Pink Floyd

Doesn't matter -in case you refer to the influence.. If Gilmore knew him, Rogers would do, as well. Pink Floyd were intellectual people all of them and Calvert the only Hawkwind member that really fitted to their profile.. I don't have any sources though, I'm just guessing.
 
David Gilmour and Paul McCartney are great friends in real life. Gilmour has for example lend his guitar skills on McCartney albums a few times. Here is the two of them performing a show together:


and another at the PETA concert:

 
I remember watching that show with Gilmour and McCartney as it was broadcast on tv.
The band I used to be in played at the Cavern a week or two before they filmed this and I remember watching it with my mum pointing out that David Gilmour is treading the same stage that I did!! He's trying to fill my boots but to no avail My mum was more impressed with McCartney!
 
Forostar said:
Quite enjoyed this one:
Click to expand...
Nice to hear that he will be working on a new album after the tour has finished! I think it's great that he gets excited talking about it......the guy is 70, has been a recording artist all his adult life and yet can't wait to start recording new stuff.
 
Is there any other band with such an awesome sixties catalogue (some jazz artists aside)? No there isn't.

- Arnold Layne / Candy and a Currant Bun (11 March 1967)
- See Emily Play (16 June 1967)
- The Piper at the Gates of Dawn (4 August 1967)
- Apples and Oranges / Paint Box (18 November 1967)
- It Would Be So Nice / Julia Dream (12 April 1968)
- A Saucerful of Secrets (28 June 1968)
- Point Me at the Sky / Careful with That Axe, Eugene (17 December 1968)
- More (13 June 1969)
- The Man and the Journey* (17 September 1969)
- Ummagumma (7 November 1969)

*Not an official release, although it was considered as such. Still a must hear radio broadcast.
 
The Pink Floyd channel that Sirius ran for a while was a regular on my app. Very sad when it was shut down. I was enjoying hearing Echoes almost everyday!
 
CriedWhenBrucieLeft said:
Ah, indeed. You will be revisiting their work very soon, yes? Haven't listened to Floyd myself for a while now...
Click to expand...

Didn't listen to them for a while as well, not much since The Endless River came out. This year, I bought A Saucerful of Secrets, I still didn't have it on CD. I also still don't have the debut album and a few others. For a long time I found Piper (and psychedelic music in general) a little difficult to take in. But now I appreciate it more. So over the course of the last months I checked all their sixties music.

I realized the wealth of non-album songs is much bigger than I thought:
Forostar said:
Here all officially released non-album songs, recorded by Pink Floyd in the sixties. The first six were released two days(!) ago, and if people have no easy access to them (e.g. via YouTube), then I can imagine that we leave them out. I guess we can better take a look at their accessibility when the time comes. Last seven are from the Zabriskie Point soundtrack: the original release had 3 Pink Floyd songs (one is a re-recording of "Careful with That Axe, Eugene", carrying a new title: "Come in Number 51, Your Time Is Up"), the bonus disc from the 1997 re-release contains 4 extra songs. Some are worthwhile to be considered (in case we won't do them all).

01- Lucy Leave (recorded in 1965, released 27 November 2015)
02- Double O Bo (recorded in 1965, released 27 November 2015)
03- Remember Me (recorded in 1965, released 27 November 2015)
04- Walk with Me Sydney (recorded in 1965, released 27 November 2015)
05- Butterfly (recorded in 1965, released 27 November 2015)
06- I'm a King Bee (recorded in 1965, released 27 November 2015)
07- Arnold Layne (11 March 1967)
08- Candy and a Currant Bun (11 March 1967)
09- See Emily Play (16 June 1967)
10- Apples and Oranges (18 November 1967)
11- Paint Box (18 November 1967)
12- It Would Be So Nice (12 April 1968)
13- Julia Dream (12 April 1968)
14- Embryo (recorded November 1968, released May 1970)
15- Point Me at the Sky (17 December 1968)
16- Careful with That Axe, Eugene (17 December 1968 or )*
17- Biding My Time (recorded July 1969, released on Relics, May 1971)
18- Heart Beat, Pig Meat (recorded 1969, released 9 February 1970)
19- Crumbling Land (recorded 1969, released 9 February 1970)
20- Come in Number 51, Your Time Is Up (recorded 1969, released 9 February 1970)*
21- Country Song (recorded 1969, released 1997)
22- Unknown Song (recorded 1969, released 1997)
23- Love Scene (Version 6) (recorded 1969, released 1997)
24- Love Scene (Version 4) (recorded 1969, released 1997)

* There's a live version of Careful with That Axe, Eugene on Ummagumma, but in case live songs won't be featured (big chance, I guess?), we can use one or two studio versions.
Click to expand...
 
Forostar said:
Didn't listen to them for a while as well, not much since The Endless River came out.
Click to expand...
Indeed, similar story here; haven't given anything a spin since I bought & listened to The Endless River at the beginning of this year.
Forostar said:
This year, I bought A Saucerful of Secrets, I still didn't have it on CD. I also still don't have the debut album and a few others.
Click to expand...
I have hardly any of their albums, actually. Like Joe Satriani, I'm just going to leisurely work my way through their catalogue as and when I pick up the CDs for cheap. I've heard enough of them (& Satch) to know that I want all their albums on CD. Long game for me...
Forostar said:
For a long time I found Piper (and psychedelic music in general) a little difficult to take in. But now I appreciate it more. So over the course of the last months I checked all their sixties music.
Click to expand...
You like analysis, so can I ask you why you think this is?

As you know I listen to a lot of Buckethead; and because of Buckethead's method of releasing music (format, timing, promotion, frequency, production, etc) he can pretty much release what he wants & be quite indulgent. Sometimes he releases 30 minutes of music & it's just one unbroken track. Some of it is very experimental sounding (psychedelic Floydesque even), improvised, jam-session sounding; dare I say a little old-school, even progressive...

What I'm getting at is: I find it hard to "rate" some of this stuff; some lengthy "tracks" can have good & bad elements, & it can be quite hard (if one has a desire to do such things as rate tracks/albums/music) to say the whole thing is, for example, 5-star or 9-out-of-10. The music is hard to pigeon-hole; it just doesn't fit with my sometimes craving to organise & rank the music I listen to; to put it into some sort of hierarchical order of merit. I didn't used to like this can't-rate aspect of some of his music; but now I've come to appreciate how potentially constricting this method of listening to music is (in some instances) and how much this analytical approach was actually stopping my enjoyment of this type of music. [On this point: I also think I recall SMX dropping a similar comment recently on the limitations of this type of approach (ranking/grading) to big long tracks & progressive music generally.]

You seem to like doing this too (maybe you don't like doing it?); organising, rating, grading, etc. Do you also find with psychedelic music (& other music like this) that this inability to, how should I put it?, view this type/format of music in this analytical way, means that you haven't really known how to properly approach & appreciate this kind of music in the past --& therefore haven't appreciated it that much? i.e. your "difficult to take in". Can I suggest, that this might even be a particular trait of some Heavy Metal fans?
 
For me, analysis means zooming in at details. Zooming in at parts of the sum. This way I can "discover" and appreciate minor things within the total result (a complete song). Mosly it adds up to already existing appreciation. So in these cases, it only gets better. The downside is that, when I recognize elements that have already been used or just sound a lot like something earlier done, it can mean that the total appreciation for the song is affected as well, in a negative way.

I am not rating constantly, but when listening to bands I like to do it somewhat organized. E.g., I never cared enough about Motörhead to investigate all their albums. Now, Lemmy is dead, and I join the rat race. I am suddenly more interested, but I am not doing this at random, or go straight at their most famous albums. I start at the beginning.

On a specific format, when we have more, let's say meandering songs rather than segments or structured verse chorus songs (e.g. a lengthy Buckethead instrumental that repeats a single theme, but him building and building and building with it, or Floyd songs like Set the Controls of the Heart of the Sun or Careful with that Axe Eugene), zooming in at details can be helpful, but feeling a song is at least as important, even more important. The atmosphere, the mood that is taken in, that's important. In the end, the total song is what's left. What did this song do to me?

All this, is spontaneous. I am not saying that band A has to be appreciated this way, and band B that way. It depends on taste and on what people like in (details of) music. In Maiden, there are lots of solos, but also cool bass patterns and riffs or drum parts. There's more beyond the melodies, vocals and lyrics. It is very rich music. Appreciating those details helped me, but for Pink Floyd it went different. There's this atmospherical element that I like a lot. But now I also like some shorter songs from the debut, e.g. Arnold Layne. I like the sound of it. I am slowly appreciating more aspects of this band, but I can't put well under words why.

CriedWhenBrucieLeft said:
You seem to like doing this too (maybe you don't like doing it?); organising, rating, grading, etc. Do you also find with psychedelic music (& other music like this) that this inability to, how should I put it?, view this type/format of music in this analytical way, means that you haven't really known how to properly approach & appreciate this kind of music in the past --& therefore haven't appreciated it that much? i.e. your "difficult to take in". Can I suggest, that this might even be a particular trait of some Heavy Metal fans?
Click to expand...
Well, to be honest, perhaps not because psychedelic music has more to do (for me at least) with atmosphere, with feeling. It is a less concrete thing. There is less to be found when I zoom in. The genre contains a lot less elements that I like in other music. And still I like some Buckethead songs, and Pink Floyd. I can't put it well into words. There is less analysis, but I am still open to the flow (of some endless river).
 
Thanks for your thoughts.

Yes, for me anyway, beyond the guitar playing & musicianship (which I can have great fun analysing), there is always atmosphere &/or feeling (as you say); very important to me. Some tracks, or pieces of music, just allow the mind to wander. I like this feeling a lot, and not just in music. I look for it in literature & film too. It's why I'm not particularly taken by page-turners (literature) &/or action (film); they don't really do anything for me. Further, they also have nuanced associations that I don't want to be associated with; it's not the way I see myself.

Music is slightly different in that I do like, for a start, Heavy Metal (which one might, superficially, associate with fast, aggression, "action", etc) & the odd grinding palm-muted Em guitar lick! But I like the pensive (not necessarily melancholy), thought-provoking, dreamy music that Floyd (& Buckethead) produce. I'm acutely aware that this is a personal physiological construction; as I believe you can use any type of music (or literature or film) as a gateway to feelings/moods that you enjoy. It can be simple association e.g. I remember something/where special or memorable when I hear that song because it's directly linked to that event (was being played at it) or is closely associated with that time in your life (a song from around that time that you were perhaps listening to a lot). But is doesn't have to be linked/associated this closely. As I get older, I use music & literature far more to access thoughts & feelings (that I enjoy, obviously), even where there isn't necessarily any actual music-to-event or literature-to-event (or whatever) association. As I said, I believe you can access this with anything, if you put your mind to it...
 
From Nick Mason's facebook:
Very funny story....... Picture Of ‪#‎RandomMan‬ And His Dog, Turns Out To Be Pink Floyd’s David Gilmour
Click to expand...
http://www.smash.com/zoella-posts-picture-randomman-dog-turns-pink-floyds-david-gilmour/

random-man-dave-gilmour-780x3901-780x390.jpg
 
Wouldn't look entirely out of place as a Pink Floyd album cover, if zoomed out a bit showing him and the dog on a vast, deserted beach :D
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top