Would Syd be remembered if PF hadn't achieved success?

[Metal Mickey]

No comment because that's what you want!

Well I call it "lively debate" but each to their own. No comment.

I have a feeling you enjoy rubbing people the wrong way which is a shame because you seem quite articulate even if you did call me a troll!

But this is a comment?!?! Anyway, I don't derive any satisfaction from rubbing people up the wrong way, I derive satisfaction by re-educating wildly delusional people who need a hand.

I will say one thing though. I have never ever considered stalking Syd Barrett...I don't even live in the same country as he did. You're way off the mark with that one!

And what is your policy of making the fruits of such stalkings (commercially or otherwise) available?

You are a very strange man!

Your problem is that you naturally assume that everyone who enjoys Syd's music is a delusional stalker. Although there are some that have unfortunately bothered him in his twilight years, I'd say they are in the extreme minority.

I honestly have no problem with your posts! You clearly don't really care for Syd as much as the other Floyd eras and that's totally cool! I do however have a problem with you putting Syd fans down as well as calling the man himself a "nutter"...that's NOT cool! But, you are entitled to your own opinion however rude it may be.

As for the excessibility of these stalker films, it disgusts me! I don't understand how anyone who claimed/claims to be a fan could circulate such an unflattering portrayal of a guy who just wanted to be left alone. I can't even watch "Syd's First Trip" because I find it exploitive. Did I answer your question correctly? Did I, did I? Do I win a prize?

[Dream To Dust]

And whilst we are on the subject, your little astral forum thought mental illness wasn't serious enough for Barrett to deserve any kind of privacy, so don't come preaching to us.

Give it a rest. The entire membership of that forum did not stalk Syd Barrett or approve of stalking or secretly filming Syd Barrett. It seems there may have been ONE person there who may have done any of it - and that person rarely even participated in the forum discussions.
You actually do show some level of ignorance every time you make these unjustified generalizations.

Furthermore, for almost the entire time the forum existed, the members were not aware that anyone associated with the site may have secretly filmed or "stalked" Syd. There were also discussions on the forum where many members expressed their distaste of such things. We even were told that the Barrett family was aware of and approved of the site; so it hardly felt like a "grubby little shrine" as you so kindly put it.

Everything related to Barrett appears to be nothing more than a big joke to some of you. Do you think mental illness is funny (not that I'm saying Syd was mentally ill; I don't know and neither do you)? Making rude remarks like that just shows your ignorance...it's a shame really!

No, I appreciate Barrett's contribution to the early Floyd material, I just think that after he spazzed out (and was fired form the band for being too unreliable) his material lost all coherency and fusion. If you want to blame anybody, blame the gold brickers who squeezed albums out the poor sucker when he was in no mental condition. As for ignorance, I am a classically trained musician with perfect pitch, and I am adept at a wide variety of musical intruments, I view myself as a better musician than Syd Barrett, and therefore I feel I have an authority to question Barrett's solo albums for what they really are, incoherent stuff that would barely warrant a demo tape.

"...I am a classically trained musician with perfect pitch, and I am adept at a wide variety of musical intruments, I view myself as a better musician than Syd Barrett..." - my breakfast.

Haha, that is amusing (seriously ) because if I didn't know better I'd swear you were doing a great Hans Keller impersonation up there just to entertain us.

"...perhaps I am a little bit too much of a musician to appreciate them" -Hans Keller.

But I suppose it was just another chance to get back up on your high horse and an attempt to add some weight to your personal opinions. It almost seems like you think an artistic expression can simply be validated or invalidated based on the level of technical proficiency of its creator or by how closely they adhered to established rules. I feel you have no more (or less) "authority" to critique Barrett's music than anyone else with the ability to hear.

I can't say I'm 100% certain, but I'm guessing Metal Mickey probably meant that you are ignorant - as in "rude" and "discourteous" more than it being about any sort of a lack of knowledge in the above quote anyway. That's the way I'm interpreting it, at least.

[kingfisher_flashing]

I only bothered listening to the incoherent shit that is Barrett's two solo albums on the whim that they may sound a bit like Piper at the Gates of Dawn. Incorrect, they sound like a spastic with an acoustic guitar making it up as he goes along (which figures).

Even Hans Keller had a bit more respect than that statement.

As for ignorance, I am a classically trained musician with perfect pitch, and I am adept at a wide variety of musical intruments, I view myself as a better musician than Syd Barrett, and therefore I feel I have an authority to question Barrett's solo albums for what they really are, incoherent stuff that would barely warrant a demo tape.

You view yourself as a better musician than Syd Barrett. Have you got any cds out? I would like to hear them.

I agree, the two Syd solo albums are a matter of taste. I love them and I never get sick of listening to them. I am not a trained musician, my pitch is crap and I cannot sing for shit, but neither can millions upon millions of others that appreciate various artists' contributions. So, to use that "qualification" to determine whether a musician is good or not is a tad self-serving I reckon.

[black bobble]

As for ignorance, I am a classically trained musician with perfect pitch, and I am adept at a wide variety of musical intruments, I view myself as a better musician than Syd Barrett, and therefore I feel I have an authority to question Barrett's solo albums for what they really are, incoherent stuff that would barely warrant a demo tape.

So you're a better technical musician than Syd. Maybe you're a better technical painter than Van Gogh. But I doubt you're capable of creating anything as emotionally intense as either. I'm a big Syd fan - I do not spend ages working out if I can play guitar "technically" better than him - I listen to the emotionally charged music that stirs emotions in me. I feel sorry for you if you can only listen to music on this technical level - you're missing out a lot.

Do you also find that some classical and Jazz guitar players technically better than Dave Gilmour? There certainly have been but that doesn't mean we should lsten to them

[Yucateco]

hilarious thread and now my answer to the question is..... No.

[PublicImage]

I find it really strange that so many people appear to think that every guitarist who is technically excellent must put no emotion into their playing at all. Clearly you've never heard Brian May.

[black bobble]

I find it really strange that so many people appear to think that every guitarist who is technically excellent must put no emotion into their playing at all. Clearly you've never heard Brian May.

I didn't mean that - you can have both (emotion and technicality) or either individually - but to say there is no value in songs that go for emotion and not technicality is to miss a lot of songs that stir up emotion - which is one reason many people listen to music.

I like some technical musicians too - I love some of Les Paul's (yes the guy who designed the Les Paul guitar) stuff which is very technical but it doesn't stop me enjoying Syd's stuff that is very emotional or even Brian May's stuff that is a bit of both.

[my breakfast.]

So you're a better technical musician than Syd. Maybe you're a better technical painter than Van Gogh. But I doubt you're capable of creating anything as emotionally intense as either.

Van Gogh might have been "emotionally intense" but what the fuck is emotionally intense about any of Syd's solo shit? Nothing, its just (as I said before) a rambling spastic making the music he goes up in a totally incoherent manner. Both Barrett's albums were produced by over-zealous men in suits trying to see how much money they could con out of people who would hoover up dead animal remains if the words "Syd Barrett" or "Pink Floyd" were written on it.

I'm a big Syd fan - I do not spend ages working out if I can play guitar "technically" better than him - I listen to the emotionally charged music that stirs emotions in me. I feel sorry for you if you can only listen to music on this technical level - you're missing out a lot.

Incorrect. I listen to music on all sorts of levels, Syd Barrett's solo output is not music, its shit of the lowest nature. Its despicable to think that anyone views this filth otherwise.

Do you also find that some classical and Jazz guitar players technically better than Dave Gilmour? There certainly have been but that doesn't mean we should listen to them

Why not? I find guitarists who can actually do more than stringbends on a strat (Gilmour's "technique") to be much more enjoyable to listen to than Gilmour.

[Dream To Dust]

As to the main topic of the thread, I voted yes.

The band already achieved a certain level of success while Syd was in it. They managed to get signed by EMI and record in a well known studio thanks mainly to Syd's talent. I think the Piper at the Gates of Dawn album, the first two singles, the television appearances and playing many high profile gigs (tour w/Hendrix, 14 hr. Technicolor Dream, etc...) all contribute to assuring that he would've been remembered by a good many people. I don't think he would've been totally forgotten if Pink Floyd did nothing else after 1968.

There are bands/musicians who had not achieved as much as Syd commercially or (arguably) artistically yet have sizeable cult followings.
I really don't see how anyone can answer a resounding "no" to this question; though the question is a bit ambiguous and maybe the answers given are based on different interpretations of it?
I think he would be remembered to some extent if they had done nothing more than release the See Emily Play and Arnold Layne singles.
Maybe then you'd only see him in a 5 second spot in one of those cheesy "Summer Of Love" or "Hits of the 60's" CD collection infomercials on late night TV or something like that, but he'd be remembered nonetheless

[Syd'sSexy]

Syd Barrett's solo output is not music, its shit of the lowest nature. Its despicable to think that anyone views this filth otherwise.

Far be it for me to get into the middle of this; however, I do have a pointed question. Alan, if you detest Pink Floyd so much, and their music has absolutely no redeeming value or characteristics, why did you become a member of this forum and why do you continue to post?

What has happened to you? You were always jovial, likeable and very witty. I always valued your opinions. Lately you have become so arrogant, and your acrimonious sarcasm is most unflattering. I know you couldn't give a rat's ass what I think, but I am sure I am stating what many other forum members have been thinking but were perhaps afraid to post.

I will butt out now.

[black bobble]

Van Gogh might have been "emotionally intense" but what the fuck is emotionally intense about any of Syd's solo shit?

Actually I find tracks like Late Night very emotionally intense - but if you don't, you don't - I guess that's why I listen to him. One person's shit is another person's ....

Its despicable to think that anyone views this filth otherwise.

I enjoy being despicable and dastardly

I find guitarists who can actually do more than stringbends on a strat (Gilmour's "technique") to be much more enjoyable to listen to than Gilmour

Yeah I don't rate gilmour much as a guitarist but his style works with Pink Floyd, much like Ringo's drumming does with The Beatles. In fact some of the best songwriters and composers (apparently Mozart was a relatively shit technician - not that I know anything about it - not being classicly trained and all) are not always the best musicians.

[Dream To Dust]

...Syd Barrett's solo output is not music, its shit of the lowest nature. Its despicable to think that anyone views this filth otherwise.

Yet another fantastically over the top, comically dramatic statement. Are you warming up for your next Broadway role or is it a hormone thing?
If it's the latter, you might want to get that checked out. It can't be good for your health.

[moom]

...Syd Barrett's solo output is not music, its shit of the lowest nature. Its despicable to think that anyone views this filth otherwise.

Well, if you want to think so, then do so, it won´t change my opinion - or anybody´s one -anyway

[Metal Mickey]

Dream to Dust, kingfisher_flashing, SS and black bobble - all really great thoughts and counter arguements...well said!

my breakfast - I can't believe you called somebody's hard work, whether you like it or not, filth! That's just WRONG! Shame on you for being so vile!

[zag]

This topic turned to be quite hilarious
What we need is some fairies to cream the crop, eh ?

Btw, I did not vote.