Forum Home Forum Home > Progressive Music Lounges > Prog Polls
  New Posts New Posts RSS Feed - Tony Banks or Rick Wakeman
  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Events   Register Register  Login Login

Topic ClosedTony Banks or Rick Wakeman

 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1 4567>
Poll Question: Who do you like better all around, group work and solo?
Poll Choice Votes Poll Statistics
58 [52.73%]
52 [47.27%]
This topic is closed, no new votes accepted

Author
Message
twosteves View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: May 01 2007
Location: NYC/Rhinebeck
Status: Offline
Points: 3024
Direct Link To This Post Posted: April 03 2014 at 19:06
Originally posted by giselle giselle wrote:

Is this a put-on? I'm not a huge fan of Rick Wakeman, but he is, at the very least, one of the outstanding keyboard players of the Rock era, whereas Tony Banks is a fine sideman, a good pro. Not a fair or sensible comparison. 

Sideman? come on he is the main composer of one of the best prog bands ever and has played consistantly amazing keyboard---not just flashy keyboard solo's--Rick is one of the most outstanding keyboard players of of the rock era and he has some amazing stuff no doubt but there is lot's of mediocre and downright bad stuff. Plus Banks style of playing has been groundbreaking on many songs ---but if you want fast solo's he can do that too---Smile
Back to Top
verslibre View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: July 01 2004
Location: CA
Status: Offline
Points: 7820
Direct Link To This Post Posted: April 03 2014 at 19:22
To be fair, Tony has said plainly in interviews that he considers himself an accompanist, not a [Wakeman/Emerson]-type keyboard player. He categorizes himself as a composer.

I've not voted in this poll because, while I own more albums by/with Rick, I'm not going to "pick one" because their respective approaches and output are drastically different, stylistically and tonally. Both guys have recorded music that is either fantastic or questionable.
Back to Top
proggman View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: October 14 2013
Location: Sweden
Status: Offline
Points: 1458
Direct Link To This Post Posted: April 03 2014 at 21:06
I like both, but I'll vote for Tony Banks.
When he rides, my fears subside.
For darkness turns once more to light.
Through the skies, his white horse flies.
To find a land beyond the night.
Back to Top
genbanks View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: April 08 2010
Location: Argentina
Status: Offline
Points: 956
Direct Link To This Post Posted: April 04 2014 at 19:27
Originally posted by Earthmover Earthmover wrote:

Are we doing these polls annually or what?

LOL Good  point

My opinion is that Rick is a bit over Tony in what a keyboard playing respect, Rick is a virtuous like Emerson, Howe or Fripp.

Tony is more in a songwritter and far better than Rick in this point, and as was said before he is the mastermind behind much of the best tunes of the golden era of the prog rock. And he is virtuous too, but prioriticing the melodies more in the vein of Gilmour and Latimer.

So both two are great, but I prefer Banks way, as other will prefer Wakeman's one.
Back to Top
twosteves View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: May 01 2007
Location: NYC/Rhinebeck
Status: Offline
Points: 3024
Direct Link To This Post Posted: April 04 2014 at 22:44
Originally posted by verslibre verslibre wrote:

To be fair, Tony has said plainly in interviews that he considers himself an accompanist, not a [Wakeman/Emerson]-type keyboard player. He categorizes himself as a composer.

I've not voted in this poll because, while I own more albums by/with Rick, I'm not going to "pick one" because their respective approaches and output are drastically different, stylistically and tonally. Both guys have recorded music that is either fantastic or questionable.

I saw the interview of Banks that you reference---in typical Banks fashion he is really putting down those other guys as show offs whereas he does it right---and tastefully. He is saying he could do what those other guys do but he has more taste.Wink
Back to Top
Mirror Image View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: December 13 2011
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 2111
Direct Link To This Post Posted: April 04 2014 at 22:54
Apples and oranges really, but Tony Banks will always be my favorite prog rock keyboardist and he's a hell of a composer in his own right as well.

I do like Rick Wakeman a good bit and never found fault with his playing, but Banks always seemed to operate at a completely different level. He wasn't into pyrotechnics like Wakeman or Emerson, but all of those chord sequences in say One For The Vine are enough to make me forget about Wakeman and Emerson. In fact, I already have! Wink 


Edited by Mirror Image - April 04 2014 at 22:55
Back to Top
cstack3 View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar
VIP Member

Joined: July 20 2009
Location: Tucson, AZ USA
Status: Offline
Points: 4429
Direct Link To This Post Posted: April 04 2014 at 23:13
Originally posted by Dellinger Dellinger wrote:

Wakeman, easily, both with Yes and solo. Though of course, Tony is really cool too.

We agree. 




Edited by cstack3 - April 04 2014 at 23:13
Back to Top
verslibre View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: July 01 2004
Location: CA
Status: Offline
Points: 7820
Direct Link To This Post Posted: April 04 2014 at 23:27
Originally posted by twosteves twosteves wrote:


Originally posted by verslibre verslibre wrote:

To be fair, Tony has said plainly in interviews that he considers himself an accompanist, not a [Wakeman/Emerson]-type keyboard player. He categorizes himself as a composer.

I've not voted in this poll because, while I own more albums by/with Rick, I'm not going to "pick one" because their respective approaches and output are drastically different, stylistically and tonally. Both guys have recorded music that is either fantastic or questionable.

I saw the interview of Banks that you reference---in typical Banks fashion he is really putting down those other guys as show offs whereas he does it right---and tastefully. He is saying he could do what those other guys do but he has more taste.Wink


Keyboard ca. the 90s?
Back to Top
Xonty View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: June 23 2013
Status: Offline
Points: 1727
Direct Link To This Post Posted: April 05 2014 at 06:32
Very tight - both are some of the best keyboardists in the world really - but Tony Banks because he's always getting these great, expensive chords underneath the Genesis songs (e.g. "Anyway"). Love both of them though Big smile
Back to Top
uduwudu View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member


Joined: July 17 2007
Status: Offline
Points: 2368
Direct Link To This Post Posted: April 06 2014 at 03:57
Originally posted by Trane Trane wrote:

Hands down it's Wakeman. While Banks has made extraordinary contributions to great pieces of work, he's lazy. Never pushed boundaries nor exposed us to more than being a keyboard player in a band. Quite a disappointment.  


Tony Banks' Seven - A Suite For Orchestra demonstrated a flair for orchestral composition. I thought it was very liustenable albeit too polite. He needed to inject some of the fun and mystery he brought to Genesis rather than writing music that was more traditional, as though this is what is supposed to be written and recorded. maybe check out Varese, Messiaen and Stravinsky. He has been writing and recording for Genesis for 25 years and did shed loads of touring.

He emerged via folk pop rock beginning gradually merging  and developing symphonic styles in a small orchestra (rock band) context. He wrote many lyrics with his music as did his compadre Mike Rutherford. Together they brought a rock band to the high point of symphonic rock. then they shifted their emphasis and allowed the soul influences informing drummer extraordinaire and fine singer Phil Collins to broaden their range.

He and Genesis did a considerable amount - this really is an understatement- to bring music from obscurity to world acclaim. This is not easy to do and requires a work ethic and inteelectual and emotional drive few can comprehend. There is a reason why these guys, Wakeman, Banks et al are there and it is most certainly NOT laziness. They're like icebergs, 90% of what goes into the evident 10% is not readily apparent. Get closer and the iceberg becomes more apparent. Unless you're skippering the Titanic.

His manner, as is evident on the remaster DVDs is a guy reserved and down to earth. No drugs, likes cycling for exercise and has the sort of manner that has kept Genesis afloat and aloft certainly  together as a band (not forgetting the input of Stuermer and Thompson as a constant unit for longer than most bands have been around). He oversaw the remastering as well. He's not a frontman but he is exacting and lays it out for everyone else. Peter Gabriel could not have put on a Foxes Head unless the picture Banks painted allowed him to do so.

His style as soloist is that of someone with something to say, he knows what he wants to do, does it, show boating is not his thing but moments of solo piano show he can do the nifty thing just as much. But musical style is all about individual identity and how it is expressed. It's not solos but how a piece hangs together effectively, e.g. One For The Vine. There are others but as a keyboard "solo" with the full band absolutely essential to it's subtleties it has little competition.

Genesis had a superb sense of the ironic. Having a singer join whose hit was because of it being featured in jeans commercials was kind of amusing considering the whole I Can't Dance thing was satirizing just that. Of course RW has a great sense of humour, between his wit and Bruford's droll writing style they would make a good team on TV...

RW has made fantastic contributions to Yes who manage to struggle on without him. Genesis without Banks or Rutherford? I don't think so. Great musician and writer. Not much of a pop star though.







Back to Top
geekfreak View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: June 21 2013
Location: Skavendom
Status: Offline
Points: 3206
Direct Link To This Post Posted: April 06 2014 at 05:10
I`m a Genesis Freak, But vote went to Rick as he as a new album/concert.

The best is yet to come..,they said when your an adult it will be fun! Thatís not how I see it...so thanks for NOTHING
Back to Top
richardh View Drop Down
Prog Reviewer
Prog Reviewer
Avatar

Joined: February 18 2004
Location: United Kingdom
Status: Offline
Points: 17383
Direct Link To This Post Posted: April 06 2014 at 05:27
Originally posted by uduwudu uduwudu wrote:

Originally posted by Trane Trane wrote:

Hands down it's Wakeman. While Banks has made extraordinary contributions to great pieces of work, he's lazy. Never pushed boundaries nor exposed us to more than being a keyboard player in a band. Quite a disappointment.  


Tony Banks' Seven - A Suite For Orchestra demonstrated a flair for orchestral composition. I thought it was very liustenable albeit too polite. He needed to inject some of the fun and mystery he brought to Genesis rather than writing music that was more traditional, as though this is what is supposed to be written and recorded. maybe check out Varese, Messiaen and Stravinsky. He has been writing and recording for Genesis for 25 years and did shed loads of touring.

He emerged via folk pop rock beginning gradually merging  and developing symphonic styles in a small orchestra (rock band) context. He wrote many lyrics with his music as did his compadre Mike Rutherford. Together they brought a rock band to the high point of symphonic rock. then they shifted their emphasis and allowed the soul influences informing drummer extraordinaire and fine singer Phil Collins to broaden their range.

He and Genesis did a considerable amount - this really is an understatement- to bring music from obscurity to world acclaim. This is not easy to do and requires a work ethic and inteelectual and emotional drive few can comprehend. There is a reason why these guys, Wakeman, Banks et al are there and it is most certainly NOT laziness. They're like icebergs, 90% of what goes into the evident 10% is not readily apparent. Get closer and the iceberg becomes more apparent. Unless you're skippering the Titanic.

His manner, as is evident on the remaster DVDs is a guy reserved and down to earth. No drugs, likes cycling for exercise and has the sort of manner that has kept Genesis afloat and aloft certainly  together as a band (not forgetting the input of Stuermer and Thompson as a constant unit for longer than most bands have been around). He oversaw the remastering as well. He's not a frontman but he is exacting and lays it out for everyone else. Peter Gabriel could not have put on a Foxes Head unless the picture Banks painted allowed him to do so.

His style as soloist is that of someone with something to say, he knows what he wants to do, does it, show boating is not his thing but moments of solo piano show he can do the nifty thing just as much. But musical style is all about individual identity and how it is expressed. It's not solos but how a piece hangs together effectively, e.g. One For The Vine. There are others but as a keyboard "solo" with the full band absolutely essential to it's subtleties it has little competition.

Genesis had a superb sense of the ironic. Having a singer join whose hit was because of it being featured in jeans commercials was kind of amusing considering the whole I Can't Dance thing was satirizing just that. Of course RW has a great sense of humour, between his wit and Bruford's droll writing style they would make a good team on TV...

RW has made fantastic contributions to Yes who manage to struggle on without him. Genesis without Banks or Rutherford? I don't think so. Great musician and writer. Not much of a pop star though.








I always think that prog keyboard players can be grouped into those that sit quietly by the side while they are playing and those that are flamboyant and like to be at the front of the music and the stage

I would put Banks with Rod Argent , Dave Greenslade , Jon Lord* and Pete Bardens

Wakeman belongs with the Keith Emerson , Eddie Jobson and Patrick Moraz camp

* Jon Lord started off in the Emerson camp but then migrated to 'other side'.

A lot of this is to do with personality. Wakeman liked to embrace the latest keyboard tech while Banks was happy with his organ (so to speak). That may have made him seem 'lazy' and not pushing boundaries back. I agree with what you say though. Genesis were the most hard working and dedicated of all the prog band. Ultimate 100% professional in everything they did. Nothing could be considered 'lazy'.




Edited by richardh - April 06 2014 at 05:29
Back to Top
Prog 74 View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: March 16 2014
Location: USA
Status: Offline
Points: 171
Direct Link To This Post Posted: April 06 2014 at 08:23
Rick Wakeman
Back to Top
twosteves View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: May 01 2007
Location: NYC/Rhinebeck
Status: Offline
Points: 3024
Direct Link To This Post Posted: April 06 2014 at 09:38
agree with uduwudu ---Banks is a quiet, genius who can do it all---Wakeman's work with Yes in the 70's was some amazing--ground breaking playing---but there is too much cheesy playing apart from the 70's for me to consider him better than Banks.
Back to Top
genbanks View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: April 08 2010
Location: Argentina
Status: Offline
Points: 956
Direct Link To This Post Posted: April 06 2014 at 12:34
Originally posted by uduwudu uduwudu wrote:

 

Tony Banks' Seven - A Suite For Orchestra demonstrated a flair for orchestral composition. I thought it was very liustenable albeit too polite. He needed to inject some of the fun and mystery he brought to Genesis rather than writing music that was more traditional, as though this is what is supposed to be written and recorded. maybe check out Varese, Messiaen and Stravinsky. He has been writing and recording for Genesis for 25 years and did shed loads of touring.

He emerged via folk pop rock beginning gradually merging  and developing symphonic styles in a small orchestra (rock band) context. He wrote many lyrics with his music as did his compadre Mike Rutherford. Together they brought a rock band to the high point of symphonic rock. then they shifted their emphasis and allowed the soul influences informing drummer extraordinaire and fine singer Phil Collins to broaden their range.

He and Genesis did a considerable amount - this really is an understatement- to bring music from obscurity to world acclaim. This is not easy to do and requires a work ethic and inteelectual and emotional drive few can comprehend. There is a reason why these guys, Wakeman, Banks et al are there and it is most certainly NOT laziness. They're like icebergs, 90% of what goes into the evident 10% is not readily apparent. Get closer and the iceberg becomes more apparent. Unless you're skippering the Titanic.

His manner, as is evident on the remaster DVDs is a guy reserved and down to earth. No drugs, likes cycling for exercise and has the sort of manner that has kept Genesis afloat and aloft certainly  together as a band (not forgetting the input of Stuermer and Thompson as a constant unit for longer than most bands have been around). He oversaw the remastering as well. He's not a frontman but he is exacting and lays it out for everyone else. Peter Gabriel could not have put on a Foxes Head unless the picture Banks painted allowed him to do so.

His style as soloist is that of someone with something to say, he knows what he wants to do, does it, show boating is not his thing but moments of solo piano show he can do the nifty thing just as much. But musical style is all about individual identity and how it is expressed. It's not solos but how a piece hangs together effectively, e.g. One For The Vine. There are others but as a keyboard "solo" with the full band absolutely essential to it's subtleties it has little competition.

Genesis had a superb sense of the ironic. Having a singer join whose hit was because of it being featured in jeans commercials was kind of amusing considering the whole I Can't Dance thing was satirizing just that. Of course RW has a great sense of humour, between his wit and Bruford's droll writing style they would make a good team on TV...

RW has made fantastic contributions to Yes who manage to struggle on without him. Genesis without Banks or Rutherford? I don't think so. Great musician and writer. Not much of a pop star though.


Yes, perfect statement, and that's why Banks is my musical reference

By the way Wakeman is there beside him, as the greatests keyboardists of all times.


Back to Top
Horizons View Drop Down
Collaborator
Collaborator
Avatar
Post/Math Rock Team

Joined: January 20 2011
Location: Somewhere Else
Status: Offline
Points: 16952
Direct Link To This Post Posted: April 06 2014 at 12:40
Tony not looking so great there. 
Crushed like a rose in the riverflow.
Back to Top
Tom Ozric View Drop Down
Prog Reviewer
Prog Reviewer
Avatar

Joined: September 03 2005
Location: Olympus Mons
Status: Offline
Points: 15828
Direct Link To This Post Posted: April 06 2014 at 15:09
I thoughtt it's Rick using Tony for some support !!!

Edited by Tom Ozric - April 06 2014 at 15:10
Back to Top
verslibre View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: July 01 2004
Location: CA
Status: Offline
Points: 7820
Direct Link To This Post Posted: April 06 2014 at 17:50
Originally posted by richardh richardh wrote:

I would put Banks with Rod Argent , Dave Greenslade , Jon Lord* and Pete Bardens


I'd put Rick Wright and Roger Powell in that group, too.

Originally posted by richardh richardh wrote:

]Wakeman belongs with the Keith Emerson, Eddie Jobson and Patrick Moraz camp


I concur.

Originally posted by richardh richardh wrote:

* Jon Lord started off in the Emerson camp but then migrated to 'other side'.


And Don Airey, who joined Purple, could fit into either group, but I'd be more inclined to put him in there with Wakeman and Emerson.

Originally posted by richardh richardh wrote:

A lot of this is to do with personality. Wakeman liked to embrace the latest keyboard tech while Banks was happy with his organ (so to speak).


I categorize guys like Banks and Bardens as "texture" players and Emerson and Wakeman are classical rockers who are the equivalent of a lead guitarist, on keys (Emerson, especially).

Then we have guys like Jan Hammer, who have fitted ably into support or lead positions and are competent in a number of musical styles/genres.
Back to Top
verslibre View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: July 01 2004
Location: CA
Status: Offline
Points: 7820
Direct Link To This Post Posted: April 06 2014 at 17:52
Btw, not sure if anyone watches That Metal Show, but on last night's season closer, guest guitarist Yngwie J. Malmsteen vocally credited none other than Tony Banks as informing his preferred style of neoclassical guitar. His sister played Genesis albums and Tony's influence on Yngwie was massive. Maybe others knew of this, but I sure as hell didn't.
Back to Top
twosteves View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: May 01 2007
Location: NYC/Rhinebeck
Status: Offline
Points: 3024
Direct Link To This Post Posted: April 06 2014 at 20:07
In Banks mind he is the lead player in Genesis---as central a lead player as the guy in the Doors---much to the annoyance of Hackett---who wasn't able to get his more guitar oriented songs in the group as often as he liked---and was usually replaced with a keyboard driven song. 
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1 4567>

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

Forum Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 11.01
Copyright ©2001-2014 Web Wiz Ltd.

This page was generated in 0.109 seconds.

Donate monthly and keep PA fast-loading and ad-free forever.