Are Rush Capable Of Another Masterpiece(Studio??)

[pbm2112]

QUOTE (VarianStar @ Jun 11 2009, 11:12 AM)

I know that historically, MP and PeW are considered to be Rush masterpieces and I know many people agree with that.  I can only speak for myself though when giving my opinion and to me, those two albums are just another two albums in their catalog.  I have never understood why so many people put those albums above all others.  Yes they have great songs, but I can list other albums that are just as cohesive and get more play on a daily basis on my ipod than MP or PeW.

I think some of this has to do with how old you are and when you started following the band. I got MP the day it came out it wasn't just another Rush album in a large back catalogue, it was a case of 'how will they possibly top PF'?

 

For me, the reason why Permanent Waves and especially Moving Pictures are masterpieces is that they represent the culmination of everything that had gone before. As musicians working on their own distinctive styles, they were never more potent, original or fully realized as in this period. As songwriters I don't think they have bettered the fluidity, subtlety and intelligence of these songs or arrangements.

 

I liked Signals but it was already changing. The passion and risk that their music communicated got lost, the synths took over - Alex's sound got processed, trem heavy and one-dimensional - Neil started to play and sound like a drum machine.. it felt like a band that had been so independent got gobbled up by the 80s. I don't think the influence of The Police was helpful either. It's great that Rush had the power to evolve and I admire that, they just didn't go quite where I would have liked them to go, and then they stayed there.

 

But really, who cares whether they make another good album, or even another album period. Haven't they given us enough?

 

 

[English Muffin]

They're putting us into a false sense of security and soon they will bring out their best album just to annoy critics

[LakesideMaiden]

QUOTE (presto123 @ Jun 10 2009, 11:27 PM)

...I think they are TOO afraid of repeating themselves(heaven forbid) when they should be embracing their earlier stuff that most agree was their pinnacle...

well, they are a Progressive Rock band....going back to their earlier sound would be Regressive...just sayin'...

[LeaveMyThingAlone]

There's a certain mystique associated with classic rock tunes. Songs like Tom Sawyer, Limelight, Spirit of Radio. Rush has been, is, and will always be considered a 70's/80's classic rock band whose airplay is still on "classic rock radio". They're labled as such, just as the Stones are, and that's the way it will be.

 

I maintain that it doesn't matter if Rush puts together a song or set of songs on their next album that have that same energy, sound, passion as Tom Sawyer and Limelight, because there will be no home for it as far as airplay goes. Yeah, we have XM and satellite now that plays the occasional rare Far Cry or One Little Victory, but the audience there is tiny. These days, you turn on any classic rock station for a couple hours and you WILL hear one of the usual Rush songs there, but nothing past, say Power Windows (Big Money), because Rush's present stuff has no home and is almost irrelevant.

 

My point is it's all personal perception. The Holy Grail of Rush (2112-Signals) has been built up over time to be part of the "classic rock sound" we had at the time, along with bands like The Who, Zeppelin, Floyd, etc.....it's about labels.

 

Personally, I rate Snakes and Arrows higher than albums like GUP, Signals, and MAYBE even AFTK, and those are 3 albums made when they were in their supposed peak, were young, creative, energetic, whatever you wanna call it....but the mystique if A Farewell to Kings will always live on, and Snakes and Arrows is deemed irrelevant outside of the hard core fan base

[WCFIELDS]

QUOTE (Fridge @ Jun 11 2009, 02:34 AM)

Not a chance. I reckon they have been largely treading water for the last twenty years or so, and I just don't think they have enough creative juice left in the tank. They are still capable of releasing some mighty fine individual tracks, but the consistency of yore is long gone. And before anyone slams me as an "Old Rush good-new Rush bad" type, let me make it clear that I think it would be ridiculous for them to attempt Hemispheres Mark 2 as that sort of stuff is just not relevant nowadays. I would however like to see them return somewhat to MP values, as that album still sounds fresh today - However, I just don't think the songwriting is there anymore. I will slip in the usual caveat that I would LOVE to be proved wrong about this....

Exactly.......not expecting much from the next one......they've strayed SO FAR from the band they once were (20+ years ago)......

[Xanadoood]

QUOTE (Sathington WillOUghby @ Jun 11 2009, 09:02 AM)

Are they capable? Absolutely. Is it likely? No. There are a number of things working against it. 1. History. Most great music, regardless of genre, is written in young adulthood. I am not prepared to argue why this is the case, it just is. 2. Self imposed limitations. Ever since the success of MP, they have tried to force their music to fit a radio format. Prior to then, it didn't matter if it took 38 seconds or 38 minutes to make their point. 3. Cohesiveness. It was incorrectly stated that they are still one of the hardest working bands out there. No they are not. They have other lives/interests now. In the "old days", they were around each other all of the time, so they were often on the same wavelength creatively. This allowed Geddy to have a connection to Neil's words. Now they work on songs together while they aren't even in the same country and it shows. Is all hope lost? No. 1. Ability. They are all still extremely capable technically, if not at the top of their game. 2. Exceptions. My favorite modern exception is Paul Simon. Long after his late 60's/early 70's success, he created Graceland. It was nothing like what he had done before. For Rush to create a new masterpiece, it too has to be something we have not heard from them before. My 2 cents, b!

Compared to some of the other Classic bands that have been aorund 30 or 40 more years, Rush works a hell of a lot harder.

 

Look at the The Who, Stones and Aerosmith. They have sort of become a parody of themselves at this point, but Rush seems to still care about making new music and not turning into a joke.

 

I still think they make relevant music and have enough gas in the tank for another 2 albums .

[greg2112]

QUOTE (PuppetKing2112 @ Jun 11 2009, 11:52 AM)

QUOTE (greg2112 @ Jun 11 2009, 05:43 AM) I frankly wouldn't mind seeing Rick Rubin come in and produce the next album, and doing the same thing he did with metallica. Ha...if you think Vapor Trails sounded bad, people actually had to rip the master tracks from Guitar Hero to get a decent-sounding version of Death Magnetic. Rubin is such a hack now. This would be a terrible decision. I know all about the controversy regarding the DM sound. But my point here was Rubin also had an influence in getting metallica to go back to their roots, particularly to the brillance of master of puppets. that is a big potential positive.

[New World Kid]

QUOTE (VarianStar @ Jun 11 2009, 11:12 AM)

QUOTE (presto123 @ Jun 10 2009, 10:27 PM) What do you think? And don't say Snakes and Arrows was. Some people love that record and some hate it. Mixed opinion for sure. But almost everybody agrees(99% anyway) that Moving Pictures and Permanent Waves are masterpieces. Are Rush past their window to make something groundbreaking. With their current mindset I would say yes. I think they are TOO afraid of repeating themselves(heaven forbid) when they should be embracing their earlier stuff that most agree was their pinnacle. SnA had hints of the old Rush magic now if they would just go all the way to recapture it. I just don't see it happening though. They play it way too safe nowdays and I don't understand why because they aren't getting much airplay anyway. Go out on a limb and get weird again and get out of that "we're serious songwriters" mode. Sorry. Done ranting now. I know that historically, MP and PeW are considered to be Rush masterpieces and I know many people agree with that. I can only speak for myself though when giving my opinion and to me, those two albums are just another two albums in their catalog. I have never understood why so many people put those albums above all others. Yes they have great songs, but I can list other albums that are just as cohesive and get more play on a daily basis on my ipod than MP or PeW.   VT and SnA are two of those albums. The sound quality on VT is not important to me. Yes the two remixed versions sound great on Retro 3, but I still listen to it on a regular basis and enjoy it immensely. I would list this album as my all-time favorite. I guess it's how the songs affected me more than anything else, but most importantly the running theme throughout the album is what I like most. There isn't one song I would leave off. The same can be said for SnA. This one is a close 2nd for me as far as favorites go and for the same reasons. These songs affected me much more than MP or PeW ever did. And again, I loved the theme that seemed to connect all of the songs together.   So yes, I think they are capable of another masterpiece. To me, they have already created two this decade. Agreed, 100%   I find a lot of Rush's work before Moving Pictures to be very... juvenile. My most listened to albums are from Counterparts forward. Old Rush strikes me as mood-less. Sure, it's hard rocking and it screams of that good old fashioned type of music, but there's no real warmth to it. Just a sort of cold, polished, 80's sound to a lot of it. And the 70's stuff, at least the first four albums, just sound like variations of that sort of cliche 70's metal sound. There are exceptions. Xanadu is tremendous. Hemispheres, the song, is good for awhile... but the sound is basically the same for the whole 20 minutes of the song.   I think a lot of my opinion of Rush's work has to do with me being a drummer. And I don't think it's coincidence that when Neil started exploring jazz more is when I find Rush to be at their peak.

[presto123]

Rush haven't been a "progressive" band in a long time. Are Counterparts, T4E, and Vapor Trails really all that different from one another?? I think not. They all have heavy guitar sound, very little keys, and a more straight ahead groovin approach. If they are still a prog band they are progressing very little at this point. Even Geddy said they are a rock band and not a prog band. And if you really thing SnA is better than MP OR PeW congrats. You are in that 1%.

[Rush Cocky]

QUOTE (presto123 @ Jun 11 2009, 05:33 PM)

And if you really thing SnA is better than MP OR PeW congrats. You are in that 1%.

Hmmmm......not sure if anyone in this thread has said that.

[jnoble]

Unfortunatly, no.

 

They need to start doing some editing. Just because you can fit 13-14 songs on a CD doesn't mean that you should. I'd rather have 9 or 10 strong songs than a bunch of filler, which is what the last two studio albums ended with.

 

Unfortunatly, Rush isn't capable of putting out a great album anymore or even one that is strong all the way through. For me, it's been three maybe four good songs and a bunch of bland filler for a long time.

[metaldad]

QUOTE (jnoble @ Jun 11 2009, 04:47 PM)

Unfortunatly, Rush isn't capable of putting out a great album anymore or even one that is strong all the way through. For me, it's been three maybe four good songs and a bunch of bland filler for a long time.

this

[Der Trommler]

QUOTE (presto123 @ Jun 10 2009, 11:27 PM)

What do you think? And don't say Snakes and Arrows was. Some people love that record and some hate it. Mixed opinion for sure. But almost everybody agrees(99% anyway) that Moving Pictures and Permanent Waves are masterpieces. Are Rush past their window to make something groundbreaking. With their current mindset I would say yes. I think they are TOO afraid of repeating themselves(heaven forbid) when they should be embracing their earlier stuff that most agree was their pinnacle. SnA had hints of the old Rush magic now if they would just go all the way to recapture it. I just don't see it happening though. They play it way too safe nowdays and I don't understand why because they aren't getting much airplay anyway. Go out on a limb and get weird again and get out of that "we're serious songwriters" mode. Sorry. Done ranting now.

Rush plays what they like not what is safe. Living in the past would make them has beens. That's it. No other way. Like the new stuff or not, at least they are coming up with new material.

I heard Rick Springfield's new tune. It is almost identical to Jessie's Girl in all ways except lyrics. I personally like Snakes & Arrows. I like all albums by them. To say to Rush, 'I want you to play songs like Moving Pictures & before & nothing else.' - is not only an injustice to the band but also an insult. Don't you think the band goes over all their songs prior to actually recording them? While they may not love every song, I know they were really excited about Snakes & Arrows. For me, I know why. This is a great album. I can't wait for the new album & whatever they might come up with next.

BTW-all their older albums sounded similar from one to the next. So saying that they haven't changed much over a few albums is kind of lame against the older stuff.

I just want to tell all people that love the older stuff to the point of insanity - STOP LIVING IN THE PAST!!!! It's 2009. We're in a new millenium & Rush has moved on to other things.

 

Sorry, but one thing that bothers me is listening to bands that can't change their music throughout the ages, the people that stick with them (living in a time they thought they were cool), & the bands that go out solely on making money off people that are stuck like that.

 

I don't know if I'll like the new Rush album, but reason would say I'll like at least half the album. I mean, it's Rush. The boys know how to write songs well.

 

 

That's my rant.....

[ILSnwdog]

IMO...for Rush to make another masterpiece, they would have to push the envelope a bit. They'd have to go back to doing a little showing off, kind of like they did in Freewill or YYZ. They were getting close with Mal Nar. I thought Snakes and Arrows was a damn good album, but unless they push the envelop again, we may just get another damn good album and nothing more.

 

[Gerxt]

I'd say they would need to be more discriminating to do annother classsic album. Their insistence on keeping every some they record for a record is a problem. How much better would S&A have been with the 8 best songs?

[Der Trommler]

QUOTE (ILSnwdog @ Jun 11 2009, 09:27 PM)

IMO...for Rush to make another masterpiece, they would have to push the envelope a bit. They'd have to go back to doing a little showing off, kind of like they did in Freewill or YYZ. They were getting close with Mal Nar. I thought Snakes and Arrows was a damn good album, but unless they push the envelop again, we may just get another damn good album and nothing more.

I think the question here is whether they showboat or not, not really if the masterpiece is great song-writing. Am I correct? If you think carefully & listen to the songs, you realize a good amount of their recent songs truly are better written than the ones of the past.

[Der Trommler]

QUOTE (Gerxt @ Jun 11 2009, 09:34 PM)

I'd say they would need to be more discriminating to do annother classsic album. Their insistence on keeping every some they record for a record is a problem. How much better would S&A have been with the 8 best songs?

The only song that was a slight lower in my book off S&A, is We Hold On but I still like that song.

[RUSHHEAD666]

QUOTE (Der Trommler @ Jun 11 2009, 06:43 PM)

QUOTE (Gerxt @ Jun 11 2009, 09:34 PM) I'd say they would need to be more discriminating to do annother classsic album. Their insistence on keeping every some they record for a record is a problem. How much better would S&A have been with the 8 best songs? The only song that was a slight lower in my book off S&A, is We Hold On but I still like that song. "We Hold On" is a great song. I think it's a perfect song to end an album with. Killer ending. JMO I was actually hoping that RUSH would have inserted "We Hold On" within their Second Leg of the Tour while taking "Spindrift" out.

[Der Trommler]

QUOTE (RUSHHEAD666 @ Jun 11 2009, 09:47 PM)

QUOTE (Der Trommler @ Jun 11 2009, 06:43 PM) QUOTE (Gerxt @ Jun 11 2009, 09:34 PM) I'd say they would need to be more discriminating to do annother classsic album. Their insistence on keeping every some they record for a record is a problem. How much better would S&A have been with the 8 best songs? The only song that was a slight lower in my book off S&A, is We Hold On but I still like that song. "We Hold On" is a great song. I think it's a perfect song to end an album with. Killer ending. JMO I was actually hoping that RUSH would have inserted "We Hold On" within their Second Leg of the Tour while taking "Spindrift" out. Like I said, I don't like it as much as the other songs on the album but that is a great song too. I did think about having them add it to the second leg as well. I also hope they would add Vapor Trail to one tour. I would like to see that live.

[LakesideMaiden]

QUOTE (RUSHHEAD666 @ Jun 11 2009, 09:47 PM)

QUOTE (Der Trommler @ Jun 11 2009, 06:43 PM) QUOTE (Gerxt @ Jun 11 2009, 09:34 PM) I'd say they would need to be more discriminating to do annother classsic album. Their insistence on keeping every some they record for a record is a problem. How much better would S&A have been with the 8 best songs? The only song that was a slight lower in my book off S&A, is We Hold On but I still like that song. "We Hold On" is a great song. I think it's a perfect song to end an album with. Killer ending. JMO I was actually hoping that RUSH would have inserted "We Hold On" within their Second Leg of the Tour while taking "Spindrift" out. I like S&A front to back, personally. And I agree - great song to end the album with

[RUSHHEAD666]

QUOTE (Der Trommler @ Jun 11 2009, 06:57 PM)

QUOTE (RUSHHEAD666 @ Jun 11 2009, 09:47 PM) QUOTE (Der Trommler @ Jun 11 2009, 06:43 PM) QUOTE (Gerxt @ Jun 11 2009, 09:34 PM) I'd say they would need to be more discriminating to do annother classsic album. Their insistence on keeping every some they record for a record is a problem. How much better would S&A have been with the 8 best songs? The only song that was a slight lower in my book off S&A, is We Hold On but I still like that song. "We Hold On" is a great song. I think it's a perfect song to end an album with. Killer ending. JMO I was actually hoping that RUSH would have inserted "We Hold On" within their Second Leg of the Tour while taking "Spindrift" out. Like I said, I don't like it as much as the other songs on the album but that is a great song too. I did think about having them add it to the second leg as well. I also hope they would add Vapor Trail to one tour. I would like to see that live. Cool! Great minds think alike!   Cheers!

[GeddyRulz]

QUOTE (LakesideMaiden @ Jun 11 2009, 08:58 PM)

QUOTE (RUSHHEAD666 @ Jun 11 2009, 09:47 PM) QUOTE (Der Trommler @ Jun 11 2009, 06:43 PM) QUOTE (Gerxt @ Jun 11 2009, 09:34 PM) I'd say they would need to be more discriminating to do annother classsic album. Their insistence on keeping every some they record for a record is a problem. How much better would S&A have been with the 8 best songs? The only song that was a slight lower in my book off S&A, is We Hold On but I still like that song. "We Hold On" is a great song. I think it's a perfect song to end an album with. Killer ending. JMO I was actually hoping that RUSH would have inserted "We Hold On" within their Second Leg of the Tour while taking "Spindrift" out. I like S&A front to back, personally. And I agree - great song to end the album with "We Hold On" is okay. The really really weak songs are just before it: "Bravest Face" and "Good News First."   QUOTE If you think carefully & listen to the songs, you realize a good amount of their recent songs truly are better written than the ones of the past.   That's not an empirical truth; it depends on which songs you're talking about. In the choice between "Xanadu" and "Heresy," for instance, I think it's very clear which is "better written." "Natural Science" versus "Dog Years"?? See what I'm saying?

[WCFIELDS]

QUOTE (Der Trommler @ Jun 11 2009, 07:39 PM)

QUOTE (ILSnwdog @ Jun 11 2009, 09:27 PM) IMO...for Rush to make another masterpiece, they would have to push the envelope a bit.  They'd have to go back to doing a little showing off, kind of like they did in Freewill or YYZ.  They were getting close with Mal Nar.  I thought Snakes and Arrows was a damn good album, but unless they push the envelop again, we may just get another damn good album and nothing more. If you think carefully & listen to the songs, you realize a good amount of their recent songs truly are better written than the ones of the past. I guess that's a matter of opinion.......but I disagree......for me 90% of the material from their debut to HYF is better than anything on S&A.......

[mfratt]

QUOTE (Der Trommler @ Jun 11 2009, 08:39 PM)

QUOTE (ILSnwdog @ Jun 11 2009, 09:27 PM) IMO...for Rush to make another masterpiece, they would have to push the envelope a bit.  They'd have to go back to doing a little showing off, kind of like they did in Freewill or YYZ.  They were getting close with Mal Nar.  I thought Snakes and Arrows was a damn good album, but unless they push the envelop again, we may just get another damn good album and nothing more. I think the question here is whether they showboat or not, not really if the masterpiece is great song-writing. Am I correct? If you think carefully & listen to the songs, you realize a good amount of their recent songs truly are better written than the ones of the past. What would be awesome is if they combined the songwriting skills with the epicness of what they did in the 70's.

[Weakly Criminal]