HUGE SPOILERS, PROBABLY HALF THE SETLIST

[LocalsBandGuy]

1-0-0-1-0-0-1, Can we please move this thread to the bad cell phone tech chatter forum? I mistakenly thought this was a thread about video credits in a tour book.

[Jhill]

CA is not even close with featuring some of their best ever. It's not even as good as SAA. Certainly not much better

[ReRushed]

To perform a proper concert musicians must enjoy playing the songs. Personally, I don't think it is an artist's obligation to placate their audience. It's to entertain, challenge, surprise and experience a moment. I think Rush does that more often than not.

[CaressMySteel]

To perform a proper concert musicians must enjoy playing the songs. Personally, I don't think it is an artist's obligation to placate their audience. It's to entertain, challenge, surprise and experience a moment. I think Rush does that more often than not.

here, here

Well said.

[GabesCavesOfIce]

 

 

why would they do 4 songs from C.A.

 

Because it's a great album, with some of their best songs ever, and it only makes sense to feature songs from your best albums at an anniversary show.

 

Taste is always subjective, but no way on a tour of this kind would I make room for more than 2 from CA.

3 votes matter. Your's isn't one.

 

Who the heck said anyone wanted to vote? Part of the fun is critiquing the band, since they seem to have a rather unique taste in their own music since getting so insecure about respect when they fired Broon. Critiquing their entire career, they seemed to thrive most when being challenged by "authority"

 

Sorry CA lovers, gave it yet another chance today. It's decent, but No way it's a top 7 Rush album. When you need an electron microscope to figure out what one or two members of a three piece are doing at any given time, something's wrong.

[ReRushed]

 

 

why would they do 4 songs from C.A.

 

Because it's a great album, with some of their best songs ever, and it only makes sense to feature songs from your best albums at an anniversary show.

 

Taste is always subjective, but no way on a tour of this kind would I make room for more than 2 from CA.

3 votes matter. Your's isn't one.

 

Who the heck said anyone wanted to vote? Part of the fun is critiquing the band, since they seem to have a rather unique taste in their own music since getting so insecure about respect when they fired Broon. Critiquing their entire career, they seemed to thrive most when being challenged by "authority"

 

Sorry CA lovers, gave it yet another chance today. It's decent, but No way it's a top 7 Rush album. When you need an electron microscope to figure out what one or two members of a three piece are doing at any given time, something's wrong.

I'm glad I have the ears I have. Clockwork Angels sounds fine to me. It's a powerful album. And no, I don't think it is a masterpiece.

 

And Terry Brown is overrated by some.

[GabesCavesOfIce]

Anarchist is a great tune. The title track has promise, but is the perfect example of striving for sophistication, resulting in a muddied and overly layered sound, burying much of the bass and guitar. Finding modern ways to renew an old issue with their sound. But yet I like the album.

 

As far as Broon goes, the proof is in the pudding. Rush peaked 2112 thru Signals. And it seems he fought them bitterly on Signals. It's apparent in that record. The focus and purity of their sound started to fade. We got the best damn bass and guitar combo in Rock, so let's play hide the bass and guitar. It's more than just the synths. They felt disrespected and decided to fire him. Their sound had not been as focused and pure since.

[GeminiRising79]

To perform a proper concert musicians must enjoy playing the songs. Personally, I don't think it is an artist's obligation to placate their audience. It's to entertain, challenge, surprise and experience a moment. I think Rush does that more often than not.

 

Playing nebulous chit that they want, disregarding audience interest. Sounds like a winning strategy to me.

[Tombstone Mountain]

Anarchist is a great tune. The title track has promise, but is the perfect example of striving for sophistication, resulting in a muddied and overly layered sound, burying much of the bass and guitar. Finding modern ways to renew an old issue with their sound. But yet I like the album.

 

As far as Broon goes, the proof is in the pudding. Rush peaked 2112 thru Signals. And it seems he fought them bitterly on Signals. It's apparent in that record. The focus and purity of their sound started to fade. Their sound had not been as focused and pure since.

I'm glad you find some love for CA. It is a great album.

 

As far as focus and purity, this one is all of that

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v7WAmYykwyk

[ReRushed]

To perform a proper concert musicians must enjoy playing the songs. Personally, I don't think it is an artist's obligation to placate their audience. It's to entertain, challenge, surprise and experience a moment. I think Rush does that more often than not.

 

Playing nebulous chit that they want, disregarding audience interest. Sounds like a winning strategy to me.

Interesting point. Why haven't you brought it up before?

[ljr869]

For all I care, they could cover Neil Diamond (With some added gems from Bread and Pablo Cruise) and I'd be pretty happy.

[The Cat 3]

To perform a proper concert musicians must enjoy playing the songs. Personally, I don't think it is an artist's obligation to placate their audience. It's to entertain, challenge, surprise and experience a moment. I think Rush does that more often than not.

 

Playing nebulous chit that they want, disregarding audience interest. Sounds like a winning strategy to me.

Interesting point. Why haven't you brought it up before?

 

Thanks a lot, I just spit espresso all over my phone! :)

[ReRushed]

To perform a proper concert musicians must enjoy playing the songs. Personally, I don't think it is an artist's obligation to placate their audience. It's to entertain, challenge, surprise and experience a moment. I think Rush does that more often than not.

 

Playing nebulous chit that they want, disregarding audience interest. Sounds like a winning strategy to me.

Interesting point. Why haven't you brought it up before?

 

Thanks a lot, I just spit espresso all over my phone! :)

:spitwater:

[The Cat 3]

To perform a proper concert musicians must enjoy playing the songs. Personally, I don't think it is an artist's obligation to placate their audience. It's to entertain, challenge, surprise and experience a moment. I think Rush does that more often than not.

 

Playing nebulous chit that they want, disregarding audience interest. Sounds like a winning strategy to me.

Interesting point. Why haven't you brought it up before?

 

Thanks a lot, I just spit espresso all over my phone! :)

:spitwater:

 

That just hit me the right way, I'm still laughing.

[Jhill]

why would they do 4 songs from C.A.

 

Because it's a great album, with some of their best songs ever, and it only makes sense to feature songs from your best albums at an anniversary show.

 

Taste is always subjective, but no way on a tour of this kind would I make room for more than 2 from CA.

3 votes matter. Your's isn't one.

 

Who the heck said anyone wanted to vote? Part of the fun is critiquing the band, since they seem to have a rather unique taste in their own music since getting so insecure about respect when they fired Broon. Critiquing their entire career, they seemed to thrive most when being challenged by "authority"

 

Sorry CA lovers, gave it yet another chance today. It's decent, but No way it's a top 7 Rush album. When you need an electron microscope to figure out what one or two members of a three piece are doing at any given time, something's wrong.

Bravo. CA has 3 really good tunes. SAA has more.

[The K Man]

why would they do 4 songs from C.A.

 

Because it's a great album, with some of their best songs ever, and it only makes sense to feature songs from your best albums at an anniversary show.

 

That and it was the previous CD too. Also remember we don't know which songs will be rotating, they were saying as many as 5 or 7 would be rotating out. It could only be 2 per night, or maybe 3. Tomorrow we will know more

 

Indeed. I don't think being the 2nd most recent CD means as much as it used to, though, especially when you consider the three previous albums (TFE, VT and S&A all weren't featured greatly on the tours following the ones for each of those albums). But Clockwork Angels is a whole other animal.

 

 

why would they do 4 songs from C.A.

 

Because it's a great album, with some of their best songs ever, and it only makes sense to feature songs from your best albums at an anniversary show.

 

Taste is always subjective, but no way on a tour of this kind would I make room for more than 2 from CA.

 

If Rush, or Geddy more specifically, was capable of doing a lot more 70s stuff, I would agree, but with the limitations of his voice now, we can only get so much old stuff.

[The K Man]

CA has 3 really good tunes. SAA has more.

 

I liked S&A a lot when it came out, and I still enjoy it from start to finish, but I think there are probably 5-6 songs on CA that are better, IMO, than EVERY song from S&A. S&A is consistently good, but doesn't have anything I would call great.

[ReRushed]

To perform a proper concert musicians must enjoy playing the songs. Personally, I don't think it is an artist's obligation to placate their audience. It's to entertain, challenge, surprise and experience a moment. I think Rush does that more often than not.

 

Playing nebulous chit that they want, disregarding audience interest. Sounds like a winning strategy to me.

Interesting point. Why haven't you brought it up before?

 

Thanks a lot, I just spit espresso all over my phone! :)

:spitwater:

 

That just hit me the right way, I'm still laughing.

GeminiRising79 is probably the most predictable and monotonous member of the forum.

[GabesCavesOfIce]

Anarchist is a great tune. The title track has promise, but is the perfect example of striving for sophistication, resulting in a muddied and overly layered sound, burying much of the bass and guitar. Finding modern ways to renew an old issue with their sound. But yet I like the album.

 

As far as Broon goes, the proof is in the pudding. Rush peaked 2112 thru Signals. And it seems he fought them bitterly on Signals. It's apparent in that record. The focus and purity of their sound started to fade. Their sound had not been as focused and pure since.

I'm glad you find some love for CA. It is a great album.

 

As far as focus and purity, this one is all of that

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v7WAmYykwyk

 

I know if I type CA, I know the mighty TM is watching from above.

 

When I see PoW cover, I always think way back to my college dorm, when one of the burnouts (like I wasn't!) picks up my copy of PoW and says...I can't believe THIS is the cover of a RUSH album. I don't think he was being complimentary.

 

Saw Marathon on TMT DVD yesterday awesome tune. And I thing Ged's singing was fine. Although I think 2112 thru MP walks on water, I like all their albums, but sometimes get a little sassy with their later stuff in order to differentiate their classics from the rest.

 

Big day is here, wish I was in Tulsa!

 

.

[Del_Duio]

When I see PoW cover, I always think way back to my college dorm, when one of the burnouts (like I wasn't!) picks up my copy of PoW and says...I can't believe THIS is the cover of a RUSH album.

 

See now when I see the PoW cover I see a young Stewart Copeland sitting in a chair, gazing out at the stars, wishing that one day he'll be in a famous rock band with the world's shortest guitarist and an arrogant prick taskmastser of a bassist. :D

[cygnify]

 

When I see PoW cover, I always think way back to my college dorm, when one of the burnouts (like I wasn't!) picks up my copy of PoW and says...I can't believe THIS is the cover of a RUSH album. I don't think he was being complimentary.

 

 

and we hadn't even gotten to Presto yet....

[GabesCavesOfIce]

 

When I see PoW cover, I always think way back to my college dorm, when one of the burnouts (like I wasn't!) picks up my copy of PoW and says...I can't believe THIS is the cover of a RUSH album. I don't think he was being complimentary.

 

 

and we hadn't even gotten to Presto yet....

 

At least there is a little...tiny eeriness with the grey on Presto cover...

 

Day of show, setlist chatter to a grinding halt. This could be the last day forever to speculate.

 

Saw Presto title track on TM Blu ray yesterday, thought Ged's singing was fine again. It's not that I hate the post MP stuff, but when they go on and on with FC, OLV, BM or the suite of CA songs, it's what they are not playing...the gems that have been ignored for so long...2112 side 2 thru Hemispheres...without those albums...the House of Rush isn't built and we are not together here on this forum. It'd be nice for the 1982-2012 crew to h/t that.

[rugen]

Jacob's Ladder, prelude to hemisphere and cygnus, oh yeah! :haz:

[puffyshirt]

I haven't kept up with this thread. How confident are we that the posted setlist will be what's played tonight?

[GotPeart]

There is 100% chance that some of these songs will be played tonight. But who knows if all will, and I'm sure there is more that haven't been mentioned - remember not every song has a video to coincide with it. Sometimes they just show the band on the big screen.