Tangent wrote:you know who you are!
Thank God, I was worried it might be me for a minute there.
Snowdog 2006 wrote:frimleygreener wrote:The Giraffe wrote:frimleygreener wrote:i liked the first album that was entitled "yes".but this is not,seemingly,the "yes" album.from the debut album called "yes",i like "survival" and "harold land".i saw them preview these tracks at parliament hill fields prior to the albums release,and they made a good fist of it.
did you not follow them much after that?
(by the way, you're showing your age there. when was that? 1969?)
it was way back..way back....yes,that sounds about right..i am a fifty four year old codger,(no syrup,own teeth,gsoh)....
So, own teeth, own hair. Who's is the sense of humour?
Davey The Fat Boy wrote:The Slider wrote:Davey The Fat Boy wrote: there is almost no subtlety in this music.
This is, I think, one of the strangest comments I have ever heard passed on Yes. Subtlety is one of their main strengths.
I don't think e are talking about the same thing.
Davey The Fat Boy wrote: My guess is you are talking about musical complexity.
Davey The Fat Boy wrote: But there was literally nothing subtle about them. Their songs were generally long and meandering,
Davey The Fat Boy wrote:
and often the arrangements seemed to be geared towards showcasing their musicianship, rather than bothering to be evocative in any meaningful way.
Davey The Fat Boy wrote:
Lyrically they were equally obscure and grandiose.
Tangent wrote:The Giraffe wrote:Tangent wrote:*Ahem*
Quite a lot of Yes fans on the board.. but who has Yes tattoo'd on their body?
is it davey?
Nope, own up, you know who you are!
Hollywood wrote:Tsk tsk my friend, you'll just HAVE to accept they're not as unpopular as you believed them to be. Tough luck.
Tangent wrote:Hollywood wrote:Tsk tsk my friend, you'll just HAVE to accept they're not as unpopular as you believed them to be. Tough luck.
Andy, apologies are in order, I never said they were unpopular, I said they sucked ass. I expect a few BCBers to be Yes fans, it goes with the territory.
Andy... yesterday
The Slider wrote:Davey The Fat Boy wrote:The Slider wrote:Davey The Fat Boy wrote: there is almost no subtlety in this music.
This is, I think, one of the strangest comments I have ever heard passed on Yes. Subtlety is one of their main strengths.
I don't think e are talking about the same thing.
Oh, sorry. I thought you were talking about subtlety.Davey The Fat Boy wrote: My guess is you are talking about musical complexity.
Sorry, no. I was talking about subtlety.
My mistake.
i thought when you said there was almost no subtlety in their music that you were talking about the lack of subtlety in their music.Davey The Fat Boy wrote: But there was literally nothing subtle about them. Their songs were generally long and meandering,
ah - so subtlety is depends upon brevity....
I bet Wagner feels a fool.Davey The Fat Boy wrote:
and often the arrangements seemed to be geared towards showcasing their musicianship, rather than bothering to be evocative in any meaningful way.
Sometimes that is the case. It is part and parcel of prog rock.
But you are painting them with the same one-dimnsional brush as a Motorhead here.
I am quite astonished that someone who is as familar with their ouvre as you claim to be would even remotely think that way. Especially as it is someone who has proven themself to be pretty musically perceptive.Davey The Fat Boy wrote:
Lyrically they were equally obscure and grandiose.
While I would not disagree with you, it doesn't have anything to do with the subtlety of their music.
Snowdog 2006 wrote:Davey The Fat Boy wrote:Snowdog 2006 wrote:Davey The Fat Boy wrote:Snowdog 2006 wrote: What's the point of saying 'a cape' as if there's something intrinsically bad about it?
Capes are intrinsically unsubtle. I am drawing a line in the sand here. You cannot wear a cape and be considered subtle. The possibility officially goes away the minute you tie the little strap thingy's around your neck.It makes about as much sense as me saying The Clash were shit because they didn't wear capes.
No. The Clash were great because they didn't wear capes. What part of this is confusing you?Is there a particular style of cape that's okay?
No. All capes are unsubtle. I am prepared to back this statement up with charts and graphs.Was it okay when Elvis wore one?
No it wasn't. It eventually killed him. Liberace too.Discussion over.
That's fine. I am perfectly willing to monologue if need be.
All I'm saying is that stating opinion as fact (which is basically what you're doing) creates a conversational dead end so there's not much point in continuing the discussion.
I will say that what I meant about The Clash (or any other artist come to think of it) is that I could just as easily state anything as a personal preference & it would still be, quite simply, meaningless.
Oh c'mon now. Just look at it. How can you defend it?
I think it looks fantastic.
Which is as valid as you saying the opposite.
Your turn.
I think you have a weird idea of what "subtle" is.
I also think you have a weird way of assessing how something must be.
You're arguments seem to be largely based on pre-conceptions or personal opinions that don't necessarily lead to the conclusion you're suggesting.
Let's have a look at some specifics:
"While it is possible to be subtle without being brief, it is very unlikely." Er... No, I'm sorry, you've lost me there. For a minute it was English then suddenly? Fluent 'arse'.
"is there anything less subtle than a musician showing off their chops?" Why is this unsubtle by default?
The combined intricacies that make up the bulk of Yes's music weave, for me at least, a complex & genuinely subtle, well let's say tapestry as it evokes the right image. Not unsubtle, not bombastic. Even something like Roundabout (since it's playing as I type this) whilst being full on, still strikes me as subtle, complex & intricate. Never bludgeoning or stodgy, despite everything that's going on.
"[grandiose lyrics don't] have anything to do with the subtlety of their music." But of course it does." No. No, really, it doesn't.
Your argument seems to run thus:
It has 4 legs.
It has a tail.
It has short fur.
It has 2 ears.
It is a horse.
Yes music is absolutely stacked full of music of the greatest subtlety, despite all the things you claim.
As is Wagner I might add.
And let's not even go there with your ridiculous generalisations about capes.
Davey The Fat Boy wrote:
Okay - let's just recap the parts that we've agreed on:
We've agreed that their songs can be looooong. You brought up Wagner as a defense, but surely you must know that Wagner is practically the poster boy for lack of subtlety to fans of classical music.
Davey The Fat Boy wrote:
While it is possible to be subtle without being brief, it is very unlikely. By nature subtlety generally brings with it an implication of doing things sparingly.
Davey The Fat Boy wrote:We've also agreed that they sometimes put an emphasis on showcasing their virtuosity over being evocative. Your defense is that this approach is part and parcel of being a prog rock band. Fair enough - but is there anything less subtle than a musician showing off their chops?
Davey The Fat Boy wrote:Lastly we've agreed that their lyrics are often obscure and grandiose. You try to sweep this away by stating "it doesn't have anything to do with the subtlety of their music." But of course it does. When a person tells Bob Dylan "I love your music," they are likely not just talking about chord changes, melodies, and harmonica riffs. They are talking about his songs. The totality of his music - including lyrics.
Davey The Fat Boy wrote:So the picture that' emerged here is of a band that:
- lacks brevity
Davey The Fat Boy wrote:- is known to present vituosity for its own sake
- writes grandiose lyrics
Davey The Fat Boy wrote:- has a keyboard player who wears a cape (see evidence below)
To me that's a pretty good case for calling them unsubtle right there.
Especially the cape.
Davey The Fat Boy wrote: On the other side of the debate you've offered no evidence that would establish their subtlety. So...until you do the criticism stands.
Davey The Fat Boy wrote:Anyhow - not trying to piss in anyone's Cheerios here. Music is always a matter of opinion. I always think it is better to try and like music than to argue against it. But in the case of Yes, I've had more than enough exposure to know that I don't enjoy them.
Davey The Fat Boy wrote: Further - my brother pushed them down my throat for more than a decade, so I can hardly be begrudged for a little message board vendetta.
Davey The Fat Boy wrote:But I respect your opinions, your knowledge and love of music, and most importantly - your right to like Yes or any other band you respond to.
Davey The Fat Boy wrote:You didn't live with my brother after all. But smart people can disagree - and on this is apparently where you and I do exactly that.
Snowdog 2006 wrote:Has anyone seen my hat? It's the pointy one.
Jimbo wrote:I guess I am over Graham Nash's politics. Hopelessly naive by the standards I've molded for myself these days.