Close To The Edge (the track)

I think this thread is one example of the vastly different ways people into different types of music, evaluate a piece.

Those of use that are fans of prog, approach a piece such as this, and look at those first 3 'uncomfortable' minutes, and know, that they are there to tell one part of a 18 minute journey (that is actually the telling of a life's spiritual journey). They are not there to stand alone, as a 3 minute song opening a standard rock album would be.

If the piece started 3 minutes later, without the tension created by the beginning, it would be so much less satisfying.

Don't get me wrong, I fully enjoy* those first 3 minutes on their own, even if they didn't serve a greater purpose of creating the tension, that needs to be resolved by the rest of the piece. But even if they weren't enjoyable* on their own (for me), they still need to be there. Or the deeper meaning of the piece is largely lost.

I guess if one is used to hearing mostly standard length rock or pop songs, that retain more or less, the same feeling and emotion from start to finish, and follow the verse>chorus>bridge...repeat format, then the foreignness of something like the intro to Close to the Edge, could be a bit off-putting.

My only recommendation would be, to not listen to that section, without taking into consideration, it is there for a purpose to server the entire piece. The term "catharsis" comes to mind, when describing this piece.

*Hell, I listen to quite a bit of avant-garde prog bands, that by comparison, can make those opening 3 minutes sound completely safe and melodious. And don't even get me started on one of my other musical obsessions, late 20th century and contemporary classical music, which can be 30 minutes of tension and anxiety ridden music, that never completely resolves, and leaves the tension hanging.

 

Really good post thank you. It is actually pretty incredible that kids were ever into stuff like this.

 

I think this is the best response so far. The tension and disharmony created by those first three minutes is explored and resolved in the rest of the suite, and - yes - the rest of the suite would be the lessor without it. Like drinking a sweet beer without the bitter hops, or eating a sweet and sour without the sour.

 

Best graffiti I ever saw was on a wall in Hackney, London:

"Why breakfast?"

Was it an enquiring mind which simply did not understand the way things are, or was it a gesture of moody pointless defiance? Though in itself a simplistic question, it relates to the eternal question of "Why are we here?", where the answer that we are here because we are here is not sufficient, because the questor is looking for a higher meaning, possibly something spiritual. "Why was this thread revived" returns us to such eternal questions. Why are we on this forum - what is it we are seeking from discussing music? And such a question is even more appropriate and fitting for a thread discussing "Close To The Edge", where someone is seeking clarity regarding why there is discord at the start.

 

Noticed that too - strange question. I agree with you, it is very apropos to Close To The Edge, not only on the resolving discord level, but whether it has any redeeming value at all, is it just noise that a few have agreed holds meaning, or is it art?

 

It’s one of the more complicated,”full” tracks of music. There’s a big group of Yes fans, like me, who enjoy how all of it plays individually and together. The guitar parts are some of the more interesting and, even with everything going on, it still manages to build into a crescendo.

That’s why I like it.

What’s the best source of it you’ve heard? Is it one of the remastered CD, vinyl, SACD, BluRay?

 

Repeating myself but have to recommend the Steve Hoffman DCC.

 

I’m asking the OP

 

The opening is a frenetic section
The build up of birds brings you in
The chaos heightens
Then a babbling brook

The jarring part cleanses the pallet for the serene

Brilliant

 

Seeing it as chaos is an initial reaction, and perhaps in a sense it is. But chaos is the state of not seeing the unity or purpose. Many observers see the suite, lyrically and musically, as relating to religion or enlightenment - that out of discord or chaos comes harmony or understanding. And that the later parts show the enlightenment after the chaos of the opening. But, another observation is that there is already harmony, unity and purpose in the first section, but that we only get to see, understand, and appreciate that section when we have been through the other sections of the suite, and then come back to the first part and hear the refrains, the music patterns, the bass notes again and can pick them out and isolate them, and then recognise them.

Understanding something is simply recognising it. Tthoisb aeppcehaaross - until you identify the pattern. It's like an intelligence test. Not everyone wants their rock music to be intelligent or clever. Indeed, I am in the camp which feels that The Kingsmen's "Louie Louie" is a more significant rock record than "Close To The Edge". However, I can still appreciate and enjoy both.

 

The introduction to the piece does much more than create an initial tension filled section. The rhythmic and motific devices (half steps for example) in both the slow and fast sections of the introduction are reprised in different ways throughout the piece. Not easy to hear but they are there and they provide familiarity. If you listen to the piece without the intro, you lose a lot of what the entire piece is about and not only "resolving tension". It does that early on when the first verse comes in.
I think some comments here are proof of how the piece gets overblown and made to seem more complex than it is. I make the same mistake at times. The intro does provide tension but more importantly, it is an exposition device of themes, motifs and rhythms. Something that intros to rock songs do all the time.
The piece has more connections to rock/pop than it does to classical music. No it is not a symphony. It is a rock song albeit a long one. It is no wonder that many listeners approach the piece with trepidation considering some of the comments here and others who make much more out of the piece than it is. It is brilliant but it is not complex once you break it down.

 

Nice description
I love the section and the later recurring themes
The whole piece is a masterpiece

The OP mentioned the first 3 minutes being especially displeasing
Helps to put it in context

 

Also……,

This incarnation of Yes is one of my favorite bands and I’ve had a tempestuous relationship to this song for close to 50 years. First time I heard it, I loved it and did so for many years. But then in the late 80’s, I found it a bit irritating and I couldn’t listen to it for a long time. But then I got the DVD A and when I heard it in surround, I fell in love again with that version. Then I started listening to the 192/24 stereo in my car, and started liking it again. But, it was the MQA release that finally brought it back to my favorites.

Back in the eighties, I was distracted with having a bunch of kids, so I thought that was why I stopped enjoying it. But, even in the 21st century, I found it irritating until I heard the DVDA copy. In the early 21st century, the only digital in my car was CD, so I put the CD in the car, but I still didn’t listen to it. The opening was an unpleasant cacophony of cymbals and squealing guitar. I attributed that to it being a car stereo and not surround like at home.

But then in 2017 I started using an full decode MQA 192/24 max DAC, USB 3 camera adapter, Onkyo HF player and Tidal on my iPhone to my car stereo aux port and I’m back to loving this song again.

Before I had Tidal, I played my ripped 192/24 stereo this way and it was so much better. Cymbals sounded like cymbals and there was a sense of each instrument being in its own space and not all mushed together into a single high pitched noise. This allows me to pick and follow a single instrument much easier. Suddenly the greatness in Bill Bruford’s percussion can be heard. He’s not just banging the cymbals for noise, rather their a delicate bridge between Howe’s snd Squire’s shredding and his own snare and kick.

I went back to my vinyl of it after I replaced my ‘table and it was all there as well. My ‘table/cartridge neglect for the 90’s left me playing only CDs until I found my cassettes in 1997. I still enjoyed Close to The Edge back then, on Cassette, hissy though it was, but I wasn’t listening to my vinyl because my 3 year old got hold of tone arm and broke my stylus and i just neglected it.

But, until I really started analyzing how MQA claims and my commensurate observation were mathematically possible, did I realize that Close To The Edge is one of the best examples of why 44.1khz isn’t sufficient for music.

I am not going to start THAT conversation again. I promise I won’t respond to everyone who has a problem with hi-res, MQA, etc do ai don’t ruin your topic.

But, have a listen to Close To The Edge on a decent amp/speaker combination from:

• An excellent, clean vinyl copy using a excellent turntable and cartridge , or
• Fully decoded MQA using a good DAC ( not partial decode that only recovers hi-sample rate. A FULL DECODE), or
• 192khz/24bit PCM or DSD using a good DAC

and see if you like it. It really is much better and you might appreciate it the way all of us who like it do.

I’m not saying that no CD listeners like the soor hear the detail. I’m saying that maybe you’re like me and you don’t like it unless you do.

I don’t like it on CD either. Maybe we’re similar?

Are there other Prog Rock stalwarts that you don’t get either?

 

That guy is fake. I remember watching him react to Tool's Lateralus and he pretended figuring out that they used the fibonacci sequence in their time signature changes. Couldn't have been more obvious lmao.

 

Reaction videos

 

The premise was to start a discussion. I’ve had the album for many years - how could someone convince me to like the small part that I don’t after all this time? It has been interesting reading why others like it, how it was composed etc, so job done.

Yet here you are. Next time, perhaps you should just scroll on by and find a thread more to your liking rather than p***ing on my cornflakes.

 

Excellent post.

 

She totally gets it.

 

Agreed about the “kids were into it” insight. Today’s situation is lamentable in that many pleasures we old AF people enjoyed are not available anymore. First, I don’t think you could get a sixteen year old to pay attention for 18 minutes to anything unless there was a video attached. Furthermore, the generation before us was replete with trained musicians who could produce music like this. Our generation, not so much. Music isn’t taught in schools and with so many titillating entertainment choices, the Gen X, Z and Millennials haven’t been exposed to Classical, Baroque, even Jazz music let alone learn music theory and/or play an instrument.

The last Harp player ever may have already been born. I don’t know how old the OP is, nor am I suggesting that all old people like the track and no young people like it, but it seems that the “critical listeners” portion of those who enjoy music is shrinking along with the number of people who have the tools to produce music like Yes, ELP, Led Zeppelin or any other skilled musicians who applied their abilities to rock. Close To The Edge is not a background track for dancing or a party. It’s more of a track to be actively listened to. (Awkward syntax)

What say you OP? Are you a critical listener who puts on a track and focuses on listening or is music 100% emotional experience where it has to immediately “grab” you? Not a judgment question, rather a question to understand the context. My ex-wife (satan) felt the same way about this track but she listened to music for dancing and the emotional lift and found this to be tedious noise.

 

What is fake?

 

"Close To The Edge" is for me the greatest piece of music ever recorded. It takes me on an emotional ride whenever I listen to it. I wouldn't change one note or one word and I certainly wouldn't change the first three minutes and I can't even comprehend how somebody who is into progressive music could find them " unlistenable".
The whole song is pure perfection.

 

He's pretending to react to these songs for the first time when clearly he has heard them before. Easy clicks.

 

I'm 55. If by critical listeners you mean anyone other than casual fans who only listen to the radio or stream random playlists, it's hard to say whether that group is shrinking. My initial thought was yes, based on the comparatively small quantity of music sold these days, but I'm sure there are plenty of younger people who are more than casual fans, but have never bought any music outside of their Spotify subscription. That's not a criticism btw, it's just how the music business and the cultural landscape around music is now, and I may well be the same if I was 30 years younger.

Disagree. In terms of technique, the skill level of the average musician today is infinitely higher than 50 years ago. If you mean songwriting, well, that's subjective.

Definitely an emotional experience, but that's not to say it has to grab me immediately. When listening to an album for the first time I'm not analysing anything in detail, more just waiting for something to pull me in - a great melody, riff, whatever. For a try-before-you-buy, I'll usually give it 3 spins before deciding, auto-buys obviously a lot more.

I'm not an audiophile. I had vinyl back in the day, and my electronic copy was ripped from a CD purchased in the 90s.