BLANDCorporatio wrote:Then, a different snobbery. PF had different phases. There was the Gilmour-led, most recent. The Twaters-led, before that until The Final Cut. And yet before that there was, as some poster above is surely familiar, the Barrett-led.
I think that's to some degree inevitable with any long-lived band, and it's not always snobbery. Everyone has different tastes, and there's always something fairly specific that attracts a particular listener to a particular band. But few bands can survive doing the same thing forever, and line-ups change, so the music evolves—consequently losing the characteristics that attracted the listener in the first place.
For me, the extreme example of this isn't Floyd, but Tangerine Dream. I adore their mid-70's works, but I'd rather be buried in quicklime than listen to anything they made after 1980. Is that snobbery? I don't think so. The band moved on and so did I; we just went in different directions. They still have plenty of followers, and I wish them well with their ongoing success (Edgar Froese is 65 now, for heaven's sake), but all of the more recent stuff that I've heard has left me cold.
Getting back to Floyd, for me they're a bit of an anomaly. Like many of my age group, I was introduced to them when Dark Side of the Moon
came out. That album socked everyone between the eyes; around '73-5, you couldn't go anywhere without hearing Money
in the background. It wasn't until 15 or more years later that I started to realize that I liked the earlier songs—Barrett and co—more than the later blockbusters.
(It didn't hurt that unlike most rock albums at the time, DSotM was sufficiently well-produced and well-manufactured that it was a tough test for the so-called hi-fi systems of the day. When I bought my first quality sound system, I played DSotM to my roommate. His jaw dropped; he'd never heard it played on a decent system, and had no idea
that it began with the sound of heartbeats. The average cheapo ‘hi-fi’ system back then just couldn't reproduce them. Never mind the horrors of reproducing the intro to Time
without burning your ears off.)
So while it's usually
the first exposure to a band that determines the era of interest, it's not always the case. I'm not sure where the line between taste and snobbery lies, but there clearly is one.
But sometimes, the music is just plain bad. I continue to think that The Piper at the Gates of Dawn
is mostly horrible.
Grammar: It's not the law, it's just a good idea.