Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments
NOTE: use Perl; is on undef hiatus. You can read content, but you can't post it. More info will be forthcoming forthcomingly.

All the Perl that's Practical to Extract and Report

use Perl Log In

Log In

[ Create a new account ]

autarch (914)

autarch
  (email not shown publicly)
http://www.vegguide.org/

Journal of autarch (914)

Saturday January 05, 2002
08:32 PM

I'm not too cool to admit I still enjoy Yes

[ #1942 ]

When I was a teenager just getting into music I started enjoying all the typical music geek bands like Rush, Yes, King Crimson, and others, though mostly Rush. After a while I started losing interest as got interested in music for other reasons than the shear musicianship of the players.

But over the past couple years (since grad school about 6 years ago) I started listening to Yes and King Crimson again pretty frequently. Yes definitely can take some left turns into Hokey-land from time to time but they also have an amazingly rich musical vision. How many other bands have created an album that is almost symphonic in scope (Fragile) (its about 40 some minutes long and manages to keep reuse themes you hear at the beginning of the album throughout the music. very cool).

King Crimson is just cool, experimental, and edgy, like Bartok (and maybe a little Messaien) on electric instruments. When I was a teen I didn't quite get it. It really helps to have heard some of the 20th century music that so influenced them.

Rush, well, ok, them I can't listen to anymore. Rhythmically interesting but melodically and harmonically they're generally pretty dull. And the lyrics! Ok, Yes can definitely be a little _too_ much with the philosophical bits. But most of it doesn't make enough sense to quibble with. Rush, OTOH, has lyrics that only a 17 year old suburban white geek can appreciate. And I did then, but I just can't now.

-dave

The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
 Full
 Abbreviated
 Hidden
More | Login | Reply
Loading... please wait.
  • Yes definitely can take some left turns into Hokey-land from time to time but they also have an amazingly rich musical vision.

    Take equal parts 70's progressive rock and classical training, and it isn't surprising what you get as a result. :-)

    I've caught myself listening to Close to the Edge now and again. Amazing how it ages so well, almost like good Hendrix or Clapton. What's really surprising now is the all-out media blitz promoting "Echos: The Best of Pink Floyd". Meddle through The Wall compri

    • I still enjoy Pink Floyd. Musically its certainly still interesting and lyrically I think its fairly good (I really like The Wall's extremely dark lyrics). And an album at least partially about fascism (The Wall again) seems awfully resonant these days here in the US.
  • Funny, as I read this, my huge randomized playlist I stream from home offered up King Crimson's Vroom.

    My playlist runs the gamut of prog rock. Genesis, Pink Floyd, Marillion, King Crimson, I've got David Gilmour's solo albums in there, Peter Gabriel's solo work (Which isn't exactly prog). I also have some bands which I'd classify as neo-prog. Guys who grew up listening to 70's prog. Spock's Beard I highly recommend for the music, but if horrid lyrics make you ill, you may want to avoid. Echolyn was a post-

    • Yeah, some of the old Rush stuff isn't all that bad, at least musically. But lyrically I really don't feel like Peart has much to say. Its generally pretty cheesy. A lot of it is regurgitated Ayn Rand at best.

      Of course, there's some songs that I'd probably still like if I bothered to listened to them, like Time Stand Still on Hold Your Fire. But I don't really bother. Too much trouble to sort out the wheat from the chaff, I'm afraid.