Did Rush influence Prog Metal?

@Catcher 10: I have two versions of each Beatles album. The 1987 and 2009 CD issues/reissues. Mia culpa.

Edited by SteveG - October 06 2020 at 11:31

SteveG wrote: Catcher10 wrote: SteveG wrote: You can thank Jose for that! I am good at bringing up stuff people don't want/are afraid to discuss........It's my hispanic hot blooded nature. And I am soooo very good with it!!   ok, can we go back to arguing about Rush's supposed influence on prog metal now?

Catcher10 wrote: SteveG wrote: Catcher10 wrote: SteveG wrote: You can thank Jose for that! I am good at bringing up stuff people don't want/are afraid to discuss........It's my hispanic hot blooded nature. And I am soooo very good with it!!   ok, can we go back to arguing about Rush's supposed influence on prog metal now? Sure.....but bro, you hi-jacked your own thread by mentioning the Fab Four.......It's your fault!

But that was only because you mentioned that people would forget Sabbath and Zeppelin first. It was a natural follow up. Damn it.

SteveG wrote: @Catcher 10: I have two versions of each Beatles album. The 1987 and 2009 CD issues/reissues. Mia culpa.

dougmcauliffe wrote: Aliens? ^

Logan wrote: Moving the goalposts.

Catcher10 wrote: The Dark Elf wrote: SteveG wrote: ^ I admire and respect your zeal for Rush Jose, but people forgetting Zeppelin and Sabbath? Come on, now. Rush was never that much in the consciousness of the main stream.     I know you want people to forget about the Beatles, but that's impossible too. Particularly since The Beatles can release another remastered album tomorrow and sell a million copies -- 50 years after they broke up. Rush in 50 years? I don't think they can duplicate the generation-to-generation success and universal appeal of The Beatles. On a lesser scale, you could say the same thing about Zeppelin, Sabbath, or even Pink Floyd, for that matter. The difference is its the same people buying the million copies, 70yr old coggers who have 20 versions of each album......they claim they have 2,000 albums, but in fact 1,000 of those albums are Beatles records.

To steer back to the topic, I'll say again that I feel that Rush inspired folks to make prog music within the context of hard rock/ metal music. Their musical influences from Rush are more confined to song structures such as suites, overtures, time changing connecting passages, recurring motifs, etc. and not so much on the music melodically or rhythmically. The lyrical themes these groups explore can again be said to be inspirational because who can make up lyrics on par with Neil Peart, unless they majored in philosophy and studied Ayn Rand exclusively. One can just as easily say that they were influenced by Roger Waters or Mark Twain. Not a lack of influence but not as much as they're given credit for. Unless of course, they said their influence was the Beatles.

Catcher10 wrote: AFlowerKingCrimson wrote: Catcher10 wrote: SteveG wrote: ^ I admire and respect your zeal for Rush Jose, but people forgetting Zeppelin and Sabbath? Come on, now. Rush was never that much in the consciousness of the main stream.   I know you want people to forget about the Beatles, but that's impossible too. Maybe not in the mainstream (that is arguable today...) but you are on a prog website not Spotify.......There are people who don't know who the Beatles are today. I don't want people to forget about them, just on this site as they have nothing to do with progressive rock music. Where r u all in this picture?? This is what the Beatles represent..... People who don't know the Beatles? Maybe really young people who only listen to pop or rap music. I can pretty much guarantee there's no one who knows about Led Zeppelin, Pink Floyd, Queen, u2, the Rolling Stones or any other band who hasn't at least heard of the Beatles. Also, I'm well aware of your disdain for the Beatles but to say they have nothing to do with progressive rock music is a bit of a stretch. It could even be argued that if there were no Beatles there would be no prog. I won't say Sgt. Pepper's is an early prog album(although some might)but it certainly led to prog. If it wasn't for Fripp hearing a "day in the life" on his way home one evening who knows if KC would have even formed and officially started prog as we know it. So yeah, personal opinions aside, the Beatles are very important in the history and development of prog whether anyone wants to admit it or not. That's the problem, people lump them into being the creators of all genres of music......BTW old people die, then really young people take over , so you answered my statement, some people don't know who the Beatles are.  They are important to music in general, but very little importance to progressive music.....This is one where they get too much (made up) credit for progressive music. People have disdain for a lot of bands, but when someone has disdain for the Beatles its deemed sacrilegious ....seems hypocritical to me. ANY band that was created in the mid to late 60's listened to the Beatles, saw the massive popularity they achieved and money/fame/carte blanche they commanded, all given to them by the fans. The belief that if the Beatles did not exist music would be different is absurd...different how?? They were a massive driver and reason for so many people getting into music, wanting to record and write songs.....but you did not see these people become Beatles copy cats (only The Knack ), they created their own music.....KC sounds NOTHING like anything the Beatles wrote.  It was a musical movement during that time, just watch Woodstock, that's what was truly going on with music during that time, the Beatles were in their own crazy bubble gum girly pop music world....Their music was nowhere near as serious as what happened at Woodstock.

Edited by AFlowerKingCrimson - October 06 2020 at 12:24

Anyone who hasn't heard of Paul McCartney & The Beatles must be living on Venus and Mars.