It's interesting that on the same website, we have a thread that can ask the (completely legitimate) question of whether Yes is unknown to most people today and also a thread in which people posit the idea that there may be a hot young guitarist out there who would see Yes as the vehicle to get him (her) the exposure to build a great career....
But getting to the core question of an understudy/heir apparent for Steve, I'm sure there are plenty of guitarists out there that have the chops to play what Steve plays but do they have the willingness to play the parts so as to sound like Steve? No one would deny that Trevor Rabin had great chops, but he typically did not play Steve's parts in a way that sounded anything like Steve. Not that I fault him for this...he did not sign up to be Steve's replacement or even be in a band called Yes. He signed up to be in a new band called Cinema that just happened to feature the old Yes rhythm section and after he turned his head for a second then looked back again, he was in Yes.
In any event, I'll espouse what seems likely to be a minority opinion, since the prevailing trend in this thread is (naturally, given the thread's title), who can step up and take Steve's place to keep Yes going? My answer to that is, no one. To me, the core of classic Yes was always Anderson, Howe, Squire and White. They were the heart of Yes because their hearts were in Yes (to steal a line from the old Yes Magazine). And the core of the Yes catalog is the phenomenal music they produced in the 1970s. That run of albums from The Yes Album through Going for the One, there is just nothing like it. And that is not in anyway to diminish or disregard other phases of the band's career, whether that be the Peter Banks days, YesWest, ABWH, or the more recent years. It's simply that the 70s material is what established them as a legend and the greatest progressive rock band of all time. It's like Fleetwood Mac. They've had many lineups and many sounds, but it is the band that produced Fleetwood Mac through Tango in the Night that will live as the real Mac in the world's eyes.
And so it is with Yes, at least for me. Once Steve is gone, that's the end of Yes, unless Anderson were to return or form a new Yes. He's the only surviving founder who is not retired or would have any interest in being in an ongoing band. It's already been pointed out that he's older than Steve so that would be unlikely, but something unexpected could happen to Steve tomorrow (God forbid) and Jon could call his band Yes. It'd be another really awkward situation, but hey, par for the course for Yes.
The naive, idealistic part of me wishes that in the wake of Alan's death and the realization that the bell eventually tolls for us all, Steve would have invited Anderson back and they would have retooled the tour to be not only the 50th anniversary of CTTE but also a farewell tour. Davidson would remain in the band and provide harmony vocals and sing lead on anything Anderson didn't want to sing lead on (Drama, etc.). And the tour would not necessarily have been limited to a certain number of dates. They could simply continue touring over a period of years, much as they did from 1998 though 2004, and then brought it to a close while they were still performing at a level to do honor the the Yes name and legacy. Once that period ends, Yes ends. Anyone who wants to continue can continue, but call it something else.
Please don't hate on me for this. It's just my opinion and it comes from a place of wanting Yes to be neither a band of ever-diminishing stature nor a band composed of people who had nothing to do with the band's heyday.
But getting to the core question of an understudy/heir apparent for Steve, I'm sure there are plenty of guitarists out there that have the chops to play what Steve plays but do they have the willingness to play the parts so as to sound like Steve? No one would deny that Trevor Rabin had great chops, but he typically did not play Steve's parts in a way that sounded anything like Steve. Not that I fault him for this...he did not sign up to be Steve's replacement or even be in a band called Yes. He signed up to be in a new band called Cinema that just happened to feature the old Yes rhythm section and after he turned his head for a second then looked back again, he was in Yes.
In any event, I'll espouse what seems likely to be a minority opinion, since the prevailing trend in this thread is (naturally, given the thread's title), who can step up and take Steve's place to keep Yes going? My answer to that is, no one. To me, the core of classic Yes was always Anderson, Howe, Squire and White. They were the heart of Yes because their hearts were in Yes (to steal a line from the old Yes Magazine). And the core of the Yes catalog is the phenomenal music they produced in the 1970s. That run of albums from The Yes Album through Going for the One, there is just nothing like it. And that is not in anyway to diminish or disregard other phases of the band's career, whether that be the Peter Banks days, YesWest, ABWH, or the more recent years. It's simply that the 70s material is what established them as a legend and the greatest progressive rock band of all time. It's like Fleetwood Mac. They've had many lineups and many sounds, but it is the band that produced Fleetwood Mac through Tango in the Night that will live as the real Mac in the world's eyes.
And so it is with Yes, at least for me. Once Steve is gone, that's the end of Yes, unless Anderson were to return or form a new Yes. He's the only surviving founder who is not retired or would have any interest in being in an ongoing band. It's already been pointed out that he's older than Steve so that would be unlikely, but something unexpected could happen to Steve tomorrow (God forbid) and Jon could call his band Yes. It'd be another really awkward situation, but hey, par for the course for Yes.
The naive, idealistic part of me wishes that in the wake of Alan's death and the realization that the bell eventually tolls for us all, Steve would have invited Anderson back and they would have retooled the tour to be not only the 50th anniversary of CTTE but also a farewell tour. Davidson would remain in the band and provide harmony vocals and sing lead on anything Anderson didn't want to sing lead on (Drama, etc.). And the tour would not necessarily have been limited to a certain number of dates. They could simply continue touring over a period of years, much as they did from 1998 though 2004, and then brought it to a close while they were still performing at a level to do honor the the Yes name and legacy. Once that period ends, Yes ends. Anyone who wants to continue can continue, but call it something else.
Please don't hate on me for this. It's just my opinion and it comes from a place of wanting Yes to be neither a band of ever-diminishing stature nor a band composed of people who had nothing to do with the band's heyday.
Comment