Giving A Clone Five Stars

I intended to participate more in this discussion but I still haven't recovered from Octopus 4's claim that Fugazi were a Genesis clone.

Marillion were often considered a Genesis clone in the 80s, but Fugazi was really better than anything the Genesis were doing in the same period.  This was my post.  In the 80s it was a common opinion mainly supported by the hard Genesis fans. I was not one of them and Fugazi has been my first Marillion album. I remember a discussion with one of them. I told him that he could think that Marillion were playing Genesis, but Genesis were actually playing pop music. I suggested him Script. He bought it then he came back to me saying "worst than the worst Genesis album". I'm not claiming that Fugazi is a clone. Genesis fans were.

richardh wrote: Guldbamsen wrote: richardh wrote: Guldbamsen wrote: richardh wrote: Guldbamsen wrote: What about artists who clone themselves? Biglietto per L´Inferno recently re-did their debut, Tangerine Dream has done several new versions of old material like Phaedra and Tangram, Nik Turner´s Sphinx underwent considerable surgery as well, and how about that Mike Oldfield? None of the mentioned examples here would get anything near 5 stars just for the record. Especially the TD and Nik Turner ones are really awful. We´re talking classic albums thrown in the "let´s make it modern and contemporary"-machine, and such a thing should be outlawed if I had my say. The scary thought however is, that these fabulous musicians at some point in time honestly felt it was a brilliant idea....   I havn't heard the re-recordings of Tangram or Phaedra but I do like the Booster series that features reworkings of old tracks like Logos and Sphinx Lightning (+ some new material)   Does JM Jarre's reissue of Oxygene count? Apparently it was totally re-recorded yet can anyone really tell the difference compared to the original release?         I like the Booster series as well, although I much prefer Cloudburst Flight in its original form Back on topic: A very good "clone" album is Babylon´s sole album from 78. I really like The Mote in God´s Eye.  As to giving a clone five stars - I don´t know what to think. I´d rate Marillion´s Fugazi 5 stars, and a lot of people write them off as Genesis clones - although I don´t hear it on Fugazi. The one where I hear the Genesis parallels is the debut.    Fugazi is my favourite Fish era Marillion album and I agree that it sounds nothing like Genesis. The main connection was Fish's voice sounding like Peter Gabriel .Pete Nicholls (IQ) also had the same thing levelled at him. ( I love IQ btw)   My favourite 'clone album' would likely be Glass Hammer Chronomotree which sounds like Yes,Genesis and ELP at various points but is very enjoyable. Personally I think they have now become too much of a Yes clone with their latest album If. I think IQ sounds even less like Genesis. Especially on those first two releases. I think it´s down to the punk - post punk feel there is to the music - very bleak and dark, somber romantic expression - which also emanates from former Sex Pistols drummer Paul Cook.  As to Fish sounding like Peter, I honestly don´t hear it, other than in the sometimes impenetrable imagery they both explore within their lyrical universes.     Not the same Paul Cook although there was a bit of a new wave punky thing running through IQ that made them a bit more interesting to me than other neo prog bands of the time . The Wake did in places sound very like Genesis , but not Gabriel era Genesis.

richardh wrote: Guldbamsen wrote: richardh wrote: Guldbamsen wrote: richardh wrote: Guldbamsen wrote: richardh wrote: Guldbamsen wrote: What about artists who clone themselves? Biglietto per L´Inferno recently re-did their debut, Tangerine Dream has done several new versions of old material like Phaedra and Tangram, Nik Turner´s Sphinx underwent considerable surgery as well, and how about that Mike Oldfield? None of the mentioned examples here would get anything near 5 stars just for the record. Especially the TD and Nik Turner ones are really awful. We´re talking classic albums thrown in the "let´s make it modern and contemporary"-machine, and such a thing should be outlawed if I had my say. The scary thought however is, that these fabulous musicians at some point in time honestly felt it was a brilliant idea....   I havn't heard the re-recordings of Tangram or Phaedra but I do like the Booster series that features reworkings of old tracks like Logos and Sphinx Lightning (+ some new material)   Does JM Jarre's reissue of Oxygene count? Apparently it was totally re-recorded yet can anyone really tell the difference compared to the original release?         I like the Booster series as well, although I much prefer Cloudburst Flight in its original form Back on topic: A very good "clone" album is Babylon´s sole album from 78. I really like The Mote in God´s Eye.  As to giving a clone five stars - I don´t know what to think. I´d rate Marillion´s Fugazi 5 stars, and a lot of people write them off as Genesis clones - although I don´t hear it on Fugazi. The one where I hear the Genesis parallels is the debut.    Fugazi is my favourite Fish era Marillion album and I agree that it sounds nothing like Genesis. The main connection was Fish's voice sounding like Peter Gabriel .Pete Nicholls (IQ) also had the same thing levelled at him. ( I love IQ btw)   My favourite 'clone album' would likely be Glass Hammer Chronomotree which sounds like Yes,Genesis and ELP at various points but is very enjoyable. Personally I think they have now become too much of a Yes clone with their latest album If. I think IQ sounds even less like Genesis. Especially on those first two releases. I think it´s down to the punk - post punk feel there is to the music - very bleak and dark, somber romantic expression - which also emanates from former Sex Pistols drummer Paul Cook.  As to Fish sounding like Peter, I honestly don´t hear it, other than in the sometimes impenetrable imagery they both explore within their lyrical universes.     Not the same Paul Cook although there was a bit of a new wave punky thing running through IQ that made them a bit more interesting to me than other neo prog bands of the time . The Wake did in places sound very like Genesis , but not Gabriel era Genesis.  That´s the second time I´ve been waaay off concerning prog musicians. Some time ago, when I first got into the Canterbury scene, I was sure that Dave Stewart from Egg and National Health (and a heap of other bands) in fact was the same as the one from Eurythmics... Good ol´ Dave must have changed quite a bit - I thought to myself. And I agree, which incidentally also supported my theory on The Sex Pistols and Cook, that those two first IQ albums certainly got a post punk feel to them. Maybe that´s why they are my faves from the band. Thanks for clearing things up for me  no worries and just in case you are wondering whether the Stewart Copeland that played in The Police is the same as the one that was in Curved Air..then this time you would be correct

However, the great Dave Stewart and the Ew-rythmics Dave Stewart are two very different folks, the latter has been going by "David A. Stewart" to avoid confusion.

Textbook wrote: AAAAH! You mean the Marillion album Fugazi! I thought you meant the classic post-hardcore BAND Fugazi!

octopus-4 wrote: Marillion were often considered a Genesis clone in the 80s, but Fugazi was really better than anything the Genesis were doing in the same period.

Well Octopus; Duran Duran, Blondie and The Go Go's were making better music than Genesis in the 80's (At least you got the music you paid for).

Iván

Edited by Ivan_Melgar_M - August 15 2011 at 10:28

DiamondDog wrote: A fair point, but dont forget that Yes etc were based on something else too. It only sounds original if you aren't aware of where it came from in the first place.

That's a great point. I'm gonna listen to Fragile right now and try to find their influence. Will be a good listening experience for sure. I'll especially pay attention to Jimi Hendrix influences.

twosteves wrote: DiamondDog wrote: A fair point, but dont forget that Yes etc were based on something else too. It only sounds original if you aren't aware of where it came from in the first place. Yes went back in music history to create a sound---there's a big difference in being influenced by Les Paul, Bach, Sibelius, Buddy Rich, an English Choir, or whatever ----but  a group sounding like another group---is not acceptable to me on any level and certainly does NOT deserve 5 stars. How can attempting to photo copy a band's sound be a good thing? It's only good if you are a tribute band.

richardh wrote: twosteves wrote: DiamondDog wrote: A fair point, but dont forget that Yes etc were based on something else too. It only sounds original if you aren't aware of where it came from in the first place. Yes went back in music history to create a sound---there's a big difference in being influenced by Les Paul, Bach, Sibelius, Buddy Rich, an English Choir, or whatever ----but  a group sounding like another group---is not acceptable to me on any level and certainly does NOT deserve 5 stars. How can attempting to photo copy a band's sound be a good thing? It's only good if you are a tribute band.    The core of anything good is the composition of the music. A lot of neo prog bands have a Genesis or Yes sound but usually manage to add their own thing. I tend to find Genesis and Yes at times a little too 'pretty' and need to hear music with a bit more directness and passion (but not not punk!). Neo prog bands like Marillion and IQ had a what I would call a 'dirtier' approach and really hardly ever sound like a photcopy of Genesis or whatever you were alluding to (imo)

rogerthat wrote: frippism wrote:  and if honestly a band doesn't have an original sound there's no point to listen to them in my opinion.    Exactly.

Of course, whether or not a band has an "original" sound can be subjective (aside from outright cover bands, of course).  Personally, I totally disagree with the notion that just because a band doesn't have an original sound, there is no point in listening to them.  There are bands I have passed on that sounded a lot like another band or couple of bands.....but it was because they just weren't very good at composing and performing, not because of a lack of originality.  If something moves me and appeals to me, I really don't care if it "sounds like Yes" or whoever.  If I like it, that is all that matters.

As long as no one is suggesting that others should look at music the way they do, then I think all the opinions stated in this thread so far are perfectly valid.  If you personally don't like bands that don't sound original (which I really can't see as anything other than subjective, unless we're talking about outright cover bands), then the solution is a simple one.  Don't listen!  But also don't suggest that people who do enjoy such things are not prog fans or are not listening to the "right" kind of prog music.