Rush vs The Beatles
Printed From: Progarchives.com
Category: Other music related lounges
Forum Name: Proto-Prog and Prog-Related Lounge
Forum Description: Discuss bands and albums classified as Proto-Prog and Prog-Related
URL: http://www.progarchives.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=53280
Printed Date: November 26 2024 at 05:23
Software Version: Web Wiz Forums 11.01 - http://www.webwizforums.com
Topic: Rush vs The Beatles
Posted By: Yorkie X
Subject: Rush vs The Beatles
Date Posted: November 12 2008 at 11:16
Both are or have been Big Bands that are really nothing much a like well not that I`m aware of anyway .. but I thought up the poll, a little smile come to my face and here I am posting it preparing for the apples and oranges to come my way. I believe very few bands could beat the Beatles in a poll like this but I think Rush may just get over the line. 
|
Replies:
Posted By: Bern
Date Posted: November 12 2008 at 11:17
APPLES AND ORANGES!  The Beatles by far. -------------  
RIP in bossa nova heaven. |
Posted By: febus
Date Posted: November 12 2008 at 11:19
The weirdest poll of them all! 
|
Posted By: proggy
Date Posted: November 12 2008 at 11:21
| WHY???????? |
Posted By: LinusW
Date Posted: November 12 2008 at 11:22
 |
Posted By: The Quiet One
Date Posted: November 12 2008 at 11:23
|
Weird.................................................................................................................................................................... Kiwis and Water Melons. Beatles have Magical Mystery Tour, Abbey Road, Sgt Pepper's, Revolver and White album. While Rush has Caress of Steel, Fly by Night, 2112 and Farewell to Kings. Damn, impossible to choose, Hard Rock or Psych Rock/Rock |
Posted By: rushfan4
Date Posted: November 12 2008 at 11:26
|
I love the Beatles, but my nick is not Beatlesfan4.
It is actually sort of funny that you have this poll. A couple of years ago, the local sports talk radio station was going through a period of time where they did a bunch of NCAA tournament brackets with 64 teams for various items. The rock band item featured the Beatles as the number 1 seed and Rush as the 16th seed in their bracket. Random callers would be asked to pick their favorite band from which ever 2 they would be asked and the winner would move on. The DJs did hold a couple veto votes though. I didn't call in, but boy would they have been in for a shock if I had had this game as my choice. That would have been 1 veto used up very quickly.  ------------- 
|
Posted By: fuxi
Date Posted: November 12 2008 at 11:28
Rush are BIG??? In proggy-cuckoo land, maybe... 
|
Posted By: LinusW
Date Posted: November 12 2008 at 11:32
No, they really are big. According to the RIAA, Rush's sales statistics place them fourth behind http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Beatles - The Beatles , http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Rolling_Stones - The Rolling Stones and http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aerosmith - Aerosmith for the most consecutive gold or platinum albums by a rock band. I know. Unexpected. |
fuxi wrote:Posted By: darksideof
Date Posted: November 12 2008 at 11:33
THIS BAND GET MY VOTE 10000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000%
 ------------- http://darksideofcollages.blogspot.com/ http://www.metalmusicarchives.com/ https://www.facebook.com/pages/Darksideof-Collages/ |
Posted By: Alberto Muñoz
Date Posted: November 12 2008 at 11:53
|
Without the Beatles, there's no Rush , so my vote is for the Beatles. -------------  |
Posted By: Alberto Muñoz
Date Posted: November 12 2008 at 11:54
And where's Rushfan number 1, 2 and 3? ------------- |
Posted By: horsewithteeth11
Date Posted: November 12 2008 at 11:56
It's harder to understand how Rush is so big on your side of the pond, but I honestly can't think of any other big hard rock or heavy metal acts here in America that can't say they were influenced by Rush at some point. Hell, Metallica's even sited Rush as an influence. That should say something. I don't think I have to say where my vote went, but this does seem like a pretty odd apples and oranges poll.  ------------- 
|
Posted By: progmetalhead
Date Posted: November 12 2008 at 11:56
.......and interestingly (although I stand to be corrected) I read that they have sold more records in the US than ANY other Prog band outside Floyd.
Not that I expect for one minute it will stop anymore Rush bashing! ------------- http://www.last.fm/user/colt2112" rel="nofollow - http://www.last.fm/user/colt2112 Colt - Admin Team MMA 
|
Posted By: rushfan4
Date Posted: November 12 2008 at 11:59
That would be Alex, Geddy, and Neil. -------------
|
Posted By: horsewithteeth11
Date Posted: November 12 2008 at 12:00
That sounds about right to me. I've heard Money and Another Brick in the Wall Pt. 2 SO many times on the radio over here that I can't stand listening to those songs anymore. -------------
|
Posted By: horsewithteeth11
Date Posted: November 12 2008 at 12:03
|
This may seem like a silly or ignorant question to some people, but could someone please explain to me what exactly make The Beatles 'progressive' in any sense? I've never seen them as progressive in any way except for the occasional song played in an odd time signature, although I'd appreciate it if someone could enlighten me.
-------------
|
Posted By: Floydoid
Date Posted: November 12 2008 at 12:05
|
The Beatles, because they got going at a time when rock & roll was in the doldrums, and their influence on the future development on modern music is incalculable. You can't say that about many artists.
------------- 'We're going to need a bigger swear jar.' |
Posted By: The Quiet One
Date Posted: November 12 2008 at 12:14
Prog they're not, and no one has said they are. PROTO-Prog is something different. As you said, they had odd time signatures, mixed genres, use of "new" instruments on rock music: Mellotron and Moog. "Epic", though it's divided in 7 or 8 songs(Abbey Road side 2) |
Posted By: Slartibartfast
Date Posted: November 12 2008 at 12:30
|
Hmmm, are you in some kind of contest for weirdest poll pairings?
------------- Released date are often when it it impacted you but recorded dates are when it really happened... 
|
Posted By: febus
Date Posted: November 12 2008 at 12:46
OooooH!!! i thought that was KBT, Naturalscience and Movingpic07
|
Posted By: febus
Date Posted: November 12 2008 at 12:50
Without them, we wouldn't be here i think
 |
Posted By: Lionheart
Date Posted: November 12 2008 at 12:55
|
This is a strange poll, folks. But, I'll indulge. Beatles far and away. They were responsible for so much, I would probably put them at the top of any Rock and Roll poll, regardless of "genre".
|
Posted By: Epignosis
Date Posted: November 12 2008 at 12:58
|
The poll question asked my preference. Therefore the "more influential" question is moot. I find The Beatles boring. Good, but boring. Sorry. |
Posted By: Alberto Muñoz
Date Posted: November 12 2008 at 12:58
it's not a silly question, but for example, check the music that mostly groups played in 1965 and then listen carefully to albums like Rubber Soul and Revolver and in fact none mainstream group was doing that the Beatles done. ------------- |
Posted By: rushaholic
Date Posted: November 12 2008 at 13:53
|
I don't think anyone questions the fact that without The Beatles, we wouldn't have a lot of the music that we do have today. No question that they are one of the greatest. But, I prefer RUSH! |
Posted By: Hawkwise
Date Posted: November 12 2008 at 14:10
------------- 
|
Posted By: Philéas
Date Posted: November 12 2008 at 14:25
|
Insane poll! XD Rush. |
Posted By: splyu
Date Posted: November 12 2008 at 14:48
Ditto. |
Posted By: Frippertron
Date Posted: November 12 2008 at 15:06
|
Bit of a daft poll this one.
Might as well have put Beethoven v Can of worms. ------------- The Cheerful Insanity of Prog Rock |
Posted By: Carlos
Date Posted: November 12 2008 at 15:17
|
Two different eras from two bands I really love...No vote this time....
------------- Democracy=A form of government in which the supreme power is vested in the people... 
|
Posted By: The Doctor
Date Posted: November 12 2008 at 15:27
|
I don't think I can vote in this poll either. Two bands that I really love. ------------- I can understand your anger at me, but what did the horse I rode in on ever do to you? |
Posted By: A Person
Date Posted: November 12 2008 at 16:52
| As much as I love The Beatles I prefer Rush. |
Posted By: horsewithteeth11
Date Posted: November 12 2008 at 17:19
Alright, that definitely helps my understanding, as well as what cacho said. Personally I'm not doubting that The Beatles were influential, they just aren't my taste. Thanks for clearing it up for me though.  -------------
|
Posted By: The Quiet One
Date Posted: November 12 2008 at 17:21
| ^no prob, and glad you understand. I'm no big fan neither. The only album I really pick by them, if I really listen to them, it is Abbey Road, the rest meh, but I must admit they are highly influential, blah blah blah... |
Posted By: Queen By-Tor
Date Posted: November 12 2008 at 17:32
|
Beatles = likely the most innovative and groundbreaking bands of any generation's time, and likely will be in all of history. My preference - Rush  |
Posted By: Petrovsk Mizinski
Date Posted: November 12 2008 at 17:50
My thoughts. |
Posted By: JROCHA
Date Posted: November 12 2008 at 18:12
|
Rush over Beatles anyday
------------- Somewhere out of a memory of lighted streets on quiet nights... |
Posted By: Syzygy
Date Posted: November 12 2008 at 18:22
|
A stupid but interesting poll. I went with the Fabs, of course; if my house was burning down I'd definitely the Beatles albums first, but I'd try to salvage some Rush as well. ------------- 'Like so many of you I've got my doubts about how much to contribute to the already rich among us...' Robert Wyatt, Gloria Gloom |
Posted By: Zargus
Date Posted: November 12 2008 at 18:32
|
Rush winning over the beatles? give me a break! Rush is an ok band but to be honest they dont do very much for me, the beatles isent exactly my favorite band ever ither but they beat rush any day of the week IMO. ------------- 
|
Posted By: MovingPictures07
Date Posted: November 12 2008 at 20:08
This is the easiest poll I've ever voted in. I never did like the Beatles at all; I actually quite dislike them. And they're up against Rush. Hmm... ------------- 
|
Posted By: Moogtron III
Date Posted: November 12 2008 at 20:16
|
The Beatles.
Up until now, I don't like Rush very much.
|
Posted By: jammun
Date Posted: November 12 2008 at 20:26
| I always take the historical perspective on these things, so voted for the Beatles. Without them, Rush would have been produced by Phil Spector and would be singing follow-ups to My Boyfriend's Back. |
Posted By: tszirmay
Date Posted: November 13 2008 at 01:41
|
This is A"POLL"ING, First I won't vote because its sort of non sensical. There would never have been a RUSH had there not been the Beatles , just as Geddy! He will agree! I mean really , Helter Skelter ! ------------- I never post anything anywhere without doing more than basic research, often in depth. |
Posted By: Phil
Date Posted: November 13 2008 at 02:01
| The Beatles - c'mon folks get real! |
Posted By: BroSpence
Date Posted: November 13 2008 at 02:48
|
The Beatles of course. Rush was best between 1974 and 1981, and even though that was their best time period, they still couldn't come close to how good the Beatles were from 1965-1969. Plus Rush wrote that awful awful Trees song (during their good period!). The Beatles did not. Thats more than enough to sway me.
|
Posted By: someone_else
Date Posted: November 13 2008 at 05:22
|
Let me compare the albums from the best periods of both bands:
Revolver, Sgt. Pepper, Yellow Submarine, The white double album and Abbey Road vs.
A Farewell to Kings, Hemispheres, Permanent Waves, Moving Pictures and Signals.
Usually I prefer Rush, but it depends on the mood I'm in. I vote for Rush, even though they were far less influential than the Beatles.
|
Posted By: BaldFriede
Date Posted: November 13 2008 at 08:43
|
A no-brainer, in my opinion. The Beatles were a lot more creative and a lot more groundbreaking.
-------------  BaldJean and I; I am the one in blue. |
Posted By: Roj
Date Posted: November 13 2008 at 08:58
|
I like some stuff by The Beatles and really like a few of their tracks. I have also heard enough of their music to appreciate how important they were in the development of popular music. However, they are not really my cup of tea.
On the other hand I adore most of the music Rush has produced. Therefore for me this is an easy question. It's Rush for me.
|
Posted By: ModernRocker79
Date Posted: November 13 2008 at 14:01
|
The Beatles I have to admit the Beatles for a mainstream band they were really progressive and even jazz music were not doing some of the things they were doing like backward guitar, drum looping to name a few. Some of their rhythms on "Happiness Is A Warm Gun" for example include a Balkan rhythm and a polyrhythm in different sections. Were they influenced by jazz? "Tomorrow Never Knows" is a very early Art-Rock song that was recorded even before the Velvet Underground. The song is influenced by Avant music and its weird sounds are produced by tape loops/samples with looped effects. The song uses an upfront drum 'n' bass sound with the looped effects not unlike many forms of Modern Music. "Love You To" is a true use of Classical Indian Music in instrumentation, style and rhythm. There is nothing like it in rock music before this. Songs like "Eight Miles High", "Norwegian Wood and "See My Friends" are nothing like this.
I considered "Strawberry Fields Forever" true progressive rock songs. With its use of mellotron, Indian scales and two separate versions of one song into one. Strawberry Fields Forever" uses diminished chords that are common with jazz music. Then are changes time signatures often 4/4, 6/8, 3/4, 2/4. Hardly simple stuff. It helped invent Progressive Rock. " I think the Beatles were one of the biggest influences in early progressive rock. |
Posted By: Yorkie X
Date Posted: November 14 2008 at 01:55
At the present time the scores are Rush 43 votes The Beatles 43 votes ... its anybodies game 
|
Posted By: moreitsythanyou
Date Posted: November 14 2008 at 02:43
|
Rush is good and all, but The Beatles are far superior. -------------  <font color=white>butts, lol[/COLOR] |
Posted By: trackstoni
Date Posted: November 14 2008 at 05:27
|
the least i can do for the Beatles is what i did a second ago , if they're involved in any polls , simply i have to stand up with them , for a million reasons and reason , they can simply win any poll even against my OWN BAND //////////////// take it easy on us fellows !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! yur friend // TracksToni // ------------- Tracking Tracks of Rock |
Posted By: Roj
Date Posted: November 14 2008 at 12:06
|
C'mon everybody who's not voted, get behind Toronto's finest.
If anybody knows any Rush fanboys who've not voted yet tell 'em to get on here pronto, there's a poll to win!
|
Posted By: Bitterblogger
Date Posted: November 18 2008 at 12:59
|
Apples and oranges? More like a watermelon v. an olive. You can't be serious to not vote for the Beatles. |
Posted By: memowakeman
Date Posted: November 18 2008 at 19:17
|
I prefer Rush ------------- Follow me on twitter @memowakeman |
Posted By: The Quiet One
Date Posted: November 18 2008 at 19:26
Here's how it would be in my opinion, trying to be objective: Beatles: Rubber Soul, Revolver, Sgt. Pepper, MAGICAL MYSTERY TOUR, The White Album and Abbey Road Rush: 2112, Farewell to Kings, Hemispheres, Permanent Waves, Moving Pictures. Have in mind I haven't heard Hemispheres neither Permanent Waves, just adding them because they're classics for the Prog fan. I love Caress of Steel, but in some type of musical terms it would be like adding Let It Be. From what I heard from Rush fans and ratings, Counterparts is another classic. |
Posted By: zachfive
Date Posted: November 18 2008 at 21:17
|
I'd like to see another poll. What band has more talented musicians? Regardless, The Beatles win in the influence department I'll give them that, but I'd say Rush has far much more musical integrity. The Beatles members solo stuff (excluding Lennon) i.e Wings and George Harrison does aboslutley no justice to their earlier work such as Sg.Peppers or Yellow Submarine.So as the opinions are stacked before me I vote for Rush, I'd say they have more consecutively great music and has "sold out" a heck of a lot less. ...shame on Mccartney, you use to play such a melodic bass and not such a boing piano   |
Posted By: Treasure
Date Posted: November 18 2008 at 22:24
|
This was LONG overdue. I voted Rush, only because they were never crappy in any way whatsoever. ------------- 
http://www.last.fm/user/YertGuy - http://www.last.fm/user/YertGuy |
Posted By: jammun
Date Posted: November 18 2008 at 22:35
Who said anything about the solo stuff??? The poll was Beatles vs. Rush. Rush would not exist without the Beatles. Nor would any other band on this site.
|
Posted By: zachfive
Date Posted: November 19 2008 at 01:01
|
Jammun said: "Who said anything about the solo stuff??? The poll was Beatles vs.
Rush. Rush would not exist without the Beatles. Nor would any other
band on this site." I already gave credit to The Beatles contribution to music, they have influenced some of my favorite musicians and I do agree that a lot of bands on this site owe tribute to them. All I was trying to get across was that the solo careers of some of The Beatles band members has soured me to their music and unlike Rush, are less consistent in producing great material . Perhaps you need to read the post thoroughly and understand what was really said before commenting, because yes this was is poll about Rush vs. The Beatles, but god forbid I explain why I voted for one over the other... |
Posted By: poslednijat_colobar
Date Posted: November 19 2008 at 09:38
Beatles, of course, but they are so different!
|
Posted By: jimidom
Date Posted: November 19 2008 at 09:53
|
What a poll! For me it's almost like choosing a favorite child. However, I have to give the ultimate nod to the Fab Four. Althought Rush is one of the greatest bands of all time, the Beatles were a cultural phenomenon. ------------- "The music business is a cruel and shallow money trench, a long plastic hallway where thieves and pimps run free, and good men die like dogs. There's also a negative side." - HST |
Posted By: ModernRocker79
Date Posted: November 19 2008 at 10:56
I am big fan of Rush but its the Beatles. The Beatles were the band that merged Pop/Rock/Experimental/Avant successfully in Rock Music examples "Tomorrow Never Knows" and " A Day in the Life". They made it possible by not releasing singles on Rubber Soul and Sgt Pepper for album orientated groups like Rush and much of Progressive Rock not to rely on singles.
|
Posted By: trackstoni
Date Posted: November 19 2008 at 12:32
|
Beatles , without any comment !!!
------------- Tracking Tracks of Rock |
Posted By: Petrovsk Mizinski
Date Posted: November 19 2008 at 20:18
|
It seems people here seem to think it's a sin not to like the people. If I must be totally honest, I don't really like the Beatles at all. Yeah, I understand their legacy, their innovations etc, but pretty much most of their music doesn't get along with me at all. And yes, I've tried listening to them too. Didn't like it much at all. I voted Rush because I at least like some of their music (some of their songs in particular, I like A LOT) and because it was a poll of what your preference was, not a question of "OMG WHO INFLUENCED WHO BEATLES BETTER THEY INFELUNCED RUSH". Ask yourself if you simply voted for the Beatles because they are perceived to be more influential or because you actually LIKE THEIR MUSIC MORE. If you voted for the Beatles simply because they are more influential, yet you like Rush's music more, you have entirely missed the point of the poll and have been quite dishonest to other PA users and yourself. Vote for who you genuinely like more, not who influenced who. Sure, Bach came before the Romantic greats, but I still like Chopin and Liszt more.... much more in fact. Go figure |
Posted By: manofmystery
Date Posted: November 20 2008 at 01:20
Went to their concert here in Pittsburgh, what was with those chicken? ha
anyway, Rush by a mile, not a Beatles fan
frankly i don't get what's so big about the Beatles, they went from boy band to a middle of the pack psych band, maybe first band carried to hyper-super stardom via tv and marketing I guess -------------  Time always wins. |
Posted By: Peter
Date Posted: November 20 2008 at 02:01
 Shakespeare vs Steven King!
Okay, the newer entrants here are quite good at what they do, but C'MON NOW!!!!
 Some people have no sense of the enormous cultural debt owed to the pioneers and trail-blazers of the past, I guess....
  Now let me go to bed -- enough with the goofy "VS" polls already!  "Rush vs The Beatles" Ha! waddaconcept! ------------- "And, has thou slain the Jabberwock? Come to my arms, my beamish boy! O frabjous day! Callooh! Callay!' He chortled in his joy. |
Posted By: AlanD
Date Posted: November 20 2008 at 02:18
|
Bombast v Genius?
No contest !! ------------- AlanD |
Posted By: Aristilus
Date Posted: November 20 2008 at 04:41
| Rush by a country mile. |
Posted By: Petrovsk Mizinski
Date Posted: November 20 2008 at 05:04
So, you're effectively saying, just because the Beatles were the 'pioneers and trailblazers" of the past, we have to like them more and should have voted for them? Okay, the Beatles were influential, as I already stated. But I only like about, 2 of their songs, at most. I like entire albums of Rush, hence I voted Rush. But what, because they aren't the Beatles, my opinion is no longer valid? Absolutely ridiculous. Jimi Hendrix was also massively influential, but he doesn't even figure in my top 50 favorite guitarists. Does that mean I don't have " a sense of the enormous cultural debt owed to the pioneers and trail-blazers of the past"? It just means I like many other guitarists more. |
Posted By: Peter
Date Posted: November 20 2008 at 08:21
No, I'm certainly NOT saying that. Don't worry, I was well aware of the logical weakness of my post even as i wrote it, but as with many others who've responded, I was struck by the profound dissimilarity between the bands, and was not taking the poll entirely seriously.
So please don't take my post seriously -- I was delirious from a lack of sleep, anyway. ------------- "And, has thou slain the Jabberwock? Come to my arms, my beamish boy! O frabjous day! Callooh! Callay!' He chortled in his joy. |
Posted By: Alberto Muñoz
Date Posted: November 20 2008 at 09:38
i think Hugues that this post that you made have to be the first one in the entire thread.
Many people vote against Rush for the reasons you stated before...
Anyway at last is music!!  ------------- |
Posted By: Dick Heath
Date Posted: November 20 2008 at 10:19
I'm with you Pete. Rush V Abba next - fun but completely irrelevant irreverency is called for. Besides bother to research and dig out those old Beatles fan magazines, (as the youngsters here should to be more aware of), then the Fab Four make reference to their infuences: the Shadows, Elvis Presley...................... etc ,etc. ------------- The best eclectic music on the Web,8-11pm BST/GMT THURS. CLICK ON: http://www.lborosu.org.uk/media/lcr/live.php - http://www.lborosu.org.uk/media/lcr/live.php Host by PA's Dick Heath. |
Posted By: ModernRocker79
Date Posted: November 20 2008 at 10:32
In my opinion you are insulting people here or its sour grapes on your part. You think people can't decide who they like better here? Many people who like the Beatles better are showing respect to Rush by complimenting them. Its old news The Beatles are way more popular than Rush around the world. The majority of good musicians (influential or not) already proclaimed the Beatles as the greatest rock band ever. Yes, I said rock band - that is what they produced, rock music. Today we have thousands of different music classifications, but this was not the case in the sixties. |
Posted By: Petrovsk Mizinski
Date Posted: November 20 2008 at 20:39
Okay, but the "Greatest" is always going to be subjective. I don't think I need to state again I understand how influential and popular they have been. "What irritates most of Beatle haters which I am not saying you are is the fact that they were very good and very popular at the same time, and Beatle haters firmly believe this is physically impossible" Well, I would hardly call myself a Beatles hater, correct. I don't go out of my way to make posts here, or on other forum boards about me hating them, I just tend to leave them alone as I think other people should feel free to enjoy it as they will. But that doesn't change the fact I don't think their music is particularly good to my ears, influential or not, so to me, they aren't the greatest rock band ever. Maybe one day, I'll warm to them more, I'll still give them that chance, but for now, I have other music I want to discover. |
Posted By: jammun
Date Posted: November 20 2008 at 20:47
I did read the post, which said:
"The Beatles members solo stuff (excluding Lennon) i.e Wings and George Harrison does aboslutley no justice to their earlier work such as Sg.Peppers or Yellow Submarine.So as the opinions are stacked before me I vote for Rush, I'd say they have more consecutively great music and has "sold out" a heck of a lot less.
...shame on Mccartney, you use to play such a melodic bass and not such a boing piano   "So the post implies, or actually states perhaps, that their solo careers have "soured" you to their (Beatles or invididual members, it's not clear) music.
|
Posted By: Alitare
Date Posted: March 27 2009 at 21:42
|
Is it a crime for me to absolutely loathe The Beatles? I of course choose Rush. |
Posted By: Petrovsk Mizinski
Date Posted: March 29 2009 at 06:46
I really don't like the bulk of The Beatles output at all. So no, it's all good. ------------- 
|
Posted By: micky
Date Posted: March 29 2009 at 07:14
|
The Beatles of course... but you know.... I would have loved to hear The Beatles do The Necromancer... that would have ruled... ------------- The Pedro and Micky Experience - When one no longer requires psychotropics to trip |
Posted By: rogerthat
Date Posted: March 29 2009 at 07:28
|
I am a Rush fan but since I don't feel any compulsion to vote for them at all costs in every poll, I will vote for the band that I like much much more: Beatles. Um, they've got no side long epics, 20-minuters, but hey, neither do Gentle Giant, whoever said they don't rule!
|
Posted By: crimhead
Date Posted: March 29 2009 at 11:26
Pretty much sums it up. |
Posted By: mr.cub
Date Posted: March 29 2009 at 11:33
|
The Beatles. I'll take world class songwriting with adequate musicianship over often times inadequate songwriting and word class musicianship...that's not to say Rush doesn't have incredible songs they just never cut a record that flows as consistenly as Abbey Road or The Beatles IMHO ------------- 
|
Posted By: BaldJean
Date Posted: March 29 2009 at 11:35
|
the Beatles of course. some said the poll was about preference, but where does it say so? it just says Rush vs. the Beatles, and therefore it is a no-brainer. I never understood all the fuss about Rush in the first place. they are not a bad band per se, but by far not as sensational as some of their fans claim they are. what they did had already been done before hen they started making music; they just had more commercial success than most other bands I grew up with prog; my parents were big fans of lots of obscure bands, especially early Krautrock; a friend of theirs who served in the army in Germany had to supply them with the latest stuff (I am originally from the USA and came to Germany in 1993). Rush were not among their favorite bands. I believe Rush are the first prog band for many prog fans who live on the North American continent; it is the only explanation I have for their superstar status with many of the prog fans from there. first loves are always special. you will find that there are much fewer die-hard Rush fans on the European continent though, simply because people from Europe usually have other bands which introduced them to prog -------------  A shot of me as High Priestess of Gaia during our fall festival. Ceterum censeo principiis obsta |
Posted By: mr.cub
Date Posted: March 29 2009 at 13:12
|
^ I never got into Rush when I first started listening to prog. Personally I preferred hard rock bands like Led Zeppelin over Rush when looking at their heavy approach. And I enjoyed ELP and Yes' progressive tendancies over Rush's. Now I'm getting into them a bit more but they really frustrate me with their inconsistencies as there are some really extraordinary parts of their songs that are surrounded by lesser compositions... -------------
|
Posted By: Canprog
Date Posted: March 29 2009 at 19:44
| While both bands did great things nobody comes close to touching the beatles! They are 100 times better than any band/artist to ever set foot on the earth. Just look at there musical output. they have sold 1billion Records, CDs, Tapes, etc. world wide that means 1 in 6 people own a Beatles album. Thats including the couple billion people who a poor, famished and or homless who could never buy an album anyway. Thats not to say rush isnt great I love them too a good Canadian band they just dont touch the beatles! |
Posted By: Equality 7-2521
Date Posted: March 29 2009 at 20:22
|
This poll is a no-brainer. It's obviously Rush. Admin edit of unnecessary remark. Admin comment: stop it Pat... ------------- "One had to be a Newton to notice that the moon is falling, when everyone sees that it doesn't fall. " |
Posted By: BaldJean
Date Posted: March 30 2009 at 06:54
|
I personally think greatness should not be measured in sales, and I had been of the conviction all members of the archives felt the same, else why is prog not more popular as a whole? yet somehow that seems forgotten when it comes to personal favorites
------------- A shot of me as High Priestess of Gaia during our fall festival. Ceterum censeo principiis obsta |
Posted By: Petrovsk Mizinski
Date Posted: March 30 2009 at 10:28
I never understood the fuss about The Beatles. -------------
|
Posted By: Roj
Date Posted: March 30 2009 at 10:37
Perhaps a little extreme, though only a little
.I voted for Rush though too. Give me any one of their albums over the entire Beatles collection, any day.
|
Posted By: BaldJean
Date Posted: March 30 2009 at 10:38
|
It is easier to understand than the fuss about Rush, at least from an historic point of view. I doubt we would have prog today if it hadn't been for the Beatles. ------------- A shot of me as High Priestess of Gaia during our fall festival. Ceterum censeo principiis obsta |
Posted By: Petrovsk Mizinski
Date Posted: March 30 2009 at 10:41
|
I'm a music fan, not a prog fan. If prog rock didn't exist as we know it, we wouldn't know anyway and there is so much awesome classical music, jazz and great 'non prog' rock music I doubt I'd be any less happy -------------
|
Posted By: Pekka
Date Posted: March 30 2009 at 10:51
|
I listen to Rush much more often and like their output more in general, but I voted for Beatles. Even if they didn't have their role in putting the prog ball rolling, you'd gotta admit that the way they progressed as a band in merely a six year recording career was pretty damn unbelievable. They were a great lightweight pop band and evolved into this experimental powerhouse in no time. ------------- http://www.progarchives.com/album.asp?id=42652" rel="nofollow - It's on PA! 
|
Posted By: BaldJean
Date Posted: March 30 2009 at 11:23
|
I think the post is not about who is liked more; at least it was not for me. I am not a great fan of either, though if pressed I would choose the Beatles. at least they had the skill to write some great melodies. for me the post was about historic importance, and that was what I put into account for my vote
------------- A shot of me as High Priestess of Gaia during our fall festival. Ceterum censeo principiis obsta |
Posted By: LinusW
Date Posted: March 30 2009 at 11:26
|
Posted By: LinusW
Date Posted: March 30 2009 at 11:26
|
^ The coward's way. Rush. |
Posted By: Petrovsk Mizinski
Date Posted: March 30 2009 at 11:34
|
I always knew you were a coward Linus. Back when you used to be hesitant to introduce yourself in the Velvet Room, just posting things like "Non regular member lurking quietly". And yet again, you're being a coward -------------
|
Posted By: LinusW
Date Posted: March 30 2009 at 11:36
You're a bad man |
Posted By: memowakeman
Date Posted: March 30 2009 at 11:56
That is why i am not really a Beatles follower, i think their value is just from the historic point of view as you said, they openend doors for new music, sounds and new genres, but i find most of their music boring.
I am not a true Rush follower either, but i actually listen to them more and prefer them over Beatles. ------------- Follow me on twitter @memowakeman |
Posted By: Petrovsk Mizinski
Date Posted: March 30 2009 at 11:58
A bad man with strength and courage is better than a coward my good sir -------------
|