Is Pink Floyd prog rock?

No. Pink Floyd is absolutely Cock-Rock.

Mortte wrote: No. Pink Floyd is absolutely Cock-Rock.

You may be confusing it with Dink Floyd which had a minor hit with "Another Dickin' the Balls" from the concept album The Balls, and made the album's sequel, the Division Balls in the 80s. The less said about the circumcision album called The Final Cut the better (it's more of a Rogered Wa*kers album anyway). My favourite DF tracks may be "A Saucerful of Syphilis", "Pricks on the Wing" and "Learning to Zip that Fly". I might just have to delete this, then delete myself.   

Edited by Logan - August 07 2020 at 03:39

Logan wrote: Mortte wrote: No. Pink Floyd is absolutely Cock-Rock. You may be confusing it with Dink Floyd which had a minor hit with "Another Dickin' the Balls" from the concept album The Balls, and made the album's sequel, the Division Balls in the 80s. The less said about the circumcision album called The Final Cut the better (it's more of a Rogered Wa*kers album anyway). My favourite DF tracks may be "A Saucerful of Syphilis", "Pricks on the Wing" and "Learning to Zip that Fly". I might just have to delete this, then delete myself.

As a matter of fact there is a band called "Drink Floyd" in Finland and their concerts are under name "Wish You Were Beer". But players are really great musicians and they play decent versions from Floyd´s songs, as far as I know, they play songs only from Dark Side, WYWH & the Wall. Here´s their facebook site:

^ They sound like my kind of Pub-Rock band.

Mortte wrote: Logan wrote: Mortte wrote: No. Pink Floyd is absolutely Cock-Rock. You may be confusing it with Dink Floyd which had a minor hit with "Another Dickin' the Balls" from the concept album The Balls, and made the album's sequel, the Division Balls in the 80s. The less said about the circumcision album called The Final Cut the better (it's more of a Rogered Wa*kers album anyway). My favourite DF tracks may be "A Saucerful of Syphilis", "Pricks on the Wing" and "Learning to Zip that Fly". I might just have to delete this, then delete myself.    As a matter of fact there is a band called "Drink Floyd" in Finland and their concerts are under name "Wish You Were Beer". But players are really great musicians and they play decent versions from Floyd´s songs, as far as I know, they play songs only from Dark Side, WYWH & the Wall. Here´s their facebook site: https://fi-fi.facebook.com/events/pub-gr%C3%B6nan/drink-floyd-wish-you-were-beer/776688999340934/

Haha, that's a much better name for a band than Dink Floyd. There is also one called Think Floyd.

Mortte wrote: Logan wrote: By the way, I love lots of Pink Floyd, but, and I'm quite sure I made this point already, presenting an "Is Pink Floyd Prog" in such a dichotomous, or binary fashion seems overly simplistic to me. Pink Floyd created music which I can consider to be Prog, but not everything Pink Floyd made I consider to be Prog-proper. And is the band itself Prog? That's another question to me. Is a constructor of buildings a building?, to get a bit silly. But one can say that the sum is greater than the individual parts. And Pink Floyd's music can be labelled in various ways. If the question was, "Should Pink Floyd be included in Prog Archives?" Then my answer would be a resounding yes. Did Pink Floyd make Prog Rock? I say yes (and that needn't be exclusive). I think I have said earlier I don´t really care what´s prog and what´s not. But anyway in the eighties Pink Floyd were called progband in Finland and nothing else. Captain Beefheart & the Magic Band I hadn´t ever thought to be prog until I found them in PA as RIO/Avant subgenre.

There's a lot of music in PA that I would not have considered to be Prog. It's such a nebulous label, and PA's scope goes beyond traditional notions of Prog. I'm glad that PA has such a wide Prog umbrella. It makes the site more interesting to me and helped with with discovery. I haven;t cared so much about what is Prog, or properly Prog, per se, more what I think fits our categories (especially for team work that I have been involved in).

TexasKing wrote: Logan wrote: ...Pink Floyd created music which I can consider to be Prog, but not everything Pink Floyd made I consider to be Prog-proper....  I could say the same for 70's Black Sabbath. They are generally labeled as heavy metal (and the pioneers of that genre), but I don't consider their 4 70's albums (the debut, Sabbath Bloody Sabbath, Technical Ecstasy and Never Say Die) to be mostly metal albums, and all those albums get a metal tag and I'd disagree. 70's Black Sabbath was metal, but they were musically very diverse so they also had many non-metal stuff.

One could say much the same for a huge amount of acts, and it one of the points I'm raising in that post. I'm also questioning labeling a band as Prog, or Metal, or Punk, or New Wave or whatever, instead of labeling particular music made by bands as [insert music labels here]. If a group of builders who call themselves Bob and the Builders build a building, it does not make them the building itself, silly as that sounds. And if they build multiple kinds of buildings, say, houses, skyscrapers and tepees, it would be wrong just to call those builders skyscrapers. I know it's sort of shorthand to call an act a genre, and it's implied that it refers to the music. A painter who paints impressionist paintings is an impressionist and not an impressionist painting, of course, unless one might be referring to his self-portrait etc.

One way that I would answer "Is Pink Floyd Prog Rock" is to say, "No, I don't think that the band is in and of itself prog rock, but I do think that the band made prog rock (not exclusively) and does represent a kind of prog rock."


Edited by Logan - August 07 2020 at 09:04

Psychedelic Paul wrote: ^ They sound like my kind of Pub-Rock band.

You mean Beefheart? Pubrock?!

Before you vote no, you might want to go back and listen to Piper at the Gates of Dawn and compare it to what was out there at the time. It is true that some of their later music tends toward blues, but prog has so many different characteristics. They are proggy, in my opinion, in many ways. Lyricism, didactic albeit twisted metaphorical storytelling, complex chords / progression, some odd time signatures, innovations with synths. I wouldn't place them in the same sub-category of prog as King Crimson. But, if you take out Pink Floyd from PA, you might as well cut off your nose to spite your face. I think some people may be mixing up the umbrella of prog with their favorite subgenre of prog. And, if you don't like my opinion, hard cheese! Resounding, resonating, and reverberating YES!!!

I would  say yes but with the provision that this does not mean every track would be categorised as 'prog' .

Guldbamsen wrote: Floyd were many things..including prog/progressive...just like most other interesting acts of the day. PA in a nutshell: Somebody makes beautiful music ——> (some of) the audience digs it ——> some don’t and start making theories about boxes and genres as to why X band is poor/not prog. Shakespeare once wrote something very clever about a rose...perhaps the same can be applied to music. Put another way: if Floyd were described as proto-baroque post-rock...would the music sound any different?

Logan wrote: Mortte wrote: No. Pink Floyd is absolutely Cock-Rock. You may be confusing it with Dink Floyd which had a minor hit with "Another Dickin' the Balls" from the concept album The Balls, and made the album's sequel, the Division Balls in the 80s. The less said about the circumcision album called The Final Cut the better (it's more of a Rogered Wa*kers album anyway). My favourite DF tracks may be "A Saucerful of Syphilis", "Pricks on the Wing" and "Learning to Zip that Fly". I might just have to delete this, then delete myself.