Shorter more focused albums

[coventry]

I agree, some later albums are far too long. Obviously some of the songs others have recommended cutting others cant possibly fathom cutting (for me, we hold on and good news first are great)

 

The one consensus seems to be that just about everyone would be okay hacking off Tai Shan and High water from HYF.

 

Um, no. "High Water" is a carefully and creatively constructed piece. Percussively, tensionally, and thematically, it's one of the more powerful songs on the album.

[JohnnyBlaze]

I agree, some later albums are far too long. Obviously some of the songs others have recommended cutting others cant possibly fathom cutting (for me, we hold on and good news first are great)

 

The one consensus seems to be that just about everyone would be okay hacking off Tai Shan and High water from HYF.

 

Um, no. "High Water" is a carefully and creatively constructed piece. Percussively, tensionally, and thematically, it's one of the more powerful songs on the album.

Yeah, I wouldn't hack it off either.And as I said earlier, I wouldn't hack off ANY song, even the ones I dislike

[losingit2k]

This is a pet peeve of mine with almost every new album. There's nothing wrong with a 40-minute album, most of my all time favorite albums are around that mark.

 

Because a CD CAN hold 80 minutes doesn't mean you HAVE to fill it up.

 

As a few people mentioned, the tracks we'd like to ditch will vary greatly from person to person, but in general I'd like to see all new releases form every band I like being put out with a single-vinyl-album running time mentality.

 

I'm digging the Winery Dogs album and the last Deep Purple greatly, but in each case trimmming 2-3 songs would elevate my overall opinion of the album.

This is my point. Consequently, I'm really loving the New Deep Purple ?! I'm still waiting to receive the Winery Dogs but what I've heard I've loved as well! :codger:

Edited August 2, 2013 by losingit2k

[losingit2k]

Do you think RUSH would have benefited from having shorter album after CD were introduce during the Hold Your Fire album and beyond. Many band once cds were introduced went "Time Happy" or more correctly - Time Crazy with their albums, contributing way to many songs that were mediocre or even substandard just to fill in the time. Album prior to Presto where much more focused and shorter due to the time limitation with vinyl. I believe RUSH fell into this trap as well. Imagine the following albums at shorter length.

 

Hold Your Fire without (Tai Shan or High Water)

Presto without (Red Tide, Anagram for Mongo and Hand over Fist)

Roll the Bones without (You Bet your Life)

Counterparts without ( Speed of Love and Everyday Glory)

Test for Echo without (Dog Years, Virtuality or Carve away the Stone)

Vapor Trails without (Nocturne or Out of the Cradle)

Snakes And Arrows without (Good News First or We Hold On)

 

Now I'm not say these songs are bad, I'm just saying their particular albums would have benefitted without their inclusion. Rush could have kept them on ice as bonus tracks for box sets like Sectors or something.

 

What do you think?

 

here's the problem, this is YOUR list of songs.. everyone would have a different list.. I can't imagine S&A without 'We Hold on'.. there's other songs on your list I couldn't live without either including 'let's all jump on the bandwagon' er I mean 'Dog Years'.. hell RUSH themselves don't even know which songs their fans will like before an album comes out, how could they anyway when every Rush fan likes something different!

 

The funny thing is... I just put on Hemispheres, started listening and then really wondered why posts like this with songs like these are argued about. I mean, every song listed above (including a couple that I like ok) are SO far out of the league of something like Hemispheres or really almost anything they put out from 1976-1984 that I don't know why we even bother piddling around discussing it. I mean, argue all you want for your Red Tide or Virtuality or We Hold On or whatever... but it's obvious to most of us that those songs are a very far distance from the best Rush. Just sayin'.

 

Sigh. How true. How could the last 29 years even hold a candle to the bonfire of the 8 years you mentioned? I mean, why did Rush even bother?

 

Note sarcasm.

 

Why did they Bother? At least six good songs per album that why? Remember, the Epics era albums only had between 4 and 8 songs per album. They focused and the developed those songs much more as well. That's my point entirely. If they had paid the same attention to the latter albums, (Post Hold Your Fire) they would have achieved or come close to that goal too. There weakest albums Presto, Roll the Bones, Test For Echo. and Vapor Trails each had at least 6 good songs on them. This would not seem as week if the album only had 6 songs or 8 songs total like PeW or MP. They would also have focused and developed the remaining two songs much more as well instead of just creating whole new songs for their ideas. Its no surprised that once they returned to a shorter format (Clockwork Angels) that they hit it out of the park again.

 

:codger:

Well....

1) coventry was being sarcastic.

2) MP's 7 songs destroy the best 7 songs off any album from Presto-CA. Same thing goes for Hemspheres or PeW vs. any of the albums from the last 25 years

3) I don' t even agree that there are at least 6 good songs on some of those albums

4) I don't agree that they focused more and developed those epic era songs. They had less time so they tinkered with things LESS. They tinkered on things MUCH more later in their careers. Snakes and Arrows, imho, sounds like they had TOO MUCH time to mess with songs (not including Hope and Malnar)

You might be on to something as well, maybe less time in the studio favors the albums as well. I do agree with you that Snake and Arrows would have benefitted from less overdubs. However, I wasn't debating the sound. I was debating the writing. Having less track time to deal with forces you to develop the ideas you have into lesser songs not create separate songs for each individual idea.

[sitboaf]

I think I made a few good points when I wrote about this in my blog back in 2009...

 

"There was a time in the early 1990s when album-making went terribly wrong.

The compact disc was born in the 1980s, but sales did not surpass cassettes until 1988. Cassettes then took a while to die out. By the early 1990s, bands began putting out albums for the CD format. And something bad happened. A lot of bands, realizing that you could fit 75+ minutes of music onto a CD, started actually doing that - making albums longer, and including tracks that perhaps shouldn't have seen the light of day.

I call this disease CD-itis.

Although the art of skipping songs became easier on CD than on vinyl and cassette, I still would rather not have to change an artist's vision by skipping tracks 7, 12 and 13.

 

Here are some early '90s albums that I had a hard time listening to uninterrupted, until iTunes came along and allowed me to trim some of the fat.

Genesis - We Can't Dance - 71m 30s

Elvis Costello - Spike - 64m 29s

Even U2's fantastic Achtung Baby is 55m 23s, and wouldn't exactly suffer from the loss of Trying to Throw Your Arms Around the World or Acrobat.

 

Most bands didn't fall into this trap. Those that did were cured of CD-itis when they realized that a succinct, 45-minute album is preferable to a 62-minute album with 4 mediocre tracks. (Pink Floyd's back-to-back magnum opuses Dark Side of the Moon and Wish You Were Here are both under 45 minutes. Sgt. Pepper is barely 39 minutes.) Let's save those "lost gems" for the fanatics who will spend money on the career-retrospective box sets."

[losingit2k]

I think I made a few good points when I wrote about this in my blog back in 2009...

 

"There was a time in the early 1990s when album-making went terribly wrong.

The compact disc was born in the 1980s, but sales did not surpass cassettes until 1988. Cassettes then took a while to die out. By the early 1990s, bands began putting out albums for the CD format. And something bad happened. A lot of bands, realizing that you could fit 75+ minutes of music onto a CD, started actually doing that - making albums longer, and including tracks that perhaps shouldn't have seen the light of day.

I call this disease CD-itis.

Although the art of skipping songs became easier on CD than on vinyl and cassette, I still would rather not have to change an artist's vision by skipping tracks 7, 12 and 13.

 

Here are some early '90s albums that I had a hard time listening to uninterrupted, until iTunes came along and allowed me to trim some of the fat.

Genesis - We Can't Dance - 71m 30s

Elvis Costello - Spike - 64m 29s

Even U2's fantastic Achtung Baby is 55m 23s, and wouldn't exactly suffer from the loss of Trying to Throw Your Arms Around the World or Acrobat.

 

Most bands didn't fall into this trap. Those that did were cured of CD-itis when they realized that a succinct, 45-minute album is preferable to a 62-minute album with 4 mediocre tracks. (Pink Floyd's back-to-back magnum opuses Dark Side of the Moon and Wish You Were Here are both under 45 minutes. Sgt. Pepper is barely 39 minutes.) Let's save those "lost gems" for the fanatics who will spend money on the career-retrospective box sets."

Well Said Sir! You can throw all of RUSH's Late 70's and Early 80's endeavor into that less than 45 minutes group as well. :ebert: :clap: :ebert:

[JohnnyBlaze]

Do you think RUSH would have benefited from having shorter album after CD were introduce during the Hold Your Fire album and beyond. Many band once cds were introduced went "Time Happy" or more correctly - Time Crazy with their albums, contributing way to many songs that were mediocre or even substandard just to fill in the time. Album prior to Presto where much more focused and shorter due to the time limitation with vinyl. I believe RUSH fell into this trap as well. Imagine the following albums at shorter length.

 

Hold Your Fire without (Tai Shan or High Water)

Presto without (Red Tide, Anagram for Mongo and Hand over Fist)

Roll the Bones without (You Bet your Life)

Counterparts without ( Speed of Love and Everyday Glory)

Test for Echo without (Dog Years, Virtuality or Carve away the Stone)

Vapor Trails without (Nocturne or Out of the Cradle)

Snakes And Arrows without (Good News First or We Hold On)

 

Now I'm not say these songs are bad, I'm just saying their particular albums would have benefitted without their inclusion. Rush could have kept them on ice as bonus tracks for box sets like Sectors or something.

 

What do you think?

 

here's the problem, this is YOUR list of songs.. everyone would have a different list.. I can't imagine S&A without 'We Hold on'.. there's other songs on your list I couldn't live without either including 'let's all jump on the bandwagon' er I mean 'Dog Years'.. hell RUSH themselves don't even know which songs their fans will like before an album comes out, how could they anyway when every Rush fan likes something different!

 

The funny thing is... I just put on Hemispheres, started listening and then really wondered why posts like this with songs like these are argued about. I mean, every song listed above (including a couple that I like ok) are SO far out of the league of something like Hemispheres or really almost anything they put out from 1976-1984 that I don't know why we even bother piddling around discussing it. I mean, argue all you want for your Red Tide or Virtuality or We Hold On or whatever... but it's obvious to most of us that those songs are a very far distance from the best Rush. Just sayin'.

 

Sigh. How true. How could the last 29 years even hold a candle to the bonfire of the 8 years you mentioned? I mean, why did Rush even bother?

 

Note sarcasm.

 

Why did they Bother? At least six good songs per album that why? Remember, the Epics era albums only had between 4 and 8 songs per album. They focused and the developed those songs much more as well. That's my point entirely. If they had paid the same attention to the latter albums, (Post Hold Your Fire) they would have achieved or come close to that goal too. There weakest albums Presto, Roll the Bones, Test For Echo. and Vapor Trails each had at least 6 good songs on them. This would not seem as week if the album only had 6 songs or 8 songs total like PeW or MP. They would also have focused and developed the remaining two songs much more as well instead of just creating whole new songs for their ideas. Its no surprised that once they returned to a shorter format (Clockwork Angels) that they hit it out of the park again.

 

:codger:

Well....

1) coventry was being sarcastic.

2) MP's 7 songs destroy the best 7 songs off any album from Presto-CA. Same thing goes for Hemspheres or PeW vs. any of the albums from the last 25 years

3) I don' t even agree that there are at least 6 good songs on some of those albums

4) I don't agree that they focused more and developed those epic era songs. They had less time so they tinkered with things LESS. They tinkered on things MUCH more later in their careers. Snakes and Arrows, imho, sounds like they had TOO MUCH time to mess with songs (not including Hope and Malnar)

You might be on to something as well, maybe less time in the studio favors the albums as well. I do agree with you that Snake and Arrows would have benefitted from less overdubs. However, I wasn't debating the sound. I was debating the writing. Having less track time to deal with forces you to develop the ideas you have into lesser songs not create separate songs for each individual idea.

I wasn't talking about sound either. I was simply talking about the creation of songs....the writing. Having TOO MUCH time isn't good. I'm sure Rush doesn't think they have "too much" time though.

1) I wouldn't hack any album that's been completed.

2) I wouldn't be opposed to shorter albums.

3) I think some of you guys believe that a shorter album would yield a better album which obviously isn't NECESSARILY the case.

[LedRush]

I agree, some later albums are far too long. Obviously some of the songs others have recommended cutting others cant possibly fathom cutting (for me, we hold on and good news first are great)

 

The one consensus seems to be that just about everyone would be okay hacking off Tai Shan and High water from HYF.

 

I object, your Texan. I still love Tai Shan :)

[Pause Rewind Replay]

The one consensus seems to be that just about everyone would be okay hacking off Tai Shan and High water from HYF.

 

Wrong again ... I love High Water. At least we do agree on the excellence of We Hold On :7up:

[tas7]

Think the album that suffered the most from this was Test for Echo, the last track Carve Away the Stone is a good track but getting there can be murder.

[greyfriar]

No need to perform an autopsy for me.

The albums are what they are...and whatever...äh...forever! :codger:

[rushgoober]

The one consensus seems to be that just about everyone would be okay hacking off Tai Shan and High water from HYF.

 

a lot of people have objected to this line. it should probably more accurately read, "The one consensus seems to be that just about everyone WHO ACTUALLY ENJOYS GOOD MUSIC would be okay hacking off Tai Shan and High water from HYF. ;)

Edited August 2, 2013 by rushgoober

[JohnnyBlaze]

The one consensus seems to be that just about everyone would be okay hacking off Tai Shan and High water from HYF.

 

a lot of people have objected to this line. it should probably more accurately read, "The one consensus seems to be that just about everyone WHO ACTUALLY ENJOYS GOOD MUSIC would be okay hacking off Tai Shan and High water from HYF. ;)

Boring. Why is it that you can rip stuff (and hide under the umbrella of "being controversial" or whatever the hell you want to call it) but when someone rips something you like, you have a hissy fit? Explain that to me once and for all. And for the record: imho, Tai Shan is "ok" at best and High Water is good but nothing spectacular.

[rushgoober]

The one consensus seems to be that just about everyone would be okay hacking off Tai Shan and High water from HYF.

 

a lot of people have objected to this line. it should probably more accurately read, "The one consensus seems to be that just about everyone WHO ACTUALLY ENJOYS GOOD MUSIC would be okay hacking off Tai Shan and High water from HYF. ;)

Boring. Why is it that you can rip stuff (and hide under the umbrella of "being controversial" or whatever the hell you want to call it) but when someone rips something you like, you have a hissy fit? Explain that to me once and for all. And for the record: imho, Tai Shan is "ok" at best and High Water is good but nothing spectacular.

 

Didn't think I was having a hissy fit. Just expressing my distaste for Tai Shan and High Water in what to me was a humorous way. Obviously, YMMV. ;)

 

And FWIW, the rest of HYF is stellar.

Edited August 2, 2013 by rushgoober

[JohnnyBlaze]

The one consensus seems to be that just about everyone would be okay hacking off Tai Shan and High water from HYF.

 

a lot of people have objected to this line. it should probably more accurately read, "The one consensus seems to be that just about everyone WHO ACTUALLY ENJOYS GOOD MUSIC would be okay hacking off Tai Shan and High water from HYF. ;)

Boring. Why is it that you can rip stuff (and hide under the umbrella of "being controversial" or whatever the hell you want to call it) but when someone rips something you like, you have a hissy fit? Explain that to me once and for all. And for the record: imho, Tai Shan is "ok" at best and High Water is good but nothing spectacular.

 

Didn't think I was having a hissy fit. Just expressing my distaste for Tai Shan and High Water in what to me was a humorous way. Obviously, YMMV. ;)

 

And FWIW, the rest of HYF is stellar.

Oh, you misunderstood. You weren't having a hissy fit HERE. You're great at showing your dislike for something and tearing it to shit. But when someone shows THEIR dislike for something you like THEN you have your hissy fit. I don't know what "YMMV" and "FWIW" mean. But I get that you like HYF a lot.

Edited August 2, 2013 by JohnnyBlaze

[rushgoober]

The one consensus seems to be that just about everyone would be okay hacking off Tai Shan and High water from HYF.

 

a lot of people have objected to this line. it should probably more accurately read, "The one consensus seems to be that just about everyone WHO ACTUALLY ENJOYS GOOD MUSIC would be okay hacking off Tai Shan and High water from HYF. ;)

Boring. Why is it that you can rip stuff (and hide under the umbrella of "being controversial" or whatever the hell you want to call it) but when someone rips something you like, you have a hissy fit? Explain that to me once and for all. And for the record: imho, Tai Shan is "ok" at best and High Water is good but nothing spectacular.

 

Didn't think I was having a hissy fit. Just expressing my distaste for Tai Shan and High Water in what to me was a humorous way. Obviously, YMMV. ;)

 

And FWIW, the rest of HYF is stellar.

Oh, you misunderstood. You weren't having a hissy fit HERE. You're great at showing your dislike for something and tearing it to shit. But when someone shows THEIR dislike for something you like THEN you have your hissy fit. I don't know what "YMMV" and "FWIW" mean. But I get that you like HYF a lot.

 

[Lerxster]

The one consensus seems to be that just about everyone would be okay hacking off Tai Shan and High water from HYF.

 

a lot of people have objected to this line. it should probably more accurately read, "The one consensus seems to be that just about everyone WHO ACTUALLY ENJOYS GOOD MUSIC would be okay hacking off Tai Shan and High water from HYF. ;)

Boring. Why is it that you can rip stuff (and hide under the umbrella of "being controversial" or whatever the hell you want to call it) but when someone rips something you like, you have a hissy fit? Explain that to me once and for all. And for the record: imho, Tai Shan is "ok" at best and High Water is good but nothing spectacular.

 

Didn't think I was having a hissy fit. Just expressing my distaste for Tai Shan and High Water in what to me was a humorous way. Obviously, YMMV. ;)

 

And FWIW, the rest of HYF is stellar.

Oh, you misunderstood. You weren't having a hissy fit HERE. You're great at showing your dislike for something and tearing it to shit. But when someone shows THEIR dislike for something you like THEN you have your hissy fit. I don't know what "YMMV" and "FWIW" mean. But I get that you like HYF a lot.

how's your convo with the troll going.

 

http://www.therushforum.com/index.php?/topic/76152-twilight-saga-great-books/page__st__20

 

His Twilight thread says it all. He'll run rampant trolling the board, but when his love of Twilight is slammed he runs to papa 73 in tears. Little boy troll. I don't even think he's married as he claims. His rushgoober personna here is about lies, douchery, hate of what he doesn't understand and love of self at the expense of others

 

Good luck with your convo tho. :cheers:

[rushgoober]

The one consensus seems to be that just about everyone would be okay hacking off Tai Shan and High water from HYF.

 

a lot of people have objected to this line. it should probably more accurately read, "The one consensus seems to be that just about everyone WHO ACTUALLY ENJOYS GOOD MUSIC would be okay hacking off Tai Shan and High water from HYF. ;)

Boring. Why is it that you can rip stuff (and hide under the umbrella of "being controversial" or whatever the hell you want to call it) but when someone rips something you like, you have a hissy fit? Explain that to me once and for all. And for the record: imho, Tai Shan is "ok" at best and High Water is good but nothing spectacular.

 

Didn't think I was having a hissy fit. Just expressing my distaste for Tai Shan and High Water in what to me was a humorous way. Obviously, YMMV. ;)

 

And FWIW, the rest of HYF is stellar.

Oh, you misunderstood. You weren't having a hissy fit HERE. You're great at showing your dislike for something and tearing it to shit. But when someone shows THEIR dislike for something you like THEN you have your hissy fit. I don't know what "YMMV" and "FWIW" mean. But I get that you like HYF a lot.

how's your convo with the troll going.

 

http://www.therushfo...ks/page__st__20

 

His Twilight thread says it all. He'll run rampant trolling the board, but when his love of Twilight is slammed he runs to papa 73 in tears. Little boy troll. I don't even think he's married as he claims. His rushgoober personna here is about lies, douchery, hate of what he doesn't understand and love of self at the expense of others

 

Good luck with your convo tho. :cheers:

 

I love you too, Lerxster!

[rushgoober]

I used to think the problem is cd's.

 

HYF was the first album to come out when CD's were really becoming the dominant format, even though it obviously wasn't their first CD. Prior to that, all their albums had been around 40 minutes, whereas HYF was around 50. AND, for me it was the first time since 1975 that they had any songs that were weak, and the final two on HYF were truly BAD. I blamed the extra length of the CD that allowed them to put too much material on the album. People have often pointed out that those weren't the last songs recorded, that Force 10 was the last one, and that if they cut out two songs from the album, it might not have been those two. Fair point. It wasn't necessarily a CD length problem, it was a quality control one.

 

And then Presto came out and then RTB. Again, longer albums, but it was no longer an issue of just cutting out a couple of songs to whittle it back to 40 minutes and achieve perfection. No, those albums were unfortunately riddled with weak material, and it was then that I thought that they had really lost it, their near perfect run from 1974-1987 was truly over - a distant memory. yes, they did redeem themselves with counterparts, and later with both S&A AND CA. thank god.

 

the only time where the cd length problem/argument really is relevant for me is with snakes & arrows. for me, if you cut out the five weaker songs there, you get an album of around 40 minutes that's fantastic. that album could have used a bit of surgery. while there's one song on CA I outright can't stand (and it's the super short one) and 1 i think is meh, it's such a great album almost all the way through that it's not an issue.

 

in general, however, i think bands trying to make 70 minutes of great music instead of 40 is a mistake. it's hard enough to make 40, and almost always you've got filler in a 70 minute recording. that's essentially what used to be a double album, and how many double albums are there without any filler or really weak spots? there ain't many.

 

i'm just glad that rush has once again gotten back to making great albums. they've had their share of lemons in their latter years, but they've also made some lemonade as well. :)

Edited August 2, 2013 by rushgoober

[Lerxster]

The one consensus seems to be that just about everyone would be okay hacking off Tai Shan and High water from HYF.

 

a lot of people have objected to this line. it should probably more accurately read, "The one consensus seems to be that just about everyone WHO ACTUALLY ENJOYS GOOD MUSIC would be okay hacking off Tai Shan and High water from HYF. ;)

Boring. Why is it that you can rip stuff (and hide under the umbrella of "being controversial" or whatever the hell you want to call it) but when someone rips something you like, you have a hissy fit? Explain that to me once and for all. And for the record: imho, Tai Shan is "ok" at best and High Water is good but nothing spectacular.

 

Didn't think I was having a hissy fit. Just expressing my distaste for Tai Shan and High Water in what to me was a humorous way. Obviously, YMMV. ;)

 

And FWIW, the rest of HYF is stellar.

Oh, you misunderstood. You weren't having a hissy fit HERE. You're great at showing your dislike for something and tearing it to shit. But when someone shows THEIR dislike for something you like THEN you have your hissy fit. I don't know what "YMMV" and "FWIW" mean. But I get that you like HYF a lot.

how's your convo with the troll going.

 

http://www.therushfo...ks/page__st__20

 

His Twilight thread says it all. He'll run rampant trolling the board, but when his love of Twilight is slammed he runs to papa 73 in tears. Little boy troll. I don't even think he's married as he claims. His rushgoober personna here is about lies, douchery, hate of what he doesn't understand and love of self at the expense of others

 

Good luck with your convo tho. :cheers:

 

I love you too, Lerxster!

 

Like young Anakin Skywalker, you use to seem like a good dude. I've seen old threads resurrected that showed that. But like Anakin, you turned to the dark side and dedicated your time here to trolling to become the malignant narcissist you are today- no Rush pun intended.

 

Well, maybe, but only because ot fits. Self love is the only love you exhibit on this board.

[rushgoober]

The one consensus seems to be that just about everyone would be okay hacking off Tai Shan and High water from HYF.

 

a lot of people have objected to this line. it should probably more accurately read, "The one consensus seems to be that just about everyone WHO ACTUALLY ENJOYS GOOD MUSIC would be okay hacking off Tai Shan and High water from HYF. ;)

Boring. Why is it that you can rip stuff (and hide under the umbrella of "being controversial" or whatever the hell you want to call it) but when someone rips something you like, you have a hissy fit? Explain that to me once and for all. And for the record: imho, Tai Shan is "ok" at best and High Water is good but nothing spectacular.

 

Didn't think I was having a hissy fit. Just expressing my distaste for Tai Shan and High Water in what to me was a humorous way. Obviously, YMMV. ;)

 

And FWIW, the rest of HYF is stellar.

Oh, you misunderstood. You weren't having a hissy fit HERE. You're great at showing your dislike for something and tearing it to shit. But when someone shows THEIR dislike for something you like THEN you have your hissy fit. I don't know what "YMMV" and "FWIW" mean. But I get that you like HYF a lot.

how's your convo with the troll going.

 

http://www.therushfo...ks/page__st__20

 

His Twilight thread says it all. He'll run rampant trolling the board, but when his love of Twilight is slammed he runs to papa 73 in tears. Little boy troll. I don't even think he's married as he claims. His rushgoober personna here is about lies, douchery, hate of what he doesn't understand and love of self at the expense of others

 

Good luck with your convo tho. :cheers:

 

I love you too, Lerxster!

 

Like young Anakin Skywalker, you use to seem like a good dude. I've seen old threads resurrected that showed that. But like Anakin, you turned to the dark side and dedicated your time here to trolling to become the malignant narcissist you are today- no Rush pun intended.

 

Well, maybe, but only because ot fits. Self love is the only love you exhibit on this board.

 

You're welcome to perceive it that way if you need to.

 

Still love you bro, regardless! :cheers:

[Lerxster]

The one consensus seems to be that just about everyone would be okay hacking off Tai Shan and High water from HYF.

 

a lot of people have objected to this line. it should probably more accurately read, "The one consensus seems to be that just about everyone WHO ACTUALLY ENJOYS GOOD MUSIC would be okay hacking off Tai Shan and High water from HYF. ;)

Boring. Why is it that you can rip stuff (and hide under the umbrella of "being controversial" or whatever the hell you want to call it) but when someone rips something you like, you have a hissy fit? Explain that to me once and for all. And for the record: imho, Tai Shan is "ok" at best and High Water is good but nothing spectacular.

 

Didn't think I was having a hissy fit. Just expressing my distaste for Tai Shan and High Water in what to me was a humorous way. Obviously, YMMV. ;)

 

And FWIW, the rest of HYF is stellar.

Oh, you misunderstood. You weren't having a hissy fit HERE. You're great at showing your dislike for something and tearing it to shit. But when someone shows THEIR dislike for something you like THEN you have your hissy fit. I don't know what "YMMV" and "FWIW" mean. But I get that you like HYF a lot.

how's your convo with the troll going.

 

http://www.therushfo...ks/page__st__20

 

His Twilight thread says it all. He'll run rampant trolling the board, but when his love of Twilight is slammed he runs to papa 73 in tears. Little boy troll. I don't even think he's married as he claims. His rushgoober personna here is about lies, douchery, hate of what he doesn't understand and love of self at the expense of others

 

Good luck with your convo tho. :cheers:

 

I love you too, Lerxster!

 

Like young Anakin Skywalker, you use to seem like a good dude. I've seen old threads resurrected that showed that. But like Anakin, you turned to the dark side and dedicated your time here to trolling to become the malignant narcissist you are today- no Rush pun intended.

 

Well, maybe, but only because ot fits. Self love is the only love you exhibit on this board.

 

You're welcome to perceive it that way if you need to.

 

Still love you bro, regardless! :cheers:

It's not perception, it's your actual posts- here in black and white. The way you conduct yourself on this board. The way you revel in bringing discomfort to others. You love me? What, are you trying to soften me up? Sorry, not buying it. Or maybe, not falling for it, Mr.Good Ruse First.

[rushgoober]

The one consensus seems to be that just about everyone would be okay hacking off Tai Shan and High water from HYF.

 

a lot of people have objected to this line. it should probably more accurately read, "The one consensus seems to be that just about everyone WHO ACTUALLY ENJOYS GOOD MUSIC would be okay hacking off Tai Shan and High water from HYF. ;)

Boring. Why is it that you can rip stuff (and hide under the umbrella of "being controversial" or whatever the hell you want to call it) but when someone rips something you like, you have a hissy fit? Explain that to me once and for all. And for the record: imho, Tai Shan is "ok" at best and High Water is good but nothing spectacular.

 

Didn't think I was having a hissy fit. Just expressing my distaste for Tai Shan and High Water in what to me was a humorous way. Obviously, YMMV. ;)

 

And FWIW, the rest of HYF is stellar.

Oh, you misunderstood. You weren't having a hissy fit HERE. You're great at showing your dislike for something and tearing it to shit. But when someone shows THEIR dislike for something you like THEN you have your hissy fit. I don't know what "YMMV" and "FWIW" mean. But I get that you like HYF a lot.

how's your convo with the troll going.

 

http://www.therushfo...ks/page__st__20

 

His Twilight thread says it all. He'll run rampant trolling the board, but when his love of Twilight is slammed he runs to papa 73 in tears. Little boy troll. I don't even think he's married as he claims. His rushgoober personna here is about lies, douchery, hate of what he doesn't understand and love of self at the expense of others

 

Good luck with your convo tho. :cheers:

 

I love you too, Lerxster!

 

Like young Anakin Skywalker, you use to seem like a good dude. I've seen old threads resurrected that showed that. But like Anakin, you turned to the dark side and dedicated your time here to trolling to become the malignant narcissist you are today- no Rush pun intended.

 

Well, maybe, but only because ot fits. Self love is the only love you exhibit on this board.

 

You're welcome to perceive it that way if you need to.

 

Still love you bro, regardless! :cheers:

It's not perception, it's your actual posts- here in black and white. The way you conduct yourself on this board. The way you revel in bringing discomfort to others. You love me? What, are you trying to soften me up? Sorry, not buying it. Or maybe, not falling for it, Mr.Good Ruse First.

 

If people get discomfort because of one person's musical opinions, even if that person is being incessant about it, they may want to recondiser their lives. ;)

 

Uh oh, I tried that line before, or some derivation of it, and was told it was a typical troll response. Oh well. It's STILL only music.

 

Anyway, think what you want that makes you happy. It's all good. :D

 

 

;)

[Lerxster]

The one consensus seems to be that just about everyone would be okay hacking off Tai Shan and High water from HYF.

 

a lot of people have objected to this line. it should probably more accurately read, "The one consensus seems to be that just about everyone WHO ACTUALLY ENJOYS GOOD MUSIC would be okay hacking off Tai Shan and High water from HYF. ;)

Boring. Why is it that you can rip stuff (and hide under the umbrella of "being controversial" or whatever the hell you want to call it) but when someone rips something you like, you have a hissy fit? Explain that to me once and for all. And for the record: imho, Tai Shan is "ok" at best and High Water is good but nothing spectacular.

 

Didn't think I was having a hissy fit. Just expressing my distaste for Tai Shan and High Water in what to me was a humorous way. Obviously, YMMV. ;)

 

And FWIW, the rest of HYF is stellar.

Oh, you misunderstood. You weren't having a hissy fit HERE. You're great at showing your dislike for something and tearing it to shit. But when someone shows THEIR dislike for something you like THEN you have your hissy fit. I don't know what "YMMV" and "FWIW" mean. But I get that you like HYF a lot.

how's your convo with the troll going.

 

http://www.therushfo...ks/page__st__20

 

His Twilight thread says it all. He'll run rampant trolling the board, but when his love of Twilight is slammed he runs to papa 73 in tears. Little boy troll. I don't even think he's married as he claims. His rushgoober personna here is about lies, douchery, hate of what he doesn't understand and love of self at the expense of others

 

Good luck with your convo tho. :cheers:

 

I love you too, Lerxster!

 

Like young Anakin Skywalker, you use to seem like a good dude. I've seen old threads resurrected that showed that. But like Anakin, you turned to the dark side and dedicated your time here to trolling to become the malignant narcissist you are today- no Rush pun intended.

 

Well, maybe, but only because ot fits. Self love is the only love you exhibit on this board.

 

You're welcome to perceive it that way if you need to.

 

Still love you bro, regardless! :cheers:

It's not perception, it's your actual posts- here in black and white. The way you conduct yourself on this board. The way you revel in bringing discomfort to others. You love me? What, are you trying to soften me up? Sorry, not buying it. Or maybe, not falling for it, Mr.Good Ruse First.

 

If people get discomfort because of one person's musical opinions, even if that person is being incessant about it, they may want to recondiser their lives. ;)

 

Uh oh, I tried that line before, or some derivation of it, and was told it was a typical troll response. Oh well. It's STILL only music.

 

Anyway, think what you want that makes you happy. It's all good. :D

 

 

;)

Ahh, the real cold clueless goober is back. The troll with the gaping hole in his soul. Music means so much to some people. Rush music is so huge in so many peoples lives. It's not just "STILL only music".

 

I would be much happier if you weren't such an asshole- trust me. ;)

[rushgoober]

The one consensus seems to be that just about everyone would be okay hacking off Tai Shan and High water from HYF.

 

a lot of people have objected to this line. it should probably more accurately read, "The one consensus seems to be that just about everyone WHO ACTUALLY ENJOYS GOOD MUSIC would be okay hacking off Tai Shan and High water from HYF. ;)

Boring. Why is it that you can rip stuff (and hide under the umbrella of "being controversial" or whatever the hell you want to call it) but when someone rips something you like, you have a hissy fit? Explain that to me once and for all. And for the record: imho, Tai Shan is "ok" at best and High Water is good but nothing spectacular.

 

Didn't think I was having a hissy fit. Just expressing my distaste for Tai Shan and High Water in what to me was a humorous way. Obviously, YMMV. ;)

 

And FWIW, the rest of HYF is stellar.

Oh, you misunderstood. You weren't having a hissy fit HERE. You're great at showing your dislike for something and tearing it to shit. But when someone shows THEIR dislike for something you like THEN you have your hissy fit. I don't know what "YMMV" and "FWIW" mean. But I get that you like HYF a lot.

how's your convo with the troll going.

 

http://www.therushfo...ks/page__st__20

 

His Twilight thread says it all. He'll run rampant trolling the board, but when his love of Twilight is slammed he runs to papa 73 in tears. Little boy troll. I don't even think he's married as he claims. His rushgoober personna here is about lies, douchery, hate of what he doesn't understand and love of self at the expense of others

 

Good luck with your convo tho. :cheers:

 

I love you too, Lerxster!

 

Like young Anakin Skywalker, you use to seem like a good dude. I've seen old threads resurrected that showed that. But like Anakin, you turned to the dark side and dedicated your time here to trolling to become the malignant narcissist you are today- no Rush pun intended.

 

Well, maybe, but only because ot fits. Self love is the only love you exhibit on this board.

 

You're welcome to perceive it that way if you need to.

 

Still love you bro, regardless! :cheers:

It's not perception, it's your actual posts- here in black and white. The way you conduct yourself on this board. The way you revel in bringing discomfort to others. You love me? What, are you trying to soften me up? Sorry, not buying it. Or maybe, not falling for it, Mr.Good Ruse First.

 

If people get discomfort because of one person's musical opinions, even if that person is being incessant about it, they may want to recondiser their lives. ;)

 

Uh oh, I tried that line before, or some derivation of it, and was told it was a typical troll response. Oh well. It's STILL only music.

 

Anyway, think what you want that makes you happy. It's all good. :D

 

 

;)

Ahh, the real cold clueless goober is back. The troll with the gaping hole in his soul. Music means so much to some people. Rush music is so huge in so many peoples lives. It's not just "STILL only music".

 

I would be much happier if you weren't such an asshole- trust me. ;)

 

The funny (or sad) thing about all of this is that NONE of any of this changes the fact that VT, T4E, RTB and Presto suck. Ah, if only attcking those who point this out made the albums suddenly great. Alas, it does not. ;)

 

If my opinions and about a few Rush albums really bother you enough to think I'm an asshole, not much I can do there. I sure love those other 15 albums, but having those opinions are pretty popular so expressing that doesn't seem to get much reaction at all. Be cool or be cast out.

 

And it really is only music, and it really is only opinions. This is why I steer clear of political discussions these days. People get all bent out of shape, but that's stuff that dramatically effects people's lives. I mean I love Rush, they're my favorite band and all... but it's not a religion, it's just a great band.