Are Yes relatively unknown to most people these days?

[luna65]

Given that anyone of any age can listen to just about anything in the history of popular music at any time here and now in the 21st Century, it really depends. It depends on one's relationship to music, for one thing. The person for whom music is wallpaper and doesn't really pay attention to bands/artists, trends, genres or anything like that? Yeah, they probably have no idea who Yes is. But this guy, he wrote a listicle for his blog and made an assertion which I don't believe is true at all. So...

By contrast, the same group have heard of Genesis & Pink Floyd - more than annoying.

I'm not annoyed by that at all, to be honest.

[Yorkshire Square]

By contrast, the same group have heard of Genesis & Pink Floyd - more than annoying.

From a commercial perspective, Genesis and Floyd are in a totally different league from Yes.

[Esthe]

Given that anyone of any age can listen to just about anything in the history of popular music at any time in the 21st Century, it really depends. It depends on one's relationship to music, for one thing. The person for whom music is wallpaper and doesn't really pay attention to bands/artists, trends, genres or anything like that? Yeah, they probably have no idea who Yes is.

Yes aren’t really trendy though.

[Ash Armstrong]

And: does it matter?
It doesn't to me, but that's just me.

[luna65]

Yes aren’t really trendy though.

And that is my point.

[Soundchaser413]

They’re pretty mainstream to me.

Who is? Yes?

[Soundchaser413]

I would agree they aren't well known anymore, especially by casual music fans. It's been decades since they have had a commercial hit and airplay on terrestrial radio stations and music TV channels. They never gained and maintained the widespread lasting recognition like that of The Beatles, Rolling Stones, The Who, U2, Pink Floyd, etc. Some younger, casual music fans may have heard OOALH and Roundabout, but probably wouldn't be able to name who the band was. Also, people consume music a lot differently now than they did in Yes' heyday.

The Who aren't really that well known these days either. They haven't had a hit since the 80's so I'm not sure why they would get a pass and not Yes although I agree they are more well known these days than Yes.

From a commercial perspective, Genesis and Floyd are in a totally different league from Yes.

I would add Rush to that list as well.

Overall, I think Yes these days are about more or less equal in popularity to the following bands (some on here may agree or disagree and that's ok):


Kansas
Jethro Tull
Deep Purple
Supertramp
Porcupine Tree
King Crimson
Emerson, Lake & Palmer (ok a bit more well known than ELP but maybe not by a whole lot)
The Moody Blues
Asia
Genesis (Steve Hackett and PG era only)
Dream Theater
Opeth
The Kinks (not a prog band obviously but I think their popularity level is more or less equal)

A bit less popular than(but maybe not a whole lot):

The Who
Rush

Others I'm sure.

[josuev80]

The Who aren't really that well known these days either. They haven't had a hit since the 80's so I'm not sure why they would get a pass and not Yes although I agree they are more well known these days than Yes..

The Who are still doing arena tours so they are lot more relevant than Yes is. It can't be just diehard The Who fans attending those shows.

[Bill M]

I think they would redeem a bit of that when it comes to influence on musicians.

For example, Fleetwood Mac is probably a more recognizable name than YES. But if I was going to ask a bunch of musicians who they were influenced by, I would expect to hear the name YES come up much more than Fleetwood Mac.

[Esthe]

Who is? Yes?

Yes.

[michelforest]

It depends on the age group, I guess. For people of my generation (I'm 55) who don't follow the band closely, Yes is a group from their youth and they're probably completely unaware of what they're up to nowadays, the same way I have no clue if bands like Jethro Tull or Styx are still around (and don't care at all. I assume they still perform in casinos or midsize theaters to the diehards, like Yes). As a long time Yes fan, I am still curious to know what's going on, but I have no interest whatsoever in what Yes is doing right now, I last saw them in 2004 and that's it for me.

I'm a college teacher and my students are young adults (17-20 years old.) Most of them have never heard of Yes. That's pretty normal. When I was 18, I didn't care about the music of my parents or grand-parents. The few of them who know the name "Yes" probably think of an old LP they've seen in their grandfather's collection.

[Soundchaser413]

It depends on the age group, I guess. For people of my generation (I'm 55) who don't follow the band closely, Yes is a group from their youth and they're probably completely unaware of what they're up to nowadays, the same way I have no clue if bands like Jethro Tull or Styx are still around (and don't care at all. I assume they still perform in casinos or midsize theaters to the diehards, like Yes). As a long time Yes fan, I am still curious to know what's going on, but I have no interest whatsoever in what Yes is doing right now, I last saw them in 2004 and that's it for me.

I'm a college teacher and my students are young adults (17-20 years old.) Most of them have never heard of Yes. That's pretty normal. When I was 18, I didn't care about the music of my parents or grand-parents. The few of them who know the name "Yes" probably think of an old LP they've seen in their grandfather's collection.

Did you ask your students if they have heard of Yes? Otherwise, I'm wondering how you would know.

Why do you not care about JT or Styx? They are good bands too and I imagine Yes fans would like them. What other bands do you like then? Genesis? Rush? Kansas? Pink Floyd? Just curious. No big deal.

[Soundchaser413]

Yes.

There's a joke here somewhere.

[Soundchaser413]

The Who are still doing arena tours so they are lot more relevant than Yes is. It can't be just diehard The Who fans attending those shows.

Well, I'm not really sure but I think maybe the fact that they started to finally release some albums has something to do with it. I think their long time fans want to hear the newer material otherwise they wouldn't go to their shows. The Who's popularity started to die out just like Yes's did probably sometime in the 90's but probably not as much as Yes. Apparently the Who are moderately relevant again. For some reason Yes kind of dropped the ball and don't have the staying power they used to. It won't happen but if Yes got Rick and Jon A back in the band a lot more people would show up at their shows. I can pretty much guranatee that.

[Soundwaveseeker]

So how much of what you said in your first couple of sentences would apply to Genesis, Rush, Pink Floyd, King Crimson and Jethro Tull (or any other high profile prog related bands)?

I would say the opposite is true of Rush, who seem to be more popular in the 2000's to now than in high school in the 80's. Before that, they were seen as a somewhat popular cult group who were only cool to those perceived as music nerds, headbangers or the stoner crowd. King Crimson also enjoys heightened popularity now and more critical acceptance than at any time I've noticed. Once some of these groups have passed into 'classic rock' status, some go up but most go down.

Genesis is often still seen as Phil Collins and they may still be known a little, though the times where people know that 'Mike' is the guy from 'Mike & The Mechanics' is fading fast, let alone a time where people know Peter Gabriel was in Genesis if they even know who Peter Gabriel is at all. Genesis is still a top influencer for aspiring prog bands - they pretty much created the neo-prog sub-genre.

Floyd has stood the test of time. They are very much in the forefront. I can't tell you how many times I've seen teenage girls on the boardwalk at the beach wearing Dark Side Of The Moon shirts. Are they familiar with the album? Or is that triangle with the rainbow beaming through it just a cool look? The mystique of the image of Pink Floyd may actually outlive the music itself at some point, Floyd reduced to an image of a prism on a black background. I'm not sure.

Jethro Tull, very actively popular in the 70's, has gone back down to cult status. Even during their peak, I'm sure many people as you know probably thought Jethro Tull was a solo artist and the name of the dude with the beard that played a flute. You would think Tull could have been more in the forefront these days, as people like 'rootsier' music with a cynical/intellectual lyrical bent, but they didn't sustain themselves with additional hits throughout the 80's and beyond. Did the name hold them back? Ian Anderson tried to be known as a solo entity and 'Ian Anderson plays the music of Jethro Tull', but that pushed him back further so now it's Tull again.

So, man on the street (or girl on the beach with DSOTM T-shirt) would probably know Floyd, possibly Rush and an ok possibly of knowing about Genesis with Phil Collins but not 100% on that one. Yes, Crimson and Tull, I would say not. Others such as ELP, Camel, Van Der Graaf Generator and Gentle Giant, definitely not. Kansas are known for two hits, but the average person on the street may think they're a country-rock group like America or an AOR band like Journey or Boston.

More 'classic rock' inclined may have heard of Tull and more music-savvy of today may have heard of Crimson along with their Steven Wilson and Pineapple Thief.
But not an average Joe. Even the name Led Zeppelin has lost some of its hold on the public conscience. Times move on.