one80Srocker

Everyone in this forum understands this sentiment. Seems like you're starting something new by joining TRF. So, you're still expanding your horizons. Do yourself a favor and check out foo fighters or smashing pumpkins...there's something there for you I promise. As for The Foo Fighters and The Smashing Pumpkins, well, The Smashing Pumpkins SUCK!!!! Since when did they expand anyones horizons? Really?! I mean, that singer actually sings that way?! f**k that group! They are a perfect example of why the 90's was such shit. I think you very adequately summed up why old people suck and don't know a damn thing about music. Extra irony points for making the same comments about Corgan's voice that people made about Geddy's, and criticizing the band's style the same way critics criticized Rush's. I actually I very knowledgable about music. And if you wanna see how bad old people suck then come to Naples, Florida. For one thing, I don't have kids so that keeps me young. I look younger than my age and I carry a youthful demeanor. I like to have fun in life. But if you think you learned something musically inclined from what you got in the 90's then you may wanna take some advice from your elders. Yeah, grab your Trapper Keeper and go sit in the front of the classroom. I will share with you some of the good I was able to pluck from the 90's. There were quite a few good one-hit-wonders but unfortunately there weren't many bands/artists that could put out a CD that was good start to finish or at least close to it. Ok, we got the obvious, Stone Temple Pilots and Pearl Jam. And let me add that 1990, 91, and 92, as much as they are years in the 90's, they really were an extension of the 80's. Something went severely wrong in 93 and 94 and then before we knew it we were in some other conservative era of just strumming chords and mocking music. The 90's was like going through bad withdraw from the 80's and 70's and might as well include the 60's and 50's too. So-called rock music took steps backwards. It was reduced and condensed into such a simple form. But through all the mockery of what was supposed to be real and the "generation X" crap (and yeah I know I am considered a gen X too because I was born in the 70's but I wasn't part of that target market), I was able to find some music that was good. I don't want to include Rush or any existing bands that had already made their mark in a prior era. Only those who were new and part of the new sound of the 90's that would mark the era with what they had us listening to as part of the soundtrack of our lives during this flat and dull era. One band in particular that will take me time to get to know and I have quite a bit of respect for, for their unpredictableness, originality, and creativity as well as making music the art it should be, is Radiohead. Here's an underrated band that could have and should have been more popular on the airwaves instead of just playing "Creep" to death. Another great sound that came out in the 90's was the first Garbage CD, along with the b-sides. That CD is trippy and and very modern in its era and timeless for that matter. The songs are deep, the changes throughout the songs are unpredictable and complex in their originality, creativity, and composition. Live was another very good band with a great singer and many good songs (but I don't ever wanna hear "Lightning Crashes" again). Nirvana was the real deal. It really sucks we didn't get to hear what they could've done for the years to come. They were the original band that started the new sound of the 90's. But go through the bands of the 70's and 80's, heck just go through the year 1984 for that matter. There isn't a year in the 90's that could match up to 1984 even if you combine years in the 90's. Find us some guitar players in the 90's that match up to Richie Blackmore, Eddie Van Halen, Yngwie Malmsteen, Michael Schenker, Jimmy Page, Randy Rhoads, Steve Howe, etc., etc. Billy Corgan? Yeah ok!!! And as far as his voice and comparing to some irony about, "well that's what they said about Geddy too." Not the same. Geddy sings with his natural voice and it may not appeal to all. King Diamond's high pitch singing doesn't appeal to everyone either but neither are singing like a complete idiot like Billy Corgan does. Anyone of of us can do an impression of that guy's singing. And their songs do suck, I don't care what anyone thinks. The drums suck, the guitar sucks, the lyrics suck, and the singing totally sucks. There is no comparison with them and Rush. The Pumpkins dominate X stations, not rock stations. They are played within the comtext of bands just as low in the talent pool that you bought into in that era, Weezer, The Offspring, Green Day, Cake, that stupid "She Missed the Train To Mars" song and "Peaches", etc. Marylin Manson sucks too. But Alice In Chains, Pearl Jam, Stone Temple Pilots, Soundgarden, Live, can be played on the same channels as classic rock bands. Ozzfest saved us from the 90's. Black Sabbath reuniting was the best thing that came out of the downward spiral of the 90's. It's certainly not that I don't like new music becuase I do. Things got way better as soon as that terrible era/decade came to an end. But let's not forget that the 90's were very ghetto and dominated by rap as well. So were you musically inclined by all that rap and R&B stuff too? Do you like Keith Sweat? How about DMX? Is that your boy? Do you go chasing waterfalls? Here's an idea, go look at the top 40 in 1994 then look at the top 40 in 1984 and you can compare talent. Def Leppard "Pyromania" is what we liked in 1984 and if I recall correctly it didn't make #1 because of Michael Jackson's "Thriller." But while we were jammin' out to Pyromania in 1984, 10 years later you were kickin' it to TLC and Des'ree. I'll take Michael Jackson and Madonna over Des'ree, TLC, and Fiona Apple any day. We had Shout At The Devil, you had Dookie. That pretty much sums it up. And don't get me wrong, some of this alternative and grunge was ok at the time but when that's the best you have to offer then there's some people out there that got away with one. Music theory certainly wasn't a prerequisite for entry level "musicians" in the 90's. Even some of the cheesiest glam bands of the 80's still had some great guitar players. And just so you know, I never intend to knock someone for what they enjoy. I'll only state my opinion and can appreciate that another really enjoys their music. I have very strong opinions of what the 90's did to music however. And "Despite all my rage I am still just a rat in a cage...." and the stupid drum fills sucks. "Letttttt....let me outtttt..." sucks! I rank it up there with my all time most hated bands. But you're so smart, right? You know something about music, right? I mean there are so many 90's bands headlining and playing arenas and stadiums, right? There's nothing inspiring about this decade. Just listen to Metallica in the 80's then listen to Metallica in the 90's. 'nuf said. Beck, there's another one dominating X stations with annoying so-called songs. The Flaming Lips! Are they selling out arenas? How about Blur? "What happened to 2-Pac?" Who cares? In 2000 Iron Maiden and Bruce reunited, Motley Crue reunited with Vince Neil and Tommy Lee, Disturbed, Linkin Park, Godsmack, 3 Doors Down, POD, Halford and Priest soon reunited, Sevendust, music was getting fun to listen to again. There was a wave of hard rock bands coming out. The door to the 90's got closed real quick! But go to your I-Heart Radio and look up 105.9 The X from Pittsburgh. You'll love that station! Your welcome! A few corrections and amendations: 1. "But if you think you learned something musically inclined from what you got in the 90's then you may wanna take some advice from your elders. Yeah, grab your Trapper Keeper and go sit in the front of the classroom." Yes, TK's were relatively popular in the '90's until 1995, but they're associated with the 80's - specifically '82-89, daddy-o. 2. "One band in particular that will take me time to get to know and I have quite a bit of respect for, for their unpredictableness, originality, and creativity as well as making music the art it should be, is Radiohead. Here's an underrated band that could have and should have been more popular on the airwaves instead of just playing "Creep" to death." Radiohead is far from underrated. And they were and are quite popular, selling out arenas (which I guess is an important criterion, as you pointed out later). And I doubt Thom Yorke would really care about airplay. 3. "Find us some guitar players in the 90's that match up to Richie Blackmore, Eddie Van Halen, Yngwie Malmsteen, Michael Schenker, Jimmy Page, Randy Rhoads, Steve Howe, etc., etc" Seriously? Trey Anastasio, Dave Navarro, Eric Johnson, Tom Morello, John Frusciante, Kim Thayil. I think you missed the point that 90's guitar zeitgeist still used, as needed, 70's and 80's technical dick waving, but also used much broader brush-strokes. 4. "Billy Corgan? Yeah ok!!! And as far as his voice and comparing to some irony about, "well that's what they said about Geddy too." Not the same. Geddy sings with his natural voice and it may not appeal to all. King Diamond's high pitch singing doesn't appeal to everyone either but neither are singing like a complete idiot like Billy Corgan does. Anyone of of us can do an impression of that guy's singing. And their songs do suck, I don't care what anyone thinks. The drums suck, the guitar sucks, the lyrics suck, and the singing totally sucks. There is no comparison with them and Rush. The Pumpkins dominate X stations, not rock stations. They are played within the comtext of bands just as low in the talent pool that you bought into in that era, Weezer, The Offspring, Green Day, Cake, that stupid "She Missed the Train To Mars" song and "Peaches", etc" This is so sadly vitriolic that is almost HAS to be clever parody. But it's not funny enough. Look, the Pumpkins aren't my favorite band by any means, but to deny their talent, musicianship, and influence on post-'95 rock is to remain hiding behind one's own fart-cloud. 6. "Marylin Manson sucks too. But Alice In Chains, Pearl Jam, Stone Temple Pilots, Soundgarden, Live, can be played on the same channels as classic rock band" The fact that you put Live up there with Alice and Pearl Jam is a measure of how myopic some of your opinions are. IMNSHO, of course. 7. "But let's not forget that the 90's were very ghetto and dominated by rap as well. So were you musically inclined by all that rap and R&B stuff too? Do you like Keith Sweat? How about DMX? Is that your boy? Do you go chasing waterfalls?" Wow. Racist much? Keith Sweat = rap? Erm. Yes, much of the '90's rap scene was obscured by the glorified belligerence of over-the-top acts like Ghetto Boys or Cypress Hill, but you're ignorant of the influence and artistry of Tupac, Nas, KRS-1, Notorious B.I.G, Mos Def, even latter-day Public Enemy - all of whom many contemporary rock acts cite as being influences and passions. And as far as the whole "chasing waterfalls" shit - TLC did more to advance female presences in a decidedly misogynistic genre than anyone since Janet Jackson or Salt-n-Pepa. But to call a decade "very ghetto" is about as passive-aggressive bigoted as you can get. Shocker you live in Florida. 8. "Def Leppard "Pyromania" is what we liked in 1984 and if I recall correctly it didn't make #1 because of Michael Jackson's "Thriller." But while we were jammin' out to Pyromania in 1984, 10 years later you were kickin' it to TLC and Des'ree." Um, Pyromania was released in early '83 and Thriller were released in late '82. The latter topped the charts until Synchronicity knocked it off, though Thriller still was the number one album in the US in '83 and '84. Still, get your years straight if you're going to be all music-y and shit. 9. "I mean there are so many 90's bands headlining and playing arenas and stadiums, right?" Chili Peppers, Phish, Pearl Jam, Radiohead, U2, and a few others are still doing the above consistently. What you miss, though, is that the 90's really wasn't about arena rock any more. The '90's saw the birth of festivals, small venues (The 930 Club in DC, the Pageant in StL, the Continental Club in Austin, etc), and more niche acts that still could sell out venues across the country. 10. "Motley Crue reunited with Vince Neil and Tommy Lee, Disturbed, Linkin Park, Godsmack, 3 Doors Down, POD, Halford and Priest soon reunited, Sevendust, music was getting fun to listen to again" Haha - you said Linkin Park... 11. "But go to your I-Heart Radio and look up 105.9 The X from Pittsburgh. You'll love that station! Your welcome!" That's "You're". Please remember paragraphs and contractual apostrophes. Oh it makes you look so smart correcting one's English. Believe me, you aren't worth it. Read my posts, I will not proofread. I know how to spell but it's quick thoughts and typing. There will be errors. If you can't get past it then that's your problem. If that's your best comeback then you're just proving you are a girl. So you like 105.9 The X? Figured you would. Again though, you aren't worth the research, I lived the years. If you could comprehend at all then you would pay attention to the details like when I say things like, "if I recall correctly." So it sounds you didn't live that era so you need to be educated. Just because the album was released on a date didn't mean it was instant success. You see, unlike your 90's bands, there were more than just one or two songs. But when you have 3 solid singles then it tends to prolong the album's activity at the top of the charts. What was still very strong in '84 seemed brand new even though the LP release was in "83 or "82. Yes, it does confuse dates when looking back into the soundtrack of life. But if you're looking for some leverage, well you won't get it with your 90's "shit." Glad you attempteed another approach, shows you're losing. But 1982, 83, and 84 had so many great songs, sounds, and bands that when one new sound was being born we were still enjoying the life of so many other great sounds that it took time for the new stuf to take over. If 90's music is your thing then good for you. Again thoug, if you read my posts closely then you will see I am not just someone knocking the music after my generation. You need to read. I can listen to music from centuries ago and find songs and sounds I like and appreciate. I like many bands from today and recent years. The crap you got in the 90's, well, sorry but you got ripped off. You were taken advatage of becuase you were young and naive. Hey, happens to us all. Not like I don't like some metal bands from the 80's that clearly got away with one. But I didn't get screwed like you did. Sorry, man. But I didn't listen to lyrics so much either. But don't get me wrong, I could take some of the 90's crap had it just been a genre of stuff that simply was a fill-in for actual good music. You didn't have bands like The Who, Fleetwood Mac, Led Lep, The Police, etc, splitting up and doing solo stuff like they did in the 80's. Sure it was a disappointment for the 70's fans but when I think of the 90's it's like in Star Wars Episode 3 and all the Jedis going into exile. Got a treat for ya! A new paragraph! Woohooooo!!!!!! Yo're too negative. Radiohead would have gotten more attention in another era. That's the band that the 90's should have taken after. That's the group that took music to another level or another direction. Yeah, Linkin Park. What's your question? They are clearly your Pearl Jam of the next decade. Gonna argue it? Can you deny their first two albums? Pretty solid stuff. Do I want to see them live? I'd like to hear them. Of course the 90's weren't about arena rok anymore. Well, for one, the talent wasn't there. Festivals have been happening for a long time. Ever go to the midwest? So you wanna talk about Florida? I can tell you some things about Florida. But feel free to read my posts. I'm from Pittsburgh, and I live in Naples, Florida. Naples is nice. But it's too rich. It has class but not many peoploe who know who Rush is. Well, except for one resident who actually plays for Rush. You take the good with the bad no matter where you live. But you should never call someone racist. Everyone is entitled to their own tastes. But again it just shows that you don't think for yourself. You show how stupid you are. "You're racist, you're dates are off, your spelling." FU

Everyone in this forum understands this sentiment. Seems like you're starting something new by joining TRF. So, you're still expanding your horizons. Do yourself a favor and check out foo fighters or smashing pumpkins...there's something there for you I promise. Seeker, it has nothing to do with being an old fart or not. Opening acts tend to suck in general. Well, except back in the 70's/80's when both bands were worthy of being the headlining act. But opening acts for Rush are usually a drag. I remember having to sit through Mr Big opening for Rush on the Presto tour. Not only does Mr Big not really have good songs but it wasn't a match for Rush music. I'd rather see a band that has a new progressive sound. If there is to be an opening act for Rush again then I trust Rush's judgement on who they might select. We don't hear all the rock bands that come out of Canada. I'm sure there are some talented bands up there that would keep our interest and play a good show. But, it's like seeing opening bands for U2. The opening acts suck and when I go to a Rush show or a U2 show, I am there for their music only. Both these bands have achieved such status that they can get away with no opening acts. U2 still has opening acts. But I don;t want anything other than An Evening with Rush. Not to mention, it's a long time to be standing there, I don't care how young or old, when you're bored with the opening act it sucks standing there. Rush fans don't wanna hear anything other than Rush. Screw the opening act. As for The Foo Fighters and The Smashing Pumpkins, well, The Smashing Pumpkins SUCK!!!! Since when did they expand anyones horizons? Really?! I mean, that singer actually sings that way?! f**k that group! They are a perfect example of why the 90's was such shit. As for the Foos, good radio rock songs but not interesting. Boring actually. I'd be f*ckin' pissed if I had to sit through either of these bands. Well, I wouldn't be sitting because I'm usually very close to the stage. But I'd be out roaming the halls and making friends with all the Rush fans that feel the same way until the opening band finished. But if there is gonna be an opening act then my vote goes to April Wine or Zebra. Not that either of those two would happen but that's a much better match. Smashing Pumpkins, gimme a break. Maybe Filter can open up too or Nine Inch Nails. Maybe POTUSA or The Offspring could open. How about Paula Cole or Luscious Jackson? Maybe Cake or Bush. How about Weezer? I mean, if we're gonna have stupid f*ckin' 90's bands opening up then here's your Rush setlist, Set 1: Test For Echo (in its entirety) Set 2: Counterparts (in its entirety) Encore: Roll The Bones (entire album in a medley) Most Rush fans favorite era is the late 70's through the early 80's. So IF there was an opening act then it'd make sense to pair the band up with bands from that era. Or, introduce us to something we haven't heard of yet. But I hope they don't have an opening act. As far as Primus, I've seen them a a couple times at the Ozfests. I just don't get their music. The songs aren't any good. Yeah the bass playing is wicked but the songs suck. Seeker, if you got with the times then you'd be wearing you pants way below your waist, you ball cap sideways and the cap would have an oversized bill, don't forget your bling-bling and your wife-beater muscle shirt, and you'd talk like, "yo! yo! wha'dup dog? Y u dissin' me?" It doesn't matter when you were born. Good music is good music and stuff that sucks simply sucks. I hate country music but not the stuff from the 50's, 60's, and 70's. There were some very good songs then. Old Motown and Soul, it's not in my i-pod but it was good. If your family is telling you to get with the times then my guess is you need to update how you're listening to your music. Yeah, ditch the cassette player and portable disc player. You deserve better. Put all your songs in an i-pod. But I know kids half my age that love Pink Floyd and Led Zep and they are bummed that they didn't grow up with that music. They love when I introduce them to more stuff from the era before Cobain killed himself and took the industry down with him. If you don't understand the modern stuff, it's not because of age. Put it this way, Incubus is a very good band. They are very talented and have some very good songs. But they can't make a good album from start to finish. And something else to remember, and I don't know your age but I'm pretty sure we come from the same era, or pretty close at least. We are that generation that doesn't grow up in many ways. We still like Star Wars and still think the X-Wing Fighter is a cool ship and still wanna own one and fly one. We still like the Trans Am in the first Smokey and the Bandit and still wanna own one. We still go to rock concerts and still feel like a kid at these shows. We had alot of cool popculture growing up that other generations didn't have. It's a little different for you because you have a wife and kids. I have a cat, so I can be whatever age I want. But be yourself and enjoy what always made you happy. I don't hate the 90's beacause I was out of high school then. There were just horrible bands then. They didn't add anything new. There were some good albums and some new sounds but for the most part it was pathetic and so bad that it was offensive. And no ofense to Tombstone, I don't mean to attack anyone's taste in music, not everyone will agree with what I like, but those 90's bands really piss me off. And by the way, I totally noticed the Sad Wings of Destiny album cover you have pictured with your posts. That's one of the best metal albums ever and totally underrated. I love Deceiver! I'm not sure what all you like these days but I'll throw a couples bands your way. You may already be familiar but here goes. Trapt, check out the CD Someone in Control. They are a very good and underrated modern hard rock band. I see that you are a Yes fan. Did you like Asia? They reunited and did 3 more albums. Omega is the middle one and has some good songs on it. I'd say it's more than half good. The secong track, Through My Veins, and the third track, Holy War, are very good songs. Sevendust has a very good album, Animosity. I'm not too crazy about the first two tracks but it really takes off after that. Great percussion and unpredictable progressions. They have good songs on the next two albums after that but they also try to just make noise and buncha double bass and roaring. You may already know all this, if so, sorry. Just sounded like you hadn't heard anything new or recent in a while. I'm guessing you never heard this band before though, To Die For. They're from Finland I believe. A dark, gothic, talented metal band. Not sure the wife will like this band since you're a Priest fan you may like them. Their early stuff was good. Check out the songs, Little Deaths, Vale of Tears, and Loveless. Stupid-ass Smashing Pumkins! If you have ever seen the show South Park, well, picture Eric Cartman singing. That's what Smashing Pumpkins' Billy Corgan sounds like. Looks like too! Rock on Seeker! Zzzzzzzzzzzz Keep ya cockyogurt to yourself. Got something to say?

Beastie Boys sold were never bigger than they were in 1987. They sold almost as much of Ill as all their other records combined. And Paul's Boutique is an 80s record as well (and much more of a critical bit than a popular one). And I listed Rage in my post :) Finally someone is wise. Rage does get honorable mention as the style of guitar was again revolutionalized. Finally someone with their own style emerged. A sound that hadn't been original in quite some time. Rage was not that great, somewhat annoying actually. Yet they fkn jammed too!. They were actually not so versitile but they were consistent with the sound of that era. In an era where guitar took a back seat, Tom Morello reinvented the guitar with his own ideas. I rank him up there with many of those who were able to do so like Eddie Van Halen and Jimi Hendrix, in the aspect of being original and revolutionizing the instrument. In an era that was obviously not a place for a guitarist to show their stuff, Rage had a special guitarist that would open the door for revivng what the 90's killed. This era was so conservative, yet some of you think it actually was real Rock. But finally some of you were able to come up with one guitarist/sound the 90's did introduce. Sorry but Audioslave was a much bigger success. Hey 90's gay persons, when did Audioslave happen? Yeah, you lose again!

Everyone in this forum understands this sentiment. Seems like you're starting something new by joining TRF. So, you're still expanding your horizons. Do yourself a favor and check out foo fighters or smashing pumpkins...there's something there for you I promise. As for The Foo Fighters and The Smashing Pumpkins, well, The Smashing Pumpkins SUCK!!!! Since when did they expand anyones horizons? Really?! I mean, that singer actually sings that way?! f**k that group! They are a perfect example of why the 90's was such shit. I think you very adequately summed up why old people suck and don't know a damn thing about music. Extra irony points for making the same comments about Corgan's voice that people made about Geddy's, and criticizing the band's style the same way critics criticized Rush's. I actually I very knowledgable about music. And if you wanna see how bad old people suck then come to Naples, Florida. For one thing, I don't have kids so that keeps me young. I look younger than my age and I carry a youthful demeanor. I like to have fun in life. But if you think you learned something musically inclined from what you got in the 90's then you may wanna take some advice from your elders. Yeah, grab your Trapper Keeper and go sit in the front of the classroom. I will share with you some of the good I was able to pluck from the 90's. There were quite a few good one-hit-wonders but unfortunately there weren't many bands/artists that could put out a CD that was good start to finish or at least close to it. Ok, we got the obvious, Stone Temple Pilots and Pearl Jam. And let me add that 1990, 91, and 92, as much as they are years in the 90's, they really were an extension of the 80's. Something went severely wrong in 93 and 94 and then before we knew it we were in some other conservative era of just strumming chords and mocking music. The 90's was like going through bad withdraw from the 80's and 70's and might as well include the 60's and 50's too. So-called rock music took steps backwards. It was reduced and condensed into such a simple form. But through all the mockery of what was supposed to be real and the "generation X" crap (and yeah I know I am considered a gen X too because I was born in the 70's but I wasn't part of that target market), I was able to find some music that was good. I don't want to include Rush or any existing bands that had already made their mark in a prior era. Only those who were new and part of the new sound of the 90's that would mark the era with what they had us listening to as part of the soundtrack of our lives during this flat and dull era. One band in particular that will take me time to get to know and I have quite a bit of respect for, for their unpredictableness, originality, and creativity as well as making music the art it should be, is Radiohead. Here's an underrated band that could have and should have been more popular on the airwaves instead of just playing "Creep" to death. Another great sound that came out in the 90's was the first Garbage CD, along with the b-sides. That CD is trippy and and very modern in its era and timeless for that matter. The songs are deep, the changes throughout the songs are unpredictable and complex in their originality, creativity, and composition. Live was another very good band with a great singer and many good songs (but I don't ever wanna hear "Lightning Crashes" again). Nirvana was the real deal. It really sucks we didn't get to hear what they could've done for the years to come. They were the original band that started the new sound of the 90's. But go through the bands of the 70's and 80's, heck just go through the year 1984 for that matter. There isn't a year in the 90's that could match up to 1984 even if you combine years in the 90's. Find us some guitar players in the 90's that match up to Richie Blackmore, Eddie Van Halen, Yngwie Malmsteen, Michael Schenker, Jimmy Page, Randy Rhoads, Steve Howe, etc., etc. Billy Corgan? Yeah ok!!! And as far as his voice and comparing to some irony about, "well that's what they said about Geddy too." Not the same. Geddy sings with his natural voice and it may not appeal to all. King Diamond's high pitch singing doesn't appeal to everyone either but neither are singing like a complete idiot like Billy Corgan does. Anyone of of us can do an impression of that guy's singing. And their songs do suck, I don't care what anyone thinks. The drums suck, the guitar sucks, the lyrics suck, and the singing totally sucks. There is no comparison with them and Rush. The Pumpkins dominate X stations, not rock stations. They are played within the comtext of bands just as low in the talent pool that you bought into in that era, Weezer, The Offspring, Green Day, Cake, that stupid "She Missed the Train To Mars" song and "Peaches", etc. Marylin Manson sucks too. But Alice In Chains, Pearl Jam, Stone Temple Pilots, Soundgarden, Live, can be played on the same channels as classic rock bands. Ozzfest saved us from the 90's. Black Sabbath reuniting was the best thing that came out of the downward spiral of the 90's. It's certainly not that I don't like new music becuase I do. Things got way better as soon as that terrible era/decade came to an end. But let's not forget that the 90's were very ghetto and dominated by rap as well. So were you musically inclined by all that rap and R&B stuff too? Do you like Keith Sweat? How about DMX? Is that your boy? Do you go chasing waterfalls? Here's an idea, go look at the top 40 in 1994 then look at the top 40 in 1984 and you can compare talent. Def Leppard "Pyromania" is what we liked in 1984 and if I recall correctly it didn't make #1 because of Michael Jackson's "Thriller." But while we were jammin' out to Pyromania in 1984, 10 years later you were kickin' it to TLC and Des'ree. I'll take Michael Jackson and Madonna over Des'ree, TLC, and Fiona Apple any day. We had Shout At The Devil, you had Dookie. That pretty much sums it up. And don't get me wrong, some of this alternative and grunge was ok at the time but when that's the best you have to offer then there's some people out there that got away with one. Music theory certainly wasn't a prerequisite for entry level "musicians" in the 90's. Even some of the cheesiest glam bands of the 80's still had some great guitar players. And just so you know, I never intend to knock someone for what they enjoy. I'll only state my opinion and can appreciate that another really enjoys their music. I have very strong opinions of what the 90's did to music however. And "Despite all my rage I am still just a rat in a cage...." and the stupid drum fills sucks. "Letttttt....let me outtttt..." sucks! I rank it up there with my all time most hated bands. But you're so smart, right? You know something about music, right? I mean there are so many 90's bands headlining and playing arenas and stadiums, right? There's nothing inspiring about this decade. Just listen to Metallica in the 80's then listen to Metallica in the 90's. 'nuf said. Beck, there's another one dominating X stations with annoying so-called songs. The Flaming Lips! Are they selling out arenas? How about Blur? "What happened to 2-Pac?" Who cares? In 2000 Iron Maiden and Bruce reunited, Motley Crue reunited with Vince Neil and Tommy Lee, Disturbed, Linkin Park, Godsmack, 3 Doors Down, POD, Halford and Priest soon reunited, Sevendust, music was getting fun to listen to again. There was a wave of hard rock bands coming out. The door to the 90's got closed real quick! But go to your I-Heart Radio and look up 105.9 The X from Pittsburgh. You'll love that station! Your welcome! Paragraphs are your friend. You didn't slog through that? Here's a summary: Although there were a few exceptions, he thinks 90's bands were composed of talentless hacks, and he still hates the Pumpkins with unrelenting fervor. Oh. So he's still just as ignorant as before, and still can't write coherently. Got it. My beef with the 80s was that the popular music was dance or pussified music. You still had great metal (and crappy hair bands) and great rock, but it was dominated by the cheese of the 80s. The 90s basically saved rock music, in my mind. It brought the guitar to the front and the radios were filled with hard rocking acts that actually knew what their instruments were for. Unfortunately, how we consume music has changed so dramatically and the landscape has reverted back to dance/pop since the mid-to-late 90s, we'll likely look back at the early 1990s as the last time that rock was king. I hope I'm wrong about that. How did the 90's save rock? Where are your guitar solos? Rock wasn't king in the 90's, alternative and grunge was. Mainly it was rap. The Rock industry was dumbed down in the 90's but please provide us with your rulers of rock in the 90's and we can play battle of the bands.

Everyone in this forum understands this sentiment. Seems like you're starting something new by joining TRF. So, you're still expanding your horizons. Do yourself a favor and check out foo fighters or smashing pumpkins...there's something there for you I promise. As for The Foo Fighters and The Smashing Pumpkins, well, The Smashing Pumpkins SUCK!!!! Since when did they expand anyones horizons? Really?! I mean, that singer actually sings that way?! f**k that group! They are a perfect example of why the 90's was such shit. I think you very adequately summed up why old people suck and don't know a damn thing about music. Extra irony points for making the same comments about Corgan's voice that people made about Geddy's, and criticizing the band's style the same way critics criticized Rush's. I actually I very knowledgable about music. And if you wanna see how bad old people suck then come to Naples, Florida. For one thing, I don't have kids so that keeps me young. I look younger than my age and I carry a youthful demeanor. I like to have fun in life. But if you think you learned something musically inclined from what you got in the 90's then you may wanna take some advice from your elders. Yeah, grab your Trapper Keeper and go sit in the front of the classroom. I will share with you some of the good I was able to pluck from the 90's. There were quite a few good one-hit-wonders but unfortunately there weren't many bands/artists that could put out a CD that was good start to finish or at least close to it. Ok, we got the obvious, Stone Temple Pilots and Pearl Jam. And let me add that 1990, 91, and 92, as much as they are years in the 90's, they really were an extension of the 80's. Something went severely wrong in 93 and 94 and then before we knew it we were in some other conservative era of just strumming chords and mocking music. The 90's was like going through bad withdraw from the 80's and 70's and might as well include the 60's and 50's too. So-called rock music took steps backwards. It was reduced and condensed into such a simple form. But through all the mockery of what was supposed to be real and the "generation X" crap (and yeah I know I am considered a gen X too because I was born in the 70's but I wasn't part of that target market), I was able to find some music that was good. I don't want to include Rush or any existing bands that had already made their mark in a prior era. Only those who were new and part of the new sound of the 90's that would mark the era with what they had us listening to as part of the soundtrack of our lives during this flat and dull era. One band in particular that will take me time to get to know and I have quite a bit of respect for, for their unpredictableness, originality, and creativity as well as making music the art it should be, is Radiohead. Here's an underrated band that could have and should have been more popular on the airwaves instead of just playing "Creep" to death. Another great sound that came out in the 90's was the first Garbage CD, along with the b-sides. That CD is trippy and and very modern in its era and timeless for that matter. The songs are deep, the changes throughout the songs are unpredictable and complex in their originality, creativity, and composition. Live was another very good band with a great singer and many good songs (but I don't ever wanna hear "Lightning Crashes" again). Nirvana was the real deal. It really sucks we didn't get to hear what they could've done for the years to come. They were the original band that started the new sound of the 90's. But go through the bands of the 70's and 80's, heck just go through the year 1984 for that matter. There isn't a year in the 90's that could match up to 1984 even if you combine years in the 90's. Find us some guitar players in the 90's that match up to Richie Blackmore, Eddie Van Halen, Yngwie Malmsteen, Michael Schenker, Jimmy Page, Randy Rhoads, Steve Howe, etc., etc. Billy Corgan? Yeah ok!!! And as far as his voice and comparing to some irony about, "well that's what they said about Geddy too." Not the same. Geddy sings with his natural voice and it may not appeal to all. King Diamond's high pitch singing doesn't appeal to everyone either but neither are singing like a complete idiot like Billy Corgan does. Anyone of of us can do an impression of that guy's singing. And their songs do suck, I don't care what anyone thinks. The drums suck, the guitar sucks, the lyrics suck, and the singing totally sucks. There is no comparison with them and Rush. The Pumpkins dominate X stations, not rock stations. They are played within the comtext of bands just as low in the talent pool that you bought into in that era, Weezer, The Offspring, Green Day, Cake, that stupid "She Missed the Train To Mars" song and "Peaches", etc. Marylin Manson sucks too. But Alice In Chains, Pearl Jam, Stone Temple Pilots, Soundgarden, Live, can be played on the same channels as classic rock bands. Ozzfest saved us from the 90's. Black Sabbath reuniting was the best thing that came out of the downward spiral of the 90's. It's certainly not that I don't like new music becuase I do. Things got way better as soon as that terrible era/decade came to an end. But let's not forget that the 90's were very ghetto and dominated by rap as well. So were you musically inclined by all that rap and R&B stuff too? Do you like Keith Sweat? How about DMX? Is that your boy? Do you go chasing waterfalls? Here's an idea, go look at the top 40 in 1994 then look at the top 40 in 1984 and you can compare talent. Def Leppard "Pyromania" is what we liked in 1984 and if I recall correctly it didn't make #1 because of Michael Jackson's "Thriller." But while we were jammin' out to Pyromania in 1984, 10 years later you were kickin' it to TLC and Des'ree. I'll take Michael Jackson and Madonna over Des'ree, TLC, and Fiona Apple any day. We had Shout At The Devil, you had Dookie. That pretty much sums it up. And don't get me wrong, some of this alternative and grunge was ok at the time but when that's the best you have to offer then there's some people out there that got away with one. Music theory certainly wasn't a prerequisite for entry level "musicians" in the 90's. Even some of the cheesiest glam bands of the 80's still had some great guitar players. And just so you know, I never intend to knock someone for what they enjoy. I'll only state my opinion and can appreciate that another really enjoys their music. I have very strong opinions of what the 90's did to music however. And "Despite all my rage I am still just a rat in a cage...." and the stupid drum fills sucks. "Letttttt....let me outtttt..." sucks! I rank it up there with my all time most hated bands. But you're so smart, right? You know something about music, right? I mean there are so many 90's bands headlining and playing arenas and stadiums, right? There's nothing inspiring about this decade. Just listen to Metallica in the 80's then listen to Metallica in the 90's. 'nuf said. Beck, there's another one dominating X stations with annoying so-called songs. The Flaming Lips! Are they selling out arenas? How about Blur? "What happened to 2-Pac?" Who cares? In 2000 Iron Maiden and Bruce reunited, Motley Crue reunited with Vince Neil and Tommy Lee, Disturbed, Linkin Park, Godsmack, 3 Doors Down, POD, Halford and Priest soon reunited, Sevendust, music was getting fun to listen to again. There was a wave of hard rock bands coming out. The door to the 90's got closed real quick! But go to your I-Heart Radio and look up 105.9 The X from Pittsburgh. You'll love that station! Your welcome! Paragraphs are your friend. If you read my posts then you will know I prefer not to proofread. You and no one else here are no English professors nor are spelling bee champs or are any different than anyone else who doesn't practice this skill of writing for a living. If you need paragraphs to comprehend thought then don't complain, just find another site that's for the paragraph sensative people. I'm not apending the extra 15 minutes to provide you with a doctored up essay especially when we can't rely on computerized spell check anyway. Thanks for wasting everyone's time though with your best shot at making you look better by saying something so dumb as "your grammer wasn't perfect." Lick the left, pal. Most of this is done while I'm winding down. All that's important is that you get the point. Which you wouldn't be able to do with perfect compisition anyway because you aren't that smart. Feel free to make your own paragraphs.

Everyone in this forum understands this sentiment. Seems like you're starting something new by joining TRF. So, you're still expanding your horizons. Do yourself a favor and check out foo fighters or smashing pumpkins...there's something there for you I promise. As for The Foo Fighters and The Smashing Pumpkins, well, The Smashing Pumpkins SUCK!!!! Since when did they expand anyones horizons? Really?! I mean, that singer actually sings that way?! f**k that group! They are a perfect example of why the 90's was such shit. I think you very adequately summed up why old people suck and don't know a damn thing about music. Extra irony points for making the same comments about Corgan's voice that people made about Geddy's, and criticizing the band's style the same way critics criticized Rush's. I actually I very knowledgable about music. And if you wanna see how bad old people suck then come to Naples, Florida. For one thing, I don't have kids so that keeps me young. I look younger than my age and I carry a youthful demeanor. I like to have fun in life. But if you think you learned something musically inclined from what you got in the 90's then you may wanna take some advice from your elders. Yeah, grab your Trapper Keeper and go sit in the front of the classroom. I will share with you some of the good I was able to pluck from the 90's. There were quite a few good one-hit-wonders but unfortunately there weren't many bands/artists that could put out a CD that was good start to finish or at least close to it. Ok, we got the obvious, Stone Temple Pilots and Pearl Jam. And let me add that 1990, 91, and 92, as much as they are years in the 90's, they really were an extension of the 80's. Something went severely wrong in 93 and 94 and then before we knew it we were in some other conservative era of just strumming chords and mocking music. The 90's was like going through bad withdraw from the 80's and 70's and might as well include the 60's and 50's too. So-called rock music took steps backwards. It was reduced and condensed into such a simple form. But through all the mockery of what was supposed to be real and the "generation X" crap (and yeah I know I am considered a gen X too because I was born in the 70's but I wasn't part of that target market), I was able to find some music that was good. I don't want to include Rush or any existing bands that had already made their mark in a prior era. Only those who were new and part of the new sound of the 90's that would mark the era with what they had us listening to as part of the soundtrack of our lives during this flat and dull era. One band in particular that will take me time to get to know and I have quite a bit of respect for, for their unpredictableness, originality, and creativity as well as making music the art it should be, is Radiohead. Here's an underrated band that could have and should have been more popular on the airwaves instead of just playing "Creep" to death. Another great sound that came out in the 90's was the first Garbage CD, along with the b-sides. That CD is trippy and and very modern in its era and timeless for that matter. The songs are deep, the changes throughout the songs are unpredictable and complex in their originality, creativity, and composition. Live was another very good band with a great singer and many good songs (but I don't ever wanna hear "Lightning Crashes" again). Nirvana was the real deal. It really sucks we didn't get to hear what they could've done for the years to come. They were the original band that started the new sound of the 90's. But go through the bands of the 70's and 80's, heck just go through the year 1984 for that matter. There isn't a year in the 90's that could match up to 1984 even if you combine years in the 90's. Find us some guitar players in the 90's that match up to Richie Blackmore, Eddie Van Halen, Yngwie Malmsteen, Michael Schenker, Jimmy Page, Randy Rhoads, Steve Howe, etc., etc. Billy Corgan? Yeah ok!!! And as far as his voice and comparing to some irony about, "well that's what they said about Geddy too." Not the same. Geddy sings with his natural voice and it may not appeal to all. King Diamond's high pitch singing doesn't appeal to everyone either but neither are singing like a complete idiot like Billy Corgan does. Anyone of of us can do an impression of that guy's singing. And their songs do suck, I don't care what anyone thinks. The drums suck, the guitar sucks, the lyrics suck, and the singing totally sucks. There is no comparison with them and Rush. The Pumpkins dominate X stations, not rock stations. They are played within the comtext of bands just as low in the talent pool that you bought into in that era, Weezer, The Offspring, Green Day, Cake, that stupid "She Missed the Train To Mars" song and "Peaches", etc. Marylin Manson sucks too. But Alice In Chains, Pearl Jam, Stone Temple Pilots, Soundgarden, Live, can be played on the same channels as classic rock bands. Ozzfest saved us from the 90's. Black Sabbath reuniting was the best thing that came out of the downward spiral of the 90's. It's certainly not that I don't like new music becuase I do. Things got way better as soon as that terrible era/decade came to an end. But let's not forget that the 90's were very ghetto and dominated by rap as well. So were you musically inclined by all that rap and R&B stuff too? Do you like Keith Sweat? How about DMX? Is that your boy? Do you go chasing waterfalls? Here's an idea, go look at the top 40 in 1994 then look at the top 40 in 1984 and you can compare talent. Def Leppard "Pyromania" is what we liked in 1984 and if I recall correctly it didn't make #1 because of Michael Jackson's "Thriller." But while we were jammin' out to Pyromania in 1984, 10 years later you were kickin' it to TLC and Des'ree. I'll take Michael Jackson and Madonna over Des'ree, TLC, and Fiona Apple any day. We had Shout At The Devil, you had Dookie. That pretty much sums it up. And don't get me wrong, some of this alternative and grunge was ok at the time but when that's the best you have to offer then there's some people out there that got away with one. Music theory certainly wasn't a prerequisite for entry level "musicians" in the 90's. Even some of the cheesiest glam bands of the 80's still had some great guitar players. And just so you know, I never intend to knock someone for what they enjoy. I'll only state my opinion and can appreciate that another really enjoys their music. I have very strong opinions of what the 90's did to music however. And "Despite all my rage I am still just a rat in a cage...." and the stupid drum fills sucks. "Letttttt....let me outtttt..." sucks! I rank it up there with my all time most hated bands. But you're so smart, right? You know something about music, right? I mean there are so many 90's bands headlining and playing arenas and stadiums, right? There's nothing inspiring about this decade. Just listen to Metallica in the 80's then listen to Metallica in the 90's. 'nuf said. Beck, there's another one dominating X stations with annoying so-called songs. The Flaming Lips! Are they selling out arenas? How about Blur? "What happened to 2-Pac?" Who cares? In 2000 Iron Maiden and Bruce reunited, Motley Crue reunited with Vince Neil and Tommy Lee, Disturbed, Linkin Park, Godsmack, 3 Doors Down, POD, Halford and Priest soon reunited, Sevendust, music was getting fun to listen to again. There was a wave of hard rock bands coming out. The door to the 90's got closed real quick! But go to your I-Heart Radio and look up 105.9 The X from Pittsburgh. You'll love that station! Your welcome!

If anyone can't see how great Clockwork Angels is then they are missing out really bad. When I first heard it, it grabbed me right away. Really though, after hearing Caravan and BU2B, I anticipated they were on to something really good. I'm still really enjoying Cockwork Angels. The Garden is such a powerful song. I can't believe the bass lines in The Anarchist. The Wreckers, what a great song and story. The title track for some reason reminds me of Iron Maiden, Powerslave. Hard for me to explain that comparison and it's late so I'm not even gonna try. I'll let you try and figure it out. There really are no words for how great this album is. My only fear is that it could be their last. What else can they do? Rush has given us a life's worth of music and memories. If they wanted to go out on top then this would be the album to retire on. It's the the NFL player who gets the opportunity to play in the Super Bowl as their last game. Or the NHL player to win the Cup then retires. But Rush has always been a working band. Even if they sit back a bit and do their own things, at some point they'll get that itch to be Rush and write and record and tour again. The ideas will be fresh and new. Life will have presented them with yet another one of life's chapters and experience to inspire and influence them. Rush seems to miss us just as we miss them. But to compare Clockwork to the albums that have stood over 30 years is a fair arguement. But if that's what's holding you back from hearing what a masterpiece Clockwork really is then you're missing out. I hate to say it but you're probably not really a true Rush fan if you can't understand how great Clockwork really is. But in the modern era, Rush albums come out every five years. Our lives change a few times before a new Rush album comes out. We have no clue where our lives will be the next time a Rush album comes out. Heck, we don't know if we'll still be alive. But if and when that next album does come out, we'll be ready. Clockwork is good enough to hold me over for a long time. I can't say that about Vapor Trails or Snakes and Arrows. It's hard for me to imagine what it will be like when Clockwork isn't the newest Rush material. And with each album I always go back and listen to one one before it.So that will be strange to me going back and listening to Clockwork not being the newest Rush album. But we all know the end could be near. Rush is in the Hall of Fame now. What else do they have to prove? This was a very exciting period of time for them. An R40 tour would probably be a way for Rush to express their thanks to all the fans. So I can see that tour coming whether it be the R40 tour or something along the lines of the HOF tour. But after that it is difficult to see other than them sitting back and staying buzy on whatever they do as individuals. Then again, who knows? Maybe they just keep going and writing and playing together. But Rush has been very good about giving their fans what they want as if they are fans themselves. So it certainly isn't out of the question to think they would be open to working with Terry Brown again. But I think we all have so much Clockwork Angels still in our system, and with the new live stuff coming out, that it isn't clear yet as to what is next. I feel very spoiled at this point. The Time Machine tour was a gift. How awesome was it that we got Rush tours in 2007, 08, 10, 11, 12, 13? And already talks of next year. Yeah, they've been good to us. But let's see what sound the music industry invents in the next couple years. Whatever it is, Rush will play it their way.

Everyone in this forum understands this sentiment. Seems like you're starting something new by joining TRF. So, you're still expanding your horizons. Do yourself a favor and check out foo fighters or smashing pumpkins...there's something there for you I promise. Seeker, it has nothing to do with being an old fart or not. Opening acts tend to suck in general. Well, except back in the 70's/80's when both bands were worthy of being the headlining act. But opening acts for Rush are usually a drag. I remember having to sit through Mr Big opening for Rush on the Presto tour. Not only does Mr Big not really have good songs but it wasn't a match for Rush music. I'd rather see a band that has a new progressive sound. If there is to be an opening act for Rush again then I trust Rush's judgement on who they might select. We don't hear all the rock bands that come out of Canada. I'm sure there are some talented bands up there that would keep our interest and play a good show. But, it's like seeing opening bands for U2. The opening acts suck and when I go to a Rush show or a U2 show, I am there for their music only. Both these bands have achieved such status that they can get away with no opening acts. U2 still has opening acts. But I don;t want anything other than An Evening with Rush. Not to mention, it's a long time to be standing there, I don't care how young or old, when you're bored with the opening act it sucks standing there. Rush fans don't wanna hear anything other than Rush. Screw the opening act. As for The Foo Fighters and The Smashing Pumpkins, well, The Smashing Pumpkins SUCK!!!! Since when did they expand anyones horizons? Really?! I mean, that singer actually sings that way?! f**k that group! They are a perfect example of why the 90's was such shit. As for the Foos, good radio rock songs but not interesting. Boring actually. I'd be f*ckin' pissed if I had to sit through either of these bands. Well, I wouldn't be sitting because I'm usually very close to the stage. But I'd be out roaming the halls and making friends with all the Rush fans that feel the same way until the opening band finished. But if there is gonna be an opening act then my vote goes to April Wine or Zebra. Not that either of those two would happen but that's a much better match. Smashing Pumpkins, gimme a break. Maybe Filter can open up too or Nine Inch Nails. Maybe POTUSA or The Offspring could open. How about Paula Cole or Luscious Jackson? Maybe Cake or Bush. How about Weezer? I mean, if we're gonna have stupid f*ckin' 90's bands opening up then here's your Rush setlist, Set 1: Test For Echo (in its entirety) Set 2: Counterparts (in its entirety) Encore: Roll The Bones (entire album in a medley) Most Rush fans favorite era is the late 70's through the early 80's. So IF there was an opening act then it'd make sense to pair the band up with bands from that era. Or, introduce us to something we haven't heard of yet. But I hope they don't have an opening act. As far as Primus, I've seen them a a couple times at the Ozfests. I just don't get their music. The songs aren't any good. Yeah the bass playing is wicked but the songs suck. Seeker, if you got with the times then you'd be wearing you pants way below your waist, you ball cap sideways and the cap would have an oversized bill, don't forget your bling-bling and your wife-beater muscle shirt, and you'd talk like, "yo! yo! wha'dup dog? Y u dissin' me?" It doesn't matter when you were born. Good music is good music and stuff that sucks simply sucks. I hate country music but not the stuff from the 50's, 60's, and 70's. There were some very good songs then. Old Motown and Soul, it's not in my i-pod but it was good. If your family is telling you to get with the times then my guess is you need to update how you're listening to your music. Yeah, ditch the cassette player and portable disc player. You deserve better. Put all your songs in an i-pod. But I know kids half my age that love Pink Floyd and Led Zep and they are bummed that they didn't grow up with that music. They love when I introduce them to more stuff from the era before Cobain killed himself and took the industry down with him. If you don't understand the modern stuff, it's not because of age. Put it this way, Incubus is a very good band. They are very talented and have some very good songs. But they can't make a good album from start to finish. And something else to remember, and I don't know your age but I'm pretty sure we come from the same era, or pretty close at least. We are that generation that doesn't grow up in many ways. We still like Star Wars and still think the X-Wing Fighter is a cool ship and still wanna own one and fly one. We still like the Trans Am in the first Smokey and the Bandit and still wanna own one. We still go to rock concerts and still feel like a kid at these shows. We had alot of cool popculture growing up that other generations didn't have. It's a little different for you because you have a wife and kids. I have a cat, so I can be whatever age I want. But be yourself and enjoy what always made you happy. I don't hate the 90's beacause I was out of high school then. There were just horrible bands then. They didn't add anything new. There were some good albums and some new sounds but for the most part it was pathetic and so bad that it was offensive. And no ofense to Tombstone, I don't mean to attack anyone's taste in music, not everyone will agree with what I like, but those 90's bands really piss me off. And by the way, I totally noticed the Sad Wings of Destiny album cover you have pictured with your posts. That's one of the best metal albums ever and totally underrated. I love Deceiver! I'm not sure what all you like these days but I'll throw a couples bands your way. You may already be familiar but here goes. Trapt, check out the CD Someone in Control. They are a very good and underrated modern hard rock band. I see that you are a Yes fan. Did you like Asia? They reunited and did 3 more albums. Omega is the middle one and has some good songs on it. I'd say it's more than half good. The secong track, Through My Veins, and the third track, Holy War, are very good songs. Sevendust has a very good album, Animosity. I'm not too crazy about the first two tracks but it really takes off after that. Great percussion and unpredictable progressions. They have good songs on the next two albums after that but they also try to just make noise and buncha double bass and roaring. You may already know all this, if so, sorry. Just sounded like you hadn't heard anything new or recent in a while. I'm guessing you never heard this band before though, To Die For. They're from Finland I believe. A dark, gothic, talented metal band. Not sure the wife will like this band since you're a Priest fan you may like them. Their early stuff was good. Check out the songs, Little Deaths, Vale of Tears, and Loveless. Stupid-ass Smashing Pumkins! If you have ever seen the show South Park, well, picture Eric Cartman singing. That's what Smashing Pumpkins' Billy Corgan sounds like. Looks like too! Rock on Seeker!

That was a good article. However, something that stood out to me, was when the author made mention of the song Countdown. So what was wrong with Countdown? I love that song! The way I interpreted it was that Terry had nothing to do with that song and was not pleased with it. I think that song is very powerful and I love the overdubs with the backround sounds, the chopper flying over, the NASA voice counting down, etc. Not to mention the awesome chord progressions to close out the song. To me, this song was produced very well and is clearly one of Rush's more underrated pieces of work. This song is totally on my wishlist to see them play live again. So I doubt Terry walked out of the studio on this song. By the way, catching a shuttle launch is a very difficult thing to do. Especially now since they stopped launching the shuttles. But I did get a chance to go to the Kennedy Space Center, and yes, while I was making my drive there after getting off a cruise ship at Port Canaveral, I jammed out Coundown quite a few times. It was only fitting to do so and alot of fun. But I did not get to see the Atlantis take off as the dates constantly would get postponed. You really have to have alot of time off, hence, all the campers in the video. The weather changes so much and cloud covering rolls in causing delays that can last for weeks. But I am in favor of Rush reuniting with Terry for another album. At this stage in Rush's career they have so much flexibility to do what they want and be who they want. They could go back through their years and reproduce any era they want and be able to do it with perfection. If Rush wanted to do another Hemispheres-like album, they could. Alot of people and articles continue to speculate some kind of instrumental album. Rush has many songs that are so long that they are actually instrumental in so many ways. Jacob's Ladder has long movements without any vocals. The Camera Eye and Xanadu have long introductions and the instrumental work on these songs really takes precedent. Even with the vocals, these songs are very instrumental. This is sort of what I picture as their next project and who better to produce this than Terry Brown? And, one last argument in favor of Countdown. This song truly lives up to the band's name. It has that adrenaline rush that the band originally intended to deliver when they first made songs and came up with the name of the band.

Rush is on a hot streak right now. This is a good period of time for them to keep writing. But it's not necessary to deliver an entire LP. If the songs are coming to them then they should just go with it. They don't have to force an entire album but maybe they will naturally be writing some songs. I think an EP of like 6 songs would be something that would kind of be an extension of the Clockwork Angels sound but also a bridge to the direction they may take next. It would also be a great way to experiment. But only an EP would be good for us Rush fans if it were realeased in the middle of these five year periods we now wait for new Rush albums. And what I would be very interested in seeing is Rush doing an EP with Terry Brown working the production with the band. I have to laugh though because Rush doing 6 songs is still a full length album for them due to the duration of their songs. But Moving Pictures is 7 songs, Permanent Waves is 6. I think following this concept would be the best way to follow up Clockwork Angels.

Here's a few more to add to the list. Anything Aerosmith has done 1989 and newer. I don't care what anyone says, Love in an Elevator is so fkn stupid! And then all the ballads they were doing in the 90's was just a brutal reality that good music was truly dying. What was there to fall back on? Metallica? Yeah let me just throw in Load, Re-Load, Blow A Load, Dump A Load, f..k Metallica! Did they all die in the bus crash? I think so. Those posers in the 90's who claim to be Metallica were more like Metallica Jam. Aerosmith and Metallica, here are two bands that have sucked for much longer than they were good. Enter Sandman was a good guitar jam (but not Master of Puppets by any means) but the lyrics are unbearable to listen to. Sorry but just because you sing it like metal doesn't make the line, "gripping your pillow tight" sound cool. This was clean metal for 12 year olds. And Aerosmith and their stupid horn section sounds. Only a saxophone has really ever fit in some songs in rock (Foreigner -"Urgent", Quarterflash -"Harden My Heart") but that noisey horn section that they think is cool, SUCKS! Although the above may not be at the top of my list of most hated songs, they have made their mark and are worth mentioning and have had their moments of pissing me off. It is just as much worth noting that anything unplugged sucks! What a horrible trend this unplugged crap was. Nothing kills a song more than when they do an acoustic version of the song. Here are some examples, Asia and Heart. The song "Don't Cry" by Asia is a very good song. It's a fast moving song, very catchy, and incredibly done by all the instruments in the band. It rocks. "The Smile Has Left Your Eyes" is a great power ballad by Asia. This song is very powerful and very deep. Yet when Asia plays live they always do acoustic versions of both these songs and it is such a buzz kill! It's bad enough when you go to a concert and the band butchers the songs with crowd interaction and encores and letting the crowd sing instead or anything they do but play the songs the way we know them. But unplugging it is a ripoff to me. If they wanna unplug it in the begining of the song then at least pick it up electric in the second half of the song. The Heart song, "Alone," another great ballad, very powerful, the song rocks. Yet live they unplug it. When I saw Foreigner I thought for sure they were going to unplug "Starrider." Thankfully they didn't! I am surprized they didn't unplug anything. But it's one thing to unplug a song on a tour but to unplug the same songs on every tour, as Asia did with those two songs, is annoying. Just take the songs off the setlist. Look, I gotta be like the parent scolding the 6 year old child. "If you can't play the songs right then you're not going to play them at all. There, problem solved. You're grounded from your acoutic guitar too." Don't get me wrong, there are some good versions of songs unplugged. Queensryche did awesome versions of "The Killing Words" and "The Lady Wore Black." But if I am seeing them live and they interupt the electric show to slow down and unplug for a couple songs it will have the same affect, BORING!!! And yeah, I know Rush unplugged "Resist." I'd still rather have heard that song electric but it wasn't a major disappointment. It slowed the show down but by unplugging that song they didn't leave much behind. Sheryl Crow! This chick's got some songs that are consistant with how bad the 90's were. I hate the song "Soak up the Sun!" But that song she and Kid Rock did, "Picture," really pisses me off! I can't believe people get paid for that crap! But that's the music industry for ya. Just like the food industry, gotta have places like Pizza Hut and Papa Johns, we gotta have poor quality music too. But I am sure most would love to be a musician but most of us take too much pride in our work to be able to submit something like "Picture" as our completed project. No, we realized we sucked that bad and decided to do something else. Little did we know we could have gotten away with being so bad. Speaking of pride in your work, anything Hip Hop, R & B, and Rap. Remember when black guys could sing? 60's and 70's soul? Some good stuff. But this garbage that for some reason is popular especially by white people, is beyond me and makes me wanna leave the frickn' country! Today's country music and that from the last 30 years makes me wanna leave as well. But look how msuic has been reduced to its smallest form. A metronome and a rhyme? It's practically tribal! Where are we going with music in this country? It was progressing nicely then all the sudden the 90's happened and we all got dumbed down. I take it no one takes music theory anymore. I can't even come up with any examples because the whole genre sounds the same. But if you were given a music project in school and this is what you handed in, wouldn't you expect to get a really low grade? Yeah, you get a grade for completeness but nothing musically inclined and no creativity. "So you get an F! And the only reason I gave you an F is because I can't give you a lower grade. So now I'm tired of slowing down my class because of you so I'm kicking you out of my class. But I'm afraid you're going to be persistant with your lame idea of music so I'm going to have you executed." My god I can't believe Rush had to play with, who was it, NWA? How does any gangster rap get in the R&R HOF? Don't call it the Rock & Roll Hall Of Fame then. If Rap is in there, you can't call it The Music Hall Of Fame either. Something else that disturbs me when thinking about idiots in music, any metal band that just tries to be heavier than the band before them. Pantera wanted to be heavier than Metallica. Who cares? Just make good songs. Judas Priest was a rock band, a hard rock band, and a heavy metal band all in one. They were professionals at what they did and changed with the times. Which was evident when they did Turbo. A major let down! Then they had to become heavier with Ram It Down. Another album that sucked. They got away from who they were. It wasn't until they reunited and did Angel of Retribution in 2004 that we heard some classic sounding Judas Priest. But alot of metal bands these days are just noise and aggression. And even if they have a few good songs like Disturbed did, many aren't talented enough to keep putting out good material. And some bands fill in the good stuff with creating material that is just a total cop out. Sevendust has alot of good songs. Only to be filled in with songs loaded with double bass and constant screaming and deep roaring. Take some fkn pride in your work and make music and write songs. And these bands wonder why they can only play cheap festivals, small local bars, and rib cook-offs. Just trying to be the heaviest, fastest, and noisiest band doesn't make you cool or any good. The Smashing Pumpkins SUCK!!! Need I say anymore? Really?! That's how that guy sings? And while I am on the topic of the worst things and things that suck, I fkn hate minivans!!!! Oh yeah, real cool how they try to ruin the Judas Priest song, "The Hellion," in their Honda Odyssey commercial. I've had to rent a minivan before while moving out of state. I refuse to listen to any good music in that thing. Every now and then I would slam my elbow into the door panel. I'd only listen to music that sucks if I listened to any music at all during that 20 hour drive. There is nothing more insulting than being stuck behind a minivan. It's like someone sticking their barefoot in your face. Don't you love when your behind a minivan in the fast lane, going under the speed limit? And you think it's the traffic in front of the minivan. Because you can't see around them, under them, or through them because the back window is tinted black! Then you catch a view of what's actually going on and realise you've just been had! There is no one in front of that piece of shit! And the whole time they have been in their own little world, in their minivan world, having no consideration for anything going on around them, completely disrespecting you. And all the while you're sorta being patient but kinda like, "C'monnnn....," and can't see nothing and then you realise you totally missed the song you were listening to. But then you realise you could have passed this asshole long ago! Gets ya pissed, doesn't it?! You pass 'em and cut 'em off! But they still aren't phased because they are in their own little minivan world and have no acknowledgement the world going on outside and around them in their Town 'n' Country or their Voyager. Yeah, I know, Rush has a song called "Caravan." I'm praying, just praying, Dodge doesn't get a hold of it! But back to this minivan shit! I swear these people who own 'em and drive 'em don't have genitals. What they do have is a big pink elbow resting on the door panel and a seat that looks more like an upright chair in front of the wheel, dork-ass ride! But they aren't male or female. "That's a nice Chevelle you have there! I used to have a '72 Chevelle......" But you cut your balls off and got a minivan. "Oh but I have kids...." So!? Get a limousine, make them feel important. Or get a dump truck! Kids like to play in the dirt. And you could dump them off at school! : ) But don't give me excuses! Minivans are disturbing and distracting and making us miss the guitar solos while we're driving. Ever notice when you are changing lanes there's always an opening behind a minivan? Do I have issues? Do I have built up anger? Yes and yes! Or am I pointing out the obvious and helping you to recognize what you always knew but never looked at it? That's gonna be another YES! Ok, I feel better now! Have fun changing lanes : )

Ok, something that time does to us is it tends to make us forget what the Rush albums made us feel at the time they were released. When Roll The Bones was brand new, it's what we jammed while we drove around in our cars in our cassette players or when we plugged in CD players to our cassette steroes, and what the radio was jammin'. Roll The Bones was bigger on the airwaves where I am from than Presto was but Pittsburgh radio did support Rush well always. Roll The Bones was a little more "catchy." In this era, late 80's and early 90's, we expected bands to go away. It's very difficult for bands to survive from one decade to the next. The Beatles knew this and were skeptical about their own survival as most bands in that early rock n roll era didn't last. It was as The Beatles accepted this as inevitable and were proud to make it as long as they did. But Rush just keeps going and keeps working. Just when we started to forget about them, BAM!!!! "Here's the new song from Rush, Dreamline!" Then the radio starts playing Neurotica and Roll The Bones and Heresy and Bravado. And at that time we are changing decades and expecting new things but not knowing what to expect. But Rush was right there on schedule and probably even ahead of schedule in our musical minds. I graduated high school in '89 so there were many transitions for me in this period of time. Understanding one's self and the new realities and either letting go of the trends we were apart of, whether it were real or just a phase of youth, were some things we have to figure out as we grow. But Rush was still being Rush and making new material and not dying off like so many bands do and did, and we got used to it. But Rush never detached from what Rush does and never stopped working or detached from us. They are like a music box that never stops playing and is so happy to do so. They are like the sweetest girlfriend or best friend that is always happy to see you and keeps smiling and full of such positive energy. Sometimes we forget what these albums sounded like when they were new to us. There are many that are so down about Test For Echo. That was the first time we had to wait 4 years for new Rush. So when we got it, it was awesome! Then the Neil Peart video came out, "A Work In Progress," and took us even deeper into the songs on that album. What a masterpiece! But the songs die for us for whatever reasons. At the time they were new, they were the latest Rush songs and were very good. Unfortunately, the 90's had such poor context, especially after the Roll The Bones era, that when you heard a new Rush song, it wasn't followed up by or played in a rock block of anything that was in at least the right direction of music. What was left was dying. At least when you hear Roll The Bones or Presto you can think of alot of other good tunes and bands and waves of music that were still delivering. Even though it wasn't the 70's and early 80's, the early 90's definately made its mark in the soundtrack in our lives even with the Rico Suave and Bel Biv Devo stuff to the continuation of the last stages of metal and glam metal to the remainders of some rock n roll legends leaving us with some one-hit-womders or a few more singles (Robert Plant, Paul Rogers-The Law, The Storm-some Journey leftovers, etc, Tom Petty). The soundwaves were still alive and well at that time and producing new sounds that were fun even if it wasn't our musical preference. As far as I am concerned, 1990, 1991, and 1992 might as well be 1980-10, 1980-11, and 1980-12. Presto and Roll The Bones are two albums that are so close to one another. Like A-side and B-side but worthy of so much more. They are like the blond chick and her best friend, the brunnette chick. Both are so beautiful and so hard to pick one over the other. I love them both so much. They are different yet have so much in common. They make a great pair. Could be the perfect double album Rish never made. But Presto was a revival album for Rush in many ways and was consistant with the climb out of the depths of the bottom of the colorful and synthesized and sell-out 80's commercial era of 1986-88. Presto was turning another corner for Rush. The format and layout of the album was similar to Hold Your Fire in the way that it had the same approximate number of songs (maybe a pattern there as Signals, Grace Under Pressure, and Power Windows had 4 songs each side). But the songs rocked and had great melody. The album had drive. And if you saw them on that tour then you might agree that it was as good as they ever sounded live. Neil's drum kit had that 80's metal era sound. Alex' guitar was distorted and had the crunch that was consistant with the over-distortion of that era but it worked for Rush. Geddy changed his image then as well and the whole thing just worked. To me, Presto is their most underrated work. For those of us who are in the class of "89, when I talk to music fans from then, they love Presto. It is not uncommon to hear a rocker from then cheer out, "Prestoooo!" I hear that when I play songs from Presto on the jukebox, when I wear my 1990 tour shirt to the shows, when I engage in Rush talk. Not to mention how cool the album cover is with the rabbits. But listen to these Rush albums as if they just came out or try to remeber and take yourself back to when they were new. Only then can you hear them in their purist form. If life is really bad then it may be a good idea to wait to buy an album from your favorite band so as not to remind you of those bad times when you hear that album later on. But Rush is always there through the good and the bad. Fortunatley for the most part when I listen to them I remember the good. Presto was there when I was in transition from high school to the real world as was Roll The Bones. But very difficult for me to pick one over the other as my Pittsburgh Penguins were winning Cups (Pirates were awesome eventhough they choked) and Roll The Bones always reminds me of that time. But I would have to say that Presto is my choice if I has to decide. There's no need to list the songs as you already know them in your own way. Every song touches us personally in our own ways. I just think the songs on Presto are deeper and better songs. The sounds are more in depth and the songs are more creative and more melodic. Hard to compete with Ghost of a Chance and Bravado but Presto is musically a better album. Roll The Bones is more upbeat. But the sountrack of my life would be incomplete without either. Sorry for rambling, good night! I hope you will forgive me, I write for a while and don't usually proofread Gonna go jam out some Roll The Bones and Presto now!

Ok, something that time does to us is it tends to make us forget what the Rush albums made us feel at the time they were released. When Roll The Bones was brand new, it's what we jammed while we drove around in our cars in our cassette players or when we plugged in CD players to our cassette steroes, and what the radio was jammin'. Roll The Bones was bigger on the airwaves where I am from than Presto was but Pittsburgh radio did support Rush well always. Roll The Bones was a little more "catchy." In this era, late 80's and early 90's, we expected bands to go away. It's very difficult for bands to survive from one decade to the next. The Beatles knew this and were skeptical about their own survival as most bands in that early rock n roll era didn't last. It was as The Beatles accepted this as inevitable and were proud to make it as long as they did. But Rush just keeps going and keeps working. Just when we started to forget about them, BAM!!!! "Here's the new song from Rush, Dreamline!" Then the radio starts playing Neurotica and Roll The Bones and Heresy and Bravado. And at that time we are changing decades and expecting new things but not knowing what to expect. But Rush was right there on schedule and probably even ahead of schedule in our musical minds. I graduated high school in '89 so there were many transitions for me in this period of time. Understanding one's self and the new realities and either letting go of the trends we were apart of, whether it were real or just a phase of youth, were some things we have to figure out as we grow. But Rush was still being Rush and making new material and not dying off like so many bands do and did, and we got used to it. But Rush never detached from what Rush does and never stopped working or detached from us. They are like a music box that never stops playing and is so happy to do so. They are like the sweetest girlfriend or best friend that is always happy to see you and keeps smiling and full of such positive energy. Sometimes we forget what these albums sounded like when they were new to us. There are many that are so down about Test For Echo. That was the first time we had to wait 4 years for new Rush. So when we got it, it was awesome! Then the Neil Peart video came out, "A Work In Progress," and took us even deeper into the songs on that album. What a masterpiece! But the songs die for us for whatever reasons. At the time they were new, they were the latest Rush songs and were very good. Unfortunately, the 90's had such poor context, especially after the Roll The Bones era, that when you heard a new Rush song, it wasn't followed up by or played in a rock block of anything that was in at least the right direction of music. What was left was dying. At least when you hear Roll The Bones or Presto you can think of alot of other good tunes and bands and waves of music that were still delivering. Even though it wasn't the 70's and early 80's, the early 90's definately made its mark in the soundtrack in our lives even with the Rico Suave and Bel Biv Devo stuff to the continuation of the last stages of metal and glam metal to the remainders of some rock n roll legends leaving us with some one-hit-womders or a few more singles (Robert Plant, Paul Rogers-The Law, The Storm-some Journey leftovers, etc, Tom Petty). The soundwaves were still alive and well at that time and producing new sounds that were fun even if it wasn't our musical preference. As far as I am concerned, 1990, 1991, and 1992 might as well be 1980-10, 1980-11, and 1980-12. Presto and Roll The Bones are two albums that are so close to one another. Like A-side and B-side but worthy of so much more. They are like the blond chick and her best friend, the brunnette chick. Both are so beautiful and so hard to pick one over the other. I love them both so much. They are different yet have so much in common. They make a great pair. Could be the perfect double album Rish never made. But Presto was a revival album for Rush in many ways and was consistant with the climb out of the depths of the bottom of the colorful and synthesized and sell-out 80's commercial era of 1986-88. Presto was turning another corner for Rush. The format and layout of the album was similar to Hold Your Fire in the way that it had the same approximate number of songs (maybe a pattern there as Signals, Grace Under Pressure, and Power Windows had 4 songs each side). But the songs rocked and had great melody. The album had drive. And if you saw them on that tour then you might agree that it was as good as they ever sounded live. Neil's drum kit had that 80's metal era sound. Alex' guitar was distorted and had the crunch that was consistant with the over-distortion of that era but it worked for Rush. Geddy changed his image then as well and the whole thing just worked. To me, Presto is their most underrated work. For those of us who are in the class of "89, when I talk to music fans from then, they love Presto. It is not uncommon to hear a rocker from then cheer out, "Prestoooo!" I hear that when I play songs from Presto on the jukebox, when I wear my 1990 tour shirt to the shows, when I engage in Rush talk. Not to mention how cool the album cover is with the rabbits. But listen to these Rush albums as if they just came out or try to remeber and take yourself back to when they were new. Only then can you hear them in their purist form. If life is really bad then it may be a good idea to wait to buy an album from your favorite band so as not to remind you of those bad times when you hear that album later on. But Rush is always there through the good and the bad. Fortunatley for the most part when I listen to them I remember the good. Presto was there when I was in transition from high school to the real world as was Roll The Bones. But very difficult for me to pick one over the other as my Pittsburgh Penguins were winning Cups (Pirates were awesome eventhough they choked) and Roll The Bones always reminds me of that time. But I would have to say that Presto is my choice if I has to decide. There's no need to list the songs as you already know them in your own way. Every song touches us personally in our own ways. I just think the songs on Presto are deeper and better songs. The sounds are more in depth and the songs are more creative and more melodic. Hard to compete with Ghost of a Chance and Bravado but Presto is musically a better album. Roll The Bones is more upbeat. But the sountrack of my life would be incomplete without either. Sorry for rambling, good night! I hope you will forgive me, I write for a while and don't usually proofread Gonna go jam out some Roll The Bones and Presto now!

I've been listening to Rush since 1979 or 1980. I wasn't even 10 years old yet. Music was always a big part of my life from as far back as I can remember. I remember being strapped into a car seat as a very small child and fighting with my older sister over the radio station we wanted to listen to in the car. She wanted Q13 and I wanted 96KICKS. My sister is a rocker though and she was the one that really got me into music including Rush. It was her copy of Moving Pictures that I kept taking and listening to. That following year, X-Mas '82 she got me Signals. Iron Maiden was my favorite band through the 80's but Rush was always there. It wasn't until like 1988 did I really decide to get the entire collection. Our rock stations where I am from played their music so much as they had so many songs released for the radio. But I wanted the rest of the collection so I went out and got Hemispheres and shortly after I purchased 2112. I used to walk to girlfriend's house at night in the fall of '88. The walk was just long enough for me to enjoy 2112 in its entirety. This girl was very special to me and what a great soundtrack I had while enjoying getting to know her. That X-Mas she got me Caress of Steel. My sister got me Hold Your Fire and Grace Under Pressure. A Show of Hands was just out and the radio was playing live versions of Mission and Marathon while my girlfriend was hanfing out with me in my room with the Christmas lights. My best friend had moved to Florida and he had come back to town for the holiday. Rush was there through all of this like another best friend. My collection had become almost complete as another girlfriend of mine had given me her Rush Archives at about the same time I had already picked up Rush and Fly By Night. She gave me her Moving Pictures tour shirt too. Come to think of it, there were alot of females involved in building my Rush collection. But it wasn't until a time in the early 90's when I had a girl ruining my life to the point I felt that life was over. Then Rush would come on the radio. Or I would stumble across some Rush in my collection while just sitting in my car parked outside my hell house where the girl and I lived. That is when I felt rescued to a certain degree. Who was she or who is anybody to do hurtful or harmful things to me? I take alot of pride in the things I like. It was some songs from Signals I listened to and I got some strength back. It was like my best friend just took me away from the hell I was going through. It was totally The Analog Kid and Subdivisions that took me from my reality and reminded me of those who really care and that Christmas that I got Signals and seeing the look on my sister's face as she was just as excited to give me that album for Christmas as I was opening it. (I still have her Moving Pictures cassette by the way). But the music reminded me that I care about myself and how much I cared about the music. Rush is the biggest part of the soundtrack of my life. Their music has been there through the good times and the bad, the growing pains and the fun times. As far as that special girl in '88, well she stopped talking to me. She never said why. We live and learn and looking back at it she probably met somebody else. I'm sure she got into a situation that wasn't sa healthy for her. Then I met another girl and to this day I regret not going out with her. She would sing lines from Xanadu to me. She liked me but to me she looked too much like the other girl and that was too much a reminder to me. Meanwhile that was probably God's way of saying, "Sorry about that one chick. But here's one that looks similar and she loves Rush!" The things we figure out later and wish we could go back and change. But I did end up with a girl who absolutely loves Rush! We were together nearly 5 years. I took her to shows. I got her 2nd row center and 10th row and 6th row and we even got backstage passes for a show 2 years ago. She was in tears when she first saw them play Red Barchetta. As a matter of fact, I had that song on the jukebox when we first met. But she went nuts at some point and fell off the deep end. As disappointing as it was I had to march on without her and do Clockwork Angels on my own. I saw them 3 times on that tour and twice went by myself. But you're never alone at a Rush concert. I feel right at home and I feel I am surrounded by friends. I make alot of friends at those shows and see alot of familiar faces. Not to mention all the Star Wars and Space Invaders shirts there! Big fan of Star Wars and early 80's video games here. So, yes, it is true that Rush music is a best friend to me and has been there all along. I think that holds true for anything we like. I get meditation out of ice skating and bicycle riding but there is something to be said for the times Rush music has saved me in the ways it has done so. And the girls still contribute to my Rush collection BTW. Mom is still good for giving me the DVD's at Christmas time. Pretty cool! Thanks mom!

I would be very surprized if they didn't play The Wreckers again. Prior to Rush doing the shows with just Rush only, they still played long sets. Unlike most bands with an opening act, Rush still played like 23 songs. Typically most bands would play 13 to 18 songs or if they played 23 songs they weren't the duration of Rush songs. Rush has played about 26 songs on thier lone tours including the drum solo. It's gotta be so hard for them to know what to play and even more difficult deciding what to ommit. But the Clockwork Angels tour was for the true fans. The average Rush fan or average rocker or concert goer or the first time Rush concert person was totally left out on this last tour. I saw them 3 times on the last tour and the fans in Sunrise, Florida just didn't get it. Tampa was alive! Pittsburgh was very good! But I think Sunrise was waiting for all the radio songs. They didn't wave their hands to Clockwork Angels like they did in Tampa and Pittsburgh. So I wondered how often Rush got that reception on this last tour and if it was enough to influence what they might play on the next tour. Alex did mention in a reent interview that the band had discussed some potential songs for an R40 tour and songs they had played but not played in a while. Well that could be The Trees, Closer To The Heart, or even Freewill depending on what "a while" means. Chemestry hasn't been played since the Signals tour. I'd trade Subdivisions for Chemistry even though Subdivisions is probably my all time favorite song. I suppose it depends on how this tour is to be promoted will determine some of the influence they have put upon them and the songs they might have to play. Or, they have the understanding of the relationship there is with their fans and they can play whatever and the tour will be a huge success. What we do know is they will play Tom Sawyer, Spirit of Radio, YYZ, 2112/Temples of Syrinx, and a drum solo. That leaves about 22 more songs left where they will select from Limelight, Subdivisions, Freewill, Red Barchetta, another instrumental, and a bunch of stuff from Chronicles. More than likely they won't blow off their latest release and will want to promote the remix of Vapor Trails so probably at least 2 songs from that album. I won't be surprized if Far Cry and Caravan are cut from this next setlist yet I won't be surprized if one of them is still included. I would be disappointed if we see either of those two songs again along with Red Sector A. I love all those songs so much but it's harder to appreciate them when we have seen them so many times. It doesn't help either that the ticket prices keep going up so it helps to stay interested instead of getting through a song we are kind of bored of and just waiting for the next song. But then again, boredom and interest can be completely infuenceed by the way they format the setlist. I would have enjoyed the Snakes and Arrows tour much better had they not tore of 5 songs in a row from that album to start the second half of the set. Clockwork Angels was just a phenomenal album so I was totally ok with the second half of the recent setlist being all the new songs off the new album. But a setlist is all about timing. It's when they play certain songs and in a certain order. And there are the songs they do so well with when it comes to the big production. It's the big screen in the backround that makes the song The Larger Bowl take on so much more meaning. War Paint was another song that they did that same thing on the Presto tour. But which song will take on that role on the next tour? And if they don't do Far Cry or One Little Victory then what song will take on the respomsibilty of being that tune with the pyrotechnics? So when formulating our dream setlists there are so many things to factor in. When in comes down to it the truth is they may play 6 songs that will be new to us or maybe just 3. They have been good for 3 surprize songs in recent years and have played songs they never played live before or when those songs were new. They did this with Between the Wheels, Presto, Between Sun and Moon. And then they are good for pulling out Digital Man, Ghost of a Chance, Grand Designs, The Body Electric, Middletown Dreams, etc,. So when trying to equate all of this and while trying to predict our setlists, these are some of the things to consider. Chances are we aren't going to get a setlist with a buch of songs they haven't played or played in a long time. In order for us to hear Afterimage we will have to get throug Stick it Out or Animate. In order for us to hear Countdown we will probably have to get throug Mission or Mystic Rythms. In order for us to hear Open Secrets we may have to get through Force Ten. I won't be surprized if they bring back the song Roll the Bones. But I can do without The Pass and Dreamline too. But this is the kind of tour that invites Cygnus X-1 to be brought back again, if it isn't included in their medley. In the Mood may be brought back. It's hard to say. But the setlist more than likely won't be all unpredictable songs. But based on the last tour, who knows? But man it's late and I'm not making sense to myself at this point. My guess is we get around 7 very good surprize songs on the next tour, and no, Rivendell isn't one of them.