Is Pink Floyd prog rock?

I don't think they sound as they sound.

HackettFan wrote: "The term art rock has been employed to describe several works of Rock music developed right after the 1960s Psychedelic Rock explosion." [RYM] Hard to put Floyd in this category since they are front and center as well as a downright canonical example of Psychedelic Rock, at least in the British version of Psychedelic Rock. This logically swoops KrautRock up in Art Rock too, btw. "Ever since its beginnings, art rock has shared connections, musical ties and even presents apparent overlaps with Experimental Rock and Progressive Rock (eventually also bearing a relationship with styles like Art Pop, Glam Rock, Krautrock and Jazz-Rock). While art rock strives to find a level of complexity similar to the one present in these two affiliated genres, it generally features a mix of rock music that tends to follow certain Pop-based structures or patterns along with the aforementioned set of eclectic influences and certain degree of complexity and conceptuality, in contrast to the more classical/jazz-mimicking or inspired patterns of prog suites, or the more radical and angular experimental rock." [RYM]. Atom Heart Mother and Meddle are classical-inspired suites. True, there are more traditional song-based pieces the same albums. However, Harold the Barrel is on the same album as Fountain of Salmacis. Maybe Genesis isn't Prog either.

Genesis is and isn't Prog depending upon the song and album, I would posit. That said I would not consider an album not Prog just because it had a pop song on it, and one might say that the whole is greater than the sum of its parts....

I would and have argued that Pink Floyd fits different labels, both on the album, from track to track, and across the career. I think Pink Floyd made Psych, Space Rock, Art Rock, Prog Rock and more. While I think that Pink Floyd started as a very psychedelic band in the 60s, it became less so later on. If Art Rock is a phenomenon that grew out of the 60s psychedelic explosion, that would not preclude Pink Floyd from having developed in an art rock direction. I would describe Dark Side of the Moon as an Art Rock album, not Piper at the Gates of Dawn. I look at it on an album by album level, and RYM is specifically referring to Pink Floyd during a 70s stage of music in the article. I wouldn't describe The Final Cut as Psych.

I like labeling by the album, so I often having a problem calling a band just one thing or another for all of it (especially when the band is reasonably diverse). That creates a false dichotomy. To me Genesis and Pink Floyd made Prog and non-Prog music, but people quite often label bands by one genre or description despite diversity.

Earlier in this thread I wrote about Pink Floyd, "It's quite diverse and it depends on the album, period somewhat, and even on the piece of music... The first album is more Psych, the second is also primarily Psych and Experimental Rock, but I would say it could also be described as Progressive Rock. Ummagumma is Psych, Experimental and Prog I think. Atom Heart Mother, my favourite, I do consider to be quite Prog, and Meddle too. Dark Side of the Moon is art rock mostly to me. Wish you Were Here is Prog Art Rock to me, as is Animals. The Wall is more art rock/rock opera... Ultimately I would say yes and no... I'd need another option. It's not black and white to me, it's grey, and to me this "yes or no" presents too simple a dichotomy. It could be described as prog and not Prog, but I don't tend to think of bands as prog per se, I tend to think about specific music those bands made, and that music could be labelled in various ways. I might have added a "Yes and no, maybe so option". It depends quite a bit on how one defines/ describes progressive rock, as well as Progressive Rock (as a genre that need not be truly progressive) and how one parameterises music, as well as how much percentage one counts and many things. One could apply many labels to Pink Floyd across the discography, and even on individual albums."

I might be totally missing your points, and logic, cause I'm not really seeing it. As a sort of genre, some Krautrock band albums would be considered Art Rock, others probably not, among other labels they could be given. Krautrock is quite diverse and bands in Krautrock are often quite diverse (delve into various musical forms, and change over time). By the way, I'm wary about snipping bits and pieces often, because I think then you are liable to lose context.

Edited by Logan - April 24 2020 at 16:54

foregonillusions wrote: Forget whether they played progressive rock (sometimes); I just wish they were interesting!

dougmcauliffe wrote: Enchant X wrote: dougmcauliffe wrote: Can we just please obliterate the mindset that prog needs to have odd times. f**ks sake!  I believe prog does need some odd time signatures to be true prog not many but a few more than Pink Floyd demonstrate.  Ohhh ok got it, So epitaph by King Crimson, not prog? Ok! Les Sinq Saisons by Harmonium isn't particularly overflowing with Odd times off the top of my head, not prog? Allman Brothers Whipping Post, well hell, thats got an odd meter in the intro, its prog! All you need is love by the beatles has a few measures of 5 as well, that's all it takes I guess, its prog! Solisbury Hill by Peter Gabriel has some measures of 7 as well, certainly more progressive than pink floyd, band with several complex 10-20 minute epics with unconventional structure and instrumentation. See how silly this mindset is. Anybody can write a song with odd times, as many as they want, but not many can push the boundaries and progress music. Floyd, most certainly did.

Are you kidding me? Prog rock or art rock, what is the real difference? Somehow all are prog in a way or another. Prog is a very eclectic way to see rock music. Prog is a multitude of different ways to see  the great rock music that progresses. This is the reason why I love prog music. And this is the reason why that there are so many sub-genres of prog. This is the reason why this site exists.  So, definetelly they're prog, in their very own way, and they're so respected here. And don't tell me that they aren't complex in their own way.

^ Kinski always played the ‘perfect madman’......which he actually was.

Tom Ozric wrote: dougmcauliffe wrote: Can we just please obliterate the mindset that prog needs to have odd times. f**ks sake!  I agree. There’s so much Prog in 4/4 it’s not funny. Blondie did have odd metres, Kajagoogoo have odd metres, Devo have odd metres - are they Prog ??

Here, skip to 5:45 (if you want to get to the relevant part right away). I thought of this since you guys mentioned Devo. ;) Unfortunately I wasn't able to embed it this time but the link definitely should work.

Edited by AFlowerKingCrimson - April 24 2020 at 21:19

AFlowerKingCrimson wrote: dougmcauliffe wrote: Enchant X wrote: dougmcauliffe wrote: Can we just please obliterate the mindset that prog needs to have odd times. f**ks sake!  I believe prog does need some odd time signatures to be true prog not many but a few more than Pink Floyd demonstrate.  Ohhh ok got it, So epitaph by King Crimson, not prog? Ok! Les Sinq Saisons by Harmonium isn't particularly overflowing with Odd times off the top of my head, not prog? Allman Brothers Whipping Post, well hell, thats got an odd meter in the intro, its prog! All you need is love by the beatles has a few measures of 5 as well, that's all it takes I guess, its prog! Solisbury Hill by Peter Gabriel has some measures of 7 as well, certainly more progressive than pink floyd, band with several complex 10-20 minute epics with unconventional structure and instrumentation. See how silly this mindset is. Anybody can write a song with odd times, as many as they want, but not many can push the boundaries and progress music. Floyd, most certainly did. Although I agree with you Doug, some people think of them as experimental rather than prog and experimental is not necessarily prog(although I suppose it can be). But to think of PF as just a regular rock band? Really? Uh no. There has to be some category for their earlier progressive music at least. If not prog then what? Experimental might suffice for the studio part of Ummagumma but not much else. I think the problem is too many people are just thinking of their radio hits or maybe the fact that they are on the radio at all and so because of that they can't be prog. It's maybe the same reason some people don't consider Rush prog.

no its not that ... I just believe pink floyd are a glorified blues band with progressive production values ...I own every Pink Floyd album I love them , but they never demonstrate complex music, glorified blues with progressive production values.  

Edited by Enchant X - April 25 2020 at 01:02

Tom Ozric wrote: So Set the Controls for the Heart Of the Sun is a glorified bluesy, jammed-out pentatonic Pop/Rock song. Man, Slayer must be a Pop band then - you know - verse/chorus/verse/solo 4/4 short song format ....... 😐

it was acid driven psychedelic rock ..experimental at best ... hardly prog. prog means you are pushing boundaries in a straight mind without the need for drugs to enjoy it, or make sense of it. 

Edited by Enchant X - April 24 2020 at 22:41