Syd Barrett solo - classic or dud?

Message Bookmarked
Bookmark Removed
Kind of surprised this hasn't been asked until now. The Madcap Laughs = classic in my little book, but the second album veers towards dud, something about the combination of professional-sounding backing with Barrett's mental state (I know that could probably apply to other records, I'm just comparing it to the unapologetically shambolic feel of The Madcap Laughs).

Damian, Friday, 16 August 2002 00:00 (twenty-two years ago)

The second album is a pretty extreme Blur rip-off

dave q, Friday, 16 August 2002 00:00 (twenty-two years ago)

i can't be objective about syd as he was one of the first musicians i ever listened to who wasn't - well - jazz or classical so has a deep seated place in my heart. i would say the first album is the greater one but they both are rather glorious in their way. terribly sad to hear him fragmenting on record though...

commonswings, Friday, 16 August 2002 00:00 (twenty-two years ago)

Classic - but not all of it is something you want to listen to.

Winkelmann, Friday, 16 August 2002 00:00 (twenty-two years ago)

I kind of prefer Barrett sometimes, Madcap Laughs can get a little depressing... and Barrett has Baby Lemonade! But yeah there's a "spirit", whatever, to Madcap that's lacking on the sequel. Of course considering Syd's state I'm glad he even did a second Lp. Did everyone know the cover of Barrett is some kind of reference to the Beatles? Of course you did. Sorry.

Andrew, Friday, 16 August 2002 00:00 (twenty-two years ago)

Total classic. I can't think of one SB solo song that hasn't ended up stuck in my head for at least a couple of weeks. At the moment it's "It is Obvious." Next it will be "Vegetable Man" or "Rats."

John Darnielle, Friday, 16 August 2002 00:00 (twenty-two years ago)

Greatly wonderful, wonderfully great, etc. Though oddly enough I listen to Opel most...

Ned Raggett, Friday, 16 August 2002 00:00 (twenty-two years ago)

Classic -- plus you get Robert Wyatt drumming too. Like Darnielle said, the songs easly get lodged in my head, snatches of melodies and phrases bobbing up and down at random. Certainly, Syd's work is pinata of lots of stuff I value including his word play, melodies, and emotional range. Probably the song that appears in my head the most (after having not listened to any Barrett for a while) is "Rats."

Jack Cole, Friday, 16 August 2002 00:00 (twenty-two years ago)

The ones that pop up in my head unannounced are the ones that I don't pay much attention to when I hear them on the album: things like "No Use Trying," "Milky Way," "It Is Obvious," "No Man's Land." I love them all though.

I think Syd's songs have a fantastic blend of emotion and imagination. I'm also a sucker for those progressions of pretty much only major triads, moving by thirds and fifths, or whatever it is exactly that he does. Bowie does a fair amount of it too. Can anyone give a more accurate description, or more examples?

Paul Eater, Friday, 16 August 2002 00:00 (twenty-two years ago)

I am somewhat saddened that William Shatner has not returned my letters offering him $50 (cash money!) to record a spoken recital of "It Is Obvious".

Joe, Friday, 16 August 2002 00:00 (twenty-two years ago)

eight months pass...
I've finally just bought The Madcap Laughs after literally nearly 10 years of procrastination. It's just ruined my inequivocal love for Blur's hitherto fanfuckingtastic Modern Life Is Rubbish and that makes me very cross.

Why do I always do this? Hearing "Sympathy For The Devil" after Screamadelica took some of my Scream love away, and now here we are again. Gah.

CharlieNo4 (Charlie), Thursday, 24 April 2003 06:11 (twenty-two years ago)

Depends on your mood, I guess. I mean, it isn't exactly average stuff to say the least. However, it is "twee" enough for me to be able to enjoy it despite the weirdness.

Geir Hongro (GeirHong), Thursday, 24 April 2003 06:47 (twenty-two years ago)

It's genius. "No Good Trying" is one of my favourite evil songs.

Nordicskillz (Nordicskillz), Thursday, 24 April 2003 09:34 (twenty-two years ago)

three months pass...
the two albums are beautiful pieces of work. His voice is very expressive. I recomment them to all readers.

DV (dirtyvicar), Sunday, 3 August 2003 22:41 (twenty-one years ago)

nine months pass...
Not wanting to be a person who started a whole thread about a Pitchfork review, I have awakened this thread to register my displeasure with Chris Dahlen's way-off-the-money and searching-everywhere-for-an-original-take review of the Radio One Sessions this morning. Of particular concern is the conclusion - "Just dig how much fun he's having making this music with his friends" - which seems to have proceeded from the thesis "Everybody's wrong about Syd." Chris, I dig you & got no beef with you, but your take on Barrett needs work.

J0hn Darn1elle (J0hn Darn1elle), Wednesday, 19 May 2004 12:07 (twenty-one years ago)

erm, on my olde Radio 1 sessions 12" single, he seems to be having more fun than on the LP versions, anyway...

mark grout (mark grout), Wednesday, 19 May 2004 12:12 (twenty-one years ago)

I have a bootleg with those sessions on it somewhere. They're nice, but I don't think they're that necessary for the non-obsessive. The story I heard about "Two Of Us" was that it was a Wright song, but Syd had somehow got it into his head that he'd written it...

That bootleg also has the guitar doodlings from the aborted '74 sessions. Sadly uninspired.

Jonathan Z. (Joanthan Z.), Wednesday, 19 May 2004 12:21 (twenty-one years ago)

I've got a two-disc boot that's got pretty much everything that's not on the albums proper. While naturally too much can be made of "Is Syd going over the deep end here?"-style readings, there can be no question of his gradual & semi-public deterioration. To dismiss is as ghoulish voyeur stuff is a talk-radio approach to things I think, and to claim that the extent of that deterioration has been exaggerated ignores the testimony of his friends and family. I don't know - having worked a lot in mental health, I think Barrett's case gives us a chance to think about "madness" and art in some interesting ways, and "Oh his being crazy had nothing to do with it, you gawkers!" isn't one of them - Dahlen's conclusion smacked of The New Criticism (Eliot etc) which I cannot get behind at no cost

J0hn Darn1elle (J0hn Darn1elle), Wednesday, 19 May 2004 12:28 (twenty-one years ago)

"...to dismiss this as" & c., sorry

J0hn Darn1elle (J0hn Darn1elle), Wednesday, 19 May 2004 12:28 (twenty-one years ago)

(xpost)

The premise wasn't so much, "everybody's wrong about Syd," as, "Syd's legacy distorts how we consume his music," or, "Syd carries a terrifying amount of baggage, which is why they're trying to get $20 from the obsessive fans by releasing this slight and unnecessary album of reissued and substandard music." I could've written just one paragraph that said, this isn't worth the money, but it is a nice listen.

The last line is, yeah, kind of a throwaway.

As for "searching-everywhere-for-an-original-take" - I don't think this tried to say anything about Barrett that hasn't been said. I wrestled with whether it was worth running through the history of Syd Barrett all over again, or just writing a review that assumed you knew who he was. But it seems like "part of the format": especially when you have 400-600 words for a review, it's nice to introduce the artist in case you have a reader who's unfamiliar with him. It also seemed relevant, since the rampant mythologizing of Barrett is the only reason that they keep digging up everything they can find from his limited catalog.

It's defensive to respond to criticism of a review, but you bring up some interesting points. What do you think of the album?

Chris Dahlen (Chris Dahlen), Wednesday, 19 May 2004 12:29 (twenty-one years ago)

To be honest, Syd's madness does have something to do with my interest in his music. The madness/art axis is a perennial runs very deep in most cultures, our current version of it is derived from the Romantics. There are some artists whose life does radically inform the work - it's hard (and absurd) to read Rimbaud or Kafka without referring to the life, or perhaps the mythical reading of the life.

Jonathan Z. (Joanthan Z.), Wednesday, 19 May 2004 12:39 (twenty-one years ago)

I know Chris & I'm sorry for putting you in a tough spot 'cause it's very hard to respond to criticism so good on you for coming on in anyway! I thought hard before clicking "submit" on the "searching-everywhere" line but I think in introducing Barrett in that review you favored editorializing over reporting. When your whole point seems to be "we should only observe/report, not let ourselves be led by the editorializing/slanted reporting of others."

More later, I'd love to discuss this as it's one of my favorite subjects, I've got a busy day but will be back

J0hn Darn1elle (J0hn Darn1elle), Wednesday, 19 May 2004 12:46 (twenty-one years ago)

How dare you accuse Syd of having fun!?! Tormented genius, tormented genius I say!!

David Allen (David Allen), Wednesday, 19 May 2004 13:13 (twenty-one years ago)

I don't have a problem with Chris using as his premise the validity of the whole "Cult of Syd" thing. While I agree that his records do comment on "madness" to an extent, it's probably less telling or insightful than some fans would like to believe. I've always had the sense that people read a little too closely into his work, and as such, hold almost everything he did in ludicrously high regard. To me, that's not insignificant when evaluating him...

Naive Teen Idol (Naive Teen Idol), Wednesday, 19 May 2004 14:18 (twenty-one years ago)

I should add that I do think the guy's a genius. But not exactly the way some people seem to think he is...

Naive Teen Idol (Naive Teen Idol), Wednesday, 19 May 2004 14:20 (twenty-one years ago)

I'm not suggesting it's insignifigant - naturally that biz plays into talking about Barrett's work. It's just that to reduce things to "oh it's not the craziness get over it" vs. "it's his mad genius don'tcha see" is to miss most/maybe all of what's interesting about the stuff. Van Gogh is a good point of comparison: both "he made great art in spite of his crippling depression" and "he poured his crippling depression into his art" are boring, as is "oh pooh pooh, all these people who make so much of his depression and mental state: just look at the paintings!" Context & content aren't entirely divorceable (hence my New Crit ref above), but Dahlen's (brief! doubtless not intended as a final statement! so I'm not, like, bein' totally harsh: just talkin') version seems to want it both ways: "The context that strawmen want [late recordings as collapsing Barrett's final transmissions from before his leap into the void] is false: here's the correct [i.e. equally flawed] context in which to consider these recordings - and it's not a construct at all, it's clearly what's really going on." Well. "Clearly what's really going on" is a suspicious construct in all circumstances, much more so in the present case. My point being that when an artist goes insane, it's just as reductive to dismiss his disease as peripheral to his work as it is to attribute that work only to his madness.

My ultimate complaint being that spending too much meta-time on dismissing phantoms ("the Barrett-worshippers who romanticize his illness") ultimate detracts from evaluation of his work, which body of work I think is wonderful & worthy of non-hook-based evaluation i.e. the "there are two views of Syd Barrett" spiel that begins the review: both of these "two views" are maybe what people have the first time they think about the story, but shortly thereafter, genuine engagement begins, at which point neither first-view is of much use.

J0hn Darn1elle (J0hn Darn1elle), Wednesday, 19 May 2004 14:33 (twenty-one years ago)

I just interpreted the last line of the review to be that it's nice to be able to listen to Syd having fun in spite of everything.

Tim Ellison, Wednesday, 19 May 2004 14:36 (twenty-one years ago)

Yeah I feel you Tim, it's the "just" that gets me

J0hn Darn1elle (J0hn Darn1elle), Wednesday, 19 May 2004 14:39 (twenty-one years ago)

I meant that I thought that this was "just" was Chris was saying (maybe? Chris?), not that one can listen to Syd "just" because it's fun.

Tim Ellison, Wednesday, 19 May 2004 15:12 (twenty-one years ago)

Yeah. It seems this whole debate is worth acknowledging his Syd's case, because it's so very much the effervescing elephant in the room. I mean, to me, the key line in Chris's review is "Wherever you stand on Barrett, his legacy regularly buries everything that was great about his tiny catalog." And the way I interpret the last two lines is, "So just listen, already." It seems more like you're just frustrated he's acknowledging it at all...

Naive Teen Idol (Naive Teen Idol), Wednesday, 19 May 2004 15:18 (twenty-one years ago)

The opposite: you gotta acknowledge it & work with it, not acknowledge it to dismiss it and "just listen" 'cause there's no such animal as "just listening"

J0hn Darn1elle (J0hn Darn1elle), Wednesday, 19 May 2004 15:21 (twenty-one years ago)

Well, I wasn't implying "dismissing it," but I agree. I'm not sure Chris meant to dismiss it, though; rather, just putting the weight of it all aside...

Naive Teen Idol (Naive Teen Idol), Wednesday, 19 May 2004 15:31 (twenty-one years ago)

Is Syd still alive? really.

Gilles Meloche (Gilles Meloche), Wednesday, 19 May 2004 15:36 (twenty-one years ago)

Yes, he lives in Cambridge and prefers to be left alone.

J0hn Darn1elle (J0hn Darn1elle), Wednesday, 19 May 2004 15:45 (twenty-one years ago)

How mad is he? Does he live a normal life, or did he go stark raving and have to live in a home?

(Like my use of medical terms?)

David Allen (David Allen), Wednesday, 19 May 2004 15:51 (twenty-one years ago)

Pretty much he lives quietly at home watched over by family, while he himself concentrates on home and garden life.

Ned Raggett (Ned), Wednesday, 19 May 2004 15:53 (twenty-one years ago)

Whatever became of that WYWH-era bald, fat and pork chop-eating Syd, anyway?

Naive Teen Idol (Naive Teen Idol), Wednesday, 19 May 2004 15:58 (twenty-one years ago)

Based on the most recent photo I saw, he's definitely bald and heavier still.

Ned Raggett (Ned), Wednesday, 19 May 2004 16:02 (twenty-one years ago)

He spent much of the seventies and eighties in and out of hospitals. He took on a lot of weight - both psychotropic medications AND lack thereof in people who need 'em can cause weight gain. He lives at home with his (aging, which is a subject of some concern) family, prefers not to be bothered and especially not to be asked about music. Every so often a tabloid photographer will catch him out buying eggs and publish an "omg Syd is fat and old!" story. There was one just a year or two ago. He "doesn't look good" i.e. he looks like a normal overweight guy and not a glamorous rock star.

J0hn Darn1elle (J0hn Darn1elle), Wednesday, 19 May 2004 16:40 (twenty-one years ago)

Well David Gilmour is kind of fat too, but nobody is talking about, eh?

Gilles Meloche (Gilles Meloche), Wednesday, 19 May 2004 16:45 (twenty-one years ago)

not that one can listen to Syd "just" because it's fun.

I can!

scott seward (scott seward), Wednesday, 19 May 2004 16:55 (twenty-one years ago)

I dunno, his life doesn't sound that bad. Other than the medication/hospital part. But lots of people have health problems. The fact that he's out and about buying eggs is heartening. I really don't know the extent of his problems. But, yeah, he looks healthy in all the newer pictures I've seen. Physically, that is. Doesn't LOOK like he's leaping into any voids.

scott seward (scott seward), Wednesday, 19 May 2004 17:01 (twenty-one years ago)

And I'm not trying to be glib about people with disabilities. Just saying that his life certainly beats the alternative. Having disabilities and NO money and no house and garden in the country. And his not recording and whatever his "friends" had to say about him don't mean shit to me. His family, well, that's another story. I've never read what they have to say about him.

scott seward (scott seward), Wednesday, 19 May 2004 17:10 (twenty-one years ago)

Just picking up this thread later in the day...Scott, I was just acknowledging John's comments about taking the whole package. I also listen to Syd because I think the music was fun and not because I see it as crazed ramblings.

Tim Ellison, Wednesday, 19 May 2004 23:29 (twenty-one years ago)

And I feel kind of bad for posting at all. I just think 35 years of "legend" and third-hand crazy diamond bullshit stories is really unfair to the music he made. And I love the music he made and his life is none of my business. I should just shut up.

scott seward (scott seward), Wednesday, 19 May 2004 23:35 (twenty-one years ago)

Yeah, fuck you, clown. Oh wait.

Ned Raggett (Ned), Wednesday, 19 May 2004 23:39 (twenty-one years ago)

I appreciate the spirit of your posts, actually. It's just that we want him to be OK; we hope he's OK.

Tim Ellison, Thursday, 20 May 2004 00:11 (twenty-one years ago)

He "doesn't look good" i.e. he looks like a normal overweight guy and not a glamorous rock star.

Have you seen Nick Mason lately?

Dadaismus (Dada), Thursday, 20 May 2004 08:46 (twenty-one years ago)

Yeah, he lives in Henley. I saw him in Chez Peking.

Anyhow, Last year, there was a book published of Mick Rock?'s pics signed in a limited edition by "Barrett" himself.

mark grout (mark grout), Thursday, 20 May 2004 09:29 (twenty-one years ago)

Was he with Mary Hopkins? I frequently used to see her 'round Henley.

I've seen Kate Bush in Savacentre in Calcot several times too!

Stewart Osborne (Stewart Osborne), Thursday, 20 May 2004 09:52 (twenty-one years ago)

(blimey, don't tell our Amber)

She looks like Julie Burchill thesedays, yeah?

mark grout (mark grout), Thursday, 20 May 2004 09:54 (twenty-one years ago)

No, Nick Mason looks like Julie Burchill these days

Dadaismus (Dada), Thursday, 20 May 2004 10:06 (twenty-one years ago)

"She looks like Julie Burchill thesedays, yeah?"

I wouldn't have said, so.

She's actually [sorry, cliche alert] smaller than I expected and looks very ordinary / unassuming / nondescript (deliberately, I'm sure: if she wanted people to pay attention to her I imagine she'd wildly back-comb her hair, slip on a leotard and a highly-polished metal breast-plate, wave some bits of gauze around her head and prance 'round the bakery and delicatessen sections on tip toe, cat-scratching the air and singing "Wuthering Heights" at the top of her voice).

The first time I saw her I obviously double-took and she actually seemed extremely surprised that I'd recognised her - 'cos I don't think many people do.

Nowadays we just smile and nod as we pass each other in the frozen food section, with the in the sort of quiet understated dignity that you'd expect from two international celebrities who don't want a lot of media attention but just want to be left alone to get on with their lives quietly and privately....

OK, the truth is I probably look more like Julie Burchill than she does, OK?

Stewart Osborne (Stewart Osborne), Thursday, 20 May 2004 10:17 (twenty-one years ago)

Fair enough.

I was forgetting, actually....

I once was on the same TV prog as her, even in the same TV studio. I was part of a 'yoof' panel reviewing singles (The best one was "Protection" Graham Parker and the Rumour, bad week for singles true. I gave a good kicking to the Korgis' first single "Young and Russian", and one of them was the star guest. (ex members of Stackridge try to rebrand as punk...)

Anyhow, after we were done, we were allowed to watch proceedings, but were told in no uncertain terms not to approach the goddess while she popped into the seat I had sat in and was interviewed by Steve Jones (and no, not THAT steve jones quite obv). And when she was done, she disappeared via a small door while we were made to stay exactly where we were. ...)

mark grout (mark grout), Thursday, 20 May 2004 11:02 (twenty-one years ago)

Did they ask you how it felt to be a "young adult" who could not drink in pubs?

Stewart Osborne (Stewart Osborne), Thursday, 20 May 2004 12:06 (twenty-one years ago)

I had just passed that point...

mark grout (mark grout), Thursday, 20 May 2004 12:08 (twenty-one years ago)

Well then, did one of the presenters stand on some scaffolding to demonstrate that that was what the programme was about - shock?

Stewart Osborne (Stewart Osborne), Thursday, 20 May 2004 12:11 (twenty-one years ago)

Do you remember Steve Jones the DJ person? Wacky glasses like buggles. etc.

The previous week, they had Jean Jacques Burnell on as 'mystery guest' while "Freddie Laker" was reviewed. The general concensus was that it was quite interesting but they couldn't make out any words. So, this (i.e. my) week they showed the video with all the words passing through on giant tickertape. (Now, That would have been the week to be on.)

mark grout (mark grout), Thursday, 20 May 2004 12:15 (twenty-one years ago)

(Oh yeah, and JJ, rather than appear through the door/partition, climbed over the set to get onto the 'stage')

mark grout (mark grout), Thursday, 20 May 2004 12:16 (twenty-one years ago)

ah that's cleared that up. i was wondering what a controversial geneticist was doing interviewing kate bush.

also shame on you for slagging off the korgis. which reminds me...beck must die for massacring "everybody's gotta learn sometime."

he replaces james warren's poignant choirboy vocal with a non-tonal baritone grunt.

he repeats the first verse twice and doesn't bother with the second verse at all.

considering the original lyrics were minimalist to the point of haikuism i don't consider it unreasonable for him to tackle both verses.

there is no violin solo. he grunts some more instead.

he should have hollywood shoved up his armpit and be made to substitute dairylea for veet.

Marcello Carlin, Thursday, 20 May 2004 12:18 (twenty-one years ago)

RE beck, I haven't heared it but I think from what you say, quite right. i.e. At least Sam and Mark got the words to Little Help from my friends right, not like Wet*3

Re: Korgis. Have you heared "Young and Russian"? it is beyond poo. At least by the time of their great hit (which I liked, even at the time), they had stopped trying to be 'punky'...

mark grout (mark grout), Thursday, 20 May 2004 12:21 (twenty-one years ago)

What programme was it Mark?

Do you remember the name of the programme in the very late '70's / early '80's that used to go into a different town every week and encourage "the yoof" to produce and present an episode of the programme? Was it "Something Else" or am I getting it confused with another one? There were always a couple of bands on; when they did it from Reading the bands were The Specials and local lads General Accident. They interviewed me and my mate at enormous length about the fanzine - and then didn't show any of it. Bastards.

Stewart Osborne (Stewart Osborne), Thursday, 20 May 2004 12:23 (twenty-one years ago)

i'm sure it was "something else." there was that other one with steve bicknell sitting in a studio being heckled by concerned yoof (the one that "Not the 9 O'Clock News" took the piss out of) but i can't remember what that one was called. it was a one-word title but it wasn't "revolver" 'cos that was peter cook's punk prog.

Marcello Carlin, Thursday, 20 May 2004 12:26 (twenty-one years ago)

What was the show you were on though?

Stewart Osborne (Stewart Osborne), Thursday, 20 May 2004 12:28 (twenty-one years ago)

i've never knowingly been on any show!

i'd quite like to bring my individual approach to newsnight review, though.

Marcello Carlin, Thursday, 20 May 2004 12:31 (twenty-one years ago)

I remember it. "It's still rock and roll to me" around the forbury lion and discussions on unemployment down ye boars head... (sadly now bulldozed)

My show was called "The Saturday Morning Show" wow what a wacky title...

mark grout (mark grout), Thursday, 20 May 2004 12:39 (twenty-one years ago)

don't remember that one. was that the one after the saturday banana with bill oddie? they had a viewers' top ten singles chart every week. "the smurf song" always came top.

Marcello Carlin, Thursday, 20 May 2004 12:47 (twenty-one years ago)

It was after that one,

Re the smurfs on that chart: The viewers chart was basically what the 'kids' on the panel decided it was going to be (and I have that from an insider)... How else can you explain "The lonely goatherd" by the Albertos making the chart one week?

mark grout (mark grout), Thursday, 20 May 2004 12:52 (twenty-one years ago)

i tried ringing to vote for 30 seconds over tokyo by pere ubu but the lady at the other end was convinced i'd rung the wrong number.

Marcello Carlin, Thursday, 20 May 2004 12:54 (twenty-one years ago)

".... "It's still rock and roll to me" around the forbury lion and discussions on unemployment down ye boars head... (sadly now bulldozed)"

ROFL! I don't remember "It's Still Rock 'n' Roll To Me" (my mind's suddenly been filled with nightmare images of Munchie, Dillan, Steve Kinks, Aaron Hall, Pete Judd, and some of the other old Star Crew prancing gracefully 'round the Forbury Gardens in formation, like a punk version of The Young Generation!) but I'm sure you're right - it's certainly the right era (I remember that one of the songs The Specials did was Man At C&A from the 2nd album, which hadn't actually been released at that point IIRC, so I'd guess this was around the Summer of '80.

Stewart Osborne (Stewart Osborne), Thursday, 20 May 2004 13:05 (twenty-one years ago)

.. it was a 'fashion' item...

mark grout (mark grout), Thursday, 20 May 2004 13:09 (twenty-one years ago)

A "fashion item"?

No, please, stop it! I've now got visions of Sprogg and Dave McCurry strutting down the catwalk and showing the camera how they'd made bumflaps out of old beertowels and carefully sown razorblades under the lapels of their leather jackets (if anyone grabbed them they got their finger tips sliced off)!

Stewart Osborne (Stewart Osborne), Thursday, 20 May 2004 13:17 (twenty-one years ago)

well strutting around the forbury gardens smiling, jumping at/on each other and all that.

Good old Syd Barrett.

mark grout (mark grout), Thursday, 20 May 2004 13:28 (twenty-one years ago)

Errr... Yes! Syd Barrett! Sprogg was a huge fan of his y'know and was the first person to introduce me to his stuff!

[nice one Mark, we've managed to get back on topic and with a bit of luck no-one will ever notice that we strayed from it ever so slightly for a moment there!]

Stewart Osborne (Stewart Osborne), Thursday, 20 May 2004 14:02 (twenty-one years ago)

[and nutty old DeeDee ramone too]

mark grout (mark grout), Thursday, 20 May 2004 14:04 (twenty-one years ago)

six years pass...

OK, this one will do:

Last, but certainly not least he served as Executive Producer on the new Syd Barrett compilation, not so cleverly titled, "An Introduction to Syd Barrett." Which will mix Syd Barrett era Pink Floyd and solo material, some of it remixed. Sadly, "Vegetable Man" nor "Scream Thy Last Scream" will be included, another missed opportunity. Why not put out these songs officially and give the fans the best quality possible and make a couple of quid in the process, instead of forcing us to continue to listen to sub-standard bootlegs? It would be a win-win for all involved. The big draw of the package isn't even on the disc it's a free bonus download of "Rhamadan,"a 20 minute previously unreleased instrumental. Since it's a download the sound quality won't be what it should. As obsessive as David is about sound this is a very odd choice. A bonus disc on the first pressing would have been a better way to get it out there, maybe even including "Vegetable Man" and "Scream Thy Last Scream". Now that would have been a great.

Mark G, Tuesday, 28 September 2010 15:12 (fourteen years ago)

David Who?

Tom A. (Tom B.) (Tom C.) (Tom D.), Tuesday, 28 September 2010 15:19 (fourteen years ago)

Gilmore.

Mark G, Tuesday, 28 September 2010 15:28 (fourteen years ago)

one year passes...

Was listening to the "introduction to" this morning, I still think "Rhamadan" sounds (and *is*) great.

Mark G, Tuesday, 17 January 2012 13:25 (thirteen years ago)

two months pass...

Was playing The Madcap Laughs while cleaning up this weekend and was reminded of this great line: "She and I are in love ...we've agreed."

city worker, Monday, 26 March 2012 15:12 (thirteen years ago)

six years pass...

The drumming on 'No Good Trying' is fucking nuts... I imagine trying to play along with Syd must have been very difficult. The abrupt changes in the song are navigated very well. Robert Wyatt on that one, wasn't it?

Le Baton Rose (Turrican), Friday, 31 August 2018 20:21 (six years ago)

All of Soft Machine, yes.

Scottish Country Twerking (Tom D.), Friday, 31 August 2018 23:03 (six years ago)

LOL yeah there's not like four bars where he's not drum rolling all over the place.

everything, Saturday, 1 September 2018 03:03 (six years ago)

i once read an interview with robert talking about that session and he said syd wasn't difficult to work with at all! well his chops were certainly better than nick mason's :)

Arch Bacon (rushomancy), Saturday, 1 September 2018 03:08 (six years ago)

by the way i know those mojo cover cds, well, they largely deserve their reputations, but there is some genuinely good stuff on the madcap laughs one... j mascis tears it up on "no good trying"...

Arch Bacon (rushomancy), Saturday, 1 September 2018 03:16 (six years ago)

Just noticed this revive. So weird, I've had a really jaunty and terrible and inappropriate Wayne Newton-esque Las Vegas nightclub arrangement of 'Late Night' running through my head all day.

Inside me I feel!
(brassy horn flourish)
Alone and unreal, yeah!
(BWAAAAAAAAH-BA-dum-bum)

My brain, there's something wrong with it.

Digital Squirts (Old Lunch), Saturday, 1 September 2018 03:36 (six years ago)

It's amazing that the Soft Machine guys were overdubbed onto "No Good Trying" and "Love You." Apart from the weird metric changes, they never sound like they get off beat to me. Syd must have had a good sense of tempo!

timellison, Saturday, 1 September 2018 07:06 (six years ago)

Playing to a prerecorded vocal/acoustic guitar track would be difficult under any circumstances, this idea that poor old Syd had lost it and couldn't keep normal time any more seems unfair on Syd. Ditto those tracks on "Opel" where he's actually having to read the words off bits of paper and play at the same time, because he's the songs are new and unrehearsed. Also some of those songs have odd time signatures and change because that's how they were written, they're supposed to be like that.

Scottish Country Twerking (Tom D.), Saturday, 1 September 2018 07:17 (six years ago)

Yeah, but if you compare the released "Love you" with the unadorned takes recorded on the same day, the others didn't have the odd timings, well not as much.

Mark G, Saturday, 1 September 2018 08:52 (six years ago)

arbitrarily changing the rhythm of the song so the rest of the band can't follow is a dick move and probably sufficient justification for kicking one out of the band but is not prima facie evidence of insanity

at the same time being a dick doesn't rule out also being insane

i'm not sure how i feel about waters/gilmour's production on that first record. i'd be pissed if my producers put out a record with as many false starts and bum notes as side two of that record has (looking at you "if it's in you"), but i still love it unreservedly.

Arch Bacon (rushomancy), Saturday, 1 September 2018 09:11 (six years ago)

The band played along to the already recorded take.

I have an image of someone holding count cards up:6! 2! 4! 11! 2! 2!

Mark G, Saturday, 1 September 2018 10:09 (six years ago)

i'm not sure how i feel about waters/gilmour's production on that first record.

Same. In a way, I appreciate the honesty of those recordings, but on the other hand it feels like a bit of a dick move when compared to the non-Waters/Gilmour productions on the LP.

Le Baton Rose (Turrican), Sunday, 2 September 2018 09:39 (six years ago)

The solo guitar songs are so abstract that it’s hard to imagine some kind of arrangement for them. There has been some speculation that Syd might have heard one or both of the Pip Proud albums, which could conceivably explain the evolution from “See Emily Play” to “If It’s in You.”

timellison, Sunday, 2 September 2018 16:54 (six years ago)

They aren't really that abstract. "Octopus" is one of his most complex songs and that has a perfectly good arrangement and accompaniment.

Scottish Country Twerking (Tom D.), Sunday, 2 September 2018 17:15 (six years ago)

That’s true. They kind of work nicely as folk songs, though.

timellison, Sunday, 2 September 2018 17:18 (six years ago)

But I do think some of them are extremely abstract! Meter all over the place.

timellison, Sunday, 2 September 2018 17:26 (six years ago)

Not really abstract though, just put together quite unusually - and ingeniously. He was doing much the same in Pink Floyd, something like "The Scarecrow" is really not that different from his solo stuff.

Scottish Country Twerking (Tom D.), Sunday, 2 September 2018 17:36 (six years ago)

... the fact that the band choose not to try and play along with it beyond some clip clopping percussion and wandering keyboards may well be instructive.

Scottish Country Twerking (Tom D.), Sunday, 2 September 2018 17:38 (six years ago)

Well...“The Scarecrow” is mostly 3/4. I’ll have to see if I can count it when I get a chance, but “Feel,” for example, seems more irregular.

timellison, Sunday, 2 September 2018 17:51 (six years ago)

It seems to me that Syd was just tailoring the solo songs with a lot of cut bars to fit what he was singing.

MaresNest, Sunday, 2 September 2018 18:23 (six years ago)

There has been some speculation that Syd might have heard one or both of the Pip Proud albums, which could conceivably explain the evolution from “See Emily Play” to “If It’s in You.”

seriously curious if that speculation exists outside of byron coley's imagination?

no lime tangier, Monday, 3 September 2018 01:02 (six years ago)

Man, it is impossible to hear where the downbeat is between the verses on Scarecrow. Seems like even Richard Wright doesn't know.

"Feel" - forget it...

Jennifer Gentle did a righteous arrangement for "If It's in You," by the way:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vlHzjm_xPwo

timellison, Monday, 3 September 2018 01:04 (six years ago)

nlt, I think it's an interesting proposition. Have you heard Pip?

timellison, Monday, 3 September 2018 01:06 (six years ago)

oh yeah, i probably play his stuff more than i listen to barrett these days. i mean it's a possibility and as you say it would be interesting if it were the case... but i dunno!

no lime tangier, Monday, 3 September 2018 01:28 (six years ago)

Well...“The Scarecrow” is mostly 3/4. I’ll have to see if I can count it when I get a chance, but “Feel,” for example, seems more irregular.

― timellison, Sunday, 2 September 2018 17:51 (yesterday) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

Mostly, yes. But there are bits where it goes into 2/4 and back, and where the 'chorus' is stretched over 8 bars instead of four, and so on..

Mark G, Monday, 3 September 2018 11:06 (six years ago)

And it varies. There’s only one extra beat in the first verse, two in the second and third verses.

timellison, Monday, 3 September 2018 16:04 (six years ago)

I was trying to recall if there was a cover of Octopus that I knew of to see how the band/artist might have dealt with the twists and turns, then I remembered this - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XZmvP0HmpDA

MaresNest, Monday, 3 September 2018 16:09 (six years ago)

Plasticland did it on this, which I remember as one of the first rock tribute albums.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beyond_the_Wildwood

timellison, Monday, 3 September 2018 17:05 (six years ago)

Bought that as an import LP when it came out! I think Paul Roland's "Matilda Mother" was my favorite - he was really great (probably still is).

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w1YEo_eOsQc

timellison, Monday, 3 September 2018 17:16 (six years ago)

First verse is slightly different and it all hangs together more in 3/4 between the verses on this one.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GiINnIjTXAM

timellison, Monday, 3 September 2018 22:30 (six years ago)

ten months pass...

Some interesting stuff about what Barrett was up to fifty years ago in the summer of 1969 (scroll down for recent posts)!

https://www.facebook.com/MenOnTheBorder/

timellison, Thursday, 25 July 2019 12:04 (five years ago)

four years pass...

https://www.sydbarrettfilm.com/

citation needed (Steve Shasta), Friday, 28 July 2023 17:38 (one year ago)

Seeing that in a couple of weeks. Will have to brush up on his own albums, which I downloaded a few years ago.

clemenza, Friday, 28 July 2023 17:50 (one year ago)

ten months pass...

I'm redoing my floors atm, very tempting!

willem, Wednesday, 12 June 2024 19:26 (one year ago)

a song from under syd barrett's floorboards

Kate (rushomancy), Thursday, 13 June 2024 13:57 (one year ago)

*Please note that the painted floorboards are sold as artefacts only, without copyright. The copyright in relation to the artwork belongs to Syd Barrett Music Ltd.

Um, what does this mean? Can't make copies? Can't do merch?

Mark G, Friday, 14 June 2024 08:16 (one year ago)

Can't write songs while lying underneath the floorboards?

Mark G, Friday, 14 June 2024 08:17 (one year ago)

Unless you're Magazine.

giraffe, Friday, 14 June 2024 08:29 (one year ago)

Yet you can if you creep into cupboards, sleep in the hall.

ILX: a violent left-wing mob who hate our country (Tom D.), Friday, 14 June 2024 08:32 (one year ago)

xpost see, if Steve Lamacq was still doing his "song based on a news story" thing called "Todays national anthem", then... overwhelmingly...

Mark G, Friday, 14 June 2024 09:17 (one year ago)

Um, what does this mean? Can't make copies? Can't do merch?

it means just because you own the boards that were painted by Syd, you don't have any right to reproduce them or license their image to others, nor do you have any claim to the album artwork that contains a photo of said floorboards etc.

Pierre Delecto, Friday, 14 June 2024 16:54 (one year ago)

I posted this in another thread and wondered the same thing. I would be surprised if the concept of alternating blue and orange floorboards is creative enough to qualify for copyright protection in the first place (but I may be wrong, and I guess the disclaimer doesn't hurt).

Energy wrong, I log off (morrisp), Friday, 14 June 2024 17:01 (one year ago)


You must be logged in to post. Please either login here, or if you are not registered, you may register here.