Jump to content

Was not playing "Losing It" on this tour a misfire?

Alchemical

By Alchemical,
in Rush

 Share

Recommended Posts

Principled Man

Principled Man

Posted
Posted

All this talk about the band playing Losing It on stage is based on the assumption that the band had any interest in playing it.

 

They've always said that there are songs on their albums that were never meant to be played live. Losing It is probably one of those songs.

I think you might've missed an interview or two. I clearly remember reading AND listening to interviews in the early 90s in which Geddy stated that anything recorded is with the thought that it CAN be duplicated onstage (if they so desire). He went on to say that they are built around their performances

 

They CAN play any song on stage - so what? Being able to play every song live is not the same as wanting to play every song live. There has been no indication that they've had any desire to play Losing It live.

 

I say again - all this talk about Losing It is just a pipedream for certain fans who want to see it in concert. It is not a "missed opportunity" for the band, as the band has never shown any desire to play it.

I was referring to the bit where you stated "They've always said that there are songs on their albums that were never meant to be played live." The way that sounds SOUNDS like they never INTENDED for some songs to EVER be played live. The articles and interviews that I'm talking about refer to the point that every song may or may not be played...but there's NEVER a song made where they DON'T WANT to play it live. At least that's what Geddy said 20 years ago or so anyway.

 

The interviews I remember had Neil discussing older songs and how there are some that will never see the stage. I can definitely see the band members having different views when it comes to their catalogue. Geddy may see all songs as doable, whereas Neil might look at some songs and say, "No way".

 

Tai Shan, for example. Geddy and Alex HATE it..... :eh: I'd bet real money that after they recorded Hold Your Fire, they said to themselves, "We're NEVER playing that again....." :laughing guy:

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Slack jaw gaze

Slack jaw gaze

Posted
Posted (edited)

The interviews I remember had Neil discussing older songs and how there are some that will never see the stage.

He even had a term for them : "production numbers", I believe. Different Strings was given as one example. I believe Witch Hunt was as well, but technology allowed Neil to play the cowbell part live.

 

That being said, I believe Losing It was at least considered for this tour. I recall it from an interview but I have no idea where.

Edited by Slack jaw gaze
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Tony R

Tony R

Posted
Posted

All this talk about the band playing Losing It on stage is based on the assumption that the band had any interest in playing it.

 

They've always said that there are songs on their albums that were never meant to be played live. Losing It is probably one of those songs.

I think you might've missed an interview or two. I clearly remember reading AND listening to interviews in the early 90s in which Geddy stated that anything recorded is with the thought that it CAN be duplicated onstage (if they so desire). He went on to say that they are built around their performances

 

I'm sorry mate but you are wrong. Back in the day they had what they referred to as "studio production numbers" that were never designed or destined to be played live. Some they have resurrected as technology has permitted but it doesn't alter the fact they they did write and record "studio only" tracks.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites
OGr8imL84AD8inF8sBlackSedan

OGr8imL84AD8inF8sBlackSedan

Posted
Posted

All this talk about the band playing Losing It on stage is based on the assumption that the band had any interest in playing it.

 

They've always said that there are songs on their albums that were never meant to be played live. Losing It is probably one of those songs.

I think you might've missed an interview or two. I clearly remember reading AND listening to interviews in the early 90s in which Geddy stated that anything recorded is with the thought that it CAN be duplicated onstage (if they so desire). He went on to say that they are built around their performances

 

I'm sorry mate but you are wrong. Back in the day they had what they referred to as "studio production numbers" that were never designed or destined to be played live. Some they have resurrected as technology has permitted but it doesn't alter the fact they they did write and record "studio only" tracks.

 

This is true.

 

As much as I or anyone else would love to have heard or would want to hear Losing It live...It ain't gonna happen.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Grover

Grover

Posted
Posted
I was excited in 1985 when Ben Mink appeared on stage with FM again when they opened for Rush in Toronto. I was hoping he would join Rush on stage for Losing It. Didn't happen. I think it would have been great to play and not very hard for Geddy to sing.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Powderfinger

Powderfinger

Posted
Posted

Absolutely. It was the 30th anniversary of Signals, and they had a string section for what will likely be the only time in their history. Missed opportunity. Should have replaced Red Sector A.

Why replace the best song they ever wrote?

 

Well, I don't know if you are being sarcastic. There once was a time when I adored Red Sector A—around the Show of Hands period. I like the song, and appreciate the lyrical subject matter and how it must hit close to home for Geddy. But it's a classic example of a song that the band thinks is more important and popular than it really is—every band has one or two of those, no?

 

Just my two cents. Red Sector is simply the first song that, when I looked at the CA tour setlist, I thought, "That one again? Why?"

Link to comment
Share on other sites
OGr8imL84AD8inF8sBlackSedan

OGr8imL84AD8inF8sBlackSedan

Posted
Posted

Absolutely. It was the 30th anniversary of Signals, and they had a string section for what will likely be the only time in their history. Missed opportunity. Should have replaced Red Sector A.

Why replace the best song they ever wrote?

 

Well, I don't know if you are being sarcastic. There once was a time when I adored Red Sector A—around the Show of Hands period. I like the song, and appreciate the lyrical subject matter and how it must hit close to home for Geddy. But it's a classic example of a song that the band thinks is more important and popular than it really is—every band has one or two of those, no?

 

Just my two cents. Red Sector is simply the first song that, when I looked at the CA tour setlist, I thought, "That one again? Why?"

 

I agree with the "That one again"...But it is such a great guitar song.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
RushBoingo

RushBoingo

Posted
Posted
I agree, Red Sector A was the only song on the Winnipeg set that I really felt was, "Oh come on, there were so many better choices you could have made". The Red Deer show on the other hand, that title went to Bravado. Now that one has been played more than it has deserved.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
JohnnyBlaze

JohnnyBlaze

Posted
Posted (edited)

All this talk about the band playing Losing It on stage is based on the assumption that the band had any interest in playing it.

 

They've always said that there are songs on their albums that were never meant to be played live. Losing It is probably one of those songs.

I think you might've missed an interview or two. I clearly remember reading AND listening to interviews in the early 90s in which Geddy stated that anything recorded is with the thought that it CAN be duplicated onstage (if they so desire). He went on to say that they are built around their performances

 

I'm sorry mate but you are wrong. Back in the day they had what they referred to as "studio production numbers" that were never designed or destined to be played live. Some they have resurrected as technology has permitted but it doesn't alter the fact they they did write and record "studio only" tracks.

No need to say 'sorry'. All good.

Again though, I'm only referring to what Geddy SAID in a couple of interviews about 20 years ago. Things they say differ from decade to decade and from member to member while none, some or all of what they say may or may not be bs....----> After Signals and the Subdivisions video were released I remember Lifeson saying that they intend to make several videos for the album (since videos were a great way to reach modern audiences [in the early 80s]). Yeah, he said that, and they might've even INTENDED that but we all know (now) that Signals saw very few videos made.

 

My point: I'm not giving an opinion or even a concert tune desire. Hell, I don't really care if they play(ed) Losing It with or without an orchestra. I'm only stating what Geddy STATED decades ago

Edited by JohnnyBlaze
Link to comment
Share on other sites
jamie

jamie

Posted
Posted
My dad and I were discussing that yesterday. We both feel that if would be great to hear it with the string ensemble.
Link to comment
Share on other sites
EagleMoon

EagleMoon

Posted
Posted

I think it might have something to do with the subject matter of the song..

 

I agree. Not really something they would want to put up front and out there at this stage in their careers. It's a nice song, but it's a bit depressing.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Cyclonus X-1

Cyclonus X-1

Posted
Posted
I don't see why the subject matter should have anything to do with it. These guys are always talking about how they're playing better than ever these days, about how all their performances nowadays are awesome and fulfilling, etc., etc. They just put out a killer album on top of that. These men are NOT has-beens; why should they pussyfoot around that song as if they are?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
GeddysMullet

GeddysMullet

Posted
Posted

I don't see why the subject matter should have anything to do with it. These guys are always talking about how they're playing better than ever these days, about how all their performances nowadays are awesome and fulfilling, etc., etc. They just put out a killer album on top of that. These men are NOT has-beens; why should they pussyfoot around that song as if they are?

 

Perhaps they simply aren't interested in playing it because feelings it expresses are so far from how they feel now.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
GeddysMullet

GeddysMullet

Posted
Posted

YES! They freaking blew it! Bravado is as much of a "buzz kill" IMHO!

 

I don't like Bravado either, but Geddy has cited the lyric "We will pay the price but we will not count the cost" as one of his top favourites, so I reckon that's why they wanted to play that song.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
P-Tor

P-Tor

Posted
Posted

I agree, Red Sector A was the only song on the Winnipeg set that I really felt was, "Oh come on, there were so many better choices you could have made". The Red Deer show on the other hand, that title went to Bravado. Now that one has been played more than it has deserved.

 

Disagree about RSA. TOTALLY agree about Bravado. They need to bury that one.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
bathory

bathory

Posted
Posted

I don't see why the subject matter should have anything to do with it. These guys are always talking about how they're playing better than ever these days, about how all their performances nowadays are awesome and fulfilling, etc., etc. They just put out a killer album on top of that. These men are NOT has-beens; why should they pussyfoot around that song as if they are?

 

Perhaps they simply aren't interested in playing it because feelings it expresses are so far from how they feel now.

 

true, they've often said that they don't like playing songs they can no longer relate to. I'm not sure how often they hold themselves to that though

Link to comment
Share on other sites
losingit2k

losingit2k

Posted
Posted (edited)

Yes! Yes!Yes! Biggest missed opportunity ever. :facepalm: They could have played Analog kid then said " here's one we've never played live" as the violinist walked down from the platform.

 

http://www.lamusicalsalon.org/sitebuildercontent/sitebuilderpictures/AudreySolomon.jpg

Edited by losingit2k
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
calirush

calirush

Posted
Posted

Yes! Yes!Yes! Biggest missed opportunity ever. :facepalm: They could have played Analog kid then said " here's one we've never played live" as the violinist walked down from the platform.

 

http://www.lamusicalsalon.org/sitebuildercontent/sitebuilderpictures/AudreySolomon.jpg

 

 

I couldn't agree more.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
losingit2k

losingit2k

Posted
Posted

Yes! Yes!Yes! Biggest missed opportunity ever. :facepalm: They could have played Analog kid then said " here's one we've never played live" as the violinist walked down from the platform.

 

http://www.lamusicalsalon.org/sitebuildercontent/sitebuilderpictures/AudreySolomon.jpg

 

 

I couldn't agree more.

Honestly, I think they took the easy way with the strings. They could have done so much more. They could have played Tears, Nobody's Hero even Limelight. They didn't even play BU2B2 which only has strings. But Losing it, that was total FUBAR not to play that during the last tour. It was the 30th Anniversary of Signals as well. Instead they went the Power Windows route. I never understood that one. Oh Well on to the next tour I guess?
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Czarcasm

Czarcasm

Posted
Posted

Could I just say how awesome it would have been to hear Witchhunt live with a full string section in place of the traditional synthesizer part?

 

Can you imagine?

 

The righteous rise

With Burning eyes

of hated and ill will

 

Imagine that part/s but with strings? It would be unbelievable.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

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 account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share
Go to topic listing

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...