Was Rush ever heavy metal?

[rftag]

"Heavy metal" is one of those terms which seems to divide people insofar as what is and is not 'metal'.

 

Also, the consensus on what is and is not metal seems to have changed over the period of time the term has been a part of general parlance.

 

When I was in high school in the late 80s, the idea that Jimi Hendrix and Led Zeppelin were "heavy metal" was not particularly controversial, though nowadays most would consider the idea that Hendrix or Zeppelin were "metal" to be ridiculous, seeing them as squarely placed in the similar but distinct genre of "hard rock".

 

Nowadays some even consider ACDC to be "hard rock" as opposed to "metal", reserving the term "metal" for bands like Judas Priest and Iron Maiden and Metallica who openly embraced the term and whose music is generally not just hard rock or "heavy blues" but a lot heavier and darker and with a minimal blues influence.

 

So the term is a bit ambiguous.

 

But was Rush ever really "metal"? They were certainly hard rock through their first 8 albums , especially the first 4, with 2112 and parts of FBN being the heaviest.

 

But critics, particularly at Rolling Stone, described such albums as GUP and even Presto as "metal", which always struck me as absurd. I remember a cassette that was promoted in the 80s called "Sounds of Metal" or some such which included Moving Pictures as representative of the genre, alongside tracks by such bands as Dio and Black Sabbath and Iron Maiden, which seemed ridiculous to me at the time (Moving Pictures is definitely NOT heavy metal).

 

I would say that in their first four albums, there are tracks which might reasonably be regarded as metal, but I don't think they've ever really been a "heavy metal" band.

 

Thoughts?

[Jaminbenb]

Nah....hard rock at first, progressive rock in the later 70's early 80's, progressive POP in the later 80's, slightly alternative in the 90's, then back to harder progressive during the beginning of the second coming, and pretty much progressive for S&A and CA.

[Geddy's Soul Patch]

They've certainly had their metal moments

[JohnRogers]

Heavy Metal as the term I knew in the 1980's I'd say yes. RUSH through Signals.

 

Flame On!

[jamie]

Far Cry and most of the songs on CA could be considered heavy metal, hard rock, or just metal.

[Bigbobby10]

They never got metal, buy definitly hard Rock especially COS AND 2112

[EagleMoon]

Rush were too melodic to be metal back in the 70's and 80's, After that, they were too mainstream rock.

[Tombstone Mountain]

CA is metal...ask Treeduck...case closed!

[Fordgalaxy]

Heavy Metal as the term I knew in the 1980's I'd say yes. RUSH through Signals.

 

Flame On!

 

Agreed. The crap they call metal these days is unlistenable, mostly because of the style of "singing".

[satchmothesnowdog]

2112 is what was considered metal back in the day and even now when they play it live, it's still ass kicking hard rock.

[calirush]

I was a teen in the eighties and always felt that Metal was it's own movement owing homage to hard rock. To me you were a Metal band or you weren't. Fast Metal like Slayer, Anthrax, Metallica, Megadeth Exodus, or more mainstream stuff like Priest, Maiden, Scorpions etc. Then the commercial movement was on with sellouts like Twisted Sister.

[J2112YYZ]

They've had moments where I would say they dabbed into metal but they never went full metal.

 

Bastille Day musically sounds like something Iron Maiden could have came up with. Anthem, Overture/Temples and Hemispheres all have metal like elements to them, the same with Headlong Flight. There are many other examples of them going a little metal but overall, I consider them hard rock.

[bathory]

by 70s standards, sure.

[treeduck]

RUSH ARE HEAVY METAL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[bathory]

Heavy Metal as the term I knew in the 1980's I'd say yes. RUSH through Signals.

 

Flame On!

 

Agreed. The crap they call metal these days is unlistenable, mostly because of the style of "singing".

 

name a metal album you've bought since 1992

[rftag]

Bastille Day musically sounds like something Iron Maiden could have came up with.

 

Interesting comment. Iron Maiden doing Bastille Day would actually be pretty cool to hear. Which suggests another thread-worthy topic; what Rush songs would you like to hear other bands perform?

 

 

[JARG]

Rush was frequently called heavy metal in the early reviews, and I suppose back then they were.

[rftag]

Bastille Day musically sounds like something Iron Maiden could have came up with,

 

Maiden has actually been described by some as "prog metal".

[rftag]

Rush was frequently called heavy metal in the early reviews, and I suppose back then they were.

 

True, but Rolling Stone described Presto as "techno metal" in their review of the album, and the same publication characterized GUP as metal, which seems absurd to me.

[Geddy's Soul Patch]

Rush were too melodic to be metal back in the 70's and 80's, After that, they were too mainstream rock.

I've heard plenty of melodic metal

[JARG]

Rush was frequently called heavy metal in the early reviews, and I suppose back then they were.

 

True, but Rolling Stone described Presto as "techno metal" in their review of the album, and the same publication characterized GUP as metal, which seems absurd to me.

 

Those descriptions seem absurd to me, too.

[rftag]

From Rolling Stone's review of GUP:

 

"This album needs no critical assistance: If you like Rush, you'll love it; if not, then Grace Under Pressure is unlikely to alter your assessment of the band as a lumbering metal anachronism."

 

From Rolling Stone'e review of Presto:

 

"When critic Lionel Trilling said, "Immature artists imitate. Mature artists steal," he wasn't talking about Rush, but he might as well have been. For the past sixteen years, as the group has gone from mimicking Led Zeppelin and Yes to approximating the Police, Rush has been too immaturely concerned with originality to just go ahead and rip off a riff or two from the greats. Consequently, there has always been something missing from the band's immaculately played techno metal."

 

[satchmothesnowdog]

From Rolling Stone's review of GUP:

 

"This album needs no critical assistance: If you like Rush, you'll love it; if not, then Grace Under Pressure is unlikely to alter your assessment of the band as a lumbering metal anachronism."

 

From Rolling Stone'e review of Presto:

 

"When critic Lionel Trilling said, "Immature artists imitate. Mature artists steal," he wasn't talking about Rush, but he might as well have been. For the past sixteen years, as the group has gone from mimicking Led Zeppelin and Yes to approximating the Police, Rush has been too immaturely concerned with originality to just go ahead and rip off a riff or two from the greats. Consequently, there has always been something missing from the band's immaculately played techno metal."

Rolling Stone always has been a big fraud

[bathory]

Rush were too melodic to be metal back in the 70's and 80's, After that, they were too mainstream rock.

I've heard plenty of melodic metal

 

I get what she means but yeah, melodic ain't the right word. sad wings of destiny and stained class probably have more "melody" than say, caress of steel or something

[bathory]

Bastille Day musically sounds like something Iron Maiden could have came up with,

 

Maiden has actually been described by some as "prog metal".

 

seventh son definitely is, as is most of their newer stuff.