[ ]   [ ]   [ ]                        [ ]      [ ]   [ ]
Yes — It Can Happen
Album: 90125
Avg rating:
6.2

Your rating:
Total ratings: 223









Released: 1983
Length: 5:17
Plays (last 30 days): 0
You can fool yourself
You can cheat until you're blind
You can cut your heart
It can happen
You can mend the wires
You can feed the soul apart

You reach
It can happen to you
It can happen to me
It can happen to everyone eventually

(It's a constant fight)
A constant fight
You're pushing the needle to the red

(Black and white)
Who knows who's right
No substitute you're born you're dead
(Fly by night)
Created out of fantasy
Our destination calls

Look up - Look down
Look out - Look around
Look up - Look down
There's a crazy world outside
We're not about to lose our pride

It can happen to you
It can happen to me
It can happen to everyone eventually
As you happen to say
It can happen today
As it happens It happens in every way

This world I like
We architects of life
A song a sigh
Developing words that linger
Through fields of green through open eyes
This for us to see

Look up - Look down
Look out - Look around
So look up - Look down
There's a crazy world outside
We're not about to lose our pride

It can happen to you
It can happen to me
It can happen to everyone eventually
As you happen to say
It can happen today
As it happens It happens in every way
As you happen to see
It will happen to be
Nothing happens to nowhere and nowhere

(Solo)

Look up - Look down
There's a crazy world outside
We're not about to lose our pride

It can happen to you
It can happen to me
It can happen to everyone eventually
As you happen to see
It will happen to be
Nothing happens to nowhere and nowhere

You can fool yourself
You can cheat until you're blind
It can happen to me
You can cut your heart
It can happen to eveyone eventually
As you happen to say
It can happen today
As it happens It happens in every way
You can mend the wires
You can feed the soul apart
You can touch your life
You can bring your soul alive

It can happen to you
It can happen to me
It can happen to everyone eventually
As you happen to say
It can happen today
As it happens It happens in every way
Comments (105)add comment
I dig it...have since it's release. It's a great album, as well.
pigglywiggly wrote:
This guy's voice is like nails on a chalkboard as far as I am concerned. :stop:
Say you HAD to pick between listening to this guy or Getty Lee.....
terrible
CBJr wrote:
Liking this song is definitely not going to happen to me.
I agree. I think this is aweful!
One of the best songs.. from one of the best Prog rock bands of all time....
in order to classic fragile, close to the edge, or something like tormato, this song can't believe to happen :( blaah.
randomprime wrote:
Can anyone post comments here or is this forum limited to Trustocity and nuggler? Not that I have anything to add... "Look up. Look down. Look at my thumb..."
BOP! "Gee, you're dumb." (He's Eric Stratton, and he's damn glad to meet you.)
reminds me of my sister when we were kids.. keep in mind we are now 33 and 31 and listened to this when I was 16. most people i knew at that age didn't listen to them. my sister really turned me on to a variety of music and i am so thankful.
what zip code is 90125?
Yeesh. The longer this song goes on the less I like it. :headshake:
Liking this song is definitely not going to happen to me.
oh yeah - and about this song....(does anyone remember this song?) Yes, this is Yes..in name. But this was really a solo record by Trevor Rabin and by the time it got all dressed up, and Jon Anderson came aboard, it became a Yes record. But without Steve Howe and Rick Wakeman, criticising it is like saying Pink Floyd sucks because you don't like Learning to Fly. (I don't) I fully understand and appreciate how you can not like this band - mazel tov - in the end - I love 'em...with their reach almost always exceeding their grasp - they still managed to turn out absolutely singular music, sounding like no other (some say thank god for that) and the secret about them is....in the day...they really effin rocked - face melting - soul shaking rock.
Zep wrote:
Thus spake the Wise King.
whew, and thank god for the Sex Pistols reunion - no irony there. This doesn't have to be a zero sum game - most of the absolute new wave crap in the 80's was a direct result of the punk 'revoltion'. Oh, and by the way it wasn't a revolution - the Pistol's were just the Monkees of punk - the Punkees. Meet the new boss, same as the old boss.
thewiseking wrote:
thank goodness for yes. for if not for this pretentious, overblown, bombastic arena crap, the punk rock/new wave indie revolt would never have found its footing.
Thus spake the Wise King.
This guy's voice is like nails on a chalkboard as far as I am concerned. :stop:
thank goodness for yes. for if not for this pretentious, overblown, bombastic arena crap, the punk rock/new wave indie revolt would never have found its footing.
Opening sitar chord is identical (intriguingly) to Beatles' Love You To. This song is three dimensional when listened to through headphones! More Yes, please... the Extraordinary Architects of Sound!
randomprime wrote:
Can anyone post comments here or is this forum limited to Trustocity and nuggler? Not that I have anything to add... "Look up. Look down. Look at my thumb..."
"Now look at Mr. Frying Pan!" *CLANG!*
Yes and Jon Anderson have been around forever...and putting out new material to boot. That must mean something. Sure, some of it is pop trash but some of it is brilliant. Do our idols have to be on the pedestal all they time or are they allowed to fall off occasionally? I had the pleasure of seeing Yes in what I believe was their first US concert as a headliner in 1972 at Millersville (PA) University (then Millersville State Teachers College.) Claire Brothers of Lititz (PA) did the sound and their next stop was Philly and the Spectrum. Fragile had just come out and I remember being transformed. They were arguably at their peak but at the time nobody knew it. 30+ years later and I'm still a fan. Stand by your BAND!!! This song is one of my faves. :bounce: \:D/
Can anyone post comments here or is this forum limited to Trustocity and nuggler? Not that I have anything to add... "Look up. Look down. Look at my thumb..."
jagdriver wrote:
:verymad: :headshake: :stop: :skull: :puke: Oh, did I mention how much I HATE this group?
If not, perhaps I didn't express myself clearly... Oh, and I said I hate the GROUP, not just the song. More precisely, I detest Jon's vocals. If I had some karoake software or HW box that could knock out just that portion, this would probably be GREAT music..performed by highly-respected rock musicians (Wakeman, et al.). It's kind of like those listeners, including myself, who simply cannot tolerate Kenny G's syruppy sax playing. Or when Blood, Sweat & Tears lost Al Kooper and replaced him with, ugh, David Clayton Thomas. Or Journey when they brought in Steve Perry and Greg Rolie relinquished his position as lead vocalist. There... am Im more clear? Oh, and I am definitely pathological!
nuggler wrote:
I was kinda being facetious there but hey, we be OK.
And now, a bit of fun....
Nuggler, I like you, too. Thanks for sparring with me. No hate, just love.
Trustocity wrote:
Is your "drift" that hating a Yes song is like hating poison ivy? If it's not, then you are the one who has "drifted." If it is... If it is... Here is your argument with the phrase "that Yes song" replacing the pronoun it. Let's see if your argument is as silly as I make it out to be, shall we? "We hate (that Yes song) because we had a bad experience with it or simply because everyone else hates it. We hate (that Yes song) without knowing anything about it. We hate (that Yes song) without taking a closer look & seeing the microcosm of life that symbiotically co-exists along with (that Yes song) or how it uniquely contributes to its microenvironment. We hate (that Yes song) because we have chosen not to educate ourselves on its unique roll in the natural order of things. We hate (that Yes song), essentially, because we are ignorant. Yes. We *hate* because we are *ignorant*." If you are the self-aware student of life and nature as you proclaim, then learn this: You overreacted, and your views on the power of words are extreme if not fringe. Words have no power, only the ideas they convey. I'd no sooner praise a car battery rusting in the grass than I'd praise words without context. And most important of all, I hate this song.
Words have no power?!!! Whew. Though I will say, I like your intellectual approach...honestly...
nuggler wrote:
Right. Poison Ivy…who can say they like Poison Ivy? No, we hate the stuff, don't we?!!
Is your "drift" that hating a Yes song is like hating poison ivy? If it's not, then you are the one who has "drifted." If it is... If it is... Here is your argument with the phrase "that Yes song" replacing the pronoun it. Let's see if your argument is as silly as I make it out to be, shall we? "We hate (that Yes song) because we had a bad experience with it or simply because everyone else hates it. We hate (that Yes song) without knowing anything about it. We hate (that Yes song) without taking a closer look & seeing the microcosm of life that symbiotically co-exists along with (that Yes song) or how it uniquely contributes to its microenvironment. We hate (that Yes song) because we have chosen not to educate ourselves on its unique roll in the natural order of things. We hate (that Yes song), essentially, because we are ignorant. Yes. We *hate* because we are *ignorant*." If you are the self-aware student of life and nature as you proclaim, then learn this: You overreacted, and your views on the power of words are extreme if not fringe. Words have no power, only the ideas they convey. I'd no sooner praise a car battery rusting in the grass than I'd praise words without context. And most important of all, I hate this song.
Trustocity wrote:
You've taken an innocent, unguarded, VERY obviously exaggerated statement and turned it into an indicative example of how a segment of the population, proceeding with disregard for the feelings and needs of their fellows, are responsible for exaccerbating a pervasive subculture of animosity which threatens to undo society's attempts at good, such as the artistic expression "It Can Happen" by the band Yes. I sincerely hope you're being disingenuous, because no one can be that dumb. But just in case these ramblings of yours represent what can only loosely be called your system of beliefs, allow me to point out one more time that Jagdriver is simply expressing his dislike (cf. the definition you posted) for a song, whereas you point out the mere existence of dislike as tantamount to suffering from a disease. You big bully.
Relax man. Don't expect me to apologize for an observation I made simply because *you* perceive it as an attempt to bully someone. Quote : "Hate is a pretty strong word & says much more about you than the band." Right. Poison Ivy…who can say they like Poison Ivy? No, we hate the stuff, don't we?!! We hate it because we had a bad experience with it or simply because everyone else hates it. We hate it without knowing anything about it. We hate it without taking a closer look & seeing the microcosm of life that symbiotically co-exists along with the ivy or how it uniquely contributes to its microenvironment. We hate it because we have chosen not to educate ourselves on its unique roll in the natural order of things. We hate it, essentially, because we are ignorant. Yes. We *hate* because we are *ignorant*. There! Now get out your little green face & puke all over that one if you must. You & the other guy. Otherwise, just meditate on it for a minute or two which is what I suggest. You might just learn something about yourself. I do. All the time. So, if those are ‘bullying words', too bad.
ploafmaster wrote:
This is the last post I'm making on this, because 6 posts ago this became too far removed from comments on a song by Yes.
Okay, so I lied... I just had to thank Trustocity for offering his usual intellectual say. Whenever you do post, it's at least fun to read, and typically more rational than 95% of the responses I receive.
nuggler wrote:
There is enough here for you to get the gist of what I'm putting down. Yes, we are free to do & think as we please, as free as the 'hate' that flows through all sectors of our culture. Now ask yourself this. How does it get there & what part do we unconsciously play in perpetuating the condition?
Wow...are you seriously suggesting that by people hating a particular song or painting, that they are contributing to this pervasive hatred "that flows through all sectors of our culture" of which you speak? I'm not sure what you mean by you're first sentence, either. Are you suggesting that I am contributing to our culture's rampant hatred? Or that the negativity on these comment boards are evidence to your point? Do you see how out of context your point is to what was originally stated? Somebody said he/she hates this song, and you've lept so far away from that, discussing the vast, pathological hate problems of our society. Maybe you really think they're connected. In fact, because I hate Reggae, I'm going to go kill all my neighbors who are different from me. Because that's the next logical step. Oh wait - not even close. This is the last post I'm making on this, because 6 posts ago this became too far removed from comments on a song by Yes.
nuggler wrote:
Hate, my friend...
To call me your "friend" is a sarcastic, manipulative, and condescending ploy on your part and the first sign of your disingenuity. nuggler wrote:
...is a pathological condition in whatever form it may come in...
Untrue. We may hate racism, poverty, inefficiency, and a score of other blights on the progression of a just society. nuggler wrote:
...If you don't mean it, don't use it...
What does "mean" mean? Could it be that Jagdriver sincerely dislikes this song, but uses "hate" as a shorthand? In contrast, I'm unsettled to think that you "mean" some of the less salient points you made today. nuggler wrote:
...There is a power in words...
Apparently, that power can be abused by those who seek to bully others into thinking and acting as they do. It's sharp irony that you end up overpowering others by attributing more power to one word than is appropriate. nuggler wrote:
...even though you might not be aware of it.
Now there's an interesting closer. Do you mean to imply that I'm not aware of it? Whence cometh your own awareness, or are you simply content to let the sheer verbosity of your exposition qualify as your credential for possessing superior etymological comprehension? I just... geez... I really hate that you tried to bully that guy around. You're not even sorry for overreacting. It's so mean. I couldn't stand by and just watch.
nuggler wrote:
There is enough here for you to get the gist of what I'm putting down. Yes, we are free to do & think as we please, as free as the 'hate' that flows through all sectors of our culture. Now ask yourself this. How does it get there & what part do we unconsciously play in perpetuating the condition?
You've taken an innocent, unguarded, VERY obviously exaggerated statement and turned it into an indicative example of how a segment of the population, proceeding with disregard for the feelings and needs of their fellows, are responsible for exaccerbating a pervasive subculture of animosity which threatens to undo society's attempts at good, such as the artistic expression "It Can Happen" by the band Yes. I sincerely hope you're being disingenuous, because no one can be that dumb. But just in case these ramblings of yours represent what can only loosely be called your system of beliefs, allow me to point out one more time that Jagdriver is simply expressing his dislike (cf. the definition you posted) for a song, whereas you point out the mere existence of dislike as tantamount to suffering from a disease. You big bully.
ploafmaster wrote:
Did you catch that line? "Most common vernacular use." Please don't tell me you really believe that most people who use the word "hate" ALWAYS use it in terms of the first definition. When my wife says she hates peas, do you really think she's afraid of them? Or perhaps you think my wife is afraid of injury? Death by peas? Or maybe, she simply means they are her least favorite vegetable, or one of her least favorite vegetables. I'm pretty sure that's what the original commentor mean when posting slingin' hatred towards this song... So okay, I'm sittin' back waiting for you to tell us all that this was an elaborate joke, and silly us for taking you seriously.
There is enough here for you to get the gist of what I'm putting down. Yes, we are free to do & think as we please, as free as the 'hate' that flows through all sectors of our culture. Now ask yourself this. How does it get there & what part do we unconsciously play in perpetuating the condition?
nuggler wrote:
Hate, my friend, is a pathological condition in whatever form it may come in. If you don't mean it, don't use it. There is a power in words, even though you might not be aware of it.
Well either you're not listening (reading), or you're hell-bent on finishing your diatribe: nuggler wrote:
Merriam Dictionary Hate : 1 a : intense hostility and aversion usually deriving from fear, anger, or sense of injury b : extreme dislike or antipathy : LOATHING When a person can apply an emotion such as this to what is essentially the pinnacle of human expression, it would indicate a degree of pathology in that person's precepts, not so?
Clearly you can tell I pulled my definition from the same source? Here's what I said: ploafmaster wrote:
No, sorry. Your drift still doesn't make sense. Considering the most common vernacular use of "hate" is "extreme dislike or antipathy,"
Did you catch that line? "Most common vernacular use." Please don't tell me you really believe that most people who use the word "hate" ALWAYS use it in terms of the first definition. When my wife says she hates peas, do you really think she's afraid of them? Or perhaps you think my wife is afraid of injury? Death by peas? Or maybe, she simply means they are her least favorite vegetable, or one of her least favorite vegetables. I'm pretty sure that's what the original commentor mean when posting slingin' hatred towards this song... So okay, I'm sittin' back waiting for you to tell us all that this was an elaborate joke, and silly us for taking you seriously.
Trustocity wrote:
You didn't really call the guy pathological, did you? Seriously? That's your attempt at objectivity? You don't really think "It Can Happen" is the pinnacle of human expression, right? Because if you don't, your awkward sentence structure implies it and makes your other salient points suspect. Lastly, you don't really think he HATES the song, do you? I mean, it's just a little ditty. I can barely muster distaste. You big bully.
Hate, my friend, is a pathological condition in whatever form it may come in. If you don't mean it, don't use it. There is a power in words, even though you might not be aware of it.
nuggler wrote:
Merriam Dictionary Hate : 1 a : intense hostility and aversion usually deriving from fear, anger, or sense of injury b : extreme dislike or antipathy : LOATHING When a person can apply an emotion such as this to what is essentially the pinnacle of human expression, it would indicate a degree of pathology in that person's precepts, not so?
You didn't really call the guy pathological, did you? Seriously? That's your attempt at objectivity? You don't really think "It Can Happen" is the pinnacle of human expression, right? Because if you don't, your awkward sentence structure implies it and makes your other salient points suspect. Lastly, you don't really think he HATES the song, do you? I mean, it's just a little ditty. I can barely muster distaste. You big bully.
nuggler wrote:
Not too much to presume when one has to a certain degree an understanding of what processes in a person inspires one to produce art. Once you have a fair idea of exactly what it is that moves the spirit to find expression in that manner, it would not be that easy to choose to 'hate' the fruits of that expression in another being even if it is not quite to your taste. Your 'hate' says more about YOU than the object you choose to hate. Catch my drift?
I'm with Ploafmaster on this one. I'd say your "certain degree of understanding" of what processes went into THIS piece of art (not your own, but a different artist) are no more or less indepth than, say, Jagdriver's. Why do you think you're more qualified to LIKE the song than he is to hate it? Of course, if you're secretly an international rock group's frontman and Jag is just a lowly critic, then you've got a leg to stand on, but I doubt you are, and I doubt you can tell me Jag ISN'T. You're taking a long and winding road to arrive at a very simple point: You're annoyed at Jagdriver for disagreeing with your assessment of the song. I would submit that his hyperbolic exaggeration is shorter and, therefore, much more entertaining than yours. Whereas mine, longer than either of yours, is entirely enlightening and delicious. Yum. But mostly, I see you, Nuggler, attacking Jag personally, whereas he is attacking a song. Does this say more about you than it does about how much you despise Jag, Ploaf, and now me? Bully.
ploafmaster wrote:
No, sorry. Your drift still doesn't make sense. Considering the most common vernacular use of "hate" is "extreme dislike or antipathy," I think it is still quite easy for somebody to be completely turned off to the fruits of an artist's expression. Even when you understand what goes into the creation of an artistic expression, you can still have utter dislike for the result; you can hate it. So unless you're using a different meaning for hate than most other people, the only thing using the word, "hate" says about the user is that he/she has "extreme dislike or antipathy" for the song/painting/etc.
Merriam Dictionary Hate : 1 a : intense hostility and aversion usually deriving from fear, anger, or sense of injury b : extreme dislike or antipathy : LOATHING When a person can apply an emotion such as this to what is essentially the pinnacle of human expression, it would indicate a degree of pathology in that person's precepts, not so?
nuggler wrote:
Not too much to presume when one has to a certain degree an understanding of what processes in a person inspires one to produce art. Once you have a fair idea of exactly what it is that moves the spirit to find expression in that manner, it would not be that easy to choose to 'hate' the fruits of that expression in another being even if it is not quite to your taste. Your 'hate' says more about YOU than the object you choose to hate. Catch my drift?
No, sorry. Your drift still doesn't make sense. Considering the most common vernacular use of "hate" is "extreme dislike or antipathy," I think it is still quite easy for somebody to be completely turned off to the fruits of an artist's expression. Even when you understand what goes into the creation of an artistic expression, you can still have utter dislike for the result; you can hate it. So unless you're using a different meaning for hate than most other people, the only thing using the word, "hate" says about the user is that he/she has "extreme dislike or antipathy" for the song/painting/etc.
ploafmaster wrote:
That's a lot of presumption on your part, though. You can no more determine the "inner thought process" of somebody based on verbal communication than you can determine the emotion of a guitar player by the visible performance. Should we all be required to provide a thorough, outlined explanation of why we don't like a song before we say we "hate" it? If that's the case, we should also be required to do the same when we say we "love" a song. Yeah, I prefer to hear sound reasons for why somebody doesn't like something, but I don't think that should be required of anybody here before posting an opinion - positive, or negative. Love, or hate.
Not too much to presume when one has to a certain degree an understanding of what processes in a person inspires one to produce art. Once you have a fair idea of exactly what it is that moves the spirit to find expression in that manner, it would not be that easy to choose to 'hate' the fruits of that expression in another being even if it is not quite to your taste. Your 'hate' says more about YOU than the object you choose to hate. Catch my drift?
nuggler wrote:
It says that there is not much of an 'inner' thought process taking place.
That's a lot of presumption on your part, though. You can no more determine the "inner thought process" of somebody based on verbal communication than you can determine the emotion of a guitar player by the visible performance. Should we all be required to provide a thorough, outlined explanation of why we don't like a song before we say we "hate" it? If that's the case, we should also be required to do the same when we say we "love" a song. Yeah, I prefer to hear sound reasons for why somebody doesn't like something, but I don't think that should be required of anybody here before posting an opinion - positive, or negative. Love, or hate.
ploafmaster wrote:
Hold on...why does the use of "hate" say more about the user than the song? What does it say about the user of the word? That he/she is willing to express the most extreme form of dislike for something? Or perhaps it's hyperbole? That would make it no worse than saying "I've heard this a million times." Simplistic as it is, I think for someone to say that he/she HATES a song says something about the song: it doesn't fit with the hater's tastes.
It says that there is not much of an 'inner' thought process taking place.
jean-louis wrote:
Tony Banks with yes?? When did that happen?
Tony Banks was never a member of Yes, Tony Kaye (Keyboards) & Peter Banks (Guitar) were both members so I can see how that mistake happened.
nuggler wrote:
Hate is a very strong word & says much more about you than the song. Yes would most certainly rate as one of the top twenty bands of all time. But of course, this is only my opinion. Go Trevor...!
Hold on...why does the use of "hate" say more about the user than the song? What does it say about the user of the word? That he/she is willing to express the most extreme form of dislike for something? Or perhaps it's hyperbole? That would make it no worse than saying "I've heard this a million times." Simplistic as it is, I think for someone to say that he/she HATES a song says something about the song: it doesn't fit with the hater's tastes.
Wow, I actually like this. I thought the entire album was like, "Owner of a Lonely Heart," and so I avoided it. I'll have to hear more tracks now...
jagdriver wrote:
:verymad: :headshake: :stop: :skull: :puke: Oh, did I mention how much I HATE this group?
Hate is a pretty strong word & says much more about you than the band.Easy there... Yes would most certainly rate as one of the top twenty bands of all time. But of course, this is only my opinion. Go Trevor...!
one of the best records made in the 80s - probably the best.
Iv been a fan of yes ever since my dad introduced me to some of there albums when i was a wee nipper... Loved just about every track i hav herd of them... This is no different...
IMHO The weakest of the Yes offerings, and I've listened to them all. That's not to say it's not better than a lot of crud that came out of the 80s, but I'd still rather listen to anything with a Roger Dean painting on the cover :)
bluedot wrote:
I think it's kinda cool that yes has survived the (sometimes temporary) replacement of EVERY MEMBER except chris squire. remember bill bruford? the buggles? patrick moraz? trevor rabin? tony banks? someone should make a documentary.
Tony Banks with yes?? When did that happen?
randomprime wrote:
This is not classic YES, so what. It' far better than a lot of the dreck from the 80's: MJ's Thriller? Rockwell? Katrina and the Waves? Hall and Oates? I'll take this over those anyday.
Hall and Oates? Hey, wait a second, I like Hall and Oates, especially the early stuff, up to Maneater , and I'm glad they made some money after that. RED
As a child of the 80's sitting here in her ol' rocking chair, it is great to hear memory trips like this once in awhile.
:verymad: :headshake: :stop: :skull: :puke: Oh, did I mention how much I HATE this group?
beelzebubba wrote:
This is NOT Yes. This is Trevor Rabin holding the torch for the some of the worse music that came out of the '80's.
I think it's kinda cool that yes has survived the (sometimes temporary) replacement of EVERY MEMBER except chris squire. remember bill bruford? the buggles? patrick moraz? trevor rabin? tony banks? someone should make a documentary.
Yes got smart, took on Rabin, made a commercially viable album, and made it on the charts. The music may not be as esoteric, but still has the polish and taste of the pros in the band. Good on them.
russellkanning wrote:
I like this .....and I like the old stuff....I even love the over-the-top "Topographic Oceans" :)
Yes, Topographic Oceans..ahhhh loved it...but can I marry Jon Anderson? Major crush...
beelzebubba wrote:
This is NOT Yes. This is Trevor Rabin holding the torch for the some of the worse music that came out of the '80's.
This is not classic YES, so what. It' far better than a lot of the dreck from the 80's: MJ's Thriller? Rockwell? Katrina and the Waves? Hall and Oates? I'll take this over those anyday.
russellkanning wrote:
I like this .....and I like the old stuff....I even love the over-the-top "Topographic Oceans" :)
I love Yes. I love TFTO's, rk. Those of you compaining about this pick; he could have chosen something from "Union" - i found it in a used bin for a buck and thought "what a find!" I was wrong. Oh, well, produce that many albums there have got to be a couple ho-hums.
GregK wrote:
yawn
I can relate to that.
ralphcanoe wrote:
I understand the comments of Yes purists, but this one is special for me. The soundtrack to some of the best colloege moments of life, and introduced me to their more classic stuff.
Same for me. Also the case for Pink Floyd's "Momentary Lapse of Reason." It really is all about the context.
I like this .....and I like the old stuff....I even love the over-the-top "Topographic Oceans" :)
GregK wrote:
yawn
Normally I'd agree with the preceeding "loser" comment -- I'm a huge Yes fan -- but this song is so obviously lacking in value. It just sucks a little. There are other songs on this album that kick my ass, but some are just dreck, and every album that followed this one got worse. Play more from "Fragile," por favor. And leave this somewhere on the roadside. To rot. And die.
GregK wrote:
yawn
loser
I was raised on Yes -- from the Yes Album through about Relayer, at which point their music got a bit too over the top for my tastes. I still listened to all the stuff they put out, but had moved on taste-wise into other things. Then, when 90125 was released, I was pulled back into the fold. Agreed, it was a very different band, but I liked what they did, and to this day the 90125 album still holds my interest. Instead of jumping on the "they don't do it like they used to" bandwagon, I've judged each iteration of Yes based on the present (or recent) album, and purchased the CDs that appealed. Sorta like a brand new band every time. Some albums I didn't like very much, but many I did. 90125 is one of the ones I do like.
I understand the comments of Yes purists, but this one is special for me. The soundtrack to some of the best colloege moments of life, and introduced me to their more classic stuff.
yawn
This was a sad era for Yes. When this album came out, it was sort of like revisting your favorite wooded park after years of absence and finding out that it has been paved over with a Walmart and a Baskin/Robbins-DunkinDonuts.
Not one of their best. Most definitely a Trevor Rabin/Horn moment. But if you didn't see the Union tour you missed a great event. Seeing Howe and Rabin on stage together was a knock-out. Big Generator is the best compromise of the Yes/Rabin years.
Xeric wrote:
Yes. More or less, anyway. Certainly "Yes"'s worst effort by a long, long way.
I disagree. I have much worse efforts by Yes, as well as many much better efforts. Without this album, they would've faded into nothingness. 90125 got a whole new generation of listeners interested in Yes, including me. If I hadn't been turned on by 90125, I wouldn't have ever discovered all their much better music (both before and after).
resonator wrote:
No.
That's so dumb... I was going to put the same thing. Heh.
beelzebubba wrote:
This is NOT Yes. This is Trevor Rabin holding the torch for the some of the worse music that came out of the '80's.
Yes. More or less, anyway. Certainly "Yes"'s worst effort by a long, long way.
Never expected from this from Yes. Great album.
No.
spieler wrote:
yeah, aged not too well, great memories with it though.
Pure nostalgia for me. Examined now, several other bands from the 60s (Who, Kinks, etc.) also had "comeback" albums in the early 80s that were dismissed as weak retreads. I dunno, though. 90125 and a few others had some fine playing and arranging. Not that prog couldn't have worked in '83, but, the shorter, poppier tracks fit the time and were solid enough in my book.
beelzebubba wrote:
This is NOT Yes. This is Trevor Rabin holding the torch for the some of the worse music that came out of the '80's.
No.
This is NOT Yes. This is Trevor Rabin holding the torch for the some of the worse music that came out of the '80's.
bluedot wrote:
who was the guitarist on this version of yes? was it steve howe or someone else?
Trevor Rabin (click here)
Very cool tune. Trevor Rabin is/was great. So was Howe. Just totally different.
This is one of the most inspired-sounding rock albums. 90125 came as a surprise to many Yes fans, but it works so incredibly well as a likeable pop album that it's hard to pan it for not being more like its progressive predecessors. The name fits them so well, Jon Anderson's soaring melodies always evoke such a positive feeling.
bluedot wrote:
who was the guitarist on this version of yes? was it steve howe or someone else?
Trevor Rabin, I beleive.
rmurray248 wrote:
Past their prime.
Yes, but then, so is Beethoven.
bluedot wrote:
who was the guitarist on this version of yes? was it steve howe or someone else?
This is Trevor Rabin's "pop" version of Yes.
Gish05 wrote:
:roflol: Right...
it's true. rush and styx and kansas were all second-generation "prog" bands that were directly influenced by yes, genesis, gentle giant, and elp. the imitation was unfailingly inferior.
bluedot wrote:
rush stole their sound from yes.
:roflol: Right...
Gish05 wrote:
Nice riffs and guitar playing... but the singing and lyrics are kind of corny. I seriously think Rush is the only band that can have geeky subject matter (and singing) in their music but still not ruin the big picture.
rush stole their sound from yes.
who was the guitarist on this version of yes? was it steve howe or someone else?
Nice riffs and guitar playing... but the singing and lyrics are kind of geeky. I seriously think Rush is the only band that can have geeky subject matter (and singing) in their music but still not ruin the big picture. I wonder why this band is called "Yes"?
Beastie wrote:
One of those rare albums that are life-changing. No-one wants to hear about that, but it's true for me. I humbly subject to the forum that this music is some of the best rock ever written, even though it's not "early YES". Thank you, Radio Paradise!
:bounce: :bounce: :bounce:
One of those rare albums that are life-changing. No-one wants to hear about that, but it's true for me. I humbly subject to the forum that this music is some of the best rock ever written, even though it's not "early YES". Thank you, Radio Paradise!
" Ev-ry-one e-ven-tu-al-ly!" Cool, an 8.
Feh.
snurfer wrote:
Thousands of their songs are better than this.
And that's the beautiful thing about music. This is a GREAT addition. Just because it's pop, doesn't make it bad.
Thousands of their songs are better than this.
dated.
Pyro wrote:
The "pop" version of Yes is ok, but I sure prefer their older works....Fragile, Close to the Edge, Relayer, etc. Those older "albums" showcased a band full of INCREDIBLY talented musicians. And Jon is recognizable anywhere. Love his voice.
Amen!
Kind of interesting how both Yes and Genesis --- the leading progressive rock bands of my high-school days --- devolved into pop groups (albeit successful ones).
And to think that these are the same guys who recorded the Yes album... WHY DIDN'T YOU RETIRE?? :beat:
Even as a Prog fan, I could never get too much into Yes. But I always liked this song.
A great litmus test to see who was a teenager at the end of the 80s. Haven't heard this since the last millenium, still sounding just as good.
The "pop" version of Yes is ok, but I sure prefer their older works....Fragile, Close to the Edge, Relayer, etc. Those older "albums" showcased a band full of INCREDIBLY talented musicians. And Jon is recognizable anywhere. Love his voice.
spieler wrote:
yeah, aged not too well, great memories with it though.
And what great memories they are! (what I can remember of them) :lol:
Wow..... I had forgotten about this song..... I'm 15 all over again.....
fun!
yeah, aged not too well, great memories with it though.
yawn.
Is it \"Classic\" yes? Of course not, but I think it\'s a damn good album. And if you take it as a band called Cinema that happens to have Jon Anderson on Vocals, it\'s an enjoyable Pop/rock album.
Past their prime.