Jump to content


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Timbale

  1. So you don't think Rush were performing Finding My Way, In The Mood, Working Man, Take A Friend and What You're Doing in '73-'74? I find it hard to believe that a band in that position went into the studio and decided "let's write new material for this". Like, it's not how bands make 1st records, almost ever.
  2. So...Geddy has told the story before that he basically had to write the lyrics right in the studio because John was responsible for the lyrics but then he had a tantrum of some sort and destroyed them all? Something like that, anyway... But...these were surely songs that they had been gigging before they went into the studio, right? Weren't these songs that Geddy had been singing prior to making the first record? How does this make any sense?
  3. Timbale


    Hmmm....I'd be interested to know what parts those are. I'm a Rush fan who puts 2112 in general way lower on the list than I think many fans do...but having said that, for me it's all of pretty much equal quality - I think Soliloquy is pretty much as good as Overture, for instance. I think Tears is quite cringy...but it's cringy the whole way though - it's not like the verse is blah and the chorus is really beautiful. It's all equally not good for me. I also think the songs on PW are very consistent - I can't think of a part of one of the songs that is of a different quality than the song itself. Freewill is a song I don't ever really listen to any more...but it's kinda because the whole thing doesn't appeal to me that much, not because I love the riff but hate the bridge or whatever. But Presto has things I really dislike rammed up against things I do like. 2 examples that are not Superconductor -1, Chain Lightning: the verses are tuneless and uninteresting to me, and the "that's nice" at the end pretty much guarantees that I would never play that song for another living grown up. BUT, the chorus "sun dogs fire..." is top tear middle period Rush, melodically, lyrically and arrangement wise. 2 - the title track: I like the verses a lot, I love the chorus and the bridge "don't ask me..." , but the "if I could wave my magic wand" into and pre-chorus thing - and particularly the synth sound that accompanies it - are terrible to me. So I don't know - does Jacob's Ladder go on a bit too long and meander a bit? Probably...but there's nothing that makes me wince like some parts of otherwise good songs from 1990 on....
  4. Timbale


    YES! Might have even been interesting to have him pull the Bonham/Kashmir trick and play a four against it. Maybe even just some of the time. It would have been cool to have the pre-chorus go to regular time in the drums - a softer, quieter section but with the drums picking up intensity. You should have produced the record, Chemistry! Then we could have had you warbling "superconductor" instead of RH!
  5. Timbale


    Wait, do you mean Neil playing half time against the riff...or the whole thing taking twice as long?
  6. Timbale


    Indeed - also moments that I don't enjoy.
  7. Timbale


    I listened all the way through Presto the other night, and have been thinking about Superconductor. Presto for me is the starting point of Rush having songs where I like parts of the songs but not other parts... the "hits you in a soft place" pre-chorus I really like a lot, the rest of the song doesn't do much for me. But with Superconductor, a big part of that is them choosing to have (I think) Rupert Hine sing the eponymous word in the chorus. I'm a bit baffled by it, even after all these years. This is the era where Geddy started singing more harmonies and back ups to himeslf, I imagine feeling freed up by the sampling technology that was allowing him to trigger vocals live. So, with all the layered stuff going on on Presto (turn around and turn around and turn around, oh the wind can carry/in the available light etc...) why have another, very different voice sing in the chorus? (I have also always found it weird the the delayed version of the word sounds like it bends out of tune, which sounds very unpleasant to my ear...) How do you feel about this other voice jumping in out of nowhere in the song? Would you enjoy it more if it was a 2 part harmony Geddy singing "superconductor"?
  8. I guess this is kinda my question, though - and I know that we don't really care what Wenner thinks at the end of the day, but... do you really think Jann was up there feeling like he had to "take it" in the sense of, oh, my publication ignored these guys for so long and now I'm embarrassed by how badly I miscalculated it....or do you think he went back stage, sipping a martini with some friends after that intro and said "of course a thousand nerds showed up to make a spectacle out of the event." As I said, I don't actually care about Jann per se, and I was happy for the band itself... but did it give the impression that these guys have been overlooked, or was it just like, well, any band we've inducted could fill this hall with fans...but only fans of a band like Rush would actually bother to make a point of it...
  9. I was reflecting on this the other day... there is now a sort of mythology built into the huge audience response to Rush's induction...the way the crowd went crazy the second Jann Wenner even said "Toronto"...and I think most of us who are fans looked at that as an indication that Rush were long overdue and far more welcomed than the "mainstream" would have us believe for so many years. But... Isn't it just a case of a s**t tonne of fans buying tickets to the thing and essentially taking over the event? I mean, it reads, watching it, like "the establishment" is finally giving Rush their due and celebrating how amazing they are...but isn't it just a huge pack of Rush nerds who've probably seen them in multiple cities on multiple tours just adding that event to their plans? Like...think about a band that you really don't like...and imagine them getting inducted and that response happening - would you be super impressed by the place exploding, or would you think "Right - a bunch of dicks on a Nickelback facebook fan page organized a trip to Cleveland". Was it cool....or lame?
  10. I think there are a bunch of interesting ideas on CA - I remember hearing the title track for the first time and thinking "I've never heard them play this kind of groove before". After 19 or so albums, there probably aren't a lot of bands who could surprise you like that. BUT, I personally find their post 2000 sound too muddy and too big/loud/crowded. The drums are fine, sonically, I guess - I prefer earlier albums but the sound on CA isn't terrible... but the bass and especially the guitar are just sludgey to me - it sounds like a Foo Fighters record in terms of the biggness of the guitars, which is a real turn off to me. It's not as insane as the original mix of VT, but I don't find it pleasant. I feel like a song like The Wreckers is a tune you should be able to put on at a medium volume and have it sound "nice" - clear and defined with the vocal up front. But like a lot of the album, it's a thing where I keep wanting to turn it up to hear more definition, but then I want to turn it down because it's too noisy. And I'm sorry to say it, but Geddy's voice is just not enjoyable to listen to on most of it. I wish he'd just continued to embrace his lower register the way he was doing around Presto. I blame the producer for pushing him so everything could sound like "old Rush".
  11. Yes - that Bowie record is top tier...an amazing farewell.
  12. This is the only music forum I'm actively (and I'm not really that active) a part of. I did spend some time on a Bob Dylan forum some years ago, but just kind of drifted away from it. I poked around on a Genesis board for a bit, but it wasn't very active. There's lots of more recent music that I like that I wouldn't dream of finding a forum for. I do find that Rush is a very interesting band to discuss because of their focus on musicianship and the lyrical content - some music that I love doesn't have that intricacy to it.
  13. They are not #1 for me anymore....likely in the top 5 (which is how I voted), but sometimes they are further down. BUT, Rush was #1 when that sort of thing was really important - for me, from about the age of 10 or 11 until my early 20s. It's completely formative and no other band or artist is going to ever have that effect on me ever again. I've become much broader in what I listen to as I've aged...and Rush would likely be the heaviest music that I still like. I'm more into jazz and the absurdly big umbrella of "singer/songwriter" now than I am rock music. I still listen to rock of course, but "new" bands do not tend to stick with me for the long haul anymore. I saw someone post something about Those Crooked Vultures recently on here... I had forgotten they existed! When that first record came out I bought it and liked it...but I have no interest in hearing it again. I feel that way about almost all new rock. It just doesn't go in very deep for me for some reason, where as Laura Marling or William Doyle or Cassandra Jenkins do. But Rush still does...and I go through phases now of it being in and out of my life. The recent MP 40th release made me listen to the live show from TO...and it was a joy...and it connects like few other bands do for me.
  14. Stairway. Xanadu is great, but it's overrated in my view (particularly the studio version) ...and at the 7 minute mark, there's no reason to go on listening - it just repeats itself after that. Stairway builds and grows and changes and, despite being grossly overplayed, is a wonderful song. LIfeson's solo at the end of Xanadu is fine..but come on, it can't compete with Page's perfectly phrased solo. Bonham's playing is also economically perfect - his simple snare fill under "there's still time to change the road you're on" - and the fact that he doesn't hit a crash cymbal after it - is way hipper than a bunch of cowbell what have yous....And again, it's so over exposed, but Jones' recorder counterpoint to Page's main riff off the top is really beautiful. And Plant is no slouch either.
  15. I just voted for Signals. It's impossible to choose for me anyway...but Signals still sounds fresh and relevant and new and exciting to me. It has some of my favourite drumming, a drum sound that rivals Moving Pictures, great bass tone, and I think it is FAR and AWAY Geddy's best vocal performance across all songs.
  16. Genesis - in no real order... 1. Supper's Ready 2. The Musical Box 3. Dancing With The Moonlit Knight 4. Eleventh Earl of Mar 5. Carpet Crawlers 6. Cinema Show 7. Entangled 8. Afterglow 9. One For The Vine 10. The Lamia 11. Can Utility and the Coastliners 12. Fly On A Windshield 13. Firth of Fifth 14. Dance on a Volcano 15. Unquiet Slumbers for the Sleepers...In That Quiet Earth 16. Me and Sarah Jane 17. Duchess 18. In The Cage 19. The Lamb Lies Down On Broadway 20. Undertow
  17. This is the kind of argument that feels designed for someone like me - a rock music fan - to agree with...but I don't. I think the fact is rock music is just not the central music art form in contemporary popular culture like it was in the 60s and 70s. There was pop music then, and there is rock music now...but the glare of mainstream attention is no longer predominantly on rock. So, did more people in general know who the musicians were who played on rock records in the 70s compared to now? Yes. Do more people know who produces pop hits now than the pop hits of the 70s? Also yes. But also, Hendrix wasn't some guy who played a guitar solo on a Steely Dan hit - he was a genuine pop phenomenon... a charismatic, sexy, dangerous ground-breaking star who wrote catchy memorable songs and was talented. The "would he be famous now" thing is a minefield of course because f**king with history's timeline makes everything moot, but I think it's safe to say a guy like Hendrix would totally be famous now. It makes me think of Jon Batiste, who I am a big fan of. He is a piano virtuoso (you might not know that if all you know of him is Colbert) who writes great, catchy songs and is super charismatic. He was nominated for 14 grammys and won 5 this year. Even in the world of SO much music content, I'd say that makes him famous. I saw him in a club that was around 800 people a couple years ago and it was one of the best shows I've ever seen...and I remember thinking 'he's like James Brown, Prince and Hendrix all in one'.
  18. ESL for me. Song selection is the best of the 3. Geddy's voice is in the best form - not as raw and edgy as on ATWAS (which is great in its own way) and not as brittle as on ASOH. Neil's drums sound the best on ESL...and the drum solo...well, there's no competition as to which is the best of the 3. I know lots of people find ESL "too sterile"...a description I would give ASOH. That record sounds devoid of soul to me. As an example, I do not particularly enjoy Closer To The Heart - it's fine and all, but not a song I would ever seek out to listen to on its own. The ESL version has a certain magic to it that makes it listenable to me. The ASOH version is the most going-though-the-motions thing I can imagine. It's clear to me that they're only playing because the have to, and all the really wanna do is get to the end so they can jam on those 3 chords over and over. Ugh. ESL overall has a warmth to it, a coziness that I find to be a feature of its sound, not a detriment. ATWAS is a close second for me, because it is such a good representation of them at the time, and I adored it growing up, playing it over and over. But I have to admit I don't fire it up much anymore.
  19. I enjoy this guy's videos, even if I don't always agree with him. And I don't know all the songs he mentions... Although it will never make any of my "best of" playlists...I've never understood the hatred for Rivendell. It outstays its welcome for sure, but I actually like, in the context of the record, that it's this gentle, intimate tune. I had never heard the story of them falling asleep during the mix....I wonder if a bit more work was done on it, maybe some interesting subtle drumming and a better vocal take in some spots might have saved it from being so maligned... I don't think Invisible Touch even counts as prog, so it's funny to see it on the list. He talks about it being indiscernible from Collins' solo work, but I believe it's a Rutherford song - which makes sense because it has a Mike and the Mechanics vibe to it. I wonder how this guy feels about More Fool Me from Selling England... And I think Learning To Fly is a great song - it's not Dogs or Shine On or anything, but it can sit beside a song like Fearless just fine...
  20. I don't know anything about guitar effect pedal systems...but I was looking at a list of Alex's gear by tour, and it lists FOUR times as many effects units on the Clockwork Angels tour than on the Moving Pictures tour! It's just funny to me that with all that gear, he couldn't make that effect as well as he could 35 years earlier...
  21. I would LOVE to be proven wrong on this, because Tap is in my top 10 films of all time...but I think it's a bad idea. If you look at Christopher Guest's last film, Mascots, it could not hold a candle to Waiting For Guffman - it's just a tired, lazy, carbon copy of better films. I'm really scared that the Spinal Tap sequel is going to be similar. The last thing I remember them doing in character, some interview segments that came with the Back From The Dead album, were pretty lacklustre and really did feel lazy. Those 4 guys and their supporting cast made one of the funniest movies of all time - I'd really be disappointed if they tarnished it. As I said, it would be a big damn smile if they prove me wrong.
  22. I had never seen a Signals era picture with that guitar - the leather pants pic that you always see is with the Fender strat...
  23. In A Big Country is a really good pick...it encapsulates the early 80's for me as well. I thought of it as "pop" music at the time because I fancied myself a hard rock fan...but it's a better song than a lot of the "metal" crap I was into then (Rush notwithstanding). (Plus the drum track is outstanding!). I think Culture Club should get a mention along with Duran Duran. I hated that stuff back then. I hear it now and a lot of it sounds pretty good to me - like, I'm not gonna crank up Karma Chameleon...but it's a hell of a lot better than whatever the hell Beiber is doing to deserve grammys these days...
  24. Listening to the Live in YYZ recording and it occurred to me that the effect of having that last long note of the guitar solo echo over the chorus is really well done on the MP tour...like, I don't think Alex ever nailed that effect quite as well after that tour. I assume that the technology got better with guitar pedals, not worse...so...why do you think that is?
  25. Springsteen is a funny one for me... the stuff of his that I like, I really like a lot, and the stuff I dislike is some of the worst music I can think of. If you want to torture me, put me in a room with "Ramrod" blaring. "Hey little lady with the blue jeans on..." UGH. I think his whole blue collar, man of the people thing rubs me the wrong way - more so the older I get. Having said that, there is some music from that period that I think is great. But... I think I like Wild, Innocent...partly because it it comes from before he was such a persona. The music on that record is still searching and feels very honest. It's also musically quite adventurous and sprawling - so different from the songs of his that I hate. (The irony of this being his actual glory days when the song Glory Days is one of the best examples of songs I can't stand....) As for songs, I love it from start to finish...but having New York Serenade come after Rosalita to end the record is just so perfect I can barely take it. :)
  • Create New...