Yes and Genesis: similar, or, not so?

Richardh wrote:

ivan_2068 wrote: Lets see: Yes is based in the individual skills of their members while Genesis is a band that bases their sound in team work, so much that usually people believe they have no virtuoso players (what is wrong). Yes lyrics make almost no sense except for poetical purpose, Genesis lyrics are deep, narrative and make sense, almost as short stories. Genesis is an atmospheric band, Yes is weak in atmosphere. Yes was always sober at stage (except for Wakeman capes) while Genesis was theatrical. I agree with NetsNJFan, the guy that bvelieve Genesis is a rip-off of Yes is an idiot, because except for the symphonic influence in both bands there's no relation between them. Both bands are in the same level and are considered into the top 5 of most proggers. Iván   Those are some real generalisations Ivan.All those points are debatable.Yes had plenty of teamwork going on in their music.Genesis don't have a monopoly of teamwork in music. Suppers Ready makes a great deal of sense doesn't it? Genesis could be pretty obscure at times.Most Yes songs makes some sort of sense to me.Anderson writes lots of lyrics about God ..ie Awaken being one of the most obvious ones and wants to bring peace and harmony to the planet.Those 'hippy' themes are revisited many times. If you think that Yes hasn't any atmosphere then you need to dig out Fragile or Going for The One.Both are strong on atmosphere. The final comment baffled me.Yes always 'sober'.What about the giant mushrooms set on the Topographic tour? I therefore prove that Genesis and Yes were exactly the same band

In first place Richardh, I talk about general rules not about specific cases.

Everybody knows almost no Yes lyric makes sense, and that the most important characteristic is how good the words of their songs sound and not what they say, of course there are exceptions like Awaken or Don't Kill the Whale, but it's not the main characteristic of Yes music.

Genesis lyrics are mainly short stories that make sense, even Supper's Ready which is full of images makes sense as a whole, being a fight of good against evil, it's important to remember that this epic is based in the Book of Revelations which is also a text full of symbols, so why this song wouldn't.

Yes as any band has a deal of team work, but the solos of each and every member are as important  as the musical concept. In Genesis you don't have many solos and the few times you get some, it's the product of two or more instruments, so I still believe Genesis is based mostly on team work rather than in virtuoso atributes of their members.

Please Yes is not an atmospheric band, you can tell me Pink Floyd is because that is true but Yes is full of solos and they don't create an atmosphere except in a couple of songs.

But everything I say is based in a general rule, there will be solos in Genesis and some atmospheric tracks on Yes but that's theexception.

Iván

Swinton MCR wrote: Yes and Genesis - Both progressive Giants of the early seventies. Both Five peice - Vocal, Drum, Bass, Lead Guitar and Keys. Both English. Both heavily influenced by classical music. Both bands are a vehicle for musical excellence and compositional superiority. A lot of people were simultaneously fans of both..... Both bands wanted a visually striking stage-show, with good sound and the best lighting/effects etc... The similarities are there for all to see thats why these bands are 1 & 2 in the all time prog hall of fame (for most prog fans - butt- out floyd and ELP fanatics).

 

Those are all really good points. My feeling has been that two Genesis albums, "Trespass" and Nursery Cryme" seemed to feed-off of the appeal of In the Court of the Crimson King ....but not Yes. The only two Genesis tracks that somewhat resembled the music of Yes were "Watcher of the Skies" and (the instrumental breaks in) "Dancing with the Moonlit Knight". The biggest difference I see is that Yes was actually much stronger - musically and in sound - but Genesis were much, much more thoughtful in what they composed. Like night 'n' day, there.

And then there's the 'cover' factor: Yes (like Deep Purple in '68) first made a name for themselves by doing really good remakes of other's songs. Genesis is one of the very, very few in bands in Rock history that never put any type of cover tune on any of their albums.

Collins and Bruford were identical in style, early on - Hackett and Howe were nearly identical. And yet I still think that Collins was ingenious, later on in the 70s and into the early 80s, by capitalizing on the loud, crisp "big drum" sound. Many other rock groups seemed to try to emulate this novel sound, afterward.

 

Edited by ldlanberg

alan_pfeifer wrote: Dragon Phoenix wrote: Mr. Krinkle wrote: For me they both have this sort of tuneful, sweet, melodic feeling. But they are indeed very diffrent. Interesting. For me the main difference between the two bands is the melody. I like Yes a lot, but there is a distinct lack of great melodies in their work. I love Genesis (until the departure of Hacket), and I think one of their strongpoints is the marvellous melodies. How does Yes lack melodies?

They do not lack melodies, but their melodies are not great melodies, let alone marvellous melodies. IMHO of course.

HI guys, I've got to say, it's quite a funny thing, that's my first message on the forum... So hi there, I'm Michał, a prog fan from Poland...
Shortly:
In my opinion those two bands are different, maybe not as different as two other prog bands might be, let's say: Egg and Jethro Tull or RTF and Radiohead, to be extreme... They both (and I mean only the 70's period, as the most characteristic for the sound of both of them) try to create symphonic sound, although IMHO Yes does the thing in a more sophisticated way - their wall of sound is different in bass and in treble etc. - while Genesis just do it by playing (in most cases) the same chords or melodies on each sound level. In that case Yes succeeded playing with the orchestra, and the strings and brass only underlined the themes that had been played on the record by the guitar or synth - and I think if Genesis wanted to do that, their tracks would have to be rearranged definitely. Yes already sound symphonically, their arrangements - often including improvisation at the same time - are complex - and so, more progressive... Ands listen to the beggining of CTTE - Squire plays in the other tempo that the rest of the group... And what harmonies!!! What melodic richness... what scales... lots of jazz, lots of modern music in that rock... Genesis wolud NEVER play anything like this...
And atmosphere? Different kinds of atmospheric playing in both groups, synth-driven in Yes, altogether with some other keabords, vocals from all of the group, sometimes harp, an acoustic, ore electric guit (flageolet etc.) some bells etc. It was always abit more choral/new age - check out Tales, I get Up, check out Awaken, check out Magnification and the Keys - but when Yes had Wakeman they did not need mellotron, all his keybords altogether with their instruments are just more symphoinic than an artificial wall of sound recorded on the Ol'  Mello's tapes. While Genesis are always a bit more "fairytaily", their sound is Mellotron - 12 string - light hammond  - And  - Piano driven - and so widely copied in Italy.. (check out PFM or Semiramis, for instance). I don't say that kind of sound is worse or sth. Just notice it's different - though BOTH bands were very atmospheric (Yes was also improvising- soloing, what made it more prog!).
3rd. difference.
Yes were experimenting while Genesis were getting closer to the hard rock roots (the Lamb) and smooth, soft, symphonic pop (beginning with Trick of the Tail). Yes were penetrating New Age, the music of the East (Tales), the modern symphonic (Close), finally - fusion (Thanks Moraz!!! - check out Relayer and Soundchaser)... that's the point, ladies an gents... That's why I call Yes more progressive, despite liking Genesis..

Also note Yes' meta-physical (Blake'ian/New Ageian) feeling that Genesis music (and lyrics) lack!

And who the **** said Genesis don't use moogs?? What about their best pieces on Selling England and Lamb Lies Down?? Cinema Show, I know what I like, Battle Of Epping Forest, Slippermen, Firth Of Fifth, Riding The Scree, and, last but not least, In the Cage with a beautiful baroque theme on minimoog and many others! The typical Banks combo in the "mature" Genesis (from Selling to And Wind and Wuthering) was a mellotron and a Hammond, altogether with a piano (all like in the early years) and a moog to play solos!!! Banks' moogs is one of the few things for which I like Genesis!!!

jojim wrote:  Bill Bruford (drums) played for YES and later on GENESIS tours, when Collins was the frontman - singing.

 

I guess alot of you already know that Phil Collins, in 1972, set his sights on taking Bruford's place in Yes when the latter left. (Source: some autobiography by Collins I was reading in one of those huge, suburban bookstores). Jon Anderson replied to Phil that he could try out for Bruford's slot. Afterward, Phil had some sort of last minute change of heart. So it didn't happen.

Can you imagine what that might've been like though? Phil would have inserted "More Fool Me" somewhere into Tales from Topographic Oceans. Ok, so I'm getting a little carried away here...

Another near-connection is not truly a factoid, because I cannot readily confirm it: I recall reading (somewhere? sorry...titles always escape me) that after Steve Hackett abruptly left Genesis, the band immediately made gestures to the very independant Jeff Beck for replacement. But apparently Beck would only join if a certain price, or agreement, was met. And Genesis, after thinking it over, decided not to try to meet Beck's bottom line.

And then there's the Elton John - King Crimson thing (1970). Fripp decided not to take E.J. for Greg Lake's vocal spot. I think the voice would have fit really well, but I guess Fripp didn't want to get into a position of butting heads with an up-and-coming talent.

 

 

 

Edited by ldlanberg

The Critics are only looking at the fact that they are both progressive rock bands.

The thing you have to remeber about them is that....

The Critics are big dumbasses.

Edited by maani

to me, Yes have a more rocking sound. They sound happy a lot. Lots of just raw energy in their music.....and i agree with those who say its more based on the guitar/bass.

Vocalists are also very different. Jon Anderson's vocals fly high........Gabriels Vocals are down to earth. Both are super super good in their own way.

At the moment i prefer Yes.....but i recently discovered Selling England by the Pound and Lamb Lies down on broadway.......in a month i might think they're equal, or i might like Genesis more.

Everything i just said about genesis was sort of based on a first impression of them.

There's only one thing we all should know.....Tales From Topographic Oceans kicks the sh*t outta The Lamb Lies Down On Broadway..........HAHA..I'm just kidding!!.....I Love both YES and Genesis....and while I do prefer Tales over the Lamb....the Lamb IS one of my favorite prog albums.

To me, it's all about what band reached it's highest peak....and I must say that YES reached places in the musical heavens that Genesis never touched.....not to say that they could not have...but in my opinion it just never happened. I mean come on guys.....when a band writes something the magnitude of Awaken...which was sent from angels in heaven to bless our lives, can ANY band truly compete with such a grand effort.....The majesty of YES music is their ability to think over large formal structures...YES thinks BIG....If I were comparing the two bands using classical terminology.....YES is a symphony while Genesis is more of a chamber ensemble....not to say that there is anything wrong with that. Some people prefer a string quartet over a 200 piece orchestra.

Recently I have had the great fortune of rediscovering Genesis....Let me praise Genesis for a minute or two.....Genesis is nothing short of MAGICAL...their music is just pure MAGIC....thats the only word that really fits....it's mystical music. I LOVE GENESIS.....however at the same time I also rediscovered YES' RELAYER......OH MY GOD......what a Gargantuan Piece of music!!!!!!....YES is COLOSSAL, YES is a JUGGERNAULT!!!.......Genesis, while being an extremely potent  and cerebral and absolutely effective band...never reached Mount Olympus as YES did.

Will this be on the test?

GENESIS always had humour while YES' music lacks humour.

GENESIS have more memorable melodies and meaningful lyrics. YES' emphasis and strength seems to be the technical prowess.

GENESIS would be totally unthinkable (to me at least) without Tony Banks. Any member of YES is replaceable (perhaps not Chris Squire).