DreamTheaterForums.org Dream Theater Fan Site

General => General Music Discussion => Topic started by: KevShmev on September 03, 2014, 12:26:53 PM

Title: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Epilogue
Post by: KevShmev on September 03, 2014, 12:26:53 PM
And away we go...

The year was 1968.  It was then that childhood friends Alex Lifeson and John Rutsey decided to form a band that would later become known as Rush, going through a series of other players in the band, including a guy Alex knew named Geddy Lee, who was kicked out of the band at one point, but was later asked back. The band even had a fourth member, who played keyboards, for a spell, but they eventually settled into being a 3-piece band, as they spent years playing bars, clubs, high school and wherever they could, hoping for their big break, as another friend, Ray Danniels, talked them into letting him be their manager, and he did whatever he could to get them gigs. Early influences were artists like Cream, Jeff Beck, Jimi Hendrix and Led Zeppelin, hard rock acts who could get bluesy more often than not.

In 1973, they managed to record a single a that was barely heard by anyone, but at least they had recorded something professionally, and it gave them a bit of momentum as they continued to play whatever gigs they could, and crowds ate up what they played with a spoon.  Most of the songs had lyrics that were pretty loose and off-the-cuff, but Geddy always figured that Rutsey, the band's lyricist in those early days, would form them into something more coherent if the time ever came when they would record again.  However, at some point, Rutsey was diagnosed with diabetes, and the illness caused him to depart the band for a short period, but with the understanding that he'd be back when he was better.  Meanwhile, Geddy and Alex carried on with another drummer at gigs. 

Eventually, Danniels talked the record company who had released the single into releasing a whole album by the band, but the fellas themselves had to front the money to record it, so they had to book the cheapest studio time possible to hurry up and record the album. And it was there where they meet Terry Brown, who became fast friends with the band and would end up producing their first nine albums. 

However, the issue with drummer John Rutsey was reaching a breaking point.  Not only was his illness making him not want to tour, but the musical differences between he and Geddy and Alex were glaring; Rutsey was more into the straight rock, while Geddy and Alex were being influenced by the early progressive rock bands like Yes, so they were eager to expand their sound. The debut album, however, would be very Led Zeppelin-esque musically, and as for the lyrics, Geddy would end up doing most of them since Rutsey, on the day of the recording, had nothing, so Geddy had to quickly make them up on the fly.  And while he was to depart the band shortly after its release, John Rutsey would be around for it, making it his only appearance on a Rush studio album.  His drumming is not bad at all.  Actually, for that style, it was pretty solid, but it's inevitable that it will be dismissed as pedestrian because of the man (whose arrival I will address in the lead-up to the 2nd album) who replaced him... 

A notable early tune that never made it on to anything the band released officially was Garden Road:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d-4vsLucYzM

As for Rush, it is a solid first record. "Working Man" is the undeniable classic from it, a song that still gets played on classic rock radio and has been played live by the band quite a bit in the 21st century. "Finding My Way," "In the Mood" and "What You're Doing" are all solid hard rock tunes in the LZ vein as well.  "Here Again" was their attempt at a bluesy tune - I think of LZ's "You Shook Me" whenever I hear it - and it's not bad at all; in fact, it is pretty good, and features a smoking solo by Alex Lifeson, who showed right from the start that he is one helluva soloist. The other songs are okay, but nothing really notable.  There are some who swear by the first album, and there is definitely a youthful energy that it makes this record an enjoyable listen on the right day, but overall, merely showed very brief glimpses of the greatness that was later to come.

(https://www.canadiandesignresource.ca/officialgallery/wp-content/uploads/2008/07/rush1974.jpg)

Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread, now featuring: Rush
Post by: King Postwhore on September 03, 2014, 12:31:09 PM
I'm in Jerry!

Great idea Kev.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread, now featuring: Rush
Post by: Ultimetalhead on September 03, 2014, 12:44:03 PM
Whoo
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread, now featuring: Rush
Post by: Zydar on September 03, 2014, 12:44:52 PM
Yaay!
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread, now featuring: Rush
Post by: TAC on September 03, 2014, 12:54:58 PM
Definitely following. For now. ;D
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread, now featuring: Rush
Post by: The Letter M on September 03, 2014, 12:57:50 PM
Gotta make mention of the beautiful intro to "Before And After", which sounded like something they would put on their following two albums. It's amazing you could hear hints of what would come when Neil joined the band, but they were still very much a LZ-sounding band during this stage.

Also, you can't forget "Fancy Dancer", another original that the band played live but never officially recorded in studio.

-Marc.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread, now featuring: Rush
Post by: jingle.boy on September 03, 2014, 01:01:16 PM
It's been a REAL long time since I listened to this album.  Gotta go dig it out. 

IIRC, Rutsey's health problems were exacerbated by some Bonham-level partying.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread, now featuring: Rush
Post by: jjrock88 on September 03, 2014, 01:02:57 PM
Love Rush!!  following
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread, now featuring: Rush
Post by: Lowdz on September 03, 2014, 01:15:39 PM
Following with a passion. The S/T does nothing for me though, not being much of a Zep fan.  :biggrin:
I'll be along for the next one!
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread, now featuring: Rush
Post by: Anguyen92 on September 03, 2014, 01:19:46 PM
Oh my.....  I'm going to follow this for sure.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread, now featuring: Rush
Post by: hefdaddy42 on September 03, 2014, 01:28:05 PM
It's been a REAL long time since I listened to this album.  Gotta go dig it out. 
Same here.  But I will do so post haste.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread, now featuring: Rush
Post by: Podaar on September 03, 2014, 01:49:16 PM
It's been forever since I listened to the self-titled but I am right now. Ah, memories. Perhaps more for that than anything else, I think it's a great record.

I really like Finding My Way, Here Again, What You're Doing, and of course, Working Man.

I'll definitely follow this thread. I need an education in later Rush, something fierce.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread, now featuring: Rush
Post by: jingle.boy on September 03, 2014, 02:29:14 PM
Yeah!  Ohhhhhhh yeah!  What a great opening track.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread, now featuring: Rush
Post by: Lowdz on September 03, 2014, 02:41:21 PM
Yeah!  Ohhhhhhh yeah!  What a great opening track.

That's a great track. Finding My Way, Working Man are great. Not much else to hint at the greatness to come.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread, now featuring: Rush
Post by: King Postwhore on September 03, 2014, 04:04:59 PM
Kev, Are you going into Danna Halper at all?  I have a little story to tell you about of you are.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread, now featuring: Rush
Post by: KevShmev on September 03, 2014, 09:21:43 PM
You mean Donna Halper?  I almost mentioned her in my write-up, but didn't.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread, now featuring: Rush
Post by: JayOctavarium on September 03, 2014, 09:42:54 PM
Following
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread, now featuring: Rush
Post by: wolfking on September 03, 2014, 09:48:03 PM
It's been a REAL long time since I listened to this album.  Gotta go dig it out. 
Same here.  But I will do so post haste.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread, now featuring: Rush
Post by: jingle.boy on September 03, 2014, 09:52:31 PM
And I did.  Man, it's probably been over 10 years since I spun it start to finish.  It's aged quite well.  I enjoyed it much more than I ever have.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread, now featuring: Rush
Post by: Lucien on September 03, 2014, 10:05:48 PM
Following
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread, now featuring: Rush
Post by: Bolsters on September 03, 2014, 10:09:52 PM
Well, one of the songs some of you are singing the praises of (Finding My Way) I find to be an absolute chore to listen through. :lol I haven't listened to this album in at least 14 years and don't remember much about it, but if this is one of the best tracks on it...this isn't going to end well.

However, Working Man is great and was one of the tracks that got me into the band in the first place, so at least there's that.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread, now featuring: Rush
Post by: PolarizeMe on September 03, 2014, 10:17:31 PM
It's aged quite well.  I enjoyed it much more than I ever have.

I haven't spun it in a long time and I share similar sentiments. Nowhere close to being one my favorites, nor my top 10 but I enjoy it for what it is. I can hear youthfulness in the songs and musicianship.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread, now featuring: Rush
Post by: Bolsters on September 03, 2014, 10:31:12 PM
It's aged quite well.  I enjoyed it much more than I ever have.
Yeah, I actually have to go along with this now aswell. Finding My Way ended up being my least favourite song, and other than In The Mood being merely tolerable and Here Again dragging on for too long, I liked what I was hearing. Colour me surprised.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread, now featuring: Rush
Post by: jjrock88 on September 04, 2014, 01:10:43 AM
one of my least played Rush albums, but always enjoy it when I hear it.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread, now featuring: Rush
Post by: Zydar on September 04, 2014, 01:22:35 AM
I barely listen to this album. I can hear the potential of the band, but Neil was the missing ingredient for them to become the band they are today (that's no slight to John though). Favourites on this album are Working Man, Finding My Way, and What You're Doing (I love playing that riff on guitar). I'm still not 100% sold on Geddy's vocals despite being a fan of the band for 3-4 years, and on this album it's really grating IMHO. He would lower the register, and tone back the shrieks later on.

A promising debut nonetheless.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread, now featuring: Rush
Post by: King Postwhore on September 04, 2014, 12:07:00 PM
You mean Donna Halper?  I almost mentioned her in my write-up, but didn't.

Ooops!  Typo.  Big surprise there.  :lol

I sat next to her at the one night premiere of "Behind the Lighted Stage". We talked about first getting the album, how Jan Wiener would never let Rush into the RRHF. (She was wrong!) and all the times she hung out with them on tour.

All in all, a Rush geeks heaven.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread, now featuring: Rush
Post by: ReaperKK on September 04, 2014, 12:07:08 PM
I'll be following and giving the debut a spin later on today.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread, now featuring: Rush
Post by: GentlemanofDread on September 04, 2014, 12:11:28 PM
Following! Not exactly the biggest Rush fan (not listened to any album between 2112-Clockwork Angels yet) so this gives me a good reason too.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread, now featuring: Rush
Post by: Mladen on September 04, 2014, 12:20:11 PM
Following!

Starting, however, with an album that is probably my least favorite of mine. I used to like it a bit when I was getting into Rush, but now it's just a bunch of average songs... With the exception of Finding my way, which is good enough.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread, now featuring: Rush
Post by: jingle.boy on September 04, 2014, 12:51:02 PM
(not listened to any album between 2112-Clockwork Angels yet) so this gives me a good reason too.

 :omg: :omg:  I can't even comprehend this.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread, now featuring: Rush
Post by: King Postwhore on September 04, 2014, 01:00:44 PM
I agree! :omg:
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread, now featuring: Rush
Post by: jjrock88 on September 04, 2014, 01:16:58 PM
Following! Not exactly the biggest Rush fan (not listened to any album between 2112-Clockwork Angels yet) so this gives me a good reason too.

Shocking! But just think of the happiness that awaits you with the abundance of Rush coming your way!
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread, now featuring: Rush
Post by: ThatOneGuy2112 on September 04, 2014, 01:43:34 PM
Aaaaaaand follow.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread, now featuring: Rush
Post by: Enigmachine on September 04, 2014, 02:05:03 PM
I'm following.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread, now featuring: Rush
Post by: nicmos on September 04, 2014, 04:22:55 PM
I'm still not 100% sold on Geddy's vocals despite being a fan of the band for 3-4 years, and on this album it's really grating IMHO. He would lower the register, and tone back the shrieks later on.


I would rather listen to his vocals on s/t versus anything Vapor Trails or after (and I actually really like the last 3 albums (not counting Feedback), I just can barely stand the change in vocal technique.)

and Before And After is definitely the underrated track from this album.  That is a kick-ass song once the full band picks up.  What You're Doing is the most overrated.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread, now featuring: Rush
Post by: Orbert on September 04, 2014, 05:07:48 PM
Everybody talks about how they were clones of Led Zeppelin in the early days, but to this day, I don't really hear it.  Riff-based rock and roll, a singer who wails, and the ability to venture outside your basic three-chord blues structure don't make you a clone; you just have some things in common.  Any band worth a damn has all of these things.

It's funny; you need a certain amount of familiarity with both bands to hear the similarities, but if you're really familiar with both bands and their respective sounds, you hear the differences.  And at some point, the differences overshadow the similarities.  To me, they're very different bands.  And yes, I realize that Rush cite Led Zeppelin as an early influence.  They're still not that similar.

Anyway, I'm along for the ride.  I've been a Rush fan since Caress of Steel, and am looking forward to learning a little bit more about this band.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread, now featuring: Rush
Post by: KevShmev on September 04, 2014, 05:10:50 PM
I kind of agree.  I mean, some of the riffs are very LZ-esque, and I still think "Here Again" is their attempt at a slow, bluesy LZ-like tune, but the one Rush book talks about how people at the time heard Working Man on the radio and wondered if it was the new Led Zeppelin song, and I'm always like, "How did people think that Geddy Lee sounded like Robert Plant?"  The difference in their voices is more than obvious, even at first on the surface.  Then again, it was the 70s, so God only knows how high everyone was. :lol :lol
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread, now featuring: Rush
Post by: jingle.boy on September 04, 2014, 09:43:42 PM
Fun facts:

Early incarnations of the band had them under the monikers of Projection, Hadrian.
Geddy was actually the 2nd bass player for Rush, and was briefly kicked out of the band
Geddy formed a band called Ogilvle, then Judd before returning back to Rush
The band broke out from doing High School gigs starting in 1971, when the drinking age in Ontario was lowered from 21 to 18.
Rush's first record pressing was a cover of Buddy Holly's "Not Fade Away"
Between Rutsey and Peart, they had a temp drummer by the name of Jerry Fielding.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread, now featuring: Rush
Post by: Lowdz on September 05, 2014, 06:34:20 AM
I'm still not 100% sold on Geddy's vocals despite being a fan of the band for 3-4 years, and on this album it's really grating IMHO. He would lower the register, and tone back the shrieks later on.


I would rather listen to his vocals on s/t versus anything Vapor Trails or after (and I actually really like the last 3 albums (not counting Feedback), I just can barely stand the change in vocal technique.)

and Before And After is definitely the underrated track from this album.  That is a kick-ass song once the full band picks up.  What You're Doing is the most overrated.

I'd agree about Geddy's voice. Things were better on CA but TFE, VT and S&A was painful.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread, now featuring: Rush
Post by: hefdaddy42 on September 05, 2014, 06:42:14 AM
Everybody talks about how they were clones of Led Zeppelin in the early days, but to this day, I don't really hear it.  Riff-based rock and roll, a singer who wails, and the ability to venture outside your basic three-chord blues structure don't make you a clone; you just have some things in common.  Any band worth a damn has all of these things.
Yeah, but did any band at that time have all of these things?  There is a reason that people loved LZ so much; they really broke new ground.

I mean, I think the LZ influence is fairly obvious on Rush's first album.  They just as obviously moved past that phase fairly quickly.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread, now featuring: Rush
Post by: Orbert on September 05, 2014, 07:25:07 AM
Black Sabbath, Aerosmith, hell, even KISS was already around by then and trying new things.  The early-mid 70's were an amazing time; Rock was moving in all different directions.  Riffs instead of just power chords weren't unique to Led Zeppelin, everyone was busting out of the stock arrangements, and every lead singer was different.  I hear the Led Zeppelin influence, too, but my point is that I think far too much is made about how Rush was little more than a knockoff or clone.  If you can't hear the differences, or think Geddy sounds anything like Robert Plant, then you're just not listening.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread, now featuring: Rush
Post by: KevShmev on September 05, 2014, 07:55:18 AM
Fun facts:

Early incarnations of the band had them under the monikers of Projection, Hadrian.
Geddy was actually the 2nd bass player for Rush, and was briefly kicked out of the band
Geddy formed a band called Ogilvle, then Judd before returning back to Rush
The band broke out from doing High School gigs starting in 1971, when the drinking age in Ontario was lowered from 21 to 18.
Rush's first record pressing was a cover of Buddy Holly's "Not Fade Away"
Between Rutsey and Peart, they had a temp drummer by the name of Jerry Fielding.

 :tup :tup
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread, now featuring: Rush
Post by: hefdaddy42 on September 05, 2014, 07:58:29 AM
I don't think that Geddy sounds like Robert Plant at all.

Geddy doesn't sound like anyone.

But that high-pitched wailing style wasn't being done popularly by very many other singers, so I get the comparison.

And Rush's first album doesn't sound anything like Black Sabbath, Aerosmith, and certainly not KISS.  But parts of it are very reminiscent of Zeppelin.  And they have said similar things themselves.

I mean, if you don't hear it, OK, but many people do.  That's why, as you said, "everybody talks about it."
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread, now featuring: Rush
Post by: Orbert on September 05, 2014, 10:34:25 AM
I didn't say they sound like Black Sabbath, Aerosmith, or KISS.  I said that riff-based rock, a singer who wails, and trying things other than basic three-chord blues are all things any good band does, and you asked whether anyone else at the time had all those attributes.  Those are three I thought of off the top of my head.

I also said that I hear the similarities between Rush and Led Zeppelin.  But more importantly, I hear the differences.


I can't tell if you're missing my points or just want to argue anyway.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread, now featuring: Rush
Post by: hefdaddy42 on September 05, 2014, 10:53:48 AM
No, I don't "want to argue."  It's a discussion forum, I am discussing.   ???

If your point is that there are differences between Zep and Rush, then I'm not sure it's a point that needs to be made.  That's obvious.  But the popular comparison between the two is about the similarities, not the differences.

The only thing I was addressing was your original point about Rush being known as a "Zeppelin clone" and you not hearing it.  If you don't hear it, OK.  And you brought up other examples of bands who do some of the same things, but I pointed out that early Rush is never compared to them, only to Zeppelin.  So, not sure what to tell you.  If you don't hear it, you don't hear it.

We can certainly move on.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread, now featuring: Rush
Post by: Orbert on September 05, 2014, 11:30:29 AM
Okay, I apologize for that.  There is a difference between argument and discussion.

But I hear the similarities.

Also, I can hear the similarities between Rush and Led Zeppelin.

Not only that, but as mentioned in at least two previous posts, I do hear the similarities between Rush and Led Zeppelin.


My point is that there is a difference between bands having similar attributes and bands being "clones".  People didn't say Rush sounded similar to Led Zeppelin, they said they were fucking clones.  Some people heard Rush and honestly thought they were hearing Led Zeppelin.  Seriously?

That's all I'm saying.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread, now featuring: Rush
Post by: hefdaddy42 on September 05, 2014, 11:34:37 AM
OK.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread, now featuring: Rush
Post by: Mladen on September 05, 2014, 12:03:32 PM
The debut is quite Zeppelin-esque in some places, but to say that they were copying Zeppelin is a bit extreme in my opinion.

Also, both :omg: and  :lol at Geddy being kicked out of the band in the early days.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread, now featuring: Rush
Post by: KevShmev on September 05, 2014, 12:07:17 PM
Well, let's remember that when Geddy was kicked out, that was when they were still just a local band doing high schools and whatnot, and the member changes were fast and frequent.  It's not like he was kicked out once they actually saw some light at the end of the tunnel (that light being a possible recording contract).
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread, now featuring: Rush
Post by: ReaperKK on September 05, 2014, 12:17:57 PM
Why was he kicked out?
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread, now featuring: Rush
Post by: KevShmev on September 05, 2014, 12:20:21 PM
According to the Visions book, John Rutsey convinced the others to kick him out at the time.  That was in 1969.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread, now featuring: Rush
Post by: theseoafs on September 05, 2014, 12:52:56 PM
I'll definitely be following this thread. 

As for the self-titled.  The comparison to Zep has been made, which is fair since that's the kind of sound they were going for.  But I can't really say that I really listen to the debut at all, in spite of the fact that I enjoy Zeppelin's early records.  The album's just not awfully interesting -- the music is often uninspired, the lyrics aren't notable, and it gets samey really quickly.  There are flashes of brilliance, of course:  I always thought Finding My Way was pretty nifty, the opening of Before and After is beautiful, and Working Man is an undisputed classic and the best that this incarnation of Rush would have to offer.  But there's just as much filler (between Need Some Love, Take a Friend, In the Mood, What You're Doing, every part of Before and After that isn't the intro, and Here Again, despite how much I love slow bluesy rockers). 

One thing I really have to commend Rush for is never staying in one place.  Fly by Night would hint at a new proggier direction for them, which was of course integral to their future success.  If they had ignored that and just spat out a few rehashes of their debut, things would likely be totally different (in spite of how successful the debut was). 
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread, now featuring: Rush
Post by: ReaperKK on September 05, 2014, 02:57:29 PM
Listening to the debut right now. It's largely forgettable. It's not bad by any means, it's just middle of the road to me. The highlights of the album are the solo in "Here Again" and the main riff of "Working Man". I actually don't really like the middle part of working man, I always thought the song would be better if it was shorter.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread, now featuring: Rush
Post by: ? on September 05, 2014, 11:58:33 PM
I'd only heard Finding My Way and Working Man, so I just listened to the album in full for the first time. You can hear some hints of what they would do on the following albums, but the lack of Neil is obvious both musically and lyrically. I still think Working Man is a monster of a song and I loved the intro to Before and After, but most of the album is bluesy hard rock that I don't find very exciting.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread, now featuring: Rush
Post by: GentlemanofDread on September 06, 2014, 06:35:04 AM
It is a strong debut album though. The sound is there, but the drummer isn't the best they would get. Geddy's voice isn't something I can take well on this album.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread, now featuring: Rush
Post by: hefdaddy42 on September 06, 2014, 02:25:20 PM
I love the debut album.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread, now featuring: Rush
Post by: Mosh on September 06, 2014, 04:07:55 PM
There are definitely some similarities between this album and Led Zeppelin. But I hear more Blue Cheer in early Rush than Zeppelin. They even covered BC on that Feedback thing.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread, now featuring: Rush
Post by: jammindude on September 07, 2014, 06:34:28 PM
LOVE the first album.   Even Take a Friend (which many people diss).    :metal :metal :metal
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread, now featuring: Fly by Night
Post by: KevShmev on September 09, 2014, 12:06:30 PM
So, with the departure of John Rutsey happening right after the recording of the first album, and the band in need of a new drummer for the upcoming shows, Alex and Geddy quickly got to auditioning drummers.  After a few that did nada for them, a fella named Neil Peart showed up one day.  During the audtion, they even jammed on a rhythm that eventually became Anthem.  While Alex wasn't sure if he was the guy for them, Geddy knew right away and convinced Alex that this Neil Peart character was their guy; after some apprehension, Alex agreed.  And with that, Neil Peart joined Rush in the summer of '74, establishing the lineup that still exists today!

Two weeks later, after getting money from the record company to buy new gear and all of the trinkets, they were on tour and off the races, heading into the studio at the beginning of '75 to record Fly by Night, which was released shortly thereafter.  Geddy had done most of the lyrics on the debut record, but had little urge to keep doing them.  Neal, meanwhile, was pretty well-read and liked experimenting with words and whatnot, so they convinced him to give it a try. They loved what he came up with, and with that, the band not only had a new drummer, but a new lyricist.  Neil even joked that he became the lyricist because "no one else wanted to do it." :lol

From the very start, the presence of Neil Peart is in your face, as he kills it during the Anthem intro, and then later melts your face off during the extended instrumental section of By-Tor and the Snow Dog.  While Rutsey's playing was solid on the first album, Peart's was immediately far better and enabled the band to do start getting a little out there with different time signatures and progressive ideas.  A song like By-Tor..., a very early Rush classic with the diehards, is a good example of them having new ideas of where they wanted to take their sound.  The title track, of course, is still somewhat of a classic rock mainstay, even if the band themselves aren't overly wild about it anymore.  Other favorites of mine are Making Memories and Beneath, Between and Behind, both of which rock and have some nice melodies.  In the End is another early fan favorite, although it has never been a favorite of mine.  I like it, but I don't love it.  Rivendell was an attempt at having a laid back acoustic number.  It misses the mark pretty badly, but at least it was an attempt at something different at the time.  To me, the obvious classics from this record are Anthem and By-Tor and the Snow Dog.  They stand up well when compared to songs from any Rush era.

Overall, I like this album quite a bit.  It retains the fire and youthful energy of the debut record, but with better playing, more diversity and better songs.  Considering where they were to go as the 70s moved along, this sounds like a natural progression from the debut, and sets up nicely where they went later that year...

(https://www.progarchives.com/progressive_rock_discography_covers/609/cover_5416207122010.jpg)
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread, now featuring: Fly by Night
Post by: Orbert on September 09, 2014, 12:22:41 PM
This one's a fave, from the early era and from any Rush era.  "Anthem" kicks my butt to this day, "By-Tor and the Snow Dog" is a great first attempt at an epic and a great song overall, and most of the other tracks are also pretty strong.  I've never slagged on "Rivendell" the way many do, perhaps because this was junior high for me and a lot of people were reading "The Lord of the Rings" books, so someone writing a song about Rivendell fit right in.  Sure, it was mellow.  It provided a nice contrast.

I love the names of the cities where the lyrics were written on the lyric sheet.  Lansing, MI -- my home town!
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread, now featuring: Fly by Night
Post by: Podaar on September 09, 2014, 01:13:05 PM
I also really like this album. Every song is great with the possible exception of Rivendell, yet it has its own charm. Strangely, the real highlight of this album, for me, is Making Memories. I think it's just really effective at presenting the lyrics and also, I'm a sucker for slide guitar.

I just love the dramatic and immediate impact that Neil had on the band's sound. Even when they're playing In The End, which could sit comfortably on the debut, the Peart flair is fully on display...and his lyrics on the whole album are so diverse and different. I remember hearing Geddy say that at first he really found the lyrics to be a mouthful to sing though.  :lol

Alex's guitar tone on this album takes on his trademark sound that I always loved so much. Somehow it can sound heavy on lower power cords but still have the higher notes ring out while working his favorite pick patterns. I've always admired guitarists who have unique, personal tones and Alex's is one of the real gems.

Speaking of tones, does anyone know how Geddy got the monster roar sounds on his bass during the battle section of By-Tor and the Snowdog?

Also, the production on this album should be mentioned. It's sound really stood out, back in the day, and still has a great expansive sound that I'd love to hear more of from modern bands.

Great album!
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread, now featuring: Fly by Night
Post by: Lowdz on September 09, 2014, 01:22:33 PM
And we're off!!!
I really love this album. There are so many great moments - Anthem, BB&B, MM, By-tor. Like Kev I'm not as keen on Rivendell and In The End but they don't kill the album or anything.
By-Tor was a great taster of what was to come. Air drumming is essential whenever 70s Rush is played and this album started that off in grand style. I love the ensemble riff that shortens each time through, interspersed with the drum madness.
Alex is on fire too.
The lyrics got a good kick in the ass too, though I always found Rivendell a bit on the boring side.
Anyway, the beginning of Rush greatness.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread, now featuring: Fly by Night
Post by: TAC on September 09, 2014, 01:29:35 PM
I love In The End, though the All The World's A Stage version is so much better than the studio.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread, now featuring: Fly by Night
Post by: emtee on September 09, 2014, 01:53:32 PM
Never listen to the debut but love FBN.

I had not spun All The World's A Stage for quite some time and did so a few days ago (good timing for this thread) and was
reminded how heavy they were at times. We can all have a debate about what's heavy and what is or isn't metal but
Anthem is heavy as hell by any definition.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread, now featuring: Fly by Night
Post by: Mosh on September 10, 2014, 04:35:45 PM
Any love for Beneath, Between, and Behind? One of my favorite 70s Rush tracks. It has a sort of charm that they lost after this album, but still sounds proggy/sophisticated.

Great album overall. The only song I don't like is Best I Can, which sounds like a leftover from the debut. Although it really destroys every song from that album, as does everything else on FBN.  :metal
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread, now featuring: Fly by Night
Post by: King Postwhore on September 10, 2014, 04:51:40 PM
My favorite early rush album.  Neil adds such a different dimension to them.  BTW Mosh, since you brought up Best I Can, it was the first song I learned on guitar from my guitar teacher. :metal    Rhythm guitar of course.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread, now featuring: Fly by Night
Post by: jjrock88 on September 10, 2014, 05:21:22 PM
Great disc and an upgrade from the debut for sure. Anthem and By Tor are absolute classics!
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread, now featuring: Fly by Night
Post by: Mosh on September 10, 2014, 07:32:50 PM
My favorite early rush album.  Neil adds such a different dimension to them.  BTW Mosh, since you brought up Best I Can, it was the first song I learned on guitar from my guitar teacher. :metal    Rhythm guitar of course.
  :metal
I remember getting my teacher to teach me the Red Barchetta a long time ago. I didn't know how guitar harmonics worked so that intro would really blow my mind.
That was the first Rush song I ever learned.

I actually just listened to the Fly By Night album and maybe I was a little too harsh on Best I Can. It's still my least favorite song, but it's still a huge step up from what they were doing on the debut.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread, now featuring: Fly by Night
Post by: Zydar on September 11, 2014, 12:35:42 AM
My favourite of the two they released under 1975. Neil Peart makes his presence known right away with Anthem (both musically and lyrically). The high points for me is Anthem, Beneath Between & Behind, and the title track.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread, now featuring: Fly by Night
Post by: ? on September 11, 2014, 03:34:20 AM
I probably listen to this less than any other Rush album (besides the debut, which I don't own), even though I have a FBN hoodie. :lol Anthem and By-Tor are awesome, but the rest of the album doesn't do much for me. You can already hear Neil's influence, but most of the songs are still fairly straightforward rock.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread, now featuring: Fly by Night
Post by: Mladen on September 12, 2014, 11:41:35 AM
Fly by night isn't bad but it's still one of my lesser favorite Rush albums. They still had to write a song that I would truly fall in love with.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread, now featuring: Fly by Night
Post by: mikemangioy on September 12, 2014, 01:13:24 PM
Posting before I get too behind:

I always wanted to explore Rush further, but never had the time/the will to do it. Now's the time!

The first record was very enjoyable, a few tunes were awesome (Need Some Love, Take A Friend, What You're Doing, Working Man) but there were also awesomely cringeworthy moments (In The Mood).

Fly By Night is amazing. Anthem is a great song, I love the chorus of BBB and the title track, and By-Tor is a masterpiece  :hefdaddy
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread, now featuring: Fly by Night
Post by: The Letter M on September 12, 2014, 02:52:55 PM
My thoughts on FBN:
-"Anthem" was a great way for them to open the album. It's very "in your face" and shows off Neil's chops and skill. It's like the band had to announce their new drummer, and they did it well.
-"Best I Can" was a staple of their live sets in the early days, and it's OK. Not one of my favorites on the album, and it definitely has that Early-Rush sound and feel.
-"Beneath, Between And Behind" is impressive, and Neil's grooves in it are very intuitive and interesting. I'm glad they kept playing it even up through the Moving Pictures Tour!
-The roaring epic, "By-Tor And The Snow Dog", is the centerpiece of the album, IMO, and it's SO prog LOL Well, I mean, it's their first track with individual movements within it, and in fact, even one of those four movements has movements WITHIN it!!! Everyone shows off well in this track, and it's been a hugely popular concert staple for many years, with good reason! It just pumps me up and I love air-drumming to Neil's solos in the middle.
-The title track is a great short rocker, a rock-radio staple, and I love hearing it on the radio whenever I happen to have it on. This is another fun one to air-drum to, especially Neil's fills that are always different! His attention to detail is astounding!
-"Making Memories" is another early-Rush rock tune, which I couple with "Best I Can" for songs that are very debut-album-ish and don't really make much of an impression on me. They're good, mind you (mostly because it IS Rush), but among tracks like "By-Tor" and "Anthem", it doesn't hit me as hard as the others.
-"Rivendell"...oh "Rivendell". That rhyme scheme is SOOOO off-sounding because everytime Geddy sings "Feel the sun upon your ____", I want to insert "ass" instead of "face" because it rhymes with "grass" in the previous line. EVERY SINGLE TIME. Thankfully, I don't listen to it very often.
-"In The End", appropriately named, is at the end of the album. Another early-Rush-ish tune but with some good heavy moments. It's got some interesting changes and parts, and for that, it's a step up from BIC and MM for me.

Over-all, the 2nd side of the album isn't as strong as the first side, and I can understand if they did that on purpose. It was also pretty tricky to put the title track, and single, at the top of side 2, just to get everyone to flip the vinyl and in turn, listen to the whole album. This was step-up and a step in the right direction for the fledgling band, and they would take a step sideways (COS) first before moving on to bigger and better things (2112).

-Marc.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread, now featuring: Fly by Night
Post by: KevShmev on September 12, 2014, 11:54:01 PM
Best I Can would be a lot better if the chorus was good, but it kind of falls flat, especially after how sweet the verses are.  But they, this was early on and they were still learning how to write good songs...
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread, now featuring: Fly by Night
Post by: jingle.boy on September 13, 2014, 08:11:02 AM
Side 1 is 10 pounds of awesome in a 5 pound bag.  Always loved BBB. By-Tor took some time for me to warm up to, but quite clearly the start of them spreading their progressive wings to form their own sound, and break away from the quite clearly 'influence' influenced style of the s/t debut.  One might even argue that By-Tor was the birth of progressive-metal.

Fun facts:
Neil was working for his dad in the parts department of Dalziel Equipment at the time he was recruited to audition for Rush.
Neil was initially non-committal on his invitation to audition for Geddy and Alex.  Geddy would whisper "he's a greaseball" when Neil entered the audition.
After accepting the position, the trio had 10 days to prep for an opening gig for Uriah Heep
The album was recorded in 21 days from the time they entered Toronto Sound Studios, to the time they delivered the master tapes.
By-Tor comes from roadie Howard Ungerleider's stay at Ray Daniels', and he was not warmly greeted by Ray's dogs.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread, now featuring: Fly by Night
Post by: KevShmev on September 13, 2014, 09:55:08 AM
Oh yeah, I forgot about the By-Tor and the Snow Dog story.  There were two dogs; one looked like a snow dog, and the other was a German Shepard that kept biting people, hence Howard Ungerleider calling him a "By-Tor." :lol :lol
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread, now featuring: Fly by Night
Post by: Kwyjibo on September 15, 2014, 08:28:16 AM
Following this, though I won't have much to say
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread, now featuring: Fly by Night
Post by: GentlemanofDread on September 15, 2014, 10:59:44 AM
Fly By Night is a lot better than the debut than me, though it might be because I just LOVE By Tor. Incredible song.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread, now featuring: Caress of Steel
Post by: KevShmev on September 16, 2014, 12:17:12 PM
After spending the spring touring, the fellas jumped right back in the studio in the summer of 1975 to record their third album, Caress of Steel, and it would be the only year to have two Rush studio albums.  They were, however, pressed for time in the studio, but they went in armed with some great ideas, one of which was their eagerness to get a little more progressive, highlighted by Neil writing some lyrics that would become a part of The Fountain of Lamneth, their first sidelong epic.  I can't help but think that had they had more time, the album would have sounded more cohesive and focused, but since it was a bit of a rush job, no pun intended, it sounds like a scattershot of great moments sandwiched around some moments that feel unrealized.  There is the most evident on the six-part sidelong epic, which has some terrific parts - No One at the Bridge and Bacchus Plateau stand out to me the most - but overall sounds like a bunch of moving parts kind of stuck together for the sake of having something they could call an epic.  It's an admirable first attempt at a sidelong epic, even if it falls way short of being great.  But hey, you always need a rough draft, right?  Not every band hits it out of the park on their first try with a 20-minute plus tune.  Plus, the band had fun making the record, being that they were all high as a kite during the making of it :lol, so maybe that explains the loose nature of it. ;)

Side 1 is comprised of three short songs and a mini-epic.  While the sidelong epic didn't really come together, the mini-epic, The Necromancer, did.  It has a great flow - Part 1 is mellow and builds up nicely; Part 2 is rocking and fast; Part 3 is a mid-tempo section celebrating the victory of the returning By-Tor over The Necromancer, punctuated by a triumphant guitar solo by Alex Lifeson to end the journey.  Of the short tunes, Bastille Day stands out the most, it being a kick ass rocker that still manages to have a lot of melodic goodness.  Lakeside Park is a laid back, nostalgic number that has its moments, but some of the vocal lines have not aged well since Geddy was still in search of vocal control and his vocal identity. I Think I'm Going Bald is kind of a throwaway song, one that has never appealed to me, even though it is a rare song that shows off their sense of humor, something they usually save just for live shows, instead of putting in songs. 

Sadly, the album was a flop at the time, which infuriated the record company, who would then amp up the pressure for the band to return to its roots, stop messing around with extended arrangements, and get back to being a basic hard rock band, ala the debut record. But that is a story better told when we get to that fourth record...

(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/f/fa/Rush_Caress_of_Steel.jpg)
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Caress of Steel
Post by: jammindude on September 16, 2014, 12:25:39 PM
Even now...30 years after I first heard it...I still am amazed by the hate for I Think I'm Going Bald.   Probably up there with my non-epic Rush songs of all time.  LOVE the riff...LOVE the contemplative lyrics.   
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Caress of Steel
Post by: KevShmev on September 16, 2014, 12:28:38 PM
I'll admit that it bugs me that the main riff is basically a slight variation of the In the Mood riff, so it sounds derivative of them being derivative of Led Zeppelin. :lol :lol
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Caress of Steel
Post by: Podaar on September 16, 2014, 12:30:44 PM
I don't know, I still love Caress of Steel, even if the color of the album cover is mistakenly brass colored. I love the brass balls it took to put this eclectic music out for all of 1975 to see!

Again, I may be guilty of overly sentimental nostalgia but I Think I'm Going Bald and Lakeside Park are both wonderful tunes. Bastille Day is an obvious highlight and the Necromancer was just a different kind of heavy that no one else was doing at the time. That middle section!  :omg:

Rush is unique.

I've never got the criticism for The Fountain of Lamneth. There are parts of it that I think surpass much of what came later.  I always found it so poetic and wonderful...of course, like them, I usually had a bit of Colombian cash crop around and plenty of black lights. Still, this passage is sublime, IMO.

Yet my eyes are drawn toward
The mountain in the east
Fascinates and captivates
Gives my heart no peace
The mountain holds the sunrise
In the prison of the night
'Til bursting forth from rocky chains
The valley floods with light


I completely enjoy this album, from front to back, everytime I play it. Which is often.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Caress of Steel
Post by: jammindude on September 16, 2014, 12:39:54 PM
I'll admit that it bugs me that the main riff is basically a slight variation of the In the Mood riff, so it sounds derivative of them being derivative of Led Zeppelin. :lol :lol

And I have to admit...this was something that I didn't notice for 20 years until someone pointed it out.    Still didn't ruin my love for it.   It think it's an improvement over In the Mood. 
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Caress of Steel
Post by: Orbert on September 16, 2014, 12:41:29 PM
I like this album more than most people do, but I'm sure that's largely due to nostalgia.  This was the first Rush album I remember hearing when it was new.  Fly By Night had come out earlier that year, and was of course great, and one of my friends even had the first album, but Caress of Steel came out and we all went out and got it.  New Rush!

In retrospect, and with the benefit of perspective (which is kinda the same thing), it's not a really great album.  But we dove into it anyway.  Even then, I remember thinking that "The Fountain of Lamneth" sounded pretty disjointed and was a bunch of things cobbled together to form an epic (I'd already been listening to Close to the Edge for years) but the guys were going for it, and the individual pieces were kinda nice.  I think that's where most of the criticism comes from.  It's not a bad piece, but somehow less than the sum of its parts, not more.

The first verse of "The Necromancer" rhymes!  With the second verse, and of course the third, it's much more obvious, but the way the first verse is spoken rather than sung, and devoid of any rhythm, it's not obvious at all.  I remember being amazed when I was reading the lyrics one day and realized this.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Caress of Steel
Post by: ? on September 16, 2014, 01:17:58 PM
I may be in the minority here, but I like COS a lot more than the first two albums. The Necromancer is awesome, Bastille Day rocks hard and ITIGB puts a grin on my face. :D I don't care much for Lakeside Park, and The Fountain of Lamneth lacks the cohesion of their later epics, but both are still listenable.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Caress of Steel
Post by: The Letter M on September 16, 2014, 01:49:23 PM
An oddity and a gem all at the same time. I felt like this was Rush being more Genesis and Yes than Led Zeppelin. Like Genesis, this is their third album ending with a song that fades out and fades back in with "The Fountain Of ______" as the title. The opening part of the closing epic features a rhythm that is two-beats shorter than a familiar rhythm in "Watcher Of The Skies".

The first side is pretty typical Rush, especially the first three songs, although there's an epic-feel to the ending of "Bastille Day" which still amazes me to this day. As early-DT have called it, it's majestic. The next two tracks are rather forgettable in the grand scheme of things, but in the evolution of Rush, they were the next step, if a bit odd lyrically, especially "I Think I'm Going Bald" - an attempt by the band to show that they should NOT be taken so seriously.

The sequel to "By-Tor & The Snow Dog" features By-Tor as the hero, thus creating the band's first attempt at a (loose) cross-album story. Their next attempt (the Cygnus X-1 Duology) would fare better, although I would love to hear them (or anyone, really) perform both By-Tor songs back-to-back in full.

The closing epic is a piece-meal try at an epic, and they've got a lot of good IDEAS, but compared to works like "Tarkus", "Supper's Ready", or "Close To The Edge", there's a lack of cohesion and thematic "glue". It's a mini-concept, almost an album in of itself, something I liken to Spock's Beard's "A Flash Before My Eyes". If the songs were longer, and it took up a whole album, it could've been the band's first true concept album, but as it stands, it's 6 pieces (really 5 songs and a drum solo) that are loosely held together by a story of a growing and traveling man (an idea that would later be perfect in Clockwork Angels). I do enjoy the fact that Neil incorporated  bits of "Didacts And Narpets" into his drum solos for years and years to come, but it's a shame there's no real live recordings of this epic.

Caress Of Steel was an early favorite of mine when I was beginning to get into Rush, and I liked the proggier bits compared to the first two albums. In fact, aside from the title track on their next album, I like COS more as a whole than I do 2112 (whose second side is a bit lacking for me, but more on that later). I often wonder how Rush would've ended up had COS been a hit, but I guess we'll never know.

-Marc.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Caress of Steel
Post by: hefdaddy42 on September 16, 2014, 02:21:10 PM
It's a good album, with some brilliant sections, but overall I prefer the first two.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Caress of Steel
Post by: Orbert on September 16, 2014, 03:57:39 PM
Like Genesis, this is their third album ending with a song that fades out and fades back in with "The Fountain Of ______" as the title. The opening part of the closing epic features a rhythm that is two-beats shorter than a familiar rhythm in "Watcher Of The Skies".

This kind of thing always amazes me.  I make some pretty obscure connections when I listen to music, but, despite listening to both albums for nearly 40 years, I never even thought about the parallels with "The Fountain of _______" and that they're each on the band's respective third album.  That takes things to a whole new level.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Caress of Steel
Post by: TAC on September 16, 2014, 04:08:23 PM
I still don't know how I feel about this album.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Caress of Steel
Post by: King Postwhore on September 16, 2014, 04:08:45 PM
It's a good album, with some brilliant sections, but overall I prefer the first two.

I agree.  I throw it on once and I while and dig it a lot but that's because I play it in moderation.

I love what they named this tour telling us in the Doc.  The "Down The Tubes" tour. :lol
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Caress of Steel
Post by: Podaar on September 16, 2014, 04:31:40 PM
I still don't know how I feel about this album.

I know I'm starting to sound like a broken record, but damnit, you're worth it TAC!

Search your feelings...
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Caress of Steel
Post by: jammindude on September 16, 2014, 04:37:18 PM
It's a good album, with some brilliant sections, but overall I prefer the first two.

I agree.  I throw it on once and I while and dig it a lot but that's because I play it in moderation.

I love what they named this tour telling us in the Doc.  The "Down The Tubes" tour. :lol

I may have misheard it...or it may be just rumor...but wasn't it the "Down the TOBES Tour"?   (a play on words?  Remember "...the tobes of Hades lit by flickering torchlight...")

EDIT:  Even though it's reported everywhere as "Down the Tubes"....I had heard it reported somewhere in the 80's that it was "Down the Tobes" and that the reporters had simply heard it wrong.    I should rewatch Lighted Stage to see how Alex actually pronounces it.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Caress of Steel
Post by: jjrock88 on September 16, 2014, 04:49:54 PM
This would be my top three least played Rush albums.  I would consider it good, no more no less
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Caress of Steel
Post by: Lucien on September 16, 2014, 06:25:42 PM
I love The Fountain of Lamneth. Tied as my favorite Rush epic to Hemispheres.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Caress of Steel
Post by: Mosh on September 16, 2014, 07:41:28 PM
Better than the debut, worse than Fly By Night. Can't stand side 2, I've tried to like it but it's always failed to grab me. It has some cool moments but not enough to justify its 19 minutes.

The first side is definitely better, with all the songs being good, but I never really listen to any of the songs by themselves. Bastille Day and Lakeside Park are still awesome though, and it's too bad they couldn't be on stronger albums.

Not the worst Rush album, but not the best. It's probably in my bottom 5.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Caress of Steel
Post by: ReaperKK on September 17, 2014, 05:16:24 AM
COS is my favorite of the first three albums. Lakeside Park being my favorite song from all three albums and one of my all time favorite Rush songs. The song captures such a good feeling of nostalgia, "Though it's just a memory, some memories last forever."
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Caress of Steel
Post by: Mladen on September 17, 2014, 07:40:48 AM
It is my favorite of the first three Rush albums as well, but still not such a great record. I like Bastille day, as well as The Fountain of Lamneth, although I feel like the latter lacks some diversity and maybe some heavier parts to stay more interesting. The remaining three are pretty forgettable, especially The Necromancer. I never understood the appeal of that one, not a single minute grabs my attention.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Caress of Steel
Post by: Jaq on September 17, 2014, 10:24:45 AM
Haven't been chiming in much here, because I said most of what I wanted to say about these songs in the individual Rush song thread, but I'm following. Always liked the energy this album had, even if it's really an undercooked version of the band they became as the 70s went on.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Caress of Steel
Post by: SoundscapeMN on September 17, 2014, 11:22:28 AM
along with Presto, Caress of Steel is maybe the most underappreciated  record they made (when more appreciation is warranted). I happen to love both Fountain and The Necromancer.

Most probably don't notice this, but the bassline's interval pattern at a point in The Necromancer basically is the same as a part of the bassline in Heart of the Sunrise from Yes, which actually was more or less the same as part of 1 of the jams on the Deluxe Edition of the Blind Faith album,
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Caress of Steel
Post by: nicmos on September 17, 2014, 02:32:37 PM

 Even then, I remember thinking that "The Fountain of Lamneth" sounded pretty disjointed and was a bunch of things cobbled together to form an epic.  It's not a bad piece, but somehow less than the sum of its parts, not more.

This is well put Orbert, I guess that's how I felt but you hit the nail on the head.  As with KevShmev, I really like No One At The Bridge, and Bacchus Plateau, but more as standalone pieces.  And did anyone notice that fellow Canuck rockers I Mother Earth's album Dig from 1993 has a tribute to (or quote from?) No One At The Bridge in the solo on the last track?  There's some respect for this album that came as a surprise.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Caress of Steel
Post by: KevShmev on September 18, 2014, 09:55:39 PM
Haven't been chiming in much here, because I said most of what I wanted to say about these songs in the individual Rush song thread, but I'm following. Always liked the energy this album had, even if it's really an undercooked version of the band they became as the 70s went on.

Honestly, I feel like my write-ups aren't doing the band justice, mainly because we have discussed them so much over the years - between the main Rush threads, the song of the day thread, Marc's live tours thread, etc. - and when you combine that with me not being in any kind of Rush mood lately, it is making this thread feels like just an afterthought, almost like doing the updates are work or required, instead of them being fun. :( 
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Caress of Steel
Post by: Mladen on September 19, 2014, 04:35:13 AM
I think the write-ups are pretty cool.  :tup
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Caress of Steel
Post by: hefdaddy42 on September 19, 2014, 04:47:47 AM
I like the writeups too, Kev.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Caress of Steel
Post by: Jaq on September 19, 2014, 09:26:23 AM
Yeah, the write ups are just fine, Kev, just explaining why I'm not all over this thread like a madman. Hell lately I haven't been posting much period because of things going on to distract me (buying a house will do that to you) so keep up the work.  :tup
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Caress of Steel
Post by: KevShmev on September 19, 2014, 09:46:49 AM
Okay, cool. :coolio

Maybe I am just seeing jingle's epic write-ups in the LZ thread and having an inferiority complex about it. :facepalm: :lol :lol
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Caress of Steel
Post by: King Postwhore on September 19, 2014, 11:38:16 AM
I'm just to lazy to even do a thread like this Kev so you are all right.  Hell, I'm to lazy to add something to this and I'm a Rush nut! :lol
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Caress of Steel
Post by: KevShmev on September 19, 2014, 11:40:25 AM
 :lol :lol

I suspect the updates will be longer and more informative now that we are getting to the really good stuff. :metal
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Caress of Steel
Post by: TAC on September 19, 2014, 12:29:26 PM
  Hell, I'm to lazy to add something to this and I'm a Rush nut! :lol
:lol

Okay, cool. :coolio

Maybe I am just seeing jingle's epic write-ups in the LZ thread and having an inferiority complex about it. :facepalm: :lol :lol

Don't let him intimidate you!! Nothing wrong with this thread.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: 2112
Post by: KevShmev on September 19, 2014, 12:40:58 PM
The future of Rush was now at stake. Caress of Steel was a flop, and the ensuing tour, dubbed the "Down the Tubes tour" by the band themselves thanks to the crowds being smaller than they were earlier that year on the Fly by Night tour, was very disheartening to the guys, who fell that they were doing the right thing as they had some growing pains, but they had little support. The record company was bugging them to return to their hard rock roots of the first album, and the three met and figured they could do one of the three things:

1) Make another first album.
2) Quit.
3) Say,"to hell with it," and keep doing what they wanted to do.

The more they talked about, the angrier they got, as they knew they were on the right path, even though it was bumpy at times, so they happily chose number 3, which the record company couldn't do a thing about, since Rush had been given creative control in their contract.  And off they went to record their fourth album, 2112, where the sidelong title track would not only be the song that would lift them up and propel them into the stratosphere where they still remain, but would arguably stand all these years later as their best and most important piece of music ever.  Inspired by the writing of Ayn Rand, Neil Peart wrote a conceptual set of lyrics that centered around individualism, with the setting being a futuristic world.  In reality, the song is not only about one man's fight against the oppressive leaders, but Rush's fight against the record company for creative freedom and control. Rush would win.

Rush won, because 2112 was an immediate hit, selling more records in the first month than the first three records had sold at that point combined! The title track was the reason, as it was heavy and long, yet accessible at the same time, not to mention being all of Side 1, which infuriated the record exes, who couldn't do a thing about it since Rush had creative control, so they couldn't move it to Side 2 and put all of the short songs on Side 1. Radio stations even played all 20 minutes and 34 seconds of it back then (remember, this was the 70s!).  I still remember the first time I heard all of it; to say in inspired awe would be an understatement. :lol  I was still a lukewarm Rush fan at the time (this was the fall of 1991), but "2112" annihilating me the way it did really opened my eyes as to how great Rush was and is. 

Getting back to Rush's victory, while their win over the record company was more than obvious, the victory over the solar federation was more ambiguous for a bit, thanks to the death of the protagonist in the sixth part of the song, but the grand finale makes it quite clear of the victory:

Attentions all planets of the solar federation
Attentions all planets of the solar federation
Attentions all planets of the solar federation (7 words x 3 times = 21)
We have assumed control
We have assumed control
We have assumed control (4 words x 3 times = 12)

The band, years later, remarked that they had no idea about that and that it was unintentional, but I think they are just being coy. :lol

I know some think "2112" doesn't sound totally cohesive thanks to stop and starts in between the majority of the movements, but I look at the different parts at snapshots of a story we are only told parts of.  Visually, think of each part as a door opening and us getting a brief glimpse of the story, and the door closes, we move on to another part, and then another door opens.  The story is complete, but we are merely given snapshots of the major events. Make sense?

But, there is more to 2112 than just the title track; a lot more! Side 2 is jammed pack with a handful of excellent short songs, all under four minutes, from rockers like "A Passage to Bangkok" and "Lessons," to a lovely ballad like "Tears," to a rocker with great dynamic shifts like "Something for Nothing," to the oddly creepy, yet most excellent, "Twilight Zone."  As great as "2112" is, Side 2 being as good as it is, is a large reason why 2112 is such a great record.

Not only was the songwriting better on this record, but Geddy Lee's voice really started getting better here.  Sure, he had the crazy howling, like in the Temples of Syrinx section, but some of the softer singing, heard in many parts of the "2112" and "Tears," really showed that he knew how to his voice depending on the song and its nature, even if he was still a little rough around the edges at times. Meanwhile, Neil Peart's drumming has never been as furious as it was on this record, and I still maintain that the lead tone Alex Lifeson had on Caress of Steel and 2112 is the best he has ever had. The guitar solos in the No One at the Bridge section of "The Fountain of Lamneth" and at the end of "The Twilight Zone" display this quite clearly, IMO.  Overall, this is not only the most important Rush record to date, but arguably their best.  It is often said that bands do their best work when they have something to prove, and 2112 is a shining example of this.

(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/c/c9/Rush_2112.jpg)
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: 2112
Post by: TAC on September 19, 2014, 12:43:54 PM
I freaking LOVE 2112! The song and the album. Something For Nothing is one of my favorite Rush songs ever.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: 2112
Post by: jjrock88 on September 19, 2014, 12:47:10 PM
Awesome write up; 2112 is pure epic!
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: 2112
Post by: hefdaddy42 on September 19, 2014, 01:07:21 PM
Fantastic writeup, and definitely one of my favorite Rush albums.  I will listen again this weekend.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: 2112
Post by: Podaar on September 19, 2014, 01:18:20 PM
I freaking LOVE 2112! The song and the album. Something For Nothing is one of my favorite Rush songs ever.

This. All of this!

Nice write-up, Kev. I didn't realise until popping in for 2112 that you'd been struggling with your write-ups. I think they've been perfect so far. So, yeah, keep it going.

The buzz for this album, when it was released, was like nothing I ever experienced before or since. To say that all my friends, my friends siblings, their girlfriends, some of our teachers and more than a few parents were buzzed about the sound, scope and compositions on this record just doesn't really capture it.

My choir teacher in Junior High wrote some harmonies for Tears and we sang it in class. I had a jewelry class and our teacher who was a prog-maniac (we'd listen to Gentle Giant during class) loved this record and whenever Passage to Bangkok came on he'd disappear into the stock room (if you know what I'm sayin')

If you went to a Friday or Saturday night kegger, 2112 (the song) was almost always played at the end of the night and everyone would just stop what they were doing and listen. Everyone, and I mean it literally, that I hung with owned this album...even girl-friends. Among the rockers of the '70's this was THE most accessible prog-rock record out there. You might get shouted at if you put on ELP, Kansas, Yes, King Crimson, or even other Rush albums but no-one complained about 2112.

I love this album for so many reasons more than just nostalgia, but make no mistake, the nostalgia with this record is off the charts!
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: 2112
Post by: TAC on September 19, 2014, 01:28:02 PM
A jewelry class?

2112 is one of those records where a band goes "next level".
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: 2112
Post by: jjrock88 on September 19, 2014, 01:32:13 PM
A couple of years ago I bought the super deluxe edition of 2112. It came with a comic book and a blu ray version of the comic.  This version drastically increased my interest in the album and I highly highly recommend it
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: 2112
Post by: Podaar on September 19, 2014, 01:33:26 PM
A jewelry class?

Yes, I had Jewelry Design for an art class. Man, was there a lot of fringe benefits with that! :)
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: 2112
Post by: Zydar on September 19, 2014, 01:33:35 PM
Ah, the first of their string of classic albums. The title track is beyond epic, A Passage To Bangkok has a chorus designed for live greatness, The Twilight Zone is very creepy and eerie (listen to that overdubbed whispering vocals), Lessons is a cool midtempo rocker, Tears is such a beautiful ballad, and Something For Nothing rounds it off as a great rocking number. Love this album.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: 2112
Post by: TAC on September 19, 2014, 01:34:27 PM
A jewelry class?

Yes, I had Jewelry Design for an art class. Man, was there a lot of fringe benefits with that! :)

https://www.dreamtheaterforums.org/boards/index.php?topic=42354.0
 ;D
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: 2112
Post by: Orbert on September 19, 2014, 01:41:55 PM
Oh man, this album.  This Album!  This was my favorite Rush album for a long time.  Well, "a long time" is relative since back in those days, bands usually released an album a year, and there were only four albums so far anyway.  But by this time (1976) I was already getting into Prog, and with 2112, Rush finally joined the ranks of Yes and King Crimson with a "real" side-long epic.  And what made it even cooler was that they were a power trio.  To my junior high mind, a 20-minute seven-part epic like "2112" was pretty much the epitome of what you could do with guitar, bass, and drums.  (And I still think that.)

And the coolest thing was that the "regular" songs on Side Two all kicked ass, too.  Rush showed that they pretty much could do it all.  They could rock out with the basic four-minute ass-kicker, they could prog out, they even had a mellow song (which is probably my least favorite song on the album, but whatever).
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: 2112
Post by: ? on September 19, 2014, 02:59:40 PM
The first classic Rush album IMO :) It would probably be in my top 5 or 6 if I had to rank the discography. Lessons feels like a filler track, but the rest of the album is amazing.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: 2112
Post by: Lowdz on September 19, 2014, 03:16:10 PM
Firstly, I love Caress Of steel. I didn't for the longest time - soundwise it was a step back from FBN - but it has grown on me over the years. I'm also a fan of I Think I'm Going Bold - I've been there  :biggrin:

2112 is just awesome. It was the 2nd Rush album I heard after AFTK and they are both my favourites. It was number 7 in my top 50 and AFTK 3, but they could be interchangeable really.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: 2112
Post by: jammindude on September 19, 2014, 05:47:52 PM
I absolutely adore 2112...but over time, it hasn't really aged well for me.

The title track is certainly a turning point...a huge step forward in epic songwriting.  But as 2112 is to Fountain of Lamneth, so is Cygnus X-1 Book 2: Hemishperes is to 2112.  But we'll save that one for later.

My point is that even the title track was eclipsed just two years later, and the short tracks on Side 2 are spotty.   Bangkok is just OK, Twilight Zone is good, Lessons and Tears are underappreciated, and Something for Nothing is a song I used to love, but it's just too repetitive. 

On the whole, a very very good album, but completely outclassed by their later output.    Best album up to this point, but a mid-tier Rush album for me.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: 2112
Post by: Mosh on September 19, 2014, 07:47:37 PM
This is where Rush becomes awesome. Not much to say about this one, I thoroughly love all of it. It's probably my least favorite of their "classic" albums, but that's not saying a whole lot since it's still a top tier album.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: 2112
Post by: nicmos on September 19, 2014, 07:48:36 PM
Wow, my opinion seems to be pretty different from most people here.

First off, great write-up Kev.  Fall of 91 is when I got into Rush as well, after my brother introduced me to them in the summer.

Side 1 is indeed great.  I agree with Jammindude that compositionally, Hemispheres surpasses 2112.  But it also doesn't rock as hard, for sure.

But side 2?  might be the biggest concentration of mediocre Rush songs that I skip most of the time, with the exception of Something For Nothing, which I think might be their best straight-ahead rocker in their entire catalog.  By straight-ahead, I mean that would be palatable for radio.  It's more sophisticated, polished, and tight than their  other rockers from the first 3 albums.  Great album closer.

Clearly Rush progressed greatly after this album, but they also lost some of that raw energy that is still on display here for the last time.  Makes sense that they capped off this era with their first live album.

Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: 2112
Post by: King Postwhore on September 19, 2014, 09:29:06 PM
My lifeblood, spills over for this album.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: 2112
Post by: ThatOneGuy2112 on September 19, 2014, 09:55:06 PM
Late as fuck, I know.

One thing I loved with early-era Rush is that each album marked a progression for the band. Rather than radically changing their sound with every album, they slowly developed it and gradually built up upon their previous releases.

The self-titled isn't the band fully evolved yet, but definitely gives a hint to the great stuff yet to come. But more than just being precursor, it's still a very solid debut effort. Finding My Way, Here Again, What You're Doing, and of course, Working Man are all great, rockin' tracks. It lacks the flare that Peart brought to complete the trio, but Rutsey does his job and you know what? He does it really well.

Fly by Night is where I began to hear more progressive elements, made clear with By Tor & the Snow Dog, generally and justifiably regarded as the best track here, and I still have lots of love for Anthem and the title track as well. I know Rivendell sticks out like a sore thumb and many outright dislike it, but I enjoy it a lot. :lol It's a nice change of pace and opened up the band to more versatile song-writing.

Caress of Steel is where I feel they truly began to feel out for their ability to write epic, longer songs with The Necromancer and The Fountain, both of which I adore. Bastille Day is another great opening track (something the guys, at this point, were becoming pretty damn good at). Admittedly, I'm not too keen on the remaining two songs, but they don't drag down the album as a whole by any means.

Ahhh, 2112. I've come to appreciate another particular Rush album more, but how great the album is can't be stated enough. This is where Rush became Rush. By this time, they've become fully realized and would continue to develop further from here. The song 2112 is definitely the big motherfucker of Rush epics. I can never do it justice with words. It was the first Rush song I'd ever heard and it completely blew me away right form the get-go and however many years later it still leaves a lasting impression. I know a lot of fans don't dig the second side with it's collection of shorter tracks, but they're all still excellent to me.

Anyways, I really dig the write-ups Kev. Guess you don't need to be told fifty times, but keep it up! :tup
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: 2112
Post by: Lowdz on September 20, 2014, 03:27:15 AM
The riffing in 2112 (song) is just awesome. As good as anything anywhere.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Caress of Steel
Post by: jingle.boy on September 20, 2014, 05:14:06 AM
Okay, cool. :coolio

Maybe I am just seeing jingle's epic write-ups in the LZ thread and having an inferiority complex about it. :facepalm: :lol :lol

Yeah, well at least you're moving at a decent pace here.  Work has been crazy for me lately, so that's slowing me down.  I'm totally digging your writeups too.

I suspect the updates will be longer and more informative now that we are getting to the really good stuff. :metal

Yes... the first three albums are surely the least regarded of the Rush eras, so (at least for the next 9-10 albums) I'm sure there will be much to say.

Will comment on CoS and 2112 later this morning... gotta get to my LZ listening!!!  :jets:
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: 2112
Post by: jingle.boy on September 20, 2014, 07:32:07 AM
Caress of Steel:

Probably at the bottom of my stack ranking of Rush albums.  On first listen, it was almost a complete WTF for me.  Lakeside Park is one of their staples on Classic Rock radio up here.  I deeply discovered Rush (beyond the radio hits) in '90 with Chronicles, so Bastille Day was an awesome listen.  Then to hear the other three tracks... WTF.  They've aged ok, but still, this is an album I would rarely seek out to listen to.

Fun Facts:
1975 Rush won the Juno for "Most Promising New Group".  BTO was at the top of the Juno awards with Group of the Year, Album of the Year, and Producer of the Year (to Randy)
The album cover was the start of Hugh Syme's path to that career.  Prior to that, he was keyboardist for The Ian Thomas Band
The album cover was botched in production - it was supposed to be silver, not brass or gold (or whatever tone you interpret it to be)
'Bald' was written for Max Webster frontman Kim Mitchell, and also a bit of an ode to Kiss's Goin Blind.
Terry Brown on the record - "We went out on a limb with that one, and it nearly cost me my career."
Neil on the record - "I often equate it to children's drawings on the refrigerator that hang around too long.  I really wish that they would just go away."  :lol
Rush would play support for acts such as Blue Oyster Cult, Mott the Hoople, and UFO
Alex ended up having to take a job pumping gas, and helping his dad on plumbing jobs when they got back home from touring.


2112:

The song is of course in the 'God-tier' category.  Side two has its ups and downs, with Something For Nothing being the highlight for me.  For me, this album starts the greatest 5 album run ever in the history of music.  The structure of the title track has just the same kind of start/stop moments that 'The Fountain' does, but lyrically it's so much more cohesive, and musically it's vastly superior.

Fun Facts:
It was released on April 1st, 1976, and hit 250,000 in sales by the release of All the World's a Stage, just 6 months later.  Suck it Mercury!
Hugh Syme got to add a spot of Mellotron and synths on the album.
Critics slagged the album... "... the same old science fiction schtick.... surely we've heard it all before"
For $6, you could've seen Rush open for Montrose and Robin Trower; $7 at the door.
This album would launch them internationally, heading over to Britain to tour there for the first time.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: 2112
Post by: KevShmev on September 20, 2014, 09:21:17 AM
Thanks, guys. :hat

As far as Neil's "I often equate it to children's drawings on the refrigerator that hang around too long.  I really wish that they would just go away." quote, I think he was referring to both Fly by Night and Caress of Steel there, and in the same train of thought he said, "Given my druthers, I would make our first album Moving Pictures. I can't think of a single reason not to do that." :eek :eek :eek

Then again, Neil, of the three, has by far the least amount of appreciation for their 70s work.  I'll bet if he had his way, they'd never play anything from pre-1980.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: 2112
Post by: Mladen on September 20, 2014, 09:45:26 AM
The title track is a masterpiece and one of my favorite Rush songs. It was my number one for a while, but I think there are a couple I'd place above it nowadays. What makes the album so fantastic is the fact that there isn't a single throwaway song when it comes to the shorter ones, which is something that not a lot of albums with a side long epic can brag about (Tarkus? Foxtrot?). I especially love Bangkok, which is my go-to track when I'm in the mood for older Rush straight out rock songs, and Tears is another highlight - a gorgeous, criminally underrated ballad. Such a great record overall...
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: 2112
Post by: nicmos on September 20, 2014, 09:51:34 AM
Thanks, guys. :hat

As far as Neil's "I often equate it to children's drawings on the refrigerator that hang around too long.  I really wish that they would just go away." quote, I think he was referring to both Fly by Night and Caress of Steel there, and in the same train of thought he said, "Given my druthers, I would make our first album Moving Pictures. I can't think of a single reason not to do that." :eek :eek :eek

Then again, Neil, of the three, has by far the least amount of appreciation for their 70s work.  I'll bet if he had his way, they'd never play anything from pre-1980.

I can understand what he's saying.  I think he's thinking more about the lyrics than the music.  And since he's changed his political attitudes notably since then, I think it's hard for him to hear them or think they're a little juvenile.

I think if you asked him specifically about the music though, he wouldn't have as much of a problem with that.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: 2112
Post by: GentlemanofDread on September 20, 2014, 11:26:35 AM
I much prefer Carees of Steel to 2112. I don't know why, but 2112's second side is nowhere near as good as the main piece of 2112, though I do like A Passage To Bangkok.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread, now featuring: Rush
Post by: ytserush on September 20, 2014, 11:54:17 AM
"I'm a Market Square Hero speeding the heat of the street pulse; the street pulse....."



I like the first album a lot. Favorites are Here Again, Before and After, Finding My Way and What You're Doing....



Always found it interesting that Ray Danniels didn't think the band would make it with Geddy as the vocalist early on.

Also interesting was that John Rutsey tore up most if not all of the lyrics in a fit of rage right before they recorded the album and that Geddy had to come up with something on very short notice.

It cost $400 to register the Mood Records name and logo.

"Putting out a record was a really big deal, going into the studio. And I remember thinking. going into the studio; all  the musicians I like, and all the bands that I like, do this. This is what they do. At one time sure, they played bars and high schools or whatever, but to go into a studio and record something that's permanent; that was a big deal. And then of course hearing it on the radio followed that. And again because it was in Toronto, it meant even more to me, 'cause this was our hometown." ---- Alex  (Up Close)
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread, now featuring: Fly by Night
Post by: ytserush on September 20, 2014, 12:17:12 PM
I love In The End, though the All The World's A Stage version is so much better than the studio.

So do I. I'm not as much of a fan of Fly By Night as some others here are (I really get off on Caress of Steel) but I love songs like In The End and Beneath, Between and Behind and Making Memories.  Anthem is pretty cool too I guess. And of course live they sound much better.

A few quotes.....

"I packed up my drums and my records and moved to England when I was 18 thinking I'd just find a band. I was a big fish in a small pond, and threw myself into the biggest pond possible, musically speaking. It was all very depressing and very educational. In trying out for a band I'd discover that they were far, far over my head in technical knowledge, in their mastery of the language and also in their snobbery----I'd just go away feeling like a piece of dirt." ----- Neil  (Musician)




"At the time he had never written any lyrics....had never thought of it I don't think. We had a date, like eight days later to play at Pittsburgh's Civic Arena opening for Uriah Heep and Manfred Mann. So that was first and foremost in our minds; we were just looking for a drummer. We never though about lyrics or anything like that. The more we got to know Neil, the more we realized his immense knowledge of the English language and his interest in reading. He was a very different person for us --- a person full of ideas and very verbose. Alex and I looked at each other --- this is the guy to solve all of our problems (laughs)    ------Geddy    (In The Studio)
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Caress of Steel
Post by: ytserush on September 20, 2014, 12:32:32 PM
COS is my favorite of the first three albums. Lakeside Park being my favorite song from all three albums and one of my all time favorite Rush songs. The song captures such a good feeling of nostalgia, "Though it's just a memory, some memories last forever."


Absolutely!   Some days I like it even better than 2112. (It certainly gets played just as much)

I'm always amused that Kiss pretty much disowned them musically after the tour (although Kiss did explode during this time)

More quotes.....

"Our management were worried, the record company though we were going down the tubes. We weren't making any money at all, we didn't get paid for months and we got pissed off   -----Alex   (Sounds)

"It was a low point for us in some ways, but it was also the time that we realized we had to be our own biggest fans and just make the music we believed in."  ----Geddy (Hit Parader)
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: 2112
Post by: ytserush on September 20, 2014, 12:57:25 PM
A couple of years ago I bought the super deluxe edition of 2112. It came with a comic book and a blu ray version of the comic.  This version drastically increased my interest in the album and I highly highly recommend it

Interesting. The only thing I like about that particular release was the bonus tracks of Overture/Temples from 1981 and A Passage To Bangkok from 1980. Could have done without the rest of that package although I suppose it's nice to stick it in the DVD player once in a while and listen to it.


I love 2112.  I'll never get tired of hearing it live and takes on a whole new meaning now than when it was first recorded. It has more of a celebratory tone now.

That said a lot of this album sonically does sound kind of dated to me and is clearly trapped in the '70s, but I still find it a very rewarding listen. Big fan of  Something For Nothing, Tears and Lessons too.


"There's a lot of anger on it because that's what we feeling. It was a key album. If it hadn't been successful, it probably would have been our last."  ----Neil   (LA Times)


"A lot of the early stuff  I'm really proud of. Some of it sounds really goofy, but some of it  stands up better than I give it credit for. As weird as my voice sounds when I listen back, I certainly dig some of the arrangements. I can't go back beyond 2112 really, because that starts to get a bit hairy for me., and if I hear "Lakeside Park" on the radio, I cringe. What a lousy song! Still, I don't regret anything that I've done." ----- Geddy   (Raw 1993)
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: 2112
Post by: Mladen on September 20, 2014, 02:28:55 PM
My lifeblood, spills over for this album.
Took me too long to get this. And I think it's not the first time I'm late with getting references.  :lol
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: 2112
Post by: KevShmev on September 22, 2014, 10:09:46 PM
I chuckled when I saw that post.  Well done, kingshmegland. :hat
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: 2112
Post by: Outcrier on September 22, 2014, 11:17:46 PM
This is where Rush becomes awesome. Not much to say about this one, I thoroughly love all of it. It's probably my least favorite of their "classic" albums, but that's not saying a whole lot since it's still a top tier album.

Yup, top tier but the four albums after it are even better imo.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: All the World's a Stage
Post by: KevShmev on September 24, 2014, 11:58:15 AM
As I've said before, I am not much into reviewing live albums, but I don't want to leave them out, since I know some like to talk about them, so I'll just say that All the World's a Stage is a fine first live album, featuring a beastly live rendition of "By-Tor and the Snow Dog."  It also began the trend of them releasing a live album every four albums, which would be the case until the 21st century.

(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/a/a0/Rush_ATWAS.jpg)
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: All the World's a Stage
Post by: TAC on September 24, 2014, 12:18:20 PM
I love this album. A fantastic version of In The End.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: All the World's a Stage
Post by: The Letter M on September 24, 2014, 12:35:51 PM
There's a sort of youthful, raw intensity in this album that breathes life into their studio material. Geddy's high pitched voice screams through powerfully, just as loud as Alex's guitars or Neil's drums. Everything presented here is at the height of these early years, and everything from "By-Tor And The Snow Dog" to "2112" is perfectly captured. Though there are only 2 songs from COS, they're played very well, especially the exceptional opener of "Bastille Day". Great live album and a wonderful way to cap off the band's first four albums and first two years together.

-Marc.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: All the World's a Stage
Post by: jjrock88 on September 24, 2014, 06:08:56 PM
I love this album. A fantastic version of In The End.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: A Farewell to Kings
Post by: KevShmev on September 27, 2014, 12:37:40 PM
Having attained total creative control and a lot of new fans in the process, Rush set about exanding their sound a bit as they prepared to go into the studio to make another album in the summer of '77.  Both Geddy and Alex would start using bass pedals more regularly, enabling them to multi-task as stage, as Geddy would start playing keyboards a little bit on stage, while both would utilize double-neck guitars on "Xanadu." Plus, Neil added some, what he called "keyboard percussion, to his already expanding drum kit - bells, chimes, etc. Those new elements to his drum kit would be featured prominently on the majority of songs on their 5th studio album. 

Containing only six songs, like its predecessor, A Farewell to Kings was another ambitious effort, featuring two 10-minute plus epics, "Xanadu" and "Cygnus X-1"; two rockers in "Cinderella Man" and "A Farewell to Kings" that explored their growing-interest in dynamic shifts between acoustic and electric sections; the equally dynamic "Closer to the Heart," which remains a classic rock favorite and one of their catchiest tunes ever; and another ballad-type tune as the 2nd last track in "Madrigal."  Despite only having six songs and being around 38 minutes, this record still has a unique diversity that makes it really stand out.

Even though this is my least favorite of the Big 5 (1976-1981 albums), I still love this record to pieces.  "Xanadu" is a top 3 Rush tune in my book, and four of the others are all terrific, as well. I have never been a big fan of "Madrigal," although I would never call it a bad song; I am just not a fan. The elements they incorporated into their sound are on full display in "Xanadu,"as we get plenty of Neil's new sounds, both Geddy and Alex playing double necks, not to mention the first Rush song  to really feature synthesizers prominently, and to great melodic effect. 

(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/1/1e/Rush_A_Farewell_to_Kings.jpg)
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: A Farewell to Kings
Post by: Nick on September 27, 2014, 01:54:21 PM
As was mentioned earlier in the thread, sometimes it's hard to comment on these things as it seems you've commented on them to death, and that certainly is the case with me. However I must take a moment to say A Farewell to Kings is my favorite album of all time, Xanadu is a top 3 song from ANY band for me, and the album inspired my first tattoo, an image they used on merchandise for the album and one I've always loved.

(https://www.wpapu.com/images/AFtKtattoo.jpg)

Edit: This album also holds the record for album I own the most formats of: CD, vinyl, 8-track, cassette, and 5.1 DVD.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: A Farewell to Kings
Post by: ThatOneGuy2112 on September 27, 2014, 06:33:03 PM
A Farewell to Kings is most definitely my favorite Rush album of all time. It's grown on me immensely even since it first touched my ears, and I liked it quite a bit then anyways. Cygnus X-1 Book 1 is a good contender for my favorite Rush ever--tied possibly with 2112.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: A Farewell to Kings
Post by: Orbert on September 27, 2014, 07:39:34 PM
Killer album.  A very solid start to the next phase of their career, and of the evolution of their sound.  Rush continued to push themselves and existing rock boundaries in new ways, while still making amazing music all the while.  Pop, prog, mellow, rockin', it's all Rush.  It's all good.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: A Farewell to Kings
Post by: The Letter M on September 27, 2014, 08:07:19 PM
Top 5 Rush album material, right here. The opening title-track is one of their proggier songs under 10-minutes, while the longer epics are two of their best. "Xanadu" remains one of my favorites of theirs and has been for the over-12 years I've been in love with Rush. "Cygnus X-1: Book 1 - The Voyage" is a roaring, heavy epic with some very unique and playful multi-meter parts, as well as some of Geddy's highest vocals to date!

The three shortest songs on here are a lot stronger than the shorter tunes on Side B of 2112, especially the classic rock radio hit, "Closer To The Heart", which has seen its fair share of transformations on stage over the decades. The initial-tour-only-played track "Cinderella Man" is another story by Neil, based on literature, and it works pretty well, although I'll never understand why it was an encore on the AFTK Tour. And "Madrigal" was an  interesting piece by Geddy that was soothing enough. Some might call it filler, but it's Rush exploring what they can do with all their new-found equipment.

Overall, this is a huge step-up from their last couple albums, and a great step in a good direction for them. Coupled with Hemispheres, these two albums are some of the best 75-80 minutes of Rush you could ever put on a single CD-r.

-Marc.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: A Farewell to Kings
Post by: jjrock88 on September 27, 2014, 08:36:46 PM
This entire album is terrific
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: A Farewell to Kings
Post by: King Postwhore on September 27, 2014, 09:25:40 PM
To me, this albums is the beginning of Rush's "sound".  I pleasure to listen to.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: A Farewell to Kings
Post by: jammindude on September 27, 2014, 09:33:45 PM
Nick...I have yet to hear a single review from ANYONE about ANY of the 5.1 remixes from the sector boxed sets.  How are they? 

I'm not sure if it's just because not too many people bought them or what. ???

I'm right there with Kev on this one.  I love it immensely, but it's low on my list of the big 5.  (actually, 2112 probably takes my award for least favorite of the big 5, but not by much and I still love it)   Madrigal is enjoyable, but pretty much filler.  Completely sick of Closer to the Heart.  The four other songs are all top notch.   Xanadu is a classic, and CXI is the prelude to the greatest Rush song ever, and the 2nd greatest song in rock history in my book. To me, it's not even a prelude...it's just a single song that had to be split into two parts due to the restrictions of the time. 
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: A Farewell to Kings
Post by: hefdaddy42 on September 28, 2014, 04:53:11 AM
Listening again for the first time in years.  This album is just killer.  Great, great stuff.  Rush was really coming into their own at this point.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: A Farewell to Kings
Post by: ? on September 28, 2014, 05:57:15 AM
My least favorite "classic" era album... I love Xanadu to death, the title-track is pretty awesome and CTTH and Cygnus are good, but Cinderella Man and Madrigal are just filler tracks IMO.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: A Farewell to Kings
Post by: Nick on September 28, 2014, 07:23:41 AM

Overall, this is a huge step-up from their last couple albums, and a great step in a good direction for them. Coupled with Hemispheres, these two albums are some of the best 75-80 minutes of Rush you could ever put on a single CD-r.

-Marc.

Back when I was first getting into Rush, a friend burned me a lot of what I didn't have onto CDs, and he included A Farewell to Kings and Hemispheres on the same disc. And yeah, talk about one CD worth of amazing material... it's never been topped since.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: A Farewell to Kings
Post by: Mladen on September 28, 2014, 08:25:52 AM
Seems like most of us agree that this is the least great of their classic five albums, although I might go with Hemispheres - but I still like them both. It's still a pretty neat record, especially Cygnus X-1. I went through a phase of not really caring about Xanadu, however it's a damn great song now that I think about it. And yes, Closer to the heart is a great short Rush hit, but they would make plenty of better ones when they cut down on song lengths on their subsequent albums.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: A Farewell to Kings
Post by: Zydar on September 28, 2014, 09:03:07 AM
Brilliant album, and Xanadu is in my Top 3 of Rush songs.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: A Farewell to Kings
Post by: mikemangioy on September 28, 2014, 11:33:53 AM
This is one awesome album, the title track, Xanadu and Cygnus x-1 are the best tracks  :metal
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: A Farewell to Kings
Post by: Lowdz on September 28, 2014, 11:49:32 AM
No 3 in my top 50. My favourite Rush album and only bettered by I&W and Mindcrime and lets face it, the difference is miniscule.
I love every note of this album and wouldn't change anything.
Cygnus X-1 is the top of the bunch but it's all just awesome.

When I first played this album I was getting it on with a girl and when Cygnus started the record stuck and looped on the spacey sounds and I didn't realise. I had a vague thought that something wasn't right but hey, I was otherwise occupied  :biggrin: I soon realised Rush wasn't really makeout music though.
Thanks to my mate Mick's brother Steve who introduced me to this masterpiece. I fell inlove with Rush there and then.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: A Farewell to Kings
Post by: nicmos on September 28, 2014, 08:15:01 PM
Hard to add something new to what everyone else has said already, but here goes:

This is the Rush album that I like Geddy's bass tone and mix the best on, and the one by which I think I implicitly measure all other rock records.  Maybe just because it's so prominent, I don't know, but the bass really adds to this album.

While I like Hemispheres slightly better as an album, I wish it had the warmth that this has.  Hemispheres just sounds too cold and distant, but this one, this sounds so great.  Xanadu is clearly in the top handful of all Rush songs, and the title track doesn't get enough love in my opinion.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: A Farewell to Kings
Post by: jingle.boy on October 01, 2014, 12:21:21 AM
Will add more thoughts and stories on this (and ATWAS) later when I'm back home, but this (as with Paul) is my #3 album of all time. Easily my favorite of their 'big-5'.  Xanadu ties for #1 Rush song, and a definite top 5 song of all time for me.

Great story btw, Paul. Can't imagine anyone making out to Rush.   :rollin
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: A Farewell to Kings
Post by: TAC on October 01, 2014, 06:25:38 AM
This is a great album that even I tend to underrate. Xanadu is my second favorite Rush song.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: A Farewell to Kings
Post by: Lowdz on October 01, 2014, 11:53:54 AM
Hard to add something new to what everyone else has said already, but here goes:

This is the Rush album that I like Geddy's bass tone and mix the best on, and the one by which I think I implicitly measure all other rock records.  Maybe just because it's so prominent, I don't know, but the bass really adds to this album.

While I like Hemispheres slightly better as an album, I wish it had the warmth that this has.  Hemispheres just sounds too cold and distant, but this one, this sounds so great.  Xanadu is clearly in the top handful of all Rush songs, and the title track doesn't get enough love in my opinion.

I agree Nic. I was saving the production comparison for the Hemispheres update. Hemispheres sounds dull to me - not to mention the title track is nowhere near the quality of Cygnus and I can't stand the twee lyrics. Peart's worst lyrical epic for me, but I'm getting ahead of myself.
Will add more thoughts and stories on this (and ATWAS) later when I'm back home, but this (as with Paul) is my #3 album of all time. Easily my favorite of their 'big-5'.  Xanadu ties for #1 Rush song, and a definite top 5 song of all time for me.

Great story btw, Paul. Can't imagine anyone making out to Rush.   :rollin

Well it's not recommended  :lol that unintentionally looping space noise was very offputting  :lol
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: A Farewell to Kings
Post by: Nick on October 01, 2014, 12:20:03 PM
Nick...I have yet to hear a single review from ANYONE about ANY of the 5.1 remixes from the sector boxed sets.  How are they? 

They are not exactly revolutionary, but certainly an improvement. In general the sound quality of the HD audio is the biggest improvement, with the surround being a nice little add on. It's tough to say that someone should buy the box sets, because frankly I hate these types of boxsets from the packaging (redoing hard case albums in cheep throwaway sleeves) to the blatant addition of new stuff with mostly old stuff. That said Fly By Night and A Farewell to Kings especially stand out as an upgrade. I *really* wish they would have done these sets as at least HD remastered audio to really make them stand out as a good new release.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: A Farewell to Kings
Post by: King Postwhore on October 01, 2014, 01:08:24 PM
Hard to add something new to what everyone else has said already, but here goes:

This is the Rush album that I like Geddy's bass tone and mix the best on, and the one by which I think I implicitly measure all other rock records.  Maybe just because it's so prominent, I don't know, but the bass really adds to this album.

While I like Hemispheres slightly better as an album, I wish it had the warmth that this has.  Hemispheres just sounds too cold and distant, but this one, this sounds so great.  Xanadu is clearly in the top handful of all Rush songs, and the title track doesn't get enough love in my opinion.

I agree Nic. I was saving the production comparison for the Hemispheres update. Hemispheres sounds dull to me - not to mention the title track is nowhere near the quality of Cygnus and I can't stand the twee lyrics. Peart's worst lyrical epic for me, but I'm getting ahead of myself.
Will add more thoughts and stories on this (and ATWAS) later when I'm back home, but this (as with Paul) is my #3 album of all time. Easily my favorite of their 'big-5'.  Xanadu ties for #1 Rush song, and a definite top 5 song of all time for me.

Great story btw, Paul. Can't imagine anyone making out to Rush.   :rollin

Well it's not recommended  :lol that unintentionally looping space noise was very offputting  :lol

Well you were trying to get into a black hole so.............. :lol
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: A Farewell to Kings
Post by: jammindude on October 01, 2014, 01:30:24 PM
Nick...I have yet to hear a single review from ANYONE about ANY of the 5.1 remixes from the sector boxed sets.  How are they? 

They are not exactly revolutionary, but certainly an improvement. In general the sound quality of the HD audio is the biggest improvement, with the surround being a nice little add on. It's tough to say that someone should buy the box sets, because frankly I hate these types of boxsets from the packaging (redoing hard case albums in cheep throwaway sleeves) to the blatant addition of new stuff with mostly old stuff. That said Fly By Night and A Farewell to Kings especially stand out as an upgrade. I *really* wish they would have done these sets as at least HD remastered audio to really make them stand out as a good new release.

Cool...thanks for the feedback (pun intended!)...maybe I'll see if any of them end up on Ebay for cheap.   :tup
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Hemispheres
Post by: KevShmev on October 02, 2014, 02:29:55 PM
Following the grueling touring schedule they maintained while touring on A Farewell to Kings, the band jumped right back in the studio to record their 6th album, which would become Hemispheres.  By this time, the band was at the height of their prog rock eagerness, shown by the fact that this record would have only four songs, including the title track, which would become their third, and final, sidelong epic, as well as their epic instrumental "La Villa Strangiato."

The funny thing about this album is they wrote much of the material in a key that proved difficult for Geddy Lee to sing in, so the vocals took a bit of time to get right, and ended up being probably the highest of his career when looking at each album collectively; his high vocals are up in the rafters on this one. :lol

But, it was all worth it, as Hemispheres, despite being only a little over 36 minutes, is a beast of a record.  The title track, which encompasses all of Side 1, is pretty great, it being a continuation of the Cygnus X-1 story of sorts, although the focus is exploration is of the different types of the human mind, with Greek mythology and science fiction used to metaphorically tell the story.  While the whole song is great, I've always had a personal affinity for the Armageddon section; something about that section is just so on the money.

Side 2 kicks off with two short tunes, the rocker "Circumstances" and the dynamic "The Trees," the latter of which features a lyric that Neil Peart has since called trite on more than one occasion, but I tend to think of it as a metaphorical look at the hierarchy of man.  The album closer, the epic instrumental "La Villa Strangiato," is arguably Alex Lifeson's signature song to date, and for good reason, as his playing has never been more raw, more powerful and more precise; it is everything that makes him a great player summed up in less than 10 minutes.  Even better, it shows how great his playing is in it when you almost overlook the other two, especially Peart, who puts on a jaw-dropping performance as well. This song is always a treat to see live, and if they played it at every show till the day they retire, I'd be fine with it.

Overall, I'd call this probably my 4th favorite of the Big 5, and probably my 6th favorite Rush album overall.

(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/6/6c/Rush_Hemispheres.jpg)
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Hemispheres
Post by: jammindude on October 02, 2014, 02:36:02 PM
For me , it's no contest.  This is the greatest rock album in history.   (Haken's The Mountain is quickly climbing the charts...but...)

Until I heard Supper's Ready, CXI:Book 2 was my all time favorite song in rock history, it's still my #2 to this day.   There's not a note of this album I don't love and cherish.  I call a lot of albums "damn near perfect", but this album *IS* perfect.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Hemispheres
Post by: Podaar on October 02, 2014, 02:38:42 PM
This is my favorite album by Rush bar none.

Alex's guitar tone and playing are the best of his career, IMO. I love the crunch tone on Circumstances. And what more can be said about his solos during La Villa Strangiato that hasn't been said a million times. If your eyes don't close in orgasmic ecstasy during the first solo and your eyes don't bung-out  :omg: during the second solo I'm willing to bet that you don't love guitar music!

This is the last album where I loved every note that Geddy sings.

Great, great, album that I'm always excited to listen to. Even after all these years.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Hemispheres
Post by: hefdaddy42 on October 02, 2014, 02:42:04 PM
This is my favorite Rush album.  Glorious, glorious, glorious.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Hemispheres
Post by: Anguyen92 on October 02, 2014, 02:44:24 PM
Yay for Hemispheres!  I heard from Beyond the Lighted Stage documentary (or probably somewhere else) that it took them the amount of time it took to create Fly By Night album (I think) just to record La Villa Strangiato which eventually made them evaluate how long they can go on about making albums the way they were making albums which eventually led to the next two, but we can save that for later.

Still, Four songs from this album, but killer songs.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Hemispheres
Post by: Lowdz on October 02, 2014, 03:02:23 PM
Lonely dissenter here.  :corn

A poor follow up to a great album. Side 2 > side 1.
I love side 2. The two shorter songs are great and LVS is just  :hefdaddy. The title track is a bit of a mess and doesn't deserve to be linked to the awesomeness of Cygnus X-1. As I said earlier I just don't like the lyrics.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Hemispheres
Post by: King Postwhore on October 02, 2014, 03:02:57 PM
My 4th favorite album from Rush and it's worth of being #1.  This album never seems stale to me no matter how many times I've played it since I got it 33 years ago.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Hemispheres
Post by: Orbert on October 02, 2014, 05:30:17 PM
This is where Rush went full-blown prog, which I thought was awesome.  They were great as a power trio (a term you don't hear much anymore, but which was common in the 70's) and transformed into a "power prog trio" in just a few years.  Bravo!

This was also the first time I saw them live.  It was an amazing show.  After the opening band (New England, who were also very good), they came out and played "2112".  The live version, five movements instead of all seven, but still, it was mind-blowing that this was their opening song.  In the darkness, we heard the taped opening sound effects to "2112" and they took the stage while it was dark.  Then they dove into the "Overture" and on into "The Temples of Syrinx".  When Geddy started singing, there were three insanely bright yellow lights behind them, one behind each of them.  They were low behind the stage, so they weren't blinding; they shined up into the rafters, and we could really only see the guys in silhouette.  After "The Temples of Syrinx" the question was whether they'd continue the suite, and if so, would it be the whole thing?  Alex started "Discovery" and the question was answered.

The lighting had changed, more subdued, as the song had a different mood to it, but whenever "the priests" spoke (sang), those bright yellow lights came on again.  "Yes we know, it's nothing new!"  It was how the priests were symbolized.  They carried on with "Soliloquy" and "Grand Finale".  Wow, what an opening song!

Geddy said "Good Evening" and a few other brief words, then they started "Cygnus X-1 Book 1: The Voyage".  At the end, during the spacey taped sounds, Geddy says "We'd like to welcome you to Side One of our new album.  This is called Hemispheres."  And they played "Hemispheres" all the way through.  It was amazing.  Nearly 50 minutes into the show, they've played three songs so far.

Then Geddy said the real greetings.  Once again, good evening.  Talked about how great it was to be back, etc. etc.

I don't remember exactly what the rest of the set list was, but I will never forget how they opened with that amazing back-to-back-to-back killer combination.  Wow.  I know they played "La Villa Strangiato"; it may have been the encore.  Incredible night.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Hemispheres
Post by: Phoenix87x on October 02, 2014, 06:10:13 PM
Hemispheres has been and will always be my favorite Rush album.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Hemispheres
Post by: jammindude on October 02, 2014, 06:24:00 PM
This is where Rush went full-blown prog, which I thought was awesome.  They were great as a power trio (a term you don't hear much anymore, but which was common in the 70's) and transformed into a "power prog trio" in just a few years.  Bravo!

This was also the first time I saw them live.  It was an amazing show.  After the opening band (New England, who were also very good), they came out and played "2112".  The live version, five movements instead of all seven, but still, it was mind-blowing that this was their opening song.  In the darkness, we heard the taped opening sound effects to "2112" and they took the stage while it was dark.  Then they dove into the "Overture" and on into "The Temples of Syrinx".  When Geddy started singing, there were three insanely bright yellow lights behind them, one behind each of them.  They were low behind the stage, so they weren't blinding; they shined up into the rafters, and we could really only see the guys in silhouette.  After "The Temples of Syrinx" the question was whether they'd continue the suite, and if so, would it be the whole thing?  Alex started "Discovery" and the question was answered.

The lighting had changed, more subdued, as the song had a different mood to it, but whenever "the priests" spoke (sang), those bright yellow lights came on again.  "Yes we know, it's nothing new!"  It was how the priests were symbolized.  They carried on with "Soliloquy" and "Grand Finale".  Wow, what an opening song!

Geddy said "Good Evening" and a few other brief words, then they started "Cygnus X-1 Book 1: The Voyage".  At the end, during the spacey taped sounds, Geddy says "We'd like to welcome you to Side One of our new album.  This is called Hemispheres."  And they played "Hemispheres" all the way through.  It was amazing.  Nearly 50 minutes into the show, they've played three songs so far.

Then Geddy said the real greetings.  Once again, good evening.  Talked about how great it was to be back, etc. etc.

I don't remember exactly what the rest of the set list was, but I will never forget how they opened with that amazing back-to-back-to-back killer combination.  Wow.  I know they played "La Villa Strangiato"; it may have been the encore.  Incredible night.

If I could go back in time to ANY TOUR AT ALL...it would be the Hemispheres Tour. 

From Cygnus X-1 dot net, the setlist was:

Anthem
A Passage to Bangkok
By-Tor and the Snow Dog
Xanadu
Something for Nothing
The Trees
Cygnus X-1
Hemispheres
Closer to the Heart
Circumstances
A Farewell to Kings
La Villa Strangiato
2112 (abbreviated)
Working Man
Bastille Day
In the Mood
Drum Solo

(they did open with 2112 on the Permanent Waves Tour....but then abbreviated versions of CXI and Hemispheres were played later in the set)

https://www.cygnus-x1.net/links/rush/setlists.php#HEMISPHERES
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Hemispheres
Post by: jingle.boy on October 02, 2014, 07:48:57 PM
My 3rd fave of the big 5. It is virtually flawless, but I agree with Paul to some extent that the title track does go off course at times, and it does feel like an 18 minute song. For me, the true character of an epic track is where you don't even notice its length, or girth.  :lol

Circumstances is my favorite short tune, and The Trees is just there as great tune.  La Villa though.... God-tier. #3 Rush song, and likely a top 10 of all time for me.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Hemispheres
Post by: KevShmev on October 02, 2014, 08:03:23 PM
Speaking of The Trees, one thing I really love about is that guitar lead Alex plays for about the first 2/3 of the instrumental section (prior to the guitar solo); awesome tone there and a gorgeous melody.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Hemispheres
Post by: jammindude on October 02, 2014, 09:42:36 PM
I always felt like 2112, while still being completely amazing, ultimately feels like several unrelated ideas that were pasted together with an Overture.

Hemispheres, OTOH, feels like a complete and cohesive piece, and if anything, feels a bit out of place without CXI preceeding it.   I have always considered CXI and Hemispheres to be a single and complete 30 minute "song".

The lyrics for Hemispheres in particular are very strong.  In my case, life altering.   It was the first song I actually sat down and *taught* my sons about....going into depth about its meaning, applications of principles in life. 

Even though I only slightly consider Supper's Ready to be a better song, its so abstract that it can't really be described, just experienced.   But Hemispheres message is clear, profound, and extremely well articulated.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Hemispheres
Post by: KevShmev on October 02, 2014, 09:51:43 PM
I've never thought of them as one song, and quite frankly, the only thing that connects the two musically is the little part of Cgynus X-1 that is thrown into the background during the mellow part around the 12-minute plus mark, and even that feels like a token "Okay, we'll throw this on in the background so there is at least something that connects the two musically" moment.  Not to mention that the production and sound of the two albums are different - A Farewell to Kings is more in-your-face and meaty, while Hemispheres is brighter and more organic, sonically - so the songs don't even have that similar of a feel.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Hemispheres
Post by: jingle.boy on October 02, 2014, 10:29:50 PM
I'm with Kev.  And I feel exactly the opposite Ben wrt to Hemispheres and 2112.  Musically there are a couple of distinct changes in 2112, but I feel it flows exactly as the concept/story would suggest.  I don't get those same vibes from Hemispheres.  Don't get me wrong, it's a fantastic song (Top 10 Rush tune for me for sure), but imo, it's not as cohesive as 2112.  :dunno:

Just listened to the album tonight, and I may have understated how good La Villa is in my last post.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Hemispheres
Post by: KevShmev on October 02, 2014, 11:19:17 PM
Yep, 2112 is far more cohesive than Hemispheres, IMO.  Not saying Hemispheres isn't, but while 2112 has the many stop and starts in between sections which give you that feeling of seeing snapshots, like a door opening to that part of a story, Hemispheres completely comes to a stop after the first part and then the rest of the song never does it; it's kind of strange in that regard.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Hemispheres
Post by: jammindude on October 02, 2014, 11:49:31 PM
PER...FEC....TION I SAY!!!   I WILL HEAR NONE OF YOUR INSOLENCE!!!!

 :P :angel:  ;D
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Hemispheres
Post by: ThatOneGuy2112 on October 03, 2014, 12:03:39 AM
I myself hold this record about on the same level as 2112. It's fun, it's exhilarating, it's fantastic. :hefdaddy Circumstances is definitely one of Rush's best shorter pieces and the praise spoken unto La Villa speaks for itself.

The run of albums from 2112 to Hemispheres is one of the best 3-string of albums I know of from any artist.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Hemispheres
Post by: Zydar on October 03, 2014, 12:15:11 AM
My least favourite of the classic/big 5. I usually only listen to Circumstances and La Villa Strangiato. The other songs don't do anything for me, I'm sad to say.

I'm glad you all love it though :)
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Hemispheres
Post by: Cruithne on October 03, 2014, 01:51:32 AM
Hemispheres is a tiny notch down from A Farewell To Kings in my estimation. The title track is just too damned long: the opening is great, iconic even, and from about 14 minutes in to the end it's also great, but there's about 10 minutes of filler in between, which is still a couple of minutes more than the two average tracks on AFTK.

The Trees, Circumstances and La Villa Strangiato are superb.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Hemispheres
Post by: ? on October 03, 2014, 05:41:23 AM
Hemispheres is a great album, although I don't listen to it very often. When it comes to epic title-tracks, I find 2112 stronger and more cohesive.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Hemispheres
Post by: Orbert on October 03, 2014, 06:48:47 AM
If I could go back in time to ANY TOUR AT ALL...it would be the Hemispheres Tour. 

From Cygnus X-1 dot net, the setlist was:

snip


Interesting.  I wonder why they listed the songs in that order.  There's no question at all that this isn't the actual set list order.  At first I thought they were just listing the songs alphabetically, but that's not it, either.  Memory is a fallable thing, but they came out with "2112" then dove into both books of "Cygnus X-1".  We all remember it. 

I did screw up, though.  They skipped both "Discovery" and "Oracle: The Dream".  It was the same version as on All the World's a Stage.  As far as I know, Rush has never played "2112" in its original arrangement.  On the 2112 tour, they had already removed the two slower movements, and later when they played all seven parts, they had lowered the key to accomodate Geddy's voice.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Hemispheres
Post by: Ultimetalhead on October 03, 2014, 06:58:59 AM
Hemispheres is so fucking good. On most days it's a 4-way tie with Farewell to Kings, Moving Pictures, and Clockwork Angels as my favorite Rush album.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Hemispheres
Post by: jingle.boy on October 03, 2014, 07:57:35 AM
As far as I know, Rush has never played "2112" in its original arrangement.

Jumping ahead 20 years from where we are, they did revive it in '97 for the Different Stages tour.

PER...FEC....TION I SAY!!!   I WILL HEAR NONE OF YOUR INSOLENCE!!!!

 :P :angel:  ;D

(https://rs37.pbsrc.com/albums/e62/rahsa9678/Quotes%20and%20Pics/achmed.gif~c200)

 :lol :lol
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Hemispheres
Post by: nicmos on October 03, 2014, 08:12:09 AM
The title track on Hemispheres is perfect.  Not a note out of place, not a second too long.  I think that's what happens when you take the time composing and revising in order to make sure everything fits perfectly.  The transitions that need to be seamless are just that. This album made my top 50, I think somewhere around 16-18 (too lazy to check).

I feel like the rest of the songs share the same compositional tightness as the title track.  Each measure seems to flow organically from the previous one, it's like you're surfing along effortlessly.  What a feeling.

And La Villa, what can you say?  The (first) solo section alone (what is it, Lerxst in Wonderland or something) puts Alex in the all-time rock guitar hall of fame.  I'd love to hear some of the alternate takes from the studio, wouldn't that be something.  I guess you can hear a lot of his variations on the live versions, and the ESL version is roll-your-eyes-back good, but it would just be great to get to hear clean studio versions where presumably Alex could compose himself before playing that section.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Hemispheres
Post by: jjrock88 on October 03, 2014, 09:47:30 AM
Top five overall Rush album for me.

Circumstances and La Villa Strangiato are two of my favorites from Rush.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Hemispheres
Post by: Lowdz on October 03, 2014, 10:53:26 AM
I'm with Kev.  And I feel exactly the opposite Ben wrt to Hemispheres and 2112.  Musically there are a couple of distinct changes in 2112, but I feel it flows exactly as the concept/story would suggest.  I don't get those same vibes from Hemispheres.  Don't get me wrong, it's a fantastic song (Top 10 Rush tune for me for sure), but imo, it's not as cohesive as 2112.  :dunno:

Just listened to the album tonight, and I may have understated how good La Villa is in my last post.

I agree about 2112.
With Cygnus and Hemispheres, there is little in common between the two songs other than the little hint Kev mentions. The lyrics aren't connected really either. I get what he's trying to say but there's nothing subtle about it.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Hemispheres
Post by: KevShmev on October 03, 2014, 12:02:27 PM
(https://img.photobucket.com/albums/v394/kevshmev/helloexactly.jpg)

 :biggrin:
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Hemispheres
Post by: TAC on October 03, 2014, 01:59:22 PM
Hemishperes is a GREAT album. Easily my second favorite Rush album after Moving Pictures. I draw what is basically at the heart of Dream Theater back to Hemisheres. When I first got into Dream Theater back in '92, my sentiment was that they were playing the music that Rush SHOULD be playing, if they continued along the path that Hemispheres set.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Hemispheres
Post by: Orbert on October 03, 2014, 02:06:00 PM
As far as I know, Rush has never played "2112" in its original arrangement.

Jumping ahead 20 years from where we are, they did revive it in '97 for the Different Stages tour.

True, but the '97 version was in a lower key, as I stated later in the very next sentence.  Removing sections and lowering the key both constitute changes to the original arrangement.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Hemispheres
Post by: mikemangioy on October 03, 2014, 02:39:35 PM
As much as I love and praise A Farewell to Kings, I like Hemispheres a lot less. It has it's great moments, like La Villa Strangiato for instance, but the rest of the album is just ok for me.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Hemispheres
Post by: jammindude on October 04, 2014, 12:09:12 AM
Rush - La Villa Strangiato. (Hemispheres) 1978.: https://youtu.be/rz1dk8eS_Jo

Where did this come from and why have I never seen it?   It's proshot...looks like a music video, but obviously recorded live. 
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Hemispheres
Post by: KevShmev on October 04, 2014, 08:33:53 AM
I've seen that before, but seeing it again, especially Neil's mustache :lol, reminds me that I didn't think to post the pic of the picture on the back cover of 2112:

(https://www.ripten.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/07/rush-from-2112-album-cover.jpg)

This thread would never be complete without that picture. :lol :lol

 :hat
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Hemispheres
Post by: Mladen on October 04, 2014, 08:59:06 AM
What a fantastic record!

The title track is brilliant start to finish. In terms of perfection, it's not far behind 2112 and it's certainly one of my favorite Rush songs. There isn't a single section I don't enjoy as much as the rest. La Villa is a tremendous instrumental that, unlike the title track which is great all the way through, starts off good and just keeps getting better and better towards the end. The shorter songs are pretty cool as well and provide a nice breather between the two prog epics.

If I had to choose between this record and 2112, I think I'd go with this one.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Hemispheres
Post by: King Postwhore on October 04, 2014, 09:11:12 AM
As far as I know, Rush has never played "2112" in its original arrangement.

Jumping ahead 20 years from where we are, they did revive it in '97 for the Different Stages tour.

True, but the '97 version was in a lower key, as I stated later in the very next sentence.  Removing sections and lowering the key both constitute changes to the original arrangement.

I'll take that then never seeing it and BTW, I was at the recording of 2112 on the Different Stages tour in the 6th row.  What a show that was.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Hemispheres
Post by: mikemangioy on October 04, 2014, 02:46:02 PM
After re-listening to the record another couple of times, I feel like it's growing on me. Still, I don't find the title-track all that great. But Circumstances is  :hefdaddy
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Hemispheres
Post by: jammindude on October 04, 2014, 03:14:21 PM
As far as I know, Rush has never played "2112" in its original arrangement.

Jumping ahead 20 years from where we are, they did revive it in '97 for the Different Stages tour.

PER...FEC....TION I SAY!!!   I WILL HEAR NONE OF YOUR INSOLENCE!!!!

 :P :angel:  ;D

(https://rs37.pbsrc.com/albums/e62/rahsa9678/Quotes%20and%20Pics/achmed.gif~c200)

 :lol :lol


 :rollin :rollin :rollin

What's really funny is that this is *exactly* how I feel when people are so dismissive of the title track.   It's almost sacrilege to give the song anything but the complete adoration it so richly deserves.     :angel:
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Hemispheres
Post by: KevShmev on October 05, 2014, 09:16:46 AM
You do realize that most of us here really like/love it, right?  Just because we don't wanna cook it dinner and "take care" of it later doesn't mean we are dismissive of it. ;) :biggrin:
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Hemispheres
Post by: jingle.boy on October 05, 2014, 09:23:46 AM
You do realize that most of us here really like/love it, right?  Just because we don't wanna cook it dinner and "take care" of it later doesn't mean we are dismissive of it. ;) :biggrin:

Word, although I would at least take it to Five Guys, and cuddle.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Hemispheres
Post by: Lowdz on October 05, 2014, 03:22:28 PM
You do realize that most of us here really like/love it, right?  Just because we don't wanna cook it dinner and "take care" of it later doesn't mean we are dismissive of it. ;) :biggrin:

I'm pretty dismissive of it  :biggrin:
And it can buy it's own dinner.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Hemispheres
Post by: KevShmev on October 05, 2014, 10:47:11 PM
You do realize that most of us here really like/love it, right?  Just because we don't wanna cook it dinner and "take care" of it later doesn't mean we are dismissive of it. ;) :biggrin:

Word, although I would at least take it to Five Guys, and cuddle.

 :lol :lol

 :metal


And it can buy it's own dinner.

With jammindude around, it'll never have to. :biggrin:
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: All the World's a Stage
Post by: ytserush on October 10, 2014, 02:26:54 PM
As I've said before, I am not much into reviewing live albums, but I don't want to leave them out, since I know some like to talk about them, so I'll just say that All the World's a Stage is a fine first live album, featuring a beastly live rendition of "By-Tor and the Snow Dog."  It also began the trend of them releasing a live album every four albums, which would be the case until the 21st century.

(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/a/a0/Rush_ATWAS.jpg)

With all of the bootlegs available from this period, there still isn't one that can hold a candle to this recording. It's lightening in a bottle.  It's also a recording that has elements in it that Rush has never surpassed since.

My favorites from this album have always been In The End, Lakeside Park and Something For Nothing.


Oddly enough Neil didn't think it the live album was going to be any good after that show was finished.

"All this angst was coming out of me during the course of the [final] night and I was annoyed and I figured the album was ruined because of all of this. And then we listened back to those tapes and those were the ones that had all of the energy and it's true that anger can sometimes bring out the passion in the music." --Neil  ( Jim Ladd Innerview)
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: A Farewell to Kings
Post by: ytserush on October 10, 2014, 03:11:10 PM


The three shortest songs on here are a lot stronger than the shorter tunes on Side B of 2112, especially the classic rock radio hit, "Closer To The Heart", which has seen its fair share of transformations on stage over the decades. The initial-tour-only-played track "Cinderella Man" is another story by Neil, based on literature, and it works pretty well, although I'll never understand why it was an encore on the AFTK Tour. And "Madrigal" was an  interesting piece by Geddy that was soothing enough. Some might call it filler, but it's Rush exploring what they can do with all their new-found equipment.


-Marc.

Don't want to be that guy but you mixed up who wrote what for Cinderella Man and Madrigal. Geddy wrote Cinderella Man while Neil penned Madrigal.

Solid album. Sometimes I listen to the studio album, but most of the time I'll just break out a live show. Certainly the way this album sounds has never been duplicated.  Very open and warm. They took the time to do it right. Unfortunately though it's a sound very steeped in the '70s and not timeless like say... Television's Marquee Moon.

Interesting  that the working title of the album had been Closer To The Heart. Don't know exactly when it was changed but early press called the new album Closer To The Heart. This version of Closer To The Heart has become my least favorite ever over the years.

Some of you probably know this  about the album cover already, but.....

"The sky and the foreground are not in the same place. The buildings and the sky are from Toronto and the foreground was a demolished warehouse in Buffalo. I would have loved a cathedral in the same condition, or something more worthy of the pathos you were intended to feel for and old building being in that state. We began a series of puns with that album, in that the King is a puppet King.  -- Hugh Syme  (Creem)
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Hemispheres
Post by: DerekTheater on October 10, 2014, 03:17:20 PM
This is one of the best albums ever made.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Hemispheres
Post by: ytserush on October 10, 2014, 03:29:38 PM
If I could go back in time to ANY TOUR AT ALL...it would be the Hemispheres Tour. 

From Cygnus X-1 dot net, the setlist was:

snip


Interesting.  I wonder why they listed the songs in that order.  There's no question at all that this isn't the actual set list order.  At first I thought they were just listing the songs alphabetically, but that's not it, either.  Memory is a fallable thing, but they came out with "2112" then dove into both books of "Cygnus X-1".  We all remember it. 


Not saying you were wrong because you were there and I wasn't but of the dozens of bootlegs I've listened too from this tour,  Both Cygnus' were connected, but 2112 was played later in the set.  While the next tour they opened with 2112  and both Cgynus' were connected farther down in the set.

Here's a few better sounding ones from Hemispheres...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r7d2NyzhIAM

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z5_Qcz4r2JQ

And Permanent Waves...


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F44x7iYR0lw&index=3&list=PLmtjR38ATGY7sWzA0laNpPkMdJ9o0rn-7

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FIl0b4vlpjg&index=4&list=PLmtjR38ATGY7sWzA0laNpPkMdJ9o0rn-7
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Hemispheres
Post by: ytserush on October 10, 2014, 03:45:33 PM
Rush - La Villa Strangiato. (Hemispheres) 1978.: https://youtu.be/rz1dk8eS_Jo

Where did this come from and why have I never seen it?   It's proshot...looks like a music video, but obviously recorded live.

Look no further than the bonus disc of the R-30 DVD.  There are also soundstage videos for The Trees and Circumstances that were recorded at the same time.


Hemispheres is definitely a favorite of mine.   You can tell the constant touring really had a positive effect on the musicianship here.  It's too band the band has bad memories recording this album as has been well documented.

More album cover trivia from Hugh Syme...

"The band told me, 'Go ahead. we'll see it when we get back' because they were in Wales for the whole album and all of my conversations with them were over the telephone. They didn't see it until it got out. Technically, it's an abomination. Once again it's an effort in the progressive era of punning. They talk about Apollo and Dionysus in the lyrics, so I figured that Apollo would be the Magritte businessman and that Dionysus would , again, be the re-institution of that figure."  (Creem)
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: A Farewell to Kings
Post by: The Letter M on October 10, 2014, 03:59:21 PM


The three shortest songs on here are a lot stronger than the shorter tunes on Side B of 2112, especially the classic rock radio hit, "Closer To The Heart", which has seen its fair share of transformations on stage over the decades. The initial-tour-only-played track "Cinderella Man" is another story by Neil, based on literature, and it works pretty well, although I'll never understand why it was an encore on the AFTK Tour. And "Madrigal" was an  interesting piece by Geddy that was soothing enough. Some might call it filler, but it's Rush exploring what they can do with all their new-found equipment.


-Marc.

Don't want to be that guy but you mixed up who wrote what for Cinderella Man and Madrigal. Geddy wrote Cinderella Man while Neil penned Madrigal.

 :facepalm: That was a terrible mistake on my part. Whoops! My Rush History isn't what it used to be, I suppose. Then again, I was gaga over them over a decade ago, and learned everything I could as I got in to them, but my knowledge of a decade's plus worth of other bands, new and old, have filled the gaps in my musical mind. Guess I'll keep that writing credit straight from now on!

-Marc.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Hemispheres
Post by: Orbert on October 10, 2014, 04:19:57 PM
If I could go back in time to ANY TOUR AT ALL...it would be the Hemispheres Tour. 

From Cygnus X-1 dot net, the setlist was:

snip


Interesting.  I wonder why they listed the songs in that order.  There's no question at all that this isn't the actual set list order.  At first I thought they were just listing the songs alphabetically, but that's not it, either.  Memory is a fallable thing, but they came out with "2112" then dove into both books of "Cygnus X-1".  We all remember it. 


Not saying you were wrong because you were there and I wasn't but of the dozens of bootlegs I've listened too from this tour,  Both Cygnus' were connected, but 2112 was played later in the set.  While the next tour they opened with 2112  and both Cgynus' were connected farther down in the set.

Here's a few better sounding ones from Hemispheres...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r7d2NyzhIAM

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=z5_Qcz4r2JQ

And Permanent Waves...


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=F44x7iYR0lw&index=3&list=PLmtjR38ATGY7sWzA0laNpPkMdJ9o0rn-7

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FIl0b4vlpjg&index=4&list=PLmtjR38ATGY7sWzA0laNpPkMdJ9o0rn-7

That's funky.  Again, it's possible that I'm misremembering some details, but they definitely opened with 2112 -- the "5 of 7" version -- because it was so amazing that they did that.  I remember the yellow lights every time Geddy sang during "The Temples of Syrinx" but they also came on every time The Priests had a line in "Presentation".  It was the priest's thing.  But when they got to "Hemispheres" Geddy welcomed us to Side One of the new album, so it was the Hemispheres tour.

Here (https://www.setlist.fm/setlist/rush/1979/lansing-civic-center-lansing-mi-1bd1dd38.html) is the setlist.fm page for that evening.  It's the right night because it was The Lansing Civic Center and New England was the opening act.  But there's gotta be something wrong because they didn't just play the first two parts of 2112.  I remember those yellow lights during "Presentation".  There are three yellow lights!  I didn't see Rush again until Moving Pictures, and after that not until Counterparts, so I'm not confusing it with another tour.

I'll admit that I remembered the awesomeness of both books of Cynus X-1 and may have forgoten that they played a few other songs before that.  But this set list is wrong anyway, so who knows?
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Permanent Waves
Post by: KevShmev on October 11, 2014, 10:03:15 AM
Following the wildly-progressive Hemispheres, Rush decided to tone down the long song arrangements and try to write shorter, more concept songs for their next album, their 7th, and with the 80s approaching, it seems like Rush was ahead of the curve, as that decade saw a major decline in prog music by bands that had done so much of it in the 70s.  But while many of those bands moved away from prog thanks to band member changes (see: Yes & Genesis), Rush made a conscious decision to start steering away from it, but, being that it was an old habit that was dying hard, the next couple albums still had a few longer tracks. 

Permanent Waves, released on the first day of the new decade, is in many ways THE definitive Rush record, as it cements their status as, first and foremost, a hard rock band, with the prog tendencies still creeping up here and there, most noticeably on the three-part "Natural Science," a 9-minute plus journey of riffs, dynamic shifts and some of the most insane drumming to ever come form the hands and feet of Mr. Neil Peart.  But, while on the previous three or four records, the shorter songs took a backseat to the longer tracks, that was not the case on this one.  The album's first two songs, "The Spirit of Radio" and "Freewill," were not only big rock radio hits for the band at the time, but have endured over the many years as tried and true Rush classics, with diehard and casual fans.  Both are still classic rock mainstays, as well as frequently showing up in the band's set lists.  And for good reason, as both are phenomenal in the studio and live, where they always bring the house down.

As for the other three songs - yes, this is another album with only six songs :lol - "Jacob's Ladder" has, slowly but surely over the years, taken over as my favorite from this record; I love the vibe and pace of it, and the climax, which this air drummer still considers a difficult task to do correctly :lol, is simply jaw-dropping.  "Different Strings" continued their tradition of making the 2nd to last track a "studio only" song, and while some of their attempts at writing mellow songs came off as kind of flat early on ("Rivendell," I am looking at you!), this one was knocked out of the park. The other short rocker, "Entre Nous," is most excellent, as well.

Overall, there isn't a lot more for me to add here. The band has said that writing and recording this album went rather quickly and very smoothly, so there is no controversy or anything like that to be had here; it's just an awesome Rush album chock full of great tunes.

(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/5/51/Rush_Permanent_Waves.jpg)
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Permanent Waves
Post by: Lowdz on October 11, 2014, 10:21:09 AM
Probably 3rd favourite for me after 2112 and AFTK. It's certainly as good as MP and benefits from not having a Vital Signs on it. No track to skip here.
Great writeup and what a way to see in a new decade.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Permanent Waves
Post by: Zydar on October 11, 2014, 10:23:02 AM
A truly great album, I'd rank it very high if I would do a Rush album ranking. Natural Science is my favourite song here, and one of their very best ever.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Permanent Waves
Post by: Lowdz on October 11, 2014, 10:34:38 AM
I love the atmosphere of Jacob's Ladder. The music tells the story as much as the words do.
Natural Science is a favourite for me. Entre Nous and Different Strings are great shorter song.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Permanent Waves
Post by: The Letter M on October 11, 2014, 10:42:50 AM
Much like how one can burn AFTK and HEMI onto a single CD-r, you can do the same with PEW and MP, and what a way to open any album - "The Spirit Of Radio" is a huge anthem for them, opening with a mesmerizing guitar riff punctuated by bass and drums before moving into the song's groove. This song had everything the band had - Neil's percussion and mallets/bells, some keys from Geddy, and very impressive playing by Alex. They just took everything that made them who they were and compressed it into a 5 minute song. Between this and "Freewill", they showed of their chops in 10 minutes in a way that most bands couldn't do in a whole album. Of course, you'd think there'd be no way they could top those two songs after it, but then comes along "Jacob's Ladder", which has a TON of meter changes, and that whacky 13/8 in the last half. When I was learning Rush songs on drums, this one was just as much of a challenge as "La Villa Strangiato" or "Cygnus X-1"! There's a lot to be said for that since this is a shorter tune, but it's got "RUSH-EPIC" written all over it.

Side B opens with the same chord/note that closed Side A (though I'm not sure if that was intentional or not), with the more poppy-sounding rocker "Entre Nous", which went unplayed live for decades until a couple tours ago. Then there's the only song on the album not to be played live, "Different Strings", which as Kev pointed out, continued the practice of writing a song for album only and placing it as the 2nd to last song (following "Rivendell", "Tears" and "Madrigal", with more to come in the 80's). It's a beautiful piece with some nice keys and grooves, but it fades out in the end, which I find to be a bit of a bummer, but it's a good set-up to the final track. The rocking epic "Natural Science", formed in 3 movements, contains some of the best playing I've ever heard from the band. There's a heavy, raw intensity here reminiscent of "2112" and "Cygnus X-1", but it still moves forward into new directions.

If Yes had Relayer (which harkened back to Close To The Edge in layout), then Rush had Permanent Waves (which brought the band back to 6 songs, like A Farewell To Kings), both after 6th albums with longer songs (and only four songs, although in the case of Yes, it was four REALLY long songs). This was Rush going back to some shorter songs with a refined formula. They had worked their prog muscles over AFTK and HEMI, but now it was a time to take those chops and slap them on traditional songs, creating something that rock radio had not quite heard before.

-Marc.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Permanent Waves
Post by: Anguyen92 on October 11, 2014, 10:55:58 AM
I'm not really fond of Jacob's Ladder or Freewill (probably my least favorite "well-known" Rush single).  I do love Entre Nous when I heard it in the Snakes & Arrows Live DVD.  Natural Science is just f'en awesome, especially during the Hyperspace section, and nothing else that can be said about The Spirit of Radio (probably my favorite "well-known" Rush single).
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Permanent Waves
Post by: mikemangioy on October 11, 2014, 02:09:35 PM
Man, this is another great album. I didn't listen to it fully until now: I knew TSOR and Freewill of course, I also knew Entre Nous. Jacob's Ladder and Different Strings were very nice discoveries, especially Jacob's Ladder, a very dark song for Rush. And also, I didn't know any ballads by them so  :tup - Natural Science is also awesome, especially the second section.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Permanent Waves
Post by: jammindude on October 11, 2014, 02:28:10 PM
Neil once said that he felt that MP was "the first *real* Rush album"...that comment always confused me because I can see a BIG shift in styles between Hemispheres and PeW, but Moving Pictures to me felt like "Permanent Waves Part 2".   I personally like PeW better, but not by much.  They are both amazing albums.   I just feel that they are so stylistically similar, that it seems odd that Neil would draw a dividing line between the two. 

At the end of the day, this is my #2 all time favorite Rush album (behind Hemispheres).   Just an amazing record.  Rush completely hit their peak at this point.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Permanent Waves
Post by: King Postwhore on October 11, 2014, 03:20:26 PM
2 favorite album in their collection.  The mix of prog and more accessible songs were perfectly mixed and only improved on by the next album.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Permanent Waves
Post by: nicmos on October 11, 2014, 03:29:50 PM
It's certainly as good as MP and benefits from not having a Vital Signs on it.

lol, I agree, but it does have a Different Strings.  this song has really never done anything for me.  is there something to it I'm missing?  like some concept related to it's nonstandard chords and progressions, and calling the song Different Strings?

I've had TSOR stuck in my head for the last few days, and this is one of those rare occasions I'm glad to have a particular song stuck in my head.  It's just a great song.  I also realized after listening to Freewill again how great the bass is in the solo section.  It's hard not to be slapped in the face by the guitars there so I just never concentrated on the bassline.  Geddy is a master, I love listening to his playing and I don't often enough.

Jacob's Ladder is a great proggy song, but I guess I just have something against slow tempos.  I appreciate it intellectually but it always seems to be a slog to get through.

Natural Science is indeed great.  Love the first half, especially, and then the ending, where the last few lines of singing are, until the end.  The more deliberate part in the second half isn't as enjoyable to me, so it's always puzzled me why it's that part they've trotted out at concerts when they don't play the whole song.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Permanent Waves
Post by: Orbert on October 11, 2014, 08:54:11 PM
In my head, I know that Permanent Waves is a good album, possibly a great album.  And it has some great songs on it.  But as a whole, it has never worked for me.  "The Spirit of Radio" is catchy, but I just hate that opening riff, that weirdass hook that keeps coming back, and the way the song keeps shifting gears without a clutch.  Just too weird of a song.  "Freewill" is the same.  Yes, it's catchy; yes, everyone else seems to like it, but I don't.  And for those two reasons, I never listened to Side One and thus never got into "Jacob's Ladder".

Side Two is better.  I kinda like "Entre Nous".  I'm not even sure why.  I'll be the first to admit that it's probably not as good a song as either of the hits, but it does have the benefit of not being played to death on the radio.  Yeah, "Different Strings" is kinda weak, but as Rush ballads go, it's one of the better ones.  "Natural Science' kicks ass, of course, but that makes exactly one song from the entire album that I like, and one that I kinda like.  So after following Rush for a few years, and playing the hell out of A Farewell to Kings, this one came out and was my first real disappointment.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Permanent Waves
Post by: jammindude on October 11, 2014, 09:14:41 PM
I'm just going to come out and say it.  The Spirit of Radio is just a better "single" than Tom Sawyer is.   They are both great songs, but I think that TSOR has much more of a memorable "hit single" feel to it than TS does.   

As awesome as Tom Sawyer is, I find myself consistently surprised that *that* is their signature tune, when it's not nearly as catchy as some of the rest of their songs...Spirit being a prime example. 
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Permanent Waves
Post by: jjrock88 on October 12, 2014, 02:01:38 AM
great album and probably my third favorite overall from the band.

toss up between Jacobs Ladder and Natural Science as my favorite from the disc.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Permanent Waves
Post by: ? on October 12, 2014, 04:56:55 AM
A truly great album, I'd rank it very high if I would do a Rush album ranking. Natural Science is my favourite song here, and one of their very best ever.
This. I think I prefer PeW to Moving Pictures, although both albums are amazing.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Permanent Waves
Post by: hefdaddy42 on October 12, 2014, 04:57:44 AM
I'm just going to come out and say it.  The Spirit of Radio is just a better "single" than Tom Sawyer is.   They are both great songs, but I think that TSOR has much more of a memorable "hit single" feel to it than TS does.   

As awesome as Tom Sawyer is, I find myself consistently surprised that *that* is their signature tune, when it's not nearly as catchy as some of the rest of their songs...Spirit being a prime example.
I agree with you wholeheartedly.  TSOR is fantastic.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Permanent Waves
Post by: nicmos on October 12, 2014, 08:00:57 AM
I third that.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Permanent Waves
Post by: Nick on October 12, 2014, 12:39:51 PM
I'll put in a fourth. Don't get me wrong, I could never hear either song again and die happy, but after 3 billion listens if I had to keep hearing one it would certainly be The Spirit of Radio.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Permanent Waves
Post by: Mladen on October 12, 2014, 01:03:16 PM
Fifth.

Here's what I wrote about this album in my ''top 50 albums list'':

The transitional Rush album that achieved the perfect balance between their prog roots and mainstream modern sound that was about to follow. It has some hits that casual fans are familiar with, but also satisfies prog rock fans with a couple of lengthier, more complex songs. Especially impressive is the fact that the band managed to cram all of their elements into such a short album. Every aspect of the band’s sound can be heard on this record, and every member reveals their complete diversity, yet they only needed 36 minutes to say everything that needs to be said about Rush. Quite an achievement.

Favorite songs: Natural science, Jacob’s ladder, The Spirit of radio

Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Permanent Waves
Post by: DerekTheater on October 12, 2014, 05:19:16 PM
Natural Science is my favorite. Maybe even my favorite Rush song.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Permanent Waves
Post by: KevShmev on October 13, 2014, 01:00:57 PM
I'm just going to come out and say it.  The Spirit of Radio is just a better "single" than Tom Sawyer is.   They are both great songs, but I think that TSOR has much more of a memorable "hit single" feel to it than TS does.   

As awesome as Tom Sawyer is, I find myself consistently surprised that *that* is their signature tune, when it's not nearly as catchy as some of the rest of their songs...Spirit being a prime example.

I know what you mean, but while many wildly popular songs have that one great hook, Tom Sawyer seems to have multiple hooks that blended together to make it a very popular song.

First off, you have that intro.  That immediate synth and drum crash, or whatever you want to call it, is probably one of the single greatest 1-second intros to a rock song ever, which sucks you in immediately.

Second, you have that melody.  That melody Alex plays from :46-:51 is just so freaking awesome.  Even when I was a kid who barely knew the song and didn't like Geddy Lee's voice, that 6-second part is what always made want to listen again and again. 

Third, you have those drum fills at the end of the instrumental section, oft-referred to as the most air drummed fills ever (along with that fill in In the Air Tonight).

Combine those things with everything else going on in the song, and it's popularity is not that difficult to fathom, especially since the song came out in 1981, a time when rockers were probably a bit starved for rock songs that would kick their ass once a day and twice on Sundays.

 :hat
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Permanent Waves
Post by: hefdaddy42 on October 13, 2014, 02:59:55 PM
Yeah, but TSOR is still a better song.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Permanent Waves
Post by: jammindude on October 13, 2014, 04:57:40 PM
Oh trust me, I'm not hating on Tom Sawyer. It was my very first Rush song, and I knew immediately that I had to own thatiincredible album. I still insist that Spirit is a stronger,  better structured,  catchier song that feels far more like a hit single than TS.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Permanent Waves
Post by: ytserush on October 13, 2014, 10:04:11 PM
Oh trust me, I'm not hating on Tom Sawyer. It was my very first Rush song, and I knew immediately that I had to own thatiincredible album. I still insist that Spirit is a stronger,  better structured,  catchier song that feels far more like a hit single than TS.

I completely agree about The Spirit Of Radio. In a lot of ways I like Permanent Waves  better than Moving Pictures anyway.

More cover trivia from Hugh Syme:

"Permanent Waves was the result of a conversation which I had with Neil out at his home in the country. We spoke all evening about Rush growing up, and how we were going to do these EKG readings of each member as they weew recording. We were going to tape their temples and chests and have real heartbeats of them while they were playing. So Permanent Waves was going to be a technical statement. and we were going to treat that with red and gold foil., and do a nice study in design as opposed to a photographic thing.
 I walked out and, in the doorway said 'Wait! Let's try something with Donna Reed, with her Permanent Toni hairdo, and have her walking out of a tidal wave situation.' Neil gave me this blank look and said 'Get out of here!' The following day he asked me to consider doing just that because he'd discussed it with the rest of the band and they all thought it was more likely for a cover rather than the serious approach."  (Creem)



"The woman on the cover is a really a symbol of us. If you think that's sexist in a negative way -- well, it's really looking at ourselves so I don't think it can be. The idea is her perfect imperturbability in the face of all this chaos. In that she represents us. In the basic sense, all that cover picture means is forging on regardless, being completely uninvolved with all of the chaos and ridiculous nonsense that's going on around us. Plus, she represents the spirit of music and the spirit of radio, a symbol  of perfect integrity, truth and beauty."  Neil   (Sounds)
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: A Farewell to Kings
Post by: ytserush on October 13, 2014, 10:07:53 PM


The three shortest songs on here are a lot stronger than the shorter tunes on Side B of 2112, especially the classic rock radio hit, "Closer To The Heart", which has seen its fair share of transformations on stage over the decades. The initial-tour-only-played track "Cinderella Man" is another story by Neil, based on literature, and it works pretty well, although I'll never understand why it was an encore on the AFTK Tour. And "Madrigal" was an  interesting piece by Geddy that was soothing enough. Some might call it filler, but it's Rush exploring what they can do with all their new-found equipment.


-Marc.

Don't want to be that guy but you mixed up who wrote what for Cinderella Man and Madrigal. Geddy wrote Cinderella Man while Neil penned Madrigal.

 :facepalm: That was a terrible mistake on my part. Whoops! My Rush History isn't what it used to be, I suppose. Then again, I was gaga over them over a decade ago, and learned everything I could as I got in to them, but my knowledge of a decade's plus worth of other bands, new and old, have filled the gaps in my musical mind. Guess I'll keep that writing credit straight from now on!

-Marc.

It's all good.  I forget a bunch of stuff  too many times myself and would want to be corrected when I do so. That was the spirit in which I did it in keeping the record accurate.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Permanent Waves
Post by: KevShmev on October 13, 2014, 10:08:07 PM
I slightly prefer The Spirit of Radio as well.  I was just giving probable reasons why Tom Sawyer is so popular.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Permanent Waves
Post by: ytserush on October 14, 2014, 03:19:11 PM
I always thought Permanent Waves is more of a timeless record than those that came before and after it -- even Moving Pictures.





"Regardless of whether we fit in with today's trends in music or not, the vitality is still very strong. And if you've got that vitality, I don't think the stylistic form of music matters. It doesn't make any difference whether you're doing white reggae or the resurrected '50s rock that most new wave music is made up of, or an ongoing like we represent, a Permanent Wave that isn't affected by styles." ------ Neil     (Chicago Tribune)
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Permanent Waves
Post by: ThatOneGuy2112 on October 14, 2014, 03:30:35 PM
Another stellar Rush album. If it doesn't land in my top 5 for them, it sure makes it really close.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Permanent Waves
Post by: TAC on October 14, 2014, 03:35:43 PM
"The woman on the cover is a really a symbol of us. If you think that's sexist in a negative way -- well, it's really looking at ourselves so I don't think it can be. The idea is her perfect imperturbability in the face of all this chaos. In that she represents us. In the basic sense, all that cover picture means is forging on regardless, being completely uninvolved with all of the chaos and ridiculous nonsense that's going on around us. Plus, she represents the spirit of music and the spirit of radio, a symbol  of perfect integrity, truth and beauty."  Neil   (Sounds)

That's interesting. I've never really "got" the album cover.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Permanent Waves
Post by: Orbert on October 14, 2014, 03:59:59 PM
I never did, either, and even with Neil's explanation, I'm still not sure if I do.  As a teenager, what caught my attention was the pretty girl strolling along with the wind blowing her skirt so that her underwear is showing.  No surprise there.  All the other stuff going on... irrelevant.  So if the cover is supposed to be symbolic of perfect integrity, truth and beauty, okay that's great, but no one's going to be looking for any deeper meaning than Hey, pretty girl, and you can see her panties.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Permanent Waves
Post by: King Postwhore on October 14, 2014, 04:15:07 PM
I never did, either, and even with Neil's explanation, I'm still not sure if I do.  As a teenager, what caught my attention was the pretty girl strolling along with the wind blowing her skirt so that her underwear is showing.  No surprise there.  All the other stuff going on... irrelevant.  So if the cover is supposed to be symbolic of perfect integrity, truth and beauty, okay that's great, but no one's going to be looking for any deeper meaning than Hey, pretty girl, and you can see her panties.

The horny mind works in mysterious ways.

I always felt that Rush was affected by it's musical surroundings but always made it their own.  The times were changing with longer sonds and new wave and punk were getting stronger as well as AOR rock.  Rush was able to blend aspects of all perfectly with this album and Moving Pictures.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Moving Pictures
Post by: KevShmev on October 15, 2014, 12:39:04 PM
At the risk of copping out, I don't know what I can say about Moving Pictures that hasn't been said many times by many of us on this forum.  It is easily the band's most popular, accessible and iconic studio record.  While not number 1 on my list, if someone else puts it there, and many do, I have a hard time disagreeing with it.  This, like 2112 and Permanent Waves, is so perfect that it is impossible to find really any fault with it.  Nearly every song on it is a Rush classic, and while "Red Barchetta" has long been my favorite, it seems like every song from this is someone's favorite song from this record.  They were firing on all cylinders at this point, and Moving Pictures is the result. 

 :hefdaddy :hefdaddy

(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/4/4a/Moving_Pictures.jpg)

Regarding the album cover, this has long been one of my favorites of theirs.  I love the triple meaning of the words 'moving pictures.'  Great stuff.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Moving Pictures
Post by: Zydar on October 15, 2014, 12:41:37 PM
My absolute favorite album of theirs :hefdaddy


I love every song here, even Vital Signs which seems to be quite a polarizing song. The Camera Eye is a Top 3 Rush song for me, while Limelight comes pretty close to the top as well.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Moving Pictures
Post by: ThatOneGuy2112 on October 15, 2014, 12:52:52 PM
A Top 5 Rush album in my book. Absolutely amazing. I actually like Vital Signs a lot--I never understood all of the hate it's gotten. The Camera Eye is my favorite track on it without a doubt.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Moving Pictures
Post by: Orbert on October 15, 2014, 01:07:19 PM
My favorite as well.  I can listen to this album all the way through, then all the way through again, and have done so a few times.

Not too many times, because that would be silly.  But enough to matter.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Moving Pictures
Post by: Lowdz on October 15, 2014, 01:35:52 PM
Great album. It's all highlights until Vital Signs. Yes, I'm that guy. Hated that song for the longest time. I can listen to it now and actually enjoy the "Impulse is pure" and "leave out the fiction" parts but hate the reggae-isms.

Almost the perfect album.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Moving Pictures
Post by: mikemangioy on October 15, 2014, 01:38:12 PM
Words aren't enough for Moving Pictures  :hefdaddy :hefdaddy :hefdaddy - until now, my favorite. Hemispheres is slowly starting to take over it, but it's still my favorite by them so far.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Moving Pictures
Post by: Zydar on October 15, 2014, 01:44:02 PM
Great album. It's all highlights until Vital Signs. Yes, I'm that guy. Hated that song for the longest time. I can listen to it now and actually enjoy the "Impulse is pure" and "leave out the fiction" parts but hate the reggae-isms.

Almost the perfect album.

One can almost say that you "deviate from the norm".


:neverusethis:
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Moving Pictures
Post by: Podaar on October 15, 2014, 01:48:35 PM
At the time, I thought this album struck just the right balance of guitar and synth and was thus my favorite for many a year. Also, I've been a big fan of Neil's lyrics on this album.

Red Barchetta, YYZ and Witch Hunt are the highlights for me.

Over the years, Hemispheres, and A Farewell To Kings have supplanted this one at the top, but I absolutely have no problem with anyone listing it as their favorite. Like I said, it was mine for a long time too.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Moving Pictures
Post by: TAC on October 15, 2014, 01:59:42 PM
Great album. It's all highlights until Vital Signs. Yes, I'm that guy. Hated that song for the longest time. I can listen to it now and actually enjoy the "Impulse is pure" and "leave out the fiction" parts but hate the reggae-isms.

Almost the perfect album.

One can almost say that you "deviate from the norm".


:neverusethis:

 :lol
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Moving Pictures
Post by: Orbert on October 15, 2014, 02:00:30 PM
Man, in "The Camera Eye" where the Oberheim first comes in with that dissonant interval and it takes forever to resolve (you know the spot I'm talking about), I think they've completely lost their minds.  I actually start looking around the room for relatively inexpensive things to break, it causes me so much discomfort.  Then it finally resolves, and I feel so much better that I go to the kitchen and make a large glass of chocolate milk and drink it all.  Mmm!  So good.

Then they do it again!  Oh my God!  The world is ending!  Quickly now, what can I break?  WHAT CAN I BREAK?!  Then it resolves again and all is well again, I think I'm gonna be alright.  And I'm feeling better again.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Moving Pictures
Post by: nicmos on October 15, 2014, 02:02:53 PM
Great album. It's all highlights until Vital Signs. Yes, I'm that guy. Hated that song for the longest time. I can listen to it now and actually enjoy the "Impulse is pure" and "leave out the fiction" parts but hate the reggae-isms.

Almost the perfect album.

Pretty much how I feel.  I really am not a fan of anywhere Rush put in a reggae rhythm (with the possible exception of The Spirit of Radio where it's okay).  Vital Signs sounds like Rush responding to critics thinking their music was too uppity and saying they should dumb it down, or them actually trying to follow the trend that was happening at the time towards simple new wave-ish songs.

other than that, Great listen, but I think later live versions of Witch Hunt exceed the studio version.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Moving Pictures
Post by: jammindude on October 15, 2014, 02:08:28 PM
This is where it all started.

Some kid brought Moving Pictures to the last day of 6th Grade (teacher let us have a "free day")....Tom Sawyer started, and I was dumbstruck.  I couldn't believe my ears.  I had never heard anything so cool in my entire life.

I immediately begged my parents to let me get the record.   They were pretty conservative about music, but Rush was always the one band they had absolutely no objection to.     It was the first record I ever owned, and I *played it til it wore out*.    By the time 1984 came around, I was so obsessed with Rush that no one wanted to hang out with me any more.   I could turn a conversation about taking a piss into a conversation about Rush.    I was *that* fan.  I was the reason everyone else hated Rush.   

It's my fault...I'm sorry...I've gotten much better.    :angel:

Moving Pictures is an amazing album, and it deserves every ounce of credit it gets.   It's one of the very few times that I heartily agree with the mass populace....sometimes, even the public at large can get it right.   Moving Pictures is one of those times.     The only reason it stands as 3 or 4 on my list (depending on mood) is because of burn out and nothing more.    And yet, even when I think I'm burnt out on it...one of the songs will come on, and I'm just reliving it all over again.

I think I'll play some of this on Rock Band with my son today.   
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Moving Pictures
Post by: Lowdz on October 15, 2014, 02:20:16 PM
Great album. It's all highlights until Vital Signs. Yes, I'm that guy. Hated that song for the longest time. I can listen to it now and actually enjoy the "Impulse is pure" and "leave out the fiction" parts but hate the reggae-isms.

Almost the perfect album.

One can almost say that you "deviate from the norm".


:neverusethis:

 :lol

 :lol
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Moving Pictures
Post by: hefdaddy42 on October 15, 2014, 02:59:36 PM
Man, in "The Camera Eye" where the Oberheim first comes in with that dissonant interval and it takes forever to resolve (you know the spot I'm talking about), I think they've completely lost their minds.  I actually start looking around the room for relatively inexpensive things to break, it causes me so much discomfort.  Then it finally resolves, and I feel so much better that I go to the kitchen and make a large glass of chocolate milk and drink it all.  Mmm!  So good.

Then they do it again!  Oh my God!  The world is ending!  Quickly now, what can I break?  WHAT CAN I BREAK?!  Then it resolves again and all is well again, I think I'm gonna be alright.  And I'm feeling better again.
I love you so much.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Moving Pictures
Post by: King Postwhore on October 15, 2014, 03:25:22 PM
 :lol

Second favorite album for me.  The production for the time is unreal and their writing skills were at their peak or close to it.  This is the album that got me into Rush and I went back franticly buying their back catalog as a 13 year old.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Moving Pictures
Post by: TAC on October 15, 2014, 03:42:57 PM
:lol

Second favorite album for me.  The production for the time is unreal and their writing skills were at their peak or close to it.  This is the album that got me into Rush and I went back franticly buying their back catalog as a 13 year old.
7th grade bro. Remember this fondly.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Moving Pictures
Post by: King Postwhore on October 15, 2014, 03:46:01 PM
Owned the album.  Carried my boom box with the cassette everywhere with my jean jacket on with the collar up, work boots untied, jeans tucked in the untied boots thinking I'm the shit.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Moving Pictures
Post by: Orbert on October 15, 2014, 03:49:05 PM
Man, in "The Camera Eye" where the Oberheim first comes in with that dissonant interval and it takes forever to resolve (you know the spot I'm talking about), I think they've completely lost their minds.  I actually start looking around the room for relatively inexpensive things to break, it causes me so much discomfort.  Then it finally resolves, and I feel so much better that I go to the kitchen and make a large glass of chocolate milk and drink it all.  Mmm!  So good.

Then they do it again!  Oh my God!  The world is ending!  Quickly now, what can I break?  WHAT CAN I BREAK?!  Then it resolves again and all is well again, I think I'm gonna be alright.  And I'm feeling better again.
I love you so much.

Music moves me like that. 




Moves me to violence sometimes!  :xbones
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Moving Pictures
Post by: jjrock88 on October 15, 2014, 05:07:12 PM
A+
100%
5 stars
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Moving Pictures
Post by: Big Hath on October 15, 2014, 09:23:58 PM
my #1 album of all time


I told the story in my top 50 thread.  Basically my brother gave me a CD-R with a bunch of various music on it, in the middle of it I found Tom Sawyer, Red Barchetta, and YYZ.  My music listening life was never the same.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Moving Pictures
Post by: ? on October 16, 2014, 08:00:48 AM
Not my favorite Rush album, but probably top 5. Witch Hunt and Limelight are among my all-time favorite Rush songs. :metal

EDIT: At first I didn't like Vital Signs either, but nowadays I can appreciate it.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Moving Pictures
Post by: TAC on October 16, 2014, 08:03:29 AM
Great album. It's all highlights until Vital Signs. Yes, I'm that guy. Hated that song for the longest time. I can listen to it now and actually enjoy the "Impulse is pure" and "leave out the fiction" parts but hate the reggae-isms.

In your defense, that song does feel like an outlier to the album. Almost like they needed one more song so they came up with Vital Signs. It feels closer to Signals than it does Moving Pictures.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Moving Pictures
Post by: Zydar on October 16, 2014, 08:04:43 AM
The band says that each album has one of those "last minute" songs, and Vital Signs is one of them.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Moving Pictures
Post by: KevShmev on October 16, 2014, 08:35:56 AM
And Witch Hunt was, at the time, their "typical" 2nd to last studio-only song, one that was never intended to be played live (but eventually was thanks to advances in keyboarding, which made it possible for it to played).
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Moving Pictures
Post by: TAC on October 16, 2014, 08:46:08 AM
The band says that each album has one of those "last minute" songs, and Vital Signs is one of them.

I think at some point I was aware of that, and you know what, it feels that way.


So anyway, this is the point that I got into Rush. At the time, it was AC/DC, Van Halen, Aerosmith, that kind of thing for me. Rush really appealed to me. Love the high vocals, which still appeal to me in a big way (Kiske, Labrie). I was ready to be a Rush fan for life.  Loved the heavy, progressive, and virtuosity in their music.
When I discovered Dream Theater, I said that THIS is the music Rush should be playing.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Moving Pictures
Post by: Mister Gold on October 16, 2014, 08:57:31 AM
While I'm sure that Moving Pictures isn't my favorite Rush album, I will concede that this album is almost certainly the 'sound' I think of when I think about the band.

YYZ is my personal favorite off the album. Quite possibly the band's best instrumental, even over La Villa Strangiato. :hefdaddy
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Moving Pictures
Post by: Mladen on October 16, 2014, 09:25:53 AM
Moving pictures used to be my 2nd favorite Rush album, but then I discovered their later stuff. Vital signs definitely drags it down, and I don't think Red Barchetta is as awesome as the rest of the fans say, although it's still really good. The rest of the album, however, is perfect. Also, Moving pictures features my favorite Rush song - The Camera eye.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Moving Pictures
Post by: Lowdz on October 16, 2014, 09:32:55 AM
Great album. It's all highlights until Vital Signs. Yes, I'm that guy. Hated that song for the longest time. I can listen to it now and actually enjoy the "Impulse is pure" and "leave out the fiction" parts but hate the reggae-isms.

In your defense, that song does feel like an outlier to the album. Almost like they needed one more song so they came up with Vital Signs. It feels closer to Signals than it does Moving Pictures.

And that's not a good thing going forard as half of Signals is almost unlistenable to me. The other half I love.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Moving Pictures
Post by: Anguyen92 on October 16, 2014, 09:48:34 AM
I, for one, don't mind the reggae-isms in Vital Signs.  I keep singing that "Everybody got mixed feelings About the function and the form Everybody got to deviate from the norm," because I just liked how it sounded.

As for the rest of the album, nothing else that needs to be said as usual with Rush.  Tom Sawyer, Limelight, Red Barchetta, YYZ, all are great, but you guys already know that.  The only songs I'm really too fond with in this one is The Camera Eye and Witch Hunt.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Moving Pictures
Post by: KevShmev on October 16, 2014, 02:57:56 PM
In 1990/early 1991, before I was really a Rush fan, my friends Matt and Eric and I used to cruise around a lot, always listening to tunes and doing stuff most do at the ages of 17-19, and Moving Pictures was a popular cassette tape for Matt to play in his car.  I was really only a fan of Tom Sawyer for a long time and always tuned the others out (I had told myself that I hated Rush cause of Geddy Lee's voice and stubbornly refused to budge for a while :lol), but he only ever played Side 1.  We'd listen to Side 1, rewind it back, do it again.  Lather, rinse, repeat.  Then one day, Matt was like, "Ya know, I listened to Side 2 the other day, and it is really good, too."  Ahhh, to be 18 and ignorant again. :facepalm: :lol
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Moving Pictures
Post by: jingle.boy on October 16, 2014, 09:32:15 PM
Oh man, I'm so behind on commenting.  Well, no sense in going way back yet, will just comment on MP.

2nd fave Rush album, but still in my Top 10 overall.  Red Barchetta ties with Xanadu as my favorite, and side one is without a doubt the greatest 4-song run in the history of music.  Loved your story Kev... Side 2 is pretty good actually! My first exposure to Witch Hunt was on A Show of Hands, so I prefer that electronic drum version for some odd reason.  Seeing DT perform The Camera Eye back in ProgNation '09 was f'n incredible.  When they opened with the keyboard intro, then kept going it was like :omg.

Kev... loved your assessment as to why Tom Sawyer is their flagship song.  And I think it's deserving of being such.

Will try to load up some 'fun facts' over the weekend before I'm traveling for work again.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Moving Pictures
Post by: KevShmev on October 17, 2014, 08:12:04 AM
Bring on the facts! :metal

At first, I was thinking I should jump pack my reviews with as many of those fun facts as possible, but a few of you bring them to the table every time I do a new album, so it all works out. :biggrin:
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Moving Pictures
Post by: TAC on October 17, 2014, 11:43:04 AM
Chad, I'm with you. Red Barchetta and Xanadu are my two favorite Rush songs.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Moving Pictures
Post by: KevShmev on October 17, 2014, 11:48:12 AM
Both are in my top 5 along with 2112, La Villa Strangiato and Jacob's Ladder (with Natural Science narrowly missing the cut).
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Moving Pictures
Post by: TAC on October 17, 2014, 12:45:02 PM
Both are in my top 5 along with 2112, La Villa Strangiato and Jacob's Ladder (with Natural Science narrowly missing the cut).
I would also have 2112 and LVS in my Top 5, probably along with Hemispheres, but both Natural Science and Jacob's Ladder are easily in my Top 10.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Moving Pictures
Post by: King Postwhore on October 17, 2014, 12:46:12 PM
Marathon is #1 for me.  Then those mentioned are right up there.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Moving Pictures
Post by: Zydar on October 17, 2014, 12:48:32 PM
Marathon is #1 for me.  Then those mentioned are right up there.

Marathon is in my Holy Trinity of Rush Songs :tup
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Moving Pictures
Post by: TAC on October 17, 2014, 12:49:38 PM
Marathon is #1 for me.  Then those mentioned are right up there.

If I had never seen Rush live, I don't know that I would have a true appreciation of Marathon. Loved the old laser show with the laser man running.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Moving Pictures
Post by: jingle.boy on October 17, 2014, 12:57:03 PM
I'd have to think a little about what I'd put as #5, but LVS and 2112 would be 3 and 4 respectively.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Moving Pictures
Post by: King Postwhore on October 17, 2014, 12:58:32 PM
Marathon is #1 for me.  Then those mentioned are right up there.

If I had never seen Rush live, I don't know that I would have a true appreciation of Marathon. Loved the old laser show with the laser man running.

I agree, I loved that laser man. 
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Moving Pictures
Post by: ThatOneGuy2112 on October 17, 2014, 01:11:12 PM
2112 and Cygnus X-1 Book 1: The Voyage constantly fight over the top spot for me. The Camera Eye and La Villa are also way up there, probably in my top 5. I imagine Jacob's Ladder isn't too far behind.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Moving Pictures
Post by: Lowdz on October 17, 2014, 01:27:03 PM
I started to do a Rush song top 50 and had to give up. I had about 25 songs in my top 5  :biggrin:
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Exit...Stage Left
Post by: KevShmev on October 17, 2014, 02:10:12 PM
Okay, it's only been two days since my MP write-up, but let's get the live album out of the way so we can dig into the synth era next week. :hat

So yeah, say what you want about Exit...Stage Left now.  Like I said before, I am not into reviewing live albums, so we'll see if others have more to say. :lol :lol

(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/a/a5/Rush_Exit_Stage_Left.jpg)
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Exit...Stage Left
Post by: TAC on October 17, 2014, 02:14:03 PM
so we can dig into the synth era next week.

Oh can't wait for that..  :yeahright


Exit Stage left was the first album that came out that I was aware of the band. In the summer between my 7th and 8th grades, I got everything by the band on 8 track!!

Loved this live album. Still do. Would love to hear some unknown facts about it from the group.

Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Exit...Stage Left
Post by: Mister Gold on October 17, 2014, 02:20:45 PM
Okay, it's only been two days since my MP write-up, but let's get the live album out of the way so we can dig into the synth era next week. :hat

Oh boy! :hefdaddy :hat GUP :heart
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Exit...Stage Left
Post by: Lucien on October 17, 2014, 02:30:30 PM
Power Windows is my favorite Rush album, so yes, looking forward to the next 4 albums on this. This live album made me appreciate Jacob's Ladder a lot more.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Exit...Stage Left
Post by: mikemangioy on October 17, 2014, 02:33:21 PM
I listened to this live album last week, and I have to say, it was a really pleasant listen. Loved the tracklist.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Exit...Stage Left
Post by: Orbert on October 17, 2014, 02:54:00 PM
The tracklist is great, the tour was great, and the album they were touring was great.  But the sound of this album is weird.  It may be that it was the first DDD album I'd ever heard and my ears hadn't adjusted yet, or it may be that they hadn't yet figured out how to make DDD albums sound good because it was so new, but somehow, despite being a live album with amazing performances, this album always sounded very dry and lifeless to me.  I never quite figured it out.  Then an asshole ex-roommate of mine stole my copy of the album (along with a bunch of others) and sold it for drug money, so I haven't listened to it in years.  But I remember it sounding weird.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Exit...Stage Left
Post by: Lowdz on October 17, 2014, 03:11:17 PM
The tracklist is great, the tour was great, and the album they were touring was great.  But the sound of this album is weird.  It may be that it was the first DDD album I'd ever heard and my ears hadn't adjusted yet, or it may be that they hadn't yet figured out how to make DDD albums sound good because it was so new, but somehow, despite being a live album with amazing performances, this album always sounded very dry and lifeless to me.  I never quite figured it out.  Then an asshole ex-roommate of mine stole my copy of the album (along with a bunch of others) and sold it for drug money, so I haven't listened to it in years.  But I remember it sounding weird.

Yeah there was something about this album that just sounded dull and lifeless. At the time I loved live albums but I'd take the studio versions of these songs every time (though I like Broon's Bane), and I wouldn't say that about Strangers In The Night, Alive II, Unleashed In The East etc.
It sounded that way on vinyl too.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Exit...Stage Left
Post by: TAC on October 17, 2014, 03:24:52 PM
The tracklist is great, the tour was great, and the album they were touring was great.  But the sound of this album is weird.  It may be that it was the first DDD album I'd ever heard and my ears hadn't adjusted yet, or it may be that they hadn't yet figured out how to make DDD albums sound good because it was so new, but somehow, despite being a live album with amazing performances, this album always sounded very dry and lifeless to me.  I never quite figured it out.  Then an asshole ex-roommate of mine stole my copy of the album (along with a bunch of others) and sold it for drug money, so I haven't listened to it in years.  But I remember it sounding weird.

Yeah there was something about this album that just sounded dull and lifeless. At the time I loved live albums but I'd take the studio versions of these songs every time (though I like Broon's Bane), and I wouldn't say that about Strangers In The Night, Alive II, Unleashed In The East etc.
It sounded that way on vinyl too.
I think part of that speaks to the strength of of the studio production for AFTK through MP, especially PW and MP. 70's Kiss, Priest, and UFO all seemed to have remedial productions.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Exit...Stage Left
Post by: Orbert on October 17, 2014, 03:43:43 PM
Yeah, "Broon's Bane" was cool.  It was like Wow, an instrumental acoustic intro to the song!  So groundbreaking, so awesome, so 1981!

Seriously though, it was cool.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Exit...Stage Left
Post by: The Letter M on October 17, 2014, 04:06:05 PM
Moving Pictures - Great album, even though I like it just a little less than PEW, possibly because the songs on side 1 have been over-played, both on radio and on tour. Side 2 is the more experimental side, which I enjoy a little more, mostly because of "The Camera Eye" and "Witch Hunt". There really isn't much else I can say or add about this album that hasn't already been said, so I'll move on to...

Exit...Stage Left. If ATWAS was the band's raw album, this was a complete 180. This sounds like a studio album without a lot of crowd, and fading out/in between some tracks. It's very noticeably pieced together, although the runs of songs sound amazing, particularly "Broon's Bane/The Trees/Xanadu". The live rendition of "La Villa Strangiato" absolutely slays, as does "Jacob's Ladder". To me, this is the band's Seconds Out, their Yessongs/i], their Welcome Back My Friends To The Show That Never Ends - it's got some epic moments, great live sound, but it does sound a BIT too sterile, even after a couple remasterings, although the latest version from the Sector box sets is an improvement.

One of my favorite live albums, but after creating my personal Complete Live Tour set, the live setlists for the PEW and MP tours are better in completion than the ESL track list. I do wish we'd get complete soundboards for BOTH tours, official or otherwise, but what we do have from boots and official releases is great.

-Marc.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Exit...Stage Left
Post by: TAC on October 17, 2014, 04:18:15 PM
One of my favorite live albums, but after creating my personal Complete Live Tour set, the live setlists for the PEW and MP tours are better in completion than the ESL track list. I do wish we'd get complete soundboards for BOTH tours, official or otherwise, but what we do have from boots and official releases is great.
I agree 100%.

Not sure what Seconds Out is though.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Exit...Stage Left
Post by: Orbert on October 17, 2014, 04:30:17 PM
Seconds Out was the second live album from Genesis.  It was long regarded as the definitive live Genesis album, and still is by many.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Exit...Stage Left
Post by: TAC on October 17, 2014, 04:34:23 PM
See avatar. ;D
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Exit...Stage Left
Post by: Orbert on October 17, 2014, 04:39:33 PM
That's not your avatar, that's your "Personal Text".  Too bad, too.  That band went through a lot of changes stylistically, and it's a shame that none of it appeals to you.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Exit...Stage Left
Post by: jammindude on October 17, 2014, 04:59:05 PM
This is *THE DEFINITIVE VERSION OF YYZ*!!!   This drum solo is so good, that it was the first time I ever heard a drum solo in regular rotation on local rock radio.   This drum solo has over the years become the most memorized and hailed drum solos in rock history.     I love this drum solo...can you tell?  :hat

This was my favorite live Rush album for a very long time.  I love every single note of it.   In retrospect, I suppose I can hear what people are talking about with the sound, but it never bothered me.  This is THE live album I grew up with.   The experience most 12 year olds had with Kiss Alive...I had with ESL.     BB/TT/Xanadu may be the best recorded "side" of live music in history...pure eargasm.   

There's not a single note of ESL I don't adore, and it is probably still my favorite live Rush album.  Sometimes I like Different Stages a bit better, but it's hard to replace your first love. 
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Exit...Stage Left
Post by: King Postwhore on October 17, 2014, 05:15:54 PM
The tracklist is great, the tour was great, and the album they were touring was great.  But the sound of this album is weird.  It may be that it was the first DDD album I'd ever heard and my ears hadn't adjusted yet, or it may be that they hadn't yet figured out how to make DDD albums sound good because it was so new, but somehow, despite being a live album with amazing performances, this album always sounded very dry and lifeless to me.  I never quite figured it out.  Then an asshole ex-roommate of mine stole my copy of the album (along with a bunch of others) and sold it for drug money, so I haven't listened to it in years.  But I remember it sounding weird.

Completely agree.  It sounds sterile.  I love the songs, but like you said it sounds lifeless.

BTW, I got it for Christmas with, wait for it................AC/DC - For Those About To Rock.  Live album for the young mind, one album for my groin. :lol
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Exit...Stage Left
Post by: The Letter M on October 17, 2014, 06:24:29 PM
This is *THE DEFINITIVE VERSION OF YYZ*!!!   This drum solo is so good, that it was the first time I ever heard a drum solo in regular rotation on local rock radio.   This drum solo has over the years become the most memorized and hailed drum solos in rock history.     I love this drum solo...can you tell?  :hat

For my Senior Recital at college (I was a music major), I played YYZ as my final piece, the ESL version complete with drum solo (well, my slightly different interpretation of it), and it was pretty fun to learn and play.

-Marc.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Exit...Stage Left
Post by: jammindude on October 17, 2014, 06:34:33 PM
I'm not even a drummer, and I swear it's the only drum solo that I have MEMORIZED NOTE FOR NOTE. 

BTW, my second favorite drum solo of all time?   I made an audio rip of the Images and Words Live in Tokyo home video.   I cannot figure out why MP hates solos so much.   I think *that* solo has the same "musical" quality that Neil gave his solos....I think Mike was extremely good at creating "musical" solos when he did them, and I can't figure out why he didn't want to do them anymore, and expressed a dislike for them.  And I put that IAWLiT solo very close the the YYZ solo. 
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Exit...Stage Left
Post by: Mosh on October 17, 2014, 07:25:02 PM
This is the first time I've heard this live album being called "sterile". I'm surprised ,I always liked the sound of it a lot and it's a really great album. Perfect if I want a fix of this era of Rush. The only thing I don't like are the fades between songs. Not sure why they couldn't just crossfade audience noise together. But that's a minor gripe, the music itself is top notch. Not of the magnitude of other live albums, but still a lot of fun.

Different eyes see different things, right?  :biggrin:
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Exit...Stage Left
Post by: nicmos on October 17, 2014, 07:42:03 PM
This is *THE DEFINITIVE VERSION OF YYZ*!!!   This drum solo is so good, that it was the first time I ever heard a drum solo in regular rotation on local rock radio.   This drum solo has over the years become the most memorized and hailed drum solos in rock history.     I love this drum solo...can you tell?  :hat

Thank you J-dude, I was surprised no one mentioned this before you.  It is so great that transition into and out of the drum solo, plus I like the fact that the solo isn't overly long like it's become in the last 20 years.  Take YYZ and LVS alone are enough to warrant buying this CD.  The Lerxst in Wonderland solo on LVS is different from the studio version, but chill-inducing nonetheless.

Other than that, yeah the production just makes everything seem so distant and dry unfortunately.  Like they were playing behind a curtain, and all the fadeouts don't help trying to make it feel like you're actually at a concert rather than listening to a bunch of separate takes.

But yeah, I'll take ESL over the other live albums.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Exit...Stage Left
Post by: jingle.boy on October 18, 2014, 07:05:16 AM
Despite not being an actual concert release, this is a great live release.  I had the VHS of it, that got a lot of plays - usually accompanied with some "environmental enhancements" for me and my buds, and the phrase "eeRE!!!".  :hat  Geddy's double-neck bass was :omg.

Drum solo - epic

LVS - still god-tier.

Though I prefer a couple of their later live releases, this too was the release in the late 80s that continued my expansion of the band beyond just the popular hits.  Listened to the shit out of this before my first concert in 1991 - and got baked out of my mind.

Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Exit...Stage Left
Post by: Mister Gold on October 18, 2014, 08:34:43 AM
This is *THE DEFINITIVE VERSION OF YYZ*!!!   This drum solo is so good, that it was the first time I ever heard a drum solo in regular rotation on local rock radio.   This drum solo has over the years become the most memorized and hailed drum solos in rock history.     I love this drum solo...can you tell?  :hat

Thank you J-dude, I was surprised no one mentioned this before you.  It is so great that transition into and out of the drum solo, plus I like the fact that the solo isn't overly long like it's become in the last 20 years.  Take YYZ and LVS alone are enough to warrant buying this CD.  The Lerxst in Wonderland solo on LVS is different from the studio version, but chill-inducing nonetheless.

Other than that, yeah the production just makes everything seem so distant and dry unfortunately.  Like they were playing behind a curtain, and all the fadeouts don't help trying to make it feel like you're actually at a concert rather than listening to a bunch of separate takes.

But yeah, I'll take ESL over the other live albums.

Yeah, I can understand some of the complaints about the weird sound on the vocal songs, but both YYZ and LVS are insane on ELS. In fact, I greatly prefer the ELS version of Lerxst in Wonderland over the original. :hefdaddy
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Exit...Stage Left
Post by: KevShmev on October 18, 2014, 12:06:10 PM
Geddy's double-neck bass was :omg.

 

Geddy and Alex jamming together on their double-necks during the rocking part of Xanadu's long intro is still Rush's single most awesome live concert video moment ever. :metal :metal
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Moving Pictures
Post by: ytserush on October 18, 2014, 12:15:41 PM
At the risk of copping out, I don't know what I can say about Moving Pictures that hasn't been said many times by many of us on this forum.  It is easily the band's most popular, accessible and iconic studio record.  While not number 1 on my list, if someone else puts it there, and many do, I have a hard time disagreeing with it.  This, like 2112 and Permanent Waves, is so perfect that it is impossible to find really any fault with it.  Nearly every song on it is a Rush classic, and while "Red Barchetta" has long been my favorite, it seems like every song from this is someone's favorite song from this record.  They were firing on all cylinders at this point, and Moving Pictures is the result. 

 :hefdaddy :hefdaddy

(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/4/4a/Moving_Pictures.jpg)

Regarding the album cover, this has long been one of my favorites of theirs.  I love the triple meaning of the words 'moving pictures.'  Great stuff.

More of a fan of side two than side 1, especially Witch Hunt and Vital Signs. YYZ and Red Barchetta are the stars of side 1.

This album arrived at the right time, too.




Haven't thrown in Alex yet so:


"We renegotiated our record deal on the strength of that record. So that automatically added to our longevity. We knew that we had the budget for so many albums for the next 8 or 10 years or whatever [Note: actually through 1989's A Show of Hands} So in many ways it guaranteed us that freedom to make whatever records we wanted to make. And to, I guess instill some confidence in the record company that we were capable of making records that they could be commercially happy with---which is not a big priority with us, believe me. The artistic end of the album is what's most important."  ---- Alex  In the Studio: Moving Pictures.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Exit...Stage Left
Post by: ytserush on October 18, 2014, 12:53:07 PM
Okay, it's only been two days since my MP write-up, but let's get the live album out of the way so we can dig into the synth era next week. :hat

So yeah, say what you want about Exit...Stage Left now.  Like I said before, I am not into reviewing live albums, so we'll see if others have more to say. :lol :lol

(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/a/a5/Rush_Exit_Stage_Left.jpg)

An iconic live album for a number of reasons...great tracklisting, kind of a greatest hits live release, took advantage of the success of Moving Pictures and kept the band on the road, showcased the what the band could do live for newer fans of the band.....

All that said, there isn't much live about this live album.  In the process of  fixing a few mistakes, a lot of the energy was drained from this album as others have said.  I used to listen to this a lot when it came out, mostly because that was all there was if I wanted to hear anything live from that period (and I wasn't quite aware of bootlegs yet. I think this album may have been the reason I sought out bootlegs  or it just could have been that I'm a geek)  Found out later that this wasn't particularly representative of the band live at all as a lot of the humor is removed from the album. It's a favorite album cover of mine too.

Also found out later (via bootleg) that a playful intro to La Villa Strangiato was cut from the version they used too.

At least Natural Science and Vital Signs were left on the cutting room floor (Vital Signs live appeared a short time later and the B-side to New World Man. Who knows what happened to Natural Science...)

It's kind of a shame that the "classic" period that this album is supposed to represent kind of falls short, but I think that's partly due to the technology at the time. Maybe it's similar to the way that The Song Remains The Same (musically) isn't as good of an indicator of what Led Zeppelin was either.


More useless trivia about the cover from Neil:

"We wanted to have Snaggelpus's tail on there. You know,'Exit...Stage Left', with a picture of just his tail. Forget it! They wanted all kinds of legal hassles and tons of money." ------Neil     Canoe online 10/16/1996
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Exit...Stage Left
Post by: jingle.boy on October 18, 2014, 02:02:44 PM
Fun Facts:

A Farewell to Kings:
- the band started headlining ... with Cheap Trick and Max Webster opening
- the album was recorded in England
- not sure if it was ever seriously considered, but rather than adding a fourth member, this is where they REALLY pushed themselves instrumentally. "We were faced with the choice of adding a band member or else getting really ambitious and doing it ourselves.  We wanted more textures, new sounds."  -- Peart
- it was their first certified Gold album in the US
- Cinderella Man was lyrically based on the movie Mr. Deeds Goes to Town; Xanadu inspired by Citizen Kane

Hemispheres:
- 'the album that nearly killed the band' - everything was bombastic ... arrangements, performance, production, and most of all, cost (as they ran out of studio time, and had to mix and re-mix at different locations in England
- it wasn't until after they finished writing that Geddy realized that the songs were in registers that required him to sing higher and harder than he ever had.
- Hemispheres was too long for them to record and get on a single piece of tape in one take.

Permanent Waves:
- recorded back in the motherland... even if it was in Quebec.
- Freewill only hit 103 on the Billboard charts; The Spirit of Radio - 55
- TSOR was taken from the tagline of local radio station, 102.1 CFNY (now known as "The Edge", and playing a 'new rock' format)
- working title of the album was Waveforms
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Exit...Stage Left
Post by: Orbert on October 18, 2014, 04:11:16 PM
My one story from this period pretty much centers on the ingestion of non-tobacco and I know that direct references are frowned upon here at DTF, but this is the story.  Mods can delete it if they feel it's inappropriate.  Also, it's pretty long.  You have been warned.

I was a Music major at Michigan State University, as was my roommate.  The two of us, plus another of my good friends, had scored tickets see to Rush on March 15 in Detroit.  Elsewhere on these boards, I've shared the tragic story of why I did not graduate with a degree in Music, but the events of this story factor into it.  Basically, I had an audition the following morning at 8:00, before the panel who would decide whether or not I would continue as a Music Education major.  They would not allow me to reschedule the audition, and I wasn't going to miss seeing Rush, so I just faced the fact that I would be seeing a concert in Detroit, driving home whenever, and attempting to audition the following morning.  I had already become quite disenchanted with the College of Music at Michigan State.  I wanted to be a band director.  I can play every instrument, winds, brass, even percussion, and my favorite teacher from high school was our band director.  Anyway, "to express yourself through an ensemble, you must first be able to express yourself as a virtuoso upon your chosen instrument" was what they told me, and I had to choose a major and minor instrument.  I liked saxophone, but there was only one sax professor, Dr. Forger, and he was so busy that he only had time for four students.  So basically, in a school of 45,000 students, there could be only four saxophone majors, and I had to audition to be one of them.  I had to beat at least one of his current students.

We were college freshmen, had all been to Detroit before, but never on our own like this, always with our families on trips and stuff.  So a road trip to Detroit to see Rush, the three of us, was a major event.  The afternoon of the show, we got ahold of some non-tobacco.  We weren't sure how long it would take us to get there, but we were going into the heart of Detroit, and also knew that by then we'd all be pretty stoned and might get lost, so we allowed three or four hours.  We figured if we got there early, fine, we could check out the town a bit, get something to eat, whatever.

We rolled several before leaving the dorm.  Many, many.  It was a weekday, so traffic on the highway to Detroit was light and we did in fact get there hours before the show was to start.  For those who are unfamiliar with the geography, Detroit is basically on the Canadian border; Michigan and Ontario are separated by the Detroit River.  You can cross over the river via The Ambassador Bridge, or drive under it via The Windsor Tunnel.  As we were driving around downtown Detroit, wasted, checking out the scenery, we'd pass signs saying "Tunnel to Canada" or "Bridge to Canada" with an arrow telling you which way to turn at the next intersection.  With two hours to kill, "Let's go to Canada!"  Over and back, just to do it.  Sure, why not?  What could go wrong?

We decided on the tunnel, because the bridge might be too freaky because we were so high.  In the tunnel, one of us (I honestly don't remember who) said "Let's burn one in the tunnel!"  Yeah!  This is so cool, we're smoking one in the tunnel!

The sign up ahead said "All Vehicles Must Stop For Customs".  OH SHIT!  Yeah, we hadn't thought about that.  We rolled all the windows down (like that would help at this point) and quickly got a story put together.  We're going to Toronto, I had friends there (which was true) and we were on Spring Break from MSU (which was close enough).  Okay.  We get to the gate, the man in the uniform leans in and asks where we're headed.  Chris the driver says "Toronto" at the same time my buddy Mitch in the back seat says "Toledo".  He puts a red card on the windshield and asks us to pull over for "further inspection".

They searched us, and didn't like what they found.  They searched the car, and found even more, and didn't like that, either.  They separated us and strip-searched us.  All we had was the non-tobacco.  We were all 18, but were still basically "stupid kids" and they threatened to call our parents and it worked, and we were scared.  We were in Canada, had crossed an international border with contraband, and among other things, could be charged with smuggling.  I personally came clean and told them the truth, that we were killing some time before a concert, but I really did have friends in Toronto, my dad was born there, and that we just wanted to visit Canada while we were so close.  I had no idea whether my friends would stick to the story or not, but at this point it didn't really matter.

Basically, they knew we were just stupid kids and not a threat to national security or anything, so they kept us long enough to scare the shit out of us, then sent us back to the United States.  They told us that we were welcome to visit Canada in the future, but please leave the illegal stuff at home.

We got to Cobo Hall and found our seats literally seconds before Max Webster came out.  We hadn't missed anything!  Max Webster were great, and of course Rush was amazing, as they always are.  The one thing I remembered was that there was a song on the radio at the time, "Battlescar" which was the two bands together, all seven of them (Webster had a keyboard player), and since they were touring together, it would make perfect sense for them to play that one song together.  But they didn't.  It was a Max Webster song, from their current album Universal Juveniles, and Webster played it by themselves.  They wasn't just disappointing, but seemed kinda dumb, a missed opportunity.  Rush was there, backstage, and could have joined them for the one song.  It would have been so cool.  But no.  Anyway, it was still a great concert.  Both bands were great.

We got back to East Lansing around 2:00 in the morning, so wired up that I couldn't sleep for a while, and it didn't help that I knew I had to get some sleep before my audition.  Didn't matter.  I sucked at the audition.  I was not going to beat out any of Dr. Forger's four current students, and thus ended my career as a Music Major at Michigan State University.

But it was a great concert.  Worth getting kicked out of the College of Music?  I wasn't gonna pass the audition anyway, so yeah.  Definitely worth it.  This is Rush we're talking about!
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Exit...Stage Left
Post by: jingle.boy on October 18, 2014, 04:20:53 PM
Awesome story Bob.  You definitely got a logically minded border official.  Such things are extinct these days.  No way an 18-year old you would get the same treatment today.  Thank your lucky stars.  That depending on how much you guys had, it could mean a lifetime ban... minimum 1-year for sure.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Exit...Stage Left
Post by: Orbert on October 18, 2014, 04:27:46 PM
Oh yeah, it definitely could have been much worse.  But this was 1981.  It was a simpler time.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Exit...Stage Left
Post by: TAC on October 18, 2014, 07:03:45 PM
I know Marc had a great live Rush thread, but to Marc or John, or anyone else, what would be the definitive boots for both the PW and MP tours?
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Exit...Stage Left
Post by: Anguyen92 on October 18, 2014, 11:27:07 PM
Hemispheres:
- 'the album that nearly killed the band' - everything was bombastic ... arrangements, performance, production, and most of all, cost (as they ran out of studio time, and had to mix and re-mix at different locations in England
- it wasn't until after they finished writing that Geddy realized that the songs were in registers that required him to sing higher and harder than he ever had.
- Hemispheres was too long for them to record and get on a single piece of tape in one take.

Wait, Hemispheres the song or the whole album that they were trying to do it in one go without stopping? I thought it was La Villa Strangiato that they were trying to get it done where they play it all the way without stopping and don't need to add anything else after that.  They try to do that for Hemispheres as well?  No wonder, they felt that overwhelming pressure.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Exit...Stage Left
Post by: Mosh on October 19, 2014, 12:26:17 AM
I'm pretty sure they tried to do LVS in one go. I remember Geddy saying so in the movie too. I don't think a song like Hemispheres would even be attempted.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Exit...Stage Left
Post by: ? on October 19, 2014, 12:37:58 AM
Yeah, I remember one of them said recording LVS took more time than the entirety of Fly by Night.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Exit...Stage Left
Post by: jingle.boy on October 19, 2014, 05:55:40 AM
I assumed the quote I read (from Terry Brown) was referring to the song, not the entire album.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Exit...Stage Left
Post by: KevShmev on October 19, 2014, 08:28:33 AM
Awesome story, Orbert!! :tup :tup
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Exit...Stage Left
Post by: jammindude on October 19, 2014, 09:53:07 AM
I still would like to know where the raw footage of this show is.   I can't help but believe that *somewhere* out there is a complete pro-shot video of an entire Moving Pictures Tour live show that was edited down for the home video release. 

Someday, I'm hoping they will find the original footage, and be able to release the entire show.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Signals
Post by: KevShmev on October 20, 2014, 09:41:56 AM
Having now reached into the mainstream with both hands, thanks to songs like "Tom Sawyer" and "Limelight" being smash rock radio hits, the world was now their oyster, but, instead of going the safe route and doing another Moving Pictures, they continued to evolve, and wanted to step up the keyboards on their next album.  This, however, would clash with longtime producer Terry Brown, who wanted to see the band remain a power trio, hard rock band at heart, but the band was insistent on moving forward and letting the keys became a bigger part of their sound, which led to some clashes during the recording with Brown, who was to them in the studio what George Martin was to The Beatles. As a result, the band's 9th studio album, Signals, was a step back in regards to overall sound and production (although later CD pressings would result in remasters that helped it out a ton).  And it would be the last album produced by a man the band had referred to on more than one occasion as the fourth member of Rush.

However, despite the in-studio struggles and clashes, the album is still pretty damn good, and the songs are there.  "Subdivisions" is arguably THE definitive Rush song of the synth era - it was a minor hit on MTV thanks to a video that got a lot of air play at the time, the diehards love it, and the band has played it on many tours over the years. "New World Man," which was a last minute "Hey, we need a song that is no longer than 3:57 to fill out Side 2 of the record" tune, Project 3:57 if you will, is a nice, catchy tune, and oddly became their biggest hit on the pop charts ever (it went to number 23). Other fan favorites like "The Analog Kid," "The Weapon" and "Digital Man" are all winners, as well.  "Countdown" and "Chemistry" both have their moments, and I enjoy them, even if both have that "dang, they could have been so much better" feeling to them.  Finally, the 2nd-to-last studio-only song, "Losing It," is pretty freaking great. That one was a bit of an afterthought for me for a long time, but one day the light bulb went on and it's been a favorite of mine since.  It was around this time when Neil Peart's lyrics went from great to consistently phenomenal, and "Losing It" is a fine example of this; so is "Subdivisions."

Getting back to the sound, it's hard to know what happened, but I get the sense that it wasn't a strength of Terry Brown's to mix it to where the keys were the dominant instrument.  On an album where the keys were supposed to step up and the guitars were supposed to step back, neither sounds up front enough more often than not, but, like I said, it's still a good-sounding record on the newer remasters; the mixing just could have been better in regards to the two lead instruments.  It's strange, too, cause I've seen the video for "Subdivisions" on Totally 80s a few times, and it's obviously still from the original release, and it sounds like listening to a song on an old transistor radio.  Every time I see the video and hear it, I think, "Is that what the original vinyl release sounded like??" Regardless, I still love Signals a ton, and while it might be my least favorite of the four synth era albums, that doesn't diminish it; that merely speaks to how much more I like the next three.

(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/6/63/Rush_Signals.jpg)
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Signals
Post by: The Letter M on October 20, 2014, 10:03:19 AM
Signals was an album that grew quickly for me in my formative years as a Rush fan. The opening two tracks were instant hits, as was "The Digital Man". I didn't quite love "Countdown" or "Chemistry" all that much at first, but in the years following, I came to love the whole album.

It's a marked change after the last two albums, but the three of them together form a powerful trio of albums that rivals the run of 2112-AFTK-HEMI, just in a different way. It is interesting to note that the band played all but "Losing It" from this album on its tour, which is a shame as it's quite a beautiful song, but understandable given that it would have required an additional musician to play the violin part.

-Marc.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Signals
Post by: Lucien on October 20, 2014, 10:30:46 AM
My father's first Rush concert was during the Signals tour, where he fell in love with Rush. If I remember correctly, it's also his favorite album.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Signals
Post by: Zydar on October 20, 2014, 10:39:18 AM
This album has grown on me the last year or so. Subdivisions was an instant classic though, and it's a Top 5 Rush song for me. The Analog Kid, Digital Man, Losing It, and New World Man are great too. The others are okay but doesn't really do that much for me.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Signals
Post by: Lowdz on October 20, 2014, 10:42:25 AM
Signals was a huge step back for me, particularly sound-wise. Yes, the original vinyl sounds dull and mushy. Plus the reggae-isms were a bit OTT on a couple of songs (Digital Man, Chemistry- still don't like these songs).
The rest of the album would be great with a better production.
I love The Analog Kid and have a soft spot for Countdown. Losing It is awesome and New World man rocks. Subdivisions is cool. Th Weapon is great too.

Peart was coming into his own as a lyric writer, less fiction based stuff, more real world stuff.

I probably wouldn't rate it that high on the ratings but that's because of the issues mentioned above. PLenty of awesome here still even if it doesn't sound like I love it.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Signals
Post by: hefdaddy42 on October 20, 2014, 10:46:42 AM
This one was never a favorite of mine, but there are definitely some good songs here.  And the change in sound is quite noticeable.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Signals
Post by: Jaq on October 20, 2014, 11:02:16 AM
SUBDIVISIONS.

 :lol
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Signals
Post by: nicmos on October 20, 2014, 01:26:27 PM

agree with Lowdz for the most part.  the reggae stuff is not for me.

first, the guitar parts, aside from the solos, sound like afterthoughts (and I read somewhere that Alex didn't work on his parts until late or some such).  love the solo on Subdivisions, but for much of the record you could really remove the guitar part and it wouldn't affect the song significantly.

Fuck New World Man, except for possibly a little part in the second verse, this song is without merit.  You can tell it was a last minute addition.  No creativity whatsoever.  Geddy's singing makes it sound like he doesn't even care about this song.  I guess this only got popular because it was a formulaic single-type song on the album after Moving Pictures.  I can't think of a single Rush song I feel short-changed more than this one.

In general, I just feel like the songwriting lacks on large parts of this album, again possibly related to Alex dicking around instead of participating in the creative process. 

song ranking:
Subdivisions (all time top 5 Rush song)
Analog Kid (still don't think the main guitar melody is that great, it probably detracts from the song for me)
Losing It (the build up and climax in the solo is sublime, plus the lyrics are great)
Chemistry (creative, new, different)
Countdown (love the synth solo)
Digital Man (fairly good except the chorus is stupid)
The Weapon (just could never get into this, I don' t feel like any part of the song really works)
New World Man (see above, ugh)

easily my least-listened-to album between 2112 and TFE.  fortunately Rush redeemed themselves in a big big way later in the decade.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Signals
Post by: TAC on October 20, 2014, 01:50:43 PM
Signals was the first studio album that came out after I became a fan. I was so into Rush at this point. Having spent the prior year and a half accumulating their catalog. I loved everything they had done up till this point. But then it came. The local radio station prmiered the new Rush song, New World Man. WTF HAPPENED TO RUSH. Surely this couldn't be them. This song was so fuc#ing lame compared to Hemispheres, Natural Science, etc..
When I bought Signals, I was so completely disapponited. The only two tracks I remotely liked were The Analog Kid and The Weapon.
I was basically done at this point being a Rush fan. Grace Under Pressure even cemented my thoughts. Even though I saw them on the Power Windows tour (Very dissappointing BTW), it was until I saw them on the Hold Your Fire tour that I became a fan again.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Signals
Post by: nicmos on October 20, 2014, 01:56:01 PM
glad to see I'm not the only one using the F-word in conjunction with New World Man :)
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Signals
Post by: TAC on October 20, 2014, 01:59:21 PM
Over time, I have basically made peace with 80's Rush, including New World Man.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Signals
Post by: Orbert on October 20, 2014, 02:04:57 PM
This is where Rush took it a bit too far for me.  The other Canadian power trio of the day, Triumph, also had synthesizers doing some occassionally interesting lines here and there, and it added to their sound, but at their heart, they remained a classic power trio.  Guitar, bass, drums.

Rush wanted to take it farther than that, and I don't blame them for it.  They were better musicians with higher goals; I just have mixed feelings about the results.  Geddy is not a gifted keyboard player.  It all sounds good because Oberheims sound good, and he's such a talented musician that he manages to express himself, but musically it's just not very interesting to me.

It was also around this time that rumors were flying that Geddy Lee had throat cancer.  All those years of wailing like that had finally done it.  Such a damned shame, too.  Then "New World Man" came out, and listen to his voice.  All low register, practically speaking the lines rather than singing.  Wow, it seemed the rumors were true.

Of course they weren't, but it was definitely a common belief, and believeable.  Too bad about Rush.  They were cool, but it took me a long time to come to terms with 80's SynthRush, and this album is a big reason why.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Signals
Post by: TAC on October 20, 2014, 02:08:06 PM


Of course they weren't, but it was definitely a common belief, and believeable.  Too bad about Rush.  They were cool, but it took me a long time to come to terms with 80's SynthRush, and this album is a big reason why.
Yeah, same here. And you mentioned Geddy's voice. I forgot to mention that too. Gone was his unique and exciting voice. It's just his humdrum lower register. Such a turnoff, because to me, I had always equated that with stopping trying.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Signals
Post by: Mister Gold on October 20, 2014, 02:14:56 PM
While I generally enjoy the synth era a great deal, Signals is one of the entries that I don't enjoy as much. The production is really spotty and you can tell that the band is still in the learning process of how to blend Geddy's synthesizers more heavily into the music, as well as how much New Age/Reggae influence should be administered to the music. That being said, Subdivisions is pretty fantastic. :metal
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Signals
Post by: King Postwhore on October 20, 2014, 03:10:42 PM
Loved it when it first came out. Over time, I did not like the backseat Alex took on this album. but as time went on I grew to love the album.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Signals
Post by: Phoenix87x on October 20, 2014, 07:21:40 PM
Didn't really like Signals for a long time. I couldn't really figure it out. It was like it didn't know what it wanted to be, so it was hard to get into.

These days I enjoy it quite a bit, with my favorites being Subdivisions and Losing it.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Signals
Post by: jjrock88 on October 20, 2014, 08:43:23 PM
Overall I would rank Signals below GUP and Power Windows.

But I would rank Subdivisions as my all time favorite song by any band!
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Signals
Post by: jammindude on October 20, 2014, 08:46:06 PM
LOVE this album.

My #1 is The Weapon with a bullet.   (and the live version from the GUP Sountrack available in the Replay 3X box set is even better)

The only meh song to me is Digital Man.   Everything else on this album is amazing.   The lyrics to Countdown are a bit....let's just say 'not up to Peart-par'  :lol but that amazing closing riff saves the song to me.   I wish it went on for a bit longer.

Are we ranking yet?

The Weapon
Analog Kid
Subdivisions
Losing It
Chemistry
Countdown
New World Man
Digital Man
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Signals
Post by: Anguyen92 on October 20, 2014, 09:25:56 PM
Loved the Analog Kid when I first heard it on the Clockwork Angels Tour DVD.  As for the rest?  I may need to listen to it again.

As for Subdivisions?  Easy winner for me.  If I had got into Rush and listened to that song 5-8 years ago when I was in high school, I would have coped with things/issues there a lot easier.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Signals
Post by: Mosh on October 20, 2014, 09:57:31 PM
Man this album took forever to grow on me. It was one of the first albums (by anyone) I had ever heard, along with Moving Pictures, 2112, and the live album A Show of Hands. I liked Moving Pictures the most, 2112 was interesting but a little dense for me at the time, and the live album was lots of fun. I had absolutely no use for Signals. It was too poppy, too easy listening. For a kid just discovering metal, this was a huge bore.

Fast forward eight or nine years and one day this album just clicked. I was going through the Rush discography in a similar fashion to what we're doing now, and I finally got to the dreaded Signals. I went into this album expecting the worst; I'd enjoy Subdivisions and it'd be all downhill from there. But then something strange happened: I actually enjoyed the entire album! Every single song, not one moment I didn't like. It's a really strong album. It doesn't have the power of Moving Pictures and I think it pales in comparison to the next two albums, but it's a great intro to the synth era. The songs are catchy and accessible, lots of great melodies, the synth sounds are really cool. I think Rush's synth sounds on this album still hold up today.

I love Geddy's voice on this too. The high pitched wailing was cool on the 70s albums, but this was a different era. A different band. He still sounds unique enough and his voice has matured quite a bit. I like his singing on these albums a lot.

Still, it is a step down from the previous 5 albums. Rush had an amazing run going from 2112 to Moving Pictures. While I think Signals is a fantastic album, it's nowhere near the caliber of the five that came before it. But it is better than their first three. I think this just speaks to how great of a band Rush is. If any other band put out an album that was not to the strengths of such a high caliber run, it'd probably be a huge disappointment. At this point, Rush at their worst were still great.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Signals
Post by: ? on October 21, 2014, 03:28:12 AM

It took me a while to get used to the reggae influences and heavily prominent synths, but now I really like Signals. However, the guitars are too low in the mix at times (most notably on Subdivisions) and I haven't completely warmed up to Countdown yet. My ranking:

Subdivisions
Losing It
Digital Man
The Weapon
The Analog Kid
Chemistry
New World Man
Countdown
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Signals
Post by: Zydar on October 21, 2014, 03:33:33 AM
This is my favourite of their synth era albums. It has the right amount of synths in the mix, not too much as on the subsequent albums.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Signals
Post by: Mladen on October 21, 2014, 04:10:43 AM
I love the sound of this album. The next two records of the synth era are fantastic as well, but whereas Grace is very dark and Power windows extremely powerful, Signals is a bit more calm and bright sounding. It's got a great mood.

The songs themselves are amazing, especially Subdivisions, The Analog kid, Losing it and The Weapon. I also think Countdown is hugely underrated, it's one of the more progressive songs of the synth era, and that bit in the middle with the actual countdown is truly dramatic. Geddy shines with some keyboard riffs and solos on here.

I see Signals as the third album of my favorite Rush era - from Permanent waves up to and including Power windows, Rush put out a streak of brilliant albums. Hemispheres is great as well, but it's obviously very different.

EDIT: Also, wow at the rumors about Geddy having throat cancer, I never knew about that story.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Signals
Post by: Lowdz on October 21, 2014, 04:20:22 AM
Listening to the album again and Chemistry starts - \i'm thinking it's not bad, I've been overly harsh. Then the verses start and it's  :facepalm: I forgot it went like that.
Digital Man is s till poor. The rest is awesome, including NWM!

The next two albums however  :hefdaddy :hefdaddy
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Signals
Post by: Mister Gold on October 21, 2014, 08:40:05 AM
Listening to the album again and Chemistry starts - \i'm thinking it's not bad, I've been overly harsh. Then the verses start and it's  :facepalm: I forgot it went like that.
Digital Man is s till poor. The rest is awesome, including NWM!

The next two albums however  :hefdaddy :hefdaddy

I enjoy Signals, but I definitely think it was a flawed prototype to the two incredible albums that were going to follow it. Really can't wait to talk about Grace Under Pressure and Power Windows. :hefdaddy
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Signals
Post by: KevShmev on October 21, 2014, 09:08:01 AM
Chemistry could have been an awesome instrumental. 

While I called Digital Man a winner in my write-up, I actually like it a lot less than I used to.  I mean, I still like it a lot, but over time, I've come to love many Rush songs more than it, while my love for that one has waned a bit.

Subdivisions and The Weapon have long been my two favorites from this one; I don't think that will ever change.  Losing It and The Analog Kid are comfortably 3a and 3b.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Signals
Post by: Big Hath on October 21, 2014, 09:26:10 AM
some funny comments here when juxtaposed.  I think I understand what you guys are talking about, but these just strike me as hilarious when you read your words back-to-back (and somewhat out of context)


TAC has the shortest fandom of a band in recorded history.

Signals was the first studio album that came out after I became a fan.

When I bought Signals, I was so completely disapponited. I was basically done at this point being a Rush fan.


Time is no factor to the king when love is involved.

Loved it when it first came out . . . but as time went on I grew to love the album.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Signals
Post by: hefdaddy42 on October 21, 2014, 09:31:57 AM
Forgive them, they are old.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Signals
Post by: Podaar on October 21, 2014, 10:29:25 AM
I'm listening to this album for the first time in like 30 years, and yeah, I'm not a fan.

All the edge is polished off Alex's tone, and...holy shit, where is Neil? Did they hire Stuart Copeland as a studio musician? Geddy sounds bored even though his bass playing is still recognizable as him.

The lyrics are good, though.

[edit] Even though The Weapon has some opportunity for Alex to be himself, turning Lifeson into, primarily, an occasional chord strummer has to be the biggest waste of talent ever. [/edit]
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Signals
Post by: King Postwhore on October 21, 2014, 10:42:41 AM
Hey hey!  To quote Bon Jovi,  "In and out of love".  And in again! :lol
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Signals
Post by: TAC on October 21, 2014, 12:39:57 PM
some funny comments here when juxtaposed.  I think I understand what you guys are talking about, but these just strike me as hilarious when you read your words back-to-back (and somewhat out of context)


TAC has the shortest fandom of a band in recorded history.

Signals was the first studio album that came out after I became a fan.

When I bought Signals, I was so completely disapponited. I was basically done at this point being a Rush fan.


Time is no factor to the king when love is involved.

Loved it when it first came out . . . but as time went on I grew to love the album.
Oh shit, I  :rollin when I read this post.
So true! :lol
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Signals
Post by: Mladen on October 21, 2014, 01:29:02 PM
Wow, I didn't know Signals was this unpopular. There are more negative comments than I expected.  :omg:

Also, talking about Chemistry, I never truly wrapped my mind around that song. I definitely enjoy it when it comes on, but when it's finished, I honestly don't remember how it goes. The only thing that stuck in my mind is Geddy yelling out ''ELECTRICITY'' at some point in the song.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Signals
Post by: mikemangioy on October 21, 2014, 01:34:23 PM
Well, I just finished listening to this album for the first time in full. I heard Subdivisions and Digital Man before, and honestly these are the only two tracks I liked, along with The Weapon and Losing It. Kinda meh album.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Signals
Post by: wolfking on October 21, 2014, 09:37:05 PM
I love Signals, it's probably top 3 for me.  Definitely top 5 at least.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Signals
Post by: Nick on October 21, 2014, 09:39:20 PM
Signals suffers from lulls at times, not necessarily from bad tracks, but several that are simply OK. Subdivisions is probably my favorite of their hits, and perhaps the best song of the synth era.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Signals
Post by: wolfking on October 21, 2014, 09:47:11 PM
Subdivisions is my fav Rush song.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Signals
Post by: jingle.boy on October 21, 2014, 09:47:59 PM
After I first got into Rush in 1990, I for some reason totally skipped the synth-era until about 5-6 years ago.  I was just happy with the hits, and with the bookends of their first 8 albums, and everything after A Show of Hands. That four album run didn't appeal to me for whatever reason.  When I did finally complete the discography, I found the music to be for the most part, really enjoyable.

Signals is a solid album, but has it's ups and downs. I remember hearing Analog Kid on the radio once in the 90s, but didn't know what song it was. For a long time I tried long and hard to find out what song that was, as the arpeggio riff was stuck firmly in my head. Even went so far as to go to music stores, and look into Rush books with the guitar tabs, but couldn't find the tune. Very relieved when I did finally find that song... I think I actually like it more than Subdivisions (which suffers from overplay).

Can't say I have any strong feeling for the rest of the songs. I hear what people are saying about the distaste for NWM, but it's a decent song.  I think I remember reading one time that it's one of Geddy's most disliked sings to perform live.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Signals
Post by: JayOctavarium on October 21, 2014, 10:14:30 PM
To be honest... as much as I love Moving Pictures, Signals probably tops it for me. I love Subdivisions and Digital Man.



(Keep in mind folks I spent years only really knowing 2112, Signals and Moving Pictures)
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Signals
Post by: KevShmev on October 21, 2014, 10:44:19 PM
The distaste for New World Man doesn't really surprise me, but I don't get it.  It's not a great song, but it's not bad by any means either.  It's catchy enough and has a bass line that is pretty rad.

As a whole, however, I know that Signals was quite a shock for many back in the day. I used to work with a few guys who jumped off the Rush bandwagon thanks to this album and never really got back on. 
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Signals
Post by: JayOctavarium on October 21, 2014, 10:47:45 PM
I don't mind NWM at all. I think it's catchy.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Signals
Post by: TAC on October 22, 2014, 05:22:54 AM
As a whole, however, I know that Signals was quite a shock for many back in the day. I used to work with a few guys who jumped off the Rush bandwagon thanks to this album and never really got back on.

*raises hand*
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Signals
Post by: Cruithne on October 22, 2014, 08:25:00 AM
First time I heard Signals I thought it was terrible. These days I'd say it's a lower end Rush album but it's still pretty strong and I think I developed a soft spot for it because it's a bridge between a great Rush album and my favourite Rush album.

The excellent: Subdivisions, Chemistry, The Weapon
The good: The Analog Kid, Digital Man, Losing It
The meh: New World Man.
The confusing: Countdown.

"Excitement so thick you can cut it with a knife". Oh my. The music to that song is really good but some of the lyrics to it are first date going badly levels of awkward.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Signals
Post by: TAC on October 22, 2014, 08:34:29 AM
The excellent:   Chemistry, 

WHAT??
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Signals
Post by: nicmos on October 22, 2014, 09:11:01 AM

"Excitement so thick you can cut it with a knife". Oh my. The music to that song is really good but some of the lyrics to it are first date going badly levels of awkward.

some things are good when written, but don't translate well to being sung.  this is one of those things.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Signals
Post by: Lowdz on October 22, 2014, 10:36:19 AM
The excellent:   Chemistry, 

WHAT??

Agreed. Awful lyrics. For Peart that is.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Signals
Post by: Orbert on October 22, 2014, 11:25:43 AM
As a whole, however, I know that Signals was quite a shock for many back in the day. I used to work with a few guys who jumped off the Rush bandwagon thanks to this album and never really got back on.

*raises hand*

*raises hand*
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Signals
Post by: Nick on October 22, 2014, 11:33:17 AM
The excellent: Subdivisions, Chemistry, The Weapon
The good: The Analog Kid, Digital Man, Losing It
The meh: New World Man.
The confusing: Countdown.

This is close to my ranking. I don't know what it is about Chemistry, but I've always enjoyed it way more than most. I see why a lot don't care much about it though.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Signals
Post by: KevShmev on October 22, 2014, 12:47:49 PM
Ya know, I hadn't really listened to Rush in chronological order in some time, but having been doing so lately for the purposes of this thread, the drop-off from MP to Signals is much more severe than I had ever realized.  I mean, I still like Signals a lot, but MP and the albums preceding it are just so freaking awesome, so it's easy to see why so many were disappointed back in 1982.  I'm also of the opinion that Signals is the least best of the four synth era albums.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Signals
Post by: Mosh on October 22, 2014, 06:23:04 PM
As a whole, however, I know that Signals was quite a shock for many back in the day. I used to work with a few guys who jumped off the Rush bandwagon thanks to this album and never really got back on.

*raises hand*

*raises hand*
Have you guys enjoyed a Rush album since then or did it pretty much end after MP for you? Out of curiosity.

Ya know, I hadn't really listened to Rush in chronological order in some time, but having been doing so lately for the purposes of this thread, the drop-off from MP to Signals is much more severe than I had ever realized.  I mean, I still like Signals a lot, but MP and the albums preceding it are just so freaking awesome, so it's easy to see why so many were disappointed back in 1982.  I'm also of the opinion that Signals is the least best of the four synth era albums.
I've had the same feeling with this thread. I used to think that Rush's strong album run went from 2112 to Power Windows, but I have to say that while those synth era albums are good, they don't hold a candle to the preceding ones.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Signals
Post by: jammindude on October 22, 2014, 06:55:36 PM
Wow, I didn't know Signals was this unpopular. There are more negative comments than I expected.  :omg:

Also, talking about Chemistry, I never truly wrapped my mind around that song. I definitely enjoy it when it comes on, but when it's finished, I honestly don't remember how it goes. The only thing that stuck in my mind is Geddy yelling out ''ELECTRICITY'' at some point in the song.

I was thinking the same thing as I was reading this thread.    I'm really amazed that it's getting this much negative feedback.   I haven't heard this much slacking on Signals since it came out.   I generally thought it was revered in the prog rock community.

It is a bit of a drop-off after the *incredible* run of AFTK-MP, but the album so completely different that it's apples/oranges honestly.   Almost like a different band.  It was certainly a new direction, and I applaud them for making such a bold step at the height of their career.   This album was a HUGE risk.

And I definitely wouldn't say it was the worst of the synth era.   We'll be getting to that one in three more albums.   :angel:
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Signals
Post by: Orbert on October 22, 2014, 07:23:26 PM
As a whole, however, I know that Signals was quite a shock for many back in the day. I used to work with a few guys who jumped off the Rush bandwagon thanks to this album and never really got back on.

*raises hand*

*raises hand*
Have you guys enjoyed a Rush album since then or did it pretty much end after MP for you? Out of curiosity.

The 80's were a very crazy time for me anyway, so my falling out with Rush was not just because I didn't care for SignalsSignals was okay, but it just seemed to indicate a direction that I wasn't too crazy about, and I've always been all over the place in terms of musical taste, so I guess I just moved on.  I still had half a dozen Rush albums that I loved and played the hell out of, but I didn't have a budget for new tunes in most of the 80's anyway.  The radio singles sounded okay, but mostly I heard them and thought "Yeah, Geddy's still obsessed with keyboards.  Wish he'd learn how to play them."

By 1989, life had settled down, and I saw Presto in a store, so I picked up it, just to see what the guys were up to.  Presto is considered by many to be another of Rush's weaker albums, but I loved it right off the bat.  The stripped-down arrangements, the shorter songs, the same things that threw 80's Rush fans off were what drew me back.  Presto was the first Rush album that I bought on CD first; the others were all vinyl replacements.  I'm not a huge fan of Roll the Bones, but I think Counterparts and Test for Echo are both great, and I love Snakes and Arrows.  So the short answer is Yes.

Eventually, 80's Rush and I came to an understanding.  I take it for what it is; a band with immense musical talent trying new things in ways that sometimes work and sometimes don't work for me.  I can't blame the guys for doing what they do.  I don't completely dislike 80's SynthRush; most of it's really good.  I just find a lot of it rather uninteresting.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Signals
Post by: jingle.boy on October 22, 2014, 08:19:42 PM
Eventually, 80's Rush and I came to an understanding.  I take it for what it is; a band with immense musical talent trying new things in ways that sometimes work and sometimes don't work for me.  I can't blame the guys for doing what they do.  I don't completely dislike 80's SynthRush; most of it's really good.  I just find a lot of it rather uninteresting.

Bingo.

I became a true fan right around the time Presto was released, so I've always enjoyed everything Presto an onward (despite a handful of duds on RTB).  Synth-era Rush is something that doesn't quite feel right, but is still enjoyable.  Kinda like fapping left handed.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Signals
Post by: Mosh on October 22, 2014, 08:29:53 PM
As a whole, however, I know that Signals was quite a shock for many back in the day. I used to work with a few guys who jumped off the Rush bandwagon thanks to this album and never really got back on.

*raises hand*

*raises hand*
Have you guys enjoyed a Rush album since then or did it pretty much end after MP for you? Out of curiosity.

The 80's were a very crazy time for me anyway, so my falling out with Rush was not just because I didn't care for SignalsSignals was okay, but it just seemed to indicate a direction that I wasn't too crazy about, and I've always been all over the place in terms of musical taste, so I guess I just moved on.  I still had half a dozen Rush albums that I loved and played the hell out of, but I didn't have a budget for new tunes in most of the 80's anyway.  The radio singles sounded okay, but mostly I heard them and thought "Yeah, Geddy's still obsessed with keyboards.  Wish he'd learn how to play them."

By 1989, life had settled down, and I saw Presto in a store, so I picked up it, just to see what the guys were up to.  Presto is considered by many to be another of Rush's weaker albums, but I loved it right off the bat.  The stripped-down arrangements, the shorter songs, the same things that threw 80's Rush fans off were what drew me back.  Presto was the first Rush album that I bought on CD first; the others were all vinyl replacements.  I'm not a huge fan of Roll the Bones, but I think Counterparts and Test for Echo are both great, and I love Snakes and Arrows.  So the short answer is Yes.

Eventually, 80's Rush and I came to an understanding.  I take it for what it is; a band with immense musical talent trying new things in ways that sometimes work and sometimes don't work for me.  I can't blame the guys for doing what they do.  I don't completely dislike 80's SynthRush; most of it's really good.  I just find a lot of it rather uninteresting.
Cool. I imagined if there was any time someone would go back to Rush it'd be around that era when the synths became a bit less prominent. I really like Presto too, I think the songwriting there is just as strong as any of the 80s albums, if not better at times (certainly compared to Hold Your Fire). But I'll  save the Presto love for when we get there.

I suppose another benefit for me is that I was familiar with 80s Rush long before 70s Rush. It was quite a few years before I heard any 70s Rush besides 2112, so I didn't have that stuff to compare the 80s too.
I suppose if I started with the 70s and worked my way up chronologically, I'd be quite disappointed with the 80s albums.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Signals
Post by: King Postwhore on October 22, 2014, 08:35:38 PM
Eventually, 80's Rush and I came to an understanding.  I take it for what it is; a band with immense musical talent trying new things in ways that sometimes work and sometimes don't work for me.  I can't blame the guys for doing what they do.  I don't completely dislike 80's SynthRush; most of it's really good.  I just find a lot of it rather uninteresting.

Bingo.

I became a true fan right around the time Presto was released, so I've always enjoyed everything Presto an onward (despite a handful of duds on RTB).  Synth-era Rush is something that doesn't quite feel right, but is still enjoyable.  Kinda like fapping left handed.

Which you did around the synth era as well.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Signals
Post by: jingle.boy on October 22, 2014, 08:49:43 PM
Eventually, 80's Rush and I came to an understanding.  I take it for what it is; a band with immense musical talent trying new things in ways that sometimes work and sometimes don't work for me.  I can't blame the guys for doing what they do.  I don't completely dislike 80's SynthRush; most of it's really good.  I just find a lot of it rather uninteresting.

Bingo.

I became a true fan right around the time Presto was released, so I've always enjoyed everything Presto an onward (despite a handful of duds on RTB).  Synth-era Rush is something that doesn't quite feel right, but is still enjoyable.  Kinda like fapping left handed.

Which you did around the synth era as well.

Endlessly
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Signals
Post by: Mister Gold on October 23, 2014, 10:08:46 AM
Cool. I imagined if there was any time someone would go back to Rush it'd be around that era when the synths became a bit less prominent. I really like Presto too, I think the songwriting there is just as strong as any of the 80s albums, if not better at times (certainly compared to Hold Your Fire). But I'll  save the Presto love for when we get there.

I suppose another benefit for me is that I was familiar with 80s Rush long before 70s Rush. It was quite a few years before I heard any 70s Rush besides 2112, so I didn't have that stuff to compare the 80s too.
I suppose if I started with the 70s and worked my way up chronologically, I'd be quite disappointed with the 80s albums.

I'd probably rank Presto over Hold Your Fire and Signals, but I'd have to really think hard on whether it was better than Power Windows. It certainly doesn't beat Grace Under Pressure for me. Then again, that's probably my favorite Rush album altogether, so I'm more than a little biased.

I got into the band through a combination of both the really early Clockwork Angels singles and Moving Pictures and eventually worked my backwards through the 70's material. I tried to listen to Signals once at that point and immediately hated it past Subdivisions. After seeing the band live though and hearing them play a ton of material off of the Synth era, I went back and worked my way through those albums again and really fell for GUP and PW.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Grace Under Pressure
Post by: KevShmev on October 23, 2014, 10:33:26 AM
Unhappy with the results of Signals, the band came to the difficult decision that they needed a new producer, meaning longtime producer and friend Terry Brown was out. The band was eager to see how someone else would treat their music, and they wanted someone who could bring ideas to the table that they didn't have already. Their choice ultimately was Steve Lillywhite, but shortly before recording was scheduled to begin, he backed out, and they had to scramble quickly, with Peter Henderson being the pick, which was in good in the sense that, in Geddy's words, he was a very good engineer - the album sounds fantastic - but when it came to being an actual producer, helping with the arrangement of songs and whatnot, he was lacking, and much of that fell on Geddy, who did more work than usual in that regard.  As a result, the album went down as one of their more difficult ones to make, but the results were pretty great.

The album, Grace Under Pressure, the band's 10th studio album, has a dark and cold feel that is a good reflection of the time, and the album cover is very fitting, too, in that regard.  While Signals had an odd mix, this album had a tremendous one, with the hard rock grit that had always defined the band once again being the backbone, while both the guitar and keys were up front and center.  All four main instruments - guitar, bass, drums and keys - are clear as day; it really is a wonderful mix.  As for the songs, it is a great collection of tunes. 

Side 1 is flawless.  "Distant Early Warning," "Afterimage," "Red Sector 'A'," and "The Enemy Within" is a beastly album side, even though I think the studio version of "Red Sector 'A'" pales in comparison to every live version I've heard of it.  Side 2 isn't quite as flawless, even though it ends with "Between the Wheels," which is a highlight of the synth era. On the flip side, the other three tunes on Side 2 are all solid, but none really stand out as complete wholes, even though all have some dynamite moments: the guitar solo in "Kid Gloves;" the lead drums in "The Body Electric;" that pre-chorus drum pattern in "Red Lenses."

Overall, this is an upgrade over Signals on multiple levels, IMO; better vibe, better mix, better flow.  Better songs is a debate, but P/G is just an easier and more enjoyable listen from start to finish.  On its own, without comparing it to the other Rush records, Grace Under Pressure is a really, really good record, and a most worthy addition to the Rush legacy.

(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/6/66/Rush_Grace_Under_Pressure.jpg)
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Grace Under Pressure
Post by: The Letter M on October 23, 2014, 10:51:07 AM
This was an album that took me awhile to warm-up to, especially because it feels so cold, sandwiched between Signals (a fairly good album IMO) and Power Windows (a masterpiece IMO). I liked half the songs on the album when I first heard it, but the rest was simply OK. As the years have gone on since becoming a huge Rush fan just over a decade ago, I've come to enjoy the album a bit more. I even have a poster of the album hanging in my room which is pretty cool, and the album also came out the year I was born, so there's that.

Stand outs are the opening and closing tracks (as is usually the case with Rush albums), "Afterimage", "Red Sector A" and the first part of the then "Fear Trilogy", which finally meant all three tracks would be played live together, including "Witch Hunt" for the first time ever.

This album also got all of its tracks played live, even the elusive second-to-last-track, in this case, being "Red Lenses", which had either a drum solo in the middle of it, or a bass solo, depending on the tour and leg. I wouldn't mind seeing some of the lesser played tracks brought back on the next tour, like "Afterimage", "Kid Gloves" or "Red Lenses", but much of this album sounds VERY dated to the mid-80's, more so than any of their other synth-era material. Perhaps that's all the more reason to revisit one or two of these rarely-played tracks, to breathe new life into them!

-Marc.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Grace Under Pressure
Post by: Zydar on October 23, 2014, 11:03:03 AM
A step down from 'Signals' for me. I'm not a fan of the synth sound, and the songs are weaker than on the previous album. Afterimage is my favourite track here, with Distant Early Warning and Red Sector A as good tracks too.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Grace Under Pressure
Post by: King Postwhore on October 23, 2014, 11:11:39 AM
Alex pushed hard again to have the guitars in the forefront and got his way on this album.  Few little nuggets on this album,

Neil did not use his 6" 8" & 10" concert toms for the recording of this album.
Alex tried for the most part to have all of the solo's involve chordal structure.

My first tour and I love the bleak, darkness of it.

One more nugget.  I remember a rock mag that had other musicians rate songs and Gene Simmons called Red Sector A, "Disco Rush".  This from a guy that played "I Was Made For Lovin' You".   :lol
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Grace Under Pressure
Post by: The Letter M on October 23, 2014, 11:16:48 AM
Another fun note - this album is one of two albums with the most music videos (the other being MP), with a total of four songs getting videos: "Distant Early Warning", "Afterimage", "The Enemy Within", and "The Body Electric".

-Marc.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Grace Under Pressure
Post by: King Postwhore on October 23, 2014, 11:19:12 AM
All on what video release Marc?


I know you know!!
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Grace Under Pressure
Post by: The Letter M on October 23, 2014, 11:24:27 AM
All on what video release Marc?


I know you know!!

 :rollin

All but "The Body Electric" were featured on the Chronicles, although a live video of "Red Sector A" was included.

-Marc.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Grace Under Pressure
Post by: King Postwhore on October 23, 2014, 11:30:51 AM
Marc, you disappoint me!


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Through_the_Camera_Eye
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Grace Under Pressure
Post by: me7 on October 23, 2014, 12:07:23 PM
Love side A of Grace under Pressure, my favourite thing Rush did after Moving Pictures. Side B however is a lot weaker, run-of-the-mill late 80's Rush.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Grace Under Pressure
Post by: hefdaddy42 on October 23, 2014, 12:10:34 PM
This album as a whole doesn't do much for me, although there are some good songs here (Notably Red Sector A and Distant Early Warning.

I guess this entire period doesn't really do that much for me.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Grace Under Pressure
Post by: The Letter M on October 23, 2014, 12:23:04 PM
Marc, you disappoint me!


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Through_the_Camera_Eye

 :facepalm:

I disappoint myself, but to my credit, I have never owned or ever even seen this release in person.

-Marc.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Grace Under Pressure
Post by: jammindude on October 23, 2014, 12:54:17 PM
This is a really good album, but it gets sandwiched in between a great album (Signals) and one of the greatest albums they've ever done (Power Windows) so it's a bit of a sleeper.

Never cared much for The Enemy Within. Weakest song in the Fear Suite by a wide margin. I used to love The Body Electric, but it hasn't aged very well. It's ok.


All 6 of the other songs are awesome to my ears...even Red Lenses, which seems to get a lot of hate for reasons I can't figure out. I love the wordplay in that song.

Really terrific album...criminally underrated.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Grace Under Pressure
Post by: Mister Gold on October 23, 2014, 01:05:35 PM
Ah, Grace Under Pressure. I love this album! The first half is just a string of classic after classic, filled with dark and foreboding music. The second half is admittedly a little weaker as a whole, but each song has something cool to show for and Between the Wheels is probably my favorite song off the album overall. It's definitely in my Top 10 Rush songs, maybe even Top 5. :metal
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Grace Under Pressure
Post by: King Postwhore on October 23, 2014, 01:35:05 PM
Marc, you disappoint me!


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Through_the_Camera_Eye

 :facepalm:

I disappoint myself, but to my credit, I have never owned or ever even seen this release in person.

-Marc.

Who owns tapes anymore anywho?! :lol
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Grace Under Pressure
Post by: The Letter M on October 23, 2014, 01:45:31 PM
Marc, you disappoint me!


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Through_the_Camera_Eye

 :facepalm:

I disappoint myself, but to my credit, I have never owned or ever even seen this release in person.

-Marc.

How owns tapes anymore anywho?! :lol

I actually own A Show Of Hands on VHS. I bought it way back in like 2005, before Replay X3 came out. :lol

-Marc.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Grace Under Pressure
Post by: KevShmev on October 23, 2014, 02:01:54 PM
Not to jump ahead here, but I am still disappointed by the mix on the A Show of Hands DVD.  I think Alex was so annoyed, in retrospect, with his wiry and bright sound of that time period that when he helped mix it for the DVD, he drowned out and/or added some distortion to some of his guitar stuff in the mix, and the overall sound isn't as great as it was on the VHS.  It sucks, too, cause that original live version of Turn the Page on the VHS is by far the best version of that song, and it's not the same on the DVD (and a version from a different night was used on the live CD).
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Grace Under Pressure
Post by: Lowdz on October 23, 2014, 02:11:52 PM
Ahh, P/g.
That beautiful cover. One of the advantages of being the vinyl days when this came out was that you could appreciate the beauty of the cover. I bought another copy just so that I could frame the cover on my bedroom wall.

This album was much better sounding than Signals. The guitar is back but as you said in the review you can hear every instrument clearly.
Songwise I agree with your review. Side 1 was all awesome. Side 2 was a bit of a mixed bag - it's ok and at least the reggae was gone. Red Lenses is a skipper for me. The solo in Kid Gloves is ace.

Something about that opening lyric in Afterimage touched me like no lyric ever had. The only death I 'd really known at that point was my nana 4 years earlier and I hadn't known how to deal with it or explain it - but Neil opened the door a little.
"Suddeny you were gone, from all the lives you left your mark upon".
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Grace Under Pressure
Post by: ? on October 23, 2014, 02:15:44 PM
Great album, slightly stronger than Signals IMO... The only songs that don't impress me that much are Red Lenses and Kid Gloves, but the rest of the album is killer, especially the first three songs and Between the Wheels. :hefdaddy
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Grace Under Pressure
Post by: Mosh on October 23, 2014, 07:05:44 PM
Love this album, the highlight of the synth era for me. You can hear that they're really comfortable in their new sound at this point. It's like the AFTK of this era. It showcases a refined 80s synth sound in the same way that Kings showed a refined 70s prog rock sound. The songs here are really strong too and this is the best balance of synth and guitar. It's too bad they didn't try to keep this balance on the next two albums.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Grace Under Pressure
Post by: nicmos on October 23, 2014, 08:48:55 PM
Afterimage is one of the most powerful songs they've ever done.  I think all the songs are really strong, with the exception of The Enemy Within (again with the upbeat accents...) and the last part of Between The Wheels from the solo on is so good and emotional it almost makes me tear up.  Some of Geddy's best singing.

Agree with others that live Red Sector A has more oomph than the studio version.  Unlike others I really like Red Lenses (surprised no one's mentioned the apocryphal "Everybody can suck my dick" line, ha...) and also Kid Gloves.  I do like the guitar balance on this album, but I don't think the sound on the album is better than Power Windows as some have suggested.  That would be my pick for the best synth-era recording mix by a mile.

I also had the album artwork poster on my wall, the only album art poster I've ever had.

Huge step up from Signals, but they kept moving the right direction during the 80s and refining their sound, and it only continues from here.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Grace Under Pressure
Post by: carl320 on October 23, 2014, 09:07:27 PM
Great album, slightly stronger than Signals IMO... The only songs that don't impress me that much are Red Lenses and Kid Gloves, but the rest of the album is killer, especially the first three songs and Between the Wheels. :hefdaddy

Red Lenses is probably my least favorite Rush song.  As a whole, p/g is my favorite Rush album.  I'm a fan of Synth-era Rush (Subdivisions is my favorite song by any band), and I really get into the darker ambiance of the album.

After reading this update, NP: Afterimage  :metal
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Grace Under Pressure
Post by: Mosh on October 23, 2014, 09:10:16 PM
Lenses (surprised no one's mentioned the apocryphal "Everybody can suck my dick" line, ha...)
???
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Grace Under Pressure
Post by: Mister Gold on October 23, 2014, 09:36:46 PM
Great album, slightly stronger than Signals IMO... The only songs that don't impress me that much are Red Lenses and Kid Gloves, but the rest of the album is killer, especially the first three songs and Between the Wheels. :hefdaddy

Red Lenses is probably my least favorite Rush song.  As a whole, p/g is my favorite Rush album.  I'm a fan of Synth-era Rush (Subdivisions is my favorite song by any band), and I really get into the darker ambiance of the album.

After reading this update, NP: Afterimage  :metal

Yeah, my favorite on Grace Under Pressure is either Afterimage or Between the Wheels. Both are incredible songs.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Grace Under Pressure
Post by: nicmos on October 24, 2014, 07:47:40 AM
Lenses (surprised no one's mentioned the apocryphal "Everybody can suck my dick" line, ha...)
???

during the fadeout at approx the 4:35 mark, Geddy mumbles some words that are unintelligible, but someone thought it sounded like "everybody can suck my dick", and while I don't believe that's what he says, it sure is at least plausible based on how it sounds...
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Grace Under Pressure
Post by: Mosh on October 24, 2014, 12:25:32 PM
Huh, I kinda hear it now. Just sounds like scat to me though.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Grace Under Pressure
Post by: Polarbear on October 24, 2014, 12:29:17 PM
Grace Under Pressure is the best album of the "synth era", and Red Sector A is a Top.5 Rush song for me!
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Grace Under Pressure
Post by: Mister Gold on October 24, 2014, 12:31:08 PM
Grace Under Pressure is the best album of the "synth era", and Red Sector A is a Top.5 Rush song for me!

It's a Top 15 Rush song for me, along with Distant Early Warning. Afterimage and Between the Wheels are Top 5 in my book. But yeah, p/g is easily the high water mark of the "Synth era" material.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Grace Under Pressure
Post by: Podaar on October 24, 2014, 12:54:38 PM
Yeah, this album is more like it.

I can recognize Alex, Neil and Geddy's musical personalities on this record, even though they're creating music I don't really crave. I think the compositions are much less self-conscious and less derivative too--which is great! So, yes, I enjoyed my listen today and I'll look forward to hearing it again in and other 25 years.  :)

I should live so long.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Exit...Stage Left
Post by: ytserush on October 24, 2014, 03:29:08 PM
I know Marc had a great live Rush thread, but to Marc or John, or anyone else, what would be the definitive boots for both the PW and MP tours?

Here's one that many consider to be better than Exit...Stage Left  (and like Exit..., it's not the whole show)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pQWYIIV9lbU

A complete show from early in the tour:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FIl0b4vlpjg

Here's a complete show from one of the shows listed in one of the photos in the Moving Pictures program.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0DjcK4_pWmE


Some partials that sound good.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dC1jHmYWYnA

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0DjcK4_pWmE


Here are a few from the Moving Pictures Tour

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7h89aLONWB8

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lTpvTJYHX2g

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LVjKAOQHW4U

For those that want to understand why some of us consider Exit...Stage Left to be "lifeless" check these recordings out and pay attention to the energy.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Grace Under Pressure
Post by: ytserush on October 24, 2014, 03:42:21 PM
Marc, you disappoint me!


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Through_the_Camera_Eye

 :facepalm:

I disappoint myself, but to my credit, I have never owned or ever even seen this release in person.

-Marc.

Who owns tapes anymore anywho?! :lol

Me of course.

For $6 Marc,  you can have mine. Still the only place you can find videos for Countdown and The Body Electric videos.

Both Signals and Grace Under Pressure are AWESOME!

More extended report coming soon.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Grace Under Pressure
Post by: jjrock88 on October 24, 2014, 10:02:11 PM
Distant Early Warning is a top 5 Rush song for me.  Awesome album
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Grace Under Pressure
Post by: Mladen on October 25, 2014, 04:26:26 AM
A great album. Just a bunch of great song, and an eerie vibe throughout.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Grace Under Pressure
Post by: mikemangioy on October 25, 2014, 05:42:01 AM
This album is great! A huge step up from Signals. I liked every song, especially Afterimage, Red Sector A (which I already knew) and Beneath The Wheels. I don't get the hate for Red Lenses, it was awesome.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Grace Under Pressure
Post by: King Postwhore on October 25, 2014, 08:50:36 AM
Marc, you disappoint me!


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Through_the_Camera_Eye

 :facepalm:

I disappoint myself, but to my credit, I have never owned or ever even seen this release in person.

-Marc.

Who owns tapes anymore anywho?! :lol

Me of course.

For $6 Marc,  you can have mine. Still the only place you can find videos for Countdown and The Body Electric videos.

Both Signals and Grace Under Pressure are AWESOME!

More extended report coming soon.

I'm not sure if mine plays anymore.  It's in storage. down the basement which is the problem but I have not room upstairs.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Grace Under Pressure
Post by: KevShmev on October 25, 2014, 02:39:30 PM



All 6 of the other songs are awesome to my ears...even Red Lenses, which seems to get a lot of hate for reasons I can't figure out. I love the wordplay in that song.
 

  I don't get the hate for Red Lenses, it was awesome.

Sidebar: I really dislike the use of the word "hate" nowadays.  For some nowadays:

"You don't think a song is as great as I do." = hate

Which, of course, makes me :facepalm:.

Even though it is is my least favorite songs from P/G, I like Red Lenses.  I don't hate it or love it.  Just wanted to clarify that. :biggrin:

Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Grace Under Pressure
Post by: billybobjoe1881 on October 25, 2014, 04:37:09 PM
I love P/G.  Yet this is the Rush album I am least likely to grab out and listen to.  When I get in the mood to hear Rush I'm more likely to grab Vapor Trails or Presto, even though I view them as two of the 5 worst albums by Rush. I don't know why this is, it just is.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Signals
Post by: ytserush on October 26, 2014, 09:51:05 AM
Having now reached into the mainstream with both hands, thanks to songs like "Tom Sawyer" and "Limelight" being smash rock radio hits, the world was now their oyster, but, instead of going the safe route and doing another Moving Pictures, they continued to evolve, and wanted to step up the keyboards on their next album.  This, however, would clash with longtime producer Terry Brown, who wanted to see the band remain a power trio, hard rock band at heart, but the band was insistent on moving forward and letting the keys became a bigger part of their sound, which led to some clashes during the recording with Brown, who was to them in the studio what George Martin was to The Beatles. As a result, the band's 9th studio album, Signals, was a step back in regards to overall sound and production (although later CD pressings would result in remasters that helped it out a ton).  And it would be the last album produced by a man the band had referred to on more than one occasion as the fourth member of Rush.

However, despite the in-studio struggles and clashes, the album is still pretty damn good, and the songs are there.  "Subdivisions" is arguably THE definitive Rush song of the synth era - it was a minor hit on MTV thanks to a video that got a lot of air play at the time, the diehards love it, and the band has played it on many tours over the years. "New World Man," which was a last minute "Hey, we need a song that is no longer than 3:57 to fill out Side 2 of the record" tune, Project 3:57 if you will, is a nice, catchy tune, and oddly became their biggest hit on the pop charts ever (it went to number 23). Other fan favorites like "The Analog Kid," "The Weapon" and "Digital Man" are all winners, as well.  "Countdown" and "Chemistry" both have their moments, and I enjoy them, even if both have that "dang, they could have been so much better" feeling to them.  Finally, the 2nd-to-last studio-only song, "Losing It," is pretty freaking great. That one was a bit of an afterthought for me for a long time, but one day the light bulb went on and it's been a favorite of mine since.  It was around this time when Neil Peart's lyrics went from great to consistently phenomenal, and "Losing It" is a fine example of this; so is "Subdivisions."

Getting back to the sound, it's hard to know what happened, but I get the sense that it wasn't a strength of Terry Brown's to mix it to where the keys were the dominant instrument.  On an album where the keys were supposed to step up and the guitars were supposed to step back, neither sounds up front enough more often than not, but, like I said, it's still a good-sounding record on the newer remasters; the mixing just could have been better in regards to the two lead instruments.  It's strange, too, cause I've seen the video for "Subdivisions" on Totally 80s a few times, and it's obviously still from the original release, and it sounds like listening to a song on an old transistor radio.  Every time I see the video and hear it, I think, "Is that what the original vinyl release sounded like??" Regardless, I still love Signals a ton, and while it might be my least favorite of the four synth era albums, that doesn't diminish it; that merely speaks to how much more I like the next three.

(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/6/63/Rush_Signals.jpg)


I adore Signals. I really love that warm organic sound even if it can be bit muddy at times. Other than that it sounds great. The vinyl and the Mobile Fidelity Sound Labs master sound best to me. Signals had been the longest studio album released to date due to "Project 3:57," which in reality became Project "3:41."


Some relevant quotes:

"Basically we didn't want to go in and make another Moving Pictures because that's kind of against everything we've ever done. We made a conscious effort not to play it safe and try to experiment in order to change our sound. It was time to inject some fresh blood."  ---Geddy  (Success Under Pressure)

"That's a conscious decision, because I want to use my voice more. I want to sing more, and it's real hard to sing when you're using all of your energy to stay two octaves above mortal man. It's a lot of work to keep punching your voice up."  -----Geddy  (Keyboard magazine)

"We realized the one element often lacking in our music was feel. And we're finding that working in a shorter framework, which we used to think was the easy way out, isn't really easy at all. It comes down to being confident in our musicianship."   ----Geddy  Success Under Pressure


"I guess that Signals has more to do about writing about people and less about ideals. Permanent Waves was probably our first album that was in touch with reality  -- it was about people dealing with technology instead of  people dealing with some futuristic fantasy world or using symbols for people. Now I'm trying to make those symbols into real people and real conflicts in real people's lives. I still want to write about ideals. I'm not interested in writing about the sewer of life."   -------Neil  (Sounds 1982)
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Grace Under Pressure
Post by: billybobjoe1881 on October 26, 2014, 10:19:53 AM
Lenses (surprised no one's mentioned the apocryphal "Everybody can suck my dick" line, ha...)
???

during the fadeout at approx the 4:35 mark, Geddy mumbles some words that are unintelligible, but someone thought it sounded like "everybody can suck my dick", and while I don't believe that's what he says, it sure is at least plausible based on how it sounds...
I just listened to it and it sounds like "Think about it, think, think about it"
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Grace Under Pressure
Post by: ytserush on October 26, 2014, 10:25:13 AM
Unhappy with the results of Signals, the band came to the difficult decision that they needed a new producer, meaning longtime producer and friend Terry Brown was out. The band was eager to see how someone else would treat their music, and they wanted someone who could bring ideas to the table that they didn't have already. Their choice ultimately was Steve Lillywhite, but shortly before recording was scheduled to begin, he backed out, and they had to scramble quickly, with Peter Henderson being the pick, which was in good in the sense that, in Geddy's words, he was a very good engineer - the album sounds fantastic - but when it came to being an actual producer, helping with the arrangement of songs and whatnot, he was lacking, and much of that fell on Geddy, who did more work than usual in that regard.  As a result, the album went down as one of their more difficult ones to make, but the results were pretty great.

The album, Grace Under Pressure, the band's 10th studio album, has a dark and cold feel that is a good reflection of the time, and the album cover is very fitting, too, in that regard.  While Signals had an odd mix, this album had a tremendous one, with the hard rock grit that had always defined the band once again being the backbone, while both the guitar and keys were up front and center.  All four main instruments - guitar, bass, drums and keys - are clear as day; it really is a wonderful mix.  As for the songs, it is a great collection of tunes. 

Side 1 is flawless.  "Distant Early Warning," "Afterimage," "Red Sector 'A'," and "The Enemy Within" is a beastly album side, even though I think the studio version of "Red Sector 'A'" pales in comparison to every live version I've heard of it.  Side 2 isn't quite as flawless, even though it ends with "Between the Wheels," which is a highlight of the synth era. On the flip side, the other three tunes on Side 2 are all solid, but none really stand out as complete wholes, even though all have some dynamite moments: the guitar solo in "Kid Gloves;" the lead drums in "The Body Electric;" that pre-chorus drum pattern in "Red Lenses."

Overall, this is an upgrade over Signals on multiple levels, IMO; better vibe, better mix, better flow.  Better songs is a debate, but P/G is just an easier and more enjoyable listen from start to finish.  On its own, without comparing it to the other Rush records, Grace Under Pressure is a really, really good record, and a most worthy addition to the Rush legacy.

(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/6/66/Rush_Grace_Under_Pressure.jpg)



Another awesome album, even if it succeeds in giving off a cold and foreboding vibe.

A personal memory about the first time I heard Distant Early Warning on the radio about a month before the album came out. As soon as I heard it, I had this unshakable feeling that the Islanders dynasty was over (which turned out to be true)  That feeling still resonates with me to this day.  I love the bass tone on the vinyl and early CD pressings of this album. The remasters have totally killed the low end off. The time period between Signals and Grace Under Pressure had been the longest between albums at that time.


"With our album Grace Under Pressure, we were in the studio for four and a half months in the dead of winter. It was very cold. We had cabin fever by the end. You get to a dangerous state, you want to finish the record and you want to get out of there. And sometimes that pressure is the wrong kind of pressure. You want to make it great and not in a hurry."   Geddy  (Rush Hour)



"It's a style of writing I've sort of been working towards over the last couple of albums that's, uh, kind of inspired by T.S. Eliot in an indirect way, but that style of pouring so much into it, so many images, and almost flooding the reader or the listener with ideas and images so that you don't seem to grasp anything out of it, but in the end you're left with something, and you're left with a feeling, or uh just an impression of it"   ---Neil    (Off The Record)



The band used a 10 inch action figure they called "Roger Kneebend"  (he's in the liner notes) acted as a producer of the album until they hired Peter Henderson.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Grace Under Pressure
Post by: ytserush on October 26, 2014, 10:30:56 AM
Lenses (surprised no one's mentioned the apocryphal "Everybody can suck my dick" line, ha...)
???

during the fadeout at approx the 4:35 mark, Geddy mumbles some words that are unintelligible, but someone thought it sounded like "everybody can suck my dick", and while I don't believe that's what he says, it sure is at least plausible based on how it sounds...
I just listened to it and it sounds like "Think about it, think, think about it"

It's "Think about it, think, think red"

It goes on a little after that with a sweet bass solo but I can't recall at the moment what else he says.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Grace Under Pressure
Post by: Lowdz on October 26, 2014, 12:26:52 PM
I love P/G.  Yet this is the Rush album I am least likely to grab out and listen to.  When I get in the mood to hear Rush I'm more likely to grab Vapor Trails or Presto, even though I view them as two of the 5 worst albums by Rush. I don't know why this is, it just is.

That is very weird.  :omg:
The only thing I would reach for Vapour Trails for is to use it as a coaster.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Grace Under Pressure
Post by: hefdaddy42 on October 26, 2014, 01:40:57 PM
Agreed
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Signals
Post by: TAC on October 26, 2014, 01:50:39 PM
There's a number of tracks the I like on Vapor Trails.


But I would rank Subdivisions as my all time favorite song by any band!
Wow! That's quite a statement.


Regarding Grace Under Pressure, as much as I rail against 80's Rush, Side A is a TAC guilty pleasure. I have an awesome 80's Rush mix..er..playlist.

  We had cabin fever by the end. You get to a dangerous state, you want to finish the record and you want to get out of there.   Geddy  (Rush Hour)

Well that would explain the absolute shiite that is Red Lenses and Kid Gloves. Also not a fan of The Body Electric.

Spent the last day listening to the awesome San Diego 5-28-84 boot.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Signals
Post by: jingle.boy on October 26, 2014, 02:13:54 PM
There's a number of tracks the I like on Vapor Trails.

I always like VT, but the production killed it for me.  Last year's remaster salvaged it.  It's now a great album.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Signals
Post by: TAC on October 26, 2014, 02:15:09 PM
There's a number of tracks the I like on Vapor Trails.

I always like VT, but the production killed it for me.  Last year's remaster salvaged it.  It's now a great album.

Yeah. Don't have the remaster. It took a while for it toclick, but when it did, it's really not that bad.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Signals
Post by: jingle.boy on October 26, 2014, 02:15:41 PM
There's a number of tracks the I like on Vapor Trails.

I always like VT, but the production killed it for me.  Last year's remaster salvaged it.  It's now a great album.

Yeah. Don't have the remaster. It took a while for it toclick, but when it did, it's really not that bad.

You should get the remaster.  It's worth it (imo).
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Grace Under Pressure
Post by: Mosh on October 26, 2014, 02:44:43 PM
The remaster is good but I really don't think it made the album that much better. That album has more issues than just the production.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Grace Under Pressure
Post by: King Postwhore on October 26, 2014, 02:54:34 PM
The 2 remasters (OLV & Earthshine) on the Retrospective III are better than the album remaster.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Power Windows
Post by: KevShmev on October 27, 2014, 01:27:16 PM
Dissatisfied with the overall experience surrounding the making of Grace Under Pressure, Rush looked to change producers again, this time going for Peter Collins, who had major pop sensibilities, as well as being a big fan of synthesizers, so his fingerprints were all over Power Windows, the band's 11th studio album.  While the keys on the two previous albums were more lush and like another layer on the musical pile, the keys on this record are in your face, and in a good way. You have loud outbursts of synths that almost act as a bridge from verse to chorus, chorus back to verse, etc.  It's a very effect technique when done well, like it is here, and, well, very 80s.

I cannot imagine what fans at the time thought when this album was released, since it was quite a departure from their usual hard rock sound.  It still rocks, but in more of a synthesized 80s way, if that makes sense.  The playing from all three is still off the charts great, but the keyboards dominated like they never had before on a Rush record, which, like I alluded to, had to be quite shocking for existing fans at the time.  However, as someone who got into them in 1991, several songs from this were key in me getting into the band.  I had just started getting into the band when a friend one night showed several of us the A Show of Hands VHS, which kicked off with "The Big Money" and "Marathon," both of which I thought were totally awesome the first time I heard them; I couldn't believe the power and energy of both songs, and the melodies in both were infectious as hell.  Power Windows ended up being one of the first Rush albums I purchased on CD (I believe it was 3rd behind Moving Pictures and 2112).

My instant favorites were the songs featured on the ASOH VHS - "The Big Money," "Marathon," "Manhatton Project" and "Territories" - and "Mystic Rhythms" was an instant favorite as well.  The other three I liked, but none of them were major grabbers for a while, but over time, I really grew to love "Middletown Dreams" a ton, and "Grand Designs" finally got me good a few years ago, too.  "Emotion Detector" is the least best of the bunch, but my opinion on it has always been about the same: good song, but just not nearly as great as everything else on this record. 

For my money, this is easily the best Rush album of the synth era, arguably a top 3 Rush record, the best post-1981 Rush record and quite possibly the best collection of lyrics Neil Peart has ever penned.  Oh, and it has their coolest album cover ever.  This record just freaking rules. :metal

(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/e/e2/Rush_Power_Windows.jpg)
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Power Windows
Post by: jjrock88 on October 27, 2014, 01:31:49 PM
This one took awhile to click, but its outstanding.  I agree, the best of the synth era
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Power Windows
Post by: Polarbear on October 27, 2014, 01:37:12 PM
Power Windows is worth getting for Mystic Rhythms alone!

IMO Grace Under Pressure hits higher, and while Power Windows doesn't hit as high it has no weak songs while GUP has one: Red Lenses

Both are killer albums. :metal
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Power Windows
Post by: TAC on October 27, 2014, 01:39:03 PM
Easily the most overrated Rush album!

I liked Territories and Manhatten Projest. Like Marathon too, but it took seeing it live to jive. Big Money has to be one of the most boring Rush songs going.

Mystic Rhythms has aged really well.

My first time seing Rush was on this tour. We had great seats, about 8 rows back in front of Geddy. It was one of the first few shows of the tour, and they were not quite in sync. Geddy looked pissed off all night.
Evertime he introduced a song, he says" ..and we'd like to play another new song", and I was like "OH NO not another one!"!!
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Power Windows
Post by: nicmos on October 27, 2014, 01:41:28 PM
I'm just going to cut and past from my top 50 albums thread, where this was #4:

"In my opinion, front to back this is the most consistently great Rush album. Once you get past the very 80s sounding (but good 80s, not bad 80s) synth arrangements, what you have is a set of 8 great, majestic sounding songs. Neil's lyrics are absolutely great and that's a large part of it too. You feel the songs mean so much more when you can get behind what Geddy's singing about. Speaking of Geddy, this is definitely one of his best vocal performances. Alex's solos are clearly the focus of his work on this album, and it shows. I love the interplay between the guitar and the backing synths in many of the solos. Most of the songs have a positive emotional sound to them as well, contrasting with the previous album, and I would say not duplicated until maybe Vapor Trails if that. The songs are all allowed to breathe, allowing the feel of each one to envelop you. Just think of the progression of the instrumental passage in Marathon, perfectly conveying the meaning of the song through music. When listening to the album, I sink in gently and it's just bliss. Favorites: Marathon, Territories, Middletown Dreams. Least favorite: Grand Designs (but it's still great) "

I'll add, from that opening chord in The Big Money, it's got this expansive sound (a lot of sustain in the guitar I guess) that pervades the whole album, it's like it lives on its own planet.

It's not that I'm a fan of the synth era more than other Rush.  Like most others it seems I agree that their biggest concentration of artistic highs was in the late 70s through MP.  And I got really excited when they gradually started bringing the guitars back to the fore, with Presto and onwards.  But you can't deny this is great music, expertly composed and arranged.  I wonder how much of the credit goes to Peter Collins?  he also produced some of their other later albums, but they don't have the same magic that this one has.

So yeah, if I could only take one Rush album to a desert island, this would be it.  I agree with Kev too that the album cover is great.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Power Windows
Post by: The Letter M on October 27, 2014, 01:55:04 PM
Power Windows is easily my favorite album of the Synth-Era of Rush (see my user name). Every song on here is great, if not truly f'ing epic. It also shows how much the band themselves really love the album when they played 7 out of 8 songs live during it's tour, and eventually bringing all of those songs back to the live stage in the last 12 years. The only exception has been "Emotion Detector", once again in the studio-only spot of 2nd-to-last-song.

The stand-outs for me are "Manhattan Project" and "Marathon", while "Territories" and "Mystic Rhythms" are pretty high up there as well. Of the four Synth-Era albums, this was the first one that really clicked with me when I became a fan, and I still love playing it all the way through. I'm glad the band brought back more POW songs on the last tour. It was a real treat hearing these songs!

-Marc.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Power Windows
Post by: hefdaddy42 on October 27, 2014, 02:21:15 PM
This is also my favorite of the synth era.  Much better than the last offering.  Full of good stuff.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Power Windows
Post by: TAC on October 27, 2014, 02:22:04 PM
Best synth era album is an oxymoron! ;D
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Power Windows
Post by: hefdaddy42 on October 27, 2014, 02:23:06 PM
Best synth era album is an oxymoron! ;D

Winger, anyone?
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Power Windows
Post by: TAC on October 27, 2014, 02:36:55 PM
Best synth era album is an oxymoron! ;D

Winger, anyone?

Well compared to that, Synth Era Rush is outstanding!! Shit So is A Flock Of Seagulls.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Power Windows
Post by: Lucien on October 27, 2014, 02:42:09 PM
Favorite album by Rush. Favorite song on there is a tie between Middletown Dreams and, surprisingly, Emotion Detector.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Power Windows
Post by: Lowdz on October 27, 2014, 03:10:08 PM
Best synth era album is an oxymoron! ;D

Winger, anyone?

Yes please!  :biggrin:

Great album. Loved it from the 1st listen. Whilst I love the first half of p/g every track here is a winner. Yes there is a load of synths but there's plenty of guitar too and everything sounds lush and big.
Great lyrics again from the master, more real world stories. I really like the lyrics in Middletown Dreams. The song was one that didn't hit with me straight away but its a favourite now.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Power Windows
Post by: Jaq on October 27, 2014, 03:46:25 PM
Marathon.

Favorite Rush song.

/post.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Power Windows
Post by: mikemangioy on October 27, 2014, 03:54:47 PM
:clap:
Great album, I really loved it. There were some of the best songs since MP. Marathon, Big Money and Territories is the holy trinity. But the rest of the album is also great, definetly my favorite from the synth era. So far, at least. And also, amazing use of synthesizers here. They were kind of cheesy in the previous albums but they sound great in this one  :tup
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Power Windows
Post by: jammindude on October 27, 2014, 07:11:58 PM
This album came out at a time when I was suffering a bit of "Rush burn out"...  I had discovered Rush around the ESL period in late '81, became a full blown "fanboi" after Signals came out, and was worse than a religious zealot by the time GUP had come out.   Between the ages of 12 and 14, Rush...was...GOD.    I was literally made fun of at my Junior High because I couldn't have a conversation without talking about Rush.   ("Taking a piss?  You know what feels even better than taking a piss?  Listening to RUSH!")   

By the fall of '85, I was kinda done.   I had heard The Big Money on the radio, and I wasn't impressed...and so I didn't buy the album on release day.  That was in October.   By December, my best friend had bought the cassette from someone who didn't like it for $4, and he didn't like it either, so he was willing to sell it to me to get his money back.   I decided that half price for a twice listened cassette to complete my collection wouldn't be such a tragedy.

The Big Money grew on me, and now I love it...but it's still one of my least favorites from the album.   But the rest of the album **FLOORED ME**.    This album renewed (and possibly even increased...if that was possible) my Rush fan-dom. 

This is about as perfect as Rush gets.   #3 on my all time list (behind Hemispheres and Permanent Waves) and without a doubt, it is Neil Peart's #1 all time lyrical achievement.     

Territories in particular REALLY resonated with me.   Those lyrics are life-changing poetry, and if they weren't profound enough already, they became even moreso after the events of 9/11.    I adopted my signature on that day, and it's been my #1 all time favorite lyrical line ever since....and probably my #2 all time favorite Rush song.   (though, as time goes on, I often wonder if Hemispheres hasn't found its usurper.  The song is just that amazing).

There's just nothing here that isn't "all killer, no filler".   It's impossible to talk about any one of these songs without feeling like you're leaving the rest out.   Funny that it took them nearly 30 years to get another album that was this *densely* good from front to back.   

1. Territories
2. Manhattan Project
3. Marathon
4. Middletown Dreams
5. Grand Designs
6. Mystic Rhythms
7. The Big Money
8. Emotion Detector

#1 is not even close to having competition.   2-6 have changed order several times throughout the years.   The Big Money is still great, but it's the only somewhat lyrically boring song on the album.   The tune is really good, but the tagline gets just a tad repetitive.    I used to love Emotion Detector a lot when the album was new, and I used to put it above Big Money...but it really hasn't aged well.    (but I still like it)

I  :heart this album so much!!!

Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Power Windows
Post by: Mister Gold on October 27, 2014, 07:35:21 PM
I recently listened to Power Windows for the first time in awhile and I was amazed that I'd forgotten how incredibly terrific this album is. Right up there with GUP, AFtK and Permanent Waves for me.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Power Windows
Post by: Mosh on October 27, 2014, 10:18:48 PM
Good album, not better than P/G (that's my favorite synth era, and definitely a top 5). Some really powerful moments on this album though, particularly the middle section of Marathon. Very nice production too.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Power Windows
Post by: Zydar on October 28, 2014, 01:42:18 AM
Way too much synths for my tastes, but it has some great songs despite the dated sound. Including Marathon which is a Top 3 Rush song for me.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Power Windows
Post by: Mladen on October 28, 2014, 04:10:39 AM
Another opportunity to quote my top 50 thread, where I placed this album at #49.

This is in my opinion Rush’s strongest album of the synth era, featuring some of their most melodic songs. The choruses are memorable and fun, but the songs are still detailed, progressive and a challenge to listen to. Lifeson’s guitar solos stick out in particular on this album, being that the listener isn’t constantly bombarded by guitar riffs due to the keyboards having a more central role. The keyboards give the band an extra layer of emotion and power, which became much more apparent to the fans years after the album was released. It’s a very unique album that proudly stands among the band’s best records.

Favorite songs: Marathon, Mystic rhythms, Middletown dreams
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Power Windows
Post by: King Postwhore on October 28, 2014, 06:05:54 AM
My #1 album of all time.  It never sounds stale to me.  Uplifting, emotional and powerful. I am listening to it at work right now!
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Power Windows
Post by: jingle.boy on October 28, 2014, 06:15:54 AM
I'll echo the sentiments of 'best synth-era album'.  It really is solid top to bottom.  I think I'd rank them very similarly to the Dude, with TBM and ED at the bottom.  Mystic Rhythms grew on me quite a bit, and Marathon is of course epic.  I knew most of these initially from ASOH, and then finally when I got the synth-era albums in the mid 00's, I kicked myself for not having this one sooner.

Sorry to go back, but still playing catchup with the 'Fun Facts':

Moving Pictures:
- the cover is meant to depict the front of Queen's Park... the Ontario Provincial Legislature building
- everyone better know this, but just for the sake of any newbies, YYZ is the three letter call for Toronto's Pearson International Airport, and the opening sequence is YYZ in morse code
- this too is likely common knowledge ... Red Barchetta was based on the story "A Nice Morning Drive", first published by Richard Foster - Road and Track November, 1973 (great read by the way)
- The Camera Eye refers to the U.S.A. Trilogy by author John Dos Passos... The 42nd Parallel (1930); 1919, (1932); and The Big Money (1936).
- Writing and recording took place at an old farm owned by Ronnie Hawkins, just north of Peterborough in mid-Ontario; mixing was done at Le Studio again
- opening acts for Rush in 80 and 81 included Saxon, Riot, Ian Hunter, FM, and of course, Max Webster

Signals:
- Ben Mink played violin on Losing It, and would later contribute to Geddy's solo album
- the samples in Countdown are actually from NASA, as the band had a friend who worked there at the time (Tempus?? :lol); this also included the video footage they displayed while touring
- opening acts for Rush on this tour would include Krokus, Golden Earing and Nazareth among others
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Power Windows
Post by: ? on October 28, 2014, 07:19:29 AM
Power Windows is worth getting for Mystic Rhythms alone!
This. Mystic Rhythms is a top 5 Rush song and PoW is a top 5 Rush album IMO - easily the highlight of the synth era. :metal
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Power Windows
Post by: TAC on October 28, 2014, 02:22:32 PM
  Funny that it took them nearly 30 years to get another album that was this *densely* good from front to back.   
Dense is a good way of describing this album. It just feels far more complete than the others in the synth era, and as you say, as complete an album as they have up until Clockwork Angels.

I'm not really a fan of this album, but listening to it this week, it was clear that the band was all in on this. It has a certain strength and a personality to it, and I think that's what seperates it.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Power Windows
Post by: Lowdz on October 28, 2014, 05:16:43 PM
Power Windows is worth getting for Mystic Rhythms alone!
This. Mystic Rhythms is a top 5 Rush song and PoW is a top 5 Rush album IMO - easily the highlight of the synth era. :metal

Mystic Rhythms is sooo good  :tup
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Power Windows
Post by: nicmos on October 28, 2014, 06:38:57 PM

Mystic Rhythms is sooo good  :tup

does it capture your thoughts and carry them away?  :coolio
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Power Windows
Post by: Phoenix87x on October 28, 2014, 07:34:40 PM
Power Windows is worth getting for Mystic Rhythms alone!
This. Mystic Rhythms is a top 5 Rush song and PoW is a top 5 Rush album IMO - easily the highlight of the synth era. :metal

Mystic Rhythms is sooo good  :tup

Mystic Rhythms  :hefdaddy :hefdaddy :hefdaddy
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Power Windows
Post by: Orbert on October 28, 2014, 08:00:32 PM
I finished a spin of Power Windows, first time in a while, and it's a bit better than I remembered.  For one thing, Neil is absolutely on fire.  He's a beast.  The mix is great; he's not way out front or anything, but man, he is present, an equal third of the band.  I find the production pretty much perfect.  You can hear all the parts, everything's mixed well, and it sounds great.

The keyboard work is also a bit better than I remembered.  As I said earlier, Geddy's not exactly a virtuoso, but he's such a great musician that it's come gonna through in his playing.  As fledgling keyboard player in the 80's myself, I used to look in the credits for things like "keyboard programming by..." so I could scoff, knowing that they weren't a "real" keyboard player.  Because a real keyboard player programs his own synths.  I think I've mellowed just a little bit.  I still scoff when appropriate (of course!) but what matters most is the music, the final product.  And that has always been the case, I just didn't see that for a while.

Alex's guitar work is great, but he was into this Andy Summers type thing with a big emphasis on texture and tone and fuzz, and the screaming solos were kinda tabled for a while since they wouldn't really have fit this kind of music.  So the guitar work doesn't really stand out unless you're specifically listening for it.  As always, it serves the music well.  I think Alex could have pushed the guitars a bit more, but instead he chose to let Geddy have his fun for a while.  And that's fine.  But if asked, he has to be honest and say that he wasn't completely thrilled by it, so that maybe seems a little unfair.  Or maybe Geddy really did push harder during these sessions and Alex backed off, wanting to keep the peace.  I don't know.

Overall, a great album, lots of good stuff here, just not really my thing.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Power Windows
Post by: King Postwhore on October 29, 2014, 06:22:02 AM
That was the sound of the time Bob.  I love his emotional solos on this album.  Geddy is a beast on this album and I love his sound on it.  During this tour, I loved seeing Marathon live.  The whole album is so uplifting even though some of the songs themes are dark.

Speaking of themes, this is a thematic album.  I love the loose concept of power and we shall never forget this is where Alex became HRH. :lol
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Power Windows
Post by: Orbert on October 29, 2014, 07:19:39 AM
Home Run Hitter?
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Power Windows
Post by: King Postwhore on October 29, 2014, 08:33:55 AM
H.R.H. KING LERXST, KING OF SCHMENGLAND !! :lol

Read his gear section from the Power Windows tourbook.


https://www.cygnus-x1.net/links/rush/tourbook-powerwindows.php

Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Power Windows
Post by: Podaar on October 29, 2014, 09:07:41 AM
I listened to Power Windows yesterday as well and was surprised at how much I enjoyed it! I'm thinking I need to buy it so I can let it absorb properly. This will be my first (last?) synth era Rush album.

I still have the feeling that other 80's bands did this kind of music better but as for Rush's take on modern (at the time) music I think this was their best. Their personalities, from their 70's music, are more pronounced and a welcome addition.

Orbert said all this better.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Power Windows
Post by: jingle.boy on October 29, 2014, 12:38:45 PM
Man... listening now, and this is one fuckin killer album.  Although, because I was introduced to many of these from ASOH, the studio version of Marathon in particular is just a titch than ASOH is.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Power Windows
Post by: The Letter M on October 29, 2014, 02:52:05 PM
Today in RUSH HISTORY, Hemispheres, Exit...Stage Left and Power Windows were all released in their respective years!!! Time to spin POW again!

-Marc.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Power Windows
Post by: Mister Gold on October 29, 2014, 07:20:37 PM
Today in RUSH HISTORY, Hemispheres, Exit...Stage Left and Power Windows were all released in their respective years!!! Time to spin POW again!

-Marc.

Listening to Hemispheres right now actually! :metal
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Power Windows
Post by: carl320 on October 29, 2014, 10:00:55 PM
Power Windows is a great album.  Every time I listen, I realize how good it is.  However, I just don't ever listen to it.  When I want to listen to synth Rush, I put on Signals, P/G or HYF, but never PW.  When I think about it, it makes no sense.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Power Windows
Post by: TAC on October 30, 2014, 05:09:03 AM
Power Windows is a great album.  Every time I listen, I realize how good it is.  However, I just don't ever listen to it.  When I want to listen to synth Rush, I put on Signals, P/G or HYF, but never PW.  When I think about it, it makes no sense.
It actually makes perfect sense. 80's Rush twists me all up in knots too.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Power Windows
Post by: KevShmev on October 31, 2014, 02:26:36 PM
Next update coming this weekend. Sorry for the delay, but it's been a busy week.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Power Windows
Post by: hefdaddy42 on November 01, 2014, 03:59:25 AM
No worries  :tup
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Power Windows
Post by: jingle.boy on November 01, 2014, 06:49:45 AM
Next update coming this weekend. Sorry for the delay, but it's been a busy week.

Definitely no worries... you're running at a better pace than me, and definitely better than Tommy Boy.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Hold Your Fire
Post by: KevShmev on November 01, 2014, 08:30:48 AM
Retaining Peter Collins as their producer, the band went about recording their 12th studio album, and Hold Your Fire was the result.  While still featuring a lot of keyboards, they were pulled back a tad, and while Power Windows sounded very big and grandiose, Hold Your Fire was more intimate and even, as Geddy once said, romantic in some ways.  Overall, it has a very melodic feel, even if some of the many crescendos sound very crash-bangy, for lack of a better term.  Granted, this is probably an album that Alex looks back on and cringes at his guitar tone, which he has described as being "wiry," but it works for the style this album was written in.  Often times, it is like he is dancing around a melodic keyboard line, like during the chorus of "Open Secrets," and distortion and/or a heavier tone wouldn't have fitted there at all.  So, while different, it stands out for him in the sense of you won't find another Rush album where his playing is like it is on this record. I think he has probably proud of that some to some extent, and he should be.  As always, Geddy and Neil were on the top of their game, on their respective instruments, as well.

As for the songs, it is loaded with good ones.  "Mission" is arguably a top 10 Rush song by just about any standard; that ending - "It's cold comfort..." - is just magnificent.  I've always been partial to "Turn the Page" and "Prime Mover," and "Lock and Key" and "Open Secrets" are easily two of their most underrated songs ever. Longtime live favorites "Force Ten" and "Time Stand Still" are both great, and I've always like "High Water" way more than most others seem to.  "Second Nature" and "Tai Shan" kind of stand out as being the least best of the bunch, but are both enjoyable enough to not skip over when listening from start to finish, even if the band recently referred to "Tai Shan" as being one of their biggest mistakes ever. :lol

Overall, this is often a hard album to rank accordingly, cause it is so different.  I can't say it's as good as any of the Big 5, or Power Windows, or a couple of their post-1980s albums, so when doing the math, it comes off as an "average" Rush record, but there really is no shame in that considering how great so many of their albums are.  This is totally a "snapshot in time" album; it sounds like 1987 in many regards.  Had this album been recorded in 1981 or 1992, God only knows how different it would have been, but I am happy it came out the way it did, and I still listen to this one a lot.  Really good record. :coolio

(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/8/8c/Rush_Hold_Your_Fire.jpg)
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Hold Your Fire
Post by: Podaar on November 01, 2014, 09:00:06 AM
I listened to this earlier in the week in anticipation but I don't recall a single impression remaining. I must listen again before commenting.

[edit] I'm listening right now, and by the holy balls of Thor, Open Secrets is AWESOME! [/edit]
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Hold Your Fire
Post by: nicmos on November 01, 2014, 09:29:08 AM
Hold Your Fire is a strange album for me.  It seems like something I really should like sometimes, and at the same time I always feel like it's not as good as it should have been.  Several of the tracks are ones I definitely enjoy the most out of any of their 80s and 90s stuff.  I think maybe it is an implicit comparison to Power Windows, which I think is the single best Rush album, that makes this seem lackluster in comparison.  But it's still an enjoyable listen from beginning to end.

Force Ten could have been one of my all time favorite Rush songs, it's really propulsive and develops nicely, but when it gets to where the solo should normally be, it just falls completely flat.  It's just some (interesting) repetitive note patterns bouncing back and forth between the snyths and the guitar.  Other than that, a great song.

Time Stand Still is I believe the best song on the album.  It exceeds all other Rush songs in its wistful mood.  The Aimee Mann vocals add a nice touch to it, and the last verse(? it doesn't neatly fit a verse or chorus or pre-chorus or bridge even, the part that goes "Summers going fast...") is so emotional.

Open Secrets and Second Nature are like the "no fun zone" of this album.  Open Secrets has just never connected with me although I like the lyrics.  Second Nature is enjoyable enough I guess but it's a little slow and not a whole lot going on in the song.

Prime Mover and Lock and Key both again seem like they should be really good songs but fall just short.  I like the bridge in Prime Mover, but even so, this song seems to lack some dynamics or something that would take it to the next level.  Lock and Key is maybe a little too formulaic, good solo, and does anyone else always think of The Body Electric during the outro?  I can't not think 1-0-0, 1-0-0, 1-SOS there.

Mission almost seems like it was made from the same magic as Power Windows, I think it's the only song on this album that seems like it would fit on that one and stand up to those great tunes, but still wouldn't be as good as most of them.  Still a great song, but the climax has always fallen a little short for me.

Turn The Page is a great song, unlike just about any other Rush song due to that bass line.  It's amazing to think Geddy actually pulls off the bass and the vocals simultaneously on this song live (and he's commented on how it took a lot of practice to get them straight).  That solo is great, and a great ending.

I like Tai Shan, and I'm going to embarrass myself and say that it means more to me after my trip to China.  I can really see how Neil was inspired to write this, and he shouldn't be embarrassed about it.  Maybe it doesn't belong on a Rush album, but an enjoyable song nonetheless.

High Water, I love the groove, especially how it develops throughout the song, and I just really like the vocal line and it feels huge in the last verse and chorus, a great way to end the album.  Totally underrated.

Also, have to say I love the inside album art, sort of like a sequel to Moving Pictures, I wish they would have gone with that for the cover, but they went with the minimalist version of it instead, I guess that was the thing to do in '87.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Hold Your Fire
Post by: The Letter M on November 01, 2014, 10:13:48 AM
The end of another 4-album era/cycle, but what should've been a timeless classic like 2112 and Moving Pictures ended up being a bit...on-par. After the stellar Power Windows (another 3rd-of-the-era album with P and W as the initials...hmmmm), it would've been difficult to follow up with an as-brilliant album.

Don't get me wrong, HYF has some GREAT songs on it, like "Mission", "Prime Mover" and "Lock And Key", with some pretty good songs as well, like "Force TEn", "Time Stand Still", "Turn The Page" and "Open Secrets", but the over-all album doesn't feel AS strong as what came before it. It was definitely an evolution of the band's sound, and it was the next stepping stone into the direction they would take in their next era, with slightly less and less keyboards, a little more guitar, and tighter, shorter songs (POW had 4 songs about as long or longer than HYF's longest song).

I like this album, and coupled with POW, I like this pair more than the SIG/GUP pair that start the synth-era of albums, but it's hard not to compare this album to POW, and as such, I find myself liking it not as much. It's a shame, though, that the band have only played SIX of these TEN songs, but they certainly played six of the best!
Turn The Page, Prime Mover, Force Ten, Time Stand Still, Lock and Key, and Mission.

I they could play one more live, I'd say either "Open Secrets" or "Second Nature".

-Marc.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Hold Your Fire
Post by: ? on November 01, 2014, 10:24:59 AM
HYF is a good album but kind of uneven, hence it's my least favorite synth era album and in the lower half of my overall Rush album ranking. Time Stand Still, Force Ten, Prime Mover (would love to see them play this live!) and Mission are fantastic and I like Open Secrets and Lock & Key, but the rest of the songs are pretty forgettable. Tai Shan isn't as bad as people say, but not exciting either, and the lyrics are kind of cheesy compared to what Neil usually writes. Maybe the album would've been tighter if it had been 40-45 minutes long like the previous ones.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Hold Your Fire
Post by: Zydar on November 01, 2014, 10:25:50 AM
My least listened to of their 80s albums. Only Time Stand Still, Force Ten and Mission interest me. Perhaps I should give it yet another chance.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Hold Your Fire
Post by: Jaq on November 01, 2014, 10:46:35 AM
My least listened to of their 80s albums. Only Time Stand Still, Force Ten and Mission interest me. Perhaps I should give it yet another chance.

This, though Mission is a top 5 Rush song for me. It doesn't help that I have a bad memory of this tour; me and my best friend had tickets to see Rush with the McAuley-Schenker Group opening. The night before, coming home from hanging out at a local bar, my friend's car gets rear ended at a stop light, and basically destroyed. If I hadn't been sitting between the front seats bullshitting with my friends and thrown forward, I'd probably have been killed. Wound up having to go to the emergency room for precautionary measures, I had a mild concussion. "But hey," I said to my best friend the next morning "at least we have Rush and MSG tonight."

And then they cancelled the show that day.  :censored
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Hold Your Fire
Post by: Mosh on November 01, 2014, 12:40:08 PM
And this is where Rush lost me. All their albums from 2112 up to this point were at least really good, but this one is among their worst and it's a lot more inconsistent after this. It's pretty clear at this point that the band needs a change in direction and are stuck in a musical rut. The songs are really samey and not as exciting as the other synth era material. Definitely in the bottom end of my rankings. Some good songs here and there, but overall not one I'm eager to go back to ever.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Hold Your Fire
Post by: nicmos on November 01, 2014, 12:44:40 PM
And this is where Rush lost me. All their albums from 2112 up to this point were at least really good, but this one is among their worst and it's a lot more inconsistent after this. It's pretty clear at this point that the band needs a change in direction and are stuck in a musical rut. The songs are really samey and not as exciting as the other synth era material. Definitely in the bottom end of my rankings. Some good songs here and there, but overall not one I'm eager to go back to ever.

I'd argue that GUP and PoW are a lot more samey or homogenous than HYF, not that the songs on those albums aren't good.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Hold Your Fire
Post by: Mosh on November 01, 2014, 01:39:33 PM
I don't really disagree, but both albums have more variety and don't blend together as much as HYF does for me.

Btw what is it about Tai Shan that people hate so much? I don't find it much better or worse than other songs on that album.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Hold Your Fire
Post by: Lowdz on November 01, 2014, 01:43:21 PM
I do like this album, though not all of it. I really like Tai Shan...
It's not as good as PW but is far more consistent than p/g, it just doesn't have those enormous highs. I agree about the production. It doesn't sound bad, just a little bare compared to the previous albums. Compared to TFE, VT and S&A its a goddamn masterpiece though.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Hold Your Fire
Post by: jammindude on November 01, 2014, 02:03:29 PM
I'm with Mosh.  Until Roll the Bones, this was my least favorite Rush album.    It tried to be Power Windows Part 2, and just failed.   There are some greats.  I love Prime Mover, Mission, Second Nature, Time Stand Still...  Most of the rest are just OK.  (though I do admit that I like Tai Shan more than most)  I guess I just have a poor opinion of this album because it was the very first of any of their albums that has true "skip tracks".   But I guess when viewed objectively, it's still half good...which is better than most other people's albums.

Still, after the perfection of Power Windows, this was a big letdown.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Hold Your Fire
Post by: nicmos on November 01, 2014, 02:26:17 PM
Until Roll the Bones, this was my least favorite Rush album. 

Come at me, bro!  :coolio
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Hold Your Fire
Post by: jammindude on November 01, 2014, 03:11:03 PM
Ranking...

1. Prime Mover
2. Mission
3. Time Stand Still
4. Second Nature
5. Force Ten
6. Tai Shan
7. Lock and Key
8. Turn the Page
9. Open Secrets
10. High Water

Love the first 4, the middle 3 are decent, I don't really care for the last three....though I guess Turn the Page is somewhere between "decent" and "forgettable"...  The chorus is just awkward, and Geddy sounds terrible doing it live because he's shifting between overlapping choruses with a single voice.   The song just doesn't do it for me.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Hold Your Fire
Post by: Lowdz on November 01, 2014, 03:16:29 PM
Just listening now for the first time in ages and I'm enjoying it. For 3 guys they do fill your ears. The bass and drums are thunderous, the guitars the supporting act really, and the keys are hardly really there.
Yeah, great album.


And I love RtB too  :biggrin:  Much better than Presto.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Hold Your Fire
Post by: TAC on November 01, 2014, 07:20:43 PM

And I love RtB too  :biggrin:  Much better than Presto.
No freaking way!  :)
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Hold Your Fire
Post by: Polarbear on November 02, 2014, 02:51:38 AM

And I love RtB too  :biggrin:  Much better than Presto.
No freaking way!  :)

Both Presto and Roll The Bones are very good IMO. I like them both better than HYF, but HYF is not a bad album. Time Stand Still, Lock And Key and Prime Mover are all great songs.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Hold Your Fire
Post by: Lowdz on November 02, 2014, 04:12:41 AM

And I love RtB too  :biggrin:  Much better than Presto.
No freaking way!  :)


Presto just never did it for me. Some good songs, certainly, after all it's Rush. RtB is better.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Hold Your Fire
Post by: Mladen on November 02, 2014, 04:38:38 AM
To my ears, the difference between this album and the previous three is enormous. I love Force ten, Second nature and Prime mover, Time stands still is pretty solid, but the rest is just completely average or below. Such a significant drop in quality after five amazing albums, I honestly can't figure out what happened...
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Hold Your Fire
Post by: hefdaddy42 on November 02, 2014, 04:45:22 AM
I kind of agree.  I mean, there are some cool songs (Force Ten, Mission, Time Stand Still, High Water) but the rest has a "filler" feel to me.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Hold Your Fire
Post by: King Postwhore on November 02, 2014, 05:27:58 AM
As much as I still play this album a ton, it is a little too smooth for a Rush album.  I would kill to hear Open Secrets live.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Hold Your Fire
Post by: jingle.boy on November 02, 2014, 06:05:44 AM
Agree with a lot of the comments above ... "smooth", "consistent", "filler", "doesn't have highs", "ties to be POW v2".

Overall, pretty good album, not sure where I'd rank it in the synth-era... 3rd or 4th.  Probably 4th.  Love Force Ten (first live song I ever heard by them).  I wouldn't call anything a total dud, but there are some less than memorable moments.

And I'm glad I'm not the only one expecting to hear 1-0-0, 1-0-0,1-SOS during Lock and Key.  Seriously, I had to check what track I was listening to, to make sure I didn't have it on random or something.  :lol  And High Water (especially the chorus line of "When the water takes me home" leading into the solo) has the same feel as Territories at times.

Kev, I must correct you though, Tai Shan wasn't the worst thing the band ever did... that is honor is without a doubt reserved for the video for Time Stand Still.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Hold Your Fire
Post by: Zydar on November 02, 2014, 06:08:08 AM
Yeah, horrible video :lol

(https://i.ytimg.com/vi/cwUY4NobpZk/hqdefault.jpg)
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Hold Your Fire
Post by: KevShmev on November 02, 2014, 07:01:54 AM
Haha, yeah, that video is, um, interesting. :lol :lol

jammindude, I don't get the "It tried to be Power Windows Part 2" comment; I outlined in my review the clear differences between the two albums.  I think the band did a really good job of giving all four synth era albums their own identity and sound (even if Signals was a bit of a failure in the sense that it didn't come out how they wanted it to, leading to the axing of Terry Brown).
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Hold Your Fire
Post by: Lolzeez on November 02, 2014, 07:02:14 AM
Used to be really into synth era Rush last year and even though HYF was my least favorite of the 4,it somehow was the one i spun the most. Mission,Force Ten,Prime Mover,Open Secrets and Time Stand Still are some great songs.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Hold Your Fire
Post by: Podaar on November 02, 2014, 07:38:09 AM

And I'm glad I'm not the only one expecting to hear 1-0-0, 1-0-0,1-SOS during Lock and Key.

 :lol  Holy, shit. I was doing exactly this yesterday while listening.

I'm a  bit surprised about the comments for this album. Sure, I've only listened to it twice, but from this noobs point of view...pretty good stuff.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Hold Your Fire
Post by: ? on November 02, 2014, 07:41:55 AM
Yeah, horrible video :lol

(https://i.ytimg.com/vi/cwUY4NobpZk/hqdefault.jpg)
(https://33.media.tumblr.com/4feb92d964880f4c9298d21146b5d0e3/tumblr_n3slwoCCjL1qhkk26o1_400.gif)
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Exit...Stage Left
Post by: ytserush on November 02, 2014, 12:40:00 PM
My one story from this period pretty much centers on the ingestion of non-tobacco and I know that direct references are frowned upon here at DTF, but this is the story.  Mods can delete it if they feel it's inappropriate.  Also, it's pretty long.  You have been warned.

I was a Music major at Michigan State University, as was my roommate.  The two of us, plus another of my good friends, had scored tickets see to Rush on March 15 in Detroit.  Elsewhere on these boards, I've shared the tragic story of why I did not graduate with a degree in Music, but the events of this story factor into it.  Basically, I had an audition the following morning at 8:00, before the panel who would decide whether or not I would continue as a Music Education major.  They would not allow me to reschedule the audition, and I wasn't going to miss seeing Rush, so I just faced the fact that I would be seeing a concert in Detroit, driving home whenever, and attempting to audition the following morning.  I had already become quite disenchanted with the College of Music at Michigan State.  I wanted to be a band director.  I can play every instrument, winds, brass, even percussion, and my favorite teacher from high school was our band director.  Anyway, "to express yourself through an ensemble, you must first be able to express yourself as a virtuoso upon your chosen instrument" was what they told me, and I had to choose a major and minor instrument.  I liked saxophone, but there was only one sax professor, Dr. Forger, and he was so busy that he only had time for four students.  So basically, in a school of 45,000 students, there could be only four saxophone majors, and I had to audition to be one of them.  I had to beat at least one of his current students.

We were college freshmen, had all been to Detroit before, but never on our own like this, always with our families on trips and stuff.  So a road trip to Detroit to see Rush, the three of us, was a major event.  The afternoon of the show, we got ahold of some non-tobacco.  We weren't sure how long it would take us to get there, but we were going into the heart of Detroit, and also knew that by then we'd all be pretty stoned and might get lost, so we allowed three or four hours.  We figured if we got there early, fine, we could check out the town a bit, get something to eat, whatever.

We rolled several before leaving the dorm.  Many, many.  It was a weekday, so traffic on the highway to Detroit was light and we did in fact get there hours before the show was to start.  For those who are unfamiliar with the geography, Detroit is basically on the Canadian border; Michigan and Ontario are separated by the Detroit River.  You can cross over the river via The Ambassador Bridge, or drive under it via The Windsor Tunnel.  As we were driving around downtown Detroit, wasted, checking out the scenery, we'd pass signs saying "Tunnel to Canada" or "Bridge to Canada" with an arrow telling you which way to turn at the next intersection.  With two hours to kill, "Let's go to Canada!"  Over and back, just to do it.  Sure, why not?  What could go wrong?

We decided on the tunnel, because the bridge might be too freaky because we were so high.  In the tunnel, one of us (I honestly don't remember who) said "Let's burn one in the tunnel!"  Yeah!  This is so cool, we're smoking one in the tunnel!

The sign up ahead said "All Vehicles Must Stop For Customs".  OH SHIT!  Yeah, we hadn't thought about that.  We rolled all the windows down (like that would help at this point) and quickly got a story put together.  We're going to Toronto, I had friends there (which was true) and we were on Spring Break from MSU (which was close enough).  Okay.  We get to the gate, the man in the uniform leans in and asks where we're headed.  Chris the driver says "Toronto" at the same time my buddy Mitch in the back seat says "Toledo".  He puts a red card on the windshield and asks us to pull over for "further inspection".

They searched us, and didn't like what they found.  They searched the car, and found even more, and didn't like that, either.  They separated us and strip-searched us.  All we had was the non-tobacco.  We were all 18, but were still basically "stupid kids" and they threatened to call our parents and it worked, and we were scared.  We were in Canada, had crossed an international border with contraband, and among other things, could be charged with smuggling.  I personally came clean and told them the truth, that we were killing some time before a concert, but I really did have friends in Toronto, my dad was born there, and that we just wanted to visit Canada while we were so close.  I had no idea whether my friends would stick to the story or not, but at this point it didn't really matter.

Basically, they knew we were just stupid kids and not a threat to national security or anything, so they kept us long enough to scare the shit out of us, then sent us back to the United States.  They told us that we were welcome to visit Canada in the future, but please leave the illegal stuff at home.

We got to Cobo Hall and found our seats literally seconds before Max Webster came out.  We hadn't missed anything!  Max Webster were great, and of course Rush was amazing, as they always are.  The one thing I remembered was that there was a song on the radio at the time, "Battlescar" which was the two bands together, all seven of them (Webster had a keyboard player), and since they were touring together, it would make perfect sense for them to play that one song together.  But they didn't.  It was a Max Webster song, from their current album Universal Juveniles, and Webster played it by themselves.  They wasn't just disappointing, but seemed kinda dumb, a missed opportunity.  Rush was there, backstage, and could have joined them for the one song.  It would have been so cool.  But no.  Anyway, it was still a great concert.  Both bands were great.

We got back to East Lansing around 2:00 in the morning, so wired up that I couldn't sleep for a while, and it didn't help that I knew I had to get some sleep before my audition.  Didn't matter.  I sucked at the audition.  I was not going to beat out any of Dr. Forger's four current students, and thus ended my career as a Music Major at Michigan State University.

But it was a great concert.  Worth getting kicked out of the College of Music?  I wasn't gonna pass the audition anyway, so yeah.  Definitely worth it.  This is Rush we're talking about!

In a way, this story (specifically the border crossing) reminded me of this....

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u5wm6F4LjjQ
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Power Windows
Post by: ytserush on November 02, 2014, 01:02:58 PM
Dissatisfied with the overall experience surrounding the making of Grace Under Pressure, Rush looked to change producers again, this time going for Peter Collins, who had major pop sensibilities, as well as being a big fan of synthesizers, so his fingerprints were all over Power Windows, the band's 11th studio album.  While the keys on the two previous albums were more lush and like another layer on the musical pile, the keys on this record are in your face, and in a good way. You have loud outbursts of synths that almost act as a bridge from verse to chorus, chorus back to verse, etc.  It's a very effect technique when done well, like it is here, and, well, very 80s.

I cannot imagine what fans at the time thought when this album was released, since it was quite a departure from their usual hard rock sound.  It still rocks, but in more of a synthesized 80s way, if that makes sense.  The playing from all three is still off the charts great, but the keyboards dominated like they never had before on a Rush record, which, like I alluded to, had to be quite shocking for existing fans at the time.  However, as someone who got into them in 1991, several songs from this were key in me getting into the band.  I had just started getting into the band when a friend one night showed several of us the A Show of Hands VHS, which kicked off with "The Big Money" and "Marathon," both of which I thought were totally awesome the first time I heard them; I couldn't believe the power and energy of both songs, and the melodies in both were infectious as hell.  Power Windows ended up being one of the first Rush albums I purchased on CD (I believe it was 3rd behind Moving Pictures and 2112).

My instant favorites were the songs featured on the ASOH VHS - "The Big Money," "Marathon," "Manhatton Project" and "Territories" - and "Mystic Rhythms" was an instant favorite as well.  The other three I liked, but none of them were major grabbers for a while, but over time, I really grew to love "Middletown Dreams" a ton, and "Grand Designs" finally got me good a few years ago, too.  "Emotion Detector" is the least best of the bunch, but my opinion on it has always been about the same: good song, but just not nearly as great as everything else on this record. 

For my money, this is easily the best Rush album of the synth era, arguably a top 3 Rush record, the best post-1981 Rush record and quite possibly the best collection of lyrics Neil Peart has ever penned.  Oh, and it has their coolest album cover ever.  This record just freaking rules. :metal

(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/e/e2/Rush_Power_Windows.jpg)

Before I get started I'm just going to repeat that Vapor Trails is a genius of an album.  Can't seem to have the courage to pull it out of the car.


Okay, Power Windows was the first Rush album I ever bought new and it sounded so different than anything that came before it.

It's also a Geddy favorite, which could be why we were treated to a lot of it in recent years.

It's also the first album where the band decided not to worry about creating something with the expectation that it would have to be reproduced live.


Another quote about the cover:

"It is pretty abstract. I love the scene of this sort of Billy Bibbot-like character confused as to his reality. The windows that he's looking out are in a sense very powerful windows. We are talking about different types of power and the way they affect us, and the way they affect him. The boy is a little shaken as to which way he should look and which window is his reality." -----Geddy  Rockline November 1985.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Hold Your Fire
Post by: ytserush on November 02, 2014, 01:31:51 PM
Retaining Peter Collins as their producer, the band went about recording their 12th studio album, and Hold Your Fire was the result.  While still featuring a lot of keyboards, they were pulled back a tad, and while Power Windows sounded very big and grandiose, Hold Your Fire was more intimate and even, as Geddy once said, romantic in some ways.  Overall, it has a very melodic feel, even if some of the many crescendos sound very crash-bangy, for lack of a better term.  Granted, this is probably an album that Alex looks back on and cringes at his guitar tone, which he has described as being "wiry," but it works for the style this album was written in.  Often times, it is like he is dancing around a melodic keyboard line, like during the chorus of "Open Secrets," and distortion and/or a heavier tone wouldn't have fitted there at all.  So, while different, it stands out for him in the sense of you won't find another Rush album where his playing is like it is on this record. I think he has probably proud of that some to some extent, and he should be.  As always, Geddy and Neil were on the top of their game, on their respective instruments, as well.

As for the songs, it is loaded with good ones.  "Mission" is arguably a top 10 Rush song by just about any standard; that ending - "It's cold comfort..." - is just magnificent.  I've always been partial to "Turn the Page" and "Prime Mover," and "Lock and Key" and "Open Secrets" are easily two of their most underrated songs ever. Longtime live favorites "Force Ten" and "Time Stand Still" are both great, and I've always like "High Water" way more than most others seem to.  "Second Nature" and "Tai Shan" kind of stand out as being the least best of the bunch, but are both enjoyable enough to not skip over when listening from start to finish, even if the band recently referred to "Tai Shan" as being one of their biggest mistakes ever. :lol

Overall, this is often a hard album to rank accordingly, cause it is so different.  I can't say it's as good as any of the Big 5, or Power Windows, or a couple of their post-1980s albums, so when doing the math, it comes off as an "average" Rush record, but there really is no shame in that considering how great so many of their albums are.  This is totally a "snapshot in time" album; it sounds like 1987 in many regards.  Had this album been recorded in 1981 or 1992, God only knows how different it would have been, but I am happy it came out the way it did, and I still listen to this one a lot.  Really good record. :coolio

(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/8/8c/Rush_Hold_Your_Fire.jpg)

The  last studio album of what had been known in the US as the "Mercury-Polygram" years.

What an album. Pretty amazing. I thought for sure the band was breaking up after this one. Either that or the next album would be classical. Obviously they took this as far as it could go (Like Hemispheres in that regard) and in Neil's opinion even over did it.

Always liked the inner sleeve to this with all of the nuggets to look for.

"With the Hold Your Fire cover...we confused everything by putting the secondary image first , so that the red spheres reflect the fireballs which appear in the main image, which appears inside. I know it's confusing, but we thought it looked nice. The juggler -- the "fire-holder" -is a character actor who appears in several films, notably "Tin Men."  ----Neil  (Backstage Club newsletter 1991)

"It's an abstraction that can be taken so many different ways. Basically, you get a good feeling about the artwork, there's something that clicks about it. The three balls geometrically and physically create a tension in the way that they're suspended. They relate to balls of fire, as it relates to holding your creative fires. It's all a play on those thoughts and everything associated with them. Sure, we can look at it as three people, three balls, but it's all of that and more."  ----Geddy  (Only Music)


"I fixed on the idea  of people's instinct and temperaments and the anti-violence side is definitely a part of that. I'm very anti-violence, but I try to avoid the term 'pacifist' because it has too many simplistic, head-in-the-sand connotations  --- Neil (Boston Globe)
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Hold Your Fire
Post by: jammindude on November 02, 2014, 01:58:07 PM
Haha, yeah, that video is, um, interesting. :lol :lol

jammindude, I don't get the "It tried to be Power Windows Part 2" comment; I outlined in my review the clear differences between the two albums.  I think the band did a really good job of giving all four synth era albums their own identity and sound (even if Signals was a bit of a failure in the sense that it didn't come out how they wanted it to, leading to the axing of Terry Brown).

I saw that you had said that, and I was immediately taken aback by the statement.   It's all good, and we can agree to disagree.   But my favorite from this album (to my ears) would have felt perfectly at home on PoW, and the 'meh' tracks sounded like PoW B-sides.    I just don't see a lot of stylistic differences.   If there is a difference to be had, it would be that HYF suffers from that feeling of, "If what we did on Power Windows worked so well...then MORE must be EVEN BETTER!"   I was especially surprised to hear to hint at the idea that there seemed to be less synth and the guitar was more pronounced (unless I'm misreading what you're hinting at).  I don't even think the band feels that way about HYF.   Like ytserush just posted, Neil may have even felt that what was done on Power Windows, may have been taken too far on HYF.    I agree exactly with that viewpoint.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Hold Your Fire
Post by: Orbert on November 02, 2014, 04:28:02 PM
(Orbert and friends get busted at the Canadian border for doing stupid shit)

In a way, this story (specifically the border crossing) reminded me of this....

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=u5wm6F4LjjQ

I've never seen that before!  Pretty cool, Alex.  Yeah, our experience did not go quite that smoothly, though.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Hold Your Fire
Post by: Lucien on November 03, 2014, 12:07:14 AM
Power Windows is about, well, obtaining power and the sense of power around us, while Hold Your Fire seems to be Neil's optimistic phase. To be completely honest, I think these two albums are tied as my favorites at least lyrically.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Hold Your Fire
Post by: Orbert on November 03, 2014, 10:53:03 AM
Speaking of lyrics...

I've played Hold Your Fire a few times recently, and there are a few lyrical things that stand out.

Back in the 80's, there was this band in my area that got pretty popular.  The name was "Savage Grace".  I always thought that that was a weird yet cool name for a band.  Unless it was previously a common expression that I've never heard before, I now know where it came from.  (Force Ten: "We can move with savage grace.")

"The point of departure is not to return".  I always liked how Neil took the term "point of departure" and focused on a completely differently interpretation.

"Hold your fire, keep it burning bright".  On the other hand, I never liked this one.  "Hold your fire" is also a common expression with completely different meaning, and conjuring instead the image of a torchbearer is kinda cool, but being the third thing on the album, lyric-wise, to grab my attention, I guess I was kinda tired of Neil and his clever puns by this point.  I mean, clever is usually good, but too much of it can be distracting, and it was.  Lyrics shouldn't take away from the music.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Hold Your Fire
Post by: KevShmev on November 03, 2014, 12:13:19 PM
Haha, yeah, that video is, um, interesting. :lol :lol

jammindude, I don't get the "It tried to be Power Windows Part 2" comment; I outlined in my review the clear differences between the two albums.  I think the band did a really good job of giving all four synth era albums their own identity and sound (even if Signals was a bit of a failure in the sense that it didn't come out how they wanted it to, leading to the axing of Terry Brown).

I saw that you had said that, and I was immediately taken aback by the statement.   It's all good, and we can agree to disagree. 

Indeed we can. :hat

But, to explain it a bit differently, the difference in sound can be summed up this way: 

Power Windows sounds fat and thick; Hold Your Fire sounds a tad thin and trebley.

Power Windows' low end sounds thick and rich, Hold Your Fire's low end sounds sharp, direct and a bit thin.

Power Windows' stop and start crescendos (like some of those heard in Grand Designs) are not sonically jarring; Hold Your Fire's are, almost like a smack in the face (like some heard in the second verse of Lock and Key).

The songs being stylistically similar, I can see to some extent, but the differences sonically between the two albums are so pronounced, that I just can't get on board with calling HYF Power Windows Part 2.

That's my two cents. :coolio
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Hold Your Fire
Post by: TAC on November 03, 2014, 01:08:16 PM
Speaking of lyrics...
  Lyrics shouldn't take away from the music.
There are a couple times, especially in the latter years where I've felt the music is just a vehicle for the lyrics.

But, to explain it a bit differently, the difference in sound can be summed up this way: 
Power Windows sounds fat and thick; Hold Your Fire sounds a tad thin and trebley.
Power Windows' low end sounds thick and rich, Hold Your Fire's low end sounds sharp, direct and a bit thin.
I agree with all that.

The songs being stylistically similar, I can see to some extent, but the differences sonically between the two albums are so pronounced, that I just can't get on board with calling HYF Power Windows Part 2.
I don't really find the songs stylistically similar. HYF seems to have much simpler structures and far catchier choruses.



Anyway, when HYF came out, I was not really paying any attention to Rush. One of my college suite mates wanted to go see them when they came to Worcester for the HYF tour. With Michael Schenker opening, I agreed to go. Definitely some non-tobacco going too (great story, O!)..
Anyway, the band was so into it, it was an excellent show. I thoroghly enjoyed it. So much more than the PW show I saw where the band looked like they wanted to be anywhere but.. But this show had so much energy and was so fun.

A Show Of Hands would come out soon thereafter, and I found that while I was completely against 80's synth era Rush, they had some damn catchy tunes. At this point in time, I would reconcile with 80's Rush and accept it for what it was. They would never attain a Top Band status with me as they had pre Signals, but I did gain an appreciation for them.

When Presto would come out, I basically greeted it with a clean slate.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Hold Your Fire
Post by: mikemangioy on November 03, 2014, 02:00:46 PM
I was surprised by this album, there are amazing songs on it. I knew Force Ten and Time Stands Still, but Mission, Turn The Page and Prime Mover are all awesome :tup
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Hold Your Fire
Post by: devieira73 on November 04, 2014, 05:54:25 AM
Just to add to this general discussion of "keyboard era" and I didn't see anyone pointed this before (if I'm not corret, sorry), somewhat oddly, from GUP to HYF, it's where stand my favorite Rush bass lines - so many great and complex ones - and bass tones, almost like Geddy uses fretless bass on various songs, sounding very "tasty".
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Hold Your Fire
Post by: TAC on November 04, 2014, 06:37:44 AM
Just to add to this general discussion of "keyboard era" and I didn't see anyone pointed this before (if I'm not corret, sorry), somewhat oddly, from GUP to HYF, it's where stand my favorite Rush bass lines - so many great and complex ones - and bass tones, almost like Geddy uses fretless bass on various songs, sounding very "tasty".

Yeah, that's a great point. I agree.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Hold Your Fire
Post by: jingle.boy on November 04, 2014, 07:22:23 AM
Just to add to this general discussion of "keyboard era" and I didn't see anyone pointed this before (if I'm not corret, sorry), somewhat oddly, from GUP to HYF, it's where stand my favorite Rush bass lines - so many great and complex ones - and bass tones, almost like Geddy uses fretless bass on various songs, sounding very "tasty".

Yeah, that's a great point. I agree.

Thirded.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Hold Your Fire
Post by: Big Hath on November 04, 2014, 09:29:28 AM
that was about the time Geddy switched to his Wal bass.  Such a great sound!
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Hold Your Fire
Post by: Orbert on November 04, 2014, 09:56:36 AM
The sound on all of the 80's albums is great IMO.  I know some of you have talked about the production, some find some of it less than great, or dated, but really, I haven't found any problems with any of them.  It's all very clear, you can hear every instrument, and they all sound great.  So much better than today's "wall of sound" mentality with everything compressed to hell.  These guys are real musicians, playing their asses off, and I want to hear every note.  And fortunately, I can.

I can understand why people are totally in love with this era.  I think it all sounds amazing, and if this is what I'd grown up with, I think I'd love it all, too.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Hold Your Fire
Post by: TAC on November 04, 2014, 10:01:39 AM
I can understand why people are totally in love with this era.  I think it all sounds amazing, and if this is what I'd grown up with, I think I'd love it all, too.
My formative music years were my 7th and 8th grade (80-82). I was very into Rush during this pre synth era time. If their synth era came a few years earlier, I would not have become a fan at all.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Hold Your Fire
Post by: Orbert on November 04, 2014, 10:16:39 AM
Mine also started in 7th grade (1974) but I consider all the way through high school my "formative music years".  Once I had a job and my own source of money, I was buying albums all the time, all the way until my senior year.  I was checking out rock, jazz, funk, country, R&B, everything I could get my hands on.  Rush was in there, and I hung with them until the early 80's, but once I got to college, many things changed, including not having disposable income to buy new music.  So I guess that's when I pulled back a bit and spent lots of time listening to the stuff I already had.

Pretty much everyone tends to go back to the comforts of their youth, and music is no exception.  I still check out new music when I can, and sometimes find stuff I can really dig into.  80's Rush is growing on me, though I'm pretty sure it will never beat out the 70's stuff I grew up with.  When it's time to kick back and just forget about the shit life has been throwing at me, nothing does it like the tunes from junior high and high school.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Hold Your Fire
Post by: TAC on November 04, 2014, 10:20:59 AM
Yeah, I graduated in 86 and I was not listening to Rush in high school as I was into heavier music.  If all I had to go on was Signals/GUP/PW, I would've likely lumped them in with The Cars. :lol
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Hold Your Fire
Post by: Orbert on November 04, 2014, 10:35:26 AM
Hey, The Cars were cool.  That first album is a classic.  I dropped the last two songs from Side One off of my iPod years ago, but the rest is solid, and the closing medley is still a sonic masterpiece IMO.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Hold Your Fire
Post by: King Postwhore on November 04, 2014, 05:03:52 PM
Yeah, I graduated in 86 and I was not listening to Rush in high school as I was into heavier music.  If all I had to go on was Signals/GUP/PW, I would've likely lumped them in with The Cars.


Dog house activated.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Hold Your Fire
Post by: TAC on November 04, 2014, 05:26:22 PM
You should think about activating the quote function properly instead. :lol
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Hold Your Fire
Post by: bl5150 on November 04, 2014, 05:29:45 PM
You should think about activating the quote function properly instead. :lol

His Highness is handing you great material on a platter of late  :lol
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Hold Your Fire
Post by: TAC on November 04, 2014, 05:34:34 PM
You should think about activating the quote function properly instead. :lol

His Highness is handing you great material on a platter of late  :lol

  Smart phone and smart owner my ass. :lol
:lol
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Hold Your Fire
Post by: jingle.boy on November 04, 2014, 05:41:20 PM
You should think about activating the quote function properly instead. :lol

It's a good thing you're a fellow Bostonian, or he'd have to kick your ass.

I still lol'd though.  :lol

I think he might need a new handle ... King Dangerfield.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Hold Your Fire
Post by: King Postwhore on November 04, 2014, 06:10:19 PM
I need my computer!! :lol
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Hold Your Fire
Post by: TAC on November 04, 2014, 06:15:23 PM
I need my computer!! :lol
:rollin
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Hold Your Fire
Post by: Lucien on November 04, 2014, 08:29:52 PM
In regards to sound quality, Power Windows is definitely their best album.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Hold Your Fire
Post by: hefdaddy42 on November 05, 2014, 07:33:55 AM
So yeah, Tai Shan is awful.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Hold Your Fire
Post by: King Postwhore on November 05, 2014, 08:03:44 AM
So yeah, Tai Shan is awful.

It's a song I regularly skip.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Hold Your Fire
Post by: devieira73 on November 05, 2014, 11:42:33 AM
So yeah, Tai Shan is awful.

It's a song I regularly skip.

I think HYF is a better record and have a better flow without Tai Shan and Second Nature.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: A Show of Hands
Post by: KevShmev on November 05, 2014, 11:43:22 AM
I'll always have a nostalgic love for A Show of Hands, Rush's 3rd live album, simply because the live VHS of it (which was a slightly different set list) was so integral to me becoming a fan in the fall of '91.  Plus, it was great for fans at the time, since the album only featured one song that had been on one of the first two live records.  If you loved the synth era, this live record was right up your alley.

(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/0/02/Rush_A_Show_of_Hands.jpg)
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Hold Your Fire
Post by: King Postwhore on November 05, 2014, 11:53:16 AM
So yeah, Tai Shan is awful.

It's a song I regularly skip.

I think HYF is a better record and have a better flow without Tai Shan and Second Nature.

I don't mine Second Nature but it is against the grain from Rush.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: A Show of Hands
Post by: Orbert on November 05, 2014, 11:56:26 AM
I've always liked A Show of Hands, even back when I wasn't crazy about the SynthRush studio albums.  These guys are just so amazing live that the source material basically doesn't matter; they're gonna rock and it's gonna be great.  I gave it a spin yesterday and yep, it still holds up.  I actually like it even more, now that I'm slowly gaining more appreciation for 80's SynthRush.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: A Show of Hands
Post by: jammindude on November 05, 2014, 12:13:38 PM
Love the synth-era...but really don't like this album at all.   Mostly because, to my ears, it doesn't sound like a live album at all.   Of all the live Rush albums, this is the one that suffers the most from all the songs sounded way too exact to their studio counterparts.    HYF, and then this really made me realize that Rush had taken synths too far.    The songs had become so computer generated, that it became impossible to recreate them live without sounding precisely like what you had done already.   There was no room for improvisation, no room for breathing.     This live album just struck me as completely cold and (ironically enough) lifeless. 

I suppose the video was a bit better because you get to see the guys moving around a bit, and the added bonus of Rush's #1 synth song Territories, which was criminally cut from the CD.   

I remember when this came out, I was hoping for a two-disc set (before I heard it, that is) and I was disappointed that they cut so much of the show to accommodate a single disc.     As you can tell, this is by far my all time least favorite live Rush release. 

There are a couple of high points.   Subdivisions is quite good, and sounds much better than it's studio equivalent (but we would get several even better versions later on)....actually I was looking for more high points, but that's about all I found.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: A Show of Hands
Post by: TAC on November 05, 2014, 12:44:07 PM
I've always liked A Show of Hands, even back when I wasn't crazy about the SynthRush studio albums.  These guys are just so amazing live that the source material basically doesn't matter; they're gonna rock and it's gonna be great.  I gave it a spin yesterday and yep, it still holds up.  I actually like it even more, now that I'm slowly gaining more appreciation for 80's SynthRush.
After ignoring Rush since Signals, I went to see this tour and it was such a great fun and energetic show. Loved ASOH. Like I posted earlier, I ended up at this point reconciling with 80's Rush, as they did in fact have some great and catchy tunes. Was it late 70's stuff? NO.
But I decided that I couldn't change it, so I just let it wash over me.
What would really piss me off would be 90's Rush, but more on that later. I would meet Presto with a clean slate.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Hold Your Fire
Post by: Lowdz on November 05, 2014, 12:52:05 PM
So yeah, Tai Shan is awful.

Noooooo!!!
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Hold Your Fire
Post by: TAC on November 05, 2014, 12:59:33 PM
So yeah, Tai Shan is awful.

Noooooo!!!

Yeeeeesss!!
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Hold Your Fire
Post by: jammindude on November 05, 2014, 01:06:26 PM
So yeah, Tai Shan is awful.

Noooooo!!!

Yeeeeesss!!


NOOOOOO!!!!!!!
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: A Show of Hands
Post by: nicmos on November 05, 2014, 02:20:31 PM
If I say NOOOOOOO!!!!! am I agreeing that it's not awful or disagreeing with the previous NOOOOOOO!!! and saying it is awful?

Tai Shan is a good song if you're not expecting a rock song.  If you want to rock out, it's not appropriate.  I like it.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: A Show of Hands
Post by: TAC on November 05, 2014, 02:24:11 PM
If I say NOOOOOOO!!!!! am I agreeing that it's not awful or disagreeing with the previous NOOOOOOO!!! and saying it is awful?
:lol

Just remember that Tai Shan = NOOOOOOOOO!!
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: A Show of Hands
Post by: hefdaddy42 on November 05, 2014, 02:50:19 PM
Tai Shan is a good song if you're not expecting a rock song.  If you want to rock out, it's not appropriate.  I like it.
I wasn't expecting a rock song.  I was expecting a song.

The one I got wasn't good.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: A Show of Hands
Post by: Lowdz on November 05, 2014, 03:27:03 PM
Tai Shan is a good song if you're not expecting a rock song.  If you want to rock out, it's not appropriate.  I like it.
I wasn't expecting a rock song.  I was expecting a song.

The one I got wasn't good.

But did China not sing to you?  :biggrin:
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: A Show of Hands
Post by: King Postwhore on November 05, 2014, 03:27:57 PM
I played the hell out of A Show Of Hands from the CD, VCR tape and the DVD when it came out. That has been a trend with Rush and myself.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: A Show of Hands
Post by: TAC on November 05, 2014, 03:37:21 PM
I played the hell out of A Show Of Hands from the CD, VCR tape and the DVD when it came out. That has been a trend with Rush and myself.
VCR tape? :lol

There has to be young guns going WTF is a VCR tape?
Joe, you crack me up everytime you post.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: A Show of Hands
Post by: King Postwhore on November 05, 2014, 03:40:37 PM
It was also called VHS too you silly person. :biggrin:
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: A Show of Hands
Post by: TAC on November 05, 2014, 03:42:01 PM
It was also called VHS too you silly person. :biggrin:

Yeah, I know that but I didn't want it to seem like I was picking on you again. :lol
 
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: A Show of Hands
Post by: King Postwhore on November 05, 2014, 03:42:47 PM
Hey!  Google VCR tapes and see!  I will win this time! :lol
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: A Show of Hands
Post by: TAC on November 05, 2014, 03:43:41 PM
I actually still have my A Show Of Hands VCR tape!
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: A Show of Hands
Post by: King Postwhore on November 05, 2014, 03:56:50 PM
No mock me good sir.



I do too! :lol
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: A Show of Hands
Post by: TAC on November 05, 2014, 04:09:52 PM
(https://i.ebayimg.com/00/s/MTUwOFgxNjAw/z/b4AAAOxyzHxRSIUs/$T2eC16NHJIkE9qU3jcrJBRSIUr8c4Q~~60_35.JPG)

 :metal
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: A Show of Hands
Post by: KevShmev on November 06, 2014, 05:21:19 PM
I know I've said it before, but I'll say it again;

A Show of Hands was far better on VHS than it is on DVD (the original mix was much better).
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: A Show of Hands
Post by: The Letter M on November 06, 2014, 05:59:20 PM
I know I've said it before, but I'll say it again;

A Show of Hands was far better on VHS than it is on DVD (the original mix was much better).

Been awhile since I've watched either the VHS or the DVD, but from what I recall, I might agree with that.

Honestly, I wish they would re-release ASOH on Blu-Ray, with "Lock And Key" and whatever else footage they have of the whole show, and release the CD with it. Or the whole Birmingham show.

Thankfully, almost the entire Birmingham show was made available through a soundboard bootleg, in addition to the ASOH CD and Video sets, and it's a great show. The official CD is good, and has a better balance between ATWAS and ESL in terms of sounding too raw and live and too "studio" and sterile. It's got good energy and a nice sound, at least to me, and some of the song choices are pretty killer, although with all the songs they played live between those four albums (7/8ths of Signals and Power Windows, all of GUP, and 6 out of 10 HYF songs), they could have made a more diverse live set, even a two-disc live set. I do enjoy the live version of "Closer To The Heart" we got on it though.

-Marc.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Presto
Post by: KevShmev on November 07, 2014, 01:02:40 PM
Following two albums with Peter Collins, the band went in search of a new producer again, this time finding Rupert Hine, who was very much of a pop producer who had a lot of good ideas when it came to vocals and how to utilize a singer's voice.  Those attributes would shine clearly on Presto, the band's 13th studio album, one that had the odd twist of fazing out the keyboards, which still lingered at times for color and texture, while still not really rocking out like many hoped a mostly keyboard-less Rush would.  In many ways, Presto is as close to pop rock as the band ever got, and the mixing of it would really help in that regard.  Even the songs that kind of rock, like "Show Don't Tell" and "Superconductor," are largely neutered by the very thin, yet clean, mix.  Getting back to Hine's strength as a vocal coach, Geddy started doing some different things with his voice on this record, like layering his voice and annunciating differently at times, things he still does to this day. 

Presto comes across to me as a good idea, but everything just didn't come together enough to make it very memorable.  There are a couple of great tracks - "The Pass" and "Available Light - and  a couple of throwaways, IMO, but overall this album is mostly full of songs that sound nice and enjoyable enough, but very few that make me want to listen to them very often.  I can listen to this album as a whole and it sounds like easy listening Rush.  I can see the appeal of it for a tiny percentage of fans who swear by it, some even calling it the best thing they ever did, but for me, it's a nice come down after the synth era.  After so many synth leads and whatnot on the previous four albums, they needed to get something like this out of their system.  It's just a shame the songwriting overall wasn't better.  Solid record, but not much more than that.

(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/0/00/Rush_Presto.jpg)
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Presto
Post by: Lowdz on November 07, 2014, 01:41:59 PM
I was very disappointed with this at the time. It didn't rock at all and had more filler and bland stuff than I was used to from the guys. Now I like it better. It misses the synths for me as it sounds as though something is missing.
There are some great songs here but it took me a long time to appreciate them. Available Light is great.

I cannot stand Anagram - the song or the lyrics, clever as they may be. And Hand Over Fist is crap too. The rest is fine but its not a great Rush album. I might be in a minority but I'd take Roll The Bones and Counterparts over it.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Presto
Post by: TAC on November 07, 2014, 01:46:43 PM
So after a great live experience on the HYF tour, I was now officially back in the Rush fold.
I greeted Presto with open arms. I really enjoyed it. It's not a great album, but it's very easy on the ears. This is what I always called Adult Comtemporary Rush. I've never been a fan of The Pass and War Paint has to be one of the worst things they've ever done. And Superconductor is weak, unfortunately a forshadowing of some of the light weight rock crap that would follow, particulaly on the next album.
But other than that Presto is an extremely enjoyable and relaxing listen. Loved for the almost stripped down (only a few keyboards) style of this.
This came out during my senoir year of college, and I would see this tour twice.

I might be in a minority but I'd take Roll The Bones and Counterparts over it.
Roll The Bones..hell NO!
Counterparts..hell YES!!
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Presto
Post by: Mister Gold on November 07, 2014, 01:51:57 PM
Presto's not bad by any means, but it's admittedly not as impressive as some of the band's other albums. That being said, Available Light is a Top 3 Rush Song in my book.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Presto
Post by: Anguyen92 on November 07, 2014, 02:32:12 PM
I love The Pass.  The lyrics are so good and the overall vibe is so laid-back and deep.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Presto
Post by: jammindude on November 07, 2014, 03:33:45 PM
I was very disappointed with this at the time. It didn't rock at all and had more filler and bland stuff than I was used to from the guys. Now I like it better. It misses the synths for me as it sounds as though something is missing.
There are some great songs here but it took me a long time to appreciate them. Available Light is great.

I cannot stand Anagram - the song or the lyrics, clever as they may be. And Hand Over Fist is crap too. The rest is fine but its not a great Rush album. I might be in a minority but I'd take Roll The Bones and Counterparts over it.

I agree with this entire post...until you got to the Roll the Bones part (freakin *terrible* album...but we'll get to that).

This album is a step up from Hold Your Fire, but was a bit of a disappointment.   We had heard in advance that Rush was dropping the keyboards and going with a more "organic" sound...and Show Don't Tell seemed to back up that claim...but the rest of the album didn't really deliver on the hard rockin promise that SDT promised. 

Still, it has aged very well for me.  And the better tracks from Roll the Bones (and how dismal that album as a whole was) puts Presto in a better light upon reflection.    War Paint and Scars get flack, but I absolutely love them.    Anagram was a clever idea, that ultimately fell flat.  Hand Over Fist is just not very good at all.   I LOVE SUPERCONDUCTOR.    I agree that the production kills it a bit, they were trying to be heavier and the production didn't capture how heavy the song wanted to be....but the song itself is killer.   The title track is wonderful.    There is a lot to love here.   Chain Lightning is my personal favorite, and I was really disappointed it was never played live. 

Ranking:

1. Chain Lightning
2. Available Light
3. Presto
4. Superconductor
5. War Paint
6. The Pass
7. Scars
8. Show Don't Tell
9. Red Tide
10. Anagram (for Mongo)
11. Hand Over Fist

In going through this...this was a very difficult ranking, and as I'm typing this, it reminds me of how strong this album is.   It's a bit of a sleeper, but I really love it.   Those first 9 songs are all really fantastic, and it's really only the last two that I don't like.   


Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Presto
Post by: Lucien on November 07, 2014, 03:48:33 PM
Anagram is actually probably my second or third favorite song on the album, just because of the melodies.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Presto
Post by: TAC on November 07, 2014, 04:17:29 PM

I agree with this entire post...until you got to the Roll the Bones part (freakin *terrible* album...but we'll get to that).

This album is a step up from Hold Your Fire, but was a bit of a disappointment.   We had heard in advance that Rush was dropping the keyboards and going with a more "organic" sound...and Show Don't Tell seemed to back up that claim...but the rest of the album didn't really deliver on the hard rockin promise that SDT promised. 

Still, it has aged very well for me.  And the better tracks from Roll the Bones (and how dismal that album as a whole was) puts Presto in a better light upon reflection.    The title track is wonderful.    There is a lot to love here.   Chain Lightning is my personal favorite, and I was really disappointed it was never played live. 


In going through this...this was a very difficult ranking, and as I'm typing this, it reminds me of how strong this album is.   It's a bit of a sleeper, but I really love it.   Those first 9 songs are all really fantastic, and it's really only the last two that I don't like.

I agree with a lot of what you say. The next album was terrible. I'm glad I'm not the only one.

My Top songs are:
1. Available Light
2. Red Tide
3. Show Don't Tell
4. Chain Lightning


I have an 80's Rush playlist and a 90's Rush playlist.
Available Light and Chain Lightning are on my 80's playlist and I put Red Tide and Show Don't Tell on my 90's playlist because I thought it fit more with those songs.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Presto
Post by: nicmos on November 07, 2014, 04:27:47 PM
This album definitely has a relaxed, mellow, or adult contemporary, or whatever you want to call it vibe about it.  Sometimes that's a good thing and other times it feels like it's a missed opportunity.  I agree with others that it sounds like they wanted to be heavier in places but it doesn't come across that way because of the production.

I think the writing on some of the songs is absolutely some of the most beautiful that Rush has ever done.  The Pass, Presto and Available Light are great examples of that.

I think my least favorites on this album are probably Anagram, and Show Don't Tell.  The latter is easily their weakest opening track until we get to all the TFE and later albums.  I guess they wanted to make a statement with that opening guitar line, but I just don't think it works well as a musical idea.  I like Hand Over Fist, especially the bridge.  I like War Paint.  I don't know why others don't like them.  Again, it goes along with the softer melodic writing on the album.

One other note, this seems to start Alex's trend of playing the repetitive guitar chords to fill out the musical line.  He does this a lot on RTB as well, it sort of feels like he wants to have the guitar be more prominent, but forgot how to do it so he just plays the same chord 6 or 8 times in rapid succession to beef up the sound.  Just a minor complaint.

The kinds of songs on this album don't really sound like any other album by anyone that I know.  I think maybe that's why they sound strange and people are uncomfortable with them.  They fit in this weird space between nice, relaxing music and hard guitar-driven rock.  I remember once I was listening to this around a co-worker and he thought the music was ridiculous; literally he ridiculed me for listening to it.  Whatever, it's good music.  Available Light is one of their best all time closers, a song of astounding beauty.

Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Presto
Post by: KevShmev on November 07, 2014, 04:37:09 PM
There is no way that I agree that this is better than Roll the Bones, but we'll get to that album early next week.  :biggrin:

I do agree that Chain Lightning is a good, underrated tune. 

On the flip side, War Paint is an atrocity; easily one of their four or five worst tracks ever.  Geddy's voice when layered can be very hit or miss, and the layering of it in this song is embarrassingly bad at times.  It's like he sings in a certain tone that, when layered, sounds really, really bad.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Presto
Post by: Mosh on November 07, 2014, 09:56:14 PM
This is a nice album. Huge step up from Hold Your Fire and the 2nd best 90s album, sitting firmly behind Counterparts. I agree with the "easy listening" Rush sentiment that gets thrown around a lot here, but I enjoy it. This shows the band really proving they can write strong melodies. This album is full of them. Rush was never a overtly melodic band in my opinion, their strengths were more in things like rhythm or atmosphere. Even the synth albums, while more melodic, the melodies aren't as memorable as the ones on Presto. That's not to say Presto is better than the synth albums, because aside from HYF and maybe Signals, it's not. But it's a drastically different songwriting approach than what we're used to and it was a much needed change. It's not really the sort of thing I want from Rush, but I think they really succeeded in what they were going for with this album and it came out really great. I at least like every song except Red Tide and there are some songs on here that are up there with Rush's best: Available Light, the title track, The Pass, Anagram, to name a few. I even really like Superconductor! All and all a very enjoyable album, even if it's not really the sound I want from Rush. I'm glad they didn't stick with this for too long though because it would've gotten old very quickly and if the crap on Roll the Bones is any indication, they would've gone seriously down hill.

I only have two complaints about this album. The production doesn't do the songs justice at all. If you listen to any of these songs live, they really come to life and you won't want to go back to the album versions again. Horrible drum sound and the thin sound of everything is not nice on the ears. I also don't really like what Rupert Hine did with Geddy's voice. I'm not exactly sure what it is, but some of the changes he made don't stick with well with me. Geddy's vocals were really good in the 80s, I'm not sure if I liked them in the 90s very much.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Presto
Post by: Orbert on November 07, 2014, 10:43:01 PM
As always, widely mixed opinions.  I don't think Rush has a single album that's universally loved or hated; they're all over the place.

After missing most of the 80's due to going back to college for the third time, sticking with it for six years and actually graduating this time, in 1989 I found myself married, in a new city, with a new job, and with actual spending money for the first time in a while.  My first salaried job, in the field of my bachelor's degree (education), and my first paycheck.  So of course I went to a record store, and discovered that they weren't record stores anymore; they were now CD stores.  Sure, that'll work too.

In the old days, discounted "cutout" albums had a notch clipped along one edge, cutting out a slice of the actual record jacket.  I never knew exactly what made an album a "cutout" album; presumably it was due to surplus or some other reason to heavily discount the album.  Anyway, I was stunned to find that this practice had carried over into the CD era, because that meant cutting a chunk of plastic out of the jewel case.  But there was a cutout bin of CDs in the crummy little music shop in Jackson, Michigan, and cutouts are where the deals are.  Presto had only been released that year, but there it was, with a notch in the jewel case but otherwise brand new for $4.99.  Why?  I never found out.  But it was new Rush, and I couldn't wait to get it home to play it.  I didn't have a CD player in my old car, but I was teaching junior high at the time so I got home about 4:00 and my wife didn't get home until 5:30.  I put in my new Rush CD (my first! -- everything else was vinyl before now) and cranked it up.

"Show Don't Tell" kicked my ass right away.  I love the syncopated intro leading into a more laid back verse, then the weird syncopated thing came back under the pre-chorus (now that's a different device) before giving way to a more laid back chorus.  What a strange, amazing, great song!

Yeah, the rest of it probably seems pretty uneven to most people.  I didn't care.  I loved every minute of it.  A clear, clean sound, not all buried in a wall of Oberheim synthesizers which sound great but get pretty oppressive after a while.  Neil, ripping up the kit as always, Geddy wailing a bit like in the old days, Alex cutting loose and actually being heard loud and clear for the first time in a while... Rush was back!

Those of you who grew up with the 80's stuff, I can see how this might not work for you.  But for me, a child of the 70's, this was something of a return to form.  Yeah, it's more laid back, but Rush was continuing to mature as a band.  No two Rush albums sound alike, and Rush never stays the same.  They keep moving, and this was the latest chapter.  Stripped-down arrangements; short, catchy songs, tight production.  And I dug into it.  It's still one of my favorite Rush albums, perhaps largely due to sentimental value.  But whatever the reason, I love this album.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Presto
Post by: The Letter M on November 07, 2014, 11:19:50 PM
Phase 4 began after the closing of the 80's/Synth era with their third live album, and with this new studio album came a new record label, a new producer, and a slightly new sound. Well, new and old, but something different.

The opening number is a great Rush song, right up there with any of their other great and timeless opening tracks, as well as "Chain Lightning" being a wonderful 2nd track, giving us a wonderful 1-2 punch just as good as any from their previous 6 albums (yes, I would even consider it just as good as TSOR/FW or Subdivisions/TAK). "The Pass" and the title track are two more amazing tracks, although there's the odd-sounding, pop-rock-influenced "Superconductor", which is a bit ironic in that its lyrics deal with someone who has "mass appeal", even though the song itself is a rock song in an atypical meter.

The closing track is another beautiful piece, while the rest of the songs range from good to just being quite different, like "Scars" with its mesmerizing drum pattern, or "War Paint", one of the few then-new songs played live from the album.

This album marks the start of what I see as a pattern of placing the less-memorable/least-likely-to-be-played-live tracks on the back-half of the album. This album, Counterparts and Test For Echo all feature 11 tracks, and it seemed like the days of playing over 75% of the new material live were going by the wayside (and it even started on the HYF tour, with only 6/10 tracks played live). I mean, as a big fan of the band, I'm fairly familiar with "Red Tide", "Anagram (For Mongo)" and "Hand Over Fist", but I'm sure the lack of playing these tracks live doesn't help their lack of popularity, or perhaps fans just enjoying them in general.

Was it ever intentional to put these sorts of tracks on the back-half of the album, or was this just a case of "oh, that's just how the album happened to be arranged" when all was said and done? In the audio-cassette age, I could see why this was advantageous - in order to get through an album, you'd have to sit and fast-forward/rewind through 20-45 minutes of tape on a Side, but with CDs or vinyl, you could skip tracks or drop the needle anywhere. Coming out of the 80's, I guess Rush thought they'd put their stronger material up front on albums, and risk putting the B-Level material on the B-Side. I guess they can't all be winners, though.

-Marc.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Presto
Post by: jjrock88 on November 08, 2014, 01:08:49 AM
I find this to be a pretty bland release. Never crave listening to it, but rather listen to it out of my Rush obligation. The bottom tier for me
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Presto
Post by: ? on November 08, 2014, 01:35:52 AM
Presto is a pretty good album and definitely more consistent than HYF to these ears. Hand Over Fist and War Paint are nothing special, but all the other songs are at least decent IMO. It's a mid-tier album in my Rush ranking, but The Pass, Available Light and the title-track are amazing songs. Also, as a former rabbit owner I love the album cover :heart
Anagram is actually probably my second or third favorite song on the album, just because of the melodies.
I don't rate Anagram that high, but I really like the melodies, and the lyrics are pretty clever.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Presto
Post by: King Postwhore on November 08, 2014, 05:17:56 AM
I remember loving this album because it was so different for Rush at the time.  The writing was the key difference.  Funny reading how most here are calling this album  Adult Comtemporary Rush.  I think the music if far from that.  It's the production that is leading most to say that.  It was after this album and Roll the Bones that the band wondered why they couldn't capture their "live" sound on an album which lead to Counterparts.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Presto
Post by: Mladen on November 08, 2014, 07:57:54 AM
I love the bright mood of this album. The entire side A is fantastic (including War paint, that last minute always gets me), and so is Available light. I guess I overplayed Hand over fist, but it's still pretty good. Amazing album.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Presto
Post by: jingle.boy on November 08, 2014, 09:22:57 AM
As always, widely mixed opinions.

In reading everyone's posts, this appears to be the most polarizing album to date.  This was my first Rush album as-it-was-released.  I knew the radio hits up to the late 80s, and then got Chronicles.  With Presto being the active album in the stores, it was one of the first CDs I grabbed.  I would say it's got a couple one disappointing track(Hand Over Fist) and a couple I don't enjoy (not a fan of Show Don't Tell), but nothing that isn't still an enjoyable listen.  In my books, it's a pretty consistent album, all songs in the B to B- range.  And I never, NEVER got the hate for Superconductor.  I truly dig that tune.

I don't think Rush has a single album that's universally loved or hated; they're all over the place.

:wtf:  Don't get this at all.  The 'Big 5', along with PoW are absolutely universally loved.  Perhaps you meant there's no album where every track is universally loved?

On the flip side, War Paint is an atrocity; easily one of their four or five worst tracks ever. 

Really!?!?!?  hhmmm.. one of the ones I put in the top 1/2 of the album.

Ranking:
Presto
Chain Lightning
Superconductor
Available Light
War Paint
Red Tide
The Pass
Anagram (for Mongo)
Scars
Show Don't Tell
Hand Over Fist

Edit... listening to it (and perhaps, like Bob it's for nostalgic reasons), I'd put it more like a B+
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Presto
Post by: Jaq on November 08, 2014, 10:00:00 AM
This is a turning point for me in my history of listening to Rush.

Namely, though I caught them on this tour with Mr. Big, great fucking show as always, Presto was the first Rush album I didn't go out and buy at or near release. A trend that continued until Vapor Trails, in fact. More shockingly, given how much I love Rush, I have never heard all of the album. A friend owning Test For Echo and Counterparts let me hear all of those, but Presto, to this day, remains the sole Rush album that I haven't heard in its entirety, and honestly launches the period of time where the band comes the closest to being bad for me that they ever were.

A lot of people tuned out on Rush during the synth era. This is the era where I tuned out.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Presto
Post by: Orbert on November 08, 2014, 10:41:50 AM
I don't think Rush has a single album that's universally loved or hated; they're all over the place.

:wtf:  Don't get this at all.  The 'Big 5', along with PoW are absolutely universally loved.  Perhaps you meant there's no album where every track is universally loved?

What are the "Big 5"?  I honestly don't get the reference.  I know 2112 is a popular album, but a lot of people very clearly said that it's the title suite only, and many don't care about Side B.  Same with Moving Pictures, another very popular one, but again many only play Side A, some just know the hits, and some have said the album is strong but suffers from overexposure.  So I don't mean literally track by track, but it would seem that even among these very popular albums, neither are considered solid all the way through, not by everyone.

Other than that, I couldn't even guess at three others.  I know we're from different generations (musically), but among myself and all my friends who grew up on 70's Rush, none of us have any strong affection for any of the 80's Synth-driven albums.  It's good music, and it's Rush, but I never go out of my way to put on anything from Signals to Hold Your Fire, and most of my friends never even bothered with them.  So that would include Power Windows.  None of the SynthRush is "universally loved".  Not by all Rush fans.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Presto
Post by: jingle.boy on November 08, 2014, 10:50:13 AM
As a 70s guy, I would've assumed you too would consider 2112 to MP as the 'big 5' ???  Those are pretty universally loved - if not track-by-track, I can't think of one situation where anyone in this discussion said they didn't like those albums.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Presto
Post by: jammindude on November 08, 2014, 11:08:58 AM
As a 70s guy, I would've assumed you too would consider 2112 to MP as the 'big 5' ???  Those are pretty universally loved - if not track-by-track, I can't think of one situation where anyone in this discussion said they didn't like those albums.

I agree here.   They are not *MY* "top 5"....but I acknowledge those 5 albums as being what is generally accepted by the mass populace as "the classic period"...and certainly their five most beloved albums *generally speaking*.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Presto
Post by: KevShmev on November 08, 2014, 11:27:09 AM
Orbert, I am shocked that you don't know what the Rush Big 5 is, since, like jammindude just said and jingle alluded to, almost everyone considers 2112 through Moving Pictures their "classic" era, hence the Big 5.

However, I do agree with you that Power Windows is not universally loved by the fan base.  Maybe by the internet fan base, but not Rush fans in general.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Presto
Post by: Orbert on November 08, 2014, 11:30:35 AM
Okay, I guess I just have a different definition of "universally loved".  To me, that means pretty much by everybody, and without qualification.

The run from 2112 to Moving Pictures is solid, and I can see how it could be considered their classic late-70's period.  So the first part of the definition is met, but I still get hung up on the second part, all the qualifications.  Most people who rave about 2112 are talking about the title suite, not the whole album.  Same with Hemispheres, although there's a lot of love for La Villa Strangiato, of course, and the two shorter songs both got radio play.  But there were detractors in this thread from the title suite itself.

So it's semantics.  I don't consider playing the hell out of Side A the same as loving the album.  And if you say you love the album, that's great, but if you go on to mention that you never actually play the second side, or there's certain tracks you always skip, then to me that's not quite the same thing.  "Universally Highly-Regarded" is probably closer to what I was getting at, but that's really awkward so I went with the more common phrase.  But with that phrase, I mentally enforced caveats which would seem to apply only to myself.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Presto
Post by: KevShmev on November 08, 2014, 11:31:21 AM


On the flip side, War Paint is an atrocity; easily one of their four or five worst tracks ever. 

Really!?!?!? 

Yes.  I hate that outro.  The "boys and girls together, paint the mirror black" part of that call and response was what I was referring to earlier about how bad Geddy's voice can sound when layered, since a) he's singing in a tone that doesn't bring out the best in his voice, and b) layering it is like being bludgeoned with it.  There are some nice melodies in the song, I'll give you that, but that last minute is such an atrocity, it ruins the whole song.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Presto
Post by: jingle.boy on November 08, 2014, 12:20:21 PM

On the flip side, War Paint is an atrocity; easily one of their four or five worst tracks ever. 

Really!?!?!? 

Yes.  I hate that outro.  The "boys and girls together, paint the mirror black" part of that call and response was what I was referring to earlier about how bad Geddy's voice can sound when layered, since a) he's singing in a tone that doesn't bring out the best in his voice, and b) layering it is like being bludgeoned with it.  There are some nice melodies in the song, I'll give you that, but that last minute is such an atrocity, it ruins the whole song.

To each their own.  I love the riff in that section.  I get the layering of his vocals ain't all that great now that I'm listening specifically to it now, but dat riff!!  I love it.  I love Neil's tones (during the whole track) as well.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Presto
Post by: jammindude on November 08, 2014, 12:26:32 PM
What's weird is that I know what you're talking about when you say that sometimes Geddy's layered vocals are annoying (Earthshine immediately springs to mind)...but I don't hear it on War Paint.   I *LOVE* that ending vocal section. 
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Presto
Post by: Mosh on November 08, 2014, 12:45:21 PM
I don't think Rush has a single album that's universally loved or hated; they're all over the place.

:wtf:  Don't get this at all.  The 'Big 5', along with PoW are absolutely universally loved.  Perhaps you meant there's no album where every track is universally loved?
Have you seriously never seen criticism for Power Windows? I've seen people go as far as to rate it as the worst Rush album. Same with "The Big 5". There are always going to be dissenters of something and unpopular opinions. Nothing is "universally loved". I'm shocked that an assumption like that would be made.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Presto
Post by: jammindude on November 08, 2014, 12:52:03 PM
Never seen anyone rate PoW as "the worst"...but I have seen many people who dislike the synth era rate it quite low. 
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Presto
Post by: JayOctavarium on November 08, 2014, 01:14:43 PM
So... Show Me Don't Tell Me just came on Pandora. This is my first exposure to Presto. I think I need this album now... And the others since I trailed off (post Signals albums).
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Presto
Post by: jingle.boy on November 08, 2014, 02:05:10 PM
I don't think Rush has a single album that's universally loved or hated; they're all over the place.

:wtf:  Don't get this at all.  The 'Big 5', along with PoW are absolutely universally loved.  Perhaps you meant there's no album where every track is universally loved?
Have you seriously never seen criticism for Power Windows? I've seen people go as far as to rate it as the worst Rush album. Same with "The Big 5". There are always going to be dissenters of something and unpopular opinions. Nothing is "universally loved". I'm shocked that an assumption like that would be made.

I think the sample I was referring to was DTF.  Don't recall anyone throwing any big shots of criticism towards the big 5 or PoW.  I guess that's different than "universally loved".
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Presto
Post by: RoeDent on November 08, 2014, 02:35:24 PM
Unless you specifically state it, "universally loved" implies that every single man, woman and child on this planet loves the albums. Otherwise it's not universally loved.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Presto
Post by: Mosh on November 08, 2014, 04:19:55 PM
Right. I could see a case for "universally loved on DTF", though I'm not sure if that would be completely true either.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Presto
Post by: mikemangioy on November 09, 2014, 01:14:45 AM
THAT'S NICE

Holy shit that scared the crap out of me  :lol :lol
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Presto
Post by: hefdaddy42 on November 09, 2014, 05:04:35 AM
Unless you specifically state it, "universally loved" implies that every single man, woman and child on this planet loves the albums. Otherwise it's not universally loved.
I don't think that anyone really believes that.  Taken that literally, nothing in the history of mankind is universally loved.

It's a generality, a phrase, an expression.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Presto
Post by: King Postwhore on November 09, 2014, 05:14:05 AM
The majority love Power Windows.  Those who don't are named TAC.


Looks like when I'm food shopping today I'll crank Presto on my earphones.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Presto
Post by: TAC on November 09, 2014, 07:15:28 AM
The majority love Power Windows.  Those who don't are named TAC.
:lol

It actually contains the most well aged song in their catalog-Mystic Rhythms.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Presto
Post by: King Postwhore on November 09, 2014, 08:43:51 AM
 :biggrin:

Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Presto
Post by: KevShmev on November 09, 2014, 08:52:31 AM
The majority love Power Windows.  Those who don't are communists.

There, that's better. :biggrin:
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Presto
Post by: TAC on November 09, 2014, 08:57:47 AM
Hey, it's not like I wrote RED Lenses, RED Sector A.

Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Presto
Post by: King Postwhore on November 09, 2014, 09:00:02 AM
I love that too Kev! :lol

What I love about Power Windows is the music is so positive.  Bright, emotional and Uplifting even though some of the lyrics are not.  It truly is a "Power"ful album.

Hey, it's not like I wrote RED Lenses, RED Sector A.



Red Lenses I get, Red Sector A?  You take that back! :lol

I remember Gene Simmons in a mag saying Red Sector A was Disco Rush.  Coming from the guy who played I Was Made For Lonin' You. :lol
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Presto
Post by: TAC on November 09, 2014, 09:03:47 AM
In all seriousness, espcially when contrasting to Presto, there are just too much keyboards for me. I would say that even today, I really only like half of each synth era album.
I listened to Power Windows again the other day, and it's just too much for me. I like Territories, Mystic Rhythms, and Manhattan Project. The sudio version of Marathon I cannot get into, though live it's great! Never cared for The Big Money. Ever.
Grand Designs, I get lost. Emotion Detector..What??

I love Red Sector A.

I remember Gene Simmons in a mag saying Red Sector A was Disco Rush.  Coming from the guy who played I Was Made For Lonin' You. :lol

Is that a cross between Loving and (knowing Gene) Boning? :lol
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Presto
Post by: King Postwhore on November 09, 2014, 09:06:26 AM
Lovin' dammit! :lol
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Hold Your Fire
Post by: ytserush on November 09, 2014, 10:17:19 AM
So yeah, Tai Shan is awful.

It's a song I regularly skip.

I like Tai Shan.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Presto
Post by: KevShmev on November 09, 2014, 10:18:37 AM
Tai Shan is better than War Paint, Time and Motion and Superconductor.  That's right, I went there. :biggrin:
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: A Show of Hands
Post by: ytserush on November 09, 2014, 10:19:52 AM
Tai Shan is a good song if you're not expecting a rock song.  If you want to rock out, it's not appropriate.  I like it.
I wasn't expecting a rock song.  I was expecting a song.

The one I got wasn't good.

But did China not sing to you?  :biggrin:

A lot more than China did....
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: A Show of Hands
Post by: ytserush on November 09, 2014, 10:22:25 AM
I know I've said it before, but I'll say it again;

A Show of Hands was far better on VHS than it is on DVD (the original mix was much better).

The laser disc is the best of both worlds.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Presto
Post by: TAC on November 09, 2014, 10:24:28 AM
Tai Shan is better than War Paint, Time and Motion and Superconductor.  That's right, I went there. :biggrin:
Time And Motion is one of the VERY FEW bright spots on TFE. I guess we'll get to that in due time.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: A Show of Hands
Post by: ytserush on November 09, 2014, 10:34:27 AM
I'll always have a nostalgic love for A Show of Hands, Rush's 3rd live album, simply because the live VHS of it (which was a slightly different set list) was so integral to me becoming a fan in the fall of '91.  Plus, it was great for fans at the time, since the album only featured one song that had been on one of the first two live records.  If you loved the synth era, this live record was right up your alley.

(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/0/02/Rush_A_Show_of_Hands.jpg)

My least listened to live album along with R30, although that's just due to it being overlooked because whenever I listen to it I'm reminded of how much the band was on fire when the tapes were running.
Still ticks me off that the first 43 second of Witch Hunt were lopped off, but that and the edited drum solo were done to keep the recording to one disc as double discs were expensive in those days.

I was there when Mystic Rhythms and Witch Hunt were recorded. 


Presto was actually the working title due to the magic that was happening on stage and they liked it so much they used it for the next album. I sometimes wonder what the cover for a live album called Presto would be like.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Presto
Post by: ytserush on November 09, 2014, 10:42:26 AM
Tai Shan is better than War Paint, Time and Motion and Superconductor.  That's right, I went there. :biggrin:

Well, it's better than Superconductor anyway.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Presto
Post by: ytserush on November 09, 2014, 11:37:46 AM
Following two albums with Peter Collins, the band went in search of a new producer again, this time finding Rupert Hine, who was very much of a pop producer who had a lot of good ideas when it came to vocals and how to utilize a singer's voice.  Those attributes would shine clearly on Presto, the band's 13th studio album, one that had the odd twist of fazing out the keyboards, which still lingered at times for color and texture, while still not really rocking out like many hoped a mostly keyboard-less Rush would.  In many ways, Presto is as close to pop rock as the band ever got, and the mixing of it would really help in that regard.  Even the songs that kind of rock, like "Show Don't Tell" and "Superconductor," are largely neutered by the very thin, yet clean, mix.  Getting back to Hine's strength as a vocal coach, Geddy started doing some different things with his voice on this record, like layering his voice and annunciating differently at times, things he still does to this day. 

Presto comes across to me as a good idea, but everything just didn't come together enough to make it very memorable.  There are a couple of great tracks - "The Pass" and "Available Light - and  a couple of throwaways, IMO, but overall this album is mostly full of songs that sound nice and enjoyable enough, but very few that make me want to listen to them very often.  I can listen to this album as a whole and it sounds like easy listening Rush.  I can see the appeal of it for a tiny percentage of fans who swear by it, some even calling it the best thing they ever did, but for me, it's a nice come down after the synth era.  After so many synth leads and whatnot on the previous four albums, they needed to get something like this out of their system.  It's just a shame the songwriting overall wasn't better.  Solid record, but not much more than that.

(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/0/00/Rush_Presto.jpg)


Another genius of an album despite the thin production that the Audio Fidelity release somewhat  corrects.

A genius that I didn't fully appreciate until about a month or so after it came out.

I was fully engulfed in When Dream and Day Unite at the time and had just seen Dream Theater open for Marillion so I wasn't entirely ready for Presto.

Of course Show Don't Tell has a distinct Living Colour influence to it, at least it does to me.... and the rest of the album is quite the treasure trove of awesomeness.

Just wish the tour had been better.

Much has been made about the band's dislike for the album in spite of the band trotting about the title track on the Time Machine tour.

"Those were interesting songs, but in retrospect I don't think they're great songs. I mean they're not songs that I look back and say, 'This is our best work.' I don't think so. The Pass stands out on that record....I think they were interesting songs, but I don't think they were profound in terms of writing. I think it's decent sounding record. but I think Roll The Bones, the writing is far superior."  --Geddy Lee (Contents Under Pressure 2004)
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Hold Your Fire
Post by: King Postwhore on November 09, 2014, 01:24:19 PM
So yeah, Tai Shan is awful.

It's a song I regularly skip.

I like Tai Shan.

Never clicked for me.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Presto
Post by: mikemangioy on November 09, 2014, 01:36:03 PM
Despite the fact that this might be one of my least favorites so far (along with Signals), this had some great songs:

Favorites:
1.Chain Lightning
2.Show Don't Tell
3.Red Tide
4.Superconductor
5.Available Light
6.Anagram

The rest of the songs ranged from "OK" to "meh/nope".

Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Presto
Post by: Nick on November 09, 2014, 02:53:59 PM
Love the unique sound of this record. Not saying I always want it, but love how it stands out. Some solid and great stuff on here, but really, what drops this to the bottom 5 for me is Superconductor and Show Don't Tell. There is only a handful (5 to 10 really) of Rush songs I really don't like, so when two of them end up on an album it really does a number on its overall ranking for me. Same with GUP and Red Lenses/Kid Gloves.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Presto
Post by: TAC on November 09, 2014, 03:17:09 PM
Love the unique sound of this record.
Ineresting. I was thinking that the other day. This seems to be the one album that doesn't really connect or compare with any other in their catalog. It kind of stands alone.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Presto
Post by: Mosh on November 09, 2014, 09:23:25 PM
I think it pairs pretty well with Roll the Bones. That's not to say they sound the same, but it's a logical progression. Roll the Bones rocks a little harder but it has similar sounding production and some of the songwriting approach seems to be a continuation of what they were doing with Presto.

If you want a Rush album that doesn't really compare with any other, I think any of the first three albums would fit that bill.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Roll the Bones
Post by: KevShmev on November 11, 2014, 09:21:20 PM
On we move to the fall of 1991. This was just when I was becoming a Rush fan and the release of "Dreamline" as the first single from the band's 14th album, certainly helped.  It was an instant favorite of mine, and as a result, Roll the Bones became one of the first Rush CDs I ever bought.  It sounds like the natural follow-up to Presto, except the sound, while still not as beefy and meaty as most of their other stuff, is not as thin and the songwriting is collectively much better.  Sure, there are a few hiccups, but by my count, there are four great songs on this record - "Dreamline," "Bravado," "Where's My Thing" and "Ghost of a Chance" - and three others that range from good to very good - "Roll the Bones," "The Big Wheel" and "Heresy".  The flaws in the others are more than obvious, but none of them are outright bad or anything; just kind of there.  This is a very easy record to just put on and listen to from start to finish and never get bored with.

Now, I get why some are not fond of this record.  The rap in the title track has always bothered some, but I have always liked it, and still do.  The title track as a whole isn't as much of a favorite of mine as it used to be, but I still like it a lot.  The aforementioned four great songs are all major winners.  "Bravado" is a melodic masterpiece, not to mention a great example of Neil Peart making a busy drum pattern sound melodic and downright gorgeous.  "Ghost of a Chance" is a melodic orgasm.  While they have much better instrumentals, "Where's My Thing" is still pretty damn great, and is pretty unique when compared to those other vocal-less songs.  "Dreamline" simply sounds like a song every Rush fan should enjoy the hell out of; it's got everything, from a great sing-along chorus to a catchy guitar lead to a great solo to great lyrics 

Overall, I can't say this is one of my favorite Rush albums, but I still like it a lot, and it will always be a nostalgic favorite of mine. :coolio :hat

(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/9/99/Rush_roll_the_bones.jpg)
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Roll the Bones
Post by: jammindude on November 11, 2014, 11:03:36 PM
My top 4 LEAST favorite Rush songs from their ENTIRE catalog are:

You Bet Your Life
Neurotica
Heresy
Face Up


I used to include The Big Wheel on that list as well...but it has aged slightly better than the rest.    This is without a doubt my all time least favorite Rush album, and it's not even close.   It's the only Rush album I never bought the remaster for.

I love the first three songs.   They are all awesome.   The title track suffered from a bit of overplay, but I still like the rap. 

The good:
1. Bravado
2. Dreamline

The OK:
3. Where's My Thing?  (my least favorite Rush instrumental, but they don't have a bad one)
4. Roll the Bones
5. Ghost of a Chance
6. The Big Wheel

The terrible:

7. (the aforementioned 4 songs in the reverse order...though they are all so terrible, it may as well be a 4 way tie.  I'd rather listen to a Rivendell marathon than be subjected to these four songs ever again)
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Roll the Bones
Post by: Lucien on November 11, 2014, 11:22:08 PM
 :lol

I actually kind of like You Bet Your Life. The lyrics are fun and hard.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Roll the Bones
Post by: The Letter M on November 12, 2014, 12:12:25 AM
Why are we here?

Because we love RUSH, and for NO OTHER REASON... (don't even think about it...)

Anyways, this is another one of Neil's thematic-lyric albums, or at least, how the title came to be (like GUP, POW, HYF, etc. etc.) where there was a blanket-concept that covered a lot of the songs Neil was writing lyrics to. The lyrics are pretty interesting on this album, but some of the music leaves a bit to be desired.

Again, like with Presto, a lot of the songs on the back-half of the album are not as memorable as the first half, especially the opener "Dreamline", as well as "Bravado" and "Ghost Of A Chance". Rush also released their first instrumental since"YYZ", and it's got a very YYZ-ish feel to it, and up until the last tour, it had only been played on the RTB tour.

This album is OK to me - it's not GREAT (like what would come after it), and it's a bit of a side-step from what came before it, so I can't really hate it too much, but with 10 tracks, I find myself only fully enjoying about half of them.

-Marc.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Roll the Bones
Post by: ? on November 12, 2014, 02:58:46 AM
RTB is fairly good, and a step up from the previous two albums IMO. It would probably be in the upper half of my album ranking, thanks to its consistency - I don't love the album as much as a year ago when I first heard it, but it's still very enjoyable. I don't even mind songs like Face Up and You Bet Your Life, although I get why they're not popular. The rap in the title-track made me go "wtf" at first, but now I love it! :lol
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Roll the Bones
Post by: TAC on November 12, 2014, 06:15:56 AM
Well, I was back on board with Rush when this came out, and what do they do with that? They let me down big time on this album. If you're going to reduce the keyboards, then let's fuc#ing rock then.

RTB, as a whole, is pretty lame.
Things to like: Dreamline and Ghost Of A Chance are all time Rush Classics to me. The title track is absolutely ruined by the rap section, otherwise I do like it. I actually like You Bet Your Life and the instrumental is fine.

But that's it. the rest of this album BLOWS!

Bravado and Heresy is this album's Pass and War Paint. Face Up? Are you kidding me? More like Face Down!
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Roll the Bones
Post by: hefdaddy42 on November 12, 2014, 06:43:16 AM
Good stuff.  This was the first Rush album I bought at release.  I love it.  It isn't as good as their best, but it is much better than the previous, well, several albums.  Dreamline is fantastic.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Roll the Bones
Post by: TAC on November 12, 2014, 06:50:40 AM
I've always felt like this album had no purpose.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Roll the Bones
Post by: Zydar on November 12, 2014, 07:00:39 AM
Pretty good album. Favourites are the title track, Dreamline, Ghost Of A Chance, and Bravado.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Roll the Bones
Post by: jingle.boy on November 12, 2014, 07:09:40 AM
Dreamline was my first 'as it happened' wow moment with Rush.  The laser show for the RTB tour (my first) was mind blowing - probably aided by my 'altered' state of mind.  I like this album.  TAC nailed it that the rap section kills an otherwise decent song... I just can't get past it - 20+ years later, and I still cringe.  Neurotica is just a bad song.  The rest range from enjoyable to excellent.  I get the hate for Heresy, The Big Wheel, Face Up, and You Bet Your Life, but I really dig those tunes.  They're just a lot of fun to listen to.  There are times that I actually enjoy them more than Ghost of a Chance and Bravado.  Then again, I like Superconductor, so :dunno:

For me, it's a step back from Presto, but I'd give it a solid B.

Ranking:
Dreamline
Where's My Thing
Heresy
Ghost of a Chance
Bravado
You Bet Your Life
The Big Wheel
Face Up
Roll The Bones
Neurotica
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Roll the Bones
Post by: King Postwhore on November 12, 2014, 07:12:11 AM
At the time, I liked this album but there are a few fillers.  I like it a bit less than Presto.  It was after these 2 albums and the thin sound that pushed Rush to have a live feel to their next album.  I love where's My Thing and the next instrumental.  There were on a roll with these.

One song I would love for Rush to play from this album is The Big Wheel.  Alex finger picking?!  Count me in.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Roll the Bones
Post by: nicmos on November 12, 2014, 07:45:02 AM
This was the first album that came out after I had discovered Rush, so I am biased in that regard.  It feels like my Rush "home".  but having said that...

The songs on this album are mostly top notch.  I clearly am an insane person, because I love a lot of the songs that people hate.

First, Dreamline may be their best ever song.  Yeah, I said it.  It is so propulsive, with a great song structure, great verses, great chorus, great solo, not a wasted moment, this song is pretty much perfection.  I'd take it over any single song from their "classic" era, not counting epic songs 9 minutes and longer.  Subdivisions might approach the quality of this song, but that's the only one that comes to mind.  Even all those awesome songs on Power Windows aren't as good as this.  I only wish they could combine the extended instrumental section from the live versions with the studio polish.  Those sustained chords in the end section are missed by me in the live version.

About half the lyrics in the title track rap are cheesy and yeah it makes it a little less good, but otherwise a great song.

Face Up is a great composition.  Love the main guitar pattern, and it joins all the sections very well.  I enjoy it every single time, more than most songs on most Rush albums.  This song surely deserves more love and I'll be the one to defend it.  Bring it.

Where's My Thing is definitely the spiritual successor to YYZ.  Great instrumental, their best post-YYZ.

The Big Wheel is a great song as well.  Great structure and composition, great main riff.  Take the first 6 tracks on this album and it's hard for me to think of a 6 track run on another album that I enjoy more.  I never skip any of them.

Heresy is slow and contemplative, but I really enjoy it.  I think the melody is great, they lyrics are oustanding.  Yeah it's a little stuck in time, but that doesn't detract from it for me.

Ghost of a Chance however, most people seem to think this is one of the best tracks, but I don't get it.  The solo is great, but otherwise it's a pedestrian song, just sort of goes along in the background until I start caring at the solo.

Neurotica, okay, these lyrics are sort of cheesy, but the melody is good, and the guitar solo in this song I think is just as good as the solo in Ghost of a Chance.

You Bet Your Life is not an epic closer like many of the albums before it, but is nontheless a very enjoyable song.

Also, the production and sound on this album is very good.  Feels like an improvement over Presto and better than the in-your-face Counterparts.

Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Roll the Bones
Post by: TAC on November 12, 2014, 07:57:04 AM
  I clearly am an insane person,
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Roll the Bones
Post by: nicmos on November 12, 2014, 08:23:21 AM
Ghost Of A Chance [is an] all time Rush Classic to me.

same thing.  ;D
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Roll the Bones
Post by: hefdaddy42 on November 12, 2014, 08:30:31 AM
I've always felt like this album had no purpose.
Dammit TAC.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Roll the Bones
Post by: jjrock88 on November 12, 2014, 01:08:30 PM
I remember talking to a guy who had next to zero knowledge about Rush. He said aren't they the band that sing that roll the bones song? Found it strange that that was the one and only song he knew of Rush.

I like this album, more so then presto and probably a little less then TFE.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Roll the Bones
Post by: Lowdz on November 12, 2014, 01:17:33 PM
Much better than Presto. It's certainly not top tier or anything - I am more likely to play this than HYF but I.m not sure its a better album.

I like the rap - as long as it's meant to be tongue in cheek. About the onl time the band's obvious humour comes out in the songs. If they mean t it in seriosness then it sucks a big one.

I love Dreamline, Ghost Of A Chance, You Bet Your Life, Heresy.
The only real clunker is The big Wheel. Neurotica would be better without the woh-ohhs
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Roll the Bones
Post by: Orbert on November 12, 2014, 01:22:12 PM
I like this one.  I remember that when it came out, the rap in the title track was a shocker and turned a lot of people off.  At the time, Rap as a genre was gaining more mainstream following and acceptance, and the reaction of many "hard core rockers" was to automatically hate it.  So when Rush flipped things over and included a rap in a song, there was backlash.  I kinda like it now, although it took me a while to get to that point.

Once again, I'm struck by the range of reception here.  Songs people think are total garbage are other's favorites, and vice versa.  Some like it, some hate it, and sometimes for the same reasons!  Same with the albums themselves.  This one's somewhere in the middle for me, but since it's Rush, that still puts it way above a lot of other stuff.  There are no bad Rush albums, and there are no bad Rush songs; there's just the ones you don't like.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Roll the Bones
Post by: mikemangioy on November 12, 2014, 01:24:51 PM
I knew no songs from this album, so I didn't know what to expect.

The results?

Best album since Power Windows. I know, some of you don't like it as I've seen, but every song (except Neurotica, and maybe Heresy to an extent) here is top notch for me.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Roll the Bones
Post by: jingle.boy on November 12, 2014, 01:25:46 PM
There are no bad Rush albums, and there are no bad Rush songs; there's just the ones you don't like.

Here here.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Roll the Bones
Post by: TAC on November 12, 2014, 01:27:15 PM
There are no bad Rush albums, and there are no bad Rush songs; there's just the ones you don't like.

Here is a bad Rush album and here are a bunch of bad Rush songs.
Fixed.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Roll the Bones
Post by: jingle.boy on November 12, 2014, 01:35:04 PM
There are no bad Rush albums, and there are no bad Rush songs; there's just the ones you don't like.

Here is a bad Rush album and here are a bunch of bad Rush songs.
Fixed.

Go roll your bones you Winger fan.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Roll the Bones
Post by: Orbert on November 12, 2014, 01:56:07 PM
There are no bad Rush albums, and there are no bad Rush songs; there's just the ones you don't like.

Here is a bad Rush album and here are a bunch of bad Rush songs.
Fixed.

Nah, you broke it.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Roll the Bones
Post by: hefdaddy42 on November 12, 2014, 02:12:03 PM
There are no bad Rush albums, and there are no bad Rush songs; there's just the ones you don't like.

Here is a bad Rush album and here are a bunch of bad Rush songs.
Fixed.
Oh my dear sweet Lord.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Roll the Bones
Post by: TAC on November 12, 2014, 02:17:12 PM
When this album came out, I think I was actually angry. :lol

After ignoring them for years, then jumping back in and enjoying Presto, they put an album of half assed rockers. I felt betrayed again!
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Roll the Bones
Post by: Anguyen92 on November 12, 2014, 03:42:26 PM
Another album where the songs sounded really good live at Rush in Rio.  Loved Bravado, the most, from the bunch.  I'll be honest.  I actually did like the rap on the title track.  It helps a lot when you see the talking skull rapping on the screen of either the live videos or the music video, I believe.

Dreamline is really good, but sometimes, I think they just played it too much in the 2000s video releases.  Did we really need like four versions (out of five videos) of it?
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Roll the Bones
Post by: Mladen on November 13, 2014, 07:11:55 AM
This one's good. Some great songs, like Dreamline, Where's my thing and the title track (I love the rap), then threre are some solid ones and a few average tracks towards the end.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Roll the Bones
Post by: Mosh on November 13, 2014, 11:52:03 PM
Listened to this on the commute today and it was actually a lot better than I remembered. Still toward the bottom end of Rush's catalog, but it's better than the next two albums for sure, as well as Hold Your Fire. I think its biggest issue is that it takes the Presto production and tries to make it rock hard where part of the charm for Presto is that it doesn't rock hard. Roll the Bones is kind of purposeless when you think about it. It's not a really album you could just chill out to like Presto, despite having production for that sort of thing, and it tries to rock but that doesn't work with the thin sound of it all. So basically there are much better albums that show the softer side of Rush and better albums that show the hard rock side. So where does that leave RTB?

It does have good songs though. I don't think anything is bad, but has a lot of middle of the road parts and gets kinda boring after awhile, I've only listened to it front to back a couple times. I also don't feel much of a continuity with these songs. Besides lyrically of course, it just sorta seems all over the place.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Roll the Bones
Post by: KevShmev on November 14, 2014, 08:15:35 PM
I'm never surprised by how many do not care much for this record.  I get why they don't, but it was such a big part of my life when I was becoming a Rush fan, not to mention that it was loved by my first serious girlfriend, whom I dated for most of 1992, that it will always be one I think fondly of. :coolio
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Roll the Bones
Post by: King Postwhore on November 14, 2014, 08:18:24 PM
I'm never surprised by how many do not care much for this record.  I get why they don't, but it was such a big part of my life when I was becoming a Rush fan, not to mention that it was loved by my first serious girlfriend, whom I dated for most of 1992, that it will always be one I think fondly of. :coolio

Does not compute. :lol
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Roll the Bones
Post by: jammindude on November 14, 2014, 08:23:51 PM
I'm never surprised by how many do not care much for this record.  I get why they don't, but it was such a big part of my life when I was becoming a Rush fan, not to mention that it was loved by my first serious girlfriend, whom I dated for most of 1992, that it will always be one I think fondly of. :coolio

Does not compute. :lol

Well....it *was* Roll the Bones.    It makes a difference.    ;) ;D
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Roll the Bones
Post by: KevShmev on November 14, 2014, 08:25:04 PM
Funny guy!!

(https://cdn-www.i-am-bored.com/media/george-costanza-jacket.jpg)

 :lol :lol

 :coolio :metal
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Roll the Bones
Post by: King Postwhore on November 14, 2014, 08:27:50 PM
I lied.  My wife of 20 years is a Rush fan before we met.  She saw them on the Presto tour before we met.  She's been to every tour with me since RTB.  But it is rare!
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Roll the Bones
Post by: Anguyen92 on November 14, 2014, 09:49:51 PM
I'm never surprised by how many do not care much for this record.  I get why they don't, but it was such a big part of my life when I was becoming a Rush fan, not to mention that it was loved by my first serious girlfriend, whom I dated for most of 1992, that it will always be one I think fondly of. :coolio

Does not compute. :lol

Which part.  The part that he had a girlfriend or the part where she listens to Rush or the part where she likes Roll the Bones?
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Roll the Bones
Post by: KevShmev on November 14, 2014, 09:52:07 PM
Girls tend to not like Rush.  There are certainly exceptions, but, by and large, Rush is very much of a guy band.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Roll the Bones
Post by: Anguyen92 on November 14, 2014, 09:59:42 PM
I think that's a bloody shame that's the case.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Roll the Bones
Post by: Lucien on November 14, 2014, 10:07:57 PM
lol. My mom's favorite album by them is Vapor Trails and her favorite song by them is The Fountain of Lamneth.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Roll the Bones
Post by: King Postwhore on November 15, 2014, 04:19:46 AM
lol. My mom's favorite album by them is Vapor Trails and her favorite song by them is The Fountain of Lamneth.

Your mom is definitely not the norm! :lol

Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Roll the Bones
Post by: Zydar on November 15, 2014, 04:29:01 AM
Well, everybody's got to deviate from the norm.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Roll the Bones
Post by: King Postwhore on November 15, 2014, 04:32:43 AM
Thank you my friend.  I was hoping someone would hit that softball.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Roll the Bones
Post by: ? on November 15, 2014, 10:18:54 AM
EVERYBODY GOT TO EVELAAATEEE FROM THE NORM
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Counterparts
Post by: KevShmev on November 16, 2014, 07:41:23 AM
In the fall of 1993, we got word that Rush would be releasing their 15th studio album and the scuttlebutt was that they would be returning to their hard rock roots.  It was hard not to get excited about the prospects about what the album would sound like.  A short time later, my friend Matt and I were driving to another friend's house in his car when KSHE-95, the local hard rock radio station, announced, "We'll be playing the new Rush song next!"  Our heads exploded, and he quickly took a quick turn so we could take the scenic route to the friend's house, that way we'd be in the car long enough to hear the new song.  Minutes later, "Stick It Out" began, and that opening riff was like their way of saying, "Okay, we are ready to really rock and kick some ass again."  And, oh man, did it rock!  About a week later, the band did the Rockline special, which back in the day was like a 2-hour special that had interviews with bands intertwined with songs by the band, usually new stuff if the band in question was releasing a new album.  The Rush special had all 11 songs from Counterparts, and I naturally recorded it off the radio on to a cassette tape that I wore out before the release of the actual CD. :lol  And I got used to the running order based on the special. I cannot remember the exact order, but i just know that "Between Sun and Moon" and "Nobody's Hero" were tracks 1 and 2 at first, so when I got the actual CD on October 19th, 1993, the "new" running order gave the album a whole feel.

This being the first new Rush album that came out after I became a fan, my excitement level was obviously off the charts, and I felt fortunate that they released such a kick ass at that point in time. For a long time, Counterparts was my favorite Rush CD.  Even though I knew that there were other Rush records that were better, it was the one I listened to the most for years.  I literally could not get enough of it.  Every song is firmly entrenched in my head to where I know all 11 like the back of my hand.  I remember listening to the actual CD for the first time and just perusing through the liner notes of the CD booklet and thinking how cool the whole thing was.  It was just a wonderful moment in my experience as a Rush fan and my growth as a music fan. :coolio

Getting down to personal favorites, the "original" tracks 1 and 2 - "Between Sun and Moon" and "Nobody's Hero" - were two of my original four favorites along with "Double Agent" and "Leave That Thing Alone." Interestingly, "Animate" and "Cold Fire" were two of my least favorites at first, but over time became two of my favorites.  "The Speed of Love" and "Stick It Out" have stayed pretty consistent as two of my least favorites, but I still think both songs are better than many fans give them credit for being.  "Everyday Glory" is the best Rush album closer since Permanent Waves, IMO.  Yes, I love it more than "Mystic Rhythms" and "The Garden."  The bridge near the end - "If the future's looking dark" - is probably one of my all-time favorite Rush moments; so freaking awesome.  "Alien Shore" has always been one of those sneaky great songs that doesn't get talked about nearly enough, while "Cut to the Chase" is a great tune that often gets listed as one of those great Rush songs that has never gotten played live for whatever reason.  At this point in time, my order preference probably looks like this:

"Leave That Thing Alone"
"Double Agent"
"Animate"
"Everyday Glory"
"Cold Fire"
"Cut to the Chase"
"Nobody's Hero"
"Alien Shore"
"Between Sun and Moon"
"The Speed of Love"
"Stick It Out"

The overall sound of the album was definitely a return to their hard rock roots.  While much of the synth era was awash in, well, synths :lol, and Presto and Roll the Bones scaled the synths back while also having a bit of a clean, thin sound, Counterparts has a great ballsy, meaty sound. And despite the meaty sound, it still manages to sound very clean, thanks to the tremendous work by Peter Collins, who was back in the producer's chair.  You can hear every instrument clear as day, even the tiny bits of keyboards that still linger, yet the album rocks in an aggressive way. Alex's guitar has serious bite again, Geddy's bass sounds thick and rich, and Neil's drums have never sounded better on a recorded record.  Plus, I honestly think this is where Geddy's studio voice was at its peak.  He had total control of it at this point, it had a maturity to it that wasn't there in his early howling days, and he hadn't yet fallen into some of the bad habits that would plague certain vocal sections in the 21st century. 

The album was also a bit of departure lyrically, as Neil, for the first time, extensively tackled relationships and emotions, hence the album title. The album is very unique in that regard when looking at their discography as a whole.

Overall, this is, for my money, their 2nd best album post-Moving Pictures album, and their best of the last 30 years (although they did almost top it in 2012, but we'll get to that one later).  I think Power Windows is just a hair or two better, but it's pretty darn close. I can never not listen to this album and not enjoy the hell out of it. :hefdaddy :hefdaddy

(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/b/b4/Rush_Counterparts.jpg)
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Counterparts
Post by: TAC on November 16, 2014, 08:04:31 AM
Counterparts was the first post Moving Pictures album that I loved right away. (I "liked" Presto).
Like you Kev, I also list it as the 2nd best post MP album, though for me the best is CA.

Great tunes like Animate, Nobody's Hero, Cut To The Chase, Cold Fire, Everyday Glory. Some definite filer on this album, but the strength of the best tracks really raise this one up.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Counterparts
Post by: jjrock88 on November 16, 2014, 09:20:30 AM
Like TAC said there is some filler on this one, but the strength of the best tracks makes up for it and then some. I remember hearing "stick it out" and being surprised at the heaviness. Great tune!
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Counterparts
Post by: The Letter M on November 16, 2014, 10:01:59 AM
A top 5 Rush album for me, and my favorite of the band's 4th phase of four albums (that is, Presto/RTB/CP/TFE). Every song on here is at least Good (3/5) to amazingly great (5/5), and it's all consistently good! They didn't toss their lesser songs on the back half of the album anymore as we get gems like "Coldfire", "Leave That Thing Alone" and the closer "Everyday Glory" at the end of the album! I'd say, if any songs were a bit low for me, it's be in the middle with "The Speed Of Love" and "Alien Shore", and possibly "Between Sun And Moon", but if those are my least favorites on the album, they're still better than most of the tracks on the previous two albums.

It's a crying shame that only 7 of these 11 tracks have ever been played live ("Animate", "Stick It Out", "Nobody's Hero", "Leave That Thing Alone", "Coldfire", "Double Agent" and "Between Sun And Moon"), with four of them only being played on one tour. I'd love to hear "Nobody's Hero" return in an acoustic setting a la "Resist", and it'd be great to hear "Alien Shore", "Cut To The Chase" or "Everyday Glory" live at some point.

-Marc.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Counterparts
Post by: Zydar on November 16, 2014, 10:04:41 AM
Giving it a spin now to refresh my memories of it. Animate, Nobody's Hero, and Cold Fire are standouts. And Leave That Thing Alone could be my favourite Rush instrumental ever.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Counterparts
Post by: KevShmev on November 16, 2014, 10:14:42 AM
Quick correction, Marc: three of seven played live were only played on one tour: Cold Fire and Double Agent on the CP tour, and then Between Sun and Moon on the VT tour.

Animate, Stick It Out, Nobody's Hero and Leave That Thing Alone were all played on both the CP and TFE tours, and three of those four have been featured on at least one tour in this century.

But yeah, I'd like to see them dig deep and bust out a couple from this on the next tour. :hat
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Counterparts
Post by: RoeDent on November 16, 2014, 10:18:02 AM
I bought this album yesterday. I've only listened to it once, so I can't really make a good judgment on it, but I really like Animate.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Counterparts
Post by: KevShmev on November 16, 2014, 10:23:09 AM
That little bass pop or whatever the hell you call it Geddy does after "sensitize me" in the chorus after the 2nd verse (around the 2:50 or so mark) is one of my favorite little moments on this record.  Granted, there are so many, but that little "pop" is impossible for me to NOT air bass.  :lol :lol
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Counterparts
Post by: Mosh on November 16, 2014, 10:43:26 AM
Love this album. Their best since Grace Under Pressure really. There isn't a single thing on this album I could complain about. Probably Neil's best drum sound on a Rush album, the way Animate kicks off might be my favorite start to a Rush album. The only two songs I can't really get into are Cut to the Chase and Stick It Out, so there's a bit of a lull after the opener for me but after that it's all awesome. Rush's best straight ahead rock songs are easily on this album.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Counterparts
Post by: The Letter M on November 16, 2014, 10:43:33 AM
Quick correction, Marc: three of seven played live were only played on one tour: Cold Fire and Double Agent on the CP tour, and then Between Sun and Moon on the VT tour.

Animate, Stick It Out, Nobody's Hero and Leave That Thing Alone were all played on both the CP and TFE tours, and three of those four have been featured on at least one tour in this century.

But yeah, I'd like to see them dig deep and bust out a couple from this on the next tour. :hat

 :facepalm: Right! "Nobody's Hero" was played again on the TFE tour. I keep forgetting that fact. Well, either way, even though they played a bit more from thier then-new album on tour, and even carried over 4 out of 6 songs to the next tour, it still doesn't seem to do the album justice. Both this album and VT should have had more songs played live from them in the last 20 years.

-Marc.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Counterparts
Post by: KevShmev on November 16, 2014, 10:52:00 AM
Well, you never know what songs they want to play and what songs make the cut.  They've said before that their set list is always like 4 1/2 hours long after they all say what they want to play :lol, and then they have to eliminate a bunch of stuff.  Power Windows is the only album from 1982-1996 to really get the heavy treatment in this century, in general across the five tours AND on one particular tour, so I don't think it's so much as them ignoring Counterparts as it is them trying to find a spot for the stuff they want to play.  Plus, as I have guessed before, songs like Cold Fire and Nobody's Hero could be deemed as too difficult for Geddy to sing now (he struggled with them in 1997, and it's 2014 now).
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Counterparts
Post by: jammindude on November 16, 2014, 11:05:55 AM
After the abysmal Roll the Bones, I was really happy to hear them rock out again.   This is a really solid CD.   When it first came out, I loved every second of it...but parts of it have not aged very well for me. 

Stick it Out is the beginning of Geddy's multi tracked vocals that would annoy me on and off again from this point forward.    The song almost tries too hard to rock out.  It's like the grunge movement was hitting the big time, and Stick It Out just came across (to me) as trying too hard to remain relevant instead of just being themselves.   "We can be heavy too!  Look at us be so heavy!!  GRRRR!!!" 

Nobody's Hero is just too preachy and repetitive.   And I will gladly nominate Between the Sun and Moon for worst Rush chorus in history.  Never have I heard a Rush song that was so wonderful in the verses, and just a complete letdown when it came to that asinine chorus.   

That being said... Animate, Cut to the Chase, Alien Shore, Cold Fire and Leave That Thing Alone are all big time standouts.

My ranking:

Cut to the Chase
Cold Fire
Alien Shore
Animate
Leave That Thing Alone
Double Agent
Everyday Glory
Stick It Out
Between the Sun and Moon
Nobody's Hero
The Speed of Love

All in all, it's a decent mid-tier Rush album and a great comeback...but to me, this album was just "shaking the rust off"...the album that follows is the perfected realization of what this album was trying to accomplish.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Counterparts
Post by: nicmos on November 16, 2014, 11:23:30 AM

Stick it Out is the beginning of Geddy's multi tracked vocals that would annoy me on and off again from this point forward.    The song almost tries too hard to rock out.  It's like the grunge movement was hitting the big time, and Stick It Out just came across (to me) as trying too hard to remain relevant instead of just being themselves.   "We can be heavy too!  Look at us be so heavy!!  GRRRR!!!" 


Jammindude, you nailed this one.  (well the quoted part anyway, I won't talk about the rest of your post.)

I still think Stick It Out is a good song.  love the cymbal playing.


Overall though, a significant step down from previous albums.  The songwriting just seems more lazy and inconsistent.

Animate is completely awesome (the bass in the bridge, yes!), but geez, that drum fill leading into the last chorus, that's just jarring.

Nobody's Hero just does nothing for me, and the lyrics don't translate well to singing.  I almost always skip this.  Don't get the love for it.

Also, Speed of Love has to be one of the worst songs they've ever written.  The verses might be okay, sort of, but that chorus, ugh. The music in this song is something I would expect from other bands in terms of its low quality, not Rush.

Leave That Thing Alone is not in Where's My Thing's neighborhood, not even close to being as good.  I don't know why they seem to prefer the former to the latter.  Cool main groove, but that's about it.

Everyday Glory is great, just like Kev said that part ("If the future's looking dark") is awesome.

Alien Shore, a great underrated song.

Last Rush album I bought on cassette.  Came out the same day as Pearl Jam's Vs. if I recall correctly, overshadowing CP.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Counterparts
Post by: KevShmev on November 16, 2014, 11:29:54 AM
How is Nobody's Hero preachy? ??? ???

I agree that the chorus in The Speed of Love is a bit plodding, but the song as a whole is pretty laid back.  I think it fits in nicely between two rockers.

And I didn't realize it until just now, but this was the 3rd album in a row where the lead single had a call and response in the chorus that had Geddy singing the lead live and then them triggering the harmony vocals.  Show Don't Tell, Dreamline, Stick It Out.  That is the Rupert Hine effect.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Counterparts
Post by: jammindude on November 16, 2014, 11:39:05 AM
How is Nobody's Hero preachy? ??? ???

I agree that the chorus in The Speed of Love is a bit plodding, but the song as a whole is pretty laid back.  I think it fits in nicely between two rockers.

And I didn't realize it until just now, but this was the 3rd album in a row where the lead single had a call and response in the chorus that had Geddy singing the lead live and then them triggering the harmony vocals.  Show Don't Tell, Dreamline, Stick It Out.  That is the Rupert Hine effect.

Most of Neil's stuff makes a point, but not at the expense of the poetry.   Nobody's Hero seemed to be more focused on the point than making good lyrics.   Like nicmos said, the lyrics just don't translate well to singing.     Neil is usually so good at the poetry of the lyrics that it becomes a bit jarring when he's just soapboxing and there's not much in the way of poetry to it.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Counterparts
Post by: Mosh on November 16, 2014, 11:44:50 AM
I agree. Nobody's Hero is probably the most preachy song in Rush's catalog. He's clearly trying to make a point and I never thought there was much poetic value there, compared to his other lyrics. It's still a great song and I respect Neil for trying different things (especially so late in his career), I just didn't think it was his strong point.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Counterparts
Post by: TAC on November 16, 2014, 11:51:04 AM


All in all, it's a decent mid-tier Rush album and a great comeback...but to me, this album was just "shaking the rust off"...the album that follows is the perfected realization of what this album was trying to accomplish.

What?? The album that follows stops Rush dead in their tracks again!
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Counterparts
Post by: jammindude on November 16, 2014, 11:53:07 AM


All in all, it's a decent mid-tier Rush album and a great comeback...but to me, this album was just "shaking the rust off"...the album that follows is the perfected realization of what this album was trying to accomplish.

What?? The album that follows stops Rush dead in their tracks again!

We'll get to it later....but TFE is an all time top 5 Rush album to my ears.  Nearly every song on that album is *out of the park* good.    Far better than CP. 
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Counterparts
Post by: KevShmev on November 16, 2014, 12:05:50 PM
I think most of the songs on CP are better than the best song on TFE.

Also, Slime and Motion easily wins the award for worst Rush chorus ever.  Just awful.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Counterparts
Post by: jammindude on November 16, 2014, 12:15:53 PM
I think most of the songs on CP are better than the best song on TFE.

Also, Slime and Motion easily wins the award for worst Rush chorus ever.  Just awful.

Oh come on.  Worse than "aaaaahhh yes to yes...to ahhhhhh to yes"????    If there was ever a WTF moment in Rush's history...that was it.   
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Counterparts
Post by: KevShmev on November 16, 2014, 12:46:25 PM
Much, much worse, yes.  Despite the strangeness of the ahhh yes to yes, to aahhh to yes lyric, that is a good chorus.  Very catchy and fun to sing along to. 
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Counterparts
Post by: jammindude on November 16, 2014, 12:56:25 PM
 :lol   To each their own.   We'll talk about T&M when we get there.   I happen to love it.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Counterparts
Post by: KevShmev on November 16, 2014, 12:58:23 PM
Yep, let's keep the focus on Counterparts for now, seeing how that is the featured album at the moment. :biggrin:
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Counterparts
Post by: Mosh on November 16, 2014, 01:00:23 PM
I like Between Sun and Moon's chorus. It's unorthodox and somehow works.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Counterparts
Post by: Polarbear on November 16, 2014, 01:04:09 PM
I love both Roll The Bones and Counterparts!

Dreamline, Ghost of a Chance, Animate and Cold Fire are all brilliant! Im gonna blast some Counterparts tomorrow, in my 70km (43 mile) morning commute.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Counterparts
Post by: King Postwhore on November 16, 2014, 01:05:26 PM
Best album after Power Windows.  This is no way influenced by grunge at all.  It was Rush wanting to gave that live sound that was completely devoid on the last 2 albums.   
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Counterparts
Post by: Lowdz on November 16, 2014, 01:18:57 PM
The last great Rush album until we get to CA. I won't have anything positive to say until we get to that one from now on.

I loved the sound of this one - a bit of oomph back in the guitars, although the obvious "rocker", Stick It Out is one of my less rated tracks here. I don't play this album anywhere near as often as I should.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Counterparts
Post by: TAC on November 16, 2014, 01:22:15 PM
I still find Stick It Out far below Rush's standards though.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Counterparts
Post by: King Postwhore on November 16, 2014, 01:29:55 PM
When it first came out, I loved SIO but over time it is on the low end on this album. Though it did give us the great Bevis abd Butt-Head skit.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Counterparts
Post by: TAC on November 16, 2014, 01:34:37 PM
I just realized that starting with Presto, which I like, I basically like every other Rush album since then. As in, like one, hate the next etc...
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Counterparts
Post by: mikemangioy on November 16, 2014, 02:39:04 PM
Just finished listening to Counterparts. And while there were songs that I really enjoyed (Stick It Out, Nobody's Hero, Double Agent) some other was just ok (Leave That Thing Alone, Everyday Glory, Cut To The Chase) but the rest... ugh. I didn't quite enjoy this album, I think it's really uninspired.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Counterparts
Post by: Mosh on November 16, 2014, 02:41:49 PM
I just realized that starting with Presto, which I like, I basically like every other Rush album since then. As in, like one, hate the next etc...
This is true for me starting with Power Windows up until Test for Echo. Then I dislike Vapor Trails and like their last two. They became very inconsistent after Power Windows, and still are really. I have faith that if they do another album, it'll be good, but the chances of them hitting out of the park again are slim to none.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Counterparts
Post by: TAC on November 16, 2014, 02:44:58 PM
Vapor Trails really grew on me.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Counterparts
Post by: nicmos on November 16, 2014, 03:36:00 PM
I'm lovin' this back and forth between Kev and Jammindude (and others).  so juicy... [rubs hands together] ... I'll have plenty to say about TFE as well.

I have a feeling the next 3 studio albums (not counting Feedback of course) are going to have a VERY wide range of contentious opinions.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Counterparts
Post by: KevShmev on November 16, 2014, 06:11:35 PM
Heh, I love a good friendly disagreement.  I mean, sure, jammindude is dead wrong, and deep down he probably knows it, but it's still fun. :biggrin: :hat
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Counterparts
Post by: jammindude on November 16, 2014, 06:17:21 PM
Heh, I love a good friendly disagreement.  I mean, sure, jammindude is dead wrong, and deep down he probably knows it, but it's still fun. :biggrin: :hat

(https://i141.photobucket.com/albums/r47/jammindude/dudeopinion_zpsaa82c2e3.jpg~original)
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Counterparts
Post by: KevShmev on November 16, 2014, 06:20:58 PM
(https://skiffleboom.files.wordpress.com/2011/12/over_the_line_walter_lebowski_skiffleboom.jpg)
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Counterparts
Post by: jammindude on November 16, 2014, 06:22:45 PM
(https://i141.photobucket.com/albums/r47/jammindude/STFU_zps6680cec4.jpg~original)
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Counterparts
Post by: Nick on November 16, 2014, 11:14:43 PM
Counterparts has been a solid grower on me for a decade now. It starts with my 2nd least favorite track on the album, but Animate does have my single favorite section on the album (My counterpart... my foolish heart, etc.). Then there is the complete stinker, Stick it Out, but the rest is nothing short of glorious. And aside from truly just not being that strong of a song, this was dead on:

Stick it Out... almost tries too hard to rock out.  It's like the grunge movement was hitting the big time, and Stick It Out just came across (to me) as trying too hard to remain relevant instead of just being themselves.   "We can be heavy too!  Look at us be so heavy!!  GRRRR!!!" 

That song was truly the only major negative comment I have about the songs for last tour.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Counterparts
Post by: ? on November 16, 2014, 11:59:35 PM
Counterparts is a top 5 Rush album in my books and doesn't have a single weak song, although I like some less than the others. Animate and Everyday Glory are my favorites, and Stick It Out is a lot of fun to play on guitar.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Counterparts
Post by: Mladen on November 17, 2014, 04:01:42 AM
Heavy, groovy and filled with hooks, they truly did a good job with this one. Some of my favorites include Cut to the chase, Double agent, Alien shore, Nobody's hero as well as Between the sun and moon - I for one adore that chorus, especially considering the numerous key changes. Too bad they included The Speed of love, it really drags the album down, and I've never been crazy about the opening song, the chorus is too repetitive.

And yeah, the production on this is flawless.  :metal
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Counterparts
Post by: hefdaddy42 on November 17, 2014, 06:34:30 AM
LOVE this album.  I remember when it came out, and Kev, I listened to that Rockline special as well, although I didn't record it lol.

Also, I really like Stick It Out.  Not sure what there is to dislike about it.  Great riffage, good energy, it rocks hard, good lyrics.  Great opener, and one of my favorites on the album.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Counterparts
Post by: King Postwhore on November 17, 2014, 07:44:42 AM
I loved listening to Rockline.  Got too old to stay up though, :lol
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Counterparts
Post by: jingle.boy on November 17, 2014, 07:54:25 AM
I'm on the jammin/nicmos end of the equation here.

Stick it Out... almost tries too hard to rock out.  It's like the grunge movement was hitting the big time, and Stick It Out just came across (to me) as trying too hard to remain relevant instead of just being themselves.   "We can be heavy too!  Look at us be so heavy!!  GRRRR!!!" 

BINGO!!!!  Just go look at the video.  Dreadlocks + 1994 SCREAMS grunge.

This is no way influenced by grunge at all.

(https://replygif.net/i/776.gif)

Seriously?  Have you never heard a grunge tune?  Animate and Stick It Out were blatant attempts to stay with the times in 1994.  I still can't stand Stick It Out, but have come to appreciate Animate over the years.  The rest of the album is mediocre to good.  Leave That Thing Alone is their worst instrumental ever, so boring.  Nobody's Hero is a great story and message, just not great lyrics.  Between the Sun and the Moon... definitely the worst chorus ever - ruins an otherwise good song.  Double Agent... completely forgetable - probably because this was the one song I didn't rip to get the album on one side of my TDK XL-II's.

Alien Shore, Cold Fire, and Everyday Glory are the only stand outs.  Cut To the Chase is up there too.  Stick it Out, Speed of Love and Double Agent are absolute tripe.

Personally, worst album of the post-synth era.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Counterparts
Post by: seasonsinthesky on November 17, 2014, 08:20:32 AM

This is no way influenced by grunge at all.

(https://replygif.net/i/776.gif)

Seriously?  Have you never heard a grunge tune?  Animate and Stick It Out were blatant attempts to stay with the times in 1994.

absolutely, it's as obvious as DT doing "Caught in a Web" — pandering to the popular sound of the time. Rush has done this forever; you can trace the popular trends of the time through every four-album series. how anyone can't immediately associate these two songs with grunge is mindblowing to me. there's even a riff in "Animate" that sounds like it could be a pre-chorus to "Even Flow!"
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Counterparts
Post by: hefdaddy42 on November 17, 2014, 09:58:34 AM
If you are saying that Caught In A Web or even Animate are DT or Rush trying to do grunge, then I don't know what to tell you.

And in Stick It Out, while I see some evidence as far as guitar tone or even some chord choices, overall it just sounds like Rush going the other direction from the synth era.  I mean, it's Rush, it doesn't sound like any grunge song.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Counterparts
Post by: Newmz on November 17, 2014, 10:02:19 AM
I have found Cut to the Chase to be by far my favorite song on counterparts. that guitar solo!  :metal
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Counterparts
Post by: King Postwhore on November 17, 2014, 10:55:15 AM
Grunge no way Chad.  Louder and bolder sound and one drop tuning on one song on the album does not equate Rush going for Grunge.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Counterparts
Post by: jingle.boy on November 17, 2014, 11:45:03 AM
Grunge no way Chad.  Louder and bolder sound and one drop tuning on one song on the album does not equate Rush going for Grunge.

Ok, so let's see... they were progressive in the 70s, prog, but-more-rock, in the early 80s, synth for the rest of the decade, couple of decent but not so heavy rockers in Presto and RTB, and then BOOM!  1994 comes and they release an album with a handful of songs like no other songs in their history, about 2 years into the 'grunge' movement?  Coincidence?  Lee is quoted at the time as saying "we had a more aggressive sound".  So, maybe not actually "grunge", but the reality of what was "in" in the music industry at the time absolutely influenced this album.  Then 2 years later, as grunge/alternative rock is falling out of the mainstream, they release TFE which scales it back a little.  Sorry, but there's no way I'll ever believe that this "more aggressive" sound is just happenstance.

Go and find five reviews of the album written back in 1994, and see how many of them DO NOT draw some reference to it's similarities to grunge/alternative rock.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Counterparts
Post by: Orbert on November 17, 2014, 11:53:32 AM
I think there's a difference between a band incorporating sounds and influences that they've heard and like, and "blatant attempts to stay with the times".  Rush has always changed, always tried new things.  To say that they were influenced by grunge and/or decided to do a grungy tune or two is fair.  Unless you have inside information, calling them "blatant attempts to stay with the times" is pretty condemning.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Counterparts
Post by: TAC on November 17, 2014, 12:07:42 PM
The only thing that Grunge and Stick It Out have in common is that they both suck.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Counterparts
Post by: King Postwhore on November 17, 2014, 12:09:42 PM
What they said in interviews was that they when they heard the songs from RTB and Presto live, they had move "Umph" like they wanted it so they wanted to capture a louder, live sound.  Basically they wanted more balls than the last 2 albums to match their live sound.

The only thing that Grunge and Stick It Out have in common is that they both suck.

 :lol
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Counterparts
Post by: hefdaddy42 on November 17, 2014, 01:04:04 PM
the reality of what was "in" in the music industry at the time absolutely influenced this album.  Then 2 years later, as grunge/alternative rock is falling out of the mainstream, they release TFE which scales it back a little.  Sorry, but there's no way I'll ever believe that this "more aggressive" sound is just happenstance.
Yes, because Rush has always followed the trends and been on the forefront of cool.

I believe the harder stuff was a reaction to their less hard stuff that they had done recently rather than whatever Pearl Jam or Soundgarden were doing.  Hell, the Rush fanbase weren't (for the most part) the target audience of grunge, anyway.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Counterparts
Post by: Newmz on November 17, 2014, 01:14:34 PM
The only thing that Grunge and Stick It Out have in common is that they both suck.
:rollin
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Counterparts
Post by: nicmos on November 17, 2014, 02:03:12 PM

I believe the harder stuff was a reaction to their less hard stuff that they had done recently rather than whatever Pearl Jam or Soundgarden were doing.  Hell, the Rush fanbase weren't (for the most part) the target audience of grunge, anyway.

I actually think Pearl Jam's first two albums are pretty good.  And STPs first two are good as well.  beyond that not really a grunge fan.

Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Counterparts
Post by: Orbert on November 17, 2014, 02:08:27 PM
I stuck with STP until the end, but they weren't really grunge by then.  Pearl Jam's Ten was/is great, but they lost me after that.

I still say that Rush might have heard some grunge and might have been influenced by it, or not, but either way, saying that they were trying to stay relevant by recording one or two heavier songs is quite a stretch.  It makes far more sense that things had just swung back that way for them.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Counterparts
Post by: jammindude on November 17, 2014, 02:13:02 PM
I heard an interview when it came out that pretty much said (and I'm paraphrasing)...that they had been listening to and liked the (then) recent trend of grunge music and decided that they needed to do something like that.   

I was the one who kicked off the statement about trying to stay relevant...and I only applied it to the single Stick It Out and and I stand by that statement.   MTV was still relevant at the time, and they got a video out for the song.    Let's face it...Presto and RtB hadn't made the splash that anyone had hoped, and they knew it was time for a return to hard rock....they started listening to the hard rock that was coming out, they liked it, and they incorporated it into their sound to try to stay with the times.     That, in and of itself, is not necessarily a bad thing.   After all, it did it's job of breaking them out of the "adult contemporary" rut that they had been in for far too long.    But I felt that on the lead off single (again...by design...the most grunge-like of the entire album) just tried a bit too hard.   
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Counterparts
Post by: TAC on November 17, 2014, 02:18:26 PM
Yeah, and even the video sucked!!

J Dude, that all makes complete sense.

Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Counterparts
Post by: Anguyen92 on November 17, 2014, 02:32:20 PM
Yeah, and even the video sucked!!

J Dude, that all makes complete sense.

It can't be that bad as the Time Stands Still video?

I'm watching it now.  Ok, maybe it is weird.  A guy strapped to a chair on top of a pole throughout most of the video?  That's pretty interesting.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Counterparts
Post by: TAC on November 17, 2014, 02:36:33 PM
  A guy strapped to a chair on top of a pole throughout most of the video?  That's pretty interesting.
No..No it's not. ;D
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Counterparts
Post by: Lowdz on November 17, 2014, 02:49:29 PM
I think there's a difference between a band incorporating sounds and influences that they've heard and like, and "blatant attempts to stay with the times".  Rush has always changed, always tried new things.  To say that they were influenced by grunge and/or decided to do a grungy tune or two is fair.  Unless you have inside information, calling them "blatant attempts to stay with the times" is pretty condemning.

Just Rush doing what they always did. Was The Police influence not blatant? The synths? I agree it didn't "sound" grunge to me but SIO was Rush trying too hard to rock. That is the only song that sounds influenced by the times - the rest sounds like the last couple of albums with a meatier guitar sound.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Counterparts
Post by: King Postwhore on November 17, 2014, 03:34:33 PM
Read what Alex in an interview on why they recorded the heavier sound.

https://www.2112.net/powerwindows/transcripts/19931100meat.htm

Here's some audio from Geddy talking about how songs on Presto and RTB live sonically were not powerful like when they played them live and they wanted to correct it.

https://www.2kmusic.com/en/webvideo/rush/I-8yQWFC7cE/rush-geddy-lee-discusses-the-beginnings-of-the-counterparts-album
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Counterparts
Post by: jammindude on November 17, 2014, 03:51:20 PM
From the Alex Lifeson interview you posted:

How have the changing times affected you? All through these 20 years, when something comes up and music changes, do you take a few things in, or do you try to resist it?

"I think we kind of absorb it subliminally. Now the kind of music that we listen to is more the alternative stuff, so you can't help but be influenced by it. Certainly in our case we've been around for so long, and we've gone through so many different styles if you will, over the last 20 years, that it's just kind of come full circle. It's refreshing to hear that these bands have a certain amount of interest in the way they focus and develop as musicians. It's a great thing to feed off. You can't help but be moved by whatever is happening, or by whatever you're listening to. We're not resistant to it, but we don't go out and make an effort to be influenced by it."


But I would take his last sentence and circle it back around on his first sentence.    Maybe you don't make a *CONSCIOUS* effort...but it effects you on a subliminal level because you're listening to it and being influence by it.   

I feel this entire answer just underlines exactly what I was saying.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Counterparts
Post by: nicmos on November 17, 2014, 03:56:19 PM
  I was the one who kicked off the statement about trying to stay relevant...and I only applied it to the single Stick It Out and and I stand by that statement.   MTV was still relevant at the time, and they got a video out for the song.    Let's face it...Presto and RtB hadn't made the splash that anyone had hoped, and they knew it was time for a return to hard rock....they started listening to the hard rock that was coming out, they liked it, and they incorporated it into their sound to try to stay with the times.     That, in and of itself, is not necessarily a bad thing.   After all, it did it's job of breaking them out of the "adult contemporary" rut that they had been in for far too long.    But I felt that on the lead off single (again...by design...the most grunge-like of the entire album) just tried a bit too hard.   

Jammindude I think you're right on again.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Counterparts
Post by: Lowdz on November 17, 2014, 04:05:51 PM
  I was the one who kicked off the statement about trying to stay relevant...and I only applied it to the single Stick It Out and and I stand by that statement.   MTV was still relevant at the time, and they got a video out for the song.    Let's face it...Presto and RtB hadn't made the splash that anyone had hoped, and they knew it was time for a return to hard rock....they started listening to the hard rock that was coming out, they liked it, and they incorporated it into their sound to try to stay with the times.     That, in and of itself, is not necessarily a bad thing.   After all, it did it's job of breaking them out of the "adult contemporary" rut that they had been in for far too long.    But I felt that on the lead off single (again...by design...the most grunge-like of the entire album) just tried a bit too hard.   

Jammindude I think you're right on again. Don't know if the plan is to talk about them in this thread but god that was one terrible album.

It was certainly true of the Lifeson solo album (and maybe Geddy's. Not played it in so long I can't remember a thing about it). Lifeson's was probably the most disappointed I've ever been in an album.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Counterparts
Post by: jammindude on November 17, 2014, 04:10:48 PM
I didn't mean to bring up the solo albums...but I for one love Victor.   I found it to be surprisingly avant guarde.   Some of those songs are really REALLY weird.   I loved it.   Geddy's was more straight forward, but Alex's was almost like a Zappa album in some spots.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Counterparts
Post by: nicmos on November 17, 2014, 04:20:06 PM
  I was the one who kicked off the statement about trying to stay relevant...and I only applied it to the single Stick It Out and and I stand by that statement.   MTV was still relevant at the time, and they got a video out for the song.    Let's face it...Presto and RtB hadn't made the splash that anyone had hoped, and they knew it was time for a return to hard rock....they started listening to the hard rock that was coming out, they liked it, and they incorporated it into their sound to try to stay with the times.     That, in and of itself, is not necessarily a bad thing.   After all, it did it's job of breaking them out of the "adult contemporary" rut that they had been in for far too long.    But I felt that on the lead off single (again...by design...the most grunge-like of the entire album) just tried a bit too hard.   



Jammindude I think you're right on again. Don't know if the plan is to talk about them in this thread but god that was one terrible album.

It was certainly true of the Lifeson solo album (and maybe Geddy's. Not played it in so long I can't remember a thing about it). Lifeson's was probably the most disappointed I've ever been in an album.

umm Lowdz I think you mixed up your quote tags somewhere and put some words in my mouth :)
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Counterparts
Post by: Lowdz on November 17, 2014, 04:22:18 PM
I didn't mean to bring up the solo albums...but I for one love Victor.   I found it to be surprisingly avant guarde.   Some of those songs are really REALLY weird.   I loved it.   Geddy's was more straight forward, but Alex's was almost like a Zappa album in some spots.

I wanted a guitar album... what I got was ...just awful. I understand why he did it - everyone was doing guitar instrumental albums so he went a different way. But man it was bad. Glad you liked it but it wasn't for me.

and Nicmos - yeah sorry. Missed that.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Counterparts
Post by: nicmos on November 17, 2014, 04:30:50 PM
for the record, I think a few of the tracks on Victor are really enjoyable, but I ended up selling my CD since I didn't like enough of it to listen all the way through.  I feel like Promise, and one of the instrumentals, Dr. X or Mr. X or something, were the ones I liked the best.  IIRC the title track was just weird.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Counterparts
Post by: KevShmev on November 17, 2014, 04:36:23 PM
Sorry, but the grunge thing is crap.  Reviews mentioning it at the time doesn't mean squat since that was back when critics still loved to find any reason to bash the band, and going with the "they are aping the grunge sound" was easy, albeit totally off base.  The Stick It Out riff was, to me, them trying to channel the Working Man riff vibe.

Also, jammindude, I disagree about RtB not making a splash.  While the diehards weren't crazy about it as a whole, the more casual Rush fans loved it.  I've known quite a few people over the years whose only Rush CD they owned was Roll the Bones, and let's not forget that Dreamline, Bravado, Roll the Bones and Ghost of a Chance all got major play on rock radio stations.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Counterparts
Post by: King Postwhore on November 17, 2014, 04:41:54 PM
And as Lowdz said, Rush has always been influenced by the times but certainly not going full Reggae or full on prog or using synths and electronic drums, or even the dry vocals of T4E.  But Counterparts is not grunge.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Counterparts
Post by: jammindude on November 17, 2014, 04:55:17 PM
Sorry, but the grunge thing is crap.  Reviews mentioning it at the time doesn't mean squat since that was back when critics still loved to find any reason to bash the band, and going with the "they are aping the grunge sound" was easy, albeit totally off base.  The Stick It Out riff was, to me, them trying to channel the Working Man riff vibe.

Also, jammindude, I disagree about RtB not making a splash.  While the diehards weren't crazy about it as a whole, the more casual Rush fans loved it.  I've known quite a few people over the years whose only Rush CD they owned was Roll the Bones, and let's not forget that Dreamline, Bravado, Roll the Bones and Ghost of a Chance all got major play on rock radio stations.

I may have mis-spoke about RtB....it did do very well.   I think what I was driving at was that even though it did do well, most people (the band included) agreed that the "adult contemporary" sound (as you've put it) was just not a good overall direction for the band and a change was needed.    And a change is exactly what happened.    I just think they overcompensated at first.   They righted the ship on the next album.  ;) :D :angel:
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Counterparts
Post by: jingle.boy on November 17, 2014, 05:21:46 PM
Ben, you've said everything that I've been thinking.  I didn't mean to imply they were trying to be or sound 'grunge', just that the influence of what was 'in' back in '93/'94 certainly comes through on those opening two tracks, and more so on SIO.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Counterparts
Post by: TAC on November 17, 2014, 05:51:13 PM
  I've known quite a few people over the years whose only Rush CD they owned was Roll the Bones,
Yeah cuz they bought that and decided to never buy another Rush album! ;D
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Counterparts
Post by: jingle.boy on November 17, 2014, 06:20:24 PM
  I've known quite a few people over the years whose only Rush CD they owned was Roll the Bones,
Yeah cuz they bought that and decided to never buy another Rush album! ;D

He's on a roll tonight.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Counterparts
Post by: King Postwhore on November 17, 2014, 06:49:35 PM
Why is he here......
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Counterparts
Post by: jammindude on November 17, 2014, 06:51:33 PM
Stop throwing stones...
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Counterparts
Post by: King Postwhore on November 17, 2014, 07:13:01 PM
TAC has a thousand saxaphones.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Counterparts
Post by: KevShmev on November 17, 2014, 07:22:41 PM
Jokes aside, the fact that Counterparts debuted at number 2 on the charts is a testament to how well-liked Roll the Bones was by the masses.  Unless you are an artist who always has albums near the top, an album debuting high like that usually means that the previous album was well-liked, and fans ran out and bought the next one right away.  Another good example of this is Queensryche's Promised Land getting to number 3 cause of the success of Empire, and Promised Land wasn't an album that went over well with the masses (even if many diehard fans loved it, including myself). 
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Counterparts
Post by: jammindude on November 17, 2014, 07:25:22 PM
Jokes aside, the fact that Counterparts debuted at number 2 on the charts is a testament to how well-liked Roll the Bones was by the masses.  Unless you are an artist who always has albums near the top, an album debuting high like that usually means that the previous album was well-liked, and fans ran out and bought the next one right away.  Another good example of this is Queensryche's Promised Land getting to number 3 cause of the success of Empire, and Promised Land wasn't an album that went over well with the masses (even if many diehard fans loved it, including myself).

Well...I think the well publicized buzz that it was a return to hard rock had something to do with that as well...
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Counterparts
Post by: jingle.boy on November 17, 2014, 07:54:47 PM
Jokes aside, the fact that Counterparts debuted at number 2 on the charts is a testament to how well-liked Roll the Bones was by the masses.  Unless you are an artist who always has albums near the top, an album debuting high like that usually means that the previous album was well-liked, and fans ran out and bought the next one right away.  Another good example of this is Queensryche's Promised Land getting to number 3 cause of the success of Empire, and Promised Land wasn't an album that went over well with the masses (even if many diehard fans loved it, including myself).

Well...I think the well publicized buzz that it was a return to hard rock had something to do with that as well...

Or the fact that they conveniently released the 'grungy' SIO as the first single.  :neverusethis:
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Counterparts
Post by: jammindude on November 17, 2014, 08:26:36 PM
Jokes aside, the fact that Counterparts debuted at number 2 on the charts is a testament to how well-liked Roll the Bones was by the masses.  Unless you are an artist who always has albums near the top, an album debuting high like that usually means that the previous album was well-liked, and fans ran out and bought the next one right away.  Another good example of this is Queensryche's Promised Land getting to number 3 cause of the success of Empire, and Promised Land wasn't an album that went over well with the masses (even if many diehard fans loved it, including myself).

Well...I think the well publicized buzz that it was a return to hard rock had something to do with that as well...

Or the fact that they conveniently released the 'grungy' SIO as the first single.  :neverusethis:

I guess that is the.............................ultimate proof.  :neverusethis:
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Counterparts
Post by: KevShmev on November 17, 2014, 08:27:27 PM
That definitely helped.  It seemed like every guy I knew was talking about the album around the time it came out, and many were thrilled about the "return" to hard rock.  KSHE here in St. Louis gave regular rotation to over half of the songs from it in the first couple weeks after its release.  Those were good times. :metal
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Counterparts
Post by: TAC on November 18, 2014, 01:46:08 PM
TAC has a thousand saxaphones.

 :lol

Jokes aside, the fact that Counterparts debuted at number 2 on the charts is a testament to how well-liked Roll the Bones was by the masses. 

I guess. I feel like Dreamline was the turning point though, not the album as a whole. My memory of it is that while they had been releasing singles and making videos right along, Dreamline felt the most like a Rush "Classic" in a very long time.
I think between the strength of Dreamline, and the hard rockedness of Stick It Out, it signaled to a lot of people who may have skipped out on the synth era that it was safe to like Rush again.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Counterparts
Post by: KevShmev on November 18, 2014, 07:17:47 PM
That's very possible.  If nothing else, Stick It Out being the lead single told the world, "We are ready to rock again," and for those who were tired of synths ('82-'87) and thin sound ('89-'91), just the sound of that song and that riff was probably a huge breath of fresh air.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Counterparts
Post by: wolfking on November 18, 2014, 07:48:57 PM
Counterparts is probably top 3 Rush for me, love it.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Counterparts
Post by: Lowdz on November 19, 2014, 01:09:50 PM
PLayed it in the car yesterday and enjoyed it. Even SiO
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Counterparts
Post by: wolfking on November 19, 2014, 04:36:58 PM
PLayed it in the car yesterday and enjoyed it. Even SiO

One of my favs actually.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Counterparts
Post by: nicmos on November 19, 2014, 07:06:34 PM
sorry, back to the Stick It Out video....

anyone notice at the end, the last 20 seconds or so of the song is mixed differently?  Geddy's vocals occur on different beats in the video than they do on the CD, and there might be an extra measure or  two.

it's such a weird change to make.  I don't feel like it helps the song at all.  anyone care to hazard a guess why they did it?  to edit the audio to match the director's vision for the video?
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Counterparts
Post by: The Curious Orange on November 20, 2014, 08:30:03 AM
It's not so much that Counterparts is good, as it sounds good. It's bar far the best produced, mixed and mastered album in their catalogue.
The previous two albums were good, but suffered from the tinny production sound that was fashionable at the time. Subsequent albums have suffered from loudness issues. Counterparts was the album where they got it right. (OK, T4E also sounds great, but the songs aren't as good...)
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Counterparts
Post by: Newmz on November 20, 2014, 11:09:03 AM
I think T4E has better songs than Counterparts.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Counterparts
Post by: TAC on November 20, 2014, 03:18:50 PM
I think T4E has better songs than Counterparts.
Just no.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Counterparts
Post by: jingle.boy on November 20, 2014, 04:13:20 PM
I think T4E has better songs than Counterparts.
Just no.

No U.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Test for Echo
Post by: KevShmev on November 20, 2014, 04:51:40 PM
For the first time ever, Rush went two full calendar years without a studio album, although Alex Lifeson did release his first and only studio album in early 1996, which was then followed later than year by Rush's 16th studio album, Test for Echo.  I have to admit that I was very fond of this album at first, even though I knew it wasn't as good as the two prior albums, but I listened to the shit out of it for months after its release, part of which I think stemmed from the fact that in 1996 and 1997, there weren't that many bands that I listened to regularly, so there wasn't a lot of competition for time in my CD player, especially when it came to new stuff.  So yeah, Test for Echo got a ton of playing time with me.

However, time has not been that kind to it, for me.  Don't get me wrong, I still like it, and I can listen to almost all of it and enjoy it, except for "Time and Motion"'s wretched chorus, but there just isn't anything on there that makes me think, "Dang, this is really great." Songs like "Resist," "Driven" and "Totem" are all very nice, and I actually think "Carve Away the Stone" is quite the underrated tune, but much of the rest of the album is just kind of there.  "Virtuality" has a beastly riff, but while the lyrics don't bother me like they do some, there is just something missing that would make it great.  I actually like "Dog Years" more than most - that riff is killer - but I can see why it's a turn-off for many.  "Half the World" and "Limbo" are both solid tunes, but, again, neither stands out.  I still don't know what to make of the title track; sometimes I like it, and sometimes I wonder what the hell they were trying to do.  It's an awfully plodding song to kick off what is generally a pretty rocking album, and the rocking parts are kind of messy, which leads me to...

The sound of this album is a bit bothersome.  While Counterparts had that meaty, beefy sound, while still retaining great sonic space for all of the instruments, Test for Echo loses the sonic greatness.  There are times where it's rocking as hell and it's like the instruments were all mashed together to make one giant noise, instead of effortlessly rocking and sounding crisp and clear like the prior album. It's not a bad-sounding album, but I think they weren't quite sure how to mix it after Neil changed up how he played the drums thanks to working with Freddie Gruber and going back to a traditional grip for some of the songs.  Plus, even when the sound is a bit clear, there are times where there is this weird balance, almost like a cool guitar part is too far back in the mix or not up front enough, like the last verse of "Driven," where that riff should have slayed you one last time, but instead sounds like it's meandering along underneath the bass and drums.  Mixing aside, the songwriting is just a bit lacking, and Neil's lyrics took a somewhat significant dip here. 

It's just one of those Rush albums that just kind of sits there and doesn't stand out in any way whatsoever.  The songwriting, music, lyrics, etc. all just sound a bit uninspired.  Ironically, the album sounds like a band who needed a break, which they would get after the tour for this album, but for all of the wrong reasons...:( :( :(

(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/b/b8/Rush_Test_for_Echo.jpg)
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Test for Echo
Post by: Bolsters on November 20, 2014, 05:32:20 PM
I actually like this album. Sure it has a few clunkers, and I wouldn't hold it up to something like Moving Picturers, but it has some good stuff aswell. I've never really understood the hate for Time and Motion either, especially on a forum for a progressive metal band.

Funnily enough this was one of the albums that got me into the band in the first place, so maybe that contributes a little to why I seems to like it more than most.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Roll the Bones
Post by: ytserush on November 20, 2014, 06:27:47 PM
On we move to the fall of 1991. This was just when I was becoming a Rush fan and the release of "Dreamline" as the first single from the band's 14th album, certainly helped.  It was an instant favorite of mine, and as a result, Roll the Bones became one of the first Rush CDs I ever bought.  It sounds like the natural follow-up to Presto, except the sound, while still not as beefy and meaty as most of their other stuff, is not as thin and the songwriting is collectively much better.  Sure, there are a few hiccups, but by my count, there are four great songs on this record - "Dreamline," "Bravado," "Where's My Thing" and "Ghost of a Chance" - and three others that range from good to very good - "Roll the Bones," "The Big Wheel" and "Heresy".  The flaws in the others are more than obvious, but none of them are outright bad or anything; just kind of there.  This is a very easy record to just put on and listen to from start to finish and never get bored with.

Now, I get why some are not fond of this record.  The rap in the title track has always bothered some, but I have always liked it, and still do.  The title track as a whole isn't as much of a favorite of mine as it used to be, but I still like it a lot.  The aforementioned four great songs are all major winners.  "Bravado" is a melodic masterpiece, not to mention a great example of Neil Peart making a busy drum pattern sound melodic and downright gorgeous.  "Ghost of a Chance" is a melodic orgasm.  While they have much better instrumentals, "Where's My Thing" is still pretty damn great, and is pretty unique when compared to those other vocal-less songs.  "Dreamline" simply sounds like a song every Rush fan should enjoy the hell out of; it's got everything, from a great sing-along chorus to a catchy guitar lead to a great solo to great lyrics 

Overall, I can't say this is one of my favorite Rush albums, but I still like it a lot, and it will always be a nostalgic favorite of mine. :coolio :hat

(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/9/99/Rush_roll_the_bones.jpg)

I love this album despite the thin production (Audio Fidelity release improves this a little) and Face Up, Neurotica and You Bet Your Life being three of my least favorite Rush songs ever. (Although I get how they fit in with the overall  album theme)

Funny story about this album is that the radio station started playing Where's My Thing?  and  Dreamline about six weeks before the album came out.  I heard Where's My Thing? first and a friend of mine heard Dreamline and we had a hell of a time trying to explain what we heard to each other and not believing that what the other guy heard was the new Rush song. Until I heard Dreamline for myself, I didn't believe him.

The songs played live are off=the-charts better than  their studio counterparts.


I like the rap in Roll The Bones.

 Neil said at the time that they considered recorded a campier version with John Cleese, but figured the joke wouldn't survive repeated listens. I'd still love to hear how that would have turned out.

Roll The Bones was also the last album their record label really supported which could be be why no Rush record has sold more copies since.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Roll the Bones
Post by: ytserush on November 20, 2014, 06:30:35 PM
I'm never surprised by how many do not care much for this record.  I get why they don't, but it was such a big part of my life when I was becoming a Rush fan, not to mention that it was loved by my first serious girlfriend, whom I dated for most of 1992, that it will always be one I think fondly of. :coolio

Does not compute. :lol

Well....it *was* Roll the Bones.    It makes a difference.    ;) ;D

Not sure if I should admit this or not, but there's a framed Roll The Bones album flat  hanging above the headboard in our bedroom.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Test for Echo
Post by: King Postwhore on November 20, 2014, 06:32:56 PM
Your wife is a saint.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Test for Echo
Post by: nicmos on November 20, 2014, 06:46:56 PM
Kev,

I think your writeup hit most of the points I would make.  I guess I sort of feel the same way.  I think the only major thing you missed was the really pronounced change in Geddy's vocal approach.  His singing style started to bother me this album, his intonations etc.  Plus all the layered harmonies really make things worse rather than better.  I more enjoy the parts where it's just a single vocal track even on this album.  I wish I could go back in time to 1995 and tell him he was going to screw up all of their subsequent albums by doing things this way.

The title track feels like it's going to start something great, but ultimately goes nowhere.  The lyrics don't do it any favors.

Driven, again seems like it should be awesome, but goes nowhere.  (the live version improves on this somewhat with the extended instrumental parts but not enough to make it a song I ever crave listening to).

Half The World is a song I was sort of annoyed at when this came out, but to be honest I think it's held up better than most of them.

Color of Right is sort of just there, not bad, but not good enough to make me want to listen to it.

Time and Motion, the chorus doesn't bother me, I think the music is pretty cool.

Totem is probably my favorite song on the whole CD.  Not because I think it's a top tier Rush song, but by this albums standards it works well.

Dog Years, I like the lyrics, but not really the music.

Bestialit... I mean Virtuality- I think they came up with a killer chorus here, one of their best ever.  That is if you ignore the lyrics.  I don't think the verses fit with the chorus musically though.  That main riff is great but I don't think it fits this song.

Resist more annoys me than anything and I get annoyed that the band likes this song enough to play it to death on tour.

Limbo, it's ok I guess.  Probably least favorite instrumental not counting the short ones on S&A.

And Carve Away The Stone is one of the better tracks, but not up to their previous album closer standards.

Overall, I rarely reach for this album.  Definitely in contention for my least favorite overall.  And I saw them twice on this tour, once on each leg, oh well.  Still hadn't sunk in how subpar I would end up thinking the album is.  I was just so excited to have a Rush album after a 3 year wait.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Counterparts
Post by: ytserush on November 20, 2014, 07:26:00 PM
In the fall of 1993, we got word that Rush would be releasing their 15th studio album and the scuttlebutt was that they would be returning to their hard rock roots.  It was hard not to get excited about the prospects about what the album would sound like.  A short time later, my friend Matt and I were driving to another friend's house in his car when KSHE-95, the local hard rock radio station, announced, "We'll be playing the new Rush song next!"  Our heads exploded, and he quickly took a quick turn so we could take the scenic route to the friend's house, that way we'd be in the car long enough to hear the new song.  Minutes later, "Stick It Out" began, and that opening riff was like their way of saying, "Okay, we are ready to really rock and kick some ass again."  And, oh man, did it rock!  About a week later, the band did the Rockline special, which back in the day was like a 2-hour special that had interviews with bands intertwined with songs by the band, usually new stuff if the band in question was releasing a new album.  The Rush special had all 11 songs from Counterparts, and I naturally recorded it off the radio on to a cassette tape that I wore out before the release of the actual CD. :lol  And I got used to the running order based on the special. I cannot remember the exact order, but i just know that "Between Sun and Moon" and "Nobody's Hero" were tracks 1 and 2 at first, so when I got the actual CD on October 19th, 1993, the "new" running order gave the album a whole feel.

This being the first new Rush album that came out after I became a fan, my excitement level was obviously off the charts, and I felt fortunate that they released such a kick ass at that point in time. For a long time, Counterparts was my favorite Rush CD.  Even though I knew that there were other Rush records that were better, it was the one I listened to the most for years.  I literally could not get enough of it.  Every song is firmly entrenched in my head to where I know all 11 like the back of my hand.  I remember listening to the actual CD for the first time and just perusing through the liner notes of the CD booklet and thinking how cool the whole thing was.  It was just a wonderful moment in my experience as a Rush fan and my growth as a music fan. :coolio

Getting down to personal favorites, the "original" tracks 1 and 2 - "Between Sun and Moon" and "Nobody's Hero" - were two of my original four favorites along with "Double Agent" and "Leave That Thing Alone." Interestingly, "Animate" and "Cold Fire" were two of my least favorites at first, but over time became two of my favorites.  "The Speed of Love" and "Stick It Out" have stayed pretty consistent as two of my least favorites, but I still think both songs are better than many fans give them credit for being.  "Everyday Glory" is the best Rush album closer since Permanent Waves, IMO.  Yes, I love it more than "Mystic Rhythms" and "The Garden."  The bridge near the end - "If the future's looking dark" - is probably one of my all-time favorite Rush moments; so freaking awesome.  "Alien Shore" has always been one of those sneaky great songs that doesn't get talked about nearly enough, while "Cut to the Chase" is a great tune that often gets listed as one of those great Rush songs that has never gotten played live for whatever reason.  At this point in time, my order preference probably looks like this:

"Leave That Thing Alone"
"Double Agent"
"Animate"
"Everyday Glory"
"Cold Fire"
"Cut to the Chase"
"Nobody's Hero"
"Alien Shore"
"Between Sun and Moon"
"The Speed of Love"
"Stick It Out"

The overall sound of the album was definitely a return to their hard rock roots.  While much of the synth era was awash in, well, synths :lol, and Presto and Roll the Bones scaled the synths back while also having a bit of a clean, thin sound, Counterparts has a great ballsy, meaty sound. And despite the meaty sound, it still manages to sound very clean, thanks to the tremendous work by Peter Collins, who was back in the producer's chair.  You can hear every instrument clear as day, even the tiny bits of keyboards that still linger, yet the album rocks in an aggressive way. Alex's guitar has serious bite again, Geddy's bass sounds thick and rich, and Neil's drums have never sounded better on a recorded record.  Plus, I honestly think this is where Geddy's studio voice was at its peak.  He had total control of it at this point, it had a maturity to it that wasn't there in his early howling days, and he hadn't yet fallen into some of the bad habits that would plague certain vocal sections in the 21st century. 

The album was also a bit of departure lyrically, as Neil, for the first time, extensively tackled relationships and emotions, hence the album title. The album is very unique in that regard when looking at their discography as a whole.

Overall, this is, for my money, their 2nd best album post-Moving Pictures album, and their best of the last 30 years (although they did almost top it in 2012, but we'll get to that one later).  I think Power Windows is just a hair or two better, but it's pretty darn close. I can never not listen to this album and not enjoy the hell out of it. :hefdaddy :hefdaddy

(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/b/b4/Rush_Counterparts.jpg)


I taped the Counterparts World Premiere too (I taped and still have all of that stuff from those years).  Just went down the archives and grabbed the recording which aired  8/14/93, about five weeks before the release date.

For the curious, here's the order the new songs were played during that special.

Between Sun And Moon
Nobody's Hero
Double Agent
Animate
Stick It Out
Everyday Glory
Alien Shore
Leave That Thing Alone
Speed Of Love


I like Counterparts (but again the live stuff REALLY shines) but I think I listened to it too much at first and really don't listen to it a lot.

Stick It Out sure screams grunge to me. So does the video.  I think it's one of my least favorite Rush lead tracks (along with Test For Echo) And Speed of Love is my clunker from this album. Enjoy the rest of it.

As far as the grunge thing (I only think Stick It Out suffers from it) the band has named checked Soundgarden, Pearl Jam, and Alice In Chains as inspiring them  "rock" again.



And I think Victor is a work of genius, I wish he'd record another one. Maybe he and Geddy should work on a Lee/Lifeson project with studio musicians or something totally unRushlike in sound. I love Geddy's solo album too for different reasons.


Oh....And I don't really get the Police thing either in the early-80's. Reggae wasn't invented by The Police. There was an influence of that style, but I don't think it was a blatant thing other than Rush just trying to be Rush.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Counterparts
Post by: ytserush on November 20, 2014, 07:31:22 PM
sorry, back to the Stick It Out video....

anyone notice at the end, the last 20 seconds or so of the song is mixed differently?  Geddy's vocals occur on different beats in the video than they do on the CD, and there might be an extra measure or  two.

it's such a weird change to make.  I don't feel like it helps the song at all.  anyone care to hazard a guess why they did it?  to edit the audio to match the director's vision for the video?

I'd have to break out the promo single edit and find out.  Not a fan of that video (or song) so I don't watch it enough.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Test for Echo
Post by: ytserush on November 20, 2014, 07:34:17 PM
Your wife is a saint.

She gets the joke and thinks it's great.  She's a saint for more than just that!
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Test for Echo
Post by: ytserush on November 20, 2014, 07:49:57 PM
For the first time ever, Rush went two full calendar years without a studio album, although Alex Lifeson did release his first and only studio album in early 1996, which was then followed later than year by Rush's 16th studio album, Test for Echo.  I have to admit that I was very fond of this album at first, even though I knew it wasn't as good as the two prior albums, but I listened to the shit out of it for months after its release, part of which I think stemmed from the fact that in 1996 and 1997, there weren't that many bands that I listened to regularly, so there wasn't a lot of competition for time in my CD player, especially when it came to new stuff.  So yeah, Test for Echo got a ton of playing time with me.

However, time has not been that kind to it, for me.  Don't get me wrong, I still like it, and I can listen to almost all of it and enjoy it, except for "Time and Motion"'s wretched chorus, but there just isn't anything on there that makes me think, "Dang, this is really great." Songs like "Resist," "Driven" and "Totem" are all very nice, and I actually think "Carve Away the Stone" is quite the underrated tune, but much of the rest of the album is just kind of there.  "Virtuality" has a beastly riff, but while the lyrics don't bother me like they do some, there is just something missing that would make it great.  I actually like "Dog Years" more than most - that riff is killer - but I can see why it's a turn-off for many.  "Half the World" and "Limbo" are both solid tunes, but, again, neither stands out.  I still don't know what to make of the title track; sometimes I like it, and sometimes I wonder what the hell they were trying to do.  It's an awfully plodding song to kick off what is generally a pretty rocking album, and the rocking parts are kind of messy, which leads me to...

The sound of this album is a bit bothersome.  While Counterparts had that meaty, beefy sound, while still retaining great sonic space for all of the instruments, Test for Echo loses the sonic greatness.  There are times where it's rocking as hell and it's like the instruments were all mashed together to make one giant noise, instead of effortlessly rocking and sounding crisp and clear like the prior album. It's not a bad-sounding album, but I think they weren't quite sure how to mix it after Neil changed up how he played the drums thanks to working with Freddie Gruber and going back to a traditional grip for some of the songs.  Plus, even when the sound is a bit clear, there are times where there is this weird balance, almost like a cool guitar part is too far back in the mix or not up front enough, like the last verse of "Driven," where that riff should have slayed you one last time, but instead sounds like it's meandering along underneath the bass and drums.  Mixing aside, the songwriting is just a bit lacking, and Neil's lyrics took a somewhat significant dip here. 

It's just one of those Rush albums that just kind of sits there and doesn't stand out in any way whatsoever.  The songwriting, music, lyrics, etc. all just sound a bit uninspired.  Ironically, the album sounds like a band who needed a break, which they would get after the tour for this album, but for all of the wrong reasons...:( :( :(

(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/b/b8/Rush_Test_for_Echo.jpg)

I'd be up for a Victor discussion too.

I love Test For Echo. The only song I'm not into is Carve Away The Stone.

How Half The World wasn't a massive hit I'll never know (Awesome video too!) Lot's of interesting experiments on this album and Neil's change in style is like a breath of fresh air and invigorates the performances (As usual, the live performances magnifies this) And Resist too! Totem is really a song I'd love to hear live.

"Of all the titles we considered 'Test For Echo' was the most evocative. Everybody needs some affirmation to know they're not alone, an echo. It was also a beautiful metaphor for us because we've been away for a while, so we're saying 'Is anyone out there?'" (Connecticut Post)
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Test for Echo
Post by: jammindude on November 20, 2014, 08:11:57 PM
Test for Echo was a top 5 Rush album for me until Clockwork Angels bumped it.    Test for Echo...to me...succeeds on every level that Counterparts failed.   In fact, you could reverse your reviews for the two albums, and that would probably be me take on both albums.  CP is just kinda there, and TFE is just amazing.

I already pointed out that CP felt like they were trying too hard...but getting out of the rut they were in was a necessary exercise.   I just think they over compensated.    Test For Echo felt like they were just back to being *RUSH*...  This is best album of the 4th "Sector" and it's not even close. 

The only klunkers  to my ears are Dog Years and Totem....and Totem has aged much better.   The lyrics for Dog Years just bug me the way that Virtuality's lyrics bug most people.    Other than that, every song on here ranges between 8-10 on the scale.   And Test For Echo-Time and Motion is the second best 1-5 start to any Rush album (Moving Pictures being #1).   ALL of those songs are 10's.

1. Driven
2. Half the World
3. Color of Right
4. Virtuality
5. Time and Motion
6. Test for Echo
7. Resist
8. Limbo
9. Carve Away the Stone



10. Totem
11. Dog Years
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Test for Echo
Post by: King Postwhore on November 20, 2014, 08:23:36 PM
I've always joked that my wife knows my mistresses, Music & Sports. Ytse, I've always joked about my passions and I think that's a good thing since my wife knows where I am. :lol

I really loved this album for a long time.  A step below Counterparts but it has faded over time.  Here's my listing.

1. Driven
2. Carve Away the Stone
3. Totem
4. Half the World
5. Resist
6. Virtuality
7. Test for Echo
8. Dog Years
9. Color of Right
10. Limbo
11. Time and Motion

I don't get the hate for Dog Years.  It's a fun song and I echo the love to see Totem played live as well as Carve Away The Stone.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Test for Echo
Post by: KevShmev on November 20, 2014, 08:40:22 PM
I was really surprised when Totem wasn't played on the TFE tour.  Since they had played six from CP on that tour, I figured on six again, and my guesses were the first three songs, Totem, Virtuality and Limbo.  Considering how much they talked up Totem on the Rockline special and how Resist was almost like an afterthought, I was stunned when Resist was played and Totem wasn't.

But, like nimcos said, I was thrilled to just get a new Rush record after three years.  That was probably another factor in why I listened to it so much.  That, and a friend of ours, who had recently gotten into Rush and drove us everywhere we went for like a year :lol :lol, played it non-stop in his car.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Test for Echo
Post by: King Postwhore on November 20, 2014, 09:01:31 PM
I was lucky enough to be at the show where they recorded 2112 that was on Different Stages.  It was a magical night from the 6th row in front of Geddy.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Test for Echo
Post by: Mosh on November 20, 2014, 11:57:21 PM
Ugh, this album. This might be my least favorite Rush album. The debut and Caress of Steel at least have charm in that they seemed really into what they were doing. This album just seems insanely half assed and forced. Like they felt obligated to make an album I wonder what was going on in the Rush camp at this time because I honestly can't think of another Rush album that feels even nearly as uninspired. The only time I ever listen to it is when I'm going through the discography or something like that, and even then reaching for it is a chore. In the span of one album, Neil went from being one of the best lyricists in rock music to being subpar at best and cringeworthy at worst, Geddy sounds bored and his vocal harmonies are awful, and Lifeson's guitar tone/playing is annoying. Horrible album.

Some positives though:
Driven is a rocking track. If it had Counterpart's energy and production I'd like it even more. It's a treat live too.

Half the World is a cool 90s tinged Rush track. One thing they were good about was being in tune with what was going on in modern music and not being afraid of letting it influence them. This is a good example of that. Still sounds like Rush but has a late 90s feel that's really quite enjoyable

Virtuality is a decent track and it's interesting seeing them tackle a subject like that before it became as relevant as it is now.

Resist is a cool song that's even better unplugged. The acoustic version is the best of course but I think it's easy to forget that the album version kicked ass too and was one of the better songs here.

And that's it really.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Test for Echo
Post by: Polarbear on November 21, 2014, 12:16:03 AM
I don't hate this album, but if i had to choose the worst Rush album after 2112 it would be this. IMO Caress of Steel and the Debut are even worse but i wont get into that..

I'm a big fan of Totem and the title track, both are really underrated.

Vapor Trails is a much better album in every way. Music, lyrics and now it sounds better than ever with the remix
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Test for Echo
Post by: The Letter M on November 21, 2014, 12:39:51 AM
I feel like at the end of every four-album cycle, Rush tried to reach a new high, a new apex, but somehow just couldn't replicate the success they had the first two times with 2112 and Moving Pictures. Hold Your Fire was a step sideways after the brilliant Power Windows and Test For Echo feels the same in comparison to Counterparts (and both POW and CP happen to be my favorite albums from those two sectors/phases/cycles/what-have-you).

There's some strong material on here, but some of Neil lyrics come across as dated and cheesy, while some of the music feels a bit uninspired. The highlights for me include the first three tracks, "Limbo" and "Carve Away The Stone", and possibly "Resist". The rest is just average Rush, which didn't seem like much at the time.

I don't HATE this album, but if I'm going to go for 90's Rush, it'll be CP or RTB first. I did come to love "Limbo" though after learning it on drums and watching Neil's video on how he re-learned drums with traditional grip and played all the songs on the album that way. Great instructional video, especially as he helped me in my formative years as a drummer. The video also helped me transcribe "Limbo" for the Rush Tablature Project! I also kind of wished they'd bring back "Limbo" to the live sets, so I hope, since "Where's My Thing?" made a comeback last tour, that they pull out this slightly obscure instrumental!

-Marc.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Test for Echo
Post by: Zydar on November 21, 2014, 12:45:59 AM
When I decided to get into Rush I looked up their discography and saw that Test For Echo got low ratings from fans and critics alike. I therefore avoided it for a while, and much later decided to give it a spin. I like it a lot, there's much here of interest. Don't know why it gets so much flak. Driven, Time And Motion, Half The World, Resist, and the title track, are all great songs. Different tastes, I guess.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Test for Echo
Post by: Mosh on November 21, 2014, 01:24:49 AM
I feel like at the end of every four-album cycle, Rush tried to reach a new high, a new apex, but somehow just couldn't replicate the success they had the first two times with 2112 and Moving Pictures. Hold Your Fire was a step sideways after the brilliant Power Windows and Test For Echo feels the same in comparison to Counterparts (and both POW and CP happen to be my favorite albums from those two sectors/phases/cycles/what-have-you).
I was thinking about this earlier today. Clockwork Angels was a brilliant album, will history repeat again with Rush's next album? I have no doubt that they're in a better frame of mind and there's more potential for quality than there was when they made TFE and HYF, but I still can't help but wonder.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Counterparts
Post by: ? on November 21, 2014, 02:02:05 AM
I find T4E pretty underrated and I think there are some great songs on it, like the title-track, Driven, Resist and Totem. Virtuality rocks as well, despite the dated lyrics about modems. :lol Dog Years is a clunker, and a few other songs aren't too memorable, but the album isn't too bad on the whole - I'd take it over Vapor Trails any day.
sorry, back to the Stick It Out video....

anyone notice at the end, the last 20 seconds or so of the song is mixed differently?  Geddy's vocals occur on different beats in the video than they do on the CD, and there might be an extra measure or  two.

it's such a weird change to make.  I don't feel like it helps the song at all.  anyone care to hazard a guess why they did it?  to edit the audio to match the director's vision for the video?
I take it you watched this version (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GgzNbPVb3zs)? It has been edited by the uploader; this video has the normal ending: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KBXWkV9yOJE
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Test for Echo
Post by: TAC on November 21, 2014, 06:06:34 AM
Ugh, this album. This might be my least favorite Rush album. The debut and Caress of Steel at least have charm in that they seemed really into what they were doing. This album just seems insanely half assed and forced. Like they felt obligated to make an album I wonder what was going on in the Rush camp at this time because I honestly can't think of another Rush album that feels even nearly as uninspired. The only time I ever listen to it is when I'm going through the discography or something like that, and even then reaching for it is a chore. In the span of one album, Neil went from being one of the best lyricists in rock music to being subpar at best and cringeworthy at worst, Geddy sounds bored

Wow, I was thinking what to write and then I read this. You nailed my thoughts exactly. Geddy's vocals on this are terrible. I think Driven is a good tune, but the vocal delivery is anything but.
I like the verses in Totem and I love Time And Motion. Best song on the aklbum by far. Title track is fine too.

Coincidently, this was the last tour that I have seen Rush. Seeing a band multiple times, you get a feeling if the band is into it or not. Well, for the show in Boston, they were NOT. Looked like a job to do.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Test for Echo
Post by: hefdaddy42 on November 21, 2014, 06:15:18 AM
I actually like this album. Sure it has a few clunkers, and I wouldn't hold it up to something like Moving Picturers, but it has some good stuff aswell. I've never really understood the hate for Time and Motion either, especially on a forum for a progressive metal band.

Funnily enough this was one of the albums that got me into the band in the first place, so maybe that contributes a little to why I seems to like it more than most.
This actually matches my opinion pretty well.  It's a really good album.

lol at the opinions all over the map.  Go Rush!
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Test for Echo
Post by: jingle.boy on November 21, 2014, 09:32:06 AM
I agree with Marc that this was a sideways step from Counterparts, but I don't think it was a bad sideways step.  Yes, there are clunkers... Virtuality's lyrics kill me, as does Dog Years.  The first half of the album is terrific (really, REALLY not sure where Kev's hate for T&M is coming from), while the latter half has the weaker tracks.  Resist is not a good ballads, and Limbo is one of their worst instrumentals... although, their respective counterparts on CP (are the worst of theirs for those two song styles).

Overall, it's on par with CP for me.  The highs are very high, the lows are pretty mediocre, and there are a couple of total duds.  Though, TFE doesn't have anything that I actively dislike (looking straight at Speed of Love).
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Test for Echo
Post by: Orbert on November 21, 2014, 09:33:23 AM
By this point, Rush had a lot of albums, and they're all over the place in terms of style and sound (yet still sounding like Rush, which has always been one of their strengths), so they're not all gonna be favorites.  I still hadn't come to terms with the 80's stuff, and I still consider the earlier stuff their best work, so this is another "somewhere in the middle" album for me.  Some good songs, some great ones, some I don't really like.

In the early 90's, we were fortunate enough to live next door to another couple who were the same age as us and shared most of our interests in terms of TV shows, hobbies, movies, and music.  Kevin and I spent hours working on his model trains while listening to music, and discussing it ad nauseum.  Yes, Genesis, Kansas, Pink Floyd, Led Zeppelin, and of course Rush.

One day Kevin knocked on the door (which was usually easier than calling anyway) and asked what I was doing that night.  I didn't have plans, so he said "Then we're going to see Rush!"  I knew Rush was in town, but money was tight, new baby, unemployed wife (again!) so I had come to consider my concert-going days a thing of the past.

"What, you have tickets?"  Dude didn't even tell me.

"No, but I got a big bonus at work, I've already cashed it, and we're gonna go get scalped!"

Ha ha!  As everyone knows, there's always "scalpers" out front or in the parking lot outside a concert, with tickets they'll sell you for ridiculous prices.  But if you're desperate enough and have the cash, you can get pretty good seats.  So we went down there, parked, and Kevin immediately started talking to guys with tickets for sale.  No, no, no, hmm... Yes!

The Capital Center in Landover, Maryland (later the US Air Arena, then later torn down) had a main floor and an odd, tiered balcony.  Front row in the balcony was of course great.  Then there were four rows, and a rise of three or four feet, then more rows, then another rise, etc.  If you were in the front row of any of these groups of rows, it was basically the front row; there was no one in front of you.  You could put up your feet on the rail, sit back, and enjoy the show.  Our seats were on the end of one of these front rows.  I was on the aisle, straight out from center stage.  Perfect seat.

Amazing show, as always.  I hadn't heard Test for Echo yet, but as with all Rush concerts, they drew from their entire catalog, so there were plenty of songs that I did know, and it was all great.  Even the 80's stuff which I didn't really like came alive.  I can always appreciate a great live performance, whatever the music or genre.

Early in the show, after the second or third song, this girl in the row ahead of me gets up and stands in the aisle so she can see better.  She's kinda short, but since she's in the back row of her group of rows, she can stand in the aisle and not block anyone's view since we're all above her.  After a while, she starts dancing, just kinda shifting her weight back and forth, eventually swinging her hips a bit more, getting into it.  I'd never seen anyone dance to Rush before, but I wasn't complaining.  She had tiny white shorts and a T shirt, and long brown hair that swayed back and forth across her back.  Pretty soon her arms were up over her head, swinging around.  She did this the entire concert.  Basically I spent the next two hours enjoying a good buzz, Rush live, and watching this girl's ass.  It was a great show.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Test for Echo
Post by: Anguyen92 on November 21, 2014, 10:05:38 AM
It's just one of those Rush albums that just kind of sits there and doesn't stand out in any way whatsoever.  The songwriting, music, lyrics, etc. all just sound a bit uninspired.  Ironically, the album sounds like a band who needed a break, which they would get after the tour for this album, but for all of the wrong reasons...:( :( :(

In actuality, this is how I felt about Test For Echo.  In comparison, with the three albums of the 2000s, with the albums of the 2000s, after going on that hiatus, Rush felt a little more invigorated since they stated when creating Vapor Trails, that it's like they are trying to start over again and trying to find that sense of being on the same direction of where the songs go which makes them more Driven (yes, I'm putting it there) and have a bit of a more chip on their shoulders that they did not have for Test For Echo.

That said, Test For Echo is decent.  I love Half the World and that bridge with the mandola? solo that Alex did.  Totem, Virtuality, Dog Years, and The Color of Right are fine enough songs to listen to on repeats.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Test for Echo
Post by: hefdaddy42 on November 21, 2014, 10:09:49 AM
Orbert FTW  :metal
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Test for Echo
Post by: nicmos on November 21, 2014, 10:26:56 AM
I'm actually surprised no one's mentioned the cover art yet.  It has to be my favorite, along with the booklet art.  Too bad the album's not worthy of it.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Test for Echo
Post by: King Postwhore on November 21, 2014, 10:45:51 AM
nicmos, the album is nowhere near as bad as you put is.  It's a good album, not a great album.

Bob, you rule! :metal  Isn't it amazing how a girl's butt makes everything better.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Test for Echo
Post by: Orbert on November 21, 2014, 12:10:10 PM
Definitely!  I did look up at the stage from time to time of course, and Rush was putting on a great show as always, so it was the perfect setup for me.  Just a glance up to check out the stage, and a glance back down to watch this lovely young lady enjoying the show in her own way, and enhancing everyone else's at the same time.  Rock and roll!
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Test for Echo
Post by: Lowdz on November 21, 2014, 02:16:56 PM
So, 70s Rush was awesome, 80s Rush was excellent on the whole, and this album was ... boring.
At the time I hated it. I'd enjoyed the previous 2 after not really loving Presto, but this was rubbish. I think I was expecting not to like it after the abomination that was Victor. And the lyrics didn't impress me at all for the first time ever.

Listening back for this, it's not as bad as I remember and it's certainly not rubbish, but there's not much to get excited about. It's not an album I  have ever reached for other than to see if it's as bad as I remember. It's a masterpiece compared to what's around the corner though, and a 1000 times better than Victor.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Test for Echo
Post by: Newmz on November 21, 2014, 03:18:53 PM
I stand by what I said before when I said that it is better than counterparts.

I never really liked counterparts because the lyrics really annoyed me. I never did think Rush was good with those type of lyrics (it's one of the reasons I tend not to like Virtuality on T4E, even though the music is good).  To me it just sounds... sappy. An expection being Cut to the Chase - I freaking love that song  :metal

T4E had a different theme behind most of the album, which allowed me to really get into the music.  To put that another way, the lyrics didn't pop out at me and distract me.  T4E also just seemed a little more straightforward.  I could listen to it without really paying attention to it, or I could focus on it and pick up those little things that every Rush album has.

Highlights include: Totem (really like the chorus. REALLY like the chorus.), Half the World, Dog Years, the Color of Right, Carve Away the Stone, and Resist. Everything else I have to be in the mood for - except limbo... I could never get into it.  :-\
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Test for Echo
Post by: Lowdz on November 21, 2014, 03:32:39 PM
On my play through I couldn't even get through Time & Motion and Virtuality.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Test for Echo
Post by: KevShmev on November 21, 2014, 06:13:21 PM
Something I forgot to mention about this record: this is where Alex Lifeson really dropped off as a soloist.  On every album prior to Test for Echo, nearly every solo he did was one I enjoyed the hell out of, to different degrees of course, but Test for Echo doesn't have one solo that kicks my ass.  A few of them are pretty good, and none of them are bad or anything, but they are just lacking overall.  I remember at some point during my "this album isn't as good as I thought it was at first" phase coming to that conclusion, many years ago.  And I consider Alex to be a phenomenal soloist, especially in the context of Rush's music, but, I don't know, maybe he blew his wad on the Victor album earlier that year and just didn't have great solos in him when it came to doing the Rush record.  The fact that the first song on Test for Echo basically recycles the "I Am the Spirit" riff from the Victor album really does make me wonder if he blew his creative wad earlier that year.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Test for Echo
Post by: Mosh on November 21, 2014, 11:00:49 PM
Speaking of Alex, this is where he started throwing the foreign instruments into the music. I have to say I really don't dig it. There's one song on S&A where it's okay (Working them Angels?) but besides that it just sounds kinda tacky and out of place. Doesn't really add much to the music, and it's actually pretty annoying on this album.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Test for Echo
Post by: Anguyen92 on November 21, 2014, 11:29:19 PM
I loved the mandola? in Half the World.  It gave an interesting flair to the song that I think would have made the song not as good if he did not incorporate it.  Working Them Angels was also good in that end as well.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Test for Echo
Post by: Mosh on November 21, 2014, 11:52:49 PM
Btw, I'm all for incorporating non traditional instruments in rock music, it just never seemed to work for me with Lifeson. It could also have to do with that stuff appearing on some songs that I really didn't like the sound of to begin with.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Test for Echo
Post by: Mladen on November 22, 2014, 04:26:25 AM
Most of the songs on Test for echo are neither average nor good, just somewhere in between. But I'm being kind to this album when comparing it to the others - after all, it's still Rush, and none of the songs are bad, honestly. The ones I really like on here are Driven, Virtuality (such an underrated tune) and Time and motion.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Test for Echo
Post by: KevShmev on November 22, 2014, 09:04:18 AM
I loved the mandola? in Half the World.  It gave an interesting flair to the song that I think would have made the song not as good if he did not incorporate it.  Working Them Angels was also good in that end as well.

Agreed.  I liked him incorporating that instrument into those songs, even if they are both songs I merely like (instead of love).

Also, since it was asked a while back and I never really explained it, my dislike for Time and Motion can be summed up this way:

-that keyboard tone used in this song is wretched, and that little melody it plays really sticks out like a sore thumb.
-"Spontaneous elation and the long enduring kind" - easily the worst chorus in Rush history and quite possibly the most cringe-worthy of their career.  Because this was played at a handful of shows at the beginning of the TFE tour and then dropped, in my head, I imagine Geddy going to the other two and saying, "Guys, I can't keep singing that awful line live; it makes me want to hurl just thinking of singing it again." :lol :lol
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Test for Echo
Post by: mikemangioy on November 23, 2014, 01:11:24 AM
This record is not bad by any means. It wasn't THAT awesome, but it had cool songs. The title-track didn't do much for me. The chorus is a bit annoying. Driven, on the other hand, was great. That chorus is amazing. Half The World was ok, too, not the best. Totem was cool and catchy, I loved the lyrics and the vibe. Dog Years is one of my favorites, and Virtuality too. The problem is that that riff is so good, but it's used in an average song, and the rest of the song doesn't stand in facing the riff. Seriously that's one of the best Rush riffs I've ever heard. I didn't like Resist that much, but I checked out the unplugged version and it's definetly better. I didn't get Limbo, I think it's their worst instrumental so far, and Carve Away The Stone was OK.

Overall, not bad, some songs are nice others are meh. Nothing really stood out.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Test for Echo
Post by: jjrock88 on November 23, 2014, 01:17:49 AM
The title track and Driven are two of my favorite Rush tracks from the 90s. Overall an above average release from the band.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Victor (Alex solo record)
Post by: KevShmev on November 23, 2014, 07:53:47 AM
Okay, I should have done this before Test for Echo, but we all got caught up in the CP vs TFE debate that it had to be next.  But I wanted to feature the two solo albums, so here we go...

In early 1996, Alex Lifeson released his first and, to date, only solo album, under the title of simply Victor.  It's more experimental than your average Rush album, and it also has some pretty straight forward rockers.  The album is kind of a mixed bag for me, as some of the songs I really like - the instrumental "Strip and Go Naked" is fantastic, the dark and eerie "At the End" is creepy story about suicide yet is oddly catchy, "Mr X" is another sweet instrumental, and "Start Today," featuring a female singer who sounds a lot like Geddy Lee, is very nice.  "Shut up Shuttin' Up" has a lot of cool stuff going on, but the constant chatter by the ladies in the background is rather silly and makes the song not age very well.  My biggest beef with some of these songs is Alex's choice of singers.  Edwin from I Mother Earth sings quite a few of the songs, and I am not particularly fond of his vocal style.  He has his moments in well-written tunes like "Promise" and "I Am the Spirit," but I can't help but think that those songs would be better with a better singer.  Les Claypool delivers some thunderous bass work on an okay track called "The Big Dance." The title track is one that is almost too out there, featuring Alex basically reading a story to us over a hypnotic keyboard beat, while other instruments slowly add more embellishment.  Cool idea, but the execution could have been better.

Overall, I like this record, even if does have an odd flow because of the difference styles of many of the songs.  If nothing else, Alex didn't play it safe and definitely move far out of the Rush box on the vast majority of the songs.

(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/1/1c/Alex_Lifeson_Victor_AC.jpg)
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Victor (Alex solo record)
Post by: King Postwhore on November 23, 2014, 08:18:00 AM
I agree but it was obvious that Alex went for something totally different from Rush. I like Shut Up, Shutin' Up. Very Frank Zappa like. This album like Kev said is a mixed bag.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Victor (Alex solo record)
Post by: jammindude on November 23, 2014, 08:52:58 AM
Victor grabbed me a lot more than MFH did....but I think it was *because* it was so Zappa-like and out there.

That being said, I haven't heard either album in a very long time, and I'm out of town at the moment.  I'll have to give them a spin when I get home.

I fondly remember 3 or 4 tracks from Victor.  I don't remember anything at all from MFH.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Victor (Alex solo record)
Post by: Orbert on November 23, 2014, 11:03:34 AM
My friend Kevin (from the Test For Echo concert story) played Victor for me one time, and I remember thinking it was very different from Rush, which I thought was good.  As far as I'm concerned, that's exactly what solo albums are for, to do things that you wouldn't normally get a chance to do with your regular band, usually because they're too different stylistically, but also if you've got some experimental stuff you've been messing around with, or always wanted to work with some other guys but it wouldn't work with your band.  That kind of thing.  So this was cool.  I didn't like some of it, some of it probably would have benefited from hearing a few more times.

So years later, I downloaded it and listened to it again, and felt exactly the same, which was both surprising and not surprising.  Maybe because so much time had passed between listens that I was basically hearing it again for the first time.  Experimental, different, sometimes pretty cool.  I too got a Zappa vibe from "Shut Up Shuttin' Up" -- reminded me of "Valley Girl" with Moon's babbling.  Fun concept, but not much replay value because even though it's humorous, I don't intentionally subject myself to things I find annoying, even for the sake of humor.  And that babbling is annoying.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Victor (Alex solo record)
Post by: The Letter M on November 23, 2014, 11:16:03 AM
Victor is a fun and quirky album, but I definitely don't listen to it (or Geddy's solo album) much anymore. Maybe I'll spin it sometime this week and post my thoughts on the album again, but I do recall enjoying it a lot when I first got it. It's got some great guitar moments (as you'd expect), and a lot of fun songs. I've often wished Alex would do another solo album because I'm sure he writes a TON of material that he just keeps, but I'm sure most of that has been saved for Rush albums (VT onward).

-Marc.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Victor (Alex solo record)
Post by: Lowdz on November 23, 2014, 01:17:03 PM
Hated it. Still hate it. Can't say anything positive about it other than the female vocal song was not total shite.

I wanted an album where Alex showed those shredders that he was a force to be reckoned with - an album full of La Villa Starngiatos. He went the other way and did some weird  shit to fuck with people. About as bad an album as I've ever bought and I once bought a Cradle Of Filth cd...

Oh yeah and I hated the vocals.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Victor (Alex solo record)
Post by: Nick on November 23, 2014, 01:32:53 PM
Victor was an interesting experiment, but doesn't get much credit from me beyond that. I don't dislike it as much as Lowdz, it just doesn't have much that stands out. The "Valley Girls" type song is my favorite, and really the only one that sticks in my brain. Probably been half a decade since I've actually played the full album though, so maybe it's time again.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Victor (Alex solo record)
Post by: Nick on November 23, 2014, 01:40:38 PM
As for Test For Echo, that's an interesting case.

I have no problem really enjoying Test For Echo. It sounds good, rocks well, and does have some amazing tracks in the title Track, Driven (which was the song I used to test out the sound system in all cars I test drove a few years back), Resist and Limbo. That said, a lot of the rest of the album is simply a solid rocker, with no unique Rush overdrive that puts it up there as a standout album. It's nice to listen to, but can't even be compared to Power Windows or Hemispheres. Still, have always enjoyed it and love the cover art.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Victor (Alex solo record)
Post by: hefdaddy42 on November 23, 2014, 03:38:12 PM
I have never heard it, and frankly, I haven't read anything here that would inspire me to do so.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Victor (Alex solo record)
Post by: nicmos on November 23, 2014, 06:47:13 PM
I have never heard it, and frankly, I haven't read anything here that would inspire me to do so.

Some of the tracks are actually decent.  Then there's some weird ones, but I think it's worth listening to at least once.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Victor (Alex solo record)
Post by: devieira73 on November 24, 2014, 05:47:26 AM
I really like Victor a lot. I think the heavier moments would totally fit in Rush, if they wanted to do something  a bit heavier than the usual for the band. And, yes, Shutting up... it's one of my favorites from that cd, very crazy in a good way. The only things I dislike in the album are the vocalists and the "song" Victor. That "song", I agree, is truly an abomination!  :biggrin:
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Victor (Alex solo record)
Post by: hefdaddy42 on November 24, 2014, 06:16:04 AM
I have never heard it, and frankly, I haven't read anything here that would inspire me to do so.

Some of the tracks are actually decent.  Then there's some weird ones, but I think it's worth listening to at least once.
I don't want to listen to anything that is worth listening to once.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Victor (Alex solo record)
Post by: devieira73 on November 24, 2014, 06:39:51 AM
Well, I listened to it (whithout Victor) 3 times only last week, after a long time not listening to the album, and I liked it a lot. The only thing I still  dont like very much are the vocals. But it's only my taste, so...
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Victor (Alex solo record)
Post by: jingle.boy on November 24, 2014, 07:30:15 AM
I have never heard it, and frankly, I haven't read anything here that would inspire me to do so.

Some of the tracks are actually decent.  Then there's some weird ones, but I think it's worth listening to at least once.
I don't want to listen to anything that is worth listening to once.

Word.  I'll pass on it.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Victor (Alex solo record)
Post by: King Postwhore on November 24, 2014, 07:43:49 AM
There are 5 song worth the CD but others are just average.  But I do admire that he went for something totally different.  Like Bob said.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Victor (Alex solo record)
Post by: wolfking on November 24, 2014, 04:39:52 PM
I have never heard it, and frankly, I haven't read anything here that would inspire me to do so.

Some of the tracks are actually decent.  Then there's some weird ones, but I think it's worth listening to at least once.
I don't want to listen to anything that is worth listening to once.

Word.  I'll pass on it.

Agree on all of this.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Victor (Alex solo record)
Post by: KevShmev on November 24, 2014, 05:32:06 PM
I'm not surprised by the comments about the Victor record.  I still think At the End is a surprisingly good song, considering the style and subject matter.  I think that was Alex attempting to do something different and something really good becoming the result.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Victor (Alex solo record)
Post by: Jaq on November 25, 2014, 08:47:27 AM
A sign of how far I drifted away from Rush in the 90s until Different Stages came out: I had no idea Alex Lifeson did a solo album.  :lol
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Different Stages
Post by: KevShmev on November 25, 2014, 01:09:23 PM
Speaking of Different Stages...discuss. :biggrin: :lol

(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/d/de/Rush_Different_Stages.jpg)
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Different Stages
Post by: The Letter M on November 25, 2014, 01:14:01 PM
Speaking of Different Stages...discuss. :biggrin: :lol

(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/d/de/Rush_Different_Stages.jpg)

Great live album, and for the first time, a double album! The mish-mash of TFE and CP tour songs is a great mixture, and we get the full live "2112", as well as "Natural Science" and a LOT of new songs from Presto to TFE.

The icing on this cake, though, is the 1978 show, and even though it is incomplete (missing "Lakeside Park", "2112" and "Closer To The Heart"), it's an amazing-sounding show with some great performances.

-Marc.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Different Stages
Post by: jammindude on November 25, 2014, 01:30:06 PM
My only complaint is that I wish disc 3 would have been from the Hemispheres Tour instead of the AFTK Tour.   Other than that, this usurped ESL as my all time favorite Rush live album.    (well........ the new CA Tour album is climbing the charts)

Dreamline, Driven, Bravado, 2112, The Analog Kid and Natural Science are all big time standouts in my book.   I suppose in retrospect, I have a second complaint.   Not enough Presto material. 
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Different Stages
Post by: King Postwhore on November 25, 2014, 01:35:19 PM
I was there for the 2112 recording and they were on fire that night.  You could feel it in the stands.  Ton's of laughs, hard rockin, blast of a time.  Got Alex to give me a "you're insane" look. :lol
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Different Stages
Post by: The Letter M on November 25, 2014, 02:12:33 PM
I was there for the 2112 recording and they were on fire that night.  You could feel it in the stands.  Ton's of laughs, hard rockin, blast of a time.  Got Alex to give me a "you're insane" look. :lol

In regards to "2112", I recall hearing Neil mess up some crashes near the end of "Grand Finale" on a bootleg of that show, but it was fixed for Different Stages, either by looping a similar part over his mistake, or using a different show for a bit.

It was interesting to hear that mistake on the original but knowing it was perfect on the live album. I discovered this when putting together my complete TFE Tour show (see my Rush Tour thread (https://www.dreamtheaterforums.org/boards/index.php?topic=35547.0)).

-Marc.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Different Stages
Post by: TAC on November 25, 2014, 04:50:03 PM
I like Different Stages a lot.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Different Stages
Post by: Big Hath on November 25, 2014, 10:39:18 PM
one of the first Rush albums I owned.  I discovered Natural Science through this album.  Permanent Waves became an immediate purchase and one of my favorite albums of all time.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Different Stages
Post by: jjrock88 on November 26, 2014, 02:06:02 AM
awesome live album and Natural Science sounds amazing.  I enjoy the whole thing.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Different Stages
Post by: ? on November 26, 2014, 03:58:06 AM
Haven't heard the whole release, but I've listened to several tracks on Spotify and it sounds great. 2112 in full = :2metal:
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Different Stages
Post by: jingle.boy on November 26, 2014, 05:37:35 AM
Probably my favorite live CD.  Saw them three times that tour... once, just like Joe, 6 rows back at the Molson Amphitheatre - so I SHOULD'VE been at the recorded show!  :lol  Still haven't had time to watch it from the R40 package, but looking forward to it.  I discovered Natural Science from this tour.  There was a lot of hype about them bringing back 2112 in it's entirety for the first time in decades, as well as dusting off Natural Science.  Given where technology was in 1997, it's amazing how well those lyrics held up 20 years later (unlike how badly Virtuality holds up today :lol).

Will spin it later today.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Different Stages
Post by: jammindude on November 26, 2014, 09:17:32 AM
Probably my favorite live CD.  Saw them three times that tour... once, just like Joe, 6 rows back at the Molson Amphitheatre - so I SHOULD'VE been at the recorded show!  :lol  Still haven't had time to watch it from the R40 package, but looking forward to it.  I discovered Natural Science from this tour.  There was a lot of hype about them bringing back 2112 in it's entirety for the first time in decades, as well as dusting off Natural Science.  Given where technology was in 1997, it's amazing how well those lyrics held up 20 years later (unlike how badly Virtuality holds up today :lol).

Will spin it later today.

I believe it was the first time EVER. 
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Different Stages
Post by: Orbert on November 26, 2014, 09:27:45 AM
So this is a great live album.  I got it as a Christmas present years ago, so it also has sentimental value, but it's great anyway.  I liked the title, and how it gives us Rush at different stages in their career, and the artwork that (to me) echoes how it's two discs from one stage and one from another.  But it was in the Rush appreciation thread that someone pointed out the double meaning of it; they were also performing on different stages.  Different venues.  I totally missed that.

In the interest of being completely fair, though, I do have to mention that as great as it is to get "2112" played in full, it still doesn't quite work for me because of the lowered key.  I know, this doesn't bother most people, but my ears are just too pitch-sensitive.  I don't know if I have perfect pitch, but I've got "pretty good pitch" and the whole thing just sounds wrong to me.  I honestly wish that that wasn't the case and that I could enjoy it the way most people do.  But to me it sounds as bad and playing it too slow or getting the words wrong.  I know what the notes sound like, and these are the wrong notes.  20 minutes of playing it in the "wrong" key.  The performance itself is great.  I should try to listen to it again.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Different Stages
Post by: hefdaddy42 on November 26, 2014, 10:03:25 AM
In the interest of being completely fair, though, I do have to mention that as great as it is to get "2112" played in full, it still doesn't quite work for me because of the lowered key.  I know, this doesn't bother most people, but my ears are just too pitch-sensitive.  I don't know if I have perfect pitch, but I've got "pretty good pitch" and the whole thing just sounds wrong to me.  I honestly wish that that wasn't the case and that I could enjoy it the way most people do.  But to me it sounds as bad and playing it too slow or getting the words wrong.  I know what the notes sound like, and these are the wrong notes.  20 minutes of playing it in the "wrong" key.  The performance itself is great.  I should try to listen to it again.
I have that same "problem."  I definitely notice it here, and with several of Neal Morse's live releases.

The biggest offender like this for me is the Eagles.  I have a live DVD of theirs from recent times (I forgot which year), but one of their strengths is their vocal harmonies, that tight and often high sound.  There are numerous songs on that performance where they have lowered the key.  They still sound great, but they don't sound right.  I know it has to be done sometimes as artists get older, but I understand you completely.

Oh, yeah, this is a really good live album.  I haven't listened to it in a long, long time though.
Title: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: tragedy, hiatus, MFH & reunion
Post by: KevShmev on November 27, 2014, 07:29:02 AM
Tragedy struck.  Shortly after the end of the Test for Echo tour in the summer of '97, Neil Peart's daughter, Selena, died in a car accident. Unfathomably, Neil's wife, Jacqueline, died of cancer 10 months later, although Neil would later say she never recovered from the loss of their daughter and died of a broken heart.  Awful, just awful.  I was not on the 'net at the time, but word did seep out that Rush was taking an extended, and understandable, hiatus, and whether they would ever do anything new as a band again was completely unknown. The more time went on, the less likely it seemed that Rush would ever be Rush again.  While a bummer, you couldn't help but think how nightmarish that had to be for Neil to go through, and if he didn't want to be part of a rock band anymore, who could blame him?

At the turn of the century, Geddy Lee decided to make his first solo album, which was released near the end of 2000.  My Favorite Headache sounds very much Rush-lite, and you can really tell how much of a stamp Geddy has on the band's songwriting when you listen to this.  Sure, it's missing the playing of Neil and Alex, as well as Neil's lyrics, but structurally and melodically, it very much sounds like what the follow-up to Test for Echo could have been.  It's a nice record, with one good song after another.  If someone said there aren't many standouts on it, I wouldn't necessarily disagree, and this isn't an album I listen to a lot, but whenever I do, it's consistency is more than obvious.  It's a good, solid record.  When it comes to favorites, I am partial to "The Present Tense," "Slipping," "The Angels' Share" and the title track. I suspect many were disappointed that Geddy didn't step outside of his normal box and make a more daring record, instead of essentially writing a Rush record without Neil and Alex, but if those songs what were coming to him, why fight it? ;)

(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/5/51/GL_My_Favorite_Headache.jpg)

Then, in early 2001, after years of mourning and self-reflection, not to mention getting remarried in 2000. which he documented in his book, Ghost Rider: Travels on the Healing Road, Neil Peart told his two longtime bandmates that he was ready to work again. Thrilled to be back together, the three set about making new music. I cannot remember exactly when word out got out that the band's hiatus was over and that they were working on new music, but I remember it being news that so many of us were overjoyed to get; it was like winning the musical lottery!  Rush was working on new music.  Rush was back.  Rush would be touring again.  After being spoiled by their constant work from 1974-1997, those four years off seemed like forever, and now they were back and you didn't know what was coming.  To say we were thankful we were getting new Rush anything would be an understatement.  The unknown was both exciting and intriguing.  When Rush would release their first album of the 21st century, what would it sound like?  Stay tuned... :biggrin:
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: tragedy, hiatus, MFH & reunion
Post by: jingle.boy on November 27, 2014, 08:17:22 AM
Back on Different Stages after listening to it yesterday.

That Cygnus teaser right at the end was such a TEASE.  I remember one of the guys I went to the show with was SO pissed they didn't play it.  Didn't bother me, as at the time I didn't 'get' Cygnus X-1.  Years later though... thank god they gave it to us on Disc 3.

I missed the CP tour, so was this the first drum solo with triggered orchestra/big-band? 

My room-mate at the time bought it just before I did, and listened to it on the way home from work.  I remember him telling me how awesome it was, and that Closer to the Heart was amazing - even better than the version on A Show of Hands.  I responded "Better than A SHOW OF HANDS" - in the same manner of Eddie Murphy's line "Better than MacDonald's!!" from RAW.  It became a running joke for us.  (You probably had to be there).

The 2112 drop in key doesn't bother me at all.  When I think about it, I notice it, but I'm not discerning enough sonically for it to be an issue.  Bob, as a musician I can totally understand your position though and how it bugs the shit out of you.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: tragedy, hiatus, MFH & reunion
Post by: The Curious Orange on November 27, 2014, 08:51:02 AM
Oh back then. I didn't know VT was coming out until I saw it in the record store. Those were the days...
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: tragedy, hiatus, MFH & reunion
Post by: TAC on November 27, 2014, 09:03:48 AM
No one should have to go through what Neil went through.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: tragedy, hiatus, MFH & reunion
Post by: The Letter M on November 27, 2014, 09:50:47 AM
Oh back then. I didn't know VT was coming out until I saw it in the record store. Those were the days...

I had a similar experience. I remember finding VT in Target one day not knowing the band had made a new album. I became a casual fan of Rush around 2000, then over the next two years, began to dive into them more and started loving their music (even though it took another year later for me to start buying all of their albums up to VT/RIR).

I had no idea what Neil had gone through until I read about it online after becoming a fan and realizing why they went on a long hiatus. I also bought Neil's book and read through it fairly quickly. I'm not usually a book reader, but that was a good read and Neil definitely captivated me with his story of loss, suffering, and healing. I read it at a time in my life where I was feeling very depressed and down and while my reasons were nowhere near what Neil had gone through, reading his healing travels helped me heal a bit on my own as well.

As for My Favorite Headache, like Lifeson's album, I don't listen to this very much anymore. As Kev said, it's got SOME of the Rush-sound that you'd expect from Geddy, but it does miss Alex's guitars and Neil's drums/lyrics. I've never really given it much of a chance of thought, but I'm not sure if that's because I didn't think much of the album overall or because I just enjoy REAL RUSH more that I don't go for those solo albums anymore.

-Marc.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: tragedy, hiatus, MFH & reunion
Post by: Anguyen92 on November 27, 2014, 12:07:11 PM
Ahh, if only I discovered Rush a lot earlier before they announced they came back in 2001.  I would have been on my knees, kissing the floor, be all "Yes! Yes! Yes! They're Back!!!"  And so begins, personally, my favorite era of Rush which is the 2000s onwards.  Sure, there isn't as much new album material coming in at the rate in the earlier years, but I got into Rush due to what they had released in the 2000s.

Anywho, going to listen to My Favorite Headache and see how it is.

Edit: I didn't know Matt Cameron of Soundgarden and Pearl Jam plays drums in this album.

Edit x 2: Really like Working At Perfekt, Runaway Train, Slipping.  The album, so far, is pretty good. 

Edit x 3: I gave Test For Echo 7-7.5/10.  This is easily an 8.  I enjoyed it more than Test For Echo and I like Test For Echo a decent amount.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: tragedy, hiatus, MFH & reunion
Post by: King Postwhore on November 27, 2014, 02:25:58 PM
I like Geddy's solo album a lot.  Slipping, Still & Grace to Grace are my favorites.

Home On The Strange has Jeremy Taggart from Our Lady Peace on drums.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: tragedy, hiatus, MFH & reunion
Post by: Lowdz on November 27, 2014, 02:49:50 PM
I haven't played MFH since the year it came out and don't have any desire to. Don't remember anything about it.

I understood when Neil stepped away from it all - who wouldn't? When I heard they were back playing and making an album I was excited.
I thought the lyrics would be very introspective and a great insight into loss.
When the album came I grabbed it in a most excited manner. The cover was gorgeous. I put the cd in and ... omg it was awful.
Geddy warbling like he was making the melodies up on the 1st read through. Noisy guitars with no memorable soloing. And noise.
Bloody awful.

I still don't know whether the lyrics were any good because it was so horrible to listen to I haven't bothered in ages.
Some people like it. They are wrong.

by far Rush's worst album.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: tragedy, hiatus, MFH & reunion
Post by: jingle.boy on November 27, 2014, 04:50:56 PM
I haven't played MFH since the year it came out and don't have any desire to. Don't remember anything about it.

I understood when Neil stepped away from it all - who wouldn't? When I heard they were back playing and making an album I was excited.
I thought the lyrics would be very introspective and a great insight into loss.
When the album came I grabbed it in a most excited manner. The cover was gorgeous. I put the cd in and ... omg it was awful.
Geddy warbling like he was making the melodies up on the 1st read through. Noisy guitars with no memorable soloing. And noise.
Bloody awful.

I still don't know whether the lyrics were any good because it was so horrible to listen to I haven't bothered in ages.
Some people like it. They are wrong.

by far Rush's worst album.

I used to think that too.  All the way up to the release of S&A.  Couldn't stand listening to it.  The remaster last year made it a good album.  I said in the Zeppelin discog thread that production can only enhance or detract so much from an album - that it's the writing and performance that matters.  Well, the production 1st time around made it about as bad as possible, and last year's made it about as good as possible.  Thus, the improvement is pretty vast.

Guess we're jumping ahead a little to the VT discussion.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: tragedy, hiatus, MFH & reunion
Post by: TAC on November 27, 2014, 04:58:36 PM
I had no idea what Neil had gone through until I read about it online after becoming a fan and realizing why they went on a long hiatus. I also bought Neil's book and read through it fairly quickly. I'm not usually a book reader, but that was a good read and Neil definitely captivated me with his story of loss, suffering, and healing. I read it at a time in my life where I was feeling very depressed and down and while my reasons were nowhere near what Neil had gone through, reading his healing travels helped me heal a bit on my own as well.

Ghost Rider was a great read.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: tragedy, hiatus, MFH & reunion
Post by: KevShmev on November 27, 2014, 10:15:36 PM
Let's keep the chatter on the featured disc at hand, please.  We'll have plenty of time to get to VT and the others.  :coolio
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: tragedy, hiatus, MFH & reunion
Post by: ? on November 28, 2014, 01:47:38 AM
I liked the songs I heard from MFH, which prompted me to order the album. I haven't received it yet, though.

I've read Ghost Rider and it's a great book, although very dark. It's amazing Neil got back into music after all he went through.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: tragedy, hiatus, MFH & reunion
Post by: jingle.boy on November 28, 2014, 05:03:28 AM
Let's keep the chatter on the featured disc at hand, please.  We'll have plenty of time to get to VT and the others.  :coolio

I've always been a man ahead of our time.  :zydar:
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: tragedy, hiatus, MFH & reunion
Post by: Newmz on November 28, 2014, 11:22:52 AM
one could say he's... progressive.

(I'll stop now)
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: tragedy, hiatus, MFH & reunion
Post by: Ben_Jamin on November 28, 2014, 12:18:32 PM
My problem with 2112 in a lower key is it loses a bit of the emotion. During the Oracle, and Discovery, and Soliloquy.  I love Geddys voice and melodies, I guess I got used to them since 2112 was my first Rush record when I decided to check out their records.

I got into them when I would hear Tom Sawyer, I believe when I was 6 or 7.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: tragedy, hiatus, MFH & reunion
Post by: Lowdz on November 28, 2014, 01:31:44 PM
I had no idea what Neil had gone through until I read about it online after becoming a fan and realizing why they went on a long hiatus. I also bought Neil's book and read through it fairly quickly. I'm not usually a book reader, but that was a good read and Neil definitely captivated me with his story of loss, suffering, and healing. I read it at a time in my life where I was feeling very depressed and down and while my reasons were nowhere near what Neil had gone through, reading his healing travels helped me heal a bit on my own as well.

Ghost Rider was a great read.

Agreed. Loved it. NOw what I should have done and didn't think about it at the time, was google all the places he talks about. I wanted to be there seeing what he saw and sharing the Macallan with the man.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Vapor Trails
Post by: KevShmev on November 29, 2014, 07:41:03 AM
Having not worked together in the studio in five years, Geddy, Alex and Neil found it a rough going at first when they got together to work on their 17th studio album early in 2001.  There was a lot of material that was thrown away, and it took them a bit of time to finally get enough material that they deemed worthy of being kept and put on a Rush album.  Instead of a couple months, like had become the norm, it took them 14 months to finish Vapor Trails.  Released in May 2002, I remember popping it in my CD player the minute I left Best Buy with it on release day and not knowing what to think.  I mean, it was not only Rush, but the first new Rush in six years!  But something about it sounded...off.  It sounded very loud and muddy, but I thought it was just me cranking it too loud at first or something, or trying too hard to get into it instantly, but the more I listened, the more I realized the band had released the worst-sounding album of their career.  It was simply too loud, the songs have no room to breathe, and it just sounded noisy.

Now, that is not meant to say that I didn't like quite a bit of it, regardless.  I most certainly did.  I was very fond of "Earthshine," "Freeze," "Nocturne" and the s-less title track at first, and those four songs have endured as my favorites from this record.  I also enjoyed "Ceiling Unlimited," "Ghost Rider," "The Stars Look Down" and "Secret Touch" at first, as well.  The rest I didn't dislike any of, but most of it just kind of seemed there, lost in the noise-fest.  Notable, too, is "One Little Victory," as I get why the band loved it, since it was like them pronouncing, "hey, just us working together again is like a little victory," but aside from that beastly intro, the song is not a very good one.  Some of the vocal melodies are just ugly, made worse by that effect they used on Geddy's voice.  What was also strange about this album: no real guitar solos.  Okay, there are a few times where he sort of does a solo, but most of the "solo sections" on this record ended up just being big jam sections, where the band basically just jammed together for a short bit, punctuated by even more noisiness, almost like the jamming was each one trying to out-loud the other. :lol :lol

For years, fans clamored for a remix or some kind of remaster that cleaned it up, so we could hear the songs breathe, and we finally got our wish in 2013, in two forms.  First, was a digital-only release of the original mix cleaned up; this, to me, while still have some flaws and problems with loudness, is the definitive version of this record.  Later that year, there came Vapor Trails Remixed, which is a completely new mix of the record.  While it sounds the best of all the versions, this new mix not only robbed many of the songs of their raw power, they did too many tweaks to bits there and bits there.  Plus, not only did they somehow make Neil's drum sound at times like they were recorded with the cheapest recording material possible, but many embellishments were done to Geddy's vocals that sound completely unnatural and just plain weird.  In short, the remix is a major trainwreck on multiple levels.  The digital only-release from earlier in 2013 is far better. 

Overall though, no matter which version you prefer the best, while it was awesome that Rush was back, this album definitely goes down as one of their least best ever.  It's not a bad album, but it's majorly flawed, and while there is plenty of raw aggression on it, it just wasn't channeled well enough to result in a great album.  It has its moments, and it really was an album they had to make, given that long hiatus they had just come back from, but it just doesn't hold up well as a whole.

(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/8/85/Rush_Vapor_Trails.jpg)
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Vapor Trails
Post by: TAC on November 29, 2014, 07:46:00 AM
It took a long time for Vapor Trails to click with me. The first couple times I heard it I thought it was awful. But then it clicked and now I really like it. Yeah, it has a strange sound to it. I can't believe this is the same band that recorded Permanent Waves more than 20 years earlier.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Vapor Trails
Post by: Orbert on November 29, 2014, 08:12:24 AM
Like everyone else, I was psyched to get ahold of new Rush, so much so that I didn't wait and downloaded a leaked copy.  It sounded like shit.  Figures, I'd gotten a bad copy, so I found another from a different source.  It too sounded like shit.  Actually, it sounded exactly the same, which made me a bit suspicious.  But it was new Rush!

In the coming weeks, I found stuff online about how bad the record sounded, like it was redlined or overcompressed or something, and that fit with what I was hearing, so I realized that what I had was what there was.  After trying for a few weeks to ignore the horrible production and appreciate the underlying music, I gave up.

I can understand that the remix doesn't work for many, because they didn't just fix the sound but changed the songs, but since I'd never gotten to a point where I knew the original versions, the changes don't bother me.  I can actually listen to and enjoy the "new" album, finally.

"Where are the solos!?"  I don't know, but that's never bothered me.  Once again, Rush was doing something different, and this album just doesn't have a lot of soloing.  I'm fine with that.  I listen to some bands that don't feel the need to wank every song.

"The songs are boring!"  That's just like your opinion, man.  I like most of them, although as with pretty much any new music these days, I put the album on and play it in my car during my commute, so I don't know any titles.  Everything is album-oriented.  I like the album, but couldn't name a single song on it.  But overall, I like the power and the vibe.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Vapor Trails
Post by: ? on November 29, 2014, 08:14:18 AM
I've only heard the remix so I can't comment on the sound quality of the original release, but musically this is a bottom 3 Rush album in my eyes. None of the songs are downright bad, but most of them just aren't too interesting or memorable - I guess the boys were just getting back into the groove after the hiatus. However, I like the album as a symbol of their return, and luckily Rush in Rio includes the best songs from it.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Vapor Trails
Post by: Lowdz on November 29, 2014, 08:46:48 AM
Well, as i said prematurely earlier, its Rush's worst album. Just awful really. How it took 14 months to come up with these tracks I don't know. SHame as I like the cover and I was so excited for new Rush.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Vapor Trails
Post by: Polarbear on November 29, 2014, 09:38:55 AM
A big step up from Test For Echo!

Ghost Rider and Ceiling Unlimited are some of the best songs they have done since the reunion! I can see why some people hate this album, but i like it. I also prefer it over a lot of their earlier material like: S/T, Caress of Steel, Hemispheres, Signals and Test For Echo.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Vapor Trails
Post by: jammindude on November 29, 2014, 09:49:38 AM
HUGE step down from Test for Echo.     I like some of the songs, but they are just so "lost in the mud"....   Earthshine is the perfect example of a great riff that got buried in mud and horrific vocal overlays.   

There are some nice ideas, but it's mostly unlistenable. 

Ghost Rider and Freeze are awesome, and really stand out among the rest.   Peaceable Kingdom and And the Stars Look Down are also OK.   Can't really get into the rest no matter how hard I try. 

I still put this as being just a rat's hair better than Roll the Bones.   But it's Rush's 2nd worst album.

EDIT:   The remix is FAR better.  But I'm out of time at the moment.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Vapor Trails
Post by: TAC on November 29, 2014, 09:53:50 AM
A big step up from Test For Echo!

Ghost Rider and Ceiling Unlimited are some of the best songs they have done since the reunion! I can see why some people hate this album, but i like it. I also prefer it over a lot of their earlier material like: S/T, Caress of Steel, Hemispheres, Signals and Test For Echo.
:omg:
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Vapor Trails
Post by: Polarbear on November 29, 2014, 09:58:09 AM
A big step up from Test For Echo!

Ghost Rider and Ceiling Unlimited are some of the best songs they have done since the reunion! I can see why some people hate this album, but i like it. I also prefer it over a lot of their earlier material like: S/T, Caress of Steel, Hemispheres, Signals and Test For Echo.
:omg:

 :lol Yeah, i have never been a big fan of Hemispheres.

La Villa Strangiato is awesome!, but i rarely listen to the rest of Hemispheres.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Vapor Trails
Post by: Anguyen92 on November 29, 2014, 10:24:29 AM
I liked Vapor Trails.  I mean, granted, I never heard of the original version in full, and based on people's comments on it, I will not bother.  However, I heard the re-mixing of it, last year, I found it to be enjoyable.  My original thoughts on it were "if this remixed version sounded like this, I don't even want to hear what the original version sounds like."

My favorites of it were Earthshine, Ceilings Unlimited, Freeze, Ghost Rider, and Out of the Cradle.  It's a good album.  A bump up from Test For Echo, but not better than the next two albums.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Vapor Trails
Post by: KevShmev on November 29, 2014, 11:50:10 AM
The Stars Look Down is one I liked at first, but it grew off of me over time.  I like the cool guitar stuff in the chorus, but I don't know is going on during those verses. :lol :lol

I would love to hear a stripped down live version of How It Is. There's a lovely melody in there somewhere, but it got mostly crushed by the loudness. 
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Vapor Trails
Post by: The Letter M on November 29, 2014, 12:34:06 PM
Being the band's newest album around the time I discovered them and became a fan, I grew to love this album...a lot. My original CD is so over-used and over-played that I thought about replacing it for years and years but held off in hopes that they'd eventually release a remaster or remix. Thankfully, my laziness and patience paid off and they released the remix last year, which I love just as much. The original, while loud, has an impact and a punch that I feel is a bit lacking in the remix. On the other hand, the remix does bring out some nice parts and the clarity allows for more intense and personal listening. The original is great for blasting in the car on long drives, but the remix is good for headphones and a good concentrated listen.

As for the songs themselves, my favorites have to be "Secret Touch", "Earthshine", "Freeze", "Vapor Trail", "How It Is" and "Ghost Rirder". Fortunately, three of those have been played live, but I have been wishing for years they'd break out any of the other three. Hearing "Freeze" with the rest of the 'Fear' series would be amazing, but I'm not sure if they'd ever play all four songs together.

I still love this album to this day, and actually every album since then as well. They've had a hit after hit for me since they came back together, so I'm excited to see if they'll do one more together for a 20th album and how great it'll be.

-Marc.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Vapor Trails
Post by: Mosh on November 29, 2014, 02:00:08 PM
Decent album. Huge step up from Test For Echo and probably better than Roll the Bones. Still at the bottom end of their rankings for me, but it has some good songs. The remix helped a ton, making what was once an unlistenable album tolerable and actually quite enjoyable at times. I still don't enjoy the guitar sound but I think that's more on Alex, since I don't really like the guitar sound on Test for Echo either.

I think the biggest issue with this album is that it's way too long. If they trimmed the fat and narrowed it down to about 10 songs, it'd be a really good album. But with 14 songs and so much subpar material in there, it's really hard for me to to be motivated to listen to it. Is this Rush's longest album?

Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Vapor Trails
Post by: KevShmev on November 29, 2014, 02:29:24 PM
I think it is, although Clockwork Angels might be a tad longer.  Cannot remember.

In comparison to Test for Echo, at least this record, while not great, has a few really good songs and sounds like a band that was full of energy, unlike TFE, which sounds like a band running short on inspiration. 
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Vapor Trails
Post by: The Letter M on November 29, 2014, 02:35:07 PM
But with 14 songs and so much subpar material in there, it's really hard for me to to be motivated to listen to it. Is this Rush's longest album?

14 songs? Did yours come with a bonus track? AFAIK, every version of Vapor Trails has only ever had 13 tracks (the same number of tracks S&A also has). I guess I would know that it's 13 songs because I've obsessively memorized the number of tracks on each album and could recite those numbers off the top of my head easily, especially since a LOT of them have 8 tracks.

And yes, at just over 67 minutes, this is their longest album ever, although their next two would also break 60 minutes. It also helped that two of the songs on VT broke the 6-minute mark, something that hadn't been done since POW (CP had one track that did, but "Animate" just barely so by 4 seconds). Their last three albums have all been over an hour long and at least 12 tracks each. A similar change happened when they broke 8 tracks after POW and went to 10 with HYF and exceeded 50 minutes. After that, from HYF to TFE, their albums all had 10+ tracks and were between 48-55 minutes long.

-Marc.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Vapor Trails
Post by: TAC on November 29, 2014, 02:54:08 PM
In comparison to Test for Echo, at least this record, while not great, has a few really good songs and sounds like a band that was full of energy, unlike TFE, which sounds like a band running short on inspiration.

I agree 100%.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Vapor Trails
Post by: hefdaddy42 on November 29, 2014, 03:22:16 PM
I can't tell you much about how the songs are on this album, because it SOUNDED so bad that I've never listened to the whole thing, and didn't even listen to the parts I've listened to more than a couple of times.  I have no desire to listen to it now, either.  It's one of the worst sonic misadventures I've ever gone on.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Vapor Trails
Post by: The Letter M on November 29, 2014, 03:26:23 PM
I can't tell you much about how the songs are on this album, because it SOUNDED so bad that I've never listened to the whole thing, and didn't even listen to the parts I've listened to more than a couple of times.  I have no desire to listen to it now, either.  It's one of the worst sonic misadventures I've ever gone on.

Have you listened to the Remix? It's greatly more listenable than the original.

-Marc.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Vapor Trails
Post by: Nick on November 29, 2014, 03:26:38 PM
Kev, I know we've had this debate before, but the remix does not lose nearly as much as you make it sound. As Hef mentioned, I could never truly evaluate this album due to how incredibly awful is sounded. The remix might have taken a *slight* edge off of some songs, but it allowed the album to be seen as a solid release as opposed to a god-awful failure.

Secret Touch is one of, if not the worst song on this album for me, and so I'm sad it made it into the live set not just for this tour, but a later tour as well. It's the single biggest let-down of the R30 tour.

Love the title track, Ceiling Unlimited, One Little Victory, Ghost Rider and Nocturne.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Vapor Trails
Post by: hefdaddy42 on November 29, 2014, 03:33:13 PM
I can't tell you much about how the songs are on this album, because it SOUNDED so bad that I've never listened to the whole thing, and didn't even listen to the parts I've listened to more than a couple of times.  I have no desire to listen to it now, either.  It's one of the worst sonic misadventures I've ever gone on.

Have you listened to the Remix?
No, and I'm not going to get it just so I can finally make it through an album.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Vapor Trails
Post by: The Letter M on November 29, 2014, 03:38:38 PM
I can't tell you much about how the songs are on this album, because it SOUNDED so bad that I've never listened to the whole thing, and didn't even listen to the parts I've listened to more than a couple of times.  I have no desire to listen to it now, either.  It's one of the worst sonic misadventures I've ever gone on.

Have you listened to the Remix?
No, and I'm not going to get it just so I can finally make it through an album.

That's a shame, but if you don't like the material enough to give the remix a chance, I guess no amount of remixing or remastering could change your opinion of the album overall. It's a breath of fresh air for me, and now I can proudly enjoy the music along side their other two newer albums and not feel like my ears are being bombarded listening to the original version of the album.

-Marc.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Vapor Trails
Post by: jammindude on November 29, 2014, 03:41:30 PM
Agreed.   The remix is such a night and day difference over the original that they almost sound like different albums. 

I've just been so busy lately that I haven't had a chance to listen to it in awhile.   But I even seem to recall that the multi-tracked vocals on Earthshine were pulled back a bit.    I knew there was a listenable song in there somewhere, but the mixing on the vocals and the yodeling on the pre-chorus was just so awful that I just couldn't get past it. 
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Vapor Trails
Post by: KevShmev on November 29, 2014, 03:42:43 PM
I like Secret Touch, but it does have that annoying habit that seems to creep their way into one song on every album now: finding that one line that they feel the need to repeat over and over and over - "The way out is the way in."  Spindrift suffers from the same affliction.

hef, if you were gonna get a better version, and I see that you are not, the iTunes-version from last year is the way to go, not that awful Remix they released.  But really, unless you are a diehard Rush fan that has to have everything, this album is not that good to where if you didn't like that much in the first album, you should bother with either new release.  Too much good music to waste your time on a slightly better version of the band's 17th-19th best album, unless, again, you are a diehard, and even then, it's iffy. :lol :lol
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Vapor Trails
Post by: KevShmev on November 29, 2014, 03:44:47 PM
And when I say 17th-19th best album, I put Vapor Trails down there in the bottom three with the debut and Test for Echo.  To me, those are their three least best albums.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Vapor Trails
Post by: TAC on November 29, 2014, 03:54:30 PM
I wish VT had the sound of Snakes, because the songs and energy are much better.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Vapor Trails
Post by: Mosh on November 29, 2014, 04:17:51 PM
But with 14 songs and so much subpar material in there, it's really hard for me to to be motivated to listen to it. Is this Rush's longest album?

14 songs? Did yours come with a bonus track? AFAIK, every version of Vapor Trails has only ever had 13 tracks (the same number of tracks S&A also has). I guess I would know that it's 13 songs because I've obsessively memorized the number of tracks on each album and could recite those numbers off the top of my head easily, especially since a LOT of them have 8 tracks.
Counted wrong, my mistake. My point still stands though (and S&A is another that could use some trimming but we'll get to that later). I've been thinking about this and I think the album would be much better if it was missing Stars Look Down, How It Is, Freeze, and Sweet Miracle. Only 9 songs now and just shy of 50 minutes. Much shorter, but also much stronger, only a few weaker moments.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Vapor Trails
Post by: Anguyen92 on November 29, 2014, 04:20:27 PM
I wish VT had the sound of Snakes, because the songs and energy are much better.

That's the funny thing.  For me, while the songs on S&A were much better, I found the energy really lacking compared to the live versions, but we'll get to that eventually.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Vapor Trails
Post by: The Letter M on November 29, 2014, 04:44:26 PM
But with 14 songs and so much subpar material in there, it's really hard for me to to be motivated to listen to it. Is this Rush's longest album?

14 songs? Did yours come with a bonus track? AFAIK, every version of Vapor Trails has only ever had 13 tracks (the same number of tracks S&A also has). I guess I would know that it's 13 songs because I've obsessively memorized the number of tracks on each album and could recite those numbers off the top of my head easily, especially since a LOT of them have 8 tracks.
Counted wrong, my mistake. My point still stands though (and S&A is another that could use some trimming but we'll get to that later). I've been thinking about this and I think the album would be much better if it was missing Stars Look Down, How It Is, Freeze, and Sweet Miracle. Only 9 songs now and just shy of 50 minutes. Much shorter, but also much stronger, only a few weaker moments.

I suppose, but given that the band always put out what they write and record, it would've been weird for them to say "Oh, by the way, we only gave you X-number of songs for our new album, but there are Y-number that we cut", especially for their "big comeback" album. I think they were excited with what they had, and especially after working on it all for over a year, they wanted to include everything.

I guess with the CD-r's and MP3 playlists, anyone can make their own version of the album, so it's really not that big of a deal if there are songs you don't like or think should not have been on the album because you can simply make your own version of it and be happy with that. I would rather them release more than what I like than say they kept stuff locked away because then there'd be that intense curiosity about what they didn't release and whether or not it was any good.

-Marc.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Vapor Trails
Post by: Mosh on November 29, 2014, 05:21:42 PM
Weird maybe, but it would've helped the album tremendously. They didn't even have to record those songs, they could've put the focus they put into those songs into the other songs to make them even better.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Vapor Trails
Post by: The Letter M on November 29, 2014, 05:29:40 PM
Weird maybe, but it would've helped the album tremendously. They didn't even have to record those songs, they could've put the focus they put into those songs into the other songs to make them even better.

True but any fan can say that about any Rush album. :rollin

-Marc.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Vapor Trails
Post by: Anguyen92 on November 29, 2014, 05:50:11 PM
Weird maybe, but it would've helped the album tremendously. They didn't even have to record those songs, they could've put the focus they put into those songs into the other songs to make them even better.

Respectfully digress.  I love Freeze and Sweet Miracle by themselves.  I like How It Is as well.  I think with albums this long, some people have their ideas of what songs should have been taken out while other people think that those songs, people think should be out of the album, are their favorites of the album.

I'm never keen on the whole idea of they don't have to record those songs and put it on the album and put the focus on other songs to make them even better (since, for all I know, the focus would be on those songs that I may not like it overall and nothing may convince me otherwise).  For me, the more songs, the merrier.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Vapor Trails
Post by: Mosh on November 29, 2014, 07:18:38 PM
Weird maybe, but it would've helped the album tremendously. They didn't even have to record those songs, they could've put the focus they put into those songs into the other songs to make them even better.

Respectfully digress.  I love Freeze and Sweet Miracle by themselves.  I like How It Is as well.  I think with albums this long, some people have their ideas of what songs should have been taken out while other people think that those songs, people think should be out of the album, are their favorites of the album.

I'm never keen on the whole idea of they don't have to record those songs and put it on the album and put the focus on other songs to make them even better (since, for all I know, the focus would be on those songs that I may not like it overall and nothing may convince me otherwise).  For me, the more songs, the merrier.
Fair enough. With an album like Vapor Trails I don't care for any of the songs enough that I'd miss any of them if they were deleted, so even though I mentioned my least favorite songs, it could apply to any group of songs on the album really. My point is that there's something to be said for brevity and I think Vapor Trail's length hurts it more than it helps it.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Vapor Trails
Post by: jammindude on November 29, 2014, 08:47:29 PM
Almost forgot my ranking:

1. Freeze
2. Ghost Rider
3. Peaceable Kingdom
4. The Stars Look Down
5. Vapor Trail
6. How It Is
7. Ceiling Unlimited
8. One Little Victory
9. Sweet Miracle
10. Secret Touch
11. Earthshine
12. Nocturne
13. Out of the Cradle
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Vapor Trails
Post by: King Postwhore on November 30, 2014, 04:38:35 AM
I remember listening to the 30 second clips and losing my mind on how heavy they were.  I was so psyched about this album.  Though it was dense and over layered I loved it.  Over time you could not hear the little intricacies that's the staple of Rush.

I for one think the 2 songs remastered on the Retrospective III is much better than the whole album re -mix that came out.  It's not bad at all and better than the original of course but the other is better.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Vapor Trails
Post by: jingle.boy on November 30, 2014, 05:52:57 AM
I haven't heard the digital-only version, so I can't comment on it-vs-remix from last year.  I will say the remix (as pretty much everyone else has said) breathed life into a virtually dead album to me.  I can now enjoy it.

I'm fairly 'meh' on the ones they've played live - Ghost Rider, Earthshine, and Secret Touch, preferring the more obscure tracks in Ceiling Unlimited, Nocturne, How it is, and Freeze

It's funny how there was a 6-year gap between TFE and this due to a 'hiatus', and (other than the covers album) that's pretty much their norm now.

Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Vapor Trails
Post by: mikemangioy on November 30, 2014, 07:31:26 AM
Here are my two cents

One Little Vicotry: loved the vocals. Wish the instrumentation was more like the intro. The structure is weird.

Celeing Unlimited: This was not so great. I didn't like at all Geddy's vocals (except for the "river" part), and also in the instrumentaion nothing really stood out.

Ghost Rider: I liked the mood of the piece, but it was kinda boring at times and I didn't like the way the lyrics were layed out.

Peaceable Kingdom: This was Ok. I liked the heaviness of the tune and the lyrics. But once again, the vocals weren't all that great.

The Stars Look Down: Finally a great song! The riffs and melodies work greatly, the lyrics are top-notch. I love the chorus.

How It Is: Nice song. Good contrast between lyrics and music. It's like if the music is trying to comfort the lyrics.

Vapor Trail: I liked the mood of this one. But nothing really stood out, except for the vocals, which were quite nice this time.

Secret Touch: My favorite so far. Great and powerful guitar work, good lyrics and finally great vocals.

Earthshine: I've already listened to this song once, and I liked it. I still like it.

Sweet Miracle: Sweet lyrics. Nice tune, not the best, but certainly not the worst.

Nocturne: Another favorite of mine. I love the atmosphere and the way the song was inspired (a nightmare). Also the line "Did I have a dream, or did the dream have me?" is genious. Anyways, this song strangely reminds me of U2.

Freeze: I honestly think that this is the best song of the album. There's wackiness, and it's pretty heavy, and those lyrics are great.


Out Of The Cradle: I like the energy in this one, but the vocals ruined it. Gawd, bad one for Geddy, uh?

--Overall: Not that bad. But not that great also. Yeah, it has great songs, but nothing really GREAT (except maybe Freeze, Secret Touch and Eartshine). I think it's too long, and also, I think that TFE is better, in terms of mood, production and enjoyability. I checked for that word in the dictionary. Yup.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Vapor Trails
Post by: Mladen on November 30, 2014, 08:31:55 AM
What a fantastic album, I love it. So intense, dark, heavy. The noisy sound somehow fits with the lyrical theme and whatever they were trying to convey - that being said, I also like the remixed version. So many great songs and quite a few really good ones, there's not a stinker in the bunch, there isn't actually a single song I would call average. This has to be one of my very favorites, possibly top 5 material.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Vapor Trails
Post by: TAC on November 30, 2014, 08:39:55 AM
The only two songs that I absolutely don't like are Peaceable Kingdom and Ceiling Unlimited. Everything else is decent.

My faves are How It Is, Secret Touch, and The Stars Look Down.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Vapor Trails
Post by: King Postwhore on November 30, 2014, 08:50:44 AM
I really would like to see Alex with his double neck playing Vapor Trail live and run right into Xanadu after!!
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Vapor Trails
Post by: KevShmev on November 30, 2014, 09:01:02 AM
That'd be cool, if only Alex hadn't retired the double neck guitar.  I remember he once said that the double neck was too hard on his back, and he's older and, well, fatter now. :lol
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Vapor Trails
Post by: King Postwhore on November 30, 2014, 11:13:48 AM
How about designing a lighter doubleneck  Alex!
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Vapor Trails
Post by: jingle.boy on November 30, 2014, 02:31:41 PM
How about designing a lighter doubleneck  Alex!

Or one with a built in girdle?
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Vapor Trails
Post by: King Postwhore on November 30, 2014, 02:57:27 PM
Sculptured to fit big guts.  I'd buy it. :lol
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Vapor Trails
Post by: nicmos on November 30, 2014, 04:33:41 PM
late to the discussion because of the Thanksgiving holiday.

Vapor Trails was definitely a grower for me.  It took me a long time (several years) to get to the point where I enjoyed more than a couple of the songs.  Now I think it's actually a really good album, although really different.  With the exception of One Little Victory, the songs are all consistently good.  I like the mood of the album, which is unlike any other Rush album.  Yeah, this continues Geddy's awful singing that I only forgive because of how great a band Rush is.  It is still hurt by the production.  I like the CD-remix version much better.

Secret Touch in particular is one of the best songs they've ever done.  It's so emotional considering the place where those lyrics came from.  I would call it very triumphant.  Love the breakdown in it and buildup back to the chorus.

Ceiling Unlimited is also one of my favorites.  Unbridled is a word I would use to describe it, sort of like how Working Man has that unbridled character.

Even the softer songs (no puns on the production intended) are ones I like.  They sound like they're at peace, something I really like.  Ghost Rider just has a mood that I love and can imagine being out on those roads that Neil likes since I've been on many of those that he's said in interviews are his favorites.

All in all, one of the easiest Rush albums for me to put on.  I'm amazed I'm saying that after how I started out not liking it too much.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Vapor Trails
Post by: TAC on November 30, 2014, 05:04:14 PM
Secret Touch in particular is one of the best songs they've ever done.  It's so emotional considering the place where those lyrics came from.  I would call it very triumphant.  Love the breakdown in it and buildup back to the chorus.
Yes. Yes! :metal
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Vapor Trails
Post by: The Curious Orange on December 01, 2014, 07:58:00 AM
The original CD of VT was a sonic turkey, one of the few really bad mastering jobs I've heard - even Death Magnetic doesn't give me that much of a headache to listen to.
But the music is on fire - this sounds like a new band of angry young Turks - not a bunch of aging millionaires. There's a few clunkers on there, sure, but there's enough great music on here to shine through the poor production. The remix is better in that it's listenable, but it does lose some of the anger.
It's such a shame that the poor production puts people off some of the best music Rush have made.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Rush in Rio
Post by: KevShmev on December 03, 2014, 09:19:00 PM
Now, THIS is a great live album, and arguably the band's best live DVD.  Great collection of songs, from all eras, and the band and crowd are both on fire.   :metal

(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/d/d2/Rush_in_Rio.jpg)
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Rush in Rio
Post by: jammindude on December 03, 2014, 09:26:06 PM
I did like this tour.   Haven't watched this video in a long time. 

I do remember that the crowd was absolutely on fire, and the band really seemed into it.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Rush in Rio
Post by: Anguyen92 on December 03, 2014, 10:03:57 PM
It is this live DVD that made me really appreciate The Pass and Bravado and the Vapor Trails songs were good, especially Ghost Rider and One Little Victory.  Great and big crowd as well.  The fans were really pumped when the opening to Tom Sawyer was played.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Rush in Rio
Post by: Nick on December 03, 2014, 10:22:18 PM
I'm sure I've told this story before, but this is a good place to tell it again.

Back when I was first really getting into music, I had gone to Best Buy and browsed the musical selections. I ended up walking out with three compilations that day, a best of the Red Hot Chili Peppers, of Blue Oyster Cult, and Spirit of Radio from Rush. Well, one of those three quickly became the only one I was really interested in. I went to my father's collection after that to see if I could poach any more, and to my enjoying he had Fly By Night, Moving Pictures, and Counterparts. All good so far, but I wasn't off the deep end yet. I went back to Best Buy and wouldn't you know, Rush had a display up at the store for a new release, a live album with a fruity dragon on the cover.

Well, that was it for me. I can't even imagine how many times I watched Rush in Rio over the next year. What still wows me all these years later was the crowd. This was a LIVE album. No live release since or Rush show I've been to has had the raw energy of this show. I think back to Exit... and how it might of well have been a compilation of studio tracks and am so glad that they came out with this to show what a live album should be. The set is solid, and it shed light on how good some of the Vapor Trails songs were. For me it only added to the disappointment when I later heard the actual album.

While other live releases have their strengths that might exceed RiR, few are up at the top as a complete package as RiR is. And, it has that added dimension that no other release has touched. Many found memories here.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Rush in Rio
Post by: Anguyen92 on December 03, 2014, 10:26:21 PM
I just realized it, right now when you mention the fruity dragon, that the dragon has a fruit hat and has one of those fancy coconut cup drinks and is wearing beads.  I'm so stupid.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Rush in Rio
Post by: jjrock88 on December 03, 2014, 10:39:30 PM
Awesome live album and the crowd is on fire for sure!

I could never completely get into VT, but this release helped me appreciate the songs off that album a bit more.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Rush in Rio
Post by: mikemangioy on December 03, 2014, 11:09:47 PM
I was considering getting this for christmas.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Rush in Rio
Post by: The Letter M on December 03, 2014, 11:19:51 PM
After having had VT, I was hyped about this release. I learned about it only after it had come out, and I saved up money to get the 3CD set just before Christmas while my dad had gone out and gotten the 2DVD set for me for Christmas. I'm thankful he didn't end up getting the CD as I already had it, but it was a nice coincidence that he got the other half of it that I wanted!

I must have brought this 3CD set around with me everywhere when I got it because my digipak has seen better days, but damnit, it was worth it! This is an AMAZING show with a great live sound and a solid band that has been around the world on their "come back" tour after so many years away from the fans. One of the highlights has always been the 1-2 punch of "The Pass" and "Bravado", as well as the drum solo, and of course, "La Villa Strangiato" with Alex's crazy ranting. Love this live show so much!

-Marc.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Rush in Rio
Post by: Mladen on December 04, 2014, 03:12:15 AM
Tremendous live DVD. And the best live audience ever.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Rush in Rio
Post by: devieira73 on December 04, 2014, 04:20:04 AM
Fantastic show indeed AND... I WAS THEEEEEEERE!!!!   :o :o :o :metal :metal :metal :hefdaddy :hefdaddy :hefdaddy
 :biggrin:
Well, I was waiting for that show since 89 and most of the audience too (or even before that), so you can imagine the crazyness level of that evening!
All I can say is that, very often, when you want something for so long, normally you get very disappointed by the expectations... but in this case, I was totally jaw dropped that the show surpassed all that I could imagine, really.
One thing that amazed me very very much was the energy level of Neil Peart's performance, something that I could never guessed just listening to cds or watching the dvds. The other day I was listening to Working Man from RIR and I was very impressed too how good Geddy Lee's voice still was back then!
Just for the record, I believe that "flowered dragon" was inspired in Carmen Miranda, a famous brazilian dancer and singer from the past, that have some sucess in Hollywood by the 40's:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carmen_Miranda
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Rush in Rio
Post by: Nick on December 04, 2014, 06:31:51 AM
After having had VT, I was hyped about this release. I learned about it only after it had come out, and I saved up money to get the 3CD set just before Christmas while my dad had gone out and gotten the 2DVD set for me for Christmas. I'm thankful he didn't end up getting the CD as I already had it, but it was a nice coincidence that he got the other half of it that I wanted!

I must have brought this 3CD set around with me everywhere when I got it because my digipak has seen better days, but damnit, it was worth it! This is an AMAZING show with a great live sound and a solid band that has been around the world on their "come back" tour after so many years away from the fans. One of the highlights has always been the 1-2 punch of "The Pass" and "Bravado", as well as the drum solo, and of course, "La Villa Strangiato" with Alex's crazy ranting. Love this live show so much!

-Marc.

It's good you mention this, as it reminds me that my story had a bit of an error I forgot about. I originally got the 3CD set, and went back a few days later and also got the DVD set, if I remember correctly.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Rush in Rio
Post by: jingle.boy on December 04, 2014, 06:39:55 AM
Tremendous live DVD. And the best live audience ever.

That sums it up.

And FUCK!!  I mDon't currently have it on my ipad - otherwise I would've watched it on my flight home tonight. Bummer.  :angry:
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Rush in Rio
Post by: Nick on December 04, 2014, 06:42:27 AM
That's going to make it a long flight... as you're...

Finding your way back home!
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Rush in Rio
Post by: hefdaddy42 on December 04, 2014, 07:23:59 AM
Arguably the best live album ever recorded, when talking about truly feeling "live" and with crowd participation.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Rush in Rio
Post by: devieira73 on December 04, 2014, 08:57:27 AM
By the way, did anyone here watch the BluRay version from R40 box set? I'm curious if it really looks and sounds better than the original DVD...
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Rush in Rio
Post by: Zydar on December 04, 2014, 09:01:24 AM
I saw someone on Facebook saying that the BluRay version isn't any better than the DVD :(
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Rush in Rio
Post by: jingle.boy on December 04, 2014, 09:03:59 AM
I saw someone on Facebook saying that the BluRay version isn't any better than the DVD :(

Damn.  Was planning to watch it this weekend, now I'm not as excited about it.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Rush in Rio
Post by: Zydar on December 04, 2014, 09:06:43 AM
I saw someone on Facebook saying that the BluRay version isn't any better than the DVD :(

Damn.  Was planning to watch it this weekend, now I'm not as excited about it.

"It's not worse than the DVD, but definitely not the upgrade you would expect."
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Rush in Rio
Post by: Nick on December 04, 2014, 09:51:02 AM
The thing is, it wasn't filmed in high enough quality for Blu-Ray, I wouldn't expect any upgrade whatsoever. The only reason they likely put it on Blu-Ray is because that's what the rest of the set is.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Rush in Rio
Post by: devieira73 on December 04, 2014, 11:39:13 AM
The thing is, it wasn't filmed in high enough quality for Blu-Ray, I wouldn't expect any upgrade whatsoever. The only reason they likely put it on Blu-Ray is because that's what the rest of the set is.

Thanks, good to know.  :tup
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Rush in Rio
Post by: Zydar on December 04, 2014, 01:10:46 PM
And to get it on one disc, since the DVD is on 2 discs.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Rush in Rio
Post by: Nick on December 04, 2014, 01:18:35 PM
And to get it on one disc, since the DVD is on 2 discs.

Yes, good point.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Feedback
Post by: KevShmev on December 06, 2014, 07:29:55 PM
With their 30th anniversary upon them in 2004, Rush decided to tour in honor of it, and seemingly for the hell of it, they busted out an EP of eight cover songs called Feedback.  I remember being totally blown away when I heard their cover of "Summertime Blues," and even though I don't listen to it much anymore, I still love it to pieces whenever I listen to it.  They did a great job with the others as well, but I don't listen to any of them much either anymore.  "Seven and Seven Is" was probably my favorite of the others at the time and still is.  Good job, but I know I am not alone when I say I don't listen to Rush for covers.

(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/8/82/Rush_Feedback.jpg)
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Feedback
Post by: Orbert on December 06, 2014, 08:07:26 PM
Yeah, this was a different thing for Rush, totally unexpected.  And I feel the same way as you do.  It's good stuff, they do some great cover work, but I don't listen to Rush for covers, either.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Feedback
Post by: Mosh on December 06, 2014, 08:16:29 PM
Meh.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Feedback
Post by: Anguyen92 on December 06, 2014, 08:19:12 PM
The first Rush song I have ever heard was the cover of Summertime Blues which was the theme song of the WWE PPV, Summerslam, in 2004.  My impressions on them, back then, was that they had a good sound with very interesting vocals and that I thought it was a band that I'm not going to hear from ever again in the future (since WWE chooses either very well-known bands or obscure standard radio-rock bands for their PPV theme songs). 

I was, obviously, very wrong about a lot of things on Rush during that time.  The only thing that I was right was that they had a great sound with very interesting and distinctive vocals.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Feedback
Post by: nicmos on December 06, 2014, 08:53:03 PM
none of the covers ever did anything for me.  didn't even bother to buy the CD.  I don't even consider this a Rush studio album.  I'm gonna say it:  I feel like it was more of a cash grab than anything.  If they wanted to have fun playing these songs they like, that's fine.  But who convinced them that the rest of us wanted to listen to it?
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Feedback
Post by: jingle.boy on December 06, 2014, 08:56:16 PM
:iagree:

Never got the album.  Wasn't a huge fan of the songs they covered, and them doing the songs did nothing for me.

Good tour though.

Watched Rush in Rio today.  Man, so good.  The unbridled joy from the crowd, right from the opening chord of Tom Sawyer... it put a lump in my throat.  Geddy was fantastic (did Freewill some serious justice).  The moments from the crowd - YYZ, giving the 'Wayne's World' bow during Freewill, the screams during La Villa and 2112.  Also, best... encore... ever.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Feedback
Post by: KevShmev on December 06, 2014, 09:21:28 PM
I don't really consider this a "real" studio album either, which is why it will get the live album treatment, meaning I'll give this a day or two before moving on the next one.  Proper studio albums I try to give at least 4-5 days.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Feedback
Post by: The Letter M on December 06, 2014, 09:56:27 PM
The Feedback EP was an interesting album. Being the first new Rush recordings after becoming a hardcore fan, I was both surprised and a little disappointed. I had hoped for new music in 2004, especially given they had a 6 year break between TFE and VT. At least the following tour produced a good live album with an amazing set list.

As for the cover songs themselves, they're not BAD, and they give the boys a good chance to rock out pretty hard and show off what their roots and origins were inspired and influenced by. That's pretty much it, though. I don't go to listen to it very often (if ever, anymore), but it's a fun little album nonetheless.

-Marc.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Feedback
Post by: King Postwhore on December 06, 2014, 10:02:01 PM
none of the covers ever did anything for me.  didn't even bother to buy the CD.  I don't even consider this a Rush studio album.  I'm gonna say it:  I feel like it was more of a cash grab than anything.  If they wanted to have fun playing these songs they like, that's fine.  But who convinced them that the rest of us wanted to listen to it?

You tell me when you ever heard the words Cash Grab and Rush in the same sentence.  You are out of your mind.  They were planning a tour and talked about their influences and decided they'd record a few songs that were influential to them old school recordings.  The way they recorded in the early days.

Now if you said Kiss I would agree but Rush?  You really don't know anything about them and their history do you nimcos?
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Feedback
Post by: The Letter M on December 06, 2014, 10:12:56 PM
none of the covers ever did anything for me.  didn't even bother to buy the CD.  I don't even consider this a Rush studio album.  I'm gonna say it:  I feel like it was more of a cash grab than anything.  If they wanted to have fun playing these songs they like, that's fine.  But who convinced them that the rest of us wanted to listen to it?

You tell me when you ever heard the words Cash Grab and Rush in the same sentence.  You are out of your mind.  They were planning a tour and talked about their influences and decided they'd record a few songs that were influential to them old school recordings.  The way they recorded in the early days.

Now if you said Kiss I would agree but Rush?  You really don't know anything about them and their history do you nimcos?

Pretty much all of THIS. Rush, even though they had made a big comeback, still weren't as huge as they would become. They weren't in the public-eye or very popular still, outside of rock/hard rock/metal/prog rock fan circles. They were more of a niche band than they are today, and so releasing a 29-minute EP of covers is hardly a "cash grab". When there are crappily-made compilations done without the band's input (or even consent!), then those are cash grabs by the record company and not the band themselves.

I can't ever say that they've really had any cash grab albums or gimmicks. They're pretty honest and forward about their careers and don't pull any stunts like that. No "Final Farewell Tours" or stupid stuff that other similar aging bands might do.

-Marc.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Feedback
Post by: ? on December 07, 2014, 01:25:56 AM
I got Feedback as part of the Atlantic box set, but I've listened to it only once. Cover songs rarely do anything for me, and this release is no exception.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Feedback
Post by: King Postwhore on December 07, 2014, 05:28:58 AM
I got Feedback as part of the Atlantic box set, but I've listened to it only once. Cover songs rarely do anything for me, and this release is no exception.

This I can understand. I rarely grad for it myself.  Still I understand why they did it at the time. 
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Feedback
Post by: KevShmev on December 07, 2014, 06:46:05 AM
none of the covers ever did anything for me.  didn't even bother to buy the CD.  I don't even consider this a Rush studio album.  I'm gonna say it:  I feel like it was more of a cash grab than anything.  If they wanted to have fun playing these songs they like, that's fine.  But who convinced them that the rest of us wanted to listen to it?

You tell me when you ever heard the words Cash Grab and Rush in the same sentence.  You are out of your mind.  They were planning a tour and talked about their influences and decided they'd record a few songs that were influential to them old school recordings.  The way they recorded in the early days.

Now if you said Kiss I would agree but Rush?  You really don't know anything about them and their history do you nimcos?

Absolutely, this.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Feedback
Post by: TAC on December 07, 2014, 06:50:29 AM
You tell me when you ever heard the words Cash Grab and Rush in the same sentence. 
R40=Cash Grab. :P


Skipped Feedback completely. Haven't heard a single song from it.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Feedback
Post by: King Postwhore on December 07, 2014, 08:08:37 AM
You tell me when you ever heard the words Cash Grab and Rush in the same sentence. 
R40=Cash Grab. :P


Skipped Feedback completely. Haven't heard a single song from it.

Tim there is no such thing as a Rush Coffin though.  :lol
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Feedback
Post by: TAC on December 07, 2014, 08:10:44 AM
You tell me when you ever heard the words Cash Grab and Rush in the same sentence. 
R40=Cash Grab. :P


Skipped Feedback completely. Haven't heard a single song from it.

Tim there is no such thing as a Rush Coffin though.  :lol

(https://1.bp.blogspot.com/_23NDPHDzVWs/TVAILVVXhiI/AAAAAAAAABs/SJJPLBCFJEw/s1600/condom1.jpg)

 :lol
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Feedback
Post by: TAC on December 07, 2014, 08:12:45 AM
In all seriousness, the R40 Cash Grab is a right out of the Iron Maiden playbook. In fact, since each of the respective reunions, these bands have seemed to be on parallel universes.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Feedback
Post by: King Postwhore on December 07, 2014, 08:14:15 AM
 :rollin

Now that's a money grab!

I think these sell more than albums now. It's the best revenue stream except touring these days.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Feedback
Post by: TAC on December 07, 2014, 08:18:34 AM
:rollin

Now that's a money grab!

I think these sell more than albums now. It's the best revenue stream except touring these days.
Hey, wait a minute..
(https://www.poppershopper.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/11/rush_condom.jpg)
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Feedback
Post by: KevShmev on December 07, 2014, 08:22:35 AM
Be smart and be safe, says Dr. Alex.

(https://rocknewsdesk.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/05/n2405lifeson.jpg)
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Feedback
Post by: TAC on December 07, 2014, 08:24:30 AM
 :lol

Kev, you know what's funny is that  if his hair was a tad darker, that IS my doctor..
My doctor has always reminded me of Alex Lifeson.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Feedback
Post by: nicmos on December 07, 2014, 08:31:07 AM
I love it.  I really hit a nerve.  The "I am the one true Rush fan" guns come out.

Now saying that I don't know anything about Rush or their history is a bit silly though.  I've been following them for 23 years.  They were my favorite band for a long time.  I got made fun of in school a couple times for it.  I used to hang out on alt.music.rush back in the day.  You better believe I know everything about them.  They are one of the bands with the most artistic integrity I know of, and that's one of the qualities that makes me like them.  Neil obviously has some of the most intelligent, thought provoking lyrics in the history of rock.  The rest of the band clearly is enough like him to stick with him.  You can hear it in all their interviews.  They have a level of maturity that you rarely see in the entertainment industry.  They're good family guys with lots of integrity all around.

So, whatever.  Like I said, there's nothing wrong with these guys playing the music they want to play.  Maybe what I should have said is that it was a cash grab by Atlantic, for promoting the CD like a new Rush album.    Not nearly as bad as all the cash grabs you guys have mentioned obviously.  A pretty mild one.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Feedback
Post by: King Postwhore on December 07, 2014, 08:37:42 AM
No band is not in it for the money.  It's their livelihood.  That's why your statement is silly.  It's the "outside the music" promotions that's the true money grab and Rush is always about their music. 

I know, I've been a Rush fan for 33 years. GUNS A BLAZIN" :lol
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Feedback
Post by: King Postwhore on December 07, 2014, 08:39:03 AM
Be smart and be safe, says Dr. Alex.

(https://rocknewsdesk.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/05/n2405lifeson.jpg)

 :lol

My favorite pic of Alex is when he's on his John Deer with a suit on drinking a glass of wine and you see an arm under the lawn mower. :lol
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Feedback
Post by: jjrock88 on December 07, 2014, 08:42:54 AM
I tried to get into Feedback, but just couldn't do it. 
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Feedback
Post by: Zydar on December 07, 2014, 08:57:01 AM
Be smart and be safe, says Dr. Alex.

 :lol

My favorite pic of Alex is when he's on his John Deer with a suit on drinking a glass of wine and you see an arm under the lawn mower. :lol

(https://www.sanspantalones.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/04/alex-lifeson-lawn-mower_thumb.jpg)
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Feedback
Post by: King Postwhore on December 07, 2014, 08:57:55 AM
Yup that! :lol
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Feedback
Post by: KevShmev on December 07, 2014, 08:58:46 AM
(https://i.imgur.com/Zkv6Gt4.gif)
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Feedback
Post by: jingle.boy on December 07, 2014, 09:21:16 AM
Yup that! :lol

Wierdest looking "arm" I've ever seen!
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Feedback
Post by: hefdaddy42 on December 07, 2014, 09:56:31 AM
Meh.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Feedback
Post by: jammindude on December 07, 2014, 10:01:22 AM
Feedback is fun for what it is. 

I never cared for their version of Summertime Blues (it just sounds all wrong without the parents dialog in the pre-chorus).   But I've grown really fond of Heart Full of Soul...even putting it on a Rush compilation for the car.   The Seeker is pretty cool as well. 

And I don't think it was a cash grab at all.  I think they wanted to do something fun and they did it.  It was a milestone, and they figured they would share what they grew up with with their fans.   I think it was a really nice gesture.   
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Feedback
Post by: King Postwhore on December 07, 2014, 10:04:17 AM
Yup that! :lol

Wierdest looking "arm" I've ever seen!

Ok ok. Leg dammit!
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Victor (Alex solo record)
Post by: ytserush on December 07, 2014, 10:43:45 AM
Okay, I should have done this before Test for Echo, but we all got caught up in the CP vs TFE debate that it had to be next.  But I wanted to feature the two solo albums, so here we go...

In early 1996, Alex Lifeson released his first and, to date, only solo album, under the title of simply Victor.  It's more experimental than your average Rush album, and it also has some pretty straight forward rockers.  The album is kind of a mixed bag for me, as some of the songs I really like - the instrumental "Strip and Go Naked" is fantastic, the dark and eerie "At the End" is creepy story about suicide yet is oddly catchy, "Mr X" is another sweet instrumental, and "Start Today," featuring a female singer who sounds a lot like Geddy Lee, is very nice.  "Shut up Shuttin' Up" has a lot of cool stuff going on, but the constant chatter by the ladies in the background is rather silly and makes the song not age very well.  My biggest beef with some of these songs is Alex's choice of singers.  Edwin from I Mother Earth sings quite a few of the songs, and I am not particularly fond of his vocal style.  He has his moments in well-written tunes like "Promise" and "I Am the Spirit," but I can't help but think that those songs would be better with a better singer.  Les Claypool delivers some thunderous bass work on an okay track called "The Big Dance." The title track is one that is almost too out there, featuring Alex basically reading a story to us over a hypnotic keyboard beat, while other instruments slowly add more embellishment.  Cool idea, but the execution could have been better.

Overall, I like this record, even if does have an odd flow because of the difference styles of many of the songs.  If nothing else, Alex didn't play it safe and definitely move far out of the Rush box on the vast majority of the songs.

(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/1/1c/Alex_Lifeson_Victor_AC.jpg)

I love this album.  Sure it's different, but many times different is good and I think it is in this case.

Have to say I'm not really a fan of Edwin of I Mother Earth though and don't really like Don't Care all that much although it fits with the the theme. I really wish Les Claypool contributed more too.

I also listen to My Favorite Headache more (which is much more accessible) than Victor but it's still a really cool listen. I really like how Alex composed this and how his lyrics fit in.  Really dig the spoken words effort too. 

"They won't expect this kind of record from me.....the lyrical content is dark and there's a real unsettling feel to the record. I'm a pretty outgoing person. I wanted to create that kind of turnaround. I wanted to surprise people." Alex  (Rag 2-96)


I hope one day to hear some of these songs live.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Different Stages
Post by: ytserush on December 07, 2014, 11:04:11 AM
Speaking of Different Stages...discuss. :biggrin: :lol

(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/d/de/Rush_Different_Stages.jpg)

Great live album, and for the first time, a double album! The mish-mash of TFE and CP tour songs is a great mixture, and we get the full live "2112", as well as "Natural Science" and a LOT of new songs from Presto to TFE.

The icing on this cake, though, is the 1978 show, and even though it is incomplete (missing "Lakeside Park", "2112" and "Closer To The Heart"), it's an amazing-sounding show with some great performances.

-Marc.

Special live album (but I guess all of them are.)

I remember getting this just before Labor Day in 1998 without Show Don't Tell and The Analog Kid  from the Counterparts tour  that were later added after some Internet complaining that there more music could be added to fill out the first two CD's. Later got the Japanese version which also has Force Ten and some cool mini tourbooks.

Have to admit that I don't listen to that third disc as much as the others in the set.

To this day, Resist and Leave That Thing Alone from this set are automatically added to any Rush compilations I make.  I REALLY wish Half The World would have made it on here.

The art and liners are great. There were several items there I hadn't previously known existed.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: tragedy, hiatus, MFH & reunion
Post by: ytserush on December 07, 2014, 11:27:14 AM
Tragedy struck.  Shortly after the end of the Test for Echo tour in the summer of '97, Neil Peart's daughter, Selena, died in a car accident. Unfathomably, Neil's wife, Jacqueline, died of cancer 10 months later, although Neil would later say she never recovered from the loss of their daughter and died of a broken heart.  Awful, just awful.  I was not on the 'net at the time, but word did seep out that Rush was taking an extended, and understandable, hiatus, and whether they would ever do anything new as a band again was completely unknown. The more time went on, the less likely it seemed that Rush would ever be Rush again.  While a bummer, you couldn't help but think how nightmarish that had to be for Neil to go through, and if he didn't want to be part of a rock band anymore, who could blame him?

At the turn of the century, Geddy Lee decided to make his first solo album, which was released near the end of 2000.  My Favorite Headache sounds very much Rush-lite, and you can really tell how much of a stamp Geddy has on the band's songwriting when you listen to this.  Sure, it's missing the playing of Neil and Alex, as well as Neil's lyrics, but structurally and melodically, it very much sounds like what the follow-up to Test for Echo could have been.  It's a nice record, with one good song after another.  If someone said there aren't many standouts on it, I wouldn't necessarily disagree, and this isn't an album I listen to a lot, but whenever I do, it's consistency is more than obvious.  It's a good, solid record.  When it comes to favorites, I am partial to "The Present Tense," "Slipping," "The Angels' Share" and the title track. I suspect many were disappointed that Geddy didn't step outside of his normal box and make a more daring record, instead of essentially writing a Rush record without Neil and Alex, but if those songs what were coming to him, why fight it? ;)

(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/5/51/GL_My_Favorite_Headache.jpg)

Then, in early 2001, after years of mourning and self-reflection, not to mention getting remarried in 2000. which he documented in his book, Ghost Rider: Travels on the Healing Road, Neil Peart told his two longtime bandmates that he was ready to work again. Thrilled to be back together, the three set about making new music. I cannot remember exactly when word out got out that the band's hiatus was over and that they were working on new music, but I remember it being news that so many of us were overjoyed to get; it was like winning the musical lottery!  Rush was working on new music.  Rush was back.  Rush would be touring again.  After being spoiled by their constant work from 1974-1997, those four years off seemed like forever, and now they were back and you didn't know what was coming.  To say we were thankful we were getting new Rush anything would be an understatement.  The unknown was both exciting and intriguing.  When Rush would release their first album of the 21st century, what would it sound like?  Stay tuned... :biggrin:


I still remember reading the article online about that accident and being in disbelief. I thought the band was done and I didn't really care given what happened. Can't even imagine how ones deals with that.


I love My Favorite Headache.  Listen to it more than several early Rush albums.

I don't think it's "Rush-lite" at all (save for the title track) just a damn fine singer-songwriter record  with a lot of that  texture Geddy likes to add.

Geddy hinted at the possibility of a very small tour when it came out but Rush put the kibosh on that since everything was happening at once. Maybe someday.

Only time I ever met Geddy was November 14, 2000 at CD World in Edison, NJ.

Instead of him signing my new CD, I had him sign the third sleeve of Different Stages where there is a photoshop of him scalping tickets to the concert. Also had him sign a Rush handbill from 1972 that may or may not be the same Rush. He said he couldn't recall if that was them or not.

Very personal record. Wouldn't mind another one down the road.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Vapor Trails
Post by: ytserush on December 07, 2014, 02:51:31 PM
Having not worked together in the studio in five years, Geddy, Alex and Neil found it a rough going at first when they got together to work on their 17th studio album early in 2001.  There was a lot of material that was thrown away, and it took them a bit of time to finally get enough material that they deemed worthy of being kept and put on a Rush album.  Instead of a couple months, like had become the norm, it took them 14 months to finish Vapor Trails.  Released in May 2002, I remember popping it in my CD player the minute I left Best Buy with it on release day and not knowing what to think.  I mean, it was not only Rush, but the first new Rush in six years!  But something about it sounded...off.  It sounded very loud and muddy, but I thought it was just me cranking it too loud at first or something, or trying too hard to get into it instantly, but the more I listened, the more I realized the band had released the worst-sounding album of their career.  It was simply too loud, the songs have no room to breathe, and it just sounded noisy.

Now, that is not meant to say that I didn't like quite a bit of it, regardless.  I most certainly did.  I was very fond of "Earthshine," "Freeze," "Nocturne" and the s-less title track at first, and those four songs have endured as my favorites from this record.  I also enjoyed "Ceiling Unlimited," "Ghost Rider," "The Stars Look Down" and "Secret Touch" at first, as well.  The rest I didn't dislike any of, but most of it just kind of seemed there, lost in the noise-fest.  Notable, too, is "One Little Victory," as I get why the band loved it, since it was like them pronouncing, "hey, just us working together again is like a little victory," but aside from that beastly intro, the song is not a very good one.  Some of the vocal melodies are just ugly, made worse by that effect they used on Geddy's voice.  What was also strange about this album: no real guitar solos.  Okay, there are a few times where he sort of does a solo, but most of the "solo sections" on this record ended up just being big jam sections, where the band basically just jammed together for a short bit, punctuated by even more noisiness, almost like the jamming was each one trying to out-loud the other. :lol :lol

For years, fans clamored for a remix or some kind of remaster that cleaned it up, so we could hear the songs breathe, and we finally got our wish in 2013, in two forms.  First, was a digital-only release of the original mix cleaned up; this, to me, while still have some flaws and problems with loudness, is the definitive version of this record.  Later that year, there came Vapor Trails Remixed, which is a completely new mix of the record.  While it sounds the best of all the versions, this new mix not only robbed many of the songs of their raw power, they did too many tweaks to bits there and bits there.  Plus, not only did they somehow make Neil's drum sound at times like they were recorded with the cheapest recording material possible, but many embellishments were done to Geddy's vocals that sound completely unnatural and just plain weird.  In short, the remix is a major trainwreck on multiple levels.  The digital only-release from earlier in 2013 is far better. 

Overall though, no matter which version you prefer the best, while it was awesome that Rush was back, this album definitely goes down as one of their least best ever.  It's not a bad album, but it's majorly flawed, and while there is plenty of raw aggression on it, it just wasn't channeled well enough to result in a great album.  It has its moments, and it really was an album they had to make, given that long hiatus they had just come back from, but it just doesn't hold up well as a whole.

(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/8/85/Rush_Vapor_Trails.jpg)

Masterpiece.

 In spite of the sonic disaster and the feeling of the "happy Rush released another album" crowd, this album is quite the work of art. Considering the amount of time that was spent on it it should be. Despite all of that it still retains the rawness and immediacy not heard much since the first album.

I'll admit the first time or two through there was a shock that there were quite of bit of un-Rushlike spontaneous moments on this album, but since then the passion just grabbed me and hasn't let go.

I haven't been able to separate Vapor Trails from my car CD player all week.

I had the remix in a few times to remember how it was altered before putting the original in. Haven't been able to pull it out since.

I could keep going on about how fantastic this album is (and you know I could), but I'll spare everyone.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Rush in Rio
Post by: ytserush on December 07, 2014, 03:03:22 PM
Fantastic show indeed AND... I WAS THEEEEEEERE!!!!   :o :o :o :metal :metal :metal :hefdaddy :hefdaddy :hefdaddy
 :biggrin:
Well, I was waiting for that show since 89 and most of the audience too (or even before that), so you can imagine the crazyness level of that evening!
All I can say is that, very often, when you want something for so long, normally you get very disappointed by the expectations... but in this case, I was totally jaw dropped that the show surpassed all that I could imagine, really.
One thing that amazed me very very much was the energy level of Neil Peart's performance, something that I could never guessed just listening to cds or watching the dvds. The other day I was listening to Working Man from RIR and I was very impressed too how good Geddy Lee's voice still was back then!
Just for the record, I believe that "flowered dragon" was inspired in Carmen Miranda, a famous brazilian dancer and singer from the past, that have some sucess in Hollywood by the 40's:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carmen_Miranda

I'd love to hear more about that night if you wouldn't mind sharing.....

I can't imagine what that was like.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Rush in Rio
Post by: ytserush on December 07, 2014, 03:15:28 PM
Now, THIS is a great live album, and arguably the band's best live DVD.  Great collection of songs, from all eras, and the band and crowd are both on fire.   :metal

(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/d/d2/Rush_in_Rio.jpg)

Awesome DVD.  Saw it on the big screen the day of release (Both the DVD and CD were in the car in the theater parking lot)
The quick cutting is a bit bothersome in the first set, but the sound is glorious.

CD sucks (but for Vital Signs and Between Sun and Moon)

Really need to burn the DVD audio to CD. That would solve the problem.

The Boys In Brazil is a great documentary too. I wish it were longer.

The release kind of proves just how dynamic those new songs are.  I know it will never happen, but I really would like to hear more from Vapor Trails live.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Feedback
Post by: ytserush on December 07, 2014, 03:34:26 PM
Feedback is fun for what it is. 

I never cared for their version of Summertime Blues (it just sounds all wrong without the parents dialog in the pre-chorus).   But I've grown really fond of Heart Full of Soul...even putting it on a Rush compilation for the car.   The Seeker is pretty cool as well. 

And I don't think it was a cash grab at all.  I think they wanted to do something fun and they did it.  It was a milestone, and they figured they would share what they grew up with with their fans.   I think it was a really nice gesture.

Had Feedback on a few weeks ago. Gave it three complete spins and was done.

I like it. I wish it were longer. I think it might have been if Alex's legal troubles didn't get in the way...or so that was the claim.


I LOVE For What It's Worth, Mr. Soul, Heart Full Of Soul, Seven And Seven Is.

Funny thing is that my least favorite songs are the ones they aired out on R30. Actually, I guess the Seeker was OK.


Not really a fan of the artwork either.

Nice to revisit every once in a while and I like the relaxed vibe on it.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Feedback
Post by: TAC on December 07, 2014, 04:41:33 PM
I LOVE ... Seven And Seven Is.

Until I saw this post I never realized it was an old song. Alice Cooper did it on his 1981's Special Forces album. I just assumed it was his.
The Rush version sounds weird to me. :lol
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Feedback
Post by: The Letter M on December 07, 2014, 05:32:43 PM
I LOVE ... Seven And Seven Is.

Until I saw this post I never realized it was an old song. Alice Cooper did it on his 1981's Special Forces album. I just assumed it was his.
The Rush version sounds weird to me. :lol

I thought the same thing of Spock's Beard's "Beware Of Darkness" cover of the George Harrison original. I had listened to SB's version since becoming a fan around 2005, but didn't really know it was a GH song until 4 or 5 years ago, and THAT version sounded weird to me! :rollin

-Marc.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Feedback
Post by: Nick on December 07, 2014, 09:15:50 PM
I LOVE ... Seven And Seven Is.

Until I saw this post I never realized it was an old song. Alice Cooper did it on his 1981's Special Forces album. I just assumed it was his.
The Rush version sounds weird to me. :lol

I thought the same thing of Spock's Beard's "Beware Of Darkness" cover of the George Harrison original. I had listened to SB's version since becoming a fan around 2005, but didn't really know it was a GH song until 4 or 5 years ago, and THAT version sounded weird to me! :rollin

-Marc.

Well, seems I just learned that Beware of Darkness is a cover. I don't even want to hear the original, it can't possibly live up.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Feedback
Post by: Mosh on December 07, 2014, 11:39:08 PM
The original is good but totally different. Pretty much the only similarities are in the lyrics and some vocal melodies.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Rush in Rio
Post by: devieira73 on December 08, 2014, 06:10:04 AM
Fantastic show indeed AND... I WAS THEEEEEEERE!!!!   :o :o :o :metal :metal :metal :hefdaddy :hefdaddy :hefdaddy
 :biggrin:
Well, I was waiting for that show since 89 and most of the audience too (or even before that), so you can imagine the crazyness level of that evening!
All I can say is that, very often, when you want something for so long, normally you get very disappointed by the expectations... but in this case, I was totally jaw dropped that the show surpassed all that I could imagine, really.
One thing that amazed me very very much was the energy level of Neil Peart's performance, something that I could never guessed just listening to cds or watching the dvds. The other day I was listening to Working Man from RIR and I was very impressed too how good Geddy Lee's voice still was back then!
Just for the record, I believe that "flowered dragon" was inspired in Carmen Miranda, a famous brazilian dancer and singer from the past, that have some sucess in Hollywood by the 40's:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carmen_Miranda

I'd love to hear more about that night if you wouldn't mind sharing.....

I can't imagine what that was like.
Ytserush, about that show what I do remember more is what it was very well represented in the DVD: the quality and energy level from the band's performance and the INCREDIBLE interaction with the audience. My impression is that my personal feelings about the show were very likely everybody else there: it was crystal clear that everyone had a dream that came true that night and that it exceed everyone's highest
expectations. At the end of the show, maybe I'm going somewhat mystical here, but it was really like a shared sensation of hapiness! Really AMAZING! Sorry for not elaborate more, but my english is a bit limited.

About feedback, it's cool, but I don't care about it very much. I guess I'm not much a fan of 60's rock. My biggest complain about Feedback is, after that, Rush is bringing to its sound that 60's influence in songs like working than angels, whish than well, clockwork angels (although I love The Way The Wind Blows, that is very bluesy) and in pieces of some songs that I don't like very much too. And that's why vapor trails (remixed) is my favourite from the last three.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: R30
Post by: KevShmev on December 10, 2014, 05:56:25 PM
Even though it was only released with the DVD-set, R30 was basically another live album.  This set list has been covered by enough of us over the years that I don't have much else to say about it other than, it's a great selection of songs, albeit fairly similar to the Rio set, and the presence of the "R30 Overture" and "Between the Wheels" makes it worthwhile. 

(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/7/71/R30_Live_In_Frankfurt.jpg)
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: R30
Post by: jjrock88 on December 10, 2014, 06:00:50 PM
love the R30 Overture
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: R30
Post by: Anguyen92 on December 10, 2014, 06:03:37 PM
Liked the R30 Overture.  Also liked the inclusion of Xanadu, as this is the only DVD set in the 2000s that has it.  Summertime Blues was also good.  Decent set though similar to Rush in Rio, but no worries, Snakes and Arrows pretty much shuffled everything well (but we'll eventually get to that).
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: R30
Post by: Nick on December 10, 2014, 06:54:49 PM
R30 was my first tour, and will always be special for that reason, but as for the live release, there isn't much to say. It's been outdone in one way or another in every category, and overall pretty much every other DVD beats it. The overture and an amazing version of Between the Wheels definitely helps keep it from complete obscurity.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: R30
Post by: Ben_Jamin on December 10, 2014, 07:00:43 PM
This was my first Rush live album, which was when I was interested in their music. I loved Between The Wheels, and hearing the Passage to Bangkok riff, plus Cygnus x-1 (which I had never heard then), and the acoustic version of Resist which really makes the emotion in the lyrics shine.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: R30
Post by: jingle.boy on December 10, 2014, 07:06:28 PM
Great quality video.  Excellent performance.  Average setlist.  Probably my least favorite of the 2000s DVDs, because most of it has  been done before, and better.  My two favorite songs (Red Barchetta and Xanadu) showing up is a plus; Xanadu being abridged is a minus.  The covers is a minus - not a fan of those songs; Rush doing them didn't change that opinion.

The fact that seeing them on tour was a disappointing experience (not for the show, for other reasons), certainly doesn't help.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: R30
Post by: ? on December 11, 2014, 03:39:28 AM
R30 is the only 2000s video release I haven't seen in full. It sucks that the DVD doesn't include the full show, but I'll probably buy the Bluray version once I get a Bluray player.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: R30
Post by: wolfking on December 11, 2014, 04:36:03 AM
Great DVD.  Love the inclusion of Between the Wheels.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: R30
Post by: nicmos on December 11, 2014, 09:20:56 AM
I watched it once on youtube.  it was good.  The increasing frequency of live albums at this stage in their career made me stop buying them though.  you know?  the live albums were special before because they were only once every 4 studio albums.  and then we get two live albums without new studio material.

can't wait to see the discussion on S&A.  that should be very interesting.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: R30
Post by: King Postwhore on December 11, 2014, 10:43:54 AM
I never got the complaints about how they release a live album every tour.  The old days I got these crappy bootlegs from every tour.  Now I get a CD and Blu Ray for chump change compared to the crazy money I spent on some dude with a camcorder in the balcony.

Besides, if you don't like it, you don't have to buy it.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: R30
Post by: Orbert on December 11, 2014, 10:54:11 AM
Same here.  There's too many?  Don't get them all.

R30 is one of the few Rush videos I have, and was my first, so it bothers me not at all that many of the songs were on previous videos, and Rush live is always awesome, and this one's no exception.  I love this one.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: R30
Post by: The Letter M on December 11, 2014, 11:52:58 AM
My only complaint is that this was NOT the full show, especially since we got all of RIR, all of S&A Live, all of the Time Machine tour, and recently, all of the CA Tour. At least the Blu-Ray gave us the full show, so one audio-rip later, I have the whole thing on 3CD-r's!

I'm glad I own the original 2DVD/2CD set, though, which is a nice complete package! Not much else to say that hasn't already been said by everyone here. The opening "R30 Overture" into "The Spirit Of Radio" is a wonderful chronological journey. Also, the final stretch of early Rush songs with no virtually no break is a WONDERFUL stretch of music - "2112" (I, II, VII), "La Villa Strangiato", "By-Tor & The Snow Dog", "Xanadu", and "Working Man".
Also, including 30 songs for the 30th Anniversary was just clever in only the way Rush would do it.

-Marc.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: R30
Post by: Nick on December 11, 2014, 04:41:07 PM
Marc, they've admitted it was a mistake, and you'll notice the songs cut were all repeats from Rush in Rio, which is why they felt they could exclude them.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: R30
Post by: The Letter M on December 11, 2014, 08:14:02 PM
Marc, they've admitted it was a mistake, and you'll notice the songs cut were all repeats from Rush in Rio, which is why they felt they could exclude them.

Ah yeah, I remember an interview or two with Geddy saying he was curious as to why they left off those 8 tracks from the DVD/CD set, but was glad they had the BR set to have the full show.

I'm glad they decided to keep giving us full shows from then onward, though. I'm really glad they gave us the A/B-switched songs on the S&A Live set from the Atlanta show and the bonus tracks on CA Tour from the other night they recorded.

-Marc.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: R30
Post by: ytserush on December 12, 2014, 07:41:59 PM
Even though it was only released with the DVD-set, R30 was basically another live album.  This set list has been covered by enough of us over the years that I don't have much else to say about it other than, it's a great selection of songs, albeit fairly similar to the Rio set, and the presence of the "R30 Overture" and "Between the Wheels" makes it worthwhile. 

(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/7/71/R30_Live_In_Frankfurt.jpg)

Probably my least favorite Rush live album /DVD although it sounds great.  Not my favorite set by any stretch, but there are a handful of good performances. The rest aren't very inspired.

The highlight of this set is all of the bonus material which was finally released after being in collector circles.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: R30
Post by: ytserush on December 12, 2014, 07:55:33 PM
I never got the complaints about how they release a live album every tour.  The old days I got these crappy bootlegs from every tour.  Now I get a CD and Blu Ray for chump change compared to the crazy money I spent on some dude with a camcorder in the balcony.

Besides, if you don't like it, you don't have to buy it.

Yearly live releases have almost killed off my bootleg habit.  I always used to preview bootlegs before I bought them so I kept the crap to a minimum unless there performances were good.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Snakes & Arrows
Post by: KevShmev on December 13, 2014, 11:08:44 AM
After taking all of 2005 off after the 30th anniversary tour, Rush set about writing and recording their first studio album of original material in early 2006, and they were eventually joined by producer Nick Raskulinecz, who implored the band to try to recapture some of their early sound on this modern record.  The results were mixed.  When Snakes & Arrows eventually came out in the spring of 2007, it was kicked off by a teaser online of the "Far Cry" intro, which ended with the "Hemispheres" chord, which got a lot of fans excited, thinking this was gonna be an album that harkened back to their 70s material, especially given the chatter about how Raskulinecz had tried to push them in that direction.  The thing that reminded the most about their early stuff was the light and dark contract heard quite often between acoustic sections and heavy electric ones, even if the feel of the new songs didn't match up; the dynamic was back in full force, as many songs prominently feature the acoustic guitar, often sounding like they were written on the acoustic given the simple, joyful melodies many of the songs possess. 

Personally, while I found "Far Cry" a bit underwhelming at first, and still do to this day, the album as a whole was very much to my liking.  It was extremely consistent; I liked every songs quite a bit, and several had that "I could see this being a favorite of mine some day" feel, especially "Armor and Sword," "The Main Monkey Business," "Malignant Narcissism" and the highly-underrated "Bravest Face."  There was a lot of good music out in 2007, but this was still a record that got a ton of listens in my CD player, like any new Rush record worth would get.  It was also cool that this was the first Rush studio album ever to feature more than one instrumental.  And it didn't have two, it had three!!  One of them was a nice little acoustic guitar-only tune by Alex Lifeson called "Hope," a song that is nice, if not really all that notable. 

The band was obviously pretty nuts about this album, as they have played 10 of the 13 songs from it live, nine of which were on the S&A tour in '07 and '08.  Oddly, I thought some of the songs didn't come off as well live as they did in the studio, in large part because this was an album so ripe with overdubs - see a song like "Armor and Sword" that is filled with tons of both acoustic and electric guitar - that replicating them live as is, even with triggers, was tough to pull off.  I've always loved the simply melodic joyousness of something like "The Larger Bowl."  You don't often see Rush do a song so simple and so melodic, and they made it work.  "The Way the Wind Blows" was another favorite of mine at first, but for some reason, I merely like it.  It's a good song, but it kind of has that "it could have been better" feel to it, and it kind of teeters into that uber-liberal preachiness that have infected a few of Peart's lyrics in the 21st century (along with "Faithless" and "BU2B").  Peart used to be a lot more subtle when writing about subjects like that, but with those songs he went for more directness and I don't think it benefited the songs.  The lyrics themselves do not bother me at all - I can always deal with lyrics that I do not agree with - but they just seem a bit too overtly wordy and preachy.  But to each his own.

Seven and a half years later, I'd be lying if I said I loved this album nearly as much as I did at first, but I still like it quite a bit.  It has a certain vibe you really won't get on any other Rush album, but while I still like every song on it, the overall album seems to lack that bit of Rush charm that usually is unavoidable.  I am not saying it feels sterile, but there is just something missing from it as a whole that I can't quite put my finger on. 

(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/c/c5/Snakesandarrows.jpg)
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Snakes & Arrows
Post by: Orbert on December 13, 2014, 11:35:00 AM
2006 was a good year for me, and I was excited to be able to buy a new Rush CD when it first came out.  I did the whole thing where I tried to avoid reviews and comments, and just grab it and listen to it and form my own opinions.  It was good, but something didn't quite work for me, and I couldn't figure out what it was.  Maybe the sound; it had the highly compressed, "modern" production to it which to this day I still don't really like.  But the songs were good, and I can usually get past any sound quality issues if the music itself is strong enough.  It takes a while, though.  The songs should be smacking me in the face, and instead I felt like I was being hit in the chest really hard, with a pillow.

So I gave it a rest, and went back to checking out other things, and eventually my commuting standby of my huge iPod playist (The Mondo Mix) which I shuffle.  Then after maybe a week, I gave Snakes & Arrows another chance.  But I forgot to take it off of Shuffle.  I always listen to albums sequentially, but shuffle playlists.

Since I didn't yet know the album that well, I didn't realize at first that it was shuffling; I just knew that I was liking it a lot more.  It sounded fresher, probably just from being given a break, but somehow the track order worked better.  Perhaps it was that the individual songs were strong, but somehow the original album track order weakened their effect.

So now, Snakes & Arrows sits in much higher regard with me, but it is as a collection of good songs rather than as a strong album.  I don't know how much difference that makes to me or anyone else, but that's the conclusion I've come to.  Kinda weird.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Snakes & Arrows
Post by: The Letter M on December 13, 2014, 12:21:21 PM
I was about 4-5 years in to being a huge Rush fan, so the news of a new album excited me greatly. After the wonderful-yet-awfully-mastered VT, and a mediocre covers EP, a brand new studio album was just what the band needed, and it's a whooper!

I think I loved the album just as much as the band did given how many songs they played live from it! There was also the fact that this album featured not just one, but THREE instrumental songs, including the first-ever Lifeson-solo on a studio album (his only other being "Broon's Bane" on the live album Exit...Stage Left). I'd say this album is full of winners, and even my least favorite song would still get a score of about 3/5 or 7/10. "The Main Monkey Business" is such a great instrumental, and it shocked me when I read that it was originally over 10 minutes long and that they had to cut it back a bit! I still wonder what the original version sounded like. I loved the song so much, I took to learning the drum part by ear and finished learning it within a couple weeks of the release of the album. I listened to it a LOT.

It's also interesting to note that this album had TWO releases, one with an enhanced disc with the "Making Of" the album feature, which I watched a ton when it came out. It was just so much fun seeing the guys in the studio, jamming out and working out parts together, and seeing the fretless bass that Geddy tinkered with, which eventually inspired Geddy and Neil to play "Malignant Narcissism"!

Rush finally made an album that was truly diverse yet still highly consistent in quality, and with another 13 songs, no less! They also stretched themselves out a bit, with 3 songs over 6 minutes long, but also with 2 songs under 3 minutes. It was hard to imagine they could ever out-do themselves ever again, but in another 5 years (who are they, Tool? lol), I would be proven wrong.

-Marc.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Snakes & Arrows
Post by: Mladen on December 13, 2014, 01:08:25 PM
I've always loved Far cry, but the rest of the album took years for me, actually. It's funny how it started to grow song by song - first I became addicted to Spindrift, then Faithless suddenly clicked, then Armor and sword (probably my favorite on the entire album), then Good news first, and it happened with Bravest face fairly recently. I don't know what it is about this album that's kinda hard to get, but I know I can picture a few more songs growing on me eventually.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Snakes & Arrows
Post by: TAC on December 13, 2014, 01:32:56 PM
While I like Far Cry, this album does absolutely NOTHING for me. It sounds fantastic, but this has to be the most boring collection of songs as they have. Faithless..they should've called it Lifeless.

Oh, and apparently, regarding the Main Monkey Business, I'm the only one that thinks it shares its main riff with Black Sabbath's A National Acrobat.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Snakes & Arrows
Post by: ? on December 13, 2014, 02:47:06 PM
A huge improvement over Vapor Trails, although cutting out fillers like Good News First would've been a good idea. Armor and Sword, Far Cry and Bravest Face are some of my all-time favorites. The rest of the album hasn't aged as well since I first heard it last year, but I still enjoy it.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Snakes & Arrows
Post by: jammindude on December 13, 2014, 03:33:34 PM
Fantastic album, and a HUGE improvement over Vapor Trails.    It's too bad that this album is often just overshadowed by the album that came next, because it is really Rush finding a "groove" they hadn't had in a long time. 

Every time I listen to this album, it's gets a little better.    WTA is incredible, Larger Bowl...and the 1-2 punch of Hope/Faithless is possibly my favorite song of the entire decade.  (I don't think those two songs should *ever* be separated...Hope just feels so much like a Faithless intro, they really belong together.)

1. Hope/Faithless
2. Workin Them Angels
3. Malignant Narcissism
4. Far Cry
5. The Larger Bowl
6. Armor and Sword
7. The Main Monkey Business
8. The Way the Wind Blows
9. Spindrift
10. Bravest Face
11. Good News First
12. We Hold On
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Snakes & Arrows
Post by: Anguyen92 on December 13, 2014, 03:47:14 PM
Yeah.  It's a great album.  The thing is for me is that the studio versions were not as exciting as the live versions from Snakes & Arrows Live or Faithless from the Time Machine Tour.  It's still good though.  That said, The Main Monkey Business, Working Them Angels, Armor and Sword, The Way The Wind Blows, and The Larger Bowl are my favorites.

Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Snakes & Arrows
Post by: The Letter M on December 13, 2014, 04:47:50 PM
(I don't think those two songs should *ever* be separated...Hope just feels so much like a Faithless intro, they really belong together.)

Ironic, considering that they split them up when performing them live, with the latter half coming years later on a separate tour. I wonder if they'll ever bring both out and play them together?

Also, of the 3 remaining unplayed songs, which would you guys like to see live? My vote goes to "Bravest Face", followed by "Good News First". Other than "The Garden", Rush haven't played a closing track from a then-new album since "Mystic Rhythms", which is really saying something about their album closers since then. Either they're too difficult to play live, or they just wouldn't sound right in the grand scheme of the whole live show. "The Garden" worked because it was part of the concept, it wrapped up that portion of the show, so it was obviously needed. "We Hold On" is a nice song, and I could see it ending a 1st set or 2nd set, but I doubt it'll ever happen at this point.

-Marc.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Snakes & Arrows
Post by: jammindude on December 13, 2014, 07:03:47 PM
(I don't think those two songs should *ever* be separated...Hope just feels so much like a Faithless intro, they really belong together.)

Ironic, considering that they split them up when performing them live, with the latter half coming years later on a separate tour. I wonder if they'll ever bring both out and play them together?


I remember that this REALLY bummed me out on the live set.   The way they flow together on the disc is just heavenly.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Snakes & Arrows
Post by: nicmos on December 13, 2014, 08:26:37 PM
Ah, Snakes and Arrows.

The album that has so much going for it, yet falls far far short of its potential.

This album was swallowed whole by bad Geddy overdub vocal harmonies and lack of (good) melodies in the verses of the songs.

It's so frustrating to listen to this album.  I can tell that they can still write great melodies.  The choruses of Wind Blows, Faithless, Bravest Face are some of the best music they've ever written!  But the verses of so many of the songs are barely listenable.  I just don't know what they were thinking.  I'd like to blame it on the producer in this case, but I don't know.  the "artillery light" and "temple and marketplace" lines, off the top of my head, are just horrid.  If I listened just now I'm sure I could find ten more to list.

On the bright side, Main Monkey Business is a great instrumental.  favorite track on the album.  The two shorter instrumentals are very enjoyable as well.  I also find the lyrics top notch.  Again, here Bravest Face shines as an underrated track.

I just wish they could have married the good lyrics (although not all of them click- how many radio singles do you know that start the singing with "pariah dogs") with better music.

The band's talent still shined through, and were pushing into new sonic territory which is good, making the music they want to make, but it just mostly doesn't work for me.  (I admit I still get that opening guitar riff from Armor & Sword stuck in my head from time to time, it's catchy, but not in what I'd call an entirely good way.)  If this were a new band and I were listening to their first CD, I'd say it's good, but I'd give it a pass.

Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Snakes & Arrows
Post by: jjrock88 on December 13, 2014, 10:11:56 PM
The instrumentals stand out to me, but for the most part I find this release fairly bland.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Snakes & Arrows
Post by: mikemangioy on December 14, 2014, 07:13:02 AM
Wow, best album in a while. Well, the next one is even better, but still, it's a very strong record. Every song is great. And with that out of the way, I've listened to every Rush record  :laugh:

It's been a fun ride, but I'll have my comments saved for when it's all over.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Snakes & Arrows
Post by: Lowdz on December 14, 2014, 09:50:24 AM
Whilst an improvement over VT (how could it not be), its another just ok album. I would take it over Test For Echo and VT. It's certainly a step up.

Geddy sounds bloody awful again with the warbling. Not an album I'm ever likely to listen to again tbh. And it started so well with the Hemispheres chord in the opening riff and track 2 has a riff that sounds like old Rush. In fact Far Cry is a great song and worthy of being a Rush song.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Snakes & Arrows
Post by: KevShmev on December 14, 2014, 10:07:05 AM
I rarely criticize Alex Lifeson, but that main riff in Far Cry (the one that first kicks in after the Hemispheres chord, about the 12-second mark) is so limp, so generic and so underwhelming, it prevents the song from ever really taking off.

Also, that main driving riff in The Way the Wind Blows (first heard around the 45-second mark) just doesn't sound right.  I don't know if it's the production or his tone, but imagine that riff with balls; it would have been a monster, instead of sounding like it needed more bite.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Snakes & Arrows
Post by: Mosh on December 14, 2014, 11:17:23 AM
I don't think Rush were ever that good at writing riffs. I think the main issue with the first album is that the riffs just aren't that memorable. So when they started to become a bit more riff driven with TFE, the music began to suffer. They're still in that phase it seems, but CA tones it down a bit.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Snakes & Arrows
Post by: mikemangioy on December 14, 2014, 11:21:32 AM
I do not agree, I really fucking adore Far Cry's riff, and I can't remember one riff that wasn't memorable. Nice word play though.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Snakes & Arrows
Post by: jammindude on December 14, 2014, 11:33:02 AM
I have to speak up in defense as well.   SO MANY memorable moments from this album.   Verses and choruses both get stuck in my head just fine.   This disc didn't leave my player for a long time when I first bought it.    As much as I have stepped up in defense of Test For Echo, I have always admitted that even that had two "skip tracks" (Totem and Dog Years).   But while this album may not have as many high highs as T4E does, it is certainly the most consistent album they had done since Power Windows.   Not a skip track to be had on this album at all. 
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Snakes & Arrows
Post by: TAC on December 14, 2014, 11:34:52 AM
T4E has "high highs"?? I skip every track after Far Cry!!
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Snakes & Arrows
Post by: jammindude on December 14, 2014, 11:39:09 AM
T4E has "high highs"?? I skip every track after Far Cry!!

The first 5 tracks from T4E is #3 all time "first 5 song" album openers from them.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Snakes & Arrows
Post by: KevShmev on December 14, 2014, 11:44:35 AM
T4E has "high highs"?? 

Not really.  In fact, its highs are probably the least best highs of any Rush record to date.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Snakes & Arrows
Post by: TAC on December 14, 2014, 11:46:58 AM
My biggest issue with S&A is that the music to me is so bland. It's like the music is just a vehicle for the lyrics. An afterthought.

I have tried many tims to get past it. In fact, knowing it was coming up in this thread, I pulled it out 2 weeks ago. I just cannot get into it.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Snakes & Arrows
Post by: Nearmyth on December 14, 2014, 12:24:54 PM
Snakes And Arros is good, not bad. That's the best way I describe it in the context of Rush's discography :lol My favs from it are probably:

Armor And Sword
The Larger Bowl
Good News First
Bravest Face
Spindrift

Far Cry, Malignant Narcissism, and MMB are all good too, the rest to me are fairly bland.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Snakes & Arrows
Post by: jammindude on December 14, 2014, 12:58:23 PM
T4E has "high highs"?? 

Not really.  In fact, its highs are probably the least best highs of any Rush record to date.

FTFM

 ;D  :angel:
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Snakes & Arrows
Post by: mikemangioy on December 14, 2014, 01:52:36 PM
I have to speak up in defense as well.   SO MANY memorable moments from this album.   Verses and choruses both get stuck in my head just fine.   This disc didn't leave my player for a long time when I first bought it.    As much as I have stepped up in defense of Test For Echo, I have always admitted that even that had two "skip tracks" (Totem and Dog Years).   But while this album may not have as many high highs as T4E does, it is certainly the most consistent album they had done since Power Windows.   Not a skip track to be had on this album at all.

This is pretty true, now that I think about it
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Snakes & Arrows
Post by: King Postwhore on December 14, 2014, 03:40:36 PM
When I first heard the album I though is was radically different  in their writing style and I loved it.  Over time I've grabbed for it less.  It's a very good album.  My highlights are,

The Main Monkey Business
Armor & Sword
The Way the Wind Blows

I felt Faithless sounds so much better as a studio song then a live song. 

I am tired of the Spindrift/Time And Motion style songs.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Snakes & Arrows
Post by: hefdaddy42 on December 15, 2014, 08:46:30 AM
I liked the album a lot when it first came out, but it's been a while since I've listened.  I will try to spin it again soon.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Snakes & Arrows
Post by: sfam2112 on December 15, 2014, 11:11:30 PM
T4E has "high highs"?? 

Not really.  In fact, its highs are probably the least best highs of any Rush record to date.

FTFM

 ;D  :angel:

and me.  :tup I love Test For Echo.  :heart
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Snakes & Arrows Live
Post by: KevShmev on December 16, 2014, 09:31:15 PM
I still find it strange that the band couldn't come up with a better name for a live album, rather than the lazy act of just adding "Live" to the end of their most recent studio album, but it is what it is.  A good live record, with a mostly phenomenal set list, featuring a lot of songs that hadn't been played live in a long time or never played before.  The five song-stretch of S&A songs to start the 2nd set was a bit of a buzz kill live, but this is still a great set of Rush tunes.

(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/5/54/Rush_Snakes_%26_Arrows_Live.jpg)
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Snakes & Arrows Live
Post by: jammindude on December 16, 2014, 09:42:25 PM
I want this live album SO BAD!  It is one of my favorite tours, and one of my favorite setlists...but for some reason, I never got around to picking it up.   I think that after picking up the previous two live albums, I was just tapped.   

Actually, now that I think about it, I really loved the "complete package" 5-disc set of R30, and I think I was really hoping that they would eventually release this as a single set as well.     So I was holding out for something bigger, and it never happened.  :-\
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Snakes & Arrows Live
Post by: The Letter M on December 16, 2014, 09:57:08 PM
I want this live album SO BAD!  It is one of my favorite tours, and one of my favorite setlists...but for some reason, I never got around to picking it up.   I think that after picking up the previous two live albums, I was just tapped.   

Actually, now that I think about it, I really loved the "complete package" 5-disc set of R30, and I think I was really hoping that they would eventually release this as a single set as well.     So I was holding out for something bigger, and it never happened.  :-\

5-Disc R30 set? You mean the 4-Disc set, right? Unless my set didn't come with a disc... AFAIK, R30's deluxe edition was 2 DVDs and 2 CDs, and some picks.

Anyways, S&A live was an interesting release. A live album from the tour they were currently IN THE MIDDLE OF. It was totally out of left-field, and then the second leg of the S&A Tour was in support of the live album from the first leg....wait...what? :lol

It was confusion, for sure, but there was a good set list there, and I was boggled as to why we got the CD but no live concert DVD. Little did we know, there was one coming down the pipeline after the whole tour was done, and this time, it included ALL of the songs from that tour (save for "Summertime Blues", I believe), which also included some songs from an Atlanta show ("Ghost Of A Chance" being one of my favorites"). Had they waited to do a CD set, they could've done a 3-CD release like they did with Rush In Rio, and release the whole show, plus alternate-leg swap-outs as bonus tracks at the end (although I still won't forgive the band for not including any recording of "Ceiling Unlimited" on the RIR CD or DVD).

-Marc.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Snakes & Arrows Live
Post by: Anguyen92 on December 16, 2014, 10:06:54 PM
I love this DVD set.  The Snakes and Arrows songs sounded so damn good, for sure better than the studio version.  The other nuggets of this set is also great. Entre Nous, Mission, Passage to Bangkok in full.  Just a glorious set.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Snakes & Arrows Live
Post by: jammindude on December 16, 2014, 10:12:55 PM
I want this live album SO BAD!  It is one of my favorite tours, and one of my favorite setlists...but for some reason, I never got around to picking it up.   I think that after picking up the previous two live albums, I was just tapped.   

Actually, now that I think about it, I really loved the "complete package" 5-disc set of R30, and I think I was really hoping that they would eventually release this as a single set as well.     So I was holding out for something bigger, and it never happened.  :-\

5-Disc R30 set? You mean the 4-Disc set, right? Unless my set didn't come with a disc... AFAIK, R30's deluxe edition was 2 DVDs and 2 CDs, and some picks.

Anyways, S&A live was an interesting release. A live album from the tour they were currently IN THE MIDDLE OF. It was totally out of left-field, and then the second leg of the S&A Tour was in support of the live album from the first leg....wait...what? :lol

It was confusion, for sure, but there was a good set list there, and I was boggled as to why we got the CD but no live concert DVD. Little did we know, there was one coming down the pipeline after the whole tour was done, and this time, it included ALL of the songs from that tour (save for "Summertime Blues", I believe), which also included some songs from an Atlanta show ("Ghost Of A Chance" being one of my favorites"). Had they waited to do a CD set, they could've done a 3-CD release like they did with Rush In Rio, and release the whole show, plus alternate-leg swap-outs as bonus tracks at the end (although I still won't forgive the band for not including any recording of "Ceiling Unlimited" on the RIR CD or DVD).

-Marc.

Of course, you're right.   I guess I was mis-remembering that they actually released the entire show on CD...thus making a 3-CD audio set.   Alas, they didn't.

Still...I wish they had done a complete package for this tour instead of making us buy the audio and video separately :-\.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Snakes & Arrows Live
Post by: Ben_Jamin on December 16, 2014, 10:17:54 PM
My first Rush concert and an epic one at that. I didn't mind the 5-song run of Snakes and Arrows songs either as they're good, except Far Cry, could never get into it. 
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Snakes & Arrows Live
Post by: ? on December 16, 2014, 11:04:39 PM
I don't own the DVD, but I've seen it once and it was enjoyable. I think that was the first time I heard Mission - what a great song and performance! :hefdaddy Circumstances also sounds great, although it's a tough song for Geddy vocally. I have no problem with the amount of songs they played from S&A, but I agree that playing five of them in a row is a bit overkill.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Snakes & Arrows Live
Post by: The Letter M on December 16, 2014, 11:29:23 PM
I think playing 5 new songs in a row was a challenge for them. They hadn't really done anything like that before on a tour. The most new songs they'd ever played live consecutively was, I think, three. Going backwards, on the CP Tour, they played a run of "Animate", "Stick It Out" and "Double Agent", while on the RTB Tour, they played the opening 3 songs from the album in a row. On the Presto Tour, they had "Show Don't Tell", "Superconductor" and "The Pass" lumped together. Before that, all new songs were done in pairs or solo with older songs all between them. Having two sets and an encore really allowed them to space their songs out after the TFE tour, but somehow they felt compelled to lump 5 new songs together for the S&A tour.

I think doing that opened up the idea of being able to do all of Moving Pictures in one go on the Time Machine tour, then doing a LARGE portion of Clockwork Angels to open the 2nd set with. I think if they hadn't had the balls to start their second set with 5 new songs on this tour, they probably wouldn't have gotten to where they were on the last two tours as far as tour setlist arrangements go.

-Marc.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Snakes & Arrows Live
Post by: Zydar on December 17, 2014, 12:11:50 AM
This was the first Rush DVD I saw, and my introduction to the band.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Snakes & Arrows Live
Post by: TAC on December 17, 2014, 05:28:15 AM
Never bothered with this. 8 songs from S&A?? Not interested. But looking at the tracklist, there are some of my faves..Digital Man, Natural Science.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Snakes & Arrows Live
Post by: emtee on December 17, 2014, 06:33:51 AM
One of my favorite live Rush releases. Love the sound quality. And hearing the S&A material performed side by side with
classic Rush solidified to me that the new material is just as good as their classic era and for me they were re-born with
S&A.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Snakes & Arrows Live
Post by: Nick on December 17, 2014, 06:46:23 AM
After the tameness of the R30 set, this was such a nice breathe of fresh air. Heavy on new material and with a nice handful of rarities pulled out. What's more is the audio was great, and the video editing made you feel more at the show than any Rush release to date. Fantastic overall release.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Snakes & Arrows Live
Post by: hefdaddy42 on December 17, 2014, 07:31:02 AM
Never got this one.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Snakes & Arrows Live
Post by: The Letter M on December 17, 2014, 08:15:03 AM
Never bothered with this. 8 songs from S&A?? Not interested. But looking at the tracklist, there are some of my faves..Digital Man, Natural Science.

Something I recall pointing out (and sending to Eric at the PowerWindows website) regarding this tour:

Quote
Keeping score on the songs played: only 6 songs were played from albums released between Moving Pictures and Vapor Trails (only one from the 90's, and one from the 80's was only performed for less than half of the tourdates); not including the drum solo, of the 27 songs played, 17 were from PeW, MP or SA - roughly 2/3 of the concert (2/3 of the entire Permanent Waves album was included). It also is worth mentioning that between the last three tours, Rush played 6/7ths of Moving Pictures live; "The Camera Eye" being the notable exception.

They really relied heavily on their new album and their two classic albums from when they were hitting their height of popularity back in the early 80's. And little did fans know that they'd finally bring back the one MP song they had yet to play in the 00's on the following tour.

-Marc.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Snakes & Arrows Live
Post by: jjrock88 on December 17, 2014, 08:19:57 AM
When I saw this tour live I could tell the audience was getting very restless with the long stretch of new material.

Overall I really like this release and I enjoy the S&A songs more live
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Snakes & Arrows Live
Post by: Lowdz on December 18, 2014, 08:36:04 AM
I have this but don't remember much about it. not one I reach for due to the high number of recent songs.
Title: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Time Machine 2011: Live in Cleveland
Post by: KevShmev on December 19, 2014, 05:09:13 PM
And on we go to another live album, making it the first and only time (so far) that Rush has released two live albums in a row without any studio album in the middle there.  Playing all of Moving Pictures was awesome, and it was cool that they debuted two songs that would eventually go on Clockwork Angels, but it's just an odd-looking set list.  That first set just didn't flow well at all, and ending the second set with "Far Cry" was more than a bit questionable, although I know Rush loves to put newer songs in spots like that, like "One Little Victory" inexplicably being an encore on the S&A tour.  Anyway, still a good live album, but other than the live version of "Presto," I really don't revisit it very much.  As thrilled as I was to finally see "Marathon" live, Geddy's declining live voice kinda ruined it for me.

(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/8/86/Time_Machine_2011.JPG)
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Time Machine 2011: Live in Cleveland
Post by: The Letter M on December 19, 2014, 05:30:56 PM
Of all the live albums they've put out since 2003, this is probably the one I've listened to the least. Both RIR and R30 were very special, being the big comeback tour and the anniversary, while S&A Live marked a bold statement about their new album, as well as featuring a fair amount of older/rarer songs. The Time Machine tour really only had about half a show's worth of great material, and agreed about Geddy's voice here. It improved a bit for the CAT release, but here it's just a bit hit-or-miss. I believe the story was that he was fighting off a cold just before this show, and since everything had already been set up to record in Cleveland, there wasn't much that could be done. Quite a shame, and I'm sure there are bootlegs out there with better Geddy vocals, but this is the one we got officially.

And to be nitpicky, sure we didn't get a full studio album before this live album, but we didn't really get one before R30 either, and so if you don't count Feedback as a studio album (more of an EP than an LP), this is the 2nd time in 10 years that two live albums were successively released. Unless, if you count the covers EP, you could possibly consider the "Caravan" single, which was released before the Time Machine Tour, and included two early versions of "Caravan" and "BU2B". It's a neat sneak-peak in an album that would take two more years to complete and release, and hearing that single was an amazing thing. I was stunned at the playing and writing, and tried to imagine an album with that level of intensity. Also, the cover to the "Caravan" single was gorgeous, and at first, I had hoped it'd be the cover to next album, but what we got was initially disappointing, but I have since grown to love it. Red really suits the band... (debut logo, the Starman, Hold Your Fire, and probably more...).

-Marc.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Time Machine 2011: Live in Cleveland
Post by: Ben_Jamin on December 19, 2014, 05:47:30 PM
Ahh, the tour that we got the first show of the NA leg. It was cool to be first in experienceing this.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Time Machine 2011: Live in Cleveland
Post by: Mosh on December 19, 2014, 06:39:42 PM
Love this live album. I think the setlist is great, the flow is totally fine. Moving Pictures front to back is pretty awesome plus the 2 new songs. It's so interesting listening back on those songs after hearing them in context. Far Cry works pretty well as a set closer I think.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Time Machine 2011: Live in Cleveland
Post by: HolidaysAnoraks on December 19, 2014, 07:56:40 PM
Really loved their decision to play Presto on this tour, which is a favorite of mine I thought I'd never get to hear live!
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Time Machine 2011: Live in Cleveland
Post by: jjrock88 on December 19, 2014, 11:09:55 PM
I have this one, but I don't think Ive listened to it since it was released
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Time Machine 2011: Live in Cleveland
Post by: hefdaddy42 on December 20, 2014, 06:27:21 AM
Never got this one.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Time Machine 2011: Live in Cleveland
Post by: mikemangioy on December 20, 2014, 02:12:37 PM
This is the only one I've watched so far, and it helped my get into some songs. Can't compare it to anything else, yet  :biggrin: but it's awesome, I think.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Time Machine 2011: Live in Cleveland
Post by: Orbert on December 20, 2014, 03:27:27 PM
I have it, and it is awesome.  All Rush is awesome.  But with so many live releases now, there are bound to be some which aren't considered top tier, for whatever reasons.  Some of the criticisms here are valid.  I only have a few of the live videos, though, and I think they're all great.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Clockwork Angels
Post by: KevShmev on December 21, 2014, 09:04:29 AM
With the Time Machine tour finished, Rush set about working on the album they had already started when they released "Caravan" and "BU2B" in 2010, and by the end of 2011, the album was finished, and Clockwork Angels would eventually be released in the summer of 2012.  There were many rumors about it being a concept album and how the band was gonna stretch out musically and whatnot, but given how many times we had heard the "the band is returning to their roots" comment over the years, some fans, myself included, took the "I'll believe it when I hear it" approach.  In April, "Headlong Flight" was released to radio stations and with a lyric video on YouTube, and I have to admit that it was pretty awesome to hear.  Not only was it nearly 7 1/2-minutes, meaning the band wasn't keeping themselves in that 5-minute box anymore most of the time, but it had a very progressive vibe to it, not to mention that the playing was ferocious and had the feel of a band very much eager to prove themselves, not of a band approaching 60.  It as an absolute thrill to hear, and when the tracklisting and song lengths of the album came out, the fan base as a whole was overjoyed to see five of the songs going over the 6-minute mark.  Now, this is not meant to imply that "longer songs automatically equals better," but many of us were eager to see the band spread their wings again instrumentally, and that many songs being 6-7 minute instead of most of them being around 5 meant that we were probably gonna get some tasty instrumental sections unlike anything we had heard on a Rush album in quite some time. 

When the album came out, our hopes were not without merit.  Not only did some of the longer tunes have some extended instrumental sections in the middle of them, but songs like "Seven Cities of Gold," "The Anarchist" and the title track all had long intros.  To be fair, Snakes & Arrows did have a number of songs that had somewhat long intros, especially considering the overall song lengths, but then they would all jump into that standard "verse-chorus-verse-chorus-quick solo section-chorus etc-end" format.  Clockwork Angels had the feel of a band that simply let the songs flow naturally and without any kind of pre-conceived notion of how they should they go; the band feels loose, in a manner of speaking.

Jumping back in a minute, when the first two songs came out in 2010, I was very fond of "Caravan," and was hoping it was a glimpse of what was to come.  I liked "BU2B,' too, but over time, it came across to me as another modern Rush songs that rocked, but didn't have much lasting impact.  In the context of the album once it came out, "Caravan" revealed itself to be a dynamite opener, while "BU2B" had an added 50 seconds at the beginning that helped it dynamically and sonically.

Now, when I first heard the rest of the album, I have to admit that the title track knocked my socks off.  The rocking verses ("You promise every treasure...") were an absolute thrill to hear, and gave me that "I have been waiting 20 years for Rush to write a song like this" feeling. I couldn't believe they were writing and playing something so explosive, so big and so expansive again.  The way the verses explode into the chorus is just so damn perfect.  Overall, the song is very diverse, with many dynamic shifts.  In many ways, it is the perfect 21st century Rush song.  It is probably still my favorite Rush song from not only this record, but undoubtedly this century.

Then it was on to "The Anarchist," which is pretty damn awesome as well; I put it just a hair behind the title track. Geddy's bass playing in this song is nothing short of absurd, and the mellow pre-chorus section, featuring some cool strings, is very much Porcupine Tree-influenced with that vocal effect.  It's very cool to see a band that was influenced by Rush now influencing Rush.  Alex's riffing in the song is easy to overlook, but it drives the song forward, and some of Neil Peart's best playing in a long time is in this song.

The next three songs were all pretty great as well, the rocking "Carnies," the acoustic-driven "Halo Effect," and "Seven Cities of Gold,' which almost sounds like a song that was written for a western, if that makes sense.  This middle section of the record being so strong is a big reason why this album is so great.  The best songs are in the first and last third of the album, but the fact that tracks 5-8 are all so good as well is an indicator of how just on fire the band was. The middle section is capped off with the catchy "The Wreckers," which was unique in that Geddy and Alex switched instruments during the writing process, so the guitar melody was written by Geddy and the bass line was written by Alex, so you get a bit of a different feel with this song, even while the main riff and vocal melodies still sound very much like modern day Rush.

The final four tracks is kicked off with the aforementioned "Headlong Flight."  I didn't mention it earlier, but this song also has some absolutely ferocious playing by Geddy, and that dirty melody Alex plays prior to the first chorus is one of my favorite moments of the entire record.  The way it builds up into the chorus when the others come back in with the bass, drums and vocals is wicked cool.  I also love the way it is used differently each time, with it being unaccompanied the first time, not being there the second time, and then being played underneath the chorus the last time.  Very neat the way they shifted it around each time.  Also, I mentioned in an earlier review that Alex's soloing dipped off starting with Test for Echo, but this album was a great return to form solo-wise for him, and the one in "Headlong Flight" is a favorite of mine. 

The reprisal in "BU2B2" is cool in giving the album more of a cohesive feel, even if this short little transitional track isn't particularly noteworthy, but it's a nice little come down in between two rockers, the second of which is the penultimate track to the album.  "Wish Them Well" seems to be the red-headed step child of the record, it being a song that seems to be often dismissed as the weak link of the record, but I could not disagree more.  I love it, and it's always a song I crank up whenever it plays.  Plus, lyrically it's a clever play on words in regards to turning the other cheek.

The finale of the album, "The Garden," is another one of those "I've been waiting 20 years for Rush to write this song" songs.  Geddy Lee has said several times in the past that he still felt like he had that perfect song in him somewhere, and it wouldn't surprise me if he feels like "The Garden" is it.  It's an absolutely gorgeous song, and a perfect ending to a phenomenal record. For a long time, it seemed like Rush got in the habit of sticking whatever song they felt was the weakest of the ones they wrote at the end, hence them never playing live any last track from any of the albums from 1987-2007, but it's clear that this time that they intended to end the album on a most wonderful note, and they achieved that in spades.  There is no other song in the Rush catalogue that sounds like "The Garden," and if they never do another album, I can't think of a more perfect way to end their career, from a studio recording standpoint.

I'll let others dig into the concept and lyrics.  And I won't go into too much detail about how I wish the album sounded better - it suffers a tad from compression and being too loud.  Overall, that little flaw aside, this is a beastly album, one I wasn't sure Rush was capable of making at that stage of their careers, especially given their ages, but they sure did prove me wrong.  And I couldn't have been more happy about it.  This is one of Rush's finest efforts ever, of any era.

(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/4/4c/Rush_Clockwork_Angels_artwork.png)
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Clockwork Angels
Post by: King Postwhore on December 21, 2014, 09:07:19 AM
The title track is the best thing I've heard from them since Power Windows.  The pushed themselves on this album and it shows!
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Clockwork Angels
Post by: TAC on December 21, 2014, 09:17:56 AM
Well, what this album proves is how much garbage they've released over the second half of their career.
This album is great! Why the fu#k did we have to wait so long for it?
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Clockwork Angels
Post by: mikemangioy on December 21, 2014, 09:20:07 AM
This album is so awesome  :hefdaddy It proves what kind of musicianship there's still in the band  :metal :metal
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Clockwork Angels
Post by: jammindude on December 21, 2014, 10:14:43 AM
Longer post later.   But I also love that the clock is set to 21:12 military time.   :metal
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Clockwork Angels
Post by: Zydar on December 21, 2014, 10:22:29 AM
Their best album in a long long time.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Clockwork Angels
Post by: Jaq on December 21, 2014, 10:35:11 AM
The first album by Rush I enjoyed, front to back, since Power Windows. Miles above the quality of everything they did from 1987 to this. Just a bloody brilliant album.  :metal
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Clockwork Angels
Post by: The Letter M on December 21, 2014, 11:40:19 AM
When the "Caravan" single came out, 3 years after Snakes & Arrows, I gained hope that we wouldn't have to wait another vie years between albums (as we did between VT and S&A), but as 2010 and 2011 dragged on, I began to wonder what the band was doing (other than touring, that is, for the Time Machine Tour). When the release date was set, I was ecstatic. I pre-ordered the Classic Rock Magazine special edition that came with a keychain and a special magazine full of Rush stories. The case itself is a VERY nice, glossy digibook.

If I recall correctly, I didn't get it from the UK until a couple days AFTER release date, and knowing it might ship late, I went ahead to Best Buy on the day of release and bought another copy of the album ANYWAY. Crazy, I know, but this is my favorite band we're talking about here! I popped that sucker into my car's CD player and sat in the parking lot for about 15 minutes getting through most of the first three songs. Having been familiar with the first two for two years now, it was nice to hear them in the context of the album, especially with some changes made. When the title track kicked in, I was elated, transported to another world and time. Rush wrote something unlike anything they had in decades, and it was transcendental. I didn't think anything on the album could top the title track, but most of the rest was about as good, if not better, like "Headlong Flight" and "The Garden".

Honestly, as weak as songs like "BU2B2" and "Wish Them Well" might sound, as a whole, the album is REALLY strong. I enjoy every song on this album, more than I enjoy every song on the previous two albums. Is it because of the story and concept? Perhaps, but all that aside, this is just Rush firing on all cylinders and pushing in all directions. Since they reconvened in 2001, every album has pushed a little more than before, which has kept me wondering where Rush will go with their next album, but until then, I have Clockwork Angels to keep me company. Heck, I have it in my car's CD player right now! I've been in the mood to blast it during my commutes lately so I put it in the other day and I'm glad I did. It had been awhile since I've heard it, so it was nice to revisit this already 2-and-a-half-year-old album. If history repeats itself, we're about another 2.5 years from the next Rush album.

-Marc.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Clockwork Angels
Post by: Lucien on December 21, 2014, 11:56:35 AM
I don't think I would be alone calling this album Rush's most consistent album. Clockwork Angels is probably in my top 5 songs by them.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Clockwork Angels
Post by: jjrock88 on December 21, 2014, 11:58:53 AM
Fantastic release, the best since Power Windows IMO
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Clockwork Angels
Post by: nicmos on December 21, 2014, 04:29:04 PM
This album is stunningly good for a band's 19th original studio effort and with members approaching 60 years old.  Is there another one anywhere that is this good?

I have to admit when I heard Caravan and BU2B, I wasn't really impressed.  I think Caravan might be my 2nd least favorite still.  It's pretty much like those songs on Snakes and Arrows as far as I'm concerned and that's not a compliment.  BU2B was at least improved on the album release.

I agree, the title track is one of the best things they've done in a long time.  A huge grin came across my face when I heard this for the first time.  It was Rush, almost like doing a kick-ass version of One Of These Days from PF.  But that's just the intro.  I really love those verses like Kev said.  I actually sort of disengage during the blues breakdown section, that's the one thing keeping this song from being among their all-time best.  I just don't think it fits the rest of the song, and it drains the amazing energy.

Anarchist and Carnies are amazing hard rocking songs for a band at this stage of their career.  I absolutely love their instrumental sections.  Anarchist is probably my favorite on the whole album.

The rest of the songs are all very good, but still don't individually break into the top-tier of Rush songs for me.  They work better together.  Headlong Flight is another great one.

Garden is so close to being one of their career highlights, but it just isn't for me.  About 80% of the song is amazing, but I'm just not a fan of the ending section.  Still a great song though, and different from anything they've done.

This is an album I"m definitely proud to own.  It reveals what amazing musicians Rush are, and a long time from now people will be holding it up as one of their great accomplishments.  Even though it might not be my preference, people might forget about everything after MP and put this up there with their must have albums.

edit: left out a word
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Clockwork Angels
Post by: Polarbear on December 22, 2014, 12:57:11 AM
I love Vapor Trails(Remix) and Snakes & Arrows, but Clockwork Angels is a big improvement over those albums. The title track is just amazing.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Clockwork Angels
Post by: ? on December 22, 2014, 05:28:42 AM
Clockwork Angels is the album that got me into Rush, so it'll always have a special place in my heart, but even after hearing all the other albums I still think it's one of their greatest achievements. Caravan, The Anarchist and Headlong Flight = :2metal:

I missed the Time Machine discussion, but I don't have a lot to add, as I've seen it only once. I thought the song selection was great, but Geddy's vocals sounded a little patchy at times (see: Time Stand Still chorus).
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Clockwork Angels
Post by: Mladen on December 22, 2014, 08:05:25 AM
This album is terrific. I adored Caravan and BU2B from the start and I knew the entire album would be as amazing if the rest of the songs are as good as the first two. Then I heard the title track, The Garden, The Anarchist, The Wreckers and the immensely underrated Wish them well and it was clear - Rush managed to put out a great record in their fifth decade. Too bad I can't be one of those best-album-since-God-knows-when guys, since I love Vapor trails just as much, actually slightly more.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Clockwork Angels
Post by: Lowdz on December 22, 2014, 02:49:12 PM
Well, what this album proves is how much garbage they've released over the second half of their career.
This album is great! Why the fu#k did we have to wait so long for it?

For once TAC and I agree!
I thought the band were dead to me until this album. I love it. Their best since Power Windows I think.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Clockwork Angels
Post by: TAC on December 22, 2014, 05:14:53 PM
Well, what this album proves is how much garbage they've released over the second half of their career.
This album is great! Why the fu#k did we have to wait so long for it?

For once TAC and I agree!
I thought the band were dead to me until this album. I love it. Their best since Power Windows I think.
Halleluiah!!! You finally came around to your senses! ;D
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Clockwork Angels
Post by: KevShmev on December 22, 2014, 06:06:06 PM
I'm not sure it has been mentioned yet, but I really love the little nod to La Villa Strangiato in Carnies, especially since it fits in perfectly in the song.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Clockwork Angels
Post by: mikemangioy on December 23, 2014, 06:42:05 AM
I'm not sure it has been mentioned yet, but I really love the little nod to La Villa Strangiato in Carnies, especially since it fits in perfectly in the song.

 :omg: when does this happen?
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Clockwork Angels
Post by: KevShmev on December 23, 2014, 06:08:41 PM
I'm not sure it has been mentioned yet, but I really love the little nod to La Villa Strangiato in Carnies, especially since it fits in perfectly in the song.

 :omg: when does this happen?

I first hear it a little around the 1:20 or so mark, in that little mellow section between the first and second verses.  That guitar lead that is somewhat in the background is reminiscent of the LVS lead.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Clockwork Angels
Post by: mikemangioy on December 24, 2014, 07:15:32 AM
I'm not sure it has been mentioned yet, but I really love the little nod to La Villa Strangiato in Carnies, especially since it fits in perfectly in the song.

 :omg: when does this happen?

I first hear it a little around the 1:20 or so mark, in that little mellow section between the first and second verses.  That guitar lead that is somewhat in the background is reminiscent of the LVS lead.

that's true, nice
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Clockwork Angels Tour
Post by: KevShmev on December 25, 2014, 10:20:40 AM
Inexplicably, for the second time in three live albums, the band took the lazy approach and simply called a live album by the name of their most recent album while sticking a word at the end of it, first "live" with Snakes & Arrows, and then again with "tour,' resulting in the live album called Clockwork Angels Tour.  Quibbling about that aside, the set list for this tour and live album was pretty mind-blowing, as they played not only almost all of the new album, but most of Power Windows, not to mention some other songs that hadn't been heard live in a long time like "Where's My Thing," "The Body Electric" and "The Analog Kid." Mix these in with some of the obvious almost always-played classics, and you had a live album that was unlike any Rush had ever done before.  The continuing disintegration of Geddy's live voice makes it not always an easy listen, but this is a live album packed front to back with great tunes.  Kudos to the band for continuing to mix up the set lists drastically from tour to tour.

(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/5/5f/Clockwork_Angels_Tour_CD_cover.jpg)
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Clockwork Angels Tour
Post by: jjrock88 on December 25, 2014, 11:31:39 AM
Awesome setlist on this one
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Clockwork Angels Tour
Post by: mikemangioy on December 25, 2014, 11:56:49 AM
This one has an interesting setlist and it's fun to watch. Nice to hear a lot of new stuff and 80's stuff both. Great imagery, too. And also, DAT Dreamline  :hefdaddy :hefdaddy :hefdaddy :hefdaddy
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Clockwork Angels Tour
Post by: nicmos on December 25, 2014, 12:18:10 PM
And also, DAT Dreamline  :hefdaddy :hefdaddy :hefdaddy :hefdaddy

I love what Alex does with the solo in Dreamline when they do it live, but the last chorus always suffers without those sustained guitar chords unfortunately.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Clockwork Angels Tour
Post by: Mladen on December 26, 2014, 03:21:22 AM
I saw them on this tour, it was the best concert I've ever seen. The DVD is gorgeous.  :heart
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Clockwork Angels Tour
Post by: ? on December 26, 2014, 06:31:30 AM
The setlist includes lots of cool songs, and it's easier on Geddy's voice than a set filled with 70s material would've been, which is a good thing at this point.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Clockwork Angels Tour
Post by: mikemangioy on December 26, 2014, 06:33:15 AM
One other thing that makes this dvd stand out: that celloist. Good gracious.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Clockwork Angels Tour
Post by: Mladen on December 26, 2014, 07:13:58 AM
I actually like the violinist better.  :heart
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Clockwork Angels Tour
Post by: The Letter M on December 26, 2014, 07:47:40 AM
Funny/interesting story about this tour... I got the tickets as a gift and dragged a friend along with me. She kind of enjoyed it, but she had never been to a concert before, at least not like that, so she wasn't feeling well near the end and wanted to leave before the encore. I was a bit heartbroken of course, and she said I could stay up through the last song of the 2nd set before the encore, and considering she was also driving on the way back home (the show was 2-2.5 hours away from home for us), I had to oblige. When she got up before the last song, she apparently bought me one of the tour t-shirts (which I didn't have ANY money for any merchandise), which she said was to make up for me missing the encore. I hugged her tightly and said it was OK and thanked her for the (rather expensive) t-shirt and ended up having a good time anyway. I guess it wasn't a big loss, anyway, since it was "Tom Sawyer" and "2112" (although I would've loved to hear them being my first Rush concert). I guess I'll have to catch them next tour! :tup

As for this particular show/release, it's a pretty good one. The band went through the extra trouble of filming TWO shows back-to-back in two different cities/states, just to ensure they'd have all the songs from the tour (except the early-tour exclusive of "Working Man", but we've had enough of that already), as well as performing one extra CA song on the main night, giving us a whopping 10 out of 12 CA songs!!! What a treat! All of the 80's tunes they played were amazing choices, and I was happy to see most of POW make an appearance on this tour. It was funny reading here how many fans thought CA was their best since POW considering they covered half of that album on this tour.

When this live set was coming out, I had to pre-order the deluxe limited special edition, and it came in around the same time that I had pre-ordered the deluxe limited special edition of Dream Theater's Live At Luna Park. It was a great time to love live releases and they're two of my favorites from last year!

(https://fbcdn-sphotos-b-a.akamaihd.net/hphotos-ak-xpf1/v/t1.0-9/1472912_10100292928336441_319988828_n.jpg?oh=86b1037b13d0fb10a27f733dbe81f15e&oe=55477B36&__gda__=1430145643_ade43a68a5112d506bbea324508702f6)

-Marc.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Clockwork Angels Tour
Post by: Nick on December 26, 2014, 08:30:46 AM
One other thing that makes this dvd stand out: that celloist. Good gracious.

I'm more for violinists. :D

(https://www.wpapu.com/images/CA01.jpg)
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Clockwork Angels Tour
Post by: ? on December 26, 2014, 08:31:15 AM
I actually like the violinist better.  :heart
Me too :hearts: According to Rush Vault she was Miss Alaska in 2000: https://rushvault.com/2012/09/16/who-are-the-string-musicians-in-clockwork-angels/
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Clockwork Angels Tour
Post by: mikemangioy on December 26, 2014, 01:20:15 PM
Well, I don't dislike the violinist either  :D

but this. (https://youtu.be/UHNaKGNwDqc?t=5m29s)
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Clockwork Angels Tour
Post by: Anguyen92 on December 26, 2014, 02:12:30 PM
What I really liked about this DVD and the tour, in general, was that, almost 40 years with the same lineup, these guys still wants to find ways to be ambitious with whatever they wanted to do for an album cycle.  It's obvious they did that really well with creating an actual concept album, incorporating almost all of the album in the live shows, bringing strings players to play these songs while giving a different approach to some of the old songs (YYZ, Dreamline, Red Sector A), and playing songs that hadn't been played in decades and still make it compelling to listen to.

I bought this DVD on the Tuesday, it came out, watched it on Thanksgiving and was very well worth it.  Hopefully, one day, I can show this DVD to friends that don't really know Rush, but can appreciate the magic that is this show and have a good time all around.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Clockwork Angels Tour
Post by: KevShmev on December 26, 2014, 10:26:39 PM
My only beef with the tour was some of the rotations.  For example, Manhattan Project, which hadn't been played since the 80s, was rotated with Dreamline, which has been played a ton since its release in the early 90s.  That didn't make any sense.  But, all in all, I still enjoyed the living hell out of the set list we got at the show here, which included Middletown Dreams!! :tup :tup
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Clockwork Angels Tour
Post by: Nick on December 26, 2014, 10:31:47 PM
I agree with you on that Kev. But that complaint aside, no matter what setlist you got, it was the best they've done in decades. So much great new material, so much stuff brought out of retirement, such an excellent string section (which could actually be heard), and which even helped bring back a song I had long grown tired of (Red Sector A) a refreshing new life. Geddy is aging, no doubt, but they managed to embrace it, adjust the set accordingly, and most importantly they really showed on this tour that they are still a force to be reckoned with. I would still see Rush if they just were a nostalgia act, but am so happy they aren't.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Clockwork Angels Tour
Post by: The Letter M on December 26, 2014, 10:59:47 PM
I don't recall it being mentioned here, but for the first time since the 70's, I believe, the guitar solo at the end of 2112's "Grand Finale" is finally played in full!!! The few times they've done "Grand Finale" in the last 20 years, Alex never played the solo, but on this tour, he finally did!!! :metal

-Marc.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Clockwork Angels Tour
Post by: King Postwhore on December 27, 2014, 04:37:54 AM
I also loved the fact of seeing the opening show and was shocked in a pleasant way for so many great 80's songs back to back to back.

I texted my best bud who was at the show as well and we were like teenagers with each song.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Clockwork Angels Tour
Post by: Phoenix87x on December 27, 2014, 06:02:25 AM
Saw this tour from the 10th row. Probably one of the greatest shows I've ever seen.

They should have played losing it though.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Epilogue
Post by: KevShmev on December 27, 2014, 04:49:16 PM
And that's a wrap.  We now sit waiting to see what Rush does next.  Strong indications are that 2015 will see them do a 41st anniversary tour, so we shall see what that entails.  I think their history speaks for itself.  I hate using this expression, but haters will always hate no matter what, but four decades of going strong, with a large fan base, outweighs any criticism thrown at them by brain dead critics or people who don't like the band.  Their legacy as one of the greats in the annals of rock music is solidified, and they have been my favorite band now for about 23 years, something I don't see changing any time soon. 

And just for fun, since we all know how much DTF loves rankings, here are my album rankings and some others I thought of off the top of my head:

Rush studio album rankings
1. 2112
2. Permanent Waves
3. Moving Pictures
4. Power Windows
5. Counterparts
6. Hemispheres
7. Clockwork Angels
8. A Farewell to Kings
9. Grace Under Pressure
10. Fly by Night
11. Hold Your Fire
12. Roll the Bones
13. Signals
14. Caress of Steel
15. Snakes & Arrows
16. Vapor Trails
17. Presto
18. Rush
19. Test for Echo

Top 20 songs of the early years/peak era (1974-1981)
1. 2112
2. La Villa Strangiato
3. Xanadu
4. Red Barchetta
5. Jacob's Ladder
6. Natural Science
7. By-Tor and the Snow Dog
8. YYZ
9. The Spirit of Radio
10. Tom Sawyer
11. The Trees
12. The Necromancer
13. Cygnus X-1
14. Freewill
15. Hemispheres
16. Witch Hunt
17. Closer to the Heart
18. Anthem
19. The Camera Eye
20. Bastille Day

Top 30 songs since then (1982-2012)
1. Marathon
2. Leave That Thing Alone
3. Mission
4. Subdivisions
5. Territories
6. Clockwork Angels
7. Headlong Flight
8. Distant Early Warning
9. Animate
10. Ghost of a Chance
11. The Anarchist
12. Mystic Rhythms
13. Cold Fire
14. Between the Wheels
15. Red Sector A
16. Turn the Page
17. The Pass
18. Dreamline
19. The Garden
20. Double Agent
21. Middletown Dreams
22. Everyday Glory
23. Bravado
24. The Analog Kid
25. Prime Mover
26. Losing It
27. Time Stand Still
28. Where's My Thing
29. Caravan
30. Nobody's Hero
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Epilogue
Post by: jammindude on December 27, 2014, 06:34:28 PM
It was a fun ride.  I'm on vacation right now...so I didn't get to do a decent review or ranking of CA, but I love it. 

I can probably do a quick ranking...

1. Hemispheres
2. Permanent Waves
3. Moving Pictures
4. Power Windows
5. Clockwork Angels
6. Test for Echo
7. Snakes and Arrows
8. A Farewell to Kings
9. Signals
10. Fly By Night
11. Grace Under Pressure
12. Caress of Steel
13. Rush
14. 2112
15. Presto
16. Counterparts
17. Hold Your Fire
18. Vapor Trails
19. Roll the Bones
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Epilogue
Post by: jjrock88 on December 27, 2014, 08:12:34 PM
Thanks for doing this, great job!
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Epilogue
Post by: mikemangioy on December 28, 2014, 01:35:37 AM
Thank you kev, you helped me doing something that I was wanting to do for a lot of time. I'm glad to say now that I've finally listened to all of Rush music. And they are number two in my favorite band ranking now  :metal :hefdaddy

Album ranking:

1.Moving Pictures
2.Hemispheres
3.Permanent Waves
4.Power Windows
5.A Farewell To Kings
6.Clockwork Angels
7.2112
8.Grace Under Pressure
9.Snakes & Arrows
10.Roll The Bones
11.Fly By Night
12.Presto
13.Test For Echo
14.Caress Of Steel
15.Vapor Trails
16.Hold Your Fire
17.Rush
18.Counterparts
19.Signals

Favorite songs:

Hard rock/prog era: 2112
Prog era: Xanadu
Synth era: Subdivisions
90's: Dreamline
Nowadays: Carnies
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Epilogue
Post by: Zydar on December 28, 2014, 02:56:25 AM
Big thanks for doing this :tup

I'll only do a Top 5 ranking, it's hard enough as it is.

1. Moving Pictures
2. A Farewell To Kings
3. 2112
4. Permanent Waves
5. Signals
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Epilogue
Post by: ? on December 28, 2014, 05:05:05 AM
Thanks Kev!

It's difficult to rank the best albums, so I'll split top 10 in two tiers:

1-5
Permanent Waves
Moving Pictures
Power Windows
Counterparts
Clockwork Angels

6-10
2112
Hemispheres
Signals
Grace Under Pressure
Roll the Bones

The rest:
11. Presto
12. Test for Echo
13. Snakes & Arrows
14. Hold Your Fire
15. A Farewell to Kings
16. Caress of Steel
17. Vapor Trails
18. Fly by Night
19. Rush
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Epilogue
Post by: hefdaddy42 on December 28, 2014, 05:11:39 AM
Great job, Kev!
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Epilogue
Post by: Mladen on December 28, 2014, 06:02:51 AM
I refreshed my list while we were doing this:

Permanent waves
Power windows
Grace under pressure
Signals
Vapor trails
Moving pictures
Clockwork angels
Hemispheres
2112
Presto
Counterparts
A Farewell to kings
Test for echo
Snakes & Arrows
Roll the bones
Hold your fire
Caress of steel
Fly by night
Rush

This was a great thread, Kev, thanks a lot for running it.  :tup
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Epilogue
Post by: KevShmev on December 28, 2014, 07:12:37 AM
Thanks, fellas. I had fun doing this thread. I am surprised I got it done in just under three months. 
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Epilogue
Post by: TAC on December 28, 2014, 07:16:46 AM
It had a good pace. Nice job Kev!
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Epilogue
Post by: King Postwhore on December 28, 2014, 08:31:06 AM
Thank you Kev.  As much as I am a Rush nut, I would have no patience or time to do a thread like this.  You rock.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Epilogue
Post by: KevShmev on December 28, 2014, 08:41:54 AM
I wasn't sure I'd have time to do it either, once I got a new job in October, but when I had time, I just busted out the written reviews in like 5-10 minutes and posted them.  I feel like I missed out mentioning a lot of things - for example, I didn't talk nearly as much about Neil's lyrics as I would have, had I put more time into it - but I guess I figured that we've all talked about Rush so much over the years that it was okay to not touch on every little thing. 
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Epilogue
Post by: TAC on December 28, 2014, 09:44:44 AM
1. Moving Pictures
2. Hemispheres
3. 2112
4. Permanent Waves
5. Counterparts
6. Signals
7. A Farewell To Kings
8. Clockwork Angels
9. Presto
10. Grace Under Pressure
11. Vapor Trails
12. Power Windows
13. Fly By Night
14. Hold Your Fire
15. Rush
16. Caress Of Steel
17. Roll The Bones
18. Test For Echo
19. Snakes And Arrows
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Epilogue
Post by: Polarbear on December 28, 2014, 11:06:34 AM
Top.5 Albums:

1. Moving Pictures
2. Permanent Waves
3. Grace Under Pressure
4. Power Windows
5. Clockwork Angels

Top.10 Songs:

1. Mystic Rhytms
2. Witch Hunt
3. Red Sector A
4. Tom Sawyer
5. Middletown Dreams
6. Camera Eye
7. Natural Science
8. Xanadu
9. Manhattan Project
10. Clockwork Angels
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Snakes & Arrows
Post by: ytserush on January 03, 2015, 03:28:40 PM
After taking all of 2005 off after the 30th anniversary tour, Rush set about writing and recording their first studio album of original material in early 2006, and they were eventually joined by producer Nick Raskulinecz, who implored the band to try to recapture some of their early sound on this modern record.  The results were mixed.  When Snakes & Arrows eventually came out in the spring of 2007, it was kicked off by a teaser online of the "Far Cry" intro, which ended with the "Hemispheres" chord, which got a lot of fans excited, thinking this was gonna be an album that harkened back to their 70s material, especially given the chatter about how Raskulinecz had tried to push them in that direction.  The thing that reminded the most about their early stuff was the light and dark contract heard quite often between acoustic sections and heavy electric ones, even if the feel of the new songs didn't match up; the dynamic was back in full force, as many songs prominently feature the acoustic guitar, often sounding like they were written on the acoustic given the simple, joyful melodies many of the songs possess. 

Personally, while I found "Far Cry" a bit underwhelming at first, and still do to this day, the album as a whole was very much to my liking.  It was extremely consistent; I liked every songs quite a bit, and several had that "I could see this being a favorite of mine some day" feel, especially "Armor and Sword," "The Main Monkey Business," "Malignant Narcissism" and the highly-underrated "Bravest Face."  There was a lot of good music out in 2007, but this was still a record that got a ton of listens in my CD player, like any new Rush record worth would get.  It was also cool that this was the first Rush studio album ever to feature more than one instrumental.  And it didn't have two, it had three!!  One of them was a nice little acoustic guitar-only tune by Alex Lifeson called "Hope," a song that is nice, if not really all that notable. 

The band was obviously pretty nuts about this album, as they have played 10 of the 13 songs from it live, nine of which were on the S&A tour in '07 and '08.  Oddly, I thought some of the songs didn't come off as well live as they did in the studio, in large part because this was an album so ripe with overdubs - see a song like "Armor and Sword" that is filled with tons of both acoustic and electric guitar - that replicating them live as is, even with triggers, was tough to pull off.  I've always loved the simply melodic joyousness of something like "The Larger Bowl."  You don't often see Rush do a song so simple and so melodic, and they made it work.  "The Way the Wind Blows" was another favorite of mine at first, but for some reason, I merely like it.  It's a good song, but it kind of has that "it could have been better" feel to it, and it kind of teeters into that uber-liberal preachiness that have infected a few of Peart's lyrics in the 21st century (along with "Faithless" and "BU2B").  Peart used to be a lot more subtle when writing about subjects like that, but with those songs he went for more directness and I don't think it benefited the songs.  The lyrics themselves do not bother me at all - I can always deal with lyrics that I do not agree with - but they just seem a bit too overtly wordy and preachy.  But to each his own.

Seven and a half years later, I'd be lying if I said I loved this album nearly as much as I did at first, but I still like it quite a bit.  It has a certain vibe you really won't get on any other Rush album, but while I still like every song on it, the overall album seems to lack that bit of Rush charm that usually is unavoidable.  I am not saying it feels sterile, but there is just something missing from it as a whole that I can't quite put my finger on. 

(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/c/c5/Snakesandarrows.jpg)

The only problem with Snakes and Arrows is that Clockwork Angels came after it.

Incredible album that shines even brighter live.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Snakes & Arrows Live
Post by: ytserush on January 03, 2015, 03:46:18 PM
I still find it strange that the band couldn't come up with a better name for a live album, rather than the lazy act of just adding "Live" to the end of their most recent studio album, but it is what it is.  A good live record, with a mostly phenomenal set list, featuring a lot of songs that hadn't been played live in a long time or never played before.  The five song-stretch of S&A songs to start the 2nd set was a bit of a buzz kill live, but this is still a great set of Rush tunes.

(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/5/54/Rush_Snakes_%26_Arrows_Live.jpg)

Awesome live album and DVD only marred by Limelight, but at least they goofed on it which was sort of fun. Bonus footage on the DVD was a nice touch.

Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Time Machine 2011: Live in Cleveland
Post by: ytserush on January 03, 2015, 04:03:00 PM
Of all the live albums they've put out since 2003, this is probably the one I've listened to the least. Both RIR and R30 were very special, being the big comeback tour and the anniversary, while S&A Live marked a bold statement about their new album, as well as featuring a fair amount of older/rarer songs. The Time Machine tour really only had about half a show's worth of great material, and agreed about Geddy's voice here. It improved a bit for the CAT release, but here it's just a bit hit-or-miss. I believe the story was that he was fighting off a cold just before this show, and since everything had already been set up to record in Cleveland, there wasn't much that could be done. Quite a shame, and I'm sure there are bootlegs out there with better Geddy vocals, but this is the one we got officially.

And to be nitpicky, sure we didn't get a full studio album before this live album, but we didn't really get one before R30 either, and so if you don't count Feedback as a studio album (more of an EP than an LP), this is the 2nd time in 10 years that two live albums were successively released. Unless, if you count the covers EP, you could possibly consider the "Caravan" single, which was released before the Time Machine Tour, and included two early versions of "Caravan" and "BU2B". It's a neat sneak-peak in an album that would take two more years to complete and release, and hearing that single was an amazing thing. I was stunned at the playing and writing, and tried to imagine an album with that level of intensity. Also, the cover to the "Caravan" single was gorgeous, and at first, I had hoped it'd be the cover to next album, but what we got was initially disappointing, but I have since grown to love it. Red really suits the band... (debut logo, the Starman, Hold Your Fire, and probably more...).

-Marc.

Exactly, I consider that single CD/45 to be an official release (especially since these songs are different versions of what came later.)


Again, another awesome live CD/DVD set. The set list is different enough to keep them special and while I wasn't very enthused about the Moving Pictures live idea, it came off rather well in spite of having to hear Limelight again.


Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Clockwork Angels
Post by: ytserush on January 03, 2015, 04:12:14 PM

(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/4/4c/Rush_Clockwork_Angels_artwork.png)

The picture speaks for itself.


Though I'm interested to know what it is about Clockwork Angels the people who bailed after Power Windows like so much about Clockwork Angels.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Clockwork Angels Tour
Post by: ytserush on January 03, 2015, 04:18:37 PM


(https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/5/5f/Clockwork_Angels_Tour_CD_cover.jpg)

Uh...Best Rush live album/DVD ever!
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Epilogue
Post by: Orbert on January 03, 2015, 11:18:47 PM
Though I'm interested to know what it is about Clockwork Angels the people who bailed after Power Windows like so much about Clockwork Angels.

For me, it's that a lot of the songs just sound powerful.  They rock, they have balls.  In the 80's, everything sounded great, but it was all produced and shiny and blended into a sometimes boring pastiche of sound.  Even when they were playing balls-out, it still felt held back somehow, like it had to be all clean and shiny.  Clockwork Angels gets dirty, heavy, ballsy sometimes in ways the 80's stuff just never did.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Epilogue
Post by: The Letter M on January 03, 2015, 11:37:13 PM
Though I'm interested to know what it is about Clockwork Angels the people who bailed after Power Windows like so much about Clockwork Angels.

For me, it's that a lot of the songs just sound powerful.  They rock, they have balls.  In the 80's, everything sounded great, but it was all produced and shiny and blended into a sometimes boring pastiche of sound.  Even when they were playing balls-out, it still felt held back somehow, like it had to be all clean and shiny.  Clockwork Angels gets dirty, heavy, ballsy sometimes in ways the 80's stuff just never did.

After albums like POW and HYF, some of the songs were becoming a bit less adventurous, even by the band's standards. You didn't get songs like "Marathon" or "Manhattan Project" or even "Mission" and "Lock And Key" after these albums. There were a few great ones, some with experimental sounds and others that were obviously influenced by the music of the time, but it did start to feel a bit same-y after awhile.

I think one of the major draws of CA was that it was a full-blown concept album, with a story and characters. Sure, they had "2112" and the "Cygnus X-1" duology back in the 70's, and throughout the 80's and 90's they had thematic albums where Neil's lyrics took on certain ideas, but CA was a story, front to back, and it had accompanying comics and a novel (and an audio-book read by Neil). It was more typical-prog than anything they had done in the last 20 years, so I think that was a huge factor in why a lot of old fans came back to the band.

It was also a good move on the band's part to include a lot of those 80's songs on the CA tour, not just because they were band favorites, but also because they do harken back to a period where the band were really experimenting with a lot of different things, and it always made me laugh when I see people say CA is their best album since POW because the band played half of that album on the CA tour.

-Marc.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Epilogue
Post by: King Postwhore on January 04, 2015, 06:23:28 AM
I also think the 80's songs are easier on Geddy's voice so it was a logical choice. I was lucky enough to see those songs live in the 80's
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Epilogue
Post by: KevShmev on January 04, 2015, 06:50:45 AM
And I still hate you for it. :biggrin: :blush :lol
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Epilogue
Post by: King Postwhore on January 04, 2015, 09:03:24 AM
 :biggrin:


I was thinking at the first show, "Holy crap!  I haven't seen them play tjis live since 1884!"
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Clockwork Angels
Post by: TAC on January 04, 2015, 11:17:59 AM


Though I'm interested to know what it is about Clockwork Angels the people who bailed after Power Windows like so much about Clockwork Angels.
After PW?? I bailed after Signals!

Rush has set a very high bar in terms of writing and playing. CA is the first album in a very long time that actually lives up to their OWN standards. It is focused, complete, and refined.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Clockwork Angels
Post by: jjrock88 on January 04, 2015, 11:50:46 AM


Though I'm interested to know what it is about Clockwork Angels the people who bailed after Power Windows like so much about Clockwork Angels.
After PW?? I bailed after Signals!

Rush has set a very high bar in terms of writing and playing. CA is the first album in a very long time that actually lives up to their OWN standards. It is focused, complete, and refined.

That's a good description of CA
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Clockwork Angels
Post by: King Postwhore on January 04, 2015, 01:14:44 PM


Though I'm interested to know what it is about Clockwork Angels the people who bailed after Power Windows like so much about Clockwork Angels.
After PW?? I bailed after Signals!

Rush has set a very high bar in terms of writing and playing. CA is the first album in a very long time that actually lives up to their OWN standards. It is focused, complete, and refined.

Power Windows and Counterparts says Ne-Ner, Ne-Ner good sir!
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Epilogue
Post by: TAC on January 04, 2015, 01:17:19 PM
I probably like Counterparts a little more myself, but CA has that "classic" feel to it.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Epilogue
Post by: King Postwhore on January 04, 2015, 01:18:30 PM
I certainly does.  To me it's proof bands need producers to push them as they get into their career.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Clockwork Angels
Post by: ytserush on January 10, 2015, 10:30:17 AM


Though I'm interested to know what it is about Clockwork Angels the people who bailed after Power Windows like so much about Clockwork Angels.
After PW?? I bailed after Signals!

Rush has set a very high bar in terms of writing and playing. CA is the first album in a very long time that actually lives up to their OWN standards. It is focused, complete, and refined.

Interesting. What would say was wrong with say....Vapor Trails. (If you can discount the obvious. If you can't that's fine because that IS there, but besides that.)
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Epilogue
Post by: jingle.boy on January 11, 2020, 06:09:09 AM
Bump.

I'll be here for a while.  Think I'll re-read a few pages per day as I go along with the discography.  Just wrapping up The Necromancer at the moment.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Epilogue
Post by: KevShmev on January 11, 2020, 08:15:14 AM
This thread was a blast to do. I will have to go back and re-read it as well.  Good bump, Chad. :tup :tup
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Epilogue
Post by: faizoff on January 11, 2020, 09:14:14 AM
Never saw this thread before, will have to check it out while listening to their discography now. Still can't believe it.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Epilogue
Post by: jingle.boy on January 11, 2020, 11:34:47 AM
I'll definitely find that clip. I've never seen that as I think S&A is generally terrible.

But let me amend that to say that I will listen to it during my discog run with an open and fresh mind considering what just happened, so I can find an new appreciation for it.

I never considered S&A terrible, but it is in the lower 1/2 of my rankings. But to your latter point, Ima already finding things to like in songs I generally thought were not good. The Fountain of Lamenth was a really nice listen earlier. 

2112 is next... though I've preferred the Different Stages version since 1996. I might just bypass the studio version.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Epilogue
Post by: TAC on January 11, 2020, 11:45:07 AM
The studio version of 2112 is biblical for me. I'm off this weekend so I actually have Caress Of Steel on now, though I think we're heading out shortly.

I honestly never connected with anything on S&A. I always felt they tried to cram in music around the lyrics. But I am not skipping it this week.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Epilogue
Post by: Lethean on January 11, 2020, 11:49:13 AM
Snakes and Arrows is a great album, imo, but it was definitely a grower for me.  First listen was like "ok...." but with time, the songs started to click for me; not all at once, but I'd find myself really enjoying one, then another would click, etc.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Epilogue
Post by: KevShmev on January 11, 2020, 11:57:23 AM
I don't like Snakes & Arrows now as much as I did when it was first released, but I still like it.  I would definitely place in my bottom tier, though, which of course is no shame since there is no Rush album I do not like.  The very dry sound of the production is bothersome, however.  Even though I like all three albums they did this century, there are major sound issues with all of them (Vapor Trails is loud and noisy, S&A is too dry, Clockwork Angels is brickwalled to death).  The bottom tier albums are the one I rarely reach for anymore (the debut, Test for Echo, Vapor Trails, Snakes & Arrows).
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Epilogue
Post by: King Postwhore on January 11, 2020, 12:01:05 PM
I'll definitely find that clip. I've never seen that as I think S&A is generally terrible.

But let me amend that to say that I will listen to it during my discog run with an open and fresh mind considering what just happened, so I can find an new appreciation for it.

I never considered S&A terrible, but it is in the lower 1/2 of my rankings. But to your latter point, Ima already finding things to like in songs I generally thought were not good. The Fountain of Lamenth was a really nice listen earlier. 

2112 is next... though I've preferred the Different Stages version since 1996. I might just bypass the studio version.

I was in the 6th row in front of Geddy for that version of 2112. They were on fire that night.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Epilogue
Post by: TAC on January 11, 2020, 12:12:53 PM
I don't like Snakes & Arrows now as much as I did when it was first released, but I still like it.  I would definitely place in my bottom tier, though, which of course is no shame since there is no Rush album I do not like.  The very dry sound of the production is bothersome, however.  Even though I like all three albums they did this century, there are major sound issues with all of them (Vapor Trails is loud and noisy, S&A is too dry, Clockwork Angels is brickwalled to death).  The bottom tier albums are the one I rarely reach for anymore (the debut, Test for Echo, Vapor Trails, Snakes & Arrows).

Huh, I always thought the production and sound was the only thing S&A had going for it.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Epilogue
Post by: Cool Chris on January 11, 2020, 12:33:44 PM
Don't have time or patience to read through this whole thread, but might skim through to read posts by Kev, jingle, and others I consider forum friends and whose musical insights and opinions I value.

I like Rush enough to say I put 2112-MP as maybe my favorite 5-album stretch of any band, while I am lukewarm at best toward the rest of their material, with exceptions like The Pass, which I might put in my favorite 20 songs of all time.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Epilogue
Post by: TAC on January 11, 2020, 06:40:27 PM
So I just finished the first Rush Era of the discog. First, Permanent Waves. This album is amazing. It stretches my imagination with it's sound and music. Natural Science is and has always been mind blowing.

At first I thought of skipping Moving Pictures in this exercise. It's literally one of my most listened to albums in my life. But I listened and I'm so glad I did. This is one of those musical life changing albums.

Moving Pictures came out in the middle of my 7th grade. Within a few months I had all of their 8 tracks. The summer of '81 was about three bands. AC/DC, Van Halen, and Rush.

But there was something different about Rush. They made music that was so interesting, and challenging. They would ultimately lose me with Signals and their 80's output, as I was a hard rock fan at my core. What Rush would do I would not find very interesting. I have come to love most of their 80's Era, but at the time, I didn't pay a huge amount of attention.

So while I don't have that "soundtrack to my life" experience that many of you have, Rush was one of my main influences in my most formative years. One of my first "favorite bands. Those early Rush albums will always be so special to me. :\
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Epilogue
Post by: King Postwhore on January 11, 2020, 06:49:07 PM
Moving Pictures sounded so modern for it's time.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Epilogue
Post by: TAC on January 11, 2020, 06:56:06 PM
Moving Pictures sounded so modern for it's time.

It sounds modern now!

Permanent Waves too.

How can albums made these days sound like such ass when albums recorded in 1979 can sound so fantastic?
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Epilogue
Post by: Cool Chris on January 11, 2020, 06:57:01 PM
Question for all... I have said that 2112-MP might be my favorite 5 album stretch of music ever. Rush music before 2112 is pretty meh for me, the 80s output is hit or miss (more miss than hit), and I like to varying degrees everything Presto and beyond, though I am not as familiar with it as with the rest of their catalog. Is there a live album (or albums) that I would should check out? I don't own any, nor have I given any a good listen.

This also made me wonder if Rush will see a spike in their album sales, as so often happens after an artist's passing.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Epilogue
Post by: King Postwhore on January 11, 2020, 06:59:17 PM
Brick walls my friend. Rush had so much dimension in their sound even in an album.

Bands today don't have dimension and it's a wall of sound.

Chris, Counterparts is for you.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Epilogue
Post by: KevShmev on January 11, 2020, 07:00:02 PM


How can albums made these days sound like such ass when albums recorded in 1979 can sound so fantastic?

Don't get me started.  I want to punch whoever is responsible for brickwalling the crap out of Clockwork Angels.  If that was mixed and sounded like Counterparts, it would probably be a top 5 Rush album for me (even with Geddy's vocals being a little rough around the edges due to his age). 
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Epilogue
Post by: TAC on January 11, 2020, 07:01:19 PM
Chris, if you want a good 80's playlist, A Show Of Hands is pretty good.

As Joe said, Counterparts is 75% killer. And Clockwork Angels obviously.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Epilogue
Post by: KevShmev on January 11, 2020, 07:04:53 PM
Chris, if you want a good 80's playlist, A Show Of Hands is pretty good.


Agreed.  I am usually a studio version guy, but some of the live versions on A Show of Hands are better than the studio ones, most notably Red Sector A, Turn the Page and Mission.  And the live version of Marathon has those extra 15-20 seconds that we didn't get on the studio version due to the fadeout (and I don't mind fadeouts).
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Epilogue
Post by: King Postwhore on January 11, 2020, 07:11:09 PM


How can albums made these days sound like such ass when albums recorded in 1979 can sound so fantastic?

Don't get me started.  I want to punch whoever is responsible for brickwalling the crap out of Clockwork Angels.  If that was mixed and sounded like Counterparts, it would probably be a top 5 Rush album for me (even with Geddy's vocals being a little rough around the edges due to his age).

I had to turn down CA today.  It was too muddled playing it loud in my car.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Epilogue
Post by: KevShmev on January 11, 2020, 07:13:27 PM

I had to turn down CA today.  It was too muddled playing it loud in my car.

Exactly.  You get ear fatigue if you turn it up and listen to too many songs from it in a row, and as a result I rarely listen to all of it anymore, although Headlong Flight and the title track are too good to not go for on a regular basis. 
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Epilogue
Post by: TAC on January 11, 2020, 07:16:22 PM
Chris, if you want a good 80's playlist, A Show Of Hands is pretty good.


Agreed.  I am usually a studio version guy, but some of the live versions on A Show of Hands are better than the studio ones, most notably Red Sector A, Turn the Page and Mission.  And the live version of Marathon has those extra 15-20 seconds that we didn't get on the studio version due to the fadeout (and I don't mind fadeouts).

I just meant that A Show Of Hands is a good greatest songs of the 80's kind of live album and would give a good cross section of tracks.


Rush is a band where it was clear if they were into it live or not, and the Hold Your Fire show that I saw was fantastic and got me back into Rush in the late 80's.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Epilogue
Post by: Cool Chris on January 11, 2020, 07:24:30 PM
Chris, if you want a good 80's playlist, A Show Of Hands is pretty good.


Agreed.  I am usually a studio version guy, but some of the live versions on A Show of Hands are better than the studio ones, most notably Red Sector A, Turn the Page and Mission.  And the live version of Marathon has those extra 15-20 seconds that we didn't get on the studio version due to the fadeout (and I don't mind fadeouts).

I just meant that A Show Of Hands is a good greatest songs of the 80's kind of live album and would give a good cross section of tracks.

Except you might have missed where I said I wasn't very fond of that era of their music :p
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Epilogue
Post by: Lethean on January 11, 2020, 07:26:29 PM
If you're looking for a live album focusing on more of their 90s material, I would highly highly recommend Different Stages.  There's plenty of old stuff too - it's an awesome set.

Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Epilogue
Post by: Lethean on January 11, 2020, 07:27:40 PM
And after that, they did a live album of every tour.  And they're all good.  Rush in Rio is super cool for the energy.  I haven't actually watched the R40 one yet; I've been holding onto it I guess.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Epilogue
Post by: Stadler on January 11, 2020, 07:53:35 PM
I don't like Snakes & Arrows now as much as I did when it was first released, but I still like it.  I would definitely place in my bottom tier, though, which of course is no shame since there is no Rush album I do not like.  The very dry sound of the production is bothersome, however.  Even though I like all three albums they did this century, there are major sound issues with all of them (Vapor Trails is loud and noisy, S&A is too dry, Clockwork Angels is brickwalled to death).  The bottom tier albums are the one I rarely reach for anymore (the debut, Test for Echo, Vapor Trails, Snakes & Arrows).

Huh, I always thought the production and sound was the only thing S&A had going for it.

I LOVE the sound of that album.  Other than the instrumentals, it's not their best album of material, song-wise.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Epilogue
Post by: ReaperKK on January 11, 2020, 08:24:01 PM
Snakes and Arrows is a great album, imo, but it was definitely a grower for me.  First listen was like "ok...." but with time, the songs started to click for me; not all at once, but I'd find myself really enjoying one, then another would click, etc.

S&A is easily my favorite Rush record but I agree that it was a grower. It was the first album I really got into and I find it kind of surprising people hate on it so much. The riffage is great, the production is pretty good and it's an aground solid album. Mid to late 80s rush was way more spotty.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Epilogue
Post by: TAC on January 11, 2020, 08:43:46 PM
Just finished Grace Under Pressure, which is the greatest 5 song Rush EP ever, and I'm about to dive into the most overrated album in the entire Rush discography.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Epilogue
Post by: KevShmev on January 11, 2020, 08:46:48 PM
Just finished Grace Under Pressure, which is the greatest 5 song Rush EP ever, and I'm about to dive into the most overrated album in the entire Rush discography.

A Farewell to Kings?
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Epilogue
Post by: TAC on January 11, 2020, 08:49:44 PM
I'm going in chronological order wise ass.

But that said, AFTK is easily my least fave in the 2112-MP run.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Epilogue
Post by: KevShmev on January 11, 2020, 08:52:06 PM
I'm going in chronological order wise ass.

But that said, AFTK is easily my least fave in the 2112-MP run.

Better to be a wise ass than a dumb ass. :P

And to be clear, I am a big fan of A Farewell to Kings, but agree that it is their least best of the classic run, and like probably 7-8 overall Rush albums more than it now, thus it gets overrated. ;)
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Epilogue
Post by: TAC on January 11, 2020, 08:54:23 PM
I'm going in chronological order wise ass.

But that said, AFTK is easily my least fave in the 2112-MP run.

Better to be a wise ass than a dumb ass. :P


Tbh, it was 50-50 which one I typed. I went back and forth. :lol
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Epilogue
Post by: KevShmev on January 11, 2020, 08:57:11 PM
I'm going in chronological order wise ass.

But that said, AFTK is easily my least fave in the 2112-MP run.

Better to be a wise ass than a dumb ass. :P


Tbh, it was 50-50 which one I typed. I went back and forth. :lol

(https://www.dreamtheaterforums.org/boards/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2F1.bp.blogspot.com%2F_-WQRXVX_HSg%2FTKsHY1XkhPI%2FAAAAAAAABHo%2F4RWqx1EfekE%2Fs1600%2F70show_RedForman.jpg&hash=bdb99122730096f8ffadd0bafcb19b38795b3de8)
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Epilogue
Post by: TAC on January 11, 2020, 09:04:53 PM
So the funny thing about Red Foreman is that my best friend in 9th grade, his father looked and talked just like Red. I think that's why his character is so realistic to me. I mean, he looked just like him!
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Epilogue
Post by: King Postwhore on January 11, 2020, 09:09:32 PM
And you're a dummass as well.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Epilogue
Post by: KevShmev on January 11, 2020, 09:23:17 PM
It took me a while to get used to the stern father from Dead Poets Society played Red. 
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Epilogue
Post by: Cool Chris on January 11, 2020, 09:28:12 PM
Both of those two are a far cry from seeing him as the president of the United Federation of Planets in Star Trek VI.

Kev, your avatar is adorable, who is it?
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Epilogue
Post by: KevShmev on January 11, 2020, 09:30:13 PM
Emilia Clarke.  To say she is adorable would be the understatement of the century.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Epilogue
Post by: Cool Chris on January 11, 2020, 09:35:27 PM
Huh never would have thought that was her! But then it took me about halfway through Solo to realize she was the gal in that too. So basically if someone kills your wife prey I am not the only eyewitness.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Epilogue
Post by: KevShmev on January 11, 2020, 09:37:31 PM
Huh never would have thought that was her! But then it took me about halfway through Solo to realize she was the gal in that too. So basically if someone kills your wife prey I am not the only eyewitness.

That shot is from this clip:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xQE66PTOy_E
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Epilogue
Post by: TAC on January 12, 2020, 06:16:26 AM
I have no idea who that is.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Epilogue
Post by: KevShmev on January 12, 2020, 06:21:37 AM
Shocking. :P  She played Daenerys, the Mother of Dragons, on Game of Thrones.

Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Epilogue
Post by: TAC on January 12, 2020, 06:24:03 AM
I've never seen Game Of Thrones. I don't know any of the cast.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Epilogue
Post by: KevShmev on January 12, 2020, 06:29:10 AM
I've never seen Game Of Thrones. I don't know any of the cast.

(https://slm-assets1.secondlife.com/assets/23532034/view_large/Dracarys_img.jpg?1557040161)

:P
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Epilogue
Post by: faizoff on January 12, 2020, 10:25:40 AM
She played Sara Connor in Terminator Genisys.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Epilogue
Post by: King Puppies and the Acid Guppies on January 12, 2020, 10:33:13 AM
She played Sara Connor in Terminator Genisys.
TAC hasn't seen a movie since 1987.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Epilogue
Post by: King Postwhore on January 12, 2020, 10:34:26 AM
She played Sara Connor in Terminator Genisys.
TAC hasn't seen a movie since 1987.

Only with commercials.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Epilogue
Post by: TAC on January 12, 2020, 10:52:09 AM
Not including kids movies, I think the last time I went to the movies I saw The Blair Witch Project.  :lol
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Epilogue
Post by: TAC on January 12, 2020, 11:35:20 AM
Well, I just finished Power Windows and Hold Your Fire...

I really was not a Rush fan in the 80's. I had a friend big into Rush that nagged me to death to see the Power Windows show. I thought it was awful really. I was like 6 rows back right in front of Geddy. It was early in the tour and Geddy just looked pissed the entire night. Plus they played so many songs from Power Windows.


A few years later, I while in college, I went to the Hold Your Fire show in Worcester. Michael Schenker was opening, so that was the real draw for me. Well, Rush blew me away. They were so joyful on stage, and not the curmudgeons they were on the previous tour.

I became reinvigorated as far as Rush was, and was really hopeful for the soon to be released Presto.


That said, I still don't get the love for Power Windows. I find it really out there and somewhat directionless. On Hold Your Fire, they clearly scaled it back a bit by writing better songs, but it's basically on par or a little less than Grace Under Pressure.

I'm glad they would soon move on from this Era, as I don't really consider Presto an 80's album.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Epilogue
Post by: HOF on January 12, 2020, 12:04:36 PM
Power Windows is just really special to me in a whole bunch of ways I probably can’t put into words adequately. Lyrically, musically, production wise, it just all pushes the right buttons for me. I don’t know what might have been up with the guys when you saw them on that tour, but Power Windows for me is brimming with joy, heart, and, well, power. I listened to a lot of Rush yesterday on shuffle or selecting individual favorites I wanted to hear, but Power Windows was the one album I listened to the whole way through (also most of Signals, but Power Windows first). It’s a magical place.

Oddly enough, while I like a lot of Hold Your Fire, that’s the album that feels a little overcooked to me (both lyrically and production wise), with a bunch of songs that just fall flat (despite some real highs in songs like Force Ten, Time Stand Still, Mission, etc.). Like they tried to make a second Power Windows but just couldn’t capture the same magic.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Epilogue
Post by: TAC on January 12, 2020, 12:15:30 PM
I find most of HYF a lot easier on the ears than most of Power Windows. And it's a lot catchier in places. But there are a couple of duds for sure.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Epilogue
Post by: KevShmev on January 12, 2020, 12:44:17 PM
IIRC, the Power Windows tour was tough on the fellas because it was the first tour where they really went full tilt with the keyboards and having to trigger stuff on stage, and I think it took some time getting comfortable and used to it, which is probably why they supposedly looked more relaxed on the Hold Your Fire tour; by then, they were comfortable with it all and had worked out all the kinks.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Epilogue
Post by: TAC on January 12, 2020, 12:56:08 PM
Yeah, we were so close to Geddy that you could see his facial expressions clearly, and I remember him being extremely frustrated.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Epilogue
Post by: The Letter M on January 12, 2020, 01:57:12 PM
As you might be able to tell, I *love* Power Windows. When I first got into Rush, of course, it was the 70's and early 80's stuff I dug, but once I began digesting their "third sector" of albums, of those four, Power Windows was the one that stuck with me. Every song is powerful to me, and they had finally struck a delicate balance between their acoustic and electronic sounds, creating a soundscape that took the best parts of Signals and Grace Under Pressure and melded it all together into eight mini-masterpieces. Of the four synth-era albums, this is the one that hits me most consistently, where I don't feel the need to skip a track (not that I typically skip tracks when listening to Rush anyway).

-Marc.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Epilogue
Post by: Stadler on January 12, 2020, 03:41:07 PM
Yeah, we were so close to Geddy that you could see his facial expressions clearly, and I remember him being extremely frustrated.

My first tour; I loved that show.  The lasers...
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Epilogue
Post by: KevShmev on January 12, 2020, 03:46:19 PM
Seems like very few bands use lasers anymore.  Even Rush didn't use them much the last few tours, IIRC.  One of the most awesome Rush live moments was always in La Villa Strangiato when the lasers kicked in as the song slowed down and went into A Lerxst in Wonderland.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Epilogue
Post by: jingle.boy on January 12, 2020, 03:59:23 PM
The lasers with Xanadu when they brought it back in full for the RtB tour... unreal (plus, I was baked beyond belief).  And of course, they were always there for Dreamline - a Top 10 Rush song for me... maybe even Top 5.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Epilogue
Post by: KevShmev on January 12, 2020, 04:04:56 PM
You're right, they did always use them for Dreamline, and it was played on their 2nd to last tour.  I think Red Sector A always got them as well.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Epilogue
Post by: King Postwhore on January 12, 2020, 04:32:44 PM
The lasers on Alex's solo on La Villa with the hugs wall of lasers with the smoke was a goosebump moment. Especially with Lifeson's build up on that solo.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Epilogue
Post by: ytserush on January 12, 2020, 07:55:55 PM

I had to turn down CA today.  It was too muddled playing it loud in my car.

Exactly.  You get ear fatigue if you turn it up and listen to too many songs from it in a row, and as a result I rarely listen to all of it anymore.

You've just described Systematic Chaos.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Epilogue
Post by: ytserush on January 12, 2020, 07:58:28 PM
I've never seen Game Of Thrones. I don't know any of the cast.

And I thought I was the only one who's never seen it.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Epilogue
Post by: ytserush on January 12, 2020, 08:02:11 PM
IIRC, the Power Windows tour was tough on the fellas because it was the first tour where they really went full tilt with the keyboards and having to trigger stuff on stage, and I think it took some time getting comfortable and used to it, which is probably why they supposedly looked more relaxed on the Hold Your Fire tour; by then, they were comfortable with it all and had worked out all the kinks.

Hold Your Fire Tour was the worst for that. They didn't start to really have fun until they finished Territories.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Epilogue
Post by: ytserush on January 12, 2020, 08:03:51 PM
The lasers on Alex's solo on La Villa with the hugs wall of lasers with the smoke was a goosebump moment. Especially with Lifeson's build up on that solo.

That was pretty cool.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Epilogue
Post by: King Puppies and the Acid Guppies on January 12, 2020, 09:15:08 PM
The lasers with Xanadu when they brought it back in full for the RtB tour... unreal (plus, I was baked beyond belief).  And of course, they were always there for Dreamline - a Top 10 Rush song for me... maybe even Top 5.
My first Rush show was on the Roll the Bones tour. My dad took me to see them in Mountain View, CA at the Shoreline Amphitheater, I think. I don't really remember too much of the set list, but I remember thinking the lasers were really cool in Dreamline. I also remember being completely entranced by Ghost of a Chance. Seeing as how I was only 6 at the time, I was not "baked beyond belief."  :biggrin: Then again, I could have been and not known it, considering how many people are typically smoking at Rush shows. And yet again, it was an outdoor venue, so who knows. :dunno:
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Epilogue
Post by: jammindude on January 12, 2020, 09:19:04 PM
While we're speaking of light shows.   There was an amazing moment on the R40 tour during Jacob's Ladder, and I don't feel like the home video came close to capturing the full effect.

During the "light streams down in bright unbroken beams" part, "sunbeam" style lights came down from the upper right hand part of the stadium and made the floor crowd look like sunbeams were shining down on them.   The only way to see this effect was from the balcony, and I was front row, dead center of the upper level....with my son....at his very first Rush concert.....and my very last.   



......I'm not crying, YOU'RE crying....
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Epilogue
Post by: King Puppies and the Acid Guppies on January 13, 2020, 06:31:38 PM
So like everyone else, I've been running through the full Rush discography (for like the 10,000th time for me) again. I'm on the Test for Echo album right now. Now, over the years I've learned the drum parts for every Rush song up through Counterparts, but never got around to learning everything from Test for Echo through Clockwork Angels. I mean I know the majority of them just from listening to them, but never really sat down at the drumkit to learn them note for note. Anyway, rambling aside, in the song Test for Echo, is Neil playing double bass the first and third time the pre-chorus comes up? This is the first time I'm hearing it like this. Am I just hearing things? Time-stamps would be at 1:35-1:49 and 4:01-4:15.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Epilogue
Post by: TAC on January 13, 2020, 06:37:34 PM
in the song Test for Echo, is Neil playing double bass the first and third time the pre-chorus comes up? This is the first time I'm hearing it like this. Am I just hearing things? Time-stamps would be at 1:35-1:49 and 4:01-4:15.

Yes he is (https://youtu.be/u_hPGiJp6Yg?t=93)
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Epilogue
Post by: King Puppies and the Acid Guppies on January 13, 2020, 06:48:22 PM
in the song Test for Echo, is Neil playing double bass the first and third time the pre-chorus comes up? This is the first time I'm hearing it like this. Am I just hearing things? Time-stamps would be at 1:35-1:49 and 4:01-4:15.

Yes he is (https://youtu.be/u_hPGiJp6Yg?t=93)
Ah, thanks. I keep meaning to watch that A Work in Progress DVD, I think that's going to be my weekend project, along with learning the song from Test for Echo on drums.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Epilogue
Post by: TAC on January 13, 2020, 06:53:07 PM
In my discog run through, I couldn't help but be amazed at the drumming in Limbo.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Epilogue
Post by: romdrums on January 13, 2020, 06:59:53 PM
in the song Test for Echo, is Neil playing double bass the first and third time the pre-chorus comes up? This is the first time I'm hearing it like this. Am I just hearing things? Time-stamps would be at 1:35-1:49 and 4:01-4:15.

Yes he is (https://youtu.be/u_hPGiJp6Yg?t=93)
Ah, thanks. I keep meaning to watch that A Work in Progress DVD, I think that's going to be my weekend project, along with learning the song from Test for Echo on drums.

It’s cool to watch him laying into the backbeat with traditional grip.  It’s also really cool to see him using coated heads on his toms.  T4E may have been the only album where he did that.  His drumming on that record is some of his best work.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Epilogue
Post by: TAC on January 13, 2020, 07:56:06 PM
I haven't followed Rush as an adult nearly as close as a lot of you. I have a question.



Did they approach Clockwork Angels as if they knew it would likely be their last? How did the writing or sessions in general compare to previous?


Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Epilogue
Post by: romdrums on January 13, 2020, 08:21:33 PM
I don’t think it was anything intentional on their part.   Neil may have hinted at it while he was putting the lyrics together, but based on interviews I read they were feeling really inspired and wanted to make a kick ass record.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Epilogue
Post by: TAC on January 13, 2020, 08:32:03 PM
I know the mob likes to gam up Power Windows as the shit, but IMO, Clockwork Angels is easily the most interesting album the band did since Moving Pictures. It has the core and soul of Rush in it.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Epilogue
Post by: Cool Chris on January 13, 2020, 08:36:04 PM
I am not well-versed in Rush's catalog after Moving Pictures, but I definitely like CA more than anything since MP. To release an album that awesome as your 19th, 38 years after your first, is ridiculous.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Epilogue
Post by: Lethean on January 13, 2020, 08:42:58 PM
Power Windows is awesome.  Clockwork Angels is awesome too.  I'm glad we have both, and everything in between (and everything that came before) to listen to.

I think romdrums is right about the approach to the Clockwork Angels.  Although I guess you never know for sure.  If Geddy and Alex were getting the sense from Neil that he wanted to retire soon, it might have affected them.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Epilogue
Post by: King Puppies and the Acid Guppies on January 13, 2020, 08:47:57 PM
in the song Test for Echo, is Neil playing double bass the first and third time the pre-chorus comes up? This is the first time I'm hearing it like this. Am I just hearing things? Time-stamps would be at 1:35-1:49 and 4:01-4:15.

Yes he is (https://youtu.be/u_hPGiJp6Yg?t=93)
Ah, thanks. I keep meaning to watch that A Work in Progress DVD, I think that's going to be my weekend project, along with learning the song from Test for Echo on drums.

It’s cool to watch him laying into the backbeat with traditional grip.  It’s also really cool to see him using coated heads on his toms.  T4E may have been the only album where he did that.  His drumming on that record is some of his best work.
I'm going to go in to learning the drums for this album without using traditional grip. I never did learn traditional grip and don't really feel like trying it. We will see how hard it is to replicate this stuff using matched grip (I tend to use a mix of French grip and German grip depending on what I'm doing).


I don't know, maybe I'll learn traditional grip at some point. I'm always up for learning new things on drums. :dunno:
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Epilogue
Post by: The Letter M on January 13, 2020, 09:34:42 PM
In my discog run through, I couldn't help but be amazed at the drumming in Limbo.

Limbo is a great song, and a fun instrumental to play. I actually wrote the tabs for Neil's part for that song on the RTP (Rush Tablature Project), using a combination of the (not quite accurate) sheet music included with A Work In Progress, and the actual studio album version of the song. Definitely one of the more complex and fun instrumentals to learn on drums!

-Marc.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Epilogue
Post by: KevShmev on January 13, 2020, 09:52:02 PM
I was mostly fine with the Test for Echo album being ignored by the band on the last four tours, but Limbo is one song I would have been fine with hearing again. 

Along those lines, even though I know we have done this before, pick five songs you wish the band would have played in the 21st century that they didn't. 

I am going with realistic choices, meaning songs that had a shot which means I am not picking The Necromancer or The Fountain of Lamneth. :lol

Turn the Page (always wanted to see this one live)
Double Agent (bums me out a little that this song was "one tour and done")
The Enemy Within (even if they weren't gonna play the entire Fear series, I wish this would have made a comeback)
The Weapon (ditto the above)
Available Light (it would have to have been on the VT or R30 tours when Geddy could still belt it out, but I so wish this would have gotten played at some point)
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Epilogue
Post by: Lethean on January 13, 2020, 10:11:22 PM
Yes yes yes to The Enemy Within and Available Light.

I'd probably have to think about the rest and then agonize over it, but those two would have been awesome.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Epilogue
Post by: romdrums on January 13, 2020, 10:12:16 PM
I was mostly fine with the Test for Echo album being ignored by the band on the last four tours, but Limbo is one song I would have been fine with hearing again. 

Along those lines, even though I know we have done this before, pick five songs you wish the band would have played in the 21st century that they didn't. 

I am going with realistic choices, meaning songs that had a shot which means I am not picking The Necromancer or The Fountain of Lamneth. :lol

Turn the Page (always wanted to see this one live)
Double Agent (bums me out a little that this song was "one tour and done")
The Enemy Within (even if they weren't gonna play the entire Fear series, I wish this would have made a comeback)
The Weapon (ditto the above)
Available Light (it would have to have been on the VT or R30 tours when Geddy could still belt it out, but I so wish this would have gotten played at some point)

That’s a solid group right there.  Turn the Page and Available Light would have been especially special!

I would add these five to the mix:
Everyday Glory
Cut to the Chase
Lock and Key
Freeze
Nocturne
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Epilogue
Post by: King Puppies and the Acid Guppies on January 13, 2020, 10:12:47 PM
I was mostly fine with the Test for Echo album being ignored by the band on the last four tours, but Limbo is one song I would have been fine with hearing again. 

Along those lines, even though I know we have done this before, pick five songs you wish the band would have played in the 21st century that they didn't. 

I am going with realistic choices, meaning songs that had a shot which means I am not picking The Necromancer or The Fountain of Lamneth. :lol

Turn the Page (always wanted to see this one live)
Double Agent (bums me out a little that this song was "one tour and done")
The Enemy Within (even if they weren't gonna play the entire Fear series, I wish this would have made a comeback)
The Weapon (ditto the above)
Available Light (it would have to have been on the VT or R30 tours when Geddy could still belt it out, but I so wish this would have gotten played at some point)
I will second Available Light. That song is amazing, but you are correct it would have to have been on the VT or R30 tour. R30 was the last time Geddy still sounded great.
I always wanted them to rework all parts of the Fear series in to 1 song live somehow, but that's just more me dreaming.
Other songs I would have loved to have heard in the 21st century live would be, Lock and Key, Kid Gloves, Hemispheres (although I don't think Geddy has been able to sing this since shortly after it was released), and maybe Everyday Glory.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Epilogue
Post by: The Letter M on January 13, 2020, 10:25:07 PM
I was mostly fine with the Test for Echo album being ignored by the band on the last four tours, but Limbo is one song I would have been fine with hearing again. 

Along those lines, even though I know we have done this before, pick five songs you wish the band would have played in the 21st century that they didn't. 

I am going with realistic choices, meaning songs that had a shot which means I am not picking The Necromancer or The Fountain of Lamneth. :lol

Turn the Page (always wanted to see this one live)
Double Agent (bums me out a little that this song was "one tour and done")
The Enemy Within (even if they weren't gonna play the entire Fear series, I wish this would have made a comeback)
The Weapon (ditto the above)
Available Light (it would have to have been on the VT or R30 tours when Geddy could still belt it out, but I so wish this would have gotten played at some point)

If I can picked five songs they hadn't played at all, I would certainly pick at least three from Vapor Trails. Had the VT Tour not been more-or-less a "comeback tour", I'm sure they would've played more. Would've loved to have seen them play "Vapor Trail", "Freeze", and probably "Sweet Miracle" or "Peaceable Kingdom".

I'd also second "Available Light", and also throw in "Cut To The Chase".

There were plenty of one-and-done songs from the post-Signals album tours that were a crime to never revive, though I am happy they brought out many of the POW songs throughout their tours in the 21st century. Would have been neat to see them bring out "Lock And Key" and "Turn The Page" again, too.

-Marc.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Epilogue
Post by: Lethean on January 13, 2020, 10:43:20 PM
I love the idea of more Vapor Trails - I would have been happy with them eventually playing the whole album - adding a couple new tracks each tour.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Epilogue
Post by: New World Rushman on January 14, 2020, 06:06:41 AM
I haven't followed Rush as an adult nearly as close as a lot of you. I have a question.



Did they approach Clockwork Angels as if they knew it would likely be their last? How did the writing or sessions in general compare to previous?

I don't think so. The seeds for CA were planted almost 6 years before the final show. They met up to make plans (I believe that was the "Dinner with Rush" documented on Beyond the Lighted Stage), they had two songs complete and released as singles in early 2010 (BU2B and Caravan) which they played on the Time Machine tour, then completed the album, toured CA in 2012-2013, took some time off, and then came the R40 tour in 2015.
I'm just saying so much happened, including three full tours, that I doubt they were thinking about that being the last album, back at the beginning. Seems like it was the CA tour that did Neil in; he agreed to R40 quite begrudgingly.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Epilogue
Post by: KevShmev on January 14, 2020, 08:16:55 AM
I would like to have seen more songs from Vapor Trails as well, especially the title track without the 's' and Freeze, but there were 5 others I would have rather seen which is why I listed nada from VT.  It still strikes me as odd that How It Is was the never-played-before song from it that they decided to rotate on the R40 tour.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Epilogue
Post by: TAC on January 17, 2020, 07:52:17 PM
So I'm pretty sure we all did a Discog run this past week. We all have our favorites and duds. But what I wanted to say was that for the albums that I'm not wicked fond of, instead of thinking this album sucks or this album blows, I pretty much listed to them with a sense of appreciation. Albums near the bottom of my rankings, I was able to simply enjoy for what they are.

It has allowed me a greater appreciation for albums like S&A, TFE, and others.

And while I've never been a huge fan of it, although I love the Presto album, I very much enjoyed my listen to The Pass.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Epilogue
Post by: Cool Chris on January 17, 2020, 08:14:52 PM
I very much enjoyed my listen to The Pass.

I was introduced to Rush in the early 90s when I got in to classic rock. I owned their Chronicles CD so I had a familiarity of the progression of their sound up through Presto. I only liked their music up through Moving Pictures, so pretty much ignored everything that followed. I heard The Pass on the radio without hearing who it was, and I loved it. I never would have associated it with Rush because the Rush I knew, the Rush I loved, was 2112, Cygnus X-1, Xanadu... songs that sound nothing like The Pass. Years later I borrowed Presto from a friend and was all "holy shit, The Pass is a Rush song?"

It is probably my #2 Rush song.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Epilogue
Post by: TAC on January 17, 2020, 08:23:57 PM
That's cool, Chris. 

#seewhatididthere  ;D


I have loved Presto since the day I bought it, but I have just never been enthralled with the song like everyone else. That said, I enjoyed it as much as I ever have.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Epilogue
Post by: Cool Chris on January 17, 2020, 08:28:22 PM
The one Presto song on Chronicles is Show Don't Tell which I didn't care for. So when i did borrow that copy of Presto I was amazed at the many great songs on it.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Epilogue
Post by: ytserush on January 17, 2020, 10:53:45 PM
I love the idea of more Vapor Trails - I would have been happy with them eventually playing the whole album - adding a couple new tracks each tour.

So do I, but the band due to the circumstances and memories surrounding it, would not have been happy.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Epilogue
Post by: DoctorAction on January 18, 2020, 01:24:20 AM
One more for Power Windows being awesome. Just crackles with energy and the sound is SO 80s to the max. Very consistent to my ears too. It's the Rush album I usually reach for.  :hefdaddy

Presto and Roll The Bones never grabbed me. I'll go back to them today and have an explore.

Would be great if they remastered Clockwork Angels eventually. Such a great record.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Epilogue
Post by: Architeuthis on January 18, 2020, 02:45:49 AM
I love the idea of more Vapor Trails - I would have been happy with them eventually playing the whole album - adding a couple new tracks each tour.
I was surprised they never played the title track "Vapor Trail"  on the Vapor Trails tour or the R30 tour,  and never beyond that. Perhaps it would have been too hard to pull off the HEY HEY-ee background vocals..  :lol
  Other songs that would have been great live are:
        Cut To The Chase (blows away Stick it Out) and that Lerxt solo!  :metal
        Everyday Glory
        Available Light
        The Good News First.  (Underrated song)
        Peacable Kingdom (love the lyrics)
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Epilogue
Post by: ytserush on January 24, 2020, 11:58:38 AM
I love the idea of more Vapor Trails - I would have been happy with them eventually playing the whole album - adding a couple new tracks each tour.
I was surprised they never played the title track "Vapor Trail"  on the Vapor Trails tour or the R30 tour,  and never beyond that. Perhaps it would have been too hard to pull off the HEY HEY-ee background vocals..  :lol
  Other songs that would have been great live are:
        Cut To The Chase (blows away Stick it Out) and that Lerxt solo!  :metal
        Everyday Glory
        Available Light
        The Good News First.  (Underrated song)
        Peacable Kingdom (love the lyrics)

I REALLY wanted to hear Peaceable Kingdom and Vapor Trail live. Even some rehearsal footage would be nice.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Epilogue
Post by: KevShmev on January 24, 2020, 05:58:21 PM
Vapor Trail is the one non-played song from that record that still surprises me.  Seemed like it would be a natural live tune.  I just think the timing never worked out for them to hit that record hard, and I think it was clear that they wanted to welcome the fans back on the VT tour with a well-rounded set list rather than having too many new songs in it.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Epilogue
Post by: Lethean on January 24, 2020, 06:40:35 PM
Probably a wise decision on their part, but I would certainly have loved to have heard Peaceable Kingdom, Vapor Trail, and beyond. 

Listening to Snakes and Arrows right now, and thinking about how great it is.  That album was a grower for me but maybe I like it all the more for it.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Epilogue
Post by: King Postwhore on January 24, 2020, 08:05:09 PM
Vapor Trail is the one non-played song from that record that still surprises me.  Seemed like it would be a natural live tune.  I just think the timing never worked out for them to hit that record hard, and I think it was clear that they wanted to welcome the fans back on the VT tour with a well-rounded set list rather than having too many new songs in it.

💯

I would have killed to hear it live.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Epilogue
Post by: DTA on January 25, 2020, 05:00:53 AM
I was sure it was going to be played on R40 but How It Is was played instead...I respect the hell out of them for bringing out songs they've never done before, but Vapor Trail was definitely the one that should've been played.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Epilogue
Post by: ytserush on January 29, 2020, 06:53:01 PM
I was sure it was going to be played on R40 but How It Is was played instead...I respect the hell out of them for bringing out songs they've never done before, but Vapor Trail was definitely the one that should've been played.

The only shockers for me on R40 was How It Is, Losing It,  and anything pre-2112 that wasn't Working Man.  Much like R30, it was the closest they ever got to a "Greatest Hits" set.  I suppose one could argue Time Machine was one too since they played all of Moving Pictures.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Epilogue
Post by: Anguyen92 on January 29, 2020, 07:24:00 PM
Closest to a Greatest Hits set and they didn't play Limelight or Freewill and even YYZ wasn't played every night on that R40 tour.  Dang, sometimes you wish most bands with extensive catalogs can create such interesting setlists the way Rush did theirs with their catalog.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Epilogue
Post by: KevShmev on January 29, 2020, 07:26:18 PM


The only shockers for me on R40 was How It Is, Losing It,  and anything pre-2112 that wasn't Working Man.  Much like R30, it was the closest they ever got to a "Greatest Hits" set.  I suppose one could argue Time Machine was one too since they played all of Moving Pictures.

Like many, I never thought we'd see Anthem, Lakeside Park or What You're Doing again, and to get all three in that encore was so great, even with Anthem slightly truncated.  The whole second set and encore was a long wet dream for the fans who love the 1974-1981 years the most.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Epilogue
Post by: ytserush on January 29, 2020, 08:32:56 PM


The only shockers for me on R40 was How It Is, Losing It,  and anything pre-2112 that wasn't Working Man.  Much like R30, it was the closest they ever got to a "Greatest Hits" set.  I suppose one could argue Time Machine was one too since they played all of Moving Pictures.

Like many, I never thought we'd see Anthem, Lakeside Park or What You're Doing again, and to get all three in that encore was so great, even with Anthem slightly truncated.  The whole second set and encore was a long wet dream for the fans who love the 1974-1981 years the most.

Glad you enjoyed them. Perhaps I'm not taking those in the spirit in which it was intended (they fit with the theme) but I did not really need to hear/see those songs live even if I never witnessed them played other than on that tour.  Way past the sell by date, but again I totally get why it went down that way and it did make sense in that context.

Feel a bit similar about Circumstances on the Snakes Tour. There was a time I would have killed to hear that live. I give them credit for trying but it just sounded antiquated in that set.  Digital Man seemed to hold up much better.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Epilogue
Post by: Cool Chris on February 27, 2020, 09:39:57 PM
So Peart's passing (and this thread) have inspired me to plow through Rush's discography, something I have never done oddly enough. My quick Rush bio: I am a huge fan of 2112-MP, a casual fan of early Rush, ambivalent to Signals-HYF, a moderate fan of Presto/RtB, largely ignorant of Counterparts-S&A, and enjoy CA quite a bit.

Rush: I enjoyed this album quite more than I expected, despite being a big LZ fan in my classic rock heyday. I don't listen to LZ ever, but they shaped my musical journey about as much as any band.

Fly by Night/Caress of Steel: I know the hits from CRR (classic rock radio) and don't need to hear them any more. Enjoyed Fountain of Lamneth and Necromancer more than I remembered doing in the past.

2112: Love it. 2112 is still my #2 favorite song of all time. The rest of the album is solid.

Farewell to Kings; Love it just as much as I always have.

Hemispheres: Great album, though I don't revere it as much as others here seem to.

Permanent Waves: Love it, top to bottom my #1 Rush album. Will never get old.

Moving Pictures: Not an album I am ever going to go out of my way to listen to considering how much still gets played on CRR but still a great album.

Signals/Grace Under Pressure/Power Windows/Hold Your Fire: I can't recall the last time I listened to any of these albums straight through. There just isn't much here that interests me, and isn't anything I am going to reach for when in the mood for Rush.

Presto: A good album, but hard to listen to without a nostalgia factor, as I listened to this a lot when it came out.

Roll the Bones: Listened to this one a lot too in real time. A few misses on this one, but some great tracks as well.

Counterparts/Test For Echo: Some good music here, but not anything I need to listen to anytime soon.

Vapor Trails/Snakes and Arrows: These are the two albums I am least familiar with. So I don't feel justified in giving them a solid judgment without further listens. I enjoyed them a fair amount. I listened to a bit of both while driving and I think that heightened the enjoyment.

Clockwork Angels: I enjoyed this as much as I did when it first came out, despite not spinning it for a long, long time.

Bottom line: The needle didn't move much for me in any direction for any era. My enjoyment of the debut surprised me the most. I've ranked 2112-MP among my favorite stretches of material of any band since high school. No change there. I've never really considered myself a Rush fan, despite them having 5 albums I'd be happy with on a desert island. But does loving 5 out of a band's 19 albums sufficient to make one a fan? 
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Epilogue
Post by: Stadler on February 28, 2020, 07:18:37 AM
Not a critique or criticism, just an observation:  I agree on some (AFTK), disagree on others (Moving Pictures) but what I found interesting is some of your groupings.   I don't put Caress with FBN, I put it with 2112, perhaps because of the epics, perhaps because of the fact that 2112 isn't god-like to me (like MP is).   Same with Counterparts and TFE; one is a pretty good, solid record with a fair amount of variety (Counterparts) and one is a steaming pile of miss that, other than revisiting the first four songs because Jammin' suggested that we do so, I have zero desire to listen to again.   Same with the S>GUP>PW>HYF run; other than the synths, for me, those albums are not four of a kind; Signals is one of my favorite Rush albums ever, GUP is, let's just say "not", and PW/HYF are both solid records with great songs that probably translate SLIGHTLY better live. 

In any event, good run-down, it was fun to read.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Epilogue
Post by: HOF on February 28, 2020, 08:01:14 AM

Moving Pictures: Not an album I am ever going to go out of my way to listen to considering how much still gets played on CRR but still a great album.


This is how I’ve always felt about MP. The only songs on it I usually care to listen to are Red Barchetta and The Camera Eye, and to a lesser extent YYZ. Tom Sawyer and Limelight were kind of ruined by radio before I ever picked up the album, and Witch Hunt and Vital Signs are just awful (IMO). Don’t get me wrong, outside of Witch Hunt and Vital Signs, those are all really great songs. I just don’t have a ton of interest in revisiting them often.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Epilogue
Post by: jingle.boy on February 28, 2020, 11:28:33 AM
Who listens to radio (much) these days anyway?  Literally the only time I do is in the car with mrs.jingle / jingle.family, and 50% of the time it is NOT classic rock radio stations.

MP is a top 10 AOTY for me, but (like much of that top 10 list, I've gotten my fill of those over the decades, and don't go to them more than a couple times a year (at best).
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Epilogue
Post by: Orbert on February 28, 2020, 12:02:49 PM
That's pretty much how I feel.  People say things like "hearing it on the radio so much ruined it for" and I think "why the fuck do you listen to the radio, and why do you listen to the same songs on the radio so much that you end up hating them?"  You know you can change the station, right?  And if you don't know how to do that, presumably you know where the Power button is.

The difference is that there's no "these days" for me.  I got my first car at 18, and the first thing I did was yank the factory stereo and put in one with a cassette deck.  No way in hell am I listening to what other people decide I should listen to.  Yeah, it's kinda fun to switch to radio once in a while and see what random song someone might have cued up, but intentionally listening to great songs so much that you end up hating them seems completely ass-backwards to me.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Epilogue
Post by: Stadler on February 28, 2020, 12:14:21 PM
That's pretty much how I feel.  People say things like "hearing it on the radio so much ruined it for" and I think "why the fuck do you listen to the radio, and why do you listen to the same songs on the radio so much that you end up hating them?"  You know you can change the station, right?  And if you don't know how to do that, presumably you know where the Power button is.

And if you don't know how to do THAT, there's always a hammer.   ;)

[/quote]The difference is that there's no "these days" for me.  I got my first car at 18, and the first thing I did was yank the factory stereo and put in one with a cassette deck.  No way in hell am I listening to what other people decide I should listen to.  Yeah, it's kinda fun to switch to radio once in a while and see what random song someone might have cued up, but intentionally listening to great songs so much that you end up hating them seems completely ass-backwards to me.
[/quote]

This is me.   The times I'm literally beholden to radio - either that or silence - is miniscule.  Between Walkmen, stereos, iPods, phones, etc., I've spent an embarrassing amount of money on being able to program my own music.   
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Epilogue
Post by: romdrums on February 28, 2020, 12:17:41 PM
That's pretty much how I feel.  People say things like "hearing it on the radio so much ruined it for" and I think "why the fuck do you listen to the radio, and why do you listen to the same songs on the radio so much that you end up hating them?"  You know you can change the station, right?  And if you don't know how to do that, presumably you know where the Power button is.

The difference is that there's no "these days" for me.  I got my first car at 18, and the first thing I did was yank the factory stereo and put in one with a cassette deck.  No way in hell am I listening to what other people decide I should listen to.  Yeah, it's kinda fun to switch to radio once in a while and see what random song someone might have cued up, but intentionally listening to great songs so much that you end up hating them seems completely ass-backwards to me.

I cannot agree with this post enough.  I'm astounded that people still listen to music on the radio.  And like Stadler stated, I too, have spent a considerable sum of money on being able to program my own music listening.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Epilogue
Post by: HOF on February 28, 2020, 12:24:14 PM
I don’t listen to the radio anymore and haven’t in years. But I grew up with it, and I’ve simply heard Tom Sawyer way too many times to have much excitement about playing it again, especially when there are nearly infinite listening choices at my fingertips and limited time.

Edit: I’ll also add that some of this is self-inflicted. My first Rush CD was the Retrospective 2 set, and I’ve spun Tom Sawyer and Limelight enough on my own to add to the burn out (even Red Barchetta a little bit). It’s not just a radio problem of course. I burned out Images and Words a long time ago too (despite never hearing it on the radio). I still think of it as a great album, but I just can’t quite get excited about throwing it on anymore.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Epilogue
Post by: Orbert on February 28, 2020, 04:14:24 PM
Self-inflicted burnout is a somewhat different thing, to me anyway.  I have some albums that I played to death, but I just leave them alone for a while.  When I pull them back out a few years later, they're like a visit from an old friend.

I do listen to the radio sometimes, mostly when I'm tired or just too lazy to pick something.  That's what I mean when I say it's a nice change to let someone else pick for me once in a while.  I was in the car one time with my son, and "Roundabout" by Yes came out.  Great song, I know every note, and I changed the station.  My son was confused and said "I thought you like Yes".  I do, which is precisely why I changed it.  I don't want to burn out on the song.  It is a great song, but it's one of like three that the Classic Rock stations play to death.  I also have a CD full of Yes mp3's in the dash more or less permanently and an iPod on the Aux input.  When I feel like listening to Fragile, I'll do so.  Same with "Tom Sawyer" or any of the three or four Rush songs they play to death.  I love those songs, so I'll listen to them when I want to.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Epilogue
Post by: Cool Chris on February 28, 2020, 04:33:53 PM
Stadler, my groupings aren't meant to be based on any sort of musical analysis. It was solely based on my opinions.

I worked for ~5 years in the home office of a classic rock lover, and aside from a couple hours of Dr. Laura, the radio was always on our local classic rock station. As he was the boss, I couldn't change the channel. Same thing with my current job (residential remodeling). The project leader has say over what music gets played. One guy loves classic rock so he is always playing the local radio station. Point being, some of this burnout is "self-inflicted" but not wholly my fault.

I asked a while ago in some other thread "Why does FM still exist?" Who listens to FM in 2020? I love internet radio stations. The variety is amazing and several times I'll hear a song and stop what I am doing to check out the song title/artist, and think "hmm.. I should check these guys out."

On topic, I think it largely goes to how I feel about these songs. I have heard so many other classic rock staples many more times, but they still sound fresh and exciting. Songs like Tom Sawyer and Limelight never reached that level with me.

Also, as a guy smarter than me once said:

I love those songs, so I'll listen to them when I want to.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Epilogue
Post by: Orbert on February 28, 2020, 04:43:14 PM
I don't claim to be smarter, but thanks.  Actually, it never occurred to me that some people are situations where the radio is on (or other canned music, such as in restaurants and stuff) and they can't do anything about it.  That would drive me nuts.

So I guess the answer to my question "Why the fuck do you listen to the radio?" is something like "I can't help it!  It's my job!"
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Epilogue
Post by: Cool Chris on February 28, 2020, 04:54:47 PM
You just said what it seemed like others were saying, just more concisely :)

I work with 3 guys. We had a 4th, that was classic rock guy. Our tasted aligned the most. Funnily enough he always changed the channel if Floyd came on. He was so burned out it didn't matter the song, he just couldn't take any Floyd. One guy doesn't usually play music on the job; one guy plays random YT playlists, lots of Air Supply, other schmaltzy 80s soft rock; one guy plays music with either guys screaming their heads off or using the n-word with alarming frequency.

I am also at Home Depot/similar stores all the time to get supplies, and am becoming more aware of the music that is piped through the stores. If you work in a store that plays music for 8 hours a day, do you quickly learn to just tune it out?


Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Epilogue
Post by: Orbert on February 28, 2020, 06:12:00 PM
I would assume so.  I worked in restaurants for years, but I was a line cook, and basically I chose the tunes we listened to in the kitchen.

Once in a while, we'll be out somewhere and my son will say "I'll meet you guys at (somewhere)" and just bolt.  The first couple times, we asked him what happened, and he said the song playing is one that's on their canned music at work, and he just couldn't take it.  He'd rather leave than subject himself to hearing that song again, which I completely understand.  So I guess while he's there, he tunes it out, but on some level he's still hearing it and every song on their tapes (or whatever they play) has been ruined for him.  Bummer.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Epilogue
Post by: cfmoran13 on February 29, 2020, 12:41:50 PM
Back in college, I used to work at Sam Goody's music for extra cash during the Christmas season.  The majority of the music played would be Christmas albums.  Mariah Carey's album was in heavy rotation.  I would walk around for 45 minutes muttering under by breath how much I couldn't stand the album.  There was no tuning it out.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Epilogue
Post by: Silent Man on March 01, 2020, 12:00:39 PM
Rush has been one of my favorite bands for many years. After Neil passed away, I felt like digging out my collection and listen again. As always, my top album is still Moving Pictures and my top song Red Barchetta...I can play that main riff again and again. One of my other top albums is Grace Under Pressure, which was the very first album I heard of them. In fact, it was a girl(!) who introduced me to Rush, she came to my house some time in the late '80ies, bringing some LPs with her, one of them was GUP. We drank beer all night, went in and out of bed and listened to Rush (no more details, sorry  ;) ). The one song that hit me immediately was 'Afterimage' with it's catchy and brilliant counter riff guitar/bass against synth. That's the best way I can describe it, hope you know what I mean.
I'm still in awe that I got introduced to a heavy band by a girl. Never thought that would happen - and I never heard about Rush before that day.
I scanned through this thread and noticed that someone compared them with Led Zeppelin. Fair enough, I also hear that at some moments. But LZ was way more blues oriented and also had a mix of english folk music in there. I'm a bit surprised though, that noone compared them with The Who. I hear a lot more of Who than LZ in their music. But maybe it's only me...
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Epilogue
Post by: Cool Chris on March 01, 2020, 12:03:18 PM
I scanned through this thread and noticed that someone compared them with Led Zeppelin. Fair enough, I also hear that at some moments. But LZ was way more blues oriented and also had a mix of english folk music in there. I'm a bit surprised though, that noone compared them with The Who. I hear a lot more of Who than LZ in their music. But maybe it's only me...

I think it is mostly their debut that has the LZ vibe. And if Peart is a big Who fan (correct?) it would make sense if you hear some Who in their music.
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Epilogue
Post by: Dublagent66 on March 02, 2020, 10:28:53 AM
I was familiar with a lot of Rush's earlier radio hits but didn't actually become a fan until the release of Power Windows.  That album has a special significance.  After that, I started collecting copies of their back catalog albums and new releases as they became available.  The rest is history.   :hefdaddy :hefdaddy :hefdaddy
Title: Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Epilogue
Post by: ytserush on March 14, 2020, 07:07:49 PM
I was familiar with a lot of Rush's earlier radio hits but didn't actually become a fan until the release of Power Windows.  That album has a special significance.  After that, I started collecting copies of their back catalog albums and new releases as they became available.  The rest is history.   :hefdaddy :hefdaddy :hefdaddy

The Rush peak for radio was 1980 to 1983 You wouldn't have to wait more than two hours to hear a Rush song (At least in the New York-Philly area (and on MTV too.))