Most overrated member of Pink Floyd?
-
- Hammer
- Posts: 739
- Joined: Tue Oct 15, 2002 8:26 pm
- Location: Finland
-
- Judge!
- Posts: 2012
- Joined: Fri Jun 14, 2002 7:31 pm
- Location: The Dark Side of Neptune
-
- Hammer
- Posts: 1267
- Joined: Tue Dec 31, 2002 6:30 am
- Location: Cuckooland
-
- Moderator
- Posts: 7074
- Joined: Thu Jul 11, 2002 12:54 pm
- Location: Edinburgh or Aberdeen depending on the time of year
-
- Hammer
- Posts: 1261
- Joined: Sun Apr 06, 2003 7:05 pm
- Location: Somewhere, but not here
Fair enough, here's my explanation for why I voted for Roger, even though several people have said it already. Roger was a brilliant songwriter, and a very good singer too. However, so many people saying he was the essencial part of Pink Floyd is what makes me consider him overrated. This could easily apply to Dave, Syd, or even Rick or Nick (as someone else has said in this thread, I forget who) as well, but let's be realistic for a second. How many people go out and say that David Gilmour was the driving force behind Pink Floyd? How many people would be complaining about a Gilmour-less Pink Floyd? How many people do complain today about a Syd-less Pink Floyd? Yeah, there are some, but it's not half as much as the amount of people who say Roger was Pink Floyd, the others were just the icing on the cake. If so many people did say that it was Dave or Syd who made Pink Floyd good, I would have voted for Dave or Syd. But I feel that Pink Floyd was a group effort all the way through, and that anyone who is said to be the most important part of the band is immideately overrated. Along with this, I belive that Pink Floyd managed to carry on just fine without Roger, proving that Roger wasn't the "driving force behind the band" as many people say.
Did I explain my reason well enough?
Did I explain my reason well enough?
-
- Hammer
- Posts: 543
- Joined: Wed Oct 30, 2002 5:35 pm
Agreed !Yet Another Movie wrote:Fair enough, here's my explanation for why I voted for Roger, even though several people have said it already. Roger was a brilliant songwriter, and a very good singer too. However, so many people saying he was the essencial part of Pink Floyd is what makes me consider him overrated. This could easily apply to Dave, Syd, or even Rick or Nick (as someone else has said in this thread, I forget who) as well, but let's be realistic for a second. How many people go out and say that David Gilmour was the driving force behind Pink Floyd? How many people would be complaining about a Gilmour-less Pink Floyd? How many people do complain today about a Syd-less Pink Floyd? Yeah, there are some, but it's not half as much as the amount of people who say Roger was Pink Floyd, the others were just the icing on the cake. If so many people did say that it was Dave or Syd who made Pink Floyd good, I would have voted for Dave or Syd. But I feel that Pink Floyd was a group effort all the way through, and that anyone who is said to be the most important part of the band is immideately overrated. Along with this, I belive that Pink Floyd managed to carry on just fine without Roger, proving that Roger wasn't the "driving force behind the band" as many people say.
Did I explain my reason well enough?
-
- Hammer
- Posts: 934
- Joined: Wed Jan 15, 2003 11:14 pm
-
- Hammer
- Posts: 543
- Joined: Wed Oct 30, 2002 5:35 pm
-
- Moderator
- Posts: 7074
- Joined: Thu Jul 11, 2002 12:54 pm
- Location: Edinburgh or Aberdeen depending on the time of year
-
- Judge!
- Posts: 2385
- Joined: Thu May 08, 2003 8:40 am
- Location: Holland
-
- Site Admin
- Posts: 17163
- Joined: Wed Jun 12, 2002 6:54 pm
- Gender: Male
- Location: Cheshire, England
-
- Hammer
- Posts: 905
- Joined: Wed Aug 07, 2002 7:50 pm
- Location: Wisconsin USA
-
- Supreme Lord!
- Posts: 7255
- Joined: Sun Jun 08, 2003 9:46 pm
- Gender: Female
- Location: Lincoln City, Oregon