REM and Rush - A Comparison

[madra sneachta]

Last Friday night, I saw REM live in Belfast's Odyssey Arena, my first arena gig since Rush in Birmingham last September. The contrast between the two in terms of setlist makes for an interesting comparison.

 

Last year for R30, Rush stuck with the same setlist for the entire tour with no variation. REM (on their unofficial 25th anniversary tour) are rotating approximately seven songs nightly, and most nights pull something out of the bag that they haven't played for ages.

 

Before Friday night, I'd looked at a few setlists from previous gigs, and the variation was clear. In London the previous week, they played "Swan Swan H" from Life's Rich Pageant for only the second time ever. This is the equivalent of Rush playing "Twilight Zone" or "Entre Nous" on a whim. In Belfast, REM played "So. Central Rain" from Reckoning. The following night in Dublin, they played "Seven Chinese Brothers" from the same era, the first time I've seen that mentioned on any playlist. In Belgrade, they played "Radio Free Europe" for the first time in years in honour of B-92, the radio station that kept broadcasting during the war that toppled Slobadon Milosivic.

 

Driving to Belfast in the car, I commented to a friend who came with me that my favourite REM song is "Exhuming Mc Carthy" from Document, but they wouldn't play it. They didn't, but they did in Dublin the following night, again, first time I've seen it mentioned this tour. On the other hand, we got "Country Feedback" and "Wake Up Bomb" in Belfast.

 

And now, the icing on the cake. One of the best known songs ever to come out of Northern Ireland is "Teenage Kicks" by the Undertones. When Stipe was introducing the band on Friday, Scott Mc Caughey, the second guitarist who tours with them played the riff, the crowd went nuts, and Stipe calls out "Do you know it?". When the affirmative roar died down, Stipe turns to the band, shouts "OK, play it", and they did, crowd singing the verses, Stipe joining in on the chorus.

 

Can you imagine that happening at a Rush gig?.

 

Before I go any further, I want to make one thing perfectly clear. I'd take one Rush gig over five REM gigs, and if I have to choose one or the other, there's no doubt what my choice would be.

 

The question that jumps to my mind is "Are Rush geared too much towards perfectionism in a live setting?". I know there are complex lighting and video arrangements, but REM had them too, although their's weren't as intricate. I also acknowledge that Rush's musical arrangements and instrumentation are also much more complex than those of REM, but has Rush swung too far to the other side?.

 

I don't know the answer, but I do know that there were personal moments at the gig in Belfast that (Alex's rant aside) were not present in Birmingham. Personally, I'd be happy to see Rush sacrifice some musical perfection in a live setting to do something different at each gig, but are the two bands so seperate and distinct that the comparison is invalid?.

 

I'm interested in what you think........

[DoubleAgent420]

Huh?

[yyz]

?????????????????

[Sweetmiracle]

QUOTE (madra sneachta @ Feb 27 2005, 03:51 PM)

I'm interested in what you think........

 

 

Rush seem to prefer more structure in their shows. It would be fun, though, to see them just jam and play on....Could be so exciting!

 

In the end, though, Rush decides what they're happy with and presents it. We take it or leave it.

 

I wonder if the guys just feel uncomfortable in a more casual setting?

 

Very well-written post by the way...

[PuppetKing2112]

I would like to see Rush mix it up a littel bit live...stop with all the triggered synths, maybe play stripped down versioins of the songs, which would not only osund cool but also give them room to mess around a little bit.

 

Also I'd take a varied setlist over tons of pyro 8 days a week.

[RushGuru]

I understand. I think it would be great if Rush rotated some songs during their tours. It would definetly be harder for them though. If Alex started fooling around with the Twilight Zone riff or Circumstances riff or something like that in between songs and the crowd went crazy, I dont think they could play either one of those songs without practicing together first. So I guess the only way that they would be able to alternate songs would be creating a basic setlist structure with all the standards and favorites, and then making a list of songs that they could throw in if they felt like it. It would mean more time practicing though.

[Sweetmiracle]

They seem to be such perfectionists, so the difference is mainly personality...

[NeilPeartFan2112]

I think they should play a bit more of their older stuff from Fly By Night and Caress. Bastille Day, The Necromancer, Beneath, Between and Behind, In the End. So many good songs on those albums. I agree with Puppetkings "mixing" idea.

[My_Shrimp_Cot]

Rush are musicians not performers - if that makes any sense.

 

Also Stipe is the leader of REM and can go in any direction he pleases with the rest of them "following along". RUSH is more of a collective. More of an "Orchestra".

 

With Rush, what you lose in "quaintness" you gain in brilliance.

[Slaine mac Roth]

The same set list/mix and match debate has been going on for a while now and, too be honest, I can't decide which position I prefer.

 

Truth be told, in my opinion, the only people who really gain anything from the mix and match idea are the one's who can afford to attend multiple shows. For those who can only afford the one, I don't think it really matters.

 

True, switching numbers can keep things fresh for the band and, especially on a long tour, can stop the whole thing becomming stale. However, and, judging by some people's reactions to the choice of songs, this can be a big however, the mix and match approach can cause enormous disapointment to those only attending the one show if their favourite song was played the night before they attended but isn't played the night they've got tickets for.

 

I think the Rush approach is fairer on us cash strapped buggers who can only afford one ticket. We know that there wouldn't havebeen a song we'd prefer to hear if we'd decided to go on a different date.

[anagramking]

Rush vs. REM is apples to oranges. Rush has a lot more they have to do than most bands. There are a lot of triggers and midi sequences that they have to plan ahead of time, as mentioned before. I don't think "stripped down" is what they'd want to do. And who is the lucky town that gets to hear Camera Eye, anyway?

 

Compare them to a band like Emerson Lake and Palmer. If ELP toured again, would they rotate all those epics out each night? One night Tarkus, the next night Pictures at an Exhibition? And did you hear they trotted out Pirates in New York? Not a chance they would tour that way. There's a lot of work that goes into those songs, and the amount of practice is probably pretty grueling. I'm sure Rush's practice sessions are pretty grueling as well.

 

[Singularity]

I can't help but think, If Rush had "mixed it up," in their earlier days, that there's the chance they wouldn't be around, today. It may have caused too much in-fighting due to their professional tenets.

 

I would LOVE to see them play something unexpected, but regardless, their formula works for them....so it works for me.

 

They could up and fart into the mics and I'd be impressed.

[neilpeart_gal]

I agree that Rush should have mixed up the set list for the R30 tour. However, that's the only thing I can give REM 'kudos' for doing. I've never gotten Stipe's deal. Whiny whiny whiny.

 

And note to their drummer : there are supposed to be TWO EYEBROWS!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[Schro]

First and foremost - great post Madra!

 

I'm a very casual REM fan - like a few of their songs but if I never see them in concert my life will still be complete.

 

As to your inquiry, I think it's nice when bands switch songs in and out here and there. But I don't know any band (perhaps REM is the exception here) that has a decent catalog that could bust out any and every song they've ever done on any given night.

 

I think the worst nightmare of any band is the "train wreck" (just learned that term last night reading "Travelling Music" - in case you don't know it's when the band gets out of sync and a song goes completely wrong)

 

All bands are sensitive to this, but I think Rush is perhaps moreso than most. Which they should be. They want to give their fans a good show. What is a good show? Fair question. But I think Rush defines a good show as one where they came off well. Not that every note is the same, but that the fans can tell that they "did their homework", and didn't just kick off the tour without any preperation.

 

Maybe I'm wrong, but I kinda doubt REM didn't practice all those songs they are switching out before the tour. It could be they're that good, but I doubt it. Playing a song you haven't practiced pre-tour seems tantamount to musical suicide. More likely they agreed on a master list and practiced those, knowing not every one would be played each night. And I would even bet the "Teenage Kicks" they appeared to trot out on the fly was something they planned ahead of time, knowing it was popular where they were playing that night (Northern Ireland).

 

Could Rush be more personal? Sure, you bet. There's different ways to do that, but I think it's certainly true that Rush has always struggled in this area. I give them credit, however, as recently I think they made great strides in this area even if they're not at the level of some other bands - in particular their concerted effort to get Geddy out from behind the keyboards on most songs, and bringing Alex into the fray during La Villa are touches I'm sure every Rush fan really appreciates.

 

Or maybe I'm completely wrong and at our next concert we'll hear this:

 

Ged.: Thank you, thank you very much.

(Alex and Neil smiling)

Ged.: You guys have been great, but I think it's time we teach you some Lessons! Anybody remember this song?

(crowd roars with approval)

 

(Alex and Neil look at each other in disbelief)

Neil: What the hell is he thinking?

Alex: I don't know man, I think he's gone nuts!

Ged.: Alright, well I'll take that as a "yes"!

(crowd goes wild)

 

(meanwhile, backstage)

Guitar Tech.: Alex - are you guys really going to play Lessons?

Alex: I.. I guess so. Cripes! I don't know!

Guitar Tech.: Well you need the doubleneck for that, right? Doesn't that start acoustic?

Alex: Right, sure - I'll take it!

Guitar Tech.: Well we have a small problem with its wherabouts.

Alex: Whereabouts? Whaddya mean? Where is it?

Guitar Tech.: It's in the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame in Cleveland.

Alex: WHAT?!

Guitar Tech.: How bout we give you the Les Paul? I'm sure you'll make it work..

 

 

(back to the stage)

Ged.: (to Alex and Neil) I know this isn't on the setlist, but let's just have fun with it.

Alex: Are you crazy? I don't even know what key it starts in!

Neil: What's the time signiture?

Ged.: Ok guys, you remember this one, right? Let's give it to them!

(Alex and Neil both give throat-slash signal. Ged seems to ignore it)

Ged.: Here we go! 1..2..3..4..

[DoubleAgent420]

[Steel Rat]

Agreed

[New World Kid]

QUOTE (NeilPeartFan2112 @ Feb 27 2005, 06:02 PM)

I think they should play a bit more of their older stuff from Fly By Night and Caress. Bastille Day, The Necromancer, Beneath, Between and Behind, In the End. So many good songs on those albums. I agree with Puppetkings "mixing" idea.

playing older songs would absolutly kill Geddy's voice over a tour. I think thats why they don't play them...

 

And no, I hate it when a band changes a song dramatically when played live. It isn't the same song. Look, if I wanted to hear the less technical version of the songs I would listen to cover bands. I'm there for that music.

 

*/rant*

[thetrees]

im not too sure...but REM is a great band though!