rush

by **Callisdrun** » Wed Dec 02, 2009 3:36 am

I like them a bit. Geddy Lee is a great bassist. Their lyrics I'm not too fond of though, and I like many bands far more than them.

by **Quiet Earth** » Thu Dec 03, 2009 9:18 pm

North Wiedna wrote:The only redeeming value in Rush is Neil Peart.

by **Vezaria** » Thu Dec 03, 2009 9:34 pm

Goias wrote:I read the post, but I didn't really understand how you could say his voice works. I was trying to prove that, objectively speaking, it's a bad voice. Sure, it might work from a certain point of view, but not mine.

You completely contradicted yourself. Congratulations.

Geddy Lee is very high on the vocal range; his speaking voice is noticeably higher than Robert Plant's. Yes, early Rush had a bit of a thing for screaming (which, in my opinion, was great), but past 1978, they ended that phase. Geddy's voice isn't even close to "whiny" or "screechy", even during the scream years. And if you even had the patience to listen to their later material and not make yourself look completely uninformed, you'd see that Geddy's voice is very mellow beginning with Counterparts.

Lee also gets props for being able to perform extremely well at concerts. Robert Plant simply could not do that and still sound anywhere close to the way he did in the studio. And seriously, the entire band of Led Zeppelin couldn't pull off their studio sound at concerts to save their lives. I love them to death (my original Houses of the Holy LP is one of my prised possessions), but they sucked live, and Jimmy Page was (and still is) a tremendously sloppy guitarist.

Edit: Oh, what the hell... I was logged into Potarius, but for some reason I guess it switched me back to my RP nation when I logged in there. Heh.

by **Goias** » Thu Dec 03, 2009 10:14 pm

Vezaria wrote:Geddy Lee is very high on the vocal range; his speaking voice is noticeably higher than Robert Plant's. Yes, early Rush had a bit of a thing for screaming (which, in my opinion, was great), but past 1978, they ended that phase. Geddy's voice isn't even close to "whiny" or "screechy", even during the scream years. And if you even had the patience to listen to their later material and not make yourself look completely uninformed, you'd see that Geddy's voice is very mellow beginning with Counterparts.

Haven't listened to them in a real long time, so I obviously don't remember what they sounded like in different phases of their career specifically. I only remember the generalities: prog-rock in the '70s, synth-heavy in the '80s, straight-ahead rock in the '90s, etc.

by **Eirros** » Thu Dec 03, 2009 11:14 pm

IMO, Tom Sawyer is overrated. I do love Rush though.

Pink Floyd is what I really like, though.

by **Allbeama** » Thu Dec 03, 2009 11:17 pm

Rush is good, but the best even for that period? No. Not by a long shot.

by **Seperates** » Thu Dec 03, 2009 11:19 pm

Rush was amazing but in my mind Boston and AC/DC beat them...

by **Buzzelli** » Sun Dec 06, 2009 9:38 am

I dont like AC/DC so much, all of their songs sound the same, same thing with Nirvana.

by **Goias** » Sun Dec 06, 2009 12:49 pm

Buzzelli wrote:I dont like AC/DC so much, all of their songs sound the same, same thing with Nirvana.

Yeah, I remember a Rolling Stone review of Flick the Switch (probably wrong album title, but I'm on a Breeders trip and can't be arsed to check) once said something to the effect of "AC/DC have managed to make the same album 6 times".

Can't really say if that's the case with Nirvana (huge fan => objectivity hard/impossible), but... yeah, I guess you could say that. Still, it ain't a bad thing if it's done properly (see: AC/DC when they were awesome).

by **Quiet Earth** » Sun Dec 06, 2009 12:57 pm

Flick of the Switch.

AC/DC isn't that bad, and they can be repetitive. They're just a fun band, and no more. And, in their defense, their Bon albums are much different than their Brian albums.

by **Goias** » Sun Dec 06, 2009 12:58 pm

Quiet Earth wrote:Flick of the Switch.

AC/DC isn't that bad, and they can be repetitive. They're just a fun band, and no more. And, in their defense, their Bon albums are much different than their Brian albums.

Yeah, my argument is that AC/DC's last great album was Back in Black, and they've sucked since. I mean, their sound is the same, it's just lacking the catchy riffs, the energy and the memorable performances...

Kind of like the Rolling Stones now really...

by **Carthakk** » Mon Dec 07, 2009 3:22 pm

not the best band ever, but they are very talented. My first concert was rush. I was three years old. I've seen 'em four times since then. Both my parernts love 'em. They have all the cds and five vynals.

hm... best song by them: "closer to the heart" hands down

by **Carthakk** » Mon Dec 07, 2009 3:23 pm

and goias is so right >>

by **Potarius** » Mon Dec 07, 2009 5:39 pm

Carthakk wrote:not the best band ever, but they are very talented. My first concert was rush. I was three years old. I've seen 'em four times since then. Both my parernts love 'em. They have all the cds and five vynals.

hm... best song by them: "closer to the heart" hands down

Closer to The Heart is one of my favorite songs to play. Timeless.

rush

Who is online