2011 Tour....Clockwork Angels

[vital signz]

Rush puts on the best concert out there if you ask me....so well planned out and detailed, with elaborate, excellent video work, BUTTTT.........how would you all feel if they changed it all up?

 

What about a stripped stage, no videos, just lighting, and a set list that could be changed up a lot....just the guys, with their instruments, and much more randomness...

 

It's obvious that they cannot change things up much with all the detail that goes into the video, and extensive visuals behind each song...but maybe if they eliminated all of that and just did the music, and good lights, maybe they could do much more off the cuff.

 

What do you all think???

[01GT Eibach]

For me, I first saw Rush on the Moving Pictures tour, then again (from the front row) on Presto. I found both concerts disappointing for different reasons. To me, Rush was one of my favorite bands for sure, but was not a great live act. It was not until the Test For Echo tour where I was tempted to go see see them again where they were featuring "an evening with Rush": (a) no opening act, (b ) three-hour set, (c ) themed humorous videos, and (d) an intermission. I found this tour immensely more entertaining than when I saw them previously, and was lucky enough to see them twice (on both legs of the tour). Since TFE, I have seen them on each subsequent tour. Also since that TFE tour, the band has stayed with the above "an evening with Rush" formula. It makes for such an entertaining concert, I think I would be very disappointed if they departed from this massively successful recipe.

[Jaminbenb]

AS someone that usually is only able to hit ONE show per tour, the structure of their current way is great, because you KNOW what to expect, and if they are playing something that you REALLY want to hear, and they bag it for your particular show, then you feel left out. There are a few bands out there that change it up every night, and I think with the technology available, they are able to change it up by pushing a button for a specific lighting/movie program.

 

During the VT tour, they swapped a few songs every few nights, and since I was able to catch that on two separate legs, I WAS able to hear both swapped tunes, which was great....

 

 

That all said, however, I would LOVE to see them pull stuff that they either haven't played in years, and stick something odd in occasionally (i.e. Lakeside Park, Beneath, Between, & Behind, etc.) I'm SURE they could handle it?!?!?!

[ghostworks]

QUOTE (vital signz @ Nov 16 2010, 11:02 AM)

...maybe if they eliminated all of that and just did the music, and good lights, maybe they could do much more off the cuff. What do you all think???

I think if they could cut it performing like that, it would be phenomenal.

 

Unfortunately, they're not confident enough.

 

The technology they've been relying on for the past 30-odd years has become a crutch they'll never abandon - not at this point.

 

They've always been perfectionists, and have always been interested in the latest & greatest technology - whether it be Taurus pedals, samplers, electronic drums, graphite bass guitars, recording techniques, etc.

 

That technology has exponentially exploded over the past few decades, and Rush have embraced it. Unfortunately, instead of discovering new instruments and creative inspiration with this technology, they have instead found comfortable and effortless 'cruise control' devices, especially live.

 

Case in point:

Neil is a great percussionist but a terrible time-keeper - he's all over the place with his tempos, and it's extremely difficult for him to groove or 'find the pocket'. He has really had to work at it, his entire career. Sequencers/click tracks take care of that.

 

Rush 'live, without a net' would be a disaster to the bands' perfectionist tendencies, but - more profoundly - just couldn't be accomplished with the band in their current 'fighting trim'.

 

They've never been an improv band - they're too self-conscious (Geddy and Neil most especially.) They favor endless hours of arrangement study, multiple takes and microscopic overdubs in the studio, and carefully scripted, accurate to the second live performances, complete with double-redundant sequencer/synth/click track systems and pre-recorded backing tracks live.

 

I know it doesn't sound like it, but I'm happy to have them just the way they are - the alternative is retirement.

 

I absolutely wish they could just break off in the middle of Subdivisions and jam the thing out for 12 minutes, but they're not those kinds of musicians. Each one of them is extremely talented, no question - but that kind of improvisational confidence is its own talent.

 

Rush - as a band - simply doesn't have it.

[Mara]

I have to agree with ghostworks here. They just aren't that kind of band and it is WAYYY too late in the game to ask them to learn a whole new bag of tricks. Perhaps back in the early 80's they could have made the shift. definitely not now.

 

Though I don't think they do it the way they do because it's "easier", or that the technology is "a crutch". They just found their groove early on and stayed with it. They want to replicate the studio sound as closely as possible, and that's fine by me. It works, most times - what you get is pretty close to studio quality with just that little extra "punch" a live performance gives.

 

 

[IChoseFreeWill]

I put non-changing detailed. It is what they are accustomed to. The only remotely spontaneous one of the trio is Alex- but I still think he likes his big show. I wonder if too much change and improptu work would upset Neil. And it would still be a bit out of element for Geddy.

[Todem]

Rush are not Phish, DMB or the Dead or Pearl Jam.

 

 

THEY ARE RUSH.

 

Perfection and the determination of pulling off the perfect show night after night, city after city for everyone to see.

 

 

I love it.

Edited November 16, 2010 by Todem

[Todem]

QUOTE (IChoseFreeWill @ Nov 16 2010, 02:52 PM)

I put non-changing detailed. It is what they are accustomed to. The only remotely spontaneous one of the trio is Alex- but I still think he likes his big show. I wonder if too much change and improptu work would upset Neil. And it would still be a bit out of element for Geddy.

It's not Rush. Rush are about concise razor sharp production.

 

Their music speaks detail, not being loose.

 

The instrumental playing around in CTTH back on the T4E tour was about as loose as it get's for Rush. And this year they f*cked around with La Villa and Working Man....I would have rather they stuck to the original ways of starting those songs.

Edited November 16, 2010 by Todem

[Todem]

Edited November 16, 2010 by Todem

[New World Kid]

There's a few of reasons I voted the way I did (for the 1 set, elaborate video show).

 

1) I like flashy things. Rush shows have lights, videos, fire, smoke, those steam things from the latest tour.

 

2) This is what they're comfortable with. I don't want to push Rush outside of their comfort zone. Rush should want to push themselves out of their comfort zone, yes, but that's a different matter.

 

3) After a few shows, they nail their sets. Changing it up every night would mean ore mistakes on their end. Like someone said, way too late int he game to be asking them to break out new skills in a show.

 

4) Money. When I buy an outrageously over priced ticket for a Rush show, I know that part of it is going to the lights and video that Rush do better than most bands. If they charged less, had an alternating set, then I'd attend more shows and see more songs in theory, but in reality, I doubt it works that rosy.

[Rushman14]

Rush shows are a spectacle and I wouldn't have it any other way. That type of production makes it impossible to change it up every night like Pearl Jam.

[CMWriter]

Okay, I'll admit. I'm truly a New World Woman.. 'specially being a teenager, I dig flashy (except in marching band but that's another story). I like the videos, I loved the epic fire flaring up during "Caravan", I adored the amazing lighting, and now we get to the music...

 

One of the things that struck me about Rush that made me love them in the first is how straight-edge concise they are in their music. It's what they've been doing for 30+ years and, dagnabbit, they do it really well. Everything's clean and precise. They pull it off, and I wouldn't ask them to do any differently.

 

Honestly, I was astounded at how incredible they not only sounded (duh) but also the concert visuals. Granted, it was my first indoor concert, but I guess most bands don't get into all that like Rush does!

[Tarkus406]

Rush should stick to what they're doing. Plus, I want to know I'm seeing the same songs as everyone else. I don't want to read a setlist from the next night and be like "AW MAN THEY DID JACOBS LADDER AND AVAILABLE LIGHT?! DAMNIT!"

[Snow-Dog2112]

i just want them to get rid of those screens behind them, idc if their on the sides but its just really distracting

[Nathan]

QUOTE (ghostworks @ Nov 16 2010, 12:45 PM)

QUOTE (vital signz @ Nov 16 2010, 11:02 AM) .He has really had to work at it, his entire career. Sequencers/click tracks take care of that. Sure Neil and the rest have a lot of technological help, but I recall an interview with their monitor mixer saying the he doesn't use a click track live.   In any case, I would be disappointed if they dropped their current setup. The videos, lights, perfect flow of the show, that's what Rush should be live, IMO. In fact, I missed not having the lasers this tour.

Edited November 17, 2010 by Nathan

[micgtr71]

I want the detailed set. I'm used to it and I like it.

[metaldad]

Drums, Amps and the band. No need for all the other crap. The Movie thing has been done to death. Let the music speak

[ColdFireYYZ]

I like both. Sometimes the lighting and videos take away from the music. I found the videos funny but too dragged out. I'd love to see them stripped down with just them playing, but that will never happen. I'm fine with how it is now.

[Snyder80]

The first post of this thread almost sounds like their suggesting Rush is comprised of sub-standard musicians who get their sounds all by trickery and effects.

 

Somebody buy this guy a copy of Exit...Stage Left!

Edited November 17, 2010 by Snyder80

[Noisy Bastard]

Well hello Mr. signz! Good topic!

 

I have to side with their present philosophy on how they set up their shows. They've always had set lists that are hardly ever altered, even in the early days. That coupled with their stand on no support act since the TFE tour lend itself to the highly detailed, rigid modus operandi. In this day and age, and for the price of the tickets, I want them to put on the best show with all the toys being trotted out. I'll save the stripped down, no videos, no lasers, no triggers, no pyro, no recorded backing vocals, no dry ice, no themed stage for when they eventually play live in my basement.

 

As someone above posted, I too would be disappointed if I saw a set list from some other date that I liked better.

 

As a side note, I would like to see them at some small, old theater or something on that scale. Same "show" -- just a smaller, tighter, cozier venue. I know they couldn't have as many lights and other regalia, but they wouldn't need as many in a small setting.

[Working2112]

I don't want them to change a thing about their shows at all!!

I am glad they still play, like in Neil's book Roadshow (quote) I don't care if they play Yankee Doodle Dandy, as long as they are playing..(unquote)

 

If you don't like the setlist or do not like the way that they put on THEIR shows, Start your own band and play the way you want to!!!

[The Big Money]

I think there's something cool about not knowing what the setlist is going to be. Yes, you miss out on some songs but you also hear a couple others that many people won't hear that tour.

[CMWriter]

I think anyone who has heard Rush or listened to a live recording knows that they certainly don't need any of that fancy technology. If you're at the concert, you know it's going to amazing regardless.

 

Some of the videos were a little bit distracting, but not too bad. They switched back to the trio on stage enough that I didn't mind.

 

As for lighting and all the really super-awesome effects with the... the EVERYTHING, I don't want them to change a thing. That was epic, epic, epic. (I think I've described "Time Machine Tour" as "epic" too many times. Sorry for the redundancy.) I jumped every time fire shot up during "Caravan" but it was a really cool effect.

[ridertoo98]

Keep doing what they do. When I go see a band I want what they sold me on the cd not some mess ,if they dont feel good or just tired after doing 20 dates in a row. I think like posted before, the Guys like doing the 100% show. They want to hit it right every time. They have said this in the past and in the movie. Let them be RUSH its what they are and what they do and its what I like. I am tired of the "change" word.

[IChoseFreeWill]

I prefer to know the setlist ahead of time. Especially for more expensive concerts, or for bands that I do not know a lot of their songs.