Early Pink Floyd

[DemonFilth2001]

Every few years I listen to all their albums released before Meddle. Still hoping to find something I’ve missed.

What albums do you like, if any, before Meddle?

[Love_Industry]

I like The Piper At The Gates Of Dawn and The Early Singles. Not the Pink Floyd signature sound but pretty cool late 60s psychedelic.

[inextrem]

Pre-Meddle?... my fave is "A Saucerful of Secrets"

[Psychobolia.com]

I'll spin Relix once a year, great compilation released right before Meddle, a bunch of non-album tracks:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Relics_(album)

Light/poppy stuff, no prog bullshit and just the right amount of weird.

[HoldenSSV]

Love me some Floyd, but I just can't get into anything before DSotM, with the exception of a few tunes.

[Sleek]

What you got against Obscured by Clouds?

[Hellsinkey]

I like the Syd Barrett years.

[CrankerBait]

Pre-DSOTM, Meddle and Obscured by Clouds are very good. (You can really sense a progression towards something much bigger and better.) The "Careful with that Axe, Eugene" single is also good. A Saucerful of Secrets and Atom Heart Mother are good too, albeit a little weird in places and not all that consistent.

The Piper at the Gates of Dawn is kind of a cool snapshot of '67 London , has a couple of really good songs, and Syd Barrett devotees obviously love it.

I think Pink Floyd is a great example of a band that needed a few albums to hit their peak. Unfortunately, the business has changed and record companies are no longer willing to make an investment in artists that might need to experiment and develop, both in the studio and live, before achieving legendary status. The Beatles and Led Zeppelin had huge albums right out of the gate, but I'd argue that it took a few tries for the Who and the Rolling Stones to start making great albums and not mainly be singles bands. AC/DC, Rush, David Bowie, Neil Young, Steve Miller and plenty of others took a while to start turning out their best and/or most successful stuff, yet they were given the time and support to get there.

[veritas]

Love me some Floyd, but I just can't get into anything before DSotM, with the exception of a few tunes.

Same. I am a HUGE (almost obsessive) fan of their DSotM and post output. I literally cannot imagine the hundreds if not thousands of times I have listened to those albums collectively.
And yet I other than Echoes and a couple other, I can't abide the earlier stuff.
In fact, I'm embarrassed to admit I have never even listened to Piper at the Gates of Dawn all the way through or ANY pre-Meddle album all the way through.

My justification is that lyrics (and song structures) matter to me, and it wasn't until DSofTm they really perfectly blended lyrics and songs together. But holy shit, once they did, that run of 4-5 albums was amazing.

[Sleek]

I think Pink Floyd is a great example of a band that needed a few albums to hit their peak. Unfortunately, the business has changed and record companies are no longer willing to make an investment in artists that might need to experiment and develop, both in the studio and live, before achieving legendary status. The Beatles and Led Zeppelin had huge albums right out of the gate, but I'd argue that it took a few tries for the Who and the Rolling Stones to start making great albums and not mainly be singles bands. AC/DC, Rush, David Bowie, Neil Young, Steve Miller and plenty of others took a while to start turning out their best and/or most successful stuff, yet they were given the time and support to get there.

My favorite example of this is Bob Seger, who hit on his ninth album...

[CrankerBait]

I think Pink Floyd is a great example of a band that needed a few albums to hit their peak. Unfortunately, the business has changed and record companies are no longer willing to make an investment in artists that might need to experiment and develop, both in the studio and live, before achieving legendary status. The Beatles and Led Zeppelin had huge albums right out of the gate, but I'd argue that it took a few tries for the Who and the Rolling Stones to start making great albums and not mainly be singles bands. AC/DC, Rush, David Bowie, Neil Young, Steve Miller and plenty of others took a while to start turning out their best and/or most successful stuff, yet they were given the time and support to get there.

My favorite example of this is Bob Seger, who hit on his ninth album...

I wonder if he spent the first half of the 70s considering the possibility that "Ramblin', Gamblin' Man" was going to be his only Top 20 hit? Seeing as he stuck with it and became a top tier rock star, maybe not...

[Ryan81]

I finally discovered Animals the second half of last year and man...what an album! Pink Floyd's Big Four albums in the 70's is as great of a run as probably any band has ever produced.

I've heard very little of the Syd stuff. However, I listened to a few of the songs on his solo albums and I really liked Tarapin. I'm fascinated by his story and wish there were more interviews of him when he was really gone. I've only been able to find a couple.

I still have yet to hear all of Echoes as well, but the first bit I heard didn't strike me as anything nearing the quality of Dogs or Sheep.

[Sleek]

He doesn't do a lot of long-form interviews, but one I saw (I wanna say Bob Costa) he was saying how he felt everything happened at the right time for him, like, he hit when he had built the skills TO hit and the maturity to deal with it, and if it had happened earlier, he probably wouldn't have lasted as long and it would have fucked him up.

I dunno. I think some of his early records fucking kill, especially Mongrel.

[Turner Coates]

My favorite example of this is Bob Seger, who hit on his ninth album...

Mine is Peter Frampton.
And then there's Fleetwood Mac.

[Ryan81]

He doesn't do a lot of long-form interviews, but one I saw (I wanna say Bob Costa) he was saying how he felt everything happened at the right time for him, like, he hit when he had built the skills TO hit and the maturity to deal with it, and if it had happened earlier, he probably wouldn't have lasted as long and it would have fucked him up.

I dunno. I think some of his early records fucking kill, especially Mongrel.

I think it's fair to say that Syd overestimated his skills regarding dealing with fame just a little bit. The main interview I heard was an audio of him and some guy talking about Syd's painting and his thoughts about art school and also what he thought of the guy interviewing him. It was kind of tough to follow (which is really saying something as I've spent more hours talking to barely coherent junkies than I care to remember), but I believe he thought the guy was kind of "silly."

I will check out Mongrel as I trust your taste in music...as well as the other finer things in life.

[Sleek]

Oh, I'm talking Seger, not Syd...but yeah, Mongrel is good. Should be up there with the Credence albums as far as known shit in the rock canon.