Ric5
Inactive
- Jan 29, 2008
- 29,772
- 30,452
- Disclosures
- I like 5, 8, 10, and 12 string basses
Enjoy the benefits of a premium membership!
Upgrade Account
-
TalkBass has been independent since 1998. Add your voice.
Create a free account to reply to discussions, view embedded media, and browse with fewer display ads.
Join free Log in
Want zero display ads or expanded classifieds tools? Compare plans.
Geddy Lee since "Counterparts"
- Thread starter Eyesee7
- Start date
i agree that his recent playing doesn't do it for me the way his old stuff did, but his playing on counterparts was great. maybe it's the freshness of his technique on that album? but he did write some amazing lines.
Good points all. To me what makes them great is that after the long and distinguished body of work- they still are there to be liked or disliked... albeit on their terms. They arent rewriting A farewell to Kings or Moving Pictures. It could be that the best they can come up w/ has been done, but I still dig what they do. I never listened to compare Rush to Yes, Mahavishnu, or any other group of musicians... I'm really thankful they didnt write to draw those comparisons, either
I saw an interview where Geddy said the Wal was a great bass and the guys at the shop were fantastic, but the bass was lacking some bottom end..he was looking for the Jazz bass sound again...If you do a search for Geddy Lee here, I am sure the interview is linked one or two times somewhere...
Alvaro Martín Gómez A.
TalkBass' resident Bongo + cowbell player
My take is that the band is flourishing at the moment: The production is stellar and the songs are some of their strongest in years. At some point people will accept that Rush wont go back in time to please anyone but themselves- most of the fans get that and welcome the diversity that the guys continue to explore...
Let the backward thinkers listen to the old records- thats what they are for
As someone who's been into Rush practically from the beginning, I've accepted they're a band that is constantly changing, growing and evolving. I wouldn't want them to be like AC/DC, churning out the same formula album after album.
But that doesn't necessarily mean I'm going to like every change. The change from "Hemispheres" to "Permanent Waves" was significant. A bit more commercial sounding; Geddy doing more singing than shrieking; and a more accessible sound that won them many new fans. I liked this change.
The next change was from "Moving Pictures" to "Signals." More synths, shorter songs, no more gritty Gibson guitar sound from Alex, etc. This album turned off a lot of fans. I liked this change also.
All the subsequent changes I've disliked -- the AOR of Presto and RTB; the cluttered, grungy sound of Counterparts, T4E and Vitals Signs...
Not sure why that's an issue honestly. They've been using sequenced triggers for quite some time, it's not a "recent" thing by any stretch of the imagination. And the double tracking isn't new either, all of it is just more pronounced and used differently in the studio then it was in the older days.
There's always been three distinct Rush camps;
Those who respect their ability to grow and expand, but can't stand them actually DOING it.
Those who don't like where they've gone because they want every thing to sound like <insert album here>.
Those who still love them pushing their abilities and styles.
Hell I love the new stuff, it's challenged me to learn a different style of playing. Yes the Vapor Trails mix / master was a goat rodeo, but some of their best work is on there and if you can filter through the noise, Freeze is great piece of bass work (IMO). It's a great derivation from his typical bass line construction, it shows how he's expanded his playing and just drives that song.
And yes some new stuff has taken me a while to warm up to for whatever reason, but I still love hearing what they're going to try next.
The flamenco style is simply an extension of something he used to do back in the keyboard days, generally a transition from bass to keys he would ring the last note of the bass on a down stroke with his finger to make moving to the keys more natural a motion.
Growing and expanding is one thing but changing for the worse is something else. Just because a band changes their sound doesn't mean it's evolving for the better. The double tracking vocals to me wasn't an evolution but more like an experimentation that didn't work well. Same with the keyboards. I can see why they did it, they were trying to fill out the sound since they are only a three piece band. But it seems like the songwriting suffered as well. It's kind of like with movies, there are are ones that have a really good screenplay, great dialogue, and an interesting story. Then there are the action flicks, with hardly any story but with a lot of special effects, explosions and car chases. I kind of equate the older Rush with the first kind of movie. I just don't want them to "grow and expand" into the other kind of movie.
Not sure it's worse. It's just not for you.
But you can't grow with out experimenting. And like all experiments - some fail, some succeed, but you'll never know what is and isn't good unless you try. Did they go overboard with the keyboards? Yup. Did they go overboard w/ the bright, jangly sound, yup. Did they go overboard with the epics, yup. Have they kept doing those things? Nope. Will they keep this style for much longer? Who knows, if they keep making albums I highly doubt they will sound the same two albums from now.
Hell he could start playing a 6 string and poppin' and slappin' next album.
But that's what makes music great isn't it? Every sound, every song, every band isn't for every one.
No it's not. I won't deny that I'm not much of a fan of 90's and early 2000's Rush. It's not that I can't appreciate the music for what it is, I just don't think it's up to the prior excellence of the 70's/80's Rush. Neither the songwriting or the music itself is quite as experimental and progressive as it was on earlier albums. I don't think that's necessarily just due to the times and the fact that they were new.
He could, but I sure hope he doesn't. There is already too much of that going around as it is.
One of the reasons I got into Rush in the first place because how Geddy's bass lines produced an intricate melodies (counterpoint) with Alex's guitar and how it provided intricate syncopated rhythms Neil's drums, complete with odd time signatures.
Geddy's lines groove more than they used to and their songs are certainly looser than they used to be, but at the same time, what I originally found interesting in their sound is no longer present. The songs I do tend to like on more recent albums tends to be because of the overall melody or feel of the song. But, IMO, that's not what Rush was known for, back in the day.
I don't mind most of the newer stuff, but I definitely don't like it as much as their older stuff. I'm really not a fan of Geddy's flamenco style as it's noisy and clanky. The distortion he uses muddies up the sound too much, and he's not doing much counterpoint anymore.
Geddy's lines groove more than they used to and their songs are certainly looser than they used to be, but at the same time, what I originally found interesting in their sound is no longer present. The songs I do tend to like on more recent albums tends to be because of the overall melody or feel of the song. But, IMO, that's not what Rush was known for, back in the day.
I don't mind most of the newer stuff, but I definitely don't like it as much as their older stuff. I'm really not a fan of Geddy's flamenco style as it's noisy and clanky. The distortion he uses muddies up the sound too much, and he's not doing much counterpoint anymore.
I never really think of it in terms of his bass sound, what kind of bassline does he play etc.. I take it more as a what the song overall feels and sounds like, do the bass, drums and guitar work well together? Are the lyrics good/fitting with the tone of the music? Have they acheived what they were trying to acheive?
I love virtually all of their stuff, apart from most of PW and HYF. Apart from that, all of their stuff, evolving through the ages, is good to me.
I love virtually all of their stuff, apart from most of PW and HYF. Apart from that, all of their stuff, evolving through the ages, is good to me.
Like many here, I'm a Rush nut. I love all eras.
While I think they're writing the best *songs* they've written for a long time, they're being suffocated under the arrangements.
There's no space - too many fat layered guitars and BVs (Alex's live tone is awful at the moment IMO), and Geddy just doesn't play *lines* any more. He just seems to fill space.
Shame.
But then, they're Rush. They can do what they like.
While I think they're writing the best *songs* they've written for a long time, they're being suffocated under the arrangements.
There's no space - too many fat layered guitars and BVs (Alex's live tone is awful at the moment IMO), and Geddy just doesn't play *lines* any more. He just seems to fill space.
Shame.
But then, they're Rush. They can do what they like.
Agreed- I am basically the same way: Ive dug the changes also (Caress era to 2112; 2112 era to Permanent Waves; PW era to Signals...), and after Grace under pressure I kind of wanted a return to guitar/bass/drum dominance and less reliance on technology ie 'synths'. It seems that each album was a new 'era' and it has basically been that way since...
I guess I looked more for the live shows to give me perspective on what they have become as opposed to what they once were. I think that S&A (and Vapor Trails to a degree) marks a return to playing and songwriting vs using technology to impact their creativity.
I still think that my favorite period is between Farewell & Signals, but I appreciate all points from A to Z. I just see the current output (live & studio)- especially w/ repeated listening- as a band that is still delivering good songs, strong musicianship, and 'bang for the buck' as fine as anyone... not bad for a band that has been around for 35 years
I just thought I'd clarify that I'm not against Geddy experimenting with the bass and other stuff.
When I first got into Rush it was with their early stuff, then PW and MP comes out and it's like 'well this is a serious change of direction'. Took me a while to get into this new style, but I dug it, then they changed it again, and again...and with each rendition I had more trouble getting into their styles. But I appreciated that they were exploring new areas, different instruments, etc.
I also like that his bass playing has come out more to the front on the later stuff and really showed off what Geddy can do with various styles (reggae, jazzy improv lines, etc.). And who doesn't want to try out various basses and rigs to see if they find something they like? He's said he just dug the Jazz sound and has stuck with it.
I didn't mind the synths and less guitars, hated the change in drums for GUP, but it seems like a lot of bands, by the 2000's have looked back and felt they needed to go back to their original way of constructing songs and going with less instrumentation. Or maybe they just reach a saturation point and want to reclaim what made them good in the beginning.
I've read this the producer for S&A is a huge Rush fan, and got them to go back to building their songs with acoustic guitars, like they did back in their early years. The were also influenced by this in making the Feedback of their favourite rock songs.
I do like S&A, at least it's an album I can listen to often and not get sick of it. I can't say that about their mid-80's and onward stuff, a few spins and I'm tired of them. I dug the Wal sound too, but it is a bit thin in the bottom end.
But that Jaco bass....it truly sounds like the Bass of Doom.
When I first got into Rush it was with their early stuff, then PW and MP comes out and it's like 'well this is a serious change of direction'. Took me a while to get into this new style, but I dug it, then they changed it again, and again...and with each rendition I had more trouble getting into their styles. But I appreciated that they were exploring new areas, different instruments, etc.
I also like that his bass playing has come out more to the front on the later stuff and really showed off what Geddy can do with various styles (reggae, jazzy improv lines, etc.). And who doesn't want to try out various basses and rigs to see if they find something they like? He's said he just dug the Jazz sound and has stuck with it.
I didn't mind the synths and less guitars, hated the change in drums for GUP, but it seems like a lot of bands, by the 2000's have looked back and felt they needed to go back to their original way of constructing songs and going with less instrumentation. Or maybe they just reach a saturation point and want to reclaim what made them good in the beginning.
I've read this the producer for S&A is a huge Rush fan, and got them to go back to building their songs with acoustic guitars, like they did back in their early years. The were also influenced by this in making the Feedback of their favourite rock songs.
I do like S&A, at least it's an album I can listen to often and not get sick of it. I can't say that about their mid-80's and onward stuff, a few spins and I'm tired of them. I dug the Wal sound too, but it is a bit thin in the bottom end.
But that Jaco bass....it truly sounds like the Bass of Doom.
I'm apparently in the minority regarding his tone, technique, etc. It's the first "modern" Rush offering that I truly love front to back!
Also, I don't think it's fair to criticize the production of that album, considering their last few, from a production stnadpoint!
Also, I don't think it's fair to criticize the production of that album, considering their last few, from a production stnadpoint!
Also, I don't think it's fair to criticize the production of that album, considering their last few, from a production stnadpoint!
If you mean Snakes and Arrows- I couldnt agree more... that album sounds great imo- Nick Raskulinecz did a bangup job... and the fact that he is a Rush head helped push the band while they recorded it
