Jump to content

Any *early* Pink Floyd fans? (67-72 era)


Rooster_Ties

Recommended Posts

  • 2 weeks later...
  • Replies 141
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

I heard Nick Mason's Saucerful of Secrets band again last night here in DC -- having seen them about 3 weeks ago in St. Louis.  Exact same set-list, but a surprisingly varied performance.  I don't have a perfect memory of what I heard in late March, but I'm sure any number of solos and entire approaches to solos were really quite different than what I'd seen before.  More collective improv last night too, than I remembered the first time -- at least 6-8 times I counted all out soloing by 2 members of the band on top of each other -- sometimes more sympathetically than others -- but either way, my buttons were pushed mightily.  I can't remember a non-jazz show I've ever been to with this much collective improv -- certainly not of this size and scale.

They will be recording this band live sometime in Europe or UK (is the UK still part of Europe? - I forget) -- in the coming weeks, for a live release of some sort -- not sure if CD or DVD (or both).  Well worth checking out, when it eventually gets released.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Scott Dolan said:

???

 It’s just my personal opinion, brother. 

Indeed.  In fact, for some of us, the very "datedness" of some music forms we love, the fact that a given work is so very much of that time and place, is a large part of the appeal of it.  I like a lot of 60's psychedelic rock in part because it is so clearly identifiable as 60's psychedelic rock.  OTOH, I love Fleetwood Mac's "Rumours" because it is great music, and it is timeless, not clearly of the mid-70's.  Pink Floyd's earliest work is clearly of it's time, and I love it for that.  Pink Floyd's middle work (Dark Side through Animals) is not of a time.   I value the early work every bit as much as the middle work (and so much more than everything from "The Wall" on).

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Scott Dolan said:

While I actually love post-Waters Floyd, I wouldn't put the first two in the same category as the middle period. But, The Endless River is right up there, IMO. 

As for what Guy is getting at, I wonder how much production value is playing into what he's saying. 

BTW, I think The Endless River is practically stunning, considering the origins of the material.  Granted, for the first month I had it -- I think I would have only given it a 6/10 -- but the more I heard it, and spun it a few times a week -- after a couple months, it became a solid 8/10 in my book.  So much going on, if you really listen.  Layers upon layers, sometimes 3 separate guitar solos overlapping.  So much care and effort went into Endless River, I imagine, though it's probably not evident on just a casual listen.  I've already listened to The Endless River more times (total), than I have The Wall -- which I barely spin more than once every 5-8 years any more.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, Rooster_Ties said:

BTW, I think The Endless River is practically stunning, considering the origins of the material.  Granted, for the first month I had it -- I think I would have only given it a 6/10 -- but the more I heard it, and spun it a few times a week -- after a couple months, it became a solid 8/10 in my book.  So much going on, if you really listen.  Layers upon layers, sometimes 3 separate guitar solos overlapping.  So much care and effort went into Endless River, I imagine, though it's probably not evident on just a casual listen.  I've already listened to The Endless River more times (total), than I have The Wall -- which I barely spin more than once every 5-8 years any more.

That's the one album associated with them I've never heard.  Doctored outtakes from an album I don't particularly like (Division Bell) 20 years after the fact did not sound like a winning proposition to me, but with all the praise of it in this thread, I'm getting curious.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

56 minutes ago, Rooster_Ties said:

BTW, I think The Endless River is practically stunning, considering the origins of the material.  Granted, for the first month I had it -- I think I would have only given it a 6/10 -- but the more I heard it, and spun it a few times a week -- after a couple months, it became a solid 8/10 in my book.  So much going on, if you really listen.  Layers upon layers, sometimes 3 separate guitar solos overlapping.  So much care and effort went into Endless River, I imagine, though it's probably not evident on just a casual listen.  I've already listened to The Endless River more times (total), than I have The Wall -- which I barely spin more than once every 5-8 years any more.

Agreed. Though I thought it was stunning on first listen. 

 

44 minutes ago, felser said:

That's the one album associated with them I've never heard.  Doctored outtakes from an album I don't particularly like (Division Bell) 20 years after the fact did not sound like a winning proposition to me, but with all the praise of it in this thread, I'm getting curious.

That’s actually a derogatory description, IMO. They are completed, not doctored. And lovingly so. They didn’t throw out a second rate product to honor Rick Wright. 

Definitely a top three PF album, IMO. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, felser said:

In fact, for some of us, the very "datedness" of some music forms we love, the fact that a given work is so very much of that time and place, is a large part of the appeal of it.  I like a lot of 60's psychedelic rock in part because it is so clearly identifiable as 60's psychedelic rock.  OTOH, I love Fleetwood Mac's "Rumours" because it is great music, and it is timeless, not clearly of the mid-70's.  Pink Floyd's earliest work is clearly of it's time, and I love it for that.  Pink Floyd's middle work (Dark Side through Animals) is not of a time.   I value the early work every bit as much as the middle work (and so much more than everything from "The Wall" on).

That's my exact opinion too.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Scott Dolan said:

They are completed, not doctored. And lovingly so. They didn’t throw out a second rate product to honor Rick Wright. 

[The Endless River is] definitely a top three PF album, IMO. 

Especially to a jazz contingent like we have here, I'd wholeheartedly recommend The Endless River (TER) to anyone with ears for all-instrumental music (only the very last tune has lyrics).  It's a lovely album, that only got better and better for me the more I heard it.  I think they did right by Wright, and so much of what Rick brought to Pink Floyd's sound can be heard throughout TER (I think he's on all but 2 of 19 tracks).

It's not an album casual Pink Floyd fans will ever rank very highly, but I think it evokes a lot of their various styles from 1968 on up to 1994 very effectively.  A couple of the songs do an amazing job of channeling two Pink Floyd songs at the same time.  For instance, Track 2: "It's What We Do" is basically VERY much the style and approach of parts of "Shine On You Crazy Diamond" -- but the actual chord changes are essentially "Welcome To The Machine".

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

55 minutes ago, Scott Dolan said:

VERY well stated, RT.  

Your assessment is spot on, IMO. 

Thanks!  Another notable 3-track sequence from The Endless River, is "Allons-y (1)" >> "Autumn '68" >> "Allons-y (2)".

The middle "Autumn '68" section of the YouTube clip below (which includes all all three tracks) was originally just Rick Wright playing solo pipe organ(!) at the Royal Albert Hall in 1968 -- which now has some lovely additional layered call-and-response with modern-day David Gilmour's guitar (only some 45-odd years later).  It's just seamless, and you can't imagine half-a-century divides the call from the response.

The two "Allons-y" tracks that bookend the pipe-organ section were originally a Division Bell era demo (1993-ish), that kind of channels some of what Gilmour was doing on a couple of his own penned tunes from The Wall (and also a bit like some things on Gilmour's first two solo-albums, in 1978 and 1984 (respectively).

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 years later...

Just got tickets to hear Nick Mason’s group again — the THIRD time for me — here in DC at the end of January.

I’m taking our next door neighbor, who won’t know any of the tunes — but she’s very into post-punk, Gang of Four, Bowie, and the like — so I think she’ll dig it.

Yes, my wife’s fine with it. She (my wife) even suggest I ask our neighbor, so I wouldn’t have to go by myself — and the cheapest seats were just $50.

Still can’t believe I’m getting to hear such a loose/tight and relatively-improvisational band — with an actual, legit original member of Pink Floyd — playing ALL this incredible, early, early Floyd material — for what will be the frickin’ third(!) time. And here in the US, no less.

Unfathomable 5 years ago, that Nick would assemble a group like this, and take ‘em out on the road for two really extended tours, including two BIG stints in the US.

Can’t wait!

The band plays 100% pre-1973 (pre Dark Side) material — virtually none of which ever got much if any radio-play over the years.

 

Edited by Rooster_Ties
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.

×
×
  • Create New...