Bard

Once again...you have missed a point. Try harder, padawan.

You missed the point. :/ I didn't miss anything, kid. Yep, you sure did, punkin. :) nah. So what was the point then? :)

It's because the other two are in pain, genius. You really do like posting fears and whines, it seems.

Glad i'm not the only one who thinks that. They already top it with the current set. Natural Science, JL, Xanadu, Prelude, Cygnus, Lakeside Park, Anthem. I dunno why folks love that track so much. It's good, but it's not one of their signature tunes, deep cut or otherwise. Natural Science and Jacob's Ladder alone in any set would be enough to top it.

A lot can top it. Playin' Losing It live was NOT the apex of their career. :) They're not going to tour after LA, people. Accept it. Embrace it. Seize the day while you can. :)

You missed the point. :/ I didn't miss anything, kid. Yep, you sure did, punkin. :)

Hate is an overused word. Most people don't really know what it means to truly 'hate.' Neil's a fine person, just private.

Lighten up francis :)

The only bands I didn't get to see live that I lament are the Doors, Zep, and the Beatles. Because I was too young. :) But what would I do for a time travel jump back in time to see the Doors at their peak at the Whisky on Sunset Blvd? Short answer: A lot.

You're overthinking it. That's like saying, "Hey. This hot babe wants to have sex with my virgin self, but it's only going to be the once because after that, my dick's going to retire for some reason. Maybe I'd rather not do it in case sex is too good and it's better if I never know what I'm missing." You have women lining up at your door, don't you... Less than others, more than some. :)

You missed the point. :/

You're overthinking it. That's like saying, "Hey. This hot babe wants to have sex with my virgin self, but it's only going to be the once because after that, my dick's going to retire for some reason. Maybe I'd rather not do it in case sex is too good and it's better if I never know what I'm missing." Uh, no. Better to do a great thing once than never at all. Lighten up, Francis. :)

LA is it. Prepare yourselves. :)

Hemispheres. :)

those are awesome!

Blaghghhh. :

Nerds. :)

None of those options are gonna happen, guys. The Forum date is the last we'll hear from them for a while. It is far more likely that you'll see a Geddy solo album before anything else Rush-related after August 1st. Except for the inevitable R40 DVD, of course.

I don't see the point of recording with a phone. Ridiculous. The bootlegs will be far superior. Pictures, sure. Vid? No current cell phone takes good vid UNLESS you're within 5 rows of the stage.

Zoinks! :)

Point n shoot digitals are fine. No detachable lenses. And no flash!

You'd be wise to hop across the pond if you want to see them one last time.

Hurrrghhhh.............

But you're not thinking of Jump, Hammerhead Shark, or Hot Dog and a Shake. :) Speaking of food, Good Enough should be on that list. ;-) For every sophomoric track you can list about Sammy's career, rest assured I can cite one from Roth's. Let's pass on that tit for that, shall we. :)

Have you read the lyrics to their songs at all? I remember a bass teacher of mine in the early 80s asking, when he was teaching me to pick up Free Will by ear, "do these guys write any songs about chicks?" They really don't, other than the debut. You can't have it both ways. Either their lyrics are thought provoking, and thus discussion worthy, or they're not. I love Roth era Van Halen. But I'm guessing a fan site of theirs wouldn't need a SOCN. You'd be surprised, then. Nearly any active rock message board has a politico forum. I actually have a theory about lyrics. They really don't matter. Whether it's Van Halen, Rush, Maiden, Genesis, Pete Gabriel, AC/DC, the Beatles, the Doors, it really doesn't matter. Sure, the lyrics are great for diehard fans to absorb and analyze and reflect upon. But the vox are most important in the context of how they mesh with the instrumentation. The harmonies and the melodies are what counts with the vox, not exactly what they're saying. Hell, when I first started seeing Rush eons ago, before I knew any of the lyrics they'd put out to date, I didn't WTF Geddy was singing about...or David lee Roth...or Bon Scott. Sometimes it's friggin' hard to tell wtf they're saying, LOL. There are STILL VH diehards who debate exactly WTF Dave is saying in certain lines in Everybody Wants Some, LOL. Point being...I don't really care what they're singing about. As long as the vox flow with the instruments, they could be singing about androgynous octopi for all I care. :) That's why it's more important that Jim Morrison hits the right notes than it is for him to tell me about the decline of western civilization. Though the latter obviously has its place. :) I actually agree with you in that I don't necessarily want a musician to offer me his or her views on societal issues, particularly if I get the sense that he or she doesn't really have a good understanding of them. And everyone is free to enjoy music for whatever reason they like, obviously. However, if you don't care at all what the lyrics of a song are about I actually feel sorry for you. I don't mean that in a smart @ss way. I mean that for me, some songs, often songs about love, can really capture the way you feel perfectly. Paul McCartney's Maybe I'm Amazed reminds me of my wife. The first time I heard Halo Effect, I immediately thought of a girl I dated off and on in college for two years. And I suspect Peart would be saddened to hear that a fan thinks that, other than his amazing drumming, he contributes nothing of lasting impact to any of the band's songs. But to each his own :cheers: I never said Peart contributes nothing of lasting impact outside of the drums. :) But the method and delivery of the way a singer sings, particularly live, is far more important than the specific context of the lyrics. My own emotions are provoked by the flow and synchronicity of a song more than its message. The message is secondary. The immersion within a perfectly cohesive beautiful moment of music (vocal and instrumental harmonies melding and blending together) is a far bigger flashpoint than the words. Words, after all, can be read. Songs must be heard. For me, lyrics rarely take away from a song. But good ones can greatly increase my appreciation for a song. Rush means so much to me not just because of their music, but because the lyrics are so powerful. It it weren't for the lyrics, I doubt that I would have ever come around to appreciating the synth period. And while I like some Bob Dylan songs, if it weren't for the lyrics I wouldn't be half as interested in him as I am. I agree with this. I love the Van Hagar era of Van Halen (not as much as the Roth era though) but Sammy's lyrics are cringe worthy if you read them. But if you're just singing about getting laid, you don't need too much sophistication. Roth's lyrics weren't any better. Van Halen songs are all about sex, drugs, rock and roll. :) They both had moments of lucidity in their songwriting (see Push Comes to Shove or Don't Tell Me What Love Can Do), but ya don't listen to Van Halen for the lyrics, LOL. Like I said....vox are about harmony and melody, not message. If there IS a message, great, that's just a bonus. Here's an easier way to put it. At a show, you're hardly gonna notice if Geddy messes up the exact phrasing of a lyric or a passage, or perhaps even skip over an entire stanza. But you're sure as hell gonna notice when he hits a flat note. It's that simple. :) Roth is a lot smarter than Hagar. His lyrics were more sly. He's Bon Scott to Hagar's Brian Johnson. LOL. I don't agree. His lyrics were no more or less playground than Sam's. See 'Jump' or "Just Like Paradise" for further proof. But Dave likes to spew out philosophic platitudes with an ADD personality, and unfortunately that just makes him seem like an attention whore more than a thinker. I actually dunno what 'sly' lyrics are. It's fine if you prefer Dave over Sam. A lotta people do. Myself, I like them both. But I don't credit either one with superior songwriting. Sam's the better singer, Dave's the better showman. It's all good as long as Ed's playing the guitar and Mike's on the bass. The VH world is currently blowin' up with Ed's new interview with Billboard. He said some dumb ass things in there, LOL. And I don't think AC/DC ever made a finer record than Back in Black. So I dig Brian Johnson. But there's no denying Bon's impact either. Jump and Just Like Living in Paradise aren't pieces of lyrical genius. But they're also not sophomoric sex metaphors. Sly means having a little wit to it. I like Brian Johnson too. But there's a difference between the studio version of The Jack and "let me cut your cake with my knife." Or "slip and slide, push it in, bitch sure got the rhythm." But if you don't care what the lyrics are, it makes no difference. I love the Van Hagar stuff. It's not in the same ballpark with the first Roth era though. Sammy might be a better technical singer. Ozzy, Tyler, Jagger and Roth might not have the best singing voices, but rock isn't really about technical ability. Sammy definitely has 'a little wit' to many of his lyrics. And Sammy isn't a better 'technical' singer, he's a better singer, period, obviously. Showmanship and singing range are two different things. But really, last thing I wanna do on a Rush board is a Dave vs. Sam debate. Been there, done that. Yawn. In any case, anybody listening to Van Halen for lyrical poetry, is barking up the wrong tree, LOL. If you're not listening to Van Halen for the cockrock guitar, you're probably not listening to Van Halen at all. :)