OT: A Little RUSH PR

[belar]

Aren't we allowed to like all of the above? I love Journey and I really like Rush. Zeppelin is one of my favorites, too. As for Yes, well, I like 90125. Haven't heard much else, to be honest.

[MartyMoffatt]

Marty - I agree with most of your post - but I'd say that Rush haven't actually evolved or surprised us that much since Hold Your Fire. Between 1974 and 1987 they went through extraordinary changes in style - but other than a shift back to basics and a heavier sound recently there's something a bit samey about much of Rush's output since the late 1980s. Also - I think their song-writing has declined. The arrangements are always great but the songs themselves are becoming increasingly disappointing, I reckon.

But they are still incredible live - possibly better than ever.

As for Journey...well, compare their first album with Raised On Radio. They sound totally different. Journey went through some extraordinary changes too between the mid-70s and the mid-80s. But I agree that all of Journey's post-ROR work has been too formulaic and it's time to shake things up again.

I can see where you’re coming from but I have to disagree. Since Hold Your Fire (a fantastic album IMO) in 1987, Rush have put out 14 official album releases. However, of these, only 5 were new studio albums. The rest were live albums, compilations/re-mixes and the covers EP Feedback which paid homage to their roots.

Of those studio albums, some of them I agree were similar. However, I think Counterparts stands out as an exceptional album and is unlike anything Rush have done before or since. It continued to push the envelope, with a stripped back sound reminiscent of the Red Hot Chile Peppers, or even Metallica at times.

Part of the reason for the slowdown in their new writing output (relatively) was due to the much publicized personal tragedies experienced by Neil Peart in the latter half of the 90s. That put the band on hiatus for five years as far as new stuff was concerned. Vapor Trails released in 2002 has been the only brand new album since that hiatus, so it will be interesting to hear the new one in May this year.

I know they are making conscious efforts to completely strip out the keyboards from their sound going forward, to allow themselves more freedom with their preferred instruments, which doesn’t sound like a band content to stick with a tried and tested formula.

Marty

[verslibre]

Marty - I agree with most of your post - but I'd say that Rush haven't actually evolved or surprised us that much since Hold Your Fire. Between 1974 and 1987 they went through extraordinary changes in style - but other than a shift back to basics and a heavier sound recently there's something a bit samey about much of Rush's output since the late 1980s. Also - I think their song-writing has declined. The arrangements are always great but the songs themselves are becoming increasingly disappointing, I reckon.

But they are still incredible live - possibly better than ever.

As for Journey...well, compare their first album with Raised On Radio. They sound totally different. Journey went through some extraordinary changes too between the mid-70s and the mid-80s. But I agree that all of Journey's post-ROR work has been too formulaic and it's time to shake things up again.

I can see where you’re coming from but I have to disagree. Since Hold Your Fire (a fantastic album IMO) in 1987, Rush have put out 14 official album releases. However, of these, only 5 were new studio albums. The rest were live albums, compilations/re-mixes and the covers EP Feedback which paid homage to their roots.

Of those studio albums, some of them I agree were similar. However, I think Counterparts stands out as an exceptional album and is unlike anything Rush have done before or since. It continued to push the envelope, with a stripped back sound reminiscent of the Red Hot Chile Peppers, or even Metallica at times.

Part of the reason for the slowdown in their new writing output (relatively) was due to the much publicized personal tragedies experienced by Neil Peart in the latter half of the 90s. That put the band on hiatus for five years as far as new stuff was concerned. Vapor Trails released in 2002 has been the only brand new album since that hiatus, so it will be interesting to hear the new one in May this year.

I know they are making conscious efforts to completely strip out the keyboards from their sound going forward, to allow themselves more freedom with their preferred instruments, which doesn’t sound like a band content to stick with a tried and tested formula.

Marty

You beat me to it: Counterparts was the same album I was going to cite, a glaringly obvious shift after the HYF-isms of Presto and RTB. And how about Vapor Trails? Regardless of the complaints about the final mastering, an AMAZING album from beginning to end, and a rockin' return to form. I played (and play) the hell out of it. And we should all be glad VT was fuelled by Neil's pissed-off energy reserervoir formed from that double-tragedy nobody should have to endure. Rush wasn't on hiatus — Rush was effectively defunct, and one would only know this by reading Neil's book Ghost Rider: Travels On The Healing Road. Neil writes that he thought he might never play again; the interest simply wasn't there. Otherwise there would be another studio album (or even two) between 1995 and 2002.

In the case of the early Journey albums sounding different from '80s Journey with Schon, Perry and Cain, that's understandable. 10+ years will do that.

[larryfromnextdoor]

Part of the reason for the slowdown in their new writing output (relatively) was due to the much publicized personal tragedies experienced by Neil Peart in the latter half of the 90s.

plus the guitar player ALMOST doing some time.

[verslibre]

Lerxst's "problem" was years later.

[larryfromnextdoor]

Lerxst's "problem" was years later.

uh,, oh yea,, i wasnt looking at the years alex lifeson!

[Matthew]

I can see where you’re coming from but I have to disagree. Since Hold Your Fire (a fantastic album IMO) in 1987, Rush have put out 14 official album releases. However, of these, only 5 were new studio albums. The rest were live albums, compilations/re-mixes and the covers EP Feedback which paid homage to their roots.

Of those studio albums, some of them I agree were similar. However, I think Counterparts stands out as an exceptional album and is unlike anything Rush have done before or since. It continued to push the envelope, with a stripped back sound reminiscent of the Red Hot Chile Peppers, or even Metallica at times.

Part of the reason for the slowdown in their new writing output (relatively) was due to the much publicized personal tragedies experienced by Neil Peart in the latter half of the 90s. That put the band on hiatus for five years as far as new stuff was concerned. Vapor Trails released in 2002 has been the only brand new album since that hiatus, so it will be interesting to hear the new one in May this year.

I know they are making conscious efforts to completely strip out the keyboards from their sound going forward, to allow themselves more freedom with their preferred instruments, which doesn’t sound like a band content to stick with a tried and tested formula.

Marty

You beat me to it: Counterparts was the same album I was going to cite, a glaringly obvious shift after the HYF-isms of Presto and RTB. And how about Vapor Trails? Regardless of the complaints about the final mastering, an AMAZING album from beginning to end, and a rockin' return to form. I played (and play) the hell out of it. And we should all be glad VT was fuelled by Neil's pissed-off energy reserervoir formed from that double-tragedy nobody should have to endure. Rush wasn't on hiatus — Rush was effectively defunct, and one would only know this by reading Neil's book Ghost Rider: Travels On The Healing Road. Neil writes that he thought he might never play again; the interest simply wasn't there. Otherwise there would be another studio album (or even two) between 1995 and 2002.

In the case of the early Journey albums sounding different from '80s Journey with Schon, Perry and Cain, that's understandable. 10+ years will do that.

I wasn't arguing that there was no change at all. As you both say, Counterparts was different from the HYF formula which made Presto and RTB sound a bit tired and uninspired. But Test For Echo wasn't breaking new ground for the band - and I'm not even sure that Vapour Trails did either - other than it representing a return to their hard rock roots.

Compare the last twenty years to - say - the nine year period between Hemispheres and HYF and there's a distinct difference in terms of innovation and quality. Yes, there was some innovation after HYF - but Rush gradually lost their ability to amaze me with each new release after they left Mercury Records.

As for "10+ years will do that"...well, very few bands changed as much as Journey did between the mid-70s and mid-80s. In fact, I can only think of Yes, Genesis and Rush
as other examples of bands who completely reinvented themselves. To say that it was just the passage of time undermines Journey's achievements in that era, I reckon.

[MartyMoffatt]

As for "10+ years will do that"...well, very few bands changed as much as Journey did between the mid-70s and mid-80s. In fact, I can only think of Yes and Rush
as other examples of bands who completely reinvented themselves. To say that it was just the passage of time undermines Journey's achievements in that era, I reckon.

I don't think it was time that was the main factor here. Yes, Journey did re-invent themselves after their first few albums, initiated by a new singer (Perry). But from about 1978 to 1986 (which incorporates virtually all the dirty dozen and covers about 7-8 albums) I can't really detect any change of style in the music. Listening to GH for instance, I couldn't tell which album or which year any particular song came from. I could certainly do so with a Rush greatest hist album or a Queen greatest hits album. That period for Journey was an incredibly successful one, but I wouldn't say it was a period of innovation.

They were actually more innovative in the period prior to Perry. After Perry arrived the songwriting improved and consolidated, but didn't depart too much from just showcasing Perry's voice.

Marty

[Matthew]

But from about 1978 to 1986 (which incorporates virtually all the dirty dozen and covers about 7-8 albums) I can't really detect any change of style in the music.

Really Marty? That surprises me. I can hear big differences between Infinity and ROR. I take your point about the Journey GH sounding more consistent than a Rush compilation - but these were just the singles. Listening to the entire albums individually and back to back the evolution the band went through is pretty obvious, I must say.

[verslibre]

I wasn't arguing that there was no change at all. As you both say, Counterparts was different from the HYF formula which made Presto and RTB sound a bit tired and uninspired. But Test For Echo wasn't breaking new ground for the band - and I'm not even sure that Vapour Trails did either - other than it representing a return to their hard rock roots.

Compare the last twenty years to - say - the nine year period between Hemispheres and HYF and there's a distinct difference in terms of innovation and quality. Yes, there was some innovation after HYF - but Rush gradually lost their ability to amaze me with each new release after they left Mercury Records.

You need to take the best songs from Presto and RTB to make a Rush album as solid as Power Windows. Some of the songs, like "You Bet Your Life" and "Red Tide" sound kind of half-assed. I preferred Presto to RTB for the longest time, but now it's the other way around.

As for "10+ years will do that"...well, very few bands changed as much as Journey did between the mid-70s and mid-80s. In fact, I can only think of Yes, Genesis and Rush as other examples of bands who completely reinvented themselves. To say that it was just the passage of time undermines Journey's achievements in that era, I reckon.

I know I was making a broad statement, and indeed Journey circa '75 and Journey circa '85 sound radically different, but I'm going to have to go with Marty on this one and agree that once Perry was onboard there wasn't much innovation after a point (perhaps when Jon Cain joined). There are exceptions of course. I really like the title track of Frontiers, for instance. I don't think it sounds like a typical SP-Journey tune.

In fact, I can only think of Yes, Genesis and Rush as other examples of bands who completely reinvented themselves.

Camel
Kansas
Blue Oyster Cult
Vangelis
Utopia
Neil Young
Jethro Tull
Goblin

(etc.)

[Carlitto H@kk]

You need to take the best songs from Presto and RTB to make a Rush album as solid as Power Windows.

And I thought I was the only one

Power Windows is my fave Rush album for some reason.
"Middletown Dreams" and "Manhattan Project" still blow me away.

[JrnyScarab]

You need to take the best songs from Presto and RTB to make a Rush album as solid as Power Windows.

And I thought I was the only one

Power Windows is my fave Rush album for some reason.
"Middletown Dreams" and "Manhattan Project" still blow me away.

See, their catalog is so varied that some people love their worst songs and some people hate their best songs. (I'm not impling that your choices are their worst. I just like some of the other songs on that CD better). Power Windows IS a great album but so was just about everything up until then. My first exposure to RUSH was the Farewell to Kings & 2112 albums. I thought, this band is onto something. From then on, every album outdid the last and was totally amazing. I don't think I've ever heard a band who progressed so fast as musicians from album to album. Simply mind boggling. Their later albums were a bit more hit or miss, but as I said, some think their greatest songs are the ones some like least. Shows how wide a net they cast. And I think Vapor Trails was a VERY inventive album. Unfortunately, the production was about as bad as it gets and it totally ruined that CD. Now if we could only have it remastered properly...

Ed

[conversationpc]

And I think Vapor Trails was a VERY inventive album. Unfortunately, the production was about as bad as it gets and it totally ruined that CD. Now if we could only have it remastered properly...

Yes, the production on that album was horrible. It sounds like they just bumped up the levels on all the instruments as high as possible. Terrible.

[JrnyScarab]

And I think Vapor Trails was a VERY inventive album. Unfortunately, the production was about as bad as it gets and it totally ruined that CD. Now if we could only have it remastered properly...

Yes, the production on that album was horrible. It sounds like they just bumped up the levels on all the instruments as high as possible. Terrible.

Yeah, in the words of Ian Gillan, "Can we have everything louder than everything else"

[Rick]

I like Rush, but Journey is an all around better band. They have a diversity that Rush doesn't know.

"Diversity"? Rush plays circles around Journey in terms of diversity. They've albums that almost don't even sound like the same band (in a good way), save for the vocals. Compare Hemispheres to Signals to Counterparts to Vapor Trails — see (hear) what I mean?

Haven't recorded or toured as a band for a 3 and 10 year stretch, and have still managed to outsell Rush.

"Outselling" Rush as of when? Borrow or rent a copy of Rush In Rio. When's the last time Journey played in front of a crowd that large? The South American shows were just a couple years ago, not from Rush's commercial peak circa the early-to-mid 1980s.

The bottom line is: Rush nay-sayers can moan all they want. A straw man argument is still a straw man argument.

All I was saying is that Journey has sold more records than Rush. It's just a fact. I do like Rush, but I love Journey. Journey is a better band. PERIOD. Rush is in my top 5 bands, but don't come in here saying they are better, you're wrong.

I will give you your props though, Rush has a better bassist and drummer. Neal is better than Alex and SP is WAY better than Geddy. JSS is better than Geddy too. Geddy is better than Augeri though.

[verslibre]

"Journey is a better band. PERIOD."


Don't forget "IMHO."

[JrnyScarab]

Geddy is better than Augeri though.

Now THAT's funny. LOL!

[Rick]

"Journey is a better band. PERIOD."


Don't forget "IMHO."

Ok bro. We can agree to disagree. I appreciate your passion for Rush, they are a damn fine band.

[Rockindeano]

Geddy is better than Augeri though.

Bullshit. I swear to you, in '06, Augeri never missed a single note. Never! Dude was consistent as cake batter.

[Saint John]

Geddy is better than Augeri though.

Bullshit. I swear to you, in '06, Augeri never missed a single note. Never! Dude was consistent as cake batter.

True...but he was also as phony as Michael Jackson's nose.

[Rick]

Geddy is better than Augeri though.

Bullshit. I swear to you, in '06, Augeri never missed a single note. Never! Dude was consistent as cake batter.

I damn near choked to death! God damn! LMAO!

[chf34jmac]

RockinDeano wrote:

Shoot 'em up wrote:
Geddy is better than Augeri though. Very Happy



Bullshit. I swear to you, in '06, Augeri never missed a single note. Never! Dude was consistent as cake batter.



I damn near choked to death! God damn! LMAO!

Ha! I knew you were full of shit. You still have Augeris' back.