I really like it.

how do you feel about the radiodread album?

Well I think Radiohead sucks so I have no real interest in it

you make me feel sad inside my tummy :(

Radiohead = Pink Floyd of the 90's

[quote=Leper;15131446]Radiohead = Pink Floyd of the 90's[/quote]

The used music store I go to had The Bends, OK Computer, and Kid A all for a total of fifteen bucks. Sadly, I could not even afford the cheapest of the three :upset:

You're pretty behind if you haven't heard those yet.

Yea but you aren't missing much

Is there a race or something?

[QUOTE]Yea but you aren't missing much[/QUOTE]

Watch it, you're starting to sound like that hooligan Pink Freud.

[quote=Kage;15131470]You're pretty behind if you haven't heard those yet.[/quote] Well considering how the way my progression of music has been:

Pink Floyd > Prog > Grunge > Jazz.

Everything has kind of stopped at jazz. I'm sure Radiohead should've been in there, I just haven't checked them out yet.

I like Radiohead's albums, and admire the way they galvanised a generation of copycats, but I don't consider them the Pink Floyd of the '90s.

I think Pink Floyd would be the Pink Floyd of the nineties, since they're last concert was in like, what, '95?

Yeah but they were done putting out any significant material by then.

Radiohead seems to me almost like a natural progression from the sound Pink Floyd created. I don't consider them copycats at all in that respect, but they invoke many of the same emotions in me as Floyd does when I listen to their music.

[QUOTE=Leper;15131559]Yeah but they were done putting out any significant material by then.

Radiohead seems to me almost like a natural progression from the sound Pink Floyd created. I don't consider them copycats at all in that respect, but they invoke many of the same emotions in me as Floyd does when I listen to their music.[/QUOTE]

I never said they were copycats, I said they galvanised a generation of copycats.

[QUOTE=Motionless;15131542]I think Pink Floyd would be the Pink Floyd of the nineties, since they're last concert was in like, what, '95?[/QUOTE]

They only had the Division Bell in '94, in terms of original material, and the bulk of their material was released in the '60s and '70s.

Pink Floyd is worthless without Roger Waters, so the Division Bell doesn't really count.

Nah, [I]The Division Bell[/I] is actually quite a good album that I'd rate above [I]The Final Cut [/I]or [I]Atom Heart Mother[/I]. The only downside is that Dave can't write lyrics to save his life.

[QUOTE=Riva;15131606]I never said they were copycats, I said they galvanised a generation of copycats.

[/QUOTE]

Yeah I know. I just thought I made them sound a little like copycats with my previous statement so I decided to elaborate a bit.

[quote=Riva;15131637]Nah, [I]The Division Bell[/I] is actually quite a good album that I'd rate above [I]The Final Cut [/I]or [I]Atom Heart Mother[/I]. The only downside is that Dave can't write lyrics to save his life.[/quote]

I don't think so. I don't have Atom Heart Mother, but The Final Cut ranks pretty high for me, and The Division Bell is crap in my opinion, which is a shame.

Pink Floyd without Rodger Waters would be like David Gilmour solo. And I like David Gilmour solo.

I like the two albums led by Gilmour. He's not as poetic or what have you with his lyrics as Roger, but they get the point across.

Roger is easily the better lyricist. But that doesn't stop Dave being like un-fathomably superior to Waters at composing music.

I like stuff from each and every era of Pink Floyd, but I tend to find myself defending Dave more than Syd or Roger. Syd and Roger were better lyricists, but they all had their strengths and weaknesses, to say the post-Waters stuff is worthless is pretty ignorant. The lyrics aren't great, but thats only to a Pink Floyd standard, they are just everyday standard rock lyrics, solid enough when not compared to someone like Waters (who we all know was a powerhouse lyricist). I mean can you honestly say songs like Sorrow, or High Hopes aren't fantastic?

And let's not forget Learning To Fly! One of my favourite Floyd songs, of any era.

Not only that, but I'm a huge fan of Rick solo, and once Roger's domination of the band ended, Rick went back to composing more freely, as he used to early on in the band's life (both Syd's and the pre-[I]Animals[/I] era).

Radiohead are a band that others should be compared to, not the other way around. You don't hear someone say that Pink Floyd was the _____ of the 70s, do you?

[QUOTE=MrConeman;15132279]Roger is easily the better lyricist. But that doesn't stop Dave being like un-fathomably superior to Waters at composing music.[/QUOTE]

Well, no, Waters is a much better composer if we're talking about actual songwriting ability. If you mean in the sense of their skills with their instruments, than Gilmour is much better.

I wouldnt really consider Radiohead like Pink Floyd, because Pink Floyd was more of an album band with better then avarage lyrics. Where as radiohead, a side from Pablo Honey, which really isnt Radiohead is more about the songs and electronica then the lyrics.

[QUOTE=YouGottaBeCrazy;15133094]Radiohead are a band that others should be compared to, not the other way around. You don't hear someone say that Pink Floyd was the _____ of the 70s, do you?
[/quote]

No, that'd be retarded because Pink Floyd was active in the '70s. :-/ But you could easily say they were the Radiohead of the '70s if it floats your boat.


Well, no, Waters is a much better composer if we're talking about actual songwriting ability. If you mean in the sense of their skills with their instruments, than Gilmour is much better.[/QUOTE]

I disagree. Dave wrote just as much of [I]Dark Side Of The Moon[/I] and [I]The Wall[/I] as Roger, and that's sort of the two main albums people associate with Pink Floyd.

[QUOTE=Riva;15133235]No, that'd be retarded because Pink Floyd was active in the '70s. :-/ But you could easily say they were the Radiohead of the '70s if it floats your boat.[/quote]

what the **** are you talking about?

[quote]I disagree. Dave wrote just as much of [I]Dark Side Of The Moon[/I] and [I]The Wall[/I] as Roger, and that's sort of the two main albums people associate with Pink Floyd.[/QUOTE]

The majority of The Wall was written by Roger, and you're just proving my point by mentioning DSOTM. It's really not any better of an album than The Final Cut is. The Floyd started to go really downhill after Roger left because they sounded uninspired. Roger was the one with the ideas and the songwriting ability.

IMO of course.

[QUOTE=YouGottaBeCrazy;15133316]what the **** are you talking about?
[/quote]

You said you couldn't call Pink Floyd the _____ of the '70s, and I said that's because they were in the '70s.

[quote]
The majority of The Wall was written by Roger, and you're just proving my point by mentioning DSOTM. It's really not any better of an album than The Final Cut is. The Floyd started to go really downhill after Roger left because they sounded uninspired. Roger was the one with the ideas and the songwriting ability.

IMO of course.[/QUOTE]

[font=impact][size=7][b]YOUR OPINION IS WRONG[/b][/size][/font]

[QUOTE=YouGottaBeCrazy;15133094]Radiohead are a band that others should be compared to, not the other way around.

[/QUOTE]

Why's that?

[QUOTE=Riva;15133395]You said you couldn't call Pink Floyd the _____ of the '70s, and I said that's because they were in the '70s. [/quote]

Yeah. Because people were referring to Radiohead as the Pink Floyd of the 90s. And I said it's stupid because it's not like Floyd are referred to as being the (insert band name here) of the 70s. They were just referred to as Pink Floyd and people don't try to compare them to bands that influenced them, so why do that to Radiohead. I think they've gained enough status in the music community, that other bands should be compared to them, and Radiohead should be in the same category as Pink Floyd, where people just accept them for who they are.

Am I making sense here?

[QUOTE]I wouldnt really consider Radiohead like Pink Floyd, because Pink Floyd was more of an album band with better then avarage lyrics. [/QUOTE]
Radiohead are as much an "album band" as Pink Floyd. With the exception of [I]Pablo Honey[/I], all their albums are of a very consistent quality-wise.

[QUOTE]Radiohead is more about the songs and electronica then the lyrics.[/QUOTE]
Not really. It's true that on [I]Kid A[/I] and [I]Amnesiac[/I] there isn't as much focus on the lyrical side, but to include [I]OK Computer[/I] and [I]The Bends[/I] in that statement is pretty dumb.

[QUOTE]Yeah. Because people were referring to Radiohead as the Pink Floyd of the 90s. And I said it's stupid because it's not like Floyd are referred to as being the (insert band name here) of the 70s. They were just referred to as Pink Floyd and people don't try to compare them to bands that influenced them, so why do that to Radiohead. I think they've gained enough status in the music community, that other bands should be compared to them, and Radiohead should be in the same category as Pink Floyd, where people just accept them for who they are.

Am I making sense here?[/QUOTE]
Well Radiohead have a much larger history of bands that came before them. That inevitably leads to more comparisons with previous bands. I don't think that really applied to Pink Floyd.