David Gilmour on early Floyd Albums

infandous wrote: =Though I'd have to say that Summer '69 is the best of side two of that album, Fat Old Sun second.

^  I see what you did there.  Summer of 69 is by Canada's very own Bryan Adams! 

Progosopher wrote: Soooo, are you looking for agreement or disagreement, or just seeing how people respond?  Artists often have a very different experience of their music than their listeners, which often involving production standards.  He may be commenting on the fact that these recordings did not sound exactly like what he and the rest of the band envisioned. Myself, I do not regard either album as Floyd greats, and agree with him to a certain extent.

I agree with him for the most part.  I did start getting really quite interested around echoes.

Nogbad_The_Bad wrote: The Ummagumma live album is one of my post played favorites.

I love it too! Astromine domine is fab!

Atom Heart Mother and Ummagumma have always been my two favourite albums.  DG is entitled to his opinion, of course, but he's entitled to be wrong.

As I said before, many artists look back on their early work with disdain.

What surprised me about the interview segments of the 70-74 Genesis box set was that Gabriel seemed to be the only one that still thinks that stuff is any good.  Banks and Rutherford (and even Collins), while not saying it was crap, seemed to have low opinions of that stuff overall.  We all know what Rick Wakeman thinks of Tales as well.

So I think this is pretty common.  In the case of Gilmour, their most popular work by far was Dark Side and after.  It's only natural that they are going to think they "got it right" only after that point since they became filthy rich and had massive success.  Personally, I think they were far more interesting before that.  They were not as good instrumentalists perhaps, but they didn't know "the rules" of writing music, so were able to come up with more interesting and original ideas.  It didn't always work, of course.  I always found a comment by Waters interesting, about AHM, that "it wasn't about anything".  Did it need to be?  Does music have to be "about" something?  Personally, I don't think it does in order to be good or great.

Like I said, once they found their successful "formula", each album was very similar, from Dark Side on.  I don't see many people pointing this out in reviews or on this thread, but there really is a lot of similarity with each album after Dark Side.  It IS a good formula, and I like those albums, I just found them much more "progressive" before that (see what I did there?  )





Edited by infandous - April 24 2012 at 09:39