I have an odd relationship with this band. I have always considered myself a fan going back 35 years. I like 2112 and most of the "hits". But the more I listen to them, the more I understand why a lot of folks don't like them. When I really think about their music, I have these thoughts: 1. Pretty lame songwriting, especially lyrically (i.e Trees, but there are tons of examples) 2. "unique" vocals 3. I am typically a big fan of drumming, but let's face it, Neil is way over the top about 90% of the time Am I wrong, or should I get back on the train?
Rush was one of the true great bands. I don't see the flaws that you mention. I'll agree that Geddy hasn't been able to sing in 25 years, but his original voice is one of the things that made them unique.
Great live band. I don't enjoy any of their studio albums after Hold Your Fire, save a few tracks from Roll The Bones.
Oh goodie Rush hate thread. I was getting tired of other bands getting all the attention. Lee should be replaced with another vocalist? lol...Geddy Lee's voice is as much a part of Rush as the drummers drumming and the guitarists playing. If you dont like his voice, then you probably dont like Rush. The writing is also Rush. If you dont the words and style, you may not like Rush. You dont like the intricate drumming...you probably dont like Rush. Its ok not to like Rush. I find it odd that theyve been around for decades and all the sudden its "Hmmm, you know what? I think Ive discovered why people dont like Rush!" Really? Just figured that out eh? People may not like them, but to try and change or knock elements of the core style of Rush isnt going to improve the band. Its simply going to make them into ..."not" Rush. I still get my Rush on. But they are like Pink Floyd to me. Later Floyd anyway. Seem a bit juvenile and silly at times. But when my inner teen comes out, I can dig them again. But Im certainly not going to try and make them into something they are not.
He can sing. He just has trouble singing the demanding music he recorded in his 20s. All water under the bridge now.
1. Fantastic songwriting. Usually very thoughtful. Frequently brillian: i.e. The Trees, but there are tons of examples. 2. Unique vocals. Personally, I love most of those unique vocals, but I can easily understand why many don't. 3. The drumming is always killer. Never a complaint there. And what's more, it continued to evolve throughout the band's career.. Always new and fresh, and consistently the best.
I certainly see the flaws — "The Trees" is not my cup of tea lyrically, and sure the histrionics can be a bit much — but none of that changes my personal evaluation that they have one of the most important and enjoyable catalogues in all of contemporary rock
This is rich. Or is it rank? Post broadside, snide, witless ‘criticisms’ dressed up as ‘opinions’ and then muse aloud about how people should ‘relax’. It is a type of narcissism unique to social media (high school aside).
My favorite lyricist in rock, favorite drummer in rock, favorite singer in rock. What you see as liabilities I see as strengths. Poor songwriting? Power Windows would like a word with you. Peart overplay? No way. Name one place in which his playing distracts from the “line” of the song. He’s the greatest drum “composer” of the rock era. So, yes, I would disagree lol. I would take another listen at some of the ‘80s records and see what you think of them. I could be wrong, but it seems like your criticism is more directed at the ‘70s material. As always, YMMV, etc.
My wife hates them. Most women do. I love it all through Signals and then they start to lose me. We’re all different.
Yeah well you do know they fired him early on right? Geddy was the glue. The really truly gifted musician of the band.
As do you. You can ask yourself, ‘Am I contributing anything meaningful here, or am I just taking potshots at a band I know full well people love? What does it say about me that I am starting a thread just to dump on something?’ A ‘re-evaluation’, my ass.
I'm not a fan but I also mean no disrespect when I say the main singer is downright god awful. I like a few of their bigger hits but that vocalist will forever keep me from further exploring their work. I'm not the biggest prog fan either, so even if they had a better vocalist their music might've not appealed to me anyways, so take what I say with a pinch of salt.
Yes. I have. Ill bite. They didn't sing oh baby baby **** after the first album. Perhaps this is what people have trouble with. If they would have kept singing the mostly juvenile stuff off the debut album they may have been more culturally accepted but no, they needed something more than that. Sure the early lyrics from Peart were a bit navel gazing and objectivist but once he settled into a more modern perspective and then to a more personal point of view, the magic happens. But if that’s not your cup of tea then Rush is not for you.
I am just going to say this. I love Rush, have always found Neil's lyrics very insightful and inspiring, and much prefer Geddy's 'original' voice through "Signals" than anything that came after. That's not to mention truly magnificent drumming and interplay.
1. Pretty lame songwriting, especially lyrically (i.e Trees, but there are tons of examples) I guess that depends on what you're looking for in terms of lyricism. The Trees is quite clever in its use of personification. It kind of reminds me of Orwell's book Animal Farm in some ways - a political story hidden within a fun tale about class structure of animals (or in the case of the Rush song, a song about trees grumbling with each other about class structure in the forest). I've always liked those lyrics in particular, so this is really a case of people looking for different things to please or interest them in song lyrics. 2. "unique" vocals Well, Geddy's voice has always been a "love it or hate it" kind of thing. There's no denying that. Kind of reminds me of Bob Dylan in the sense that both singers have a "love it or hate it" kind of thing going with their singing style. In my case, I dislike Bob's voice but think he's a genius lyricist. I do listen to him from time to time simply because his lyrics are often so good I am able to get past not really digging the delivery. In Geddy's case, his voice is very unique and I do understand some people not being able to like it. It is what it is. I think it's awesome. 3. I am typically a big fan of drumming, but let's face it, Neil is way over the top about 90% of the time Neil is an incredible drummer, and I'm really not sure of what you mean, here. When I think of a great drummer who sometimes has an "over the top" delivery, I think of Keith Moon. He occasionally plays like it's the last song he will ever be able to play on drums and he has to make it count. And that's the charm. He puts his heart into it to the extreme. Neil on the other hand doesn't seem to have any of that; not that I see anyway. His approach is quite mercilessly clinical - there's a reason his nickname is the Professor. When he gets busy, it's as clean as it gets. He never seems to be playing on the edge. Am I wrong, or should I get back on the train? I don't think any of your points are a "wrong or right" kind of thing. It's all in how you feel about it when you hear it.
