Author |
Topic Search Topic Options
|
Guests
Forum Guest Group
|
Posted: December 01 2005 at 16:17 |
I find DSOTM to be pretty overrated, but I'd still say it's a good four star effort. Reasons include:
- "Speak to me" isn't just filler, it's overly annoying too
- Outside of "Money", there's not a whole lot of variation on the second side.
- I don't think any of the songs on it are 10/10 masterpieces. "Time"
might be if it didn't have those annoying clocks at the start, but
that's about it.
EDIT: For comparison purposes, I think WYWH is worth the five star ratings it so often gets.
Edited by Six Eight
|
 |
ANDREW
Forum Senior Member
Joined: November 21 2005
Location: Italy
Status: Offline
Points: 3064
|
Posted: December 01 2005 at 15:25 |
THAT'S A PIECE OF ROCK HISTORY, NOT OVERRATED!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
|
 |
xhamasaki
Forum Senior Member
Joined: June 13 2005
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 128
|
Posted: December 01 2005 at 12:20 |
any pink floyd album is better than anything yes or genesis could ever do, pink floyd has much more emotion and feeling, and overall more timeless songs than 99% of the bands on these archives. Thats why dark side of the moon isnt overrated, its timeless. Every single song on the album can be remembered, sung, and played. It was so important to rock in general.
|
 |
Lateralus_66
Forum Senior Member
Joined: May 03 2005
Location: Fiji
Status: Offline
Points: 118
|
Posted: December 01 2005 at 03:04 |
Pink Floyd is a seminal band. (Ask to a bunch of groups that nowadays are "over-using" their style. ) No one of their albums is overrated.
|
"A mind is like a parachute. It does'nt work if it's not open." - Frank Zappa
|
 |
richardh
Prog Reviewer
Joined: February 18 2004
Location: United Kingdom
Status: Offline
Points: 30347
|
Posted: December 01 2005 at 02:46 |
Certif1ed wrote:
Wow!
A thoughtful and considered reply - no less than I would expect from you, Richard.
Doesn't mean I agree, of course... 
richardh wrote:
My feeling about DSOTM is that it is a formula.
Maybe it's retrospectively become a formula, but at the time, it was revolutionary.
Chuck blues and rock into the equation along with 'deep and meangfull' lyrics about why we are here and you have a massive selling album.
Not necessarily - no-one had done it before, and Floyd were just writing the music they loved. People seem to forget that they were essentially a blues band before they started playing psychedelia.
Deep and meaningful lyrics are amazingly hard to write, without coming across as cheesey, and I think Waters did a stunning job.
It wasn't a given that DSOTM would be a massive selling album - that wasn't necessarily the idea. Of course, making money from your craft was a necessary evil - hence the song. But there's no way the Floyd could have predicted just how well it would sell, based on their previous releases.
The lack of ambition in the music is palpable.
I must disagree entirely!!!
It's exceptionally ambitious, in that it's more about creating space and not cramming in masses of notes. No-one else was writing music of such sparsity at the time - it takes a huge degree of willpower and self-discipline to hold back and produce music in such a fine "less is more" manner.
Its very plain and overtly safe in musical content and has done well because of it as the masses can easily appreciate it.
I think that's very cynical, and shows a lack of understanding of the writing process.
It's cynical, because the masses have appreciated it - that wasn't the intention. Writing with the intention of "the masses appreciating it" and having that translate into real success is not as easy as you might think.
Nice idea to include 'Dark' in the title as well.That way people think they are buying into something that is 'subversive' instead of the safe middle of the road effort it really is.And critics can wax lyrical about it because it carries emotional reasonance.That would be the horrible cat wailing sounds on Great Gig In The Sky then? They should have called it the 'Emperors New Clothes' for accuracy.The best thing about DSOTM is that it gave them the confidence to produce 3 of the greatest prog albums ever starting with WYWH.
Again, it's in no way safe - Floyd may have played the entire album live before taking it into the studio, but they didn't sit there thinking "How can we sell this to 50,000,000 people over the next 30 years.
It's an incredible team effort (band, friends and producer) of creating a fine work of art that gives as much to the connoisseur as it does to the average music listener.
And that takes an incredibly rare and progressive talent.
From your comments about Claire Torre's vocals, well, she wasn't happy about them either - but I think her vocal control and range of pitch, dynamic and emotion is stunning, and the fact that it was done in a single take carries with it a natural spontaneity and creates a sense of wonder and exploration even after having heard it 50,000,000 times...
So what you're really saying, like everyone else who says it's "overrated", is that you don't like it.
Why not say that instead?

|
|
Actually I do like it! But I do have a hard time understanding why people think its so important.Prog rock to me is about stretching yourself and breaking down barriers.At that time (73/74) many prog bands were doing more interesting music (ie ELP 'Brain Salad Surgery',Yes 'Tales form Topographic Oceans,Genesis 'The Lamb Lies Down On Broadway',Gentle Giant 'In A Glass House' etc).However Floyd produce what is really a straight rock album and garner all the glory.My comments are coming from a prog perspective.I can understand that DSOTM is an excellent rock album but thats all.As far as prog goes Rick Wright stretched himself much further on WYWH to create magnificient keyboard landscapes while the title song is far more emotive than anything on DSOTM in my opinion.DSOTM is primarily an intellectual exercise while WYWH and Animals are more emotional and musically a lot more interesting to my ears.I prefer to praise Floyd for those later albums.
|
 |
An old fart
Forum Senior Member
Joined: October 15 2005
Location: Finland
Status: Offline
Points: 207
|
Posted: December 01 2005 at 01:24 |
Some reasons why I personally like Dark Side of the Moon:
1. All the tracks, including On the Run, stand the test of time with great endurance. It's 15 years since I first heard it in its' entirety and I don't seem to get bored of it. Sometimes I don't listen to it for months, but I always pick it up again, because it remains as one of the definite classics.
2. The lyrics are much better compared to most rock music before and after its' release. The less idiotic rock is, the better. The Dark Side of the Moon doesn't make me embarrassed for the band that created it.
3. It's musically very rich in nuances, even though there isn't a fast track (unless you consider On the Run fast) and there is only one song with odd time signature (Money in 7/8) and no sudden key changes. The variety and the endurance of the album comes from the dynamic running order of the songs, different musical moods, but it's still cohesively laidback; creative arrangements and compositions (A Great Gig in the Sky for instance), the sound effects (a supporting device developed further from the Beatles' records), the overall continuation created by linking the songs together and the lyrics based on a single theme (a bit vague, though, I admit), fantastic production (I won't go into details on this...), fine vocals by Gilmour and Torry, atmospheric and melodic solos from Gilmour and Wright and finally one of the greatest finales of all time (Eclipse).
4. The album is also relatively easy to listen, which is clearly intentional, but not necessarily a calculated solution. Pink Floyd members never were technical virtuosos on their instruments, so they concentrated on what they did best, recording timeless (yet revolutional), emotional and intelligent (prog) rock albums. What's wrong with simple music, if it's good? Does prog rock always have to be very complex to be enjoyable?
How can this album be over-rated? (I also find Wish You Were even better, but that's another topic, so I shut up now.)
|
"Make tea, not love"
|
 |
Hendrix828
Forum Groupie
Joined: November 19 2005
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 63
|
Posted: November 30 2005 at 23:45 |
Floyd are one of my top 5 favorite bands. But I absolutley hate them from Darkside and onward.
I actually stop listening to Floyd about 72. Everything before then was great. As soon as they hit the big time,it was all over.
Syd Barrett is my fav by the way
|
 |
aapatsos
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: November 11 2005
Location: Manchester, UK
Status: Offline
Points: 9226
|
Posted: November 30 2005 at 19:24 |
I can understand is a very important album
I have never heard of it in deep, so I cannot tell if its overrated or not...
|
 |
Ben2112
Forum Senior Member
Joined: March 15 2005
Status: Offline
Points: 870
|
Posted: November 30 2005 at 19:19 |
Great, this again...
Thanks for reminding me why I don't come here very much any more.
"I don't like something that millions of other people do...ergot it's OVERRATED!"
|
 |
Manunkind
Forum Senior Member
Joined: February 02 2005
Location: Poland
Status: Offline
Points: 2373
|
Posted: November 29 2005 at 05:26 |
'Overrated' threads zzzzzzzzzz....
A truly beautiful album, the only thing I don't like about it are the 'real life' sound effects, but that's just me, I simply don't like it when bands do these things...
|
"In war there is no time to teach or learn Zen. Carry a strong stick. Bash your attackers." - Zen Master Ikkyu Sojun
|
 |
Certif1ed
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: April 08 2004
Location: England
Status: Offline
Points: 7559
|
Posted: November 29 2005 at 03:08 |
Wow!
A thoughtful and considered reply - no less than I would expect from you, Richard.
Doesn't mean I agree, of course... 
richardh wrote:
My feeling about DSOTM is that it is a formula.
Maybe it's retrospectively become a formula, but at the time, it was revolutionary.
Chuck blues and rock into the equation along with 'deep and meangfull' lyrics about why we are here and you have a massive selling album.
Not necessarily - no-one had done it before, and Floyd were just writing the music they loved. People seem to forget that they were essentially a blues band before they started playing psychedelia.
Deep and meaningful lyrics are amazingly hard to write, without coming across as cheesey, and I think Waters did a stunning job.
It wasn't a given that DSOTM would be a massive selling album - that wasn't necessarily the idea. Of course, making money from your craft was a necessary evil - hence the song. But there's no way the Floyd could have predicted just how well it would sell, based on their previous releases.
The lack of ambition in the music is palpable.
I must disagree entirely!!!
It's exceptionally ambitious, in that it's more about creating space and not cramming in masses of notes. No-one else was writing music of such sparsity at the time - it takes a huge degree of willpower and self-discipline to hold back and produce music in such a fine "less is more" manner.
Its very plain and overtly safe in musical content and has done well because of it as the masses can easily appreciate it.
I think that's very cynical, and shows a lack of understanding of the writing process.
It's cynical, because the masses have appreciated it - that wasn't the intention. Writing with the intention of "the masses appreciating it" and having that translate into real success is not as easy as you might think.
Nice idea to include 'Dark' in the title as well.That way people think they are buying into something that is 'subversive' instead of the safe middle of the road effort it really is.And critics can wax lyrical about it because it carries emotional reasonance.That would be the horrible cat wailing sounds on Great Gig In The Sky then? They should have called it the 'Emperors New Clothes' for accuracy.The best thing about DSOTM is that it gave them the confidence to produce 3 of the greatest prog albums ever starting with WYWH.
Again, it's in no way safe - Floyd may have played the entire album live before taking it into the studio, but they didn't sit there thinking "How can we sell this to 50,000,000 people over the next 30 years.
It's an incredible team effort (band, friends and producer) of creating a fine work of art that gives as much to the connoisseur as it does to the average music listener.
And that takes an incredibly rare and progressive talent.
From your comments about Claire Torre's vocals, well, she wasn't happy about them either - but I think her vocal control and range of pitch, dynamic and emotion is stunning, and the fact that it was done in a single take carries with it a natural spontaneity and creates a sense of wonder and exploration even after having heard it 50,000,000 times...
So what you're really saying, like everyone else who says it's "overrated", is that you don't like it.
Why not say that instead?

|
Edited by Certif1ed
|
 |
xhamasaki
Forum Senior Member
Joined: June 13 2005
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 128
|
Posted: November 29 2005 at 02:47 |
if it was such an overrated album then it wouldnt be remembered as one of the genre defining albums of rock. It is one of the MOST influential albums in rock music, and its influences can still be seen. That makes it progressive.. its not about how complicated the bass playing or drumming is, its about how the album flows and how it can evoke alot of different emotions. The album was a landmark in recording processes and in song writing.
Its certainly a way better album than most of the stuff on this website (ie yes, genesis, elp, etc etc etc)
|
 |
OldFatherThames
Forum Senior Member
Joined: April 02 2005
Location: Canada
Status: Offline
Points: 317
|
Posted: November 29 2005 at 01:37 |
I like this album, but cannot IMO be compare to many works by Genesis, Gentle Giant, Jethro Tull, and others. I won't say it's overrated, but I have difficulty to understand why everybody loves it to death.
Great atmosphere, fun to listen, but for me not a masterpiece.
This is a stupid question because for me, yes I found Pink Floyd a bit overated but for other, they are god and they don't understand how someone like me can find them overrated. Theres is people who think Genesis are overated. For me, that's absolutely unthinkable and I just cannot understand how someone can think like that. So, the term "overrated" always lost his sense.
For me, the most overrated band in the universe are the Rolling Stones. But, their is millions of fan...who don't find them overrated.......that's just opinion, nothing more.
We can discuss about that during 120 pages and there will be no conclusion.....OPINION.
|
 |
Flip_Stone
Forum Senior Member
Joined: August 11 2005
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 388
|
Posted: November 28 2005 at 18:39 |
I've got to agree. I've listened to the album off and on for over 20 years, and it still doesn't sound any better than the first time I listened to it. Never cared for the dark weirdness on it either (such as On the Run, yeah, maybe On the Run to the nearest dumpster)
Thanks for the post. 
Edited by Flip_Stone
|
 |
richardh
Prog Reviewer
Joined: February 18 2004
Location: United Kingdom
Status: Offline
Points: 30347
|
Posted: November 28 2005 at 17:28 |
Certif1ed wrote:
WHY is it overrated, in the minds of people who think it is?
Not one person in the "overrated" camp has managed to express anything more intelligent or intelligible than "Yes it is" - which is a bit poor, if you don't mind me saying.
It's poor if you do mind me saying... 
At the moment, it looks like people with low intelligence find it overrated - or am I wrong?
|
My feeling about DSOTM is that it is a formula.Chuck blues and rock into the equation along with 'deep and meangfull' lyrics about why we are here and you have a massive selling album.The lack of ambition in the music is palpable.Its very plain and overtly safe in musical content and has done well because of it as the masses can easily appreciate it.Nice idea to include 'Dark' in the title as well.That way people think they are buying into something that is 'subversive' instead of the safe middle of the road effort it really is.And critics can wax lyrical about it because it carries emotional reasonance.That would be the horrible cat wailing sounds on Great Gig In The Sky then? They should have called it the 'Emperors New Clothes' for accuracy.The best thing about DSOTM is that it gave them the confidence to produce 3 of the greatest prog albums ever starting with WYWH.
|
 |
oliverstoned
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: March 26 2004
Location: France
Status: Offline
Points: 6308
|
Posted: November 28 2005 at 14:26 |
I agree with you all, saying that it's overated, but about the synthe work on "On the Run"?
|
 |
Korova
Forum Senior Member
Joined: November 04 2005
Location: Italy
Status: Offline
Points: 189
|
Posted: November 28 2005 at 14:08 |
ldlanberg wrote:
MikeEnRegalia wrote:
It's a very important album. |
Yes, I know. If I'm not mistaken DSOTM was the first non-addicting sleep medicine. |
You're wrong it's very addicting...
Anyway this is the most stupid thread I've seen on this forum...ever
|
La Speranza della coscienza è forza
La Speranza del sentimento è schiavitù
La Speranza del corpo è malattia
(G.I. Gurdjieff)
|
 |
Space Dimentia
Forum Senior Member
Joined: August 25 2005
Location: England
Status: Offline
Points: 440
|
Posted: November 28 2005 at 13:42 |
DSOTM OVERRATED! ARE YOU MAD! This is one of the most important albums every created! With out this album many of todays modern recording techniques would not be in use such as layering and dubbing, even some of the editing is quite revolutionary for the period it was made (bout 1977-78). The lyrics are very ahead of their time when talking about differnt social groups and the society of the 1970's.
|
Prog is music for the mind
Hear your Orphaned child!
Check out my bands myspace site: www.myspace.com/equinox17
|
 |
alan_pfeifer
Forum Senior Member
Joined: December 05 2004
Status: Offline
Points: 823
|
Posted: November 28 2005 at 13:23 |
ThisWas wrote:
anyone else think most of pink floyds songs are unbearably depressing?
|
I've never foud their music overly depressing. More like nostalgic longing for something....
|
 |
Phil
Forum Senior Member
Joined: June 17 2005
Location: United Kingdom
Status: Offline
Points: 1881
|
Posted: November 28 2005 at 09:20 |
It had an enormous impact at the time, I think it's lasted well (though
not as well as the next two albums from the Floyd). However I can
understand some people hearing it now for the first time
wondering why it is so revered, as it was released 30+years ago and
it's just not going to have the same impact now.
|
 |