Marillion Name-Checked by British Labour Party Leader

[JKL2000]

This is pretty amazing and hilarious:

http://m.huffpost.com/uk/entry/uk_59...&utm_hp_ref=uk

[iguana]

HAHAHAHA! BRILLIANT!

henceforth the overexposure paradigm shall be named the “marillion problem”. i anticipate keen use of the phrase way beyond the point when that particular band has expired and is long forgotten.

[Halmyre]

Funny enough, but it's not actually Corbyn who's doing the name-checking.

[JKL2000]

Funny enough, but it's not actually Corbyn who's doing the name-checking.

Sorry, fake news! It's actually the beloved Joe Twyman, Head of Political and Social Research at YouGov!

[Baribrotzer]

I don't know about that assertion - when I first hear Marillion, I couldn't quite see the point to an imitation of Genesis with not-as-good playing, not-nearly-as-good songs, and a vocalist who sounded like Peter Gabriel with a terrible case of bronchitis.

[mozo-pg]

I don't know about that assertion - when I first hear Marillion, I couldn't quite see the point to an imitation of Genesis with not-as-good playing, not-nearly-as-good songs, and a vocalist who sounded like Peter Gabriel with a terrible case of bronchitis.

Marillion has almost had a 40 year career with dozens of albums and only one sounds like Genesis.

[GuitarGeek]

I don't know about that assertion - when I first hear Marillion, I couldn't quite see the point to an imitation of Genesis with not-as-good playing, not-nearly-as-good songs, and a vocalist who sounded like Peter Gabriel with a terrible case of bronchitis.

Wow, disagree on all points. Yes, the Fish era albums sound a bit like Genesis. That's actually why I like them, because it sounds like Genesis. As far as the playing and songs being "not as good as", I disagree. I think both aspects of the band during that era were top notch. Maybe there's not as much virtuoso playing going on, but there's more to great music than being able to play some supposedly unplayable piano part or some ludicrously convoluted arrangement.

Now, if you want to make the argument that they were a lot of mainstream oriented than Genesis were during the Gabriel years, yea, that's probably true. There's more blatant stabs as singles, but in my opinion, those tended to be really good songs. And they were one of those bands that had great b-sides on the singles too.

And I certainly think Steve Rothery was (and probably still is) a fantastic guitarist. I love his playing on Lavender, Kayleigh, Sugar Mice, Warm Wet Circles, Assassing, Lady Nina, Easter, Cover My Eyes, etc.

And it's funny to me that people invoke the "Genesis sound-a-like" clause when it's been at least 25 years since they've done anything that even remotely sounds like Genesis.

[JKL2000]

Wow, disagree on all points. Yes, the Fish era albums sound a bit like Genesis. That's actually why I like them, because it sounds like Genesis. As far as the playing and songs being "not as good as", I disagree. I think both aspects of the band during that era were top notch. Maybe there's not as much virtuoso playing going on, but there's more to great music than being able to play some supposedly unplayable piano part or some ludicrously convoluted arrangement.

Now, if you want to make the argument that they were a lot of mainstream oriented than Genesis were during the Gabriel years, yea, that's probably true. There's more blatant stabs as singles, but in my opinion, those tended to be really good songs. And they were one of those bands that had great b-sides on the singles too.

And I certainly think Steve Rothery was (and probably still is) a fantastic guitarist. I love his playing on Lavender, Kayleigh, Sugar Mice, Warm Wet Circles, Assassing, Lady Nina, Easter, Cover My Eyes, etc.

And it's funny to me that people invoke the "Genesis sound-a-like" clause when it's been at least 25 years since they've done anything that even remotely sounds like Genesis.

They never sounded like Genesis to me except on Grendel, which was a b-side from a 35-year-old single. Fish sounded more like Peter Hammill to me, who was another big influence.

But I don't really understand what Baribrotzer's point is anyway.

[mozo-pg]

They never sounded like Genesis to me except on Grendel, which was a b-side from a 35-year-old single. Fish sounded more like Peter Hammill to me, who was another big influence.

I don't think Marillion sounded like Genesis except from their inception.

[JKL2000]

I don't think Marillion sounded like Genesis except from their inception.

I don't agree that everything the band's ever released sounds like Genesis.

[mozo-pg]

I don't agree that everything the band's ever released sounds like Genesis.

That's what I said - Marillion sounded like Genesis only when they were initially formed (their inception).

[JKL2000]

That's what I said - Marillion sounded like Genesis only when they were initially formed (their inception).

If you reread your post you can see how I might think you were having a go at me. But fair enough, to me all of Script really has a more modern sound and is very different from Genesis.

[GuitarGeek]

They never sounded like Genesis to me except on Grendel, which was a b-side from a 35-year-old single. Fish sounded more like Peter Hammill to me, who was another big influence.

I remember Tony Banks talking about this in his Invisible Touch era Keyboard magazine interview. He said that though Fish's voice does sound a bit like Gabriel's, he felt their singing styles were very different. According to Tony, Peter was "more melodic, whereas little chance of getting Fish to sing a written melody", or words to that effect.

And I think another thing that drew comparisons was the stage show. In the early days, Fish wore makeup and costumes onstage, and sort of acted out the songs. I think that was another thing were people saw them as being like Genesis MKII or whatever.

But I don't really understand what Baribrotzer's point is anyway.

I think it's another example of avant-prog snobbery, ie "Oh, it's not really progressive, because they're just reiterating what came before". Or whatever. (shrug)

[Hurm]

I hoped the article mentioned that Corbyn advised every politician to listen to Marillion's latest album "F.E.A.R." (it's my advice anyway), but alas....

[JKL2000]

I remember Tony Banks talking about this in his Invisible Touch era Keyboard magazine interview. He said that though Fish's voice does sound a bit like Gabriel's, he felt their singing styles were very different. According to Tony, Peter was "more melodic, whereas little chance of getting Fish to sing a written melody", or words to that effect.

And I think another thing that drew comparisons was the stage show. In the early days, Fish wore makeup and costumes onstage, and sort of acted out the songs. I think that was another thing were people saw them as being like Genesis MKII or whatever.


I think it's another example of avant-prog snobbery, ie "Oh, it's not really progressive, because they're just reiterating what came before". Or whatever. (shrug)

I thought Baribrotzer was saying getting people to listen to more Marillion wouldn't get them to like it, which is exactly the point of the guy being interviewed -- he's saying someone he knows said that, and HE disagreed with it.

But yeah, I think Baribrotzer was just taking advantage of an opportunity to say he doesn't like Marillion. But I forgive him.

[Baribrotzer]

But yeah, I think Baribrotzer was just taking advantage of an opportunity to say he doesn't like Marillion.

To some extent, although I'll admit I haven't heard much of them. But that really was my reaction to Script for a Jester's Tear, when I heard it, soon after it came out. Part of the reason being that it was hyped as, "oh, this is progressive rock returned and brought back to life." So I listened to it with that expectation, and found it disappointing.

[aith01]

To some extent, although I'll admit I haven't heard much of them. But that really was my reaction to Script for a Jester's Tear, when I heard it, soon after it came out. Part of the reason being that it was hyped as, "oh, this is progressive rock returned and brought back to life." So I listened to it with that expectation, and found it disappointing.

That's something I can understand, although I still have a soft spot for Script.

But Marillion has come a long way since that album, as to have invented their own sound really. They had some gems in the 90s, and even in recent years.

[Scott Bails]

I hoped the article mentioned that Corbyn advised every politician to listen to Marillion's latest album "F.E.A.R." (it's my advice anyway), but alas....

[GuitarGeek]

I thought Baribrotzer was saying getting people to listen to more Marillion wouldn't get them to like it, which is exactly the point of the guy being interviewed -- he's saying someone he knows said that, and HE disagreed with it.

Yeah, well getting people to listen to more Sleepytime Gorilla Museum isn't going to get them to like it either, if they don't already.

[GuitarGeek]

To some extent, although I'll admit I haven't heard much of them. But that really was my reaction to Script for a Jester's Tear, when I heard it, soon after it came out. Part of the reason being that it was hyped as, "oh, this is progressive rock returned and brought back to life." So I listened to it with that expectation, and found it disappointing.

Well, if you were looking for something "new", yeah, I could see the disappointment. The progressive rock allusions were no doubt to the complex song structures and lyrical themes (well, complex compared to their synth pop and new romantic contemporaries). I didn't actually into Marillion, really, until the end of the 80's, but they were exactly what I wanted, ie a band doing that style of music. It didn't matter to me (and still doesn't) that it kinda sounded like something from the previous decade.

But I actually agree that were sort of a more modern aspect to their sound, in terms of the use of newer technologies, eg polyphonic synths, more production techniques, etc. Steve Rothery's guitar playing always struck me as being like a cross between David Gilmour, Andy Summers and The Edge, for instance. And songs like Kayleigh and Lavender were way better "pop songs" than what most so called "progressive" rock band did (and that includes trio era Genesis).

But really, if you want to hear Fish era Marillion at their best, you have to go to the last two albums they did before he left, Misplaced Childhood (my favorite) and Clutching At Straws.