IMHO Syd beats almost anyone as far as originality goes. His style was HIS. It's so very personal...

But, having said that, I think that this comparison is not fair. I prefer "The Wall" to "Piper" and Roger Waters can beat as well almost anyone as far as concepts linking whole albums go. I think that rock operas such as "Tommy", "Quadrophenia" or "The Lamb Lies Down on Broadway" are very weak narratively compared with "The Wall" or "Amused to Death" (I'm talking about narrative coherence, not about the music) and it is quite difficult to articulate a whole album around a story and make it work effectively (ask Dream Theater: "Metropolis Part II" is an awful mess lyrically and it's full of clichés).

But perhaps he isn't as good with the music as he is with the words. Though he's got wonderful songs of his own, a lot of the best songs have come up in collaborations with the other band members (Echoes, Us and Them, Wish You Were Here, Dogs, Comfortably Numb...).

You see, they are two very different artists to be compared on the same level. And, what is more, Roger had 12 years to evolve from "Take Up Thy Stethoscope" or "Small Furry, blah, blah, blah..." to "The Wall", whereas poor old Syd Barrett went crazy and couldn´t get any further. Who knows what things he could have done if he hadn´t lost his head on the way?

But, of course, this is just wishful thinking. How would have the Stones evolved with Brian Jones alive and kicking? And Hendrix's guitar style if he hadn't died? John Lennon's works and opinions in the 80's and 90's?... All wishful thinking.

__________________
"Me fail English? That's unpossible!"

Solo work