| Author |
 Topic Search  Topic Options
|
Prejjer 
Forum Groupie
Joined: May 19 2008
Status: Offline
Points: 50
|
 Posted: June 18 2008 at 10:00 |
|
I have heard their entire discography and I must say that yes, they are overrated. I think most of their albums range from good to average. I think what I like most about Floyd though, would be that their discography holds a huge variety, (not as huge as KC, but still pretty huge). But still... They are very overrated, and they are definitely not one of the more prominent 'prog' bands, in fact, I would hesistate to call them prog in the first place.
|
 |
MikeEnRegalia
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: April 22 2005
Location: Sweden
Status: Offline
Points: 21206
|
Posted: June 18 2008 at 10:22 |
^ I would rate any discography by its best album ... maybe with really big discographies the top 2 or 3 albums. By that standard, Pink Floyd are underrated. 
|
|
|
|
Prejjer
Forum Groupie
Joined: May 19 2008
Status: Offline
Points: 50
|
Posted: June 18 2008 at 10:37 |
|
I personally think A Saucerful of Secrets and Animals are the best floyd albums, and they are both 3.5-4.0 stars to me. But hey, thats just me anyway.
|
|
JayDee
Forum Senior Member
VIP Member
Joined: September 07 2005
Location: Elysian Fields
Status: Offline
Points: 10063
|
Posted: June 18 2008 at 11:45 |
|
Wow, 5 pages already? This thread is overrated.
|
|
|
|
Dean
Special Collaborator
Retired Admin and Amateur Layabout
Joined: May 13 2007
Location: Europe
Status: Offline
Points: 37575
|
Posted: June 18 2008 at 17:59 |
 birdwithteeth11 wrote:
Before I started my response, I just wanted to point out a couple things from your post, which I hope you will read carefully before reading my response.
First of all I'd like to thank you for taking the time in engaging me in a stimulating, intellectual debate, one of the things in life that I enjoy. I still stick by my statements that PF was influential in the progressive movement and goodness knows there would be many bands that wouldn't exist today, both inside and outside of prog, if they had never existed. However, that doesn't mean that I can't make the logical jump to saying they're overrated. For example, anyone that I personally know who isn't heavily into prog, or doesn't listen to it, tends to treat PF as if they are God incarnate, which is what in the end bugs me the most. In fact, I wouldn't be surprised if many people on this site feel the same way. Let me give you a mainstream example and a prog example. Someone I know from my summer job told me a few days ago that he thinks that PF is easily one of the top 5 bands of all time and asked if I agreed with him. When I said they'd probably be in my top 150, he freaked out and asked how I couldn't like the greatest band in the world. As soon as I started explaining how PF made simplistic music, he said he had no clue what I was talking about and promptly continued, jokingly, belittling me for not liking PF enough, ignoring what I'd just said. Another example is of a friend of mine who has been listening to prog metal for a couple years now, but is just getting into the classic 70s material. Awhile ago, I remember making an anti-PF comment in front of him and he was on my case immediately, saying many of the same points that you've mentioned. I claimed that the fact that PF makes prog music simplistic enough for a mainstream audience to absorb it and immediately think that said band is God helps prove my point on why I think they're overrated. Some of their albums in particular are overrated in terms of how proggy they are. I wouldn't doubt for a minute that Animals, AHM, and WYWH are definitely albums that deserve more recognition, but albums like DSOTM and The Wall make me wonder how committed they are to the prog scene. Unfortunately I don't have enough time to cover everything I want to in your post, but if there is anything else you wish to debate/still don't fully understand about my opinion please feel free to respond to me again.
|
Last night I wrote a reply to this and lost it due to IE7's overrated ability to process text-boxes. This evening I re-wrote it, though nowhere near as erudite or wittily, and IE7 flushed it into the ether again. I'm old and life is far to short to go through all that again. So I started using Firefox - which I dislike with a passion because it is clunky and slow and has an unpleasant way of displaying text which hurts my eyes – but it doesn’t have a spell-checker, so now I’m using Word.  None of this is particularly relevant, except I'm not in the same buoyant responsive mood I was when I started this. So, for the final time, here are the salient points minus all the erudite comments and witty responses...
1. I read everything carefully; especially things I write, but thnaks fur the typ  2.1 I cannot make the same logical leaps as you because to me they are illogical, but that's my prerogative/failing
2.2 If a band is influential in the Prog world and highly regarded in the ‘real’ world then it does not follow that they are generally overrated.
2.3 You could say they are overrated in the ‘real’ world, but this thread is saying they are overrated here (in our little Prog world), and that is what you implied in your initial post. You have since clarified that, but still haven't explained why you think that is the case.
3.1 Elevating rock idols to god-like status is something all teenagers do (and something some of us grow out of  ) – that does not mean they are overrating the artists, it just means they quite like them (a bit) ((this week)) (((until the next fad comes along))) (((( )))). 3.2 Some people venerate Christain Vander as a God-like figure (I don’t) but I would never say Magma is overrated because of that.
3.3 Idolatry is something that angered Roger Waters greatly (hence the infamous Montreal incident) – he witnessed the bad-effects of it with Syd Barrett and he wrote songs about it several times between 1969 and 1979, culminating in The Wall, where it is one of the underlying themes.
3.4 Criticising an artist because of their fans behaviour is not artistic criticism, nor is it 'fair'
4.1 Prog music does not have to be complex, and there’s nothing in the rule-book about mainstream having to be simplistic either.
4.2 I honestly cannot be bothered counting the beats in a bar to see whether a band is using irrational meters or indulging in rapid signature changes – when they get it wrong I’ll notice, but that hardly going to be good music in that case. Money switched between 7/4 and common time - (That’s the erudite bit remembered  ) – but that makes no difference to 99% of the people who listen to it. 4.3 Prog-by-numbers is as creative as painting-by-numbers (Oh! And I've remembered the witty bit!  ) 5. but I’ve forgotten what point ‘5’ was.   6. How proggy an album is is not relevant – progginess is (a made up word and is) subjective. Whatever criteria you use to gauge it, most bands who have a long recording history will have albums that will fail your proggy test at some point.
7. Atom Heart Mother was Floyd’s first UK No. 1 album – nothing remotely simplistic or ‘mainstream’ there. DSotM never got to No. 1. Go figure. 8. Commitment to Prog by an artist is irrelevant – Robert Fripp and Steven Wilson (to name but two) are in Prog-denial, but that does not stop us regarding them as Prog artists or their music as Prog. Quite a few Prog bands from the 70s & 80s made 'commercial' albums - some of them successfully, some not.
You can criticise a band – and their fans will come to their defence, that is to be expected – make anti-PF comments in front of a PF fan and he gets on your case – Quelle Surprise! Criticise any band in front of their fans and heaven knows where your new butt-hole will be, but sure as eggs is eggs you’ll have one by the time they’re finished with you. 
You can criticise an album – that’s what this site is all about after all. But simply state that a 5-star album is overrated without justifying that based upon the music alone and watch the complaints flood in.
That is because calling something overrated is not criticising the band or the album – all you are doing is attacking the fans of that artist by saying their judgement is flawed and not as good as yours.
That is why people get their panties in a bunch when threads like this are started; that’s why people call for the banning of the word ‘overrated’ and that’s why I say people should choose their words carefully. 
|
|
What?
|
|
Roj
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: July 02 2008
Location: Manchester, UK
Status: Offline
Points: 3126
|
Posted: July 10 2008 at 12:02 |
|
Absolutely no way are Floyd overrated. One of the all time great prog bands, and one of the most influential. They were involved right at the start of the prog movement, ie Atom Heart Mother suite, a true epic rather than a few songs thrown together. Their output from AHM through to The Wall was outstanding.
|
|
Logan
Forum & Site Admin Group
Site Admin
Joined: April 05 2006
Location: Vancouver, BC
Status: Offline
Points: 36152
|
Posted: July 10 2008 at 12:53 |
|
I really wish there were other option for this poll. Now I was a big a Pink Floyd fan, but judging from close friend's exhortations in the past of the amazingly outstanding nature of Pink Floyd (as the best), I feel that there is rather too much hype and hyperbole when it comes to PF -- speaking from personal experience. But fans do tend to overpraise/ go overboard with their enthusiasms. Still, no vote. Obviously, Pink Floyd is a very important band, and I enjoy many of the compositions greatly.
|
|
|
|
Padraic
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: February 16 2006
Location: Pennsylvania
Status: Offline
Points: 31169
|
Posted: July 10 2008 at 12:57 |
Dean wrote:
That is because calling something overrated is not criticising the band or the album – all you are doing is attacking the fans of that artist by saying their judgement is flawed and not as good as yours.
|
This should be repeated in every "overrated/underrated" thread from now on.
|
|
The Quiet One
Prog Reviewer
Joined: January 16 2008
Location: Argentina
Status: Offline
Points: 15745
|
Posted: July 10 2008 at 13:09 |
|
^I wouldn't say for underrated, but yes for overrated.
|
|
alanerc
Forum Senior Member
Joined: December 20 2007
Location: Mexico
Status: Offline
Points: 278
|
Posted: July 10 2008 at 16:14 |
Well, maybe some of PA guys don't like PF 'cause it's very comercial band, maybe one of the most comercial bands ever, but you have to admit, you don't find albums like Meddle, Dark side of Moon, or Wish you were here every day  Overrated: No
|
|
Padraic
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: February 16 2006
Location: Pennsylvania
Status: Offline
Points: 31169
|
Posted: July 10 2008 at 16:19 |
cacho wrote:
^I wouldn't say for underrated, but yes for overrated. |
"Underrated" can be just as obnoxious sometimes.
|
|
Logan
Forum & Site Admin Group
Site Admin
Joined: April 05 2006
Location: Vancouver, BC
Status: Offline
Points: 36152
|
Posted: July 10 2008 at 16:35 |
NaturalScience wrote:
cacho wrote:
^I wouldn't say for underrated, but yes for overrated. |
"Underrated" can be just as obnoxious sometimes.
|
Equally so; depending on who says it and depending on my opinion (which counts highly, at least for me). It can be obnoxious when someone says that people have too low as well as too high an opinion of anything, and it can be very misleading. Imagine someone saying that Stalin is overrated by communists, or that Marx is underrated by economists (this socialist admires Marx, but despises Stalin). I'm against torture, but it would be wrong for to say that torture is overrated by sadists. The fanatics, and non-fanatics, have a right to their opinion of merit, as long as they don't have their facts wrong.
|
|
|
|
crimhead
Forum Senior Member
VIP Member
Joined: October 10 2006
Location: Missouri
Status: Offline
Points: 19236
|
Posted: July 10 2008 at 16:42 |
|
Few bands have had the output that Floyd had in a 10 year span.
AHM,Meddle,DSOTM,WYWH,Animals and The Wall.
1996 RnR Hall of Fame inductee.
They have gotten their accolades.
Edited by crimhead - July 10 2008 at 16:42
|
|
JROCHA
Forum Senior Member
Joined: October 18 2007
Location: Oakland, KS
Status: Offline
Points: 1501
|
Posted: July 10 2008 at 17:26 |
|
they are praised too much by many, they are a great band though, thet made some great albums , but i don't think they compare to King Crimson,Genesis,Yes or Rush. thats just what i think
|
|
boo boo
Forum Senior Member
Joined: June 28 2005
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 905
|
Posted: July 11 2008 at 03:33 |
Sure they're insanely popular, but they freaking deserve to be.
I don't consider them overrated, nor underrated but I will say they get a bit of a bum rep sometimes within the prog fan community, maybe because they're not the most skilled of musicians. But that to me is one of the things that made Floyd so great, they showed a side of prog that didn't need to rely on technical prowess or rhythmic complexity.
I also hate how kids are trying to be all hipster now by saying everything Floyd did after Barrett left is crap.
|
|
The Quiet One
Prog Reviewer
Joined: January 16 2008
Location: Argentina
Status: Offline
Points: 15745
|
Posted: July 11 2008 at 15:15 |
JROCHA wrote:
they are praised too much by many, they are a great band though, thet made some great albums , but i don't think they compare to King Crimson,Genesis,Yes or Rush. thats just what i think
|
huh!!!!???? Pink Floyd not better or at least equal TO RUSH?!?! Dude are you serious? Not saying Rush is a bad band, but Floyd is a cornestone of the whole Prog genre, while Rush just being for Heavy Prog(not a bad thing, though)
And if you say that Floyd is too praised by many, isn't Rush too?!
I surely wouldn't consider any Rush album better to any of Floyd albums from the 70's. AHM, Meddle, OBC, DSOTM, WYWH, Animals and The Wall are classics and extremely innovating.
Rush could have released A Farewell to Kings, Hemispheres, Permanent Waves and Moving Pictures, but seriously they're no match to Floyd, maybe equally on high standard material but on innovation, nah.
It seems you're praising too much Rush, saying that they're better than Floyd, sorry, but I completely disagree with ya, I know it's YOUR opinion, but this isn't really something complicated to think of.
|
|
Padraic
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: February 16 2006
Location: Pennsylvania
Status: Offline
Points: 31169
|
Posted: July 11 2008 at 15:18 |
cacho wrote:
Rush could have released A Farewell to Kings, Hemispheres, Permanent Waves and Moving Pictures, but seriously they're no match to Floyd, |
I would listen to those albums over any Floyd album every day of the week and twice on Sundays. Yay opinions.
|
|
MovingPictures07
Prog Reviewer
Joined: January 09 2008
Location: Beasty Heart
Status: Offline
Points: 32181
|
Posted: July 11 2008 at 15:30 |
cacho wrote:
huh!!!!???? Pink Floyd not better or at least equal TO RUSH?!?! Dude are you serious? Not saying Rush is a bad band, but Floyd is a cornestone of the whole Prog genre, while Rush just being for Heavy Prog(not a bad thing, though)
Where is your backup? Most of all Floyd ever did was psych-influenced mainstream prog-wannabe rock. Hell, Rush unarguably covered more ground over 30 years than Floyd ever did.
And if you say that Floyd is too praised by many, isn't Rush too?!
If you want to get into an opinions argument.
I surely wouldn't consider any Rush album better to any of Floyd albums from the 70's. AHM, Meddle, OBC, DSOTM, WYWH, Animals and The Wall are classics and extremely innovating.
Rush could have released A Farewell to Kings, Hemispheres, Permanent Waves and Moving Pictures, but seriously they're no match to Floyd, maybe equally on high standard material but on innovation, nah.
THIS IS ALL YOUR OPINION.
It seems you're praising too much Rush, saying that they're better than Floyd, sorry, but I completely disagree with ya, I know it's YOUR opinion, but this isn't really something complicated to think of.
I love this. You're bashing him for stating his opinions, and then you turn things EVEN WORSE by stating that he can't understand something which is simple to grasp and you're doing the EXACT same thing.   |
Next time, if you want to state a reasonable point, don't be a hypocrite and lose all of your credibility with it. You could have easily just said that all of his stuff was opinion and therefore didn't make it objective, but then you imply that your opinion IS objective. What the hell?
Edited by MovingPictures07 - July 11 2008 at 15:31
|
|
|
|
MovingPictures07
Prog Reviewer
Joined: January 09 2008
Location: Beasty Heart
Status: Offline
Points: 32181
|
Posted: July 11 2008 at 15:51 |
My comrade may not want to continue this argument, but I'd be willing to, since I have not yet offered my two cents in this topic with a direct post.
Dean wrote:
birdwithteeth11 wrote:
Before I started my response, I just wanted to point out a couple things from your post, which I hope you will read carefully before reading my response.
First of all I'd like to thank you for taking the time in engaging me in a stimulating, intellectual debate, one of the things in life that I enjoy. I still stick by my statements that PF was influential in the progressive movement and goodness knows there would be many bands that wouldn't exist today, both inside and outside of prog, if they had never existed. However, that doesn't mean that I can't make the logical jump to saying they're overrated. For example, anyone that I personally know who isn't heavily into prog, or doesn't listen to it, tends to treat PF as if they are God incarnate, which is what in the end bugs me the most. In fact, I wouldn't be surprised if many people on this site feel the same way. Let me give you a mainstream example and a prog example. Someone I know from my summer job told me a few days ago that he thinks that PF is easily one of the top 5 bands of all time and asked if I agreed with him. When I said they'd probably be in my top 150, he freaked out and asked how I couldn't like the greatest band in the world. As soon as I started explaining how PF made simplistic music, he said he had no clue what I was talking about and promptly continued, jokingly, belittling me for not liking PF enough, ignoring what I'd just said. Another example is of a friend of mine who has been listening to prog metal for a couple years now, but is just getting into the classic 70s material. Awhile ago, I remember making an anti-PF comment in front of him and he was on my case immediately, saying many of the same points that you've mentioned. I claimed that the fact that PF makes prog music simplistic enough for a mainstream audience to absorb it and immediately think that said band is God helps prove my point on why I think they're overrated. Some of their albums in particular are overrated in terms of how proggy they are. I wouldn't doubt for a minute that Animals, AHM, and WYWH are definitely albums that deserve more recognition, but albums like DSOTM and The Wall make me wonder how committed they are to the prog scene. Unfortunately I don't have enough time to cover everything I want to in your post, but if there is anything else you wish to debate/still don't fully understand about my opinion please feel free to respond to me again.
|
Last night I wrote a reply to this and lost it due to IE7's overrated ability to process text-boxes. This evening I re-wrote it, though nowhere near as erudite or wittily, and IE7 flushed it into the ether again. I'm old and life is far to short to go through all that again. So I started using Firefox - which I dislike with a passion because it is clunky and slow and has an unpleasant way of displaying text which hurts my eyes – but it doesn’t have a spell-checker, so now I’m using Word. None of this is particularly relevant, except I'm not in the same buoyant responsive mood I was when I started this. So, for the final time, here are the salient points minus all the erudite comments and witty responses...
1. I read everything carefully; especially things I write, but thnaks fur the typ 2.1 I cannot make the same logical leaps as you because to me they are illogical, but that's my prerogative/failing
2.2 If a band is influential in the Prog world and highly regarded in the ‘real’ world then it does not follow that they are generally overrated.
2.3 You could say they are overrated in the ‘real’ world, but this thread is saying they are overrated here (in our little Prog world), and that is what you implied in your initial post. You have since clarified that, but still haven't explained why you think that is the case.
I won't argue that they're not influential, but I will argue that in a prog-sense of the word, they are not near as innovative as King Crimson, Yes, or Genesis. Sure, they defined a sound, and peaked with certain albums that managed to break into the mainstream, but I simply can't buy the fact that Pink Floyd can be considered hardcore progressive rock as much as those other three bands. Simplicity is certainly one argument, as Pink Floyd did not have one member which I would call a virtuoso or even close. I'm not arguing that they're NOT prog, I'm just saying they're not nearly as representative of the movement as the other three. I'd be willing to continue this if you want.
3.1 Elevating rock idols to god-like status is something all teenagers do (and something some of us grow out of ) – that does not mean they are overrating the artists, it just means they quite like them (a bit) ((this week)) (((until the next fad comes along))) (((( )))).
Of course it does. Saying "Pink Floyd is the best band ever!!!" sincerely, really does mean that they think it is.  3.2 Some people venerate Christain Vander as a God-like figure (I don’t) but I would never say Magma is overrated because of that.
How many people venerate Christian Vander as a God-like figure and how many venerate Pink Floyd (both in the prog world and out)? Then tell me there isn't a difference.
3.3 Idolatry is something that angered Roger Waters greatly (hence the infamous Montreal incident) – he witnessed the bad-effects of it with Syd Barrett and he wrote songs about it several times between 1969 and 1979, culminating in The Wall, where it is one of the underlying themes.
3.4 Criticising an artist because of their fans behaviour is not artistic criticism, nor is it 'fair'
I believe he wasn't directly criticising the artist because of their fan's behavior--it's more so split up into two criticisms. Even so, here's my argument:
1. Pink Floyd wrote music that was progressive and influential, but nonetheless not near as impactingly progressive as their other contemporaries (refer to previous blob of argument which I'd be willing to expand upon; this is barely touching the surface).----That's the blame on the artist.
2. The general population (as well as in PA) heavily are apt to blindly follow the crowd of "Pink Floyd is the greatest!", yet do not recognize the subtle differences in progressiveness (covered in segment #1)---That's the blame of the fans' behavior.
4.1 Prog music does not have to be complex, and there’s nothing in the rule-book about mainstream having to be simplistic either.
This is taken directly from the PA's defintion of prog: "Progressive rock artists sought to move away from the limitations of
radio formatted rock and pop, and "progress" rock to the point that it
could achieve the sophistication of jazz or classical music. It is
admired by its fans for its complexity, requiring a high level of
musical virtuosity to perform. Critics have often derided the genre as
pompous and self-indulgent."
4.2 I honestly cannot be bothered counting the beats in a bar to see whether a band is using irrational meters or indulging in rapid signature changes – when they get it wrong I’ll notice, but that hardly going to be good music in that case. Money switched between 7/4 and common time - (That’s the erudite bit remembered ) – but that makes no difference to 99% of the people who listen to it.
I won't deny that Pink Floyd were good at what they did---I'm saying that they're simply NOT one of the biggest stones that holds up the 70s progressive movement, no matter what anyone thinks. And (as covered in 4.1), complexity is ONE of the reasons they're not. I thought you were talking about our little world, not 99% of people.4.3 Prog-by-numbers is as creative as painting-by-numbers (Oh! And I've remembered the witty bit! ) 5. but I’ve forgotten what point ‘5’ was. 6. How proggy an album is is not relevant – progginess is (a made up word and is) subjective. Whatever criteria you use to gauge it, most bands who have a long recording history will have albums that will fail your proggy test at some point.
Now THIS is your biggest mistake.
You just said: "2.3 You could say they are overrated in the ‘real’ world, but this
thread is saying they are overrated here (in our little Prog world),
and that is what you implied in your initial post. You have since
clarified that, but still haven't explained why you think that is the
case."
How can how proggy an album is be not relevant when that's EXACTLY what we're discussing? 7. Atom Heart Mother was Floyd’s first UK No. 1 album – nothing remotely simplistic or ‘mainstream’ there. DSotM never got to No. 1. Go figure.
Tell me if "Atom Heart Mother" is nearly as representative of the movement as "Close to the Edge" or "Larks' Tongues in Aspic". 8. Commitment to Prog by an artist is irrelevant – Robert Fripp and Steven Wilson (to name but two) are in Prog-denial, but that does not stop us regarding them as Prog artists or their music as Prog. Quite a few Prog bands from the 70s & 80s made 'commercial' albums - some of them successfully, some not.
You can criticise a band – and their fans will come to their defence, that is to be expected – make anti-PF comments in front of a PF fan and he gets on your case – Quelle Surprise! Criticise any band in front of their fans and heaven knows where your new butt-hole will be, but sure as eggs is eggs you’ll have one by the time they’re finished with you.
You can criticise an album – that’s what this site is all about after all. But simply state that a 5-star album is overrated without justifying that based upon the music alone and watch the complaints flood in.
That is because calling something overrated is not criticising the band or the album – all you are doing is attacking the fans of that artist by saying their judgement is flawed and not as good as yours.
What's wrong with that? If someone is using logic to prove that the sky is blue, yet everyone else blindly follows some idiot who says the sky is red without any proof, then who is wrong? I realize that some of this dabbles into subjective territory, but how Pink Floyd can be considered a "cornerstone" of the movement boggles me to no end, regardless of whether I like them or not.
That is why people get their panties in a bunch when threads like this are started; that’s why people call for the banning of the word ‘overrated’ and that’s why I say people should choose their words carefully.
Banning the word "overrated"? What, are you going to ban us from stating our opinions next? That's blatantly absurd. |
|
|
|
|
crimson87
Prog Reviewer
Joined: January 03 2008
Location: Argentina
Status: Offline
Points: 1818
|
Posted: July 11 2008 at 15:57 |
None of the choices reflects my opinion.I think they deserve all the hype they get but have to admit that I hate those fanboys with the DSOTM t shirt.
Probably they are considered overrated because... lets face it They are introductory prog ,it's like a gateway to hear more challenging music like KC or VDGG.So then yo can go to a newbie who listens to PF and say:You call THAT prog!! .(then make sure you start playing Pawn Hearts to the newbie to support your opinion). They have achieved a lot of success and sold a lot of records so , picture Lizard or Larks tongues... videos on MTV.No matter how complex they are lots of proggers are gonna say: Hey dude!!! The Crimson King has sold out!!!
|
|
/PAlogo_v2.gif "Progarchives.com Homepage")
Is Pink Floyd overrated?
