[tru blu]

Quote:

Originally Posted by tru blu /img/forum/go_quote.gif This'll probably end up being a minority opinion around here (audio-geeks are such Floyd-heads), but I don't even think it's a fair comparison. The Beatles made the world safe for Floyd.

Hate to say, "I told ya' so", but…

 

[FrederikS|TPU]

Pink Floyd!

 

[ac404]

I just started listening to The Beatles not too long ago. I like a lot of their songs, but just too happy go-lucky sounding for me to really get into them. Anyways i love Pink Floyd way too much.

Pink Floyd for me.

 

[ComfyCan]

The Beatles were indescribably influential and most of their music is timeless. Floyd will always be my personal fav. though. I get burned out on listening to the Beatles, even though their catalogue is much larger and is quite diverse. I never burn out on PF (at least Gilmour era Floyd).

 

[panyncor]

I like Pink Floyd -- just finished listening to them, in fact -- but a lot of their music feels self-indulgent and pompous. The Beatles, on the other hand, always maintained their wit, and no band has ever equaled the breadth and diversity of their output (in under a decade, no less).

Thought experiment: in a hundred years, which band will have a larger and more devoted following? I don't for a moment doubt that it will be the Beatles. Pink Floyd will probably still have a cohort or fans, but I'm guessing (and of course it is only a guess) that their place in the popular consciousness will by that time be fairly small.

That said, I will give Pink Floyd the nod for recording quality, although even there the Beatles hold up surprisingly well. Listen to Sgt. Pepper and try to grasp how they did all of that on a 4-track recorder.

Edit: Please no Floyd fans take this as too negative. There really is a lot to like with them.

 

[rainy]

panyncor: I don't really " get " this thought experiment. If, for the sake of argument, we accept that people can mistakenly put an inferior band over a superior band now, I don't see why they would not be able to do that in a 100 years, or for that matter in a 1000, or 10000, or 100000 years. Naturally, in a million years folks should be advanced enough to see that PF is totally cooler than Beatles .

According to some cosmologies, golden age is a time when arts, sciences and development of people is at its height, during silver age it is lower, during iron age it is extremely low. By that logic, both Beatles and Pink Floyd are musicians of our iron age. Therefore, people living in the next Golden age will poo-poo both Pink Floyd and Beatles and will only make minor distinction between them.

I will listen to Floyd because I like their songs that much better, and I'm still living here, in our sorry times .

 

[Contrastique]

That's an easy one: Pink Floyd for me. I don't like the Beatles..

 

[tru blu]

Quote:

Originally Posted by rainy /img/forum/go_quote.gif According to some cosmologies, golden age is a time when arts, sciences and development of people is at its height, during silver age it is lower, during iron age it is extremely low. By that logic, both Beatles and Pink Floyd are musicians of our iron age. Therefore, people living in the next Golden age will poo-poo both Pink Floyd and Beatles and will only make minor distinction between them.

Hmm…just curious, when was that golden age, then? Some think of the 20th century as an extraordinary period of creative and technological innovation. Rock & roll (and by extension, the Beatles and Pink Floyd) might be seen as part of that, along with Picasso, microchips, aircraft, jazz, whatever…

 

[rainy]

Quote:

Originally Posted by tru blu /img/forum/go_quote.gif Hmm…just curious, when was that golden age, then? Some think of the 20th century as an extraordinary period of creative and technological innovation. Rock & roll (and by extension, the Beatles and Pink Floyd) might be seen as part of that, along with Picasso, microchips, aircraft, jazz, whatever…

I don't remember exactly, but the current iron age started, according to some chronologies, around ~6,000 BC. It should end in a few hundred years, sigh, too late for poor us.

 

[thatwunguy]

i prefer the beatles, but i'm talking about the beatles after they started doing a little experimenting (with drugs and music).

 

[Displayman]

I like them both but my first choice alwasys would be The Beatles....
I love music and there nothing better than the Beatles and if you have not heard the four disc's called Beatle Jazz check those out they are wonderful.

 

[Kovax]

At least for me - Pink Floyd wins with a large margin.

 

[davidhunternyc]

I am shocked Pink Floyd is ahead. I think it is because the Beetles really poppy tunes are on everyone's minds.

 

[ozz]

Quote:

Originally Posted by davidhunternyc /img/forum/go_quote.gif I am shocked Pink Floyd is ahead. I think it is because the Beetles really poppy tunes are on everyone's minds.

Or simply they have not listened to their catalog from Revolver forward.
And then again they just might like PF better I have both but I tend to listen
to the Beatles later tunes more often.

 

[pdennis]

This is tough, but leaving aside questions of style, influence, etc., I prefer Floyd.