Genesis: Calling All Stations - a total artistic failure!

Forgive the negative thread title. I'm of the mind that there are very few 'bad' albums in existence and that no one deliberately sets out to make one.

But how ''bad' albums emerge can be interesting. I bought CAS recently from a charity shop (50p) as something to listen to on a long car journey. It was the only Genesis album I didn't feel I knew at all. I was aware that it had bombed badly in 1997, but I'd lazily put that down the absence of the Collins Factor.

Well - it turns out it bombed because it was BAD! Genesis great skill as performer/composers had been their amastery of the prog epic and, latterly, the 3 minute pop song. With CAS, they attempt to do both - at the same time. Pop tunes - and hookless ones at that - are meaninglessly extended to preposterous lengths in order - one assumes - to satisfy both sides of their fractured fanbase.

There is nothing wrong with Ray Wilson's contribution to this album - he's a good, if somewhat anonymous singer, who doesn't really sound like either Gabriel or Collins; but the lack of ideas evident on this album is truly shocking . No wonder they felt they had no choice but to hang it up!

 

I thought it was a considerable improvement on We Can't Dance and I certainly go back and listen to it more than Invisible Touch. I wish it had been successful enough for them to continue in this direction with Ray.

It is a shame that they did not bring Chester Thompson in on drums for it. He is an excellent drummer who was hand picked by Collins to be their main live drummer for the preceding 2 decades. Not giving him the nod when they needed a studio drummer was disrespectful.

 

I quite like it to be honest. The only thing which really annoys me is that pretty much every song fades out I think.

 

Love the album, The Dividing Line is worth the price of admission alone. There was no way they would be accepted with a new vocalist this late into their career so it was doomed to failure.

 

Chester and Daryl Stuermer were still playing live for Phil Collins. That may explain his absence.

 

I feel the album would have been much better received if they had not used the Genesis brand.

Taken on its own, CAS is not bad or unprofessional, some of the moods are dark and compelling, songs like "Shipwrecked" and "Congo" have catchy hooks. But asking any fans (who cared) who worshipped either the Gabriel or Collins eras to embrace another completely distinct "Genesis" was not advisable.

 

Agreed. The premature fade outs that seem to randomly occur in every song betray a half-baked nature. It's as if CAS is a collection of demos, not final product.

 

I like it too. It is not as strong as We Can't Dance, but I don't agree with the original poster. the songs are consistent within the album, and the album is consistent of what one would expect with a change up of lead vocals a a few years after We Can't Dance. It has some very typical Genesis sounding tracks and interludes if you ask me. "There Must Be Some Other Way" in particular has a great Banks prog thing going on in the middle of the song. It's a favorite.

On the contrary, I think this album always gets ridiculed too harshly. It's a solid effort that is only really hindered by lack of Phil Collins in order for it to be considered a bonafide follow up to We Can't Dance.

 

better than we can't dance. and I agree the fades are the main thing that aggravates me. shoulda spent some more time on it.

 

Probably would have been completely ignored, like Tony's solo albums.

What really doomed the album was the band's not touring in America. They could have played theaters and slowly established the new lineup, but didn't want to make that effort.

 

They were caught between 2 worlds. Too bad they didn't have the artistic courage of say, Neil Young, (who does?) and just went for it. They still wanted hits but it was past their time. Too bad because they could've done some amazing things, unfortunately anything less than mega platinum was a failure in their eyes.

 

I remember around that time Phil did a tour with Ricky Lawson instead of Chester.

 

I remember seeing an ad in the New York Times for their arena concert (probably Madison Square Garden) that never happened.

My other memory is that I heard "Congo" on WXRT in Chicago nearly every day for a month or so before the CD came out, and then upon release it disappeared.

 

I imagine it would have been really tough on Tony and Mike to go from playing giant arenas and festivals to small theatre gigs. Having tasted enormous fame and success, they probably were not that enthusiastic about starting all over again.

 

It's too bad they looked at it that way. They actually had a decent size audience who would've been more interested in them going in a less mainstream direction.

 

In the scope of Genesis' history, wherein they survived a major transition from Gabriel's vocals to Collin's, it seems ironic that some fans could not accept the change on Calling All Stations.
Unless, they were essentially Genesis fans of the Phil era only, which had the Top 40 hits.

 

I don't really think the album itself is bad. The ingredients of a good album were there, but they preparation was lacking. Fades, some songs carried on far longer than they should have been, etc. all played their part.

Additionally, I think Ray Wilson being brought in relatively late in the writing process hampered things. He didn't have a chance to have songs tailored to his voice (they were written essentially as if Phil was still going to sing them from what I recall) and the melodies weren't really played with. Having listened to Wilson's solo material, the guy is capable of much more than he's employed to do on Calling All Stations.

 

I think if this lineup had swallowed its pride and toured the US in theaters and followed up CAS with a second and better release, this lineup could have had potential. I agree with the OP's assessment that Genesis try to do both the prog side and the pop side and don't come up a winner on either end. But I don't think the album as a whole is bad either. I could do without the ballads, especially the "Hold On My Heart" rewrite "If That's What You Need", but I do think the title track and "The Dividing Line" are pretty strong and could have been the catalyst for another darker, proggier release...if Genesis had had the courage. Either way, Ray Wilson was in a tough spot.

 

Found this comment from Chester in an interview with World Of Genesis, explaining his non involvement:

"WOG: After Phil quit Genesis, many fans were surprised that you did not take the drummer’s seat for the next studio album, Calling All Stations….

CT: In actual fact, I did call up Mike and asked what they were going to be doing, and I proposed to jam with the guys to see if there was a real chemistry there. Because, at that point, if it was going to continue, I was not going to be content to continue as a side man. If they were willing to open it up to be a real group, then I certainly would have leaped at the chance. But again, like I said, its their band; and Mike made it very clear that it was their band, and that they were not at all interested in sharing anything. So, that was that."

So in the end Mike and Tony chose keeping more cash over rewarding decades of top notch contributons. I may have to start liking the album less.

And as well as the album sold they probably would have made out better financially with a third profit participant than with a salaried drummer, as I doubt there was any profit and probably not a huge advance on a project without Phil.

 

listen to the album and imagine they are singing about and to phil Collins leaving genesis. takes on a new meaning

 

It seemed like Mike and Tony wanted it all ways at once. They wanted to retain their pop audience while simultaneously reigniting their prog roots and wanted to be as successful as they were up to that point, despite having a new singer and a different sound. They must have known that most people wouldn't readily accept this new incarnation but didn't have the courage of their convictions to actually call it a different name.

The album itself is fine, hardly a failure but far from a success. As a collection of songs it's far more interesting and cohesive than We Can't Dance. What really doomed it to failure was Mike and Tony's toe in the water attitude about it.

 

You can't really compare Gabriel leaving and Collins taking over to the Ray Wilson situation. Phil was already a well-loved member of the band, and from what I remember at the time fans wanted him to succeed.

Also, I think Rutherford was more willing to play smaller places; he was used to that with his own band. For Tony, it was harder to accept. Mike covers this in his autobiography I believe.

 

It's a good album. Sure, I could point out a few weak spots. For one thing, they certainly miss Phil's contributions as an arranger and instrumentalist. But overall I think it's a solid collection of songs.

An issue that's always bugged me is the idea that Mike and Tony shouldn't have used the Genesis name. Why not? It's theirs to use as they see fit, and in the end it doesn't change the final product in any way. It's nothing more than a personal perception.

Another thing to point out is that they recorded enough material to fill up a standard 2 LP release (most later released as B-sides). There were a couple of tracks left off of the final album that I thought were much stronger than certain songs that made the cut. So, as I see it, some lost opportunity.

 

It's basically a Tony Banks solo album crossed with a Mike and the Mechanics album. Which is not entirely surprising.

But it lacks the groove and commercial knowhow that Phil could bring - so all the songs sort of plod along in 4/4 with uninspired "Tony Banks Solo Album Drumming", going not very far, before fading out into oblivion.

The Dividing Line, There Must Be Some Other Way and One Man's Fool all have good parts but are still a way away from Fading Lights or Driving the Last Spike.

Shipwrecked and If That's What You Need are the lamest ballads they'd done since Your Own Special Way - and Congo is just the weirdest single ever.

The title track and Not About Us are good, though. I wouldn't change much about those.

Wow, I started typing thinking I would defend the album because I do actually like it as much as I like "Strictly Inc" and "Beggar on a Beach" but it doesn't really sound that way, does it?

 

As I recall there is a Rutherford interview on that site too where he claimed no memory of this conversation.