Pink Floyd cover on new Rolling Stone

cwta eugene · Post by **cwta eugene** » Tue Mar 20, 2007 2:48 pm

Syd was on the cover...

sagetavigirl · Post by **sagetavigirl** » Tue Mar 20, 2007 8:57 pm

I actually have the 87 copy of the RS w/PF - On my coffee table as we speak even!

But I'm also a subscriber, so I'm sure to get the next PF cover here shortly! I think it's GREAT!

Yay! Old stories, but still.. the memorabilia is still nice to have!

JABallarat · Post by **JABallarat** » Wed Mar 21, 2007 1:31 am

Technically, PF was on the cover (but not pictured on the cover) of Rolling Stone in 1983 when the The Final Cut got its five star review. The cover cover read "Pink Floyd's Best Album."

I don't have the issue handy, but I'm sure someone else here does.

Sonic Destruction · Post by **Sonic Destruction** » Wed Mar 21, 2007 1:44 am

Massed Gadgets wrote:Well, technically, Pink Floyd is not on that cover...at least not any pictures of the group members. Remember, that's what it's all about, to get your picture of the cover of The Rolling Stone (at least according to Dr. Hook & the Medicine Show!).

That is right. According to Brain Damage, this time they are going to have a band photo on the cover, for the first ever time.

Is the reason for this timing that Roger will be touring the US?

alma · Post by **alma** » Wed Mar 21, 2007 10:09 am

Perhaps it's just the 40th anniversary of the release of 'The Piper At The Gates Of Dawn'?

the doctor · Post by **the doctor** » Wed Mar 21, 2007 8:51 pm

Yeah,obviously what Rolling Stone meant was it would be the first time that the group itself in an actual photo would be featured on the cover,and not some headline,or artwork,but the band itself. Of course if that cover
shown is to be the actual pic - it's just a little behind the times! That pics
like what - circa 1973-5? What do you expect from Rolling Stone Magazine
though. The same magazine that often features Britney Spears,Madonna,
and other such crap on there cover. Also,the guy who runs the show - what's his name? Jann Wenner (something like that) holds a pretty lofty
position in the so-called Rock 'N' Roll Hall-of-Fame. So,it's been said that if you don't feature in his magazine - you won't be getting into the HOF anytime soon......maybe that's why the truly awesome band Rush never
seem to be up for entrance into the HOF,and yet just a week ago they let in "GrandMaster Flash,and the Furious Five".........whatever......Wenner's an Idiot,but hey that's just my opinion........

Doc,

Freddie Mercury · Post by **Freddie Mercury** » Wed Mar 21, 2007 9:19 pm

Saint Seiya wrote:http://www.rollingstone.com/rockdaily/i ... the-cover/

Edited By Admin - Added cover image.

I wonder if Roger will like having that big square slapped over his head while Dave fills most of the rest of the image

Syd'sSexy · Post by **Syd'sSexy** » Wed Mar 21, 2007 9:34 pm

That's how it should be, isn't it?

moom · Post by **moom** » Thu Mar 22, 2007 9:47 am

Why did RS never like them, well, rarely? What's their problem with PF? Anyway, I hope to getting my hands on this one

Post by **Keith Jordan** » Thu Mar 22, 2007 10:32 am

RS prefer girl bands and trash. Whoever is popular and shifting most units.

moom · Post by **moom** » Thu Mar 22, 2007 12:18 pm

The Russian version (which I buy) often features stuff about good (even old) bands, too

And not only music... Also, one of the few, it's inexpencive (40 EEK equals to about over 3$ or over 1,5 pounds

)

Vlad The Impaler · Post by **Vlad The Impaler** » Thu Mar 22, 2007 2:44 pm

moom wrote:Why did RS never like them, well, rarely? What's their problem with PF? Anyway, I hope to getting my hands on this one

Fickle lot...that magazine. Treated Zappa the same way...and first he was a darling...then...nothing he did lived up to whatever standards they think they have.

.

AsydWaters · Post by **AsydWaters** » Fri Mar 23, 2007 4:33 pm

That photo is Chopped i.e. its been digitally edited with Photoshop (take a closer look at Nick's cheeks and the lighting on the band's hair)
So whats the big issue; better to put effort in searching the photographer BBC needs ( ask Keith 'bout it).

Post by **Keith Jordan** » Fri Mar 23, 2007 5:45 pm

Darkside of Oz Video Mashup....

http://www.rollingstone.com/rockdaily/i ... ide-of-oz/

ESLAFTK2112 · Post by **ESLAFTK2112** » Fri Mar 23, 2007 6:31 pm

the doctor wrote:Yeah,obviously what Rolling Stone meant was it would be the first time that the group itself in an actual photo would be featured on the cover,and not some headline,or artwork,but the band itself. Of course if that cover
shown is to be the actual pic - it's just a little behind the times! That pics
like what - circa 1973-5? What do you expect from Rolling Stone Magazine
though. The same magazine that often features Britney Spears,Madonna,
and other such crap on there cover. Also,the guy who runs the show - what's his name? Jann Wenner (something like that) holds a pretty lofty
position in the so-called Rock 'N' Roll Hall-of-Fame. So,it's been said that if you don't feature in his magazine - you won't be getting into the HOF anytime soon......maybe that's why the truly awesome band Rush never
seem to be up for entrance into the HOF,and yet just a week ago they let in "GrandMaster Flash,and the Furious Five".........whatever......Wenner's an Idiot,but hey that's just my opinion........

Doc,

Same magazine who detested bands like Jethro Tull, Queen, Supertramp, Rush, Styx. I bet you if they did a Rush cover story that they would use a band photo circa 1977.

RS is Britney and Madonna (or as I call them B*tchney and Madonut) central.

Pink Floyd cover on new Rolling Stone

PF on Rolling Stone cover

Re: Pink Floyd cover on new Rolling Stone