# What's wrong with Rush? **URL:** \ **Category:** Cafe Society\ **Created:** [November 25, 2004, 1:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whats-wrong-with-rush/276621 "2004-11-25T13:17:30Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 3
**Author:** ![Denis](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/5e9695/32.png) [@Denis](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Denis)\ **Post date:** [November 26, 2004, 3:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whats-wrong-with-rush/276621/41 "2004-11-26T15:55:24Z")
What’s wrong with Rush? Nothing. Some people don’t like what they do and make an issue of it. I’m a Rush fan who used to get pissed off by this. Now I find it amusing. ---
**Author:** ![WordMan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/e8c25b/32.png) [@WordMan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/WordMan)\ **Post date:** [November 26, 2004, 4:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whats-wrong-with-rush/276621/42 "2004-11-26T16:22:17Z")
> [@Lars Aruns](#): > > I’d also like to comment on the definition of rock as the three-cord style concerned with teen angst, rebellion and lust. Rock started like that, granted, but who said that it should stay like that? it’s like saying that classical music should have remained the entertainment of the princes and therefore we should dump, I dunno, Carl Orff or Modest Mussorgsky. Rock, like classical music, can be used as a means of expressing much more than what they started for, so what’s wrong in doing it? Furthermore, paraphrasing what another doper (sorry, can’t recall who or where) said in some other thread, there’s a limit on how much you can write about going to Fresno to meet with your posse, or how you met that hot girl and rocked with her all night long. Well, since I made the statement regarding the definition of rock listed above, I’ll respond. Yes musical styles evolve - look at jazz moving from early stride/dixieland beginnings, through swing to bebop, hardbop, cool and free. Rock has clearly evolved, too - from rockabilly/R&B though blues-based rock, hard rock, punk, etc. With rock, it seems to grow layers of complexity and then, about once a decade or so, it explodes and is stripped down to a simpler form again. 50’s - from simple early rock up through Motown Wall of Sound and Beatles Sgt Pepper production art pieces - blown up by simpler blues-based rock in the 60’s 70’s - blues-based rock evolved into layered prog rock and “corporate” rock and was blown up by punk 80’s - hair metal was blown up by grunge. New wave got too overblown and was blown up by techno and, oh, acid house and trip hop…and of course early hip hop enters the picture and has been going through similar cycles. So it seems to me that the essential aspect of rock is its return to simplicity and, yes, three chord songs about rebellion and lust. If that is the case - and IMHO it is - then Rush, at least initially, represents a band that was at the tail end of a cycle right before rock returned to its roots. This is all a way of agreeing with posters who say they aren’t critics’ darlings - I think this is why. I am not a huge Rush fan, but find no need to be dismissive. They have accomplished a lot in their careers and each is very talented on their instrument. And they have endured. They have a rabid fanbase - I can think of many of my music oriented friends who are absolutely nuts over them - and play to that crowd while they are also moving their music along. Bottom line? They are a acquired taste that a ton of people have acquired - they aren’t mainstream rock, don’t aspire to be and have had a great run… ---
**Author:** ![Raygun99](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/6f9a4e/32.png) [@Raygun99](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Raygun99)\ **Post date:** [November 26, 2004, 4:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whats-wrong-with-rush/276621/43 "2004-11-26T16:31:02Z")
> [@spooje](#): > > And that makes them inferior, in your eyes? The title of the thread is “What’s wrong with Rush?” If you can’t take people being critical of them, then avert your eyes. ---
**Author:** ![Malthus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/85f322/32.png) [@Malthus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Malthus)\ **Post date:** [November 26, 2004, 4:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whats-wrong-with-rush/276621/44 "2004-11-26T16:36:25Z")
Heh. What I find really interesting is that people have such strong views on Rush - seems this is one band people either love or hate, and both sides are certain they are right. 😃 [For the record, I like them a lot.] ---
**Author:** ![ultrafilter](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/3d9bf3/32.png) [@ultrafilter](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ultrafilter)\ **Post date:** [November 26, 2004, 5:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whats-wrong-with-rush/276621/45 "2004-11-26T17:10:34Z")
> [@Satasha](#): > > If you want to talk about mining trends from the 70’s you could easily criticize most genres, including punk, metal and electronica. Not really. All three of those genres have moved pretty far beyond their 70s roots. Me, I’m not a huge Rush fan, but I like 'em. As far as their influence goes, the influence of prog rock on metal pretty much can’t be overstated, so as the first (relatively) heavy prog band, I’d say they were pretty important in the overall direction at least one genre took. ---
**Author:** ![Gadfly](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/aeb1de/32.png) [@Gadfly](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Gadfly)\ **Post date:** [November 26, 2004, 7:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whats-wrong-with-rush/276621/46 "2004-11-26T19:14:02Z")
> [@spooje](#): > > And yet, they’ve been recording (and selling records) and touring for 30 fucking years. > > Get over yourselves. No one is asking you to like Rush. I get that you don’t. But a lot of folks do. Rush, and some other prog-rock bands, have stood the test of time. Which is something that cannot be said about a lot of acts that have gotton a lot of press. Just standing “the test of time” doesn’t make a band great. Again, the Pixies, who I was just blown away by, have been around for more than 20 years - but if you really like Rush and their business, you’d probably hate them. > [@sleestak](#): > > And Gadfly for an example of a " coherent, powerful song" check out "Losing It’ off of Signals. Amazing lyrics and extremely powerful. Will do. > [@Satasha\[/quote](#): > > Saying Rush can’t “compose for shit” simply because they don’t write concise songs, is like saying Bach can’t “compose for shit” for the same reason. It is much harder to write a 15 minute long instrumental piece with 17 sections that fit together than it is to write a 4 minute pop song with maybe 3 or 4 parts at most. Music does not have to be concise. And “powerful” is completely subjective. I love their (old) long works and find them very “powerful.” Please. Note that my dislike of Rush doesn’t say much about my taste in music as a whole. Ever heard Spem In Alium, by Thomas Tallis? Brilliant, brilliant work. It’s quite long, and it’s also perhaps the most complex piece of choral music ever created. It’s coherent, but that’s perhaps not the best word to separate it from Rush. It’s memorable, and it brings out so many emotions within me. When I hear a Rush song being complex, I think, “Oh, those wacky Rush dudes. They can sure wail, or whatnot.” When I hear all of the incredible details in Spem In Alium, I’m too busy being in euphoria to think much of anything. ---
**Author:** ![by-tor](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/by-tor/32/266_2.png) [@by-tor](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/by-tor)\ **Post date:** [November 26, 2004, 8:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whats-wrong-with-rush/276621/47 "2004-11-26T20:01:57Z")
Gadfly, can you possibly get any more subjective about this with words like memorable, powerful and euphoria. Please. This is so tiring. Like what you want but don’t pretend you are objective with words like coherent. Ultafilter, I disagree. I find Greenday quite derivitive of the Sex Pistols to give one example. Black Sabbath are constantly mined in metal in my opinion. ---
**Author:** ![vl\_mungo](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/v/bc8723/32.png) [@vl\_mungo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/vl_mungo)\ **Post date:** [November 26, 2004, 8:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whats-wrong-with-rush/276621/48 "2004-11-26T20:15:20Z")
To directly answer the OP… **Geddy Lee’s voice.** For similar reasons I also dislike **Uriah Heep** ---
**Author:** ![ultrafilter](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/3d9bf3/32.png) [@ultrafilter](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ultrafilter)\ **Post date:** [November 26, 2004, 8:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whats-wrong-with-rush/276621/49 "2004-11-26T20:19:00Z")
> [@Satasha](#): > > Ultafilter, I disagree. I find Greenday quite derivitive of the Sex Pistols to give one example. Black Sabbath are constantly mined in metal in my opinion. I hear a lot of difference between Green Day and the Sex Pistols. It’s pretty clear that there’s influence there, but I can’t see how you’d fairly call them derivative. And–although I’ll probably lose whatever metal cred I’ve gained here for saying this–I really don’t think that Black Sabbath is as influential as everyone makes them out to be. ---
**Author:** ![Gadfly](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/aeb1de/32.png) [@Gadfly](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Gadfly)\ **Post date:** [November 26, 2004, 8:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whats-wrong-with-rush/276621/50 "2004-11-26T20:30:21Z")
> [@Satasha](#): > > Gadfly, can you possibly get any more subjective about this with words like memorable, powerful and euphoria. Please. This is so tiring. Like what you want but don’t pretend you are objective with words like coherent. > Ultafilter, I disagree. I find Greenday quite derivitive of the Sex Pistols to give one example. Black Sabbath are constantly mined in metal in my opinion. Well, art is always subjective. That’s the nature of the beast. I **loathe** Rush. Other people love them. But I have the right to speak about how I dislike their music, just like you have the right to speak up about liking them. ---
**Author:** ![Miller](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/miller/32/481_2.png) [@Miller](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Miller)\ **Post date:** [November 26, 2004, 9:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whats-wrong-with-rush/276621/51 "2004-11-26T21:30:04Z")
> [@sleestak](#): > > Well, to answer _Miller_ 's question about bands that have been influenced by Rush here is a short list. > > Queensryche > Dream Theater > Helmet > Slaughter::boggle:: > Great White::another boggle:: > Skid Row > and I believe I have a Guitar Player magazine around here somewhere that has Pantera listing Rush as a major influence. Well, that’s just a _pile_ o’ bands I don’t like! Thanks for the info, though. > [@satasha](#): > > Saying Rush can’t “compose for shit” simply because they don’t write concise songs, is like saying Bach can’t “compose for shit” for the same reason. It is much harder to write a 15 minute long instrumental piece with 17 sections that fit together than it is to write a 4 minute pop song with maybe 3 or 4 parts at most. Music does not have to be concise. And “powerful” is completely subjective. I love their (old) long works and find them very “powerful.” It sure is hard. Too hard for Rush, if the stuff I’ve heard is any measure. > [@](#): > > Gadfly, can you possibly get any more subjective about this with words like memorable, powerful and euphoria. Please. This is so tiring. Like what you want but don’t pretend you are objective with words like coherent. You want to talk tiring? What I find tiring is that you can’t have threads like this without someone voicing the complaint you just made. _Of course_ **Gadfly** ’s opinion is subjective. So is yours. So is every post in this thread. It’s art, for the love of fuck. Objectivity never even enters into it. The idea that “15 minute long instrumental piece with 17 sections” is better than a “4 minute pop song with maybe 3 or 4 parts at most” is itself entirely subjective. Complexity does not equal quality. Popularity does not equal quality. Longevity does not equal quality. The only way to measure quality is to experience the work in question and ask yourself, “Do I like this?” I’ve listened to Rush. I don’t like what I’ve heard. They are not a good band. Simple as that. ---
**Author:** ![by-tor](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/by-tor/32/266_2.png) [@by-tor](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/by-tor)\ **Post date:** [November 26, 2004, 10:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whats-wrong-with-rush/276621/52 "2004-11-26T22:02:09Z")
Damn! Getting the beatdown here. ---
**Author:** ![yBeayf](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/y/e274bd/32.png) [@yBeayf](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/yBeayf)\ **Post date:** [November 26, 2004, 10:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whats-wrong-with-rush/276621/53 "2004-11-26T22:46:56Z")
Some other bands that have listed Rush as huge influences: Primus Metallica (granted, their latter-day stuff isn’t too good, but back in the 80s when they were making glorious music Rush was one of their big inspirations. Geddy, Alex, and Neil are thanked in the credits on _Master of Puppets_). Meshuggah Tool Soundgarden Nine Inch Nails Opeth Foo Fighters Oh, and **Miller** … > [@](#): > > I’ve listened to Rush. I don’t like what I’ve heard. Ok, fine. This is a subjective opinion. Nothing wrong with that. > [@](#): > > They are not a good band. Simple as that. But now you’re making an objective statement, and backing it up with subjective opinion. I say that Rush is a good band. You say that they are not. Who is correct? Do any objective criteria exist for determing the quality of a band, especially when they inspire such polarized opinions? ---
**Author:** ![Purd\_Werfect](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/e47c2d/32.png) [@Purd\_Werfect](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Purd_Werfect)\ **Post date:** [November 26, 2004, 10:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whats-wrong-with-rush/276621/54 "2004-11-26T22:58:52Z")
I have nothing against prog-rock, and I think that as a style it’s too often trashed. But a lot of it I don’t care for and Rush falls into that camp, as does Yes. With Rush, it’s the vocals and (sometimes) the lyrics. I’m speaking primarily of their earlier albums, as I’ve only heard radio cuts from their later efforts. In the later stuff I’ve heard, I don’t find the music at all visceral. I can’t wait for the next Porcupine Tree release though, and it’s about time for me to pick up Selling England by the Pound on CD, as I only have it on vinyl. ---
**Author:** ![ultrafilter](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/3d9bf3/32.png) [@ultrafilter](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ultrafilter)\ **Post date:** [November 26, 2004, 11:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whats-wrong-with-rush/276621/55 "2004-11-26T23:05:32Z")
> [@yBeayf](#): > > Do any objective criteria exist for determing the quality of a band, especially when they inspire such polarized opinions? How about influence, sales, longevity, and musical skill? There are also less objective criteria like pop appeal, artistic merit, and the ability to make complex, coherent music. ---
**Author:** ![Gadfly](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/aeb1de/32.png) [@Gadfly](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Gadfly)\ **Post date:** [November 26, 2004, 11:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whats-wrong-with-rush/276621/56 "2004-11-26T23:35:24Z")
> [@Satasha](#): > > Damn! Getting the beatdown here. Well, no beatdown intended. We simply disagree about music. 🙂 ---
**Author:** ![yBeayf](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/y/e274bd/32.png) [@yBeayf](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/yBeayf)\ **Post date:** [November 27, 2004, 12:40am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whats-wrong-with-rush/276621/57 "2004-11-27T00:40:12Z")
> [@](#): > > How about influence, sales, longevity, and musical skill? Well, then, Rush is doing pretty well, I would say. ---
**Author:** ![Miller](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/miller/32/481_2.png) [@Miller](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Miller)\ **Post date:** [November 27, 2004, 1:02am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whats-wrong-with-rush/276621/58 "2004-11-27T01:02:30Z")
> [@yBeayf](#): > > But now you’re making an objective statement… No, I’m not. “Rush is a bad band,” can never, under any circumstances, be an objective statement. It is impossible to make an objective statement using purely subjective criteria, such as “good,” “bad,” or any synonyms thereof. > [@](#): > > I say that Rush is a good band. You say that they are not. Who is correct? We both are correct, obviously, as we are both relating our subjective interpretations. > [@](#): > > Do any objective criteria exist for determing the quality of a band, especially when they inspire such polarized opinions? No. There are no objective criteria in art. ---
**Author:** ![Raygun99](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/6f9a4e/32.png) [@Raygun99](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Raygun99)\ **Post date:** [November 27, 2004, 1:11am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whats-wrong-with-rush/276621/59 "2004-11-27T01:11:44Z")
> [@yBeayf](#): > > But now you’re making an objective statement, and backing it up with subjective opinion. I say that Rush is a good band. You say that they are not. Who is correct? Do any objective criteria exist for determing the quality of a band, especially when they inspire such polarized opinions? I think you are having problems inserting the assumed words, “I think” in front of his statement. ---
**Author:** ![yBeayf](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/y/e274bd/32.png) [@yBeayf](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/yBeayf)\ **Post date:** [November 27, 2004, 1:47am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whats-wrong-with-rush/276621/60 "2004-11-27T01:47:17Z")
> [@](#): > > I think you are having problems inserting the assumed words, “I think” in front of his statement. Indeed. I try not to assume words are there unless I see them. It usually makes for less misunderstanding. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whats-wrong-with-rush/276621.md?page=2) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whats-wrong-with-rush/276621.md?page=4)