Jump to content

Neil a phony??


nicky6
 Share

Recommended Posts

Yuck. Rush and politics. All this because of a Peart sound byte?

 

Blaggh.

 

Have you read the lyrics to their songs at all?

 

I remember a bass teacher of mine in the early 80s asking, when he was teaching me to pick up Free Will by ear, "do these guys write any songs about chicks?" They really don't, other than the debut. You can't have it both ways. Either their lyrics are thought provoking, and thus discussion worthy, or they're not. I love Roth era Van Halen. But I'm guessing a fan site of theirs wouldn't need a SOCN.

 

You'd be surprised, then. Nearly any active rock message board has a politico forum.

 

I actually have a theory about lyrics. They really don't matter. Whether it's Van Halen, Rush, Maiden, Genesis, Pete Gabriel, AC/DC, the Beatles, the Doors, it really doesn't matter. Sure, the lyrics are great for diehard fans to absorb and analyze and reflect upon.

 

But the vox are most important in the context of how they mesh with the instrumentation. The harmonies and the melodies are what counts with the vox, not exactly what they're saying. Hell, when I first started seeing Rush eons ago, before I knew any of the lyrics they'd put out to date, I didn't WTF Geddy was singing about...or David lee Roth...or Bon Scott. Sometimes it's friggin' hard to tell wtf they're saying, LOL. There are STILL VH diehards who debate exactly WTF Dave is saying in certain lines in Everybody Wants Some, LOL.

 

Point being...I don't really care what they're singing about. As long as the vox flow with the instruments, they could be singing about androgynous octopi for all I care. :)

 

That's why it's more important that Jim Morrison hits the right notes than it is for him to tell me about the decline of western civilization. Though the latter obviously has its place. :)

 

I actually agree with you in that I don't necessarily want a musician to offer me his or her views on societal issues, particularly if I get the sense that he or she doesn't really have a good understanding of them. And everyone is free to enjoy music for whatever reason they like, obviously. However, if you don't care at all what the lyrics of a song are about I actually feel sorry for you. I don't mean that in a smart @ss way. I mean that for me, some songs, often songs about love, can really capture the way you feel perfectly. Paul McCartney's Maybe I'm Amazed reminds me of my wife. The first time I heard Halo Effect, I immediately thought of a girl I dated off and on in college for two years.

 

And I suspect Peart would be saddened to hear that a fan thinks that, other than his amazing drumming, he contributes nothing of lasting impact to any of the band's songs. But to each his own :cheers:

 

I never said Peart contributes nothing of lasting impact outside of the drums. :)

 

But the method and delivery of the way a singer sings, particularly live, is far more important than the specific context of the lyrics.

 

My own emotions are provoked by the flow and synchronicity of a song more than its message. The message is secondary. The immersion within a perfectly cohesive beautiful moment of music (vocal and instrumental harmonies melding and blending together) is a far bigger flashpoint than the words.

 

Words, after all, can be read. Songs must be heard.

 

For me, lyrics rarely take away from a song. But good ones can greatly increase my appreciation for a song. Rush means so much to me not just because of their music, but because the lyrics are so powerful. It it weren't for the lyrics, I doubt that I would have ever come around to appreciating the synth period. And while I like some Bob Dylan songs, if it weren't for the lyrics I wouldn't be half as interested in him as I am.

 

I agree with this. I love the Van Hagar era of Van Halen (not as much as the Roth era though) but Sammy's lyrics are cringe worthy if you read them. But if you're just singing about getting laid, you don't need too much sophistication.

 

Roth's lyrics weren't any better. Van Halen songs are all about sex, drugs, rock and roll. :)

 

They both had moments of lucidity in their songwriting (see Push Comes to Shove or Don't Tell Me What Love Can Do), but ya don't listen to Van Halen for the lyrics, LOL.

 

Like I said....vox are about harmony and melody, not message. If there IS a message, great, that's just a bonus.

 

Here's an easier way to put it.

 

At a show, you're hardly gonna notice if Geddy messes up the exact phrasing of a lyric or a passage, or perhaps even skip over an entire stanza.

 

But you're sure as hell gonna notice when he hits a flat note.

 

It's that simple. :)

 

Roth is a lot smarter than Hagar. His lyrics were more sly. He's Bon Scott to Hagar's Brian Johnson.

You've obviously never heard Poundcake.

 

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yuck. Rush and politics. All this because of a Peart sound byte?

 

Blaggh.

 

Have you read the lyrics to their songs at all?

 

I remember a bass teacher of mine in the early 80s asking, when he was teaching me to pick up Free Will by ear, "do these guys write any songs about chicks?" They really don't, other than the debut. You can't have it both ways. Either their lyrics are thought provoking, and thus discussion worthy, or they're not. I love Roth era Van Halen. But I'm guessing a fan site of theirs wouldn't need a SOCN.

 

You'd be surprised, then. Nearly any active rock message board has a politico forum.

 

I actually have a theory about lyrics. They really don't matter. Whether it's Van Halen, Rush, Maiden, Genesis, Pete Gabriel, AC/DC, the Beatles, the Doors, it really doesn't matter. Sure, the lyrics are great for diehard fans to absorb and analyze and reflect upon.

 

But the vox are most important in the context of how they mesh with the instrumentation. The harmonies and the melodies are what counts with the vox, not exactly what they're saying. Hell, when I first started seeing Rush eons ago, before I knew any of the lyrics they'd put out to date, I didn't WTF Geddy was singing about...or David lee Roth...or Bon Scott. Sometimes it's friggin' hard to tell wtf they're saying, LOL. There are STILL VH diehards who debate exactly WTF Dave is saying in certain lines in Everybody Wants Some, LOL.

 

Point being...I don't really care what they're singing about. As long as the vox flow with the instruments, they could be singing about androgynous octopi for all I care. :)

 

That's why it's more important that Jim Morrison hits the right notes than it is for him to tell me about the decline of western civilization. Though the latter obviously has its place. :)

 

I actually agree with you in that I don't necessarily want a musician to offer me his or her views on societal issues, particularly if I get the sense that he or she doesn't really have a good understanding of them. And everyone is free to enjoy music for whatever reason they like, obviously. However, if you don't care at all what the lyrics of a song are about I actually feel sorry for you. I don't mean that in a smart @ss way. I mean that for me, some songs, often songs about love, can really capture the way you feel perfectly. Paul McCartney's Maybe I'm Amazed reminds me of my wife. The first time I heard Halo Effect, I immediately thought of a girl I dated off and on in college for two years.

 

And I suspect Peart would be saddened to hear that a fan thinks that, other than his amazing drumming, he contributes nothing of lasting impact to any of the band's songs. But to each his own :cheers:

 

I never said Peart contributes nothing of lasting impact outside of the drums. :)

 

But the method and delivery of the way a singer sings, particularly live, is far more important than the specific context of the lyrics.

 

My own emotions are provoked by the flow and synchronicity of a song more than its message. The message is secondary. The immersion within a perfectly cohesive beautiful moment of music (vocal and instrumental harmonies melding and blending together) is a far bigger flashpoint than the words.

 

Words, after all, can be read. Songs must be heard.

 

For me, lyrics rarely take away from a song. But good ones can greatly increase my appreciation for a song. Rush means so much to me not just because of their music, but because the lyrics are so powerful. It it weren't for the lyrics, I doubt that I would have ever come around to appreciating the synth period. And while I like some Bob Dylan songs, if it weren't for the lyrics I wouldn't be half as interested in him as I am.

 

I agree with this. I love the Van Hagar era of Van Halen (not as much as the Roth era though) but Sammy's lyrics are cringe worthy if you read them. But if you're just singing about getting laid, you don't need too much sophistication.

 

Roth's lyrics weren't any better. Van Halen songs are all about sex, drugs, rock and roll. :)

 

They both had moments of lucidity in their songwriting (see Push Comes to Shove or Don't Tell Me What Love Can Do), but ya don't listen to Van Halen for the lyrics, LOL.

 

Like I said....vox are about harmony and melody, not message. If there IS a message, great, that's just a bonus.

 

Here's an easier way to put it.

 

At a show, you're hardly gonna notice if Geddy messes up the exact phrasing of a lyric or a passage, or perhaps even skip over an entire stanza.

 

But you're sure as hell gonna notice when he hits a flat note.

 

It's that simple. :)

 

Roth is a lot smarter than Hagar. His lyrics were more sly. He's Bon Scott to Hagar's Brian Johnson.

You've obviously never heard Poundcake.

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GjLAaE07SW8

 

Oh yeah! :haz:

 

Sammy is the real deal. David well... :LOL:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yuck. Rush and politics. All this because of a Peart sound byte?

 

Blaggh.

 

Have you read the lyrics to their songs at all?

 

I remember a bass teacher of mine in the early 80s asking, when he was teaching me to pick up Free Will by ear, "do these guys write any songs about chicks?" They really don't, other than the debut. You can't have it both ways. Either their lyrics are thought provoking, and thus discussion worthy, or they're not. I love Roth era Van Halen. But I'm guessing a fan site of theirs wouldn't need a SOCN.

 

You'd be surprised, then. Nearly any active rock message board has a politico forum.

 

I actually have a theory about lyrics. They really don't matter. Whether it's Van Halen, Rush, Maiden, Genesis, Pete Gabriel, AC/DC, the Beatles, the Doors, it really doesn't matter. Sure, the lyrics are great for diehard fans to absorb and analyze and reflect upon.

 

But the vox are most important in the context of how they mesh with the instrumentation. The harmonies and the melodies are what counts with the vox, not exactly what they're saying. Hell, when I first started seeing Rush eons ago, before I knew any of the lyrics they'd put out to date, I didn't WTF Geddy was singing about...or David lee Roth...or Bon Scott. Sometimes it's friggin' hard to tell wtf they're saying, LOL. There are STILL VH diehards who debate exactly WTF Dave is saying in certain lines in Everybody Wants Some, LOL.

 

Point being...I don't really care what they're singing about. As long as the vox flow with the instruments, they could be singing about androgynous octopi for all I care. :)

 

That's why it's more important that Jim Morrison hits the right notes than it is for him to tell me about the decline of western civilization. Though the latter obviously has its place. :)

 

I actually agree with you in that I don't necessarily want a musician to offer me his or her views on societal issues, particularly if I get the sense that he or she doesn't really have a good understanding of them. And everyone is free to enjoy music for whatever reason they like, obviously. However, if you don't care at all what the lyrics of a song are about I actually feel sorry for you. I don't mean that in a smart @ss way. I mean that for me, some songs, often songs about love, can really capture the way you feel perfectly. Paul McCartney's Maybe I'm Amazed reminds me of my wife. The first time I heard Halo Effect, I immediately thought of a girl I dated off and on in college for two years.

 

And I suspect Peart would be saddened to hear that a fan thinks that, other than his amazing drumming, he contributes nothing of lasting impact to any of the band's songs. But to each his own :cheers:

 

I never said Peart contributes nothing of lasting impact outside of the drums. :)

 

But the method and delivery of the way a singer sings, particularly live, is far more important than the specific context of the lyrics.

 

My own emotions are provoked by the flow and synchronicity of a song more than its message. The message is secondary. The immersion within a perfectly cohesive beautiful moment of music (vocal and instrumental harmonies melding and blending together) is a far bigger flashpoint than the words.

 

Words, after all, can be read. Songs must be heard.

 

For me, lyrics rarely take away from a song. But good ones can greatly increase my appreciation for a song. Rush means so much to me not just because of their music, but because the lyrics are so powerful. It it weren't for the lyrics, I doubt that I would have ever come around to appreciating the synth period. And while I like some Bob Dylan songs, if it weren't for the lyrics I wouldn't be half as interested in him as I am.

 

I agree with this. I love the Van Hagar era of Van Halen (not as much as the Roth era though) but Sammy's lyrics are cringe worthy if you read them. But if you're just singing about getting laid, you don't need too much sophistication.

 

Roth's lyrics weren't any better. Van Halen songs are all about sex, drugs, rock and roll. :)

 

They both had moments of lucidity in their songwriting (see Push Comes to Shove or Don't Tell Me What Love Can Do), but ya don't listen to Van Halen for the lyrics, LOL.

 

Like I said....vox are about harmony and melody, not message. If there IS a message, great, that's just a bonus.

 

Here's an easier way to put it.

 

At a show, you're hardly gonna notice if Geddy messes up the exact phrasing of a lyric or a passage, or perhaps even skip over an entire stanza.

 

But you're sure as hell gonna notice when he hits a flat note.

 

It's that simple. :)

 

Roth is a lot smarter than Hagar. His lyrics were more sly. He's Bon Scott to Hagar's Brian Johnson.

 

LOL. I don't agree. His lyrics were no more or less playground than Sam's. See 'Jump' or "Just Like Paradise" for further proof. But Dave likes to spew out philosophic platitudes with an ADD personality, and unfortunately that just makes him seem like an attention whore more than a thinker.

 

I actually dunno what 'sly' lyrics are. It's fine if you prefer Dave over Sam. A lotta people do. Myself, I like them both. But I don't credit either one with superior songwriting. Sam's the better singer, Dave's the better showman. It's all good as long as Ed's playing the guitar and Mike's on the bass. The VH world is currently blowin' up with Ed's new interview with Billboard. He said some dumb ass things in there, LOL.

 

And I don't think AC/DC ever made a finer record than Back in Black. So I dig Brian Johnson. But there's no denying Bon's impact either.

Edited by Bard
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yuck. Rush and politics. All this because of a Peart sound byte?

 

Blaggh.

 

Have you read the lyrics to their songs at all?

 

I remember a bass teacher of mine in the early 80s asking, when he was teaching me to pick up Free Will by ear, "do these guys write any songs about chicks?" They really don't, other than the debut. You can't have it both ways. Either their lyrics are thought provoking, and thus discussion worthy, or they're not. I love Roth era Van Halen. But I'm guessing a fan site of theirs wouldn't need a SOCN.

 

You'd be surprised, then. Nearly any active rock message board has a politico forum.

 

I actually have a theory about lyrics. They really don't matter. Whether it's Van Halen, Rush, Maiden, Genesis, Pete Gabriel, AC/DC, the Beatles, the Doors, it really doesn't matter. Sure, the lyrics are great for diehard fans to absorb and analyze and reflect upon.

 

But the vox are most important in the context of how they mesh with the instrumentation. The harmonies and the melodies are what counts with the vox, not exactly what they're saying. Hell, when I first started seeing Rush eons ago, before I knew any of the lyrics they'd put out to date, I didn't WTF Geddy was singing about...or David lee Roth...or Bon Scott. Sometimes it's friggin' hard to tell wtf they're saying, LOL. There are STILL VH diehards who debate exactly WTF Dave is saying in certain lines in Everybody Wants Some, LOL.

 

Point being...I don't really care what they're singing about. As long as the vox flow with the instruments, they could be singing about androgynous octopi for all I care. :)

 

That's why it's more important that Jim Morrison hits the right notes than it is for him to tell me about the decline of western civilization. Though the latter obviously has its place. :)

 

I actually agree with you in that I don't necessarily want a musician to offer me his or her views on societal issues, particularly if I get the sense that he or she doesn't really have a good understanding of them. And everyone is free to enjoy music for whatever reason they like, obviously. However, if you don't care at all what the lyrics of a song are about I actually feel sorry for you. I don't mean that in a smart @ss way. I mean that for me, some songs, often songs about love, can really capture the way you feel perfectly. Paul McCartney's Maybe I'm Amazed reminds me of my wife. The first time I heard Halo Effect, I immediately thought of a girl I dated off and on in college for two years.

 

And I suspect Peart would be saddened to hear that a fan thinks that, other than his amazing drumming, he contributes nothing of lasting impact to any of the band's songs. But to each his own :cheers:

 

I never said Peart contributes nothing of lasting impact outside of the drums. :)

 

But the method and delivery of the way a singer sings, particularly live, is far more important than the specific context of the lyrics.

 

My own emotions are provoked by the flow and synchronicity of a song more than its message. The message is secondary. The immersion within a perfectly cohesive beautiful moment of music (vocal and instrumental harmonies melding and blending together) is a far bigger flashpoint than the words.

 

Words, after all, can be read. Songs must be heard.

 

For me, lyrics rarely take away from a song. But good ones can greatly increase my appreciation for a song. Rush means so much to me not just because of their music, but because the lyrics are so powerful. It it weren't for the lyrics, I doubt that I would have ever come around to appreciating the synth period. And while I like some Bob Dylan songs, if it weren't for the lyrics I wouldn't be half as interested in him as I am.

 

I agree with this. I love the Van Hagar era of Van Halen (not as much as the Roth era though) but Sammy's lyrics are cringe worthy if you read them. But if you're just singing about getting laid, you don't need too much sophistication.

 

Roth's lyrics weren't any better. Van Halen songs are all about sex, drugs, rock and roll. :)

 

They both had moments of lucidity in their songwriting (see Push Comes to Shove or Don't Tell Me What Love Can Do), but ya don't listen to Van Halen for the lyrics, LOL.

 

Like I said....vox are about harmony and melody, not message. If there IS a message, great, that's just a bonus.

 

Here's an easier way to put it.

 

At a show, you're hardly gonna notice if Geddy messes up the exact phrasing of a lyric or a passage, or perhaps even skip over an entire stanza.

 

But you're sure as hell gonna notice when he hits a flat note.

 

It's that simple. :)

 

Roth is a lot smarter than Hagar. His lyrics were more sly. He's Bon Scott to Hagar's Brian Johnson.

You've obviously never heard Poundcake.

 

 

I was actually thinking of Poundcake. Or Black and Blue. Or In and Out.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yuck. Rush and politics. All this because of a Peart sound byte?

 

Blaggh.

 

Have you read the lyrics to their songs at all?

 

I remember a bass teacher of mine in the early 80s asking, when he was teaching me to pick up Free Will by ear, "do these guys write any songs about chicks?" They really don't, other than the debut. You can't have it both ways. Either their lyrics are thought provoking, and thus discussion worthy, or they're not. I love Roth era Van Halen. But I'm guessing a fan site of theirs wouldn't need a SOCN.

 

You'd be surprised, then. Nearly any active rock message board has a politico forum.

 

I actually have a theory about lyrics. They really don't matter. Whether it's Van Halen, Rush, Maiden, Genesis, Pete Gabriel, AC/DC, the Beatles, the Doors, it really doesn't matter. Sure, the lyrics are great for diehard fans to absorb and analyze and reflect upon.

 

But the vox are most important in the context of how they mesh with the instrumentation. The harmonies and the melodies are what counts with the vox, not exactly what they're saying. Hell, when I first started seeing Rush eons ago, before I knew any of the lyrics they'd put out to date, I didn't WTF Geddy was singing about...or David lee Roth...or Bon Scott. Sometimes it's friggin' hard to tell wtf they're saying, LOL. There are STILL VH diehards who debate exactly WTF Dave is saying in certain lines in Everybody Wants Some, LOL.

 

Point being...I don't really care what they're singing about. As long as the vox flow with the instruments, they could be singing about androgynous octopi for all I care. :)

 

That's why it's more important that Jim Morrison hits the right notes than it is for him to tell me about the decline of western civilization. Though the latter obviously has its place. :)

 

I actually agree with you in that I don't necessarily want a musician to offer me his or her views on societal issues, particularly if I get the sense that he or she doesn't really have a good understanding of them. And everyone is free to enjoy music for whatever reason they like, obviously. However, if you don't care at all what the lyrics of a song are about I actually feel sorry for you. I don't mean that in a smart @ss way. I mean that for me, some songs, often songs about love, can really capture the way you feel perfectly. Paul McCartney's Maybe I'm Amazed reminds me of my wife. The first time I heard Halo Effect, I immediately thought of a girl I dated off and on in college for two years.

 

And I suspect Peart would be saddened to hear that a fan thinks that, other than his amazing drumming, he contributes nothing of lasting impact to any of the band's songs. But to each his own :cheers:

 

I never said Peart contributes nothing of lasting impact outside of the drums. :)

 

But the method and delivery of the way a singer sings, particularly live, is far more important than the specific context of the lyrics.

 

My own emotions are provoked by the flow and synchronicity of a song more than its message. The message is secondary. The immersion within a perfectly cohesive beautiful moment of music (vocal and instrumental harmonies melding and blending together) is a far bigger flashpoint than the words.

 

Words, after all, can be read. Songs must be heard.

 

For me, lyrics rarely take away from a song. But good ones can greatly increase my appreciation for a song. Rush means so much to me not just because of their music, but because the lyrics are so powerful. It it weren't for the lyrics, I doubt that I would have ever come around to appreciating the synth period. And while I like some Bob Dylan songs, if it weren't for the lyrics I wouldn't be half as interested in him as I am.

 

I agree with this. I love the Van Hagar era of Van Halen (not as much as the Roth era though) but Sammy's lyrics are cringe worthy if you read them. But if you're just singing about getting laid, you don't need too much sophistication.

 

Roth's lyrics weren't any better. Van Halen songs are all about sex, drugs, rock and roll. :)

 

They both had moments of lucidity in their songwriting (see Push Comes to Shove or Don't Tell Me What Love Can Do), but ya don't listen to Van Halen for the lyrics, LOL.

 

Like I said....vox are about harmony and melody, not message. If there IS a message, great, that's just a bonus.

 

Here's an easier way to put it.

 

At a show, you're hardly gonna notice if Geddy messes up the exact phrasing of a lyric or a passage, or perhaps even skip over an entire stanza.

 

But you're sure as hell gonna notice when he hits a flat note.

 

It's that simple. :)

 

Roth is a lot smarter than Hagar. His lyrics were more sly. He's Bon Scott to Hagar's Brian Johnson.

You've obviously never heard Poundcake.

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GjLAaE07SW8

 

I was actually thinking of Poundcake. Or Black and Blue. Or In and Out.

You can pretty much take your pick....classics, all of them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yuck. Rush and politics. All this because of a Peart sound byte?

 

Blaggh.

 

Have you read the lyrics to their songs at all?

 

I remember a bass teacher of mine in the early 80s asking, when he was teaching me to pick up Free Will by ear, "do these guys write any songs about chicks?" They really don't, other than the debut. You can't have it both ways. Either their lyrics are thought provoking, and thus discussion worthy, or they're not. I love Roth era Van Halen. But I'm guessing a fan site of theirs wouldn't need a SOCN.

 

You'd be surprised, then. Nearly any active rock message board has a politico forum.

 

I actually have a theory about lyrics. They really don't matter. Whether it's Van Halen, Rush, Maiden, Genesis, Pete Gabriel, AC/DC, the Beatles, the Doors, it really doesn't matter. Sure, the lyrics are great for diehard fans to absorb and analyze and reflect upon.

 

But the vox are most important in the context of how they mesh with the instrumentation. The harmonies and the melodies are what counts with the vox, not exactly what they're saying. Hell, when I first started seeing Rush eons ago, before I knew any of the lyrics they'd put out to date, I didn't WTF Geddy was singing about...or David lee Roth...or Bon Scott. Sometimes it's friggin' hard to tell wtf they're saying, LOL. There are STILL VH diehards who debate exactly WTF Dave is saying in certain lines in Everybody Wants Some, LOL.

 

Point being...I don't really care what they're singing about. As long as the vox flow with the instruments, they could be singing about androgynous octopi for all I care. :)

 

That's why it's more important that Jim Morrison hits the right notes than it is for him to tell me about the decline of western civilization. Though the latter obviously has its place. :)

 

I actually agree with you in that I don't necessarily want a musician to offer me his or her views on societal issues, particularly if I get the sense that he or she doesn't really have a good understanding of them. And everyone is free to enjoy music for whatever reason they like, obviously. However, if you don't care at all what the lyrics of a song are about I actually feel sorry for you. I don't mean that in a smart @ss way. I mean that for me, some songs, often songs about love, can really capture the way you feel perfectly. Paul McCartney's Maybe I'm Amazed reminds me of my wife. The first time I heard Halo Effect, I immediately thought of a girl I dated off and on in college for two years.

 

And I suspect Peart would be saddened to hear that a fan thinks that, other than his amazing drumming, he contributes nothing of lasting impact to any of the band's songs. But to each his own :cheers:

 

I never said Peart contributes nothing of lasting impact outside of the drums. :)

 

But the method and delivery of the way a singer sings, particularly live, is far more important than the specific context of the lyrics.

 

My own emotions are provoked by the flow and synchronicity of a song more than its message. The message is secondary. The immersion within a perfectly cohesive beautiful moment of music (vocal and instrumental harmonies melding and blending together) is a far bigger flashpoint than the words.

 

Words, after all, can be read. Songs must be heard.

 

For me, lyrics rarely take away from a song. But good ones can greatly increase my appreciation for a song. Rush means so much to me not just because of their music, but because the lyrics are so powerful. It it weren't for the lyrics, I doubt that I would have ever come around to appreciating the synth period. And while I like some Bob Dylan songs, if it weren't for the lyrics I wouldn't be half as interested in him as I am.

 

I agree with this. I love the Van Hagar era of Van Halen (not as much as the Roth era though) but Sammy's lyrics are cringe worthy if you read them. But if you're just singing about getting laid, you don't need too much sophistication.

 

Roth's lyrics weren't any better. Van Halen songs are all about sex, drugs, rock and roll. :)

 

They both had moments of lucidity in their songwriting (see Push Comes to Shove or Don't Tell Me What Love Can Do), but ya don't listen to Van Halen for the lyrics, LOL.

 

Like I said....vox are about harmony and melody, not message. If there IS a message, great, that's just a bonus.

 

Here's an easier way to put it.

 

At a show, you're hardly gonna notice if Geddy messes up the exact phrasing of a lyric or a passage, or perhaps even skip over an entire stanza.

 

But you're sure as hell gonna notice when he hits a flat note.

 

It's that simple. :)

 

Roth is a lot smarter than Hagar. His lyrics were more sly. He's Bon Scott to Hagar's Brian Johnson.

 

LOL. I don't agree. His lyrics were no more or less playground than Sam's. See 'Jump' or "Just Like Paradise" for further proof. But Dave likes to spew out philosophic platitudes with an ADD personality, and unfortunately that just makes him seem like an attention whore more than a thinker.

 

I actually dunno what 'sly' lyrics are. It's fine if you prefer Dave over Sam. A lotta people do. Myself, I like them both. But I don't credit either one with superior songwriting. Sam's the better singer, Dave's the better showman. It's all good as long as Ed's playing the guitar and Mike's on the bass. The VH world is currently blowin' up with Ed's new interview with Billboard. He said some dumb ass things in there, LOL.

 

And I don't think AC/DC ever made a finer record than Back in Black. So I dig Brian Johnson. But there's no denying Bon's impact either.

 

Jump and Just Like Living in Paradise aren't pieces of lyrical genius. But they're also not sophomoric sex metaphors. Sly means having a little wit to it. I like Brian Johnson too. But there's a difference between the studio version of The Jack and "let me cut your cake with my knife." Or "slip and slide, push it in, bitch sure got the rhythm." But if you don't care what the lyrics are, it makes no difference.

 

I love the Van Hagar stuff. It's not in the same ballpark with the first Roth era though. Sammy might be a better technical singer. Ozzy, Tyler, Jagger and Roth might not have the best singing voices, but rock isn't really about technical ability.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yuck. Rush and politics. All this because of a Peart sound byte?

 

Blaggh.

 

Have you read the lyrics to their songs at all?

 

I remember a bass teacher of mine in the early 80s asking, when he was teaching me to pick up Free Will by ear, "do these guys write any songs about chicks?" They really don't, other than the debut. You can't have it both ways. Either their lyrics are thought provoking, and thus discussion worthy, or they're not. I love Roth era Van Halen. But I'm guessing a fan site of theirs wouldn't need a SOCN.

 

You'd be surprised, then. Nearly any active rock message board has a politico forum.

 

I actually have a theory about lyrics. They really don't matter. Whether it's Van Halen, Rush, Maiden, Genesis, Pete Gabriel, AC/DC, the Beatles, the Doors, it really doesn't matter. Sure, the lyrics are great for diehard fans to absorb and analyze and reflect upon.

 

But the vox are most important in the context of how they mesh with the instrumentation. The harmonies and the melodies are what counts with the vox, not exactly what they're saying. Hell, when I first started seeing Rush eons ago, before I knew any of the lyrics they'd put out to date, I didn't WTF Geddy was singing about...or David lee Roth...or Bon Scott. Sometimes it's friggin' hard to tell wtf they're saying, LOL. There are STILL VH diehards who debate exactly WTF Dave is saying in certain lines in Everybody Wants Some, LOL.

 

Point being...I don't really care what they're singing about. As long as the vox flow with the instruments, they could be singing about androgynous octopi for all I care. :)

 

That's why it's more important that Jim Morrison hits the right notes than it is for him to tell me about the decline of western civilization. Though the latter obviously has its place. :)

 

I actually agree with you in that I don't necessarily want a musician to offer me his or her views on societal issues, particularly if I get the sense that he or she doesn't really have a good understanding of them. And everyone is free to enjoy music for whatever reason they like, obviously. However, if you don't care at all what the lyrics of a song are about I actually feel sorry for you. I don't mean that in a smart @ss way. I mean that for me, some songs, often songs about love, can really capture the way you feel perfectly. Paul McCartney's Maybe I'm Amazed reminds me of my wife. The first time I heard Halo Effect, I immediately thought of a girl I dated off and on in college for two years.

 

And I suspect Peart would be saddened to hear that a fan thinks that, other than his amazing drumming, he contributes nothing of lasting impact to any of the band's songs. But to each his own :cheers:

 

I never said Peart contributes nothing of lasting impact outside of the drums. :)

 

But the method and delivery of the way a singer sings, particularly live, is far more important than the specific context of the lyrics.

 

My own emotions are provoked by the flow and synchronicity of a song more than its message. The message is secondary. The immersion within a perfectly cohesive beautiful moment of music (vocal and instrumental harmonies melding and blending together) is a far bigger flashpoint than the words.

 

Words, after all, can be read. Songs must be heard.

 

For me, lyrics rarely take away from a song. But good ones can greatly increase my appreciation for a song. Rush means so much to me not just because of their music, but because the lyrics are so powerful. It it weren't for the lyrics, I doubt that I would have ever come around to appreciating the synth period. And while I like some Bob Dylan songs, if it weren't for the lyrics I wouldn't be half as interested in him as I am.

 

I agree with this. I love the Van Hagar era of Van Halen (not as much as the Roth era though) but Sammy's lyrics are cringe worthy if you read them. But if you're just singing about getting laid, you don't need too much sophistication.

 

Roth's lyrics weren't any better. Van Halen songs are all about sex, drugs, rock and roll. :)

 

They both had moments of lucidity in their songwriting (see Push Comes to Shove or Don't Tell Me What Love Can Do), but ya don't listen to Van Halen for the lyrics, LOL.

 

Like I said....vox are about harmony and melody, not message. If there IS a message, great, that's just a bonus.

 

Here's an easier way to put it.

 

At a show, you're hardly gonna notice if Geddy messes up the exact phrasing of a lyric or a passage, or perhaps even skip over an entire stanza.

 

But you're sure as hell gonna notice when he hits a flat note.

 

It's that simple. :)

 

Roth is a lot smarter than Hagar. His lyrics were more sly. He's Bon Scott to Hagar's Brian Johnson.

 

LOL. I don't agree. His lyrics were no more or less playground than Sam's. See 'Jump' or "Just Like Paradise" for further proof. But Dave likes to spew out philosophic platitudes with an ADD personality, and unfortunately that just makes him seem like an attention whore more than a thinker.

 

I actually dunno what 'sly' lyrics are. It's fine if you prefer Dave over Sam. A lotta people do. Myself, I like them both. But I don't credit either one with superior songwriting. Sam's the better singer, Dave's the better showman. It's all good as long as Ed's playing the guitar and Mike's on the bass. The VH world is currently blowin' up with Ed's new interview with Billboard. He said some dumb ass things in there, LOL.

 

And I don't think AC/DC ever made a finer record than Back in Black. So I dig Brian Johnson. But there's no denying Bon's impact either.

 

Jump and Just Like Living in Paradise aren't pieces of lyrical genius. But they're also not sophomoric sex metaphors. Sly means having a little wit to it. I like Brian Johnson too. But there's a difference between the studio version of The Jack and "let me cut your cake with my knife." Or "slip and slide, push it in, bitch sure got the rhythm." But if you don't care what the lyrics are, it makes no difference.

 

I love the Van Hagar stuff. It's not in the same ballpark with the first Roth era though. Sammy might be a better technical singer. Ozzy, Tyler, Jagger and Roth might not have the best singing voices, but rock isn't really about technical ability.

 

Sammy definitely has 'a little wit' to many of his lyrics. And Sammy isn't a better 'technical' singer, he's a better singer, period, obviously. Showmanship and singing range are two different things.

 

But really, last thing I wanna do on a Rush board is a Dave vs. Sam debate. Been there, done that. Yawn.

 

In any case, anybody listening to Van Halen for lyrical poetry, is barking up the wrong tree, LOL. If you're not listening to Van Halen for the cockrock guitar, you're probably not listening to Van Halen at all. :)

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I was actually thinking of Poundcake. Or Black and Blue. Or In and Out.

 

But you're not thinking of Jump, Hammerhead Shark, or Hot Dog and a Shake. :)

 

Speaking of food, Good Enough should be on that list. ;-)

 

For every sophomoric track you can list about Sammy's career, rest assured I can cite one from Roth's. Let's pass on that tit for that, shall we. :)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I was actually thinking of Poundcake. Or Black and Blue. Or In and Out.

 

But you're not thinking of Jump, Hammerhead Shark, or Hot Dog and a Shake. :)

 

Speaking of food, Good Enough should be on that list. ;-)

 

For every sophomoric track you can list about Sammy's career, rest assured I can cite one from Roth's. Let's pass on that tit for that, shall we. :)

 

I don't know man. Sammy has a big catalog. ;-)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Yuck. Rush and politics. All this because of a Peart sound byte?

 

Blaggh.

 

Have you read the lyrics to their songs at all?

 

I remember a bass teacher of mine in the early 80s asking, when he was teaching me to pick up Free Will by ear, "do these guys write any songs about chicks?" They really don't, other than the debut. You can't have it both ways. Either their lyrics are thought provoking, and thus discussion worthy, or they're not. I love Roth era Van Halen. But I'm guessing a fan site of theirs wouldn't need a SOCN.

 

You'd be surprised, then. Nearly any active rock message board has a politico forum.

 

I actually have a theory about lyrics. They really don't matter. Whether it's Van Halen, Rush, Maiden, Genesis, Pete Gabriel, AC/DC, the Beatles, the Doors, it really doesn't matter. Sure, the lyrics are great for diehard fans to absorb and analyze and reflect upon.

 

But the vox are most important in the context of how they mesh with the instrumentation. The harmonies and the melodies are what counts with the vox, not exactly what they're saying. Hell, when I first started seeing Rush eons ago, before I knew any of the lyrics they'd put out to date, I didn't WTF Geddy was singing about...or David lee Roth...or Bon Scott. Sometimes it's friggin' hard to tell wtf they're saying, LOL. There are STILL VH diehards who debate exactly WTF Dave is saying in certain lines in Everybody Wants Some, LOL.

 

Point being...I don't really care what they're singing about. As long as the vox flow with the instruments, they could be singing about androgynous octopi for all I care. :)

 

That's why it's more important that Jim Morrison hits the right notes than it is for him to tell me about the decline of western civilization. Though the latter obviously has its place. :)

 

I actually agree with you in that I don't necessarily want a musician to offer me his or her views on societal issues, particularly if I get the sense that he or she doesn't really have a good understanding of them. And everyone is free to enjoy music for whatever reason they like, obviously. However, if you don't care at all what the lyrics of a song are about I actually feel sorry for you. I don't mean that in a smart @ss way. I mean that for me, some songs, often songs about love, can really capture the way you feel perfectly. Paul McCartney's Maybe I'm Amazed reminds me of my wife. The first time I heard Halo Effect, I immediately thought of a girl I dated off and on in college for two years.

 

And I suspect Peart would be saddened to hear that a fan thinks that, other than his amazing drumming, he contributes nothing of lasting impact to any of the band's songs. But to each his own :cheers:

 

I never said Peart contributes nothing of lasting impact outside of the drums. :)

 

But the method and delivery of the way a singer sings, particularly live, is far more important than the specific context of the lyrics.

 

My own emotions are provoked by the flow and synchronicity of a song more than its message. The message is secondary. The immersion within a perfectly cohesive beautiful moment of music (vocal and instrumental harmonies melding and blending together) is a far bigger flashpoint than the words.

 

Words, after all, can be read. Songs must be heard.

 

For me, lyrics rarely take away from a song. But good ones can greatly increase my appreciation for a song. Rush means so much to me not just because of their music, but because the lyrics are so powerful. It it weren't for the lyrics, I doubt that I would have ever come around to appreciating the synth period. And while I like some Bob Dylan songs, if it weren't for the lyrics I wouldn't be half as interested in him as I am.

 

I agree with this. I love the Van Hagar era of Van Halen (not as much as the Roth era though) but Sammy's lyrics are cringe worthy if you read them. But if you're just singing about getting laid, you don't need too much sophistication.

 

Roth's lyrics weren't any better. Van Halen songs are all about sex, drugs, rock and roll. :)

 

They both had moments of lucidity in their songwriting (see Push Comes to Shove or Don't Tell Me What Love Can Do), but ya don't listen to Van Halen for the lyrics, LOL.

 

Like I said....vox are about harmony and melody, not message. If there IS a message, great, that's just a bonus.

 

Here's an easier way to put it.

 

At a show, you're hardly gonna notice if Geddy messes up the exact phrasing of a lyric or a passage, or perhaps even skip over an entire stanza.

 

But you're sure as hell gonna notice when he hits a flat note.

 

It's that simple. :)

 

Roth is a lot smarter than Hagar. His lyrics were more sly. He's Bon Scott to Hagar's Brian Johnson.

 

LOL. I don't agree. His lyrics were no more or less playground than Sam's. See 'Jump' or "Just Like Paradise" for further proof. But Dave likes to spew out philosophic platitudes with an ADD personality, and unfortunately that just makes him seem like an attention whore more than a thinker.

 

I actually dunno what 'sly' lyrics are. It's fine if you prefer Dave over Sam. A lotta people do. Myself, I like them both. But I don't credit either one with superior songwriting. Sam's the better singer, Dave's the better showman. It's all good as long as Ed's playing the guitar and Mike's on the bass. The VH world is currently blowin' up with Ed's new interview with Billboard. He said some dumb ass things in there, LOL.

 

And I don't think AC/DC ever made a finer record than Back in Black. So I dig Brian Johnson. But there's no denying Bon's impact either.

 

Jump and Just Like Living in Paradise aren't pieces of lyrical genius. But they're also not sophomoric sex metaphors. Sly means having a little wit to it. I like Brian Johnson too. But there's a difference between the studio version of The Jack and "let me cut your cake with my knife." Or "slip and slide, push it in, bitch sure got the rhythm." But if you don't care what the lyrics are, it makes no difference.

 

I love the Van Hagar stuff. It's not in the same ballpark with the first Roth era though. Sammy might be a better technical singer. Ozzy, Tyler, Jagger and Roth might not have the best singing voices, but rock isn't really about technical ability.

 

Sammy definitely has 'a little wit' to many of his lyrics. And Sammy isn't a better 'technical' singer, he's a better singer, period, obviously. Showmanship and singing range are two different things.

 

But really, last thing I wanna do on a Rush board is a Dave vs. Sam debate. Been there, done that. Yawn.

 

In any case, anybody listening to Van Halen for lyrical poetry, is barking up the wrong tree, LOL. If you're not listening to Van Halen for the cockrock guitar, you're probably not listening to Van Halen at all. :)

 

Singing, as opposed to vocals, is about technical skill. Dave's vocals on the first 4 VH albums blows doors on any singing Sammy ever did. But you're right, it is a snooze fest to debate. :-)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hagar is a far better singer than Roth, though I like Roth-era Van-Halen a bit more than Hagar era, though I think the difference is far less than most people. And both their lyrics suck. EVH on crack generally writes better lyrics than both of the others. Edited by LedRush
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Why is this thread still alive?

 

Because we're discussing Van Halen!

Yeah, but only the Sammy vs Dave debate. Guess that's the way it has to be though, since the essential greatness that is the Cherone era is not being discussed; its excellence not being in dispute.

Edited by laughedatbytime
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The world at the moment is populated by crap politicians both left and right, owned by big corporations and

media barons. But it is Americans who seem obsessed with left versus right, the word libertarian replacing

Communist. Here in Australia I didn't vote for the first time as we had a terrible 'left wing' government

and replaced it with a terrible 'right wing' government. In the words of Neil Peart, 'plus ca change...

Amen. Need a clean sweep, start over

Yep, hoping the Greeks pull out of the Euro. The only country that got it right was Iceland.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Moved another political post that had nothing to do with Neil (and a few responses to it) to SOCN.

 

ReRushed had a good response to someone who replied to it: "Why even bother responding?"

Edited by 1-0-0-1-0-0-1
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Moved another political post that had nothing to do with Neil (and a few responses to it) to SOCN.

 

ReRushed had a good response to someone who replied to it: "Why even bother responding?"

 

Shouldn't the last couple pages be moved to a VH thread in music of the spheres?

 

;)

 

 

 

.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Moved another political post that had nothing to do with Neil (and a few responses to it) to SOCN.

 

ReRushed had a good response to someone who replied to it: "Why even bother responding?"

 

Shouldn't the last couple pages be moved to a VH thread in music of the spheres?

 

;)

 

Nah... :D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Moved another political post that had nothing to do with Neil (and a few responses to it) to SOCN.

 

ReRushed had a good response to someone who replied to it: "Why even bother responding?"

 

Shouldn't the last couple pages be moved to a VH thread in music of the spheres?

 

;)

 

Nah... :D

 

Now if we could only get the phony word out of the thread title ;)

 

Well then I'll just crank some Eruption and Right Now for both VH camps!

  • Like 1
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...