Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

ARW Revisited

Collapse
X
 
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #46
    Originally posted by Homemade Parachute
    At the end of the day, what ARW accomplished might not be what they set out to accomplish, but it succeeded for me at least at being a wonderful summation of the story of Yes. I don't think they intended it as a farewell tour, obviously, but I think it worked that way, and I don't think we'll get another one. Farewell tours are tricky, as they're often a) marketing and b) one last kick at the can. Rush's R40 wasn't pushed or sold as a farewell tour, and I don't think every member of the band thought it was, but it was, or turned out to be, (and at least one member almost certainly knew it was), and in that sense it worked so brilliantly as a review of the band's history and story that there really wasn't anywhere to go. R30, from ten years (well, duh) earlier didn't even attempt that.
    I take what you are saying, but I completely disagree! What Rabin did to Howe's guitar lines was not a "wonderful summation of the story of Yes" and Wakeman's added noodling to the YesWest songs little better. The line up, for me, never managed to celebrate the history of Yes because it was a line up that had never existed in the history of Yes. It was thus doomed to perform incoherent versions of Yes music.

    It was lovely to hear Anderson up there, singing with a band. It was lovely to hear Rabin live playing the YesWest material. It was lovely to hear Wakeman on those classic '70s tunes. But there was barely a single song in the set that didn't sound flawed to me because Rabin wasn't interested (understandably) in performing Howe's lines and Wakeman wasn't interested (understandably) in performing Kaye's. The only solution to this conundrum would have been for a brand new line up to offer us brand new material. Their hearts were in to doing that (although their management possibly wasn't!), but it didn't happen.

    The best performances were Pomeroy doing "The Fish"; or "Awaken", where there was some sense of doing something new with it.

    As it is, we got a lazy and static greatest hits set list and a big dose of trash talk... and one of the worst put together live albums I've ever heard. It remains, to my mind, one of these least successful attempts to "do" Yes ever.

    Comment


    • #47
      Originally posted by Mr. Holland

      Some of us even gave it a 80% chance of being released by 2020. Imagine how they must feel....
      Henry didn't say 80% -- he said 50%, and it wasn't in 2018 since Wakeman said there would be an EP, but in 2017.

      Comment


      • #48
        😀 Nice try.

        Comment


        • #49
          Originally posted by Davy
          😀 Nice try.
          It's true! in 2017, Henry thought there was a 50% chance that ARW would release an album in 2018.

          Comment


          • #50
            Originally posted by yamishogun

            Henry didn't say 80% -- he said 50%, and it wasn't in 2018 since Wakeman said there would be an EP, but in 2017.
            As I recall, neither A, R, or W were really telling the same story publicly.

            Henry's call on chances for an album were based on the best info he could gather at the time, and, as it turns out, information that was coming from the Horseses' mouths, who weren't even on the same page evidently.

            Comment


            • #51
              Originally posted by bondegezou

              I take what you are saying, but I completely disagree!
              As in all things, your milage may vary! (Besides, isn't "completely disagree" British for "you may have a point there"?) And I can fully understand your own reaction as well. I didn't get to see ARW perform live, so I'm going by the Apollo album and not, and I do think this is crucial here, the video, which I have little interest in (my way of saying the fake crowd noise doesn't bother me at all, but I don't have the disconnect of the visuals to really drive that home, you know?)

              Originally posted by bondegezou
              The line up, for me, never managed to celebrate the history of Yes because it was a line up that had never existed in the history of Yes.
              That's the great thing about Yes, almost every line up had never existed before. Relayer lineup: never existed before. Drama lineup: never existed. 90125 lineup: never existed. Union lineup: never existed. OYE and I think every new album tour after that, always a new lineup. Whether those lineups *work*, of course, is a different question, and answerable by each of us individually.

              Originally posted by bondegezou
              It was thus doomed to perform incoherent versions of Yes music.
              "Incoherent"'s a strong word, maybe, but I don't think they were "doomed" any more so than any new lineup of Yes is "doomed" to incoherent versions of older songs: was the Oliver/Benoit band doomed to incoherency? Or even the post-Squire band?

              Originally posted by bondegezou
              It was lovely to hear Anderson up there, singing with a band. It was lovely to hear Rabin live playing the YesWest material. It was lovely to hear Wakeman on those classic '70s tunes.
              I think that's what I appreciate the most: it was at least a pretty full spectrum of material, from The Yes Album up through Union and/or Talk, which is unlikely to be heard again. Was there enough variety? Probably not. I'd wish Yes, in any form, would be able to change up more than they do, like Marillion, maybe, or even <pant pant> Springsteen, but it seems unlikely at this point: some bands like a set in stone setlist, some can mix it up night to night. Yes was always pretty orchestrated in that regard.

              Originally posted by bondegezou
              But there was barely a single song in the set that didn't sound flawed to me because Rabin wasn't interested (understandably) in performing Howe's lines and Wakeman wasn't interested (understandably) in performing Kaye's. The only solution to this conundrum would have been for a brand new line up to offer us brand new material. Their hearts were in to doing that (although their management possibly wasn't!), but it didn't happen.

              The best performances were Pomeroy doing "The Fish"; or "Awaken", where there was some sense of doing something new with it.
              I'd add "Roundabout" to that list, and man, have I been sick of hearing "Roundabout", but here at least it sounded pretty fresh and something I actually look forward to. I thoroughly enjoyed "Cinema" and "Perpetual Change" as well, "Hold On" and "Changes" never disappoint, and as I've said (many, many times) before, "Awaken" for me was a revelation, and sure, I would have loved more in that direction. But I don't find the other performances "uninterested": both have been "troopers" over the years in playing a lot of material they didn't originate (Wakeman and White together on YIND remains one of my personal great Yes highlights), but added some flair to, or at the very least played professionally enough. Given that Wakeman and Rabin have presented that kind of divide, and haven't had any overlap in original material (and Wakeman in particular has had far fewer opportunities to play any of the YesWest material), I think this was always going to be the risk, that they wouldn't have much to musically say to each other, but that didn't bother me so much. If the presentations were less than definitive, they were pretty darned good for a group of senior citizens to be performing night after night!

              Comment


              • #52
                Originally posted by Homemade Parachute
                I didn't get to see ARW perform live, so I'm going by the Apollo album and not, and I do think this is crucial here, the video, which I have little interest in (my way of saying the fake crowd noise doesn't bother me at all, but I don't have the disconnect of the visuals to really drive that home, you know?)
                Totally fair, IMO - it's definitely easier to listen to the album than to watch the video.

                Rabin-esque
                my labor of love (and obsessive research)
                rabinesque.blogspot.com

                Comment


                • #53
                  Originally posted by pianozach

                  As I recall, neither A, R, or W were really telling the same story publicly.
                  Henry's call on chances for an album were based on the best info he could gather at the time, and, as it turns out, information that was coming from the Horseses' mouths, who weren't even on the same page evidently.
                  I think they were telling the same story .

                  In early 2016, they all said they were working on an album that would likely be put out for the fall tour but by June they were saying that they weren't sure how the songs would be released and in July Rabin said they were working hard on new songs. Anderson also said in July that the songs wouldn't be recorded until 2017 and that "We'll probably release EPs." Wakeman had said that they wanted to perform together for a while and then record the new songs in 2017. Everyone said they weren't going to rush the songs. Rabin said he wasn't sure about a full album but that 1/8 of an album was done and that 1/3 was written.

                  In early 2017, Rabin and Wakwman said that they did not want to work with a record company. Rabin said four long-form songs had been written and that two would be recorded in the summer. Pomeroy, as an objective observer, said that the music so far was "fantastic." In April 2017, Rabin said 1/5 of an album was finished and that they would first be released as individual songs and that they expected to have half the album done in June. In June, Rabin said there was quite a bit of music almost ready to release but needed adjustments. In September, Rabin said there were musical pieces they were slowly putting together and thought it would "result in something pretty special if we have the patience to get through it!" A month later, Rabin is asked about the album but instead talks about the solo album he is working on and probably the first sign the ARW album/songs had hit a snag. Also in October, Wakeman says they don't want to "just put out an album."

                  In early 2018, Wakeman said there would be an EP of the best music they had, Anderson said in the summer that they were half way through an album and as far as recording and releasing it: "It's been my mantra for the last five years that "It'll happen when it happen" while Rabin said about the same time that there was "a lot more in the pipeline" after "Fragile/Touch".





                  see:
                  Last edited by yamishogun; 01-24-2022, 10:53 AM.

                  Comment


                  • #54
                    ​
                    Originally posted by Homemade Parachute

                    As in all things, your milage may vary! (Besides, isn't "completely disagree" British for "you may have a point there"?) And I can fully understand your own reaction as well. I didn't get to see ARW perform live, so I'm going by the Apollo album and not, and I do think this is crucial here, the video, which I have little interest in (my way of saying the fake crowd noise doesn't bother me at all, but I don't have the disconnect of the visuals to really drive that home, you know?)...


                    ... I'd add "Roundabout" to that list, and man, have I been sick of hearing "Roundabout", but here at least it sounded pretty fresh and something I actually look forward to. I thoroughly enjoyed "Cinema" and "Perpetual Change" as well, "Hold On" and "Changes" never disappoint, and as I've said (many, many times) before, "Awaken" for me was a revelation, and sure, I would have loved more in that direction. But I don't find the other performances "uninterested": both have been "troopers" over the years in playing a lot of material they didn't originate (Wakeman and White together on YIND remains one of my personal great Yes highlights), but added some flair to, or at the very least played professionally enough. Given that Wakeman and Rabin have presented that kind of divide, and haven't had any overlap in original material (and Wakeman in particular has had far fewer opportunities to play any of the YesWest material), I think this was always going to be the risk, that they wouldn't have much to musically say to each other, but that didn't bother me so much. If the presentations were less than definitive, they were pretty darned good for a group of senior citizens to be performing night after night!
                    You got that right, obviously even without seeing them. YesFeaturing was a success of musicality and playfulness and the will to move on. Too bad that they showed that only on stage. I saw them twice, would have liked a much different setlist the second time (somewhat different it though was), but hey, I'd rather would have seen them a third time with similar songs to get another two hours of such real Yes-fun in concert. And yes, they made Awaken really a beast. YesF wasn't absolutely perfect to me though, stronger harmony-vocals would have been good. And other than others I personally missed a really strong bass-performance, both players were good, no doubt, but I wished they had played more at the forefront. But anyway, it was joyful Yes-experience.
                    And do you know what - after your fine post you really deserve to see them soon on stage. So, come on, boys... encore... ​​​​
                    Last edited by PeterCologne; 01-25-2022, 05:50 AM.

                    Comment


                    • #55
                      Originally posted by bondegezou

                      What Rabin did to Howe's guitar lines was not a "wonderful summation of the story of Yes" and Wakeman's added noodling to the YesWest songs little better. The line up, for me, never managed to celebrate the history of Yes because it was a line up that had never existed in the history of Yes. It was thus doomed to perform incoherent versions of Yes music.

                      It was lovely to hear Anderson up there, singing with a band. It was lovely to hear Rabin live playing the YesWest material. It was lovely to hear Wakeman on those classic '70s tunes. But there was barely a single song in the set that didn't sound flawed to me because Rabin wasn't interested (understandably) in performing Howe's lines and Wakeman wasn't interested (understandably) in performing Kaye's. The only solution to this conundrum would have been for a brand new line up to offer us brand new material. Their hearts were in to doing that (although their management possibly wasn't!), but it didn't happen.
                      I think that is really the crux of it for me. R & W wanted a version of Yes where they played together - and we got one. But because there was no new music there was nothing where there styles integrated effectively. One of the 2 always sounded like the odd man out to me and the show I saw (at Hammersmith Odeon) was ultimately unsatisfying (to me). I thought they sounded 'far' better on the YesWest material and, whilst I like Rabin's take on AYAI, Awaken with neither Fishy or Howe lost all the magic imho. Jon sounded great though and it was a genuine thrill to hear him sing so well.

                      Comment


                      • #56
                        Originally posted by Homemade Parachute
                        I didn't get to see ARW perform live, so I'm going by the Apollo album and not, and I do think this is crucial here, the video, which I have little interest in (my way of saying the fake crowd noise doesn't bother me at all, but I don't have the disconnect of the visuals to really drive that home, you know?)
                        I've never seen the video. I find the album unlistenable to as it is. Clearly, it bothers others less.

                        Originally posted by Homemade Parachute
                        That's the great thing about Yes, almost every line up had never existed before. Relayer lineup: never existed before. Drama lineup: never existed. 90125 lineup: never existed. Union lineup: never existed. OYE and I think every new album tour after that, always a new lineup. Whether those lineups *work*, of course, is a different question, and answerable by each of us individually.
                        Yes has indeed had many line-up changes. Some were bigger than others. Drama swapped out two people, whereas Relayer only swapped out one. The lead singer or guitarist roles have more impact, perhaps, than who is drumming. The Relayer and OYE bands had that core of Anderson/Squire/Howe/White. The Union line-up was superset of many past line-ups.

                        ARW was a big change from any past line-up: you're not just swapping out one person (like Relayer or effectively OYE) or even two people (like Drama). ARW had 0-2 members in common with any past line-up. (The current Yes also have 0-2 members in common with many past line-ups, but they got there in stages, not a single leap... and plenty of fans don't think they're successful live!) Having a characterful guitarist and keyboardist who didn't want to mimic ex-members meant that most of what they played sounded different from the album versions.

                        All of which could've been fine, because many new line-ups tackle the issue head on, by going hard on new material. The Relayer, Drama and 90125 line-ups played sets with lots of new material, and older material that fit them well. Drama and 90125 were big changes in line-up too, but the new material gave them a coherence live.

                        ARW was a big line-up change with no new material. Anything they played could be compared to an older, and generally much-loved, version. They were offering nostalgia in the set list, but an anti-nostalgia approach to how that music was played...?

                        But, OK, even that could've been fine. Be ambitious, present the material differently. I love Dylan Howe's Subterranean project, re-interpreting a set of Bowie songs, for example. Or try Arkady Shilkoper's shows of Yes music. But ARW didn't -- for me! -- offer much of a creative vision. The YesWest songs stuck to the original material closely, but Wakeman went weedly-weedly-wee over them. The '70s songs mostly stuck to the original material, but Rabin played all the guitar lines on an electric guitar. They just didn't put in the hours to shake things up, but they equally chose not to stick to the original arrangements. "Awaken" was the only song where I felt there was an idea for how to make the piece something different.

                        Originally posted by Homemade Parachute
                        "Incoherent"'s a strong word, maybe, but I don't think they were "doomed" any more so than any new lineup of Yes is "doomed" to incoherent versions of older songs: was the Oliver/Benoit band doomed to incoherency? Or even the post-Squire band?
                        The Oliver/Benoit band is an interesting comparison, another big change in the line-up, mostly old material. They did offer a scrap of new material in "Aliens". I think if ARW had done just "Fragile/Touch", it would've been significant. The Oliver/Benoit band did two things that ARW didn't: they went all in on nostalgia, and generally stuck very closely to the original songs. They also chose an interesting set of old songs: there were some surprise returns to the set, and the songs they picked highlighted the connections they did have with the past well (e.g. doing a song like "Onward"). If ARW had gone with say "Madrigal" and "Endless Dream", exciting choices playing to their strengths, that would've made a difference.

                        But my sense of the ARW shows was laziness. Let's use a set everyone mostly knows. Let's not put much effort into re-arrangements, or learning the originals properly.

                        Comment


                        • #57
                          I think on reflection I'm glad I never went to see one of the ARW concerts. I thought the ticket prices were a bit over the top, but I wouldn't have minded the opportunity to hear Anderson performing Yes again and to hear Rabin perform YesWest material would have been interesting.

                          But unfortunately I have zero interest in hearing Rabin perform Howe material [or not] and having reviewed the much-lauded performance of Awaken, I'm somewhat relieved I didn't attend. I regard that song as one of the high watermarks of rock music - it is in more ways than one, sacred and sacrosanct. I'm not so precious as to insist it has to be Howe performing it - I thought the Todmobile version with Anderson was magnificent.

                          I get why Rabin doesn't want to cover Howe's parts and I'm not entirely without sympathy, but I just can't help thinking he really doesn't 'get' the work if he does what he does to it.

                          Comment


                          • #58
                            Originally posted by bondegezou

                            I've never seen the video. I find the album unlistenable to as it is. Clearly, it bothers others less.



                            Yes has indeed had many line-up changes. Some were bigger than others. Drama swapped out two people, whereas Relayer only swapped out one. The lead singer or guitarist roles have more impact, perhaps, than who is drumming. The Relayer and OYE bands had that core of Anderson/Squire/Howe/White. The Union line-up was superset of many past line-ups.

                            ARW was a big change from any past line-up: you're not just swapping out one person (like Relayer or effectively OYE) or even two people (like Drama). ARW had 0-2 members in common with any past line-up. (The current Yes also have 0-2 members in common with many past line-ups, but they got there in stages, not a single leap... and plenty of fans don't think they're successful live!) Having a characterful guitarist and keyboardist who didn't want to mimic ex-members meant that most of what they played sounded different from the album versions.

                            All of which could've been fine, because many new line-ups tackle the issue head on, by going hard on new material. The Relayer, Drama and 90125 line-ups played sets with lots of new material, and older material that fit them well. Drama and 90125 were big changes in line-up too, but the new material gave them a coherence live.

                            ARW was a big line-up change with no new material. Anything they played could be compared to an older, and generally much-loved, version. They were offering nostalgia in the set list, but an anti-nostalgia approach to how that music was played...?

                            But, OK, even that could've been fine. Be ambitious, present the material differently. I love Dylan Howe's Subterranean project, re-interpreting a set of Bowie songs, for example. Or try Arkady Shilkoper's shows of Yes music. But ARW didn't -- for me! -- offer much of a creative vision. The YesWest songs stuck to the original material closely, but Wakeman went weedly-weedly-wee over them. The '70s songs mostly stuck to the original material, but Rabin played all the guitar lines on an electric guitar. They just didn't put in the hours to shake things up, but they equally chose not to stick to the original arrangements. "Awaken" was the only song where I felt there was an idea for how to make the piece something different.



                            The Oliver/Benoit band is an interesting comparison, another big change in the line-up, mostly old material. They did offer a scrap of new material in "Aliens". I think if ARW had done just "Fragile/Touch", it would've been significant. The Oliver/Benoit band did two things that ARW didn't: they went all in on nostalgia, and generally stuck very closely to the original songs. They also chose an interesting set of old songs: there were some surprise returns to the set, and the songs they picked highlighted the connections they did have with the past well (e.g. doing a song like "Onward"). If ARW had gone with say "Madrigal" and "Endless Dream", exciting choices playing to their strengths, that would've made a difference.

                            But my sense of the ARW shows was laziness. Let's use a set everyone mostly knows. Let's not put much effort into re-arrangements, or learning the originals properly.
                            And also there expectations were raised. Rabin talked of "Shoot High Aim Low" being 'almost a certainty" at some point before the first tour and either Wakeman or Rabin or both talked about so much material being rehearsed they could fill a six hours show. To then come out with a setlist that, sans two songs, mimiced the Union tour, was slightly disappointing. The overall theme here: over-promising and under-delivering.

                            Comment


                            • #59
                              Originally posted by Chris2210
                              I think on reflection I'm glad I never went to see one of the ARW concerts. I thought the ticket prices were a bit over the top, but I wouldn't have minded the opportunity to hear Anderson performing Yes again and to hear Rabin perform YesWest material would have been interesting.

                              But unfortunately I have zero interest in hearing Rabin perform Howe material [or not] and having reviewed the much-lauded performance of Awaken, I'm somewhat relieved I didn't attend. I regard that song as one of the high watermarks of rock music - it is in more ways than one, sacred and sacrosanct. I'm not so precious as to insist it has to be Howe performing it - I thought the Todmobile version with Anderson was magnificent.

                              I get why Rabin doesn't want to cover Howe's parts and I'm not entirely without sympathy, but I just can't help thinking he really doesn't 'get' the work if he does what he does to it.
                              I saw one show. It was an experience... 🤔

                              To be fair, I don't recall the ticket prices being massively OTT.

                              Comment


                              • #60
                                Bit more than Yes, but not untoward...

                                Click image for larger version

Name:	IMG_20220125_181903.jpg
Views:	446
Size:	3.32 MB
ID:	5846

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X
                                😀
                                🥰
                                🤢
                                😎
                                😡
                                👍
                                👎