Jump to content

Is RUSH better than the Beatles


losingit2k
 Share

  

108 members have voted

  1. 1. Is RUSH Better than The Beatles

    • Yes
      63
    • No
      39
    • The Same
      6


Recommended Posts

I we

I've met music fans who have dogged Led Zeppelin.

I've met music fans who have dogged Pink Floyd.

I've met music fans who have dogged The Who.

 

But anyone who dogs The Beatles gets burned at the stake.

 

That's the issue I have..not everything they wrote was genius..

 

No, not everything. I'm not a huge fan of pre-Rubber Soul Beatles, although they did have some great songs early on too.

 

The main thrust of the thread, however, is are Rush better than The Beatles, and for that I have to give a huge and resounding NO. And Rush is my favorite band, but on so many levels The Beatles are just the better band. It's really not even a comparison. The members of Rush would be the first to agree with me, not like that matters if you really think Rush is better, but it's not like I'm making some outrageous statement by saying they're better. I mean, look at the poll results - on a fanatical Rush board 40% of everyone thinks The Beatles are as good or better. That's really saying something.

 

Here's another angle..

 

1976.. The Beatles and Rush LIVE...

 

Leaving the show, who would have blown you away more?

 

McCartney's Rock Show was filmed during his 1976 tour. It's pretty amazing actually.

 

I'm sure it is, but as a live unit, dare I say! , Rush and , let's say, The Who were a more powerhouse unit.

 

Interestingly enough, this is somewhat similar to a debate I've had for almost 30 years now ( :codger: :scared: ) with a college buddy of mine. He maintains that Aerosmith is better than the Beatles because, for example, Back in the Saddle is a better "drinking" song than Magical Mystery Tour. Rush and The Who (I've seen both) are louder than McCartney live (but Live and Let Die is pretty loud live, particularly when the pyro goes off) but McCartney is actually a pretty energetic performer, even now.

 

I've seen Rush on the MP, Signals, GUP and Time Machine tours. I've enjoyed every show a lot, but I wouldn't call any of those shows my "favorite." I saw McCartney in 2008 or so at Fenway. That show is in the conversation for the best live show I've ever seen.

 

Fair enough. But I would say the reason you might think that about Mcartney at Fenway as being in your best show ever conversation is because it was at FENWAY PARK!! The atmosphere I'm sure had something to do with it.. A show at a place as sacred as Fenway, and especially if you're a big Sox fan, naturally would be magical.

 

Waters playing the wall at Yankees Stadium was definitely among one of my best concert experiences. I don't know if it was the venue, but the venue helped. Audio, visual, musicianship were all great, too. But nothing matches the RUSH live experience for me.

I went to a brothel and had an amazing time but it really had nothing to do with the venue.

I'm pretty sure if we would have been in Brazil for the filming of RUSH in RIO we might think different about the venues!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is difficult for me to answer. I answered "no," because the Beatles are, far and away, the most influential band ever. I remember when Oasis claimed to be the next Beatles, which is a joke when you think about it now. Nobody will ever come close to their lofty status. The Stones, Zeppelin, and Pink Floyd probably come the closest. Pick any Beatles album and it'll contain more hits or potential hits than most bands can boast of for their entire catalog. You could put five Beatles albums (Rubber Soul, Revolver, Sgt. Peppers, The White Album, and Abbey Road) in the top ten greatest albums of all time, and few would think you're crazy for doing so. They have more "throw-away" hit songs than any band, by far. Yes, they were that good.

 

On the other hand, I like Rush better. I love the Beatles, but I LOVE Rush. If I were stranded on a desert island, I'd pick Moving Pictures over any of the five Beatles albums I listed above.

 

Are they better to me? Yes. Are they "better?" No.

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is difficult for me to answer. I answered "no," because the Beatles are, far and away, the most influential band ever. I remember when Oasis claimed to be the next Beatles, which is a joke when you think about it now. Nobody will ever come close to their lofty status. The Stones, Zeppelin, and Pink Floyd probably come the closest. Pick any Beatles album and it'll contain more hits or potential hits than most bands can boast of for their entire catalog. You could put five Beatles albums (Rubber Soul, Revolver, Sgt. Peppers, The White Album, and Abbey Road) in the top ten greatest albums of all time, and few would think you're crazy for doing so. They have more "throw-away" hit songs than any band, by far. Yes, they were that good.

 

On the other hand, I like Rush better. I love the Beatles, but I LOVE Rush. If I were stranded on a desert island, I'd pick Moving Pictures over any of the five Beatles albums I listed above.

 

Are they better to me? Yes. Are they "better?" No.

 

:goodone:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This is difficult for me to answer. I answered "no," because the Beatles are, far and away, the most influential band ever. I remember when Oasis claimed to be the next Beatles, which is a joke when you think about it now. Nobody will ever come close to their lofty status. The Stones, Zeppelin, and Pink Floyd probably come the closest. Pick any Beatles album and it'll contain more hits or potential hits than most bands can boast of for their entire catalog. You could put five Beatles albums (Rubber Soul, Revolver, Sgt. Peppers, The White Album, and Abbey Road) in the top ten greatest albums of all time, and few would think you're crazy for doing so. They have more "throw-away" hit songs than any band, by far. Yes, they were that good.

 

On the other hand, I like Rush better. I love the Beatles, but I LOVE Rush. If I were stranded on a desert island, I'd pick Moving Pictures over any of the five Beatles albums I listed above.

 

Are they better to me? Yes. Are they "better?" No.

 

:goodone:

Hey Goober there are about 18 VT threads I can turn you on to! Interested? :huh:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I we

I've met music fans who have dogged Led Zeppelin.

I've met music fans who have dogged Pink Floyd.

I've met music fans who have dogged The Who.

 

But anyone who dogs The Beatles gets burned at the stake.

 

That's the issue I have..not everything they wrote was genius..

 

No, not everything. I'm not a huge fan of pre-Rubber Soul Beatles, although they did have some great songs early on too.

 

The main thrust of the thread, however, is are Rush better than The Beatles, and for that I have to give a huge and resounding NO. And Rush is my favorite band, but on so many levels The Beatles are just the better band. It's really not even a comparison. The members of Rush would be the first to agree with me, not like that matters if you really think Rush is better, but it's not like I'm making some outrageous statement by saying they're better. I mean, look at the poll results - on a fanatical Rush board 40% of everyone thinks The Beatles are as good or better. That's really saying something.

 

Here's another angle..

 

1976.. The Beatles and Rush LIVE...

 

Leaving the show, who would have blown you away more?

 

McCartney's Rock Show was filmed during his 1976 tour. It's pretty amazing actually.

 

I'm sure it is, but as a live unit, dare I say! , Rush and , let's say, The Who were a more powerhouse unit.

 

Interestingly enough, this is somewhat similar to a debate I've had for almost 30 years now ( :codger: :scared: ) with a college buddy of mine. He maintains that Aerosmith is better than the Beatles because, for example, Back in the Saddle is a better "drinking" song than Magical Mystery Tour. Rush and The Who (I've seen both) are louder than McCartney live (but Live and Let Die is pretty loud live, particularly when the pyro goes off) but McCartney is actually a pretty energetic performer, even now.

 

I've seen Rush on the MP, Signals, GUP and Time Machine tours. I've enjoyed every show a lot, but I wouldn't call any of those shows my "favorite." I saw McCartney in 2008 or so at Fenway. That show is in the conversation for the best live show I've ever seen.

 

Fair enough. But I would say the reason you might think that about Mcartney at Fenway as being in your best show ever conversation is because it was at FENWAY PARK!! The atmosphere I'm sure had something to do with it.. A show at a place as sacred as Fenway, and especially if you're a big Sox fan, naturally would be magical.

 

Waters playing the wall at Yankees Stadium was definitely among one of my best concert experiences. I don't know if it was the venue, but the venue helped. Audio, visual, musicianship were all great, too. But nothing matches the RUSH live experience for me.

I went to a brothel and had an amazing time but it really had nothing to do with the venue.

I'm pretty sure if we would have been in Brazil for the filming of RUSH in RIO we might think different about the venues!

Why, do they have really fancy brothels in Brazil?
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I we

I've met music fans who have dogged Led Zeppelin.

I've met music fans who have dogged Pink Floyd.

I've met music fans who have dogged The Who.

 

But anyone who dogs The Beatles gets burned at the stake.

 

That's the issue I have..not everything they wrote was genius..

 

No, not everything. I'm not a huge fan of pre-Rubber Soul Beatles, although they did have some great songs early on too.

 

The main thrust of the thread, however, is are Rush better than The Beatles, and for that I have to give a huge and resounding NO. And Rush is my favorite band, but on so many levels The Beatles are just the better band. It's really not even a comparison. The members of Rush would be the first to agree with me, not like that matters if you really think Rush is better, but it's not like I'm making some outrageous statement by saying they're better. I mean, look at the poll results - on a fanatical Rush board 40% of everyone thinks The Beatles are as good or better. That's really saying something.

 

Here's another angle..

 

1976.. The Beatles and Rush LIVE...

 

Leaving the show, who would have blown you away more?

 

McCartney's Rock Show was filmed during his 1976 tour. It's pretty amazing actually.

 

I'm sure it is, but as a live unit, dare I say! , Rush and , let's say, The Who were a more powerhouse unit.

 

Interestingly enough, this is somewhat similar to a debate I've had for almost 30 years now ( :codger: :scared: ) with a college buddy of mine. He maintains that Aerosmith is better than the Beatles because, for example, Back in the Saddle is a better "drinking" song than Magical Mystery Tour. Rush and The Who (I've seen both) are louder than McCartney live (but Live and Let Die is pretty loud live, particularly when the pyro goes off) but McCartney is actually a pretty energetic performer, even now.

 

I've seen Rush on the MP, Signals, GUP and Time Machine tours. I've enjoyed every show a lot, but I wouldn't call any of those shows my "favorite." I saw McCartney in 2008 or so at Fenway. That show is in the conversation for the best live show I've ever seen.

 

Fair enough. But I would say the reason you might think that about Mcartney at Fenway as being in your best show ever conversation is because it was at FENWAY PARK!! The atmosphere I'm sure had something to do with it.. A show at a place as sacred as Fenway, and especially if you're a big Sox fan, naturally would be magical.

 

Waters playing the wall at Yankees Stadium was definitely among one of my best concert experiences. I don't know if it was the venue, but the venue helped. Audio, visual, musicianship were all great, too. But nothing matches the RUSH live experience for me.

I went to a brothel and had an amazing time but it really had nothing to do with the venue.

I'm pretty sure if we would have been in Brazil for the filming of RUSH in RIO we might think different about the venues!

Why, do they have really fancy brothels in Brazil?

Yes.. they are free to tourist!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I we

I've met music fans who have dogged Led Zeppelin.

I've met music fans who have dogged Pink Floyd.

I've met music fans who have dogged The Who.

 

But anyone who dogs The Beatles gets burned at the stake.

 

That's the issue I have..not everything they wrote was genius..

 

No, not everything. I'm not a huge fan of pre-Rubber Soul Beatles, although they did have some great songs early on too.

 

The main thrust of the thread, however, is are Rush better than The Beatles, and for that I have to give a huge and resounding NO. And Rush is my favorite band, but on so many levels The Beatles are just the better band. It's really not even a comparison. The members of Rush would be the first to agree with me, not like that matters if you really think Rush is better, but it's not like I'm making some outrageous statement by saying they're better. I mean, look at the poll results - on a fanatical Rush board 40% of everyone thinks The Beatles are as good or better. That's really saying something.

 

Here's another angle..

 

1976.. The Beatles and Rush LIVE...

 

Leaving the show, who would have blown you away more?

 

McCartney's Rock Show was filmed during his 1976 tour. It's pretty amazing actually.

 

I'm sure it is, but as a live unit, dare I say! , Rush and , let's say, The Who were a more powerhouse unit.

 

Interestingly enough, this is somewhat similar to a debate I've had for almost 30 years now ( :codger: :scared: ) with a college buddy of mine. He maintains that Aerosmith is better than the Beatles because, for example, Back in the Saddle is a better "drinking" song than Magical Mystery Tour. Rush and The Who (I've seen both) are louder than McCartney live (but Live and Let Die is pretty loud live, particularly when the pyro goes off) but McCartney is actually a pretty energetic performer, even now.

 

I've seen Rush on the MP, Signals, GUP and Time Machine tours. I've enjoyed every show a lot, but I wouldn't call any of those shows my "favorite." I saw McCartney in 2008 or so at Fenway. That show is in the conversation for the best live show I've ever seen.

 

Fair enough. But I would say the reason you might think that about Mcartney at Fenway as being in your best show ever conversation is because it was at FENWAY PARK!! The atmosphere I'm sure had something to do with it.. A show at a place as sacred as Fenway, and especially if you're a big Sox fan, naturally would be magical.

 

Waters playing the wall at Yankees Stadium was definitely among one of my best concert experiences. I don't know if it was the venue, but the venue helped. Audio, visual, musicianship were all great, too. But nothing matches the RUSH live experience for me.

I went to a brothel and had an amazing time but it really had nothing to do with the venue.

Nothing says "amazing time" like contracting gonorrhea! ;)

You know Trixy, also?

Reminds me of that old Christmas song....On the first day at brothel my Trixy gave to me: b-j and an s-t-d. On the second day at brothel my Trixie gave to me.....
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I we

I've met music fans who have dogged Led Zeppelin.

I've met music fans who have dogged Pink Floyd.

I've met music fans who have dogged The Who.

 

But anyone who dogs The Beatles gets burned at the stake.

 

That's the issue I have..not everything they wrote was genius..

 

No, not everything. I'm not a huge fan of pre-Rubber Soul Beatles, although they did have some great songs early on too.

 

The main thrust of the thread, however, is are Rush better than The Beatles, and for that I have to give a huge and resounding NO. And Rush is my favorite band, but on so many levels The Beatles are just the better band. It's really not even a comparison. The members of Rush would be the first to agree with me, not like that matters if you really think Rush is better, but it's not like I'm making some outrageous statement by saying they're better. I mean, look at the poll results - on a fanatical Rush board 40% of everyone thinks The Beatles are as good or better. That's really saying something.

 

Here's another angle..

 

1976.. The Beatles and Rush LIVE...

 

Leaving the show, who would have blown you away more?

 

McCartney's Rock Show was filmed during his 1976 tour. It's pretty amazing actually.

 

I'm sure it is, but as a live unit, dare I say! , Rush and , let's say, The Who were a more powerhouse unit.

 

Interestingly enough, this is somewhat similar to a debate I've had for almost 30 years now ( :codger: :scared: ) with a college buddy of mine. He maintains that Aerosmith is better than the Beatles because, for example, Back in the Saddle is a better "drinking" song than Magical Mystery Tour. Rush and The Who (I've seen both) are louder than McCartney live (but Live and Let Die is pretty loud live, particularly when the pyro goes off) but McCartney is actually a pretty energetic performer, even now.

 

I've seen Rush on the MP, Signals, GUP and Time Machine tours. I've enjoyed every show a lot, but I wouldn't call any of those shows my "favorite." I saw McCartney in 2008 or so at Fenway. That show is in the conversation for the best live show I've ever seen.

 

Fair enough. But I would say the reason you might think that about Mcartney at Fenway as being in your best show ever conversation is because it was at FENWAY PARK!! The atmosphere I'm sure had something to do with it.. A show at a place as sacred as Fenway, and especially if you're a big Sox fan, naturally would be magical.

 

Waters playing the wall at Yankees Stadium was definitely among one of my best concert experiences. I don't know if it was the venue, but the venue helped. Audio, visual, musicianship were all great, too. But nothing matches the RUSH live experience for me.

I went to a brothel and had an amazing time but it really had nothing to do with the venue.

Nothing says "amazing time" like contracting gonorrhea! ;)

You know Trixy, also?

Reminds me of that old Christmas song....On the first day at brothel my Trixy gave to me: b-j and an s-t-d. On the second day at brothel my Trixie gave to me.....

....Bur urn ning pee
Link to comment
Share on other sites

No, The Beatles invented it. Rush did it better having seen the blueprint. I still listen to both bands and rarely compare or make judgments.

 

What? The Beatles invented Rock and Roll now. Really? And who gave them the blueprint....Chuch Berry perhaps?

 

:facepalm:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I we

I've met music fans who have dogged Led Zeppelin.

I've met music fans who have dogged Pink Floyd.

I've met music fans who have dogged The Who.

 

But anyone who dogs The Beatles gets burned at the stake.

 

That's the issue I have..not everything they wrote was genius..

 

No, not everything. I'm not a huge fan of pre-Rubber Soul Beatles, although they did have some great songs early on too.

 

The main thrust of the thread, however, is are Rush better than The Beatles, and for that I have to give a huge and resounding NO. And Rush is my favorite band, but on so many levels The Beatles are just the better band. It's really not even a comparison. The members of Rush would be the first to agree with me, not like that matters if you really think Rush is better, but it's not like I'm making some outrageous statement by saying they're better. I mean, look at the poll results - on a fanatical Rush board 40% of everyone thinks The Beatles are as good or better. That's really saying something.

 

Here's another angle..

 

1976.. The Beatles and Rush LIVE...

 

Leaving the show, who would have blown you away more?

 

McCartney's Rock Show was filmed during his 1976 tour. It's pretty amazing actually.

 

I'm sure it is, but as a live unit, dare I say! , Rush and , let's say, The Who were a more powerhouse unit.

 

Interestingly enough, this is somewhat similar to a debate I've had for almost 30 years now ( :codger: :scared: ) with a college buddy of mine. He maintains that Aerosmith is better than the Beatles because, for example, Back in the Saddle is a better "drinking" song than Magical Mystery Tour. Rush and The Who (I've seen both) are louder than McCartney live (but Live and Let Die is pretty loud live, particularly when the pyro goes off) but McCartney is actually a pretty energetic performer, even now.

 

I've seen Rush on the MP, Signals, GUP and Time Machine tours. I've enjoyed every show a lot, but I wouldn't call any of those shows my "favorite." I saw McCartney in 2008 or so at Fenway. That show is in the conversation for the best live show I've ever seen.

 

Fair enough. But I would say the reason you might think that about Mcartney at Fenway as being in your best show ever conversation is because it was at FENWAY PARK!! The atmosphere I'm sure had something to do with it.. A show at a place as sacred as Fenway, and especially if you're a big Sox fan, naturally would be magical.

 

Waters playing the wall at Yankees Stadium was definitely among one of my best concert experiences. I don't know if it was the venue, but the venue helped. Audio, visual, musicianship were all great, too. But nothing matches the RUSH live experience for me.

I went to a brothel and had an amazing time but it really had nothing to do with the venue.

Nothing says "amazing time" like contracting gonorrhea! ;)

You know Trixy, also?

Reminds me of that old Christmas song....On the first day at brothel my Trixy gave to me: b-j and an s-t-d. On the second day at brothel my Trixie gave to me.....

....Bur urn ning pee

Four Genital Warts, Three Discharge, Two Pounding Blue Balls and a Case of Untreatable Crabs!
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

If brothel and genital warts talk don't kill this tired and pointless thread, nothing will. So bring on Trixie and all the VD hell that she has!!!

Better than the VT hell Goober is currently in. :P

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If brothel and genital warts talk don't kill this tired and pointless thread, nothing will. So bring on Trixie and all the VD hell that she has!!!

Better than the VT hell Goober is currently in. :P

 

:LOL:

 

You really should take at least one listen to the remix of VT. Don't buy it, just listen to the RS stream with headphones. You might be pleasantly surprised. (I hope!) Then if you like it......Buy it!

Edited by losingit2k
Link to comment
Share on other sites

If brothel and genital warts talk don't kill this tired and pointless thread, nothing will. So bring on Trixie and all the VD hell that she has!!!

Better than the VT hell Goober is currently in. :P

 

:LOL:

 

You really should take at least one listen to the remix of VT. Don't buy it, just listen to the RS stream with headphones. You might be pleasantly surprised. (I hope!) Then if you like it......Buy it!

 

I guess you're the person who goes to Pamplona with a red tablecloth, eh?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If brothel and genital warts talk don't kill this tired and pointless thread, nothing will. So bring on Trixie and all the VD hell that she has!!!

Better than the VT hell Goober is currently in. :P

 

:LOL:

 

You really should take at least one listen to the remix of VT. Don't buy it, just listen to the RS stream with headphones. You might be pleasantly surprised. (I hope!) Then if you like it......Buy it!

 

I guess you're the person who goes to Pamplona with a red tablecloth, eh?

 

It was a red parachute. To slow me down!

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...