Maestro

QUOTE (1-0-0-1-0-0-1 @ Jun 9 2005, 08:28 PM)

Quite possibly the most underrated prog band from the '70s to mid-'80s. Most people know them from "Carry On Wayward Son" and "Dust In The Wind," but Kansas (on mainly their first five studio albums) belongs in the same category as Genesis and Yes for orchestral-sounding prog-rock. Kerry Livgren, who wrote most of their "deep, pondering" tunes, was equally adept at both lead guitar and keyboards, which when combined with Steve Walsh's searing organ playing and Richard Williams' "meatwall" heavy guitar, made the band sound both like a hard rock band and an art-rock prog band. Steve Walsh had an instantly recognizable voice, and he could sing his ass off. Having a full-time violinist in Robby Steinhardt also helped define their unique sound. In any one song they could go from a loud twin-guitar/organ attack to a soft piano/violin duet. Kansas was very diverse. Growing up I was into Led Zep, Deep Purple, Ted Nugent, Aerosmith, Boston, and the whole southern rock thing. Then I heard Kansas' Leftoverture album, featuring a 6:41 instrumental (with a small vocal section thrown in) named "Magnum Opus." It featured tricky time changes and insane playing. I'd never heard anything like it, and that album introduced me to prog rock. A couple of years later Rush's Permanent Waves came out, and I haven't listened to Ted Nugent since.

Why doesn't The Rush Camp record, promote and tour twenty-four hours a day, seven days a week, thirty (or thirty-one or twenty-eight or twenty-nine -depending) days a month, twelve months a year, ten years a decade... ...?

 

The Neverending Story

Why don't people who need to make some sort of statement simply and silently shave themselves hairless?

QUOTE (OriginalFan @ Jun 5 2008, 07:06 AM)

QUOTE (Maestro @ Jun 4 2008, 11:38 PM) From the Thread: 2112 Would Be The Perfect Song If...    [...It Were Only 79 Seconds Longer.] It could be 21 minutes and 12 seconds after all [Here we go disecting 2112 again  Why is it that we can't seem to leave that album alone? ].    How to devour 79 seconds... ..To make it fit: 2112 was first released on vinyl, no? Consider this: once the LP is on the turntable, it takes a considerable number of seconds before the album actually cues up. This number of seconds will vary depending on the model of turntable in question. Also, depending on the stylus, anti-skating and tracking level, as well as the adjusted weight on the stylus armature -not to mention the condition of the LP itself- the silent lead-in and lead-out might add an additional second or two. What I'm saying is that from the moment the 'play' button is pressed until the stylus arm returns to its normal postion at rest could easily take an entire 21 minutes and 12 seconds.  It all depends on how you look at it. For those of you who might argue the point with: The playlength itself is actually 20:33, I offer this: Yes, it is - at 33.333 r/m. But if you have a variable pitch control, what would happen if you slowed it down just a bit? A barely perceptable bit? Round it down to the nearest integer -33? That would add a few seconds, to be sure. I haven't done the math myself, but the result might prove mildly interesting. Lastly, 20m33s works out to 1233 seconds. Why couldn't they add just 1 second? Just one more second? 'uh-one, two, three 'FOOUUURRRRR....'  Or is 1233 the way it was meant (or intended) to be so we here, now, today could ponder this great mystery some 32 years later?  If I need 2112's playlength to be 21m12s in order to rest peacfully, assured all is well in a perfectly balanced universe, it is already so close anyway, I could probably find a way to do so without deeply disturbing anyone. III. I'm sure that in some perfectly balanced parallel universe, Rush's 2112 is exactly 21:12 It's just that in OUR universe, time is running some miniscule iota of a degree faster... or slower... I forget which... Are you the mother of our children, or who?

From the Thread: 2112 Would Be The Perfect Song If... [...It Were Only 79 Seconds Longer.]

 

 

It could be 21 minutes and 12 seconds after all [Here we go disecting 2112 again Why is it that we can't seem to leave that album alone? ].

 

How to devour 79 seconds... ..To make it fit:

 

2112 was first released on vinyl, no? Consider this: once the LP is on the turntable, it takes a considerable number of seconds before the album actually cues up. This number of seconds will vary depending on the model of turntable in question. Also, depending on the stylus, anti-skating and tracking level, as well as the adjusted weight on the stylus armature -not to mention the condition of the LP itself- the silent lead-in and lead-out might add an additional second or two.

 

What I'm saying is that from the moment the 'play' button is pressed until the stylus arm returns to its normal postion at rest could easily take an entire 21 minutes and 12 seconds.

 

It all depends on how you look at it.

 

For those of you who might argue the point with: The playlength itself is actually 20:33, I offer this: Yes, it is - at 33.333 r/m. But if you have a variable pitch control, what would happen if you slowed it down just a bit? A barely perceptable bit? Round it down to the nearest integer -33? That would add a few seconds, to be sure. I haven't done the math myself, but the result might prove mildly interesting.

 

 

Lastly, 20m33s works out to 1233 seconds.

 

Why couldn't they add just 1 second? Just one more second?

 

'uh-one, two, three 'FOOUUURRRRR....'

 

Or is 1233 the way it was meant (or intended) to be so we here, now, today could ponder this great mystery some 32 years later?

 

If I need 2112's playlength to be 21m12s in order to rest peacfully, assured all is well in a perfectly balanced universe, it is already so close anyway, I could probably find a way to do so without deeply disturbing anyone.

 

 

 

 

III.

"Who is John Galt?"

 

-Ayn Rand, Atlas Shrugged

 

 

 

III.

 

 

Nettie

 

 

QUOTE (Roguedrummer @ Jun 2 2008, 09:04 PM)

Classical Gas

The Fawn-eyed girl with sun-brown legs [which we cannot see] dances [in ultra-slow motion] on the edge of her dream...

 

Analog Kid?

QUOTE (nimagraven @ Jun 1 2008, 03:25 AM)

QUOTE (trenken @ May 31 2008, 11:16 AM) I dont know if it was mentioned, but there's no mystery to 1001001. That's binary code, used in all computers. That's the language that computers speak. They're using the metaphor of machines in the song, and that's just something to represent that in the chorus. They're basically saying the computer has gone mad. No one's saying theres a mystery. We're saying that it's pretty handy that it comes to = I in ASCII which is basically just as universal as binary is .   Given the subject matter of the song, I consider this relatively important, if not just very coincidential, yes? And also not beyond the realms of possibility considering the amount of Binary/Decimal/Hex/ASCII tables out there.. It's been a well known fact for a long time .   Of course the only way to know is to sit down with them and ask them specifically .

I snot indivisible; I's divisible by three: I/3 = me!

 

ex: The young man on The AlbumArt for Power Windows is I/3 Shaved!

So, if we split 2112d [an even integer] by 33d [an odd interger] it yeilds 64d -which we all know is 2^6 or 00I0 0000b, correct ?

QUOTE (OriginalFan @ May 30 2008, 01:35 PM)

QUOTE (Maestro @ May 26 2008, 12:41 PM) QUOTE (different strings @ May 26 2008, 04:20 AM) QUOTE (Maestro @ May 26 2008, 03:20 PM) QUOTE (OriginalFan @ May 25 2008, 06:05 PM) QUOTE (Maestro @ May 24 2008, 11:33 PM) Splitting 2112 makes perfect sense to the casual Rush fan. Splitting 2112 yeilds the integers  21  and  12 repectively... Now, if we take the integers of The Cask of  '43 - four and three repectively- and reverse them, this yeilds the integers 3 and 4. Now, if we take the integer 21 and divide it by the all-powerful 3, this returns the number 7 and, by the same logic, if we divide the integer 12 by the integer 4 this returns our all-powerful number 3. Now if we concatinate 7 and 3 this yeilds the decimal number 73 -which in ASCII Code represents the letter 'I' What was Ayn Rand's theme in Anthem? The suppression of individuality? If splitting 2112 by the The Cask of '43 yeilds 73, and 73 = 'I' and 'I' = 1001001, then it follows that 'I'=2112. You see?  It all makes perfect sense!    III. Will you marry me?     I love the way your mind works!   K Noone's ever proposed to Moi before! How Untraditionally Sweet!         III. So is that a yes Maestro That's a definate I don't perhaps maybe know Ah well... I tried   Untraditional       Kismet She gives up to easily, huh peeps?

QUOTE (nimagraven @ May 29 2008, 10:43 PM)

QUOTE (Maestro @ May 29 2008, 04:33 PM) O& incidentally: Not that it really means anything; but if we were to take two's complement of 1001001 [i.e., 0110110], split that, then we would have: [0110] & [0110]. Do I detect a some sort of familar form of symmetry here? How do the digits from that album go? [2112] or something like that? Its only obvious; there is a certain Order to The Universe!        O& BTW, Jon...  ...You did 'Win.'  Congradulations! III.   ...Plus, you use the same zero twice to come to your conclusion, which could potentially instantly makes it false ...   ...You are setting a 0 constant to a parity, which is false. A parity can be even or odd, and this case it is constantly even...   ...The only way it WOULD work was if you were talking about a machine that worked in octets. Then yes, they WOULD set the parity bit to zero....   ...HOWEVER, you come across a fundamental problem that you have added a 0 in the middle of the binary.. And not at the end .   ...In theory, the correct answer you're looking for is 0110 and 110(0)(1) which completely breaks the symmetry...   ...Again, I'm talking about ASCII because ASCII runs in 7 bits...     We've deduced that 1001001 is 73/43/I and therefore, any binary number you start messing around with in 7 bits, for the sake of this argument, since you can't change the meaning if you change the 1001001 formula (because that'd break the connection to I etc) it is 7 bit ASCII.   Forgot to add before I had to go catch my public transport that you can't get symetry from 7 bits...   If 1001001 was symetrical it'd be 10011001 and the result would be 01100110....   I concede the argument...   It is TRUE... I, in my haste, inadvertantly added an imaginary zero mid-string where I shouldn't have... [0110 [j(0)]110]   An oversite... ...Simply because someone wants something to be true doesn't make it so; but such a desire can influence one's perception...   Such was my case in this situation...   I know bits can be [and sometimes, for a host of reasons must be] added to the end of 7-bit byte; but, never, for any LOGICAL reason should a bit be slipped into the middle of a word...   Here I am mistaken and freely admit it...   Indeed, had I been more objective, had I slowed myself down a bit I'd have caught myself and realized the symmetry I sought was indeed, the last string you mentioned: [01100110]!   Thanx for pointing out my error... [Can't blame a guy for trying!!!]   Octal... ...Haven't heard that in an aeon.   Three-bit bytes! How quaint!     III.

QUOTE (telegraphcreeklocal @ May 29 2008, 08:28 PM)

QUOTE (Maestro @ May 29 2008, 08:24 PM) Just a post to resurrect the thread!  Hows it up there in Redding! Hilltop drive ring a bell. It rhymes with Hell... Local News: Redding's okay but only just; Red Bluff sucks out loud; Eureka's better than both/either. It's my destination. Changing residence next year.   Mount Shasta's still in tact (for now) Mount Shasta Mall is what it is. Just caught Mannhiem Steamroller at the Convention Center last month. Weaverville almost burned to the ground last year.   Shasta Lake is always big fun!     Thanx for asking.     III.

Just a post to resurrect the thread!

O& incidentally: Not that it really means anything; but if we were to take two's complement of 1001001 [i.e., 0110110], split that, then we would have:

 

[0110] & [0110].

 

Do I detect a some sort of familar form of symmetry here.

 

How do the digits from that album go?

 

[2112] or something like that?

 

Its only obvious; there is a certain Order to The Universe!

 

 

 

 

 

 

O& BTW, Jon... ...You did 'Win.'

 

Congradulations!

 

 

III.

QUOTE (nimagraven @ May 29 2008, 10:36 AM)

QUOTE (Maestro @ May 29 2008, 12:17 PM) QUOTE (J0N @ May 29 2008, 02:51 AM) QUOTE (nimagraven @ May 26 2008, 03:56 PM) I still don't get how it loosely equates to 2112. I even added them both together.... In binary.. And the number wasn't divisble by 8 . I think he just means you can derive 1001001 from 2112 and 43, and thats the link   I hope so anyway, else its way beyond me We Have A Winner!!!!!! Not really.   You're just putting a lot of useless ends together to derive a meaning that no one else had seen/thought of before.   That's not really meaningful, it's like the six degrees of separation hypothesis. It's just a likelihood not that it was actually DEVISED around that.   That's why I still maintain that there isn't really a link. More of coincidence than anything.   Now if you could get 2112 and 1001001 to actually mean something without adding just a lyric into the equation, I'd be impressed, until then I'm nonplussed over it logically, because it's a song lyric mixed with two names of songs. Plus, 2112 is never a lyric in 2112, yet Cask of '43 is. Just sayin', I don't really think it's fair to compare two separate classes and a property in a separate class (Hey.. We HAVE been talking binary and all) .   I personally don't believe Neil Peart is some kind of grand master of math that sat there and did all the workings out to make all this fit - he's a musician and his songs tend to have a meaning, but I don't really think he went to all this trouble lol. I mean, it's possible, but it's also highly unlikely.   It's kind of like putting poop in cake. Lots of ingredients make cake, but it doesn't mean it'll taste good if you put the poop in the cake . Thus, the end result in a way is garbage (Though I mean this in the nicest way possible, Maestro). GIGO and all that . Yet another computing term I thought I'd throw in LOL.   It just so happens, you can mix the ingredients together, but does the end result mean it's a good or correct one? Well, that's highly debatable . Oh... ...I dunno...   It was only a casual observation in the first place; the [1001001]='I' 'argument' is a very old [1985]. I was simple trying to have bit of fun with it. No big deal. Garbage In, Garbage Out.   But then again... ...Not that Neil had/has anything to do with it [it would seems like an 'Alex-Sot-Of-Thing' to me -maybe even Hugh Syme's]; but, the puppet master left his marionette's 'hand-control' on the reverse of Farewell To Kings in the shape of an "X-1"   And it takes two line-segments to form an 'X' and one line segment to form a 1 -and we all know [2+1] = 3 (most of the time)   Not to mention the bones going out the window in the insert on Roll The Bones are also in the shape of "X-1" (or "1-X", depending on your point of view...)   And it goes without mention that the majority of the pips on the AlbumArt dice from Roll The Bones are themselves, indeed number 3; and, if you were to hold said AlbumArt upsidedown in a mirror RUSH could be made out to be LAZY...   And I'm STILL counting all the references to The All Powerful Number 3 on Moving Pictures alone...   Again... ...These are all old observations intened for the enjoyment or bemusement and/or befuddling of The Casual Rush fan.   Just coincidence? Who knows?   Still makes Perfect Sense to me... It was meant in good, clean fun. Nothing more, nothing less.   In no way am I an 'Offical Source' of information.   No harm, no foul.     III.

QUOTE (J0N @ May 29 2008, 02:51 AM)

QUOTE (nimagraven @ May 26 2008, 03:56 PM) I still don't get how it loosely equates to 2112. I even added them both together.... In binary.. And the number wasn't divisble by 8 . I think he just means you can derive 1001001 from 2112 and 43, and thats the link   I hope so anyway, else its way beyond me We Have A Winner!!!!!!

QUOTE (different strings @ May 26 2008, 04:20 AM)

QUOTE (Maestro @ May 26 2008, 03:20 PM) QUOTE (OriginalFan @ May 25 2008, 06:05 PM) QUOTE (Maestro @ May 24 2008, 11:33 PM) Splitting 2112 makes perfect sense to the casual Rush fan. Splitting 2112 yeilds the integers  21  and  12 repectively... Now, if we take the integers of The Cask of  '43 - four and three repectively- and reverse them, this yeilds the integers 3 and 4. Now, if we take the integer 21 and divide it by the all-powerful 3, this returns the number 7 and, by the same logic, if we divide the integer 12 by the integer 4 this returns our all-powerful number 3. Now if we concatinate 7 and 3 this yeilds the decimal number 73 -which in ASCII Code represents the letter 'I' What was Ayn Rand's theme in Anthem? The suppression of individuality? If splitting 2112 by the The Cask of '43 yeilds 73, and 73 = 'I' and 'I' = 1001001, then it follows that 'I'=2112. You see?  It all makes perfect sense!    III. Will you marry me?           I love the way your mind works!               K Noone's ever proposed to Moi before! How Untraditionally Sweet!                 III. So is that a yes Maestro That's a definate I don't perhaps maybe know

QUOTE (OriginalFan @ May 25 2008, 06:05 PM)

QUOTE (Maestro @ May 24 2008, 11:33 PM) Splitting 2112 makes perfect sense to the casual Rush fan. Splitting 2112 yeilds the integers  21  and  12 repectively... Now, if we take the integers of The Cask of  '43 - four and three repectively- and reverse them, this yeilds the integers 3 and 4. Now, if we take the integer 21 and divide it by the all-powerful 3, this returns the number 7 and, by the same logic, if we divide the integer 12 by the integer 4 this returns our all-powerful number 3. Now if we concatinate 7 and 3 this yeilds the decimal number 73 -which in ASCII Code represents the letter 'I' What was Ayn Rand's theme in Anthem? The suppression of individuality? If splitting 2112 by the The Cask of '43 yeilds 73, and 73 = 'I' and 'I' = 1001001, then it follows that 'I'=2112. You see?  It all makes perfect sense!    III. Will you marry me?           I love the way your mind works!               K Noone's ever proposed to Moi before! How Untraditionally Sweet!                 III.

To further the assertion: 73d=49h=1001001b= (which loosely equates to 2112)

 

Consider the ampersand [&] on Snakes & Arrows... ...If it hasn't been emphasized enough in the color scheme of the Album art; if it hasn't been pointed out that you must shift a 7 to acheive its charcter on the keyboard, then let me add this...

 

Observe its reflection and perchance you will see

a lowly seven imposed upon three.

 

 

[or a three upon seven, depending on how you look at]

 

 

[sorry, folx. Just a bit bored.]

QUOTE (Maestro @ May 24 2008, 10:33 PM)

Splitting 2112 makes perfect sense to the casual Rush fan. Splitting 2112 yeilds the integers 21 and 12 repectively...

QUOTE (Maestro @ May 24 2008, 10:33 PM)

You see? It all makes perfect sense!

Splitting 2112 makes perfect sense to the casual Rush fan.

 

Splitting 2112 yeilds the integers 21 and 12 repectively...

 

Now, if we take the integers of The Cask of '43 - four and three repectively- and reverse them, this yeilds the integers 3 and 4.

 

Now, if we take the integer 21 and divide it by the all-powerful 3, this returns the number 7 and, by the same logic, if we divide the integer 12 by the integer 4 this returns our all-powerful number 3.

 

Now if we concatinate 7 and 3 this yeilds the decimal number 73 -which in ASCII Code represents the letter 'I'

 

What was Ayn Rand's theme in Anthem? The suppression of individuality?

 

If splitting 2112 by the The Cask of '43 yeilds 73, and 73 = 'I' and 'I' = 1001001, then it follows that 'I'=2112.

 

You see? It all makes perfect sense!

 

 

III.

If Crime Fighters crime, what do Freedom Fighters fight?