[QUOTE=purple_hazer]pink floyd in general, they were some of the few pioneers (that i know of) to try to have a "Dolby 5.1"esque sound system at their shows to completely wrap their music around the audience, quite ahead of their time for being in 71'-73' or whatever[/QUOTE]
No, wrong again.

That's not ahead of their time, because people LIKED IT then.

this kwash2 guy knows what he's talkin about keep it up bro

[QUOTE=Krabs]How is that?[/QUOTE]

well the sound effects used were very modern for the time. The music itself sounded very good back then and the music wouldn't sound out of place if it was released now. As a piece of musical engineering it was superior to everything else around it. Stereo sound back then was not a common occurance as well.

[QUOTE=Kwash2]I don't think you guys really understand the phrase "Ahead of it's time."

It means like, something that wasn't recieved well by the public when it was first released, but later was hailed as good.

IE, Fauvism, early cubism in art.[/QUOTE]

why can't ahead of its time mean that it was disliked? surely it would mean the music was 'ahead of its time' in that it wasn't following the trends of the era and went for something different. Which is what Dark Side of the Moon did

edit: ****, double post

umm

what

[QUOTE=David_Gilmour]well the sound effects used were very modern for the time. The music itself sounded very good back then and the music wouldn't sound out of place if it was released now. As a piece of musical engineering it was superior to everything else around it. Stereo sound back then was not a common occurance as well.[/QUOTE]

Stereo was almost mandatory after like the mid 60's. :smash:

Sound effects? The only places where I consider sound effects playing a large role is in Time.

[QUOTE=Atman]i would think actual pink floyd fans would vote for meddle as being the most forward thinking anyway[/QUOTE]

yep

and this guy's username is pinkfloyd so i win

123 with Meddle.

Iron Maiden had yet to come along and Pink Floyd made Meddle.

Foward thinking there.

Also, the song,"The Nile Song," by Pink Floyd, I didn't think it was Pink Floyd the first time I heard it.

[QUOTE=David_Gilmour]why can't ahead of its time mean that it was disliked? surely it would mean the music was 'ahead of its time' in that it wasn't following the trends of the era and went for something different. Which is what Dark Side of the Moon did

edit: ****, double post[/QUOTE]

Shut up now while your still ahead.

[QUOTE=Krabs]Stereo was almost mandatory after like the mid 60's. :smash:

Sound effects? The only places where I consider sound effects playing a large role is in Time.[/QUOTE]

On The Run, Money, the constant bits of speech throughout the album. The sound mixing and engineering was top quality as well.

[QUOTE=David_Gilmour]On The Run, Money, the constant bits of speech throughout the album. The sound mixing and engineering was top quality as well.[/QUOTE]

HEY! Hadn't the Beatles used loads of sound effects 7 years earlier on Yellow Submarine on the Revolver album?

the album did a lot of innovative things considering it was mainstream music but it wasn't ahead of its time

[QUOTE=Krabs]HEY! Hadn't the Beatles used loads of sound effects 7 years earlier on Yellow Submarine on the Revolver album?[/QUOTE]

yeah but they weren't as good or effective as Dark Side of the Moon. the sounds quality on DSOTM was phenomanol. It can still hold its own against the CD's being produced now for sound quality.

[QUOTE=David_Gilmour]yeah but they weren't as good or effective as Dark Side of the Moon. the sounds quality on DSOTM was phenomanol. It can still hold its own against the CD's being produced now for sound quality.[/QUOTE]

That still has absolutely no relevence to whether it was ahead of its time or not.

Nine Inch Nails - The Downward Spiral.

Nothing like it exists. Period. It is absolutally undefinable to this day, calling it industrial is an insult. It's the audio equivilent of watching "Requiem for a Dream". Sonically, it still blows my mind that this album is 12 years old, you can listen to it 100 times, and pick out something new. And listening to the 5.1 mix it becomes clear that Trent Reznor is only limited by technology, what goes on in that man's mind is unreal.

I find it funny that being [I]angry[/I] and [I]sad[/I] is so [I]in[/I] right now. Ten thousand emo bands couldn't touch how truely scary TDS is.

[QUOTE=David_Gilmour]yeah but they weren't as good or effective as Dark Side of the Moon. the sounds quality on DSOTM was phenomanol. It can still hold its own against the CD's being produced now for sound quality.[/QUOTE]

:eek:

You are sounding very fanboy.

[QUOTE]I've always been a Crimson/Fripp fan [/QUOTE]

[QUOTE]Same here....[/QUOTE]

Well then....

King Crimson is a band that (until the 21st century rolled around) refused to rest on their laurels. Each incarnation of the band was innovative to the extreme and often sounded nothing alike the lineup it preceeded. When a band has had members as talented as Ian MacDonald, Tony Levin, Bill Bruford, John Wetton, David Cross, Michael Giles, and Jamie Muir pass through it's ranks you know King Crimson is a band that relishes in it's own inventiveness.

But at the heart of all this innovation and boundary breaking is Robert Fripp. His work within King Crimson, with Brian Eno, the Talking Heads, and David Bowie has established him as quite the guitar player.

Albums to check out:

[I]In the Court of the Crimson King
Lizard
Lark's Tongues in Aspic
Red
Discipline[/I]

[QUOTE=The_Shredder]Nine Inch Nails - The Downward Spiral.

Nothing like it exists. Period. It is absolutally undefinable to this day, calling it industrial is an insult. It's the audio equivilent of watching "Requiem for a Dream". Sonically, it still blows my mind that this album is 12 years old, you can listen to it 100 times, and pick out something new. And listening to the 5.1 mix it becomes clear that Trent Reznor is only limited by technology, what goes on in that man's mind is unreal.

I find it funny that being [I]angry[/I] and [I]sad[/I] is so [I]in[/I] right now. Ten thousand emo bands couldn't touch how truely scary TDS is.[/QUOTE]

it's true except TDS wasn't ahead of its time since it was critically and commercially acclaimed

[QUOTE=Grant]Well then....

King Crimson is a band that (until the 21st century rolled around) refused to rest on their laurels. Each incarnation of the band was innovative to the extreme and often sounded nothing alike the lineup it preceeded. When a band has had members as talented as Ian MacDonald, Tony Levin, Bill Bruford, John Wetton, David Cross, Michael Giles, and Jamie Muir pass through it's ranks you know King Crimson is a band that relishes in it's own inventiveness.

But at the heart of all this innovation and boundary breaking is Robert Fripp. His work within King Crimson, with Brian Eno, the Talking Heads, and David Bowie has established him as quite the guitar player.

Albums to check out:

[I]In the Court of the Crimson King
Lizard
Lark's Tongues in Aspic
Red
Discipline[/I][/QUOTE]

What about Starless and Bible Black? I have listened to the album so much.

There Would Be No Now Music If There Was No Then Music...Dur.

[QUOTE=Irish_Scorpion]That still has absolutely no relevence to whether it was ahead of its time or not.[/QUOTE]

nothing of this quality (musically and soundwise) like this album had ever been heard before. The technology used i'm sure must have astounded people with the quality of recording therfore making it ahead of its time, plus the fact it was a pretty good bit of music helped:p

[QUOTE=Atman]it's true except TDS wasn't ahead of its time since it was critically and commercially acclaimed[/QUOTE]

Not really...

The album didn't take off until MTV plasterd NIN all over the airwaves with their performance at woodstock. Granted you're saying "ahead of it's time" pertains to "years", but Im still sayin this is the case with TDS. 90% of the people out there refer to [I]Closer[/I] as "The I wanna fu[I]c[/I]k you like an animal" song. NIN was in the right place at the right time, with the right image.

Trent can thank a brilliant video, and MTV for selling that album. Anyway, Joe satriani agrees with me, so that's all the backing I need. :thumb:

[QUOTE=David_Gilmour]nothing of this quality (musically and soundwise) like this album had ever been heard before. The technology used i'm sure must have astounded people with the quality of recording therfore making it ahead of its time, plus the fact it was a pretty good bit of music helped:p[/QUOTE]

woah we got a bad case of the fanboy here

sound quality was good but there many other albums out there released before then which had great sound quality

even then, sound quality isn't a indicator of whether music is ahead of its time or not

it's the music itself and the resulting (lack of) commercial success which gives you an idea of whether a band hit it off right or just came too early

[QUOTE=The_Shredder]Not really...

The album didn't take off until MTV plasterd NIN all over the airwaves with their performance at woodstock. Granted you're saying "ahead of it's time" pertains to "years", and Im still sayin thid is the case. 90% of the people out there refer to [I]Closer[/I] as "The I wanna fu[I]c[/I]k you like an animal" song.

Trent can thank a brilliant video, and MTV for selling that album. Anyway, Joe satriani agrees with me, so that's all the backing I need. :thumb:[/QUOTE]

nah it took off before mtv even whored them out

see: ticket sales

"21st Century Schizoid Man"

That is so as[U]s[/U]-kicking as to be unreal.

John McLaughlin does everything sweet.


[QUOTE=Atman]it's the music itself and the resulting (lack of) commercial success which gives you an idea of whether a band hit it off right or just came too early[/QUOTE]

I don't necessarily think that to be ahead of its time the album should have a lack of success.

[QUOTE=David_Gilmour]nothing of this quality (musically and soundwise) like this album had ever been heard before. The technology used i'm sure must have astounded people with the quality of recording therfore making it ahead of its time, plus the fact it was a pretty good bit of music helped:p[/QUOTE]

Yer and its still not ahead of its time. Period.

Robert Fripp is amazing.

[QUOTE=Syncratic]I don't necessarily think that to be ahead of its time the album should have a lack of success.[/QUOTE]

commercial success yes maybe not critical success

that's the whole point of bands who are ahead of their time

premature births

[QUOTE=Atman]
nah it took off before mtv even whored them out

see: ticket sales[/QUOTE]

- Yeah, thanks to Woodstock.

How 'bout the Velvet Underground? Very different almost punk sound that wouldn't be popular for another decade...

[QUOTE=Atman]commercial success yes maybe not critical success

that's the whole point of bands who are ahead of their time

premature births[/QUOTE]

I see your point Amit.