Transcribed by Ade Catchpole
The pace never slackens, but at least you can be busy in comfort, and there can be little doubt that Genesis' success over the years has brought them most imaginable comforts. Their commitment to what they do, both in terms of the band and individually on their solo projects, seems to be undiminished. Not content with releasing 92's internationally successful /We Can't Dance/ album, single and suitably tongue-in-cheek video, they've organised the release of a two-part live album, `The Way We Walk'. The first part - `Volume 1: The Shorts' - is already successfully assaulting the charts, with the second, `The Longs', to be released as I write this.
`Shorts' and `Longs', Mike?
"We did it that way as a result of trying to combine all the songs we wanted to use on one album, and failing. It didn't seem to work no matter how we arranged the running order. In the space of our two and a half hour live show we can do a long section for about fifty minutes, then a couple of short songs and it works really well, especially with the visuals - the screens and so on. But within the space of an album we couldn't seem to get the same effect to come over, and were really making no progress. But as we refused to put out a double album this time, someone came up with the idea of an album of `shorter' songs and a separate one for the `longer' ones. That felt right, so we went with it. And as quite a lot of people seem to prefer one type of song over the other, they can now make their choice. So I think the concept is a good one."
The live album came together very quickly, overlapping in fact with the closing stages of the tour. Didn't that require a lot of extra work on the band's part, at a time when most acts would be looking forward to putting their feet up for a while..?
"Yes and no. Live albums don't require the same amount of effort as studio albums, in terms of creating the actual material, and so the majority of the hard work was mainly done by Nick Davis, with Robert Colby co-producing. They would set up the mixes, then I'd come in with Tony Banks mainly, as Phil was away for quite a lot of that time, and we'd assess the tracks, comment on them and usually say `Yep' then leave again, because it was just where it should be. Occasionally we had to start again, but overall the mixing side was really quite easy. The recording side not so, because we had to record various shows from Philadelphia to Hanover to get the material we needed.
"For some reason, I don't quite know why, this album feels as if it's being taken much more seriously as a live album - perhaps we're getting better at it."
As a band, Genesis are no strangers to the concept of the live album...
"No. My personal opinion is, and most record labels will definitely not agree, that live albums should be cheaper to buy, because to me they are `extras'. I know some fans just like live albums, but the price in these cases should be reduced. It's a battle that I've fought long and hard, with only mixed success."
Modern PA technology has made the live album a much more successful representation of a band's real sound. Could Mike still listen to the first `Genesis Live' album from the early '70s, which was primitive in that respect?
"I haven't actually heard it since we did it. Although we get asked about old albums and old material, and we obviously comment on it in cases like this, occasionally it strikes me that I haven't actually heard the songs I'm commenting on for about fifteen years! So you're talking about your image of how you imagine they are, and if you go back to hear them, well...
"One project we have discussed doing in the future - because on the early albums, live and otherwise, the recorded sound was not very good - without doing anything fancy or changing the flavour of the songs we would like to re-release those albums with the production brought slightly more in line with present standards, even if it was just a remix with new technology. Our sound was pretty rough then, especially drums and bass, with poor separation and so on. So it would be good to give that side of the earlier music more definition."
To get back to the present, the band initiated a change of producer for `We Can't Dance'. Did the change have any significant effect on Genesis, who have such a distinctive sound anyway?
"I would agree that we do have `a sound' whoever produces it, but would add that the previous albums were actually all co-produced with the band anyway. When we've finished doing the writing and recording of the rough demo tapes, then that is a large part of what the sound of the finished songs will be. I should add that we changed from Hugh Padgham not so much because of any unhappiness with Hugh's work, but because it's so important that a band like Genesis gets to change, and it can't be any of us three.
"So, although the basic sound is always there, it then becomes a different atmosphere. Everyone is a bit nervous in the way that you are when starting to work with someone new, but it worked out fine. There's no difference to the structure of our recording; the difference is in the personalities. One different face just changes the whole atmosphere and how we all react. Some other things changed too, though; I got a much better guitar sound than previously..."
A week or so before recording, with absolutely no material already prepared, the band get together and jam out ideas from scratch. It might seem like a strange way of doing things nowadays, but Mike feels it's the only way to get the best out of Genesis.
"I suppose it's a gamble on our part. If we were to go in with two or three songs each, then we'd be up and running right away. If you go in with nothing, and this is what I like about the situation, the ideas are then a result of Genesis the band, which, to me, is about the three of us anyway. If nothing happens, if there's nothing sparking, then it's the end of the band. It means you can't cruise on someone else's material, and I like that."
The adrenaline's stirred by that kind of situation must provide inspiration, too...
"On the first day there's pretty much no result, because we're just getting back into it. In fact, for the first two days you pretend to be working on your gear most of the time as a cover-up for your lack of effective individual contribution. But we're recording everything, which can be awful chaos to listen to on the playback. There's as much bad as there is good material, as you can imagine. When we're jamming, I've no idea what key Tony is in on the keyboards, and vice versa. But that's the whole point. For instance, if you knew that a jam was in the key of A, then you'd spend your time using what fits in that key, and that would be very restrictive. So it's literally played by ear. When we take it into the studio to begin recording in earnest and I hear Tony's contribution in isolation, I'll often say, `Is that really what you're playing?'"
Is Phil coming in with lyrical ideas at this point? Or perhaps scatting through the songs..?
"Well, both, but for the `Can't Dance' album, I thought I heard him singing, `You're no son of mine...' and remarked what a good lyric I thought that was, but it wasn't what he was singing at all, although that's what it became. Whereas /Jesus He Knows Me/ was a deliberate idea for a song. But it's always helpful to the development of the song if you can get the lyrics, or the sound of the lyrics, as early as possible."
Does Mike think it strange that, in this day and age, a song such as /I Can't Dance/ with its simple riff, very reminiscent of late '60s Stones, still has that irresistible appeal?
"Well, a good riff is a good riff! To be honest, I've always wanted to write something like that - very simple and effective. Plus, it wasn't `written' in our normal terms; we had the riff, and we had Tony's drum machine accompaniment, but we'd left it till the end of the album sessions, on the condition that if we played it again and it didn't sound good, we'd ditch it.
"When we did try it again, it was all very hurried; we were saying to Tony, `Come on, give us a middle eight... Right, that'll do!' Phil was doing lyrics round the corner from us while we were working on this around the lunchtime period, and so the whole thing was done in a day. It still sounded as simple as it was meant to be - a nice way to work, too."
According to Mike, a band's influences shows up most in its writing, so for Genesis it would be The Beatles and Tamla Motown...
"Those songs are still wonderful, and indeed all the late '60s English pop scene, which had such wonderful bands like The Small Faces, The Who, Kinks, Yardbirds. We were really spoilt for choice then, and that material, by and large, still sounds exciting today.
"With regard to ourselves, I still think we owe Jonathan King a lot. To get a chance to make an album in those days - four guys just out of school - that was a big break for us. We did the album in three days and that gave us such a valuable insight into what it was all about. We had a lot of material available - in fact there's still a lot of good `pre' first album material that has never been heard, and it might be an idea to arrange for it to be released sometime. [Let's hope they make it into more than a vague idea someday!]
"Looking back, there's quite a lot of it that I couldn't listen to, because I know that all of us were trying too hard, but that was only natural at the time, to want to play to the best of your ability and prove yourself by doing clever things. But, I don't know, I've changed, everyone does, and listening to the songs now I know that I wouldn't arrange my bass parts the same way..."
Were you musically aware of what you were doing, particularly the shifting time signatures?
"Yeah, and I enjoyed a lot of that. We don't do it so much now, maybe because we did it for a long time back then. When we jumped time signatures sometimes it sounded very good, but listening to it now I find some of it awkward - again, because we were trying to be clever. But perhaps that was part of the charm of the songs, because we felt it was all a challenge."
That distinctive quirkiness completed Peter Gabriel's eccentric lyrics and stage presence perfectly...
"I think that the biggest change between early Genesis including Peter, and now, is that we used to put so much material into a song then - in fact too much. Now we'll take an idea and try to develop it, which is actually harder to do. With Peter, if we had an idea which lasted a minute and a half and we couldn't develop it or even find a home for it, we'd just pop it into a song, do it for a minute and a half, and then move on. So some of the long songs were an easy way of assembling a collection of largely unrelated ideas which wouldn't fit anywhere else."
After Peter's surprising departure, was it an arduous process to find a replacement singer? Phil wasn't seriously considered to begin with, was he?
"We certainly didn't plump for Phil right away. We'd started writing for a new album without Steve (Hackett) even, because he was off finishing his solo album. It was just Tony, Phil and myself, and it went very well. We had various singers come down during the writing period to try out, and Phil would sing them the melody lines and show them how they went. Then we started to notice that none of the singers actually sounded any better than Phil. When the recording for the album started, we decided that Phil should sing the softer songs because he had that purer, quieter quality, and we'd use another singer for the raunchier stuff. Time was getting on, though, so Phil did the vocal on /Squonk/ which was a big step forward for him as it has quite an aggressive vocal, and he sounded great, so we went with that. We still thought that, live, we'd use someone else, then gradually that idea disappeared as Phil evolved into our singer...
"Although it was a major shock when Peter left, there were songs such as /Cinema Show/ on `Selling England By The Pound' which we had mainly written anyway. But Peter was an integral part of the writing process, and so it was a matter of restructuring that process too. But it's natural that people should think that the frontman /is/ the band - and on stage at that time that looked to be very true - but so much of the writing was down to the rest of us. Now, of course, the same thing is happening with Phil, so you can't win."
What does Mike think of the songwriting he hears in the charts in the '90s?
"The trouble is that nowadays it's so easy to get a keyboard and a drum machine, a few echoes, and even just using the presets you can quickly sound like half the dance bands currently in the charts. And that's being substituted for songwriting. I'm not saying it's good or bad, just that it's so easy to do, and people aren't bothering to write melodies or chords, because you've got a happening moment anyway. It results in a real lack of character and individuality since everyone's using the same keyboards with the same sounds. That lack of character is my main complaint at the moment. As an example - whether or not you like the band - when you hear a Queen song you know it's them immediately, and that identity is important. U2, The Blue Nile, Bruce Hornsby, Paul Brady: they all have a recognisable sound with real quality."
The latest Genesis tour included a number of smaller, regional gigs. Did that move away from the stadium prove a positive step?
"The first `regional' gig in Southampton was a real shock to us. We'd discussed doing these regional theatre dates, obviously, and knew that Genesis worked well in that environment. Plus we felt that doing only two locations in Britain, including Earl's Court, was a bit brief, especially as the show was very strong, and so the idea of doing an additional four or five dates came about. Bearing in mind that so much of our live work is planned far in advance, I remember a wonderful moment in the dressing room after the first show in Southampton, where our manager was ringing round other theatres, such as Norwich City Hall, and asking if they had any dates available in about ten days time! And that's what I felt touring should be. So by the time we played Newcastle City Hall, the whole show was going really well. I'd like to see other name bands doing the same thing; the response is terrific, and it's just a matter of scaling everything down, lights and so on, to suit the gig."
What about your other project, Mike and the Mechanics, a group that's had great success in its own right...?
"The Mechanics came about very much like Genesis did, in that I had a whole collection of songs which I'd written with Chris Muir [sic?] and B.A.Robertson, and couldn't find anyone to cover them. They wouldn't have suited Genesis, so I thought, `Sod it, I'll do it myself.' And that's how the first Mechanics album was started. B.A. brought Paul Carrack down, and he tried some of the songs and sounded very good, plus he was a writer, too - an additional asset.
"The /Living Years/ single brought so many letters, more than for anything else we've ever done, about the effect that the song seemed to have on people, changing their lives and attitudes because of the sentiments involved. The first `Mechanics' album did very well in America because of that track. The second suffered a bit because we went through a rough patch during its recording, changing producer halfway through, which knocked us off our stride as the Mechanics normally record quite quickly."
[Mike seems to be getting confused here, so replace `first' with `second' and `second' with `third' in the last paragraph and it makes sense!]
The Mechanics project seems to be divorced from Genesis in the public's minds, with a completely different appeal.
"I think I have an advantage there, in that I'm not the front man for Genesis, and my band isn't really seen as directly related to Genesis in respect of sound - vocals, especially - in the way that Phil is. In the meantime, whilst I'm presently trying to avoid fixing dates, the Mechanics will probably be reactivated next year."
How did your design of the guitar which became the Steinberger GM-series come about?
"I used one of the original `stick' Steinbergers, and looked pretty ridiculous with it, because of my height and its lack any dimensions. I used to call it my `George Formby guitar' because that's who I felt I looked like with it. I asked Steinberger if they would change the design for me to something bigger and they refused, because they're a small company and couldn't afford to get into the business of making one-offs. So one night I laid the guitar down on top of a piece of card and drew the outline of the guitar shape that I wanted, and got Roger Giffin to make it up for me. It looked fine and so I used it, and Steinberger later saw it and asked if they could have a look at it, and ended up using it as a basis for their GM-series production model. I had a feeling when they saw it that they'd like it."
The biggest change to Mike's stage rig happened recently, when his guitar tech, Geoff Banks, brought him something new to try...
"He turned up with a Groove Tubes `Trio' amplifier which I thought was just fantastic. I played it on almost the whole of the `Can't Dance' album. In fact, a lot of the writing - in terms of the chords and the riffs - comes from the Trio's sound. It all just seemed to click for me. The biggest benefit comes when playing quietly, because I always feel you're not pushing the amp hard enough, if you are using a Marshall, for instance. And although I still use the Marshall cabs in my setup, the Trio compensates with a good sound at lower volumes. And I didn't use Strats very much for a long time, as I felt their sound to be a little too thin, but the Trio fattens it out nicely."
What about the old Shergold double-neck?
"I've still got it somewhere, but I would dread having to put it together and use it. During rehearsals at the start of this tour, not only did we try out all the songs from the new album to find out what worked and what didn't, we were also trying out various medley combinations of songs from the '70s. We feel that's quite a valid way of presenting those songs for our older fans, and during those songs I was constantly having to change guitars from six to 12-string, then to bass and so on, so I went back to the double-neck and it brought it all back, this great heavy object hanging round my neck. At that period, because the songs had so many sections in them, it was a good answer to the quick changeover from bass to the guitar and bass pedals, then back again, so it was particularly convenient. But mine's one of the earliest ones and it's just /so/ heavy. So I was very glad I wasn't still using it.
"I've found a new bass for this tour - a Yamaha TRB 4P. I first heard Daryl Stuermer playing one and it sounded great, so we're using that."
Through changing sounds, changing songs and changing personnel, what does Mike feel has kept the core of Genesis together for so long?
"I think we're grown to respect what we can each contribute to the band, and that uniqueness continues to keep it special. Not only that, on this tour I've felt that what we were doing was still relevant and contemporary, and that's good. There's no sense looking back, and we're certainly not trading on hits we've had in the past. In fact we've probably got a wider age cross-section of fans than any other band, and new fans seem to arrive all the time..."
THE END.