Fingal's Cave Podcast Ep.14 - Pink Floyd live recordings, The Year 1967

[Skinny12]

Hi Folks!

Are you ready to travel back in time? I mean way back? Then you've come to the right place!

Pink Floyd's 1967 concerts were raw, fast and unpredictable musical experiences.

Many concert setlists are incomplete or missing. The best-surviving evidence exists in snippets of film, two BBC radio sessions, photographs and three audience recordings captured between September and November 1967.

In this episode, we reflect on this essential cluster of amateur recordings: who taped them and how, what to listen for, the degree to which they reflect Syd's withdrawal, what's missing and the possibilities for the existing tapes and new discoveries.

Seek out
• September 10th at Gyllene Cirkeln, Stockholm, Sweden
• September 13th at Starclub, Copenhagen, Denmark, and
• November 13th at Hippy Happy Fair, De Oude-Ahoy Hallen, Ahoy Heliport, Rotterdam, The Netherlands

And join us for a Reaction in G.



Homepage: https://fingalscavepodcast.com
Youtube: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X7k5KjYbx2A
Apple Podcasts: https://podcasts.apple.com/de/podcas...e/id1686352696
Amazon: https://music.amazon.de/podcasts/ef8...ink-floyd-fans
Spotify: https://open.spotify.com/show/5l7sw8X4YkSNpvxkYOzF2z

Best
Skinny

[Journey Man]

Fantastic. ..a fascinating subject that needs this level of detail. Can’t wait to hear this one.

[Swirling Panpot]

I have just listened to the full podcast and I would like to share a few impressions here.

Firstly, let me say I am enjoying the entire series of Fingal's Cave, and I thank everyone - presenters and guests alike - for what is going into them. Of course Pink Floyd is my favorite topic, so they have all been fascinating to me.

OK, in no particular order, they discussed the changing setlists over a short period of time. My observation here is that their stage time was consistently quite short in 1967, unlike in later years where they might play two hours or more on a regular basis. And having just recorded the album, they would have been very familiar with all the material. So therefore it makes sense to me that they would rotate songs through the sets, just because they could only play a handful of songs per show. Later on Nick Mason is famously quoted as saying they were becoming bored with their material just because the sets were so similar from gig to gig. This really seemed to start in 1970 - where the sets stabilized after The Man and The Journey were dropped. That said, the live sides of Ummagumma were also an attempt to retire some of their original material, although that didn't work either, since ASOS, STCFTHOTS and CWTAE still featured in the sets into 1972 & 1973 (thankfully, if you ask me).

They talked about the harshness of the 1967 sound, and I put this down to Syd's guitar sound. Syd's preferred instrument was the Fender Telecaster, which is notoriously bright. I am not positive that Dave started with the band in 1968 using a Stratocaster, but he ultimately did settle there. There is also the character of the amplifiers used, and I wonder if Dave brought or changed his own equipment as part of his transition into the band.

Concerning Syd's later 1967 performances, by reading written characterizations of Syd Barrett at that time, one might be forgiven for assuming he has lost all ability to perform. Clearly these recordings dispel that myth, as even the December 1967 BBC recordings and indeed some of his solo material demonstrate that Syd could still play. I suspect most if not all of the variability in his performing had more to do with his waxing and waning enthusiasm for the band.

Phil makes the comment that performing Flaming live in 1968 was a terrible idea. I couldn't disagree more. My two cents.

Ian mentions leaked snippets from the Mothers concert in 1969. Do we have these on the tracker? Can anyone please identify these specifically. I probably have them already, but the collection is a bit of a sprawl at this late date.

I also want to note that they did not discuss the CBC performance of Interstellar Overdrive, which may have been late 1966 or early 1967, but which although incomplete is a great example of their early improvisation.

Finally, they suggest that there are 3 eras of the Waters Pink Floyd. These being early Syd, later Syd, and the Gilmour era. I would possibly advocate for 5 eras:
Early Syd
Later Syd (declining era)
Pre-DSOTM (including DSOTM - 1968 > 1973)
Post DSOTM (aka 1974 > 1977)
And Wall Era

To me each of these eras - particularly in the live performance context - are unique from each other.

Gee, those are my reactions. Again, really enjoyed it!

[Anredeon]

Of course Flaming between STCFTHOTS and ASOS is an odd thing (and Gilmour could barely sing it), but it´s a Barrett masterpiece (for me at least) and the band probably recognized it as that. Anyway, I´m happy there are liveversions of it.

[j.vavala513@gmail.com]

It has always intrigued me that Syd seems in pretty good form overall (and seemingly best in December) over the course of these shows and the BBC sessions. I’m sure there were ups and downs, but what is the likelihood that he was so bad off that they couldn’t manage to go forward with him, and we’d get 3 shows (plus bbc) from this era and he seems in top form during A lot of it. Wild.

[Paul]

Great podcast! Doing the rediscovery deep dive for sure! Thank you

[Simond]

Enjoyed watching this. Thank you

[plegault]

What a fantastic listen. Curious how you guys will breakdown the later years. Can’t wait!

[Llama]

Another great show!! Thanks, for your time and insights!! I am currently playing it again! I just can't get enough!!

[YASHA]

Many thanks!!!

[Mark45]

OK, in no particular order, they discussed the changing setlists over a short period of time. My observation here is that their stage time was consistently quite short in 1967, unlike in later years where they might play two hours or more on a regular basis. And having just recorded the album, they would have been very familiar with all the material. So therefore it makes sense to me that they would rotate songs through the sets, just because they could only play a handful of songs per show. Later on Nick Mason is famously quoted as saying they were becoming bored with their material just because the sets were so similar from gig to gig. This really seemed to start in 1970 - where the sets stabilized after The Man and The Journey were dropped. That said, the live sides of Ummagumma were also an attempt to retire some of their original material, although that didn't work either, since ASOS, STCFTHOTS and CWTAE still featured in the sets into 1972 & 1973 (thankfully, if you ask me).

I understand what you are saying here, but in my view, it was a deliberate choice by the Floyd in 70/71 to play the same setlist over and over again, with small variations over time. At the same time, they had quite a pool of songs to choose from, as by 1970 they had already released 5 albums (although we should only include the studio disc of Ummagumma here)....

And even into 1972 with Meddle and Obscured by Clouds being added to the portfolio, they could have varied more in their setlist.

How does this by the way compare to other rockbands of that time, that were no 'hit' bands? Like Led Zeppelin: how much did their setlist vary between let's say 1970 and 1973?

[j.vavala513@gmail.com]

As you mentioned they had amassed quite a catalog by ‘72-‘73. It has always struck me that so few songs even got live airings, especially after it seems like they played just about everything off of Piper.

I would’ve loved to have heard Remember a Day (though it’s rumored to have been played once), Fearless (again, was rumored), and more of the OBC soundtrack live.

It’s really a pity that that Mother’s show is rotting away somewhere. A unique improv, Let there be more light (I seem to recall anyway).

[Son of Nothing]

How does this by the way compare to other rockbands of that time, that were no 'hit' bands? Like Led Zeppelin: how much did their setlist vary between let's say 1970 and 1973?

In the torrenting era, where we can listen to recordings to a wide variety of bands over the years, I am surprised and slightly horrified about how static many band's setlists were. Even back to the 70s. Sure, they changed from tour to tour, but within a tour the setlists of some pretty major bands like Floyd, Zep, Tull and Yes were pretty damn static. I imagine these kinds of bands just rehearsed and rehearsed then stuck with it.

[DeepCreatures]

Just a thought here, but perhaps one reason the Floyd moved to more jam oriented songs in the latter part of 1967 was to be able to more easily "hide" the erratic playing of Syd.

As far as setlist variations, while Floyd did play a lot of the same songs from 1970 to 1971, I always enjoyed how they mixed the songs up within the setlist quite a bit during that time period

[YYZ]

Not my favourite era, but you guys have made this a must watch.
So so interesting and professionally produced again!
Keep them coming.

[TheGreenStrat]

Excellent listen! Great work, keep em coming

[Swirling Panpot]

I understand what you are saying here, but in my view, it was a deliberate choice by the Floyd in 70/71 to play the same setlist over and over again, with small variations over time. At the same time, they had quite a pool of songs to choose from, as by 1970 they had already released 5 albums (although we should only include the studio disc of Ummagumma here)....

And even into 1972 with Meddle and Obscured by Clouds being added to the portfolio, they could have varied more in their setlist.

How does this by the way compare to other rockbands of that time, that were no 'hit' bands? Like Led Zeppelin: how much did their setlist vary between let's say 1970 and 1973?

Mind you, I am not complaining at all about the sets of the early 70s. Some bands moved on from excellent material in order to promote the latest album. I happen to love the songs of these sets, but to play them night after night might have gotten a bit boring. At least they improvised within the structure of those songs to keep things interesting.

As for other bands, I suggest the Grateful Dead were among the most variable, keeping a stable of perhaps 100 songs on any given tour. Granted, what they gained in variety was sometimes lost in polish. But they were reaching for improvisation (as were the Floyd) and this sometimes comes at the cost of polish.

[DesertRat]

I really enjoyed this! Looking forward to the next ones too