Jump to content

The tour Rush sounded the least good live....


fraroc
 Share

Recommended Posts

I thought it was a bit much for so many SnA songs in a row, but CA worked perfectly. Rush isn't like touring nostalgia acts that need to stick to the hits. They're aware that 90% of the audience knows the new stuff, and would rather hear that and deep cuts.
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I thought it was a bit much for so many SnA songs in a row, but CA worked perfectly. Rush isn't like touring nostalgia acts that need to stick to the hits. They're aware that 90% of the audience knows the new stuff, and would rather hear that and deep cuts.

 

I doubt it was as high as 90% wanting all that.

 

But yeah, Rush isn't (or wasn't) like a touring nostalgia act and we & Rush were all better for it.

 

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Much as I loved hearing the songs and the setlist, TM tour for me too. Maybe if they had used a different night for the live album/DVD I would feel differently, but man, that was rough. (that said, I don't remember the LA shows being rough).

 

i saw TM tour. it was fun to see MP in full but.........

 

Ged's voice was gone and there was a chunk in set 1 from Stick it Out to BU2B the crowd was dead. they couldn't care less about that chunk of songs.

 

most awful stretch of music they could have picked.

 

Mick

 

I remember that being a lull as well, Even though I dig most of those songs. Maybe if they'd been arranged differently in the set...like this instead?

 

“Stick It Out”

"Leave That Thing Alone"

"Freewill"

“Workin’ Them Angels”

"Marathon"

"BU2B"

“Faithless"

“Subdivisions”

 

i like that alot better. cause all the "new" songs in a row. Killed the high that the snags prior created. people were going to the merch stands, getting drinks. talking, lol. it was awful.

 

Mick

Same thing happened on the Snakes & Arrows tour. Six or seven new songs in a row was excruciating.

 

ETA: I checked, and it was five songs in a row. Nine new tracks total (three instrumentals)

 

Its only excrutiating if you dont like the album.

Not true. I like the album a lot. In fact, it's one that I listen to more often than most others. But at the two shows I attended, the life was sucked out of the arenas by the long string of SnA tracks.

That didn't hold a candle to the CA tour where they played practically the whole album in a row...9 songs of a 12 song album. Talk about sucking the life out of the crowd. I realize part of that had to do with the string section being a large part of the performance. And once they were out there and set up it was easier to keep them out there. But it was too much. Too much new, not enough what people came to see (yeah, that's my opinion). I remember when they finally got to the end of the CA stretch and went in to TSOR, the crowd went insane. Rightfully so.

I actually skipped the tour for that reason. I hadn't missed a tour since T4E, but had little interest in the CA setlist.

 

#NoTrueRushFanTM

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Much as I loved hearing the songs and the setlist, TM tour for me too. Maybe if they had used a different night for the live album/DVD I would feel differently, but man, that was rough. (that said, I don't remember the LA shows being rough).

 

i saw TM tour. it was fun to see MP in full but.........

 

Ged's voice was gone and there was a chunk in set 1 from Stick it Out to BU2B the crowd was dead. they couldn't care less about that chunk of songs.

 

most awful stretch of music they could have picked.

 

Mick

 

I remember that being a lull as well, Even though I dig most of those songs. Maybe if they'd been arranged differently in the set...like this instead?

 

“Stick It Out”

"Leave That Thing Alone"

"Freewill"

“Workin’ Them Angels”

"Marathon"

"BU2B"

“Faithless"

“Subdivisions”

 

i like that alot better. cause all the "new" songs in a row. Killed the high that the snags prior created. people were going to the merch stands, getting drinks. talking, lol. it was awful.

 

Mick

Same thing happened on the Snakes & Arrows tour. Six or seven new songs in a row was excruciating.

 

ETA: I checked, and it was five songs in a row. Nine new tracks total (three instrumentals)

 

Its only excrutiating if you dont like the album.

 

I like Snakes more than most on here. and that chunk of songs on the tour had even me checking my watch.

 

Mick

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I thought it was a bit much for so many SnA songs in a row, but CA worked perfectly. Rush isn't like touring nostalgia acts that need to stick to the hits. They're aware that 90% of the audience knows the new stuff, and would rather hear that and deep cuts.

I loved hearing the new stuff on the CA tour. As a matter of fact, my daughter's favorite part of the show was when they played The Garden.
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I thought it was a bit much for so many SnA songs in a row, but CA worked perfectly. Rush isn't like touring nostalgia acts that need to stick to the hits. They're aware that 90% of the audience knows the new stuff, and would rather hear that and deep cuts.

 

I doubt it was as high as 90% wanting all that.

 

But yeah, Rush isn't (or wasn't) like a touring nostalgia act and we & Rush were all better for it.

 

Sorry, but for me they've been a nostalgia act since Hold Your Fire......

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I thought it was a bit much for so many SnA songs in a row, but CA worked perfectly. Rush isn't like touring nostalgia acts that need to stick to the hits. They're aware that 90% of the audience knows the new stuff, and would rather hear that and deep cuts.

 

I doubt it was as high as 90% wanting all that.

 

But yeah, Rush isn't (or wasn't) like a touring nostalgia act and we & Rush were all better for it.

 

Sorry, but for me they've been a nostalgia act since Hold Your Fire......

 

To me, nostalgia acts play little to no new material. So if using that thought, it'd only possibly apply for R40

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I thought it was a bit much for so many SnA songs in a row, but CA worked perfectly. Rush isn't like touring nostalgia acts that need to stick to the hits. They're aware that 90% of the audience knows the new stuff, and would rather hear that and deep cuts.

I loved hearing the new stuff on the CA tour. As a matter of fact, my daughter's favorite part of the show was when they played The Garden.

Hearing the new stuff and playing almost the whole album in a row are two different things. I had no problem with the new stuff (at the time), but it was too much bunched all together. It would've been much more enjoyable to have the new stuff intermixed with the old. I don't know, all I can tell you is a large part of the audience in St. Louis sat through most of that chunk of the concert. That's what I mean by saying it sucked the life out of the crowd. Almost the entire second half of the show was taken up with CA material. Too much. And I love the Garden as much as the next person. But even that was at the end of a veeeerrry long set.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Time Machine (recording) is pretty weak. HYF tour was a really weak sound, which makes it all the worse that killer songs like Lock and Key, Prime Mover and Turn The Page never saw the light of day again. Same goes for p/g and the other 80s tours. I've never been fond of ESL either, but do dig the "Spirit of the Airwaves" bootleg from PeW tour in St Louis. In my top 3 live records of theirs (if you include unofficial of course)

 

 

Personally, I don't think Rush had a really good live sound between PeW through Test For Echo. T4E tour sounded pretty good, and then everything since Vapor Trails is killer. R40 and S&A are thee other two favorite live records in my top 3.

Edited by DistantEarlySignals
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I thought it was a bit much for so many SnA songs in a row, but CA worked perfectly. Rush isn't like touring nostalgia acts that need to stick to the hits. They're aware that 90% of the audience knows the new stuff, and would rather hear that and deep cuts.

I loved hearing the new stuff on the CA tour. As a matter of fact, my daughter's favorite part of the show was when they played The Garden.

Hearing the new stuff and playing almost the whole album in a row are two different things. I had no problem with the new stuff (at the time), but it was too much bunched all together. It would've been much more enjoyable to have the new stuff intermixed with the old. I don't know, all I can tell you is a large part of the audience in St. Louis sat through most of that chunk of the concert. That's what I mean by saying it sucked the life out of the crowd. Almost the entire second half of the show was taken up with CA material. Too much. And I love the Garden as much as the next person. But even that was at the end of a veeeerrry long set.

I'm sure the first 15 rows were rocking...while the rest of the venue checked their watches.
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

For me, I would say the Snake and Arrows tour. They slowed almost every song down to a snail's pace on this tour and there was just this general lack of energy on that tour in particular. That is why out of all the concert's I'll play on my R40 box set, Snakes and Arrows is the one I play the least often. Subdivisions and Between The Wheels were affected horribly by that slowdown. Thankfully from 2011 onward, they started playing at the right tempo and there was more energy on stage.

 

 

So anyway, which tour would you say that Rush sounded the least good on?

 

Depends on your definition of "sounded least good on." Rush has generally always sounded good on every tour, but performance wise I think their weakest given the performances and the set was the Presto tour (The mid-life crisis tour.)

 

Most of all except for the last three weeks of the the R40 tour wasn't all that great performance-wise either but that was due to complications resulting from the aging process which is really the first time that it's ever happened to Rush.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Rush has never had a "bad" tour IMO but I feel their performances on the Presto Tour was uninspired. The only real surprises/deep cuts were the excerpt of "Xanadu", "Mission", and "Manhattan Project", and the band's performances seemed to lack inspiration and energy, it seemed like they were tired and going through the motions.

 

Vocally i'd say Geddy was at his worst on the Vapor Trails Tour, I really don't like the pinched, nasal tone he used during that tour, sounds like he was imitating his '70s voice but failed.

 

I actually didn't like the Presto or RTB tour

 

Counterparts tour and particularly the TFE tour were MUCH better

 

Mick

 

The Bones shows were much better than the Presto show I saw. Even despite the lame as hell Xanaconductor.

 

There was way more

Energy and the setlist was mostly much better. Bootlegs confirm this. The TMT boots I have are sooooo much better than the officially released cd (as does CA). Sadly Geds voice...man. :(

 

Oddly enough, the first time I saw Rush (HYF tour) I thought they were too mechanical and "perfect", and much preferred the Presto/RTB shows especially for energy.

And yet, I listen to Show of Hands all the time, so what does that say?! LOL

 

I should pick up a couple of TMT and CA boots then... I can't listen to the live albums.

 

For me the energy comes back and just keeps getting better during the Euro-leg of the Roll The Bones Tour. Not quite sure what happened during that break, but it was palpable. Neil discovering Jazz might have helped.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

HYF tour for me, even though it was the first time I saw them and was wired to the moon with excitement. That Signature guitar and Wal bass sound was just wrong for the band in almost all of the material they played.

Ged's singing was also pretty ropey that night, I have seen him comment since that it was after that tour when he started to make a conscious effort to look after his voice.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

HYF tour for me, even though it was the first time I saw them and was wired to the moon with excitement. That Signature guitar and Wal bass sound was just wrong for the band in almost all of the material they played.

Ged's singing was also pretty ropey that night, I have seen him comment since that it was after that tour when he started to make a conscious effort to look after his voice.

 

The Wal had a very unique sound, there's no denying that...That's actually why I like that bass so much, it gave the older songs a different, more current (to that time period) sound.

 

Alex with the Jackson guitars looked a bit awkward though.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Call me crazy but I actually like the live HYF-RTB era truncated La Villa much better than the original and live renditions during that time frame. Especially the snappy sounding Wal bass which made that crazy bass solo in the middle stand out even more
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Call me crazy but I actually like the live HYF-RTB era truncated La Villa much better than the original and live renditions during that time frame. Especially the snappy sounding Wal bass which made that crazy bass solo in the middle stand out even more

 

People call me crazy all the time for liking the Presto tour version of Xanadu, but I've always said that it was the best example of why the Wal was one of the best basses that Geddy ever played. You hear EVERY note crystal clear, nothing is ever drowned out or muddy.

 

I really wish he would have broken out the Wal or even the Steinberger for R40 for the 80s songs as opposed to the Les Paul bass.

Edited by fraroc
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Wal era YYZ I also like better than the original Fender renditions

Well, you know, that was also before people started singing to it, so they had that going for it as well. :boo hiss:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

HYF tour for me, even though it was the first time I saw them and was wired to the moon with excitement. That Signature guitar and Wal bass sound was just wrong for the band in almost all of the material they played.

Ged's singing was also pretty ropey that night, I have seen him comment since that it was after that tour when he started to make a conscious effort to look after his voice.

 

The Wal had a very unique sound, there's no denying that...That's actually why I like that bass so much, it gave the older songs a different, more current (to that time period) sound.

 

Alex with the Jackson guitars looked a bit awkward though.

 

Interesting point. It's a sound on those songs you won't find anywhere else. There are some songs I don't think that sound works...Tom Sawyer being one. but it that sound might of been my favorite for Xanadu before the Counterparts Tour rolled around and crushed just about any version before or since.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Call me crazy but I actually like the live HYF-RTB era truncated La Villa much better than the original and live renditions during that time frame. Especially the snappy sounding Wal bass which made that crazy bass solo in the middle stand out even more

 

People call me crazy all the time for liking the Presto tour version of Xanadu, but I've always said that it was the best example of why the Wal was one of the best basses that Geddy ever played. You hear EVERY note crystal clear, nothing is ever drowned out or muddy.

 

I really wish he would have broken out the Wal or even the Steinberger for R40 for the 80s songs as opposed to the Les Paul bass.

 

That's certainly not the worst version I've ever heard.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...