| Author |
 Topic Search  Topic Options
|
erik neuteboom 
Prog Reviewer
Joined: July 27 2005
Location: Netherlands
Status: Offline
Points: 7659
|
 Topic: Can we put Rush in the super prog category?
Posted: July 24 2006 at 07:54 |
Hello progheads.
This week I enjoyed the Rush Replay box and was again impressed by the incredible high level of this seminal Canadian progrock trio. Along with the DVD's Rush In Rio and R30 you can conclude that during the years Rush have made lots of outstanding compositions like Xanadu, La Villa Strangiato, Jacob's ladder, Natural Science and YYZ, to name a few. Between the early Seventies and the mid-Eighties they have turned from a Led Zep/Cream/Hendrix inspired progressive hardrock band into a highly acclaimed heavy progressive high-tec orchestra'. I wonder or Rush can be put in the same category as bands like Yes, Genesis, King Crimson, ELP and Pink Floyd, the superprog category?
Personally I have the opinion that Rush is the only band that can compete with the socalled superprogrock bands because of their outstanding high technical level, compositional skills and adventurous approach, their innovative sound, their serie of great albums (I would like to focus on the era 1976-1986) and their huge influence on (prog) rock bands all over the world  !
I am curious to your opinion about this: am I too subjective as a huge Rush fan or do Rush deserve a place among Yes, Genesis, ELP, Pink Floyd and King Crimson in the super prog category?
|
 |
Bob Greece
Prog Reviewer
Joined: July 04 2005
Location: Greece
Status: Offline
Points: 1823
|
Posted: July 24 2006 at 08:02 |
 erik neuteboom wrote:
Personally I have the opinion that Rush is the only band that can compete with the socalled superprogrock bands |
I have the same opinion. If they're not in the supergroup, they are only just outside.
I heard some people say that the main reason they missed out on the "Big 6" is because they started too late.
|
|
|
|
Arrrghus
Forum Senior Member
Joined: July 21 2006
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 5296
|
Posted: July 24 2006 at 08:12 |
|
Wait, Rush isn't in the superprog category? I always thought they were.
|
|
|
|
aapatsos
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: November 11 2005
Location: Manchester, UK
Status: Offline
Points: 9226
|
Posted: July 24 2006 at 08:15 |
^ I also think that this is the reason
But alongside these big 5, I think we should put Rush and Jethro Tull
|
|
Blacksword
Prog Reviewer
Joined: June 22 2004
Location: England
Status: Offline
Points: 16130
|
Posted: July 24 2006 at 08:18 |
|
If the criteria is musicianship, and creative songwriting, then yes! If it's album sales then possibly yes, also. I wouldn't be suprised if they had sold more albums over their career so far, than King Crimson or ELP. Remember ELP split in the late 70's, and didn't do anything until ELPowell which flopped. In that time Rush had released Permenant Waves, Moving Pictures, Signals, Grace Under Pressure all of which were top ten albums (I think) That was on the back of 2112 (which has gone platinum more than once) I think they have sold in excess of 45,000,000 albums.
They are 'Premier League' as far as I'm concerned.
Edited by Blacksword - July 24 2006 at 08:19
|
|
Ultimately bored by endless ecstasy!
|
|
erik neuteboom
Prog Reviewer
Joined: July 27 2005
Location: Netherlands
Status: Offline
Points: 7659
|
Posted: July 24 2006 at 08:19 |
Three quick reactions, two from Greece, remarkably  !
About their sales, good point  !
Edited by erik neuteboom - July 24 2006 at 08:21
|
|
Guests
Forum Guest Group
|
Posted: July 24 2006 at 08:22 |
I don't think so. I can't no way compare Rush with the big names you mentioned ( and some other ones you forgot ).
To me they are in a second or third division, which means they are good. Of course, fans won't agree with me.
Greetings to everybody.
|
|
Vompatti
Forum Senior Member
VIP Member
Joined: October 22 2005
Location: elsewhere
Status: Offline
Points: 67407
|
Posted: July 24 2006 at 08:23 |
aapatsos wrote:
But alongside these big 5, I think we should put Rush and Jethro Tull |
I agree.
|
|
Frasse
Forum Senior Member
Joined: November 22 2004
Location: Sweden
Status: Offline
Points: 758
|
Posted: July 24 2006 at 08:44 |
Blacksword wrote:
If the criteria is musicianship, and creative
songwriting, then yes! If it's album sales then possibly yes, also. I
wouldn't be suprised if they had sold more albums over their career so
far, than King Crimson or ELP. Remember ELP split in the late 70's, and
didn't do anything until ELPowell which flopped. In that time Rush had
released Permenant Waves, Moving Pictures, Signals, Grace Under
Pressure all of which were top ten albums (I think) That was on the
back of 2112 (which has gone platinum more than once) I think they have
sold in excess of 45,000,000 albums.
They are 'Premier League' as far as I'm concerned.
|
Among the mentioned bands, only Pink Floyd have sold more than Rush, I think.
|
|
Phil
Forum Senior Member
Joined: June 17 2005
Location: United Kingdom
Status: Offline
Points: 1881
|
Posted: July 24 2006 at 08:50 |
"Superprog"...a sort of PA "Hall of Fame?!
I've always thought Rush were one of the "big" prog bands!
|
|
Bob Greece
Prog Reviewer
Joined: July 04 2005
Location: Greece
Status: Offline
Points: 1823
|
Posted: July 24 2006 at 09:04 |
erik neuteboom wrote:
I wonder or Rush can be put in the same category as bands like Yes, Genesis, King Crimson, ELP and Pink Floyd, the superprog category? |
|
|
|
|
Dragon Phoenix
Forum Senior Member
Joined: August 31 2004
Status: Offline
Points: 1475
|
Posted: July 24 2006 at 09:12 |
|
Let's see what the rankings in our own PA say....
Ranked by their third best album:
1 [8] Genesis
2 [12] Yes
3 [13] Pink Floyd
4 [17] King Crimson
5 [28] Rush
6 [29] Camel
7 [46] Gentle Giant
8 [50] VDGG
9 [57] Dream Theater
10 [61] Opeth
Not in the top 10: Jethro Tull [92] and ELP [80].
Ranked by their fourth best album:
1 [11] Genesis
2 [34] Yes
3 [38] Pink Floyd
4 [48] Rush
5 [49] Gentle Giant
6 [62] Dream Theater
7 [65] VDGG
8 [96] Porcupine Tree
9 [99] King Crimson
10 [101] ELP
Still no Tull [116]
Let's go with their fifth best albums:
1 [24] Genesis
2 [55] Pink Floyd
3 [60] Rush
4 [63] Gentle Giant
5 [68] Yes
6 [72] Dream Theater
7 [119] Jethro Tull
8 [127] King Crimson
9 [137] Camel
10 [200] Marillion
Sixth, you say?
1 [70] Genesis
2 [81] Yes
3 [87] Gentle Giant
4 [111] Rush
5 [133] Dream Theater
6 [156] Pink Floyd
7 [145] King Crimson
8 [171] Jethro Tull
9 [245] Porcupine Tree
10 [263] Camel
One last shot, lucky seven:
1 [71] Genesis
2 [115] Yes
3 [138] Gentle Giant
4 [174] Pink Floyd
5 [176] Jethro Tull
6 [187] Dream Theater
7 [239] Rush
8 [252] King Crimson
9 [305] Camel
10 [419] Porcupine Tree
conclusion: based on this, ELP should not be mentioned as one of the
supergroups, Gentle Giant, Jethro Tull, Dream Theater, Rush and
possibly Camel have a good claim on that status.
|
|
Blog this:
http://artrock2006.blogspot.com
|
|
bhikkhu
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: April 06 2006
Location: A² Michigan
Status: Offline
Points: 5109
|
Posted: July 24 2006 at 09:13 |
|
Even though their appeal was diminished for me, I believe they are members of prog's elite class. They may be on a slightly lower tier, because they were not as influential as the others. Before all the fanboys get upset, this is only because of timing. The others just had a head start.
|
|
|
|
BDTF
Forum Newbie
Joined: December 24 2005
Location: Belgium
Status: Offline
Points: 37
|
Posted: July 24 2006 at 09:33 |
Hello everybody,
I did the following to get a (somewhat) objective answer to this question. I gave points to every release in the PA top 100. Number 1 (CTTE) got 100 points, number 2 (TAAB) got 99 points and so on...
Then I counted the first three albums of every band and in doing so I got the following:
(1) Genesis 97 + 96 + 93 = 286
(2) Pink Floyd 98 + 95 + 88 = 281
(3) Yes 100 + 91 + 89 = 280
(4) King Crimson 94 + 87 + 84 = 265
(5) Rush 92 + 86 + 73 = 251
(6) Camel 81 + 79 + 72 = 232
(7) Gentle Giant 83 + 70 + 55 = 208
(8) Van Der Graaf Generator 82 + 74 + 51 = 207
(9) Dream Theater 85 + 62 + 44 = 191
(10) Jethro Tull 99 + 66 + 9 = 174
(11) Opeth 60 + 48 + 40 = 148
(12) ELP 65 + 47 + 21 = 133
(13) Pain Of Salvation 56 + 43 + 34 = 133
So if you follow this way of thinking, Rush certainly belongs in the "super-prog" category.
If you ask my (really subjective) opinion on this matter: yes, Rush belongs in the all-time top 5!!!!
|
|
BDTF - Belgian Dream Theater Fan
|
|
Bob Greece
Prog Reviewer
Joined: July 04 2005
Location: Greece
Status: Offline
Points: 1823
|
Posted: July 24 2006 at 09:40 |
Historically, when people have talked of these prog super groups, they meant 2 things:
- the band was recording in the early 70's;
- they achieved widespread recognition.
Genesis, Yes, Pink Floyd, ELP and Jethro Tull meet both of these criteria and King Crimson is included because they were in there at the beginning.
Of all the other bands, they either came on the scene too late or were not widely popular enough.
|
|
|
|
Baza
Forum Senior Member
Joined: June 29 2005
Location: Israel
Status: Offline
Points: 185
|
Posted: July 24 2006 at 09:46 |
|
I believe that Rush doesn't belong there. I think that Rush is more a hard rock than prog band, they reached their peak later than most of the other big groups, and they are not British!! There are exactly 9 big prog bands, you know which bands I'm talking about. The rating in this site has nothing to do with Rush being a "super-prog" band. The criteria for that is importance and influence of the bands on the music scene.
|
|
pirkka
Forum Senior Member
Joined: December 06 2005
Location: Finland
Status: Offline
Points: 191
|
Posted: July 24 2006 at 10:39 |
Baza wrote:
I believe that Rush doesn't belong there. I think that Rush is more a hard rock than prog band, they reached their peak later than most of the other big groups, and they are not British!! There are exactly 9 big prog bands, you know which bands I'm talking about. The rating in this site has nothing to do with Rush being a "super-prog" band. The criteria for that is importance and influence of the bands on the music scene. |
I agree about Rush, completely.
But now I must dissagree "are not British!!" shame shame shame on you! 
Allthough Prog has a lot of it's origins in brittish music scene it is not brittish music. It is mostly EUROPEAN! And also bands from USA and Canada were there when the style evolved. Classical music is the one biggest influence to turn rock into prog and, pardon me, Britain has never been in the superleague of calassical music.
So being non-brittish is no reason why a band could not be a superhyperprogband! Perkele!
Pirkka
Edited by pirkka - July 24 2006 at 10:46
|
|
Mandrakeroot
Forum Senior Member
Italian Prog Specialist
Joined: March 01 2006
Location: San Foca, Friûl
Status: Offline
Points: 5851
|
Posted: July 24 2006 at 10:52 |
pirkka wrote:
Baza wrote:
I believe that Rush doesn't belong there. I think that Rush is more a hard rock than prog band, they reached their peak later than most of the other big groups, and they are not British!! There are exactly 9 big prog bands, you know which bands I'm talking about. The rating in this site has nothing to do with Rush being a "super-prog" band. The criteria for that is importance and influence of the bands on the music scene. |
I agree about Rush, completely.
But now I must dissagree "are not British!!" shame shame shame on you!
Allthough Prog has a lot of it's origins in brittish music scene it is not brittish music. It is mostly EUROPEAN! And also bands from USA and Canada were there when the style evolved. Classical music is the one biggest influence to turn rock into prog and, pardon me, Britain has never been in the superleague of calassical music.
So being non-brittish is no reason why a band could not be a superhyperprogband! Perkele!
Pirkka |
RUSH IS A GREAT BAND... BUT ONLY THE EUROPEAN BAND ARE FOR INCLUDING IN THIS CATEGORY!!!!
|
|
pirkka
Forum Senior Member
Joined: December 06 2005
Location: Finland
Status: Offline
Points: 191
|
Posted: July 24 2006 at 10:56 |
Bob Greece wrote:
Historically, when people have talked of these prog super groups, they meant 2 things:
- the band was recording in the early 70's;
- they achieved widespread recognition.
Genesis, Yes, Pink Floyd, ELP and Jethro Tull meet both of these criteria and King Crimson is included because they were in there at the beginning.
Of all the other bands, they either came on the scene too late or were not widely popular enough. |
And where do you put these: Moody Blues, Caravan, Barclay James Harvest, Camel, Deep Purple, Gentle Giant, Renaissance, Strawbs, Uriah Heep, VdGG?
Pirkka
|
|
Raff
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: July 29 2005
Location: None
Status: Offline
Points: 24429
|
Posted: July 24 2006 at 11:00 |
bhikkhu wrote:
Even though their appeal was diminished for me, I believe they are members of prog's elite class. They may be on a slightly lower tier, because they were not as influential as the others. Before all the fanboys get upset, this is only because of timing. The others just had a head start. |
I think you are quite right. I am a major Rush fan (it wasn't that hard to miss, BTW...  ), but I admit that their having started later than the others has been detrimental to their being considered part of the so-called 'big league'. However, they have been (and still are) extremely influential for the newer prog groups, notably Muse, TMV and Tool as well - not to forget DT, of course...
|
|
Donate monthly and keep PA fast-loading and ad-free forever.
/PAlogo_v2.gif "Progarchives.com Homepage")
Can we put Rush in the super prog category?
I thought we had sorted this out on the forum. 
