Jump to content

Superconductor


Timbale
 Share

Recommended Posts

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"?

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've never thought much of it. It's no more or less odd than Neil saying "Subdivisions", or the "It's true!" shout in Red Lenses.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

45 minutes ago, ST3V said:

I've never thought much of it. It's no more or less odd than Neil saying "Subdivisions", or the "It's true!" shout in Red Lenses.

 

Indeed - also moments that I don't enjoy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

55 minutes ago, chemistry1973 said:

Superconductor would be so much better if they half timed the main riff.

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

Link to comment
Share on other sites

57 minutes ago, Timbale said:

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

Everything the same except NP playing in half time in 7. Would be heavier and almost danceable.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, chemistry1973 said:

Everything the same except NP playing in half time in 7. Would be heavier and almost danceable.

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!

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

One of Neil's most sneering, cynical lyrics, which deserves a much more powerful piece of music to go along with it. There are some brilliant moments on Presto, but this isn't one of them. Rupert's production was rarely able to capture Rush rocking out well (see also Face Up).

 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Regarding the OP, I don't care for the echoing "superconductor" vocal either.  It doesn't add anything at all.  I don't mind the song.  I like the pre-chorus, the bridge, as well as the main groove, and I appreciate the irony the music puts forth against the biting lyrics. 

 

The video was absolutely awful.

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

i get what they were trying to do with it but I'm always slightly annoyed after I hear it. That video doesn't do it any favors either. It's the worst video they've ever done by quite a large margin.

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, ytserush said:

i get what they were trying to do with it but I'm always slightly annoyed after I hear it. That video doesn't do it any favors either. It's the worst video they've ever done by quite a large margin.

Yes.  This video is orders of magnitude worse than Time Stand Still.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 7/21/2022 at 1:32 PM, Timbale said:

 Presto for me is the starting point of Rush having songs where I like parts of the songs but not other parts...

Naw, there are plenty of examples of this in the 70s.

Some bits of prog work well, other bits are an absolute slog. 

For me, nearly every song on PW has bits I like and bits I skip over. Even the last two parts of 2112 rarely get played round these parts. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Weatherman said:

Naw, there are plenty of examples of this in the 70s.

Some bits of prog work well, other bits are an absolute slog. 

For me, nearly every song on PW has bits I like and bits I skip over. Even the last two parts of 2112 rarely get played round these parts. 

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....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Superconductor is a bit of a marmite song - people either like it/don't mind it or hate it vociferously.

 

I like it (and don't mind the RHine voice part) but I think it kind of sticks out like a sore thumb, stylistically, against the rest of Presto in my opinion.

It might be noticed more so annoys those who don't like it and gets a bigger beating than it otherwise would.

Just a theory.

 

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 hours ago, Timbale said:

Hmmm....I'd be interested to know what parts those are.

 

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.

 

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....

Yeah, JL is a perfect example of a prog song that's more fun to play than to listen to. 

The abrupt change in tone in Natural Science made me cringe, now, yesterday, and 30 years ago when I first heard it.

Freewill -- don't even get me started. Good prechorus, and I like Geddy's bass and Neil's clams isolated from whatever the fork Alex is doing. Other parts are ridiculous.

The earlier stuff has nice bits and terrible bits -- Fountain of Lamneth, for example.

And again the last two parts of 2112 are inferior to the first 5 parts.  

 

Sum total: People have different ears! 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I like the song, but yeah, that is a brutally terrible video.  For a band that was so meticulous about every other aspect of their art, including visual presentation, it's mystifying that they never produced a really interesting video.  The best they ever managed was "okay", but the majority were flat out bad.

 

edit: Come to think of it, I actually rather like the video for Mystic Rhythms.  That's probably the only one, though.

Edited by Rush Didact
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Rush Didact said:

I like the song, but yeah, that is a brutally terrible video.  For a band that was so meticulous about every other aspect of their art, including visual presentation, it's mystifying that they never produced a really interesting video.  The best they ever managed was "okay", but the majority were flat out bad.

 

edit: Come to think of it, I actually rather like the video for Mystic Rhythms.  That's probably the only one, though.

I enjoy the Time Stand Still video in the same way that I enjoy watching The Room, or Troll 2. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, Rush Didact said:

 

edit: Come to think of it, I actually rather like the video for Mystic Rhythms.  That's probably the only one, though.

Mystic Rhythms is a rare gem in the RUSH music video catalog

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Superconductor and Neurotica are the worst songs for me.  Cringey awful so I don't listen to them anymore.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...