Rush

6 views
Skip to first unread message

lif...@louconn.com

unread,
May 29, 1994, 2:51:53 AM5/29/94
to

Anybody here like the rock group "Rush"?
Guess some of you can tell by my name that I'm a rush fan.

The Louisville Connection (502) 241-3878 12 Lines

alexander@linux

unread,
May 29, 1994, 6:34:35 PM5/29/94
to

Why, uh, sure man. i like rush. i like them as a representative
of just about everything that i hate as far as music is concerned.
I know that "alternative" doesn't really mean anything
any more, but RUSH?! Jesus-Peasus-- this must be a joke
and i guess i bit, huh?

JoeJanecek

unread,
May 30, 1994, 12:34:02 AM5/30/94
to
you mean Lush, right?

The Analog Kid

unread,
May 30, 1994, 1:15:31 AM5/30/94
to
lif...@louconn.com wrote:

: Anybody here like the rock group "Rush"?


: Guess some of you can tell by my name that I'm a rush fan.

Indeed I do... love the band, however this is hardly the place to be
discussing the group -- although, when one truly thinks about the
definition of "alternative," they fit better than many of the groups being
discussed. Anyway, I don't suggest you continue talking about them on
here, rather take it to alt.music.rush, and I also recommend that you
subscribe to The National Midnight Star (e-mail rush...@syrinx.umd.edu).
--
_ __ _ _ __ _ , ___________________________________________________
' ) ) ' ) / ( ) ' ) /
/--' / / \ /--/ PAUL SINGH (pa...@rogue.com)
/ \_ (__/ (___) / (_ "We fight the fire while we're feeding the flames"

The Analog Kid

unread,
May 30, 1994, 1:17:38 AM5/30/94
to
alexander@linux wrote:

: Why, uh, sure man. i like rush. i like them as a representative

I probably should not dignify your comments with a response, but I guess
I'm going to regardless... Out of curiosity (and please do so in e-mail as
I agree this is not the correct forum to be discussing Rush) exactly what
does Rush represent which you "hate as far as music is concerned?" Could
it be that they are a band with members who actually have talent, and know
how to play their respective instruments? Intelligent lyrics perhaps?
I'm dying to know... but like I said, please respond in e-mail. Thank you.

David Watson

unread,
May 30, 1994, 7:33:35 PM5/30/94
to

In a previous article, lif...@louconn.com () says:

>Anybody here like the rock group "Rush"?
> Guess some of you can tell by my name that I'm a rush fan.

Damn right, I do. Ever since _A Farewell to Kings_, I've been a fan (even
though they were a bit disappointing around the late 80's, their latest,
_Counterparts_, is a huge improvement). I will even go so far as to say
that I think they're more alternative than overrated bands like Pearl Jam,
Alice in Chains (who bored me to death the two times I saw them) and Stone
Temple Pilots. And "Xanadu" blows "Stairway to Heaven" out of the water.
--
Dave Watson, Severed Heads Liberation Front (Re-release the _Stretcher_ EP!)
Frezier Balzoff (Ottawa), Ontario, Canada Email-...@Freenet.carleton.ca
"A man is measured by the depth of his anger."--Eddie
"Everyone in this room is wearing a uniform, and don't kid yourself!"--Zappa

Scott Allen Miller

unread,
Jun 6, 1994, 9:17:44 PM6/6/94
to

lif...@louconn.com wrote:
>
> Anybody here like the rock group "Rush"?
> Guess some of you can tell by my name that I'm a rush fan.
>

YES!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! I DO!!!!!!

Scotto
--
Scott Allen Miller
igo...@ksu.ksu.edu

Scott Allen Miller

unread,
Jun 6, 1994, 9:42:15 PM6/6/94
to

The idea that Rush cannot be, by any means, an alternative band is one that is
propagated by the alternative elitists that drove Billy Corgan to a nervous
breakdown and probably contributed to Kurt Cobain's demise. I don't understand
it. We have Big Star being played on alternative radio stations. They were a 70s
rock band that some notable alternative types have said they like. So they get
the OK to be discussed as "alternative" now. Primus has singled out Rush as a
humongous influence, but they don't get the same respect. Meanwhile, Tony Bennet
is Unplugged on MTV and Johnny Cash, Rock and Roll Hall of Famer, is now an
alternative figure. Bullshit! I *grew up* on Johnny Cash, folks, and he's the same
as he ever was. I really like him, but alternative? I don't know. Well, whatever
the capricious cynical nihilists with post-modern angst and suspicion of anyone
with money or success say, must be right. After all, they want to create a more
inclusive world.
I really think it's because Rush doesn't whine all the time, make most
alternative bands' creativity look like kindergarten crayon scrawlings, *and*
because they have been selling albums well for 20 years now. Or maybe it's
because they don't have to get the producer to play their instruments for them?


Jealousy is universal,

Ned A. RAGGETT

unread,
Jun 6, 1994, 10:30:49 PM6/6/94
to
In article <2t0j9n$5...@pancho.ksu.ksu.edu>,

Scott Allen Miller <igo...@pancho.ksu.ksu.edu> wrote:
> I really think it's because Rush doesn't whine all the time,

Well, Geddy Lee's voice can get rather high at times :->

>Or maybe it's
>because they don't have to get the producer to play their instruments for them?

I'll have to quibble with you a bit here--not over whether or not Rush
play their own instruments [I'm quite sure they do], but over the
standard of who should be playing the music. On the one hand, our notions
of authenticity are gratified by the knowledge that in fact the people
we see on the album cover [or wherever] are the ones playing the tune.
Still, ultimately it all comes down to what the music sounds like as
opposed to who it actually playing it, I'd argue. Not the most
popular of stances, perhaps, but just to throw out one random example,
though we all now know that Frankie Goes to Hollywood's _Welcome to
the Pleasure Dome_ was performed by other musicians, excepting Holly
Johnson's astounding voice, of course, I still love the album as an
audacious pop masterpiece. Others will disagree violently on its musical
worth, of course, but I don't think you can dismiss that element of
my stance which doesn't care that the actual band didn't play; I don't
hold that up as a musically worthwhile goal precisely because it has
nothing to do with musical worth. There is always the claim that
somehow pop's 'inauthenticity' cannot hold a candle to rock's 'authenticity',
but I find this stance fairly useless because it attempts to weld two
differing standards together to create a universal standard of musical
value, which is impossible to achieve. To throw out another example--
I'll take a producer-controlled example of music like Madonna's
"Holiday" over Counting Crows' entire back and future catalog, because I.
rather happen to like that bubblesalsa confection over the Crows' dirges.
Mind you, I happen to think that the Chameleons and My Bloody Valentine
are infinitely better than either the big M or the Crows, to name just
two of my favorite bands. Anyway, returning to the subject at hand:
the fact that Counting Crows can 'actually' play their music means nothing in
my assessment; if you think it does, then you have blinkered standards.
If you think I'm wrong because you like the music per se of the Crows
more than Madonna's, fine, because that's a different matter.

Ned Raggett
nara...@uci.edu

Steve Carsello

unread,
Jun 7, 1994, 9:08:37 AM6/7/94
to

> The idea that Rush cannot be, by any means, an alternative band is one that is
> propagated by the alternative elitists that drove Billy Corgan to a nervous
> breakdown and probably contributed to Kurt Cobain's demise. I don't understand
> it. We have Big Star being played on alternative radio stations. They were a 70s


Well said ! There's nothing worse than alternative weenies who don't
like Rush. Alex, Geddy, and Neil have more talent in their pubic hair
than Allice in Chains have in their collective sum of bodies.

Rocco

Doug Horne

unread,
Jun 8, 1994, 2:19:22 PM6/8/94
to

: Well said ! There's nothing worse than alternative weenies who don't

: like Rush. Alex, Geddy, and Neil have more talent in their pubic hair
: than Allice in Chains have in their collective sum of bodies.

So, talent has something to do with being an alternative band?? There are
talented and untalented bands in mainstream and alternative music....

And what's this about Alice in Chains? (what have they got to do with
alternative music?)

Mark Secker

unread,
Jun 9, 1994, 2:49:34 AM6/9/94
to
ha...@wrcs1.urz.uni-wuppertal.DE (Randarr Hauk) writes:

>lif...@louconn.com wrote:

>: Anybody here like the rock group "Rush"?


>: Guess some of you can tell by my name that I'm a rush fan.

> "White people are into stuff that is so overly wack, like Soul
>Asylum, Rush and Sports Illustrated." -Beastie Boys

>Not flamin', just wanted to get that outta my system y'all.

>CBH

I've only one question about Rush - Why can't their studio albums be as
great as their live albums? - HMMM - I can't stand ANY of their studio
stuff - most cold - some clinical - last few over produced. But their live
stuff just blows me away! same songs, same band, different story.

so I guess this makes me a Rush fan, of sorts

Mark Secker
m.se...@cowan.edu.au

lif...@louconn.com

unread,
Jun 8, 1994, 10:33:18 AM6/8/94
to

B

IN>In article <2t0j9n$5...@pancho.ksu.ksu.edu>,
IN>Scott Allen Miller <igo...@pancho.ksu.ksu.edu> wrote:
IN>> I really think it's because Rush doesn't whine all the time,

IN>Well, Geddy Lee's voice can get rather high at times :->

IN>>Or maybe it's
IN>>because they don't have to get the producer to play their instruments for
IN>them?

IN>I'll have to quibble with you a bit here--not over whether or not Rush
IN>play their own instruments [I'm quite sure they do], but over the
IN>standard of who should be playing the music. tions
Then why are they considered one of the best live acts to see if they're
not masters of their instruments. Geddy Lee is regarded as one of the
best bassists of all time, Neil Peart is considered by many to be the
greatest drummer that ever lived..and Alex Lifeson is on the cover of
Giutar magazines every time rush release an album. They may be only a 3
piece band, but they sound like six poeple in a band. Geddy Lee has no
problen juggling 3 instruments in a single show, and Neil Peart spend
hours on end memorizing complex drum pieces, and records then in usually
one take. And Alex Lifeson has 25 years experience under his belt, as welll
as creating a new "sound" for the guitar. Rush do play their own
instruments, and it is arguable that they are all the best at their
respected instruments....something that has to be taken into
consideration about rush is that they don't get enough credit like
sellouts like Pearl Jam and Stone Temple Pilots get! I mean, rush have made'
19 albums only to find themselves virtually unkown by the general
public, but ask any Bass, drum, or guitar teacher that grew up with the
music of rush, and ask them who rush are, they'll say that rush are one
of the greatest groups ever...or at least one of the most influential...
A lot of people may disagree considering people have their own tastes ine I.
music, but those who open their minds to music, and don't judge rush on
Geddy's voice and the fact that not many people have heard of them, at
leastwhere I live, will realize that rush are a great group.

IMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMMM;
: THE LOUISVILLE CONNECTION - (502)241-3878 * 12 NODES 14.4 * :
: 18 CD'S ONLINE * TW2002 INTERACTIVE * MUTANTS! * FIDO * NETACCESS * :
: NATIONWIDE CHAT * MATCHMAKER * EVERYONE NEEDS A LITTLE TLC! :

James Black

unread,
Jun 9, 1994, 12:52:37 PM6/9/94
to
"It's always September somewhere on the Usenet" - anon.


In article <014178HUAT...@louconn.com> you write:

>Then why are they considered one of the best live acts to see if
>they're not masters of their instruments. Geddy Lee is regarded as one

^ this should be a "?"

>of the best bassists of all time, Neil Peart is considered by many to
>be the greatest drummer that ever lived..and Alex Lifeson is on the

^^ should be " "

>cover of Giutar magazines every time rush release an album. They may

sp.: "Guitar" ^ try a plural here

>be only a 3 piece band, but they sound like six poeple in a band.

sp.: "people"

This sentence is clumsy. Try "They may only be a three piece band,
but they can sound like a six piece".

You get the idea. I want a corrected version posted 1,000 times to
alt.test by tomorrow or you fail and kibo will come and revoke your
posting priviliges.

Spelling, punctuation, and grammar aside, you should concentrate on
reading more and posting less. Your reading comprehension is
underwhelming, to say the least.

"But he records all the drums in one take!" *Snort*

PERCEPTIVE READERS: There appears in this post a phrase that he will
undoubtedly latch onto, even before he realizes that he's being
flamed. Can anyone guess what it is? HINT: it's in the .sig.

"Sometimes, even killing yourself wouldn't be enough. Like when you
realize that your entire life has been lived under a presumption of
free will, but all you've been able to make of it is a sad parody of
everything you used to hate. Slowly, without trying, everyone becomes
what he despises most." - Steve Albini

James Black (j-b...@uchicago.edu)

Steve Carsello

unread,
Jun 9, 1994, 11:02:06 AM6/9/94
to

No, talent has nothing to do with being an alternative band. I just
hate the word "alternative". Don't you ? I like quite a few "alternative"
bands, but I feel it's my duty to defend the mainstream bands that I like
when they get ragged on by alternative weenies like yourself.

Rocco


lif...@louconn.com

unread,
Jun 11, 1994, 5:43:10 AM6/11/94
to

IC>> : Well said ! There's nothing worse than alternative weenies who don't
IC>> : like Rush. Alex, Geddy, and Neil have more talent in their hair
IC>> : than Allice in Chains have in their collective sum of bodies.

IC>> So, talent has something to do with being an alternative band?? There re r
IC>> talented and untalented bands in mainstream and alternative music....

IC>> And what's this about Alice in Chains? (what have they got to do with
IC>> alternative music?)

IC>No, talent has nothing to do with being an alternative band. I just
IC>hate the word "alternative". Don't you ? I like quite a few "alternative"
IC>bands, but I feel it's my duty to defend the mainstream bands that I like
IC>when they get ragged on by alternative weenies like yourself.

IC>Rocco

The point is..alternative bands have no talent!! Really
alternative ones that just make noise and nothing that even comes close
to resembling music..I am a "Progressive" rock fan....it may have some
ties to early alternative, but Progressive is the closest I get to
alternative.

Ned A. RAGGETT

unread,
Jun 11, 1994, 5:32:06 PM6/11/94
to
In article <31006HHCC...@louconn.com>, <lif...@louconn.com> wrote:
> The point is..alternative bands have no talent!! Really
>alternative ones that just make noise and nothing that even comes close
>to resembling music..I am a "Progressive" rock fan....it may have some
>ties to early alternative, but Progressive is the closest I get to
>alternative.

OK, I've had it. Sit and spin, "lifeson". Your blinkered attitudes
towards music are as pathetic as those of the classical-music obsessives
who say things about music like Rush's that resembles what you spouted
off above. We all have our own definitions of what constitutes quality;
certainly your definition of what's different between 'music' and
'noise' is hardly universal.

Before you start yelping like a hurt puppy, I happen to like Rush myself--
got all their albums but two of the live ones. But I haven't elevated
my love for that group and the music they play, or more accurately the
groups I especially value [the Chameleons, My Bloody Valentine, and the
Fall among others] and the music they play, into some blind bigotry
against other forms of music.

Ned Raggett
nara...@uci.edu

James Black

unread,
Jun 13, 1994, 12:03:43 PM6/13/94
to
In article <31006HHCC...@louconn.com> lif...@louconn.com
writes:

>The point is..alternative bands have no talent!! Really alternative
>ones that just make noise and nothing that even comes close to
>resembling music..I am a "Progressive" rock fan....it may have some
>ties to early alternative, but Progressive is the closest I get to
>alternative.

You worthless fucktard. Go crawl back under whatever stinking bigoted
little rock you crawled out of. Pig-ignorant little party liners like
yourself are what drives reasonable Rush fans nuts.

As a Rush fan, your indefensible, ignorant bleating makes my skin
crawl; as a music lover, your blinkard dogmatic pigeonholing makes me
cringe; as a speaker of English, your well-demonstrated inability to
form a complete, coherent sentence gives me a good laugh.

In short, fuck off.

David Watson

unread,
Jun 13, 1994, 1:42:40 PM6/13/94
to

In a previous article, lif...@louconn.com () says:

> The point is..alternative bands have no talent!! Really
>alternative ones that just make noise and nothing that even comes close
>to resembling music..I am a "Progressive" rock fan....it may have some
>ties to early alternative, but Progressive is the closest I get to
>alternative.

I agree that there are too many untalented "musicians" in the alternative
field, but there are very many who are, so don't go tarring everyone with
the same brush. Primus, Violent Femmes' bassist Brian Ritchie, veterans
of Frank Zappa's bands, and Buckethead, to name but a few, are outstanding.
But then again, to me the only talent that matters is the ability to make
original, distinctive and touching sounds. There are many heavy metal
guitarist who I'll never play technically as good as, but for the most
part they bore the hole out of me. So in that respect, anybody who can
take a synth/sampler setup, never touch a keyboard and still make
something with its own distict sound (very hard to find, but they're out
there) is just as talented as the members of Rush.

Steve Carsello

unread,
Jun 14, 1994, 8:24:57 AM6/14/94
to
: part they bore the hole out of me. So in that respect, anybody who can

: take a synth/sampler setup, never touch a keyboard and still make
: something with its own distict sound (very hard to find, but they're out
: there) is just as talented as the members of Rush.

In your dreams buddy !

David Watson

unread,
Jun 14, 1994, 6:56:12 PM6/14/94
to

In a previous article, car...@pts.mot.com (Steve Carsello) says:

>: part they bore the hole out of me. So in that respect, anybody who can


>: take a synth/sampler setup, never touch a keyboard and still make
>: something with its own distict sound (very hard to find, but they're out
>: there) is just as talented as the members of Rush.

>In your dreams buddy !

Refer to band in first line of .sig below.

Doug Horne

unread,
Jun 15, 1994, 10:46:01 AM6/15/94
to
: No, talent has nothing to do with being an alternative band. I just

: hate the word "alternative". Don't you ? I like quite a few "alternative"
: bands, but I feel it's my duty to defend the mainstream bands that I like
: when they get ragged on by alternative weenies like yourself.

Oh, another Netnews hothead... should have guessed. I never hated the
word alternative until it became a badge of honour or something. It was
quite simple before, there were mainstream bands and alternative bands,
some people listened to some, some people to others and some listened to
both. Now, everyone gets upset if you say "perhaps that's not an
alternative band". This is not a qualitative statement (there's no
judgement there at all, just a comment on their popularity, sales etc). I
happen to like bands from both mainstream and alternative and quite often
can't decide which is which. Rush may not be one of my favourites but the
Stones and Led Zeppelin (and many others) get played frequently by me. It
really doesn't matter in which category a band seems to fall, and I never
implied that it did.

So, why the HELL do you want to call me an "alternative weenie"???? You
don't know me, you don't even understand my opinion, and, of course,
you're hiding behind your terminal. I didn't even rag Rush.... buy a
punching bag, guy, you're addressing real people when you mindlessly hurl
abuse around here.

The Analog Kid

unread,
Jun 15, 1994, 3:40:30 PM6/15/94
to
I've pretty much stayed out of this discussion, mainly because it is
rather pointless -- we all have our own different tastes and it really
isn't necessary (or would even be desired) to have them all be the same.
However, I have to take object to the person who said that Rush is not
very talented, and anyone with a synth could reproduce what they've been
doing for the last 20 years... I suggest that person go out and actually
listen to a few Rush albums before passing judgement. Regardless of
whether you like Rush or not, anyone with even the slightest sense of
musical ability would agree that the three members of Rush are extremely
talented at their respective instruments. Neil Peart is the Modern
Drummer hall of fame, Geddy Lee is in the hall of fame of the major Bass
mag. (i forget the name), and Lifeson is often recognized by the various
guitar magazines as an outstanding player. But in all honesty, that
doesn't really mean much... One doesn't need to be a genius to figure out
that the band members are extraordinary players.

David Watson

unread,
Jun 15, 1994, 6:41:53 PM6/15/94
to

In a previous article, pa...@rogue.com (The Analog Kid) says:

>However, I have to take object to the person who said that Rush is not
>very talented, and anyone with a synth could reproduce what they've been
>doing for the last 20 years...

If you're talking about my post, you've got me all wrong. I said that if
anyone can make distinctive, original, touching music, regardless of
musical ability, then I think they're talented, whenther the talent is
amazing drumming or amazing programming. I love Rush' music, and have
been a huge fan since 1977 (10 years old!). I also love Severed Heads,
who are not the greatest keyboard players, but they make music that hits me
in the same spot as Rush does. Therefore I regard them both as equally
talented, just different talents. Got me now?

>I suggest that person go out and actually listen to a few Rush albums
>before passing judgement.

I've got all of 'em, plus a boot and quite a few singles. Next...

Reply all
Reply to author
Forward
0 new messages