Rush and Steely Dan, and a Late-Term Effect

[Thunderthumbs73]

I just wanted to say in the last 4 years, both of those groups have grown on me. It's taken a long time for this stuff to really sink in.

With Rush, people are like you're a bassist/singer, why aren't you into them?

With Steely Dan, people are saying it's "musician's kind of music", and that I should be getting into them- not that I listen to what people tell me to listen to, of course...

I think I've gotten to the point where I respect and enjoy these groups. I've had a few Rush CDs and Steely Dan's hits album for years, but I'm listening to it more and more.

That's really all I have to say on that. I've listened to all kinds of great music, but those two bands didn't grab me until relatively recently, even though I've known of them for at least 20 years now: a late-term effect.

[cdef]

I'm not up on Rush, but SD is truly a musicianly enterprise in that they have the chords, the chops and the smarts. While most popular music is poor in harmonic thinking, Becker and Fagen are jazz buffs who do a soul/pop thing reeking of chordal sophistication. The more you understand musical theory, the more you will appreciate the Dan. And then there are those literate, cunning lyrics, which totally distance them from the likes of Toto.

[Thunderthumbs73]

For Rush, I'm trying, and to a degree have learned to appreciate "hard rock" for what it is, and to not instinctively tie it to "heavy metal" or anything metal sounding. I think that is key for me. Kinda like Porcupine tree has some rather metal-ish moments, but I don't really consider them a metal band at all.

And then for Steely Dan, I have to say their music is unfailingly tasteful and well-played, but is not always the most dynamic of musics. As far as I can tell, the closest thing to "abandon" that would be related to their music is the guitar solos, and even some of those are quite methodical and measured. I guess I'm waiting to hear in Steely Dan those very dramatic musical moments which I find Seal and Simple Minds are so good at, but they never happen. Also, I find that as a group, everything is well recorded, and there is a full sound, but not necessarily a layered sound or anything ambient or atmospheric about the playing, mix or production. But then, maybe I'm asking Steely Dan to just not be Steely Dan any more.

I think Toto is great as well, and in fact I think there is a lot of "fire" in Toto's music which I wish was more frequent in Steely Dan's. Well, when you have Jeff Porcaro and Steve Lukather, that is an exciting combination that's pretty hard to beat, in my book.

I think ultimately the Steely Dan songs are written both from a kybd perspective, and also to fit Fagen's voice, and that really seems to define a lot about the group's music, in my opinion. Toto doesn't have that centrality, it seems, with multiple lead singers, and writing that doesn't seem so kybd-centric. Or maybe that's just my opinon.

By the way, I think Howard Jones does a better version of I.G.Y. than the Fagen version... check it out. It's one instance where the original version is not the best one. Again, in my opinion...