OFFICIAL Caravan and BU2B reaction thread

[trenken]

QUOTE (PariahDog @ Jun 8 2010, 12:25 PM)

The vocal melodies on these tunes are limited by the framework of the music around them.  Both songs (especially Caravan) have a lot going on musically, with lots of riff changes, time changes (double time, half time), etc.  When you've got so much going on musically, the tradeoff is that the vocals need to fit into that structure and won't be as free flowing.  Having said that, there are still some nice vocal moments in these tunes, especially the bridge of BU2B. Funny, last time out Rush delibrately wrote a vocal-oriented song with The Larger Bowl, and people ripped the music as being "too simple," "sounds like country," "I could have written that guitar part," etc.   Go figure.

I think for some Larger Bowl had too much of a 60s folk feel to it. At least that was my problem with it anyway, although I dont hate that song. Ive found myself singing that chorus here and there.

Edited June 8, 2010 by trenken

[rushgoober]

QUOTE (LeaveMyThingAlone @ Jun 8 2010, 08:24 AM)

QUOTE (Gerxt @ Jun 8 2010, 06:14 AM) Can you honestly ever see Jacob Moon being able to cover them? Sorry, I can't just let this one go. This is the line of the year.   Judging a Rush song by whether Jacob Moon can cover it.....Holy Crap, we've jumped the shark and Youtube has officialy taken over the world   Thanks for the laugh I actually think he's making a good point. I mean, yeah, who cares about Jacob Moon specifically, but he's talking about melody and hooks and a catchy song. I never really thought about "catchy" in terms of Rush until I started noticing songs that aren't catchy by them in more recent times...   ... Ok, that was the start of my original post, and then I thought about it. I guess most of their songs are catchy in some way, even the new ones to an extent. I think I'm trying to somehow rationalize what I've been suspecting for awhile the more I listen to these songs, and that's that I just don't like them too much. I don't hate them, but after the initial couple of listens, they haven't excited me much at all.   I love the very start of Caravan. I also love the instrumental break in Caravan (well love is a strong word, I guess I could say I'm impressed by it), but the rest not so much - the chorus I find kind of boring and the lyrics I don't find really particularly meaningful at all. BU2B is a bit too heavy for my tastes, and it's kind of lyrically depressing.   Still I've only been hearing these tracks on YouTube as I'm waiting for the CD, so I know I'm missing out on some sound quality, but I can't imagine that will be so dramatic that it will significantly alter my feelings on the songs themselves. It's kind of like the Mita remaster of VT - it improved the sound quality, but couldn't improve the songs themselves.   Anyway, it's been hard to admit it to myself as I always WANT to love new Rush, but I can't force what ain't there. I guess the tracks are on par with some of the lesser songs on S&A, but it's nowhere near the best songs on that album IMHO...

[rushgoober]

[Soni]

Ok oK OK!

I wanted to wait a week before having a good opinion on these songs.

 

LOVE 'EM!

 

This is exactly what I want Rush to sound like, huge guitars, busy drumming and groovy bass lines. Perfect.

If the whole album follows that direction we may have a modern day Rush masterpiece.

[Gerxt]

Surely it doesn't take too much perception or imagination to work out why I mentioned whether you can imagine Jacob Moon playing these songs? When you take a song back to its basics and you have nothing but the melody you know how good it is.

 

The songs simply don't have the melodic strength to match the playing skills. Can you imagine if Geddy was a mediocre bass player as opposed to what he actually can do. The songs wouldn't be the same. Good vocals for me are as important as the playing.

[Gompers]

OK, just listened to both for the first time. Caravan is great. Love it! BU2B sounds OK but right now not too memorable. I'll just have to keep listening.

[daveyt]

i'm glad i bought the tunes instead of listening to the samples first!

[trenken]

QUOTE (Gerxt @ Jun 8 2010, 06:46 PM)

Surely it doesn't take too much perception or imagination to work out why I mentioned whether you can imagine Jacob Moon playing these songs? When you take a song back to its basics and you have nothing but the melody you know how good it is. The songs simply don't have the melodic strength to match the playing skills. Can you imagine if Geddy was a mediocre bass player as opposed to what he actually can do. The songs wouldn't be the same. Good vocals for me are as important as the playing.

Agreed for the most part, except I personally think the vocal melodies are the most important part of a song, more important than the playing. There are many bands that arent great players, but have some great songs. Look at U2, their rhythm section is awful, but they do have some damn good songs because Bono is fantastic at writing melodies.

 

Good playing underneath is a nice bonus to me, but its not essential, to me the vocals are.

 

Look at some of Rush's simpler songs musically. Dreamline is very simple musically, any amateur bassist could play that. If you have fingers, you can play Dreamline on bass, but Geddy's vocal melodies are strong in that song, so the song sounds great, most Rush fans seem to love it.

 

 

[1-0-0-1-0-0-1]

QUOTE (trenken @ Jun 8 2010, 09:41 PM)

QUOTE (Gerxt @ Jun 8 2010, 06:46 PM) Surely it doesn't take too much perception or imagination to work out why I mentioned whether you can imagine Jacob Moon playing these songs? When you take a song back to its basics and you have nothing but the melody you know how good it is. The songs simply don't have the melodic strength to match the playing skills. Can you imagine if Geddy was a mediocre bass player as opposed to what he actually can do. The songs wouldn't be the same. Good vocals for me are as important as the playing. Agreed for the most part, except I personally think the vocal melodies are the most important part of a song, more important than the playing. There are many bands that arent great players, but have some great songs. Look at U2, their rhythm section is awful, but they do have some damn good songs because Bono is fantastic at writing melodies.   Good playing underneath is a nice bonus to me, but its not essential, to me the vocals are.   Look at some of Rush's simpler songs musically. Dreamline is very simple musically, any amateur bassist could play that. If you have fingers, you can play Dreamline on bass, but Geddy's vocal melodies are strong in that song, so the song sounds great, most Rush fans seem to love it. I think what most Rush fans like about the band is that they can do melodic and "simple" rock songs like "Dreamline" AND heavy and weird and complex songs like "Caravan." Then there are fans who prefer the melodic numbers, and fans who prefer the complex ones.   That level of diversity is probably a big reason why this band has endured for decades.

[-D-RocK-]

Hi -D-RocK- here, long time listener first time caller and all I have to say is:

 

 

YAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA!!!!!

 

 

[psionic11]

QUOTE (1-0-0-1-0-0-1 @ Jun 8 2010, 08:59 PM)

QUOTE (trenken @ Jun 8 2010, 09:41 PM) QUOTE (Gerxt @ Jun 8 2010, 06:46 PM) Surely it doesn't take too much perception or imagination to work out why I mentioned whether you can imagine Jacob Moon playing these songs? When you take a song back to its basics and you have nothing but the melody you know how good it is. The songs simply don't have the melodic strength to match the playing skills. Can you imagine if Geddy was a mediocre bass player as opposed to what he actually can do. The songs wouldn't be the same. Good vocals for me are as important as the playing. Agreed for the most part, except I personally think the vocal melodies are the most important part of a song, more important than the playing. There are many bands that arent great players, but have some great songs. Look at U2, their rhythm section is awful, but they do have some damn good songs because Bono is fantastic at writing melodies.   Good playing underneath is a nice bonus to me, but its not essential, to me the vocals are.   Look at some of Rush's simpler songs musically. Dreamline is very simple musically, any amateur bassist could play that. If you have fingers, you can play Dreamline on bass, but Geddy's vocal melodies are strong in that song, so the song sounds great, most Rush fans seem to love it. I think what most Rush fans like about the band is that they can do melodic and "simple" rock songs like "Dreamline" AND heavy and weird and complex songs like "Caravan." Then there are fans who prefer the melodic numbers, and fans who prefer the complex ones.   That level of diversity is probably a big reason why this band has endured for decades. But that's the point. Beyond good vocal melodies that the average singsong popsumer can digest, there is the diversity that Rush has not only created but inherited. What?   Well, they're not the Beatles or Oasis where you're looking for a great sing-along melody. Nor are the King Crimson or Dream Theater where you're looking to be wowed by musical technicality.   They're somewhere in-between, and elusive as a snake dodging an arrow. Geddy has proved he can write melodically catchy vocal hooks.   For me, I see them as straddling a pop sensibility while delivering cutting-edge boudary breaking. All within the confines of an old school power trio. Sure, there are heavier melodic bands, catchier pop-indie outfits, more adventurous prog rock experiments.   The great think about Rush is how many genres they can drive-by 'touch and grace'.

[Gerxt]

No one is saying anything about catchy hooks etc. It is simply that the songs melodies (the basis of ANY song) are not that good. Good melodies does not make it pop, it makes it a good song.

Tricky playing and hard rock is why we all like Rush. These songs seem to me to be playing exercises where the melody ( the SONG) is a secondary consideration.

[ReRushed]

I woke up this morning and went about my business. As I was preparing my French Toast, for some unprovoked reason I starting singing the melody to "Caravan".

[Xanadoood]

QUOTE (ReRushed @ Jun 9 2010, 09:17 AM)

I woke up this morning and went about my business. As I was preparing my French Toast, for some unprovoked reason I starting singing the melody to "Caravan".

French Toast has a history of bringing out these type of tunes.

[1-0-0-1-0-0-1]

QUOTE (ReRushed @ Jun 9 2010, 10:17 AM)

I woke up this morning and went about my business.  As I was preparing my French Toast, for some unprovoked reason I starting singing the melody to "Caravan".

Yep, I chronicled a similar experience two pages ago. So much for the song not having a good melody...

[trenken]

QUOTE (ReRushed @ Jun 9 2010, 09:17 AM)

I woke up this morning and went about my business. As I was preparing my French Toast, for some unprovoked reason I starting singing the melody to "Caravan".

What was in that french toast??

[SpiritOfRush]

QUOTE (1-0-0-1-0-0-1 @ Jun 8 2010, 08:59 PM)

QUOTE (trenken @ Jun 8 2010, 09:41 PM) QUOTE (Gerxt @ Jun 8 2010, 06:46 PM) Surely it doesn't take too much perception or imagination to work out why I mentioned whether you can imagine Jacob Moon playing these songs? When you take a song back to its basics and you have nothing but the melody you know how good it is. The songs simply don't have the melodic strength to match the playing skills. Can you imagine if Geddy was a mediocre bass player as opposed to what he actually can do. The songs wouldn't be the same. Good vocals for me are as important as the playing. Agreed for the most part, except I personally think the vocal melodies are the most important part of a song, more important than the playing. There are many bands that arent great players, but have some great songs. Look at U2, their rhythm section is awful, but they do have some damn good songs because Bono is fantastic at writing melodies.   Good playing underneath is a nice bonus to me, but its not essential, to me the vocals are.   Look at some of Rush's simpler songs musically. Dreamline is very simple musically, any amateur bassist could play that. If you have fingers, you can play Dreamline on bass, but Geddy's vocal melodies are strong in that song, so the song sounds great, most Rush fans seem to love it. I think what most Rush fans like about the band is that they can do melodic and "simple" rock songs like "Dreamline" AND heavy and weird and complex songs like "Caravan." Then there are fans who prefer the melodic numbers, and fans who prefer the complex ones.   That level of diversity is probably a big reason why this band has endured for decades.   BTW, I'm an Islander fan as well (yes I admit it).

[ReRushed]

QUOTE (trenken @ Jun 9 2010, 10:24 AM)

QUOTE (ReRushed @ Jun 9 2010, 09:17 AM) I woke up this morning and went about my business.  As I was preparing my French Toast, for some unprovoked reason I starting singing the melody to "Caravan".  What was in that french toast?? Basic French Toast, made with eggs and oatmeal bread with a touch of cinnamon and lots of maple syrup.

[1-0-0-1-0-0-1]

[trenken]

[Mara]

[Silas Lang]

[trenken]

[rushgoober]

[trenken]