worthog Posted June 29, 2010 Share Posted June 29, 2010 Well from what I can see this is probably all songs we will hear...but the order may be different and maybe add 2 more songs....i think that we are missing JL because I truly believe people like Score Out and he did mention something about JL bein in there....and i think MalNar is the beginning of the drum solo...so thats 28 songs and a different order....and don't forget there could be alternates Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gtbos Posted June 29, 2010 Share Posted June 29, 2010 I did the math,2h 30 min ,seems a little short,maybe missing one song from first set.JL,one from second set....otherwise i can live with it Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
krlowe Posted June 29, 2010 Share Posted June 29, 2010 I think it's off. I just have a gut feeling it's not quite right. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hemispheres89 Posted June 29, 2010 Share Posted June 29, 2010 First of all, for everyone making a big deal about Jacob's Ladder.. no it is not listed in the setlist, but do you think that maybe it's one of those so-called "surprises" that everyone in the Rush camp seems to talk about frequently? I'm just saying.. maybe it's not listed on purpose and they're going to "shock" us with it on actual concert date..? Just a thought Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
losingit2k Posted June 29, 2010 Share Posted June 29, 2010 (edited) High Points of this set:  La villa Marathon The Camera Eye Presto Faithless Low Points: No Jacobs Ladder No Middletown Dreams Leave that thing alone (Rather hear Where's my Thing or Limbo) or better yet Jacobs ladder sets seem Short By like two songs each To be honest! I can't understand anyone who is disappointed with a set list that has The Camera Eye and La Villa in it!  Edited June 29, 2010 by losingit2k Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
amish_ashaman Posted June 29, 2010 Share Posted June 29, 2010 QUOTE (gtbos @ Jun 28 2010, 10:12 PM) I did the math,2h 30 min ,seems a little short,maybe missing one song from first set.JL,one from second set....otherwise i can live with it It's 1-2 songs off from being fantastic, if the 1-2 are lesser played songs from the classic period. They could go through the pre-MP catalog, pick ANY two songs that they haven't played since the MP or Signals tour, and it would be fantastic. ANY two songs from that period would rock, because they all rock. I didn't like all of the first album, but starting when Neil joined the band, the first song I didn't like was Red Lenses. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ReflectedLight Posted June 29, 2010 Share Posted June 29, 2010 QUOTE (Hemispheres89 @ Jun 28 2010, 10:17 PM) First of all, for everyone making a big deal about Jacob's Ladder.. no it is not listed in the setlist, but do you think that maybe it's one of those so-called "surprises" that everyone in the Rush camp seems to talk about frequently? I'm just saying.. maybe it's not listed on purpose and they're going to "shock" us with it on actual concert date..? Just a thought i'm so tired of rush not playing this or not playing that. i'm just going to go and have a few beers and enjoy myself. if i feel the need for a beer break, i'll plan accordingly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
krlowe Posted June 29, 2010 Share Posted June 29, 2010 It's just we don't know who sneaked the setlist. I came from RIAB which I don't trust 100% because they do there best to interpret these rumors that come in. These reports were from fans "within an earshot" of the grounds. Who knows maybe it's a group of people blowing smoke?.... It's a good setlist, but missing Jacobs Ladder, Hemispheres, Xanadu, Cygnus X-1, Middletown Dreams, Prime Mover, just a bunch I wanted to hear....oh well! At least they are touring right? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
danielmclark Posted June 29, 2010 Share Posted June 29, 2010 QUOTE (amish_ashaman @ Jun 28 2010, 10:06 PM) I think most would agree that if there were only going to be 1 or 2 surprises, we'd prefer them to be from the older stuff. Circumstances, Entre Nous and Bangkok are way better than anything being played on this tour, at least on the basis of being stuff from the classic period that the hard cores would want to hear. And honestly, at this stage of Rush's career, I think they ought to play a little more for the hard cores. The idea that songs from the mid-late 80's are "old" is off base. Where Rush is concerned, generally speaking, Moving Pictures was the last of the "old" Rush. Anything more recent is "new". (Signals took some getting used to, BTW, but it's among my favorites.) All three of the songs you named have been played on recent tours, so they wouldn't exactly be surprises. But I get where you're coming from. You'd rather they play some songs that haven't been played since the early days. I can respect that. But I don't think they should be playing to the oldies. No disrespect intended, but honestly - if they hadn't been picking up new fans throughout their career, we wouldn't be having this conversation. People who supported them early on made it possible for them to move into the 80's and beyond, but it was people that came later that are enabling them to go even further. So, I strongly, vehemently disagree that anything post-MP is "new". 74-80 was only six years of their career, and after that, there's been 30. To say that Signals or P/G or PoW is "new" is a little weird to me. True, they represented a change in direction, but so did AFTK. Is the second phase, from AFTK to MP less worthy or important because it's not as old as the first phase, up to 2112? There has to be more to the equation than age. But more to the point, the very definition of new vs. old... I don't understand how something from 1985 could be considered "new" when it was recorded 25 years ago. It's newer certainly, than say, Hemispheres, but there are people in this forum that weren't born when that record came out. It ain't new. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BrightAntennae Posted June 29, 2010 Share Posted June 29, 2010 QUOTE (worthog @ Jun 28 2010, 10:12 PM) Well from what I can see this is probably all songs we will hear...but the order may be different and maybe add 2 more songs....i think that we are missing JL because I truly believe people like Score Out and he did mention something about JL bein in there....and i think MalNar is the beginning of the drum solo...so thats 28 songs and a different order....and don't forget there could be alternates Score Out never mentioned any songs. Especially JL. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
duntov1966 Posted June 29, 2010 Share Posted June 29, 2010 So much disappointment heard in this thread. Â I'm happy to get to see them, the venue I am going to is awesome. Â This gives me somthing to live for, an outdoor show under the summer moon listening to the best band on earth.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Del_Duio Posted June 29, 2010 Share Posted June 29, 2010 QUOTE (danielmclark @ Jun 28 2010, 10:25 PM) QUOTE (amish_ashaman @ Jun 28 2010, 10:06 PM) I think most would agree that if there were only going to be 1 or 2 surprises, we'd prefer them to be from the older stuff. Circumstances, Entre Nous and Bangkok are way better than anything being played on this tour, at least on the basis of being stuff from the classic period that the hard cores would want to hear. And honestly, at this stage of Rush's career, I think they ought to play a little more for the hard cores. The idea that songs from the mid-late 80's are "old" is off base. Where Rush is concerned, generally speaking, Moving Pictures was the last of the "old" Rush. Anything more recent is "new". (Signals took some getting used to, BTW, but it's among my favorites.) All three of the songs you named have been played on recent tours, so they wouldn't exactly be surprises. But I get where you're coming from. You'd rather they play some songs that haven't been played since the early days. I can respect that. But I don't think they should be playing to the oldies. No disrespect intended, but honestly - if they hadn't been picking up new fans throughout their career, we wouldn't be having this conversation. People who supported them early on made it possible for them to move into the 80's and beyond, but it was people that came later that are enabling them to go even further. So, I strongly, vehemently disagree that anything post-MP is "new". 74-80 was only six years of their career, and after that, there's been 30. To say that Signals or P/G or PoW is "new" is a little weird to me. True, they represented a change in direction, but so did AFTK. Is the second phase, from AFTK to MP less worthy or important because it's not as old as the first phase, up to 2112? There has to be more to the equation than age. But more to the point, the very definition of new vs. old... I don't understand how something from 1985 could be considered "new" when it was recorded 25 years ago. It's newer certainly, than say, Hemispheres, but there are people in this forum that weren't born when that record came out. It ain't new. Math aside, I consider Rush-HYF the "old stuff" and Presto-Clockwork Angels the "new stuff". I know that doesn't make much sense to anybody but me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
danielmclark Posted June 29, 2010 Share Posted June 29, 2010 QUOTE (duntov1966 @ Jun 28 2010, 10:36 PM) So much disappointment heard in this thread. I'm happy to get to see them, the venue I am going to is awesome. This gives me somthing to live for, an outdoor show under the summer moon listening to the best band on earth.. When it comes right down to it, as much as some of us have been arguing, complaining and ranting (as much fun as it is )... that's what it's all about. Right on. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ReflectedLight Posted June 29, 2010 Share Posted June 29, 2010 QUOTE (duntov1966 @ Jun 28 2010, 10:36 PM) So much disappointment heard in this thread. I'm happy to get to see them, the venue I am going to is awesome. This gives me somthing to live for, an outdoor show under the summer moon listening to the best band on earth.. i guess alot of us have seen alot of different setlist combinations over the years and were looking for something out of the ordinary or rush getting a little crazy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
worthog Posted June 29, 2010 Share Posted June 29, 2010 Score out Wow. Was that uncalled for. Ya know, if someone spoke to me like that in person without any provocation I'd put them through a wall - but I guess it's easy to act like an asshole when you're protected by a computer screen. Â In any event, you'll get your wish. The venom on this board from some people is vile and it's certainly not a community I have any desire to be a part of. There's 2 or 3 people here with rock-solid information and connections to the Rush camp and, despite the fact that none of them have ever posted a single piece of incorrect information over many months to disprove that, the peanut gallery is practically foaming at the mouth to tear them down. It's pretty sad really. I'm not aware of any awards or prizes for being proven correct in the end and there's been no reward in contributing whatever information and value that I have and that I am able to, so that type of environment is certainly not appealing to me. Â On a final note, the comments are me "covering my bases" and backtracking with regard to the setlist are truly comical. Some of you need to USE YOUR BRAINS!!! There have already been about 13 songs made public from the setlist (7 from MP, CTTH, JL, MalNar, SIO, Caravan, BU2B). The setlist is about 28 songs. You throw in some obvious ones like Spirit of Radio and Far Cry and the Drum Solo and 2 more staples and you're at 18. The "rumored" setlist has like 36 songs in it. I suspect even some of you can nail 5 to 8 more songs that appear in the show with 18 guesses. Hardly rocket science. Â The order on the rumored setlist is also way off even among the songs that are correct. So is the rotation element. There will likely be a few changes from the initial setlist designed in March, but there aren't wholesale changes among the songs and especially among the order. Certain songs are production songs with lights, lasers, pyro, video, effects etc. Those are designed based around specific points in the show and especially 1st and 2nd set (light vs dark) so those don't just get completely tossed around 4 weeks before the tour starts. So obviously, with half the show already known, and about 7 or 8 extra songs on the list, the rumored setlist contains most of the songs in the show. But with a few songs missing and many included that aren't in the show, along with a completely incorrect order, and a totally wrong guess on the rotation, it's still not close to accurate. Bottom line is that I have the actual real setlist they designed to bring into rehearsals and to give to the production team for lights, videos etc. The rumored list isn't it and isn't close. But clearly I'm just guessing so feel free to discount this and keep believing wrong information. Â Happy National Yo-Yo Day everyone. Â --------------------------------------------------------------------------------Â Â Â That was what he said Bright Antennae...its on pg 10 of the old setlist discussion Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
worthog Posted June 29, 2010 Share Posted June 29, 2010 and sorry i suck at the quoting thing....lol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
amish_ashaman Posted June 29, 2010 Share Posted June 29, 2010 QUOTE (Del_Duio @ Jun 28 2010, 10:36 PM) QUOTE (danielmclark @ Jun 28 2010, 10:25 PM) QUOTE (amish_ashaman @ Jun 28 2010, 10:06 PM) I think most would agree that if there were only going to be 1 or 2 surprises, we'd prefer them to be from the older stuff. Circumstances, Entre Nous and Bangkok are way better than anything being played on this tour, at least on the basis of being stuff from the classic period that the hard cores would want to hear. And honestly, at this stage of Rush's career, I think they ought to play a little more for the hard cores. The idea that songs from the mid-late 80's are "old" is off base. Where Rush is concerned, generally speaking, Moving Pictures was the last of the "old" Rush. Anything more recent is "new". (Signals took some getting used to, BTW, but it's among my favorites.) All three of the songs you named have been played on recent tours, so they wouldn't exactly be surprises. But I get where you're coming from. You'd rather they play some songs that haven't been played since the early days. I can respect that. But I don't think they should be playing to the oldies. No disrespect intended, but honestly - if they hadn't been picking up new fans throughout their career, we wouldn't be having this conversation. People who supported them early on made it possible for them to move into the 80's and beyond, but it was people that came later that are enabling them to go even further. So, I strongly, vehemently disagree that anything post-MP is "new". 74-80 was only six years of their career, and after that, there's been 30. To say that Signals or P/G or PoW is "new" is a little weird to me. True, they represented a change in direction, but so did AFTK. Is the second phase, from AFTK to MP less worthy or important because it's not as old as the first phase, up to 2112? There has to be more to the equation than age. But more to the point, the very definition of new vs. old... I don't understand how something from 1985 could be considered "new" when it was recorded 25 years ago. It's newer certainly, than say, Hemispheres, but there are people in this forum that weren't born when that record came out. It ain't new. Math aside, I consider Rush-HYF the "old stuff" and Presto-Clockwork Angels the "new stuff". I know that doesn't make much sense to anybody but me. I was talking about when they played those three songs last tour. When we saw them on the setlist, there was some surprise.  "New" and "old" are always going to be relative. 6 years at the beginning produced 8 albums. It takes them longer to do 8 albums these days. I'm also speaking from my own experience, too. At the time Signals was released, my friends and I all thought of it as "new", and we'd refer to anything that came before as the "old" Rush, even though it only came out 2-3 years prior. It's relative to one's own experience.  Some bands NEVER scrap their old material. Phish is probably the poster child for this, playing any song in their enormous catalog at any time plus any number of covers, solid 2 1/2-3 hour shows every night. Some shows won't have anything from the newest album. Sometimes they'll go 5-6 shows without duplicating a song. I'm not saying Rush should do that, I'm just giving an example of a band that has been around for a while (since 1983), still writes new music, but also still plays all of the old. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
danielmclark Posted June 29, 2010 Share Posted June 29, 2010 QUOTE (amish_ashaman @ Jun 28 2010, 10:59 PM) QUOTE (Del_Duio @ Jun 28 2010, 10:36 PM) QUOTE (danielmclark @ Jun 28 2010, 10:25 PM) QUOTE (amish_ashaman @ Jun 28 2010, 10:06 PM) I think most would agree that if there were only going to be 1 or 2 surprises, we'd prefer them to be from the older stuff. Circumstances, Entre Nous and Bangkok are way better than anything being played on this tour, at least on the basis of being stuff from the classic period that the hard cores would want to hear. And honestly, at this stage of Rush's career, I think they ought to play a little more for the hard cores. The idea that songs from the mid-late 80's are "old" is off base. Where Rush is concerned, generally speaking, Moving Pictures was the last of the "old" Rush. Anything more recent is "new". (Signals took some getting used to, BTW, but it's among my favorites.) All three of the songs you named have been played on recent tours, so they wouldn't exactly be surprises. But I get where you're coming from. You'd rather they play some songs that haven't been played since the early days. I can respect that. But I don't think they should be playing to the oldies. No disrespect intended, but honestly - if they hadn't been picking up new fans throughout their career, we wouldn't be having this conversation. People who supported them early on made it possible for them to move into the 80's and beyond, but it was people that came later that are enabling them to go even further. So, I strongly, vehemently disagree that anything post-MP is "new". 74-80 was only six years of their career, and after that, there's been 30. To say that Signals or P/G or PoW is "new" is a little weird to me. True, they represented a change in direction, but so did AFTK. Is the second phase, from AFTK to MP less worthy or important because it's not as old as the first phase, up to 2112? There has to be more to the equation than age. But more to the point, the very definition of new vs. old... I don't understand how something from 1985 could be considered "new" when it was recorded 25 years ago. It's newer certainly, than say, Hemispheres, but there are people in this forum that weren't born when that record came out. It ain't new. Math aside, I consider Rush-HYF the "old stuff" and Presto-Clockwork Angels the "new stuff". I know that doesn't make much sense to anybody but me. I was talking about when they played those three songs last tour. When we saw them on the setlist, there was some surprise.  "New" and "old" are always going to be relative. 6 years at the beginning produced 8 albums. It takes them longer to do 8 albums these days. I'm also speaking from my own experience, too. At the time Signals was released, my friends and I all thought of it as "new", and we'd refer to anything that came before as the "old" Rush, even though it only came out 2-3 years prior. It's relative to one's own experience.  Some bands NEVER scrap their old material. Phish is probably the poster child for this, playing any song in their enormous catalog at any time plus any number of covers, solid 2 1/2-3 hour shows every night. Some shows won't have anything from the newest album. Sometimes they'll go 5-6 shows without duplicating a song. I'm not saying Rush should do that, I'm just giving an example of a band that has been around for a while (since 1983), still writes new music, but also still plays all of the old. Well stated, and I completely understand your point of view. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ReflectedLight Posted June 29, 2010 Share Posted June 29, 2010 we'll see how it unravels tomorrow night but as of now time machine and revamped mean the same thing. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Spoutnik Posted June 29, 2010 Share Posted June 29, 2010 (edited) QUOTE (shaun3701 @ Jun 28 2010, 06:45 PM)QUOTE (presto123 @ Jun 28 2010, 06:43 PM) QUOTE (theworkingman @ Jun 28 2010, 06:41 PM) Spirit of Radio into Time Stand Still is going to be great. Don't get me wrong it has its moments......but too many momentum killer moments as well......3 "religion" songs in a row???? lol like I said, that seems to be the band's new theme. They might as well have called this the "Anti-Christ Tour" and had Neil put 666 all over his drumkit.  Anti-Christ tour...ha!ha! I never thought in 1988 that Rush will still touring in 2010...So i'm just happy they still rock us. Edited June 29, 2010 by Spoutnik Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
1-0-0-1-0-0-1 Posted June 29, 2010 Share Posted June 29, 2010 QUOTE (worthog @ Jun 28 2010, 11:49 PM) Score out Wow. Was that uncalled for. Ya know, if someone spoke to me like that in person without any provocation I'd put them through a wall - but I guess it's easy to act like an asshole when you're protected by a computer screen. In any event, you'll get your wish. The venom on this board from some people is vile and it's certainly not a community I have any desire to be a part of. There's 2 or 3 people here with rock-solid information and connections to the Rush camp and, despite the fact that none of them have ever posted a single piece of incorrect information over many months to disprove that, the peanut gallery is practically foaming at the mouth to tear them down. It's pretty sad really. I'm not aware of any awards or prizes for being proven correct in the end and there's been no reward in contributing whatever information and value that I have and that I am able to, so that type of environment is certainly not appealing to me. On a final note, the comments are me "covering my bases" and backtracking with regard to the setlist are truly comical. Some of you need to USE YOUR BRAINS!!! There have already been about 13 songs made public from the setlist (7 from MP, CTTH, JL, MalNar, SIO, Caravan, BU2B). The setlist is about 28 songs. You throw in some obvious ones like Spirit of Radio and Far Cry and the Drum Solo and 2 more staples and you're at 18. The "rumored" setlist has like 36 songs in it. I suspect even some of you can nail 5 to 8 more songs that appear in the show with 18 guesses. Hardly rocket science. The order on the rumored setlist is also way off even among the songs that are correct. So is the rotation element. There will likely be a few changes from the initial setlist designed in March, but there aren't wholesale changes among the songs and especially among the order. Certain songs are production songs with lights, lasers, pyro, video, effects etc. Those are designed based around specific points in the show and especially 1st and 2nd set (light vs dark) so those don't just get completely tossed around 4 weeks before the tour starts. So obviously, with half the show already known, and about 7 or 8 extra songs on the list, the rumored setlist contains most of the songs in the show. But with a few songs missing and many included that aren't in the show, along with a completely incorrect order, and a totally wrong guess on the rotation, it's still not close to accurate. Bottom line is that I have the actual real setlist they designed to bring into rehearsals and to give to the production team for lights, videos etc. The rumored list isn't it and isn't close. But clearly I'm just guessing so feel free to discount this and keep believing wrong information. Happy National Yo-Yo Day everyone. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- That was what he said Bright Antennae...its on pg 10 of the old setlist discussion This is the first time I've seen this. I had no idea Score Out was getting abused that badly. Whatever happened to giving someone the benefit of the doubt? Whatever happened to innocent until proven guilty? How about waiting until his predictions are proven wrong after opening night (IF they were proven wrong) before bashing him?  What's wrong with you people??? If you idiots haven't scared off FOH yet, how about leaving him alone until after the first show? Can you vultures handle that? (Of course I'm speaking only to those who talked to SO and FOH that way. Others have given them a chance.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
raygun47 Posted June 29, 2010 Share Posted June 29, 2010 FOH was real cool about it when I thought there was no tour...he assured me that there would be, and that I would here about it within the week, and it did in fact go down that way.  Scores Out...if he has a friend in the know...probably can't tell us what we want to know. I respect that. If I knew someone who told me things I shouldn't know, I probably wouldn't say anything at all...but I definitely would want to. I'd want to tell. But if he gave someone his word, what can he do? Betray that trust? That's not cool. And now...he doesn't show here anymore.  One thing I really dig about seeing Rush...I'm an avid concert goer and music fan. I'm big into metal, prog, everything. I've seen countless gigs, and I've seen countless Rush gigs...and Rush fans are among the coolest to spend an evening with. Can't wait to see the band, and see everyone again after the relatively short lay-off. The guy I like to see Rush with...this is basically the only time we really hang out. To see Rush...and maybe a few other bands...but I digress. I play my fantasy hockey here. Reigning champion...and I mention that with all due humility (yeah, right...I rule), and I love playing that here. Wouldn't even bother anywhere else. I have been a member of other band's boards, and this is the only one I like posting to because everyone is normally so cool. I hope this thread is just a flare up and not the wave of the future. Guess I just wanted to let you all know that I hope upon hope that...even if you don't care much for what we believe the set is...that you attend and give it a roll, because I think this set can be real good if done by paid professionals, which I believe the guys to be! Normally, I see a few shows per tour, but I can only make it to July 5th this time around. And I'll enjoy. And you will enjoy.  I can only guess that we have all blown this up to the point where it can never live up to what we expect in our imaginations. But damn it...I kind of enjoy our community, and I'd like to continue to do so. I want to whip your behinds again in fantasy hockey, and hopefully meet some of you in person in Chicago. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. Not Posted June 29, 2010 Share Posted June 29, 2010 6. Workin' Them Angels 7. Faithless (never played live) 8. BU2B (new song - never played live)   That's going to suck....  I really hope this isn't the real setlist, as everyone else is saying; it could be way better. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ReRushed Posted June 29, 2010 Share Posted June 29, 2010 QUOTE (Kenneth @ Jun 29 2010, 01:14 AM) 6. Workin' Them Angels 7. Faithless (never played live) 8. BU2B (new song - never played live) That's going to suck.... I really hope this isn't the real setlist, as everyone else is saying; it could be way better. Suck? Nah! "Workin' Them Angels" is a great song and "BU2B" is excellent. And "Faithless" is pretty good. Personally, I would replace "Faithless" with something else. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
raygun47 Posted June 29, 2010 Share Posted June 29, 2010 QUOTE (ReRushed @ Jun 29 2010, 12:18 AM) QUOTE (Kenneth @ Jun 29 2010, 01:14 AM) 6. Workin' Them Angels 7. Faithless (never played live) 8. BU2B (new song - never played live) That's going to suck.... I really hope this isn't the real setlist, as everyone else is saying; it could be way better. Suck? Nah! "Workin' Them Angels" is a great song and "BU2B" is excellent. And "Faithless" is pretty good. Personally, I would replace "Faithless" with something else. "Faithless" will be like "Ghost of a Chance" for me...didn't get it when I saw it's inclusion, and it turned out to be a pleasant surprise. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now