Rolling stone quote from Geddy.....

[Phantom]

Love hearing this from Ged:

 

 

Frontman Geddy Lee tells Rolling Stone the fresh tracks are "upbeat, hard rocking songs" with a Rush trademark: "typically absurdist arrangements."

 

 

 

http://www.rollingstone.com/music/news/;kw=[24942,129715]

 

 

[Rushchick10]

QUOTE (Phantom @ Apr 24 2010, 05:39 PM)

Love hearing this from Ged: Frontman Geddy Lee tells Rolling Stone the fresh tracks are "upbeat, hard rocking songs" with a Rush trademark: "typically absurdist arrangements." http://www.rollingstone.com/music/news/;kw=[24942,129715]

 

Can't wait for some new !!

[TullSkull]

QUOTE (Rushchick10 @ Apr 24 2010, 05:17 PM)

QUOTE (Phantom @ Apr 24 2010, 05:39 PM) Love hearing this from Ged: Frontman Geddy Lee tells Rolling Stone the fresh tracks are "upbeat, hard rocking songs" with a Rush trademark: "typically absurdist arrangements." http://www.rollingstone.com/music/news/;kw=[24942,129715]   Can't wait for some new !! Second That!!

[ReflectedLight]

sounds good to me.

o i almost forgot. here's to you rolling stone.

[Alex]

QUOTE (ReflectedLight @ Apr 24 2010, 07:54 PM)

sounds good to me. o i almost forgot. here's to you rolling stone.

Stole my post.

[Some Half-Forgotten Stranger]

Link doesn't seem to be working.

[trenken]

I like the arrangements comment. Hopefully that means they're going to get a little more experimental, or adventurous. Ive been waiting for 25 years for them to get back to what originally made Rush great.

 

Doesnt sound like they're writing a full albums worth of songs, as neil has discussed a few times, so just take that handful or whatever and make them really amazing.

 

Instead of and album with 12 songs where only half of them are good and the rest filler, just make 5 or 6 really amazing songs. That would make me happy.

[GeddyLeeRoth]

No, eight solid songs. Like the Olden Days.

[snowdog2112]

QUOTE

No, eight solid songs. Like the Olden Days.

 

 

 

 

 

No, 13 amazing songs like on S&A.

 

There is going to be a full album, Geddy just confirmed that on radio this morning. They just won't complete it until winter.

 

 

[trenken]

QUOTE (snowdog2112 @ Apr 26 2010, 11:52 PM)

QUOTE No, eight solid songs. Like the Olden Days.           No, 13 amazing songs like on S&A.   There is going to be a full album, Geddy just confirmed that on radio this morning. They just won't complete it until winter. Lol 13 songs. So Like S&A we get 4 or 5 good ones and the rest lame? Why not take the same amount of time it takes to create 13, and just do 5 or 6 and make some some of the best shit weve heard out of them in 20+ years? Id much rather that then get another album like S&A.

[metaldad]

QUOTE (snowdog2112 @ Apr 26 2010, 11:52 PM)

No, 13 amazing songs like on S&A.

You must have 13 Other songs than i do

[Khan]

vhttp://img.photobucket.com/albums/v423/KublaKhan/allgood-1.jpg

[EmotionDetector]

QUOTE (trenken @ Apr 27 2010, 08:54 AM)

QUOTE (snowdog2112 @ Apr 26 2010, 11:52 PM) QUOTE No, eight solid songs. Like the Olden Days.           No, 13 amazing songs like on S&A.   There is going to be a full album, Geddy just confirmed that on radio this morning. They just won't complete it until winter. Lol 13 songs. So Like S&A we get 4 or 5 good ones and the rest lame? Why not take the same amount of time it takes to create 13, and just do 5 or 6 and make some some of the best shit weve heard out of them in 20+ years? Id much rather that then get another album like S&A. Yeah, but see, this is where I disagree with you.   See, you're assuming that if they make a record with just 5-6 songs on it, that they will all be perfect.   You probably dislike Rush songs that the guys themselves thought was one of the best on those records.   Who's to say that if they make a record with only 6 songs, that some won't turn out like a 'Dog Years' or 'Tai Shan', or whatever songs get a crapload of flack on these boards?   I do agree that albums are really long now, but honestly, I don't see that as a problem.   You may have liked 4-5 songs on S&A, while others may have liked a different 4-5 songs on the album. If they are all released, then we all get to hear the songs we love.   My bottom line is, don't assume that an EP type record will all of a sudden mean we get just another MP or Hemispheres. There is a good chance that some of those songs will still get ragged on by others here, and the words "filler" will be yelled out by alot of people here.

[Don Quixote]

Maybe this time the Geddy Lee Chorus will be retired.

[snowdog2112]

QUOTE

See, you're assuming that if they make a record with just 5-6 songs on it, that they will all be perfect. You probably dislike Rush songs that the guys themselves thought was one of the best on those records. Who's to say that if they make a record with only 6 songs, that some won't turn out like a 'Dog Years' or 'Tai Shan', or whatever songs get a crapload of flack on these boards?

 

This is exactly my point.

 

What these people don't realize that they're saying is "just release the songs that I would like".

 

There is no such thing as filler. Actually, the only two songs you could literally make the case for as being filler on S&A are Far Cry and MalNar. Those are the only 2 that some of you like.

 

The only problem with S&A having 13 songs on it is that it didn't have 26 songs on it. It's some of the best music they've ever made. How anybody with any clue about music can say something like Fly By Night for example is better music is beyond me. I like FBN in the way that I like junk food but in terms of actual musical quality? It's utterly primitive. All I'm hearing from some people here is that "if it doesn't have heavy riffing it's filler". It's just silly. No band ever says "Ok, now we're basically done with the album, let's just make some filler songs now." You guys act like there's some way to define that. Those are just songs you don't like, other people love them.

 

 

 

 

 

[EmotionDetector]

QUOTE (snowdog2112 @ Apr 27 2010, 10:04 AM)

QUOTE See, you're assuming that if they make a record with just 5-6 songs on it, that they will all be perfect. You probably dislike Rush songs that the guys themselves thought was one of the best on those records. Who's to say that if they make a record with only 6 songs, that some won't turn out like a 'Dog Years' or 'Tai Shan', or whatever songs get a crapload of flack on these boards?   This is exactly my point.   What these people don't realize that they're saying is "just release the songs that I would like".   There is no such thing as filler. Actually, the only two songs you could literally make the case for as being filler on S&A are Far Cry and MalNar. Those are the only 2 that some of you like.   The only problem with S&A having 13 songs on it is that it didn't have 26 songs on it. It's some of the best music they've ever made. How anybody with any clue about music can say something like Fly By Night for example is better music is beyond me. I like FBN in the way that I like junk food but in terms of actual musical quality? It's utterly primitive. All I'm hearing from some people here is that "if it doesn't have heavy riffing it's filler". It's just silly. No band ever says "Ok, now we're basically done with the album, let's just make some filler songs now." You guys act like there's some way to define that. Those are just songs you don't like, other people love them.   Yes, exactly. People assume that "filler" is something every band attempts to make. I don't buy it.   What happens is, Rush releases all of the songs that THEY believe are worthy of being on the album. Obviously, other fans may not see it like that, but that is because music is all subjective.   Look at this board...and look at how many people think differently about different songs.   Songs like Neurotica and Virtuality get crapped on all the time, and they are two of my favourites from those respective albums. Somebody thought that 'Colour of Right' was the best Rush song, and I think it's probably one of my bottom 2-3 on TFE. I remember one time someone making a thread about how they HATED Natural Science, and I think alot of people rank it among some of their best songs of all-time.   Bottom line is, the term 'filler' is over-used. The point I was making was, Rush can release an album with just 4 songs on it, but I'll bet it won't be another Hemispheres. People will bitch that 2 of the songs were 'crap' or 'filler', meaning that now, you only have 2 songs left that you like after waiting years for a new record. However, if we get 13 songs on an album, there is a better chance of getting more material that we like.   I know S&A wasn't everyone's cup of tea, but the band seemed to honestly believe it was some of their best material in ages, which I agree with. Remember, Rush does what they want to do, so no matter how many songs are on the next album, there will still be unhappy fans regardless.

[trenken]

QUOTE (EmotionDetector @ Apr 27 2010, 08:37 AM)

QUOTE (trenken @ Apr 27 2010, 08:54 AM) QUOTE (snowdog2112 @ Apr 26 2010, 11:52 PM) QUOTE No, eight solid songs. Like the Olden Days.           No, 13 amazing songs like on S&A.   There is going to be a full album, Geddy just confirmed that on radio this morning. They just won't complete it until winter. Lol 13 songs. So Like S&A we get 4 or 5 good ones and the rest lame? Why not take the same amount of time it takes to create 13, and just do 5 or 6 and make some some of the best shit weve heard out of them in 20+ years? Id much rather that then get another album like S&A. Yeah, but see, this is where I disagree with you.   See, you're assuming that if they make a record with just 5-6 songs on it, that they will all be perfect.   You probably dislike Rush songs that the guys themselves thought was one of the best on those records.   Who's to say that if they make a record with only 6 songs, that some won't turn out like a 'Dog Years' or 'Tai Shan', or whatever songs get a crapload of flack on these boards?   I do agree that albums are really long now, but honestly, I don't see that as a problem.   You may have liked 4-5 songs on S&A, while others may have liked a different 4-5 songs on the album. If they are all released, then we all get to hear the songs we love.   My bottom line is, don't assume that an EP type record will all of a sudden mean we get just another MP or Hemispheres. There is a good chance that some of those songs will still get ragged on by others here, and the words "filler" will be yelled out by alot of people here. Well basically what I mean is, in the olden days they would only write 6-8 songs, they didnt start getting to 10+ until HYF, when CDs started taking over.   Id just rather see a smaller handful of songs get more attention, than have that spread out over 13 where the quality of each is lower.   I didnt hate S&A, but I didnt think there was a single track on there that was as good as stuff they did in the 70s or early 80s, or even as good as anything off of GUP or PoW, back when they didnt need to write as many songs.   And now with itunes and ipods, you dont have to write as many songs anymore. I see modern bands all the time putting out EPs on itunes. I dont have any problems with it at all.   Example: I listen to this band called Head Automatica. Before their last album they put out an EP of 4 really amazing songs. Then they followed that up with a full album, and not 1 single song on that full album was as good as anything off of that EP. They talked about the EP, how they were able to spend more time on each song. So im just going with that here, and also what Neil said about not recording full albums anymore. It just seems logical to me, apparently he feels the same way, but we'll see what they decide to do.

[Ron2112]

QUOTE (trenken @ Apr 27 2010, 09:49 AM)

Well basically what I mean is, in the olden days they would only write 6-8 songs, they didnt start getting to 10+ until HYF, when CDs started taking over. Id just rather see a smaller handful of songs get more attention, than have that spread out over 13 where the quality of each is lower.

I think this is exactly on target. Increasing album lengths hasn't always meant more great moments on each album. IMO, the last album Rush put out where every song is fantastic was Power Windows.

 

SnA especially seems to suffer from a certain "sameness" throughout. Not saying it's a bad album, but there are a good 3 or 4 songs on that album that seem half-baked....almost like the band has tried too hard to fill up a CD. I think the days where we got one 40-minute album per year worked better than the present where we get one 70-minute album every three years.

 

Actually, this is true for a lot of bands......

 

Peace,

Ron

Edited April 27, 2010 by Ron2112

[metaldad]

QUOTE (Don Quixote @ Apr 27 2010, 08:48 AM)

Maybe this time the Geddy Lee Chorus will be retired.

That would be beautiful

[rushgoober]

I don't think Rush sets out to make filler, but I think they could perhaps be more critical about their work, especially by recording material and letting it sit for awhile and then listening back over time to make sure it's really a song of the highest quality that they can be proud of. That's often the problem with saying ok, we have 3 months to make an album. Maybe the way they're doing it now will improve things by giving them the room needed to come up with the best material.

 

Of course one person's filler is another person's masterpiece, but isn't it amazing how with their material from the 70's through the mid 80's you hear people talking about songs being filler FAR less than the music that's come out since then? Individual opinions vary, but consensus opinion holds a lot of weight as far as I'm concerned.

 

Part of this is because the length of albums - coming up with 35-40 minutes of high quality material is a major undertaking for even the best band. Coming up with 50 minutes, much less 65-70 minutes of it is near impossible. How many double albums (which is essentially what a 65-70 minute CD is) do you know of that are high quality all the way through and wouldn't have been better as a single album? It's definitely the exception, not the rule.

 

Why not record 13 songs, live with them a little while, make changes to ones that need it and then just release the 7 or 8 best songs as a 40 minute CD? Put those extra songs in the vaults and release them as bonus material in a few years. People would have been thrilled if Good News First was a bonus track in 2015. As a song on S&A, it just pales by comparison to the far better songs on the album...

[Tick]

QUOTE (RushNut @ Apr 27 2010, 09:20 AM)

vhttp://img.photobucket.com/albums/v423/KublaKhan/allgood-1.jpg

[Del_Duio]

QUOTE (EmotionDetector @ Apr 27 2010, 09:19 AM)

I remember one time someone making a thread about how they HATED Natural Science

Yeah, we killed that guy

[snowdog2112]

QUOTE

Yeah, we killed that guy

 

 

 

 

By the way, I really do understand what the people who think there are too many songs are getting at. In other words, I don't agree with you but I do understand that perspective. Keep in mind though that the actual amount of output over time has been reduced drastically.

 

So, when I read...

 

QUOTE

I don't think Rush sets out to make filler, but I think they could perhaps be more critical about their work, especially by recording material and letting it sit for awhile and then listening back over time to make sure it's really a song of the highest quality that they can be proud of

 

 

...I just don't think people are thinking it through. It sounds good on the surface, but if anything I think they're sometimes in danger of spending way too much time and effort on each song. First off, you can say about most of those old albums that, yeah, they only have between 4 and 6 songs on them but so many of the songs were so long that you can't do a direct comparison against 13 songs, 2 of which are just 2 minute instrumentals anyway. But the bigger thing is that they released albums so much more frequently back then.

 

They released 6 studio and 1 live album in just a little over a 4 year period. They typically wrote those songs in soundchecks and in the bus whenever they had a few minutes and most of those albums were recorded from anywhere from 5 days to a couple weeks. They spent months and months writing for S&A before they even went into the studio and we've only had 3 full studio albums in 17 years. They spent over a year recording Vapor Trails. It's ridiculous to say that they're trying to make too many songs at once or they're not spending enough time on them. If anything they're overworking them so they lose a lot of that spontaneous energy that the old songs had when they had no time to write and record. Hell, you guys should be hoping they make 50 songs on the next album that way the band isn't working on the same song for months and therefore feel the need to continue to add more and more layers to it.

 

Besides some of this time limit stuff is just arbitrary. You people who use an album like Hemispheres to demonstrate how fewer songs makes better albums have no way of knowing if a 10 songs Hemispheres would have been just as good. Maybe there were 6 more equally great Hemispheres era songs we could have had if Rush had the time and cd space they have now.

 

I want Rush to make as much music as they're happy with and we can simply choose to listen to the ones we want.

Edited April 27, 2010 by snowdog2112

[Lerxster]

Geddy Lee was interviewed on 94 WYSP in Philadelphia and described the two new finished songs as follows: "It's hard, it's fresh. They're pretty hard hitting. They're pretty musically ambitious. One of the songs is longer... kind of a cross between Far Cry and Monkey Business. Another one is just the shorter kind of super energy song."

 

[snowdog2112]

QUOTE

Geddy Lee was interviewed on 94 WYSP in Philadelphia and described the two new finished songs as follows: "It's hard, it's fresh. They're pretty hard hitting. They're pretty musically ambitious. One of the songs is longer... kind of a cross between Far Cry and Monkey Business. Another one is just the shorter kind of super energy song."

 

I can't wait! Some people will still not like them for no other reason than they won't sound like 2112 or Tom Sawyer though.