Who was/is the best producer post-Terry Brown?

[GeddyRulz]

[ReRushed]

Peter Collins with Nick Raskulinecz a close second. Everyone else swung and missed, in my opinion.

[eshine]

QUOTE (danielmclark @ Nov 1 2011, 09:26 AM)

QUOTE (Drummerrobin @ Nov 1 2011, 07:55 AM) Why on earth the band kept hold of Rupert Hine after he made such a cock-up of the production of Presto is beyond me.  Seriously why did they keep him?! Because there's nothing wrong with Presto. It sounds like the band wanted it to sound, it sold respectably, and it has a ton of fans.   They were a 25-year-old band at the time - producers don't tell *them* what to do, the band tells the producer what *they* want to do, and the producer's job is to help them get there. If they wanted to put out an album of polka covers, the producer wouldn't be responsible for convincing them not to.   They wanted Presto to be a more back-to-basics, stripped-down(ish), vocal-and-melody-heavy album. That's that they got. Hine helped them achieve that. BINGO!!!!!!   Not to mention Rupert Hine is the first producer that treated Geddy like the gifted singer he is.

[grand phil-nale]

Peter Collins by a mile.

 

Shame Steven Wilson will never be on the list.

[eshine]

While I love Power Windows, I credit Peter Collins for producing two of the bands weakest efforts, HYF and the dreadfully dated TFE.

 

As for Steve Wislon, his music is lovely wallpaper.

[eshine]

QUOTE

I hate the production of Presto, and Daniel's defense of the album doesn't really address what it is I hate.  It's fine "giving the artist what they want," and bringing things "back-to-basics, stripped-down(ish), and vocal-and-melody-heavy."  But you can do all that without taking the balls out of the sound.  It's a rock album but sounds way too "polite" to my ears; very sterile.  That's the sound, that's the "bad production," not which instruments are subtracted or highlighted.

If you dislike Presto for it's lack of "balls" - then you must utterly loathe its predecessor.

 

I had the complete opposite reaction when Presto was released. It was a blessed return to form after the absolute castration of HYF, which is about as sterile as you can get.

Edited November 1, 2011 by eshine

[presto123]

QUOTE (ReRushed @ Nov 1 2011, 03:54 PM)

Peter Collins with Nick Raskulinecz a close second. Everyone else swung and missed, in my opinion.

What? GUP is one of their stellar records IMO. A top 5 easily for me.

[ReRushed]

QUOTE (presto123 @ Nov 1 2011, 06:03 PM)

QUOTE (ReRushed @ Nov 1 2011, 03:54 PM) Peter Collins with Nick Raskulinecz a close second. Everyone else swung and missed, in my opinion. What? GUP is one of their stellar records IMO. A top 5 easily for me. As far as I'm concerned, it's middle of the pack, because of the production. The album sounds very "cold" to me, always has since the day I first listened to it. I don't know how else to describe it.

[ColdFireYYZ]

Collins. If Steven Wilson produced a Rush album, I'd bet that he'd be the best producer Rush ever had.

[grand phil-nale]

QUOTE (ColdFireYYZ @ Nov 1 2011, 05:36 PM)

Collins. If Steven Wilson produced a Rush album, I'd bet that he'd be the best producer Rush ever had.

The worst part is that Wilson has publicly said that he would love to produce Rush and remix their back catalog in 5.1. If I'm not mistaken he actually approached Alex about the 5.1 thing. Epic fail on Rush's part.

[presto123]

QUOTE (ReRushed @ Nov 1 2011, 05:33 PM)

QUOTE (presto123 @ Nov 1 2011, 06:03 PM) QUOTE (ReRushed @ Nov 1 2011, 03:54 PM) Peter Collins with Nick Raskulinecz a close second. Everyone else swung and missed, in my opinion. What? GUP is one of their stellar records IMO. A top 5 easily for me. As far as I'm concerned, it's middle of the pack, because of the production. The album sounds very "cold" to me, always has since the day I first listened to it. I don't know how else to describe it. I think that is part of the brilliance of it. It's a dark, cold war type record lyrically and the production helps solidify that.

Edited November 1, 2011 by presto123

[ReRushed]

QUOTE (presto123 @ Nov 1 2011, 07:15 PM)

QUOTE (ReRushed @ Nov 1 2011, 05:33 PM) QUOTE (presto123 @ Nov 1 2011, 06:03 PM) QUOTE (ReRushed @ Nov 1 2011, 03:54 PM) Peter Collins with Nick Raskulinecz a close second. Everyone else swung and missed, in my opinion. What? GUP is one of their stellar records IMO. A top 5 easily for me. As far as I'm concerned, it's middle of the pack, because of the production. The album sounds very "cold" to me, always has since the day I first listened to it. I don't know how else to describe it. I think that is part of the brilliance of it. It's a dark, cold war type record lyrically and the production helps solidify that. I don't think it's a bad album, just middle of the road, as far as Rush albums go. I want to hear a little bit more warmth and closeness when I hear the songs on Grace Under Pressure. Good songs I think could have sounded better. That's all.   From what I read it was Geddy who actually produced the album and Peter Henderson filled the role of engineer. Whatever happened, Rush went on and found a proper and more appropriate producer with Peter Collins.

[kevorkazito]

I have a hard time to separate the material from the technical capture of it.

 

Don't like synths filling up the songs along with tacky, pastiche triggered samples. No producer would've changed that. That said I do love the 'whole Rush experience', so I like to understand everything they've done; their career arc.

 

My vote is with Peter Collins, mostly because CP got me back into listening to Rush (they lost me in the middle of Signals).

Edited November 1, 2011 by kevorkazito

[Drummerrobin]

[Drummerrobin]

QUOTE (eshine @ Nov 1 2011, 04:48 PM)

I had the complete opposite reaction when Presto was released. It was a blessed return to form after the absolute castration of HYF, which is about as sterile as you can get.

Wow. Your idea of sterile couldn't be more different to mine!

[1 of the 7]

Collins for best. Rupert Hine and Nick R. for middle of the road. Can't vote for Henderson for worst, as I love how GUP sounds, but I know the band wasn't happy with the making of that album. That leaves Northfield for last...

[PolarizeMe]

QUOTE (grand phil-nale @ Nov 1 2011, 05:43 PM)

QUOTE (ColdFireYYZ @ Nov 1 2011, 05:36 PM) Collins. If Steven Wilson produced a Rush album, I'd bet that he'd be the best producer Rush ever had. The worst part is that Wilson has publicly said that he would love to produce Rush and remix their back catalog in 5.1. If I'm not mistaken he actually approached Alex about the 5.1 thing. Epic fail on Rush's part. I wonder if Steven even knows that Moving Pictures is in 5.1 exists..he said in an interview that it's one of the albums he'd love to hear in 5.1.   Nevertheless, Alex made a huge mistake for rejecting SW's proposal to mix the back catalog in 5.1. I think that was Steven's way of trying to make up for Alex's contribution for the 1st solo in Anesthetize.   As for my favorite post-Terry Brown producer, it's Collins by a long shot. Power Windows and Counterparts are my favorite post Signals albums.

[GeddyRulz]

[Drummerrobin]

[Ged Lent's sis]

I was going to post my first with the question about Broon. Seeing this thread, I decided to put my thoughts out here.

 

It seems to me that a lot of folks are reading too much into the job of being a producer insofar as what it might or might not do for Rush. In terms of bringing in a miracle worker from elsewhere (ie. after leaving TB), the band has yet to find their GM, PS, BE, or BL. They've been mucking about with run of the mill producers now for over twenty-five years.

 

To touch on a couple of points made on the thread that I agree with so far:

1) It's the songs and the instrumentation that has made or broken this particular group of guys first, then the production - and even then, you hafta parcel out responsibility to the recording and mixing aspect, and potential full responsibility to mastering. And what about that mix? You just never know how much or little say the producer had there.

2) Peter Henderson may not be popular with the band, but I'll bet he's more popular than Steve Lillywhite.

 

It's commonly known that Henderson's not being a decision-maker stressed the band. Yes, the sound is as cold as the war. But the experience certainly forced the trio to produce something on there own after leaving Daddy's house. So maybe Mister Supertramp deserves credit for that?

 

And before moving on: What about Terry Brown? Sure, there are some great sounding albums to which he contributed compositional ideas, but they came to him by default (unless you believe in fate: don't tell that to Neil). We'll never know what they would've put out with a different producer in the early days. Nevertheless, credit Broon for the work he put in - over a decade of great work overseen.

 

Peter Collins did one thing functionally that I have to credit him for: He managed to get CP in spite of what had come before it. But should we not be giving credit to Caveman for his insistence on the dry recording? It was Collins, afterall, who'd supervised Geddy's foray into playing the bass as an afterthought...

 

...okay, I like PoW and HYF - the former more than the latter - but it's the songs, not the sound that make them what they are. If Collins is to receive any credit - we cannot say for sure what the hell he did to make those records any good (we weren't there, we do not know). We can't say for sure that they wouldn't have been better off with the wishy-washiness of Henderson. Maybe by then they would've gotten good at self-production.

 

And Paul Northfield did not master that friggin notorious piece of poo, whose vapor is still trailing behind it. What did Northfield do? We don't know.

 

And unless you really think that S&A is the best thing since the family-sized Snickers, with revolutionary sound, inducing a new kind of brain wave which renders sleep unnecessary and cures cancer, I cannot see what this praise for Nick Skabooshkabitz is all about. Is it desperate hope cum hype? (Well, at least the new record won't result in the droning of innocent civilians. So there's that.)

 

Another Terry Brown album? He's the only one with a sufficient track record to measure, as far as I'm concerned. But times have changed, the players have moved on, and by now I'm sure that the band knows that, at the end of the day, it's up to them to produce something good, bad, or indifferent.

Edited November 30, 2011 by Ged Lent's sis

[micgtr71]

I will have to go with Peter Collins because of PoW and HYF. T4E not so much but you can't make chicken soup out of chicken sh...Rupert Hine was my least favorite. I do like this new guy though.

[Presto-digitation]

Collins, easily. Nick R. next.

[Todem]

Collins production was superb on Power Windows and Counterparts.

 

Very good on Hold Your Fire and good on Test For Echo.

 

I know their is a contingent of Rush fans who despise Hold Your Fire's production, but imo the band was clearly striving for that sound and although Alex's guitars were very thin and wet, it was the sound in that day and age. Hold Your Fire to my ears is a liush soundscape that I never thought in a million years Rush would ever produce.

 

It was shocking on my first listen....then brilliant from the second listen to this day.

 

I love that album. It is a perfect time capsule along with Power Windows of Rush's take on the new wave 80's sound of that day and age.

 

Signals - Hold Your Fire was a truly unique time for the band and I wish Rush still had that daring approach again. I loved the fact they took off in a new direction after the AFTK-Moving Pictures era. Which to this day is their signature work. I truly believe if they kept the same formula and had not went in the direction they did with Signals the band would have been broken up 20 years ago.

 

Who knows......maybe Clockwork Angels will have some adventurous music again. Caravan imo gives us a taste of that by having that sick jam. I can't wait to hear it all next year.

[StellarJetman]

I voted for Collins. Power Windows and Counterparts sound great (if a bit too slick for Rush), and, while I could take or leave Test for Echo's production, it seems to be pretty popular. Hold Your Fire only gets more stifling to me with each listen, though.

 

Raskulinecz would be my second pick. While I don't care too much for the way that Snakes and Arrows sounds (barring a few tracks), I love reading about the way that he pushes the band to their limits behind the scenes, and it makes me excited for the next album.

 

Rupert Hine's work on Presto gets way too much hate around here. The bass is awful, yes, but the production itself does a great job of augmenting the core instruments without overwhelming them, and there's a great sense of space to the mix. I love how sparkly and shimmery everything is. I love the rain sticks in "Red Tide" and the piano in "Available Light". The whole album has this wonderfully refined, understated tone to it, but it's so weak and underpowered that most people miss it. If it had a decent amount of punch to it, I think that it would be a lot more popular.

 

Roll the Bones, on the other hand, is still crap. Cheesy enough to put on a cracker.

Edited December 1, 2011 by StellarJetman

[Drummerrobin]

QUOTE (Todem @ Nov 30 2011, 07:56 PM)

Signals - Hold Your Fire was a truly unique time for the band and I wish Rush still had that daring approach again. I loved the fact they took off in a new direction after the AFTK-Moving Pictures era. Which to this day is their signature work. I truly believe if they kept the same formula and had not went in the direction they did with Signals the band would have been broken up 20 years ago.

My thoughts exactly! I think it was when they started to backtrack around Presto and try to go back to their "old style", the songwriting lost some of it's spark. That's not to say they became bad songwriters by any means, but all the albums since Presto imo have had issues with consistency (Counterparts fairing the best here I think). For that reason I consider Hold Your Fire to be their last truly great album, with Counterparts being close to hitting the mark.

 

Don't get me wrong, I still like most of the post HYF albums a lot and I'm not bashing them at all. I just don't think they quite have the gusto of what came before. Sometimes I wish Rush would stop trying to be so "Old School" and start being more adventurous again. I for one would love to see them using technology to their advantage more, like they did in the 80s. There are so many different forms of electronic music around now, I think it would be awesome to see Rush incorporating some new styles into their sound, like they used to.