Is there a future for YES? or NO?

[Skullhead]

I haven't seen YES in a while. The last time was with Benoît David. In all honesty, it was just hard for me to see YES without Jon Anderson, but I think Benoit did a respectable job.

This week I watched YES on cable with Jon Davison while Chris was still with us. I must admit, I was very impressed with him as a replacement much like what they did with "Journey" His pitch is excellent, and he comes across as having a genuine spirit and a true love of this music.... along with a gentle nature much like Jon Anderson. I just can't imagine a better fit for YES as a replacement singer for Jon Anderson.

That being said, I wonder about the future of YES.

This Hippodrome concert I think was 2014? It's respectable that Steve and Chris still wanted to bring live YES music to theaters across the land.
Downes does a good job also replicating Wakeman and Kaye for that matter.... however cold the keyboard palate feels.

I suppose few would argue that this already is quite a watered down version of YES. What about now without Chris? I have not seen Sherwood filling in for Chris, but I have heard he is doing quite a fine job.

But, where is this all leading? Could someone REALLY carbon copy Steve Howe's playing. He truly is the untouchable master of progressive rock guitar playing. Even as he ages, I can still really feel his playing inside YES music in spite of the obvious.

I know there was talk years ago about YES being an act that would or could transcend all of their lifetimes with new members much like a symphony might operate over the centuries.

I feel we are not far off this just being a really great tribute band with Steve sitting in as the elder statesman.

Should The Musical Box just inherit the name Genesis? Is there an argument for that?
Dark Star Orchestra for The Grateful Dead?

These are very good bands, and the argument that this music should not die is a respectable if not logical one.

Thoughts?

[moecurlythanu]

There are enough modern bands who write material that hews close enough to Yes, Genesis or the Grateful Dead that the question is largely irrelevant. The "reasonable facsimiles thereof" will live on. For a time, anyway.

[rcarlberg]

Bands who lose their guiding lights -- in this case Chris Squire -- should by all means continue to perform as long as they have the desire and ability to do so. But they should change their name to "Soft Machine Legacy" or "Tribute To Journey" or "Joseph and the Amazing Technicolor Dreamcoat Remembered" rather than laboring on as if nothing had happened.

IMO of course.

[abhorsen]

Yes was my favorite band in high school and college. I've seen them many times over the years, beginning with the Drama tour when I was too young to drive and for the last time in 2002 with Anderson, Wakeman, Howe, White and Squire. I had always wanted to see that lineup and it was a great show. To that gig I took a good friend who is not a prog fan at all and he enjoyed the heck out of that show, especially the playing of Squire, White and Howe. I remember thinking after that show that if I never see Yes live again it'll be fine because this gig is a good way to remember them. I enjoyed the 2002 tour more than the tours for the Ladder, Masterworks, and Close Your Ears. While I really like the Fly From Here studio album, I haven't felt a desire to see them live in many years. It's not just the lack of one Jon Anderson. I don't actually mind that part of it all that much. My first tour was Drama after all and that was fantastic. To me it's more the fact that some of the guys just aren't up to the task. I quite like Jon Davison, but as much as I have enjoyed Alan White in earlier years, it's clear to me that he should put down the sticks. Great career, but he's done now. Geoff Downes I enjoy quite a lot in Asia but his skillset isn't well suited to the music originally composed by other Yes musicians in the 1970's and he does a crappy job covering the material live IMO. Honestly, I think Chris Squire was the backbone for the band Yes, much like John Bonham in Led Zeppelin and I sincerely wish Yes had called it a day after his passing. No Chris, no Yes for me. Yes was the greatest progressive rock band in the 1970's but listening to the live recordings of the current band hurts my ears. Just my .05 cents since you asked.

As for ARW, I wish they would drop the Yes name and resurrect Cinema but I'm probably in the minority on that one.

[Zappathustra]

Of course there is a future for yes. As there is a future for no. As there is even future for trolling the shit out of everybody here.

[Vic2012]

I think if/when Jon Anderson, Steve Howe, Tony Kaye, Rick Wakeman retire or pass away the YES band name should be retired. If they want to keep the continuity with Downes, Sherwood, Rabin, etc. that's fine. Let it be an official tribute. Just put YES to rest.

[Tangram]

Bands who lose their guiding lights -- in this case Chris Squire -- should by all means continue to perform as long as they have the desire and ability to do so. But they should change their name to "Soft Machine Legacy" or "Tribute To Journey" or "Joseph and the Amazing Technicolor Dreamcoat Remembered" rather than laboring on as if nothing had happened.

IMO of course.

Guess you're still waiting for Tangerine Dream to change its name. I'm pulling for Tangerine Leaves, after the fan site I think we will be waiting a long while for this.

[spacefreak]

Yes nowadays is nothing more than a tribute band of themselves.

[Skullhead]

Yes nowadays is nothing more than a tribute band of themselves.

Steve Howe's life is playing the guitar. I don't think he has any other big hobbies or anything, I could be wrong.
I just feel he really loves that music, loves playing and is still more than competent. I think he is going to surround himself
with a supporting cast so he can do his thing. Alan, well, it's obvious.

I guess, what happens when Steve is gone?

The Yesical Box?

[notallwhowander]

I don't think institutionalizing the names is a good move. It's not very rock'n'roll at any rate.

I remember read Robert Fripp's thought about a King Crimson cover band. He thought that a group of young musicians talented enough to play King Crimson's music would probably be more interested in pursuing their own musical ideas.

Add to that the business angle: is there enough money in being a Yes cover band to make it worth the effort? It seems unlikely for anything but a side gig.

In my neck of the woods we have The Santa Cruz White Album Ensemble. They do two concerts locally, around the New Year, where each set is an entire Beatles album. There are occasional other projects, but it is nobody's full time gig. I can see this model persisting, as long as their is a sizable local audience and musicians who love the music.

[Sputnik]

There are enough modern bands who write material that hews close enough to Yes, Genesis or the Grateful Dead that the question is largely irrelevant. The "reasonable facsimiles thereof" will live on. For a time, anyway.

Totally agree.

Yes came, Yes went. To me, it's over, and has been over for close to 20 years, if not double that. Yeah, they did some OK tours in the 90s and 00s with Anderson and either Wakeman or Igor. But their original material has been a pale ghost of their 70s output for me; if even. Some like it, and that's fine with me, but I think it sucks and I don't want to listen to it. Nor do I want to hear the band with a bunch of replacement players. If others do, great. But I don't.

I'd rather focus my attention on modern bands creating new music, albeit in the style pioneered by Yes and the other touchstone "Prog" bands. If Yes has a future, they'll have it without me. Sorry to be grumpy, but that's just how I feel.

Bill

[Zappathustra]

I - correctly - believe that all 70's prog bands bit the dust somewhere in the mid 80's, I will post it autistically about a thousand times, then I will start a post about one of these 70's bands whether it has a future in 2018. Then I'll expect some hundreds of posts to acquire the illusion of having some sort of a life. Thoughts? Am I a troll or not?

[arturs]

^^^ Dunno, but I think Skull's trying to be mature and articulate here. So I'll play...

For me Yes lives as long as they can convey that "magic of Yes" at their concerts. I have seen Yes 9x and as recently as 2013 (Yestival). Damn if I didn't walk out in that same blissful state in 2013 as I did almost every other time I saw the band. The only time I would say I walked out feeling nothing was 1987. I love 90125 and all but it just wasn't happening for me at that show.

Based on the recent Topographic Drama record, I think Yes still has the magic. I will see them again whenever possible until the magic is just not there anymore. Then I'll stop. Then for me Yes will be over.

[moecurlythanu]

Yeah, they did some OK tours in the 90s and 00s with Anderson and either Wakeman or Igor. But their original material has been a pale ghost of their 70s output for me; if even.

Ask yourself this: If Yes had never made those 70s albums, if those albums never existed, and this band called Yes came along in the 90s and made the albums they did throughout the 90s til now, would they be held in high esteem here? I think they'd be held in high esteem. As high as Deyss anyway.

[moecurlythanu]

Am I a troll or not?

Dunno. Do you have fluorescent Don King hair?

[flowerking]

Steve Howe leading Yes with White, Downes and Davidson and whoever on bass is fine with me as long as Howe keeps dipping into the well of rarer material. I saw them a couple of summers ago where they did all of Drama and about 60% of Tales and it was great. But more than that, there were about 10000 people at the show. You won't get that with the Musical Box or Dark Star Orchestra.

As far as whether a tribute band should just inherit a name, no, I don't think so. But I have no problem with fans start following the tribute band. But what I don't like is when the tribute band doesn't show a bit of their own personality. Musical Box, for as great as they sound, try to be a complete Genesis copy. I like DSO better when they aren't playing a prior show but coming up with their own setlist. But my favorite tribute band is ZPZ. Dweezil has done an outstanding job replicating Zappa music but also allowing the band to show their own personality, changing the songs when its warranted rather than trying to be a copy.

[MrXindeed]

Anderson Rabin Wakeman are carrying the torch

[kid_runningfox]

For me, Yes haven't had a future since about 1997. Unfortunately, they haven't let that stop them.

[Yodelgoat]

For me, its about hearing the music live. - Would I go and see one member of Yes performing Yes with others that he would decide to play with? - Hell Yes! Think about it. I can stay home watch TV or some other worthless thing, or I can go and see a real live band playing some of my favorite music - That's a complete no-brainer. For those of you wh have seen them a billion times, it may be something you dont care to do. But Music is my fishing. And the worst day Listening to Yes music live is better than any other day at work, or doing what I typically do. Perhaps if I was doing something significant ( I do do volunteer and service work, so its not like I'm living a totally selfish life, or anything like that). I just prefer hearing great live music to just about anything else. I would go see a YES tribute band anytime - although I would prefer a band just covering Yes and looking like themselves to the meaningless "we LOOK like YES" - I just prefer they play like Yes. You dont have to look like Steve Howe, but if you can play like him? - That's worth seeing any day of the week.

Some people can't go see a band if someone is missing. I am not that person, and any good band that comes to town is welcome in my book. I may prefer Jon Andersons voice to anyone else, but Jon isnt there is he? (I'll catch him when he comes through) I dont always take people to concerts and that makes it quite affordable. I was able to get a sweet seat the last time I saw Yes, and it was just before we lost Squire, so it really meant something to me to see them with him. He was probably already sick, but showed no signs of it. I do not regret any concert I've ever gone to. Even the ones I've walked out on (Charlie Daniels and Styx - not together but I've walked out on 2 concerts - because the sound was intolerable)

[JKL2000]

Thank god we're finally talking about this!

[Yodelgoat]

^^^ Ha!

[Skullhead]

Do you think a band such as YES is best defined by their studio output or their live performances? It's an important question.

The last truly great YES album was?

[kid_runningfox]

The last truly great YES album was?

Going for the One. All true Yes fans agree with me.

[moecurlythanu]

Going for the One. All true Yes fans agree with me.

Hell, I'm not even a True Yes Fan and I agree with you!

[Sputnik]

Do you think a band such as YES is best defined by their studio output or their live performances? It's an important question.

I think Yes, and most bands, are best defined by their original music. The studio albums are where that original music is presented and will the reference point for the vast majority of listeners. The only band I can think of where this may not be true is the Grateful Dead, where their live legacy is at an unprecedented level and their concerts and tours became a virtual lifestyle and were legendary in the rock music world.

Other bands may leave a substantial live legacy, but I think are still defined in the minds of fans by their studio output. IMO, Yes fits this pattern.

The last truly great YES album was?

IMO, Going for the One. You can't argue that 90125 didn't resonate with a huge number of people. To me, it's not really a Yes album, it's the brainchild of Trevor Rabin and was Squire's attempt to "re-brand" the band to gain popularity in a changing musical landscape. But slapping a Yes logo on it doesn't for me change its fundamental nature.

I'd also argue exactly what Mark said above, that if 90125 was this band's first album, they'd be little more than a curiosity here. An anomalous artsy pop band that happened to make a record with some vague "proggy" tendencies, but really little to see there. And the remainder of the Yes-related stuff after that (including ABWH, which heaven help me I actually like) wouldn't attract a lot of attention.

That's just my sense of it.

Bill