HDTenEightyP/NetNews huggingface dataset:
From: khiggins@nyx.cs.du.edu (Ken Higginson)
Subject: Re: Album bouts
X-Disclaimer: Nyx is a public access Unix system run by the University
	of Denver for the Denver community.  The University has neither
	control over nor responsibility for the opinions of users.
Organization: Nyx, Public Access Unix at U. of Denver Math/CS dept.
Date: Sun, 24 Jan 93 20:38:27 GMT

In article <1993Jan22.193925.3013@murdoch.acc.Virginia.EDU> fes9s@faraday.clas.Virginia.EDU (Howard Johnson's Got His Ho-Jo Workin') writes:
>Hm, well, HYF certainly sounds wonderful, IMO the best recorded album
>of theirs to date, in terms of quality of sound.  What it doesn't have
>is that youthful fire driving it along, although Force Ten comes close,
>in its own way.  That and the simpler attitude of "we gotta play this 
>live, guys" makes FBN, at least for me.  Hey, would you rather
>see By-Tor live these days or any of the other HYF stalwarts that
>have been on the last several tours??? I gotta go with the former.
>Ultimately, it's nice to compare the albums for their differences,
>but I just have a hell of hard time saying one is _better_ than the
>other.  Each has its moments.
>

Hmm, I just found a back issue of Playboy magazine at a book store, and in
there was a review of "Hold Your Fire"...  They rate their albums from 1
to 10, and the higest this album got was a couple of 5's...
 
What the hell do they know, anyway....  Rush _NEVER_ gets the credit they
deserve from the press, unless it's in a guitar magazine like Guitar
Player or GFTPM.  I remember reading a review in Rolling Stone where they
said "Presto" is too much like some Sting album....?!?!?
 
Don't you guys think Bytor is better on the "All The World's A Stage"
album?  I do..  I like the breakdown in the middle..where it get's quite. 
Are those synths or volume swells on Alex's guitar?
 

Newsgroups: alt.music.rush
From: cka52397@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu (Slartibartfast)
Subject: Re: The Pass
Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana
Date: Tue, 26 Jan 1993 02:29:25 GMT

In article <1k1mhlINN8ea@bigboote.WPI.EDU> steveso@wpi.WPI.EDU (Steven C Sousa) writes:
>In article <C1FG2L.3v3@csugrad.cs.vt.edu> mwilson@csugrad.cs.vt.edu (Zaphod Beeblebrox) writes:
>>Ever since the release of Presto, The Pass has been a special song to me.  I
>>don't think too much arguement could be done over the basic theme of the song,
>>but there is one little tid-bit that I'm not fully decisive about.  The final
>>line in the Lyrics notes on the CD is:
>> 
>>       Christ, what have you done?
>>
>>Now, I don't know about the rest of you, but it has been my personal opinion 
>>for some time now that Mr. Peart does not choose his words lightly.  I firmly
>>beleive that each and every word in his songs are there for a reason.  Now,
>>the word Christ here can have two meanings.  Christ can be used as a simple
>>exclamation, or it can be used as a noun.  I've come up with the theory that
>>Neil might be trying to blame Christ for starting the suicide thing.  
>>The verse previous to the one in question talks about a noble warrior who lost
>>the will to fight.  Could this be Jesus Christ who accepted his fate to die and
>>did not fight for his freedom or life?
>
>	I believe that Christ in this song is merely used as an exlaimation.
>I should admit that I am a Christian, and since Jesus was God, he could have
>easily saved his own life at any time. Therefore I believe it must have taken
>an incredible will to fight to remain in horrible pain and humiliation on the
>cross. The two lines, "Someone set a bad example/made surrender seem all
>right" are the only lines where I feel he could possibly be referring to Jesus,
>but nowhere in Christianity is Jesus's death referred to as suicide, and no
>mainstream Christian religion I have ever heard of has glorified suicide, so I
>must conclude that he uses the word Christ for emphasis only. I had never
>really considered the other possibility before now, however.
>
>						Steve Sousa

	I don't want to get into a flame war, or anything over religion, but
since Christ, according to Christianity at any rate, is/was God, how could he
suffer or feel pain?  I just don't understand how mere mortals such as us could
inflict pain upon God...  Any takers?  

	BTW, e-mail all flames to me, don't waste bandwidth..

	As an answer to the original question, I feel (IMHO) that there was no
reference to Christ in the spiritual sense, I think it is merely taking God's 
name in vain.  Your milage may vary.  :-)

-- 
 Chintan Amin  The University of Illinois, Urbana Champaign  c-amin1@uiuc.edu
  "Public speaking is very easy!" <-- Quayle 10/88  ;-)
  "Unfortunately, the people of Louisiana are not racists" <-- Quayle, 10/12/90
NeXTMail Accepted at cka52397@sumter.cso.uiuc.edu  Go Illini Holiday Bowl 1992
From: intruder@cats.ucsc.edu (Isaac N. Truder)
Newsgroups: alt.music.rush
Subject: Re: The meaning of "The Trees"
Date: 26 Jan 1993 04:52:56 GMT
Organization: University of California; Santa Cruz
NNTP-Posting-Host: am.ucsc.edu


 > >       Probably the fact that we have this increadible ability to 
 > >amongst ourselves, rather than against a common enemy.  The trees 
 > >felled by humans, after failing to band together...
 > 
 > I don't think so. The _trees_ passed a law that they must be kept
 > equal. If any humans _reduced_ (a la "kept equal", not _felled_)
 > _some_ trees it was presumably due to _their_ law. It's not that
 > the trees were fighting humans or something.

No, I agree with the other guy.  If I walked up to you on the street and
asked you, "Here's a quiz.  What do you do with hatchets, axes, and
saws?", you would probably answer, "Cut down trees".  I think that's
clearly the implication here.  "The trees are all kept equal" -- equally
stumps.
-- 
+------------------------------------------------------------------+
| Isaac Truder  <intruder@cats.ucsc.edu> | BLADDER CONTROL CENTRAL |
|      "The more you drive... the less intelligent you are."       |
+------------------------------------------------------------------+
Newsgroups: alt.music.rush
From: s92458km@sfc.keio.ac.jp (Kunio Muto)
Subject: Re: Dumb Question about Trees
Organization: Keio University Shonan Fujisawa Campus.
Date: Wed, 27 Jan 1993 06:33:56 GMT

	Hi, this is the kunedog, I've been reading this newsgroup once
in a while, but it's the first time for me to post here. 

	I've always thought that the trees in "the Trees" symbolized
England (the Oaks) and Canada(the Maples) and how Canada became in
equal relationships with England after becoming independent.... just
my opinion.... I don't want to start any flames... 


--
				The kunedog (s92458km@sfc.keio.ac.jp)
				Freshman, Keio Univ. SFC. 
				Faculty of Policy Management
From: jaeger@buphy.bu.edu (Gregg Jaeger)
Newsgroups: alt.music.rush
Subject: Re: Afterimage
Date: 21 Jan 93 06:29:22 GMT
Organization: Boston University Physics Department

In article <1993Jan21.041546.1220@galileo.cc.rochester.edu> jm012b@uhura.cc.rochester.edu (Jeffrey P. Moon) writes:

>... My favorite song on there
>has to be "Afterimage."

>... My question is this: is this song discuss
>death or the passage of time and leaving your friends behind? It could be
>easily interpreted as a eulogy for a friend who has passed on to another
>world...

>... Is there something that Geddy or any of the
>band members have said regarding the meaning of this work? 


Yes, it's written about the death of a friend who died in a motorcycle
accident...

Gregg


-- 
Gregg Jaeger (jaeger@buphy)  Dept. of Physics (and Philosophy), Boston Univ.
"You see, the quantum mechanical description is in terms of knowledge" -Peierls
"One can _not_ put the psi-function... in place of the... thing" -Schroedinger
                   _De gustibus non disputandum_, NOT!              (*
From: jm012b@uhura.cc.rochester.edu (Jeffrey P. Moon)
Newsgroups: alt.music.rush
Subject: Re: The meaning of "The Trees"
Date: 28 Jan 93 02:53:16 GMT
Organization: University of Rochester - Rochester, New York

In <C1I48K.Iqu@dartvax.dartmouth.edu> Timothy.J.Young@dartmouth.edu (Timothy J. Young) writes:

>  Someone e-mailed me and said this :

>     Oaks = U.S.  and     Maples = Canada

>I suppose the song could be taken to mean that the U.S. grabs all the
>light and treats Canada almost like a "child" or a protectorate.

>-Tim Young, Dartmouth College, Class of '96

	What? That is ridiculous... how can you say that the United States
oppresses Canada? I don't know of any tensions between the U.S. and Canada
that can be deemed as protectorate. Considering that the U.S.-Canadien
border is the world's longest border that is not protected by armed forces.
I'd say that the U.S. has no intentions to take Canada out of its
"Limelight."
-- 
Jeffrey Moon			* "And the trees are all keep equal,		
University of Rochester		*  By hatchet, ax, and saw..."
New York			*		- Rush, "The Trees"
From: jaeger@buphy.bu.edu (Gregg Jaeger)
Newsgroups: alt.music.rush
Subject: Re: The meaning of "The Trees"
Date: 27 Jan 93 17:40:02 GMT
Organization: Boston University Physics Department

In article <C1IrCB.LLx@fang.att.com> bcd@fang.att.com (Brendan Dwyer) writes:
>From article <108333@bu.edu>, by jaeger@buphy.bu.edu (Gregg Jaeger):

>I always thought this song was a negative comment about socialism.  The
>Maples form a union (traditional socialist organization) and force the
>haves (Oaks) to give (light) to the have-nots (Maples).  What do you think?

Sure, though that's a specific form of a more general tendency of
the less able to parasite on/be jealous of the more able. I wouldn't
characterize it so much as have vs. have not, since that is usually
understood to mean "have property" vs. "haven't property" which is
not the primary point which is ability. (IMO of course).


Gregg

-- 
Gregg Jaeger (jaeger@buphy)  Dept. of Physics (and Philosophy), Boston Univ.
"You see, the quantum mechanical description is in terms of knowledge" -Peierls
"One can _not_ put the psi-function... in place of the... thing" -Schroedinger
                   _De gustibus non disputandum_, NOT!
Newsgroups: alt.music.rush
From: moleface@next02cville.wam.umd.edu (Moleface)
Subject: Re: ALBUM BOUT #2
Organization: Workstations at Maryland, University of Maryland, College Park
Date: Mon, 25 Jan 1993 21:13:54 GMT

In article <1993Jan24.131005.10123@iscsvax.uni.edu>  
wipperma9340@iscsvax.uni.edu writes:
> Sorry Gregg.  Your arguments are interesting, but I will go on with the  
project
> regardless of your bitter dissent.
> 
> ALBUM BOUT #2
> 
> All the World's a Stage v. A Show of Glands . . . I mean Hands
> 
> My preference in #1:  Hold Your Fire.  As a matter of fact, it's may  
favorite
> album of all time- even though I'm comparing it to things that are  
completely
> different.  Mission= total genius; Tai Shan: cool; Prime Mover:  rocks;   
High
> Water: awesome; et al (insert praise here)
> 
> FBN is fine, but it's just too silly.  Rivendell should be banned.
> 
> Yours etc.,
> 
> The Analog Kid

Hard for me to say, since they have a policy of playing songs live almost  
exactly the way they do on the album.  I'd hafta say AtWaS, simply because  
they jam on it a bit more (although the new ending to "closer to the  
Heart" is great)
Moleface
Newsgroups: alt.music.rush
From: cka52397@uxa.cso.uiuc.edu (Slartibartfast)
Subject: Re: Digital vs. Analog
Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana
Date: Tue, 26 Jan 1993 19:59:30 GMT

In article <1k2fupINNjoo@darkstar.UCSC.EDU> intruder@cats.ucsc.edu (Isaac N. Truder) writes:
>
> > And as for the Digital vs Analog debate, I personally think Analog
> > is better for the following reasons:
> > 1)  With Digital (computer), the sound is either 1 or 0, while in
> > Analog (real
> >     life), sounds vary "infinitely"
>
>Mmmm, I guess I see what you're saying.  But the problem is, everybody I
>know plays their music through speakers.  Speakers are powered by
>electrical current, which is either on or off, 1 or 0.  Seems like a
>pretty good match, then, to me.

	I don't think so, Current is an analog signal, it can vary infinitely,
digital signals are on/off and only come with two different potentials, whereas
speakers recieve current through an amp that either takes an analog output from
the CD players digital to analog converter, or converts the CD player's digital
signal to analog inside the amp.  At any rate, the signal that the amp delivers
to the speakers is an analog signal.

	Not that I buy the original poster's first statement.  The Digital 
encoding system encodes every facet of the sound, and the analog systems
infinite variance justs muddles the sound.  An analogy (no pun intended) is
that the decoder, whether a person or a machine, must make a value-judgment/
or round, whereas with a Digital Signal, although more Bytes are needed to 
encode, the information is more precise, since there are only two possibilties
in every bit...
				IMHO

>| Isaac Truder  <intruder@cats.ucsc.edu> | BLADDER CONTROL CENTRAL |


-- 
 Chintan Amin  The University of Illinois, Urbana Champaign  c-amin1@uiuc.edu
  "Public speaking is very easy!" <-- Quayle 10/88  ;-)
  "Unfortunately, the people of Louisiana are not racists" <-- Quayle, 10/12/90
NeXTMail Accepted at cka52397@sumter.cso.uiuc.edu  Go Illini Holiday Bowl 1992
From: jaeger@buphy.bu.edu (Gregg Jaeger)
Newsgroups: alt.music.rush
Subject: Re: The meaning of "The Trees"
Date: 27 Jan 93 04:07:12 GMT
Organization: Boston University Physics Department

In article <1993Jan26.210414.10197@iscsvax.uni.edu> wipperman9340 writes:
>In article <1k3qruINN473@pandora.sdsu.edu>, misselt@trapper.sdsu.edu.sdsu.edu (Karl &) writes:

>>    There is no mention of humans at all in the song.  As your original post    
>> stated, it is an allegory for human behavior.

>The Trees are supposed to represent humans, but they aren't humans in the song. 
>That's why it's possible for the humans to keep the trees equal within the
>context of the song.  

Wha?

>The actions of the trees appear to be similar to those of human groups, but the
>trees aren't human.  A metaphor is supposed to be a comparison; that doesn't
>mean that the two things that are being compared have to be the same thing in
>physical appearance.  Because of this, humans come on to the seen at the end of
>"The Trees" to solve the problem for the antagonistic trees.

Again there is no mention of (literal)humans, only the "trees", so it
is a forced interpretation to say that humans "come on to the scene"...

>Yours etc.,

etc. etc.


Gregg




-- 
Gregg Jaeger (jaeger@buphy)  Dept. of Physics (and Philosophy), Boston Univ.
"You see, the quantum mechanical description is in terms of knowledge" -Peierls
"One can _not_ put the psi-function... in place of the... thing" -Schroedinger
                   _De gustibus non disputandum_, NOT!
From: Timothy.J.Young@dartmouth.edu (Timothy J. Young)
Newsgroups: alt.music.rush
Subject: Satanism and Humor (was Re: Rivendell (was Re: ALBUM BOUT)
Date: 26 Jan 93 18:48:20 GMT
 <1jurifINNlns@cat.cis.Brown.EDU> <1993Jan24.235142.9313@wam.umd.edu> 
 <1993Jan24.205546.10137@iscsvax.uni.edu> 
 <C1E3J7.HD1@dartvax.dartmouth.edu>  <1k2rgeINN8kq@shaman.nexagen.com>
Organization: Dartmouth College, Hanover, NH
X-Posted-From: InterNews1.0a5@newshost.dartmouth.edu

In article <1k2rgeINN8kq@shaman.nexagen.com>
cook@shaman.nexagen.com writes:

> I don't know about "The Camera Eye," but the stuff they say at the beginning of
> "WItch Hunt" is just supposed to represent the rumblings of a mob about to
> burn a witch. I also happen to know for a fact that this noise was achieved
> when the band took all of the people in the studio at the time out into the
> parking lot and had them shout, yell and generally make noise. No incantation
> there, but how appropriate that you would think that there would be something
> hidden and sinister about "Witch Hunt," when the song is about people
 looking
> for things that are wrong (like Satanic influences) in music, books, etc.

   I figured maybe it was a joke. I figured maybe the guys were sitting
around and one of them said "What if we threw a secret message into one
of our songs? I wonder if anyone would find it?" I hear Pink Floyd had
done the same in 1979. When some friends of mine recorded a demo, they
threw in a Satanic message (via a sampling synth one of them had). I
responded because I didn't want anyone thinking that I thought Rush was
at all satanic. 

   How does one listen to backward satanic messages if one has to look
so hard for them, anyway. This was one thing I was always unclear on...
That's why I thought that whole Judas Priest thing was a riot...
    



-Tim Young, Dartmouth College, Class of '96
The opinions expressed here are not necessarily those of Dartmouth
College, its students, or anyone else.
"Not everyone can carry the weight of the world..."- R.E.M.
From: misselt@trapper.sdsu.edu.sdsu.edu (Karl &)
Newsgroups: alt.music.rush
Subject: Re: The meaning of "The Trees"
Date: 26 Jan 1993 17:02:54 GMT
Organization: San Diego State University, College of Sciences
NNTP-Posting-Host: trapper.sdsu.edu
X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.1 PL8]

:>Weren't the humans responsible for passing the Noble Law?  The Oak oppression
:>was stopped by hatchets, axes, and saws used by humans.  Unfortunately for all
:>of the trees, the humans didn't distinguish between the kinds of trees that are
:>chopped down.  The humans came by to end the war between the trees- not for
:>altruistic motives, however.

:>Yours etc.,

:>The Analog Kid

:>P.S.  Who's this imposter calling himself The Analod Kid? Make it be known
:>that there's only room for one of us!

   There is no mention of humans at all in the song.  As your original post    
stated, it is an allegory for human behavior.  The trees (both maples and 
oaks), represent human beings.  I think people are reading too much 
superfluous stuff into the lyrics. (IMO, appropriate smiley...)              

-Karl M.

Newsgroups: alt.music.rush
From: rgrozier@uncc.edu (Richard Rozier)
Subject: Re:all about bootlegs
Reply-To: rgrozier@uncc.edu
Organization: University of NC at Charlotte
Date: Fri, 22 Jan 1993 00:56:46 GMT


In article 1@hamp.hampshire.edu, dtonya@hamp.hampshire.edu () writes:
>	I have several of the bootlegs from the RTB tour and heard many others
>and found "Atmospheric" (which is the same as "Over Europe" I believe) has the
>best sound quality.  Except for the occasional  singing by the bootleggers, it
>is difficult to tell that it is an audience recording.  Also, it is one of the
>few bootlegs that includes all of the medley and encore.  "Mardi Gras" is not
>that bad a bootleg, this audience recording is a more like what you would
>expect from a bootleg, phasing between channels, drop outs, and crowd noise.  I
>found it very listenable compared to other bootlegs in my collection. 
>"Pensecola" sounds the same as "Mardi Gras" and has the same cheap cardboard
>packaging, though it does have a great picture of Geddy doing his Paul Bunyon
>inpersonation!  "The Fly" has the best packaging of all the RTB boots I've
>seen, the sound quality is lesser than "Pensecola" and "Mardi Gras", but is a
>beautiful picture disk and great concert photos.  Definitely worth having for
>the packaging alone.  Avoid the boot "Bravado"  as the sound quality really
>sucks.
NOW you tell me!

Richard Rozier
UNC Charlotte
Newsgroups: alt.music.rush
From: saunders@luther.che.wisc.edu (Brian E. Saunders)
Subject: Re: ALBUM BOUT #2
Organization: University of Wisconsin - Madison
Date: 24 Jan 93 17:54:43 CST

In article <1993Jan24.131005.10123@iscsvax.uni.edu> wipperma9340 writes:

>ALBUM BOUT #2
>All the World's a Stage v. A Show of Glands . . . I mean Hands

All The World's A Stage, easily.  I know ASOH "sounds" better, but it
seems sort of flat to me, lacking high moments.  ATWAS was Rush's first
live album, and I think it sort of introduced Rush as a good live band.
-- 

Brian E. Saunders			saunders@luther.che.wisc.edu
From: intruder@cats.ucsc.edu (Isaac N. Truder)
Newsgroups: alt.music.rush
Subject: Re: Digital vs. Analog
Date: 27 Jan 1993 09:30:40 GMT
Organization: University of California; Santa Cruz
NNTP-Posting-Host: am.ucsc.edu


 >    2) CD's have much more dynamic range "CAPABLE".  They may not 
 >       always use it, but it's there.  I'm not an expert on 
 >       CD recording standards, but your dynamic range is limited
 >       by the number of bits per sample due to quantization noise.
 >       More bits means less noise and more signal-to-noise ratio.
 >       16 bits gives you quite a bit of range, but obviously more
 >       would be nice.  Does anyone know at what point you reach
 >       the point where your signal-to-noise ratio is so low that
 >       other things in the system (background noise, analog
 > filters,
 >       your EARS, etc.) begin to take over and make more bits
 >       unimportant?  I don't happen to know.

Hmmmm, not sure I understand your last question here.  I DO know I've
had plenty of CDs where there's so much tape hiss from the crappy analog
recording and mixing techniques that it drives one nuts.  A lot of the
"headroom" is just bled away by people who don't seem to have any
respect for the clarity you can get in the CD medium.  I haven't noticed
much hiss on Rush albums, but I have one CD where there's so much hiss
on the vocal track that you can actually hear them turning the level of
the track up and down when the singer is singing quietly, because they
had to jack up the level so high to catch his voice that it sounds like
you're cooking sausages.  And this is an actual studio recording, not a
bootleg or anything.
-- 
+------------------------------------------------------------------+
| Isaac Truder  <intruder@cats.ucsc.edu> | BLADDER CONTROL CENTRAL |
|      "The more you drive... the less intelligent you are."       |
+------------------------------------------------------------------+
Newsgroups: alt.music.rush
From: kyoung@nyx.cs.du.edu (Kris Young)
Subject: Digital vs. Analog
X-Disclaimer: Nyx is a public access Unix system run by the University
	of Denver for the Denver community.  The University has neither
	control over nor responsibility for the opinions of users.
Organization: Nyx, Public Access Unix at U. of Denver Math/CS dept.
Date: Mon, 25 Jan 93 05:22:58 GMT

Here's one for everyone to think about.  When I first listened to the new 
digital CD's and such (as opposed to old analog LP's, cassetes), I noticed
how nice, clear and noise free it was.  I also noticed that many subtle
things in the music are much easier to hear.  However, when I really started
to get in to digital, I noticed that something is missing. I saw a news
report on eMpTytV that had a lot of artists bantering about on this point.
There was the Dave Mustaine side of it "The people who switched from analog
to digital and back to analog did it because they suck, and digital brings
this out in the open."  Then there's the argument that inflections and reverbs
are altered or lost in the sampling process.  I don't know about everyone else,
but when I listen to an old album or LP (Moving Pictures, for instance), I 
seem to notice that it has lots more energy behind it, even though the clarity suffers. 

   I was wondering about this, because the world has begun to hit heavily
in digital, perhaps not knowing that something is not quite right.  I hear the 
digitally recorded RUSH stuff and wonder what could be...  What does everyone
else think?  Have we lost something?  Are we moving in the wrong direction?
Definitely a point to ponder.

Kris
_________________Who needs a sig, anyways?!__________________________________








Newsgroups: alt.music.rush