Is Dark Side of The Moon Overrated?

Rolling Stone has not been kind to many bands over the years. 

Mortte wrote: SteveG wrote: This is the first time that I've ever heard WYWH called DSotM part 2,  but I've come to realize, as in past posts, that you are in quite a mindset all your own on many topics. Mmm...perhaps reading some PA reviews on WYWH would change your views. I think you should read some critics from 1975 from WYWH: From Rolling Stone: Shine on You Crazy Diamond is initially credible because it purports to confront the subject of Syd Barrett, the long and probably forever lost guiding light of the original Floyd. But the potential of the idea goes unrealised; they give such a matter-of-fact reading of the goddamn thing that they might as well be singing about Roger Waters's brother-in-law getting a parking ticket. This lackadaisical demeanor forces, among other things, a reevaluation of their relationship to all the space cadet orchestras they unconsciously sired. The one thing those bands have going for them, in their cacophonously inept way, is a sincere passion for their "art." And passion is everything of which Pink Floyd is devoid From Melody Maker: "From whichever direction one approaches Wish You Were Here, it still sounds unconvincing in its ponderous sincerity and displays a critical lack of imagination in all departments." In Finland many reviewers of that time just said, how that album doesn´t bring anything new from Pink Floyd. Those were the times when Pink Floyd and others were started to call dinosaur bands. Also I know a Pink Floyd-fan, who thinks only Piper-Dark side is the only great Floyd-period, he doesn´t listen albums after that period. I have my own opinions, but unless many others here, I have also read about Floyd. Really don´t want to read any reviews about WYWH about PA, some of the reviews in PA are quite miserable (specially some ones made recently from the old classics). And one thing: I haven´t said they´re absolutely same kind of albums. I have said they have a lots in common as sounds and as the main theme, but really one thing what WYWH lacks is that positive power that´s in DSoTM.

Really? Read the opinions of pro punk, pro Bruce and anti Prog rags regarding WYWH?

Mortte wrote: ^Why that pro punk, Pro Bruce and Antiprog magazine then made a positive review from Dark side? Do you think Loyd Grossman was fired after his review? And you think in PA, where everyman can make reviews are automatically objective reviews, more objective that Music Magazine´s review of that time? Yes, it´s true in 1975 common opinion started to turn against prog. But I think there was also reason, WYWH wasn´t of course the worst mainstream album of that time, but I think it was also one reason (Pink Floyd as a band that time) why punk became and I am not saying it was a bad thing. Anyway if you´re not really understanding my points here (which I have doubt, it seems you are those internet persons who like to twist others opinions) I was just showing it wasn´t just my idea, that WYWH isn´t bettering from the Dark Side.

And now WYWH is mainstream?

Mortte wrote: ^then what is it? If million selling album is not mainstream then? This is useless: - this wall is white - no, it´s black! - are you blind? It´s of course white - no it´s green - aaaaarrgghhh...

Why of course WYWH is mainstream old chap! And bubble gum pop and AOR too! I see the light! 

Edited by SteveG - March 20 2018 at 08:47

Walkscore wrote: HackettFan wrote: Walkscore wrote: DSOTM is special because, in addition to what many others have said (re gateway, sound quality, composition), I think many of us would not be who we are but for this album. For many of us (including myself) it was the album that opened up a world of possibilities for what could be done in music, and it came with a particular kind of political sensibility that few bands other than Floyd could really communicate, at least not as emotionally.  While I agree that Close to the Edge and Selling England are on the same plane musically - i.e. equally musical - I think I still would have been the same person if one of those two albums didn't exist. But I might not have 'found music' if it weren't for DSOTM.  But of course, I am not sure if the same is true for new listeners so many years on... ...um, you mean, if it weren't for the Lamb. We all have such different answers for that, don't we? I love both Selling England and The Lamb. Really musical - musically even more original than DSOTM. Please don't get me wrong. However, I am not sure if there is a political message to The Lamb, or if there is then I am not sure that I understand it. (Perhaps someone could explain it to me?)  My point was the DSOTM (and the albums Floyd made afterwards) has a very clear and direct political message that is integrated right into the music/concept in a very direct and emotional way - most can instantly 'get it', and many see it as revealing some underlying truth, and hence assign importance to it for this reason. I think this makes it special - both special as in rare, and special as in the reason it and other post-DSOTM albums are treasured so much. Of course, not everyone will love it and if one is turned off by the message, or not interested in the message, then it won't have the same emotional impact. But I think many who listen to it see the music and message as inseparable and are affected emotionally by it (and other post-DSOTM Floyd) in a way that is rare for other albums/bands, even really excellent musical ones.

I was responding to your statement about not being the same person and not finding music without it. The Lamb held that sort of sway for me. The lyrics, surreal or not, spoke to me emotionally. Others have taken other paths of course, some through DSotM. And it's quite good indeed. The essential question for me is why should it be regarded as superior to other Floyd albums?




Edited by HackettFan - March 20 2018 at 09:25

Frankh wrote: The most important factor to take into consideration is the times this release went out into. What was taking place culturally then. Especially, but not confined to America.

I agree. Understanding the times when the release came out is crucial.  This album came out 15 years before Frenetic was even born, so it's not hard to understand why he fails to understand the impact of DSOTM on the music and cultural scene, as do those of us who lived thru it.

Bing Crosby's "White Christmas" came out 15 years (or a little more) before I was born.  Even though it sold over 100 million copies, I find it sappy, overly simplistic, over-played, and boring --  therefore, it is overrated.

"I don't like it; therefore, it is overrated." is not a valid statement.

Your personal opinion has no bearing on whether something is overrated or not.  It is just an opinion.  To be overrated, something must have been hyped and then failed to live up to those expectations or failed to perform in the view of the many (not the one).  DSOTM exceeded everyone's expectations (even the band's) and has performed for 45 years. It earned it's reputation, whether you like the album or not.

If this hasn't already been said, just for the record, it's perfectly possible for an album to be overrated and still be a masterpiece. And i wouldn't take any notice of NME, who were cynical jerks and became unbearable once new wave arrived. As for Rolling Stone, every time Bob Dylan puts out an album of himself gargling they call it the best thing he's done since Highway 61.

Personally I think 'Dark Side' is clearly the best Floyd album. It would take forever to go through each album and try to analyse why, but I just think it's the album where they defined and perfected their sound in the same moment. Waters has more or less indicated that they may as well have broken up after it, and Gilmour even admitted he may have been right.

If there's one PF album which I do consider overrated it's definitely The Wall. Compared with the other three albums from their classic period, I find it for the most part realtively musically unadventurous and straightforward. Most of the songs just have a few chords, often with the figure of Waters' one-note bass-line rumbling or plodding through them, ala 'One of these days'. And the concept? I know that by the late 70's Roger literally wanted to spit in the audience's faces, but I find it hard to generalise his problems into something more broadly meaningful to me.

It's still a good album, IMO, but I don't understand why people rate it above Dark side.

wiz_d_kidd wrote:  This album came out 15 years before Frenetic was even born, so it's not hard to understand why he fails to understand the impact of DSOTM on the music and cultural scene, as do those of us who lived thru it.

^ Agreed 100%