Your_Lion Posted June 14, 2012 Share Posted June 14, 2012 (edited) The Classic Rock magazine with the Fan Pack was an informative and enjoyable read, but one part in particular had me scratching my head and going "huh?". It's from the page on Counterparts. "Sandwiched between two albums - Roll The Bones and Test For Echo - that hardcore fans often discuss with great affection, 1993's Counterparts tends to get written out of Rush history." Really? Edited June 14, 2012 by Your_Lion Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Del_Duio Posted June 14, 2012 Share Posted June 14, 2012 Not any history I've ever seen. I love it. A lot of us here do. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Animate Posted June 14, 2012 Share Posted June 14, 2012 (edited) Frankly, I also did not like their almost apologetic description of Caress of Steel. Don't have the magazine with me at work to quote directly, but the tone in it was something along the lines of "Can't imagine Caress of Steel being anyones favorite Rush album". Edited June 14, 2012 by Animate Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
beherit Posted June 14, 2012 Share Posted June 14, 2012 These lame-ass magazines know 2112 and Moving Pictures and nothing else. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jnoble Posted June 14, 2012 Share Posted June 14, 2012 If anything, HYF and Presto seem to fit that description more than Counterparts. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
beherit Posted June 14, 2012 Share Posted June 14, 2012 True. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sin City Posted June 14, 2012 Share Posted June 14, 2012 It's pretty much written out of MY history anyways.........As I said on another thread counterparts and test for echo were records of a band dying on its arse. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mika Posted June 14, 2012 Share Posted June 14, 2012 QUOTE (Your_Lion @ Jun 14 2012, 08:13 AM) The Classic Rock magazine with the Fan Pack was an informative and enjoyable read, but one part in particular had me scratching my head and going "huh?". It's from the page on Counterparts. "Sandwiched between two albums - Roll The Bones and Test For Echo - that hardcore fans often discuss with great affection, 1993's Counterparts tends to get written out of Rush history." Really? I noticed that, too. Counterparts is probably in my top 3 fave Rush albums, and after all these years it still tickles my fancy. One of their best albums, I think. And I noticed the sentiment with Caress of Steel, too. It's not my very favourite album, but I do really enjoy it, and I like it for what it is - crazy, envelope-pushing epic songs, and has a real gem with 'Bastille Day'. It's unfortunate that something that Rush was so proud of when they made it has become a bit of an embarrassment. I don't think it's worthy of embarrassment, but to each their own, I guess. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cyclonus X-1 Posted June 14, 2012 Share Posted June 14, 2012 QUOTE (Your_Lion @ Jun 14 2012, 08:13 AM)"Sandwiched between two albums - Roll The Bones and Test For Echo - that hardcore fans often discuss with great affection, 1993's Counterparts tends to get written out of Rush history." Really? Yeah, pretty ridiculous. I could see how someone who isn't "in the know" would be under the misconception that Roll the Bones is widely beloved simply because it sold so many copies, but Test for Echo? As for Counterparts being neglected, I could see people drawing that conclusion only if they're basing it on the fact that the guys in the band themselves haven't exactly lavished praise on it over the years. QUOTE Frankly, I also did not like their almost apologetic description of Caress of Steel. Don't have the magazine with me at work to quote directly, but the tone in it was something along the lines of "Can't imagine Caress of Steel being anyones favorite Rush album". Well, screw them. That's my favorite Rush album and one of my favorite records of all time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ShlappinDahBass Posted June 14, 2012 Share Posted June 14, 2012 Well, in a way. I do have to agree with the magazine in some of that area... As a somewhat newer Rush fan of a few years ago. I only JUST heard of Counterparts a few months ago. It is a very "under the radar" album that not very many people have heard about except for a typical Rush fan. I do disagree with them, though, that Test For Echo and Roll The Bones are albums that fans discuss with "great affection". Those are probably my two least favorite albums and I'm sure most other fans can agree. I love them both, but just not as much as others. AND WHAT IS WITH THAT BULLCRAP WITH CARESS OF STEEL!? That is an amazing album. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
theredtamasrule Posted June 14, 2012 Share Posted June 14, 2012 QUOTE (ShlappinDahBass @ Jun 14 2012, 05:33 PM) Well, in a way. I do have to agree with the magazine in some of that area... As a somewhat newer Rush fan of a few years ago. I only JUST heard of Counterparts a few months ago. It is a very "under the radar" album that not very many people have heard about except for a typical Rush fan. I do disagree with them, though, that Test For Echo and Roll The Bones are albums that fans discuss with "great affection". Those are probably my two least favorite albums and I'm sure most other fans can agree. I love them both, but just not as much as others. AND WHAT IS WITH THAT BULLCRAP WITH CARESS OF STEEL!? That is an amazing album. I'm with you and my first new release was GUP. I like Counterparts a lot but man I freaking can't stand RTB. T4E, eh, haven't heard it in a long time and if I don't again it's no big deal. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ShlappinDahBass Posted June 14, 2012 Share Posted June 14, 2012 QUOTE (theredtamasrule @ Jun 14 2012, 05:59 PM) QUOTE (ShlappinDahBass @ Jun 14 2012, 05:33 PM) Well, in a way. I do have to agree with the magazine in some of that area... As a somewhat newer Rush fan of a few years ago. I only JUST heard of Counterparts a few months ago. It is a very "under the radar" album that not very many people have heard about except for a typical Rush fan. I do disagree with them, though, that Test For Echo and Roll The Bones are albums that fans discuss with "great affection". Those are probably my two least favorite albums and I'm sure most other fans can agree. I love them both, but just not as much as others. AND WHAT IS WITH THAT BULLCRAP WITH CARESS OF STEEL!? That is an amazing album. I'm with you and my first new release was GUP. I like Counterparts a lot but man I freaking can't stand RTB. T4E, eh, haven't heard it in a long time and if I don't again it's no big deal. You never know. Maybe going back to them might change your opinion again. But, they are with out a doubt their more weaker albums of the 20. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Drummerrobin Posted June 14, 2012 Share Posted June 14, 2012 Haha that statement is complete and utter wank. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CrossedSignals Posted June 15, 2012 Share Posted June 15, 2012 QUOTE (Your_Lion @ Jun 14 2012, 06:13 AM) The Classic Rock magazine with the Fan Pack was an informative and enjoyable read, but one part in particular had me scratching my head and going "huh?". It's from the page on Counterparts. "Sandwiched between two albums - Roll The Bones and Test For Echo - that hardcore fans often discuss with great affection, 1993's Counterparts tends to get written out of Rush history." Really? Judging by what I've read here on TRF, the exact opposite is true! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EmotionDetector Posted June 15, 2012 Share Posted June 15, 2012 The funniest thing is, if you ran a poll with RTB, CP, and TFE and asked to pick the best of the bunch, CP would destroy that poll. It's hardly 'forgotten' amongst Rush fans at all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LeaveMyThingAlone Posted June 15, 2012 Share Posted June 15, 2012 The Consensus on this forum seems to be that CP is their best album since the 80's, so the writer of that article is As for me, it's a top 5 album. One of their classics of all time Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LeaveMyThingAlone Posted June 15, 2012 Share Posted June 15, 2012 QUOTE (Sin City @ Jun 14 2012, 04:56 PM) It's pretty much written out of MY history anyways.........As I said on another thread counterparts and test for echo were records of a band dying on its arse. Counterparts is hardly written by a band dying on it's arse. After the underwhelming Hold Your Fire, Presto, and Roll the Bones, Counterparts re sparked Rush. Their heaviest album since the 70's Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GeminiRising79 Posted June 15, 2012 Share Posted June 15, 2012 (edited) I found Counterparts depressing and uncharacteristic of Rush Edited June 15, 2012 by GeminiRising79 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EmotionDetector Posted June 15, 2012 Share Posted June 15, 2012 QUOTE (GeminiRising79 @ Jun 15 2012, 11:36 AM) I found Counterparts depressing and uncharacteristically Rush I found Moving Pictures to be completely uninspired and tirelessly boring. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
CrossedSignals Posted June 15, 2012 Share Posted June 15, 2012 QUOTE (GeminiRising79 @ Jun 15 2012, 08:36 AM) I found Counterparts depressing and uncharacteristically Rush I found your usage of the word 'uncharacteristically' to be characteristically incorrect. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ShlappinDahBass Posted June 15, 2012 Share Posted June 15, 2012 QUOTE (EmotionDetector @ Jun 15 2012, 10:59 AM) QUOTE (GeminiRising79 @ Jun 15 2012, 11:36 AM) I found Counterparts depressing and uncharacteristically Rush I found Moving Pictures to be completely uninspired and tirelessly boring. I found 2112 to be too poppy and completely insignifcant. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rush-O-Matic Posted June 15, 2012 Share Posted June 15, 2012 QUOTE (beherit @ Jun 14 2012, 04:16 PM) These lame-ass magazines know 2112 and Moving Pictures and nothing else. Wait. Can we go back to this? This isn't a "lame ass magazine" - it's a QUOTE 132-page magazine dedicated to one of hard rock's biggest and most enduring bands. So, it may be an odd quote, but it's not some toss off sentence that's part of a three column piece in Rolling Stone or something. The whole "magazine" is a Rush book, done with cooperation from the band. But, yeah, I like Counterparts . . . but not as much as Clockwork Angels. amirite? High five. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GeminiRising79 Posted June 15, 2012 Share Posted June 15, 2012 QUOTE (CrossedSignals @ Jun 15 2012, 03:02 PM) QUOTE (GeminiRising79 @ Jun 15 2012, 08:36 AM) I found Counterparts depressing and uncharacteristically Rush I found your usage of the word 'uncharacteristically' to be characteristically incorrect. corrected, thank you. TGIF Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
robertrobyn Posted June 16, 2012 Share Posted June 16, 2012 QUOTE (Animate @ Jun 14 2012, 08:40 AM) Frankly, I also did not like their almost apologetic description of Caress of Steel. Don't have the magazine with me at work to quote directly, but the tone in it was something along the lines of "Can't imagine Caress of Steel being anyones favorite Rush album". in my top 5 COS Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tommy Sawyer Posted June 16, 2012 Share Posted June 16, 2012 I noticed that too... 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