jnoble Posted November 15, 2013 Share Posted November 15, 2013 (edited) I'm not bashing it or saying it's bad. Afterimage is one of my favorite songs from that era and the guitar solo. While listening to the album yesterday it occurred to me that the vocals on it are pretty plain. Not Geddy's singing per se, the production of it. Every album before that had some double-tracking or mild echo or reverb or some sort of gussying up the singing. But GUP has almost none of that on every track. Very upfront with no effects. I wonder if that was deliberate or if they wouldve done it differently if they had a real producer working on it with them like Peter Collins or Terry Brown. Power Windows after it went totally the other way smothering his voice in reverb to the point where he sounds like he's singing from inside a trash can. Edited November 15, 2013 by jnoble Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ReRushed Posted November 15, 2013 Share Posted November 15, 2013 They were supposed to have Steve Lillywhite as producer. He backed out last minute. They hired Peter Henderson. He turned out to be more of an engineer than producer. Geddy ended up the de facto producer. The result is what you hear. I read this somewhere, I think Contents Under Pressure. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
RushBoingo Posted November 15, 2013 Share Posted November 15, 2013 Yeah it is pretty plain, except for kid gloves and the chorus of between the wheels Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
drbirdsong Posted November 15, 2013 Share Posted November 15, 2013 Time does things to the albums you get when they are new. I remember Grace Under Pressure when it first came out and it sounded different compared to a lot of music released around the same time. The early 80s were saturated with far too much reverb , but then Rush dropped this arid beast on us. I remember my girlfriend at the time saying, with a memory of the band that was at best a couple of years old, that Rush had been fun, but now they were like prophets descending from the mountain with dire proclamations. I recall focusing on that dry sound most of all. So to make a long story long... Yeah it's a bit dry sounding. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
robertrobyn Posted November 15, 2013 Share Posted November 15, 2013 GuP Is in my top 3 so there!!! 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
OGr8imL84AD8inF8sBlackSedan Posted November 15, 2013 Share Posted November 15, 2013 Never noticed the dry sound. I still love P/G though. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lerxster Posted November 15, 2013 Share Posted November 15, 2013 Geddy had some type of medical saliva issue during the recording of GUP. Parcheditis or something. Lackawata Syndrome maybe? I don't remember. Oh, it was Cantspitosis. It's a very Canadian malady. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tas7 Posted November 15, 2013 Share Posted November 15, 2013 Rush fans talk about Signals being the big change but G/P was the real change for me and didn't like it at first. Must admit it has aged quite well 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
lifeson90 Posted November 15, 2013 Share Posted November 15, 2013 Dunno what you talking about no dryness here just a great great album :) 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bangster of Goats Posted November 15, 2013 Share Posted November 15, 2013 Yeah I've noticed that on GUP... and personally and artistically, I prefer a drier sound. I don't like things to get all blurry with tons of reverb slathered on. And I'm still mentally scarred from the pingy-bright gated-reverb drum sounds of the 80s. ;) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Segue Myles Posted November 15, 2013 Share Posted November 15, 2013 I get this completely. I still think its a hundred times the album Power Windows is. Marginally superior to Signals. The vocals are a big part of that! For me, the change in sound began with Moving Pictures. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Czarcasm Posted November 15, 2013 Share Posted November 15, 2013 I get this completely. I still think its a hundred times the album Power Windows is. Marginally superior to Signals. The vocals are a big part of that! For me, the change in sound began with Moving Pictures.>P/G better than PoW>You're serious wow gr8 b8 m8 Why do you think Rush hired the esteemed English pop producer Peter Collins for two albums? They weren't pleased with the sound of Signals, and Grace under pressure sounded so clinical it may as well have been recorded in pharmacy. P/G could never have been recorded and Rush's progression musically would have been unchanged. Signals to Power Windows just sounds more logical than what actually happened. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
analog guy Posted November 15, 2013 Share Posted November 15, 2013 I've never liked the sound of the vocals on that album.... I've never been able to figure out exactly why. Maybe it is the dryness. It's almost too isolated from the backing track. I always thought that they didn't EQ his voice quite right, or something. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GeddysMullet Posted November 16, 2013 Share Posted November 16, 2013 I completely agree that Grace Under Pressure is way better than Power Windows. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dark Lord von Crayola Posted November 16, 2013 Share Posted November 16, 2013 I guess I never really noticed it, or it just didn't bother me, because Grace Under Pressure is one of my favorite Rush albums. I've always thought it was much better than Signals. Signals just has too many songs that I don't really care for (New World Man, The Weapon, Countdown never really interested me). I love every song on Grace Under Pressure, (yes, that includes red lenses). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Narps Posted November 16, 2013 Share Posted November 16, 2013 (edited) I completely agree that Grace Under Pressure is way better than Power Windows.We agreed on something....... :dweez: :codger: Edited November 16, 2013 by Narpet Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Snaked Posted November 16, 2013 Share Posted November 16, 2013 Gah! I hate it when people call Grace Under Pressure "GUP" It's P/g! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dark Lord von Crayola Posted November 16, 2013 Share Posted November 16, 2013 Gah!I hate it when people call Grace Under Pressure "GUP"It's P/g! I hate all of the abbreviations and acronyms for the albums and songs. I prefer to just type out the whole name; it's not hard. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
GeminiRising79 Posted November 16, 2013 Share Posted November 16, 2013 I love p/g. Its in my top-tier list of Rush albums. Love the clean sound...wish they would return to it. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jnoble Posted November 17, 2013 Author Share Posted November 17, 2013 (edited) I disagree about Grace being better than Power Windows. I mean, they're both good and music is very subjective, but Power Windows is SO much bigger and brighter and richer and optimistic sounding both musically and lyrically than the uptight tense Grace album that came before. Night and day difference in multiple ways. I don't mind reverb on vocals to spruce them up but there are some Rush albums that went overboard with it (Signals and Power Windows) and some that got it just right (Moving Pictures, HYF, Presto come to mind) Edited November 17, 2013 by jnoble Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now