Jump to content
  • Welcome!

    Register and log in easily with Twitter or Google accounts!

    Or simply create a new Huddle account. 

    Members receive fewer ads , access our dark theme, and the ability to join the discussion!

     

50 Years Ago..... Dark Side of the Moon


Anybodyhome
 Share

Recommended Posts

It was 50 years ago Pink Floyd released one of the quintessential albums of all time in Dark Side of the Moon. October 13, Pink Floyd/Warner Music will release a remastered edition of the epic title in Vinyl, CD and blu-ray.

Coincidentally (?), Roger Waters is releasing Dark Side of the Moon Redux, which is a complete re-interpretation of the entire album on his own terms.

My personal favorite off the album. I have 2 copies of the vinyl, one still sealed brand new and a second I play.

 

  • Beer 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Dark Side was a weird Floyd album for me.  It took me way too many years to view it a positively as the rest of the world did.

Ive always been a big fan of PF back to the mid 70s but there was always another album grabbing my attention.  Meddle, Animals, Wish You Were Here, The Wall...

 

It wasn't until some time after I saw them on the Delicate Sound of Thunder tour that I sort of forced myself to really stop and really listen to Dark Side.

 

Still not my favorite Floyd album but it is unquestionably fuging epic.

  • Pie 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

53 minutes ago, Cullenator said:

Dark Side was a weird Floyd album for me.  It took me way too many years to view it a positively as the rest of the world did.

Ive always been a big fan of PF back to the mid 70s but there was always another album grabbing my attention.  Meddle, Animals, Wish You Were Here, The Wall...

 

It wasn't until some time after I saw them on the Delicate Sound of Thunder tour that I sort of forced myself to really stop and really listen to Dark Side.

 

Still not my favorite Floyd album but it is unquestionably fuging epic.

Not even a top 4 on my PF list. Although groundbreaking, commercially huge and a seminal album for a kid like me at 17 when it came out, radio just beat "Time" and "Money" to death in Southern California.

 But Wish You Were Here, Meddle, Wall and Animals are my top 4; and they interchange where on that list depending on where I'm at musically/mentally on any given day. Hell, I didn't sit down with my Koss Pro IV-X headphones and critically and appreciatively listen to it until the 90s. One cannot "get" PF unless they listen to an entire release, front to back, in order.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

 Share


  • PMH4OWPW7JD2TDGWZKTOYL2T3E.jpg

  • Topics

  • Posts

    • Um, no, just no. Bills, Chiefs, Chargers, Ravens, Bengals, Texans, Eagles, Commanders are 8 teams that it's not even a debate, they aren't trading their QB for Purdy. Patriots, Broncos, Titans, Giants, Bears, Vikings, Falcons are 7 more teams with QBs drafted in the last 2 years that also would rather stick with them than trade for Purdy as they all have more upside than he does. Lions, Packers, Cowboys, Bucs are 4 more that would likely keep their QB's as well, age aside for Goff, Dak, and Baker. Panthers and Colts are two teams in the same situation, QB's who have both struggled and shown flashes to where the teams probably stick with them because they drafted them, but in a re-draft of all QB's, they probably take Purdy over the guy they currently have. Jags, Cardinals, Dolphins, are 3 more with QB's who probably have a higher upside than Purdy but come with their own question marks, so debatable if they'd take Purdy over who they already have. That leaves Jets, Raiders, Steelers, Browns, Saints, Seahawks, and Rams. Rams would take him over Stafford for the future of course, but not for 2025, and I'd think the Seahawks would take him over Darnold, but honestly not sure if they would take him over Milroe at this moment as they really like his potential and have him for 4 years really cheap. That leaves 5 teams that I see who would absolutely take him over their current situation right now, and a handful of others who MIGHT take him over their current guy, a far cry from your 20.  
    • Agreed. Also as soon as they received the top pick in the next draft it was over. Bears won that trade. Gave up a top overall pick got one the next year plus pick 9, a couple 2nds, and DJ Moore a proven young WR. Had their 2024 pick from us be in the late teens or later it would be more debatable IMO. 
    • Option A:  Pay your starting QB starting QB money. Option B:  Look for a starting QB for 4-10 years (or longer) while wasting the talent at every other position.    How many of the top 20 QB's do you think are worth what they are being paid?   When you factor in the last year of his present deal his contract is really an average of 45 million per year which in today's QB market is a very, very good deal. I wish we'd had found a Brock Purdy to pay 50+ million a year right after we parted ways with Cam.  Ya'll go ahead and live in fairy tale land where good to great (much less elite) QB's are available to pay. Just the fact that they had the chance to pay Brock after the disaster of trading up for Lance is a testament that when you find a quarter back you can win with, complete in the playoffs and superbowls with, you pay him.  
×
×
  • Create New...