savagegrace26 Posted October 18, 2014 Share Posted October 18, 2014 I said this in another thread but..........i would actually encourage them to go through 97. but not continue after Neil's tragedy )I wouldn't bring myself to tell Neil about it) I would do this because at this point i'm FAR more interested in a Ged solo career. I want to see What ged could have come up with. I would say that when that split happens to let Ged explore on his own. MickNot me. Quit while you're ahead. Since everyone is being honest, I will be too. After Signals, it was all downhill. Yes, each album after that has a good song or two or three. CA is the best in ages, and it would have been better if they had another producer. But even though CA is the best in a long time, it still doesn't come close to Signals, or Permanent Waves, or Hemispheres, or.....A Farewell to Kings. Yea i was looking back at my quit in 97 statement. I already don't agree with myself, lol. They should have quit in 89.......then Ged solo.....i dunno. all speculation. But yes......if we're honest.....and that's hard to be......it was downhill after Signals. Might not have been immediately noticeable. but it was starting to slip. Mick So you think everything after 89 should be erased and forgotten? Eh. There was some really good material and some excellent tours after 89 and I'm grateful for everything they've produced. So why do you come here again? Obviously It's hypothetical. but yes if i could i'd erase the 90's onward....i probably would. I'm a fan. yes......i just am not a worshiper. I have Rush I love and rush I don't. and am not afraid to criticize. so i have to dick ride rush to be here? That's nice. Mick Mick I'm not a worshipper either. Still, there's enough good material from the past 25 years that I would really miss it if it never existed and not releasing or touring during that time would certainly have not helped increase their fanbase or popularity. Appreciating what they've produced to a degree is not "dick riding". And we certainly wouldn't be here now having this lovely conversation if they stopped in 1989. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bluefox4000 Posted October 18, 2014 Share Posted October 18, 2014 I said this in another thread but..........i would actually encourage them to go through 97. but not continue after Neil's tragedy )I wouldn't bring myself to tell Neil about it) I would do this because at this point i'm FAR more interested in a Ged solo career. I want to see What ged could have come up with. I would say that when that split happens to let Ged explore on his own. MickNot me. Quit while you're ahead. Since everyone is being honest, I will be too. After Signals, it was all downhill. Yes, each album after that has a good song or two or three. CA is the best in ages, and it would have been better if they had another producer. But even though CA is the best in a long time, it still doesn't come close to Signals, or Permanent Waves, or Hemispheres, or.....A Farewell to Kings. Yea i was looking back at my quit in 97 statement. I already don't agree with myself, lol. They should have quit in 89.......then Ged solo.....i dunno. all speculation. But yes......if we're honest.....and that's hard to be......it was downhill after Signals. Might not have been immediately noticeable. but it was starting to slip. Mick So you think everything after 89 should be erased and forgotten? Eh. There was some really good material and some excellent tours after 89 and I'm grateful for everything they've produced. So why do you come here again? Obviously It's hypothetical. but yes if i could i'd erase the 90's onward....i probably would. I'm a fan. yes......i just am not a worshiper. I have Rush I love and rush I don't. and am not afraid to criticize. so i have to dick ride rush to be here? That's nice. Mick Mick I'm not a worshipper either. Still, there's enough good material from the past 25 years that I would really miss it if it never existed and not releasing or touring during that time would certainly have not helped increase their fanbase or popularity. Appreciating what they've produced to a degree is not "dick riding". And we certainly wouldn't be here now having this lovely conversation if they stopped in 1989. Hey.......I don't disagree with you. There's good songs sprinkled after 89......but honestly if they were gone. I wouldn't miss the 90's onward. A question was asked. i just answered. Sorry if you don't like my answer. Mick 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Disk98 Posted October 18, 2014 Share Posted October 18, 2014 "Enjoy the ride, fellas. Enjoy it." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bathory Posted October 18, 2014 Share Posted October 18, 2014 I tell them not to let go of Broon. No. They needed a change and needed to find their own direction. I bet if they stayed with Broon they would've broken up a long time ago. There was obviiously some friction and differences. Your opinion, not mine. Maybe he would've talked them out of so many keyboards which would've been a good thing. I disagree, if the artists want to pursue a particular musical direction, it is not the producers job to convince them otherwise bob rock disagrees! :D Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bathory Posted October 18, 2014 Share Posted October 18, 2014 I said this in another thread but..........i would actually encourage them to go through 97. but not continue after Neil's tragedy )I wouldn't bring myself to tell Neil about it) I would do this because at this point i'm FAR more interested in a Ged solo career. I want to see What ged could have come up with. I would say that when that split happens to let Ged explore on his own. MickNot me. Quit while you're ahead I would have told them. Since everyone is being honest, I will be too. After Signals, it was all downhill. Yes, each album after that has a good song or two or three. CA is the best in ages, and it would have been better if they had another producer. But even though CA is the best in a long time, it still doesn't come close to Signals, or Permanent Waves, or Hemispheres, or.....A Farewell to Kings.Not speaking of S & A's but of only CA and VT, I believe the material (songs) are there for something really good even special potentially but the production just killed it in both cases.... it seems like every old rock band is clueless when it comes to modern production 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Narps Posted October 18, 2014 Share Posted October 18, 2014 I said this in another thread but..........i would actually encourage them to go through 97. but not continue after Neil's tragedy )I wouldn't bring myself to tell Neil about it) I would do this because at this point i'm FAR more interested in a Ged solo career. I want to see What ged could have come up with. I would say that when that split happens to let Ged explore on his own. MickNot me. Quit while you're ahead I would have told them. Since everyone is being honest, I will be too. After Signals, it was all downhill. Yes, each album after that has a good song or two or three. CA is the best in ages, and it would have been better if they had another producer. But even though CA is the best in a long time, it still doesn't come close to Signals, or Permanent Waves, or Hemispheres, or.....A Farewell to Kings.Not speaking of S & A's but of only CA and VT, I believe the material (songs) are there for something really good even special potentially but the production just killed it in both cases.... it seems like every old rock fan is clueless when it comes to modern productionFixed some... 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bastille Dave Posted October 19, 2014 Share Posted October 19, 2014 "whatever you do, don't put a naked man on an album cover." 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
patjnev Posted October 19, 2014 Share Posted October 19, 2014 Become a Jazz fusion band after 1990 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fridge Posted October 19, 2014 Share Posted October 19, 2014 Retire in 1987 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Union 5-3992 Posted October 19, 2014 Share Posted October 19, 2014 I wouldn't say anything. I don't care about meeting them ever. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
antiquark Posted October 19, 2014 Share Posted October 19, 2014 Retire in 2030. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
G Lee Posted October 19, 2014 Share Posted October 19, 2014 Geddy: Will you marry me? Alex and Neil: Wanna get drunk? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Snyder80 Posted October 20, 2014 Share Posted October 20, 2014 (edited) For the magic you are about to create for the next 40+ years: Thank You. Edited October 20, 2014 by Snyder80 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Motorshooter Posted October 20, 2014 Share Posted October 20, 2014 Hi guys, can I get you a beer? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nicky6 Posted October 21, 2014 Share Posted October 21, 2014 I would tell them to STAY GOLD 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