trenken Posted June 18, 2012 Share Posted June 18, 2012 Responses here would look much different if the guy loved the album and gave it 5 *'s. But he didnt, so the fanboys just act like the review is irrelevant. Convenient. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shredder2 Posted June 18, 2012 Share Posted June 18, 2012 QUOTE (Unattractive Truth @ Jun 18 2012, 12:57 PM) Gnomic Turgidity I am going to request to change my username. That is awesome. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ShlappinDahBass Posted June 18, 2012 Share Posted June 18, 2012 QUOTE (Godeater2112 @ Jun 18 2012, 12:55 PM) QUOTE (ShlappinDahBass @ Jun 18 2012, 01:50 PM) The fact he even used Nickelback in a RUSH review is as ignorant and stupid as thinking that Olive Garden is considered a Chinese restaurant. I wouldn't be surprised if Alex actually says something about that. I see why Rolling Stones should never do reviews on Rush. They need to sod off. People are pretty defensive. That was clearly regarding the straightforward modern (NB like) production... "modern-rock production actually adds power to these ancient masters" Doesn't sound like too much a jab to me. The problem is they don't know what they're talking about. Nickelback does not have "modern power" at all. They're just sounding ignorant in the review. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trenken Posted June 18, 2012 Share Posted June 18, 2012 QUOTE (Godeater2112 @ Jun 18 2012, 12:55 PM) QUOTE (ShlappinDahBass @ Jun 18 2012, 01:50 PM) The fact he even used Nickelback in a RUSH review is as ignorant and stupid as thinking that Olive Garden is considered a Chinese restaurant. I wouldn't be surprised if Alex actually says something about that. I see why Rolling Stones should never do reviews on Rush. They need to sod off. People are pretty defensive. That was clearly regarding the straightforward modern (NB like) production... "modern-rock production actually adds power to these ancient masters" Doesn't sound like too much a jab to me. It wasnt a jab. The guy liked the album, he just didnt love it. 3/5 is what I would give it myself. To me it's about halfway between their worst albums and the best ones. That's not too bad for their age. If Im going to call Moving Pictures great, I certainly cant use that word for this album, so I think its just good. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jmo2112 Posted June 18, 2012 Share Posted June 18, 2012 What's worse, Gnomic Turgidity or Silent Lucidity? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trenken Posted June 18, 2012 Share Posted June 18, 2012 The Nickelback comment he made was very appropriate. He's just talking about the SOUND, not the songs themselves, and this does sound like a Nickelback album with the safe production style Nick has and heavy guitars. This doesnt sound like some off the wall creative production. It sounds like a regular rock album. I cant turn on a rock station without hearing that damn band and they're one of the most successful rock bands out there these days so it's fair to compare to them when talking about the sound of an album. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ShlappinDahBass Posted June 18, 2012 Share Posted June 18, 2012 QUOTE (trenken @ Jun 18 2012, 01:06 PM) The Nickelback comment he made was very appropriate. He's just talking about the SOUND, not the songs themselves, and this does sound like a Nickelback album with the safe production style Nick has and heavy guitars. This doesnt sound like some off the wall creative production. It sounds like a regular rock album. I cant turn on a rock station without hearing that damn band and they're one of the most successful rock bands out there these days so it's fair to compare to them when talking about the sound of an album. IMO, I don't hear the similarities. People seem so split between Nickelback. I mostly see haters of it. Heck, for the Thanksgiving game for the Lions last season, there was a petition to keep them from playing during halftime. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
condemned2bfree Posted June 18, 2012 Share Posted June 18, 2012 (edited) oh dear, rs review on rush are getting more condescending through cryptic stealth reviews...grabbing a little controversy .. damn em and their main stream ways:D Edited June 18, 2012 by condemned2bfree Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Union 5-3992 Posted June 18, 2012 Share Posted June 18, 2012 The comments do a much better job at reviewing this album than the actual review. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
canadianice Posted June 18, 2012 Share Posted June 18, 2012 Not a shock that a certain someone would try to blow smoke up our collective asses, with nickleback comments. This trying to piss everyone off act, is really wearing thin. I am really sick and tired of this arrogant little know-it all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Xanadoood Posted June 18, 2012 Share Posted June 18, 2012 (edited) I get what he was saying about the Nickleback production comparison, but any mention of B Nickleback is sure to make people compare the two bands musically and give another reason to laugh at Rush..It was a jab IMO Edited June 18, 2012 by Xanadoood Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
s_b_g Posted June 18, 2012 Share Posted June 18, 2012 QUOTE (trenken @ Jun 18 2012, 01:06 PM)The Nickelback comment he made was very appropriate. He's just talking about the SOUND, not the songs themselves, and this does sound like a Nickelback album with the safe production style Nick has and heavy guitars. This doesnt sound like some off the wall creative production. It sounds like a regular rock album. well said - i sometimes wonder if people actually bother to read the words before commenting the rs guy was talking about the production not the music - god is that so hard to grasp!! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
canadianice Posted June 18, 2012 Share Posted June 18, 2012 QUOTE (s_b_g @ Jun 18 2012, 01:40 PM) QUOTE (trenken @ Jun 18 2012, 01:06 PM)The Nickelback comment he made was very appropriate. He's just talking about the SOUND, not the songs themselves, and this does sound like a Nickelback album with the safe production style Nick has and heavy guitars. This doesnt sound like some off the wall creative production. It sounds like a regular rock album. well said - i sometimes wonder if people actually bother to read the words before commenting the rs guy was talking about the production not the music - god is that so hard to grasp!! I know what he was talking about. Comparing the production of Rush albums to Nickleback is totally assinine. But some will disagree. Who cares. ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
s_b_g Posted June 18, 2012 Share Posted June 18, 2012 QUOTE (canadianice @ Jun 18 2012, 01:45 PM)Comparing the production of Rush albums to Nickleback is totally assinine. why is comparing the mastering of a modern rock album to nickelback assinine? - i think it's actually a very valid point that many people on this very forum have made - i.e. that the album is being mastered to appeal to the modern commercial rock world rather than some audiophile sub section of rush fans? d Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rush Cocky Posted June 18, 2012 Share Posted June 18, 2012 Lest we forget one of the most famous quotes in the history of TRF: QUOTE (rushgoober @ Jun 2 2010 @ 12:33 PM)If I used pages of Rolling Stone magazine to pick up my dog's shit, it would be both an insult to my dogs and to dogshit everywhere. And without Rush there would be no Nickleback, so no, they don't deserve to be mentioned in the same breath unless that breath is uttering "Canadian rock bands" regardless of era. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
trenken Posted June 18, 2012 Share Posted June 18, 2012 QUOTE (canadianice @ Jun 18 2012, 01:45 PM) QUOTE (s_b_g @ Jun 18 2012, 01:40 PM) QUOTE (trenken @ Jun 18 2012, 01:06 PM)The Nickelback comment he made was very appropriate. He's just talking about the SOUND, not the songs themselves, and this does sound like a Nickelback album with the safe production style Nick has and heavy guitars. This doesnt sound like some off the wall creative production. It sounds like a regular rock album. well said - i sometimes wonder if people actually bother to read the words before commenting the rs guy was talking about the production not the music - god is that so hard to grasp!! I know what he was talking about. Comparing the production of Rush albums to Nickleback is totally assinine. But some will disagree. Who cares. ? Have you ever heard Nickelback in your life? Then listen to this album. Hmmmm.... they really sound very similar. Not the song writing, the sound/production. Nick is the same exact sort of producer bands like Nickelback use. Bands not looking for a real creative production, just a safe solid sounding rock album. Then factor in Nickelback has been one of the more successful rock bands in recent memory. He wasnt comparing the bands or their songs, but just the sound, and both of them are very similar. Really not very hard to grasp. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shredder2 Posted June 18, 2012 Share Posted June 18, 2012 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Karena Posted June 18, 2012 Share Posted June 18, 2012 (edited) QUOTE (s_b_g @ Jun 18 2012, 01:40 PM) QUOTE (trenken @ Jun 18 2012, 01:06 PM)The Nickelback comment he made was very appropriate. He's just talking about the SOUND, not the songs themselves, and this does sound like a Nickelback album with the safe production style Nick has and heavy guitars. This doesnt sound like some off the wall creative production. It sounds like a regular rock album. well said - i sometimes wonder if people actually bother to read the words before commenting the rs guy was talking about the production not the music - god is that so hard to grasp!! So the one thing that many fans don't like about it is the very thing that seems to have saved it from an awful review. RS- you gotta love em. I think Rush should make music that directly opposes everything RS likes, then we'll have our masterpiece. Did they really have to use Nickelback for the production comparison? How about some other modern rock band that isn't ...Nickelback. If they think the lyrics are nerdy, wait til they get a load of the little story that goes with them. Edited June 18, 2012 by Karena Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mjohnson30 Posted June 18, 2012 Share Posted June 18, 2012 It looks to me like he's saying, "Look I think this stuff is really pretty good. I just can't fully admit it. We've got a reputation to uphold". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jomboni Posted June 18, 2012 Share Posted June 18, 2012 Another fun Rush/Nickelback fact: the A&R guy from Roadrunner who signed Nickelback is the same guy who signed Rush. He played in a metal band with my fiance's uncle that put an album out on Columbia in the late '80s / early '90s. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tom Sawyer Posted June 18, 2012 Share Posted June 18, 2012 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GeddyLeeFender Posted June 18, 2012 Share Posted June 18, 2012 QUOTE (trenken @ Jun 18 2012, 01:06 PM) The Nickelback comment he made was very appropriate. He's just talking about the SOUND, not the songs themselves, and this does sound like a Nickelback album with the safe production style Nick has and heavy guitars. This doesnt sound like some off the wall creative production. It sounds like a regular rock album. I cant turn on a rock station without hearing that damn band and they're one of the most successful rock bands out there these days so it's fair to compare to them when talking about the sound of an album. God damnt your an idiot. Nickelback?! Your not a Rush fan dude...AT ALL Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BigBob Posted June 18, 2012 Share Posted June 18, 2012 So...was it a good review or bad? I couldn't figure out if the guy liked it or not. I'm sorry if I'm not into the music critic lingo, but I got a vibe this guy liked the album. If I'm wrong please tell me. I'm just a little confused Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Jomboni Posted June 18, 2012 Share Posted June 18, 2012 QUOTE (GeddyLeeFender @ Jun 18 2012, 03:48 PM) QUOTE (trenken @ Jun 18 2012, 01:06 PM) The Nickelback comment he made was very appropriate. He's just talking about the SOUND, not the songs themselves, and this does sound like a Nickelback album with the safe production style Nick has and heavy guitars. This doesnt sound like some off the wall creative production. It sounds like a regular rock album. I cant turn on a rock station without hearing that damn band and they're one of the most successful rock bands out there these days so it's fair to compare to them when talking about the sound of an album. God damnt your an idiot. Nickelback?! Your not a Rush fan dude...AT ALL Uhh did you read the review? Neither the reviewer, or anybody in this thread said Rush sounds like Nickeback. He said the PRODUCTION & SOUND of the album is similar to Nickelback, and he's right. He could have also said Foo Fighters, or just about any other big name rock band these days. This is what rock album sound like nowadays. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Godeater2112 Posted June 18, 2012 Share Posted June 18, 2012 QUOTE (Jomboni @ Jun 18 2012, 04:53 PM) QUOTE (GeddyLeeFender @ Jun 18 2012, 03:48 PM) QUOTE (trenken @ Jun 18 2012, 01:06 PM) The Nickelback comment he made was very appropriate. He's just talking about the SOUND, not the songs themselves, and this does sound like a Nickelback album with the safe production style Nick has and heavy guitars. This doesnt sound like some off the wall creative production. It sounds like a regular rock album. I cant turn on a rock station without hearing that damn band and they're one of the most successful rock bands out there these days so it's fair to compare to them when talking about the sound of an album. God damnt your an idiot. Nickelback?! Your not a Rush fan dude...AT ALL Uhh did you read the review? Neither the reviewer, or anybody in this thread said Rush sounds like Nickeback. He said the PRODUCTION & SOUND of the album is similar to Nickelback, and he's right. He could have also said Foo Fighters, or just about any other big name rock band these days. This is what rock album sound like nowadays. Absolutely. He coulda and shoulda used "Foo Fighters" as an example instead of NB and nobody would have their panties all bunched up. Nice to know Rush fans can be so insecure that it's easily for reviewers to push our buttons so easy. 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