Doing a Rush retrospective folks after watching a doc on Prog rock. I've heard individual songs and the whole of Clockwork Angels which I loved. Just wanted to know what people felt were their best albums were.
Music RUSH
- Thread starter Inigo Montoya
- Start date
Overrated wank band who make shit music.
I can now leave this thread, knowing I have done enough to keep it going for pages as deluded rush fans will start explaining how wrong I am about their overrated wank band that makes shit music.
I can now leave this thread, knowing I have done enough to keep it going for pages as deluded rush fans will start explaining how wrong I am about their overrated wank band that makes shit music.
The way Alex Lifeson dealt with Ricky was quite something.
Great drummer but overrated as feck
Well that's that then, lock the thread
Had a feeling this would happen. Great that this place turns into Twitter when you get self entitled posters
Excellent musicians, Peart in particular. They're not a band I choose to listen to very often though. 2112 and Moving Pictures are very good albums, though I haven't listened to either in ages. I should give them a spin again.
Thanks I’ll start with those
You're welcome.
My favourite band, but I don't think there is much call for them round here.
Devastated when Neil Peart passed away, they'll never be another
Also, this: https://www.redcafe.net/threads/a-t...h-fans-those-who-like-proper-drummers.308518/
Devastated when Neil Peart passed away, they'll never be another
Also, this: https://www.redcafe.net/threads/a-t...h-fans-those-who-like-proper-drummers.308518/
That was a funny and informative read!My favourite band, but I don't think there is much call for them round here.
Devastated when Neil Peart passed away, they'll never be another
Also, this: https://www.redcafe.net/threads/a-t...h-fans-those-who-like-proper-drummers.308518/
Would agree a lot of what is said about Peart. Great musician but sometimes rated too highly as drummers go but at the same time underrated which seems like a paradox. Lifeson is a guitarist I rate highly from the way he has built his solos. Used by Steven Wilson as well
I used to love Rush, but I guess I kinda moved on - and definitely heard their stuff far too much. Still good music though!
It's a bit hard to say what albums to recommend as their style shifted a lot. From the perios before synths became dominant (Moving Pictures onwards), I prefer Hemispheres; but I know 2112 and A Farewell to Kings are more common calls. Permanent Waves is a little inconsistent, although The Spirit of Radio is a great radio track and Jacob's Ladder is one of may favorites of theirs. (Was very happy to see it live in 2015. ) The first three are rather basic hard-rock in comparison, especially the first one.
The synth period is from Moving Pictures to Presto/Roll the Bones (although those two are kinda in between). My favorites are Moving Pictures and Power Windows, which are just incredibly strong all through. Special shoutout to the underrated Middletown Dreams of the latter. (Also, Territories for the rare spot of humor in the lyrics!) I also really like Signals. I think I'm rare in that one and I agree the production is too muddy, but there are a couple of amazing songs on there, like Subdivisions, Countdown, and The Analog Kid, as well as Losing It, one of their very few 'ballads', and very beautiful, haunting, and sad.
Grace Under Pressure is very good as well. Side A is among their best sequences of music (including a bit of pretty OK ska in The Enemy Within!), but the album as a whole is let down by its side B to me. Hold Your Fire has a couple of great tunes (the ones you'll find on a best of), but is too slick for me overall and the quality drops are too deep. Presto and Roll The Bones both have a rather thin sound to me, which makes them harder to listen to. Even their best tunes (like Red Tide or Dreamliner) suffer from that.
I'm less into the period from the 90s onwards, when they largely ditch their synths and start rocking harder again. I like Counterparts and Test for Echo though, since their melodic sensitivities are still strong there. They also have another great trio of instrumentals, starting with the one on Roll the Bones. I don't really hear that in Vapor Trails of Snakes & Arrows, which I find rather meh. I agree that Clockwork Angels is quite strong again though (The Anarchist is probably my favorite track there), but I don't like the sound as much.
Feedback is also a fun little album btw: they have a lot of fun playing 8 of their favorite 60s and 70s rock tracks and it sounds great. I would skip over their live albums though; they add very little to the albums, apart from the drum solos.
It's a bit hard to say what albums to recommend as their style shifted a lot. From the perios before synths became dominant (Moving Pictures onwards), I prefer Hemispheres; but I know 2112 and A Farewell to Kings are more common calls. Permanent Waves is a little inconsistent, although The Spirit of Radio is a great radio track and Jacob's Ladder is one of may favorites of theirs. (Was very happy to see it live in 2015.
) The first three are rather basic hard-rock in comparison, especially the first one.The synth period is from Moving Pictures to Presto/Roll the Bones (although those two are kinda in between). My favorites are Moving Pictures and Power Windows, which are just incredibly strong all through. Special shoutout to the underrated Middletown Dreams of the latter. (Also, Territories for the rare spot of humor in the lyrics!) I also really like Signals. I think I'm rare in that one and I agree the production is too muddy, but there are a couple of amazing songs on there, like Subdivisions, Countdown, and The Analog Kid, as well as Losing It, one of their very few 'ballads', and very beautiful, haunting, and sad.
Grace Under Pressure is very good as well. Side A is among their best sequences of music (including a bit of pretty OK ska in The Enemy Within!), but the album as a whole is let down by its side B to me. Hold Your Fire has a couple of great tunes (the ones you'll find on a best of), but is too slick for me overall and the quality drops are too deep. Presto and Roll The Bones both have a rather thin sound to me, which makes them harder to listen to. Even their best tunes (like Red Tide or Dreamliner) suffer from that.
I'm less into the period from the 90s onwards, when they largely ditch their synths and start rocking harder again. I like Counterparts and Test for Echo though, since their melodic sensitivities are still strong there. They also have another great trio of instrumentals, starting with the one on Roll the Bones. I don't really hear that in Vapor Trails of Snakes & Arrows, which I find rather meh. I agree that Clockwork Angels is quite strong again though (The Anarchist is probably my favorite track there), but I don't like the sound as much.
Feedback is also a fun little album btw: they have a lot of fun playing 8 of their favorite 60s and 70s rock tracks and it sounds great. I would skip over their live albums though; they add very little to the albums, apart from the drum solos.
Last edited:
What docu did you watch btw?
Would love to know that too..
During the 70s and 80s Geddy Lee and Phil Lesh were considered the best bass players in rock. Neil Peart was hands down the best rock drummer. A three man band that has two of the best musicians is pretty difficult to be overrated. Rush might not be everybody's cup of tea, but it is silly to downplay how outstanding they were.
I also found it very interesting that Geddy Lee and Alex Lifeson were married before Rush started touring and according to other bands that traveled with them, they did not spend their time partying. Gene Simmons of Kiss really liked them and was convinced they were a couple because they never left their hotel room. They were family men that were very dedicated to their wives and children, not the sterotype for 70s rockers. I enjoy Rush, but I am a little overwhelmed because my son plays bass, so not only did I experience them as a teenager, my son plays Rush songs, eventhough he does not listen to them as a fan. There are a handful of bassists that improve his skills and Geddy Lee is near the top.
I also found it very interesting that Geddy Lee and Alex Lifeson were married before Rush started touring and according to other bands that traveled with them, they did not spend their time partying. Gene Simmons of Kiss really liked them and was convinced they were a couple because they never left their hotel room. They were family men that were very dedicated to their wives and children, not the sterotype for 70s rockers. I enjoy Rush, but I am a little overwhelmed because my son plays bass, so not only did I experience them as a teenager, my son plays Rush songs, eventhough he does not listen to them as a fan. There are a handful of bassists that improve his skills and Geddy Lee is near the top.
Lee has this really weird technique where he plays with his fingers (not a pick), but then usually only one finger instead of his whole hand. Never seen that before and it looks kinda clumsy (if I didn't miss-see), but obviously it works for him!
Lifeson is underrated I think. 'Good' is usually interpreted as 'fast', and he doesn't do any of that. His solos aren't very spectacular or stand out in other ways either. But he had a pretty unique sound in the 80s and layering in his parts is pretty special as well. I don't think Rush would have sounded as good if they had had a guitarist that's considered 'great' but has a more conventional approach to sound and chords.
I read the Rush bio by Jon Collins, and yeah, they're a pretty boring band behind the scenes. I like that actually; it allows the biographer to talk more about the music! (I read a Freddy Mercury bio as well and kinda regretted it: I don't really care for the gossip, I want to hear more about production, composition, shows - the music side! Bill Bruford's autobiography is excellent for that btw.)
There are lots of them on YouTube actually, also for individual bands. I'm trying not to look into that too much, cause it will suck up all my time while I probably wouldn't learn much new anymore after over two decades of interest in prog rock. I'm always interested in checking out stuff people recommend in particular though!
I always thought Lifeson’s leads were done extremely well with the melody of the songs and his acoustic work was exceptional. It is difficult to get praise when your contemporaries are Jimi Hendrix, Eric Clapton, and Jimmy Page.
Sky arts Music Icons
Ah okay - I don't have access to that.
TBF there are probably some good ones on YouTube
Their second album, Fly by night, is my personal favorite. More rock than prog though, so maybe not the one you should look.
Edit: it's more like a Zeppelin record, so if you like Zeppelin you may enjoy it a lot.
Edit: it's more like a Zeppelin record, so if you like Zeppelin you may enjoy it a lot.
I used to love Rush, but I guess I kinda moved on - and definitely heard their stuff far too much. Still good music though!
It's a bit hard to say what albums to recommend as their style shifted a lot. From the perios before synths became dominant (Moving Pictures onwards), I prefer Hemispheres; but I know 2112 and A Farewell to Kings are more common calls. Permanent Waves is a little inconsistent, although The Spirit of Radio is a great radio track and Jacob's Ladder is one of may favorites of theirs. (Was very happy to see it live in 2015.
The synth period is from Moving Pictures to Presto/Roll the Bones (although those two are kinda in between). My favorites are Moving Pictures and Power Windows, which are just incredibly strong all through. Special shoutout to the underrated Middletown Dreams of the latter. (Also, Territories for the rare spot of humor in the lyrics!) I also really like Signals. I think I'm rare in that one and I agree the production is too muddy, but there are a couple of amazing songs on there, like Subdivisions, Countdown, and The Analog Kid, as well as Losing It, one of their very few 'ballads', and very beautiful, haunting, and sad.
Grace Under Pressure is very good as well. Side A is among their best sequences of music (including a bit of pretty OK ska in The Enemy Within!), but the album as a whole is let down by its side B to me. Hold Your Fire has a couple of great tunes (the ones you'll find on a best of), but is too slick for me overall and the quality drops are too deep. Presto and Roll The Bones both have a rather thin sound to me, which makes them harder to listen to. Even their best tunes (like Red Tide or Dreamliner) suffer from that.
I'm less into the period from the 90s onwards, when they largely ditch their synths and start rocking harder again. I like Counterparts and Test for Echo though, since their melodic sensitivities are still strong there. They also have another great trio of instrumentals, starting with the one on Roll the Bones. I don't really hear that in Vapor Trails of Snakes & Arrows, which I find rather meh. I agree that Clockwork Angels is quite strong again though (The Anarchist is probably my favorite track there), but I don't like the sound as much.
Feedback is also a fun little album btw: they have a lot of fun playing 8 of their favorite 60s and 70s rock tracks and it sounds great. I would skip over their live albums though; they add very little to the albums, apart from the drum solos.
Thanks folks
Yeah, Fly By Night is fun but lacks depth to me. It's definitely a big improvement on their first record though (a meh attempt at Zeppelin rock), and much better than their third, where they do try to go deeper and it's mostly just very ponderous. 2112 is better than all those in I'd say, but it's way further from their Zeppelin roots and won't necessarily please the same people.
I m usually in the lighter side of progressive (Yes, Camel) or pseudo-prog (Elo, 10cc, Supertramp), but I can't find myself enjoying the heavier prog of Rush or DT that much. Not that I dislike it. Far from it. But I absolutely love Zeppelin, that's why I find Fly by Night more suitable to my taste. But I can see why Rush fans won't enjoy it as much as their other albums.
Yep, that's what you get with bands developing their style so much.
I'm not much into heavier prog either. Apart from Images and Words, Dream Theater really isn't for me - and I guess that's part of the reason why Rush from the 90s onwards works less well for me. (I do actually like math though and I can appreciate bands link Textures and Gojira. It's a fine line. )Not sure why you'd call Yes the lighter side of progressive though. Guess you're not talking about their series of albums from Fragile to Going For The One?
I went through a brief phase of liking Rush about the time Permanent Waves came out but quickly moved on and now if I listen to them I wonder what I liked as they don't do it for me at all now.
Ligher in terms of lack of heavy guitar not complexity. I found the Yes' sound softer, more melodic thus lighter.Yep, that's what you get with bands developing their style so much.
Not sure why you'd call Yes the lighter side of progressive though. Guess you're not talking about their series of albums from Fragile to Going For The One?
X 2
Actually I’ve not really heard anything by them since the early 80s. I’m surprised people are talking about them being a prog band; I remember them as an ersatz Kiss or AC/DC for people who considered themselves too smart for those two. They had absolutely nothing in common with the likes of King Crimson or the Canterbury bands. Maybe prog means something different in America.
I think you are right that in general American prog and English prog are entirely different.
Other bands considered proggish, like Kansas, Styx, Journey, are closer to arena rock than Jethro Tull or Camel. And Queensryche are more metal than prog.
From the little I’ve heard of the American bands you mention I’m sure that’s spot on.
My feelings towards UK prog are pretty mixed. At school all the pretentious boys were into Yes and ELP, both of whom I absolutely hated; I was much more of a Glam fan. When I got to university, by which time UK prog was very much on the slide, I had a friend who introduced me to the likes of the Canterbury bands and I discovered there was a whole world of “prog” that I really enjoyed. And still do, though I think I’ve been right all along with ELP and Yes.
Could never take them seriously- Geddy Lee's voice is ludicrous.
Well some glam artists were more progressive than prog bands. Especially Bowie and even Sweet, who went from manufactured bubblegum pop to influencing many metal bands.
I was listening to a Spotify 1972 playlist on the way to picking my daughter up from training last night and had the pleasure of both Little Willy and Wig Wam Bam
I guess it depends on how you define prog. To me, it means music in which irregular song structures, irregular time signatures, and technical play are more common (but which isn't jazz). In that sense, Rush fits in, though they're on the lighter side of that after Moving Pictures. There's quite a lot going on in their music from 2112 to Moving Pictures though. They haven't got a patch on Canterbury, ELP, or Yes of course - but it's hard to say where prog ends anyway. Is Genesis's Duke still prog? Supertramp's Crime of the Century? Or Marillion's Holiday in Eden?
Personally, I don't really care. Genres are a pain to define in all areas of music, so they're always best considered as rough indicators that facilitate discussion. Personally, I actually refer to a lot of music as 'proggy' (e.g., anything by Radiohead from OK Computer, onwards, or most Pink Floyd), to indicate that a certain mindset is present. It works for me in conversations.
I think purists actually have a broad variety of subgenres of prog. A lot of those US bands, for example (almost none of which I like; but Spock's Bear and Echolyn have done good 'proper' prog since the 90s) are often called 'symphonic rock', I think - just like ELO. For what it's worth.
Canterbury is awesome btw. In some cases though, you have to wonder if you haven't arrived at fusion, or what's the difference. I mean, bands like National Health or Soft Machine (pre-Canterbury?) have little to do with rock anymore.
Last edited:
Gosh that’s a really interesting post!
You’re absolutely right about prog having zillions of sub-genres and much overlap with stuff that few would regard as prog. There’s a big Early Music influence (Tull, Gabriel-era Genesis, Gentle Giant) that I find rather appealing, and although its fans might not like to admit it, a good deal of “classy pop”. I think Duke-era Genesis is really awful, but there’s a hell of a lot of good pop tunes in their supposedly classic prog stuff. Ditto Caravan.
By the mid-70s Soft Machine were full-on jazz, and I can’t say I’m a fan of their later Karl Jenkins stuff. Their first album, while they still had Kevin Ayers, is a wonderful blend of psychedelic pop/rock, soul and avant-garde and pretty much launched the whole Canterbury thing.
Supertramp have always been a bit of a guilty pleasure. The production and vague “concept” on Crime of the Century certainly gives it a proggy sheen, but at heart it’s a collection of very good straightforward pop/rock songs.
Cheers!
I must say I like prog from 1969 to about 1975/6/7 best. That's where the main bands (and smaller jewels like Gentle Giant and Gryphon) are still really exploring music and do all kinds of interesting things. It's a lot less exciting afterwards, I find. Lots of great and interesting tunes are still being made, but to me, a band like Marillion, which is probably the biggest 'proper' prog band of the 80s and which I really like, never made anything nearly as exciting as Yes's or Genesis's main albums.
I actually like Duke, although I dislike the sound (too thin and weak) and it does have a couple of rather weak tunes (which is what And Then There Were Three suffers from all over from me; except Burning Rope). It's still obviously prog I'd say, especially the songs comprising the Duke suite; but yeah, that's pretty much lost entirely afterwards.
All the same, to me, what always made great prog stand out, was the songcraft. The bands I still enjoy the most displayed a knack for melody and a certain kind of catchiness from the start. Maybe that's intellectual laziness on my end, but it's why I find Gentle Giant harder to listen to (even if especially Three Friends and Octopus are quite brilliant); and also some of King Crimson's stuff, like Lizard or Lark's Tongues In Aspic.
It's also my issue with jazz in general - and hence with some of the Canterbury stuff. I think Hatfield And The North found that balance between jamming and technicality while maintaining melody and direction perfectly, but I don't have it enough in, say, National Health or Caravan's Nine Feat Underground. And not at all in Soft Machine; or also Gong. And I might as well bring up Magma here as well - as much as that's great just for the unique sound and craziness! Anyway, all of that is probably amazing if you're more into the jazz side of things. I do enjoy it though, just not as much. (How do you like Gilgamesh btw? They're still on my wishlist.)
That's where Supertramp fits in as well for me: great melody and songcraft. When they combine that with interesting composition, it's very good, even if I agree that it's still pop; I really like Crime Of The Century, and I also enjoy Crisis and Breakfast In America (although less overall). And actually also their debut album. But when it's not there, it becomes stale pretty quickly. Although listening to Davies play piano is always great - even a simple song like Downstream. His first album without Hodgson, Brother Where You Bound, is also surprisingly interesting, and sounds very different, too. (It almost makes you forget Famous Last Words was such a dud.)
I actually also like their Some Things Never Change, but that's like Genesis's We Can't Dance, Peter Gabriel's Up, or Dire Straits' On Every Street: just calm, nice music, craftily made. (Well, Up has its edges.) Retirement albums that have nothing much to do with prog anymore. (Apart from the soloing and drumming on Genesis's Fading Lights.
)Sorry, I used to be a total proghead, I could go on forever about this.
Last edited: