Am I the only one who feels somewhat underwhelmed?

[GeminiRising79]

QUOTE (CantStopThinkingBig @ Jun 20 2012, 08:18 PM)

Don't get me wrong, it's a good album... and it blows away S&A (which isn't hard to do). But I'm just feeling a bit underwhelmed. Maybe I expected too much... maybe it was all the anticipation. I also feel like the 3 singles we got to hear ahead of time are the main highlights of the album, so everything else is just "meh". I don't know... maybe I need to give it more time.

I agree. Its terrifically mediocre, imo.

[andrew28]

QUOTE (Gedneil Alpeart @ Jun 21 2012, 11:05 AM)

QUOTE (andrew28 @ Jun 21 2012, 10:30 AM) QUOTE (Pound of Obscure @ Jun 21 2012, 09:51 AM) QUOTE (andrew28 @ Jun 21 2012, 09:29 AM) QUOTE (briremo @ Jun 20 2012, 08:59 PM) QUOTE (CantStopThinkingBig @ Jun 20 2012, 08:18 PM) Don't get me wrong, it's a good album... and it blows away S&A (which isn't hard to do). But I'm just feeling a bit underwhelmed. Maybe I expected too much... maybe it was all the anticipation. I also feel like the 3 singles we got to hear ahead of time are the main highlights of the album, so everything else is just "meh". I don't know... maybe I need to give it more time. Ive listened to it a few times now and have a couple of the tunes staying with me.   I'm now burdened with the realization that they have cut and pasted the chorus arrangements for the past 10 years.   So many people are leaning towards The Garden and personally I love it. And the reason is its melodic and original.   as for the rest of the album I agree. meh. I agree. There are plenty of great "moments" throughout the album, but there are only a few songs that I LOVE from start to finish.   There seems to be a lot of "cutting and pasting" and often the transitions from one paste to another are not so great.   Sonically, it sounds like every other album today. One review I read compared it to a Nickelback album (production wise - not musically) and I can see his point.   Part of what made Hemispheres, MP and PW is the production: Neil's crisp snare, Alex's bright and brilliant guitars, Geddy's signature bass lines - all working together and complementing each other without any sense of overpowering the other part.   I can listen to Hemispheres on crappy headphones or computer speakers and still pick out ever little intricate detail. I can't say the same about CA. You're sonically stuck man. Get with the times.   Music today is supposed to sound like fuzzy, buzzing crap.   Time to grow and move on dude. In that case, it's the model of what modern audio production should be.   Production aside, it still has lots of great moments, but there are just as many "meh" moments, too.   The album's shining moments far, far outweight any "meh" moments for me. It's a very subjective take.   About the sound, while I agree that Rush's older albums and generally albums from that time sounded clearer, warmer, and with better separation (which is ironic, considering that it's supposed to GET BETTER with time), today's sound and that of CA does not bother me and I'm easily able to overlook it. Yes, I acknowledge that it's loud, dense, and at times muddled, but those factors do not take away my enjoyment of the songs, which to me are some of their strongest in decades. I go by what I feel....the emotions....and I feel positive things when I hear this album that I haven't felt in a Rush album since the 1980s.   So, I'm in the camp that agrees that sonic production has gotten worse with time, not better, but I'm easily able to overlook it when the music itself is so strong and powerful to me as I hear it on CA. With VT, I am not able to overlook it because the sonic production is much, much worse than on CA and the music is not as strong.....much more choatic, disorganized, and scattered. Agreed. I just wish the production was better so I could appreciate the music a little bit more.   I think Nick R. does a great job at inspiring them to do great things (like a coach or conductor), but unfortunately, a lot of those things get lost in the mix.

[Gedneil Alpeart]

QUOTE (andrew28 @ Jun 21 2012, 11:15 AM)

QUOTE (Gedneil Alpeart @ Jun 21 2012, 11:05 AM) QUOTE (andrew28 @ Jun 21 2012, 10:30 AM) QUOTE (Pound of Obscure @ Jun 21 2012, 09:51 AM) QUOTE (andrew28 @ Jun 21 2012, 09:29 AM) QUOTE (briremo @ Jun 20 2012, 08:59 PM) QUOTE (CantStopThinkingBig @ Jun 20 2012, 08:18 PM) Don't get me wrong, it's a good album... and it blows away S&A (which isn't hard to do). But I'm just feeling a bit underwhelmed. Maybe I expected too much... maybe it was all the anticipation. I also feel like the 3 singles we got to hear ahead of time are the main highlights of the album, so everything else is just "meh". I don't know... maybe I need to give it more time. Ive listened to it a few times now and have a couple of the tunes staying with me.   I'm now burdened with the realization that they have cut and pasted the chorus arrangements for the past 10 years.   So many people are leaning towards The Garden and personally I love it. And the reason is its melodic and original.   as for the rest of the album I agree. meh. I agree. There are plenty of great "moments" throughout the album, but there are only a few songs that I LOVE from start to finish.   There seems to be a lot of "cutting and pasting" and often the transitions from one paste to another are not so great.   Sonically, it sounds like every other album today. One review I read compared it to a Nickelback album (production wise - not musically) and I can see his point.   Part of what made Hemispheres, MP and PW is the production: Neil's crisp snare, Alex's bright and brilliant guitars, Geddy's signature bass lines - all working together and complementing each other without any sense of overpowering the other part.   I can listen to Hemispheres on crappy headphones or computer speakers and still pick out ever little intricate detail. I can't say the same about CA. You're sonically stuck man. Get with the times.   Music today is supposed to sound like fuzzy, buzzing crap.   Time to grow and move on dude. In that case, it's the model of what modern audio production should be.   Production aside, it still has lots of great moments, but there are just as many "meh" moments, too.   The album's shining moments far, far outweight any "meh" moments for me. It's a very subjective take.   About the sound, while I agree that Rush's older albums and generally albums from that time sounded clearer, warmer, and with better separation (which is ironic, considering that it's supposed to GET BETTER with time), today's sound and that of CA does not bother me and I'm easily able to overlook it. Yes, I acknowledge that it's loud, dense, and at times muddled, but those factors do not take away my enjoyment of the songs, which to me are some of their strongest in decades. I go by what I feel....the emotions....and I feel positive things when I hear this album that I haven't felt in a Rush album since the 1980s.   So, I'm in the camp that agrees that sonic production has gotten worse with time, not better, but I'm easily able to overlook it when the music itself is so strong and powerful to me as I hear it on CA. With VT, I am not able to overlook it because the sonic production is much, much worse than on CA and the music is not as strong.....much more choatic, disorganized, and scattered. Agreed. I just wish the production was better so I could appreciate the music a little bit more.   I think Nick R. does a great job at inspiring them to do great things (like a coach or conductor), but unfortunately, a lot of those things get lost in the mix. See, that's the difference...   For you, the production interferes in the music, for me, it does not. Despite the production, I can hear everything and don't feel anything is lost. Would I prefer a clearer production and have some aspects of their music shine through more clearly? SURE! But, for me, it's not so bad that it takes away my enjoyment.

[Mr. Henry Gale]

Considering how deep they are into their career, and that I didn't really care for S&A, this album is great! That said, I guess I see where OP is coming from. Is it really "great" - or is it only "great" because it's good "all things considered".

 

I've thought about this quite a lot, and it's something I always ask myself once a band is deep into their career. At what point as a listener do you need to get realistic, and curve your expectations? And if you do start to curve your expectations, is the album only good, because you have lowered your standards/expectations for the band?

 

At the same time, it seems unfair to me to compare this album to say Signals. But if you are trying to rate/weight this album in a general sense (trying to define whether it's good or not) - and thus compare it to the bands past work, and other works outside of the band, then I can't say I fault you for that.

 

Honestly, trying to step away from all this though, I really do think this is a good album. Great? Not sure. I'm in the group of people that think the band has become a bit too comfortable with relying on the generic alt/heavy guitar riffs. I also don't think Peart has been that great of a lyricist in the past 10 + years (compared to his earlier lyrics). So if you are asking me if this album stands up there with the best of their work -probably not. Do most bands later works stand up with their best? No, not usually.

 

I think the problem here is that we aren't talking about this from the perspective of being a critic, who's job is to define albums and place some kind of ranking among their peers in the medium based on the artistic merits of the album. We are talking about this from a perspective of a fan. A fan base. Fans don't really view albums like that. They have way too much personal investment into the band, and their music. And hell, most of the fans have grown old with the band! So I always find this a bit difficult.

 

But I guess for me, it all just comes down to how the album makes me feel. Do you feel good listening to it? Does the album evoke some kind of emotion? Do you just enjoy the music on a very basic level? The melodies, the sound? And if it does, then all the above is non-sense. You aren't a critic. It's not your job to view albums that way. But if you are the kind of fan that has to rank, and has to put technical perspectives on each record, well, it is what it is. Then of course you are going to compare this album to other things. I guess what I would ask you though, is the album not being able to match an earlier sound what makes you dislike it? Or not like it as much? Or are you just saying the album on its own two legs, just doesn't do anything for you?

[Chicken hawk]

QUOTE (metaldad @ Jun 20 2012, 09:19 PM)

Maybe you need to stop thinking Big

[Chronos]

[Finding IT]

[Finding IT]

QUOTE (Pound of Obscure @ Jun 21 2012, 09:49 AM)

QUOTE (Finding IT @ Jun 21 2012, 05:29 AM) There are some folks who are sonically stuck in the 70s and 80s. They can't move on and are truly bothered when others can. And so they try to tear down anything the band does outside of their circle of comfort. And finally, don't hate the folks who are remain 30 years behind. Pity is a better sentiment. Really?   This is what you think of people who don't find every new Rush production perfect applebutter and sunshine?   I pity your sentiment.   In the grand scheme of things, it doesn't matter.   Nope, I didn't say it and I didn't imply it.   If you find that all of the music you like is from a single period, ya might want to take a look at yourself before pointing fingers.   And if you do, the pity needs to aimed at you because you are the one missing out.

[Sabs89]

I love this album. I think it's easily a top 7 Rush album, maybe top 5. Either way, it's much better than the previous album. S&A was probably the worst they've made in their career.

[Gedneil Alpeart]

QUOTE (Mr. Henry Gale @ Jun 21 2012, 11:31 AM)

Considering how deep they are into their career, and that I didn't really care for S&A, this album is great! That said, I guess I see where OP is coming from. Is it really "great" - or is it only "great" because it's good "all things considered". I've thought about this quite a lot, and it's something I always ask myself once a band is deep into their career. At what point as a listener do you need to get realistic, and curve your expectations? And if you do start to curve your expectations, is the album only good, because you have lowered your standards/expectations for the band? At the same time, it seems unfair to me to compare this album to say Signals. But if you are trying to rate/weight this album in a general sense (trying to define whether it's good or not) - and thus compare it to the bands past work, and other works outside of the band, then I can't say I fault you for that. Honestly, trying to step away from all this though, I really do think this is a good album. Great? Not sure. I'm in the group of people that think the band has become a bit too comfortable with relying on the generic alt/heavy guitar riffs. I also don't think Peart has been that great of a lyricist in the past 10 + years (compared to his earlier lyrics). So if you are asking me if this album stands up there with the best of their work -probably not. Do most bands later works stand up with their best? No, not usually. I think the problem here is that we aren't talking about this from the perspective of being a critic, who's job is to define albums and place some kind of ranking among their peers in the medium based on the artistic merits of the album. We are talking about this from a perspective of a fan. A fan base. Fans don't really view albums like that. They have way too much personal investment into the band, and their music. And hell, most of the fans have grown old with the band! So I always find this a bit difficult. But I guess for me, it all just comes down to how the album makes me feel. Do you feel good listening to it? Does the album evoke some kind of emotion? Do you just enjoy the music on a very basic level? The melodies, the sound? And if it does, then all the above is non-sense. You aren't a critic. It's not your job to view albums that way. But if you are the kind of fan that has to rank, and has to put technical perspectives on each record, well, it is what it is. Then of course you are going to compare this album to other things. I guess what I would ask you though, is the album not being able to match an earlier sound what makes you dislike it? Or not like it as much? Or are you just saying the album on its own two legs, just doesn't do anything for you?

I go by the feeling mostly. This album has created sensations in me I haven't felt in a Rush album for decades. That's why I rank it so high. Others don't approach it that way and that's fine. To each his or her own.

[Pound of Obscure]

QUOTE (Finding IT @ Jun 21 2012, 11:43 AM)

QUOTE (Pound of Obscure @ Jun 21 2012, 09:49 AM) QUOTE (Finding IT @ Jun 21 2012, 05:29 AM) There are some folks who are sonically stuck in the 70s and 80s. They can't move on and are truly bothered when others can. And so they try to tear down anything the band does outside of their circle of comfort. And finally, don't hate the folks who are remain 30 years behind. Pity is a better sentiment. Really?   This is what you think of people who don't find every new Rush production perfect applebutter and sunshine?   I pity your sentiment.   In the grand scheme of things, it doesn't matter.   Nope, I didn't say it and I didn't imply it.   If you find that all of the music you like is from a single period, ya might want to take a look at yourself before pointing fingers.   And if you do, the pity needs to aimed at you because you are the one missing out. Ok.   I'm sure those folks are out there. Doubt very many are in here.

[Peartlee]

QUOTE (Pound of Obscure @ Jun 21 2012, 09:51 AM)

QUOTE (andrew28 @ Jun 21 2012, 09:29 AM) QUOTE (briremo @ Jun 20 2012, 08:59 PM) QUOTE (CantStopThinkingBig @ Jun 20 2012, 08:18 PM) Don't get me wrong, it's a good album... and it blows away S&A (which isn't hard to do). But I'm just feeling a bit underwhelmed. Maybe I expected too much... maybe it was all the anticipation. I also feel like the 3 singles we got to hear ahead of time are the main highlights of the album, so everything else is just "meh". I don't know... maybe I need to give it more time. Ive listened to it a few times now and have a couple of the tunes staying with me.   I'm now burdened with the realization that they have cut and pasted the chorus arrangements for the past 10 years.   So many people are leaning towards The Garden and personally I love it. And the reason is its melodic and original.   as for the rest of the album I agree. meh. I agree. There are plenty of great "moments" throughout the album, but there are only a few songs that I LOVE from start to finish.   There seems to be a lot of "cutting and pasting" and often the transitions from one paste to another are not so great.   Sonically, it sounds like every other album today. One review I read compared it to a Nickelback album (production wise - not musically) and I can see his point.   Part of what made Hemispheres, MP and PW is the production: Neil's crisp snare, Alex's bright and brilliant guitars, Geddy's signature bass lines - all working together and complementing each other without any sense of overpowering the other part.   I can listen to Hemispheres on crappy headphones or computer speakers and still pick out ever little intricate detail. I can't say the same about CA. You're sonically stuck man. Get with the times.   Music today is supposed to sound like fuzzy, buzzing crap.   Time to grow and move on dude. And sadly the boys have jumped on the bandwagon. CA isn't as bad as VT, but it's close. Lots of noise - nothing really seems to stand out.   S&A really to me sounded fine. It took a while for it to grow on me, but in the end I enjoy the album.   I wish I knew if they had a whole lot of say in the final mastering of the album, or if they let whats-his-name just run with it and put out a bunch of noise that kinda sounds like RUSH. Of course they let VT fly with its brickwalled sound, so who knows. Maybe at their advancing age and 40 years of rockin' their hearing isn't what it use to be.   So far, a lot of the foreign bands that I listen to (Nightwish, Epica, Within Temptation) haven't brickwalled their music nearly as bad as other US releases. Sadly I can't lump Lacuna Coil into that bunch since they decided to go mainstream - their last two albums were thrown up against the brickwall repeatedly.   But regardless, I still heart   Edit: I just cranked the highs up in my iTunes EQ, took some of the mud out.

Edited June 21, 2012 by Peartlee

[Gedneil Alpeart]

http://www.musicradar.com/news/guitars/int...singles-549792/

 

Part 1 is above. In part 2 (yet to be shown), Geddy and Billy Corgan will discuss the mastering loudness wars (taken From RIAB). Will be interesting to read what they say about it.

[hammerofthor]

I'll tell you what, this album has made Presto and RTB sound alot better to me.

[losingit2k]

QUOTE (Peartlee @ Jun 21 2012, 12:00 PM)

QUOTE (Pound of Obscure @ Jun 21 2012, 09:51 AM) QUOTE (andrew28 @ Jun 21 2012, 09:29 AM) QUOTE (briremo @ Jun 20 2012, 08:59 PM) QUOTE (CantStopThinkingBig @ Jun 20 2012, 08:18 PM) Don't get me wrong, it's a good album... and it blows away S&A (which isn't hard to do). But I'm just feeling a bit underwhelmed. Maybe I expected too much... maybe it was all the anticipation. I also feel like the 3 singles we got to hear ahead of time are the main highlights of the album, so everything else is just "meh". I don't know... maybe I need to give it more time. Ive listened to it a few times now and have a couple of the tunes staying with me.   I'm now burdened with the realization that they have cut and pasted the chorus arrangements for the past 10 years.   So many people are leaning towards The Garden and personally I love it. And the reason is its melodic and original.   as for the rest of the album I agree. meh. I agree. There are plenty of great "moments" throughout the album, but there are only a few songs that I LOVE from start to finish.   There seems to be a lot of "cutting and pasting" and often the transitions from one paste to another are not so great.   Sonically, it sounds like every other album today. One review I read compared it to a Nickelback album (production wise - not musically) and I can see his point.   Part of what made Hemispheres, MP and PW is the production: Neil's crisp snare, Alex's bright and brilliant guitars, Geddy's signature bass lines - all working together and complementing each other without any sense of overpowering the other part.   I can listen to Hemispheres on crappy headphones or computer speakers and still pick out ever little intricate detail. I can't say the same about CA. You're sonically stuck man. Get with the times.   Music today is supposed to sound like fuzzy, buzzing crap.   Time to grow and move on dude. And sadly the boys have jumped on the bandwagon. CA isn't as bad as VT, but it's close. Lots of noise - nothing really seems to stand out.   S&A really to me sounded fine. It took a while for it to grow on me, but in the end I enjoy the album.   I wish I knew if they had a whole lot of say in the final mastering of the album, or if they let whats-his-name just run with it and put out a bunch of noise that kinda sounds like RUSH. Of course they let VT fly with its brickwalled sound, so who knows. Maybe at their advancing age and 40 years of rockin' their hearing isn't what it use to be.   So far, a lot of the foreign bands that I listen to (Nightwish, Epica, Within Temptation) haven't brickwalled their music nearly as bad as other US releases. Sadly I can't lump Lacuna Coil into that bunch since they decided to go mainstream - their last two albums were thrown up against the brickwall repeatedly.   But regardless, I still heart   Edit: I just cranked the highs up in my iTunes EQ, took some of the mud out. That's the reason they invented those buttons.

[Gompers]

QUOTE (hammerofthor @ Jun 21 2012, 01:09 PM)

I'll tell you what, this album has made Presto and RTB sound alot better to me.

Holy shit! You must really not like it.

[hammerofthor]

QUOTE (Gompers @ Jun 21 2012, 12:49 PM)

QUOTE (hammerofthor @ Jun 21 2012, 01:09 PM) I'll tell you what, this album has made Presto and RTB sound alot better to me. Holy shit! You must really not like it. I meant sonically.

[spock]

I'm trusting my instincts, since I have the same feeling now (about CA) that I had when I first heard Led Zep IV? It was not what I expected - because it was so much more than I expected. For me, Rush always seemed to take a few albums to develop a new peak and I think CA hit that peak. Is it loud - you bet, I'm glad to hear it. There are several points in some of the songs where the music behind the vocals is just a indistinguishable wall of sound, but after many spins I think it was very intentional and very appropriate. I think about Jimmy Page's "guitar army" - sometimes you just need all guns firing. The lyrics seem disjointed. I know the story arc but feel like I'm looking at 12 Polaroid pictures trying to make out a life story - I expect the novel will fill in all the holes and make me appreciate CA even more.

 

The three singles releases gave me hope that they were going to kick it up yet another notch and I'm not disappointed.

[andrew28]

QUOTE (spock @ Jun 21 2012, 01:00 PM)

I know the story arc but feel like I'm looking at 12 Polaroid pictures trying to make out a life story - I expect the novel will fill in all the holes and make me appreciate CA even more.

Very well said.

[LerxstLuthier]

It's the mastering of this CD that's the problem. You want to hear it the way it should sound? Get the vinyl!

[losingit2k]

QUOTE (LerxstLuthier @ Jun 21 2012, 01:10 PM)

It's the mastering of this CD that's the problem. You want to hear it the way it should sound? Get the vinyl!

Yeah, you missing alot of clicks and pops when you listen to the cd.

 

 

 

[WCFIELDS]

QUOTE (hammerofthor @ Jun 21 2012, 11:09 AM)

I'll tell you what, this album has made Presto and RTB sound alot better to me.

[LerxstLuthier]

QUOTE (losingit2k @ Jun 21 2012, 01:15 PM)

QUOTE (LerxstLuthier @ Jun 21 2012, 01:10 PM) It's the mastering of this CD that's the problem. You want to hear it the way it should sound? Get the vinyl! Yeah, you missing alot of clicks and pops when you listen to the cd.   I take care of my vinyl. No clicks and pops. My point was that not only does vinyl just sound way better, it's also not brickwall limited in the mastering.

[treeduck]

QUOTE (hammerofthor @ Jun 21 2012, 12:09 PM)

I'll tell you what, this album has made Presto and RTB sound alot better to me.

The production of those albums may be clear but they're also weak with a tupperware drum sound...

[ILSnwdog]

QUOTE (CantStopThinkingBig @ Jun 20 2012, 08:18 PM)

Don't get me wrong, it's a good album... and it blows away S&A (which isn't hard to do). But I'm just feeling a bit underwhelmed. Maybe I expected too much... maybe it was all the anticipation. I also feel like the 3 singles we got to hear ahead of time are the main highlights of the album, so everything else is just "meh". I don't know... maybe I need to give it more time.

I felt the same way...then I listened to the album more, and that went away.