Have Rush mentioned / hinted / said ANYTHING about another album?

[Bluefunk]

my point is that if they did want to make a studio album for the love of making music, they could do it without having to go on a huge tour. they choose not to, and that's a loss for everyone because it means we get an album once every five years, if that.

Thay could well do this in the future though; after all they'd never released two individual tracks with no album until Caravan/BU2B.

[Lerxster]

they should then do what they love doing - they really DON'T need more money - enjoy the creative process of making new music and let the fans reap the rewards too! win-win. :ebert:

Interested to know how you can be sure that they don't need any more money?

 

http://www.celebrity...-lee-net-worth/

 

http://www.celebrity...eson-net-worth/

 

http://www.celebrity...eart-net-worth/

Yeah, that's a website that gives an estimated net worth. No mention of how they get that figure. But that's besides the point- even if you could know exactly how much net worth a person has, you still can't know how much they have in their bank account, how much they owe in taxes, wages for employees etc., and how much they need for their future plans. Surely the only person who knows how much money Geddy Lee needs, is Geddy Lee himself.

Goober is just trolling again. Posting like a blatant fool = trolling. That's his game here.

I know, I like to troll back, as you probably noticed! :D

 

not trolling at all - just stating my opinion. when it's a popular opinion, it's just posting. when it's an unpopular one, it's considered trolling. and the weird thing is that i'm sure lerxster would LOVE a new rush album, but he doesn't like how i state things - not P.C. enough. it's all good.

 

i think it's a safe bet that the boys have WAY more than enough money to last for several lifetimes. they've proven to be not stupid - i'm sure they didn't throw all their money away. my point is that if they did want to make a studio album for the love of making music, they could do it without having to go on a huge tour. they choose not to, and that's a loss for everyone because it means we get an album once every five years, if that.

Okay troll boy, I'll bite again. Saying Rush has made enough money (or too much money) doesn't have anything to do with popular and unpopular opinion. Saying it (or not) has everything to do with whether you're an asshole (or not).

 

edited to add, just where you know where I'm coming from- rich people who give regularly to charity cannot earn too much IMO. Reason suggests, the more they make, the more they give away. We know Rush donates to charity overtly, but probably way more often covertly. By someone saying Rush makes too much money suggests to me that someone thinks they give away too much to charitable causes. Now what kind of person besides an asshole thinks Rush gives too much away to charities?

Edited September 16, 2013 by Lerxster

[bathory]

they should then do what they love doing - they really DON'T need more money - enjoy the creative process of making new music and let the fans reap the rewards too! win-win. :ebert:

Interested to know how you can be sure that they don't need any more money?

 

http://www.celebrity...-lee-net-worth/

 

http://www.celebrity...eson-net-worth/

 

http://www.celebrity...eart-net-worth/

Yeah, that's a website that gives an estimated net worth. No mention of how they get that figure. But that's besides the point- even if you could know exactly how much net worth a person has, you still can't know how much they have in their bank account, how much they owe in taxes, wages for employees etc., and how much they need for their future plans. Surely the only person who knows how much money Geddy Lee needs, is Geddy Lee himself.

Goober is just trolling again. Posting like a blatant fool = trolling. That's his game here.

I know, I like to troll back, as you probably noticed! :D

 

not trolling at all - just stating my opinion. when it's a popular opinion, it's just posting. when it's an unpopular one, it's considered trolling. and the weird thing is that i'm sure lerxster would LOVE a new rush album, but he doesn't like how i state things - not P.C. enough. it's all good.

 

i think it's a safe bet that the boys have WAY more than enough money to last for several lifetimes. they've proven to be not stupid - i'm sure they didn't throw all their money away. my point is that if they did want to make a studio album for the love of making music, they could do it without having to go on a huge tour. they choose not to, and that's a loss for everyone because it means we get an album once every five years, if that.

 

maybe they're just not wanting to make albums as much

[rushgoober]

they should then do what they love doing - they really DON'T need more money - enjoy the creative process of making new music and let the fans reap the rewards too! win-win. :ebert:

Interested to know how you can be sure that they don't need any more money?

 

http://www.celebrity...-lee-net-worth/

 

http://www.celebrity...eson-net-worth/

 

http://www.celebrity...eart-net-worth/

Yeah, that's a website that gives an estimated net worth. No mention of how they get that figure. But that's besides the point- even if you could know exactly how much net worth a person has, you still can't know how much they have in their bank account, how much they owe in taxes, wages for employees etc., and how much they need for their future plans. Surely the only person who knows how much money Geddy Lee needs, is Geddy Lee himself.

Goober is just trolling again. Posting like a blatant fool = trolling. That's his game here.

I know, I like to troll back, as you probably noticed! :D

 

not trolling at all - just stating my opinion. when it's a popular opinion, it's just posting. when it's an unpopular one, it's considered trolling. and the weird thing is that i'm sure lerxster would LOVE a new rush album, but he doesn't like how i state things - not P.C. enough. it's all good.

 

i think it's a safe bet that the boys have WAY more than enough money to last for several lifetimes. they've proven to be not stupid - i'm sure they didn't throw all their money away. my point is that if they did want to make a studio album for the love of making music, they could do it without having to go on a huge tour. they choose not to, and that's a loss for everyone because it means we get an album once every five years, if that.

Okay troll boy, I'll bite again. Saying Rush has made enough money (or too much money) doesn't have anything to do with popular and unpopular opinion. Saying it (or not) has everything to do with whether you're an asshole (or not).

 

edited to add, just where you know where I'm coming from- rich people who give regularly to charity cannot earn too much IMO. Reason suggests, the more they make, the more they give away. We know Rush donates to charity overtly, but probably way more often covertly. By someone saying Rush makes too much money suggests to me that someone thinks they give away too much to charitable causes. Now what kind of person besides an asshole thinks Rush gives too much away to charities?

 

 

anyway, my points still stand. if you choose to think of me as an asshole, i can't help you with that one. the feeling is not mutual.

[Slack jaw gaze]

edited to add, just where you know where I'm coming from- rich people who give regularly to charity cannot earn too much IMO. Reason suggests, the more they make, the more they give away. We know Rush donates to charity overtly, but probably way more often covertly. By someone saying Rush makes too much money suggests to me that someone thinks they give away too much to charitable causes. Now what kind of person besides an asshole thinks Rush gives too much away to charities?

Where does he say they earn too much? The point was they could pretty safely retire, which I'm sure they could.

[Lerxster]

edited to add, just where you know where I'm coming from- rich people who give regularly to charity cannot earn too much IMO. Reason suggests, the more they make, the more they give away. We know Rush donates to charity overtly, but probably way more often covertly. By someone saying Rush makes too much money suggests to me that someone thinks they give away too much to charitable causes. Now what kind of person besides an asshole thinks Rush gives too much away to charities?

Where does he say they earn too much? The point was they could pretty safely retire, which I'm sure they could.

 

Well, that they could comfortably retire now was not his point. He never say "too much", but he did say:

 

God knows they have enough money already.

and

i think it's a safe bet that the boys have WAY more than enough money to last for several lifetimes.

 

There's a strong inference of "too much".

 

I was serious about the charity thing. Look at Bill Gates and a bunches of other rich folks who give it away. I mean, thank god Gates doesn't actively run Microsoft anymore because he's too busy going around the world giving money away to the less fortunate. There'd be a shareholder revolt otherwise. I think I recall Neil saying something to the effect of he gives away a certain percentage of his earnings to charities.

 

I was very hard on rushgoober in this thread, but I suspect his OP was a set up for trolling. Start with a reasonable question, then go on to suggest Rush somehow lacks integrity because they don't just make albums without touring. It's well known artists don't make much from albums these days. Then go on to infer Rush make too much money.

 

Goober has admitted repeatedly that he trolls for pleasure. Set up passionate fans with bait so he can giggle to himself at the "hilarity" that ensues. Not very nice at all, IMO.

 

I'm sure the fans who only saw them for the first time on this two-legged CA tour appreciate how much they tour, as well as the fans that brought their child with them for the first time, etc. Rush work hard at earning their money on tour. I certainly understand goobers frustration at an album every 5 years, but I believe in accepting and enjoying this reality for what it is. It's sure better than the alternative reality of the end of Rush at Test For Echo, or some other bad alternative.

[rushgoober]

my point is that if they did want to make a studio album for the love of making music, they could do it without having to go on a huge tour. they choose not to, and that's a loss for everyone because it means we get an album once every five years, if that.

Thay could well do this in the future though; after all they'd never released two individual tracks with no album until Caravan/BU2B.

 

I doubt we'll ever see that debacle again. I don't think the boys meant it for it to then be so long until the album came out, and even then by that point they ended up modifying the songs. It was a pretty slim thread to hang a whole tour on - just two songs.

[MMCXII]

http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=HqJ4zxtCWXY

 

Listen from 0:38.. Pretty much sums up their philosophy on more albums/less touring..

 

Yes I know this is over 30 years ago and the question is slightly different but still..

[rushgoober]

http://m.youtube.com...h?v=HqJ4zxtCWXY

 

Listen from 0:38.. Pretty much sums up their philosophy on more albums/less touring..

 

Yes I know this is over 30 years ago and the question is slightly different but still..

 

a lot can change and has changed in 30 years.

 

anyway, i'm one of those dinasours who remembers when they made an album every year, and then every year and a half. every 5 years is a fucklong of a time to wait. just trying to be creative and think of ways we can get some more albums out of them before they're done. it's quite a shame we've gotten so few albums from them in the last 2 decades.

[losingit2k]

my point is that if they did want to make a studio album for the love of making music, they could do it without having to go on a huge tour. they choose not to, and that's a loss for everyone because it means we get an album once every five years, if that.

Thay could well do this in the future though; after all they'd never released two individual tracks with no album until Caravan/BU2B.

 

I doubt we'll ever see that debacle again. I don't think the boys meant it for it to then be so long until the album came out, and even then by that point they ended up modifying the songs. It was a pretty slim thread to hang a whole tour on - just two songs.

 

It wasn't just two songs. If I remember correctly they also played two other songs they had never played prior. (Presto and Faithless) along with Caravan and BU2B on that tour.

[losingit2k]

http://m.youtube.com...h?v=HqJ4zxtCWXY

 

Listen from 0:38.. Pretty much sums up their philosophy on more albums/less touring..

 

Yes I know this is over 30 years ago and the question is slightly different but still..

 

a lot can change and has changed in 30 years.

 

anyway, i'm one of those dinasours who remembers when they made an album every year, and then every year and a half. every 5 years is a fucklong of a time to wait. just trying to be creative and think of ways we can get some more albums out of them before they're done. it's quite a shame we've gotten so few albums from them in the last 2 decades.

 

Well they could have just broke up after Moving Pictures like so many other bands did prior after hitting their peak. The Police, The Beatles, and Pink FLoyd comes to mind. What did they give us in the past two decades. The Police basically toured without even releasing an album. Well they released that live album or previously recorded songs. Big effort there! The Beatle gave us two songs that were recorded by John Lennon with the others putting in their two cents after the fact and Pink Floyd well, They gave us one good album and its corresponding Tour in the span of two decades. Just be glad RUSH is still around and providing great music 40 years down the road. Oh, did I mention the lack of releases by the Stones? They basically give us one good song wrapped in a ball of shit every time they release an album and then they tour on that.

 

:outtahere:

[bathory]

http://m.youtube.com...h?v=HqJ4zxtCWXY

 

Listen from 0:38.. Pretty much sums up their philosophy on more albums/less touring..

 

Yes I know this is over 30 years ago and the question is slightly different but still..

 

a lot can change and has changed in 30 years.

 

anyway, i'm one of those dinasours who remembers when they made an album every year, and then every year and a half. every 5 years is a fucklong of a time to wait. just trying to be creative and think of ways we can get some more albums out of them before they're done. it's quite a shame we've gotten so few albums from them in the last 2 decades.

 

you f*ckers wouldn't have liked the albums they would've put out anyway!

[rushgoober]

http://m.youtube.com...h?v=HqJ4zxtCWXY

 

Listen from 0:38.. Pretty much sums up their philosophy on more albums/less touring..

 

Yes I know this is over 30 years ago and the question is slightly different but still..

 

a lot can change and has changed in 30 years.

 

anyway, i'm one of those dinasours who remembers when they made an album every year, and then every year and a half. every 5 years is a fucklong of a time to wait. just trying to be creative and think of ways we can get some more albums out of them before they're done. it's quite a shame we've gotten so few albums from them in the last 2 decades.

 

you f*ckers wouldn't have liked the albums they would've put out anyway!

 

the last two were great!

[HalfwayToGone]

I guess what's missing in the discussion is a mention that sometimes creativity stays around for long periods of time, but more often it comes in waves, and forcing one's self to write songs when there isn't a decent idea brewing usually leads to either a lot of writers block or a lot of crappy output. I have no idea if Rush is capable of continuously writing worthwhile songs, or if they have sporadic flashes of inspiration or what, but the answer would definitely have an impact on how much they could put out in a given period of time.

 

One point goober made that is worth considering though—if they spent the time and energy that they spend touring, instead hanging out and writing and recording, they'd most likely put out more new songs more often. Even if they are fairly slow to come. On the other hand, some people really crave the live show and would not be pleased at all if they only went on the road once in a blue moon for a very short time.

 

Then there's the band's enjoyment to consider. Touring is rough, and wears thin, but it's tough to beat the experience of several thousand or more people going apeshit over your performance. I think the biggest audiences I played for were some sold out shows at the fastlane in asbury park opening for bands like monster magnet, prong, COC and the like, and that was only a few hundred people—a packed room freaking out is like manic energy pumped straight into your brain and body (unless you have stage fright I guess). I consider myself very lucky to have had a taste of that from time to time, and i can only imagine what it would be like magnified by 10 or 100. I suppose I'd spontaneously combust like the drummers in spinal tap. It comes with a price though. I suppose watching your sales and billboard chart position climb is exciting too, but I doubt watching numbers is as exciting as a gigantic, pumped up audience.

[Lerxster]

Alex, from a new Classic Rock mag interview:

 

No. There are no definitive discussions about it at this point. Right now it's only been a month since we got home and we really need three or four months to get it out of our system and then see what we feel like doing. But I think we're looking at spring of 2015 as the probable time to get back going again. ... Ged's been collecting bass guitars like a madman. He's covered the walls with all these vintage basses. He's playing them, and he's not one for playing when we're not touring. So I'm wondering if maybe he and I will sit down in the new year and do something. I'm just speculating. I'm not saying there are any plans for writing or anything like that. But if he's goofing around with his basses, that's a good sign for me.

[Lerxster]

Based on the laws of Rush, Geddy and Alex will reconvene sometime in 2014 to start jamming and begin work on Rush's next album.

That hasn't been the case since the mid 90s.

"So I'm wondering if maybe he (Geddy) and I will sit down in the new year and do something", said Alex.

 

That'd be 2014. You fought the Law, and the Law won. Already.

[rushgoober]

Alex, from a new Classic Rock mag interview:

 

No. There are no definitive discussions about it at this point. Right now it's only been a month since we got home and we really need three or four months to get it out of our system and then see what we feel like doing. But I think we're looking at spring of 2015 as the probable time to get back going again. ... Ged's been collecting bass guitars like a madman. He's covered the walls with all these vintage basses. He's playing them, and he's not one for playing when we're not touring. So I'm wondering if maybe he and I will sit down in the new year and do something. I'm just speculating. I'm not saying there are any plans for writing or anything like that. But if he's goofing around with his basses, that's a good sign for me.

 

Encouraging, BUT, if they truly do work on something 2015, that would mean an album likely in 2016, and AGAIN we're 5 years between albums.

 

As always, a new album, if it truly happens, is better then them retiring, but they sure take their sweet time. Hopefully they will start sooner, consider not touring, and take a lot of the pressure off - it'd be nice to have them make music for the pure love of doing it without the 2-year string attached of a massive worldwide undertaking. Alas, a man can dream...

[Lerxster]

Alex, from a new Classic Rock mag interview:

 

No. There are no definitive discussions about it at this point. Right now it's only been a month since we got home and we really need three or four months to get it out of our system and then see what we feel like doing. But I think we're looking at spring of 2015 as the probable time to get back going again. ... Ged's been collecting bass guitars like a madman. He's covered the walls with all these vintage basses. He's playing them, and he's not one for playing when we're not touring. So I'm wondering if maybe he and I will sit down in the new year and do something. I'm just speculating. I'm not saying there are any plans for writing or anything like that. But if he's goofing around with his basses, that's a good sign for me.

 

Encouraging, BUT, if they truly do work on something 2015, that would mean an album likely in 2016, and AGAIN we're 5 years between albums.

 

As always, a new album, if it truly happens, is better then them retiring, but they sure take their sweet time. Hopefully they will start sooner, consider not touring, and take a lot of the pressure off - it'd be nice to have them make music for the pure love of doing it without the 2-year string attached of a massive worldwide undertaking. Alas, a man can dream...

But Mr. Rushgoober, they make music for the pure love of doing it, then they tour. That's what they've done for forever. You are absolutely unreachable; a man-child lost in your world of "how it ought to be" while the rest of us live in a "how it is" world. Dream on dreamer, and be sure to always wear your helmet.

[upstateNYfan]

I think it's much more likely that if we get anything more at this point, a tour is much more likely than an album. Albums are not profitable, take a tremendous amount of creativity and work, and Clockwork Angels would be nearly impossble to surpass.

[HalfwayToGone]

I'll disagree with you on that. CA may be a good or even great album, but Rush wrote and recorded it, not some mythical creature. If they did it before they can do it again. They might not do another big concept album next, but they certainly are capable of doing something, and if they write even one decent riff on it, they can make some income licensing it out to TV or something similar. I'd say if anything, as time marches on, touring is going to be impossible long before recording is. There's no comparison there—touring is a hundred times more exhausting, even if maybe writing and recording is more frustrating and like pulling teeth at times.

[GeminiRising79]

http://www.utah-drug-possession.com/images/cokedistro-first.jpg

[rushgoober]

Alex, from a new Classic Rock mag interview:

 

No. There are no definitive discussions about it at this point. Right now it's only been a month since we got home and we really need three or four months to get it out of our system and then see what we feel like doing. But I think we're looking at spring of 2015 as the probable time to get back going again. ... Ged's been collecting bass guitars like a madman. He's covered the walls with all these vintage basses. He's playing them, and he's not one for playing when we're not touring. So I'm wondering if maybe he and I will sit down in the new year and do something. I'm just speculating. I'm not saying there are any plans for writing or anything like that. But if he's goofing around with his basses, that's a good sign for me.

 

Encouraging, BUT, if they truly do work on something 2015, that would mean an album likely in 2016, and AGAIN we're 5 years between albums.

 

As always, a new album, if it truly happens, is better then them retiring, but they sure take their sweet time. Hopefully they will start sooner, consider not touring, and take a lot of the pressure off - it'd be nice to have them make music for the pure love of doing it without the 2-year string attached of a massive worldwide undertaking. Alas, a man can dream...

But Mr. Rushgoober, they make music for the pure love of doing it, then they tour. That's what they've done for forever. You are absolutely unreachable; a man-child lost in your world of "how it ought to be" while the rest of us live in a "how it is" world. Dream on dreamer, and be sure to always wear your helmet.

 

Some pepole are just easily satisfied with whatever is handed to them.

Edited September 18, 2013 by rushgoober

[rushgoober]

I'll disagree with you on that. CA may be a good or even great album, but Rush wrote and recorded it, not some mythical creature. If they did it before they can do it again. They might not do another big concept album next, but they certainly are capable of doing something, and if they write even one decent riff on it, they can make some income licensing it out to TV or something similar. I'd say if anything, as time marches on, touring is going to be impossible long before recording is. There's no comparison there—touring is a hundred times more exhausting, even if maybe writing and recording is more frustrating and like pulling teeth at times.

 

Agreed.

 

I would even say they can do better than CA. Mind you, it's a great album, but it's far from their best - it's just the best album they've done in a very long time.

Edited September 18, 2013 by rushgoober

[thizzellewashington]

lol

[Slack jaw gaze]

There's a strong inference of "too much".

I didn't infer that.

 

The word you are looking for is implication. And no, I don't think he implied "too much".