Author Topic: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Epilogue  (Read 85726 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Podaar

  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 9938
  • Gender: Male
Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Signals
« Reply #350 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]
« Last Edit: October 21, 2014, 10:43:58 AM by Podaar »
"Owners of dogs will have noticed that, if you provide them with food and water and shelter and affection, they will think you are God. Whereas owners of cats are compelled to realize that, if you provide them with food and water and affection, they draw the conclusion that they are God.” — Christopher Hitchens

Offline King Postwhore

  • Couch Potato
  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 59480
  • Gender: Male
  • Take that Beethoven, you deaf bastard!!
Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Signals
« Reply #351 on: October 21, 2014, 10:42:41 AM »
Hey hey!  To quote Bon Jovi,  "In and out of love".  And in again! :lol
I don't like country music, but I don't mean to denigrate those who do. And for the people who like country music, denigrate means 'put down'.” - Bob Newhart
So wait, we're spelling it wrong and king is spelling it right? What is going on here? :lol -- BlobVanDam
"Oh, I am definitely a jackass!" - TAC

Online TAC

  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 74728
  • Gender: Male
  • Arthritic Metal Horns
Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Signals
« Reply #352 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
would have thought the same thing but seeing the OP was TAC i immediately thought Maiden or DT related
Winger Theater Forums........or WTF.  ;D
TAC got a higher score than me in the electronic round? Honestly, can I just drop out now? :lol

Offline Mladen

  • Posts: 15240
  • Gender: Male
Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Signals
« Reply #353 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.

Offline mikemangioy

  • Posts: 1373
  • Gender: Male
  • do feel free to spool through.
Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Signals
« Reply #354 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.
Because Mike is better than Mike

Offline wolfking

  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 46884
  • Gender: Male
Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Signals
« Reply #355 on: October 21, 2014, 09:37:05 PM »
I love Signals, it's probably top 3 for me.  Definitely top 5 at least.
Everyone else, except Wolfking is wrong.

Offline Nick

  • A doctor.
  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 20053
  • Gender: Male
  • But not the medical kind.
Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Signals
« Reply #356 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.
For the best online progressive radio: ProgRock.com
For the best in progressive news, reviews, and interviews: SonicPerspectives.com
For a trove of older podcasts and interviews: WPaPU.com
Awesome Majesty Pendant Club: Member #1

Offline wolfking

  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 46884
  • Gender: Male
Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Signals
« Reply #357 on: October 21, 2014, 09:47:11 PM »
Subdivisions is my fav Rush song.
Everyone else, except Wolfking is wrong.

Online jingle.boy

  • I'm so ronery; so sad and ronery
  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 44911
  • Gender: Male
  • DTF's resident deceased dictator
Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Signals
« Reply #358 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.
That's a word salad - and take it from me, I know word salad
I fear for the day when something happens on the right that is SO nuts that even Stadler says "That's crazy".
Quote from: Puppies_On_Acid
Remember the mark of a great vocalist is if TAC hates them with a special passion

Offline JayOctavarium

  • I used to be a whorejerk
  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 10055
  • Gender: Male
  • But then I took a Hef to the knee...
Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Signals
« Reply #359 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)
I just don't understand what they were trying to achieve with any part of the song, either individually or as a whole. You know what? It's the Platypus of Dream Theater songs. That bill doesn't go with that tail, or that strange little furry body, or those webbed feet, and oh god why does it have venomous spurs!? And then you find out it lays eggs too. The difference is that the Platypus is somehow functional despite being a crazy mishmash or leftover animal pieces

-BlobVanDam on "Scarred"

Offline KevShmev

  • EZBoard Elder
  • *****
  • Posts: 41974
  • Gender: Male
Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Signals
« Reply #360 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. 

Offline JayOctavarium

  • I used to be a whorejerk
  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 10055
  • Gender: Male
  • But then I took a Hef to the knee...
Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Signals
« Reply #361 on: October 21, 2014, 10:47:45 PM »
I don't mind NWM at all. I think it's catchy.
I just don't understand what they were trying to achieve with any part of the song, either individually or as a whole. You know what? It's the Platypus of Dream Theater songs. That bill doesn't go with that tail, or that strange little furry body, or those webbed feet, and oh god why does it have venomous spurs!? And then you find out it lays eggs too. The difference is that the Platypus is somehow functional despite being a crazy mishmash or leftover animal pieces

-BlobVanDam on "Scarred"

Online TAC

  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 74728
  • Gender: Male
  • Arthritic Metal Horns
Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Signals
« Reply #362 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*
would have thought the same thing but seeing the OP was TAC i immediately thought Maiden or DT related
Winger Theater Forums........or WTF.  ;D
TAC got a higher score than me in the electronic round? Honestly, can I just drop out now? :lol

Offline Cruithne

  • Posts: 529
Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Signals
« Reply #363 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.

Online TAC

  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 74728
  • Gender: Male
  • Arthritic Metal Horns
Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Signals
« Reply #364 on: October 22, 2014, 08:34:29 AM »
The excellent:   Chemistry, 

WHAT??
would have thought the same thing but seeing the OP was TAC i immediately thought Maiden or DT related
Winger Theater Forums........or WTF.  ;D
TAC got a higher score than me in the electronic round? Honestly, can I just drop out now? :lol

Offline nicmos

  • Posts: 965
  • Gender: Male
  • Having said that...
Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Signals
« Reply #365 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.

Offline Lowdz

  • Posts: 10386
  • Gender: Male
Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Signals
« Reply #366 on: October 22, 2014, 10:36:19 AM »
The excellent:   Chemistry, 

WHAT??

Agreed. Awful lyrics. For Peart that is.

Offline Orbert

  • Recovering Musician
  • EZBoard Elder
  • *****
  • Posts: 19276
  • Gender: Male
  • In and around the lake
Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Signals
« Reply #367 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*

Offline Nick

  • A doctor.
  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 20053
  • Gender: Male
  • But not the medical kind.
Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Signals
« Reply #368 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.
For the best online progressive radio: ProgRock.com
For the best in progressive news, reviews, and interviews: SonicPerspectives.com
For a trove of older podcasts and interviews: WPaPU.com
Awesome Majesty Pendant Club: Member #1

Offline KevShmev

  • EZBoard Elder
  • *****
  • Posts: 41974
  • Gender: Male
Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Signals
« Reply #369 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.

Offline Mosh

  • For I have dined on honeydew!
  • Posts: 3857
  • Gender: Male
Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Signals
« Reply #370 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.
New Animal Soup scifi space opera for fans of Porcupine Tree, Mastodon, Iron Maiden: Chariots of the Gods

https://animalsoup.bandcamp.com/album/chariots-of-the-gods

Offline jammindude

  • Posts: 15327
  • Gender: Male
Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Signals
« Reply #371 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:
"Better the pride that resides in a citizen of the world.
Than the pride that divides when a colorful rag is unfurled." - Neil Peart

The Jammin Dude Show - https://www.youtube.com/user/jammindude

Offline Orbert

  • Recovering Musician
  • EZBoard Elder
  • *****
  • Posts: 19276
  • Gender: Male
  • In and around the lake
Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Signals
« Reply #372 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.

Online jingle.boy

  • I'm so ronery; so sad and ronery
  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 44911
  • Gender: Male
  • DTF's resident deceased dictator
Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Signals
« Reply #373 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.
That's a word salad - and take it from me, I know word salad
I fear for the day when something happens on the right that is SO nuts that even Stadler says "That's crazy".
Quote from: Puppies_On_Acid
Remember the mark of a great vocalist is if TAC hates them with a special passion

Offline Mosh

  • For I have dined on honeydew!
  • Posts: 3857
  • Gender: Male
Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Signals
« Reply #374 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.
New Animal Soup scifi space opera for fans of Porcupine Tree, Mastodon, Iron Maiden: Chariots of the Gods

https://animalsoup.bandcamp.com/album/chariots-of-the-gods

Offline King Postwhore

  • Couch Potato
  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 59480
  • Gender: Male
  • Take that Beethoven, you deaf bastard!!
Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Signals
« Reply #375 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.
I don't like country music, but I don't mean to denigrate those who do. And for the people who like country music, denigrate means 'put down'.” - Bob Newhart
So wait, we're spelling it wrong and king is spelling it right? What is going on here? :lol -- BlobVanDam
"Oh, I am definitely a jackass!" - TAC

Online jingle.boy

  • I'm so ronery; so sad and ronery
  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 44911
  • Gender: Male
  • DTF's resident deceased dictator
Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Signals
« Reply #376 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
That's a word salad - and take it from me, I know word salad
I fear for the day when something happens on the right that is SO nuts that even Stadler says "That's crazy".
Quote from: Puppies_On_Acid
Remember the mark of a great vocalist is if TAC hates them with a special passion

Offline Mister Gold

  • The Makers of Our Own Destiny
  • Posts: 2359
  • Gender: Male
  • Human
Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Signals
« Reply #377 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.
Beyond the limits of the mortal frame
To the farthest boundary of eternity
Where I, the Cosmic Sea
Watch the little ego floating in me.

Offline KevShmev

  • EZBoard Elder
  • *****
  • Posts: 41974
  • Gender: Male
Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Grace Under Pressure
« Reply #378 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.


Offline The Letter M

  • Posts: 15562
  • Gender: Male
Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Grace Under Pressure
« Reply #379 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.
ATTENTION - HAKEN FANS! The HAKEN SURVIVOR 2023 has begun! You can check it out in the Polls/Survivors Forum!!!

Online Zydar

  • Creep With Tonality
  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 19282
  • Gender: Male
Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Grace Under Pressure
« Reply #380 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.
Zydar is my new hero.  I just laughed so hard I nearly shat.

Offline King Postwhore

  • Couch Potato
  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 59480
  • Gender: Male
  • Take that Beethoven, you deaf bastard!!
Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Grace Under Pressure
« Reply #381 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
I don't like country music, but I don't mean to denigrate those who do. And for the people who like country music, denigrate means 'put down'.” - Bob Newhart
So wait, we're spelling it wrong and king is spelling it right? What is going on here? :lol -- BlobVanDam
"Oh, I am definitely a jackass!" - TAC

Offline The Letter M

  • Posts: 15562
  • Gender: Male
Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Grace Under Pressure
« Reply #382 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.
ATTENTION - HAKEN FANS! The HAKEN SURVIVOR 2023 has begun! You can check it out in the Polls/Survivors Forum!!!

Offline King Postwhore

  • Couch Potato
  • DTF.org Alumni
  • ****
  • Posts: 59480
  • Gender: Male
  • Take that Beethoven, you deaf bastard!!
Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Grace Under Pressure
« Reply #383 on: October 23, 2014, 11:19:12 AM »
All on what video release Marc?


I know you know!!
I don't like country music, but I don't mean to denigrate those who do. And for the people who like country music, denigrate means 'put down'.” - Bob Newhart
So wait, we're spelling it wrong and king is spelling it right? What is going on here? :lol -- BlobVanDam
"Oh, I am definitely a jackass!" - TAC

Offline The Letter M

  • Posts: 15562
  • Gender: Male
Re: The History of Rush v. Discography Thread: Grace Under Pressure
« Reply #384 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.
ATTENTION - HAKEN FANS! The HAKEN SURVIVOR 2023 has begun! You can check it out in the Polls/Survivors Forum!!!