Anderson led line-up vs. Davison led line-up

[Mr. Holland]

All right. Frumious B posted this in another thread: "Yes with Jon Anderson is what the overwhelming majority of Yes fans want, including many who support the current band. Given a choice, they would still prefer the Real Deal."

So, let's put it to the test here. Which would you prefer next: a tour with Anderson leading the line-up, or with Davison leading the line-up? (for argument/voting sake, let's say the rest of the line-up remains the same as it is now)

Now, this is thread/poll is ment to speak out on preference, not put down what you don't prefer, so let's keep things civil!!

[Mr. Holland]

So far, Davison led line-up has 100% of the votes.....LOL

[tidewater]

Anderson led line up.

[Punj Lizard]

Davison led line-up.

The reason being that despite Jon Anderson's status in my own mind vis-à-vis the Yes that I consider the best Yes (i.e. TYA-GFTO), my desire to see him sing with them again is born out of nostalgia more than any sense that they could create anything new and worthwhile together, other than briefly on stage. Moreover, I'm concerned he'd be below par and as a result that would not be a good way for his relationship with the band to end. Anderson, by his own admission, is not up to coping with any "crazy Yes tours". A couple of limited engagements would be fantastic, but not a tour.

With Davison on board, though, I believe another tour with him singing could help them create some new and interesting material. They may have the Yes name, but like the Rabin version before, and the Yeggles version before that, they're a different incarnation of the band, and I'm interested to see what they create.

[RelayerI]

Davison - happy, functional, TOURING and hopefully creative/ongoing vs a few greatest hits gigs in a small number of venues, then breakup.

No contest...

[TOBYSGRAPHICGOKART]

Davison led line-up.

The reason being that despite Jon Anderson's status in my own mind vis-à-vis the Yes that I consider the best Yes (i.e. TYA-GFTO), my desire to see him sing with them again is born out of nostalgia more than any sense that they could create anything new and worthwhile together, other than briefly on stage. Moreover, I'm concerned he'd be below par and as a result that would not be a good way for his relationship with the band to end. Anderson, by his own admission, is not up to coping with any "crazy Yes tours". A couple of limited engagements would be fantastic, but not a tour.

With Davison on board, though, I believe another tour with him singing could help them create some new and interesting material. They may have the Yes name, but like the Rabin version before, and the Yeggles version before that, they're a different incarnation of the band, and I'm interested to see what they create.

+1

[geofmcm]

I've gone Davison for the following reasons:

The key is the last word in the question 'NOW',

This band has toured without JA now for 4 years, they have evolved as a band and produced new music, admittedly JD's tenure is less than a year but already they are comfortable with him and discussing new music.

The fact that they replaced BD with JD rather than approach JA means that they want to carry on this progress and not regress back.

Additionally when preparing for 2008 (pre illness) there are claims that JA brought several songs to the table but these appear not to have impressed the rest of them.

I am happy with FFH and can't wait to see what they can produce next.

There may be some point in the future where the band feels it's gone as far as they can and that the next logical step for the band would be to reengage with JA. At that time my answer may possibly be different.

[Mr. Holland]

Thanks for people's input so far!

[Mr. Holland]

So far, it's a close call, it's 4-5.

[paul vaughan]

so davison is now the leader

[Mr. Holland]

so davison is now the leader

Is that your conclusion or do you mean it as a question? (Interpunction is such a great invention)

[edarnold]

Davison for now

Sent from my ADR6300 using Tapatalk 2

[ragtime]

It depends whether you mean in an ideal world or in the actual realities of now. In an ideal world in which everyone was healthy, happy and full of mutual affection and respect, it would be Anderson. But in the real world in which that would never work in a healthy, happy way, I am glad they have found a credible and sustainable new singer. I am impressed with what Davison is doing and interested to see what they come up with next with him as lead singer. FFH left me cold for the most part, but if the next album grabs me I would happily see them play as the current band.

[downbyariver]

I voted for Anderson, obviously. :)

I think Davison is going to be overrepresented in this poll, whether he wins or not, because folks who post to this site are a little different from the average concert goer or album buyer (A lot of Glass Hammer fans hang out here, I think). In the real world, 90% of Yes fans can't even spell Jon Davison's name right, if they know his name at all.

Anderson is flat out the better singer. and Anderson is flat out better on his own material. Anderson has so far done better material outside of Yes than Davison has done outside of Yes. And even at 70ish, Anderson has more bass and depth to his voice and it doesn't sound shrill while still being able to hit the high notes.

No offense to Davison, but, my friend, you're replacing the replacement of a legendary singer in the very band said legendary singer made his name in, singing songs he wrote or co-wrote with his voice in mind and for which his voice provided the definitive performances of. Of course, people are going to prefer Anderson.

I can live with Davison, and with a few albums of original Davison Yes material, if it's good, I might even come to appreciate Davison, but Jon Anderson is always going to be the definitive Yes singer. That's just one of those things you have to live with if you replace a band's original lead singer long after the band's prime. Most people who enjoy Yes music probably just listen to their old records or classic rock radio and will never even hear Davison sing.

The few "replacement" lead singers who have been successful in bands took over before the band hit it's peak or during it's peak and thus got a lot of attention and had many years of active song writing to establish their own legacy. Phil Collins with Genesis is one example- the band was riding upward with Gabriel, and then peaked with Collins. Or Sammy Hagar with Van Halen, they were right at their peak when David Lee Roth left, and were able to keep on rolling. Yes is too low profile and now and is too established in terms of what their greatest hits are to really form a new identity around a new lead singer that resonates with the general public. They also may simply be too old as a band.

Also, I obviously subjectively am not that into Davison. I was happier with Benoit David. I'd be happier with Billy Sherwood. Trevor Rabin could come back. Davison just doesn't connect with me musically for some reason. Maybe he will eventually. Like I said, an album or two with Yes and maybe he'll blow me a way with his awesome talent when trying to write and sing for Yes versus writing for Glass Hammer with Glass Hammer in mind or singing covers of Jon Anderson, Trevor Horn, and Benoit David Yes songs that just don't quite sound right. You never know, I live in hope.

One thing that I'll say is promising about Davison is that he's a fan of 90125. If he went and actually made a Yes album that sounded like 90125 or Big Generator, he'd go within about a nanosecond from being a goat to someone I think is super-awesome. I don't think he's going to go that route, but that'd be one way to win me over- go back to my favorite Yes sound that everyone else abandoned.

But if they announced tomorrow that Jon Anderson was back with Yes and they were going into the studio to record a new album together, I'd be estatic.

[Frumious B]

I voted for Jon :)

[RelayerI]

I think some people are not taking the 'Now' into account. That has to include Jon's inability to tour, his recent songwriting, personal animosities, financial 'disagreements' etc.

[luvyesmusic]

.....and some of us are. ;-)

[PeterCologne]

I have a question: What does lead mean here? I mean, I don't know if one even could say, that Anderson ever was leading Yes. But one could argue about that of course. But if a Davison led Yes does mean here, that somone expect him to be the most important member in the future, I find this a little too much.

Come on, guys, Davison seems to be the better choice for lead vocals compared to David. But he still is just an Anderson-variation. And what do we know about his composing skills? I bought Glashammers album "If" and I find it very, very boring and flat. It's a Tales-tribute-album, that tries to simulate the Tales-Sound, but on a third-rate niveau. Whatever he added to this album, it does not work. I don't know about his other group, Sky Cries Mary, but anyway...

I would not put this guy down, we have to see, what he is able to. But at this point I see no reason at all to overstimate him. By the way, we won't do him a favour with that. To already name him in the same breath with Anderson is very, very... let' say optimistic. Of Course I'd be happy if this lineup would give us the Relayer of the year 2013, but... it needs much more than an Andersonical voice to kick this Yes back to a glorious future.

[Frumious B]

Nothing against Davison at all. I like him and wish him well. However, Anderson was the one who helped to build this band from the ground up from nothing to rock icons. You can wave Drama around like a Get out of Jail Free! card all you want, but I still say Anderson is as integral to Yes as Jagger is to The Stones or Bono is to U2. Yes With Jon Davison is a band that I kinda like, Yes with Jon Anderson is a band that I LOVE. I'd rather see a band that I love than a band that I kinda like.

[Rabin105]

I went with Davison