Is Yes really Yes anymore? - Progressive Rock Music Forum

SouthSideoftheSky wrote:

Steve Howe joined the band some 50 years ago, and participated on all of the classic albums from The Yes Album to Drama, and then again in the 90's and beyond. Alan White has been on all Yes albums since he joined in 1972. Geoff Downes goes back to the Drama album in 1980, and the upcoming album will be his fourth studio release with the band. Billy Sherwood has been contributing on and off for 30 years, as song-writer, session man, extra live guitarist, producer/mixer/engineer, and now full-time bassist, etc.

Yet, some people here claim that this line-up doesn't have the right to the band name! Come on, people! How many roads must a man walk down before you call him a man? Aren't you setting the requirements a little high?

None of them are original members though and none of them had primary control over the band's creative process. No matter how much they contributed to the band's sound during an aspect of YES' career, they were still nothing more than employees of Squire, the brand name owner of this enterprise. Without his conductor's shrewdness, for my liking it isn't YES any longer.

As mentioned above, YES really is a tribute band of its past glory and this new album is likely only put out to appease the fanbase as an excuse for touring. Nothing wrong with that of course. I'm sure many will be happy to see a few classic members performing all the hits.

I think what we're discussing here, or attempting to, is YES' relevance as a creative artist and that's where some of us have found that they have long been irrelevant as such for 20 years now in fact. Personally i just think it tarnishes their legend by releasing a series of crap.

https://rateyourmusic.com/~siLLy_puPPy

siLLy puPPy wrote:

SouthSideoftheSky wrote:

Steve Howe joined the band some 50 years ago, and participated on all of the classic albums from The Yes Album to Drama, and then again in the 90's and beyond. Alan White has been on all Yes albums since he joined in 1972. Geoff Downes goes back to the Drama album in 1980, and the upcoming album will be his fourth studio release with the band. Billy Sherwood has been contributing on and off for 30 years, as song-writer, session man, extra live guitarist, producer/mixer/engineer, and now full-time bassist, etc.

Yet, some people here claim that this line-up doesn't have the right to the band name! Come on, people! How many roads must a man walk down before you call him a man? Aren't you setting the requirements a little high?

None of them are original members though and none of them had primary control over the band's creative process. No matter how much they contributed to the band's sound during an aspect of YES' career, they were still nothing more than employees of Squire, the brand name owner of this enterprise. Without his conductor's shrewdness, for my liking it isn't YES any longer.

As mentioned above, YES really is a tribute band of its past glory and this new album is likely only put out to appease the fanbase as an excuse for touring. Nothing wrong with that of course. I'm sure many will be happy to see a few classic members performing all the hits.

I think what we're discussing here, or attempting to, is YES' relevance as a creative artist and that's where some of us have found that they have long been irrelevant as such for 20 years now in fact. Personally i just think it tarnishes their legend by releasing a series of crap.

Like I have said before, I don't think a focus on the original members fits well with Yes's history and nature as a band. The original line-up only did two albums, and most fans agree that those are not the band's best. Many people who joined later have made very important contributions to the band, and Howe is clearly one of them.

Truth is that Yes is a band that has always kept evolving, and line-up changes has always been usual with them. I absolutely reject your claim that all members of the band have been "nothing more than employees of Squire". To the contrary, I see the band as a vehicle for a certain sound, and no specific individual is essential for that sound. For example, the Anderson Bruford Wakeman Howe album is a Yes album in all but name, and it sounds totally like Yes, even though Squire was not involved.

I do agree that as of late, they have been like a tribute band of themselves, but that was because they have only been performing live and not made any new music. Now that a new studio record is finally coming, I feel that they are more than a tribute band again. Is the new record merely an excuse for more touring? Maybe. But personally, I am a record guy. I don't go to many live shows, I listen to records. And new music from Yes is not something we've seen a lot of in recent decades. So I am hungry for a new Yes studio album.

I don't expect The Quest to be a great Yes album, but neither do I think it will be crap.

Edited by SouthSideoftheSky - July 15 2021 at 03:34

siLLy puPPy wrote:

^ i don't think you understand the business aspect of bands of the 70s. Whoever owns the copyright owns the band. Just because others contributed doesn't mean that Squire didn't have the final say. That's how all bands work. There's usually ONE member who basically OWNS the band.

Chris Squire was obviously extremely important for the band, not just musically. I know that. But I don't see how that proves that the current line-up cannot really be Yes. Besides, as far as I've heard, Chris wanted the band to move on.

siLLy puPPy wrote:

I just would rather see a band go down as a legend rather than blemish it with mediocre meh.

Yeah, I agree with that. Some of the recent live albums they've put out have been very unimpressive, and I think we would have been better off without these really. If the upcoming studio record is going to be really mediocre, it would be worse than no record at all. But I think that there is hope that The Quest will be a worthy Yes album. At least, it would be unfair to dismiss it before it is even out.

Edited by SouthSideoftheSky - July 16 2021 at 02:00

"It's bleedin demised...."

One does nothing yet nothing is left undone.
Haquin

Yes is a brand name and Howe (and possible Alan White) have the rights, so Yes it is. The brand just draws attention to the work. Whether one wants to go along for the ride is up to you.

Edited by tdfloyd - July 20 2021 at 14:26

Yes?! No!!

"It just has none of the qualities of your work that I find interesting. Abandon [?] it." - Eno

^

Maybe white topographic punks on fragile dope!

Actually maybe the question should really be...

Was YES ever YES in the first place?

https://rateyourmusic.com/~siLLy_puPPy

New video just out

Not as bad as i feared but doesn't sound like Yes either except a Howe guitar lick here and there

https://rateyourmusic.com/~siLLy_puPPy

I thought "Touch & Go" by ELP was playing when I first hit play in that new song lol.

Yes is one of my favorite bands ever, but I haven't paid much attention to their latest material and I've even lost track of who is in the band anymore.

But since the name thing has been debated, what happens if Anderson and Wakeman want to release music under the Yes name? Why are Howe and White the ones that have the name and not them? Who decides who can use the name?

I remember when Anderson, Wakeman, Howe and Brufford who were basically the full classic lineup without Squire had to release it under a different name and couldn't use "Yes".

I shook my head and smiled a whisper knowing all about the place

Poll Question: Do you consider the current lineup of Yes to really be Yes?
Poll Choice	Votes	Poll Statistics
Yes	17	[20.99%]
No	53	[65.43%]
I don't know	11	[13.58%]
You can not vote in this poll