How good were Pink Floyd?

BlueMoonRisin’ said:
I went off them after Momentary Lapse of Reason. I love Gilmour's vocals and superb guitar, but Floyd lost the moody scathing cynicism and angst that Waters provided in his lyrics. The Final Cut was a very underrated album. As for Roger Waters solo stuff, well the guy is a genius in my eyes.

@chesterbells Did you get round to listening to his solo albums, pal? I think it was you was asking about them.
Click to expand...

I did end up doing a ‘compare & contrast’ of his On An island with his self titled debut from the late 70s. Island I found very ‘stately’ but preferred his first album more, which I guess is unsurprising as I think he did it around the time of Animals didn’t he? It certainly had more edge and variety, whereas his later album lacked that. Having said that, by the age he was when Island was written maybe one shouldn’t judge too harshly - at least he was still being creative I guess! There was a decent track called Pocket o Stones I think, which was quite notable.
His later albums should definitely be called by David & Polly though - she writes all most of lyrics I thought I’d read.
 
nickmcfc1 said:
You've done it now. One thing I learnt about music was you fight a losing battle unfortunately if you slag off
Bowie
Pink Floyd
Queen.
Click to expand...

Went to Queen at Maine Road to see what all the fuss was about, but never bought a record. Their playing Sun City & breaking the apartheid ban never sat right with me. Even now I have a love/hate relationship with them & their music.
 
chesterbells said:
I did end up doing a ‘compare & contrast’ of his On An island with his self titled debut from the late 70s. Island I found very ‘stately’ but preferred his first album more, which I guess is unsurprising as I think he did it around the time of Animals didn’t he? It certainly had more edge and variety, whereas his later album lacked that. Having said that, by the age he was when Island was written maybe one shouldn’t judge too harshly - at least he was still being creative I guess! There was a decent track called Pocket o Stones I think, which was quite notable.
His later albums should definitely be called by David & Polly though - she writes all most of lyrics I thought I’d read.
Click to expand...
I was asking if you had listened to any Waters solo albums, not Gilmour's! Are you still drunk or summat? ; )
 
BlueMoonRisin’ said:
I went off them after Momentary Lapse of Reason. I love Gilmour's vocals and superb guitar, but Floyd lost the moody scathing cynicism and angst that Waters provided in his lyrics. The Final Cut was a very underrated album. As for Roger Waters solo stuff, well the guy is a genius in my eyes.

@chesterbells Did you get round to listening to his solo albums, pal? I think it was you was asking about them.
Click to expand...
His solo stuff has it’s pros and cons.
 
urban genie said:
I would add oasis to that list tbf, god forbid you say they were not that good around here ;-)


Bowie = genius at times
Flyod = decent but once you have heard them you don't need to go back, I certainly wouldn't go out of my way to put their stuff on.
Queen = I"ll accept I like fat bottom girls and the flash gordon film , the rest I can take or leave. With the preference on leave.


But yes it is true across many forums say you don't like floyd or Zeplin and you are cast out as a parriah for having an opposite opinion.
Click to expand...
I'd agree with your analysis.
I just don't get this PF worship.
The music is pretty dirge-like slow and ploding.
Except for David they weren't very good musicians.
Unlike King crimson Steely Dan and Yes who were all virtuoso musicians.
 
Most posters are right, apart from Gilmore, Pink Floyd aren't great musicians and if you listen to their 70s studio albums they aren't virtuoso in any way. Also, compared to prog rock bands like King Crimson, Yes, ELP and the like, they aren't very sophisticated either.
Gilmore has a unique sounding voice and guitar, Waters is an okay bass player, could write a good lyric (from a very mard arse middle-class perspective) but singing-wise he couldn't carry a tune in a bucket.
What makes them better than most of their peers is their experiments ambient sound and mood. If you let it wash over you (especially armed with a good set of headphones and some sort of artificial stimulant) it's quite engaging and pleasurable, but not much more than that.
Though you can't really expect much more and I get very little of that from today's music.
Also, seen 'em a few times (on freebies) and they did put on a good show but I only listen to the albums as far as The Wall.
Waters' Pros and Cons album is pretty mint though.
 
HermanPant said:
some sort of artificial stimulant
Click to expand...

An absolutely vital requirement, I strongly suspect. But then, I'm rather jaundiced about them. The number of earnest, heavily stoned ("maaan, but this Leb red is fucking good…!") slow-motion conversations, all pontificated from the obligatory bean bags, of course, that I had inflicted on me in my youth, about the relative merits of the Floyd, well, they could and have lasted me a lifetime.
 
nimrod said:
Unlike King crimson Steely Dan and Yes who were all virtuoso musicians.
Click to expand...


Big fan of all of them (some poor albums for all of them, to be fair, as well) but by God you could hardly put a more motley crew together. I can't see (or rather hear) the connection between the three of them, musically. Of course, there's the Bruford link, but he himself has gone on record as saying that joining KC from Yes was like going over the Berlin wall — into east Berlin…
 
BlueMoonRisin’ said:
I was asking if you had listened to any Waters solo albums, not Gilmour's! Are you still drunk or summat? ; )
Click to expand...

Haha. I lose track mate...
I’ve still not heard Waters ‘latest’ from 3 years ago Is The The Life, but I’m familiar and enjoy his others. I’d rank them as;
Amused to Death as best by far, then Radio Kaos, then Pros & Cons
 
nimrod said:
I'd agree with your analysis.
I just don't get this PF worship.
The music is pretty dirge-like slow and ploding.
Except for David they weren't very good musicians.
Unlike King crimson Steely Dan and Yes who were all virtuoso musicians.
Click to expand...

Jesus.. you're like a broken record (excuse the pun)

Ever heard less is more? The whole point is allowing the space to soak it in. Too many bands are far too busy in that respect.
 
Last edited:
Lovebitesandeveryfing said:
An absolutely vital requirement, I strongly suspect. But then, I'm rather jaundiced about them. The number of earnest, heavily stoned ("maaan, but this Leb red is fucking good…!") slow-motion conversations, all pontificated from the obligatory bean bags, of course, that I had inflicted on me in my youth, about the relative merits of the Floyd, well, they could and have lasted me a lifetime.
Click to expand...
I meant a bottle of poppers and a 10" dildo






I didn't really.
It's mostly a glass of scotch these days but I know what you mean.
 
Listening to Floyd's 70's output now, the lyrics are relevant as is the production. Dark side and Animals in particular deal with themes that are happening and will still be happening for a long time. I love their early stuff as well.. even Syd's solo stuff is great, as is Rogers, which is an extension of The Wall and Animals.

The less said about Gilmour's output since the better. Sure the guy is an amazing guitarist but a songwriter he isn't.

Apart from Fat Old Sun :)
 
Roger was a genius at concepts and lyrics. Gimour was a first rate musician. Wright was great at adding jazz melodies through his key stabs. Nick was.... er -- not Bill Bruford. Together they work out to be one of the greatest bands of all time. Apart none of them were going to constently stun you with their solo work. Though I love "The Pros and Cons of Hitchhiking." Gimour's solo stuff reminds me of the background music of a bunch of rich aristos getting absolutely blotto on wine before an afternoon siesta.
 
nimrod said:
I'd agree with your analysis.
I just don't get this PF worship.
The music is pretty dirge-like slow and ploding.
Except for David they weren't very good musicians.
Unlike King crimson Steely Dan and Yes who were all virtuoso musicians.
Click to expand...
Maybe.
But they sold more than all three of the others together and are still listened to by millions.
I bet you couldn’t find 10 people who still listen to Yes’ shite doodling.
I did listen to King Crimson and Steely Dan once.
It was enough.
 
HermanPant said:
Most posters are right, apart from Gilmore, Pink Floyd aren't great musicians and if you listen to their 70s studio albums they aren't virtuoso in any way. Also, compared to prog rock bands like King Crimson, Yes, ELP and the like, they aren't very sophisticated either.
Gilmore has a unique sounding voice and guitar, Waters is an okay bass player, could write a good lyric (from a very mard arse middle-class perspective) but singing-wise he couldn't carry a tune in a bucket.
What makes them better than most of their peers is their experiments ambient sound and mood. If you let it wash over you (especially armed with a good set of headphones and some sort of artificial stimulant) it's quite engaging and pleasurable, but not much more than that.
Though you can't really expect much more and I get very little of that from today's music.
Also, seen 'em a few times (on freebies) and they did put on a good show but I only listen to the albums as far as The Wall.
Waters' Pros and Cons album is pretty mint though.
Click to expand...
Sounds like you’re describing the Stone Roses to me.
 
nimrod said:
I'd agree with your analysis.
I just don't get this PF worship.
The music is pretty dirge-like slow and ploding.
Except for David they weren't very good musicians.
Unlike King crimson Steely Dan and Yes who were all virtuoso musicians.
Click to expand...
As a teenager I loved Yes and Crimson also. All I knew that I liked by SD was Reeling in the Years.

The thing is none of them wrote anything that had a universal appeal.
The seventies albums by Floyd even when music was changing were still hitting a hard message that people could identify with, even if it was from a more middle class perspective than what came out of other genres.

Prog died in the mid to late seventies but Floyd managed to step over the debris and avoid much of the criticisms due to Waters’ scathing lyrical critique.

They endured and I still listen to them whereas I rarely revisit Yes, although they were my absolute favourite at the time.

Their lyrics mean nothing to this generation and were nothing but fantasy to mine.

Crimson on the other hand were very much a niche audience and a bit more adult in my view. When I want something a bit different I can return there.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Unread Posts

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top