Neil Peart down on band's 70s work

M27Barney wrote: Well Neil, I reckon you've got your head firmly up your arse! Rush's OUTPUT CEASED TO BE with Moving Pictures..... But I suppose that's not an opinion that would be shared by too many, even on this website! I saw a tribute band belt out 2112 in a tiny pub in Bolton a few months ago - and I can remember Rush doing the same in the late 70's - and that piece alone has more balls and power than EVERY fookin thing they did after 1980....Mind you signals was so sh*t - I haven't even bothered listening to much after that, and when I did I thought it was short track tripe....but hey It's de-rigour to Sl*g off the seventies!

Well, I would argue that things started being less interesting after Moving Pictures, but I still like Grace Under Pressure and Power Windows........both of which are prog in my world.  After that though, it was just okay, and finally not very good (until the most recent album, anyway).

In any case, I think we agree that it is more than a little harsh for him to wish the albums before MP out of existence.  He and the band wouldn't have gotten to where they did after that without those albums (whether the individual likes where they went after MP or not......Neal obviously does).  Also, for fans, it IS a bit of a slap in the face if your favorite album is 2112 or Permanent Waves or whatever.  Still, I think it's pretty common for rock artists to Sl*g off their early work.  They are too close to it, and in the case of Rush especially, are always looking to move forward and better their music (again, whether or not you think it got better is not really relevant to the artist).

If I seem a bit pedantic, I am currently reading some quite heavy philosophical stuff on memetic replication and thus I am in more of an analytical mood than normal!!!

I think it's strange that Neil is saying something like that given that one of their latest releases (Time Machine) is packed with songs from the records he wishes he could erase (Spirit of the Radio, Freewill, Closer To The Heart, snippets from 2112, Strangiato, Working Man). Of course, if we look at past releases, specially in the live department, there's a ton of examples of old songs being played, sometimes much more than the ones from the records they were touring for at the time. I mean, every band 30++ or 40++ years old play stuff from their early days. Even Gilmour put some oldies in his On An Island tour. But I really think that saying that if you could you would erase these records from existence is something completely out of proportions.

Rush is a nerd band, they'll always be, no matter how many times Dave Grohl call them "cool". Most people are interested in things like Hemispheres and 2112, even though they're sympathetic with nice records like Roll The Bones and Grace Under Pressure. Anyway, like Floyd is Floyd up to The Wall (and I love obsessively The Final Cut), Rush is Rush up to Moving Pictures. There are nice records but what made the band what they are were songs like Freewill, Tom Sawyer, Closer To The Heart, 2112 and so forth. Something like Bravado and, even, Animate, is cool but not even close of being a song that would make 'em the multimillion selling band they become.

M27Barney wrote: Mind you signals was so sh*t

Only if you don't like synthesizers with your guitars & drums (I love 'em)!

Rednight wrote: Triceratopsoil wrote: Permanent Waves is their best album so obviously he's drunk. You're a bit in a sticky wicket and a little around the bend on this one, I'm afraid. I can think of five albums up through Grace Under Pressure that top the goofiness of 'Waves. As for best, well, their fans were gathered by Fly By Night, but the world was delivered with A Farewell To Kings.

It's just strange to think of Neil glooming over anything pre-HYF because they had such an incredible run from 78/80 through 85/87 (one can plus or minus as s/he sees fit).

Triceratopsoil wrote: Permanent Waves is their best album so obviously he's drunk.

You're a bit in a sticky wicket and a little around the bend on this one, I'm afraid. I can think of five albums up through Grace Under Pressure that top the goofiness of 'Waves. As for best, well, their fans were gathered by Fly By Night, but the world was delivered with A Farewell To Kings.

Finnforest wrote: 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.

Spot on mate.
I do agree Moving Pictures is their starting point but imo the next best in the catalog is before that album ,not after even though I love Signals.

I prefer The Tubes first three albums also.
P.S. why aren't The Tubes listed on Prog Archives btw?

Fortunatley Yes never got this idea after their success with 90125 and "Owner of a Lonley Heart", otherwise we might never have heard them play their 70's music live again, nor have heard them doing any attempt at prog again after that (which, though they have not been able to repeat their masterpiece albums from the 70's, they have managed some really nice prog songs since).

deafmoon wrote: I get what Neil is saying and I don't disagree with him. But, I still like alot of that music. For him though, ya gotta remember, it was a time in his life that is no more. I mean his first wife and child were around then. That could leave a person with a mind-set that has the whole period of their life boxed up ina corner of their memory that may just be better off for them left there. I mean losing a spose is one thing. But losing a child? Your soul may just be ripped apart and everything that surrounded that time period with it. I know I don't wish that on anyone.

Well....Yes his wife and kid were around in the 70s, but they were also around in the 80s and early 90s.  So I don't think this is about the tragedy really.  If it were about boxing away music created during that part of his life, it would include many post MP albums also.  Or do I misunderstand you?

Never take musician's opinions on their own music to heart if you disagree; they're much more closely emotionally attached to the music than any fan could ever be, and they experienced the evolution of how their music was made, whereas we come in and listen to the fully finished product.

This is without acknowledging Neil's tragedies.


Edited by darkshade - March 30 2014 at 17:04