Progarchives.com Homepage
Forum Home Forum Home > Progressive Music Lounges > Prog Bands, Artists and Genres Appreciation
  New Posts New Posts RSS Feed: Neil Peart down on band's 70s work
  FAQ FAQ  Forum SearchSearch  Calendar   Register Register  Login Login

Neil Peart down on band's 70s work

 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1 789
Author
Message
Sumdeus View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: October 23 2012
Location: SF Bay Area
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 825
Post Options Post Options   Quote Sumdeus Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Topic: Neil Peart down on band's 70s work
    Posted: August 25 2014 at 21:25
Originally posted by ProgMetaller2112

Really? The Necromancer(Caress of Steel for that matter) or 2112 doesn't sound angry to you?

Not in the way that metal does. Like I said, they get heavy but I wouldn't consider any heavy and angry music to be necessarily metal just because of that. A lot of punk is heavy and angry but not metal. A lot of rock'n'roll is angry and was heavy for its' time but still isn't metal. Free jazz can be very aggressive and loud and intense but most certainly is not metal. I don't think it necessarily makes a difference in the matter of the quality of Rush but I personally can't see them as metal music. If i did, I would also have to call King Crimson a metal band because of the opening riff of 21st Century Schizoid Man or the heavily distorted parts on Larks Tongues In Aspic, which I do not.

Edited by Sumdeus - August 25 2014 at 21:26
Sumdeus - surreal space/psych/prog journeys
Tathastu - funky/bluesy rockin' psych jams
Back to Top
ProgMetaller2112 View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: December 08 2012
Location: Riverside,CA
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 2489
Post Options Post Options   Quote ProgMetaller2112 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: August 25 2014 at 21:27
^^^ Gotcha Smile
“War is peace.
Freedom is slavery.
Ignorance is strength.”
― George Orwell, Nineteen Eighty-Four

"Ignorance and Prejudice and Fear walk Hand in Hand"- Neil Peart

Back to Top
Catcher10 View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: December 23 2009
Location: Emerald City
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 6649
Post Options Post Options   Quote Catcher10 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: August 25 2014 at 21:28
I totally agree Rush music is not easy to categorize, and not that I like doing that myself. But yes, back in the day like 70's, their early albums I would consider more metal than anything else. They were a 3-pc with no keyboards and heavy distorted guitar and heavy drumming.

Heck most people thought the debut album was a new Zeppelin album. Once they started to refine the sound, more melodic and throw in Neil's lyrics towards progressive themes, some of the metal attributes went away.

You can call it Rush Metal ....I don't think Priest and Motorhead were the same kind of metal if you want to get technical.
      
Back to Top
Metalmarsh89 View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: January 15 2013
Location: Oregon, USA
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1433
Post Options Post Options   Quote Metalmarsh89 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: August 25 2014 at 21:28
Originally posted by ProgMetaller2112

Originally posted by Sumdeus

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Xu0z1csRnKQ

70's Priest which is very much metal.

I wouldn't really call any Rush from back then metal either, they had a lot of hard rock influence and got heavy compared to other prog at the time but actually metal? nah. it doesn't have the edge and aggression compared to something like Priest, Sabbath or Motorhead.

that's not to say that I don't think it's good, just not really in the metal realm

Really? The Necromancer(Caress of Steel for that matter) or 2112 doesn't sound angry to you?

By the way I've viewed and participated in many polls and other blogging sites and have found out that there is a general consensus that agrees that they are


It doesn't sound nearly as angry as say Peter Hammill, and Geddy seems to do it for the sake of story-telling, and evoking different personality traits in the characters, not because he himself is angry. It's a bit more objective than that.
Back to Top
steve j View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: September 30 2007
Location: United Kingdom
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 160
Post Options Post Options   Quote steve j Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: August 26 2014 at 16:29
Going back to the original quote. I don't think this is a recent quote.  I recall this being said a long time ago, and I think he was talking about the really early albums not 2112 onwards.  I may be wrong but the quote rang a bell.
Back to Top
Xonty View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: June 23 2013
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1301
Post Options Post Options   Quote Xonty Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: August 26 2014 at 17:13
Originally posted by presdoug

I always preferred their 70s material, but Neil Peart is entitled to his own perspective on it, even though I don't feel that way about it.

Agreed. 

Funnily enough, I've never fully appreciated "Moving Pictures" even though it should be one of my favourites considering what I like about Rush. Thinking about it, I actually prefer every Rush album before MP to it (yes, even the debut - just about) Confused


Edited by Xonty - August 26 2014 at 17:14
Back to Top
Finnforest View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Honorary Collaborator

Joined: February 03 2007
Location: 1950s Suburbia
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 13178
Post Options Post Options   Quote Finnforest Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: August 26 2014 at 17:26
Originally posted by steve j

Going back to the original quote. I don't think this is a recent quote.  I recall this being said a long time ago, and I think he was talking about the really early albums not 2112 onwards.  I may be wrong but the quote rang a bell.


No, it was relatively recent (I think it was one of the latter day DVD extras interviews, I can't remember which one anymore)

And he was talking about just what it says....pre MP albums.  He did not exclude 2112-PWaves as you suggest. 


Edited by Finnforest - August 26 2014 at 17:28


Back to Top
Michael678 View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: June 02 2013
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1131
Post Options Post Options   Quote Michael678 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: August 26 2014 at 17:47
yeah Neil, why did you go and say that?! Moving Pictures wouldn't f**king exist without those early albums, and that kind of goes for a lot of other bands too.
Michael678
Back to Top
Prog_Traveller View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: May 29 2005
Location: Bucks county PA
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1307
Post Options Post Options   Quote Prog_Traveller Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: August 27 2014 at 00:07
The band Echolyn(especially one or two members of the band in particular)are not too keen on their early albums(especially the first one)also. It's probably not uncommon for musicians to not think too highly of their early stuff.
Back to Top
progbethyname View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: July 30 2012
Location: DAC LAND
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 5058
Post Options Post Options   Quote progbethyname Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: August 28 2014 at 10:53
He may be down on the 70's material because his work in the 80's is in, my opinion, his very very best.
His drumming and song writing in the 80's is a few notches above.
Belhold the power and gift of BEARD! As Damian Wilson sports a beard now his voice somehow got even better than it already was. :)
Back to Top
yesrushdt View Drop Down
Forum Newbie
Forum Newbie
Avatar

Joined: October 01 2006
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 11
Post Options Post Options   Quote yesrushdt Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: August 29 2014 at 17:32
Which is why they abandoned most of their 70's material on the last tour I guess.   I've definitely moved on to other bands over the last 15 years.  Still enjoy listening to their classic albums every now and again though.

Edited by yesrushdt - August 29 2014 at 17:33
Back to Top
Intruder View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member


Joined: May 13 2005
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 800
Post Options Post Options   Quote Intruder Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: September 02 2014 at 13:34
Never a big fan of Rush, though I can appreciate their early prog-rock sound, like Zep meets Yes with a hand tightly squeezing the lead singers testicles. 
 
I always hate it when musicians Sl*g off their early work so that they may justify that line that I know even they don't believe, "I really think our latest record is our best."  Rubbish.   Elton John just called his latest album - the dead boring The Diving Board - the best he's produced.  Phil Collins and Tony Banks run down the early Genesis sound; the Yes boys say the new singers have given them a creative spark they haven't felt since Relayer; etc.  I was once at a Robin Trower show and one of the punters shouted out a request for "Whiskey Train", this set the old man off on a ramble against the old Procol stuff that I still can't believe.....how can anyone run down In Held 'Twas I?


Edited by Intruder - September 02 2014 at 13:35
I like to feel the suspense when you're certain you know I am there.....
Back to Top
Finnforest View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Honorary Collaborator

Joined: February 03 2007
Location: 1950s Suburbia
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 13178
Post Options Post Options   Quote Finnforest Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: September 03 2014 at 21:27
Intruder, I know exactly what you mean, it does get old.  It's almost a cliche at this point.  I'm a rock fan.  Most of the long running bands I appreciate had a particularly great peak period, almost always relatively early in their career, when they are in their 20s to early 30s.  It was a time (often) before they had families and children, when the band was their family so to speak, and when music was their life.  That, along with the fire and imagination of youth provides that oomph factor.



Back to Top
Jeffro View Drop Down
Forum Groupie
Forum Groupie
Avatar

Joined: March 29 2014
Location: USA
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 46
Post Options Post Options   Quote Jeffro Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: September 04 2014 at 06:14
Originally posted by Finnforest

Intruder, I know exactly what you mean, it does get old.  It's almost a cliche at this point.  I'm a rock fan.  Most of the long running bands I appreciate had a particularly great peak period, almost always relatively early in their career, when they are in their 20s to early 30s.  It was a time (often) before they had families and children, when the band was their family so to speak, and when music was their life.  That, along with the fire and imagination of youth provides that oomph factor.


it seems like some musicians can't accept that they hit their peak and then could never get there again. The idea that the newest stuff is the "best they've ever done" is at times, complete rubbish and just spin. I mean, who really expects them to say that it's not as good as what they did 20 years ago?
Back to Top
peskypesky View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: September 25 2005
Location: NYC
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 262
Post Options Post Options   Quote peskypesky Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: September 06 2014 at 15:27
Neil is entitled to his opinion, of course. And I'm entitled to mine. And for me, Rush's best years were the 70s, including the first album, which I have loved for 40 years.
Back to Top
Michael678 View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: June 02 2013
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1131
Post Options Post Options   Quote Michael678 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: September 12 2014 at 14:42
Originally posted by peskypesky

Neil is entitled to his opinion, of course. And I'm entitled to mine. And for me, Rush's best years were the 70s, including the first album, which I have loved for 40 years.


well said! and ill tell you that it's his birthday today!!
Michael678
Back to Top
tamijo View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: January 06 2009
Location: Denmark
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 3911
Post Options Post Options   Quote tamijo Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: September 12 2014 at 14:50
Originally posted by Jeffro


Originally posted by Finnforest

Intruder, I know exactly what you mean, it does get old.  It's almost a cliche at this point.  I'm a rock fan.  Most of the long running bands I appreciate had a particularly great peak period, almost always relatively early in their career, when they are in their 20s to early 30s.  It was a time (often) before they had families and children, when the band was their family so to speak, and when music was their life.  That, along with the fire and imagination of youth provides that oomph factor.


it seems like some musicians can't accept that they hit their peak and then could never get there again. The idea that the newest stuff is the "best they've ever done" is at times, complete rubbish and just spin. I mean, who really expects them to say that it's not as good as what they did 20 years ago?


I you make music, your newest stuff is the best ever, You just spent month creating it. At a listener it another story.

Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1 789

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

Bulletin Board Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 9.69
Copyright ©2001-2010 Web Wiz

This page was generated in 0.141 seconds.