The Article
Yes: When A Band Is No Longer ‘Fit For Purpose’
29th December 2017
Title: Topographic Drama
Label: Rhino
During it’s 2016 tour, Yes played its 1980 album Drama in its entirety. The first time it had ever done such a thing. More than that, it also played sides one and four from the 1973 double-album Tales From Topographic Oceans. Startling because these are arguably the two most contentious LPs in the band’s entire discography. The first because Trevor Horn was on vocals for the former original album and nearly ripped his voice to shreds trying to be lead vocalist, Jon Anderson, instead of doing what he did best. Being Trevor Horn.
The latter LP was the symbol of so much prog excess that it, quite possibly, single-handedly forged punk. It was also disliked by many rock fans, some prog fans and even former Yes band members. And now both were being played on stage!
This new triple-LP features live performances from 12 dates recorded on the same tour in February 2017, by the current Yes line-up: Steve Howe (guitars), Alan White (drums), Geoff Downes (keyboards), Billy Sherwood (bass), Jon Davison (vocals, replacing Jon Anderson) and additional drummer for this tour, Jay Schellen.
With the addition of And You And I from 1972’s Close To The Edge and Heart Of The Sunrise from 1971’s Fragile, the elaborate gatefold package also arrives with a full size, 6-page booklet.
Mastering is very nice indeed. Despite revealing the give-away spacious auditorium feel the music has been mastered remarkably quietly, prompting a gain boost, further opening up the detail and midrange insight which is both smooth and very pleasant to the ear.
There are a few irritations. The audience gives a standing ovation when anyone so much as lifts an eyebrow while Davison is a pleasant but weak vocalist – he’s no Jon Anderson. He’s too meek and, fragile (sorry) in his delivery. No, um, drama (sorry, again). The lack of emotional uplift and punch harms the songs, I’m afraid and gives the music a tribute band feel making Davison sound like a young Aled Jones.
End of review.
My thoughts continued beyond it, however.
There is something about the lead singer of any band that forges that band’s inherent personality, don’t you think? Instrumental bands have a much easier time of it, in this respect (stand up Tangerine Dream which features not one original member and yet sounds exactly like TD of yore).
Not bands encumbered with singers though. One such band, Yes, has been through varying guitar players and drummers and keyboard merchants and now a new bass player. You may feel sorry and sad that old instrumentalist favourites have left the fold to explore pastures new or they may have sadly passed away but the band has always felt like Yes because Jon Anderson’s vocal was still there, piercing the upper atmosphere with his strong, impassioned, wholly spiritual and rather high pitched vocal stylings. His vocals have always acted as a sort of spine to the Yes sound. A sunlit core around which the music has been formed.
Anderson doesn’t just sing the songs, he believes in each and every word. His unique vocal approach is – has to be – the very personality of the band. If you hear a few words of his sung on the radio then you immediately think, “Yes!” You hear a solo Steve Howe on the radio or Alan White in a different band and you’d respond with, “Hang on…that sounds a bit like…is it…?” And other delaying tactics before a rough, educated guess can be made.
The late and lamented Chris Squire’s bass sound was iconic in Yes terms but you can just – just – about get away with Billy Sherwood as his replacement. Kinda. If you squint a bit. As long as Anderson’s soaring vocal formed the spine of the band’s sound, then it could cushion the tragic Squire loss a bit. Turn that around, though. When Squire was still with us and Anderson was not singing with him, Yes always sounded odd. Unfinished.
With Anderson, there will always be Yes. Without Anderson, there is no Yes. The equation is as simple as that.
You doubt me? Let me give you examples of other bands who thought they could carry on without their main vocal man. Whether those delusions be based on “Sure, it’ll be fine. The fans are too dumb to notice,” or even “You’ll pay us how much if we carry on?” Whatever the reasons, The Doors thought that they could continue being The Doors without Jim Morrison. Hang on, though, this was the same band except for Jim wasn’t it? In terms of personnel, yes it was, sure. Yet, the heart had been pulled from the core of The Doors. In fact, The Doors was all about Morrison’s personality, his delivery, his articulation. As frustrating and annoying and irritating as these important facts might have been to the other three band members, the band was Mr Morrison.
Queen. Freddie dies and the rest of the band haul…Paul Rodgers (?!) into the front man slot. Rodgers? George Michael would have done a far better job, I have to add but George, for once in his life, made the right decision and exclaimed, something like, “No fear, I’m off.” The Rodgers result? Well it wasn’t Queen. I’m not suggesting that Paul Rodgers wasn’t/isn’t allowed to play music with the Freddie Mercury backing band but that collected group of people should never have been called Queen. Even with all of the other original members in tow. It was not Queen. It can never really be Queen.
I could say the same about Thin Lizzy. I could say the same about…well, the list grows. Even Deep Purple have given their band different names when they change their front man but they sneak a silly appellation to it: Deep Purple Mk.I, Deep Purple Mk.II, Deep Purple Mk.III, etc. These are mere twists to the brand name but the band get away with it in that manner.
The only band who can truly get away with changing their front man every five minutes and retain their original band name is King Crimson. The Mighty Crim are unique, though. Their soul sits on a stool at the side of the stage (sometimes in deep shadow), stares at the floor and noodles on a guitar. Fripp, the true leader of that band, is the sole exception.
This is because Fripp constantly and completely reinvents King Crimson. Compare the 70s KQ with the early 80s version. The two cannot be compared. Hence, if Fripp ever leaves for good. King Crimson will die.
Yes find it difficult to reinvent. They find it much easier to clone.
Generally, when all is said and done and in broad terms, you remove the front man? You kill the band. Once you’ve done that, you have to have the guts to start afresh.
Nirvana ceased to exist artistically but also physically, wholly and completely when Kurt Cobain died, didn’t they? You see? Sometimes bands do the right thing.
So, as much as I respect Jon Davison, he does fine work with Glass Hammer, the only reason that he’s in the band is because his name is also Jon and it saves the other ageing band members, whose memories are tending to fade as they approach or reside in their 70s, having to remember a brand new first name. Surely, that’s the reason he’s in the band?
Oh, and I say that I respect Jon Davison? I do. I really do. Much more, it seems, than Yes itself actually does. Why? Because, all joking side, the Yes establishment has, once again, chosen a new lead singer because he sounds like Jon Anderson. That, my friends, is a complete and total lack of respect to the other Jon, Mr Jon Davison. You bring in an independent artist, a human being with his own thoughts and feelings, his own artistic vision and ambitions, likes and dislikes and the only reason, the ONLY reason he is there is because he vaguely sounds…like…another…guy.
Yes, as an organisation and a band, do this sort of thing over and over (i.e. Trevor Horn, Benoît David and now Jon Davison). The only reason that former lead singer Trevor Rabin got away with singing in his God-given voice was because Jon Anderson was standing next to him, at the time. Goodness knows what despicable medical operation Rabin would have had to endure, in order to reach the highest registers, if Anderson would have left while Rabin was still treading the boards with Yes. You need to watch the contract small print, you know.
If Yes is dead without Jon Anderson, as I postulate, then the band should, by all means, carry on but adopt a new band moniker, bring in a new singer (maybe one that has a deep voice? How about that? Something a bit Johnny Cash perhaps?) and produce new work while, if the old songs must be sung, reinterpret them with the new vocalist in a new fashion and allow that new vocalist to impose his creative will on the band not the other way around.
Jon Anderson had the decency to change the name of his new band when he temporarily split with Yes back in 1988. He called his quartet ABWH. Not Yes 2. Or some bastardisation of a classic Yes song title transformed into a band name or somesuch. Just ABWH. Funny thing was, when ABWH were in action they were, arguably, more Yes than Yes were at that time.
So, as far the current band is concerned, just don’t call it Yes. Don’t pretend that we cannot tell the difference. If you want Jon Anderson. Get bloody Jon bloody Anderson bloody. Please do not rope in some poor sap who is acting like some sort of Jon Anderson puppet. A Jon Anderson impersonator. A Jon Anderson doppelgänger. It surely does nothing for Davison’s self esteem, his reputation, his future career or even his dignity to be constantly compared to Jon Anderson. It’s actually distasteful. Davison will never be as good as Jon Anderson because, well, he’s Jon Davison isn’t he?
A message to Yes? Do import top quality band members who are individuals and talented people who will bring new and amazing ideas to the group dynamic. But stop – I repeat, stop – dragging in sub-standard band impersonators. You’ve heard of Fake News? This is Fake Yes. Now there’s a name for a tribute band. Time for a name change Mr White, Howe et al?
agree… 🙁 Yes sin Anderson no es Yes, Yes sin Howe no es Yes, si ambos est√°n en el escenario, es lo m√°s cercano a Yes que podr√≠a verse ahora que no est√° Squire…
The list of bands who have had commercial or artistic success after changing their singers is a long one, and only begins with Genesis. I think of Van Halen, who did it *at least* once. No disrespect to Michael Anthony,, but that band is Eddie and Alex and whoever they want to play with.
I think of Anthrax, who fired an iconic lead singer in Joey Belladonna, hired a reasonable but hardly exemplary replacement in John Bush, and went on to make one of their best albums.
I think of Black Flag. Some people think that the band was best before it hired their longest serving vocalist.
Or if you want me to get back to prog, how about Can? Their recorded output is just about split in half when you file either by vocalist Marvin Mooney, or vocalist Damo Suzuki.
Thinking about it, I’d say that often in a band there is an irreplaceable link, without whom the band loses its identity, no matter how much the remaining members might wish it were not so. Sometimes that band member is a vocalist. Sometimes it’s not.
Beyond that, I am a little surprised at the romanticization of Jon Anderson in the article and in the comments. Iconic voice, sure, and you can argue that he is the irreplaceable link–he might be. But the whole ‘I won’t sing Drama songs’ was childish and to the touring band’s detriment. I think that his firing was sort of poetic justice after he tried to run the band as an autocrat for so many years, after he fired so many keyboardists 🙂
Hi rastronimacals
Thanks for your thoughts. Lots of good examples in there. For myself, if Band A fires its lead singer, it effectively becomes Band B (*most* of the time – not always I know, depends on who launched the band and who is the leader). If Band B then has success well that’s fine and dandy. But it’s still not Band A. It’s just a successful Band B. I agree, there is that link, the soul of the band, the core which does create exceptions – only a few though oddly. I think I gave the King Crimson example in the feature. As long as Robert Fripp noodles his guitar on the side of the stage, KQ still is KQ, no matter who the singer is. In fact, KQ doesn’t even need a singer to be KQ. And that’s the point of Fripp and his band.
I think my romanticisation, as you call it, stems from what Anderson does to a Yes song when he sings it and how the magic drains away when Anderson-imitators have a go. I agree, band politics are so much childish spats and tantrums. I don’t think I’d last 5 minutes in a band myself. Most bands are horribly immature and its always a welcome relief to hear a balanced and intelligent voice from any of them. Just read the Bill Bruford biog, he’s definitely one of those.
A bit late to this one but completely agree with your analysis of Yes (JD version). It’s all about the money and Steve Howe should be ashamed. I have been a big Yes fan since the early 70s and have seen them many times over the decades but was heartbroken to hear the Buggles bloke sing with them c 1977. Yes without Jon Anderson are not Yes. I saw him with ARW at Lloerley festival last summer and he was superb( despite recent health issues) , he was energetic ,on point and entertaining. So , to the other lot, quit while you are ahead, your not doing your reputations any good.
No deadline on comments Stephen 🙂 Many thanks for your thoughts.
They suck big time, maybe if they got away from drama, niggles sound and played more upbeat songs.
Hi Paul,
I enjoyed your article and I agree that it is, in most cases, nearly impossible to replace a lead singer, as he/she embodies the persona of the band so strongly. But, as I point out in my own review, I think in some, albeit few, cases it works. Genesis being a case in point. I think Jon Davison is another example and find his voice perfectly suited for the lineup with Steve Howe. In brief form, I think there’s room in the universe for both lineups. But on a deeper level, I feel that like all art, its beauty is defined by the sincerity and authenticity delivered…and Davison, to my ears…brings this quality, together with his clear falsetto. I also think that because of the timeless nature of Yes’ catalog, it is bigger, even, than the members themselves, and thus can possibly find its delivery in new bodies. I saw Howe’s lineup two nights ago, and plan to see Anderson, as well, this summer. I like to think about things like art and why we can’t or cannot replace a lead singer…And so, I have expounded on this more fully in my own writeup. I hope you don’t mind me mentioning it, but I think it adds to this conversation and besides music fans may like another point of view…all in good spirits, of course! Cheers…Donna
My write up (in support of Davison): fiftyyearsafter wordpress.com/
Many thanks for your note, Donna. Interesting points made here. Firstly, I wouldn’t connect the Genesis change-over to what’s happened with Yes. Mainly because, when Collins replaced Gabriel, Collins forged his own style and song-writing approach. He was an independent artist with a strong mind and will. While he initially tried to retain a strong prog style element, that didn’t even last that long because pop quickly infused the Genesis pathway from there on in. What you can hear, in effect, is the Collins influence when he fronts the band. Both in terms of his vocal style and in the songwriting. With Yes, there is none of that. I feel that Davison is an employee, not a creative equal. He has no real say in the band’s direction or style. It sounds like he is there to mimic Anderson and no more. He’s there to do a job. To maintain the status quo. Collins never tried to mimic PG, he was able to promote his art and impose his own creativity.
That said, on the other side of the coin, the breakaway group is by no means perfect. While Anderson and Wakeman do a great job, I dislike the guitar style of Rabin – when Rabin attempts to tackle classic Yes songs. Rabin is far too brutal and muscular in his guitar approach and has none of the delicacy or subtlety of Howe. So, for example And You and I is a disaster in the hands of Rabin. Rabin is perfect for 90215-era tracks but, there again, he had a creative say in that album.
What Yes should have done was to become Davison’s band. Support *his* vision not impose *their* vision upon Davison. Change and respect Davison’s interpretation of what Yes should be through his eyes. Allow, in effect, an evolution through Davison’s approach to a Yes template. Too revolutionary for you? Fleetwood Mac did exactly that when Peter Green left. They evolved. They didn’t suffer too much from the change.
Such a sad state of affairs. For a band that touched my heart so deeply, they certainly have torn at it nearly as much. We all have our opinions. Mine is no Jon Anderson, no Yes. They should have packed it up so many times. Especially after the 35th anniversary in 2004. The feelings were so contentious towards one another at that part. But it’s always about the money. This is the biggest paycheck for any of these guys. Much more so than anything they do on a solo level. Every time Steve Howe’s Yes goes out on the road, I’ll head up to YouTube to see if it’s worth going to the show. And with every successive tour, the music sounds worse. Most especially the tempos, which are insufferably slow. I have seen Jon Anderson’s Yes twice since they reformed and everything is spot-on. But it’s still not Yes. It never will be. I will never see my favorite band live in this lifetime again. Because that Yes only exists in recordings. And I enjoy that… and the memories of my attending Yes shows for some 35 years.
Thanks for your points, Gabriel and I echo your, “Yes only exists in recordings.” statement.
So true. I don’t want to add ad nauseum to the diatribe but to merely say please retire Steve and put it to rest. The current version of YES is bad. ARW is great but it only represents one album in their catalogue. They will live on in my dreams and records. My favorite band YES. Thanks for the music guys.
Thanks for that, Gary.
Jon Davison sings falsetto which makes his singing weak. I totally agree with this article except it gets dicey when you start talking about bands survival after a singer leaves. AC/DC and Van Halen soldiered on just fine. Jon Anderson seems to be a different story especially when weigh the amount of composition credited to him and his influence on the direction of Yes.
Hi Paul and all the commentators! I read this article last year when originally posted and saw your point of view clearly. I’m one of the ones that disagree, though. As a Yes fan from 1970 onward I’ve enjoyed all the lineups and the differing music for what they are, not what they could have been “if only x y or z.” Having said that, I’ve seen every tour since Chris’ untimely passing and feel that the current lineup is getting better and better together with JD meshing with them better with every outing.
I’ve seen ARW and while they brought a freshness to the arrangements and I loved the show, bought the DVD, and will go see them again if they do another tour and come close enough for me to get there. I have no problem loving both bands *for what they are* and not for what they could or should be.
Looking at this in hindsight, I can say with no ambiguity at all that the Yes50 tour was one of the best Yes shows I have seen in years. They were tight, hitting on all cylinders as it were, and sounded great, regardless of the current personnel. I only wish Alan were in better health but that can’t be helped and Jay Schellen is a worthy drummer in his own right and can play Yes music perfectly. (As did Dylan Howe when he played with them on the Yestival tour.)
Now to Jon D…his voice has a different timbre to Jon A, I have no argument there. But very few singers could come as close as he does to Jon A singing the classic Yes tunes. I wish they would make new music and have pressed Billy on this many times as he is a more than worthy writer and could create some wonderful tunes for the band. I think that he, more than anyone, would be the catalyst for new, fresh music for Yes. His collaboration with Chris is proof of that. (The More We Live Let Go comes right to mind)
With the current lineup I feel like there’s a lot of life left in this band as long as health and age doesn’t catch up with the older members, God forbid.
A band with 50 years has to play the songs that made them. A new singer that can’t hit the notes is not an option here. Trevor H couldn’t really do it for any length of time and even Benoit tore his voice up. Jon D can do it and do it well without damage. So he sounds a little different. I think he sounds great and he’s very accessible to the fans, as are they all, really. Jon is very humble and truly appreciates where he is and it shows in his interaction with fans. Billy and Jay, also. Just nice guys who are very talented and appreciate the music they are making and the fans that love it also. Steve, Alan and Geoff are the real veterans and they, too, are very accessible at the M&Gs. I ran into Geoff before a show and he stopped, shook my hand, remembered me from previous after-shows and took the time to casually chat. You just can’t put a price on that!
OK, so that’s the off the top of the head ramblings of a long-time fan that loves both bands for what they are and hope they both live long and prosper!
Peace, y’all. 🙂
Thanks for taking the trouble to pen your thoughts, Royce. Appreciate the contribution.
I think you under estimate Jon Davison. He is a gifted musician, singer and composer. Plays muliple instruments brilliantly. How can you judge him based on seeing him in concert. Your words are hurtful and not based on the talent or the mam. Shame on you.
Hi Patricia – I’ve never underestimated any artist: singer, author, oil on canvas, whatever they may be. It’s because I hold his talents in high esteem that I wrote my piece and asked why he cannot have direct input in the creative output of the band. Please re-read the feature. If you’d rather not then allow me to quote my own text, “Oh, and I say that I respect Jon Davison? I do. I really do. Much more, it seems, than Yes itself actually does. Why? Because, all joking side, the Yes establishment has, once again, chosen a new lead singer because he sounds like Jon Anderson. That, my friends, is a complete and total lack of respect to the other Jon, Mr Jon Davison. You bring in an independent artist, a human being with his own thoughts and feelings, his own artistic vision and ambitions, likes and dislikes and the only reason, the ONLY reason he is there is because he vaguely sounds‚Ķlike‚Ķanother‚Ķguy.”
Frustrating times for the fans. I won’t likely buy this. I would like to hear/see a well produced a live version of Drama tour from 1981. Probably not out there. Trevor Horn made that album his. The previous Yes material probably didn’t work well for him…so what. Maybe Jon had a hard time making the Drama material work for him. Maybe the band new that. If they didn’t try, could be cool. There’s time…. or not.
We’re just people. If those core people in the bands can see it, it might be thoughtful to consider time and possibilities of a true farewell. Seems Alan needs a little help these days, so ask Mr.Bruford to get in shape for a partnership. Steve, Jon and Rick could consider what is left in the engine. Sherwood might step aside (just my personal add) and let Mr. Levin add his flavor…..not required. If money is the key, maybe this is something to consider. If the music is the key, maybe this is something to consider. No matter what, all those hard headed guys (Bill has some pretty high ideals too), need to like the thought of “Getting back on the bus”. However, I am 52. I am already tired of struggling to get things done well (my way or the wrong way). Its a tall order for the 70 somethings. Its amazing what they are doing already.
I initially did not like the direction or tone of your commentary because it felt like you were not giving Steve his due credit. Really wasn’t about that and as I went through and read your great attention the comments, I noticed what appears to be your overall appreciation for a band so many here love. You kept your point strong as a good writer should.
YES has been and should be a culmination of a lot of hard work by very strong musicians. Head strong makes the work harder and less likely, but far richer when complete. We may never get that magic ever again with these men.
By the way, commenters be careful about YOUTUBE depictions of live shows. I decided to take my family to see Ozzy this past September. I spent a lot of money for good seats. Almost didn’t because of one of those youtubes, but decided since he’s not here for long, give it a go. Didn’t expect perfect, but the crowd was delighted to be there, he fed on that (no bats, heh) and did his best. There was magic, as made by those ingredients. (Adam Wakeman had a blast).
Cell phone video or sound capture doesn’t pick that up.
Nice article/thread Paul. Thanks
Thanks for your considered comments Kelly and thanks for taking the time to pen them. You mentioned Bruford but I hear that he’s retired now, I’m afraid. A shame – he’s an intelligent and articulate man/musician and I see him as a benefit to any group. On that point, I heartily recommend his book. You can find it in a few places on Amazon but elsewhere, I’m sure. Here’s one: https://www.amazon.co.uk/Bill-Bruford-Autobiography-Crimson-Earthworks/dp/1905792433/ref=sr_1_3?ie=UTF8&qid=1549189651&sr=8-3&keywords=bill bruford