Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
Milestones

Yes

73 posts in this topic

4 hours ago, JSngry said:

...A "timeless quality", can only exist as long as something exists to present it to a people who are there to have it presented, and then only if they are there in such a way so as to be disposed to embracing whatever that quality is. That's a helluva whole lot of specifics to impose on something as non-specific as "time", so...good luck with all that....

Earlier this week, I hear Sonny Rollins playing "Winter Wonderland" in Kroger. Once I did the math of who owns what and how this got there, was I left with anything else or provable, quantifiable value? I mean, it made me laugh like hell to hear that music just...melting all over Kroger, but if anybody else besides me noticed, it only has life there for as long as somebody puts it there. And at some point, I'd expect somebody to say, hey, what is it with this weirdass melting Christmas song, get that shit out of here! And then, hey, so much for "timelessness", right?

I had just about the same reaction to hearing, "I Wanna Be Sedated" in Kroger too last week.
Yes, you laugh, and then realize that you've had an auditory version of a rainbow
(as you described above) that works in a very pinpointed way on your psyche.
The human trait of placing time-based events in a wildly flexible mind-frame and
deciding that "it" will not be affected by the passage of time is a pretty curious short-sited quirk
that's delusional at best and counter-productive at worst. I think what many people refer to as
"timeless" is invoked by the act of placing said stimulus in two historical moments simultaneously:
rubbing the "now" with the "then" and producing sparks, but letting on that the sparks were and
will continue to be a rainbow of colors that everyone will recognize for time immemorial. 
It's a very strange tendency that provides people - even those without a personal social network,
(that, of course, works in the same fashion) - a place to hang their auditory hats.

"I Wanna Be Sedated"?

Hell yes!

It's the holiday season!

Now, everyone sing along with the organ: "Ommmmmm ... "

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, Scott Dolan said:

Hmmm...I'm not so sure about that assertion. For example, isn't Kind Of Blue timeless? Aren't most Classical pieces timeless? 

I'd say they are canonised. Anyway, Kind of Blue has only been around for around 50/60 years. It's a bit early to call it 'timeless'. The term is generally a euphemism for "I like it a lot and if you have 'good taste' (like me) you will too". 

"With Yes, unfortunately, I think you can. Not that any of it is bad, it just really shows its age."

'Kind of Blue', the St. Matthew Passion show their age. But when you connect with music you don't notice it. Music that shows its age is music other people listen to.

**********************************

This is all, as ever, about personal taste and listening contexts. Part of the hostility to Yes arose from the fact that for a few years in the mid-70s they were mega-successful - that always provokes a reaction. 

I also think that one of the reasons many people find them 'cold' is because they deliberately avoided the blues, soul, gospel etc building blocks that were standard to rock at the time.  To a 15 year old in a sleepy English town in 1971 that was so refreshing - not that I didn't like lots of the standard rock but as with the folk-rock bands and the Soft Machine/Caravan groups it just felt that this belonged to us. Most British rock bands of the time affected Americanisms (inevitably, given the power of rock and roll) right down to the accents - it was rather nice to hear music sung in Lancastrian (despite the silly lyrics which always sounded silly). 

The blues/soul/gospel tradition is so important to so much American popular music that it's not hard to see why taking that out might be perceived as 'soullessness'. But for that 15 year old provincial English kid it sounded like music that reflected life in England far more than someone from Bromsgrove singing about how he was going down to Memphis to get him a mojo hand (pork pie, perhaps, but not a mojo hand). 

**************************************

I still listen to Yes every now and then (did so last night - the forbidden album) - there's oodles of music I've heard subsequently that I value more highly in my own personal listening world (I don't much care for overall pronouncements of 'greatness'). But they hold a special place for me purely because of what they meant at a time that I was just getting obsessed with music and I'd say they shaped a lot of the way I hear music - often very different music - subsequently.

Taste is an odd thing resulting from all manner of experience, background, peer pressure, response to prevailing orthodoxies, accidental bumping into things. Queen are a group who aren't that different to Yes - more poppy but full of flash instrumentals, big production numbers, shifting metres and segmented tracks made up of two or three songs. Yet I can't abide them. I know they were incredibly talented, understand why they are so popular (much more so than Yes) and yet they set my teeth on edge. To adopt an Americanism, 'Go figure!' 

6 hours ago, Milestones said:

Certainly one has to feel that the works of Shakespeare and Mozart, having survived for centuries, will not be vanishing any time soon.  Some 20th Century artists may have the same lasting power.

Maybe for as long as 'Western' culture is the dominant culture of the world - they've been long written into the canon of what 'cultured' people 'admire' and 'appreciate' (which is not to knock the writing or music in any way - merely to suggest that the status of such figures is about more than inherent 'artistic' value). 

The dominance of 'timeless' 'Western' culture, however, doesn't look nearly so certain as it did even a year ago.  

Edited by A Lark Ascending

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For Christ sake...

Look, my personal definition of timeless, once again, is that you can listen to it now and not be able to place it within a certain era. 

For example, Jim somehow fell ass backwards into mentioning Winter Wonderland. Have you heard the Andrews Sisters version of that song? Pretty easy to place it within a certain era, right? It's not like you're going to potentially wonder if it came out in the 70's, or the 90's. 

Yet with Kind Of Blue, if you are simply a casual fan, which era could you place it in? Well hell, there have been cats putting out similar albums for nearly 60 years now. So hell, it could have come out in the 80's, or possibly in the new century. 

That's what makes it timeless, IMO. It has nothing to do with taste, or any of the other semi-condescending bullshit you posted. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I really like a lot of Yes's output. I think Chris Squire's incredible bass work sets this band apart. I hear their hit "Roundabout" with Squire's bass belting out the melody loud & clear and I think, "What other rock band did this?".

I'm not a fan of all of their work. Sure, they made some clunkers, but the good ones more than make up for it.

BTW, I think it's a disgrace that it took so many years for the Rock & Roll "Hall of Fame" to recognize Yes for induction. It's almost like they got shamed into it when Squire died last year and people finally started realizing how corrupt the Rock & Roll Hall Of Fame election process was.

They have inducted so many non-Rock bands and artists before classic bands like Deep Purple, Yes and Jethro Tull (still not in). I guess they are waiting until Ian Anderson dies before they decide to induct Tull.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Kevin Bresnahan said:

BTW, I think it's a disgrace that it took so many years for the Rock & Roll "Hall of Fame" to recognize Yes for induction. It's almost like they got shamed into it when Squire died last year and people finally started realizing how corrupt the Rock & Roll Hall Of Fame election process was.

They have inducted so many non-Rock bands and artists before classic bands like Deep Purple, Yes and Jethro Tull (still not in). I guess they are waiting until Ian Anderson dies before they decide to induct Tull.

Yes, that has always seemed ludicrous to me.  To see mundane artists from Joan Jett to Abba to Gene Vincent and the Blue Caps to some of the gangsta rap dudes inducted and groups like the ones you mention, Genesis, and the Moody Blues ignored.  Definite systematic bias at work.  And Yes should have been the first, so hopefully the floodgates open now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

None of it means shit until The Fleetwoods get in.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Seems like "timeless" boils down to "stuff I like / don't like" intermingled with the listener's age and the confusing phenomenon of "retro".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Guy Berger said:

Seems like "timeless" boils down to "stuff I like / don't like" intermingled with the listener's age and the confusing phenomenon of "retro".

Not in my book. As I've now explained twice. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, JSngry said:

None of it means shit until The Fleetwoods get in.

Great song, and  they definitely had the sartorial style.

Image result for fleetwoods come softly

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And they helped make the babies. You don't have a Rock & Roll Hall Of Fame without the babies being made.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Right on, Scott, for your highly reasonable posts.  Language is by nature flexible, and too many people have gone with a literal and limiting view of the word "timeless."

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks, brother. 

Though, I'm not even sure their takes are literal at all. Limiting, to be sure, but they seem more a sneering personal opinion. 

Who knew the term "timeless music" could be so controversial?! 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

https://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/timeless

  1. 1 archaic :  premature, untimely

  2. 2a :  having no beginning or end :  eternal b :  not restricted to a particular time or date <the timeless themes of love, solitude, joy, and nature — Writer>

  3. 3 :  not affected by time :  ageless

http://www.dictionary.com/browse/timeless

1. without beginning or end; eternal; everlasting.
2. referring or restricted to no particular time : the timeless beauty of great music.
 
 

ime·less

 (tīm′lĭs)
adj.
1. Independent of time; eternal: the timeless struggle between good and evil.
2. Seemingly unaffected by time; ageless: a timeless village on the coast.

time′less·ly adv.
time′less·ness n.
American Heritage® Dictionary of the English Language, Fifth Edition. Copyright © 2016 by Houghton Mifflin Harcourt Publishing Company. Published by Houghton Mifflin Harcourt Publishing Company. All rights reserved.

timeless

(ˈtaɪmlɪs)
adj
1. unaffected or unchanged by time; ageless
2. eternal
3. an archaic word for untimely
ˈtimelessly adv
ˈtimelessness n
Collins English Dictionary – Complete and Unabridged, 12th Edition 2014 © HarperCollins Publishers 1991, 1994, 1998, 2000, 2003, 2006, 2007, 2009, 2011, 2014

time•less

(ˈtaɪm lɪs)

adj.
1. without beginning or end; eternal.
2. referring or restricted to no particular time: timeless beauty.
[1550–60]
time′less•ly, adv.
time′less•ness, n.
Random House Kernerman Webster's College Dictionary, © 2010 K Dictionaries Ltd. Copyright 2005, 1997, 1991 by Random House, Inc. All rights reserved.
 
Thesaurus AntonymsRelated WordsSynonymsLegend:
Switch to new thesaurus
Adj. 1. timeless - unaffected by time; "few characters are so dateless as Hamlet"; "Helen's timeless beauty"
unaltered, unchanged - remaining in an original state; "persisting unaltered through time"
Based on WordNet 3.0, Farlex clipart collection. © 2003-2012 Princeton University, Farlex Inc.

timeless

Collins Thesaurus of the English Language – Complete and Unabridged 2nd Edition. 2002 © HarperCollins Publishers 1995, 2002

timeless

adjective
The American Heritage® Roget's Thesaurus. Copyright © 2013, 2014 by Houghton Mifflin Harcourt Publishing Company. Published by Houghton Mifflin Harcourt Publishing Company. All rights reserved.
Translations
Spanish / Español
Select a language:
 

timeless

[ˈtaɪmlɪs] ADJ [book, experience] → intemporal
Collins Spanish Dictionary - Complete and Unabridged 8th Edition 2005 © William Collins Sons & Co. Ltd. 1971, 1988 © HarperCollins Publishers 1992, 1993, 1996, 1997, 2000, 2003, 2005

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On ‎12‎/‎24‎/‎2016 at 9:00 AM, Guy Berger said:

Seems like "timeless" boils down to "stuff I like / don't like" intermingled with the listener's age and the confusing phenomenon of "retro".

It's official, the O/P just became every Beatles' thread on Steve Hoffman Forums! 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ugh...that's truly unfortunate. I'm pretty sure Aspergers is a prerequisite for posting there. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Debating the hell out of of the word "timeless" - so fucking lame.

In case you didn't notice, the thread is titled "Yes" - as in the rock band Yes.

Timeless or not - this debate has nothing to do with the discussion of the band, Sometimes. this group derails honest discussion in the stupidest of ways.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 12/22/2016 at 7:23 AM, Hardbopjazz said:

 

I was a fan of the early days.  I discovered them through The Yes Album that a friend played me and then of course Roundabout was all over the radio when Fragile was released.  Tales was their downfall and I never gave them any time after that.  The early albums with Banks on guitar and Bruford on drums are very good, even Yesterday and Today which has strings.  I See You by The Byrds was given a jazz feel on the first album and Bruford had a lighter feel to his playing.  Steve Howe is a monster guitar player.

You can tell he's worked hard to get to his level of playing and he's been at  it a long time.  Chris Squire was one of rock's finest bassists.  His sound and style are so singular and he was out front with the band, not relegated to the dark corner.  I know many fans will tell me I'm missing some good music by cutting them off at Close To The Edge but for me that was their magnus opus.

They never bettered it as far as the long piece goes.  The opening track of their first album Beyond And Before is thrilling rock of a different kind.  You know you're hearing something new right away.  And using strings on their sophmore album?  Career suicide?

They survived, and I like that album a lot.  Fragile is half a good album.  Most of the solo stuff is indulgence at an embarassing level.  The rest of the album is some  of their best writing and performing. IMHO of course.

Edited by six string

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, Kevin Bresnahan said:

Debating the hell out of of the word "timeless" - so fucking lame.

In case you didn't notice, the thread is titled "Yes" - as in the rock band Yes.

Timeless or not - this debate has nothing to do with the discussion of the band, Sometimes. this group derails honest discussion in the stupidest of ways.

I went back and listened to Roundabout, as I hadn't heard it in forever. Your assessment of it is spot on. What a bass line! It's probably the only Yes tune I ever truly loved. I preferred their more succinct tunes, like that one. I briefly liked Tales From Topographic Oceans, but my Prog-y slog-y phase didn't last long. Which is actually kind of odd considering how much I got into Zappa many years later, and then Phish some time after that. 

I also remember really liking Brother Of Mine from Anderson Bruford Wakeman Howe. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 24.12.2016 at 0:49 PM, Kevin Bresnahan said:

I really like a lot of Yes's output. I think Chris Squire's incredible bass work sets this band apart. I hear their hit "Roundabout" with Squire's bass belting out the melody loud & clear and I think, "What other rock band did this?".

Not being a dedicated Yes follower at all but full agreement on Chris Squiere's outstanding basswork here ....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The 'timeless' discussion came out of the assertion that the music of Yes was dated.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Three of my favourite 'jazzy' bits in early Yes - the version of 'I See You' on the first record, especially the guitar solo against the brushes; the version of Steven Stills 'Everydays' on the second; and Steve Howe's guitar solo in the central section of 'A Venture' on 'The Yes Album' that mutates effortlessly from cocktail jazz to loud rock.

Some of the first places I heard jazzy sounds and thought 'I might want to hear more music like this' (rather than hearing jazz as music that old people listened to). Not that being jazzy is necessary to validate rock music.

Edited by A Lark Ascending

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.