tangy Posted May 15, 2015 Share Posted May 15, 2015 The idea that rush was bar band quality or they were not top tier players as stated above in the 70's is laughable. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Segue Myles Posted May 15, 2015 Author Share Posted May 15, 2015 I think I love Bruce Springsteen more than any thing else. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Captain Avatar Posted May 15, 2015 Share Posted May 15, 2015 The idea that rush was bar band quality or they were not top tier players as stated above in the 70's is laughable. I'm with you. The point being made is that 70's Rush was a "bar band" when compared with the likes of ELP, Yes, Genesis, and Kansas, but I just don't agree at all. I think they are all comparable musicians. "Hemispheres Neil" doesn't stack up against Phil Ehart? No way in hell that's true."Hemispheres Geddy" sucks when compared with Mike Rutherford? Seriously?"Hemispheres Alex" is "bar band" musician compared with Kerry Livgren? Give me a break. Perhaps Hemispheres is not as complex or symphonic as something like Brain Salad Surgery or Close to the Edge, but no way are Geddy, Alex and Neil "bar band" players, IMO. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EagleMoon Posted May 15, 2015 Share Posted May 15, 2015 The idea that rush was bar band quality or they were not top tier players as stated above in the 70's is laughable. I'm with you. The point being made is that 70's Rush was a "bar band" when compared with the likes of ELP, Yes, Genesis, and Kansas, but I just don't agree at all. I think they are all comparable musicians. "Hemispheres Neil" doesn't stack up against Phil Ehart? No way in hell that's true."Hemispheres Geddy" sucks when compared with Mike Rutherford? Seriously?"Hemispheres Alex" is "bar band" musician compared with Kerry Livgren? Give me a break. Perhaps Hemispheres is not as complex or symphonic as something like Brain Salad Surgery or Close to the Edge, but no way are Geddy, Alex and Neil "bar band" players, IMO. You're allowed to disagree. It's a free country. :) I'm talking about technical ability. No way were the boys in the same category with classically trained musicians. They just weren't. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Segue Myles Posted May 15, 2015 Author Share Posted May 15, 2015 The idea that rush was bar band quality or they were not top tier players as stated above in the 70's is laughable. I'm with you. The point being made is that 70's Rush was a "bar band" when compared with the likes of ELP, Yes, Genesis, and Kansas, but I just don't agree at all. I think they are all comparable musicians. "Hemispheres Neil" doesn't stack up against Phil Ehart? No way in hell that's true."Hemispheres Geddy" sucks when compared with Mike Rutherford? Seriously?"Hemispheres Alex" is "bar band" musician compared with Kerry Livgren? Give me a break. Perhaps Hemispheres is not as complex or symphonic as something like Brain Salad Surgery or Close to the Edge, but no way are Geddy, Alex and Neil "bar band" players, IMO. You're allowed to disagree. It's a free country. :) I'm talking about technical ability. No way were the boys in the same category with classically trained musicians. They just weren't. It is ok, I agree completely. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Captain Avatar Posted May 16, 2015 Share Posted May 16, 2015 The idea that rush was bar band quality or they were not top tier players as stated above in the 70's is laughable. I'm with you. The point being made is that 70's Rush was a "bar band" when compared with the likes of ELP, Yes, Genesis, and Kansas, but I just don't agree at all. I think they are all comparable musicians. "Hemispheres Neil" doesn't stack up against Phil Ehart? No way in hell that's true."Hemispheres Geddy" sucks when compared with Mike Rutherford? Seriously?"Hemispheres Alex" is "bar band" musician compared with Kerry Livgren? Give me a break. Perhaps Hemispheres is not as complex or symphonic as something like Brain Salad Surgery or Close to the Edge, but no way are Geddy, Alex and Neil "bar band" players, IMO. You're allowed to disagree. It's a free country. :) I'm talking about technical ability. No way were the boys in the same category with classically trained musicians. They just weren't. Yeah, I disagree. In fact, you're the first person I've ever heard say that 70's Neil Peart is "bar band" quality compared with...well...anyone...but certainly not the likes of Phil Ehart or Phil Collins. But, to each his own. For the record, I absolutely agree that Rick Wakeman, Tony Banks, and Keith Emerson wipe the floor with Geddy on keys...but then again Geddy has never claimed to be a great keyboardist. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ReRushed Posted May 16, 2015 Share Posted May 16, 2015 The idea that rush was bar band quality or they were not top tier players as stated above in the 70's is laughable. I'm with you. The point being made is that 70's Rush was a "bar band" when compared with the likes of ELP, Yes, Genesis, and Kansas, but I just don't agree at all. I think they are all comparable musicians. "Hemispheres Neil" doesn't stack up against Phil Ehart? No way in hell that's true."Hemispheres Geddy" sucks when compared with Mike Rutherford? Seriously?"Hemispheres Alex" is "bar band" musician compared with Kerry Livgren? Give me a break. Perhaps Hemispheres is not as complex or symphonic as something like Brain Salad Surgery or Close to the Edge, but no way are Geddy, Alex and Neil "bar band" players, IMO. You're allowed to disagree. It's a free country. :) I'm talking about technical ability. No way were the boys in the same category with classically trained musicians. They just weren't. Yeah, I disagree. In fact, you're the first person I've ever heard say that 70's Neil Peart is "bar band" quality compared with...well...anyone...but certainly not the likes of Phil Ehart or Phil Collins. But, to each his own. For the record, I absolutely agree that Rick Wakeman, Tony Banks, and Keith Emerson wipe the floor with Geddy on keys...but then again Geddy has never claimed to be a great keyboardist.Geddy never tried to be a keyboardist on the level of Wakeman or Emerson or Banks. Why compare? It's ridiculous. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EagleMoon Posted May 16, 2015 Share Posted May 16, 2015 The idea that rush was bar band quality or they were not top tier players as stated above in the 70's is laughable. I'm with you. The point being made is that 70's Rush was a "bar band" when compared with the likes of ELP, Yes, Genesis, and Kansas, but I just don't agree at all. I think they are all comparable musicians. "Hemispheres Neil" doesn't stack up against Phil Ehart? No way in hell that's true."Hemispheres Geddy" sucks when compared with Mike Rutherford? Seriously?"Hemispheres Alex" is "bar band" musician compared with Kerry Livgren? Give me a break. Perhaps Hemispheres is not as complex or symphonic as something like Brain Salad Surgery or Close to the Edge, but no way are Geddy, Alex and Neil "bar band" players, IMO. You're allowed to disagree. It's a free country. :) I'm talking about technical ability. No way were the boys in the same category with classically trained musicians. They just weren't. Yeah, I disagree. In fact, you're the first person I've ever heard say that 70's Neil Peart is "bar band" quality compared with...well...anyone...but certainly not the likes of Phil Ehart or Phil Collins. But, to each his own. For the record, I absolutely agree that Rick Wakeman, Tony Banks, and Keith Emerson wipe the floor with Geddy on keys...but then again Geddy has never claimed to be a great keyboardist. I'm sure the guys in the band would have agreed that their musical virtuosity at the time wasn't at the level of someone classically trained. We don't even know for sure how much the guys know about musical theory. I don't remember ever reading much about that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lucas Posted May 16, 2015 Share Posted May 16, 2015 70's Rush was kind of basic bar band compared to groups like Kansas or ELP who were much more accomplished musicians and could play circles around Geddy, Alex and Neil. Excuse my French, but this is complete bullshit ... "training" has nothing to do with "accomplishment" ... I have spent years studying, training, being instructed ( or whatever you want to call it ) with the classical guitar, but that does not make it any more of an accomplishment then the way I have learned to jam rock and roll - on my own - with other musicians simply by playing what I love .. There is the misconception that the only way to be "good" is to lock yourself in a room, or go to some place of learning and be taught something ... That is no more an accomplishment than what Hendrix accomplished his own way ... I've seen a lot of live music in my time - rock, fusion, jazz, pop, big band, etc - and I will say that there is no one off the top of my head that I would say "ran rings" around Geddy as a bass player Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EagleMoon Posted May 16, 2015 Share Posted May 16, 2015 70's Rush was kind of basic bar band compared to groups like Kansas or ELP who were much more accomplished musicians and could play circles around Geddy, Alex and Neil. Excuse my French, but this is complete bullshit ... "training" has nothing to do with "accomplishment" ... I have spent years studying, training, being instructed ( or whatever you want to call it ) with the classical guitar, but that does not make it any more of an accomplishment then the way I have learned to jam rock and roll - on my own - with other musicians simply by playing what I love .. There is the misconception that the only way to be "good" is to lock yourself in a room, or go to some place of learning and be taught something ... That is no more an accomplishment than what Hendrix accomplished his own way ... I've seen a lot of live music in my time - rock, fusion, jazz, pop, big band, etc - and I will say that there is no one off the top of my head that I would say "ran rings" around Geddy as a bass player It's not necessary to be rude when expressing an opinion. Your experience is no more valid than mine. I have also spent a lot of years playing live music but I also spent time learning theory and how to read music etc. but you've kind of missed the point, which I have explained. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Segue Myles Posted May 16, 2015 Author Share Posted May 16, 2015 (edited) Eaglemoon...let them sulk. You cannot win when expressing a well thought out, non-offensive opinion when it comes to anything that can even remotely be called negative towards Rush. Sheesh...used to get mocked for actually praising certain Rush albums above others! Time to move on sweetie pie. Edited May 16, 2015 by Segue Myles 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Segue Myles Posted May 16, 2015 Author Share Posted May 16, 2015 Rush never wrote a song as beautiful as Sandy or New York City Serenade by Springsteen. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rugen Posted May 16, 2015 Share Posted May 16, 2015 Rush never wrote a song as beautiful as Sandy or New York City Serenade by Springsteen. Is that a subjective point a view on what you like and what you consider to be beautiful? Anyone can find a song in the wide world of music that is more beautiful than any Rush's songs, but that doesn't mean that those artists made better albums than Rush. I always had a dilemma if my favorite band was Genesis or Rush, but i realize at the end that the two bands brings something different in a range of emotions. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Segue Myles Posted May 16, 2015 Author Share Posted May 16, 2015 Rush never wrote a song as beautiful as Sandy or New York City Serenade by Springsteen. Is that a subjective point a view on what you like and what you consider to be beautiful? Anyone can find a song in the wide world of music that is more beautiful than any Rush's songs, but that doesn't mean that those artists made better albums than Rush. I always had a dilemma if my favorite band was Genesis or Rush, but i realize at the end that the two bands brings something different in a range of emotions. Agreed. But these are two of the songs that make me certain I prefer The Boss over Rush. Which is the purpose of this thread. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
satchmothesnowdog Posted May 16, 2015 Share Posted May 16, 2015 Rush never wrote a song as beautiful as Sandy or New York City Serenade by Springsteen. Is that a subjective point a view on what you like and what you consider to be beautiful? Anyone can find a song in the wide world of music that is more beautiful than any Rush's songs, but that doesn't mean that those artists made better albums than Rush. I always had a dilemma if my favorite band was Genesis or Rush, but i realize at the end that the two bands brings something different in a range of emotions. Agreed. But these are two of the songs that make me certain I prefer The Boss over Rush. Which is the purpose of this thread. It's all about my moods and my music. I have a few favorite bands that have been sountracks of my life and they are wide and varied in sound and style over my 47 years. Rush, Moody Blues, Ministry, Naked Raygun, Simon and Garfunkel, Social Distortion, Emerson, Lake and Palmer have been my go to bands and there are 6000 albums in my collection for mood filler. It's not all about Rush Rush Rush or anything else. I love them all, it's just different heartbeats will want to listen to different strings, so to speak :) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tangy Posted May 16, 2015 Share Posted May 16, 2015 The idea that rush was bar band quality or they were not top tier players as stated above in the 70's is laughable. I'm with you. The point being made is that 70's Rush was a "bar band" when compared with the likes of ELP, Yes, Genesis, and Kansas, but I just don't agree at all. I think they are all comparable musicians. "Hemispheres Neil" doesn't stack up against Phil Ehart? No way in hell that's true."Hemispheres Geddy" sucks when compared with Mike Rutherford? Seriously?"Hemispheres Alex" is "bar band" musician compared with Kerry Livgren? Give me a break. Perhaps Hemispheres is not as complex or symphonic as something like Brain Salad Surgery or Close to the Edge, but no way are Geddy, Alex and Neil "bar band" players, IMO. You're allowed to disagree. It's a free country. :) I'm talking about technical ability. No way were the boys in the same category with classically trained musicians. They just weren't. Seems a little snobbish and something that someone with some training would say. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tick Posted May 16, 2015 Share Posted May 16, 2015 I will always consider Rush my favorite band. Kansas, Dream Theater, Marillion, The Beatles....all great, and many more......Zep, The Who, Sabbath.... on and on and on................................................. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Segue Myles Posted May 16, 2015 Author Share Posted May 16, 2015 The idea that rush was bar band quality or they were not top tier players as stated above in the 70's is laughable. I'm with you. The point being made is that 70's Rush was a "bar band" when compared with the likes of ELP, Yes, Genesis, and Kansas, but I just don't agree at all. I think they are all comparable musicians. "Hemispheres Neil" doesn't stack up against Phil Ehart? No way in hell that's true."Hemispheres Geddy" sucks when compared with Mike Rutherford? Seriously?"Hemispheres Alex" is "bar band" musician compared with Kerry Livgren? Give me a break. Perhaps Hemispheres is not as complex or symphonic as something like Brain Salad Surgery or Close to the Edge, but no way are Geddy, Alex and Neil "bar band" players, IMO. You're allowed to disagree. It's a free country. :) I'm talking about technical ability. No way were the boys in the same category with classically trained musicians. They just weren't. Seems a little snobbish and something that someone with some training would say. She is not being snobbish she is voicing her opinion. Poor girl, I think maybe you should think about the responses she has been getting before throwing the word "snobbish" around. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
USB Connector Posted May 16, 2015 Share Posted May 16, 2015 There are other bands besides Rush? Inconceivable! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Digital Dad Posted May 16, 2015 Share Posted May 16, 2015 There are other bands besides Rush? Inconceivable! Oh there are lots of bands. They just arent as good. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EagleMoon Posted May 16, 2015 Share Posted May 16, 2015 The idea that rush was bar band quality or they were not top tier players as stated above in the 70's is laughable. I'm with you. The point being made is that 70's Rush was a "bar band" when compared with the likes of ELP, Yes, Genesis, and Kansas, but I just don't agree at all. I think they are all comparable musicians. "Hemispheres Neil" doesn't stack up against Phil Ehart? No way in hell that's true."Hemispheres Geddy" sucks when compared with Mike Rutherford? Seriously?"Hemispheres Alex" is "bar band" musician compared with Kerry Livgren? Give me a break. Perhaps Hemispheres is not as complex or symphonic as something like Brain Salad Surgery or Close to the Edge, but no way are Geddy, Alex and Neil "bar band" players, IMO. You're allowed to disagree. It's a free country. :) I'm talking about technical ability. No way were the boys in the same category with classically trained musicians. They just weren't. Seems a little snobbish and something that someone with some training would say. She is not being snobbish she is voicing her opinion. Poor girl, I think maybe you should think about the responses she has been getting before throwing the word "snobbish" around. Thank you, Segue. I'm glad someone actually understands what I am trying to say. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EagleMoon Posted May 16, 2015 Share Posted May 16, 2015 The idea that rush was bar band quality or they were not top tier players as stated above in the 70's is laughable. I'm with you. The point being made is that 70's Rush was a "bar band" when compared with the likes of ELP, Yes, Genesis, and Kansas, but I just don't agree at all. I think they are all comparable musicians. "Hemispheres Neil" doesn't stack up against Phil Ehart? No way in hell that's true."Hemispheres Geddy" sucks when compared with Mike Rutherford? Seriously?"Hemispheres Alex" is "bar band" musician compared with Kerry Livgren? Give me a break. Perhaps Hemispheres is not as complex or symphonic as something like Brain Salad Surgery or Close to the Edge, but no way are Geddy, Alex and Neil "bar band" players, IMO. You're allowed to disagree. It's a free country. :) I'm talking about technical ability. No way were the boys in the same category with classically trained musicians. They just weren't. Seems a little snobbish and something that someone with some training would say. According to that logic. if I have training then I'm a snob, if I don't have training then I just don't know what I'm talking about. It's just possible that I do know what I'm talking about and your defensiveness is just keeping you from seeing what I'm saying. People hate to have their preconceptions challenged and I think that's what's going on here. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Narps Posted May 16, 2015 Share Posted May 16, 2015 ... :) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lucas Posted May 16, 2015 Share Posted May 16, 2015 (edited) YES is probably the best example of a fantastic band who had great chops, and fit those abilities into the context of great songs ... But when looking at, for example, Steve Howe - Howe is an amazing guitarist and musician, but he's not "classically trained" .. Steve Howe has some broad influences, which obviously include classical music and flamenco ... And his genius is weaving those influences into his own style and compositions .. But Howe does not possess the discipline and technique of a trained guitarist - his hand positions and, for example, rolls in a piece like "Mood For A Day" are amateurish when compared to true flamenco players .. Do that make Steve Howe any less of a musician ?? ... Absolutely NOT ... To me, his brilliance is in his style - HIS style, not a force fed or trained style ... I realize this has strayed from the original question - "Bands You Like More Than Rush" - but, in a way, that is my point - "liking" a band is very different than pointing out that other bands or musicians might have more training or schooling than another band ... The "musicianship" aspect could be endless - at some point, there must be appreciation for the creativity and vision of a musician, and that needs to be included in how "accomplished" they are ... . . Edited May 16, 2015 by Lucas Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EagleMoon Posted May 16, 2015 Share Posted May 16, 2015 YES is probably the best example of a fantastic band who had great chops, and fit those abilities into the context of great songs ... But when looking at, for example, Steve Howe - Howe is an amazing guitarist and musician, but he's not "classically trained" .. Steve Howe has some broad influences, which obviously include classical music and flamenco ... And his genius is weaving those influences into his own style and compositions .. But Howe does not possess the discipline and technique of a trained guitarist - his hand positions and, for example, rolls in a song like Mood For A Day are amateurish when compared to true flamenco players .. Do that make Steve Howe any less of a musician ?? ... Absolutely NOT ... To me, his brilliance is in his style - HIS style, not a force fed or trained style ... I realize this has strayed from the original question - "Bands You Like More Than Rush" - but, in a way, that is my point - "liking" a band is very different than pointing out that other bands or musicians might have more training or schooling than another band ... The "musicianship" aspect could be endless - at some point, there must be appreciation for the creativity and vision of a musician, and that needs to be included in how "accomplished" they are .... You don't think people appreciate Rush for the musicians they are? 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