Protest at Yesshows!

lazland wrote: Blacksword wrote: I would have thought Rick would be proud as punch, that his son is up there with such agreat band. Like passing on the family business.. For that reason, the claims on the protestors flyers are likely to be bullsh*t. Wakeman has been quoted more than once as saying that he is proud as punch of his son, but regards the present lineup as the most expensive tribute band in the world.

Oh well. I bet he didn't think much of Drama era Yes either..



I've only seen clips of the current line up, and they sound pretty good to me. I think all of the bands manifestations have had something good to offer.

cstack3 wrote: lazland wrote: Blacksword wrote: I would have thought Rick would be proud as punch, that his son is up there with such agreat band. Like passing on the family business.. For that reason, the claims on the protestors flyers are likely to be bullsh*t. Wakeman has been quoted more than once as saying that he is proud as punch of his son, but regards the present lineup as the most expensive tribute band in the world. Hmmm...he MAY have a point, unless this incarnation recorded some original material before the tour!  Are they touring in support of a new release?  I'm not aware of it if they are.  At least all of the previous incarnations of Yes recorded something unique, I have to wonder if this is in the plans?  I'm doubtful, unless Jon has split the scene entirely. Pity, the band got along so well onstage during the 35th Anniversary tour!

The last time I saw Yes (Rome, summer of 2003), they were not touring in support of a new album - Magnification had been released two years before that. They played two tracks from that album, and then most of the staples of their live performances. True, both Jon and Rick were part of the band at the time, but the situation was not that different. And then, there are many other bands that are touring regularly without any new material. Blue Oyster Cult are out of a record deal, but still play regularly on the US live circuit, and occasionally elsewhere.

Negoba wrote: There is certainly an element of sour grapes from Jon and Rick. Not that it's unjustified, but they are looking alot like grumpy old men. I'm sure some of it has to do with money, but other people's business affairs do not belong to me.   But for folks who have never seen Yes especially, this is a great opportunity. There is no arguing that the show is great.

Slartibartfast wrote: Just say no to Yes?

Negoba wrote:  In fact, he almost died.

Chris Squire owns the YES name, he being the only founding member who has never left the band, or the bathtub (small LOL). I believe the publishing rights are also under his control.

  So, any band he is in can legally be called YES. Various postings are spot on: Jon and Rick are getting paid via performance royalties, 3 out of 5 members is an average quotient, nothing unusual there, and it is about money and ego for Jon and Rick.

   But, I am OK with that. Without their wanting to be stars and wanting the cash, there would not still be anything YES, with or without them. This is part of all showbiz, not just prog, and not just YES. I would be upset if my life work were usurped, and I had to stand on the sidelines and watch, powerless and not participating. But, I would also be proud that it has the strength and quality to be carried on without me.

88melter

lazland wrote: Blacksword wrote: I would have thought Rick would be proud as punch, that his son is up there with such agreat band. Like passing on the family business.. For that reason, the claims on the protestors flyers are likely to be bullsh*t. Wakeman has been quoted more than once as saying that he is proud as punch of his son, but regards the present lineup as the most expensive tribute band in the world.

Well, he's not one of the Grumpy Old Men for nothing!  

   It IS true that major players in the arts generally get a big pass on stuff that the general public, or even politicos, cannot get away with. I think this is mostly because showbiz ultimately does not matter all that much.

   Elvis didn't sign any treaties, Frank Sinatra drank onstage, and John Lennon was a public drunk before he was a martyr.

   As far as YES and this board are concerned, we all know that talent + ego = longevity in the music bizness, and YES has enough of both for several lifetimes, in fact, I think Jon has already written songs about three of the aforementioned lives.

(lol?)

88melter

JLocke wrote: Negoba wrote: There is certainly an element of sour grapes from Jon and Rick. Not that it's unjustified, but they are looking alot like grumpy old men. I'm sure some of it has to do with money, but other people's business affairs do not belong to me.   But for folks who have never seen Yes especially, this is a great opportunity. There is no arguing that the show is great. Couldn't disagree with you more. Jon and Rick have no reason to cry 'sour grapes', since they still get a cut of the profits from the golden days (as far as I know), and have had very successful solo careers outside of Yes. It's mind-boggling to me how many people jump at Yes' defense no matter what. They could commit murder and people on this board would be saying it was somehow the victim's fault.

I think they are taking both Jon's and epescially Rick's comments somewhat out of context.  Both have waffled back and forth on this issue, so it's not that hard to slant a few of their comments negatively.  While money is no doubt an issue here, it seems like tour length, going abroad, health issues, and scheduling conflicts are all at least as important.

^ Funny, I love Yes more than Genesis, and I think both modern incarnations are sh*t.