More Squire and Entwistle

Eddie:

 >>>>John is melodic but it is not for the sake of being heard. John is
playing lead instrument alternately with Keith and Pete and when he is not
the lead instrument he will often play root notes like in Magic Bus and
through much of Tommy. John does have his moments of going off, but it is a
more crucial interplay between him and Keith and Pete than Chris with the
other Yes players. <<<

What makes Entwistle's interplay more "crucial"?  I look at it like this:
 They are both crucial within their bands.  Taking their basslines out of
their respective bands' music, then I would miss them both.  I imagine we
largely agree on this one.

However, don't overlook the early motivations within the Who.  I think there
is an aspect of Entwistle that pushed him toward melodic bass because it
would draw attention to himself.  *Each* member of the Who wanted visual
attention and this drive for attention manifested itself in the Who's stage
sound. Entwistle had to compete with: a guitarist who looked funny and
smashed up his guitar; a physically attractive lead singer; and a manic
drummer.  

>>>John is a typically reserved middle to upper class Brit. It's not in him
to
jump around. Eventually his choice of weighty custom weapons and the
complexity of his playing would prevent his jumping around... <<<

I don't see how being a middle class Brit had anything to do with Entwistle's
ultimate stage stance.  Pete and John are of the same class, yet Pete did it.
 ???  Also, I don't think John was upper class in his upbringing.  The Who
were all largely from working class families (with Pete's parents being
musicians, Pete might be the one exception to this).


>>In the Who, John is too important to maintaining the structure of the
>>songs and would definitely be missed if he was not playing with the
>>group.
>The same is true of Squire even if you can't see it or accept it.

>>>[Tony Levin's] even a better player [than Chris]. The only thing I missed
in AWBH was his vocals for the
older Yes material.<<<

I can't comment if Levin's a better player--I don't play bass.  I saw the
8-man Yes from 91 (Wakeman didn't use 20+ keyboards and Steve Howe's
"battalion" of guitars was rather reduced--I mean Steve can only play one
guitar at a time, y'know).  Certainly Chris's vocals and bass were important
to me for the show I saw.  Of course, I have never discounted Entwistle's
contribution to the Who's sound--it's very important, IMHO.  But I don't like
this line of argument that Entwistle is more important to the Who than Squire
is to Yes.

>>It's just a guess on my part, but maybe the bass was lower in >>the mix at
MSG because John didn't care enough to argue on >>his own behalf. 

>I sincerely doubt it. I give John more credit than that. He >suffered
through the same thing on the Tommy tour... His >comment: "I feel a bit
redundant."

I give John lots of credit, no doubt about it.  But my theory is legitimate,
given John's longstanding history of fighting to get himself heard in the
mix.  It is possible that this time 'round he simply put up little fuss
because he had bigger plans to think about.  One thing is certain:  if he did
argue this time, it didn't matter (from the critiques that have been
presented in this forum).  Maybe Pete *wants* him buried in the mix...?

Glad to see you're a Yes fan, too!

- --Jim