>pretty disappointing and dull when compared to other prog rock
>pretty sophisticated and non-radio-friendly when compared to other hugely successful pleb albums
I'm not saying it's a particularly bad album, but why is it so fucking popular?
>>66374069
babbies first alternative album
>>66374079
alternative?
>>66374069
because it's accessible. it's popular because it has broad themes and interesting lyrics, while having inoffensive and relatively boring music.
Scaruffi's review is pretty spot on-he says something along the lines of Pink Floyd perfecting muzak with dark side.
>>66374069
They pioneered atmoprog
Least wanky and complax compared to other bands
>>66375433
"Alternative" as in not pop
>>66375467
>relatively boring music
Easily accessible and edgy
>>66376903
compared to their debut or Saucerful of Secrets, yeah. I'm not saying it's a bad album.
>>66377337
Oddity for oddity's sake doesn't equate to interesting, though. AHM, Meddle, Saucerful are very innovative and interesting but I don't think that diminishes the "interesting-ness" of Dark Side. I don't get all the praise for Piper, it's not as lush and fully fleshed as some of their other highly psychedelic suites.
>>66374069
the thing with prog rock is that the more progressive it gets, the worse it sounds. this was a happy medium.
innovative yet still melodic. beats anything king crimson ever came out with imhofam.
>>66374069
I don't like it that much either, my favorite is animals, but if anyone here is going to say that albums like ummagumma are good, your a fucking retard trying to be edgy, even they said that it was shit.
Plus all rock is shit compared to jazz or classical, soy all of them are pretty pop.
>>66374069
10/10 album all through
fUK you aAaaaLL
Try not to think of is as a prog album. It's an amazing album but when you come to it from a proghead's perspective and expect more prog, it won't hold up.
Pink Floyd aren't really a prog band anyway. Their songwriting is incredibly simplistic in comparison to even the most mainstream prog bands.
>>66377658
respectable opinion, as a KC fanatic I disagree but what you're saying is perfectly reasonable
>>66377843
Ummagumma is their worst imo, but you should not let an artist tell you what is their best. They also hated Atom Heart Mother, but it's one of their best works imo.
>>66374069
Because it hit the "sweet spot" in the middle of the two types of music you just mentioned.
Other albums in this zone include Siamese Dream, Nevermind, and Songs for the Deaf.
The final 3 songs are perfect; groovy, melodic and progressive without overstepping their mark into overblown wankery.
>>66379494
ummagumma is certainly not their worst are you joking its their most interesting
>>66377387
A lot of that's in the primitive recording equipment and stereo mixing, the mono version sounds a lot "fuller" and less primitive, it's pretty nuts that something that noisy came out in '67
>>66377843
the live half of Ummagumma is fucking GOAT
>prog
>>66378851
This is true. I love them but I don't know why they get called prog, Pink Floyd are definitely a psych rock band, most of the members couldn't even read music. I don't think they put much thought into the theory aspect, they just jammed
>>66374069
I've never understood it either.
For example The Wall is already much more accessible and relatable for average people.
>>66379840
>it's pretty nuts that something that noisy came out in '67
DOFP is much more lush and fulfilling than Piper, and it came out in the same year.
>>66379918
They're Psychedelic Prog
>>66379970
Note I said noisy
Piper's innovative in its weirdness and feedback, there were other similarly weird things coming out a couple years later (krautrock and VU) but as far as making that sort of thing digestible it's a good 20 years early, there's a reason why Jesus and Mary Chain covered Syd's songs
faggots in che shirts need something to listen to
>>66380223
I think you are talking about RATM.
