Oh man, you gotta listen to Obscured by Clouds more, I think it's one of their top 5 albums.
-
donstuie — 19 years ago(January 31, 2007 09:16 PM)
I know I'll probably get castrated for this, but if any Floyd album in my eyes can be considered "overrated" to me it's
Wish you were here
.
dodges bottles hurled at him Now hear me out. I still think it's a great album, one of my personal favourites. But I don't understand how people can compare it to DSOTM and The Wall in terms of creativity and technical prowess. To me, WYWH is the ideal album (on par perhaps with Ok Computer by Radiohead) to listen to while lying on her back with a joint, or by a warm fireplace with a glass of whiskey in your hand. But for me, you can't compare it with DSOTM or the Wall for sheer brilliance.
On the flipside, I think Floyd's most
underrated
album would have to be
Meddle
. Two of my favourite Floyd songs of all time to bookend the album (One of these days & Echoes) but unfortunately a lack of quality otherwise. Had there been more meaningful material to fill the gaps this could've been a classic to Dark side proportions.
Animals
too is often overlooked in the Floyd canon. -
doublea54321 — 19 years ago(May 10, 2006 12:30 AM)
yeah i agree that dark side is the most cliched. i don't know about overrated, it certainly is a very solid album, and usually the listener's first floyd one. the wall was good for me the first few times, but then i got tired of it. i'd say their most underrated is Animals, followed by Meddle maybe. Piper wasn't too bad either. Oh and Wish You Were Here was perfect
-
cowtown43202 — 19 years ago(March 22, 2007 10:55 PM)
I agree with davemx 100%.
Those two records are a blemish on a legendary band's history. If you don't agree that Momentary Lapse and Division Bell aren't real Pink Floyd, just look at the writing credits the real Pink Floyd didn't need a team of record company-hired writers. -
julianreynoso — 19 years ago(March 25, 2007 01:52 PM)
The thing is that Pink Floyd died when Waters left the band. The combination of all four guys were Pink Floyd. I've seen a Waters show recently and the dark side of the moon isn't the same without Gilmour. And this new pink floyd trio lacks the composing and theatrical skills that Waters has.
-
donstuie — 18 years ago(April 22, 2007 08:22 PM)
That's right. As crucial as Waters is to the band and its success, it's the creative input from all of the members (particularly from Gilmour) that made the Floyd the success they were. Gilmour can't write songs but is a great collaborator and plays the guitar better than almost anybody and Waters can't sing or give the Floyd that radio-friendly edge, but is obviously a superb writer. These two need each other, and to listen to each other, for the band to be the best it can be. Sure, Momentary Lapse and Division Bell (while still pretty good albums) don't stack up to the stuff from the 70s, but having said that The Final Cut and Roger's solo work comes up short also because Roger is in an environment where he is the boss, and is seperated (by a wall, I guess you could say) from his listeners.
Waters + Gilmour = Pink Floyd, tha5b4t's all there is to it. -
davemx — 18 years ago(April 22, 2007 10:12 PM)
Wow, Waters can't sing? lol you should know Pink Floyd and Waters' history better before posting, not only about Roger's singing, but also because you can't even compare "Amused To Death" to those crappy Gilmour-led albums (AMLOR, TDB) "Amused" is a masterpiece that confirms Roger WAS and still IS Pink Floyd's leader and creative force, Waters could sing, i absolutely agree Dave is a brilliant guitar player, but he always needed the vehicle of Roger's composing to display his best skills, and he sings nice too, but try and compare "On An Island" to "The Pros' And Cons" or "Amused To Death", there you go.
Dave needs Roger more than Roger needs him.
Waters - Gilmour = Pink Floyd, that's all there is to it. -
kongen-6 — 18 years ago(July 20, 2007 11:15 AM)
You lost or something? Do you actually HEAR tones in your head when you listen to a record?
Need glasses too perhaps? I can agree with you that "Momentary" was rather bad.But if you can read? take a look at the credits on Division bell!!! Gilmour/Wright ALL THE
beep WAY! with some additional b68lyrics from Gilmours wife Polly.
SeriouslyThey have schools that can help you learn to read!
Marooned? Cluster One.Keep talking? Coming back to lifeHigh Hopes? if thats what you morons call CRAP, then Britney must be a musical GENIUS ehh?
Im a long life Floyd fan from DSOTM to Divison Belland for me DSOTM and the wall are the two best albums seen as a "whole" but Division bell is beep great too.If you actually listen to the album with no "Waters was the genius" in your paperhead then youll find it great too. There are 3 Pink Floyd "camps" out there today 1.Waters fanatics - He was the only creative person and everybody else sucks! (mostly teenagers whos conclusions are based on other peoples opinions)
2.Gilmour fans - They think he was the musical foundation along with Rick and Roger the "creative force"
3.Pink Floyd music fans - People who actually listen to their music instead of taking sides. Loves the classic seventies era and thinks their latest albums are OK too.
I think im in the last "camp" : )
Here is my rating on some of their most respected work:
Piper - 3/10Pathetic? This is like hearing my 10 year old brother play!
Genius? maybeDepends on your mental health :)I like to listen to music and melodyNOT watch paint dry (It may be a nice "painting" in the end but)
Meddle - 7/10Echoes is a complete MASTERPIECE..but san tropez and the other ones are just goodVery good album but not great.
DSOTM - 10/10Nothing to say hereJust fantastic!
WYWH - 9/10A couple of classic compositions here but a little too "synth" for my taste..Not entirely as good as DSOTM
Animals - 8/10..DOGS! need i say more? Maybe one of their greatest songs? I think so
The wall - 8/10..Concept is fantastic but i get a little tired when i listen to it.There are a few tracks i usually skips(Bring the boysVeraetc.)
Comfortably Numb!!! Ahhhhhhh what a great song!
Final Cut - 3/10.for meThis is just WHINING! Leftovers from the wall i think.One good track thouFletcher memorial.
Momentary Laps - 5/10A couple of very good tracks like "learning to fly" and "Sorrow" but to "80ies" for my taste
Division bell - 9/10..One of my favourite albums! this has the "old" DSOTM kind of sound quality to it.Not by far as good as DSOTM concept or lyricaly likeBut GREAT tracks individually speaking.High hopes! what a great finale!
Cheers!
Pardon my typing.
English is not my native tongue!
-
Cbak — 18 years ago(April 23, 2007 07:24 AM)
Definitely Piper At The Fates of Dawn for me. Yes, Astronomy Domine and Interstaller Overdrive, but then there are several tracks which are just like nursery rhymes. What's the difference between, say, The Gnome and Paul McCartney's We All Stand Together? At least McCartney wasn't pretending to appeal to spaced out hippies with the frog song.
Floyd's best album is Wish You Were Here. Every track still sounds good as part of the album or in its own right. Some of Dark Side sounds dated, like the instrumentals On The Run and Any Colour You Like, and Brain Damage/Eclipse. The Wall is too fragmented to deserve all the acclaim heaped on it (songs not really going anywhere), despite the magnificence of Comfortably Numb. Animals suffers because the bookended Pigs On The Wing is musically out of step with all the anger in the other tracks. The only other album that counts is Meddle. Too many of the first few tracks either offer more than they deliver, or are just plain awful (St Tropez, Seamus), although it's worth getting through all that to reach the haven of Echoes (a masterpiece). -
davemx — 18 years ago(April 23, 2007 09:03 AM)
Well, you obviously are not a Pink Floyd fan, Brain Damage/Eclipse is the best part from DSOTM, the grand finale, and it doesn't sound "dated", "Any Colour You Like" is a crappy song indeed, with Richard Wright's nonsense on the keyboards, it is so bad, the band didn't even mention it on the "Classic Albums" DVD, but still, the record is a masterpiece from Roger Waters.
The Wall 'too fragmented"? yeah, right, the only bad moment in it, is Dave's vocals on "The Show Must Go On", lame.
"Pigs On The Wing" is great, and it fits perfectly on the "Animals" album, contrasting with the other tracks. -
donstuie — 18 years ago(April 23, 2007 06:25 PM)
Wow, Waters can't sing? lol you should know Pink Floyd and Waters' history better before posting, not only about Roger's singing, but also because you can't even compare "Amused To Death" to those crappy Gilmour-led albums (AMLOR, TDB) "Amused" is a masterpiece that confirms Roger WAS and still IS Pink Floyd's leader and creative force, Waters could sing, i absolutely agree Dave is a brilliant guitar player, but he always needed the vehicle of Roger's composing to display his best skills, and he sings nice too, but try and compare "On An Island" to "The Pros' And Cons" or "Amused To Death", there you go.
Dave needs Roger more than Roger needs him.
Waters - Gilmour = Pink Floyd, that's all there is to it.
You have no idea how much I know about the Floyd, so keep the generalisations to yourself.
Even Roger admits that his vocal abilities are limited, he's said so for decades, and even on his most recent tour wouldn't touch songs like Money or Us and Them, and left them to his co-horts. I also quite like how you chose to overlook the fact that I said Gilmour can't write songs to save his own life. No beep There's no doubt that Waters' solo work is stronger than Gilmour's, but it still isn't Floyd. Floyd's success was from their ability to write and play music that was both highly artistic and creative, but also could be commercially viable at the same time, and the band were at their best when they were collaborating (except for The Wall obviously). Waters wanted the message to come before the music, Gilmour wanted the opposite. Waters' solo work is not Floyd, its Waters' solo work. I'm not going to get into a pissing match over who was more important to the band, because it's obviously Waters, but the simple fact is that for both men to be as good as they can be, they need each other, and dare I say it they need that conflict of ideas.
Floyd is Waters writing the songs with input from Gilmour, Gilmour on guitar and the two of them sharing vocal duties. Sorry to burst your bubble but you'll probably find the majority of Floyd fans feel the same way.
Just because people disagree with you it doesn't mean they don't know what they're talking about, think about it. -
davemx — 18 years ago(April 23, 2007 07:52 PM)
Generalisations? i was being very specific.
Even Roger admits that his vocal abilities are limited, and even on his most recent tour wouldn't touch songs like Money or Us and Them
A= Roger tries and respect the songs as they were intended to be, so he'll just re create his original voice parts and leave Gilmour's to singers with a similar range, instead of destroying them like Dave does live, i can't stand him on "Brain Damage/Eclipse", or "Run Like Hell" among so many others. EW!
I also quite like how you chose to overlook the fact that I said Gilmour can't write songs to save his own life. No beep
A= I also quite like how you chose to overlook the fact that I said Gilmour is a brilliant guitar player.
There's no doubt that Waters111c' solo work is stronger than Gilmour's.
A= You're beep right,
but it still isn't Floyd. Floyd's success was from their ability to write and play music that was both highly artistic and creative, but also could be commercially viable at the same time.
A= There you go, and that's the irony, Gilmour's crappy albums sell by the millions, and Waters' highly artistic works make less money, but Roger's fanbase isn't as worried as you are about commercial success, his tour has been on the road for a year.
Floyd is Waters writing the songs with input from Gilmour.
A= Wrong again, Floyd is Waters writing the songs, period. Floyd is Waters' music, Waters' lyrics, and Waters' concepts.
YOU think about it. -
BallsJr — 18 years ago(April 24, 2007 02:32 AM)
This has lost track of the original topic, but I'm gonna jump in here anyway.
davemx, you're a bit too hot under the collar mate, and also a little narrow-minded with your views. I'm not here to offend but just to say that others here have indeed made some valid points, which you have lambasted as "not knowing Floyd history" or "not being a Floyd fan". What crap!
You seem an obviously long-time passionate Waters fan (which I respect and understand), but with at the least a borderline resentment against Gilmour. I don't really care the reasons behind either - to each their own, after all - but will point out that both can make you intolerant in such discussions as this.
From my perspective, after years of listening to, watching, reading about and generally loving Floyd's music, their magic is born simply from the sum of the parts. And of course, especially Waters' and Gilmour's parts! To say "Floyd is Waters" (which is the gist of your posts), well, suggests to me that you are the one who is not a Floyd fan.rather you're purely a Waters fan. Surely all true fans know that PF would not have been what they were had they been apart, or the band composed of different members. They may still have been greatbut they wouldn't have been Floyd as we know them! -
davemx — 18 years ago(April 24, 2007 08:16 AM)
All i'm saying (again) is that Dave is a BRILLIANT guitar player ("Comfortably Numb" must be the greatest guitar solo EVER), but is Roger's ideas, music and lyrics that made Floyd the legend it is, and i find it ridiculous that someone says he can't sing lol
-
donstuie — 18 years ago(April 24, 2007 09:06 PM)
Generalisations? i was being very specific.
Specific you say?
"you should know Pink Floyd and Waters' history better before posting"
(to another poster) "Well, you obviously are not a Pink Floyd fan"
I'd call those generalisations my friend, and the kind that are made using one's opinion as if it was total fact, the worst kind.
Roger tries and respect the songs as they were intended to be, so he'll just re create his original voice parts and leave Gilmour's to singers with a similar range, instead of destroying them like Dave does live, i can't stand him on "Brain Damage/Eclipse", or "Run Like Hell" among so many others
No, it's because he can't do them, because he simply doesn't have the vocal range. How many times does he have to publicly state this for people to get it into their heads??? On DSOTM Waters wanted to sing even less than he did, and it was actually Gilmour that encouraged him to do more. And why do you think they got Harper to do vocals on Have a Cigar? Waters' voice is perfect for Waters' own work, Animals, The Wall, Final Cut, Pros and Cons etc, his voice is perfect for the music that Floyd was making later on, but it doesn't change the fact (a fact because he's SAID SO) that vocally he's very limited, and the opinion of many that Gilmour was by far the superior vocalist.
I also quite like how you chose to overlook the fact that I said Gilmour is a brilliant guitar player
What does it matter? You appear to be saying that Gilmour's guitar-work had nothing to do with the success of Floyd, and that Roger really didn't need any of the other guys for the band to be as good as it was. Or are you going to backtrack now and say that Gilmour was indeed an integral part of the band's success?
There you go, and that's the irony, Gilmour's crappy albums sell by the millions, and Waters' highly artistic works make less money, but Roger's fanbase isn't as worried as you are about commercial success, his tour has been on the road for a year.
Funny, I always thought Waters had by far the superior solo career than Gilmour, unless you're refering to Momentary Lapse and Division Bell, in which case I think it's got a bit more to do with the fact that they were branded under Pink Floyd and thus given more marketing support. I don't agree with it, but this is just simply the sad reality of the music industry.
But there you go generalising again, because I don't give a beep about commercial success, I just don't feel the need to get all Holier than thou over that fact. But therein lies the difference between Waters on his own, and Waters with input from Gilmour. Waters + Gilmour pushed the boundaries creatively while still making music that regular radio listeners could enjoy (You DO know that Gilmour collaborated quite a lot musically on Meddle, Dark Side and WYWH, right?), and most agree that while Waters was the architect of the whole thing, it was through collaborating with Gilmour's opposing musical philosophies that they both produced their best work. Gilmour's own work is just boring and little more than elevator music, and Waters' music is far too narrative and political for many's tastes. I would much rather buy a Waters solo album than a Gilmour, because I think it's better. But we're dealing with subjectivity here, and opinions, and personal tastes, not facts. Look up the difference.
Wrong again, Floyd is Waters writing the songs, period. Floyd is Waters' music, Waters' lyrics, and Waters' concepts.
OPINION!!! Just like my own. Any numbskull cover band can play DSOTM or The Wall, but are you saying because it was Waters' words they would've inevitably had the same success as the Floyd? Do you really think Waters could've gone around with any band for hire and still had the same success as he had with Gilmour supporting him? I also went to see Waters when he was here recently, and it was fantastic, but the difference in quality between this and Floyd (yes, even when it was just Gilmour, Mason and Wright) was noticeable even to an observer in the crowd. There were times where he obviously mimed, where his voice broke on even simple notes, where he required T5b4WO guitarists to do Gilmour-solos that Gilmour could do in his sleep and even screwing up simple things like the intro to Shine on The show reaffirmed my belief that Waters needs Gilmour there to produce his best work, and vice versa. You cannot sit there with a straight face and tell me that band would've had the same success simply because Waters was behind it all. If you can, boy, you are one committed fan. -
davemx — 18 years ago(April 25, 2007 08:24 AM)
I agree that Roger could pick a better guitar player for his tours, but i guess he gives them the freedom to play as they feel like, maybe not knowing that people (me, included), expect the solos to sound like Dave's, but that's his choice, at least Kilminster has improved from Doyle Bramhall's disaster from 2001.
I enjoyed Waters' current DSOTM tour better (both because of the set list, and sound) than "Pulse", and like you say, that's my opinion, i love Roger's style on bass, it sounds way better than Guy Pratt (can i say, obviously?). i guess we can't have it all, too bad Gilmour closed every door for a Pink Floyd reunion.
I've explained my views, we disagree, and that's my opinion.