New Rolling Stone Tony Kaye interview

[Paulrus]

So I just watched that video at the top of the thread where Trevor Horn describes the process of creating "Owner of a Lonely Heart". He's not very complimentary about Trevor Rabin's production and engineering instincts, which ironically is exactly what Billy Sherwood seems incredibly enamored with. One wonders what TH would say about Billy's production style.

[GuitarGeek]

Kind of the same reason for bringing Rick Wright back into the Pink Floyd fold just as "A Momentary Lapse of Reason" is being completed. You just need to shore up your legal status so you're not worried about meetings with lawyers clogging up your tour plans.

Yeah, exactly. Even if it's not what Pete Townshend once termed A Legal Matter, I think they wanted to give as much of an air of "legitimacy" to the whole thing, i.e. get Jon back in, get Tony in so that we have a majority of original members, and like I said, I think "band reunions" make for good copy in the press.

[Trane]

Depends on your browser. I can't on Chrome, but I can with Firefox.

Yup, Firefox/Qwant rules

That's how I read it, and how I had a friend read it, as well.

Google/Chrome was never my friend, ever since they sell my infos they steal from me
At worst, I Bing it

Kind of the same reason for bringing Rick Wright back into the Pink Floyd fold just as "A Momentary Lapse of Reason" is being completed. You just need to shore up your legal status so you're not worried about meetings with lawyers clogging up your tour plans.

I'm not even sure the public Floyd hassle example was worse than the behind-the-scene Yes legal haglings

Yeah, exactly. Even if it's not what Pete Townshend once termed A Legal Matter, I think they wanted to give as much of an air of "legitimacy" to the whole thing, i.e. get Jon back in, get Tony in so that we have a majority of original members, and like I said, I think "band reunions" make for good copy in the press.

but SH and RW were never original members, though ... unless P Banks & Broof would've made a problem (the former might, because he was sore to get fired, but the latter couldn't have cared less at the time)... AFAI can guess, this is only this Brian Lane character still being a pain after being evicted from Yes affairs.

But OK, that gave Kaye a chance to get back in and make his share of the dough, and good for him.

[sphinx]

Is there any way of reading this interview without a RS subscription?

I think I have mentioned this already, but there is this cheap trick™, which still works with RS (other mags having killed this loophole already).
Put a dot directly behind the URL part, i.e. "rolling stone.com.", and after maybe another dialog the pop-up goes away and the article unfolds

[Baribrotzer]

Is there any way of reading this interview without a RS subscription?

I have a cheat for a number of journalistic sites, but it probably depends on my having a relatively slow connection: I click on the link, and then while it's still loading, I highlight the whole thing, copy it, and paste it into Wordpad. It gets all the text, but none of the photos. But the trick depends upon the paywall being the last part to load, which isn't the case with every site, and it also depends upon the RS or NYT site being bulky enough that the whole thing doesn't get there instantly on my slow connection.

[Kcrimso]

So I just watched that video at the top of the thread where Trevor Horn describes the process of creating "Owner of a Lonely Heart". He's not very complimentary about Trevor Rabin's production and engineering instincts, which ironically is exactly what Billy Sherwood seems incredibly enamored with. One wonders what TH would say about Billy's production style.

Trevor Horn's head would probably explode if he heard Arc Of Light...

[Rarebird]

I have a cheat for a number of journalistic sites, but it probably depends on my having a relatively slow connection: I click on the link, and then while it's still loading, I highlight the whole thing, copy it, and paste it into Wordpad. It gets all the text, but none of the photos. But the trick depends upon the paywall being the last part to load, which isn't the case with every site, and it also depends upon the RS or NYT site being bulky enough that the whole thing doesn't get there instantly on my slow connection.

I often use another trick if a newspaper, or a magazine offers a few free articles. I remove the cookies of the website involved and can start al over again.

[happytheman]

Is there any way of reading this interview without a RS subscription?

I read it here without any issues.. https://www.rollingstone.com/music/m...GucyCwjd7-hbHw

[Kcrimso]

You understand that cheating paywall content from media companies is exactly the same thing as piracy in music business?

[GuitarGeek]

I'm not even sure the public Floyd hassle example was worse than the behind-the-scene Yes legal haglings

Well, certainly the whole business of Jon wanting to use the Yes name for ABWH, that's more or less the same thing, i.e.

but SH and RW were never original members, though ... unless P Banks & Broof would've made a problem (the former might, because he was sore to get fired, but the latter couldn't have cared less at the time)... AFAI can guess, this is only this Brian Lane character still being a pain after being evicted from Yes affairs.
.

Whether or not Steve Howe or Rick Wakeman were original members isn't the point. The point is, somewhere along the way, Steve apparently gained whatever legal say so with the name that he had to be paid a settlement to allow the 90125 lineup to go forward with the Yes name. Or at least that's the explanation I've always heard. I've never heard any talk of Rick being involved in such matters, beyond Jobson's vague comment.

Who owns the rights to a band name, and who gets to say "you can't use the name" isn't always about who is or isn't an original member. I remember reading about this big lawsuit involving the Little River Band. Apparently, the three guys who wrote and/or sang most of their hits, one by one, ended up leaving the band, coming back then leaving again, etc. From what I remember, eventually at some point, the three of them decided to put their own LRB together and go on tour, and the other band, which I believe had no original members left, sued them. Apparently, at whatever point, the band's name was acquired by someone who joined in the early 80's, and he gets to dictate who can call their band the Little River Band.

A lot of times, what happens is, the band name is never copyrighted, until things start going sideways with band relations, and someone sneakily copyrights the name, so that when the band breaks up, he/she can go forward using the name, with the agitators. I remember seeing a thing on VH-1 about the band Berlin, and that's what happen: Terri Nunn copyrighted the band's name. John Crawford, their bassist/songwriter/founder said he asked her, "What if I want to do something with Berlin?", and Terri told him, "Well, then then you'll be working for me", and apparently that was like the last conversation they had for something like 15 years.


Another story I heard was that Steve Perry somehow got controlling interest of Journey. Herbie Herbert once suggested that during the post Perry era, the band was effectively "Steve's bitches", because he was getting paid whether or not he was "in" the band or going on the road with them or whatever.

So it's possible that the Yes name was never copyrighted until sometime in the 70's. It might have been a situation where the band name was shared by Howe, Wakeman, Anderson, Squire, White and Lane, and that's what caused the problems during that 90125 period. I'm not sure how having Tony back in would change that issue, unless there was some kinda clause in the paperwork that said "it has to be these five guys, or at least 3/5's of the original band".

[aith01]

So I just watched that video at the top of the thread where Trevor Horn describes the process of creating "Owner of a Lonely Heart". He's not very complimentary about Trevor Rabin's production and engineering instincts, which ironically is exactly what Billy Sherwood seems incredibly enamored with. One wonders what TH would say about Billy's production style.

I'm failing to see the irony. Maybe you can explain it to me.

[Dan Roth]

Kaye was interviewed in the latest issue of Prog also. Some of the interview was reprinted here.

I thought this was a good exchange:

Looking back on your time with Yes, would you change anything?

Kaye: I wouldn't change a thing. The 50th anniversary was a great experience. I did think twice about it, cause I wasn't sure whether I really wanted to go on the road and, you know, do that thing. The band has gone through some craziness in the past and different people and, some people who were not that easy to work with. This current band, of Steve, Jon, Alan, Geoff, and Billy are just such great guys. We were friends and that's not always an easy thing to have.

That's why when people say it's not Yes without Jon Anderson and everything, you know, from a band's point of view, it doesn't really ring true because one of the most important things is being able to play together and be friends. That's what this band is and that's why this band will, in my opinion anyway, carry on into the future.

[Scott Bails]

Anderson ain't coming back.

And that's a good thing, IMO.

[miamiscot]

Rolling Stone does a lot of great stuff online. In print - not so much. Don't be fooled.

[Mstove]

I'm not sure that print is more important than online at this point. Or, even close, really.

[Baribrotzer]

......one of the most important things is being able to play together and be friends.

That is such a good point.

[luvyesmusic]

Getting along, for the most part in any job, or contractual period is only a positive. I believe Steve in particular is pretty damn serious about his performances, and being faithful to the music and fans, for the most part. Sure he likes a laugh just as much as anyone else in the proper settings. Also try working with someone who feels the need, or does get the lion's share of the shared pot. The Wakeman jokes are old. Laughing about f'ing up tje music or being too stoned to perform isn't good either.

I feel uncomfortable as a fan during a show when I see folks on stage I know don't get along. You have to know when "it"doesn't/no longer works anymore as a band, individuals in a band, or a marriage for that matter.

It's good most of these guys are still going, and performing in one form or another. And as fans, more options. Hopefully soon, again, but everything comes to an end. Such is life.

[Rarebird]

Getting along, for the most part in any job, or contractual period is only a positive. I believe Steve in particular is pretty damn serious about his performances, and being faithful to the music and fans, for the most part. Sure he likes a laugh just as much as anyone else in the proper settings. Also try working with someone who feels the need, or does get the lion's share of the shared pot. The Wakeman jokes are old. Laughing about f'ing up tje music or being too stoned to perform isn't good either.

I feel uncomfortable as a fan during a show when I see folks on stage I know don't get along. You have to know when "it"doesn't/no longer works anymore as a band, individuals in a band, or a marriage for that matter.

It's good most of these guys are still going, and performing in one form or another. And as fans, more options. Hopefully soon, again, but everything comes to an end. Such is life.

There is getting along and getting along. Some groups are a bunch of friends, who started to make music together and other groups are more like a group of equally talented people, who have got together, to create music. That doesn't mean they don't get along, but they respect eachother, without perhaps really being friends. with some groups one experience they are more like a group, showing they have fun on stage, while others are more a professional group, who are just doing their job as good as they can.

[Progatron]

There is getting along and getting along. Some groups are a bunch of friends, who started to make music together and other groups are more like a group of equally talented people, who have got together, to create music. That doesn't mean they don't get along, but they respect eachother, without perhaps really being friends. with some groups one experience they are more like a group, showing they have fun on stage, while others are more a professional group, who are just doing their job as good as they can.

Dave Pegg is a good example of someone who (sometimes simultaneously) experienced both ends of the spectrum: Fairport Convention was a bunch of good pals who happened to also make music together. Jethro Tull was a professional organization who spent almost no time socializing with one another or even taking their meals together while on tour.

[JJ88]

Wakeman said in an interview that early on he realised that Yes weren't especially close socially, compared with The Strawbs who he'd just left. Having said that, him and Anderson seem to have a genuine friendship.

A lot of these bands ultimately end up as businesses first and foremost- familiarity seems to breed contempt.

[Dan Roth]

Wakeman said in an interview that early on he realised that Yes weren't especially close socially, compared with The Strawbs who he'd just left. Having said that, him and Anderson seem to have a genuine friendship.

A lot of these bands ultimately end up as businesses first and foremost- familiarity seems to breed contempt.

And yet, according to Tony Kaye, Yes (the current lineup) has ended up as a group of friends.