Would you consider Rush's music Eclectic Prog??

Rush is one of those bands who is not afraid of experimenting even if it means losing fans in the process. Their music has always practically been hard to categorize, they are Hard Rock and Metal and Progressive Rock all in one. Yet they also incorporate elements of Reggae, New Wave, Synth Rock and even Alternative Rock and Pop Rock into their sound. My question to you is. Would you consider them Eclectic??? Because the term Heavy Prog makes it seem as if they are always heavy and that's not always the case.

I think they've reinvented themselves on at least 3 occasions. Heavy prog does not adequately describe 2112 , Farewell To KIngs or Hemispheres which are much closer to symhonic prog than heavy metal in my opinion. In the eighties they actually became closer to Art Rock or even sometimes described as 'Techno Rock'. For about Roll The Bones onwards they fit the heavy prog category pretty well although the prog element as disappeared over time imo. Overall if you look at their origins and then take the later albums the soul of the band is as a heavy prog band. They rule that category. If you put them in eclectic prog then presumably they go toe to toe with King Crimson and Gentle Giant.

I really don't think I could ever call them eclectic prog.

ProgMetaller2112 wrote: and you didn't spell Symphonic right.

So he forgot a "p", big deal. You're one to talk about good English.

ProgMetaller2112 wrote: many would argue that Art Rock is Prog Rock.

And many more would disagree. In general, "art rock" describes any rock music with 'artsy' elements in it, whereas "prog rock" places a greater emphasis on instrumental and compositional complexity. For example, David Bowie and Radiohead are generally considered art rock but not prog rock, because their music is relatively simple for the most part.

I think Rush fit just fine in heavy prog. I wouldn't go as far as calling their music heavy metal (although they did influence a lot of prog metal bands), but definitely hard rock. Symphonic? I would say their sound is not 'orchestral' enough for that. They did change their sound over the years, but so did many many other prog bands that aren't categorized as Eclectic. I think it makes more sense to categorize a band after the style they're generally associated with, and that's heavy prog for Rush. It's bands like King Crimson, who are associated with more than one style, or Gentle Giant, whose music contains elements of many styles at once, that belong into Eclectic.

It's true that they have morphed style during their long career, but this does not qualify them as Eclectic.

Heavy prog is a nonsense genre anyway. But so is eclectic. But if it is so, yes, why not Eclectic?

^You are probably right. Rush might be , but they are also Heavy. But so is King Crimson....

The Bearded Bard wrote: I would consider Rush's music eclectic, but that goes for most prog bands. As for moving them to Eclectic Prog, I would say no. The core of their music is unmistakenly hard rock, which makes Heavy Prog a perfect fit for them, IMO.

I agree with this.  They are predominantly a guitar-bass-drum hard rock band with keyboards/synths.  Before they became a release a live album for every tour band, they used to release a live album after ever 4 studio albums, and these live albums kind of indicated the end of an era and a change in direction for the band, albeit they progressed in the direction of the next era during each set of 4 studio albums. 

Guldbamsen wrote: Rush are like the prog version of the Stones. You'll get your rocks off, no doubt, but you know what to expect and have they ever really really changed style?

Actually, the Stones changed their style a lot: British Invasion, R&B, baroque pop, psychedelia, roots rock, blues rock, funk, soul, reggae, country, disco... They did all of those things.

Allocating a sub genre to certain bands may not be appropriate or necessary. Rush are one of those bands in my opinion. You could argue that Moving Pictures is quite 'eclectic' in its variety of styles. Vital Signs, Tom Sawyer, Camera Eye and Limelight are all very different. Bounded only by having the same production.

Overall, it's fair to call Rush, quite simply prog rock, imo, as they 'progressed' and developed from one album to the next, drawing on a number of diverse musical influences. To categorise them overall as 'eclectic' to me seems both off target, and unnecessary.