Clockwork Angels sucks....

[vital signz]

I have been a fan since I was 14. I am 48 now. In my humble opinion, this is their most consistent, overall best effort since Power Windows. The only parts that stink are the new intro to BU2B, BU2B2, and the chorus of Geddy's during Wish Them Well. The song WTW is good, but the chorus of Geddy's is painful. If they just had removed those things, this would have been a perfect album. You can't say that about any other album they have done since Power Windows.

 

Anyone who thinks this is a weak effort just is blatantly wrong and needs to just give up listening to music altogether.

[canadianice]

Yes Mr. Terrapin, tell it like it is!

 

Vapor Trails

Snakes & Arrows

Clockwork Angels

 

All three releases are wretched messes.

 

Everybody who says these abominations are a "masterpiece" have no taste in music. NONE! CA is a Masterpiece, and i have a tremendous taste in music. Clowns like you are a dime a dozen, now run run along along and join the Kiss army.

 

These albums are so bad I must troll! I can't help it!

[Ventris]

This is never going to end

[bathory]

why are all these people who don't like most of rush's discography on a rush fan forum?

[calirush]

Yes Mr. Terrapin, tell it like it is!

 

Vapor Trails

Snakes & Arrows

Clockwork Angels

 

All three releases are wretched messes.

 

Everybody who says these abominations are a "masterpiece" have no taste in music. NONE!

 

These albums are so bad I must troll! I can't help it!

 

Saying you don't like something is your thing, it's subjective anyway. Saying what someone else's taste is is ridiculous, and what qualifies you to judge others taste anyway?

[Mika]

Gosh, saying this album 'sucks' sure is harsh. I'm happy that I enjoy it, and have to simply shrug when others are negative towards it; everyone has differing opinions, after all.

 

In fact, when a CA song, such as 'Caravan', 'The Anarchist', or 'The Garden' lately, pops up on my randomized ipod, I actually get tears in my eyes and shivers. I've had to discreetly wipe moist eyes whilst walking to work because of these songs. To me, this is a mark of a great body of music. But does this mean that I'm right and every nay-sayer is wrong? Of course not. But, the difference is, I get to enjoy this music, while others have decided that "it sucks" and likely will not listen to the album again, or at least often.

 

I think the most important thing in enjoying music to keep an open mind and give it a chance. If a guy sits down to listen to music that he has high expectations of, and is going to compare the music to everything else the band has ever done, he's going to get trapped. Music is not meant to be judged like this, or compared and contrasted. I'm tired of people saying, "Oh, CA is ok, but not as good as anything from the 70s." How can anything today be compared to music created 30 or 40 years ago? Rush music can't be compared with other Rush music; they are a true progressive band, which means their music progresses. It changes. We're lucky to have so many different sounds to choose from as being our favourites of Rush. Of course, some will have 70s Rush as their favourites (and may be forever disappointed that Rush doesn't make music exactly like that anymore), and some will prefer the Moving Pictures album, and some will love the 90s stuff. And what I find sad is that some fans won't give some of the music a chance. Vapor Trails is very often maligned, but to me it's one of my top three favourite albums. I gave it many listens, gave it a good chance, and discovered I loved it. CA didn't overwhelm me with awesomeness at first, but I kept listening to it, and it grew and grew. I think it's a very solid album, with songs that absolutely rock live.

 

My only advice, to those that give a toss, is to make sure you give the music a fair chance before you renounce it - listen to an album at least a dozen times through to get a good feel for it. Sometimes things take time to gain an appreciation for, which in this day is counter to our preoccupation of instant gratification. Give things a reasonable chance, and then decide for yourself if you like it or not. But keep an open mind and be fair - it's too easy to be so black-and-white in formulating a response of "I love it!" or "I hate it!" right away instead of saying, "Hmm, this isn't bad... let's see how what happens down the road."

 

And, it's just plain rude to reward anyone's hard work with saying that it 'sucks'. There's a world of difference between "well, it's not really to my liking" and "it sucks". I realize this thread is from some months ago, but the sentiment is still relevant.

 

Whew. Another essay brought to you by MIka, who really needs to get to bed.

[calirush]

Gosh, saying this album 'sucks' sure is harsh. I'm happy that I enjoy it, and have to simply shrug when others are negative towards it; everyone has differing opinions, after all.

 

In fact, when a CA song, such as 'Caravan', 'The Anarchist', or 'The Garden' lately, pops up on my randomized ipod, I actually get tears in my eyes and shivers. I've had to discreetly wipe moist eyes whilst walking to work because of these songs. To me, this is a mark of a great body of music. But does this mean that I'm right and every nay-sayer is wrong? Of course not. But, the difference is, I get to enjoy this music, while others have decided that "it sucks" and likely will not listen to the album again, or at least often.

 

I think the most important thing in enjoying music to keep an open mind and give it a chance. If a guy sits down to listen to music that he has high expectations of, and is going to compare the music to everything else the band has ever done, he's going to get trapped. Music is not meant to be judged like this, or compared and contrasted. I'm tired of people saying, "Oh, CA is ok, but not as good as anything from the 70s." How can anything today be compared to music created 30 or 40 years ago? Rush music can't be compared with other Rush music; they are a true progressive band, which means their music progresses. It changes. We're lucky to have so many different sounds to choose from as being our favourites of Rush. Of course, some will have 70s Rush as their favourites (and may be forever disappointed that Rush doesn't make music exactly like that anymore), and some will prefer the Moving Pictures album, and some will love the 90s stuff. And what I find sad is that some fans won't give some of the music a chance. Vapor Trails is very often maligned, but to me it's one of my top three favourite albums. I gave it many listens, gave it a good chance, and discovered I loved it. CA didn't overwhelm me with awesomeness at first, but I kept listening to it, and it grew and grew. I think it's a very solid album, with songs that absolutely rock live.

 

My only advice, to those that give a toss, is to make sure you give the music a fair chance before you renounce it - listen to an album at least a dozen times through to get a good feel for it. Sometimes things take time to gain an appreciation for, which in this day is counter to our preoccupation of instant gratification. Give things a reasonable chance, and then decide for yourself if you like it or not. But keep an open mind and be fair - it's too easy to be so black-and-white in formulating a response of "I love it!" or "I hate it!" right away instead of saying, "Hmm, this isn't bad... let's see how what happens down the road."

 

And, it's just plain rude to reward anyone's hard work with saying that it 'sucks'. There's a world of difference between "well, it's not really to my liking" and "it sucks". I realize this thread is from some months ago, but the sentiment is still relevant.

 

Whew. Another essay brought to you by MIka, who really needs to get to bed.

 

Well said, and I agee, well except Vapor Trails but seriously, I''ve been listening to CA since the day it came out and it has only gotten better with time. I rank this on par with Rush's best work.

[Lerxster]

Just as an FYI since this thread was resurrected, OP's thread was just some trolling. Here's some of OP's other quotes on CA:

 

I really don't want to be "Negative Nancy" or a "Debbie Downer" regarding CA, but I'm afraid after numerous listenings to the actual CD, in several different environments, I'm finding it very hard to hear Geddy's vocals. Indeed, the whole CD appears to be far too compressed to my ears.

 

A real shame as in my opinion, Neil has written some of his best lyrics for quite a while and Geddy has sung them with an exuberance and melodic quality that is at some points, spine tingling.

 

Perhaps its just the digital age, or maybe my age (45) but the this beautifully written and performed suite has been compromised by the almost "phoned in" production.

 

Either way, I love the songs - hate the production

 

and

 

Nope, don't hate Clockwork Angels, in fact, I love most of it. My issue is with the mastering.

[Thunder Bay Rush]

Very well said. Another excellent essay by Mika... I hope you got some sleep!!

 

:goodone:

 

 

I hope you got some sleep!!

[Chicken hawk]

! :rush: Edited January 25, 2013 by Chicken hawk

[losingit2k]

What the hell are you drinking?

[RUSHHEAD666]

why are all these people who don't like most of rush's discography on a rush fan forum?

 

Great question!

[Mika]

why are all these people who don't like most of rush's discography on a rush fan forum?

 

Great question!

 

Agreed! I don't understand someone joining a forum for a band that the person hasn't liked any music of for the past three decades, as is the case with a (small) handful of peeps here, and then complaining and bad-mouthing new music by the band. Why waste time being negative about something that is, after all, only opinion, when that time could be spent doing, well, anything, like learning to play guitar, or catching up on correspondence with friends and family, or volunteering.... [this sentence has a lot of commas in it!]

 

I don't think there should only be positive things, ever, said about Rush here (it's interesting to get different opinions), but blatant negativity on a fan site is just kind of weird.

 

And, BTW, I did not get enough sleep. Five hours, and 11 hours of work later, and then another two days of 12 hours each. Ugh, no rest for the wicked (or the good, in my case! :)).

[priest_of_syrinx]

I was wondering why this thread sucked so much, and then I realized, "Oh... Terrapin posted it."

[rushgoober]

Yes Mr. Terrapin, tell it like it is!

 

Vapor Trails

Snakes & Arrows

Clockwork Angels

 

All three releases are wretched messes.

 

Everybody who says these abominations are a "masterpiece" have no taste in music. NONE!

 

These albums are so bad I must troll! I can't help it!

 

Saying you don't like something is your thing, it's subjective anyway. Saying what someone else's taste is is ridiculous, and what qualifies you to judge others taste anyway?

 

I think he's eminently qualified to judge other people's taste, and I'll explain why...

 

 

... oh, ok, i admit it, I got nothin'.

[eshine]

Gosh, saying this album 'sucks' sure is harsh. I'm happy that I enjoy it, and have to simply shrug when others are negative towards it; everyone has differing opinions, after all.

 

In fact, when a CA song, such as 'Caravan', 'The Anarchist', or 'The Garden' lately, pops up on my randomized ipod, I actually get tears in my eyes and shivers. I've had to discreetly wipe moist eyes whilst walking to work because of these songs. To me, this is a mark of a great body of music. But does this mean that I'm right and every nay-sayer is wrong? Of course not. But, the difference is, I get to enjoy this music, while others have decided that "it sucks" and likely will not listen to the album again, or at least often.

 

I think the most important thing in enjoying music to keep an open mind and give it a chance. If a guy sits down to listen to music that he has high expectations of, and is going to compare the music to everything else the band has ever done, he's going to get trapped. Music is not meant to be judged like this, or compared and contrasted. I'm tired of people saying, "Oh, CA is ok, but not as good as anything from the 70s." How can anything today be compared to music created 30 or 40 years ago? Rush music can't be compared with other Rush music; they are a true progressive band, which means their music progresses. It changes. We're lucky to have so many different sounds to choose from as being our favourites of Rush. Of course, some will have 70s Rush as their favourites (and may be forever disappointed that Rush doesn't make music exactly like that anymore), and some will prefer the Moving Pictures album, and some will love the 90s stuff. And what I find sad is that some fans won't give some of the music a chance. Vapor Trails is very often maligned, but to me it's one of my top three favourite albums. I gave it many listens, gave it a good chance, and discovered I loved it. CA didn't overwhelm me with awesomeness at first, but I kept listening to it, and it grew and grew. I think it's a very solid album, with songs that absolutely rock live.

 

My only advice, to those that give a toss, is to make sure you give the music a fair chance before you renounce it - listen to an album at least a dozen times through to get a good feel for it. Sometimes things take time to gain an appreciation for, which in this day is counter to our preoccupation of instant gratification. Give things a reasonable chance, and then decide for yourself if you like it or not. But keep an open mind and be fair - it's too easy to be so black-and-white in formulating a response of "I love it!" or "I hate it!" right away instead of saying, "Hmm, this isn't bad... let's see how what happens down the road."

 

And, it's just plain rude to reward anyone's hard work with saying that it 'sucks'. There's a world of difference between "well, it's not really to my liking" and "it sucks". I realize this thread is from some months ago, but the sentiment is still relevant.

 

Whew. Another essay brought to you by MIka, who really needs to get to bed.

 

This is a nice sentiment, Mika - but why expell so much energy in an obviously silly, attention seeking thread?

[Mika]

Gosh, saying this album 'sucks' sure is harsh. I'm happy that I enjoy it, and have to simply shrug when others are negative towards it; everyone has differing opinions, after all.

 

In fact, when a CA song, such as 'Caravan', 'The Anarchist', or 'The Garden' lately, pops up on my randomized ipod, I actually get tears in my eyes and shivers. I've had to discreetly wipe moist eyes whilst walking to work because of these songs. To me, this is a mark of a great body of music. But does this mean that I'm right and every nay-sayer is wrong? Of course not. But, the difference is, I get to enjoy this music, while others have decided that "it sucks" and likely will not listen to the album again, or at least often.

 

I think the most important thing in enjoying music to keep an open mind and give it a chance. If a guy sits down to listen to music that he has high expectations of, and is going to compare the music to everything else the band has ever done, he's going to get trapped. Music is not meant to be judged like this, or compared and contrasted. I'm tired of people saying, "Oh, CA is ok, but not as good as anything from the 70s." How can anything today be compared to music created 30 or 40 years ago? Rush music can't be compared with other Rush music; they are a true progressive band, which means their music progresses. It changes. We're lucky to have so many different sounds to choose from as being our favourites of Rush. Of course, some will have 70s Rush as their favourites (and may be forever disappointed that Rush doesn't make music exactly like that anymore), and some will prefer the Moving Pictures album, and some will love the 90s stuff. And what I find sad is that some fans won't give some of the music a chance. Vapor Trails is very often maligned, but to me it's one of my top three favourite albums. I gave it many listens, gave it a good chance, and discovered I loved it. CA didn't overwhelm me with awesomeness at first, but I kept listening to it, and it grew and grew. I think it's a very solid album, with songs that absolutely rock live.

 

My only advice, to those that give a toss, is to make sure you give the music a fair chance before you renounce it - listen to an album at least a dozen times through to get a good feel for it. Sometimes things take time to gain an appreciation for, which in this day is counter to our preoccupation of instant gratification. Give things a reasonable chance, and then decide for yourself if you like it or not. But keep an open mind and be fair - it's too easy to be so black-and-white in formulating a response of "I love it!" or "I hate it!" right away instead of saying, "Hmm, this isn't bad... let's see how what happens down the road."

 

And, it's just plain rude to reward anyone's hard work with saying that it 'sucks'. There's a world of difference between "well, it's not really to my liking" and "it sucks". I realize this thread is from some months ago, but the sentiment is still relevant.

 

Whew. Another essay brought to you by MIka, who really needs to get to bed.

 

This is a nice sentiment, Mika - but why expell so much energy in an obviously silly, attention seeking thread?

 

Sometimes it's nice to let the words flow and the feelings out. I like to put words to my thoughts, and for me it's not a waste of energy, especially if I'm ultimately extolling the virtues of something that I'm keen on, like Rush. Of course, to each their own! :)

 

And now, off to 12 hours of work (again).

[eshine]

Gosh, saying this album 'sucks' sure is harsh. I'm happy that I enjoy it, and have to simply shrug when others are negative towards it; everyone has differing opinions, after all.

 

In fact, when a CA song, such as 'Caravan', 'The Anarchist', or 'The Garden' lately, pops up on my randomized ipod, I actually get tears in my eyes and shivers. I've had to discreetly wipe moist eyes whilst walking to work because of these songs. To me, this is a mark of a great body of music. But does this mean that I'm right and every nay-sayer is wrong? Of course not. But, the difference is, I get to enjoy this music, while others have decided that "it sucks" and likely will not listen to the album again, or at least often.

 

I think the most important thing in enjoying music to keep an open mind and give it a chance. If a guy sits down to listen to music that he has high expectations of, and is going to compare the music to everything else the band has ever done, he's going to get trapped. Music is not meant to be judged like this, or compared and contrasted. I'm tired of people saying, "Oh, CA is ok, but not as good as anything from the 70s." How can anything today be compared to music created 30 or 40 years ago? Rush music can't be compared with other Rush music; they are a true progressive band, which means their music progresses. It changes. We're lucky to have so many different sounds to choose from as being our favourites of Rush. Of course, some will have 70s Rush as their favourites (and may be forever disappointed that Rush doesn't make music exactly like that anymore), and some will prefer the Moving Pictures album, and some will love the 90s stuff. And what I find sad is that some fans won't give some of the music a chance. Vapor Trails is very often maligned, but to me it's one of my top three favourite albums. I gave it many listens, gave it a good chance, and discovered I loved it. CA didn't overwhelm me with awesomeness at first, but I kept listening to it, and it grew and grew. I think it's a very solid album, with songs that absolutely rock live.

 

My only advice, to those that give a toss, is to make sure you give the music a fair chance before you renounce it - listen to an album at least a dozen times through to get a good feel for it. Sometimes things take time to gain an appreciation for, which in this day is counter to our preoccupation of instant gratification. Give things a reasonable chance, and then decide for yourself if you like it or not. But keep an open mind and be fair - it's too easy to be so black-and-white in formulating a response of "I love it!" or "I hate it!" right away instead of saying, "Hmm, this isn't bad... let's see how what happens down the road."

 

And, it's just plain rude to reward anyone's hard work with saying that it 'sucks'. There's a world of difference between "well, it's not really to my liking" and "it sucks". I realize this thread is from some months ago, but the sentiment is still relevant.

 

Whew. Another essay brought to you by MIka, who really needs to get to bed.

 

This is a nice sentiment, Mika - but why expell so much energy in an obviously silly, attention seeking thread?

 

Sometimes it's nice to let the words flow and the feelings out. I like to put words to my thoughts, and for me it's not a waste of energy, especially if I'm ultimately extolling the virtues of something that I'm keen on, like Rush. Of course, to each their own! :)

 

And now, off to 12 hours of work (again).

 

Fair enough :)

[ILSnwdog]

Bashing Rush's music on a Rush fan forum will get one plenty of attention, if that is what one craves. ;)

[goose]

15 pages! :clap:

 

Meanwhile, over at SOCN a First Amendment debate gets a page and a half.

[jnoble]

I wouldn't go as far as saying it sucks but I'm not that impressed with it. The storyline is interesting but the music itself....lyrics, structure, guitar riffs, vocals, mix......just don't do much for me or stick in my head after listening. It's better than the depressing boring Snakes but I don't consider it The Greatest Album Ever like many other Rush fans do. A reviewer on Amazon put it best....CA sounds like a Rush tribute band that decided to write their own original material. If Geddy still had good pipes and the album wasn't produced in the modern way, that is a ton of cut and paste overdubs with a dense muddy sound (not as bad as VT but still very loud). I'd like it more. As of now it's another drink coaster taking up space in my CD rack.

 

[Mika]

I wouldn't go as far as saying it sucks but I'm not that impressed with it. The storyline is interesting but the music itself....lyrics, structure, guitar riffs, vocals, mix......just don't do much for me or stick in my head after listening. It's better than the depressing boring Snakes but I don't consider it The Greatest Album Ever like many other Rush fans do. A reviewer on Amazon put it best....CA sounds like a Rush tribute band that decided to write their own original material. If Geddy still had good pipes and the album wasn't produced in the modern way, that is a ton of cut and paste overdubs with a dense muddy sound (not as bad as VT but still very loud). I'd like it more. As of now it's another drink coaster taking up space in my CD rack.

 

You keep drink coasters in your cd rack? Wouldn't it be better to have 'em on, say, a coffee table, where they can serve out their designated purpose?

 

Ok, that was a bit facetious! And cool that you have your own opinion of CA, and are not jumping on any bandwagon or anything. I agree that the sound isn't the best it could be - it could be clearer - but these ears don't mind the slight muddiness, if we can describe it as such. That was a weird comment about this album sounding like a tribute band... I would never have thought of it this way!

[calirush]

I wouldn't go as far as saying it sucks but I'm not that impressed with it. The storyline is interesting but the music itself....lyrics, structure, guitar riffs, vocals, mix......just don't do much for me or stick in my head after listening. It's better than the depressing boring Snakes but I don't consider it The Greatest Album Ever like many other Rush fans do. A reviewer on Amazon put it best....CA sounds like a Rush tribute band that decided to write their own original material. If Geddy still had good pipes and the album wasn't produced in the modern way, that is a ton of cut and paste overdubs with a dense muddy sound (not as bad as VT but still very loud). I'd like it more. As of now it's another drink coaster taking up space in my CD rack.

 

You keep drink coasters in your cd rack? Wouldn't it be better to have 'em on, say, a coffee table, where they can serve out their designated purpose?

 

Ok, that was a bit facetious! And cool that you have your own opinion of CA, and are not jumping on any bandwagon or anything. I agree that the sound isn't the best it could be - it could be clearer - but these ears don't mind the slight muddiness, if we can describe it as such. That was a weird comment about this album sounding like a tribute band... I would never have thought of it this way!

 

I hate to ride this theme but the more one listens to CA the less muddy it sounds. Maybe it's just because I play it a lot, but the sound mixing doesn't bother me now the way it did in the early stages of listening to it. A Rush tribute band could only dream of putting an album together like this.

[Mika]

I wouldn't go as far as saying it sucks but I'm not that impressed with it. The storyline is interesting but the music itself....lyrics, structure, guitar riffs, vocals, mix......just don't do much for me or stick in my head after listening. It's better than the depressing boring Snakes but I don't consider it The Greatest Album Ever like many other Rush fans do. A reviewer on Amazon put it best....CA sounds like a Rush tribute band that decided to write their own original material. If Geddy still had good pipes and the album wasn't produced in the modern way, that is a ton of cut and paste overdubs with a dense muddy sound (not as bad as VT but still very loud). I'd like it more. As of now it's another drink coaster taking up space in my CD rack.

 

You keep drink coasters in your cd rack? Wouldn't it be better to have 'em on, say, a coffee table, where they can serve out their designated purpose?

 

Ok, that was a bit facetious! And cool that you have your own opinion of CA, and are not jumping on any bandwagon or anything. I agree that the sound isn't the best it could be - it could be clearer - but these ears don't mind the slight muddiness, if we can describe it as such. That was a weird comment about this album sounding like a tribute band... I would never have thought of it this way!

 

I hate to ride this theme but the more one listens to CA the less muddy it sounds. Maybe it's just because I play it a lot, but the sound mixing doesn't bother me now the way it did in the early stages of listening to it. A Rush tribute band could only dream of putting an album together like this.

 

I was thinking a bit more about this last night, as I'd read the tribute band comparison thing right before going to bed. I don't like it. I think it's derogatory to Rush, even if it's just someone's opinion. It just seems that some people want to make a fancy-sounding label for things, to sound all witty and hip and knowledgeable yet a bit irreverant.

 

For the record (heh!), I'm not concerned with any sound issues, but I can see (hear?) that some people might be.

 

I think the songs are catchy, and have some really great riffage. The opening of 'The Anarchist' still gives me shivers!

Edited February 7, 2013 by Mika

[calirush]

I wouldn't go as far as saying it sucks but I'm not that impressed with it. The storyline is interesting but the music itself....lyrics, structure, guitar riffs, vocals, mix......just don't do much for me or stick in my head after listening. It's better than the depressing boring Snakes but I don't consider it The Greatest Album Ever like many other Rush fans do. A reviewer on Amazon put it best....CA sounds like a Rush tribute band that decided to write their own original material. If Geddy still had good pipes and the album wasn't produced in the modern way, that is a ton of cut and paste overdubs with a dense muddy sound (not as bad as VT but still very loud). I'd like it more. As of now it's another drink coaster taking up space in my CD rack.

 

You keep drink coasters in your cd rack? Wouldn't it be better to have 'em on, say, a coffee table, where they can serve out their designated purpose?

 

Ok, that was a bit facetious! And cool that you have your own opinion of CA, and are not jumping on any bandwagon or anything. I agree that the sound isn't the best it could be - it could be clearer - but these ears don't mind the slight muddiness, if we can describe it as such. That was a weird comment about this album sounding like a tribute band... I would never have thought of it this way!

 

I hate to ride this theme but the more one listens to CA the less muddy it sounds. Maybe it's just because I play it a lot, but the sound mixing doesn't bother me now the way it did in the early stages of listening to it. A Rush tribute band could only dream of putting an album together like this.

 

I was thinking a bit more about this last night, as I'd read the tribute band comparison thing right before going to bed. I don't like it. I think it's derogatory to Rush, even if it's just someone's opinion. It just seems that some people want to make a fancy-sounding label for things, to sound all witty and hip and knowledgeable yet a bit irreverant.

 

For the record (heh!), I'm not concerned with any sound issues, but I can see (hear?) that some people might be.

 

I think the songs are catchy, and have some really great riffage. The opening of 'The Anarchist' still gives me shivers!

 

I love the whole album but If pushed I'll start with "The Wreckers" or "BU2B".