Would you consider Rush's music Eclectic Prog??

The old "art rock" genre for Rush worked just fine for me.

richardh wrote: ProgMetaller2112 wrote: richardh wrote: I think they've reinvented themselves on at least 3 occasions. Heavy prog does not adequately describe 2112 , Farewell To KIngs or Hemispheres which are much closer to symhonic prog than heavy metal in my opinion. In the eighties they actually became closer to Art Rock or even sometimes described as 'Techno Rock'. For about Roll The Bones onwards they fit the heavy prog category pretty well although the prog element as disappeared over time imo. Overall if you look at their origins and then take the later albums the soul of the band is as a heavy prog band. They rule that category. If you put them in eclectic prog then presumably they go toe to toe with King Crimson and Gentle Giant. Symphonic Prog , Rush is one of the founders of Progressive Metal, I would argue that their music is Progressive Metal, listen to The Necromancer, 2112 is that Symphonic Prog, and you didn't spell Symphonic right. I would consider everything they did from Fly By Night to Hemispheres  Prog Metal or the beginnings of it. In the eighties they actually became closer to Art Rock , many would argue that Art Rock is Prog Rock. For about Roll The Bones onwards they fit the heavy prog category pretty well although the prog element as disappeared over time imo , The proggy elements have always been there with them, it's just the way they play , it doesn't feel right for them not to play complicated pieces If you put them in eclectic prog then presumably they go toe to toe with King Crimson and Gentle Giant. yeah and  they are just as good as those two bands probably even better  I didn't bother to correct my spelling as that 'edited at blah blah' thing at the bottom of the page is always irrititating. In any case it was actually a typo   I always assumed 'Art Rock' to be more about songs than long peices but had a quick look on the internet and its not that straightforward http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/36651/art-rock I guess I got it wrong by using the term 'art rock' but what I was trying to get at was that in the 80's Rush left behind the complexity without losing the artistic qualities in their music. From 90's onwards they became a lot more straightforward and concentrated on just writing songs but retaining heavy qualities. I have no problem with that btw and rate Vapor Trails highly.   I am a fan and would argue that hardly anything they did could be called 'prog metal'. They likely influenced prog metal bands but then so did many other prog bands .Rush were from a heavy rock background and no more a metal band than Led Zep or Deep Purple. The origins of prog metal come from metal. This would be Iron Maiden , Mettalica and so forth. If you are going back before then perhaps Led Zep 'Achilles Last Stand' was a starting point?   As good as Gentle Giant and King Crimson? Rush smoke both those bands for sheer power but I think those other bands were drawing on a much wider base of influences that went beyond other prog bands. Rush were influenced by King Crimson among others not vice versa.   Disclaimer - apologies for any typo's in the above caused by having chubby ageing fingers. (However I do accept that grammatical errors are down to my lack of intelligence and/or education )

where do you think Maiden and Metallica got some influences, from Prog Rock bands sure but Rush was one of them, too

Snow Dog wrote: Heavy prog is a nonsense genre anyway. But so is eclectic. But if it is so, yes, why not Eclectic?

nonsense, neither are nonsense genres they're Prog

Agreed with many of the above comments; yes, Rush's music could be classified as "eclectic," but if you put them in eclectic prog I feel like you could make an argument to put almost any band in eclectic.  Although not all of their music is hard rock, that's the basis of their sound and I think they fit very well in Heavy Prog.  I could see making a case to put them in crossover, but that seems like it would be counterproductive as the already fit perfectly well in their subgenre.

As to the "metal or not" debate, you have to remember that Zep and Deep Purple were considered metal in the 70s.  Rush was heavier than both of them.  While I wouldn't consider anything after Hemispheres to be metal, something like 2112 definitely could be described as progressive metal in my opinion, even though it doesn't fit into "progressive metal" as the genre is defined here.  Rush decreased the metal elements in their sound drastically in the albums following 2112, though, so I don't think you can say that Rush is a progressive metal band even by 70s standards.

Slartibartfast wrote: I consider their music to be country, but the country happens to be Canada.

Who'da thunk I'd ever like country music? 

ProgMetaller2112 wrote: Would you consider them Eclectic??? Because the term Heavy Prog makes it seem as if they are always heavy and that's not always the case.

If being in Heavy Prog indicates that a band is always heavy, then almost zero bands belong there.  Porcupine Tree wouldn't fit, The Mars Volta wouldn't fit, etc.

Likewise, how can a band be eclectic all the time?

While they incorporate many styles into their music, the main foundation throughout is heavy.

Allocating a sub genre to certain bands may not be appropriate or necessary. Rush are one of those bands in my opinion. You could argue that Moving Pictures is quite 'eclectic' in its variety of styles. Vital Signs, Tom Sawyer, Camera Eye and Limelight are all very different. Bounded only by having the same production.

Overall, it's fair to call Rush, quite simply prog rock, imo, as they 'progressed' and developed from one album to the next, drawing on a number of diverse musical influences. To categorise them overall as 'eclectic' to me seems both off target, and unnecessary.

Guldbamsen wrote: Rush are like the prog version of the Stones. You'll get your rocks off, no doubt, but you know what to expect and have they ever really really changed style?

Actually, the Stones changed their style a lot: British Invasion, R&B, baroque pop, psychedelia, roots rock, blues rock, funk, soul, reggae, country, disco... They did all of those things.

The Bearded Bard wrote: I would consider Rush's music eclectic, but that goes for most prog bands. As for moving them to Eclectic Prog, I would say no. The core of their music is unmistakenly hard rock, which makes Heavy Prog a perfect fit for them, IMO.

I agree with this.  They are predominantly a guitar-bass-drum hard rock band with keyboards/synths.  Before they became a release a live album for every tour band, they used to release a live album after ever 4 studio albums, and these live albums kind of indicated the end of an era and a change in direction for the band, albeit they progressed in the direction of the next era during each set of 4 studio albums.