I was going to raise this question in the other Pink Floyd thread that’s open in Cafe, but I was afraid it would turn into a hijack.
I’ve heard every note Pink Floyd ever recorded (at least up until 1992). They were horrible. They were terrible. They were a bunch of pretentious slugs with a fetish for ambient quality synths and sound effects. OOOOO AHHHH, that’s really just annoying.
Their “profound” lyrics come across to me as shoddy high school angst poetics with all the depth of a 15 YO’s crush. I’ll grant you that there’s some good guitar work. Other than that, I can’t find any “quality” to them.
What is the big deal? Why is this band so revered? I’m not trying to open a can of worms with the legions of fans, but I really don’t get it.
While we’re at it, anyone care to solve the mystery of Jethro Tull for me? Here’s another incredibly pretentious band that’s WAY too full of itself and it’s “art”. Okay, the flute player is pretty talented, but the song structures are all very formulaic and the lyrics are laughably self-indulgent.
Like I said, someone please explain the appeal. I know lots of very intelligent people whose opinions i usually admire who like this stuff, and I can’t for the life of me figure out why.
Just to make you happy, I should let you know that David Gilmour has said that Pink Floyd won’t be touring or releasing any more albums of new material any more, so you’re safe on that one.
Did you listen with the ears of a 20 year-old during the 70’s? Of course you didn’t!
Did you listen to the lyrics (forget the music)?
I don’t know your age, but I will grant you that a Generation X-er probably could not relate to Pink Floyd.
Their music states a need, and maybe even suggests a solution. Anger, yes ! But there is also a kind of aural “sigh”: Yeah, I know I’m screwed up, but I wish you’d love me anyway."
Sometimes when I get sad, I’ll listen to Dark Side or The Wall and even though they don’t answer any questions, at least I know there was someone else who felt the way I did, and I feel a kinship with him.
If I may ask: What do you want the music/lyrics to be?
They are there. Indelibly. Just like those horrible Beatles who tried to lift our spirits and make us think and love.
Please listen again. We’ll get back to you on Tull
I can’t relate to Pink Floyd, but I love the music anyway. the lyrics are far better than the mushy greeting-card crap that come’s out now and the assembly line noise that passes for music these days.
Listen to The Wall. There are some pretty powerful lyrics about fear, paranoia and hatred.
It’s all opinion. I’ll always like it. You obviously never will.
I like Pink Floyd myself, but all you Floyd-haters must enjoy this comment from my chemistry teacher:
“You know, my friends and I were sitting in a pizzeria one night and we all realized that Pink Floyd is just stuff to listen to when you’re high.”
Of course, this is in response to one of my best friends, well known for his love of cannabis, saying Pink Floyd was one of his favorite bands.
Now that I’m getting really far off the OP I might as well throw this in. When we were synthesizing the active ingredient in aspirin said friend joked, “No drugs in school.” The Saharan-witted chem teacher noted, “No druggies in school either.” Good times.
i can take or leave Floyd (though Dark Side will always have a special place in my little LSD-taking adolescent heart) but don’t you DARE speak against Jethro Tull! Tull was (and I do mean was) one of the most original, exciting, thoroughly great bands of the 60’s/70’s.
I have a picture of Ian Anderson holding up a sign that says “Hi, [my real name]” - friend of mine was dating the drummer and knew how much I loved him, so got him to sit for it, can you imagine?
Lyrics about the death of one’s father, his isolation and mental torment at the hands of his mother, being used by women, and then going mad and falling into a state of emotionlessness is equal to a 15 year old’s crush?
Personally, what I find phenomenal about Pink Floyd is the fact that they manage to use lyrics that are actually filled with emotion - as opposed to the angst referenced in the OP that you’d find in something by Blink 182 or something - that are melded perfectly with the instruments.
It was just before dawn
One miserable morning in black 'forty four.
When the forward commander
Was told to sit tight
When he asked that his men be withdrawn.
And the Generals gave thanks
As the other ranks held back
The enemy tanks for a while.
And the Anzio bridgehead
Was held for the price
Of a few hundred ordinary lives.
Of course Pink Floyd is stuff you listen to when you’re high! Whats the problem? Well it’s all subjective, you know. No good music, no bad music etc. you either like it or you don’t. I don’t know how I would have made it through high school without “Dark side of the moon” and “The Wall”.
Excuse me if I seem to be at a loss for words-I’ve never encountered anyone who did’nt like Pink Floyd!
There’s just no accounting for taste, is there. I’ve always loved Floyd and Tull, but I’ll admit that the appeal now is partly nostalgic. In the case of Floyd, I’ll even admit that I don’t listen to it much now that I’m not a dope smoker. The two really, really do go together.
I’ve heard others say that Pink Floyd should get over their high school angst, but that angst was part of their thing. A thing that lots of us can relate to, even if we’ve moved on. It went far beyond high school difficulties–and even if it hadn’t, “Another Brick in the Wall” expresses the pain of adolescence better than most of us could. And the guitar work is phenomenal, not good.
As for Tull, there’s nothing formulaic about their music. They mixed rock and classical, giving it their own unique sound, and used time signatures that rock and roll had rarely seen. (Come to think of it, Pink Floyd used some unusual time signatures too. Ever heard “Money”?) Jethro Tull still performs, but the members have changed and the music has matured. I think Ian Anderson moved away from the prancing and flute-twirling at just the right time, gracefully surrendering the things of youth. What impressed me most at his concerts was his impeccable politeness, even on a stage in front of thousands of screaming teenagers.
My advice, if you don’t like Pink Floyd and Jethro Tull, is not to listen to them. It’s not as if the radio bombards us with their stuff. I’m curious about what music you do like. Britney? Oh wait, that’s not music. (It’s a joke. I don’t doubt that you listen to some good stuff too.)
Perhaps it’s just the color Pink in the name.
Imagine if they had called themselves Black Floyd, or maybe Blue Floyd.
Would we be watching the Osbournes if they had been Pink Sabbath?
Not to mention the images Pink Oyster Cult brings up.
Perhaps you’ve just become so burnt out on all the groups who came later, emulating the Pink Floyd sound that you only see their innovation as cliche.
As with a lot of groups, you can say “you had to have been there” to really appreciate what they brought to the tableau.
Unless you were there, you have no idea how good Jethro Tull’s “Stand Up” sounded in 1969.
Hearing the Stones’ “Satisfaction” now can not come near what it souded like when WABC played it solid for a half hour on a summer night back in 1965.
There is some perspective to music such as this which can not be passed on through the decades. Something a classic rock station cannot provide when they play their endless rotations of these songs.
Back in the good old days, we didn’t have classic rock stations playing Pink Floyd, Jethro Tull and others. You had to listen to “underground” radio or discover these on your own.
Sorry you missed it.
It was dark all around.
There was frost in the ground
When the tigers broke free.
And no one survived
From the Royal Fusiliers Company C.
They were all left behind,
Most of them dead,
The rest of them dying.
And that’s how the High Command
Took my daddy from me.
If a band just doesn’t do it for you, then that’s a matter of taste, and there’s no point in arguing about it. But if Pink Floyd sounds “formulaic”, it’s a formula they invented.
i can’t say i’m extraordinarily aquainted with pink floyd’s catalogue, but i know enough to form a reasonable opinion, so…
…add me to the list of haters.
i don’t see the deal. weird for the sake of being weird. pink floyd sound like they’re simply trying to be different rather than innovative. the velvet underground were doing some pretty fucked up stuff at a similar time, or even before, and they were innovative. to my ears, pink floyd sound bombastic, excessive and in possession of a love of studio trickery to cover some fairly average rock.
take time for instance. the beginning is pretty cool, until we actually get into the song. play it without all the effects and it’s really boring rock. particularly the eagles style guitar solos.
i don’t really have a problem with the lyrics. a little bit pretentious maybe, but not overly bad. i’m never going to call them great lyricists, but they’re not as bad as, say, new order’s (who i like - but there’s no excusing lyrics like bernard sumner’s). and there’s nothing wrong with angst; i like placebo!
but essentially, i take MrO’s advice:
and if you want to know what this pink floyd hater listens to, the answer is: pretty much everything. looking at my playlist, the last songs i listened to were by busta rhymes, outkast, the ataris, red hot chili peppers and ani difranco. the last five cds i bought were by daft punk, the get up kids, weezer, 28 days and built to spill
I have a strange opinion. I really can’t stand Pink Floyd. But I am a big fan of Roger Waters’ solo work. I think its because, in general I find high treble-y sounds irritating, like nails on a chalkboard… aaghhh! aagghh! turn it offfff!
Thus, most of David Gilmour’s guitar work, which was skilled, but IMHO, squeaky/squealy in pitch. Take out the guitar, and hey presto, I like it! Roger Waters has a low pitched voice and doesn’t spend too much time shrieking, either.
I used to have a saying, “If it’s Floyd, and I like it, it must be The Final Cut.”
