amish_ashaman

QUOTE (LeaveMyThingAlone @ Jun 29 2010, 11:01 AM) QUOTE (Running Rebel @ Jun 29 2010, 10:20 AM) I saw a friend at work after the last tour who loved Rush but mostly the old stuff and hadn't listened to any of the newer stuff so he was complaining. The normal fan (aside from the hard core ones) will love this. A mix of new, but plenty of old with all of Moving Pictures, 2112, Working Man, Closer to the Heart, Subdivisions etc. Everyone has preferences and there's a couple I'd switch but all in all it's an understandable set list. It will be a fantastic show. I think you hit the nail on the head my friend. The few hundred people that post on this forum reguarly are a minute sample of what the Rush audience will be. Again, Rush is trying to put together a setlist that will please 3 groups of people: 1. Their hard core fans 2. Their casual fans that mainly only know the staples 3. Themselves! They have to enjoy what they're playing every night This is not an easy thing to do. And reading through some of these threads it's comical to hear the different complaints: "Not enough obscure songs from the vault" "Where's all the GUP stuff"? "Nothing off Vapor Trails"? "Xanadu is a total Rush staple. How can they not play THAT?" Rush can't win. This is a setlist designed to draw in a good 8000-12000 people on every show and I think they've accomplished that. For all the people complaining to give Working Man, La Villa, Spirit, Closer to the Heart a rest, the other 95% of the people in the audience will be flipping out when they hear this! "Stick it Out" may not be a favorite, but got a lot of video play at one time and even made it on Beavis and Butthead. It's recognizable Time Stand Still same thing. The hard cores should take a step back and realize this was never gonna be a true "B-Sides" tour for a couple thousand people every night (because that's what they'd draw). This is a major arena tour, and is a setlist I'd expect... accept, yeah, I'm a little bummed about Jacob'sd Ladder LOL. But we'll see tonight, still crossing fingers It shouldn't be hard to do, really... They play on average 28 songs a show: 7 current album (or in this case, MP) 2 previous album 1 instrumental w/drums 1 acoustic guitar thing 12 staples, evenly distributed from 2112-VT 4 from the vault 1 unplayed or deeper cut from the past 10 years or so Who would complain about that? Someone, I'm sure, but I bet there'd be less of it. All the oldies are really asking for is a couple of songs. Is that really that hard to do?

QUOTE (Todem @ Jun 29 2010, 09:54 AM) QUOTE (trenken @ Jun 29 2010, 09:01 AM) I wish they would play some really old stuff, Best I Can, Lamneth, Necromancer, Something For Nothing or Twilight Zone, AFTK title track, maybe all of hemispheres, if they did 2112 they could do that. Throw in Jacobs Ladder, and Camera Eye, and youve got one hell of a setlist there. I think the fans would really react well to that stuff at the shows. Instead its just another pretty safe rush setlist. Best I can? Necromancer? Fountain of Lamneth? Do you really thin they will ever even sniff those songs again? Really, you have to be be real about anything before 2112. They are so done with most of the back catalog. I don't expect any of that stuff ever again and have not since the HYF tour. They have brought back old songs in Working Man, By Tor, Circumstances, Entre Nous, Digital Man, Witch Hunt, Vital Signs, Cygnus X-1 (no vocal but it did rock) the R-30 Medley was fantastic, Passage to Bangkok 2112 complete in 96/97 NAtty Science for 3 tours, Xanadu, La Villa, Between the Wheels, Prelude Hemispheres. Rush has done a great job in bringing back some classic stuff. This go around we just need Jacobs Ladder and I think 90% of the complaining would cease. It's the only tune that really needs to be played again to really satisfy the hunger for old epic Rush. They have covered a ton of stuff the last 5 tours...really go back to the CP tour till the Snakes tour (both legs) they have really brought out a bunch of classic epics and deep cuts. This tour is no exception Camera Eye Presto Marathon Time Stand Still Faithless There are the deep cuts this tour. Toss in La Villa the new songs and other classics and we have a damm good set of music. There are so many fans who dig those deep cuts I mentioned for this set. I am pissed no question about Jacobs Ladder if indeed it is left out again...but other than that and Stick it Out (blech) this set is super strong. Forget the pipe dream of COS stuff....it will never happen. And quite frankly they have so much better material than that album. other than the Necromancer and Bastille day that album is not a good one for them compared with the rest of the catalog.....old time fans are still clinging to the first 3 albums....but Rush let go of them after Permanent Waves. I guess I am a Moving Pictures generation fan so everything from a AFTK-HYF is my golden period. I agree about the title track from AFTK....that would rock. Something for Nothing will kill but they would have to tune down no question. Would I and everyone else love Hemispheres? Of course...but Beyond the Lighted Stage summed up their thoughts on that piece. This is a very good setlist...ad a couple of more gems and most would be thrilled. Was the 2007 Setlist better? No question it was. But i need to see and hear this before I give my final thoughts...so that will come in October. Let the tour begin!!! Have they ever really addressed the reasons for being done with the early stuff? I am curious to know. I'm 43 years old and Rush has been my favorite band since I was a kid. I've moved on from a lot of stuff I was listening to at that time, but not Rush. I've never heard anything that has moved me the way Rush did (and still does), all the way up through GUP. I'm not tired of the old stuff, will never be tired of the old stuff, and am curious as to why the band is, especially since they haven't touched it in years. They aren't likely to write better material, and if they get tired of the new stuff, they've got a whole catalog full of stuff just waiting to be played. I know a lot of people who like Rush. I never hear any of them say stuff like "Man, do you think they'll play a bunch of stuff off Counterparts?", or sit around listening to Hold Your Fire all night. Before I got my tickets to this tour, I asked 10-12 people if they were going. Most couldn't, but even the ones who couldn't asked me if I thought they'd play anything from AFTK, COS, Hemispheres, etc. Then they'll ask, "Hey, is the new stuff any good?" Most of them haven't even heard the new stuff, but they sure as hell know the old stuff. People crave the old stuff and I think the band might be surprised at how it would be received. Really, how many of you listen to FM radio or sit around watching music videos? If I'm listening to music on the radio, it's XM or bust for me. People don't hear new music the way they used to. I don't know how many casual fans Rush really has, anyway. Everyone I know either loves them or hates them. Let me qualify that also, be saying that everyone I know that likes Rush pretty much falls into the category of white males between the age of 25-50. That's a pretty solid group to have as your clientele from a business perspective. You don't just have a bunch of kids out spending daddy's money at a Rush show. Daddy's there himself, spending his own money. If they started playing deeper stuff, a lot of older fans who haven't bothered to come see them in years would come crawling out of the woodwork.

QUOTE (LeaveMyThingAlone @ Jun 28 2010, 04:37 PM) QUOTE (N.O.RUSH @ Jun 28 2010, 04:18 PM) This set is hard for me to believe and to me, disappointing if true. For some reason i believe it though. I mean nothing from GUP??? NOthing????? Faithless????? C'mon. I pray that it is wrong and JL will be played and the original rehearsal list posted here is the one. Nonetheless, im happy i get to see them live again. Perfect example of why it's impossible to please everyone. Your biggest gripe is that they're playing nothing from GUP?!? Most of the other complainers have been no Jacob's Ladder and not enough from the '70's! Kind of funny They could play either AFTK or Bastille Day and I wouldn't care what they played the rest of the night.

QUOTE (Andrew1 @ Jun 29 2010, 02:21 AM) QUOTE (amish_ashaman @ Jun 29 2010, 02:20 AM) QUOTE (ReflectedLight @ Jun 29 2010, 12:28 AM) QUOTE (Kenneth @ Jun 29 2010, 12:24 AM) I'm not usually disappointed with this band but that first set looks terrible. the 2nd is fine. Doesn't live up to the excitement of the imagery I got when I read "Time Machine Tour." that's because they're catering to the casual fan again while pitching a few bisquits towards the die hards. What biscuits for the die hards? Last tour gave us three(Entre Nous, Circumstances, Bangkok). I don't see any this time, except for maybe TCE. Jacob's Ladder was a pretty big f***ing biscuit but I see your point. I love Rush so much that I hate them. I hate them for not playing the songs I want to hear (and were supposed to play) but I love them for still touring in 2010. Why couldn't Toto have had that kind of resolve? The horror....the horror.... Regardless, they're my favorite band even though I hate the bastards. Those sorry son's of bitches are playing Stick It Out when they should be playing Jacob's Ladder? What balls! They're pissing right in our faces while pocketing our hard earned money! Damn them straight to hell! Whatever the setlist turns out to be, I'm sure I'll be mad as a hornet about something.... But when they're gone and retired and shooting elk in Manitoba, or basking in the Maui sun, or taking pottery lessons wherever you take pottery lessons, we'll be wishing they were still touring and playing songs like Stick It Out. Maybe...... Maybe...

QUOTE (Del_Duio @ Jun 28 2010, 09:21 PM) It's pretty good, overall. It's surprising in some ways and the general consensus is it's surprising in a bad way. Personally I think the 1st leg of S&A was better. Or maybe the 1st set of the 1st leg in particular. (Entre Nous, Digital Man, BTW, & Circumstances is pretty much going to destroy any 1st set in my eyes.) So one way or the other, you're in for a surprise! Couldn't agree more, especially with Circumstances and Entre Nous. In Beyond the Lighted Stage, think of what Billy Corgan said about Entre Nous. He said he felt like the song was written just for him. I felt like that about Entre Nous AND Circumstances. This show only has one song like that for me, but it's one of the songs we already knew was coming.

QUOTE (theworkingman @ Jun 29 2010, 02:08 AM) Does this mean they aren't coming out on a Delorean? Anybody need an extra ticket? Aw, dude, how cool would that be?

Thank you!!!

"There is no such thing as a moral or immoral book. Books are either well written or badly written. That is all." - Oscar Wilde The same applies for music.

...they never told us Moving Pictures would be played in its entirety, they called it something else and the setlist looked like this: 1- Far Cry 2- Time Stand Still 3- Presto 4- Leave That Thing Alone 5- Stick It Out 6- Workin' Them Angels 7- BU2B 8- Tom Sawyer 9- Red Barchetta 10- YYZ 11- Limelight 12- The Camera Eye 13- Witch Hunt 14- Vital Signs 15- Faithless 16- Caravan 17- Drums 18- Alex 19- Closer to the Heart 20- Freewill 21- Subdivisions 22- 2112 23- The Spirit of Radio 24- La Villa Strangiato 25- Marathon 26- Working Man Far Cry is an opener. That pyro blast in the second chorus would let everybody know that they were in for a show. By splitting MP over the two sets, you keep the end of set one interesting. In set 2, you can get away with Faithless and caravan back to back because everyone will still be jacked from TCE and Vital Signs. Then you close it out with some predictable classics. I moved Marathon to the encore because I think it's the biggest "treat" besides the stuff on MP, and it is aggressive enough to put between LVS and Working Man, and could keep the encore momentum going. It's still a song or two off from greatness, but the boys seem to have forgotten one of the cardinal rules of business: promise less, deliver more. We've been fed too much hype and the carrot that was dangled before us got us a little too worked up. Instead of naming songs that may or may not make the cut, why not just say "We've been experimenting with a couple of songs we don't normally play. Nothing too major, just a couple of songs that will be a little different from the usual rotation."

QUOTE (ReflectedLight @ Jun 29 2010, 12:28 AM) QUOTE (Kenneth @ Jun 29 2010, 12:24 AM) I'm not usually disappointed with this band but that first set looks terrible. the 2nd is fine. Doesn't live up to the excitement of the imagery I got when I read "Time Machine Tour." that's because they're catering to the casual fan again while pitching a few bisquits towards the die hards. What biscuits for the die hards? Last tour gave us three(Entre Nous, Circumstances, Bangkok). I don't see any this time, except for maybe TCE.

QUOTE (Del_Duio @ Jun 28 2010, 10:36 PM) QUOTE (danielmclark @ Jun 28 2010, 10:25 PM) QUOTE (amish_ashaman @ Jun 28 2010, 10:06 PM) I think most would agree that if there were only going to be 1 or 2 surprises, we'd prefer them to be from the older stuff. Circumstances, Entre Nous and Bangkok are way better than anything being played on this tour, at least on the basis of being stuff from the classic period that the hard cores would want to hear. And honestly, at this stage of Rush's career, I think they ought to play a little more for the hard cores. The idea that songs from the mid-late 80's are "old" is off base. Where Rush is concerned, generally speaking, Moving Pictures was the last of the "old" Rush. Anything more recent is "new". (Signals took some getting used to, BTW, but it's among my favorites.) All three of the songs you named have been played on recent tours, so they wouldn't exactly be surprises. But I get where you're coming from. You'd rather they play some songs that haven't been played since the early days. I can respect that. But I don't think they should be playing to the oldies. No disrespect intended, but honestly - if they hadn't been picking up new fans throughout their career, we wouldn't be having this conversation. People who supported them early on made it possible for them to move into the 80's and beyond, but it was people that came later that are enabling them to go even further. So, I strongly, vehemently disagree that anything post-MP is "new". 74-80 was only six years of their career, and after that, there's been 30. To say that Signals or P/G or PoW is "new" is a little weird to me. True, they represented a change in direction, but so did AFTK. Is the second phase, from AFTK to MP less worthy or important because it's not as old as the first phase, up to 2112? There has to be more to the equation than age. But more to the point, the very definition of new vs. old... I don't understand how something from 1985 could be considered "new" when it was recorded 25 years ago. It's newer certainly, than say, Hemispheres, but there are people in this forum that weren't born when that record came out. It ain't new. Math aside, I consider Rush-HYF the "old stuff" and Presto-Clockwork Angels the "new stuff". I know that doesn't make much sense to anybody but me. I was talking about when they played those three songs last tour. When we saw them on the setlist, there was some surprise. "New" and "old" are always going to be relative. 6 years at the beginning produced 8 albums. It takes them longer to do 8 albums these days. I'm also speaking from my own experience, too. At the time Signals was released, my friends and I all thought of it as "new", and we'd refer to anything that came before as the "old" Rush, even though it only came out 2-3 years prior. It's relative to one's own experience. Some bands NEVER scrap their old material. Phish is probably the poster child for this, playing any song in their enormous catalog at any time plus any number of covers, solid 2 1/2-3 hour shows every night. Some shows won't have anything from the newest album. Sometimes they'll go 5-6 shows without duplicating a song. I'm not saying Rush should do that, I'm just giving an example of a band that has been around for a while (since 1983), still writes new music, but also still plays all of the old.

Any reports of another rehearsal tonight?

QUOTE (gtbos @ Jun 28 2010, 10:12 PM) I did the math,2h 30 min ,seems a little short,maybe missing one song from first set.JL,one from second set....otherwise i can live with it It's 1-2 songs off from being fantastic, if the 1-2 are lesser played songs from the classic period. They could go through the pre-MP catalog, pick ANY two songs that they haven't played since the MP or Signals tour, and it would be fantastic. ANY two songs from that period would rock, because they all rock. I didn't like all of the first album, but starting when Neil joined the band, the first song I didn't like was Red Lenses.

I'm not going to bother quoting anyone because I'm too tired to go back and find the posts, but I have a lot of thoughts on this. I totally agree with the person who talked about the lack of "coveted" songs here. Yes, there is a lot of classic material here, just nothing out of the ordinary from that period, where the few songs from the later period do have the surprises we might have preferred from the older stuff. I think most would agree that if there were only going to be 1 or 2 surprises, we'd prefer them to be from the older stuff. Circumstances, Entre Nous and Bangkok are way better than anything being played on this tour, at least on the basis of being stuff from the classic period that the hard cores would want to hear. And honestly, at this stage of Rush's career, I think they ought to play a little more for the hard cores. I don't think they would play anything that's not going to be played, but I could see where they might omit a song or two. This list does seem a couple of songs short. For S&A, they played 28 songs. For R30 they played 29. For VT, they played 29. For T4E they played 28 and one of those was the complete 2112. The idea that songs from the mid-late 80's are "old" is off base. Where Rush is concerned, generally speaking, Moving Pictures was the last of the "old" Rush. Anything more recent is "new". (Signals took some getting used to, BTW, but it's among my favorites.) Again, I have no complaints about the new stuff they chose. I like the songs. People are more pissed about what isn't there than what is.

QUOTE (Hemispheres89 @ Jun 28 2010, 05:53 PM) My original thoughts were..... NO WAY! (In a bad way) I was sorely disappointed. However, I did myself a favor and re-read the setlist over and over again, and made myself listen to some specific songs, to the point where now I'm ok with it. There are some things I'd change, obviously, but they dropped a bombshell of a surprise on me by confirming one particular song, and that's what ultimately made me happy If you were to see the setlist, it wouldn't be what you'd expect. You'd mostly likely scratch your head, like 90% of us did I'm curious to know what the surprise was. The only thing that surprised me was what wasn't there.

QUOTE (Hemispheres89 @ Jun 28 2010, 05:17 PM) QUOTE (PariahDog @ Jun 28 2010, 04:59 PM) So can we all agree that set two and the encore are pretty excellent? The main gripe seems to be with: Presto Stick It Out Leave That Thing Alone Workin' Them Angels Faithless You've nailed my gripes, down to a tee! (for me personally, anyway) Actually, I've had a change of attitude when I keep reading the setlist over and over again. The more I read it, the more I'm getting used to it and conforming to it. From the get-go, I loved the encore, was "meh' with the second set, and just was just downright disappointed with the first set. Now, I'm loving the entire second half, and like at least 70% of the first set. The only exceptions are the S&A songs and Presto, which I REALLY don't care to hear But alas, I have learned to like and accept the setlist as a whole I remember thinking when Presto first came out that it was the only song on the album that I might end up liking. As it stands, I didn't end up liking any of them, but I think Presto has a chance to shine live, and with the more aggressive sound. I actually don't have a problem with any of the songs they chose from that era, just that there are 5 of them and nothing out of the ordinary from the earlier period. I'm fine with one instrumental per show, and since we've got YYZ, I really don't need Leave That Thing Alone. I don't like Time Stand Still but I'll tolerate it here because of the context.

QUOTE (coolphantom190 @ Jun 28 2010, 04:47 PM) QUOTE (amish_ashaman @ Jun 28 2010, 04:44 PM) QUOTE (PariahDog @ Jun 28 2010, 02:51 PM) QUOTE (amish_ashaman @ Jun 28 2010, 02:49 PM) This went from being possibly the best tour they've done in a LONG time to being the worst one they've done since Hold Your Fire. Which specific songs make you feel that way? It's more a lack of certain things. No JL, nothing from Hemispheres(there usually is), and a heavy concentration of stuff from the late 80's/early 90's. I would expect them to play the late 80's/early 90's stuff, but why so much of it and so little from the classic period? The order is a bit odd, too. These songs could have been better arranged (if this is indeed the actual order). Far Cry so low in the set is kinda anti-climactic don't ya think? This is essentially 2 songs away from me thinking "Okay, this is fine." S&A was much better, with Circumstances, Bangkok, and Entre Nous in there. This tour doesn't have any real surprises like that. Just a bunch of stuff they normally play and a couple of newer songs that they haven't gotten around to playing very much. I was NOT expecting All the World's a Stage II, but maybe a bone or two from the classic period. Freewill and Spirit hardly count because they always play them anyway. There is nothing pre-PW that is in any way surprising. La Villa Strangiato is off of Hemispheres! HAHAHAHA!!!! Doh! Sorry, I missed that.

QUOTE (PariahDog @ Jun 28 2010, 02:51 PM) QUOTE (amish_ashaman @ Jun 28 2010, 02:49 PM) This went from being possibly the best tour they've done in a LONG time to being the worst one they've done since Hold Your Fire. Which specific songs make you feel that way? It's more a lack of certain things. No JL, nothing from Hemispheres(there usually is), and a heavy concentration of stuff from the late 80's/early 90's. I would expect them to play the late 80's/early 90's stuff, but why so much of it and so little from the classic period? The order is a bit odd, too. These songs could have been better arranged (if this is indeed the actual order). Far Cry so low in the set is kinda anti-climactic don't ya think? This is essentially 2 songs away from me thinking "Okay, this is fine." S&A was much better, with Circumstances, Bangkok, and Entre Nous in there. This tour doesn't have any real surprises like that. Just a bunch of stuff they normally play and a couple of newer songs that they haven't gotten around to playing very much. I was NOT expecting All the World's a Stage II, but maybe a bone or two from the classic period. Freewill and Spirit hardly count because they always play them anyway. There is nothing pre-PW that is in any way surprising.

QUOTE (TwoOneOneTwo @ Jun 28 2010, 03:59 PM) You know, I don't give a damn what they play. They rehearse diligently and come to the stage prepared, and they care about what they're doing. Unlike a group like....Yes. Be grateful Rush doesn't act like that ridiculous and embarrassing comedy of errors. Yes is infamous for using their shows as dress rehearsals, and then they have the balls to charge exorbitant prices for their tickets---and Alan is pretty much always drunk and Steve is pretty much always high as a kite. If Yes played the entire Relayer, Tales, and CTTE albums at each show under those conditions, it wouldn't be worth a dime. So count your blessings, Rush fans. Rush can play whatever the fcuk they want. That's their choice. I'm not paying for a ticket to tell them what should be in the goddamn setlist. What I *do* expect for my money is for them to be sober on stage and to have rehearsed the material. I mean, really rehearsed---not the occasional clam. And they ante up: I've never seen them incapable of playing or making vast amount of errors all over the place. That's called professionalism, and they have more of it than any rock group I've ever seen in thirty-eight years. The one time I saw Yes was one of the best shows I've ever seen.

This went from being possibly the best tour they've done in a LONG time to being the worst one they've done since Hold Your Fire.

QUOTE (cygnus_thegodofbalance @ Jun 28 2010, 01:59 PM) That is an insanely terrible first set. If that is real, God help us. No doubt. This is by far the worst "supposed" setlist I've seen.

QUOTE (cdaddie @ Jun 28 2010, 01:01 PM) "If you choose to say "no comment", you still have made a comment, you can choose from....." I can't believe I didn't catch that the first time through. Ha!

QUOTE (Brava Doh! @ Jun 28 2010, 12:44 PM) The whole "Stick it Out" thing was mentioned on "the Hour" and was in response to a question about a song that Alex loves and Geddy hates (or vice-versa, can't remember). they joked about Stick It Out as being one Neil hates to play. That was it. I don't take that as confirmation that the song is being played. It could very well have just been discussed and discarded due to Neil's objections. I imagine lots of songs go through the same process. i'm not saying it won't be played, but I don't believe it has been "confirmed"...unless it came up somewhere else from the Band and I missed it. that's possible, i don't claim to know everything. I'd personally rather it isn't played but if it is, no problem. Good point. I thought one of them said they had rehearsed it. But in that interview with Geddy from 2009, he said they had rehearsed AFTK several times before S&A and weren't happy with it. That pretty much confirms that they will rehearse songs and then those songs still might not make the cut. I also wonder...could they have gone back to AFTK, refusing to give up on it if they did really want to play it again? In Beyond the Lighted Stage, one thing that really stood out to me was the devotion they had in rehearsing the tough songs until they got them right, like La Villa Strangiato for instance. They didn't seem to like the fact that they never got it all in one take.

Best one I've seen yet, but it doesn't jive with all of what we've heard from the interviews and such (Stick It Out, one song from T4E, etc.). You are a couple of songs short (it's usually in the 26-28 range), but damn that would be one amazing show.