Is anyone else getting kind of sick of Pink Floyd?

Message Topic Search Topic Options Post Reply Create New Topic Printable Version Translate Topic

 TODDLER wrote:

 A Person wrote:

 m2thek wrote:

Do the people who think PF suck also think that all the people who like them are completely nuts? If a lot of people like something there's usually a good reason behind it.

For some reason, a lot of the people who don't like PF come off as former PF fans who over did it, or their musical taste changed and now they have had a revelation: PF isn't good! I, the lowly prog fan, must denounce this so-called king of prog, for I have listened, and deemed him unworthy. 

Perhaps a little too sarcastic, but these threads never seem to focus on the actual music, just the fact that PF isn't prog.

First of all let me say this, I am an over the hill burn-out that grew up on the music of Pink Floyd. Do you remember back in the late 60's and early 70's how kids like me were subjected to bands who added progressive elements to their music? Well, there is your answer. Mostly everyone from the mad days generation thought the band to be progressive in that fashion or for those who did not understand the term, just thought they were a bit too strange. Fairport Convention were thought to be progressive like Jethro Tull were, especially on the Liege and Lief album. After Keith Emerson became well known, the concept of applying more notes formed a solid definition of prog to most. And then bands that added progressive elements to their music became somewhat outside of the prog circle by many prog fans. Things just happened this way and being a smuck, I could not tell you why? It's not such a bad thing but, it is when Floyd get the shaft. They were on tour with Soft Machine and Hendrix at a time when progressive music was evolving. Zappa had the Mothers of Invention on the west coast. Everything in rock music was still brewing. Keith Emerson and the Nice etc.  

Then there is the history. Barrett of course wrote this psychedelic album Piper. He, himself always considered it to be simply a collection of songs and nothing else. In otherwords, he could not see what all the fuss was about. He opened doors and made paths for other musicians and writers to explore. He was not a great musician by any means. He was an innovator by all means. He was chased down or hounded by punkers who knocked on his door. The punk rockers for the most part loved Barrett. Syd was influential to punk rockers and space rockers. Waters claimed that Syd taught him when not to play. He relates  that concept on the piece "Breathe" from DSOTM. When Barrett refused to play the BBC, Richard Wright stated that he actually felt the same way and many great musicians in London at the time felt that way. Wright explained that in their environment many musicians thought of success to be tasteless. It was common ground then. Today you have people with zero talent and they are looking for stardom. Floyd were an art rock band. Atom Heart Mother, Ummagumma, Saucerful, More, Relics, Meddle, Obscured by Clouds can be placed into the space rock genre or simply art rock from the 70's. Sometimes I wonder if Tangerine Dream were influenced by the early Floyd. So if you review the basics of their history, you can clearly see how they changed music and why they deserve to be in the prog genre. 4 guys from art school that took their chances in 1966 by bringing in a new style of rock. Space Rock, Art Rock, whatever, they did it. They took that plunge. Syd liked the Beatles but the Floyd was much different in style. Space rock jamming to be exact. They influenced Hawkwind and the later style of the Floyd I can hear on 90'S Camel records. Think about real hard and things will come to mind. Think about who you listen to and make an observation. You will most likely hear Pink Floyd in other prog band's music. Prog bands that get more credit than the Floyd.    

Good post. 