Presto

[bluefox4000]

Reading this thread it's very interesting to read the Slams on pop music and melodies. I am not putting anybody down it's just interesting. I love complex stuff as much as anyone. But if a pop tune catches my ear.......i'm there. I'm so there, lol. As i said....just an observation When Rush attempted pop. I respected them more as a band. Just my view.

 

Mick

[Segue Myles]

This album is towards the bottom of their catalog for me, but I still really like it. I don't listen to it often, but when I do, I enjoy it!

Chain Lightning, Presto and The Pass are my favorites.

 

I wish they could do a re-mix on this and beef it up a little...

 

I say leave it alone. The album, while not good, I'm glad it exists. It's their transitional album after the sterile Hold Your Fire. The real album to hate on is Roll The Bones since they didn't move forward, they just stuck with where they were on Presto, except the killer opening track Dreamline.

 

There is no need to hate on any Rush album! Roll The Bones is a good, fun album that I find is great for when I am to lazy to want to listen to more challenging Rush, the technical stuff of the early albums.

 

Same goes for Presto. It has its flaws, but it helped them progress away from the synth era (which I love) without completely avoiding a natural evolution.

[LedRush]

This album is towards the bottom of their catalog for me, but I still really like it. I don't listen to it often, but when I do, I enjoy it!

Chain Lightning, Presto and The Pass are my favorites.

 

I wish they could do a re-mix on this and beef it up a little...

 

I say leave it alone. The album, while not good, I'm glad it exists. It's their transitional album after the sterile Hold Your Fire. The real album to hate on is Roll The Bones since they didn't move forward, they just stuck with where they were on Presto, except the killer opening track Dreamline.

 

Except that they wrote songs that were widely appreciated for the first time in a while. And the songs were much better. And while thin, it had much more balls than Presto...even in the "ballad" Ghost of a Chance. But other than that...

[Chicken hawk]

Show me dont tell me ♪♪♪♪

[goose]

Reading this thread it's very interesting to read the Slams on pop music and melodies. I am not putting anybody down it's just interesting. I love complex stuff as much as anyone. But if a pop tune catches my ear.......i'm there. I'm so there, lol. As i said....just an observation When Rush attempted pop. I respected them more as a band. Just my view.

 

Mick

I actually wish RUSH would return to a more pop-oriented song writing style. The plodding, melody-less songs get old to me really fast. Edited January 7, 2014 by goose

[bluefox4000]

Reading this thread it's very interesting to read the Slams on pop music and melodies. I am not putting anybody down it's just interesting. I love complex stuff as much as anyone. But if a pop tune catches my ear.......i'm there. I'm so there, lol. As i said....just an observation When Rush attempted pop. I respected them more as a band. Just my view.

 

Mick

I actually wish RUSH would return to a more pop-oriented song writing style. The plodding, melody-less songs get old to me really fast.

 

I agree. to build on that point, and not to thread-jack, but it's one of the reasons why an outfit like dream theater doesn't work to well. In going through they're work again. While there's brilliance sure. a lot of it self masturbatory Chaos, lol I love that Rush went pop a while.

 

Mick

Edited January 7, 2014 by bluefox4000

[Todem]

Rush has always strived for the song since Waves. Always trying to write great melodies. And they have done so....masterfully. And IMO they wrote a lot better on other albums than on Presto. I like Presto, but Roll The Bones was a far better "pop" Rush album IMO. It was far more realized than Presto overall. So if we were to pigeon hole Presto and Roll The Bones as the "Pop" Rush.....give me Roll The Bones if I had to choose one.

[Segue Myles]

I agree! I think if Rush had failed to experiment and had carried on with the long progressive tracks they would have grown stale. What makes the band so unique is that with every album they have experimented and kept things interesting, and with Presto, the band felt they had a good set of songs, but somehow it wasn't right. So it only makes sense they tried it again and came up with Roll The Bones, a superior album!

 

And most rock music does have a lot in common with pop. Why should melody be sacrificed for loudness? And Rush always had shorter, to the point rockers.

 

My issue with HYF through to, say, CP is that the songs were often badly affected by production. I love RTB, but it does lose a lot of points for the shiny, commercial pop production, I enjoy it but I often have to stop it halfway and play the rest later (I like every song)...still, Presto sounds to me like a band rediscovering their roots. I just wish we could have hearda version of this album the band themselves were pleased with...

[Brucey]

I agree! I think if Rush had failed to experiment and had carried on with the long progressive tracks they would have grown stale. What makes the band so unique is that with every album they have experimented and kept things interesting, and with Presto, the band felt they had a good set of songs, but somehow it wasn't right. So it only makes sense they tried it again and came up with Roll The Bones, a superior album!

 

And most rock music does have a lot in common with pop. Why should melody be sacrificed for loudness? And Rush always had shorter, to the point rockers.

 

My issue with HYF through to, say, CP is that the songs were often badly affected by production. I love RTB, but it does lose a lot of points for the shiny, commercial pop production, I enjoy it but I often have to stop it halfway and play the rest later (I like every song)...still, Presto sounds to me like a band rediscovering their roots. I just wish we could have hearda version of this album the band themselves were pleased with...

 

 

I didn't realise they themselves didn't like it

[bluefox4000]

ir's hard for me to say if I like Bones over Presto. I love Bones though it's a pop monster.

 

Mick

[Segue Myles]

They said they liked the songs but it wasn't right. I don't know where the article is, but it is the one album they would be happy to do over, if I remember correctly. But they did like it!

[jnoble]

Presto was the album that got me into Rush... heard Show Don't Tell and had to get it. To me there isn't a bad song on it. As for why a lot of people don't like it, I have two words: Rupert Hine. Listen to Show Don't Tell on Different Stages: an already excellent song taken to another level by putting some balls in the production. Heck, every song from Presto and RTB that's appeared on a live CD/DVD has made the original sound comparatively lame.

 

If I've said it once I've said it a million times on here regarding Presto/RTB and Rupert Hine...... you're NOT GOING TO PRODUCE a hard-rock aggressive sounding album recording with a Wal bass and Signature/PRS guitars run through a ton of processed effects and chorus!!! Geddy himself admitted years later that the Wal isn't a very good "rock" bass to play that style of music with. Unless you run it through a distortion/ overdrive effect, it's going to sound as clean and bouncy as it does on all the Wal-era albums (PW, HYF, Presto,RTB, etc)

 

Yes, Rupert went for a stripped down sound but the band themselves where the ones who chose to use those instruments.

Ironically, the guitars that Geddy and Alex mimed with in the Show Don't Tell video (Fender Jazz and Gibson 355) shouldve been the ones they recorded the album with.

Edited January 8, 2014 by jnoble

[jnoble]

I agree! I think if Rush had failed to experiment and had carried on with the long progressive tracks they would have grown stale. What makes the band so unique is that with every album they have experimented and kept things interesting, and with Presto, the band felt they had a good set of songs, but somehow it wasn't right. So it only makes sense they tried it again and came up with Roll The Bones, a superior album!

 

And most rock music does have a lot in common with pop. Why should melody be sacrificed for loudness? And Rush always had shorter, to the point rockers.

 

My issue with HYF through to, say, CP is that the songs were often badly affected by production. I love RTB, but it does lose a lot of points for the shiny, commercial pop production, I enjoy it but I often have to stop it halfway and play the rest later (I like every song)...still, Presto sounds to me like a band rediscovering their roots. I just wish we could have hearda version of this album the band themselves were pleased with...

 

 

I didn't realise they themselves didn't like it

 

if you read any of the books about the band and later interviews, both Neil and Geddy admit that Presto is the one album they wish they had a do-over with and flesh some songs out better and take some of the ideas further.

 

Fun Fact: Hand Over Fist was going to be an instrumental until the music was used to go with Neil's lyrics for same.

[EagleMoon]

 

If I've said it once I've said it a million times on here regarding Presto/RTB and Rupert Hine...... you're NOT GOING TO PRODUCE a hard-rock aggressive sounding album recording with a Wal bass and Signature/PRS guitars run through a ton of processed effects and chorus!!! Geddy himself admitted years later that the Wal isn't a very good "rock" bass to play that style of music with. Unless you run it through a distortion/ overdrive effect, it's going to sound as clean and bouncy as it does on all the Wal-era albums (PW, HYF, Presto,RTB, etc)

 

Exactly. Just like Justin Chancellors tone with Tool is so over processed through tons of effects. You hardly know it's a Wal.

[bathory]

it's ok

[LedRush]

Rush has always strived for the song since Waves. Always trying to write great melodies. And they have done so....masterfully. And IMO they wrote a lot better on other albums than on Presto. I like Presto, but Roll The Bones was a far better "pop" Rush album IMO. It was far more realized than Presto overall. So if we were to pigeon hole Presto and Roll The Bones as the "Pop" Rush.....give me Roll The Bones if I had to choose one.

I agree! I think if Rush had failed to experiment and had carried on with the long progressive tracks they would have grown stale. What makes the band so unique is that with every album they have experimented and kept things interesting, and with Presto, the band felt they had a good set of songs, but somehow it wasn't right. So it only makes sense they tried it again and came up with Roll The Bones, a superior album!

 

And most rock music does have a lot in common with pop. Why should melody be sacrificed for loudness? And Rush always had shorter, to the point rockers.

 

My issue with HYF through to, say, CP is that the songs were often badly affected by production. I love RTB, but it does lose a lot of points for the shiny, commercial pop production, I enjoy it but I often have to stop it halfway and play the rest later (I like every song)...still, Presto sounds to me like a band rediscovering their roots. I just wish we could have hearda version of this album the band themselves were pleased with...

 

I've said the same thing a lot of times here, but the regulars generally disagree strongly.

 

I also say the same thing about CP and T4E.

[Segue Myles]

I don't understand how anybody could be a hardcore fan of a band if they are so eager to dismiss entire sections of said bands discography, and mock another fans love of a less iconic album.

 

if someone here thinks Presto or T4E are the bands best albums, and they love them with all their heart, I will disagree with their view, but also agree to disagree!

 

Rush make great music.

[goose]

 

 

Fun Fact: Hand Over Fist was going to be an instrumental until the music was used to go with Neil's lyrics for same.

That would have been a pretty dull instrumental.

[LeaveMyThingAlone]

I don't think the production/recording/mixing/whatever you want to call it can be underestimated. Rupert Hine butchered Presto. Thin is a good word. It has no balls. Hine was Paula Abdul's producer and it sounds like a dance album. I was surprised they brought him back for Roll the Bones, which is a much better sound, but still not great.

 

Like Vapor Trails, it's very frustrating to try to listen to, but for the opposite reason. Vapor Trails has too much testosterone and Presto not enough. I think it has a lot of great songs and I'd love to hear the album with a Vapor Trails like makeover. It's funny because when I saw Rupert Hine for the first time on the documentary, he was exactly like how I would picture someone who took a rock band and made it sound like this

 

Show don't tell has one of my favorite Alex riffs ever, War Paint is phenomenal, Presto is genius, Available Light is solid, The Pass is good, but not a favorite

 

Roll the Bones is so odd because it might have more garbage than any other rush album but has 4 songs that are outstanding and better than anything on the previous 5 albums. Dreamline is as good as it gets, Roll the Bones, where's my thing, and ghost of a chance- all great

Edited January 9, 2014 by LeaveMyThingAlone

[sitboaf]

Poor production aside, every album from Signals to Roll the Bones follows the same basic formula: around 10 short songs that aren't too heavy (yes, I know that's a crashing generalization - go with it for a second).

 

Back when they were making proggy albums, Rush could afford to experiment by doing fewer, longer songs, taking detours and leading the listeners on a journey.

But, in the 80s, because of that new, dense formula they were using, their albums were only considered excellent when virtually all of the songs were strong. A great album might have 1 or 2 clunkers, but that's about the max, because just a few hiccups will quickly derail an 11-song pop-rock album.

 

E.G. Despite how most of us LOVE LOVE LOVE Dreamline, we don't like RtB overall because of Neurotica and a few others.

In other words, it's not just the peak songs that make or break the short-form 80s albums; it's the valleys, too.

 

(For you Iron Maiden fans, think about what they pulled off during this time period: They went from the fantastic Powerslave album in 1985, which had a 13-minute epic and an instrumental, directly to the pop metal of 1986's Somewhere in Time, (which has but one real flaw - a couple of the songs are actually too long!), then right back to prog metal for 1988's Seventh Son.)

Edited January 9, 2014 by sitboaf

[bathory]

Poor production aside, every album from Signals to Roll the Bones follows the same basic formula: around 10 short songs that aren't too heavy (yes, I know that's a crashing generalization - go with it for a second).

 

Back when they were making proggy albums, Rush could afford to experiment by doing fewer, longer songs, taking detours and leading the listeners on a journey.

But, in the 80s, because of that new, dense formula they were using, their albums were only considered excellent when virtually all of the songs were strong. A great album might have 1 or 2 clunkers, but that's about the max, because just a few hiccups will quickly derail an 11-song pop-rock album.

 

E.G. Despite how most of us LOVE LOVE LOVE Dreamline, we don't like RtB overall because of Neurotica and a few others.

In other words, it's not just the peak songs that make or break the short-form 80s albums; it's the valleys, too.

 

(For you Iron Maiden fans, think about what they pulled off during this time period: They went from the fantastic Powerslave album in 1985, which had a 13-minute epic and an instrumental, directly to the pop metal of 1986's Somewhere in Time, (which has but one real flaw - a couple of the songs are actually too long!), then right back to prog metal for 1988's Seventh Son.)

 

somewhere in time isn't pop metal to me

[Segue Myles]

I don't think the production/recording/mixing/whatever you want to call it can be underestimated. Rupert Hine butchered Presto. Thin is a good word. It has no balls. Hine was Paula Abdul's producer and it sounds like a dance album. I was surprised they brought him back for Roll the Bones, which is a much better sound, but still not great.

 

Like Vapor Trails, it's very frustrating to try to listen to, but for the opposite reason. Vapor Trails has too much testosterone and Presto not enough. I think it has a lot of great songs and I'd love to hear the album with a Vapor Trails like makeover. It's funny because when I saw Rupert Hine for the first time on the documentary, he was exactly like how I would picture someone who took a rock band and made it sound like this

 

Show don't tell has one of my favorite Alex riffs ever, War Paint is phenomenal, Presto is genius, Available Light is solid, The Pass is good, but not a favorite

 

Roll the Bones is so odd because it might have more garbage than any other rush album but has 4 songs that are outstanding and better than anything on the previous 5 albums. Dreamline is as good as it gets, Roll the Bones, where's my thing, and ghost of a chance- all great

 

Whoah! Call me Seggerz but RTB has songs on it that are better than anything on the previous 5 albums?

 

NO NO NO NO NO! HYF and Presto, yes, but that's it.

Edited January 9, 2014 by Segue Myles

[Disk98]

I don't know, Roll the Bones is certainly better than Hold Your Fire. Would you rather listen to Heresy or Tai Shan?

[bluefox4000]

Roll the Bones is another heavily underrated album. Best of the 90'strilogy to me and i'll stand by it. I thought they nailed it pop wise on RTB.

 

 

Nothing wrong with pop either.

 

Mick

Edited January 12, 2014 by bluefox4000

[Segue Myles]

I love pop!