All the fuss about Pink F

This was my time born 1947. I have of course bought the obligatory Dark Side and some of that music is quite intense and enjoyable. Today I wonder if some are living off a past I do not see them having an entitlement to.

While of course their music has been almost Classical in comparison to Sabbath, Zeppelin, Purple they too could produce some quiet and tender pieces of noteworthy work.

My memory of THE WALL from all those years ago was of better sounds than this Solo ish effort. While I have only scanned through Roger seems monotonous and forced and not enjoyable.

I have seen Gilmore in his solo ish efforts and find that he is also difficult to listen to to for similar reasons.

Other than the fact that the group seems to have such a large following I do not get them. Arnold Lane may well have been my most favourite story song and the singles of that early era. Being described as a Psychedelic band that may be a reason I do not get it. The only time I ever got to see the world of the drug user was momentary pre op and fleetingly while on Morphine or Pethidine. This was short lived as pain does sort of nullify the pleasures of these chemicals. I have never enjoyed [is that the word] this useful drug class while in good health. Does it improve the writing ability or the listening ability?

Not for me perhaps and I do enjoy some of the music written by those who come from a different age. If Wolfgang had only had a few sessions of LSD goodness knows what he might have come up with considering the heightened awareness he surely must have gained.

Sorry Watters and Gilmore. Might have to look out for the music of the very first offerings.

The love of this must be almost cultist.


Well, you don't have to like everything or "get" everything. When some aspect of popular culture escapes me, which much of it does, I just move on to something else.



I have never understood the popularity of Elvis, or The Grateful Dead, or a large number of other very popular (and talented) musicians.

Pink Floyd, and Roger Waters in particular, is one of those that speak to me.

No one's holding your feet to the fire to make you "get" them.


You're entitled to your opinions, but for f#cks sake please spell Waters and Gilmour correctly.


Music affects different people in different ways. I was born in 1969, bought The Wall when it was first released, and have been a fan of the band since. There's something about their music that just speaks to me like no other band. (With the possible exception of a more recent band named Blue October, but I digress...)
I've never really been a fan of country or dance music and I don't like rap at all, but I understand why some people are. It just speaks to them on a level I doubt even THEY could explain, any more than I can explain why Pink Floyd does it for me. One of my best friends is the biggest Beatles fans I've ever known, and your question made me curious to see if he could explain why. His reply? "I don't know. It just touches my being in a way that a Rembrandt painting may touch someone, or looking at a sunset." Pretty good answer if you ask me.
I'm not going to be one of
those self-important clowns that says, "You don't GET the music", or any nonsense like that. I like what I like, same as your liking what you like. I'm sure I'm not as big a fan of your favorite band as you are, but I don't need to be. It just resonates differently for you. We're all our own person, and art touches us all differently.
I doubt this is the answer you're looking for, or that it offers any insight whatsoever. I'm just giving a little input, for whatever that's worth.
This reply is a little longer than I thought it be. Thanks for taking the time to read it.


Entitlement based on market demands. Their following is far to diverse to be cultist; you can see that in their audiences that crosses several generations.

I thought Walters and Gilmour's solo work was very good, "The Pros and Cons of Hitch Hiking" and "David Gilmour" respectively.


No offence, but being too lazy to type "Floyd" in your header (for which you had plenty of space) combined with your inability to get simple names right (it's Waters and Gilmour) and the fact that you only seem to appreciate their early pop-ish radio-format songs has much more to do with the reasons why you've never been able to be a fan than anything relating to 'drugs'.

Some aspects of Pink Floyd are cultist, I'll grant you that, but "The Wall" certainly isn't. I'm convinced this album will continue to find a renewed and dedicated, life-long fan base as long as we keep producing teens and as long as there'll be older, open-minded, sensible-yet-dissatisfied folks.
This album speaks volumes to anyone remotely angst-filled, distraught and confused with the vapidness of the world around them. Limiting its scope to anti-establishment nihilism equates to not having given it an honest listen. And the music is just so damn good to boot!

I was 9 when it came out, and was hooked instantly to the band (come from upper-middle class family, no drugs).
Water's solo career is simply fantastic; some truly powerful, poignant stuff, albeit "Radio K.A.O.S." hasn't aged that well (the only one). The man is, undeniably, a genius.
Gilmour? Superb guitar player depending on context, but that's about it, IMO.

Ignorance is bliss... 'til it posts on the Internet, then, it's annoying.