General Rating: 2

Introduction

ALBUM REVIEWS:

• Yes
• Time And A Word
• The Yes Album
• Fragile
• Close To The Edge
• Yessongs
• Tales From Topographic Oceans
• Relayer
• Going For The One
• Tormato
• Drama
• Yesshows
• 90125
• Big Generator
• Anderson, Bruford, Wakeman & Howe
• Union
• Talk
• Keys To Ascension
• Keys To Ascension 2
• Open Your Eyes
• The Ladder

VIDEOS:

• Yessongs

This page also hosts comments from the following Certified Commentators: Jeff Blehar, Rich Bunnell, Ben Greenstein, Richard C. Dickison, Nick Karn, Joel Larsson, Philip Maddox, John McFerrin.

You might not have noticed it, but I gave a lower rating to Yes than to most of its not less ambitious contemporaries, including Genesis and Jethro Tull. Now before I get flamed by millions of loyal Yesheads (or just get despised by them in silence, which would be even worse), let me quickly offer an explanation for this mishappening.
Yes were a fine little prog rock band that pretty much defined the genre: they might not have been its immediate fathers (this honour still falls to King Crimson), but they really came to epithomize it par excellence, with their erratic and lengthy song structures, spacey meaningless lyrics, superprofessional instrumentation and a heavy classical influence. Albums like Fragile or Tales From Topographic Oceans, whatever else I or anybody else might say about them, are so hugely mastodontic in their appearance, so grandiose, pretentious and pompous, and, on the other hand, so well-balanced by some of the finest playing ever seen in rock music, that it's impossible to understand what prog was really about without having assimilated (or, at least, having tried to assimilate) them. Along with Led Zep and Pink Floyd, the band pretty much defined the entire sound of the Seventies. "So", you must think, "why does this freak go ahead and put down such a fine ensemble?"
For several reasons, actually. See, I don't like prog-rock just for the sake of being 'progressive', i.e., long-winded, symphonic and mystical. Moreover, I'm certain you shouldn't like it for these things alone as well. I really only care for those prog rock bands who manage to make this long-winded, symphonic and uncomprehensible music interesting: whatever that might mean. It might mean making this music rock out, at the same time giving it a charming 'nationalistic' feel (right, it's early Jethro Tull I'm pointing at); it might mean making this music sound really dark and medieval, taking us on to a fantastic trip through time (yeah, I do mean Peter Gabriel's Genesis); finally, it might mean making this music acquire a creepy, brooding feel, so that it sounds like something which actually lied for a long time in the obscurest depths of your conscience and is disturbed only now, so that the music seems to come out of your head rather than out of your earphones (yup, some, but not all, of Pink Floyd's output fits that category). Yes had none of that. Their music was always what you might call 'prog for the sake of prog'. Sometimes it feels that the band's only desire in life was to get as complicated as possible so as to blow away all competition, and, what's even worse, sometimes it feels that this complicatedness only served to mask a general lack of truly creative ideas. Like every single bit of professionally played prog music, it can really blow you away if you give in to it - but then again, anything can blow you away once you give yourself in to it. I can't really give in to it. That's the same reason I'm not a huge fan of King Crimson - a lot of verve and professionalism, but not much to say.
Another reason I feel so iffy about Yes is somewhat more personal, although I know that a lot of people share it too. Namely, I can hardly stand their lead singer Jon Anderson. The songs he wrote were mostly good, but his singing (and he's the only lead vocalist on all Yes records, except for the few pathetic efforts recorded by the band in the Eighties without him) is something that truly turns me off. He's got a good falsetto vocal, for sure: but it sounds so uniform on all the songs that you really can't help but come up with the conception of Jon being really a robot acquired by the band in desperate search for a singer. Indeed, he so rarely changes his tone and pitch that all of this output ends up sounding like robotic, emotionless and generally bored 'vocal-recording' - a far cry from Ian Anderson's flashy posing or Peter Gabriel's character inscenerations. If you really dig that tone, okay. You'll get by just fine. But me, oh no: I just think his range sucks, 's all.
That said, the band really did some good music. Sometimes they even did some very good music. They did some really ass-kickin' live shows where they played good music. Of course, quite often they came up with very bad music, as well, but nobody's perfect. Take this as an excuse for writing my reviews. And really, now that I've vented all I had to vent in the band-rating and the intro paragraph, I guess I can be more tolerant on the actual reviews - while reading them, you'll eventually understand that I don't hate Yes at all, in fact, I mostly enjoy their 1969-72 output and even selected records from the later period, not to mention that overtime I've slowly become more and more accustomed to the band's sound - I started out hating this band, which I don't do any more. Which means that even if you're a Yes fan you're still invited to read them.
Lineup: Jon Anderson (lead vocals), Chris Squire (bass), Peter Banks (guitar), Tony Kaye (keyboards), Bill Bruford (drums). There were enormous changes in this line-up which I just don't have the guts to list here, so I think I'll confine them to the actual album reviews. Suffice it to say that what is known as the 'classical lineup' consists of same as above minus Banks and Kaye plus Steve Howe (guitar, added 1970) and Rick Wakeman (keyboards, added 1972). Apart from that, almost every new Yes album was made by a new line-up. The bastards!!!

General Evaluation:

Listenability: 2/5. Too much reliance on complexity and atmosphere without a really solid melodic pattern. Too much.
Resonance: 2/5. Unless you're deeply lost in the fantasy world, Yes music is as resonant as a dead duck - but if you're as puffed up as Jon Anderson's lyrical philosophy, this might work for you.
Originality: 3/5. Yes didn't exactly create progressive rock, but they did help bring the genre to its peak, along with their more talented colleagues (such as King Crimson and Genesis, if you really wanna know).
Adequacy: 2/5. Yes are inadequate. More often than not. If not for their chops which I truly respect, this rating would be even lower.
Overall: 2.25 = * * on the rating scale.

What do YOU think about Yes? Mail your ideas

Your worthy comments:

Josh <[email protected]> (19.05.99)

Well, while your reviews for Yes are entertaining, I hardly think many Yes fans will appriciate your bashing them. But it doesn't really bother me any, i've heard people, (including my brother), bash Yes much more than you have. For example, on the Amazon.com site, someone said listening to nails scratching on a blackboard was less irritating than Yes' music. Someone else said that he dares anybody to buy a Yes album. Either way, i've always been extremely fond of Yes. Jon's voice isn't for everyone's personal taste, at times very annoying. Though I hate their music from 1983-1994 has always driven me crazy, the Keys To Ascension albums are good, and I even like Open Your Eyes! Yes is, of course, very daring, even to this day. I think that made a lot of people mad (or jealous). Whenever they got bashed by critics and fans, they would just keep getting better (In my opinion). They are very underrated, but I see where you have your complaints. And plus, they never did any drugs either!
P.S. (21.08.99). Once again, I've changed my mind, I ABSOLUTELY AGREE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Okay, so not completely, but I'm sorry to say, I hate Close To The Edge, and I love Going For The One. Fragile is okay, and Tales isn't that good either. I think I outgrew Yes a little!

Cole <[email protected]> (18.08.99)

First, Jon's lyrics aren't supposed to make sense, they're just tailored to fit the vocal melodies--to sound good. Second, why are people so blasted negative sometimes? Opinions are very subjective, especially when it comes to music. I happen to like Jon's voice, but I can't stand Rod Stewart or John Fogerty. You don't see me going on about it on those pages, though, do you? Simply stating once whether you like or dislike a certain person's voice is enough. Third (and finally), George... if you can't stand Yes so much, why do you have all these albums by them? I don't buy Rod Stewart or John Fogerty albums...

<[email protected]> (24.10.99)

All of your Yes reviews, including your introduction, are ridiculous and meandering. You don't seem to make any sense: fragile really rocks, but Close to the Edge is boring!?!! Even though fragile contains the most filler of any of their seventies albums ('Cans and Brahams', 'five percent for nothing', 'We Have Heaven'--all throwaways, well performed, but filler nonetheless). Close to the Edge rocks just as much as 'Roundabout' and 'Heart of the Sunrise', and more than 'South Side of the Sky' and 'Long distance Runaround', especially 'Siberian Khatru'. Close is the best album the band ever made, and you give it the same rating as Anderson, B, W , howe?! What the hell is wrong with you? I can understand if you gave fragile, yes album, Close, Tales, and Relayer poor reviews and then gave ABWH a good review, or vice versa, but the inconsistancy kills me. It's like giving Beatles White Album and Sgt Peppers a 5, and Abbey Road a 10. No sense there. Every Yes album from Yes Album to Going for the ONe is classic, and very similar in sense of melody, style, and playing. Besides, you gave Lamb Lies down on Broadway a 6 as well, so who am I talking to here? (I also hesitate to understand why you bought all those crappy 80s and 90s yes albums if you didn't even like most of the 70s stuff). Oh and one more thing. You say you hate Anderson due to his range. Well, you then give some of the best reviews to Yes and time and a Word, easily the worst singing of his career, and the most monotonous. He hadn't even grown into his voice yet. And 'TIme and Word'...you think Close to the Edge is boring? The 18 minutes of 'Close to the Edge' hold up better than than the 3 or so minutes of that dud. (Theres a time, blah blah, and it's right for me.) gag me.

Ben Greenstein <[email protected]> (31.12.99)

I would just like to state that I, for one, totally agree with your placement of Yes as a two star group. Personally, I'd give them one star, but that's just my own lame opinion.
What I don't get is how Yes has as big a fan base as they do (and do they ever!) when their music is - how shall I put this nicely? - BORING! Even on a song like "Heart Of The Sunrise," where there is plenty of cool, complex stuff going on, more of the song is taken up with uninteresting filler than actual melodic songcraft. Come to think of it - did these guys EVER pen a memorable melody? Sure, there was "Owner Of A Lonely Heart," but that's often considered a sellout, and there was "All Good People," but that's (and this is my actual opinion) not a very good song. If Hall and Oates did that same melody, you'd all hate it, but since Yes does it, it's great. The rest of the band's songs are completely lacking in melody and mood.
Which brings me to another point. The main thing I like about prog-rock as I understand it - groups like Genesis (who were a much better band, even in their later years) and King Crimson (who I honestly haven't heard very much of yet) - is the atmosphere that it creates. Of all of the Yes songs I've heard, the only one to even hint at another world is "The Fish," and that one's just a brief instrumental. Besides that, the only atmospheric thing about the group are their album covers.
Don't get me wrong! I'm not saying that Yes were a crappy group, I'm... oh, wait. I am. Yes, in my opinion, suck. And I don't even have a problem with the guy's voice or lyrics, I just think that there are bands that (emphasis on the next part) DO THE SAME THINGS BETTER. To be honest, I think that Styx are a better band than Yes - they still suck, but I'd much rather listen to "Mr. Roboto" than "Long Distance Runaround."
I like "Starship Trooper" and "And You And I" but those are about the only songs that I wouldn't mind hearing again. And they're honestly not that good. In fact, the only reason I bought any Yes albums is because I heard a really awesome song on my local "hardcore" radio station that sounded like Supertramp - but it wasn't Supertramp, so I thought it might be Yes. It wasn't Yes either. To be honest, I'm glad it wasn't - there's nothing sadder than a band that can only pull of one great song. Oh, wait - there is. A band that CAN'T pull of one great song. A band like Yes.
P.S. Isn't "The Clap" a sexually transmitted disease?

Rich Bunnell <[email protected]> (31.12.99)

While Yes isn't exactly my favorite band in the whole world, I pretty much disagree with Ben's last comment. While I don't enjoy them nearly as much as other prog-rock like Genesis (who were much more capable of crafting a melody) the band has a certain "jumbled" charm of their own which shows up heavily in such songs as the title tracks to Close To The Edge and Going For The One and basically all of The Yes Album. I don't even mind Jon Anderson's voice because it doesn't tend to destroy promising musical material around it, as does, say, Geddy Lee's voice from Rush. Basically, I find Yes's music to be extremely entertaining, maybe overlong at several points but still chock-full of interesting ideas. I doubt that the band even has a place in my Top 30 bands of all time but still-- they deserve some respect.
Regarding Hall & Oates....umm....I don't think that those two wusses would even come close to writing even as complex a melody as the "Your Move" section of "All Good People"(they were too busy writing obvious crap like "Your kiss! Your kiss! Your kiss is on my list!"). While I respect the opinions of others, I really don't consider Yes to be as crap as Ben makes them out to be, and....err....-Styx- is better than them? You mean Styx is better than -any- band?

Anthony Walters <[email protected]> (07.01.2000)

I do like some of those albums, especially the Ladder. I do think that the best collection for YES fans is Classic Yes. The live version of "roundabout" and " I'v seen all good people" are two of the best live songs I have ever heard.

Steve Knowlton <[email protected]> (04.02.2000)

I haven't listened to a lot of Yes, but what I've heard drives me crazy because of the rhythm section. These guys don't seem to understand that a "rhythm" section is supposed to provide a "rhythm." The bass player goes nuts on every song -- why do they even have a guitar player if the bass is playing solos. And the drummer never plays a backbeat. If it's prog-rock then it's gotta rock. Give me Foghat any day.

Jeff Blehar <[email protected]> (23.02.2000)

Yes? No!
I've got this feeling that I'm the kind of guy that hard-core Yes fans hate. "Roundabout?" Love it! "I've Seen All Good People?" Alright! Those first two albums? Probably their absolute best! Tales From The Topographic Oceans? I'd happily burn a stack of copies in a sacrificial bonfire! That being said, you might know already that I'm not the greatest fan of prog . So what the hell am I doing here? Well, I've got a bunch of their albums, and I *kinda* like Yes - Rich is right, they have this jumbled English charm of their own. But they're almost completely humourless (except for those first two albums, which I like), and so taken with their own chops that I just want to slap them all sometimes. And you know what? When Anderson, Bruford, Wakeman, Howe, and Squire die and go to hell, they'll be locked in a room and forced to play nothing but TWELVE-BAR BLUES. Ha! Eternal torment for those wankers!
Okay, I'm being quite mean, I suppose. To make up for it, I'd like to say that I really don't mind Jon Anderson's countertenor voice a bit - in fact, I kinda like its airy tone, even though I'll agree the man has about as much emotion as a stone slab. Perhaps it's because my singing voice is similarly high (which is to say I'm used to hearing voices up in the clouds), but I respect anyone who can get that far up the scale without turning into annoying Geddy Lee-isms. It takes a real man to sing like a woman.
That being said, his lyrics are unabatedly atrocious; I can only enjoy Yes on a background music level (which is not necessarily bad, since most of my music is background music) where I tune out the words and just listen to their harmonic sound, since the minute I start to think about what he's saying, I choke with disbelief. But musically, these guys COULD be pretty interesting, and generally speaking they were better when they kept it shorter: "Roundabout" is one thing, the hideously bloated "Ritual - Nous Somme Du Soleil" is another entirely. Alright, on with the massacre!

Ben Greenstein <[email protected]> (23.06.2000)

Oh, man, I feel like such a dork for writing that. Did I really say that Styx is better than Yes? They were entertaining, but Yes had some really GREAT songs, like "Heart Of The Sunrise" and the entire Close To The Edge album. These guys will never be as high in my book as Genesis, or even ELP, but they are certainly a fine group well worth my time. I've just GOT to pick up that Tales album as soon as possible!

Philip Maddox <[email protected]> (07.07.2000)

Chalk me up to the list of people who think you've underrated Yes. I think Yes is a great band! I even like their really long songs (though I must admit that I've never heard Tales From Topographic Oceans) - they manage to pack them with enough ideas and beautiful melodies to keep my interest throughout. I like Jon's voice, too. It doesn't have much of a range, but he hits every note and makes his voice fit into each song very well. I think that Yes music had a purpose as well - Jon was a very spiritual person and probably wrote lyrics that only make sense to him. The music was always well played and created unique moods - no other song makes me feel quite like 'The Gates Of Delirium'. Of course, the main problem with Yes was that long songs can go two ways - they can be beautiful of they can be boring. If a song isn't very good and it lasts for 10 minutes (like 'To Be Over'), it can easily put you to sleep. And like I've said, I've never heard Tales, so I can't judge the tunes on that album. All I've heard from it is 'The Revealing Science Of God', which I liked. I haven't heard much of their late period stuff either, so I can't say anything about more recent Yes albums (but I DO have Union... *shudders*...).

Nic Neufeld <[email protected]> (19.07.2000)

Given the intense flak Yes has taken on this site, I figured as a devoted Yes-head do my best to defend them. I am an 18 year old guitarist and bass guitarist, and an avid Yes fan. I own all of their albums from The Yes Album to Going For The One, as well as the Ladder. To let you know how much of a Yes fan I really am, listen to this. I ACTUALLY LIKE Tales From Topographic Oceans. I must be a nut, right? No not really. I started out with their more simple 70s stuff, like 'Roundabout', 'All Good People', etc. Then a guitar playing friend suggest I try Close To The Edge. I waded through it the first time. I was terribly confused, so confused I disliked it. But I kept listening to it. Soon, as I became aware of the different sections, and I grew to anticipate each and every note, I fell in love with the song. I have spent so many hours listening to it. Its one of the only tapes I play in my car. Yes is in spite of what others say a VERY melodic band. That is exactly what they base their songs on, melodies, not chord progressions like most pop/rock groups. Steve Howe is not a strumming kind of player, if you know what I mean. Jon Andersons voice matches perfectly to Yes's majestic sound. Imagine if, say, Neil Diamond were to sing "In and around the lake mountains come out of the sky and they stand there.." Theres a disturbing mental picture for you. He is not nearly as annoying as other progrock voices, such as Geddy "Castrated Hamster" Lee. Also, as far as someone complaining about Squire not being a rhythm player, good God, what do you want? Just another player playing the root note four to the bar? Squire is actually my favorite musician ever. His rich full tone inspires me to waste lots of money in pursuit of his tone, his flowing, lightning quick runs and riffs heavily influence my own style. I think he establishes the rhythm well enough, and still manages to revolutionize the art of bass playing at the same time. Anyway, I love EVERYTHING about 70s Yes, as no doubt you can sense, but I must admit, 80s and 90s Yes doesnt do much for me. They still rock live, though. Over 50 or not....

Kimberly Hipps <[email protected]> (05.09.2000)

I don't have a lot to say except that I love YES!  I am a young fan and as a classically trained musician myself I can decidedly say that their music is some of the most beautiful, complex, incredible music I have heard since Mozart or Beethoven ( who were also dismissed by the ears of the masses of their days).   YES has never written music to appeal to the masses like Genesis, Styx or most other groups (apparently, 'Owner Of A Lonely Heart' can only appeal to high-browed intellectuals - G. S.).  They write music to appeal to the intelligent and trained ears of true progressive music fans.  The thing about progressive music is that sometimes it takes years, decades or centuries for the masses to catch up because it is so progressive!  I have never read this page before but now that I have done so I am truly embarrassed for you.  You write about not liking YES and their music.  To those of us who are fully musically trained in the classical music genre you are simply displaying you ignorance of what it is that YES, as a supremely talented group, accomplish (the big problem is that me and Kimberly, we both know perfectly well what it is that Yes are accomplishing; I just say that they accomplish it in a far worse way than certain other prog bands that Kimberly probably never heard about, if all she can do is compare them to pop-era Genesis or Styx - G.S.).  I say this with all due respect and urge you to become more knowledgable about what it is that YES does for a living.  They compose and I applaud them for not selling out just to be on the radio (where they are still present quite often, unlike, say, Gentle Giant - G. S.)!
Oh and please find a new career. You have no business spreading your limited opinion around!
Sincerely and musically, Kimberly Hipps

Kelly <[email protected]> (12.09.2000)

Let me start by saying that I am an open-minded YES freak and respect all of your opinions. I even AGREE with a lot of them and enjoyed a chuckle here and there. (Laughing with you, not at you, I assure you) I also like, listen to and have libraries of several of the other bands mentioned in your writings. But for what I'm reading, the assorted reasons that several of you dislike YES so much are the same, exact reasons that I and other fans are driven to the rabid points we are.
I mean, it's just all part of the packaging. Believe me, even after 23 years of listening to my favorite band in the world, all time, hands down(!), sometimes I still have no idea what the heck Jon is singing about or why they spent the last 6 minutes musically meandering on a piece of music. But I don't care. Just because I'm a big fan doesn't mean that I have to like every single thing they do or "understand" every song on every album, etc. Just like I don't agree with/like every thing my favorite sports team does. Or there may be a movie or a book that you rave about and I just won't "get it". That doesn't make it bad.
All I know is that it's a great feeling when a lot of those "meaningless" phrases start to mean something to you. I can listen to some songs over the years and get totally different meanings than I ever did before. And sometimes it's nice to "go away" for 10 minutes. I've have listened to TFTO (NOT all at the same time) or Awaken or whatever only to realize that the song ended a little while ago. It's OK. (Gotta go, the little men in white coats are coming)
And YES is simply a piece of the prog-rock puzzle. They along with Crimson, Genesis, Floyd, blah, blah all make up the journey. None of these bands alone IS prog-rock, they all are. "If everyone was the same we'd be bored." And all prog-rock was and is experimentation. Now considering other elements that people where experimenting with during this time maybe YES didn't always know when to put the test tubes away. But, at least they and other bands had the guts and resources to try their ideas. I would much prefer that period of music to today's pre-packaged "look good before you sound… well, you know" anytime.
And YES fans - chill out! People are allowed not to like everything we do and visa-versa. Try and have a sense of humor about it. You know, even Jon lightened up after a few years when it came to his lyrics.
Chris, Steve, Jon, et al. will always have special places in my heart and nothing anyone can write, say or do will ever change that. So deal with it! Now, as long as you don't set up a web site like this about my 2nd favorite band, Rush, there'll be no problems. ;-)

Brian Van Zanten <[email protected]> (19.09.2000)

I became a Yes fan ever since I heard "Owner Of A Lonely Heart".  That became my favorite song ever since I first heard it.  I loved "Owner Of A Lonely Heart" so much that I listened to 90125 a lot.  My dad got me Highlights (one of their compilation albums).  I listened to it and I loved it.  I saw them in concert at Van Andel Arena (which is in Michigan).  I am from Michigan.  My name is Nick.  Yes came to Van Andel Arena on November 5 1997.  The live version of "Owner Of A Lonely Heart" was so cool.  I am glad that they did "Owner Of A Lonely Heart"

Joel Larsson <[email protected]> (02.10.2000)

First, I have to say that I haven't listen to more then three Yes-albums (yet), so excuse me if I'm wrong if I say that Jon Anderson has one of the most personal voices in the entire rock history. And it's always used as an istrument itself, just like Jimi Hendrix used his voice. Well, Jimi was more technical than Jon, while Jimi's voice never should be good in the songs Yes wrote, which all are custom-maded for Jon.
So, tell me: Should Yes be Yes with another vocalist? What about David Byron? Maybe, OK. James Hetfield? Steven Tyler? Hendrix? Springsteen? NEVER! So shut up,all Anderson-haters! No Yes without Anderson!

Robert Grazer <[email protected]> (07.10.2000)

I am a Yes fan, but I am also happy that you are not. So many internet critics are fans of Yes that it sometimes seems dull looking at all of the reviews praising the band (if only I could find some one who hates the Beatles). Anyway, there is a lot of progressive rock that you seem to hate (some of your other 2 star bands are Renaissance and ELP). The only point in favor of Yes I wish to bring up is your criticism of Jon Anderson's vocals. How can you do this while Bob Dylan is one of your five-star artists? I don't get it.
Anyway, this is one of the major areas I disagree with you on. In my humble opinion Yes and Pink Floyd arethe best bands of the "classic rock" era, penning two of the greatest albums Close to the Edge and Animals. Once again, I'm glad we disagree on Yes.
[Special author note: I don't exactly hate Yes, and I certainly don't hate either ELP or Renaissance. 'Criticize' is a better term, I think.]

John Morgan <[email protected]> (12.11.2000)

After reading your review I felt inclined to write you. I became a Yes fan with the release of 90125. I was thirteen at the time. Since then, I have collected all of their albums along with a large number of solo works by various members. I found your review of the band very interesting. You see, as an avid Yes fan it is sometimes hard to keep from maintaining a "do no wrong" attitude towards them. I seem to be a little less critical than most including Yes fans. Unfortunately, most reviews either show a strong disdain or a great love for the band. Yours is the first I've read that seems to be filled with the good and the bad in as objective of a fashion as I've ever seen. It helped me to perhaps take a step back and be a little more aware of the weaknesses in the band as various times. They will always be my favorite, and I'm glad you appear to no longer hate them. I could ramble on for sometime with my own opinions which would loosely correspond to any number of other Yes fans, but by now you've heard it all before. I would just like you to know that I can appreciate your perspective and I wish people would be little more honest sometimes. Too many folks love to hate them because it's "the thing to do."
Best wishes, John
P.S. Okay, one opinion, sorry. Going For The One is my favorite Yes album. Okay, I feel better. :)

Stephanie <[email protected]> (23.11.2000)

My name is Stephanie. I am a 15 year old YES fan. Now don't worry I am not going to be mean because of the fact that you site totally disses YES and everything they ever did for music. Actually I think some Prog your right about. Some of the music goes on and on about nothing. It goes no where. It is music for the sake of saying "oh yeah my song is twenty minutes long". And sometimes it is twenty minutes of crap! But in my opinion I don't think YES was doing this. For example the song "Gates of Delirium". That song was a FULL idea when Jon Anderson brought it into the studio. It was complete. The other members of the band made the vision come alive. You say you don't like Jon's voice. Look at it from this perspective: He had a vision. He knew what he wanted to do in music and he went for it with his heart and soul. Give him credit for that part. And about Steve Howe: He went and played like no one else. He wanted to be like none other. He wanted to be original. So to each their own in their taste of music. You have a right to your own opinion, but remember that YES was one of the only bands that has EVER totally gone and done their own thing. The defied all boundaries. There are a hell of a lot of bands that just feed the pop machine. YES didn't. You seem like a very opinionated person. I like that. Hope to hear back from you soon!!! You have a great site!

Year Of Release: 1969
Record rating = 8
Overall rating = 10

The humble beginnings, with nice melodies, good guitar and little ambition. But lots of Jon Anderson.
Best song: YESTERDAY AND TODAY

As every first album of every young and crescent rock band, this one's a little shy, immature, insecure and naive. In the end, though, maybe this is just what makes it so easily accessible for me, in parts, at least (I hold the same feelings towards From Genesis To Revelation, you know). Neither Howe nor Wakeman weren't present yet, so the musicians in the band don't really feel any urgent need to display their musical ambitions: they just chop on, and do it in a rather acceptable way. There's no overall theme or concept either, if you don't count the strange need to begin almost every tune with a one or two minute instrumental 'prologue' a conceptual element. But you can't deny that from the very beginning Yes were already masters of their game, even if it was still somewhat limited.
In fact, guitarist Peter Banks is a highly competent young man, able to imitate both Hendrix, like on the opening mantra-like 'Beyond And Before', and those cool jazz dudes from times long gone by, like on the Byrds' cover 'I See You'. 'Beyond And Before', by the way, is one of the band's most convincing rockers ever; penned by Chris Squire, it is quite traditionalistic, with a relatively simple rhythm (for Yes, that is) and some astounding lines from Pete - indeed, the contrast between his hard-rocking wah-wah leads and the band's high-pitched harmonies is rather nice. And the band's interpretation of that obscure Byrds cover (a great, but strangely forgotten psycho love anthem) is completely competent, with not a chord played wrong. Anderson sounds rather nice on that one, too, and maybe even nicer on one more equally convincing rocker - the organ-dominated 'Looking Around', whose short running time, brilliant intertwine between Squire's bass and Kaye's sharp, glistening organ chords, and the remarkable contrast between the band's harmonies and Anderson's 'solo screaming' all contribute a little bit to my, and (I hope) many others' delight.
And one more good thing I've gotta say about Jon Anderson in relation to this album is that he hasn't yet developed his tantric-shmantric passions: actually, he even writes love songs - and it doesn't matter that the lyrics are, well, er, innovative for a love song, they're still love songs at that. I think I should also add that the two love songs he gets on here are the best cuts on the whole record, but that's just my opinion. I mean, isn't 'Yesterday And Today' gorgeous? The vocals are soooo McCartneyesque that it makes me wonder how on Earth did Jon manage to lose that incredible tender atmosphere about his singing in a few years - without a trace. Of course, it also has something to do with the exquisitely constructed vocal melody and the soothing, relaxing piano solo played by Tony Kaye, but I really dig that tone all by itself. And 'Sweetness' is only a very little bit behind because the melody isn't so obvious and the atmosphere doesn't involve the listener to such an extent, yet don't take this as a complaint: the song grows on you, slowly, but irresistably.
You might vehemently disagree with my opinions, of course. You might suddenly notice that you prefer the closing suite 'Survival' because it's the closest thing to Close To The Edge here (notice how I just used the word 'close' three times, each times with a different function? That's wordplay for you!) And sure it is, with multipart arrangements, bizarre evolutionist lyrics and, well, that spacey vocal tone which makes it impossible to confound a Yes record with any other record on the planet. But it's also lengthy and relatively hookless, if you don't count Squire's fat exemplary basslines in the rocking intro, and they hardly compensate for the unmemorability of the tune which just flows past you with its lyrics dedicated to evolution and presents no melody twirls that would be 'ear-piercing', if you get my drift. In other words, this is no 'Roundabout', that's for sure. So I'd better stick to the ballads.
Same goes for such a waste of vinyl as the pseudo-medieval ballad 'Harold Land' (things like that would soon be far bettered by Genesis). All the instruments seem to flow together into a non-discernible mess, and the multiple changes of key and tempo don't do anything significant with the song; I couldn't name even one element that would distinguish itself in my memory as something interesting. Pretty hit and miss with these guys - at this early stage as well as later.
In other words, if you still haven't got my drift, I'd like to point out that the band is at its best while either doing Anderson love songs, short catchy rockers or, well, doing covers. Did I mention that besides the already mentioned Byrds cover, there's also one of the Beatles' 'Every Little Thing'? With a lengthy, overtly proggy keyboards/guitar intro, too, not to mention painfully extended vocal notes, plus a riff from 'Day Tripper' making its appearance in a couple of places - and you thought Beatles For Sale was nothing but a marking-time effort!
On the other hand, they can't really manage to pull off a decent 'noble' tune without sounding derivative, clumsy or simply boring. This sounds dangerous, because, as you may have guessed, they would soon drop both love songs and covers and venture freely into the world of 'noble' tunes... For now, though, I give the album an eight because 'Yesterday And Today' is indeed so very much McCartney-like, and I respect it when a bunch of green young men can manage a truly McCartney-esque number. Also, the guitarwork is superb throughout. Truly, this may not be the Yup as you've grown to like them, but it's still a young, charming, innocent, but already professional and talented Yeah. Go get it.

I see you mailing your ideas

Your worthy comments:

Josh <[email protected]> (21.08.99)

Wow! This must be the first time we agree 100%! Although, I like "Looking Around", and "Harold Land" is pretty good. Everything else stays exactly the same!
My rating-8

Bob <[email protected]> (09.02.2000)

I don't have the first album, but I'm familiar with the tunes. I find them listenable, but nothing special. The band just wasn't all that unique at this point, except, for all your complaints, Jon's voice. But the band wasn't writing really strong melodies at this point, so the rhythm section is really all over the place. And Banks and Kaye could be a guitarist and organist from any old post-psychedelic band from this period. If this lineup had persisted, the band would have dropped from sight long before Fragile.

Jeff Blehar <[email protected]> (23.02.2000)

Here's a thought. Yes was better as a COVER band than as songwriting group! Blasphemy! But their first two albums, this one and Time And A Word, are a lot of fun, and the cover tunes are the best ones. Have you heard their prog-defilement of West Side Story's "Something's Coming" that was the B-side of "Sweetness?" It's hilarious, in a really good, intentional, genial kind of way. You know they're being completely tongue-in-cheek (at least I HOPE to god they are...). On Yes, their jazz-rock deconstruction of The Byrds' "I See You?" I love it, especially because when I first heard Fifth Dimension that song jumped out at me as being a really obscure one that was also really good. And man, Anderson and his yesmen might've been a bunch of humorless prigs after 1972 or so, but I defy you to tell me they aren't enjoying the HELL out of themselves on "Every Little Thing." In fact, this might get me tarred and feathered in Liverpool, but I PREFER this to the original Beatles version! I mean, I love the way they have utterly NO respect for The Beatles' "mystique" - they tear this sucker apart and reassemble it in a completely different way. You know that it's all in good fun after Peter Banks throws in that "Day Tripper" riff near the beginning. What can I say? I really enjoy this song a lot; I suppose it's the definition of a truly "guilty" pleasure. As for the self-penned tracks here, they're actually quite pretty little things, if insubstantial. "Survival"'s whole evolution theme is a warning sign of things to come (to quote David Byrne), but it's a good song, while "Looking Around," "Sweetness," and "Yesterday And Today" are all fun, inoffensive numbers with really amazing playing in the background. I don't instrumental virtuosity when its put to benign use like this. In fact, whisper it quietly, but I quite dig this little disc. 9/10, 'cause really, Yes didn't really IMPROVE from here, they just got more complex. Sure that sound preposterous but it's what I believe. And I'm a moron.

Derrick Stuart <[email protected]> (02.07.2000)

You see, the main difference between Yes' debut and From Genesis To Revealtion is that Jon Anderson was almost 25 when this was realized, Genesis were in their teens. Yes had also had years of experience unlike Genesis.

Ben Greenstein <[email protected]> (25.07.2000)

It's amazing how mature this album is - really, for a debut, these guys sound incredibly sure of themselves, with lots of energy and, well, melodies! Let's face it, Yes weren't always the catchiest group, but a lot of this early stuff is pretty memorable. You don't have to hear it five or more times to remember how it goes. Which is the problem with that first Genesis album, I guess - any melodies on there only establish them after endless repetition, and those ones certainly are quite less than "exciting." (Oh, please, Georgey - don't change the rating of that album to a ten like you threatened to!)
"Looking Around" is, to me, the obvious highlight (in fact, why isn't this song all over classic rock radio?), but all of the others are good, even the way-too-melodramatic Beatles cover. Although I do miss the atmospherics that the band would perfect on later songs ("To Be Over"! "To Be Over"! Oh, how I love "To Be Over"!), it is indebatably a very strong album. A high eight.

Kevin Muckenthaler <[email protected]> (29.08.2000)

The Yes lads seem so happy and naive on this harmless album, which makes it hard for me not to like it. "Beyond and Before" is a great upbeat song with superb vocal harmonies. "I See You" is just kinda funny. Yes covering the Byrds? Jon sounds completely female on "Yesterday and Today" with some smooth falsetto vocals. "Looking Around" is another catchy number with some good Hammond organ by Tony Kaye. "Harold Land" tells the story of a man who goes off to war and comes back disillusioned with the world. It's a little too melodramatic, but enjoyable nonetheless. "Sweetness" has some dumb lyrics and a definate 60's vibe. "Every Little Thing" is a good Beatles cover with a completely different arrangement. Most people like "Survival." It's okay for an early prog song, but it's nothing compared to the songs they would put out a few years later. Overall, a lively and semi-goofy first album.

Year Of Release: 1970
Record rating = 8
Overall rating = 10

The young pretentious whiners want to convince us they're intelligent. Instead, they're just funny, but it's a charming kind of fun.
Best song: TIME AND A WORD

I know I might offend the light-hearted, but this album strongly reminds me of Genesis' From Genesis To Revelation. Yes' first album was made by a band of little kids (admitted, they were older than Genesis members when they recorded that album, but relatively speaking, they were little kids anyway) who never thought much of themselves and were so glad they finally got to record an album of their own that they were happy to put anything on it - and it worked. Time And A Word was made by the same band of little kids, but this time they already thought a lot of themselves - not that I blame them particularly, because this was the epoch of puffing and huffing, the happy time when being pretentious and 'universalist' really mattered.
So? Quite naturally, the songs on Time And A Word are puffed up, overblown, smothered in orchestration and pompous arrangements, there are no more love songs (unless you count the title track as a love song, of course), and instead Jon Anderson lets go with his famous streams of meaningless subconscious. Plus, almost every song, except for the mercifully brief 'Clear Days', is lengthy, boring and full of unnecessary instrumental wanking. As for the orchestral embellishments - the biggest 'innovation' since Yes - they're not at all pointless or banal, as in the case of the Moody Blues; rather, there are some nice ideas fluttering around, but this doesn't mean that they're able to save a bad song if it's bad.
And what can I say in favour of the album? Why, exactly the same things I said about FGTR! These kids are happy, full of life, and even if they are taking this life a bit too seriously and humourless, they do it in such an innocent, 'unspoiled', pleasant way that it really makes you feel good about the record. The title track is especially nice: were it written about two years later or so, it would have sounded totally stupid and 'not on the level', if you know what I mean. As it is, it's just another naive Love Anthem by young hippie cats, but it's catchy and charming. Therefore, bravely defying the more snub-nosed Yesfans, I'll go ahead and say: I'm glad it's on the record. And I'm also glad the band revived the tune for their 1996 tour and album: this means they are in no way refusing their past and their innocent 'primitive' days, quite unlike Peter Gabriel, for example, who never ever plays anything from his Genesis days, for "deep philosophical reasons", I believe. Or perhaps he thinks he's offending his former bandmates that way? Aw, never mind.
Fact is, nothing on the album, speaking melody-wise, even comes close to the title track. And yet on a certain level, most of the songs do work. The two covers they chose to record this time are really obscure - a Richie Havens and a Buffalo Springfield tune - and not particularly interesting; at least, they weren't particularly interesting until they fell into the hands of Yes. Havens was probably quite surprised to hear his song beginning with a loud organ blast, furious swirls of strings, and a zoom-zoom-zooming bassline from Squire that proved to all the dubious gentlemen that Chris was definitely keen on disclosing his talents more and more with every subsequent release.
Anderson is kept a wee bit below on the album, which is all right by me - but he does get to shine on 'Then', a weird 'prog-folk-rock' composition on which his brand of visionary imagery finally comes shining through ("And in a time that's closer, life will be even older then...") and the first blossoms of idiocy appear in the form of lyrics like "love is the only answer, hate is the root of cancer then...", but if you don't mind the lyrics, it's all right because the vocal melody is pretty catchy and the instrumental breaks are pretty powerful. 'Sweet Dreams' is also a gas, one of the band's most upbeat and accessible pop rockers of the epoch, with a rather straightforward beat - hell, I could easily see it re-arranged for 80125. It's songs like that which really explain Yes' success among the mainstreamish public - isn't this vintage radio-ready material?
The only tunes I really don't care for are 'The Prophet' and 'Astral Traveller'. The former is one spot where they take themselves too seriously, to the point of being sick, plus it always seems to me that the lengthy organ intro is ripped-off from Genesis' 'The Knife' which makes me angry. As for 'Astral Traveller', it always seems kinda clumsy to me: it's one of their more convincing spacey tunes, with 'cosmically encoded' vocals in the chorus, but the main melody is too twisted and inconsistent for me to ever get any real enjoyment. Oh, for that matter, 'Clear Days' is dippy beyond words, but it's only two minutes long, so it's simply inexistent by Yes' usual standards.
All these cute little details, however, can be noticed only if you pay some serious attention - I tell you, if it weren't for the title track, I'd probably be fallin' asleep towards the middle... as it is, the hope of hearing the brilliant lines 'there's a word and the word is love and it's right for me it's right for me and the word is love' for the zillionth time keeps me on my toes. Yup. And oh, there've also been complaints about excessive orchestration on this album (apparently, there's been a lot of these complaints ever since the release of the album, cause it was the last time the band ever used strings), but I'm not complaining: compared to From Genesis, the strings are used sparsely. And anyway, it's not in the strings that the peculiarity of the album lies. Not at all. Get it if you're wild about 'Siberian Khatru' or any other ditties like that. It's really much closer to 'classic Yes' than to their debut album.
Oh! It's also the last record to feature Peter Banks on guitar. Did it make any difference? Read on to find out!

No opportunity necessary, no experience needed to mail your ideas

Your worthy comments:

Josh <[email protected]> (21.08.99)

This album sorta stinks. "Time And A Word" bares a slight resemplence to a bad mother goose rhyme, the covers are terrible, and Peter's guitaring sounds slightly dull compred to the last album. I like "Astral Travaller", and "The Prophet", and the rest is passable.
My rating-6

Bob <[email protected]> (09.02.2000)

More of the same, except for the orchestra. And sometimes the arrangements work, and sometimes they doesn't -- sounds clumsy on "Clear Days," but supportive and warm on the title track and exciting on Richie Havens "No Opportunity." Havens himself sent me an e-mail saying he loves it. And as for the naive lyrics on the title track, so what? You can hardly expect Plastic Ono Band from Yes.
By the way, orchestrator Tony Cox later put his experience to use on Renaissance's Scherezade and Live at Carnegie Hall.

Jeff Blehar <[email protected]> (23.02.2000)

Again, not too shabby for an ostensibly stick-up-the-arse prog outfit. Supposedly this one's a real let down for all the hardcore fans, but I likes it just fine, even if the orchestration is a little bit ridiculous. Sometimes it's great, though, as on that hoot of an opener "No Opportunity Necessary, No Experience Needed." I'll never forget the first time I heard that one, on the boxed set. The organ fires up, it sounds great, and then...the STRINGS! And they're really ostentatious and pushed up in the mix, flailing around wildly, but they're so unsubtle as to be charming. So I'm listening, thinking exactly the following words: "Christ, I'm expecting "How The West Was Won" to break out any minute here." And THEN IT DID!! That musical quote in the middle of the song is beyond audacious, as if they were completely mocking themselves the whole time. And I like that a lot. Any band that can make fun of themselves immediate gets some slack cut from me. Go figure, it's a Ritchie Havens song. Remember what I said about Yes as a cover band? And also their take on the Buffalo Springfield song "Everydays" is great inasmuch as it takes a really banal song from an otherwise great album (Buffalo Springfield Again) and makes it into a speed-jazz boogie. "Sweet Dreams" is a perfectly acceptable pop song, and if "Then"'s orchestration is a bit too fruity, "Time And A Word" is a fine dippy ballad. I really like the wateryvocals of "Astral Traveller" for some reason, too. Truth be told, I'm not too sure why I find Time And A Word and Yes perfectly acceptable and Tales From The Topographic Oceans nausea-inducing; I think it's because I'm surprised that any group as overblown, bloated, and waterlogged as Yes (a dinosaur if ever there was one) was actually pretty spry and down-to-earth at one point. So I'll just be a little surprised and give this a 7/10.
And it just occurred to me that George might be perplexed as to why I'd give this a 7/10 and Genesis' From Genesis To Revelation a 3/10. Here's why: this album is a bit more overblown, but uses the strings &c. much more conservatively, is MUCH better produced, and the band CAN PLAY. That's why. Also, it's a heck of a lot more interesting. There ain't nothing like "No Opportunity" on FGTR.

Year Of Release: 1971
Record rating = 9
Overall rating = 11

Harmless and tight prog-space rock. But what the hell are these guys trying to give me?
Best song: I'VE SEEN ALL GOOD PEOPLE

Well, er, not really. I may be diminishing his role, but the only major new thing Steve Howe brought into the band were some tasty countryish acoustic licks that Peter Banks simply couldn't master - as on the short, cheerful live recording of Howe's solo spot, the three-minute instrumental 'The Clap'. It's exceptionally good, fresh and moody, and should not at all be taken as just a flashy demonstration of chops because it has a certain musical sense of its own. It's also a possibly enlivening break from the prog formula that had by now fallen firmly into place. This is the first really successful Yes album, nowadays treated as their first absolute classic record. And it's easy to see why: Anderson's lyrics have gone totally nuts, jumping from one baseless image to another, absorbing all kinds of high-style cliches and non-cliches. Yeah, I know they're supposed to be 'poetry', but true poetry is supposed to work, filling your head with images and impressions, while Anderson's broodings are nothing but a nasty cosmic put-on, whether it be the love allusions on 'Yours Is No Disgrace', visionary gallucinations of 'Starship Trooper', or pseudo-epic puff-ups of 'A Venture'. Moreover, most of them are presented with the kind of emotionless, intonationless, hell, humanless voice I've been lamenting over in the intro paragraph. On the first two records Jon at least tried to freshen this voice on his love songs ('Sweetness') or teenage utopian fantasies ('Time And A Word'); here there's no such things. Maybe that's why everybody loves this album (and the following ones), I dunno - because this kind of singing elevates their childish ditties to the rank of 'serious' musical output. Dunno. I liked their childish ditties.
Anyway, I could even cope with Jon's voice if it weren't for another factor that ruins an almost immaculate album. Once again, I know that lengthy instrumental passages are a sine qua non of prog rock, but I also believe they must entertain. These ones, for the most part, don't. Strange as it may seem, only Chris Squire's base playing manages to impress me, especially on the opening 'Yours In Disgrace', as well as on selected places throughout the rest of the record. Bruford is Bruford, and he hasn't changed much; and as for Howe, his guitar playing isn't really superior to Banks - at least, not on this record. This leaves Tony Kaye, and he doesn't seize the chance. Maybe that's why he was fired right after this record.
Thank God, at least the melodies are good. Well - mostly good: the short 'A Venture' is just a toss-off (whoever thought it was a good idea to pair complex mantraic vocal harmonies with simplistic music hall piano rhythms gets smacked from me instantaneously), and Anderson really tries his best to reduce every one of them to the same cosmic schlock. However, once you've coped with him, you're bound to like most of these tunes. A major highlight, in particular, is the opening 'Yours Is No Disgrace', a classic Yes anthem in its own rights. As soon as you learn to cope with the 'shiny purple wolfhound' lyrics (a very widely quoted excerpt from Anderson supposed to indicate his nuttiness, second only to the infamous 'rearrange your liver to the solid mental grace' bit off 'Close To The Edge'), it's impossible not to get caught in the bounciness and catchiness of the melody, highlighted by fluent bass and Howe's rapid tasty licks. Should it have been shorter? It should - I would easily cut out most of the instrumental breaks, except for those parts where Howe has some fun with the speakers, playing these great angry wah-wah licks from channel to channel. Guitar playing is also a major attraction on 'Perpetual Change' - Howe's 'hammering' riff on that one is among his best. Even if, again, the song's main driving point are the vocal harmonies (nice, catchy and singalongish), and its weakest spot are the instrumental breaks.
Another instant classic is 'Starship Trooper' - a song about God only knows what, but I suppose it's just the good old hip thing going on with Mr Anderson (deep down inside, I do feel that all of his songs are just ultra-ciphered takes on 'All You Need Is Love', even if this can hardly be proved). The first three minutes of it don't do anything much for me, although the atmosphere is pleasant, and the middle countryish part is just okay, but its coda, entitled 'Wurm' for no particular reason, is as amazing as Yes codas go: Steve Howe plays a cool phased riff and the band builds up a tremendous climax around him, giving the song a real sci-fi feel and making you dizzy - don't you get visions of starship troopers in battle order, slowly advancing on the enemy or something? Well, I nearly do. Oh, by the way, Howe actually overdubbed several guitar parts on here, including some acoustic 'support' and another blazing solo in the background, but they did play the song live, and it was almost just as good.
But as flabbergasting as 'Wurm' is, I don't give the record a nine for instrumental codas. I give it a nine for the uttermost fun, grace and beauty of the classic anthem 'I've Seen All Good People'. Sure, it sounds just like a repetitive mantra, but this also gives Anderson's voice an excuse, for once: mantras are supposed to be chanted without emotion, not sung. And chant he does, repeating the senseless, but memorable line 'I've seen all good people turn their heads so satisfied I'm on my way' for what seems like a hundred times, while Howe plays some daring and invigorating licks all around him (hey, of course that's far from the only thing that's going on in the song - the opening acoustic section is quite beautiful, for one). One might disagree with the fact that it's the best song, but nobody can disagree it's the most memorable and immediately striking one. Yup.
In fact, while it's somewhat strange to me, I do have to confess that in terms of catchiness, The Yes Album is almost more accessible than any of the band's first two albums. It's definitely more good-timey, too: when Wilson & Alroy accused it of being extremely 'commercial', they were right in that a good deal of these songs, in slightly edited form, would qualify as hit singles and appeal to the general public quite easily. Well, actually, 'I've Seen All Good People' is supposed to be a radio standard, and 'Starship Trooper' is also a song not too uncommon on the air.

I've seen all good people mail their ideas so satisfied I'm on my way

Your worthy comments:

Richard C. Dickison <[email protected]> (03.05.99)

I was trying not to comment on these guys. I really hate the high pitched Anderson robot but...
I like The Yes Album for the one song 'I've Seen All Good People'.
I like Fragile for 'Round-A-Bout' and so on, and so on.
They actually are not all that bad on this album because they have not gone off the deep end yet torturing people with hours on end of pretentious filler.
The problem I have with this group is that I really just want to take only the songs I like off all their albums and stick them together and dump the rest.
I can't sit thru entire albums all the way through because they filled them with such crap songs and tried to sell them as spirtual harmonious whatevers.
That is why on my original comment on this band I mixed up where 'All Good People' came from, I forgot the exact album because I just don't pull them out that much.
Thank god for CD burners, they were made for this group.

Josh <[email protected]> (21.08.99)

Slightly better. What a brilliant album title! Well, "Yours Is No Digrace" is a little too long, it would have benn better if it was 5-6 minutes."Clap" proves that Steve Howe could kick Peter Banks' behind (Try to keep the language clean!)."A Venture" is okay. I could live wothout "Perpetual Change". "I've Seen All Good People" is gorgeous, at least the "Your Move" section is. "Starship Trooper" is awesome! Not great, but enjoysable anyway!
My rating-7

Rich Bunnell <[email protected]> (23.08.99)

Not being familiar with the full body of Yes' work, it's hard for me to give ratings, but on the Yes scale for me I suppose this is about an 8. Full rating an 11, maybe. The mix of happiness and long song structures still hasn't been perfected (it would be on the following album, or at least as far as I know) and some of the tunes, like "Perpetual Change," suffer from unneeded excesses.
"I've Seen All Good People" is excellent, though, as is "Starship Trooper"-- and I'm talking the ENTIRE SONG! What's wrong with the first few minutes?!? That's the coolest part! The stomping guitars, the bizarre time signature, everything! Best song on the album, though the whole "doo doo doo doo doo!" harmonies make the "Your Move" half of "All Good People" a candidate too. I also like "Yours Is No Disgrace" quite a bit, and at least "A Venture" doesn't hang around for too long. I can't really get into "The Clap" however, but that's because I'm a worthless moron who doesn't go crazy over guitar technique. All of you real music fans out there should find me and kill me.

Glenn Wiener <[email protected]> (30.09.99)

I am not the biggest Yes Fan in the world. Their songs are mostly way too long and Jon Anderson's soprano style is a little hard to endure sometimes. However, there is alot of creativity on these six pieces.
Tony Kaye's organ playing is outstanding whether its effects or solos. Steve Howe is on top of his game as well. Long songs can be good if the song combines the best of creativity and structure and Yes suceeds very admirably on this release.

<[email protected]> (17.01.2000)

I am in absolute agreement about the lyrics. Just words strung together! Yecch!!!
But---'Wurm' gets my vote for the best crescendo in rock. Period.

Bob <[email protected]> (09.02.2000)

Huge, huge disagreement! This is my favorite, even if the next lineup had better musicianship. And the reason: the album ROCKS. And the reason for that is Steve Howe. He is a totally unique, versatile guitarist -- the most indispensable element of Yes (with Squire a close second). He provides the anchor for the songs, resulting in the rhythm section getting itself under control while playing excellently. And as for Kaye, he's in more of a support role than a soloist here, which suits the songs fine.
The one place where one wishes for Rick Wakeman is on the low point -- "A venture." One wonders what he could have done with this song instead of Kaye's clunky piano lines.
And while you dis Jon's voice, it's worth noting that there are some wonderful harmonies here, especially on "Your Move." And granted, the lyrics are quite abstract, but not totally indescipherable -- "Your Move" provides a chess game as a metaphor for the tug of war in a love affair, for example. He hasn't gone off the deep end yet.

Jeff Blehar <[email protected]> (23.02.2000)

Yeah, the big breakthrough. But so forkin' what? Not much to say here. "I've Seen All Good People" is another one of those songs I'm kinda ashamed to admit I dig due to its complete meaninglessness, and "Starship Trooper" is genuinely glorious: one of the few times I don't mind the Affirmative going on, and on, for 9 minutes. But "Yours Is No Disgrace" IS an absolute disgrace. I can't think of enough bad things to say about this song, be it the simply gutter-level poesy of the lyrics (I mean, Anderson's always pretty much meaningless but this is an EXCEPTIONAL low) or the relative lack of interest of the tune and its variations over something like a small eternity. To step back from hyperbole, it's not an utterly travesty, (it starts out fine) but it's surely not worthy of its length. Squire's bass is good, sure, but there's so little of musical interest that I just can't focus on it. "The Clap" is fun (and short, always a plus) and...well that's about it. Nothing else really worth mentioning. This is where Yes begins to go horrible wrong for me...long rarely equals good with these guys, and after the next album, it's all 8 minute + songs for a long, long time. 6/10.

Philip Maddox <[email protected]> (07.07.2000)

This gets a 9 from me. No weak tracks whatsoever - every song works. 'Perpetual Change' is probably the weakest because it goes on for a bit too long. Other than that, I've got no complaints. 'Yours Is No Disgrace' is one of the most mind-numbingly catchy and upbeat songs ever recorded, and doesn't bore me at all. The first 2 parts of 'Starship Trooper' rule in a major way, but the instrumental coda at the end is my favorite instrumental coda of all time. Period. I love everything about it - it's absolutely beautiful, exciting, and it manages to build suspense. 'The Clap' is a short, good acoustic instrumental - not as good as 'Mood For A Day', but still good. 'A Venture' is a short, jazzy tune that isn't as great as most of the stuff on here, but it's still cool. The grand prize, though, has to go to 'I've Seen All Good People'. It's easily one of my favorite tunes of all time, and I don't care how overplayed it is. The first half is the most beautiful mantra ever recorded, and the second half doesn't fail to excite either - great guitar licks and vocals. Who cares if the lyrics are meaningless? Like I said, a 9, and a high one at that. Buy this record.

Ben Greenstein <[email protected]> (25.07.2000)

You know, I really expected to hate this one, seeing as two of the three songs that I had heard prior to my purchase were musical pieces that always had stirred up hatred from the very deepest depths (sorry - lack of better word) of my heart - but, surprisingly, I think it's rather good. In fact, I will even go so far as to say that I now believe "Yours Is No Disgrace" to be a great song, even if that first verse is a little ugly. The rest is MEGA, though! I still hate "I've Seen All Good People," though. Why am I the only one who realizes how much that song sucks? Maybe I've just become prejuced against it by way of even grosser ripoffs like "Carry On Wayward Son," I don't know. All I know is, from that a-capella intro to the dumbshit closing disco chorus, I am in musical HELL whenever the song is playing.
Rest of the album is good. "The Clap" is amazing, "Starship Trooper" has always been a favourite, and "Perpetual Change" is the last of the band's songs that can fit into the "cool, catchy, sixties rock" category, even if it is a little wierd. I can give the album an eight (except for a certain six-minutes-fifty-six-seconds which get a NEGATIVE three!).

Year Of Release: 1972
Record rating = 10
Overall rating = 12

Here's ample proof that prog rock can really rock when pressed hard.
Best song: ROUNDABOUT

Hmm, not bad. New band member Rick Wakeman makes his way onto the heart of the band's sound, but ends up mostly buried deep down in the mix so you wouldn't have known about him at all were it not for the credits and for his short solo spot. Well, no, of course I'm exaggerating. He does shine on several lengthy wankfests. However, unlike most people, it seems, I tend to think that his being added to the band didn't revolutionize its sound - just like Banks' replacement by Howe didn't revolutionize it, either. Yup, both Howe and Wakeman have their little tricks that couldn't have been done earlier (like Howe's country/classical acoustic ditties and Wakeman's medieval piano parts), but the main effort is still placed on lengthy spacey rockers where these tricks don't work.
Actually, the album is neatly divided into just these two parts: lengthy spacey rockers and the band members' solo spots, all highlighting what they did best. And much as I tend to get sceptical about the band's 'classic' period, I'm surprised to say that most - heck, nearly all - of this stuff really works. The rockers, in particular, are definitely up a grade from the last record. Again, the most interesting parts, for my ear, at least, are provided by Chris Squire's bass (the guy was good), but Howe adds some uplifting solos, Wakeman gives in some mellow pianos and synths, and Anderson delivers his lyrics with his usual emotionless, faceless intonation, but at least they are accompanied by accomplished, memorable melodies. The problem with all of these is the usual overdoing of instrumental sections, but I guess that goes without saying. But at least they rock - which I couldn't really say for The Yes Album, which dragged. They're fast, they have great basslines and good vocal hooks. And not every prog band could master that even in 1972, which was the heyday of prog, as you probably know already.
'Roundabout' is the song they sometimes do on the radio, probably because of the lead-in segment - heck, Anderson's battle cry of 'call it morning driving thru the sound and in and out the valleeeeeeey' is as radio-friendly as possible. Later on, though, the song becomes far less accessible, with very complex time signatures and tricky group harmonies which still grow on you. 'South Side Of The Sky' is moody and winterish (with the aid of some wind howling); And 'Long Distance Runaround' is quirky and short, with the vocal melody somewhat clumsy, but redeemed with the happy poppy instrumentation. In fact, vocal melodies are probably the weakest spot on the album: probably in a desperate move away from their 'commerciality' on The Yes Album, the band only provided a very limited amount of vocal hooks for Anderson on this album, and even on my tenth and later listen, I still can't memorize the way that darned vocal melody on 'Heart Of The Sunrise' goes. But what wonderful playing. In parts, the number even sounds painfully like King Crimson's '21st Century Schizoid Man', and I don't blame them for ripping off the tune: anything that makes a Yes song rock out is welcome.
Perhaps one of the most important things that separates this album from most of its predecessors and followers is that it has some... some sort of actual sense. For me, Fragile is truly a concept album, all dedicated to the single theme. And that theme? Movement. Just look at titles like 'Roundabout' and 'Long Distance Runaround', contemplate the lyrics of 'South Side Of The Sky' ('move forward was my friend's only cry') and 'Heart Of The Sunrise' ('sharp - distance... love comes to you and you follow... straight light moving...', etc.). And not coincidentally, Fragile is Yes' 'bounciest' album ever, with most of the tunes going off at pretty fast, steady tempos; meanwhile, there's always something happening around, the record is never passive or purely atmospheric, it always seems to drive you on - where to is another question. To the sci-fi world of Close To The Edge, probably, but you only know it when you get there.
Still, all subjective reflections aside, there is one definite objective thing that really and truly distinguishes this album from all others and provides it a secure ten: these are the band members' solo spots. They're all catchy, and they're all short. And this is a thing that you won't meet on any other Yes album. Two lesser efforts (Wakeman's Brahms bit rearrangement and Bruford's 'Five Per Cent For Nothing') are still refreshing, and the other three are groovy fun: Anderson's 'We Have Heaven' sounds either like a self-parody or a musical visit card, with its multiple endless harmony overdubs, Howe's 'Mood For A Day' is a beautiful classical acoustic piece (which puts fellow guitarist Mike Rutherford to shame), and Squire's 'The Fish' is a bass-riff-fest - you'd never know how many clever things it is possible to make with just one base and just one recording studio. 'Schindleria praematurus', indeed. (By the way, 'The Fish' was Squire's nickname that he earned because of his unusual fondness of splashing in a bath all the time - so the way the tune connects with its title might be taken as a [sub]conscious tribute to his great bass predecessor, John 'The Ox' Entwistle, who also had a bass-driven instrumental called 'The Ox' on the Who's debut album). And, besides their own merits, all of these tunes also take on the honourable function of giving you a break between the lengthy tunes: the album is a very careful and thoughtful construction. Very solid, too. Even if they called it Fragile. Ironic, isn't it?
Oh! If you haven't yet understood it, this is the best Yes album ever. I used to hate it, of course. But bear with me: I'm just a Yes-bashing moron, and Jon Anderson is such a bastard... Do you think Yes would have sounded better with Greg Lake on vocals?

We have heaven, but we don't have your ideas

Your worthy comments:

Josh <[email protected]> (21.08.99)

Well, I suppose I should say SOMETHING positive about their break through album, but the fact is, I don't like this album very much. It's okay. Ricky Wakeman does add something to the band, though I'm not sure what. That's not an insult, he is a great player. I heard "Roundabout" far too many times during my life. "Cans And Brahms" is boring (and I've heard the real version before too, and it's also boring, so it's not his fault!). "We Have Heaven" is ridiculous! My favorite from here has to be "South Side Of The Sky". It has a great melody, lyrics that acually make sense (Kind of), and a spooky piano solo! I'm not going to bother mentioning "5 % 4 0". It's pathetic. "Long Distance Runaround" is okay. "The Fish" is my second favorite! Wow! "Clap" for the last one was fun, but "Mood For A Day" fails in all catagories. "Heart OF The Sunrise" is just too darn long, but it does have a good melody. I only listen to this on occasion!
My rating-5 (sorry)

Rich Bunnell <[email protected]> (23.08.99)

Yep, a 10 will do. The filler pieces don't detract from the feeling of the album (even "Five Per Cent For Nothing" since it's short) and the longer songs are long in a way that The Yes Album attempted but failed at on a few occasions. "Roundabout" is a classic of course and so is "Heart Of The Sunrise." Oh, and I heard "Long Distance Runaround" on the radio, and they actually let it run into "The Fish"! "The Fish" was played on the radio! Awesome! As is the whole album, even that stupid Wakeman Brahms thing.

Bob <[email protected]> (09.02.2000)

The album doesn't flow well with the solo spots alternating with the group performances. Great musicianship, though. And, again, wonderful harmonies, especially on "Roundabout." "The Fish" is just mind-boggling. On the whole, though, I think I would have preferred a full album of group performed tunes.

Jeff Blehar <[email protected]> (23.02.2000)

Pretty much the last hurrah for these guys in terms of music I can stand. By the time they decided to deflate back to songlengths that could be fit, oh I don't know, THREE TO A SIDE, they'd ceased having anything interesting to say. But I'll grudgingly admit that Fragile is pretty damn rockin' - I can get my ya-ya's out of their glass case for a lot of stuff here. And since I'm no hardcore Yesfan (and since *I* never heard it on the radio ONCE before getting this album), I think "Roundabout" is a wonderful song, fully deserving of all 8 minutes of its time. It does more interesting things during that span than, say, "Yours Is No Disgrace" and "Heart Of The Sunrise" put together. I REALLY like "Long Distance Runaround;" in fact, it makes me kind of upset. Because here's a capital example of some the amazing things these guys could have done if they'd just kept their megalomania under control: this song is SO quirky, offbeat, with bass lines and guitar runs that objectively make no sense whatsoever but resolve themselves brilliantly into...a 3 minute pop song! Jon Anderson's vocal melody is really good on this one, too. Possibly my favorite Yessong ever, it's just so full of promise that they never fulfilled. "The Fish" is really impressive too, with all those basses, doing all those things, all the time...you really do get the impression of some bizarre alien (or prehistoric) fish swooshing its way through a primeval sea. "South Side Of The Sky" is too long, but prettier than my sister, but the solo spots (other than Squire's) are all just blatant filler. And "Heart Of The Sunrise" is "Yours Is No Disgrace" Mark II for me: meandering, pretentious, pointless. But still, this album, for all its diffusion, has a real unified mood, and I have to say, I give it a spin more often than I'd care to admit. But I always put on The Clash afterwards as a corrective. 8/10. From here on out the Yes discography is pretty much a wasteland....

Ben Greenstein <[email protected]> (23.06.2000)

This album is really overrated. While the four actual songs are really good ("Roundabout" no longer annoys or bores me at all! And for the record, I've NEVER heard it on the radio!) the short numbers are pointless and often even annoying. About "Cans And Brahms," I don't think he butchered the original piece, but I also feel that it has no place on the album. Ruins the album's consitency, I feel - it doesn't flow with all of those short bits tossed in. I like the last two, though - "The Fish" is just a second part to the kickass "Long Distance Runaround," and "Mood For A Day" is neat, although certainly no Steve Hackett.
And anyone who can deny that "Heart Of The Sunrise" is the most fantastic song this band ever recorded has got something in their ears. It's fabulous. Atmospheric, rockin', and catchy, it has everything that makes Yes cool, and a couple of things that they never achieved elsewhere. That song moves the six score up to a seven. Man it's cool!

Philip Maddox <[email protected]> (07.07.2000)

It's hard to complain about this one (except Wakeman's pointless 'Cans and Brahms', which is kinda cheesy and doesn't fit the feel of the album). The actual songs are all nearly perfect - I don't even rank them because they're all great. 'South Side Of the Sky' has an especially great middle section - great harmony vocals! The solos (except for Wakeman's) are all great, too. Bruford's 'Five Per Cent For Nothing' gets made fun of, but I think it's great! And even if you don't like it, it's 30 seconds long. Howe contributes a great guitar solo, Anderson does a fun, cheery vocal harmony piece, and Squire contributes one of the greatest bass songs ever! 'The Fish' is made up of nothing but bass noises! How cool is that?! A 10. Highly recommended for anyone remotely interested in prog.

Kevin Muckenthaler <[email protected]> (01.09.2000)

Some good stuff here. Squire's bass is extremely prominent on this album. I would venture to call this a bass album, because it really sets the whole tone. Bill Bruford's drumming is superb here, too. Despite hearing "Roundabout" over a million times, it's still good. The whole song works perfectly, and it seems hard to believe that it's actually eight and a half minutes long. "South Side of the Sky" is amazing. The piano section in the middle creates a great lonely atmosphere. "Long Distance Runaround" is a quirky track. "Heart of the Sunrise" contains a menacing, frenetic riff and some of Jon's best vocals ever. The 'solo' spots take away from the album's cohesiveness, though. "Cans and Brahms" is much-maligned, but it isn't too bad. "We Have Heaven" is pretty funny. "Five Per Cent for Nothing" is so quirky and short that I can't say if it's good or bad. "The Fish" is an interesting piece. My favorite solo spot is "Mood for a Day." Fragile is one of Yes' best albums, and a good place for beginners (although I'd recommend The Yes Album first).

Year Of Release: 1972
Record rating = 9
Overall rating = 11

If you've heard The Yes Album, you've heard it all and you've heard more of it; yet this is epic enough to deserve a high rating.
Best song: CLOSE TO THE EDGE, but only a part of it, really.

Okay, I can't stand it any longer, I just have to go out and say it. Jon Anderson is a graphomaniac whose only purpose in life seems to be penning pretentious, cosmic, universalist, but totally absurd, senseless and bland lyrics and singing them with his voice which I've already complained about a dozen times. I don't even hate the guy - I'd rather pity him. It's more of a medical problem than of anything else. If the stuff he's singing is supposed to have some real meaning, I'll just have to suppose that in his previous incarnation he was a master cryptographer; I'm not even trying to decipher any "messages" in these lines...
That said, Close To The Edge is definitely a good album - while an older state of this here review hardly did anything but bash it up, which explains all the further disagreements and hatemail below, I think I've grown mature enough to tolerate it and even teach myself to like parts of it. Thus, in the new review I will try to concentrate on both the good and the bad sides of the story, as it is indeed a very complicated one.
The main problem of the album as I see it now is that there are only three songs on it. Three, you get it? And one of them takes up an entire side. Now that could be small tragedy, since there'd already been a few precedents (Jethro Tull's Thick As A Brick the most important of those), and the length of a tune, be it fifty minutes or even more, isn't necessarily a fault by itself. But the main fault of the title track, as well as the two lesser ones, is that it uncompromisingly refuses to present us with a sufficient quality of original ideas. Basically, what you get is what you already know by heart if you ever bought Fragile a few months before: rapid, flawless riffing a la Howe, fluid synth parts a la Wakeman, immaculate drumming a la Bruford, fantastic bass lines a la Squire and the well-known tenor robotic singing a la Anderson. The same old story. Technical perfection, this time around complemented by far more moody synth and organ effects than before; Close To The Edge tries to recreate the atmosphere of Yes' "metaphysical fantasy world", and so the pure musical parts alternate with 'beautiful noise' and environment sounds like birds chirping, etcetera. However, when it comes around to the actual playing, I always tend to get bored rather quickly because there are not enough themes. Yep. The title track, for instance, has (a) the intro part, (b) the main melody, (c) the 'middle' part of 'I Get Up I Get Down'. Everything else is just minor variations or 'noise breaks'. All of these three themes are decent (even if we manage to overlook the fact that the main theme is nothing but a recycling of the old standards, borrowing extensively from both 'Yours Is No Disgrace' and 'I've Seen All Good People'), but taken together, they could have easily made a five or six minute long tune. Sure, it would not have the epic swirl it has on this record, but it also would not cause me yawning in distraction as they sing the same verse melody for the quadrillionth time. For comparison, the first side of Thick As A Brick alone had at least six or seven different musical themes going on, not counting the breaks in between; same goes for Genesis' 'Supper's Ready' and even - shudder - Van Der Graaf Generator's 'Plague Of Lighthouse Keepers'.
More or less the same accusation can be hurled against the two songs on the other side: both the mellow 'And You And I' and the more rocking 'Siberian Khatru' do not at all justify their running length by the number of musical ideas contained therein. When they play a melody, they mostly repeat one or two main themes that are, once again, quite good (the main riff of 'Khatru' in particular), but there's just about too much of them; when they don't play a melody, they just sit around and make noise that's kinda inessential.
One might make a good counterpoint: 'Yeah, but that's not their point. They don't go for diversity, they go for atmosphere'. So maybe they do, but that brings up another problem - what atmosphere? When it comes down to atmosphere, objective criteria cease to exist altogether and it all comes down to whether the noise you're listening to touches some of your particular nerves or whether it doesn't. In my case, it doesn't - well, not particularly. I definitely feel there are moments of beauty on the album; definitely so. In particular, the 'I Get Up I Get Down' section of the title track is gorgeous beyond words, and one of the few cases when I don't feel like complaining about Anderson's singing at all. And when Anderson sings 'not right away, not right away', there is something utterly pretty there too, although hell if I know what. And there is a stately synth/guitar-led climax in 'And You And I' (also reprised twice, by the way) that can easily qualify as the most defining moment of pure heavenly majesty in the entire Yes catalog. But when we have to deal with all the other musical sections that are not self-consciously beautiful, it's another story. I, for one, really cannot force myself to think of a reason why more or less the same musical piece should be given three different subtitles - 'The Solid Time Of Change', 'Total Mass Retain' and 'Seasons Of Man' - and played thrice on a nineteen-minute long track. Not to mention that it is not atmospheric at all: it rocks pretty hard, but with no special effects or diversifying gimmicks, and it even sounds kinda reggaeish to me, at times. What a strange bunch of dudes.
These two problems - not enough musical ideas and "atmosphere = acquired taste" - are a serious blow indeed, and I don't see how rabid Yes fans can actually overlook them, especially since next to this album in their collection sits Fragile which successfully resolves both of them. On the other hand, after a long battle with myself, I decided that the album is still a big achievement for Yes. Actually, I think that if only the huge songs were 'cut down' and reduced to a short fifteen- or twenty-minute EP, it would possibly be the best Yes EP ever. Because, like I said, most of the actual musical themes range from decent to gorgeous; and when it comes down to musicianship, the band shows itself on such a tight level as never before or after. They play as a well-oiled, powerful unit, in which the members never overshadow one another and never disappear from sight. Perhaps the best moment to demonstrate it is the intro theme to 'Close To The Edge' that can be taken as a kind of 'band anthem': Bruford displays his polyrhythms, Squire is quietly blazing out his speedy zoops 'in the corner', Howe is playing an energetic solo, and Wakeman gets in with finger-flashing 'rainy' synthesizer patterns which actually sound like a tape loop to me but probably aren't - after all, wasn't the man supposed to be reproducing them live? And there are many more moments like that on the record.
Thus, in the end the immaculate musicianship and the goodness of the themes makes me overlook most of the album's flaws. No, I will never totally get into Yes' fantasy world, as inviting as it is, because these guys don't even give a hint at what kind of world it really is, bar the 'And You And I' climax, of course, but out of pure respect for the guys' blending together really well, I give it an 11... with no chances of growing further, but it's already grown as high as it could grow. After all, like I said, atmosphere is subjective. Any listener can fill this thirty-seven minute long "form" with any spiritual content his heart desires; isn't music in the mind of the listener? If I can't fill it with spiritual content today, it's my current problem and nobody else's. It would be a different thing if there were no form at all - just lengthy noodlings made on the spur of the moment. "Hey Jon, heard that these Tull fellows just released a 45-minute song?" "No kidding!" "Yeah, they did just that, here's the album..." "Hey Chris, Rick, Bill, whatcha waiting for? Get down to business, we need to scramble enough bits to make at least a sidelong piece! How come we hadn't thought of that ourselves?" "Well, I did suggest we join 'Starship Trooper' and 'Perpetual Change' in one, but you didn't listen..." "Yeah, yeah, I know, I was a jerk. All right, we need to toss off something real quick right now, but we'll still beat these guys in a year or so. How 'bout a double album underway?"
I sincerely hope nothing like the conversation above actually took place - Close To The Edge sounds a fairly normal and expected sequel to Fragile. It's a well thought-out, excellently produced record with a lot of care and philosophy put into it. And, after all, the lack of diversity speaks at least for one important thing: it's an extremely coherent album. 'Supper's Ready' and 'Thick As A Brick' are both classics, and they are both linked with several musical and lyrical ideas, but they still sound very much like just a bunch of short numbers strung together; you could easily insert some pauses in between their parts and nobody would pay a lot of attention. You cannot do the same to any of the CTTE numbers - they all form an unbreaking continuity. And maybe this is Yes' greatest merit about this record - it is the first (and last) Rock Symphony in the truest sense of the word.
And here comes the hatemail now - remember, I gave this an overall rating of 8/15 one day...

And you and I, we all have ideas, so mail them

Your worthy comments:

Juan Manuel Cuenca Flores <[email protected]> (13.07.99)

ok, i read your close to the edge (YES) review, and now i can understand that u just dont understand, i hate you!
[Special author note: all right, here's at least one gentleman who shares that esoteric knowledge. I wish he'd written this in a more informative manner...]

Rich Bunnell <[email protected]> (26.07.99)

Personally I myself would give Close To The Edge around an 11 or 12 on your scale (that is, the full 15-point scale) because I personally don't listen to prog-rock to be "carried away by the melodies" or "be immersed in the complex harmonies and meaning." I just think that the songs are really interesting! Some parts even catchy, even! Particularly the title track, and the riff on "Siberian Khatru." Now, "And You And I," that one's different, it blends together several different parts into a tune which I myself don't notice very much, but since the other songs take up 3/4 of the album, I still find it to be a nice listen. I don't see how anyone would need to "understand" Yes albums; I think that they're just building the songs up that way in their minds because of the song lengths. Also, Jon Anderson's voice isn't the worst that rock has to offer--I mean, Geddy Lee from Rush? Roger Hodgson from Supertramp? Compared to them, Jon's voice is positively deep!
[Special author note: er... well... sorta... I mean, ladies and gentlemen, let's not pronounce such rude words as 'Supertramp' on this site - there might be small children visiting it! It ain't Nanny-protected! As for Jon Anderson, I was trying to honour the man by putting him on the same site with the Beatles and the Kinks, but if we're gonna put him in the Rush domain, guess I'll just have to erase the link.]

Richard C. Dickison <[email protected]> (19.08.99)

I really am perplexed by the rabid Yes fans, If you say something about John's voice, they say it could be worse. If you point out the overly long and pointless music, they tell you that your not hearing it right or that you just don't have the required background to say anything about it.
Well, first off taking only Close To The Edge and Tales From Topographic Oceans to task, there are just so many more interesting albums instrumentally, How many Vangelis albums I could bring up, Bladerunner, The Bounty, Missing, China, all purely instrumental and all following a theme most of them a movie soundtrack (for christ sakes). None have what I would consider a great deal of lyrics but all moving and breath taking examples of long complex themed passages that leave these pitiful little simplistic amaturish albums in the dirt.
If your wanting to discuss purely prog bands I would bring up Camel in particular the Rain Dances or Moonmadness albums as having more interesting tracks while having their own individual faults. If you are going the route of classic influenced music, why not go for the real thing? Wendy Carlos and that unbelievable Switched On Bach album.Even Syd Barret made the style of music he did because he just did not care, not because he knew better than you or I. Can someone at least agree with the fact that the only person who made pretentiousness an entertaining art form was maybe (sometimes) David Bowie, snobbish music that cannot be bothered to make itself accessible and structured is more likely than not to be the intellectual aural equivalent of wanking off. Oh, I understand better than you think, I just don't wallow in musical vomit and try to pass it off as spiritual hymns for humanity.

Josh <[email protected]> (21.08.99)

Are you people beginning to wonder yet if I even LIKE Yes? I really have a hard time getting through this album. It's not BAD, but it's has many faults. The title track just seems to have no particular point, and it goes in no particular direction. "I Get Up, I Get Down" is great, but it has almost nothing to do with the song. "And You And I" is my favorite Yes song up to that point. I don't even mind the length! "Siberian Khatru" is okay. But after this, things slowly get better.
My rating-7

<[email protected]> (16.10.99)

Just who are the idiots writing comments about the classic Yes albums. You guys keep saying things like "overly long". What? I don't listen to music with a stopwatch. Good thing you fellows don't "critique" classical music. Some of that stuff is really loooooooong!!!

Bob <[email protected]> (09.02.2000)

I rate this as #2, after The Yes Album, although most fans put it at #1. The musicianship is higher because of Wakeman, but although they rock here, they rock more succinctly on The Yes Album. That said, even though the songs are long, they are still accessible -- they still can write a great hook and draw you in with it, and rock hard with it when it's called for. Unlike later.

Mark Christian-Edwards <[email protected]> (25.02.2000)

I was a music-unaware teenager in the 70s. After Tubular Bells, the first LP I bought (to get some awareness) was a rock compilation, which had "And you and I" on it. I assumed the singer was a woman (obviously!), but I liked the song. Then I saw "Close to the Edge" in a record store and made it mine. Oh, the beauty of that music! I was not aware that there was such a thing as "Progressive Rock" - I just loved the intricacy, the unexpectedness, the power of this band called Yes. Dodgy high voice though (the singer's a MAN?!). My other favourites now are Relayer and the Yes Album. Unusually, I also like Tormato. The essential band members are Anderson, Squire and Howe - or it's not Yes for me. My little brother "discovered" Yes in the 90s - he likes Big Generator and his favourite band member is Trevor Rabin. But what does he know?

Jeff Blehar <[email protected]> (27.02.2000)

Close To The Edge and right over the cliff. One album. Three songs. Two good musical ideas. And that's a nasty oversimplification of this ostensible meisterwork, but I feel the need to let the air out of Yesfans' tires (not that George hasn't done that quite well already). But first, the good (and there is a surprising amount of good): "Close To The Edge" would've been an amazing 9-minute epic, heck, even 14 minutes at a stretch. Unlike George, I find a lot of this to be damn catchy, just brimming with hooks. I don't really see where it's "inaccessible" - the whole "close to the edge, down by river" bit is darn near impossible to get out of my head. I find myself singing it on the streets of Baltimore, for no good reason. And I like church organs a lot, so that whole "I Get Up, I Get Down" part works for me. It's not the epiphany a lot of people make it out to be, but it's good. But 19 minutes? No! No no no no.
In response to the guy above, it's not the "length" of songs that bothers me per se, it's the UNECESSARY length. You reference classical music. But did Mahler (whose awesome, emotionally devastating 3rd symphony is one of the longest on record) ever write lengthy passage to demonstrate his "chops?" Mozart may have been intoxicated with his talent, but the charm of his complex counterpoints and constructions lies in their CONCISION. A famous dead white guy once wrote that brevity was the soul of wit (and he meant wit in the sense of "intelligence," not "humor"), and he was talking about Yes, even if he didn't know it. That being said, at least Yes doesn't drag a totally useless set of ideas into the ground - I can actually sit still for all 19 minutes, even though I'm not happy about it. And that opening is GREAT, with Anderson just busting out with "AAAHHH!" at random - I love that kind of jarring feeling, that discomfort. For once they're able to evoke the atmosphere indicated in the title, of being "close to the edge," in danger.
But the other half of Close To The Edge? Remember I said that there were two good musical ideas? Well they were used up on the first song. "And You And I" is pretty but I can't remember it for the life of me, and "Siberian Khatru" is similarly nondescript: lots of riffing and loudness, on a level of complexity expected by Yes, but nothing really memorable as would be befitting an album of this reputation. Oh, and what an atrocious cover. What's the story behind that? Puke green? How inviting. 5/10.

Nick Karn <[email protected]> (08.05.2000)

I can kind of see why you hate this one - it seemed really disorganized to me at first, but on further listens I found the songwriting to be at a magnificent level.... maybe not as great as Fragile, but still several utterly breathtaking moments. Plus, the flow here is much better, and so is Bill Bruford's drum sound.
As far as "Close To The Edge" the song goes, I'm one of those who are actually intrigued by lyrics that make absolutely no sense - even if I did hate them, it still wouldn't detract from the fact the musicianship is exceptional. It's very expertly constructed as far as mood, shifting from the tension reflected in the chaotic intertwining jam to the melodic instrumental part just before the vocals come in. The song flows effortlessly and gets to the 9 minute mark before you know it, and then of course comes the insanely breathtaking 'I get up, I get down' section, which is just heavenly (not in a "We Have Heaven" kind of way though). After a frantic solo bit, it reverts back to the normal verse and chorus, then to the birds chirping at the end as if nothing had happened in between. This song just blows anything off The Yes Album out of the water (not that that one wasn't strong itself) in terms of melody, song construction, and mood. NO ONE else sounded like this in 1972 or previous to it - this is a key song in prog's development, love it or not.
The rest of the album? Listening to "And You And I", there's no way I can accept the idea that Jon Anderson is a soulless robot. The lyrics may not make that much sense compared to most bands, but I can see there are romantic themes there, and I can hear genuine emotion in his voice there. Plus, it has more gorgeous Steve Howe acoustic work and an incredible climax that seems a little disconnected from the rest of the song, but it's still quite magnificent... great ending too! I don't see what makes "Siberian Khatru" any worse than the rest of this album, though - the main riff and melody are extremely catchy, and Rick Wakeman's symphonic keyboard playing gives the song a majestic aura about it, and the lyrics are intriguing and mystical, matching the flow of the song. Also, that bit just before the ending solo ('blue tail, tail fly, Luther, in time...') serves the song well in my opinion. Overall, I'd probably give this one a high 9 (not quite a 10 like Fragile, since a few parts seem a tiny bit awkward), and a 13 on your scale.

Ben Greenstein <[email protected]> (02.06.2000)

Maybe I was completely wrong about these guys. Because I really like this album. It's not the most outwardly interesting music I've ever heard, but if you listen closely, there's a lot going on besides the expected noise onslaught. None of the three songs bother me in the way that "Your Is No Disgrace" does, nor do they lost me like "Roundabout," where I get bored within the first minute. "And You And I" is really fantastic, starting with that neat harmonic intro, and going off into a melodic accoustic piece, before a couple of overblown climaxes. "Siberian Khatru" keeps piling new ideas and memorable riffs until I'm almost convinced that it's the best song ever. The title track doesn't even drag for me - and who gives a fuck about the lyrics! The only bands that I listen to for the lyrics are XTC and sometimes Elvis Costello. The rest of the time I don't even care about words. I could give this a nine! Maybe higher soon!

Eric Einhorn <[email protected]> (05.06.2000)

You're kind of right about Yes being somewhat "prog to the extremes". But I think that Jon Anderson is really a great and very underrated vocalist. I'm not a huge Yes fan, so I've only heard Fragile and Close To The Edge. But Anderson's vocals, especially on the latter, are well worth listening to. You see, I honestly think that he was one of the best ever singers to use his voice as an instrument instead of a way to get words across. He was really very versatile, as "Close To The Edge" shows; he can go from the fast parts at the beginning to the (a bit too) slow 'I Get Up I Get Down' part. The beauty of it is, his lyrics may be weird, but his voice fits with the music. You can listen to CTTE without understanding a word he says and it doesn't make a difference. Instead, his voice is just one part of the musical depth that Yes used. In this way, Jon Anderson is as much of a revolutionary as Keith Moon was; the way Moon used his kit as a lead instrument, Anderson sang as if complementing the music instead of covering it or being boring. I think that's pretty cool.
By the way, I think the best thing on CTTE is at the beginning where Howe (I think) is playing that atonal solo in 6/8 time and it cuts suddenly into an a cappella chord, then breaks back in, and repeats a couple of times. That still blows me away every time I hear it.

John McFerrin <[email protected]> (29.06.2000)

Well George, you said that you'd like to get inside the soul of a Yesfan who enjoys this album, so here it goes. The following are the images, more or less, that pass through my mind when I am listening to this sucker. I would also like to point out to all who read this that I am normally nowhere NEAR as kooky or strange as the following will make me seem to be.
The thing is, believe it or not, this is an album which must not only be taken _musically_ as a whole, but as one big chunk which includes, of all things, the cover and mid-section art. The world shown in the middle, a surreal chunk of water and colored rock, is where this album takes you. The green on the front and back is a veil, of sorts, through which one enters and exits this world.
You pass through this veil, and when you first enter, all you can sense are the quiet chirpings and river babblings of nature. But you can also feel an impending onslaught, one that you cannot quite describe ... and then it is there. You are being flooded with powers that you cannot begin to understand. What you can sense, however, is that it is a purifying force, and as with all purification the process is painful. You can feel all of the outside worldliness being violently sucked out of you, and as this happens you want to scream, but you only find it registered in your mind. When the smoke clears, however, you do not wish to rest - you feel overwhelmed to take a journey. To what, you do not know, but you must press onwards and upwards the path that has been presented you. You begin to march. Your mind is flooded with abstract thoughts and images, but they do seem to have a common theme within them, about the perils that people have created for themselves by denying the powerful life force which is all around them. You keep marching. The path is always rugged and twisty, but you feel compelled to go on.
In time, though, you hit a clearing, and through it you see a beautiful oasis, more radiant and breathtakingly beautiful than anything you had ever before comprehended. The atmosphere of the place is simultaneously uplifting and mournful, as though a great sacrifice has been made that could ultimately help the others of the universe, although they might not recognize it. The forces within you and without you allow you to stay and take it all in...
....but only for so long. This gorgeous place begins to flicker and glow, becoming more overwhelmingly colorful and astoundingly beautiful with each passing second, and as it reaches the threshold of what you can comprehend before you would die of pleasure, it disappears. Just like that. And you are left to continue on your journey, just as before. The voices come back to your mind, giving you a lesson that you still do not fully understand, and yet which you can still comprehend. You feel these words in your heart, though your brain is totally befuddled, and they feed and grow in you with each passing second.
You keep going until you can tell that you are almost at the top, and the forces urge you on. At last you make it to the top, and with triumph you gaze upon a plateau of sheer surreal beauty. The forces applaud your effort in one voice with great aplomb, and you are allowed to sit and take it in.
After resting, you begin to press onwards to the center of this plateau. The journey is easier now, as the land is mostly flat, and you can move fairly briskly. The forces begin to now give you images of man's relationship to nature, and you take them in quickly, without much thought. As you approach the center, though, the forces become stronger - you can tell that you are nearing a holy place of sorts. As you come closer to this place, you can begin to feel the power, and it grows with each passing second. You know not exactly where in it to go, and yet the forces practically carry you to it.
And then you see it and feel it, the point of your journey. You look up, and you can see everything, everyone, everyplace, and everytime. You are absolutely overcome and overpowered with an overwhelming sense of awe and a complete oneness with every last thing in existance. The majesty is totally beyond anything which you had ever before comprehended, and you are simply speechless.
As you stand in the place, however, the force fades away, leaving you weak-kneed and in need of rest from the experience. Eventually, you get up the strength to get moving again in the same direction as before, and once more your journey is brisk. More thoughts pass through you, but they seem less powerful after what you have experienced. Eventually, you come to the other side of the plateau, the peaceful thoughts fade away, and you are left to rest.
You now feel compelled to go down the cliff in order to leave this place. You try to keep a slow, controlled pace, but the steepness forces you to have to move at a much faster rate than before. Thoughts continue to pass through you, but now they don't mean as much and don't resonate with you deep down, since all of your concentration is spent in getting down this cliff without hurting yourself. Ocasionally the path is less steep, but no sooner does it get easy then it gets fast again.
Eventually, you lose your footing, and you start to slide down. Thoughts are still going through you, but now you can make no sense of them whatsoever - you're so terrified of your painful and increasingly accelerating descent that you can only pick out bits and pieces of what is going on. The thoughts finally leave all together, but you keep sliding. And then, without warning, you approach the 'exit veil'. As when you entered this place, you want to scream - your necessary worldliness is flying back into you, and after what you experienced on the plateau, that is the last thing you want. The onslaught of forces are as powerful as before, though different in nature, since they are _returning_ as opposed to _taking_ your worldliness. You continue to slide, and you gradually pass through the veil and the reality of this strange world begins to fade.
Well, George, you asked, you got it. :p

Philip Maddox <[email protected]> (07.07.2000)

I'd give this a much higher rating than you did - probably a 9 or something. 'Close To the Edge' tries hard, but doesn't bore me at all during its entire 20 minute length. People say that the 'I Get Up I Get Down' part stands out, but I think the main verse melody is awesome, too. My favorite part is at the conclusion when Jon sings "Now that you're whole... seasons will pass you by.... I get uuuuup, I get dow-owowow-ownnn". It's beautiful. A great tune. Side 2 isn't bad either. 'And You And I' is extremely pretty, too. It sounds a bit like 'I've Seen All Good People', but not as good until the end, where it gets extremely beautiful. 'Siberian Khatru' is the weakest track here - it doesn't have enough ideas and/or melody to last 10 minutes. It isn't bad, though. In fact, it's still quite good. just not as good as the two tracks that preceded it. I could care less how complex music is in general - I just like music that's exciting, beautiful, interesting, or all 3. This album qualifies easily, if you ask me. A high 9.

Joel Larsson <[email protected]> (14.09.2000)

I've just one thing to say about this LP: It is better than a 6 and 8 rating. Just listen to 'Siberian Khatru'!

<[email protected]> (10.10.2000)

Well, I have to give you credit for stating your opinions. But I think that you are way overanalyzing things (see "complaint # 2" on the plans page - G.S.). It took me a while to grow use to the Yes sound as well (that is the whole point, it is complicated music), but a piece like "And You and I" might be one of the most beautiful pieces of Rock music I have ever heard. Some of the melodies are downright staggering in their beauty, and I know that I am just one of many who feel this way. I would rather fail occasionally and be ambitious than simply stick to the tried and true. Just imagine what it must feel like to write and perform such a beautiful peace of music. Even the lyrics are cool. They are obscure, but Jon Anderson's singing on "And You and I" is incredible. How you could say you feel sorry for him is crazy.

Year Of Release: 1973
Record rating = 9
Overall rating = 11

The triumph of progressive rock ideas? Sprawl and audacity!
Best song: STARSHIP TROOPER

I don't know if Yessongs was the first triple album ever, but most probably so: at least, only Yes could have dared to put out a triple live album at the time, and Yessongs was such a powerful and impressive statement that even the critics were trembling in their undergarments, and up to this day, if somebody directs you to a live prog rock album, it will most probably be Yessongs. (Actually, as some of the commentators pointed out below, George Harrison's All Thigs Must Pass was the first triple album; it just skipped my mind at the time of writing because I'm so used to dismissing the Apple Jam part of it that it's always considered a double album by my subconscious. Apologies). Three records, filled to the brim with performances of every single 'epic' composition from the band's last three albums (bar 'South Side Of The Sky', for some reason), and padded out with an excerpt from Rick Wakeman's Six Wives Of Henry VIII and a couple shorter numbers. A gorgeous album cover and lots of inlay pictures painting a whole fantasy world of their own. An incredible, mind-blowing level of live performance previously unheard of. Perhaps the only overall complaint that can be hurled towards the album is the sound quality: it is, indeed, not of the highest order, and probably has to be explained by the fact that this was the first case of a live recording of THIS order. Still, there are worse live albums out when it comes to sound quality, and the roughness of the sound and the sloppiness of the mix will wear off after just a couple of listens.
The natural question, then, is: what the hell do we need this album for, apart from its obvious use as a great document of its epoch? In what way does it substitute or complement the studio albums? Err... if I had to give one general answer, it would probably be - it doesn't, and moreover, it couldn't. For the most part, Yes faithfully reproduced the originals on stage, and like most progressive bands at the time, their main aim was to impress the audience and plunge them into a more 'realistic' landscape of sound than could be achieved through the usual turntable or tape deck. In accordance with this principle, a video version of Yessongs was also released at the same time, with a slightly different track listing and order (see the video review below). This all worked very well, of course; however, no live album can actually capture a certain 'live experience' perfectly, and prog rock bands suffer the most when their concerts are transferred onto record - without the grandiose sound system and the visual appeal, these massive shows lose most of their charm.
What's up with this particular performance, then? (Or, rather, performances: while most of the tracks feature new drummer Alan White, a couple of them are taken from earlier shows that still featured Bill Bruford - namely, the 'Long Distance Runaround/The Fish' medley and 'Perpetual Change'; the latter actually has a Bruford drum solo). Well, it's actually better than just a faithful reproduction. Graced with such a unique combination of ace players, Yes take their time carefully and widely displaying the individual band members' prominence, i. e. employ a principle that's close to the one used on Fragile, where every member was given a short 'solo spot'. However, the Fragile solo spots did not so much demonstrate the actual 'chops' as they demonstrated the individual members' wit and personality - the heavenly harmonies of Anderson, the classical inclinations of Howe and Wakeman, the inventive weirdness of Squire, the jazzy tricks of Bruford. Here, the 'solo spots' are taken in the more traditional sense - the given band member just picks up the vibe and gets on with it. Like I said, Bruford's moment of 'royalty' is on 'Perpetual Change'. Wakeman takes what's his on the Six Wives excerpts, stunning the audience with everything from Bach-inspired piano runs to thunderous "astral noise" fugues. Squire gets to perform 'The Fish', although, to be frank with you, this can hardly be called 'The Fish' because it's no longer based on multiple bass overdubs, but rather just features Squire noodling away on his four-string like crazy. And Howe has his day on 'Yours Is No Disgrace', amply demonstrating why he has to be deemed the most technically gifted prog rock guitarist of all time. Only Mr Anderson kinda just stands there and does nothing but sing the regular lines. Poor guy. Maybe that's why I like the album so much?
All of these 'solo showcases' are good - I don't have any problems with 'completely justified self-indulgence', not to mention that most of them don't go over five or six minutes. (It's no 'Moby Dick', I tell you!). However, that's not the only difference. Some of the numbers are slightly rearranged so as to fit the live atmosphere better - for instance, 'And You And I' is introduced by the same 'climactic' section that we find in the middle and at the end of that number on Close To The Edge, with the obvious intent of stunning the audience by this Olympic sonic onslaught from the very beginning. And Howe actually hardens up some of his guitar tones and pumps up the energy level throughout - even the introductory riff to 'Yours Is No Disgrace' is at least twice as massive and energetic as the studio version. Real guitar thunderstorms are also evidenced on 'Heart On The Sunrise' (damn is that speedy guitar riff awesome) and 'Close To The Edge'. Plus, is there a cooler way to end the show than with 'Starship Trooper'? The 'Wurm' coda just rocks the house down... err, wrong page, but still, I just haven't yet found a suitable equivalent for a powerful prog rock show stopper.
This can indeed be a good introduction to the band's sound, although it sure wears down on you on first listen - after all, eleven progressive epics in a row is a bit too much even for the seasoned prog fan. But don't listen to it all at once unless you're already dying of devotion to the regular studio records. Imbibe it bit for bit. Me? I'm content. I can just program out the worst offenders ('Siberian Khatru', for instance - although I do like to listen to it for the first three or four minutes, just to catch up with that cool funky riff) and enjoy the band working off their asses. Guess I'm just a sucker for live albums. Oh, and, by the way, don't believe the anti-hype: ELP's Welcome Back My Friends, which came out next year and was obviously modelled after this monster, was just as good. Don't you just LOVE a nice triple album stuffed with pretentious renditions of pompous twelve-minute long epics?
I hate to say it, but the answer is: "YES".

Close to the edge of mailing your ideas?

Your worthy comments:

Chris Mitchell <[email protected]> (12.12.2000)

George Harrison's All Things Must Pass actually beat Yessongs to the first-triple-album punch by about 3 years. Yes may well have the first triple live album, though.

John McFerrin <[email protected]> (13.12.2000)

Yup, I agree, this is a wonderful live album (though the sound quality doesn't quite match up). I would go so far as to say that if you really don't want to spend too much money on Yes, this and Fragile would fill out your collection just fine. I mean, it's got all of CTTE and the four epics of TYA. Given the choice, I think that casual fans would easily want to skip TYA (I mean, what will they lose - 'A Venture'? Oooooh ... Well, ok, there's the clap, but we get 'Mood For a Day' here!).

Mike DeFabio <[email protected]> (13.12.2000)

Ahem... George... a little something called ALL THINGS MUST PASS???!!!
I like prog-rock. I've said it and I'm saying it again. I like 12 minute songs that make you feel like you're going on some epic fantasy journey. And this album has very many of them. They're great songs, and they're faithfully rendered, so it gets a thumbs up from me. Has anyone realized how the "Wurm" section of "Starship Trooper" is kind of a prog-rock "Freebird"? That's why it makes such a good closer.

Philip Maddox <[email protected]> (14.12.2000)

Fantastic live album by the Yessers, and worth that nine you gave it. The songs are all adequately changed from the studio versions, be it with crunchier guitars ("Yours Is No Disgrace"), extended soloing ("The Fish"), or some rearrangements ("Roundabout", "And You And I") to make it worthwhile. Plus, early Yes epics were usually pretty great, and 3 albums worth of them never really gets boring. The only real complain that I have here is that the live "Close To The Edge" isn't nearly as great as the studio version (how could it be?) due to some changes that had to be made in concert (the keys certainly sounds cheesier, Jon doesn't soar as high as he should in some parts), but the song is great regardless. And like you said, "Starship Trooper" is fantastic beyond words here - that coda gets me every time. It's the perfect way to close out a live experience. Like I said, a fantastic album. Not even the subpar sound quality can get to me (trust me, I've heard a lot worse).

Year Of Release: 1974
Record rating = 6
Overall rating = 8

Have you been told lately that complexity need not compromise beauty? Well, throw that crap out of your head. It does exactly that.
Best song: RITUAL (NOUS SOMMES DU SOLEIL)

I originally planned giving this album a 1 (indeed) as the biggest mistake in rock history. But then I've changed my mind. And why, do you ask? Simply because I felt that I was put under pressure by Anderson and Howe, it was like they were persuading me - come on, give it a 1 and make your review and the album object of endless battles and controversions and everything! Nope. A 1 is too good a rating for an album like Tales. A 1 would mean that it is outstandingly bad - if we consider my general rating of Yes, that would have given an overall rating of THREE which is a unique case up till now. Everybody would rush to the stores to buy the worst album in rock history, and there would be heaps of discussions about what makes it so bad or about what makes this idiot of a reviewer consider it so bad, and how in the world could such talented musicians... etc... etc... etc...
Nope. None of that. Instead of crucifying this Herostrates of an album, I mildly give it a 5 and say: it's not a very bad album. It's just okayish, background music. Now THAT's what I call revenge on 80 minutes of mind-numbing torture!
Okay, cut these remarks out. Here starts the serious part. By now, Anderson and company have seemingly decided that Close To The Edge wasn't really as complex as they'd like it to be. Consequently, they came up with an even more mastodontic project, maybe the most mastodontic project in the history of rock & pop music; while the music presented herein might not be exactly the most complex ever written in rock (for that, I suppose one should turn to stuff like Gentle Giant), it is certainly the most ambitious and the most complex on a large scale. Tales From Topographic Oceans is a double album with four tracks, each of them sidelong and the smallest one 'measuring' almost nineteen minutes. (Note that, recordsmen as they were, they still didn't beat Jethro Tull's 'Thick As A Brick' as the longest song of all). The album seems to be a concept one: apparently, it's based on Anderson's interpretations of some Yogi tract, but you really couldn't tell, 'cause the lyrics are typical Anderson meaningless ravings. True, this time there is a certain religious flavour to them, because all four sound like hymns, but hymns to whom? hymns to what? Don't even bother to guess. If lyrics like 'What happened to this song we once knew so well/Signed promise for moments caught within the spell/I must have waited all my life for this moment' really mean a thing to you, my reader, and to you, and to you, you may be sure your interpretations will all be different and none of them will reflect Anderson's ideas he actually put into this (if he did, that is). Once again I tell you that graphomania is a disease - not a virtue. And mind you, the example quoted above is only the most innocent of the lines in 'Revealing Science Of God'. If you're a Yes fan, you'll love it, of course, but please don't tell me I'm a stupid dumbass jerk just because I don't share the game with you, okay?
Needless to say, all of the lyrics are delivered in the same humanless, robotic tone we've all grown to love so well. This, taken together with the fact that they don't even bother to entertain you at least by inserting clever, melodical chantings of the 'I Get Up I Get Down' type, renders the sung parts of the tunes as boring as possible. And the music? More of the same stuff that we met on their 1972 albums, but worse, because Steve Howe isn't so prominent on the album. When he is, it's good (the short guitar solo on 'Ritual'); when he isn't, it's Wakeman who does the job, and he doesn't sound particularly inspired, either. Some of his synth solos are quite breathtaking, to be sure, but mostly he just sticks in the background and often ends up sounding like Tony Banks (God forgive me). Even Chris Squire's base isn't that good because it's usually quite low in the mix (did they think the guy was taking too much place in the band?) Bill Bruford quit before this album, on the ground that the band gave out everything it could give out (oh man, did he have a point), and new drummer Alan White (ex-Plastic Ono Band, by the way) is weaker: I mean, he keeps the beat up nicely, but he doesn't really do anything else.
So the actual songs are, for the most part, reduced to pleasant, highly professional and technically flawless, but also lengthy, cumbersome and secondary lullabies (the 'introduction' to 'Revealing Science Of God' is a perfect example). I can hardly stand disc one at all, with the worst moment being the first ten minutes of 'The Remembering': a slow, preachy, dragging countryish shuffle which doesn't go anywhere in particular (except out of the window, of course). It does pick up a little steam near the middle, but not too much. The second disk is notably better, though: 'The Ancient' is the only tune that seems to have a little energy, with a good, ravin' and chuggin' drums/base/guitar intro (although the lyrics are arguably the worst on the album, with Anderson reciting meaningless, cabbalistic words he apparently doesn't have the slightest idea of), while 'Ritual (Nous Sommes Du Soleil)' is the closest they ever came to a generic hippie song since 'Time And A Word'. Its main melody is catchy and happy, and Wakeman's synths do strengthen that 'shining', 'resplendent' idea of the song, but of course twenty-one minutes and a half do not a good hippie anthem make.
Please note that the album is, in fact, vastly different from most of Yes' previous output; Rick Wakeman didn't hate it for nothing. Close To The Edge might not have featured a potload of ideas, but all of its songs were based on actual melodies - solid guitar riffs, cool repeating keyboard phrases, harmonious sequences that actually had a beginning and an end. Tales, in comparison, often end up sounding like random sonic collages, with the band carefully avoiding hooks and trying to reach the maximum level of deconstruction. Not that the actual tunes are atonal or highly dissonant; they do have some kind of flow to them, but it's a forced, mechanical, artificial flow that hasn't got any real life to it. No matter how much I listen to this stuff, NOTHING agrees to stick in my head - except for 'Ritual', that is, where they have made the fatal mistake of letting some real hooks flow through their hands, hah hah. Basically, if Close To The Edge finally grew on me after a while and made me at least respect the effort, if not necessarily love it, this album simply refuses to follow suit. There's just nothing intriguing about this kind of music. The only intriguing thing, in fact, is the album cover (Roger Dean's zenith, probably: his surrealistic panorama is simply wonderful. Is this a snapshot from 'topographic oceans'? Could be, with all the cute little fishes).
Final judgement: okay. You shouldn't spit on this album (after all, give the guys some credit: it was really hard to do a thing like that), but you shouldn't love it, either (don't fall into this trap they have set for you - trust me, it's nothing but a put-on). Unfortunately, most of the people whose opinions I know prefer either this or that. Why can't you clear your head and take a good look (and listen, for that matter) at the actual musical quality? I mildly squeeze out a six here, out of love for 'Ritual' and respect for the boldness of the move and the hardships of actually recording it, but that's as far as I can go. Here's my final bequest:
To the sceptics: could you come up with such a complicated piece of music that does manage to thrill thousands of people?
To the adepts: go read some Shakespeare and listen to some Stravinsky, if you really want high art.
To the unspoiled ones: beware of extremism!

Ritual of posting comments, it's a good one

Your worthy comments:

John McFerrin <[email protected]> (03.05.99)

Hey! I _love_ Stravinsky, more so than any other composer, but I still like this album a lot. As has been said, Anderson's lyrics are essentially just the ravings of drugged-up madman, but they can mean whatever you want them to. And yeah, 'The Remembering' is a little dull, and the words on 'The Ancient' suck, but the first and last tracks CANNOT BE BEAT (yeah, I know that I said I preferred the whole of disc one to disc two on the prindle site; I've listened more and since changed my mind).

Josh <[email protected]> (21.08.99)

I have mixed feelings about this. Sometimes I like it, sometimes I don't, but I always find it quite fascinating. I can't really review the separate songs, it's too hard. I'll just say that I like parts of every song. Except "The Ancient" which is HORRIBLE!
My rating-7

Chris Wallace <[email protected]> (11.01.2000)

As a 23 year old musician who appreciates almost all types of music, I find this to be simply the BEST album I have ever heard, and many albums have I heard. Pure genius is Tales From Topographic Oceans. One day, more people will see it as I do.

Bob <[email protected]> (09.02.2000)

I must agree. The absolute low point. Lots of fans put this at #1, but who knows why? I've only heard the whole thing once, and parts of this are just totally unlistenable, while a lot of it is just plain dull. Steve's guitar screeches a lot. And the lyrics are way over the top -- they are supposed to have a connection with the Shastric scriptures, but who could tell? The best track is "Ritual," which does recall "Close to the Edge" and has some good melodies, but they ruin it with a way-too-long percussion solo.
Oh well, sometimes experiments fail.

Chris Cormier <[email protected]> (19.06.2000)

I thought the lyrics of "what happened to the song we once knew so well" were pretty obvious, especially in the setting of the song.  I must be one of those yes fans that think the world doesn't understand.  They mean, what have we done with what we were given, for instance, children aren't prejudiced and ignorant, they have no concept of these things, until they grow older and start learning 'adult' ways.  You must be familiar with this drift, God gave us a amazing planet to live on, basically a garden of paradise which was 'improved' into the cesspool it is today, he gave us a life to live and all we do is whine (how come there are no eating disorders in famine-stricken areas?)  The only thing worse than hippy philosophy is people who attack it (and immediately replace it with their own even more weak-minded smart-ass one.)
I don't really see the point in attacking an artist so completely though, what's the point?  I can dress up in armor and skewer a fudge sundae, but isn't that going a bit overboard, maybe i'm more confident in my masculinity or something.  I'll say that the rolling stones sucked real bad and relied on being perceived as shocking and offensive (in keith richards case, actually being very offensive) more than having any actual talent (supposedly you got 'em messed up with Alice Cooper, dude - G. S.).  But I'm not going to write pages detailing it because (1) apparently some people get a real charge from it, it's kind of pointless to write on and on how i just don't get it.  Sucks to be me, and (2) I'd have to torture myself and listen to all that stuff over and over just to get enough material to write about.  

Ben Greenstein <[email protected]> (25.07.2000)

I seem to be in the minority on this album - I can see all of it's flaws very clearly (it IS very overlong, and it IS way too lethargic), but I still enjoy it quite a bit. They are clearly running out of melodies - each song has about one hook, which is in opposition to the eight or so they stuck on each song on the last album, but the music is always pleasant - and not really boring, just good as background music. Though, I'll admit, it is annoying when you peek over at the elapsed time, expecting a song to be nearing it's end, and you've still got ten minutes to go. "Ritual" is a great song, though. So is "Revealing Science," if not as much. Another eight.

Richard Savill <[email protected]> (01.09.2000)

I heard this album for the first time only just this year. I had to see what all the fuss is about on the various YES websites.
My impressions are this.
This album just doesn't have anything that really grabs you. For an album to grab you it takes something called 'melody'. I realise that it was not calculated to be a melodious album, but if the 'movements' had better phases between the moments, Topo might not be the cause of such civil wars with ardent YES fans.
Sad to say, I prefer to listen to a long and boring Gustav Mahler symphony than relax to Topo. But these are my early impressions. I have listened to it a few times now and still I cannot enjoy it. My view may change, but so far it looks like one of those CDs that rarely gets played.
I can see why some people would like the album though. It's deep. You have to listen to it intellectually. Having said that, this means the album can be construed as pretentious.
I enjoyed your article. You told it straight.
By the way, have you heard of Klaatu? I would really like to hear how you'd review their album HOPE (1977).

John McFerrin <[email protected]> (24.09.99)

1. 'Even Chris Squire's base isn't that good because it's usually quite low in the mix (did they think the guy was taking too much place in the band?)'
Actually, that's not far from the truth. My brother was reading an old interview with Bill Bruford (since my bro's a big KC fan, we each give Bill the same level of reverence) in which he said that the primary reason that he left was actually the fact that he was "sick of waiting for Chris to 'catch up'." IE, he was tired of having to 'compete' with Chris for the right to jazz up the rhythm section, and he had to restrain himself more than he wanted so that there could be _some_ semblance of rhythm. Of course, I don't really agree with his assessment there, but whatever ...
2. To Mr. Cormier: I probably love this album more than you do. But just because the average Stones fan will despise this album doesn't mean that a lover of this album should ignore or put down the Stones (as I once did, unfortunately). Both Yes and the Stones are fabulous bands, just with different approaches.
3. (Back to you George): I still disagree on the assessment of Anderson's lyrics on this album as raving nonsense. The texts within each of these tracks must be taken as a holistic whole - while I will admit that it is unfortunate that one cannot find meaning in individual lines (like with, say, Peter Gabriel's Genesis) taken as a whole, they WORK. And Jon _did_ put thought into these lyrics, he did he did he did!!!!
4. Ok, as far as the music goes, I can understand. I don't have anything against the gigantic deconstructionism in this album, but I can see where it would annoy. A lot.
5. ... But you never get the 'getting over overhanging trees' part of 'TRSoG' stuck in your head? Wow, I must be a real freak.

Tony Weitner <[email protected]> (20.11.2000)

Hi there,
As a completely unpompous fan of this period of rock music (and an even bigger fan of classical and jazz - the real thing) I enjoyed your commentary on this.
One note of possible interest:
You write"'The Ancient' is the only tune that seems to have a little energy, with a good, ravin' and chuggin' drums/base/guitar intro (although the lyrics are arguably the worst on the album, with Anderson reciting meaningless, cabbalistic words he apparently doesn't have the slightest idea of), "
If my memory serves me correctly, these 'cabbalistic words' as you call them are really the word 'Sun' in different languages of the world.
Would more people give the actual music more of a chance if it weren't for the pompous personalities bringing it to life?
Thanks again.

Bill Jean <[email protected]> (02.12.2000)

I went to my first or second Yes Concert back in the early 70's and it was for the Tales Tour. I remember falling asleep during the concert. Most of the crowd were pretty quiet as well when they played the entirety of Tales. It seemed like the guys were pretty much into their musci and didn't give a shit about the crowd. Afterwards, this was THE ALBUM me and my friends listened to for the whole of our University life. I wish I knew the material during that album because they never really played it much live afterwards. 30 years later I'm still listening to it. This is the Muhammed Ali of prog rock albums.

Year Of Release: 1974
Record rating = 8
Overall rating = 10

Not exactly 'art metal', but sometimes 'close to the edge'. A weird album for a Yes one; unfortunately, 'weird' and 'good' are different things.
Best song: THE GATES OF DELIRIUM

Apparently, the fact that the musical press hated Tales and that Rick Wakeman's sudden departure from the band owed much to the album's pointlessness and 'padding' hadn't cured the band of their, by now usual, approach to rock music. So, having grabbed sideman Patrick Moraz instead, they flipped out yet another three-track album. Don't panic, it's a single one, and in that respect kinda emulates Close To The Edge rather than Tales; namely, it is fortunate enough to more or less (not completely, though) forsake the mind-blowing deconstructionism of Topographic Oceans and return to the "limited", but existent, melodicity of old. But there are serious differences just as well. Which I'm going to tell you about right now.
I don't know - have you ever heard 'The Gates Of Delirium'? If you haven't, you'll hardly understand my following blabber, but there's a great distance between it and, say, 'Close To The Edge', or, in fact, anything Yes ever did before. It's a sidelong, spacey raving, as usual, but this time they give it a much more hard edge. Not to say that this is really hard rock or metal (although in a couple of places Steve Howe does end up sounding like some metal dude). But bear in mind that the band previously relied on the 'cosmic conscience' groove, with slow, mind-boggling, hallucinogenous passages, all drenched in church organs, acoustic guitars and string-imitating synths. That's why Tales were ultimately so boring: if your conscience can't adjust to the groove, you're bound to fall asleep. This ain't the case with 'Gates Of Delirium'. For once, Anderson has written lyrics that do make sense: if I get it right, the effect is supposed to be apocalyptic, with both the name of the track and the album cover (a huge snake coiled before some fearsome rock structures - the gates of delirium, p'raps?) contributing to the mix, and the lyrics, with their war and confusion imagery, are completely in place. As for the music - well, this is probably the most texture-rich Yes album this far. I ain't saying that the melodies are more complicated than anywhere else, but the arrangements, with rows on rows of instruments and sound effects, certainly are. The lengthy central part, totally instrumental, probably represents the Final Judgement or something of the kind. (Well, actually, I think the whole track is dedicated to describing a global battle - together with all the preparations, the fight itself, and the ensuing peace and quiet). Yup. It's totally crazy, crazy like nothing before. I'm no musician, so I won't indulge myself in discussions over who's the greatest - Wakeman or Moraz; all I'm gonna say is that these keyboard parts are so nuts that they are really entertaining. Taken together with White's steadily improving drumming, Squire's immaculate bass and Howe's angry licks, they form a truly rockin' musical sequence; and at least in one respect I think it superates all the previous efforts - the level of overdubbing and "wall-of-sound" effects is truly overwhelming. Then, just as your eardrums are ready to burst, it all reverts to the 'calm after the storm' and Anderson's soothing final lines. My final word is that, even if there's no 'I Get Up I Get Down'-type hidden beauty to be found here (well, some find the final part "soon-oh-soon..." to be even more emotionally resonant, but I guess that's a matter of personal preference - of course, it is very pretty), this is still the most impressive of Yes' overlong pieces. The main thing is, it is the most rational of Yes overlong pieces: the sections aren't really drawn out more than they're supposed to. After all, it's a battle, and a battle doesn't just last three minutes zero seconds, now does it? So count me, and the worldwide population, happy. BUT...
...unfortunately, side two is the usual hell of a mess. Well, it's not the worst side of Yes material ever recorded, but it's not even close in effectiveness to the first one. The supposedly rockin' 'Sound Chaser' and the slightly Indian-flavoured, soft and moody 'To Be Over' do absolutely nothing for me (rather like side two of Close To The Edge, but even worse). 'Gates' were a curious elusion from Yes' standard formula; these two songs aren't, and not even Moraz can do anything with that. Good background music, but nothing more. They go for a kind of "compromise" between the more concentrated melodies of CTTE and the rambling un-structures of TFTO, but that doesn't actually work. 'Sound Chaser' doesn't make sense, and no sooner do we get to hang on a snippet of catchy melody than it goes away. Steve Howe gets in with some really angry guitar licks, though, and Anderson and company furiously chanting 'cha cha cha' is highly unpredictable for a Yes song; but that's it. 'To Be Over' is just solid atmosphere, nowhere near the heavenly effect of, say, 'And You And I'. Well, anyway, like I said, 'Gates' is the only song on a 'classic' Yes album that does make some sense and stands up to rational criticism. The others don't. They're way too pointless, fractured, and hey - dare I say it? - self-indulgent. That said, they aren't particularly nasty or anything - and anyway, since I consider 'Gates Of Delirium' to be one of the band's most impressive progressive peaks, I see no problem in giving Relayer an 8 on the whole. This way, the music really seems to work, and this leaves me with a pondering question: what would a Yes with no Jon Anderson look like?
Damn it, maybe I shouldn't have asked. It would be Drama Yes, for sure.

To be over, this review needs your comments

Your worthy comments:

Josh <[email protected]> (21.08.99)

Sloppy, heavy, yet somehow, satisfying. "Gates Of Delirium" is acually amazing! Among the band's best musicianship. "Sound Chaser" I love, although I'm not sure why! "To Be Over" is nice, but nothing extraordinary! It's good!
My rating-9

Bob <[email protected]> (09.02.2000)

Yes was going for a sort of jazz-fusion sound here. Which one can definitely hear, especially from Patirck and Alan. I'm one of the fans that thinks Patrick fills Wakeman's shoes just fine. The discordance of the guitar in "Gates" is grating and disturbing, but I think that's the effect Steve was going for. My main problem with "Sound Chaser" and "To Be Over" is that the vocal harmonies are mixed way too low in the track. But the "Soon" piece which ends "Gates" is one of the most melodic, beautiful ballads the band ever recorded.
George, as a Russian you might be interested in knowing that "Gates" was an attempt by Anderson to turn the novel War and Peace into a 22 minute song.

Rich Bunnell <[email protected]> (18.03.2000)

I still don't see what everyone hates about this band's wobbly prog jamming. Maybe I'm just more tolerant than most people, or maybe it's just because I haven't heard Tales From Topographic Oceans yet, but I still love this band's sound and love this album. "The Gates Of Delirium" is wonderful! It doesn't bother me at all that basically fourteen minutes of it is band jam because the jam is apocalyptic, relentless, and raucously tuneful. It's really a wonderful song, and even though this is the part that no one will agree with me on, "Sound Chaser" and "To Be Over" are real keepers as well. The former is messy and the latter's pretty soft, but I have to say that neither gives me any reason to hate them. People who bash that "CHA CHA CHA CHA CHA!" part in "Sound Chaser" are being really superficial (the one thing I really hate in music reviewing-- don't hate something because it's the most obvious thing to do, people, hate things when you actually mean it!). I'd give this album a nine.

Ben Greenstein <[email protected]> (20.06.2000)

Oh, man - I really like this one, too! It's not as catchy as Close To The Edge, (and whatever you say, that's a really catchy album), but the general mood is stronger, more atmospheric, and more rocky. How can you say that there's no "hidden beauty" on "Gates Of Delirium"? What do you call that "Soon" part at the end? That part defines beauty! "To Be Over," also - really pretty. Sounds like Neil Young. "Sound Chaser" is the only weak spot, for me, just because it's too fractured to really excite. But it's okay. I give this album a high eight!

Philip Maddox <[email protected]> (07.07.2000)

I don't think it's as good as the 71-72 albums, but really, REALLY close. 'The Gates Of Delirium' is my favorite long form Yes song - that jam in the middle is killer! That is some really weird, messy, noisy friggin' music! The parts that frame the jam are great too. The opening vocal sections are great, and the section after the jam is absolutely beautiful - much more so than 'I Get Up I Get Down' was. The album is worth what you pay for it for just that one song. Side 2 isn't as good, though. 'Sound Chaser' is a great song, too. The focus is clearly on the band's instrumental skill here - that song is insane! It knocks me backwards it's so well played! It's interesting, too - I don't know how they thought of all this stuff! The last song, 'To Be Over', is kinda weak, though. It's nice, but not very memorable or exciting. It's supposed to be "calming", but it just bores me to death. It's not bad, it just pales next to the other material. i'd give this a low 9. Excellent album.

Year Of Release: 1977
Record rating = 8
Overall rating = 10

Progressive music seriously distilled with Rock And Roll and Pop and Soul. It worked for them - it almost works for me.
Best song: GOING FOR THE ONE

Imagine yourself coming home with a brand new record by one of your favourite alternative bands, putting it on with a smile and... flying out of the room with a distorted composure on your face, crying 'What the f...?' as you are pursued with a pseudo-classical suite heavily influenced by P. I. Tchaikowsky. Of course, sooner or later, as you regain your tranquility, you'll come to understand that your favourite alternative band has decided to make a risky change of image, and if it is a really talented band, chances are that in some time you'll even come to enjoy the album. But the initial reaction, the reaction of uttermost horror and stupefaction, will never be forgotten.
Why am I saying this? Well, because it's just the kind of feeling you get when the first notes of 'Going For The One' echo through your living room. Unlike the magical 'ting' of Fragile or the mystical whispers of Tales or the morpheic crescendo of Close To The Edge, what you hear first is some ferocious notes from Howe's guitar... played boogie-woogie style! Wow, you must admit that's something for Yes. Of course, they were too smartass for allowing themselves to play some pure boogie-woogie: as soon as Anderson steps in with the vocals, it becomes quite a complex tune, with a 'wall-of-sound' kind of production similar to the one used on 'Gates Of Delirium', but more 'booming' and less menacing. The song is excellent indeed, and even Jon's impersonation of a heavy metal singer doesn't annoy me. The coda is extended a little longer than I'd like it to be, but the chorus is memorable, and the lyrics are good - thank God, the Relayer experience turns out to be the beginning of Anderson's 'normalization' as a textwriter rather than a singular moment of temporary convalescence.
Besides that, the album heralds a whole series of 'firsts'. The first first is that Rick Wakeman is back as a band member, and it shows - the keyboards are maybe even more prominent on the album than on the 1972-74 releases. The second first is that this is the first album in a long time whose cover is not painted by Roger Dean. That's a bad first, though, because it forces me to spend some time contemplating an incognito's butts whose artistic value I seriously doubt. The third first, the most important one, is that there are five tracks on the album - and that's more than on the whole double Topographic Oceans, you gotta admit that. Finally, the fourth first is the only 'subjective' one, because this is the first album since Fragile that has more than one good song on it. Talkin' bout a revolution indeed!
Indeed. Indeed, 'Parallels' is a most curious rocker, because its main attraction lies in the main instrument being church organ. A rockin' church organ song, that's really something you must hear. 'Turn Of The Century' distinguishes itself in my memory primarily by not being very complicated - an anthem that goes on for eight minutes without giving the impression of a musical labyrinth. At times it seems suspiciously close to Seventies' pop garbage, but that's only at times, and only from a specific angle of view. You shouldn't use that naughty angle while listening to it. Just enjoy the instrumental techniques, that's what I say, and try not to pay attention to Anderson very much (a thing I usually do with every Yes album after the first listen). Finally, the short, obviously pop-oriented 'Wonderous Stories' has a nice melody and, again, Anderson is doing a fine work. Now I know I just put him down, but that's the trouble with Jon: he really could be a good singer, when he tried to (remember 'Sweetness'?) The problem is, he wanted to be a bad singer more often than a good one. As for 'Wonderous Stories', some people twitch their noses at it because it's too poppy for them (Yes even got to play it on Top of the Pops!), but I don't care. I only care for a good melody. I think Rumours is one of the greatest albums of the Seventies. Now that all the pure art lovers have gone away, let me stay with the eclecticists and share the idea that 'Wonderous Stories' is the second or third best tune on the album. It's pretty.
Unfortunately, the period of regeneration is not over completely. This means that we still have to endure a mega-pompous tune at the end, the fifteen-minute 'Awaken' (fortunately, that would be their last song that goes over fifteen minutes for twenty years). Its lyrics are more or less understandable (although they don't really say anything that hadn't been said before), and it starts out quite pretty; unfortunately, most of the time that it plays is spent on a horrible, dissonant jam with multiple overdubbed vocals and the wall-of-sound impaling my ears. Sorely. Steve Howe plays some great solos, but wouldn't it be better if he saved them for a better song? Why not move them to the title track, for instance?
So I'm terribly sorry, but the inclusion of 'Awaken' leads to my lowering the rating by a couple of points. Otherwise, though, the record's just fine, and the thing I like most about it is a general 'simplification' of the process. I mean, the tunes are still complex and often innovative, but it doesn't all sound totally artificial or esoteric like on Close To The Edge. In a certain way, it's more like a return to the idealism of Time And A Word, only on a more serious and mature level. And that's a good thing that didn't last for very long, unfortunately...

Awaken and mail your ideas

Your worthy comments:

John McFerrin <[email protected]> (27.05.99)

Georgy, Georgy, you are far too predictable. I KNEW that you would like the first 4 tracks and hate 'Awaken' and give the album an 8. Nevertheless, I have to agree with your thoughts on the first 4 songs, tho I'd give the best song title to 'Paralells'. But, I really, really like 'Awaken'. So they're just exploring the same ol cosmic blah blah ideas lyrically, but the organ guitar interplay is terrific, and I ALWAYS look forward to hearing it at album's end.
Oh well, at least you gave it some credit. I'd give a 9, but 8 is good enough.

Josh <[email protected]> (16.09.99)

Pretty friggin' good! "Aside froom the insipid "Wonderous Storries", the rest is real good! Title track is Yes' bounciest rockers, but great. That church organ on "Parallels" makes the song worth while. One of their most innovative songs if you ask me. "Turn Of The Century' is decent, but can drone on. "Awaken" is by far their most effective extended song. More glorious organ (yes, it's one of my favorite instruments!), more hard rocking, and gentle, and has one of the best codas ever! Really awesome stuff. If not for "Wonderous Stories", it would be a killer!
My rating-9 1/2

Bob <[email protected]> (09.02.2000)

When I first heard the album, I thought that "Turn of the Century" was too meandering, "Parallels" too sluggish, and "Awaken" too long. Those songs have grown on me over the years.
My problem with the album is more with the production. than the songs. It's way too cold. And I have the opposite opinion about the keyboards -- I think they are too far back in the mix. The album lacks the full bodied, warmer sound of the previous studio albums, no doubt due to the band's decision to dump producer Eddie Offord and do it themselves. Big mistake.
The songs, in my opinion, translate better to a live setting, which is one reason to get Yesshows and Keys 2. Although they performed "Awaken" definitively on the 1991 Union tour -- find a good bootleg!

Rich Bunnell <[email protected]> (15.02.2000)

This one was incredibly overlooked because Yes made the mistake of waiting three years between albums after an album (Relayer) which didn't exactly make a monumental splash with the critics. Plus, the production is sort of murky-- gone are the clear Yes Album production values of old. Yet, I feel that it's a fine album, containing five songs and five good ones at that-- the title track is so messily complex and jumbled that there's no way that it can't rule my arse, and "Parallels" is loud, exuberant, pompous, and wonderful! Plus, I don't see why lots of people seem to despite "Wondrous Stories" so heavily... it's just a short, concise ballad. Just because it got played on Top Of The Pops doesn't automatically make it bad, people. Also, "Awaken" and "Turn Of The Century" are longer, but they work. A 9 this gets from the person who is me.

Ben Greenstein <[email protected]> (25.07.2000)

This one starts out really strong, with that cool title track (which is NOT boogie-woogie, that's a piano style! This is just cool surf guitar!), and then there's that beautiful "Turn Of The Century" song, which is the first time since "Mood For A Day" that Steve lets his beautiful classical playing shine. Then, however, they ruin things by putting on "Parallels" (which may rock, but is still kinda boring!) and that tedious looooooooong song, plus "Wond'rous Stories," which I like, but sounds a little small in this setting. In my opinion, they should have written a couple more songs and edited some of the longer ones. You'd have a much more well-rounded album then. As it is, maybe a low seven.
[Special author note: ehhh... maybe boogie-woogie did start as a piano style, but it's like saying you can't rock'n'roll on a piano because rock'n'roll is a guitar style. Surf guitar? Whatever.]

Kevin Muckenthaler <[email protected]> (29.08.2000)

Yes starts to slide just a bit. This album is mainstream and a little inconsistent compared to Relayer from a couple years before. It starts off with the really weird boogie of "Going for the One," which I like quite a bit. Lots of annoying but cool steel guitar courtesy of Steve Howe and some funny and far-out lyrics by Mr. Anderson. A lot of people love "Turn of the Century," but I think it's a little dull. "Parallels" is pretty much a straightforward rocker driven by a church organ and Squire's bass. I would like this one more if the production wasn't so muddled. "Wonderous Stories" is pleasant, but nothing to get too excited about. "Awaken" is the album's 'epic'. It's good, but isn't as complex as most of their other long tracks. I used to think the harp/organ thing in the middle was boring, but I like it now. Not a bad album, but not as good as their previous five.

Philip Maddox <[email protected]> (26.11.2000)

You know, as I get more and more into Genesis, I don't like Yes quite as much as I used to. Sure, Yes had better musicians, but they never had quite the songwriting talent of Gabriel, Collins and associates (though they did pull out a few really, really good albums). For one, I wouldn't give Fragile an 10/10 anymore - more like an 8. Same with Relayer. Which brings me to this album - I really liked it the first time or 3 I heard it, but after a few listens, I've realised something here - the songwriting just isn't quite up to the past few albums. "Going For The One" and "Parallels" are good, but not great. "Wonderous Stories" is a decent pop song, though it never really grabs me as anything special. "Turn Of The Century" is very pretty, but a bit too long. Which, of course, brings me to the big one here - "Awaken". It's my favorite song on here - I love the demented vocals during the first loud part and how it suddenly shifts into a groovy waltz - but to be honest, even it lasts a bit too long - it should NOT be 15 minutes plus in length. This is basically a good album, and worthy of a 7/10 from me, but the album needed a bit of trimming around the edges, if you ask me.

Year Of Release: 1978
Record rating = 5
Overall rating = 7

A dull pop record disguised as progressive rock or a dull prog record disguised as contemporary pop? Works either way.
Best song: ONWARD

Now this is bad. I mean, really really really truly bad. I don't mind giving a low rating to a record like TFTO or Close To The Edge, because their main flaw lies in overlong songs heavily watered down with boring 'jams' and mindless chord progressions: the very fact that you're making a twenty-minute long song usually predicts its unsubstantial moments. (There are some rare exceptions like 'Thick As A Brick', but they're so rare they're not even worth mentioning). But look, this isn't a three-song record. There are eight tracks on here, and even the longest doesn't go over eight minutes, while most of them are in the four - five minute format, and 'Madrigal' is less than three minutes long, the first attempt of the kind since early 1972. And yet, this record is about as welcome as a stale hamburger that you're forced to eat after a delicious meal. You know, just to remind you that life ain't all milk and honey.
Seriously now, I had a lot of hopes for this record after Going For The One turned to be about the only Yes record that I didn't force myself to like. Even after a dozen listens Tormato still stinks, like the splashed tomato on the front cover. I didn't believe my ears - after all, these guys did know how to write short songs some years ago. 'Sweetness'? 'Yesterday And Today'? 'Roundabout'? 'I've Seen All Good People'? 'Going For The One'? Here's ample proof that side-long symphonies were not the only forte of Yes in their prime. Aaarggh. There's one good song on Tormato, and even that one good song is not something special that one might get particularly excited about, yup, it's the beautiful keyboard ballad 'Onward' that echoes back to 'Time And A Word' again with its idealistic mood (it's inferior, though). The other songs are crappy, not one excluded. Crappy to the brink.
I still give it a 5 because I'm pleased with quite a few specific moments on some of the songs. There's the cool guitar playing on the tricky rocker 'Release Release'; the weird electronic noises imitating the migration of aliens on 'Arriving UFO'; the driving riff of 'On The Silent Wings Of Freedom'; the gorgeous singing on 'Circus Of Heaven'; and Steve Howe's guitar playing is immaculate throughout, while Alan White shows himself the master of weird time signatures - sometimes it seems he just can't keep time, but it's really an illusion ('Wings Of Freedom' again).
On the down side... well, there are just too many down sides. Anderson and company continue the mainstreamisation of their ideas and concepts, but somehow it doesn't work second time around. These songs either fall in the category of pop songs ruined by unnecessary complication or prog songs made silly by the insertion of customer-attracting gimmicks. I'm particularly speaking of the synth sound on this record: for the first time Wakeman really abuses these things, polymoogs and all, so that sometimes they end up sounding like contemporary Genesis. Now I'm not saying that they were willing to re-model themselves after Genesis (seeing that Genesis themselves had earlier modelled themselves after Yes), but the domination of corny synths on the record certainly has a lot to do with popular trends around the time. Synths open the starting number, a dull rehashment of old successes ('Future Times/Rejoice'), and infiltrate our minds for thirty five minutes more.
Lyrically Anderson is playing with topics that could render the album more commercial: poorly disguised eco rock ('Don't Kill The Whale'), trite alien subjects ('Arriving UFO') and banal celestial imagery ('Circus Of Heaven'), while the less commercial numbers display a new fit og graphomania ('Release Release' and 'Silent Wings Of Freedom' are particularly trashy). Musically there are just no new ideas at all (not that there was a hell of them earlier, but Going For The One was at least novel). Even the short ballad 'Madrigal' that's supposed to be pretty, has always escaped my ears. If I have some idea about this song soon, I'll add a postscriptum; for the time being let's call it quits. Shabash, as we Russians say.

Rejoice (even if there's little to rejoice about) and mail your ideas

Your worthy comments:

Josh <[email protected]> (22.09.99)

Here it is. The most hated progressive album in music history. I too hate it, but there are some bursts of life here and there. "On The Silent Wings Of Freedom" starts off like a good rocker, but can quickly bore the life out of me."Onward" is a cute little, thing. "Madrigal" is good. and "Future Times/ Rejoice" is also decent. However, "Arriving UFO" is one of the biggest avant-garde failures of all time. Horrible melody, even worse sound effects, and an absolutely pointless lyric. Same for "Circus Of Heaven". I could never find the disco hint in "Don't Kill The Whale", but either way, it blows. And oh how pathetic "Release Release" is. Poor guys. And Jon Anderson never sounded worse.
My rating-5

Bob <[email protected]> (09.02.2000)

Well, I must agree that the album cover is the worst in history -- what the hell were they thinking?
I have mixed opinions about the songs. "Arriving UFO" and "Circus of Heaven" are, simply, the biggest embarrassments in the group's history. Just beyond awful. Nothing can save these. And "Future Times/Rejoice" is just plain random. I saw the band on this tour about three weeks before the album came out, and after they played this song, the main reaction was looks of total confusion.
On the other hand, "Onward" and "Madrigal" are perfectly lovely ballads, which, incidentally, do include real strings. And "Don't Kill the Whale," "Freedom" and "Release Release" are fine rockers in the Yes tradition -- the latter got a great reception at the show.
My main problem, besides the two howlers, is again the ice cold production. Wakeman's keyboards are more upfront than on the last album, but his primary instrument of choice is the polymoog rather than Hammond organ or mellotron, which only adds to the chill of the arrangements. Bring back Eddie Offord!

Mark Christian-Edwards <[email protected]> (25.02.2000)

I don't have this album any more, but I bought it when it came out and loved it. Maybe I was just too young to appreciate the subtler points of the band's demise (I was only 15)...
Must admit it was the first Yes album I heard with parts I didn't like on it though ('Arriving UFO' especially); but I thought 'Circus of Heaven' was ecstacy. Go on, tell me I haven't go a clue!

Rich Bunnell <[email protected]> (27.07.2000)

I actually think that this album is kind of underrated. The problem is that people tend to think of this as Yes trying to hold onto their prog roots, when, to be pretty honest, there's hardly any prog here at all. What we have here is basically a collection of weird pop songs mixed in with a pair of short ballads. I actually find quite a bit of this album to be much more enjoyable than people say it is, and can't understand how people can disregard a song like "Future Times" even though it's more tuneful and catchy than anything the band's done since The Yes Album. "Arriving UFO" is really weird and neat, "Release Release" is an absolutely killer bizarre rocker (or as close to a rocker as Yes is able to muster) and the two ballads are short, pretty, and to the point. I even think that "Don't Kill The Whale" is a vastly underrated song, though I may be crucified for saying that. I agree 100% that the lyrics are trendy ecological hogwash, but the melody isn't offensive, and the only thing "disco" about the whole song is the beat (which sounds really cool anyway) and Anderson's funny-as-hell "dig it, dig it!" after the chorus.
Don't go phoning the mental institution just yet just because some guy likes Prindle's most hated Yes song, because the album certainly has some flaws. The production is pretty murky; a slight problem on Going For The One and a much larger one here. Songwise, "On The Silent Wings Of Freedom" goes on for eight long minutes expecting everybody to like it just because it "rocks" when it doesn't have a single interesting melody, and "Circus Of Heaven" has got to be one of the stupidest songs ever done by a band not called Loverboy. Also, even though I like "Future Times," the second half of the song "Rejoice" is pretty dull and meandering (kind of weird, considering that it's basically the same tempo as the song that it's attached to). So yeah, the album isn't great, but it's kind of stretching it to call it one of the all-time lows of progressive rock. Particularly when you consider that it isn't prog at all. 7/10

Ben Greenstein <[email protected]> (25.07.2000)

I guess it does kind of ride the line between pop and prog, but it's hardly dull! In fact, I've listened to this album nine times in the several days since I bought it, and I can honestly say that I've enjoyed it consistently. "Don't Kill The Whale," eco-disco or not, is still really fun - maybe for certain novelty reasons (Jon Anderson says "dig it"!!!!), but more likely because I -gasp- enjoy the music. Don't know why, to be honest, but it's great.
Now, all of the songs are pretty different, and kind of sound like they belong on different albums, but they are COOL. Musically, not as complex as the early stuff, but still petty damn complex. The two ballads work well, the long rockers also ("Release Release" is fantastic!), the only song that doesn't work is "Circus Of Heaven." Sounds like two half-baked ideas glued together, to me. Rest of the album's really cool. The synths are a little overbearing, I guess (since I have to find SOME fault with the record), but this is very far from the bad record everyone claims it is. So leave it alone! A high eight.

Kevin Muckenthaler <[email protected]> (29.08.2000)

OK. The album cover is admittedly dumb. So are some of the songs. The production is also pretty bad, especially with the thick, muddy drum sound. Rick Wakeman's keyboards are too high-pitched and goofy, Steve noodles a lot, and Chris uses lots of effects pedals and stuff. The album opener,"Future Times/Rejoice," is a fun track. "Don't Kill the Whale" has eco lyrics and a lame but strangely appealing beat. "Madrigal" is an okay, yet short, song. "Release, Release" is full of energy. "Onward" is really boring and dull, but does sound better on the Keys to Ascension live CD. "On the Silent Wings of Freedom" doesn't have many musical ideas, but isn't bad at all. The big problem for most listeners lies in "Arriving UFO" and "Circus of Heaven." AUFO has cheesy lyrics and nothing very interesting musically. COH is REALLY dumb, especially Damion's complaining at the end. Overall, this album is just really odd, but has some good stuff on it.

Year Of Release: 1980
Record rating = 6
Overall rating = 8

The 'new look' Yes, a transitive phase, but not without its little keyboard/base fun.
Best song: TEMPUS FUGIT

A most strange thing had happened. Soon after the poor sales of Tormato, Rick Wakeman quit the band again, this time accompanied by Jon Anderson in person. For quite a lot of fans it should have been the rightful end of Yes, since who could imagine an Anderson-less Yes? And yet, both Steve and Chris could. Having hired former Buggles (I've never heard the Buggles, so I can't say anything about their New Wave-style music) Geoff Downes on keyboards and Trevor Horn as occasional vocalist and bassist, and supplying a large part of the vocals themselves, they bravely plodded on, making Yes step into the Eighties without some of its primary trademarks. That's alright by me, anyway. In fact, I first thought I would love this album, since my main pretensions were always directed at Jon and nobody else. Unfortunately, no such chance: the guys make their best to end up all sounding like Jon Anderson, using the same high pitch and intonationless intonations (only 'Does It Really Happen?' doesn't sound this way, but this doesn't mean it sounds better).
The songs themselves are pretty interesting, though. They certainly approach the plank separating 'art' from 'mass production banality' far too closely, indeed, much more closely than on Tormato. But, paradoxically enough, the melodies are more entertaining this time around. The production is much more slick; there are less guitars here - practically no acoustic at all, and the electric one sounds a bit generic to my ears; the synth playing mostly relies on discoish and purely dancing rhythms that certainly profanate Wakeman's classical-influenced techniques; and in all, this sounds suspiciously close to the Eighties' Genesis, only with a little more emphasis on the bass functions, since Chris Squire wasn't yet willing to be shoved into the background. The album certainly changed Yes' image radically, and was the first step in helping them survive the hard times - losing old fans and acquiring new ones. But what about the songs, you say?
Well, the melodies mostly display a New Wave influence (which is hardly surprising with all those flukey New Wave rockers in the band). 'Run Through The Light' is the best of these, where Trevor Horn almost sounds like Sting, and it's kinda pretty. It also features the best Steve Howe riffing on the record, in that part where he goes with his rapid, machine-gun playing. Same goes for the lengthy 'Into The Lens' ('I am a camera camera...') which sounds like almost a discoified clone from some classic Police number. It ain't emotional or anything, but it's just pleasant enough to listen to.
There's also the controversial 'Machine Messiah' which so many fans usually detest because it's opening with a couple minutes of braindead heavy metal riffing a la stupid heavy cockrock of, I don't know, well, just about any heavy metal band you happen to dislike. But they forget that later on it develops into a cool pop song with not a hint at heavy metal; again, not very memorable (but what Yes song is memorable?), but a great choice for you to dance to if you feel ashamed about putting on Donna Summer. 'Progressive dance music' - how about that one? Music to satisfy both your body and your soul! (Actually, it doesn't satisfy either, but at least it tries). And the song's plaintive ending is one hundred percent classic Yes. Groovy lyrics, too, and what a song title!
The only 'genuine Yes' number on the whole record, though, is the album closer 'Tempus Fugit', and even that one shows a strong New Wave influence, with its simplistic riffs and modern keyboard sound. But listen to those opening verses - don't they remind you of 'Close To The Edge' or anything like that? And the refrain is pure, pure Jon Anderson: could the song be an earlier outtake or were they just modeling the classic style with a little more care than elsewhere? It's also funny how many times the word 'Yes' gets repeated throughout the song, as if it was their way of saying 'We're still the Yes! Really! Yes! YES!'
In fact, just in order to prove that dubious assumption they even turned back to Roger Dean for the album cover, one of his most beautiful ever (probably second best after TFTO). These white rocks, the white bird and the black panther are gorgeous. The only sad thing for me is that the musical content of the album can't even hope to match the beauty of the cover - a clear case of packaging that superates the essence. Buy this still if you're not afraid of corny synths and horny Eighties' style production. It's not one of their worst.

Tempus fugit, so mail your ideas quickly

Your worthy comments:

Josh <[email protected]> (16.09.99)

The Buggles?? "Video Killed The Radio Star"?? Those guys?? With Yes?? Is this some kind Saturday Night Live Skit?? If that's not frightening enough, what's even scarier is that they accually soung GOOD!!! *gasp*! One moment please....... Ok. Drama was a shocking surprise for me. The tunes are really strong. "Machine Messiah" is very good, considering the line up change. "Does It Really Happen" and "Tempus Fugit" are even better. "White Car" is far too short to leave any type of impression. However, "Run Through The Light" is horrid, and the lyrically weak (To put it mildly) "Into The Lens" is waaaaaaay too long. Not bad though, but it was the last Yes album I botered to buy. I was hardly impressed by their 1983- 1991 output, to put it mildly.
My rating-7

<[email protected]> (18.01.2000)

OH so Drama is on the same level as Close to the Edge. I can't believe what I'm seeing.

Bob <[email protected]> (09.02.2000)

I think this is the most accessible and consistently enjoyable album since Close to the Edge. Even if it doesn't hit the peaks of subsequent albums, neither does it hit the pits. The Buggles' facility with pop hooks and Yes's musicianship made for a great combination. Everything works. The only drawback is that Steve's presence is muted -- the arrangements are dominated by Squire and Downes. Which isn't all bad -- Downes isn't Wakeman when it comes to virtuosity, but he provides a warmth and fullness to the arrangements that was absent on the previous two. And Squire just COOKS on most of the album (they should not have let Horn sub on "Run Through the Light").
The problem with the Drama band was in live performance. They did well on their own material, including two songs "And We Can Fly From Here" and "Go Through This", which were never released on a record. However, on the old stuff, Downes could pretty much only play Rick's lines note for note, and Horn's voice was hideously out of tune on songs like "Yours is No Disgrace". (They apparently couldn't figure out how to lower the key of those tracks to fit Horn's vocal range). The endless booing of Horn generated by the British leg of the tour was a major factor in the breakup of the band -- and in driving Horn from live performance into the producer's chair forever.

Ben Greenstein <[email protected]> (23.06.2000)

You know, I really like the first Buggles album, and even with them on it, this album still bores me. "Tempis Fugit," even, isn't very good. The best song on the album, to be honest, is "Into The Lens," which is catchy in a very Bugglesy way. Well, SORT OF. I can't really be too kind to any of the material here. I hate the more Policey stuff, too, because I don't like the Police. Ah well, I'll forgive them. I give it a five.

Derrick Stuart <[email protected]> (02.07.2000)

An andersonless Yes, isn't that just the same as The Door without Morrison, it's like The Experience without Hendrix. The diehard fans didn't take to this one well, especially not in concert. Mister Horn tried to do a few CTTE tunes, and it got a horrible response. Just as he began 'And You And I' the crowd threw garbage at him and he was booed off stage.

Rich Bunnell <[email protected]> (27.07.2000)

The thing that bothers me about this album has nothing to do with the fact that they recruited Trevor Horn and Geoff Downes. If you ask me, Horn sounds almost exactly like Anderson, or at least close enough to be able to give the songs the same overall "feel" as the Yes of old. I think that Bob's anecdote about Trevor getting booed off the stage for starting "And You And I" just goes to show how stupid some Yes fans are-- what, did they go to the concert to hear nothing but Drama and Buggles songs? Or did they just go there for the purpose of booing him? To quote Lisa Simpson, "Why would they come to our concert just to boo us?" The problem with the album is with the songwriting, at least on the first side of the album. "Machine Messiah" and "Does It Really Happen" bore the absolute CRAP out of me, going for their respective long lengths without presenting a single interesting musical idea. Sure, "Messiah" is ten minutes long and fast-paced, but who needs it? All I hear is a bunch of ugly riffage and nondescript vocal sections. Urgh.
The second half of the album fares much better, however. "Tempus Fugit" is an AWESOME song with a great mechanical clunky riff and fast-paced, catchy lyrics, and "Run Through The Light" is a pretty good balladish song, and not nearly as random and tempo-less as some fans say it is. Sounds pretty straightforward to me. And I know that saying this in the midst of a page full of Yes fans is roughly equivalent to yelling out "HEIL HITLER!" at a bar mitzvah, but I really dig "Into The Lens." Honestly, some Yes fans complain about the stupidest things. "The chorus is 'I am a camera'! That's the worst lyric I've heard in my life! Let's all go out and lynch Trevor Horn!" The song does go on for far too long, but it has an interesting, if corporate-sounding melody and is hardly as horrible as most Yesheads seem to say it is. Still, though the second half of the album makes up for the first, this stuff is in no way as a whole comparable to Relayer or Close To The Edge. 6/10
And now Ben has suddenly decided that not only does he like solo Sting better than the Police, he doesn't like the Police at all! Ben, distinguishing yourself isn't THAT important. Now be a good boy and set fire to your copy of Mercury Falling.

Kevin Muckenthaler <[email protected]> (01.09.2000)

Drama is a large improvement over Tormato. Yeah, Jon and Rick are gone and you get The Buggles. But Trevor Horn sounds sorta similar to Jon, and Geoff Downes is fine on keyboards. Steve, Chris, and Alan totally tear it up on this album. "Machine Messiah" may be Yes' hardest rocking song ever. "White Car" is a throwaway. "Does it Really Happen?" has one of my favorite basslines of all time. "Into the Lens" seems a bit overlong, but it's still good. "Run Through the Light" is all right, but it seems awkward to me. "Tempus Fugit" is fast-paced and has some high-pitched vocoder voices saying "yes"! It's a really good album with a very Yessy feel to it, even though some people don't think it's true Yes. The band photo in the booklet is really stupid, though.

John McFerrin <[email protected]> (28.09.2000)

'To quote Lisa Simpson, "Why would they come to our concert just to boo us?"'
Actually, the issue was slightly more complex than that. The American tour actually went off splendidly, with one slight problem - as mentioned in an earlier comment, the band refused to lower the 'classic' songs an octave to match Trevor's comfortable range. At first, it was just somewhat clumsy (I have a bootleg from their first USA show, and it's at least decent) but still passable. However, a month of being forced to sing at the edges of his range was very bad for Trevor's vocal chords, and by the time the band hit Europe, he had a massive throat infection. Result? By this time, he couldn't sing Anderson's songs worth crap - hence the incredible booing. Poor guy - he never went on tour with any band again, just because of the massive psychological trauma.
It also didn't help that many fans weren't actually aware of the recent lineup change, nor that a new album had been put out - they expected to see and hear Anderson and Wakeman, and were pissed to see the Buggles.

Year Of Release: 1980
Record rating = 8
Overall rating = 10

Live wankfests, but at least the material is mostly good.
Best song: TIME AND A WORD

This is a live album, but, like Yessongs before it, it's slightly messy, some of the material being really old and featuring Moraz. The newer material, from Going For The One and Tormato, features Wakeman once again. Plus, if you pay attention to 'Time And A Word', you'll notice that there are at least three 'epochs' of the band represented here and, dang it, are they different... But let's deal with them chronologically, why not? 'Time And A Word' is such a cool tune! You'd never have guessed listening to it crammed among all the filler on the 1970 disc that it would sound so fresh and strong here, in among all the sprawl. Yet it does: believe it or not, Yes were a better band in 1970 than they were in any other epoch, at least song-wise. Naive and innocent, but charming and catchy. Wow!
Out of the 'cosmic-schmosmic' era come 'Ritual' and 'The Gates Of Delirium', both done in their twenty-minute entirety. These I'm not too fond of. I mean, both were good on record (strange enough, they pleased me by picking up exactly the two lengthy tunes that I can stand, unlike all the others), the former with its nostalgia for Flower Power and the latter for its apocalyptic visionary subjects. However, 'Ritual' loses part of its charm by not sounding polished enough, and 'Gates Of Delirium' somehow manages to pass me by as well. Dunno why, but I bet it has something to do with Moraz unable to reproduce his funky keyboard parts live. Or maybe he was able, but it's the mix that is crappy. The final part ('calm after the storm') is just as good as its studio predecessor, though.
Finally, out of the recent tunes we have 'Parallels', 'Wonderous Stories' and the title track from Going For The One. All good. Seriously now, these three 'short', ehn, 'ditties' are enough to push the rating up seriously. The performances are tight and compact, the grooves are set, 'Parallels' rocks out mightily, much more mightily than anything from Tales could ever hope to, and 'Going For The One' has such a weird time signature and is at the same time so cool that I really really have nothing against it. 'Wonderous Stories' is just gentle and nice, and it's four minutes long - and Lord knows I like it when Yes write a four-minute long song. The only passable tune is 'Don't Kill The Whale' from Tormato, but it's also short.
So what else can be said? What can be said about live albums, in general? If you've already discussed the studio ones? Nope, nothin'. The only thing that strikes me about the album is the sudden change in Jon Anderson's pitch. Instead of becoming lower with age, much to my surprise it becomes higher and higher, and it's especially evident on the newer tunes. Say what you will, but so much for the better. At least it somehow becomes distinctive: quite too often Anderson, with his 'zero-tone', just got totally lost among the wild instrumentation. Here he's totally clear, energetic and sometimes even emotional (I'm serious). That's another good point. Steve Howe is also quite good, ripping out all kinda ferocious licks on his trusty electric. Can't hear a lot of Rick or Chris or Patrick (Moraz), though, but I think I already said 'Gates Of Delirium' might sound thus insipid because of the awful mix. Well... not that I care about Rick, but that base, man, that base cannot be beat. Best base in the prog rock world, and I can't hear it. Well, you can't always get what you want. At least we get a cool Roger Dean cover with a beautiful bird flying over snowy mountains. The guy sure could paint. Wonder what the cover has to do with the contents, though?

Don't kill the whale, better mail your ideas

Your worthy comments:

Bob <[email protected]> (09.02.2000)

The version of "Parallels" here is just KILLER, especially when compared with the studio version. They pick up the tempo and Rick plays a great moog solo. It rocks -- worth the entire price of the album. Unlike you, I think "Gates" and "Ritual" improve over the studio versions, Especially "Ritual" - I don't find the track quite as overwhelming here, although the percussion solo is still just as annoying. The rest is OK, too, although I also agree that the mix, courtesy of Mr. Squire, could have been clearer.
This album is one of those contractual obligation things. It was originally supposed to come out after Tormato, but was scrapped when Anderson and company decided to enter the studio and record a followup studio album instead. After completing an early version of "Run Through the Light," they started bickering, resulting in the walkouts of Jon and Rick. When Yes disbanded a year later, they still owed a couple of albums, so we got this.

John McFerrin <[email protected]> (02.07.2000)

A couple of things
1. While you are kind enough to acknowledge that Jon often sounds good on this album, I don't feel you give him enough credit on 'GoD'. When I first put this version on, I was shocked at the way Jon sounded so damn good. He actually matched his singing style to the vicious, aggresive lyrics (especially on the "Word cause our banner" chunk). My tagging of this as possibly the best Yes track ever, live or studio, is indeed mostly due to the improved vocals
2. Perhaps you couldn't hear him too well on the other tracks, but to say that Chris Squire is invisible given his solo on 'Ritual'? My goodness gracious, George, please tip your hat at least a _little_ to that solo. It's fast, it's powerful, and it RUMBLES.

Year Of Release: 1983
Record rating = 7
Overall rating = 9

The end of the transitive phase. Prog lovers, get out of the way - the Eighties production values are in.
Best song: CHANGES

Sheez, they did make the decision to carry on after all. And look here! Downes and Horn are out (although the latter is still credited for producing the record); Anderson is back! What's even more amusing, Tony Kaye is back - the same Tony Kaye that was kicked out of the band to make place for Wakeman twelve years ago. Unfortunately, Steve Howe is out (gee, doesn't the situation remind you of some famous puzzle game?) To replace him, they've picked out unknown South African (!!!) guitarist Trevor Rabin who pretty much defines the Eighties Yes sound. Yes, it's a totally new sound, and, while one can certainly trace its roots to Drama, this is hardly a true 'prog rock' album. Someone in the Yes camp had probably spent quite a lot of time listening to and digesting the recent Genesis releases, because it's obvious they were desperately searching for a contemporary update of their sound. The difference is that, while Genesis have opted for a lighter, synth-happy sound, almost completely abandoning the guitar, the new Yes sound is much more guitar-based. But these guitars ain't nothing like Steve Howe's guitars: heavy, screeching and ultimately quite bland and derivative.
Yup, a contemporary update it was: heavy booming electronic drums, hi-tech synthesizers, dancing rhythms, heavy metal guitars and suchlike. Quite a lot of Yes fans leave the band at this point, but we'll stick to it until the very end, okay? Let's just see what happens. These nine tracks are certainly different from the classic Yes style, but they're not necessarily worse, and some are even better than quite a bit of their overblown symphonies. They don't sound distinctive any more: without the phenomenal solo work of Howe and Wakeman, most of the instrumental passages sound either deadly boring (synth solos) or horrendous (metallic solos a la... well, just about any heavy metal band at that time was doing these guitar attacks). But at least they did worry about the hooks and interesting, attractive melodies. The hit here was the pretty 'Owner Of A Lonely Heart' (unfortunately, partially ruined by murky drum machines and that dirty axe tone), although there were other radio standards as well. My favourite is 'Changes', maybe because the lyrics fit in so well with the general flash of energy on the song ('one word can bring you round... boom... CHANGES!!'), but it's really hard to pick a favourite, because the song quality is rather even. If you ask for any standouts, I'd probably have to mention the harmony-drenched 'It Can Happen' because it features a sitar, and you don't often get to hearing a sitar on a modern-production, high-tech record. Maybe this makes the sound dated for somebody (for a lot of people the sitar is associated with 'pothead crap'), but I like the way it 'interplays' with electronic keyboards and stuff. Another stand-out, this time in the bad sense of the word, is the one number I can hardly stand at all: the ultra-heavy, dorky sounding 'City Of Love' where Rabin really abuses those distorted chords while John plays it up to him with his stupid screams. And the line 'we'll be waiting for the night, we'll be waiting for the night' has always irritated me as sounding incredibly silly. In all, the song is more Guns'n'Roses than Yes.
Luckily, after the nadir comes the zenith: 'Hearts', the album closer, is probably the closest to 'traditional Yes' here than anything else, for quite a number of reasons. First, it's relatively long (seven and a half minutes - the average length of a short Yes filler). Second, it has some great organ from Kaye, and thus has at least a little retro-ish sound. Third and most important, it gives us the nostalgic opportunity to get to hear the 'Time And A Word'-style Jon Anderson once again: the refrain has some gorgeous falsetto vocals that recreate the innocent hippie optimism that helped redeem Jon's early compositions. It might be rather 'simplistic' for Yes standards, but it's certainly more complex than your average pop love ballad. In fact, I could have easily dubbed it my favourite song on the album if it weren't for the atrocious guitar solo that Trevor Rabin probably picked off a conveyer transporting 'heaven and hellish' guitar solos to all the bland 'progressive' bands of the Eighties. As it is, 'Changes' sounds more compact. Still, if you're painfully searching for a pretext to buy this purportedly 'pop' album, 'Hearts' is just the motive for ya. 'It Can Happen' will probably please the serious fan as well, but the other stuff, well, you just gotta be eclectic enough to love it.

It can happen that you'd like to mail your ideas, now can't it?

Your worthy comments:

Richard C. Dickison <[email protected]> (09.06.99)

I'll step in here and give 90125 a solid ten and a gold star. Because Yes actually did it.
Oh my god, they gave robot Anderson (I hate him) a sound he could actually sing with and be convincing no less.
Can you believe George after years of Torturemato and ReFlayer and Dtrama they actually pull off an album that took them to top ten status and re-energized their sound. It's insane it's just not done.
Maybe they had talent, maybe they had brains, maybe they hired some other band to make an album for them.
Who cares, Yes was just not that important to me, but I got this album and just drop jawed all over it.
Sure it was eighties by the numbers rock, but even Asia (that hackneyed bunch of prog flab) could'nt pull off a whole album of sort-of good stuff.
None of the other older bands came anywhere close to this type of out of nowhere growth, what a surprise, the only disappointment is that they could not sustain this type of growth past this one album. That's their other problem, they were never consistent like Genesis who just kept be-boping along following Phil's solo effort's like they were his back-up band (which by this time they were).

Bob <[email protected]> (09.02.2000)

One thing that I think gets overlooked here is that they've come up with the best harmonies since The Yes Album. Particularly "Leave It" -- Horn had evidently been paying attention to Brian Wilson's vocal layering techniques. The B-side of the original single was a mix without the instrumentation, and one can really appreciate the vocal talent on hand after hearing it -- if one can, like me, ignore the fact that they aren't singing anything with meaning!
Rabin comes up with hooks galore, which is why the album was such as huge crossover hit. But my main complaint about this is that this stuff could be played by ANYBODY.Rabin is a talented musician, but there is nothing distinctive about his style. And Squire just gets buried - - you wouldn't know he was there. I enjoy the music for what it is but this just further proves that Steve Howe was the center of the whole Yes vibe.
This version of the band was originally dubbed Cinema, but when Jon climbed on board at the last minute, they changed the name back to Yes -- Rabin was overruled and outnumbered. It made commercial as well as sense personnel-wise, but Cinema might not have drawn such ire from hardcore Yessers as the "new" Yes did if they had left it at that.

Rich Bunnell <[email protected]> (15.02.2000)

Umm hmm...See, I can't approach this album with a "it's a sellout, therefore I hate it" approach because then I'd be a hypocrite-- Duran Duran's Rio is one of my favorite albums of the '80s. If there's any reason for me to insult this album, it's because a few of the songs aren't just poppy, they're poppy in a big, loud, irritating arena-rock way which is the same thing that makes me despite the crap out of bands like Bad Company and Foreigner. "Hold On" is the biggest example-- I hate that song. Plus, "Owner Of A Lonely Heart," though undeniably catchy, gets a bit stupid when it turns into brassy shimmery party funk and goes crazy with those loads of Janet Jackson "BANG!" noises. However, I love the rest of the album-- "It Can Happen," "Changes," and "Leave It" are heavenly, and everything else ain't nothin' to sneeze at either. I'd give this an 8-- in no way is this akin to Yes of the '70s, but just because it's overproduced and poppy doesn't necessarily make it bad. I haven't heard Big Generator yet though, so who knows what I might think later on?

Philip Maddox <[email protected]> (07.07.2000)

This is actually a really good record. It sounds absolutely nothing like the Yes of old, but it's still good. It's like Jethro Tull's A in that it was never intended to be released by the group - this was supposed to be a Cinema album. They decided at the last second that there were enough ex-members of Yes to call it Yes. It sounds like a hard rock/pop band of the eighties, but the difference is that the songs are really good for the most part. 'Owner Of A Lonely Heart', 'Changes', and 'Hearts' are my favorites, each boasting catchy, attractive melodies, but 'It Can Happen' isn't far behind either - you gotta love that sitar. Elsewhere, 'Cinema' is a throwaway instrumental, 'City Of Love' is ok, but stupid and completely un-Yeslike, and 'Leave It' sucks really bad. This record is somewhere in between a 7 and an 8. But remember - liking this in no way means you'll like Relayer or Close To The Edge. You can basically consider Yes before this and Yes after this as 2 separate bands - 90125, love it or hate it, was a very important album for Yes.

Kevin Muckenthaler <[email protected]> (01.09.2000)

This album is actually pretty good. You can't compare it at all to Yes' former sound. Although I don't like Trevor Rabin too much, he's a bit less annoying both vocally and musically here. There's something about these songs that is really appealing and catchy. "Owner of a Lonely Heart" is a very 80's song (obviously), and one of the band's best known tracks. I like it quite a bit. "Hold On" has a rhythm to it that eats its way into my mind (in a good way). "It Can Happen" has a singalong style chorus, and Chris Squire actually gets lead vocals in some parts here. I never liked "Changes" too much, but the instrumental opening is kinda cool. "Cinema" is nothing special. "Leave It" is really weird, yet it has its appeal. I like "Our Song", despite the goofy lyrics. "City of Love" is a really lame attempt at hard rock. I do like the 'wall of vocals' style chorus, though. "Hearts" harkens back a little to old Yes, and I like it. Yeah, Yes sold out, but it's not bad!

Year Of Release: 1987
Record rating = 5
Overall rating = 7

More formulaic. Anderson is good throughout, but God you don't know how I am sick of these heavy metal tones.
Best song: RHYTHM OF LOVE

Aw Lord, I had enough and I'm gonna keep this one short. Why do I always have to make extended reviews if nobody reads them? (Nah, I hope that last remark isn't really true. You tell me! Mail your comments!) Anyway, this is the second studio release of the Rabin-dominated Yes, and it can't help but be worse. They still demonstrate enough care for the songs and do not drown the musical skeletons in seas of hi-tech synths or anything, but that's not necessarily a compliment, as these skeletons are often murky beyond imagination. 'Almost Like Love' and the title track, in particular, are the kind of high-noise level mid-Eighties garbage that sounds particularly overbloated and pretentious, mostly due to the fat guitar tones and booming drums that substitute inspiration and instrumental technique. Yeah, you can't help tapping your feet to these sounds, but I equal 'em to evil enchantments of some wicked witch. In this case, the wicked witch seems to be symbolized by Trevor Rabin, on one hand, and mid-Eighties fashion, on the other.
There are some good things that can be said about the record, that's why I don't let it down entirely. Anderson is mostly good throughout, especially on 'Rhythm Of Love', one of the few really 'rhythmic' tracks on here that can be qualified as decent. 'Shoot High Aim Low' has an interesting chorus, and 'Love Will Find A Way' is very pretty (although the word 'love' is reprised in too many tracks for me - was Jon really trying to revive the hippie ideals? In 1987? What a fanatic!) There's also some cute pseudo-acoustic plucking all over some of the songs, which gives you some periods of relief from the generic metal guitar. And the second part of 'I'm Running' develops into a groovy, fast-paced song with some thrilling ascending vocal lines. Also, what's that they play in parts of it? Balalaika? Anyway, a good pop number with some retro connotations. But the rest I'm not even prepared to discuss. Why? Because I have nothing to say about it. No matter how much I listen to this stuff, it always escapes my attention because it has no attractive value at all. Bah! Oh well, you gotta give the guys some credit for not employing drum machines. But why did all the drumming in the Eighties have to be electronically enhanced? Did they really think it was some kind of 'progression'?

Shoot high aim low, I'm waiting for your ideas

Your worthy comments:

John McFerrin <[email protected]> (26.08.99)

Huh ... I just read your review for Big Generator for the first time, and I'm finding it really eerie that without having previously seen your review, my review on my own page says almost the exact same things in a bunch of places. Oh well; needless to say, I agree, and while I gave it a 6, it is, to be realistic, a very low 6, and a 5 seems reasonable too.

Bob <[email protected]> (09.02.2000)

I don't detest this as much as a lot of fans do. More of the same, although the band seems more willing to stretch out on longer songs. More Beach Boys-inspired vocals, especially on the intro to "Rhythm of Love".An interesting tradeoff on "Shoot High, Aim Low" of Jon and Trevor's vocal and lyrical styles. "Love Will Find a Way" is a pretty cool little 60's-type folk-rock song, with the harmonies and guitars more than a little reminiscent of the Byrds. Although, like a lot of fans, I get irritated at the grammatically incorrect, out of place line. "I eat at chez nous."
The Trevor-centric sound does wear thin over the course of the whole thing, though. Again, fine for what is, but that's all.

Rich Bunnell <[email protected]> (26.07.2000)

This album is pretty generic and worthless. Whereas on 90125 the songwriting was fresh, tight and catchy enough to make the change from the old-style Yes forgiveable, most of this stuff just plods along like a big, overproduced lumbering dinosaur, especially that godawful excuse for a song that the band decided to name the album after. It's nice that Anderson stays in the forefront for the course of the album, since I'm not too font of Rabin's absolutely generic vocal style, but most of these songs just glide by without any sort of impact nevertheless. I absolutely adore "Rhythm Of Love" in spite of this; a stunning pop song that surpasses anything on the previous album, and "I'm Running" is probably the closest thing that anyone can find here to a classic Yes track (which isn't to say it sounds like one at all, but moreso than the others). "Love Will Find A Way" is okay too, but ironically, pretty much every part of the song except for that neat bridge with the "I eat at chez nous" line just bores me. And every Yes fan acts like the song is a complete disgrace because of that line! Whatever. I guess that the album is certainly listenable (except for the title track), but that doesn't mean I'm gonna recommend it at all. The Rabin-led Yes didn't have very many interesting ideas in the first place, and they pretty much shot their wad on 90125.

Kevin Muckenthaler <[email protected]> (01.09.2000)

What a weird album. The first track, "Rhythm of Love," is pure pop with some nice vocals oohing and ahhing. "Big Generator" is a complete dreck noisefest. Were they trying to sound that bad? "Shoot High Aim Low" is slow and pretty mellow. The vocals on the chorus are strangely irritating, though. Jon sounds really funny to me on "Almost Like Love." "Love Will Find a Way" is an average Rabin pop song. "Final Eyes" is good, especially the "if ever I needed someone..." part. "I'm Running" has a funky bass intro and some good melodies throughout. It's the closest song on here to 70's Yes (but not too close), and also the best track on the album. I think I might be the ONLY person who likes "Holy Lamb." Oh well.

ANDERSON, BRUFORD, WAKEMAN & HOWE

Year Of Release: 1989
Record rating = 6
Overall rating = 8

A projection of the classic Yes sound onto the Eighties, it just goes to show how much the Eighties suck.
Best song: LET'S PRETEND

Gee. Turns out that legally, Yes was Chris Squire's band after all. So when Anderson and Howe finally had enough of Trevor Rabin and his tendency to metallize Yes, on one hand, and move it into the mainstream, on the other hand, and they decided to part company, it became obvious that they just couldn't keep the name, no matter how they wanted it, and ol' butthead Squire was much too picky at them, not to mention he just probably wanted to keep the cash flowing.
As a delicate move of revenge, the guys re-teamed up with Rick Wakeman, who's probably had enough of his blubby solo career as well, and were even lucky to have a go at Bill Bruford, and formed their own, 'local' version of Yes - even if they somehow totally lacked imagination to come up with a new name for the band. Come to think of it, though, the guys badly needed marketing, and what's a poor boy (hell, four poor boys) gotta do if they want their public to take their output as a standard Yes album in its own rights but lack the rights to put the word 'Yes' on the cover? Well, here's a good recipe, then: 1) you put the words 'ANDERSON BRUFORD WAKEMAN HOWE' in large letters on the cover; 2) you make sure Roger Dean painted it, so that nobody will confuse it with the Big Generator stuff; 3) finally, if that wasn't enough, you put up a sticker that says 'From The Men That Brought You Close To The Edge'. And voilà! The nearest thing to a Yes album! And how cleverly masked! (Sheez!)
Oh, sorry. I forgot Important Element Number Four. Which is: make the music sound much, much more close to 'classic Yes' than it ever sounded since 1977. As you might easily guess, this is the hardest task to accomplish. The problem is that none of the band really wanted, or needed to make an exact replica of Close To The Edge, so as not to seem too repetitive, derivative, whatever, and they updated their sound with ultra-modern technologies. That's not to say that this particular album sounds just as fake or sterile as Big Generator. Actually, it sounds a lot better! The crappy metallic riffs are simply not there, to make your ears bleed, and there are no stupid dance rhythms meshed in - apart from the real disaster which is the seven-minute 'Teakbois' that incorporates... er... African rhythms... African rhythms??... ... ... ... !!!!! .... !!!! ..... AFRICAN RHYTHMS FOR YES? GET ME THE VALIUM RIGHT NOOOOW!
Oh, the other stuff is not that bad. Steve Howe plays some nice acoustic runs from time to time, and Wakeman just sits around and dabbles in his synths that are modernized, for sure, but they still sound moody and all. A bit worse than on the 'real good stuff', of course, but sure a little better than on Tormato. The bass duties are handled by Bruford's old ex-King Crimson colleague Tony Levin, but I never really caught these basslines, and he never gets a serious chance to shine. The big problem concerns the drumming: I'm perfectly sure that some of the stuff that's bashing on here is not drum machines - as far as I know, Bruford is a real pro on electronically enhanced drums, but I'm also perfectly sure that my musical knowledge simply does not permit me to tell drum machines from real drumming here, and anyway, Bruford's drumming on Eighties' King Crimson records was tons more impressive.
The biggest problem, however, concerns the songwriting. Like I said, the band decided to sound more like the Yes of old, and in order to do that, they return to the 'huge format': four of the songs presented are multi-part suites, and only three of nine tracks end under five minutes. Out of these, the closing 'Let's Pretend' is a gentle, melodic ballad that almost smells of the young and innocent hippie days of 'Time And A Word' (more probably, of the witty recreation of the hippie vibe on 'Wond'rous Stories'); 'Fist Of Fire' rocks more in the vein of the Rabin-dominated Yes, but is still passable, maybe due to some particularly impressive synth bursts from Wakeman; and 'The Meeting' is passable, even if pretty and gentle.
But most of the 'suites' are simply boring. Oh, I mean, they serve you well as mood music, but melodies? Where are they? No strong melodies to speak of at all, if you ask me. Do I like something about them? Well, I like the way 'Themes' start, with those pretty little tinglings, and 'I Wanna Learn' from 'Quartet' is quite nice, with a magnificent Steve Howe acoustic part. However, 'Order Of The Universe' is pompous, tedious and banal, and anyway, please be on your guard when you have to deal with Yes song titles with the word 'universe' in them, especially if they date from the Eighties. Sounds more like late Genesis, if you really need my opinion (which I doubt). And even the 'good' beginnings lead nowhere in the end.
Of course, I also dislike Close To The Edge. So what do I know? I rate these two albums as equal! They're boring, so there. Still better than what they pumped out a couple of years later...

Let's pretend you still haven't mailed your ideas, right? Now mail them!

Your worthy comments:

Bob <[email protected]> (09.02.2000)

Well, I agree that it does sound more like classic Yes than the Rabin albums, especially with Howe on board. But it is overproduced -- one thing you have to give the previous two albums, they did have streamlined production. More importantly, it doesn't convey the sense that an organic band created this music they way that the classic albums did. Instead, you get the feeling that the Wakeman and Bruford, in particular, are just more talented versions of the session men who also appeared. Rick is too often buried on tracks like "Brother of Mine," and I agree with you that they really blow it with Levin. Bruford manages to get his good buddy from King Crimson to show up, and what does Jon do? Smother him in the mix! They didn't make that mistake on the tour, though -- Levin was just terrific. He doesn't play the same with Squire, but he proved that he could more than adequately have replaced Squire if ABWH had been able to call themselves Yes.
And if you think there's too much live Yes out there as it is, George, I guess the live album from this tour, An Evening of Yes Music Plus, never made it to Russia. It is actually wonderful, if you like Yes -- well recorded. The ABWH stuff comes across much better and less overblown live and there are brief, tasteful solo spots. But then you get another live "Close to the Edge", "Roundabout", "And You and I", etc. In case you don't own enough versions of those songs.

Year Of Release: 1991
Record rating = 4
Overall rating = 6

MORE formulaic. Geez, wouldn't these guys have anything like a new idea by this time? This is getting monotonous!
Best song: I WOULD HAVE WAITED FOREVER

This is actually two bands - the much hyped Anderson, Bruford, Wakeman and Howe, and the latter days Rabin-led 'Yes' (yeah, really) including Rabin himself, Kaye, Squire and White. For several years these two organizations had been trying to push each other out of the market but finally, seeing as how the market wasn't really that much impressed with any of them, decided to join forces in desperate hope that this would be (a) successful artistically and (b) successful commercially. Well, it wasn't. Instead, what they managed to do was to churn out an ultra-long album (well, what can be expected when you have two bands recording at the same time?) chock-full of rip-offs. Approximately half of this stuff is ripped off from 90125/Big Generator, and the other half is ripped off from their mid-Seventies stuff (Going For The One or, well, Tormato type). The actual quality of the songs depends on the degree of accuracy in ripping off and nothing else. To be honest, I must admit that they do succeed in that respect: few of the songs sound really horrendous (except maybe for the generic people-loving anthem 'Saving My Heart' that sounds fit for something Phil Collins might have written for a beer-loving society and the ridiculous heavy-metal-riff-meets-multitracked-screeching mockery of 'Dangerous'). But they virtually add nothing to the Yes legacy and do indeed sound like a Yes parody in many cases.
Let's see: the opening track, 'I Would Have Faited Forever', again sung by Jon in his cherished 'Time And A Word' style, almost manages to deceive you into thinking this might be a good one. It has all the formal traces of a classic Yes composition, such as the length (circa 6:30), optimistic robotic vocals, multiple sections and instrumental passages, etc., etc. The only thing it does not have is sparring guitarwork, blistering keyboard work or impressive drumming, but I guess that goes without saying. Somehow I just don't get to feel the presence of either Wakeman, Howe or Bruford on this album. On the other hand, the modernistic synths of Kaye, metallic riffs of Rabin and booming simplified drums of White are all over the tracks. Yup, there is a pretty little solo acoustic Howe spot ('Masquerade'), but that's about it. The rest of the tracks can be separated into the Heavy Metal part and the Progressive Gospel part. The first one is totally worthless: apart from the already mentioned 'Dangerous' (the truly low point), its representatives are not really appalling but it's certainly not the kind of music you'd be impressed with if you happen to know at least a couple of things about earlier Yes. Of course, if you've already heard Big Generator, you shouldn't even bother. 'Shock To The System', eh? Hardly.
The Progressive Gospel part does have its moments (personally I don't have anything against the cute 'Take The Water To The Mountain' and 'Lift Me Up'), but in the long run it just looks dull. Anyway, what the hell am I supposed to do with a Yes number that is neither emotional nor professional nor original? Of course, I don't count the Kambodian text declamation in 'Angkor Wat' as 'original': it's stupid and gimmicky. Nah. Funny, I can almost see them struggle and wriggle all over this record, trying in desperation to emulate their formula - in vain. What's even more pitiful is that none of them were really washed up - every now and then there's a momentary blink of past glories going through our ears, but they never even try to solidify that moment. The main reason, of course, is that this is not really a return to the old formula - it's a lame attempt at inserting selected elements of the old formula into the new Eighties/Nineties style of 90125-Yes. Without blistering guitar solos. Without inspired instrumentation. Without true inspiration. I mean, if they didn't fire Rabin and Kaye that meant they weren't really inspired.
And to think that this album has the best cover since Drama! Is this some kind of hand of fate or what?

I would have waited forever for your ideas

Your worthy comments:

Bob <[email protected]> (09.02.2000)

The title is indeed a total lie. But I don't hate it as much as most fans do.
I kind of solve the problem of detesting the CD by programming so that the ABWH songs play in sequence. Then I can listen to at as a second ABWH album. But that doesn't make it great. Levin is still too far down in the mix, although not as badly as the last album. And the same for Rick, when he's there at all -- producer Jonathan Elias frequently erased his and Howe's parts and replaced them with session men, much to their chagrin. Which reminds me, this stuff again sounds more like a big studio supersession than a Yes band album.
The Rabin/Squire stuff is all over the place, but more fun. Squire's "The More We Live" is a cool spacey tune. "Saving My Heart" doesn't sound all that Yessish (reggae on a Yes album?), but its catchy and upbeat. "Miracle of Life", on the other hand, is the most intricate and closest Rabin every came to classic Yes, and "Lift Me Up" carries some emotion due to a good melody and more accessible lyrics than usual -- Jon didn't write them!
The album seems like just an excuse for the eight man lineup to do a tour, rather than the other way around -- they performed only three numbers from the album live. But the tour has gone down in history as the best Yes tour in history for many fans -- I wish I had seen it. But there was lot of friction on the tour, particularly between Bruford and Squire and between Rabin and Howe. There was no way these eight individuals could be forced into a studio to record a real "union", so something had to give.

Jean-Paul Keulen <[email protected]> (26.04.2000)

I don’t think this album is as bad as George says it is. A record rating of at least 5 would be fair, I think, so it’s overall rating would be “Plain bad” instead of “Truly offensive”. It’s just a bunch of songs as opposed to a coherent album, true, but there’s nothing wrong with most of these songs individually. They sound quite nice to me. And since there’s such a lot of material on the disc, I’m sure everyone will be able to find three or four songs he/she really likes. I read somewhere Yes did a tour with all eight “band members” after the release of this album…? That must’ve been impressive, White and Bruford, Howe and Rabin, etc. all on the same stage at the same time. But anyway. I agree Talk is a much better album than Union.

Philip Maddox <[email protected]> (07.07.2000)

I bought this in a used bin - for some reason, I wasn't scared of the 10 copies of it sitting there. I get the CD home, plop it in, and here Jon's tenor on 'I Would Have Waited Forever'. Pretty good. Not excellent, but pretty good. Then things took a turn. The record just kind of turns to sludge. Only a few of these songs totally suck ('Saving My Heart' is one of the worst songs I've ever heard; 'Dangerous'; 'Angkor Wat' is really stupid), but only 4 do anything for me; the aforementioned 'I Would Have Waited Forever' isn't bad at all, 'Masquerade' is a pretty Steve Howe solo, 'Lift Me Up' is actually beautiful, and 'Miracle Of Life' is pretty, too. Everything else is either boring ('The More We Live - Let Go', generic ('Shock To The System', or an embryonic good song that doesn't quite work ('Without Hope You Cannot Start the Day', which is ok until the "IT MUST BE LOVE! MUST BE LOVE! MUST BE LOOOOOOOVE!!!" part comes in and ruins it). I'd give this a 4 - a few ok songs buried between horrible songs and severely flawed songs. A LOW 4. You always see this in used bins along with REM's Monster. Buy Monster - it's an underrated gem. This isn't.

Year Of Release: 1994
Record rating = 6
Overall rating = 8

They try to make it accessible AND progressive all at once - a daring try, and not one of their worst.
Best song: I AM WAITING

The Union lineup did not last too long - after all, how could it have lasted long? The whole project was so dang artificial and commercially oriented that it was evident we wouldn't get the chance to see a second album of the 'mega-lineup'. Instead, the ABWH combo simply parted ways - with Anderson rejoining the Rabin-led Yes for, well, the third time, while the BWH guys simply went their own ways (Bruford actually returned to the freshly reformed King Crimson, where he seems to be formally staying up to the present times). The lineup is thus the same as on 90125, and I expected the record to be horrendous like everybody said it was... well, it is horrendous, but not quite. Actually, I think it's their best effort since the pie chart record, and yup, that might not be saying much, but it sure is saying a lot. If this doesn't make sense to you, please read on.
The main trademarks of the Eighties' Yes are still here, of course: boomy modernistic production, generic metal guitar lines, hi-tech synths and electronic drums abound. But this time, the dudes have made a definite attempt at recapturing at least some of their former progressive audiences. There are but seven songs, one of them multipart and most of the others with running times much longer than your standard radio-played singles. There are no obvious hooks and next to no melodies that could be rated as 'simplistic': these are, indeed, songs that consist of several distinct themes and feature Complicated Musical Ideas. Titles like 'Endless Dream', 'The Calling' and 'State Of Play' will bring you memories of the good old Yes o' yestreday, too, and I'm pretty sure that if you're a fan of Jon Anderson's lyrics, you'll find plenty o' stuff that equals, maybe even surpasses his 'classic' lyrics to 'Close To The Edge' or 'Starship Trooper' or any of his other cr... sorry, 'poetry'. Personally, I just didn't bother to listen to this with the lyrics sheet in my hands, as I had more important things to do. But they seem pompous enough.
The big problem, of course, arises when you discover that it's a pretty hard task indeed to make a Yes record that has no Howe and no Wakeman on it. Rabin is a good guitarist, and sometimes he can even be convinced to make the best of his abilities: thus, the guitar part on 'I Am Waiting' is absolutely gorgeous, perhaps Trevor's best, 'shiniest' moment with the band - I am amazed myself that he was able to produce such incredible guitarwork. But that only happens at certain specified moments, which are rather few. Elsewhere, he just comes up with the same exhausted riffage that we heard a million times before and would never like to hear again. Even worse, most of the synth playing on record is his and not Kaye's, with the endless tape loops, robotic samplings, and other dreadful stuff. The drumming is rudimentary as well, and any good basswork? You can only dream about it.
Which brings me to the point that most of these songs could be classics - were they written in another era. As such, almost none of the songs suck, but quite a few are boring, and chef-d'oeuvres you will find not. Yeah, it is my opinion that the album is generally underrated - surprisingly, I found it an easier listen than Union; but for every underrated album there is a reason of its underratedness, and yes, the reason is right before your eyes: garbage-style production and terribly underdeveloped ideas. That said, I do like some of the songs here. 'The Calling' is perhaps the closest they got to 'classic Yes' on this album: a bit too four-fourish, perhaps, but still, a perfectly harmonized, soaring anthem in its own rights. Then there's 'I Am Waiting' which I already mentioned as a great guitar showcase, but it's just kinda nice as a mellow ballad. And Rabin sings lead on 'Walls', a super duper, almost annoyingly catchy pop number, whose refrain alone has an obvious Top Of The Pops potential. Which in the context of this exact review means that it's great.
And that's it; I mean, three songs out of seven for a late period Yes album ain't that little, eh? Apparently, there are several moments in other songs here where they approach being not just passable or decent, but real good - some harmonies on the endless 'Endless Dream', the riff on 'Real Love', etc., I mean, sometimes it really works, yeah. And when I get to that murky 'synth vomit' section on 'Endless Dream', I like to imagine these sounds as representing Trevor Rabin's death agony, a little trick that lets me tolerate the section with total ease and even some kind of self-satisfaction. (Hope I'm not breaking any of the PC rules here). But, in fact, I don't think I'll experience that problem much anymore, as I doubt that I'll be throwing the damn record onto my player that often.

I am waiting for your ideas (gee, doesn't that sound monotonous?)

Your worthy comments:

<[email protected]> (18.10.99)

Talk is one hell of a good cd. One of my favs of all the new stuff. This cd rocks. Yes are one of the best groups out right now. I love the last song, 'Endless Dream'. Talk, Talk, Talk. This is wonderfull. Rabin is pretty damn tough and he brings an edge to this band. See you all at Yes 10-30-99.

Bob <[email protected]> (09.02.2000)

Well, I wouldn't be so harsh, but you're pretty much on the money. It's the Rabin show all the way, guitars at the center. It sounds to me like Tony appears only on "The Calling." And, like the other Rabin albums, Chris gets shunted aside. And I do think "Walls" is a very catchy song, with down-to-earth lyrics, but it's the least Yessish track they ever did -- for all practical purposes, it's a Rabin solo single. But "The Calling" has those great trademark harmonies, and Rabin gets points with me as far as trying to stretch the envelope with his sound on everything but "Walls." But they went as far as they could in this direction, that's for sure.

Philip Maddox <[email protected]> (01.10.2000)

7/10 from me. This is about as good as Trevor Rabin Yes could get. Love 'The Calling' - in my opinion, the best Rabin era track (though I haven't heard Big Generator). Very catchy, great harmonies, excellent all around. The rest isn't bad either. 'Endless Dream' is a bit long, but some of the harmonies are excellent (the way Jon's voice ascends and descends is quite pretty). 'Real Love' has one of Yes's most striking choruses - very memorable and "tough" (well, as tough as Yes could get). Can't give it any higher than a seven, though, because a lot of this stuff is kinda generic and none of it is particularly creative - this is basic pop rock. Still, it makes for a very enjoyable listen.

Year Of Release: 1996
Record rating = 8
Overall rating = 10

A return to form or a nostalgic trip backwards? You know, both variants are probably true.
Best song: AMERICA

Finally, not a moment too soon, the 'prog come back' movement seems to have reached Yes as well. Quite suddenly, we find out that the Eighties Yes are gone! It's almost as if 1983 and its weaker follow-ups never existed, along with Rabin, Kaye and Horn. Instead, what we have on this record is the 'classic' Yes line-up minus Bruford plus Alan White (and indeed the record could have featured Bruford if he were not busy touring with the 'double trio' of King Crimson). More importantly, they throw away all the unnecessary garbage they'd collected all the way - like electronic drums, heavy metal riffage and cheesy hi-tech synths. Those who threw away all hope that Yes would eventually go back to its roots again, rejoice! This is a three-quarters live album plus two new studio tracks that run for the good old standard Yes running time - respectively, one for nine and the other for nineteen minutes. To be honest with you, though, I'm not as overtly pleased with the album as everybody else is, for my own specific reasons. First of all, whatever you might object, its release was totally predictable. Everybody with at least a decent sense of the laws of the genre should know that, if Yes were ever to continue (and they were to continue - all the famous bands that work according to the 'revolving door' principle are close to immortal), they were bound to return to their roots. Nostalgia sucks people in, you know. Show me a band that exists for more than twenty years and still hasn't gone back to the source, at least once. So I really wouldn't run around crying, 'Hey! Isn't it a wonder they're back?'
Second and worse, the live tracks are utterly dispensable. Oh no, they're not bad at all, on the contrary, they're fantastic. Not all are my favourites, of course: I still don't like some of the bombastic numbers like I didn't like the originals. 'Siberian Khatru' and 'Awaken', for one, still don't do anything for me. And 'The Revealing Science Of God' is just as mind-numbing as it was in 1974. But 'Onward' never ceased being pretty, 'Roundabout' never ceased being catchy and rockin', and 'Starship Trooper' never ceased being impressive, especially the 'Wurm' coda, of course. Plus, they do a ten-minute version of Simon & Garfunkel's 'America' (previously only available on the Yesterdays compilation that otherwise featured excerpts of the band's first two studio albums) that sounds totally great: Steve Howe plays some of the most polished, sharp, crystal clear guitar lines in his career, and the re-interpretation of the song as a whole, from a romantic, sad ballad into a soaring hymn is at the least amusing. Isn't it?
What I really meant to say when I mentioned the word 'dispensable' was that the songs sound not a bit different from the studio versions. Okay, I don't claim full responsibility to this phrase: I'm not in the mood to pick up the originals again and to spend a whole day comparing the versions. But even if there are differencies, they're minimal. There is none of that brilliant spontaneity and improvisation that made Yessongs sound so involving. My major complaint lies with Steve again: he seemingly hasn't lost anything, but he just refuses to liven up the atmosphere. Instead, everything is screwed and tightened up to the utmost level, so that at times it's damn impossible to tell the original from the copy. So who needs this copy? And why? No, I'm not telling you not to buy this - there is a guilty pleasure in collecting such undistinguishable live versions, and the game 'Find Ten Differencies' is also fun to play. But you know, one could expect more creativity from these guys than the live material actually suggests.
So you understand, of course, that I was really curious about the two new tracks (not that I expected something which I'd fall in love with: if I don't even like 'Close To The Edge', how could I expect to love 'That That Is'?) Sure enough - they do sound like classic Yes more than anything else since Tales From Topographic Oceans, at least if we judge by the instruments and the atmosphere. But there's just nothing exciting about these tracks - 'Be The One' gets duller and duller on every new listen, and 'That That Is', even if it does have a beautiful Howe acoustic intro and lots of twists and turns typical for the usual Yes complexity level, is little better. The instrumental work isn't stunning - nothing like a ferocious guitar solo or keyboard workout is presented; the riffs are almost non-existent; and the lyrics are in the best tradition of 'Close To The Edge' (as in, 'raving nonsense').
What this actually means is that the guts are still there but the flame is gone. Get me? They are still able to get together and make up a complex, multi-part composition, but they're unable to make it come alive, to get it lighted up with the same youthful flame that they shared long ago. Nobody really wants to play this stuff - they seem to think that writing it is enough. Let me just tell you that if their material from the early Seventies had been played with the same level of 'energy' and the same carelessness as on the original tracks on Keys To Ascension, no way they'd become the leading stars of progressive rock. Nevertheless, I wouldn't want to give the album anything less than an 8 because if this doesn't get an 8 then what does? A fine effort, lads. And maybe I forget the 'psychological' effect - how does it feel to listen to this after listening to Union? Let us appraise the album for the psychological effect! Okay?

Be the one to mail your ideas

Your worthy comments:

John McFerrin <[email protected]> (14.08.99)

Since I just read that the russki versions of most of your CD's don't have liner notes, I'll fill you in a bit
These two albums are not just random modern-day live albums that have been created to suck more money out of loyal fans (well, maybe some people might differ in that opinion, but anyways). Rather, these two albums are of extreme historical importance for the band
After Rabin and Kaye quit, the remaining Yessers were left to pick up the pieces. They wanted to know how they could get back to being loved by their fans, and as you might suspect, they realized that the best way was to get the old gang back together and play the older stuff. But they didn't want a "comeback tour," persay. Rather, they wanted the band's reemergence to be more of a "comeback special."
They decided to hold a three day festival in March 1996 in San Luis Obispo. They would play the same lengthy set on each of these days, allowing as many fans as wished to hear them in their old glory (i.e. if somebody couldn't make it a given day, they could hear the exact same songs that a fan would have heard on another day.) KTA and KTA2 are recordings from that festival. Basically, they took the best performance of each song and put it on disc. If I knew which song was from which day, I'd say, but I don't so I can't. I do know, however, that between the two is the complete setlist.
I will admit that it might seem somewhat redundant to have a third complete Close to the Edge, but at least the marketers have a somewhat decent excuse this time around.

Josh <[email protected]> (24.09.99)

Weak. The live tracks are okay, but laking energy. Anderson is still singing like a computer, but Squire seems as though he'll never grow old!. The best live track is "Starship Trooper". The new songs are worse. "Be The One" is one of the most boring songs I've ever heard. "That, That Is" starts good, gets bad, than get's good again, and back to bad. It's half and half. A worthy enough album (I might even begin to say that it's great after listening to Union), but not their best effort.
My rating-7 1/2

Bob <[email protected]> (09.02.2000)

A return to classic form. I agree, the live stuff doesn't have the same edge -- they are definitely more low key. But they do well, and the stuff is very well recorded. (For all its virtues, Yessongs sounds like it was recorded in a big cave.) "The Revealing Science of God" is more tolerable here than the studio version, but it still really drags and just cannot command my attention through the whole thing ."Onward," on the other hand, is TOTALLY transformed -- the acoustic arrangement is absolutely perfect for this song. Beautiful. On the third hand, I really didn't need "Roundabout" or "Starship Trooper" again.
The studio stuff sounds kinda like ABWH tunes on their way to being Yes tunes. Which isn't bad, necessarily -- at least it sounds like the band is playing together, even if Rick overdubbed his parts after everybody else was done.

Year Of Release: 1997
Record rating = 7
Overall rating = 9

More of the same, this time with a little more accent on new studio tunes. Unfortunately, that's the bad point.
Best song: TIME AND A WORD

Apparently, everybody loved the first Keys album so much, they decided to go ahead and release a follow-up within less than a year. The resemblance is, err, 'awesome', and even the two album covers are practically undistinguishable. However, this time they decided to cut it half-to-half: the first CD presents us yet another set of live recordings of all-time classics, while the second is fully devoted to new compositions. Unfortunately, no huge surprises in either direction.
The selections on the first CD turn out to be more well-known and even banal: obviously, they were scraping the bottom of the barrel of their new concert program. So you get 'I've Seen All Good People' again (great song, though, and look how fine it has aged), and you get both 'Close To The Edge' and 'And You And I'! Taken together with 'Siberian Khatru' on the previous album and the versions of these songs on Yessongs, you receive the whole Close To The Edge three times full! Now that's what I call pride for your own native product! Yup, but that doesn't mean I have to love these versions better than the originals which I hardly liked at all. The 'I Get Up I Get Down' section is still beautiful, and the rest is still sprawl. Furthermore, there are two numbers recycled from Yesshows, although this is where you don't see me complaining: both 'Going For The One' and 'Time And A Word' are among my all-time Yes favourites. 'Time And A Word', in fact, is the only tune that gets a radical reworkment, and the reworkment works: it gets a brilliant tinkling piano intro, and all over the song Wakeman tries very hard to make it sound more important than just your average hippie crap stuff. Ooh, how soothing... but still, that does not detract me from the obvious and objective fact that this live album can't help being inferior to its immediate predecessor. Sequels are like that, you know? Unless your sequel is a Sierra adventure game in the late Eighties, but here I go digressing again...
Now the studio album is just another disappointment. Again, they try to emulate the ancient Yes sound, and again it doesn't work. There are some sparkling moments of beauty which you have to dig for, like the beautiful and simple instrumental piece 'Sign Language' or certain lines in 'Children Of Light', but they are really few. For the most part, this music reminds me of a half-professional, inspiration-less rock band trying to cover the above-mentioned 'And You And I' and failing. The reason is that I just don't feel the energy. Both Wakeman and Howe, once the pride of the band, seem to be playing their instruments with one hand while squabbling in a chair and holding a cigar in the other. I wouldn't call their work primitive, and I know they can do it if they want to, but they hardly seem to want! In fact, the only thing that moves this lazy, reluctant music forward seems to be Squire's base - the man was obviously glad to turn up in the light again, after ten years of being relegated to secondary work, and he revels in his newly-found freedom, churning off ferocious riffs and dazzling speed lines in 'Foot Prints' and some other tracks. Anderson seems to be going through the motions, though - his main showcase (the usual twenty-minute long 'Mind Drive') is feeble, with lyrics recycled from his former imagery, and, to tell you the truth, this is where I finally become so sick of his vocals that my attention gets drawn away from the song all of the time. Oh yeah, I know that nobody forced me to take the steep path of a record reviewer, so the only person responsible for this torture is me and nobody else, but I still have to shout it out loud: I Can't Stand These Vocals And These Lyrics! Now crucify me.
In all, I would give the album a five or six because most of the studio stuff sucks and the live album is much more predictable. Still, I get so happy when I hear 'Time And A Word' that I can't help but raise the rating! Just a little! Just a teeny-weeny bit! You should know better, of course - you probably like 'Close To The Edge' and don't mind to hear it again in a ninety-five percent equal version. Feel free to raise the rating if you like. Who am I - Adolph Hitler?

Close to the edge of mailing your ideas, are ye? Don't hesitate!

Your worthy comments:

Josh <[email protected]> (24.09.99)

Better than the 1st! The live tracks are somewhat more interesting. "Close To The Edge" sounds really good! The studio tracks are also better. "Mind Drive" is good, but they sound like they're trying too hard to make it 20 minutes."Footprints" and "Bring Me To The Power" are both shamelessly overlong. "Children Of Light" is one of their best in a looooooooooooooooooooooooong time. That I stress, a very looooooooooooooooooong time.Great harmonies, and an effective ending. "Sign Language" is also their best instrumental in an even looooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooonger time! Best since "The Clap"!
My rating-8 /2

Bob <[email protected]> (09.02.2000)

I agree that most of the live stuff is really redundant. And while "Going" and "Time and a Word" are very well arranged and recorded, the tempo and energy level are definitely turned down a notch from the versions from Yesshows. What do you want after 18 years, though?
The new stuff is also more of the same, although Rick sounds more integrated here. But the studio tracks here and on the last album are doomed to be neglected -- Rick left before the tour, Open Your Eyes was released concurrently, and the band favored it. Oh well.

Year Of Release: 1997
Record rating = 5
Overall rating = 7

A painful attempt to return to the Yes of old, but there's a little too little substance...
Best song: OPEN YOUR EYES

Okay. I do acknowledge that this album is made of the kind of material that is quite unlike anything the band did since 90125. Notice how they got the band name in huge letters on the cover and the album title in minimal letters? That's because the original intent was to entitle the album simply Yes, like as if they were beginning from the start again. This, indeed, is a pathetic attempt to return to the sound of the Yes of yore. Unfortunately, I still don't like it. Moreover, this doesn't even sound like the Yes of Close To The Edge to me. And this isn't even the Yes of Relayer. This looks closer to the Yes of Tormato, ladies and gentlemen - pseudo-melodic noodlings with no special purpose and no sense of direction.
Reason? Try as they might, they still can't do anything without a first-rate pianist. And Wakeman is out of the band - again!! (The guy has probably set a personal record - he left a single band three times in its history, and who knows? This history is far from over yet!) Instead, they recruited American novice (or maybe veteran? Who cares!!) Billy Sherwood who struggles effectively to render his presence on the album as inobservable as possible. What's even worse is Steve Howe: either he was in a state of paranoia or he just didn't believe in the miracle of recreation of the classic Yes sound. Hear him playing on this album and you'll never understand what made the guy special in the first place: his solos are generic and uninteresting, and the riffage is one hundred percent derivative. Add to this that it's been a while since Chris Squire pleased us with any truly interesting basswork, and you get an album that does imitate the 'classic sound', but without even a tenth part of the technical proficiency of the former.
An interesting thing is that, from what I've heard, most Yes fans either love or hate this album, holding practically no middle ground. This is perfectly understandable, but totally unforgettable. There's no need for a Yes fan to hate this, because none of the songs should be offensive to a Yes lover's ears. Maybe they do get a bit 'simplistic', but there's no Trevor Rabin on this one, and the sound, although it does borrow some elements from the Nineties, is still independent of the fashion. On the other hand, I can see no reason for loving this album other than desperate nostalgia, in which case people are welcome to turn to Fragile. The best thing for me to do is to give the album a 5 and wait if something else strikes me about it some day. I doubt it, though.
You know, maybe one of the problems oldies acts share is that someday they all want to 'get back to the roots', only to find out that they can't do that effectively enough. Now I agree that it's real difficult to cover any new musical ground in rock at the end of the Nineties, when basically everything was explored and everything discovered. And still - I'd much rather love to see Yes or anybody else try and assume an experimental approach than try to rehash the old standard formula after forgetting its basic elements. The experiment might fail, but at least its very existence would speak of the band as a creative, rather than stagnated force in rock. Why don't they try something new, instead of letting Jon Anderson rave and rave on on the well-known and thoroughly explored topics of love, love and... love?
Okay, back to the album. A couple of tunes are actually very good, and I'd eagerly let them be included into the Golden Fund. The title track, for instance, is a brilliant pop song, slightly reminiscent of 'Time And A Word', and 'No Way We Can Lose', with its strange harmonica (not a very frequent instrument in the Yes inventory), almost has a bluesy feel to it, which is funny. And, speaking of experiments, the album closes with a sixteen-minute long sound collage consisting of various synthesized nature sounds over which Anderson and company sing certain accapella lines for quite a long period of time. If it were not so long, I'd call it amusing; as it is, it's kinda tedious, but that doesn't mean you have necessarily to sit through it. However, I really don't have anything to say about the other tunes because they tend to escape me. Suffice it to say they're, err, cute. But you heard better ones before, and nobody but the most diehard fan should really want to engage in a Howeless, Wakemanless record that promises to represent the beginning of a new era but instead represents, to me at least, the breaking of an illusion: that the ancient Yes sound is possible to recapture in our times. Maybe they should have released Keys To Ascension 3 instead?

Open your eyes and mail your ideas

Your worthy comments:

Josh <[email protected]> (24.09.99)

I'm quite impressed. I was expecting this to be another lovey-dovey borefest like Big Generator (I don't own it, but I've heard it), but the only ones that come even close are "Wonderlove" and "Love Shine". I love the first to songs the most, and that ending with the nature sounds and the singing. "Man In The Moon" has bad lyrics, but has a really cool melody. Just a good album. I also have pretty high hopes for their upcoming The Ladder album.
My rating-8 3/4

Bob <[email protected]> (09.02.2000)

The reason that Steve gets short shrift this time is that a lot of the tunes were originally intended for a Squire/Sherwood side project. "Man in the Moon" makes that most obvious -- lyrically and vocally, it in particular is very un-Yeslike.
I don't detest it, but it's just not very memorable. Nothing sinks in, even after repeated listenings. There aren't great hooks, no great harmonies. And I agree totally, a keyboard presence is desperately needed.
The band moved on very quickly from this album after the tour.

DURET Fabien <[email protected]> (22.11.2000)

This record is GREAT but everything about "No way we can lose" is RIDICULOUS (harmonica, vocals, harmonies), and this is your second favourite. 4 minutes of that seem very much longer to me than the 25 minutes of "Gates of Delirium" or "Close to the edge".
Steve Howe plays wonderfully on this album, is totally coherent with his style and sometimes gets even further (the Frippy style on "wonderlove"). It's also the come back of Squire, the first really interesting bass playing since "the silent wings of freedom" on Tormato. The only bad things on this album are :
- the lyrics which are the most ridiculous ones even sung by Anderson in a Yes album. But I don't mind. In fact, the ridiculous word "wonderlove" for example, suits totally to this piece's music, and it seems that the word was just used to make a perfect final : "wonderlo-o-o-ove", a slice of speed guitar, and "BANG BANG". Breathtaking. One of the most intelligent ends of pieces that were made by Yes. I mean, the important thing is the sound of the word related to the music, not the signification, because Anderson uses his voice as an instrument, rather than singing.
- the BIG PROBLEM of this album : why can't we here Anderson alone from time to time ? Why are all the pieces except the acoustic one saturated with the voices of all the members ? The problem was taken into account and disappears on the following the Ladder. The mistake on Open Your Eyes is that the background vocals don't add anything because they are always there, and that's too heavy and makes the album hard to listen in its entirety. It's a very important point to tell about in a real analysis. It's one (negative) particularity of this album.
This album is excellent and Talk is the worst Yes record, and in fact not a Yes record (production, writing, heavy metal or FM hard- rock inepties : Trevor Rabin) : maybe the name of the album is "Yes", and the band is "Talk", the leader of which is Rabin. He also could have been the leader of groups such as Bon Jovi, Scorpions (I don't say Europe because I have respect for his sometimes great guitar parts on 90125 and Big Generator).
That's all. Sorry for becoming subjective but I don't want to discuss anymore. I first read your Van Der Graaf Generator reviews and saw they were absolute nonsense. I then read your Yes reviews which I found even worse. I am not a fan of any group. But I am a musician, and I'm sorry, but Tormato is better than Drama, Open your eyes fucks Talk, and Tales From Topographic Oceans may be the Best Yes Album, if it's not Fragile, Close To The Edge or Relayer (for studio albums - Yesshows is for me even better than those ones). Also, depending on one's personal tastes, 90125 for its energy, or Big Generator for its more Classic-Yes pieces and esthetics, can be both considered as the best Rabin-Yes record. But Talk is a joke (and not a funny one). Well, a friend told me that you weren't so deaf toward beauty in your Crimson Reviews (I feared you would say something like "the best album is In The Court, the last good album is Islands, and after I don't understand". It's not the case. Thank You). And what about your Genesis Reviews ? Will it be "I only understand 'I Know What I Like' - 'Fountain of Salmacis' and 'Firth of Fifth' are bad attempts to beauty that make the group sound like Yes, so I don't understand" ????
To all people starting in the Prog Music : don't listen to him, he's a mad man that wants Yes to stop playing Yes music, and to become something between The Buggles and Scorpions. If you listen to Open Your Eyes, remove "No Way We Can Lose" from your CD player -program. It's his favourite, but it's absolutely non-prog.

Year Of Release: 1999
Record rating = 8
Overall rating = 10

Finally! The good balance between the pop and the prog has been found... or has it?
Best song: FACE TO FACE

[Update as of 11.04.2000: Okay, so I finally reached the state of mind where I can easily give the album an overall rating of ten. I mean, what the hell, almost every single song on here is good, and it still gets a mediocre rating? Whatever. Now read the actual review, written at a stage where I instinctively felt I loved the album but was afraid to voice my sentiments about it in the form of a little figure. One must be honest, after all - I can't help it if the songwriting on here far succeeds that on Close To The Edge.]
I'm in a good mood today, so that is probably why this album does not offend me in the least. Actually, at some point I almost ended up giving it an eight, but that would probably cause too much friction between me and 'classic Yes' fans, so no way. Anyway, the songs may be good, but really few of them are memorable, so I guess a seven will do for it quite fine.
The Yessers didn't really like the final results of Open Your Eyes (neither did I, so we're pals), so they re-worked their sounds once again, adding Igor Khoroshev on keyboards as a regular member and moving Billy Sherwood on to second guitar, and came out with an album that's LOADS more fun and enjoyable than its predecessor. Now I may be on my own here, as I haven't yet seen even a vaguely positive review of Ladder; and it's more or less explainable. The sound is much more simple and straightforward than on OYE or any 'classic' releases; while it's still quite far away from your average modern pop ditty, most of the melodies aren't convoluted or cunningly twisted at all. If anything, Yes sound pretty normal - do not be fooled by the pretentious Roger Dean cover, this sure ain't no Tales From Topographic Ocean.
But you know, I have always loved Yes when they were pretty normal. To me, it always seemed like they were the kind of a band that was always intentionally moving away from what they deemed as 'conventional' songwriting, but their few attempts at 'conventional' songwriting, amazingly enough, always worked - 'Time And A Word', 'Going For The One', 'Wonderous Stories', all that crap, I actually loved it. It's only when they added the Eighties' cheesiness to the 'conventional' sound, resulting in Rabin-style garbage, that I began, sorta, you know, waxing nostalgic about eighteen minute long tracks... But Ladder certainly has none of the Eighties' cheesiness. It isn't, in fact, even particularly keyboard-oriented: the sound is dominated by the guitars (although Howe still is nowhere near his best). Jon shows that his voice is still 'great', having lost none of its range or power; and, since the lyrics are more or less decent, I can certainly tolerate his singing more on this one than on Close To The Edge. But the biggest surprise, yeah, the biggest and by far the most pleasant one, is the return of Chris Squire. Yes, you heard right: Chris is back! The bass work on this album is awesome, his best in at least twenty years and maybe more. Check any randomly selected track and you'll see it for yourself; I would primarily suggest the mad pulsation of 'Face To Face' and the awesome funky riff of 'The Messenger'. The bass alone pumps up the rating of this album a couple of points, I say.
Of course, if the aim was, once again, to emulate the Yes of old, it's another failure. But somehow it seems to me that the guys really tried to go for something different. And do not forget, that, after all, it is Ladder, not OYE or the studio tracks off Keys To Ascension, that marks the radical departure from the Eighties - early Nineties style. If you're looking for booming electronic drums, hi-tech synths or metallized generic guitar riffs (although why in the world you should ever look for these just baffles me), go somewher else, please. This one's a surprisingly mellow album, and not at all rooted in the Nineties. Well, perhaps it is; the pathetic, echoey balladeering of 'If Only You Knew' or the slickly produced Latin rhythms of 'Lightning Strikes' do reek of the Nineties, indeed. But not in a bad way. And most of these songs cook - they're quite enjoyable while they're on. I still can't remember even a single melody, of course (apparently, three times is not quite enough for such an album), but while they're on, I remember really getting my kicks out of 'em. There's also a couple of longish, nine-minute tracks, and the second one of them, 'New Language', ain't that attractive, but 'Homeworld' is a great tune - built on a solid, stable dance-style melody and leading us through several complex, not uninteresting instrumental passages before dissolving in a charming little piano coda.
Truthfully, there's little to complain about here. Even the ridiculous little 'Fragile tribute', 'Can I?', which recreates the innocent fun of 'We Have Heaven', has its merits. Apart from a general, not to say generic, feel of Yes-induced boredom that can't help but grab me towards the end, I have no complaints. The songs jump, bounce, pulsate, vibrate, they're quite lively and energetic and the band members don't sound washed up at all. I feel a bit sad about Steve Howe, though: his presence is indeed marked by several stupendous guitar passages on some of the tracks, but overall, he still does not show up for the guitar god he is (or was? I'm starting to doubt his talents already). Maybe this, in fact, is why people are sometimes so disappointed about latter days Yes releases: it's not the dance beats or the straightforward melodies, it's the lack of fascinating guitarwork. But I guess we'll just have to take it as it is. In the meantime, just buy this album; this might well be a stable formula to which Yes will stick for a few more years now, if, of course, they don't shift their line-ups once more. Which wouldn't be at all surprising. And where the hell is Wakeman, by the way?

It will be a good day if you mail your ideas

Your worthy comments:

Rich Bunnell <[email protected]> (06.08.2000)

Whoa! Screw 90125, THIS is Yes's pop masterwork. I don't CARE if it's produced by the Aerosmith/Bon Jovi guy. I don't CARE if the melodies are simplistic. It doesn't matter because the songs are almost all so freaking good!!! The two "epics" are Yes's best in years (especially the title track), both winding together simplistic passages into musical grandness like good epics are supposed to, and MAN, those shorter songs! They kick! "Lightning Strikes" is stupid and non-Yes-like but utterly infectious, "If Only You Knew" rises above its corny melody because it....uuh.....has an awesome melody, "To Be Alive" is really cool ("Everybody wants some" - WHO FREAKING CARES? Another entry in the "Yes fans bitch about stupid things" contest)...and...well, these songs are just awesome. It may sound like Yes doing modern adult pop, but it shows a certain variety and proficiency that other adult pop has simply never achieved. The only song I don't care for very much is "The Messenger," but the rest is dandier than Yes have been since <B>Going For The One</B>, at least in my stupid opinion. I don't have any problem whatsoever giving this a 9.
Sorry that this comment is so crappy, but I have SNL playing right now, and they're showing a crappy Joyologist sketch with Molly Shannon and the stupidity is rubbing off on me. Why I have the show playing at all is because I'm a closet masochist.

Bob Josef <[email protected]> (04.12.2000)

As with Strange Times, I waited a very long time to obtain a copy of this, since Open Your Eyes, like Keys of the Kingdom, was pretty much a disappointment. And, as with the Moodies, I found that Yes has provided me with a surprisingly good album. The album certainly reflects the tension between Howe's waxing nostalgic about 20 minute noodlefests (as in Keys to Ascension) and Squire's desire to have another "Owner of a Lonely Heart" saturating the airwaves (as in Open Your Eyes). Squire seems to have won the upper hand here in terms of that, but the melodies here are so much more catchy than the stuff he and Sherwood came up with on the last album, even on the two nine minute tracks. Bruce Fairbairn must have ruled the Yes roost pretty firmly. And certainly, while there is no instrumental grandstanding a la Close to the Edge, the musicianship here is very solid. I agree, Chris' work here is the best since Drama, and Igor is on a par with Wakeman, as far as I'm concerned -- a very fine addition.
Like a lot of fans, "If Only You Knew" and "Lightning Strikes" induce a few cringes here. Yes is way too English to be totally comfortable with ethnic rhythms, but the "LS" is at least better than "Teakbois". And while "If Only You Knew" is the most blatantly commercial thing Yes has EVER recorded (I imagine Howe and Squire wincing as they were recording the background vocals), it sounds a lot more sincere than any of the horrible wimpy ballads the latter day Genesis came up with.
A fine start for yet another lineup, but once again the two-album curse strikes. Sherwood is out, probably because Howe decided that this here town ain't big enough for the both of them. (On the other hand, I couldn't figure out what the hell Sherwood did here, anyway, so it's most likely no loss). And some rather nasty extracurricular activities by Igor on the latest tour has fired a lot of fan speculation that he may be out on his ass shortly, as well. Well, in the meantime, we can "console" ourselves with a live album from the Ladder tour. A live album from Yes! Just what the world needs!

Year Of Release: 1973

This video more or less roughly corresponds to the album version, except for a couple performances. As you already know, the live tracks do really differ from the studio ones, sometimes to good effect. The bad side is that the band members aren't very good showmen: mute the sound and you couldn't distinguish Steve Howe from an ordinary heavy metal player, while Anderson is mostly standing on the spot and doing nothing (the poor guy, he must feel terribly uncomfortable during all those lengthy instrumental passages). Chris Squire, in fact, is the only person who really tries to get the things going a little, with his groovy cloak and almost Townshend-like movements. But this isn't enough, so the video is fairly dull. Sometimes they try to variegate it with some surrealistic scenery (Roger Dean goes again), but it's also dull. For a good prog live show, go see ELP or Genesis. For impressive surrealistic art, go see Pink Floyd. This is boring. Recommended for huge fans only - even though you do have to see the band face to face a couple of times in your lives. Not the modern Yes, of course, but the Yes in their prime. Also, as far as I know, the video has Steve performing 'The Clap' (and a fairly impressive performance it is), while the album has 'Mood For A Day' on it, so completists are also welcome.

Mail your ideas