3 Prog Rock Giants

I like YES and GENESIS but all their albums added together wouldnt replace KC's discography for me... So its an easy choice

HarbouringTheSoul wrote: It's a moot point anyway. Had Barrett been able to keep control of his mind, he would have never made an album like Piper in the first place.

How could he keep control of his mind when he was on LSD?

^ Now, now, this is not a kindergarten time. What was the joke?

Dayvenkirq wrote: ^ Even though the '68-'70 albums were "spotty", as you say, I think they were crucial to the development of the band's sound. They were still learning how to write songs, let alone original ones.

I absolutely agree. They were kind of "growing up in public".

Dayvenkirq wrote: So, maybe we shouldn't disdain those albums as much as we usually do.

Do we, usually? Although they're certainly nowhere near as acclaimed as the 1973-1979 period, I do see a lot of praise for these albums, especially from the more 'avantgarde-minded' people.

Dayvenkirq wrote: But what confuses me the most is that you said "the danger of never making it past 1970". What do you mean by "never making it past"?

I think that more than most groups, they were in danger of either disappearing from the public eye as "has-beens" or splitting up due to a lack of artistic direction.

It's a moot point anyway. Had Barrett been able to keep control of his mind, he would have never made an album like Piper in the first place. For my part, I think it was the Barrett-less Floyd who were in serious danger of never making it past 1970. The stuff they did from 1968 to 1970 was... spotty, to put it mildly. It was Meddle that saved them, and I think it's quite remarkable that a group of sidemen managed to emerge as an artistic force in their own right.

^ well, exactly - my taste is telling me that Piper was amusing at the first listen (which was lo-o-o-o-o-o-o-ng ago), but I have never felt like owning it. The next Barrett's album Madcap was kind of  Piper Mk.2, which was no longer an amusing novelty, and after it Barrett did nothing memorable. Crazy diamond he is, and we recognize that, but it was to be the de-Barretized PF that went on being a productive band for decades. 

I guess it's a matter of taste then, Barrett's music is not a curious novelty to me by any means, nor do I find it to be "nonsense" or "cacophony". And considering the kind of innovation and creativity he showed on Piper I think we can only imagine what else he could have went on to do if he was able to keep control of his mind


Edited by Sumdeus - December 28 2012 at 04:50

Sumdeus wrote: Ivan_Melgar_M wrote: Lets be honest.....Pink Floyd became an icon when Barrett left. With Barrett they were just another good Psyche band that would never survived 1970, with Gilmour, they became legends. let's be honest. no."another good psych band"? Pink Floyd were THE psych band. I don't think any other record released in 67 captures the essence of british psychedelia at that time like Piper. Seriously I understand that Barrett isn't for everyone and I have no issues if you don't dig his stuff but like post-Barrett Floyd, but to say that they were "just another psych band" and wouldn't have survived past 1970 is just silly and wrong.

Still, Pink Floyd would never have achieved the legendary status they reached with Barrett instead of Gilmour.

ProgMetaller2112 wrote: mister nobody wrote: ProgMetaller2112 wrote: Dayvenkirq wrote: ProgMetaller2112 wrote: HAVING NO CONCEPTS DOESN'T SAY ANYTHING ABOUT THE BAND'S QUALITY! you're right but it enhances the band in my opinion Are you speaking of male enhancement? What do you mean by "concepts enhance a band"? always with the kid jokes, GROW UP!!!!!!! Isn't this a little ironic... ] yeah it kind of is but he brought up a stupid joke and i thought my joke was witty.

Quote one of your jokes that was "witty". As for my joke, ... let's just say that I like having a ball by mocking trolls.  I like mocking condescending people who can't make their ideas clear and have an intelligent argument. So, ... we can just go for the exact opposite.

Edited by Dayvenkirq - December 27 2012 at 18:47

mister nobody wrote: ProgMetaller2112 wrote: Dayvenkirq wrote: ProgMetaller2112 wrote: HAVING NO CONCEPTS DOESN'T SAY ANYTHING ABOUT THE BAND'S QUALITY! you're right but it enhances the band in my opinion Are you speaking of male enhancement? What do you mean by "concepts enhance a band"? always with the kid jokes, GROW UP!!!!!!! Isn't this a little ironic...

]