Lucas Posted January 9, 2016 Share Posted January 9, 2016 (edited) ... a Top 5 RUSH album for me ( Narps, where are you ?!?!? ) Just listening to it again, and realizing how fantastic is sounds - the production is great in its simplicity, and Alex's tone was never better . John Rutsey and Geddy are so locked in with each other, and the way Geddy's vocals are recorded is perfect .. The best version of What You're Doing - Rutsey nails this song like Neil never did ( sorry, but it's true ) Listen back to back and tell me Neil played it better - you can't .. Edited January 9, 2016 by Lucas 5 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lucas Posted January 9, 2016 Author Share Posted January 9, 2016 http://www.2112.net/powerwindows/downloads/smartphone960x854/Rush-Debut.jpg 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fordgalaxy Posted January 9, 2016 Share Posted January 9, 2016 Not worth the time. It's the same as or not as good as any other album of that era. I haven't listened to it in about 20 years (except the incessant radio play of Working Man). 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Babycat Posted January 9, 2016 Share Posted January 9, 2016 It's the way all three are locked in with Working Man. That completely got my attention. 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Digital Dad Posted January 9, 2016 Share Posted January 9, 2016 Just gave it a listen. Its ok Alex is definitely the star here. Thankfully they expanded their sound, with or without Neil they wouldn't have survived playing this particular style. Not in 1974. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hammerofthor Posted January 9, 2016 Share Posted January 9, 2016 Criminally underrated, for sure. 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EagleMoon Posted January 9, 2016 Share Posted January 9, 2016 I think its awesomeness lies in its simplicity. Raw, blues rock. Alex's guitar tone is sublime. on Working Man. So thick and raunchy. They did do it well, but they just moved to another level when Neil joined. 9 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Your_Lion Posted January 9, 2016 Share Posted January 9, 2016 As the Ambassador for the debut, I approve of this thread :cheers:Without Narps, I thought I was going to be on my own defending this album. Cheers Lucas. 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
geezer Posted January 9, 2016 Share Posted January 9, 2016 Simply: FOR THOSE ABOUT TO ROCK! 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. JD Posted January 9, 2016 Share Posted January 9, 2016 I love "Here Again". It has been in my rotation of favorite Rush songs for years. 9 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AnEggplant Posted January 9, 2016 Share Posted January 9, 2016 It's alright. I enjoy it because I hear 3 young musicians having fun and really trying to make it big. If that weren't the case, it's just an average blues rock album. There's some greatness on it but Fly By Night and ESPECIALLY Caress of Steel would blow it out of the water for me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stormtron Posted January 9, 2016 Share Posted January 9, 2016 The debut rules. Always loved it. 5 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Analog Cub Posted January 9, 2016 Share Posted January 9, 2016 I suppose it's alright for what it is, but I still rank it at the bottom of my Rush album list (yes, even past Presto), because it just isn't Rush to me. Rush became Rush when Neil joined and this is the precursor for better or worse. They definitely brought the house down on the R40 tour with What You're Doing and Working Man, though. 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Digital Dad Posted January 9, 2016 Share Posted January 9, 2016 (edited) I suppose it's alright for what it is, but I still rank it at the bottom of my Rush album list (yes, even past Presto), because it just isn't Rush to me. Rush became Rush when Neil joined and this is the precursor for better or worse. They definitely brought the house down on the R40 tour with What You're Doing and Working Man, though. Those are the two best on the album. Other than that its largely forgetable. Ill take ATWAS TYVM. Edited January 9, 2016 by Digital Dad 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Segue Myles Posted January 9, 2016 Share Posted January 9, 2016 Considering I now adore Fly By Night, I think it is an oppurtune time to listen to this again! 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lorraine Posted January 9, 2016 Share Posted January 9, 2016 I always ignored this album but lately have been listening to it. I love it because of its hardness which was typical of guitar players of that time. And I have to say too, yet again, that Working Man from the R40 LA show was a twelve star performance. As I have already said elsewhere on the forum, if this was indeed the last time anyone would see Rush perform live, they went out on top. 5 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Cat 3 Posted January 9, 2016 Share Posted January 9, 2016 I love the debut album. Just great rock and roll. Neil's accomplishments very much (understandably) over shadow John Rutsey fine playing in this album. I like how rough and loose this album feels. It was one of this first Rush albums I purchased when I started getting into them. They sound (as they, most likely were) very hungry and aggressive, in a good way. Cheers for the thread Lucas. 8 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
grasbo Posted January 9, 2016 Share Posted January 9, 2016 Is this the new Led Zeppelin album? was the call when Working Man hit the air waves back then.But in 1974 Led Zeppelin had moved on from that heavy bluesy style(there's nothing really heavy or bluesy about Houses of the Holy)and Rush was filling a gap for people wanting that sought of thing.It's a great rawk album but if Neil didn't come on board with his Dungeon &Dragons lyrics and being fairly handy with the drums then I feel they would have just ended up mucking about with the likes of Foghat or BTO(no disrespect) 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lorraine Posted January 9, 2016 Share Posted January 9, 2016 Is this the new Led Zeppelin album? was the call when Working Man hit the air waves back then.But in 1974 Led Zeppelin had moved on from that heavy bluesy style(there's nothing really heavy or bluesy about Houses of the Holy)and Rush was filling a gap for people wanting that sought of thing.It's a great rawk album but if Neil didn't come on board with his Dungeon &Dragons lyrics and being fairly handy with the drums then I feel they would have just ended up mucking about with the likes of Foghat or BTO(no disrespect) Bachman Turner Overdrive? Did Rush ever, even back then, sound like them? I had BTO's first album and don't know whatever happened to them, so they might have changed their music style. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lorraine Posted January 9, 2016 Share Posted January 9, 2016 Many posts in this thread would make Narps shed tears of happiness. I just know it. 4 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tangy Posted January 9, 2016 Share Posted January 9, 2016 Right on Lucas! The debut is killer. I think its far better than anything post grace under pressure. Working man imo is the most "important"Rush song. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tony R Posted January 9, 2016 Share Posted January 9, 2016 It's a good hard rock album. It suffers from a few out and out Zep clones but there's plenty of energy and enthusiasm. The lyrics are awful. Makes you wonder what the original Rutsey lyrics were like. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tangy Posted January 9, 2016 Share Posted January 9, 2016 Oh yeah. How many of you old timers got the debut as part of archives? Archives was a christmas present for the young tangster! 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lorraine Posted January 9, 2016 Share Posted January 9, 2016 It's a good hard rock album. It suffers from a few out and out Zep clones but there's plenty of energy and enthusiasm. The lyrics are awful. Makes you wonder what the original Rutsey lyrics were like. I wonder why he did that. Very strange behavior, writing lyrics but refusing to part with them and let anyone sing them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
grasbo Posted January 9, 2016 Share Posted January 9, 2016 Is this the new Led Zeppelin album? was the call when Working Man hit the air waves back then.But in 1974 Led Zeppelin had moved on from that heavy bluesy style(there's nothing really heavy or bluesy about Houses of the Holy)and Rush was filling a gap for people wanting that sought of thing.It's a great rawk album but if Neil didn't come on board with his Dungeon &Dragons lyrics and being fairly handy with the drums then I feel they would have just ended up mucking about with the likes of Foghat or BTO(no disrespect) Bachman Turner Overdrive? Did Rush ever, even back then, sound like them? I had BTO's first album and don't know whatever happened to them, so they might have changed their music style.Not saying that they sounded like them although there was some heavy guitar playing going on it's just that i feel they would have stayed a second division band with a small devoted following and not scale to the heights that they did.Anyway Geddy had a higher voice than gruff old C.F.Turner and stuttering Randy. 1 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