advertisement


Pink Floyd ....

I started with Ummagumma on release and went back and bought the previous albums, and then AHM. In those days I could only afford 1 album a month.
Meddle was a bombshell and remained my favourite album for years.
In two minds about the success of DSOTM: I didn't want to share PF with the whole world !
Very disappointed with the bust up, and shabby treatment of Rick. Apart from that not prepared to criticise anything. Thank you PF.
 
In regards to the bust-ups, was this down Roger Waters being greedy for more money because he wrote allot of the songs? I view songs much more than words. I'm sure there are many session players out there who have contributed big parts to the success of songs, but get very little reward in return. Maggie May's Mandolin comes to mind straight away - I don't think it even got a credit!
 
foxwelljsly said:
Unfortunately they're all rendered imperfect by Roger Waters' offputting grumpy hectoring didactism, which reached it's apogee on the Wall, whose best moments are, significantly, those with most Gilmour.

I love Careful with that Axe Eugene, Saucerful of Secrets, Shine on you Crazy Diamond and, most of all, Echoes. But when Waters starts whining their not insubstantial musical spell is usually broken.
Click to expand...

I do find myself in general agreement with those sentiments. And sadly, RW only got worse as he got older.
 
While I've revised many of my juvenile musical attitudes, the status of Pink Floyd as peak BOFs has never wavered. I always disliked the orthodoxical reverence afforded DSOTM among the core audience of long haired sixth formers. When The Wall came along it was another reason to dislike them even more.
 
are hugely overrated. IMO, obviously.

And since I'm one of the few ugly Americans on PFM, I'll ask: What the HELL are "long haired sixth formers?" :confused:
 
I will never understand threads like this. People are allowed to like and enjoy liking whatever music they want. No one is in a position to tell anybody else what they're supposed to like and not like.
 
Sixth form: for people doing further education after statutory school leaving age of 16, up to the age of 18. Long haired should be self explanatory.

BOF: boring old fart, specific term of abuse post 1976-77 for people still into pre-punk rock music.

There should be a PFM glossary page.
 
kensalriser said:
Sixth form: for people doing further education after statutory school leaving age of 16, up to the age of 18. Long haired should be self explanatory.

BOF: boring old fart, specific term of abuse post 1976-77 for people still into pre-punk rock music.

There should be a PFM glossary page.
Click to expand...

Aha! Thank you! I had NO idea (save the long hair . . . ).
 
vinylslug said:
I will never understand threads like this. People are allowed to like and enjoy liking whatever music they want. No one is in a position to tell anybody else what they're supposed to like and not like.
Click to expand...
I don't think anybody is doing that.
Personally I find it quite interesting to know which era of a band people preferred and why.
 
webster said:
I don't think anybody is doing that.
Personally I find it quite interesting to know which era of a band people preferred and why.
Click to expand...
Perhaps you're right. I initially sensed a lot of negativity and trolling, but I've re-read the entire thread (I'm dedicated!) and it's not quite as weighted as it first seemed. I think it's the occasional suggestions that "so-and-so is not very good after such-and-such happened" etc. that prickle me. One person's 'rubbish' is another's 'genius'. But, in fairness, the thread isn't as bad as some I could mention.
 
vinylslug said:
Perhaps you're right. I initially sensed a lot of negativity and trolling, but I've re-read the entire thread (I'm dedicated!) and it's not quite as weighted as it first seemed. I think it's the occasional suggestions that "so-and-so is not very good after such-and-such happened" etc. that prickle me. One person's 'rubbish' is another's 'genius'. But, in fairness, the thread isn't as bad as some I could mention.
Click to expand...
There is a similar thread on Hoffman ref Waters' memoirs and the need to be either team RW or team DG is frankly pathetic. Grown adults arguing about who's fault it was that PF split, who is the better musician, who contributed more to whichever album ...so boring.
 
vinylslug said:
I will never understand threads like this. People are allowed to like and enjoy liking whatever music they want. No one is in a position to tell anybody else what they're supposed to like and not like.
Click to expand...

I don’t think anyone is doing that, and if anyone got close to it I’m probably the most guilty. To be honest my 2008 posts on this thread make me cringe. I’m far more at peace with the music of my teenage years now. I can’t really explain it, but the more I move out into jazz, classical, soul, funk and just about anything else interesting the less judgemental I become about anything. I guess it is an eventual realisation that I don’t actually know anything and all we can ever do is learn and absorb! The tribalism of pop music is looking increasingly bizarre and I’ve certainly dug most Floyd albums out a couple of times since I wrote the early posts, and enjoyed them too. Atom Heart Mother is a step too far though, and I still can’t remember anything about Obscured By Clouds!

PS I’m complete on vinyl up to WYWH, and have Animals & The Wall on CD. I’ve actually got Arnold Layne and See Emily Play on 7” too, but they are in rough shape.
 
Music is important, so it's good to argue about it rather than simply say everyone has their own taste. The mistake is to take any of that arguing personally.
 
sideshowbob said:
Music is important, so it's good to argue about it rather than simply say everyone has their own taste. The mistake is to take any of that arguing personally.
Click to expand...

Agreed, though it is also wise to assume that one’s taste isn’t fixed, or certainly shouldn’t be. As an example I remember the whole anti-disco thing of the late-70s, early 80s very well, and in many ways it stopped me looking beyond say Donna Summer and Grace Jones, so attacking stuff can very much be a fashion choice. As of course attacking Pink Floyd was for manifesto punks etc. Some stuff is just unforgivable though, e.g. there is no coherent justification for Andrew Lloyd Webber or The Stereophonics, but beyond that I’m pretty chilled-out.
 
Oh god yes. I keep discovering I actually love things I always thought I hated. Steely Dan the most recent example. But certain things are fixed certainties...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.


advertisement


Back
Top