How good were Pink Floyd?

[chesterbells]

I was asking if you had listened to any Waters solo albums, not Gilmour's! Are you still drunk or summat? ; )

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

 

[Aphex]

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.

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.

 

[Bill Walker]

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.

I'm now a huge fan of all 3 :)

 

[HermanPant]

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.

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.

 

[Aphex]

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 :)

 

[citizenyank76]

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.

 

[denislawsbackheel]

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.

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.

 

[mancity2012_eamo]

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.

Sounds like you’re describing the Stone Roses to me.

 

[mancity2012_eamo]

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.

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.

 

[hilts]

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.

And led zep


* I like Bowie very much