Neil Peart down on band's 70s work
Printed From: Progarchives.com
Category: Progressive Music Lounges
Forum Name: Prog Bands, Artists and Genres Appreciation
Forum Description: Discuss specific prog bands and their members or a specific sub-genre
URL: http://www.progarchives.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=97299
Printed Date: November 30 2024 at 11:55
Software Version: Web Wiz Forums 11.01 - http://www.webwizforums.com
Topic: Neil Peart down on band's 70s work
Posted By: Finnforest
Subject: Neil Peart down on band's 70s work
Date Posted: February 25 2014 at 18:10
|
Wondering what Rush fans think of a recent Neil Peart quote, which would seem to diss some of their most beloved albums.... No 2112, no Hemispheres, no Permanent Waves??? Say it ain't so Neil! "Those were the growing years. I often equate that to children's drawings on the refrigerator that hang around too long, you know? I really wish they would just go away. I think we really started....wow, given my druthers, I would make our first album "Moving Pictures." I can't think of a single reason not to do that!" Great drummer, but I think he's cracked on this one. I love their early work. |
Replies:
Posted By: HolyMoly
Date Posted: February 25 2014 at 18:15
|
I actually agree. At least lyrically and conceptually, which is kind of Neil's area. But even musically, maybe Neil thinks he began to say more with less once Moving Pics and the following albums happened. Not to say the 70s were bad in any way, but they were not quite as lasting for me. And I say this as a person who used to think the opposite 30 years ago. ------------- My other avatar is a Porsche It is easier for a camel to pass through the eye of a needle if it is lightly greased. -Kehlog Albran |
Posted By: Finnforest
Date Posted: February 25 2014 at 18:26
|
I'm just the opposite now. Years ago I enjoyed post MP stuff more. These days I have rediscovered the aggression and intensity of the early work and I can't get enough of it. The later stuff just doesn't grab me...as much. I'm finding that of a lot of bands though. I love their youthful power and naivity more than their later "sophistication." |
Posted By: The T
Date Posted: February 25 2014 at 18:30
|
I kind of agree with Neil Peart. 2112 has lots of merits but for me the really great albums in Rush's discography start with Permanent Waves. Before that, they were a talented band finding their best possible sound and style. After Permanent Waves, independent on their continued "proginess" or not, Rush found a unique, cohesive, and for me great, sound. And Peart's drumming got from fantastic to best-in-class. ------------- 
|
Posted By: smartpatrol
Date Posted: February 25 2014 at 18:40
|
i can see what he means, to a degree. The band really had a more professional and confident way of doing things since Moving Pictures, but I still think their work before that are excellent, especially their albums from 77-80, which are my three favorites by them
------------- http://bit.ly/1kqTR8y" rel="nofollow">  The greatest record label of all time! |
Posted By: Horizons
Date Posted: February 25 2014 at 18:46
|
Why not Permanent Waves..? Come on Neil. You're starting to show your age. I can understand why he would brush off albums like Hemispheres and Caress of Steel, but MP's sister album? :< ------------- Crushed like a rose in the riverflow. |
Posted By: Finnforest
Date Posted: February 25 2014 at 18:53
|
It reminds me of the Floyd when they diss their pre-Meddle work, I just love that stuff. LZ1 and LZ3 are two favorites. I like Tull's early albums better than their acclaimed ones. Benefit especially. Yes and Genesis, the same story. Then again, to play on Neil's quote, I would probably rather look at a collection of children's artwork than what passes for most "real" art by sophisticated types.....  |
Posted By: Finnforest
Date Posted: February 25 2014 at 18:54
|
Oh, and Kate. Lionheart is my favorite. Anyway, sorry, back to Rush............... |
Posted By: Mellotron Storm
Date Posted: February 25 2014 at 19:06
|
Statements like this really piss me off. I was going to mention Floyd Jim which you did already and the two guys from Kraftwerk as well who all seem embarrased with their early stuff. I can see how a musician becomes a better song writer and player as they get older and more mature but they also lose something in my opinion as to what is so important about music that they had in their youth. My favourite music touches my heart, soul and my feelings in some way which most of the music from the three bands I mentioned did early on. To me it's an insult to say he wished Permanent Waves never existed. Notice all three bands I mention are all rich older men and I guess their early stuff doesn't touch them like it did their fans. And to be fair maybe musicians look at their music differently than fans do, maybe they are more objective or equate the ones that sold the most as being the best. I don't know but he just insulted a lot of his fans. ------------- "The wind is slowly tearing her apart" "Sad Rain" ANEKDOTEN |
Posted By: Finnforest
Date Posted: February 25 2014 at 19:24
|
I hear you John. I doubt he intended to insult anyone, Neil seems like a nice chap. But there is sort of an arrogance that develops over time (more pronounced in Waters) where the older, wiser, matured artist looks down his nose with a sneer at the youthful days. It may make perfect sense to these guys who are now all businessmen, but not to me. I give Rush a lot of credit for the constant pursuit of refinement and the seriousness with which they took their career, I really do. But it's just always been this way for me.....with very few exceptions, the spark is captured early in rock music....it is a young person's game in my opinion. For me as a fan, it's about the fun and energy, not the precision of the production or the social conscience of their latest lyric. All about the spark in the eye, the fire in the belly. |
Posted By: presdoug
Date Posted: February 25 2014 at 19:36
| I always preferred their 70s material, but Neil Peart is entitled to his own perspective on it, even though I don't feel that way about it. |
Posted By: Rick Robson
Date Posted: February 25 2014 at 19:37
|
Always loved Neil Peart's drumming work, for me an excellent drummer. Maybe he is thinking that the artist should follow the changings of the modern times, thus leaving that classic concept which was so characteristical until Permanent Waves (or maybe until Moving Pictures). But i think after that the band began gradually to lose that so intense flowing energy and propulsive force blended with kind of a original surrealistic atmosphere, very present in their early works. After Signals i began to lose interest in their later works, besides feeling in me a litlle change in my music preferences i felt in that album a litlle change in the band. -------------  "Music is a higher revelation than all wisdom and philosophy." LvB |
Posted By: Mellotron Storm
Date Posted: February 25 2014 at 19:47
Well said Jim and as usual i'm overreacting, but this is my favourite band and I just think sometimes these guys lose touch as to what their music means to fans. It's now a business to them and the product from the early years is something they wouldn't ship out today. Honestly though I can't see Lifeson and Lee saying this but maybe i'm wrong. It's just disappointing to me to read this from Peart. Yeah i'll get over it. ------------- "The wind is slowly tearing her apart" "Sad Rain" ANEKDOTEN |
Finnforest wrote:Posted By: Finnforest
Date Posted: February 25 2014 at 19:54
|
Nah...you're not overreacting John...I know exactly how you feel. And yes, Ged comments about the same issue in this book but with more balance. He talks about Caress and while admitting some of the shortcomings, he talks about their grand ambitions and passions with fondness, and says there are "beautiful moments" despite being ponderous (Lamneth). He also recalls fondly the "funny aromas" in the control room while cutting Caress. No wonder I love that album |
Posted By: presdoug
Date Posted: February 25 2014 at 19:55
| ^hey, John, I guess I see how you feel, them being your favorite band. I guess if Jurgen Fritz said that about Triumvirat's early work, I'd be peeved. |
Posted By: KingCrInuYasha
Date Posted: February 25 2014 at 19:58
Hit the nail right on the head. I think a lot of flack Peart has towards their early work has to be directed toward himself, specifically in regards to his early lyrics. Compare stuff "By-Tor And The Snow Dog" and "The Necromancer" with "Free Will", "Tom Sawyer" and "Losing It" and you easily see how much he improved. I agree that it's silly that he comes across as being ashamed of Rush's early work (seriously Peart, you're really gonna liken "Xanadu" and "La Villa Strangiato" to children's drawings?), but I can forgive him because the band really did grow and improve on their craft.
------------- He looks at this world and wants it all... so he strikes, like Thunderball! |
Posted By: twosteves
Date Posted: February 25 2014 at 20:08
| I agree with him but I'm not the biggest Rush fan--there's a sameness to their sound that I can take in small doses--I have like 4 of their albums. |
Posted By: Atavachron
Date Posted: February 25 2014 at 20:14
|
I'm afraid I largely agree with Neil, though I would make their "first album" Hemispheres or AFtK. |
Posted By: Triceratopsoil
Date Posted: February 25 2014 at 20:37
| Permanent Waves is their best album so obviously he's drunk. |
Posted By: bhikkhu
Date Posted: February 25 2014 at 20:58
|
It's all about perspective. For him that was probably when he first felt like a true master of his craft. It is also a difference of six years leading up to Moving Pictures and the 30 plus since. Fans give a lot of weight to what is now a fraction of their career. We may not agree but his comments are understandable. ------------- a.k.a. H.T. http://riekels.wordpress.com" rel="nofollow - http://riekels.wordpress.com |
Posted By: Finnforest
Date Posted: February 25 2014 at 21:00
Well then you don't really agree with him David because you're pulling back almost half of the work he put on the curb. |
Posted By: Mellotron Storm
Date Posted: February 25 2014 at 21:03
Peart is so serious compared to Lifeson and Lee and this was before the tragedies in his life. He's a reflective guy and is probably too hard on himself and his craft. I don't want to say he's self absorbed 'cause I don't know him but he's excelled at everything he does so I can see how his song writing from the early years might embarass him. Thanks for sharing that about the Caress Of Steel sessions. ------------- "The wind is slowly tearing her apart" "Sad Rain" ANEKDOTEN |
Posted By: Atavachron
Date Posted: February 25 2014 at 21:08
It's true, my favorite Rush period is between 78 and 82, but I kinda know what he means about the stuff before that. It's strange 'cause I usually like a band's early stuff. Or maybe it's because Hem was the first record I ever owned. |
Posted By: Finnforest
Date Posted: February 25 2014 at 21:10
| And I agree with you David about stretching it to 82, or even through Grace, as their primo period. It's the post 85 stuff that I think falls off fast and never truly comes back. Yeah, it's quality "product" as they say, but in terms of excitement, thrills, and true gut punch...nah. It's oldster rock. |
Posted By: Catcher10
Date Posted: February 25 2014 at 21:23
|
Hmmm....well I too tend to agree with him. Lets just say the early stuff was well early material. We as adults all have something in our younger years, lets say elementary age, that when we look back we go WHAT???!! I did that!! I like his example of the children's drawing....if you have some take a look at them, pretty silly stuff if you ask me, unless of course I am the parent of that child artist then it is pure brilliance!! As the perfectionists they are, I suspect they acknowledge the fact that the early material was too weird, trying to be deep in a 2" pond of water.....and since he is the lyricist, some of that stuff was kooky by todays standards of his writings, or maybe that is what he is trying to convey, not actually dissing the early stuff but more their age. They have advanced both musically and lyrically.......I am currently listening to Vapor Trails, Secret Touch is insane lyrics as well as much of the album is. There are some stinkers in the early days as well as the post MP albums.....He just can't keep writing about Cygnus X-1 and The Fountain of Lamneth. As a teenager that was brilliance to me, as an adult I find it quirky explaning the lyrics to my kids. That being said I still long for this concert setlist: Side I 2112 Cygnus X-1 Cygnus X-1 Book 2 AFTK La Villa Strangiato By-Tor & The Snowdog The Necromancer Fountain of Lamneth Xanadu Encore: Fly By Night In The Mood Working Man -------------   
|
Posted By: The Dark Elf
Date Posted: February 25 2014 at 21:27
Perfect! I began not caring for them before he claims they started. That makes me prescient.  ------------- ...a vigorous circular motion hitherto unknown to the people of this area, but destined to take the place of the mud shark in your mythology... |
Posted By: Finnforest
Date Posted: February 25 2014 at 21:27
|
Nice set list Jose! (except I'd trade "In the Mood" for "Anthem.") A minor quibble. Let's go!  |
Posted By: jude111
Date Posted: February 25 2014 at 21:44
I think he's being defensive. For a great many Rush fans, the band could have called it quits after Moving Pictures. I feel that way. I'm not interested in Rush (or King Crimson for that matter) trying to be the Talking Heads. It must frustrate him though.
|
Posted By: Neo-Romantic
Date Posted: February 25 2014 at 21:53
|
I can't think of any creative artist who believes in their material who won't say their most recent stuff is the culmination of a journey that's long been in progress. Think of the alternative: you hit your peak early and spent your entire life making at best (in your view) silver metal material. Naturally, we don't always agree with their assertions, but hey, that's the beauty of having opinions and references! It's the same reason why some people say Islands is their favorite KC album when it isn't ranked anywhere near the top. They definitely matured and put out a lot of material over the years that showed a clear focusing in their writing, lyrically and musically. Their stuff without a doubt became more polished over the years and didn't ever lose that creative spark. Just became more tightly packaged and evolved with the times. Nothing inherently wrong with that. I just know I personally wouldn't speak against my early works because A) It disrespects a God-given talent and the material that issued forth from it at the time, B) It might offend a listener who holds it in such high regard, and C) It has the potential to prevent you from revisiting earlier ideas to reinvigorate your stuff later in your career that could still hold some untapped artistic potential. This all being said, I personally think they were at their best with Hemispheres and Permanent Waves. Both masterpieces in my book. |
Posted By: Progosopher
Date Posted: February 26 2014 at 00:36
|
There is often a disjunct between the impression artists and fans have of their work. The quip about pictures on the refrigerator is a great comparison but it might overstate his point. Artists need to grow, to push beyond the boundaries that keep them in one place, but does this mean that the older works or meaningless or terrible? I don't think so. They may be relatively primitive but they also serve as stepping stones to the later work. I for one am not a big fan of Caress of Steel, but I do enjoy it to a degree and can see how it laid the groundwork for 2112, which in turn laid down the ground work for A Farewell to Kings, which in turn, etc. It is a process, one we have plenty of records on, i.e. the albums themselves. To paraphrase Buddha: One takes a canoe to get across the river. Once on the other side, one no longer needs the canoe - on land it is only an encumbrance. But it is also worthless to curse the canoe now that it has served its function. Maybe he feels he has moved on from the themes he explored in years past. Or maybe he is just tired of playing Working Man. ------------- The world of sound is certainly capable of infinite variety and, were our sense developed, of infinite extensions. -- George Santayana, "The Sense of Beauty" |
Posted By: richardh
Date Posted: February 26 2014 at 01:21
| Its weird though that he considers Moving Pictures as their first mature album and not Permanent Waves. They are virtually identical in approach and both have powerful material. Needs further explanation. For me Hemispheres is a bit of a bore but I do like 2112 and AFTK. I only like one song off the first 3 albums (By-Tor) so they can be consigned to the 'bin' from my perspective. |
Posted By: Atavachron
Date Posted: February 26 2014 at 02:02
| ^ and in many ways Waves is more sophisticated than the flashier Pictures |
Posted By: rdtprog
Date Posted: February 26 2014 at 03:54
|
Maybe Neil is thinking about the struggle the band had to made their earlier albums. The members of Yes had this same perspective with "CTTE", but those albums were well received by the fans and reviewers. I think that those older albums were a essential part of the band's history and you can't make them go away. As a fan, i wish i could erase the Rush's era 90's et +, but i can't... ------------- Music is the refuge of souls ulcerated by happiness. Emile M. Cioran |
Posted By: Blacksword
Date Posted: February 26 2014 at 04:29
|
I'd be surprised if a lot of long established musicians are not critical of their early work. He's entitled to his opinion. It's his work, after all. I disagree with him of course. Parts of some of those earlier albums do sound like a very young band finding their feet. People often do forget how young Rush were when they got their break. Geddy was only 21 when they recorded FBN, and what Neil perhaps neglects to acknowledge is that had it not been for those albums he appears not to like, their wouldn't have been a Moving Pictures at all. Each album was a natural progression from the last, and clearly MP would not have turned out the way it did had it not been for Permenant Waves. ------------- Ultimately bored by endless ecstasy! |
Posted By: Libor10
Date Posted: February 26 2014 at 05:42
|
If it wouldn't be for 2112 I never listen to Rush. Although second side of the LP is weaker I remember how I was overwhelmed by the the first side (=2112 song). I love all their records from this onward to, say, Signals. Then I gradually lost interest for them. It's hard to say why, but it seems to me they started to be mechanical, without sparkle or so (no, their playing skills and lyrics etc. was and is great, but their records seems to me cold without passion). So the period between 2112 and Signals is the best for me and I cannot agree with Neil here. ------------- 
|
Posted By: chopper
Date Posted: February 26 2014 at 06:39
|
Posted By: Blacksword
Date Posted: February 26 2014 at 07:32
I think he means if it had been down to him; if he'd had his own way..etc ------------- Ultimately bored by endless ecstasy! |
Posted By: lazland
Date Posted: February 26 2014 at 07:54
|
I can see where he is coming from, to a degree. My take? Rock bands can be compared to us mortals. When young, you are learning, make mistakes, and are sometimes naive. You then mature, progress career, have kids, become boring old fart, but produce best work. You get old, and, by and large, live off of past glories. Rush, Yes,.......could probably name a pile more to whom this applies. ------------- Enhance your life. Get down to www.lazland.org Now also broadcasting on www.progzilla.com Every Saturday, 4.00 p.m. UK time! |
Posted By: altaeria
Date Posted: February 26 2014 at 11:24
|
Meanwhile... Slumped over his bar stool next to Neil's, and keeping up with Neil shot-for-shot... Chris Squire blurted out, "I agree! And every [YES] album before [BIG] GENERATOR was complete and utter rubbish!"  |
Posted By: Evolver
Date Posted: February 26 2014 at 11:30
|
Right, Mr. Peart. We here at ProgArchives.com have assigned a crack team of data scrubbers to erase any indication of those early albums that now offend you. Very soon, you will not see any mention of  , or , and especially . So don't worry, Neil, you will never have to acknowledge that you once played .------------- Trust me. I know what I'm doing. |
Posted By: Biff Tannen
Date Posted: February 26 2014 at 11:34
|
Actually, that quote is from 2004, in the Contents Under Pressure book. As for what he thinks, it doesn't faze me at all. I don't agree with him, and he is not the first artist to have what the majority would call a crazy opinion about his own work. ------------- "What are you looking at, butthead?" |
Posted By: Menswear
Date Posted: February 26 2014 at 12:34
|
HOt DaNg somebody messed up his meds or what?!!
The guy is suffering of what I call: 'Peter Gabriel Syndrome' Gabriel will NEVER admit that his best work (by far) was with Genesis, in that period where he was experimenting without not much of a clue sometimes. Perhaps Neil is judging Power Windows or Test for Echo more 'intelligent', more structured than Permanent Waves or A Farewell to Kings. Personnally, and people WILL agree with me, we liked when Rush had more balls and experimented. Presto over Hémisphères? Clockwork Angels over Fly by Night? Hold your Fire better than Farewell to Kings? Heavenly God NO! ------------- A friend is someone who helps you move. A best friend is someone who helps you move a body. |
Posted By: Ambient Hurricanes
Date Posted: February 26 2014 at 12:39
|
*Sees Rush thread* *Comes out of hiding* I think he has a point to an extent. I would agree with Neil (and the rest of the band) that Rush really found their sound around the PW/MP era; their earlier efforts were ambitions (and occasionally brilliant) but they only really achieved a consistently cohesive, mature sound around 1980 or so. The ideas were there, they weren't just developed in the same skillful, subtle way that they were in the 80s and afterward. If you actually analyze Rush songs from a compositional standpoint (and I'm a composer of both classical and rock music) you start to realize that although early Rush sounds more ambitious and complex on the surface, it actually gets more compositionally interesting as you get into the 80s; the band gets better at actually developing the themes they introduce (their ideas were incredible in the 70s but they really didn't do a whole lot with them); they start to introduce variations over the course of a verse-chorus structure instead of merely repeating sections with different lyrics; the music just generally becomes more intricate and yeah, they get better at writing melodies. Plus, the lyrics get better; not that they were bad in the 70s, but they were a bit obvious in their imagery and the way they conveyed their messages. I can't agree with Neil in his outright dismissal of the band's early work; their youthful energy, ambition, and potential produced some great stuff and some outright masterpieces, including 2112 (the song) and Hemispheres (the album). Although they hadn't matured as songwriters yet, they were still brilliant musicians who hadn't quite brought their craft to mastery. I think this thread illustrates why I like Vapor Trails so much; it perfectly fuses the raw aggression and energy of Rush's early years with the intricate maturity of their later period. ------------- I love dogs, I've always loved dogs |
Posted By: Biff Tannen
Date Posted: February 26 2014 at 12:40
|
I don't think he is saying that ever Rush album they did from the 1980 till now is better than every 70s album, but that those 70s albums when they were experimenting were like starter albums and Moving Pictures was, in his view, the first album where they got it all right. If you read the Contents Under Pressure book, Neil is very fond of the synth era albums (1982-1987), which I can see since that is when he was at his best lyrical peak, he was more experimental with drums during that time period, and his drum sound was awesome then. ------------- "What are you looking at, butthead?" |
Posted By: Catcher10
Date Posted: February 26 2014 at 12:49
Straight from the horses mouth........I agree, and yea VT kicks a$$. -------------
|
Posted By: Guldbamsen
Date Posted: February 26 2014 at 13:16
|
I perfectly understand his sentiments, although I am somewhat irritated by the manner in which he conveys them. Same goes for Floyd when they continuously bash Atom Heart Mother. The thing is that rock, and experimental rock in general , still is a rather new entity in the giant scope of music history. The artists uttering these opinions with the power of hindsight never really had the opportunity to experience something similar from a fan's point of view. Maybe they'd feel similarly if Paul McCartney one day announced that Rubber Soul through Abbey Road were mere childish efforts cooked up by a bunch of drug addicts trying to get with the prevailing psychedelic whims of society? I don't know, but I'd like to see them experience the other side of the coin some time, where they'd face some of their most beloved artists spit venom at their most treasured musical moments. I recently saw some tv broadcast where Clapton was interviewed while doing the Cream reunion at the Albert Hall, where he spoke about the wah wah pedal like it was nothing. "It doesn't add anything, it just makes a sound" - and here I am paraphrasing dear ol' Eric, but it told me a lot about where he stands today as an artist, and perhaps even more so what he thinks about the music of those early days...... and to bridge that with both Rush and Floyd: Maybe these old farts merely have turned old and dull - unable to feel and hear the fire and excitement of that ever so fleeting, yet for me most essential, nerve? Maybe most musicians turn into some kind of pseudo sportsmen as they get older - forever chasing the perfectly recorded solo, chorus, bridge - like some ocd gaming junkie always looking to better his score? And in the midst of all this they forget about what makes the music, the mistakes that turn into brilliant shimmers of music that you can't replicate because it was a once-in-a-lifetime-thing that felt good at the time, - forget that half of the music is noise: the feedback, the echo of the bass pedal, the plinking of the piano, the sound of fingers rolling across the bands of the guitar - all of that.....and today most of em seek to erase those things because they feel it sounds unprofessional and wrong, because there is only room for perfection and metronome-like behaviour. I know I know - different strokes for different folks.....I just enjoy the naive, the unforeseen and the nerve - and I love the mistakes that turn out to be something else entirely: something magical. Just think about how Jimi Hendrix would've sounded like if he had had this kind of approach to making music. We would never have heard Machine Gun for once, and that would be a horrible crime against the art of music imho.
------------- “The Guide says there is an art to flying or rather a knack. The knack lies in learning how to throw yourself at the ground and miss.” - Douglas Adams |
Posted By: HolyMoly
Date Posted: February 26 2014 at 14:14
------------- My other avatar is a Porsche It is easier for a camel to pass through the eye of a needle if it is lightly greased. -Kehlog Albran |
Posted By: rdtprog
Date Posted: February 26 2014 at 14:56
|
Neil will try to stop this to come out, because it covers almost all the period he prefer to forget! http://www.bravewords.com/news/218706" rel="nofollow - http://www.bravewords.com/news/218706  ------------- Music is the refuge of souls ulcerated by happiness. Emile M. Cioran |
Posted By: richardh
Date Posted: February 26 2014 at 16:06
twin twin necks
|
Posted By: Epignosis
Date Posted: February 26 2014 at 19:41
|
Rush' best two albums are Hemispheres and Vapor Trails. In other words, old or new, it's good stuff.
------------- https://epignosis.bandcamp.com/album/a-month-of-sundays" rel="nofollow - https://epignosis.bandcamp.com/album/a-month-of-sundays |
Posted By: The Neck Romancer
Date Posted: February 26 2014 at 20:46
This
This too
------------- 
|
Posted By: verslibre
Date Posted: February 26 2014 at 20:51
Definitely. Maybe Neil had a brain fart and meant to name Waves but messed up. That album really is the beginning of the "new sound" they pursued and refined up through Power Windows. Sometimes rock veterans say weird things. I recall on eMpTyVee, when it used to be a music-focused network, an interview circa the early '90s where Rikki Rachtman asked Glenn Danzig if he would play Misfits and/or Samhain songs on his solo tour of the time. Glenn politely but sternly replied that those bands were of a certain time, and if you'd missed the boat, too bad. Fast-forward to the late '90s, and Glenn not only sustained his then-tour by playing Misfits songs, he had his former bandmate Doyle von Frankenstein join him for those songs every single night. In the late '80s Edgar Froese let slip some rumor that he was going to retire Tangerine Dream after the 1988 tour. He's still going 25 years later...and not only that, he's milked the band's legacy thoroughly, including but not limited to (as if!) re-recording/re-releasing Phaedra and Tangram, two of TD's most beloved recordings. Whether you consider it art or heresy, it's pretty clear Edgar does it to get a few more dollars. ------------- https://www.ebay.com/sch/i.html?_ipg=50&_sop=1&_rdc=1&_ssn=musicosm" rel="nofollow - eBay |
Posted By: Dellinger
Date Posted: February 26 2014 at 22:25
| I find it weir really. Perhaps if he was referring to their first 2 albums (or three, if you count the very first without him) it would be easier to agree, but after 2112 (and until "Moving Pictures" or "Signals") you would have what, at least here, would be considered their essential material. Many talk here about artists getting better because of experience, and being perhaps too young at their early 20's to make great albums... however, what I have seen is that most of the major masterpieces, at least from prog, come from their early albums (perhaps not the earliest, sometimes they needed 2 or 3 albums to get polished and take out their best), and those albums were usually made by people at their early 20's. And usually they just can't capture the same magic again later in their life, no matter how much experience they have obtained. Perhaps they get to do some great songs or even an album if they are "lucky", but it seems that many of those artists had certain amount of brilliance to give, and once it is spent, they already gave the best they had to give. |
Posted By: geogkrt
Date Posted: February 27 2014 at 05:41
| He can have his own opinion like everyone else (and even though he was a member of the band I don't think his opinion matters anymore than the hardcore fans). In my opinion, their best album is A Farewell to Kings. |
Posted By: Leroy2112
Date Posted: February 27 2014 at 06:23
Speaking in a musician point of view... (any art for that matter) Stuff I wrote years ago; I also see as amateur compared to my new material though people still my friends and family still love my old stuff? I evolve with my material Indeed Rush's 2112, hemispheres, *everything before moving pictures!! lol was and still is amazing to the fan! but to the musician it's old news!!! (and having to think they use to play 200 concerts a year back when they were first getting recognized? I think anyone would get tired of playing the same songs over and over again  )RUSH STILL RULES lol ------------- This isn't real life.... This is fantasy.... |
Posted By: King Crimson776
Date Posted: February 28 2014 at 02:26
|
I've recently gained an appreciation for albums like Grace Under Pressure and Power Windows. 80's Rush is immaculately produced music. I would never call the songs great, but the tones are really beautiful. |
Posted By: Atavachron
Date Posted: February 28 2014 at 02:44
|
^ Agreed, and as much as I dislike GUP, it is when Alex's playing really takes on the unique tone-oriented style it has. |
Posted By: prog4evr
Date Posted: February 28 2014 at 03:10
| Maybe Peart is just admitting (like Collins with Genesis) that he can play prog, but he doesn't prefer it. From "Moving Pictures" on into the 80s, there are shades of prog on Rush albums (similar to Yes and Genesis of the same period), but nothing that comes close to the quintessential prog of the 70s... |
Posted By: richardh
Date Posted: February 28 2014 at 03:14
Interesting especially about TD. 1988 was actually the natural end of TD as a creative enterprise but I guess that it was easier to get record companies to release albums that had that name so it sort of continued even though it was mainly just him and his son. The Booster series are very nice and I have the first 4 , but the recycling and duplication of previously recorded music is not a creative exercise that's for sure so one can conclude that money is a big part of it.
|
Posted By: Metalmarsh89
Date Posted: February 28 2014 at 12:27
|
Neil's mustache from the 1970's is still something to be jealous of. ------------- Want to play mafia? Visit http://www.mafiathesyndicate.com" rel="nofollow - here . |
Posted By: Guldbamsen
Date Posted: February 28 2014 at 12:31
|
I loved his secret hats myself. ------------- “The Guide says there is an art to flying or rather a knack. The knack lies in learning how to throw yourself at the ground and miss.” - Douglas Adams |
Posted By: Catcher10
Date Posted: February 28 2014 at 13:34
|
With a discography so large, one has to think the band members become "fans" of their own collection and have opinions, as we do. As far as I am concerned he can diss his own work all he wants, the fact that they do not play much of the pre PW material live says a lot, seems like a quick discussion when they are planning a set list.. On the Snakes & Arrows Tour they did bust out Natural Science.....that was fun. -------------
|
Posted By: Tapfret
Date Posted: February 28 2014 at 14:18
|
In his defense, I feel the same way about my listening. Rush was a stepping stone that I rarely listen to on purpose anymore. But I have to feel nostalgic about the "childhood drawings on the refrigerator" phase and just cringe with embarrassment about the following "teenage slut" years and the "blend into the crowd because nobody really cares who we are anymore" years. ------------- https://www.last.fm/user/Tapfret" rel="nofollow">  https://bandcamp.com/tapfret" rel="nofollow - Bandcamp |
Posted By: Horizons
Date Posted: February 28 2014 at 14:39
|
What ------------- Crushed like a rose in the riverflow. |
Posted By: Terra Australis
Date Posted: February 28 2014 at 17:43
|
My favourite Rush era is from 2112 up to signals. 2112 is the first album of theirs I bought and side one still resonates with me. Lost interest with anything after signals until Clockwork Angels which I like a lot. The early years were not too polished and had pizazz! ------------- Allomerus. Music with progressive intent. http://allomerus.bandcamp.com" rel="nofollow - http://allomerus.bandcamp.com |
Posted By: moshkito
Date Posted: March 01 2014 at 13:09
|
Roger Waters has also said something similar about a lot of Pink Floyd's early material. I, personally, (not that you have to care or pay attention!) do not think that we do not learn something from the young days or not. It seems pretty hip and interesting that when these folks get big and rich, they can say that they were not that good and that it was overblown. Even Roger has said that AHM was total crap. Probably because he doesn't want to five Ron Geesin any money at all for some things they did when they were ripped, drunk, or simply playing around with microphones up their a$$es and then call it "Our Song". There is something that one learns from all this, and in the end, Roger and PF learned how to play with sound effects and eventually created the ne plus ultra of all sound effects, by creating a story around it, and calling it The Wall, on top of it, because behind it, is a whole other story. Roger would know that intimately, but why would he not admit to it? It is, in my book, a bit of self-righteous attitudes and a lot of the rock fame BS thing, that hurts and makes these comments appear so bad and sometimes stupid. In the end, it is hurting one's own creative juices, because it is like saying you don't like a piece of yourself, and it is crap, but it IS a part of who you are. You denying that is stupid, and eventually will hurt your creativity more than anything else out there. I just think that this is more about the "rock press" and their 4 minute song, than anything else. It is cool for all these tune places to trash that stuff and mis-quote musicians left and right, because it supports their business model, which in turn gives the bands more money! You have to stick with the art of it all, not always the money, and this is one of the reasons why I have not enjoyed RUSH for almost 20 years! It died a long time ago, and it's talent diluted to nothingness, and an overblown design of lyrics, that are supposed to be meaningful! And hearing Neil say that, makes me feel like I was right to ignore them all this time! They don't believe in their own art any more anyway. They are too rich, fat and famous, to have to tell you that all of their work is important and is a part of who you are! But some folks don't believe it all as a pat of their lives. It's just another song, and it ain't their favorite. And THAT my friends, is not even a "progressive" thought, so why would you think this band is? It ain't any more.------------- Music is not just for listening ... it is for LIVING ... you got to feel it to know what's it about! Not being told! www.pedrosena.com |
Posted By: rdtprog
Date Posted: March 01 2014 at 13:38
|
Moshkito, your comments are really harsh, inappropriate and reductive, but that was at least passionate!
------------- Music is the refuge of souls ulcerated by happiness. Emile M. Cioran |
Posted By: dr prog
Date Posted: March 01 2014 at 16:58
|
Rush have been crap for the last 20 years. They were pretty average for the 10 years before that. Signals was their last stong album. Peart had a crappy snare sound after that. I reckon he needs a wake up call. Hemispheres is their best with Signals. Bit the 1974-77 period wasn't much better than the 83-91 period.
------------- All I like is prog related bands beginning late 60's/early 70's. Their music from 1968 - 83 has the composition and sound which will never be beaten. Perfect blend of jazz, classical, folk and rock. |
Posted By: verslibre
Date Posted: March 01 2014 at 20:13
Snare sounds aside (I agree the drums and Geddy's bass sound best on Signals), do you really think albums like Grace Under Pressure, Counterparts, Vapor Trails and Clockwork Angels are "crap"? ------------- https://www.ebay.com/sch/i.html?_ipg=50&_sop=1&_rdc=1&_ssn=musicosm" rel="nofollow - eBay |
Posted By: richardh
Date Posted: March 03 2014 at 01:16
|
Rush have been a hard rock band for about 20 years which doesn't go down well here obviously. I think of them now as a decent hard rock band not a prog band. Vapor Trails was great when I saw Rush live and stands up against their more vaunted material. The last 3 albums are good but fail on prog credentials.I think they have settled into old age but any band that still tours and puts out new albums regularly deserves respect imo. |
Posted By: twosteves
Date Posted: March 03 2014 at 08:28
agree with richard---when they were young they loved Yes and Lee loved Squire and they pointed to Relayer as their fav album---but really their music is hard rock--with very structured chorus verse arrangements.
|
Posted By: moshkito
Date Posted: March 03 2014 at 08:43
I'm a writer!
I know what I say and write most of the time, and can explain it to you, if you are ever interested.
But denying my experience when I was 15, or 20, or 30, despite it being hard with no English, is difficult to do, and it became a part of my learning.
What you don't understand and see, or have any idea about, is that our house in Portugal and Brazil was full of famous literatii and folks that my dad translated, and they were much bigger and better known than RUSH will EVER be. But you are defending your very favorite rock song, or band! THAT will pass and is a notorious youthful trademark!
I can appreciate great music and excellent work as well as anyone else, but you are trying to assimilate RUSH with the giants in the arts, and it might in fame and fortune during its time, but it won't afterwards! This, you do not want to see or believe when that time comes! And like Dean says, it's just pop music!
There is a side to "harsh" that you don't get, and will never EVER appreciate or read or discuss. It is having the dad having a gun pulled to his children's heads in order to shut him up and tell him to stop writing freedom poetry and such! Fascism, and corruption, is a bigger bandit and a much rougher enemy, but you don't see that!
It's ok to think that Harry Potter is mysticism ... but don't go screaming when it doesn't work! That is my problem with RUSH. It's nice ... so what? ------------- Music is not just for listening ... it is for LIVING ... you got to feel it to know what's it about! Not being told! www.pedrosena.com |
Posted By: Dorsalia
Date Posted: March 03 2014 at 15:51
|
Ironic considering it was those albums (2112 to Moving Pictures) that made them legendary. Those are the albums people are still passionate about, the albums that new generations keep discovering. ------------- "Es ist übrigens unmöglich, eine Meinung zu haben, ohne dass es unerfreuliche Überschneidungen gibt. Die Grünen sind für den deutschen Wald, die NPD ebenfalls." |
Posted By: Padraic
Date Posted: March 03 2014 at 16:02
| Even the artists' opinions of their own work has no bearing on whether or not I enjoy it. |
Posted By: Billy Pilgrim
Date Posted: March 03 2014 at 16:34
| Thank god Peart doesn't own a time machine. |
Posted By: richardh
Date Posted: March 04 2014 at 01:53
reminds me of when Asia were interviewed on the BBC by legendary DJ Tommy Vance. That was about 1982 and he put a question framed exactly that way. John Wetton and Steve Howe tried to answer it but didn't give a a very convincing answer. Trying to disregard your past when the fans are so passionate it usually is a bad idea BUT in Rush's case they managed to reinvent themselves and retain creative integrity. Very few had pulled that off so Rush are in a privileged position. I suppose the question is whether Peart is abusing this privilege considering that Rush would not be here probably if 2112 hadn't taken off the way it did.
|
Posted By: uduwudu
Date Posted: March 04 2014 at 02:13
This is why, lyrically The Trees still has a resonance to me lyrically. It's an interesting allegory, akin to Orwell's 1984 and Toffler's Future Shock (who wrote the music of the futura, er, future... would be chiefly percussive..... The Trees had a resonance beyond a mere pop lyric (and speaks more volumes than anything off Clockwork Angels - for me anyway. This is one album that is not clicking with me. Heh, one album I never bought was Vapour Trails. All that latter day maturity and this album had such a bad reputation sonically i just never got it. S'pose I should now it's ... okay? Rush had a nice hard rock debut, restarted with the longer material, got a bit tangled progressing concepts with Caress of Steel, got it right with their Tarkus, 2112 and then took it to the limit with Cygnus. Oh well, I like most but AFTK, H, 2112, Permanent Waves, GUP (superb drumming) and Counterparts are terrific. I even got to liking Signals in recent years. Then came the new beginnings - that awesome classic Permanent Waves. The inter-development of harmonies area (a bit like Genesis); instead of placing the solos as easily identifiable entities they put them as part of the arrangements allowing a platform for ideas to develop more interestingly. Especially since it's only pop music.  I suppose when he says he's wish they'd go away... well wishing won't make it happen. ;) But honesty is valued... |
Posted By: moshkito
Date Posted: March 04 2014 at 07:36
I do not think that some people ever end up appreciating the riches they got, and all they can do after 40 or 50 years is sit down and write a 4 minute song with 3 sets of lines that supposedly mean something or other, and you are supposed to buy it because you are a nobody that can't tell the difference!
Nothing against Roger, but David Gilmour (or Rush) is in the same boat, and so are many well know, rich stars out there, and probably the only one that won't concede, and we think he's a jerk because of it, is Robert Fripp! Or even Bryan Eno, but we like to say that he's just playing with knobs and not music!
Life for them, at that level, is about trying to find some meaning that escapes them, and they have so many people around them saying so many things that it is difficult to tell what is what and who is true and who is false. Even John Lennon said that in an interview a few months before he was taken away!
The "development of harmonies" was there, wayyyyy before Neil Peart and Rush! Theirs could be considered 2nd rate harmonies compared to so many of the English folk-rock bands, for example! ------------- Music is not just for listening ... it is for LIVING ... you got to feel it to know what's it about! Not being told! www.pedrosena.com |
Posted By: ProgVanWinkle
Date Posted: March 04 2014 at 18:38
|
OK, put me down for liking (obviously in general) Hemispheres through Presto. Pretty much liked them all. Yes, I liked 2112 in the day - but I can see Peart's point of view with that album and the earlier ones. Their writing really blossomed with Hemispheres in my opinion. Then took off from there. And starting with Roll the Bones, I was scraping for a couple cuts that I liked. PS - I did like Clockwork Angels better than anything since Presto - which may not be saying much personally. But I did like it somewhat. |
Posted By: Metalmarsh89
Date Posted: March 04 2014 at 23:53
I think so, especially if you enjoyed any of their other releases after Test for Echo. They remixed it and released that version last year, and they did wonders with the sound. Some prefer the original 'raw' version, but I believe the vast majority appreciated the remix. Neil Peart had no part in the remix though, as he didn't want to revisit the album. ------------- Want to play mafia? Visit http://www.mafiathesyndicate.com" rel="nofollow - here . |
Posted By: King Crimson776
Date Posted: March 05 2014 at 03:40
Grace Under Pressure is good. Counterparts is pretty bad (unavoidable when playing alt rock), but not without a few redeeming features. Vapor Trails and Clockwork Angels are prime crap, however. |
Posted By: moodyxadi
Date Posted: March 05 2014 at 11:02
As long as we're talking about rock and pop music, it can't be more true than this. ------------- Bach, Ma, Bros, Déia, Dante. |
Posted By: ProgVanWinkle
Date Posted: March 05 2014 at 11:15
|
I can't help but disagree with that. I'd give 3 examples, and they are not obscure ones. IMO the earliest recorded work of Genesis, Yes (and I might even include the Beatles) are "not necessarily" their strongest bodies of work. And I personally would include Rush in that category. |
Posted By: Finnforest
Date Posted: March 05 2014 at 11:42
Well let me clarify...by early/young work I don't necessarily mean their first album or two. I mean the albums they made in their young prime....Cryme to Selling England....and YA to Topographic would be the peak ranges I'd pick for those bands.
Really what I'm getting at is that guys together in an established band do their best work together in their 20s, when the spark and the "band of brothers" effect is highest. Once they hit their 30s and have kids, assuming they're still in the band, it changes to more of a business churning out product. It may be well done, quality product, but it lacks the spark of the youthful work...imo.
|
Posted By: surrogate people
Date Posted: March 05 2014 at 17:52
|
Well, as usual, it`s a matter of taste. But I must admit that I've always felt something similar to what Mr. Peart states. One of the things about Rush that I find curious is that while most bands peak early in their career, they started their best period around their seventh or eight album. I have nothing against those early records but I don't think that if it were for them Rush would be a favourite of mine. From the eighties on they started focusing on songwriting, delivering much better compositions, and improving as musicians themselves. Geddy Lee started to actually sing, and while his voice might not be one of the best, he did much better than his former falsetto screams, which honestly I find a little embarrassing. Not to mention the improvement in his bass skills. Alex Lifeson got into a more harmonic approach, adding a touch of interest to his role as a hard rock player. And Peart definitively got a hell better as a drummer and a lyricist, so I must agree with him. I'll take Power windows or Counterparts over Hemispheres anyday, although I know that's not the way most fans of the band feel. ------------- Surrogate People they walk on by, they walk on by When they replace you They live your life, they live your life |
Posted By: Slartibartfast
Date Posted: March 06 2014 at 06:09
|
Most artists who have been at it for a while like their newer stuff better than their older stuff otherwise, why keep making new music?
------------- Released date are often when it it impacted you but recorded dates are when it really happened... 
|
Posted By: AtomicCrimsonRush
Date Posted: March 06 2014 at 08:13
|
bAND members rarely give their early material any credit. Fans love them of course as we listen to them constantly and it grows as a part of our lives but members of bands move on and want to listen to their latest album or play it live rather than move into nostalgia mode. i think Neil's crazy for not acknowledging the essential past of Rush =- thats what makes them great. However I still think Moving Pictures is a treasure like Neil. In any case Peart is a stunning drummer and thats all that matters despite his weird observations of their career. ------------- 
|
Posted By: Warthur
Date Posted: March 07 2014 at 08:19
Yeah, there's lots of creative people - and I guess I'd count Neil as one of them - who are terrible judges of their own work. I think a lot of it comes from them perceiving flaws in the work that the rest of us don't notice because we as the audience only judge the work by the work itself, whilst the artist is constantly comparing what they produced to the way they envisaged it and noticing all the differences. Either way, any Rush discography that excludes 2112 and Farewell to Kings but keeps hold of Hold Your Fire and Presto is a goof by my reckoning. No offence to Mr Peart but based on those comments I'd rate him higher as a drummer and lyricist than I do as a music reviewer.
|
Posted By: rogerthat
Date Posted: March 07 2014 at 09:09
| I am a bit surprised by the fuss over his opinion. I mean, it's hardly something new. Of course artists are more interested in talking about their latest work and if they aren't, there's a good possibility they are has beens milking their legacy of successful albums. Some say it nicely and some don't but usually artists don't live in the past and there's nothing wrong with that. |
Posted By: Finnforest
Date Posted: March 07 2014 at 22:27
|
Well, there's no more "fuss" here than any other thread....we're just
conversing. Second, there's a fair bit of room between "living in the
past" and trashing works like Hemispheres and Permanent Waves. I think
someone as articulate as Neil is perfectly capable of discussing his new
work at great length without having to discard his first seven
albums. On another note, in the same book Alex is noted as calling Grace Under Pressure "Rush's last heavy album." |
Posted By: rogerthat
Date Posted: March 07 2014 at 22:31
| Trashing is a word you have coined to describe his opinion. All he has done is state what he thinks of them but because of your fondness for the albums, you feel entitled to overstate the case. He has simply said he feels embarrassed about those records and wishes they would go away. There's nothing wrong with that. If that alone makes you feel entitled to say he's cracked (and others have echoed similar sentiments), I don't see anything wrong in my saying you all are making a fuss about it. Peart has no obligation to be nice about his own work precisely because it is HIS work. He was there, he wrote the lyrics, he played the drums, he's entitled to think they are cringeworthy because they are (partly) his creations. |
Posted By: richardh
Date Posted: March 08 2014 at 02:24
| ^Accept a load of fans bought 2112 which saved the band from extinction. To not recognise that fact is odd. Peart is being a bit too 'cold' about this imo. |
Posted By: rogerthat
Date Posted: March 08 2014 at 02:30
Well in the same vein Genesis had to move to pop to remain commercially relevant. For which they get bashed as sellouts. We'll have to agree to disagree; I do not think artists should concern themselves at all about what the fans think of their older albums. Their views are unlikely to match.
|
Posted By: richardh
Date Posted: March 08 2014 at 02:40
That was not the point I was trying to make. Peart seems to have become emotionally disconnected from his own music. Different opinions are always nice but to actually feel embarrassed about an album that saved the band from going out of existence is strange. Genesis is altogether a different argument and not relevant to this at all. Genesis basically changed their audience something that Rush never did.
|
Posted By: Toaster Mantis
Date Posted: March 08 2014 at 13:04
|
Don't most artists prefer their recent work to the early anyway? Especially if they've been active for as long as Neil Peart has, and hence have probably changed a lot personality-wise during their career. ------------- "The past is not some static being, it is not a previous present, nor a present that has passed away; the past has its own dynamic being which is constantly renewed and renewing." - Claire Colebrook |
Posted By: moshkito
Date Posted: March 09 2014 at 11:50
You mean "new OLD song" that is supposed to be new music, right? ------------- Music is not just for listening ... it is for LIVING ... you got to feel it to know what's it about! Not being told! www.pedrosena.com |
Posted By: moshkito
Date Posted: March 09 2014 at 12:23
Nope. Not all of them.
I don't hear Peter Hammill or Roy Harper, or the real poets and writers worrying about what they wrote yesterday, or what they said and felt yesterday.
And that is the difference for me. Immature rich boy makes it big in a band, and now thinks that he is a star, and he didn't know a thing when he was a kid, and he believes, NOW. Whatevahhhh!!!
It just tells you that they are not "artists of the heart", because if they were, they would not be negating "themselves", or a part of them that helped them grow and get to the point where they are now! It's not always a "lesson", and it doesn't have to be!
Sorry. Glad to get rid of all RUSH material in my collection!
Oh wait. I don't have any! And never will! ------------- Music is not just for listening ... it is for LIVING ... you got to feel it to know what's it about! Not being told! www.pedrosena.com |
Posted By: Catcher10
Date Posted: March 09 2014 at 14:41
I find it funny how you know him so well to call him and others, "Immature rich boy..." and after 40+ yrs calling him out as not an "artist of the heart" and others. And to your point you know for a fact that both Peter Hammill and Roy Harper have no negative critique on their past work? I for one have no problem with an artist saying...."I don't like that, I can do better next time, that is not my favorite pc of music, hate it!" That to me breeds the desire to do better, not for you or I as fans..but as he the music artist and their craft. You claim to be a writer moshkito, so you have zero negative feelings for all your past work? I find that hard to believe... Have a great day! -------------
|
Posted By: Finnforest
Date Posted: March 12 2014 at 21:16
|
hot damn.... |
Posted By: Tapfret
Date Posted: March 12 2014 at 21:54
|
You would never hear John Rutsey saying such a thing. ------------- https://www.last.fm/user/Tapfret" rel="nofollow"> https://bandcamp.com/tapfret" rel="nofollow - Bandcamp |