Updates and other random Rush stuff

Posted on Friday, February 8, 2013 at 1:00PM

WELCOME ! Please Leave a comment

Page 1 of 7 - 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
20 items per page (10 50 100 ), Sorting by newest first (oldest first)
#129 - Posted 2/25/13 @4:47PM by BoltFromTheBlue [contact]

you got any meat?

#128 - Posted 2/15/13 @12:46AM by Snaked [contact]

Hamilton - July 6th - Copps
Halifax - July 12th - Halifax Metro Centre
#127 - Posted 2/13/13 @4:00PM by broughttoyoubytheletterj [contact]

I think Taylor Hawkins summed it up pretty well in the "2112 & M P. doc'
"If you liked Yes and you liked Genesis for their complexity, but Black Sabbath for their power, then Rush was the perfect band for you"...
#126 - Posted 2/13/13 @11:15AM by simon r

No 115-looks like tour dates drifting into next week now. Maybe the RRHF takes a lot of organising for celebs etc. Looking back at tour dates till 2007 they have done LA & Vegas each year so I expect that trend to continue. Must be money spinners even with smallish crowds at Gibson $706k & MGM $839k. Just frustrating this delay-must be some sports events causing problems like Hockey did in Vancouver.
#125 - Posted 2/13/13 @9:13AM by Enigmaticus [contact]

Thank you, #119 for your well thought out opinion. Of course, there is nothing wrong with reasonable debates which support your opinion, and while I would certainly agree with Rush being labeled as "progressive hard rock," from the band's inception in 1968 through 1976, I am not so certain that this label really describes most of their work. Even on their harder pieces, such as 'The Fountain Of Lamneth' and '2112,' Rush has always had a tendency to incorporate "softer" pieces as well: 'Discovery' from "2112" and 'Panacea' are prime examples of that. 'Tears' is another example of great songwriting. 'Lakeside Park' and 'Rivendell' however are perhaps not as great.

Prog Archives labels Rush as a "heavy prog" group, I have to diagree with this label as well, for describing the bulk of their work. The great thing about Rush's music, is that it has always incorporated nuances of "soft" and "hard" throughout the bulk of their catalog. Rush's music does not beat you over the head with a "barrage" of heavy sound throughout the body of their songs, unlike perhaps early Dream Theater. Of course, I do really like one song by Dream Theater. I think that "On The Backs Of Angels" is absolutely brilliant, but then again, it also incorporates nuances of "hard" rock and "soft" rock as well.

When Rush had first started incorporating synthesizers and keboards into their music in 1977, their sound had once again started to change. Rush had started to become more of a "symphonic progressive rock" band. Songs like 'Closer To The Heart,' 'Madrigal' and the bulk of 'Xanadu' from "A Farewell To Kings" certainly supports this opinion. Of course, one could argue that the title track, 'Cinderella Man' and 'Cygnus X-1' also support your opinion. More correctly, Rush's music had become a hybrid of the two styles. This stylistic change had continued throughout "Hemispheres," "Permanent Waves," "Moving Pictures" and had peaked with "Exit... Stage Left."

During their third era and through the middle of the fourth era, (from "Signals" through "Roll The Bones") Rush had essentially become an "art rock" band. Their music had still remained progressive, but had become more commercially successful, softer and their songwriting of individual songs had improved immeasurably. Even, 'Nobody's Hero,' from "Counterparts" is still stylistically part of this period.

From "Counterparts" until the present, Rush has been more of an "eclectic" symphonic progressive rock band, certainly such songs as 'Time & Motion' from "Test For Echo," the bulk of "Vapor Trails," "Snakes & Arrows" and the majority of "Clockwork Angels" support this argument. Rush has not been afraid to incorporate folk elements, a string section, or even a mellotron to make their music better.

As time went on, Rush had started to incorporate the sounds of new wave
#124 - Posted 2/12/13 @11:12PM by kjbird [contact]

#123 - Yea!! Way to go, jupe! A modern day warrior you are!
#123 - Posted 2/12/13 @10:44PM by jupeguyowensound [contact]

I'll try it. I just hope I don't blow up the inner-net!

#122 - Posted 2/12/13 @9:30PM by LanceTheShred [contact]

Brilliant Rob! Abraham "Linkin" you are.........;)
#121 - Posted 2/12/13 @9:22PM by Rob [contact]





#120 - Posted 2/12/13 @7:11PM by jupeguyowensound [contact]

#118 -thank you so much for the link info Liver.Appreciate it!:)
To tell you the truth I didn't really read that carefully. As soon as I see HTML ,URL and such computer lingo I zone out. And hey I never said I was a rocket appliance! Oh well it's all water under the fridge now.
#119 - Posted 2/12/13 @6:57PM by What-A-Rush

I have to slightly disagree with #20 (Enigmaticus) regarding his assertion of Rush as exclusively "progressive rock". Personally, I have no qualms with referring to Rush as a "progressive hard rock" band. Splitting hairs? Maybe. That said, Rush, at their best, certainly created a blueprint and/or template to take "prog rock" into harder-edged musical territory moreso than a band like the Moody Blues did. It was almost like they didn't want to forget the "rock" that all three loved in the first place. After all, there's a reason why the guys cite bands like Zeppelin, The Who, The Jimi Hendrix Experience, and even Blue Cheer as prime influences. Funny enough, some would argue that the first three bands mentioned incorporated some "progressive" elements in their music as well, without leaving the "rock" behind. For that reason alone, I consider Rush to have more in common with The Who than the Moody Blues, in my opinion.

Let's not forget, some "prog purists" would even say that Rush aren't truly exclusively "progressive rock". Generally, I think there are many more casual rock fans who would find Rush more "appealing" than they would a band like Yes or King Crimson. I've always felt that even though Rush have always placed a strong emphasis on quality musicianship, one didn't have to be able to play an instrument to appreciate their music simply because they NEVER forgot the overall importance of the SONG. Unfortunately, SOME "prog rock" misses that point entirely.

Like yourself, I certainly would never call Rush "progressive metal", but there's no doubt they paved the way for "prog" to be taken into an even heavier direction by bands like Queensryche, Fates Warning, Dream Theater, Crimson Glory, and Tool, all putting their stamp on "progressive" music for future generations to come. Dare I say it, all five probably first listened to Rush and identified with them much more than the "prog" bands that came before, and of course as time went on then they "discovered" the progenitors of progressive rock and in turn expanded on that in their music as well. So overall I'm more than happy to consider Rush "progressive hard rock". In short order, there would be no Queensryche without Rush first. I really enjoyed reading your viewpoint, 'Enigmaticus'! Thanks RIAB.
#118 - Posted 2/12/13 @6:13PM by Liverpool 78

re #114

To create a link, as Ed has kindly put for you above the 'Please leave a comment' box -

HTML is disabled in comments. To create a link, simply type the full URL (i.e. "link and the link will be created automagically.

Hope this helps :-)

Anyways...about Rush - aren't they just the best darndest band on the planet?

#117 - Posted 2/12/13 @5:36PM by Liverpool 78

re #110

Very little point in writing anything or commenting to anyone about anything then.

If all one can do is tell everyone how wonderful they are and how correct they are and how they must be the greatest Rush fan ever conceived then the whole thing just becomes a crock full of sychophantic ooze.

Anyways...about Rush - aren't they just the best darndest band on the planet?

#116 - Posted 2/12/13 @2:54PM by Surfguy [contact]

You'll are out of control...almost as if your thread rioting. Better get a Rush update soon. ;)
#115 - Posted 2/12/13 @2:16PM by jupeguyowensound [contact]

We really need those summer tour dates. Really hoping they play Vegas again, but not real optimistic about that happening.
#114 - Posted 2/12/13 @2:12PM by jupeguyowensound [contact]

Awesome.Neil looks like he's in fine shape then, more bicycling than motorcycling I suppose.Glad he doesn't wear that dumb looking helmet on stage now though.I'd add some links but I've never done that.Duh!! I know,I am a computer dummy.I'll have to get one of my kids to show me how to do that.
#113 - Posted 2/12/13 @1:46PM by kjbird [contact]

That would be Peartinent...here's a kick ass link for you...link
#112 - Posted 2/12/13 @1:42PM by jupeguyowensound [contact]

kj- great link.Love the britcoms.Fawlty Towers,Little Britain, Mrs.Brown's Boys, The Two Ronnies etc. Father Ted is my favorite.Too bad Dermott Morgan passed away so young.Oh...RRRUUUSSSHHH!!!! gotta keep the post pertinent you know, or is that Peartinent.
#111 - Posted 2/12/13 @1:12PM by kjbird [contact]

#107 "would you care for a rat..." link
#110 - Posted 2/12/13 @12:37PM by LanceTheShred [contact]

Damn Liver, haven't you read the new rules on Ed's site? Be careful what you say or you will be fined one credit for a violation of the Verbal Morality Statute.

What the hell is that you say?

It's been deemed that anything not good for you is bad; hence, illegal. Alcohol, caffeine, contact sports, meat, bad language, chocolate, gasoline, uneducational toys and anything spicy. Abortion is also illegal, but then again so is pregnancy if you don't have a licence.

So in other words "Happy Happy Joy Joy" brother! Express yourself on riab like a 47-year-old virgin sitting around in his beige pajamas, drinking a banana-broccoli shake, singing "I'm an Oscar Meyer Wiener" and "Rivendell" while your butt is perched up on a bench in Willowdale.
Leave a comment | Back to top

Page 1 of 7 - 1 2 3 4 5 6 7
20 items per page (10 50 ), Sorting by newest first (oldest first)

Login to post your comment

You must login to post comments. If you do not have an account you can create one for free at this link.