Rush

Kess73

Never gave them much of a listen at any point, but never seem to hear anyone say anything but good about them.

I noticed Amazon have a small box set next month with 7 Rush albums for £21.60.

the albums are

Presto
Roll the Bones
Counterparts
Test For Echo
Vapor Trails
Feedback
Snakes and Arrows


Would this be a decent way to check out Rush, and how good/bad would Rush fans rate the 7 albums as being?

stefan idiot jones

Kess73 wrote: »

Never gave them much of a listen at any point, but never seem to hear anyone say anything but good about them.

I noticed Amazon have a small box set next month with 7 Rush albums for £21.60.
I
the albums are
I
Presto
Roll the Bones


No, No, No, No, No, No, No.

Not those seven, the first seven
Counterparts
Test For Echo
Vapor Trails
Feedback
Snakes and Arrows


Would this be a decent way to check out Rush, and how good/bad would Rush fans rate the 7 albums as being?

No, No, No, No, No, No and No.

The first eight albums from 'Rush' 1974 up to 'Moving Pictures' 1981 are the only ones you need. And they are blinding.

After that they went too far down the synthesiser way and lost some of their raw edge. Once Geddy swapped his 4001 for the Jazz it all weakened.

There are too many great songs to pick out but YYZ is a masterpiece of musicianship.

Check them out and you will fall in love.

bradlente

That's a bit harsh on their newer stuff,There are some good song's in there amongst those 7 albums.I like Roll The Bones and Test for Echo especially out of them.

Roanmore

Kess73 wrote: »

Never gave them much of a listen at any point, but never seem to hear anyone say anything but good about them.

I noticed Amazon have a small box set next month with 7 Rush albums for £21.60.

the albums are

Presto
Roll the Bones
Counterparts
Test For Echo
Vapor Trails
Feedback
Snakes and Arrows


Would this be a decent way to check out Rush, and how good/bad would Rush fans rate the 7 albums as being?

May not be the best albums to start with but I would definetely buy them at that price, there is some great stuff on those albums.

By the way if you get 2112, play the title track in your car and turn up to 11 especially the first few minutes.

4Sticks

I agree that after Moving Pictures Rush lost something so I tend to agree with stefan idiot jones . 2112 is fantastic as is Hemispheres but my personal favorite is Farewell to Kings.

mike65

Kess73 wrote: »

Never gave them much of a listen at any point, but never seem to hear anyone say anything but good about them.

I noticed Amazon have a small box set next month with 7 Rush albums for £21.60.

the albums are

Presto
Roll the Bones
Counterparts
Test For Echo
Vapor Trails
Feedback
Snakes and Arrows

Would this be a decent way to check out Rush, and how good/bad would Rush fans rate the 7 albums as being?

We its not representative being the most recent part of their canon, I've only got two of them myself as I pretty much stopped buying new albums 20 years ago Frankly for the money its a no brainer. Roll the Bones is worth it just to hear Rush feature rap! :eek:

Its hard to know where any newbie should start, the band can be split onto several phases - post hippy guitar-led prog, the intermediate hard rock period (1980-1984 which is usually considered their best era) followed by smart "man at C & A" pop rock with synths (1985-1989) which lasted up to Presto then the Roll the Bones period which mixed muscular AOR and acoustic strumming and finally from 2002 post trauma "serious face" intense rock.

The best solution is simply to buy Different Stages which covers 30 years of music done live and if you like it you'll like Rush.

Roanmore

4Sticks wrote: »

I agree that after Moving Pictures Rush lost something so I tend to agree with stefan idiot jones . 2112 is fantastic as is Hemispheres but my personal favorite is Farewell to Kings.

Yeah AFTK is one of my favourites as well.
I like playing AFTK and Hemispheres back to back without the Cygnus X-1 songs, some great music in there.

Kess73

mike65 wrote: »

We its not representative being the most recent part of their canon, I've only got two of them myself as I pretty much stopped buying new albums 20 years ago Frankly for the money its a no brainer. Roll the Bones is worth it just to hear Rush feature rap! :eek:

Its hard to know where any newbie should start, the band can be split onto several phases - post hippy guitar-led prog, the intermediate hard rock period (1980-1984 which is usually considered their best era) followed by smart "man at C & A" pop rock with synths (1985-1989) which lasted up to Presto then the Roll the Bones period which mixed muscular AOR and acoustic strumming and finally from 2002 post trauma "serious face" intense rock.

The best solution is simply to buy Different Stages which covers 30 years of music done live and if you like it you'll like Rush.

What I ended up doing was getting Retrospective I,II, and III. They were being sold by the same Market place seller on Amazon so for a combined total of 14 quid (inc P&P) I figured I could not go too far wrong and would be able to hear something from poretty much every era of the band.


As if oft the case with me I tend to buy CDs in clusters so have only been partially listening to the Rush stuff due to trying to listen to other stuff.

Do like a lot of what is on Retrospective I. Not so keen on the material on Retrospective III.

mike65

That sounds the best approach, I always think a live album or two is the best way to get to know a band. Usually if the band is any good it catches them at their best and then you can pick and choose the studio stuff.

stefan idiot jones

Kess73 wrote: »

Do like a lot of what is on Retrospective I. Not so keen on the material on Retrospective III.

Now all you have to do now is but the first eight albums and your sorted.:)

I watched this a couple of years ago and was very interesting. Long gone are the days you crammed all your gear into the back of a transit van.

Roanmore

stefan idiot jones wrote: »

Now all you have to do now is but the first eight albums and your sorted.:)

I watched this a couple of years ago and was very interesting. Long gone are the days you crammed all your gear into the back of a transit van.

That's a great documentary, gives a great idea what the band are about.
The Classic Albums series also did one on 2112 and Moving Pictures combined, very good as well.

Kess73

mike65 wrote: »

That sounds the best approach, I always think a live album or two is the best way to get to know a band. Usually if the band is any good it catches them at their best and then you can pick and choose the studio stuff.

Might follow up with that as I love good live albums. Will probaby pick up the earlier albums that contain the songs I liked best on Restrospective I as well.

To my ears a lot of the latter day stuff on Retrospective III sounded more dated and more "tired" than the music they released in the 1970's. Would that be a fair enough comment or am I short changing the newer stuff? I don't doubt that there must be some good newer stuff, but it does not sound a patch on the 1970's music to me.

4Sticks

The live performance of 2112 on their first live album All The Worlds a Stage is just stunning. I am jealous for you for this soon to be new discovery ( which I play often since 1980) . And By Tor and the Snow dog will demonstrate why many rock fans regard Neil Peart of THE drummer.

gimli2112

2112 is on my ipod

Had Farewell to Kings, Fly By night, Grace Under Pressure and some other album "Bastille Day" was on it, on cassette. Haven't listened to them in 20 years. I liked their earlier stuff & must pick them up again.

4Sticks

When I saw them in Dublin in 2011 ( their only time to play here ) the phrase I overheard again and again was " I forgot just how good these guys are...""

Kess73

4Sticks wrote: »

The live performance of 2112 on their first live album All The Worlds a Stage is just stunning. I am jealous for you for this soon to be new discovery ( which I play often since 1980) . And By Tor and the Snow dog will demonstrate why many rock fans regard Neil Peart of THE drummer.

Love checking out bands with a big back catalogue that bypassed me in my younger days. Means if I like what I hear I get to check out decades of music that is mostly new to my ears.


Rush for one reason or another are a band I never bothered to check out over the years despite me being old enough to have heard a lot of their stuff first time around.

mike65

Kess73 wrote: »

To my ears a lot of the latter day stuff on Retrospective III sounded more dated and more "tired" than the music they released in the 1970's. Would that be a fair enough comment or am I short changing the newer stuff? I don't doubt that there must be some good newer stuff, but it does not sound a patch on the 1970's music to me.

Hard to say! As I noted above the band have er progressed through phases they stick 2012 beside say Presto and you could be talking about two different bands in most respects. I guess a newbie needs to decide where they will spend their time and money. The 70s music is superficially easier to get into I suppose - loud, sharp multi tracked lead guitars with widdly widdly time changes and stop/start patterns get straight to the visceral heart of the listener. Whereas later stuff is much more musically and lyrically subtle, aimed as much at the head and takes longer to absorb fully.

Compare Bastille Day with The Pass or Ghost of a Chance, the difference is huge. I should say I prefer Geddy Lee's voice as its got older and more rounded.

Roanmore

This thread has got me back listening to some Rush again (goes through it in phases) which can't be a bad thing.

+1 for 2112 on All the world's a stage

SLK2005

I recently listened to all the Rush studio albums in order over a few days. I much prefer the early ones as far as Moving Pictures. After that I think they changed direction and the writing and music changed,which is part of a bands evolution and not a bad thing, some songs seem forced, hard to explain what I mean. Having said that the later albums are quite good, I especially love the track Time Stand Still. What were they thinking about with Presto. For me Working Man is one of their best tracks, compare that to some of the rubbish like Neurotica, Thai Shan. Anyway that's just my humble opinion and no doubt someone will have a completely different point of view. Just enjoy the music cause as they say "we are only immortal for a limited time".

mike65

SLK2005 wrote: »

I recently listened to all the Rush studio albums in order over a few days. I much prefer the early ones as far as Moving Pictures. After that I think they changed direction and the writing and music changed,which is part of a bands evolution and not a bad thing, some songs seem forced, hard to explain what I mean. Having said that the later albums are quite good, I especially love the track Time Stand Still. What were they thinking about with Presto. For me Working Man is one of their best tracks, compare that to some of the rubbish like Neurotica, Thai Shan. Anyway that's just my humble opinion and no doubt someone will have a completely different point of view. Just enjoy the music cause as they say "we are only immortal for a limited time".

That was my initial reaction after the Peter Collins produced Power Windows/Hold Your Fire pair but over time I got into its softer sounding vibe courtesy of pop producer Rupert Hine

Roanmore

Got into Presto after seeing them in Dublin, the title track got a huge cheer when they played the start of it and it spiked my curiosity.
Takes a bit of a listen but I like it.

bnt

Vapor Trails (2001) has just been given a thorough remixing (not just a remastering), so we're getting the chance to hear it as if it's a new album. Fave so far is Ceiling Unlimited, a song which I thought had huge potential buried under a too-dense mix - and I think I was right. Rolling Stone magazine are streaming the whole album now, here.

PS: if you want to know why VT needed a remix/remaster, this is a good place to read some gory sonic details.

peter1892

The Retrospectives are a great place to start - but there are so many hidden gems within the albums that's its worth getting hold of them at some point. For example tracks like 'Kid Gloves' (on Grace Under Pressure) or 'Grand Designs' (Power Windows) are tracks that I love and that really highlight just how good the 3 musicians are. There isn't one album that I would say should be avoided or ignored...

Look at the most recent tour - lots of 80's tracks in the first set then Clockwork Angels (or most of it) for the second set, with a few oldies thrown in. It was brilliant! But there aren't many bands of their vintage who'd do that, and fewer still who's fans would be as into it.

Rush are...Rush. Can't really describe them, I just direct people towards their music and let them make their minds up. Some people get them (a lot don't). But listen to the drums on 'Red Barchetta' and marvel at just how he does it!

OntheStrings

I'd have to say that Rush are one of my favorite bands. Every song they do is so individually unique and it's so refreshing to listen to music that expresses a multitude of emotions in the most non traditional way!

The only word to describe their music is otherworldy

Also, the new album Clockwork Angels is superb! Was so impressed by it. They're forever evolving!

Hagar the Nice.

Not a bad deal at all.
You can check out lots of their 'live' stuff here,way too many to list,sorry.

http://tela.sugarmegs.org/

Baggio1

there ARE NO bad songs/albums by Rush

but maybe I am a little biased

Roanmore

2112 is 40 years old :eek:

http://www.rush.com/2112-comic-book-video-suite/