|
First thing I'd like to get out of the way: I'm not a fan per se. Not that I dislike or hate them, I've heard some stuff on the classic rock station and thought it was catchy enough, but I'm admittedly listening to it in a vacuum. Since they were recently inducted to the Rock n Roll Hall of Fame a lot of fans have come out of the woodwork in a sort of indignant vindication towards the perceived snubbing of Journey. I know a lot of people like to joke that liking journey is essentially a virginity pact too and besides being Canadian and appealing to nerds for whatever reason, I have no context. So yes, I would like you, the fan, to explain Journey to me in a more depth way.
|
| # ? Jan 17, 2013 06:28 |
|
|
|
| # ? May 18, 2013 20:12 |
|
|
Journey is not Canadian. Are you thinking of Rush?
|
| # ? Jan 17, 2013 12:30 |
|
|
uublog posted:Journey is not Canadian. Are you thinking of Rush? gently caress me. I did mean Rush. Why I kept thinking Journey I don't know... yeah Rush
|
| # ? Jan 17, 2013 13:39 |
|
|
Alan Smithee posted:gently caress me. Kids these days..... Anyway, while not required, it does make it more difficult to explain Rush's music and appeal if you don't know poo poo about writing or playing music. If you DO know how to write or play music, Rush's appeal should be instantly understandable....they're really, really good at the art form. They've also influenced a huge amount of other bands and are still capable of selling out football stadiums in most countries. Also, Neil Peart....
|
| # ? Jan 17, 2013 15:53 |
|
|
I will explain Rush to you: I don't really know how you 'explain' why should like music though. Listen to some, you'll either like it or you won't. Here: Fly by Night Limelight Spirit of the Radio The Necromancer Red Barchetta 2112(long as gently caress) Xanadu also: 
|
| # ? Jan 17, 2013 16:17 |
|
|
They're a rock band and they sing about walking down the boulevard.
|
| # ? Jan 17, 2013 18:54 |
|
|
I get Journey, Rush, Yes, the Who, and Voyager all confused. They all remind me of going on vacation.
|
| # ? Jan 17, 2013 19:00 |
|
|
Neil Peart is considered one of the top 5 best rock and roll drummers of all time, if not the best. It's usually some combo of him, Keith Moon, John Bonham, Stewart Copeland, and someone else (Ringo, Dave Grohl, maybe even Charlie Watts) The simplest test to see if you like them is if Limelight or Tom Sawyer come on the radio and you're not tempted to turn it the gently caress up, then you're probably not a fan.
|
| # ? Jan 18, 2013 00:40 |
|
|
Rush is a band. They made a song called Tom Sawyer. It has a synthesizer lead that goes doodoodoodoodoodoodoo doodoodoodoodoodoo doo. Dave Lovelace explains Rush: http://umop.com/hamsterdunce/031.htm Sizone fucked around with this message at Jan 18, 2013 around 03:44 |
| # ? Jan 18, 2013 03:28 |
|
|
Asides from a couple of their albums (Snakes and Arrows, Roll the Bones), everything they have done I feel is great. The songs I feel are most "accessible" are Spirit of Radio, Tom Sawyer, and Closer to the Heart. Geddy Lee's also great at riding a toboggan
|
| # ? Jan 18, 2013 06:57 |
|
|
Their new album is pretty good too.
|
| # ? Jan 18, 2013 09:30 |
|
|
I want to nuke this thread from orbit 
|
| # ? Jan 18, 2013 09:31 |
|
|
This movie is pretty good at examining everything that is Rush: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1545103/
|
| # ? Jan 18, 2013 09:37 |
|
|
They're big wonky stringed intrument playing musicians who make lots of interesting noises with their stringed musical instruments. I used to love Rush and then I used to hate Rush and now I mostly don't care about Rush, because they're good when you're in that phase of your life when you're discovering that some people make really cool technically impressive noises with instruments. The dadrock phase. When you're kind of breaking out of the idea that all rock music is MOR post-grunge stupidity and you just wanna hear all the long-haired guys go dooda-dooda-dooda on their bass. That I think explains why most people love Rush, and despite how condescending that paragraph might've sounded I really don't begrudge them at all. Rush makes pretty cool-sounding catchy music. It's just that, at least for myself, catchy dadrock riffs have a bit of a short shelf-life before you yearn to move along and find out more structural or emotive ways people make/have made novel-sounding music. Of course, there's also the small minority of Rush fans who are REALLY into Ayn Rand, and I don't think anyone can really explain those people. edit: vvvv my god, this PERFECTLY sums up how I feel about Rush quadrophrenic fucked around with this message at Jan 18, 2013 around 12:09 |
| # ? Jan 18, 2013 12:02 |
|
|
I don't even like or listen to Rush and I still like Rush.
|
| # ? Jan 18, 2013 12:07 |
|
|
Ugh, seriously can a mod change the title to Rush? This is worse than probation I swear
|
| # ? Jan 18, 2013 14:41 |
|
|
Rush is loving awesome but I do hate that they dedicated 2112 to Ayn Rand. The whole libertarian vibe is Neil Peart's fault anyway.
|
| # ? Jan 18, 2013 15:20 |
|
|
Alan Smithee posted:Ugh, seriously can a mod change the title to Rush? This is worse than probation I swear Rush have been around for ages. They have sold a shitload of gold and platinum records. I think they're number 3 on the list of "bands that have the most consecutive albums go gold or platinum". They have influenced a lot of other bands. Their new albums still sell well, and they still sell out stadiums. Basically, it was ridiculous that it took so bloody long for them to be inducted into the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame. I mean, the Hall is totally bogus and irrelevant, but STILL. All three of them are absolute killer musicians. Geddy Lee played synths and used foot pedals to play the bass "guitar" at the same time as singing. Alex Lifeson comes up with amazing riffs. And Neil Peart is one of the greatest drummers of all time - some say THE greatest. Also, they don't take themselves seriously at all - they joke around onstage. While they are technically gifted, most of their music is extremely accessible. Dream Theater is music for musicians, but Rush is music that everybody can appreciate, but still blow away other musicians. Not many bands can do that. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GHkucr1jJpQ http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UNilsLf6eW4 (edit: beaten on posting this song). http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Eh_9NY56Sxw
|
| # ? Jan 18, 2013 15:29 |
|
|
Is this an example of them joking around on stage? It sounds like a StSanders video http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2BrLEuzVCVQ
|
| # ? Jan 18, 2013 17:11 |
|
|
I have Rush to thank for Styx existing, right? Thanks Rush.
|
| # ? Jan 18, 2013 19:29 |
|
|
I normally listen to weird experimental electronic bullshit and hip hop and garbage indie crap but i love old progressive rock and I still think farewell to kings is the best rush album and if you don't like it you are shameful 
|
| # ? Jan 18, 2013 20:45 |
|
|
safety dan posted:Rush is loving awesome but I do hate that they dedicated 2112 to Ayn Rand. The whole libertarian vibe is Neil Peart's fault anyway. I think that's what makes it awesome. I'm no fan of ayn rand but you gotta apreciate it for what it is, and its a wonderfully cheesy and hella rad libertarian prog anthem 2112, hemispheres, and farewell to kings are pro tier and everything after them are just kind of mediocre though. I'm not too big on the radio friendly 80's rock
|
| # ? Jan 18, 2013 20:51 |
|
|
safety dan posted:Rush is loving awesome but I do hate that they dedicated 2112 to Ayn Rand. The whole libertarian vibe is Neil Peart's fault anyway. Neil really isn't the best lyricist either. As far as the libertarian vibe, I'm not a big Lord of the Rings fan but Led Zeppelin's obsession with it doesn't discourage me from enjoying their music when I hear it.
|
| # ? Jan 18, 2013 21:18 |
|
|
Tom Pridgen posted:Neil really isn't the best lyricist either. I'm not a big fan of Mein Kampf, but that doesn't discourage me from enjoying Horst-Wessel-Lied when I hear it.
|
| # ? Jan 19, 2013 01:47 |
|
|
Rush is a band that represents everything about the idea that more=better Playing a rock music song that has three chords is great, therefore playing a rock music song that has ALL of the chords must be better to a Rush fan. Rush's drummer Neal Peart plays with ALL the drums. Does this make his drumming sound better than say, Charlie Watts from the Rolling Stones who plays with like four drums? I would argue not. A band like Black Sabbath will play a riff that has five notes and it will be AWESOME and they'll play it over and over as Ozzie Osbourne or  sings about wizards overtop it. Rush will play a riff that has all of the notes and it might be awesome for a brief moment, but instead of holding onto that, they'll move into a different movement of their song as Geddy Lee sings about how Affirmative Action is bad using a tortured tree metaphor.Have you ever met someone who sunk thousands of dollars into a car to make it vroom faster, and put a giant spoiler and nitrous boosters on it only so that he could drive it to the store and work never actually exceeding 35 mph? That guy embodies the same spirit as Rush, and everything that is great about that notion is what people find great about Rush and everything that people find laughable about it is what people find laughable about Rush.
|
| # ? Jan 20, 2013 05:05 |
|
|
TB-303 Player posted:Rush is a band that represents everything about the idea that more=better Maybe for some of their huge sprawling prog rock entire album side songs, but that's pretty much a requirement to being a Prog Rock band. You could say that about Pink Floyd, Genesis, whatever. Besides those, most of their songs are fairly simple, structurally.
|
| # ? Jan 20, 2013 05:31 |
|
|
Mister Snips posted:2112, hemispheres, and farewell to kings are pro tier and everything after them are just kind of mediocre though. I'm not too big on the radio friendly 80's rock Anyway I'm never keen on the idea of "explain <band> to me", but a good illustration of the niche that Rush occupies is Jason Segel's character in Freaks & Geeks's fandom. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fIbk5O2bAlI TB-303 Player posted:Rush's drummer Neal Peart plays with ALL the drums. Does this make his drumming sound better than say, Charlie Watts from the Rolling Stones who plays with like four drums? I would argue not. stratdax posted:Maybe for some of their huge sprawling prog rock entire album side songs, but that's pretty much a requirement to being a Prog Rock band. You could say that about Pink Floyd, Genesis, whatever. Besides those, most of their songs are fairly simple, structurally.
|
| # ? Jan 20, 2013 05:53 |
|
|
het posted:Signals I could see drawing a line at, but Permanent Waves and Moving Pictures just happened to have catchy radio hits, it's not like radio stations were scrambling for Witch Hunt (one of my favorites) or The Camera Eye. Signals was the start of the Synth heavy era. The guitars really fell by the wayside - in the documentary, Alex said he really wasn't happy about it. They lost some fans when they did that, but for me I appreciate the effort. They tried new things, they committed themselves to it, but if it didn't work out, they were willing to change to another direction and explore new territory again. The opening of Couterparts, "Animate Me", was a big statement that said "We are a guitar-bass-drums power trio, and the synths are gone". But the synth era had some really great songs as well. For example, on Signals, there's Subdivisions. Great f'ing song. het posted:Anyway I'm never keen on the idea of "explain <band> to me", but a good illustration of the niche that Rush occupies is Jason Segel's character in Freaks & Geeks's fandom. I guess Segel is a really big Rush fan. Half of I Love You, Man was about Rush. Edit: Congratulations Alan Smithee on your new avatar. That's hilarious. stratdax fucked around with this message at Jan 20, 2013 around 08:48 |
| # ? Jan 20, 2013 08:46 |
|
|
stratdax posted:Signals was the start of the Synth heavy era. The guitars really fell by the wayside - in the documentary, Alex said he really wasn't happy about it. They lost some fans when they did that, but for me I appreciate the effort. They tried new things, they committed themselves to it, but if it didn't work out, they were willing to change to another direction and explore new territory again. The opening of Couterparts, "Animate Me", was a big statement that said "We are a guitar-bass-drums power trio, and the synths are gone". But the synth era had some really great songs as well. For example, on Signals, there's Subdivisions. Great f'ing song.
|
| # ? Jan 20, 2013 09:33 |
|
|
stratdax posted:Signals was the start of the Synth heavy era. The guitars really fell by the wayside - in the documentary, Alex said he really wasn't happy about it. They lost some fans when they did that, but for me I appreciate the effort. They tried new things, they committed themselves to it, but if it didn't work out, they were willing to change to another direction and explore new territory again. The opening of Couterparts, "Animate Me", was a big statement that said "We are a guitar-bass-drums power trio, and the synths are gone". But the synth era had some really great songs as well. For example, on Signals, there's Subdivisions. Great f'ing song. That's one of my favorite things about Rush. With each album they're always trying something new, always evolving in some way. They've done prog, blues, reggae, electronic, acoustic, grunge, funk, the list goes on. This is why I believe they are so widely liked and appeal to so many people: there is something for everyone within their catalog. Bands that offer such a variety, and make it work well, tend to be the most successful for this reason, and it makes sense. Hell, I love 80 percent of Rush's discography. The remaining 20 percent is almost entirely made up of their synth era. It wasn't bad by any means, and there were a handful of diamonds in the rough ("Subdivisions", as mentioned above, was fantastic), it just wasn't my favorite Rush era, and that's okay, because someone else out there loved it. My favorite Rush albums are Moving Pictures, Counterparts, and Clockwork Angels. They are all Rush albums at their core, but offer very different and unique sounds, and exist within entirely separate decades! These guys are almost sixty, and they just made their best record in twenty years. Not a lot of bands offer that level of consistency. This is why it's such a travesty that the Rock N' Roll Hall of Fame didn't recognize them until now, and only because of the outrage sparked by them blatantly ignoring the band's existence for so long. It basically just made them look really bad amongst Rush fans (whom there are a lot of in the Rock N' Roll world). I'm glad they finally caved and inducted them, but I feel like it was more to stop the bleeding than anything else.
|
| # ? Jan 20, 2013 10:52 |
|
|
stratdax posted:Edit: Congratulations Alan Smithee on your new avatar. That's hilarious. You know, I was starting to worry about the fact that I had the word "surprise sex" in my old one. edit: JUST A SMALL TOWN GIRL LIVING IN A LONELY WORLD SHE TOOK THE MIDNIGHT TRAIN GOING ANYWHERE *prog riff* Director's edit: If I am to be tarred in feathered in NMD the least you slags can do is gold this thread Alan Smithee fucked around with this message at Jan 20, 2013 around 11:20 |
| # ? Jan 20, 2013 11:14 |
|
|
Alan Smithee posted:edit: JUST A SMALL TOWN GIRL LIVING IN A LONELY WORLD SHE TOOK THE MIDNIGHT TRAIN GOING ANYWHERE *prog riff* That's a Journey song, who were only vaguely progessive for their first album or two (and that song isn't prog by any stretch). Then they turned into generic 70s arena rock. (Although "Open Arms" is a pretty good song). Forget about Journey. I hope you're picking up good stuff about Rush from this thread of yours.
|
| # ? Jan 20, 2013 11:44 |
|
|
Moving Pictures is one of the greatest standalone albums of all time. If you can't enjoy that, then I dunno, I guess you just don't like Rush.
|
| # ? Jan 20, 2013 14:05 |
|
|
stratdax posted:That's a Journey song, who were only vaguely progessive for their first album or two (and that song isn't prog by any stretch). Then they turned into generic 70s arena rock. (Although "Open Arms" is a pretty good song). Forget about Journey. I hope you're picking up good stuff about Rush from this thread of yours. That was a really obvious joke man.
|
| # ? Jan 20, 2013 15:34 |
|
|
het posted:I always hate this argument, of course drumming can't simply be judged through how many pieces you use, but it always feels like when someone brings this up, they're explicitly arguing the inverse, which is just as stupid. You can be a good drummer and still use lots of ridiculous instruments. You don't have to be embarrassed that you have a dozen toms of descending sizes, or literal bells and whistles, or a gong (wellll maybe for the gong, but for different reasons). The idea that you can't make good music if it's really elaborate/complicated is really dumb to me. I think the point was that he's exchanging 'good' for 'more' though? I mean I've never really listened to Rush, but I've heard people bring up Neil Peart as the best drummer lots of times, and that video posted up there has a lot of moving simple, pedestrian rhythms around a big pile of drums. There's nothing wrong with having a lot of percussion at all, but if it's just an excuse to go thud thud thud thud bickybicky beckybecky bockybocky buckybucky then it's not exactly adding to the experience. The best parts of that are when he starts wailing on the snare. And Boris uses a gong, so gongs are good
|
| # ? Jan 20, 2013 16:24 |
|
|
baka kaba posted:I think the point was that he's exchanging 'good' for 'more' though? I mean I've never really listened to Rush, but I've heard people bring up Neil Peart as the best drummer lots of times, and that video posted up there has a lot of moving simple, pedestrian rhythms around a big pile of drums. There's nothing wrong with having a lot of percussion at all, but if it's just an excuse to go thud thud thud thud bickybicky beckybecky bockybocky buckybucky then it's not exactly adding to the experience. The best parts of that are when he starts wailing on the snare. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uV9WlgC5oWo
|
| # ? Jan 21, 2013 17:15 |
|
|
It shouldn't come as a surprise that it took so long for Rush to be inducted into the Hall of Fame. They've always struggled to break through into the larger rock and roll scene. Early on, many hard rock fans found Rush's music to be too complicated to maintain their attention, but at the same time they weren't artsy enough to gain the approval of prog aficionados. They started carving a niche for themelves with Permanent Waves, which was their most balanced album to date in terms of accessibility and originality, though it was a bit too new wavey for my tastes. It wasn't until Moving Pictures when they really came into their own, both critically and commercially.
|
| # ? Jan 21, 2013 20:52 |
|
|
I listen to a lot of death metal and can even deal with the grindcore poo poo where they are gurgling like dying pigs, but I've never been able to stand Geddy's voice. Their instrumental stuff is awesome though.safety dan posted:Rush is loving awesome but I do hate that they dedicated 2112 to Ayn Rand. The whole libertarian vibe is Neil Peart's fault anyway. To be fair, 2112 was released in 1976. You can't really judge him by the modern Paul/Beck/Gingrich wacko libertarianism, which I'm pretty sure he's distanced himself from in interviews.
|
| # ? Jan 21, 2013 23:20 |
|
|
When I started paying attention to Rush's lyrics I really started to dislike them. Someone once told me that Isis is "a great instrumental band that has a singer" and I think that doubly applies to Rush.
|
| # ? Jan 22, 2013 04:02 |
|
|
|
| # ? May 18, 2013 20:12 |
|
|
precision posted:When I started paying attention to Rush's lyrics I really started to dislike them. Someone once told me that Isis is "a great instrumental band that has a singer" and I think that doubly applies to Rush. See, for me my favorite part about Rush is the lyrics. I mean call me a stupid nerd internet virgin who doesn't like songs about sex and love (seriously buy me some red text, I loving dare you just don't touch Robert D. Jr.) but for me the thing I like the most about Rush is that their lyrics aren't super saturated with sappy love and 'i love her she doesn't me' kind of crap that a lot of stuff has. Which isn't to say that they don't deal with love and relationships between humans, but it's in interesting ways such as Chemistry off of their album Signals or Virtuality off of their album Test for Echo (keep in mind this song was released in 1996). I guess really what it boils down to is that it's three dudes who are nerds but are okay with being nerds and they sing about nerdy stuff, but they have some sweet guitar and drum solos tied into some cool synth riffs and are always looking for new and interesting ways to compose their music. Like seriously, how many bands do you know wrote a song about trees that was a metaphor for communism (because now you know that Rush wrote a song about trees that was a metaphor for communism)
|
| # ? Jan 22, 2013 05:42 |
|
