Will YES survive the eventual retirement of Alan White and Steve Howe?

[Ash Armstrong]

There may even be one or two British musicians who'd like to have a go reinventing the music of Yes for a new era. Who knows how it will go in years and decades to come, long after I've shuffled off this mortal coil and joined the choir invisible...

[downbyariver]

Johnny Bruhns and Jimmy Haun, can sound just like Steve live, and are both class acts. Not sure about Jimmy, but Johnny has been chomping at the bit for years to join YES.

I agree. That raises a question, though:

Lets say you're Downes, Sherwood, and Davison and the mantle gets passed to you when Howe and White retire (That isnt guaranteed, but hopefully Howe and White would pass Yes on to them when they are done with it.). You're all at least in your 50s and 60s at that point (I think they all are now- Davison might be barely under 50, and he's the youngest).

Do you bring on board your friends who are also in their 50s and 60s if they have no name value except to the diehards, because you know they can do the music well live and fit in back stage, or do you proactively look to get younger when filling the open positions? If you bring in Haun, you know the next tour will sound fine, but you have a band that is pretty old with no apparent next generation, and with the same type of issues the band faces today (i.e. slowing tempos, diminishing physical skills, etc.) on the horizon for people who are not the legends their predecessors were, and maybe are already past their creative peaks the second they are brought in.

If you hire a 30 year old virtuso guitarist, you're not as sure about the next tour and how he'll do on the tricky material, but you've maybe got someone in his physical and creative prime who can be a spark in a whole lot of ways, help hide your own weak spots as you get older, and provide a potential path to succession (i.e. If he works out, he may be one of the guys you pass the band on to in 15 or 20 years).

I often get the feeling- and I'm just guessing- that Steve Howe and Alan White are mainly thinking about things from the angle of who can play the music on the next tour the way they want it played as opposed to who can keep the band going really long term. They may not want it around past themselves, or may view those details as something best left to the people who are left when the time comes. If Davison and Sherwood are the old-timers, they will have the opportunity to think about things in terms of not just the next tour or the next album, but the next 20 years of tours and albums- if they are any more interested in that than the other guys are or (by then) were.

I would say that Davison, Sherwood, and Downes (If he's still active) could split the difference and hire both a guitarist their age as Howe's immediate replacement, and a 30 year old multi-instrumentalist to do some select parts, some rhythm guitar, some harmony vocals, and sort of be the heir apparent to Haun, *but* the band is more likely to try to cut costs or hold costs steady until they know what their post-Howe-White income streams look like, not expand the band to 6 or 7 members. So, they probably would have to choose.

The ideal thing would be for the band to bring on that 20 or 30 something multi-instrumentalist *now* while they can (probably) afford a slightly bigger band (and, lets face it, would even benefit in the near term from someone who can really rock and bolster harmonies), but Steve has shown no interest in that. In fact, when Billy Sherwood kind of was that guy in the 90s, the two didn't always get along (He seems more comfortable with Sherwood the bass player filling a needed position that poses no imagined or real threat to Steve being the one true non-bass guitarist for as long as he wants to be. ).

So, that poses a tough choice down to the guys who inherit the group about which way to go if they do get the group. That also kind of assumes they get a choice and it isn't like "Steve Howe had emergency back surgery yesterday. The tour starts in a week.", because if that happens, the only choice for that tour is Haun, Bruhns, or a similar player, and then even though that person is technically a touring musician and not a band member, it becomes hard to tell your friend to take a hike a year later after he's been playing with the band already to rave reviews if Howe officially retires. Imagine then trying to replace White with someone other than Schellen.

The decision might also be a bit out of their hands if someone prominent like Carl Palmer who promoters, record label executives, and fans would view as a huge legendary "add" announces his availability at a time when people retire and that star power gives you a chance to keep going at the same level of star power.

[bondegezou]

I think Billy Sherwood and Jon D said that when the time comes, they'll do everything they can to keep Yes going as Chris wanted, so they probably do an album/tour and see if people show up at the shows

Agree, but I suspect they won't be given the rights to call what they're doing "Yes". My guess -- and who knows, we're all just speculating -- would be that there's some kind of name agreed with Howe/White. So it's not "Yes", but it's "The Yes Project" or something.

[bondegezou]

The decision might also be a bit out of their hands if someone prominentslike Carl Palmer who promoters, labels, and fans would view as a huge legendary add announces his availability at a time when people retire and that star power gives you a chance to keep going at the same level of star power.

I remain uncertain about the sense in bands with entirely new line-ups of youngsters. However, some are giving the idea a good go, like Gong and Tangerine Dream. I do like the idea of the remaining big names from the old times getting together. I think Carl Palmer, Steve Howe, Geoff Downes and Steve Hackett should just go out and tour together!

[yamishogun]

I can't see Trevor jumping back in although it would be fun to see how he sounds with JD

It's hard to see Rabin joining with one reason being the ages of the two he would also want in, Anderson and Wakeman. It seems a lot more likely that ARW will regroup, which as we have been informed by someone who should know, there is still a pulse!

[PeterCologne]

I think Billy Sherwood and Jon D said that when the time comes, they'll do everything they can to keep Yes going as Chris wanted, so they probably do an album/tour and see if people show up at the shows

Didn't Rick Wakeman say, that Chris did not explicitely expressed, that he wanted Yes to carry on...? I did read something like this somewhere.

[Ash Armstrong]

Didn't Rick Wakeman say, that Chris did not explicitely expressed, that he wanted Yes to carry on...? I did read something like this somewhere.

Who knows what was said, or when, or to whom? It's hearsay, and shouldn't be taken to be some kind of binding contract, or believed to be such by anyone. Chris may have expressed a wish for the band to continue, to complete an album, to undertake a tour, who knows? It's a stretch to infer, from such hearsay, that he wished Yes to continue to exist 'forever', not to say absurd.
The music, by which I mean primarily but not exclusively the groundbreaking and genuinely progressive music from the 1970s, will endure, be played, listened to, talked about, enjoyed, reimagined, for decades to come, long after we're all dust, but it won't be Yes doing that.
For me that's the crucial thing, the legacy if you will: the music, the compositions, not the band as such.

[PeterCologne]

Who knows what was said, or when, or to whom? It's hearsay, and shouldn't be taken to be some kind of binding contract, or believed to be such by anyone. Chris may have expressed a wish for the band to continue, to complete an album, to undertake a tour, who knows? It's a stretch to infer, from such hearsay, that he wished Yes to continue to exist 'forever', not to say absurd.
The music, by which I mean primarily but not exclusively the groundbreaking and genuinely progressive music from the 1970s, will endure, be played, listened to, talked about, enjoyed, reimagined, for decades to come, long after we're all dust, but it won't be Yes doing that.
For me that's the crucial thing, the legacy if you will: the music, the compositions, not the band as such.

Yes, and to add some personal note: Even if the perpetual change worked for Yes more or less for four decades, till the beginning of this century, I think it is just not right to make poeple believe that almost anyone can put the Yes-logo on its albums and on tour-posters and be Yes (for my taste to some extend it just already went into that direction). It's not so easy to be Yes.

[bondegezou]

dbar, if you Comment rather than Quote, I can't then quote or comment on your reply, it appears.

[RelayerI]

This is going to sound like heresy, but bear in mind Steve's at least my joint favourite member of the band ever, and Alan's my favourite drummer.

Alan can't play much any more and Steve's writing on Quest is all the worst songs. The question should be asked about that generation continuing.

I'd certainly be extremely happy with Haun (or Bruhns), give the stool to Jay and reinstate Oliver (or Brislin). You'd have a band with the chops to do justice to the old material AND get some decent new material.

The glory days are gone and they're not coming back, but these guys could take Yes into the 2030's.

Edit - I'd certainly be happy with some of the older guys contributing or guesting in the studio if they wanted to, away from the rigours of touring and pandemics.

[PeterCologne]

This is going to sound like heresy, but bear in mind Steve's at least my joint favourite member of the band ever, and Alan's my favourite drummer.

Alan can't play much any more and Steve's writing on Quest is all the worst songs. The question should be asked about that generation continuing.

I'd certainly be extremely happy with Haun (or Bruhns), give the stool to Jay and reinstate Oliver (or Brislin). You'd have a band with the chops to do justice to the old material AND get some decent new material.

The glory days are gone and they're not coming back, but these guys could take Yes into the 2030's.

Edit - I'd certainly be happy with some of the older guys contributing or guesting in the studio if they wanted to, away from the rigours of touring and pandemics.

Are you sure, that Haun or Bruhn are at least as good as composers, arrangers, producers and stuff as Steve Howe is now - let alone better? I would be interested in hearing music done by them that is at least as good as Yes' medium-good music? I mean we are talking about the great Steve Howe here, as we are talking in the case of the current singer being a substitute for the great Jon Anderson

I don't see that anyone of them can run even a Yes that would be as good as Howe-Yes-music of the 90s, let's say like Keys or The Ladder.

[downbyariver]

Henry writes:

dbar, if you Comment rather than Quote, I can't then quote or comment on your reply, it appears.

I am just now seeing the distinction. I hadn't realized that "commenting" placed something directly below what it replies to instead of at the end of the thread (As in the old forum), and in quasi-quotation marks instead of outside of them.

I have now deleted the comments in question and replaced them with traditional replies as posts 28 and 29 of the thread.

I'm going to go out on a limb and say that I'm probably not the first or the last to get confused by this, and that I don't see the utility of comments as the forum defines them over traditional replies (Which seem to be called quotes). It would be very easy to miss other people's comments if they aren't a direct reply triggering a notification, because they are placed upthread with things people have already read instead of downthread where they are trained to look for new content.

Perhaps there is a preference in the admin panel that @John Vehadija could check to turn off the commenting system as it exists now and revert to the traditional way of doing things, if he agrees with our critique?

[downbyariver]

Agree, but I suspect they won't be given the rights to call what they're doing "Yes". My guess -- and who knows, we're all just speculating -- would be that there's some kind of name agreed with Howe/White. So it's not "Yes", but it's "The Yes Project" or something.

What you're saying sounds like it could very well be what happens, but I hope that things don't unfold that way. Not being able to use the Yes name would really hurt the band's album and ticket sales and standing with promoters. It would also create a big question mark around whether the studio albums they'd hopefully be making, and indeed the group itself, are really Yes or not.

I realize some of that would happen even if they got clear use of the name in whatever way they wanted, but likely to a much lesser degree IMO, and at least to me personally, if the group is Yes and in continuity with Yes and puts out a Yes album, it's a Yes album. If something called "The Yes Project" puts out an album, though I'd almost certainly buy it, even someone like me who wants to count this stuff would have to find of go "This is really album #1 from The Yes Project and not Album #22 from Yes, isn't it?". The name has a lot of value in a lot of senses and a lot of ways to a lot of people- I would say subjectively, except that there would probably be a pretty objective difference in revenues and bookings.

They also could find themselves fighting for money and attention with something called "Yes Featuring Jon Anderson" if Jon is still around and up to playing with a band at that point. If Steve and Alan want the descendent of their version of Yes to win that contest, calling it simply "Yes" is probably important.

[downbyariver]

I remain uncertain about the sense in bands with entirely new line-ups of youngsters. However, some are giving the idea a good go, like Gong and Tangerine Dream. I do like the idea of the remaining big names from the old times getting together. I think Carl Palmer, Steve Howe, Geoff Downes and Steve Hackett should just go out and tour together!

I could certainly see a future where the members of a certain generation that doesn't have many active bands left takes the people from a sub-genre who can still play, pairs it with a name that one or more of them owns, and then goes out and plays a set list that focuses on the band name they are using, but also includes hits from the repertoire of the other players.

For example, if this were applied to Yes, and the lineup was Davison, Sherwood, Downes, Palmer, Howe, and Hackett, they might play a set of Yes songs plus "Heat of the Moment" (Asia), "The Cage Medley" (Genesis- including anything from the band's catalog in the medley they want to add or promoters request, just like Genesis always added newer songs to the medley on new tours), "Lucky Man" (ELP), "Video Killed the Radio Star" (Buggles), and "When the Heart Rules the Mind" (GTR). For a lot of those bands, they would have 2 or 3 members on stage, especially if one counts Sherwood as having been in Asia (Two tours, but no studio albums) and Geoff Downes as having been in GTR (Never credited as an official band member, but involved in the 80s).

Already, we've seen Geoff Downes as part of a brief All-Star band type touring group. That group had a wider range of music than what we are talking about would, and did not inherit a band name from the old days, but it's sort of a partial proof of concept. One could also see this potential future way of doing things as something similar to the Yestival with ELP/Lodge/Asia/Yes, except with everyone formally condensed into a single band that just plays.

I've seen Davison do some Genesis songs on YouTube and in tribute albums, and he can handle it. Sherwood sang lead for Asia for an entire tour (They replaced him as lead singer and made him just the bass player on the next tour, but, subjectively, I liked what I heard in videos, and even if they view him as not quite up to being the lead singer of Asia, they could easily also view him as up to covering an Asia song in this type of scenario. A song or two doesn't need to be quite as good as an entire concert of songs.). I think they could figure out how to get those songs sung credibly enough with the singers they'd have.

In a way, it's a bit like the old super group concept, it'd just be using an established band name and focusing a bit more on the songs of that band than a supergroup would. In the 1980s and such, they sometimes put together supergroups with new names in part because they wanted to repackage good musicians who's existing band names might not have been given a fair shot at a time when those names were old enough to be considered a bit out of style but not quite old enough to be nostalgic or provide the feel of seeing a legendary band play that one was too young to see play in it's prime. In the 2020s or 2030s and beyond, however, the old band name would be a selling point that would draw fans, because they've long ago now become nostalgic and a band younger people who dig the music would like to say they saw.

My concern there would be that it just feels to me as though a group that calls itself Yes but is really an All-Star band is less likely to come up with new Yes studio albums and to be around long-term. Those concerns aren't necessarily accurate to what would happen, but at some level I think I'd feel a band that went a more traditional path of continuation would be more likely to put out new albums and go on for longer. I don't really have any evidence for that and I certainly wouldn't let it keep the band from bringing, say, a Carl Palmer on board if he's still playing well and up for it (They could always *ask* Palmer if he'd be up for doing more Yes studio albums and take that into consideration. Maybe he's say yes, and, if he did, those albums might rock harder. True, he's an aging drummer, but word was that he had, before Wetton died, planned to leave Asia before the next album because he didn't like the softer direction the band's music was headed, so maybe you talk to him beforehand and all agree if he joins, you're making harder rocking Yes albums on a regular basis. I mean, I can see a move like that working out. It's just a matter of what everyone in the band wants to do, and how much they prioritize it in things like informal hiring interviews.).

And, of course, that exact lineup might be unlikely, as Howe will presumably not want to do such a dramatic overhaul to the concept of Yes that this might entail, and Steve Hackett seems to be drawing really well in Europe with his solo Genesis Revisited stuff. But something similar doesn't seem completely outside the realm of possibility with the exact lineup TBD.

[RelayerI]

Are you sure, that Haun or Bruhn are at least as good as composers, arrangers, producers and stuff as Steve Howe is now - let alone better? I would be interested in hearing music done by them that is at least as good as Yes' medium-good music? I mean we are talking about the great Steve Howe here, as we are talking in the case of the current singer being a substitute for the great Jon Anderson

I don't see that anyone of them can run even a Yes that would be as good as Howe-Yes-music of the 90s, let's say like Keys or The Ladder.

No, I'm not.

Although Haun in particular has more of a career writing commercially these days. Oliver proved himself on From A Page and Brislin is a talented writer.

Steve's my hero. I feel disloyal and I don't want to put him down, but as a writer, creatively he's not what he was.

I'd still listen to him play any day...