The Rush appreciation thread - Progressive Rock Music Forum

Catcher10 wrote:

Argo2112 wrote:

^ I think some of the prog puritans here think if the album doesn't have a 10 minute plus song it's not a real prog album. I don't subscribe to that view.

So then why do all the prog puritans think the Beatles are prog?? Which is clearly LOL

as hell....

I don't know about prog puritans, but what the Beatles were doing starting with Revolver (some will say even Rubber Soul) and finishing with Abbey Road was unique and important to what will be coming later, prog or not. Whether you like them or not, they were important and influential.

Argo2112 wrote:

^ I think some of the prog puritans here think if the album doesn't have a 10 minute plus song it's not a real prog album. I don't subscribe to that view.

So then why do all the prog puritans think the Beatles are prog?? Which is clearly LOL

as hell....

I'm the exception to this weird "pop" description of Rush in the 90s albums, which is fine its just a descriptor that happens in the prog world, if its not prog its pop.

I enjoy all those post Signals albums because of the nature of their influence at that time....reggae, synth/electronic sadly what always suffers is the guitar player. Both Geddy and Neil described very detailed why the music became what it was...The Police influence and sound that was so dominating during that time. Plus how Rush described the songs as mini stories that should stand on their own, not needing 20min to do that. Also Neil as a writer/lyricist becoming more mature and the desire to write about priests and Greek Gods basically going to zero.

I look at each album standing on their own rather than linked in some way like some of the earlier releases, similar themes. Of course a couple not having strong legs like TFE and RTB.

I think there is a common agreement that we as prog fans look at up to Perm Waves as the pivotal years for Rush, but not me.

M27Barney wrote:

And anyway, anybody who rates Moving pictures > Hemispheres is a bovine spongiform polyp on satans anus...

Ha! And someone who doesn't rate Signals (*) highly, at least in their Top Ten Rush album list, is a crusty relic whose lunar underside has mossed over and has to be groomed by leprechauns. LOL

*It only has Geddy's best recorded bass tone and some of his best lines, after all. AND some of their best songs. AND fantastic drumming. (Etc.)

eBay

I really liked Clockwork Angels - that may even be one of the 5

M27Barney wrote:

And anyway, anybody who rates Moving pictures > Hemispheres is a bovine spongiform polyp on satans anus...

God forbid someone thinks differently than you.

richardh wrote:

M27Barney wrote:

^ Argo. If your house was on fire and you could only save five rush cd's from the blaze...bet none of them would be from the 80's or later...

that's a completely ridiculous hypothetical situation

I happend to be in a completely ridiculous hypothesis mood...😁

AFlowerKingCrimson wrote:

Cristi wrote:

I don't know why but the post Test for Echo albums that I rarely listen to. I don't know why, they're not bad at all.

They are the ones I am the least familiar with(especially vapor trails)which is why I have been listening to them lately.

I'd say clockwork angels is better than TFE. S&A is about the same though.My personal favorite Rush albums are in the 70's and 80's though. They lost a certain magic after Hold your fire imo. That album in fact is very underrated imo. I'll admit part of is because I'm a synth/keyboard guy and synths didn't really appear all that much after HYF.

Argo2112 wrote:

^ Well if you count Moving Picture & Permanent waves as 80's ( both released in 1980) you would be wrong.

Also, even though Power Windows is considered one of their more pop albums I like it a lot.

Moving Pictures was released in 1981.

I also love Power Windows. Big smile

^ Argo. If your house was on fire and you could only save five rush cd's from the blaze...bet none of them would be from the 80's or later...