1983 - A Thread for the Final Cut Haters!

General discussion about Pink Floyd.
User avatar
mosespa
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 11555
Joined: Thu Sep 12, 2002 5:54 pm
Location: In the editing bay...working on the final cut...

Re: 1983 - A Thread for the Final Cut Haters!

Post by mosespa »

The Gunner's Dream wrote: Add9 chords consist of a major triad and a 9th. They have a 3rd. Suspended chords don't. Suspended chords either consist of the 1st, 2nd and 5th degrees of the scale (Sus2) or the 1st, 4th and 5th degrees of the scale (Sus4). But a Sus2 is really just an inverted Sus4. So some would say that a suspended chord always refers to a suspended 4th and that the term "Sus2" only describes the order of notes in the inversion of a Sus4 chord.
Your point of the inclusion of the third in the add9 is duly noted and something that I cannot argue with.

However, a 9th is simply a 2nd an octave higher.

It's not a different note. If it were a different note, then there would be way more than merely five notes in a pentatonic scale...because there is more than one octave on a guitar neck.
User avatar
The Gunner's Dream
Lord!!
Lord!!
Posts: 3906
Joined: Tue Jun 14, 2005 12:58 am
Gender: Male

Re: 1983 - A Thread for the Final Cut Haters!

Post by The Gunner's Dream »

mosespa wrote:
However, a 9th is simply a 2nd an octave higher.
This is correct.

On a related note (pun intended) keep in mind that, when playing a standard scale, you usually don't hear anyone play up to the major 7th and then descend. You always hear the octave played. So while technically the root and the octave are the same "tone", the pitch of the octave gives the impression of "completeness" in the scale.
User avatar
mosespa
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 11555
Joined: Thu Sep 12, 2002 5:54 pm
Location: In the editing bay...working on the final cut...

Re: 1983 - A Thread for the Final Cut Haters!

Post by mosespa »

I'm used to hearing scales only go up to the fifth and then back down, anyway. *shrug*
mojoman
Blade
Blade
Posts: 132
Joined: Wed Nov 29, 2006 5:03 am
Location: jersey

Re: 1983 - A Thread for the Final Cut Haters!

Post by mojoman »

it was such a buzzkill when it came out..........while over the years i have warmed up to it it still remains in the category of what if.
User avatar
mosespa
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 11555
Joined: Thu Sep 12, 2002 5:54 pm
Location: In the editing bay...working on the final cut...

Re: 1983 - A Thread for the Final Cut Haters!

Post by mosespa »

I think that if it weren't what it is, it would merely be a nearly random collection of songs which wouldn't be able to stand up on their own.

I think that the best thing that could have happened with this album did happen.

*shrug*
User avatar
thefinalcut
Hammer
Hammer
Posts: 836
Joined: Fri Mar 11, 2005 7:57 pm
Gender: Female
Location: Argentina

Re: 1983 - A Thread for the Final Cut Haters!

Post by thefinalcut »

This album is (along with The Wall & Animals of course) the most beautiful piece of music I ever listened to. How can anyone get to hate it?
hugo zuccarelli
Embryo
Embryo
Posts: 5
Joined: Fri Feb 25, 2011 7:23 pm

Re: 1983 - A Thread for the Final Cut Haters!

Post by hugo zuccarelli »

Hi guys, here a note of history, has anybody bother to notice few exceptional facts about TFC?
First is was the latest collaboration, from the late Michael Kammen , whom also created the orchestration of The Wall.
Next is the fact that in this album Roger sung, to my knowledge, the longest vocalization note in Rock History( without electronics), in "the gunners dream"
Night after night go around , and round my brain, His dream is driving me INSAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA AAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIINNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNN NNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNEEEEEEEEEEE EEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE.
COUNT HOW LONG IS IT, AND COMPARE IT TO ( SAY ) Pavaroti.
Next of course have you guys listened to TFC in headphones??
Any Comments?
User avatar
Hudini
Supreme Lord!
Supreme Lord!
Posts: 5787
Joined: Mon Apr 09, 2007 1:53 pm
Gender: Male
Location: Rattle That Lock... Baby!

Re: 1983 - A Thread for the Final Cut Haters!

Post by Hudini »

hugo zuccarelli wrote:Next is the fact that in this album Roger sung, to my knowledge, the longest vocalization note in Rock History
Interesting. Can you quote any source on this, or is it just your own observation?

And welcome. ;)
hugo zuccarelli
Embryo
Embryo
Posts: 5
Joined: Fri Feb 25, 2011 7:23 pm

Re: 1983 - A Thread for the Final Cut Haters!

Post by hugo zuccarelli »

Count the seconds, and try to find a longer one from ANYONE.
I couldn't.
hugo zuccarelli
Embryo
Embryo
Posts: 5
Joined: Fri Feb 25, 2011 7:23 pm

Re: 1983 - A Thread for the Final Cut Haters!

Post by hugo zuccarelli »

Did Anybody payed attention to Roger Waters Guinness books of records ( not),17 seconds long vocalization on the gunners dream?
Jimi Dean Barrett
Judge!
Judge!
Posts: 1592
Joined: Fri Apr 02, 2010 1:30 pm

Re: 1983 - A Thread for the Final Cut Haters!

Post by Jimi Dean Barrett »

hugo zuccarelli wrote:Did Anybody payed attention to Roger Waters Guinness books of records ( not),17 seconds long vocalization on the gunners dream?
Ooh! Unlucky! Actually Bill Withers beat Roger by one second for "A lovely daaaaaaaaaaay" at 18 seconds.
However the longest held note according to Guinness Book Of Online Records:

http://community.guinnessworldrecords.c ... /7691.html

"Hi, I'm Mick Hucknall, after leaving Simply Red I decided to become an addict to crack cocaine* and as a result, I can hold a note from 'New York, New York' for over one minute and seven seconds!"

And then he does it again to prove it, but it was too much for my ears. (You might want to turn your volume down...)

*=This bit might not actually be true.
hugo zuccarelli
Embryo
Embryo
Posts: 5
Joined: Fri Feb 25, 2011 7:23 pm

Re: 1983 - A Thread for the Final Cut Haters!

Post by hugo zuccarelli »

Gotta re check the timing at the last breath,it start:" is driving me insaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiii iiiiiiiiiiiiinnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnnn nnnngggggggggggggggggggg"and is not a simple note, He make it clear is not digital stretching.....
Anyway, I just Love it. :D
User avatar
thefinalcut
Hammer
Hammer
Posts: 836
Joined: Fri Mar 11, 2005 7:57 pm
Gender: Female
Location: Argentina

Re: 1983 - A Thread for the Final Cut Haters!

Post by thefinalcut »

Mr. Zucarelli, I´m just honored to say hello to you ! Bienvenido. :D
User avatar
Enish
Knife
Knife
Posts: 429
Joined: Fri Aug 05, 2011 4:02 pm
Gender: Female
Location: United States

Re: 1983 - A Thread for the Final Cut Haters!

Post by Enish »

What about that note he holds in "The Gunner's Dream"? AND HOLD ON TO THE DREEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAM...

While it's not as long, it's Roger being the theatrical ham he's proven himself to be on some Pink Floyd records. I'd love to know the exact thought process that buzzed through Roger's head as he was making this album.
User avatar
thefinalcut
Hammer
Hammer
Posts: 836
Joined: Fri Mar 11, 2005 7:57 pm
Gender: Female
Location: Argentina

Re: 1983 - A Thread for the Final Cut Haters!

Post by thefinalcut »

JackRegan wrote:
sintrait wrote:I'm glad this album exists.
I'm not.
you´re a disgrace.