I'm not comparing the bands but I do see similarities.Both took rock and infused Classical,Jazz and opera.Queen was much better live though
Thread
Posts in chronological order
Ihave never heard any of there songs... what was their biggest hit?
Steve Howe was on Innuendo, the wandering minstrel guitar part.
Their biggest hit was probably "owner of a lonely heart"
I don`t think Queen`s inclusion of either opera, classical or jazz go beyond three minutes. Yes is another story of course.
I don't think it's possible to compare these two bands. Yes are true artrock band (in 70's), their studio compositions often were more than 15 minutes long, with alot of classical music influences (see Wakeman (kbd), for example).
Yes, Yes's biggest hit was probably 'Owner Of A Lonely Heart' in 80's (from 90125 LP), but by my mean, this wasn't true Yes anymore. Their probably best and most known composition is 'Close To The Edge' from 1972 - 18 minutes long opus. Maybe somebody could know their great cover America (Simon&Garfunkel) too.
BTW, almost all members of Yes are great musicians. Chris Squire (bg) are IMHO the best bass player ever, Steve Howe (g) or Rick Wakeman on keyboards are also fantastic musicians.
Howe played spanish guitar in Innuendo (middle part). Interesting could be, that Yes in 1979 had recorded some songs with Roy Thomas Baker. Unfortunately, for some reason, they didn't release them. There are some songs from this 'French sessions' on expanded 'Drama' CD.
Yes, Yes's biggest hit was probably 'Owner Of A Lonely Heart' in 80's (from 90125 LP), but by my mean, this wasn't true Yes anymore. Their probably best and most known composition is 'Close To The Edge' from 1972 - 18 minutes long opus. Maybe somebody could know their great cover America (Simon&Garfunkel) too.
BTW, almost all members of Yes are great musicians. Chris Squire (bg) are IMHO the best bass player ever, Steve Howe (g) or Rick Wakeman on keyboards are also fantastic musicians.
Howe played spanish guitar in Innuendo (middle part). Interesting could be, that Yes in 1979 had recorded some songs with Roy Thomas Baker. Unfortunately, for some reason, they didn't release them. There are some songs from this 'French sessions' on expanded 'Drama' CD.
I agree with you Libor, "Owner of a Lonely Heart" was NOT the true style of Yes. I like all those prog rock bands, and I see lots of similarities to Queen.
Agreed - comparing Queen and Yes is not a good idea. And Owner is most definitely NOT what Yes were/are about.
Peace,
Adam.
Peace,
Adam.
I find it funny how Yes and Genesis fans constantly bash them for leaving their progressive rock style of the 70s for a more mainstream pop/rock edge of the 80s.
Of course I don't need to mention that a lot Queen fans expected them to make every single fuckin' album sound like everything they did from 'Queen II' to 'ADATR'.
I mean just let it go, for God's sake.
A band can't spend their whole freakin careers making the same kind of music. They have to adjust to the times in their own style, and in my opinion bands like Genesis and Queen did it very well. I think Yes had a bit of a harder time changing styles.
Of course I don't need to mention that a lot Queen fans expected them to make every single fuckin' album sound like everything they did from 'Queen II' to 'ADATR'.
I mean just let it go, for God's sake.
A band can't spend their whole freakin careers making the same kind of music. They have to adjust to the times in their own style, and in my opinion bands like Genesis and Queen did it very well. I think Yes had a bit of a harder time changing styles.
I like Yes and I think there are similarities sometimes. "I've seen all good people" would be a nice song to introduce somebody to the "old" Yes sound. Though I like "Owner..." as well. In fact, I like all of the "90125" album.
Cheers,
Ogre-
Cheers,
Ogre-
Tell me, Mr. Jingles, where I was bashing Yes for changing their style?
I don't have anything against changing style of band music during time. I have a few LPs and CDs of Yes from 80's and 90's also. 90125 is fine. But to pretend this is classic Yes sound is ridiculous.
I have no problem with their later music (sometimes better, sometime worse), but you cannot dictate me, what I'd like the most from the band. And, despite of your meaning, the fact is, that the best music Yes did in 70's. This is for what they are known until now. Same goes for Genesis. Like it or not, but that's all you can do with it.
I don't have anything against changing style of band music during time. I have a few LPs and CDs of Yes from 80's and 90's also. 90125 is fine. But to pretend this is classic Yes sound is ridiculous.
I have no problem with their later music (sometimes better, sometime worse), but you cannot dictate me, what I'd like the most from the band. And, despite of your meaning, the fact is, that the best music Yes did in 70's. This is for what they are known until now. Same goes for Genesis. Like it or not, but that's all you can do with it.
I didn't say you were, and I'm very glad that you somehow appreciate what Yes did during the 80s when they changed musical direction, and it's respectable that you didn't like most of it, and I'm going to agree by saying that perhaps what Genesis and Yes did in the 70s was for the most part better than the 80s. I for once appreciate both.
The fact is that most Genesis, and Yes fans (particularly those who have a strong fondness of their progressive rock era of the 70s) seem to hate everything they did in the 80s.
I mean to each their own, but why completely trash your favorite band for changing and not willing to sell you the same thing over and over again. Don't take it personally, because I'm sure you still love and respect Yes, but I know some people who take things to the extreme.
That also goes for Metallica fans who got pissed at them for cutting off their hair and trying a more alternative sound.
Oh, and don't get me started with those Pink Floyd fans who do nothing but whine about everything Dave Gilmour and the band did after Roger Waters left.
I need to say sorry if you took it personally, because it sure wasn't directed at you. I just get pissed off at people who think that rock bands should always do what the fans want, and not what the band members want.
The fact is that most Genesis, and Yes fans (particularly those who have a strong fondness of their progressive rock era of the 70s) seem to hate everything they did in the 80s.
I mean to each their own, but why completely trash your favorite band for changing and not willing to sell you the same thing over and over again. Don't take it personally, because I'm sure you still love and respect Yes, but I know some people who take things to the extreme.
That also goes for Metallica fans who got pissed at them for cutting off their hair and trying a more alternative sound.
Oh, and don't get me started with those Pink Floyd fans who do nothing but whine about everything Dave Gilmour and the band did after Roger Waters left.
I need to say sorry if you took it personally, because it sure wasn't directed at you. I just get pissed off at people who think that rock bands should always do what the fans want, and not what the band members want.
OK, sorry. Maybe I took it too personally myself.
Have a fine day.
Have a fine day.
I just get pissed off at people who think that rock bands should always do what the fans want, and not what the band members want.
I hear ya, Jingles. Too bad you don't extend that attitude to U2.
Let's face it, most of the stuff U2 did in the 90s did REALLY SUCK DONKEY BALLS. There's nothing more pathetic than a band that has no interest in making REAL MUSIC but rather trying to experiment with techno and electronica sounds and put them on an album no matter how bad it sounds.
http://www.queenzone.com/queen/forum/topic_view.asp?Q_FORUM_ID=3&Q_FORUM_NAME=Personal&Q_FORUM_TOPIC_ID=366244&TOPIC_SUBJECT=Is+there+anyone+here+who+doesn%27t+like+U2%3F
As long as U2 doesn't make techno or electronica they will most likely make a good song.
http://www.queenzone.com/queen/forum/topic_view.asp?Q_FORUM_ID=3&Q_FORUM_NAME=Personal&Q_FORUM_TOPIC_ID=396221&TOPIC_SUBJECT=U2%27s+new+Single
At least I'm glad that U2 left behind their extravagant days of electronica and techno junk. There was nothing more annoying that listening to Bono belt out awful out of tune falsettos, while he was dressed up like 'Mecphisto' with those silly horns. Watching Bono humping cameras during the Zoo TV and PopMart tours was perhaps one of the most pathetic things to watch... especially coming from a band who once stood for serious political, social, and humanitarian issues.
http://www.queenzone.com/queen/forum/topic_view.asp?Q_FORUM_ID=3&Q_FORUM_NAME=Personal&Q_FORUM_TOPIC_ID=427695&TOPIC_SUBJECT=U2+%2D%2D+on+Flatbed+Truck
I mean just let it go, for God's sake.
A band can't spend their whole freakin careers making the same kind of music. They have to adjust to the times in their own style,
You really can't have it both ways, you know.
This is a great thread in the sense that it poses an interesting dilemna. Queen, Yes and Genesis all did infinitely superior work in the 70s compared to that whuch they did in the 80s. All of them broke new ground with their early albums, and found their own sound. But what do you do after you've started a career based on a sound?
If you're Kiss, or Van Halen (save the keyboards and attempted stylistic change on VH 3 with Gary Cherone), you go with the same sound throughout your career. However much you like these bands, they haven't really changed that much, and that appeals to their core fans. Yet they are dinosaur bands. As someone who thinks the last great Queen album was New of the World, I'm glad they went in another direction. AKOM and The Miracle are but a patch on ANATO, but a different patch, from a band not afraid to try new things. I wouldn't want to listen to a rehashed ANATO in 1988 because the early days prioduced their best music.
Americans have a saying that you "can't hit a home run every time at bat." Queen, Yes and Genesis may have done their best work early, but they had to change to keep their sanity about them. They may not have hit a home run with their work in the 80s, but at least they tried something new.
If you're Kiss, or Van Halen (save the keyboards and attempted stylistic change on VH 3 with Gary Cherone), you go with the same sound throughout your career. However much you like these bands, they haven't really changed that much, and that appeals to their core fans. Yet they are dinosaur bands. As someone who thinks the last great Queen album was New of the World, I'm glad they went in another direction. AKOM and The Miracle are but a patch on ANATO, but a different patch, from a band not afraid to try new things. I wouldn't want to listen to a rehashed ANATO in 1988 because the early days prioduced their best music.
Americans have a saying that you "can't hit a home run every time at bat." Queen, Yes and Genesis may have done their best work early, but they had to change to keep their sanity about them. They may not have hit a home run with their work in the 80s, but at least they tried something new.