Quote:
Originally Posted by OctaneHugo
There's a lot more psychedelic influence in their music, but they're still progressive. Personally I think that's why they're BETTER than every prog band - they don't just play crazy stuff like Crimson or Yes, they basically took psychedelic music and twisted it around a lot.
Although, then you say they're not all that psychedelic...what are they?
Also, I'd probably give Animals top billing in their discography, then Dark Side of the Moon with Wish You Were Here bringing up the rear.
The Wall is pretty middling, got some cool songs but it's not the masterpiece everyone says it is. I think Mark Prindle, who I don't often agree with, hit the nail on the head; it's an album for teenagers. Very youthful. |
The thing that used to amaze me about Floyd when I first getting into them 3-4 years ago was the fact that I had no idea how to define what they did. The prog/psych tendencies are there, but I've never found them to be fitting descriptions of what they did. That's partially to do with the fact that they were the first band that amazed me (post-Green Day phase) so I always have a part of my cranium dedicated to putting them up on an immovable pedestal, even while I've learned that's not the case.
Then again, in retrospect, I don't really know what else you
could call them. Rock music? Too general. So I'd have to go for 'prog/psych' in the end, if only by being forced into it.
edit: I also agree with what he said on The Wall. I'm still a teenager and all, but I can't stomach it like I used to be able to.