| Author |
 Topic Search  Topic Options
|
Dellinger 
Forum Senior Member
VIP Member
Joined: June 18 2009
Location: Mexico
Status: Offline
Points: 12724
|
 Posted: March 21 2018 at 18:14 |
|
I think this thread is a great example of how the album is not over-rated. Even the people who don't like it and say it's overrated take their time to talk about it and say why they don't think it's so good and so on. If the album were not important, then they wouldn't even care.
|
 |
HackettFan
Forum Senior Member
Joined: June 20 2012
Location: Oklahoma
Status: Offline
Points: 7951
|
Posted: March 21 2018 at 20:30 |
 Mortte wrote:
HackettFan wrote:
SteveG wrote:
^ A good question from HF, as usual. I can only guess that aside from it's commercial breakthrough, DSotM established a type of PF musical formula and theatrical musings that extended over into their following albums. |
First off, Thank you. Second why would we not extend the same qualities to Meddle? |
I really try this one time. DSoTM is superior to the other Floyd-albums that in this album they succeeded to balance their musical ambitions, perfection recording, meaningful lyrics, all of their greatest qualities. For example in there are not such pieces that Fearless, San Tropez and Seamus are in Meddle (I like them, but they´re just much mediocre than other stuff in Meddle). Also they succeeded to make it their bestseller still not giving up anything about their ambitious that time. DSoTM is really anymore my personal favourite album, but really would ever said it overrated comparing any other Floyd album. They succeeded best all the way in that album and never succeeded at least artistically as great after that. |
And I find Us and Them exceedingly mediocre, so slow and plodding that it’s unlistenable. I’m actually willing to concede that DSotM may be an improvement in certain respects over Meddle. I like Meddle better, though it is not even my favorite anyway, Umma Gumma is. DSotM would and should ideally be an improvement over DSotM since it came thereafter. What I don’t see is the level of improvement that leaves Meddle in the dust. All I see is very natural improvement that comes with any band that has just one more album under its belt. Calling it anything else, imo, is overrating it.
Edited by HackettFan - March 21 2018 at 20:37
|
|
A curse upon the heads of those who seek their fortunes in a lie. The truth is always waiting when there's nothing left to try. - Colin Henson, Jade Warrior (Now)
|
|
HackettFan
Forum Senior Member
Joined: June 20 2012
Location: Oklahoma
Status: Offline
Points: 7951
|
Posted: March 21 2018 at 21:05 |
SteveG wrote:
HackettFan wrote:
SteveG wrote:
^ A good question from HF, as usual. I can only guess that aside from it's commercial breakthrough, DSotM established a type of PF musical formula and theatrical musings that extended over into their following albums. |
First off, Thank you. Second why would we not extend the same qualities to Meddle? |
I feel that with Meddle, particular with Echos, Floyd was still perfecting their musical formula. And aside from Echos, the songs on Meddle are just not as strong musically as well as lyrically to those on DSotM. As others have said, its all about subjective opinions. So your view is as valid as mine. |
They began perfecting it with Atom Heart Mother. I think the leap between Atom Heart Mother and Meddle is beyond the leap between Meddle and Dark Side of the Moon and still not “perfected” there. Wish You Were Here continues the band’s positive development. So I ask the question, why is everyone underrating Meddle? Answer: Because they’re overrating Dark Side of the Moon. Indeed, I agree we all attempt a critical eye (ear), but it does all rest upon a whole lot of opinion in the end.
|
|
A curse upon the heads of those who seek their fortunes in a lie. The truth is always waiting when there's nothing left to try. - Colin Henson, Jade Warrior (Now)
|
|
Mortte
Forum Senior Member
Joined: November 11 2016
Location: Finland
Status: Offline
Points: 5538
|
Posted: March 21 2018 at 23:33 |
Dellinger wrote:
I think this thread is a great example of how the album is not over-rated. Even the people who don't like it and say it's overrated take their time to talk about it and say why they don't think it's so good and so on. If the album were not important, then they wouldn't even care. |
Very great points!
|
|
Mortte
Forum Senior Member
Joined: November 11 2016
Location: Finland
Status: Offline
Points: 5538
|
Posted: March 21 2018 at 23:37 |
HackettFan wrote:
SteveG wrote:
HackettFan wrote:
SteveG wrote:
^ A good question from HF, as usual. I can only guess that aside from it's commercial breakthrough, DSotM established a type of PF musical formula and theatrical musings that extended over into their following albums. |
First off, Thank you. Second why would we not extend the same qualities to Meddle? |
I feel that with Meddle, particular with Echos, Floyd was still perfecting their musical formula. And aside from Echos, the songs on Meddle are just not as strong musically as well as lyrically to those on DSotM. As others have said, its all about subjective opinions. So your view is as valid as mine. |
They began perfecting it with Atom Heart Mother. I think the leap between Atom Heart Mother and Meddle is beyond the leap between Meddle and Dark Side of the Moon and still not “perfected” there. Wish You Were Here continues the band’s positive development. So I ask the question, why is everyone underrating Meddle? Answer: Because they’re overrating Dark Side of the Moon. Indeed, I agree we all attempt a critical eye (ear), but it does all rest upon a whole lot of opinion in the end. |
Well, I think DSoTM is the most perfect record of Pink Floyd. But I personally don´t think perfect music is the most interesting music, so that´s the reason why I think Atom Heart Mother is the greatest Floyd album. But still again, I don´t think DSoTM is overrated at all, it deserves all it has got, also all the attention here too!
Edited by Mortte - March 21 2018 at 23:38
|
|
SteveG
Forum Senior Member
Joined: April 11 2014
Location: Kyiv In Spirit
Status: Offline
Points: 20604
|
Posted: March 22 2018 at 06:18 |
HackettFan wrote:
SteveG wrote:
HackettFan wrote:
SteveG wrote:
^ A good question from HF, as usual. I can only guess that aside from it's commercial breakthrough, DSotM established a type of PF musical formula and theatrical musings that extended over into their following albums. |
First off, Thank you. Second why would we not extend the same qualities to Meddle? |
I feel that with Meddle, particular with Echos, Floyd was still perfecting their musical formula. And aside from Echos, the songs on Meddle are just not as strong musically as well as lyrically to those on DSotM. As others have said, its all about subjective opinions. So your view is as valid as mine. |
They began perfecting it with Atom Heart Mother. I think the leap between Atom Heart Mother and Meddle is beyond the leap between Meddle and Dark Side of the Moon and still not “perfected” there. Wish You Were Here continues the band’s positive development. So I ask the question, why is everyone underrating Meddle? Answer: Because they’re overrating Dark Side of the Moon. Indeed, I agree we all attempt a critical eye (ear), but it does all rest upon a whole lot of opinion in the end. |
I personally don't see Meddle as a fully formed development of the 'trade mark' Floyd sound that resulted in DSotM. As this is my view, then DSotM is not overrated and Meddle is not underrated. Again, it comes down to one's opinion regarding PF's development.
Edited by SteveG - March 22 2018 at 06:26
|
|
This message was brought to you by a proud supporter of the Deep State.
|
|
dr wu23
Forum Senior Member
Joined: August 22 2010
Location: Indiana
Status: Offline
Points: 20623
|
Posted: March 22 2018 at 09:18 |
|
^Totally agree.......Meddle was Floyd looking for a new direction. They eventually found it in DSOTM.
|
|
One does nothing yet nothing is left undone.
Haquin
|
|
moshkito
Forum Senior Member
Joined: January 04 2007
Location: Grok City
Status: Offline
Points: 17494
|
Posted: March 22 2018 at 09:24 |
Hi,
Hearing DSOTM today, as opposed to 43 years ago, is very different.
Extremelly different!
Today, people have heard a lot more music, than we would have in those days, considering that we relied on album covers, its art, and sometimes some friend ... and rarely a radio station, since even the early PF stuff was not exactly radio stuff, until the early FM days in the early 70's in Southern California, when some stations started playing Ummagumma and then ATH and then Meddle ... and also allowing the long cuts to continue instead of cutting them off. Have you ever heard the AM version of "Money" ... you should ... you will feel so cheated it's not funny!
At the time, when it came out, I was already into PF and I had already seen them at least once (Hollywood Bowl 1972), and I enjoyed tremendously those albums they had, even though I had not gotten Ummaguma yet (the double album was too expensive, and I was hoping to find a used copy so I could get it!).
When DSOTM came out, it exploded in LA radio on the FM dial and pretty much helped kill a lot more AM stations including the fun/crazy things like Wolfman Jack and Doctor Demento. Unlike what they played and AM played, this music was laid back, spread out nicely and it took its time in developing to an incredible crescendo that we all fell in love with it.
Hearing it today, without the comparative point of years ago, is a lot less meaningful. At the time, LZ, The Who, Jefferson Airplane, The Doors, Jimi Hendrix, Cream, Beatles and Rolling Stones were the "majors" and when PF came around, it gave us something that these bands did not have ... a very stony experience, that you had to sit back and enjoy. It was hard to do that with LZ as the songs ended too soon. The Who had never been a trip band. JA was probably too weird to be just a trip band, and it was not exactly cohesive in their tripping. The Doors, were the closest movie to music, but also likely too poetic for a rock audience to enjoy. Specially when they were being fed so much poor music all around it. And the others were "hits" and not quite trippers. Cream, could probably be considered a trip band, but nothing in their first album suggested "tripping" other than just "songs" and a couple of hits. They tried to live down the rest of it, probably because of the record company, but when they started tripping, all three of them started fighting.
So here comes a band, that is not a "behinner" and their members are reasonably educated and some of them already have their college degrees, which almost all the others DID NOT have, and this kind brought to the table, what I thought was a much more MATURE way of presenting music, than before.
This point, today, is superflouous and hard to think about ... because the spread of music is all over nowadays, and while there still are many excellent things, now they are truely buried when in those days, the quantity was probably not as large, and it was easier to ... have you heard that guy on VdGG? He's amazing ... and boom we all would go for it. Today, with so many wide tastes, most folks do not even consider doing that, or bother to check ... they already have their "favorites" and sometimes checking into something new and different is time consuming and not something that one wishes to do as it has a tendency to throw your ideas off to the far planets and you have to adjust your musical likes and dislikes again ... I am not sure most "fans", including some that post here, are wishing to ever do that since they are into "dark music" and into this or that ... as if Mozart himself was not into expressing a "dark side" of his inner vision into music, which has been made fun of in some films.
I would not suggest it is over rated or under rated. I think it is an artistic piece that came up at such a time, and was loved by many folks. It has stood out as an important view of those days, and I think as such it deserves its credit for being relevant and important at the same time, when Beatles, Rolling Stones, Who, and LZ had already fallen away, with not being as completely relevant as they could, and were now even less important musically than the impact they made earlier.
So, for me, PF stands out as one of the huge artists of the 20th century, and that list would include other composers like Stravinsky, Picasso, Dali, Bunuel, Lean, Brook, Godard, Truffaut, Fellini ... folks that changed things and were so different and insanely well done, that you could not just stand there and go ... wow ... that was cool. That was far out. That was really neat.
I'm just excited, and proud to have been "there" and experienced almost all of that ... and wish that more people (TODAY) could have a similar attitude towards the arts ... there is a lot of beauty out there that you will miss of your eyes are not open ... and let me tell you, there were just as many (percentage wise) blind in those days, as there are today! You know who they are when they always support the majority ... how I wish another FM radio would come up again ... it would change music again, like you could not imagine!
Edited by moshkito - March 23 2018 at 10:17
|
|
Music is not just for listening ... it is for LIVING ... you got to feel it to know what's it about! Not being told!
www.pedrosena.com
|
|
Lewian
Prog Reviewer
Joined: August 09 2015
Location: Italy
Status: Offline
Points: 14691
|
Posted: March 22 2018 at 09:26 |
micky wrote:
that is the reason why these overrated discussions are usually trash... it has NOTHING to do with tastes.
It has everything to do with understanding rock(prog) music and its evoluation. No one in their right mind would ever say that WYWH or Animals were on the same level as DSOTM. One might enjoy them more.. and that is cool. More power to those that do.. but to express the opinion they are as great of albums does not mark the albums as overrated.. it just marks those who have that opinion as ignorant and unable to evaluate music.. only parrot what they like and don't like. |
Yes and no. I'm with you in that it's ridiculous to state that an album is "overrated" on the basis that I don't like it but others rate it highly. The better thing then is to ask "what do others find in it that I can't see?" - which in fairness the thread opener does. On the other hand, music is communication. It's something between people. Quality in music doesn't exist independently of everyone's tastes. I may record a marvelous original album - if nobody gets it, it means that communication has failed (but then I may not be interested and still appreciate it myself). There's no way to say objectively (meaning independently of whether people like it or "get" it - the term "like" doesn't necessarily capture what goes on in the appreciation of music) that something is "good" with the ambition that somebody who doesn't get it should be convinced. Some music speaks to some people and not to some others, just so. Neither is this the fault of the music nor of the listener who doesn't get it. We can talk about albums being influential, opening new ways of listening and seeing the world to us, just sounding great... we may be open minded and do some "work" to appreciate things that we originally didn't appreciate, following some others who recommended and maybe explained it. Also I'm not saying that everyone's quality of listening to music is the same or "counts" the same. Some people put more effort in, have more knowledge of the background and role in history and more conscious experiences etc. Still music appreciation is about "getting" and appreciating messages, it's not about "good" or "bad". You may have good reasons to dislike an album that everybody else (including those who think there's something objective to musical quality) loves, and by explaining these you may contribute something valuable to the overall communication of music experience, even though it may not stop anyone else from loving it. When it comes to DSotM, it took me a long time to actually appreciate it. In my early days of music and prog fandom, indeed I found much of it too plain and straight and maybe also slow and sleepy. I didn't put much effort in, there was so much other music to discover that would appeal to me more immediately. But over the years songs like "Time" and "Us and Them" found their way into my appreciating ear on their own, without me making much of an effort. I'd say they revealed their inner logic to me; listening to them now makes me feel that all of the notes are exactly in their place, everything is welcome when it comes, now, after having listened to them for so many times. Indeed I could say I grew into the album, and now parts that earlier wouldn't have talked to me at all now have become seamlessly integrated into the whole. Pink Floyd on DSotM didn't create music that appealed to me at the first listen, but they created something to feel at home and well in, after all the time.
|
|
SteveG
Forum Senior Member
Joined: April 11 2014
Location: Kyiv In Spirit
Status: Offline
Points: 20604
|
Posted: March 22 2018 at 11:33 |
moshkito wrote:
Hi,
Hearing DSOTM today, as opposed to 43 years ago, is very different.
Extremelly different!
Today, people have heard a lot more music, than we would have in those days, considering that we relied on album covers, its art, and sometimes some friend ... and rarely a radio station, since even the early PF stuff was not exactly radio stuff, until the early FM days in the early 70's in Southern California, when some stations started playing Ummagumma and then ATH and then Meddle ... and also allowing the long cuts to continue instead of cutting them off. Have you ever heard the AM version of "Money" ... you should ... you will feel so cheated it's not funny!
At the time, when it came out, I was already into PF and I had already seen them at least once (Hollywood Bowl 1972), and I enjoyed tremendously those albums they had, even though I had not gotten Ummaguma yet (the double album was too expensive, and I was hoping to find a used copy so I could get it!).
When DSOTM came out, it exploded in LA radio on the FM dial and pretty much helped kill a lot more AM stations including the fun/crazy things like Wolfman Jack and Doctor Demento. Unlike what they played and AM played, this music was laid back, spread out nicely and it took its time in developing to an incredible crescendo that we all fell in love with it.
Hearing it today, without the comparative point of years ago, is a lot less meaningful. At the time, LZ, The Who, Jefferson Airplane, The Doors, Jimi Hendrix, Cream, Beatles and Rolling Stones were the "majors" and when PF came around, it gave us something that these bands did not have ... a very stony experience, that you had to sit back and enjoy. It was hard to do that with LZ as the songs ended too soon. The Who had never been a trip band. JA was probably too weird to be just a trip band, and it was not exactly cohesive in their tripping. The Doors, were the closest movie to music, but also likely too poetic for a rock audience to enjoy. Specially when they were being fed so much poor music all around it. And the others were "hits" and not quite trippers. Cream, could probably be considered a trip band, but nothing in their first album suggested "tripping" other than just "songs" and a couple of hits. They tried to live down the rest of it, probably because of the record company, but when they started tripping, all three of them started fighting. So here comes a band, that is not a "behinner" and their members are reasonably educated and some of them already have their college degrees, which almost all the others DID NOT have, and this kind brought to the table, what I thought was a much more MATURE way of presenting music, than before.
This point, today, is superflouous and hard to think about ... because the spread of music is all over nowadays, and while there still are many excellent things, now they are truely buried when in those days, the quantity was probably not as large, and it was easier to ... have you heard that guy on VdGG? He's amazing ... and boom we all would go for it. Today, with so many wide tastes, most folks do not even consider doing that, or bother to check ... they already have their "favorites" and sometimes checking into something new and different is time consuming and not something that one wishes to do as it has a tendency to throw your ideas off to the far planets and you have to adjust your musical likes and dislikes again ... I am not sure most "fans", including some that post here, are wishing to ever do that since they are into "dark music" and into this or that ... as if Mozart himself was not into expressing a "dark side" of his inner vision into music, which has been made fun of in some films.
I would not suggest it is over rated or under rated. I think it is an artistic piece that came up at such a time, and was loved by many folks. It has stood out as an important view of those days, and I think as such it deserves its credit for being relevant and important at the same time, when Beatles, Rolling Stones, Who, and LZ had already fallen away, with not being as completely relevant as they could, and were now even less important musically than the impact they made earlier.
So, for me, PF stands out as one of the huge artists of the 20th century, and that list would include other composers like Stravinsky, Picasso, Dali, Bunuel, Lean, Brook, Godard, Truffaut, Fellini ... folks that changed things and were so different and insanely well done, that you could not just stand there and go ... wow ... that was cool. That was far out. That was really neat.
I'm just excited, and proud to have been "there" and experienced almost all of that ... and wish that more people (TODAY) could have a similar attitude towards the arts ... there is a lot of beauty out there that you will miss of your eyes are not open ... and let me tell you, there were just as many (percentage wise) blind in those days, as there are today! You know who they are when they always support the majority ... how I wish another FM radio would come up again ... it would change music again, like you could not imagine! |
A very good post Pedro! 
|
|
This message was brought to you by a proud supporter of the Deep State.
|
|
moshkito
Forum Senior Member
Joined: January 04 2007
Location: Grok City
Status: Offline
Points: 17494
|
Posted: March 23 2018 at 10:28 |
SteveG wrote:
very good post Pedro!  |
Thank you kindly. I don't know why I always look at things in a completely different perspective, but the history of the arts, for me, is too great to be ignored, and rock music is a part of it, despite most rock critics, thinking that art does not have anything to do with rock music!
For another similar post ... look up my review of THE WALL, by Roger, as opposed to the original THE WALL that I posted on the live concerts area ... it also has some details that help understand the time and place and "experience" that was PF, instead of just a rock show.
|
|
Music is not just for listening ... it is for LIVING ... you got to feel it to know what's it about! Not being told!
www.pedrosena.com
|
|
HackettFan
Forum Senior Member
Joined: June 20 2012
Location: Oklahoma
Status: Offline
Points: 7951
|
Posted: March 23 2018 at 18:30 |
Mortte wrote:
Well, I think DSoTM is the most perfect record of Pink Floyd. But I personally don´t think perfect music is the most interesting music, so that´s the reason why I think Atom Heart Mother is the greatest Floyd album. But still again, I don´t think DSoTM is overrated at all, it deserves all it has got, also all the attention here too! |
Well, I don't see the perfection in terms of content (Recording quality quite possibly). If it was perfect, then Wish You Were Here was even more perfect with superior virtuosity and far superior lyrics to say the least. You don't agree. Okay.
SteveG wrote:
I personally don't see Meddle as a fully formed development of the 'trade mark' Floyd sound that resulted in DSotM. As this is my view, then DSotM is not overrated and Meddle is not underrated. Again, it comes down to one's opinion regarding PF's development. |
Not sure if I'd call that their 'trade mark' sound. Maybe one their trade mark sounds, as they've had different eras. Give me Several Species of Small Furry Animals Gathered Together in a Cave and Grooving With a Pict. Now that's Floyd to me. I do have to fundamentally agree that DSotM is the (still imperfect, Imo) culmination of a trilogy of albums. You're perspective is that because it's the top step in the series it merits extra special acclaim. My perspective is that each step rises by 9 inches (if you follow my metaphor), therefore there is no reason to pick one of those steps as more special than the other. You don't agree. Okay. For me though, I got into Floyd by reading about them first. As a youngster and Genesis fan I was interested in other Progressive Rock. I was first familiar with early Floyd a little bit from hearing the "song" Several Species of Small Furry Animals... and from reading a Syd Barrett biography. Pink Floyd was not known as Progressive Rock in the places I tread. It was called either Acid Rock or Psychedelic Rock. Later when I read album reviews that made it clear that they were at least very Prog-like, I got Dark Side of the Moon, because the reviews for it really hyped it up. My first reaction was that On The Run stuff and Breathe, Breathe in the Air stuff was just a lame stalling for time until they got to Time, and something good was finally happening on the exalted album. Good, but the review to my tastes overrated it, and it stalled my further later consumption of Floyd. I was younger than some of you and could barely afford an album let alone a quality stereo, which might have made a difference. Well, I guess I might have been able to if I spent less of my paper route money on comic books...
|
|
A curse upon the heads of those who seek their fortunes in a lie. The truth is always waiting when there's nothing left to try. - Colin Henson, Jade Warrior (Now)
|
|
SteveG
Forum Senior Member
Joined: April 11 2014
Location: Kyiv In Spirit
Status: Offline
Points: 20604
|
Posted: March 24 2018 at 11:28 |
^ I'm afraid that there's more back and forth to come form us.  I would think that a 'trademark' sound is the one that's most identifiable with an artist. I should think that the sound of DSotM fits that criteria and not "Picts Grooving.." or "Adam's Psychedelic Breakfast", but then again I never put comics books, or any books, ahead of obtaining Floyd albums. (Except for just a copy of Playboy now and then as the mag was the same price of an album.  .)
Edited by SteveG - March 24 2018 at 11:31
|
|
This message was brought to you by a proud supporter of the Deep State.
|
|
HackettFan
Forum Senior Member
Joined: June 20 2012
Location: Oklahoma
Status: Offline
Points: 7951
|
Posted: March 25 2018 at 08:23 |
SteveG wrote:
^ I'm afraid that there's more back and forth to come form us. Smile I would think that a 'trademark' sound is the one that's most identifiable with an artist. I should think that the sound of DSotM fits that criteria and not "Picts Grooving.." or "Adam's Psychedelic Breakfast", but then again I never put comics books, or any books, ahead of obtaining Floyd albums. (Except for just a copy of Playboy now and then as the mag was the same price of an album. Wink.) |
Neither of us are using trademark in a literal fashion. We are choosing different exemplars. The exemplar I used reflects their previous psychedelic flavor, which is what I found most identifiable with the Pink Floyd (and one thing I could relate to at a very young age when one of my best friends who generally appreciated music beyond his years brought it in for show and tell. The nun stopped it before it ended, I recall). Still, I understand where you're coming from on that. If my attempt at persuasion about has not been effective to this point, then I'm at a loss as to what further to say, and there are certainly no spoils to gain. It remains an album that I will only perk up to when the bells and chimes go off for Time and when the cash register sounds off Money.
|
|
A curse upon the heads of those who seek their fortunes in a lie. The truth is always waiting when there's nothing left to try. - Colin Henson, Jade Warrior (Now)
|
|
moshkito
Forum Senior Member
Joined: January 04 2007
Location: Grok City
Status: Offline
Points: 17494
|
Posted: March 28 2018 at 08:38 |
dr wu23 wrote:
^Totally agree.......Meddle was Floyd looking for a new direction. They eventually found it in DSOTM. |
Hi,
This is probably incorrect in the history of PF.
The new direction was already there in "Saucerful of Secrets". "Ummagumma" was a chance for all the 4 members to see where they stood. "Meddle" was not looking for a new direction, like "Atom Heart Mother" was, but in essence, if the bootlegs from the time are any indication here is the PF history ... more or less. And this comes from about 20 to 25 bootlegs, covering from 1971 until just before DSOTM came out ... where you can see things changing and developing.
Between songs, at the time, and during their early "QUADRAPHONIC" sound, they had sound effects and bits and pieces going around the crown in the audience. Speakers were usually on both sides at the back, center and front, and one of the really far out things, in 1972 at the Hollywood Bowl, was how they could make a "Alan's Psychedelic Breakfast" so real, that you wanted to go to the concession stand real quick ... it was like this ... a voice back there somewhere walks closer to that speaker and it moves to the next speaker says something else, eats something and moves over there and does something else ... and so on. This created a very nice "theatre" for your imagination, that was NOT a part of the songs themselves ... YET. I rather think that some of these were actually done on purpose for "far out moments", while also giving the folks a chance to setup instruments for the next piece. Remember that keyboards and synthesizers at the time could not contain remember a whole lot, and you had to do things all over again, many times from the start, and they still would not sound the same. For more on this, read Edgar Froese's book! Insane!
By the time that DSOTM came out, I think that the "visualization" was to become a sort of conceptualized story that helped carry the new album, and the album was recorded to make sure that could help. It has a couple of bits and pieces and passages that were just like the old days in the QUAD setups ... and you were so stoned and it sounded really far out!
To me, The Wall, is the final and ultimate visualization of these scenario moments that became a part of the full story. In DSOTM they were partial, and in The Wall, they were complete. Not a single moment was wasted.
To me, PF's only direction was about the VISUALIZATION of their music, and they developed this from 1971 until its final conceptualization with THE WALL. Plain and simple ... from a suggestion on a stony morning (as in Alan's Psych Breakfast) to a real event in THE WALL, PF now was a complete story, not just a bunch of songs, even though within a radio/rockstation context this is just a bunch of songs for all of us! But, for the most part, it was a true and complete "composition" in its design, compared to before where it could be stated that the band was trying out different things, many of which ended up being used quite a bit later in a different context.
Remember, that PF, unlike almost 90% of all the bands around them, were older, and some of them even already had college degrees, when compared to almost every other band on the top ten, most of which were just kids doing nothing and saying even less ... which made the punk thing later really bizarre, because it became obvious how fake it was in the first place! PF was not fake. As such, the chance, and ability to put something together that would be more than just a song, is probably what drove PF a lot more than anyone else. Some bands, tried to copy this and bring out the loudness with the QUAD, but they failed because their music was too scattered and not centered around the sound itself. And in some ways, I think this is what hurt ELP the most ... all they could do is place this sound from that synth over here, and Greg over there, and the like, and it created a subliminal separation that hurt the band many times.
PF did not "find" their voice in DSOTM ... they had been developing it for 2 to 3 years, and even the original DSOTM on bootlegs will show you how different it was, and how it was a piece of music that integrated the sounds, the singing and the theatrical moments ... and these had started several years before when they were playing bits and pieces of Syd in between their music ... some of the lines being famous like the one about people standing, and cheering, something they did not understand ... or the one about scream your last scream old lady with a basket ... or even the bit from the plane that landed upside down ... there were a lot of them, and while I never thought they "drove" the music or the concept, by the time that they put together DSOTM for the stage, it started coming together and be a complete piece of theatrical proportions, the likes of which a rock audience had never seen!
Suggestion. Listen to about 20 to 30 different bootlegs prior to DSOTM. Some of the bits, even sometimes separated from the recordings, were in the various shows, as I can attest about the Hollywood Bowl 1972 in QUAD sound, and many other fans ... that were not so stoned as to not remember anything, which was always a problem with the PF shows! I only had a cold during that night!
|
|
Music is not just for listening ... it is for LIVING ... you got to feel it to know what's it about! Not being told!
www.pedrosena.com
|
|
Frenetic Zetetic
Forum Senior Member
Joined: December 09 2017
Location: Now
Status: Offline
Points: 9233
|
Posted: March 28 2018 at 17:12 |
Man, I thought this thread was done by now! 
|
|
"I am so prog, I listen to concept albums on shuffle." -KMac2021
|
|
Rednight
Forum Senior Member
Joined: January 18 2014
Location: Mar Vista, CA
Status: Offline
Points: 4807
|
Posted: March 28 2018 at 17:34 |
|
Heavens no. It's a lot more simplistic than much of what came out around the same time, but that doesn't deter from the fact that it set the bar. sort of speak on what good prog could sound like. I prefer 'Moon's follow-up but wish it had some of 'Moon's elements for a fuller listening experience.
|
|
"It just has none of the qualities of your work that I find interesting. Abandon [?] it." - Eno
|
|
moshkito
Forum Senior Member
Joined: January 04 2007
Location: Grok City
Status: Offline
Points: 17494
|
Posted: March 29 2018 at 08:37 |
Frenetic Zetetic wrote:
Man, I thought this thread was done by now! |
Not wanting to sound distasteful, but even your avatar shows a fake. PG had so much of it, that he dropped it off on the gutters in Broadway! Outfits included! No more masks ... a sort of cheap Greek theater to tell you that this is sad, this is that and this is something else!
My take on a lot of the "progressive" music, specially in the late 60's and early 70's is that it all had a VISUAL content, that was not just about the lyrics. The music itself supported the visual of the whole thing with breaks and moments in between where some thing else could carry it and develop it. Some pieces, come off more "abstract", like TFTO, or even PP, the lyrics of which are not exactly nice ... but they presented a story and a view that was far more interesting and "progressive" than a song about teeny polka dots, and another (later) about the witch had a gun, or worse, let's have a party, and then ... do one at the county jail (satire on the metal stuff by 10CC).
The real issue is that a bunch of songs, do not a "concept" make, which was, originally, what a lot of the "progressive" music was about. And this is the main reason why we do not consider SF/LA as much of a progressive forerunner, as the albums are not conceptual at all, regardless of who you select from Doors, to iron Butterfly, to Jefferson Airplane, to Grateful Dead, to Spirit and many others. They simply either were not "interested" in the literary ideal of a concept and story, as opposed to the whole thing being just a bunch of songs ... UNLESS, this was a major issue with the recording companies at the time, which is very possible, since there are stories about what they wanted Jimi, Janis and many others to do, instead of what they were interested in!
It's kinda sad to see anyone, someone, make that kind of comment ... it was the strength of the music that brought this whole thing to where it is 45/50 years later, and you simply are missing a good historical perspective (forget the hits theory!), in order to see what was happening.
AND, while not "supported" (and for good reason), the early days bootlegs, were what made many bands famous as they ended up being known as fabulous bands in concert, and PF was one of them. Like the story in Tangerine Dream's books, (impossible to get the synths all perfect 2 days in a row), these groups all ended up sounding different and many of them, specially PF, adjusted very well to many of these issues, and the effects helped. The fact that they were not doing "hits" helped even more, because they did not have to worry about doing a different version of "Set the Controls for the heart of Your Butt", and you would be complaining because it was not the same song!
This, alone, is massive, in the development of PF ... and for all intents and purposes, is what is missing in almost ALL of the other "progressive" bands, that forgot what the whole thing was about. Some folks in Italy, France, Spain and Germany ended up using the classical traditions and experimental traditions to create something different. But both the US and UK, went for the hit and forgot the music!
The only "underrated" thing here, is the sad disrespect for the history of the music and the many folks that suffered because they believed, like me and others here on this board that helped create PA and others some 30 years ago at the start of the open internet. The "overrated" part is usually by folks that think that the history of music is over rated, going as far back as 500 to 1000 to 2000 to 5000 years!
|
|
Music is not just for listening ... it is for LIVING ... you got to feel it to know what's it about! Not being told!
www.pedrosena.com
|
|
moshkito
Forum Senior Member
Joined: January 04 2007
Location: Grok City
Status: Offline
Points: 17494
|
Posted: March 30 2018 at 20:20 |
Rednight wrote:
Heavens no. It's a lot more simplistic than much of what came out around the same time, but that doesn't deter from the fact that it set the bar. sort of speak on what good prog could sound like. I prefer 'Moon's follow-up but wish it had some of 'Moon's elements for a fuller listening experience. |
The weird part of this is that, originally, what became "Animals" is the material that was being played during the DSOTM shows, and it also contained the piece about Syd which ended up on WYWH.
It has been my thought that the order of the material was changed, from what might have been a double album, to a single album, concentrating strictly on Syd, with a DSOTM familiarity, to prevent the "audience" and "fans" from seeing such a drastic change, as the material in "Animals" originally was before it got softened down for the album. The original "Raving and Drooling", for example, was a massive space rock piece, unlike any that PF had done before. And when it was finished for "Animals" the idea of "space rock" was gone, into a very strong RW song. PF always mentioned that they liked to play things a few times before recording in order to smooth them out ... and the bootlegs would agree with this, other than the fact that "Raving and Drooling" was far better on the bootlegs, but the newer version was done to give you something else that you did not catch until you saw the band live ... at the Anaheim Stadium the chord change out there, live, was almost a Pepto Bismol moment! That strong and magnificent, and it is likely that RW knew that something could be done with that chord change.
I think that WYWH could not have a more comprehensive show, because what it started with, disappeared after the piece, and the concept of the whole thing changed, and disappeared. There is no more "Syd" after the opening piece, that I can remember. It is possible that if we look at all Syd's lyrics in the first 2 PF albums, that we will find something about the music industry, but it must be hidden, in an incredible literary fashion that no one can figure out.
And worse of all, I think the album (WYWH) cover showed a deal made with the devil (guy on fire) and suggests that they had married the machine, and then made a song right after it about how cynical the whole thing was, specially as sung so beautifully by Roy Harper. After that, I think the album is just a copy of DSOTM and is "feature-less" for me. PF, for me, even though I appreciate the great moments in THE WALL, had died for me at that moment ... the honesty died, and was now excused by something that was supposedly more meaningful than before. Sorry ... I find "Echoes" a lot more meaningful than "The Wall", even if it has such a Shelley'esque style and smoothness.
All it suggests is that this was not the original thing they wanted to do, because the "completeness" that was DSOTM, was gone. Also strange, was that after so many years of using lines by Syd, in the new piece, where they could have been used to accent the piece even more with Syd in the background, and it was not there. I have a feeling that it might have been considered bad taste, and the main reason for its removal, other than the PF members were tired of dealing with it.
I do wish that either RW or DG would come a bit clearer/cleaner on this history, because almost all of the stuff out there is just fodder and garbage for rock fans, without a whole lot of a redeeming factor. I thought that Nick's book might touch it, but in the end, it was just like the line in the movie "Live in Pompeii" ... just a nice home movie. In that sense, Nick's book is a huge disappointment. He doesn't seem to care about what it might suggest, or be about, and I think this may be something that the three remaining members are privy to. They are probably tired of questions about it all, and none of these questions that go beyond just being another rock song for the top of the pops. As such, PF beat almost all of them except Beatles, Rolling Stones and Michael Jackson in their time.
My thoughts, NOW, are ... is PF overrated, instead of is DSOTM overrated?
|
|
Music is not just for listening ... it is for LIVING ... you got to feel it to know what's it about! Not being told!
www.pedrosena.com
|
|
moshkito
Forum Senior Member
Joined: January 04 2007
Location: Grok City
Status: Offline
Points: 17494
|
Posted: April 01 2018 at 08:46 |
Hi,
(Sorry ... had more about this topic! and its development)
A lot of this is really difficult to discuss and explain, and sometimes I think I am just another FOOL trying, but that's how my mind works. It has less to do with the role of the FOOL being an idiot, than the FOOL trying to make sense of what he sees, which is different.
For me, a lot of this goes along with the history of television. AND, it was in the mid 60's or so, when COLOR TV began making its appearance and was affordable, and from that point on, ALL of the arts changed. The Beatles and Rolling Stones became more "VISUAL" and both "Sgt Peppers" and "Their Satanic Majesty's BS" were very cisual albums and the way they were done were very imposing in our perception. We were more in tune with Elvis (so to speak) in those days as a teenager rebelling and wanting some sense of freedom that was being taken away, and all of a sudden here is someone talking about your mind being the issue not just your body.
PROGRESSIVE MUSIC has its roots in a lot of this VISUAL material, and we can go into a lot of the theater at the time (Edward Albee, Tom Stoppard, and others) as well as FILM (Stanley Kubrick - specially his use of music!, David Lean, John Schlensinger, Jean Luc Godard, Federico Fellini and others) whose visual accuity was one of the most important parts of their work. So it is no secret that KC's first album, is almost EXCLUSIVELY a visual experience, to the point where folks do not even like the suggestive nature of the two very soft pieces in there. And later, YES made that stronger with CTTE and TFTO, and Pink Floyd came out with ATH and Meddle, and Genesis with a couple of albums that suggested that something was not complete, but sadly, when they completed one, it broke up the band.
The same thing, artistically, was happening in France, at least with ANGE, but then that's like saying that folks like Richard Pinhas/Heldon were not doing the same thing, specially with the album covers suggesting a political view, that most "progressive" folks essentially steered away from, as they would be usually termed as naive and stupid (such was the case in America many times!).
It's hard to not listen to PFM and BANCO and not see these stories complete with movie and show for your delectation. And this helped a lot the music at the time.
As it became better known, you can tell that a lot of this simply went to the lyrics, and the "let's make believe" content in popular music, and to me, this has a tendency to dillute the ability and the strength of the material itself. From a stage director's perspective, that's like assuming that what the actor says is what the audience gets, and that is one of the worst assumptions any actor can make on a stage and one Friday night with a drunken audience, they won't laugh about that joke, and your performance, will die like a brick into the ocean! Again, lyrics, is not enough, unless you have the perfect ability to feel and deliver to an audience, and those kind of folks are few and far in between and we will be lucky to see one of them in our lives.
For me, the study of "progressive music" is almost specifically about its visual ability and how it brings it about.
|
|
Music is not just for listening ... it is for LIVING ... you got to feel it to know what's it about! Not being told!
www.pedrosena.com
|
|
/PAlogo_v2.gif "Progarchives.com Homepage")
Is Dark Side of The Moon Overrated?