DSOTM OVERRATED!!

My feeling about DSOTM is that it is a formula.

Maybe it's retrospectively become a formula, but at the time, it was revolutionary.

Chuck blues and rock into the equation along with 'deep and meangfull' lyrics about why we are here and you have a massive selling album.

Not necessarily - no-one had done it before, and Floyd were just writing the music they loved. People seem to forget that they were essentially a blues band before they started playing psychedelia.

Deep and meaningful lyrics are amazingly hard to write, without coming across as cheesey, and I think Waters did a stunning job.

It wasn't a given that DSOTM would be a massive selling album - that wasn't necessarily the idea. Of course, making money from your craft was a necessary evil - hence the song. But there's no way the Floyd could have predicted just how well it would sell, based on their previous releases.

The lack of ambition in the music is palpable.

I must disagree entirely!!!

It's exceptionally ambitious, in that it's more about creating space and not cramming in masses of notes. No-one else was writing music of such sparsity at the time - it takes a huge degree of willpower and self-discipline to hold back and produce music in such a fine "less is more" manner.

Its very plain and overtly safe in musical content and has done well because of it as the masses can easily appreciate it.

I think that's very cynical, and shows a lack of understanding of the writing process.

It's cynical, because the masses have appreciated it - that wasn't the intention. Writing with the intention of "the masses appreciating it" and having that translate into real success is not as easy as you might think.

Nice idea to include 'Dark' in the title as well.That way people think they are buying into something that is 'subversive' instead of the safe middle of the road effort it really is.And critics can wax lyrical about it because it carries emotional reasonance.That would be the horrible cat wailing sounds on Great Gig In The Sky then? They should have called it the 'Emperors New Clothes' for accuracy.The best thing about DSOTM is that it gave them the confidence to produce 3 of the greatest prog albums ever starting with WYWH.  

Again, it's in no way safe - Floyd may have played the entire album live before taking it into the studio, but they didn't sit there thinking "How can we sell this to 50,000,000 people over the next 30 years.

It's an incredible team effort (band, friends and producer) of creating a fine work of art that gives as much to the connoisseur as it does to the average music listener.

And that takes an incredibly rare and progressive talent.

From your comments about Claire Torre's vocals, well, she wasn't happy about them either - but I think her vocal control and range of pitch, dynamic and emotion is stunning, and the fact that it was done in a single take carries with it a natural spontaneity and creates a sense of wonder and exploration even after having heard it 50,000,000 times...

So what you're really saying, like everyone else who says it's "overrated", is that you don't like it.

Why not say that instead?

Wow!

A thoughtful and considered reply - no less than I would expect from you, Richard.

Doesn't mean I agree, of course...

richardh wrote: My feeling about DSOTM is that it is a formula. Maybe it's retrospectively become a formula, but at the time, it was revolutionary. Chuck blues and rock into the equation along with 'deep and meangfull' lyrics about why we are here and you have a massive selling album. Not necessarily - no-one had done it before, and Floyd were just writing the music they loved. People seem to forget that they were essentially a blues band before they started playing psychedelia. Deep and meaningful lyrics are amazingly hard to write, without coming across as cheesey, and I think Waters did a stunning job. It wasn't a given that DSOTM would be a massive selling album - that wasn't necessarily the idea. Of course, making money from your craft was a necessary evil - hence the song. But there's no way the Floyd could have predicted just how well it would sell, based on their previous releases. The lack of ambition in the music is palpable. I must disagree entirely!!! It's exceptionally ambitious, in that it's more about creating space and not cramming in masses of notes. No-one else was writing music of such sparsity at the time - it takes a huge degree of willpower and self-discipline to hold back and produce music in such a fine "less is more" manner. Its very plain and overtly safe in musical content and has done well because of it as the masses can easily appreciate it. I think that's very cynical, and shows a lack of understanding of the writing process. It's cynical, because the masses have appreciated it - that wasn't the intention. Writing with the intention of "the masses appreciating it" and having that translate into real success is not as easy as you might think. Nice idea to include 'Dark' in the title as well.That way people think they are buying into something that is 'subversive' instead of the safe middle of the road effort it really is.And critics can wax lyrical about it because it carries emotional reasonance.That would be the horrible cat wailing sounds on Great Gig In The Sky then? They should have called it the 'Emperors New Clothes' for accuracy.The best thing about DSOTM is that it gave them the confidence to produce 3 of the greatest prog albums ever starting with WYWH.   Again, it's in no way safe - Floyd may have played the entire album live before taking it into the studio, but they didn't sit there thinking "How can we sell this to 50,000,000 people over the next 30 years. It's an incredible team effort (band, friends and producer) of creating a fine work of art that gives as much to the connoisseur as it does to the average music listener. And that takes an incredibly rare and progressive talent. From your comments about Claire Torre's vocals, well, she wasn't happy about them either - but I think her vocal control and range of pitch, dynamic and emotion is stunning, and the fact that it was done in a single take carries with it a natural spontaneity and creates a sense of wonder and exploration even after having heard it 50,000,000 times...   So what you're really saying, like everyone else who says it's "overrated", is that you don't like it. Why not say that instead?