Pulse

Ooooo.....a live album. Not just any band though and of course it's supremely engineered and slick, almost seamless. Interesting the tracks were recorded at different times/places too so not really a representation of an 'event'....... Good value for money at 2.5 hours long and if you love Pink Floyd like me you won't mind the time spent. The newer Gilmour tracks suit his voice and the guitar solos are as good as ever but I can't help but miss Roger's input. The music and support (backing singers etc) are as good as you would expect and the whole thing is well framed but all in all only for people like me.

It’s not even one full concert but instead select live recordings of greatest hits from a European tour. This isn’t a ground-breaking or earth-shattering record. The music is great but it’s already represented by the original discs on which it was recorded. It does not belong.

Pretentious shite

This is a very cool live album. Crisp-clear, and mixed right so you hear the audience only when it matters

While my instant reaction to live albums puts me in a state of fight or flight, I will say that this is one of the better ones. Pink Floyd has always been one of the better bands to see live. My main complaint with live albums, specifically for this list, is that it feels like cheating. The artist gets to choose their very best songs to include on the album. That can lead to the album feeling a tad disorganized, as it has tracks from multiple albums and, presumably, different eras of the artists life. This album just goes balls to the fucking wall with that idea and says, “Yeah, we’ll just put it all in”. The ENTIRETY of Dark Side? Sure, why not? So my main concern with live albums is put to rest on this occasion, however there is always the downside that the sound quality isn’t as good as the studio recording, but I’ll say this is certainly one of the better audio performances in terms of live outings. Not perfect, the crowd is a bit too prevalent. The instrumentation is great. The vocals are not as good as the original recording. Sorry, they just ain’t. Otherwise, all very nice. It’s a live album so I don’t mind the two and a half hour long runtime. Wish Roger were here. 3/5

It’s hard to fault Pulse on technical grounds. The band is in perfect form, the mix pristine, and the sound among the best ever captured on a live rock album. It’s a showcase how well Pink Floyd know their legacy. The Dark Side of the Moon performed in full, “Comfortably Numb” given stadium-scale treatment, and Gilmours songwriting on full display. And yet, that same perfection is its weakness. Pulse is immaculate to the point of sterility. Every note feels planned, every silence filled, every emotion calibrated. I've heard most of these songs in the exact same version already on the regular albums (which I really enjoy if I might add) But even when the band finally stretches out (for the first time, after a whole hour, with “Another Brick in the Wall”) it still sounds rehearsed. It’s less a live concert than an exhibition of Pink Floyd’s best moments, missing danger and spontaneity. Many of these songs are among the greatest ever written, but this album doesn’t belong on a list of essential recordings.

I don't think anyone is doubting Floyd's all-time great status, so why add a 2.5-hour live album of songs that are already present on the list? We've already listened to them on the main 1001, and while this LP is executed well with exceptionally clean production and amazing performances, it's still a duplication of effort at the end of the day. Stop wanking over the same 5 classic rock bands and add a new album/artist that hasn't been given their time to shine!

I do not know what a live album of a band that is far away from their peak performance adds to this list. And certainly not if the album is over 150 minutes long and boring. Is this a joke of some sort? Ummagumma and Delicate Sound of Thunder are far better Pink Floyd (semi) live albums. These two also have better album covers. A blinking pulsating led in the cd case, what a boomer kind of design.

Can't help but respect the sheer nerve, the audacity, the gall, the gumption of the person who submits a 2,5-hour live album from a band who have 4 albums on the original list, plus one additional on the user albums. Also, this is the dadrockiest dadrock dads have ever rocked.

2 hours plus of pink band greatness. Yeah the first song is 13 minutes long with 8 minutes of instrumental until some tired old guy starts meekly singing about some shit. Problem, liberal? Certainly one of the better live albums on here. The only problem with this is that I wasn't there when it was made. I'm literally pulsing my dick to this rn

My favorite live album from my favorite band, listen to it on the regular basis.

Favorite songs: What Do You Want From Me, Time, Hey You, High Hopes, Money, Us and Them, Keep Talking, Shine On You Crazy Diamond, Another Brick in the Wall, Wish You Were Here, Comfortably Numb, Run Like Hell, Coming Back to Life, Learning to Fly Least favorite songs: Astronomy Domine 5/5

I didn't really get on board any of the Pink Floyd albums until 1987's "A Momentary Lapse of Reason", an album I bought on CD and fell in love with. For whatever reason, it took another few decades to really listen to more Pink Floyd. While live albums aren't always my favorite, I did very much enjoy spending the better part of my day listening to this. I really do need to dig more into their studio releases though.

I love Pink Floyd and live albums are just nice to listen to - But, I prefer the original albums. Still, it's Pink Floyd 4.5/5

One of my favorite bands and one of their best live albums. I think "Live at Pompeii" is probably a bit better if only for the unique production values. Younger listeners may not remember, but the CD release of Pulse literally came with a pulsing red LED light in the side of the case. It always drew my eye when I saw it on a shelf in Best Buy because the whole rack would be blinking. Unique packaging like this is what I miss about physical media! Ah well...

Between the lists, Pink Floyd's had more than their fair share of exposure, and this doesn't cover much ground that's not in the other ones. That said, I mean a two-hour live album from them's actually a pretty good time, so, y'know, twist my arm etc

Ja, Pink Floyd är ju Pink Floyd och då vet vi att det är bra. Dock är det live och konserter ska upplevas på plats.

Not much to say, wish I was there *wink* *wink*

Whoever mixed this live album needs to teach a class. Perfect live album sonically.

Pulse is a live Pink Floyd album with some of the hits and some stuff I don't care much about. It's a nice live performance but live albums need to be spectacular to be worthy of a place on here and this isn't. Just a 3, even though it lasts fucking ages.

Some great music that I would prefer without the sound of the live audience.

A personal favourite from someone? :) I remember my roommate buying this CD and seeing that damn LED light blinking all night in the common room for like 6 months. Not a critique - it's fine. I'll happily listen to a little* David Gilmour, especially Shine On You Crazy Diamond so maybe I should have cut it off after the first track? I did/do like this version of Astronomy Domine maybe better than the original, hmm... Nice to hear a few of the old tracks on here, but I was never much a fan of the 80s output (especially Division Bell: snoozer.) and no cuts from Animals is a huge negative. I've also never understood the need for this live album just a few years after....their previous live album. Not sure I could tell the difference even now. And this may sound anathema to the entire experience but even with the talent shown here I really almost always prefer studio tracks - especially with a band like Floyd, even if it truly sounds great. Something about the mystery within these songs gets lost. It gets boring once you're into the "newer" tracks on disc 1. I feel like this plays more or best as a really fine basic sampler for someone unfamiliar with Floyd which again is fine, just not something I'd really reach for. *2.5 hours though? - wayyy too damn long...yikes. 5/10 3 stars.

Wow this is a tough one. A whole live album is difficult, and I don’t think I’ve ever done 2.5 hours straight of Pink Floyd. BUT no doubt about it this album is like greatest hits. I think I can do a couple of these songs but after a while in like mmmm. But good choice.

I love Pink Floyd, but really lost interest after Roger Waters left. Their music after that just seemed like a bland, uninspired imitation. There are some good performances here of their greatest hits, but I'd rather just listen to the original versions. 3 stars.

I've been putting off listening to this for a while. It was, you know... the length, coupled with the fact that it's a double live album. It's a hard sell, and I happen to love Pink Floyd. I will say though that musically this was pretty solid and the production is about as flawless as I've heard on a live album. I guess I should have expected no less from this band. But there's something about the quality of the performances that just falls flat. It's lots of little things - David Gilmour's somewhat tired delivery, the background singers that are slightly off the mark, the rather large Roger Waters-shaped hole at the center of the whole thing. It's hard to put my finger on it, except to say that I was unmoved. Fave Songs: Money, Us and Them, Breathe (In the Air), Coming Back to Life, Shine On You Crazy Diamond

nice

This is a good live album, and stand alone worthy of the list, but I wouldn’t switch out any of their studio albums for it.

Pink Floyd was kind of a big deal in my musical life for a lot of years and then pretty much faded. I can't really do The Wall anymore, and I have little interest in the post-Waters band. So this is another awful lot of live Floyd with a fair chunk of it outside of even my waning interest zone. It's meticulously performed anyway, and I generally felt fine about the listen, but none of the versions really wowed me.

Ehhh... I would have probably gone with "Live at Pompeii" if we were going to add a live Pink Floyd album to the list, since that's an infinitely more interesting project than this one (and a side of the band that wasn't really showcased on the original list). Pink Floyd's one of my favorite bands of all time, but I'm not sure I love any band enough to justify 2.5 hours of slightly worse live recordings of their biggest hits. Not bad or anything of course, but as an album experience it's probably a 3/5.

I’m not a Pink Floyd fan but I liked this more than I expected to.

I love PF but thus feels a bit too sanitized. Pompeii is better.

This is definitely a great live album. Kind of long though

Y'know how Stop Making Sense is the highest rated live album, at least on the user list? You know why? "Because it's Tallking Heads!" Yes, but also because the original is less than forty minutes! It also is an interesting live album because it changes the sounds of the established tracks, or even has stuff never performed by Talking Heads the band, such as What A Day That Was. Pink Floyd is a band that absolutely has great tracks, and those great tracks could certainly be performed live to great effect. There are some moments of that on this album, but coming in at over two hours long, there is not enough here to make me want to listen to this over any Pink Floyd studio recording. It feels more like a greatest hits compilation, with late 80s and 90s cuts we now know didn't stand the test of time. It isn't a bad album, Pink Floyd has good moments, of course, but I'd rather have had Meddle, or if we have to do a live album, their performance at Pompeii was released in album form just this year, and that performance had icon status before this album was even released. At the end of the day, this is a Pink Floyd live album, and unfortunately not much more than that. But, still alright.

Progressive rock, psychedelic rock. Laaaaaaaargo. No me hace tanto Pink Floyd... Me ha aburrido. Un 2.

got kinda bored on the first disc but thought i'd stick around for the full play of Dark Side, which I wasn't terribly impressed by.

For how much Pink Floyd was on the original list, it's absolutely to ridiculous to consider this to have been missed. 90s era Pink Floyd just isn't it. This is too perfect and calculated and empty and incomplete, and far too long. I guess I'm happy to say I was able to slog through this thing, but this is a hard no.

I love PF, but fuck you for putting in a 2.5 hr live album. Doesn't matter the bend. Eat the business end of a shotgun.

Wha' a load'a robbish 1

While I really enjoy a lot of Pink Floyd, and while I know that the audio engineering of a Pink Floyd concert was the absolute pinnacle of what was possible at the time - I have absolutely zero interest in hearing a live performance. And this isn't a live performance. It's two and a half mother fucking hours of live concert excerpts. Any live album will start off at 1 star, on general principle, and it has to be exceptional to increase from that. This does get a boost from being at the very cutting edge of what's possible from a live concert. But. It gets dings for being two and a half goddamn hours. And for including crowd noise. And for breaking up the structure of some of their albums. And it absolutely gets dings for being music from albums that are included within the main list. This isn't just a waste of an album suggestion, it's a vaguely insulting waste of time. To present worse versions of music we've already listened to for the project - seriously? Of all the artists in this world, of all the music you could introduce to people who've spent three plus years listening to music, presumably for the love of music, you chose worse versions of stuff we've already heard? Two and a half hours of it? Yeah, nah. Would you like to have another go?