Rush’s genre

Well, RUsh started off as a Hard Rock band, then later involved into a Progressive Hard Rock, then in 80s, the synth, Prog, dance, pop, rock, metal, whatever you want to call it.

Like most people said, Rush is in a breed of their own.

Bilek wrote: IMHO, there should have been another sub-genre, "Heavy Prog", "Hard Prog", or "Progressive Hard Rock", and include bands like Rush, Kansas, Uriah Heep, Deep Purple (please don't make it another discussion subject!!!), and to an extent, Styx (just for the sake of their first five albums). I saw this subgenre at least in one other progrock site (and it probably included twice as much genres as progarchives!), and I believe it exists. Even particular works of some hard rock bands (Sabbath's Bloody Sabbath, Led Zeppelin's 4th, Alice Cooper's Welcome to My Nightmare albums etc.) might be considered under this sub-genre, and it's a totally different story whethter or not these individual albums should be included or not. Summary: The solution is adding the "Heavy Prog" (or whatever) subgenre, and moving Rush and their likes over there...

I agree! I like the "Progressive Hard Rock" label as it sounds and for what it hinhts at - it would be quite suitable for Rush and Kansas, just to name a couple of examples, although the reviewers for these two bands' albums should cpecify in which moments they get more art-rock oriented (e.g., Rush's 'Big Money', 'Red Sector A', Kansas' 'A Glimpse of Home'), more heavy rock-oriented (e.g., Rush's 'Anthem', Kansas' 'Lighning's Hand') or more overtly symphonic prog (e.g., Kansas' 'Song for America', 'Nobody's Home', 'Closet Chronicles', Rush's 'Xanadu').

But yes, I think the aforemantioned label would state things a bit clearer. Of course, there's no such thing as he perfect label, but we can reasonably create some who can be more clarifying than confusing.

Regards.

plodder wrote: Badges!! We don't need no stinking badges. Keep your labels and genres to yourselves. Rush are just a fantastic band. Stop trying to divide everything up into little boxes. Art rock, math rock blah blah blah.

So, Paco de Lucía is just a guitarist, not a Flamenco guitarist, right? If we drop labels and badges, how are we supposed to assimilate and enjoy, with the ehart and mind, the music provided by musicians? De Lucía's music shouts out its Flamenco label, doesn't it? Perceiving him as merely an un-badged guitarist would mean missing the point absolutely. Watkins plays piano and so did Tchaikovsky - shall we call them merely pianists, without regarding the former as a prog-fusion-new age musician and the latter as an academic chamber composer? Madonna and Peter Hammill write the lyrics to their own songs - shall we put them together in one single "catalogue" as songwriters so we avoid badges we allegedly don't need?

Agitation Free and Premiata Forneria Marconi both do music - should we stay beyond the distinction between krautrock and symphonic prog? Oh, and shuold we change the name of this website, too? - its name bears a badge, too.

Single Coil wrote: If they didn't invent prog-metal... who did?

Queen did with their debut and more so with Queen II. 

Then Metallica re-invented it 6 years before "Images and Words", which is just an extension of what Metallica did. And that's being kind.

Categories, schmategories - it's all prog!

A bit off topic, but still about Rush. One day in one of my classes this year, I was listening to Different Stages, and the guy next to me wanted to listen to my CD player. I reluctantly gave him my cd player, and the first song he listened to was Nobody's Hero. When the song was over, he turned to me and said, "Are these guys a gay band?"

It made me so angry!