Is Dark Side of The Moon Overrated?

no there is nothing in rock music to compare to

AFlowerKingCrimson wrote: ProgMetaller2112 wrote: AFlowerKingCrimson wrote: Larkstongue41 wrote: ^ That's exactly why some people argue that it is overrated. Not because it is of low quality (it is not) but because it has the status of the greatest rock album ever made. Yep, similar to how myself and many others consider the Beatles to be over rated.  The Beatles ain't overrated  Ain't?

Beach Boys released Pet Sounds back in 1966. The Beatles, Sgt. Pepper in 1967.
Those albums were the gold standard, and the shape of things to come.

When Floyd released DSOTM, we already had many KC records including one of the cornerstones of prog: ITCOTCK; every yes album up to (and including) Close to the Edge, we had Thick as a Brick and freaking Tarkus among other fantastic records (including some of Floyd's own) that were much ballsier.

To say DSOTM was groundbreaking is absolute rubbish. It was a calculated effort, a formula: how to reach the most people without alienating listeners. Playing safe and being sterile on all fronts.
Later came WYWH. A record that was 1/2 about trying to remember old Floyd and Syd, the other half was about DSOTM, their own Frankenstein: "we heard about the sell out"

Hey, long time fan, we love and miss Syd's Floyd, yeah, too bad he's now an empty shell. Nothing we can do about it. Btw, there are some dudes wearing suits that push us around. But we are fighting, we aren't releasing a new DSOTM for the non-fans that loved it, we are still the same old band, look we even made some longer, proggier tracks this time just for you... like the ones on Meddle and AHM (the best we could do after Syd was no more).

Just my two cents.

Mortte wrote: I believe I just can´t ever understand that opinion, which seem to be very common here, that WYWH is better than DSoTM. If somebody has still interest, I really liked to know the arguments why somebody´s thinking it´s better. What they do better in WYWH than DSoTM? And don´t say better songs, I´ve heard that and disagree.

What other reason could I have to say I like Wish you were Here better than Dark Side than that I like the songs better? (I won't say that the album, or the songs are better, only that I like them better). Yeah, in concept and collection of songs Dark Side works better than Wish, but for me it's more important how much I enjoy the music. And a great part of the weight for that is that Shine On (as a whole thing) is my favourite song ever... and then the way it flows into Welcome to the Machine (which I also love) is just dream-like... as well as the way the title song flows into Shine On again. In the end, I just love that album, and for me it's not only my favourite Pink Floyd album, but my favourite album, period.

SteveG wrote: Mortte wrote: I believe I just can´t ever understand that opinion, which seem to be very common here, that WYWH is better than DSoTM. If somebody has still interest, I really liked to know the arguments why somebody´s thinking it´s better. What they do better in WYWH than DSoTM? And don´t say better songs, I´ve heard that and disagree. I can only speak for myself, naturally, and I feel that WYWH is awesome because it followed DSotM and actually bettered it while not treading old ground.

No. I think WYWH could easily have named DSoTM part 2. It has lots in common as sounds, music, also really the theme. I am not saying WYWH is a bad album, although when DSoTM is quite positive album although it had quite scary theme, WYWH is really depressive album and I think that´s the most reason why I don´t rate it as high as for example DSoTM. When madness was a theme commonly in DSoTM, in WYWH it´s Syd´s becoming mad and what that caused to the band. WYWH is of course profound album like all the Floyd albums are and really I think if they hadn´t done it, I believe they would have splitted already those days.

AFlowerKingCrimson wrote: ProgMetaller2112 wrote: AFlowerKingCrimson wrote: Larkstongue41 wrote: ^ That's exactly why some people argue that it is overrated. Not because it is of low quality (it is not) but because it has the status of the greatest rock album ever made. Yep, similar to how myself and many others consider the Beatles to be over rated.  The Beatles ain't overrated  Ain't?

No.

Upbeat Tango Monday wrote: Beach Boys released Pet Sounds back in 1966. The Beatles, Sgt. Pepper in 1967. Those albums were the gold standard, and the shape of things to come. When Floyd released DSOTM, we already had many KC records including one of the cornerstones of prog: ITCOTCK; every yes album up to (and including) Close to the Edge, we had Thick as a Brick and freaking Tarkus among other fantastic records (including some of Floyd's own) that were much ballsier. To say DSOTM was groundbreaking is absolute rubbish. It was a calculated effort, a formula: how to reach the most people without alienating listeners. Playing safe and being sterile on all fronts. Later came WYWH. A record that was 1/2 about trying to remember old Floyd and Syd, the other half was about DSOTM, their own Frankenstein: "we heard about the sell out" Hey, long time fan, we love and miss Syd's Floyd, yeah, too bad he's now an empty shell. Nothing we can do about it. Btw, there are some dudes wearing suits that push us around. But we are fighting, we aren't releasing a new DSOTM for the non-fans that loved it, we are still the same old band, look we even made some longer, proggier tracks this time just for you... like the ones on Meddle and AHM (the best we could do after Syd was no more). Just my two cents.

Edited by Frenetic Zetetic - March 20 2018 at 02:25

Really the truth is most people can take prog because it´s complexity (yes the long songs too). I think Floyd just succeeded to put together in Dark side their ambitions and something that hit the ordinary people (I still think on the run & great gig are too much to ordinary people). I don´t also believe there are lots of people today who listens Dark Side whole through, yes I can believe Money is in many´s playlists, I really believe many doesn´t like even Time just because it´s too arty beginning.

Mortte wrote: ^What I never do, is thinking is some record good prog record or not. To me there is just great music, good music and bad music.

...And DSoTM is "bad" music (relative to other choices at the time) to my ears, hence this entire thread dude. 

You seem to be the one trying to defend a traditionalists view here. I've been nothing but reasonable in this thread and people act like my opinion instantly means I'm being stubborn or elitist and claiming fact, when in reality it's the PF fanbois trying to objectively and empirically prove this record.

If anything, my point/opinion is arguing how collective consumer group consensus doesn't equate to artistic mastery of an artist/legendary recordings.

Lots of people like this record and bought it. That doesn't mean it's the best record ever.

Lots of people also enjoy abusing drugs. That doesn't mean that's a smart choice.

This hilarity of me admitting this is all opinion, and people coming in and attempting to state opinions as fact, is beyond entertaining, though. More so than DSoTM! 

Mortte wrote: So it seems the most problem you is, that when DSoTM is said progrecord, you are hurt.

Flip that the other way around, dude. PF fanbois are the ones who keep posting and reviving this thread. I've posted like 4 times in the last several pages, stating my same opinion.

Mortte wrote:   Also comparing Dark Side to Close to the or Supper´s is little silly to me. It´s like comparing first Elvis records to greatest Frank Sinatra recordings sayin "Sinatra sucks cause Elvis rocks more".

Silly to you, and that's why it's called an opinion, just like this entire thread. I could say the same exact thing about your defense of DSoTM relative to everything you just said; DSoTM doesn't hit as hard as what came before and after IMHO. Who cares if it's silly, that's why it's an opinion and not an empirical fact.

Mortte wrote: Really the truth is most people can take prog because it´s complexity (yes the long songs too). I think Floyd just succeeded to put together in Dark side their ambitions and something that hit the ordinary people (I still think on the run & great gig are too much to ordinary people). I don´t also believe there are lots of people today who listens Dark Side whole through, yes I can believe Money is in many´s playlists, I really believe many doesn´t like even Time just because it´s too arty beginning.

This is the most concise portion of your argument, and is more inline with the type of discussion I was looking for in this thread, so thank you.

Edited by Frenetic Zetetic - March 20 2018 at 03:57

^ I don't see how is WYWH Dark Side... part 2.