posted: August 17 2015 at 22:22 |
About Renaissance puting their sights lower than Genesis... well I'm not sure, perhaps it depends on the point of view. Conceptually, I guess that's a given (but I don't really care for that, since I don't really like Genesis concepts anyway), on stage theatricallity, that's a given too (but once again, I don't really like Gabriel's concept of theatricallity). As for music, well, Renaissance were certainly softer, but I guess their love for orchestrating their music isn't setting their sights low at all. And about the change of sound from Selling England to The Lamb... I rather dislike The Lamb... there are some songs I do like, of course, but the new sound they got, dropping the long songs with beautiful instrumental passages, it just lost what I did like from the band.
Camel's albums from Mirage to Moonmadness were great indeed. I haven't heard the whole first album, only songs, but it seems to be nice enough too... though I guess not at the same level from those 2. After Moonmadness I lost interest, specially after listening to the songs chosen on a greatest hits album... Lunar Sea I think it was called (for I actually bought it getting confused and wanting to buy Moonmadness)... however, most of the songs presented from after Moonmadness just didn't do it for me, they had just lost their touch... and I understand that many of those songs are actually fan favorites.
About Gentle Giant, I really love their first two albums, and sort of like their next two. After that I lost them. But many like those albums from Power and the Glory and on better, so that might make a good amount of consecutive great albums for them.
However, as I had just stated, for me the one band that really gets my choice for consistency is Pink Floyd, I really like most of what they did, with some albums being really masterpiece class.
|
|
rogerthat
Prog Reviewer
Joined: September 03 2006
Location: .
Status: Offline
Points: 9869
|
Posted: August 17 2015 at 22:32 |
I meant the part about sighting their sights lower more in terms of how progressive their tracks were (or weren't). While they did use orchestra, a lot of the orchestral interludes were banal or went absolutely nowhere. Running Hard is exhibit A. The fact that Annie could easily compensate for the lack of orchestra by vocalising those parts suggests they weren't THAT complex (which is not to say you should try this at home). If say you compare Dancing with the Moonlit Knight with Running Hard or just about any song off Cards, the instrumental passages on the former are way more interesting. At least for me they are and I don't think I am alone there, probably even micky would agree. Ren did finally get more progressive on Novella but again dragged down Can You Hear Me with a very boring interlude. They got it right on Song for All Seasons but had already begun to introduce a more 'commercial' element in their music. So in that sense, they lacked ambition compared to Genesis imo. Even the dreary Wind and Wuthering has some passages of shimmering brilliance. What is often said in Ren's defence is they were more vocal oriented and hence the instrumental passages were underplayed. But if that were the case, they wouldn't have been writing 10-12 minute tracks at all and in any case an interesting interlude can support a singer a lot better than a boring one. Long story short, I don't think they were as talented but played well to their strengths and with the occasional bout of resentment relied on their trump card to carry the day.
Re consistency, yeah, overall PF were the most consistent and because they had already crossed over in the 70s, they also aged more gracefully. The worst that can be said about AMOLAD or DB is that they were terribly boring and exceedingly safe by PF standards but they never succumbed to making dated pop music. Even AMOLAD sounds very pleasant and not too 80s like.
|
|
HackettFan
Forum Senior Member
Joined: June 20 2012
Location: Oklahoma
Status: Offline
Points: 7946
|
Posted: August 17 2015 at 22:55 |
rogerthat wrote:
I meant the part about sighting their sights lower more in terms of how progressive their tracks were (or weren't). While they did use orchestra, a lot of the orchestral interludes were banal or went absolutely nowhere. Running Hard is exhibit A. The fact that Annie could easily compensate for the lack of orchestra by vocalising those parts suggests they weren't THAT complex (which is not to say you should try this at home). If say you compare Dancing with the Moonlit Knight with Running Hard or just about any song off Cards, the instrumental passages on the former are way more interesting. At least for me they are and I don't think I am alone there, probably even micky would agree. Ren did finally get more progressive on Novella but again dragged down Can You Hear Me with a very boring interlude. They got it right on Song for All Seasons but had already begun to introduce a more 'commercial' element in their music. So in that sense, they lacked ambition compared to Genesis imo. Even the dreary Wind and Wuthering has some passages of shimmering brilliance. What is often said in Ren's defence is they were more vocal oriented and hence the instrumental passages were underplayed. But if that were the case, they wouldn't have been writing 10-12 minute tracks at all and in any case an interesting interlude can support a singer a lot better than a boring one. Long story short, I don't think they were as talented but played well to their strengths and with the occasional bout of resentment relied on their trump card to carry the day.
Re consistency, yeah, overall PF were the most consistent and because they had already crossed over in the 70s, they also aged more gracefully. The worst that can be said about AMOLAD or DB is that they were terribly boring and exceedingly safe by PF standards but they never succumbed to making dated pop music. Even AMOLAD sounds very pleasant and not too 80s like. | Great post.
|
|
rogerthat
Prog Reviewer
Joined: September 03 2006
Location: .
Status: Offline
Points: 9869
|
Posted: August 17 2015 at 23:03 |
Thanks!
|
|
Donate monthly and keep PA fast-loading and ad-free forever.