Taking Sides: Beatles versus Floyd

Message Bookmarked

Bookmark Removed

Holding the covers of The White Album and The Wall side by side. Lennon vs. McCartney versus Waters vs. Gilmour. Stu Sutcliff vs. Syd Barrett. Beatles vs. Stones versus Floyd vs. Zeppelin. The Beatles' influence versus Floyd's (how come people don't acknowledge how "The Headmaster's Ritual" and "How Soon Is Now?" owe much to the Floyd?). By the 2010s kids might think of the 1960s like how we think of the 1950s, and the 70s the 60s. Anyways I'm waked & baked--should I put on Magical Mystery Tour or Meddle next? That is the question.

― god of rock, Saturday, 16 October 2004 13:43 (twenty-one years ago)

Put "Meddle" on FFS!! Just for "Meddle", Floyd win!

OTOH, worst floyd is far far worse than the worst beatles.

― Pashmina (Pashmina), Saturday, 16 October 2004 13:48 (twenty-one years ago)

You know, this world would I think have been improved if Meddle rather than Dark Side became Thee Eternal Rock Classic Oh Yes Album.

― Ned Raggett (Ned), Saturday, 16 October 2004 13:54 (twenty-one years ago)

i reiterate my claim that roger waters was a poor man's frank zappa -- with all that that implies, good and bad. ummagumma v. uncle meat, the wall v. joe's garage, the final cut v. ship arriving too late to save a drowning witch. whatever.

i heard that john lennon liked piper at the gates-era floyd -- "mr. kite" sounds like syd on some REALLY weak acid.

― Eisbär (llamasfur), Saturday, 16 October 2004 14:03 (twenty-one years ago)

rubber soul = revolver = piper... > rest of beatles catalogue >>> rest of floyd catalogue

― peter smith (plsmith), Saturday, 16 October 2004 14:27 (twenty-one years ago)

This tends to forget that "rest of Beatles catalogue" includes "Abbey Road" and "Let it Be", though, doesn't it?

― Pashmina (Pashmina), Saturday, 16 October 2004 14:39 (twenty-one years ago)

ehh - fair enough - ill put a FEW floyd releases above those 2.

― peter smith (plsmith), Saturday, 16 October 2004 14:44 (twenty-one years ago)

If I had to put something on right now, I'd pick Meddle over any Beatles album. But I don't think there's much question that The Beatles are a better band.

― Hurting (Hurting), Saturday, 16 October 2004 14:46 (twenty-one years ago)

I think there is zilch question that they're the more well-known and influential (paging Mark S) band. But after that, anything is up for grabs.

― Ned Raggett (Ned), Saturday, 16 October 2004 14:48 (twenty-one years ago)

well, I'm one of those clichés who basically only likes the Barrett Floyd. Which is a pretty small body of work. And a cliché who can listen to "Wish You Were Here" and parts of "The Wall" and not arf all over my lunch. "Dark Side of the Moon" is...something, some kind of great middlebrow opus, but Jesus Christ, I'm not gonna listen to that. Or "Meddle" either, or "Ummagumma" or however it's spelled, any of that. The Beatles weren't too good at psychedelica apart from a few things--they was better off drinking whiskey and Coke than doing drugs, actually, so again I'm the cliché who likes their early stuff, four or five middle-period tunes, a few odds and ends from the end of their career, like a couple of George Harrison tracks like "Old Brown Shoe" and "Something" and most of side two of "Abbey Road." About enough for a 70-minute CD, I'd say. Which is about what I'd give the Floyd.

― eddie hurt (ddduncan), Saturday, 16 October 2004 14:55 (twenty-one years ago)

I Love Pink Floyd, but they never wrote a "Yesterday", a "Michelle", a "Penny Lane", a "Hey Jude", a "Strawberry Fields Forever". Etc. Etc.

So Beatles have to win here

― Geir Hongro (GeirHong), Saturday, 16 October 2004 15:20 (twenty-one years ago)

Beatles

― Mr. Snrub, Saturday, 16 October 2004 16:15 (twenty-one years ago)

apples/oranges. pop band/experimental jam wank.

i love 'em both.

― Helios Creed (orion), Saturday, 16 October 2004 16:19 (twenty-one years ago)

Alan Parsons Project

― dave q, Saturday, 16 October 2004 16:29 (twenty-one years ago)

SLAYER \\m//

― latebloomer (latebloomer), Saturday, 16 October 2004 16:45 (twenty-one years ago)

i second the apples to oranges characteristic of this thread - both of these bands were very groundbreaking and influential but for different descendants altogether. personally, floyd was a band that was in the rite of passage category that didn't really age well as i matured, with the exception of meddle and dark side of the moon. the beatles, on the other hand are still fresh to my ears even though i've heard all those fucking songs at least 500 times each. and that is the genius of the beatles and why they will always win this contest.

― j.m. lockery (j.m. lockery), Saturday, 16 October 2004 22:15 (twenty-one years ago)

Hmmmmm. Not sure they're really that comparable. The Beatles had much more of an accessible pop sensibility (and cuddly appeal) to the comparatively sombre, impenetrable, often personality-free Pink Floyd. Sure, the `Floyd are relatively unchallenged in the realm of atmospheric, arty, surreal soundscapery, but the Beatles could get their creep-out on too, but by the same turn whip out a "Martha My Dear" or "Get To Get You Into My Life" to please the teenage girls and grandmothers. At the end of the day, the Beatles just had more arrows in their creative quiver.

― Alex in NYC (vassifer), Sunday, 17 October 2004 13:50 (twenty-one years ago)

It is interesting that you mention the Stax pastiche that was "Got To Get You Into My Life" as an example of a song aimed at grandmothers and teenage girls :-)

― Geir Hongro (GeirHong), Sunday, 17 October 2004 13:52 (twenty-one years ago)

*wonderes if geir will evah start a 'macca vs andrew lloyd webber' thread*

― t\'\'t (t\'\'t), Sunday, 17 October 2004 13:57 (twenty-one years ago)

Macca easily beats Lloyd Webber at Webber's own game anyway ;)

That being said, Andrew Lloyd Webber is of course a much more important songwriter than any R&B writer.

― Geir Hongro (GeirHong), Sunday, 17 October 2004 13:58 (twenty-one years ago)

"got to get you"--it's not a stax rip, it's motown. or something. they were aware of stax but to them it was all just "soul music." they didn't know no better. "drive my car" is actually closer to stax than "got to get you." i mean lennon couldn't even remember, later on--he described "you can't do that" as "wilson pickett" but it was done before pickett even recorded his stuff, at stax. i admire the beatles for their ability to transmute stuff, it wouldn't have been half as good if they'd been earnestly trying to re-create sounds as do today's hip folks. barrett was a real talent, "arnold layne" and "apples and oranges" and several others were true A-plus songs, as were a scattering of beatles tracks like "ticket to ride" and "rain" and "and your bird" and a few others. it evens out for me, actually.

― eddie hurt (ddduncan), Sunday, 17 October 2004 17:28 (twenty-one years ago)

If you listen to the drum beat and brass themes in "Got To Get You Into My Life", there is considerably more influence from Booker T & The MGs than from the Motown sound.

Of course the melody is stronger and more harmonically sophisticated in the case of "Got To Get..." than in the case of most Stax songs, but that is just because McCartney's ass is a better songwriter than any of the guys at Stax could possibly dream of ever becoming.

― Geir Hongro (GeirHong), Sunday, 17 October 2004 17:32 (twenty-one years ago)

wank beats pop everytime. its like friggin rock vs scissors.

― harshaw (jube), Sunday, 17 October 2004 19:48 (twenty-one years ago)

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