Disco Posted May 4, 2005 Share Posted May 4, 2005 Now I know that all here have the Rush love, and my brothers and sisters, my heart normallyshares the love with you... But, in my non-Rush moments, maybe they are momoents of weaknees, I find myself exasperated by their lack of range. 30 odd years and the vast majority of their stuff sticks firmly in the category of bombastic rock - where, I ask, is the Jewish wedding waltz, the drinking song, the song sounds lke anguish, the pastoral acoustic song, the folk track, the jazz tune, the down and dirty song of lust and desire, the funk, the trance beats, the torch song, the stage tune swing? You get the picture... Every song for 30 years, except maybe Rivendell, has been based has guitar, bass and drums - sometimes with keyboards sometimes without. Why I ask myself in this foul mood of non-Rush love that engulfs me, do they think that EVERY track needs guitar? OK, their it is my dear fellow posters - I have broached the dark secret of my heart, let light in on my doubts. Perhaps you could help me restore my faith - help me get back on the Rush love path - and tell me why the Rush's output isn't an embarrassment of musical restriction.... Love to you all Disco Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GhostGirl Posted May 4, 2005 Share Posted May 4, 2005 I admit my heart longs for a Rush-style stage tune swing. I like 'em just like they are. I'm just silly that way. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tkotitan Posted May 4, 2005 Share Posted May 4, 2005 I think the answer to your question is because "that's not the way they are." They're a 3-piece rock band, that's just the way their built. On the subject, I will say that I am greatful that they have the courage to just be themselves no matter what anyone else thinks. They have evolved their sound constantly while maintaining stylistic and personal integrity. I can't think of one Rush album that could be called "Just another...<album name>" because they continuously evolve the sound. So who knows, you may one day get your wish, but I don't see them changing style as much as they will change substance. I garuntee the next album will not be another Vapor Trails, but it will still have the Rush name on it, because that's how creative intregrity works. Compare to another sucessful rock band like Metallica, who has changed their sound twice over a dozen albums and after each change, fans jump ship after each change, calling them names like "sellouts." Their last album St. Anger was a totally Rush-like move by reinventing their sound. The greatest thing about Rush is that they're on their own trip, and we are just along for the ride. It's often quite the opposite in the industry where the players begin to eat their own hype and end up being on a burnt-out catering tour. And when you go to see them, you go to see the master artists crafting master art, not for anything superficial. They greatly respect us as fans, but the music comes first. And that is the sign of all great art. It dares to challenge the heart, mind, and soul of those who encounter it, allowing some to grow and be inspired. So long as it does not lead into obscurity, there will always be a group of those inspired to share and support the wonder as long as we can. And if my copious schpeel doesn't help, go listen to Spirt of Radio and Limelight over and over again Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
invisibleairwaves Posted May 4, 2005 Share Posted May 4, 2005 Didn't you hear? They're making a hardcore rap album! http://www.therushforum.com/index.php?showtopic=5951&st=0 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
New World Kid Posted May 4, 2005 Share Posted May 4, 2005 I actually find Rush to have an extensive range. Although tis is insanely biasedan opinion, they have tried rap (Roll the Bones), a funk sound (Red Lenses), and so many other styles I can't think of... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Disco Posted May 4, 2005 Author Share Posted May 4, 2005 ...New World Kid, I not sure if referring me to the 'rap' in Roll the Bones is going to pull me back into the Rush-love Are you sure Red Lens is part of the mothership connection that is funk? And before anyone says it he Weapon is not a dance rhythm. L Disco But wouldn't Roll the Bones make a great swing stage tune - imagine the flight of white stairs, the lines of ladies with their feather boas. Maybe not... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
By-Tor & the Jazz Bass Posted May 4, 2005 Share Posted May 4, 2005 I love RUSH just the way they are. They have been going strong for 30+ years doing the music they want to play. Having to answer to no one. I would hate to see them turn into an Aerosmith or a Metallica. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
circumstantial tree Posted May 4, 2005 Share Posted May 4, 2005 QUOTE (tkotitan @ May 4 2005, 05:36 PM) They're a 3-piece rock band, that's just the way their built. One might even say they're "Built to Last" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
My_Shrimp_Cot Posted May 5, 2005 Share Posted May 5, 2005 Why didnt Charlie Parker play Polkas or Beethoven Swing? Why does every F'n Symphony need strings? HOW BORING! Why don't they just blow on moonshine jugs and scape across washboards? "The Brothers" do songs of lust well enough don't you think? Do you really want RUSH to be "all of music"? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Drumnut Posted May 5, 2005 Share Posted May 5, 2005 Where is the Rush Polka I ask you? Why must they skip over this fine genre of music? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
troutman Posted May 5, 2005 Share Posted May 5, 2005 QUOTE (tkotitan @ May 4 2005, 04:36 PM)I think the answer to your question is because "that's not the way they are." They're a 3-piece rock band, that's just the way their built. On the subject, I will say that I am greatful that they have the courage to just be themselves no matter what anyone else thinks. They have evolved their sound constantly while maintaining stylistic and personal integrity. I can't think of one Rush album that could be called "Just another...<album name>" because they continuously evolve the sound. So who knows, you may one day get your wish, but I don't see them changing style as much as they will change substance. I garuntee the next album will not be another Vapor Trails, but it will still have the Rush name on it, because that's how creative intregrity works. Compare to another sucessful rock band like Metallica, who has changed their sound twice over a dozen albums and after each change, fans jump ship after each change, calling them names like "sellouts." Their last album St. Anger was a totally Rush-like move by reinventing their sound. The greatest thing about Rush is that they're on their own trip, and we are just along for the ride. It's often quite the opposite in the industry where the players begin to eat their own hype and end up being on a burnt-out catering tour. And when you go to see them, you go to see the master artists crafting master art, not for anything superficial. They greatly respect us as fans, but the music comes first. And that is the sign of all great art. It dares to challenge the heart, mind, and soul of those who encounter it, allowing some to grow and be inspired. So long as it does not lead into obscurity, there will always be a group of those inspired to share and support the wonder as long as we can. And if my copious schpeel doesn't help, go listen to Spirt of Radio and Limelight over and over again Couldn't have said it any better Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
faultline Posted May 5, 2005 Share Posted May 5, 2005 my complete Rush collection was ripped off from me a couple of years ago. I have been slowly recollecting the collection...oh well, roll the bones! Last weekend I bought 'Rush" , from 1974, and "Hold your Fire" 1987. Take out Geddys voice, and never in a million years could you guess that this is indeed the same band. Even with Geddy singing, you still might not guess. Rush is not a cover band, I am trying to compare by example any rock band that has this versatility you speak of. ?????????????????????? Usually song writers will write songs in a style that they like, and are passionate about. If one writes songs in styles they are not passionat about, they may show that they are versatile, but they are crappy at it. And, no one is passionate about a bunch of different types of music. If Rush is a car, It cannot be both a mini-van and a roadster at the same time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rolinda Bonz Posted May 5, 2005 Share Posted May 5, 2005 QUOTE (Drumnut @ May 4 2005, 07:52 PM) Where is the Rush Polka I ask you? Why must they skip over this fine genre of music? You're awesome, Drumnut Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spirit of radio Posted May 5, 2005 Share Posted May 5, 2005 QUOTE (Disco @ May 4 2005, 04:15 PM) Now I know that all here have the Rush love, and my brothers and sisters, my heart normallyshares the love with you... But, in my non-Rush moments, maybe they are momoents of weaknees, I find myself exasperated by their lack of range. 30 odd years and the vast majority of their stuff sticks firmly in the category of bombastic rock - where, I ask, is the Jewish wedding waltz, the drinking song, the song sounds lke anguish, the pastoral acoustic song, the folk track, the jazz tune, the down and dirty song of lust and desire, the funk, the trance beats, the torch song, the stage tune swing? You get the picture... Every song for 30 years, except maybe Rivendell, has been based has guitar, bass and drums - sometimes with keyboards sometimes without. Why I ask myself in this foul mood of non-Rush love that engulfs me, do they think that EVERY track needs guitar? OK, their it is my dear fellow posters - I have broached the dark secret of my heart, let light in on my doubts. Perhaps you could help me restore my faith - help me get back on the Rush love path - and tell me why the Rush's output isn't an embarrassment of musical restriction.... Love to you all Disco Lack of range.... Embarrassment of musical restriction. You don't need us to put you back on the Rush love path, you need Liberace to rise from the grave and grab your nuts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sullysue Posted May 5, 2005 Share Posted May 5, 2005 Methinks, my Disco friend, you have been "called out." I think a lot of us, deep down, have doubted our feelings for this band from time to time. For me, I had listened to them over and over again so many times that I did crave a newness from them. Then low and behold, they delivered for me with Vapor Trails. Still, although I stepped away for a while to seek out new genres and broaden my musical tastes, I still keep coming back to the one band that has consisently held my interest since I was 12. There is a heartfelt honesty to their music. The lyrics never insult one's intelligence, and the musicianship always reflects their dedication to their own idea of what is true to them. That's why we respect them and why we are loyal, because they are loyal not to the critics or those who've labeled them "bombastic" (what an overused cliche), but to what music is to them. They continue to evolve and and invite whomever is willing to listen to that evolution to do so. Not one of us would be judgemental for you asking why they don't make some huge monumental change in their style. The point is that Rush is Rush, just as the Beatles were the Beatles, or U2 is U2. That said...... F***in' , man! YEA!!!!!!!!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pratt Boy Posted May 5, 2005 Share Posted May 5, 2005 Waiting for the band's new direction...... Country and Western. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sullysue Posted May 5, 2005 Share Posted May 5, 2005 QUOTE (Pratt Boy @ May 5 2005, 08:30 AM) Waiting for the band's new direction...... Country and Western. Being a fellow Texan who I'm sure is also sick of the sh** kickers who surround us, please join me in a big hearty... BLLLLAAAAACCCCCKKKKKK!!!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rickyrob Posted May 5, 2005 Share Posted May 5, 2005 If their music WAS all the same, I'd have given up on them years ago. One of the things I do like about them is the fact that they produce something different every time, whilst not being behind the times. Compare these albums and you will see totally different musical themes throughout the years of evolution (I've deliberately taken three from each 'era'): Caress of Steel Farewell to Kings Hemispheres Moving Pictures Grace Under Pressure Hold Your Fire Counterparts Test for Echo Vapour Trails They are a Rock band, not anything else. I like the way they have had the bottle to insert snippets from other genres, but without making it sound tacky or stupid. Its as though they are acknowledging the fact that there are different genres of music about, whilst not detracting from their hard rock roots. Keep rockin' guys, and don't ever try to be somethin' you aint! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slaine mac Roth Posted May 5, 2005 Share Posted May 5, 2005 Disco, I've read your post half-a-dozen times and really can't see what point you're trying to make. Am I being incredibly dense here or are you trying to dazzle us with your gift for incomprehensible satire? First of all you criticize them for playing rock music. Erm, excuse me but Rush have always been a ROCK band and, I think it is likely, that they always will be. As for you question: QUOTE where, I ask, is the Jewish wedding waltz, the drinking song, the song sounds lke anguish, the pastoral acoustic song, the folk track, the jazz tune, the down and dirty song of lust and desire, the funk, the trance beats, the torch song, the stage tune swing? the answer is, quite probably, they don't want to do anything like that. As for moving into swing territory, I don't think that Rush could pull that off as there is no way that they could sound so smug and self-satisfied as the majority of swing performers do. As for your next question: QUOTE Every song for 30 years, except maybe Rivendell, has been based has guitar, bass and drums - sometimes with keyboards sometimes without. Why I ask myself in this foul mood of non-Rush love that engulfs me, do they think that EVERY track needs guitar? Erm, one of the members of Rush is called Alex Lifeson. Now, the particular individual, Alex Lifeson, plays the guitar, that's why he's called the guitarist. He doesn't play tuba, or sitar, or bongos, or violin, or spoons, or washboard - he plays guitar. Now, I don't know about you, but doing a song without one of the members doesn't really make sense (OK, OK, I know that Neil didn't play on Rivendell but, as the missus pointed out to me, its easier to omit drums/percussion from a piece than it is the primary melodic instrument.) As for your comments about Rush being 'an embarrasment of musical restriction', that is like criticising JRR Tolkien for only writing great fantasy fiction. Incidentally, in previous posts, you have waxed lyrical over the abilities of Gershwin and Berlin - excuse me, but have I , somehow, overlooked their critically acclaimed Thrash Metal period? edited because I fried my brain Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sullysue Posted May 5, 2005 Share Posted May 5, 2005 Good job, Slaine. But, are you sure Alex doesn't play the washboard? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Snowdog Posted May 5, 2005 Share Posted May 5, 2005 When the hell is Rush going to release that CD of Gregorian chanting??? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Indica Posted May 5, 2005 Share Posted May 5, 2005 If you was talking about AC-DC then I would understand............ I like the violin that is added in "losing it"..... It's "different" How many rock bands have played for years and never had a violin in any of their songs? lol............ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sullysue Posted May 5, 2005 Share Posted May 5, 2005 QUOTE (Snowdog @ May 5 2005, 02:14 PM) When the hell is Rush going to release that CD of Gregorian chanting??? I think Mr. Peart is still getting voice training for that. Might be a while..... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chasartymac Posted May 5, 2005 Share Posted May 5, 2005 Ahh nuts.. I was looking forward to the Rush Himalayan bell and pipe ensemble.http://img117.exs.cx/img117/9585/q9crolleyes.gif Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pratt Boy Posted May 5, 2005 Share Posted May 5, 2005 I still think the Rush rap album would be best. That would be cool. Watch out P-Diddy, Snoop Dog, Eminem, etc...... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.