Rush - Clockwork Angels is now online!

kidgloves2

Just not as strong as Rush of yesteryear

I agree. They're simply not the band they used to be. Over the years, they just became much more song-oriented, and CA is a song-oriented concept album. I was thinking about this just yesterday...there used to be entire songs w/o choruses - Red Barchetta, Natural Science, The Trees, Camera Eye, etc. Those songs wandered their own paths, and they've not written that type of stuff in a long, long time. It is what it is, as the man says. But that's the kind of stuff that made Rush RUSH. You know?

Sparky

 
I duuno...I don't feel The Garden like a lot here do, but I DO feel Clockwork Angels (the song) to a huge degree. As far as Rush piano songs go, Available Light whips on The Garden, but maybe that's just me. 

 
I'm with you on that one. I don't really get what so many of you others find so special about The Garden. As far as the quieter songs on CA go, I vastly prefer Halo Effect.
 
I'm not with you on your other post, though. While it's true they haven't strayed from the typical verse-chorus-verses-chorus-bridge-chorus formula for the most part in years, I don't see that as a negative thing. Nor as a positive thing, either. I just don't care about how a song is structured as long as it captivates me. And that's what they still do. *I* think CA is full of hooks, be it vocal melodies, guitar riffs, bass lines, solos, drum fills or whatsoever. Some only crept up on me after repeated listens, but quite a lot of them didn't take all that long.

 There is an 80's type of flow to the record and yes these songs stick in your head and won't let go. CA is full of hooks. Might want to give it more listens because this seems to be a record that even those that aren't crazy at first come around on. I thought the same thing on my first listen and before long the vocal melodies and everything else just made sense. It is a brilliant record.

I have the day off and the house to myself. I'm such a die hard Rush fan I've played Clockwork about 5 times in a row. As soon as the album stops I start it all over again. True, it's a grower. There are still songs I don't care for though. The hooks are just different kinds of hooks than they used to do. The thing is, I never had to do this with their older albums. I was blown away the first time through. I remember when I was little and hearing Hemispheres for the first time. It was like a movie for the ears. I remember hearing Natural Science for the first time. It raised my IQ a few points! It flooded my brain with chemicals. It made the world more clear. And it still does it after all these years.
 
I like clockwork, I just don't "love" it.
 
Who thinks Steve Wilson should produce Rush's next record?
 
 
 
 

My dream is for Eno to produce RUSH. 
But the fact is they're comfortable with Nick so I'm sure if there is another album they'll have him do it again. 
 
 
Would be nice if they got The Caveman to be the engineer though. 
Nothing against Chycki but maybe Kevin could develop the sound a bit differently like he did with CP. 

Eno could be good. He has to understand Rush though. I'm curious if he likes Rush. Mylo Xyloto was a little hot.

dunno kids this album is a monster - sitting outside all day listened to it 6 times and I can't get it out of my head (the whole thing as one journey) _ at this stage in the game I can't get my head around how they pulled this together. Maybe it is just speaking to me at this stage in my life. Not sure what it is, never expected a Ruch release to hit me this hard again but here it is :)

Richard Chuyki only recorded the album. Nic actually mixed it. Would of preferred Richard to mix it as I loved what he did with the VT remix tracks

presto123
 
Feedback? You can't be serious. I would like to forget that even happened. Plus SnA isn't even in the same ballpark as CA.

 
I am totally serious. Obviously, Feedback would be the weakest in that run for a number of reasons, but I love it just the same.
I'd still put anything Rush has done in the last 10 years up against anything they've ever recorded. That said, the objectives for any Rush era you'd want to consider are different.

"Here come the opinion police! Only one sided opinions allowed eh?"  

How is it possible to have a two sided opinion?

When I heard it the first time after the fanpack arrived about 10 days ago, I barely got through the first listen the mix was so bad.
For me, it gets better with each listen and I can't get enough of it.
 
 
I still think the mid-range is mud (not sure how these things get signed off on), but I'm not going to let that stop it from kicking my ass (just like I don't let the sonic disaster that is Vapor Trails get in the way of kicking my ass.)
 
I've noted it and moved on.
 
Your mileage may vary.

 Lets just agree that every Rush fan has a different fav than the next Rush fan. There is plenty of great stuff for us to enjoy. I literally love every record although some more than others. A lot of times it just depends on what mood I'm in. I give thanks that the band that inspired me to be a musician is still around. They literally changed my life:) I wish I could shake their hands and thank them for this.

presto123


 Lets just agree that every Rush fan has a different fav than the next Rush fan. There is plenty of great stuff for us to enjoy. I literally love every record although some more than others. A lot of times it just depends on what mood I'm in. I give thanks that the band that inspired me to be a musician is still around. They literally changed my life:) I wish I could shake their hands and thank them for this.

Could not agree with you more with this!!! But if I was ever lucky enough to meet them, I would probably die before I got there!

kidgloves2

 
Who thinks Steve Wilson should produce Rush's next record? 

I'd love that. Alex did the guitar solo for Anesthetize and Neil has stated he likes Gavin's drumming.
If I personally knew Geddy, Alex or Neil I'd wink them at Steven's direction  
 
Not saying that Steven is the best but he knows Rush like the back of his hands and I sure do like his production style personally; mixing, mastering... everything. 

kidgloves2

The thing is, I never had to do this with their older albums. I was blown away the first time through. I remember when I was little and hearing Hemispheres for the first time. It was like a movie for the ears. 

I remember hearing Hemispheres for the first time and not liking the title track at all. Different strings, I guess.

In my experience an album that takes some time to absorb stands the test of time
better than an album you love on the first listen. Not in all cases but in the majority.
I spun this several more times over the weekend. I love it. Gets better every listen.
 

Loving the album

kidgloves2

Aelon


What a wussy society we've turned into.  Seriously!  The boys have given us this amazing album, and yet we sit here and argue over the mix.  Stupid.  A Rush version of "Never Enough".  Be glad these guys ever existed to give you music their in the first place.  I'm tired of the asshole bickering.  If you don't like it, don't listen.  If you do, listen!  As for me, I love the album, and don't need to hear Monday morning quarterbacking from people who have not been in a band for 38 years.  

Here come the opinion police! Only one sided opinions allowed eh?

As a Rush fan for over 25 years and someone who invested personal time to listen to the Clockwork Angels 3 time... I will give my opinion. Last I knew you don't have to be in a band for 38 years to like music.

Pros:
1. Great Lyrics as usual
2. Some catchy memorable moments. I especially like the mood change on the title track at 1:07.
3. Good energy...driving bass lines and drum grooves.

Cons:
1. Production is annoying. It hurts to listen to, even at low volumes. It's clear some people are more sensitive to this than others.
2. Like Snakes and Arrows, A lot of Clockwork is forgettable. There are a lot of reasons for this. Often times the melody isn't there. It seems Geddy is more a story teller than a singer. Or he recycles the same melodies over and over and the songs blur for me. Don't get me wrong, sometimes melody is there. And when it is it's great.
3. This next opinion is very personal. I'm a guitar player. Rush got me into playing guitar. I used to listen to old Rush and I couldn't wait to figure out how to play Alex's parts. Alex's guitar work was always so memorable and perfectly planned out. I used to be in school and watch the clock, waiting to get home and learn riffs. Nothing on this album is calling me like that. I thought maybe I'm just getting old. Then I checked that thought at the door and realized I love learning new Radiohead riffs.
4. I feel they got good at creating "filler"

Again, I like a lot of the album. There might be a few riffs I want to learn.  I will spin it a few more times. Then it probably goes back on the shelf next to S&A. (I still love "Hope" from S&A, and it was a great song to learn on guitar) Gone are the days when 100% of a rush album is amazing. Yet, I will take something over Nothing.

Except for one thing.  That isn't what is being complained about (at least not me).  I wouldn't even be posting in this thread if the comments were what you are saying.  All that is valid and fair, and interesting to read.  But there are some here (and thank GOD we haven't gotten to the graphs and charts yet) that are taking it to the next level and ascerting their "opinions" as hard fact:  that the sound is wrong, and a mistake and something that was supposed to be (as opposed to possibly could have in the world of all possibilities) something different.   Anyone can say "I would have made different choices", because that is what art is, a series of choices intended to make some statement (whatever that statement is).  But no, we've got to sit with so-called experts telling the rest of us how "wrong" this is, as if there is some checklist that forgot to be completed.  If one doesn't like it, fair enough.  Move on. But I'm with the "the incessant complaining is REALLY annoying" crowd.  

Sparky

kidgloves2

Just not as strong as Rush of yesteryear

I agree. They're simply not the band they used to be. Over the years, they just became much more song-oriented, and CA is a song-oriented concept album. I was thinking about this just yesterday...there used to be entire songs w/o choruses - Red Barchetta, Natural Science, The Trees, Camera Eye, etc. Those songs wandered their own paths, and they've not written that type of stuff in a long, long time. It is what it is, as the man says. But that's the kind of stuff that made Rush RUSH. You know?

Or, maybe, you're not the listener you used to be? (I guess more correctly, it would be "you still are the listener you used to be")?
 
I'm of the opinoin that "music produced by the three guys that comprise Rush" is the stuff that made/makes Rush.  But that's just me.

It's a flaw and it's there, enough said on that. It's not going away just because of your opinions on the finer point of art, sorry.

Gotta say, there are some very catchy deliveries by Geddy on this album, he's a better singer now than he's ever been in the studio.

I'm just giggling at how good the album is.   I can't remember the last time a Rush album made me *literally* giggle with delight.  
 
I'm just having a tough time picking out a favorite.   I've been a fan since Moving Pictures, and I can honestly say that I'm finding *nothing* that is "forgettable" about this album at all.  (just things that havn't sunk in yet)
 
For me, I'm having the feeling about this album that kidgloves described about Hemispheres.   It is like a "movie for the mind".    I absolutely can't get enough of it.   
 
It's too soon to tell, but I'm just shocked at how good this album is.  

The Fish


It's a flaw and it's there, enough said on that. It's not going away just because of your opinions on the finer point of art, sorry.

 
I'm lost.  I don't know how you can say that.  You calling it a flaw doesn't make it so.  Jean Luc Picard calling it a flaw doesn't make it so.  ONLY Geddy, Neil, and Alex can say that, and I don't think they've weighed in on that topic yet (like they did on Vapor Trails). 

You see, Geddy, Neil and Alex deferred a lot of duties, and more hands in the pot than just them.
If you look at the tunes in Audacity, the top of the wave form is cut off at some of the louder parts of the album, it creates (if you were here I'd describe it as a farting effect, wait I just did), distortion that's not the result of the performance, but rather someone's post production choices. I know Geddy did the mix down, so maybe it's his doing, maybe it's someone else, but it is a flaw. 
Somebody around here a while back started a thread with 4 or 5 youtube videos with some studio guru explaining brick walling, what it looks like on a wave form, and the end result. 

I understand what "brickwalling" is, and I understand the wave forms.  Effects are added on purpose in post-production all the time.  Adding disortion then or earlier is still an artistic choice.   How is purposefully clipping a piece of music any different than, say, David Lee Roth overloading his microphone on "Everybody Wants Some"?  Or putting a completely atonal, in my opinion, wholly out of place solo in a song like "Lucky Man"?  That's what makes ELP not the Kingston Trio. 
 
I come from a different school than you, is all.  If Geddy Lee sat at the mixing console and pushed every fader to 11 so that the disk was white noise, I would give him the benefit of the doubt that that is what he wanted us to hear.  That a wave form is "clipped" does not, in and of itself, make it a "flaw".  There is no law that says that that can't - or shouldn't - be done on purpose.  By your defintion, Paul Stanley's mirror guitar is a "flaw" because the mirror that is glued to the front of his guitar is "broken". 
 
Personally?  I'm arguing this not to be a dick, but because I LIKE my favorite artists to push boundaries.  I LIKE the energy that sometimes comes across in these recordings.  To me, Grace Under Pressure is wimpy, and tame.  It's pristine, but it's boring.  I LIKE that Geddy Lee might potentially be saying "Fuck you!" to all the people crying about "clipped wave forms" and what not. Isn't that what art is all about?  NO RULES?  Isn't it kind of neat that at 60 or whatever, those guys are still willing to blaze their own trail in whatever form that might take?

I'm so glad that I don't have to evaluate waveforms and charts in order to enjoy an album. I don't know about anybody else, but for *ME*, I just pop the CD into whatever player I choose, hit the play button and enjoy. 
 
I don't need a waveform, chart or some guy named Hoffman to tell me whether or not the album is good.  *I* like what I hear and thats all that matters. 

Stadler


I understand what "brickwalling" is, and I understand the wave forms.  Effects are added on purpose in post-production all the time.  Adding disortion then or earlier is still an artistic choice.   How is purposefully clipping a piece of music any different than, say, David Lee Roth overloading his microphone on "Everybody Wants Some"?  Or putting a completely atonal, in my opinion, wholly out of place solo in a song like "Lucky Man"?  That's what makes ELP not the Kingston Trio. 

I come from a different school than you, is all.  If Geddy Lee sat at the mixing console and pushed every fader to 11 so that the disk was white noise, I would give him the benefit of the doubt that that is what he wanted us to hear.  That a wave form is "clipped" does not, in and of itself, make it a "flaw".  There is no law that says that that can't - or shouldn't - be done on purpose.  By your defintion, Paul Stanley's mirror guitar is a "flaw" because the mirror that is glued to the front of his guitar is "broken". 

Personally?  I'm arguing this not to be a dick, but because I LIKE my favorite artists to push boundaries.  I LIKE the energy that sometimes comes across in these recordings.  To me, Grace Under Pressure is wimpy, and tame.  It's pristine, but it's boring.  I LIKE that Geddy Lee might potentially be saying "Fuck you!" to all the people crying about "clipped wave forms" and what not. Isn't that what art is all about?  NO RULES?  Isn't it kind of neat that at 60 or whatever, those guys are still willing to blaze their own trail in whatever form that might take?

I'm pretty sure it's not Geddy Lee trying to revolutionize modern rock, because this issue is fairly common in music currently. It's how records are "supposed" to sound because that's what the competing market is doing. 
 
Look, I don't have a reputation for being an audiophile around here, and I'm not trying to be overbearing on the point, but just because you accept that it was a conscious choice that was signed off doesn't change anything from where I'm standing. I think most of your comparisons aren't really on topic, because Kiss sucks and the others are performance oriented and not affected in post production.
 
I'm not unable to enjoy the music because of this, but from a technical standpoint it's at least a discussed issue if not a flaw, i'll let you choose the phrasing. I'm surprised they made those choices. How's that?
 

I will say that the album is ...growing on me. I spun it twice in the last two days. I like the nasty riff at the start of The Anarchist, it's been stuck in my head.

http://www.rollingstone.com/music/albumreviews/clockwork-angels-20120618
 
not that anyone cares but I saw this and laughed..
 
"Nickelback-like meathead modern-rock production actually adds power to these ancient masters' gnomic turgidity:"

Read more: http://www.rollingstone.com/music/albumreviews/clockwork-angels-20120618#ixzz1yAfq9Jvj

Speeding Wheels


I'm so glad that I don't have to evaluate waveforms and charts in order to enjoy an album. I don't know about anybody else, but for *ME*, I just pop the CD into whatever player I choose, hit the play button and enjoy. 

I don't need a waveform, chart or some guy named Hoffman to tell me whether or not the album is good.  *I* like what I hear and thats all that matters. 

+1
 
Some folks need to tear out the introduction...
 
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wOENu0fK0uM
 

Speeding Wheels


I'm so glad that I don't have to evaluate waveforms and charts in order to enjoy an album. I don't know about anybody else, but for *ME*, I just pop the CD into whatever player I choose, hit the play button and enjoy. 

I don't need a waveform, chart or some guy named Hoffman to tell me whether or not the album is good.  *I* like what I hear and thats all that matters. 

This is exactly how I feel as well. 

I'm with you guys, if it sounds good to me I dont care about anything else.

If you don't notice or care it's not an issue. That's established. 

 Why are we still talking about this? I had a small issue with the mix and re-EQ'd it and it sounds not just good but great.

 oh..........and I read a review last night that called CA the best of Rush's career.(from a guy that didn't like SnA) The stellar reviews keep rolling in.

The Fish


I'm pretty sure it's not Geddy Lee trying to revolutionize modern rock, because this issue is fairly common in music currently. It's how records are "supposed" to sound because that's what the competing market is doing. 

Look, I don't have a reputation for being an audiophile around here, and I'm not trying to be overbearing on the point, but just because you accept that it was a conscious choice that was signed off doesn't change anything from where I'm standing. I think most of your comparisons aren't really on topic, because Kiss sucks and the others are performance oriented and not affected in post production.

I'm not unable to enjoy the music because of this, but from a technical standpoint it's at least a discussed issue if not a flaw, i'll let you choose the phrasing. I'm surprised they made those choices. How's that?

By the way, not overbearing; I could talk about this all day, as you may be able to tell.  At the risk of sounding "pedantic" (because that's not what this is about for me) that is fine.  Not because I want you to say things a certain way (I could give a shit).  To me, it is not even close to saying the same thing a different way.  If you see it that way, fair enough, but while I readily concede that it is a "discussed issue" that is very very different from being a "flaw".  Cookie monster vocals are a discussed issue, but they are not a flaw.  Bad artistic decision, maybe, but not a flaw. 
 
Oh, and Kiss rules.  :) 

presto123


 Why are we still talking about this? I had a small issue with the mix and re-EQ'd it and it sounds not just good but great.

Blame me.  Because for whatever reason, I have a problem with this false assumption that there is a "right" and a "wrong" with this kind of stuff.  And I think it is fun and interesting to debate.  And because I am stuck on boring conference calls all day and this is a way of not snoring into the mute button. 

Stadler is to blame for keeping a debate going? NOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!! I find that hard to believe!
 

Cookie monster vocals are a performance thing.. the crux of this for me is somewhere in that nugget. 

I'd have no trouble arguing that Cookie Monster vocals are a horrible mistake. Not a choice; most certainly a mistake.