Genesis vs Yes?

Question

Two masters of progressive rock. Which band is better. The best albums by Yes are: Close To The Edge, Fragile and Relayer. I would give all those albums a 10/10. The best Genesis albums are: Nursery Crime, Foxtrot, Selling England By The Pound, and The Lamb Lies Down On Broadway. I would give all those albums a 10/10.

I think Yes were better at their instruments than Genesis, but Genesis were better songwriters, in my opinion.

I love Yes with all my heart. They are my fourth favorite band behind King Crimson (my third), Pink Floyd (my first), and Genesis (my second). So I personally like Genesis more, but albums like Close To The Edge, Fragile and Relayer are some of my favorites. It's just that I don't like their other albums as much as those three. With Genesis, I think they have four strong albums, which is one more than Yes. Still, they are both very great bands that have some of my favorite musicians. Chris Squire is my favorite bassist of all time, and I love Fish Out Of Water, which is a solo album by him. Genesis have my favorite singer of all time: Peter Gabriel. I love his early solo album, and sometimes find myself listening to his more commercial songs when I'm not in the mood to listen to entire albums.

Answer 1

I'd agree with your analysis -- Yes were more skilled instrumentalists, but Genesis had them beat in the songwriting department. There's no comparison between Peter Gabriel and Jon Anderson -- Gabriel's probably the greatest vocalist in the entire progressive rock genre, and one of the best rock singers in general, not to mention that his lyrics are a lot more engaging (Anderson's "word/gibberish painting" can be fun, but also obnoxious). Genesis has been my second favorite prog band and fourth favorite band of all time (after The Beatles, Pink Floyd, and The Rolling Stones) for a while. All of the Gabriel albums are at least good, and "Selling England By the Pound" and "Foxtrot" are masterpieces of the genre. "The Yes Album", "Fragile" and "Close to the Edge" are of similar quality, but overall Yes' consistency didn't quite match up to Genesis', at least in their prog years (I love Genesis' first three '80s albums, but after that it's a toss-up). At least "Union" was not as disgraceful as "Calling All Stations".



Furthermore, Genesis gave us the solo careers of Gabriel and Steve Hackett, which produced some great music. The solo careers of the Yes members are perfectly fine, but far less consistent (and I think "Fish Out of Water" is the only record Squire made on his own).

Answer 2

Yes was never a real band, it was always a bunch of big egos behind a well established name. Most albums sounded like all the egos fighting for longer solos and parts and strangest ideas. After 1971 there was only some moments when some harmony was heard from Yes.

Yes was adored and succesful band from early on, from 1970 and managed to keep the level more than a decade but from mid 80s Yes has been more a nostalgia act.

Despite the big egos, only some of numoerous member of Yes have made succesful solo career.



Genesis was a proper band, nobody actually dominated within it totally. They were able to compose proper pieces and songs. And they used to be smart too. Until 90s they did massive career and commersial progression, from a commercially unsucceful cult band to megastar stadium act.

Although Genesis wasn`t a group of big egos, almost all members did good solo career too. Pretty unique achievent, even Beatles could not reach that sort of level.

Answer 3

I love both but I'm a huge Genesis fan,I love the Phil Collins era as much as the Peter Gabriel. Yes are a bit more inconsistent I only really like their 70's stuff.

Answer 4

lets not forget trick of the tail by genesis which is a brilliant concept record. i think one of the key factors here is rick wakeman. a talented man for sure but what an ego maniac. lyrically anderson is by far the more creative writer but take for example los endos, to be honest i believe genesis sold more but yes left more of an impact. phil collins vs. wakeman and anderson. its very close. i'm going to say its a draw. each have their own masterworks and lets just let that be

Answer 5

Genesis pros: Steady career progression, more hit singles, better vocalist(s), more coherent, more of a true band, underrated musicianship, better at atmospherics



Distinguishing characteristics: Early years--more pastoral, 12-string guitar, Peter Gabriel, Tony Banks' organs and mellotrons more dominant than guitars. Later years--better use of technology (synths, drum machines, etc.), became a hit machine.



Genesis cons: became focused on singles in later years, not as technically gifted, went "soft-rock" at times.







Yes pros: Better musicianship, rocked harder, better at long-form prog than Genesis, more successful initially



Distinguishing characteristics: Early years--perfected long-form prog, Chris Squire's bass, Bill Bruford's drumming, Rick Wakeman's keyboard "flair". Later years--became much heavier-sounding in the 80's with keys pushed to the background as Steve Howe pushed to the front; short-lived revival followed by many "reunions".



Yes cons: Too many competing egos, lyrics not as focused, "Tormato", revolving door of members.

Answer 6

It sounds like you might like Emerson Lake and Palmer.



BTW, have you heard Wakeman's solo work?

Answer 7

I still like Yes more. :P

Answer 8

YES