Forum Home Forum Home > Progressive Music Lounges > Prog Bands, Artists and Genres Appreciation
  New Posts New Posts RSS Feed - Are RUSH actually Prog?
  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Events   Register Register  Login Login

Are RUSH actually Prog?
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1 89101112 27>
Author
Message
  Topic Search Topic Search  Topic Options Topic Options
verslibre View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: July 01 2004
Location: CA
Status: Offline
Points: 17249 		Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote verslibre Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: May 04 2021 at 08:38
Originally posted by cstack3 cstack3 wrote:

OK, what exactly is progressive about Rush?  I just don't hear it.

Because you stopped at Fly By Night. LOL

That's like jumping ship with Tull after This Was.
eBay
Back to Top
dr wu23 View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: August 22 2010
Location: Indiana
Status: Offline
Points: 20625 		Post Options Post Options   Thanks (1) Thanks(1)   Quote dr wu23 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: May 04 2021 at 08:58
Originally posted by SteveG SteveG wrote:

It amazes how cstack3 makes the same early prog argument for Journey as others have done for Rush but can't see the parallels.

Yes...and Journey( basically a Santana clone-Schon and Rolie- with less latin influence). had 2 decent lp's in the very early time and pop rock junk later,  while Rush had a string of strong lp's from 76-81, but I never considered either to be all that 'proggy'...though that epic 2112 piece had its moments.


Edited by dr wu23 - May 04 2021 at 09:00
One does nothing yet nothing is left undone.
Haquin
Back to Top
SteveG View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: April 11 2014
Location: Kyiv In Spirit
Status: Offline
Points: 20609 		Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote SteveG Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: May 04 2021 at 09:16
Originally posted by dr wu23 dr wu23 wrote:

Originally posted by SteveG SteveG wrote:

It amazes how cstack3 makes the same early prog argument for Journey as others have done for Rush but can't see the parallels.


Yes...and Journey( basically a Santana clone-Schon and Rolie- with less latin influence). had 2 decent lp's in the very early time and pop rock junk later,  while Rush had a string of strong lp's from 76-81, but I never considered either to be all that 'proggy'...though that epic 2112 piece had its moments.

But the thing with 2112 is that it's not symphonic prog, which throws the old timers. Prog metal or heavy prog doesn't resonate and that's the other half of the problem, but it's still prog rock.

Edited by SteveG - May 04 2021 at 09:27
This message was brought to you by a proud supporter of the Deep State.
Back to Top
Catcher10 View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar
VIP Member

Joined: December 23 2009
Location: Emerald City
Status: Offline
Points: 17848 		Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Catcher10 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: May 04 2021 at 10:21
Originally posted by chopper chopper wrote:

Originally posted by cstack3 cstack3 wrote:

OK, what exactly is progressive about Rush?  I just don't hear it.   

Caress Of Steel and 2112 both have side long suites.
A Farewell to Kings has Xanadu - that's about as prog as it gets
Hemisphere has another side long suite and it has La Villa Strangiato - if that ain't prog I dunno what is.

Admittedly from after Moving Pictures things changed, but I would definitely consider the Caress of Steel to Permanent Waves period prog.

Agree with Chopper....
It's funny to me that what is being debated is something that has already happened and a long time ago. Not just Rush but other bands we have to constantly point out the same albums, same period or same years that a band was creating progressive rock music.
Some that question a band not being progressive, prog or proggy nit pick or try to split pube hairs into quarters and say "see that is not prog...!" 
Well on the other hand you can also go further into the Rush catalog and also pick out songs that have prog, proggy tendencies ie the song Subdivisions that starts on the synth is in 7/8, bounces around 4/4, 5/4 back to 7/8. Many of their later songs do this time changing, Limelight is all over the place. And YYZ a song built off of an airport broadcast code....really?? Talk about taking a risk.....

Both Yes and Genesis progressed into pop rock, arena rock, AOR/FM radio friendly recordings later into their careers. 90125, Big Generator, Invisible Touch, Abacab, all of these much later towards the end of their careers and all popular with rock and pop music fans.......Once you get past Moving Pictures and into the later part of Rush's catalog you don't find their music as accessible, FM radio friendly as Moving Pictures or Signals was.

And yes Rush are actually Prog.....If you don't like Rush that's a different topic. There are tons of bands here I don't listen to and I have no problem recognizing their contribution to the prog rock world.
Back to Top
Cristi View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Crossover / Prog Metal Teams

Joined: July 27 2006
Location: wonderland
Status: Online
Points: 43833 		Post Options Post Options   Thanks (1) Thanks(1)   Quote Cristi Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: May 04 2021 at 10:24
Originally posted by SteveG SteveG wrote:

Originally posted by dr wu23 dr wu23 wrote:

Originally posted by SteveG SteveG wrote:

It amazes how cstack3 makes the same early prog argument for Journey as others have done for Rush but can't see the parallels.


Yes...and Journey( basically a Santana clone-Schon and Rolie- with less latin influence). had 2 decent lp's in the very early time and pop rock junk later,  while Rush had a string of strong lp's from 76-81, but I never considered either to be all that 'proggy'...though that epic 2112 piece had its moments.

But the thing with 2112 is that it's not symphonic prog, which throws the old timers. Prog metal or heavy prog doesn't resonate and that's the other half of the problem, but it's still prog rock.

heavy prog fit Rush rather well, I don't understand how some have a problem with that. Confused
Back to Top
Catcher10 View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar
VIP Member

Joined: December 23 2009
Location: Emerald City
Status: Offline
Points: 17848 		Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Catcher10 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: May 04 2021 at 10:38
Originally posted by Cristi Cristi wrote:

Originally posted by SteveG SteveG wrote:

Originally posted by dr wu23 dr wu23 wrote:

Originally posted by SteveG SteveG wrote:

It amazes how cstack3 makes the same early prog argument for Journey as others have done for Rush but can't see the parallels.


Yes...and Journey( basically a Santana clone-Schon and Rolie- with less latin influence). had 2 decent lp's in the very early time and pop rock junk later,  while Rush had a string of strong lp's from 76-81, but I never considered either to be all that 'proggy'...though that epic 2112 piece had its moments.

But the thing with 2112 is that it's not symphonic prog, which throws the old timers. Prog metal or heavy prog doesn't resonate and that's the other half of the problem, but it's still prog rock.

heavy prog fit Rush rather well, I don't understand how some have a problem with that. Confused
True dat........I'm a heavy prog guy myself, I actually like that sub genre definition.
Back to Top
verslibre View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: July 01 2004
Location: CA
Status: Offline
Points: 17249 		Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote verslibre Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: May 04 2021 at 11:13
Originally posted by dr wu23 dr wu23 wrote:

Journey( basically a Santana clone-Schon and Rolie- with less latin influence). had 2 decent lp's in the very early time and pop rock junk later

From "Kohoutek" and "Look Into the Future" to "I'm Cryin'" and "Open Arms"...ouch!! LOL
eBay
Back to Top
cstack3 View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar
VIP Member

Joined: July 20 2009
Location: Tucson, AZ USA
Status: Offline
Points: 7281 		Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote cstack3 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: May 04 2021 at 12:15
Originally posted by SteveG SteveG wrote:

It amazes how cstack3 makes the same early prog argument for Journey as others have done for Rush but can't see the parallels.

What I said is that Journey had more "progressive cred."  Neal Schon was a historic powerhouse on guitar, and their early music was very progressive.   They devolved into radio pap, but let's face it, you don't make much money in prog music.  

Again, what is "progressive" about Rush?  Substandard guitar work, limited vocals, next to no keys etc.  

They do have a massive following, and enjoy a fair amount of their music, but I am more demanding in what I would label as "progressive."  


Edited by cstack3 - May 04 2021 at 12:16
I am not a Robot, I'm a FREE MAN!!
Back to Top
SteveG View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: April 11 2014
Location: Kyiv In Spirit
Status: Offline
Points: 20609 		Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote SteveG Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: May 04 2021 at 12:24
Originally posted by cstack3 cstack3 wrote:

Originally posted by SteveG SteveG wrote:

It amazes how cstack3 makes the same early prog argument for Journey as others have done for Rush but can't see the parallels.

What I said is that Journey had more "progressive cred."  Neal Schon was a historic powerhouse on guitar, and their early music was very progressive.   They devolved into radio pap, but let's face it, you don't make much money in prog music.  

Again, what is "progressive" about Rush?  Substandard guitar work, limited vocals, next to no keys etc.  

They do have a massive following, and enjoy a fair amount of their music, but I am more demanding in what I would label as "progressive."  
Charles, what they have are multi suite songs, turn on a dime tempo changes and epic songs with killer lyrics and, if you care to admit it not, excellent musicianship. That's prog cred enough. I don't think that Steve Howe is any great shakes, but he fits Yes, the same way Lifeson fits Rush. But even if Lifeson really was as poor as you say, does that make Geddy and Peart anything less than monster musicians? Or the music that much less than what Howe did with Yes? I'll say it again, you don't like them and you can't see past Geddy Lee's nose.

Edited by SteveG - May 04 2021 at 12:28
This message was brought to you by a proud supporter of the Deep State.
Back to Top
cstack3 View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar
VIP Member

Joined: July 20 2009
Location: Tucson, AZ USA
Status: Offline
Points: 7281 		Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote cstack3 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: May 04 2021 at 12:30
Originally posted by SteveG SteveG wrote:

Originally posted by cstack3 cstack3 wrote:

Originally posted by SteveG SteveG wrote:

It amazes how cstack3 makes the same early prog argument for Journey as others have done for Rush but can't see the parallels.

What I said is that Journey had more "progressive cred."  Neal Schon was a historic powerhouse on guitar, and their early music was very progressive.   They devolved into radio pap, but let's face it, you don't make much money in prog music.  

Again, what is "progressive" about Rush?  Substandard guitar work, limited vocals, next to no keys etc.  

They do have a massive following, and enjoy a fair amount of their music, but I am more demanding in what I would label as "progressive."  
Charles, what they have are multi suite songs, turn on a dime tempo changes and epic songs with killer lyrics and, if you care to admit it not, excellent musicianship. I don't think that Steve Howe is any great shakes, but he fits Yes, the same way Leifson fits Rush. But even if Leifson really was as poor as you say, does that make Geddy and Peart anything less than monster musicians? Or the music that much less than what Howe did with Yes? I'll say it again, you don't like them and you can't see past Geddy Lee's nose.

Ha ha ha, the devotion folks have to Rush on PA is remarkable!  

How have they innovated within the rock paradigm?  Fripp always pushed the instrumental envelope, from early adoption of Mellotron to synth guitar and looping software....Howe was perhaps the first to bring pedal steel guitar into the rock formula with stunning results....Genesis pretty much invented the multi-movement epic rock suite.  

I don't hate Rush, but they just don't feel very progressive to me.  Lifeson is about as good as Howard Keese from Heart, Geddy is decent on bass but not nearly as good as Squire/Rutherford/Lake etc. 
I am not a Robot, I'm a FREE MAN!!
Back to Top
SteveG View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: April 11 2014
Location: Kyiv In Spirit
Status: Offline
Points: 20609 		Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote SteveG Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: May 04 2021 at 12:34
Originally posted by cstack3 cstack3 wrote:

Originally posted by SteveG SteveG wrote:

Originally posted by cstack3 cstack3 wrote:

Originally posted by SteveG SteveG wrote:

It amazes how cstack3 makes the same early prog argument for Journey as others have done for Rush but can't see the parallels.

What I said is that Journey had more "progressive cred."  Neal Schon was a historic powerhouse on guitar, and their early music was very progressive.   They devolved into radio pap, but let's face it, you don't make much money in prog music.  

Again, what is "progressive" about Rush?  Substandard guitar work, limited vocals, next to no keys etc.  

They do have a massive following, and enjoy a fair amount of their music, but I am more demanding in what I would label as "progressive."  
Charles, what they have are multi suite songs, turn on a dime tempo changes and epic songs with killer lyrics and, if you care to admit it not, excellent musicianship. I don't think that Steve Howe is any great shakes, but he fits Yes, the same way Leifson fits Rush. But even if Leifson really was as poor as you say, does that make Geddy and Peart anything less than monster musicians? Or the music that much less than what Howe did with Yes? I'll say it again, you don't like them and you can't see past Geddy Lee's nose.

Ha ha ha, the devotion folks have to Rush on PA is remarkable!  

How have they innovated within the rock paradigm?  Fripp always pushed the instrumental envelope, from early adoption of Mellotron to synth guitar and looping software....Howe was perhaps the first to bring pedal steel guitar into the rock formula with stunning results....Genesis pretty much invented the multi-movement epic rock suite.  

I don't hate Rush, but they just don't feel very progressive to me.  Lifeson is about as good as Howard Keese from Heart, Geddy is decent on bass but not nearly as good as Squire/Rutherford/Lake etc. 
Charles, I own one Rush album, a "best of" that I can't recall the name of. It has a dog on the cover staring at an old fashioned record player. I'm not a Rush devotee, I just give credit where credit is due.
This message was brought to you by a proud supporter of the Deep State.
Back to Top
Catcher10 View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar
VIP Member

Joined: December 23 2009
Location: Emerald City
Status: Offline
Points: 17848 		Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Catcher10 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: May 04 2021 at 12:37
..."next to no keys.." Confused I guess one would have to define "no". The Rush prog heads have for eons complained about the Rush synth years being their least favorite, tons of synth in their music. They were never a mellotron band, I don't think it was needed and clearly the fans don't care either.

I've been a Journey and Santana fan since the early 70s. Pushing both of them into the prog world IMO is a massive stretch (talk about splitting hairs) compared to not believing Rush are prog, again does not matter if you like them or not.

This is soooo coo-koo for CocoPuffs.....
Back to Top
verslibre View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: July 01 2004
Location: CA
Status: Offline
Points: 17249 		Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote verslibre Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: May 04 2021 at 12:43
Originally posted by cstack3 cstack3 wrote:

Originally posted by SteveG SteveG wrote:

It amazes how cstack3 makes the same early prog argument for Journey as others have done for Rush but can't see the parallels.

What I said is that Journey had more "progressive cred."  Neal Schon was a historic powerhouse on guitar, and their early music was very progressive.   They devolved into radio pap, but let's face it, you don't make much money in prog music.

Was it, though? It sounds watered down compared to Caravanserai, the album Clive Davis told Carlos he was committing "career suicide" with! If you take away "Conversations" and the other two instrumentals, it sounds like good textured rock, but it's not without its schmaltz. In spite of the band's rock solid pedigree, the first two albums have always lacked something and thus have never earned permanent slots in my collection.

Neal also played on Azteca's first two albums before he and Rolie formed Journey.

Originally posted by cstack3 cstack3 wrote:

Again, what is "progressive" about Rush?  Substandard guitar work, limited vocals, next to no keys etc.

Ouch!

I. Alex Lifeson, like Buck Dharma, is one of the most underrated rock guitarists out there.

II. Limited? Because there aren't five guys doing backing vocals? Confused

III. There is no full-time keyboardist because they were a trio, were always a trio (and rely on backing tracks in concert), and elected to not add the "fourth touring member" (the way Triumph eventually did with Rick Santers).

Originally posted by cstack3 cstack3 wrote:

I am more demanding in what I would label as "progressive."

Okay, then. LOL


Edited by verslibre - May 04 2021 at 14:50
eBay
Back to Top
SteveG View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: April 11 2014
Location: Kyiv In Spirit
Status: Offline
Points: 20609 		Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote SteveG Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: May 04 2021 at 12:44
I found it Charles! A best of called "Spirit Of Radio".  Now, if I could only remember what songs are on it. LOL


Edited by SteveG - May 04 2021 at 12:50
This message was brought to you by a proud supporter of the Deep State.
Back to Top
cstack3 View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar
VIP Member

Joined: July 20 2009
Location: Tucson, AZ USA
Status: Offline
Points: 7281 		Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote cstack3 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: May 04 2021 at 12:47
Originally posted by Catcher10 Catcher10 wrote:

..."next to no keys.." Confused I guess one would have to define "no". The Rush prog heads have for eons complained about the Rush synth years being their least favorite, tons of synth in their music. They were never a mellotron band, I don't think it was needed and clearly the fans don't care either.

I've been a Journey and Santana fan since the early 70s. Pushing both of them into the prog world IMO is a massive stretch (talk about splitting hairs) compared to not believing Rush are prog, again does not matter if you like them or not.

This is soooo coo-koo for CocoPuffs.....

LOL, I love messing you Rush guys around!!  What I said was that Journey had legitimate prog credibility - Dunbar was a killer prog/fusion drummer, Schon had some real chops, Rollie was/is a fine keyboard player and vocalist etc.  I don't much care for Journey once they got all AM radio friendly, same for Rush & Genesis. 

I like some of what I've heard from Rush, and have even covered some of it on guitar and bass over the years. I find it musically limited.  I have tastes in some music that some of my friends object to (ie. power pop, one of my addictions!), and the power pop community has similar back & forth discussions about "level of purity." 

The most progressive Rush music I ever heard was the cover of "Limelight" by the band Clatter, a two piece (!) band consisting of wife (12 string bassist) and drummer husband.  Check this out:
I am not a Robot, I'm a FREE MAN!!
Back to Top
verslibre View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: July 01 2004
Location: CA
Status: Offline
Points: 17249 		Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote verslibre Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: May 04 2021 at 12:48
Originally posted by Catcher10 Catcher10 wrote:

Rush prog heads have for eons complained about the Rush synth years being their least favorite

I know a few like that, but they're older fans who grew up with the '70s albums. They jumped ship with Signals.

All I can tell them is "your loss."

OTOH, most Rush fans love every "era." Clap
eBay
Back to Top
cstack3 View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar
VIP Member

Joined: July 20 2009
Location: Tucson, AZ USA
Status: Offline
Points: 7281 		Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote cstack3 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: May 04 2021 at 12:50
Originally posted by Catcher10 Catcher10 wrote:

..."next to no keys.." Confused I guess one would have to define "no". The Rush prog heads have for eons complained about the Rush synth years being their least favorite, tons of synth in their music. They were never a mellotron band, I don't think it was needed and clearly the fans don't care either.

I've been a Journey and Santana fan since the early 70s. Pushing both of them into the prog world IMO is a massive stretch (talk about splitting hairs) compared to not believing Rush are prog, again does not matter if you like them or not.

This is soooo coo-koo for CocoPuffs.....

LOL, I love messing you Rush guys around!!  What I said was that Journey had legitimate prog credibility - Dunbar was a killer prog/fusion drummer, Schon had some real chops, Rollie was/is a fine keyboard player and vocalist etc.  I don't much care for Journey once they got all AM radio friendly, same for Rush & Genesis. 

I like some of what I've heard from Rush, and have even covered some of it on guitar and bass over the years. I find it musically limited.  I have tastes in some music that some of my friends object to (ie. power pop, one of my addictions!), and the power pop community has similar back & forth discussions about "level of purity." 

The most progressive Rush music I ever heard was the cover of "Limelight" by the band Clatter, a two piece (!) band consisting of wife (12 string bassist) and drummer husband.  Check this out:
I am not a Robot, I'm a FREE MAN!!
Back to Top
SteveG View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: April 11 2014
Location: Kyiv In Spirit
Status: Offline
Points: 20609 		Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote SteveG Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: May 04 2021 at 12:51
Originally posted by cstack3 cstack3 wrote:

Originally posted by Catcher10 Catcher10 wrote:

..."next to no keys.." Confused I guess one would have to define "no". The Rush prog heads have for eons complained about the Rush synth years being their least favorite, tons of synth in their music. They were never a mellotron band, I don't think it was needed and clearly the fans don't care either.

I've been a Journey and Santana fan since the early 70s. Pushing both of them into the prog world IMO is a massive stretch (talk about splitting hairs) compared to not believing Rush are prog, again does not matter if you like them or not.

This is soooo coo-koo for CocoPuffs.....

LOL, I love messing you Rush guys around!!  What I said was that Journey had legitimate prog credibility - Dunbar was a killer prog/fusion drummer, Schon had some real chops, Rollie was/is a fine keyboard player and vocalist etc.  I don't much care for Journey once they got all AM radio friendly, same for Rush & Genesis. 

I like some of what I've heard from Rush, and have even covered some of it on guitar and bass over the years. I find it musically limited.  I have tastes in some music that some of my friends object to (ie. power pop, one of my addictions!), and the power pop community has similar back & forth discussions about "level of purity." 

The most progressive Rush music I ever heard was the cover of "Limelight" by the band Clatter, a two piece (!) band consisting of wife (12 string bassist) and drummer husband.  Check this out:






All the vids you post are a waste of time. Do you realize you are comparing apples to apples?
This message was brought to you by a proud supporter of the Deep State.
Back to Top
verslibre View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: July 01 2004
Location: CA
Status: Offline
Points: 17249 		Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote verslibre Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: May 04 2021 at 12:51
Originally posted by cstack3 cstack3 wrote:

What I said was that Journey had legitimate prog credibility - Dunbar was a killer prog/fusion drummer, Schon had some real chops, Rollie was/is a fine keyboard player and vocalist etc.  I don't much care for Journey once they got all AM radio friendly, same for Rush & Genesis.

Stack, you don't know Rush well enough to dismiss them.

I'm a fan of Dunbar, Schon and Rollie, but

a) Neil played circles around Aynsley;

b) Alex can hang with Neal anytime;

c) Ross can't restring Geddy's basses! LOL


Edited by verslibre - May 04 2021 at 12:52
eBay
Back to Top
SteveG View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: April 11 2014
Location: Kyiv In Spirit
Status: Offline
Points: 20609 		Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote SteveG Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: May 04 2021 at 12:51
Originally posted by cstack3 cstack3 wrote:

Originally posted by Catcher10 Catcher10 wrote:

..."next to no keys.." Confused I guess one would have to define "no". The Rush prog heads have for eons complained about the Rush synth years being their least favorite, tons of synth in their music. They were never a mellotron band, I don't think it was needed and clearly the fans don't care either.

I've been a Journey and Santana fan since the early 70s. Pushing both of them into the prog world IMO is a massive stretch (talk about splitting hairs) compared to not believing Rush are prog, again does not matter if you like them or not.

This is soooo coo-koo for CocoPuffs.....

LOL, I love messing you Rush guys around!!  What I said was that Journey had legitimate prog credibility - Dunbar was a killer prog/fusion drummer, Schon had some real chops, Rollie was/is a fine keyboard player and vocalist etc.  I don't much care for Journey once they got all AM radio friendly, same for Rush & Genesis. 

I like some of what I've heard from Rush, and have even covered some of it on guitar and bass over the years. I find it musically limited.  I have tastes in some music that some of my friends object to (ie. power pop, one of my addictions!), and the power pop community has similar back & forth discussions about "level of purity." 

The most progressive Rush music I ever heard was the cover of "Limelight" by the band Clatter, a two piece (!) band consisting of wife (12 string bassist) and drummer husband.  Check this out:


 




All the vids you post are a waste of time. Do you realize you are comparing apples to apples? LOL

Edited by SteveG - May 04 2021 at 12:52
This message was brought to you by a proud supporter of the Deep State.
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1 89101112 27>

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down



This page was generated in 0.158 seconds.
Donate monthly and keep PA fast-loading and ad-free forever.