R.G Posted September 11, 2006 Share Posted September 11, 2006 In my time here i have noticed that (broadly) there are the die-hard fans who wont say a word wrong about the band, and the 'rogue' fans who seem to spend their time announcing the shortfalls of the band and attacking those who fall in to the first category. Therefore i've devised this thread to try and see if both sides will meet somewhere in the middle, or if they are really as defined as i state above. So, write down one thing about Rush which you feel could be improved or is a shortfall, and one thing which Rush does and another of your favourite bands could learn from. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
treeduck Posted September 11, 2006 Share Posted September 11, 2006 I'm a big fan of course and do pretty much like every album they've done, there's always some decent stuff on every album, but I'm prepared to question certain things, (see Neal Peart website comments thread) so I'm sort of in the middle leaning slightly over towards the total diehards. [i also like writing longish sentences] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
melodic777 Posted September 11, 2006 Share Posted September 11, 2006 I love them and at the same time wish Geddy would get his ears checked because I think he needs hearing aids based upon his shitty selection of basses throughout his career, and then when getting the only one that sounded articulate, punchy, and phat on bottom, decides to go back to the Schmegma eating Fender CRAP bass. Yea, I'm in the middle. I love Rush and the boys, I absolutley despise his choice of basses. He might as well not try to write anything interesting because other than the mid-late eighties with the WAL bass, everything that has sounded good on an album has never sounded as good live because of shit for tone. Just like YYZ.......those bass solos sound like ass. Sounds like a shitty guitar with half ass distortion on it. On the other hand, how it sounds on his Wal bass is amazing, and every bit what it was supposed to sound like! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vicious Posted September 11, 2006 Share Posted September 11, 2006 QUOTE (treeduck @ Sep 11 2006, 11:27 PM) I'm a big fan of course and do pretty much like every album they've done, there's always some decent stuff on every album, but I'm prepared to question certain things, (see Neal Peart website comments thread) so I'm sort of in the middle leaning slightly over towards the total diehards. [i also like writing longish sentences] I hate it when Rush fans spell Neil's name wrong! Edit: I hate the tone of Geddy's Wal basses too. This time I'm serious. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tick Posted September 11, 2006 Share Posted September 11, 2006 i would love to see the band get retro and record an epic track, you know one thats 15 minutes long or longer. i think that would totally rock ! c'mon now whos with me on that one. something really progessive with odd time signatures. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KublaKhan Posted September 11, 2006 Share Posted September 11, 2006 I generally give everything Rush records a chance, and usually end up prejudging albums. the only thing I dont like about Rush is Dog Years. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Maddy Posted September 11, 2006 Share Posted September 11, 2006 Well, the video for "Time Stand Still" is about the worst video anyone ever did - they're surprisingly hit or miss when it comes to concept videos. Given the visuals on their album covers, I honestly expected more from them. On the plus side, I love the intelligent sonwriting, the fact that not every freaking song they write is about getting laid (Okay, okay, there are a couple - but "In The Mood" is adorable. At least Geddy is singing it.) I also love how they've evolved over the years without losing their own sound. I also love the sense of humor they have about themselves. Only with Rush would the question of what appliance will they have on stage this tour come up... (Let's see, they've had the fridge, tumble dryers, washing machines - I'm guessing stove or dishwasher this time 'round...) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
deadwing2112 Posted September 11, 2006 Share Posted September 11, 2006 Rush's humor is kinda weird imo. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tyranny Posted September 11, 2006 Share Posted September 11, 2006 QUOTE (melodic777 @ Sep 11 2006, 05:14 PM) I love them and at the same time wish Geddy would get his ears checked because I think he needs hearing aids based upon his shitty selection of basses throughout his career, and then when getting the only one that sounded articulate, punchy, and phat on bottom, decides to go back to the Schmegma eating Fender CRAP bass.... You are probably onto something there. I'm not any kind of an expert on bass guitars, so I can't really comment on that; but I am dectecting evidence that Geddy has some high-frequency hearing loss, at least. Especially on the R30 concert DVD. Too many concerts w/o earplugs, unfortunately. The occupational hazard of musicians. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ghost of a Rider Posted September 12, 2006 Share Posted September 12, 2006 I am a huge fan and there's not much I don't like from them as far as material. For instance I never cared for the song Test For Echo or Animate and there are a few others that just don't move me. As for the guys themselves, I think they're all likeable fellas even though some think that Neil is arrogantly aloof. I don't know, I've never met him. He may be the most engaging guy you'll ever meet in person, who knows?. He just has a hard time with strangers acting like they know him and I can understand how he'd feel that way. Their music is not perfect but it's safe to say that it is perfect for me. No other band has ever moved me the way they have and I'm infinitely grateful to have found them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rayzray Posted September 12, 2006 Share Posted September 12, 2006 gee,, i can say "anything" i want about them??!! i have only started listening to Rush about 2 years ago;; and as a professional musician and singer myself;; i must say they are great for a 3 1/2 piece band.. (the synths equeals 1/2 of a person to me).. i LOVE their material;; thay play exceptionally well;; so,, how can they out-do what they already have done.. (experament) (sp);; so it's all like a Russian Roulette game.. instrumentally they rock;; and vocally;; well;; his voice kinds of creeks me;; but i see his voice as an odd foreign instrument without the enunciation.. i listen to them a lot now;; but i must admit;; i love re-mixing their CD's and DVD'a by taking OUT the vocals and make extremely long instrumentals with them.. (it must by his lyrics).. is it possible Getty chooses a Bass guitar that matches closely to his synth bass?? so when he does his bass rants,, he can hold a similar synth note without too much contrast.. so,, i am on the fence on this;; 50/50;; the glass is half full AND half empty.. but,, give the guys a break;; they have "Made it" and are still making it.. i just wish they would put out a more Quality DVD than they do;; probably not their fault as much as the backgrounders.. i am lucky i can "Fix" all their woes on my Sima A/V mixer.. well,, lets take it this way;; on odd days i will critisize them;; and on even days i will love them..!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PuppetKing2112 Posted September 12, 2006 Share Posted September 12, 2006 Most of what I criticise about Rush isn't entirely their fault...more due to their label's shitty publicists and all that, and people who want them to go back to the style of a certain album, which is completely against everything Rush represents to me. So here goes: What I think they do better than anybody else: Rush has an incredible ability to always move forward with their music, never staying in the same spot for too long and never going back to the past to pander to their fan base. They do things completely on their own terms. They didn't care when they lost people with Signals, they could have sold 5 times as many records with Moving Pictures Part II...and after Caress of Steel was a critical and commercial failure, their label wanted them to go back to sounding like they did on their first album, and instead they made 2112, which (ironically) became their commercial breakthrough. Their music has had its ups and downs over the years (much of which I go into elaborately in other posts), but when taken as a whole it's just an awe-inspiring body of work. They are probably the only band of their era that has stayed together in their original lineup for all this time, and has never become a state-fair/casino has-been nostalgia band. And as for what they can improve that's actually something they can do something about, how about a little spontaniety in the setlists and live arrangements. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
treeduck Posted September 12, 2006 Share Posted September 12, 2006 QUOTE (Vicious @ Sep 11 2006, 04:35 PM) QUOTE (treeduck @ Sep 11 2006, 11:27 PM) I'm a big fan of course and do pretty much like every album they've done, there's always some decent stuff on every album, but I'm prepared to question certain things, (see Neal Peart website comments thread) so I'm sort of in the middle leaning slightly over towards the total diehards. [i also like writing longish sentences] I hate it when Rush fans spell Neil's name wrong! Edit: I hate the tone of Geddy's Wal basses too. This time I'm serious. I do sometimes get my Neals mixed up with my Neils. I also pronounced Peart "Purt" instead of "Pee-at" for ages... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
launchpad67a Posted September 12, 2006 Share Posted September 12, 2006 I wish they would produce a live album that was actually recorded well. And the remarks about Ged's bass tones...how can you dog the Fender Jazz bass? What's that bass in your avatar, some 6 string, active electronics, fiberglass japanese model? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
1-0-0-1-0-0-1 Posted September 12, 2006 Share Posted September 12, 2006 QUOTE (melodic777 @ Sep 11 2006, 05:14 PM)I love them and at the same time wish Geddy would get his ears checked because I think he needs hearing aids based upon his shitty selection of basses throughout his career, and then when getting the only one that sounded articulate, punchy, and phat on bottom, decides to go back to the Schmegma eating Fender CRAP bass. Yea, I'm in the middle. I love Rush and the boys, I absolutley despise his choice of basses. He might as well not try to write anything interesting because other than the mid-late eighties with the WAL bass, everything that has sounded good on an album has never sounded as good live because of shit for tone. Just like YYZ.......those bass solos sound like ass. Sounds like a shitty guitar with half ass distortion on it. On the other hand, how it sounds on his Wal bass is amazing, and every bit what it was supposed to sound like! Couldn't disagree more. Sure the Wal was clean sounding, and I suppose a clean bass sound fit the music that was produced on Power Windows and HYF, but IMO that bass had no balls. That bass tone and Alex's guitar sound on those two albums is thin and lifeless. They chose those instruments to complement the massive amount of keyboards they were employing at the time, and that's fine, but they kept using them for Presto and RTB, and the more guitar-driven arrangements of those albums suffered greatly because of it. It's not surprising that songs like "Big Money," "Dreamline," "The Pass" and "Force Ten" sound so much better as played in concert the past few tours with Alex playing real guitars through tube amps and Ged playing a fat-sounding Jazz Bass. Just my opinion, of course. This is why they make so many different kinds of instruments. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DonnaWanna Posted September 12, 2006 Share Posted September 12, 2006 QUOTE (deadwing2112 @ Sep 11 2006, 07:50 PM) Rush's humor is kinda weird imo. how so? and i could do without covers they do least in concerts, id rather hear Rush songs instead of Rush playing Non-Rush songs I have to say..i was never into drum solos till i saw Rush in concert.always went to the potty during those solos or a beer run But He is just amazing!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Earthshine Posted September 12, 2006 Share Posted September 12, 2006 I like all of Geddy's basses over the years. He has chosen the right one for each song an album. Same with Alex's guitars. His sounds stay current and go along with the music they are playing at the time. Same with Neil's drums. His drums never sounded bad, despite what so-called "discoverer" of John Bonham Carmine Appice may say. Neil is in a class all his own. The only thing I could say is that I wish that Rush would play more older material and play it in its entirety! Not much I can say that I don't like about Rush. Sorry. Simply love the band. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fridge Posted September 12, 2006 Share Posted September 12, 2006 I would say that I probably like /love about 85% of their stuff up to and including 1987 ( HYF) then it tails off to about 30%. Like others, I have always admired their willingness to experiment and do things on their own terms. Of course, it doesn't always work, but fair play to them for trying. As I have said before, I am not a "fan" as such of any band, but listen to songs as they come and judge them each on their own merits. This means that I don't love the "institution" of Rush and will not try to "make" myself like a song. If its good/bad, thats it. As far as I can see, very few other band seven comes close to the ratio of songs I like, so they must have been doing something right. I still think they are a shadow of the band they once were, but who knows? maybe they can produce a rabbit out of the hat with the latest offering... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Soni Posted September 12, 2006 Share Posted September 12, 2006 nah, they all suck... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RUSHHEAD666 Posted September 12, 2006 Share Posted September 12, 2006 I can say on here that I am one of the biggest Neil Peart fans in the world but I can attack a few shortfalls of Neil that has bugged me for many years. First off ever since the "Presto" album Neil "downsized" his kit and dumped the double bass drums to go with a single kick with a double pedal. Shit, even I have a single kick with an Iron Cobra double pedal. I thought that was a lame move. The thing that really bugs me about Neil is when he bombed on those Buddy Rich Memorial Concert tapes!! Remember those?? He did "Cottontail" and one other Buddy Rich tune with his big band. Neil was terrible. Neil cannot swing. He tries man but he can't get it. Please do not bring up his current solos. He is great but come on, he has to have the video screen of big band black and white homage going on in the background. He even hired Freddie Gruber for a year to change his style and tom placement. Neil went from matchstick grip back to traditional grip. It didn't work. If you have noticed ever since the "Test For Echo" Tour, he is slowly going back to matchstick grip. Neil is obsessed with Buddy. So much he also did those "Burning For Buddy" cds and videos. Those are excellent. Neil's enthusiasm is beyond. He is animated like a boy inside a toy store. My parents were vacationing down in the Bahamas a few summers ago. They were on the beach one afternoon and somehow bumped into a bald fellow by the name of Steve Smith. My father mentioned to him somehow that I was a drummer and a major Neil Peart, RUSH fan! Steve told my dad that Neil was tough to work with on the "Burning For Buddy" recordings. He said that when Neil plays RUSH music he is in his own world and is one of the best drummers ever. He then said that if you take Neil out of that mindframe and put him into a big band mode he doesn't quite get it. Take this story for what it's worth. Not all is peaches and cream in the world of RUSH. Neil Peart will always be my favorite drummer on the earth, but I know no one is perfect. Some people probably think that Mike Portnoy is a better drummer than Neil. NO WAY!! Dave Weckl? Maybe............... Dennis Chambers? Perhaps................ Everyone has their own style. Neil has his own, yet he tried to tweek it. Just play man!! I want the Professor back on the drumkit of old!!! A real double bass acoustic drumset!! Forget the drum triggers too!! I want to see a real gong, real triangles, real woodblocks, real wind chimes!! Oh well. I am a 38 year old dinosaur. HAPPY BIRTHDAY NEIL!!!! As for Geddy, maybe over the years his voice has gone downhill. That is life and that is just age. Still love the guy. Alex? Nothing can be said bad about him. The most underrated guitar player on the planet!!! RUSH STILL RULES!!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
R.G Posted September 12, 2006 Author Share Posted September 12, 2006 QUOTE (PuppetKing2112 @ Sep 12 2006, 01:49 AM) Most of what I criticise about Rush isn't entirely their fault...more due to their label's shitty publicists and all that, and people who want them to go back to the style of a certain album, which is completely against everything Rush represents to me. So here goes: What I think they do better than anybody else: Rush has an incredible ability to always move forward with their music, never staying in the same spot for too long and never going back to the past to pander to their fan base. They do things completely on their own terms. They didn't care when they lost people with Signals, they could have sold 5 times as many records with Moving Pictures Part II...and after Caress of Steel was a critical and commercial failure, their label wanted them to go back to sounding like they did on their first album, and instead they made 2112, which (ironically) became their commercial breakthrough. Their music has had its ups and downs over the years (much of which I go into elaborately in other posts), but when taken as a whole it's just an awe-inspiring body of work. They are probably the only band of their era that has stayed together in their original lineup for all this time, and has never become a state-fair/casino has-been nostalgia band. And as for what they can improve that's actually something they can do something about, how about a little spontaniety in the setlists and live arrangements. great post, just what i was looking for. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dakota2112 Posted September 12, 2006 Share Posted September 12, 2006 QUOTE (R.G @ Sep 11 2006, 03:18 PM)In my time here i have noticed that (broadly) there are the die-hard fans who wont say a word wrong about the band, and the 'rogue' fans who seem to spend their time announcing the shortfalls of the band and attacking those who fall in to the first category. Therefore i've devised this thread to try and see if both sides will meet somewhere in the middle, or if they are really as defined as i state above. So, write down one thing about Rush which you feel could be improved or is a shortfall, and one thing which Rush does and another of your favourite bands could learn from. I've been a rabid fan of Rush's music for about 20 years. Over that timespan, I'm sure I've been the "die-hard fan" as well as the "rogue" fan and everyplace in between. There was a time for me when Rush could do no wrong, and everything they did turned to gold. Everything they did was better than everyone else's music. I rarely even listened to anything besides Rush. But that was years and years ago. Since then, I've learned that yes, there are other bands out there besides Rush, and yes, other bands can produce material every bit as good as the best Rush has to offer. Rush just happens to have the best overall catalog of material, period. They're in a league of their own, in my book, because of this. However - as with any long-term relationship - I find that it's important to be secure enough in my relationship that I'm comfortable with identifying shortfalls. In this case, I'm talking about my relationship with Rush's music, but the theory is the same regardless. Does anyone stay married for 20 years without being able to honestly identify the other's weaknesses? Is there anything wrong with identifying weaknesses? No way, and in fact, I think it's critically important. Otherwise, you'd be wearing blinders. At least that's my take on it. I honestly don't see how someone can genuinely say they really like everything Rush has ever done. If they really mean it, more power to them. I guess there was a time long ago that I felt the same way about Rush. But I've been a fan for long enough that I think I'm allowed to identify their weaknesses. If that offends anyone, well, sorry. Being a music fan is fundamentally 100% opinion afterall ya know... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
launchpad67a Posted September 12, 2006 Share Posted September 12, 2006 I forgot. I love Neil but I wish he wouldn't "rush" when he plays. It becomes very annoying when he is so ahead of the groove all the time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DmanYYZ Posted September 12, 2006 Share Posted September 12, 2006 QUOTE (dakota2112 @ Sep 12 2006, 09:54 AM) QUOTE (R.G @ Sep 11 2006, 03:18 PM)In my time here i have noticed that (broadly) there are the die-hard fans who wont say a word wrong about the band, and the 'rogue' fans who seem to spend their time announcing the shortfalls of the band and attacking those who fall in to the first category. Therefore i've devised this thread to try and see if both sides will meet somewhere in the middle, or if they are really as defined as i state above. So, write down one thing about Rush which you feel could be improved or is a shortfall, and one thing which Rush does and another of your favourite bands could learn from. I've been a rabid fan of Rush's music for about 20 years. Over that timespan, I'm sure I've been the "die-hard fan" as well as the "rogue" fan and everyplace in between. There was a time for me when Rush could do no wrong, and everything they did turned to gold. Everything they did was better than everyone else's music. I rarely even listened to anything besides Rush. But that was years and years ago. Since then, I've learned that yes, there are other bands out there besides Rush, and yes, other bands can produce material every bit as good as the best Rush has to offer. Rush just happens to have the best overall catalog of material, period. They're in a league of their own, in my book, because of this. However - as with any long-term relationship - I find that it's important to be secure enough in my relationship that I'm comfortable with identifying shortfalls. In this case, I'm talking about my relationship with Rush's music, but the theory is the same regardless. Does anyone stay married for 20 years without being able to honestly identify the other's weaknesses? Is there anything wrong with identifying weaknesses? No way, and in fact, I think it's critically important. Otherwise, you'd be wearing blinders. At least that's my take on it. I honestly don't see how someone can genuinely say they really like everything Rush has ever done. If they really mean it, more power to them. I guess there was a time long ago that I felt the same way about Rush. But I've been a fan for long enough that I think I'm allowed to identify their weaknesses. If that offends anyone, well, sorry. Being a music fan is fundamentally 100% opinion afterall ya know... .....and the criticism is what? Mine is that I do not like the 3 and 4 track overdubbing of Geddy's voice. Too many words per lyric and not enough tempo changes. It seems like the songs I really like that aren't epics are the ones that build until they blow up right as Alex's solo sounds like the big machine has pieces flying off of it. Now, I know not every single song can be this way but since RtB they seem to start and stay there until they end. (Alien Shore and others, Driven, not withstanding.) That's why a longer song format is so much better. It has a chance to develop and change, to build and refrain and build back up and it doesn't have to get 300 words in in four minutes. There, my criticism.....now that just feels ridiculous. I have no room to gripe. They are not burned out and I am not burned out on them. If it were a record every two years it wouldn't be magic. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GeddyRulz Posted September 12, 2006 Share Posted September 12, 2006 Rush's shortfall: the Roll the Bones album, and the overuse of keyboards in the 80s. What other bands should learn from Rush: personal and artistic integrity, virtuosic musicianship, and awesome lyrics. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.