AnEggplant Posted October 26, 2015 Share Posted October 26, 2015 Rush is having a second peak in the current era. Equal to early 80's, and better than late 80's early 90's. YES! The albums from Counterparts on are among their best in my opinion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ged Lent's sis Posted October 26, 2015 Share Posted October 26, 2015 Neurotica and Virtuality are both excellent songs...two of their best from the 90's Era.Snakes & Arrows is a fantastic album...with 'Side 1' being arguably one of their strongest "sides" since the 80's.With the exception of Neurotica I agree. My opinion of Neurotica is coloured by this one, which I like too much more (and which I know Rush are aware of):http://youtu.be/LLRd3CfZ_sI 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AnEggplant Posted October 26, 2015 Share Posted October 26, 2015 Neurotica and Virtuality are both excellent songs...two of their best from the 90's Era.Snakes & Arrows is a fantastic album...with 'Side 1' being arguably one of their strongest "sides" since the 80's.With the exception of Neurotica I agree. My opinion of Neurotica is coloured by this one, which I like too much more (and which I know Rush are aware of):http://youtu.be/LLRd3CfZ_sI I agree. That one is definitely better. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lucas Posted October 26, 2015 Share Posted October 26, 2015 This http://www.cygnus-x1.net/links/rush/images/albums/rush-cover-s.jpg is better than this http://cdn.recordinghacks.com/images/albumcovers/rush-moving-pictures.jpg I don't agree with this but I can see why you might say that. I think the debut is much better than a lot of people give it credit for. Sorry, but take the name Rush off the cover, and it could be the above average debut of many an unknown band. Perhaps I should have said "I like this better" - because I do . . And I will respectfully - and completely - disagree with the notion that the debut could be many an unknown band - there is only one voice like that !! To my ear, before there are the epics, before there are the musical chops, there is Geddy and his voice 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Blue J Posted October 26, 2015 Share Posted October 26, 2015 (edited) This http://www.cygnus-x1.net/links/rush/images/albums/rush-cover-s.jpgis better than thishttp://cdn.recordinghacks.com/images/albumcovers/rush-moving-pictures.jpg I don't agree with this but I can see why you might say that. I think the debut is much better than a lot of people give it credit for. Sorry, but take the name Rush off the cover, and it could be the above average debut of many an unknown band. Perhaps I should have said "I like this better" - because I do . . And I will respectfully - and completely - disagree with the notion that the debut could be many an unknown band - there is only one voice like that !! To my ear, before there are the epics, before there are the musical chops, there is Geddy and his voice I won't weigh in on the notion of the two albums pitted against one another, but I definitely agree about Geddy. I also think that Mr. Lifeson had considerable chops, even at age 20. Edited October 26, 2015 by Blue J 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Narps Posted October 26, 2015 Share Posted October 26, 2015 Neurotica and Virtuality are both excellent songs...two of their best from the 90's Era. Well that pretty much sums up that era. Happy to have missed it to be honest. P U... 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lucas Posted October 26, 2015 Share Posted October 26, 2015 Neurotica and Virtuality are both excellent songs...two of their best from the 90's Era. Well that pretty much sums up that era. Happy to have missed it to be honest. P U... lol I agree Narps 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bigbobby10 Posted October 26, 2015 Share Posted October 26, 2015 When i first listened to Rush's debut I never really liked it. But recently, i listened to it again, and it is a pretty solid album. Maybe not some of their best, but there are some great songs on it. I would recommend anyone who doesn't like it to give it another listen 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bluefox4000 Posted October 26, 2015 Share Posted October 26, 2015 When i first listened to Rush's debut I never really liked it. But recently, i listened to it again, and it is a pretty solid album. Maybe not some of their best, but there are some great songs on it. I would recommend anyone who doesn't like it to give it another listen it's a fine hard rock album. Just not what i want to hear when i reach for Rush. Mick 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. Not Posted October 26, 2015 Share Posted October 26, 2015 When i first listened to Rush's debut I never really liked it. But recently, i listened to it again, and it is a pretty solid album. Maybe not some of their best, but there are some great songs on it. I would recommend anyone who doesn't like it to give it another listen I've given that generic album more than it's fair share of it's listens. There's nothing that album offers that Led Zeppelin can't and then some. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. Not Posted October 26, 2015 Share Posted October 26, 2015 Rush isn't underrated or overlooked. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bluefox4000 Posted October 26, 2015 Share Posted October 26, 2015 Oh i got one. i think Animate is pretty awful live. it's a pure studio track. it's where it's magic is. Mick Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
J2112YYZ Posted October 26, 2015 Share Posted October 26, 2015 (edited) Oh i got one. i think Animate is pretty awful live. it's a pure studio track. it's where it's magic is. Mick I thought they played the song good on R40. They played it at the proper pace and they didn't slow it down like they used to. The song actually had some life in it live. Edited October 26, 2015 by J2112YYZ 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Segue Myles Posted October 26, 2015 Share Posted October 26, 2015 This http://www.cygnus-x1.net/links/rush/images/albums/rush-cover-s.jpg is better than this http://cdn.recordinghacks.com/images/albumcovers/rush-moving-pictures.jpg I don't agree with this but I can see why you might say that. I think the debut is much better than a lot of people give it credit for. Sorry, but take the name Rush off the cover, and it could be the above average debut of many an unknown band. Perhaps I should have said "I like this better" - because I do . . And I will respectfully - and completely - disagree with the notion that the debut could be many an unknown band - there is only one voice like that !! To my ear, before there are the epics, before there are the musical chops, there is Geddy and his voice But much like Yes debut, or even The Beatles, you rarely see the debut making a Splash with anyone but the diehard fans. An important album for Rush, but not a milestone release for rock music. And I don't find his voice unique on this debut. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bluefox4000 Posted October 26, 2015 Share Posted October 26, 2015 This http://www.cygnus-x1.net/links/rush/images/albums/rush-cover-s.jpg is better than this http://cdn.recordinghacks.com/images/albumcovers/rush-moving-pictures.jpg I don't agree with this but I can see why you might say that. I think the debut is much better than a lot of people give it credit for. Sorry, but take the name Rush off the cover, and it could be the above average debut of many an unknown band. Perhaps I should have said "I like this better" - because I do . . And I will respectfully - and completely - disagree with the notion that the debut could be many an unknown band - there is only one voice like that !! To my ear, before there are the epics, before there are the musical chops, there is Geddy and his voice But much like Yes debut, or even The Beatles, you rarely see the debut making a Splash with anyone but the diehard fans. An important album for Rush, but not a milestone release for rock music. And I don't find his voice unique on this debut. a higher robert Plant........i was never big on Plant. Mick 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Segue Myles Posted October 26, 2015 Share Posted October 26, 2015 This http://www.cygnus-x1.net/links/rush/images/albums/rush-cover-s.jpg is better than this http://cdn.recordinghacks.com/images/albumcovers/rush-moving-pictures.jpg I don't agree with this but I can see why you might say that. I think the debut is much better than a lot of people give it credit for. Sorry, but take the name Rush off the cover, and it could be the above average debut of many an unknown band. Perhaps I should have said "I like this better" - because I do . . And I will respectfully - and completely - disagree with the notion that the debut could be many an unknown band - there is only one voice like that !! To my ear, before there are the epics, before there are the musical chops, there is Geddy and his voice But much like Yes debut, or even The Beatles, you rarely see the debut making a Splash with anyone but the diehard fans. An important album for Rush, but not a milestone release for rock music. And I don't find his voice unique on this debut. a higher robert Plant........i was never big on Plant. Mick My thoughts exactly. The only people who will ever big up the Rush debut are Rush fans. No one else. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
J2112YYZ Posted October 26, 2015 Share Posted October 26, 2015 The debut album was just practice for Geddy and Alex. The addition of Neil took the band to a level of musical and lyrical brilliance they never would have come close to achieving without him. Their debut is decent hard rock, nothing more. There is nothing special about that album. It's standard 70s hard rock. If they continued like that they would have been done by 1980 if not sooner and we never would have had anything close to what they did on FBN through Hemispheres. When Neil joined, he completely changed the direction of the band. He challenged Geddy and Alex's songwriting abilities and made them a hundred times better at it. They had no equal once Neil was in the fold and the band truly became one of a kind. Overall, the debut is very weak in comparison to most of the stuff they did after it. That's why no one really talks about it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bigbobby10 Posted October 26, 2015 Share Posted October 26, 2015 (edited) Overall, the debut is very weak in comparison to most of the stuff they did after it. That's why no one really talks about it. I agree with this, but it isnt a BAD album, i like it a lot even if it is really basic Edited October 26, 2015 by MagicSpree101 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lucas Posted October 26, 2015 Share Posted October 26, 2015 Overall, the debut is very weak in comparison to most of the stuff they did after it. That's why no one really talks about it. Not do I talk about it, I listen to it all the time For me, music isn't something to compare, but simply to enjoy and be inspired by .... And frankly, I could give 2 ***** what other people talk about or find interest in Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MadTheDJ Posted October 27, 2015 Share Posted October 27, 2015 The debut album was just practice for Geddy and Alex. The addition of Neil took the band to a level of musical and lyrical brilliance they never would have come close to achieving without him. Their debut is decent hard rock, nothing more. There is nothing special about that album. It's standard 70s hard rock. If they continued like that they would have been done by 1980 if not sooner and we never would have had anything close to what they did on FBN through Hemispheres. Well, that's not exactly accurate for FBN. There's a good deal of the pre-Neil sound on FBN: "Anthem" - the riff predated Neil. Alex has said that John Rutsey just didn't like playing it, so the song never went further until Neil arrived. They even jammed on the riff with Neil at Neil's audition. It probably would've become a different song (certainly different lyrics), but the finished version bridges the Rutsey era and Peart era. "Best I Can" - this song was pretty much done during the Rutsey days, as heard during the Laura Secord Secondary School concert. "In The End" - the Fly By Night lyrics sheet says the song was written in Toronto and without Neil Peart. It is finished as early as the August 1975 Agora Ballroom concert (a month after Neil joined the band), this song would seem to date from the days before Neil replaced John Rutsey. "7/4 War Furor" - This jam began life in 1975 as part of live versions of "Working Man" (before later being incorporated into "By-tor") and is pretty much Alex and Geddy at work, so it's not unreasonable to guess that if John had been around for album no. 2, this piece of music would've been given a home somewhere on it. So, yes, while much of FBN was written on the road during that '75 tour after Neil joined, a significant portion of it still represents Rutsey-era Rush. Caress Of Steel was really the first full Peart-era Rush album. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Anthemic Posted November 6, 2015 Share Posted November 6, 2015 rush fans are not generally any more intelligent than other rock fans 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
graxxus Posted November 6, 2015 Share Posted November 6, 2015 rush fans are not generally any more intelligent than other rock fans Except for me, of course. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tom_Sawyer99 Posted November 6, 2015 Share Posted November 6, 2015 (edited) The video for Time Stand Still is the greatest music video of all time. The special effects used could beat Avatar! (Note: not sure if we're supposed to be serious or just joking around) Edited November 6, 2015 by Tom_Sawyer99 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lucas Posted November 6, 2015 Share Posted November 6, 2015 rush fans are not generally any more intelligent than other rock fans count me in on that .. in fact, I'm no more intelligent than your average rock 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ged Lent's sis Posted November 6, 2015 Share Posted November 6, 2015 rush fans are not generally any more intelligent than other rock fansI once heard someone voice such a conviction in just about those words ("Rush fans are generally more intelligent"). I was bonding with a fellow Rush fan far away from home. Of course we were sharing our feeling that our appreciation was not appreciated. He uttered the statement in a tone that suggested he had been privy to the raw data that proved the assertion. 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