I imagine that's often why we as fans have certain expectations/desires about our favorite bands going for certain sounds/styles, while in reality they have internally moved on from them...not necessarily for "commercial" reasons, but because they are genuinely interested in something different. Not saying that's always the case. But I'd think this is often true, especially for bands with long - and eclectic! - histories, like Rush was.
This caught my interest, as I too feel fans have expectations/desires from bands that are sometimes not what the band actually wants to do anymore.
Fans tend to have preconceived notions on bands. When these are not met, you get defensive fans saying things almost as if the band has forsaken them, almost to point of considering the bands new album as sacrilege. These preconceived notions and expectations are formed by the songs/albums we are first introduced to by the band that drew us into the band.
The bands are musicians whom just want to create and play music. The musicians end up being forced into a certain style by the fans, and may end up desiring something different, as a musician can get tired of creating the same style. It creates a reason for a musician to leave the band, as he wants to do something different and experiment when the other guys are fine where they are, so he leaves due to "creative differences" and forms a brand new band. It also happens vice-versa with the band wanting to experiment and do something different, while the musician wants to keep on with that style and leaves the band to form a new band with that same consistent style.
Rush is a band that has proven to us, they were able to find compromises with their creations, and were in agreement with their styles at the time. To where the musician themselves view an album
some fans consider sacrilege as one of their favorites of the band. Which is fascinating information to know.
The thing about RTB is that it has a few weak tracks, which for some fans, is all they think of. But it has three of the biggest concert staples of their career( Dreamline, Bravado, RTB). The band probably thinks about those songs mainly when talking about the album. On top of those three you another great song with Ghost of a Chance, a decent instrumental, and two pretty good songs; The Big Wheel and Heresy. Commercially the album was a hit as well. So yeah…they should be proud of it. I think it’s a great album and a great mix of what they did in the 80s and what they were moving toward. For me they didn’t make a better album until Clockwork Angels.
But this proves those fans as a minority, as the fact it was commercially a hit, and those songs are constant in the set-lists, says a lot of how it's viewed by not only the fans, but the casual listeners of Rush.
Roll The Bones, I actually liked that song when I first heard it on R30, and also because of the cool video of the skeleton doing the rapping part.
For me, the album suffers from the production that is just a product of it's time. If it were to have the production of say, Counterparts, it'd be a great album sonically. I enjoy these songs on this album live, and I like what they did in Rush in Rio by going from The Pass into Bravado. Also though, that synth is the quintessential 80's synth, which reminds me of the synth in the Labyrinth song "Dance Magic Dance", and also "Ghostbusters".
Poll