Is it a concept album?

Printed From: Progarchives.com
Category: Progressive Music Lounges
Forum Name: Prog Music Lounge
Forum Description: General progressive music discussions
URL: http://www.progarchives.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=103778
Printed Date: April 26 2024 at 21:02
Software Version: Web Wiz Forums 11.01 - http://www.webwizforums.com

Topic: Is it a concept album?

Posted By: RoeDent
Subject: Is it a concept album?
Date Posted: August 21 2015 at 13:04

I need to vent. For the last time, 2112 is NOT a concept album! Just because 20 minutes of it is taken up by a single song doesn't make the entire album a concept album. None of the songs on Side 2 have anything to do with the title suite. A single theme/storyline has to run through the entire album from beginning to end for it to be a true Concept Album, otherwise every album ever made could be given that label.

Another thing...Wish You Were Here is NOT a concept album! While closer to that format than 2112, it still has two themes, not one. Shine On/WYWH are tributes to Syd Barrett, and Welcome to the Machine/Have a Cigar are about the record industry. The connection between the two groups of songs is only vague and can't be confirmed for a certainty.

Replies:

Posted By: aglasshouse
Date Posted: August 21 2015 at 13:14

RoeDent wrote:

Wish You Were Here is NOT a concept album!

Oh dear...

-------------
http://fryingpanmedia.com

Posted By: Horizons
Date Posted: August 21 2015 at 14:04

So wait, a concept can't have multiple themes?

Huh.

-------------
Crushed like a rose in the riverflow.

Posted By: chopper
Date Posted: August 21 2015 at 14:24

I agree, 2112 is not a concept album.

Posted By: DDPascalDD
Date Posted: August 21 2015 at 14:44

So I'm not the only one. I always didn't founf any connections between those two themes! (In WYWH)

A concept album should have one single clear concept. Nothing more

-------------
https://pascalvandendool.bandcamp.com/album/a-moment-of-thought" rel="nofollow - New album! "A Moment of Thought"

Posted By: rushfan4
Date Posted: August 21 2015 at 15:04

chopper wrote:

I agree, 2112 is not a concept album.

QFT

-------------

Posted By: Hercules
Date Posted: August 21 2015 at 15:10

Neither 2112 nor Wish You Were Here are concept albums in the true sense of the term.

-------------
A TVR is not a car. It's a way of life.

Posted By: verslibre
Date Posted: August 21 2015 at 15:22

Rush referred to albums like 2112 and Hemispheres as "theme" albums, though the "concept" of the first side of Hemispheres begins with "Cygnus X-1" at the end of A Farewell to Kings.

-------------
https://www.ebay.com/sch/i.html?_ipg=50&_sop=1&_rdc=1&_ssn=musicosm" rel="nofollow - eBay

Posted By: The Dark Elf
Date Posted: August 21 2015 at 20:12

Wish You Were Here is actually two concepts that mesh. One centers around the disillusionment of Roger Waters with the recording industry, and the other concerning the loss of band member Syd Barrett and what Waters perceived as the erosion of closeness and friendship within the band that was evidently missing by the time the album was composed, as opposed to the more halcyon days when Barrett was still in his right mind and the band did not have the weight of stardom, conflicting band ideas and media pressure weighing on them.

As for 2112, who cares?

-------------
...a vigorous circular motion hitherto unknown to the people of this area, but destined
to take the place of the mud shark in your mythology...

Posted By: Atavachron
Date Posted: August 21 2015 at 20:14

-------------
"Too often we enjoy the comfort of opinion without the discomfort of thought." -- John F. Kennedy

Posted By: HackettFan
Date Posted: August 21 2015 at 21:07

The Dark Elf wrote:

Wish You Were Here is actually two concepts that mesh. One centers around the disillusionment of Roger Waters with the recording industry, and the other concerning the loss of band member Syd Barrett and what Waters perceived as the erosion of closeness and friendship within the band that was evidently missing by the time the album was composed, as opposed to the more halcyon days when Barrett was still in his right mind and the band did not have the weight of stardom, conflicting band ideas and media pressure weighing on them.

As for 2112, who cares?

Aye.

Posted By: Dellinger
Date Posted: August 21 2015 at 21:24

As for 2112, who cares?

Actually, I don't think Pink Floyd/Roger Waters were trying to do a concept album at the time of Wish you were Here. I understand that the general atmosphere that was present during the recording of the album was the erosion of closeness you mentioned (I have read about them saying that the thing about Wish you were Here is that the band member really didn't want to be there). As for the two concepts that mesh, well, I think they are related, at least within the story of the band, and so you could say the album did end up having a concept/story, but I guess that's more by default than by intention (I guess this album is as much a concept album as Aqualung is).

As for 2112, I have never considered it a concept album, and I have never read about people considering it so. I guess this album is as much a concept album as Tarkus is (not).

Posted By: Manuel
Date Posted: August 21 2015 at 23:02

chopper wrote:

I agree, 2112 is not a concept album.

I'm with you on this one.

Posted By: Progosopher
Date Posted: August 21 2015 at 23:52

verslibre wrote:

Rush referred to albums like 2112 and Hemispheres as "theme" albums, though the "concept" of the first side of Hemispheres begins with "Cygnus X-1" at the end of A Farewell to Kings.

This is a sensible distinction. Theme albums tend to be looser in their conception (ha) while true concept albums stick more closely to it. Naming some examples of true concept albums would clarify the original point.

-------------
The world of sound is certainly capable of infinite variety and, were our sense developed, of infinite extensions. -- George Santayana, "The Sense of Beauty"

Posted By: Toaster Mantis
Date Posted: August 22 2015 at 02:16

I think people need to distinguish between "concept album" and "rock opera". I've noticed that many people treat them as synonymous which I don't really think is correct.

-------------
"The past is not some static being, it is not a previous present, nor a present that has passed away; the past has its own dynamic being which is constantly renewed and renewing." - Claire Colebrook

Posted By: Disparate Times
Date Posted: August 22 2015 at 02:35

^ Can you elaborate?

Posted By: Toaster Mantis
Date Posted: August 22 2015 at 02:57

I get the impression that a rock opera tells a narrative story over the course of the album, whereas a concept album just has to have a unifying conceptual theme going through all the songs (as well as visual presentation etc.) and does not have to be as specific.

To use specific albums, The Wall would be a rock opera and Wish You Were Here a concept album.

-------------
"The past is not some static being, it is not a previous present, nor a present that has passed away; the past has its own dynamic being which is constantly renewed and renewing." - Claire Colebrook

Posted By: Disparate Times
Date Posted: August 22 2015 at 03:11

A narrative story would seem to be a specific way of doing a concept.

Posted By: Toaster Mantis
Date Posted: August 22 2015 at 03:15

Yeah, all rock operas are concept albums but not all concept albums are rock operas...

-------------
"The past is not some static being, it is not a previous present, nor a present that has passed away; the past has its own dynamic being which is constantly renewed and renewing." - Claire Colebrook

Posted By: Disparate Times
Date Posted: August 22 2015 at 03:37

Indeed

Posted By: dr wu23
Date Posted: August 22 2015 at 08:49

Toaster Mantis wrote:

I get the impression that a rock opera tells a narrative story over the course of the album, whereas a concept album just has to have a unifying conceptual theme going through all the songs (as well as visual presentation etc.) and does not have to be as specific.

To use specific albums, The Wall would be a rock opera and Wish You Were Here a concept album.

Fair enough but WYWH had 2 concepts so we have to create a new category called Double Concept Album.

-------------
One does nothing yet nothing is left undone.
Haquin

Posted By: RoeDent
Date Posted: August 22 2015 at 16:20

Rock operas are albums where the lyrics consist entirely of dialogue between characters, such as Tommy, Snow and Scenes from a Memory. The lyric booklets normally tell the listener which character is singing what lyrics.

Posted By: Svetonio
Date Posted: August 23 2015 at 03:43

Hercules wrote:

Neither 2112 nor Wish You Were Here are concept albums in the true sense of the term.

Exactly.
Or, if they are concept albums, then e.g. last great The Who's 70s Rock album titled Who Are You is also a concept album, about the band revival after three years in hiatus. However, there are three JAE songs which direcly went at the album from JAE's sadly never released double LP concept album about the human cloning and those great songs (Trick of the Light, Had Enough, 905), although fits majestically the album, have nothing to do with that Townshend's tiny concept about the band who went, after three years of hiatus, directly in that boxing ring with punk in one corner and prog in another. And as there couldn't be any concept album with two or more different themes, it's not a concept album at all.

Posted By: Queen By-Tor
Date Posted: August 25 2015 at 17:32

Okay,

but they're still awesome. That part doesn't change.

Posted By: Lewian
Date Posted: August 26 2015 at 14:58

Can you explain what difference it makes whether these are concept albums or not?

They are what they are and they sound how they sound, whether you call them "concept" or not.

Still, please respond. This is not a rhetorical question, I'm really curious.

Posted By: sublime220
Date Posted: August 26 2015 at 15:04

Lewian wrote:

Can you explain what difference it makes whether these are concept albums or not?

They are what they are and they sound how they sound, whether you call them "concept" or not.

Still, please respond. This is not a rhetorical question, I'm really curious.

It doesn't make a difference but it sounds weird if you call Taylor Swift's "1989" a concept album and you don't call Tommy one, you will get strange looks. It's like defining a genre, the music doesn't change, it's just telling what type of album it is.

-------------
There is no dark side in the moon, really... Matter of fact, it's all dark...

Posted By: Lewian
Date Posted: August 26 2015 at 15:13

It's a bit different from defining a genre, because by defining a genre, optimally, you group some artists together that tend to appeal to the same people, which helps you looking for things you may like if you like the genre. "Concept album" on the other hand isn't about how it sounds at all.

But what do I know, perhaps some people are into concept albums in particular. regardless of how they sound?

Posted By: Floydoid
Date Posted: August 26 2015 at 15:40

dr wu23 wrote:

Fair enough but WYWH had 2 concepts so we have to create a new category called Double Concept Album.

I prefer to think of WYWH as having a single theme of alienation - the alienation they felt from Syd, and the alienation/animosity they felt towards the music industry. Whether that makes it a concept album or not is debatable.

-------------
'We're going to need a bigger swear jar.'

Posted By: dr wu23
Date Posted: August 26 2015 at 16:28

Floydoid wrote:

dr wu23 wrote:

Fair enough but WYWH had 2 concepts so we have to create a new category called Double Concept Album.

Whatever trips your trigger.........besides, who am I to argue with an obvious Floyd fan?

-------------
One does nothing yet nothing is left undone.
Haquin

Posted By: sublime220
Date Posted: August 26 2015 at 16:49

Lewian wrote:

It's a bit different from defining a genre, because by defining a genre, optimally, you group some artists together that tend to appeal to the same people, which helps you looking for things you may like if you like the genre. "Concept album" on the other hand isn't about how it sounds at all.

But what do I know, perhaps some people are into concept albums in particular. regardless of how they sound?

I totally understand what you're getting at here but my point is that there are so many disagreements about what is a genre and what is not, like is Radiohead prog. Half say yes, half say no. Saying something is "progressive" still does not change how it sounds. If I were to say that Opeth is pure folk, the music wouldn't change, just how it might differ in your mind.

-------------
There is no dark side in the moon, really... Matter of fact, it's all dark...

Posted By: Floydoid
Date Posted: August 26 2015 at 17:05

dr wu23 wrote:

Floydoid wrote:

dr wu23 wrote:

Fair enough but WYWH had 2 concepts so we have to create a new category called Double Concept Album.

Whatever trips your trigger.........besides, who am I to argue with an obvious Floyd fan?

I could just have easily said the album is about absence - the fond absence of Syd, and the absence of any empathy they had with the industry.

-------------
'We're going to need a bigger swear jar.'

Posted By: Lewian
Date Posted: August 27 2015 at 09:26

sublime220 wrote:

I'm repeating myself but I see more sense in a discussion about whether Radiohead are prog or not, because this has implications on what kind of people will come across them where and with what kind of expectations and preconceptions (assuming there are still some around who don't know them...); or whether prog listeners look into bands that are elsewhere classified as close to Radiohead. Also it may direct some Radiohead fans to prog. I don't see this kind of thing happening though based on whether or not something is classified as a concept album.

Posted By: Disparate Times
Date Posted: August 27 2015 at 14:21

I just heard about this (one man) band called Right Away Great Captain he did a trilogy of albums about a 17th century sailor that discovers his wife betrayed him with his own bother. From what little i heard the music is very simple just a guy and a guitar definitely not prog. Fans of this may be curious to hear more concept albums and thus be led to prog due to the large number of concept albums out there.
I think the classification of albums as concepts could be an important thing. Maybe not as relevant as genre, but still important none the less. I personally love concept albums and when i hear of them regardless of genre I'm usually inclined to check it out.

Posted By: Rednight
Date Posted: August 27 2015 at 16:35

I've only ever viewed 2112 as a so-so album

-------------
"It just has none of the qualities of your work that I find interesting. Abandon [?] it." - Eno

Posted By: The Sloth
Date Posted: August 28 2015 at 00:23

How are the Wish You Were Here themes unrelated? The band had bad feelings about Syd (a fallen music star), and also had bad feelings about the music business (which chews up and spits out stars).

Posted By: Floydoid
Date Posted: August 28 2015 at 10:28

The Sloth wrote:

How are the Wish You Were Here themes unrelated? The band had bad feelings about Syd (a fallen music star), and also had bad feelings about the music business (which chews up and spits out stars).

It's ironic really that they were (or at least Roger was) being vitriolic about the very industry they'd done pretty well out of.

I guess it's called Floydian humour.

-------------
'We're going to need a bigger swear jar.'

Posted By: Dean
Date Posted: August 29 2015 at 06:45

Hence the two concepts are linked by the title track, which is why I assume it was used as the album title, [and to some extent by the cover artwork]. The first verse is about Syd ("Did you..."); the second about the industry ("Did they...") and the final verse is about them ("How I..." and "How we..."). At least, that's my interpretation.

-------------
What?

Posted By: Dean
Date Posted: August 29 2015 at 06:47

Floydoid wrote:

It's ironic really that they were (or at least Roger was) being vitriolic about the very industry they'd done pretty well out of.

I guess it's called Floydian humour.

None of that was new to Floyd -- Cymbaline and Free Four also touched on this issue.

-------------
What?

Posted By: Floydoid
Date Posted: August 29 2015 at 10:29

Very true.

-------------
'We're going to need a bigger swear jar.'

Posted By: moshkito
Date Posted: August 29 2015 at 16:07

Hi,

(correcting an accidental error!)

WYWH is not a concept album, in my thoughts, and was a "forced" album by the record company to have something that was closer to DSOTM. The stuff that some folks thought would be after DSOTM, was NOT released, and was delayed and later came out as "Animals", with the exception of a version of SOYCD.

Roger just recently released these with the redone version of SOYCD, as he apparently was not a great fan of the original pieces, though one of them was the best space rock piece you ever heard (Raving and Drooling).

The other 2 pieces about the industry was PF's finger, that they were big enough and could do that!

SOYCD was probably something that had been created in 5 minutes while David was in the loo, and probably had a few lyrics, that were comments that they had made while discussing beers in heaven! SYWH is the perfect fake "neo-" something or other. However, it is my opinion that with other bootlegs, and considering the volume of Syd phrases and lines in many places, that SOYCD, was trying to close the book on Syd, which they were not able to do with DSOTM, that started out being about Syd, when the Greatest Gig in the Sky had a lot of things in it, some of which almost came off like Syd's.

WYWH is a very disappointing album and in my book, despite so many folks liking it. to me, it's a typical rock album when a band is swindled by the machine, or record company. No different than the hundreds of millions that Led Zeppelin and the Rolling Stones got earlier!

I would rather have had the 3 pieces that they were doing in concert, than a half album that was almost a copy of the DSOTM.

-------------
Music is not just for listening ... it is for LIVING ... you got to feel it to know what's it about! Not being told!
www.pedrosena.com

Posted By: The Dark Elf
Date Posted: August 29 2015 at 16:50

moshkito wrote:

Hi,

WYWH is not a concept album, and was a "forced" album by the record company to have something that was closer to DSOTM. The stuff that some folks thought would be after DSOTM, was NOT released, and was delayed and later came out as "Animals". Roger just recently released these with the redone version of SOYCD, which is the first time he has admitted that the material was already there, though the bootlegs have shown it for at least 2 years prior!

The 2 pieces about the industry was PF's finger, that they were big enough and could do that!

SOYCD was probably something that they created in 5 minutes while David was in the loo, and probably had a few lyrics, that were comments that they had made while discussing beers in heaven! SYWH is the perfect fake "neo-" something or other. The only two things in there that are worth any value as a Pink Floyd piece would be the two big pieces against the music company.

WYWH is a very disappointing album and in my book, the weakest of all PF albums! It would have been better to even release the original version of the Greatest Gig in the Sky with Syd sounding like he was a priest on a pulpit delivering a sermon ... on the way to his end! It would have been a bit sardonic, and sadistic, but at least it would be real, and on par with London theater and film, instead of rock'n'roll stupid goon'ery and supposed this and that supposed tragedy. If it was you or I, only our ma and pa would care.

Naturally, I disagree with nearly everything you have stated.

First, Wish You Were Here is certainly a concept album. The album cover relates to the concept: "getting burned" as two businessmen, one on fire, engage in an empty handshake, the stickers accompanying the cover have two robotic hands shaking (again, mirroring the mechanical nature of the gesture), and the back cover feature a disembodied and faceless "suit" handing out albums in the desert. Like DSotM, there are seamless segues from one song to another (one, before the song "Wish You Were Here", features the mindless chatter of a cocktail party, and the song "Shine on You Crazy Diamond" acts as both intro and outro on the album, with parts I to V at the start and parts VI to IX at the end.

Second, Floyd was not "forced" to record the album. Please provide facts when making your absurd opinions you blurt as facts.

Third, the songs that were later titled "Dogs" and "Sheep" (called originally "You Got To Be Crazy" and "Raving and Drooling") and "Shine on You Crazy Diamond" were attacked by critics (Syd Barrett fans) when they were first were played during their 1974 tour. This so irritated Waters that when Floyd entered the studio, he carried his disdain with him and completed the conceptualization.

Fourth, "Shine On You Crazy Diamond" features some of the best blues guitar passages Gilmour ever created, and it is a song Gilmour has continued to play for decades. It would seem he spent a lot of time in "the loo" working out the licks. Likewise, the song "Wish You Were Here" is so genuinely loved by so many avid listeners because the pain and regret is genuine in the lyrics, particularly since it not only touches on the loss of Syd Barret but on Waters' grandfather who died during that time period. People, including myself, identify with the sadness and regret the song engenders.

Fifth, you might not care for the album, but it was in no way a "disappointment" either in record sales or critical acclaim - or respect by prog fans who rate it highly. Please attempt a bit of objectivity before drunkenly bashing your shoe upon the pulpit.

-------------
...a vigorous circular motion hitherto unknown to the people of this area, but destined
to take the place of the mud shark in your mythology...

Posted By: moshkito
Date Posted: August 29 2015 at 17:03

hi,

Welcome to the machine, DE ... and make sure you kiss it good!

Cleaned up. I was incorrect, on the bootleg and found that there indeed was a version of SOYCD, which tells you how good it was that it was almost ignored, though not intentionally.

The anger and comments about the record company including the pictures, are no secret to anyone. The pictures and the cover only show the hassles of dealing with the machine, including the "devil", on fire.

-------------
Music is not just for listening ... it is for LIVING ... you got to feel it to know what's it about! Not being told!
www.pedrosena.com

Posted By: The Dark Elf
Date Posted: August 29 2015 at 17:13

moshkito wrote:

hi,

Welcome to the machine, DE ... and make sure you kiss it good!

I had a bootleg with the 3 pieces from Animals, 3 days after the LA series of concerts of DSOTM. It's why I BOUGHT IT at the time! And was already looking forward to their next album. WYWH was the biggest disappointment and sapping piece of crap that PF ever did, except for those 2 pieces!

The rest is not worth a discussion, since anyone can create a story about nothing or something or anything, as if t were any different than what you said! I guess that anything sounds better than nothing in the media, especially a fan kissy website!

First, I call bullsh*t on your bootleg. There were two songs - not three - played that eventually were released on Animals. The third was "Shine On You Crazy Diamond". If you are going to lie, at least get your points straight.

And obviously, the rest is not worth a discussion to you because fact always intrudes on your fantasy, and renders your baseless opinion as half-baked as the hash resin in your hookah.

-------------
...a vigorous circular motion hitherto unknown to the people of this area, but destined
to take the place of the mud shark in your mythology...

Posted By: moshkito
Date Posted: August 29 2015 at 17:21

The Dark El wrote:

(updated as I did have an error!)

Not worth the discussion since you will not even check the play lists! Raving and Drooling and Gotta Be Crazy for sure ... and I am not even sure what the third piece was now, but there were 2 songs on one side and 1 song on the other side. And it was indeed an early version of SOYCD. My apologies for missing that, but it tells you how effective and nice it was, that compared to other stuff it was accidentally dismissed.

The album I had was from the Sports Arena show in LA, which is the same show that Dean mentions.

But, obviously, because they are not "legal", bootlegs can not tell any history, specially here, so your version is the official one! Bootlegs be damned, so the record company is kissed again! Such a corporate attitude, that it will kill a lot more progressive music than otherwise, even though now things are quite different.

No worries, you can have all the glory you want!

-------------
Music is not just for listening ... it is for LIVING ... you got to feel it to know what's it about! Not being told!
www.pedrosena.com

Posted By: The Dark Elf
Date Posted: August 29 2015 at 17:27

moshkito wrote:

The Dark El wrote:

But, obviously, because they are not "legal", bootlegs can not tell any history, specially here, so your version is the official one! You are the God of information!

No worries, you can have all the glory you want!

Isn't that precious! You crow about a bootleg you allegedly got three days after the concert and now you have no clue what the third song was. As I said, bullsh*t.

Facts, Mosh, facts. You can look it up yourself, rather than making up things to make you look good, in your usual narcissistic manner. Every concert has the songs lists that were played. Again, historical fact is your friend. Use it some time.

-------------
...a vigorous circular motion hitherto unknown to the people of this area, but destined
to take the place of the mud shark in your mythology...

Posted By: Dean
Date Posted: August 29 2015 at 17:38

Oh my giddy aunt. Pedro, give it up dude, your posts are so full of wrong they are in danger of imploding.

The boot you refer to is, of course, "British Winter Tour '74" and that features a 23 minute version of Shine On You Crazy Diamond along with Raving and Drooling and You Gotta Be Crazy. Since Floyd never toured the USA in 1974 and certainly didn't play those three songs prior to 1974 it is a temporal impossibility for you to have bought that bootleg after seeing them in LA but before WYWH was released. (FFS).

Also, with regard to your comments about Great Gig In The Sky - for the second time of telling - Syd's voice was never used on that song, nor Roger's nor David's, the voice samples on the early mixes (including the organ version that is variously titled "the religious song" or "the morality sequence") were of a commentator from the Apollo moon landings, a tv evangelist and British pundit Malcolm Muggeridge.

-------------
What?

Posted By: The Dark Elf
Date Posted: August 29 2015 at 17:54

Dean wrote:

Oh my giddy aunt. Pedro, give it up dude, your posts are so full of wrong they are in danger of imploding.

The boot you refer to is, of course, "British Winter Tour '74" and that features a 23 minute version of Shine On You Crazy Diamond along with Raving and Drooling and You Gotta Be Crazy. Since Floyd never toured the USA in 1974 and certainly didn't play those three songs prior to 1974 it is a temporal impossibility for you to have bought that boot leg after seeing them in LA but before WYWH was released. (FFS).

Awwww, Dean! You spoiled my fun! If Mosh had continued I was going to then mention that the three songs in question, "Shine On You Crazy Diamond", "Raving and Drooling" and "You Gotta Be Crazy" were only played in Britain and France during 1974.

-------------
...a vigorous circular motion hitherto unknown to the people of this area, but destined
to take the place of the mud shark in your mythology...

Posted By: Dean
Date Posted: August 29 2015 at 17:56

The Dark Elf wrote:

Dean wrote:

Oh my giddy aunt. Pedro, give it up dude, your posts are so full of wrong they are in danger of imploding.

The boot you refer to is, of course, "British Winter Tour '74" and that features a 23 minute version of Shine On You Crazy Diamond along with Raving and Drooling and You Gotta Be Crazy. Since Floyd never toured the USA in 1974 and certainly didn't play those three songs prior to 1974 it is a temporal impossibility for you to have bought that boot leg after seeing them in LA but before WYWH was released. (FFS).

you Ninja's every reply I was typing in response to Pedro I had to leap in with something before you got there. Tongue

-------------
What?

Posted By: The Dark Elf
Date Posted: August 29 2015 at 17:58

^ Well, in hindsight, a second voice of sanity makes the discussion that much better.

-------------
...a vigorous circular motion hitherto unknown to the people of this area, but destined
to take the place of the mud shark in your mythology...

Posted By: moshkito
Date Posted: August 30 2015 at 11:22

Hi,

At least I was honest enough to update my posts ... you two are simply beating a dead dog, or horse, instead of being more helpful!

The only class you are showing is how others are wrong, and you are always such a righteous and correct person ... that the deodorant even smells!

-------------
Music is not just for listening ... it is for LIVING ... you got to feel it to know what's it about! Not being told!
www.pedrosena.com

Posted By: The Dark Elf
Date Posted: August 30 2015 at 11:29

moshkito wrote:

Hi,

At least I was honest enough to update my posts ... you two are simply beating a dead dog, or horse, instead of being more helpful!

The only class you are showing is how others are wrong, and you are always such a righteous and correct person ... that the deodorant even smells!

"At least I was honest...."

No, you outright lied, you were called out on it, and now you are futilely trying to cover your tracks. Don't waste time trying to spin outrage and accusing others of classlessness.

One can gild sh*te, but naught can hide the reek.

-------------
...a vigorous circular motion hitherto unknown to the people of this area, but destined
to take the place of the mud shark in your mythology...

Posted By: moshkito
Date Posted: August 30 2015 at 11:31

The Dark Elf wrote:

What a crock of poop. This was also played in LA, at least! And I am not the only person that was there!

You want to ask Jim Ladd about this? You should!

Now you are saying that no one in LA saw anything! What a crock! And you guys go around saying I'm wrong instead of helping correct a few errors. Makes one wonder how twisted you guys really are. Yes you both know things well, but instead of adding to the discussion and help correct the details (which I did, btw!), you kill it!

Show your class, not your crass!

-------------
Music is not just for listening ... it is for LIVING ... you got to feel it to know what's it about! Not being told!
www.pedrosena.com

Posted By: The Dark Elf
Date Posted: August 30 2015 at 11:42

moshkito wrote:

The Dark Elf wrote:

What a crock of poop. This was also played in LA, at least!

Now you are saying that no one in LA saw anything! What a crock!

You should really consider apologizing at this point.

As Dean already pointed out, Floyd did not tour the U.S. in 1974 (they only toured Britain and France). The three songs in question were not played in the U.S during the 1973 tour. The only time you could have heard these songs live in the U.S. were during the 1975 tour when the songs were in their finished form. The bootleg you claim to have purchased with songs that didn't exist in 1973, three days after a concert that didn't exist in 1974, came from concerts in Britain. Complete set lists are available online for your perusal.

Go ahead, look it up. Then apologize. You are looking more and more silly every time you post.

-------------
...a vigorous circular motion hitherto unknown to the people of this area, but destined
to take the place of the mud shark in your mythology...

Posted By: The Dark Elf
Date Posted: August 30 2015 at 11:51

Here, I'll help you, since you don't seem to be 'net savvy. Los Angeles, April 26, 1975:

Pink Floyd Setlist at Los Angeles Sports Arena, Los Angeles, CA, USA

Apr261975

http://www.setlist.fm/setlists/pink-floyd-13d6adc5.html" rel="nofollow"> Pink Floyd setlists

Setlist

http://www.setlist.fm/stats/songs/pink-floyd-13d6adc5.html?song=Sheep" rel="nofollow - - Play Video
http://www.setlist.fm/stats/songs/pink-floyd-13d6adc5.html?song=Dogs" rel="nofollow - - Play Video
http://www.setlist.fm/stats/songs/pink-floyd-13d6adc5.html?song=Shine+On+You+Crazy+Diamond+%28Parts+I-V%29" rel="nofollow - - Play Video
http://www.setlist.fm/stats/songs/pink-floyd-13d6adc5.html?song=Have+a+Cigar" rel="nofollow - - Play Video
http://www.setlist.fm/stats/songs/pink-floyd-13d6adc5.html?song=Shine+On+You+Crazy+Diamond+%28Parts+VI-IX%29" rel="nofollow - - Play Video
Speak to Me javascript:void%280%29;" rel="nofollow -
http://www.setlist.fm/stats/songs/pink-floyd-13d6adc5.html?song=Breathe" rel="nofollow - - Play Video
http://www.setlist.fm/stats/songs/pink-floyd-13d6adc5.html?song=On+the+Run" rel="nofollow - - Play Video
http://www.setlist.fm/stats/songs/pink-floyd-13d6adc5.html?song=Time" rel="nofollow - - Play Video
http://www.setlist.fm/stats/songs/pink-floyd-13d6adc5.html?song=Breathe+%28Reprise%29" rel="nofollow - - Play Video
http://www.setlist.fm/stats/songs/pink-floyd-13d6adc5.html?song=The+Great+Gig+in+the+Sky" rel="nofollow - - Play Video
http://www.setlist.fm/stats/songs/pink-floyd-13d6adc5.html?song=Money" rel="nofollow - - Play Video
http://www.setlist.fm/stats/songs/pink-floyd-13d6adc5.html?song=Us+and+Them" rel="nofollow - - Play Video
http://www.setlist.fm/stats/songs/pink-floyd-13d6adc5.html?song=Any+Colour+You+Like" rel="nofollow - - Play Video
http://www.setlist.fm/stats/songs/pink-floyd-13d6adc5.html?song=Brain+Damage" rel="nofollow - - Play Video
http://www.setlist.fm/stats/songs/pink-floyd-13d6adc5.html?song=Eclipse" rel="nofollow - - Play Video
Encore:

http://www.setlist.fm/stats/songs/pink-floyd-13d6adc5.html?song=Echoes" rel="nofollow - - Play Video

Posted By: Dean
Date Posted: August 30 2015 at 11:56

moshkito wrote:

Hi,

At least I was honest enough to update my posts ... you two are simply beating a dead dog, or horse, instead of being more helpful!

The only class you are showing is how others are wrong, and you are always such a righteous and correct person ... that the deodorant even smells!

Sorry if it seems we are beating you, I thought I was actually being helpful by posting facts that you were too f**king lazy to check yourself.

[lecture]Back-editing posts is bad form and impolite, the only possible reason to change a previously quoted post is to make the person who commented on your post look bad. Edits are permitted for speloing and garmmer errars but changing them to make yourself look right when you were wrong is simply a poor show. If you must post a correction then do it in a new post. [/lecture]

moshkito wrote:

The album I had was from the Sports Arena show in LA, which is the same show that Dean mentions.

The British Winter Tour 74 boot was (huh) recorded in Britain in 1974 from the show at Trentham Gardens, Stoke on Trent - Shine On was played in its entirety with out a break. The LA sports arena show was in April 1975. This was obviously after WYWH had been recorded in the studio but prior to its release. By the time of the American tour Shine On had been split into two parts with Have A Cigar in the middle. The set-list for that show given on SetListFM.com gives the opening two tracks as Sheep (previously known as Raving and Drooling) and Dogs (previously known as You Gotta Be Crazy) and Shine On in two parts split by Have A Cigar, the boot from that concert (called "Sheep and Dogs") is definitely not the album you describe because of this splitting of Shine On.

Now, no matter how you read it, your original post (which fortunately Greg quoted in full so your back-edits are in vain) was full of wrong - it wasn't an accidental error, it was a whole mess of inaccuracies.

Now if you must throw a hissy fit, please observe some decorum and do it quietly. Stern Smile

-------------
What?

Posted By: Floydoid
Date Posted: August 30 2015 at 12:04

The Dark Elf wrote:

Fifth, you might not care for the album, but it was in no way a "disappointment" either in record sales or critical acclaim - or respect by prog fans who rate it highly. Please attempt a bit of objectivity before drunkenly bashing your shoe upon the pulpit.

Many Floyd fanatics (such as myself) rate it as an album made at the peak of their creativity (before Roger's megalomania started to set in).

And the finest they ever released.

-------------
'We're going to need a bigger swear jar.'

Posted By: Dean
Date Posted: August 30 2015 at 12:14

An "accidental" error:

moshkito wrote:

It would have been better to even release the original version of the Greatest Gig in the Sky with Syd sounding like he was a priest on a pulpit delivering a sermon ... on the way to his end! It would have been a bit sardonic, and sadistic, but at least it would be real, and on par with London theater and film, instead of rock'n'roll stupid goon'ery and supposed this and that supposed tragedy. If it was you or I, only our ma and pa would care.

which after I posted the correct information gets clumsily back-edited to:

moshkito wrote:

when the Greatest Gig in the Sky had a lot of things in it, some of which almost came off like Syd's.

...and still contains errors. The name of the song is Great Gig In The Sky, and the early versions (aka "the religious song" and "the morality sequence") are nothing like Syd's anything.

To refresh your fogged memory cells:

-------------
What?

Posted By: Stann
Date Posted: September 05 2015 at 11:39

Who cares. Afterall, it is only "2112" lp we are talking about.

....
Regards concepts, what I'd really like to hear is for some clear wit to fudge-factor Procol Harum's " first side of "Shine On Brightly", linking it thematically with the epic side 2.

The title track is clearly anti-religion.
The opening track "Quite Rightly So" sings of a person "in need of saving grace" because his "eyes refused to see" and how he desperately wants to be instructed basically because he is ignorant. In otherwords, the sheer gullibility of the simple-minded, or easily-manipulated.

But the remainder of side one?
For instance, what the heck is "Skip Softly (My Moonbeams)" about? Can you tie that in with the theme of religion?(Or man's passage thru life?)

Posted By: uduwudu
Date Posted: September 11 2015 at 06:50

2112 is obviously a concept piece. Not the whole album. This is the problem with confusing music with formats and look at the problems you may very well run into with Cygnus being on the end of AFTK and Hemispheres.

I would have thought WYWH was / is a concept album, with the personal (Syd) and the context (industry) as the points of illustration of depersonalization / alienation being the over-arching idea encompassing related values (y'know, like two lost souls swimming in a fish bowl). Seemed clear, even to me. Unless it wasn't which is why I had to play it so often. And still got it wrong.

** the off topic bits**
The legality of bootlegs cropped up... it is not illegal to own a bootleg. Indeed my town's public library has a CD of Pompeii. Which has not been officially released on CD. It is illegal to sell unauthorized recordings much the same as it is to distribute (free) legitimate ones. Distribution of unauthorized recordings is their courtesy of artist's permission (most tacitly or early agree. Fripp doesn't - he sells **all** - yes, crappy audience recordings as well - KC boots on DGM. For someone who claimed illicit recording was a form of rape he decided to sell all these - occurrences). Oh, and neither does his disciple, Steven Wilson. Which is a shame as P Tree boots are often fantastic experiences and the main way I became acquainted with a lot of P Tree music when so much was out of print).