Rush

Rock & Roll Hall of Famer

Category: Performer

Inducted in: 2013

Inducted by: Dave Grohl and Taylor Hawkins

Nominated in: 2013

First Eligible: 1999 Ceremony

Inducted Members: Geddy Lee, Alex Lifeson, Neil Peart


Inducted into Rock Hall Revisited in 2005 (ranked #121) .


Essential Albums (?)WikipediaAmazon MP3Amazon CD
2112 (1976)
Moving Pictures (1981)

Essential Songs (?)WikipediaAmazon MP3YouTube
Working Man (1974)
2112 (1976)
Closer To The Heart (1977)
The Spirit Of Radio (1980)
Tom Sawyer (1981)
Limelight (1981)
YYZ (1981)

Rush @ Wikipedia

Rush Videos

Comments

1108 comments so far (post your own)

Some Rush fans are taking direct action to get the Boys into the RRHof:

http://www.petitiononline.com/xanstar/petition.html

http://www.erikandanna.com/Rush/hall_of_fame.htm

http://www.thepetitionsite.com/takeaction/405906345?ltl=1153773100

http://www.rushhof.com/

Maybe if the efforts joined forces...

As a long-time Rush fan I certainly _believe_ they deserve admission given their influence, but given that they're already in the Canadian Music Hall of Fame, I don't see it happening.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Canadian_Music_Hall_of_Fame

r

Posted by Fibre Channel on Monday, 07.24.06 @ 14:34pm


The reason Rush have been ignored since they were eligible is not because they're Canadian.

It's because:

(a) The never catered to fashion or "the in thing" and made records they wanted to. They were never media darlings, they were _working men_.

(b) The never did coke, heroin, or any other drugs. And Neil Peart quit smoking years ago.

(c) The never acted like jerks towards the media.

(d) The never acted like jerks towards the fans.

(e) The never behaved like "rock stars" and trashed hotel rooms or anything else.

(f) All are over 50 years old and NONE of them had any legal trouble until Alex Lifeson was beaten up by the pigs in Florida. A hotel employee has testified that Lifeson and his family were NOT causing problems and were assaulted without warning when they were out of public view.

(g) Rush were doing charity concerts before it was fashionable.

Acting like civilized human beings is a black mark against you in the eyes of the so-called "hall of fame".

Anyone who knows Rush's quality knows the "hall" _needs them_ more than they need _it_.

Posted by Bob Dog on Wednesday, 08.23.06 @ 12:31pm


Wow, that's the silliest thing I've ever read.

But yeah, we need to do something about this anti-canadian bias! We need to get Neil Young, Joni Mitchell, and The Band into the hall!

Oh, wait.

Rush was part of the second wave of prog that had no idea what it wanted to do with itself and devolved into pointless instrument wankery. When the hall finally does adress progressive, Rush is going to have to stand in line behind a LOT of good progressive bands.

Posted by Kit on Wednesday, 08.30.06 @ 23:01pm


Rush is the best band Canada has every produced. Its a joke they are not in the hall.. Bob Dylan has nothing on Rush.

Find me one better drummer then neil peart and i will move to russia...

Anyways get them in hall . its a joke they are not in there..

All The Worlds a Stage....



Sal

Posted by Sal Forest on Monday, 09.25.06 @ 14:14pm


Kit,
Your entry is the silliest thing I've ever read.

Bob Dog is right.Looking at this year's nomineesthe "Hall" definitely needs Rush more than Rush needs the hall. Induction is now a mere publicity campaign for undeserving "B" level bands who can't hold a candle to the true musicianship of 3 'working men' from Canada.

Posted by Gary B. on Friday, 11.3.06 @ 08:22am


Kit...you're an idiot.
Rush was a prog band for a very short period of time. They have always, however, worked out of a hard rock context, influenced a hell of a lot of bands, and didn't, as you said, devolve in wankery. If anything, the put *the song* ahead of instrumental noodling after 1978, and continued to do that throughout their career.
Hell...their last proper studio album didn't even have any out and out guitar solos, and had no keyboards.
You might want to get yourself out of your myopic 1977 time-warp and save your critiques for people who don't know any better...like Kiss fans, or something.

Posted by Moses on Saturday, 11.25.06 @ 02:32am


Rush and Van Halen have been #1 and #2 on this poll:
http://www.rateitall.com/t-2529-deserving-of-the-rock-and-roll-hall-of-fame.aspx
for over 2 years. They are most deserving of the overlooked artists. Looks like Van Halen will get in this year, which will leave Rush as the most overlooked.

Posted by Garrett on Wednesday, 11.29.06 @ 16:11pm


There are three bands that really deserve to be in the hall of fame but are being overlooked.

Those bands are Rush, Iron Maiden & Alice Cooper.

IT is a joke that they aren't in the "fame"

Posted by Justin on Tuesday, 12.12.06 @ 20:38pm


Its a joke that they've been overlooked for 9 years now. They are easily the most influencial and innovative band I have ever seen. Neil Peart is still influencing drummers today, Geddy Lee has the voice unmatched by anyone except Meat Loaf, and Alex Lifeson could arguably rank in with the top 10 guitarists in the past 34 years. Now that's all without mentionning synthesizers. One of the first group to use it, and the first to be overly succesful with it. Innovation right at your finger tips. But they are overlooked. Why? I'm not sure, but those who provide the nominations AND the voters, are definatly not the brightest bilbs in the box. Rush Is Too Good For The Hall. They Can be mentionned in the same breath as The Beatles, Led Zepplin and AC/DC. Yes they can.

Posted by Matt on Thursday, 12.28.06 @ 23:31pm


Kit is an idiot who needs to get a life and learn what the hell she's talking about. she's probably never even listened to Rush. THey are the most underrated band in rock history and argubly in the top ten most talented groups of all time. Their lyrics are absolutely amazing and the music is beautifully fluid. the HoF is a joke if they don't induct rush. but rush is obviously for more intelligent people than the idiots who nominate at the HoF.

Posted by Alice on Friday, 12.29.06 @ 20:08pm


I'm a he, darling. And I've heard Rush plenty of times, and everything they do was done earlier and better. Their lyrics are ridiculous Ayn Rand pieces of tripe and while I'd be a fool to deny their individual skill with their instruments, their playing comes across as showy for its own sake and robotic.

Insinuating I've never heard of a band because I don't like them is a retarded thing to do.

Rush can get in line behind King Crimson, ELP, Genesis, etc. Bands who I assume you're familiar with.

Posted by Kit on Friday, 12.29.06 @ 23:44pm


rush is at the top of the spot for the progressive bands because they have sold more records than any of the others and lasted longer. I agree that genesis, king crimson, and yes among others are also deserving bands for an induction. but not ahead of Rush. their sound is unique while being easier listening than some of the other prog bands. and just because their lyrics are actually about individualism and a philosophy that makes sense doesnt make it "pieces of tripe." i suspect the reason that crtics dont like them is because the media is into "collectivism" and all that garbage.

Posted by Alice on Monday, 01.1.07 @ 13:28pm


Sales should not have any impact on the Rock Hall, and "easier listening" is not what I expect or want out of prog.

The lyrics aren't tripe for endorsing individualism or any of that fun stuff, they're tripe because they either put it in a ridiculous incomprehensible sci-fi pastiche (2112) or they go the exact opposite route and just read a philosophy essay while some guitars noodle away in the background ("Free Will").

Posted by Kit on Monday, 01.1.07 @ 19:18pm


re: Bob Dog's comment much earlier on Rush and drugs...

I love Rush too (they're easily my favorite band from that era), but I'm fairly confident that they've smoked bales upon bales of marijuana in their time. Or maybe a "Passage to Bangkok" is a concept piece about how awesome it _would_ be to fly around to the greatest weed fields on Earth. I think Ayn Rand wrote extensively on the same topics earlier in her career.

Agree with you in the respect I have a hard time seeing them riding the high horse, white pony, jejo, crank, crack, freebase, cough syrup, N02, speedballs, powerballs, et et et al.

Posted by Rick on Tuesday, 01.2.07 @ 20:56pm


Nah. Just no. Hardly anybody ever lists Rush as a big influence, and despite a few cool singles, they never even had a consistent album.

Plus, they're a nice buffer zone. If they're not in the Hall, no Genesis or Yes. Or even unrelated artists that some of you crazy people keep mentioning (Alice Cooper? WTF?).....it's the same reason why it was great to not have Van Halen in there because it prevented any other hair bands from getting in. Better to snub one act, then to open the floodgates for mediocrity.

Posted by Casper on Thursday, 01.4.07 @ 18:35pm


Casper, you make good points. But though "Rush" may not be listed as an influence, ask any drummer you know if Neil Peart deserves to be in the Hall. I agree with the idea of holding back the floodgates (ESPECIALLY for hair bands), but I want to see Rush, Van Halen AND Yes inducted.

Posted by Elwood on Thursday, 01.4.07 @ 21:11pm


RUSH! RUSH is one of the most phenominal and talented bands ever. Their influence extends to just about every aspiring rock musician over the past 30 some years. Their music, their lyrics, are beyond just about any band. The fact that they have never garnered a single nomination by the hall of shame in cleveland marshelled by Jann Wenner is an abomination, almost as disgusting as the snub of the Moody Blues...but not quite

Posted by mycroft on Friday, 01.5.07 @ 08:00am


Awwwwww.... SALESMEN!

Influence? You want influence? Ask any aspiring drummer who the best drummer of all time is... and I'd say you'd get AT LEAST 50% of them saying Neal Peart. There are drum stores with "No Tom Sawyer" signs in them since the kids all want to play that (and ususally can't).

When they were in their prime... from 2112 to Grace Under Pressure, they were the technical wizards of Rock and Roll. Probably only Pink Floyd could claim to bring a bigger stage theater than Rush.

True, they may lay claim to the goofiest song of all time (The Trees) and were more than a bit overindulgent... but c'mon! Look at the Stones! They're a walking parody of themselves now.

I'm sure Rush falls into the same category that befell Black Sabbath and The Sex Pistols. They have huge loyal fan bases, and scores of critics.

Art Rock is seen as Rock gone bad (think Styx and Asia... I'm embarassed to admit I used to listen to them) and bands like Rush, Yes, and King Crimson may end up paying for some of the junk that got put out there by lesser artists of the same genre.

Who says that Rock and Roll has to be on a 5 minute single? Zep got in. So did Zappa. And Floyd. There's room for Rush. I'm sure there is.

Posted by lightninli on Sunday, 01.7.07 @ 01:17am


Geddy Lee sounds almost exactly like Burke Shelley, and they're both bassists.

Funny, that.

Posted by William on Monday, 01.8.07 @ 18:33pm


Name me a rock trio that exists today that is as talented and as tight as Rush.

Hands down.
Rush deserves it

Posted by Henry on Saturday, 01.13.07 @ 17:26pm


A nice band with some nice songs, and they obviously have a very passionate fan base, but I think there are many other bands ahead in the queue.

I have a friend who is nearly obssessed with Rush, and he'd always go around yelling "Saaaaalesmeeen!"

I'd listen to some stuff, and I'd enjoy the classic radio staples, though they were understandably less than life changing. But then my friend would be like, "Hey, you have to hear this," and he'd play me "Bytor the Snow Dog."

My eyes glazed over, and I said "Yeah, that's something all right."

I even went to see them live once. Once again, the classics were fun, but once the nigh 15 minute solos got going, it was like "Man, what the hell time is it? I got things to do!"
They're lucky to have the fans they do, though. You people are rabid.

*cough*Saaaaaaaaaleessssmeeeeen!*cough*

Posted by Matt on Saturday, 01.20.07 @ 15:10pm


No influence? When Soundgarden, Nine Inch Nails, Rage Against the Machine, Metallica, Radiohead, Tool, & Pearl Jam all get in, & they all cite Rush as a rather key influence(as they've all done), then maybe the thoughts on the band will change.

Posted by chris on Sunday, 01.21.07 @ 09:10am


Also, the patina of prog sticks to them like glue. Rush haven't been "prog" since 1978. When you go to a Rush show, it's essentially like watching the history of rock & roll(the #1 reason why they're not in---the critics think they just co-opted whatever style was hiting at the time). A band is not allowed to change, yet keep a distinct style I guess. The Clash will always be "punk", Depeche Mode will always be "fey electronic", etc. Yawn already...

Posted by chris on Sunday, 01.21.07 @ 09:13am


Kit and all the other negative comments: Being inducted into the RR Hall of Lame has nothing to do with personal like or dislike - it is supposed to be somewhat objective (i.e. criteria include been around for 25 + years, influenced Rock music, etc.). I totally understand some people not liking Rush on a personal, subjective level - (i.e. it is simply not for them - Yes, to some LEE's voice can be annoying, the songs can be long and self-indulgent, you may not like the lyrics, etc.).

However, induction is NOT supposed to be about whether someone "likes" a band. NO ONE would deny or should deny there profound influence on music and pop culture for that matter (which is ironic because that is not what Rush is about). Not influenced any bands?? Fact, influenced: Metallica, Smashing Pumpkins, Primus, Dream Theater, Foo Fighters, etc. Also, Alex Lifeson and Andy Summers (The Police) influenced each other during the 1980's.....Geddy Lee has had profound influence on bass players, and obviously Neil Peart on drummers.....

In terms of the pop culture influences:
1) "Tom Sawyer" has been mixed into a number of rap songs, including Beastie Boys
2) Have been quoted or metioned in many current TV shows (i.e. That 70's show, the Family Guy, South Park, etc.)
3) Have been in movies (i.e. Fast Times at Ridgmont High - there are EXIT STAGE LEFT ALBUMS IN THE BACKGROUND IN ONE SCENE, Waterboy with Sandler plays Tom Sawyer in one scene, ED-TV "Ed is wearing the 2112 starman t-shirt in one scene, School of Rock with Jack Black shows student 2112 album and calls Peart best rock drummer, etc.)

There is a huge list of these located at:
http://www.2112.net/powerwindows/RushReferences.htm

In any event, I digress.....Rush may not be everyone's favorite band for whatever reason...which is fine...it is supposed to be that way...just like not everyone like broccoli. BUT INDUCTION IS SUPPOSED TO BE ABOUT LONGEVITY AND INFLUENCE AND RUSH HAVE CLEARLY FULFILLED THIS CRITERIA.......certainly a lot more than "The Dells"...."The Moonglows"....who are all in the RR HALL OF LAME...and, of course there is Miles Davis...last time I checked, isn't he a jazz musician??..duh

Bottom Line: Rush may not be everyone's favorite band, but they have fulfilled the RR HALL of LAME's criteria for admission...that is a fact..


Posted by Michael on Sunday, 01.21.07 @ 09:58am


One mo' thing...in terms of influencing bands - like Chris mentioned above, Metallica, Sound Garden and Pearl Jam have all mentioned Rush as influences...I guess if Rush does not get in, then these bands cannot either - I mean, how does Metallica or Pearl Jam get in (if they do), if their "Teachers" do not???

Also, as far as no infleunce, why has there been two tribute albums to Rush with the likes of some of the best Rock musicians. The album is called WORKING MAN...Mike Portnoy, Bill Sheehan,John Petrucci, George Lynch, etc. There is also the album SUBDIVISIONS: A tribute to Rush. I guess these guys decided to make the tribute albums because RUSH did not have any influence or impact on them...(note sarcasm)

Oh yeah, and one more thing, from the Wikpedia website: "As a whole, Rush boasts 23 gold records and 14 platinum (3 multi-platinum) records, making them one of the best-selling rock bands in history. These statistics place Rush fifth behind The Beatles, The Rolling Stones, KISS and Aerosmith for the most consecutive gold and platinum albums by a rock band."

I think my two posts sum it up best... and there is really no other choice but to induct, which I believe personally will not happen, because like everyhting else... it is not about truth, but political games.....



Posted by Michael on Sunday, 01.21.07 @ 10:17am


Metallica and Pearl Jam will get in regardless of Rush's position because of their individual impact in their own subgenres regardless of who came before them. The same reason Nirvana will probably get in before Soundgarden, The Melvins, or Pixies.

Stop citing record sales. They mean nothing.

Rush's impact within prog is negligible and they came after the much more influential King Crimson, Genesis, ELP, and Yes (whom I hate).

The Rock hall isn't nessecarily about longevity. The Velvet Underground were around for four years, the Beatles for eight, Jimi Hendrix for five. If longevity is your criterion, induct Status Quo too.

Posted by Kit on Sunday, 01.21.07 @ 12:46pm


Rush are progenitors of a genre that generally gets little critical respect or acclaim. Rush are usually cited as a band "of the people," meaning that while they have a dedicated fan base, critics, industry folks, and yes, people WHO SELECT ARTISTS FOR THE ROCK HALL BALLOT, hate them.

Aside from their die-hards, they've mostly been ignored since 2112. And when influence is a deciding factor, it doesn't bode well for them.

When I search for Rush's influence, I can name Coheed and Cambria, and really, not much else.

Posted by Matt on Sunday, 01.21.07 @ 13:24pm


I have personally seen interviews with Metallica and the police in which they site Rush as an influence. There are also two tribute albums to Rush with top notch Rock Musicians. RUSH HAS INFLUENCED COUNTLESS BANDS - IT IS A FACT. Lee has not influenced Bass players, Peart has not infleunced drummers??? Lifeson, no influence in other guitarists.....LOL, LOL, LOL.

BUT, I GUESS WE SHOULD SIMPLY IGNORE THE FACTS AND WHAT MEMBERS OF METALLICA ACTUALLY SAY DURING AN INTERVIEW, OR IGNORE THE TRIBUTE ALBUMS, BUT SHOULD INSTEAD LISTEN TO "KIT" of Nebraksa or wherever he is from, B/C KIT KNOWS BETTER.

As for other bands like ELP, YES, I never said they should not get in at all - that is off the topic completely. Send them in too...who cares

The fact is the RRHOF is a political organization and had nothing to do with longevity and influence in rock music...Name 3 songs of the "Dells" or the "Moonglows" (QUICK, HURRY DO A GOOGLE SEARCH...LOL, LOL)...Oh, and btw, who have these bands influenced?? LOL, LOL.......Miles Davis, wasn't he a Jazz player...LOL, LOL..

If you want to debate facts, fine...but the fact is Rush is not in because the "voters" over there simply do not like them....there is no objective criteria, which they claim in their website....my only point is that they should not make such a claim on the website, when it is simply not true...........

In all honesty, I doubt that Rush cares much (but who knows)...they can, however, certainly look in the mirror and know that they stayed true to themselves and played the kind of music they loved to play and have stuck with that philosophy ever since...not giving into the record executives, playing songs like "Love in an elevator, living it up when I'm going down."

MB if Rush grew there hair longer, grew beards, smoked pot, wrote lyrics about how miserable they are, and played two chord songs...then they could get in...."like a rolling stone, with no direction home......" (with a drone of course...

Later

Posted by Michael on Sunday, 01.21.07 @ 14:36pm


Dude, take a chill pill. No need to make this personal, we're just two dudes talking music.

My point in bringing up ELP and Yes is that if the hall inducts prog, it will have to do so in tiers. Meaning the first tier, the people who shaped it in the first place, should get in first. Meaning no Rush until King Crimson et al get their due.

I don't agree with The Dells or The Moonglows inductions either. Miles Davis is a legendary figure that trandscends genre.

I really don't know where you're going with the last paragraph at all. Not a Bob Dylan fan? Too bad, because he is scores more influential than Rush could hope to be.

PS: I'm from Texas, not Nebraska.

Posted by Kit on Sunday, 01.21.07 @ 15:27pm


I am taking my pills now.....I enjoy some Bob Dylan stuff, but was making the point that he is not very talented in terms of musical "chops." He is most known for lyrics and influencing and writing about social issues.

In any event, I am not a huge Dylan fan at all - but I CAN be objective and readily admit that his influence in the music world was and is profound - yes, much more than Rush - although it is really comparing apples and oranges (one is solo vs group, "folk rock" vs Progressive / Heavy Metal Rock, etc.).

That is just my point, you do not need to love or like a band to admit their influence or "qualifications" to get in the RRHOF. I remember once talking to some guy and he said, I do not like Rush at all, but I respect them as musicians and what they do....just show some respect to one of the greatest and influential progressive rock bands of all time, as reflected in all of the bands they have influenced, as well as their huge record sales despite essentially no marketing and promotion and no "air" time......


Posted by Michael on Sunday, 01.21.07 @ 20:17pm


I don't rank Rush as totally worthless like I do Kansas or Journey. I just don't think they are worthy of the hall, especially not at the expense of the bands who made them what they are in the first place.

There are some bands I despise but are too important to the general canon of 20th century music to ignore. Nirvana would be an example of a band whose importance outweighs their quality.

Posted by Kit on Monday, 01.22.07 @ 10:55am


Kansas and Journey - "Totally worthless" - okay??? What does that even mean? I do not like certain bands, but would never refer to any music or band as totally worthless. For starters, enjoyment of music is a totally subjective experience and for millions of people, Journey brought enjoyment and happiness. Plus, it makes you sound pompous and arrogant.....

As for Nirvana - totally overrated, hyped by the media. kurt cobain - a depressed drug addict, suicide - overrated. I do feel bad for all of his physical and emotional pain he went through, but it really says something about our society when someone as essentially non-functional as him becomes elevated to such a "god-like" quality. Like I said, all Rush has to do is grow beards, snort some coke, and play two chord songs - and they would roll out the carpet for entry to the Hall of Lame...unfortunately for Rush they actually know how to play music, which apparently disqualifies one from admission to the hall......

Plus, Rush has influenced virtually all of these seattle "grundge" bands. The fact is Rush has had a profound influence on literally hundreds of bands and should be in the hall....Once again, just b/c you do not like Rush PERSONALLY is fine, but Rush has fulfilled the halls criteria......

Posted by Michael on Monday, 01.22.07 @ 19:20pm


I mean just what I said with regards to Kansas and Journey. They should be made to personally apologize to everyone that has ever heard their songs.

I don't like Nirvana either but to deny that Nirvana had a huge impact on rock is to live in a silly happy fantasy dreamworld.

Are you denying that simpler songs have any place in rock? Technical play is not all there is to life, in fact it can produce a feeling of detatchment in the music. I think that's the problem most people have with prog in general. Two chord songs can be and most often times are just as well-written as the behemoths produced by the prog giants, and often times moreso. It is you who sounds pompous here.

Rush's influence on grunge is negligible and I doubt the bands Green River, The Melvins, Soundgarden, and Mother Love Bone took Rush into account at all when they started recording in the mid-80s.

You are overrating Rush at the expense of both their immediate forebears and apparently entire genres and styles.

Posted by Kit on Monday, 01.22.07 @ 19:36pm


I sound arrogant?? - in one bold statement, you called two HUGE bands (esp. Journey) worthless - it does not get more arrogant than that. You are clearly underrating Rush simply b/c you do not like them - your just jealous......

As for Rush's influence: Sound Garden has explicity cited Rush as an influence. When they were recording in the mid 80's they did not have any influence - duh - Rush had been around for 15 years - duh! and three of their greatest achievements and contributions to Rock music were completed and is irrefutable, as these albums are hailed by all musicians as the main influence on them: 2112, Permanent Waves, and Moving Pictures.

No influence, taken from WIKPEDIA regarding TOM SAWYER - THAT WOULD BE MERELY ONE RUSH SONG FROM THIS GREAT ALBUM!:

Covers and appearances in pop culture:

The synth intro to the song was later used by The Beastie Boys as part of a DJ set during one of their tours. It was also covered by Deadsy on 2002's Commencement and by Mindless Self Indulgence on their 2005 album You'll Rebel to Anything and was sampled in The Aquabats' song Pool Party.

The main/verse guitar riff of the song was used by Metallica as the bridge of the song Sanitarium that originally appeared on their 1986 album Master of Puppets. Metallica has often listed Rush as one of their main influences and even thanks the band in the credits section of the album.

The song appeared in the movie Small Soldiers (remixed by DJ Z-Trip) and in the movie The Waterboy starring Adam Sandler.
Professional wrestler Kerry Von Erich (who wrestled under the nickname "The Modern Day Warrior") used "Tom Sawyer" as his entrance music.

During the episode Anthology of Interest II of Futurama, the song plays during the Space Invaders scene, referring to the lyrics: "Today's Tom Sawyer, he gets high on you, and the space he invades he gets by on you."

Barenaked Ladies do a small musical homage to this song in the middle of their song "Grade 9" off their first full length album Gordon.

In 1993, short-lived Rap collective the Young Black Teenagers sampled Tom Sawyer on their song "Tap The Bottle" on the grounds that "it's the phattest shit ever recorded and deserves to be revisited".

In the episode "Chick Cancer" of the 5th season of Family Guy makes reference to the song, with a stoned Chester Cheetah declaring "Oh god! There is no ####ing drummer better than Neil Peart!" as the song plays in the background. (He mispronounces Neil Peart's name, however.)
The song is featured on The Knights of Prosperity episode "Fighting Shape" as the Knights "theme song".


ANOTHER INFLUENTIAL SONG: The Spirit of Radio

From Wikpedia:

The song was named one of The Rock and Roll Hall of Fame's 500 Songs that Shaped Rock and Roll.

The opening riff is also found in "Grade 9" by the Canadian band Barenaked Ladies on their "Gordon" album.


MORE FOR 2112 FROM WIKPEDIA:

The Audio-Visual Preservation Trust, a non-profit Canadian charitable organization dedicated to promoting the preservation of Canada's audio-visual heritage, has sponsored MasterWorks, which annually recognizes 12 culturally significant Canadian classics from the film, radio, TV and music industries. In 2006, 2112 was one of the albums chosen to be preserved.

In 1999, in the same spirit that discovered "Dark Side of the Rainbow" (playing Pink Floyd's Dark Side of the Moon while watching The Wizard of Oz), it was a similar strain of serendipity that uncovered "Willy Wonka's 2112" - playing the 2112 CD, beginning at a point near the entrance into the factory. Specific instructions and instances of synchronicity can be found online at The Willy Wonka & 2112 website.

In Chris Cornell's solo section during Audioslave's October 7, 2005 concert in Toronto, he performed an acoustic rendition of "Soliloquy".

Tool uses the main riff of "A Passage to Bangkok" as the intro for their own song "Cold and Ugly" whenever they play it live.

Coheed and Cambria's album, In Keeping Secrets of Silent Earth: 3, contains a bonus track titled 2113, probably as a nod to this album.

These are just three examples, the list could go on and on...butI guess Kit knows best, they have had no influence....duh...LOL...LOL...LOL

THE FACT IS RUSH (WITH NO EFFORT TO DO SO - JUST PLAYIN' MUSIC) HAS PENETRATED OUR CULTURE, BOTH MUSICALLY AND IN THE MAINSTREAM CULTURE WITH INFLUENCES TO HUNDREDS OF BANDS, INCLUDING RAP ARTISTS AND ROCK BANDS, THE LIST IS TOO LONG TO EVEN LIST. PLUS,THEY HAVE EVEN INFLUENCED OUR POP CULTURE IN MOVIES, TV, PROFESSIONAL WRESTLING, ETC. THESE ARE UNDENIABLE FACTS.

Posted by Michael on Monday, 01.22.07 @ 20:12pm


....wait, did you just use wrestling and Family Guy jokes (JOKES FFS) as an evidce of influence? Here's some more straws, keep grasping...

Posted by Kit on Monday, 01.22.07 @ 21:21pm


Those were references to pop culture to demostrate that Rush is ubiquitous both in and out music...a fact you deny for whatever reason...I guess you missed all of the other references to music....at least I am not named after a trans-am from a television show.....LOL....LOL...

Posted by Michael on Monday, 01.22.07 @ 21:32pm


INFLUENCED: Bare Naked Ladies, Primus, Dream Theater, Tool, Audioslave, Soundgarden, Coheed and Cambria, Metallica, Beastie Boys, Smashing Pumpkins, Primus, Symphony X, Living Colour, Manic Street Preachers, Megadeth, Pearl Jam,Winger, Sepultura,Skid Row, Mr. Big, Shadow Gallery, Dokken, Fates Warning,Stuart Hamm, Steven Morse, Richard Chycki,Matt Guillory, Deen Castronovo, Devin Townsend,Joey Vera,Mark Zonder, and so on and so on and so on......

every drummer,just about every progressive hard rock or prog-metal band will list Rush as an influence......(too tired to go on...yawn)

"Keep on lookin' forward, no use in lookin' round..hold your head above the crowd and they won't bring you down" -Peart

Posted by Michael on Monday, 01.22.07 @ 22:26pm


That would've been Kit with two Ts.

And again, I point to those that came before Rush and ask that they be given their due before Rush.

Being joked about in Family Guy isn't a sign of stature. Would you reccomend Europe for induction based on The Final Countdown being in a Diet Pepsi commercial?

Posted by Kit on Tuesday, 01.23.07 @ 00:16am


No b/c Europe sucked and it was only used b/c it fit the commercial...stop using dumb analogies that make no sense. It was a combination of factors that would put Rush in...

Plus, Rush's influence is ubiquitous and references in pop culture are replete, as well as their influence on other bands...tell me the other references of "Europe" in pop culture...obviously, there are none - duh. KITT, try to stay on focus and see the whole picture.......

Posted by Michael on Tuesday, 01.23.07 @ 04:19am


Rush's influence is anything but ubiquitous. If anything much of punk and post punk was a backlash against the overblown wankings of Rush.

There's been plenty of mentions of Europe in pop culture. They, much like Rush, are the constant butt of jokes. You may not have noticed in your fervent copy/pasting, but those Family Guy references were casting Rush (and their fans) in a negative light.

You are the one who does not see the big picture and who does not realize the first wave of prog MUST be inducted before we can have anything to do with the second wave.

Posted by Kit on Tuesday, 01.23.07 @ 13:41pm


Europe's "The Final Countdown" was also used in several episodes of Arrested Development. Now that is a noteworthy pop culture reference. They still suck. Kit's points are well taken. King Crimson, Yes and Genesis all need to be inducted before there are any conversations regarding Rush. I have always thought that I would enjoy Rush a lot more if all of their songs were instrumental.

Posted by Dezmond on Tuesday, 01.23.07 @ 13:43pm


I don't care if King Crimson is inducted, but Rush should be. The fact is Rush's influences were not KC, but Cream, Zeppelin, Who, etc. Comparing "Europe" to Rush is a joke. Tell me another reference of Europe to pop culture? there are none. Rush has been referenced in so many areas it is unbelievable....there is simply no comparison to the so called band Europe (with the one hit wonder song - final countdown).

NOT UBIQUTOUS? Virtaully every modern rock / progressive band has been influenced by them - if that is not ubiqutous, then I do not know what is.

As for the family guy reference - the cheetah says with tom sawyer playing, Neil Peart is the greatest rock drummer of all time...sounds pretty positive...and even if it was sarcastic...it is still funny and sheds light on how much this "drummer" has effected us all

When Rush was played in the Sandler movie - that was in "negative light." NOT.....

When Jack Black hands the kid the 2112 album in school of Rock - that was in a negative light...hmm....NOT

Denial aint just a river in Egypt.....

Plus, you need to open your mind....even negative reactions are an INFLUENCE. I mean KITT look at the influence Rush has had on you...they are a band you despise, yet you go out of your way, during your busy day, to criticize them - that is a pretty profound effect - do you have nothing better to do? I mean I would never go to a blog to "put down" a band I do not care about.

That is why I could care less about puttin in King Crimson to the hall...I like progressive rock...but in reality Rush was just a bit more successful than KC - hands down - and were not a major Rush influence......later Kit



Posted by Michael on Tuesday, 01.23.07 @ 19:00pm


You don't care about KC going to the hall? Well thanks for outing yourself as a Rush fanboy who does not care about the greater picture of rock, only your own pet project.

The Family Guy reference portrays Rush as music which potheads listen to. Jack Black's role in School of Rock was as the ultimate fanboy and not someone to be taken seriously. If Rush influence's people negatively, that's hardly a good thing. I come here to talk about everything in music, sometimes that includes bad bands. Oh well.

Posted by Kit on Tuesday, 01.23.07 @ 19:25pm


Rush is music potheads listen to? The basis for any and all rock is rebellion and use of drugs (i.e. Beatles - LSD), etc. How this relates to Rush as being pothead music is just plain dumb...

School or Rock...totally incorrect interpretation..it was nothing more that this Teacher trying to show the students who the "kings" and "giants" of rock music were and are...I am sure that scene must of killed you.

Any influence, whether + or - is an influence. If as you claim, Punk music was a reaction to Rush - boy Rush is way, way bigger than I thouht to have such a profound effect on these bands...of course the statement is ludicrous and baseless....

As for KC..like I said, if you want to put them in, fine...but the major problem there is that they are not a band like Rush...do you have any clue how many "members" of KC there have been...count em'.....here it is.....20...that is right 20 different members of a band - who gets inducted??? Give me a break...LOL...LOL....LOL

Rush is my "pet project" - you wouldn't by any chance be a homo - who speaks like that?

Posted by Michael on Tuesday, 01.23.07 @ 19:37pm


Arguing about Family Guy references belittles the real reason Rush should be inducted -- the MUSIC. No one needs to argue that they have seeped into pop culture - lots of artists have, good and bad. It's the music that matters, and on those grounds they have the right stuff.

Posted by c.w. on Tuesday, 01.23.07 @ 20:11pm


Finally, some sanity on this post by CW. This guy Kit is in la la land. Fine, he hates Rush, that's his right... but anyone would agree that they have shaped and influenced Rock music, which is the basis to initiate to the RRHOF.

As for the pop culture references you are right, it really does not mean much of anything - I only pointed it out to show that Rush has had a profound impact not only in music, but in other areas of culture - a fact that Kit (for whatever reason) would deny......

Posted by Michael on Tuesday, 01.23.07 @ 20:38pm


Michael, who still says "NOT"? Come on. Kit is correct, the entire punk movement was a reaction to overblown, bloated bands like Rush and Yes. Now, my preferences are actually for said overblown, bloated bands like Rush and Yes over what is, ultimately, a dead end (punk rock). I say Rush should be inducted, but for their musical chops. The lyrics are often beyond silly, and Geddy Lee sounds like he has his balls stuck in a vise.

Posted by Dezmond on Tuesday, 01.23.07 @ 22:13pm


"Entire" movement due to Rush...yeah, okay...your giving Rush and Yes way too much credit......why are they "overblown"?? B/c they have talent and "chops." Give us all break...

Posted by LM on Tuesday, 01.23.07 @ 22:21pm


From Wikpedia:

According to Ramones drummer Tommy Ramone, "In its initial form, a lot of [1960s] stuff was innovative and exciting. Unfortunately, what happens is that people who could not hold a candle to the likes of Hendrix started noodling away. Soon you had endless solos that went nowhere. By 1973, I knew that what was needed was some pure, stripped down, no bullshit rock 'n' roll".

RUSH's FIRST ALBUM WAS NOT EVEN OUT UNTIL 1974, so it seems that "Punk" rockers were already shaping and forming their music long before rush was around.

Another quote from sex pistols manager:
Malcolm McLaren recalls feeling "punk rock had to come along because the rock scene had become so tame that bands like Billy Joel and Simon and Garfunkel were being called rock and roll, when to me and other fans, rock and roll meant this wild and rebellious music"

NO MENTION OF RUSH, REACTION OF PUNK WAS TO ACTS OF BILL JOEL AND THE LIKE BEING REFERRED TO AS ROCK AND ROLL.

"No Elvis, Beatles or Rolling Stones in 1977", declared The Clash.

AGAIN NO MENTION OF RUSH

THE FACT IS, THE PUNK SCENE FORMED BEFORE RUSH WAS EVEN AROUND AND THE PUNK REACTIONS TO CREATE THEIR MUSIC WAS A REACTION TO BANDS INCLUDING ELVIS, BEATLES, STONES, BILLY JOEL (AS PER THE DIRECT QUOTES ABOVE OF THE ACTUAL PUNK ROCKERS.

Later.......

Posted by Michael on Wednesday, 01.24.07 @ 05:46am


Mike is right. Punk was much, much more of reaction to 60's music (the likes of the Elvis, Stones, Hendrix, Beatles, etc.), rather than bands like Yes or Rush. Rush did not come out with their first album until '74 and even then were not a big influence. In fact, that first album from '74 did not even have Peart on it (the drummer was Rutsey).

If Tommy Ramone says himself that "by 1973" rock music needed a change - it would seem that punk had already been crystalized before Rush's first album even came out.

That is not to say that punk music is not very different than Rush or Yes, but the impetus for such music came more out of the 60's than anything else.

Dylan

Posted by Dylan on Wednesday, 01.24.07 @ 06:08am


Denying that the simplicity of punk was a direct reaction against the stately flourishes of prog is a waste of time, because it was. Obviously that wasn't the only thing, because nothing is ever the only thing, but it was a huge part. The Sex Pistols used to burn an effigy of Keith Emerson at concerts. Yes, I know that's not specifically Rush, save your caps lock button the wear Micheal. It's a representation of the same sort of mindless technical wankery Rush indulged in frequently.

Again, Rush is part of the second generation of prog that lacked the chops of ELP, the sense of humor of Genesis, and the manically psychotic and unified vision of King Crimson. No talking about them until those three are in. End of story.

Posted by Kit on Wednesday, 01.24.07 @ 09:37am


LM, read carefully, I said bands like Rush and Yes, I did not say that Rush alone ushered in the punk rock movement. But prog rock was one of the primary reasons punk exploded on the scene when it did. And dude, I LIKE Rush and Yes. But how are they "overblown", you ask? "2112" and "Tales From Topographic Oceans", that's how. In the wake of those "masterworks", "I Wanna Be Sedated" was a breath of fresh air.

Posted by Dezmond on Wednesday, 01.24.07 @ 14:28pm


Speaking as a member of a progressive rock band and a huge Rush fan, I have to say that Kit is right about one thing. King Crimson should be acknowledged before Rush, as should Genesis and Yes. I personally disagree with Kit's assessment of ELP's importance, seeing as how he contradicted himself in his justification, but his overall point is still valid. However, Rush should be inducted shortly after this "first wave" of prog bands. Forget about the pop culture references; their influence on several generations of musicians worldwide is undeniable.

Beyond that, this whole debate is going nowhere. Some people will always think that progressive rock is an important part of the history of rock, while others will always disagree. I would say that any sub-genre of rock will have its detractors. For example, I have little use for southern rock. I contend that it has done very little to further the development of this art form. However, I would not go so far as to dismiss it entirely by continuing to omit southern rock bands from the HoF. This sub-genre is still part of rock's history, regardless of its uselessness. That's what irks me most about the HoF voters. Seeing as how their whole reason for existence is to portray a complete history of rock, the glaring omission of most progressive rock artists essentially makes the Hall irrelevant.

As an aside, one could argue that Rush ceased to be a prog band after their "Hemispheres" album because they started writing shorter songs, but I disagree with that. A five minute song can still be progressive. For that matter, a thirty second song can be progressive. As long as the music exhibits a progression of ideas, it should be considered progressive. Analyze the way the drum parts establish patterns and then vary them during the guitar solos in "Red Barchetta" and "Limelight", for example, and you'll see what I mean.

Posted by Craig on Wednesday, 01.24.07 @ 18:03pm


I am outta this blog for a number of reasons. For one, KIT mainly is not in reality. Despite the Ramones comment about 1973 (prior to Rush's first album), he still thinks that Rush and progressive Rock was the main reason for punk...when the clash said "No more beatles, Elvis or Stones in 1977". The main reason for punk was, thus, reactions to the 60's genre of music, not Prog. rock. Sure, mb a bit of that came later (I would agree with that), but that was not the original or main reason for Punk... But, Kit denies this b/c he knows better than the actual punkers themselves.

As for the burning an ELP effigy...that is just plain dumb for one rocker to do that to another. The fact remains it is ALL rock music, just variations on a theme. My dad who is a trained musician and professional musician (keyboards) studied at NYU and played / taught music in a professional band his whole life - he thinks that ALL rock music (whether it is Rush or Ramones, etc.) is garbage. He believes that the ultimate form of music is Jazz. To him it is all the same and he has no appreciation for the "electric guitar" , etc.

In any event, Rockers, whether punk or not, should stick together...I have simply never heard of one band publicly bashing another like that...certainly a band like Rush would never do such a thing. A band that would do that is more angry than talented....

Of prog rock, Rush is clearly the best and clearly the most succesful (at least commerically)...I am a huge Rush fan, so I support them. I could frankly care less if KC or ELP gets in or not - although my opinion is that Rush was and is way better (c'mon moving pictures is not one of the best rock albums of all times??? Wasn't YYZ nominated for a grammy???). Plus, how do you put in KC when they have had 20 different members - not much cohesion or continuity - but mb that is not a criteria for the HOF - I truly do not know...

In all seriousness, Rush's influence has certainly been musically, but in most respects in a philopsohy and vision. Alex Lifeson said in an interview that many bands have been influenced by Rush (even though they sound nothing like Rush) b/c of Rush's philosophy and vision (i.e. to stay true to who you are as an artist and not to be swayed by commercialism, etc.). He also openly admitted that people "either love us or hate us." So true...

This may sound like "sour grapes" but I really think Rush could care less about the US HOF. It simply not what they are about - that we would all agree - Rush is not out to please others -just to play music they love to play. In fact, I think Rush being in the hall (US that is) is antithetical to who Rush is. Plus, I guess they are in the hall that counts for them (i.e. the Canadian HOF).

Bottom line....Woody Allen will never go to awards shows depsite his movies being nominated for various awards (direction, etc.) b/c he believes that competition within the arts is silly and nonsensical. I could not agree more. Different strokes for different folks. Art is subjective and there is really no way to be objective - it is sort of silly, but people seem to like these kinds of things (i.e. a handful of "experts" deciding what is good art or the "best" - the Oscars, Emmy's, MTV Awards, etc.) - pretty nonsensical. I think this is proven by the fact that the "Dells" or "Moonglows" are in - I mean how many of the people on this blog would have voted them in - NONE! But, the so-called "experts" at the HOF think they should be in, so they are. And, the people over there also do not like progressive rock, so they will likely never put any of them in, including Rush..oh, well...I guess they know best :-) So, Kit will be happy, and myself and Rush, and the rest of the fans, will know that it simply does not matter because:

"One likes to believe in the freedom of music
But glittering prizes and endless compromises
Shatter the illusion of integrity."

Posted by Michael on Wednesday, 01.24.07 @ 22:10pm


Too bad, Michael, I was rather enjoying this lively debate. Who wants to have a conversation where everyone agrees? That is boring. Perhaps it does not make sense to say that punk was a reaction to a certain genre of music. But punk WAS a reaction to the general bloated state of rock and roll in the 70's. It was a combination of aging 60's stars who no longer mattered as much any more, of prog rock excess, etc. It was really all of those things that ushered in the punk movement. It is analogous to what happened when Nirvana hit the scene. Rock had become a bit stale, and needed to be shaken up. That is all it really is. Every ten years or so it is time to clean house, shake things up.

I like Craig's points about the nature of prog rock. Interesting way to put it. There can even be some common ground between what one appreciates about prog rock and what one can appreciate about the best of what "southern rock" has to offer. One of the good qualities of prog rock generally is the superior musicianship. But also give a listen to The Allman Brothers "Live at the Filmore East", and you have one of the greatest displays of musical technique ever committed to wax (or tape, or CD). Sure, Tha Allmans were much more based on improvisation vs. many prog rock bands who would rather carefully construct their music, but I hear amazing musicianship and musical peaks in Duane Allman and Dickey Betts roaring through 25 minutes of "Whipping Post" just as I hear in on "Close to the Edge". As Michael said, it is all just rock and roll.

But I do disagree with Michael when he gets upset about th ELP effigy and what that represents. So much of rock and roll is about rebellion, discontent and anger...to me, that is the perfect rock and roll moment right there. Whether I am an ELP fan or not (Greg Lake is talented, but overall I do not enjoy them), I have to appreciate that act as the essence of rock and roll attitude. Like I said, so much of rock and roll's freshness is still there because every ten years or so, you gotta tear it all down and start over. Why has jazz become so stale? Modern jazz is so stuck in reverence of what came before, it cannot progress as it should. Rock and roll has no such constraints. Or it shouldn't.

Posted by Dezmond on Thursday, 01.25.07 @ 09:11am


The reason Rush is not in the RRHOF is very simple. The ability to play an instrument is no longer a requirement for musical success. Therefore their influence is no longer valued. You have to have played an instrument to truly appreciate Rush. Case in point: wake up any drummer in mid sleep and ask, "Who's the best drummer!" He'll shout "Neil Peart!!!!". Today's artists, due in part to radio programming and American Idolism don't amase us. Where is the next Hendrix or Van Halen? Where is the next Bonham, Moon or Peart? I can't find them, can you?

Posted by Aaron Noe on Friday, 01.26.07 @ 00:27am


[Case in point: wake up any drummer in mid sleep and ask, "Who's the best drummer!" He'll shout "Neil Peart!!!!".]

Uhm, no Aaron...I know quite a few who would say "Bill Bruford" instead. They wouldn't bother to shout it either.

Posted by William on Friday, 01.26.07 @ 18:07pm


Or Stewart Copeland.

Posted by Dezmond on Monday, 01.29.07 @ 21:13pm


Bill Bruford? Even he would so Neil Peart.

Posted by Alan White on Monday, 01.29.07 @ 22:33pm


I assume you meant "say," and I don't see how you plan to prove it.

Ignoring for a second that musicians probably have better things to do than compare themselves to other musicians, Bruford has the better resume by far.

Posted by William on Tuesday, 01.30.07 @ 00:21am


Right, and a lot of people would say guys like Neil Peart, Bill Bruford, Dave Weckl, Vinnie Colaiuta, Mike Portnoy, etc. ad nauseum are ALL great players and anyone would love to have their skill, regardless of their resume.

Posted by Charles on Tuesday, 01.30.07 @ 22:13pm


Rush are not prog rock! That's the whole point. They play EVERYTHING!

Posted by chris on Wednesday, 01.31.07 @ 21:57pm


Alan White-that's funny.

Posted by Aaron Noe on Friday, 02.2.07 @ 14:23pm


Huge Rush Fan - Rush is the greatest, but as fo drummers, I love Stewart Copeland more than Peart - just my own taste.

Posted by Ricky on Saturday, 02.3.07 @ 17:06pm


I've read most of the following posts. First, it is imperative to note that Kit is an idiot. Mainly because of his unwillingness to acknowledge basic facts and solid logic.

Second, this thread establishes exactly why the R&R HOF is such a joke. Using similar foundations in sport such as the NFL Hall of Fame, the voting is generally grounded in accomplishments. I doubt anyone on this thread would deny the great 30 year record setting career of RUSH as lacking accomplishment (aside of Kit based on the previously mentioned aptitude for idiocy). In fact, few bands beside the obvious can even hold a candle in terms of success.

Take concert attendance as one example. I was lucky enough to catch RUSH at Red Rocks in 2005. The concert was incredible, primarily because of the enthusiasm of the audience. In comparision, I attended a WHO concert this year at Pepsi Center, where The Pretenders (a HOF member) opened for the legendary Who. The crowd was mostly polite at best. In fact, my wife and I, who grew up with Pretenders classics were the only ones in our section dancing. Does this mean The Pretenders don't belong in the HOF...well that is questionable. But they certainaly don't merit attendance before RUSH.

A true hall of fame would sing up obvious groups like RUSH in terms of what they have accomplished, to begin with. Then they would vote in obscure inductees such as Patti Smith, Funk Master Flash and The Rondales. Why does REM beat Rush in for example? Based on Kit's arguements REM should never be placed ahead of countless bands. REM is simply an evolution of progressive radio rock.

One more thing, I take offense to placing RUSH into a label of progressive rock. Listen to Anthem, Fly By Night and then listen to Moving Pictures and Permanent Waves and then listen to Vapor Trails. Then you can try and define the legendary band RUSH. They are hard rockers, they are modern day rockers and they are future rockers. But don't call them progressive rock, because that is missing the mark.

MJB

Posted by Michael Billingsley on Sunday, 02.4.07 @ 15:04pm


The Pretenders belonged in before Rush for being a huge player in post-punk and for Chrissy Hynde setting the standard for a generation of female lead singers in rock and punk.

REM were at the very forefront of the Amerindie movement and the College rock movement.

Your inability to get the names of Grandmaster Flash and the Ronettes hurts your credibility, as does your labeling of Grandmaster and Patti Smith as "obscure."

Why is progressive a bad thing in your eyes?

Posted by Kit on Sunday, 02.4.07 @ 16:04pm


Once again, Kit cannot acknowledge anothers viewpoint and arrogantly believes that he is always right.

As usual you also miss the point. We have nothing against "progressive" rock per se, but it is YOU who always caetegrizes Rush as progresive and says that other progressive bands should get in first. It is also YOU who lambastes progressive. However, Rush was only briefly progressive - that is why he makes that point - does everything need to be spelled out for Kit?

As for the other lame bands that got in - misspelling the names does not in itself negate a point.

As for REM, while not bad and I did like them, was not worthy of the hall based upon Kits interpretation - they were nothing more than a bunch of Top 40 "Pop Rockers" (i.e. shiny happy people, Losing my religion, etc.) who had a few radio hits and virtually no influence. REM has nothing on Rush, and to suggest otherwise demonstrates a total lack of understanding of music history. I mean, how many people do you think still pop in old REM - I bet not much. The music was catchy at that time, but lacked substance. Rush's music on the other hand, like them or not, has considerable substance and will be listened to for generations to come....as for REM being at the "forefront of the college rock movement" - what??? grasping a bit, desperate to find an influence?? Give us all a break KIT...oh, and as for the "amerindie" influence, sounds real important - ask 100 people on the street what that is and who influenced it - I am sure you will get - "ameri - what"?? And, as for REM being at the forefront of that scene - NOT TRUE - the bands at the forefront of that scene were Dead Kennedys, the Nuns, Negative Trend, the Dils, the Dickies, Flipper, etc.

Lets call a spade a spade - Rush will never get in the Hall - not because other progressives need to get in first, as Kit says, but only because those at the RRHOF do not like Rush, who have never kissed the asses of those in the media - that is the bottom line. All of the other hall "criteria" Rush has fulfilled, that is a no brainer.

As someone said on a post above:

"Name 3 songs of the "Dells" or the "Moonglows" (QUICK, HURRY DO A GOOGLE SEARCH...LOL, LOL)...


"One likes to believe in the freedom of music
But glittering prizes and endless compromises
Shatter the illusion of integrity."





Posted by Anonymous on Sunday, 02.4.07 @ 18:00pm


REM had no influence? Really? Top 40 pop-rockers? That's just an absolutely ridiculous statement to make. Complete nonsense. REM was the first "underground" band to make the leap to mainstream and their music is much more than the pop you make it out to be. Interesting that the two songs you name are from their 1991 release Out of Time. This suggests a lack of familiarity with their early work, which I highly reccomend, especially Murmur and Fables From The Reconstruction.

This isn't about what the man on the street feels. The man on the street listens to Hinder. Perhaps if I said American Indie instead of using the Christgauism Amerindie you would have gotten the point quicker, and more of your hypothetical men on the street would have gotten the question.

He didn't just misspell the names, he got them wrong, as if he knew nothing about them. It would hurt my credibility just as much if I called Rush "Speed".

Even if you shift Rush's catagorization (incorrectly) from prog to Hard Rock they are still standing in line behind Alice Cooper, T-Rex, Judas Priest, Iron Maiden, and others.

The Dells and The Moonglows induction sucked. No one is disputing that and that's not the topic. The topic is if Rush belongs in the Hall. I say no and I have my reasons. You're trying to make this much more personal than it should be, please don't.

Posted by Kit on Sunday, 02.4.07 @ 20:39pm


Oh yeah, you are right, I also forgot about their wonderful "tribute song" to Andy Kaufman - "Man on the Moon" - that one certainly made them worthy of the hall (note sarcasm). Any band that would agree to produce such a song should be "made to apologize." (i.e. just like Kansas and Journey).

Like I said REM was decent, but not monumental and again - how often do you think people pop in old REM cruising on the open highway- doubt it! But, no one could ever get tired cruising on the open road with Red Barhcetta or Spirit of Radio at a volume of 10. I mean is there really a comparison - NOT!

You don't think Rush belongs in the hall b/c you do not like there music personally, it is that simple. But, newsflash, no one cares what you think...well, that's not true...Kit cares about himself, we all know that. You throw around some big SAT words and think you are some bigshot - you call Rush arrogant??

Oh, and anyone that thinks Judas Priest or Iron Maiden belongs in the hall before Rush loses all credibility - those bands were gimmicky and talentless....just like Kiss and Motley Crue.


Oh, and you are certainly right about one thing, it is NOT about what the man on the street thinks...it is about the snobs over at the hall of lame. If it was about what the man on the street thinks, then you would be rest assured that the Dells and Moonglows would not be in......the man on the street would get it right...

"Some world views are spacious
And some are merely spaced"

Posted by Anonymous on Monday, 02.5.07 @ 19:57pm


Oh, and BTW you totally missed the point of the guy regarding the pretenders. They were the opening act for the WHO. I don't know, mb its just me, but I think a band that is of "HALL OF FAME CALLIBER" should be able to hold their own and not be an "opening act" for another band.

THERE IS ABSOLUTELY NO COMPARISON OF RUSH TO THE PRETENDERS - the pretenders are mediocre at best.

Like Woody Allen once said in a movie (I am adapting it to fit here of course): The Pretenders may be an American phenomenon, but so is acid rain......

Posted by Anonymous on Monday, 02.5.07 @ 20:03pm


Way to completely ignore my points on REM. I know plenty of people who have rocked out to Murmur, Fables, and Document and I know a lot of people who can't stand Rush. Saying "everyone does this" or "everyone does that" is patently incorrect.

The Pretenders opened for The Who because it would be really weird if The Who opened for The Pretenders. I saw that tour when it rolled into Dallas and Chrissy Hynde still has the ability to put on a great show. The Pretenders are in both for her incredible stage presence and songwriting and James Honeyman-Scott's guitar heroics and innovation. His use of echo and delay are still heard today, mostly in the work of The Edge of U2, who will readily admit his influence.

Priest and Maiden had their share of gimmickry, but they also had more than their share of innovation, especially Maiden who are responsible for just about every subgenre of metal that came after.

The Rock Hall should not be about the man on the street. The average person does not listen to music very closely or very carefully. That's the only way to explain Kenny G. The vote should be put in the hands of those who have voluntarily chosen to eat live and breathe music, the writers and musicians themselves. I will ever agree with them one hundred percent but I sure as hell can't call them ignorant, which I can about many people I deal with in real life.

Please stop personally attacking me. I am being respectful to you and would like you to please do the same to me.

Posted by Kit on Monday, 02.5.07 @ 21:57pm


"Echo- Delay", c'mon - Lifeson was doing all that in the 70's and is the one who influenced countless guitarists, including the Edge (and vice versa). For instance, on Hemispheres and permanent waves he used Three Roland Space Echos and Loft analog delays. Lifeson's claim to fame as a guitarist is his ability to create ambience - he is a pioneer in that respect.

As for the Pretenders - do I need to explain again. The point is, why would a band of RRHOF calliber be an "opening act"??? That was the point. I can give you the answer - they are simply not that good and cannot stand on their own. Would Rush open for anyone? NOT...


BTW: "Around the time "Moving Pictures" came out, Jimmy Page was asked who his favorite band of the moment was, a band that really impressed him and he replied Rush was the only one."

NUFF SAID (I mean c'mon, coming from Jimmy - the master - himself).

Later.....

Posted by Anonymous on Monday, 02.5.07 @ 22:46pm


Lifeson used them in a prog set of circumstances (and wasn't the first), Honeyman-Scott was the first of any punk/post-punk band to mess with affects like that You're doing the exact same thing you accused me of, marginalizing the considerable accomplishments of a band simply because you don't like them.

Perhaps they agreed to be the opening act because they wanted to play a show with The Who. I'd have a hell of a time turning down that offer, Hall of Fame or no. A band's buisness decisions are not relevant to their impact of influence, two things The Pretenders have in spades.

I'm not gonna tell Jimmy Page what to think, obviously. But if we're playing the "here's what this guy thinks" game, Pete Townshend called King Crimson's debut "an uncanny masterpiece".

Posted by Kit on Tuesday, 02.6.07 @ 00:05am


See, isn't this a lot more satisfying when you're not trying to think of the next snarky insult? =p

Posted by Kit on Tuesday, 02.6.07 @ 00:09am


I have nothing against the Pretenders, but I just think they are pretty mediocre. As for King Crimson, who cares about them, and what Townsend said - I only provided that quote from Page b/c you despise Rush - on the contrary - I do not despise King Crimson - and in fact am totally indifferent to them.

The Pretenders being an "opening" act is not a "business" decision, but rather one of reality - they are simply not that big.

As for Lifeson vs. Honeyman-Scott - DON'T EVEN GO THERE - THERE IS SIMPLY NO COMPARISON. LIFESONS BLOWS HIM AWAY.

Finally, did u actually say "snarky"?



Posted by Anonymous on Tuesday, 02.6.07 @ 00:24am


"As for the Pretenders - do I need to explain again. The point is, why would a band of RRHOF calliber be an "opening act"??? That was the point. I can give you the answer - they are simply not that good and cannot stand on their own. Would Rush open for anyone? NOT..."

You know, Led Zeppelin opened for Spirit during one of their tours (and later ripped off one of their chord progressions). Guess we ought to revoke their status, huh?

What the hell does that have to do with influence or innovation?

Posted by William on Tuesday, 02.6.07 @ 01:19am


Uh, yeah it is a buisness decision. They wanted to play with The Who, so they played with The Who. It doesn't say anything about their status as innovators whatsoever.

As for Lifeson vs. Honeyman-Scott, it all depends on your musical priorities. I wouldn't call either guitarist bad, but Lifeson bores me for the most part while Honeyman-Scott's unique style has made my life brighter.

Posted by Kit on Tuesday, 02.6.07 @ 01:27am


Anyone who says that the Pretenders made there life "brighter" and that Lifeson is "boring" should not even be allowed to listen to music. Lifeson is regarded as one of the great rock guitarists and innvovators of all time.


Zep opened for Spirit - YEAH, WHEN SHMUCK?? When they were starting out? Some how I doubt that Zeppelin would open for any band NOW. Fact is, the Pretenders (Yawn, Yawn) are not so hot, not so great, and nothing more than an opening act...If you think they are so influential and should be in the hall, great. The hall does not put in the best, that is a fact (i.e. Moonglows, The Dells, I could go on you know...). Oh, I gotta go and watch my Rush in Rio DVD, where Rush (30 years after their career started!) played in front of over 60,000 fans in Brazil - oh wait a minute, as Kit says, what does the fan know, you know the man on the street?

Posted by Anonymous on Tuesday, 02.6.07 @ 05:51am


Chrissie Hynde:

"All you hamburger-eating mother####ers are gonna die!"

"I firebombed McDonald's."

Yes, very influential.....

Posted by Anonymous on Tuesday, 02.6.07 @ 06:38am


Anonymous, you are doing the same thing you are are accusing Kit of doing. Your personal passion for Rush gets in the way of your analysis. You vastly underrate REM's infuence. I am a marginal REM fan at best, but even I admit that they are probably the second most important band to emerge in the last 25 years or so (behind U2). Kit is correct, they were the first band from that group of indie college radio bands to make it in the mainstream, and throughout the 80's and the early 90's they continued to evolve and remained influential throughout these evolutions. You point out the exceptions when you point out "Shiny Happy People" (or a song like "Stand"), that is not representative of their music as a whole.

And then you go on to say that Iron Maiden and Judas Priest are mere gimmick bands? Just two of the most influential metal bands ever, that's all.

The fact that the Pretenders opened for The Who means...nothing. Every band goes through peaks and valleys in popularity. The Pretenders' time has passed. They are not as big as they were in the 80's. So what? That takes nothing away from what they did accomplish or their influence in their heyday. Another example, I saw The Who back in '89, and Stevie Ray Vaughan opened for them. This was well into SRV's career, only two year's before his death. So SRV is not worthy of note because he was a "mere" opening act? It is all business decisions. SRV, or his management team, wanted to be part of a big tour and big specatacle. It made sense. SRV himself could fill arenas at that time, but he was getting to play stadiums with The Who. It made sense. That should not matter when he is eligible for induction (next year, I believe).

Look, Rush is great. I think it is ridiculous that they are not in the RRHOF. They should be. Along with quite a few other deserving artists. But your arguments are made weaker when you show that you have little understanding of the legacies of bands like REM, Maiden, Priest or Pretenders. You sound like little more than a Rush fanboy who lacks an overall understanding or perspective on the bigger rock picture.

Posted by Dezmond on Tuesday, 02.6.07 @ 07:47am


"Zep opened for Spirit - YEAH, WHEN SHMUCK?? When they were starting out?"

Considering that Page pretty much went straight from the Yardbirds to Zep (and took a lot of his pre-established fanbase with him), they were already very well-known when they "started out."

Your ignorance is appalling.

Posted by William on Tuesday, 02.6.07 @ 13:33pm


"Considering that Page pretty much went straight from the Yardbirds to Zep (and took a lot of his pre-established fanbase with him), they were already very well-known when they "started out."

"Your ignorance is appalling."

BOTTOM LINE - I AM RIGHT - ZEP WOULD NEVER "OPEN" FOR ANYONE NOW, THEY WOULD NOT HAVE TO - Plus, if they were as "well known" as you claim, then they would not have had to be the "opening" act. Oh, let me get this straight, you actually believe that Zep was huge then, could have sold out a huge show on their own, but decided - "Hey, guys, we are huge now, we have hit the big time, but lets just be the opening act." Your stupidity is appalling

"The fact that the Pretenders opened for The Who means...nothing. Every band goes through peaks and valleys in popularity."

NOT GREAT BANDS AND CERTAINLY BANDS THAT ARE WORTHY OF THE HALL AND IN THE HALL SHOULD MAINTAIN THERE GREATNESS. THE FACT IS, THE PRETENDERS ARE A HAS BEEN BAND, NO ONE GIVES A SHIT ABOUT THEM. THEY DO NOT POSSESS LONGEVITY AND FOR THAT REASON SHOULD NOT EVEN BE IN THE HALL - ARE YOU GOING TO TELL ME THAT ZEPPELIN AND THE PRETENDERS ARE ON PAR - C'mon. Bands like Zep, Who, Beatles, are the ones that belong because they are great and will be listened to forever and will never have to worry about waning interests. Interst in the Pretenders has waned for one reason -- they are not that good to begin with. Rush has been "UP" for 30 years no valleys there (except when peart's famil died and they took a few years off). The fact is, Rush is as big as ever in 2007. I guess we will have to agree to disagree.

As for Iron Maiden and Judas Priest - those are talentless bands that no one will ever care about in 50 years. As for influencing other "metal" bands - that you are right about - one cheesey band influencing others. Like I said earlier, IM and JP may be an American phenomenon, but so is acid rain

As for REM- I like REM, but they are overrated. They sold out and ended up making pop friendly, Top 40 music. Nothing wrong with that, but it is just not great to me. Should they be in the hall? Why not? Let em in too......

Posted by Anonymous on Tuesday, 02.6.07 @ 16:54pm


Rush is not as big as ever. When was their last album of original material? How'd it do in the charts? Not as well as Spirit of Radio.

Your attacking of The Pretenders is undefendably wrongheaded. You aren't even making use of any logical concepts so there's nothing for me to even latch on to and counter. They still get regular radio play on CRR and AOR, they have a devoted fanbase, they are named as influences by a myriad of rock bands. Where they play and who they play with has nothing to do with anything.

The Hall is not about what you like, it's about influence and innovation. The Pretenders, Iron Maiden, Judas Priest, and REM all innovated and influenced. If you can't see that, then I don't know what to tell you.

Posted by Kit on Tuesday, 02.6.07 @ 17:57pm


correction: Permanent Waves, not Spirit of Radio. One is an album, one isn't...

Posted by Kit on Tuesday, 02.6.07 @ 18:45pm


"ZEP WOULD NEVER "OPEN" FOR ANYONE NOW, THEY WOULD NOT HAVE TO"

They didn't "have to" then, you idiot. That is exactly what I'm saying. They did it for their own reasons. They were never a small band. They started out with a bunch of tour dates that were previously scheduled for the Yardbirds. Page was already a staple name. Your argument has fallen apart.

And bands are inducted based on "innovation and influence," not popularity. Even though I dislike the HoF and disagree with much of it, I agree with the principle.

Posted by William on Tuesday, 02.6.07 @ 20:47pm


Anonymous, Dude. You are so wrong on so many levels. But I will address the most ridiculous..."GREAT BANDS AND CERTAINLY BANDS THAT ARE WORTHY OF THE HALL AND IN THE HALL SHOULD MAINTAIN THERE GREATNESS. THE FACT IS, THE PRETENDERS ARE A HAS BEEN BAND, NO ONE GIVES A SHIT ABOUT THEM. THEY DO NOT POSSESS LONGEVITY." It appears from that quote and the rest of your post that you are basically equating popularity and ability to fill arenas with greatness. But going even further, having once been able to fill such venues is not enough, you seem to be saying that if you ever have a period that varies from your peak in popularity, you are no longer great? What the hell are you talking about?

So, let's see...The Velvet Underground barely filled night clubs when they were actually playing together. So, let's toss them out of the Hall? Neil Young had a rough patch through most of the decade of the 1980's, commercially speaking, so Neil doesn't deserve a spot? Let's go beyond even rock and roll and the Hall, and take you concept back further. Frank Sinatra had several periods, some lengthy, during his career where he was out of fashion and lost much of his selling power. So, Frank wasn't a "great" singer and artist then? Hell, someone here even pointed out Mozart. His work was not very popular at all during his lifetime, he wasn't in a lot of demand. Guess he sucked too.

Your argument is ridiculous.

Posted by Dezmond on Wednesday, 02.7.07 @ 10:01am


No you are ridiculous - don't be so literal. You are taking my point and twisting it to fit your criticism of me. Obviously, all bands go through low and high points - that is evident, and bands cannot be popular forever. I was merely pointing out that a band like the Pretenders, for me, is mediocre at best, and was never that "great" to begin with. So, it is not surprising that they are nothing more than an "opening act." The rest of what you said is true - Neal Young, Sinatra, went through mediocre times.

And, yes to answer the implied question - being in "demand" and popular to some degree is important (not the main criteria - I agree with that). Music is meant to be listened to or enjoyed by the listener. It does not exist in a vaccum. Could you imagine any band playing music that no one liked and appealed only to those playing the music? I guess you could call that musical masturbation. Obviously, if no one is interested in the music - then how "good" can it be? To an extent or degree then, popularity and "sales" of records is important because it reflects interest in the music. But, yes being the most popular or having the most record sales means nothing in itself - that I would agree.

Posted by Anonymous on Wednesday, 02.7.07 @ 14:03pm


BTW, Lets stick to Rush. I do not care a wit about the Pretenders or REM, etc. Plus, isn't this the "Rush" page?? I only post to sites about bands I like. I would not go to a site and "bash" bands that I do not care about at all. I have other more useful things to do, but thats just me. I guess to each is own.

I will not mention any names, but go to sites like "RUSH", "KANSAS", "JOURNEY", "KISS" etc. and you will see that this blogger puts a lot of focus on bands he DOES NOT LIKE. Seems this persons main focus is to "rain on others parades." Tells you something of this persons character when he says nothing more in one blog to refer to a band as "they suck" with no elaboration. Again, tells you not only of the chracter, but also speaks to ignorance.

In any event, I will be posting something later this evening or tomorrow, which will outline very factually why RUSH belongs in the hall - even if they or myself do not care - sometimes you do things for the "principal."

Peace!

Posted by Anonymous on Wednesday, 02.7.07 @ 14:16pm


If you're tired of talking about other bands, don't bring them up. In each case YOU have been the one to bring the band up in conversation.

I'm getting real sick of you attacking me when I've been respectful.

I feel obliged to repeat myself, but The Hall is not about what you or anyone else likes, or about the venues you choose to play or who you choose to play with (honestly, name one band that WOULDN'T open for The Who). It's about influence and innovation.

I look forward to your arguement, I hope it is well-written and doesn't contain the veiled personal attacks all of your other posts do.

Posted by Kit on Wednesday, 02.7.07 @ 14:50pm


Anonymous, I appreciate your desire to stick to a Rush conversation, but as you know, these conversations often go in different directions as they unfold. Also, as we are discussing the RRHOF and the choices they make, inherent in the conversation is some comparisons (this band is in because of X and Y, this band is not because of Z, etc.) Pointing out the innovations of one band sometimes halp clarify why another band is not inducted (or just as often it is because of the politics of those making the choices).

Anyway, I too look forward to your Rush treatise. I will likely agree with much of it, I like Rush quite a bit.

Posted by Dezmond on Thursday, 02.8.07 @ 09:33am


Anyway, Kit a bit defensive there..perhaps it is you who is the one who says bands "suck" with no elaboration...I just call a spade a spade - and I see what you are about. You are respectful? That is a joke - I have seen your blogging and you are anything but respectful. MB, I have not been either, I can admit that, but take a look in the mirror dude.



Posted by Anonymous on Thursday, 02.8.07 @ 19:16pm


I've been going out of my way to treat you with respect. I deride the bands plenty but I never insult the individual, and I've always given reasons for my distaste for certain bands. If I'm defensive, it's because you're offensive.

Posted by Kit on Thursday, 02.8.07 @ 20:59pm


"I've been going out of my way to treat you with respect. I deride the bands plenty but I never insult the individual, and I've always given rasons for my distaste for certain bands."

REALLY??: Found this at Journey, posted by you:

"You left out the part where they suck."

Newsflash: making such hostile comments towards a "band" is an "indirect" insult to those that really enjoy the music of that band. It suggests that those people have "no taste" and "terribel judgment" about what is good music and what is not. Sounds pretty insulting to me. Again, it is an indirect insult.

A more appropriate comment could be: I don't think Journey deserves the hall, a lot of people loved them, but definitely not for me....or something to that effect.

But, when you simply say that they "suck", it is condascending and insulting to those that are passionate about that band.

Kit, Get Real........

Posted by Anonymous on Thursday, 02.8.07 @ 21:49pm


I was unable to post the "Resume" in its entirety - the site does not allow it, so I have to do it in multiple parts.

The following is a list of “facts” about Rush. When reading this one should also remember that Rush did all of this with very little radio air play, except for select classic rock stations across the country. Rush has also done very little self-promotion, such as appearing on the Tonight Show or Letterman or SNL. With this in mind, I present the Rush “Resume.”

RUSH “RESUME”

Rush: Canadian Rock Band formed in 1974. Mainly and highly influenced by British Rock Blues, such as Cream, Led Zeppelin, and Deep Purple. Also, very much influenced by The Who and later YES.

March 1994 - Rush was inducted into the Canadian Music Hall of Fame

Rush has been awarded several Juno Awards.

Rush boasts 23 gold records and 14 platinum (3 multi-platinum) records. These statistics place Rush fifth behind The Beatles, The Rolling Stones, KISS and Aerosmith for the most consecutive gold and platinum albums by a rock band.

May 1996 - Lee, Lifeson, and Peart are made Officers of the Order of Canada, the first rock musicians so honored.

May 1997 - The Foundation Forum and F Musicfest have announced Rush this year's recipient of the "Concrete/Foundations Outstanding Contribution to Music Award. Rush joins a distinguished list of receipts including Van Halen, KISS, Ozzy Osbourne and Alice Cooper.

January 2000 - Rush has topped JAM! Music's online poll, which determines them "Best Canadian Musicians of All Time."

Two tribute albums released: “Subdivisions” and “Working Man”, including artists such as Mike Portnoy, Billy Sheehan, Sebastian Bach, Steve Morse, Stu Hamm, Mike Mangini, John Petrucci, etc.

Influenced countless bands, including: Bare Naked Ladies, Primus, Dream Theater, Tool, Audioslave, Soundgarden, Coheed and Cambria, Metallica, Beastie Boys, Smashing Pumpkins, Primus, Symphony X, Porcupine Tree, Living Colour, Manic Street Preachers, Megadeth, Pearl Jam,Winger, Sepultura, Skid Row, Mr. Big, Shadow Gallery, Dokken, Fates Warning, Stuart Hamm, Steven Morse, Richard Chycki, Matt Guillory, Deen Castronovo, Devin Townsend,Joey Vera,Mark Zonder, etc.

In 2002, nearly 30 years after their first album, Rush played in South America (Brazil) to its second largest crowd as a headliner (40,000 fans) in Rio. Their largest crowd was the previous night of 60,000 fans in São Paulo. Thus, for only two shows Rush played for 100,000 fans in Brazil.


Posted by Anonymous on Thursday, 02.8.07 @ 21:53pm


Part II

In 2003 (nearly 30 years into their career), according to Rolling Stone Magazine, Rush’s tour grossed 21 million dollars, more than Kiss or Ozzfest (http://www.rollingstone.com/artists/rush/articles/story/6959138/money_makers)

According to RIAA, in the history of rock music, Rush ranks 78 in total record sales in the US.

Posted by Anonymous on Thursday, 02.8.07 @ 21:58pm


Part III

MOST PEOPLE DO NOT KNOW, BUT RUSH HAS HAD A SONG NOMINATED FOR A GRAMMY IN EVERY DECADE SINCE THE 1980's:

“YYZ”: Nominated for Grammy for Best Rock Instrumental in 1982.

“Where’s My Thing”: Nominated for Grammy for Best Rock Instrumental in 1991.

“Leave that Thing Alone”: Nominated for Grammy for Best Rock Instrumental in 1994

“O’ Baterista” (Peart Drum Solo): Nominated for Grammy for Best Rock Instrumental Performance in 2005.

Posted by Anonymous on Thursday, 02.8.07 @ 22:01pm


Geddy Lee: Bass Player

Bass Hall of Fame - Guitar Player Magazine
6 time winner: "Best Rock Bass" - Guitar Player Magazine
1993 - "Best Rock Bass Player" Bass Player readers' poll
Inspired such players as: Steve Harris of Iron Maiden, John Myung of Dream Theater, Les Claypool of Primus, Cliff Burton of Metallica.

Posted by Anonymous on Thursday, 02.8.07 @ 22:03pm


Alex Lifeson: Guitar
· 1983 - "Best Rock Talent" - Guitar for the Practicing Musician
· 1984 - Best Rock Guitarist - Guitar Player Magazine
· 1991 - Inducted into the Guitar for the Practicing Musician Hall of Fame
· Influenced many guitar players who often cite Lifeson as an influence, and is most known for creating ambience and “texture” within songs. Popularized the use of the “chorus effect.”

“Working Man” and “La Villa” often cited as one of Rocks greatest guitar solos: (http://guitar.about.com/library/bl100greatesti.htm)

Posted by Anonymous on Thursday, 02.8.07 @ 22:04pm



Neal Peart: Drums

· Hall of Fame: 1983
· Best Rock Drummer: 1980,1981,1982,1983,1984,1985,2006
· Best Multi-Percussionist: 1983,1984,1985,1986
· Best Percussion Instrumentalist: 1982
· Most Promising New Drummer: 1980
· Best All Around: 1986
· 1986 Honor Roll: Rock Drummer, Multi-Percussion
· According to Modern Drummer: Aside from Buddy Rich, no drummer has, “inspired more drummers the world over than Neil Peart.” (http://www.moderndrummer.com/updatefull/20000145)

Posted by Anonymous on Thursday, 02.8.07 @ 22:05pm


I presented the record sales and concert info. to demonstrate some facts only. I realize that this is not the "basis" for entry, but should be taken within the overall framework of what Rush has accomplished over there 30+ year career, which of course includes a profound influence on Rock music.

If they cannot get in with this resume, oh well...PEACE!

Posted by Anonymous on Thursday, 02.8.07 @ 22:07pm


Record sales are important. Every other Hall of Fame (MLB,Pro Football,Basketball) is based on accomplishments during a career. The reason any musician puts his work on wax,CD or now MP3 is for sales. Rush not only has the innovation AND undeniable influence,they also have the sales.

Posted by Aaron Noe on Thursday, 02.8.07 @ 22:23pm


If someone takes a statement towards a band personally, that's hardly my fault or my problem.

Guitar World is not what I would consider a reliable source, as its main target audience are pimply teenagers.

You list of Rush influences leaves out KC.

Some of your listed bands that are influenced by Rush are stretches, especially Manic Street Preachers (seriously?) and Barenaked Ladies. I don't detect the slightest hint of Rush on their albums. And I think Winger hurts your case more than helps it.

Brian Eno has more to do with texturing than Alex Lifeson did and is still on the outside.

You know who else won a grammy? Christina Aguilera. The grammy comittee has very little going for it as far as credibility.

It's a case that should be looked at, but not until other bigger oversights, namely those among the first wave of prog, have been corrected.

And I still personally say no.

Posted by Kit on Thursday, 02.8.07 @ 23:13pm


"Guitar World is not what I would consider a reliable source, as its main target audience are pimply teenagers."

Your opinion only and once again, insulting and condascending. Also, taking only one small part of the "resume" out of context.

"Some of your listed bands that are influenced by Rush are stretches, especially Manic Street Preachers (seriously?) and Barenaked Ladies. I don't detect the slightest hint of Rush on their albums."

Really? Steven Page and Ed Robertson played together in a Rush tribute band before they became Barenaked Ladies!

http://www.2112.net/artifacts/rushinsalutes/track4/4.html

In any event, selecting out one or two bands that you do not think Rush influenced is trivial.

"You know who else won a grammy? Christina Aguilera. The grammy comittee has very little going for it as far as credibility."

Rush never won a grammy. It was pointed out as a fact that many people do not know. To those that watch the Grammy, Rush is obsucure, so it is a big accomplishment. But, as I said (and ignored by you), those facts were pointed out as a matter of interest and were supposed to be taken within the context of the whole "picture." Stop looking at the the trees, rather than the forest.

"And I still personally say no."

It is not about anyone's personal like or dislike. They meet the halls criteria hands down. As for other bands should be in first...that is an old story...this is a Rush page.

PEACE OUT!











Posted by Anonymous on Friday, 02.9.07 @ 01:18am


"Brian Eno has more to do with texturing than Alex Lifeson did and is still on the outside."

For starters, taking a minor obsucre point is not a reason Rush should not be in the hall. Plus, shmuck, Brian Eno, was not a guitar player and is most known for producing and when it came to playing - played keyboards. No one ever said that Lifeson CREATED, but rather thay he had popularized as a GUITARIST.


Your arguments are weak and trivial and demonstrate only that "deep down" you know Rush should be in the hall, but outwardly, since you have a need to always be right, you focus on petty issues.

LATER

Posted by Anonymous on Friday, 02.9.07 @ 05:57am


TYPO - was supposed to say that: No one ever said that Lifeson created texturing, but rather that he popularized it as a guitarist

Posted by Anonymous on Friday, 02.9.07 @ 05:59am


Brian Eno is not obscure, nor did he exclusively play keyboards. You've pretty much deintegrated every other band just to build Rush up. As for texturing on the guitar, Robert Fripp beats Rush to the punch there.

Guitar World is a publication aimed at adolescents; this is fact. It is not a reliable source or any sort of measurement of talent.

Influence isn't about what bands listen to when they're bored. It's about the sound. Do you detect any of Rush's influence in Barenaked Ladies' limp acoustic shuffling with ridiculously bad lyrics? Okay, maybe there's a lyrical connection, but even that's a stretch. In fact, I'd say that very few of your bands have anything to do with Rush, but I wouldn't want you to freak out and change your name again.

You can't talk about Rush without talking about their contemporaries and their forebears. No band exists in a vacum.

Don't presume to know what I think "deep down". That's an arrogant and insulting thing to say.

Posted by Kit on Friday, 02.9.07 @ 09:38am


I don't think that there is any question that Rush deserves induction. I don't need to go through the stats, Anonymous has done that adequately. This is splitting hairs, but I don't hear much influence from Lifeson on other guitarists. He's very talented, but not all that innovative. As Kit said, most guitar innovations associated with Lifeson were done earlier and better by others (Fripp, Steve Hackett). And then later guitarists took it a lot further and eventually overshadowed Lifeson (for texture, hear Andy Summers or Edge). That said, Lifeson is competent and creative. Geddy Lee, I don't see anyone he's influenced. It is Peart who has clearly influenced musicians. I prefer many drummers over Peart, but his influence and the respect for him is undeniable.

We get back to the real reason Rush is not in: the RRHOF hates prog rock. I know, Rush was only really prog in the early days, but like it or not, they are often still categorized as such.

Posted by Dezmond on Friday, 02.9.07 @ 10:14am


"Brian Eno is not obscure..."

I NEVER SAID THAT HE WAS OBSCURE. I WAS POINTING OUT THAT YOUR ARGUMENT WAS OBSCURE. IN OTHER WORDS, IF YOU THINK THAT ENO WAS MORE INNOVATIVE THAN LIFESON - THAT IS FINE. BUT, IT IS A MINOR POINT, AND WOULD NOT BE A REASON TO EXCLUDE RUSH FROM THE HOF.


"Geddy Lee, I don't see anyone he's influenced."

REALLY? TAKEN FROM FENDER WEBSITE DIRECTLY:

"Few hard rock bassists have been as influential as Rush's Geddy Lee...Lee's influence on rock bass can be heard in the playing of such wide-ranging disciples as Primus' Les Claypool, Dream Theater's John Myung, and Metallica's Cliff Burton."

(http://www.fender.com/artists/artists.php?artist=geddy_lee)


As for Lifeson...you cannot fault him for being second or third in line from other guitar players...obviously, when he was born and who came before him, is something he cannot control. I do think that his two best attributes is that he is a master at creating ambience within a song (i.e. see Xanadu) and his solos and guitar playing always stay "within" the song (i.e. not overdone).

As for the "Edge" and "Andy Summers" - (BTW, The police are my second favorite band to Rush) - they are decent guitar players, but cannot stand next to Lifeson - no way, no how. Yes, those guitarists were innovative and fresh for their time - I will give you that.

However, anything they have done, Lifeson has done as well. But, Lifeson, has the edge because he can "shred" way better than those two. Take a listen to "La Villa" or "Working Man" or "2112"- those are guitar masterpieces, and as noted above, are regarded as some of the best rock guitar solos / works of all time. The Edge and Summers have never come close to these. Name one song that comes close.

Please don't say that the music style of the Police and U-2 were different - they had plenty of opprtunity for solos, the fact is, those two did not play that style of guitar because they were not as good in that respect. I love the Police and have heard Summers "solos" - they are mediocre at best. His guitar playing overall is good, but not great, in my opinion. I beleieve that the Police were great because of Sting and because they had in my opinion the best drummer (Copeland) - yes, I like Copeland more than Peart.


My last point, is that some bands have been influenced by Rush in more abstract ways. One, in their vision of sticking to what they want to play and not caring what the record execs say (Lifeson is quoted as saying that has been a big part of their influence) Second, structural influences - such as timing changes, etc. Thus, even though a band does not sound like Rush, they could have still been profoundly influenced by them. That would probably explain why so many bands cite Rush as an influence - there influence is undeniable, except to Kit and the RRHOF.

Oh well...












Posted by Anonymous on Friday, 02.9.07 @ 17:22pm


The Edge doesn't "shred" because he's a master of understatement. Not a note is wasted; he's deferential and he serves the song by keeping things concise and tasteful. When he does solo, it's great. The same can be said for Andy Summers. Guitarists shouldn't be measured by decadent, pointless soloing (not that I'm necessarily accusing Lifeson of this). In my opinion, when it comes to guitar playing, less is more. Get that gonzo shredding crap out of my face.

Posted by Matt on Friday, 02.9.07 @ 19:24pm


I totally agree with you Matt. That is my exact point though, Lifeson has always played "less" (esp. with Peart and Lee in the band - he is "overshadowed" by them) and has always been able to stay within the song. However, he can "shred" and still stay within the song with great feel and make the solo fit perfectly within the song. A classic example, the Limelight solo. Plus, some guys can "shred" and sound like they are all over the place, but Lifeson does it in such a way that is plain awesome. Just pop in Working Man and crank it up - you will see what I mean. And even better example is "Kid Gloves" or "Between the Wheels." I definitely like Summers and the Edge, but I do not believe tha they have the "chops" of Lifeson.

In any event, I like all three guitarists for that reason, making each note count and staying within the song - PROPS TO ALL THREE.

Anon



Posted by Anonymous on Friday, 02.9.07 @ 19:42pm


Good points, Anon, but I still think you are overstating Geddy Lee's influence as a bass player. He is excellent, but I have not heard anything in his playing that was not done as good or better before him. check out Chris Squire or John Entwistle, for instance.

I will also give grant you the fact that Lifeson does create atmospherics very well, he isn't just standing up there wanking away and playing solos all over the place. But Edge and Summers are both better at that than Lifeson. In fact, nobody does it better than those two.

finally, you are right about Summers' solos. In those rare instances when Sting sets his ego aside enough to allow for a guitar solo in a Police song, Summers' straight up soloing is mediocre to not so great. But fortunately, he is a genius as a rhythm guitarist, and a master of using technology with his playing to really fill out the sound in those Police songs. Sting's bass takes more of the melody lines in Police songs anyway. Glad we agree that Stewart Copeland is the greatest drummer. I rank Keith Moon right behind him, although Moon and Copeland couldn't be more different in their styles.

Oh, we were supposed to be talking about Rush.

Posted by Dezmond on Saturday, 02.10.07 @ 10:57am


I forgot to mention, since we were talking about the Police. I am sure you have heard that they are reuniting for a tour this summer, right? Awesome. Also, there is reason to watch at least the beginning of the Grammy's tomorrow night. The Police are supposedly opening the show.

OK. Back to Rush.

Posted by Dezmond on Saturday, 02.10.07 @ 11:00am


Yeah, I love Copeland as a drummer. Peart is great, but I find Copeland to be more "natural" if that means anything. His drum kit is half the size of Peart's but his playin is as "big." Don't get me wrong Peart added a dimension to drumming that was unheard of in rock until he came along. But, his playing, to me, is more contrived.

Also, Lifeson is my favorite guitarist in Rock, hands down, which is why I got "defend" my boy. I realize that he is know satriani or Yngwvie, but I love his style and what he is able to create much more. Sure, those guitarists have an innate and uncanny ability to play fast (almost inhuman), but there is so much more to guitar playing than that. I actually saw Malmsteen and Steve Vai in a show in Vegas. They are inhuman on the guitar. For starters, Steve Vai has the longest fingers I have ever seen. Malmsteen was fat and drunk, but still played great.

Anwyay, I will check out the Police, I definitely will, thanks for the heads up. I know I said to stick to Rush, but at this point, I am bored and we seem to talking in circles at this point. Plus, what does the RRHOF really mean. Do you think Peart, Lifeson, and Lee even think about this? Personally, I doubt it very much, but who knows.

Posted by Anonymous on Saturday, 02.10.07 @ 12:51pm


TYPO: duh, should have been "no Satriani" -

Posted by Anonymous on Saturday, 02.10.07 @ 12:52pm


For the mere fact that the Pretenders are heard daily during the Rush Limbaugh Show they should be booted OUT of the RRHOF. Rush (the band) rules.

Posted by Aaron on Monday, 02.12.07 @ 16:29pm


Go to http://www.therock951.com/index.php then nav through to 'Rock Interviews' and listen to the Jeff Burrows (Drummer for 'Tea Party')interview of Alex - near the end of the interview the discussion moves to the RRHOF and you can hear a little of what Mr. Lifeson and, in plausible extension, Rush think about the subject.

Posted by Zeno70 on Wednesday, 02.14.07 @ 12:49pm


I listened to the Lifeson interview. He basically laughed and said, "Well, look who they are putting in." He is right to a degree...I mean the Dells and The Moonglows.... :-) LOL, LOL, LOL

He also sounded sincere and basically said that it really does not matter to them. He felt that the RRHOF was a place where fans and bands "look back" on their careers and he felt that Rush still is alive and kicking and wants to "look forward." And, considering their new album comes out May 1st - he is certainly backing up his words.

Can't wait for the new album...............



Posted by Anonymous on Tuesday, 03.6.07 @ 12:13pm


You would definately put RUSH at the top of the ballot for nomination. Just listen to EVERY RUSH ALBUM back to back and the choice would be very clear. The rest is self-explanatory. Are you people with me? Enough said.....

Posted by Jeff D on Sunday, 03.11.07 @ 17:25pm


How many kids were influenced to become rockers because of Rush? Quite a few. Let them in already.

Posted by Joe on Monday, 03.12.07 @ 17:10pm


I'm a huge Rush fan from the States. Though it does have some justification, I doubt there is any real anti-Canadian bias. At least I hope not. For Rush not to be in the HOF just ruins its credibility as an institution. They are great musicians and massively influential. This is true a crime. The best thing Canada has ever exported along with maple syrup and Wayne Gretzky.

Posted by Chuckwheat on Thursday, 03.15.07 @ 15:57pm


"Any escape might help to smoothe the unattractive truth, but the future rock hall website has no charms to soothe the restless dreams of Rush fans."

Ha Ha...

Posted by Anonymous on Saturday, 03.17.07 @ 16:22pm


Sales mean NOTHING to the Hall??? Hmmm...taken from RRHOF Website from REM Induction:

"Both albums sold more than 4 million copies in the U.S. alone, ushering R.E.M. into rock’s upper echelon."

Gee..wonder why they mentioned that since according to some, sales "Means nothing."


Here is one regarding Van Halen, recently inducted and taken word for word from the RRHOF Website:

"After 30 years and 11 studio releases—four of which reached Number One—Van Halen remains the band’s top seller, with U.S. sales of more than 10 million. The band’s other blockbuster, 1984, has also surpassed the 10 million mark. To date, Van Halen has sold more than 56 million records in the U.S., which places them among the top 20 best-selling artists of all time."

Gee...seems to be a pretty long section regarding sales, popularity and rankings.

Sales do not mean anything to the RRHOF? That is total nonsense. If that were the case, well....you know....

Posted by Anonymous on Sunday, 03.18.07 @ 08:50am


"Billboard" lists the Greatest Trios of All Time: Essential Listening List - there are 12 on the list - one of which is Rush: Moving Pictures

http://www.billboard.com/bbcom/greatesttrios/2006/essential_listening.jsp

Posted by A Rush Fan on Sunday, 03.18.07 @ 12:27pm


Rush's influence on monumental bands (i.e. Metallica), as well as some more upcoming and obscure bands (i.e. Anaka, Can of Worms, I could literally go on an on)is undeniable, unless of course you live your life in denial. There snub to the hall is a pathetic joke.

Posted by A Rush Fan on Sunday, 03.18.07 @ 12:56pm


I have seen posts by Kit calling Rush lyrics arrogant, pretentious, etc. Well, really? Hmm...in fact Peart's lyrics are nothing of the sort. You may want to expose yourself to more than two or three Rush songs before passing such judgment. Peart's lyrics are deep, insightful and intimately connected to the human condition, as well as the foibles of our society.

For instance:

1) "And the men who hold high places
Must be the ones who start
To mold a new reality
Closer to the heart"

2) The hypocrites are slandering
The sacred Halls of Truth
Ancient nobles showering
Their bitterness on youth
Can't we find the minds that made us strong?
Can't we learn to feel what's right
And what's wrong?

3) "When life becomes as barren
And as cold as winter skies
There's a beacon in the darkness
In a distant pair of eyes
In vain to search for honor
In vain to search for truth
But these things can still be given
Your love has shown me proof"

4)"Growing up it all seems so one-sided
Opinions all provided
The future pre-decided
Detached and subdivided
In the mass production zone
Nowhere is the dreamer or the misfit so alone "

5) "Suddenly, you were gone
From all the lives you left your mark upon...I learned your love for life, I feel the way that you would I feel your presence
I remember. I feel the way you would
This just can't be understood..."

6) "We can go from boom to bust
From dreams to a bowl of dust
We can fall from rockets' red glare
Down to "Brother can you spare..."
Another war
Another wasteland
And another lost generation"

7) "Dreams flow across the heartland
Feeding on the fires
Dreams transport desires
Drive you when you're down
Dreams transport the ones who need to get out of town"

8) "Here's a little trap
That sometimes catches everyone
When today's as far as we can see
Faith in bright tomorrows
Giving way to resignation
That's how it is
How it's going to be"

9) "All of us get lost in the darkness
Dreamers learn to steer by the stars
All of us do time in the gutter
Dreamers turn to look at the cars...Someone set a bad example
Made surrender seem all right
The act of a noble warrior
Who lost the will to fight"

Yeah, real arrogant...songs about love, lonliness, feeling depressed and hopeless (how he felt after his wife and daughter died), loss of a loved one, songs of hope, and lastly songs about finding leaders / mentors to guide our youth and society in a better direction.

Maybe if Kit went beyond reading the lyrics of Tom Sawyer or Free will or Anthem - he would actually have a clue....

A Rush Fan

Posted by A Rsuh Fan on Wednesday, 03.21.07 @ 19:20pm


Plus, another thing is that the lyrics of Tom Sawyer and Anthem are often misunderstood. Peart does not advocate "selfishness" in the sense that most people think of it. He advocates "healthy" self-interest, which is what an old professor of mine used to say: "What is good for me is good for others." Meaning, if you take good care of yourself, then you are content and happy (hopefully), and consequently a much better person to be around. It is sort of when you go on an airplane and they tell you to put the O2 mask on your SELF first before your child. Why? Because if you take care of yourself, you are in a much better position to care for others, etc. But, Peart never suggested that people walk around in their lives arrogantly acting in a self-absorbed, selfish manner - to think that just demonstrates a total lack of understanind of his writings and "objectivism."

As for Tom Sawyer, that is really a song about individualism and freedom, and believing in yourself and being head strong despite the craziness around you - there is nothing arrogant about that. In fact, given the level of conformity in our society, we desperately need leaders like "Tom Sawyer." MB if we had that a few years back, we would NOT be in Iraq and clueless!

One last story -when I was 15 (during the 1980's) I was in the Rush Backstage Club (yes I admit it). Someone wrote in a question to Peart, which pertained to the time when "We are the World" was big.

The question was, something to this effect:

"In an age of 'We are the World', etc. doesn't it seem that lyrics like: 'Live for yourself, there is no one else more worth living for. Begging hands and bleeding hearts will only cry out for more' are not applicable."

PEART'S RESPONSE (BTW, This question also demonstrates the questioner's total lack of understanding of what Peart was trying to say in that lyric, as I described above), in any event, Peart responded:

That he tried to put together a charity event (not too long prior to "We are the World") and he had made inquiries to a number of famous musicians and none were interested. Why? Becasue the charity event that he was involved in would NOT AFFORD THE BAND OR MUSICIAN ANY PUBLIC EXPOSURE. Essentially, there was NOTHING IN IT FOR THEM, and they all declined, so what he was trying to put together fizzled out and it never came to be.

In any event, this story demonstrates that Peart and what he believes (i.e. reflected in his writings) has nothing to do with "selfishness" - if he believed in "selfishness", why would he attempt to put together a charity that he would not get much out of on a personal level (i.e. no exposure for him or Rush). And, most importantly, it shows that all those folks who pretend to be selfless are not at all - people in most circumstances want to know, what is in it for me?

Before people judge Peart or his lyrics, they should 1) Actually be familiar with the entire catalog of lyrics, not just 3 or four songs
2) and if they are familiar with most of the catalog, they should not select out three or four songs to make a point and simultaneously disregard the other lyrics - that is called misleading
3) Have the brain to be able decipher and figure out what they actually mean (i.e. not misinterpret the lyrics, as frequently occurs with Peart).





Posted by A Rush Fan on Wednesday, 03.21.07 @ 20:34pm


Gotta love seeing Geddy Lee on those ESPN baseball promos. Kit, you are right. Rush has no influence. Baseball fans don't know who he is,right? Yeah,right!

Posted by Aaron on Thursday, 03.22.07 @ 09:37am


From Wikipedia on "Progressive Rock:

"Several of the leading bands in the prog-metal genre— Dream Theater (U.S.), Ayreon (Netherlands), Opeth, (Sweden), Fates Warning (U.S.) and Queensrÿche (U.S.)—cite pioneer progressive hard-rockers Rush as a primary influence, although their music exhibits influences from more traditional metal bands such as Black Sabbath or Deep Purple as well.

No Influence?????

Posted by A Rush Fan on Thursday, 03.22.07 @ 18:22pm


Most consecutive Gold Albums

42 - Beatles
39 - Rolling Stones
24 - Kiss
23 - Aerosmith
22 - Rush******
22 - Alabama
22 - Chicago
20 - Beach Boys
20 - Jefferson Airplane/Starship
20 - Santana
19 - AC/DC
18 - Grateful Dead
18 - Pink Floyd
18 - Who
17 - Doors
17 - Lynyrd Skynyrd
17 - Queen
16 - Led Zeppelin
16 - Temptations
15 - Isley Brothers
15 - Jethro Tull
15 - Mannheim Steamroller
15 - U2

Posted by A Rush Fan on Friday, 03.23.07 @ 05:55am


REVIEW OF LIFESON:

"Sound: Alex's style revolves around occupying a lot of space, and nobody does it better. Through the careful use of time-based effects as well as unusual, ambiguous chord voicings, Alex creates a wash of sound that is almost three dimensional."

"Chord voicings: I honestly believe that many of the chords Alex plays didn't exist (at least in rock) before he created them. Take a listen to the Hemispheres album for a virtual clinic on Lifeson chords. You can analyze them from a theory standpoint but that won't do them justice; the approach to fingering them is so outside-the-box that a schooled player would NEVER think to do it that way."

"Versatility: Alex is a very versatile player who employs many different tones, textures, and styles to get his point across while still maintaining his identity."

"An entire book could be written on Alex's rhythm playing. He started out playing a lot of standard rock power chords with the occasional odd voicing tossed in. Gradually, the odd voicings took over"

YEAH, NO INFLUENCE??.....

IDIOTS!





Posted by Anonymous on Sunday, 03.25.07 @ 12:25pm


If you look at the "Eligible Artists" section of this blog you will notice that in a few years there will be nearly no truly qualified candidates for HOF induction. The Hall, in an attempt to not induct rappers only, will then induct rock and roll icons like Kiss, Rush and Cheap Trick. Just wait, you'll see I'm right.

Posted by Aaron on Monday, 03.26.07 @ 18:15pm


I have lost all respect for the RnR HOF - no metal, and no Prog Rock. Iron Maiden, Judas Priest, Rush, Yes, where are these bands??? Grandmaster Flash is in and they are not? WTF?

Posted by KingAd on Tuesday, 04.3.07 @ 09:21am


BTW, to Kit and all of the Rush detractors: over 30 + years into their career, Rush tickets have gone on sale - and front row seats are now going for over 1,000 dollars a seat - sorry, but real bands with true influence do not have waning interest, as in the lame Pretenders.

GO Grand Master, The Dells and The Moonglows

Those elitist snobs at the RRHOF should wake up and get a clue and induct the true legends of Rock music..........

Posted by Anonymous on Tuesday, 04.3.07 @ 18:05pm


Oh, and regarding the comments that bands have fluctuatins in interest over time - really????, Two comments:

1) "The grapes must be sour"

2) The Police

Posted by ANON on Tuesday, 04.3.07 @ 18:20pm


"But I do disagree with Michael when he gets upset about th ELP effigy and what that represents."

Sure rock is about anger and rebellion, but towards society, the gov't, etc. But, not other rockers....sorry you are just wrong.

Posted by ANON on Wednesday, 04.4.07 @ 18:30pm


"honestly, name one band that WOULDN'T open for The Who."

ANSWER: Rush, The Police, etc. They do not need to, they are legendary and headliners and would not take a "back seat" unless they had to - like the lame Pretenders.

Posted by ANON on Wednesday, 04.4.07 @ 18:36pm


The reason Rush is not in the Hall in because the people who are doing the voting have no respect for progressive rock. They deem progressive rock as souless. Ultimately, as time passes, bands are remembered for songs and not trends, album sales or top-40 hits. Rush easily has 20-30 songs that have been FM staples for 30 years and I suspect that Tom Saywer, Limelight, Freewill, Closer To The Heart, 2112, Subdivisions, etc. will continue to be played for another 30 years.....they deverve to be in. Apparently Blondie made the Hall last year...huh? I don't know one song of theirs that is still consistently played on the radio. And last I checked, Rush can still pack an Arena and Blonie couldn't fill my living room.

Posted by Brian on Tuesday, 04.10.07 @ 17:24pm


Pink Floyd will probably be the only Progressive Rock group to ever get in the Hall.

Posted by Joe Skee on Friday, 04.13.07 @ 11:40am


I see above someone compared Rush to "Europe." That is a joke. Europe blows and Rush is a monumental Rock Band.

Don't believe me??...just check the "future eligibles" for Europe and no one has posted to them, not a single comment...I guess that's because no one cares.

Posted by A Rush Fan on Wednesday, 04.25.07 @ 14:44pm


I read all the posts both pro and con for the induction of Rush into the RRHOF. Since this "institution" is dominated mainly by people connected with Rolling Stone magazine I doubt Rush will be even nominated because:



a) Not enough sex appeal


I've never met a member of the female species who expressed even the slightest interest or like of Rush. For whatever reason the chicks just don't dig Rush.




b) Too individualistic


Rolling Stone is a magazine very socialistic in its politics. Aside from the freedom to do whatever drugs you feel like and have sex with whomever you feel like they seem to want to leave all the rest of life's concerns to big government which is in direct contrast to the more individualistic philosophy embodied in Rush's lyrics.





c)Little if any sense of humor


Being the rather silly, shallow publication that it is Rolling Stone probably thinks prog bands like Rush are a "little too full of themselves" and don't fool around enough. On this point I somewhat agree. There isn't 1 song they do that I've heard that makes a joke about anything. Even heavy bands like ELP always tried to lighten it up a little like "Are You Ready Eddie" and "Benny the Bouncer"


Thus I believe for those 3 reasons Rush is a long shot...not to say that I personally don't enjoy their music-I definitely do. They are very good musicians and I believe the world already has enough clowns, but this isn't how Jann and Company think. And they really didn't "invent" Hard Rock, Prog Rock or Prog Metal so that's a problem as well.


Just a very good band with many solid tunes.

Posted by SG on Tuesday, 05.1.07 @ 01:38am


Wow....
I just came from the Moody Blues room where Anonymous has been pissing all over the walls and chucking his feces at anyone who enters. Seems Kit and William dared to challenge his foaming-mouth obsession with Rush and he went OFF; creepy - very Gollumish. I swear he uttered "My Pr-r-recious" once when referring to Rush.

Holy freakin crap dude. Are the neighbors noticing yet that their pets are missing? Do you leave the bodies there after you have sacrificed Mr. Biggles and Scruffy at your altar of Rush?

You are quite mad, Anon. You and your 2112 logo underoos are unreachable.

Posted by shawn on Monday, 05.7.07 @ 14:22pm


Shawn - your way off base about me or who I am, but that's besides the point. Last time I checked, this is a Rush blog, yet you make no mention in your post of Rush's music or your viewpoint on the whether they should be inducted on the above post. Yes, it is obvious that Rush is my favorite band, and I support them. But, I can respect other's opnions as long as THEY ARE based upon facts. Like when someone says Rush has had no influence, that's just plain wrong and only refelcts their dislike of the band.

In any event, I am shocked that they did not just remove your meaningless post, since it is not relevant on any level.

You have become obsessed with me and it is quite creepy....

Posted by Anonymous on Monday, 05.7.07 @ 17:49pm


"You have become obsessed with me and it is quite creepy...."

Posted by Anonymous on Monday, 05.7.07 @ 17:49pm

..said the pot to the kettle.
They ought to remove both of ours starting about 5 days back, when I got sucked into your hell.

Posted by shawn on Tuesday, 05.8.07 @ 09:07am


Neil Peart crys at night because he can't play as well as Stewart Copeland.

Posted by shawn on Tuesday, 05.8.07 @ 23:27pm


"Neil Peart crys at night because he can't play as well as Stewart Copeland."

Can't really compare the two, as both are phenomenal drummers, but stylistically quite different. Plus, I really doubt Peart "cries" over being regarded by many critics as the greatest rock drummer over the past 30 years.

Posted by Anonymous on Wednesday, 05.9.07 @ 05:53am



Looks like you were off base

100 best rock drummers:
www.digitaldreamdoor.com/pages/best_drummers.html
(Peart is #1 and Copeland is #17)

Some other polls and rankings, whatever they are worth:

www.angelfire.com/ab/reviews/drummer.html
(Peart is #2, Copeland is #6)

http://www.the-top-tens.com/lists/best-rock-drummers.asp
(Peart #2, Copeland not on the list)

steelkaleidoscopes.typepad.com/steel_kaleidoscopes/2006/06/top_10_rock_dru.html
(Peart #1, Copeland not on list)

www.bandlink.net/forum/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=37509
(Peart #1, Copeland #12)

I guess for Peart, those are tears of joy....


Posted by ANON on Thursday, 05.10.07 @ 19:26pm


THIS JUST IN:

MAY 9, 2007

RUSH’S “SNAKES AND ARROWS” DEBUTS AT #3,
MARKING BAND’S HIGHEST U.S. PREMIERE IN 14 YEARS;
WORLD TOUR SET TO FOLLOW TRIUMPHANT RETURN

“SNAKES AND ARROWS,” the acclaimed new album from Anthem/Atlantic recording group Rush, makes an impressive debut on the Billboard 200 this week, entering the chart in the #3 spot. This marks Rush’s highest chart debut since 1993, as well as the group’s eleventh top ten album in the U.S. The renowned rock trio’s first new collection of original material in nearly five years proves they still have what it takes to produce explosive and innovative music.

“SNAKES AND ARROWS” has also debuted at #3 in the band’s native Canada and at #13 in the UK, which marks the band’s highest British chart ranking in 16 years. In other international news, the album has premiered in the top ten in Sweden and Finland, and in the top twenty in Norway, the Netherlands, and Japan.

Not bad for a 35 year old non-U.S. hall of fame band...

Posted by Anonymous on Friday, 05.11.07 @ 16:55pm


I just picked up the album - yes a little delayed. Has a very different sound to it.

Rush worked with the former producer of the Foo Fighters and Velvet Revolver.

There is a lot of acoustic guitar - definitely different for Rush, but overall very good. Once again, Rush, a band that has been around for so long continues to remain fresh and modern while still maintaining that Rush "sound." Just another reason to...well you know...

Posted by Anonymous on Wednesday, 05.30.07 @ 05:48am


I must first say that I am a huge Rush fan. But the new album is a huge disapointment. With the exception of "Far Cry" all the songs sound like the original songs of a Rush cover-band. Did somebody steal half of Peart's drum kit? And take Alex's effect pedals? I want to remember Rush for their masterpiece albums like 2112,Moving Pictures, Permanant Waves and Roll the Bones. This album just give the naysayers ammunition.
Note to Rush: Continue touring, but only play the classics, don't tarnish your legacy.

Posted by Aaron Noe on Wednesday, 05.30.07 @ 12:42pm


Disagree....sure Rush will never make another 2112 or MP, but how could they match those masterpieces? Plus, do you think they want to be stuck in the 70's or 80's?

They tried to do something a bit different and overall succeeded. The instrumental track #6 is incredible. I do agree that some of the songs are weak, but since there are 13 songs, they can afford to have a mediocre song or two. Track # 7 is also cool with the blues guitar sound

Posted by Anonymous on Wednesday, 05.30.07 @ 18:48pm


The more I think about it, Rush definitely deserves indcution.

Posted by shawn on Friday, 06.1.07 @ 05:43am


Rush is one of the greatest bands of all time and the greatest power trio to ever grace a stage. They are certainly not at the top of the all time snub list but they are certainly on the list, that honor has to go to the greatest prog band of all: The Moody Blues. Prog and metal have been disenfranchised for years and that is because of the "opinions" of a few who have a stranglehold on the rock hall, and their attempt to rewrite rock history to reflect their own record collections.

Posted by mycroft on Saturday, 06.2.07 @ 07:57am


said perfectly mycroft....much agree

Posted by Anonymous on Saturday, 06.2.07 @ 15:12pm


I think they are a good group but i clearly understand those who say they were not part of the first wave.You know it'squite illogical and that's not their fault it is this hall that did not enter the good ones at the time they would.
But maybe we should think that perhaps a prog band in the hall would be maybe a victory for all the genre and i also think that rush has been eligible for more or less 10 years they have waited so much time that we can consider that we don't have to enter all the real pioneers before(because it would take lots of years considering that there are lots of other genres)

Posted by roméo on Saturday, 06.2.07 @ 15:22pm


What in the world can we make of this? Rush's induction chances (16%) are in the same family as Motley Crue (11%)?? Anon, this must be an outrage for you to behold!
Look at who else is in Rush's league:

Jimmy Buffet!! (11%)
Journey (11%)
Ted Nugent (11%)
Billy Idol (12%)
Butthole Surfers (12%)
Foreigner (12%)
Tears For Fears (13%)
Toto (14%)
Peter Frampton (15%)
and look who is considered more likely!:

Moody Blues (17%)
and get this.........

Meatloaf!!!! (19%).
Well there it is - it's official; Meatloaf is more significant than Rush, though I'm sure the Canadian Wonerboys are slightly better musicians and have a longer career. Oh well; 2 out of 3 ain't bad.

Posted by shawn mc on Wednesday, 06.13.07 @ 09:16am


I don't get outraged about things I have no control over...I learned that a long time ago...Rush, with many other bands that I love, brings me happiness and enjoyment, what more can I ask for?

As for the hall induction, that is really not that big of a deal...I mean who takes that organization that seriously? I know I don't. I only come to these blogs b/c I am a music "lover" and enjoy the occasional "conversations."

The fact is, irrespective of hall induction, bands exist and their accomplishments can never be taken away by some elite snobs....the fact is Rush are millionaires a gazillion times over and the fact that other bands frequently cite them as an influence cannot be taken away...and I doubt Rush or any of the other bands not in the so called "Hall" need that kind of stroking from the "piss stain" organization (the latter comment of course being made by one of the actual inductees).

Posted by Anon on Wednesday, 06.13.07 @ 12:12pm


"I don't get outraged about things I have no control over......Rush..brings me happiness.."

Bravo Anon - good restraint! I was trying to bait you into a tirade and you resisted. I am genuinely impressed.
But c'mon --- Meatloaf?! In all seriousness, how can that one album theatrical sweat machine really be closer to the Hall than Rush, with their long standing career?
This, along with the Stevie Ray Vaughan 27% makes me question the validity of this site's formula for coming to these numbers.

Rush's chances are only slightly higher than Huey Lewis and the News'?

Posted by shawn mc on Wednesday, 06.13.07 @ 14:52pm


As for Meatloaf and the other bands, I am not sure how they figure the formulas, etc. Like I said, I really do not think it is a very respected hall to the public. Think of it like this, when you think of a player getting into the Baseball Hall of Fame, it is a highly prestigous accomplishment with the likes of Ruth, Gehrig, Mantle, etc. It has an aura of mystique, prestige, and the feeling that the player is being enshrined for eternity.

Sorry, but the RRHOF does not come close to that - it is a joke that most peopele do not take very seriously. When one of the inductees calls the RRHOF a "piss stain" how serious can you really take the hall? Overall, the RRHOF is a fun idea, but the publice perception of it is certainly not on par with other halls, like baseball, etc.

Posted by ANON on Wednesday, 06.13.07 @ 15:10pm


I have heard a couple of Rush's albums PERMANENT WAVES and MOVING PICTURES. I'll admit they where a damn good group. But do they really deserve enshrinement in the RRHF!!!!

Posted by Joe-Skee on Wednesday, 06.13.07 @ 15:20pm


Baseball stats are based on things like HITS and other 100% objective criteria. They're not open to interpretation at all.

And actually, if it pleases you, they are anticipating a big stink over some competitive sports in the near future as to what constitutes fairness (like prosthetic limbs, corrective eye surgery, and that long-time favorite, steroids).

But yeah, sports are a different thing entirely from art.

Posted by William on Wednesday, 06.13.07 @ 15:25pm


Anon, I disagree. While music halls of fame are more difficult to keep "objective" than the one for baseball, they are still prestigious places to be enshrined. The RRHOF has made some terrible mistakes in inductions and omissions, but they have also gotten a lot of things right. Let's give them that. And the vast majority of inductees seem genuinely honored and happy to be inducted. It is an acknowledgment of their life's work.

One of the reasons I pay so much attention is that I believe in what the Rockhall COULD be, only if some problems were fixed and some more care and attention was given to what they are really doing and their mission. But I believe in the mission and the spirit of what the Hall was intended to do. And yes, I realize in many ways a stodgy old Hall of Fame is antithetical to the rebellious and youthful nature of rock and roll, but so be it. I love history as well as rock and roll, so putting them together in a museum and hall of fame is irresistible to someone like me. I just really want them to get it right, that's all.

But the Rockhall, with all of its faults, is pretty respected. Many of the people who claim to not respect it are, funny enough, the ones who spend a lot of their time here at this stie discussing it.

Posted by Dezmond on Wednesday, 06.13.07 @ 16:55pm


...And the "piss stain" comment was made by Johnny Rotten. What the hell do you expect? It's the Sex Pistols. That is what they are expected to say.

Posted by Dezmond on Wednesday, 06.13.07 @ 16:57pm


"it is a joke that most people do not take very seriously."

Well I'm wondering if it's not quite possible that Johnny Lydon made his "piss stain" comment because, ironically, people are taking the Hall too seriously.
Not to trivialize art, but this is guitars and drums, sound and poetry... yes? But when we begin to get so austere about it that we is "legitimate" and who is "insignificant", when it becomes a tastemaking club, I agree that it becomes a bloated joke.

Consider this: if you removed all the mind altering variables - if you lived on an isolated island for 30 years, never been contaminated one way or the other by commercial radio nor critical review, were not aware in any measure of what constituted either good taste or popularity - completely newborn to any music.... and you were played both "What a Fool Believes" by the Doobie Brothers and "Kracked" by Dinosaur Jr. and you just organically, unbiasedly embraced The Doobies song......... would that indicate that you had inherantly bad taste?

Posted by shawn mc on Wednesday, 06.13.07 @ 17:15pm


"Baseball stats are based on things like HITS and other 100% objective criteria. They're not open to interpretation at all."

That has to be the dumbest statement I have ever heard. The stats are facts, but who is actually inducted is based upon a human decision based upon stats AND other non tangible criteria. Sure it is somewhat more factual and objective than the RRHOF, I will give you that, but induction ultimately is a human decision - it is not made by a computer....


As for the hall being a prestigous place to be enshrined - that is a joke and a bit of a stetch. When bands are inducted, it makes like page 22 in a small column of a newspaper, unless it is a big band like U2. Sure, band show up and smile for being honored It feels good. So, what? I would do the same - that does not legitimize the hall.

The fact is the baseball hall of fame has a mystique an aura to it that the RRHOF will simply never have... I never questioned whether they got decisions "right" or wrong - actually, I never even mentioned that point at all.


As for the comment obviously directed at me about spending time here....when I am bored I do find some of the converation, at times, interesting - talking about different bands, etc. Actually, most of the time, I forget that it is even in connection with the RRHOF. In fact, those dumb voting things to vote YES or NO for a band, I have never even done.

In any event, I digress...I think this goes back to a comment I read on one of these blogs. Woody Allen will not attend the Oscars, despite being voted innumerable times. Why? Because he does not believe in competition within the arts. So, yes William baseball is different from the RRHOF because the former is a sport where it is SUPPOSED to be about competition and beating the other guy.

In music, however, which is art, having a competitive rock hall of fame is a bit cheesy and in some ways does not feel right, and is antithetical to the whole point of rock music. Rock and music is supposed to be about rebellion, creativity, etc. not who is better. And, there my friend you have the "piss stain" comment. It is also for this reason...that the RRHOF will NEVER live up to the baseball HOF....






Posted by Anonymous on Wednesday, 06.13.07 @ 18:09pm


Once again, I disagree with you Anonymous. Being enshrined in the RRHOF is a big deal. It is not the Baseball Hall of Fame, but NO hall of fame has that mystique. I agree.

I think it becomes more of a joke if they miss the mark on their inductions, which is one reason I am interested in that process and want them to get it right. I would like for it to be a big deal and taken seriously. Which is one reason I do not like for the Committee to be too dominated by certain individuals, such as Wenner and Springsteen's freakin' manager (I am blanking on his name, but he's an ass and has been quite influential in the past).

I don't really see it as a competitive thing so much as recognizing the movers and shakers, the ones that really made a difference. That is the ideal, anyway. Sure, it is by its very nature competitive if you are picking and choosing inductees and not inducting others, but that's not the ultimate purpose.

And I have acknowledged the disconnect between rock's rebellion and outsider aesthetic vs. the ultimate establishment symbol of a hall of fame. Oh well.

In the most recent issue of Rolling Stone (the definition of rock establishment), the Sex Pistols give an interview. Very un-Johnny Rotten, wouldn't you say? But he goes on about going to PTA meetings and so forth.

Posted by Dezmond on Thursday, 06.14.07 @ 18:12pm


Good points, but I just do not see the RRHOF as such a big deal...like I said when bands or artists are inducted, I do not think too many people are buzzing about it - mainly because what does it really mean? That some group of individuals really like this band over that band - like William said, it is not nearly asobjective as the Baseball HOF. That is the whole point, it lacks any objectivity, at least the way it is done now with personal vendettas, keeping out certain genres (i.e. progressive). Sure, it would be nice if it were different, but its not and I do not see it changing any time soon. I live in the real world. And, frankly, given that music is art and subjective, it is a bit silly, to a degree. I am not saying totally wasteful - lets be clear on that. I do not totally disregard the RRHOF....

My dad was a professional musician and amongst my friends and circle no one really talks about the RRHOF....In fact, as a professional musician, I would hate to quote my dad on what he thinks of Rock music as a whole....

ANyway, you do make some valid points, but like I have said competition within the arts is a bit silly and antithetical to what art is supposed to be...I guess I am in agreement with Woody A. on this one...

Posted by Anonymous on Thursday, 06.14.07 @ 18:27pm


This is totally off the topic, but I just realized - if anyone is to take this hall seriously, how can Cat Stevens not be in there? Just shocking....the guy was huge at one point - even commerically, and his soul searching music lyrics have made us all think. Shawn, here is a perfect example of an artist who was commerically successful AND also meaningful. I simply do not understand this RRHOF - I truly do not.

Posted by Anonymous on Thursday, 06.14.07 @ 19:19pm


I have been reading some of the comments regarding Rush's worthiness and because someone listenes to a mere 2 albums they question their status as one of the great rock acts. Well this year Rush goes on tour and June 23rd they will grace saratoga Performing Art Center, Saratoga NY one more time. If you hav any questions please see one of their concerts. This will be my 7th time. They will not disappoint.

Posted by mycroft on Sunday, 06.24.07 @ 16:02pm


Eeveryone loves to whine "why is Rush so overlooked?" Gee, you do't supppose the reason has something to do with the fact that the lead vocals are mindnumbingly awful and their most popular song ("Tom Sawyer") has one of the worst keyboard riffs ever.

Posted by Creepozoid on Monday, 06.25.07 @ 08:03am


"their most popular song ("Tom Sawyer") has one of the worst keyboard riffs ever."

There are a variety of reasons Rush is not in yet, the least of which is "keyboards" on Tom Sawyer...that is a dumb comment

Posted by Anonymous on Monday, 06.25.07 @ 22:25pm


Well, if their supposed best work is that piece of crap, it's no freakin' wonder they're not in.

You know what's really "dumb". Posting as Anonymous you jackass.

Posted by Creepozoid on Tuesday, 06.26.07 @ 01:12am


Well IC this thread will start to degenerate in to the predictable (insert anyone here) s*cks thread, and of course the- no they don't - responses.


Tom Sawyer rocks, Geddy is god. Cya

Posted by mycroft on Tuesday, 06.26.07 @ 06:01am



"Well, if their supposed best work is that piece of crap, it's no freakin' wonder they're not in."

Many people, esp. Rush fans consider TS to be so overplayed and trite at this point, so you are just a bit off base. Certainly, it is their most well known song, but any Rush fan knows there are better songs in the catalog.

As for my "name" being "anonymous", as if "Creepozoid" really tells us who you are - idiot!

Posted by Anonymous on Tuesday, 06.26.07 @ 06:20am


Led Zeppelin + Styx = Rush ????

Posted by Joe-Skee on Tuesday, 06.26.07 @ 11:08am


"Led Zeppelin + STYX = Rush ????"

AYEEE!! Do not summon that name, Joe! What about the children, Mr. Roboto? I smell Styx in here, and it is foul indeed.
I am not real Rush fan, but I say to you sir, tis' a cruel act to impugn Rush's name by placing Styx beside them -- an odious lie!
Give Rush their due and utter not the vile name of the-creators-of-Kilroy; wash your mouth out with soap.

Posted by shawn mc on Tuesday, 06.26.07 @ 12:32pm


The Grand Illusion!!!!.....Pieces of Eight????

Posted by Joe-Skee on Tuesday, 06.26.07 @ 12:55pm


Yea... ok - I'll give you '77 and '78. That was probably their best period. Some of their AOR pop stuff was decent. But DeYoung just couldn't put a chain on his pretentious appetite, could he? He ruined the momentum of those two albums plus "Renegade" with "Babe" and then "Best of Times" and then took a nice fat crap with the whole "Kilroy Was Here" opus.

I'll admit to having a nostalgic spot for some old Styx radio hits.

Posted by shawn mc on Tuesday, 06.26.07 @ 13:33pm


"Led Zeppelin + STYX = Rush ????"

Rush cannot be categorized...they were early on a Zep immitator, but that did not last. And, as Shawn said, Styx and Rush are way different. To me, Styx was much more of a pop act...Rush on the other hand were more on the fringe, esp. with Lee's voice

Posted by Anonymous on Tuesday, 06.26.07 @ 18:23pm


"Many people, esp. Rush fans consider TS to be so overplayed and trite at this point, so you are just a bit off base. Certainly, it is their most well known song, but any Rush fan knows there are better songs in the catalog"

Wow. An actual point coming from the void that is your mind. Took ya long enough.

"As for my "name" being "anonymous", as if "Creepozoid" really tells us who you are - idiot!"

At least I took the time to actually type in a screen name - idiot. There's a million Anons on this site but I guess you were too lazy to notice.

Posted by Creepozoid on Wednesday, 06.27.07 @ 02:31am


You are exactly your screen name...Rush are icons of rock music...it is a simple fact and I highly doubt they give a rats ass about you or the "hall."

Posted by Anonymous on Wednesday, 06.27.07 @ 19:33pm


Learned something new today, no only is The Spirit of Radio hailed by the RRHOF as one of the most influential rock songs of all time, 2112 is considered one of the most influential rock albums of all time:

"The Rock and Roll Hall of Fame is pleased to recognize this varied collection of some of history’s most influential and popular albums."

Referred to as the "Definitive 200."

http://www.rockhall.com/pressroom/definitive-200

198) 2112

Granted, it is at the bottom, but it IS on the list and for a band that is supposedly hated by the RRHOF and is supposedly not influential...so much for that.

In looking through the list, I realize that it is far from perfect, but it is endorsed by the RRHOF and 2112 is there....

Posted by Anonymous on Thursday, 06.28.07 @ 19:03pm


BTW, no King Crimson either...oh well

Posted by Anonymous on Thursday, 06.28.07 @ 19:05pm


Meatloaf? Well for one thing he is a great Yankee fan and Phil Rizzuto is the only baseball player to ever get a grammy so that should count for soemthing. Meatloaf put out some great stuff and some pretty mediocre stuff but comparing Meatloaf to Rush?

Rush is a band that seems to evoke a great deal of passion both for and against and the main point of contention seems to be Geddy's voice, their talent is indisputable. So for all those who have a problem with Geddy's voice, GET OVER IT!

Posted by Bruce Wilkie on Friday, 06.29.07 @ 05:54am


Learned something new today, no only is The Spirit of Radio hailed by the RRHOF as one of the most influential rock songs of all time, 2112 is considered one of the most influential rock albums of all time:

"The Rock and Roll Hall of Fame is pleased to recognize this varied collection of some of history’s most influential and popular albums."

Referred to as the "Definitive 200."

http://www.rockhall.com/pressroom/definitive-200

198) 2112
66. MEATLOAF – BAT OUT OF HELL
43. BOSTON – BOSTON
Huh, this list I haven't seen before and it seems a curios collection. It looks more like someone's own personal collection than a definitive list of rocks greatest albums compiled by a true historian.

Some of the more curios entries
ALANIS MORISSETTE – JAGGED LITTLE PILL ??? What?
Dixie Chicks Wide Open Spaces + SHANIA TWAIN – COME ON OVER Country now??
SANTANA – SUPERNATURAL not Abraxsas???
Tons of rap crap

Very odd list

Posted by Bruce Wilkie on Friday, 06.29.07 @ 09:57am


If you read the hall descriptor, it says most infuential AND popular albums of all time (so natuarally, sales does factor in). Def Leppard is on the list twice!

In any event, I only pointed it out because supposedly the hall hates Rush, progressive rock, etc. YET has acknowledged their contributions (to a degree at their webpage) by putting them on the definitive 200 list, as well as listing Spirit of Radio as one of rocks most influential songs....but, again the list is BOTH influential and "popular" albums - so there can really be no criticism of the list per se b/c it is also about popularity (i.e. sales). But, somehow I doubt 2112 was on there for "popularity" reasons, but for the other reason....

Posted by Anon on Friday, 06.29.07 @ 10:06am


Last night I once again had the great privilege of seeing one of the truly great, incredibly talented acts ever: RUSH and their Snakes and Arrows Tour at Saratoga Performing Art Center, Saratoga NY. I was going to go into a long tirade about how SPAC is a freakin jail, how they milked concert goes for $10 a beer and put up the beer jail fence, and how SPAC is run by NAZI's bent on ruining everyone's fun. But hey, the renovations they made over the winter to the seating and sound system were amazing, and it couldn't have been a better night for a concert even if it did get a bit cold, into the upper 40s.

The review below isn't from the SPAC show but most of it is relevant. I will post the local review when it come online.

Geddy introduced "Malignant Narcissism", a drawn out, incredible instrumental that featured Neil's amazing drum solo. I seem to remember Tony remarking that Neil was not a very good jazz drummer, so not hearing Neil attempt jazz in the past I had no first hand knowledge. Well Neil did a jazz, big band swing rendition of .... wait for it... Gene Krupa. He held his left drum stick in proper form and easily recreated Gene Kupa, didn't break a sweat. His drum set spun around and he played what looked like an electronic xylophone as well as an amazing array of drums and synthetic devices that I can't say exactly what they were. Alex did an incredible acoustic piece on a 12 string.

The crowd was very large and everyone left happy. Many who were young and had never heard Rush before were saying how amazed they were. I am always amazed that these three guys can put on such an incredible show and I remember hearing, and saying much the same the first time I saw them back in the winter of 75.

Rush may not be worthy of the hall but there is little doubt that they are the greatest power trio of all time and one of the most talented acts ever, if not the greatest. Just an amazing show.

www.concertdvdreviews.com/concert_reviews/Rush_062307.htm

Rush - Snakes & Arrows Tour
June 23rd, 2007
Nissan Pavilion,
Bristow, Virginia
If you were wondering why Rush has not toured with an opening act since 1994's Counterparts tour, it is probably so that they can get away with the marathon three hour shows they have been putting on ever since. Not that I am complaining though, a three hour Rush concert still goes by entirely too fast for me. Since the members of Rush, Geddy Lee (bass, keyboards, vocals), Alex Lifeson (guitars, synthesizers), and Neil Peart (drums, percussion), are all now in their mid-50's, they do still need to slip in a 20-minute intermission between each of their 80-minute sets in order to recharge and refuel. Thank God. It also gives us concertgoers time to refuel, and to get rid of all that spent fuel - if you know what I mean.

This year's Snakes & Arrows tour certainly continues the trend. Last night at the Nissan Pavilion - somewhere out in East Bumfuck, Virginia - Rush put on a mesmerizing, three hour, 28-song show that somehow managed to leave me a bigger fan than I already was. At 7:45 PM, with the sun still shining brightly on the amphitheater, a hilarious video intro featuring a couple of Snakes & Arrows -inspired dream sequences kicked off the show. This would be the first of many used effectively throughout the show.

The first one features Alex abruptly sitting up in bed saying, "Snakes? Who would dream about snakes, that's so creepy. Honey? Honey...wake up. I had the weirdest dream, it was a snake...", and just then you realize that the person laying next to him is actually Neil. Startled, they both scream "AHHHHHH!". The next sequence features Geddy as he wakes up in a chair groaning, "What did I eat last night?", as an old man dressed in a Scottish kilt, speaking with a thick Scottish accent (played by a barely recognizable Geddy himself), tells him "come on you lazy bastard...the show must go on and that sadly means you! Now wipe that chicken off your face and get up on that stage...".

At this point the band is running out on stage and Alex begins firing off the opening guitar lick to "Limelight", but Geddy is momentarily delayed getting out and poor Alex has to stop mid-chord. Based on some of the fan reviews I have read, this is all a staged continuation of the opening video theme, since Geddy is actually pulling off a bib and wiping chicken off his face as he runs out. I think only the orchestra seating was close enough to be in on the joke, because to me it looked like he just came out a few seconds late throwing a towel to his roadie - and I was in section 103. Awesome seats by the way.

I was close enough to make out the three huge "Hen House" rotisserie chicken roasters, as big as Alex's Hughes & Kettner amplifier cabinets, positioned on the stage behind Geddy. The last couple of tours it was clothes dryers, and now it's frigging chicken ovens. You can't say these Canucks don't have a sense of humor. For those who are still unaware, this began as an inside joke about the appliance-sized speaker cabinets that are often used on stage. Since Geddy was now relying on ear monitors to hear himself, and not bass cabinets, he wanted to balance out Alex's wall of guitar amps with his own "appliances". The funniest part of it all was watching the young lady, dressed in a white chef's uniform, come out and baste the chickens throughout the show.

Opening the concert with "Limelight" was a good move, as it instantly whipped the anxious crowd into a frenzy. If you came to this concert hoping to enjoy your comfortable pavilion seat, you were @#%$ out of luck this night, since the entire crowd was on its feet for the entire concert - except for when they opened the second set with five songs in a row from Snakes & Arrows. That was not a wise move. "Far Cry" and "Workin' Them Angels" sounded especially good live, but by the time they got to "Armor And Sword", many in the crowd were taking a seat. The video shown during "Workin' Them Angels" was particularly moving in that it stunningly depicted various working class heroes draped with huge angel's wings. The ones of soldiers got a particularly good crowd response at this show.

The concert was much too long for me to get into a song by song account, but I will touch on a few of my personal highlights. "Entre Nous" has always been one of my favorite tracks off the Permanent Waves album, and this tour was the first time they have ever played the song live. Some other long forgotten classics that were last performed live when many of you were not even born yet, were "Circumstances" (Hemispheres tour), "A Passage to Bangkok" (Permanent Waves tour), "Digital Man" (Grace Under Pressure warm-up tour), and "Witch Hunt" (Power Windows tour). These songs set the place on fire - "Witch Hunt" literally did with enough pyro to make even Kiss envious.

This leads me to the light show, which was one of the most impressive I have ever seen Rush put on - although I have certainly not seen every tour. The stage was backed with three giant video screens, and these four, huge, suspended lighting rigs, each holding a myriad of rotating colored spotlights and strobes, would occasionally descend down to within damn-near jumping distance of the band and turn the place into a scene straight out of Close Encounters.

After a typically incredible performance of "The Spirit Of Radio" towards the end of the second set, another hilarious video takes over the screen featuring the characters from South Park as Lil' Rush. Cartman is dressed like Geddy and is singing and playing the keyboard riff to "Tom Sawyer" when Kyle is forced to stop him midstream, "Stop! Stop! Those aren't the right lyrics fat ass!" Cartman confidently responds, "Tom Sawyer builds a raft and floated down a river with a black guy. I read the book." Kyle angrily corrects him, "that's not Tom Sawyer, that is Huckleberry Finn stupid!". Cartman fires right back with "I am Geddy Lee, and I will sing whatever lyrics I want!", at which point they start over and count off "and a one and a two and a..." which leads into the monstrous opening synthesizer riff to "Tom Sawyer" - by the real band. It was insane.

Geddy's vocals were the best I have heard in over a decade. Is he getting that singer's second wind? Those incredibly high notes from some of the 70's and early-80's material, were much less of a problem for him on this tour. Alex's guitar work was awesome as usual, and he and Geddy were both having a blast on stage, which really made it a fun show to watch. Neil continues to be a mesmerizing machine behind the drum kit, and his untouchable drum solo, which runs the gamut between epic prog-rock, African and Oriental rhythms, and big band swing, was one of the highlights of the show.

Rush are closing in on their 35th anniversary as a band, and it is not an exaggeration to say that they are still playing better than ever. Although they will probably never surpass some of the magic they laid down to vinyl during the holy trinity years of Permanent Waves, Moving Pictures, and Signals, they certainly continue to excel in the live concert arena. This was one of the best concerts I have seen since, well, the last Rush tour - and I have seen some great ones. Are you hearing me Rock and Roll Hall of Fame?!

Setlist

Set 1:
01. Limelight
02. Digital Man
03. Entre Nous
04. Mission
05. Freewill
06. The Main Monkey Business
07. The Larger Bowl
08. Secret Touch
09. Circumstances
10. Between The Wheels
11. Dreamline

Intermission

Set 2:
12. Far Cry
13. Workin' Them Angels
14. Armor And Sword
15. Spindrift
16. The Way The Wind Blows
17. Subdivisions
18. Natural Science
19. Witch Hunt
20. Malignant Narcissism
21. Drum Solo
22. Hope
23. Summertime Blues
24. The Spirit Of Radio
25. Tom Sawyer

Encore:
26. One Little Victory
27. A Passage to Bangkok
28. YYZ

Posted by bruce wilkie on Sunday, 07.1.07 @ 13:21pm


Woe!!!! Woe!!!! Hold up man....!!!! I'm not reading all that shit!!!!

Posted by Joe-Skee on Sunday, 07.1.07 @ 14:21pm


Agreed Joe Skee - I am a huge, huge Rush fan, but cutting and pasting "concert reviews" and the "set list" is not what this site is about...

Posted by Anonymous on Sunday, 07.1.07 @ 16:41pm


Alright Anon.... I'm ready to give RUSH a try. Which one album would you advise I go get as virginal listen? Tough question for you to pick one, I'm sure, but which one should a newbie give a spin?

Posted by shawn mc on Monday, 07.2.07 @ 00:47am


Moving Pictures is their most accessible and popular album. But, you must listen to it loud.....:-) But, remember with Rush, they have so many different sounds, the 70's was quite different from the 80's to the 90's, etc. So, you may like one era much more over another. Anwyay, MP is probably the best one to start with.... it is an 80's album. When u listen to the album, try track "7" Vital Signs and tell me what other 80's band it sounds like?

Posted by Anonymous on Monday, 07.2.07 @ 02:41am


Posting a review about their current tour is relevant to this discussion because it lends Rush's credibility as one of the greatest, most talented bands of all time and why many acts, including Metallica, site Rush as an influnence.

For any new comer to Rush I would recommend 2112 to start and the their next 4: A Farewell to Kings, Hemispheres, Permanent Waves and Moving Pictures.

Posted by Bruce Wilkie on Monday, 07.2.07 @ 06:22am


Bruce, I appreciate your enthusiasm over Rush, and parts of your concert review were entertaining, but you are definitely a fevered fanboy if you can't see that your hefty blow by blow report was just an indulgence and does not provide "proof" that RUSH deserves Hall induction.

You need to come back down to earth, friend.

Posted by shawn mc on Monday, 07.2.07 @ 09:17am


OK Anon, I'll try Moving Pics first; thanks. Which album would you choose as their best 70's work, and which for the 90's?

Posted by shawn mc on Monday, 07.2.07 @ 09:20am


The 70's was varied too. For more of a heavy metal blues feel and the first Peart album, definitely get "Fly By Night." For the more progressive sound get "Hemispheres." For a progressive / metal sound, get "2112." And, I am sure you know that 2112 was put on the "definitive 200 list" on the Rock and Roll hall of fame website. 2112 and MP are the certainly the Rush classics - MP is quadruple platinum at this point and 2112 is triple platinum, which are there two best selling albums.

For a totally different feel, I would try "Presto", which is "progressive" to a degree, but much cleaner sound and no heavy metal on this one. Honestly, there are so many good albums, and only 2-3 duds. Stay away from Caress of Steel (I like the album, but it is not one of their best). Stay away from Hold Your Fire - probably one of the worst Rush albums -in fact, there are some songs that Lifeson is just standing around and watching the other two play -yuk)

So, along with Moving Pictures

1) Fly By Night
2) 2112
3) Hemispheres
4) Presto

That is a good start because Rush, like Crimson could take some time to "get into it" as there is a lot going on and a lot of subtle things to listen for.

I cannot believe that you have not heard much Rush - if you do not mind me asking, how old are you?

Posted by Anon on Monday, 07.2.07 @ 10:09am


Naw, I don't mind you asking - I'm 41. I had friends here and there who would mention Rush, particularly in the early 80's when I was like 15-18 years old. I'd heard of them, of course, heard "Tom Sawyer" and "Closer To the Heart", seen the album covers for "Fly by Night" and "2112" somebody's brother had, y'know... I was aware, but they just never interested me enough to make me go and buy.

Some of my first albums were Supertramp's "Breakfast in America", Steve Winwood's "Arc of a Diver", Billy Joel's "Songs in the Attic", Wings' "Back to the Egg", Genesis' "Abacab" and.. god forgive me.. Foreigner's "4".
Prog and metal did not interest me. Metal still doesn't, but I'm gaining an appreciation for prog more and more.

So I am ready now in later life to give this phenomenon called Rush a fair chance.

Posted by shawn mc on Monday, 07.2.07 @ 10:58am


get rich or die trying was #57 on the definitive list so I don't put to much stock in that. The problem with the rock hall is they are all plastic big wigs who only want to draw the mainstream, thats why they put rappers and hip hop artists in there, it isn't about the music its about the money.

At first I thought and wanted them in there, but now I'd rather see them not in there because they are better then most of the crap they induct now. Sex pistols had it right calling the Hall a piss stain, because it is.

Posted by Jax on Monday, 07.2.07 @ 14:33pm


"thats why they put rappers and hip hop artists in there, it isn't about the music its about the money."

I have no agenda to defend the Hall, but there is no plural here - they've put ONE rap/hip-hop act in, and an iconic ground breaking one at that. Let's not overstate reality.

Posted by shawn mc on Monday, 07.2.07 @ 15:04pm


Bruce, I appreciate your enthusiasm over Rush, and parts of your concert review were entertaining, but you are definitely a fevered fanboy if you can't see that your hefty blow by blow report was just an indulgence and does not provide "proof" that RUSH deserves Hall induction.

You need to come back down to earth, friend.

Your gratuitous comments are fully appreciated but your obvious bias against Rush is noted.

Posted by Bruce Wilkie on Tuesday, 07.3.07 @ 07:01am


"your obvious bias against Rush is noted."


"Against" Rush....hmmm

Posted by Anon on Tuesday, 07.3.07 @ 08:00am


I guess if they don't induct Rush, Dream Theater won't have a prayer when they become eligible.

Posted by jon on Tuesday, 07.3.07 @ 09:07am


Hey shawn mc. "Permanent Waves" is a fine album. It's essential Rush. Meaning it's amongst their best work from an artistic stand point.

Posted by Joe-Skee on Tuesday, 07.3.07 @ 13:15pm


In 2006 Detroit classic rock station WCSX conducted a listener poll to choose the best rock act of all time. In the final poll Rush came second only to Zed Zeppelin by 42% to 58%. The total number of votes was over 200,000. The results: http://www.wcsx.com/hoops/brackets06.htm
A band that popular can't help but have an influence on the genre.

Posted by Silverchemist on Monday, 07.9.07 @ 18:54pm


I see the point you are going for Silver, but me thinks you picked the wrong example.
In this radio station's head-to-head tournament bracket style voting "competition", the (ahem)bong stupored voters barely gave The Beatles (51%)a "win" over Heart (49%). They also chose Rush over Traffic, Steely Dan, CSNY, The Rolling Stones, and Pink Floyd.
Crikees.

Posted by shawn on Monday, 07.9.07 @ 19:04pm


I don't think there is anything wrong with the example, per se. It just means that a lot of people in Detroit dig Rush. That is not surprising though, as it is a "working man" city. I bet if you picked a radio station in Atlanta or Los Angeles, the results would differ at least somewhat. I am sure Rush might come in lower in those cities.

Hey Shawn, if you are still "speaking" to me - did u pick up a Rush album yet?

Posted by Anonymous on Monday, 07.9.07 @ 19:56pm


For what its worth, I found a pretty interesting article in USA Today about the RRHOF the article is from 3/07- here is an excerpt:

"While not a fan of pioneering prog and glam acts snubbed by the hall, New York writer Roger Wade considers their importance and influence undeniable "to all but the most hard-headed music history revisionists."

He's referring to the hall's nominating committee members, "who are finally able to right the wrongs made by the buying public," he suggests with undisguised sarcasm. "They reflect rock history through their own prism of 'how it should have been.' I've never owned a Rush album, and I've long harbored an actual dislike for both Kiss and its army. ... As both a musician and an avid record buyer starting in the early '80s, my allegiances were firmly in the punk, new wave, and alternative camps and against the 'dinosaur rock' of Rush and Kiss, but even I'm willing to admit both were wildly popular and hugely influential among fans as well as my fellow musicians." (HMMM.....)

Here is my favorite part:

"This is supposed to be a hall of fame, and denying both the fame and influence of Rush and Kiss makes the institution look ridiculous," (another Hmmm...) says Wade. "If they renamed the place Rock and Roll Hall of Artists You Should Have Liked More Than the Ones You Actually Did, I would not begrudge them these exclusions."

I love that last line! How can the hall have any respect when they deny the obvious popularity AND influence of bands like the Moody Blues, King Crimson, Rush, Yes, Genesis, Deep Purple, Jethro Tull, Kiss, etc.



The rest can be found here:

www.usatoday.com/educate/college/arts/articles/20070318.htm

Posted by Anonymous on Monday, 07.9.07 @ 20:31pm


"Hey Shawn, - did u pick up a Rush album yet?"

Yes. Moving Pictures. It gave me an STD in my ear.

Posted by shawn on Tuesday, 07.10.07 @ 09:58am


I take it you did not like it? Was it Geddy's voice? It is a qaudruple platinum album with some Rush "staples" on there - give it more time.

Posted by Anonymous on Tuesday, 07.10.07 @ 17:49pm


Maybe he should've bought "Permanent Waves" first??? Such virtuosity!!!!

Posted by Joe-Skee on Tuesday, 07.10.07 @ 18:34pm


If the rock and roll hall of fame has one shred of integrity, they would elect bands into the hall democratically. They would ask the people to decide on which bands should be accepted. But instead the decision making happens behind closed screens. Now as for earlier acceptees, like Little Richard, Chuck Berry, and possibly Elvis, they are legitimate for this kind of title. Muddy Waters, electric blues, sure, fine with me, but placing groups like the Ronnettes and The Righteous Bros before them, not that I dont like them, I enjoy their music, and they were influential, but they weren't what you really call innovative. As far as I know, most of their songs weren't even written by the band, but in the Brill Building instead. Yes, the Teen Idols recieved their music from the Brill Building. Neil Diamond, Neil Sedaka, and even Carole King worked there and made more money singing and writing than just writing for others.
But the Beatles, The Jimi Hendrix Experience, The Rolling Stones, thats innovation. They created the fork in the road. Either you go down the path of bubble gum, or the path that ROCKS!!! But the important part, why not Rush? Innovative? Yes. the fluidity of the changing meters is astounding. Influential? Yes. Look at the lists of artists provided above. Skillful? Why ask? Aside from the fact that Geddy Lee and Alex Lifeson have won numerous awards for their skills, Neil Peart is considered by many one of the greatest drummers of all time. Most who have even listened to their music know that answer.
All this seems to be boiling down to is the fact that this committee that determines which rock is better than others bases them more on personal preference rather than the true degree of skill and innovation. "Petitions with tens of thousands of signatures were also being ignored and some groups that were signed with certain labels or companies or were affiliated with various committee members have even been put up for nomination with no discussion at all," (Wikipedia). As the Sex Pistols put it, this whole thing is a "Piss Stain." And the Sex Pistols are smart to think so because something as big as this should not be run by a small group of people only concerned with commercial interests and personal preferences.
If groups like the Beastie Boys and Metallica, who have either proclaimed of Rush's influence on them and/or even used their material in their music, then WHY NOT RUSH?

Posted by Anonymous 8.7 on Saturday, 07.14.07 @ 05:26am



rock hall of fame is of this world;Rush transcends that. No other band is close to them

Posted by dwayne moore on Saturday, 07.14.07 @ 10:23am


Rush won't be elected to the RRHOF for the simple reason that the pool of voters is biased and too small, simple as that. The rest of these arguments are silly and pointless. When 3 or 5 people or whatever comprise your panel, it is laughable. Case in point would be that Black Sabbath should've been inducted in their first year of eligibility, or is there someone here brave enough to say that they were NOT influential? If the hall of fame voting occurred in the same way that Baseball elects its hall of fame members (a large group of reporters, players and managers get a vote), the NBA all star game (Fans vote) or even the MLB all star game fan voting, then a large group of people would determine the nominees. For instance, if inductees, and a list of 500-1000 active musicians, producers, and industry people were all responsible to elect inductees, then Rush would've been in with their first year of eligibility, as would Black Sabbath had been, while others would not have been there yet that are there. The funny part of all of this would be if Rush actually were inducted sometime in the near future, and then they refuse to participate or accept nomination. That would really be funny, and illustrate the stupidity of the voting process.

Posted by daronius on Sunday, 07.22.07 @ 00:00am


Just got back from Vegas. Saw Rush at the MGM Grand to an essentially sold out show to about 17k screaming fans. Now what was that comment about bands having waning interests over time? Nearly 35 years into their career, they still rock....I had seats way up and my ears are still ringing it was so damn loud...

Posted by Anonymous on Sunday, 07.29.07 @ 20:55pm


"or is there someone here brave enough to say that they were NOT influential?"

influential, but shit nonetheless, and their followers likewise (shit)

Posted by liam on Saturday, 09.15.07 @ 16:38pm


Calling such a monumental band with such longevity who have influenced so many bands over the years "shit" reeks of ignorance and nothing more than a personal dislike of Rush...if you don't think they were influential, just ask Metallica

Posted by Anonymous on Saturday, 09.15.07 @ 23:24pm


Ironic considering that Metallica is also influential and long-lived, and from a purely objective standpoint, I think "shit" is about the only word I could use to describe them today.

Posted by William on Saturday, 09.15.07 @ 23:43pm


Thinking a band is "shit" is not objective - it is an opinion, thus totally subjective.

Posted by Anonymous on Sunday, 09.16.07 @ 15:22pm


That was obviously the joke, which is what makes me question your assertion that anyone who calls Rush "shit" (i.e., anyone with a negative OPINION) is "ignorant." You were doing fine with the influence argument, but as you yourself have just admitted, calling them "shit" neither proves nor disproves that.

Posted by William on Sunday, 09.16.07 @ 17:39pm


Of course he can have his so called opinion, but he makes no points but to refer to them as "shit." It is fine if he does not like them, but he provides no reason (i.e. Lee's voice is annoying, etc.).

Plus, I think it is plain wrong to refer to a band with so much success and talent as "shit." To me, it came off as ignorant and a bit angry...but your point is well taken.

Posted by Anonymous on Sunday, 09.16.07 @ 18:03pm


"Calling such a monumental band with such longevity who have influenced so many bands over the years "shit" reeks of ignorance and nothing more than a personal dislike of Rush"

If you read the quoted papragraph, you'd realize I was talking bout Black Sabbath

Posted by liam on Monday, 09.17.07 @ 08:57am


Oh....so much for all of the follow-up posts about Rush :-)

Black Sabbath, Shit??? Well, that's an interesting one....hmmm

Posted by Anon on Monday, 09.17.07 @ 09:37am


Now that's just silly. Black Sabbath was shit? Well okay, I can live with someone saying that, but "all" of their followers, meaning roughly 90% or more of all metal artists? I have a hard time swallowing that.

Posted by William on Monday, 09.17.07 @ 13:12pm


I cannot live with someone calling Black Sabbath shit - they were a great metal band and one of the first. Plus, he calls them shit, but provides no reasonable explanation for this - that is what I have the biggest problem with. And, of course as William said, "all" of their followers - c'mon, put down the crack pipe Liam, will you?

Posted by Anonymous on Monday, 09.17.07 @ 18:55pm


yeah well i'd only ever claim to like about 10% of metal to be honest, alot of which is taken by led zep, even if they are thieves.

Put down the crack pipe? Its my honest opinion that metal (especially heavy) is contradictory: 'Hardcore' music made by 'boring as fuck' people for 'boring as fuck' people (Iron Maiden for example).

Wait, actually. I'll admit that I used to think Black Sabbath was quite bad, but then I heard 'Avenged Sevenfold'...

While you type your retorts, I'll be listening to The Queen Is Dead and Definitely Maybe

Posted by liam on Tuesday, 09.18.07 @ 10:49am


I highly doubt you've heard even "10% of metal." In fact, I doubt that more than a handful of people on this Earth could claim that, if even. Genre-bashing is always good for a laugh, though.

While you're busy stroking your ego to the tune of the same two bands you haven't shut up about since you arrived, I think I'll put on some Iceburn.

Posted by William on Tuesday, 09.18.07 @ 11:18am


since William obviously wants to ME to turn this into a slanging match so he can have the upperhand, I won't.

Its becoming more blatant by the comment that you're only listening to shit that hardly anyone has heard of (and it deserves not to be) to look like a musical intellect.

FACT: good music doesnt necessarily sell, but it influences and it gets heard of over time.

Posted by liam on Tuesday, 09.18.07 @ 12:04pm


Funny coming from the guy who takes generally well-known bands and tries to pass them off as some sort of secret, the guy who actually insinuated that I wouldn't know who The Smiths, Blur, or The Stone Roses were.

Yes, of course, I listen to things no one has heard of, hence my list of ten album choices from the Kiss thread includes Frank Black (Charles Thompson of the Pixies, who are well-known), Frank Zappa, Guided by Voices, Neutral Milk Hotel (probably among the best-known "indie" bands of the late '90s), Ween, and Voivod. None of those are really near the bottom of the popularity barrel. They might get a few raised eyebrows from the average man on the street, but you could measure their fans in the many thousands. As I've said before, popularity is irrelevant to me, and that goes both ways. I happened upon Iceburn purely by accident, and I liked what I heard. I could have used Voivod in my example, but it's all the same.

And please, trying to reason out that tenuous link between "influential" and "good" is a wasted effort, so no surprise that you'd attempt it. Tell me, how exactly do you reconcile that with the fact that "good music" is not the only music that influences? Or how about telling me how "good music" is supposed to become influential when people don't hear it? I'm not making a case for my favorite little unknowns to win inductions because they honestly wouldn't deserve it. But these things are not mutually exclusive, you git. You can be any combination of innovative, influential, and/or good. It doesn't have to be all or nothing. You fail at music.

Posted by William on Tuesday, 09.18.07 @ 12:17pm


"how exactly do you reconcile that with the fact that "good music" is not the only music that influences?"

i never said that influential music was always good. I said that good music was influential

"Funny coming from the guy who takes generally well-known bands and tries to pass them off as some sort of secret, the guy who actually insinuated that I wouldn't know who The Smiths, Blur, or The Stone Roses were."

I'm sure you know WHO THEY ARE, but could you tell me anything more about them? How about telling me the classic roses line-up. Or the 4 memebrs of the Smiths. William, you come across as having forgotten that music is something to enjoy and tuned it into something like a test

Posted by liam on Tuesday, 09.18.07 @ 13:45pm


"i never said that influential music was always good. I said that good music was influential"-liam

And again, I'm saying that it is not in all cases. There are examples of bands that represent a movement at its prime (like I said about Godspeed You Black Emperor!), but because they were not among the first bands within their movement, they will not be particularly influential. What they are doing has been done before, although quite possibly they do it better. Then of course there are those bands that just don't become popular, and there are a myriad reasons for this, though you insist it's only because they aren't "good." Piero Scaruffi apparently thought Iceburn was good enough to merit some praise on his site, but music that is genuinely challenging doesn't earn fans easy. Lots of people will tell you Mozart was great, but relatively few people actually sit down to listen to it unless forced. It's just not good pastime music, and not the sort of thing most would throw on in the car over a long drive.

"I'm sure you know WHO THEY ARE, but could you tell me anything more about them? How about telling me the classic roses line-up. Or the 4 memebrs of the Smiths."-liam

Would playing a trivia game (one that could easily be won by anyone competent enough to use Google) add anything to this conversation? Why don't you tell me the name of the former Melvins bassist whose mother was a famous child actress, or where and when Morphine singer Mike Sandman died? Tell me who Bill Callahan's big musical idol was and the name of his made-up company. My point from the beginning was that YOU were the one trying to leverage bands for credbility, many of whom happen to be very popular with the NME crowd. I do enjoy music, and I don't consider trivia to be essential to enjoying it. Similarly, I don't find genre-bashing productive because there is something in almost every musical movement that, regardless of whether or not I like it, is worthwhile. Your opinions are worthless.

Posted by William on Tuesday, 09.18.07 @ 14:11pm


It is funny you bring up the Queen is Dead - that is one of my favorite albums of all time. In fact, I own and listen to a bunch of the Smiths albums.

But, the point William is making is that when you bash an entire genre, you come off as ignorant and not credible. And, in my opinion calling Sabbath shit is really dumb because a) they were very influential, and b) they had a great sound that people still listen to today many years later. I guess I should not have said put the crack pipe down and should have instead said, put down the Smiths album and try something new for a change...

Posted by Anonymous on Tuesday, 09.18.07 @ 17:15pm


BTW, what is a "boring as fuck people?" Is there some way to measure that? B/c if there is, I would like to know -- cuz then I could use that as a way to figure out who I should befriend....so let me know, eh...

Posted by Anonymous on Tuesday, 09.18.07 @ 18:34pm


"where and when Morphine singer Mike Sandman died?"

The answer to this question is the best thing ever. I hope I'm lucky enough to die in a similar fashion.

ps: liam, why do you keep bringing up Oasis? Did they eventually do something besides fight with each other and replicate Beatles hooks?

Posted by Kit on Tuesday, 09.18.07 @ 18:41pm


ACL was awesome, Arcade Fire and Andrew Bird were freaking amazing, THANKS FOR ASKING GUYS

Posted by Kit on Tuesday, 09.18.07 @ 18:42pm


Actually was thinking about that Kit and meant to follow up by asking you about the experience. Had you been before? How many acts were there? Besides Arcade Fire and Andrew Bird, what were the best performances?

Posted by shawn on Wednesday, 09.19.07 @ 00:39am


First time to any sort of outdoor festival event, and I certainly hope it wasn't the last, an absolutely great atmosphere, and it helps that Austin is the greatest city in these united states.

My ticket was only a day two ticket, so I missed a lot of fun stuff on day one (Spoon, LCD Soundsystem, Bjork) and day 3 (Wilco, Regina Spektor, and the man himself Bob Dylan). Still a lot of great stuff.

First act I saw was Dax Riggs, late of Deadboy and the Elephantmen, his twisted version of the White Stripes formula was certainly not unappreciated.

Then I caught a piece of an act I don't recognize or remember but they covered Mother's Little Helper in an interesting way. Interesting is always nice.

Next full act I saw was Steve Earle, he's kind of a big deal in Austin. Some good solid country-folk stylings, even if I was under 30.

Headed to class right now, so I'll finish this up later.

Posted by Kit on Wednesday, 09.19.07 @ 07:54am


I went to the ACL Festival website just now and was blown away at all of the notable acts performing - total of like 130, right? Wow ... what a Disneyland-like music weekend, almost too much to try to take in! I've heard of how cool Austin is. Interested to hear more from your day.

Posted by shawn on Wednesday, 09.19.07 @ 08:41am


I got a different sort of feeling at that concert than I have at any other, at the end, after the huge ovation and the encore of Neighborhood#3 and Wake Up, Wim got on the mic and was just awestruck. The was a distinct note of disbelief in how loud we were when he said "fucking awesome. Good night, Austin." I felt like not only had they made our night, we in turn had made theirs and they were thankful and gracious. That's not an impression I've gotten from any other concert. Maybe I'm just not going to the right ones enough, but Wim's sincerity was the second best thing about the night, the best being the actual tunes he wrote.

Posted by Kit on Wednesday, 09.19.07 @ 09:38am


the above is talking about Arcade Fire. Oops.

Posted by Kit on Wednesday, 09.19.07 @ 09:39am


"put down the Smiths album and try something new for a change..."

such as:
Joy Division,
New Order,
Happy Mondays,
James,
Stone Roses,
Inspiral Carpets,
Blur,
The Charlatans UK,
Muse,
The Libertines,
The Who,
The Stones,
Kinks,
Cast,
Ocean Colour Scene,
Kasabian,
Arctic Monkeys,
Ian Brown,
Black Grape,
Kaiser Chiefs,
Beautiful SOuth,
Jesus and Mary Chain,
Interpol,
Killers,
Nirvana,
Radiohead,
Art of Noise,
Prodigy,
Chemical Brothers,
Faithless,
Interpol,
The Beach Boys,
The Beastie Boys,
Public Enemy,
Kalxons,
Franz Ferdinand,
Strokes,
REM,
U2,
T. Rex,
David Bowie,
Echo & the Bunnymen,
Editors,
Sex Pistols,
Fad Gadget,
The Enemy,
Foo Fighters,
The Gossip,
Groove Armada,
Grooverider,
Blondie,
Pendulum,
The Jam,
The La's,
Massive Attack,
Moby,
The Verve,
The Stranglers,
The Clash,
Scissor Sisters,
Ryan Adams
or Pulp?

Posted by liam on Wednesday, 09.19.07 @ 11:08am


Wow, you are able to type a lot of band names - that is impressive.

Posted by Anon on Wednesday, 09.19.07 @ 11:23am


That's very nice, you like Madchester, Brit-pop, and early post-punk. How about challenging yourself and moving out of that narrow circle?

Posted by Kit on Wednesday, 09.19.07 @ 11:34am


"How about challenging yourself and moving out of that narrow circle?"

You're forgetting Indie Rock, Punk, House, rock n roll, dance and a wee bit of rap to name but a few. I know you might want to say: 'the only early punk bands you named are the clash, pistols and stranglers', but that was a top of your head list.

And one genre that (i think) sticks out like a soar thumb is electronic, but the fact tht none of you have commented on any of the big beat bands (chems and prodigy to name a couple) makes me feel you have either disregarded it or just never dicovered it

and its a bit dubious saying 'you like britpop'. Did britpop have a sound? No. Even its two big acts, Blur and Oasis, sounded different about 80% of the time. But yes i do like britpop.

Posted by liam on Wednesday, 09.19.07 @ 12:07pm


I'm just curious. Do you consider The Beach Boys Madchester, Britpop, or postpunk?

Posted by The Claw on Wednesday, 09.19.07 @ 12:07pm


"I'm just curious. Do you consider The Beach Boys Madchester, Britpop, or postpunk?"

I'm SURE Joy Division influenced Pet Sounds.....

Posted by liam on Wednesday, 09.19.07 @ 12:09pm


"I'm just curious. Do you consider The Beach Boys Madchester, Britpop, or postpunk?"

I'm SURE Joy Division influenced Pet Sounds.....

Posted by liam on Wednesday, 09.19.07 @ 12:09pm


Your indie selections are very weak (The Killers? They aimed for Springsteen and hit Meat Loaf. Editors? Clones of a clone.) and there's exactly one rap group. A wee bit indeed. You mention four punk bands, two of which are canon, one of which is British canon (The Jam), and The Stranglers who stink. You mention The Who and The Stones as if they're secrets you just discovered. There are no singer-songwriters, no hardcore, no metal, one grunge (Nirvana, way to branch out there buddy), no proto-punk, no prog, and only the most basic of 60s rock. I have a list three times as long and five times as diverse on my facebook profile as a laugh.

Why did you post it? To impress us? To show off the new ground you have broken? Good job.

Posted by Kit on Wednesday, 09.19.07 @ 12:22pm


"I'm just curious. Do you consider The Beach Boys Madchester, Britpop, or postpunk?"

Hooray, one exception!

Posted by Kit on Wednesday, 09.19.07 @ 12:24pm


"And one genre that (i think) sticks out like a soar thumb is electronic, but the fact tht none of you have commented on any of the big beat bands (chems and prodigy to name a couple) makes me feel you have either disregarded it or just never dicovered it"-liam

This hardly even makes sense. How many complete genres have you failed to comment on on this site? I guess that means you've never heard of them. I mean, logically, that's the only conclusion a rational person could arrive at, correct?

Posted by William on Wednesday, 09.19.07 @ 12:26pm


"This hardly even makes sense. How many complete genres have you failed to comment on on this site? I guess that means you've never heard of them. I mean, logically, that's the only conclusion a rational person could arrive at, correct?"

Or if someone with a BIT of forward thinking could have worked out it could have been that:

a) I didn't feel the need to voice my opinion on certain subjects that had already been aired by the maj of people commenting on the artist/genre.

OR EVEN MORE SHOCKINGLY...

b) I hadn't actually GOTTEN ROUND TO IT.

If you'll look at The Chemical Brothers or The Prodigy you will find that no one had posted comments before me, as i'm sure is the case with fad gadget and many others

Posted by liam on Wednesday, 09.19.07 @ 13:06pm


I don't think any wordsmith could have made my sarcasm more painfully obvious. That was the entire point: That is NOT what a rational person would do and consequently you were not being rational.

Posted by William on Wednesday, 09.19.07 @ 13:11pm


William - I got your point completely, but this guy is way out there. Whoosh, over the head. Plus, anyone that says he has not gotten "round" to it is no one worth even wasting your energy on.

Posted by Anon on Wednesday, 09.19.07 @ 13:15pm


"Plus, anyone that says he has not gotten "round" to it is no one worth even wasting your energy on."

Oh Anon please don't make me turn this into a slanging match as its perfectly obvious that William is the one that wants to 'tip me over' (whoops, another classic example of culturally influenced phraseology that Anon looks down on). Ironic coming from the same person that refered to someone as an 'elitist snob'.

and william, i would have gotten you're 'sarcasm' if i'd read that good old 'correct?' on the end. I know you will say 'not reading the comment fully reveals you're not acting rationally' but you're initial comments on rationality are some what off topic.

"I got your point completely,"

yes, i'm sure you did. what i'm wondering is 'why did you includ the point about your own understanding?' You AND I (the guy who's not worth wasting energy on) SHOULD (well I do) realize that you're point about my lack of understanding his sarcasm would have worked without even mentioning 'you', so you obviously have doubts about something.

"but this guy is way out there. Whoosh, over the head."

great, a slanging match



Posted by liam on Wednesday, 09.19.07 @ 14:25pm


What??...are you drunk?

Posted by Anon on Wednesday, 09.19.07 @ 14:43pm


why are you asking me questions? afterall, i am way 'out there' as you say.

And i'm not going to use psych terms, it would take too long

(William/Kit/Anon: 'well, you made that big list before so i don't see why not'....before scoffing to self loudly)

Posted by liam on Wednesday, 09.19.07 @ 14:47pm


The question was rhetorical if you can wrap your brain around that concept...

Posted by Anon on Wednesday, 09.19.07 @ 14:49pm


I believe Rush should be there. I refuse to visit the Hall of Shame even though I live 30m away because of this issue. Rush is one of my favorites!!

However, to correct Bob Dog who says Rush never did drugs, I have an article here (I collect these) from the 2112 era where Rush admits to smoking weed.

So unfortunately they were in the drug culture at one time contrary to what you said.

Posted by Michael O on Monday, 10.1.07 @ 16:33pm


I hope Rush never gets voted in. The Rock and Roll Hall of fame is a joke so is Rolling Stone magazine (where Rush has never graced the cover). A vote to the Hall would reduce perhaps the greatest rock band ever to mere mediocrity. Rush deserves better - Rush deserves to be left out.

Posted by Andrew T. on Monday, 10.1.07 @ 17:34pm


I think Kit from way earlier in this thread needs to look below again and find out that truly, she is a woman. Aside from David Hasselhoff's car from the Knight Rider series, I don't know many people named "Kit" who weren't a candy bar (last name "Kat") or someone completely full of themselves or vodka. The RRH of fame is a joke - not just for RUSH, but for a wide range of choices and/or non-choices they've made. PS: Is this site run by Kit and others frequently adding to this dialogue? I'm to full of what is previously mentioned as the second option of what Kit possibly is to make enough time to research this completely. Kit are you the guy from The Simpsons who runs the comic book store? I hope that you're really cheesed by this and post some inane flame that shows your incredible intellect that goes so unnoticed because of...whatever. I need go to bed. Go ahead and delete it...it's okay...your mom understands...

Posted by Sparky on Monday, 10.1.07 @ 21:08pm


I have had my "differences" with Kit, but that post is fuckin incoherent...and at least most of the time I understand what he is talking about, even if I do not always agree....

Posted by Anonymous on Monday, 10.1.07 @ 21:36pm


Casper- You are wrong about Rush not being influential. They influenced many "alternative" rock bands and musicians. For example: Soundgarden, Red Hot Chilli Peppers (Flea), and Primus. Simply put, if there no Rush, there would absolutely be no Soundgarden or Primus. And Geddy Lee was a big influence on Flea of RHCP, that is a fact, as well as Steve Harris (Iron Maiden) and Cliff Burton (Metallica). So there you have it, they were significant influences of 2 of the biggest rock bands of the 1990's (Soundgarden and RHCP), and some musicians in some very prominent bands over the years. And less significantly, they also influenced prog/metal bands such as Queensryche and Dream Theater. And I know there are others, i just can't think of them right now.

Posted by Dave B on Tuesday, 10.2.07 @ 13:15pm


Sorry Kit, but no Rush, no Soundgarden. Period. Chir Cornell even said it himself, he said something like, "Soundgarden is something like Rush meets the Ramones." Rush was one of Chris Cornell's favorite bands grwoing up. Also, listen to the guitar parts to "Red barchetta" and "Tom Sawyer", and then to the songs "Superunknown" and "Limo Wreck". There is a clear sylistic link, unless you are biased, as you certainly appear to be. And yes, you can hear some Rush like riffs in Soundgarden's earlier recordings too.

Posted by Dave B on Tuesday, 10.2.07 @ 13:57pm


Dave - I am a huge Rush fan - have seen them like 25 times. You are absolutely correct on every point. However, I have given up on convincing people of their obvious influence. As I have said, Metallica even explicitly thanks Rush on the liner notes of one of their albums - duh??.

In any event, there is no point in arguing with people that live in denial simply because they do not like Rush on a personal level. As for Kit and others, my take is that he does not like Rush's music (which is fine), but I think he would concede they do have some importance, but he believes that other progressive acts should be inducted first, such as Crimson, Yes, Tull, etc. He may have a point there too...I think Kit and others would like to see progressive get in, but in "tiers" in terms of influence. Of course, the argument against that is that many people believe Rush was progressive only breifly. In any event, do what I do - know the truth, and let it go...

Posted by Anonymous on Tuesday, 10.2.07 @ 17:48pm


Let it go!?!?

How many other threads of other groups on this site have you been whining ad infinitum about the virtues of Rush for at least the last 6 months.....just check out the Moody Blues thread as 1 example.

I agree with a lot of what you say not just on Rush but other topics as well but....


"Let it go"..... give us a break...

Posted by SG on Tuesday, 10.2.07 @ 18:04pm


No longer...because there is no point...I have let it go...

Posted by Anonymous on Tuesday, 10.2.07 @ 20:06pm


Well that's great to hear.

It's time to leave that Rush phase behind.

Dance music is the new craze. Put on some Sly & The Family Stone "Dance To The Music" just to warm up then some Donna Summer and Chic!

We're gonna get you boogyin!!!

Posted by SG on Tuesday, 10.2.07 @ 20:26pm


I like all kinds of music - except of course hard core country - yuk!

Posted by Anonymous on Tuesday, 10.2.07 @ 20:45pm


Rush, by virtue of their accomplishments over the last 30 years, more than deserves a place in the Rock & Roll Hall of Fame. I'm not sure why they (and scores of others) have been overlooked even for consideration. It bothers me that we, the music "consumers," in spite of many petitions, have absolutely no "valid" input into the eligibility of an artist for consideration. However, as several have stated above - RUSH's reputation stands on it's own. Th RRHF need not include RUSH for Alex, Geddy and Neil to bask in the genuine appreciation of their true fans/friends. I, for one, will have nothing to do with RRHF or Rolling Stone magazine.

Posted by Mike T on Tuesday, 10.2.07 @ 23:05pm


Rush, like Pink Floyd, sold millions of albums and concert tickets as an ensemble without a star frontman and without press and media coverage. Geddy Lee, Alex Lifeson and Neil Peart treat their fans like GOLD! They are humble, quiet, unassuming and highly educated serious musicians. The Band was not all Canadian, their drummer Levon Helm was a Yankee (from Arkansas) who defected to Canada. Rush are SUPERB! From 2112 to Moving Pictures to Signals to Counterparts to Snakes and Arrows, Rush continue to influence current generations of hard rock and metal bands and the music still holds up in 2007.

Posted by Terrence Reardon on Sunday, 10.7.07 @ 22:10pm


Kit said Rush lacks the chops of ELP? You've got to be kidding me. Let's compare: As for keyboards, I'll easily give that to Emerson. He's a virtuoso keyboardist while Geddy Lee, though a decent keyboardist, is primarily a bass player. As a bass player, I think we can all agree that Geddy far outshines Lake. Few bass players in rock have had an influence and career like Lee. As for guitarists, Lake has come up with many wonderful songs and guitar passages, but Lifeson is one of the most highly regarded lead/rhythm player of the past 30 years, this despite often being overshadowed by his bandmates. Peart vs. Palmer. Palmer is a fantastic drummer, a big influence on Peart, and a playrer who is still going strong today. But Peart is widely regarded by many as the greatest rock drummer EVER -- certainly the most influential. Yes, even more so that Bonham, Moon, Bruford and Palmer.

Rush often is overlooked in many areas, but give them their credit where credit is due. These 3 individuals are among the most proficient players in rock history. Yes, there are many players who have chops like they do, but to create music that is both instrumentally challenging and commercially viable at the same time (without canceling each other out) is something that only a few bands can do, and do well. This is where Rush's genius lays.

Posted by Anthony on Monday, 10.8.07 @ 06:49am


Anthony well said....Kit had said that earlier because he does not like Rush...that's all

Posted by Anonymous on Monday, 10.8.07 @ 22:56pm


Rush is one of the best bands ever. Any band that has come this far going against the word of the record company (the man ) has my vote. King crimson yes and genesis are all great bands but it only took 3 guys (Rush) to play that awesome music and took the others 5 or more to make their sound... WIthout rush no smashing pumpkins tool primus rage against the machine iron madien metalica sound garden living color dream theater and many many other bands... yes im a rush fan and we may get annoying but goddamn it rush deserves credit. they rock the shit ... they sell alot of records and they do it without selling there souls how many time do you go to walmart and see pink floyd kiss led zep acdc shirts you would never see a rush shirt at walmart i think that in it self should give rush the hall o fame nod .

Posted by Brian Spiess on Wednesday, 10.10.07 @ 18:19pm


I see where Rush was recently rated as the second worst lyricists of all time by Blender magazine. I guess science fiction and philosophical goobledeegook doesn't appeal to every male geek in the western hemishpere!

Posted by shawn on Wednesday, 10.10.07 @ 21:26pm


I read the "list." They do not provide how they came up with the list. My impression is that it is just whatever the "guys" who wrote the article did not like. Plus, on the list was Sting, as well as Jim Morrison, David Crosby, Genesis, Robert Plant,and others. I guess the next time I want to know if a song has good lyrics, I will check with those "guys" over there at the magazine.

I happen to think that Sting, a former English teacher, is an excellent lyricist. My all time favorite is: "Words are hard to find, they are only checks I've left unsigned from the banks of chaos in my mind."

And, of course the asessment of Peart is aways based upon the 2-3 "sci-fi" CD's (esp 2112), which actually demonstrates ignorance of the full catalog of Peart's lyrics, which is so varied in content and style. What do you expect from a magazine named after an applicance. They just dislike Peart because of his politics and world view. The fitting lyric here would be (from Peart to the "guys" at Blender) - and always one of my favorites:

"Closed for my protection
Open to your scorn
Between these two directions
my heart is sometimes torn."



Posted by Anonymous on Wednesday, 10.10.07 @ 22:18pm


Limelight - 1981
(long after the "science fiction" stage):

"Living on a lighted stage
Approaches the unreal
For those who think and feel
In touch with some reality
Beyond the gilded cage

Cast in this unlikely role
Ill-equipped to act
With insufficient tact
One must put up barriers
To keep oneself intact"

Huh - wha-? Does anyone have a Rush to English dictionary?

Posted by shawn on Wednesday, 10.10.07 @ 23:53pm


That is a straight forward lyric...r u serious?

Posted by Anonymous on Thursday, 10.11.07 @ 00:12am


"Ten score years ago, defeat the kingly foe
A wondrous dream came into being
Tame the trackless waste, no virgin land left chaste All shining eyes, but never seeing"

"The hypocrites are slandering
The sacred Halls of Truth
Ancient nobles showering
Their bitterness on youth
Can't we find the minds that made us strong?
Can't we learn to feel what's right
And what's wrong?
What's wrong?"

On Love:
"When life becomes as barren
And as cold as winter skies
There's a beacon in the darkness
In a distant pair of eyes
In vain to search for honor
In vain to search for truth
But these things can still be given
Your love has shown me proof."

"Wheels can take you around
Wheels can cut you down
We can go from boom to bust
From dreams to a bowl of dust
We can fall from rockets' red glare
Down to "Brother can you spare..."
Another war
Another wasteland
And another lost generation."


On Nationalism:
"They shoot without shame
In the name of a piece of dirt
For a change of accent
Or the color of your shirt
Better the pride that resides
In a citizen of the world
Than the pride that divides
When a colorful rag is unfurled."

A lyric anyone human being could connect to:

"The office door closed early
The hidden bottle came out
The salesman turned to close the blinds
A little slow now, a little stout
But he's still heading down those tracks
Any day now for sure
Another day as drab as today
Is more than a man can endure
Dreams flow across the heartland
Feeding on the fires
Dreams transport desires
Drive you when you're down
Dreams transport the ones who need to get out of town."


This may pertain to Bush and the current state of affairs:
"Now it's come to this
Hollow speeches of mass deception
From the Middle East to the Middle West
Like crusaders in a holy alliance
Now it's come to this
Like we're back in the dark ages
From the Middle East to the Middle West
It's a plague that resists our science."


I guess the "guys" at "Blender" missed these...


Posted by Anonymous on Thursday, 10.11.07 @ 00:26am


Holy Crap!!!!! Sorry I brought the subject up everyone! I didn't expect Anon to transcribe all the awesome Rush lyrics he has doodled on his Trapper Keeper here.
I wasn't giving you license to post Peart peotry, Dude. Forget I said anything....... please!

Posted by shawn on Thursday, 10.11.07 @ 09:09am


Shawn, you raise a point obviously to "put down" Peart, etc., thereby creating a degree of hostility. Then when I say something that is in defense of Peart, in whatever format I chose - you then say that I should not have said anything. Classic passive-aggressive behavior - you may want to get that checked out....

BTW, do ya' think Sting should be considered the worst lyricist or even be on the list at all???

Posted by Anonymous on Thursday, 10.11.07 @ 21:18pm


Wake up people! The truth is hidden in plain sight. The mere fact that 278 comments have been posted on this subject, dating back to July 2006, is testament enough that this band MATTERS. Love then or hate them; they had influence. I remember the dawn of the internet in the late 80's/early 90's and Rush "bulletin boards" were among the most popular. Far more than any other musical act of the time. Rush spoke the musical language of early PC consumers. I recently attended a Rush concert and saw fans ranging between 13 to 60 years old in the audiance. Induct them in the damn hall already!

Posted by Aaron Noe on Friday, 10.12.07 @ 01:32am


"The mere fact that 278 comments have been posted on this subject, dating back to July 2006, is testament enough that this band MATTERS."-Aaron Noe

Bad logic.

Posted by William on Friday, 10.12.07 @ 08:18am


Considering that Blender once named "Sound of Silence" as one of the 50 worst songs of all time, no one should really take anything they say seriously.

Posted by A-Killa on Friday, 10.12.07 @ 10:08am


"I happen to think that Sting, a former English teacher, is an excellent lyricist. My all time favorite is: "Words are hard to find, they are only checks I've left unsigned from the banks of chaos in my mind." "

sting? lyrics? any decent lyrics he ever used were 'borrowed' from Shakespseare, and the rest were utter year 1 bullshit

Posted by liam on Friday, 10.12.07 @ 11:40am


"The mere fact that 278 comments have been posted on this subject, dating back to July 2006, is testament enough that this band MATTERS."-Aaron Noe

"Bad logic." - William

Not at all bad logic - that would only be if you do not like Rush - I think it is great logic. It demonstrates that Rush is discussed in great detail - virtually more than any other band on this site, and most of the remarks are in support of Rush - go figure.


"Considering that Blender once named "Sound of Silence" as one of the 50 worst songs of all time, no one should really take anything they say seriously."

More good logic - thank you!

"sting? lyrics? any decent lyrics he ever used were 'borrowed' from Shakespseare, and the rest were utter year 1 bullshit"

Bad logic. Sting has written excellent lyrics. On every album and every song? Of course not - nobodys perfect. But, to put him as number one on that list is actually the bullshit...his lyrics are excellent

Posted by Anonymous on Friday, 10.12.07 @ 17:35pm


Here is one review of Blender I found:

"In a related story, Blender magazine was nominated world’s saddest excuse for a music rag, as well as receiving the award for the lamest publicity stunt to try and garner readership by making a list that would inspire controversy.

At least it gave the morning talk shows something to crow about. Apparently Sting was at the top of the list.


Another review:

"richly awful tapestries of fantasy and science" - BLENDER

Yet another critic who hasn't heard a Rush album in 25 years. I mean if you are going to review Rush, at least try something post 70's - duh


Posted by Anonymous on Friday, 10.12.07 @ 17:42pm


"Not at all bad logic - that would only be if you do not like Rush" - Anon

Anon, it is terrible logic. If it wasn't, we should be inducting the likes of MCR and P!ATD.

"But, to put him as number one on that list is actually the bullshit...his lyrics are excellent" - Anon

Ofcourse, had they included a lot of radio-filler artists, he would have come a lot lower. But for someone who takes their lyrics seriously he really is shite

Posted by liam on Saturday, 10.13.07 @ 10:32am


Your logic is flawed - there are a ton of worse lyricists that are not "radio filler." It was a publicity stunt...a bad one at that, one any intelligent person could decipher...I would hardly call Aerosmith radio filler.."Love in an elevator, livin' up when I'm goin down"....

Posted by Anonymous on Saturday, 10.13.07 @ 10:39am


i love the way you constantly confuse 'intelligence' with 'logical thinking'.

I won't say exactly what i think of Sting, but at least Aerosmith metaphors aren't so finely wrapped up you can't understand straight away

Posted by liam on Saturday, 10.13.07 @ 10:50am


"I won't say exactly what i think of Sting, but at least Aerosmith metaphors aren't so finely wrapped up you can't understand straight away."

God forbid people should be challenged and made to think, please know, we can have none of that here in America.

BTW, I didn't know Aerosmith used "metaphors" in their songs - fancy that.

Posted by Anonymous on Saturday, 10.13.07 @ 12:05pm


"Not at all bad logic - that would only be if you do not like Rush - I think it is great logic. It demonstrates that Rush is discussed in great detail - virtually more than any other band on this site, and most of the remarks are in support of Rush - go figure."-Rush

The entire premise for his argument was that having a lot of people (who, as I hate repeating, ARE NOT MUSICIANS) talking about a band means that that band is inherently important TO MUSIC. It is complete nonsense. I could go find a Fall Out Boy forum somewhere that has more comments than this entire site, and that wouldn't prove jack squat because, as I've absolutely tired of saying, IT HAS NO BEARING ON THE ACTUAL QUALIFIERS FOR INDUCTION. The fact that any band (take Bon Jovi, for instance) has enough people who like it to make a ton of comments does not prove to me in any way that that band has any impact MUSICALLY. Maybe some of the individual comments discuss that, true, but the sheer number of comments represented by a few digits IS NOT IMPORTANT. Why is this such a complex concept for you?

Number of comments = not important at all.

Posted by William on Saturday, 10.13.07 @ 12:08pm


"God forbid people should be challenged and made to think, please know, we can have none of that here in America."

made to think? MADE TO THINK?! i accept you may enjoy pondering the meaning of life whilst listening to De Do Do Do, De Da Da, but i look for something a bit more intellectualy challenging.

Posted by liam on Saturday, 10.13.07 @ 12:18pm


It is the Number of comments couple with other factors (i.e. influence, success, etc.). It is never one thing....

"having a lot of people (who, as I hate repeating, ARE NOT MUSICIANS)"

How could you possibly know that?

Posted by Anonymous on Saturday, 10.13.07 @ 13:07pm


"whilst listening to De Do Do Do, De Da Da, but i look for something a bit more intellectualy challenging."

Most people, and probably yourself, do not even know the lyrics to the song and think it is just some stupid pop song. Some great lines from the song:

"Don't think me unkind
Words are hard to find
They're only cheques I've left unsigned
From the banks of chaos in my mind."

And, yet another verse:

"Poets, priests and politicians
Have words to thank for their positions
Words that scream for your submission
And no-one's jamming their transmission
'Cos when their eloquence escapes you
Their logic ties you up and rapes you."

SO true.. and said with such eloquence...




Posted by Anonymous on Saturday, 10.13.07 @ 13:11pm


"The entire premise for his argument was that having a lot of people (who, as I hate repeating, ARE NOT MUSICIANS) talking about a band means that that band is inherently important TO MUSIC. It is complete nonsense"

Jan Wenner = Not a musician
David Marsh = not a musician
etc., etc., etc.

So, since non-musicians opinion do not count, I guess we can throw aways the whole RRHOF...and this site too!

Posted by Anonymous on Saturday, 10.13.07 @ 13:35pm


"Poets, priests and politicians
Have words to thank for their positions
Words that scream for your submission
And no-one's jamming their transmission"

uses rhyme of ion to much
and 'jamming their transmission' is probably the most bullshit sounding piece of muck he could have shoved in there

"Cos when their eloquence escapes you
Their logic ties you up and rapes you."

huh? uses of 'you' three times in two verses. tut-tut. text book error.

PS you've just answered one of my ultimate questions: 'what kind of sad fuck actually argues that Sting can write lyrics AND quotes Sting to "prove" he is a good lyricist?'

Posted by liam on Saturday, 10.13.07 @ 13:58pm


"It is the Number of comments couple with other factors (i.e. influence, success, etc.). It is never one thing...."-Anon

So mixing something relevant with something entirely irrelevant makes them both relevant? No.

"How could you possibly know that?"-Anon

Because only the tiniest fraction of any popular band's audience actually plays instruments, therefore it's a safe bet that most of the people here are not, and in any case.

"Jan Wenner = Not a musician
David Marsh = not a musician
etc., etc., etc.

So, since non-musicians opinion do not count, I guess we can throw aways the whole RRHOF...and this site too!"-Anon

I absolutely hate how dense you can be when you try. Once again, you miss the point. The number of comments made by non-musicians is not important. It's not important. It's not important. It is not im-por-tant. What IS important? Der, how about "innovation and influence"? That sounds pretty important, don't it? So arguments that ATTEMPT TO ASSERT THE EXISTENCE OF THOSE TWO QUALITIES are what I and other rational being would call "sensible." Arguments that are based on horrible premises such as "the number of commments = more important band" are what I would deem "not worth my time" and "get that crap out of here."

So do you get it? I don't care about the PEOPLE making the arguments, just the arguments they choose to make, i.e., very very bad ones.

Posted by William on Saturday, 10.13.07 @ 14:11pm


"So, since non-musicians opinion do not count, I guess we can throw aways the whole RRHOF...and this site too!"

well, YOU can fuck off whenever you please, but i'm quite happy here, thanks

Posted by liam on Saturday, 10.13.07 @ 14:34pm


"uses rhyme of ion to much"

According to who? Plus, the importance of a lyric is in its content and meaning, not the number of times he makes a rhyme - Sting never claimed nor did I ever purport that he was a poet.


"PS you've just answered one of my ultimate questions: 'what kind of sad fuck actually argues that Sting can write lyrics AND quotes Sting to "prove" he is a good lyricist?'"

I merely pointed out those lyrics because many people think the song "de, do, da, da" is a meaningless song with stupid lyrics - I was merely pointing that out.

And, actually, the irony here is that most of your posts lack any sense or the proper use of the English language - go figure.

Posted by Anonymous on Saturday, 10.13.07 @ 14:36pm


As for William - I am honestly asking you - how do you reconcile the fact that the RRHOF committe are just a bunch of writers

You bring up a valid point - maybe, just maybe the RRHOF should be voted on by other musicians, not some snobby critics (i.e. "Those that can't do, teach").

Posted by Anonymous on Saturday, 10.13.07 @ 14:40pm


oh SORRY everyone! the last comma i used was actually meant to be a full stop, sorry for the inconvenience, everyone...oh wait, just anon

Posted by liam on Saturday, 10.13.07 @ 14:49pm


Oh, gheeez, I said "merely" twice in the same thought above - Liam the word counter will now discount what I said because of it...shucks!

Posted by Anonymous on Saturday, 10.13.07 @ 15:00pm


what backward person says 'gheeez'? its actually 'jeez', two e's and a j instead of a 'gh' (gh? wouldn't that make it sound the same as geezer?)

Oh, jeez, i never counted it anyway

Posted by liam on Saturday, 10.13.07 @ 15:07pm


'those that can't do, teach' slags off teachers, but you used the fact that Sting was an english teacher as being some sort of argument for him being a good lyricist. Therefore you are a hypocrite.

As for 'Loaded', you'd have been better off using 'pissed', 'smashed', 'lashed' or 'a skinful'. That last bit was pointless, but so are many of your comments

Posted by liam on Saturday, 10.13.07 @ 15:38pm


My God - we've discoverd Anon's British doppleganger - Liam is actually taking Anon to task for not using UK argot; what's the local colloqialism for "stupid", mate?

Posted by shawn on Saturday, 10.13.07 @ 15:53pm


Tell me about it.

Sting will bein the hall one day as a solo artist. Plus, this is the same guy that shoots a load from the band Oasis!

Posted by Anonymous on Saturday, 10.13.07 @ 15:58pm


why? Sting's solo career really doesn't amount to much, and it's hardly a huge leap away from the style of the Police anyway.

and i could just aswell remind everyone that you're the guy who argued that Lionel Richie deserves induction.

Posted by liam on Saturday, 10.13.07 @ 16:09pm


"Liam is actually taking Anon to task for not using UK argot"

actually, 'jeez', an abreviation for jesus christ, is more commonly used than 'gheez'

Posted by liam on Saturday, 10.13.07 @ 16:32pm


"As for William - I am honestly asking you - how do you reconcile the fact that the RRHOF committe are just a bunch of writers"-Anon

Doesn't bother me because that was never my objection. The people who do the selection, provided they're doing their jobs correctly, are still choosing based on innovation and influence. I wouldn't trust a panel of musicians to do a significantly better job because they have their own set of biases. The only reason I constantly mention musicians is because they are the ones who take influence. How musician A influences musician B is important, becuase it shows musical impact. It shows that that person did something that was thought to be worth imitating or expanding upon. How many non-music-playing fans they have is not important in that respect, as are the number of comments their fans rack up on a website.

Posted by William on Saturday, 10.13.07 @ 19:39pm


I know this may be overdoing it, and I apologize, but these idiots at Blender went out of their way to denigrate two wonderful writers. They had an obvious agenda. Suggesting that Peart is not a good writer and lyricist is dumb.

Saying that you do not agree with his opinion or philosophy is another thing. In any event.....

This is a review from the website "Blog Critics", which is described as: "an online magazine, a community of writers and readers from around the globe."

The review of the Peart book, The Maksed Rider, partially states:

"There oughtta be a law against it. Some people are just so talented. Neil Peart's cup runneth over. Not only is he arguably the greatest rock drummer (Rush), his lyrics often transcend genius.

In sum, the book demonstrates a gifted thinker and writer giving a glimpse into his unusual life. I recommend it."

For the rest of the review:

blogcritics.org/archives/2005/09/29/102650.php


Another review - different book:

"In an absorbing, conversational style that favorably recalls John Irving's (and makes one impatient for a book about his life with Rush), Peart weaves his many threads together into a paean to the lifelong quest for knowledge, for movement, for excellence. It's that questing spirit that gives Traveling Music its momentum, and makes even its longer detours worth the trip."

Rest of review: www.shakingthrough.net/books/reviews/2004/neil_peart_traveling_music_2004.html


And, yet another:

"is a must read. It is a history lesson, a social commentary, a comedy, drama, and documentary all in one. Neil Peart, drummer and lyricist for Rush, shows that he can truly captivate and charm his reader with prose as well as poetry...Neil's vivid descriptions of the countryside make you feel as if you were there. I can still visually recall many moments from this book...."

Full Review: http://reviews.myeyez.net/review.php?The_Masked_Rider:_Cycling_in_West_Africa


Well, you get the point...

Posted by Anonymous on Saturday, 10.13.07 @ 20:51pm


anon, no matter how many blogs and reviews you cite, it won't change my view that Peart's lyrics are overbearing and pretentious. Yes, MY view, not yours

Posted by liam on Sunday, 10.14.07 @ 06:45am


1) Not sure why you feel the post was towards you Liam, as my comments pertained to those at Blender - I was not attempting to convince YOU of anything. Your narccisism is quite evident. But, since you raise the issue:

2) Saying that Peart's lyrics are pretentious is a trite comment obviosuly stolen from past reviews - a "jump on the bandwagon" comment.

3) Have you read "The Masked Rider" or "The Ghost Rider?" Have you read the full catalog of Rush lyricss, not just The Trees or Tom Sawyer? Likely NOT....that would disqualify you from being able to critically comment on his writings / lyrics.

4) If you accuse a writer of something then back up what you are saying - something you have not done.

Posted by Anonymous on Sunday, 10.14.07 @ 08:34am


"Have you read the full catalog of Rush lyricss"

Christ, if i knew you had your dick THAT far up Peart's arse i wouldn't have said anything.

I am somewhat doubtful that even YOU can claim to know every lyric of every song by Rush. I would never claim to (who would?), but from what I have listened to (which is enough), I believe that I can justify my argument, which I won't do here because it would be pointless doing so, and its my opinion which you will, no doubt, make some overblown argument about to 'prove' wrong.

Posted by liam on Sunday, 10.14.07 @ 08:57am


Just what I thought....you have heard a "few" songs out of hundreds and then render an opinion - huh?

And, I do know every lyric (of course not memorized), but since I own all of the CD's, I am familiar with the entire catalog. So, that puts me a much better position than you.

Plus, Liam you lack any sense or intellect. It would be fine to say something like (which I have seen critics actually say) - - (paraphrased of course):

"His earlier writings were a bit overblown and too much sci-fi, but during the 80's he progressed into more tangible issues, and in the 90's with the death of his wife and daughter, the lyrcis became more personal."

Or conversely, if you are a fan of sci-fi and hard core progressvie rock, you could say the opposite. The point is, you never fucking read the lyrics, you borrow from others, and are unable to articulate any meaningful position.

As for the anal sex comment, that is from the same guy that, no matter what band is being dicussed, brings up the 80's band, the Smiths.

Posted by Anonymous on Sunday, 10.14.07 @ 10:08am


A couple of belated observations from all of this back and forth.

In defense of Anon, many of you make comments along the lines of "Christ, if i knew you had your dick THAT far up Peart's arse i wouldn't have said anything" (Liam). I find those type of comments rather silly considering the site that we are all posting on. Of course Anon is a Rush fanatic. I admire his enthusiasm for his favorite band. None of us would be posting here on a regular basis of we weren't all music geeks anyway. If people were attacking some of my favorites, I would defend them with as much vigor. You have anything negative to say about The Kinks, I'm ready to rumble! But that is the whole point. This site is about the Rockhall, sure, but it offers a larger forum for music geeks to come together and argue vigorously about musical minutia that the general public could care less about. So, attack Rush for substantive reasons, definitely. Let's foster good debate and discussion. But making arguments, then someone responds, and then to respond to that person with an argument along the lines that they are too enthusiastic about that band...seems asinine considering the forum in which we are all participating in the first place. Of course Anon is a crazy, music nut-job. We all are. We have no business wasting our time here if we aren't...

Now, to Peart's lyrics. They are absurb. But so what. At least he attempts to say something substantive, as silly as it comes across at times. And Geddy Lee's balls-in-a-vise whine generally overshadows what the lyrics are trying to convey anyway. I dig Rush, I have quite a bit of their material, but the reason I like them is for the music. I would like them a lot more if they did away with the lyrics and vocals altogether and just did instrumentals. They'd be a favorite band if they did that.

Saying Sting is a bad lyricist is ridiculous. Sting is an excellent rock/pop lyricist. The bar is not set very high, but he clears it easily. Yes, he has some cringe-worthy missteps and in recent years he has gotten lazy and generic ("Let Your Soul Be Your Pilot", argghg!) But his early solo work (first 3 or 4 albums) and Police work is top-notch. I mean, the guy is educated and is not afraid to show it. In a music dominated by dopes who didn't even finish high school, here we have an educated, philosophical dude unafraid to show it. Pretentious? Sure. Sometimes pretention ain't a bad thing. Anon has pointed out some great lyrics in my opinion, so if you think they really are some of the worst you've heard, please enlighten us to other rock writers who are heads and shoulders about Sting as a lyricist. Please. And save pulling out Bob Dylan. He is in a class by himself. Anyone else?

To add to Anon's examples, I always enjoy some lines from "Wrapped Around Your Finger". Lines like "You consider me your young apprentice / Caught between the Scylla and Charibdes". Say what you will, but who the fuck else could have a huge hit song that references relatively obscure Greek mythology? Count me in as impressed. And if the album 'Synchronicity' encouraged some young fans in the 80's (such as myself) to explore Jungian writings to figure out what the hell Sting was talking about in some of those songs, is that a bad thing?

Posted by Dezmond on Sunday, 10.14.07 @ 10:18am


"As for the anal sex comment, that is from the same guy that, no matter what band is being dicussed, brings up the 80's band, the Smiths."

I actually find your calling it 'the anal sex comment' funnier than my own original comment. And actually I think that you've brought up Rush more times than I've brought up the Smiths.

"You have anything negative to say about The Kinks"

No. The complete opposite, actually.

"In a music dominated by dopes who didn't even finish high school"

I really don't think that your education has anything to do with the quality of your music, especially since so many respected artists came from (near to) nothing.

"please enlighten us to other rock writers who are heads and shoulders about Sting as a lyricist"

i could name a few better ones:

Morrissey,
Paul Heaton/David Hemmingway,
Ian Curtis,
Robert Smith,
Alex Turner,
Micheal Stipe,
Paul Weller,
Lou Reed,
and (cringes) Jarvis Cocker

I suppose you could put it that Sting has some of the lowest lows of all major lyricists when it comes to lyrical quality.

Posted by liam on Sunday, 10.14.07 @ 11:29am


I agree with virtually everyhing dex said. Couple of points, bringing up Lee's voice is really a different topic because this was really about lyrics. But, one can certainly argue that Lee's voice is a bit annoying.

As for the lyrics being absurd, that is a bit off. How? Sure, some of the songs are, like the Trees, etc., but I would bet that Peart would say that the song lyrics to many of these "absurd" songs were written on a whim and taken way too seriously. In any event, perusing the full catalog of his lyrics, he has an uncanny ability to say a lot with so little space, which is the challenge of writing lyrics. And, if people do not think he is a great writer - reference the book reviews.

As for Sting, Dez is dead on. The Police and Sting are my 2nd favorite. Both Peart and Sting are great thinkers and writers. It is amazing though - when you put thought into your lyrics and / or take a position on an issue - you are somehow perceived as arrogant or pretentious...

And, Liam I do agree that Morrisey, although a bit depressive at times, is a great lyricist too -in a different way of course than Sting or Peart.

Lets call it a day - cheers!



Posted by Anonymous on Sunday, 10.14.07 @ 13:06pm


well, anon, if you find a Morrissey 'a bit depressive' i recommend that you look up The Beautiful South (if you haven't already).

The way that the pop melodies contradict the darkly humorous (and sometimes deadly serious) lyrics is, i find, very clever.

Posted by liam on Sunday, 10.14.07 @ 13:12pm


You mean they aren't in already?

That's ridiculous.

Posted by Joe on Tuesday, 10.16.07 @ 16:55pm


I must have come to the right or wrong place. I love Rush and the Smiths. You either appreciate the creativity of a group's lyrics to express themselves or not("but don't plagarize or take on loan") I happen to think Rush produces inciteful,relevant lyrics (from personal loss to acid rain to middle east peace). Their abilty to stand the test of time is reflected best in that the number of times that newer groups have cited them as an influence and the number of times that their peers have recognized their musicianship. Seems like the this is in concert with the Hall entry criteria (sorry for the pun)

The Smiths are a whole other animal....
Cheers

Posted by Phil on Friday, 10.19.07 @ 14:44pm


Of course Phil.

The "Blender" thing was nothing more than a publiciy stunt. Think about it - when you searched the net for the headlines - it said something like "Sting is worst lyricist." His name was everywhere... Obviously, since they put Peart 2nd-he could have easily been the number one - but headlines reading Peart is worst lyricist is obviously and clearly not going to carry the weight and publicity of naming Sting the "worst" - oh well....

lets see - name two lyricists known for great lyrics and then name them the "worst" of all time - oh, puh--lease

Posted by Anonymous on Friday, 10.19.07 @ 15:40pm


I apologize.

If I had seen who else was on the list, namely a certain Gallagher brother, I would have realized that it was infact a complete attention grab.

"said Gallagher "seemed incapable of following a metaphor through a single line, let alone a whole verse"

I'd like to see some EXAMPLES. Noel has made some of the most memorabele lyrics in the last decade and a bit (don't bash me for doing this, its he northern patriotism AGAIN);

'stand up inside the fireplace, take that look from off your face, cos ain't ever gonna burn my heart out'

'i said maybe, i don't really wanna know, how your garden grows, cos i just wanna fly'

bullshit. i'd admit he's not big on his lyrics, but it doesn't take a fucking William to realise how much theyre talking out of their arses.

Also, does anyone have a link to the whole list? I'd like to see their argument about how Bob Dylan isn't in touch with his fellow man, and why Morrissey comes across as too cheery in Death of A Disco Dancer....

Posted by liam on Friday, 10.19.07 @ 16:04pm


dw found the list.

"Manchester’s drunkest son once said"

Noel? Manchester's drunkest son? Nah, that title goes to Shaun Ryder. And the most drugged is definitely Bez. You name it, the Happy Mondays have snorted it.

Shame about the direness of their new album though

Posted by liam on Friday, 10.19.07 @ 16:09pm


Here it be:

www.blender.com/guide/articles.aspx?ID=2882

Posted by Anonymous on Saturday, 10.20.07 @ 06:33am


Like Archie Manning who spawned two future Hall of Famers. RUSH too, fathered many future Hall of Famers...but sadly, neither parent will ever be in the Hall themselves. Though many feel both deserve induction.

Posted by anonymous on Saturday, 10.20.07 @ 13:08pm


Well, I have read the prior posts ranging from "Rush RULES!!!! (and, frankly they do) to "Rush? Whatever." (frankly, a seriously misguided perception of reality). Johnny Rotten said best. Rush, I imagine, isn't too worried about the continual rejection - I mean, look at their wine cellars, planes, motorcycles, and cars. Not too shabby for a band of little significance, don't you think. And besides, would they want to be inducted into a museum that inducted Bob Seger (shudder!!!!!)? That, in a nutshell, sums it up for me!!!!! By the way, Rush RULES!!!!!!!!

jvb

Posted by jvb on Wednesday, 10.31.07 @ 10:36am


"I mean, look at their wine cellars, planes, motorcycles, and cars."-jvb

Why do people continue to talk about the pettiest and least relevant aspects of a band's career? Planes do not write songs, sir, and I know this might come as a shock, but quite a few people can afford those things who happen not to be worthy musicians. If a band has any relevant aspects at all that make it a candidate for induction, then try talking about those things rather than drawing terrible conclusions about how they must be good musicians because they can afford wine.

Posted by William on Wednesday, 10.31.07 @ 12:01pm


"Well, I have read the prior posts ranging from "Rush RULES!!!! (and, frankly they do) to "Rush? Whatever." (frankly, a seriously misguided perception of reality). Johnny Rotten said best. Rush, I imagine, isn't too worried about the continual rejection - I mean, look at their wine cellars, planes, motorcycles, and cars. Not too shabby for a band of little significance, don't you think. And besides, would they want to be inducted into a museum that inducted Bob Seger (shudder!!!!!)? That, in a nutshell, sums it up for me!!!!! By the way, Rush RULES!!!!!!!!"

Nice try anon, but no cigar...

Posted by liam on Wednesday, 10.31.07 @ 12:12pm


"I mean, look at their wine cellars, planes, motorcycles, and cars."-jvb


"Behind every fortune there is a crime."
-Honoré de Balzac

Posted by SG on Wednesday, 10.31.07 @ 14:21pm


For the record, Rush is my favorite band. They are the first concert I attended and I totally admire everything about them. In my humble opinion, they are the tops in their respective musical categories and instruments. They have influenced untotalled number of other musicians and/or bands. That is the real testament to their music.

The real issue is whether induction into the Hall of Fame matters at all. I submit to you that it doesn't. Those who like Rush are still going to like them, and those who don't, well, will miss out on a huge body of great music.

jvb

Posted by jvb on Wednesday, 10.31.07 @ 15:31pm


Liam, I did not write that post with an alias. I agree with Bill that saying a band is essentially rich is really a stupid argument for induction into the RRHOF. I mean should I list all the crappy financially succesful solo artists or bands that will never even get close to the hall?

"Behind every fortune there is a crime."

Actually, that is a misquote:

Translation: "The secret of a great success for which you are at a loss to account is a crime that has never been found out, because it was properly executed." This is sometimes oversimplified and distorted as "Behind every great fortune there is a great crime."

Found that a Wiki. Plus, while some people get rich through cheating, many do not. Obviously, Rush falls into the latter...

Posted by Anonymous on Wednesday, 10.31.07 @ 17:15pm


Anonymous,

There are several variations depending on the translation, another being:

"The secret of great wealth with no obvious source is some forgotten crime, forgotten because it was done neatly."

In this case the crime is stealing. Rush took the sound of Black Sabbath and superimposed the sound of Yes over top of it and sprinkled it with the sounds of some other British blues bands like Cream just to make it look good.

With the criteria for admission into this museum being innovation as well as influence, Rush's innovation score just isn't that high........

Posted by SG on Wednesday, 10.31.07 @ 18:34pm


Of course Rush was influenced by other bands - that is a natural process. But, most people would agree that Rush's overall sound, whether you like them or not, is pretty unique. Plus, what I could never understand is that if you really believe that Rush (or any other band)is a blend of prior bands sounds, then that blend that they have created is something unique and different. Plus, if you are truly familiar with the entire Rush catalog, those bands you list (esp. Cream) really only influenced Rush on the earlier albums. In fact, they admit openly in interviews (plus they did a cover CD of those bands that they loved to listen to, so it is no big secret) that they were influenced by Yes, Cream, Zep, The Who, but during the late 70's and on, they went in their own unique direction...

I think they were pretty innovative, but sure some of the things they did were done before - I would not deny that. But, overall, they have a pretty unique sound and certainly Rush has influenced countless bands in different ways - which I need not list, as there are way too many and I have done that already.

Posted by Anonymous on Wednesday, 10.31.07 @ 19:18pm


SG, I've got to go with Anon on this one. There are some weak spots of Rush that can be legitimately attacked, but lack of originality or not enough innovation is not one of them. It took you quite a few influences to string together to even make your point. Who the hell is totally original? Bach. Maybe. You can strain and trace back influences for almost everyone. Zeppelin ("Whole Lotta Love" = Muddy Waters' "You Need Love", "Bring It On Home" = well, Sonny Boy Williamson's "Bring It On Home", etc.), Cream (covering many blues standards or simply rearranging older blues riffs and adding spead and volume to them, a la "Crossroads"), and on down the line. Who wasn't influenced by someone else? And if you sit there long enough, you can pick out traces of the influence. But give Rush its due, especially, as Anon points out, after their first couple of albums (which were quite derivative). They forged their own path...

Posted by Dezmond on Wednesday, 10.31.07 @ 19:34pm


But Dezmond if you're going to argue that nobody is totally original, then why the need for this museum, why not put everybody who claims to be a rock & roll artist in? I think the point here is to honor DEGREE of influence, DEGREE of innovation. I think that's why they are limiting the number of inductions to 5 per year now. This is to insure only the highest DEGREE of innovation and influence.

Look at some of these artists and their genres and think about how much these acts played a role in their creation and how long it took them to do so.

Pretenders-post punk
Grandmaster Flash-rap
REM-American Indie
David Bowie-Glam
King Crimson-prog
Black Sabbath-metal
Muddy Waters-electric blues
Kraftwerk-electronic


I also see then even you said back in February that you didn't think the members of Rush were that influential:

"I don't think that there is any question that Rush deserves induction. I don't need to go through the stats, Anonymous has done that adequately. This is splitting hairs, but I don't hear much influence from Lifeson on other guitarists. He's very talented, but not all that innovative. As Kit said, most guitar innovations associated with Lifeson were done earlier and better by others (Fripp, Steve Hackett). And then later guitarists took it a lot further and eventually overshadowed Lifeson (for texture, hear Andy Summers or Edge). That said, Lifeson is competent and creative. Geddy Lee, I don't see anyone he's influenced. It is Peart who has clearly influenced musicians. I prefer many drummers over Peart, but his influence and the respect for him is undeniable.

We get back to the real reason Rush is not in: the RRHOF hates prog rock. I know, Rush was only really prog in the early days, but like it or not, they are often still categorized as such.

Posted by Dezmond on Friday, 02.9.07 @ 10:14am"

I definitely agree that eventually in the early 80's after other prog/hard rock bands had fallen by the wayside or became overcommercialized that Rush did come into its own. Songs like "Force Ten," "Red Sector A," "Distant Early Warning" are good examples. But that was a good 8-10 years after Rush started out-waaaay longer than the above mentioned artists for their genres. First impressions mean alot. I think this is why Rush won't be inducted-they did forge their own path, but they just didn't forge it fast enough.

Posted by SG on Wednesday, 10.31.07 @ 23:57pm


SG, you are splitting hairs now...yes it is a matter of degree..exactly. Has Rush been the most influential and innovative band? Of course not...but they have been both TO A DEGREE. Natually, not everyone can be the most influential. Certainly, their reumse is enough to get them in. But, the may not get in, and not for why you say (i.e. due to lack of innovation or influence), but due to the fact that the voters do not like prog. and certainly do not like Rush (i.e. personal dislike). But, you are honestly folling yourself if you think that Rush is not going to get in because of lack of influence or innovation.

Posted by Anonymous on Thursday, 11.1.07 @ 05:12am


No fair using my own words against me! Especially back from Frebruary! Anyway, I think I can make a distinction between what I said then and what I said more recently. That quote mainly discussed the individual members of Rush being influential on other musicians of those individual instruments. I still don't think Lifeson has directly influenced too many guitarists, although the fact that many musicians love their music definitely leaves that possibility open. Same for Geddy Lee as a bass player. But even then, I said that Peart was a very influential and respected drummer. But their influence might come more from their overall sound and rather complex and interesting compositions as a whole.

I agree with Anon that the main reason they have yet to be even nominated is due to their lumping in with prog rock, a genre the Central Committee seems hellbent on keeping out wholesale, and probably a personal dislike of Rush by either A. Jann Wenner, B. Dave Marsh, C. Jon Landau, D. All of the above.

You make an interesting point about first impressions. Maybe that is why John Mellencamp is still trying to get in after multiple attempts.

Posted by Dezmond on Thursday, 11.1.07 @ 07:41am


I will not touch Peart or Lee for influence, because that is obvious. But, of course Lifeson has influenced countless guitarists, to say otherwise is plain dumb. Before I outline the influences, here is a succinct review of him:

“He is the member of Rush that everyone seems to forget. He is also my favorite member of the capable group. His playing ranges from near heavy metal to the delicacy of flamenco and classical guitar. Over their 20+ year career, he has demonstrated his constant ability to change and progress to encompass nearly every known style. Lifeson's solos are some of the greatest out there and, like Fripp, he has the ability to overshadow and change the direction of an entire song with just a solo. Like Marr, he has a mastery of chords and a quick and complex playing style that operate well within the boundaries of popular music.”


Partial List of Influences:

1) For instance, Petrucci from Dream Theater.

http://www.johnpetrucci.com/bio.html


2) Steve Morse: "According to Steve Morse (Kansas, Deep Purple) himself, "Major Impacts" has been one of the most captivating things he has ever done. The concept was for him to write music that reflected the styles of some of the musicians who had influenced him both as a guitarist and as a musician. He loved the concept and knew he had to come up with familiar tempos, phrasing, instrumentation and reminiscent themes that would be literally original but obviously intended to imitate. Morse's 'major impacts' were Cream ("Derailleur Gears"), Jimi Hendrix ("Well, I Have"), Jeff Beck/Eric Johnson/Alex Lifeson ("TruthOla")..."

www.stevemorse.com/disco/r-mi.html


3) Degarmos of Queensryche: "Rhythmically, there is also a ton of Alex Lifeson in DeGarmo's voicings and clean chord work."

www.dinosaurrockguitar.com/bios/DeGarmo.shtml


4) Ty Tabor of Kings's X: "The guitarist of legendary rock band Rush also is mentioned. "He inspired me many years ago to figure out ways of doing that type of thing, having some mammoth riff with open strings." (Ty Tabor-Guitar Player 1994)."

www.epinions.com/content_3382747268

5) As Shawn once pointed out, how many guitar players have been influenced by a guitarist or any band and are unknown. Here would be an example of an "unknown" that cites Lifeson as an influence:

www.umich.edu/~urecord/0607/Jun25_07/spotlight.shtml


Naturally, the list can go on and on to include the likes of Billy Corgan, Tom Morello, etc.....

Posted by Anonymous on Thursday, 11.1.07 @ 18:14pm


Whoa, what a monstrous guitar DeGarmo is holding in that picture-must weigh a ton! Sometimes I wonder whether guitars like that are more for show than playing anything very effectively!

One thing I'm sure of is the three members of Rush have great ability as musicians. That I would not argue. Second only to ELP as a power trio. It's too bad talent isn't as high a criteria for admission as the influence/innovation BS.

Posted by SG on Friday, 11.2.07 @ 00:39am


Well, as for Talent and the influence / innovation, Rush clearly has both, clearly. If anyone says otherwise, they have a personal agenda...

Posted by Anonymous on Friday, 11.2.07 @ 05:28am


no no NO. what has rush ever inspired anyone to do? read ayn rand? sing in whinging castrato?

Posted by b on Friday, 11.2.07 @ 15:41pm


Rush has been tremendously inspirational to so many artists, it is too long to even list. If you want to start some type of dialogue "b", then at least be in touch with reality and post something meaningful Plus, what the hell is a "whinging" voice - did you mean a whining voice? Well, at least we know the "anti-Rush" group are not too swift :-)

Posted by Anonymous on Friday, 11.2.07 @ 16:27pm


"It's too bad talent isn't as high a criteria for admission as the influence/innovation BS."-SG

Let's induct The Great Kat.

Posted by William on Saturday, 11.3.07 @ 00:09am


"Let's induct The Great Kat."

The difference is that Rush has the talent / chops, as well as influence, despite Lee's annoying voice and Peart's pretentious lyrics...

Posted by Anonymous on Saturday, 11.3.07 @ 08:43am


My point was that there is no direct correlation between talent and impact. Giving credence to talent is something music journalists do because it is actually relevant in that field. History is just a list of things that happened, whether you believe they should have or not. Calling it "BS" is just silly, and undermines the significant musical contributions of countless people.

Once again you miss that I am arguing against bad arguments and not against whatever band happens to be at the top of the page.

Posted by William on Saturday, 11.3.07 @ 09:19am


yes, British and slang - "ain't" that the truth

Posted by Anonymous on Saturday, 11.3.07 @ 12:42pm


Bill, I understood your obvious point - in fact it was a straightforward point that if you inducted on talent alone, then artists like the Great Kat would get in...but, thanks for the condascending remark - I need at least one a day...

Posted by Anonymous on Saturday, 11.3.07 @ 12:45pm


I wasn't really saying that innovation/influence didn't deserve to be considered, but more that talent should be just as important instead of just a passing thought. .....really if you think about it, in a sane world people would gravitate toward those who displayed a certain amount of talent and strive to emulate that as opposed to striving to emulate those with little talent.....so in effect, talent through its own dynamic should create its own influence.

Posted by SG on Saturday, 11.3.07 @ 22:49pm


"so in effect, talent through its own dynamic should create its own influence." -SG

Very well put, I think, SG. Personally, I think that this whole myopic dogma of Influence and Innovation is used by some to rationalize a quite unrealistic view of what a populist Rock Hall is ever going to be. As I've said in so many words before, if these two pedigrees are going to be your sole passports, then you had better be able to unequiviocally gauge them - which I say, you cannot do. Should we try? Sure, but only with a measure of relativity, also taking all the OTHER things that some here would so adamanntly scold others for mentioning - longevity, cultural presence, talent, quality and yes.... even sales/popularity to SOME extent. It's certainly not an exact science, and each artist or band has to be considered uniquely.
The whole goddamm "influence & innovation" manifesto is, once again, constructed off of ONE form letter and interpreted as strictly as the reader chooses.
In what proportions are these two to balance against each other, anyway? Are you prepared to sanction a decidedly crap band because they so obviously "INFLUENCED" a slew of lemming crap bands? Live by it, die by it.

Posted by shawn on Sunday, 11.4.07 @ 09:55am


Those are all good points. And, Shawn I even referenced you above when referring to Lifeson's influence on other guitarists. I think you once said that how can you measure influence when there can be so many unknowns that are inspired by a particular artist or group, as you called them I think "bar bands."

As for the "sales" thing, of course that should factor in to some degree. Obviously, you need to look at the whole picture, but I think commercial success should count (i.e. record sales). Again, not necessarily the primary or even secondary criteria, but it should have some weight. I mean, has anyone ever heard of a hall of fame that did not count success as being important? Naturally, one aspect of success in music, is how many people actually enjoy the music that they feel inspired enough to actually go out and buy it? Music by its very nature is a shared experience. If no one likes the music, then why bother? Ultimately, artists create music, paintings, sculptures, etc. for the public to enjoy them or at least they should. Plus, if you look at virtually every band that is in the hall now, they (at the RRHOF website) almost always talk about the bands commercial success to some degree (i.e. see police, U2, etc.).

Posted by Anonymous on Sunday, 11.4.07 @ 10:26am


"Personally, I think that this whole myopic dogma of Influence and Innovation is used by some to rationalize a quite unrealistic view of what a populist Rock Hall is ever going to be. As I've said in so many words before, if these two pedigrees are going to be your sole passports, then you had better be able to unequiviocally gauge them - which I say, you cannot do."-Shawn

You can't OBJECTIVELY grade talent either. So really, there are absolutely ZERO concrete criteria you could use. So what do you suggest? Again, I argue that there is no way to make a decent Hall, but damn, why argue that the criteria currently in place are "myopic" when there are no better criteria to use at all? In order to BE myopic, there have to be decent alternatives you're turning down.

Personally, I'd rather leave all this mess to the journalists because their ideas come out on paper rather than in a building, and they're almost always more interesting and informative anyway.

Posted by William on Sunday, 11.4.07 @ 11:26am


"You can't OBJECTIVELY grade talent either. So really, there are absolutely ZERO concrete criteria you could use. So what do you suggest?"
- William

That's 100% correct - there is almost nothing about evaluating musical artists for enshrinement that is objective. We (meaning you, me, Wenner, and 95% of the population) may be able to collectively concur about the "Significance" of an artist - however vague that adjective is - but it's still opinion. It's still soft "fact".

It's not that we throw up our hands and abandon all attempt at measurement - it's that we get off of the Influence and Innovation mantra - that's just too..... myopic - yes!

William says: "why argue that the criteria currently in place are "myopic" when there are no better criteria to use at all? In order to BE myopic, there have to be decent alternatives you're turning down."

Here are those alternative/additional criterias (call them what you will): Talent - both technical and songwriting, Quality of musical phrasing, Quality of lyrics, Quality of performance, Longevity, Cultural presence, Popularity/AlbumSales/Concert Attendance.

And that's my point: in the absence of any criteria immune to challenge, it's got to be amalgamate - it ALL goes into the mix, or to be more accurate, all of the possible factors should be relative. Every act has its own angle. Some are more purist, some more commercial, some simply because of their ubiquity in their time.

Talent, quality, crap or cream - these may indeed be the most subjective variables of them all. Sure, OK.

Even so called hard facts like longevity and sales are fuzzy. Albums naturally sell millions more in 2007 than they did in 1977--- there are millions more consumers in the buying public due to simple population growth!

Longevity? When is an act still vibrant and healthy and when is it a dog that should have been put to sleep? What is admirable and what is pathetic? If you play the State Fair and Indian Casino circuit, are you just milking past glory?

But next on the hierarchy of subjectivity is surely innovation and influence.
To this argument I would ask this: when is an inflencED artist important enough to "count" as one touched? I don't just mean the tiny, uncountable barbands - I'm asking when does an influencee show up on your radar? When SHOULD it, too? William, I have seen you fire off lists of bands that I am sure are very fine and I am sure 98 out of 100 people neither have, nor will ever hear of. My only point here is that hypothetically, I could assemble a giant circle-jerkoff of bands who inspire each other form Alpha to Omega within their relatively isolated universe. Does this merit the accolade of Inflential?
And also, "how" influenced does the inspired have to be? One songs worth? Two? Must it be in print? Does your ear hear the same mimickry that your fellow music lover hears? If not, what then?
Innovation? Even more subjective.
And Innovative - if I place a trumpet in my butt and produce a sound that has never been heard in recorded history and put a nice backbeat to it - does that deserve innovative kudos? It still comes down to that wildly taste oriented question of Quality, doesn't it? Is it "Good" innovation or not?
These two Gods of criteria are way too nebulous to be your ONLY touchstones.



"Again, I argue that there is no way to make a decent Hall..Personally, I'd rather leave all this mess to the journalists.." - William

We need at least 2 Halls - one populist, one musician oriented, built on the theology of Pitchfork journalist types. This Hall is MTV - you want PBS.
A nearly perfect creation IS possible..... just highly unlikely.

Posted by shawn on Sunday, 11.4.07 @ 15:02pm


Looking at the list of inductees one gets the feeling that these potato-heads really don't get progressive rock ,they are stuck in a bygone era, and rap is an art-form , not music ... and britney spears....gag me ....pistol pete

Posted by Pete Warland on Thursday, 11.22.07 @ 14:22pm


"and rap is an art-form , not music"

I'm really unsure as to what you're trying to put across there. On the one hand, you could be arguing that 'rap' is above music, that 'rap' is another paralell to music.

Or on the other, you could just be another stalwart fuck-up prog-rock obsessive who was reluctant to leave the 1970s

Posted by liam on Thursday, 11.22.07 @ 14:40pm


"Or on the other, you could just be another stalwart fuck-up prog-rock obsessive who was reluctant to leave the 1970s."

So, if someone likes progressive rock, they are a "fuck-up - don't see any connection there.

Actually, I am not a huge progressive rock fan (like any other style of music - some is good and some not so good), but why do peope who do not like progressive rock, think it ended in the 70's when it in fact is still very much alive today (sure mb not mainstream, but so what - it is progressive, it is not supposed to be mainstream). For instance, see Dream Theater, Porcupine Tree, Tool, The Flower Kings, Coheed and Cambria, Symphony X, etc.

Posted by Anonymous on Thursday, 11.22.07 @ 16:58pm


What?...RUSH is not in the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame? What are you going to tell me next? Henry Ford is not in the Automotive HOF, Edison is not in the Inventors HOF and Bill Gates isn't in the Computer Programers HOF!!! You have got to be kidding right? Is today April Fools Day?

Posted by Aaron Noe on Thursday, 11.22.07 @ 19:28pm


Well, Aaron, apparently 35 years of worldwide success, influence, and longevity do not count - oh well....but, all sarcasm aside, you do realize that it is "personal" thing with hall voters? I mean, you do not think that the HOF actually inducts based upon legit criteria? Do you? I mean look at recent inductees: Dells, Moonglows, Grandmaster Flash, Percy Sledge, etc. C'mon, you canot think of other more deserving rock artists? I know I can....

Posted by Anonymous on Thursday, 11.22.07 @ 19:56pm


And apparently, Aaron, Anon wants nothing more than to supply me with ammuntion to show him up as a suck-up twat

Posted by liam on Sunday, 11.25.07 @ 07:51am


"And apparently, Aaron, Anon wants nothing more than to supply me with ammuntion to show him up as a suck-up twat."

Actually, my post had nothing to do with YOU - you narcissist...

Posted by Anonymous on Sunday, 11.25.07 @ 11:01am


"you narcissist..."

Better that than be a complete suck-up twat

Posted by liam on Sunday, 11.25.07 @ 11:13am


Oh, BTW, that indpendent fuck-rock CD that you occasionally push is shite

Posted by liam on Sunday, 11.25.07 @ 12:07pm


Actually, in all honesty, every thread in which you are involved consists of you claiming to know something more than everyone else, putting "down" others opinions, and which adds absolutely nothing...plus, I was not sucking up to anyone. Since I am a Rush fan, I agreed with his opinion. If you had half a brain you would have deduced that it makes me a Rush fan, not a suck up - idiot.

Posted by Anonymous on Sunday, 11.25.07 @ 14:04pm


"putting "down" others opinions," -Anon

I never put down people's opinions, Anon. It's their stupid, cattle-like statements that get at me

"every thread in which you are involved consists of you claiming to know something more than everyone else,"

Does this mean?...Truly?! I get to be part of Anon's 'Elitist Art Snobs who claim to know everything just 'cos they listen to the VU and Patti Smith' club? Goody! I'm honored.

"If you had half a brain you would have deduced that it makes me a Rush fan, not a suck up - idiot."

No, Anon, I am not a chump, and therefore I am not going to buy that ludricous bullshit



Posted by liam on Sunday, 11.25.07 @ 14:32pm


To be honest, I cannot even respond to any of your statements because they are so far from reality..so whats's the point to go on?

Posted by Anonymous on Sunday, 11.25.07 @ 15:46pm


Anon, I think anyone with a brain knows what I'm on about.

Anyway, I can see that no one interesting is going to comment here any time soon, so today will be the last time I comment here in a while.

Posted by liam on Monday, 11.26.07 @ 10:24am


No, Liam - actually when reading your posts - I would estimate that about 50% of the time anyone could decipher your posts, the other half make little to no sense. Like when you say that I am a "suck up" when in fact the more logical conclusion is that I said what I had said because I am huge Rush fan. I mean are you suggesting that as huge Rush fan, I should have DISAGREED with Aaron?

Posted by Anon on Monday, 11.26.07 @ 10:32am


Anon, as usual you were being leech, trying to sap on the closest Rush fan within a 5 mile radius

Posted by liam on Monday, 11.26.07 @ 11:14am


Oh, I guess you are NOT leaving.

No, I was not being a leech - I was merely agreeing with Aaron. In fact, more than half the post pertained to a criticism of the HALL, in general, and had nothing to with Rush. But, I guess from your statement you are saying that I should not have responded at all? What are you like a control freak? Now, I have to ask you permission before responding?

Posted by Anon on Monday, 11.26.07 @ 11:28am


I can see that noone is going anywhere now. As Shawn mentioned before, this site has become somewhat of a bad habit I've developed, and I can't see any positivity coming out from it now.

The earliest that you'll hear from me again will be a few months.

I'll leave you with a list of some of my favourite albums, some of which you'll know, some you won't:

1) Primal Scream - "Screamadelica"
2) My Bloody Valentine - "Loveless"
3) New Order - "Power, Corruption & Lies
4) Morrissey - "Bona Drag"
5) The Smiths - "Louser Than Bombs" (come on, EVERYONE knows the queen is dead)
6) Oasis - "Definitely Maybe"
7) Supergrass - "I Should Coco"
8) Buzzcocks - "Product"
9) The Kinks - "Some Else by..."
10) Radiohead - "The Bends"
11) Fad Gadget - "Incontinent"
12) The Verve - "Northern Soul"
13) Magazine - "Real Life"
14) Jesus & Mary Chain - "Psycho Candy"
15) Happy Mondays - "Bummed"
16) Echo & the Bunnymen - "Ocean Rain"
17) Dizzee Rascal - "Boy In Da Corner" (no; his spelling, not mine)
18) The Coral - "Magic & Medicine"

See Ya!

Posted by liam on Monday, 11.26.07 @ 12:14pm


Good riddance to all - Shawn is gone, now Liam, and no more William or Kit - like Stewie of the Family Guy, I have taken over this website and my quest for world domination is next!!

Posted by Anonymous on Monday, 11.26.07 @ 16:44pm


Say what?

Posted by William on Tuesday, 11.27.07 @ 00:27am


"Sure rock is about anger and rebellion, but towards society, the gov't, etc. But, not other rockers....sorry you are just wrong." - Anon

Christ ALMIGHTY! You really are 'Eau de Toilette' in a literal sense.


Posted by liam on Friday, 11.30.07 @ 08:25am


Liam, stop following me already...nice to respond to a post from months ago....ya freak

Posted by Anon on Friday, 11.30.07 @ 09:38am


You know what's REALLY great though, don't you? That we ge to say WHATEVER we like about Rush now that HE'S gone....>:D

Posted by liam on Tuesday, 12.11.07 @ 14:22pm


The ROR Hall of Shame has furthered it's ineptness to be taken seriously with 2007's announcement of inductees. Too many great ROCK AND ROCK bands have been overlooked. In my book, Rush is worst victim of this crime.

Long live Rush!

Posted by Gompers on Friday, 12.14.07 @ 11:02am


"ROCK AND ROCK bands"

Hahahahahahaha!

Posted by liam on Sunday, 12.16.07 @ 07:22am


Hey, since he can retaliate, do you all remember how Anon used to think that his word was golden ("I say the VU is pretentious crap cos it it"), and would turn around at every given oppurtunity to say that someone else's statements were crap (do I need to give a quote?)

I'm actually only doing this because I know he'll read it, and I know he his argument is now stuck at zero - maybe you should look for another outlet or hobby, dude.

Posted by liam on Wednesday, 12.19.07 @ 15:18pm


EDIT: "since he CAN'T retaliate"

Posted by liam on Wednesday, 12.19.07 @ 15:19pm


I wonder if the exclusion of Rush has less to do with their nationality than with the apparent limit of five bands per year. With the multitude of guitarists and drummers that were inspired by Rush, there doesn't seem to be a valid reason for excluding them from the Hall.

Posted by Joe on Saturday, 12.22.07 @ 16:53pm


Lack of innovation and the fact that many well known critics detest their elitist lyrcs.

Posted by notlol on Saturday, 12.22.07 @ 17:10pm


Ha ha ha ha

Posted by -------- on Saturday, 12.22.07 @ 20:10pm


Let us pray, all who care:

Merciful and Great OZ of the Future Rock Hall website,
- unseen force that oversees all,
- admin,
- aka Neil:

Please hear my humble plea.

I realize that you do not get "involved" with this pit of rancor, other than to occasionally censor posts of the most vulgar and out-of-control variety.

For your wisdom and lenience we give our thanks this day, great OZ.
I know you have watched and know all - you can see the I.P. addresses of all, regardless of the labels we give ourselves.

I have but one request.
If, after viewing the history of one resident liar, liar, liar, LOL'ing, sanctimonious assclown who has taken refuge in anonymity but LIES and continues his intolerable antics with NO end in sight.......
if you can observe and agree that he is insufferable and that we all put up with way more than we should - please confirm to all here the following:
the troll known as Anon is, in fact, one and the same "Michael" who posted and fled on 2.4.07.

He must be exposed, for he is wretched and unclean and stains this site with his unendurable sanctimony.

Please grant us a simple "YES" (this is true)or "NO" (you are wrong), great OZ.

Posted by shawn on Thursday, 12.27.07 @ 10:32am


Shawn - I cannot believe that you are bating the adminstrators here to get involved in the adolescent antics. Two, what is to stop anyone from answering your question and just saying that they are the administrators when in fact they are not? Third, what is with the obsession here?

Posted by Anon on Thursday, 12.27.07 @ 10:46am


I am not "baiting" great OZ; I submitted a humble request which he will choose to grant or ignore.
My last hope is that he will have mercy on the rest of us and rip the sheet off of your stupid head, although it is unbearably obvious - I am stupified that you are daring to deny that you are Micahel - it is just preposterous to the point of infuriating. You have GOT to be joking.

You are a goddamn liar and a sanctimonious ass, Michael and you feel very comfortable being smug; I detset you - I am currently obsessed, I admit it.

Answer my other question, Dr., about your "diagnosis".

Posted by shawn on Thursday, 12.27.07 @ 10:59am


And by the way, I assume that whether he answers my prayer or not, either seeing someone else post dishonestly as "Rock Hall" or "admin" would be tolerated and swiftly met with deletion.
I assume the same if he answers YES and you then choose to deny it still and accuse one of us of posting.

Let's see what happens.

You stil haven't answered me about your clinical diagnosis. Dr. - was that proof of your education and intellect or something, short bus?

Posted by shawn on Thursday, 12.27.07 @ 11:04am


correction: "would not be tolerated.."

Posted by shawn on Thursday, 12.27.07 @ 11:06am


Anon, I find you an utterly dispicable person, and I would be reluctant to be on the same country as you, nio matter how big it is.

I don't understand. How can ANYONE be that stupid? You must be trying. You are stubborn, obnoxious, boring, lacking a sense of humour (see the "Me? I'm always thinking about Oasis" story: I'm sure you'll laugh at my joke if you're not Anon), simple minded, grotesque, dishonest, idiotic, plain and everything anyone, other than you, should find to be negative.

I also stopped valuing your inputs a few months (?) ago, but I'll be honest and say that when I was new, and ignorant to you, I 'respected' you.

Posted by l i a m on Thursday, 12.27.07 @ 11:45am


Wow, those are really strong feelings towards someone you don't know - need a tissue?

Posted by Anon on Thursday, 12.27.07 @ 11:48am


Wow. I am so not getting into this one.

For the record, I have seen the following bands open shows for others:

GnR for the Rolling Stones
Living Color for the Rolling Stones
Def Leppard for AC/DC
The Clash for The Who
Queen for Mott the Hoople
Led Zeppelin for Iron Butterfly (Fillmore East - 1969) My first concert!!!!
Rush for Blue Oyster Cult (if memeory serves me correct - 1977 or 78) They may have actually shared the headline, but Rush came on first.

So the comment regarding opening acts being inferior is a total fallacy. Great bands have been opening acts at some point in their careers.

The acknowledged "greatest rock drummer" - Carl Palmer

ELP needs to be in the HoF.

I have no problem with Rush being in, but not before Deep Purple.

My heart says yes to King Crimson, but like Procul Harum, I don't think they will ever be recognized. YES lost me at Tales for T.O. (sorry, but that was a horrible album)!

Posted by Dameon on Thursday, 12.27.07 @ 14:13pm


Unfortunately for us and lucky for you, Michael, it appears that the Great OZ is not going to out you.

Anyone with eyes and 8th grade reading comprehension can clearly see that Micahel and Anon and Matzo Ball and Ryan and Hey Joe are all you. You know how humiliating your sanctimony and missteps are; I don't need an admin to expose you; you know exactly what I am talking about.

You're a clown and a coward. You're sad. You are without humility or character; you're a weasel, a Gollum.

Here is a kind of "best of" Michael's idioacy before and after he bailed out and became anon; can you tell the difference?
Honestly, how can he deny this with a straight face?

I guess these guys decided to make the tribute albums because RUSH did not have any influence or impact on them...(note sarcasm)

Oh yeah, and one more thing, from the Wikpedia website:

Lifeson, no influence in other guitarists.....LOL, LOL, LOL.

BUT SHOULD INSTEAD LISTEN TO "KIT" of Nebraksa or wherever he is from, B/C KIT KNOWS BETTER.

(QUICK, HURRY DO A GOOGLE SEARCH...LOL, LOL)...Oh, and btw, who have these bands influenced?? LOL, LOL.......Miles Davis, wasn't he a Jazz player...LOL, LOL..

MB if Rush grew there hair longer, grew beards, smoked pot, wrote lyrics about how miserable they are, and played two chord songs...then they could get in...."like a rolling stone, with no direction home......" (with a drone of course...
Later

Kansas and Journey - "Totally worthless" - okay??? What does that even mean? I do not like certain bands, but would never refer to any music or band as totally worthless. For starters, enjoyment of music is a totally subjective experience and for millions of people, Journey brought enjoyment and happiness. Plus, it makes you sound pompous and arrogant.....

Plus, Rush has influenced virtually all of these seattle "grundge" bands.

I sound arrogant?? - in one bold statement, you called two HUGE bands (esp. Journey) worthless - it does not get more arrogant than that. You are clearly underrating Rush simply b/c you do not like them - your just jealous......

..taken from WIKPEDIA regarding TOM SAWYER:
..ANOTHER INFLUENTIAL SONG: The Spirit of Radio From Wikpedia:
..MORE FOR 2112 FROM WIKPEDIA:

These are just three examples, the list could go on and on...butI guess Kit knows best, they have had no influence....duh...LOL...LOL...LOL

[Posted by Kit]: ....wait, did you just use wrestling and Family Guy jokes (JOKES FFS) as an evidce of influence? Here's some more straws, keep grasping

Those were references to pop culture to demostrate that Rush is ubiquitous both in and out music...a fact you deny for whatever reason...I guess you missed all of the other references to music....at least I am not named after a trans-am from a television show.....LOL....LOL...

(quoting Rush lyrics): "Keep on lookin' forward, no use in lookin' round..hold your head above the crowd and they won't bring you down" -Peart

I don't care if King Crimson is inducted, but Rush should be. (yea --- read that a second time..)
The fact is Rush's influences were not KC...

As for the family guy reference - the Chester cheetah says with tom sawyer playing, Neil Peart is the greatest rock drummer of all time...sounds pretty positive...and even if it was sarcastic...it is still funny and sheds light on how much this "drummer" has effected us all

When Rush was played in the Sandler movie - that was in "negative light." NOT.....

When Jack Black hands the kid the 2112 album in school of Rock - that was in a negative light...hmm....NOT

That is why I could care less about puttin in King Crimson to the hall...I like progressive rock...but in reality Rush was just a bit more successful than KC - hands down - and were not a major Rush influence......later Kit

[posted by Kit]:
You don't care about KC going to the hall? Well thanks for outing yourself as a Rush fanboy who does not care about the greater picture of rock, only your own pet project.

Give me a break...LOL...LOL....LOL
Rush is my "pet project" - you wouldn't by any chance be a homo - who speaks like that?

posted by c.w.:
Arguing about Family Guy references belittles the real reason Rush should be inducted -- the MUSIC. No one needs to argue that they have seeped into pop culture - lots of artists have, good and bad. It's the music that matters, and on those grounds they have the right stuff.

**demonstrates his dense mind again, that he has no clue that c.w. did not just offer him support but in fact told him he was on the wrong track: "Finally, some sanity on this post by CW. This guy Kit is in la la land. Fine, he hates Rush, that's his right.."

From Wikpedia:

Bottom line....Woody Allen will never go to awards shows

I am outta this blog for a number of reasons. For one, KIT mainly is not in reality.

(as Michael Billingsley on 2.4.07):
I've read most of the following posts. First, it is imperative to note that Kit is an idiot.
A true hall of fame would sing up obvious groups like RUSH in terms of what they have accomplished, to begin with. Then they would vote in obscure inductees such as Patti Smith, Funk Master Flash and The Rondales. Why does REM beat Rush in for example? Based on Kit's arguements REM should never be placed ahead of countless bands. REM is simply an evolution of progressive radio rock.

posted by Kit:
Your inability to get the names of Grandmaster Flash and the Ronettes hurts your credibility, as does your labeling of Grandmaster and Patti Smith as "obscure."

Now.... as "Anonymous" on 2.4.07:
Once again, Kit cannot acknowledge anothers viewpoint and arrogantly believes that he is always right.

As for the other lame bands that got in - misspelling the names does not in itself negate a point.
(** holy shit: he has just conjured up an imaginary friend to defend his ineptitude as Michael**)

As for REM, while not bad and I did like them, was not worthy of the hall... they were nothing more than a bunch of Top 40 "Pop Rockers" (i.e. shiny happy people, Losing my religion, etc.) who had a few radio hits and virtually no influence. REM has nothing on Rush, and to suggest otherwise demonstrates a total lack of understanding of music history. I mean, how many people do you think still pop in old REM - I bet not much. The music was catchy at that time, but lacked substance. Rush's music on the other hand, like them or not, has considerable substance and will be listened to for generations to come....

(** he's serious with this shit**)

As someone said on a post above:

"Name 3 songs of the "Dells" or the "Moonglows" (QUICK, HURRY DO A GOOGLE SEARCH...LOL, LOL)...

(**holy shit, now he is referencing himself!**)

"One likes to believe in the freedom of music
But glittering prizes and endless compromises
Shatter the illusion of integrity."

(**quoting his Bible, the lyrics of Rush, once again**)

Oh yeah, you are right, I also forgot about their wonderful "tribute song" to Andy Kaufman - "Man on the Moon" - that one certainly made them worthy of the hall (note sarcasm).

(**again with the "note sarcasm" thing - just as when he was Michael...dumbass**)

Any band that would agree to produce such a song should be "made to apologize." (i.e. just like Kansas and Journey).
Like I said REM was decent, but not monumental and again - how often do you think people pop in old REM cruising on the open highway- doubt it! But, no one could ever get tired cruising on the open road with Red Barhcetta or Spirit of Radio at a volume of 10. I mean is there really a comparison - NOT!

**oh my god - I can't take anymore**

Posted by shawn on Thursday, 12.27.07 @ 19:26pm


So...who likes music? Music's okay.

Posted by Kit on Thursday, 12.27.07 @ 19:31pm


I think Kit's statment says it all...enough with the obsession - it is over. Wow...you know there are meds for your condition :-)

Posted by Anonymous on Thursday, 12.27.07 @ 19:37pm


You smug piece of shit; you're a fraud and a troll; you've got the reasoning capabilities of a struggling 6th grader, and the personal ethics of a beady eyed purse snatcher. You fool noone.

That's it ----------- I drop the cause and leave it to all of us here to ignore his ass.
I am done obsessing.

Posted by shawn on Thursday, 12.27.07 @ 19:47pm


"REM has nothing on Rush" - Oh. My. God.

Wait, Anonymous, Michael, whatever: you WERE joking, right? Or do you really need to see the psychologist you falsely claim to be?

Posted by l i a m on Friday, 12.28.07 @ 07:45am


"A true hall of fame would sing up obvious groups like RUSH... to begin with. Then they would vote in obscure inductees such as Patti Smith, Funk Master Flash and The Rondales." - michael/anon

I have to agree; I have never heard of the Funk Master Flash or The Rondales either. (???)
And Patti Smith is truly an obscure one too; who ever heard of her??? TURN UP BYTOR AND THE SNOW DOG, MAN!!!!!!!

Posted by shawn on Friday, 12.28.07 @ 09:01am


"A true hall of fame would sing up obvious groups like RUSH... to begin with. Then they would vote in obscure inductees such as Patti Smith, Funk Master Flash and The Rondales."

I never said that...I can spell, but I am impressed that you know Bytor! :-) Nice...

As for REM - they may be influential, etc., but Rush blows them away - and I am sure I could get a gazillion people to agree. But, guess what, I am sure you can get a gazillion people to agree to the converse. That's the point, it is just my opinion. I do think that the Rush catalog blows away REM, but so what - I am just one person's opinion?

Posted by Anon on Friday, 12.28.07 @ 09:08am


"As for REM - they may be influential, etc., but Rush blows them away"

Wrong. R.E.M. are: more influential, more innovative and generally better than Rush. I've been looking into Rush's catalogue recently, and aside from 2112 and Moving Pictures, not of it particularly great, especially not when compared to Murmur and Document.

"I do think that the Rush catalog blows away REM"

I disagree. Maybe try looking beyond your old "Yah, REM had a few hits in the 90s's" view, and you'll be pleaseantly surprised.

Posted by l i a m on Friday, 12.28.07 @ 09:20am


"As for REM - they may be influential, etc., but Rush blows them away - ...That's the point, it is just my opinion." -michael

Wrong, Glombus - the point is that when you loudmouth this:
"As for REM.. was not worthy of the hall...they were nothing more than a bunch of Top 40 "Pop Rockers" (i.e. shiny happy people, Losing my religion, etc.) who had a few radio hits and virtually no influence."

Dudya-dubya-du-dudubya... WHA???
Yea, you wrote that! "virtually no influence".
That's not just opinion - that is raw ignorance at in appaling quantity.

"REM has nothing on Rush, and to suggest otherwise demonstrates a total lack of understanding of music history." -michael/anon

Really??? (just....laughing in disbelief..) To suggest otherwise shows a complete lack of understanding of music history??
Again, not just opinion; enough ignorance to choke on -- it's everywhere -- oh, the humanity!

"I mean, how many people do you think still pop in old REM - I bet not much. The music was catchy at that time, but lacked substance." - I've clearly eaten psychtropic chemicals as a young child michael

BUT LACKED SUBSTANCE.
You should be beaten about the head and neck with a 2112 album.

Posted by shawn on Friday, 12.28.07 @ 09:22am


Anon, so why do you bother with this forum? If its just one person's opinion? You're obviously not influenced by anyone else's viewpoint, and you don't exactly make a case for any bands that haven't been inducted yet (aside from Rush). So what do you gain from this whole thing if its all meaningless discussion?

I still haven't heard of any contemporary artists you listen to either.

Posted by Chuck on Friday, 12.28.07 @ 09:23am


BTW, Mr Mask, do you still believe that The Cure are less deserving than Rush?

I need a laugh today.

Posted by l i a m on Friday, 12.28.07 @ 09:27am


"A true hall of fame would sing up obvious groups like RUSH... to begin with. Then they would vote in obscure inductees such as Patti Smith, Funk Master Flash and The Rondales." - michael

"I never said that...I can spell.." - Pinnochio

LIARLIARLIARLIARLIARLIARLIARLIARLIARLIARLIARLIAR.

You're never going to be a real boy at this rate.

And the issue, as Kit pointed out to you even back then, was not your "spelling", dicksauce. You completely botched the names.

(Kit): "(Michael) didn't just misspell the names, he got them wrong, as if he knew nothing about them. It would hurt my credibility just as much if I called Rush "Speed"."

Ass. Uber-Ass.

Posted by shawn on Friday, 12.28.07 @ 09:31am


We can go back and forth on Rush vs REM, etc. When I bad mouthed REM, I was obviosuly going over the top and exaggerating for effect. At least I thought it was obvious. Obviously, REM is a solid band with influence. I just prefer Rush. As for influence, I think Rush has influenced a shit load of bands. In actuality they were both very influential, just in different circles. Liam, how do you know REM is MORE influential? How did you measure that? DId you go out and interview bands, do extensive research? Show me....

"I still haven't heard of any contemporary artists you listen to either."

How does that matter?

As for the Cure, they certainly deserve a place...I like the Cure a lot. I think comparing Rush and The Cure is apples and oranges - different genres.

Wow, is this turning into a music discussion, fancy that....

Posted by Anon on Friday, 12.28.07 @ 09:36am


Again Shawn, that was not me - it really was not. I am not Billingsley. What else can I say. I mean Shawn if I am really Michael, as you believe, then why would I use the name Michael as an alias (and just add some "phoney" last name)?

Posted by Anon on Friday, 12.28.07 @ 09:40am


"Anon, so why do you bother with this forum? If its just one person's opinion?" - Chuck

Chuck, if you had been here for a few months you would know that this is #5 on the list of Michael's greatest hits, which I have gone over before. He will often pull out the "Well the point is that this is just my opinion" bromide, with no discernable point or purpose.

This is often followed by catch phrase #3 (one of his favorites): "You need a new hobby/a life."
and hit #6: "You post here arguing with strangers, how pathetic, you loser.", the collosal irony and desperate ridiculousness of which seems to escape his pea brain.

Get used to many of his greatest shits if you hang around.

Posted by shawn on Friday, 12.28.07 @ 09:43am


"Liam, how do you know REM is MORE influential?"

Because I think that Rush's influence never strays far from Hard Rock and Metal, where as R.E.M. seems to contain influence all over the board - even Oasis used the riff from "The One I Love" on the track "Morning Glory" (even if that is only one example).

Your problem (in this case), however, is that R.E.M. are in the Hall, and Rush aren't, so, if anything, YOU should try convincing me of why Rush deserved in over R.E.M.

"As for the Cure, they certainly deserve a place...I like the Cure a lot. I think comparing Rush and The Cure is apples and oranges - different genres."

Maybe if you used some forward thinking you could realize that we should be discussing artists in relation to their respectiive genre. I think that The Cure's impact on alternative, goth and mainstream culture is far greater than that of Rush to Prog, Hard Rock and Metal.

Posted by l i a m on Friday, 12.28.07 @ 09:45am


"Again Shawn, that was not me - it really was not. I am not Billingsley." - michael

Fukk off, Pinnochio. You're a naked liar. I am done arguing with you about that; it's like insisting that the earth may be flat. You insult everyone's intelligence by clutching to that ludicrous stance. It's so goddamn obvious, so sbvious.

Just shut the hell up.

Posted by shawn on Friday, 12.28.07 @ 09:47am


"I mean Shawn if I am really Michael, as you believe, then why would I use the name Michael as an alias (and just add some "phoney" last name)?"

Because you got so used to being argued with by about three people at a time, you decided to introduce some "support players". Not that it actually worked

Posted by l i a m on Friday, 12.28.07 @ 09:50am


"Your problem (in this case), however, is that R.E.M. are in the Hall, and Rush aren't, so, if anything, YOU should try convincing me of why Rush deserved in over R.E.M."

Liam is right. Even for all its flaws, the HOF does have people who know their musical shit making the decisions. (and, i dare say they listen to contemporary bands to understand and measure influence over time - that's why it matters).

So if you think Rush should be in, you need a better argument than personal taste.

Posted by Chuck on Friday, 12.28.07 @ 09:55am


"Because I think that Rush's influence never strays far from Hard Rock and Metal"

Smashing Pumpkins cite Rush as an influence and even do a cover of limelight - they are not metal or hard rock, per se. But, even if the influence was only within Hard rock or metal, so what - even though I do not think that is the case.

"Your problem (in this case), however, is that R.E.M. are in the Hall, and Rush aren't, so, if anything, YOU should try convincing me of why Rush deserved in over R.E.M."

I think the RRHOF gets it right sometimes, but there are so many great bands not in, that it is hard to take the hall that serious. REM is in because they are the perfect type of band to be inducted - a "critics choice" band and commercially popular and succesful, exactly what the hall wants.

As for Shawn's comments, well forget it...

Posted by Anon on Friday, 12.28.07 @ 09:56am


Anon is trying to admit being the same person who left all of those "Michael" posts, but just not the one that is "Michael Billingsley". Fair enough.

Posted by Chuck on Friday, 12.28.07 @ 09:57am


"the HOF does have people who know their musical shit making the decisions."

Have you seen some of the snubs? What I meant by the original post is that we have to work with what we've got; I never endorsed that the Hall knew anything about music (which it doesn't...)

Posted by l i a m on Friday, 12.28.07 @ 09:58am


I am staying away from the whole RUSH - REM thing. One band's induction should not have anything to do with anothers when they are in different sub-genres of Rock. Therefore, this comparrison does not work. If you were using REM to validate the 80's indie scene, then that would be fine. If you are using Rush to validate 80's Hard Rock bands, then that is also good.

Chuck (I still haven't heard of any contemporary artists you listen to either.)

I don't think knowing contemporary bands has anything to do with someone wanting a band from the 70's in the HoF.

Posted by Dameon on Friday, 12.28.07 @ 10:01am


If you'll look, Dameon, you'll see that "anon" was the one saying R.E.M. were less deserving than Rush.

Posted by l i a m on Friday, 12.28.07 @ 10:03am


R.E.M.'s legacy is that it is probably the patriarch of "alternative". They were THE seminal artists of what was to become known as alternative, the next step in evolution from what was post-punk. They represented a genre to the point that they were considered its creators.
They were just that influential from "Radio Free Europe" through "Murmer' and beyond.
In the early-mid 90's only U2 rivaled them as music giants striding the earth.

Rush, while a phenomenon of longevity and cultish fandom, is a one trick pony and a bit of an oddity as an acquired taste. Their a nice little footnote of prog/hard rock that should be recognized, but REM kicks their ass in head-to-head significance wise.
To misunderstand these differences and say "Rush blows away REM" is massively ignorant.

Posted by shawn on Friday, 12.28.07 @ 10:07am


Dameon, there are dozens of examples, but a few are Kanye, MIA, Kings of Leon, Tegan & Sara, Ben Harper, Amy Winehouse, PJ Harvey, etc, etc.

Liam, a few snubs don't render the entire Hall a joke. Could it be improved? Of course. Is there a generational divide between you and the powers that choose the inductees? You bet. I'm sure their knowledge of 50's and 60's rock is far better than yours.

Posted by Chuck on Friday, 12.28.07 @ 10:12am


"In the early-mid 90's only U2 rivaled them as music giants striding the earth." - shawn

Hey, I think there might have been another band aswell....from Manchester; two of 'em were brothers, and they were always fighting and/or taking drugs; liked the Beatles.

Posted by l i a m on Friday, 12.28.07 @ 10:14am


"If you'll look, Dameon, you'll see that "anon" was the one saying R.E.M. were less deserving than Rush."

I admitted that was dumb and even called comparing them or The Cure comparing "apples and oranges."


And, yes, Chuck (AKA Shawn), no one has heard your musical interests -

Posted by Anon on Friday, 12.28.07 @ 10:14am


"Anon is trying to admit being the same person who left all of those "Michael" posts, but just not the one that is "Michael Billingsley". Fair enough." - Chuck

Uuuhh - I don't think this is true, Chuck. Someone else ask him if this is what he is saying, because this would be a major breakthrough and an admission of a grand lie, up to this point, as well as an acknowledgment of huge sanctimony. If this is so, the next step is an apology to Liam for raking him hypocritically for his (liam's) time posting as another michael.

But I think you are mistaken, Chuck; I don't think anon/michael has decided to be an honest person yet.

Posted by shawn on Friday, 12.28.07 @ 10:15am


"And, yes, Chuck (AKA Shawn), no one has heard your musical interests - " -asscheese

Hey Fukkwad - I went over this - I have too much character to play the same pig liar games you do. Are you as offended by this shit as me, Chuck?
Go fukk yourself, Micahel.

Besides my solemn word (as contrasted with your weak nu-uh's), examine our different styles and voices.
What makes your lies so obvious is your stupid transparency by all of your habits as both Michael and Anon - the LOL's, the Wiki and Rush quotes, the lack of perception, the hyper-defensiveness. Matzo and Ryan and Hey Joe were that obvious from the start as well, dumbass.

Posted by shawn on Friday, 12.28.07 @ 10:21am


"Liam, a few snubs don't render the entire Hall a joke."

Yeah I suppose that we could just ignore:

The Stooges,
Nick Drake,
The Cure,
Joy Division,
New Order,
Gang Of Four,
The Buzzcocks,
Depeche Mode,
The Jam,
The Cure,
Beastie Boys,
Metallica,
Sonic Youth,
Iron Maiden,
The Specials,
Duran Duran,
King Crimson,
Moody Blues,
Genesis,
Deep Purple,
Kraftwerk,
Roxy Music,
BOC,
Siouxsie & the Banshees,
Black Flag
and Echo & the Bunnymen

because none of them did anything for music, right?

Posted by l i a m on Friday, 12.28.07 @ 10:21am


Like I said, the Hall could be improved by including some of the names you listed. But if you step back and look at who is actually in, it does represent a fairly accurate picture of the critical consensus from the last 40-50 years.

Posted by Chuck on Friday, 12.28.07 @ 10:26am


"I'm sure their knowledge of 50's and 60's rock is far better than yours." - Chuck

I'm sure it may be, but the Hall nominating comittee seems to think that rock ended around 1980.

ps: I think I have better knowledge of 1980 and onward than they do

Posted by l i a m on Friday, 12.28.07 @ 10:27am


"But if you step back and look at who is actually in, it does represent a fairly accurate picture of the critical consensus from the last 40-50 years."

Why do you think that?

Posted by l i a m on Friday, 12.28.07 @ 10:30am


"One band's induction should not have anything to do with anothers when they are in different sub-genres of Rock. Therefore, this comparison does not work." - dameon

"If you'll look, Dameon, you'll see that "anon" was the one saying R.E.M. were less deserving than Rush." -liam

"I admitted that was dumb and even called comparing them or The Cure comparing "apples and oranges." -Pinnochio

Once again, for like th 100th time ---- YOU DON'T COMPREHEND WHAT IS BEING SAID.
Liam was explaining to dameon his purpose for and the relevance of his talk of REM and Rush; that it was not stem from a comparison HE initiated, that in fact he (liam) was addresseing it only becuase someone else put it out there. he was not, in this instance, directly bashing you for the comparison, as stupid as it was. he was explaining his actions, not attacking yours.

You are hopelessly dense.

Posted by shawn on Friday, 12.28.07 @ 10:33am


"But if you step back and look at who is actually in, it does represent a fairly accurate picture of the critical consensus from the last 40-50 years." -Chuck

There are some good, solid inductions Chuck, perhaps even the majority are right on or at least reasonable. But the problem that i think Liam sees, as do I, is that it is not well rounded enough; it ignores entire genres and seems to disproportionately favor almost anyone from the early-mid 60's. Later decades and developments are too few and far between.

is this kind of what you feel, Liam?

Posted by shawn on Friday, 12.28.07 @ 10:38am


Well, Liam, the Hall includes every top tier level group from the 60's and 70's (your Beatles, Stones, Dylans, Led Zeps). Those are the groups that had it all -- influence, innovation, critical success, commercial success, you name it. There's another group that's in that's missing some piece of the pie, but still deserve their place. And there is another level down where they maybe only achieved a single element, but still managed to sneak in (and these are where the arguments really start).

I would say none of the bands you listed are top tier. They all have some "flaw" that are keeping them out, and none are true unassailable giants of rock.

Posted by Chuck on Friday, 12.28.07 @ 10:41am


Indeed that is what I feel. And I don't think that Jann Wenner & Co would even be capable of considering any of the snubs.

Posted by l i a m on Friday, 12.28.07 @ 10:41am


Shawn, you're a "glass half empty" kinda guy, right?

Posted by Chuck on Friday, 12.28.07 @ 10:45am


"They all have some "flaw" that are keeping them out, and none are true unassailable giants of rock."

You've got to be f*cking kidding me! Joy Division has two 11/10 albums, so you're little theory is put to shame.

Posted by l i a m on Friday, 12.28.07 @ 10:46am


"Shawn, you're a "glass half empty" kinda guy, right?"

I'd be reluctant to even call it as much as half full.

Posted by l i a m on Friday, 12.28.07 @ 10:49am


"They all have some "flaw" that are keeping them out, and none are true unassailable giants of rock."

A few problems:

1) It isn't true. I'd say the only artist that was a grasp at a straw, in that list, was Echo & the Bunnymen

2) All those 60s/70s artists have flaws in their careers, and I sometimes choose to include crappy solo expeditions as flaws for the original group.

3) You're placing the importance of 60s/70s artists you listed heads and shoulders above the artists I listed

Posted by l i a m on Friday, 12.28.07 @ 10:58am


For the record, I think Joy Division should be in, but they're not one of the giants (of which there are very few). Commercial success? Touring success? Hits? They're not a household name in America (not even close)... You can't tell me they're on the same level as even Stevie Wonder or U2.

Posted by Chuck on Friday, 12.28.07 @ 10:59am


"Well, Liam, the Hall includes every top tier level group from the 60's and 70's (your Beatles, Stones, Dylans, Led Zeps). Those are the groups that had it all -- true unassailable giants of rock. I would say none of the bands you listed are top tier." -chuck

That's fine, Chuck, so what's the point?
I'd say we're just about done ushering in the Holy Legends of Rock - the unassailables, wouldn't you?
Who is left of the Monster Icons? If that is going to be your standard against which all others are judged, then the collection is pretty much complete as is and there is no purpose in considering anyone else.

I'm a "glass half empty" kind of guy? Looking for the flaws and constatly striving to correct them becuse I want it to be as accurate, fair, and just "right" about who and how many get nominated seems like a good idea if I am playing committee member and want the Hall to be well represented, well rounded and relevant.

Posted by shawn on Friday, 12.28.07 @ 10:59am


""Shawn, you're a "glass half empty" kinda guy, right?" - Chuck

"I'd be reluctant to even call it as much as half full." -liam

Ha-ha-ha --- now what, pray tell, does this mean?
Don't make me get out my snooker ball in a sock.

Posted by shawn on Friday, 12.28.07 @ 11:03am


I never said the Hall should be limited to the giants. I'm just saying that after you move down from them there are arguements to be had. Lots of grays.

If you asked the Hall people to justify their inclusions and exclusions, they could probably make a case. Would you or I agree with it? No. But they have their own perspective and biases just like we do. They certainly could do a better job of being more objective. No question there.

Posted by Chuck on Friday, 12.28.07 @ 11:05am


"Commercial success? Touring success? Hits? They're not a household name in America (not even close)..." - Old Chuck

I don't care about any of that, and neither SHOULD the Hall. If this was all about commercial success, touring success and hits, then we may aswell induct KISS; which I am opposed to. As for whether someone is a household name, you're suggesting that every household contains a musician. And a clever person.

"You can't tell me they're on the same level as even Stevie Wonder or U2." - Chuck

U2 would like to have a word outside. Now.

Music owes a hell of a lot more to Joy Division, with their 2 albums, than to Stevie or U2. U2 gave use some great radio-friendly and critically acclaimed albums in the 80s, but their 90s career only dampens their case, and they lack innovation.

Posted by l i a m on Friday, 12.28.07 @ 11:06am


"Ha-ha-ha --- now what, pray tell, does this mean?
Don't make me get out my snooker ball in a sock."

;D

"They certainly could do a better job of being more objective. No question there."

Ofcourse. The fact that they (nominating comittee) all get their favourites and friends in doesn't count, does it?

Posted by l i a m on Friday, 12.28.07 @ 11:09am


So your criteria begins and ends with influence and innovation? Is that it? Nothing else matters?

Quality of the live show?
Cultural impact?
Depth of catalog?

There must be other important things, no?

Posted by Chuck on Friday, 12.28.07 @ 11:16am


"So your criteria begins and ends with influence and innovation? Is that it? Nothing else matters?" - CHuck

Not particularly. If any artist fits the criteria you mentioned ASWELL AS the ones I mentioned, it would be nice, but ultimately uncessary. I'd say that depth of catalogue is pretty muchg assumed anyway, as there are plenty of "shitty innovater" around.

Posted by l i a m on Friday, 12.28.07 @ 11:21am


I'd also mention that I think that influence is the only criteria an artist MUST fit: if an artist is innovative, but no one follows them or is influenced by their sound/style/technique, how did the original artist help progress music?

Posted by l i a m on Friday, 12.28.07 @ 11:24am


"Commercial success? Touring success? Hits?" -chuck

Before I hung out here and listened to other's views on what makes an artist "significant", I would have been of your mind too, Chuck.
Now, however, my views have been altered some by opinions voiced here that have convinced me that there are many non-mainstream artists, ones I had never evenheard of, that deserve induction for reasons quite different than just commercial success.

I still endorse a system of judgment that can take the things you mention - chart, sales and touring success and hits - as relevant, depending on the specific artist uner consideration. You and I are of one camp, and you will find that there is another that believes earnestly that sales and hits are completely irrelevant using the logic, as Liam alluded to, that other musicians and musically educated people do not make up the bulk of those buying albums and concert tickets.
I say this with no sneer towards that philosophy (right now :) ) - just laying out the picture for you. Liam and Casper and this hep cat named William, who has yet to come out of his sniper tree since you have arrived, are of this former think tank.
Dezmond seems to be a moderate, like me, and I can't quite peg Kit; I think he leans towards the "money don't matter" argument, though not as purist as William.
Nobody gives a shit what that michael/anon sideshow freak has to say, and it changes to suit whatever random stance he blurts out from day to day.

It makes for some interesting debate.

Posted by shawn on Friday, 12.28.07 @ 11:35am


OK guys, I'm going out in a few minutes. See you tomorrow.

Posted by l i a m on Friday, 12.28.07 @ 11:39am


The hits and commercial success are not the most important things, and I never claimed they were. All I said is that they are (small) pieces of the whole picture. The "giants" that are in the Hall can be parsed anyway you want, with nearly any criteria you set, and they're still hall of famers. You simply can't say the same thing about a Joy Division. You just can't. They have some holes in their resume. They burned bright for a very very short time. I would say they're on the same level as the Pixies.

Posted by Chuck on Friday, 12.28.07 @ 11:44am


"I'd say that depth of catalogue is pretty muchg assumed anyway, as there are plenty of "shitty innovater" around." - liam

Ahhhhhh (laughing) --- yet another one of the other great controversies and conundrums is placed on the table!

The dilemma of "Influence". Does bad Quality mitigate it, or does influence stand as a power, regardless of whether we like it or not. Can we really "edit" history to our liking?

This, Chuck, is one of the advocates of Influence
as a God have a chink in the armour of their argument, in my opinion.
If quality > influence, then it all just comes back around to a judgment of quality and Influence is a false God, a standard used when it is convenient. Live by it, die by it I say.

But this would allow in KISS and Def Leppard and some other unmentionables.

Posted by shawn on Friday, 12.28.07 @ 11:45am


This has gotten bad for me too; I really have to discipline myself and take a break for 24 hours, otherwise this is nothing more than an addiction.

Good to meet you Chuck - hope you hang around - you seem like a smart and thoughtful guy. We need as many of those as we can get!
Back tomorrow,but not before noon AZ time.

Posted by shawn on Friday, 12.28.07 @ 11:49am


"otherwise this is nothing more than an addiction."

Finally, some insight

Posted by Anon on Friday, 12.28.07 @ 12:11pm


Oh, I am not Michael, Ryan, Matzo whatever, etc. My real name is Mitchell and I live in New Jersey.

Posted by Anon on Friday, 12.28.07 @ 12:33pm


"Finally, some insight"

i.e. "Finally, something I understand]"

Care to give us your precious insight on the topic at hand, or can we just expect the usual?

Posted by l i a m on Friday, 12.28.07 @ 15:34pm


"The "giants" that are in the Hall can be parsed anyway you want, with nearly any criteria you set, and they're still hall of famers." - Chuck

I know what you mean by "giants". But that's only "rock" music specifically. The Hall MUST stay relevant to survive, and to do that it must regard all areas of music in the past 50-odd years; all the subgeneres. Yes; all.

"You simply can't say the same thing about a Joy Division. You just can't. They have some holes in their resume."

I'm interested what you mean by this. In their respective sub-genre, which is Post-Punk, they are about the second most importatn artist. I'd say The Cure is 1st, but even The Cure were influenced by J.D. Also, what do you mean by "holes" in their resume? I know that they only recorded two albums, despite how acclaimed they were, and were very short-lived; is that what you meant?

Posted by l i a m on Friday, 12.28.07 @ 15:43pm


But this would allow in KISS and Def Leppard and some other unmentionables.

Shawn - why do you have to pick on Def Leppard? :-) Do I have to start up on Patti Smith again :=?

Anon (Mitchell) - are you Michael?

Anon - just for the record, although I have seen you state that the comparison of REM and Rush was probably not the best example, I will state that RUSH has no "Radio Free Europe" which IMO is one of the top 100 songs of all time. And I am not talking about whether it was innovative or influential. It is as well crafted a song as you will ever hear. And that is was a muscian looks for. IMO, I don't believe RUSH has any songs like that.

I think we can stop talking about innovation now. There are very few innovative bands. I dare say that some of the truly innovative bands owe much of that to their producers (Beatles - George Martin). NIN was an innovative band, U2 and REM are not. They may have reintroduced certain melodies and chord structures, but they did not create them. Influential is another story - REM was influential and they are in the HoF. End of story! Anon (Mitchell) has stated that a number of musicans site Rush as a major influence. If this is true, then that arguement is over, RUSH can then clearly be defined as influential. Whether you like the musicians or bands they influenced is another story. Rush also has a true body of work that no one can dispute. I do believe that they continue to be a viable recording entity if not influential anymore. As Chuck mentioned, I think we also need to look at the other variables such as sales and live performances. Perhaps in 20 years, we will have a better idea about all this. 40 years later, bands are still recording Beatles and Stones tunes. Lets's see if that is the case with these bands. And I will give this to Rush, they put on a better live show than REM and I have seen both bands.

Shawn, if I understood you correctly, you make the case that you may actually not have a problem with RUSH as long as KC, ELP and a few others get in first. I agree with you to a point. I think that we can all agree that REM was first generation (post punk) alternative. Rush at best is third generation in their genre. But I don't think we can hold that against them. I love KC, in fact I constantly put their vinyl (true sound)on and marvel at what they recorded, but I can tell you that the HoF will never allow them in. It's not happening. I don't see why RUSH should be penalized for that. They may have taken what KC started, but they have also built on it and there is nothing wrong with that. Rush is in their 4th decade and kids today are probably picking up guitars because of them. There has to be something said for that as well.

Chuck, I do not give as much credit to the knowledge of the HoF nominating committee. I don't think there is a writer or critic who knows more than anyone here. I don't care what anyone argues, music is an art form and art like beauty, is in the eye of the beholder.

Enuff of this, my fingers hurt. I am going to see Nicki Armstrong tonight at Lucille's.

Posted by Dameon on Friday, 12.28.07 @ 16:40pm


"And that is was a muscian looks for. IMO, I don't believe RUSH has any songs like that."

Actually, The Spirt of Radio is in the Hall of Fame as one of the top 500 most influential songs of all time - is that what you were asking?

Mitch

Posted by Anonymous on Friday, 12.28.07 @ 17:31pm


Mitch - I didn't know that - thanks. I didn't even know the HoF at a top 500. I will check that out.

Posted by Dameon on Friday, 12.28.07 @ 17:35pm


That list was goofy and almost completely random.

Posted by Kit on Friday, 12.28.07 @ 17:57pm


Kit is right. That list is completely bogus. It was put together by the national chain of retailers and the Rock Hall agreed to slap their name on it. It's good for a laugh anyway.

Posted by Chuck on Friday, 12.28.07 @ 18:32pm


Dameon:

www.rockhall.com/exhibithighlights/500-songs-by-name-wz/

THe list may not be perfect, but I would doubt that it was truly random. That would suggest, if taken literally, that they put on blindfolds, put on pieces of paper the names of thousands and thousands of songs, and picked them randomly. I doubt it worked that way - I am sure some thought went into it. According to the RRHOF webiste at least, it says that songs were "selected by curators, rock critics and historians."

Posted by Anonymous on Friday, 12.28.07 @ 18:33pm


Actually, in reviewing the list there are a lot of great songs on there, but naturally with a list of 500 songs, ther is bound to be some that you will not like or agree with.

"It was put together by the national chain of retailers and the Rock Hall agreed to slap their name on it."

How do you know that? - show me.

Posted by Anonymous on Friday, 12.28.07 @ 18:35pm


I have just reviewed that list. This was then followed by my losing my dinner and I fear I will not be able to go out tonight. Just the fact that not one song from the Blindfaith album is listed causes this list to have zero creditablility.

This list was compiled by music writers and critics. I will say it again; they know nothing. THE ROCK AND ROLL HALL OF FAME DOES NOT HAVE A CLUE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Go To The Mirror by The Who (Stop - it is not even one of the top 5 songs on the whole album)

Jump - Van Halen ( one of their worst songs)

Dancing the The Dark - Springsteen (someone should have beaten the crap out of him for that song)

Yesterday - Beatles - they should have chosen Michele instead if they wanted McCartney at his sappiest)

And I am just naming some of my favorite bands on the list. I could remove at least 100 others easily as I think most people would.

Where is Samba Pa Ti (Santana), Man In The Box (AIC), I Want You to Want Me - "live" and Surrender (Cheap Trick), Life on Mars (Bowie), Child of Time and Hush (Deep Purple), Walk Away (James Gang), All The Young Dudes (Mott the Hoople), Tarkus (ELP), Gimme Shelter (The Stones), Photograph (Def Leppard), Court of the Crimson King (KC), Radar Love (Golden Earring), She's Not There and Time of the Season (Zombies), White Room (Cream), Itchy Coo Park (Faces), Say Hello 2 Heaven (Temple of the Dog), How Soon Is Now (Smiths), Open Your Eyes and Holy War (Lords of the New Church), Dead Souls and Hurt (NIN), Dumb Waiters (Psychedelic Furs) and there is not enough room to list the songs by the Beatles, Queen and The Who that do belong on this list. Where is Procul Harum? And these are just off the top of my head.

This top 500 list really p'd me off.

Posted by Dameon on Friday, 12.28.07 @ 18:36pm


Agreed, but like I said any "list" thing is always going to have ones that will piss you off, but some they got right. If it were me though, I might pick Tom Sawyer oveer Spirit. But, to be quite honest, i do think Rush was very influential in terms of their vision, musicianship, etc., but I really do not think any specific Rush song changed the face of rock, at least not to any great degree. There influence was more global. See, I can be objective.

Posted by Anonymous on Friday, 12.28.07 @ 18:42pm


Sorry, I was thinking of this bogus list:
http://www.rockhall.com/pressroom/definitive-200

Posted by Chuck on Friday, 12.28.07 @ 18:47pm


And Dameon, by all means, do not read that list! You might need to be hospitalized!

The HoF completely sold out on the "definitive 200" -- what an embarrassment.

Posted by Chuck on Friday, 12.28.07 @ 18:51pm


And where the hell is the Yardbirds version of "Train Kept a Rollin". I will even take Aerosmith's version. Speaking of Aerosmith, where is Season of Whither?

Anon - I would agree with you. Although you cannot say that there is any one Rush song that can be clearly defined as monumental, I have no doubt that Rush caused a lot of kids to pick up the guitar, bass and drumsticks. Regarding a specific song, I mentioned "Radio Free Europe" because it made peoples heads turn. I know you and Shawn disagree with me, but D.L.'s Photograph made heads turn. I am sorry it influenced crap like Europe and Warrant, but the song did cause a lot of guys to throw away their skinny tie and bash out power chords again. And having played guitar for close to 40 years, there is nothing sexier in music than the power chord. It helped rid the world of The Knack.

Hey wait a minute, shouldn't My Sharona be on that list?

Posted by Dameon on Friday, 12.28.07 @ 19:00pm


It is a scary list indeed, but at least that list was compiled by NARM, so their criteria is different. And I will not take sales away as a criteria for the HoF.

It is lists that are put together by writers and critics that make me bleed inside.

Posted by Dameon on Friday, 12.28.07 @ 19:15pm


"and I can't quite peg Kit;"

That's me, FRH's very own international man of mystery. >_>

I think that sales in themselves are not indicative of anything. However, if a band is the first in its little niche to make a huge mainstream breakthrough, that should definitely make an impact. That's why it's no skin off my ass why R.E.M. got in before The Replacements, and why I'm resigned to Nirvana getting in before Soundgarden.

Posted by Kit on Friday, 12.28.07 @ 19:34pm


"I have no doubt that Rush caused a lot of kids to pick up the guitar, bass and drumsticks"

There is no doubt about that, but Rush has also influenced countless well known bands (not just kids) like Metallica, Smashing Pumpkins, Queensryche, Dream Theater, etc.

Posted by Anonymous on Friday, 12.28.07 @ 19:51pm


BTW, Kit I know you despie Peart's lyrics, but what did you think of Sting topping the Blender list of the worst lyricist? I know myself and Dez thought it was a joke - I mean Sting is a great writer. Now, obviously one can pick out select songs and say this sucks, etc. but overall. Anyway, just curious?

Posted by Anonymous on Friday, 12.28.07 @ 19:53pm


I think I vaguely remember that. Sting's just an easy target because of his flaccid solo career and his odd affinity for world music, and Blender doesn't have the huevos to take down anyone that isn't an easy target.

Blender's highest aspiration seems to be taking cheap shots so I wouldn't really take their ranking seriously. Not that I'm putting down cheap shots, they're great fun and are perfect for the student budget, but at least make them good cheap shots, that's all I ask.

Posted by Kit on Friday, 12.28.07 @ 20:06pm


Well, as soon as I saw Sting as the worst lyricist ever, I knew I could not take it seriously. As for Peart, I wholeheartedly diagree (he was two or three on the list), but him I can understand because he has been criticized in the past by others for being arrogant or obscure, or of being into anti-collectivism, etc. So, as much as I would disaree with the choice of Peart, at least that fits with prior critics. I think Sting's came out of nowhere...

Posted by Anonymous on Friday, 12.28.07 @ 20:21pm


I had already made comment about that in a previous posting.

Posted by dameon on Saturday, 12.29.07 @ 04:47am


"Dead Souls and Hurt (NIN)," - Dameon

Dead Souls was actually a cover of a Joy Division song. The original is better, by the way, as the NIN version comletely dropped the tempo and it just sounds boring

"I think we can stop talking about innovation now. There are very few innovative bands. I dare say that some of the truly innovative bands owe much of that to their producers (Beatles - George Martin). NIN was an innovative band, U2 and REM are not."

If you're think that only THAT amount qualifies induction, then we would have stopped at Kraftwerk. Every artist owes another artist. NIN heavily owes the sound of Ministry and the style of Joy Division. So long as an artist can craft a sound which isn't a mimic of those who came before them, then they can be called innovative.

"Anon (Mitchell) has stated that a number of musicans site Rush as a major influence. If this is true, then that arguement is over, RUSH can then clearly be defined as influential."

I don't think anyone claimed that Rush were not influential. I simply said that out of all the snubs, Rush aren't at the front of the queue. Also, "Mitchell" only gave about 5 or 6 artists who cite Rush as an influence; he's not doing them any favours to get them up that queue.

"but I can tell you that the HoF will never allow them [King Crimson] in. It's not happening. I don't see why RUSH should be penalized for that."

It's because we at FRH formed a sort of "queue" for the snubs to get in on. Casper made one somewhere, but I'm not sure where it is (if anyone knows where, or has, one is, please show it). King Crimson definitely deserve over Rush. You say that King Crimson won't ever get in, but we ignore these things when arguing objectively, and what's to say Rush will ever get in? It's been nearly ten years now.

"Rush is in their 4th decade and kids today are probably picking up guitars because of them. There has to be something said for that as well."

Really? Because, at the moment, it seems as if the majority of kids are either into 2nd wave of britpop, "emo", punk and heavy metal. I see lots of kids picking up records from before they were born, but Rush isn't often among them. I rarely even see Rush in the shops over here.

"i do think Rush was very influential in terms of their vision, musicianship, etc., but I really do not think any specific Rush song changed the face of rock, at least not to any great degree. There influence was more global. See, I can be objective."

Vision? Oh please, don't say it's to do with Spirit of Radio, one of the most pretentious pieces of prattle ever to hit the lyric sheet.

"There influence was more global. See, I can be objective."

You're kidding me, right? Do you really think that "Spirit of Radio"stands up with culture defining songs like "Anarchy in The UK" (Oh soz, I forgot that punks were "f*ck ups") or "Heaven Knows I'm Miserable Now"?

"Rush has also influenced countless well known bands (not just kids) like Metallica, Smashing Pumpkins, Queensryche, Dream Theater, etc."

1, 2, 3, 4. Most people can count to four.

Posted by l i a m on Saturday, 12.29.07 @ 09:58am


"Vision? Oh please, don't say it's to do with Spirit of Radio, one of the most pretentious pieces of prattle ever to hit the lyric sheet."

Shows how dumb you really are. I just got finished saying how there is no SPECIFIC Rush song that changed Rock music - and then you make some statment about the Spirit of Radio. "Vision" means in the big picture, the larger sense. And there is nothing pretentious about the song at all...

"Rush has also influenced countless well known bands (not just kids) like Metallica, Smashing Pumpkins, Queensryche, Dream Theater, etc."

"1, 2, 3, 4. Most people can count to four."

I guess you missed the etc. - that means and so on, and so on, and so on. Do you really think Rush only infuencced four bands? Dumb ass

Posted by Anonymous on Saturday, 12.29.07 @ 11:48am


Liam - we get it - you hate Rush! You have made that abundently clear. You blast everyone who may have a different opinion that you. I got that also. But don't mention one or two songs and act like yours is the only opinion. I like NIN's version of Dead Souls better. I like Joy Division, but in my eyes, they blew it. Kind of like Dwight Gooden, if I may use that analogy.

Forgeting about your personal feelings towards Anon or myself, how about discussions regarding a different band. I cannot say that I am a bug fan of Rush, but I do respect them. They have been entertaining their fans for over 30 years with new material. Good for them and good for their fans.

Posted by Dameon on Saturday, 12.29.07 @ 12:12pm


""Vision" means in the big picture, the larger sense."

I'm looking in the dictionary and......no, it doesn't say anything about that at all. I'll save you the bother of following up, with "what I meant to say was...", and inturn save myself the bother of bringing up your inability to articulate your thoughts.

"I guess you missed the etc. - that means and so on, and so on, and so on. Do you really think Rush only infuencced four bands? Dumb ass"

Look here, you specifically said "countless" artists were influenced by Rush, and then listed four; a number which you may, or may not, be able to count to. It's pointless putting "etc.", as anyone with a mind wouldn't buy it.

And ofcourse I don't think that Rush only influenced four bands; I never actually said that, and I only said "1, 2..." to show your fault up. Dork.

Posted by liam on Saturday, 12.29.07 @ 12:13pm


"Liam - we get it - you hate Rush! You have made that abundently clear."

I don't totally detest Rush. But I do believe critics are right in slamming them, what with them only having two competent albums, and their lyricist is a pretentious piece of dogsh*t.

"You blast everyone who may have a different opinion that you. I got that also."

Wrong. If anyone can competently put their opinion across (which is rare), then great, but don't expect me to go "Oh you're obviously right, then". I have a bit more self-respect than to do that.

"I like NIN's version of Dead Souls better."

Fine, but I don't see how it ranks among the most influential songs ever.

"I like Joy Division, but in my eyes, they blew it."

Do you mean just the song, or JD's general career?

"I cannot say that I am a bug fan of Rush"

Don't think Anon could, either ;D

Posted by liam on Saturday, 12.29.07 @ 12:21pm


I think the haunting in NIN's version of Dead Souls is just amazing. It is an opinion. You wish to focus on one of the songs I mentioned, fine. I remove it from the list. I was just lashing out at that stupid list. As far as Joy Division, I mean their career. And I don't believe I am the only one with this opinion.

Wrong. If anyone can competently put their opinion across (which is rare), then great, but don't expect me to go "Oh you're obviously right, then". I have a bit more self-respect than to do that.

It is responses like this which make me kind of giggle. I have read some of your diatribe and I can't say that you were getting your point across competently on all ocassions either. But then, I have been guilty of rambling myself. Self-respect. You accused me for two days of being Anon. I am still waiting for an admission of error on that one.

Your point regarding this subject is quite clear and you need not rehash it all just so you can have the last word on the subject. I think we all understand your viewpoint. Personally, I am done with this.

Posted by Dameon on Saturday, 12.29.07 @ 13:29pm


"I am still waiting for an admission of error on that one."

OK, I apologize 'bout that one.

"I think we all understand your viewpoint."

Doubt it...

Posted by liam on Saturday, 12.29.07 @ 13:48pm


their lyricist is a pretentious piece of "dogsh*t."

How ironic of a statement....do you see the irony? and if you actually knew more than three song lyrics, you would not think that. His songs are often about love, loss and pain.

"but don't expect me to go "Oh you're obviously right, then". I have a bit more self-respect than to do that."

Why would agreeing with someone cause you lowered self-respect? Very bizarre.


"It's pointless putting "etc.", as anyone with a mind wouldn't buy it."

No, anyone with a mind would realize that it is a term of convenience and that it would not be necessary to repeat the entire list since such a list has already been compiled and made known on this thread. Ass

Vision = don't be so literal. What it means is like if a company has a company "vision" - it means the overall plan or goal for the company. In any case,since you are not bright enough to figure out what I meant - Rush has often been emulated in their approach to making music and not being sell outs. Sticking to what you believe in and not succumbing to marketing pressures. In fact, Lifeson has even said that in interviews.

BTW, one last thing, have you always been so oppositional defiant? There is no point with you because you openly admit that even if you agree with someone, you would never admit that - you know it could hurt your widdle, widdle fragile ego - poor Liam, poor baby.


Posted by Anonymous on Saturday, 12.29.07 @ 18:00pm


"Shows how dumb you really are." - Michael/anon

Right. Because Liam, if you really wanted to demonstrate your smartitude you'd cut, paste and plagiarize entire passages from Wikipedia psychology articles and then follow it up with the exit line: "Now who is dumb?"

But don't forget to then pretend like, "..I meant to do that" when you are caught; that's key.

Posted by shawn on Saturday, 12.29.07 @ 20:53pm


Yeah, b/c cutting and pasting from Wiki is a crime - I was never hiding that - it is just a lot easier than typing. Is someone perseverating? (Now that word you might need to look up:-)

Posted by Anonymous on Saturday, 12.29.07 @ 22:19pm


Yo btw, window cleaner - the name is Mitchell

Posted by Anonymous on Saturday, 12.29.07 @ 22:23pm


"Rush has often been emulated in their approach to making music and not being sell outs. Sticking to what you believe in and not succumbing to marketing pressures. In fact, Lifeson has even said that in interviews."

What, so you're saying that Rush was the first artist to bring artistic integrity into music? You really are a complete idiot, you know that?

"There is no point with you because you openly admit that even if you agree with someone, you would never admit that"

No, jackass, wrong again. What I said was that even if someone could put their point across clearly, I would still challenge what they said. It's no surprise that you would so quickly put words into my mouth - you have no integrity, honesty or humility.

"you know it could hurt your widdle, widdle fragile ego - poor Liam, poor baby."

Awww, maybe you could make a few more fake names up to "trick" us with. Dipsh*t.

Posted by liam on Sunday, 12.30.07 @ 07:30am


"Yo btw, window cleaner - the name is Mitchell"- michael

Ho-ho.. now you're going to go that route again, you tiny, tiny man? I don't know which is worse: that you thrash out from your vicious little bratty corner with another "dig" at one of us with how we earn our livings, OR
that you tried this shameful and desperate antic BEFORE when you used to sneer at Kit's job in a music store over and over.

Do you have an original cell in your body, or are you that oblivious to how to just recycle the same ugly little scripts over and over? That's why it is so easy to observe that you are Michael and Matzo Ball and Ryan and Hey Joe, you anal wart.

And so now you're "Mitchell from New Jersey"???
Your solution to the disgrace you calculated is to pile on MORE shit??!! Billingsley, you have bragged many a time how you are from NYC, even infered how upscale and sophisticated and even tough that makes you; what an collossal ass you are. At 49, will you ever mature out of the mind of a wounded 6th grader?

Can we move off of this Rush page? It's a tired and boring subject and Michael has soiled this page enough.

Hey Chuck - did "Anon" ever answer your question?

Posted by shawn on Sunday, 12.30.07 @ 08:40am


No asswipe, I said live in the NYC area, which would include Long Island, NJ, CT, etc. BTW, it is Bill that works in a music store - pay closer attention

Posted by Anonymous on Sunday, 12.30.07 @ 08:45am


"No asswipe, I said live in the NYC area, which would include Long Island, NJ, CT, etc." -asshair

Wow. You are a certifiable fu**ing Wizard!! Your ability and willingness to distort the truth also extends to geography!! Connecticut and "etc" are part of NY? Would that include Boston an D.C., maybe the entire North-Eastern coast?(btw, you specifically claimed you lived in NYC - you did not say "area")

"BTW, it is Bill that works in a music store - pay closer attention" -the fungus

1) Stop calling him "Bill" - it's not cute and he never gave any of us permission to give him a nickname, esp your silly ass.
2) OOOO - well I guess that negates my whole point then, doesn't it?... Which you choose to conveniently dodge.
That's right, Kit was the one you tried to "dis" by laughing that his name was similar to the Knight Rider car; William was the one you kept giggling and saying 'will that be cash or charge? Here's your change." I believe those were the days when you would punctuate everythinmg with LOL-LOL-LOL!

Posted by shawn on Sunday, 12.30.07 @ 09:10am


I did not say area - my mistake, I did not realize I would be quizzed later - lost my head there.

Anyone who lives in this area knows that the this is referred to as the "Tri-State"area for a reason, which includes lower CT, Northern NJ and Long Island. No it does not include Boston, etc. If you ever listen to NYC radio stations, which I do - they always give traffic reports for NJ, CT, and Long Island b/c people commute into NYC regularly from these areas. But, in either case I can assure you I do not live in Manhattan and I do know where I live.

As for William or Bill - I always thought they were interchangeable, I did not see it as a big deal. He never said anything, so who cares?

Posted by Anonymous on Sunday, 12.30.07 @ 09:57am


Point is you boasted more tha once about how NYC was your headquarters, and now, for some odd reason you are compelled to misdirect us to New Jersey and change your name yet again; something hit too close to home, Michael?

Do you feel any regret or shame for being juvenile enough to nya-nya at Kit's name?
How about at William's job?

Posted by shawn on Sunday, 12.30.07 @ 10:18am


And on and on and on and on and on.

And to think, people want to know why they can't make peace in the Middle East.

Shawn, I am the one from NYC. And since I am 50, I am the elitist when it comes to all that is involved with that since I actually lived and experienced the Punk Rock scene. I didn't read about it in a magazine or listen to it on a college radio station 5 years after it actually ended. (Actually, that comment was meant for Liam).

Liam, please don't lecture on the importance of "Never Mind the Bollocks". You will never really understand the importance or lack of importance that album had.

You guys are in your 30's and 40's.

Just let it go man.

Posted by Dameon on Sunday, 12.30.07 @ 10:24am


"Do you feel any regret or shame for being juvenile enough to nya-nya at Kit's name?
How about at William's job?"

Honestly, it was all in good fun - I mean calling Kit a name by making a reference to the TV show - I do not think he took that too serious. Unlike you, Kit and William strike me as the type of guys that have backbones and could give a rats ass what I think or say - it is a an anonymous blog where no one really knows each other. The point is, if they do not care, who cares....

Posted by Anonymous on Sunday, 12.30.07 @ 10:24am


Look Shawn, Dameon is right...lets just make the peace and call it a day...go back to talking music. "Friends?"

-Mitch

Posted by Anonymous on Sunday, 12.30.07 @ 10:35am


"I mean calling Kit a name by making a reference to the TV show - I do not think he took that too serious."

Well, there certainly was a gaping hole where the humour was supposed to be be - as always.

"Unlike you, Kit and William strike me as the type of guys that have backbones and could give a rats ass what I think or say"

No - we actually give a sh*t about each other, because we all happen to be capable of making informed and intelligent inputs. As always, if you can't win on one front, you try and go for the exact opposite - I actaully think you're about 45 years younger than the age you claim to be.

"Liam, please don't lecture on the importance of "Never Mind the Bollocks". You will never really understand the importance or lack of importance that album had."

Where the f*cking hell did you find that?! I don't remember upholding the vritues of Johnny and Sid on this site, nor anywhere else, for that matter. I actually couldn't care less about the album's importance - all I actually know is that it's a f*cking good album. Maybe you'll watch your f*cking words and read what I actually write next time, as I feel insulted at that wrongful statment made at me.

"Honestly, it was all in good fun"

Not really, you sorry piece of cack. Some of us have senses of humour. "Surely humour is totally subjetive blah blah blah LOL RuSH".

F*ck off.

And BTW, you're not from England, so you're already a step down.

Posted by liam on Sunday, 12.30.07 @ 14:06pm


F*ck off.

Do you not know any other words?

Liam, no one can say I didn't try and be civil with you. Now, I realize that you are an annoying little man who is to be ignored from here on in.

Posted by Dameon on Sunday, 12.30.07 @ 16:26pm


Dameon - there is no point with him. He is unable to "step back"

And, yes Liam the Kit thing was not funny at all and the comments about Bill's job was not even an attempt at humor - it was an attempt to "stick it" to him - I admit that. It was immature and childish - sometimes we behave that way here...

Posted by Anonymous on Sunday, 12.30.07 @ 17:02pm


"Honestly, it was all in good fun - I mean calling Kit a name by making a reference to the TV show - I do not think he took that too serious.
..And, yes Liam the Kit thing was not funny at all It was immature and childish

Look Shawn, Dameon is right...lets just make the peace and call it a day...go back to talking music. "Friends?"" - anon

Wow Anon - I am genuinely impressed and taken aback. You feel a bit regretful about making fun of Kit's name and William's job? Am i seeing some humility?
I will glady offer my hand in peace and try to start over in civility if you will only come clean about being Michael and apologize for being an obnoxious hypocrite to Liam for razzing him so hard and I for not being "man enough" to stay gone and post as aliases. I need to see this honesty and humility from you before I gain enough respect back for you to treat you with new courtesy.

What say you?

Posted by shawn on Sunday, 12.30.07 @ 20:14pm


"F*ck off.

And BTW, you're not from England, so you're already a step down." -- liam

Will somebody who administers this website please lock out this gradeschoolyard bully who keeps insulting everything and everybody that he doesn't agree with. It's really stinking up the place.

Posted by observer on Sunday, 12.30.07 @ 23:49pm


No, Dameon, I actually felt insulted that you would lambast me for something I never actually did, that's all.

It's just I have more respect for you than to expect that.

Posted by l i a m on Monday, 12.31.07 @ 07:15am


This site is moving so slowly today, it is making me crazy.

Liam - thanks, but I doubt you have any respect for my opinions here, which is fine. I was not insulting you; I commented on an overall feel that I got from reading many of your posts which lately end with f-off or something like that. (I forget where, but you did defend the greatness of Bollocks somewhere on this blog.) And then I respond without first taking a deep breath and that is my mistake, I should know better than that. I guess it is just that when I see your name, my hand slowly starts balling up into a fist. I swear, it is almost like you are the Sid Vicious of this site and for some reason, that just annoys me. But that is my problem and not yours.

Posted by Dameon on Monday, 12.31.07 @ 07:59am


I don't understand why anybody cares about the Rock n Roll HOF? It was created by hippies for those that care about hippie folk music. If you don't like it, start your own Hall and call it the Music HOF. Seriously, Rush fans should rejoice in their exclusion for that reason alone. Rush has obviously done okay without Jann Weiners blessing.

Posted by Todd on Sunday, 01.6.08 @ 22:36pm


Hey, I as a long time Rush fan (have not missed a tour since Power Windows), I want nothing to do with the HOF if Maddona is in it.

Posted by AZCOHEN on Thursday, 01.10.08 @ 08:09am


I've been by this post a few times over the past 3 months and I just have to chime in here. There are people who love Rush, and people who hate Rush. I love Rush, not that it matters to anyone that hates them, but what point does it make going back and forth about whether or not Peart's lyrics are pretentious.

Peart has ideas and he is fortunate enough to have the outlet to share them with others. His words have made a world of difference to a lot of people. He's a smart, talented guy with an interesting way of looking at things. Not all of his ideas are original, often inspired by books he has read, but at least he's getting those ideas out to people who may never have heard them otherwise.

Posted by PeartFan67 on Monday, 01.21.08 @ 12:03pm


Wow - what happenned in here today? Liam has been vaporized, as has the guy he was arguing with on Rush. Holy crap. Sorry to see this, Liam.

Posted by Blue on Monday, 01.21.08 @ 22:41pm


Yea I didn't understand that either. Maybe it just got caught in yesterday's Liam dragnet operation.
With Bowie, Dameon siad he liked Alladin Sane period.
I think you recommended Ziggy Stardust then onto Hunky Dory: is that correct?

Posted by Blue on Tuesday, 01.22.08 @ 09:53am


The order of albums where you can appreciate the growth is Space Oddity, The Man Who Sold the World, Hunky Dory, Ziggy Stardust, Aladdin Sane, Diamond Dogs. But this was over 35 years ago and my memory of releases may be off, but I don't think so. These recording were followed up by his "Thin White Duke" personna (Young Americans and Station to Station).

Posted by Dameon on Tuesday, 01.22.08 @ 11:23am


So all the ones you mention are like pre-'75 or so?
Good stuff - thanks much!

Posted by Blue on Tuesday, 01.22.08 @ 11:30am


Yes (pre-75)and the order I put them in is in fact correct. I think each album leads perfectly into the next. Diamond Dogs get a little weak, but not by much. You can see he was tiring a bit.

Posted by Dameon on Tuesday, 01.22.08 @ 12:24pm


RUSH in the featured vote spot?!
Who will defend the honor of these 3 screeching icons of sci-fi philosophical noodling? Is there a single female fan anywhere at a Rush concert?
Has a sworn Rush fan ever been layed?

What we need here is some jackass contrarian who believes so firmly in the genius of Rush that he quotes full pages of Wikipedia,spits at the likes of King Crimson and The Pretenders and REM, and never shuts up about his Canadian love gods - but he would need to remain..........Anonymous.

Oh where is such a bufoon when Rush needs him? Where has he been banished to?
Pity.

Posted by Shaw-- I mean, Blue on Tuesday, 02.26.08 @ 08:24am


Hey Blue - where have you been? I hope all is well with you.

Posted by Dameon on Tuesday, 02.26.08 @ 10:15am


together more than 30 years and still putting out new material that is well received by their fans. last year's snakes & arrows tour was so successful that the band is doing it all over again in 2008 and they're even adding new show dates as i write this.

rush certainly deserves to be inducted. but if i were them, after ten years of being snubbed by weener, i'd probably do what the sex pistols did and refuse it.

Posted by philip witak on Saturday, 03.1.08 @ 21:06pm


I think just the fact that The Sex Pistols did it will keep Rush from doing it.

Posted by Ronnie on Sunday, 03.2.08 @ 08:53am


This is just one US Citizen's opinion. Rush is absolutely worthy of induction, and they will be. When the are inducted, Geddy, Alex, and Neil will show up and graciously accept their award. They will then proceed to tear into A Farewell To Kings or YYZ, blowing the ears off the stunned audience. Rush will be inducted, America loves them, and critics suck, but you all know that...

Posted by Lance Swanson on Tuesday, 03.4.08 @ 00:49am


One more thing, this is huge number of posts for this particular band, and I only read three negative comments about Rush. The funny thing about these opinions is that they sound just like the self-important crap that professional critics write. You simply cannot convince the public that Rush sucks. I love the comment about the person who wanted to walk out after 15 minutes of seeing Rush in concert. Are you freaking kidding me? One hell of an idiot, he. Rush will be inducted soon.

Posted by Lance Swanson on Tuesday, 03.4.08 @ 00:55am


"Rush will be inducted soon." -Lance

De-LUUUUUUUU-sional rantings of a madman.
Canadian geek goofiness for the perpetual 15 year old male.

Posted by Blue on Tuesday, 03.4.08 @ 07:58am


"You simply cannot convince the public that Rush sucks."

I doubt the entire public is fully aware of Rush.

"One hell of an idiot, he. Rush will be inducted soon."

They haven't even been considered and it's been ten years. I'd beg to differ.

Posted by Liam on Tuesday, 03.4.08 @ 09:50am


Despite Rush deserving a spot, I don't see them getting in, as the folks over there have a "personal" think against Rush...

Posted by nona on Thursday, 03.6.08 @ 23:00pm


I like to think that it has more to do with the fact that Rush's influence on music is negligible (especially compared to alot of PUNK artists you LOVE like The Stooges and The Sex Pistols and The Clash and The Buzzcocks and The Ramones!!)....





Oh wait! I forgot about those "countless bands"! I'm sorry Metallica and Soundgarden!

Try doing your homework and you'll find out just how much artists like Gang of Four, The Stooges, Joy Division and Sonic Youth deserve in over Rush.

Posted by Liam on Friday, 03.7.08 @ 11:18am


Reading these comments have been interesting. I got to looking over who was in and wasn't after the utter disgust of seeing Madonna getting in. I looked over all the bands on the list and IMO, Rush is the most deserving for many of the reasons already listed (which I won't rehash here). Their influence on other musicians cannot be diminished, it is immense and crosses genres, that alone should get them in. Longevity, sales, impact on pop culture, etc. etc. All worthy aspects. It's a shame progressive rock has been over looked in general and the hall should be ashamed, and I do agree bands such as Yes and King Krimson should be in as well.

And where is Iron Maiden and Priest, talk about two more bands that should be in. I guess metal fans should be happy Sabbath made in (they do deserve it as they greatest band of all time, see I'm not a total Rush freak), but metal is another genre that will be over looked.

Posted by Brian H. on Monday, 03.10.08 @ 10:58am


"I looked over all the bands on the list and IMO, Rush is the most deserving for many of the reasons already listed (which I won't rehash here)."

Or not.

"Their influence on other musicians cannot be diminished, it is immense and crosses genres, that alone should get them in."

Yes, it can; no, it doesn't; and no, it shouldn't.

"Longevity, sales, impact on pop culture, etc. etc. All worthy aspects."

1. No one cares about Rush anymore (excluding the PAINFULLY OBVIOUS uber-fans like yourself), so I really wouldn't call them well-lived.

2 Sales mean nothing

3 Rush has literally no impact on pop culture. Yeah face it - you're out of touch.

"It's a shame progressive rock has been over looked in general and the hall should be ashamed, and I do agree bands such as Yes and King Krimson should be in as well."

This is where you should have included your comment about punk bands.

"(they do deserve it as they greatest band of all time, see I'm not a total Rush freak), "

No they aren't and yes you are.

"but metal is another genre that will be over looked."

That'd be why AC/DC, Van Halen, Led Zeppelin, Black Sabbath, The Kinks, Queen, ZZ Top, Aerosmith and some tohers are in the HoF.




ps: Drop the moniker; it's quite pathetic.

Posted by Liam on Monday, 03.10.08 @ 11:47am


Liam, here is the homework you and most others omitted. According to wikiperdia.com and the RIAA, "Rush possesses 24 gold records and 14 platinum (3 multi-platinum) records. These statistics place Rush fifth behind The Beatles, The Rolling Stones, Kiss and Aerosmith for the most consecutive gold and platinum albums by a rock band. Rush also ranks 78th in U.S. album sales according to the RIAA with sales of 25 million units.[5] Although total worldwide album sales are not calculated by any single entity, as of 2004 several industry sources estimated Rush's total worldwide album sales at over 40 million units."

This attest to the bands popularity over a long course of time. One argument to this is that The same people buy Rush albums each time. For 1/2 million people to buy an album from one band 24 times (over 30 years) is another testament to the bands lasting musical influence to a large populace. How many other bands can claim that kind of loyalty? Another argument is that they are already in the canadian HOF. Say what? Led Zep and the Beatles are British folks. Who cares. This is not the US HOF. It the R&R HOF and any other awards a band recieves should only enhance their stature. let's add that they have won Juno awards as well.

Let's add more while we are at it. Each band member has had numerous awards from different music publication as the "best player" on their respective instruments. Guitar Player has had Alex and Geddy on the cover countless times and Neil Peart is usually regarded as one of the best drummers regardless of genre. So who the hell reads these magazines and votes on these stupid awards? Musicians you twit! To think that these guys did not profoundly influence generations of Musicians is simple being naive.

Lastly, I just bought Rush tickets In Kansas City from a broker because they had sold out 5 minutes after they went on sale. How many sold out shows have The Stooges and The Sex Pistols and The Clash and The Buzzcocks The Ramones and Joy Division had recently? Are any making relevant music after 32 years?

Please amuse me!

Posted by Lance Baumgartner on Monday, 03.10.08 @ 12:57pm


"Although total worldwide album sales are not calculated by any single entity, as of 2004 several industry sources estimated Rush's total worldwide album sales at over 40 million units.""

Say it again: Sales do not matter at all because they rarely give an accurate representation of an artists influence - The Velvet Underground, Gang of Four and My Bloody Valentine are all pefect examples of artists whose sales out do their influence.

"2nd paragraph containing random bullsh*t about sales and some boring-as-hell stuff about Canada(wtf?)"

I never mentioned Rush's nationality.

"Each band member has had numerous awards from different music publication as the "best player" on their respective instruments. Guitar Player has had Alex and Geddy on the cover countless times and Neil Peart is usually regarded as one of the best drummers regardless of genre. So who the hell reads these magazines and votes on these stupid awards? Musicians you twit!"

And yet NONE of them is the best overall player of their respective instrument.

I don't care about any stupid awards - Jimi Hendrix isn't the bestest everest guitarist ever, and yet most of the populace would say he is.

"Lastly, I just bought Rush tickets In Kansas City from a broker because they had sold out 5 minutes after they went on sale."

Not that it actually makes ANY difference, I only have your word for that.

"How many sold out shows have The Stooges and The Sex Pistols and The Clash and The Buzzcocks The Ramones and Joy Division had recently? Are any making relevant music after 32 years?"

Rush aren't making relevant music after 32 years. The few young nerds would be influenced by the likes of 2112 and Moving Pictures, not the recent samey crap.

It would help Joy Division, The Clash and The Ramones if their song-writers weren't dead. Do your homework.

And in case you were wondering, "Flat-Pack Philosophy" by The Buzzcocks is a fantastically great album coming from a band that was there at the dawn of UK Punk - far better than modern Rush

Also, all the bands listed there have massive influence in (and outside) their own subgenre. Far more than Rush, and just being ignorant about the bands doesn't make them any less or any more important, so don't try THAT argument.







ps What you fail to realise is that you need to be convincing me of why Rush should be in, not the opposite - since Rush isn't actually in. Something you fail at.

Posted by Liam on Monday, 03.10.08 @ 13:24pm


EDIT: that should be "whose influence outdoes their sales."

Irritating.

Posted by Liam on Monday, 03.10.08 @ 13:28pm


Liam,

Your such and idiot. Back up your opinion with facts.

Sales do matter. It proves popularity of an artists and therefore is associated with influence. It is also a criteria for Hall entry.

"Rush does not matter anymore". They continue to sell out concerts and sell CD's. Geddy Lee was on the cover of the latest "Bass Player Magazine" They don't matter to you, but that does not matter.

"No influence on Pop Culture" See above. By the way, they toured with Primus recently. Les Claypool is the first to admit Geddy's influence.


By the way, longevity is also a Hall criteria.

Your entire opinion has no basis in argument and is unsupported by any facts. I would imagine such from someone who is probably no older than 21.

Posted by Lance Baumgartner on Monday, 03.10.08 @ 13:47pm


*shouts*

Hey William, you wouldn't mind digging out that old lesson-to-Anon about the difference between an opinion and fact, would you? I feel like a laugh.

*stops shouting*

"It proves popularity of an artists and therefore is associated with influence. It is also a criteria for Hall entry."

No, let's try again, shall we?

There is absolutely NO rule to say that "Big sales = Big influence" because bands like Nob Jovi can sell buckets with near to no followers; and bands like The Velvet Underground, Sonic Youth and Gang of Four can't break 1 million within a decade and are still some of the most influential artists of all time.

"They continue to sell out concerts and sell CD's. Geddy Lee was on the cover of the latest "Bass Player Magazine" They don't matter to you, but that does not matter."

I was speaking in terms of influence on recent musicians. How many notable groups that started 2000 and later are there that cite Rush? Coheed and Cambria? The list ends there, or maybe at ten.

""No influence on Pop Culture" See above. By the way, they toured with Primus recently. Les Claypool is the first to admit Geddy's influence."

Primus also cite XTC - a band who is much, much better, and far more influential and innovative, than Rush. I'm even told they've done a live cover of "Making Plans for Nigel".

"I would imagine such from someone who is probably no older than 21."

Absolutely laughable, coming from the guy who not only thought that he could get away with switching screen-names, but also thought that we would believe him when he denied such a painfully obvious lie.

Not to mention some of the 'comments' you've made here.

Posted by Liaml on Monday, 03.10.08 @ 14:05pm


Liam,

Your just renforcing my argument. All of what you said is supported by you and only you.

"And yet NONE of them is the best overall player of their respective instrument."

The above is your opinion. The following is from Guitar Player Magazine Fan Voting:

Neil's Award Achievements in the "Modern Drummer" magazine reader's poll:

Voted to Modern Drummer Hall of Fame: 1983
Best Rock Drummer: 1980,1981,1982,1983,1984,1985
Best Multi-Percussionist: 1983,1984,1985,1986
Best Percussion Instrumentalist: 1982
Most Promising New Drummer: 1980
Best All Around: 1986


Oh yeah, Alex is on the March cover and Geddy on the current one.

So what if Joey Ramone is dead. That's not an argument. The relevancy is afcts. Rush is still here, still touring, still making CD's, still selling them.

You don't care about awards. Emphasizing "you" again. Fortunatly, other people do care and cared enough to vote. In the case of the awards above, musicians (which you are probably not) voted for them. People who actually have some clue as to how to vote on the subject.

By the way, how many times has anyone from Korn won a musicians award? Sold a Platimum record? Maybe no one cares enough. Perhaps they are not relevent enough.

I like whipping up on you.

Posted by Lance Baumgartner on Monday, 03.10.08 @ 14:10pm


Liam,

You argument on influencing "recent musicians" contains no validity. We are talking about entering the R&R HOF. You must make you first album 25 years ago. The entire body of work is what is relevant.

Of course, let's argue that one. If Geddy is on the Cover of the Latest Guitar Player Mag and Alex is on March 2008, how does that not influence Musicians under the age of 25? This is the Target Market of that Magazine.

Posted by Lance Baumgartner on Monday, 03.10.08 @ 14:17pm


Never switched my screen name. First time I've visited. I simply like beating on people who simply cannot look beyond their own opinion.

Posted by Lance Baumgartner on Monday, 03.10.08 @ 14:30pm


rush should've already been inducted.

Posted by amber on Monday, 03.10.08 @ 14:43pm


A few of the "small bands" influenced by Rush.

Iron Maiden
Dream Theater
Queensryche
Living Colour
Mr. Big
Racer X

Rush is a no brainer...they are much more deserving than any of the people being inducted this year.

Posted by Derek on Monday, 03.10.08 @ 16:25pm


Derek, did you just try to cite Mr. Big as a positive example of a Rush influencee?
HAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!
Someone dropped a dooky in your Halloween candy bag. You dork.

Posted by Blue on Monday, 03.10.08 @ 18:19pm


I'll take Paul Gilbert and Billy Sheehan over so many other guitar/bass combos. So yes, I'll take the musicianship of those two. I'm not sure your insult is warranted. Especially, if that's all you have.

Posted by Derek on Monday, 03.10.08 @ 18:43pm


Lance Baumgartner...if you are through patting yourself on the back, I'll give you my observations:

First of all, I think that the HoF has way too many undeserving inductees...to me, there should be about 30-40 inductees. It should be for the best of the best in influence and innovation and who have stood the test of time...artists who they will be talking about for centuries!

Now, that being said, Rush is a very good band, been around for 40 years, and sold 40 million records worldwide. They are all very good musicians. Innovation...what "wheel" did they invent? What has been heard out there that can be said "that's a direct influence from Rush"? To me, "influence" means you've done something that people will never forget and will always be passed on in some way, shape, or form. The "power trio" thing kinda started with Buddy Holly, nothing new there. I've talked to people who preferred Triumph or The Jeff Healey Band to Rush, as far as Canadian "power trios" go. I can't think of anything they've done other than the fact that they're a "very good band".

Now, I've subscribed to Guitar Player Magazine for over 30 years. Most recent cover was Allan Holdsworth...now there's someone whos audience base is 25 and under...not!! Where did that ridiculous statistic come from? You must be thinking of Guitar WORLD. Over the years, the cover is usually reserved for guitarists of some noteriety, except for "special" issues, like the '74 Hendrix issue. It doesn't mean you're one of the best ever, just means you're "familiar". Bass Player is the same format. Being on the cover of either magazine isn't any sort of HoF argument.

I am not a Rolling Stones fan...never have been, never will be, they just never appealed to me. Do I think they should be in the HoF...ABSOLUTELY!! If I have to explain why, you shouldn't be presenting arguments on this site anyway. Now, there are a lot of bands not in the hall with similar credentials as Rush (even though comparatively speaking, some artists have ONE album that has sold more than 40 million copies), but the hall is diluted enough the way it is. Rush, in my opinion, is a very good group...but I think that about a lot of groups. Do I think they should be in the Hall of Fame? Probably not. To me, they're just not "one of a kind" enough for me.

Posted by Terry on Monday, 03.10.08 @ 19:11pm


Based on the list of bands that have made it in over the past few years the HoF is missing the boat if they do not include Rush and soon. This year they are touring the world for the 30 something year and the concerts are full of parents and their kids. These guys are getting a whole new set of fans and rock about as good as you can get live. Music is super sharp, Geddy has a little troulbe with the high notes but is amazing anyway, Alex jams the guitar as good or better than most and Neil has won every drum award so many times they have made him ineigible for most awards so others have a chance.

It's time and for the ultimate "Working Men" to be inducted to the HoF.

Texas - Rocks to these Canadians

Posted by Mike H on Tuesday, 03.11.08 @ 22:28pm


Rush will never be inducted into the RRHOF - never, ever - plain and simple. And, who cares ?!! The RRHOF is a sham, and everyone knows that.

Posted by skyfly on Saturday, 03.22.08 @ 09:36am


it's really sad that rush isnt in the rrhf. but someone like madonna is. is this this the rock and roll hall of fame or the pop hall of shame ? just wondering .

Posted by rick on Sunday, 03.23.08 @ 09:46am


Hey, Madonna had much more "rock" about her than Depeche Mode.

Posted by Liam on Wednesday, 03.26.08 @ 13:07pm


Rush > Bob Willis and his Texas Playboys.

It's as simple as that. If Bob Willis and his Texas Playboys are in, and Rush is excluded, you have yourself on joke of a HoF.

Of course, I can't wait for the day when the HoF is desperate for decent bands. They've passed up on so many good artists. I think decent, music loving musicians should form a union of sorts and agree not to enter the Hall. Let's see what Rolling Stone Magazine has to say about that!

Posted by Brendan on Saturday, 03.29.08 @ 21:49pm


I don't think you can actually force the Hall to NOT recognize you if they want to.

Posted by William on Sunday, 03.30.08 @ 04:22am


sorry if i mistake this field

Posted by drugs on Monday, 03.31.08 @ 23:25pm


Rush is band, along with many others, that clearly should be inducted. The longevity, influence, and talent is undeniable. But, hey even Alex Lifeson,, mocked the hall, exclaiming, "Look who they are putting in."


"Borderline, you just keep on pushing my love, over the borderline...you must be my lucky star."


They should rename the hall, the "pop" hall of fame....LONG LIVE ROCK

Posted by Cygnus on Thursday, 04.3.08 @ 06:14am


ledger - best drugstore choose / sorry if i mistake this field

Posted by ledger on Friday, 04.4.08 @ 09:32am


Greatest Rock Hall Snub (IMO): RUSH

"Closed for my protection
Open to your scorn
Between these two directions
My heart is sometimes torn"

Posted by Big Daddy on Thursday, 04.10.08 @ 14:28pm


The fact that Rush has been eligible all this time and hasn't been inducted shows you what a sham the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame really is.

Posted by aquadonia on Wednesday, 05.7.08 @ 02:49am


I agree with the post above, Rush is a misunderstood band that was very influential, especially during the 1980's with Moving Pictures and Permanent Waves. I think they are long overdue, so lets put in my fellow Canadians!

Posted by Steven L on Wednesday, 05.14.08 @ 18:11pm


Why is Rush not already in the Hall of Fame? Wake up out there and listen to this great band. I would put Rush in the top 5 greatest bands of all time. If not for Rush we would not have the great progessive bands like Dream Theater, Brainstorm, Eldritch and many others. Rush Rules.

Posted by skull on Tuesday, 05.20.08 @ 21:49pm


Rolling Stone’s List of the 25 Undisputed Guilty Pleasure Bands

Some of us still have a thing for Rush or Paula Abdul or RuPaul. That’s cool. To each his or her own and all that. But there are some artists who unequivocally leave much to be desired in terms of, say, quality or coolness, but still manage to rock, or at least inspire serious if shameful adoration on a mass scale. It’s these artists that we’re interested in. Artists who absolutely belong on a best guilty pleasures ever list, because that’s what we’re creating.

Those of you who proudly listen to Rush at top volume in your car all summer long, (ie thereby displaying the total lack of guilty in your pleasure), take note:? Rush come in at Number One on our official list of the Rock’s Undisputed Guilty Pleasure Bands. Like the rest of the acts on our list (which you helped put together), we love them to death, and can never forgive ourselves. The full list:

1. Rush
2. E.L.O. (Electric Light Orchestra)
3. Journey
4. ABBA
5. Chicago
6. Boston
7. Foreigner
8. Bread
9. Bon Jovi
10. New Edition
11. The Monkees
12. Motley Crue
13. STYX
14. Eddie Money
15. Simply Red
16. Kelly Clarkson
17. America
18. Wham
19. R.E.O. Speedwagon
20. Poison
21. Lionel Richie
22. Kansas
23. Air Supply
24. Hall & Oates
25. Britney Spears

Posted by Roy on Tuesday, 06.10.08 @ 13:39pm


The above seems to present more of a case against Rush's chances along with those of ABBA, Chicago, The Monkees and Bon Jovi. Don't think the others ever would have really come into the discussion.

Posted by Casper on Tuesday, 06.10.08 @ 17:17pm


It's very easy to simplify this argument by simply putting it this way. Rush should be in ahead of so many other artists of their time. i.e. Blondie gets in and Rush doesn't???? There are many more examples out there. It's a joke that they are not in.

Posted by DennyB on Thursday, 06.19.08 @ 11:04am


"Blondie gets in and Rush doesn't????"

Yes, you read correctly. If you honestly think Rush has anything near the amount of impact Blondie has then, well...you're an idiot.

Posted by Liam on Thursday, 06.19.08 @ 11:10am


I can't wait to hear your assessment of Blondie and what their impact was?

Posted by Dameon on Thursday, 06.19.08 @ 11:28am


Don't hold your breath...

No I'm joking. In a minute.

Posted by Liam on Thursday, 06.19.08 @ 11:35am


Blondie were amongst the most commercially succesful of the New Wavers (wouldn't be shocked if the most), and helped its development whilst it was still a young movement (much like the Cars). This commercial success was a direct cause of the girly-pop garbage that began around the '80s (Madge) through to some unpredictable time in the future (Britney Spears). Debbie Harry has influenced hordes of woman musicians, from Annie Lennox to Justine Frischmann, Gwen Stefani to Madonna and Shirley Manson.

Posted by Liam on Thursday, 06.19.08 @ 11:53am


I thought commercial success meant crap in your world? For all the reasons you have listed for Blondie; you can use for Def Leppard; except for the chick thing.

Posted by Dameon on Thursday, 06.19.08 @ 12:17pm


I actually meant to say that their commercial success was one way in which they aided New Wave - sorry, that bit wasn't written too well.

Def Leppard were a bit too late to aid anything while it was "young," IMO. DL's debut came two years after Van Halen's, with Van Halen already having two albums out - quite late considering the 'movement' of Hair-metal lasted just over a decade. The term "New Wave" came about in '76, the same year as Blondie's debut.

Posted by Liam on Thursday, 06.19.08 @ 12:32pm


I actually meant to say that their commercial success was one way in which they aided New Wave - sorry, that bit wasn't written too well. - Liam


Liam - you are back pedaling my friend. Basically what you are now saying is exactly what Shawn and I fought with you about on the "Induction Criteria" board. Commercial success is in fact a way to influence the next generation of musicians.

You cannot blame D.L. for the crap of the mid-80's as you constantly do and then say that is was actually V.H. who influenced the scene. I can say that, but you can't.

I agree with you that the L.A. scene (cock rock)was heavily influenced by V.H., but it was bands that actually had musical chops that leaned more towards the D.L. song structure (hooks and harmonies); Tesla, Dokken and many others.

Whether D.L., Rush, Joy Division, The Cure and other bands gets in or not is no longer the point here. I think was has been clearly pointed out on the many boards here is that the set of standards used by the HoF changes dramatically depending on which band is up for nomination.

Posted by Dameon on Thursday, 06.19.08 @ 12:50pm


How am I back-pedaling then? If you want to know, I said "aided" not "influenced," and I already admitted that the original comment wasn't written properly (rushed it), so it's not worth discussing. No, commercial success is not a "way to influence the next generation of musicians," what absolute BS. The way you influence musicians is by, um, let me think, actually influencing and/or inspiring them to make music, not just by them picking up your CD at the Wal-Mart (or wherever). Yet another attempt at sneaking sales in as a criteria...Christ, are you that desperate to get your Way Back When groups into the HoF?

The discussion on the Induction Criteria page got way too sloppy, and no real conclusion was reached.

Yes, success can have an affect on influence (never disagreed with that; the Beatles and Nirvana demonstrate that argument perfectly), but that's "can have" and not "has," so you can't make a rule out of it. If an artist sells millions of records, but influences barely a handful of artists and innovates nothing (Bon Jovi, for instance), then in what way does sales show impact?

It's funny how I don't actually blame DL for the crap of the '80s, just that their entire discography sucks a generic egg and only allowed for more absolute horseshit. Yes, Van Halen were the root of that garbage, but they were actually talented song-writers and musicians, unlike DL.

There is no "DL song structure." Everything, literally everything they ever did had been done before, and it all traces back to their influences, whether it be Judas Priest, T. Rex, Van Halen...Yes, DL had some influence, but I swear to God it's nowhere near as big as you seem to think.

Posted by Liam on Thursday, 06.19.08 @ 13:19pm


"Nothing, I repeat, nothing in [the induction criteria] even suggests that anyone's opinion should be taken as measurement. You like them, I don't. Why should your view be taken over absolutely anyone else's?" -Liam

"It's funny how I don't actually blame DL for the crap of the '80s, just that their entire discography sucks a generic egg and only allowed for more absolute horseshit." - Liam's completely irrelevant musical opinion on the topic at hand.

Posted by mel on Thursday, 06.19.08 @ 13:39pm


I have never claimed their influence was huge; but it was enough to meet that criteria standard of the HoF. And again; there is measureable influence (other bands that secured some success) and just kids who picked up a guitar or bass because they heard D.L. which cannot be measured.

I never claim D.L. to be the greatest thing since slice bread, but I do give them their due from 1980 - 1987. They did dominate an era and that says a lot.

And finally, sales does have an impact on influence. But I am not even having this discussion again.

Posted by Dameon on Thursday, 06.19.08 @ 16:10pm


Once and for all if you look at the timeline of Def Leppard and Van Halen they are almost the same. Def Lepppard put out a four song EP in 1977 in their homeland. And as for all these people that hate Def Leppard? Yeah that's why they are currnetly on a world tour (because they suck and no one wants to see them). Liam I understand that you don't like DL and believe that they do not deserve to be in the HOF. But you must agree that there is still millions of fans out ther that want to see them. Actually their new album (I think it's okay) "songs from the sparkle lounge" debuted at number five on the billboard charts. Not bad for a so called washed up hair band. Peace brother!

Posted by dano on Thursday, 06.19.08 @ 18:14pm


Dano - Liam will admit nothing and lets stay out of this arguement with him.

Posted by Dameon on Thursday, 06.19.08 @ 18:38pm


""Nothing, I repeat, nothing in [the induction criteria] even suggests that anyone's opinion should be taken as measurement. You like them, I don't. Why should your view be taken over absolutely anyone else's?" -Liam" -mel

Congrats for taking the quotation in the completely wrong context. If you'd actually bothered to read the convo (I'm assuming good faith here, as always), you'd see that I said that about whether people's opinions of groups should be a criteria for induction (ie whether they think they're good; how strong they rate the discography)

Posted by Liam on Friday, 06.20.08 @ 09:39am


Rush is getting a STAR on the hollywood walk of fame.

Posted by Roy on Monday, 06.23.08 @ 08:36am


I used to think they shouldn't be inducted. I've now listened to more of their work & now that I have an iPod I can now decipher more of their lyrics than I seemed to be able to do when listening on a regular stereo back in 80s.

I think they are worthy of induction.

Posted by Paul in KY on Thursday, 07.10.08 @ 13:20pm


The fact that a band such as Rush has not even been considered for the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame is proof enough to me that this "so-called" hall is a joke, and should not be taken too seriously. Rush has been one of the most influential bands in the history of rock and roll. Most every major band out there can trace their influential roots to Rush, either directly, or by being influenced by someone that was influenced by Rush - especially when it comes to drums or bass guitar. Leaving Rush out of this list of artists is about the same as leaving eggs out of the Breakfast Hall of Fame.

Posted by Ronnie on Wednesday, 07.16.08 @ 22:07pm


There are some bands that are unfortunate to not be HOF inductees, some that are shocking they aren't and then a whole other category for a band like Rush. They have the numbers (albums sold, concert grosses) the have the influence, they have the longetivity. They not only belong, but they belong in the upper echelon wing. In baseball terms, they may not be a Babe Ruth or Willie Mays, but they are not a Phil Rizzuto or Tony Perez. Bands like Cheap Trick should be in, bands like Rush shouldn't even need discussion. Then again, there really is no band like Rush.

Posted by Jason on Thursday, 07.24.08 @ 14:06pm


"Then again, there really is no band like Rush."

Cream, Yes, The Who, King Crimson, Led Zeppelin. Just to name a few.

Posted by Liam on Friday, 07.25.08 @ 05:30am


Actually, those are great bands, Liam, but they really do not sound anything like Rush...Rush has a pretty unique sound, love em or hate em'

Posted by Jason on Wednesday, 07.30.08 @ 13:28pm


Captain Beefheart has (or had, depending on how you look at it) a "pretty unique sound," not Rush, and I hear each and every one of the bands I listed in Rush's sound (especially the Who).

Posted by Liam on Thursday, 07.31.08 @ 05:14am


Is this a trick question? Of course Rush should be in. They are an amazing band and their drummer is one of the best in the world.

Posted by Joey on Wednesday, 08.27.08 @ 16:02pm


The fact that Rush, Iron Maiden and Van Halen aren't in the RRHF yet, makes me have to side with what the Sex Pistols said about it. They have Grand Master Flash, but not the aforementioned. Wtf?!

Posted by David Smith on Saturday, 08.30.08 @ 04:47am


Van Halen is in the RRHOF already.

Posted by Aaron O'Donnell on Saturday, 08.30.08 @ 05:52am


For Exclusive Rush Footage go to www.freewebs.com/liberachi321

Posted by max weiss on Wednesday, 09.3.08 @ 15:28pm


Why are the trio getting snubbed year end and year out? What does the R&RHF have against the boys from Canada? They've been together from day 1. And they sound better than ever. What can we do to get the Hall of Fame to notice RUSH!

Posted by DCG on Friday, 09.5.08 @ 09:19am


Go to your local Borders or Barnes and Noble. Rush is on the cover of this months Classic Rock And Roll Magazine.

I forgot what the subtitle was. Something about them being the best nerd band.

Posted by Roy on Friday, 09.5.08 @ 10:31am


Because they're f*cking awful and their fanbase consists solely of uber dorks.

And if you don't believe me: next time you're at a concert for this terrible band with the sh*tbag singer, count how many guys are wearing sci-fi T-shirts. Surprised? Hell, I'd tell you to count the number of women there, but I'm seriously doubtful there'd be any. Maybe the odd groupie, but I'm sure they'd have to be mentally ill in some aspect to every come this worthless bunch of idiots.

Posted by Liam on Friday, 09.5.08 @ 10:38am


Hey Liam - tell us what you really think about Rush. Don't hold back.

Posted by Dameon on Friday, 09.5.08 @ 13:53pm


who cares? I can't wait till the new CD
Rush good RRHOF bad

Posted by darb on Wednesday, 09.17.08 @ 05:27am


How do you know Liam - been to a Rush concert? Could not resist? Or you just "heard"? Since when did having a fan base of more males mean anything - as usual your diatribe leads nowhere

Posted by Blue Water on Sunday, 09.21.08 @ 12:08pm


Geez, let's get it over with and induct them already...

Posted by denyo on Sunday, 09.21.08 @ 17:13pm


RUSH deserves to be in the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame. If you have ever gone to a Rush concert, it is a truly religious experience! We've only heard the musicianship on the records, but to see it played out in front of you is truly spectacular. The concert goer is usually jumping around and dancing, but then slowly stops to see and appreciate the men who are generating this art on stage. The music, the short films, the stage set up is amazing. It's like being in a small venue with 25,000 people behind you.

Rush is the best. And to prove they are the best, they are 55 and 56 years of age and still working. Working and rocking.

As far as pot smoking in their younger days, they haven't done anything offensive or disturbing to their fans. They respect their fans, as the fans respect them and the music.

Since Rush won't sell out, they won't be inducted into the RRHOF. The loss is on the RRHOF.

Posted by Janet on Monday, 09.22.08 @ 20:28pm


Best Drummer. Hall of Fame bassist and guitarist. VERY INFLUENTIAL playing styles. The ability to come out with relevant material after 30 years. (REM, Stones, Dylan haven't had an ounce radioplay or sales in years). I can go on and on. The point is that the RRHOF hates us, not Rush. They hate that we keep reminding them just how great Rush is. A critics wet dream is to find the obscure, offbeat, unpopular piece of art and declare it to be genius. Wow, and only the most brilliant of critic could see that. The sheep that we are are too below them, and therefore cannot possibly have the cognitive ability to recognize what they see. But we do see it. And this threatens their whole existence. Pat yourselves on the back. Rolling Stone magazine, etc.screw off.

Posted by joseph on Monday, 09.22.08 @ 20:58pm


The RRHOF is a joke - Chic?, War? - how do they get nominated and Rush doesn't even get considered? The committee should be ashamed of themselves.

Maybe Jann Wenner needs to be dragged to a Rush concert to really appreciate how great they are.

Posted by Barney on Tuesday, 09.23.08 @ 08:07am


I visited the RRHOF a few years ago & discovered, to my amazement, that Rush was not "in". I guess I had assumed that a band with their longevity, talent & loyal fanbase would have been a shoe-in. Ridiculous. Obviously the folks that do the voting have some issue with them, but I'm willing to bet that Alex, Geddy & Neil couldn't care less. They made a conscious decision decades ago not to play the game:
"...one likes to believe in the freedom of music. But glittering prizes and endless compromises shatter the illusion of integrity..."

So, after learning that Rush wasn't a "member" of the hall, I continued to take my tour with a little disappointment. I was then doubly suprised when I turned a corner to see a huge Neil Peart drumset! So they think they can use this as a 'prop' as if it were nothing more than a gimmicky souvenier of a flash-in-the pan act?

Screw Cleveland. I'm going to the Canadian RRHOF where they obviously appreciate talent.
But by all means, go to Cleveland if you want to see the "Chic" disco tribute.

Posted by Matt on Tuesday, 09.23.08 @ 09:08am


BTW - just watched the Rush in Rio - tons of chicks at the concert - yeah, boy!

Posted by Rush Kicks Ass on Tuesday, 09.23.08 @ 21:37pm


"Some Rush fans are taking direct action to get the Boys into the RRHof"

Rush took heavy rock/progressive rock and merged the two into something of their own.
Their fine musicianship has been cited NUMEROUS times by many KNOWN artists as inspirational etc.
RRHOF worthy

Posted by Lynn on Wednesday, 09.24.08 @ 12:20pm


To the dimwits that have dissed Rush over the past year - and you know who you are - looks like the tide is turning...feature article in Rolling Stone mag...

http://s200.photobucket.com/albums/aa16/local_guitarist/

Posted by Rush Kicks Ass on Wednesday, 09.24.08 @ 19:01pm


Rush, the rock group that has stood the test of times (30+ years) this is a group for the ages! from their first album "Rush" to "Snakes and Arrows" They deserve to be in the RRHOF!

Posted by Tim on Friday, 09.26.08 @ 07:29am


Happy New Year and Happy "Rush-Hashana"!!

Posted by Blue Water on Wednesday, 10.1.08 @ 07:06am


Rush is easily and by far the biggest snub of the Hall of Fame. They deserve to be inducted immediatley but some members/snobs of the Hall have flat out admitted they just don't like them because they think their music is plastic and soulless. I think they probably say that about all the progressive/metal type bands they discriminate against. Well....millions think otherwise. Hall members....pull your head out and VOTE YES for Rush........I am a long-time fan and historian of rock and roll and I approve this message.

Posted by bquest on Tuesday, 10.7.08 @ 13:37pm


Rush was a relly good band but does'nt the lead singer sound like a girl? Rush will go in the Rock Hall but it is something to think about. Jefferson Airplane also sounded like girls.

Posted by Mike on Saturday, 10.11.08 @ 16:38pm


They've had the same lineup for more than 30 years and continue to make great music on their own terms.

Posted by Bruce Helmick on Tuesday, 10.21.08 @ 22:06pm


I have to admit, I didn't grow up listening to Rush, even though their glory days were my teenage and college years. But Moving Pictures is an amazing album and got them the exposure they needed to attract more fans.

I recently attended a Rush concert and was blown away! These guys are extraordinary musicians! Neil Pert may be the greatest drummer alive and Neil Leifson certainly can be considered one of the great guitarists of rock! And Geddy Lee, ok, so not everyone likes his voice, but talk about unique vocals! And, the guy can flat out make the bass guitar sound like rythm guitar when he wants to!

There is no doubt in my mind after seeing them in person that they are RRHF calibre! It's actually amazing to me that they aren't in. Lyrically the music is intelligent, intstumentally it's outstanding and the longevity of the band is solid. Where they "chart toppers"? No. But that is not a criteria as far as I can see. What they have been is very, very influential on other artists that have followed. I'm not sure there is a band in history outside if Zepplin that you could point to and legitimatly argue that all the players , bassist, drummer and guitarist could all be in the top ten all time greats of their instrument of choice! I know, I know....you CAN argue that point....but Rush fans could definatly state their case for the three talented men!

End the politics, snobbery or whatever it is and put Rush where they should be. IN the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame!

Posted by Scott Harbison on Friday, 10.31.08 @ 09:13am


How is Rush not in?
The Hall of Fame operators apparently do not have the Spirit of Radio and do not have respect for those living in the limelight and whatever Tom Sawyer line could be applied here.

Posted by R.S. on Friday, 01.2.09 @ 13:00pm


That kit girl or guy, is an idiot. A. Instrument wankery wow you obviously haven't heard moving pictures, 2112, Permanent Waves and countless others. How bout you go and listen to yyz in rio on you tube and come and say instrument wankery again. B. Theyre not even all that much prog rock i mean listen to Working Man, Spirit Of radio, plus others im to lazy to write, and say the same thing again. Not to mention that you forgot about Yes.. So just shut your mouth, you know nothing of music

Posted by alex on Tuesday, 01.6.09 @ 20:14pm


Rush does not deserve to be the "hall of fame"... because the hall of fame represents the worst of the industry that they successfully ignored for their entire career. There are many talented artists in the hall of fame, but they are not talented because they are in the hall of fame, they were before it came along and will be after it is closed... the hall of fame is sucking off of them.

So let it be. At first I was pissed, now I think it is appropriate and an honor in its own way. Rush is apart from the machine or corporate music.

Posted by tfantz on Monday, 01.12.09 @ 21:26pm





Posted by tfantz on Monday, 01.12.09 @

21:26pmRush does not deserve to be the "hall of fame"... because the hall of fame represents the worst of the industry that they successfully ignored for their entire career. There are many talented artists in the hall of fame, but they are not talented because they are in the hall of fame, they were before it came along and will be after it is closed... the hall of fame is sucking off of them.

So let it be. At first I was pissed, now I think it is appropriate and an honor in its own way. Rush is apart from the machine or corporate music.

-----------------------------------------------------
lol Rush is HOLLYWOOD HYPE Great band but HYPE
I would say 75% of the RHOF should be there..
Some that are not the should be there..


Posted by mrxyz on Monday, 01.12.09 @ 22:52pm


My opinion has now changed, now I NEVER want to see Rush in the HOF. I would be embarrassed for them to be included with the likes of Run DMC. The best part of it is that I actually bet a friend a couple of years back that Run DMC would be in before Rush...as a joke!

Posted by bigK on Wednesday, 01.14.09 @ 21:28pm


Once again, the Hall of Shame's empty suits are sitting around discussing who will be inducted in 2009. One suit says, how about Run DMC. Hey that'll work. Maybe with the help of Aerosmith we can make a go of it. Then again, a drum machine, a pre recorded guitar riff, and two microphones should do the trick! I have a better idea Armani! How about inducting a band! A ROCK BAND! A band that has been together going on 4 decades with the same lineup! Still tours selling out arenas, not bars! A band that has transcended time having adapted through 4 generations of music. The 70's with the whole disco thing. The 80's with the punk rock, new wave and hair band metal thing. And the 90's grunge movement on to today without ever selling themselves, their music or their fans out! Stadiums and arena's however, YES!!! Having one of the most loyal fan bases in the world, these are three of the most accomplished, respected, and influential musicians ( don't say musicians too loud, the "others" might get offended) to ever grace rock music! That's what were talking about, isn't it! Rock Music! Well I'm talking about RUSH!!!!!! RUSH!!!!! RUSH!!!!! Get them in there! They deserve it! They are way over due! The people want it and you know it! Don't let politics and your inflated egos dictate what is right! This is a band so great that they should have their own wing! Neil Peart should get in by himself as he is the greatest rock drummer ever! Study up suits, you guys are really making a mockery of the Hall with these inductee selections. Due the Hall a favor. Add some instant credibility, add RUSH!!!!

Posted by Robert on Thursday, 01.15.09 @ 03:00am


Rush is the opposite of Hollywood hype....that makes little sense and is bordering on stupidity..anyway,

"Each member of Metallica was also asked what band he’d like to see in the Rock Hall. They lobbied for Motorhead (Hetfield), Deep Purple (Ulrich), Rush (Hammett) and UFO (bassist Robert Trujillo.)" - Rollingstone.com, January 15, 2009

Posted by Rush is a band on Saturday, 01.24.09 @ 12:53pm


Here is the link to the article:

//www.rollingstone.com/rockdaily/index.php/2009/01/15/metallica-want-to-avoid-drama-of-a-van-halen-at-rock-and-roll-hall-of-fame-induction/

Posted by Rush is a band on Saturday, 01.24.09 @ 12:55pm


Top 3 Best Concerts EVER!:

1. Jimi Hendrix at Woodstock
2. Rush in Rio
3. AC/DC at Donnignton

Posted by Mike on Wednesday, 01.28.09 @ 15:12pm


ROLL THE BONES!!!!!!

EARTHSHINE!!!!!!!!!!

THE TREES!!!!!!!!!!!

Posted by Mike on Tuesday, 02.3.09 @ 16:03pm


Yeah.. they're #1 on the rateitall top 120 most deserving... Geez, a 16% chance of getting in is pretty shocking.

Posted by ray on Monday, 03.2.09 @ 03:02am


Top 5 Rock Drummers:

1.Keith Moon
2.Neil Peart
3.John Bonham
4.Bill Ward
5.Ringo Starr

Posted by S.R on Wednesday, 03.18.09 @ 17:21pm


Favorite Rock Drummers:
1) John Bonham
2) Carmine Appice
3) Max Weinberg
4) Neil Pert
5) Ginger Baker
Honorable Mentions: Ringo Starr and Keith Moon, all great drummers, classics.

Posted by Jonny on Wednesday, 03.18.09 @ 17:28pm


Jonny / S.R. -

Hung up on drummers tonight? Mind if I toss in a few names?


Some modern drummers nobody mentions, but who perhaps deserve a second look (no particular order here)

Alex Van Halen
Matt Cameron
Dave Abbrusezzee
Tommy Lee
Lars Ulrich
Jimmy Chamberlain
Eric Kretz
Barrett Martin

IMO - Most underrated drummer ever (anytime) - Mitch Mitchell

Posted by Cheesecrop on Wednesday, 03.18.09 @ 17:56pm


Gee rock drummes huh no order kinda
Hal Blaine
Sandy Neslon
Ron Wilson
Jeff Porcaro
Keith Moon
Charlie Watts
Ginger Baker
Mitch Mitchell
Joe Pollard
John Densmore
Dewey Martin
Ringo Star
Dennis wilson

Posted by mrxyz on Wednesday, 03.18.09 @ 18:11pm


Panama Francis
Earl Palmer
Scotty Moore

Posted by Philip on Wednesday, 03.18.09 @ 18:36pm


tonight it is drummers and tomorrow will be tambourine players. LOL

I agree with most of your guys drummers and I would like to add Rick Allen to that list.

Posted by Brian on Wednesday, 03.18.09 @ 18:42pm


Vinnie Appice
Bill Bruford
Dave Lombardo

Posted by S.R on Wednesday, 03.18.09 @ 18:43pm


Heh,and maybe friday,it'll be harmonica players.

Posted by S.R on Wednesday, 03.18.09 @ 19:25pm


S.R./Cheesecake: I totally meant Mitch Mitchell as my 5th, not Ginger Baker. I agree w, you Cheesecake, Mitch Mitchell is a total badass and completely underrated. Ginger Baker, on the other is great and all, but maybe a little overated

Posted by Jonny on Wednesday, 03.18.09 @ 22:52pm


My Top 15 Drummers in No Paticular Order
1. John Bonham
2. Neil Peart
3. Mitch Mitchell
4. Tommy Lee
5. Keith Moon
6. Phil Rudd
7. Ringo Star
8. Alex Van Halen
9. Ginger Baker
10. Steven Adler
11. Chris Slade
12. Matt Sourum
13. Hail Blaine
14. Ron Wilson
15. Dewey Martin

Posted by Mike on Monday, 03.23.09 @ 18:11pm


Mitch Mitchell is very underated but also overated. My friend thinks because Mitch Mitchell and Noel Redding were in the Jimi Hendrix Experience means they are the best drummer and bassist of all time. BULL!

Posted by Mike on Monday, 03.23.09 @ 18:13pm


Nice list,I like it.

Posted by S.R on Monday, 03.23.09 @ 18:15pm


Mike...you might want to add Tony Thompson, Carmine Appice and Cozy Powell in there somewhere, too...

Posted by Gitarzan on Monday, 03.23.09 @ 18:19pm


Yeah, I forgot. Looking back at the list I see I also forgot Lars Ulrich.

Posted by Mike on Monday, 03.23.09 @ 18:20pm


best put in
Richard "Pistol" Allen {Funk Brothers}

Posted by mrxyz on Monday, 03.23.09 @ 18:22pm


Uriel Jones {funk BROTHERS MOTOWN}
CHARLES CONNOR {litte Richards early drummer}

Posted by mrxyz on Monday, 03.23.09 @ 18:27pm


I might add: Cosmo
Nick Mason
Buddy Rich
Max Roach
Phil Collins(with Genesis)

Posted by S.R on Monday, 03.23.09 @ 18:37pm


Good list just the same, though...

Posted by Gitarzan on Monday, 03.23.09 @ 18:41pm




Good list just the same, though...

Posted by Gitarzan on Monday, 03.23.09 @ 18:41pm


true

Posted by mrxyz on Monday, 03.23.09 @ 21:58pm


Guys - aren't we missing someone? Arguably the greatest Rock drummer of all time - Carl Palmer.

Posted by Dameon on Tuesday, 03.24.09 @ 06:00am


Oh Sh*t - what about Ian Paice of Deep Purple? I would certainly rank him higher than half that list. No disrespect Mike to your list! And S.R.; if you are going to add Buddy Rich here, then you have to also add Gene Kruppa.

It is so difficult to come up with these lists.

Posted by Dameon on Tuesday, 03.24.09 @ 06:06am


As far as drummers, I think Clem Burke of Blondie is pretty damn good.

Posted by Paul in KY on Tuesday, 03.24.09 @ 06:19am


It's harder with drummers then with singers or guitarists. I also forgot Bun E. Carlos of Cheap Trick.

Posted by Mike on Tuesday, 03.24.09 @ 15:56pm


It's harder with drummers then with singers or guitarists. I also forgot Bun E. Carlos of Cheap Trick.

Posted by Mike on Tuesday, 03.24.09 @ 15:56pm




best add Levon Helm's of the "Band"
and Dave Clark of Dave Clark Five lol

Posted by mrxyz on Tuesday, 03.24.09 @ 16:30pm


Favorite Band: Rush

Favorite Drummer: Stewart Copeland - he is just blazing and I believe not mentioned above.

Posted by Rush is a Band on Wednesday, 03.25.09 @ 13:11pm


If you're favorite band is Rush and your name is Rush is a Band why isn't Neil Peart your favorite?

Posted by Mike on Saturday, 03.28.09 @ 06:46am


My favorite band is by far Rush...band means ensemlbe, the whole, etc...but when strictly looking at a drummer's style (i.e. an individual), certainly I like Peart, but I just like Copeland's style better....In any event, it is interesting that Metallica is now getting inducted, a band that clearly has had tremendous influence from Rush and even thanked Rush in their liner notes of an album...ooohhh the irony.

Posted by Rush is a band on Saturday, 04.4.09 @ 14:55pm


well hatfield just read off a list at the end of his speech who he thinks should be intducted...and guess who? rush!!

Posted by antwashere2293 on Sunday, 04.5.09 @ 00:01am


I couldn't agree more with James Hetfield's list of bands that should have been inducted long before Metallica.

But wait!....there's hope, now that James and the boys have been inducted they get to vote!

Oops, sorry....if these bands don't get nominated by the 30 or so stuck-up, arrogant, morons that make-up the nominating committee than they will never get the chance to vote them in....and that IS the problem.

The committee doesn't even follow their own criteria for induction of "innovation, influence and perpetuation" with many of the bands or artists that have been inducted. It's based on who they like and don't like.

There has been a huge outcry for these bands to be inducted by not only the fans but musicians like James and his band mates that goes totally ignored by these assholes.

But it's their club and there is nothing we can do about it.

It just keeps getting worse and worse. The word "Rock" in the name Rock and Roll Hall of Fame is the word that is most ignored and left out. "Rock Music" is very poorly represented in the hall. Maybe when they came up with their lame criteria that they don't even follow, they should have mentioned that the possible nominees had to at least "Rock" to get in, then maybe all this other crap they have been inducting would not be there.

But then again they probably would have ignored that criteria also.

Long live the People's Choice Rock Legends Hall of Fame.

"Hey people are you ready to get in the streets, to be your own police, to stand up and fight for your rights"
Grand Funk Railroad

SpaceTrucker

Posted by SpaceTrucker on Sunday, 04.5.09 @ 12:16pm


Amen, BrotherTrucker!!!

Posted by Gitarzan on Sunday, 04.5.09 @ 12:26pm


Rush will never be inducted as long as Jann Wenner and his cabal of aging hippies from Rolling Stone call the shots.

Long ago they 'decided' what Rock music is and what it isn't, and that defines who is inducted and who is not.

In a nutshell, if you regularly express sentiments such as those found in songs like "Working Class Hero" or "Shake Your Hand, Share the Land" you will get in. White middle class/upper middle class guilt plays a huge role in who is inducted and who is not.

For whatever reason, people who can really play their instruments tend to rub these folks the wrong way. Peruse Rolling Stone and their record guides, particularly the scandalous first edition, and you will see that being able to play your instrument really well is largely considered to be a negative. Apparently it offends the sensibilities of these self-appointed arbiters of taste that some musicians actually place a premium on musicianship.

Rush is far from the only example...there are many deserving artists/bands who are continually denied admission based on these criteria. Deep Purple isn't in the rock hall...are you kidding me?

Influence is said to play a major role, and yet we are beginning to see a generation of musicians inducted who cite the many deserving (and excluded) artists and bands as primary influences.

There are so many deserving artists who are missing from the hall, in various genres. To name just a few: Rush, Genesis, ELP, King Crimson, Todd Rundgren, Iggy Pop & the Stooges, Alice Cooper, Judas Priest, Iron Maiden, and I'm sure I'm unintentionally snubbing more myself with this partial list.

In the final result it doesn't mean much: the bands that influenced new generations of musicians influenced them whether or not the rock hall deigns to acknowledge them. The rock hall itself is largely seen for what it is: a self-fulfilling aggrandizement of the egos of Jann Wenner and his toadies.

It is ironic in the extreme that Jann and his cohorts will stridently claim that their judgment is an affirmation of the sensibilities of the common folk, yet they spend very little if any effort in understanding what we actually value...

Posted by John Hathaway on Sunday, 04.5.09 @ 13:09pm


Rush have sold 40 million albums world-wide and are one of the the most influencial progressive rock bands of all time. How has the hall of shame ignored them? We all know that progressive rock is most likely the most hated genre among the commitee. Pink Floyd is the only progressive band in the hall. Basically they ignore the whole genre after Floyd, which makes me pretty freaking mad. How can you call yourselves a "Rock and Roll Hall of Fame" and ignore one of it's greatest subgenres. Don't even let me get started on how many metal bands have also been forgotten by the hall of shame.

Posted by Dude Man on Monday, 05.4.09 @ 13:29pm


Chris on Sunday, 01.21.07 @ 09:10am WROTE THIS:

"No influence? When Soundgarden, Nine Inch Nails, Rage Against the Machine, Metallica, Radiohead, Tool, & Pearl Jam all get in, & they all cite Rush as a rather key influence(as they've all done), then maybe the thoughts on the band will change."

He was dead-on and Vindicated (as is every other Rush fan) by recent comments (on this very site!)
by the words of James Hetfield!

"We’re very honored to be recognized. There’s a whole genre around us that hopefully we can invite through the door. Hopefully there will be recognition for some of the bands that have changed music and changed people’s lives. That’s what I think the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame should be about. There are certainly a lot of bands that aren’t in there that I can’t belive aren’t: Motorhead, Rush, Judas Priest, Deep Purple. But for us to be in there, hopefully we can bring some awareness to heavy stuff." - James Hetfield


http://www.futurerocklegends.com/blog_files/Jason_Newsted_likely_to_perform.html

Posted by Les on Thursday, 05.21.09 @ 17:18pm


When, not if, but when Rush gets in, I hope that that institutes a time when other worthy bands such as Genesis, Yes, and OMGJethroTullhowaretheynotinalready (yes, that should be one word) are so honored. As much as I love Chrissie Hynde, (I am about thisclose to being restraining order material for her), she shouldn't have been put in before the artists I have already mentioned.

Posted by Michael on Tuesday, 06.30.09 @ 18:43pm


http://www.rollingstone.com/news/story/21743794/rush_vs_rolling_stone_a_qualitative_analysis

Here's an interesting article. It's definately worth a read.

Posted by Dude Man on Thursday, 07.23.09 @ 23:17pm


Rock & Roll Jeopardy
Category: If They Collaborated

If Rush and Nirvana were to collaborate, the result would be...

What is "Smells Like Teen Spirit Of Radio?"

Posted by Aaron O'Donnell on Friday, 07.24.09 @ 23:39pm


Rock & Roll Jeopardy
Category: If They Collaborated

If Rush and Robert Plant were to do an album together, it would be called...

What is "Moving Pictures At Eleven?"

Posted by Aaron O'Donnell on Saturday, 07.25.09 @ 17:35pm


are you kidding me rushs chance of getting is only 16% there they most talented band of all time and there chances are 16% this is why the rock n roll hall of fame is a joke

Posted by hunter on Saturday, 08.8.09 @ 08:26am


The Rock and Roll personnel who admitt bands into the Hall of Fame have some issues they need to fix. Rush who is one of the bands with the most studio albums made and who's live shows puts the meaning into the word ROCK should be without a doubt inducted in the HOF.

When you don't consider longevity, passion, individual talent, fans, and success as an important part of music then I can understand some of bands and musicians that have been inducted in the past, but RUSH who fall into every category above and define what being a Role Model for all should be with their music talent should be a no brainer.

The ROR HOF needs and overhaul and let the fans become the deciding factor.

Posted by tbrcky on Tuesday, 08.25.09 @ 11:04am


"Geddy Lee sounds almost exactly like Burke Shelley, and they're both bassists."- William

Just an old quote I find interesting. I had always wondered why Rush never cited Budgie as an influence. Geddy does look, sound, and play very similar to Shelley. Though Rush are prog and Budgie metal.

Posted by Dude Man on Sunday, 09.27.09 @ 21:03pm


kit, u r a twit. Only the first four years of rush's albums had anything to do with ayn rayd. not all of their songs were scifi in those years either. moving pictures was the last album with any trace of sci fi, in red barchetta. stop criticizing the first 6 six albums and look at their other 20.

Posted by JM on Sunday, 10.4.09 @ 10:04am


Kit is just a rush hater....look, when Metallica gets inducted and says that Rush should be in...it tells you something. Who should you listen to? Kit from Arkansas or wherever he is from or rock legends that have actually already been inducted? BTW, that question was rhetorical....

Posted by Blue Rush on Wednesday, 11.11.09 @ 15:13pm


BTW, for thos who do not know, this is the quote: "...There are certainly a lot of bands that aren’t in there that I can’t belive aren’t: Motorhead, Rush, Judas Priest, Deep Purple. But for us to be in there, hopefully we can bring some awareness to heavy stuff." - James Hetfield

Posted by Blue Rush on Wednesday, 11.11.09 @ 15:15pm


Definitely the best 3 man rock band of all time.
Tremendous musical talent, and unquestionably the best drummer in rock history (my opinion).
Why aren't these guys in?

Posted by Wayne on Sunday, 11.29.09 @ 22:55pm


I certaintly agree Rush needs to be in a Hall such as this. A Hall without them is barely a Hall at all. They have great influence on some of today's most famous bands, were very popular, and can still release new material. This embodies all the logical criteria for induction in my opinion.

Posted by Dr. W on Tuesday, 12.15.09 @ 15:17pm


I agree Frank Marino should be in, but does anyone really know who else was in that band? It was pretty much a revolving cast.

Posted by Vilos Cohaagen on Saturday, 01.16.10 @ 10:43am


Whoever said Rush isn't/wasn't an influence on culture is a fool.

A) Neil Peart is known as one of the (if not the) greatest drummers of all time for a reason.
B) Check out the influences of Metallica. More than one member says they were inspired by a member of Rush. Same goes for a multitude of other bands.
C) They've got the 4th highest amount of consecutive Gold singles

Oh well. They are a fairly polarising band. Ya either love them or you hate them. While the musical talents seem to be fairly well recognized (my sister, a drummer, isn't really into prog rock, however when I was watching R30, she was amazed at Peart), the voice of Lee/lyrics of Peart have always seemed to be debated.

Posted by brendon on Thursday, 01.28.10 @ 22:21pm


Oh, and those saying that Yes/Elp/Genesis should be inducted before Rush because they came before Rush/partially influenced Rush should think about this...considering all the bands in the RRHoF having mentioned being influenced by Rush, shouldn't Rush have gotten in before them?

Posted by brendon on Thursday, 01.28.10 @ 22:46pm


Rush!
To stay with same line up for 35yrs is an acomplishment all on it's own..I am a huge Rush fan and love all Rush music.I remember having a 6 foot poster on my wall when I was a teenager. At that time Rush were argubly one of the biggest bands in the world..To have that status in any period of time is worthy of something..
Rush is a band you either love them or hate them...But the ones who love them are probably some of the most passionate fans anywhere..Right from there self titled debut Album to Snakes and Arrows I have loved this band..I have seen them about 10 times and will continue to see them.
Rush are deserving to be in the Hof..They work hard and have never sold out or compromised there art. They are 3 of the talented musicians rock has ever produced. Metalica to the foo fighter have named them as extreme influences..
I have never been a big Zepplin fan but know they were more than deserving to be in the hof. I wish the none Rush fans can also see that in tnem..

Posted by princeinexile on Friday, 01.29.10 @ 19:28pm


Rush deserves in, but I definitely tired of them quick. Too many synthesisers and the vocals get annoying. Great band, lots of influence, but I really can't say I like them that much. Although they were a very important part of one of the greatest movies of all time, I Love You Man.

Posted by slappin da bass on Saturday, 01.30.10 @ 16:09pm


<<Rush deserves in, but I definitely tired of them quick. Too many synthesisers and the vocals get annoying. Great band, lots of influence, but I really can't say I like them that much...>>

Posted by slappin da bass on Saturday, 01.30.10 @ 16:09pm

And I thought I was the only one who thought this. I like their music, but after a while--call it "the Rush sound?"--it all sounds the same.

As for greatest drummers, I always thought Mick Fleetwood belonged on the list. But then, that may be just me...

Posted by Joe on Saturday, 01.30.10 @ 17:25pm


"Like I said REM was decent, but not monumental and again - how often do you think people pop in old REM cruising on the open highway- doubt it! But, no one could ever get tired cruising on the open road with Red Barhcetta or Spirit of Radio at a volume of 10. I mean is there really a comparison - NOT!

You don't think Rush belongs in the hall b/c you do not like there music personally, it is that simple. But, newsflash, no one cares what you think...well, that's not true...Kit cares about himself, we all know that. You throw around some big SAT words and think you are some bigshot - you call Rush arrogant??

Oh, and anyone that thinks Judas Priest or Iron Maiden belongs in the hall before Rush loses all credibility - those bands were gimmicky and talentless....just like Kiss and Motley Crue."

From dictionary.com: "Monumental": One of the definitions is "of historical and enduring significance." R.E.M. Priest and Maiden all fit the bill, and possibly Kiss and Crue (Kit and William will chew me out for this I know.) As Kit, Dezmond and William very kindly pointed out to you, Anonymous/Michael, you moron, R.E.M. were one of the pioneers of alternative, and Murmur was a mixture of post-punk and folk-rock=Innovative. They influenced almost every alternative band that followed them, and have a catalogue of great songs. You threw out a couple of radio hits (yes, "Shiny Happy People" is cheesy) to try and make your point, but just looked stupid in the process. You're probably too narrow-minded to understand the importance or greatness of Murmur or Automatic For The People. You said that nobody will care about Judas Priest or Iron Maiden in 50 years and that they have no talent? On the contrary, both bands are stocked with talent. Maiden in particular is huge outside of the U.S. Judas Priest fused together the biker gear (leather, spikes, studs and motorcycle love) with twin lead guitars, made metal even heavier and louder by stripping away all remaining elements of the blues. In the process, they created the New Wave of British Heavy Metal, which fused Black Sabbath with punk. Iron Maiden were one of the standouts of that scene, and found the most success and longevity. Their first album alone was showing great ambition, as they were among the first to fuse metal, prog and punk together successfully (see the song "Phantom of the Opera.") If you asked Metallica, I think they'd say they owe much more to Priest and Maiden than to Rush. Though I'm not much of a Rush fan, they do belong, though after the early prog bands, as Kit says. In conclusion: You're a moron, your ignorance is appalling and your credibility is "0."

Posted by Sam on Thursday, 02.4.10 @ 20:33pm


After reading some of the post on this page, everything from Rush's resume, to longevity, to influences, to musicianship has be said why Rush is so deserving of being inducted into the RRHOF.

I play drums (20 Years)and Guitar (3 Years) and have been playing off and on in bands for a good 15 years. I would never profess to being an expert on who is a great drummer, elec/bass guitar player but I feel I have enough sense to know the difference between average, good and great musicians. Lee/Lifeson/Peart are great musicians. On stage they are amazing to watch.

Rush belongs in the RRHOF (no brainer) but I couldn't care less if they got in. To me, Rush is recognized by there fans and their peers (other musicians) as one of the greatest rock bands ever. That's good enough for me and hopefully most of you here agree. To me the RRHOF is a tainted institution in need of new management.

Posted by Jerome Dukes on Saturday, 02.6.10 @ 02:45am


I am a fan of this band - they're marvellous!

Nonetheless, while I think that they may one day be inducted into the RRHOF, I would not obsess over same.

That Rush has been able to realize their creative goal of finding and securing an audience 'en masse' truly is fame enough for any commercial act, I would imagine.

Indeed, that these three men have been able to realize their musical ambitions and win fame and fortune in the process truly is distinguishment and prestige enough for anyone.

Remember the discipline itself (Rush has): it gives rise to the glory of the music. For this principle alone, such honours can wait (forever, if need be - that the authors' music is known is the true glory).

To All Of You: May All My Favourites Be Your Favourites Too, Regardless Of Age, Current Zeitgeist or Genre.

Tommy D.
British Columbia

Posted by Tommy on Monday, 02.15.10 @ 22:02pm


1. Rush should be inducted into the RRHOF because of its influence on so many bands
2. Punk was a backlash against talent, many of the punk artists have even stated this fact, so I would be happy to say Punk was against Rush. Hmm...In a way, Rush influenced Punk to be as unlike them as possible by playing as bad as they could since Rush is a technically perfect band.
3. Rush has 24 gold albums and 14 platinum albums without even trying. Imagine if they ever tried to make a hit album.
4. Neil Peart (pronounced P-ear-t) is listed in the top 3 of almost every "Greatest Drummer of All-Time" lists
5. Geddy Lee is listed in the top 3 of almost every "Greatest Bass Players of All-Time" lists
6. Rush was inducted into the Juno Hall of Fame in 1994.
7. Rush's awards for their talent are too numerous to state here. Check "Rush Awards" on Wikipedia. I will state that in some categories, Geddy and Neil have awards that say they are no longer eligible to win the award again (because they won so many times).
8. Rush was named "Band of the Millenium" by the Harvard Lampoon.

I could go on...but I think you get the idea. Why are they not in the RRHOF yet?

Posted by Byron on Sunday, 02.21.10 @ 00:30am


Byron, you gotta be careful with that award stuff for a couple reasons: one, the trend in Hall of Famers does not really favor award winners; two, awards like the Junos and Juno Hall Of Fame are little more than Canadians honoring Canadians for being Canadians and NOT Americans. In other words, they're of very little true substance.

Posted by Philip on Sunday, 02.21.10 @ 02:11am


One thing should be cleared up...Geddy Lee is NOT one of the 3 best bass players ever. I would think he's not even in the top 25...

Where do these guys come up with this stuff...???

Posted by Gitarzan on Sunday, 02.21.10 @ 09:37am


Gitarzan,

You struck a nerve with me with the Geddy Lee comment. He is definitely a top bassist in Rock Music. Top 25 somewhere for sure. You can tend to be a little arrogant with your assessment of musicians sometimes and I believe it to be your dislike for that particular band or artist or genre even.

Awhile back we were talking about Michael Schenker and you said something to the effect that, he was pretty good. Schenker and Geddy are both phenomenal players in their field and are revered by must all rock musicians.

So your statement about Geddy of,

"One thing should be cleared up...Geddy Lee is NOT one of the 3 best bass players ever. I would think he's not even in the top 25...

Where do these guys come up with this stuff...???"

is pretty arrogant. You are wrong on this one. I dare you to ask any accomplished musician about Geedy and I'm pretty sure your not going to get anything but praise of the highest nature.

SpaceTrucker

Posted by SpaceTrucker on Sunday, 02.21.10 @ 18:40pm


Duh,

The last comment about Geddy Lee should read "Nothing" but praise of the highest nature.

C-YA!

Posted by SpaceTrucker on Sunday, 02.21.10 @ 19:07pm


I think it's you who are wrong. I like Rush just fine, and Geddy Lee fits in the framework of what they do very well...but top 3???? Based on what? I've heard some pretty phenomenal bass players over the years, at least a dozen who have used it as a lead instrument successfully. Alex Lifeson is a very good guitar player, but his name is rarely mentioned when it comes to the ones who are truly great.

Lee and Peart form one of the truly grat backbeats in rock music, and the three of them put out some serious music...but calling Geddy Lee on of the top three bassists is absurd. If that makes me arrogant, then there are probably more players who think the same thing who are "arrogant' too, I guess...I can live with that.

Posted by Gitarzan on Sunday, 02.21.10 @ 19:25pm


..."grat" should be "great"!

Posted by Gitarzan on Sunday, 02.21.10 @ 19:26pm


Hey Gitarzan,

It's hard to get all the spelling right when posting a passionate statement sometimes. I feel really stupid after I proof read it and then post it, only to find a type-o. But we can all usually decipher it. Thank God for spell check!

Anyway the top three ranking for Geddy is subjective of course. My beef was your statement that he probably doesn't even make the top 25. I'm pretty sure he does.

So, just for the hell of it I went to Google punched in 'Top Rock Bass Players' read about ten post's (of course this is unofficial and random) but the general consensus was Geddy between 6th and 10th.

So not only am I right but I believe most people would agree that he definitely belongs in the top 25. Tag your it!

Your friend,
SpaceTrucker

P.S. I apologize for any type-o's in advance.

Posted by SpaceTrucker on Sunday, 02.21.10 @ 20:21pm


I've seen lists like you've mentioned that don't even mention the likes of Louis Johnson, James Jamerson, Tony Levin, Stu Hamm, John Entwistle, Jaco Pastorius, Alphonso Johnson, Stanley Clarke, Leland Sklar, etc..., just to name of a few. Lists like that, even though they're subjective, in my opinion are someone's idea of a joke. Rolling Stone magazine had the audacity to publish a "100 Greatest Guitar Players" list...and it was totally crazy!

I'm not saying Geddy Lee isn't a very good player. I'm saying he's part of a fraternity that has some pretty legendary players...

Posted by Gitarzan on Sunday, 02.21.10 @ 21:56pm


Gitarzan,

There you go again, "Geddy Lee is a very good player" that's the best you can come up with? He is a phenomenal bassist, much more then "very good"

Look I agree with you on these list's for the most part they are more for controversy than anything else, but when you say'

"One thing should be cleared up...Geddy Lee is NOT one of the 3 best bass players ever. I would think he's not even in the top 25...

Where do these guys come up with this stuff...???"

it gets under my skin because again Geddy is a top rock music bassist. One of the list's I saw did mention some of those names you mentioned.

Maybe this is where the confusion is coming from, I'm only guessing, but I think the comment about "Top three bass players' is refering to rock music, this site is called 'Future ROCK Legends' isn't it.

Your list mentions all kinds of players that are session players and Jazz musicians, so maybe the original comment got under your skin since it said "All-time bass players not Rock players.

But after saying that I think Geddy could hold his own pretty well with most of the guys you mentioned.

Okay I've said my piece about this, I'm done with it,you can take it from here.

SpaceTrucker

Posted by SpaceTrucker on Monday, 02.22.10 @ 13:12pm


Well, at least I acknowledged that he's very good...I reserve phrases like "phenomenal" for a very few artists (as an example, if it's still on youtube check out Stu Hamm playing "Linus & Lucy...by himself. THAT'S phenomenal). You're also right about me including different genres...happens all the time on this site.

I think your vantage point and mine are probably different, which there's nothing wrong with that. I took the time to study a whole lot of bass players for my own grasp of the instrument. If that makes me seem a little "arrogant", then guilty as charged...

Posted by Gitarzan on Monday, 02.22.10 @ 13:31pm


Wow Gitarzan,

If watching Stuart Hamm playing the Linus and Lucy theme floats your boat, your right, our vantage points aren't even on the same planet.

Holy shit dude, I'll take Geedy Lee tearing it up on YYZ over Linus and Lucy any day. Check out Geddy performing YYZ from Rush in Rio on youtube. Alex and Neil are pretty F@#king good to.

It's PHENOMENAL!

Now I'm done.

SpaceTrucker

Posted by SpaceTrucker on Monday, 02.22.10 @ 19:09pm


Wow, Spacetrucker!!! I'll bet there's a chance you didn't even look at it, did you? It's not so much "Linus & Lucy"...it's HOW he played it! Check this guy out...I saw him at Red Rocks about 30 years ago. he put on the most incredible display of bass playing I'd ever seen at the time...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=CslkVhOoE2U

Posted by Gitarzan on Monday, 02.22.10 @ 19:55pm


I checked it out, and those three musicians play very well within the template that is Rush. As a contrast, check out this "jam session" with Eddie Van Halen, Jan Hammer, and Tony Levin at a Les Paul tribute...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=g1VOcZ280vA

Once again...Geddy Lee is a very good bassist and Rush is a very good group. Is he the best bassist I've ever seen? Not even close...

Posted by Gitarzan on Monday, 02.22.10 @ 20:12pm


SpaceTrucker...one other thing to realize...these and usually everything else I say (unless I can back it with fact) is my opinion. I'm certainly not trying to dissuade you as to what you like or to convert you to my way of thinking. I will most certainly give examples that will clarify what I'm talking about when I can. Call it arrogant or opinionated or whatever...it's just Gitarzan being Gitarzan...

Posted by Gitarzan on Monday, 02.22.10 @ 20:20pm


Gitarzan,

I would never dishonor our relationship on this site by not watching something you recommended before I comment on it. He played one part of the song with his left hand and the melody with his right, I get it, he's phenomenal(there's that word again), wrong music though, I don't care if he plays with his toes, I am not interested in the type of music he plays.

Yes that's narrow minded, but I'm doing real good where I'm at as a Hard Rock and Heavy metal fan and Geddy Lee is AWESOME!

Look you and I are music lovers, just different music and that's cool. I really enjoy sparring with with you though.

Until the next epic match,

SpaceTrucker

Posted by SpaceTrucker on Monday, 02.22.10 @ 20:22pm


S.T...I'm hip to what you're saying. Being a very long time player, I go back to something Darrell Abbott once said...

"If you pick up an instrument and attempt to play, none of it sucks."

I've covered a lot of different genres over the years, and the funny thing about that Linus and Lucy bit was when I first saw it, I didn't really dwell on what he was playing...I just thought he must have two brains...LOL!!!!

Darrell Abbott...The "Dimebag"...now there was a PLAYER!!!!

Posted by Gitarzan on Monday, 02.22.10 @ 20:28pm


Another thing...if you get the chance go to Wikipedia and check out the list of people Stu Hamm has played with...considering your focal point of music, I'd think you'd be very interested...

Posted by Gitarzan on Monday, 02.22.10 @ 20:37pm


Isn't Geddy Lee also playing about 3 other instruments when he's playing bass (at least in the live shows)?

Posted by Paul in KY on Tuesday, 02.23.10 @ 07:09am


Yes, he does...he's a very talented musician. He doesn't play them all at the same time, though...LOL!!!!

Posted by Gitarzan on Tuesday, 02.23.10 @ 07:30am


Gitarzan,

I was thinking about our Geddy Lee discussion and you mention the possibility of Stu Hamm pocessing two brains because he was doing two different things on the bass at the same time, that mad me chukle.

After some thought I said to myself when RUSH plays live Geddy plays the bass, Taurus Pedals and sings at the same time on certain songs. I didn't think it was worth a post.

Then I saw Paul's post.

And then your post.

Gitarzan, Have you ever seen RUSH live?

As I said, Geddy does those three things at the same time. An above average bass line, pedals for texture and thought provoking lyrics.

My God, the man has THREE brains!

Come on Gitarzan, it's time to jump aboard the Thialand Express on the Passage To Bangkok!

SpaceTrucker

Posted by SpaceTrucker on Tuesday, 02.23.10 @ 16:06pm


Re: Stu Hamm, has playing associations with Steve Vai, Frank Gambale, Joe Satriani, and others ... not a bad cast! as re Rush, not my personal favorites, but they def rate a Yes vote.

btw: congrats Gitarzan, your at top # comments (altho Liam really has more?) ... I been away for awhile!

Posted by Telarock on Tuesday, 02.23.10 @ 16:12pm


"Come on Gitarzan, it's time to jump aboard the Thialand Express on the Passage To Bangkok!"

I don't know...is it nice there this time of year????

Posted by Gitarzan on Tuesday, 02.23.10 @ 17:37pm


Wassup, Telarock!!!! Nice to see you on here again!!! Yep, I've seen Rush live, and playing, manipulating pedals, and singing all at the same time is tricky. Once again, I would never dismiss Geddy Lee as just some ordinary musician...I think those three make a monster sound and I've never been anything but impressed with them.

Posted by Gitarzan on Tuesday, 02.23.10 @ 17:42pm


Good the see you back on the forum Telarock

Posted by mrxyz on Tuesday, 02.23.10 @ 22:34pm


Gitarzan, he's not doing any kind of '1 man band' stuff when they're doing a live show? Like playing a little keyboard when he's not hitting the bass or attaching cymbals to his knees, etc.

Posted by Paul in KY on Wednesday, 02.24.10 @ 06:29am


"They are easily the most influencial and innovative band I have ever seen. Neil Peart is still influencing drummers today, Geddy Lee has the voice unmatched by anyone except Meat Loaf, and Alex Lifeson could arguably rank in with the top 10 guitarists in the past 34 years. Now that's all without mentionning synthesizers." There are in fact a few bands in the "Eligible" department that could definitely top them or give them a run for their money in the influence department. As for most innovative, I take it you've never heard of New Order, Deep Purple, Joy Division, Judas Priest, Iron Maiden, Motorhead... that sentence was pure fanboy nonsense. And I think Ian Gillan could top Geddy Lee in a vocalist's duel, as could Bruce Dickinson, Rob Halford, Freddie Mercury, Steven Tyler, Robert Plant... What you said about Lifeson and Peart is certainly true, but where were you going with the synthesizers bit? What about them?

Posted by Sam on Friday, 02.26.10 @ 16:54pm


"But punk WAS a reaction to the general bloated state of rock and roll in the 70's. It was a combination of aging 60's stars who no longer mattered as much any more, of prog rock excess, etc. It was really all of those things that ushered in the punk movement. It is analogous to what happened when Nirvana hit the scene. Rock had become a bit stale, and needed to be shaken up. That is all it really is. Every ten years or so it is time to clean house, shake things up."-Kit

True. John Lydon (Johnny Rotten) actually likes Pink Floyd, but he was accepted by the other 3 because he wrote "I Hate" on his Pink Floyd T-shirt (I like PF), and apparently Glen Matlock was fired "because he liked the Beatles". There are a great many fans of punk who hate prog and art-rock, and apparently The Clash used to make fun of Yes in interviews.

Posted by Sam on Saturday, 04.10.10 @ 14:12pm


Like who cares if punk artists "hate" Rush or any progressive rock band...it is a free country. But, who cares. Does not make Rush or progressive rock any less or more relevant. All I know is that I got tickets to the "Rush: Beyond the Lighted Stage" premiering at Tribeca Film Festival on April 24th...with guest appearances from other rockers....take that Kit!

Posted by Rush Fan on Tuesday, 04.13.10 @ 19:47pm



Trailer for the new documentary:

http://music.msn.com/video/music/?g=42fbdc32-f1f2-4e81-b504-7e760a21f0e1

Oh, and Rush ranks only third behind the Beatles and Stones for the most consecutive Gold Albums.

In the trailer, Rush receives interviews and praise from Foo Fighters, Kiss, Pantera, Rage Against the Machine, Smashing Pumpkins, and Metallica - the last band calling Rush a "Huge" influence....so go *&^% yourself KIT :-)

In the end of it all, you were just plain wrong...and that makes me feel so warm and fuzzy inside....have a nice day

Posted by Anon on Saturday, 04.24.10 @ 11:05am


Correct link:

http://www.metalhistory.com/news/rush-beyond-the-lighted-stage-official-movie-trailer/2010/04/

Posted by Rush Fan on Saturday, 04.24.10 @ 11:15am


"In the trailer, Rush receives interviews and praise from Foo Fighters, Kiss, Pantera, Rage Against the Machine, Smashing Pumpkins, and Metallica - the last band calling Rush a "Huge" influence....so go *&^% yourself KIT :-)"

I don't think Kit is really on the site that much anymore, though yes in the trailer Kirk Hammett called them a huge influence; whether on music or himself is irrelevant (though I know Cliff Burton was influenced by Geddy Lee.) Kirk and James both said Rush should be in, so yes you were right and Kit was wrong. I still haven't confirmed whether they influenced Soundgarden, but it's certainly possible.

With that said, you were wrong about Judas Priest, Iron Maiden and R.E.M. and Kit was correct. So you're both wrong and both right. Logically, if we classify Rush as prog, then no Hall for them before King Crimson, ELP and Yes; if we call them Hard Rock, no Hall before Judas Priest, T. Rex, Deep Purple and Alice Cooper (and maybe Thin Lizzy.) Kit said Iron Maiden should go in first, but Steve Harris is also Geddy Lee influenced, so I'll put Rush ahead. With that said, if they're not going to induct any of those bands, then I see no reason not to induct Rush.
I'll certainly check out the movie.

Posted by Sam on Saturday, 04.24.10 @ 14:19pm


Actually, saw the movie premier tonight and Alex and Geddy were there and spoke briefly at the start of the movie.....In fact, Kirk Hammett from Metallica called Rush 'Hugely' influential and cited Lifeson specifically as a major influence to his guitar playing...he credited Lifeson with doing things he HAD NEVER HEARD BEFORE (i.e. see La Vills Strangiato)....Other bands in the movie giving major praise for Rush were:

9 Inch Nails, Foo Fighters, Death Cab For Cutie, Pantera, Smashing Pumpkins, Dream Theater, etc. I actually saw them speaking - their lips were moving...LOL...some of them were talking about how they wanted to emulate Rush (Wow, sounds pretty influential to me).

As for being wrong about Priest, REM, etc. I could not care about those bands one iota....this is a Rush page. This page is about Rush....Kit was wrong about Rush - way wrong about Rush and their influence and that makes me feel gleaful :-) Kit is long gone from these pages, which is fine....because his insights were most often plain wrong....as for who goes in first, second, third, etc. because of what style Rush is...Well, that was one point in the movie...Rush cannot really be classified...they are pretty unique and do their own thing, so the order thing makes little sense at least when it comes to Rush....Rush was mainly influenced by bands like Zep, The Who, Police, not the ones you mention (Again, I heard them say this)...This is a Rush page...either you feel Rush should be in or not....Bottom line they have spanned four decades and have influences so many bands and deserve a spot, although will likely never get - oh well..

Posted by Anon on Saturday, 04.24.10 @ 23:41pm


BTW, I would agree that KC should be in as well....just wanted to make that point...while they have not had the international success and popularity of Rush, they were certainly influential.

Posted by Anon on Sunday, 04.25.10 @ 15:33pm


Yep, if none of the bands I mentioned don't get in, I see no reason to hold back Rush. However, it appears none of the bands I brought up are going to get in (except R.E.M. who were rightfully inducted), and if the artists don't care then neither will I. I'm not even a big prog fan, but snubbing almost an entire genre is ridiculous (I forgot to mention Jethro Tull.) We're actually doing a "Rock Hall Revisited" now to make our own Hall of Fame... gets frustrating trying to decide :)

Posted by Sam on Sunday, 04.25.10 @ 17:46pm


IMO rush deserves a spot, irrespective of these other bands (i.e. KC, Priest) because, as I said above, Rush really cannot be categorized and the order makes no difference to me. Plus, Rush has had the influence coupled with pretty big success. And have had the same three members for four decades (unlike KC).

One last point - for the "order" thing - not only is Rush not clearly in any one category, the RRHOF put Metallica in before Rush, when Metallica cites Rush as a 'Huge' influence. So, if the RRHOF does not care about 'order', then neither do I. But, like I said, Rush does not fit neatly into any one category, so I would be fine to let them in first.

Posted by Anon on Monday, 04.26.10 @ 05:55am


As would I. Metallica and Rush were both big influences, and Rush influenced Metallica (as you said), and Metallica is in. Metallica also got in before Deep Purple (the Hall might be having trouble with deciding who to induct, but no other excuses besides that), Thin Lizzy (see DP), Judas Priest, Iron Maiden, Venom (see DP), and Motorhead (see DP), despite all of those bands being an influence on them. Sadly, it's something the Hall just seems to do. Such as Red Hot Chili Peppers getting nominated (and likely going to get in before) before Gang of Four, and why I'm prepared for the inevitable of Oasis getting in before Blur, Suede and The Stone Roses. You're right, if the Hall ignores the pecking order, then no reason why we can't.

Posted by Sam on Tuesday, 04.27.10 @ 19:18pm


By the way Anon/Michael, my guess would be Rush are facing the same obstacles that Yes and Deep Purple are facing (the latter especially is way overdue for the Hall), and that is being considered dinosaurs. My guess would be that the Commitee views them all as overblown and noodling and boring, and possibly pretentious. These arguments don't add up. For one, Pete Townshend has admitted that "Tommy" was pretentious, though he still thinks it holds up (the "Tommy" movie with all the different people like Elton John, Keith Moon and Eric Clapton doing the singing was weird, but some of the songs certainly still hold up.) For one, couldn't one also accuse Led Zeppelin and Pink Floyd of being overblown if you're accusing the above bands of being noodlers? Floyd and Zep certainly had some very long songs (The actual version of "Shine On You Crazy Diamond" is 13 minutes long, though it's must listen as it is a guitar masterpiece.) Finally, the idea of them being noodling or "soulless" can easily be disputed in some areas. You and I both know that Rush' radio-friendly songs have some fantastic musicianship but really cut down on the extended soloing and focus on the song instead, the drum solo in "Tom Sawyer" exluded; "Subdivisions" is underrated in that regard. Yes could certainly be accused of this somewhat even in their radio songs (though as I said you could with Zeppelin or Pink Floyd as well; you could also with The Doors.) However, the musicianship is again fantastic, and on their biggest hit "Owner of A Lonely Heart" (which I don't really enjoy) they had no keyboard solos and kept the guitar soloing to a minimum. As for Deep Purple: They really stripped things down for the radio (listen to "Space Truckin" or "Woman From Tokyo"). They could display excellent musicanship whilst still rocking hard ("Flight of the Rat" and "Highway Star"), and as for no soul: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pfzv3bf9-OY

Also check out the Made In Europe version of "Mistreated"; that just oozes bluesiness. Ritchie Blackmore's an underrated guitar player in some ways. Put all three bands in the Hall. Any thoughts on my points?

Posted by Sam on Tuesday, 05.4.10 @ 21:10pm


Its Mitchell BTW....anyway, I agree with a lot of what you say....not sure I would call Rush or the other bands "soulless" - that is just an opinion or perspective. Sure, Rush will never be touchy feely music and for the most part, they do not make songs that you can hum. But, that is fine...when I am in the mood for easier listening, I put on that style of music. When I am more into a "harder" sound, then I put on Rush...it is all about one's mood. But, saying Rush or any of the other bands are overblown, is sort of redundant...it is progressive rock (at least the early years of Rush were), so that is what that genre is about - like it or not. But, I agree, Rush definitely got away from that earlier progressive stuff to focus on more "user-friendly" shorter and more accessible songs. Even Rush admitted this in the docuementary - after making the album Hemisperes....it was so draining and time consuming, they basically said, never again....hey, on the album liner notes for the song "La Villa" - they call it an "exercise in self-indulgence", which to me suggests that they understood it was a bit much - but figured, hey, lets do it anyway.....After that album, that is when they started to make more "radio friendly" type of songs.

But, really the RRHOF is supposed to be about influence, longevity, etc. I think a lot of these bands have that - Yes, Rush, KC, etc. Anyway, why do I feel we have had this conversation before? :-)

Posted by Anon on Thursday, 05.6.10 @ 21:21pm


I don't know. During your lengthy debate with Kit he said Rush are standing in line behind KC, Genesis (now in, though more likely due to the huge Collins era than the Gabriel era), Yes and ELP (though we of course agreed that the snub queue is no longer relevant, due to Metallica getting in ahead of many of their influences, R.E.M. and U2 getting in ahead of Joy Division and Gang of Four... there are other examples.) You said that it's easier to induct Rush as they have been a more stable band, which is an accurate statement; for example, the Hall might be having trouble deciding which members of Deep Purple to induct or whether they're honoring the Alice Cooper band or Alice Cooper solo (the former, as that was doing the influence; Alice solo is Alice going out on his own, going pop-metal and making a comeback.)

Since I'm not an expert on King Crimson I don't know for sure who should be inducted outside of definitely Robert Fripp, Boz Burrell and Greg Lake.

As for the self-indulgence thing; as I said, Pink Floyd have been accused of that with The Wall and Pete Townshend has admitted that Tommy was pretentious. If you're going to accuse certain people of being self-indugent you have to spread it all around. I know Metallica lost a lot of people with their post-80's output (some of which I like), but they admitted that playing ...And Justice For All live was difficult so they felt they'd taken thrash as far as they could. You also had that with Kit, when he said that two or three chord songs can be just as meaningful as an instrumental masterpiece (I agree with that, actually, though I would say that while I'm listening to KISS.) In fact some of the really great songs by The Police weren't complex at all, like "Invisible Sun", "Spirits In the Material World" or "Wrapped Around Your Finger"; would you agree with that?

Sorry I'm rambling. Rush should be inducted, but does it matter at this point? I think not. Many musicians know that the Hall is a sham (David Bowie didn't even bother to attend his induction), and I'm also going to let the kids in the future decide who their heroes are. We're actually making our own Hall of Fame on this site; we're voting on the class of '91 now, and we're off to a good start with our Hall.

Later.

Posted by Sam on Thursday, 05.6.10 @ 21:55pm


RUSH

1994 CANADIAN MUSIC HALL OF FAME
1997 OFFICERS OF THE ORDER OF CANADA
1999 THE CANADA HONOURS/CANADA'S WALK OF FAME
2010 CANADIAN SONGWRITERS HALL OF FAME

Posted by Roy on Monday, 05.24.10 @ 11:09am


RUSH

1994 THE JUNO/CANADIAN MUSIC HALL OF FAME
1997 OFFICERS OF THE ORDER OF CANADA
1999 THE CANADA HONOURS/CANADA'S WALK OF FAME
2010 THE CANADIAN SONGWRITERS HALL OF FAME

Posted by Roy on Monday, 05.24.10 @ 11:11am


RUSH

1994 THE JUNO/CANADIAN MUSIC HALL OF FAME
1997 OFFICERS OF THE ORDER OF CANADA
1999 THE CANADA HONOURS/CANADA'S WALK OF FAME
1999 THE HOLLYWOOD WALK OF FAME
2010 THE CANADIAN SONGWRITERS HALL OF FAME

Posted by Roy on Monday, 05.24.10 @ 11:14am


"Oh yeah, you are right, I also forgot about their wonderful 'tribute song' to Andy Kaufman - 'Man on the Moon' - that one certainly made them worthy of the hall (note sarcasm). Any band that would agree to produce such a song should be 'made to apologize.' (i.e. just like Kansas and Journey)." - Anon/Michael

"Man on the Moon" was one of their most popular songs but far from their best. In fact, it was from being even the best on "Automatic For the People" (I reccomend that just as much as I reccomend "Murmur".) And they just decided to write that because of their admiration for Andy Kauffmann (who I know nothing about.) You might be thinking of "The Great Beyond", which is about Kauffman's philosophy, according to Peter Buck. They wrote that for the film "Man on the Moon". They also contributed "All the Right Friends" to the Vanilla Sky soundtrack. I haven't seen either movie.

I mainly posted this to break up the monotony, as Roy just posted the same thing three times.

Posted by Sam on Friday, 05.28.10 @ 18:00pm


F*&^% REM and that pu&^%$Y music -

Rush gets Star on Hollywood Walk of Fame!

www.hollywoodreporter.com/hr/content_display/news/e3i14a7e72d3d44c14d641a133d52224d07


Posted by Rush Fan on Friday, 07.2.10 @ 19:42pm


"Rush should be inducted, but does it matter at this point?"

I would agreee with that - that it does not matter at this point. But, the reason it does not matter now is because the RRHOF did it to themselves by inducting acts that are not even rock or worthy of induction and exluding so many important and influential rock bands. By doing this, they watered down and decreased the credibility of the whole organization, at least IMO. So, people start not caring....it can make for interesting debate, but the truth is - i genuinely could care less if Rush is inducted in the RRHOF. What does it mean anyway? That a bunch of writers agreed you should be in? If Rush were inducted tomorrow - that would be nice, but it would not in any way change or alter my opinions or feelings on the band.

Posted by Anon on Friday, 07.2.10 @ 19:49pm


"F*&^% REM and that pu&^%$Y music" - Rush Fan

Brilliant argument here.

Posted by Chalkie on Friday, 07.2.10 @ 19:57pm


"Brilliant argument here." - Chalkie

Indeed. I hope he's not putting R.E.M. and Black Flag and the Sex Pistols in the same bag. He was given a platform to argue for Rush' induction (which I support) or to say something sensible, and he pissed on it.

Oh, and Grand Slam comment Anon, but I'll add that some musicians are also involved. I agree with one idea that's been thrown around: Each musician that's been inducted gets a vote as well. If an inducted musician is deceased, everyone in their family gets a vote each year. It's only fair.

Posted by Sam on Saturday, 07.3.10 @ 14:56pm


even though rush is too good for the RNR hall of fame but i have a gut feeling that this is going to be rush's year.

Posted by icebox on Saturday, 07.17.10 @ 23:43pm


In the movie 'I love You Man' ,

On the "Colbert Report',

Had a Documentary premeiere at Tribeca where many bands praised Rush and called them a 'Huge' influence - including Metallica, Smashing Pumpkins, 9 Inch Nails, Foo Fighters, Death Cab For Cutie, Pantera, Dream Theater, etc.

Just received Star on Hollywood Walk of Fame

In 2010 Selling sold out concerts all over US and other parts of the world - where many bands could not sell out a High School arena at this point in their career...

Could the rest of the world finally be realizing the greatness of Rush - the holy triumvirate?.....

So, go F*&^% yourself that guy named after a car! LOL.....LOL

R

Posted by RFAN on Tuesday, 07.27.10 @ 18:53pm


"Could the rest of the world finally be realizing the greatness of Rush - the holy triumvirate?.....

So, go F*&^% yourself that guy named after a car! LOL.....LOL"

Dude, I agree that the Hall's bias towards prog and Hard Rock is ridiculous, and I agree that Rush should be inducted. Just don't end up like Roy, who has alienated lots of people from supporting Chicago for induction because of his fanboyism (though I don't support them because I don't feel they cut the mustard.) Oh, and who's named after a car?

Posted by Sam on Tuesday, 07.27.10 @ 19:55pm


"Well, if their supposed best work is that piece of crap, it's no freakin' wonder they're not in."

Creepozoid: You think Survivor should be inducted. You would have denied The Police induction. You deny Peter Gabriel and Rush induction (okay Liam and Kit did as well but at least they knew a thing or two). You say Bon Jovi should be in without giving any reason for it. These are the reasons why I don't take you seriously.

Posted by Sam on Tuesday, 07.27.10 @ 21:15pm


RUSH

1994 THE JUNO/CANADIAN MUSIC HALL OF FAME
1997 OFFICERS OF THE ORDER OF CANADA
1999 THE CANADA HONOURS/CANADA'S WALK OF FAME
2010 THE HOLLYWOOD WALK OF FAME
2010 THE CANADIAN SONGWRITERS HALL OF FAME


Posted by Roy on Tuesday, 08.3.10 @ 12:09pm


RUSH

THE 1997 ORDER OF CANADA BIOGRAPHY

Members of the progressive rock trio, RUSH, these veterans of the stage have raised over a million dollars for charities such as food banks and the United Way. Their efforts have enhanced an awareness of the plight faced by society's less fortunate, inspiring and awakening the social consciousness of an entire generation. Musicians far and wide have been influenced by the band's accomplishments, a testament to its contribution to popular music.

Posted by Roy on Tuesday, 08.3.10 @ 13:02pm





http://www.canadaswalkoffame.com/inductee/rush

RUSH

THE 1999 CANADA HONOURS/CANADA'S WALK OF FAME BIOGRAPHY

For 25 years Geddy Lee (keyboard/bass/vocals/), Alex Lifeson (guitar), and Neil Peart (drums) have established Rush as the quintessential Canadian heavy rock band.

Their first album, Rush, in 1974, became the biggest-selling debut by a Canadian band, and by 1979 the group was so successful worldwide that the Canadian government awarded them the title of official Ambassadors of Music.

During the 1980's the band streamlined its image, to the dismay of some earlier fans, but Rush persevered with a determination to progress musically with each new album.

The group's 1981 album, Moving Pictures, has been described as a ground-breaking fusion of technological rock and musical craft. They followed this with Hold Your Fire in 1987, Test For Echo in 1996, and Different Stages, described as a commemorative of the group's different stages of evolution, which was released in 1998. They received the Group of the Decade award in 1990, have won numerous Junos, and sold more than 40 million records internationally.

Rush has also raised more than one million dollars for charities such as food banks and the United Way. The band, which continues to tour to packed audiences, received the Order of Canada in 1997.

Big Break:

1974 Rush released their first album entitled "RUSH". It became the biggest selling debut LP that any Canadian band had ever released. The band spent years building their core audience by constant touring in North America doing as many as 200 dates a year.

Posted by Roy on Tuesday, 08.3.10 @ 13:20pm


http://www.hollywoodchamber.net/index.php?module=wof&s=nor&p=1&sname=Rush&wof_id=2443

RUSH

THE 2010 HOLLYWOOD WALK OF FAME BIOGRAPHY

Rush – is without question one of the most inventive and compelling groups in rock history, equally famed for both its virtuoso musicianship and provocative songwriting.

The honor comes as the progressive-rock trio comprised of bassist-frontman Geddy Lee, guitarist Alex Lifeson and drummer Neil Peart gear up for their North American Time Machine tour and pre-releasing 2 new songs “Caravan” & “BU2B” from their forthcoming 20th studio album Clockwork Angels (due spring 2011)

Just last year, a career-chronicling Rolling Stone feature praised the band for its continuing artistic vitality, noting that “It’s true that Rush doesn’t mean today what it did in ’76 or even ’96. It may mean more.”

Rush's enduring pop culture relevance is perhaps best evidenced by a pair of high- profile appearances - a rare national television performance and interview on Comedy Central's "The Colbert Report" in 2008 (the band's first TV appearance since 1975), and a pivotal role in the storyline of the 2009 hit comedy, I Love You, Man, starring Paul Rudd and Jason Segal, where the band also made a memorable cameo in the film.

Beginning with their self-titled debut album in 1974, their extraordinary body of work – which includes such formidable works as 1976’s 2112, 1981’s Moving Pictures, 1996’s Test for Echo and the latest studio album “Snakes & Arrows”- made a triumphant debut on the Billboard 200 upon its initial release in 2007, entering the chart in the #3 spot. The album’s success marked Rush’s highest chart debut since 1993, as well as the group’s eleventh Top Ten album in the U.S.

Rush has sold more than 40 million records worldwide and garnered untold legions of devoted and admiring fans. According to the RIAA, Rush's sales statistics place RUSH third behind The Beatles and The Rolling Stones for the most consecutive gold or platinum studio albums by a rock band. Some of their most popular songs include: The Spirit of Radio, Tom Sawyer, Limelight, Closer To The Heart, YYZ, Working Man and Subdivisons.

Rush has also won a number of Juno Awards, been nominated for multiple Grammy awards, was inducted into the Canadian Music Hall of Fame in 1994, bestowed the Order of Canada in 1997, inducted into Canada’s Walk of Stars in 1999 and Canada’s Songwriting Hall of Fame in March of 2010. Consistently celebrated and respected worldwide, Rush is the most successful Canadian rock band of all time, and they remain one of the biggest grossing arena rock bands ever.

Rush has become known for the instrumental skills of its members, complex compositions, and eclectic lyrical motifs drawing heavily on science fiction, fantasy, and libertarian philosophy, as well as addressing humanitarian, social, emotional, and environmental concerns.

A special limited engagement big screen release of the documentary "Rush: Beyond the Lighted Stage," opened worldwide on June 10. Directors Sam Dunn with Scot McFadyen's rock doc, which follows the band's 40-plus-years career, premiered this past April at the 2010 Tribeca Film Festival where it won the coveted Audience Award. The documentary includes interviews with some of today’s most respected rock artists such as Billy Corgan, Taylor Hawkins, Trent Reznor, Sebastian Bach, Kirk Hammett and Gene Simmons speaking about the influence of Rush. The doc is slated for release on DVD and Blu-Ray in the U.S. on June 29. *On the day of the ceremony there will be a special screening of the documentary at Mann Chinese 6 in Hollywood, just 2 blocks west of where the band will get their star on the Hollywood Walk of Fame. The film will be featured on Friday June 25 as an all day event. The film will play at 2pm, 5pm and 8pm. This is a last chance to see it on the big screen Event tied in to celebrate the band's honor of receiving the Star.

Four days after receiving the Hollywood Walk of Fame star, Rush will kick-off its "Time Machine Tour" on June 29, in Albuquerque, New Mexico and finish October 2, in West Palm Beach, Florida.

Posted by Roy on Tuesday, 08.3.10 @ 13:23pm


http://www.cansong.ca/vhof/bio/modern/Rush.aspx

RUSH

THE 2010 CANADIAN SONGWRITERS HALL OF FAME BIOGRAPHY

First formed in 1968, Rush has enjoyed a prolific career that spans four decades and has, in those years, borne some pretty substantial fruit: 24 gold records; 14 platinum (three multi-platinum) records; 79th place in U.S. album sales with 25 million units; total worldwide album sales estimated at over 40 million units; and, according to the Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA), sales statistics that place them fourth behind The Beatles, The Rolling Stones, and Aerosmith for the most consecutive gold or platinum albums by a rock band.

Rush has been inducted into the Canadian Music Hall of Fame (1994), honoured with numerous Junos, is the first rock troupe to be made Officers of the Order of Canada as a “group” (May 9, 1996), and hailed by countless rock bands, from Metallica and Smashing Pumpkins to Dream Theatre and Primus, as their foremost musical influence.

Rush is one of the most uncompromising, unique and enduring bands that Canada has ever produced. And to say their fan following is strong would be putting it mildly. They began modestly and from the ground up, playing cover songs at local bars and high school events. In 1973, they released their first single, Not Fade Away, a Buddy Holly cover, and included a track they had penned themselves on side B, entitled You Can’t Fight It. The single barely made any waves and was not championed by any record labels. At this point the band decided to start their own record label, which they named Moon Records (later renamed Anthem Records).

They released their self-titled debut album on their label in 1974. Donna Halper, a DJ and musical director working at radio station WMMS in Cleveland, Ohio, picked up the single Working Man for regular rotation. The popularity of the single prompted Mercury Records to re-release the entire album in the U.S. that same year. Just after the release of the debut album and two weeks before their first U.S. tour, Neil Peart replaced Rutsey as drummer, and the band arrived at the form it holds to this day.

The group quickly found their natural niches within the band. Peart, for example, took over the role of main lyricist from Lee, who was more interested in composing music, as Lifeson also was. Peart’s love of fantasy, science fiction and individualist literature showed itself in his songwriting and in the band’s second album, “Fly By Night” (1975). Their third album, “Caress of Steel” (1975), was released soon after and built upon the epic song structure that had been introduced to fans in “Fly By Night.” “Caress of Steel,” however, emphasized storytelling and complex arrangements in the five hard-rock tracks that made up the album, two of those being “multi-chapter” tracks.

As is usually the case when artists deviate from the norm and others’ expectations, Rush was immediately blasted by critics for releasing an “unfocused” album. Executives from their record label urged the band to work on a more commercially friendly release to follow “Caress of Steel.” The band did not succumb to the pressure of convention, however, and released “2112” in 1976. The album included a title track that covered the entire side A of the record. “2112” went platinum in Canada and brought the band its first taste of commercial success. Rush released their first live album shortly after. “All The World’s A Stage” (1976) featured recordings from their three-night billing at Massey Hall in Toronto during their 2112 tour.

Rush became renowned for daring to experiment and evolve their musical style, especially with the release of “A Farewell to Kings” (1977) and “Hemispheres” (1978). They produced both albums in Rockfield Studios in Wales. It was a time of major experimentation for the band, extensively developing their trademark style of concept songs, synthesizer use, and intricate time signature changes. Peart drew upon classical, fantasy and science fiction literature in his lyrics, and included triangles, glockenspiel, wood blocks, cowbells, timpani, gong and chimes in his percussion. Lifeson expanded his guitar-playing with twelve-string and classical instruments, and Lee experimented with bass-pedal synthesizers and Minimoog.

Their 1980s album, “Permanent Waves,” reached number 5 on the U.S. album charts, and showcased country and “new wave” punk influences. It included the hits The Spirit of Radio and Freewill, the former one of the group’s best-known songs. A year later, Rush produced an album that would take them to new heights of fame. “Moving Pictures” (1981) highlighted the band’s progressive style while also maintaining an accessible and radio-friendly sound. It featured the hit track Tom Sawyer, co-written with fellow Canadian Pye Dubois of Max Webster. “Moving Pictures” reached number 3 on the Billboard 200 Album chart and was certified quadruple platinum.

Though they had attained a desirable level of popularity and recognition, Rush was enthusiastic about continuing to experiment and develop musically. Hard at work throughout the remainder of the ’80s, Rush released the albums “Exit…Stage Left” (Live, 1981), “Signals” (1982), “Grace Under Pressure” (1984), “Power Windows” (1985), “Hold Your Fire” (1987), “A Show of Hands” (Live, 1989), and “Presto” (1989). Rush consistently topped the charts during these years and enjoyed impressive record sales. In 1989 they changed labels from Mercury to Atlantic.

Rush shed its heavy use of synthesizers and electronic sounds and moved towards more of a guitar-focused, barebones traditional rock sound during the ’90s. “Roll the Bones” (1991), “Counterparts” (1993), and “Test for Echo” (1996) all reached number 1 on Canadian album charts and reached 3, 2, and 5 on the U.S. album charts respectively.

The band took a time out when Peart’s personal life was hit by tragedy in August 1997. His daughter, Selena, was killed in an automobile accident. His wife, Jacqueline, died ten months later of cancer. In 1998, “Different Stages” was released, a three-disc compilation of live recordings from the “Counterparts,” “Test for Echo,” and “A Farewell to Kings” tours, dedicated to Selena and Jacqueline. Peart took a few years away from the band to mourn. He rode across North America on his motorcycle and penned the memoir Ghost Rider: Travels on the Healing Road (2002) while on his journey. In 2001, he announced to his bandmates that he was ready to make music again. Rush went back to work in a Toronto studio, and spent fourteen months developing their first album since their hiatus, entitled “Vapor Trails” (2002), and hit the tour circuit after more than six years away. “Rush in Rio” (Live, 2003), a triple CD and an accompanying DVD of the same name was recorded on the last night of the Vapor Trails tour and hit Diamond sales status in Canada.

In 2004, Rush released the album “Feedback” to celebrate their 30th anniversary. It featured eight cover tracks paying homage to the artists that influenced the band during their start three decades earlier. The band then began a top-selling worldwide 30th Anniversary Tour and released a DVD of their Frankfurt, Germany, show in 2005, entitled “R30: Live in Germany.”

In 2006, the band began writing for their 2007 album release, “Snakes and Arrows.” The first single, Far City, reached number 2 in the U.S. and the album debuted at number 3 on Billboard Top 200 albums chart. Rush then commenced another immensely popular worldwide tour and released the “Snakes and Arrows Live” album in 2008.

On November 17, 2009, Rush released “Working Men,” a “best-of” live compilation album and DVD. Ultimately, their impact cannot be expressed merely through chart positions, distribution, airplay or awards. “Rush” is a sub culture. They are the epitome of progressive, enduring rock ‘n’ roll, influencing some of the leading musical artists of our time and amassing a loyal fan following.

INDUCTED SONGS

TOM SAWYER

In 1981, Rush produced its biggest-selling record to date, “Moving Pictures,” featuring the hit Tom Sawyer, which has become a rock classic. After its release on Mercury Records and PolyGram, it reached number 25 in the U.K. singles chart in October as the follow-up to the band’s breakthrough hit, The Spirit of Radio, which was released only a year and a half earlier. In the U.S. it reached number 44 on the Billboard Hot 100 and number 8 on the Billboard Mainstream Rock chart. In 2009 it was named the 19th greatest hard rock song of all time by VH1. The song was also featured on several Rush compilations, such as “Chronicles” (1990).

Tom Sawyer, titled after Mark Twain’s literary character, was co-written with Canadian lyricist Pye Dubois, lyricist of rock band Max Webster. During a rehearsal one summer on a farm just outside Ontario, Peart was presented with a poem of Dubois’ entitled “Louis the Lawyer” (Louis the Warrior), which he later modified and, with the help of Lee and Lifeson, set to music. According to Peart, the original lyrics were “a portrait of a modern-day rebel, a free-spirited individualist striding through the world wide-eyed and purposeful.” He stated that “the themes of reconciling the boy and man within and the difference between what people are and what others perceive them to be,” were later added by him.

Tom Sawyer has been featured in several movies such as “The Waterboy” (1998), “Rob Zombie’s Halloween” (2007), “Fanboys” (2008), and “I Love You, Man” (2009), as well as television shows such as “Chuck”, “Family Guy”, “Trailer Park Boys”, “Freaks and Geeks” and “Futurama”. On July 16, 2008, the band made its first American television appearance in 33 years, performing the song during an airing of The Colbert Report.

A cover version of the song is included in the popular video game Rock Band.

Cover artists include: Alexisonfire, Deadsy, Sebastian Bach, Mindless Self Indulgence, Fifty One’s and Run for Cover.

LIMELIGHT

First appearing on the quadruple-platinum certified 1981 album, “Moving Pictures”, Limelight charted number 4 on the U.S. mainstream charts and number 55 on the U.S. Hot 100 chart. It is unquestionably one of Rush's most popular singles.

The lyrics, written by Neil Peart, articulate his discomfort with fame and notoriety in sombre, eloquent language, even alluding to the well-known Shakespearean line “All the world’s a stage / And all the men and women merely players” from the play, “As You Like It.”

In a 2007 interview, Alex Lifeson gave his take on Limelight: “It's funny: after all these years, the solo to Limelight is my favorite to play live. There's something very sad and lonely about it; it exists in its own little world. And I think, in its own way, it reflects the nature of the song's lyrics – feeling isolated amidst chaos and adulation."

The song was featured in the films “I Love You, Man” (2009), “Adventureland” (2009), and “Fanboys” (2008). In an episode of the television series, “Trailer Park Boys”, Bubbles gives Mr. Lahey the finger to the opening riff of Limelight while driving by in a car.

Cover artists include: Billy Corgan.

CLOSER TO THE HEART

Closer to the Heart gave the world its first taste of the future Canadian rock icons, Rush. A true fan favourite, the song is one of the band’s most radio-friendly tunes and is such an unforgettable and enduring rock anthem that over three decades later, it is still heard on the radio airwaves.

Neil Peart, considered by music fans, critics, and fellow musicians alike as one of the most articulate lyricists in the music industry, put some of his most moving thoughts down on paper in Closer to the Heart. Peter Talbot, a musician friend of Peart’s, co-wrote the lyrics to the track, with Lee and Lifeson composing the music.

Released on the 1977 album “A Farewell to Kings,” the song was Rush’s first hit single in the U.K., reaching number 36 on the charts in February 1978 and certified gold in album sales. “A Farewell to Kings” was also Rush’s first gold-certified album in the U.S. and reached number 33 on Billboard’s album charts. Soon after, it reached platinum-certified status in both the U.S. and Canada.

On the original recording of the song and in live performances, Peart played on an acoustic drum set, except between the years 1984 and ’94, where he used an electronic drum set.

The track has appeared on nearly every set list for most of Rush’s tours and subsequently on most of the band’s live albums, including “Exit…Stage Left” (1981), “A Show of Hands” (1989), “Different Stages” (1998), “Rush in Rio” (2003), “R:30 30th Anniversary World Tour” (2005), and “Grace Under Pressure Tour” (2006).

In the third season of the famed Canadian comedic television series “Trailer Park Boys”, Alex Lifeson makes a guest appearance and plays “Closer to the Heart” with Bubbles, one of the show’s main characters, at the end of the episode. In the “R:30” DVD, a clip is included of the entire band playing with Bubbles and Barenaked Ladies front-man Ed Robertson during the Tsunami Relief concert.

Cover artists include: Fates Warning and Landon Pigg.

SUBDIVISIONS

Subdivisions is a single from Rush’s ninth studio album, “Signals” (1982). The song is a fan favourite and has been regularly included on the band’s set lists. Upon its release, it reached number 8 on the U.S. charts, and number 53 on the U.K. charts.

The song marks the band’s increased use of synthesizers in their music. The lyrics speak of the loneliness, isolation, and stifling conventions of life in the suburbs, as well as the pressure felt by youths to “sell their dreams” and conform.

The band filmed the downtown scenes of the Subdivisions music video in Toronto and filmed the suburban scenes in Scarborough, Ontario. The school hall of L'Amoreaux Collegiate Institute in northwest Scarborough was included, as well as a clip of east Toronto’s Don Valley Parkway and a bustling Toronto Transit Commission (TTC) subway station.

Young Canadian singer/songwriter Anita Athavale recorded a beautiful rendition of Subdivisions on her 2007 debut album, “In the Noise.” Her thoughts on the song’s inspiring message convey a sentiment shared by most Rush fans: “Making the album, I was in a place where I was about to put music down: try something else, be normal, make some money, buy a house, whatever else I was supposed to do. That song made me think about choosing that other life.”

Cover artists include: Jacob Moon, Anita Athavale, Randy Jackson, Dominic Cifarelli and Jeff Feldman.

THE SPIRIT OF RADIO

The Spirit of Radio was written by Rush in 1979 and released in 1980 on the “Permanent Waves” album. The song quickly climbed the U.K.’s singles chart to number 13 and became their biggest and most recognizable U.K. hit.

The song was titled after the slogan for Toronto’s local radio station, CFNY, which started out in Brampton, Ontario, in 1960 and is now known as Edge 102. The maverick radio station, which experienced a tumultuous history due to ownership and personnel changes over the years, was known for its intensely loyal listeners. It was the listeners themselves who named the station The Spirit of Radio. Its strong reputation with its listeners is exactly what inspired Rush to compose the song of the same name.

In an interview with Billboard Magazine, Neil Peart said about the song: “The Spirit of Radio was actually written as a tribute to all that was good about radio, celebrating my appreciation of magical moments I'd had since childhood, of hearing the right song at the right time.”

The Spirit of Radio gained a significant amount of attention and was soon recognized as one of the band’s most successful singles. Peart discussed the song with Bob Mack of Spin, stating that he still considered it a song that fused the sounds of reggae, pop, and metal in a new way, "a valid musical gumbo" created "to represent what radio should be." Rolling Stone's David Fricke was quoted as saying that "Rush demonstrates a maturity that even their detractors may have to admire." He showed a particular interest in the single The Spirit of Radio and in his review he mentioned that "this band is among the very best in its genre." John Swenson of Rolling Stone observed that The Spirit of Radio had "gotten more airplay than Rush's entire catalog put together, and it's brought them a whole new audience."

The Spirit of Radio was named one of The Rock and Roll Hall of Fame's 500 Songs that Shaped Rock and Roll. In June, a rendition of the song recorded from a live performance at the Apollo in Manchester, England, was featured in the video game Guitar Hero 5. In 1993, the famously familiar opening riff of the song was sampled on Conchita Martinez from the album “So Tough” by British indie band St. Etienne. In 2006, the song appeared on the soundtrack for “Trailer Park Boys: The Movie”, and became available as downloadable content for Karaoke Revolution Presents American Idol Encore 2 for the popular gaming system, Playstation 3. The track is also available on the music video game Rock Revolution.

Cover artists include: Les Claypool, St. Etienne, Rachel Barton Pine and Premonition.

Posted by Roy on Tuesday, 08.3.10 @ 13:33pm


Who is the pretentious dip sh*&^% named after a car? Well, I can give you one hint: It was a car from a TV show. If you cannot figure it out after reading all of the posts from this blog - well, I dunno what to say.

-RFAN

Posted by RFAN on Sunday, 08.8.10 @ 10:44am


I've read through this entire thread twice regardless of finding that, so my guess would be Kit (I don't know of a car by that name, but that's irrelevant.)

Posted by Sam on Sunday, 08.8.10 @ 17:48pm


Sam: I refer you to the old TV show "Knightrider" :-)

But, what is even more shocking is that you read this thread not just once, but twice....that is a lot of free time!

Posted by RFAN on Tuesday, 08.10.10 @ 16:31pm


"F*&^% REM and that pu&^%$Y music" - Rush Fan

"Brilliant argument here"

Was not aiming for cerebral, but for visceral

Posted by RFAN on Tuesday, 08.10.10 @ 16:39pm


LIAM SAID:

"No one cares about Rush anymore (excluding the PAINFULLY OBVIOUS uber-fans like yourself), so I really wouldn't call them well-lived."

I say:

Nonsense....they have been extremely popular as of late....selling out concerts, appearing on TV, selling out concerts in US and abroad. In fact, in attempting to get a meet and greet, I contacted a local rock radio station (this station DOES NOT PLAY MADONNA) and was told they have none and Rush is immensely popular right now, so they are hard to come by. Who better to have the pulse of the people and music than someone actually at the radio station? Plus, if you go to shows, there are people of all ages. Once again Liam knows nothing.


"Rush has literally no impact on pop culture. Yeah face it - you're out of touch."

I say:

On the Colbert report
Appeared in the Movie 'I Love You Man'
Just received Star on Hollywood Walk of Fame
There are so many references to Rush in Movies, TV, etc. that it is impossible to even list....there is a website that lists them, but I think the point is made. Clearly, Liam is blatantly wrong and the one 'out of touch.'

Posted by RFAN on Tuesday, 08.10.10 @ 16:49pm


But, what is even more shocking is that you read this thread not just once, but twice....that is a lot of free time!

Posted by RFAN on Tuesday, 08.10.10 @ 16:31pm

Are you saying Sam isn't allowed to spend his free time how he wants? Did it ever occur to you he may just be passionate about discussing Rock and Roll? He has over 900 posts on this site on every sort of artist from all over the board. You, on the other hand, not just based on your name but based on the fact you only post on this page evidently demonstrates you only care to discuss Rush. You will take any sort of argument against Rush as a personal insult and turn to name calling (like insulting whoever you said was named after a car, pretty shallow). I have no problem with Rush's induction and yes they are overdue like so many other artists but I needed to respond to you because fanboys like you irk me. You remind me of someone from the Steve Perry page....

Posted by Tahvo Parvianen on Wednesday, 08.11.10 @ 01:34am


And when I say you only care to "discuss" Rush I really mean insult anyone who disagrees with Rush's induction (And post their reference in "I Love You Man" over and over). Just look at the posts done by Roy on this page, the man is a total Chicago fanatic but he still finds the time to make a compelling case for Rush more than I see you doing

"Brilliant argument here"

Was not aiming for cerebral, but for visceral

Posted by RFAN on Tuesday, 08.10.10 @ 16:39pm

Well if you're aiming for visceral I guess you made your intentions very clear yourself and there's no point having a serious discussion with you then.

Posted by Tahvo Parvianen on Wednesday, 08.11.10 @ 01:44am


There is an error in Rush`s 2010 Canadian Songwriters Hall of Fame bio. Their latest hit Far Cry is referred to as Far City. I hate when that happens! I should have read it and fixed it before posting it here.

The biography for the 1994 induction into The Juno/Canadian Music Hall of Fame was on the Juno website, but it was taken down while the site is being updated. I will post it here once it is back up.

Posted by Roy on Wednesday, 08.11.10 @ 12:48pm


Rush will probably be inducted into the U.S. Songwriters Hall of Fame and receive the Kennedy Center Honor before being inducted into The Rock And Roll Hall Of Fame.

Posted by Roy on Wednesday, 08.11.10 @ 12:51pm


But, what is even more shocking is that you read this thread not just once, but twice....that is a lot of free time!

Posted by RFAN on Tuesday, 08.10.10 @ 16:31pm

My bosses are flexible with when I work... I was going over it with a fine-toothed comb, checking every detail. But, pop culture references aside (because that's stuff's side-dishes and dressings, not meat and potatoes), if influence is a criteria then they've easily earned a spot. Tool, Coheed & Cambria, Smashing Pumpkins, Porcupine Tree, Metallica, Queensryche, Dream Theater... that's 7 bands they've majorly influenced just off the top of my head. Oh, I've found the documentary, so I'll watch it now.

Posted by Sam on Thursday, 08.12.10 @ 15:58pm


Oh yeah, and Primus.

Posted by Sam on Thursday, 08.12.10 @ 16:04pm


"You will take any sort of argument against Rush as a personal insult and turn to name calling"

lighten up dude...stop using the word "fanboy" - it is "gay" for the lack of a better term...I was kidding about Sam - completely....I could care less about how he spends his time....if he chooses to post all over this site, so be it...the same way I have chosen to only post to the page of my favorite band...who cares?

I actually like REM (when I referred to them as P*&^% music - it was a joke).... when people say they dislike Rush because of Lee's voice - I could see that or when they say the songs are way too long and drag on - I could see that too....I also see the points of letting in earlier bands like King Crimson before Rush...but as a huge Rush fan, I like to support my favorite band....I am not a very big King Crimson fan, so I do not care much what happens with them...but as a music fan, I do see the importance of letting them in too.

I only disagree with someone's critique of Rush when it is not based in reality - like saying they have had 'No' influence or they have no relevance in current pop culture. Those points are just plain wrong.

I don't need to make the points for Rush's induction...the bands accomplishments and discogrpahy speaks for itself, as well as all of the points made on the over 700+ comments on this site.

Posted by RFAN on Thursday, 08.12.10 @ 19:33pm


Good points Sam....I only brought up the pop culture thing because I had seen a post above in which someone said they were not referenced in pop culture - it should not matter for hall induction...

Kirk Hammett of Metallica called Rush a "HUGE" inlfuence in the documentary...people say Rush fans are biased or use terms like 'Fanboy', but for anyone to say that Rush has not been influential in music is the biased one and are simply wrong...their influence has been 'HUGE' - to quote K. Hammet.

Posted by RFAN on Thursday, 08.12.10 @ 19:39pm


"Well if you're aiming for visceral I guess you made your intentions very clear yourself and there's no point having a serious discussion with you then."

-That wholly depends upon my mood - sometimes serious and other times not so serious - I am a complex person - the ladies love dat shit!

Posted by RFAN on Thursday, 08.12.10 @ 19:44pm


lol, ok RFAN, thanks for clarifying your view point. I may have been a bit mistaken labelling you as a "fanboy" as I tend to use that term more to describe some people who post here who only post consistently on artists they love (some, not all, but some of which have no shot for the RRHOF) and act completely irrationally and are very quick to do insults (if you're more familiar with this site I take it you've browsed around and seem some of those sorts of posts). But yeah in any way, Rush are long overdue together with many other bands and one can only hope they clear some of this backlog soon. I was quite surprised to see them nominating KISS last year since they've (well, Dave Marsh mostly) have spoken so much against them (not that I love KISS but it gave some people hope) and the nomination and induction of a prog band like Genesis was very good to see. I can only hope these steps in the right direction hold up this year but I guess we'll see soon enough.

Posted by Tahvo Parvianen on Friday, 08.13.10 @ 01:12am


Did not know Genesis was inducted.....when?

Posted by RFAN on Friday, 08.13.10 @ 17:46pm


Wow...just saw that Genesis got in this year....shocking....I agree could be a step in right direction

Posted by RFAN on Friday, 08.13.10 @ 17:47pm


Sorry to burst your bubble, but probably not. Genesis probably only got in because of the 80's stuff (which I don't mind), so don't expect King Crimson, Yes, Rush, ELP and the Moody Blues to get their due now. Another example: When U2 were inducted, they said that Patti Smith, Television and Roxy Music were in THEIR Hall of Fame. Smith was eventually inducted, but Television and Roxy have still failed to get nominations. Metallica were inducted two years ago, and they revealed their Hall of Fame: KISS, Rush, Alice Cooper, Judas Priest, Iron Maiden, Ted Nugent, Thin Lizzy, Motorhead, UFO and Deep Purple. Obviously KISS got a nomination (finally), so they could be on the ballot again this year. Them being noticed could bring Alice his first induction, and some people think this is Deep Purple's year. However, Rush, TL, Ted, Priest and Motorhead have still not been considered, so I don't expect things to change.

Posted by Sam on Tuesday, 08.17.10 @ 16:05pm


Rush is one of the greatest bands of all time and the greatest power trio to ever grace a stage. They are certainly not at the top of the all time snub list but they are certainly on the list, that honor has to go to the greatest prog band of all: The Moody Blues. Prog and metal have been disenfranchised for years and that is because of the "opinions" of a few who have a stranglehold on the rock hall, and their attempt to rewrite rock history to reflect their own record collections.

Posted by DDD on Friday, 09.24.10 @ 21:24pm


As great as Rush is...I can think of lots of "Power Trios " better: Cream ,Hendrix, Grand Funk, to only name a few...I mean Heck the Who were only 3 musicians...Same with Led Zep...and Van Halen...Lee Michaels was only 2 many times LOL....

Posted by mrxyxomg on Friday, 09.24.10 @ 21:40pm


(Sigh.) A power trio is 3 people in the band; therefore, The Who and Zeppelin were not power trios. Also, you forgot Motorhead; let's remember they should be inducted, as should Rush.

I think that there are other people who could contend for the title of biggest omission besides The Moody Blues, but otherwise I completely agree, DDD.

Posted by Sam on Saturday, 09.25.10 @ 12:58pm


I have read through just about every post.

First to Kit and the others that were judgemental in stating that you need to toke to be a fan of Rush:
I am here to tell you, there are a TON of fans out there that don't toke or get stoned that are Rush fans. I DJ and Rush happens to be a widely accepted band on my playlist. Let's be realistic. The band never broke up, and have been around for 32 years and counting. (Neil Peart said to Lee and Lifeson "Consider me retired" after his then only daughter died in a one car crash, then his common-law wife died only 10 months after that. Neil did come back after a long trip on the road to do some thinking.) Genesis? While they haven't disbanded, when was their last album of original recorded material? Judas Priest? Let's be realistic here. Some of the bands you talk about are either no longer together, or not performing anymore. Many of their fans have died off and gone to other groups or genres. Why are we giving these bands the nods? Why are they not getting their just dues WHILE they are here? Is it going to take (god forbid) Peart, Lifeson, or Lee dying before the HOF gets their heads out of their collective rears to give them the nod?

If this were the Beatles, everyone would be in an uproar if they were still not nominated and given the nod.

It's time for Progressive Rock to get some representatives in. Yes, Rush, Moody Blues.... we need em in, or it will be a long forgotten genre. Progressive of yesterday is where Grunge, Metal, and a few other genres came into play in their days and into today's Alternative music.

Let's not forget, this is NOT about promoting one genre, but ALL GENRES. If it has the name Rock somewhere in the Genre, then it should TECHNICALLY be in the Hall.

Posted by Sarah on Monday, 09.27.10 @ 12:41pm


Cheers to Sarah for a sensible post. There are some people who ARE still active that I would induct first (Genesis had a reunion tour two or three years ago, even though Gabriel didn't participate, and one of the shows was before 500,000 fans in Rome. No, you didn't misread... 500,000. Yes and King Crimson are both still around, and ELP have reunited in this decade as well.) However, it's irrelevant; Genesis are now in, and The Stooges are in; two bands who rank higher in the food chain in their genres (Prog and Punk, respectively) than Rush. Alice Cooper has finally been nominated, and if he gets in this year (a big IF) that's another higher-up band (more influential to Shock Rock/Hard Rock than Rush are to Prog/Hard Rock) finally taken care of. However, Guns 'n' Roses, a very good band but one with virtually no influence, will be inducted within the next two years, Nirvana, Pearl Jam, Red Hot Chili Peppers and Green Day will be inducted straight-away ahead of quite a few of the people who made it possible for them, while Bon Jovi, who are only a minor influence, are now nominated whilst quite a few VERY important artists are still waiting for one. Also, let's not forget:

-Metallica in (quite rightly;) Judas Priest*, Iron Maiden, Motorhead*, Deep Purple, Thin Lizzy* and Ozzy* solo still waiting for nominations.

-The Stooges nominated before MC5, whilst they're now (quite rightly) inducted while the MC5 are still not in.

-New York Dolls nominated before MC5 (neither band has been nominated since.)

-The Ramones, The Clash and The Sex Pistols (all quite rightly) inducted before The Stooges, whilst the MC5 and New York Dolls are still waiting for inductions and Link Wray* (who with just one song made it possible for all "heavy rock" bands) is still waiting for a nomination.

-The Hollies in while The Zombies* are still waiting for a nomination.

-KISS nominated before Alice Cooper (and both of them nominated before Screamin' Jay Hawkins, who was actually the first shock-rock performer by all accounts.)

-Bon Jovi nominated (and potentially inducted) before Motley Crue* or Def Leppard

-Red Hot Chili Peppers nominated before Gang of Four* or Black Flag*

-R.E.M. and U2 (they both started out as post-punk bands) inducted before The Cure, Wire* or Joy Division* even receive a nomination. *=Still haven't even been considered.

We'll see more of this kind of thing in the future, so chronological order of inductions and nominations is fast becoming irrelevant. After the initial euphoria over Genesis finally being inducted, which was really all down to the hit-making era under Phil Collins (which I don't mind really), prog has failed to even receive a nomination this year. The Moody Blues, Yes, King Crimson, ELP, Rush, The Zombies... all absent from the Hall of Fame, all still waiting for a nomination. I don't care which one gets in first, just get ONE of them in already before they're all dead.

Posted by Sam on Friday, 10.1.10 @ 10:07am


ARTISTS WHO WERE INDUCTED INTO THE CANADIAN SONGWRITERS HALL OF FAME AND RECEIVED A STAR ON THE HOLLYWOOD WALK OF FAME IN THE SAME YEAR:

01. 2010 - Rush

Posted by Roy on Monday, 11.15.10 @ 19:57pm


My - fuking - god. Not rush??? u have got to be kidding me, i have even no words to describe why they should be in

Posted by Peter on Saturday, 11.20.10 @ 11:42am


Rush

Geddy Lee
Alex Lifeson
Neil Peart
John Rutsey

Rush's original drummer John Rutsey only appeared on the band's first album. He died in 2008 from diabetes. Will he be inducted?

Posted by Roy on Sunday, 12.12.10 @ 07:37am


I am going to say this, Rush is the most unique band of all time, just go through and listen album to album. Couple that with the fact that they have never hit big on the main stream (I personally dont think they want too) and they still have proved to be influential to countless artists (ok maybe not countless). I hope they never get inducted, it solidifies my arguement that they are the most unique band of all time. Considering all they have done, all that I have mentioned, not to mention Geddy and Neil are among the top all time at their respective instrument and Alex being one of the most underrated guitarists of all time. GO RUSH!

Posted by kalvin on Friday, 01.7.11 @ 03:09am


Don't really see how selling about 40 million records isn't hitting it big in the mainstream.

Posted by GFW on Friday, 01.7.11 @ 10:00am


I Think People Don't Think About Good Music Anymore And When You Think Of Good Music And Rock Legends You Got Guys Like AC/DC, Aerosmith, Black Sabbath, Metallica, & Rush Plus So Many More But Now You Got Idiots Who Think They Got It All When Only One Out A Hundred Of Them Pay Tribute To These Rock Legends Others Think "It's My Time Who
Cares About These Old Acts" And That Pisses Me Off
Because Those People Need To Remember This Guys Paved The Way For There Stupid Careers Don't Forget About The Legends, And Those People That Think These Guys Are To Old To Play Listen To Some Of There Music Like Thunderstruck, Walk This Way, Cat Scratch Fever, or Smells Like Teen Spirit And Tell Me If Those Songs Are Good... But As Far As Rush Is Concerned They Should Have Been In The Rock N Roll Hall Of Fame After Black Sabbath, AC/DC & Led Zeppelin
LONG LIVE ROCK.

Posted by Louis on Saturday, 01.8.11 @ 05:35am


Smells Like teen Spirit is an awesome song, don't lump it in with that crap.

But I agree, Rush should be in, They sold well, Are great musicains (Neil Peart is considered by many to be one of, if not the greatest, drummer of all time) And they are versatile, they can preform chart topping rock songs to long progressive rock suites.

Posted by GFW on Saturday, 01.8.11 @ 05:49am


"Couple that with the fact that they have never hit big on the main stream (I personally dont think they want too)"

I think 25 million albums sold in the US (with several Top 10 or Top 20 albums), playing the Hammersmith in London back in the day and playing to 60,000 in Rio on that one DVD says otherwise.

Posted by Sam on Saturday, 01.8.11 @ 08:36am


16319.....43220

Posted by Erorgotootjes on Wednesday, 01.19.11 @ 08:16am


Denying that the simplicity of punk was a direct reaction against the stately flourishes of prog is a waste of time, because it was. Obviously that wasn't the only thing, because nothing is ever the only thing, but it was a huge part. The Sex Pistols used to burn an effigy of Keith Emerson at concerts. Yes, I know that's not specifically Rush, save your caps lock button the wear Micheal. It's a representation of the same sort of mindless technical wankery Rush indulged in frequently.

Again, Rush is part of the second generation of prog that lacked the chops of ELP, the sense of humor of Genesis, and the manically psychotic and unified vision of King Crimson. No talking about them until those three are in. End of story.

Posted by Kit on Thursday, 01.20.11 @ 03:41am


Who is the twat who keeps reposting other people's comments?

Posted by Sam on Saturday, 01.22.11 @ 09:52am


So the Rock Hall doesn't like Prog because by drawing from classical elements, prog rock implied to some that rock itself wasn’t artistically interesting or important enough to contain its complex ideas. And for many critics prog strayed too far from rock’s African-American origins, reinforcing the stereotype that associated European music with the intellect and African music with the body. Prog rockers considered Bo Diddley too simple. In other words, Europeans use their heads to write music (that's Prog), while Africans use their private parts to write music (that's Rock). Furthermore, Europeans are intellectuals and Africans are sex crazed.

Posted by Roy on Tuesday, 02.15.11 @ 06:28am


induct rush in 2012, the writers need to start on the prog rock movement, and do it quickly before there all dead. cause this is ridiculous

Posted by chris on Friday, 02.25.11 @ 08:34am


When is the actual iphone 5 supposed to show up? I've verizon and would certainly like to have the iphone when my personal contract is up in September, I would really like to discover if the new iphone five is arriving out anytime in the future, since if so, I might stick it out lengthier to have that instead of the iphone 4.

Posted by iphone 5 specs on Friday, 03.4.11 @ 01:06am


Hey Kit-your points are fine about punk being a reaction to progressive - likely true, but who cares.

Rush lacks the chops of ELP - Laughable statement

Sense of humor of Genesis - this is music not Comedy Fest....plus Genesis is already in - you have not heard?

Psychotic vision, etc. of King Crimson - thats because Rush is a different band with different influences.

In any event, have you seen the Rush documentary (doubtful) where Metallica, Nine Inch Nails, etc. all put Rush on a pedestal calling Rush a 'huge' influence? They qualify irrespective of whether your opinion is that it is 'technical wankery' (which I assume is a reference to some of the older material).

This is the Rush thread with Rush fans...so the order thing means jack to us - plus, like pointed out above - Genesis is already in. Put em in already!!

Posted by 2112 on Monday, 03.7.11 @ 18:00pm


Abba is in, but not Rush? Selling out arenas after 30 years, millions of albums/CDs/mp3s sold, three of the best musicians in rock history-what else do u need?

Posted by Mike on Tuesday, 03.29.11 @ 01:33am


The biographies for the Canadian Music Hall of Fame inductees were online a few years ago, but now they are not. I don't know when they will be back up!

Posted by Roy on Monday, 04.4.11 @ 00:12am


Maybe the Hall will recognize Rush next year as it's 2012, exactly 100 years before 2112 ;)

Posted by Tahvo Parvianen on Saturday, 04.16.11 @ 13:54pm


http://www.walkoffame.com/rush

The New Rush 2010 Hollywood Walk of Fame Biography Page. All inductees pages have been updated. New look!

Posted by Roy on Monday, 04.25.11 @ 19:35pm


I think Kit should get educated before he gives an opinion about Rush . They have been ariund for 40 yrs and are still selling out every concert they play anywhere in the worldi think that it speaks for itself
Even Kiss are playing casinos now. But Rush arr selling out stadiums everywher

Posted by bubba on Thursday, 06.9.11 @ 18:46pm


Saw Rush last night at the New Orleans Arena. Knew they're amazing musicians, but it took seeing them UPCLOSE a few feet away to realize their true level of virtuosity. If Neal Peart isn't a musical genius, no one is. Alex & Geddy do things that shouldn't be humanly possible, based on my 30+ yrs of musical training. The fact Rush isn't in the HOF proves it's a JOKE. The Sex Pistols scoffed their '06 induction was evidence it is.

Posted by queenwhodat on Saturday, 06.11.11 @ 12:54pm


Any band that has influenced MANY big-name and great artists should be a shoo in to the HOF! Rush is among that select few that deserve to be classed in that category!

Posted by Antonio on Monday, 07.18.11 @ 01:29am


I'm not even going to go through this entire slugfest of he said nonsense, but I would like to add my two cents to this great band. Rush should be in the R&RHOF and whether they get in before this band should also be irrelevant. Here you have three members of a band that started off as a Zeppelin/Cream/Hendrix type of band and when their drummer left and Neil Peart joined, he brought the band to a whole new different level of consciousness. The three as musicians are amongst top musicians all time on their perspective instruments and took the English Prog influences and became one of the genre defying bands of their generation.

Posted by Chuck AzEee! on Sunday, 08.14.11 @ 13:47pm


"Lifeson bores me for the most part while Honeyman-Scott's unique style has made my life brighter."

Honeyman-Scott's guitar solo in "Kid" is one of the great moments in rock-guitar HISTORY.

Posted by Chalkie on Thursday, 08.18.11 @ 22:23pm


The three main reasons Rush hasn't been inducted into the R&R HOF are:
1. Their music is boring (see #2 below)
2. Their music is uninteresting (see #1 above)
3. Their music isn't good

Posted by D. Stroy on Wednesday, 09.21.11 @ 18:27pm


to D. Story- yeah that must be it...so explain how Madonna got in @her FIRST year of eligibility then?

Posted by PowerTrio on Wednesday, 09.21.11 @ 19:07pm


D. Stroy is just a troll; he has nothing to say beyond that kind of thing.

Posted by Sam on Friday, 10.21.11 @ 11:09am


Hey Kit and D. Stroy....since the MAIN criteria for induction is 'influence' and since Metallica is already in - lets check out this youtube video of Kirk Hammet calling Lifeson - a 'HUGE INFLUENCE' - and that Rush was the main inlfuence on conceptual metal:

www.youtube.com/watch?v=YzBtGj6shW4&feature=relmfu

Posted by Rushisaband on Saturday, 10.29.11 @ 19:45pm


Don't pay any attention to D. Stroy, the dude's just a troll who makes statements like "the statement after this is false, the statement before this is true."

And I don't think I've come across any posts by Kit on here that were posted later than 2008 so don't expect him to come back to this site to argue with you.

Posted by Tahvo Parvianen on Sunday, 10.30.11 @ 11:48am


True...Kit likely aint comin' back - but either way I think the opinion of Kirk Hammett of Metallica - a band in the hall already - counts just a bit more than some moron named Kit or Stroy....

Posted by Rushisaband on Sunday, 10.30.11 @ 12:00pm


24 Gold records multiple platinum records behind only the beetles and rolling stones...multiple individual awards from music industry journals such as modern drummer and Muscician. Still selling out arenas in 2011 and the same line up for 30 years...what is the criteria for the ROH? Look it up. They will get in after one dies, OD's or shoots or molests someone. I won't hold my breath though

Posted by Gary Kaylor on Thursday, 12.8.11 @ 10:26am


"Big Influence...Huge"

- Kirk Hammett - Metallica - on Lifeson and Rush - source 'Beyond the Lighted Stage' documentary.

Posted by Joey101 on Friday, 12.30.11 @ 07:32am


I am totally delighted with strong your blog greatly that warned me! Thank you “Success is liking yourself, liking what you do, and liking how you do it.” - Maya Angelou

Posted by touring russia on Friday, 01.27.12 @ 18:02pm


I am totally delighted with strong your blog greatly that helped me! Thank you “Money won’t create success. The freedom to make it will.” - Nelson Mandela

Posted by on Saturday, 01.28.12 @ 17:04pm


I am totally delighted with strong your blog greatly that saved me! Thank you “May God have mercy upon my enemies, because I won’t.” - George Patton

Posted by russia tours on Sunday, 01.29.12 @ 19:29pm


http://canadianmusichalloffame.ca/inductees/rush/

The 1994 Canadian Music Hall of Fame Biography

Rush

Winner of 7 JUNO Awards, 41 nominations

In 1974, Rush released its first (self-titled) album. It became the biggest selling debut from any Canadian band and brought with it the first of countless Juno nominations. Since then, Rush has shown a phenomenal propensity for both national and international success, recognition, awards, sellout shows, and silver, gold and platinum certifications. After breaking in the US in 1976 with 2112, and then internationally in 1980 with the release of Permanent Waves, Rush went on to sell more than 30 million records worldwide. Among the band’s many awards are Group of The Decade-1990, Harold Moon Award (SOCAN)- 1992, two Grammy nominations- 1982 and 1992, and a Toronto Arts Award in 1993. The band has received 33 Juno nominations up to and including 1993. As well, Rush has influenced innumerable bands (Primus, Dream Theatre, Queensryche, Fates Warning) and musicians. Individually, the members are perennial winners of readers polls in magazines such as Modern Drummer, Guitar Player and Playboy, among others. Perhaps the most intriguing accolade that has been bestowed upon this trio was the declaration in 1993 by Harvard Lampoon, the world’s oldest humor magazine, that the players in Rush were the “Musicians of the Millenium.

“Despite all of the acclaim, the members of Rush have displayed a remarkable ability to keep their lives private and to completely avoid the usual entertainment scandals, rumors and innuendo that almost inevitably follow most celebrities. In fact, close examination points to the distinct possibility that, while the members of Rush take their music very seriously, they don’t really perceive themselves as “rock stars.” Even when their personal lives are revealed, it is not the fast land of jet-setting and posh parties that is exposed, but tales of drummer Neil Peart’s bicycle tours, guitarist Alex Lifeson’s scuba-diving sojourns with former PM Pierre Trudeau and bassist Geddy Lee’s wife co-owning a Toronto based clothing design company called Zapata.

Musically, Rush has always been an enigma. In a world of three-chord heavy rock, the group’s only peers are in the arena of fusion jazz, although its roots are early-to-mid-’70s Led Zeppelin and post-psychedelic “prog-rock.” For Rush to comfortably share a place in the Juno Hall of Fame alongside such diverse legends as Anne Murray, Leonard Cohen, Maureen Forrester, The Band, Glenn Gould, Neil Young and Oscar Peterson also speaks volumes about the multi-hued landscape of Canadian music.

Rush has a unique ability to age not just gracefully but imperceptibly. There is nothing that Rush has done in 1974 or 1984 or today in 1994 that is inconceivable for the band to continue doing in 2004 and beyond.

Posted by Roy on Sunday, 01.29.12 @ 23:15pm


http://canadianmusichalloffame.ca/inductees/rush/

The 1994 Canadian Music Hall of Fame Biography

Rush

Winner of 7 JUNO Awards, 41 nominations

In 1974, Rush released its first (self-titled) album. It became the biggest selling debut from any Canadian band and brought with it the first of countless Juno nominations. Since then, Rush has shown a phenomenal propensity for both national and international success, recognition, awards, sellout shows, and silver, gold and platinum certifications. After breaking in the US in 1976 with 2112, and then internationally in 1980 with the release of Permanent Waves, Rush went on to sell more than 30 million records worldwide. Among the band’s many awards are Group of The Decade-1990, Harold Moon Award (SOCAN)- 1992, two Grammy nominations- 1982 and 1992, and a Toronto Arts Award in 1993. The band has received 33 Juno nominations up to and including 1993. As well, Rush has influenced innumerable bands (Primus, Dream Theatre, Queensryche, Fates Warning) and musicians. Individually, the members are perennial winners of readers polls in magazines such as Modern Drummer, Guitar Player and Playboy, among others. Perhaps the most intriguing accolade that has been bestowed upon this trio was the declaration in 1993 by Harvard Lampoon, the world’s oldest humor magazine, that the players in Rush were the “Musicians of the Millenium.

“Despite all of the acclaim, the members of Rush have displayed a remarkable ability to keep their lives private and to completely avoid the usual entertainment scandals, rumors and innuendo that almost inevitably follow most celebrities. In fact, close examination points to the distinct possibility that, while the members of Rush take their music very seriously, they don’t really perceive themselves as “rock stars.” Even when their personal lives are revealed, it is not the fast land of jet-setting and posh parties that is exposed, but tales of drummer Neil Peart’s bicycle tours, guitarist Alex Lifeson’s scuba-diving sojourns with former PM Pierre Trudeau and bassist Geddy Lee’s wife co-owning a Toronto based clothing design company called Zapata.

Musically, Rush has always been an enigma. In a world of three-chord heavy rock, the group’s only peers are in the arena of fusion jazz, although its roots are early-to-mid-’70s Led Zeppelin and post-psychedelic “prog-rock.” For Rush to comfortably share a place in the Juno Hall of Fame alongside such diverse legends as Anne Murray, Leonard Cohen, Maureen Forrester, The Band, Glenn Gould, Neil Young and Oscar Peterson also speaks volumes about the multi-hued landscape of Canadian music.

Rush has a unique ability to age not just gracefully but imperceptibly. There is nothing that Rush has done in 1974 or 1984 or today in 1994 that is inconceivable for the band to continue doing in 2004 and beyond.

Posted by Roy on Sunday, 01.29.12 @ 23:15pm


Progressive rock trio is how an article about their star on the Hollywood Walk of Fame described them. Think of the evolution of Rush and their music. After 1975 going into 2112 what other band was doing what they were doing? Permanent Waves and Moving Pictures ahead of its time and musically dynamic. Each member is a super talent in their own right. The Rock n' Roll Hole of No Brain is a political scam - They are left over douche bag slime. D. Stroy is vomit juice too. Hall of Fame - Screw! Another embarrassment to the U.S.

Posted by Voltaire on Wednesday, 02.8.12 @ 22:56pm


Don't understand why they are not in the hall of fame.They basically got their start in Cleveland from a female disc jockey playing working man in 1974. Her comments were everybody was calling in asking at that time when the next Led Zeppelin album was coming out. Growing up as a Canadian i was not a huge Rush fan but after all the years of them performing and selling out concerts and millions of albums worldwide even i realized that the time has come to give it up for them. Almost 40 years of rocking their asses off and satisfying millions of people and influencing great musicians ( like Metallica and The Foo Fighters to name a couple) i think they deserve to be rewarded by being inducted into the rock and roll hall of fame without waiting as in A.S.A.P. Thanks for your time

Posted by Nick Finamore on Monday, 02.20.12 @ 10:06am


They never did any Coke - now that is funny!!

Read Ghost Rider for a good Coke reference - around the time of Moving Pictures I think they had plenty of Coke going around man.

Rush are great nonetheless. Clockwork Angels should be a great release.

Posted by Ya Right on Monday, 02.20.12 @ 12:13pm


BTW - screw the hall of fame bunch of panzy's - who needs em!!!!!!!!!!

Posted by Ya Right on Monday, 02.20.12 @ 12:20pm


Please sign my petition for my 10th birthday 2/29 :) Thanks!
http://www.ipetitions.com/petition/leap-into-2012-induct-rush-now/?utm_medium=email&utm_source=system&utm_campaign=Send%2Bto%2BFriend

Posted by Kirsten on Wednesday, 02.22.12 @ 18:23pm


I do not even know with strong your blog greatly that saved me. God bless you “Never underestimate a child’s ability to get into more trouble.” - Martin Mull

Posted by Berrymall on Wednesday, 03.7.12 @ 03:08am


What's so great about this band again? They were good to smoke a joint to, but that's all I can say.

Posted by astrodog on Wednesday, 04.11.12 @ 13:19pm


The reason Rush is not in the hall.... is because they are still together, still rocking, and still relevant.

The hall is for bands that are disbanded. The hall of fame is just about getting bands back together. Its all about the drama of seeing a member who was kicked out... perform with people that really dont like him.

The hall should be called "The Van Halen Experiment".

Rush is not in... because they have always been Alex/Geddy/Neil (no offense John Rutsey RIP).

Posted by JD on Tuesday, 04.17.12 @ 19:46pm


the Hall of Fame is no longer worthy of having RUSH.

Posted by vinny on Thursday, 04.19.12 @ 23:40pm


Probably the greatest outrage is Rush not being in the Hall of Fame.. The most talented power trio of all time and phenomenal Live, may well be the best ever in that department. From the stand point of musical talent (musicianship)Alex, Geddy and Neil are light years ahead of 99% of those already in the hall. The second poster cited reasons for the snub very well.

Posted by Paul Thomas on Saturday, 05.12.12 @ 19:40pm


Rush has a new album coming out in June.

Posted by Roy on Tuesday, 05.22.12 @ 21:02pm


http://www.walkoffame.com/rush

RUSH
Inducted to the Walk of Fame on June 25, 2010 with 1 star. 3 Comments

Quick Facts
Born:
Canada
Ethnicity:
White
Time Capsule:
View Time Capsule Image
Rush Receives Walk of Fame Star
By STEVEN HERBERT
City News Service

HOLLYWOOD (CNS) - The Canadian progressive rock trio Rush received the 2,412th star on the Hollywood Walk of Fame today, drawing praise for their values and loyalty.

``I've been in the rock 'n' roll business for about 20 years now and let me tell you -- these guys are the best of the best,'' said Billy Corgan, the vocalist and lead guitarist for The Smashing Pumpkins said in the late-morning ceremony in front of the Musicians Institute on Hollywood Boulevard.

``They represent the value that the fan will listen and will care, that you're not just a bunch of sheep out there, that you actually give a (obscenity) about what's going on.''

Donna Halper, a former music director and radio personality at WMMS-FM (100.7) in Cleveland, the first disc jockey to play Rush's music, said ``for nearly four decades, the members of Rush have remained true to themselves and true to their music.

``They've never allowed success to spoil them,'' Halper said. ``They've never lost their integrity. In a world where it often seems the good guys never win, Rush are living proof that sometimes good people do finish first.''

Halper told of a man in Japan who learned English ``so he could better appreciate the words of Rush songs,'' along with similar stories from fans in Chile, Brazil, Finland, Israel and Mexico.

Geddy Lee, the group's bassist and frontman, said ``there are some times in life where you have what I would call a beautiful, surreal moment. This is one of those moments.''

Guitarist Alex Lifeson told the fans, who lined up on both sides of Hollywood Boulevard, ``we wouldn't be able to do what we do without you. It's really special to us.''

The group's third member, drummer Neal Peart, did not attend the ceremony, as he was riding his motorcycle Albuquerque, N.M., where Rush will begin its 37-city Time Machine tour Tuesday.

Rush drew what Leron Gubler, the Hollywood Chamber of Commerce's president and chief executive officer who presided over the ceremony, called ``one of the most enthusiastic crowds we've had in a very long time.''

The ceremony came four days before both the start of its tour, which includes stops at the Forum in Inglewood Aug. 11 and the Verizon Wireless Amphitheater in Irvine two days later, and the DVD release of the documentary ``Rush: Beyond the Lighted Stage.''

Beginning with its self-titled debut album in 1974, Rush has sold more than 40 million records worldwide. Only The Beatles and The Rolling Stones have more consecutive gold or platinum studio albums by a rock band, according to Recording Industry Association of America figures.

Rush's most-acclaimed albums include ``2112,'' ``Moving Pictures,'' and ``Test of Echo.'' Some of its most popular songs include ``The Spirit of Radio,'' ``Tom

Sawyer,'' ``Limelight,'' ``Closer to the Heart,'' ``YYZ,'' ``Working Man'' and ``Subdivisions.''

Rush is considered Canada's most successful rock band. It was inducted into the Canadian Music Hall of Fame in 1994, Canada's Walk of Stars in 1999 and Canada's Songwriting Hall of Fame in March and was bestowed the Order of Canada in 1997.

View more clips of the Hollywood Walk of Fame ceremony.
Subscribe to Hollywood Walk of Fame channel on YouTube

RUSH- Geddy Lee, Alex Lifeson, and Neil Peart - honored with 2,412th Star on the Hollywood Walk of Fame
Hollywood Honor Coincides With Tour, *Documentary and New Single
Guest speakers included Donna Halper, former radio personality at WMMS Cleveland where Rush received their first airplay with Working Man; and Billy Corgan, vocalist, lead guitarist and songwriter for The Smashing Pumpkins will participate as well.
6752 Hollywood Boulevard in front of Musician's Institute
Friday, June 25, 2010.

Posted by Roy on Saturday, 05.26.12 @ 08:01am


RUSH

THE 1994 JUNO/CANADIAN MUSIC HALL OF FAME
THE 1997 ORDER OF CANADA
THE 1999 CANADA HONOURS/CANADA'S WALK OF FAME
THE 2010 HOLLYWOOD WALK OF FAME
THE 2010 CANADIAN SONGWRITERS HALL OF FAME
THE 20?? SONGWRITERS HALL OF FAME
THE 20?? ROCK AND ROLL HALL OF FAME

THE BIOGRAPHIES

THE 1994 CANADIAN MUSIC HALL OF FAME

In 1974, Rush released its first (self-titled) album. It became the biggest selling debut from any Canadian band and brought with it the first of countless Juno nominations. Since then, Rush has shown a phenomenal propensity for both national and international success, recognition, awards, sellout shows, and silver, gold and platinum certifications. After breaking in the US in 1976 with 2112, and then internationally in 1980 with the release of Permanent Waves, Rush went on to sell more than 30 million records worldwide. Among the band’s many awards are Group of The Decade-1990, Harold Moon Award (SOCAN)- 1992, two Grammy nominations- 1982 and 1992, and a Toronto Arts Award in 1993. The band has received 33 Juno nominations up to and including 1993. As well, Rush has influenced innumerable bands (Primus, Dream Theatre, Queensryche, Fates Warning) and musicians. Individually, the members are perennial winners of readers polls in magazines such as Modern Drummer, Guitar Player and Playboy, among others. Perhaps the most intriguing accolade that has been bestowed upon this trio was the declaration in 1993 by Harvard Lampoon, the world’s oldest humor magazine, that the players in Rush were the “Musicians of the Millenium.

“Despite all of the acclaim, the members of Rush have displayed a remarkable ability to keep their lives private and to completely avoid the usual entertainment scandals, rumors and innuendo that almost inevitably follow most celebrities. In fact, close examination points to the distinct possibility that, while the members of Rush take their music very seriously, they don’t really perceive themselves as “rock stars.” Even when their personal lives are revealed, it is not the fast land of jet-setting and posh parties that is exposed, but tales of drummer Neil Peart’s bicycle tours, guitarist Alex Lifeson’s scuba-diving sojourns with former PM Pierre Trudeau and bassist Geddy Lee’s wife co-owning a Toronto based clothing design company called Zapata.

Musically, Rush has always been an enigma. In a world of three-chord heavy rock, the group’s only peers are in the arena of fusion jazz, although its roots are early-to-mid-’70s Led Zeppelin and post-psychedelic “prog-rock.” For Rush to comfortably share a place in the Juno Hall of Fame alongside such diverse legends as Anne Murray, Leonard Cohen, Maureen Forrester, The Band, Glenn Gould, Neil Young and Oscar Peterson also speaks volumes about the multi-hued landscape of Canadian music.

Rush has a unique ability to age not just gracefully but imperceptibly. There is nothing that Rush has done in 1974 or 1984 or today in 1994 that is inconceivable for the band to continue doing in 2004 and beyond.

THE 1997 ORDER OF CANADA

Members of the progressive rock trio, RUSH, these veterans of the stage have raised over a million dollars for charities such as food banks and the United Way. Their efforts have enhanced an awareness of the plight faced by society's less fortunate, inspiring and awakening the social consciousness of an entire generation. Musicians far and wide have been influenced by the band's accomplishments, a testament to its contribution to popular music.

CANADA'S WALK OF FAME 1999

For 25 years Geddy Lee (keyboard/bass/vocals/), Alex Lifeson (guitar), and Neil Peart (drums) have established Rush as the quintessential Canadian heavy rock band.

Their first album, Rush, in 1974, became the biggest-selling debut by a Canadian band, and by 1979 the group was so successful worldwide that the Canadian government awarded them the title of official Ambassadors of Music.

During the 1980's the band streamlined its image, to the dismay of some earlier fans, but Rush persevered with a determination to progress musically with each new album.

The group's 1981 album, Moving Pictures, has been described as a ground-breaking fusion of technological rock and musical craft. They followed this with Hold Your Fire in 1987, Test For Echo in 1996, and Different Stages, described as a commemorative of the group's different stages of evolution, which was released in 1998. They received the Group of the Decade award in 1990, have won numerous Junos, and sold more than 40 million records internationally.

Rush has also raised more than one million dollars for charities such as food banks and the United Way. The band, which continues to tour to packed audiences, received the Order of Canada in 1997.

Big Break:

1974 Rush released their first album entitled "RUSH". It became the biggest selling debut LP that any Canadian band had ever released. The band spent years building their core audience by constant touring in North America doing as many as 200 dates a year.

THE 2010 HOLLYWOOD WALK OF FAME

Rush – is without question one of the most inventive and compelling groups in rock history, equally famed for both its virtuoso musicianship and provocative songwriting.

The honor comes as the progressive-rock trio comprised of bassist-frontman Geddy Lee, guitarist Alex Lifeson and drummer Neil Peart gear up for their North American Time Machine tour and pre-releasing 2 new songs “Caravan” & “BU2B” from their forthcoming 20th studio album Clockwork Angels (due spring 2011)

Just last year, a career-chronicling Rolling Stone feature praised the band for its continuing artistic vitality, noting that “It’s true that Rush doesn’t mean today what it did in ’76 or even ’96. It may mean more.”

Rush's enduring pop culture relevance is perhaps best evidenced by a pair of high- profile appearances - a rare national television performance and interview on Comedy Central's "The Colbert Report" in 2008 (the band's first TV appearance since 1975), and a pivotal role in the storyline of the 2009 hit comedy, I Love You, Man, starring Paul Rudd and Jason Segal, where the band also made a memorable cameo in the film.

Beginning with their self-titled debut album in 1974, their extraordinary body of work – which includes such formidable works as 1976’s 2112, 1981’s Moving Pictures, 1996’s Test for Echo and the latest studio album “Snakes & Arrows”- made a triumphant debut on the Billboard 200 upon its initial release in 2007, entering the chart in the #3 spot. The album’s success marked Rush’s highest chart debut since 1993, as well as the group’s eleventh Top Ten album in the U.S.

Rush has sold more than 40 million records worldwide and garnered untold legions of devoted and admiring fans. According to the RIAA, Rush's sales statistics place RUSH third behind The Beatles and The Rolling Stones for the most consecutive gold or platinum studio albums by a rock band. Some of their most popular songs include: The Spirit of Radio, Tom Sawyer, Limelight, Closer To The Heart, YYZ, Working Man and Subdivisons.

Rush has also won a number of Juno Awards, been nominated for multiple Grammy awards, was inducted into the Canadian Music Hall of Fame in 1994, bestowed the Order of Canada in 1997, inducted into Canada’s Walk of Stars in 1999 and Canada’s Songwriting Hall of Fame in March of 2010. Consistently celebrated and respected worldwide, Rush is the most successful Canadian rock band of all time, and they remain one of the biggest grossing arena rock bands ever.

Rush has become known for the instrumental skills of its members, complex compositions, and eclectic lyrical motifs drawing heavily on science fiction, fantasy, and libertarian philosophy, as well as addressing humanitarian, social, emotional, and environmental concerns.

A special limited engagement big screen release of the documentary "Rush: Beyond the Lighted Stage," opened worldwide on June 10. Directors Sam Dunn with Scot McFadyen's rock doc, which follows the band's 40-plus-years career, premiered this past April at the 2010 Tribeca Film Festival where it won the coveted Audience Award. The documentary includes interviews with some of today’s most respected rock artists such as Billy Corgan, Taylor Hawkins, Trent Reznor, Sebastian Bach, Kirk Hammett and Gene Simmons speaking about the influence of Rush. The doc is slated for release on DVD and Blu-Ray in the U.S. on June 29. *On the day of the ceremony there will be a special screening of the documentary at Mann Chinese 6 in Hollywood, just 2 blocks west of where the band will get their star on the Hollywood Walk of Fame. The film will be featured on Friday June 25 as an all day event. The film will play at 2pm, 5pm and 8pm. This is a last chance to see it on the big screen Event tied in to celebrate the band's honor of receiving the Star.

Four days after receiving the Hollywood Walk of Fame star, Rush will kick-off its "Time Machine Tour" on June 29, in Albuquerque, New Mexico and finish October 2, in West Palm Beach, Florida.

THE 2010 SONGWRITERS HALL OF FAME

First formed in 1968, Rush has enjoyed a prolific career that spans four decades and has, in those years, borne some pretty substantial fruit: 24 gold records; 14 platinum (three multi-platinum) records; 79th place in U.S. album sales with 25 million units; total worldwide album sales estimated at over 40 million units; and, according to the Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA), sales statistics that place them fourth behind The Beatles, The Rolling Stones, and Aerosmith for the most consecutive gold or platinum albums by a rock band.

Rush has been inducted into the Canadian Music Hall of Fame (1994), honoured with numerous Junos, is the first rock troupe to be made Officers of the Order of Canada as a “group” (May 9, 1996), and hailed by countless rock bands, from Metallica and Smashing Pumpkins to Dream Theatre and Primus, as their foremost musical influence.

Rush is one of the most uncompromising, unique and enduring bands that Canada has ever produced. And to say their fan following is strong would be putting it mildly. They began modestly and from the ground up, playing cover songs at local bars and high school events. In 1973, they released their first single, Not Fade Away, a Buddy Holly cover, and included a track they had penned themselves on side B, entitled You Can’t Fight It. The single barely made any waves and was not championed by any record labels. At this point the band decided to start their own record label, which they named Moon Records (later renamed Anthem Records).

They released their self-titled debut album on their label in 1974. Donna Halper, a DJ and musical director working at radio station WMMS in Cleveland, Ohio, picked up the single Working Man for regular rotation. The popularity of the single prompted Mercury Records to re-release the entire album in the U.S. that same year. Just after the release of the debut album and two weeks before their first U.S. tour, Neil Peart replaced Rutsey as drummer, and the band arrived at the form it holds to this day.

The group quickly found their natural niches within the band. Peart, for example, took over the role of main lyricist from Lee, who was more interested in composing music, as Lifeson also was. Peart’s love of fantasy, science fiction and individualist literature showed itself in his songwriting and in the band’s second album, “Fly By Night” (1975). Their third album, “Caress of Steel” (1975), was released soon after and built upon the epic song structure that had been introduced to fans in “Fly By Night.” “Caress of Steel,” however, emphasized storytelling and complex arrangements in the five hard-rock tracks that made up the album, two of those being “multi-chapter” tracks.

As is usually the case when artists deviate from the norm and others’ expectations, Rush was immediately blasted by critics for releasing an “unfocused” album. Executives from their record label urged the band to work on a more commercially friendly release to follow “Caress of Steel.” The band did not succumb to the pressure of convention, however, and released “2112” in 1976. The album included a title track that covered the entire side A of the record. “2112” went platinum in Canada and brought the band its first taste of commercial success. Rush released their first live album shortly after. “All The World’s A Stage” (1976) featured recordings from their three-night billing at Massey Hall in Toronto during their 2112 tour.

Rush became renowned for daring to experiment and evolve their musical style, especially with the release of “A Farewell to Kings” (1977) and “Hemispheres” (1978). They produced both albums in Rockfield Studios in Wales. It was a time of major experimentation for the band, extensively developing their trademark style of concept songs, synthesizer use, and intricate time signature changes. Peart drew upon classical, fantasy and science fiction literature in his lyrics, and included triangles, glockenspiel, wood blocks, cowbells, timpani, gong and chimes in his percussion. Lifeson expanded his guitar-playing with twelve-string and classical instruments, and Lee experimented with bass-pedal synthesizers and Minimoog.

Their 1980s album, “Permanent Waves,” reached number 5 on the U.S. album charts, and showcased country and “new wave” punk influences. It included the hits The Spirit of Radio and Freewill, the former one of the group’s best-known songs. A year later, Rush produced an album that would take them to new heights of fame. “Moving Pictures” (1981) highlighted the band’s progressive style while also maintaining an accessible and radio-friendly sound. It featured the hit track Tom Sawyer, co-written with fellow Canadian Pye Dubois of Max Webster. “Moving Pictures” reached number 3 on the Billboard 200 Album chart and was certified quadruple platinum.

Though they had attained a desirable level of popularity and recognition, Rush was enthusiastic about continuing to experiment and develop musically. Hard at work throughout the remainder of the ’80s, Rush released the albums “Exit…Stage Left” (Live, 1981), “Signals” (1982), “Grace Under Pressure” (1984), “Power Windows” (1985), “Hold Your Fire” (1987), “A Show of Hands” (Live, 1989), and “Presto” (1989). Rush consistently topped the charts during these years and enjoyed impressive record sales. In 1989 they changed labels from Mercury to Atlantic.

Rush shed its heavy use of synthesizers and electronic sounds and moved towards more of a guitar-focused, barebones traditional rock sound during the ’90s. “Roll the Bones” (1991), “Counterparts” (1993), and “Test for Echo” (1996) all reached number 1 on Canadian album charts and reached 3, 2, and 5 on the U.S. album charts respectively.

The band took a time out when Peart’s personal life was hit by tragedy in August 1997. His daughter, Selena, was killed in an automobile accident. His wife, Jacqueline, died ten months later of cancer. In 1998, “Different Stages” was released, a three-disc compilation of live recordings from the “Counterparts,” “Test for Echo,” and “A Farewell to Kings” tours, dedicated to Selena and Jacqueline. Peart took a few years away from the band to mourn. He rode across North America on his motorcycle and penned the memoir Ghost Rider: Travels on the Healing Road (2002) while on his journey. In 2001, he announced to his bandmates that he was ready to make music again. Rush went back to work in a Toronto studio, and spent fourteen months developing their first album since their hiatus, entitled “Vapor Trails” (2002), and hit the tour circuit after more than six years away. “Rush in Rio” (Live, 2003), a triple CD and an accompanying DVD of the same name was recorded on the last night of the Vapor Trails tour and hit Diamond sales status in Canada.

In 2004, Rush released the album “Feedback” to celebrate their 30th anniversary. It featured eight cover tracks paying homage to the artists that influenced the band during their start three decades earlier. The band then began a top-selling worldwide 30th Anniversary Tour and released a DVD of their Frankfurt, Germany, show in 2005, entitled “R30: Live in Germany.”

In 2006, the band began writing for their 2007 album release, “Snakes and Arrows.” The first single, Far Cry reached number 2 in the U.S. and the album debuted at number 3 on Billboard Top 200 albums chart. Rush then commenced another immensely popular worldwide tour and released the “Snakes and Arrows Live” album in 2008.

On November 17, 2009, Rush released “Working Men,” a “best-of” live compilation album and DVD. Ultimately, their impact cannot be expressed merely through chart positions, distribution, airplay or awards. “Rush” is a sub culture. They are the epitome of progressive, enduring rock ‘n’ roll, influencing some of the leading musical artists of our time and amassing a loyal fan following.

INDUCTED SONGS

TOM SAWYER

In 1981, Rush produced its biggest-selling record to date, “Moving Pictures,” featuring the hit Tom Sawyer, which has become a rock classic. After its release on Mercury Records and PolyGram, it reached number 25 in the U.K. singles chart in October as the follow-up to the band’s breakthrough hit, The Spirit of Radio, which was released only a year and a half earlier. In the U.S. it reached number 44 on the Billboard Hot 100 and number 8 on the Billboard Mainstream Rock chart. In 2009 it was named the 19th greatest hard rock song of all time by VH1. The song was also featured on several Rush compilations, such as “Chronicles” (1990).

Tom Sawyer, titled after Mark Twain’s literary character, was co-written with Canadian lyricist Pye Dubois, lyricist of rock band Max Webster. During a rehearsal one summer on a farm just outside Ontario, Peart was presented with a poem of Dubois’ entitled “Louis the Lawyer” (Louis the Warrior), which he later modified and, with the help of Lee and Lifeson, set to music. According to Peart, the original lyrics were “a portrait of a modern-day rebel, a free-spirited individualist striding through the world wide-eyed and purposeful.” He stated that “the themes of reconciling the boy and man within and the difference between what people are and what others perceive them to be,” were later added by him.

Tom Sawyer has been featured in several movies such as “The Waterboy” (1998), “Rob Zombie’s Halloween” (2007), “Fanboys” (2008), and “I Love You, Man” (2009), as well as television shows such as “Chuck”, “Family Guy”, “Trailer Park Boys”, “Freaks and Geeks” and “Futurama”. On July 16, 2008, the band made its first American television appearance in 33 years, performing the song during an airing of The Colbert Report.

A cover version of the song is included in the popular video game Rock Band.

Cover artists include: Alexisonfire, Deadsy, Sebastian Bach, Mindless Self Indulgence, Fifty One’s and Run for Cover.

LIMELIGHT

First appearing on the quadruple-platinum certified 1981 album, “Moving Pictures”, Limelight charted number 4 on the U.S. mainstream charts and number 55 on the U.S. Hot 100 chart. It is unquestionably one of Rush's most popular singles.

The lyrics, written by Neil Peart, articulate his discomfort with fame and notoriety in sombre, eloquent language, even alluding to the well-known Shakespearean line “All the world’s a stage / And all the men and women merely players” from the play, “As You Like It.”

In a 2007 interview, Alex Lifeson gave his take on Limelight: “It's funny: after all these years, the solo to Limelight is my favorite to play live. There's something very sad and lonely about it; it exists in its own little world. And I think, in its own way, it reflects the nature of the song's lyrics – feeling isolated amidst chaos and adulation."

The song was featured in the films “I Love You, Man” (2009), “Adventureland” (2009), and “Fanboys” (2008). In an episode of the television series, “Trailer Park Boys”, Bubbles gives Mr. Lahey the finger to the opening riff of Limelight while driving by in a car.

Cover artists include: Billy Corgan.

CLOSER TO THE HEART

Closer to the Heart gave the world its first taste of the future Canadian rock icons, Rush. A true fan favourite, the song is one of the band’s most radio-friendly tunes and is such an unforgettable and enduring rock anthem that over three decades later, it is still heard on the radio airwaves.

Neil Peart, considered by music fans, critics, and fellow musicians alike as one of the most articulate lyricists in the music industry, put some of his most moving thoughts down on paper in Closer to the Heart. Peter Talbot, a musician friend of Peart’s, co-wrote the lyrics to the track, with Lee and Lifeson composing the music.

Released on the 1977 album “A Farewell to Kings,” the song was Rush’s first hit single in the U.K., reaching number 36 on the charts in February 1978 and certified gold in album sales. “A Farewell to Kings” was also Rush’s first gold-certified album in the U.S. and reached number 33 on Billboard’s album charts. Soon after, it reached platinum-certified status in both the U.S. and Canada.

On the original recording of the song and in live performances, Peart played on an acoustic drum set, except between the years 1984 and ’94, where he used an electronic drum set.

The track has appeared on nearly every set list for most of Rush’s tours and subsequently on most of the band’s live albums, including “Exit…Stage Left” (1981), “A Show of Hands” (1989), “Different Stages” (1998), “Rush in Rio” (2003), “R:30 30th Anniversary World Tour” (2005), and “Grace Under Pressure Tour” (2006).

In the third season of the famed Canadian comedic television series “Trailer Park Boys”, Alex Lifeson makes a guest appearance and plays “Closer to the Heart” with Bubbles, one of the show’s main characters, at the end of the episode. In the “R:30” DVD, a clip is included of the entire band playing with Bubbles and Barenaked Ladies front-man Ed Robertson during the Tsunami Relief concert.

Cover artists include: Fates Warning and Landon Pigg.

SUBDIVISIONS

Subdivisions is a single from Rush’s ninth studio album, “Signals” (1982). The song is a fan favourite and has been regularly included on the band’s set lists. Upon its release, it reached number 8 on the U.S. charts, and number 53 on the U.K. charts.

The song marks the band’s increased use of synthesizers in their music. The lyrics speak of the loneliness, isolation, and stifling conventions of life in the suburbs, as well as the pressure felt by youths to “sell their dreams” and conform.

The band filmed the downtown scenes of the Subdivisions music video in Toronto and filmed the suburban scenes in Scarborough, Ontario. The school hall of L'Amoreaux Collegiate Institute in northwest Scarborough was included, as well as a clip of east Toronto’s Don Valley Parkway and a bustling Toronto Transit Commission (TTC) subway station.

Young Canadian singer/songwriter Anita Athavale recorded a beautiful rendition of Subdivisions on her 2007 debut album, “In the Noise.” Her thoughts on the song’s inspiring message convey a sentiment shared by most Rush fans: “Making the album, I was in a place where I was about to put music down: try something else, be normal, make some money, buy a house, whatever else I was supposed to do. That song made me think about choosing that other life.”

Cover artists include: Jacob Moon, Anita Athavale, Randy Jackson, Dominic Cifarelli and Jeff Feldman.

THE SPIRIT OF RADIO

The Spirit of Radio was written by Rush in 1979 and released in 1980 on the “Permanent Waves” album. The song quickly climbed the U.K.’s singles chart to number 13 and became their biggest and most recognizable U.K. hit.

The song was titled after the slogan for Toronto’s local radio station, CFNY, which started out in Brampton, Ontario, in 1960 and is now known as Edge 102. The maverick radio station, which experienced a tumultuous history due to ownership and personnel changes over the years, was known for its intensely loyal listeners. It was the listeners themselves who named the station The Spirit of Radio. Its strong reputation with its listeners is exactly what inspired Rush to compose the song of the same name.

In an interview with Billboard Magazine, Neil Peart said about the song: “The Spirit of Radio was actually written as a tribute to all that was good about radio, celebrating my appreciation of magical moments I'd had since childhood, of hearing the right song at the right time.”

The Spirit of Radio gained a significant amount of attention and was soon recognized as one of the band’s most successful singles. Peart discussed the song with Bob Mack of Spin, stating that he still considered it a song that fused the sounds of reggae, pop, and metal in a new way, "a valid musical gumbo" created "to represent what radio should be." Rolling Stone's David Fricke was quoted as saying that "Rush demonstrates a maturity that even their detractors may have to admire." He showed a particular interest in the single The Spirit of Radio and in his review he mentioned that "this band is among the very best in its genre." John Swenson of Rolling Stone observed that The Spirit of Radio had "gotten more airplay than Rush's entire catalog put together, and it's brought them a whole new audience."

The Spirit of Radio was named one of The Rock and Roll Hall of Fame's 500 Songs that Shaped Rock and Roll. In June, a rendition of the song recorded from a live performance at the Apollo in Manchester, England, was featured in the video game Guitar Hero 5. In 1993, the famously familiar opening riff of the song was sampled on Conchita Martinez from the album “So Tough” by British indie band St. Etienne. In 2006, the song appeared on the soundtrack for “Trailer Park Boys: The Movie”, and became available as downloadable content for Karaoke Revolution Presents American Idol Encore 2 for the popular gaming system, Playstation 3. The track is also available on the music video game Rock Revolution.

Cover artists include: Les Claypool, St. Etienne, Rachel Barton Pine and Premonition.

Posted by Roy on Saturday, 05.26.12 @ 08:02am


RUSH

THE 1994 JUNO/CANADIAN MUSIC HALL OF FAME
THE 1997 ORDER OF CANADA
THE 1999 CANADA HONOURS/CANADA'S WALK OF FAME
THE 2010 HOLLYWOOD WALK OF FAME
THE 2010 CANADIAN SONGWRITERS HALL OF FAME
THE 20?? SONGWRITERS HALL OF FAME
THE 20?? ROCK AND ROLL HALL OF FAME

THE BIOGRAPHIES

THE 1994 CANADIAN MUSIC HALL OF FAME

In 1974, Rush released its first (self-titled) album. It became the biggest selling debut from any Canadian band and brought with it the first of countless Juno nominations. Since then, Rush has shown a phenomenal propensity for both national and international success, recognition, awards, sellout shows, and silver, gold and platinum certifications. After breaking in the US in 1976 with 2112, and then internationally in 1980 with the release of Permanent Waves, Rush went on to sell more than 30 million records worldwide. Among the band’s many awards are Group of The Decade-1990, Harold Moon Award (SOCAN)- 1992, two Grammy nominations- 1982 and 1992, and a Toronto Arts Award in 1993. The band has received 33 Juno nominations up to and including 1993. As well, Rush has influenced innumerable bands (Primus, Dream Theatre, Queensryche, Fates Warning) and musicians. Individually, the members are perennial winners of readers polls in magazines such as Modern Drummer, Guitar Player and Playboy, among others. Perhaps the most intriguing accolade that has been bestowed upon this trio was the declaration in 1993 by Harvard Lampoon, the world’s oldest humor magazine, that the players in Rush were the “Musicians of the Millenium.

“Despite all of the acclaim, the members of Rush have displayed a remarkable ability to keep their lives private and to completely avoid the usual entertainment scandals, rumors and innuendo that almost inevitably follow most celebrities. In fact, close examination points to the distinct possibility that, while the members of Rush take their music very seriously, they don’t really perceive themselves as “rock stars.” Even when their personal lives are revealed, it is not the fast land of jet-setting and posh parties that is exposed, but tales of drummer Neil Peart’s bicycle tours, guitarist Alex Lifeson’s scuba-diving sojourns with former PM Pierre Trudeau and bassist Geddy Lee’s wife co-owning a Toronto based clothing design company called Zapata.

Musically, Rush has always been an enigma. In a world of three-chord heavy rock, the group’s only peers are in the arena of fusion jazz, although its roots are early-to-mid-’70s Led Zeppelin and post-psychedelic “prog-rock.” For Rush to comfortably share a place in the Juno Hall of Fame alongside such diverse legends as Anne Murray, Leonard Cohen, Maureen Forrester, The Band, Glenn Gould, Neil Young and Oscar Peterson also speaks volumes about the multi-hued landscape of Canadian music.

Rush has a unique ability to age not just gracefully but imperceptibly. There is nothing that Rush has done in 1974 or 1984 or today in 1994 that is inconceivable for the band to continue doing in 2004 and beyond.

THE 1997 ORDER OF CANADA

Members of the progressive rock trio, RUSH, these veterans of the stage have raised over a million dollars for charities such as food banks and the United Way. Their efforts have enhanced an awareness of the plight faced by society's less fortunate, inspiring and awakening the social consciousness of an entire generation. Musicians far and wide have been influenced by the band's accomplishments, a testament to its contribution to popular music.

CANADA'S WALK OF FAME 1999

For 25 years Geddy Lee (keyboard/bass/vocals/), Alex Lifeson (guitar), and Neil Peart (drums) have established Rush as the quintessential Canadian heavy rock band.

Their first album, Rush, in 1974, became the biggest-selling debut by a Canadian band, and by 1979 the group was so successful worldwide that the Canadian government awarded them the title of official Ambassadors of Music.

During the 1980's the band streamlined its image, to the dismay of some earlier fans, but Rush persevered with a determination to progress musically with each new album.

The group's 1981 album, Moving Pictures, has been described as a ground-breaking fusion of technological rock and musical craft. They followed this with Hold Your Fire in 1987, Test For Echo in 1996, and Different Stages, described as a commemorative of the group's different stages of evolution, which was released in 1998. They received the Group of the Decade award in 1990, have won numerous Junos, and sold more than 40 million records internationally.

Rush has also raised more than one million dollars for charities such as food banks and the United Way. The band, which continues to tour to packed audiences, received the Order of Canada in 1997.

Big Break:

1974 Rush released their first album entitled "RUSH". It became the biggest selling debut LP that any Canadian band had ever released. The band spent years building their core audience by constant touring in North America doing as many as 200 dates a year.

THE 2010 HOLLYWOOD WALK OF FAME

Rush – is without question one of the most inventive and compelling groups in rock history, equally famed for both its virtuoso musicianship and provocative songwriting.

The honor comes as the progressive-rock trio comprised of bassist-frontman Geddy Lee, guitarist Alex Lifeson and drummer Neil Peart gear up for their North American Time Machine tour and pre-releasing 2 new songs “Caravan” & “BU2B” from their forthcoming 20th studio album Clockwork Angels (due spring 2011)

Just last year, a career-chronicling Rolling Stone feature praised the band for its continuing artistic vitality, noting that “It’s true that Rush doesn’t mean today what it did in ’76 or even ’96. It may mean more.”

Rush's enduring pop culture relevance is perhaps best evidenced by a pair of high- profile appearances - a rare national television performance and interview on Comedy Central's "The Colbert Report" in 2008 (the band's first TV appearance since 1975), and a pivotal role in the storyline of the 2009 hit comedy, I Love You, Man, starring Paul Rudd and Jason Segal, where the band also made a memorable cameo in the film.

Beginning with their self-titled debut album in 1974, their extraordinary body of work – which includes such formidable works as 1976’s 2112, 1981’s Moving Pictures, 1996’s Test for Echo and the latest studio album “Snakes & Arrows”- made a triumphant debut on the Billboard 200 upon its initial release in 2007, entering the chart in the #3 spot. The album’s success marked Rush’s highest chart debut since 1993, as well as the group’s eleventh Top Ten album in the U.S.

Rush has sold more than 40 million records worldwide and garnered untold legions of devoted and admiring fans. According to the RIAA, Rush's sales statistics place RUSH third behind The Beatles and The Rolling Stones for the most consecutive gold or platinum studio albums by a rock band. Some of their most popular songs include: The Spirit of Radio, Tom Sawyer, Limelight, Closer To The Heart, YYZ, Working Man and Subdivisons.

Rush has also won a number of Juno Awards, been nominated for multiple Grammy awards, was inducted into the Canadian Music Hall of Fame in 1994, bestowed the Order of Canada in 1997, inducted into Canada’s Walk of Stars in 1999 and Canada’s Songwriting Hall of Fame in March of 2010. Consistently celebrated and respected worldwide, Rush is the most successful Canadian rock band of all time, and they remain one of the biggest grossing arena rock bands ever.

Rush has become known for the instrumental skills of its members, complex compositions, and eclectic lyrical motifs drawing heavily on science fiction, fantasy, and libertarian philosophy, as well as addressing humanitarian, social, emotional, and environmental concerns.

A special limited engagement big screen release of the documentary "Rush: Beyond the Lighted Stage," opened worldwide on June 10. Directors Sam Dunn with Scot McFadyen's rock doc, which follows the band's 40-plus-years career, premiered this past April at the 2010 Tribeca Film Festival where it won the coveted Audience Award. The documentary includes interviews with some of today’s most respected rock artists such as Billy Corgan, Taylor Hawkins, Trent Reznor, Sebastian Bach, Kirk Hammett and Gene Simmons speaking about the influence of Rush. The doc is slated for release on DVD and Blu-Ray in the U.S. on June 29. *On the day of the ceremony there will be a special screening of the documentary at Mann Chinese 6 in Hollywood, just 2 blocks west of where the band will get their star on the Hollywood Walk of Fame. The film will be featured on Friday June 25 as an all day event. The film will play at 2pm, 5pm and 8pm. This is a last chance to see it on the big screen Event tied in to celebrate the band's honor of receiving the Star.

Four days after receiving the Hollywood Walk of Fame star, Rush will kick-off its "Time Machine Tour" on June 29, in Albuquerque, New Mexico and finish October 2, in West Palm Beach, Florida.

THE 2010 CANADIAN SONGWRITERS HALL OF FAME

First formed in 1968, Rush has enjoyed a prolific career that spans four decades and has, in those years, borne some pretty substantial fruit: 24 gold records; 14 platinum (three multi-platinum) records; 79th place in U.S. album sales with 25 million units; total worldwide album sales estimated at over 40 million units; and, according to the Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA), sales statistics that place them fourth behind The Beatles, The Rolling Stones, and Aerosmith for the most consecutive gold or platinum albums by a rock band.

Rush has been inducted into the Canadian Music Hall of Fame (1994), honoured with numerous Junos, is the first rock troupe to be made Officers of the Order of Canada as a “group” (May 9, 1996), and hailed by countless rock bands, from Metallica and Smashing Pumpkins to Dream Theatre and Primus, as their foremost musical influence.

Rush is one of the most uncompromising, unique and enduring bands that Canada has ever produced. And to say their fan following is strong would be putting it mildly. They began modestly and from the ground up, playing cover songs at local bars and high school events. In 1973, they released their first single, Not Fade Away, a Buddy Holly cover, and included a track they had penned themselves on side B, entitled You Can’t Fight It. The single barely made any waves and was not championed by any record labels. At this point the band decided to start their own record label, which they named Moon Records (later renamed Anthem Records).

They released their self-titled debut album on their label in 1974. Donna Halper, a DJ and musical director working at radio station WMMS in Cleveland, Ohio, picked up the single Working Man for regular rotation. The popularity of the single prompted Mercury Records to re-release the entire album in the U.S. that same year. Just after the release of the debut album and two weeks before their first U.S. tour, Neil Peart replaced Rutsey as drummer, and the band arrived at the form it holds to this day.

The group quickly found their natural niches within the band. Peart, for example, took over the role of main lyricist from Lee, who was more interested in composing music, as Lifeson also was. Peart’s love of fantasy, science fiction and individualist literature showed itself in his songwriting and in the band’s second album, “Fly By Night” (1975). Their third album, “Caress of Steel” (1975), was released soon after and built upon the epic song structure that had been introduced to fans in “Fly By Night.” “Caress of Steel,” however, emphasized storytelling and complex arrangements in the five hard-rock tracks that made up the album, two of those being “multi-chapter” tracks.

As is usually the case when artists deviate from the norm and others’ expectations, Rush was immediately blasted by critics for releasing an “unfocused” album. Executives from their record label urged the band to work on a more commercially friendly release to follow “Caress of Steel.” The band did not succumb to the pressure of convention, however, and released “2112” in 1976. The album included a title track that covered the entire side A of the record. “2112” went platinum in Canada and brought the band its first taste of commercial success. Rush released their first live album shortly after. “All The World’s A Stage” (1976) featured recordings from their three-night billing at Massey Hall in Toronto during their 2112 tour.

Rush became renowned for daring to experiment and evolve their musical style, especially with the release of “A Farewell to Kings” (1977) and “Hemispheres” (1978). They produced both albums in Rockfield Studios in Wales. It was a time of major experimentation for the band, extensively developing their trademark style of concept songs, synthesizer use, and intricate time signature changes. Peart drew upon classical, fantasy and science fiction literature in his lyrics, and included triangles, glockenspiel, wood blocks, cowbells, timpani, gong and chimes in his percussion. Lifeson expanded his guitar-playing with twelve-string and classical instruments, and Lee experimented with bass-pedal synthesizers and Minimoog.

Their 1980s album, “Permanent Waves,” reached number 5 on the U.S. album charts, and showcased country and “new wave” punk influences. It included the hits The Spirit of Radio and Freewill, the former one of the group’s best-known songs. A year later, Rush produced an album that would take them to new heights of fame. “Moving Pictures” (1981) highlighted the band’s progressive style while also maintaining an accessible and radio-friendly sound. It featured the hit track Tom Sawyer, co-written with fellow Canadian Pye Dubois of Max Webster. “Moving Pictures” reached number 3 on the Billboard 200 Album chart and was certified quadruple platinum.

Though they had attained a desirable level of popularity and recognition, Rush was enthusiastic about continuing to experiment and develop musically. Hard at work throughout the remainder of the ’80s, Rush released the albums “Exit…Stage Left” (Live, 1981), “Signals” (1982), “Grace Under Pressure” (1984), “Power Windows” (1985), “Hold Your Fire” (1987), “A Show of Hands” (Live, 1989), and “Presto” (1989). Rush consistently topped the charts during these years and enjoyed impressive record sales. In 1989 they changed labels from Mercury to Atlantic.

Rush shed its heavy use of synthesizers and electronic sounds and moved towards more of a guitar-focused, barebones traditional rock sound during the ’90s. “Roll the Bones” (1991), “Counterparts” (1993), and “Test for Echo” (1996) all reached number 1 on Canadian album charts and reached 3, 2, and 5 on the U.S. album charts respectively.

The band took a time out when Peart’s personal life was hit by tragedy in August 1997. His daughter, Selena, was killed in an automobile accident. His wife, Jacqueline, died ten months later of cancer. In 1998, “Different Stages” was released, a three-disc compilation of live recordings from the “Counterparts,” “Test for Echo,” and “A Farewell to Kings” tours, dedicated to Selena and Jacqueline. Peart took a few years away from the band to mourn. He rode across North America on his motorcycle and penned the memoir Ghost Rider: Travels on the Healing Road (2002) while on his journey. In 2001, he announced to his bandmates that he was ready to make music again. Rush went back to work in a Toronto studio, and spent fourteen months developing their first album since their hiatus, entitled “Vapor Trails” (2002), and hit the tour circuit after more than six years away. “Rush in Rio” (Live, 2003), a triple CD and an accompanying DVD of the same name was recorded on the last night of the Vapor Trails tour and hit Diamond sales status in Canada.

In 2004, Rush released the album “Feedback” to celebrate their 30th anniversary. It featured eight cover tracks paying homage to the artists that influenced the band during their start three decades earlier. The band then began a top-selling worldwide 30th Anniversary Tour and released a DVD of their Frankfurt, Germany, show in 2005, entitled “R30: Live in Germany.”

In 2006, the band began writing for their 2007 album release, “Snakes and Arrows.” The first single, Far Cry reached number 2 in the U.S. and the album debuted at number 3 on Billboard Top 200 albums chart. Rush then commenced another immensely popular worldwide tour and released the “Snakes and Arrows Live” album in 2008.

On November 17, 2009, Rush released “Working Men,” a “best-of” live compilation album and DVD. Ultimately, their impact cannot be expressed merely through chart positions, distribution, airplay or awards. “Rush” is a sub culture. They are the epitome of progressive, enduring rock ‘n’ roll, influencing some of the leading musical artists of our time and amassing a loyal fan following.

INDUCTED SONGS

TOM SAWYER

In 1981, Rush produced its biggest-selling record to date, “Moving Pictures,” featuring the hit Tom Sawyer, which has become a rock classic. After its release on Mercury Records and PolyGram, it reached number 25 in the U.K. singles chart in October as the follow-up to the band’s breakthrough hit, The Spirit of Radio, which was released only a year and a half earlier. In the U.S. it reached number 44 on the Billboard Hot 100 and number 8 on the Billboard Mainstream Rock chart. In 2009 it was named the 19th greatest hard rock song of all time by VH1. The song was also featured on several Rush compilations, such as “Chronicles” (1990).

Tom Sawyer, titled after Mark Twain’s literary character, was co-written with Canadian lyricist Pye Dubois, lyricist of rock band Max Webster. During a rehearsal one summer on a farm just outside Ontario, Peart was presented with a poem of Dubois’ entitled “Louis the Lawyer” (Louis the Warrior), which he later modified and, with the help of Lee and Lifeson, set to music. According to Peart, the original lyrics were “a portrait of a modern-day rebel, a free-spirited individualist striding through the world wide-eyed and purposeful.” He stated that “the themes of reconciling the boy and man within and the difference between what people are and what others perceive them to be,” were later added by him.

Tom Sawyer has been featured in several movies such as “The Waterboy” (1998), “Rob Zombie’s Halloween” (2007), “Fanboys” (2008), and “I Love You, Man” (2009), as well as television shows such as “Chuck”, “Family Guy”, “Trailer Park Boys”, “Freaks and Geeks” and “Futurama”. On July 16, 2008, the band made its first American television appearance in 33 years, performing the song during an airing of The Colbert Report.

A cover version of the song is included in the popular video game Rock Band.

Cover artists include: Alexisonfire, Deadsy, Sebastian Bach, Mindless Self Indulgence, Fifty One’s and Run for Cover.

LIMELIGHT

First appearing on the quadruple-platinum certified 1981 album, “Moving Pictures”, Limelight charted number 4 on the U.S. mainstream charts and number 55 on the U.S. Hot 100 chart. It is unquestionably one of Rush's most popular singles.

The lyrics, written by Neil Peart, articulate his discomfort with fame and notoriety in sombre, eloquent language, even alluding to the well-known Shakespearean line “All the world’s a stage / And all the men and women merely players” from the play, “As You Like It.”

In a 2007 interview, Alex Lifeson gave his take on Limelight: “It's funny: after all these years, the solo to Limelight is my favorite to play live. There's something very sad and lonely about it; it exists in its own little world. And I think, in its own way, it reflects the nature of the song's lyrics – feeling isolated amidst chaos and adulation."

The song was featured in the films “I Love You, Man” (2009), “Adventureland” (2009), and “Fanboys” (2008). In an episode of the television series, “Trailer Park Boys”, Bubbles gives Mr. Lahey the finger to the opening riff of Limelight while driving by in a car.

Cover artists include: Billy Corgan.

CLOSER TO THE HEART

Closer to the Heart gave the world its first taste of the future Canadian rock icons, Rush. A true fan favourite, the song is one of the band’s most radio-friendly tunes and is such an unforgettable and enduring rock anthem that over three decades later, it is still heard on the radio airwaves.

Neil Peart, considered by music fans, critics, and fellow musicians alike as one of the most articulate lyricists in the music industry, put some of his most moving thoughts down on paper in Closer to the Heart. Peter Talbot, a musician friend of Peart’s, co-wrote the lyrics to the track, with Lee and Lifeson composing the music.

Released on the 1977 album “A Farewell to Kings,” the song was Rush’s first hit single in the U.K., reaching number 36 on the charts in February 1978 and certified gold in album sales. “A Farewell to Kings” was also Rush’s first gold-certified album in the U.S. and reached number 33 on Billboard’s album charts. Soon after, it reached platinum-certified status in both the U.S. and Canada.

On the original recording of the song and in live performances, Peart played on an acoustic drum set, except between the years 1984 and ’94, where he used an electronic drum set.

The track has appeared on nearly every set list for most of Rush’s tours and subsequently on most of the band’s live albums, including “Exit…Stage Left” (1981), “A Show of Hands” (1989), “Different Stages” (1998), “Rush in Rio” (2003), “R:30 30th Anniversary World Tour” (2005), and “Grace Under Pressure Tour” (2006).

In the third season of the famed Canadian comedic television series “Trailer Park Boys”, Alex Lifeson makes a guest appearance and plays “Closer to the Heart” with Bubbles, one of the show’s main characters, at the end of the episode. In the “R:30” DVD, a clip is included of the entire band playing with Bubbles and Barenaked Ladies front-man Ed Robertson during the Tsunami Relief concert.

Cover artists include: Fates Warning and Landon Pigg.

SUBDIVISIONS

Subdivisions is a single from Rush’s ninth studio album, “Signals” (1982). The song is a fan favourite and has been regularly included on the band’s set lists. Upon its release, it reached number 8 on the U.S. charts, and number 53 on the U.K. charts.

The song marks the band’s increased use of synthesizers in their music. The lyrics speak of the loneliness, isolation, and stifling conventions of life in the suburbs, as well as the pressure felt by youths to “sell their dreams” and conform.

The band filmed the downtown scenes of the Subdivisions music video in Toronto and filmed the suburban scenes in Scarborough, Ontario. The school hall of L'Amoreaux Collegiate Institute in northwest Scarborough was included, as well as a clip of east Toronto’s Don Valley Parkway and a bustling Toronto Transit Commission (TTC) subway station.

Young Canadian singer/songwriter Anita Athavale recorded a beautiful rendition of Subdivisions on her 2007 debut album, “In the Noise.” Her thoughts on the song’s inspiring message convey a sentiment shared by most Rush fans: “Making the album, I was in a place where I was about to put music down: try something else, be normal, make some money, buy a house, whatever else I was supposed to do. That song made me think about choosing that other life.”

Cover artists include: Jacob Moon, Anita Athavale, Randy Jackson, Dominic Cifarelli and Jeff Feldman.

THE SPIRIT OF RADIO

The Spirit of Radio was written by Rush in 1979 and released in 1980 on the “Permanent Waves” album. The song quickly climbed the U.K.’s singles chart to number 13 and became their biggest and most recognizable U.K. hit.

The song was titled after the slogan for Toronto’s local radio station, CFNY, which started out in Brampton, Ontario, in 1960 and is now known as Edge 102. The maverick radio station, which experienced a tumultuous history due to ownership and personnel changes over the years, was known for its intensely loyal listeners. It was the listeners themselves who named the station The Spirit of Radio. Its strong reputation with its listeners is exactly what inspired Rush to compose the song of the same name.

In an interview with Billboard Magazine, Neil Peart said about the song: “The Spirit of Radio was actually written as a tribute to all that was good about radio, celebrating my appreciation of magical moments I'd had since childhood, of hearing the right song at the right time.”

The Spirit of Radio gained a significant amount of attention and was soon recognized as one of the band’s most successful singles. Peart discussed the song with Bob Mack of Spin, stating that he still considered it a song that fused the sounds of reggae, pop, and metal in a new way, "a valid musical gumbo" created "to represent what radio should be." Rolling Stone's David Fricke was quoted as saying that "Rush demonstrates a maturity that even their detractors may have to admire." He showed a particular interest in the single The Spirit of Radio and in his review he mentioned that "this band is among the very best in its genre." John Swenson of Rolling Stone observed that The Spirit of Radio had "gotten more airplay than Rush's entire catalog put together, and it's brought them a whole new audience."

The Spirit of Radio was named one of The Rock and Roll Hall of Fame's 500 Songs that Shaped Rock and Roll. In June, a rendition of the song recorded from a live performance at the Apollo in Manchester, England, was featured in the video game Guitar Hero 5. In 1993, the famously familiar opening riff of the song was sampled on Conchita Martinez from the album “So Tough” by British indie band St. Etienne. In 2006, the song appeared on the soundtrack for “Trailer Park Boys: The Movie”, and became available as downloadable content for Karaoke Revolution Presents American Idol Encore 2 for the popular gaming system, Playstation 3. The track is also available on the music video game Rock Revolution.

Cover artists include: Les Claypool, St. Etienne, Rachel Barton Pine and Premonition.

Posted by Roy on Saturday, 05.26.12 @ 08:05am


Roy, this vids for you.

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nc_LIR5ExIU[/youtube]

Posted by GFW on Saturday, 05.26.12 @ 14:27pm


oops, apparently not. Well, i'll sum up the vid.

Roy, shut the fuc'k up.

Posted by GFW on Saturday, 05.26.12 @ 14:29pm



rush fans X)

Posted by Mikhail on Friday, 07.6.12 @ 07:33am


Neil Peart is one of the greatest drummers ever and one of the most influential drummers. He deserves to be in the hall of fame with the rest of his band.

Posted by Ryan on Friday, 08.24.12 @ 20:25pm


I don't really understand the case against Rush. Their talent is undeniable, their influence far-reaching, their sound is distinct and innovative, their longevity is rare and impressive, and they have had some crossover appeal, at least as much as, say, the Grateful Dead. Yeah, not everyone likes them, but not everybody likes Metallica or Black Sabbath, or even the Beatles. Some people will say Yes, ELP, or King Crimson should get in before them, but that's just personal preference, in my opinion. If you look at the usual metrics, including influence, impact, sales, critical support, and continued relevance, Rush comes out on top of the early 70's prog brigade anyway, with maybe Yes (who should also be inducted) just behind them.

"Rush sucks" is obviously not a legitimate reason to keep them out, either. That's also just preference.

Anyone have a cogent argument about why Rush shouldn't be in the Hall?

Posted by Mike on Sunday, 08.26.12 @ 09:21am


"Anyone have a cogent argument about why Rush shouldn't be in the Hall?"

There simply is not one. Anyone that says Rush shouldn't be in, simply has no grasp of music or musical history. They meet and exceed all the criteria for inclusion.

Unfortunately I don't see Rush getting nominated again this year. I don't think they'll ever get in, which is a shame, but frankly they'll be remembered far longer than 90% of the artists in there now.

Posted by S2 on Friday, 08.31.12 @ 10:07am


Seriously, does anyone outside of the RRHOF think Rush does NOT belong in the Hall ?

Posted by TheTed on Wednesday, 09.5.12 @ 11:36am


Seriously, does anyone outside of the RRHOF think Rush does NOT belong in the Hall ?

Posted by TheTed on Wednesday, 09.5.12 @ 11:36am

Most of us believe that Rush belongs, but we also realize that there are many acts and ignored genres caught in the bottleneck and Rush isn't special enough to deserve complaints any more than 40 other acts. (And King Crimson should go before Rush).

Posted by DarinRG on Wednesday, 09.5.12 @ 12:08pm


Seriously, does anyone outside of the RRHOF think Rush does NOT belong in the Hall ?

Posted by TheTed on Wednesday, 09.5.12 @ 11:36am

Morons?

Posted by GFW on Wednesday, 09.5.12 @ 12:43pm


Invite Jimmy Page to induct Rush into the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame.

Posted by Betty and Christian on Saturday, 09.8.12 @ 00:09am


The problem with people like Kit is, the same as the problem with the owners of the Hall of Fame. It's all about what they like. Nothing else. Everything else is irrevlevent. Rush has far more followers, more sells, more everything than many any there today. I don't like Kiss. But then again, it's not called David's Hall of Fame, it's called Rock and Roll Hall of Fame. They have enough sells and people who do support them that they shoud be in there over others that do not have as many supporters. The HoF is nothing more than 10 fat guys in a room who know nothing about music picking and choosing what they like. Nothing more. Don't try and turn it into something it is not. It shouldn't be called "The Rock and Roll Hall of Fame, it should be called "10 fat guys opinon".

Posted by David on Monday, 09.10.12 @ 18:26pm


Rush (1972-Present)
Rush Limbaugh (1991-Present)
Rush, Rush - Paula Abdul (1991)
Rush: The Motion Picture and Soundtrack by Eric Clapton (Tears In Heaven) 1992

Posted by Roy on Thursday, 09.13.12 @ 23:49pm


Rush is the finest example of perfection in the music world; hence the reason they are considered "musicians' musician's". Stop comparing inferior bands with the greatest that ever lived.

Posted by Jon on Saturday, 09.15.12 @ 13:23pm


There's better singersand better guitarists. not sure about bassists, but drumemrs could be contested (myself, I'd go for Elvin Jones) There's also better keyboardists.

Posted by GFW on Saturday, 09.15.12 @ 14:07pm


My My GFW................!
Do you just say things to make waves? lol
Rush, is a wonderful rock band, full of talent...
I have never been a huge fan of them but..Many are ...
I know Neil Peart... Is thought of as one of he better rock drummers in todays music world....
Rush meets all the stuff for RRHOF...
Like so many others. From the so called 1 hit wonder , the no hit I wonderand even the to many hits wonder..........

Let's hope they get IN,,,,,,!!!!!

Posted by Happy on Sunday, 09.16.12 @ 01:01am


Nah, just stating my opinion. The guys in Rush are amazing and they've made some damn good stuff but they aren't all the absolute pinnacle of their instruments.

Posted by GFW on Sunday, 09.16.12 @ 07:12am


Nah, just stating my opinion. The guys in Rush are amazing and they've made some damn good stuff but they aren't all the absolute pinnacle of their instruments.

Posted by GFW on Sunday, 09.16.12 @ 07:12am

All of them are thought of as some of the top players in rock..

Even if that was not true.. They fit all of the RRHOF needs,,
As mentionded.. So do many others from a 1 hit wonder to many hits I wonder....
knowone is the "absolute pinnacle of their instruments"...There is always a faster gun coming into town,,,,so to speak..
Neil Peart has many endorsement and is viewed as one of the top drummers by his fellow rock drummmers.....

Geddy Lee
Bass Hall of Fame – Guitar Player magazine
6 time winner: "Best Rock Bass" – Guitar Player magazine

Alex Lifeson
"Best Rock Talent" by Guitar for the Practicing Musician in 1983
"Best Rock Guitarist" by Guitar Player Magazine in 1984 and May 2008
Runner-up for "Best Rock Guitarist" in Guitar Player in 1982, 1983, 1985, 1986
Inducted into the Guitar for the Practicing Musician Hall of Fame, 1991
1996 – Officer of the Order of Canada, along with bandmates Geddy Lee and Neil Peart
"Best Article" for "Different Strings" in Guitar Player (September issue).
Most Ferociously Brilliant Guitar Album (Snakes & Arrows) – Guitar Player Magazine, May 2008


1993 – "Best Rock Bass Player" Bass Player readers' poll
1994 – With Rush, inducted into the Juno Hall of Fame
1996 – Officer of the Order of Canada, along with band mates Alex Lifeson and Neil Peart
Best Album for Bass (Snakes & Arrows) – Bass Player magazine
"Coolest Bass Line in a Song" (for "Malignant Narcissism") – Bass Player magazine
"Best 2007 Cover Feature" for "Northern Warrior" – Bass Player magazine
2010 – With Rush, "Living Legend" – Classic Rock Magazine
2012 - Queen Elizabeth II Diamond Jubilee Medal[38]




Posted by Happy on Sunday, 09.16.12 @ 12:40pm


Rush is also already on the "Hollywood Rock Walk of Fame"
Which to many, in the music biz is a bigger or as big of a complement as the RRHOF.....

Posted by Happy on Sunday, 09.16.12 @ 12:48pm


Happy: i love Rush, but to be fair, most artistis management pay for them to get on the Hollywood Walk of Fame. It is an honor to be sure, but not totally on merit. It is more a publicity thing.

Posted by Dubes on Friday, 09.21.12 @ 10:05am


Happy: i love Rush, but to be fair, most artistis management pay for them to get on the Hollywood Walk of Fame. It is an honor to be sure, but not totally on merit. It is more a publicity thing.

Posted by Dubes on Friday, 09.21.12 @ 10:05am

If they pay that is news to me.....I can think of quite aa few that don't have a dime to there name Also here is the list I just don't see them paying. I do know a few folks at Guitar Center I asked them they said aint so....






AC/DC

September 15, 2000





Ace Frehley

July 25, 1996





Aerosmith

March 6, 1990





Alex Van Halen

June 18, 1991





Alice Cooper

August 27, 1991





Ann Wilson

November 14, 1986





Armand Zildjian

April 1, 1987





B'z

November 19, 2007





B.B. King

August 29, 1989





Bill Graham

February 23, 1996





Bill Haley & The Comets

July 6, 2005





Bill Ludwig, Jr.

December 31, 1986





Billy Sheehan

January 27, 1999





Black Sabbath

November 18, 1992





Blondie

May 22, 2006





Bo Diddley

April 27, 1989





Bob Seger

October 18, 1994





Bonnie Raitt

September 20, 1996





Bootsy Collins

January 27, 1999





Brian Wilson

November 28, 1996





Buddy Guy

September 20, 1996





Buddy Holly

February 21, 1989





Buddy Rich

June 18, 1991





C.F. Martin, III

November 13, 1985





C.W. Kaman, II

January 16, 1992





Carl Perkins

June 11, 1996





Carlos Santana

February 23, 1996





Carmine Appice

June 18, 1991





Carole King

June 14, 1989





Cheap Trick

October 2, 1998





Chet Atkins

September 26, 1997





Chuck Berry

December 31, 1986





Cream

August 9, 2004





Curtis Mayfield

May 20, 2008





Def Leppard

September 5, 2000





Dick Clark

March 28, 1991





Dick Dale

September 20, 1996





Dimebag Darrell

May 17, 2007





Duane Eddy

September 26, 1997





Earth, Wind & Fire

July 7, 2003





Edward Van Halen

November 13, 1985





Elvis Presley

September 21, 1990





Emerson, Lake & Palmer

November 23, 1993





Eric Carr

July 25, 1996





Eric Clapton

August 9, 2004





Ernie Ball

January 16, 1992





Frank Zappa

November 9, 1993





Gary Brooker

May 1, 1997





Gene Krupa

June 18, 1991





George Clinton & P-Funk

November 21, 1996





George Martin

November 2, 1994





George Thorogood & The Destroyers

June 16, 2007





Ginger Baker

June 18, 1991





Grace Slick

October 24, 2002





Gregg Allman

September 20, 1987





Hall & Oates

August 5, 2003





Hank Garland

September 26, 1997





Harold Rhodes

January 14, 1988





Hartley Peavey

January 20, 1990





Henry Steinway

January 17, 1990





Herbie Hancock

January 15, 2003





Holland Dozier Holland

May 12, 2003





Hubert Sumlin

June 16, 2007





Ike Turner

April 4, 2005





Ikutaro Kakehashi

February 7, 2000





Iron Maiden

August 19, 2005





Isaac Hayes

November 4, 2004





Jack Bruce

May 1, 1997





Jackie Wilson

November 13, 2002





Jaco Pastorius

January 27, 1999





James Brown

June 5, 1992





James Burton

September 26, 1997





James Jamerson

January 27, 1999





Jan & Dean

April 12, 1996





Janis Joplin

January 19, 1999





Jeff Beck

September 23, 1995





Jerry Lee Lewis

January 14, 1988





Jethro Tull

January 14, 1988





Jim Marshall

November 13, 1985





Jimi Hendrix

February 21, 1989





Jimmie Vaughan

June 3, 1999





Jimmy Page

December 7, 1993





Joe Cocker

April 1, 1998





Joe Satriani

June 3, 1999





Joe Zawinul

January 15, 2003





John Bonham

June 18, 1991





John Lee Hooker

February 21, 1989





John Lennon

October 9, 1998





John Mayall

September 6, 1998





Johnny Cash

September 21, 1990





Johnny Winter

May 8, 1998





Kansas

July 28, 1996





Keb' Mo'

June 16, 2007





Keith Moon

June 18, 1991





Kenny Loggins

March 7, 2007





Kim Simmonds

September 6, 1996





KISS

May 18, 1993





Kris Kristofferson

July 6, 2006





Larry Carlton

June 3, 1999





Larry Graham

January 27, 1999





Leiber & Stoller

November 17, 1994





Leland Sklar

January 27, 1999





Leo Fender

August 10, 1987





Les Paul

January 14, 1988





Little Richard

January 17, 1990





Los Lobos

October 8, 1997





Lou Adler

June 17, 1999





Lou Reed

June 24, 2003





Louie Bellson

December 4, 1999





Lynyrd Skynyrd

May 24, 1996





Marvin Gaye

February 21, 1989





Melissa Etheridge

January 16, 2002





Mick Taylor

September 6, 1998





Miles Davis

September 28, 2006





Motörhead

September 1, 2003





Motley Crue

May 20, 1997





Muddy Waters

April 4, 2005





Nancy Wilson

November 14, 1986





Ozzy Osbourne

November 18, 1992





Peter Criss

June 20, 1996





Peter Frampton

May 1, 1997





Peter Green

September 6, 1998





Phil Ramone

August 16, 1994





Queen

September 8, 2004





Randy Rhoads

March 18, 2004





Remo Belli

November 13, 1985





Richie Blackmore

September 20, 1996





Rick Nelson

May 8, 1996





Ritchie Valens

October 8, 1997





Robert Cray

April 4, 2005





Robert Johnson

May 9, 1999





Robert Moog

January 14, 1988





Ronnie James Dio

January 17, 2007





Roy Orbison

February 21, 1989





Run-D.M.C.

February 25, 2002





S.N. Shure

January 17, 1990





Scorpions

April 6, 2010





Scotty Moore

September 26, 1997





Simon Kirke

May 1, 1997





Slash

January 17, 2007





Smokey Robinson

October 22, 1991





Solomon Burke

April 4, 2005





Sonic Youth

August 18, 2003





Stanley Clarke

January 27, 1999





Steely Dan

September 8, 1993





Stephen Stills

September 19, 1997





Steve Miller

July 11, 2005





Steve Vai

June 3, 1999





Stevie Ray Vaughan

September 20, 1996





Stevie Wonder

November 13, 1985





Ted McCarty

January 16, 1992





Ted Nugent

May 31, 1996





Terry Bozzio

January 17, 2007





The Animals

May 11, 2001





The Black Crowes

May 14, 2001





The Chantays

February 21, 1989





The Cure

April 30, 2004





The Doobie Brothers

January 14, 1988





The Funk Brothers

November 13, 2002





The Germs

August 20, 2008





The Isley Brothers

January 10, 2002





The Moody Blues

September 27, 1994





The Ramones

August 6, 1996





The Smashing Pumpkins

April 23, 2008





The Surfaris

April 12, 1996





The Ventures

April 12, 1996





The Wrecking Crew

June 25, 2008





Tim Bogert

January 27, 1999





Tito Puente

July 21, 2000





Todd Rundgren

November 11, 1992





Tony Levin

January 27, 1999





Toto

May 4, 1999





Tsutomu Katoh

January 15, 2003





Van Dyke Parks

November 28, 1996





Van Halen

October 6, 1996





Waylon Jennings

July 6, 2006





Willie Dixon

April 27, 1989





X

June 25, 2002





Yardbirds

September 6, 1998





Yes

May 24, 1994





Yngwie Malmsteen

October 28, 2008





Zakk Wylde

January 17, 2006





ZZ Top

August 18, 1994







© 2012 Guitar Center, Inc. All Rights Reserved. | Terms of Use | Your Privacy Rights | Purchase Terms & Conditions

Posted by Happy on Friday, 09.21.12 @ 21:52pm


Oh my lord Happy, format this stuff first.

Posted by GFW on Saturday, 09.22.12 @ 06:28am


Oh my lord Happy, format this stuff first.

Posted by GFW on Saturday, 09.22.12 @ 06:28am



????????????????????????????????

Posted by Happy on Saturday, 09.22.12 @ 13:36pm


All dem spaces.

Posted by GFW on Saturday, 09.22.12 @ 14:20pm


Please join my group, "Why isn't RUSH in the Rock n Roll Hall of Fame" We started a couple months ago and now have over 100 members and counting. Many of the members are outraged by this exclusion from a band that invented it's own sound, has more than 30 studio albums, continues to tour to sold out crowds. They boast one of the most famous and talented percussionists of all time in Neil Peart, their guitar Alex Lifeson has his own mesmerizing guitar style and Geddy Lee has one of the most famous voice in Rock n Roll History. RUSH came out as a Proggie Band writing all their own music, they don't bicker publicly and they finally hit the mainstream 30 years ago with songs like Spirit of Radio, Tom Sawyer, Limelight, Freewill,Fly by Night and Closer to the Heart. They have one of the all time Rock n Roll Masterpieces in 2112. They definitely send messages through their songs like The Tree's. Tunes like "Working Man" and "LaVilla Strangiato" are anthems to rock n Roll culture and their perseverance of over 40 years together is amazing. They stay fresh with new material and blend in classics. I'm glad they are the ballot now let's get it done so we don't have to waste our time lobbying, although it is fun lobbying for these Canucks!!!

Posted by Todd on Tuesday, 09.25.12 @ 17:03pm


Has Rush done anything since Tom Sawyer?

Posted by Dubes on Sunday, 09.30.12 @ 17:22pm


Rush finally got nominated along with Deep Purple

Posted by Johnny on Thursday, 10.4.12 @ 00:24am


Going through these posts - I saw that way back this KIT thought he was a know it all.....well, hey RUSH just got nominated to the RRHOF for 2013. Shallow brooks are noisy! LMAO

Posted by Rush is a band on Thursday, 10.4.12 @ 07:09am


Boy would I hate these guys to get inducted. They are one of the most boring bands I have ever heard. I think they are good, but they are boring. U2 is probably the only band more boring than them, but even I, a person who dislikes these guys, thinks they have what it takes to get inducted. They have influence, innovation, and what a band needs to get inducted.

Posted by Joey on Friday, 10.5.12 @ 19:02pm


Nah, just stating my opinion. The guys in Rush are amazing and they've made some damn good stuff but they aren't all the absolute pinnacle of their instruments.

Posted by GFW on Sunday, 09.16.12 @ 07:12am


Did not sound like GFW thought that Rush is even good enought to get a chance in the RRHOF



I have a feeling they will get in
Let's hope they do..

Posted by Happy on Saturday, 10.6.12 @ 11:52am


How did you get "GFW doesn't think they're desrving" from "GFW dosen't consider them the utter pinnacles of their instruments"?

Posted by GFW on Saturday, 10.6.12 @ 14:54pm


How did you get "GFW doesn't think they're desrving" from "GFW dosen't consider them the utter pinnacles of their instruments"?

Posted by GFW
Well I see you think they are good and may get in.. just not that good... I am happy you're on board..

Posted by Happy on Saturday, 10.6.12 @ 20:33pm


"Has Rush done anything since Tom Sawyer?"

This, in a nutshell, is representative of why Rush will NEVER get into the R&R HOF.

Posted by Brian of Nazareth on Monday, 10.8.12 @ 04:20am


Why is Rush being inducted before their predecessors Yes, Jethro Tull, King Crimson, and Emerson, Lake and Palmer?

So Rush can vote for them once they are nominated.

Posted by Roy on Monday, 10.8.12 @ 08:09am


I'm still stuck on Procol Harum's nomination. The basic explanation is that they are "arguably" the first prog rock band. Among the reasons why it's "arguable" is that prog rock isn't that easy to define. There is a whole discussion of the first bona fide prog album. Was it Freak Out (1966)? Pink Floyd's first album (early 1967)? Jefferson Airplane's Surealistic Pillow (1967)? Moody Blue's Days of Future Past (1967)? King Crimson's Court of the Crimson King (1968)? And many people point to elements of Sgt.Pepper, a massive album. (Zappa would always accuse the Beatles of borrowing ideas from Freak Out to make the album).
What all this points to is that to say that any band was the "first" prog rock band is difficult at best and pointless at worst. What you saw instead was a general trend toward more complicated composition with more artistic elements. This went on across the board; think of the Who's debut compared to Tommy for example.
Moreover, to say that Procol Harum was arguably the first prog rock band runs into two major problems. The first is chronological. Freak Out. Surealistic Pillow. Pink Floyd's first album. Sgt. Pepper. Days of Future Past. All were recorded and/or came out before Procol Harum's debut.
But that aside, it's really the second problem that destroys this claim. Specifically, Procol Harum's 1967 debut is really not a prog album. A few songs involve symphonic elements, but the album is on the whole extremely conventional. No one listening to it would have seen it as anything distinctive. Just compare it to Freak Out or Pink Floyd's debut or especially Days of Future Past. There is no comparison. I actually get the impression that the "first prog band" claim is getting rehashed without the benefit of listening to their first album. Of course that people are unfamilar with it besides Whiter Shade of Pale is part of the issue.
Finally, even if people persist in the first prog band claim, they still need to show an actual impact. Zappa, Floyd, the Beatles, Jefferson Airplane, the Moody Blues-none of their contemporaneous albums can be attributed to Procol Harum for obvious chronological reasons. And there is no basis to think that later prog bands (King Crimson, Genesis, Yes, ELP) were in the slightest way influenced by or indebted to Procol Harum. They clearly had much stronger antecedents to choose from and were again part of the general trend. Every objection aside, there has to be more to it than arguably being "first".

All that said, I realize that people are basing their induction possibilities on being a 60's era act and the Hall's track record. That may be right, but it's still all backroom bs. I guess it's worthwhile to clearly identify it as such.

Posted by astrodog on Tuesday, 10.9.12 @ 04:22am


I was joking about the "Have they done anything since Tom Sawyer."

True, Rush are a prog act and are not the "First Prog Band" by a long shot, but while they were very popular with their prog period, they continued on for about 30+ more years after they stopped doing blatant "prog rock" and their most popular tracks have been radio friendly (Tom Sawyer, Limelight, Spirit of Radio). I think that their Hall candidacy does not rely on being a prog act at all. They started that way, but truly, how many bands have been round for 40 years, consistently putting out new music and touring in a real way (nota reunion, nostaglia or booze cruise way).

Posted by Dubes on Thursday, 10.11.12 @ 11:51am


Do you think they will actually induct drummer John Rutsey with Rush? He died after Rush's first album.

Posted by Roy on Saturday, 10.20.12 @ 22:14pm


Rush

Geddy Lee
Alex Lifeson
Neil Peart
John Rutsey

Posted by Roy on Saturday, 10.20.12 @ 22:20pm


If they do get inducted, it would be probably the three principle members.

Posted by Tim on Saturday, 10.20.12 @ 22:23pm


http://www.rollingstone.com/music/news/rush-power-from-the-people-19810528

Rush: Power From the People
Ignored by critics and radio, this hard-rock trio went straight to the fans

Posted by Roy on Saturday, 10.27.12 @ 06:12am


It's a very well known fact that over the years The Rock Hall has gotten thousands of letters from fans of The Moody Blues and Rush. More than any other bands. The Moody Blues pre-date Rush, but Rush might get inducted first, to add to the votes for The Moody Blues. The Moody Blues were nerd Rock long before Rush came along.

Posted by Roy on Saturday, 11.3.12 @ 22:31pm


To the guy who said Rush were part of a wave that "devolved into instrumental wankery"...uh, no, after their clear "prog period", they *evolved* into more of a pop act if anything. I for one think they combined every trait of modern music into a new little stew, but to think Rush after 1980 just were up there playing masterbatory solos is absurd. If anything, the OPPOSITE happened, much to the chagrin of a decent segment of their fan base (didn't prevent them from filling arenas ever *since* 1980, however)...

Posted by Christopher on Thursday, 12.6.12 @ 06:09am


http://www.rollingstone.com/music/news/rolling-stones-list-of-the-25-undisputed-guilty-pleasure-bands-20070409

Rush is the second band from Rolling Stone’s 2008 List of the 25 Undisputed Guilty Pleasure Bands to be inducted into the Rock And Roll Hall Of Fame. The first was ABBA. Bon Jovi was nominated but lost.

Some of us still have a thing for Rush or Paula Abdul or RuPaul. That’s cool. To each his or her own and all that. But there are some artists who unequivocally leave much to be desired in terms of, say, quality or coolness, but still manage to rock, or at least inspire serious if shameful adoration on a mass scale. It’s these artists that we’re interested in. Artists who absolutely belong on a best guilty pleasures ever list, because that’s what we’re creating.

Those of you who proudly listen to Rush at top volume in your car all summer long, (ie thereby displaying the total lack of guilty in your pleasure), take note:? Rush come in at Number One on our official list of the Rock’s Undisputed Guilty Pleasure Bands. Like the rest of the acts on our list (which you helped put together), we love them to death, and can never forgive ourselves. The full list:

1. Rush
2. E.L.O. (Electric Light Orchestra)
3. Journey
4. ABBA
5. Chicago
6. Boston
7. Foreigner
8. Bread
9. Bon Jovi
10. New Edition
11. The Monkees
12. Motley Crue
13. STYX
14. Eddie Money
15. Simply Red
16. Kelly Clarkson
17. America
18. Wham!
19. R.E.O. Speedwagon
20. Poison
21. Lionel Richie
22. Kansas
23. Air Supply
24. Hall & Oates
25. Britney Spears

Posted by Roy on Tuesday, 12.11.12 @ 15:46pm


According to the Mayans, the world is supposed to end on December 21, 2012. That's 12/21/12, and Rush has an album called 2112.

Posted by Roy on Tuesday, 12.11.12 @ 22:01pm


Billy Corgan, the vocalist and lead guitarist for The Smashing Pumpkins gave the Hollywood Walk of Fame induction speech for Rush in 2010. I think he should also give the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame induction speech for Rush as well.

Posted by Roy on Tuesday, 12.11.12 @ 22:32pm


RUSH

THE 1994 JUNO/CANADIAN MUSIC HALL OF FAME
THE 1997 ORDER OF CANADA
THE 1999 CANADA HONOURS/CANADA'S WALK OF FAME
THE 2010 HOLLYWOOD WALK OF FAME
THE 2010 CANADIAN SONGWRITERS HALL OF FAME
THE 2013 ROCK AND ROLL HALL OF FAME
THE 20?? SONGWRITERS HALL OF FAME

Posted by Roy on Tuesday, 12.11.12 @ 22:33pm


Regarding John Rutsey: Rutsey died a few years ago (not right after the first album), but death is not necessarily an obstacle to getting inducted into the R&RHOF. The other three might include him because he was the one guy who left before the band got famous.

Posted by Gregory Pietsch on Tuesday, 12.11.12 @ 22:34pm


John Howard Rutsey (July 23, 1952 – May 11, 2008) was a Canadian drummer, most recognized for being a co-founding member of Rush along with Alex Lifeson and Jeff Jones, and performing on the band's debut album. John Rutsey left the band in 1974, as he had musical differences with the band and suffered from type 1 diabetes throughout his life, and he was replaced by Neil Peart. His diabetes would later lead him to a death of a heart attack in 2008, 3 days shy of his 55th birthday. Tape-recorded comments from Rutsey are heard in the 2010 documentary Rush: Beyond the Lighted Stage, and the DVD release includes two performances with him on drums.

Posted by Roy on Tuesday, 12.11.12 @ 23:00pm


Rush

01. Alex Lifeson (1968-Present; guitar)
02. Jeff Jones (1968; vocals, bass guitar; Rush, Ocean, Red Rider, Stingaree)
03. John Rutsey (1968-1974; drums)
04. Geddy Lee (1968-Present; vocals, bass guitar, keyboards)
05. Neil Peart (1974-Present; drums)

Posted by Roy on Tuesday, 12.11.12 @ 23:13pm


This is foolishness. Jones and Rutsey were inconsequential to Rush's candidacy. It would be like inducting Pete Best and Stu Sutcliffe with the Beatles. Please stop this nonsense.

Posted by Chalkie on Tuesday, 12.11.12 @ 23:24pm


I agree with Chalkie, but you never know, Robert Trujillo got inducted with Metallica even though he has only been on one album.

Posted by Gassman on Tuesday, 12.11.12 @ 23:32pm


I was just showing everyone the history of Rush. I didn't say Jones and Rutsey were going to be inducted, or should be.

Posted by Roy on Tuesday, 12.11.12 @ 23:39pm


"Robert Trujillo got inducted with Metallica even though he has only been on one album."

Yeah, and he didn't deserve it either. Same deal with Josh Klinghoffer. Two wrongs don't make a right, however.

Posted by Chalkie on Tuesday, 12.11.12 @ 23:39pm


"I was just showing everyone the history of Rush. I didn't say Jones and Rutsey were going to be inducted, or should be."

Fair enough, Roy. I apologize for my sharpness. I just foresaw a slippery slope.

Posted by Chalkie on Tuesday, 12.11.12 @ 23:40pm


I have to imagine that with Josh Klinghoffer and Robert Trujillo getting inducted, it means that the bands themselves get to choose who gets inducted and who doesn't.

Posted by Gassman on Wednesday, 12.12.12 @ 00:03am


I asked Rush on twitter if they will tell the Rock Hall they want John Rutsey to be inducted with Rush as well? I'm waiting for a response.

Posted by Roy on Wednesday, 12.12.12 @ 00:27am


Will Rush ever get the Kennedy Center Honors?

Posted by Roy on Wednesday, 12.12.12 @ 22:49pm


http://www.songhall.org/

Next stop for Rush: The Songwriters Hall of Fame

All Lyrics by Neil Peart (except first album)
Music by Alex Lifeson and Geddy Lee

Studio albums

Rush (1974)
Fly by Night (1975)
Caress of Steel (1975)
2112 (1976)
A Farewell to Kings (1977)
Hemispheres (1978)
Permanent Waves (1980)
Moving Pictures (1981)
Signals (1982)
Grace Under Pressure (1984)
Power Windows (1985)
Hold Your Fire (1987)
Presto (1989)
Roll the Bones (1991)
Counterparts (1993)
Test for Echo (1996)
Vapor Trails (2002)
Snakes & Arrows (2007)
Clockwork Angels (2012)

Posted by Roy on Wednesday, 12.12.12 @ 23:07pm


http://songwritershalloffame.com/

Songwriters Hall of Fame Virtual Museum

Posted by Roy on Wednesday, 12.12.12 @ 23:09pm


Equal parts Led Zeppelin, Cream and King Crimson, Rush burst out of Canada in the early 1970s with one of the most powerful and bombastic sounds of the decade. Their 1976 magnum opus 2112 represents progressive rock at its grandiose heights, but just a half decade later they had the guts to put epic songs aside in favor of shorter (but no less dynamic) tunes like “Tom Sawyer” and “The Spirit Of Radio” that remain in constant rotation on radio to this day. Absolutely uncompromising in every conceivable way, the trio has spent the last forty years cultivating the largest cult fan base in rock while still managing to sell out every arena in the country. While they have never gotten the critical respect they so richly deserve, Neil Peart has inspired more young drummers to take up the instrument than any other drummer of the past thirty years. No less impressive is Geddy Lee’s ability to play keyboards and bass in concert while never missing a note of his lead vocals, and guitarist Alex Lifeson is a virtuoso simply without peer. They are a band completely removed from the mainstream music scene, and yet somehow also one of the most popular rock bands in the country. It is a dichotomy that has fueled them from the very beginning. Their newest release, Clockwork Angels, is as bold and ambitious as any of their works of the 1970s, and even though the members are now pushing sixty it is hard to shake the feeling that they are just getting started.

Equal parts Led Zeppelin, Cream and King Crimson, Rush burst out of Canada in the early 1970s with one of the most powerful and bombastic sounds of the decade. Their 1976 magnum opus 2112 represents progressive rock at its grandiose heights, but just a half decade later they had the guts to put epic songs aside in favor of shorter (but no less dynamic) tunes like “Tom Sawyer” and “The Spirit Of Radio” that remain in constant rotation on radio to this day. Absolutely uncompromising in every conceivable way, the trio has spent the last 40 years cultivating the largest cult fan base in rock while still managing to sell out every arena in the country. While they have never gotten the critical respect they so richly deserve, Neil Peart has inspired more young drummers to take up the instrument than any other drummer of the past 30 years. No less impressive is Geddy Lee’s ability to play keyboards and bass in concert while never missing a note of his lead vocals, and guitarist Alex Lifeson is a virtuoso simply without peer. They are a band completely removed from the mainstream music scene, and yet somehow also one of the most popular rock bands in the country. It is a dichotomy that has fueled them from the very beginning. Their newest release, Clockwork Angels, is as bold and ambitious as any of their works of the 1970s, and even though the members are now pushing 60, it is hard to shake the feeling that they are just getting started.

Posted by Roy on Thursday, 12.13.12 @ 08:05am


Rush*

Posted by astrodog on Thursday, 12.13.12 @ 14:20pm


Be prepared to vote when Rush is nominated for the Songwriters Hall of Fame.

You can vote on who gets inducted into The Songwriters Hall Of Fame every year. If you are not a member of the music industry, you only qualify for Lifetime Membership, which will cost you $1000.00. You will receive the ballot in your mailbox every year and you can attend the ceremonies. Here is the application to become a member:

The New Way http://www.songhall.org/join

The Old Way http://www.songhall.org/forms/shof_membership.pdf

Posted by Roy on Tuesday, 12.18.12 @ 22:14pm


Jennifer Rush

Posted by Roy on Saturday, 12.29.12 @ 08:52am


Do you think they'll actually get an actor to induct Rush!? Jack Black? I hope not!

Posted by Roy on Saturday, 12.29.12 @ 16:06pm


if they got an actor to induct them I think it would be Jason Segel or Paul Rudd since they were the stars of the movie I Love You Man which had alot to do Rush and Rush was in the movie.

Posted by bojanthebest on Saturday, 12.29.12 @ 22:12pm


He he ----where is Mr. D*ouche bag Kit (and his entourage) now? Hmm.. Kit proven wrong.....Rush is going in - the Hall finally came to its senses and will be putting these legendary musicians in! Point proven - some people just blabber on when they have no clue what they are talking about.

Posted by Mitch on Sunday, 01.13.13 @ 16:04pm


What Rush has that Leonard Cohen does not:

A star on the Hollywood Walk of Fame
A maple leaf on Canada's Walk of Fame

What Leonard Cohen has that Rush does not:

An induction into the U.S. Songwriters Hall of Fame

What Rush and Leonard Cohen both have:

Both inducted into the Canadian Music Hall of Fame
Both inducted into the Canadian Songwriters Hall of Fame
Both inducted into the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame
Both invested with the Order of Canada

What Rush and Leonard Cohen both don't have:

A Kennedy Center Honor

Posted by Roy on Sunday, 01.13.13 @ 16:52pm


Alex Lifeson, Jeff Jones, John Rutsey, Geddy Lee and Neil Peart are all mentioned in the Rock Hall's bio for Rush, but the inductees have not been listed yet.

Posted by Roy on Wednesday, 01.16.13 @ 11:13am


Dave Grohl, from a trio called Nirvana, is inducting Rush, a trio. This was done on purpose.

Posted by Roy on Wednesday, 01.23.13 @ 22:54pm


Why?

Posted by Dezmond on Wednesday, 01.23.13 @ 23:08pm


http://rockhall.com/inductees/rush/timeline/

Error in the Rush Rock Hall Timeline

1980: Rush releases "Permanent Waves." The album sells more than four million copies and includes such tracks as "Tom Sawyer" and "Limelight."

"Tom Sawyer" and "Limelight" are from the 1981 Moving Pictures album.

WHAT A BUNCH OF CARELESS IDIOTS

ERROR REPORTED!

Posted by Roy on Thursday, 01.24.13 @ 07:11am


Dave Grohl, from a trio called Nirvana, is inducting Rush, a trio. This was done on purpose.

Posted by Roy on Wednesday, 01.23.13 @ 22:54pm

Why?

Posted by Dezmond on Wednesday, 01.23.13 @ 23:08pm

In preparation for a Nirvana induction.

Posted by Roy on Thursday, 01.24.13 @ 07:13am


It's been fixed

Posted by Roy on Thursday, 01.24.13 @ 16:39pm


The only reason Rush is being inducted is because the Rock Hall got tired of all the fans sending them letters about Rush, and certain inductees wanted them inducted as well. Jann Wenner does not care about Rush. He just decided to listen to the fans for once. Deep Purple was more deserving. Heart got in because they are women. Heart and Rush will add to the votes for Deep Purple. Rush and Heart never did drugs.

Posted by Roy on Friday, 01.25.13 @ 10:23am


yep, thats why the hall kept out DP. Cos they did drugs. I mean, it's not as if any RNRHOF inductees have done drugs, what a ridiculous thing that would be to say!

Posted by GFW on Friday, 01.25.13 @ 11:12am


Another trip to Fantasy Island by Roy...

Posted by Paul on Friday, 01.25.13 @ 11:35am


I was implying that Rush and Heart got in even though they didn't do drugs. The Rock Hall likes to induct artists who did do drugs.

Posted by Roy on Friday, 01.25.13 @ 12:17pm


Dave Grohl, from a trio called Nirvana, is inducting Rush, a trio. This was done on purpose.

Posted by Roy on Wednesday, 01.23.13 @ 22:54pm

Why?

Posted by Dezmond on Wednesday, 01.23.13 @ 23:08pm

In preparation for a Nirvana induction.

Posted by Roy on Thursday, 01.24.13 @ 07:13am

What exactly do they need to "prepare" for? And how does allowing Grohl to give a fanboy speech about Rush better prepare anyone for the inevitable induction of Nirvana?

Posted by Dezmond on Friday, 01.25.13 @ 20:27pm


Artists mentioned in the Rock Hall biography for Rush:

Buddy Holly, Led Zeppelin, Cream, King Crimson, Yes, Van der Graaf Generator, The Who, The Yardbirds

Posted by Roy on Friday, 01.25.13 @ 23:55pm


RUSH

THE 1994 JUNO/CANADIAN MUSIC HALL OF FAME
THE 1997 ORDER OF CANADA
THE 1999 CANADA HONOURS/CANADA'S WALK OF FAME
THE 2010 HOLLYWOOD WALK OF FAME
THE 2010 CANADIAN SONGWRITERS HALL OF FAME
THE 2013 ROCK AND ROLL HALL OF FAME
THE 20?? SONGWRITERS HALL OF FAME
THE 20?? KENNEDY CENTER HONORS

Posted by Roy on Wednesday, 02.6.13 @ 18:42pm


I was first introduced to the music of Rush in early 1979 with the album, "Hemispheres." At that time, it had been the most amazing piece of music that I had ever heard. After enrolling in the University of Arizona, I would be re-introduced to "Hemispheres" by a fellow student in the autumn of 1980. I have been an aficionado of Rush's music ever since. With the possible exception of most of the songs on their debut album, with the exceptions of 'Here Again' and 'Working Man'.and 'Lesson' from 2112, I have enjoyed almost all of Rush's vast catalogue. I feel that Rush is one of those bands who is undoubtedly amongst the most consistently excellent songwriters of all time. Their upcoming induction into the Rock & Roll Hall Of Fame is long overdue. My hope is that other "progressive rock" bands will be inducted in their wake. I am also hoping that this is the first of many honors yet to be bestowed upon them. They deserve to receive induction into both the American and U.K. Songwriter's Hall Of Fame, a lifetime Grammy award and the Kennedy Center Honors.

Posted by Enigmaticus on Monday, 03.4.13 @ 09:24am


Rush talks about their fellow inductees on page 26 of this week's Rolling Sone magazine. Mumford and Sons on the cover.

Posted by Roy on Thursday, 03.21.13 @ 22:24pm


Why does Geddy Lee wear shirts that say RASH instead of RUSH?

Posted by Roy on Tuesday, 03.26.13 @ 07:45am


Roy,

If you ever see the "Time Machine Tour" video, you will understand where the Rash reference comes from. By the way, now that Rush is finally getting inducted, whom will you place your support behind for induction in 2014?

Posted by Enigmaticus on Saturday, 03.30.13 @ 13:10pm


Do you mean if they are nominated who will I support, or who do I support regardless of whether or not they are nominated in 2014? Chicago!

Posted by Roy on Saturday, 03.30.13 @ 20:31pm


What if Nile Rodgers shows up to give the induction speech for Donna Summer, meets Rush, and produces their next album?

Posted by Roy on Tuesday, 04.2.13 @ 11:26am


THE 2013 ROCK AND ROLL HALL OF FAME BIOGRAPHY

RUSH

Inductees: Gary Lee Weinrib aka Geddy Lee (vocals, bass; born July 29, 1953), Neil Peart (drums; born September 12, 1952), Alex Zivojinovich aka Alex Lifeson (guitar; born August 27, 1953)

Equal parts Led Zeppelin, Cream and King Crimson, Rush burst out of Canada in the early 1970s with one of the most powerful and bombastic sounds of the decade. Their 1976 magnum opus 2112 represents progressive rock at its grandiose heights, but just a half decade later they had the guts to put epic songs aside in favor of shorter (but no less dynamic) tunes like “Tom Sawyer” and “The Spirit of Radio” that remain in constant rotation on radio to this day. Absolutely uncompromising in every conceivable way, the trio has spent the last 40 years cultivating the largest cult fan base in rock while still managing to sell out arenas around the globe.

Rush was formed in August 1968 in the Willowdale neighborhood of Toronto. The original lineup included Alex Lifeson on guitar, Jeff Jones on bass and John Rutsey on drums. Jones was soon replaced by Geddy Lee, and, in 1974, after the release of the group’s debut album, Rutsey left and was replaced by Neil Peart. That lineup – Lee on vocals, bass and keyboards; Lifeson on guitar, and Peart on drums – has remained stable throughout the years.

The group played around on the Toronto scene for a few years and then, in 1973, released its first single, a cover of Buddy Holly’s “Not Fade Away.” The record didn’t do well, and the band decided to form its own label, Moon Records. The group released its first album, Rush, in 1974. The album wasn’t faring too well until a Cleveland radio station, WMMS (100.7 FM), added the song “Working Man” to its playlist. The album was then picked up by Mercury Records in the U.S., and sales began to skyrocket.

The following year, Rush released two albums, Fly by Night and Caress of Steel. The group’s big breakthrough came the following year with the release of the album 2112. The album featured a 20-minute title track divided into seven sections. It went platinum in Canada, and Rush hit the road, touring the U.S. and Canada. The tour culminated with a three-night stand at Massey Hall in Toronto. The group recorded the shows and released its first live album, All the World’s a Stage, in 1976.

Rush then re-located to the U.K., where the band recorded its next two albums, 1977’s A Farewell to Kings and 1978’s Hemispheres, at Rockfield Studios in Wales. The music on those two albums ventured more in the direction of progressive rock. “As our tastes got more obscure, we discovered more progressive rock–based bands like Yes, Van der Graaf Generator and King Crimson, and we were very inspired by those bands," said Lee. "They made us want to make our music more interesting and more complex, and we tried to blend that with our own personalities to see what we could come up with that was indisputably us.”

Rush’s popularity continued to soar, and in 1980, with the release of Permanent Waves, the group became one of the most successful bands in the world. The album marked something of a change in the group’s sound. The songs were shorter, and the group’s influences now included reggae and New Wave. Permanent Waves reached the Top Five in the U.S. The following year Rush released Moving Pictures. That album reached Number Three and sold more than four million copies.

With the release of Signals in 1982, Rush’s sound underwent yet another change. Synthesizers were now at the forefront of the group’s music. In addition, the album included Rush’s only Top 40 hit single in the U.S., “New World Man.” The album also expanded the band’s use of ska, reggae and funk.

Through the rest of the Eighties, the band kept a somewhat lower profile, not spending as much time on the road. Even so, its albums continued to go gold or platinum. With the 1989 album Presto, Rush once again began emphasizing guitar instead of keyboards. The transition from synthesizer to guitar continued with 1993’s Counterparts and 1996’s Test for Echo. After touring to support the latter album, Rush began what amounted to a five-year hiatus in 1997. The layoff was brought on by personal tragedies in Peart’s life. Peart's daughter Selena died in an automobile accident in August 1997, followed by the death of his wife Jacqueline from cancer in June 1998.

The band returned to the studio and released a new album, Vapor Trails, in 2002. For the first time since the Seventies, Rush did not use a single synthesizer, organ or other keyboard on the album. To celebrate their 30th anniversary, Rush released Feedback, a studio EP, in June 2004. The recording featured Rush’s covers of eight songs by some of the artists that influenced the group, including Cream, the Who and the Yardbirds. The band also hit the road in the summer of 2004, playing anniversary shows in the U.S., Canada, the United Kingdom, Germany, Italy, Sweden, the Czech Republic and the Netherlands.

Rush continued recording and touring, releasing the albums Snakes & Arrows in 2007 and Clockwork Angels in 2012. The group also released a live album, Time Machine 2011: Live in Cleveland, in 2011. The album was recorded on April 15, 2011, at Quicken Loans Arena in Cleveland, Ohio.

While they have never gotten the critical respect they so richly deserve, Neil Peart has inspired countless young drummers to take up the instrument over the past 30 years. No less impressive is Geddy Lee’s ability to play keyboards and bass in concert while never missing a note of his lead vocals, and guitarist Alex Lifeson is a virtuoso simply without peer. Rush is a band completely removed from the mainstream music scene yet remain one of the most popular rock bands in the world. It is a dichotomy that has fueled the group from the very beginning.

TIMELINE

1952: Neal Peart is born in Hamilton, Ontario.

1952: Geddy Lee is born as Gary Lee Weinrib in Toronto.

1953: Alex Lifeson is born as Alex Zivojinovich in Surnie, British Columbia, Canada.

1968: Rush forms in the Willowdale section of Toronto. The original lineup includes Alex Lifeson on guitar, John Rutsey on drums and Jeff Jones on bass.

1968: Geddy Lee replaces Jeff Jones on bass.

1973: Rush releases its first single, a cover of Buddy Holly's "Not Fade Away."

1974: Rush releases its first album, "Rush."

1974: John Rutsey plays his last show with the band, in London, Ontario.

1974: Neil Peart becomes Rush's drummer.

1976: Rush releases "2112," it's fourth studio album. In 2012, the album is ranked Number Two on "Rolling Stone's" list of "Your Favorite Prog- Rock Albums of All Time."

1981: Rush releases "Moving Pictures." The album sells more than four million copies and includes such tracks as "Tom Sawyer" and "Limelight."

1996: Rush releases "Test for Echo", its 16th studio album. The album reaches Number Five. The band supports the album with a tour without any opening acts. The tour is called "An Evening with Rush."

1997: Neal Peart's daughter is killed in an automobile accident, and the band takes a five- year hiatus.

2002: Rush releases "Vapor Trails, its 17th studio album.

2004: Rush begins its R30: 30th Anniversary Tour.

2011:Rush plays the Quicken Loans Arena in Cleveland. The show is recorded and released on the album "Time Machine 2011: Live in Cleveland."

Posted by Roy on Friday, 04.12.13 @ 23:12pm


Rush wants Deep Purple, Yes, King Crimson, Emerson, Lake and Palmer, The Moody Blues and Jethro Tull inducted into the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame.

Posted by Roy on Sunday, 04.14.13 @ 20:52pm


http://www.futurerocklegends.com/statistics.php

When is Rush going to be taken off the Voting Statistics page to make room for someone else? Most Votes and Most Yes Votes categories.

Posted by Roy on Saturday, 04.20.13 @ 21:35pm


I am certain that this issue has been beaten to death many times over, but I have to know one thing.

In your opinion,

Which choice best describes Rush:

A) a simplistic "heavy metal" group?

B) An enduring "progressive metal" band with a whiny voiced vocalist?

C) An engaging heavy "progressive rock" band, whose roots lie in the "hard rock" bands of the mid to late 1960's and the early "progressive rock" stylings of King Crimson, Yes, Genesis, Jethro Tull and Emerson, Lake & Palmer?

D) An innovative major "art rock," symphonic and eclectic "progressive rock" band, whose influences have included: The Beatles, The Moody Blues, Procol Harum, King Crimson, Jefferson Airplane, Cream, Led Zeppelin, The Who, Yes, Genesis, Jethro Tull and Gentle Giant, in addition to The Police, Talking Heads and other "art rock" bands, whose primary incarnation has been as a "power trio?" The unique thing about Rush, lies in their incorporation of folk rock, classical guitar and string sections to support their vision, they are also impeccable songwriters and experimental musicians whose talent lies in often composing in "odd" time signatures which are flawlessly integrated into the body of their songs, the creation of "concept songs" within "concept albums" and the ability of the band to incorporate various styles, such as hard rock, blues, jazz, hip hop and classical music into their songs and structures. Additionally, they have created and incorporated unusual "arty" videos and comedy into their live shows. Along the way, they have been a band which has influenced "progressive rock" musicians, "hard rock" artists and although, not a "heavy metal" band have inspired the development of the genre of "progressive metal?"

Posted by Enigmaticus on Saturday, 05.11.13 @ 12:27pm


Anyone know where I could get a transcript of Alex Lifeson's RRHOF induction speech?

Posted by Joe on Monday, 05.20.13 @ 17:38pm


Blah, blah, blah. Summarizes most Rush songs perfectly.

Posted by astrodog on Tuesday, 05.21.13 @ 14:00pm


I have just a few more comments about Rush:

#125 - Posted 4/23/13 @10:02AM by Enigmaticus [contact]

Shall we get back to the earlier subject, please?

I had just read the Allmusic Guide's Discography for Rush. It appears that they have not yet become enlightened, unfortunately.

I was glad to hear that David Wild has finally eaten his words. It has taken over 2 decades to make this a reality, but now since Rush is now a member of the Rock & Roll pantheon, it was worth it.

Now, as to the ratings on the Rush discography:
Firstly, let's divide their recordings into 5 distinct periods.

The Early Period

Rush ***
Fly By Night *** 1/2
Caress Of Steel *****
2112 ****
All The World's A Stage *** 1/2

The Middle Period

A Farewell To Kings **** 1/2
Hemispheres *****
Permanent Waves *****
Moving Pictures *****
Exit... Stage Left *****

The Early Modern Period

Signals *****
Grace Under Pressure ****
Power Windows *****
Hold Your Fire ****
A Show Of Hands ****

The Middle Modern Period

Presto *****
Roll The Bones *****
Counterparts ****
Test For Echo ****1/2
Different Stages *****

The Late Modern Period

Vapor Trails ****1/2
Rush In Rio ****
Feedback (EP) ****
R30 *****
Snakes & Arrows *****
Snakes & Arrows Live *****
Time Machine Tour ****
Clockwork Angels *****
Clockwork Angels Live *****

#68 - Posted 4/20/13 @7:11PM by Enigmaticus [contact]

Ladies and gentlemen, I can certainly understand your frustration over Rush being snubbed for induction for 15 years. As I have said numerous times before, I have supported their induction since the very beginning. I have to wonder if Jann Wenner was the individual responsible though. From what I have read, it has been critic David Wild who had allegedly detested Rush from the very beginning. Of course, Wild was quick to praise Foreigner, Bad Company and even after a while, Heart- their "Behind The Music Remastered" episodes attest to that fact.

In Jann Wenner's defense, I would like to mention the 2nd Rolling Stone Record Guide (the blue one) from 1983, wherein John Swenson had given most of Rush's albums 3 & 4 stars, respectively. I feel that a critical reevaluation of Rush's discography is definitely in order. Critic Greg Prato, from the Allmusic Guide needs to amend their discography and his review of "Exit.. Stage Left" is completely unwarranted.

If I were to rate Rush's discography (of studio and live albums), I would give most of them 5 stars, These include the following : (Caress Of Steel, Hemispheres, Permanent Waves, Moving Pictures, Exit.. Stage Left, Signals, Power Windows, Presto, Roll The Bones, Different Stages, R30, Snakes & Arrows, Snakes & Arrows Live, Clockwork Angels & the upcoming Clockwork Angels Live)
4 1/2 stars to: A Farewell To Kings, Test For Echo & Vapor Trails
4 stars to: 2112, Grace Under Pressure, Hold Your Fire, Counterparts, Rush In Rio and the Time Machine Tour.
3 1/2 stars to: Fly By Night & All The World's A Stage
3 stars to: Rush

What are your opinions?

Posted by Enigmaticus on Wednesday, 05.29.13 @ 10:12am


After seeing the edited HBO version of the 2013 Rock & Roll Hall Of Fame Induction ceremony several times, was there ever any doubt that Rush belongs there?

Posted by Enigmaticus on Tuesday, 06.11.13 @ 02:08am


Recently, a longtime critic of the band had described Rush as the greatest rock & roll band of all time.

Posted by Enigmaticus on Sunday, 06.23.13 @ 13:41pm


Now that Rush has been firmly ensconced in the Rock & Roll Hall Of Fame, who should be next?

Posted by Enigmaticus on Sunday, 06.30.13 @ 00:16am


Now that Rush has been firmly ensconced in the Rock & Roll Hall Of Fame, who should be next?

Posted by Enigmaticus on Sunday, 06.30.13 @ 00:16am
--------------------------------------------------
That's the most open question you could ask, period. Pick any one of a zillion groups who all have a claim to the Hall (and who are eligible, obviously) & you'll find someone to support them.

Age-wise, the 50's acts have it over anyone. Link Wray, the Rock & Roll Trio, etc., all have an obvious case. If not them, then Chubby Checker, Dick Dale, & a lot of early 60's acts.

The flip side here is Nirvana, but they're just simply waiting for the call. There's a fair amount who are new and waiting, but they can always hold another yr. or two.

In between those parameters, you make the call. Just throw a name out there, & you'll find support.

Posted by Cheesecrop on Sunday, 06.30.13 @ 19:40pm


The first five names that popped into my head are Kraftwerk, Roxy Music, MC5, the Cure and Johnny Burnette & the Rock and Roll Trio.

That's obviously a biased list for those who know my taste. There are plenty of deserving acts in other subgenres that are less on my personal radar and plenty who aren't white males.

Posted by DarinRG on Sunday, 06.30.13 @ 21:23pm


I would personally chose the following:

1. Duran Duran
2. The Moody Blues
3. Chicago
4. Carly Simon
5. The Doobie Brothers
6. Electric Light Orchestra
7. Carole King (as performer)
8. Foreigner
9. Stevie Ray Vaughan
10. Yes





Posted by Enigmaticus on Monday, 07.1.13 @ 01:47am


I was first introduced to the music of Rush in early 1979 with the album, "Hemispheres." At that time, it had been the most amazing piece of music that I had ever heard. After enrolling in the University of Arizona, I would be re-introduced to "Hemispheres" by a fellow student in the autumn of 1980. I have been an aficionado of Rush's music ever since. I have enjoyed most of Rush's vast catalog, with the exception of the majority of the songs on their debut album, except for 'Here Again' and 'Working Man.' I have never been very fond of 'Lessons' from 2112. I feel that Rush is one of those bands who's members are undoubtedly amongst the most consistently excellent songwriters of all time. Their induction into the Rock & Roll Hall Of Fame was long overdue. My hope is that other "progressive rock" bands will be inducted in their wake. I am also hoping that this is the first of many honors yet to be bestowed upon them. They deserve to receive induction into both the American and U.K. Songwriter's Hall Of Fame, a lifetime Grammy award and the Kennedy Center Honors.

Posted by Enigmaticus on Monday, 03.4.13 @ 09:24am

Posted by Enigmaticus on Monday, 07.1.13 @ 03:17am


I was first introduced to the music of Rush in early 1979 with the album, "Hemispheres." At that time, it had been the most amazing piece of music that I had ever heard. After enrolling in the University of Arizona, I would be re-introduced to "Hemispheres" by a fellow student in the autumn of 1980. I have been an aficionado of Rush's music ever since. I have enjoyed most of Rush's vast catalog, with the exception of the majority of the songs on their debut album, except for 'Here Again' and 'Working Man.' I have never been very fond of 'Lessons' from 2112. I feel that Rush is one of those bands whose members are undoubtedly amongst the most consistently excellent songwriters of all time. Their induction
into the Rock & Roll Hall Of Fame was long overdue. My hope is that other "progressive rock" bands will be inducted in their wake. I am also hoping that this is the first of many honors yet to be bestowed upon them. They deserve to receive induction into both the American and U.K. Songwriter's Hall Of Fame, a lifetime Grammy award and the Kennedy Center Honors.

Posted by Enigmaticus on Monday, 03.4.13 @ 09:24am

Posted by Enigmaticus on Monday, 07.1.13 @ 05:46am


If I were to choose the most deserving artists, not yet in the Rock & Roll Hall Of Fame, my list would look something like this:

1. The Moody Blues
2. Chicago
3. Yes
4. King Crimson
5. Jethro Tull
6. Procol Harum
7. Duran Duran
8. Styx
9. Kansas
10. Supertramp
11. Carly Simon
12. Carole King
13. Stevie Nicks
14. Pat Benatar
15. Deep Purple
16. Judas Priest
17. Iron Maiden
18. Twisted Sister
19. Peter Gabriel
20. Stevie Ray Vaughan
21. Steve Miller Band
22. Boston
23. Journey
24. Foreigner
25. Bad Company
26. Doobie Brothers
27. Gentle Giant
28. Sade
29. Lionel Richie
30. Garth Brooks
31. Shania Twain
32. k.d. lang
33. The Zombies
34. Don Henley
35. Alan Parson's Project
36. Emerson, Lake & Palmer
37. Bread
38. America
39. The Carpenters
40. Gentle Giant

Posted by Enigmaticus on Monday, 07.1.13 @ 09:46am


If I were to choose the most deserving artists, not yet in the Rock & Roll Hall Of Fame, my list would look something like this:

1. The Moody Blues
2. Chicago
3. Yes
4. King Crimson
5. Jethro Tull
6. Procol Harum
7. Duran Duran
8. Styx
9. Kansas
10. Supertramp
11. Carly Simon
12. Carole King
13. Stevie Nicks
14. Pat Benatar
15. Deep Purple
16. Judas Priest
17. Iron Maiden
18. Twisted Sister
19. Peter Gabriel
20. Stevie Ray Vaughan
21. Steve Miller Band
22. Boston
23. Journey
24. Foreigner
25. Bad Company
26. Doobie Brothers
27. Gentle Giant
28. Sade
29. Lionel Richie
30. Garth Brooks
31. Shania Twain
32. k.d. lang
33. The Zombies
34. Don Henley
35. Alan Parson's Project
36. Emerson, Lake & Palmer
37. Bread
38. America
39. The Carpenters
40. Electric Light Orchestra
41. The Cars
42. Depeche Mode
43. Roxy Music
44. Bryan Ferry
45. Three Dog Night
46. The Monkees
47. Echolyn
48. Soundgarden
49. Pearl Jam
50. Queensryche
51. Jim Croce
52. Warren Zevon
53. Free
54. Toto
55. Soft Machine
56. Asia
57. Camel
58. Tangerine Dream
59. Kraftwerk
60. Wham
61. Culture Club
62. Dream Theater

Posted by Enigmaticus on Monday, 07.1.13 @ 10:07am


Wow, with the possible exception of the blue-eyed soul Doobie Brothers, Sade is the only R&B act on that list, and certainly the only Black act. That's why the Foundation will never take people like us seriously, Enig. I've seen lists with 300+ Rock Hall snubs that have maybe five R&B/Black acts on there, and you can be damn sure none of them are rap/hip-hop. It's all about the suburban White culture, especially about bands that were themselves, or influenced by British bands. Many of them are definitely deserving, but they will condemn your list as racist and short-sighted as quickly as I noticed it if you've got Gentle Giant (whom I've never even heard of) and not the Spinners, Marvelettes, GAP Band, etc./whatever.

I know it's not about race for you. I think either Cheesecrop or astrodog summed up your position: you want to induct bands, not groups that used session musicians. Only bands matter for you (unless they're singer/songwriters like Zevon or Simon). But that has never been what the Hall is about, and it's a strawman to the powers-that-be.

On a purely personal note: Garth and Shania? *puke*

Posted by Philip on Monday, 07.1.13 @ 11:29am


you'd best bump Kraftwerk up that list son

Posted by GFW on Monday, 07.1.13 @ 12:52pm


A Snub List (along w/a few comments):

1. The Funk Brothers - These gentlemen played on the majority of what Motown released. Although I do not have exact numbers to bear this out, I'm willing to bet that you'd have to add up the combined output of the Beatles, The Stones, Dylan, & the Beach Boys to reach the amount of #1's these gentlemen were a part of.

What, was the Film enough??!!!

2. (tie) Dick Dale/Link Wray/The Rock & Roll Trio - The future is in view here. The train was rolling as early as 56... then it rumbled through town in 58... before hitting the Pacific Coast Hwy. (61)... then in the words of the Surfari's...

"ha, ha, ha, ha, Wipe Out!"

& 50 yrs. later, they put out a video game called "Guitar Hero".

5. Deep Purple - Will somebody please complete the British metal trio (Zeppelin, Sabbath, Purple), please?!

6. Chubby Checker - Cause dance music has a history, but the modern club audience can't be bothered with it. Apparently the Trans-Europe Express makes no stops at the old American Bandstand studios...

7. Jethro Tull - Cause Living in the Past ain't where it's at (or at least it shouldn't be). From Phish's kick-off in the mid-80's through the hordes of H.O.R.D.E'rs in the mid-90's, the good ship Jam Nation had a Tull hull.

8. Def Leppard - Yes, VH put down the guitar sound, but Def Lep laid the studio foundations down for a decade of bands. That used to be worth something, but before we start living in the past again...

9. Chicago - Miles Davis is in as an influence - yet nothing he influenced (McLaughlin/Mahavishnu, Weather Report, Herbie Hancock, BS & T, Chick Corea, etc.) is in... so what's he influencing?

Unless you count the Doors as an early influence (& Jim Morrison was counting Oedipus Rex as more of an influence than Miles here... Get Him to the Greek(s) alright!), just who did Miles influence?

Here's a nice place to begin.

10. War - We're harder than Earth, Wind, & Fire, but we're not quite Funkadelic. We've a Latin influence, we fit as Funk/Rock/R&B, & we were the soundtrack of the mid-70's for a lot of people. But we're not in. Why?

11. Kraftwerk - The Rock & Roll Trio promised us the train would keep a' rollin', all night long. Apparently that wasn't enough for these guys. They wanted a Metro-Liner...

12. Duran Duran - Two reasons why DD haven't made the Hall:

a. They did a song called "Wild Boys". The Stones did a song called "Some Girls". The voting committee's majority male. Who do you think they Are going to choose?

b. They did a song called "Hungry Like The Wolf". Bad call. Zevon can't get in, & he's had a whole pack of werewolves runnin' with him for a while...

Lon Chaney Jr. - "When the moon rises, I turn into a wolf..."

Lou Costello - "You & 20 million other guys".

(Abbott & Costello Meet Frankenstein)

13. Kool & the Gang - We've got a sound that's harder than E,W,&F, but not Funkadelic. However, we had a pop side that took us to the top of the charts in the disco era, & kept us there till the mid-80's. Yet you all forgot about us. Why?

14. The Monkees - Check back in ten yrs. when they want to elect Britney & N'Sync, & watch the squirming begin...

oh, & btw - they actually picked up the instruments & kept it real (as some rappers might say) later on...

15. T-Rex - Go to the beach, & take a T-Rex album. When you get to "20th Century Boy" & "Solid Gold Easy Action", pick up a seashell & hold it next to the album, as it's playing...

You'll hear Prince & the Revolution complaining that they wished they'd done these songs themselves...

That's my first 15. Maybe I'll come back & do a few more in a bit.

Posted by Cheesecrop on Tuesday, 07.2.13 @ 05:59am


Ladies and gentlemen,

When I had started making that list, I was not ranking those artists in order, nor was I being literal. That list is simply representative of some of the great artists which have not yet been inducted. I would personally rather see Living Colour and The Commodores inducted also. I do have a few issues with individuals who sang someone else's songs, but were not involved in the creative process of creating their own works. If I had added all of my personal favorite artists that list would be much shorter and slightly different, concentrating upon "progressive rock," for the most part. In my honest opinion, Gary Clark Jr. is already doing very impressive
things. I think that any great group would be enhanced by his
presence.

Posted by Enigmaticus on Tuesday, 07.2.13 @ 10:14am


Since this is the Rush page, I have determined that it has been necessary to amend my list. Overall, in my honest opinion, these are Rush's best recordings. All are worthy of 5 stars:

1. Exit... Stage Left
2. Roll The Bones
3. Power Windows
4. Moving Pictures
5. Clockwork Angels
6. Permanent Waves
7. Snakes & Arrows
8. Presto
9. R30
10. Snakes & Arrows Live
11. Signals
12. Different Stages (Live)

Of course, the upcoming live album from the "Clockwork Angels" tour will undoubtedly shift that list around again.



Posted by Enigmaticus on Thursday, 07.4.13 @ 13:23pm


http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ymPD0_xMexg

Full induction video surfaces.

Posted by Roy on Friday, 07.5.13 @ 10:06am


Could there be a connection between the album ratings in the "New Rolling Stone Record Guide," (1983 edition) and the artists who have been inducted into the Rock & Roll Hall Of Fame? If so, then it would certainly explain the partial list of present inductees. After all, in this particular guide, Rush had received 4 star ratings for the following recordings: "2112," "Hemispheres," "Permanent Waves," "Moving Pictures" and "Exit... Stage Left" and a 3 star rating for "A Farewell To Kings." Unfortunately, there were not any 5 star recordings amongst Rush's discography.

One wonders then, if Rush's recent induction into the Rock & Roll Hall Of Fame earlier this year will ultimately lead to a further revision of their album ratings. What do you think?

Posted by Enigmaticus on Monday, 07.8.13 @ 08:51am


Rush has only 2 essential albums amongst their discography, how is this even remotely possible? The way that I see it, Rush has released a "classic," or "essential" album approximately every 5 years since releasing 2112. In this case, excluding 2112, they have no less than 5, amongst these are:

1. Moving Pictures (1980)
2. Power Windows (1985)
3. Roll The Bones (1991)
4. Test For Echo (1996)
5. Vapor Trails (2002)
6. Snakes & Arrows (2007)
7. Clockwork Angels (2012)

Personally, using this rule, I feel that "Moving Pictures," "Power Windows," "Roll The Bones," "Snakes & Arrows" and "Clockwork Angels" are amongst their best studio albums.

Of course, IMHO, "Exit... Stage Left" is still their best live album and "Permanent Waves," "Signals" and "Presto" are great albums as well. "Test For Echo" and "Vapor Trails" are very good also, but are not amongst my favorites.

Posted by Enigmaticus on Monday, 07.8.13 @ 09:35am


How is it possible that Rush has only 2 "essential" albums amongst their discography? The way that I see it, Rush has recorded and/or released a "classic," or "essential" album approximately once every 5 years. Excluding 2112, IMHO, there are at least 5 masterpieces which follow this particular pattern:

1. Moving Pictures (recorded in 1980, released in 1981)
2. Power Windows (1985)
3. Roll The Bones (1991)
4. Snakes & Arrows (2007)
5. Clockwork Angels (2012)

Of course, "Test For Echo" (1996) and "Vapor Trails" (2002) are also very good albums.

Of course, "Permanent Waves," (recorded in 1979, released in 1980) "Signals" (1982) and "Presto" (1989) do not necessarily follow this rule. "Exit... Stage Left," (1981) arguably, Rush's greatest live album does however.


Posted by Enigmaticus on Monday, 07.8.13 @ 10:14am


Could there be a connection between the album ratings in the "New Rolling Stone Record Guide," (1983 edition) and the artists who have been inducted into the Rock & Roll Hall Of Fame? If so, then it would certainly explain the partial list of present inductees.

etc., etc., on down.

One wonders then, if Rush's recent induction into the Rock & Roll Hall Of Fame earlier this year will ultimately lead to a further revision of their album ratings. What do you think?

Posted by Enigmaticus on Monday, 07.8.13 @ 08:51am
--------------------------------------------------
I wouldn't put too much faith in RS's Album guides. First, your using a 1983 guide as a basis. There are new writers at the magazine who have a diff. view of the group, and would probably challenge their fellow colleagues here. In addition, a lot of these guides, not just from RS but from any magazine, work as unintentional extensions of the mags philosophy. What you're reading there are the partial views of the writer, along w/an edited view of RS's public stance on Rush, at the moment.

Amore updated guide might give you a better take on whether the view on Rush changed, how it changed, & who was responsible for the shift (if any). It will also give you a better clue on which way the prevailing winds blow, via other acts not in the Hall yet.

Posted by Cheesecrop on Tuesday, 07.9.13 @ 05:50am


Cheesecrop,

It is certainly true that various critics will have differing views with respect to Rush, as they do with Yes, The Moody Blues, etc.

Case in point, the 1979 (orange) Rolling Stone Record Guide had given Yes much higher ratings. If I am not mistaken, both "The Yes Album" and "Close To The Edge" were given 5 star ratings. "Tales From Topographic Oceans" was given 4 stars.

The critics were not nearly as kind to Rush. I seem to recall that Alan Niester, a Toronto high school teacher had given Rush appallingly low ratings. I believe that he had even quipped something along these lines, 'This power trio which boasts a vocalist who sounds like a cross between Donald Duck and Robert Plant on helium reached the pinnacle of success it was discovered by Circus magazine and turned into fanzine wall decoration material. Rush is to the late '70's what Grand Funk was to the early '70's the power boogie band for the 16 Magazine Graduating Class...' I was certainly confused; what did this even mean?

When I had read that review, (amongst others) it had made me absolutely furious. I had vowed to change the prevailing opinion about "progressive rock," in general and Rush, in particular. The advent of the Internet had made this possible. Therefore, I had started creating my website in May, 1997. I
had one particular goal in mind, to find other like minded individuals and reverse those opinions.

Posted by Enigmaticus on Tuesday, 07.9.13 @ 08:52am


I had been reading the online biography of William Shakespeare's life and works over the past several days, after having seen, "Shakespeare In Love" once again. This magnificent movie had motivated me to consider the concept of what makes someone truly great. Certainly, Shakespeare had used universally recognized themes in the creation of each of his characters, which had made his works popular during his own lifetime.

Sometimes, the works of particular artists are even more highly regarded than even during their own lifetimes. Such are the cases of such artists as: Shakespeare, Mozart, Beethoven, Tchaikovsky, Claude Monet, Pierre Auguste Renoir, Edouard Manet and Salvador Dali, to name but a
few.

I think that the works of such artists transcend their lifetimes and eventually make those artists works immortal. How will historians look upon the culture of the late twentieth and early twenty first century? Will the music of Rush be played 100, or even 1,000 years from now? Only time will tell, but my thoughts on the subject, indicate that Rush's works will survive their lifetimes and become immortal, as well.

Posted by Enigmaticus on Tuesday, 07.9.13 @ 09:22am


"Shakespeare, Mozart, Beethoven, Tchaikovsky, Claude Monet, Pierre Auguste Renoir, Edouard Manet and Salvador Dali" And then Rush?

I like Rush. A lot.

But no. Let's get some perspective here.

Posted by Dezmond on Tuesday, 07.9.13 @ 09:57am


Sometimes, the works of particular artists are even more highly regarded than even during their own lifetimes. Such are the cases of such artists as: Shakespeare, Mozart, Beethoven, Tchaikovsky, Claude Monet, Pierre Auguste Renoir, Edouard Manet and Salvador Dali, to name but a
few.

I think that the works of such artists transcend their lifetimes and eventually make those artists works immortal. How will historians look upon the culture of the late twentieth and early twenty first century? Will the music of Rush be played 100, or even 1,000 years from now? Only time will tell, but my thoughts on the subject, indicate that Rush's works will survive their lifetimes and become immortal, as well.

Posted by Enigmaticus on Tuesday, 07.9.13 @ 09:22am
--------------------------------------------------
No offense here, Enigma, but I'm w/Dez here on the Rush = Shakespeare, Mozart, etc., comparison.

You're dealing w/the idea of timely vs. timeless. A lot of people directly connected w/rock will tell you that it's all about the moment. It's the reason we have the reaction we do to artists like Elvis, the Beatles, Michael Jackson, etc.

Thing is, it's all but impossible to have an art that's both "timely" in such an intense manner, and then "timeless", in the sense that the person experiencing it many yrs. down the line has the same exact effect. I think the crux of the R&R Hall came from the realization that some of these artists in the 50's & 60's weren't going to really last forever in the minds of younger people as the "no doubt about it greatest" acts ever.

If you check the Bob Dylan page, I believe, you'll see that some time back, I had the same conversation w/someone else. A bunch of us were involved (in fact, this was when Liam was on the board. It may have been one of the rare times we were in full agreement on an issue). I think I quoted from a book I have on this. I'm pretty sure.

Posted by Cheesecrop on Wednesday, 07.10.13 @ 05:45am


Enigmaticus:

This is the conversation I was looking for:



And Piggies and Bungalow Bill were great songs, but you had to be there. And you weren't. Stick with what you know Liam.

Posted by Dameon on Sunday, 09.28.08 @ 22:01pm
--------------------------------------------------
Please understand... please... I am not picking on you specifically.

I have heard this comment, or seen it on here, from many other folks. It is a common defense against younger rock fans by older ones, and I have always felt it was a ridiculous way to defend "classic" rock. Until recently I found I could not properly articulate why this was, despite the fact that I could relate why certain elements of this were wrong. Then I found this:

"Kill Your Idols" - Jim De Rogatis/Carmel Carillo (2004) Barricade Books

pg. 7
"Primarily members of Generation X & Y (with a few strays who are, technically speaking, demographic Baby Boomers, though they identify philosophically as X'ers), the men and women who've written for this book resent the notion that they missed out on everything just because they weren't at Woodstock. They've seen the movie and it sucked, and many of them have been to raves in warehouses and muddy fields that had much cooler soundtracks, not to mention better drugs. How much of the "classic rock" of the last fifty years is defended by the lame notion that, "You really had to be there?" Shouldn't a great album speak to you even if you weren't?

Posted by Cheesecrop on Monday, 09.29.08 @ 05:06am
--------------------------------------------------
Most of what we've all listed & voted on here is timely art, no matter what it is. The pre-rock songs we've listed are the songs that will stand the test of time. What is referred to as the "Great American Songbook" needs no Hall of Fame set up to honor it. At the same time, it's also the reason why the reaction to big bands is different than the reaction that rock acts received.

I'm not trying to down Rush in any sense of the word, when it comes to rock. They'll be remembered, but within the confines of what they were & where they were. My favorite act is Pearl Jam, & even though I'd like to think they'll be remembered in the same way 50 or 100 yrs. from now, even I know that's not going to be the case.

The R&R Hall is an attempt to do a little dance around the "timely vs. timeless" issue. It's a little thing we call "having our cake and eating it too."

Posted by Cheesecrop on Wednesday, 07.10.13 @ 06:01am


Cheesecrop,

This is certainly an interesting idea. Is the art of our time ephemeral, or is it eternal? Will a young girl, who is just starting to play the piano, learn how to master a work, such as 'Jacob's Ladder,' or even 'Xanadu?' Will the music of Rush and the other progressive rock greats be taught by universities, alongside Bach, Mozart, Beethoven, Tchaikovsky, Prokofiev, Stravinsky, Gershwin, Copland and others?

When the work of an artist begins to appeal to the next generation and subsequently, the following generations revere that artist as well, then their works become timeless. Did Rush do anything other than build upon what had preceded
them?

I happen to remember meeting the late Dr. Timothy Leary at a book signing, back in the late 1980's. At that time, he had
been accompanied by Yoko Ono. After having provided an eloquent introduction, I had asked him a very important question: "Will Rush's music become part of the great continuum? Will their work's become immortal?" To his credit, he had given his response as a resounding, " Yes."

What makes an artist immortal, is their ability and desire to tap into so-called universal truths. Did Neil Peart's lyrics deal with the superficial, or did they delve into the deeper world of the subconscious?

When Geddy Lee and Alex Lifeson had composed their music, was it trendy, or was it rooted within the realms of tradition?
that work becomes timeless.

Posted by Enigmaticus on Wednesday, 07.10.13 @ 09:58am


This is certainly an interesting idea. Is the art of our time ephemeral, or is it eternal? Will a young girl, who is just starting to play the piano, learn how to master a work, such as 'Jacob's Ladder,' or even 'Xanadu?'
____________________________________________________

Xanadu? As in, the ELO song?

I certainly hope not!

Posted by GFW on Wednesday, 07.10.13 @ 10:41am


Enigma, I admire your allegiance to Rush. I feel that same way about my favorites. Their music is a fabric of my life and I am sure future generations of rock fans will also appreciate them. BUT, Rush and 99.99999% of the other great rock bands will not be remembered in the same way as Mozart and Beethoven have been over a similar length of time after their demise. It is not the nature of rock music and too much has cluttered the scene and, well, Mozart and Beethoven were amongst the handful of artists who have defined Western musical structure and form.

I think that putting any rock or rock and roll artist in the same category as Mozart and Beethoven (even The Beatles or Elvis or Chuck Berry) just is not really taking a realistic and historical perspective. That is no insult to Rush or any of my favorites. It doesn't have anything to do with the fact that most days I'd rather listen to The Who over Mozart.

There were thousands and thousands of probably great musicians in Mozart's time. Time has filtered most of the out.

Posted by Dezmond on Wednesday, 07.10.13 @ 13:28pm


Cheesecrop,

This is certainly an interesting idea. Is the art of our time ephemeral, or is it eternal? Will the music of Rush and the other progressive rock greats be taught by universities, alongside Bach, Mozart, Beethoven, Tchaikovsky, Prokofiev, Stravinsky, Gershwin, Copland and others?

When the work of an artist begins to appeal to the next generation and subsequently, the following generations revere that artist as well, then their works become timeless. Did Rush do anything other than build upon what had preceded
them?

What makes an artist immortal, is their ability and desire to tap into so-called universal truths. Did Neil Peart's lyrics deal with the superficial, or did they delve into the deeper world of the subconscious?

When Geddy Lee and Alex Lifeson had composed their music, was it trendy, or was it rooted within the realms of tradition?
that work becomes timeless.

Posted by Enigmaticus on Wednesday, 07.10.13 @ 09:58am
--------------------------------------------------
I edited you down here a little.

It's not that Rush's stuff won't last, it's that at a certain point it'll give out, just like all the other rock bands. Rock & Roll has to be taken as a whole. Anyone can do a ballad, so any group can have a timeless song. When you're dealing w/the harder stuff that the groups made their stock and trade, you've got issues.

For me, a classic example of timely vs. timeless is the Guess Who's "American Woman". When the song hit the airwaves in 1970, lots of kids probably cheered the end, where the fading vocals can be heard to sing:

"Goodbye, American Woman,
"Goodbye, American S***"

By the 1980's, D.J.'s were making it a point to talk over the words, since the sentiment was no longer in vogue. They still do it today. It's a good rock song, but it's timely, not timeless.

Most rock is like this (so's most hip-hop, most dance, etc.), though not as dramatic in intent.

Taken individually, Rush is timely & awesome. Taken as a whole, Rush will last through the ages, but not with the hype that came from it's immediacy. In other words, someone studying popular culture in the yr. 2100 will hear Rush as a prime example of what the music as a whole sounded like in the late 70's and early 80's. They'll be taken alongside Bowie, Bad Co., Zeppelin, etc. prior to them (1970-1975?), and Bon Jovi, Def Lep, & GN'R after them (1983?- 1990) as part of a long continuous line.

Posted by Cheesecrop on Wednesday, 07.10.13 @ 15:55pm


I'll be pretty dissapointed if Bon Jovi is remembered as one of the defining bands of the 80's and not Pixies or somethin'...

Posted by GFW on Wednesday, 07.10.13 @ 17:35pm


This is certainly an interesting idea. Is the art of our time ephemeral, or is it eternal? Will a young girl, who is just starting to play the piano, learn how to master a work, such as 'Jacob's Ladder,' or even 'Xanadu?'
____________________________________________________

Xanadu? As in, the ELO song?

I certainly hope not!

Posted by GFW on Wednesday, 07.10.13 @ 10:41am

--------------------------------------------------------------------------

Very funny GFW,

I certainly hope that you have found that your comment, regarding E.L.O. was as hilarious, as I had thought that it had been. But no, in this case, I was referring to the Rush epic, 'Xanadu' which had been inspired by the poem, "Kubla Khan," by Samuel Taylor Coleridge.

"... I had heard the whispered tales of immortality..."

Of course, those lyrics deal with the issue of immortality also, as do the lyrics from 'Dreamline,' from "Roll The Bones."

"...When we are young
Wandering the face of the earth
Wondering what our dreams might be worth
Learning that we are only immortal
For a limited time..."

Which brings up an interesting question.

Did Rush write their music with the intent of their works becoming immortal, or did they see their music and lyrics as lasting only a limited time?

Posted by Enigmaticus on Thursday, 07.11.13 @ 09:42am


In the final analysis,

The members of Rush are impeccable musicians, magnificent songwriters, superb composers and amazing showmen.

Posted by Enigmaticus on Saturday, 07.13.13 @ 00:25am


I doubt very many artists write songs with the express intent that "this will become immortal!" I imagine it is more just sitting down, being inspired and writing good music. The immortality is too unpredictable and takes care of itself. I doubt even Mozart was writing his music and thinking that people would still listen to it hundreds of years later. It was just brilliant stuff in his head that he had to get down on paper and he also had to make a living.

That being said, Enigma, I do agree at least with your final analysis, that "The members of Rush are impeccable musicians, magnificent songwriters, superb composers and amazing showmen." That I can go with.

Posted by Dezmond on Saturday, 07.13.13 @ 07:06am


Thank you Dezmond,

Now I would like to discuss Rush's greatest songs and epics from each decade per album. If I were to choose at least two songs from each album, the list might look as follows:

Rush (1974)

'Here Again'
'Working Man'

Fly By Night (1975)

'Fly By Night'
'Bytor & The Snow Dog'

Caress Of Steel (1975)

'Bastille Day'
'The Fountain Of Lamneth'

2112 (1976)

'2112'
'A Passage To Bangkok'
'Tears'
'Twilight Zone'

A Farewell To Kings (1977)

'Xanadu'
'Closer To The Heart'

Hemispheres (1978)

'Cygnus X-1 Book II Hemispheres'
'The Trees'
'La Villa Strangiato'

Permanent Waves (1980)

'Freewill'
'Jacob's Ladder'
'Different Strings'
'Natural Science'

Moving Pictures (1981)

'YYZ'
'Red Barchetta'
'Limelight'
'Tom Sawyer'
'The Camera Eye'
'Vital Signs'

Exit... Stage Left (1981)

'Xanadu'
'Jacob's Ladder'
'La Villa Strangiato'
'The Trees'
'Closer To The Heart'
'Red Barchetta'
'Broon's Bane'
'Freewill'
'Tom Sawyer'
'A Passage To Bangkok'
'The Spirit Of Radio'
'YYZ'

Of course there are certainly exceptions (even from the mid 1970's into the early 1980's) such as: '2112,' 'Hemispheres' 'Permanent Waves,' 'Moving Pictures' and 'Exit... Stage Left.' Those albums simply have too many great songs on them to narrow the list down to 2. Throughout the remainder of Rush's career, their songwriting would become so exceptional, that one would be hard pressed to find a single (less than great) song on an album.








Posted by Enigmaticus on Tuesday, 07.16.13 @ 09:51am


Just a few more notes about Rush:

On July 29, Geddy Lee had a birthday. July 29th had also marked the 39th anniversary of the current lineup (Lee, Lifeson and Peart).

Even if Rush does not release another studio album, they will eventually be remembered for writing some of the greatest songs of all time in two different centuries. Even though their induction into the Rock & Roll Hall Of Fame had been long overdue, they still deserve to be honored with the Lifetime achievement Award in Songwriting, the Grammy for Lifetime achievement and The Kennedy Center Honors.

Rush had deserved induction at least a decade ago. Instead of waiting 15 years to induct other noteworthy acts, I think that it is paramount to ensure that Duran Duran does not suffer their fate: this iconic band has deserved induction into
the Rock Hall for several years, as well.

Those bands which have influenced Rush, such as: The Moody Blues, Yes, King Crimson, Jethro Tull, Supertramp, Gentle Giant. ELP and Deep Purple deserve to be enshrined also. Hopefully, these will not be posthumous inductions.

Posted by Enigmaticus on Thursday, 08.1.13 @ 10:11am


I had pulled out another one of my album review guides today. In this case it is "Music Hound: The Essential Album Guide." Upon reviewing the Rush album reviews, one realizes that Rush has quite a few 4 bone albums.

Posted by Enigmaticus on Sunday, 08.4.13 @ 05:23am


Approximately every two years, or so, I purchase a new remastered copy of "Exit.... Stage Left" on cd. I have purchased at least 5 copies of thee remastered version of "Exit... Stage Left," during the past decade. I am hoping that Audio Fidelity will finally release a gold or SACD version of the remastered version of Exit... Stage Left during the next couple of years.

Posted by Enigmaticus on Tuesday, 08.6.13 @ 02:36am


   Approximately every two years, or so, I purchase a new remastered copy of "Exit.... Stage Left" on cd. I have purchased at least 5 copies of the remastered version of "Exit... Stage Left," during the past decade. I am hoping that Audio Fidelity will finally release a gold or SACD version of the remastered version of Exit... Stage Left during the next couple of years.

Posted by Enigmaticus on Tuesday, 08.6.13 @ 03:16am


The "Clockwork Angels" tour has finally come to an end. Now, the members of Rush can take some well deserved time off to recharge their batteries. Their recent induction into the Rock & Roll Hall Of Fame will definitely be one of their high points. Who knows what will transpire next year, as their present incarnation reaches their 40th anniversary? Of course, Geddy Lee and Alex Lifeson will have a milestone to celebrate next month, the 45th year since Rush was founded.

If I had to pick one particular album, from their vast discography which embodies the greatness of Rush, I would have to choose "Exit... Stage Left." Approximately every two years, or so, I have purchased a new remastered copy of "Exit.... Stage Left" on cd. I have purchased at least 5 copies of the remastered version of "Exit... Stage Left," during the past decade alone. I am hoping that Audio Fidelity will finally release a gold or SACD version of the remastered version of Exit... Stage Left sometime within the next couple of years.
Posted by Enigmaticus on Tuesday, 08.6.13 @ 03:16am

Posted by Enigmaticus on Wednesday, 08.7.13 @ 09:47am


The "Clockwork Angels" tour has finally come to an end. Now, the members of Rush can take some well deserved time off to recharge their batteries. Their recent induction into the Rock & Roll Hall Of Fame will definitely be one of their high points. Who knows what will transpire next year, as their present incarnation reaches their 40th anniversary? Of course, Geddy Lee and Alex Lifeson will have a milestone to celebrate next month, the 45th year since Rush was founded.

If I had to pick one particular album, from their vast discography which embodies the greatness of Rush, I would have to choose "Exit... Stage Left." Approximately every two years, or so, I have purchased a new remastered copy of "Exit.... Stage Left" on cd. I have purchased at least 5 copies of the remastered version of "Exit... Stage Left," during the past decade alone. I am hoping that Audio Fidelity will finally release a gold or SACD version of the remastered version of Exit... Stage Left sometime within the next couple of years.
Posted by Enigmaticus on Tuesday, 08.6.13 @ 03:16am

Posted by Enigmaticus on Wednesday, 08.7.13 @ 09:49am


Rush has written many great songs over the past 5 decades:

The 1970's

Songs:

Working Man
Fly By Night
Bastille Day
A Passage To Bangkok
The Twilight Zone
Closer To The Heart
The Trees
Circumstances

epics (and instrumentals)

The Fountain Of Lamneth
2112
Xanadu
Cygnus X-1 Duo-logy
La Villa Strangiato

The 1980's

Songs:

The Spirit Of Radio
Freewill
Different Strings
Entre Nous
Tom Sawyer
Red Barchetta
Limelight
Vital Signs
Subdivisions
Digital Man
New World Man
Losing It
Countdown
Distant Early Warning
Afterimage
Red Sector A
Red Lenses
Between The Wheels
The Big Money
Grand Designs
Manhattan Project
Marathon
Territories
Middletown Dreams
Mystic Rhythms
Force Ten
Time Stand Still
Open Secrets
Second Nature
Prime Mover
Lock & Key
High Water
Show Me Don't Tell Me
The Pass
War Paint
Scars
Presto
'anagram' (for Mongo)
Red Tide
Available Light

Epics:

Jacob's Ladder
Natural Science
The Camera Eye
War Paint







Posted by Enigmaticus on Saturday, 08.17.13 @ 01:14am


The 1990's

Songs:

Dreamline
Bravado
Roll The Bones
Heresy
Ghost Of A Chance
You Bet Your Life
Animate
Cut To The Chase
Nobody's Hero
Between Sun And Moon
Double Agent
Everyday Glory
Test For Echo
Half The World
The Color Of Right
Time & Motion
Carve Away The Stone

Instrumentals:

Where's My Thing
Leave That Thing Alone
Limbo

2000's

Ghost Rider
Peaceable Kingdom
Vapor Trail
Earthshine
Far Cry
Armor And Sword
The Larger Bowl
The Way The Wind Blows
Faithless
Good News First

Instrumentals:

The Main Monkey Business
Hope
Malignant Narcissism

2010's

Songs:

Caravan
BU2B
Clockwork Angels
The Anarchist
Halo Effect
The Wreckers
Headlong Flight
BU2B2
The Garden

Posted by Enigmaticus on Saturday, 08.17.13 @ 04:01am


Rush has written many great songs over the past 5 decades:

The 1970's

Songs:

Working Man
Fly By Night
Bastille Day
A Passage To Bangkok
The Twilight Zone
Closer To The Heart
The Trees
Circumstances

epics (and instrumentals)

The Fountain Of Lamneth
2112
Xanadu
Cygnus X-1 Duo-logy
La Villa Strangiato

The 1980's

Songs:

The Spirit Of Radio
Freewill
Different Strings
Entre Nous
Tom Sawyer
Red Barchetta
Limelight
Vital Signs
Subdivisions
Digital Man
New World Man
Losing It
Countdown
Distant Early Warning
Afterimage
Red Sector A
Red Lenses
Between The Wheels
The Big Money
Grand Designs
Manhattan Project
Marathon
Territories
Middletown Dreams
Mystic Rhythms
Force Ten
Time Stand Still
Open Secrets
Second Nature
Prime Mover
Lock & Key
High Water
Show Me Don't Tell Me
The Pass
War Paint
Scars
Presto
'anagram' (for Mongo)
Red Tide
Available Light

Epics:

Jacob's Ladder
Natural Science
The Camera Eye

Instrumentals:

YYZ






Posted by Enigmaticus on Saturday, 08.17.13 @ 15:53pm


I would like to hear what Rush thinks of Chicago. More specifically, Geddy Lee on Peter Cetera, Alex Lifeson on Terry Kath, and Neil Peart on Danny Seraphine. Rush has only commented on Deep Purple, Yes, King Crimson, Jethro Tull, The Moody Blues, Emerson, Lake and Palmer, and Kiss. They want them all inducted. I want to hear what Rush has to say about Chicago. Does Rush want Chicago inducted?

Posted by Roy on Saturday, 08.17.13 @ 21:55pm


Roy,

Honestly, I do not know. I would say that the members of Rush would support the inductions of The Moody Blues, Yes, Jethro Tull, King Crimson, Deep Purple, Supertramp, Procol Harum and Duran Duran.

I know that Chris Squire of Yes has asked why Chicago wasn't there, however.

Rush did use a brass band on various songs on "Hold Your Fire," although they appear to be more partial to the support of a string section, or a full symphony orchestra.

I would expect

Posted by Enigmaticus on Saturday, 08.17.13 @ 23:11pm


I read the Chris Squire interview with RS.

Posted by Roy on Saturday, 08.17.13 @ 23:19pm


Roy,

I can certainly understand your appreciation of the music of Chicago. I think that their first two albums are brilliant and I even like Peter Cetera's ballads. Of course, I am an aficionado of the music of Rush and progressive rock, in general.

#163 - Posted 8/18/13 @9:43AM by Enigmaticus [contact]

#162 - Posted 8/18/13 @9:36AM by Enigmaticus [contact]

For those of us who have been aficionados of Rush's music for more than 3 decades, I will impart the following story.

My first exposure to the music of Rush was on a sunny day, a few weeks after my 17th birthday, in February, 1979.

At the time, I was attending the Heart Seminar (for High School students interested in medical careers) being given at the University of Arizona College of Medicine, in Tucson, Az.
I was a Junior in High School at the time and I could not carry on a conversation, to any extent about Rock music. My parents had forbidden either my sister, or myself from listening to any rock & roll while growing up, with the possible exception of The Carpenters which were considered okay, in their eyes. My only exposure to any other music came from either the radio, or television via the tv show, "Solid Gold." Therefore, as far as modern music was concerned, I was only familiar with disco music and songs like 'Love To Love You Baby,' by the late Donna Summer, 'Ring My Bell' by Anita Ward and 'Don't Bring Me Down,' by The Electric Light Orchestra. Otherwise, I was familiar with some of the romantic music of Peter Illyich Tchaikovsky, some motion picture soundtracks, and some jazz and big band era music.

That all had changed in February, 1979 however when I had followed two of my fellow high school students into a record shop, where I would first hear "Hemispheres." This, to me, this was a sonic revelation, it was both new and familiar simultaneously. I was overwhelmed by it's beauty and complexity. I was mesmerized by it's melody, I was enthralled by the bombast. It was, up until that time, the most amazing music that I had ever heard in my life. My world had changed, I had been exposed to "progressive rock." Unfortunately, it would be another year and a half before I would hear it once again.

Posted by Enigmaticus on Sunday, 08.18.13 @ 10:22am


Roy,

I can certainly understand your appreciation of the music of Chicago. I think that their first two albums are brilliant and I even like Peter Cetera's ballads. Of course, I am an aficionado of the music of Rush and progressive rock, in general.

#163 - Posted 8/18/13 @9:43AM by Enigmaticus [contact]

#162 - Posted 8/18/13 @9:36AM by Enigmaticus [contact]

For those of us who have been aficionados of Rush's music for more than 3 decades, I will impart the following story.

My first exposure to the music of Rush was on a sunny day, a few weeks after my 17th birthday, in February, 1979.

At the time, I was attending the Heart Seminar (for High School students interested in medical careers) being given at the University of Arizona College of Medicine, in Tucson, Az.
I was a Junior in High School at the time and I could not carry on a conversation, to any extent about Rock music. My parents had forbidden either my sister, or myself from listening to any rock & roll while growing up, with the possible exception of The Carpenters which were considered okay, in their eyes. My only exposure to any other music came from either the radio, or television via the tv show, "Solid Gold." Therefore, as far as modern music was concerned, I was only familiar with disco music and songs like 'Love To Love You Baby,' by the late Donna Summer, 'Ring My Bell' by Anita Ward and 'Don't Bring Me Down,' by The Electric Light Orchestra. Otherwise, I was familiar with some of the romantic music of Peter Illyich Tchaikovsky, some motion picture soundtracks, and some jazz and big band era music.

That all had changed in February, 1979 however when I had followed two of my fellow high school students into a record shop, where I would first hear "Hemispheres." This, to me, was a sonic revelation, it was both new and familiar simultaneously. I was overwhelmed by it's beauty and complexity. I was mesmerized by it's melody, I was enthralled by the bombast. It was, up until that time, the most amazing music that I had ever heard in my life. My world had forever changed, I had been exposed to the forbidden world of "progressive rock." Unfortunately, it would be an additional year and a half before I would hear it once again.

Posted by Enigmaticus on Sunday, 08.18.13 @ 11:17am


#164 - Posted 8/18/13 @10:11AM by Enigmaticus [contact]

One and a half years had passed. It was now October, 1980 and I was now a Freshman majoring in Architecture, at the University of Arizona. A fellow student had invited me to his room, to hear a cassette of his. On one side was "Dark Side Of The Moon," by Pink Floyd. The other side was "Hemispheres," by Rush. Prior to that time, I had discovered 'Nights In White Satin,' by The Moody Blues, from my roommate's radio. I had also purchased as my first two cassettes, please don't laugh, "Lost In Love," by Air Supply and "Xanadu: The Original Motion Picture Soundtrack."

I had really enjoyed both sides of that cassette, and from that initial exposure to both Pink Floyd and Rush emerged my overall taste in music. As a result, I would become one of progressive rock's strongest advocates and would make it one of my life's goals to expose others to the music of Rush and progressive rock, in general. In the ensuing remaining months of 1980, I would become more familiar with the music of Styx, especially "The Grand Illusion," The Moody Blues, Kansas, Heart and of course, Rush.

Posted by Enigmaticus on Sunday, 08.18.13 @ 13:40pm


On a cold rainy day in December, 1980, I would stop in at a now-defunct record store named "Roads To Moscow" to make my first purchase of a Rush album on cassette.

For the price of $8.00 + tax, I had purchased "A Farewell To Kings." When I had returned to my dorm room, I climbed up into the top bunk and fell asleep while listening to 'Xanadu' on my primitive cassette player. As the song had played, I had conjured up amazing visions of riding the winged horse, Pegasus, across the high mountaintops of the Himalayas. Finally, I had landed by a cave, near the top of Mt. Everest.

Posted by Enigmaticus on Sunday, 08.18.13 @ 15:21pm


Okay,

Just a few more questions about Rush:


Was their induction into the Rock & Roll Hall Of Fame earlier this year long overdue, or was it at the appropriate time?

Did too many artists get in much earlier than they should have?

What about the artists who have yet to be inducted?

What did those artists contribute to the fabric of Rock & Roll and how did their work affect you personally?



Posted by Enigmaticus on Tuesday, 08.20.13 @ 09:46am


Just a few more questions about Rush:


Was their induction into the Rock & Roll Hall Of Fame earlier this year long overdue, or was it at the appropriate time?

Did too many artists get in much earlier than they should have?

What about the artists who have yet to be inducted?

What did those artists contribute to the fabric of Rock & Roll and how did their work affect you personally?

Posted by Enigmaticus on Tuesday, 08.20.13 @ 09:46am
--------------------------------------------------
I'm split on whether they were long overdue, or it was the right time. I wouldn't say they were long overdue, but I would've put them in at least 5 yrs. ago.

When you talk about artists who get in earlier than they should have, it's a relative question. I've always said that if you're an obvious choice, you shouldn't have to wait. Some acts are clear cut choices, & they shouldn't have to wait. I'm not just talking Elvis or the Beatles either. There was a backlog of sorts when Bruce Springsteen came up, & he got in right off. Makes sense, since he deserved the vote right off. Guns N' Roses made it on the first vote, and they should have. Nirvana's up next yr.; they should be voted in w/out question. Why make the obvious one's wait?

When you ask about the artists still waiting, is this in relation to Rush? If it's a general question, there are a fair amount of artists who should be there. I'll not name who I think are obvious picks here (I'd prefer a separate list), but there are enough to go round.

If you are referring to artists who are still waiting, who maybe should've been voted in before Rush, that's anybody's guess. If you really wanted to be a stickler about putting acts in along the lines of "oldest to youngest", you'd have to say Dick Dale, Link Wray, the Rock & Roll Trio, and some late 50's, early 60's acts should've gone before them. That's only if you're a stickler for the "oldest comes first" scenario - which I'm not.

The last question, about what the other (as yet n-named) artists contributed to the music, & how it affects someone, is simply too log to answer here. If you really want my take on some acts that are waiting, I'll be glad to spout. I won't do it in this post, though, & I'll wait for you to say so (or if the whole site just starts riffing on this idea - if it's a free-for-all, I'll jump in).

Posted by Cheesecrop on Tuesday, 08.20.13 @ 16:11pm


Will Rush's induction into the Rock & Roll Hall Of Fame have any lasting impact, or will it return to the "business as usual" routine of induction, once again?

Posted by Enigmaticus on Sunday, 08.25.13 @ 11:33am


It's a very well known fact that over the years The Rock Hall has gotten thousands of letters from fans of The Moody Blues and Rush. More than any other bands. The Moody Blues pre-date Rush, but Rush might get inducted first, to add to the votes for The Moody Blues. The Moody Blues were nerd Rock long before Rush came along.

Posted by Roy on Saturday, 11.3.12 @ 22:31pm

Thank you. I had found this statement to be inspirational, prophetic and revelatory, Roy.

Now that Rush has been firmly ensconced into the Rock & Roll Hall Of Fame, will their induction forever change the way that the Rock & Roll Hall Of Fame Nomination Committee goes about conducting business?

Posted by Enigmaticus on Sunday, 09.8.13 @ 03:32am


My favorite Rush albums of those released in the 1980's:

1. Exit... Stage Left
2. Power Windows
3. Presto
4. Moving Pictures
5. Permanent Waves
6. Signals
7. Hold Your Fire
8. Grace Under Pressure
9. A Show Of Hands

And the greatest songs of the 1980's:

1. Xanadu
2. Mystic Rhythms
3. Available Light
4. Tom Sawyer
5. Jacob's Ladder
6. Losing It
7. Time Stand Still
8. Red Lenses
9. Marathon
10. La Villa Strangiato
11. Territories
12. Scars
13. The Camera Eye
14. Different Strings
15. Digital Man
16. Open Secrets
17. Red Sector A
18. Grand Designs
19. Presto
20. Red Barchetta
21. Freewill
22. Subdivisions
23. Prime Mover
24. Between The Wheels
25. Middletown Dreams
26. The Pass
27. Limelight
28. Entre Nous
29. New World Man
30. High Water
31. Afterimage
32. The Trees
33. 'anagram' (for Mongo)
34. YYZ
35. Freewill
36. Chemistry
37. Distant Early Warning
38. Force Ten
39. The Spirit Of Radio
40. The Big Money
41. Red Tide
42. Vital Signs
43. Natural Science
44. The Analog Kid
45. Second Nature
46. Chain Lightning
47. Emotion Detector
48. Witch Hunt
49. Countdown
50. Lock And Key

Posted by Enigmaticus on Sunday, 09.8.13 @ 04:31am


My favorite Rush albums of those released in the 1980's:

1. Exit... Stage Left
2. Power Windows
3. Presto
4. Moving Pictures
5. Permanent Waves
6. Signals
7. Hold Your Fire
8. Grace Under Pressure
9. A Show Of Hands

And the greatest songs of the 1980's:

1. Xanadu
2. Mystic Rhythms
3. Available Light
4. Tom Sawyer
5. Jacob's Ladder
6. Losing It
7. Time Stand Still
8. Red Lenses
9. Marathon
10. La Villa Strangiato
11. Territories
12. Scars
13. The Camera Eye
14. Different Strings
15. Digital Man
16. Open Secrets
17. Red Sector A
18. Grand Designs
19. Presto
20. Red Barchetta
21. Freewill
22. Subdivisions
23. Prime Mover
24. Between The Wheels
25. Middletown Dreams
26. The Pass
27. Limelight
28. Entre Nous
29. New World Man
30. High Water
31. Afterimage
32. The Trees
33. 'anagram' (for Mongo)
34. YYZ
35. Freewill
36. Chemistry
37. Distant Early Warning
38. Force Ten
39. The Spirit Of Radio
40. The Big Money
41. Red Tide
42. Vital Signs
43. Natural Science
44. The Analog Kid
45. Second Nature
46. Chain Lightning
47. Emotion Detector
48. Witch Hunt
49. Countdown
50. Lock And Key

Posted by Enigmaticus on Sunday, 09.8.13 @ 04:32am


My favorite Rush albums of those released in the 1980's:

1. Exit... Stage Left
2. Power Windows
3. Presto
4. Moving Pictures
5. Permanent Waves
6. Signals
7. Hold Your Fire
8. Grace Under Pressure
9. A Show Of Hands

And the greatest songs of the 1980's:

1. Xanadu
2. Mystic Rhythms
3. Available Light
4. Tom Sawyer
5. Jacob's Ladder
6. Losing It
7. Time Stand Still
8. Red Lenses
9. Marathon
10. La Villa Strangiato
11. Territories
12. Scars
13. The Camera Eye
14. Different Strings
15. Digital Man
16. Open Secrets
17. Red Sector A
18. Grand Designs
19. Presto
20. Red Barchetta
21. Freewill
22. Subdivisions
23. Prime Mover
24. Between The Wheels
25. Middletown Dreams
26. The Pass
27. Limelight
28. Entre Nous
29. New World Man
30. High Water
31. Afterimage
32. The Trees
33. 'anagram' (for Mongo)
34. YYZ
35. Broon's Bane
36. Chemistry
37. Distant Early Warning
38. Force Ten
39. The Spirit Of Radio
40. The Big Money
41. Red Tide
42. Vital Signs
43. Natural Science
44. The Analog Kid
45. Second Nature
46. Chain Lightning
47. Emotion Detector
48. Countdown
49. Witch Hunt
50. Lock And Key

Posted by Enigmaticus on Sunday, 09.8.13 @ 05:30am


Of course when dealing with Rush, I have divided their albums into 5 distinct periods. I have differed from Prog Archives opinion wise on Rush being classified as a " Heavy Progressive" act.

The Early Period (1968-1976)

Heavy Progressive

1. Rush
2. Fly By Night

Heavy Symphonic Progressive

3. Caress Of Steel
4. 2112
5. All The World's A Stage

Middle Period (1977-1981) aka The Classic Period

Symphonic Progressive

6. A Farewell To Kings
7. Hemispheres

Symphonic Progressive/Art Rock

8. Permanent Waves
9. Moving Pictures
10. Exit... Stage Left

Early Modern Period (1982-1988)

Art Rock

11. Signals
12. Grace Under Pressure
13. Power Windows
14. Hold Your Fire
15. A Show Of Hands

Middle Modern Period (1989-1998)

Art Rock

16. Presto
17. Roll The Bones

Art Rock/Eclectic Progressive

18. Counterparts
19. Test For Echo
20. Different Stages

22. Late Modern Period (1999-201?)

Progressive Hard Rock

21. Vapor Trails
22. Rush In Rio
23. Feedback

Symphonic Eclectic Progressive

24. R30
25. Snakes & Arrows
26. Snakes & Arrows Live
27. Clockwork Angels
28. Clockwork Angels Live

Posted by Enigmaticus on Sunday, 09.8.13 @ 07:41am


I am very disappointed that none of the following Rush songs are part of the Rock Hall Revisited lists:

1. Dreamline
2. Bravado
3. Roll The Bones
4. Ghost Of A Chance
5. Heresy
6. The Big Wheel
8. You Bet Your Life
9. Animate
10. Nobody's Hero
11. Between Sun And Moon
12. Cold Fire
13. Everyday Glory
14. Test For Echo
15. Half The World
16. Totem
17. Time & Motion
18. Carve Away The Stone

Posted by Enigmaticus on Sunday, 09.22.13 @ 20:29pm


I am very disappointed that none of the following Rush songs are part of the Rock Hall Revisited lists:

1. Dreamline
2. Bravado
3. Roll The Bones
4. Ghost Of A Chance
5. Heresy
6. The Big Wheel
7. Where's My Thing (instrumental)
8. You Bet Your Life
9. Animate
10. Nobody's Hero
11. Between Sun And Moon
12. Cold Fire
13. Everyday Glory
14. Leave That Thing Alone (instrumental)
15. Test For Echo
16. Half The World
17. Totem
18. Time & Motion
19. Carve Away The Stone
20. Limbo (instrumental)

Posted by Enigmaticus on Sunday, 09.22.13 @ 20:29pm

Posted by Enigmaticus on Sunday, 09.22.13 @ 23:11pm


Yeah, with all of the important artists with important songs who have little to no representation, we'll just go and induct 20 Rush songs.

Seriously, pop your bubble. You've become a caricature.

Posted by DarinRG on Monday, 09.23.13 @ 00:07am


Not to mention that the definitive Rush songs not inducted are "Xanadu" and "Subdivisions" (which he didn't even list), while most of those are pretty minor tracks from after their prime. The "Roll the Bones" album is probably more generic than most of their other stuff. I'm a Rush fan, but although "Subdivisions" is my favorite, I admit their representation is pretty sufficient.

Posted by Sean on Monday, 09.23.13 @ 00:49am


Oh drat, I forgot 'Resist.'

DarinRG,

I did not say that I had wanted all 21 Rush songs from the 1990's nominated. I said that I was very disappointed that not a single Rush song from the 1990's was nominated. But then again, I did not see a single song by: Yes, Jethro Tull, Genesis, Pink Floyd, King Crimson, or ELP listed either. With the exceptions of Duran Duran and perhaps, Queen, this list has completely ignored PROG, or "art rock."

Posted by Enigmaticus on Monday, 09.23.13 @ 09:38am


Or for that matter, not a single song by The Moody Blues, nor Peter Gabriel are listed either.

These artists were still creating great music even then. It is very disappointing to see this. It is almost like someone does not think that "progressive rock" had any importance whatsoever. Please keep in mind that it was in the 1990's that many of those so-called alternative bands had declared the aforementioned artists as an influence.

Posted by Enigmaticus on Monday, 09.23.13 @ 09:50am


About Rush, Enigmaticus wrote:
   Or for that matter, not a single song by The Moody Blues, nor Peter Gabriel are listed either.

These artists were still creating great music even then. It is very disappointing to see this. It is almost like someone does not think that "progressive rock" had any importance whatsoever. Please keep in mind that it was in the 1990's when many of those so-called alternative bands had declared the aforementioned artists as an influence. I am sure that Roy could list all of the honors bestowed upon those artists during that decade, if he really wanted to.
Monday, 09.23.13 @ 09:50am

Posted by Enigmaticus on Monday, 09.23.13 @ 10:00am


Yeah we clearly utterly hate Prog. That's why all the bands you just mentioned are inducted, and have songs and albums inducted.

Posted by GFW on Monday, 09.23.13 @ 16:26pm


Enigmaticus: What are you talking about? We have songs and albums inducted from all of those groups. Not from the 90's because other then "Steam" by Peter Gabriel, all those acts did nothing worthy of our recognition in that decade.

Posted by Gassman on Monday, 09.23.13 @ 17:23pm


Wow, your honesty is quite refreshing Gassman. Of course, I was taken aback by your previous statement. To completely ignore any of those aforementioned acts in the 1990's and beyond is disheartening to say the least.

Yes had released the brilliant "Keys To Ascension 1 & 2." The Moody Blues had released "A Night At Red Rocks," in addition to "Strange Times." Jethro Tull had released "Roots To Branches," ELP had released "The Atlantic Years" and "Black Moon." King Crimson had reemerged as a double trio to release "Thrak" and "B'Boom." Rush had released "Roll The Bones," "Test For Echo" and "Different Stages," in addition to "Counterparts." Pink Floyd had released "The Division Bell" and "Pulse."

Posted by Enigmaticus on Tuesday, 09.24.13 @ 23:30pm


My favorite Rush studio albums from worst to best:

20. Rush

Other than 'Working Man' and perhaps 'Here Again,' none of the other songs warrant my attention.

19. Fly By Night

The title track and 'Making Memories' are good; 'Bytor And The Snow Dog' is interesting; 'Rivendell' is boring.

18. Feedback

A good cover's album. I especially like Rush's cover of 'What It's Worth,' 'Mr. Soul' and 'The Seeker.'

17. 2112

I like the '2112' suite and 'A Passage To Bankok,' 'Twilight Zone,' 'Tears' and 'Something For Nothing.' 'Lessons,' however is horrible.

16. Grace Under Pressure

I like 'Distant Early Warning,' 'Red Lenses,' 'Red Sector A' and 'Between The Wheels.'

15. Vapor Trails

A relatively good album, overall. The new version might be spectacular. My favorite songs are: 'Peaceable Kingdom,' 'Vapor Trail,' 'Ghost Rider,' 'How It Is' and 'Nocturne.'

14. Counterparts

'Animate,' 'Leave That Thing Alone' and 'Nobody's Hero' are
brilliant. The rest of the songs with the exception of 'Stick It Out' are very good.

13. Hold Your Fire

'Prime Mover,' 'Second Nature,' 'High Water,' 'Time Stand Still' and 'Force Ten' are brilliant. The other songs are quite good as well.

12. A Farewell To Kings

'Xanadu' is Rush's magnum opus. 'Closer To The Heart,' 'Madrigal' and 'Cinderella Man' are very good, as well. 'Cygnus X-1' is very interesting.

11. Caress Of Steel

'Bastille Day' and 'The Fountain Of Laneth' are great. 'Lakeside Park' is very good. 'The Necromancer' is good. 'I Think I'm Going Bald' is okay.

10. Test For Echo

'Test For Echo,' 'Time & Motion,' 'Resist,' 'Carve Away The Stone,' 'Totem,' 'Half The World' and 'The Colour Of Right' and 'Limbo' are excellent. 'Dog Years' is humorous.

Posted by Enigmaticus on Wednesday, 09.25.13 @ 10:07am


Rush's studio albums from worst to best part I:

About Rush, Enigmaticus wrote:
   My favorite Rush studio albums from worst to best:

20. Rush

Other than 'Working Man' and perhaps 'Here Again,' none of the other songs warrant my attention.

19. Fly By Night

The title track and 'Making Memories' are good; 'Bytor And The Snow Dog' is interesting; 'Rivendell' is boring.

18. Feedback

A good cover's album. I especially like Rush's cover of 'What It's Worth,' 'Mr. Soul' and 'The Seeker.'

17. 2112

I like the '2112' suite and 'A Passage To Bangkok,' 'Twilight Zone,' 'Tears' and 'Something For Nothing.' 'Lessons,' however is horrible.

16. Grace Under Pressure

I especially like 'Distant Early Warning,' 'Red Lenses,' 'Red Sector A' and 'Between The Wheels.'

15. Vapor Trails

A relatively good album, overall. The new version might be quite spectacular. My favorite songs are: 'Peaceable Kingdom,' 'Vapor Trail,' 'Ghost Rider,' 'How It Is' and 'Nocturne.'

14. Counterparts

'Animate,' 'Leave That Thing Alone' and 'Nobody's Hero' are
brilliant. The rest of the songs with the exception of 'Stick It Out' are very good.


13. Hold Your Fire

'Prime Mover,' 'Second Nature,' 'High Water,' 'Time Stand Still'
and 'Force Ten' are brilliant. The other songs are quite good
as well.

12. A Farewell To Kings

'Xanadu' is Rush's magnum opus. 'Closer To The Heart,'
'Madrigal' and 'Cinderella Man' are very good, as well.
'Cygnus X-1' is very interesting.

11. Caress Of Steel

'Bastille Day' and 'The Fountain Of Lamneth' are great.
'Lakeside Park' is very good. 'The Necromancer' is good. 'I Think I'm Going Bald' is okay.

10. Test For Echo

'Test For Echo,' 'Time & Motion,' 'Resist,' 'Carve Away The Stone,' 'Totem,' 'Half The World' and 'The Colour Of Right'
and 'Limbo' are excellent. 'Dog Years' is humorous.

Wednesday, 09.25.13 @ 10:07am

Posted by Enigmaticus on Wednesday, 09.25.13 @ 10:23am


Rush's best studio albums (worst to best) part II

The following nine studio albums are the best of Rush's output. For those of us who have been aficionados of their works for years, these are the best of the best.

9. Hemispheres

This was the album which introduced me to the greatness and magnificence of Rush. It has only four songs, but each of those songs are extraordinary individually, or when taken as a whole. 'La Villa Strangiato' is probably Rush's greatest instrumental. 'Cygnus X-1 Book II : Hemispheres' is probably Rush's greatest side long work. 'The Trees' is an exemplary example of an insightful song dealing with class struggle, disguised as a minor fairy tale. 'Circumstances' is a song dealing with the personal struggles and uncertainties in our daily lives.



Posted by Enigmaticus on Thursday, 09.26.13 @ 01:49am


Continuing the countdown of Rush's greatest studio albums:

8. Snakes And Arrows

After a five year hiatus due to Neil Peart's personal tragedies, Rush had returned with the bare bones sound of the aforementioned "Vapor Trails."

"Vapor Trails" was a triumphant return to form, yet it had lacked the progressive rock dynamics of Rush's earlier works. After touring Brazil, Rush was inspired to release a covers album,
"Feedback" which had payed homage to some of their earliest influences, such as: Buffalo Springfield, The Who, The Yardbirds and Cream, amongst others. From that aforementioned recording, as far as I am concerned: 'For What It's Worth,' 'Mr. Soul' and 'The Seeker' are standouts.

In 2004, Rush had embarked on a 30th anniversary tour and the efforts of their live recording, "R30" was quite spectacular.

In 2007, after another brief hiatus, Rush had returned to form with the spectacular, "Snakes & Arrows," an album which had dealt with various aspects of spirituality and religion.

"Snakes And Arrows" is a true return to form, representing a mature Rush plus it pays homage to their progressive rock predecessors by showcasing a mellotron on various tracks. "Snakes & Arrows" is more mellow than it's predecessor and includes such standouts as the spectacular: 'Far Cry,' 'Workin' Them Angels,' 'Armor and Sword,' 'The Way That The Wind Blows,' three great instrumentals: 'The Main Monkey Business,' 'Malignant Narcissism' and 'Hope.' 'Hope' is a beautiful Alex Lifeson guitar piece. My favorite song on this album is the poignant, 'Faithless,' one of Rush's greatest songs, the string section on this song is used to great effect, enhancing the atmospheric nature of this work. The other songs are great also, but the 3 instrumentals in addition to those aforementioned songs make "Snakes & Arrows" one of
Rush's greatest works and a spectacular return to form.

Posted by Enigmaticus on Thursday, 09.26.13 @ 10:00am


Before discussing my 7th favorite Rush album, I thought that it would be appropriate to discuss the albums that had preceded that change:

In 1977, Rush had released, "A Farewell To Kings," which had contained the magnificent magnum opus, 'Xanadu,' and the great single, 'Closer To The Heart.'

In 1978, Rush had released, "Hemispheres," which was previously discussed in even the most terse manner possible, had included, 'The Trees' and 'La Villa Strangiato.' "Hemispheres" was considered by many to be Rush's last epic work.

I will discuss the next three albums in Rush's discography at a later date. For now, let's discuss the new wave and it's impact on Rush.

In the late 1970's, a new style of music was forthcoming. After the advent of punk rock and it's return to the basics, a new generation of musicians had seen the opportunity to form bands and consequently change the way that music was heard and seen. It has been stated that the members of Rush had loved the music of that period and had sought to incorporate those styles into their arsenal.

Hence, in 1982 Rush had released:

7. Signals

After Rush's great "middle period," Rush had decided to simplify their sound. On a more personal note, I had developed an interest in urban planning and city design, back in 1980. In the autumn of 1980, I had decided to approach urban planning via enrolling in the College Of Architecture. While there I had met a fellow student, who would re-introduce me to the music of Rush and to the music of Pink Floyd. By the summer of 1981, I had become a major progressive rock aficionado. For over 32 years, I have been a very strong advocate for this style of music. By 1997, I had the ability to create a website which would finally discuss my appreciation of "art rock," or "progressive rock."

I had purchased a copy of "Signals" in the autumn of 1982. I was encouraged to see more personal lyrics and a slew of great songs on this album. I was also impressed by most of the music, especially the keyboard focus on this album. It was obvious that Rush was listening to the new music and that they were fully embracing the style. The sings were shorter in length and they even had a top 40 hit with 'New World Man.'






Posted by Enigmaticus on Saturday, 09.28.13 @ 15:36pm


My favorite songs from "Signals" are: 'Losing It,' 'Digital Man,' 'Chemistry,' 'Countdown,' 'New World Man,' 'Subdivisions' and 'The Analog Kid.'

For example, I really like the incorporation of Ben Mink's electric violin into the song, 'Losing It.' I also like the lyrics. I like the dominance of the synthesizers on this particular recording as well.

My appreciation of "Signals" had led me to the further appreciation of the music of Duran Duran, The Police, Talking
Heads and U2. As time went on, I would look forward to each and every new recording by Rush. Each new recording was like receiving a great birthday present. Rush's music was foremost in expanding my interest in new musical genres and the appreciation of earlier artists as well. As a result, I would thoroughly embrace "art rock" and cautiously embrace "new wave. Unlike other artists, with very few exceptions, Rush has never disappointed me.

Posted by Enigmaticus on Saturday, 09.28.13 @ 16:04pm


Continuing the countdown of greatest Rush albums, I have a
bit of a dilemma. I have found that both #6 and #5 are equally magnificent for the most part. So after a great deal of deliberation on this matter, I have decided to choose "Permanent Waves" as their 6th greatest recording.

6. Permanent Waves

What can you say about this great record? It has 6 superlative songs (2 of which have become radio staples, 'The Spirit Of Radio' and 'Freewill.') and this is thankfully, also the point at which, Geddy Lee stops singing with that extremely obnoxious shriek and begins to finally sing in his normal register. This album has two magnificent progressive rock masterpieces, the mini-epics, 'Jacob's Ladder' and 'Natural Science,' and two other great songs, 'Different Strings' and 'Entre Nous.'

One of my favorite songs on this recording is 'Jacob's Ladder.' for me, it represents the perfect melding of instrumental expertise and lyrical minimalism. It conveys the atmospheric sense of being within the middle of a major thunderstorm. It is at first, intense and energetic, then it subsides to a deliberate and pervasive calm as the storm passes.

Not to be outdone, 'Natural Science' is another magnificent mini epic, in this case, it starts with the calm of the tide pool and evolves into the fury of a whirlpool which almost intensifies into witnessing the birth of the universe itself. Finally, the ska like beat adds to the lyrical magnificence, at the end however it once again, resorts to the calm of the tide
pools.

Posted by Enigmaticus on Saturday, 09.28.13 @ 17:11pm


'Different Strings' is one of Rush's most beautiful songs. In many ways, it harkens back to 'Tears' from "2112." For one thing, both of these songs were written by Geddy Lee. Both songs also feature keyboard playing by Hugh Syme. In the case of 'Tears,' Hugh plays the mellotron and in the case of Different Strings, Hugh plays the piano. as a result, one gets the sense that Rush has a mellow melodic side as well.

Another great song on "Permanent Waves" is 'Entre Nous.' According to the band's documentary, "Beyond The Lighted Stage," 'Entre Nous' had emotionally connected with Billy Corgan of The Smashing Pumpkins.

I need not discuss the importance of either 'Freewill,' nor 'The Spirit Of Radio,' suffice it to say that both songs have been on heavy rotation on classic rock stations for over 3 decades.

Overall, "Permanent Waves," is a superlative recording, worthy of 5 star status.

Posted by Enigmaticus on Sunday, 09.29.13 @ 01:07am


Before, I mention Rush's fifth greatest studio album, I think that it would be advantageous to recapitulate the previous 5 albums:

10. Test For Echo

The last recording before the 5 year long hiatus.

9. Hemispheres

The album which had first introduced me to the music of Rush in February, 1979.

8. Snakes & Arrows

The great progressive rock album which had arrived 5 years after "Vapor Trails."

7. Signals

The album which had changed Rush's style from "symphonic progressive rock" to "art rock."

6. Permanent Waves

The recording which had decreased the length of their epic songs and had introduced the shorter song format.

And now, presenting the moment that you have been waiting for:

5. Moving Pictures

This is the album which had established Rush as a serious contender for the title of greatest group within the realm of "progressive rock." I was fortunate to have started re-discovered the magnificence of their music, just a few months prior to thie release of this recording. My appreciation of "Moving Pictures" had led me to the greatness of such groups as Yes, Genesis and Jethro Tull. It had also increased my newfound appreciation of such groups as: The Moody Blues, the Electric Light Orchestra and The Alan.Parson's Project. It would also cement my interest in finding earlier Rush albums.

Prior to the arrival of "Moving Pictures," I had spent the early winter of 1980/1981 listening to "A Farewell To Kings," my first Rush recording purchase. Their epic song, 'Xanadu' had awakened within me a desire to discover more of Rush's back catalog. When "Moving Pictures" had arrived, it had also led me to an appreciation of more "classic rock" bands, such as Heart, The Eagles, Fleetwood Mac, Styx, Kansas and Foreigner.

For me, the music on "Moving Pictures" also led me to an appreciation of more minimalistic music and psychedelic music, also. In my honest opinion, "Moving Pictures" has six great songs and one very good one.

'Tom Sawyer' is arguably Rush's signature song. It is the one
that you will probably most often hear played on the radio. For a long time, I did not really like it. It was such a radical departure from such epic works as 'Xanadu.' but as time went on, I had begun to realize that it was a great song it's own right. As far as I am concerned, 'Tom Sawyer' is still the bridge that links psychedelia with minimalism. My appreciation of 'Tom Sawyer' would eventually lead me to a newfound interest in such groups as Jefferson Airplane,

'Red Barchetta' is a great song about a car, but what an exciting song about a car it is. It propels one into the cinematic scope of being within a car racing it to the nth degree.

'YYZ' is one of Rush's greatest instrumental. It combines different styles which ultimately lead to a newfound appreciation of world music.

'Limelight' is another one of Rush's greatest songs. It focuses on the danger and the distance felt by various artists when they become famous. Ironically, Rush would become very famous after this release.

'The Camera Eye' is the last of Rush's epic songs. It provides a cinematic backdrop to the contrast between two different cities, the modernity of New York City and the more traditional London. It is a great song from beginning to end.

'Witch Hunt' is my least favorite song on "Moving Pictures." It's dark moody synthesizer throughout exemplifies the intolerance of our world towards new things, different ideas, etc.

In sharp contrast, 'Vital Signs' is more upbeat. It is the song which will lead Rush into the new stage of their career.

"Moving Pictures" is the last of Rush's seventies type albums. Afterwards, Rush would shorten their songs tremendously and would wholeheartedly embrace the new musical waves.

Posted by Enigmaticus on Sunday, 09.29.13 @ 07:28am


Before, I mention Rush's fifth greatest studio album, I think that it would be advantageous to recapitulate the previous 5 albums:

10. Test For Echo

The last recording before the 5 year long hiatus.

9. Hemispheres

The album which had first introduced me to the music of Rush in February, 1979.

8. Snakes & Arrows

The great progressive rock album which had arrived 5 years after "Vapor Trails."

7. Signals

The album which had changed Rush's style from "symphonic progressive rock" to "art rock."

6. Permanent Waves

The recording which had decreased the length of their epic songs and had introduced the shorter song format.

And now, presenting the moment that you have been waiting for:

5. Moving Pictures

This is the album which had established Rush as a serious contender for the title of greatest group within the realm of "progressive rock." I was fortunate to have rediscovered the magnificence of their music, just a few months prior to the release of this recording. My appreciation of "Moving Pictures" had led me to the greatness of such groups as Yes, Genesis and Jethro Tull. It had also increased my newfound appreciation of such groups as: The Moody Blues, the Electric Light Orchestra and The Alan Parson's
Project. It would also cement my interest in finding earlier
Rush albums.

Prior to the arrival of "Moving Pictures," I had spent the early
winter of 1980/1981 listening to "A Farewell To Kings," my
first Rush recording purchase. Their epic song, 'Xanadu' had
awakened within me a desire to discover more of Rush's
back catalog. When "Moving Pictures" had arrived, it had also
led me to an appreciation of more "classic rock" bands, such
as: Heart, The Eagles, Fleetwood Mac, Styx, Kansas and
Foreigner.

For me, the music on "Moving Pictures" also led me to an appreciation of more minimalistic music and psychedelic music, also. In my honest opinion, "Moving Pictures" has six great songs and one very good one.


'Tom Sawyer' is arguably Rush's signature song. It is the one
that you will probably most often hear played on the radio.
For a long time, I did not really like it. It was such a radical
departure from the grandeur of such epic works as 'Xanadu.' but as time has passed, I had begun to realize that it was a great song in it's own right. As far as I am concerned, 'Tom Sawyer' is still the bridge that marries psychedelia with minimalism. My appreciation of 'Tom Sawyer' would eventually lead me to a newfound interest in such groups as Jefferson Airplane,

'Red Barchetta' is a great song about a car, but what an exciting song about a car it is. It propels one into the
cinematic scope of being within a car racing it to the nth
degree.

'YYZ' is one of Rush's greatest instrumentals. It combines
a myriad of different styles which would ultimately lead to a newfound appreciation of world music, including but not limited to Peter Gabriel's solo work.

'Limelight' is another one of Rush's greatest songs. It focuses
on the danger and the distance felt by various artists towards their audience when they become famous. Ironically, Rush would become very famous after this release.

'The Camera Eye' is the last of Rush's epic songs. It provides a cinematic backdrop to the contrast between two different cities, the modernity of New York City and the more traditional London. It is a great song from beginning to end.

'Witch Hunt' is my least favorite song on "Moving Pictures." It's dark moody synthesizer throughout exemplifies the
intolerance of our world towards new things, different ideas, etc.

In sharp contrast, 'Vital Signs' is more upbeat. It is the song
which would lead Rush into the new stage of their career.

"Moving Pictures" is the last of Rush's seventies type albums. Afterwards, Rush would shorten their songs tremendously and would wholeheartedly embrace the arriving new musical
waves.

Posted by Enigmaticus on Sunday, 09.29.13 @ 08:25am


After the cinematic grandeur of "Moving Pictures," Rush would radically change their direction for the next 30 years. In those ensuing decades, I would discover such groups as: King Crimson, Talking Heads, ELP, Gentle Giant, Renaissance, Echolyn and Jefferson Airplane. I would also listen to a great deal of Yes, discover the earlier works of Genesis, aka The Peter Gabriel era, embrace the psychedelic era works of The Beatles, The Beach Boys, Cream and others.

All of this would eventually lead me to a further appreciation of "progressive rock" and "art rock."


Posted by Enigmaticus on Sunday, 09.29.13 @ 08:45am


Continuing the countdown of Rush's greatest studio albums and we finally arrive at their last album of the 1980's:

4. Presto

When I had first heard Presto, I was astonished by how great of a recording it was. With the possible exception of 'Superconductor,' this album is surely a Rush tour de force. "Presto" addresses such issues as: teen suicide, the pollution of the environment, evolution and magic. It is another cinematic album by Rush. Each of the individual songs, convey multiple images. In my honest opinion, many of Rush's greatest songs are here, including: 'Available Light.' 'Presto,' 'Scars,' 'Red Tide,' 'Anagram (for Mongo),' 'Chain Lightning,' 'The Pass' and 'Show Don't Tell.'



Posted by Enigmaticus on Monday, 09.30.13 @ 01:15am


I have just purchased the box set of Rush studio albums from "Presto" through "Snakes & Arrows." Since, two of those albums will feature prominently on the list of top 5 Rush studio albums, I will be reviewing the final four (in more detail) at a later date. Suffice it to say, that the remastered version of no. 4, "Presto" may have various sonic revelations, heretofore unknown.

Therefore, announcing the third greatest Rush studio album, may be appropriate at this time. It is none another than Rush latest studio album, "Clockwork Angels."

3. Clockwork Angels

There are so many great songs on this most recent Rush recording that elucidating them individually will most certainly be a monumental task. Suffice it to say, that supplementing the support of a string section to Rush's superb instrumental acumen enhances it in many ways. Many of Rush's greatest songs are here, also. Those extraordinary songs include: 'The Garden,' 'The Wreckers,' 'Halo Effect,' 'Clockwork Angels,' 'The Anarchist,' 'Caravan' and 'Brought Up To Believe (BU2B)' and 'BU2B.'

As a hint of what my top 2 Rush studio albums are: one is featured somewhat prominently in the "Clockwork Angels Tour" list and the other on various compilations, and earlier tours. Oh yes, one more thing: a supposedly "true Rush fan" will be aghast at my selection. Thank goodness, I am not a
"true Rush fan," but instead an aficionado of their music,
otherwise my top two studio albums would be considered
heretical, to say the least. ;-)

Posted by Enigmaticus on Wednesday, 10.2.13 @ 05:50am


I have just purchased the box set of Rush studio albums from "Presto" through "Snakes & Arrows." Since, two of those albums will feature prominently on the list of top 5 Rush studio albums, I will be reviewing the final four (in more detail) at a later date. Suffice it to say, that the remastered version of no. 4, "Presto" may have various sonic revelations, heretofore unknown.

Therefore, announcing the third greatest Rush studio album, may be appropriate at this time. It is none another than Rush latest studio album, "Clockwork Angels."

3. Clockwork Angels

There are so many great songs on this most recent Rush recording that elucidating them individually will most certainly be a monumental task. Suffice it to say, that supplementing the support of a string section to Rush's superb instrumental acumen enhances it in many ways. Many of Rush's greatest songs are here, also. Those extraordinary songs include: 'The Garden,' 'The Wreckers,' 'Halo Effect,' 'Clockwork Angels,' 'The Anarchist,' 'Caravan' and 'Brought Up To Believe (BU2B)' and 'Headlong Flight.'

As a hint of what my top 2 Rush studio albums are: one is
featured somewhat prominently in the "Clockwork Angels
Tour" list and the other on various compilations, and earlier tours.

Oh yes, one more thing: a supposedly "true Rush fan" will be aghast at my selection. Thank goodness, I am not a "true Rush fan," but instead an aficionado of their music,
otherwise my top two studio albums would be considered
heretical, to say the least. ;-)

However, all is right in the world, since my favorite Rush recording is not really a studio album per se, and later this month, that particular album will be celebrating it's 32 year old birthday. It may finally be dethroned by next month's release of the "Clockwork Angels Tour" cd, dvd and BluRay however.

All that I can say now, however is "Stay tuned."


Posted by Enigmaticus on Wednesday, 10.2.13 @ 05:50am

Posted by Enigmaticus on Wednesday, 10.2.13 @ 06:09am


Therefore, announcing the third greatest Rush studio album may be more appropriate at this time. It is none other than Rush's latest studio offering: "Clockwork Angels."

3. Clockwork Angels

As I had noted earlier, after the prolonged 5 year long hiatus, due to the personal tragedies that Neil Peart had faced, Rush had returned with a renewed focus.

Posted by Enigmaticus on Wednesday, 10.2.13 @ 06:46am


"Clockwork Angels" is another Rush tour de force. In my honest opinion, I feel that the music of Rush had always been written to be played by symphony orchestras. Back in the mid 1980's, Geddy Lee had stated that he had "...preferred to think of Rush's music as being orchestrated, rather than simply arranged..." With the inclusion of the "Clockwork Angels string ensemble," the great music of Rush is enhanced immensely by the incliusion of cellos, violins and violas.

This makes one wonder if Rush will do a symphonic orchestration for 'Xanadu' in the near future?

In any event, there is certainly an emotional connection for me at some level, to such beautiful songs as: 'Clockwork Angels,' 'Halo Effect,' 'The Wreckers' and especially, 'The Garden.'

In my opinion, 'The Garden' is one of Rush's greatest masterpieces. I have always been far more impressed by the mellower and more melodic side of Rush, as opposed to
Rush's harsher side. I feel that the softer passages that Rush has incorporated into their style, emphasize the scope of their versatility, both musically and lyrically.

Certainly this album's heavier pieces, such as 'Caravan,' 'BU2B,' 'Seven Cities Of Gold' and 'Headlong Flight' deserve to be acknowledged also.

Other than perhaps, 'Wish Them Well,' I like most of the selections on "Clockwork Angels." "Clockwork Angels" is one of those albums that deserves to be heard in it's entirety, fro. Beginning to end. The overall theme, might be somewhat nebulous, however "Clockwork Angels" certainly does share something in common with one of Rush's first epics: 'The Fountain Of Lamneth,' from "Caress Of Steel." Both share the theme of looking back upon one's life and the adventures that one has experienced.

Posted by Enigmaticus on Sunday, 10.6.13 @ 01:43am


Before I continue the countdown of Rush's greatest studio albums, I would like to emphasize the importance of the incorporation of a string ensemble into Rush's songs. Certainly, Rush's greatest songs are enhanced by the support of more instrumentation.

About Rush, Enigmaticus wrote:
   "Clockwork Angels" is another Rush tour de force. In my honest opinion, I feel that the music of Rush had always been written to be played by symphony orchestras. Back in the mid 1980's, Geddy Lee had stated that he had "...preferred to think of Rush's music as being orchestrated, rather than simply arranged..." With the inclusion of the "Clockwork Angels string ensemble," the great music of Rush is
enhanced immensely by the inclusion of bass violins, cellos, violins and violas.

This certainly makes one wonder if Rush will do a symphonic
orchestration of their epic 'Xanadu' in the near future?

In any event, there is certainly an emotional connection for
me at some level, to such beautiful songs as: 'Clockwork Angels,' 'Halo Effect,' 'The Wreckers' and especially, 'The Garden.'

In my opinion, 'The Garden' is one of Rush's greatest
masterpieces. I have always been far more impressed by the
mellower and more melodic side of Rush, as opposed to Rush's harsher side. I feel that the softer passages that Rush has incorporated into their style, emphasize the scope of their versatility, both musically and lyrically.

Certainly this album's heavier pieces, such as 'Caravan,' 'BU2B,' 'Seven Cities Of Gold' and 'Headlong Flight' also deserve to be acknowledged as impressive works in their own right.

Other than perhaps, 'Wish Them Well,' I like most of the selections on "Clockwork Angels."

"Clockwork Angels" is one of those albums which deserves to be heard in it's entirety, from beginning to end.


The overall theme, might be somewhat nebulous, however "Clockwork Angels" certainly does share something in common with one of Rush's first epics: 'The Fountain Of Lamneth,' from "Caress Of Steel." Both share the theme of looking back upon one's life and the adventures that one has experienced, in addition to the lessons that the individual has learned throughout his, or her life. Ultimately according to the lyrics from 'The Garden,' "... The treasure of a life is the measure of love and respect, so hard to earn, so easily burned, in the fullness of time, a garden to nurture and protect.."

Sunday, 10.6.13 @ 01:43am

Posted by Enigmaticus on Sunday, 10.6.13 @ 02:13am


Before I discuss Rush's two greatest studio albums. I would like to reiterate just how great Rush's recordings are, overall. Rush is one of the most consistently excellent rock bands of all time. Historians of the future, will eventually look back at the music of the 20th and 21st centuries and acknowledge those bands which had the most significant impact upon the musical culture of the time.

One simply cannot argue that The Beatles will be acknowledged as one of the most significant artists of all time. Their experimentation had foreshadowed later movements in rock music, including the advent of progressive rock.

In 1967, The Beatles had released "Sergeant Pepper's Lonely Hearts Club Band." This recording is still acknowledged as one of the most significant and influential recordings of all time. During that same year, The Moody Blues had released "Days Of Future Passed." The Jefferson Airplane had released "Surrealistic Pillow" and Procol Harum had released their debut album- "progressive rock" was born.

The inclusion of string ensembles, symphony orchestras and choirs to enhance an artist's music was common during that era. To a certain fledgling band in Toronto, this movement would significantly impact their music in the future. Taking a cue from such artists as The Beatles, Procol Harum and The Moody Blues, Rush had released one of their greatest albums in the mid 1980's. That album is none other than "Power Windows."




Posted by Enigmaticus on Sunday, 10.6.13 @ 02:48am


2. Power Windows


For over 27 consecutive years, "Power Windows" had remained my favorite studio album by Rush. "Power Windows" has always been a great concept album about "power."

Posted by Enigmaticus on Sunday, 10.6.13 @ 03:00am


In my earlier statement, I had said that the album, "Power Windows" was a concept album about power. Some critics would lead you to believe that Rush's only complete concept album was/ is "Clockwork Angels."

Actually Rush has several thematic albums. Sometimes the concept is not as clearly delineated however. With regards to power, Rush has several thematic songs about power on this album:

'The Big Money' is a song dealing with the abuse of power. In this case, Neil Peart's lyrics deal with the evils of corporations and organized religion.

'Grand Designs' is a glorious song about the power to choose one's own path.

'Manhattan Project' deals with the development of the atomic bomb, the ultimate weapon, and how our society had permanently changed afterwards. The string sections are used to emphasize the effect of being inside of the atomic bomb during the blast.

'Marathon' is about a race, the choir and string sections are utilized to their fullest.

'Territories' concerns the issues of nationalism and pride and the separations between societies. The ultimate lesson is the unity of purpose, rather than the division of society.

'Middletown Dreams' is about the power to choose one's own destiny, to follow one's dreams. Within the context of the song, three creative pursuits are discussed: writing, art and music.

Finally, 'Mystic Rhythms,' which is one of Rush's greatest songs, concerns those forces which exist outside of our own being and how insignificant we are within the context of the universe. The lyrics, "...the more we think we know about, the greater the unknown, we suspend our disbelief and we are not alone..." emphasize this completely.

"Power Windows" is overall, another majorbtour de force by Rush, but there is still one greater studio album. Before I discuss this album, i would be remiss, if I did not discuss the other 18, in some detail.

20. "Rush" has no true unified theme and no signature sound. 'Working Man' and 'Here Again' are the highlights.

19. "Fly By Night" really has no unified theme and only a few great songs, but it does signal a stylistic change from the previous album.

18. "Feedback" is a covers album paying tribute to some of Rush's earliest influences.

17. "2112" deals with censorship and control. It was Rush's first successful album which allowed them to forge a path outside of the mainstream.

16. "Grace Under Pressure" deals with the dangers of the modern world.

15. "Vapor Trails" does not really have a unified theme. It does however discuss the pains, associated with loss and fear.

14. "Counterparts" is about love and instinct and the nature of our being.

13. "Hold Your Fire" deals with the creative impulse.

12. "A Farewell To Kings" does not have a unified theme either, but it does have quite a few great songs.

11. "Caress Of Steel" deals with mortality and death.

10. "Test For Echo" deals with communication.

9. "Hemispheres" is Rush's first masterpiece, it is tied to the previous album but does not seem to have a unified theme, either.

8. "Snakes & Arrows" is about spirituality, faith and religion.

7. "Signals" deals with the issues of the modern world.

6. "Permanent Waves" is about choice and change.

5. "Moving Pictures" is cinematic in it's approach, dealing with fame.

4. "Presto" is about a multitude of subjects, not clearly reflecting a unified theme.

3. "Clockwork Angels" deals with an individuals life and his experiences along the way.

2. "Power Windows" concerns power.

1. This brings us to Rush's greatest studio album. The one with the most unified theme overall. Some Rush fans would verbally excoriate me for listing this album as their best. But all of Rush's elements had finally come together with this
masterpiece. The unified theme is chance, and Rush's songwriting has never been better, Geddy Lee's vocals are magnificent and the sound is impeccable. Rush's greatest studio album therefore is none other than "Roll The Bones."

Posted by Enigmaticus on Sunday, 10.6.13 @ 07:04am


1. "Roll The Bones"

I know what you're thinking; has he lost his mind? Undoubtedly you've been told by the powers that be, that this is Rush's worst studio album. I can assure you that this is definitely not the case. For those individuals who would like to skip over their early 1990's period and embrace "Counterparts," this album is surely an anathema. Some individuals would like to forget that this one exists, but there is a definitive reason why songs from this album continue to
return to their set lists. Four of these songs are certifiable masterpieces: 'Dreamline,' 'Bravado,' 'Roll The Bones' and 'Ghost Of A Chance.' There are individuals who absolutely despise this album; overall, those individuals are not quite as
enlightened as they might claim to be unfortunately and probably never will be. I have several different versions of this recording in my possession, the original cd from 1992, the remastered version, the Audiofidelity gold cd version and the new version from the recently released Atlantic Box Set.

While the members of Rush themselves endorse this recording, their fan base is split with regards to how to evaluate it. I have read quite a few reviews which have made me quite furious. It is one thing to listen to an album and not appreciate it, it is entirely another thing to disregard it, due to the prevailing popular opinion. In my opinion, every single song on this album is a masterpiece and each song stands on it's own merit. The detractors would like you to believe that this is not a progressive rock album, the songs are not long enough, nor complicated enough. They will say, "How dare Rush incorporate rap into one of their songs?"

The way that I see it, "Roll The Bones" was somewhat experimental and because several songs were played on the radio did not mean, that this was a "pop album." This album however epitomizes how amazing Rush really is. Afterwards, Rush would start to receive awards from institutions such as The Harvard Lampoon. An article in Maclean's magazine would emphasize how popular this recording was.

I will discuss every single song, in greater detail, on this
masterpiece at a later date.

For now, I would like to mention briefly something about Rush's greatest album. The epitome of their live albums. The one regarded as the 9th best live album overall by a Classic Rock opinion poll, regarded as one of the greatest live albums of all time. In my honest opinion, the other bookmark to the "progressive rock" era, the greatest progressive rock live album and the best progressive rock album overall. The absolute epitome of the genre: "Exit... Stage Left."

Posted by Enigmaticus on Sunday, 10.6.13 @ 07:42am


Before I discuss "Exit... Stage Left" in any great detail, I would be remiss if I did not discuss the other live Rush recordings.


8. "All The World's A Stage"

It is Rush in a raw and heavier form, including songs from the early period. In a word, it is unpolished. The song list is okay, but I have never been particularly fond of it, overall.

7. "A Show Of Hands"

This recording was made during the "early modern" period of
Rush's development. This seems to be extremely modern, yet colder sounding.

6. "Rush In Rio"

These are great songs, but they are played in a raw and unpolished manner.

5. "Time Machine Tour"

There is a great deal of energy to this set list. These are great songs, also.

4. "Snakes & Arrows Live"

Another great set list. This is one of Rush's greatest live recordings.

3. "R30"

What's not to love about this recording, or this set list? This includes many of Rush's greatest songs.

2. "Different Stages"

One of Rush's greatest live albums. It showcases the "middle modern period" songs on two discs and includes a third disc from the "A Farewell To Kings' tour" from the Hammersmith Odeon.

1. "Clockwork Angels Live"

Another live tour de force for Rush. It includes the support of a string section, the only way that Rush could possibly sound better, would be with the support of a full symphony orchestra.



Posted by Enigmaticus on Tuesday, 10.8.13 @ 09:56am


I am so sorry, I stand corrected. I had meant "Clockwork Angels Tour," not "Clockwork Angels Live." this recording is scheduled to be released on November 19. In my honest opinion, the only way that a Rush live recording could possibly be better is to have been recorded with a full symphony orchestra.

Back in Rush's early days, their sound was much rawer, their second live recording is still in my honest opinion, the greatest live Rush recording, the greatest Rush recording, the greatest progressive rock live album and the greatest progressive rock album. Ladies and gentleman, that recording is none other than "Rush: Exit... Stage Left."

***** 1. Exit... Stage Left *****

For nearly 32 years, this has held the number one position amongst my favorite recordings. This is where Rush as a three piece is transformed into the "world's smallest symphony orchestra."

With the possible exception of 'Beneath, Between & Behind,' which really does not belong here, every single song on this recording is a masterpiece, made even better by the fact that "Exit" is a live recording.

The set list is magnificent, the sound is incomparable and the musicianship is superlative. I had even been inspired to paint various scenes by listening to 'Xanadu,' which is arguably Rush's greatest work. I had become even more enamored of progressive rock and art rock music, as a result of my appreciation of this recording. I have been an avid supporter of both genres for nearly 32 years. The reason why I had embraced such different artists as: Duran Duran, The Moody Blues, Yes, Genesis, Gentle Giant, King Crimson, Echolyn, The Police, The Talking Heads, Roxy Music, etc. is directly related to my appreciation of this recording. Over nearly those past 32 years, I have also listened to a great amount of new age music as well, including such as artists as: Shadowfax, Yanni, Vangelis and Andreas Vollenweider.

Posted by Enigmaticus on Wednesday, 10.9.13 @ 10:00am


@Enigmaticus, I loved reading your list. It was good to see someone take apart all their albums and I can't wait to see what you have to say about the individual tracks on "Roll the Bones." My top 5 contains two your top 5. My top 5 is as follows

5. Clockwork Angels: It is just a wonderful story and reading the novel even makes it better. My favorites are "Wish Them Well," "The Wreckers," "Halo Effect" and "The Garden." But, I love the whole album.

4. Counterparts: A good album throughout and also one of their most commercially successful. "Animate," "Double Agent" and "Everyday Glory" are the highlights for me. The only weak link for me is "At the Speed of Love." Even though Neil Peart is one of the greatest lyricists of all time, he has no business trying to write a "love song."

3. Power Windows: Solid throughout and probably the most melodic of their albums. My favorites are "Territories," "Manhattan Project," and "Middletown Dreams." It is one of those great albums with really no weak link.

2. Roll the Bones: The album that made me a fan of the band. Again an album with no weak links. I think it also has one of their most cleverly written songs on it, "The Big Wheel." I love the line "I was lined up for glory, but the tickets sold out in advance." Being 19 when that album came out I could really relate. I would like to go track by after you post yours.

1. Presto: The first Rush album I ever owned. For this one I will go track by track.

"Show Don't Tell" - A youth anthem if their ever was one. Great guitar work too.

"Chain Lightning" - So poetic. Just a wonderful song.

"The Pass" - This song literally has saved my life on more than one occasion. Suicide may be a downer, but Neil wrote the song with so much optimism. No matter how low you feel there is always hope.

"War Paint" - Another good self-esteem song. "To the beautiful and wise, the mirror always lies." My teenage daughter loves this one.

"Scars" - Great bassline, but that's all it really does for me.

"Presto" - Possibly my favorite of all of their songs. What a brilliant way to describe the human condition. Also, the live version on Time Machine breathes new life into it.

"Super Conductor" - "Packaged like a rebel or a hero: 'target: mass appeal.'" This is Rush at their poppiest and I believe they meant for it to
be a pop song and it works.

"Anagram (For Mongo)" - Such clever writing! I know it's not all true anagrams but even the partial ones are pretty cool.

"Red Tide" - This song is just a good Rush song. I really can't put my finger on why, I just like it.

"Hand Over Fist" - A great tune about the fine line between peace and violence.

"Available Light" - A consider this to be a "micro-epic." It puts so much power and feeling into five minutes. My favorite line is "A play of light, a photograph, the way I used to be, some half-forgotten stranger doesn't mean that much to me.."

Again I can't wait until your next post.

Posted by Ray on Wednesday, 10.9.13 @ 19:50pm


Thank you Roy, for your polite response. I will return to my analysis of the top Rush recordings in the not-too-distant future.

Posted by Enigmaticus on Thursday, 10.10.13 @ 16:17pm


I was looking back over 16 years to the creation of my now archived website. I had created this (now archived) page approximately 16 years ago.

http://reocities.com/SunsetStrip/Lounge/1254/exitstageleft.htm

Posted by Enigmaticus on Friday, 10.11.13 @ 01:46am


Before I get into the many reasons why I feel that Rush is the greatest rock band of all time, I would like to discuss one of their biggest influences: Yes.

Now that Rush's recent induction has finally opened that door for more progressive rock bands to be inducted, I think that the Rush fan base should throw their support behind Yes.

Given that Yes and Rush are roughly as old as each other, (both were formed in 1968) I think that acknowledging Yes' worthiness of being enshrined by the RRHOF should be discussed. So let's do this; shall we?

Posted by Enigmaticus on Friday, 10.18.13 @ 09:51am


I have not forgotten; I will get back to my analytical discussion about Rush recordings at a later time. In the meantime, Yes, Peter Gabriel and Deep Purple have all influenced Rush; they deserve to be inducted as soon as possible.

Posted by Enigmaticus on Friday, 10.25.13 @ 06:54am


Two exciting developments in the world of progressive rock are occurring next month, the release of the Yes studio albums box set and the release of Rush's "Clockwork Angels Tour" on cd, DVD and BluRay.

This month however marked the release of the Rush box set of Atlantic Studio albums recorded from 1989- 2007. As I had said before, this represents the release of several of Rush's greatest studio recordings:

4. Presto *****
1. Roll The Bones *****
14. Counterparts ****
10. Test For Echo **** 1/2
15. Vapor Trails ****
8. Snakes & Arrows *****

Thus far, I have only heard "Presto" and "Roll The Bones" and I have to admit that the remixes are magnificent.

Posted by Enigmaticus on Saturday, 10.26.13 @ 12:37pm


The new YouTube videos of the rock & roll hall of fame inductees are very interesting.

Posted by Enigmaticus on Wednesday, 11.6.13 @ 23:30pm


Before I get into the many reasons why I feel that Rush is the greatest rock band of all time, I would like to discuss one of their biggest influences: Yes.

Now that Rush's recent induction has finally opened that door for more progressive rock bands to be inducted, I think that the Rush fan base should throw their support behind Yes.

Given that Yes and Rush are roughly as old as each other, (both were formed in 1968) I think that acknowledging Yes' worthiness of being enshrined within the Rock & Roll Hall Of Fame should be discussed. So let's do this; shall we discuss Yes' accomplishments in great detail?




Posted by Enigmaticus on Saturday, 11.9.13 @ 11:45am


I am going to have to rethink this original scenario:


Future inductions of "prog" and "art rock" bands:

Rush ---> Moody Blues ---> Yes, Deep Purple ----> King Crimson ---> Jethro Tull ---> Gentle Giant ---> Dream Theater

Rush ---> E.L.O. ---> Styx ---> Procol Harum---> Supertramp
---> Kansas

Rush ---> Duran Duran ---> Roxy Music



Posted by Enigmaticus on Monday, 05.6.13 @ 05:05am

Posted by Enigmaticus on Saturday, 11.9.13 @ 11:55am


I am definitely looking forward to the release of "Clockwork Angel's Tour" on November 19, 2013. It is possible that this live recording may finally surpass "Exit...Stage Left" as Rush's finest recording.

Posted by Enigmaticus on Saturday, 11.9.13 @ 12:03pm


Future inductions of "art rock" and "progressive rock" bands:

Rush -----> Yes ------------> King Crimson ---/-----> Jethro Tull -------------> Gentle Giant --------> Dream Theater --------> Tool -------> Mastodon

Rush -----> Deep Purple --------/

Rush --------------------------> Moody Blues

Rush --------------------------> Duran Duran --------> Roxy
Music

Posted by Enigmaticus on Sunday, 11.10.13 @ 04:34am


Although, I have enjoyed many episodes of Sam Dunn and Scott McFadyen's series, "Metal Evolution," I have a differing opinion with regards to the progenitors of "progressive metal."

Instead of placing Rush under the "progressive metal" banner, I would argue that Uriah Heep deserves that accolade, instead. Rush is a progressive rock, not a progressive metal band. Certainly, they may have flirted with a harder sound initially, but they have a different demeanor than the heavy metal bands and their flirtation with harder sounds represents a miniscule portion of their overall output. They may have inspired the development of "progressive metal," but they would probably deny the parentage as well.



______________________________________________

PROGRESSIVE ROCK
______________________________________________

JETHRO TULL
KING CRIMSON
EMERSON, LAKE & PALMER
YES
GENESIS
RUSH
MAHAVISHNU ORCHESTRA
STYX
KANSAS
__________________________________________________


Posted by Enigmaticus on Sunday, 11.10.13 @ 13:46pm


Although, I have enjoyed many episodes of Sam Dunn and Scott McFadyen's series, "Metal Evolution," I have a differing opinion with regards to the progenitors of "progressive metal."

Instead of placing Rush under the "progressive metal" banner, I would argue that Uriah Heep deserves that accolade, instead. Rush is a progressive rock, not a progressive metal band. Certainly, they may have flirted with a harder sound initially, but they have a different demeanor than the heavy metal bands and their flirtation with harder sounds represents a miniscule portion of their overall output. They may have inspired the development of "progressive metal," but they would probably deny the parentage as well.

Posted by Enigmaticus on Sunday, 11.10.13 @ 13:46pm
--------------------------------------------------
Agree. Rush skirts the metal universe of the time, but were always juts short of crossover. At the same time, a lot of folks did perceive them in metal terms. A lot of groups that showed up in the second half of the 70's were pegged as "metal" just because they sounded louder than what had come out a yr. or two prior.

The old "Rolling Stone Illus. History of Rock" (1992) has Rush listed as metal, along w/Boston, Journey, Styx (I believe), & a few others. Under the old heading of "Art Rock", which I presume is meant for progressive, they mention Zappa, Yes, ELP, Pink Floyd ("Dark Side of the Moon" onward-Floyd), & a few others (Eno, Tangerine Dream, etc.). Mind you, that was 1992. I think they may have a diff. take now.

It's a bit of a shock to see this in the "Metal Evolution" series, though maybe the filmmakers simply liked Rush, & wanted to find a way to squeeze them in somehow.

Posted by Cheesecrop on Sunday, 11.10.13 @ 20:43pm


Yes Cheesecrop,

However, I would argue that actually Yes and King Crimson are actually much heavier bands. Perhaps the best description of Rush is "atmospheric symphonic progressive rock."

Posted by Enigmaticus on Sunday, 11.10.13 @ 22:38pm


Rush is absolutely one of the early prog metal bands. It certainly can be argued, on many different fronts, that they are THE most important band of this sub-genre. There is plenty of prog metal to be found in early Rush - Anthem, By Tor, Bastille Day, Necromancer (check out the 7-8:30 mark if you think Yes is a heavier band), Temples, Cygnus X-1, even as late as Natural Science can you find elements of prog metal. As far as influence, look up the major prog metal bands (like Dream Theater, Queensryche, and Fates Warning) and check out who their influences are (I'll give you a hint - Rush, especially early Rush). Even a band like Metallica, who dabbled in prog metal(Puppets, And Justice For All) cites Rush as a major influence. Were other bands such as King Crimson and Uriah Heep also in the mix as far as the beginnings? Absolutely. But to claim that Rush isn't a precursor of or at one point practitioners of prog metal is incorrect. Just because they didn't wear black leather and studs doesn't mean that some of their early music didn't qualify as metal. As a matter of fact, go on Rush sites that reprint early magazine articles and you'll see Rush listed as a metal band in most of their reviews and clippings up until the mid-80's.

Posted by Classic Rock on Monday, 11.11.13 @ 22:59pm


I would like to amend the list of progressive rock bands:


__________________________


PROGRESSIVE ROCK

___________________________

THE MOODY BLUES

PINK FLOYD

GENESIS

PROCOL HARUM

JETHRO TULL

YES

RUSH

KING CRIMSON

GENTLE GIANT

RENAISSANCE

EMERSON, LAKE & PALMER

STYX

KANSAS

CAMEL

___________________________

Posted by Enigmaticus on Monday, 11.11.13 @ 23:03pm


Classic Rock,

I am not arguing over the issue of whether Rush did or did not have a flirtation with harder rock styles. Yes, I will acknowledge that they did. However, the subject matter of most of Rush's work did not demean women, nor represent women as sexual objects, like many of the heavy metal bands. I do recall a quote by Alex Lifeson, "We've never considered ourselves to be a heavy metal band anyway. We feel that we have more to offer than that."

I have made every attempt, by creating my website over 16 years ago, to correct those early erroneous opinions. I had not supported Rush's induction for the past 16 years to have them labeled as a "heavy metal" band. I have been an avid supporter of "progressive rock," instead. For me, AC/DC is the ultimate heavy metal band and I strongly detest them!

Posted by Enigmaticus on Monday, 11.11.13 @ 23:27pm


The following is a link to one section of one of my long archived web pages:

http://reocities.com/SunsetStrip/Lounge/1254/exitstageleft.htm#genre

Posted by Enigmaticus on Tuesday, 11.12.13 @ 00:17am


IMO, Wishbone Ash and The Gods would also qualify as progressive bands.

Posted by Paul in KY on Tuesday, 11.12.13 @ 08:26am


Thank you Paul in Ky,

I am not familiar with The Gods, but I have heard a song by Wishbone Ash. "Progressive Rock" is such a diverse category, it has grown to include such "proto progressive" bands, as: The Doors, The Who and Cream.

Back in the early 20th century, one of the U.K.'s television networks had named the top 10 progressive rock bands, based upon their time spent on the British charts. They are:

10. Camel
9. King Crimson
8. Hawkwind
7. Rush
6. Emerson, Lake & Palmer
5. Yes
4. Jethro Tull
3. The Moody Blues
2. Genesis
1. Pink Floyd

Of course, with regards to the U.S. Charts, Pink Floyd is still in the number one position, but the remainder of the list is slightly different and in a different order.


Posted by Enigmaticus on Thursday, 11.14.13 @ 05:16am


Without expanding the traditional definition of "progressive rock," we have only 8 entries in the U.S. Charts:

8. Jethro Tull
7. Electric Light Orchestra
6. Yes
5. Kansas
4. Styx
3. Genesis
2. Rush
1. Pink Floyd

Posted by Enigmaticus on Thursday, 11.14.13 @ 05:42am


"Progressive Rock" is such a diverse category, it has grown to include such "proto progressive" bands, as: The Doors, The Who and Cream.

Posted by Enigmaticus on Thursday, 11.14.13 @ 05:16am
--------------------------------------------------
I'd definitely differ here. Groups such as the ones listed above were never perceived as "progressive" in their original moment.

The way I always perceived it, "progressive" rock was rock that showed influences of classical music. Outside of this, anyone can be perceived to be progressive. It's true that these acts fiddled about w/semi-"prog" touches to their work, but it's only a passing part of Cream (maybe "Deserted Cities of the Heart") & The Doors ("The Soft Parade" album).

With The Who, it's a little greater, but most folks wrote "Tommy" off as the extension of the psych-era. I think "Love, Reign O'er Me" sits more w/in the definition of "prog", but outside of pulling "Tommy" out of the hat over & over again, I'm not sure where the "progressive" part is. As a matter of fact, going back to "Tommy" over & over again (movies, stage shows, etc.) actually comes off as regressive, unless mining a product for every last cent is now the new "progressive". Of course, big business has been doing this for yrs. now, so maybe they're right & I am quite wrong (ha-ha!).

Posted by Cheesecrop on Thursday, 11.14.13 @ 06:19am


Enigmaticus,

When you talk about the US Charts are you talking about sales figures? A large amount of Progressive music charted in the 70s in the states. Those were are the top certified Prog acts in the US by sales. But charting acts were numerous. Emerson, Lake & Palmer are a top performing Albums act in the US, even Utopia nabbed 10 charting albums in a decade. And they are a far lesser known act. Everybody charted on the album charts, the American music market is massive. Prog was quite popular in it's heyday and even smaller acts were finding chart action.

Posted by Chris F. on Thursday, 11.14.13 @ 07:07am


Enigmaticus, check out album 'Genesis' by The Gods. Might actually be more psycadelic (misspelled that) than prog. Listened to some more Wishbone Ash the other night & they have more blues in them then I had previously thought. Another band to check out would be Blossom Toes. They are also in the progressive genre, IMO.

Posted by Paul in KY on Thursday, 11.14.13 @ 07:44am


Yes Chris F.,

That list of "progressive rock" artists is in reference to album sales by the aforementioned artists:

I wonder if there is an existing correlation between album sales and Rock and Roll Hall Of Fame induction?

Certainly, it is true that Pink Floyd, Rush and Genesis are all inductees.

If this is the case, then why isn't Chicago there?



Posted by Enigmaticus on Thursday, 11.14.13 @ 08:27am


Yes Cheesecrop,

Most of the artists in the progressive rock genre tend to have a familiarity with classical music styles (baroque, classical and romantic composers). According to Chris Squire, Yes' music was more deeply rooted in choral music. On the other hand, Rush's music is firmly rooted in classical music styles. "2112" even borrows from Tchaikovsky.

As far as the proto progressive rock groups are concerned, Prog Archives has expanded to include them under the "prog rock" umbrella.

Although, The Who's "Tommy" is progressive, aren't "Quadrophenia" and "Who's Next," also?

I wonder how long it will take Prog Archives to start embracing Duran Duran?

Posted by Enigmaticus on Thursday, 11.14.13 @ 08:40am


Just thought I'd throw this out there as a "fun" fact. The top performing Prog acts on the US Album Charts:


30) Dixie Dreggs
29) Gentle Giant
28) Kraftwerk
27) Renaissance
26) Tool
25) Roxy Music
24) Utopia
23) Triumph
22) Procol Harum
21) Uriah Heep
20) King Crimson
19) Todd Rundgren
18) Queensryche
17) Steve Winwood
16) Dream Theater
15) Kansas
14) Traffic
13) Alan Parson's Project
12) Emerson, Lake, & Palmer
11) Peter Gabriel
10) Electric Light Orchestra
9) Styx
8) Genesis
7) Yes
6) The Moody Blues
5) Frank Zappa
4) Rush
3) Jethro Tull
2) Chicago
1) Pink Floyd

I was just going to do 15, but realized that some of these acts may be less "Prog" and it is always important to note that the more popular acts branched into the mainstream to achieve that success. So I just gave a top 30. Marillion & Camel would be at 31 and 32 respectively.

Enigmaticus,

Chicago is paying for the stuff they put out in the second half of their career. When they drifted away from being a tight band of skilled musicians and moved squarely into Pop territory. I don't think the Hall has been able to ignore that when they consider the band. It is a shame, the Pop stuff was middle of the road, but their early records are fantastic. The Hall only considers Pop when it is really fantastic stuff (ABBA) or when it has stood the test of time (Neil Diamond). I've always disagreed with that especially looking at the less deserving acts that have been inducted.

Posted by Chris F. on Thursday, 11.14.13 @ 08:45am


Was gonna comment on Kraftwerks inclusion there, but then realized that they're more musically progressive than any of the others :p

Posted by GFW on Thursday, 11.14.13 @ 13:58pm


GFW,

I figured if I didn't include them someone might take me to task for it. And if I did include them that someone else might slap it down. I decided to grab them off my spreadsheet and include them anyway. People tend to forget Kraftwerk were actually popular in the States for a moment in time. Although I would argue they have went through a bit of a revival in the past 10 years as people really started to focus on how important they were.

Posted by Chris F. on Thursday, 11.14.13 @ 14:06pm


Yeah, they definitely had a revival in the 2000's. Well deserved as well, people seem to forget just how influential they are, I think we could honestly justify ranking them from 10 - 20 in our rankings.

Posted by GFW on Thursday, 11.14.13 @ 16:43pm


Chris F.,

Actually, I only have three Chicago albums thus far: "Chicago Transit Authority," "Chicago" and the compilation, "Only The Beginning." As far as the Peter Cetera era is concerned, I like quite a few of the hit songs, as well.

If Chicago had allowed Peter Cetera to have a solo career, while still a member of Chicago, then I think that things would have turned out quite differently.

Regarding Rush, their sales totals have not been calculated accurately for approximately a quarter century. I seriously doubt that Rush has only sold 40 million albums worldwide; my estimate is that ithey have sold at least 200,000,000 and that figure is a conservative estimate.

Posted by Enigmaticus on Thursday, 11.14.13 @ 21:47pm


There are only 5 days remaining until the release of Rush's long awaited "Clockwork Angels' Tour."

Posted by Enigmaticus on Friday, 11.15.13 @ 00:48am


Now, there are only 4 days remaining until the release of "Clockwork Angels Tour" on BluRay, DVD and CD.

Those of us who have long enjoyed most of Rush's output, tend to think of time's passing, in terms of the time between Rush recording release dates.

Posted by Enigmaticus on Friday, 11.15.13 @ 03:21am


200,000,000 is insane, enig. That'd make Rush one of the most successful bands ever, which they most certainly aren't.

Posted by GFW on Friday, 11.15.13 @ 11:28am


Enigmaticus,

"If Chicago had allowed Peter Cetera to have a solo career, while still a member of Chicago, then I think that things would have turned out quite differently."

I agree with that completely.

As for sales and estimated sales with Rush it would be highly unlikely for them to be that high. For most artists there totals are lower than what would be a true sales figure. Artists also tend to have the highest numbers in the US Market. Largely because of the substantial record buying population, overall diversity, and the fact that the US has been tracking sales for far longer than anyone else. With Rush at 25 million in the States it is unlikely that they would exceed 100 million worldwide. The US has insanely high certification levels (Platinum here is 1 Million in the UK a platinum album only has to sell 300,000) which leaves quite a bit unaccounted. You have to remember that albums not certified at a sales mark (Gold, Platinum, Diamond) don't get counted into an artists total. So everyone gets a boost from that when discussing sales. Double albums are counted twice. Something like "Exit Stage Left" which is certified platinum (1 Million) actually only sold 500,000 units. Which takes down a tally.

There is a lot that goes into Sales estimating. The best thing to do is look at the 15 or so reliable industry trade associations (RIAA, BPI, RIAJ) and get the best rough figure you can. 200 Million is a high figure for Rush although I will agree 40 million is a bit low. But I can only ever get the Beatles to a bit over 260 million (I've seen claims as high as 1 Billion), and while popular Rush was never near that level.

Posted by Chris F. on Friday, 11.15.13 @ 16:42pm


Another thing about record sales is that associations like RIAA did not automatically calculate record sales. The record label would have to seek certification. Certain labels really would ignore multi certifications above platinum. So even RIAA numbers are a crap shoot.

Posted by astrodog on Saturday, 11.16.13 @ 00:28am


Thank you for your perspectives on this, Chris F. & astrodog,

But I had always been curious about Rush's total worldwide album sales. Of course, I had received different counts based on what exactly, I do not know. As far as the United States is concerned, if we add the album sales of their early catalog and combine them with the Soundscan era figures, the count is even more substantial. Of course, only Geddy, Alex, Neil, their manager and attorneys probably know those figures. The following link had helped to elucidate some of the numbers for me, (from 1991 until 2007):

http://www.rushisaband.com/blog/2007/02/03/788/Rush-Soundscan-record-sales

Posted by Enigmaticus on Saturday, 11.16.13 @ 03:36am


The idea that Rush is described as 3rd behind The Beatles and Rolling Stones, in consecutive gold and platinum albums is quite revelatory. The following link had shown just how popular Rush had become in the past few years:

http://www.rushisaband.com/blog/2013/08/14/3748/Rush-back-catalog-RIAA-Gold-and-Platinum-certification-coming-soon?p=3&n=10&o=DESC

Posted by Enigmaticus on Saturday, 11.16.13 @ 03:58am


Now, there are only 3 days remaining until the release of "Clockwork Angels Tour" on BluRay, DVD and CD.

Those of us who have long enjoyed most of Rush's output, tend to think of time's passing, in terms of the time between Rush recording release dates.

Posted by Enigmaticus on Saturday, 11.16.13 @ 05:22am


Now, there are only 2 days remaining, until the release of "Clockwork Angels Tour" on BluRay, DVD and CD.

Those of us who have long enjoyed most of Rush's output, tend to think of time's passing, in terms of the time between Rush recording release dates.

Posted by Enigmaticus on Sunday, 11.17.13 @ 06:16am


Now, there is only 1 day remaining, until the release of "Clockwork Angels Tour" on BluRay, DVD and CD.

Those of us who have long enjoyed most of Rush's output, tend to think of time's passing, in terms of the time between Rush recording release dates.

Posted by Enigmaticus on Monday, 11.18.13 @ 02:45am


"Those of us who have long enjoyed most of Rush's output, tend to think of time's passing, in terms of the time between Rush recording release dates."

Here's a question for longtime readers...

Who loves their band the most? Is it...

A. Enigmaticus/Rush
B. Roy/Chicago
C. Rick Vendl/ELO?

Posted by Dezmond on Monday, 11.18.13 @ 14:53pm


Dezmond, that's a tough one. I'd have to say Roy/Chicago, although Enig has impressed me with his 'all things can be compared only to Rush' devotion.

Posted by Paul in KY on Monday, 11.18.13 @ 15:26pm


Roy, and it's not even close. I think about 430 of the first 500 comments on the Chicago page were by him. Not to mention his idea (proven incorrect) that Chicago would be inducted because of Obama's election.

Posted by Sam on Monday, 11.18.13 @ 18:08pm


Today is the day that I have been waiting for, for more than 32 years.

I have been eagerly awaiting a live album which might actually challenge the supremacy of "Exit... Stage Left." I am hoping that finally, the detractors will be proven incorrect.

According to various sources, this will be the release of Rush's 10th live album. Of course, I am most looking forward to watching the BluRay and DVD.

Posted by Enigmaticus on Tuesday, 11.19.13 @ 08:28am


Roy has the sort of devotion to Chicago that the Taliban do to Allah.

Posted by GFW on Tuesday, 11.19.13 @ 12:41pm


Yeah, while Enigmaticus has indeed impressed as of late, you cannot beat the one, the original...Roy. I especially enjoyed his comment somewhere recently where he felt people like U2, Bob Dylan and Lou Reed were overrated. But Peter Cetera on the other hand...

Posted by Dezmond on Tuesday, 11.19.13 @ 23:18pm


Now now, let's not rush (har!) to conclusions, here. Obama's still in office, so there's time for his theory to pan out. But I think you gotta give honorable mention to Lax and Peter Gabriel. Remember his expectation of inducting not just Genesis as a band, but then give second inductions for all the solo careers of even fringe members just because they were Genesis? It was short lived, but it bordered on the maniacally delusional. I really feel bad for Lax. I wonder what he'll do if/when Peter Gabriel makes it in this year (I think he will too).

Posted by Philip on Wednesday, 11.20.13 @ 00:47am


Yes, Phillip, you are right about Lax. I think at that time he was not as up-to-speed on how Hall operates, etc. etc. He certainly doesn't think that now (or if he does, he doesn't post any more of his crazy Gabriel theories).

Those were some wild posts to read, though...

Posted by Paul in KY on Wednesday, 11.20.13 @ 08:20am


Feel disappointed I haven't been obsessed with an artist to a degree that people link me with them...

Posted by GFW on Wednesday, 11.20.13 @ 13:19pm


GFW,

Come on now we all know about your large collection of ICP memorabilia.

Posted by Chris F. on Wednesday, 11.20.13 @ 13:41pm


My ideal world:



(if anyone gets this i will love you for an eternity and more)

Posted by GFW on Wednesday, 11.20.13 @ 14:17pm


Thanks for that post, GFW. Now that I know you read Homestuck, I'll be sure to treat all of your opinions as completely worthless from now on.

(jk I am a huge Homestuck fan even though I kind of hate myself for it)

Posted by Idlewild on Wednesday, 11.20.13 @ 23:01pm


Magnets?! How the f**k they work?

Posted by Paul in KY on Thursday, 11.21.13 @ 07:41am


""Those of us who have long enjoyed most of Rush's output, tend to think of time's passing, in terms of the time between Rush recording release dates."

Here's a question for longtime readers...

Who loves their band the most? Is it...

A. Enigmaticus/Rush
B. Roy/Chicago
C. Rick Vendl/ELO?"

I do agree that Roy deserves accolades for supporting Chicago against all enemies, foreign and domestic.

As far as I am concerned, most Rush fans would not consider me to be one, since I have only attended 3 Rush concerts in my life.

However, I have felt the need to defend "progressive rock" in general and Rush, over the years against verbal assaults. One colleague of mine had referred to me, as the "high priest of Rush."

Of course, I like Yes and Rush almost equally. For the past few weeks, I have either been wearing Rush, or t-shirts to work each day.

Would I have placed Rush in the 18th position on the Immortal's list, if I had been so completely obsessed with Rush?

Posted by Enigmaticus on Thursday, 11.21.13 @ 08:48am


Of course, I like Yes and Rush, almost equally. For the past few weeks, I have either been wearing Rush, or Yes t-shirts to work each day.

Would I have placed Rush in the 18th position on the Immortal's list, if I had been so completely obsessed with them?

#9 - Posted 11/21/13 @8:29AM by Enigmaticus [contact]

Medocre, really?

I had the unfortunate experience yesterday of calling a "supposed friend," to ask him about how he had been doing lately. After a few minutes, he had launched into a tirade of about how Rush was not a significant band, because their music was not played on the radio, how Yes and Peter Gabriel were more important, how Rush was not influential and how Rush was a "mediocre" band.

Mediocre, really? As far as I am concerned, it is highly unlikely that I will ever telephone, or visit this individual again.

As far as I am concerned, radio programmers did not play Rush's music, because they had lacked the necessary intelligence, in order to do so. With very few exceptions, I have found out over the years that anyone, who does not like the music of Rush, is not very intelligent!

Posted by Enigmaticus on Thursday, 11.21.13 @ 09:00am


And I you, Idlewild!

(don't feel bad bruh it's amazing, rereading and i reached cascade yesterday, sooooo good)

Posted by GFW on Thursday, 11.21.13 @ 12:54pm


The way that I see it, sex sells. Rush did not write songs of the "wham bam thank you ma'am mentality." with the possible exception of the first album, which was meant to simply put Rush's foot in the door, most of Rush's work had been far more cerebral in nature.

Radio programmers did not know how to evaluate Rush, therefore they were not played in the early days. Radio programmers tend to subscribe to the lowest common denominator regarding the songs that get played on the radio. Rush, for much of their career, did not write love songs, nor did they write party songs.

Certainly, when Rush finally did start getting played on the radio, the same four or five songs were in constant rotation: "The Spirit Of Radio," "Tom Sawyer," "Closer To The Heart," "Fly By Night" and "Limelight."

My former friend, who had gone on this diatribe about Rush being mediocre, has claimed to have never heard Rush played on either f.m., or a.m. radio. In fact, he had not even heard of Rush until he had met me.

Of course, I had a different perspective, I remember hearing the "Exit... Stage Left" version of 'Xanadu,' being played on K.F.O.G. during the early morning.

Posted by Enigmaticus on Saturday, 11.23.13 @ 12:43pm


I have been watching "A Diamond In The Mind," by Duran Duran and "Clockwork Angels Tour" on BluRay for most of the day. Of course, I had to connect my new HDTV to my Acoustic Wave for the best possible sound.

Posted by Enigmaticus on Saturday, 11.23.13 @ 19:45pm


The accompaniment of a string section on "Clockwork Angels Tour" has spoiled me. I would definitely like to see Rush play, accompanied by a full symphony orchestra on their next tour. Seeing Alex play a segment of 'The Garden' on an electric piano has prompted me to fathom the idea of Rush releasing an all acoustic album, with Geddy playing an upright bass and a grand piano.

Posted by Enigmaticus on Sunday, 11.24.13 @ 11:24am


I wonder if Rush's success with "Clockwork Angels Tour" on DVD and BluRay will prompt The Moody Blues to release "A Night At Red Rocks," in it's entirety on BluRay at some point in the future.

I certainly hope so, because in my honest opinion, nothing beats hearing a great "progressive rock" band accompanied by a full symphony orchestra.

Usuall, in most cases, the final song on any Rush album is indicative of the direction in which Rush is currently heading. If 'The Garden' is any indication of Rush's direction, then I suspect that we will be seeing a fully symphony orchestra backing Rush during their next tour.

Posted by Enigmaticus on Sunday, 11.24.13 @ 11:45am


I wonder if Rush's success with "Clockwork Angels Tour" on DVD and BluRay will prompt The Moody Blues to release "A Night At Red Rocks," in it's entirety on BluRay at some point in the future.

I certainly hope so, because in my honest opinion, nothing beats hearing a great "progressive rock" band accompanied by a full symphony orchestra.

Usually, in most cases, the final song on any Rush album is indicative of the direction in which Rush is currently heading. If 'The Garden' is any indication of Rush's direction, then I suspect that we will be seeing a fully symphony orchestra backing Rush during their next tour.

Posted by Enigmaticus on Sunday, 11.24.13 @ 11:48am


I am certain that this issue has been beaten to death many times over, but I have to know one thing.

In your opinion,

Which choice best describes Rush:

A) a simplistic "heavy metal" group?

B) An enduring "progressive metal" band with a whiny voiced vocalist?

C) An engaging heavy "progressive rock" band, whose roots lie in the "hard rock" bands of the mid to late 1960's and the early "progressive rock" stylings of King Crimson, Yes, Genesis, Jethro Tull and Emerson, Lake & Palmer?

D) An innovative major "art rock," symphonic and eclectic "progressive rock" band, whose influences have included: The Beatles, The Moody Blues, Procol Harum, King Crimson, Jefferson Airplane, Cream, Led Zeppelin, The Who, Yes, Genesis, Jethro Tull and Gentle Giant, in addition to The Police, Talking Heads and other "art rock" bands, whose primary incarnation has been as a "power trio?" The unique thing about Rush, lies in their incorporation of folk rock, classical guitar and string sections to support their vision, they are also impeccable songwriters and experimental musicians whose talent lies in often composing in "odd" time signatures which are flawlessly integrated into the body of their songs, the creation of "concept songs" within "concept albums" and the ability of the band to incorporate various styles, such as hard rock, blues, jazz, hip hop and classical music into their songs and structures. Additionally, they have created and incorporated unusual "arty" videos and comedy into their live shows. Along the way, they have been a band which has influenced "progressive rock" musicians, "hard rock" artists and although, not a "heavy metal" band have inspired the development of the genre of "progressive metal?"

Posted by Enigmaticus on Saturday, 05.11.13 @ 12:27pm

Posted by Enigmaticus on Thursday, 11.28.13 @ 17:45pm


How about "E) A major, innovative, and influential art-and-progressive rock band--with a whiny-voiced vocalist. Now go enjoy Thanksgiving, even if you don't live in the US."

That's my pick.

Posted by Philip on Thursday, 11.28.13 @ 19:37pm


what do i have to enjoy phillip?

WHAT?!?

Posted by GFW on Saturday, 11.30.13 @ 15:21pm


Actually Philip, Geddy Lee usually does not sing in that whiny voice, he prefers to sing in his normal register. This makes every album after "Hemispheres," much better, in my honest opinion.

Posted by Enigmaticus on Sunday, 12.1.13 @ 14:22pm


Actually Enigmaticus, whether it's his normal register or not, it's still whiny, it still sounds like the inspiration for Rob Paulsen's "Pinky" voice, and it's still annoying to me.

Posted by Philip on Sunday, 12.1.13 @ 15:21pm


Both VH1 Classic and Palladia had aired "Clockwork Angels Tour" this evening.

Posted by Enigmaticus on Monday, 12.2.13 @ 01:09am


Progressive and/or art rock bands who had influenced the "holy triumvirate", who are currently in the Rock & Roll Hall Of Fame:

THE BEATLES
CREAM
THE WHO
JEFFERSON AIRPLANE
PINK FLOYD
TALKING HEADS
THE POLICE
GENESIS

Those who might be inducted in 2014:

YES
DEEP PURPLE
PETER GABRIEL

Those prog and/ or art rock artists who have yet to be inducted:

THE MOODY BLUES
PROCOL HARUM
JETHRO TULL
KING CRIMSON
GENTLE GIANT
ROXY MUSIC
DURAN DURAN

Have I forgotten anyone?

In my honest opinion, if you had influenced, arguably progressive rock's greatest band, then you should be enshrined within the Rock & Roll Hall Of Fame.

Posted by Enigmaticus on Thursday, 12.12.13 @ 09:06am


Somehow, I seem to have forgotten the following artists:


EMERSON, LAKE & PALMER
SUPERTRAMP

Posted by Enigmaticus on Thursday, 12.12.13 @ 23:25pm


Recently, a colleague of mine, from work, had said that "Rush sucks," based upon hearing less than 2 minutes of the song, 'Roll The Bones.'

He claims to have heard other songs, but does not remember their titles. Now, you have a rough idea of what kind of musical prejudice I have to deal with, on a daily basis.

Even so, I will always defend my favorite genres of music, namely: "progressive rock," "art rock," "modern," "romantic," "classical," "baroque" and "classic rock," against all enemies, foreign and domestic.

Posted by Enigmaticus on Saturday, 12.14.13 @ 15:32pm


Although, I appreciate and understand the members of Rush's loyalty to Kiss, I have to wonder if Kiss' reasons for having Rush open for them in the early years was entirely altruistic.

The way that I see it, Kiss had only chosen Rush as their tour mates, because they had reminded them of a Canadian Led Zeppelin. Led Zeppelin just so happened to be the biggest band at that time.

The telling issue comes from Paul Stanley's confusion over Rush's album, "Caress Of Steel," Alex Lifeson says "that we played it for him and he did not get it."

Afterwards, Rush was consigned to play in small clubs with Ted Nugent, until the release of their breakthrough album, "2112."

Should Kiss have been inducted in 2014's class over Yes and Deep Purple, and perhaps The Zombies? My answer is an emphatic "No!!!!!"

Posted by Enigmaticus on Saturday, 12.21.13 @ 17:26pm


I am still in the process of watching the "Clockwork Angels Tour" BluRay. I am highly supportive of the opinion that The Clockwork Angels' String ensemble has definitely enhanced Rush's music; other individuals think that the trio should be sacrosanct and should never have any additional players added to their lineup. I, on the other hand, would be in favor of Rush being accompanied by a full symphony orchestra on their next tour.

As far as I am concerned, anything that could be done to enhance each song should be considered; Rush's music was not designed to be played by just 3 great musicians; it was designed to be performed by entire symphony orchestras: brass sections, string sections, woodwind sections and even percussion ensembles.

Posted by Enigmaticus on Monday, 12.23.13 @ 01:38am


Since, Public Enemy was rated as a 9 by Digital Dream Door and since Rush were the headliners for the 2013 class, does this mean that Rush are indeed a 10, one of the immortals?

If so, then why are they placed on the lower level of the 2nd tier of the Rock Hall Pyramid? In my honest opinion, they should be placed at the least on the 4th tier, if not the 5th tier.

Posted by Enigmaticus on Monday, 12.23.13 @ 21:41pm


Progressive and/or art rock bands who had influenced the "holy triumvirate", who are currently in the Rock & Roll Hall Of Fame:

THE BEATLES
CREAM
THE WHO
JEFFERSON AIRPLANE
PINK FLOYD
TALKING HEADS
THE POLICE
GENESIS

Those who will be inducted in 2014:

PETER GABRIEL

Those prog and/ or art rock artists who have yet to be
inducted:

THE MOODY BLUES
PROCOL HARUM
JETHRO TULL
DEEP PURPLE
YES
KING CRIMSON
GENTLE GIANT
SUPERTRAMP
EMERSON, LAKE & PALMER
ROXY MUSIC
DURAN DURAN

Other than perhaps Classical, or Romantic composers, or Led Zeppelin, have I forgotten anyone?

In my honest opinion, if you had influenced, arguably progressive rock's greatest band, then you should be enshrined within the Rock & Roll Hall Of Fame.

Posted by Enigmaticus on Thursday, 12.12.13 @ 09:06am

Posted by Enigmaticus on Friday, 12.27.13 @ 03:15am


I have been listening to both the "Clockwork Angels Tour" cd on my car stereo and the "Clockwork Angels Tour" BluRay on my high definition l.e.d. television for the past several days. In my honest opinion, the "Clockwork Angels' String Ensemble" thoroughly enhances Rush's already magnificent music. Their contribution to the sound provides Rush's music with several more layers of sonic texture than just the trio would be capable of achieving on their own.

I can only hope, one day to see and hear Rush's greatest songs played with the accompaniment of a full symphony orchestra. This is a good move in that general overall direction, however.

Posted by Enigmaticus on Saturday, 12.28.13 @ 12:14pm


What makes an artist great? Is it a random combination of the ability to convey an idea, or an emotion? Is it the ability to improvise at a moment's notice? Is it the ability to create great music, without caring about whether it is unconventional, or unpopular? Is it the ability to have a single minded vision and pursue that muse wherever it takes you? Is it the ability to influence other great musicians, as well?

If so, then many artists of the "progressive rock" genre meet those criteria. In this original post, I had been referring to Gentle Giant, but I could have been referr