Classic Rush

S.D. wrote:

tohostudios wrote:

Nomadic Drifter wrote:

I voted 2112.  Ask me again tomorrow and I'd prob say Moving Pictures.  (and next week I'll say Hemispheres)  


Personally - IMHO - I think the Classic era culminates with Hemispheres, and another era begins.  

I agree.  It's at that point that the band got too "proggy" for me.  But I still enjoy anything from Hemispheres on back in their catalog.

Moving Pictures threw me a curveball because that to me felt like a return to form and I would rank that album 3rd in the Rush catalog but after that they got waaaaay too proggy for me.

That really makes no sense.  Their albums from Caress through Hemispheres are by far the most "proggy" in their discography.  Permanent Waves & Moving Pictures brought in more radio-focused pop sensibilities into the the mix, that continued on Signals, Grace, Power...with each successive album the prog leanings DECREASE.

Maybe it's because they became less "rock guitar oriented" after Moving Pictures?  Lots of new wave influences, Peart's infatuation with Police drummer Stewart Copeland, keyboards moving to the foreground and Lifeson also showing that he had been listening to Talking Heads and The Police in his playing.

I can't explain it. I just don't find the songwriting to be nearly as memorable after Hemispheres. And the increased use of keyboards also turned me off (at least in the Rush context). I think it's what I perceive as the lack of memorability after Hemispheres (with the notable exception of Moving Pictures) that turned me off to the band. Maybe increased keyboards and lack of memorability equates to "proggy" to my ears.

Well, I think almost every song on Signals and Grace Under Pressure are very memorable, as are most of the songs on Power Windows. "Memorability" is 100% subjective to the listener.

Many bands have keyboards that aren't "progressive" in the slightest, so I don't buy that, personally.

I was too shortsighted as a youngster to dive into their synth-oriented albums, and I plan on getting around to those someday. Of course, albums like Roll the Bones and Counterparts were very much the hard rock we were familiar with.

Anyway, this is a tough one. While part of me says 2112, it would purely be for the title--the B-side material is great but not nearly the punch that side A provides. With Moving Pictures, it's solid throughout, and there's so much strength and completion found in tracks like Red Barchetta and Limelight that it's one of those records that can't get any better. As for Tom Sawyer, no matter how much I've heard that song on the radio, I still get a rush every time I throw the record on.

So Moving Pictures it is.

I'm really not familiar with Farewell or Hemispheres which is sad. I call myself a huge Rush fan but haven't heard these. Went to a garage sale a couple of months ago and saw Hemispheres and thought I grabbed it. When I got home I looked thru my stack and had The Knack "But The Little Girls Understand". And not to knack The Knack, they are ok and I hve their first album, but Rush they ain't!

I became a Rush fan during the Moving Pictures thru Hold Your Fire era, that was when I was buying each album as a new release. At the same time I was buying their earlier albums and getting to know them. Because of this I think I appreciate both eras equally. They changed their sound a great deal, yet they still couldn't be confused for anyone else but Rush.

S.D. wrote:

I became a Rush fan during the Moving Pictures thru Hold Your Fire era, that was when I was buying each album as a new release.  At the same time I was buying their earlier albums and getting to know them. Because of this I think I appreciate both eras equally.  They changed their sound a great deal, yet they still couldn't be confused for anyone else but Rush.  

I can relate to this almost exactly. I first heard RUSH when Moving Pictures was released. I wanted to know more but didn't know where to begin. I suppose there must have been about a year of indecision before Exit, Stage Left appeared. I went for that and was blown away by the older stuff. I was able to buy/trade for all the older albums by the time Power Windows was released. I finally was in the right place at the right time and saw them on the Power Windows tour. I guess that would be '86.

Regarding the eras of RUSH - I always felt that each of the Live albums marked the end of an era - at least up until (and including) Different Stages. But I can understand why Moving Pictures gets included in the Classic era - as described by this poll - due to it being the last album with a truly lengthy track (Camera Eye).

Hahaha love that avatar Nomadic Drifter! A years I thought I was the ONLY huge metal fan in my house and now it is me and 4 others. Maybe I should bring all of them around the stereo!

I agree with the ones saying that Hemispheres is the last album of the classic era. Not saying that later albums are bad or worse than these, though.

And for the favourite, it's a tough one between 2112, Kings and Hemispheres. I'll go with 2112 just because it was the first one I heard from them and owned for quite a while I checked the rest. The Temples of Syrinx is extremely heavy for 1976!

S.D. wrote:

Well, I think almost every song on Signals and Grace Under Pressure are very memorable, as are most of the songs on Power Windows.  "Memorability" is 100% subjective to the listener.  

I totally agree; you find the songs on those albums memorable and I don't; I find them meandering and boring.  But as you said, memorability is 100% subjective so there is no wrong or right interpretation.

One other thing I should probably mention: As I get older I find that my patience for "grower albums" has gone from limited to almost nil. I'm not even sure I would enjoy a new Tull album at this point because for me, most Tull albums definitely didn't sit well upon first listen (Aqualung and Heavy Horses are the only exceptions I can think of off hand). These days I'm all about being able to sing along to the chorus the second or third time I hear it. Call it the "sleaze effect".

tohostudios wrote:

One other thing I should probably mention:  As I get older I find that my patience for "grower albums" has gone from limited to almost nil.  I'm not even sure I would enjoy a new Tull album at this point because for me, most Tull albums definitely didn't sit well upon first listen (Aqualung and Heavy Horses are the only exceptions I can think of off hand).  These days I'm all about being able to sing along to the chorus the second or third time I hear it.  Call it the "sleaze effect".

I'm 100% hard opposite of that.

If an album hits me right away I usually get tired of it after 4 or 5 listens.

I want albums that have to be digested, that continually offer up new experiences, that are complex and layered. I want to hear excellent musicians playing music that challenges me.

I don't spend a lot of time listening to music anymore so it's all about the immediacy for me now. I don't think I spend more than an hour a day with music these days so maybe that's another reason my views have changed.

I used to be like you; albums I liked right away grew stale quickly while albums that grew on me ended up being favorites. But I just don't have the time for "growers" any more.

Moving Pictures for me.

Fly By Night for me. I actually have all the albums listed (bands like Rush, Yes, etc. are easy to collect at used CD stores) which is a first for me. I like them all, but FBN is just the more memorable material to me.

Very difficult to choose from this list as there is something to like with each of these albums. I chose 2112 because it was my introduction to Rush through a friend at college. I could have easily gone with "Fly By Night" as Neal Peart's debut with the band. A distinct change from the first album. "Moving Pictures" could have been my choice as well as the perfect balance between commercially appealing and progressive rock.

Sometimes "favorite" and "best" vary. "Hemispheres" is my favorite, but "Moving Pictures" is the best.

I could make a case for any of the albums on that list. My favorite is A Farewell To Kings.

Rush never got more or less "proggy" in my estimation. Even their "hard rock" albums have really atypical rhythms and riffs, so they never do "stupid" unless it's an inside joke they slip in somewhere.

They have a similar arc to Genesis, without the obvious landmark of a singer leaving and even THAT is kind of deceptive because Genesis with Phil Collins sounded the same for another album or two before things sort of started to change. Even pop material from Genesis has tricky bits, hence why I love the band.

But both Genesis and Rush have the common marker of moving from OBVIOUSLY complex music to stuff that reveals its complexity if you're paying attention. Hemispheres was the last TRICKY Rush album. After that, it started to streamline, but the complexity never went away, it just stopped taking center stage.

Just my take.

I have none of these albums or any other Rush albums for that matter. For some reason they've never clicked with me. I think I will buy all of these albums and give them a listen to see if they'll appeal to me.

Even though I voted for Hemispheres, I'd recommend starting with 2112, because it's a pretty good sampler of what the band is capable of.

It's also what allowed me to get over my allergy to Geddy Lee as a vocalist in my teens. Seriously, that man KILLS it on there.

Runicen wrote:

They have a similar arc to Genesis, without the obvious landmark of a singer leaving and even THAT is kind of deceptive because Genesis with Phil Collins sounded the same for another album or two before things sort of started to change.

And that was when Steve Hackett left. I think his departure had more of an effect on Genesis than Phil Collins taking over, yet Collins is the one who gets all the blame.

Citanul wrote:

Runicen wrote:

They have a similar arc to Genesis, without the obvious landmark of a singer leaving and even THAT is kind of deceptive because Genesis with Phil Collins sounded the same for another album or two before things sort of started to change.

And that was when Steve Hackett left.  I think his departure had more of an effect on Genesis than Phil Collins taking over, yet Collins is the one who gets all the blame.

It was most definitely when Hackett left, most of the prog boards I frequent agree with this as well.

No argument there, but even "And Then There Were Three..." still has a lot of the same textures as what came before. Duke was really the big break stylistically.

S.D. wrote:

Citanul wrote:

Runicen wrote:

They have a similar arc to Genesis, without the obvious landmark of a singer leaving and even THAT is kind of deceptive because Genesis with Phil Collins sounded the same for another album or two before things sort of started to change.

And that was when Steve Hackett left.  I think his departure had more of an effect on Genesis than Phil Collins taking over, yet Collins is the one who gets all the blame.

It was most definitely when Hackett left, most of the prog boards I frequent agree with this as well.  

I would agree with this as well.

Buddy Hackett was in Genesis ?