Radiohead vs. Pink Floyd
Mar 23, 2009 at 2:23 PM Post #17 of 55
Quote:

Originally Posted by jonathanjong /img/forum/go_quote.gif
I disagree. It's a fair question to ask who we prefer and for what reason, even if the difference is "obvious." It's what gets conversation rolling. Furthermore, the "correct answer" isn't obvious it seems, given that both bands always get votes.


x2
 
Mar 23, 2009 at 2:33 PM Post #18 of 55
I of course would sit down with Pink Floyd any day so my choice is obvious. That being said I think comparing a genre originator, Pink Floyd, to another band is a tremendously dificult task. When one creates something new and unique, as in Pink Floyd's case, that goes beyond classification of current music how do you measure that against someone who came much later and had that band as an influence. Merely having the influence of the previous generation complicates any comparison. This would be akin to asking who was better: Muddy Waters or Stevey Ray Vaughn. In their own right they are great and accomplished. What other comparison do you need?
 
Mar 23, 2009 at 2:54 PM Post #19 of 55
i listen to more radiohead on a daily basis, but my bow has to be directed at the floyd!

with regard to the comment about radiohead being around for 25 years, sure, they formed at college to gain that timeframe, but as far as i am concerned, and am sure others, i start counting from 1992 upon release, as i cant glean their style and progress in those unreleased years, which gives them 17 years active to my way of thinking

floyd however, were on release for 27 years, 1967-1994 so there is still a good way to chart radios progress and albums yet released

so it isnt a fair comparison in a way, for a band which is still active and presumably has works ahead of itself to a band who released their last album 15 years ago
 
Mar 23, 2009 at 4:48 PM Post #21 of 55
Quote:

Originally Posted by analogbox /img/forum/go_quote.gif
Premature? Radiohead's been around for 24 years and countless young and old bands around the world are influenced by their music and you call it premature? I'm sorry but it sounds like you don't know much about Radiohead and their influences around the world. Yes, Pink Floyd's legendary status is no match for Radiohead but saying that they didn't go through enough phases sounds like an absurd statement.


Meh.

The band formed in 1988, so technically they've been around 21 years, and they only released their debut album Pablo Honey in 1993, which would make their recorded history only about 16 years long (barring EP's and demos, etc.)...I cede that that is not a short amount of time, but to be able to draw a fair comparison to Pink Floyd, they will have to be around at least an additional decade IMO.

Of course they are influential, but there are lots of influential bands that only lasted one album, and those flash in the pans aren't being compared to Pink Floyd.

I personally don't hear a dramatic difference from Radiohead's early output to their current output. Yes, they have become a more mellow, studio oriented band and less a pub rocking outfit, but no more so than R.E.M. in the way that band from Athens changed.

I think that ultimately Radiohead will be seen more like King Crimson than like Pink Floyd...influential and interesting, but more for connoisseur's and the cognoscenti than for the masses.
 
Mar 23, 2009 at 4:55 PM Post #23 of 55
Quote:

Originally Posted by Quaddy /img/forum/go_quote.gif
with regard to the comment about radiohead being around for 25 years, sure, they formed at college to gain that timeframe, but as far as i am concerned, and am sure others, i start counting from 1992 upon release, as i cant glean their style and progress in those unreleased years, which gives them 17 years active to my way of thinking

floyd however, were on release for 27 years, 1967-1994 so there is still a good way to chart radios progress and albums yet released

so it isnt a fair comparison in a way, for a band which is still active and presumably has works ahead of itself to a band who released their last album 15 years ago


I wasn't comparing them to Pink Floyd but rather just answering to the previous statement that they didn't have enough time to be recognized as an established band. 17 years is the time people got to know Radiohead but not the time they did music. They were in the music scene for 20+ years and they've well established the experimental music well into current generation which deserves some credit.
 
Mar 23, 2009 at 5:06 PM Post #24 of 55
Quote:

Originally Posted by Jeff Guidry /img/forum/go_quote.gif
Meh.

The band formed in 1988, so technically they've been around 21 years, and they only released their debut album Pablo Honey in 1993, which would make their recorded history only about 16 years long (barring EP's and demos, etc.)...I cede that that is not a short amount of time, but to be able to draw a fair comparison to Pink Floyd, they will have to be around at least an additional decade IMO.


Maybe I misunderstood you, but you didn't say compared to in your previous statement and sounded more like you meant Radiohead as a band didn't go through enough phases to be recognized as an influential band.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jeff Guidry /img/forum/go_quote.gif
Of course they are influential, but there are lots of influential bands that only lasted one album, and those flash in the pans aren't being compared to Pink Floyd.


I'm sorry but that is just not true. What band or artist have influenced bands around the globe with just one, or even two albums? You probably don't listen to any other international bands but including United States, a lot of European and Asian bands now days try to sound like Radiohead which sounds almost ridiculous. Please, name me one band that has affected this much influence. Just one.
 
Mar 23, 2009 at 5:48 PM Post #25 of 55
Tough poll, both bands have a significant role in musics history, but Pink Floyd definitely played a bigger role, and their music is a tad more consitent and approachable for the new comer, so I voted Floyd. But by a very small margin.
 
Mar 23, 2009 at 6:53 PM Post #26 of 55
Quote:

Originally Posted by Dublo7 /img/forum/go_quote.gif
I would kill to be able to go back in time and attend The Wall tour.


Who would you kill?
 
Mar 23, 2009 at 7:03 PM Post #27 of 55
i enjoy both personally and i find it hard to vote one over the other. its obvious that radiohead got some of its influences from floyd though. i started listening to radiohead first, then i got into listening to floyd.
smily_headphones1.gif
 
Mar 23, 2009 at 7:37 PM Post #29 of 55
I have to say that I think that this matchup is a bit unfair, much like the Radiohead v. Coldplay matchup, though the latter was terribly unfair. In this case, though, I don't think you can really make the comparison yet. Once Radiohead is done recording and people have had 10ish years for the music to percolate, I think that this would be a viable and interesting poll.
 
Mar 23, 2009 at 8:14 PM Post #30 of 55
Quote:

Originally Posted by analogbox /img/forum/go_quote.gif
I'm sorry but that is just not true. What band or artist have influenced bands around the globe with just one, or even two albums? You probably don't listen to any other international bands but including United States, a lot of European and Asian bands now days try to sound like Radiohead which sounds almost ridiculous. Please, name me one band that has affected this much influence. Just one.


What a stupid, elitest, hipster dumbass thing to say. A lot of Korean companies blatantly rip off American and Japanese cell phone designs, and many times the phones they rip off aren't even good. Saying presumptuous things like "You probably don't listen to any other international bands" was one of the most dumb and elitest actions I have ever seen. As for a band that spawned a legion of followers and copycats with just one album? The Sex Pistols. Pack up your bags and leave, because you look like an idiot.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 2 (members: 0, guests: 2)
Back
Top