The best and the "worst" song in your opinion?

Best : Us and Them

Worst : Money

Yes I know it's an fantastic album and should not be divided into best and worst song haha

 Best: Time

Worst: On The Run

Best: Time/Great Gig (yes, I do realize putting both is cheating)

Worst: Money

"Time" and "The Great Gig in the Sky" are both great; I can't choose between them.

Not certain about worst. Definitely not "Money"; a great track to dance to. One of the proofs that a 7/8 rhythm can definitely be danced to. Another one is "Dance on a Volcano", by the way.

Even though I like OTR I would have to agree here. It seems to be a sequencer so it's probably ground breaking but it just doesn't really do much. Tangerine Dream could have done better in their sleep(pun intended ).

As for favorite possibly Time but I also really like the Great Gig in the Sky and Us and them.

Here is my official answer:

Best: Us and Them

Worst(or at least least favorite): On the Run

Though I picked differently on mine, I really cannot argue with this either. Good piks. 

I've always been a side-one guy, but Us and Them is undeniably exquisite?  I'm not a big sax guy, but on this song it is heroic. 

Time

Money

I'm not a massive fan of this album although I've seen it performed live in it's entirety and it becomes a different animal in that environment entirely. It rocks big time and the guitar licks are some of the best of any genre. However I will always turn towards Wish You Were Here and Animals if I feel like listening to some Floyd.

If I want to listen to Pink Floyd I will turn to "Ummagumma" or "Meddle", but most definitely not to the ridiculously overrated "Animals". Had "Animals" come out a few years earlier my opinion would be different, but for the time it came out it was absolutely lame compared to what was musically going on at that time.

Animals is not vastly overrated. By looking it objectively, it's the only Floyd album without "bad songs". The album is solid as a rock. It's also the favourite album by many hardcore Floyd fans.

first of all: there is no such thing as "looking at something objectively"; this only exists in your imagination. personal taste always plays a crucial role. and "bad" is in the eye of the beholder, or rather the ear of the listener. there are in my opinion definitely two weak tracks on "Animals", the two parts of "Pigs on the Wing". "Meddle" or "Ummagumma" don't have weak tracks. yes, I love "San Tropez" and "Seamus" (how someone can NOT love that dog's singing is beyond me, but I know many people hate that track).

second: as Friede rightly pointed out an album has to be viewed in the context of the time it was recorded. had "Animals" been recorded in 1972 or 1973 it would have been great. but at the time it came out it sounded as if coming from a bunch of BOFs who are totally oblivious to what is musically going on around them and who have become so saturated that they can't get their fat asses out of their armchairs anymore to really get rocking. other artists had noticed the sign of the times and reacted; take for example Hawkwind's "Quark, Strangeness and Charme" or "Live Floating Anarchy" by Planet Gong which came out in the same year as "Animals".

I must agree that the two parts of the pigs on the wing are the biggest flaw on the album. Anyhow coming to Meddle I found that album a bit boring apart from "One of these days" and the masterpiece "Echoes". The four songs between those have nothing new for me. (except the dog's singing). It feels like Beatles did better ones years ago. Ummagumma is great tho!

But in terms of a great album I also value the production. Animals mixing is top-notch as is almost all the Pink Floyd's albums. For example, comparing Animals to the two albums you mentioned. Yes I know the other one is a live album and can't be compared to studio album in terms of production.

I think the Planet Gong album is pretty cool tho but I just really can't get into hawkwind.

Anyhow, back to DSOTM :)

production NEVER is a criterion for me; what counts is the music and only the music. it is nice if an album has a good production, but if not - so what?

to be honest: it wouldn't matter to me at all.

I personally think this thing about production is typically male. most women I know don't give a damn about production; they want to hear great music that sounds alive. of course there are exceptions to this for both genders, but I think it is a pretty good rule of thumbs

In my opinion, an appropriate production has a great deal in making music that sounds alive.

however equal men and women may be, I think there are most definitely psychological differences, with pros and cons on both sides. men usually have a better sense of orientation than women, for example. women on the other hand are usually better at multitasking. of course there are exceptions from these rules too.

the Bald Angels are an all female band consisting of my wife Friede and me, our daughters Alice and Dorothy and my sister Bea. we play a huge variety of instruments. only two members of the band are bald though (due to alopecia universalis), my wife and I

Time, U&T and Brain Damage

 

two/three weaker one;

Breathe, Money and Colour.

Following up on the Animals discussion, musically Animals is not innovative by any means but the lyrical concept is very convincing and the music is a perfect fit for it. I can see why people who are looking for innovation and surprise find it lame. However in my view it's a very good and legitimate way to follow up on the super successful DSOTM and WYWH. There is justified disappointment when a band after such a success just tries to do it again and produces an uninspired clone. On the other hand I'm fine with bands that develop slowly rather than doing something completely different, and surely not everybody has to "go with the time" (which may mean development as well as losing identity and trying something that others do better). Animals sits pretty well in the middle. It builds on the predecessors and sounds very mature and confident, and it also has some edge that DSOTM and WYWH don't have. Also in its time it may not have been the coolest most exciting thing around, but listening to it in 2019 it has aged quite well and for my personal listening pleasure why would it make a difference whether it came out in 1977 or 1973?

I think, that this comment may be ... somewhat incorrect, and unfair to PF.

UMMAGUMMA, in many ways, is just a solo album, and its sound appears to have been generated from what we would probably call "home studio" which takes away the slickness that the previous studio albums with Syd Barrett obviously had, as the mixes are really good, and helps emphasize the lyrics even more.

The "murkiness" is a result of not being in a massive big studio with all the stuff available to them, and I wonder if you are implying more to that album than is really there.

Compare the "individual" touches that UMMAGUMA has, which is a set of solo albums, with DG's solo album with fattened lyrics with bacon and eggs, and is so stuffy as to make you open the windows and let the smog in!

For the record, DSOTM is not an album that I can select a "song". The whole thing makes sense in one sitting from beginning to end, and for me to select one "song" is to destroy a great piece of music, into a bunch of top ten crap. And to me, this album is not crap, but its material stands up better together, not apart, even if most folks want to hear MONEY yet again ... ohhhh you should have heard the 23 minute reggae version of that they did in concert, which has never been released ... it was even better, and probably the only bit I would buy separate.

Strange discussion ... since PF was already doing all of the ANIMALS and WYWH material during the DSOTM tour. It was well known that they liked to play the stuff and smooth it out before putting it on record.

My take on the order of the releases, is that the record company wanted an album that was not so different from DSOTM, and thus WYWH was put together, which to me, is just 2/3's of an album and the rest after Roy is just a throwaway left over. But the record company did not want to see "Raving and Drooling" and "You Got to be Crazy" released, because it was so different from DSOTM ... and on top of it, "Raving and Drooling" in its early form was one of the best pieces of SPACE ROCK, on line with 2 of their early pieces (Astronomy Domine and Interstellar Overdrive), and sadly, by the time it made it to an album, it was ravaged senseless and its drive was gone, into something else ... it was still good, but ... now it was just a song, instead of it being a really good trip!

And this is the part that I missed from PF ... in the middle of those years and their 2 or 3 albums, they stopped being a great trip band ... it was now all songs ... and of course, here we are, on a "progressive" board and someone is talking about "songs" ... the music is now worthless and simplified to the lowest level possible!

Strongest: Time, Us and Them

Weakest: Speak to Me

… and hooking into the Animals discussion: the Pigs-songs are not the strongest ones, but Sheep and Dogs lift the album up to the upper middle class of PF's catalog.

This, but it's my favorite album ever so I love basically all of it.

Obviously taken on its own Speak to Me is the worst since it's hardly a song.

BaldJean wrote: Foxprog wrote: BaldFriede wrote: richardh wrote: Time Money I'm not a massive fan of this album although I've seen it performed live in it's entirety and it becomes a different animal in that environment entirely. It rocks big time and the guitar licks are some of the best of any genre. However I will always turn towards Wish You Were Here and Animals if I feel like listening to some Floyd.   If I want to listen to Pink Floyd I will turn to "Ummagumma" or "Meddle", but most definitely not to the ridiculously overrated "Animals". Had "Animals" come out a few years earlier my opinion would be different, but for the time it came out it was absolutely lame compared to what was musically going on at that time.   Animals is not vastly overrated. By looking it objectively, it's the only Floyd album without "bad songs". The album is solid as a rock. It's also the favourite album by many hardcore Floyd fans.   first of all: there is no such thing as "looking at something objectively"; this only exists in your imagination. personal taste always plays a crucial role. and "bad" is in the eye of the beholder, or rather the ear of the listener. there are in my opinion definitely two weak tracks on "Animals", the two parts of "Pigs on the Wing". "Meddle" or "Ummagumma" don't have weak tracks. yes, I love "San Tropez" and "Seamus" (how someone can NOT love that dog's singing is beyond me, but I know many people hate that track). second: as Friede rightly pointed out an album has to be viewed in the context of the time it was recorded. had "Animals" been recorded in 1972 or 1973 it would have been great. but at the time it came out it sounded as if coming from a bunch of BOFs who are totally oblivious to what is musically going on around them and who have become so saturated that they can't get their fat asses out of their armchairs anymore to really get rocking. other artists had noticed the sign of the times and reacted; take for example Hawkwind's "Quark, Strangeness and Charme" or "Live Floating Anarchy" by Planet Gong which came out in the same year as "Animals". I know a lot of people love "Animals", but for me it is absolutely lame. in the context of time, of course

Why it's context so important? If the same notes, performed the same exact way had been recorded before or after it would be a great album, but when it did it isn't? It sounds strange, especially given you said in a different post that you don't care about production and only the music. I struggle to see how "context" falls under the definition of music but "production" doesn't  (though I kinda agree with what you said about production tho, it's just that context it's way more irrelevant than production for me).

Always hated "Money" (and still do).

"Great Gig" and "Time" are in a category of rarefied numen. We'll call it "peak progiastics" or "progasm."

A tough album to pick a "best" or "favorite" cuz I used to only play whole sides: all of Side One or all of Side Two after skipping "Money," every night, for years!

Great point! Who cares what was going on at the time. Is it relevant today? Does it stir emotion, admiration, and respect now, today? 

Can't believe Hawkwind and Planet Gong are mentioned as examples of what was truly reflective of the times (1977)! If this were the case, why weren't their albums A) big sellers, B) the talk of the world at that time (in the media), and C) rated higher here on PA where people care about progressive rock music? 

to b) same answer

to c) because most people who are into "progressive" rock are actually conservative in their musical taste. which is one of the reasons why "Animals" is rated so high. a proof for this is an album Friede currently rants about in this thread:

http://www.progarchives.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=120404" rel="nofollow - http://www.progarchives.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=120404

I totally agree with Friede that this album should be much higher rated, but I fear she is preaching to deaf ears. I have given up on promoting Roman Bunka on this site; I tried several times. he will remain the overlooked guitar player. but Friede still thinks she can open these deaf ears.

I too agree that bands should be doing what they want, but I question this is the case with "Animals". as Moshkito nicely pointed out somewhere "Dogs" had originally been a completely different animal, or was it "Sheep" (please forgive the pun)?

Best: Us and Them

Worst: On the Run?

I believe you are missing the point and mis-representing its worth.

Creativity is usually tied to the social/political time it came from ... it (very rarely) is just a song from MARS with melodies from VENUS and a feel from PLUTO!

In the 60's, the majority of the music that sold, was played on radio, and it was the late 60's and one of the main drives of "psychedelia" and the "revolution" that changed things a lot ... you don't have to make a case for commerciality to prove your point. THE DOORS were not there "for the money!" ... neither were the JEFFERSON AIRPLANE, though later they found how much they were ripped off!

Big sellers has NOTHING to do with quality or value of the material ... your question is very offensive ... something like ITCOTCK did not sell a whole lot, since one song was actually a single ... and I can easily tell you that in Madison, and then Santa Barbara, not a single one of any friends I knew that had lots of music in their house, even had the album!

Your argument is very hurtful to the story of "progressive music" ... since with the exception of a handful of bands, most of them were not even that well known and were not selling. And you conveniently forget that GENESIS, did not became a "great" in the "Progressive" world until much later after many of these bands ... it was the delivery of SEBTP that got GENESIS on the air in the big stations, but even then, there were problems ... which song is the BLUE DOT? NONE. That means, it can only be played from midnight to 6 AM ... that was the reality ... but you think that has nothing to do with the bands history, and it does! And in a place like LA, with KMET and KLOS then, that would be a death knell ... so it was up to the lesser stations to make this album come alive ... and they DID SUCCEED, despite you not giving a damn!

It's true that Genesis only became really big when in 1978 they released ATTWT (an album I love btw) because it was easy to program the songs for radio. It was clever that at least they kept the prog vibe going on tracks like Deep In The Motherlode and Undertow. Wasn't to last long though.

Yes biggest selling album is well known to be 90125 which is a truly depressing stat to me!

But that said the likes of ELP , Yes , Genesis were very popular in the UK in the early seventies and the albums also sold very well in Europe despite the lack of airplay. Even the likes of Focus and Camel had a fair few fans! 

Th UK being a relatively small country meant that a band could become big by word of mouth and if you were prepared to do a bit of work (ie get off your arses and play live) then there were rewards. I often wish we could go back to this. Modern music is being strangled by radio and commercial interests. I hear bits of this and that at work and its just horrible auto tuned crap. Also worryingly , the line up at Glastonbury must have been one of the worst yet. Music is not in a good place at the moment.

Signed ''Old Fart''

I think that FRAGILE was, however, "Roundabout" was more of a hit on the FM dial than it was in the AM radio where it never really showed up! But the song from 90125 did show up on both dials, although by that time AM radio in America had lost its ability and was much less important than ever. FM radio had the "new" generation of hit makers, and ELP, YES, and many others were being played regularly.

The big issue, is that YES more than likely never got paid a whole lot for the first 4 albums, and the one album that is still paying them is CTTE, at least according to Bill Bruford's book ... he's not complaining and at the very least he is thankful for it.

Back to the thread title ... MONEY was released as a single for the AM dial in America, and it was cut in half (with the one word not there of course!), and even the FM radio stations lambasted the AM stations for playing the small version ... however, I never thought that the song was as valuable as the whole album was, and I did not like separating one song from the whole idea/concept of the album ... it felt like I had to take your right arm off so I could show it off to all the folks what a magnificent specimen it is of the human culture .... !!!!!!!! 

richardh wrote: ... But that said the likes of ELP , Yes , Genesis were very popular in the UK in the early seventies and the albums also sold very well in Europe despite the lack of airplay. Even the likes of Focus and Camel had a fair few fans!  ...

FOCUS made it in America with the rowdy single that was quite a fun piece of music to play. CAMEL got played, I think a lot after Guy Guden played so much from MIRAGE, and the next month or so, MOONMADNESS flew out and it got played a lot.

Guy Guden should have gotten credit for a lot of these bands ... PF was not a regular play anywhere until after DSOTM and even then, not right away either ... but Guy had been playing PF since the days of Syd Barrett. Guy should have gotten some credit for Gentle Giant, Supertramp, Golden Earring (with the famous moment and one of my favorites of one DJ speaking over "Are You Receiving Me?" ... saying that it was not "rock'n'roll ... and Guy slowing the song to a complete stop and then saying ... "I don't care ... it's GREAT MUSIC!". And the song re-wound up to normal speed again. Average White Band should have gotten him some credit ... he even had a fake commercial created (Guy was also a writer and actor!) where a music industry guy was saying that Ernie and the Crotch-hairs would be the next hit and that this new thing will never, ever hit the air waves ... and he went on to play AWB ... and it took a week, and everyone at the station started playing it and the following week someone in LA "discovered" AWB.

That ought to give you a bit of an idea about the time and place ... I first saw PF in 1972 at the Hollywood Bowl, a famous time for them with the QUADRAPHONIC sound going around the whole place, giving it a "reality" that helped the music feel a lot more personal and real to your experience. Later, they converted this to a concept/story (DSOTM) and of course, later still they even made a movie of it all ... the "experience" was now "real" and complete, instead of just apparent sound effects with a few lines for fun, that came off as stoned ... but probably weren't.

Is that vinyl only or includes CD?

I suspect the 'Vinyl Crowd' are in general a very different animal and more interested in the checking out the 'good stuff'.

Nowadays… Eclipse.

I recently saw one. Listened to DSOTM. 

(see: http://www.progarchives.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=120422&PID=5668186#5668186" rel="nofollow -

· Great Gig..

All of them really… perhaps Money is the most listened to, but still a great track. "On the run" I find it interesting; and Brain Damage, perhaps among the more approachable at very first, and guitar-friendly for playing it, maybe I don't listen to as often.. but is a hallmark of this album, deals with another theme, insanity, and IMO is a great antechamber for the grand conclusion, Eclipse.

Very Good

- Us and Them

- Money

The other songs are fillers, mostly quite good, but not so great.

On the Run is the worst, maybe the only bad song.

In my opinion, TDSOTM is an overrated album.

Favorite: Us and Them

Least favorite: Speak to Me

Favourite: Brain Damage

Least Favourite: Any Colour You Like

Worst: Speak To Me (because it's short and doesn't really do much)

it's just an intro that goes smoothly into Breathe.