Thus quoth the Raven ...
 MT> For me, the Yes sound revolves heavily around Wakeman and
 MT> Howe together.  I'm not discounting the others, of course.  It's just
 MT> that Wakeman's silver lame capes were very important to me.
 CR>  For me, I don't think the Yes revolves around any one member. 
 CR> It's always impressed me that their sound was dependant upon 
 CR> every member. This remained true up until _Tales_ when Howe 
 CR> and Wakeman seemed to be taking more leads and White tended 
 CR> to just be a good rhythm foundation.
You'll get no argument from me.  Each member was important to the style; 
despite the soloing from Wakeman and Howe, Yes were very much an ensemble 
band.  What I hear most though is Howe and Wakeman, followed equally by 
Broof, Anderson and Squire.  When Howe came on board with _The Yes Album_, he 
brought the focus onto the "classic" Yes style.  With _Fragile_ and Wakeman, 
everything clicked and the band was in it's prime.  Yes, every member had 
something to do with this transformation.  They certainly weren't dragged 
along kicking and screaming.  From a historical (and my) perspective, though, 
it seems that Howe (mostly) and Wakeman (secondarily) were the catalysts that 
led to the band's peak period.
 MT> "Gates" and "Sound Chaser."  "To Be Over" doesn't do much for me,
 MT> though.
 CR>  Really? I love all of it. "To Be Over" is gorgeous. 
I think it may be because of it's position.  After the intensity and tension 
of the first two songs, I find my mind starting to wander during "To Be 
Over."  Sure, it's a nice release of tension but I must over-release or 
something. =8)
            Mike
--- Obolus 1.0.2
---------------