Snaked

Counterparts tour from Auburn Hills. CLEAN IT UP AND RELEASE IT ALREADY!

 

That isn't theirs to release. It's a bootleg from the in house video feed.

Let's see...

 

If they didn't play Losing It on the CA tour they never will. They had the perfect opportunity with the string section and didn't bite.

They've had Vapor Trail ready for several tours.. but choose not to play it.. so I'm guessing that's out as well.

 

Out of the rest of the list I would personally pick Available Light.. as long as they don't give it the Presto treatment and cut Alex's solo short.

How about a team in Windsor?

Us Detroiters need more football! :)

I'm still not sure which side of this argument I fall on but I think the following is interesting:

 

1973 - Secretariat wins the Belmont in a field of 5 horses. Only 1 other horse (Sham) runs all 3 legs of the Triple Crown

1978 - Affirmed wins the Belmont in a field of 5 horses. Only 1 other horse (Alydar) runs all 3 legs of the Triple Crown

1977 - Seattle Slew wins the Belmont in a field of 8 horses. Only 2 other horses (Sir Sir, Run Dusty Run) run all 3 legs of the Triple Crown

 

 

So horse racing has a history of this behavior. It shouldn't be a surprise to Coburn that fresh horses were in the field.

Maybe a horse shouldn't have to run all 3 legs to qualify for the Belmont.. but at least 1 of the previous 2 races?

 

 

Good research. The last suggestion seems like a good compromise to me

 

My problem with that suggestion is if you're the top dog (or in this case, horse) you should welcome all comers to take their best shot. Shouldn't you?

 

It's a really difficult situation.. probably because I remember how dominant Seattle Slew and Affirmed were.. and even though I was too young to remember when it happened I have watched the Secretariat vids many times. While I do find it distasteful to pop a well rested horse into a race simply to try to play spoiler, a true champion should be able to overcome it.

 

Now the part that is starting to bother me is the 11 horse field... how many 'ringers' were sent to NY to try to bust up the chase for the crown.

I can see that point of view, but the other horses are getting rest, and the Triple Crown is a grueling process. To have to defeat specialists, and being less rested seems like too high a bar to clear.

 

Comparing it to the the Grand Slams in golf and tennis, you may have specialists on certain surfaces or types of courses, but in general (with the exception of the British Open in golf to a certain extent, though for different reasons) all of the top competitors are playing in each of the tournaments, health permitting.

 

I was thinking about the Grand Slams and I don't think they are fair comparisons for this reason...

If somebody misses a major this year.. they can go back next year and try again.

For horse racing, the Triple Crown is ONLY for 3 year olds. California Chrome (or any other horse) can't go back next year and try again.

I'm still not sure which side of this argument I fall on but I think the following is interesting:

 

1973 - Secretariat wins the Belmont in a field of 5 horses. Only 1 other horse (Sham) runs all 3 legs of the Triple Crown

1978 - Affirmed wins the Belmont in a field of 5 horses. Only 1 other horse (Alydar) runs all 3 legs of the Triple Crown

1977 - Seattle Slew wins the Belmont in a field of 8 horses. Only 2 other horses (Sir Sir, Run Dusty Run) run all 3 legs of the Triple Crown

 

 

So horse racing has a history of this behavior. It shouldn't be a surprise to Coburn that fresh horses were in the field.

Maybe a horse shouldn't have to run all 3 legs to qualify for the Belmont.. but at least 1 of the previous 2 races?

 

 

Good research. The last suggestion seems like a good compromise to me

 

My problem with that suggestion is if you're the top dog (or in this case, horse) you should welcome all comers to take their best shot. Shouldn't you?

 

It's a really difficult situation.. probably because I remember how dominant Seattle Slew and Affirmed were.. and even though I was too young to remember when it happened I have watched the Secretariat vids many times. While I do find it distasteful to pop a well rested horse into a race simply to try to play spoiler, a true champion should be able to overcome it.

 

Now the part that is starting to bother me is the 11 horse field... how many 'ringers' were sent to NY to try to bust up the chase for the crown.

I'm still not sure which side of this argument I fall on but I think the following is interesting:

 

1973 - Secretariat wins the Belmont in a field of 5 horses. Only 1 other horse (Sham) runs all 3 legs of the Triple Crown

1978 - Affirmed wins the Belmont in a field of 5 horses. Only 1 other horse (Alydar) runs all 3 legs of the Triple Crown

1977 - Seattle Slew wins the Belmont in a field of 8 horses. Only 2 other horses (Sir Sir, Run Dusty Run) run all 3 legs of the Triple Crown

 

 

So horse racing has a history of this behavior. It shouldn't be a surprise to Coburn that fresh horses were in the field.

Maybe a horse shouldn't have to run all 3 legs to qualify for the Belmont.. but at least 1 of the previous 2 races?

 

 

 

On a side (related) note:

I went back and watched all 3 races for the last 3 triple crown winners.

 

Secretariats Belmont might be the most impressive win... something like 25 lengths.

Affirmed's Belmont might be the most exciting, barely edging out Alydar by half a head

Seattle Slew's Belmont is probably the best.. at least IMO. Breaking in the last 1/2 to take it by about 4 without much problem at all.

This is a hell of a game!

I turned it off at 3-1 to watch the Tigers vs Boston and then flipped back to find it 4-4 midway through the 3rd.

 

Bring on the 2nd OT!

Personally I wouldn't mind this game going into a 3rd OT ;)

 

 

But hoping LA wins. I hate NYR

There is something to be said for the argument that only horses that run the Derby should be able to run the Preakness.. and only horses who ran the first two should be allowed in the Belmont.

These are a battery of races that make up the Triple Crown.. so I see the argument.

 

That being said... if you're the best, you should beat all comers regardless.

 

 

I can see both sides of this one.. and I'm not sure where I stand.

I'm probably leaning towards it being a series.. and you can't move on to the next phase unless you compete in the previous one.

 

 

That being said.. I can be swayed..

 

 

Oh.. and it was a very exciting race, for the first 3/4 mile at which point it became pretty obvious CC wasn't going to win.

I was just listening to this album today for the first time in a while.

 

Remember the band Flock of Seagulls from the eighties? That is who I think of when I listen to Gup. Oops! Excuse me. G/p. ;)

 

 

Get it right... P/g!

Sheesh!!!!

YEAH! OHHHHHHH YEAH!!!

You Bet Your Life is technically the most difficult RUSH song for me to listen to. :P

 

 

Does that count?

1-5 and I'll do halves

 

RUSH - ★

FBN - ★ 1/2

CoS - ★ 1/2

2112 - ★★★

AFTK - ★★★★

Hemispheres - ★★★★★

Permanent Waves - ★★★★ 1/2

Moving Pictures - ★★★★★

Signals - ★★★★

P/g! - ★★★★★

Power Windows - ★★★★★

Hold Your Fire - ★★★★

Presto - ★★★★

Roll The Bones - ★★★ 1/2

Counterparts - ★★★★ 1/2

Test For Echo - ★★★ 1/2

Vapor Trails (Remixed) - ★★★★ 1/2

Snakes & Arrows - ★★★★

Clockwork Angels - ★★★★★

 

Live Albums:

 

ATWAS - ★★★★★

Exit Stage Left - ★★★★

A Show of Hands - ★★★ 1/2

Different Stages - ★★★★ 1/2

RUSH in Rio - ★★★★★

R30 - ★★ 1/2

S&A Live - ★★ 1/2

Time Machine Live in Cleveland - ★★★★

Clockwork Angels Live - ★★★★ 1/2

I'm going to go out on a limb here and say that the Strat in question was in Alex's "bullpen"... a backup guitar tuned a certain way for certain songs in case his main broke a string or otherwise crapped out.

 

I don't recall ever seeing a white/white strat... the only other logical possibility is that somebody from either Fender or a local music shop asked him to give the axe a spin for a song or two and he tried it out live... but that's doubtful since the setup would have been a clusterfuck for him.

What is the source for that picture?

It looks like it's coming from page 11 of... ????

Those crazy people are driving on the wrong side of the roaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaad!

No tour on the horizon for 2015. :( I personally think that there's no tour in 2015. For the last tour I had my tickets, in hand, over a year in advance. The dates were announced at least 14 month before tour start, back then, as far as I can remember.

 

The UK/Europe shows were announced a year ahead of time because it was during the 2nd leg of the tour.

The US/Canada shows were announced 6-7 months ahead of time.

 

The 2015 tour will probably be announced in January/February.

There will be 3-5 new songs.

Not an albums worth of new material, but not just a "Maxi-Single" either.

 

They're scheduled to begin working on it in September.

 

Thank you, Snaked! Your info has always been very reliable. Super excited! 3-4 would be sweet but it wouldn't shock me if it turned into 5-7. It seems to me that they don't start writing with pre determined limitations. They just write and whatever comes out, comes out.

 

Snaked - from your experience, what is the turn around time?

 

If they start in September and if the tour is scheduled to start in the spring I wouldn't be surprised if we see the first single no later than mid-February.

 

I'm basing it solely on the 2 facts we know.

1. They are scheduled to start working in September

2. They are touring in 2015.

 

*IF* either of those facts change the timetable changes as well.

To quote Geddy on the subject "We're a hard rock band, sometimes"

Yup, the guy was very "in" with the band. A close friend. Rush is very loyal. They trusted him and he screwed them over by writing that book. He was immediately kicked out of the circle of trust and he has not had any association with the band since...

 

Everyone nailed it. It was absolute gold for the Rush fans. But the book reads like it was written by a 10 year old. Very poor spelling and grammar. Embarrassingly so. I remember reading it and how shocked I was that it could be this bad and be released. I always think of Neil reading that book and how he must have reacted.

 

In terms of content, there was some stuff that was very cool to learn about the band. However, it was somewhat painful trying to find it amongst the "look at me" style he wrote it in. That really got old very fast.

"So, Alex says hey B-Man lets go grab some lunch! I wanted to do Chinese and Alex was cool with that as long as I was going"

"Geddy asked me what I thought of his mullet. I gave him a wink and thumbs up. We hugged"

"Neil asked me what I thought of Limelight. I told him to change the song title from I am Paranoid to Limelight. He gave me a high five and said I am the greatest guy ever"

 

 

The book had nothing to do with his falling out with the band.

 

I would say it had a lot to do with it. I assume you are referring to BB sharing some unreleased songs off Hold Your Fire with radio stations? Yah, that didn't help either

 

 

Again, the book had NOTHING to do with the falling out. Not even a little bit.

Yup, the guy was very "in" with the band. A close friend. Rush is very loyal. They trusted him and he screwed them over by writing that book. He was immediately kicked out of the circle of trust and he has not had any association with the band since...

 

Everyone nailed it. It was absolute gold for the Rush fans. But the book reads like it was written by a 10 year old. Very poor spelling and grammar. Embarrassingly so. I remember reading it and how shocked I was that it could be this bad and be released. I always think of Neil reading that book and how he must have reacted.

 

In terms of content, there was some stuff that was very cool to learn about the band. However, it was somewhat painful trying to find it amongst the "look at me" style he wrote it in. That really got old very fast.

"So, Alex says hey B-Man lets go grab some lunch! I wanted to do Chinese and Alex was cool with that as long as I was going"

"Geddy asked me what I thought of his mullet. I gave him a wink and thumbs up. We hugged"

"Neil asked me what I thought of Limelight. I told him to change the song title from I am Paranoid to Limelight. He gave me a high five and said I am the greatest guy ever"

 

 

The book had nothing to do with his falling out with the band.

 

I would say it had a lot to do with it. I assume you are referring to BB sharing some unreleased songs off Hold Your Fire with radio stations? Yah, that didn't help either

 

 

Again, the book had NOTHING to do with the falling out. Not even a little bit.

 

Yep. He provided a radio station with the pre-release tapes of HYF even after being asked by the band not to. End of relationship. I don't understand why a guy like him who seemed to worship at the alter of the band would ignore a direct request like that. If anything, you'd think he'd be the LAST one to backstab the band. Maybe he wanted the glory of being "The Guy" who got their new music out first albeit illegally.

 

Yah he choked on that one. What he was thinking I have no idea....I guess he wrote the book after they kicked him out then? At least he didn't make it ugly. He treated Rush very well in that book...

 

You seem to forget that he not only had permission to write the book but the band helped him out with photos, additional interviews and unique access.

 

I have no idea why you have it in your brain that the book is in any way, shape or form tied to his ouster from the inner circle.

snaked IS bill banasiewicz

 

No. But I do play him on TV :P

Yup, the guy was very "in" with the band. A close friend. Rush is very loyal. They trusted him and he screwed them over by writing that book. He was immediately kicked out of the circle of trust and he has not had any association with the band since...

 

Everyone nailed it. It was absolute gold for the Rush fans. But the book reads like it was written by a 10 year old. Very poor spelling and grammar. Embarrassingly so. I remember reading it and how shocked I was that it could be this bad and be released. I always think of Neil reading that book and how he must have reacted.

 

In terms of content, there was some stuff that was very cool to learn about the band. However, it was somewhat painful trying to find it amongst the "look at me" style he wrote it in. That really got old very fast.

"So, Alex says hey B-Man lets go grab some lunch! I wanted to do Chinese and Alex was cool with that as long as I was going"

"Geddy asked me what I thought of his mullet. I gave him a wink and thumbs up. We hugged"

"Neil asked me what I thought of Limelight. I told him to change the song title from I am Paranoid to Limelight. He gave me a high five and said I am the greatest guy ever"

 

 

The book had nothing to do with his falling out with the band.

 

I would say it had a lot to do with it. I assume you are referring to BB sharing some unreleased songs off Hold Your Fire with radio stations? Yah, that didn't help either

 

 

Again, the book had NOTHING to do with the falling out. Not even a little bit.

Yup, the guy was very "in" with the band. A close friend. Rush is very loyal. They trusted him and he screwed them over by writing that book. He was immediately kicked out of the circle of trust and he has not had any association with the band since...

 

Everyone nailed it. It was absolute gold for the Rush fans. But the book reads like it was written by a 10 year old. Very poor spelling and grammar. Embarrassingly so. I remember reading it and how shocked I was that it could be this bad and be released. I always think of Neil reading that book and how he must have reacted.

 

In terms of content, there was some stuff that was very cool to learn about the band. However, it was somewhat painful trying to find it amongst the "look at me" style he wrote it in. That really got old very fast.

"So, Alex says hey B-Man lets go grab some lunch! I wanted to do Chinese and Alex was cool with that as long as I was going"

"Geddy asked me what I thought of his mullet. I gave him a wink and thumbs up. We hugged"

"Neil asked me what I thought of Limelight. I told him to change the song title from I am Paranoid to Limelight. He gave me a high five and said I am the greatest guy ever"

 

 

The book had nothing to do with his falling out with the band.

There will be 3-5 new songs.

Not an albums worth of new material, but not just a "Maxi-Single" either.

 

They're scheduled to begin working on it in September.

I'm trying to arrange to take the family up to Toronto, maybe Ottawa, and Ontario and Niagara Falls in general.

 

Curious if anyone living up yonder has heard of any potential one-gig deals that the band may be involved with?

 

... or regular things that they might do on a regular/semi-regular basis up there.

 

I figured not, but just thought I'd ask.

 

 

Unless another "Sarstock" pops up there won't be any shows in 2014.

Headlong Flight simply because it's even more epic live than it is on the album... and it's pretty freakin epic on the album!