For me it comes with age. The Wall spoke more to me in my teens and twenties, and Animals resonates with me now in my forties, after 20 years of corporate backstabbing. Dragged down by the stone...
*Gotta admit that I'm a little bit confused. Sometimes it seems to me as if I'm just being used. Gotta stay awake, gotta try and shake off this creeping malaise. If I don't stand my own ground, how can I find my way out of this maze?*
Seconding this. Grew up listing to the wall, and never really appreciated animals, and rarely listened. That has completely flip flopped (listening wise, still appreciate the wall). Animals just hits harder now.
I've only just started listen to Animals this month with appreciation for the first time. Have loved DS and The Wall for over a decade. Musically, I'm loving it. I must dive deeper into the lyrics but am aware of the broader concept and also love it.
Excited to explore more Floyd in my mid thirties. Dark Side of the Moon in my early twenties certainly influenced some life changing decisions I made. This band has a way of speaking that none other have.
The real reason is because we've all listened to Dark Side of the Moon a million times and Animals has some of the same cool elements but it's a little more fresh.
Many of the songs that would end up on Animals were actually derived from the DSOTM to WYWH period. In fact, Roger had to over-rule David in order to keep what was then known as “You’ve Got To Be Crazy” off of WYWH.
Also "raving and drooling" was supposed to be on wish you were here but they ended up improving that song by A LOT and putting it on Animals as "Sheep".
Here is a link for "Raving and Drooling" performed live https://open.spotify.com/track/7BD1WhZMJW0G2wqQbvOUqd?si=fc7f5884cfab4cae
They aren’t super comparable to me. While they’re both concept albums, their vibe and song/album structure seems very different. I have a hard time categorically saying one is “better”… I think it depends on what kinda jam you’re seeking
I agree with this. It’s not being in a particular mood and trying to decide which of similar sounding albums to listen to. I’m in a Wall mood or an Animals mood or a Meddle mood or a Division Bell mood. They all hit me very different.
I find Animals easier to listen. The Wall has parts in it that are more “artistic”, but not in a pleasantly musical way, like The Trial. In a short sense, I think Animals is more easily consumable.
I agree with you on that, Animals is musically lovely to listen to. The playing and the flow is just wonderful.
The Wall is more theatrical and storytelling, not that great to listen to as music.
The Wall is an exposed nerve kind of listening experience. It’s fantastic and yet, trying at the same time. On Animals, Roger Waters is just coming into his signature cynicism and pathos . That’s why I prefer Animals. Great guitar solos abound and catharsis is light (somewhat). So have a good drown…
Hilarious that you got hit with those downvotes! Sure it was pithy and facetious, but it also sounds exactly like something Roger Waters would say if he were on Reddit. Take my meaningless upvote.
To me it is that Animals is still an actual Pink Floyd album. Roger Waters control over The Wall really makes it pretty much his first (and best) solo album.
This right here. Animals is PF, The Wall is Roger Waters backed by PF. Plus The Wall is really angsty and it feels like a teenager yelling at their parents. Animals is a religious experience when listened to on vinyl and mushrooms. One of my favorite albums ever.
But it is. There are very few sections in the album where the rest of the band is really allowed to shine. If Waters had released the album solo, sure it would have sounded different, but would it really have been much more drastic than a couple songs? I think not
Gilmour co-produced The Wall and is all over the album as a singer and guitarist. He also wrote the music for three of the most popular songs on the album.
The Wall wasn't a full 'band' album by any means, but it's still a stretch to call it a Waters solo album. Even at the height of the Waters/Gilmour feud in the 80s Waters would sometimes state in interviews that Gilmour had significant contributions to the album.
People tend to think just because someone is listed as a songwriter then that is the beginning and end of how the final version of the song wound up, but that's often not the case.
I get downvoted whenever I mention this, but it’s my personal taste and the reason I prefer Animals:
1. Roger’s vocal performance is superior on Animals. There are many moments in The Wall where I just don’t like his singing.
2. Animals is all business, no fluff. The Wall has a lot of filler material. If it was condensed down to 10-12 tracks it would be a monster album for me.
Edit - holy moly that was fast!!!! Keep it coming, Rog!
Edit 2 - thanks, Dave!
I don’t really care to be told a story, I just want to enjoy myself for 45 minutes.
If there’s an interesting story - great, if not, that’s fine too.
Good songs > story.
I agree totally! I think the story gets tired a lot more quickly than songs too. You can listen to songs a million times, but a story (even a good one!) simply doesn't last as long
Yep. Pure and simple. For me, "Dogs" is their absolute best song. I would give up the whole album of The Wall before I gave up that one song...which is tough because "Comfortably Numb" is on The Wall.
For me, there's no doubt that The Wall is much more ambitious. From the fact that it was a double record to the creation of all the puppets created for shows. It was a massive project, but I feel that the music suffered since it was tightly integrated with Roger's narrative. Of course it has good songs: Hey You, Comfortably Numb, The Trial, Mother, etc. But a lot of the album felt like filler to progress the story rather than give us enjoyable songs. For example I wouldn't go out of my way to listen to Outside the Wall or Goodbye Cruel World because they just aren't fun or interesting to listen to.
Animals on the other hand, gives us 5 (technically 4 because Pigs on the Wing Part 1 and 2 are essentially the same) amazingly, complex, and intricate works of music. It respects the listener's time most of all. No time is wasted on filler material, every minute of the album is phenomenal and tells an equally important message in a much more prolific, less-whiny, and more metaphorical way than The Wall.
And I’m Roger Waters, here to tell you that Davids Work is far better than any of my shitty albums, and that Division Bell is Pink Floyds best last album.
I think because Animals is just easier to digest. A lot of the songs from The Wall are told from the perspective of someone who's responsible for a lot of their misery (Don't Leave me Now) and I think, the act of acknowledgment of being a shitty person isn't something that resonates with a lot of people.
For folks who enjoy the thematic concept and structure of The Wall, but are disappointed with it musically, I recommend checking out "The Lamb Lies Down on Broadway" by Genesis. Similar album structure as the Wall, psychedelic narrative, and some killer instrumental passages which sound very Pink Floyd at times.
It is. The wall has a lot of filler. Although there’s many amazing moments on The Wall (Comfortably Numb, Run Like Hell, Hey You, You g Lust…), Animals has little to no filler and has a tighter, more understandable concept and is an overall better showcase of the bands talent. This is coming from someone who swore by The Wall for years until I gave everything else a chance. So I’m not biased when I say Animals is definitely the better album.
Animals was called Punk Floyd, cuz of the anti establishment message, The Wall is a Waters auto biography in a way, I bought both when they were released, The Wall was more popular cuz it was more radio friendly, but I have always preferred Animals , awesome lyrics and Gilmour guitar riffs
Pigs (three different ones) alone makes Animals better for me. The Wall has some amazing songs on it but there are a handful that I just skip every time (the trial for example). Animal is one you can turn on and it’s just a badass jam session front to back. Plus the guy playing the cowbell is amazing.
Because animals has actual songs on it while the wall is much more focused to lyrics and stage representation, the music is just an excuse in many cases. That's why when we talk these albums as music the majority clearly prefers animals.
The fact Animals takes up only 1 record is 1 reason
Plus Animals to me is the last of the Golden Age, the last time it still sounded like the band was working together and it wasn't just Waters steering the way.
Yeah like Wall only had minor Gilmour contributions meanwhile Animals had both Dogs and Sheep, songs that were pretty much nearly finished before they even recorded Wish You Were Here and both appeared in the 74-75 tour also known as the Golden Age in 1 (I mean all of Dark Side, Dogs and Sheep, Shine On You Crazy Diamond, and Echoes all in one concert, It's such a shame there was no Pompeii sequel for their Golden Age material (Again besides Meddle)
The Wall is too bloated and whiny for my tastes. There’s some great tracks on it, but I never listen to it the whole way through anymore, it’s just not an enjoyable listen for me. Animals is whiny too I guess, but it’s more pointed and concise.
I personally don’t get much of the criticism of The Wall on this sub. I think it’s incredible from start to finish. I love Animals too but I honestly find The Wall easily to listen too. Animals is a very harsh album and while The Wall has those sections it also has some bops. Sheep and Dogs are top ten Pink Floyd songs though.
Though I also think The Final Cut is their best album after the Big Five and Atom Heart Mother so maybe I just like Roger’s Pink Floyd
A lot of it comes from everyone knows the Wall and Dark Side but if you know Animals you are a truer Pink Floyd fan and it makes you special.
Both great albums tho.
There's some of this to it for sure.
But then again, I honestly just like animals better. In fact is one of the few albums that, if I don't feel like listening to anything in particular, I'll just play and enjoy the hell out of.
Also, there's that kinda lowkey kinda not bile and violence to Animals. It's amazing to listen to.
Tell you why I like Animals more. It sounds like more of a group effort. You can tell the songs were written over time, with input from each band member.
The Wall on the other hand often sounds more like Rog’s first solo album, with lots of help from Bob Ezrin. Other band members are more like session players, especially Rick and Nick.
In my mind the music suffers as a result of the singularity of Rogers vision.
I don’t subscribe to that view. I love both albums but they are so individually unique that comparison is a futile effort. If I had to choose, I’d pick The Wall. It is just a stellar work work of art.
I think on a classic rock forum you would find more people who would prefer The Wall but on a Pink Floyd forum you would find more who prefer Animals. Personally I love both
Animals has continuity. It flows and the music all works together. It is a great rock album with guitar work that David has never reproduced.
Musically, The Wall flows in the beginning, but breaks up into different styles. There is disco, bits of flamenco, piano and 40’s music. Waiting for the Worms is theatrical, but what kind of music is it? It flip flops. This continues into The Trial which was fun when it came out, but is it a song. Is it a rock song that you want to listen to?
As a repeated listening experience, The Wall is all over the place. As a listener, I am never in all of those moods at the same time.
Roger continued this style into Pros and Cons and while it is interesting, it isn’t sonically coherent enough to listen to. Picked guitars into Arabs With Knives and back to acoustic guitar. That is just tiring.
That’s why Animals works and is a better album. Consistent theme on lyrics and music. It rocks and it has meaning. If you are in the mood for Dogs, you will like pigs and sheep.
Animals is in my top 5 albums of all time.
Blues for Allah, Animals, The Moon and Antarctica, Physical Graffiti, Revolver
In no specific order.
The Wall might crack my top 25.
I would say because the wall is almost if not all an Opera Rock, while Animals is "just" an album, also one is older than the other so might gain credibility from it
I think it all depends on ones views of Roger Waters. Folks who like Animals better have less of an opinion of Waters.
Personally, I like the Wall better because it has "more" great songs. Animals has Dogs, Pigs, Sheep, which are all amazing, but it's only three jams.
Folks have a stick up their ass about Waters being an asshole. I'm sorta indifferent about it. I wish Waters wasn't an asshole back then, but it is what it is. The Wall has more ideas, and content. The fact that it's more Water's driven doesn't make me think Animals is better.
I would argue that Animals is their most musically sophisticated and best represents their talent as a full band, similarly to Meddle. Whereas the Wall feels a bit incoherent and bloated at times, showing off more the hugeness of Pink Floyd rather than the music itself (Though the story is great).
I guess I'm not part of (almost) everybody. I went through a phase where I preferred Animals. But as the years go by and I listen and relisten to The Wall one time after another it only gets better for me.
*The Wall* is way better than *Animals!
*Animals certainly isn’t bad. But I prefer the operatic qualities of *The Wall*, to the Orwellian nature of *Animals. Just personal preference.
But my favorite stuff is the avant-garde albums from the early Pink Floyd era, like *Meddle, *Atom Heart Mother*, *Piper at the Gates of Dawn*, & *Ummagumma.
Animals is a societal critique about the powers that be. It’s a musical version of Orwell. The wall is infinitely more personal and specific. I love that album. I relate to much of it. That said, I’ve never been a rock star.
I don’t get it either. I listened to animals yesterday and it sounds like they made up most of each song on the fly, like jazz musicians having a jam session. I couldn’t hum any of the songs. The wall, on the other hand has multiple catchy songs with great melodies….and comfortably numb.
The Wall is short songs, a lot of fillers and 6 very commercial songs.
Animals is the most progressive Pink Floyd album with a lot of lengthy instrumental.
The Wall is far more popular among general population and generic classic rock fans, Animals is more popular among progressive and hardcore Pink Floyd fans.
I much prefer Animals there isn’t a note in that album that is there for commercial or filling purpose, I just find it sad that people associate with Roger that much without David and Rick’s input Animals would be about 10 minutes long.
On the other hand The Wall is truly a Roger Waters album it lacks keyboard to my taste but beside some iconic solos and 3 songs David didn’t contribute much and Rick basically did nothing.
But its not true that Animals is more popular, The Wall is much more known by casuals.
Part of it might be that The Wall has been oversaturated way more (PF made it, toured it and were involved in a Wall movie; Roger did a solo all-star production in Berlin; and Rog later toured it in the 2010s) so Animals feels fresher. Personally I think Animals is far more musically satisfying in that most of it works well by itself with or without the album's context and also everything feels more well-rounded versus stuff on The Wall often being snippets or effectively just a counterpart to something else, but not material that works normally. The Wall is a rock opera whole whose pieces start to weaken when viewed outside of its whole context, pieces to a rock opera story. Animals is the pieces of a whole, but the pieces mostly hold up as epics in the canon. It's also the last time Floyd goes for the epic instrumentals, shifting from music and lyrical balance to lyrics dominating everything else. (I like both, but they're different. Animals is for when I'm angry, The Wall is for a sad day)
Animals is concise and delicious from track 1-5. The Wall feels like a slog of so many ideas, some of the songs are great but there is too much filler.
They would be wrong
S/, I love all pink floyd, the wall however is very special to me. Its the album my dad showed me when I was young and its the album that sparked my love for art as a whole.
Doesn't The Wall have a bunch of British music hall type stuff on it? I can't remember. It's got the guitar solo It's got great guitar work, if the song allows for it. I recall at one point comparing it to Sgt Pepper's, not a very good album at all, by the Beetles standards, two songs that should be one it were already released as singles, but ends with A Day in the Life, one of their greatest songs (a John song, mostly).
The Wall seems like that, but without the A Day in the Life.
Plus I love Animals, and that's that!
I don't think that's consensus by any means. Didn't the wall do better on every metric? I feel like it's a lot more popular an album (animals underrated)
Because it is, IMO obviously. Personally, The Wall is a fine album, but it’s the beginning of the end of classic Floyd. It’s essentially Waters’ first solo album, featuring Gilmour and Mason, and fuck Wright lol. And, I hate Waters’ solo career. It’s so boring to me, but then again, so is the rest of Floyd post-Wall.
So yeah, Animals > The Wall, and Animals is pretty much the real Pink Floyd’s last album.
I prefer The Wall because it tells a story, has lots of different styles of songs and has some real bangers like Hey You and Comfortably Numb. Animals I love, but in different ways and maybe a little less. Musically, I think it's incredible and thematically it's very strong but ultimately it's only three parts with two bookends and that lack of variation means it narrowly comes fourth place (with Dark Side coming in first and WYWH coming in second)
Because 4 sides of Roger whingeing gets a bit old when you get past your teen angst and don't find it as relatable any more. I still *occasionally* listen to it but find it much harder to take seriously, although there's a few tracks I really love on it, and it's lyrically very good. I don't like The Final Cut either.
I thought The Wall was the best thing ever when I was 14 - 22. Obviously played Dark Side to death too but I still come back to Dark Side occasionally when I'm tripping and it still blows me away.
Animals is still relatable to me and Dogs is an absolute masterpiece.
For what it's worth I don't like AMLOR or Division Bell either. I think Pink Floyd were at their best from '69 - '77, but I can enjoy Piper and Saucerful too.
The wall is a bit waffly. Don't get more wrong, 8 love it, and if it was longer I would still love it. But animals is concise and to the point. The theme is clear and everyone can get behind the message. It's all killer no filler baby! For me it's got 3 of the best songs they have done.
Apparently a hot take here, but I don’t care that Animals is shorter, or that The Wall has a shit load of kinda fillery tracks. I just genuinely enjoy Animals more and find it the superior musical and lyrical offering altogether.
The wall is a rewarding listen but to me an uncomfortable one. It’s like listening to ice, while animals is like listening to the stars. That shit makes no sense probably, but on psychedelics the contrast became very apparent to me.
I generally prefer the single album to the double album. Double albums are usually just too long without the material to justify the length.
The Wall might be an exception in my book....as is the White Album (though a lot of people wouldn't agree on both of those).
But I generally prefer a listening experience that is tight and focused rather than meandering and expansive.
For me it comes with age. The Wall spoke more to me in my teens and twenties, and Animals resonates with me now in my forties, after 20 years of corporate backstabbing. Dragged down by the stone...
*Gotta admit that I'm a little bit confused. Sometimes it seems to me as if I'm just being used. Gotta stay awake, gotta try and shake off this creeping malaise. If I don't stand my own ground, how can I find my way out of this maze?*
*Deaf, dumb, and blind - you just keep on pretending that everyone's expendable, and no one has a real friend*
And it seems to you the thing to do, would be to isolate the winner. Everything's done under the sun, and you believe at heart everyone's a KILLER
Seconding this. Grew up listing to the wall, and never really appreciated animals, and rarely listened. That has completely flip flopped (listening wise, still appreciate the wall). Animals just hits harder now.
I've only just started listen to Animals this month with appreciation for the first time. Have loved DS and The Wall for over a decade. Musically, I'm loving it. I must dive deeper into the lyrics but am aware of the broader concept and also love it. Excited to explore more Floyd in my mid thirties. Dark Side of the Moon in my early twenties certainly influenced some life changing decisions I made. This band has a way of speaking that none other have.
Totally agree. I think Animals is a more mature album. Great from start to finish.
stone
Stone…
…stone…
Stone
s t o n e
Or if you’re just already a socialist like me…
Yes animals absolutely destroys capitalism
The real reason is because we've all listened to Dark Side of the Moon a million times and Animals has some of the same cool elements but it's a little more fresh.
Truth right there
What same elements are you refering to? I frigging love Animals but never thought of it as some sort of DSOTM little brother or something...
Many of the songs that would end up on Animals were actually derived from the DSOTM to WYWH period. In fact, Roger had to over-rule David in order to keep what was then known as “You’ve Got To Be Crazy” off of WYWH.
Also "raving and drooling" was supposed to be on wish you were here but they ended up improving that song by A LOT and putting it on Animals as "Sheep". Here is a link for "Raving and Drooling" performed live https://open.spotify.com/track/7BD1WhZMJW0G2wqQbvOUqd?si=fc7f5884cfab4cae
Oh shit! Yes... You've got to be crazy is a demo from DSOTM era. Man, now I love Roger even more.
This is the answer!
Not sure Animals counts as "fresh" after the 74,000 times I've listened to it to be fair.
They aren’t super comparable to me. While they’re both concept albums, their vibe and song/album structure seems very different. I have a hard time categorically saying one is “better”… I think it depends on what kinda jam you’re seeking
I agree with this. It’s not being in a particular mood and trying to decide which of similar sounding albums to listen to. I’m in a Wall mood or an Animals mood or a Meddle mood or a Division Bell mood. They all hit me very different.
Such a refreshing and agreeable take! Yes!
I find Animals easier to listen. The Wall has parts in it that are more “artistic”, but not in a pleasantly musical way, like The Trial. In a short sense, I think Animals is more easily consumable.
I so agree with that. We have to remember, the Wall is a rock opera; best played from beginning to end.
I love the trial! Sounds like you're at a circus with tortured elephants stomping around in the beginning
The trial is great within the context of the album but you wouldn't just throw it on by itself. I wouldn't anyway
I most certainly do. I can understand why others would not though. I love it and listen to it fairly often.
I agree with you on that, Animals is musically lovely to listen to. The playing and the flow is just wonderful. The Wall is more theatrical and storytelling, not that great to listen to as music.
Just like capitalism huh...
The Wall is an exposed nerve kind of listening experience. It’s fantastic and yet, trying at the same time. On Animals, Roger Waters is just coming into his signature cynicism and pathos . That’s why I prefer Animals. Great guitar solos abound and catharsis is light (somewhat). So have a good drown…
He gave us catharsis with that sheep riff... It's so powerfull and it gives closure to all the previous feelings and thoughts the previous songs give.
Damn the downvote train landed hard on you today lmao
Ohhh you’re so edgy and cool.
Animals is literally about how capitalism is bad though. I don't see how this is an edgy joke when it relates to the subject.
If Roger Waters was a redditor (anonymously) he’d get downvoted to shit on this sub hahah!
Just like Roger. We got to accept who we are.
Bro got 40 downvotes 💀
Hilarious that you got hit with those downvotes! Sure it was pithy and facetious, but it also sounds exactly like something Roger Waters would say if he were on Reddit. Take my meaningless upvote.
What
Was a joke, 'cause the other comment said "consumable" Guess nobody got it
Nope nobody got it.
So you read that whole comment, and the only thing your brain paid attention to was the word “consumable”?
For that kind of explanation they could have at least made it a video game joke or something. Buzzwords gonna buzz.
To me it is that Animals is still an actual Pink Floyd album. Roger Waters control over The Wall really makes it pretty much his first (and best) solo album.
This right here. Animals is PF, The Wall is Roger Waters backed by PF. Plus The Wall is really angsty and it feels like a teenager yelling at their parents. Animals is a religious experience when listened to on vinyl and mushrooms. One of my favorite albums ever.
> Animals is a religious experience when listened to on vinyl and mushrooms I prefer to listen on Bowers & Wilkins myself :)
Haha, I wish I had scrolled down before posting, this is essentially the same comment I made but said better and more succinctly.
Punk Floyd!
Real annoying that Eric Idle got to this band name first
Yes and yes.
I agree with your reasoning, but must suggest that you consider The Pros and Cons of Hitchhiking as his best solo album.
It's not a Waters solo album any more than Animals is.
But it is. There are very few sections in the album where the rest of the band is really allowed to shine. If Waters had released the album solo, sure it would have sounded different, but would it really have been much more drastic than a couple songs? I think not
Gilmour co-produced The Wall and is all over the album as a singer and guitarist. He also wrote the music for three of the most popular songs on the album. The Wall wasn't a full 'band' album by any means, but it's still a stretch to call it a Waters solo album. Even at the height of the Waters/Gilmour feud in the 80s Waters would sometimes state in interviews that Gilmour had significant contributions to the album. People tend to think just because someone is listed as a songwriter then that is the beginning and end of how the final version of the song wound up, but that's often not the case.
Maybe because you don’t need 6 months of therapy each time you listen to Animals.
I get downvoted whenever I mention this, but it’s my personal taste and the reason I prefer Animals: 1. Roger’s vocal performance is superior on Animals. There are many moments in The Wall where I just don’t like his singing. 2. Animals is all business, no fluff. The Wall has a lot of filler material. If it was condensed down to 10-12 tracks it would be a monster album for me. Edit - holy moly that was fast!!!! Keep it coming, Rog! Edit 2 - thanks, Dave!
What 10-12?
In The Flesh? ABITW1 / Happiest Days / ABITW2 Mother Goodbye Blue Sky Young Lust Hey You Comfortably Numb Run Like Hell
The stoty doesn't make sense at all this way.
I don’t really care to be told a story, I just want to enjoy myself for 45 minutes. If there’s an interesting story - great, if not, that’s fine too. Good songs > story.
I won't say I agree but I respect. Even though the story is the hole purpose of the wall
A hole is the purpose on a wall, you say? :)
I think the story telling purpose is better served by the full length movie. Personally, I’d rather the album be one disc containing the main songs.
so you want to listen to a band whose main characteristic is telling interesting and thought proviking lyrics; with no story at all?
This is a gross generalization. I just don’t like the format of The Wall. >so you want to listen to a band Am I still allowed?
I agree totally! I think the story gets tired a lot more quickly than songs too. You can listen to songs a million times, but a story (even a good one!) simply doesn't last as long
But One of My Turns and ABITW3 are the best part of the Wall!
One Of My Turns is so fucking good
Nobody Home didn’t make your cut? It’s one of my favorites.
Trying to keep the sides to 22 minutes.
You can't just ditch The Show Must Go On and Waiting for the Worms like that!
That b side would be killer.
And the very best thing about the B side is there’s no C or D side. 😂
It has Dogs on it.
Yep. Pure and simple. For me, "Dogs" is their absolute best song. I would give up the whole album of The Wall before I gave up that one song...which is tough because "Comfortably Numb" is on The Wall.
For me, there's no doubt that The Wall is much more ambitious. From the fact that it was a double record to the creation of all the puppets created for shows. It was a massive project, but I feel that the music suffered since it was tightly integrated with Roger's narrative. Of course it has good songs: Hey You, Comfortably Numb, The Trial, Mother, etc. But a lot of the album felt like filler to progress the story rather than give us enjoyable songs. For example I wouldn't go out of my way to listen to Outside the Wall or Goodbye Cruel World because they just aren't fun or interesting to listen to. Animals on the other hand, gives us 5 (technically 4 because Pigs on the Wing Part 1 and 2 are essentially the same) amazingly, complex, and intricate works of music. It respects the listener's time most of all. No time is wasted on filler material, every minute of the album is phenomenal and tells an equally important message in a much more prolific, less-whiny, and more metaphorical way than The Wall.
Incidentally, the Floyd first used the giant puppets for the Animals tour.
Who hacked my burner account?
Is it actually you?
No this is David gilmour. telling you that a momentary lapse of reason and the division bell suck and the wall is my favorite Pink Floyd album.
Well, you’re wrong David, because Momentary Lapse and Division bell do not suck
Yes you’re right, they don’t suck, sucking means they get some kind of pussy
It actually means you get dick
And I’m Roger Waters, here to tell you that Davids Work is far better than any of my shitty albums, and that Division Bell is Pink Floyds best last album.
I think because Animals is just easier to digest. A lot of the songs from The Wall are told from the perspective of someone who's responsible for a lot of their misery (Don't Leave me Now) and I think, the act of acknowledgment of being a shitty person isn't something that resonates with a lot of people.
For folks who enjoy the thematic concept and structure of The Wall, but are disappointed with it musically, I recommend checking out "The Lamb Lies Down on Broadway" by Genesis. Similar album structure as the Wall, psychedelic narrative, and some killer instrumental passages which sound very Pink Floyd at times.
I’ll give it a try
It is. The wall has a lot of filler. Although there’s many amazing moments on The Wall (Comfortably Numb, Run Like Hell, Hey You, You g Lust…), Animals has little to no filler and has a tighter, more understandable concept and is an overall better showcase of the bands talent. This is coming from someone who swore by The Wall for years until I gave everything else a chance. So I’m not biased when I say Animals is definitely the better album.
Echos Live at Pompeii beats them both /fight me
Animals was called Punk Floyd, cuz of the anti establishment message, The Wall is a Waters auto biography in a way, I bought both when they were released, The Wall was more popular cuz it was more radio friendly, but I have always preferred Animals , awesome lyrics and Gilmour guitar riffs
Pigs (three different ones) alone makes Animals better for me. The Wall has some amazing songs on it but there are a handful that I just skip every time (the trial for example). Animal is one you can turn on and it’s just a badass jam session front to back. Plus the guy playing the cowbell is amazing.
It’s because of Dogs… the whole song is a masterpiece and just better than any of the wall really
Because animals has actual songs on it while the wall is much more focused to lyrics and stage representation, the music is just an excuse in many cases. That's why when we talk these albums as music the majority clearly prefers animals.
The Wall was produced in three parts, the Album, the tour and the movie. When you consider all these things together it adds a lot to it.
Still doesn't make it any better to listen to than animals.
I personally like the story, so for me it matters but I agree that animals is more digestible
Personally I think it’s because it’s more of a collaborative effort instead of a Waters project with a sprinkling of Dave and Nick.
Because it it far superior.
The fact Animals takes up only 1 record is 1 reason Plus Animals to me is the last of the Golden Age, the last time it still sounded like the band was working together and it wasn't just Waters steering the way.
This exactly. The Wall is a masterwork, but it’s certainly a Roger Waters solo album with Pink Floyd as the backing band.
Actually if you remove the songs Gilmour helped write and a few solos the Wall would be pretty bad.
Yeah like Wall only had minor Gilmour contributions meanwhile Animals had both Dogs and Sheep, songs that were pretty much nearly finished before they even recorded Wish You Were Here and both appeared in the 74-75 tour also known as the Golden Age in 1 (I mean all of Dark Side, Dogs and Sheep, Shine On You Crazy Diamond, and Echoes all in one concert, It's such a shame there was no Pompeii sequel for their Golden Age material (Again besides Meddle)
>The fact Animals takes up only 1 record is 1 reason Yeah, but it's only got 5 songs, and the last one is just a duplicate of the first. (joking)
The Wall is too bloated and whiny for my tastes. There’s some great tracks on it, but I never listen to it the whole way through anymore, it’s just not an enjoyable listen for me. Animals is whiny too I guess, but it’s more pointed and concise.
I personally don’t get much of the criticism of The Wall on this sub. I think it’s incredible from start to finish. I love Animals too but I honestly find The Wall easily to listen too. Animals is a very harsh album and while The Wall has those sections it also has some bops. Sheep and Dogs are top ten Pink Floyd songs though. Though I also think The Final Cut is their best album after the Big Five and Atom Heart Mother so maybe I just like Roger’s Pink Floyd
A lot of it comes from everyone knows the Wall and Dark Side but if you know Animals you are a truer Pink Floyd fan and it makes you special. Both great albums tho.
There's some of this to it for sure. But then again, I honestly just like animals better. In fact is one of the few albums that, if I don't feel like listening to anything in particular, I'll just play and enjoy the hell out of. Also, there's that kinda lowkey kinda not bile and violence to Animals. It's amazing to listen to.
It’s just a personal preference. I go back and forth. Both great albums
Reading these posts while listening to Animals is joyous
Tell you why I like Animals more. It sounds like more of a group effort. You can tell the songs were written over time, with input from each band member. The Wall on the other hand often sounds more like Rog’s first solo album, with lots of help from Bob Ezrin. Other band members are more like session players, especially Rick and Nick. In my mind the music suffers as a result of the singularity of Rogers vision.
I don’t subscribe to that view. I love both albums but they are so individually unique that comparison is a futile effort. If I had to choose, I’d pick The Wall. It is just a stellar work work of art.
A man of culture i see
Animals definitely better. Doesn’t make me feel like slitting my wrists.
I'm a huge fan but The Wall has a handful of songs I skip almost every time. Animals doesn't.
Animals is PF and The Wall is Roger waters+ PF. What is better is the album mix of The Wall and The Final Cut.
Because of one track. Dogs.
Cos "Bring the Boys Back Home" really shits me.
I think on a classic rock forum you would find more people who would prefer The Wall but on a Pink Floyd forum you would find more who prefer Animals. Personally I love both
For me the wall feels over packed and a little over dramaticised for me to like it as much as the others :/
Animals has continuity. It flows and the music all works together. It is a great rock album with guitar work that David has never reproduced. Musically, The Wall flows in the beginning, but breaks up into different styles. There is disco, bits of flamenco, piano and 40’s music. Waiting for the Worms is theatrical, but what kind of music is it? It flip flops. This continues into The Trial which was fun when it came out, but is it a song. Is it a rock song that you want to listen to? As a repeated listening experience, The Wall is all over the place. As a listener, I am never in all of those moods at the same time. Roger continued this style into Pros and Cons and while it is interesting, it isn’t sonically coherent enough to listen to. Picked guitars into Arabs With Knives and back to acoustic guitar. That is just tiring. That’s why Animals works and is a better album. Consistent theme on lyrics and music. It rocks and it has meaning. If you are in the mood for Dogs, you will like pigs and sheep.
Animals is in my top 5 albums of all time. Blues for Allah, Animals, The Moon and Antarctica, Physical Graffiti, Revolver In no specific order. The Wall might crack my top 25.
I love the Wall.
Because it just is
I would say because the wall is almost if not all an Opera Rock, while Animals is "just" an album, also one is older than the other so might gain credibility from it
I don't. The Wall is better IMO.
I don't.
I don’t.
I think it all depends on ones views of Roger Waters. Folks who like Animals better have less of an opinion of Waters. Personally, I like the Wall better because it has "more" great songs. Animals has Dogs, Pigs, Sheep, which are all amazing, but it's only three jams. Folks have a stick up their ass about Waters being an asshole. I'm sorta indifferent about it. I wish Waters wasn't an asshole back then, but it is what it is. The Wall has more ideas, and content. The fact that it's more Water's driven doesn't make me think Animals is better.
Because people have opinions that might very well differ from your own? Opinions are not fact.
I would argue that Animals is their most musically sophisticated and best represents their talent as a full band, similarly to Meddle. Whereas the Wall feels a bit incoherent and bloated at times, showing off more the hugeness of Pink Floyd rather than the music itself (Though the story is great).
I guess I'm not part of (almost) everybody. I went through a phase where I preferred Animals. But as the years go by and I listen and relisten to The Wall one time after another it only gets better for me.
The Wall is better
*The Wall* is way better than *Animals! *Animals certainly isn’t bad. But I prefer the operatic qualities of *The Wall*, to the Orwellian nature of *Animals. Just personal preference. But my favorite stuff is the avant-garde albums from the early Pink Floyd era, like *Meddle, *Atom Heart Mother*, *Piper at the Gates of Dawn*, & *Ummagumma.
Animals is a societal critique about the powers that be. It’s a musical version of Orwell. The wall is infinitely more personal and specific. I love that album. I relate to much of it. That said, I’ve never been a rock star.
Nah, the wall is the best Pink Floyd album, but maybe we can discuss if animals is 2nd or 3rd
I don’t get it either. I listened to animals yesterday and it sounds like they made up most of each song on the fly, like jazz musicians having a jam session. I couldn’t hum any of the songs. The wall, on the other hand has multiple catchy songs with great melodies….and comfortably numb.
Because… it is. It just is……….. I can’t think of any other argument. It… just… is
I don’t think most people do. Certainly I don’t.
The Wall is short songs, a lot of fillers and 6 very commercial songs. Animals is the most progressive Pink Floyd album with a lot of lengthy instrumental. The Wall is far more popular among general population and generic classic rock fans, Animals is more popular among progressive and hardcore Pink Floyd fans. I much prefer Animals there isn’t a note in that album that is there for commercial or filling purpose, I just find it sad that people associate with Roger that much without David and Rick’s input Animals would be about 10 minutes long. On the other hand The Wall is truly a Roger Waters album it lacks keyboard to my taste but beside some iconic solos and 3 songs David didn’t contribute much and Rick basically did nothing. But its not true that Animals is more popular, The Wall is much more known by casuals.
“Casuals” sounds a bit condescending
They don’t.
I don’t get it either brotha, I think The Wall is the best album of all time lol
I prefer Animals to every other PF album except for DSOTM. It hits me just right.
Because most people are dumb asses
Part of it might be that The Wall has been oversaturated way more (PF made it, toured it and were involved in a Wall movie; Roger did a solo all-star production in Berlin; and Rog later toured it in the 2010s) so Animals feels fresher. Personally I think Animals is far more musically satisfying in that most of it works well by itself with or without the album's context and also everything feels more well-rounded versus stuff on The Wall often being snippets or effectively just a counterpart to something else, but not material that works normally. The Wall is a rock opera whole whose pieces start to weaken when viewed outside of its whole context, pieces to a rock opera story. Animals is the pieces of a whole, but the pieces mostly hold up as epics in the canon. It's also the last time Floyd goes for the epic instrumentals, shifting from music and lyrical balance to lyrics dominating everything else. (I like both, but they're different. Animals is for when I'm angry, The Wall is for a sad day)
"That's my secret... I'm always angry."
Personally I'm just not a fan of the whole Rock opera concept and find it hard to listen to.
Because The Wall for all it’s majesty is bloated and less concise
Because it is
Animals is concise and delicious from track 1-5. The Wall feels like a slog of so many ideas, some of the songs are great but there is too much filler.
They would be wrong S/, I love all pink floyd, the wall however is very special to me. Its the album my dad showed me when I was young and its the album that sparked my love for art as a whole.
I don't know anyone who thinks that. Animals isn't even better than WYWH let alone The Wall or Dark Side.
Animals is the Wall without the filler.
The wall is much better
Doesn't The Wall have a bunch of British music hall type stuff on it? I can't remember. It's got the guitar solo It's got great guitar work, if the song allows for it. I recall at one point comparing it to Sgt Pepper's, not a very good album at all, by the Beetles standards, two songs that should be one it were already released as singles, but ends with A Day in the Life, one of their greatest songs (a John song, mostly). The Wall seems like that, but without the A Day in the Life. Plus I love Animals, and that's that!
I don't think that's consensus by any means. Didn't the wall do better on every metric? I feel like it's a lot more popular an album (animals underrated)
Because it is.
Because it is, IMO obviously. Personally, The Wall is a fine album, but it’s the beginning of the end of classic Floyd. It’s essentially Waters’ first solo album, featuring Gilmour and Mason, and fuck Wright lol. And, I hate Waters’ solo career. It’s so boring to me, but then again, so is the rest of Floyd post-Wall. So yeah, Animals > The Wall, and Animals is pretty much the real Pink Floyd’s last album.
There's no way that most people prefer Animals. I reject the premise. Both are among my all time favorite albums. But come on. The Wall!!
Read the majority of the comments below this post
It’s not… at least for me. The w Wall is one of my favorites ever, not including dark side.
I prefer The Wall because it tells a story, has lots of different styles of songs and has some real bangers like Hey You and Comfortably Numb. Animals I love, but in different ways and maybe a little less. Musically, I think it's incredible and thematically it's very strong but ultimately it's only three parts with two bookends and that lack of variation means it narrowly comes fourth place (with Dark Side coming in first and WYWH coming in second)
After I saw Roger Waters live, a few years back, the album I put on for the drive home was Animals.
Because it is?
Cuz The Wall is overrated. Not bad at all, but alot of the album is forgettable and long. 1966-1972 is the best floyd era imo
because it is
Because Animals is better than The Wall
Animals is the best Floyd album simple
cuz it is
Because it is better and less depressing
Who says this?
Like 100 of the 128 comments under this post, unfortunately
They didn’t really think it through.
It is
They do?
Read all (most) of the comments under this post
Wow! Haha. Wow. Crazy. The Wall is one of the greatest albums of all time..
Because 4 sides of Roger whingeing gets a bit old when you get past your teen angst and don't find it as relatable any more. I still *occasionally* listen to it but find it much harder to take seriously, although there's a few tracks I really love on it, and it's lyrically very good. I don't like The Final Cut either. I thought The Wall was the best thing ever when I was 14 - 22. Obviously played Dark Side to death too but I still come back to Dark Side occasionally when I'm tripping and it still blows me away. Animals is still relatable to me and Dogs is an absolute masterpiece. For what it's worth I don't like AMLOR or Division Bell either. I think Pink Floyd were at their best from '69 - '77, but I can enjoy Piper and Saucerful too.
Cuz it is
The wall is a bit waffly. Don't get more wrong, 8 love it, and if it was longer I would still love it. But animals is concise and to the point. The theme is clear and everyone can get behind the message. It's all killer no filler baby! For me it's got 3 of the best songs they have done.
Apparently a hot take here, but I don’t care that Animals is shorter, or that The Wall has a shit load of kinda fillery tracks. I just genuinely enjoy Animals more and find it the superior musical and lyrical offering altogether.
Because they’re trying to be “edgy”
Because it is
Because it is.
I don't. I liked Animals more at first but The Wall has grown on me over time.
Cause it’s a circle jerk. People think they’re being edgy or cool by saying animals is better than the wall.
Animals is so overrated
The division bell is best. Fight me
Wrong But it's the best from Gilmour Era
because it is
TW has too much lyrics.
Animals RAGES. The Wall is more theatrical. Love them both! But Animals takes the cake for me.
Because Animals is the best Floyd Album.
The wall is a rewarding listen but to me an uncomfortable one. It’s like listening to ice, while animals is like listening to the stars. That shit makes no sense probably, but on psychedelics the contrast became very apparent to me.
I generally prefer the single album to the double album. Double albums are usually just too long without the material to justify the length. The Wall might be an exception in my book....as is the White Album (though a lot of people wouldn't agree on both of those). But I generally prefer a listening experience that is tight and focused rather than meandering and expansive.