Evaluate this statement...

Chad · #1 11-28-2002, 05:52 PM

... from a friend of mine, whose knowledge of Pink Floyd is limited pretty much to Money, and me telling him that they're good.

"without the Beatles, there could be no pink floyd"

Is this somewhat accurate, or is he just taking a stance that centres on a single band as "it" and assuming that everybody - including the members of Pink Floyd - agree with him. I'm not trying to downplay the Beatles in any way, I just don't see his logic in this statement other than assuming that the Beatles have influenced everything. Other than both being British, I don't see them being similar at all...

So... yes, no, sorta? I'm thinking no.

This all started with his proclaiming the Beatles as the greatest lyrics ever. I disagreed and pointed to Pink Floyd (the lyrics of Time particularly). He, while knowing nothing about Pink Floyd, disagreed on the principle that "whatever it is, it's probably not better than the Beatles." Trying to explain The Wall (we were talking about lyrics, seems like natural progression to me) to somebody who knows nothing about it is hard... he pretty much just looked at me funny and thought to himself that it sounded stupid. Arrgh.

Shane G. · #2 11-28-2002, 05:57 PM

Well, that statement is true in the fact that the Beatles influenced Pink Floyd somewhat.

I agree that PF has better lyrics, however.

Da_Floyd_Fan · #3 11-28-2002, 06:03 PM

I do agree, too.

Hicks · #4 11-28-2002, 06:04 PM

Tell your friend he has a very limited knowledge of rock history.

mad yannis · #5 11-28-2002, 06:05 PM

I put it this way: like it or not Beatles opened a lot of doors for music in the 60s. Maybe your friend is right when he said "without Beatles no Floyd". Music is evolution and Beatles was a big step in this process. We haven't any proof, however. But if we have to be honest, well, yes, The Beatles changed a lot of things, no matter if we think they were good or not.

But.

But "greatest lyrics ever"? The Beatles? Come on. Please. And I tell you, I don't even think Pink Floyd had the "greatest lyrics ever", no no, no way. But for sure NOT The Beatles.

mad yannis · #6 11-28-2002, 06:20 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Shane G.
Well, that statement is true in the fact that the Beatles influenced Pink Floyd somewhat.

I agree that PF has better lyrics, however.

That's what I meant.

Hicks · #7 11-28-2002, 06:22 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Shane G.
Well, that statement is true in the fact that the Beatles influenced Pink Floyd somewhat.

Oh, surely, they influenced all psychedelic and prog-rock bands... I'd say they were the pioneers of Canterbury school too, and their influence is easily detectable in punk and new-wave too, God bless Beatles cos they invented pop-rock and they were the fathers of modern music!

Wildman · #8 11-28-2002, 07:41 PM

I too have to agree with your friend. Like 'em or not, The Beatles did have a profound influence on just about everybody at the time, and certainly inspired the whole self-contained band, singer, writer musician idea as well

fIoydian slip · #9 11-28-2002, 11:41 PM

All hail Pan, the piper at the gates of dawn.

The Who and the Stones were around at the same time, so maybe without them the Beatles would not have been pushed to out do them.

Without Elvis would there be the Beatles?

Without Robert Johnson, Bo Diddley, Muddy Waters, Howlin' Wolf, ect.. Would there be a Elvis?

In my opinion, it is all circumstancial evidence. The only true fact is that without Pink Anderson and Floyd Council there would be no Pink Floyd.

DavidAV · #10 11-28-2002, 11:51 PM

Yeah, I wouldn't have been born if my parents did not have sex, but I am still my own person. Get it?

Loupgaros · #11 11-29-2002, 08:04 AM

I think the Beatles are overrated but they DID influence a lot of bands. However I believe the Floyd were influenced by other artists, not just the Beatles exclusively. Gilmour was influenced by Elvis, for example, and other singers/songwriters of that time. There's also a bit of jazz, maybe even classical music in there as well.

Lyric-wise, PF win hands-down. I like a few Beatles songs but they tend to be the more well-writen stuff.

Vintageblue · #12 11-29-2002, 01:04 PM

I agree that music is derivitive by nature.

Before the Beatles it was pretty much 3 chord rock & roll out there. They pioneered the use of strings sections in pop and, on the insistance of Lennon to simulate double tracked vocals, their engineer invented Flanging which led to other time based modulation effects. Also studio time was basically 9-5 and all the engineers wore white coats, can you believe that .

That changed at Abbey Road and then elsewhere.

I'm sure in someway Floyd have been influenced by the Beatles but also many others too.

Regards

Chad · #13 11-29-2002, 02:06 PM

Quote:

Yeah, I wouldn't have been born if my parents did not have sex, but I am still my own person. Get it?

And you could very well write better lyrics than your parents did.

I really dislike those "x wouldn't have happened without y" things... it might be likely in a lot of cases, but you can never really say for sure. Those statements just seem like they're oversimplifying thing to me. But I can admit that the Beatles opened doors and were an influence... but I won't go so far as to say PF wouldn't exist without them.

Aggh... it's turning into a gang war. I've got myself and 2 people on the Floyd lyrics side. He's got another girl on his side and his Media English teacher... and we've got two fence-sitters.

And he comes up with the fact that Pink Floyd said themselves that they were less about the lyrics than using the studio and effects and stuff... depends really on when they said this, I think. Ahh well.

And I want to say again that I like the Beatles. Very much.

Wildman · #14 11-29-2002, 02:56 PM

I really dont think its a case as to weather or not The Beatles influenced Floyd DIRECTLY as much as they influenced the whole INDUSTRY at the time, susequently opening many doors.

In terms of lyrics, they can't be properly comared because of their subjective nature. Sorry if that appears to be "fence sitting" but I feel that at their best, Floyd and Beatles lyrics are of equal merit depending on ones point of view at the time.

As regards Floyd being more into the studio and effects type stuff, that may have been the case in the early days, but CERTAINLY not from the DSOTM period onwards. In fact, Gilmour has always accused Waters of concerning himself far to much with the lyrics and not enough with the music....

Hicks · #15 11-29-2002, 05:40 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Vintageblue
I agree that music is derivitive by nature.

Before the Beatles it was pretty much 3 chord rock & roll out there. ...

Are you sure you know well what happened in the 50s? And have you ever heard Sandy Bull? Or Moondog?
And anyway, Beatles are not 3 chord r&r? Here maybe your right: they are 2 chord pop

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version Email this Page	Search this Thread: Advanced Search
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

Evaluate this statement...

General