[Peter Polo]

Radiohead is for me the Pink Floyd for "nowerdays"

 

[Aman]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Zodduska /img/forum/go_quote.gif Maybe you are underestimating their popularity.. Though, I'm too young to gauge how popular PF was in its time.

Walk throughout a typical high school or college, and you will find a large number of students have never heard of Tool, let alone be able to hum one of their tunes to you. Radiohead is more likely to be known by the masses, but I still challenge you to find a large number of people who can sing any of their "classics". Pink Floyd was as synonymous of a name as The Rolling Stones or The Beatles at their height.

And that's only on the level of popularity. Neither groups have done anything noteworthy in terms of innovative uses of the studio, fantastic live performances, etc. Regardless of your feelings for all of these bands, it is difficult to deny that Pink Floyd's music completely changed popular music, whereas these effects DEFINITELY haven't been felt yet from Tool or Radiohead.

 

[eyeteeth]

Quote:

Originally Posted by roadtonowhere08 /img/forum/go_quote.gif While I think that The Beatles influenced everyone and their brother, I still believe that Pink Floyd will attract more interest in the long run.

You may be right. 50 or more years from now PF may still have something contemporary in their sound while the Beatles may be too dated sounding. You think there is a greater aspect of timelessness to their sound and you might be right. It would be DSOTM and The Wall for me. Animals sounds quite dated for me.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Aman /img/forum/go_quote.gif Walk throughout a typical high school or college, and you will find a large number of students have never heard of Tool, let alone be able to hum one of their tunes to you. Radiohead is more likely to be known by the masses, but I still challenge you to find a large number of people who can sing any of their "classics". Pink Floyd was as synonymous of a name as The Rolling Stones or The Beatles at their height. And that's only on the level of popularity. Neither groups have done anything noteworthy in terms of innovative uses of the studio, fantastic live performances, etc. Regardless of your feelings for all of these bands, it is difficult to deny that Pink Floyd's music completely changed popular music, whereas these effects DEFINITELY haven't been felt yet from Tool or Radiohead.

I'm a big fan of Tool (which embarrasses me a bit) and like Radiohead a lot, both of whom I like more than Pink Floyd, but I don't see either band coming anywhere near Pink Floyd's stature or distinctiveness.

The word for Pink Floyd is "inimitable" (not capable of being imitated). That's why there is no real Pink Floyd of today.

On a side note: sometimes I listen to PF just because the mastering is so damn fine. So warm and dynamic.

 

[roadtonowhere08]

Quote:

Originally Posted by eyeteeth /img/forum/go_quote.gif You may be right. 50 or more years from now PF may still have something contemporary in their sound while the Beatles may be too dated sounding. You think there is a greater aspect of timelessness to their sound and you might be right. It would be DSOTM and The Wall for me. Animals sounds quite dated for me.

For me, DSOTM and WYWH are the timeless ones. The Wall is great in that is has some truly timeless songs, but I could take it or leave it on the whole.

Also, I would not really be embarrassed about liking Tool (maybe Radiohead

). I am a huge Tool fan, and I find their music to be very satisfying. I would not really compare them to PF, but there is nobody even close to them right now, kinda like PF. What I really respect about Tool is that they play the game on their terms and are very true to themselves. What sucks about Tool is that many fans think they are like a musical DiVinci code or something, which is not their fault, but they really ham it up. Needless to say, they do have a hell of a sense of humor

 

[brandon13830]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Aman /img/forum/go_quote.gif Walk throughout a typical high school or college, and you will find a large number of students have never heard of Tool, let alone be able to hum one of their tunes to you. Radiohead is more likely to be known by the masses, but I still challenge you to find a large number of people who can sing any of their "classics". Pink Floyd was as synonymous of a name as The Rolling Stones or The Beatles at their height. And that's only on the level of popularity. Neither groups have done anything noteworthy in terms of innovative uses of the studio, fantastic live performances, etc. Regardless of your feelings for all of these bands, it is difficult to deny that Pink Floyd's music completely changed popular music, whereas these effects DEFINITELY haven't been felt yet from Tool or Radiohead.

Isn't Tool known for putting on one of the best shows people have ever seen? I here that all the time.

 

[roadtonowhere08]

Quote:

Originally Posted by brandon13830 /img/forum/go_quote.gif Isn't Tool known for putting on one of the best shows people have ever seen? I here that all the time.

Honestly, no, not really. I have seen them, and while I love their music, their shows are, IMO, not all that great considering all the praise they get. Maynard is in the back and acts like Tarzan, Adam and Justin are motionless for the most part, but Danny is fun to watch. The visuals are trippy, though. As far as the bands I have seen, I'd say Tool is in the middle of the pack in terms of putting on a concert.

 

[eyeteeth]

Quote:

Originally Posted by roadtonowhere08 /img/forum/go_quote.gif What sucks about Tool is that many fans think they are like a musical DiVinci code or something, which is not their fault, but they really ham it up. Needless to say, they do have a hell of a sense of humor

Oh yes you nailed it. It is kind of embarrassing how Tool can be elevated by fans to where you'd think Maynard uses the Ark of the Covenant to receive lyrical content. They are still serious though and you're right also humorous. At this stage I'm sure they've exorcised those real personal demons which fueled Opiate/Undertow/Aenima. Now some of it is shtick.

Some of my slight embarrassment is the smallness of the subject matter, neurotic angst rather than larger more universal, mature themes. Tool is more adolescent than adult. Or am I just getting too old? Hey 3 of 4 members are older than I am!

 

[vcoheda]

britney spears or mandy moore. i can't decide which.

 

[Frostychrist]

About Tool in concert. I would say its was one of the worst concerts I have been to. Not because of Tool but because of the fans. Interesting this leads to the person who said most high school kids don't know who Tool is. The fans were the worst fans I have ever seen. I go to alot of concerts. Heavy Metal concerts where you mosh and headbang and get into the music. There is an unspoken etiquette among the people there. When i saw Tool I can't recall how many fist fights broke out. manily during the softer songs. No Patience, No appreciation. Secondly, people were lighting there shirts on fire and throughing them in the middle of the pits. They would purposly stand on the outside of the pit and if they got touched they wanted to fight. So Tool fans have some of the dumbest founds I have seen. But as for Tool they did a pretty good job. Sorry to side track this thread but I wanted to put my Two cents in.

 

[geekbanter]

I have some Porcupine Tree and Radiohead albums, and I like them both. I have only listened to a portion of a Tool CD once (don't remember which one) and I didn't like it at the time. My tastes change fairly often so I might be more receptive if I give them another try.

Any recommendations on your favorite Tool album or where I should start?

Oh, and check out some of the String Quartet Tributes, and Trans-Siberian Orchestra - Beethoven's Last Night. They aren't Pink Floyd, but I find myself sitting down and enjoying them just as I do when listening to DSOTM.

 

[Coltrane]

Quote:

Originally Posted by roadtonowhere08 /img/forum/go_quote.gif My last bit, then I'm done: There are so many reasons why The Beatles are so popular now, then, and will be in the foreseeable future, which, for the sake of not derailing this thread, I will not delve into. Now, I think it is obvious that I am not a Beatles fan; none of their songs have done anything for me. They are not my style. What I was trying to get at though (and probably not very well) was that they are bands are representative of different genres. Strictly speaking from my experience, I think that those who heap praise on The Beatles are *generally* older, and I think that the style of music that will appeal to most youth in the future (who will be the ones buying the music after the Baby Boomers are gone) will be more in line with Pink Floyd and not The Beatles. While I think that The Beatles influenced everyone and their brother, I still believe that Pink Floyd will attract more interest in the long run. Call me ignorant, biased, or whatever. I may be wrong, but at least I will be long gone before I have to admit it Carry on...

I can buy all that. I think the Beatles have the best chance of sounding dated because they were copied a whole lot more than PF. I think Floyd will be listened to for as long as there is music as well. I just had a contention with the idea that Floyd will actually outlast the Beatles. Can they be more popular at some point? Absolutely.

And for the record, I quite enjoy Tool's live shows, but they definitely arent legendary.

 

[Frostychrist]

Geekbanter I Would Try either Undertow or Aenima. My Personal Favs, However, Lateralus is a decent album to listen to as well. Their new album 10,000 Day's IMO is just no good. If you like a lot ambience and filler you might like it.

 

[skullguise]

I think one important point that many folks are missing is that the MARKET is different now.

Yes, there can be comparisons of "Top 40" in the old days to "Top 40" now.

But Album-Oriented Radio was the thing back then; now it isn't. You can't compare exposure now and then. "Space" or "Psychedellic" music, however you choose to generically describe it, is much more a smaller niche today than it was int he 60's and 70's. Today's make-me-a-packaged-hit mentality will never support making that type of music and creativity popular.

As for originality, well, you won't get that much either. Too much time has passed, too many bands coem and gone, and there's often NO way to describe a band as being completely "new" and original; there are always aspects of some other sound coming in when you describe them. What PF was doing in their time wa soften treading new ground, that hadn't been tread before.

Because of the difference in the market and the difference in the times, there may NEVER be another Pink Floyd. Not because a band isn't creative, plays well together, and hits the musical peaks like Floyd did; but rather because their influence and music won't be as exposed.

Now all that said.....if there was to be some parallel in purely musical capability and creativity, I would agree somewhat with Tool, and somewhat more with Porcupine Tree.

But to counter that, no one I've heard has such soulful guitar work as David Gilmour....his "touch" does indeed seem one of a kind.

My 2 cents....

 

[NightWoundsTime]

The only comparison that works for me is Flaming Lips. Big stage show, definite "arc" in the development of their albums. Granted they haven't made a Wall or WYWH yet but I think Soft Bulletin could be called their Dark Side, with everything coming before it falling into the same sort of experimental cauldron that Floyd worked from. Granted I saw the Lips a couple weeks ago and thought their live show was pathetic. Too much flash, not enough heart. I may have viewed Pink Floyd in the same way for all I know, I'm too young to have seen them. I may go catch Roger Waters from a distance in a couple weeks, doing DSOTM in full. I like Pink Floyd and Flaming Lips about equally when it comes to their recorded output, except that the Lips never put out an album as strong as Wish You Were Here, which is my favorite from PF.

 

[BoxBoxBox]

yes I agree with Flaming Lips, but time will tell if they peaked or will grow in ambition... also mars volta... in terms of 'ambition' not sound. de-loused is great... at one point we could have said radiohead but in the past 5 years they've been lazy... legend just doesn't grow that way. it's also FEAR

I miss the days when artists released new material every year---it was THEN that you see who the truly great ones were, bowie had like 12 masterpieces in a row, yes too...

nowadays a band makes a new album every 5 years, i just wish there wasn't such a fear, but it is a very human instinct and as with all major low points in modern society it all points to stock prices

but you see it with film too, the 60's and 70's were a definite golden era for creativity in both music and film... both fields lag today because the entire culture shifted... not cool anymore to be different or intellectual, but it is cool to be a CEO for a major corporation.

the culture shifted