GeddyRulz

QUOTE (Gemari77 @ Oct 4 2012, 09:06 AM) Another method to accomplish this is to learn how to play the bass part inside and out until it's ingrained in your muscle memory. Then go and learn the vocal. There it is. Just what Geddy, Squire, and Will Lee have all said.

The fact is, often a bassline is 'contrapuntal' and will go against the melody of a song. Therefore, singing while playing bass is harder than singing while playing any other instrument. It's even easier to sing while DRUMMING than it is to sing while playing bass. With bass, it's quite hard. Bass Player magazine once asked Geddy, Chris Squire, and Will Lee (studio musician, and from David Letterman's band) how they can sing while playing bass. They all pretty much said the same thing: first learn the bass part, continue practicing it until it becomes "automatic" to you... and then you can sing at the same time without having to think about the bassline any more.

Honey Boo Boo.

How about Jimmy Page? He once said Rush were the best currently-active band in Metal (this was around the time of GUP, which never struck me as "Metal"), and a public stamp of endorsement from such an esteemed Rock God would lend credence to Rush's "worthiness."

QUOTE (softfilter @ Oct 4 2012, 10:38 AM) Gemari 77 & Geddy Rulz express my feelings on the matter completely with there excellent post so I really don't need to repeat what they already said. But I will add that with my decision and desire for all dedicated Rush fans to vote them in. Were making the ultimate statement and giving the hall a big middle finger showing we have Rush's back. The powers that be would be overjoyed if the fan vote turned out low for Rush. Hear Jann Wenner now "You see we gave the fans a voice in the decision and most agree with us that Rush doesn't belong..." Being nominated and us getting the point across with our vote is all we can to do for closure. Rush don't make the cut, so be it done our part. Just as good carrying the tradition of NOT getting in.. Glad you liked and agreed with my post. To the part I highlighted above: the voting tally currently has Rush with about twice as many votes as their nearest competitor. I think Rush will be one of the top five vote-getters easily; I'm guessing they'll finish at number one by a landslide. So yeah, Jann Wenner won't be able to look at the tally and say, "See? The public agrees with me about Rush!" Instead, he and the editorial staff will look at the tally and say, "Those diehard Rush geeks stuffed the ballot box! No fair!" This is also as good a place as any to re-interate something I said in the other RNRHOF thread: everyone please note that having Rush easily win this "the fans get to vote" thing in a landslide will only net Rush ONE OFFICIAL VOTE for induction. There are 600+ other people, music critics and such, who also get an official vote; we the public, collectively, can only net Rush ONE. If we and Cliff Burnstein officially vote for Rush and the other 600 people vote against... well, all our ballot-stuffing amounts to nothing. By all means vote, I did, but I'm just saying...

QUOTE (Tom Sawyer @ Oct 4 2012, 09:07 AM) The RRHoF induction to Rush would be like.... You building a huge monument over dozens of years, that countless onlookers revere with amazement, only to have the architects digest send you an appreciation form letter. pfft! That's a fairly accurate analogy, but still the little acknowledgment from Achitect's Digest is at least "nice" to get. Would you and the thousands who admired your monument for all those years be chanting "screw Architect's Digest!" on the Internet?

QUOTE (EveryNerveAware @ Oct 4 2012, 09:10 AM) I really don't care whether they get into the Disco Hall of Fame or not, but as of right now, Rush has twice as many votes as the 2nd place band Deep Purple. I think this will be a landslide vote for Rush. http://www.rollingstone.com/music/news/vot...uctees-20121004 To you and everyone who thinks this "the fans get to vote" thing will have much of an impact: look carefully at the explanation of it, on the Rolling Stone website. The top five vote-getters, as voted on by we the public, will then get ONE official vote for induction. There are 600+ other persons who vote, and collectively we're just ONE vote. Even a "landslide" of votes from the Rush community won't make much impact.

QUOTE (Gemari77 @ Oct 4 2012, 08:20 AM) I understand the sentiment... But, I want the boys to get all the acclaim and recognition they deserve. It's only right that they get in there...in my opinion. I've never been one of these F**k the Hall types anyway. I want them to be celebrated. I do understand that there are many reasons to shit on the Hall and there may be questionable motives behhind the induction... but still. I can't NOT support them getting in there. Exactly my feelings on this. I can appreciate the POV of liddybuck, and I know other Rush fans share it, but I want them in the Hall. Call it a personal weakness, like I need that little stroke, that little validation from the mainstream, but I'd like them to get in. It's time for the critics and mainstream audiences to officially recognize the contributions of this remarkable band - their talents, their enduring success, their influence on other artists, and their longevity. Yeah, I've never totally been a "Screw the Hall" type, either. If I've ever expressed that, it was just imaginary armor to shield me from the pain of yet another year with no nomination. And to anyone in the "Screw the Hall" Camp who has ever hoped that Rush would refuse induction or give Rolling Stone and the RNRHOF the finger after being told they're inducted: you obviously don't know this band very well, because they'd never do that. They have far too much dignity, class, integrity, and humility for a stunt like that. Even if that's their true feelings about it, they'll still show up, accept induction, say a few words, and go home without an incident. And I plan on being there for it.

QUOTE (CygnusGal @ Oct 3 2012, 05:00 PM) "Why is the premier power trio in the world buried under all of those synthesizers?" - as Peter Collins wondered. That was Rupert Hine who said that. (You quoted it a bit wrong, but I know the quote you mean.) Peter Collins was the producer who did all the burying, not the later producer who complained about it.

I for one am stoked. A couple years back, my wife said if Rush are inducted we should take a vacation and make sure to BE THERE. (This, from somebody who barely knew Rush when we met and is still not too big a fan. She suggested this, I think, because she knows how much they've meant to ME. I'll keep that lady.) This is just the list of nominees; if Rush is announced as an INDUCTEE, I'm going to try to go.

QUOTE (snowdogged @ Sep 30 2012, 01:08 PM) QUOTE (goose @ Sep 29 2012, 05:39 PM) QUOTE (Silas Lang @ Sep 29 2012, 12:21 PM) As is Caress of Steel since I don't think anyone really knows what it's supposed to mean. Fingers on strings. In my mind I always thought of the steel as a sword but yours seems like a pretty good analogy and maybe Neil came up with the title with the intentional double meaning. I'm fairly sure "fingers on strings" is most accurate. Keep in mind that Alex plays a STEEL GUITAR on that one album. It's that easy. Although, to hear Michael "Ego Death" Hoffman describe it, "Caress of Steel" is a double-entrendre allusion to the mystical state of "ego death," because it hints at "the GUILLOTINE (see 'Bastille Day') of ego death." He says he's embarrassed it took him six years to decipher that meaning. (Yeah, Michael, go drop another hit of acid... when you get back to Earth, spend another SIXTY years trying to figure out the more obvious meaning! )

I find I lean towards the aggressive-sounding, hard rock-sounding titles: Caress of Steel Hold Your Fire Test for Echo Vapor Trails I must also agree with Gary: "A Farewell to Kings" sounds very literary and Proggish.

QUOTE (barchetta90480 @ Oct 2 2012, 02:19 PM) In the Mood (cheesiest Rush song ever) Agreed! God knows why they used it as an encore song for so many tours! This typical rock song with its dopey lyrics is beneath them. It may be their worst song EVER.

RUSH: In the Mood FBN: Fly by Night COS: I Think I'm Going Bald 2112: A Passage to Bangkok AFTK: Madrigal HEMI: Circumstances PEW: Different Strings MP: Witch Hunt SGNLS: Chemistry GUP: Red Lenses POW: Middletown Dreams HYF: Tai Shan PRSTO: Scars RTB: Heresy CP: The Speed of Love T4E: The Color of Right VT: The Stars Look Down S&A: Bravest Face CA: BU2B2

QUOTE (RUDT @ Sep 24 2012, 01:28 PM) Good! Can we have the audio link to download and put on my mp3 player?? It's a YouTube clip, so moving it to your iPod is actually free and simple... QUOTE Open a second browser (YouTube is the first), and navigate to www.youtube-mp3.org Enter the YouTube url for "The Battle" into the space provided, to convert the Youtube clip to MP3 format. Choose "download" to put the MP3 on your computer hard drive. Open your iTunes and "add file to library," choosing "The Battle" from your hard drive. Now it's on your iTunes. Edit the title/artist/album accordingly, and add artwork if you like, then move the whole file to your iPod.

QUOTE (drgrendel @ Sep 17 2012, 01:14 PM) In all seriousness and respect, I would think that for people who don't like the current set list, those tours would have been awful for them. Why? Look at those tours and see what was played along with the new album that was out at the time. A nice sprinkiling of tunes served RUSH-style. Agreed. I wasn't at all disappointed with those setlists at the time. We're talking about 1984, '85, '87, etc. Rush was only 10-12 years old at the time. Sure, they'd play a lot of new stuff, but also a lot of "older" stuff... which wasn't very old! The setlists were half-70s, half-80s. I swear, on the current tour, they're playing more "Keyboard Era" stuff than they played DURING the Keyboard Era!

QUOTE (moedrabowsky @ Sep 17 2012, 01:18 PM) I see GeddyRulz beat me to the punch. D'oh! But kudos on the "apples and chalkboards" line. I was going to say "apples and oranges," but your line is more accurate.

QUOTE (RUSHFREAK101 @ Sep 17 2012, 01:04 PM) They played moving pictures all in a row 7 songs...what two more songs? Not the same. For one thing, the audience going to the Time Machine Tour knew ahead of time they'd be hearing MP in its entirety. For another thing, the Time Machine audience had 35 years to familiarize themselves with the MP songs. On the CA tour, casual concert-goers were unfamiliar with CA, and even if interested in hearing it, would've had only a few months to become familiar with it. And, oh yeah, at least four of those seven MP songs have been FM radio staples since 1981. MP has had more exposure, and over a much greater period of time, than CA... therefore, again, more people are familiar with it. Then, of course, there's the fact that EVERYONE loves MP. You and I may love CA, but you must admit it's more divisive than the universally-loved MP.

QUOTE (moedrabowsky @ Sep 17 2012, 01:00 PM) I've seen every tour since GUP and this is the worst setlist I've ever seen from them. I'm exactly the same. My first show was GUP, I've seen them fourteen times since, and I think this is the worst setlist. Rush are never bad, but this is the worst set I've seen. I kind of wish I had seen a show later in the tour and knew what was coming, so I could've prepared myself. Seeing them on opening night and being SURPRISED by this poor set... disappointing!

QUOTE (zappafrank @ Sep 17 2012, 12:55 PM) To anyone who took issue with my "true fans" comment(s), I apologize. I just *really* like the current set list, and am still reveling in the fact that so much of the stuff I never thought I'd get a chance to see was represented. Passion, etc. Again, I apologize. Thank you. Glad you liked it. Of the 14 shows I've seen, I think it was the worst setlist, but that's me.

QUOTE (zappafrank @ Sep 17 2012, 12:22 PM) Call me high and mighty if you want, but if other people can complain about not liking the set list, why can't I complain about them complaining about it? Pretentiousness aside, the intent of my post was to try and see if we could see why some people aren't digging the set list. I really think it goes beyond "they didn't play TSoR or Limelight." I think there's something about the kind of Rush music that these detractors like that contributes to their anger. It's like, why go see them if you only like a portion of their music? B/c chances are you're not gonna get just that portion, more so on this tour than on others. People are acting like it's some big surprise that Rush has decided to dig deep. To me, it's their MO. Let me cut to the chase, then. I'll give you the facts about ME and why I was disappointed with the setlist, okay? Other "complainers" may have different reasons. 1. I love the new album. They played a lot of it, and because it's a concept album, they played the songs in order. No complaints! Great! 2. I'm not a fan of the band's Keyboard Era, but I don't normall dismiss the entire catalog from those years - I take those years on a song-by-song basis. 3. While I'm not a fan of the Keyboard Era, I recognize that SOME songs in their setlist will be from that period. I'm okay with this, because I'm willing to sit through the shit to get to the stuff I like/love. 4. Really look and #3, above, and then really look at the setlist from Manchester. I say again: 70% of the non-CA songs the band played were from the Keyboard Era!! The band's setlist on this tour doesn't give the audience a smattering of Keyboard Era songs, or just "some" Keyboard Era songs... it hits the audience over the head with that shit! Bottom line, and I'm repeating myself: I'm normally okay with SOME Keyboard Era songs being played, because I know the Rush stuff I like will also be represented. On this tour, that's not the case; fans of the Keyboard Era have a feast and fans of the band's other periods (like me) have a famine. And that's why I don't like the setlist. EDIT: And about that "Rush digging deep" line of yours. If that were the case, I'd be all for it. I'm a little tired of most the "hits" and I like hearing the "deep cuts." But that's not exactly what the setlist is comprised of, is it? "Deep cuts"? Sure, a couple songs make a surprise re-emergence into the set, but that's been the case on all of the past few tours. This setlist isn't "Rush digging deep" exactly. This is Rush "digging into their Keyboard Era, and playing little else." (Note that most of those Keyboard Era songs they're playing are NOT deep cuts; they're the "hits" from that era!)