Page 14 of 14 FirstFirst ... 41011121314
Results 326 to 350 of 350

Thread: Why did YES not become "The Grateful Dead"?

  1. #326
    Quote Originally Posted by bondegezou View Post
    Except maybe ticket prices...?

    Or, if I were in a really bad mood, I might add: putting out good albums...? Is anyone going to cheer for Counterparts through to Snakes & Arrows?

    Henry
    Why start at Counterparts? I thought Roll The Bones was the weakest album the band had made since the early days. At the other end, though, I thought that Snakes and Arrows was pretty good. It is widely regarded as a come-back album for the band. It has several tracks that do nothing for me, but I think the best 30 minutes are actually really good, rather than just the best of a weaker batch of songs. I don't think that the Counterparts, T4E and Vapor Trails are bad at all, just not superlative in any way.

  2. #327
    Member Plasmatopia's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    Plague Sanctuary, Vermont
    Posts
    2,481
    I thought I read something on FB about the GD ticket prices not being the fault of the GD but scalpers and such?
    <sig out of order>

  3. #328
    Quote Originally Posted by Facelift View Post
    Why start at Counterparts? I thought Roll The Bones was the weakest album the band had made since the early days. At the other end, though, I thought that Snakes and Arrows was pretty good. It is widely regarded as a come-back album for the band. It has several tracks that do nothing for me, but I think the best 30 minutes are actually really good, rather than just the best of a weaker batch of songs. I don't think that the Counterparts, T4E and Vapor Trails are bad at all, just not superlative in any way.
    This is about how I feel, as well. I would go further and say that RTB is the weakest album Rush ever made, since I happen to love the first three albums a lot. Lifeson seems to have gotten his mojo back on Counterparts, and they've made a lot of good music ever since then. From Counterparts on, they made really good 40-minute albums that all had about 20-30 minutes of extra padding on them; though, Clockwork Angels is an exception that is strong throughout.

    Rush has a mild similarity to the Dead in that they created a certain "mini-culture" around their fanbases that has lasted through the decades. Absolutely zero overlap, though.

  4. #329
    cunning linguist 3LockBox's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    hiding out in treetops, shouting out rude names
    Posts
    3,657
    If you're going to disqualify bands as heir apparent to the GD throne because they delved into pop music then you couldn't possibly support YES as replacement either.

    And did the Dead really eschew forays into pop music? When they began their style was becoming popular - they put out a 10-track greatest hits album by '74 or '75. They had back-to-back hit albums in the mid to late '80s.

  5. #330
    Quote Originally Posted by bondegezou View Post
    Except maybe ticket prices...?

    Or, if I were in a really bad mood, I might add: putting out good albums...? Is anyone going to cheer for Counterparts through to Snakes & Arrows?

    Henry
    I sure as hell would. Beats listening to Limelight for the millionth time.

  6. #331
    Quote Originally Posted by profusion View Post
    This is about how I feel, as well. I would go further and say that RTB is the weakest album Rush ever made, since I happen to love the first three albums a lot. Lifeson seems to have gotten his mojo back on Counterparts, and they've made a lot of good music ever since then. From Counterparts on, they made really good 40-minute albums that all had about 20-30 minutes of extra padding on them; though, Clockwork Angels is an exception that is strong throughout.

    Rush has a mild similarity to the Dead in that they created a certain "mini-culture" around their fanbases that has lasted through the decades. Absolutely zero overlap, though.
    Yes, good point. I said earlier on in the thread that the question should not be why Yes isn't the Grateful Dead, it's why couldn't they have been as successful as Rush? It's similarly-aged bands approaching music in similar ways (not that the end-product *sounds* similar), with fans that have a lot of overlap. I guess Yes held their own for awhile in the '80s with the earlier years of the Yes-West configuration, but then they dropped off.

  7. #332
    Quote Originally Posted by Garden Dreamer View Post
    Test for Echo and remixed Vapor Trails, yes. Counterparts and Snakes & Arrows, an emphatic NO.
    Original Vapor Trails for me thanks.

    I like my passion raw and unaltered.

  8. #333
    Quote Originally Posted by Facelift View Post
    Yes, good point. I said earlier on in the thread that the question should not be why Yes isn't the Grateful Dead, it's why couldn't they have been as successful as Rush? It's similarly-aged bands approaching music in similar ways (not that the end-product *sounds* similar), with fans that have a lot of overlap. I guess Yes held their own for awhile in the '80s with the earlier years of the Yes-West configuration, but then they dropped off.
    Yes have never done consistency, constant line-up changes and constant style changes. I tend to think it's that in the 1990s that really damaged the band's popularity. The Union was a huge opportunity, but the album was poor and the shifts and turns afterwards left fans wrong-footed, never knowing what the band is. When things settled down again, the band grew audiences from the OYE tour through to 2004.

    Rush are a model of consistency: the same 3 guys since near enough the beginning. The band has changed style over the years, but generally fairly gradually. Most Rush albums sound a fair bit like the one before and the one after.

    So they make for an interesting comparison. Clearly Yes were the bigger band through the early and mid-seventies. I think Rush's large-scale success stems to how they successfully navigated the end of the '70s and the switch from a prog sound to a more new wave-influenced sound. Permanent Waves, Moving Pictures and Signals bridged that gap and brought the band a big increase in sales. And, indeed, the band's album sales slipped back later on (last UK sales award was Presto going Silver; last Platinum album in the US was Roll the Bones, while their last US Gold was Test for Echo), but by then I think their longevity had established the band a reliable core.

    Henry
    Where Are They Now? Yes news: http://www.bondegezou.co.uk/wh_now.htm
    Blogdegezou, the accompanying blog: http://bondegezou.blogspot.com/

  9. #334
    Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    Iowa City IA
    Posts
    2,438
    Quote Originally Posted by bondegezou View Post
    So they make for an interesting comparison. Clearly Yes were the bigger band through the early and mid-seventies. I think Rush's large-scale success stems to how they successfully navigated the end of the '70s and the switch from a prog sound to a more new wave-influenced sound. Permanent Waves, Moving Pictures and Signals bridged that gap and brought the band a big increase in sales. And, indeed, the band's album sales slipped back later on (last UK sales award was Presto going Silver; last Platinum album in the US was Roll the Bones, while their last US Gold was Test for Echo), but by then I think their longevity had established the band a reliable core.

    Henry
    I agree except I think Yes navigated the 70s-80s divide superbly with 90125. Better than any Rush album except for Moving Pictures, which I would put as an equal. But Yes didn't sustain the momentum with the egos and drugs and whatever else. Had they put out 4-5 strong albums after 90125, say each as good as BG with some catchy singles and solid longer songs, I think they would still be up in the Rush category in terms of popularity.

  10. #335
    Quote Originally Posted by 3LockBox View Post
    If you're going to disqualify bands as heir apparent to the GD throne because they delved into pop music then you couldn't possibly support YES as replacement either.

    And did the Dead really eschew forays into pop music? When they began their style was becoming popular - they put out a 10-track greatest hits album by '74 or '75. They had back-to-back hit albums in the mid to late '80s.
    If you're talking about Skeletons In The Closet, Warner Brothers put that out after the band had already left the label, so they can hardly be blamed for that.

    One way or another, the Dead did at least appear to flirt with "radio friendliness". They went from playing obtuse psychedelic music on the first four albums to Americana thing on Workingman's Dead and American Beauty. Supposedly, their A&R guy heard the Workingman's Dead songs the first time, he thought the Dead were playing a prank on him. Now, I'm inclined to believe that was largely because the direction of Hunter's lyrics changed, and the weird arrangements that made up songs like New Potato Caboose wouldn't have worked with something like Cumberland Blues or Uncle John's Band.

    But also, I think the band realized they needed to make music that could generate some kind of record sales, after running up a $100,000 studio bill making Anthem Of The Sun and American Beauty.

    But then they pull a stunt like deciding the second live album should be called Skullfuck, which the A&R department naturally didn't like.

    I think the Dead are the kind of band that, if cut back the extended guitar solos, the music is naturally just on the verge of being some form of radio friendly (well, it was in the 70's and 80's, maybe not so much now), bu there's this misfit vibe within the band which, without some kind of outside influence (say a mainstream pop or rock producer), keeps it from being going too far into that direction. And even when they had producers associated with the likes of Fleetwood Mac and Foreigner, their music still managed to go "the other way", eg side two of Terrapin Station, or something like Feel Like A Stranger (which isn't quite top 40 material).

    And they did not have back to back hit albums in the 80's. I'm sure Built To Last sold well, but it didn't do the kind of business that In The Dark had done, probably because MTV to play Foolish Heart into the ground the way did with Touch Of Grey.

  11. #336
    cunning linguist 3LockBox's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    hiding out in treetops, shouting out rude names
    Posts
    3,657
    Quote Originally Posted by GuitarGeek View Post
    If you're talking about Skeletons In The Closet, Warner Brothers put that out after the band had already left the label, so they can hardly be blamed for that.
    Blame them? no way. They wrote what they wrote and people liked it. But my point was that they had 10 bonafide hits by the mid '70s - I'm not suggesting they were trying to be a top-40 band but they didn't exactly shy away from radio friendly material.
    Compact Disk brought high fidelity to the masses and audiophiles will never forgive it for that

  12. #337
    Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    NH USA
    Posts
    35
    I just don't know! That question hurts my brain!

  13. #338
    Quote Originally Posted by 3LockBox View Post
    Blame them? no way. They wrote what they wrote and people liked it. But my point was that they had 10 bonafide hits by the mid '70s - I'm not suggesting they were trying to be a top-40 band but they didn't exactly shy away from radio friendly material.
    Define "hit". The Grateful Dead had exactly one top ten hit, and that was Touch Of Grey in 1987. Their other singles, like Uncle John's Band and Truckin', didn't crack the top 40. And at least some of the songs on Skeletons In The Closet weren't actually released as singles (Rosemary, for instance). I'm not entirely sure what the motivation for Warners to release a best of by a band who hadn't scored any hit singles, unless they reckoned that there was still some gravy to be had on the train, as it were, even without top 40 airplay.

    And if that wasn't strange enough, they issued a second best of, this one a double LP, called What A Long Strange Trip. This one at least has benefit of containing Ripple, genuinely one of the best songs the Hunter/Garcia songwriting team ever generated, as well as both sides of the rare Dark Star/Born Cross Eyed single (one of the ultimate "WTF?! moments in rock).

  14. #339
    I hope Steven Wilson remixes Wake of the Flood some day. "Weather Report Suite" (along with "Terrapin Station") is among the Dead's Yessiest jams and could use some sonic boom.

  15. #340
    Member Since: 3/27/2002 MYSTERIOUS TRAVELLER's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    The Kingdom of YHVH
    Posts
    2,770
    Quote Originally Posted by Nador View Post
    ...
    Skullhead? ... zat chew?
    Why is it whenever someone mentions an artist that was clearly progressive (yet not the Symph weenie definition of Prog) do certain people feel compelled to snort "thats not Prog" like a whiny 5th grader?

  16. #341
    Nope, sorry, just me. I only post under this name.

  17. #342
    Highly Evolved Orangutan JKL2000's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Location
    Westchester, NY
    Posts
    16,529
    Why did Camel not become Santana?

  18. #343
    Member Sputnik's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    South Hadley, MA
    Posts
    2,663
    Quote Originally Posted by JKL2000 View Post
    Why did Camel not become Santana?
    They became Pink Floyd instead.

  19. #344
    Member Vic2012's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    La Florida
    Posts
    7,554
    Quote Originally Posted by JKL2000 View Post
    Why did Camel not become Santana?


    No offense to the OP but what kind of a question is "Why did Yes not Become The Grateful Dead?" Answer: Because Yes are Yes, and the Dead are The Dead.

  20. #345
    Jazzbo manqué Mister Triscuits's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    Utopia
    Posts
    5,390
    Quote Originally Posted by Vic2012 View Post
    No offense to the OP but what kind of a question is "Why did Yes not Become The Grateful Dead?" Answer: Because Yes are Yes, and the Dead are The Dead.
    Ok then, why didn't David Bowie become the Dead?

    Hurtleturtled Out of Heaven - an electronic music composition, on CD and vinyl
    https://michaelpdawson.bandcamp.com
    http://www.waysidemusic.com/Music-Pr...MCD-spc-7.aspx

  21. #346
    Highly Evolved Orangutan JKL2000's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Location
    Westchester, NY
    Posts
    16,529
    Quote Originally Posted by Facelift View Post
    Why start at Counterparts? I thought Roll The Bones was the weakest album the band had made since the early days. At the other end, though, I thought that Snakes and Arrows was pretty good. It is widely regarded as a come-back album for the band. It has several tracks that do nothing for me, but I think the best 30 minutes are actually really good, rather than just the best of a weaker batch of songs. I don't think that the Counterparts, T4E and Vapor Trails are bad at all, just not superlative in any way.
    I never really got why so many people have a problem with the songs Stick It Out and Animate. I think they're both great songs. Also, both as hit-worthy as earlier Rush.

  22. #347
    Banned
    Join Date
    Dec 2015
    Location
    Serbia
    Posts
    1,882
    Quote Originally Posted by Skullhead View Post
    With all the craze about the final Grateful Dead shows in Chicago... 300K tickets sold in hours etc.
    this reminded me of what I always though was a misdirection of hippie consciousness.

    For some reason, the huge "Dead Head" following has become a timeless institution of all things hippie and 60's 70's ethos.

    Should YES have been the more viable vehicle for hippie culture?

    YES is much more creative and forward thinking both musically and lyrically. Jon's spiritual lyrics, vegetarianism etc.. seems a better fit for trippy hippies, deeper lyrics, much superior musicianship and creative songwriting. The Dead guys are no slouches, but I think there is so much more in YES music than in Grateful Dead music.

    I think Jon would have been a much better leader of the "Heads" than Jerry who died a junkie heroin addict. Jon also has embraced world music and YES could have incorporated more of that into their music with Jon's guidance.

    YES was still fully intact with original members into the 90's and 2000's. After Jerry passed, I thought YES would have been a more appropriate band to follow than Phish for example.

    I think YES could have inherited the tie die shirts, vegan food stands, incense and dreadlocks that are still in vouge with the young hippie kids. There will be thousands of kids in Chicago who never saw the dead, many born after Jerry died.

    While there are certainly a lot of cross over fans, I just wonder why a great band like YES didn't inherit the Deadheads as they might have.

    Any thoughts?
    YES? Nah.
    GonG fits way better than Yes.
    But there was not a better hippie band than The Grateful Dead due to their mix of psych / space jamming and acid-folk.

    Last edited by Svetonio; 05-29-2016 at 02:35 AM.

  23. #348
    Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    Portland, OR, USA
    Posts
    1,865
    Q: Why did YES not become "The Grateful Dead"?

    A: Because they aren't. Yes are a band - at their peak a very good band, but still, just a band. Their music is just music - at its peak very good music, but still, just music. The Dead, though, are a whole lifestyle. The Deadheads are the ones who live it, the Deadheads are the show, the Deadheads are the party - the Dead themselves are just the soundtrack.

    No comparison.

  24. #349
    cunning linguist 3LockBox's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Location
    hiding out in treetops, shouting out rude names
    Posts
    3,657
    Quote Originally Posted by Mister Triscuits View Post
    Ok then, why didn't David Bowie...
    Well... in a way...
    Compact Disk brought high fidelity to the masses and audiophiles will never forgive it for that

  25. #350
    Member jake's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Xxxxxxx
    Posts
    1,064
    Quote Originally Posted by Svetonio View Post
    YES? Nah.
    GonG fits way better than Yes.
    But there was not a better hippie band than The Grateful Dead due to their mix of psych / space jamming and acid-folk.

    Wow I looked at that and saw this
    548398_327614183963746_227936413931524_892466_563712366_n.jpg

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •