Why Rush Suck

somecleric · 11-21-2002, 01:54 AM

It seems every thread has a mention of Rush, ontopic or not, thanks to a number of hardcore Rush fans here. I generally respect other people's opinions, but rather than post to 15 threads about why Rush aren't very good, I'm doing it all here. Not because you're not allowed to like Rush, but because I don't want anyone buying any Rush albums because they get mentioned often here as a good band.

Don't be fooled, Rush suck. Rush suck a lot. They're fairly skilled musicians, but they were like the Tool of their day. They were painfully pretentious, and people only really liked them because they enjoyed being able to look down on people who 'didn't get' that Rush were like, amazing, man. Prog is the most horrible thing ever to happen to music, it was just an excuse to make really long, really monotonous songs with lame hooks recycled from Pink Floyd and Queen.

Speaking of, Rush were just Pink Floyd for those who thought Floyd were pussies. Stoner rock for those who hated hippies. Oh, and people who were really geeky. Because just about all Rush songs (all the ones people call great, at least), are about shit like elves and space launches and Ayn Rand. Like Weezer, but instead of mainstream pop detritus like comics and bad TV, Tolkein and the space program.

So beware Rush, they may be decent (hell, even great) musicians, but their recorded output is unoriginal and unlistenable.

And stupid.

Eomer · 11-21-2002, 07:20 AM

Thanks for explaining to me why I like bands like Rush and Tool. I had always thought that I liked their music a lot. But obviously I was self-deceived all along, and am really just a music snob :/. I am going to kill myself.

Nice troll.

Evelys · 11-21-2002, 08:28 AM

Besides, everyone knows that Geddy Lee has the best mullet in rock.

Marack · 11-21-2002, 11:13 AM

Hehe, there are some "musicians bands", and "musicians artists". Frank Zappa, for instance, is a "musicians artist", most people don't appreciate him for the genious that he was.. except for musicians. Especially lead guitarists (god damn lead guitarists piss me off, but thats another rant for another day =)). Rush is a "musicians band" , I don't think there is a drummer out there that wouldn't worship the ground Neil Pert walks on. Jaco Pastorious gets the nod from bassists, and so on. It's an incredibly biased view, but hey, thats how it goes...

As for Prog Rock, have you ever heard 21st Century Schitzoid(sp?) Man? How anyone could lable that as drawn out, monotonous, with lame hooks is beyond me. As with all other types of music there is the good and the bad. There is some Prog Rock that fits your description to a T, but then there is some amazingly good stuff of it to (King Crimson the obvious choice.. the early years of course). And Pink Floyd IS prog, just give a listen to Meddle, or Dark Side.

Music is situational. When I want to be challenged intellectually I pop in some Radiohead or Sigur Ros. When I want to be challenged musically I put in Rush, Cream, Primus or Jaco (bassist

). When I want a good walking rhythm I put in Ultramarine. When I want to forget about the world, stop thinking and just enjoy some good sound I put in Queens of the Stone Age. When I need a good laugh I put in some Tenacious D. When I need to wallow in my own missery I put in Alice in Chains or Soundgarden.

When you look at music from a situational standpoint its hard to dislike any kind of tunes. I pitty the lack of diversity in the life of someone who only listens to one genre of music.

Tarissa DR · 11-21-2002, 12:49 PM

Ug, I've been liking Rush all these years in total ignorance!

I'm not crazy about their new shit, but I find it hard to listen to their older stuff and not get into it either as a musician or just a fan

Some of Zappa's 'classical / avante-garde' compositions are just sickeningly complex. I sit there and listen to it and start to get dizzy. Not sure why he bothered with his Sheik Yeboutie / You are what you is days. I guess they were catchy, but it's funny how he goes from brilliant to brilliantly juvenile.

Then again, in a way, that's always been Frank

somecleric · 11-21-2002, 02:32 PM

Obviously I'm simplifying and generalizing, but prog has always seemed to be complexity for the sake of complexity to me. I just don't get how people can listen to it. While Rush do have a few relatively straighforward singles, complete with hooks and structure and such, the majority of their work seems to be overindulgent crap. To call them a 'musician's band' and write off as anyone who doesn't like them as ignorant is exactly the attitude I was referencing in my original post. It may not be the only reason you like Rush, but you like the elitism Rush provide.

Besides, by claiming only a musician can truly appreciate the complexity of Rush's work, you're minimizing their actual impact. Jonny Greenwood is an amazing technical musician, but no one says you need to be a musician yourself to 'get' Radiohead. Television did things to guitars no one had ever thought about doing before, but you didn't need to play guitar to know it. Sigur Ros are one of the finest live bands of recent times, and brilliant technical musicians, but you don't have to be a studio engineer to get them. Stereolab know more about recording albums than just about anyone, but people don't like them because they know what their way around a Farfisa, they like them because they're good. Brian Wilson, Kevin Shields and Brian Eno changed music, but their work was embraced by everyone, not just musicians.

'Musician's band' is just another way of saying 'not interesting enough on their own merits'.

twistidd · 11-21-2002, 03:43 PM

I've been playing music for 17 years and I still think Rush suck some serious ass. Just cause a musician is talented at playing an instrument doesn't make him good at writing a song. That guy's voice is by far one of the most annoying sounds to ever plague this planet. I guess, however, since Neil Pert is such a great drummer, I should go buy an album... I'll go pick up a Dream Theater album as well. I hear they are great musicians.

Tarissa DR · 11-21-2002, 05:18 PM

Well, the main problem with this whole argument never amounting to anything is that judgments like 'overindulgent' and criticisms on geddy lee's voice amount to opinion.

Rush's success points to the fact that a whole lot of people seem to think, wow, they're a pretty good band.

Folks who aren't fans of progressive metal/rock usually use words like overindulgment and meandering to describe it, and that's fine, but it doesn't mean it's bad music - just not the music for them.

Marack · 11-21-2002, 06:53 PM

hehe, thats not really what I ment by "musicians band". Have you ever heard the phrase "with a face only a mother could love"?

It's a general bias that you usually get from playing an instrument IMO. I listen for the bass in a band immediately, if the bassist is kicking I'll still usually enjoy the act even if the rest of the band sucks. There are some bands that I'll listen to any day of the week that my friends look at me funny for puting in (Morphine comes to mind). "Musicians artist" is just a general term I use to describe the tendancy of a musician to look past song structure, lyrics, etc. because of good musicianship.

I guess that is what you said though, but good musicianship is their merits. And how can you argue that good musicianship doesn't merit popularity? There are some bands that have/had good songwriting without superb musicianship, yet I don't call them sucky bands solely because of that. I enjoy the songwriting ability look at that part of them. Why don't you think it works two ways, that songwriting skills are so far and away superior to musicianship that musicianship can be completely disregarded when assessing the merits of a band?

edit: added in the last paragraph

Synd D`nys · 11-22-2002, 01:13 AM

Quote:

While Rush do have a few relatively straighforward singles, complete with hooks and structure and such, the majority of their work seems to be overindulgent crap.

So, because alot of their work isn't cookie cutter 3:30 songs that fit nicely into a program director's song rotations, they suck?

This has got to be the worst post I have ever seen on one of Millie's boards. Not because it is ripping on a band that I like but because of the sheer pretensiousness of it. You don't like Rush so you felt compelled to warn the masses by saying "I don't want anyone buying any Rush albums because they get mentioned often here as a good band".

You don't like them. That's fine. I think you are a moron, though. Not because you don't like a certain band but because of the arrogence and ignorance you displayed in your post.

I'd love to hear who you think doesn't suck and see how many of them have released 20+ albums and sold out dozens of world tours over 30 years of making music. Apparently, more then a few people think Rush doesn't suck.

twistidd · 11-22-2002, 01:59 AM

Quote:

I'd love to hear who you think doesn't suck and see how many of them have released 20+ albums and sold out dozens of world tours over 30 years of making music.

So that's what defines a good band? Personally I could care less if a band hadn't sold one 7" or sold 10 Billion records. Music is music and all that matters is what you enjoy. Who cares if anyone else likes it.

Marack, sorry if it sounded like I was taking shots at you. Everyone is entitled to their own opinion and you do make a valid point. I do listen to a drum roll or guitar riff, before I listen to anything else. I'm just not a big fan of their particular style. All their songs sound like to me are a gigantic guitar and drum solo. Truth of the matter is, although I do hate Rush, what bothers me more is that every Rush fan I know is like a Jehovah's witness, attempting to convert me into liking Rush because they can play their instruments so well. Like I said before, I could care less if they can play their instruments well, if I don't like the song, I'm not going to listen to it.

somecleric · 11-22-2002, 02:06 AM

I'm just trying to provide some balance. I'll concede Rush are sometimes alright, but reading these boards, you'd think they were the second coming of The Beatles. You think they're the best band ever? Fine, but I think you're a moron who needs to listen to some actual good albums.

Like, you know, anything The Ramones ever released, Closer and Unknown Pleasures from Joy Division, any of the 4 real Velvet Underground albums, Revolver, Ziggy Stardust, Low, Heroes, Aftermath, Exile On Main Street, Let It Be, Tim, It Was Hot We Stayed In The Water, The Glow Pt II, Marquee Moon, Suicide, Second Suicide, Nevermind, Blacklisted, Violator, Pet Sounds, Smiley Smile, Mezzanine, Dummy, Fear of Fours, Free All Angels, Parallel Lines, More Songs About Buildings And Food, Loveless, Isn't Anything, Music Has The Right To Children, Born To Run, Oklahoma, Island Row, Life Is Full Of Possibilities, Come Clean, Let's Get Free, Return Of The Durutti Column, Endless Summer, Le Jardin de Heavenly, Grace, Sings, London Calling, Exile To Guyville, She Hangs Brightly, Lonesome Crowded West, Yesterday Was Dramatic Today Is OK, From Her To Eternity, Let Love In, The Birthday Party, I Walk The Line, Doolittle, Surfer Rosa, Red Headed Stranger, The Bends, OK Computer, Jamboree, Country Life, Siren, Dub Housing, The Tenement Year, Metal Box, Serge Gainsbourg & Jane Birkin, Vu de l'Exterieur, Ágætis Byrjun, Good Morning Spider, Mass Romantic, Rain Dogs, Swordfishtrombones and Everyone Who Pretended To Like Me Is Gone.

Wow, that was a long list, and I'm going to be kicking myself every 5 minutes or so for the next few days, remembering albums I should have included. Clearly, I'm not married to the 3 minute pop song, although it holds a special place in my heart. I have no problem with experimentalism (see: Suicide, Sigur Ros, Can, Pere Ubu, Tom Waits, The Velvet Underground, The Beach Boys), just when it's boring and uninspiring.

You think Rush are the best band ever? Fine, convince me. No crap about 'you have to ______ to appreciate it', no 'you just don't get it' and no 'lol, u sux'. Give me one reason Rush have released a better album than any of those I listed.

twistidd · 11-22-2002, 02:10 AM

... but dude listen to that drum roll.

Synd D`nys · 11-22-2002, 03:28 PM

Quote:

You think Rush are the best band ever? Fine, convince me. No crap about 'you have to ______ to appreciate it', no 'you just don't get it' and no 'lol, u sux'. Give me one reason Rush have released a better album than any of those I listed.

Never once did I say that Rush is the best band ever. Never once did I try to "convert" a Rush hater into a Rush lover. Never once did I use any trite descriptions like "musicians band" or "cerebral rock".

I have no need nor any desire to try and convince you that they don't suck because they don't. You don't like them. More power to you. That doesn't make them or any band suck. That's a real adolecent mentality. Anything you don't like must suck and anyone who feel's differently needs to be warned of the error of their ways.

That was the entire point of my beef. Not to be evangelical in anyway about a certain band.

Merauk · 11-22-2002, 03:39 PM

Can't believe nobody listed the obvious answer as to why Rush sucks. They are from Canada, nuff said.

11-21-2002, 01:54 AM	#1 (permalink)
somecleric Registered User Join Date: Mar 2002 Posts: 121 -1 Internets	Why Rush Suck It seems every thread has a mention of Rush, ontopic or not, thanks to a number of hardcore Rush fans here. I generally respect other people's opinions, but rather than post to 15 threads about why Rush aren't very good, I'm doing it all here. Not because you're not allowed to like Rush, but because I don't want anyone buying any Rush albums because they get mentioned often here as a good band. Don't be fooled, Rush suck. Rush suck a lot. They're fairly skilled musicians, but they were like the Tool of their day. They were painfully pretentious, and people only really liked them because they enjoyed being able to look down on people who 'didn't get' that Rush were like, amazing, man. Prog is the most horrible thing ever to happen to music, it was just an excuse to make really long, really monotonous songs with lame hooks recycled from Pink Floyd and Queen. Speaking of, Rush were just Pink Floyd for those who thought Floyd were pussies. Stoner rock for those who hated hippies. Oh, and people who were really geeky. Because just about all Rush songs (all the ones people call great, at least), are about shit like elves and space launches and Ayn Rand. Like Weezer, but instead of mainstream pop detritus like comics and bad TV, Tolkein and the space program. So beware Rush, they may be decent (hell, even great) musicians, but their recorded output is unoriginal and unlistenable. And stupid.

11-21-2002, 12:49 PM	#5 (permalink)
Tarissa DR Registered User Join Date: May 2002 Posts: 72 -1 Internets	Ug, I've been liking Rush all these years in total ignorance! I'm not crazy about their new shit, but I find it hard to listen to their older stuff and not get into it either as a musician or just a fan Some of Zappa's 'classical / avante-garde' compositions are just sickeningly complex. I sit there and listen to it and start to get dizzy. Not sure why he bothered with his Sheik Yeboutie / You are what you is days. I guess they were catchy, but it's funny how he goes from brilliant to brilliantly juvenile. Then again, in a way, that's always been Frank __________________ Tarissa Doveshadow 60 Rogue - Hoss

11-21-2002, 05:18 PM	#8 (permalink)
Tarissa DR Registered User Join Date: May 2002 Posts: 72 -1 Internets	Well, the main problem with this whole argument never amounting to anything is that judgments like 'overindulgent' and criticisms on geddy lee's voice amount to opinion. Rush's success points to the fact that a whole lot of people seem to think, wow, they're a pretty good band. Folks who aren't fans of progressive metal/rock usually use words like overindulgment and meandering to describe it, and that's fine, but it doesn't mean it's bad music - just not the music for them. __________________ Tarissa Doveshadow 60 Rogue - Hoss

11-21-2002, 06:53 PM	#9 (permalink)
Marack Registered User Join Date: Sep 2002 Posts: 18 -1 Internets	hehe, thats not really what I ment by "musicians band". Have you ever heard the phrase "with a face only a mother could love"? It's a general bias that you usually get from playing an instrument IMO. I listen for the bass in a band immediately, if the bassist is kicking I'll still usually enjoy the act even if the rest of the band sucks. There are some bands that I'll listen to any day of the week that my friends look at me funny for puting in (Morphine comes to mind). "Musicians artist" is just a general term I use to describe the tendancy of a musician to look past song structure, lyrics, etc. because of good musicianship. I guess that is what you said though, but good musicianship is their merits. And how can you argue that good musicianship doesn't merit popularity? There are some bands that have/had good songwriting without superb musicianship, yet I don't call them sucky bands solely because of that. I enjoy the songwriting ability look at that part of them. Why don't you think it works two ways, that songwriting skills are so far and away superior to musicianship that musicianship can be completely disregarded when assessing the merits of a band? edit: added in the last paragraph Last edited by Marack : 11-21-2002 at 07:21 PM.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version Email this Page	Search this Thread: Advanced Search
Display Modes	Rate This Thread
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode	Rate This Thread:

11-21-2002, 07:20 AM	#2 (permalink)
Eomer Registered User Join Date: Feb 2002 Posts: 8,885 +4 Internets	Thanks for explaining to me why I like bands like Rush and Tool. I had always thought that I liked their music a lot. But obviously I was self-deceived all along, and am really just a music snob :/. I am going to kill myself. Nice troll.

11-21-2002, 08:28 AM	#3 (permalink)
Evelys The Anti-Gnome Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: South of Hell Posts: 138 +0 Internets	Besides, everyone knows that Geddy Lee has the best mullet in rock.

11-21-2002, 11:13 AM	#4 (permalink)
Marack Registered User Join Date: Sep 2002 Posts: 18 -1 Internets	Hehe, there are some "musicians bands", and "musicians artists". Frank Zappa, for instance, is a "musicians artist", most people don't appreciate him for the genious that he was.. except for musicians. Especially lead guitarists (god damn lead guitarists piss me off, but thats another rant for another day =)). Rush is a "musicians band" , I don't think there is a drummer out there that wouldn't worship the ground Neil Pert walks on. Jaco Pastorious gets the nod from bassists, and so on. It's an incredibly biased view, but hey, thats how it goes... As for Prog Rock, have you ever heard 21st Century Schitzoid(sp?) Man? How anyone could lable that as drawn out, monotonous, with lame hooks is beyond me. As with all other types of music there is the good and the bad. There is some Prog Rock that fits your description to a T, but then there is some amazingly good stuff of it to (King Crimson the obvious choice.. the early years of course). And Pink Floyd IS prog, just give a listen to Meddle, or Dark Side. Music is situational. When I want to be challenged intellectually I pop in some Radiohead or Sigur Ros. When I want to be challenged musically I put in Rush, Cream, Primus or Jaco (bassist ). When I want a good walking rhythm I put in Ultramarine. When I want to forget about the world, stop thinking and just enjoy some good sound I put in Queens of the Stone Age. When I need a good laugh I put in some Tenacious D. When I need to wallow in my own missery I put in Alice in Chains or Soundgarden. When you look at music from a situational standpoint its hard to dislike any kind of tunes. I pitty the lack of diversity in the life of someone who only listens to one genre of music.

11-21-2002, 02:32 PM	#6 (permalink)
somecleric Registered User Join Date: Mar 2002 Posts: 121 -1 Internets	Obviously I'm simplifying and generalizing, but prog has always seemed to be complexity for the sake of complexity to me. I just don't get how people can listen to it. While Rush do have a few relatively straighforward singles, complete with hooks and structure and such, the majority of their work seems to be overindulgent crap. To call them a 'musician's band' and write off as anyone who doesn't like them as ignorant is exactly the attitude I was referencing in my original post. It may not be the only reason you like Rush, but you like the elitism Rush provide. Besides, by claiming only a musician can truly appreciate the complexity of Rush's work, you're minimizing their actual impact. Jonny Greenwood is an amazing technical musician, but no one says you need to be a musician yourself to 'get' Radiohead. Television did things to guitars no one had ever thought about doing before, but you didn't need to play guitar to know it. Sigur Ros are one of the finest live bands of recent times, and brilliant technical musicians, but you don't have to be a studio engineer to get them. Stereolab know more about recording albums than just about anyone, but people don't like them because they know what their way around a Farfisa, they like them because they're good. Brian Wilson, Kevin Shields and Brian Eno changed music, but their work was embraced by everyone, not just musicians. 'Musician's band' is just another way of saying 'not interesting enough on their own merits'.

11-21-2002, 03:43 PM	#7 (permalink)
twistidd Banned Join Date: Nov 2002 Location: Houston Posts: 43 +0 Internets	I've been playing music for 17 years and I still think Rush suck some serious ass. Just cause a musician is talented at playing an instrument doesn't make him good at writing a song. That guy's voice is by far one of the most annoying sounds to ever plague this planet. I guess, however, since Neil Pert is such a great drummer, I should go buy an album... I'll go pick up a Dream Theater album as well. I hear they are great musicians.

11-22-2002, 02:06 AM	#12 (permalink)
somecleric Registered User Join Date: Mar 2002 Posts: 121 -1 Internets	I'm just trying to provide some balance. I'll concede Rush are sometimes alright, but reading these boards, you'd think they were the second coming of The Beatles. You think they're the best band ever? Fine, but I think you're a moron who needs to listen to some actual good albums. Like, you know, anything The Ramones ever released, Closer and Unknown Pleasures from Joy Division, any of the 4 real Velvet Underground albums, Revolver, Ziggy Stardust, Low, Heroes, Aftermath, Exile On Main Street, Let It Be, Tim, It Was Hot We Stayed In The Water, The Glow Pt II, Marquee Moon, Suicide, Second Suicide, Nevermind, Blacklisted, Violator, Pet Sounds, Smiley Smile, Mezzanine, Dummy, Fear of Fours, Free All Angels, Parallel Lines, More Songs About Buildings And Food, Loveless, Isn't Anything, Music Has The Right To Children, Born To Run, Oklahoma, Island Row, Life Is Full Of Possibilities, Come Clean, Let's Get Free, Return Of The Durutti Column, Endless Summer, Le Jardin de Heavenly, Grace, Sings, London Calling, Exile To Guyville, She Hangs Brightly, Lonesome Crowded West, Yesterday Was Dramatic Today Is OK, From Her To Eternity, Let Love In, The Birthday Party, I Walk The Line, Doolittle, Surfer Rosa, Red Headed Stranger, The Bends, OK Computer, Jamboree, Country Life, Siren, Dub Housing, The Tenement Year, Metal Box, Serge Gainsbourg & Jane Birkin, Vu de l'Exterieur, Ágætis Byrjun, Good Morning Spider, Mass Romantic, Rain Dogs, Swordfishtrombones and Everyone Who Pretended To Like Me Is Gone. Wow, that was a long list, and I'm going to be kicking myself every 5 minutes or so for the next few days, remembering albums I should have included. Clearly, I'm not married to the 3 minute pop song, although it holds a special place in my heart. I have no problem with experimentalism (see: Suicide, Sigur Ros, Can, Pere Ubu, Tom Waits, The Velvet Underground, The Beach Boys), just when it's boring and uninspiring. You think Rush are the best band ever? Fine, convince me. No crap about 'you have to ______ to appreciate it', no 'you just don't get it' and no 'lol, u sux'. Give me one reason Rush have released a better album than any of those I listed.

11-22-2002, 02:10 AM	#13 (permalink)
twistidd Banned Join Date: Nov 2002 Location: Houston Posts: 43 +0 Internets	... but dude listen to that drum roll.

11-22-2002, 03:39 PM	#15 (permalink)
Merauk Fires of Heaven Member Join Date: Feb 2002 Posts: 290 -1 Internets	Can't believe nobody listed the obvious answer as to why Rush sucks. They are from Canada, nuff said.