LOL, when I first read the subject title, I saw "Rush, at their peak in their 70's".
MJ
We don't have too long a wait for that…
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.
LOL, when I first read the subject title, I saw "Rush, at their peak in their 70's".
MJ
I love their first two albums the most. I hate the use of synthesizer so as it becomes more prominent, the less i like it.
How Rush uses them. I just like a classic power trio.Just curious--synthesizers in general, or when Rush uses them?
Now dont get me wrong, I absolutely think they still are an incredible band (despite not being able o find tickets any of the 3 times they came to town); nor do I confess to be one of those 'hard-core' Rush fan who owns all their records and knows each one inside and out. But is it just me, or do A Farewell to Kings and Hemisphere''s have a certain extra "wow"-factor that many of their later and more famous albums are missing?
I've never even heard of these albums. Like I said in a previous thread, saw them live 16 times, bought all their records, but was done after Signals. Magic gone, moved on.If you're in the mood for synth heavy material you can go as far as Hold Your Fire. The songs aren't bad, just very '80s'
The 90s were kind of poopy, Test For Echo is my least favorite album.
Post 2000, I really like Vapor Trails. Snakes and Arrows sucked. The covers album was cool and Clockwork was okay.
This is so true. I have a period where they are just amazing, but I also appreciate how they experiment, shift, redefine, and take chances. Think about how hard it is to go from broke with a crappy van to filling stadiums and still willing to change possibly hurting the money flow. Came into the fold with Hemispheres and loved Working Man without a flinch. Would WM ever happened if Peart was in the band from the beginning? When you establish the starting point with any band everything afterwards is scrutinized and the past is always accepted. Bowie did the same thing and that's cool. The balance between what the fan wants and keeping it different is an impossible task but would you really want By-Tor and the Snowdog part XXIV?Wow. How do you break down a 40+ year career in a paragraph or three? You can't. But we can pay homage to our inadequately honoured idols from the north. Have I payed enough attention to them over the years? No, absolutely not. My musical tastes and Rush parted ways somewhere in the mid '80's. And this is from someone who wore out the 2112 album and saw them a half dozen times in their so-called halcyon peak. I still question if I outgrew them or vice-versa. In either case, we sought divergent musical paths. My admiration for them came from afar. My love for the band was only recently rekindled upon viewing their documentary, "Beyond the Lighted Stage". It was like catching up with a long lost friend (I'm sure Mr. Peart wouldn't mind/ care, sorry Neil). I was amazed, but not surprised by their diverse catalog of tunes over the ensuing years. I was incredibly proud of what they'd accomplished and overcome. I felt more than a tinge of guilt for not being able to hang in. C'est la vie.
Did Rush peak in the '70's? No. We just grew apart like high school friends. Unlike many of their contemporaries, fortunately, Rush has survived intact. Thank the musical gods for that.
Come to think of it most 70's bands kinda sucked in the 80's. Rush, Queen, Rainbow, Sabbath (cept the Dio stuff), Yes (although I love Drama), and even The Who couldn't quite fit in with the 80's sound.
Totally agree.I'll go out on a big limb with 2112 to Counterparts. The B cd's during this time, imho - Signals, Grace Under Pressure and Presto. Loved the Peter Collins produced CDs during this time although I know I won't get a lot of support. Kings & Hemispheres are definitely standouts.