Pink Floyd: Barrett-Waters or Gilmour-Waters?

darthmise

Just curious as to what some of you like more, the early Floyd stuff or the later stuff, and by later i'm not talking Division Bell or any of the 80's soundtracks, i'm on about The Wall, Wish You Were Here. Early Bieng the sixties, later being the 70's, (the 80's don't count for much IMO.)

Personally i'd be hard pushed to choose, but i reckon i'd go early stuff...

Kali

pah.. three albums versus seven?
anything after saucerful of secrets isn't barrett.
meddle definitely isn't anyway
all barrett contributed was pointless acid-inspired drivel
i mean who else could make a love song like bike? it really is woeful cring-inducing listening..
any major floyd fans i know only listen to it very occasionally for laughing purposes (and to truely appreciate how far they came with tracks like shine on and echoes) thats not to say theres no good tracks on piper, theres some seriously funky guitar(interstellar overdrive/lucifer sam/take up thy..) but two of those came from waters as well..

saucerful is pretty good, yes barrett-derived, but by that stage he was well off his trolley and out of the band..and is notable only for the first two tracks imo.. most of the rest is an attempt by waters to emulate barretts acid-crap .. which he done woefully (and thank god stopped doing)..
even take ummagumma as a case of early late 60s floyd totally barrett-less (in person and influence), it does suck compared to meddle (even though its still great listening.. granchester meadows/narrow way especially)..

WhiteWashMan

definately later

not now john?

no

not any more syd.....

Dustaz

later without a doubt. the only early stuff i really like is the stuff collected on relics. but compared to what they went on to do....

Kali

on the subject... anyone else headin to Australian Pink Floyd this evening?

darthmise

I can see the point your making Kali, i guess i should have put the question differently.
I would never question the contribution of Waters to the music, thats a given, but i never rated Dave Gilmour at all. The proof to me, of that would be that once Waters left, the band practically ceased to exist, creatively.
I just feel that had Barrett been able to continue, the band could have surpassed what they went on to creat with Dark Side, WYWH, and The Wall, even though Waters pretty much created The Wall single handedly. Gilmour didn't seem to have the ability to progress as a musician, whereas i think Barrett really could have.
I get more excited when i listen to Barrett/ Floyd and i sit back and marvel at Gilmour/ floyd.

I honestly think that had Sid Barrett continued, they would have been bigger than the Beatles.

Lolo

No contest, definitely the Syd years. There's a 60s Pink Floyd tribute band over here called Interstellar Overdrive (but of course), haven't seen 'em though.

Is it the Australian Pink Floyd who are really form Milton Keynes?

mike65

I can't or won't choose between the two eras as they are equally
valid just quite different, the early stuff has great charm in an
Alice-in-Wonderland on acid fashion while the latter Waters dominated music has great presence and elan. Both bloody good.

Mike