job Posted March 16, 2009 Share Posted March 16, 2009 QUOTE (Storm Shadow @ Mar 16 2009, 03:01 PM) I just know that they have a shitload of albums and I only dislike three of them. Which 3? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stormtron Posted March 16, 2009 Share Posted March 16, 2009 QUOTE (job @ Mar 16 2009, 03:51 PM) QUOTE (Storm Shadow @ Mar 16 2009, 03:01 PM) I just know that they have a shitload of albums and I only dislike three of them. Which 3? Presto, RTB, and TFE. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PuppetKing2112 Posted March 16, 2009 Share Posted March 16, 2009 My first Rush album was VT, and that's still my favorite thing they've done, but the rest of the top 5 is Power Windows, A Farewell to Kings, Permanent Waves, and Signals. So my Rush tastes are all over the map. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
treeduck Posted March 16, 2009 Share Posted March 16, 2009 All in all and all things considered, 70s Rush/early 80s Rush is the best RUSH Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Did Lee Squat? Posted March 17, 2009 Share Posted March 17, 2009 For me, 2112 - MP/Signals was when they were at the top of their game, creatively...but I'm more of a proghead, so Rush's more pop-rock 80's-90's stuff just doesn't satisfy me like PeW or Hemispheres. But I still like all of Rush's albums. And I think they should start showing off their chops a little more...S&A could have used some of those killer instrumental breaks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Weakly Criminal Posted March 17, 2009 Share Posted March 17, 2009 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
job Posted March 17, 2009 Share Posted March 17, 2009 I will admit this: Because of this very thread, I pulled GUP out for the first time in ages. This is an album that I never particularly enjoyed because of the synth era sound. Much to my surprise, today I THOROUGHLY enjoyed it...and played it repeatedly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Xanadude69 Posted March 17, 2009 Share Posted March 17, 2009 QUOTE (job @ Mar 16 2009, 07:15 PM) I will admit this: Because of this very thread, I pulled GUP out for the first time in ages. This is an album that I never particularly enjoyed because of the synth era sound. Much to my surprise, today I THOROUGHLY enjoyed it...and played it repeatedly. I dislike all the Synth albums but for some reason GUP was appealing to me. I guess because the guitar is very prominent. I don't know why but GUP is really the only synth album I like. Well there are 3 songs from signals I like but overall that album didn't appeal to me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rushgoober Posted March 17, 2009 Share Posted March 17, 2009 It's hard for me to pick between the 70's and the 80's since both eras were so great and so different, especially when you're talking 1974-1981 and then 1982-1987. I also love their first three albums, with the exception of a couple of songs on COS. Part of me wants to say the 70's are better, but really there are so many great songs from both periods. To me they really haven't had the best run of albums from Presto onwards, with a couple of bright spots like Counterparts and Snakes & Arrows that were pretty consistent, but outside of that only a handful of songs interest me from Presto, RTB, T4E & VT. If I'm being really honest, the only songs I almost ever listen to from those 4 albums these days are The Pass and Dreamline, and um, that's IT. Take T4E - well, mediocre Rush is still better than almost anything else from 1996, and it's certainly not a BAD album (like VT), but when I look at how many GREAT Rush albums there are, I just never feel like putting it on. So for me 70's and 80's big thumbs up, and it's been real spotty since then... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JPRushHed Posted March 17, 2009 Share Posted March 17, 2009 QUOTE (GeddyRulz @ Mar 16 2009, 03:38 PM) QUOTE (JPRushHed @ Mar 16 2009, 02:32 PM) GeddyRulz -"I'm not jumping around saying the band sucked after MP" And I'm not jumping around saying the band sucked prior to Permanent Waves" I'm still confused what your point is. How difficult is this????? I'm not saying everything after MP sucks. MANY LONGTIME FANS WOULD SAY THAT. Ergo, I'm kinder to the later material than most. Get it??????? I was merely defending my earlier statement, that I'm kinder to the later material than most. (Which you "didn't understand," so I explained it.) This is very very simple to understand; how well do you do with deep Neil Peart lyrics? I would have to disagree with your claim that: "Many longtime fans would say everything after MP sucks". Quite the contrary. I know alot of Rush fans, and not one of them thinks that. In fact, the band didn't even get interesting to me until Permanent Waves. The way you stated that was so matter of fact, as if everyone thought that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JPRushHed Posted March 17, 2009 Share Posted March 17, 2009 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EmotionDetector Posted March 17, 2009 Share Posted March 17, 2009 QUOTE (JPRushHed @ Mar 16 2009, 09:20 PM) I think 5 ERA's of Rush is stretching it a bit IMO. 1.) Kings and Moving Pictures have nothing in common. 2.) TFE isn't pop/rock. 3.) VT isn't hard rock. I would categorize them like this: Old Rush - Rush-Hemispheres Mid Rush - PWaves-Hold Your Fire New Rush - Presto-SnA 6 albums in each category. Permanent Waves was really the first transition record. Okay, I think you may have skipped over my italicized edit, so I'll post it again below: EDIT: I did want to mention that in all honestly, while I've looked at this in terms of grouping them in 4's, I have a real tough time with the 3rd era. I do think that Presto and RTB are very "Pop-Rock", but I would almost couple CP and TFE in the next era, as I think they moved right into a more "Hard-Rock" approach, which moved into VT and S&A. I just wanted to add that in, as I always have trouble classifying this era as one particular sound. Basically, I will officially break those down like this: Pop-Rock: Presto / RTB Hard-Rock: CP / TFE / VT / S&A (If you really don't think that VT is hard-rock, then how could you consider TFE to be?) Also, I have to kindly disagree with you about "5 eras being too much". The eras to me, have nothing to do with grouping them in even numbers of 6 each. You say "Kings and Moving Pictures have nothing in common". Okay, so taking your era separations, please explain to me how Permanent Waves and/or MP are anything like Hold Your Fire? Please explain. I do understand your opinion of PeW being a "transition record", but I still think that Signals - HYF is the one era that no other albums can really fit into. I would be willing to bet that most people see more similarities between AFTK and MP, than MP and HYF. I think that's pretty simple to see... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EmotionDetector Posted March 17, 2009 Share Posted March 17, 2009 QUOTE (JPRushHed @ Mar 16 2009, 09:09 PM) QUOTE (GeddyRulz @ Mar 16 2009, 03:38 PM) QUOTE (JPRushHed @ Mar 16 2009, 02:32 PM) GeddyRulz -"I'm not jumping around saying the band sucked after MP" And I'm not jumping around saying the band sucked prior to Permanent Waves" I'm still confused what your point is. How difficult is this????? I'm not saying everything after MP sucks. MANY LONGTIME FANS WOULD SAY THAT. Ergo, I'm kinder to the later material than most. Get it??????? I was merely defending my earlier statement, that I'm kinder to the later material than most. (Which you "didn't understand," so I explained it.) This is very very simple to understand; how well do you do with deep Neil Peart lyrics? I would have to disagree with your claim that: "Many longtime fans would say everything after MP sucks". Quite the contrary. I know alot of Rush fans, and not one of them thinks that. In fact, the band didn't even get interesting to me until Permanent Waves. The way you stated that was so matter of fact, as if everyone thought that. I think GR is referring mainly to people in this Forum. You are still fairly new to this board, but it is well-known that there are many people here that have few good things to say about the later years of Rush. Also, I think he's more specifically referring to Presto and beyond. With the release of Retro 3, there have been many comments about how this was Rush's "poorest period". Personally, I love the most recent era too. But I would agree with GR, that there are MANY Rush fans who don't feel the same way I do. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JPRushHed Posted March 17, 2009 Share Posted March 17, 2009 QUOTE (EmotionDetector @ Mar 16 2009, 10:28 PM) QUOTE (JPRushHed @ Mar 16 2009, 09:09 PM) QUOTE (GeddyRulz @ Mar 16 2009, 03:38 PM) QUOTE (JPRushHed @ Mar 16 2009, 02:32 PM) GeddyRulz -"I'm not jumping around saying the band sucked after MP" And I'm not jumping around saying the band sucked prior to Permanent Waves" I'm still confused what your point is. How difficult is this????? I'm not saying everything after MP sucks. MANY LONGTIME FANS WOULD SAY THAT. Ergo, I'm kinder to the later material than most. Get it??????? I was merely defending my earlier statement, that I'm kinder to the later material than most. (Which you "didn't understand," so I explained it.) This is very very simple to understand; how well do you do with deep Neil Peart lyrics? I would have to disagree with your claim that: "Many longtime fans would say everything after MP sucks". Quite the contrary. I know alot of Rush fans, and not one of them thinks that. In fact, the band didn't even get interesting to me until Permanent Waves. The way you stated that was so matter of fact, as if everyone thought that. I think GR is referring mainly to people in this Forum. You are still fairly new to this board, but it is well-known that there are many people here that have few good things to say about the later years of Rush. Also, I think he's more specifically referring to Presto and beyond. With the release of Retro 3, there have been many comments about how this was Rush's "poorest period". Personally, I love the most recent era too. But I would agree with GR, that there are MANY Rush fans who don't feel the same way I do. People that prefer old Rush grew up in the 70's and like 70's rock music. I can't stand 70's rock music for the most part. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
steelcaressed Posted March 17, 2009 Share Posted March 17, 2009 QUOTE (JPRushHed @ Mar 17 2009, 01:03 AM) QUOTE (EmotionDetector @ Mar 16 2009, 10:28 PM) QUOTE (JPRushHed @ Mar 16 2009, 09:09 PM) QUOTE (GeddyRulz @ Mar 16 2009, 03:38 PM) QUOTE (JPRushHed @ Mar 16 2009, 02:32 PM) GeddyRulz -"I'm not jumping around saying the band sucked after MP" And I'm not jumping around saying the band sucked prior to Permanent Waves" I'm still confused what your point is. How difficult is this????? I'm not saying everything after MP sucks. MANY LONGTIME FANS WOULD SAY THAT. Ergo, I'm kinder to the later material than most. Get it??????? I was merely defending my earlier statement, that I'm kinder to the later material than most. (Which you "didn't understand," so I explained it.) This is very very simple to understand; how well do you do with deep Neil Peart lyrics? I would have to disagree with your claim that: "Many longtime fans would say everything after MP sucks". Quite the contrary. I know alot of Rush fans, and not one of them thinks that. In fact, the band didn't even get interesting to me until Permanent Waves. The way you stated that was so matter of fact, as if everyone thought that. I think GR is referring mainly to people in this Forum. You are still fairly new to this board, but it is well-known that there are many people here that have few good things to say about the later years of Rush. Also, I think he's more specifically referring to Presto and beyond. With the release of Retro 3, there have been many comments about how this was Rush's "poorest period". Personally, I love the most recent era too. But I would agree with GR, that there are MANY Rush fans who don't feel the same way I do. People that prefer old Rush grew up in the 70's and like 70's rock music. I can't stand 70's rock music for the most part. This statement demonstrates your youth almost as well a COS demonstrates 's youth....almost. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JPRushHed Posted March 17, 2009 Share Posted March 17, 2009 Caress of Steel was a train wreck. Even the band think the record is garbage. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Prince Sphinc-Tor Posted March 17, 2009 Share Posted March 17, 2009 QUOTE (JPRushHed @ Mar 17 2009, 03:02 AM) Caress of Steel was a train wreck. Even the band think the record is garbage. I don't believe that is true. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I was under the impression were very proud of that record and had very high hopes for it....don't know if their opinions have changed as a result of the following tour and what some fans have to say about it....or just the passage of time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pags Posted March 17, 2009 Share Posted March 17, 2009 Era Wars Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GeddyRulz Posted March 17, 2009 Share Posted March 17, 2009 QUOTE (EmotionDetector @ Mar 16 2009, 10:28 PM) QUOTE (JPRushHed @ Mar 16 2009, 09:09 PM) QUOTE (GeddyRulz @ Mar 16 2009, 03:38 PM) QUOTE (JPRushHed @ Mar 16 2009, 02:32 PM) GeddyRulz -"I'm not jumping around saying the band sucked after MP" And I'm not jumping around saying the band sucked prior to Permanent Waves" I'm still confused what your point is. How difficult is this????? I'm not saying everything after MP sucks. MANY LONGTIME FANS WOULD SAY THAT. Ergo, I'm kinder to the later material than most. Get it??????? I was merely defending my earlier statement, that I'm kinder to the later material than most. (Which you "didn't understand," so I explained it.) This is very very simple to understand; how well do you do with deep Neil Peart lyrics? I would have to disagree with your claim that: "Many longtime fans would say everything after MP sucks". Quite the contrary. I know alot of Rush fans, and not one of them thinks that. In fact, the band didn't even get interesting to me until Permanent Waves. The way you stated that was so matter of fact, as if everyone thought that. I think GR is referring mainly to people in this Forum. You are still fairly new to this board, but it is well-known that there are many people here that have few good things to say about the later years of Rush. Also, I think he's more specifically referring to Presto and beyond. With the release of Retro 3, there have been many comments about how this was Rush's "poorest period". Personally, I love the most recent era too. But I would agree with GR, that there are MANY Rush fans who don't feel the same way I do. Perfect. Now let's see if he "gets" that. In his defense, the few Rush fans he meets on the street aren't the norm, and they're not usually the diehards. Come to the Internet, and we're all OBSESSED, DIEHARD fans. If he'll look around this site and others on the Net, he'll see a lot of dissing on the post-MP (and certainly post-HYF) albums. I don't go there; I'm "kinder to the later albums than most." Yes, with the Retro3 release, we had fans saying "Why bother buying it? This is the band's worst era!" But I DID buy it, and was excited about it; that should illustrate - again - that I'm "kinder to the later albums than most." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EmotionDetector Posted March 17, 2009 Share Posted March 17, 2009 QUOTE (Prince Sphinc-Tor @ Mar 17 2009, 05:29 AM) QUOTE (JPRushHed @ Mar 17 2009, 03:02 AM) Caress of Steel was a train wreck. Even the band think the record is garbage. I don't believe that is true. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I was under the impression were very proud of that record and had very high hopes for it....don't know if their opinions have changed as a result of the following tour and what some fans have to say about it....or just the passage of time. Yeah, that's pretty much what I think as well. I believe the boys were always proud of CoS, at least at the time. I recall hearing Alex always mention about how there never would've been a 2112 without Caress of Steel. I think if the boys have any ill-feelings towards CoS nowadays, it is most likely a result of the poor commercial support it received when it was released. Unfortunately for us, that's most likely what's keeping them from playing some of these songs live. But I think it is well-known that if they kicked into 'The Necromancer' or 'The Fountain of Lamneth' on the next tour, most of the fans (at least from this Board) would be thrilled about it. I know I would be... (Oh, and I don't think that the boys' opinions about albums should mean anything to us. Just ask most people here what they think about RTB getting constantly represented on every tour! ) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
steelcaressed Posted March 17, 2009 Share Posted March 17, 2009 QUOTE (EmotionDetector @ Mar 17 2009, 08:47 AM) QUOTE (Prince Sphinc-Tor @ Mar 17 2009, 05:29 AM) QUOTE (JPRushHed @ Mar 17 2009, 03:02 AM) Caress of Steel was a train wreck. Even the band think the record is garbage. I don't believe that is true. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I was under the impression were very proud of that record and had very high hopes for it....don't know if their opinions have changed as a result of the following tour and what some fans have to say about it....or just the passage of time. Yeah, that's pretty much what I think as well. I believe the boys were always proud of CoS, at least at the time. I recall hearing Alex always mention about how there never would've been a 2112 without Caress of Steel. I think if the boys have any ill-feelings towards CoS nowadays, it is most likely a result of the poor commercial support it received when it was released. Unfortunately for us, that's most likely what's keeping them from playing some of these songs live. But I think it is well-known that if they kicked into 'The Necromancer' or 'The Fountain of Lamneth' on the next tour, most of the fans (at least from this Board) would be thrilled about it. I know I would be... (Oh, and I don't think that the boys' opinions about albums should mean anything to us. Just ask most people here what they think about RTB getting constantly represented on every tour! ) Geddy liked it so much that he pushed for the release of archives, a triple set including the first three albums. I have a copy, which I purchased in 1985. I like guitar-centric, hard-driving music. When it was made doesn't really matter. That's why I like early . I like other guitar-centric bands also, no matter what era they play in. Hence, there is a fair amount of Iron Maiden, Black Sabbath, Van Halen, Mark Knopfler (w/ and w/o Dire Straights) and Little Feat in my catalogue (along w/ many others.) I discovered in '81 or so, and their new releases from that time on just kept dissappointing me. That doesn't mean I don't like them, I just did not think that those albums fit the standards I held to. I still don't think they live up to potential. I like them all a lot, for varying reasons. For me however, I prefer the raw, three-man sound of the Broon era. I love the live performances from that time period as well, before the advent of samples and soundbanks, and the choir of Geddy's. It was more honest, more robust, and more experimental. That's why I like it, and it has nothing to do w/ when it was released or when I "got into" them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JPRushHed Posted March 17, 2009 Share Posted March 17, 2009 QUOTE (GeddyRulz @ Mar 17 2009, 06:08 AM) QUOTE (EmotionDetector @ Mar 16 2009, 10:28 PM) QUOTE (JPRushHed @ Mar 16 2009, 09:09 PM) QUOTE (GeddyRulz @ Mar 16 2009, 03:38 PM) QUOTE (JPRushHed @ Mar 16 2009, 02:32 PM) GeddyRulz -"I'm not jumping around saying the band sucked after MP" And I'm not jumping around saying the band sucked prior to Permanent Waves" I'm still confused what your point is. How difficult is this????? I'm not saying everything after MP sucks. MANY LONGTIME FANS WOULD SAY THAT. Ergo, I'm kinder to the later material than most. Get it??????? I was merely defending my earlier statement, that I'm kinder to the later material than most. (Which you "didn't understand," so I explained it.) This is very very simple to understand; how well do you do with deep Neil Peart lyrics? I would have to disagree with your claim that: "Many longtime fans would say everything after MP sucks". Quite the contrary. I know alot of Rush fans, and not one of them thinks that. In fact, the band didn't even get interesting to me until Permanent Waves. The way you stated that was so matter of fact, as if everyone thought that. I think GR is referring mainly to people in this Forum. You are still fairly new to this board, but it is well-known that there are many people here that have few good things to say about the later years of Rush. Also, I think he's more specifically referring to Presto and beyond. With the release of Retro 3, there have been many comments about how this was Rush's "poorest period". Personally, I love the most recent era too. But I would agree with GR, that there are MANY Rush fans who don't feel the same way I do. Perfect. Now let's see if he "gets" that. In his defense, the few Rush fans he meets on the street aren't the norm, and they're not usually the diehards. Come to the Internet, and we're all OBSESSED, DIEHARD fans. If he'll look around this site and others on the Net, he'll see a lot of dissing on the post-MP (and certainly post-HYF) albums. I don't go there; I'm "kinder to the later albums than most." Yes, with the Retro3 release, we had fans saying "Why bother buying it? This is the band's worst era!" But I DID buy it, and was excited about it; that should illustrate - again - that I'm "kinder to the later albums than most." I've totally understood your point of view from the beginning. I just strongly disagree with it. You speak so matter of factly about every Rush fan preferring the 70's stuff to the newer material. "You're kinder to the newer material than most" is kind of an arrogant statement. Also, your dismissal of the Rush fans that I know as people I met on the street who aren't diehard fans is a put down and kind of laughable. Here's where I'm coming from: Fans of Rush that prefer the 70's output generally grew up in that ERA and prefer 70's rock style music. I understand that, but that's not me. I don't like Prog, 20 minute songs, sci-fi lyrics, screeching vocals, nut hugging kimonos or songs about spaceships. I do like alternative rock, lyrics about the human condition and life and bands that take chances. 70's Rush for me is: Working Man, Bastille Day, Anthem, By-Tor, 2112, Something For Nothing, Bangkok, Xanadu & all of Hemispheres. That's about a dozen songs I consider essential. In comparison, the masterpiece that is Vapor Trails alone, gives me 13 songs (about real human beings) that I love. You could even take my 2 least favorite albums of modern Rush - Presto & Roll The Bones and I could find as much material to love that equals the 70's output. Now granted The Pass isn't Xanadu, but the quantity is there. So while I understand the sentiment and appeal of 70's Rush - You need to also understand that's just one part of the picture. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EmotionDetector Posted March 17, 2009 Share Posted March 17, 2009 QUOTE (JPRushHed @ Mar 17 2009, 10:09 AM) Now granted The Pass isn't Xanadu, but the quantity is there. Sorry, I don't understand this. Could you please elaborate? I'm honestly not trying to be a smart-ass...I just want you to explain this line further. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
troutman Posted March 17, 2009 Share Posted March 17, 2009 QUOTE (Pags @ Mar 17 2009, 02:48 AM) Era Wars Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
circumstantial tree Posted March 17, 2009 Share Posted March 17, 2009 Count me in the group that thinks Hold Your Fire was the last truly great Rush album. I like Presto and RTB, but CP and TFE are lackluster, imo. Things picked up with VT but slid a little with S&A. Kinda like Wall Street, eh? So 70's and 80's eras are the best, imo. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.