193 replies to this topic

[Disembodied Spirit]

blueschica, on 30 August 2016 - 11:09 AM, said:

FOH Lights, on 30 August 2016 - 10:03 AM, said:

blueschica, on 30 August 2016 - 09:54 AM, said:

I accept that it's over for Neil, but Tom raises an interesting point- the Olivia factor.  I've wondered that also.  If she reaches a point in the next few years where she says, "Dad, I really wish I could see you play live . . . "   I don't think he'll ever tour again but quite a few artists do those multi-night residencies in New York these days. I can see them doing one in New York or Toronto if Olivia wants to see Dad play again.

The rest of us would just have to figure out how to get the limited tickets and get there!

That will never happen. They'd lose money. Well, that and the fact that Neil will NEVER play live again. lol

OK, I understand that about Neil.  I don't understand the losing money part.  How did the Allman Brothers do their residencies at the Beacon Theatre for more than 20 years if that type of arrangement loses money?  Billy Joel has been doing once a month shows at Madison Square Garden that continue all through this year.  

I'm not being snarky, I just don't understand the finances.  Are you saying the production values of a Rush show are pretty pricey and it takes many, many tour dates (not just a week) to pay for the show?

The 1st part. While I do not know the exact details of the Allman Brothers specific contract, it probably is a set dollar amount.
We as fans think the artist is getting the gross amount. On an extended stay that is rarely the case. The artist usually gets a promised amount from the venue in exchange for a certain number of shows. So in this case the Beacon sits 2800, and if the Allmans play 5 nights they may get a set amount of say $500,000. Now that is without a single ticket being sold. Beacon can turn around with Citi and sell 2800x$100 for $280,000 times 5 shows for $1,400,000. This way both win.
It's No difference then telling a band at your bar, we'll pay you $400 for each night + free booze. If the bar is charging a $20 cover and no one shows up, the band still gets paid..if 1000 people show up over 2 days, the bar wins.
Santana and Billy Idol have deals in place for 15 shows a year at House of Blues in Vegas. That place only sits 700. No way they make money without getting a Set dollar amount for each show. The casino wants bodies 'In the building' and they will get it.

Edited by Disembodied Spirit, 31 August 2016 - 12:07 AM.

[FOH Lights]

Disembodied Spirit, on 31 August 2016 - 12:06 AM, said:

blueschica, on 30 August 2016 - 11:09 AM, said:

FOH Lights, on 30 August 2016 - 10:03 AM, said:

blueschica, on 30 August 2016 - 09:54 AM, said:

I accept that it's over for Neil, but Tom raises an interesting point- the Olivia factor.  I've wondered that also.  If she reaches a point in the next few years where she says, "Dad, I really wish I could see you play live . . . "   I don't think he'll ever tour again but quite a few artists do those multi-night residencies in New York these days. I can see them doing one in New York or Toronto if Olivia wants to see Dad play again.

The rest of us would just have to figure out how to get the limited tickets and get there!

That will never happen. They'd lose money. Well, that and the fact that Neil will NEVER play live again. lol

OK, I understand that about Neil.  I don't understand the losing money part.  How did the Allman Brothers do their residencies at the Beacon Theatre for more than 20 years if that type of arrangement loses money?  Billy Joel has been doing once a month shows at Madison Square Garden that continue all through this year.  

I'm not being snarky, I just don't understand the finances.  Are you saying the production values of a Rush show are pretty pricey and it takes many, many tour dates (not just a week) to pay for the show?

The 1st part. While I do not know the exact details of the Allman Brothers specific contract, it probably is a set dollar amount.
We as fans think the artist is getting the gross amount. On an extended stay that is rarely the case. The artist usually gets a promised amount from the venue in exchange for a certain number of shows. So in this case the Beacon sits 2800, and if the Allmans play 5 nights they may get a set amount of say $500,000. Now that is without a single ticket being sold. Beacon can turn around with Citi and sell 2800x$100 for $280,000 times 5 shows for $1,400,000. This way both win.
It's No difference then telling a band at your bar, we'll pay you $400 for each night + free booze. If the bar is charging a $20 cover and no one shows up, the band still gets paid..if 1000 people show up over 2 days, the bar wins.
Santana and Billy Idol have deals in place for 15 shows a year at House of Blues in Vegas. That place only sits 700. No way they make money without getting a Set dollar amount for each show. The casino wants bodies 'In the building' and they will get it.

All true. However, I don't think Rush has the diverse fan base required for an "extended stay" like that to be successful for the venue. So, that won't happen. Well, that and the fact the Neil will NEVER play live with Rush again.

[Planet X-1]

FOH Lights, on 31 August 2016 - 09:48 AM, said:

Disembodied Spirit, on 31 August 2016 - 12:06 AM, said:

blueschica, on 30 August 2016 - 11:09 AM, said:

FOH Lights, on 30 August 2016 - 10:03 AM, said:

blueschica, on 30 August 2016 - 09:54 AM, said:

I accept that it's over for Neil, but Tom raises an interesting point- the Olivia factor.  I've wondered that also.  If she reaches a point in the next few years where she says, "Dad, I really wish I could see you play live . . . "   I don't think he'll ever tour again but quite a few artists do those multi-night residencies in New York these days. I can see them doing one in New York or Toronto if Olivia wants to see Dad play again.

The rest of us would just have to figure out how to get the limited tickets and get there!

That will never happen. They'd lose money. Well, that and the fact that Neil will NEVER play live again. lol

OK, I understand that about Neil.  I don't understand the losing money part.  How did the Allman Brothers do their residencies at the Beacon Theatre for more than 20 years if that type of arrangement loses money?  Billy Joel has been doing once a month shows at Madison Square Garden that continue all through this year.  

I'm not being snarky, I just don't understand the finances.  Are you saying the production values of a Rush show are pretty pricey and it takes many, many tour dates (not just a week) to pay for the show?

The 1st part. While I do not know the exact details of the Allman Brothers specific contract, it probably is a set dollar amount.
We as fans think the artist is getting the gross amount. On an extended stay that is rarely the case. The artist usually gets a promised amount from the venue in exchange for a certain number of shows. So in this case the Beacon sits 2800, and if the Allmans play 5 nights they may get a set amount of say $500,000. Now that is without a single ticket being sold. Beacon can turn around with Citi and sell 2800x$100 for $280,000 times 5 shows for $1,400,000. This way both win.
It's No difference then telling a band at your bar, we'll pay you $400 for each night + free booze. If the bar is charging a $20 cover and no one shows up, the band still gets paid..if 1000 people show up over 2 days, the bar wins.
Santana and Billy Idol have deals in place for 15 shows a year at House of Blues in Vegas. That place only sits 700. No way they make money without getting a Set dollar amount for each show. The casino wants bodies 'In the building' and they will get it.

All true. However, I don't think Rush has the diverse fan base required for an "extended stay" like that to be successful for the venue. So, that won't happen. Well, that and the fact the Neil will NEVER play live with Rush again.

Well, then it's time for a new drummer and off to R01...  

[edhunter]

Planet X-1, on 31 August 2016 - 10:01 AM, said:

FOH Lights, on 31 August 2016 - 09:48 AM, said:

Disembodied Spirit, on 31 August 2016 - 12:06 AM, said:

blueschica, on 30 August 2016 - 11:09 AM, said:

FOH Lights, on 30 August 2016 - 10:03 AM, said:

blueschica, on 30 August 2016 - 09:54 AM, said:

I accept that it's over for Neil, but Tom raises an interesting point- the Olivia factor.  I've wondered that also.  If she reaches a point in the next few years where she says, "Dad, I really wish I could see you play live . . . "   I don't think he'll ever tour again but quite a few artists do those multi-night residencies in New York these days. I can see them doing one in New York or Toronto if Olivia wants to see Dad play again.

The rest of us would just have to figure out how to get the limited tickets and get there!

That will never happen. They'd lose money. Well, that and the fact that Neil will NEVER play live again. lol

OK, I understand that about Neil.  I don't understand the losing money part.  How did the Allman Brothers do their residencies at the Beacon Theatre for more than 20 years if that type of arrangement loses money?  Billy Joel has been doing once a month shows at Madison Square Garden that continue all through this year.  

I'm not being snarky, I just don't understand the finances.  Are you saying the production values of a Rush show are pretty pricey and it takes many, many tour dates (not just a week) to pay for the show?

The 1st part. While I do not know the exact details of the Allman Brothers specific contract, it probably is a set dollar amount.
We as fans think the artist is getting the gross amount. On an extended stay that is rarely the case. The artist usually gets a promised amount from the venue in exchange for a certain number of shows. So in this case the Beacon sits 2800, and if the Allmans play 5 nights they may get a set amount of say $500,000. Now that is without a single ticket being sold. Beacon can turn around with Citi and sell 2800x$100 for $280,000 times 5 shows for $1,400,000. This way both win.
It's No difference then telling a band at your bar, we'll pay you $400 for each night + free booze. If the bar is charging a $20 cover and no one shows up, the band still gets paid..if 1000 people show up over 2 days, the bar wins.
Santana and Billy Idol have deals in place for 15 shows a year at House of Blues in Vegas. That place only sits 700. No way they make money without getting a Set dollar amount for each show. The casino wants bodies 'In the building' and they will get it.

All true. However, I don't think Rush has the diverse fan base required for an "extended stay" like that to be successful for the venue. So, that won't happen. Well, that and the fact the Neil will NEVER play live with Rush again.

Well, then it's time for a new drummer and off to R01...  

Agreed. Replace the grumpy old bugger and move on. He's not THAT special. Anyone can write socially awkward lyrics and overplay their drum parts...

[blueschica]

FOH Lights, on 31 August 2016 - 09:48 AM, said:

Disembodied Spirit, on 31 August 2016 - 12:06 AM, said:

blueschica, on 30 August 2016 - 11:09 AM, said:

FOH Lights, on 30 August 2016 - 10:03 AM, said:

blueschica, on 30 August 2016 - 09:54 AM, said:

I accept that it's over for Neil, but Tom raises an interesting point- the Olivia factor.  I've wondered that also.  If she reaches a point in the next few years where she says, "Dad, I really wish I could see you play live . . . "   I don't think he'll ever tour again but quite a few artists do those multi-night residencies in New York these days. I can see them doing one in New York or Toronto if Olivia wants to see Dad play again.

The rest of us would just have to figure out how to get the limited tickets and get there!

That will never happen. They'd lose money. Well, that and the fact that Neil will NEVER play live again. lol

OK, I understand that about Neil.  I don't understand the losing money part.  How did the Allman Brothers do their residencies at the Beacon Theatre for more than 20 years if that type of arrangement loses money?  Billy Joel has been doing once a month shows at Madison Square Garden that continue all through this year.  

I'm not being snarky, I just don't understand the finances.  Are you saying the production values of a Rush show are pretty pricey and it takes many, many tour dates (not just a week) to pay for the show?

The 1st part. While I do not know the exact details of the Allman Brothers specific contract, it probably is a set dollar amount.
We as fans think the artist is getting the gross amount. On an extended stay that is rarely the case. The artist usually gets a promised amount from the venue in exchange for a certain number of shows. So in this case the Beacon sits 2800, and if the Allmans play 5 nights they may get a set amount of say $500,000. Now that is without a single ticket being sold. Beacon can turn around with Citi and sell 2800x$100 for $280,000 times 5 shows for $1,400,000. This way both win.
It's No difference then telling a band at your bar, we'll pay you $400 for each night + free booze. If the bar is charging a $20 cover and no one shows up, the band still gets paid..if 1000 people show up over 2 days, the bar wins.
Santana and Billy Idol have deals in place for 15 shows a year at House of Blues in Vegas. That place only sits 700. No way they make money without getting a Set dollar amount for each show. The casino wants bodies 'In the building' and they will get it.

All true. However, I don't think Rush has the diverse fan base required for an "extended stay" like that to be successful for the venue. So, that won't happen. Well, that and the fact the Neil will NEVER play live with Rush again.

DS, thank you for explaining the finances!  I was wondering how those residencies worked.  FOH, yes, Rush may not have what you call a "diverse" fan base, (although not sure if I agree with you on that) but it sure has a devoted one!  Judging just from how many members here attended multiple shows and traveled cross country (and some from overseas) for shows, I think a multi night would be possible.  

But yes, as you say, discussing is meaningless since Neil is gone.  You are an inside person, details please.

[Anthemic]

FOH Lights, on 31 August 2016 - 09:48 AM, said:

Disembodied Spirit, on 31 August 2016 - 12:06 AM, said:

blueschica, on 30 August 2016 - 11:09 AM, said:

FOH Lights, on 30 August 2016 - 10:03 AM, said:

blueschica, on 30 August 2016 - 09:54 AM, said:

I accept that it's over for Neil, but Tom raises an interesting point- the Olivia factor.  I've wondered that also.  If she reaches a point in the next few years where she says, "Dad, I really wish I could see you play live . . . "   I don't think he'll ever tour again but quite a few artists do those multi-night residencies in New York these days. I can see them doing one in New York or Toronto if Olivia wants to see Dad play again.

The rest of us would just have to figure out how to get the limited tickets and get there!

That will never happen. They'd lose money. Well, that and the fact that Neil will NEVER play live again. lol

OK, I understand that about Neil.  I don't understand the losing money part.  How did the Allman Brothers do their residencies at the Beacon Theatre for more than 20 years if that type of arrangement loses money?  Billy Joel has been doing once a month shows at Madison Square Garden that continue all through this year.  

I'm not being snarky, I just don't understand the finances.  Are you saying the production values of a Rush show are pretty pricey and it takes many, many tour dates (not just a week) to pay for the show?

The 1st part. While I do not know the exact details of the Allman Brothers specific contract, it probably is a set dollar amount.
We as fans think the artist is getting the gross amount. On an extended stay that is rarely the case. The artist usually gets a promised amount from the venue in exchange for a certain number of shows. So in this case the Beacon sits 2800, and if the Allmans play 5 nights they may get a set amount of say $500,000. Now that is without a single ticket being sold. Beacon can turn around with Citi and sell 2800x$100 for $280,000 times 5 shows for $1,400,000. This way both win.
It's No difference then telling a band at your bar, we'll pay you $400 for each night + free booze. If the bar is charging a $20 cover and no one shows up, the band still gets paid..if 1000 people show up over 2 days, the bar wins.
Santana and Billy Idol have deals in place for 15 shows a year at House of Blues in Vegas. That place only sits 700. No way they make money without getting a Set dollar amount for each show. The casino wants bodies 'In the building' and they will get it.

All true. However, I don't think Rush has the diverse fan base required for an "extended stay" like that to be successful for the venue. So, that won't happen. Well, that and the fact the Neil will NEVER play live with Rush again.

why are you so dang happy about that?  are you neil?

[Del_Duio]

blueschica, on 30 August 2016 - 09:54 AM, said:

I accept that it's over for Neil, but Tom raises an interesting point- the Olivia factor.  I've wondered that also.  If she reaches a point in the next few years where she says, "Dad, I really wish I could see you play live . . . "   I don't think he'll ever tour again but quite a few artists do those multi-night residencies in New York these days.  I can see them doing one in New York or Toronto if Olivia wants to see Dad play again.

The rest of us would just have to figure out how to get the limited tickets and get there!

If Olivia wants to see her dad play live she can pop in 10 different DVDs.
And as an added bonus, Geddy will still sound pretty awesome in most of them!

[Del_Duio]

Anthemic, on 31 August 2016 - 11:56 AM, said:

FOH Lights, on 31 August 2016 - 09:48 AM, said:

Disembodied Spirit, on 31 August 2016 - 12:06 AM, said:

blueschica, on 30 August 2016 - 11:09 AM, said:

FOH Lights, on 30 August 2016 - 10:03 AM, said:

blueschica, on 30 August 2016 - 09:54 AM, said:

I accept that it's over for Neil, but Tom raises an interesting point- the Olivia factor.  I've wondered that also.  If she reaches a point in the next few years where she says, "Dad, I really wish I could see you play live . . . "   I don't think he'll ever tour again but quite a few artists do those multi-night residencies in New York these days. I can see them doing one in New York or Toronto if Olivia wants to see Dad play again.

The rest of us would just have to figure out how to get the limited tickets and get there!

That will never happen. They'd lose money. Well, that and the fact that Neil will NEVER play live again. lol

OK, I understand that about Neil.  I don't understand the losing money part.  How did the Allman Brothers do their residencies at the Beacon Theatre for more than 20 years if that type of arrangement loses money?  Billy Joel has been doing once a month shows at Madison Square Garden that continue all through this year.  

I'm not being snarky, I just don't understand the finances.  Are you saying the production values of a Rush show are pretty pricey and it takes many, many tour dates (not just a week) to pay for the show?

The 1st part. While I do not know the exact details of the Allman Brothers specific contract, it probably is a set dollar amount.
We as fans think the artist is getting the gross amount. On an extended stay that is rarely the case. The artist usually gets a promised amount from the venue in exchange for a certain number of shows. So in this case the Beacon sits 2800, and if the Allmans play 5 nights they may get a set amount of say $500,000. Now that is without a single ticket being sold. Beacon can turn around with Citi and sell 2800x$100 for $280,000 times 5 shows for $1,400,000. This way both win.
It's No difference then telling a band at your bar, we'll pay you $400 for each night + free booze. If the bar is charging a $20 cover and no one shows up, the band still gets paid..if 1000 people show up over 2 days, the bar wins.
Santana and Billy Idol have deals in place for 15 shows a year at House of Blues in Vegas. That place only sits 700. No way they make money without getting a Set dollar amount for each show. The casino wants bodies 'In the building' and they will get it.

All true. However, I don't think Rush has the diverse fan base required for an "extended stay" like that to be successful for the venue. So, that won't happen. Well, that and the fact the Neil will NEVER play live with Rush again.

why are you so dang happy about that?  are you neil?

He's close enough!
And I agree with FOH, Neil finally got out and no way he's coming back.

[fraroc]

Not this topic again

[blueschica]

FOH Lights, on 30 August 2016 - 10:03 AM, said:

blueschica, on 30 August 2016 - 09:54 AM, said:

I accept that it's over for Neil, but Tom raises an interesting point- the Olivia factor.  I've wondered that also.  If she reaches a point in the next few years where she says, "Dad, I really wish I could see you play live . . . "   I don't think he'll ever tour again but quite a few artists do those multi-night residencies in New York these days. I can see them doing one in New York or Toronto if Olivia wants to see Dad play again.

The rest of us would just have to figure out how to get the limited tickets and get there!

That will never happen. They'd lose money. Well, that and the fact that Neil will NEVER play live again. lol

If what you are saying is true (I think you have mentioned before that you are an insider?)  it is indescribably sad for many reasons.  The main one being that something that once brought joy to him (I'm thinking of when he has written about playing in his 20's) now sounds like it has become such a burden that he says he will never play live again?  Very sad for him.

Edited by blueschica, 31 August 2016 - 02:42 PM.

[Union 5-3992]

fraroc, on 31 August 2016 - 01:57 PM, said:

Not this topic again

Then stay out of it.

[Fordgalaxy]

FOH Lights, on 30 August 2016 - 07:01 AM, said:

Haha, it's not about money, and it's not about ego.

You know this, how? Are you suggesting that bands tour just because they like to play instruments for the enjoyment of strangers? If you read Ghost Rider, or whichever book NEP wrote after he rode around North America, it was pretty clear he was going to run out of money, according to his accountant, if he continued spending at the rate he was. The only way he really had to make money was to go on tour or maybe sell some records.

Edited by Fordgalaxy, 02 September 2016 - 05:24 PM.

[upstateNYfan]

Fordgalaxy, on 02 September 2016 - 05:22 PM, said:

FOH Lights, on 30 August 2016 - 07:01 AM, said:

Haha, it's not about money, and it's not about ego.

You know this, how? Are you suggesting that bands tour just because they like to play instruments for the enjoyment of strangers? If you read Ghost Rider, or whichever book NEP wrote after he rode around North America, it was pretty clear he was going to run out of money, according to his accountant, if he continued spending at the rate he was. The only way he really had to make money was to go on tour or maybe sell some records.

That was 15 years ago. They've worked a ton since then. Also, I might be remembering wrong, but it was more like, "you're spending more than you make". Speculating it was a lifestyle, not ability, thing. Neil deftly alluded to wealth, too, about the "principal to spend"...

I wanted to be wrong for a year, but after reading snippets on Google from the new book, I'd say there's a 1% chance we'll ever see or hear Rush again.

[tomhealey]

The topic does seem to have veered off of what I intended.  I hadn't meant to debate whether we'll see a live show again.  None of us knows that except, perhaps, Neil, so we're all just guessing.  I intended to discuss what goes into the decision of whether to embark on another tour, or a shortened tour, or a limited engagement, or whatever.  I continue to think that money and ego (expansively interpreted) are the prime drivers.  Do people see other factors?  
FOH may very well be correct that it ain't happening (I have a great deal of respect for his opinions, he does seem to be connected to the band, and he helped me out considerably in thinking through a question about Periscope a while back), but the question isn't if Neil has said no (the excerpts from his upcoming tome very clearly confirm the answer "no" to me), the question is why?

[Tombstone Mountain]

tomhealey, on 04 September 2016 - 06:24 PM, said:

the question isn't if Neil has said no (the excerpts from his upcoming tome very clearly confirm the answer "no" to me), the question is why?

I'm of three minds about this question.

1) He's older and knows he will not improve his craft in any measurable way in the future, so why bother? It's always been about getting better as musicians on the one hand.

2} He wants to give a fulfilling life to his family

3) I think a disconnect, or distance between the band members on a friendship level is a factor. Resentments may weigh in. Neil isn't a founding member, yet he's absolutely critical to what and who Rush is. Something that sticks out in my mind is from the Dinner at the Hunting Lodge clip. Geddy, at times, seems dismissive to Neil on a couple of occasions. Perhaps this is SOP when dealing with Neil. He's "outside" the establishment. He's always referred to Geddy and Alex as the "guys" from work...there's a level of intimacy there, but not that deep. He's just not that close to both of them, particularly Geddy, even though they have years together under their belts. A sort of rivalry is there that maybe the fly in the ointment for Neil.

Edited by Tombstone Mountain, 04 September 2016 - 08:22 PM.

[blueschica]

Tombstone Mountain, on 04 September 2016 - 08:22 PM, said:

tomhealey, on 04 September 2016 - 06:24 PM, said:

the question isn't if Neil has said no (the excerpts from his upcoming tome very clearly confirm the answer "no" to me), the question is why?

I'm of three minds about this question.

1) He's older and knows he will not improve his craft in any measurable way in the future, so why bother? It's always been about getting better as musicians on the one hand.

2} He wants to give a fulfilling life to his family

3) I think a disconnect, or distance between the band members on a friendship level is a factor. Resentments may weigh in. Neil isn't a founding member, yet he's absolutely critical to what and who Rush is. Something that sticks out in my mind is from the Dinner at the Hunting Lodge clip. Geddy, at times, seems dismissive to Neil on a couple of occasions. Perhaps this is SOP when dealing with Neil. He's "outside" the establishment. He's always referred to Geddy and Alex as the "guys" from work...there's a level of intimacy there, but not that deep. He's just not that close to both of them, particularly Geddy, even though they have years together under their belts. A sort of rivalry is there that maybe the fly in the ointment for Neil.

Very interesting and thoughtful analysis!

[Tombstone Mountain]

blueschica, on 04 September 2016 - 08:29 PM, said:

Tombstone Mountain, on 04 September 2016 - 08:22 PM, said:

tomhealey, on 04 September 2016 - 06:24 PM, said:

the question isn't if Neil has said no (the excerpts from his upcoming tome very clearly confirm the answer "no" to me), the question is why?

I'm of three minds about this question.

1) He's older and knows he will not improve his craft in any measurable way in the future, so why bother? It's always been about getting better as musicians on the one hand.

2} He wants to give a fulfilling life to his family

3) I think a disconnect, or distance between the band members on a friendship level is a factor. Resentments may weigh in. Neil isn't a founding member, yet he's absolutely critical to what and who Rush is. Something that sticks out in my mind is from the Dinner at the Hunting Lodge clip. Geddy, at times, seems dismissive to Neil on a couple of occasions. Perhaps this is SOP when dealing with Neil. He's "outside" the establishment. He's always referred to Geddy and Alex as the "guys" from work...there's a level of intimacy there, but not that deep. He's just not that close to both of them, particularly Geddy, even though they have years together under their belts. A sort of rivalry is there that maybe the fly in the ointment for Neil.

Very interesting and thoughtful analysis!

Just grinding that out sister. Seems plausible

[Permanent-Rush]

edhunter, on 31 August 2016 - 10:32 AM, said:

Agreed. Replace the grumpy old bugger and move on. He's not THAT special. Anyone can write socially awkward lyrics and overplay their drum parts...

[EagleMoon]

Tombstone Mountain, on 04 September 2016 - 08:22 PM, said:

tomhealey, on 04 September 2016 - 06:24 PM, said:

the question isn't if Neil has said no (the excerpts from his upcoming tome very clearly confirm the answer "no" to me), the question is why?

I'm of three minds about this question.

1) He's older and knows he will not improve his craft in any measurable way in the future, so why bother? It's always been about getting better as musicians on the one hand.

2} He wants to give a fulfilling life to his family

3) I think a disconnect, or distance between the band members on a friendship level is a factor. Resentments may weigh in. Neil isn't a founding member, yet he's absolutely critical to what and who Rush is. Something that sticks out in my mind is from the Dinner at the Hunting Lodge clip. Geddy, at times, seems dismissive to Neil on a couple of occasions. Perhaps this is SOP when dealing with Neil. He's "outside" the establishment. He's always referred to Geddy and Alex as the "guys" from work...there's a level of intimacy there, but not that deep. He's just not that close to both of them, particularly Geddy, even though they have years together under their belts. A sort of rivalry is there that maybe the fly in the ointment for Neil.

It's always seemed that way to me too. Friends and coworkers but not really close. It seems like he's always been on the outside.

[Tombstone Mountain]

EagleMoon, on 05 September 2016 - 04:03 AM, said:

Tombstone Mountain, on 04 September 2016 - 08:22 PM, said:

tomhealey, on 04 September 2016 - 06:24 PM, said:

the question isn't if Neil has said no (the excerpts from his upcoming tome very clearly confirm the answer "no" to me), the question is why?

I'm of three minds about this question.

1) He's older and knows he will not improve his craft in any measurable way in the future, so why bother? It's always been about getting better as musicians on the one hand.

2} He wants to give a fulfilling life to his family

3) I think a disconnect, or distance between the band members on a friendship level is a factor. Resentments may weigh in. Neil isn't a founding member, yet he's absolutely critical to what and who Rush is. Something that sticks out in my mind is from the Dinner at the Hunting Lodge clip. Geddy, at times, seems dismissive to Neil on a couple of occasions. Perhaps this is SOP when dealing with Neil. He's "outside" the establishment. He's always referred to Geddy and Alex as the "guys" from work...there's a level of intimacy there, but not that deep. He's just not that close to both of them, particularly Geddy, even though they have years together under their belts. A sort of rivalry is there that maybe the fly in the ointment for Neil.

It's always seemed that way to me too. Friends and coworkers but not really close. It seems like he's always been on the outside.

reminds me of a song I heard once