RUSH IS A BAND

#2 - Posted 11/12/2006 4:31 PM by Dino [contact]

If anyone here is interested, I've just relisted the last remaining Rush SARS shirts I have in stock. New, and the link is as follows.


link

Just thought a couple of Rush fans would appreciate them.

#4 - Posted 11/12/2006 11:55 PM by Broonskey [contact]

And as I have said before, what do multi-millionaires have to worry about making more money for? I think ever since the early-mid 80's they've been doing what they do because they love it, I hardly think they would have gone broke if they had broke up and quit doing everything, recording and touring, after the early-mid 80's. Unless they are really bad with money, or feel some "need" to have things like 5 different residences in as many different countries, lol.

Anyway, great news that they will probably do another tour. Bad news that it will probably be a Spring/Summer/Fall tour, because I think they sound the best in inside venues, so unless they stop by St. Louis sometime in the late Fall, I'll probably have to see them at the UMB Bank Pavillion which is great for a more mellow, soft-rock, type of band, and music festival atmosphere (like Fleetwood Mac and CSN&Y or OzzFest) but not so much for Rush with their musical intensity and huge light show that you can't even see until the sun goes down and the show is half-way over (in summer anyway).

But, hey, a new Rush album and probable tour 30 years after 2112? Simply amazing! I can not complain! :)

#6 - Posted 11/13/2006 8:37 AM by Mark Wallace [contact]

Great news. I am so hoping they stop by Virginia Beach!

By the way, Ed, I think the "Rushispheres" term works!! Better get to the copyright office soon!

#8 - Posted 11/13/2006 11:42 AM by Jimmy [contact]

Thanks Ed for the info (and the excellent site!!)...time for me to start saving up for a possible road trip. I feel good about them coming to N.C. --from past experience-- but, as Jay pointed out, their tour slate is getting a little leaner as the years roll by.

God-willing, I will see them at least once "somewhere."

#10 - Posted 11/13/2006 1:50 PM by YaddaYadda [contact]

Easy way to confirm this: See if Clair Brothers in Tennessee has buses/drivers reserved for the 2nd quarter of '07 for Rush. I'm not sure if being direct will help or hinder, but this is a good way to confirm. While the guys fly via Gulfstream charter...Neil still needs one and let's not forget the crew.

#12 - Posted 11/13/2006 7:39 PM by Broonskey [contact]

Hey Jay, good point about the availability of open-air venues made mostly for concerts over the arenas made mostly for sport events.

I have seen them twice in open-air venues, and 3 times in closed venues. The funny thing is that the worst and best shows I have seen were both in arenas! :P One was at the old St. Louis Checkerdome on the Counterparts tour (my 1st concert ever when I was 16), before they tore it down, and I was up in nose-bleed on Geddy's side and the sound was terrible. The other was in Ames, Iowa at the ISU Cyclones stadium for the VT tour and the sound was phenomenal, the best Rush concert I have seen. The times I saw them in the open-air were on the R30 and T4E tour (I also saw them in an arena on the T4E tour, as they came to St. Louis twice on that tour! and the arena show was better). But it's not as if a Rush concert can be bad, I just prefer closed venues over open air ones. (And every time I see Rush I make sure to stay totally sober so to experience the show better, so that wasn't any factor in my judgement. :P) So of course I'll take an open-air concert over none!

Cygnify: I meant also their continued album production and not just the tours. I think Neil is just bitching but still fundamentally enjoys touring on some level. It's kind of like someone who complains about their job but never quits even when they have the means to or are in their old age, you know they really like it, they just like to complain about it. He did say that "the only thing worse than touring is not touring". :?

#14 - Posted 11/13/2006 9:34 PM by Broonskey [contact]

Rob:

I understand what you are saying and I'm don't want to get into an arugment, but I just don't see how any member of Rush total worth would be under even a million. I mean, the average person at the end of his/her life after raising kids and everything has probably got an estate of a few hundred thousand (my grandma, for instance, passed away 1 year ago to this day, Nov. 13, 2005, and she and my grandpa never had big money and raised 3 kids, but her total estate was still worth $185,000, even after she gave $50,000 to her sister about 5 years ago and her stocks went down from $300,000 after the 2000 e-commerce burst, and I'm gettin $31,432 out of the whole estate), so how could the members of Rush who are far from the average person in terms of monetary income possibly have something equal to the average person's total worth? Do you really think they are sitting around with just a few hundred thousand to their names? I think at least a few million. How many people do you know have sold 35 million + albums, have in-home studios, BMW cars and motorcycles, and Neil has 2 residences? I don't know any. :P

Anyway, I'm not trying to complain about another Rush tour, who could I? It's awesome! It will be a great show indoors or outdoors, and I'm excited at the chance to see them again and REALLY excited about this new ablum! :)

#16 - Posted 11/13/2006 11:28 PM by Dave [contact]

I have seen every Rush tour since Permanent Waves, in open air venues and huge arenas. I would say they have sounded the best at the Forum in Los Angeles and Glen Helen Regional in Devore California. One open air and one arena. The worst venue I've ever seen them perform in was at the Pond in Anaheim. They were the first rock concert ever there and with all the marble in the place, everything seemed to reverberate. Sitting third row in front of Geddy, he continously looked at Alex and shook his head. He even slapped at the little mascots he had on his keyboards once. Needless to say, they have never returned to Anaheim. I look forward to seeing them in Irvine this year. Maybe they'll make a stop at Staples Center this year instead of the Hollywood Bowl. I can't wait!!

#18 - Posted 11/14/2006 12:11 AM by Steve [contact]

Do the math...what 40 million albums sold, been touring for 30 years. The last 3 tours alone have grossed over 60 million. Of course that's gross, not net, but you get the point. I don't know what kind of royalty money they get, but with the catalogue of albums they have, it must be a nice amount totalled up.

I also agree with the point that it's nobodies business how much money they have, and what they do with it. I certainly don't like anybody telling me how to spend my paycheck..(if my girlfriend gives it to me that is).. and I'm sure they don't like it either. Quite frankly I could care less what they do with their money. The only thing I want from Rush is more albums and more tours.

#20 - Posted 11/14/2006 1:43 AM by Broonskey [contact]

Thanks Dave and Steve, nice to know that their are economically literate people here. :)

#22 - Posted 11/14/2006 9:11 AM by Ed [contact]

Sang- I'm sure they'll hit the Cleveland/Akron area. Since this tour will likely mirror the R30 tour timing-wise, most likely they'll hit Blossom again (since it'll be a late spring/summer tour). And I'll be there! I think I'm gonna make the trek to Toronto to see them this time too. I can't wait.

Thanks for all the great comments guys!

#24 - Posted 11/14/2006 12:58 PM by Broonskey [contact]

Comment Deleted

#26 - Posted 11/14/2006 6:38 PM by Rob [contact]

I'm not saying that these guys dont have millions,but what is wrong about making more? Judging by the price of a concert ticket these days,I'm sure these guys can make more money than they ever have before. Also given the slump of Record sales Industry wide I think touring is the best bet. If Rush could not make money touring,then I'm sorry to say guys that the band would come to an end. But lets hope that wont happen for a while. Hell yea I'm psyched too about the tour. I personally like the outdoor shows better

#28 - Posted 11/14/2006 9:24 PM by Dino [contact]

Broonskey;
I read your 2nd post & acknowledge it. I do reassert however, and Mark adds testimony to this fact, the topic of their income (re: net worth) is generally tabled by you. And I stress again: who cares?
But it doesn't matter who brings it up. The topic itself is erroneous and worn quite thin already.

#30 - Posted 11/14/2006 10:55 PM by Dino [contact]

Very good point Steve. And they do it the way it should be done. With very little if any fanfare, and by contributing what they feel is right.

#32 - Posted 11/15/2006 5:20 PM by Crabs [contact]

HA ha ha. That was funny. Actually I think that was Kelli.

#34 - Posted 11/15/2006 11:59 PM by xanadu2112 [contact]

wow so many random people commenting, i guess when i started posting back in marchish this site was dead compared to now

And i love when im not in the middle of a "post-off"

P.S. broonskey your responses are too epically long and they remind me of Willy Loman from Death of a Saleman or Hamlet's Solilquoies

#36 - Posted 11/18/2006 5:18 PM by David Strangelight [contact]

I know this to be true, and that there will also be a European leg to the tour too.

#38 - Posted 11/19/2006 1:30 AM by Dino [contact]

Valid points one & all. But if you believe that passion for music is the pure motivation, you are incorrect.
This band (like countless others) is finally embracing merchandising. And what better way to expose onself than to tour. Evidence to this is obvious in their Backstage website. As stated before, good for them. But do not believe for one moment, because someone is financially sound they will not attempt to achieve more. Feel free to examine today's sports athletes for reference.
THAT is what capitalism is about. And any socialist, atheist, quick tempered individulas can pound salt if they don't like it.

#40 - Posted 11/20/2006 6:08 AM by Broonskey [contact]

Not to revisit an old thread and argue with those who are obviously ignorant and close-minded, but thanks M for being someone who isn't totally cynical and so hollow that they have to project their sad, pathetic desires and needs for excess material crap and vulgar consumerism onto everyone else. These empty, greedy souls will never understand that after a moderate amount of income there is no more happiness to be gained, and some people do what they for the enjoyment of it. Study after study confirms that there is no big jump in personal happiness between those who have modest income, possessions, and lifestyles and those who have extreme, elitist, wealth and possessions. And other studies show that the countries with the highest level of psychological health are not the ones that contain the wealthiest citizens. Here is one HUGE meta-study where people in the US come in at 23rd on the level of personal contentment (Denmark is first):

link

But, alas, these depraved individuals and America-centric capitalist, conformist, consumer-culture sheep are so hopelessly brainwashed and biased that none of this will matter to them. Let them keep pursuing the corrupt goal of owning "better" material baubles and competing with one another over who has the best. They will never know happiness, contentment, and personal fulfillment; they are just immature, insecure children fighting over who has and gets the biggest toy. Really, really sad and amusing these types are to me, I'm so glad to be above this nonsense scrabbling and psychologically healthy enough to not measure my personal worth and achievements by what car, house, tv, and stereo I own (I still have the stereo I bought when I was in high-school from part-time job money, I only recently added $250 dollar JBL speakers I got offline at half the MSRP. Lately, since I recently inherited $30,000+, I am looking at buying an old Pioneer Sx-series receiver from the mid-late 70's to replace my entry-level and 14 year old Kenwood. You can get these for under $200, less than what they cost when they came out, and they were made in the good days when receivers had a warm, powerful, and natural sound, were constructed with real wood and metal instead of plastic and thin cheap metal, and had analog dials and meters with awesome glowing lights instead of cheap digital displays.) As I said in another post on here:

"...i'm quite happy not being super spoiled as that only tends to corrupt oneself, and i'm glad to just be comfortable middle class. the best house (or two or five), best car (or ten), the best material whatever, can never replace the good times with friends i've had, the love of my gf and family, my education and love of books/learning, my health, or the time i spent listening to Rush on my modest teenage stereo i bought after starting work at age 16. these are where personal riches lie, and one only needs a modest income to acquire and sustain them."

and:

"...in an starving world, i couldn't even drive or own excessively material things in good conscience, EVEN IF i desired them (i happen to presently own several things that i could replace financially, but i'll keep them until i REALLY need to replace them, probably until they are unusable. and i never have nor ever will purchase a new car.) REASONABLE, MODERATELY priced items/luxuries (like an decent car, tv, stereo, furniture...etc.) yes, but not unnecessarily expensive ones. the disease of conspicuous consumption and consumerism is for the bored, intellectually bankrupt, shallow, vulgar, insecure, corrupt, amoral, immature, and overall underdeveloped individual."

It just takes a far more advanced and virtuous soul to understand that the rat race for material trinkets is not only an empty pursuit that only leads to wanting more and more and never satisfies no matter what level of wealth and possessions one ultimately attains, as well as that someone who engages in this sad and empty life is also immoral for living in excess far above their needs when 3 BILLION people live in absolute poverty. What a cruel, viscous, selfish, uncaring, and morally hollow/corrupt individual to accept and praise meaningless consumerism and material greed and dedicate their depraved "lives" to it! What immense good could be done in this world if those same people would give a few thousand (or even hundred) a year to charities instead of spending their excess money on unecessary material luxuries no reasonable person needs and caring nothing for anyone except themselves and perhaps their families/friends (yes I have and do give to charity, and am a contributing member of many groups for social/moral causes, and try to live modestly with few excesses, so stfu before you accuse me of hypocriticalness)! As I said before, anyone living above the upper middle class level in a starving world where every few seconds a child dies of a curable situation or disease is a morally corrupt person, no matter what they give to charity (for they obviously have things they don't need and could give MORE--and that would mean the difference between life and death for many and only the lack of a unecessary material item for them--like a luxury car over an used economic one), and this includes Rush, although at least they DO give to charity, many of the well-off don't bother at all (although, as I said before, ANYONE has the RIGHT to do what they wish with their money, and I would NEVER try to take that freedom away from them! But I, as a morally decent human being, have NO RIGHT to respect selfish people, rich or not, who spend money on excessive goods that could be spent saving lives and people from misery, and EVERY RIGHT to condemn them for their lack of humaneness, caring, and overall moral destitution).

Anyway, I feel sorry for all you ignorant vulgar little conformist, conspicous consumption, consumer-culture brainwashed, and capitalist/american greedy way of life champions. What a sad, pathetic, selfish, uncaring, empty, corrupt, immature, depraved, and worthless "life" you lead. What a pity and shame, even a tragedy.


"Some will sell their dreams for small desires
And lose the race to rats
Get caught in ticking traps..."

#42 - Posted 11/20/2006 9:34 AM by Neil [contact]

For goodness sake, Broonskey, this is a place for Rush fans - a fun place and a celebration of the band we all love. Do you really have assaut our eyes and minds with this crap? I can only assume these mindless rants are in someway meant to compensate for an anatomical shortcoming you may suffer. Here's a hint: insulting people doesn't make you better than them.

Now, can be get back to Rush please?

Ed, I think we need an edit button! ;)

#44 - Posted 11/20/2006 11:41 PM by Dino [contact]

And just as an afterthought. When you buy your new stereo, if you can, ponder what a Somalian may think of your 'modest' $200 purchase. Or perhaps a homelss American. What I'm saying is, it's nice of you to set the standard as long as it's acceptable to you. Stop justifying and quantifying. You can do more by doing deeds than preaching. Ya know, maybe you could learn a thing or two from....ooops scripture.
Otherwise, it's hipocracy in my eyes. But, whatever helps you sleep.

#46 - Posted 11/21/2006 11:15 PM by Ned [contact]

Uh, yea, I was staying out of all of this until I saw these last three (among others) ridiculous posts:

Dino are you retarded?

He's not an hypocrite because he said that living above the upper middle class level is morally objectionable, not that living a middle class lifestyle and making modest "luxury" purchases like $200 for a vintage receiver, a few Rush shirts, cd's, and concert tickets is, especially when he (at least claims) to give to charity and social organizations, own a modest house, car, tv...etc. And if he has come into a $30,000+ inheritance and also just has extra money from being comfortable middle class anyway, he could easily spend thousands on a new receiver alone. So for him to buy a modest and reasonably priced old vintage receiver to replace the one that is over a decade old and crappy to begin with is hardly hypocritical, since he was only objecting to those who live well above reasonable needs and give nothing to charity, ever, and also would buy something like a receiver costing thousands if they had the means to in a starving world and care and think nothing about it.

And as for the "deeds" thing, just giving money to those who do the deeds is doing far more than just preaching online (as you are), as well as when he said he does volunteer work. Did you even bother to read his post, or do you just lack the ability to comprehend it? Either way, it sounds as if he gives, does, and cares alot more than you do, as well as his overall intelligence and knowledge is far beyond your seemingly high-school dropout level. I expected to find many bright, humane, educated, and knowledgeable people on a Rush related sight, so far I only see Broonskey (and a couple others) as representing this. Sad.

And Crabs, uh wow, you're obviously hardly literate and judging everyone you don't agree with as being "commies"? That's not ignorant prejudice and self praising and serving? Nice contradiction. Do us and yourself a favor and don't post anymore about things you can't even begin to comprehend. "Commies" lol, dear lord, go back to the 50's.

It's despairing that people this stupid and ignorant could be Rush fans, and Broonskey, don't bother to argue with these types, it's like arguing with the dead or immature children (I, like you, won't be back in this thread!). Those like you and I are just leagues above them in all conceivable ways, and they can't be helped anyway as they lack the mental abilities to be, nor do they even want to be, because of their silly stubborn ignorant arrogance, that type of conceit dumb uneducated people have while they hypocritically act as if people like us are the only ones stuck-up, lol. At least we have a reason to be! ;)

~Ned (not my real name) out~

#48 - Posted 11/22/2006 10:55 AM by Neil [contact]

You know, I am embarrassed, ashamed and saddened to see all the crap in this topic's comments. I said before, this site is about celebrating Rush. I can't help but think how appalling it would be if Neil, Alex or Geddy dropped by for a look and read all of this rubbish. Way to go, Broonskey/Ned. Wake up to yourselves would you please. :(

And, Ed, can you remove all these comments please?