2000-2008: What Went WRONG For "Classic YES"?

[Gilly Goodness]

I felt then that the symphonic project was worth exploring further.

....and eventually you got your wish. Howe and Paul K Joyce explorin' new symphonic territory within the context of song-based YES music.

[Ash Armstrong]

I can remember groaning inwardly, and very likely outwardly too, when it was announced in 2002 that Rick was returning. I felt then that the symphonic project was worth exploring further.

[Soundwaveseeker]

Not sure what insight or what else to add to what you guys here have already said about the 2004-2008 period. I also look at it as the end of the era that began with Keys To Ascension and ended with the Yes 35 EP and Wakeman's final departure. 1995-2004. I suppose the group just hit a brick wall and couldn't really get around it. As Jon said in one interview, 'life got in the way'. It was bound to happen, Yes was never a stable collection of ol' mates with an all-for-one mantra. After a while, the old differences and a few grudges might resurface, personality differences may become more heightened and where at one time the music could smooth it all out, it may have become too difficult to sustain it anymore. Jon's health and other factors were the brick wall that would derail Yes for quite a while.

I remember 2002 when Rick came back, the tour and the vibe then. At the time I remember thinking 'cool! Rick's back, The orchestral experiment is over, and - though I loved magnification & tour - thought 'Now we can get back to some cool keyboards & synths and stuff!'. Back to the 5-man format. But by 2004, I was left thinking, 'Ok, where's the new album? They got Rick! Let's go!'. Unfortunately, the last 'Classic Yes' reformation did not bear fruit in the studio save for an EP with 3 solo tracks and two remakes. They had the makings of 'Fragile II' with that, but dropped the ball. It dawned on me that having a 'Classic Yes' is a mixed thing. After Rick bailed following Keys, Yes entered a kind of third epoch where the drive forward resulted in several new albums of varying quality to add to the catalogue. This was done without Wakeman. But any time a 'Classic Yes' regroups, it seems that the band is less stable. Sometimes it takes the new blood to invigorate the band towards new creativity and resilience. As much as I love Rick Wakeman an Jon and classic lineups of the past, I learned to put my money on the odd-numbered lineups. Those were the ones giving me new albums, which is where a lot of my Yes heart lies. As much as I love seeing Yes live, with or without the Tales/GFTO/Keys configuration, I know what Roundabout and Starship Trooper sound like live - last two songs in the set, you can't miss it. That said, I'd give no complaint if Jon or Rick returned. It's just that one could be wary of 'Classic Yes' - it's no longer sustainable to itself.

I'm not sure how bands without lineup changes do it, I guess they can count themselves lucky that they can function pretty well when 'life gets in the way'. Marillion have had the same lineup since 1989, and that's with releasing albums fairly frequently, though they have slowed down a bit in recent years. But back to the era 2004-2008, the in-between 'lost' Yes era - that was a long wait for a studio album,. Then Jon was out and it was another long wait till we got to Fly From Here. But I never got the vibe that they were done, just that they were in a sort of weird hibernation mode.

But during that era we did get some fine solo and Yes-related releases: The Syn, Circa, Steve Howe's Remedy and a steady stream of solo albums, White, Asia, Icon, Patrick Moraz reissues, Bruford's Summerfold/Winterfold reissues, Anderson/Wakeman Living Tree, and lots of Billy Sherwood albums. I wasn't starving for Yes music in a solo context, just for Yes as a collective.

[Ash Armstrong]

Read the whole DBAR. Can't get the image of Jon and Chris havin' make-up sex before recordin' 90125. Don't ask who is top or who is bottom.

Ew!

[Gilly Goodness]

Read the whole DBAR. Can't get the image of Jon and Chris havin' make-up sex before recordin' 90125. Don't ask who is top or who is bottom.

[josuev80]

... I also feel that attempts to kind of create a classic lineup for Yes are somewhat artificial. A lot of people use the Keys to Ascension lineup as a template, but that lineup had to that point actually only appeared on two studio albums together as a fivesome- Tales from the Topographic Oceans and Tormato. The idea that they were "the classic lineup" is sort of mixture of fan creation and marketing.
.

You forgot about GFTO. Had a few good songs on it.

[downbyariver]

You know, you just look at Alex and Geddy and you wonder why these other guys can't or won't ensure the health of their band relationships.

I think almost every human being has a current or former spouse, lover, friend, or relative who they would not want to spend large chunks of the year traveling with (touring) and working on collaborative projects with (new albums) on an indefinite basis, every year, rinse and repeat.

In a way, that can be amplified by band members not necessarily having a lot in common to begin with and not (Typically) having having the intimate relationship of a lover or a spouse. Instead of becoming friends over time due to some sort of similarity of interests or complementarity of personality, bands often add new members after hearing a single try-out that came about because someone answered an ad in a newspaper or the record label recommended them. And, of course, generally bandmates don't have a sexual history with each other and the possibility of sexual healing or makeup sex to sort of help them reconcile or help a reconciliation stick. There are no vows involved or the welfare of children to consider.

In a way, what surprises me is not that some bands can't keep the same lineup together for 30, 40, or 50 years or more, but that there are some bands that can.

In any event, Yes is one of those bands that has never really been defined as a certain group of members and only those members anyway. They switched guitarists after their second album, keyboardists after their third album, and drummers after their fifth album- which meant the majority of the band had turned over in the three years since their first album came out. Then they switched keyboardists again after their sixth album and a third time after their seventh album (Admittedly, that was the first returning member of the band after having previously been ousted, but it's still a lineup change).

After their ninth album, they switched lead singers and keyboardists, the latter for the fourth time (With three actual keyboardists involved). After their 10th album, they switched lead singers, lead guitarists, and keyboardists (Admittedly, the switch in lead singers and keyboardists brought back people who'd previously been in and then left the band).

I could go on through all 21 albums (By my count), but I think we've established that Yes was never about 5 guys in particular (I think the band has had around 20 members over the years). It always took the football franchise approach where the roster changes gradually over time, but it's still your favorite team. Frankly, I strongly prefer that to situations where a band is considered to only be one possible lineup, because the one lineup bands go away at some point and never return, whereas the franchise bands might continue to produce new music for many decades exceeding the lifespans of the original members, at least in theory. Frankly, shaking up a lineup by someone leaving a band can sometimes make the next album better by adding not only a fresh musical voice (Either literally, as in a vocalist, or figuratively, as in a style of playing an instrument), but also by creating all sorts of new combinations in the collaborations between the new person (or people) and the legacy members.

I also feel that attempts to kind of create a classic lineup for Yes are somewhat artificial. A lot of people use the Keys to Ascension lineup as a template, but that lineup had to that point actually only appeared on three studio albums together as a fivesome- Tales from the Topographic Oceans, Going for the One, andTormato. The idea that they were "the classic lineup" is sort of mixture of fan creation and marketing.

I think the Yes lineup with the longest consecutive streak of years together is actually the current lineup of Howe, White, Downes, Davison, and Sherwood, if you don't count the addition of touring drummers to supplement White as lineup changes. The "YesWest" lineup of Anderson, Squire, Rabin, Kaye, and White has them beat if you count the Union-era with eight people on stage in the calculations because those five were all on stage, despite having three other band members during that spell and a cast of thousands for the studio album.

[luna65]

You know, you just look at Alex and Geddy and you wonder why these other guys can't or won't ensure the health of their band relationships.

So many reasons! But ego is certainly a big factor. Plus, those two grew up together and have always led with their regard for each other, so to speak. Like, that was the most important thing. Whereas in a lot of bands, even with people who are related and/or grew up together, other things are more important to them and so therefore the foundation will crack eventually.

[Gilly Goodness]

But the soap opera of it all is really part of the experience of the artist, to me. I do like to wonder about it and chat it up with you folks for sure.

"Our Reason To Be Here"

[Dantalion Rides Again]

I hear the 90s as more of a gradual build that results in Magnification, as opposed to it being an anomoly in that period. I definitely don't regard their 90s work as garbage, for me it's as good a return to form as I feel we could have expected (maybe even going back to include ABWH & Union, which had their own sort of restorative elements).

I haven't really been keen on the newer material and I'm a 90s defender, so I actually appreciate hearing the opposite perspective. I'm trying to appreciate these new albums so it helps to know someone prefers them to material I tend to defend, if that makes any sense at all.

I think it's fair to say that it's a struggle to fully understand the relationships in the bands we love. The personnel themselves have their own perceptions and mis-perceptions of it all themselves, so how could we ever know?

Sometimes I do wonder if they were reasonably close to working it out and resolving their splintered relationships, or if maybe the opposite were true and we don't know the half of the interpersonal suffering or abuse that went on. As a Floyd fan, a Beatles fan, a Yes fan, Van Halen fan, Kiss fan, Fleetwood Mac ... list goes on of course, and that's just top-of-my-head bands I dig. It's a people thing, marriages don't last, people quit jobs, there is such a thing as former friends.

The idealist in me likes speculating that maybe there was missed opportunity / maybe things could have been worked out. The realist side of me doesn't envy the difficult decision of dissolving such relationships that mean so much to so many, and so I'm in support of the boundary setting & healthy workplace side of things. You know, you just look at Alex and Geddy and you wonder why these other guys can't or won't ensure the health of their band relationships.

But the soap opera of it all is really part of the experience of the artist, to me. I do like to wonder about it and chat it up with you folks for sure.

[Frumious B]

I look at that era of the band as spanning KTA to the end of the 2004 tour. So we got a Yes that included Anderson, Howe, Squire and White recording and touring with no long breaks in activity for close to nine years with five albums and an EP worth of studio material and tons of live shows. How awesome is that? And Magnification was a very worthy finale IMHO. In retrospect 2004 marked the end of the real Yes. I think they were just out of gas. Anderson, Howe and Squire would never do anything together again.

If Anderson hadn’t nearly died maybe they could have gotten it going again in 2008. Who knows? Instead we got what we got with Benoit, a couple of decent, listenable releases in the form of Fly From Here and From A Page, and this has evolved over the last 13-14 years into a thoroughly mediocre band with that cool as heck Roger Dean logo flying overhead and an amazing guitar player.

[Mr. Holland]

maybe egos got too much leading to the breakup- maybe a disagreement over a desire to do more new material by some? Yes has hardly ever been stable and it was hardly a surprise, I guess they used Jon's asthma problem as a way of moving forward without him, but I feel they would never have made new material if Anderson had stuck around, I think there must have been massive issues behind the scenes by 2008.

Read my two posts....LOL...

[soundchaser09]

maybe egos got too much leading to the breakup- maybe a disagreement over a desire to do more new material by some? Yes has hardly ever been stable and it was hardly a surprise, I guess they used Jon's asthma problem as a way of moving forward without him, but I feel they would never have made new material if Anderson had stuck around, I think there must have been massive issues behind the scenes by 2008.

[Ash Armstrong]

"So, so you think you can tell Heaven from hell?
Blue skies from pain?
Can you tell a green field
From a cold steel rail?
A smile from a veil?
Do you think you can tell?
Did they get you to trade
Your heroes for ghosts?
Hot ashes for trees?
Hot air for a cool breeze?
Cold comfort for change?
Did you exchange
A walk-on part in the war
For a leading role in a cage?
How I wish, how I wish you were here
We're just two lost souls
Swimming in a fish bowl
Year after year
Running over the same old ground
What have we found?
The same old fears
Wish you were here."

Running over the same old ground all over again will most likely result in the same kind of acrimony and blame-gaming that came to the fore in the ARW thread.

[Mr. Holland]

To add to the above: this is what Steve said in a 2012 interview about those songs Jon brought to them and more or less about burnt bridges:

Jon Anderson said he was working on new long-form music for Yes in 2008 that the band didn’t take an interest in. What can you tell me about those songs?

I don’t know professionally what is right to say here. What Jon did was drip-feed us a few songs and we basically turned him down and said “No, we don’t want to do those.” Then there was another time for another song and we said “No, no, no.” He then presented one other song and we said “No, no, not that one either.” We didn’t find a song we leapt on that made us feel we must rush around and suddenly record. We didn’t hear anything we thought had enough material to make us start moving. When you listen to a Yes album, you expected grounded, developed, thought-about lyrics. That’s how we look at it. We found the lyrical content of these songs to be rather ad-libbed. I don’t want to deride Jon, because this is his music. I don’t want you to think I am saying it was bad music. All I’m saying is we didn’t pick up on any of the songs or notice that there was a trilogy of songs coming at us that was part of some epic. We definitely didn’t see them like that. We saw them as demos of songs that were very loose and we didn’t know where they were going. It’s not dissimilar to when we were preparing Drama, when we thought Jon and Rick were going to come to the party, which of course they didn’t do. Jon eventually came down and played us his songs and we said “We can’t relate to that.” So, this is another version of that, really. I wish Jon luck with his music. I seriously and truthfully feel that way. But I’m not sure our mutual desire to achieve the same thing exists anymore. I think we burned it out a bit. We crossed paths and we’re not together anymore. I think there has to be some element of moving on."