Led Zeppelin vs Yes vs Pink Floyd (album competition)
S.F.BZY
I am comparing only the first 8 studio albums of the bands (I am
excluding Ummagumma because it is 50% live and also both the Pink
Floyd soundtracks. Coda is also excluded, since it is not a proper
studio album, but a compilation)
Led Zeppelin vs Yes vs The Piper At the Gates of Dawn
WINNER: The Piper At the Gates of Dawn.
Yes debut is underrated and Led Zeppelin's debut sold a lot more. But
Pink Floyd's debut was revolutionary and also the most experimental of
the three. It also had more variety and has some scary aspects to it.
For some people it might be hard to digest, but I like it immensely.
Led Zeppelin II vs Time And A Word vs A Saucerful of Secrets
WINNER: Led Zeppelin II.
Both Pink Floyd and Yes suffered from a sophomore slump IMO. Not
Zeppelin. This album is more or less equal to the debut. In fact this
is more consistent and rocks harder. This may not be the best Zeppelin
album but it is my favorite
Led Zeppelin III vs The Yes Album vs Atom Heart Mother
WINNER: The Yes Album
I find Led Zeppelin III immensely underrated. It is a great album and
in my opinion is almost as good as their previous two albums, if not
better. Atom Heart Mother was an interesting experimental effort by
Floyd but it was bogged down by some poor execution. The Yes Album
signalled the new Yes sound. It is almost a perfect album. Except for
"The Venture", every track on the album is a classic.
Led Zeppelin IV vs Fragile vs Meddle
WINNER: Led Zeppelin IV
All the three albums are absolute classics IMO. Meddle has some songs
which don't stand up to the best songs on the album. Fragile has a
great flow and is better IMO. But Led Zeppelin IV is relentlessly
great and there is hardly a weak moment in the entire album.
Houses of The Holy vs Close to the Edge vs The Dark Side of the Moon
WINNER: Close to the Edge
Close to the Edge is the only PERFECT album, I have ever heard my
whole life. The Dark Side of the Moon is almost up there. But the two
instrumentals "On the Run" and "Any Colour You Like" don't do much for
me. Houses of the Holy is the most versatile Zeppelin album ever but
has some weak songs like "Dancing Days" and "The Crunge"
Physical Graffiti vs Tales From Topographic Oceans vs Wish You Were
Here
WINNER: Physical Graffiti
Tales From Topographic Oceans is a bold attempt by Yes. Four songs on
a double album. Most of it works but not all. This could have been an
amazing live album. Physical Graffiti is a much better double album in
my opinion. Wish You Were Here has nothing wrong in it but it has some
boring stuff on it and sounds like a safe album to me.
Presence vs Relayer vs Animals
WINNER: Relayer
Relayer is almost as good as the perfect Close to the Edge. Except for
"Soundchaser" which probably has a bit too much of wanking, the other
two songs are perfect. Presence was interesting return to rawking but
is one dimensional. Animals is probably the worst Pink Floyd album of
the 70s. Some of the songs drag on especially "Dogs".
In Through The Out Door vs Going For The One vs The Wall
WINNER: The Wall
In Through The Out Door is actually quite underrated. It sees Zeppelin
expanding their sound. I dont understand why people dont like it that
much. Going For The One is an attempt to make shorter songs like
Fragile but does not quite nail it. The Wall inspite of his flaws is
grand and works on a whole!
After these 8 albums, I think the three bands went down like a lead
balloon and signalled the end of dinosaur rock and the arrival of
nasty things like punk/disco/new wave/hair metal ;-)
Chris Jemmett
Me
1. yes pink van led black rock! View profile
(3 users) More options Sep 18, 11:00 am
Newsgroups: alt.music.led-zeppelin, rec.music.beatles,
alt.music.pink-
floyd, rec.music.progressive, alt.music.yes
From: yes pink van led black rock! <zepflo...@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 18 Sep 2007 09:00:20 -0700
Local: Tues, Sep 18 2007 11:00 am
Subject: I am taking a break from posting
Reply | Reply to author | Forward | Print | Individual message | Show
original | Report this message | Find messages by this author
It is an utter waste of time. I start threads to start a discussion.
But all that happens is trolls pissing on each other and mostly over
me.
I like Zep, Floyd and Yes a lot. Because among all the bands I have
heard they have consistently delivered the goods. Beatles are good
too
but they had more fillers in their albums than those three. But
anyways, I try to discuss other bands too. But I am labeled with
someone who discusses these bands only.
There is too much hooliganism over here. Trolls forming alliances and
taking it on some poor guy who is alone, just because they get a kick
out of it. It is not that I cannot fight these trolls (I know I can)
but I am getting sick of it. What is the point? Is there any end to
it.
Anyway, I feel I am betrayed by own fellow fans, speaking of which
are
some of the trolls over here really fans. All they talk about is some
obscure bootleg (wereo) that no one cares about or some pedophile
Mark
Bender or Yoko Ono's panties or fucking relgious or racist crap. They
are not interested in the band or their music at all.
I tried to ignite some life to the music group especially the Floyd
and Zep ng which are pretty much dead now with only trolls slinging
shit over each other. Hats off to you Bukkake, Babymash, Kyla, Wereo
Supreme, Scott Sullivan and Chris Jammit! Enjoy your shit slinging!
Adios losers, I am outta here!
Ben
I have never enjoyed Led Zep II. For me it does not work, and sounds
forced. I think their best were I, IV, and V.
Saw the Floyd in Seattle ages before they were popular (was it at "The
Trips Festival"? If you remember the 60's, then you were not there).
The entire performance was one giant lysergic acid diethylamide fueled
experience so it sort of blends and blurs into a psychedelic memory.
A couple of years later, when they were still a cult band I saw them
at in the UW basketball arena (again a psychedelic experience). This
time I snuck in a high end tape recorder and taped the experience.
For the second half of the gig they said "we'd like to play something
new we are working on" and they played the entire Dark Side of the
Moon" LP. This was about a year of more before it was released. My
circle of friends all had copies of my tape and wondered why it had
not been released.
When it finally came out and went mega, I actually did not like it,
preferring the original live performance I had. The wailing black
chick added to it seemed forced and clichéd to me (the Stones did it
on Gimmi Shelter, and now it is time for the Floyd to do it ---yeah---
okay---I don't thinks so!!!). I did not even buy it, and actually sit
down and listen to it until last year.
Here is a funny story: at the end of the informal gig in the
University of Washington gymnasium, a friend who worshiped Pink Floyd
went up to the rickity make shift stage set up on the basketball court
and asked David Gilmore "Are you for Real". David's reply: "Are
you?". That comment really bothered Robin, I think, as he was as
ripped as the rest of us were, and begin pondering the cozmic meaning
of the comment.
On the trip home we took a highway instead of the freeway thinking
there were less cops. We went past a local roadside drive in
restaurant kitsch attraction that was a giant T-Rex. We all had the
same hallucination at once that the T-Rex was chasing our car, sort of
like that scene in movie Jurassic Park. Between that, and the
permanent echo chamber that 3 hours of the Floyd had reduced our
brains to, a most merry time was had by all.
S.F.BZY
>
> - Show quoted text -
Thanks for sharing your experience. I wish I was born in the 60s :)
RichL
news:1194716772....@v3g2000hsg.googlegroups.com...
> The three greatest "dinosaur" rock bands of the Jurassic era (70s)!
Wrong. But two out of three ain't bad. Sorry, but in the grand scheme of
things, Yes is a minor player.
S.F.BZY
> "S.F.BZY" <zepflo...@gmail.com> wrote in message
Not according to me.
WAY2GOOD
You just proved his point, Raja.
S.F.BZY
> "S.F.BZY" <zepflo...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>
> news:1194735737.1...@d55g2000hsg.googlegroups.com...
>
> > On Nov 10, 3:31 pm, "RichL" <rpleav...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> >> "S.F.BZY" <zepflo...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>
> >>news:1194716772....@v3g2000hsg.googlegroups.com...
>
> >> > The three greatest "dinosaur" rock bands of the Jurassic era (70s)!
>
> >> Wrong. But two out of three ain't bad. Sorry, but in the grand scheme
> >> of
> >> things, Yes is a minor player.
>
> > Not according to me.
>
> You just proved his point, Raja.
...
Morphy's ghost
"Chris Jemmett" <ccje...@rogers.com> wrote in message
news:1194721237.4...@c30g2000hsa.googlegroups.com...
> to x-post is rajan, to ignore, sublime
>
I swear I think he's recycling old lists here.
David W
S.F.BZY
> "S.F.BZY" <zepflo...@gmail.com> wrote in message
> > On Nov 10, 3:31 pm, "RichL" <rpleav...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> >> "S.F.BZY" <zepflo...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>
> >>news:1194716772....@v3g2000hsg.googlegroups.com...
>
> >> > The three greatest "dinosaur" rock bands of the Jurassic era (70s)!
>
> >> Wrong. But two out of three ain't bad. Sorry, but in the grand scheme of
> >> things, Yes is a minor player.
>
> > Not according to me.
>
> Hardly anyone has even heard of them.
that doesnt make them any worse. I said best not the greatest. Plus
Yes' chart success both sides of the atlantic speaks for itself. As
far as I have heard, them were almost as popular as Zeppelin between
1972-74 before their hiatus for 3 years.
Mackenzie
> that doesnt make them any worse. I said best not the greatest. Plus
> Yes' chart success both sides of the atlantic speaks for itself. As
> far as I have heard, them were almost as popular as Zeppelin between
> 1972-74 before their hiatus for 3 years.
I don't remember them being all that popular in the 1970s. I remember
meeting only three "Yes" fans while I was in undergraduate school
around 1973. In those days I listened to mostly Pink Floyd and Mothers
of Invention.
w
Take "Roundabout" out of their early 70s repertoire, they would have been
as popular as Gentle Giant.
w
> These just aren't comparable.
>
> The albums are barely contemporaneous.
>
> They're by seperate bands.
>
> The bands have different styles from each other.
>
> There is no 'versus'. They were not, and are not, in competition with each
> other.
>
> JJ (UK)
> (The dist list for this reply has the tennis and Beatles newsgroups removed
> since they're off-topic)
Thanks.
Barely or bearly?
Rubber or dental?
Is there a God? Is He, or was He, in competition with Jesus?
w
(The dist list for this reply has the tennis and Beatles newsgroups added
since you're acting like a fukken Usenet Kop))
Happ_e_Maker
comparable.
"S.F.BZY" <zepf...@gmail.com> a écrit dans le message de news:
1194716772....@v3g2000hsg.googlegroups.com...
Caffe Mocha
> "Chris Jemmett" <ccjemm...@rogers.com> wrote in message
>
> news:1194721237.4...@c30g2000hsa.googlegroups.com...
>
> > to x-post is rajan, to ignore, sublime
>
> I swear I think he's recycling old lists here.
Oh, yeah, he's done this one before.
Give it up, Raja. Please get a life, won't you?
Caffe Mocha
Raja, please have the decency to masturbate in private.
Jeff
Raja, if you e-mail me, I'll tell you a nice place to go where people
love to talk about these topics even more.
S.F.BZY
thats because none of the songs from their other albums are short
enough to be played on radio. They sold out a bunch of concerts.
use...@bondegezou.demon.co.uk
Nonsense. Look at their respective album chart performances, even
before the release of "Roundabout".
--
Henry
Steven Sullivan
Oh, so *that's* why the next four studio albums after Fragile reached the top ten on the
charts. That also explains the seven sold out shows at Madison Square Garden in 1978-79. It
was all about 'Roundabout'.
Brilliant observation, douche.
___
-S
"As human beings, we understand the world through simile, analogy,
metaphor, narrative and, sometimes, claymation." - B. Mason
Senor Bungle
"Steven Sullivan" <ssu...@panix.com> wrote in message news:fha09q$9f6$1...@reader1.panix.com...
> In alt.music.yes w <loverl...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Sun, 11 Nov 2007 21:00:45 -0800, Mackenzie wrote:
>
>> >>
>> >> that doesnt make them any worse. I said best not the greatest. Plus
>> >> Yes' chart success both sides of the atlantic speaks for itself. As
>> >> far as I have heard, them were almost as popular as Zeppelin between
>> >> 1972-74 before their hiatus for 3 years.
>> >
>> > I don't remember them being all that popular in the 1970s. I remember
>> > meeting only three "Yes" fans while I was in undergraduate school
>> > around 1973. In those days I listened to mostly Pink Floyd and Mothers
>> > of Invention.
>
>> Take "Roundabout" out of their early 70s repertoire, they would have been
>> as popular as Gentle Giant.
>
> Oh, so *that's* why the next four studio albums after Fragile reached the top ten on the
> charts. That also explains the seven sold out shows at Madison Square Garden in 1978-79. It
> was all about 'Roundabout'.
>
> Brilliant observation, douche.
Without a breakout song, it seems unlikely any band would succeed.
If Fragile didn't exist, no one would have cared as much.
Now, get that cock out of your mouth.
Steven Sullivan
Another brilliant observation. If Aqualung didn't exist, no one would have cared as
much. So? There was still a lot of caring going on long after the 'breakout song'.
> Now, get that cock out of your mouth.
Impatient to have it in yours?
Chris Jemmett
Your memory of that time period may not be the definitive arbiter on
this one. Not that mine is...
Chris Jemmett
> "S.F.BZY" <zepflo...@gmail.com> wrote in message
> > On Nov 10, 3:31 pm, "RichL" <rpleav...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> >> "S.F.BZY" <zepflo...@gmail.com> wrote in message
>
> >>news:1194716772....@v3g2000hsg.googlegroups.com...
>
> >> > The three greatest "dinosaur" rock bands of the Jurassic era (70s)!
>
> >> Wrong. But two out of three ain't bad. Sorry, but in the grand scheme of
> >> things, Yes is a minor player.
>
> > Not according to me.
>
> Hardly anyone has even heard of them.
Firstly, the cross posting troll who pretends to be a Yes fan is
really just a nut. I'm sorry that he picked Yes be the topic of his
idiocies.
Secondly, SFBZY is Raja and Fuck Off, Raja.
O'Leary III
> That also explains the seven sold out shows at Madison Square Garden in 1978-79. It
> was all about 'Roundabout.
They did hold the record for a while.
rob...@aol.com
What year was it that _Tales_ *shipped* gold? But forget 1973 and the
arena crowds Yes was playing to at the time...if one doesn't count
anything else at all, Yes was playing *stadiums* in 1976.
Rob "Yes was very popular in the '70's, no matter who you might not
have met" Allen
w
So did the fukken Monkeys.
w
>> Take "Roundabout" out of their early 70s repertoire, they would have been
>> as popular as Gentle Giant.
>
> Nonsense. Look at their respective album chart performances, even
> before the release of "Roundabout".
You win. They were 2 degrees better than the fukken Monkees.
S.F.BZY
comparing Monkees to Yes is as good as comparing Spinal Tap to Led
Zeppelin.
Relayer
> Hardly anyone has even heard of them.
Only if you had your head up your own ass (or tounge in someone
elses)during the 70's and 80's.
Mackenzie
> Your memory of that time period may not be the definitive arbiter on
> this one. Not that mine is..
This is true, but where I was raised and grew up and listened to FM
radio broadcasting, the Yes weren't that big. If I remember correctly
in my hometown of Merrill (Wisconsin) there were only four stations
that played Yes hits such as "Roundabout" and "I've Seen All Good
People".
I remember listening to "Beyond and Before" and stupidly thinking that
it was the Fudge. When I moved to California, there was more of a
demand for the Yes, but then it later waned with time.
Mackenzie
> On Nov 11, 8:53?pm, "David W" <n...@email.provided> wrote:
>
> > Hardly anyone has even heard of them.
>
That's a bit of an exaggeration. On the other hand, I do not think
that today's teenagers even know that there was a band called the
"Yes" a long time ago. Chris thinks this and I agree.
Jeff
It wasn't called "the" Yes. The band is called "Yes."
Sydney of Astatula
I've noticed that people tend to completely ignore the macroscopic intent
of a post in favor of debating some irrelevant triviality, like a typo or
grammatical error, or even a trivial mistake. Is this because the person
constructing a reply is not intelligent enough to grasp the intent, or is
it because he thinks that identifying the trivial error will support his
image of intellectual eliteness, or is it because he cannot debate the main
point and seeks a tangental topic that he can debate with confidence? It
seems like it happens all the time, more often than not, the main point is
discarded in favor of bullshit.
O'Leary III
> I've noticed that people tend to completely ignore the macroscopic intent
> of a post in favor of debating some irrelevant triviality, like a typo or
> grammatical error, or even a trivial mistake. Is this because the person
> constructing a reply is not intelligent enough to grasp the intent, or is
> it because he thinks that identifying the trivial error will support his
> image of intellectual eliteness, or is it because he cannot debate the main
> point and seeks a tangental topic that he can debate with confidence? It
> seems like it happens all the time, more often than not, the main point is
> discarded in favor of bullshit.
The main point *is* bullshit.
w
>>> Nonsense. Look at their respective album chart performances, even
>>> before the release of "Roundabout".
>>
>> You win. They were 2 degrees better than the fukken Monkees.
>
> comparing Monkees to Yes is as good as comparing Spinal Tap to Led
> Zeppelin.
"w"erks for me.
w
>>> That's a bit of an exaggeration. On the other hand, I do not think
>>> that today's teenagers even know that there was a band called the
>>> "Yes" a long time ago. Chris thinks this and I agree.
>>
>> It wasn't called "the" Yes. The band is called "Yes."
>>
>
> I've noticed that people tend to completely ignore the macroscopic intent
> of a post in favor of debating some irrelevant triviality, like a typo or
> grammatical error, or even a trivial mistake. Is this because the person
> constructing a reply is not intelligent enough to grasp the intent, or is
> it because he thinks that identifying the trivial error will support his
> image of intellectual eliteness, or is it because he cannot debate the main
> point and seeks a tangental topic that he can debate with confidence? It
> seems like it happens all the time, more often than not, the main point is
> discarded in favor of bullshit.
"Yes", Jeff is a fukken Moron, "Yes" we all agree.
S.F.BZY
>
> and the guitar solo was more entertaining.
than Led Zeppelin? Which planet are you from?
S.F.BZY
> On Mon, 12 Nov 2007 19:41:50 -0800, Jeff
>
> tend to agree with Mackenzie, but only because of what my college-age
> daughter tells me. She's the only person she knows at her college, or
> in her high school, who knew about Yes and certainly was the only
> person who had ever been to a Yes concert. Me and the wife took her to
> the 35th anniversary tour thing, which unfortunately, was pretty
> boring, with idiots in the row ahead of us, yakking on cel phones.
So you judge Yes on a a concert they perform when they are 100 years
old. Very fair!
Fartacus
Fartacus. Can I shoot some up your left nostril?
w
> On Mon, 12 Nov 2007 19:41:50 -0800, Jeff
> irrelevant.
>
> tend to agree with Mackenzie, but only because of what my college-age
> daughter tells me. She's the only person she knows at her college, or
> in her high school, who knew about Yes and certainly was the only
> person who had ever been to a Yes concert. Me and the wife took her to
> the 35th anniversary tour thing, which unfortunately, was pretty
> boring, with idiots in the row ahead of us, yakking on cel phones.
Let me guess.
Chastain.
O'Leary III
> spinal tap was a lot funnier.
>
> and the guitar solo was more entertaining.
And they were in tune.
Ryan White
>>>It wasn't called "the" Yes. The band is called "Yes."
>>
>> irrelevant.
>>
>> tend to agree with Mackenzie, but only because of what my college-age
>> daughter tells me. She's the only person she knows at her college, or
>> in her high school, who knew about Yes and certainly was the only
>> person who had ever been to a Yes concert. Me and the wife took her to
>> the 35th anniversary tour thing, which unfortunately, was pretty
>> boring, with idiots in the row ahead of us, yakking on cel phones.
>
> So you judge Yes on a a concert they perform when they are 100 years
> old. Very fair!
I don't judge Yes. I also don't judge squirrel hemorrhoids.
See how that works?
S.F.BZY
>
> I've seen them about 10 times, on various tours, with various line
> ups.
>
> that particular show, was pretty dull.- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
Why would you just mention that one dull show then?
Jeff
> Jeff wrote innews:1194925310.9...@v65g2000hsc.googlegroups.com:
>
> > On Nov 12, 9:37 pm, Mackenzie <jade_...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> >> On Nov 12, 9:45 pm, Relayer <relayer...@aol.com> wrote:
>
> >> > On Nov 11, 8:53?pm, "David W" <n...@email.provided> wrote:
>
> >> > > Hardly anyone has even heard of them.
>
> >> That's a bit of an exaggeration. On the other hand, I do not think
> >> that today's teenagers even know that there was a band called the
> >> "Yes" a long time ago. Chris thinks this and I agree.
>
> > It wasn't called "the" Yes. The band is called "Yes."
>
> I've noticed that people tend to completely ignore the macroscopic intent
> of a post in favor of debating some irrelevant triviality, like a typo or
> grammatical error, or even a trivial mistake.
I wasn't trying to do anything besides make a correction. Say for
example..if people are curious about the Band "Yes" and would like to
hear them..and
type in "The Yes" on say Rhapsody, they aren't going to find what they
are looking for. I had no other motive for my correction except for
this.
Is this because the person
> constructing a reply is not intelligent enough to grasp the intent, or is
> it because he thinks that identifying the trivial error will support his
> image of intellectual eliteness,
What? You are blowing this whole thing out of proportion. I don''t
even think I'm an "Intellectual,"....and I don't even come close.
or is it because he cannot debate the main
> point and seeks a tangental topic that he can debate with confidence?
I wasn't trying to debate a point. Please re-read what I said, and
you'll see that, instead of trying to make me the image of your
choice.
It
> seems like it happens all the time, more often than not, the main point is
> discarded in favor of bullshit.
Ok, let people go ahead and think "Yes" is "The Yes." Fine with me.
Jeff
Thank you. I am a "fukken Moron.
Jeremy Weissenburger
On 11/12/07 11:54 AM, in article uz%Zi.3720$WN2.515@trnddc08, "Senor Bungle"
<re...@vertigo.com> wrote:
>
> "Steven Sullivan" <ssu...@panix.com> wrote in message
> news:fha09q$9f6$1...@reader1.panix.com...
>> In alt.music.yes w <loverl...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> On Sun, 11 Nov 2007 21:00:45 -0800, Mackenzie wrote:
>>
>>>>>
>>>>> that doesnt make them any worse. I said best not the greatest. Plus
>>>>> Yes' chart success both sides of the atlantic speaks for itself. As
>>>>> far as I have heard, them were almost as popular as Zeppelin between
>>>>> 1972-74 before their hiatus for 3 years.
>>>>
>>>> I don't remember them being all that popular in the 1970s. I remember
>>>> meeting only three "Yes" fans while I was in undergraduate school
>>>> around 1973. In those days I listened to mostly Pink Floyd and Mothers
>>>> of Invention.
>>
>>> Take "Roundabout" out of their early 70s repertoire, they would have been
>>> as popular as Gentle Giant.
>>
>> Oh, so *that's* why the next four studio albums after Fragile reached the top
>> ten on the
>> charts. That also explains the seven sold out shows at Madison Square Garden
>> in 1978-79. It
>> was all about 'Roundabout'.
>>
>> Brilliant observation, douche.
>
> Without a breakout song, it seems unlikely any band would succeed.
> If Fragile didn't exist, no one would have cared as much.
Technically, Yes had at least two breakout songs. "I've Seen All Good
People," anyone?
--Jeremy
--
"If you smile at me, I will understand. That is something everybody
everywhere does in the same language." -- David Crosby
O'Leary III
> I wasn't trying to debate a point. Please re-read what I said, and
> you'll see that, instead of trying to make me the image of your
> choice.
I think his image is running on the wrong reel, Jeff. All backwards and
lopsided.
David W
Not really. At least Spinal Tap were rock (well, between their pop beginning and
their "new direction" anyway :-) )
S.F.BZY
wrote:
> On 11/12/07 11:54 AM, in article uz%Zi.3720$WN2.515@trnddc08, "Senor Bungle"
>
>
>
>
>
> <re...@vertigo.com> wrote:
>
> > "Steven Sullivan" <ssu...@panix.com> wrote in message
> >news:fha09q$9f6$1...@reader1.panix.com...
> >>> On Sun, 11 Nov 2007 21:00:45 -0800, Mackenzie wrote:
>
> >>>>> that doesnt make them any worse. I said best not the greatest. Plus
> >>>>> Yes' chart success both sides of the atlantic speaks for itself. As
> >>>>> far as I have heard, them were almost as popular as Zeppelin between
> >>>>> 1972-74 before their hiatus for 3 years.
>
> >>>> I don't remember them being all that popular in the 1970s. I remember
> >>>> meeting only three "Yes" fans while I was in undergraduate school
> >>>> around 1973. In those days I listened to mostly Pink Floyd and Mothers
> >>>> of Invention.
>
> >>> Take "Roundabout" out of their early 70s repertoire, they would have been
> >>> as popular as Gentle Giant.
>
> >> Oh, so *that's* why the next four studio albums after Fragile reached the top
> >> ten on the
> >> charts. That also explains the seven sold out shows at Madison Square Garden
> >> in 1978-79. It
> >> was all about 'Roundabout'.
>
> >> Brilliant observation, douche.
>
> > Without a breakout song, it seems unlikely any band would succeed.
> > If Fragile didn't exist, no one would have cared as much.
>
> Technically, Yes had at least two breakout songs. "I've Seen All Good
> People," anyone?
There are three from the 70s
I've seen All Good People
Roundabout
Long Distance Runaround
The main reason they didnt have any other radio hits is because most
of their great songs ranged from 9-20 minutes long. The best songs on
The Yes album are all 9 minute long. Heart of the Sunrise and South
Side of the Sky of Fragile are 10 minute long. CTTE, Relayer and Tales
have combined 10 songs. None of this can be played on radio.
Yes were a great album rock band but not a singles band, just like Led
Zeppelin and Pink Floyd.
RichL
> There are three from the 70s
> I've seen All Good People
> Roundabout
> Long Distance Runaround
>
> The main reason they didnt have any other radio hits is because most
> of their great songs ranged from 9-20 minutes long.
Gee, for some reason that didn't keep Bohemian Rhapsody from being a bit
hit.
RichL
Go back and read the posts that preceded RC's. I'm sure even *you* can
figure it out.
Rockie
> Ok, let people go ahead and think "Yes" is "The Yes." Fine with me.
Thanks!
--
www.rainbowpirates.com
It's a lie, I never stole Cid Summer's stereo!
w
>>>>It wasn't called "the" Yes. The band is called "Yes."
>>>
>>> irrelevant.
>>>
>>> tend to agree with Mackenzie, but only because of what my college-age
>>> daughter tells me. She's the only person she knows at her college, or
>>> in her high school, who knew about Yes and certainly was the only
>>> person who had ever been to a Yes concert. Me and the wife took her to
>>> the 35th anniversary tour thing, which unfortunately, was pretty
>>> boring, with idiots in the row ahead of us, yakking on cel phones.
>>
>>Let me guess.
>>
>>Chastain.
>
> nope, they werent bad at all at Chastain. Pretty good, in fact. This
> was the last time around, at Philips.
Cells at Philips? Hly shitsky.
RichL
message news:hjp_i.22667$JD.1...@newssvr21.news.prodigy.net...
> "RichL" <rple...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > > There are three from the 70s
> > > I've seen All Good People
> > > Roundabout
> > > Long Distance Runaround
> > >
> > > The main reason they didnt have any other radio hits is because most
> > > of their great songs ranged from 9-20 minutes long.
> >
> > hit.
>
> Gee, Mr. All Threads Lead to Queen, "Bohemian Rhapsody" isn't even
> SIX minutes long, much less 9-20.
I was simply pointing out that falling more or less within a 3-minute-or-so
time slot is not a necessary condition for a hit, especially on '70s-era FM
radio.
Jeff
wrote:
Haha. My handle fits well. Well said. LOL
RichL
> "RichL" <rple...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > > Gee, Mr. All Threads Lead to Queen, "Bohemian Rhapsody" isn't even
> > > SIX minutes long, much less 9-20.
> >
> > I was simply pointing out that falling more or less within a
3-minute-or-so
> > time slot is not a necessary condition for a hit, especially on '70s-era
FM
> > radio.
>
Raja was implying it in his post.
> There's still a big difference between nine-minute (or much longer)
> songs getting on rock radio, and six-minute songs getting on rock
> radio.
That's true. I confess I thought BR was longer (maybe because I've heard it
so much it seems to *drag on*). And I chose that example simply out of
familiarity; no ulterior motive ;-)
> I'm probably forgetting a couple, but I can't think of any
> nine-minute plus songs which I routinely heard during my rock-radio
> days beyond "Freebird" and "The End." And even in the case of "The
> End," I wonder if my memory is distorted by all the times I heard
> "The End" as part of special "album showcase" programs where the
> Doors' entire first album was played at once.
It may be a function of the market you are (were) in. I seem to recall
hearing my favorite stations in Boston and Washington DC playing a lot of
really long stuff back in those days; unfortunately, my recollection is
short on specifics. Grateful Dead jams come to mind, but I know there was
more than that.
O'Leary III
> It may be a function of the market you are (were) in. I seem to recall
> hearing my favorite stations in Boston and Washington DC playing a lot of
> really long stuff back in those days; unfortunately, my recollection is
> short on specifics. Grateful Dead jams come to mind, but I know there was
> more than that.
Those were the days. : )
O'Leary III
> Hm. Does anyone else want to pass on their own listening experiences
> here? And, really, let's talk post-1960s, after rock radio started
> developing more of a "format."
Scott Muni on WNEW-FM would play an entire album side, sometimes not on
purpose. This went on into the late '70's, at least. Cool stuff!
Nil
<subscr...@eliteintelligentsiamonthly.com> wrote in
rec.music.beatles:
> Hm. Does anyone else want to pass on their own listening
> experiences here? And, really, let's talk post-1960s, after rock
> radio started developing more of a "format."
I used to tape stuff of KABC and other "underground FM" stations in
L.A. in the late '60s - early '70s. I still have the tapes somewhere.
Long songs such as Cream's "Spoonful", Creedence's "Suzie Q", Allman
Bros. "Whipping Post", Doors "When the Music's Over" and "The End" were
popular and played often.
O'Leary III
>> Ok, let people go ahead and think "Yes" is "The Yes." Fine with me.
>
> Thanks!
Hooters had no "The". Nor did Eagles at first.
The Nice, did, however. And you know Yes didn't and doesn't.
O'Leary III
> OK...but when you talk about "underground," you're talking more
> about unformatted radio....
>
> I've certainly heard both of those Doors tunes on commercial radio
> -- though "The End" much more than the other. Not sure about "Suzie
> Q" and "Whipping Post," because don't both of those songs have long
> and short versions?
If the Los Angeles market was anything like the New York market, KABC-FM
was much like WABC-FM. By the time WABC-FM became WPLJ (in June 1971),
the formatting had begun. Probably that was the case with KLOS. I forget
what the WNEW-FM equivalent was out there. NEW carried the "progessive"
banner into the late '70's at least.
I interviewed Scott several times back then, and he really cared about
that battle, although he knew it was a matter of time before it would
become a losing battle. One example is that they were the last holdout
to use the Crazy Eddie audio featuring Jerry Carroll (who was a very
mellow guy, actually). They would read the same copy, but not have
Jerry's carnival barking recording that everyone else used.
Yes, there were shorter studio versions of "Whipping Post" and
"Freebird". WNEW-FM did not typically edit songs down.
S.F.BZY
> "S.F.BZY" <zepflo...@gmail.com> wrote in message
Its a pop song. big diff. Yes werent making pop.
Mackenzie
> their "new direction" anyway :-) )
Have you ever seen the movie "This is Spinal Tap"?
Mackenzie
> Gee, for some reason that didn't keep Bohemian Rhapsody from being a bit
> hit.
That's because it was such a damn good song. :)
RichL
> "RichL" <rple...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > > And no one's claiming otherwise.
> >
> > Raja was implying it in his post.
>
> perfectly accurate.
>
> > That's true. I confess I thought BR was longer
>
> looked it up on the Web).
>
> On the other hand, I also looked up "The End" and that was *longer*
> than I would have guessed.
>
> > > I'm probably forgetting a couple, but I can't think of any
> > > nine-minute plus songs which I routinely heard during my rock-radio
> > > days beyond "Freebird" and "The End." And even in the case of "The
> > > End," I wonder if my memory is distorted by all the times I heard
> > > "The End" as part of special "album showcase" programs where the
> > > Doors' entire first album was played at once.
> >
> > It may be a function of the market you are (were) in. I seem to recall
> > hearing my favorite stations in Boston and Washington DC playing a lot
of
> > really long stuff back in those days; unfortunately, my recollection is
> > short on specifics. Grateful Dead jams come to mind, but I know there
was
> > more than that.
>
> here? And, really, let's talk post-1960s, after rock radio started
> developing more of a "format."
Well, my DC listening experience started in 1970. Unfortunately I don't
remember the call letters of the station I listened to here in the 70s but
it was definitely in the "underground" variety. Then starting in the early
80s I listened to WHFS, which at the time was a locally-owned station,
definitely not what you'd consider "commercial", which played a lot of local
music as well as little-known artists from all over the country. They
played everything from Beat Farmers to pre-fame Bangles. So I suppose if
you're thinking in terms of "hit radio", my personal experience was mainly
outside of that realm at the time. It really wasn't until sometime in the
1990s when WHFS was sold to corporate ownership and went more mainstream,
but until then I had pretty good access to underground/alternative music
over the airwaves since the late '60s.
David W
RichL
"I've Seen All Good People", "Roundabout", and "Long Distance Runaround" are
as "poppy" as Bohemian Rhapsody. As are "Owner Of A Lonely Heart" and "It
Can Happen", IMO. In fact, my major complaint about Yes is that they are
*too much* in this vein compared with the other two bands in your OP. To
me, the vocals reek of that Styx/REO Speedwagon sound, which quickly grows
tiring to me.
David W
>> hit.
>
> That's because it was such a damn good song. :)
Actually, it's pretentious crap.
RichL
news:kqmdnUmmnbhFzqfa...@comcast.com...
> Rockie wrote:
>
> >> Ok, let people go ahead and think "Yes" is "The Yes." Fine with me.
> >
> > Thanks!
>
> Hooters had no "The". Nor did Eagles at first.
You mean these Hooters?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Hooters
They definitely had a "The".
On the other hand, if these are the hooters you have in mind:
http://www.hootersrmd.com/featured_gallery.php
The "the" is optional ;-)
There was, however, a band called The The.
I need a beer.
O'Leary III
> You mean these Hooters?
>
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Hooters
>
> They definitely had a "The".
They didn't want to. I guess there's no arguing with the almighty Wiki.
I actually preferred their predecessor, Baby Grand. Now there was a band
that should have one somewhere. And no mandolin!
> On the other hand, if these are the hooters you have in mind:
>
> http://www.hootersrmd.com/featured_gallery.php
>
> The "the" is optional ;-)
There's one near me, and I've never been there. I was at one in Albany
once. Bad food. I guess that's not why people go. : )
> There was, however, a band called The The.
I saw them open for the Police at Irving Plaza in 1979. I don't remember
anything about it.
> I need a beer.
Which reminds me...
RichL
news:l0v_i.25762$tp3.1...@nasal.pacific.net.au...
You feel that way, probably, because you basically don't understand Queen.
Do you think Queen really took that stuff seriously? Do you think ol'
Freddie put a crown on his head and wrapped himself in the Union Jack at
the end of concerts because he thought he was the friggin' Queen of England?
Think of it this way, because it may be easier to understand. I think most
of us can get that The Who represented anger, angst, introspection, etc. (at
least from Tommy onward).
Well, Queen was the anti-Who. They were about fun, mockery, silliness.
RichL
> RichL wrote:
>
> > You mean these Hooters?
> >
> > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Hooters
> >
> > They definitely had a "The".
>
> They didn't want to. I guess there's no arguing with the almighty Wiki.
> I actually preferred their predecessor, Baby Grand. Now there was a band
> that should have one somewhere. And no mandolin!
You're right! I just checked my copy of "Nervous Night", no "The"! I never
even noticed that before. Of course I haven't played it in about 12 years,
not since one of my sons decided it would be a good idea to record him and a
friend playing guitars over the first three songs. Damned if they weren't
the best three on the album, too!
> > On the other hand, if these are the hooters you have in mind:
> >
> > http://www.hootersrmd.com/featured_gallery.php
> >
> > The "the" is optional ;-)
>
>
> There's one near me, and I've never been there. I was at one in Albany
> once. Bad food. I guess that's not why people go. : )
There's one at Harborplace in Baltimore's Inner Harbor, which I went to a
few times when I used to see Orioles games (before what's-his-name bought
the team). Also, there's a large convention center nearby that hosted a
number of technical conferences I attended, and we occasionally went to
Hooters for lunch. It's funny watching a bunch of nerdy physicists trying
to eat with their tongues hanging out of their mouths. And oh yeah, the
food isn't bad if you know what to order ;-)
> > There was, however, a band called The The.
>
>
> I saw them open for the Police at Irving Plaza in 1979. I don't remember
> anything about it.
>
>
> > I need a beer.
>
>
> Which reminds me...
I got a head start.
O'Leary III
> You're right! I just checked my copy of "Nervous Night", no "The"! I never
> even noticed that before.
That's for the reality check. I just remember a guy on the cew making a
big deal about it for their receipt once.
> Of course I haven't played it in about 12 years,
> not since one of my sons decided it would be a good idea to record him and a
> friend playing guitars over the first three songs. Damned if they weren't
> the best three on the album, too!
Sounds like he has good taste!
> There's one at Harborplace in Baltimore's Inner Harbor, which I went to a
> few times when I used to see Orioles games (before what's-his-name bought
> the team). Also, there's a large convention center nearby that hosted a
> number of technical conferences I attended, and we occasionally went to
> Hooters for lunch. It's funny watching a bunch of nerdy physicists trying
> to eat with their tongues hanging out of their mouths. And oh yeah, the
> food isn't bad if you know what to order ;-)
People say the wings are good. That's not the only part that's good. : )
Like I say, I have to get to an O's game. I was also checking out the
new Nationals park on their site tonight. That's almost ready.
O'Leary III
> Do you think Queen really took that stuff seriously? Do you think ol'
> Freddie put a crown on his head and wrapped himself in the Union Jack at
> the end of concerts because he thought he was the friggin' Queen of England?
>
> Think of it this way, because it may be easier to understand. I think most
> of us can get that The Who represented anger, angst, introspection, etc. (at
> least from Tommy onward).
>
> Well, Queen was the anti-Who. They were about fun, mockery, silliness.
I can see that. I love bands with a sense of humor. King Crimson was
always about that. Obviously J. Lennon was like that, too.
Did you ever hear David Spade's routine about being a gay Queen fan?
Kinda funny in a David Spade way.
RichL
news:MOadnYm7SsO5GKfa...@comcast.com...
Can't say I've had the pleasure. I bet it's funny though; I like him!
Steven Sullivan
> "David W" <n...@email.provided> wrote in message
> news:l0v_i.25762$tp3.1...@nasal.pacific.net.au...
> > "Mackenzie" <jade...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> > > >
> > >> Gee, for some reason that didn't keep Bohemian Rhapsody from being a
> bit
> > >> hit.
> > >
> > > That's because it was such a damn good song. :)
> >
> > Actually, it's pretentious crap.
> You feel that way, probably, because you basically don't understand Queen.
> Do you think Queen really took that stuff seriously?
Freddie didn't, but Brian May did.
Guitarists!
___
-S
"As human beings, we understand the world through simile, analogy,
metaphor, narrative and, sometimes, claymation." - B. Mason
RichL
news:fhe0uv$ff7$2...@reader1.panix.com...
> In alt.music.yes RichL <rple...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > "David W" <n...@email.provided> wrote in message
> > news:l0v_i.25762$tp3.1...@nasal.pacific.net.au...
> > > "Mackenzie" <jade...@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> > > > >
> > > >> Gee, for some reason that didn't keep Bohemian Rhapsody from being
a
> > bit
> > > >> hit.
> > > >
> > > > That's because it was such a damn good song. :)
> > >
> > > Actually, it's pretentious crap.
>
> > You feel that way, probably, because you basically don't understand
Queen.
>
> > Do you think Queen really took that stuff seriously?
>
> Freddie didn't, but Brian May did.
>
> Guitarists!
Hey, I represent that remark!
But you're right in a way, Brian took it more seriously than Freddie did.
Nowhere near the degree that Pete Townshend took *himself* though, IMO.
RichL
news:MOadnYm7SsO5GKfa...@comcast.com...
> I can see that. I love bands with a sense of humor. King Crimson was
> always about that. Obviously J. Lennon was like that, too.
I like these guys' attitudes:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4tCL3bTFDog
Nil
<subscr...@eliteintelligentsiamonthly.com> wrote in
rec.music.beatles:
> OK...but when you talk about "underground," you're talking more
> about unformatted radio....
I'm not following this conversation, and I don't know what kind of
evidence you're gathering to support what theory, but you seemed to
be asking if long songs were played on the radio. They were. Even
after the L.A. stations started to get more structured in the
early-to-mid '70s, I would still hear long songs and sometimes even
whole albums. KABC changed names, I forget to what. KLOS and KMET
were also fairly free-form. So was KGB San Diego when I lived there.
> Not sure about "Suzie Q" and "Whipping Post," because don't both
> of those songs have long and short versions?
Suzie Q has been edited down, and the studio version of Whipping
Post is short-ish. I'm talking about the full length versions.
O'Leary III
> I like these guys' attitudes:
>
> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4tCL3bTFDog
Cool. Then there's Brooklyn's own:
w
> On Tue, 13 Nov 2007 17:16:56 -0500, w <loverl...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>On Tue, 13 Nov 2007 14:14:50 -0500, RC_Moonpie wrote:
>>
>>>>>>It wasn't called "the" Yes. The band is called "Yes."
>>>>>
>>>>> irrelevant.
>>>>>
>>>>> tend to agree with Mackenzie, but only because of what my college-age
>>>>> daughter tells me. She's the only person she knows at her college, or
>>>>> in her high school, who knew about Yes and certainly was the only
>>>>> person who had ever been to a Yes concert. Me and the wife took her to
>>>>> the 35th anniversary tour thing, which unfortunately, was pretty
>>>>> boring, with idiots in the row ahead of us, yakking on cel phones.
>>>>
>>>>Let me guess.
>>>>
>>>>Chastain.
>>>
>>> nope, they werent bad at all at Chastain. Pretty good, in fact. This
>>> was the last time around, at Philips.
>>
>>Cells at Philips? Hly shitsky.
>
> I've been seeing live video bootlegs of bands in concert on YouTube,
> filmed from cel phones.
Shit, I fukken tried that at Chastain, a quick still, and Tull's Mouse
Police Truly Did Not Sleep, they got fukken nasty.
I was scared.
Reeely.
David W
news:Uav_i.2526$RR1.2205@trnddc02...
> "David W" <n...@email.provided> wrote in message
>> > >
>> >> Gee, for some reason that didn't keep Bohemian Rhapsody from being a
> bit
>> >> hit.
>> >
>> > That's because it was such a damn good song. :)
>>
>> Actually, it's pretentious crap.
>
> You feel that way, probably, because you basically don't understand Queen.
>
> Do you think Queen really took that stuff seriously? Do you think ol'
> Freddie put a crown on his head and wrapped himself in the Union Jack at
> the end of concerts because he thought he was the friggin' Queen of England?
>
> Think of it this way, because it may be easier to understand. I think most
> of us can get that The Who represented anger, angst, introspection, etc. (at
> least from Tommy onward).
>
> Well, Queen was the anti-Who. They were about fun, mockery, silliness.
Okay, if there's a subtlety I've missed then maybe I've judged it harshly, but
I'd need something more specific than fun, mockery and silliness.
Mackenzie
> Actually, it's pretentious crap.
David, if you only understood the message behind the song it is a true
work of genius. Do you notice how much the tempos and melody
structures change throughout the song? In the beginning, we have a
slower tempo, then faster, then slower at the end. Bohemian Rhapsody
is sung and arranged as if the person's thoughts are displayed in
front of us. He is feeling very sorry for himself in the beginning,
hence the slower tempo without the guitars; and then he becomes angry
with his situation. Later in this stage we can since an explosion
(achieved by the ending guitar solo) and descending of thought
(achieved by the slow piano chords towards the end of this section).
Then, he feels as if whatever will be will.
It is showy for a reason and one reason only: to make you feel the
story. It is not just another pop or folk number, it is a well thought
out and arranged song. The only other song that is similar is
Happiness Is A Warm Gun. HIAWG still sounds as if it is four songs
pieced together into one.
David W
I don't dispute that the music itself is good and there's obviously a lot of
talent behind it. So I shouldn't have called it crap. But the overall impression
I get from the setting and the thing taken as a whole is of pretentiousness.
However, as I said elsewhere, if there's a subtlety I've missed then maybe I'm
too harsh.