It's pretty damn awesome though.

It is pretty damn awesome, yes, but so are most things Floyd has recorded.

[QUOTE=last_few_bricks;14742864]yeah, it's really good, but the best?[/QUOTE]

Yes, it is. They never matched the excitement or the playful experimental nature of the first singles and album. I like their other albums up to [I]Animals[/I] but they don't match the brilliance of the Barrett era.

[QUOTE=Leper;14745897]It is pretty damn awesome, yes, but so are most things Floyd has recorded.[/QUOTE]

Nah, that's a lie.

[QUOTE=The NPC;14745933]Nah, that's a lie.[/QUOTE]

I only speak the truth, sir.

I'm actually not that big a fan of the Barrett era. Well...I am a fan but I just prefer the post-Barrett era.

[QUOTE=Leper;14745952]I only speak the truth, sir.

I'm actually not that big a fan of the Barrett era. Well...I am a fan but I just prefer the post-Barrett era.[/QUOTE]

I love Floyd but even I can admit that all their post Barrett albums have their flaws and are no where near as consistent as their early work. They were never as good as they could have possibly been had Barrett stuck around. Their Gilmore/Waters 70s albums are also to a large degree very overrated.

Only thing Floyd ever did that came close to Barrett-era was Careful With That Axe, Eugene, however, that is their best song.

this band is awesome

[QUOTE=Danger Bird;14746422]Only thing Floyd ever did that came close to Barrett-era was Careful With That Axe, Eugene, however, that is their best song.[/QUOTE]

That's a great track, but "Echoes" is probably the best post Barrett track.

I dont know why,but Ive never liked the Barrett era. My favorite albums are from Meddle to The Wall,all 5 of those albums are great.

[QUOTE]That's a great track, but "Echoes" is probably the best post Barrett track.[/QUOTE]
Echoes is one of their best tracks, but post-Barrett era music is at it's finest on Animals IMO. The best track off Animals would probably have to be Dogs.

[QUOTE=morrison357;14747777]Echoes is one of their best tracks, but post-Barrett era music is at it's finest on Animals IMO. The best track off Animals would probably have to be Dogs.[/QUOTE]

It was already formulaic by [I]Animals[/I].

Not really. You could just as easily say that [I]Piper At The Gates Of Dawn[/I] was formulaic, if you wanted to break each song down to its base components.

[QUOTE=Riva;14750046]Not really. You could just as easily say that [I]Piper At The Gates Of Dawn[/I] was formulaic, if you wanted to break each song down to its base components.[/QUOTE]

Yes really and no you can't do that with Piper. It's all over the place.

lol pentatonic

Wearing the Inside Out is such a damn good song.

[QUOTE=The NPC;14750181]Yes really and no you can't do that with Piper. It's all over the place.[/QUOTE]

Comparing psychedelic rock to progressive rock, yeah, it's more over the place. Even so, you've got Lucifer Sam, Matilda Mother, The Gnome, Chapter 24 and Scarecrow that are predominately lyrics based, with a musical interlude in the centre, whereas Interstellar Overdrive, Pow R Toc H and Astronomy Domine are based around music, and finally Bike and Take Up Thy Stethoscope And Walk which balance the two.

The rhyming schemes in almost all the songs are generally AA BB CC or ABAC, and probably the most dynamic parts of the songs is the guitar and keyboards.

[QUOTE=MrConeman;14750226]Wearing the Inside Out is such a damn good song.[/QUOTE]

Yeah, it's grown on me too.

[QUOTE=Riva;14750300]Comparing psychedelic rock to progressive rock, yeah, it's more over the place. Even so, you've got Lucifer Sam, Matilda Mother, The Gnome, Chapter 24 and Scarecrow that are predominately lyrics based, with a musical interlude in the centre, whereas Interstellar Overdrive, Pow R Toc H and Astronomy Domine are based around music, and finally Bike and Take Up Thy Stethoscope And Walk which balance the two.

The rhyming schemes in almost all the songs are generally AA BB CC or ABAC, and probably the most dynamic parts of the songs is the guitar and keyboards.



Yeah, it's grown on me too.[/QUOTE]

Progressive Rock doesn't exist. The Bad Man made it up. You're taking the "formulaic" idea too literally. All music is formulaic because if it weren't you wouldn't have a logical progression of an arrangement. The point is there are a lot more things going in Piper then any other album they made. If you listen to it separated in quadraphonic sound it's pretty exciting.

P.S. Roger Waters is tone deaf.

And David Gilmour's eyebrows are bloody creepy.

Just out of curiosity, how many posts do you have in this thread Jason?

464 in this one. Probably more in the last one.

Piper is a great album and I love Syd, but I'm kind of glad events unfolded that led them away from the psychedelic music. That genre completely disappeared a couple years after Piper was released, so we would have gotten another album, maybe two out of Floyd before they were gone.

Even if they had changed, would they have been as good a band? We never really got to hear Syd write anything other than that psych stuff.

So I enjoy Piper and Syd's time with the band, but I prefer the stuff the normal lineup released more.

[QUOTE=MattSharpIsCool;14751110]Piper is a great album and I love Syd, but I'm kind of glad events unfolded that led them away from the psychedelic music. That genre completely disappeared a couple years after Piper was released, so we would have gotten another album, maybe two out of Floyd before they were gone.

Even if they had changed, would they have been as good a band? We never really got to hear Syd write anything other than that psych stuff.

So I enjoy Piper and Syd's time with the band, but I prefer the stuff the normal lineup released more.[/QUOTE]

whoa, that never occurred to me. I'm more into their later stuff, although I like the old, psych stuff, too. just couldn't imagine Pink Floyd fading into obscurity that early...

Well, really, I doubt that, even if Syd had stayed with the band till the end of the psychedelic era, he would have been able to adapt to the kind of music that Roger and Rick were writing. His personality was just too different, I think, which is sad because it's ultimately his personality that led to his breakdowns.

Do you think they would be a bit like the Beatles because they were kinda heading that way with Piper?

Well, I suppose it could be possible, since you could draw parallels between Roger and John Lennon as the lead creative forces behind each band, but I don't think so. The Beatles and Pink Floyd both went through their psychedelic periods at the same time, it is true, but that might have been more of a situational thing than anything else, considering Sgt. Pepper's and Piper were recorded at the same time at Abbey Road.

Yeah, true. St. Pepper got a lot of recongition, where as Piper from what I could understand didnt. Therefore they may have become unknown and only refered to as a Beatle rip-off in later dates. This could be a lot of bullshit but meh.

Piper was rather well-received actually, enough to make Syd go crazy from being thrust into the limelight. They certainly weren't on the same level as The Beatles, though.

That kinda makes sense. Piper might not have got a lot of recognition due to the fact that a) Syd left with only recording one studio album with them and b) they released better albums afterwards.

Floyd was a huge part of the British psychedelic scene, too. Not only did their album sell decently, they played shows almost every night and people were always showing up.

I'm sure Syd could have adapted to Roger's style, but it would have been different than with Dave. Syd is an alright guitar player, but he's no Gilmour.

[QUOTE]I'm sure Syd could have adapted to Roger's style, but it would have been different than with Dave. Syd is an alright guitar player, but he's no Gilmour.[/QUOTE]
I agree. If Gilmour wouldn't have joined the group, they musically wouldn't have been as good. They might still written some really awesome music, but it wouldn't be as musically good, at least on guitar.

I think it's fair to say Gilmour and Wright were the true musicians of the band.
All members were great at some point though.

Well, Roger did compose some good stuff, he just wasn't a technical wizard on the bass.

But yeah, I'd characterise it as Rick and Dave being the musicians, Roger being the lyricist and Nick being the sort of pocket player a band like Pink Floyd needed.

[QUOTE=MrConeman;14759412]I think it's fair to say Gilmour and Wright were the true musicians of the band.
All members were great at some point though.[/QUOTE]


I agree completly, but the Floyd lineup really was golden because combing the lyrical ideas/songwriting of Waters, stunning musicianship of Wright and Gilmour, and of course Mason never got in anyones way, creating a good path for the rest of the band, while still playing solid drums.

I think that if Floyd focused more on technicality it would have detracted from the overall product of their music, because their songwriting, and lyrical themes were more captivating.

I love Roger's bass lines. They're nothing spectacular, they just fit the mood and the music so well. Same with everyone's playing, really. Nick definitely isn't the best drummer out there, but I'm glad he's not. That would really take away from Floyd's sound.

[QUOTE=Riva;14755922]Well, I suppose it could be possible, since you could draw parallels between Roger and John Lennon as the lead creative forces behind each band, but I don't think so. The Beatles and Pink Floyd both went through their psychedelic periods at the same time, it is true, but that might have been more of a situational thing than anything else, considering Sgt. Pepper's and Piper were recorded at the same time at Abbey Road.[/QUOTE]

Side note:

Lennon hated making Sgt. Peppers actually and it was considered more of a McCartney project. He came up with the concept along with a lot of the musical directions the Beatles took on the album.

[QUOTE=MattSharpIsCool;14762198]I love Roger's bass lines. They're nothing spectacular, they just fit the mood and the music so well. Same with everyone's playing, really. Nick definitely isn't the best drummer out there, but I'm glad he's not. That would really take away from Floyd's sound.[/QUOTE]

yeah you're right, it would suck to have all these 5 minute drum solos, it would have totally led away from everything else that they had to offer

Drum solos wouldn't have fit at all with Floyd. Mason was perfect for the band because he didn't really seem to have an ego which was good because the rest of them certainly did.

I don't think you can really compare Piper and Sgt. Peppers though. The Beatles were the biggest band in the world and Floyd was really just beginning to take off. Well, I guess you could compare the music, but you couldn't fairly compare the success of the albums themselves.

Aren't those two albums kind of considered the best psychedelic albums ever?

I heard something like that awhile ago. I don't listen to a lot of psych, but from what I have listened to, I could agree with that.