raisemyrent wrote:heard it again. i'd forgotten about the little descending melody break. IDENTICAL to Have a Cigar. Sigh.
speaking of have a cigar, well, he didn't sing it even though it kind of sounds like him. More to do with the ridiculous amount of words, but range-wise, I doubt he could sing it now.
But this whole embarrassment made me reflect on the 'creative genius' label. After seeing The Wall film (which never really decides if it's a concert film or a disjointed journey edit), I felt that I came to see Roger the human, and made me reflect on how much he has wanted to say to the world throughout his life. I think that drive to express things was his 'creativity' that he brought to the band. Musically, even by WYWH, some cracks were showing with the songwriting and the number of syllables etc. I mean in have a cigar all those lyrics that just don't fit and sound so forced. Remove the keyboards and Gilmour solo and you get rubbish, I mean, a Roger solo song. Welcome to the Machine is a great, different tune overall but it too suffers from some very forced, almost musical theatre 'can't-really-say-this-in-fewer-words' kind of feel to it. yawn. The genius bit was the entire package, when it was nice and balanced. Roger's thing was primarily to have lots of things to say in usually some angry fashion or speaking into the microphone. To grab that, brand it and it alone "genius", focus on it, and give it steroids for the next 30+ years is quite beyond me. That was Roger's contribution, and I think no amount of wishful thinking, producers, instrumentalists, time between albums, world events, and Flathead posts is going to make this new album any different, and that's why all his new stuff sounds the same since Animals. But I'll probably still pay no more than $50 to hear some of the dark Floyd repertoire played live in a state of the art show, if I'm in town that night. If only Gilmour were more insecure...
Trashing the album WYWH (#4 all time at Rate Your Music) and the founder of Pink Floyd, for sounding like Pink Floyd?
You know what would be fun? A Pink Floyd cover band that could add Gilmour solos to Waters solo material, and at the same time play de-Gilmourized versions of Pink Floyd songs.
Like take for example Wish You Were Here: if you take out the guitar intro and solo, you basically end up with a pretty standard Roger Waters solo ballad: 4 chords on the guitar, simple but soulful vocal melody and a set of emotional lyrics. Something that sounds a lot like Pigs On The Wing, Watching TV, The Tide Is Turning, If or Seashell and Stone. Naked like that WYWH is still a good song, but with Gilmour's input it becomes a really great song. Now, imagine the effect he could have on Roger's solo work? It would be 1974 all over again!
The contrary can't be done with Gilmour solo work, sadly. Because in order to "Rogerize" his work the song structures would need to be re-written from scratch. It's not just a lyrical problem: Gilmour songs are boring. The music itself is bland and totally missing Roger's sense of simple and catchy emotional melodies, which was Waters' basic musical input in the band during the 70s, and whch constituted the skeleton over which Gilmour and Wright would later build the Pink Floyd sound.
That's why both Gilmour and Waters solo work suck: Roger's music is missing the Pink Floyd skin and Gilmour's music is missing the Waters skeleton. Both of them complement each other. It took Waters 25 years to realize that. But Gilmour, sadly, is still living in the delusion that he doesn't need his bandmate in order to make great music.
That's a good point Daniel. Echoes (ha!) some of what I said earlier with removing parts and ending up with a boring song etc. The difference being, though, Gilmour took Pink Floyd as far as he could and involved his band mates. Then felt guilty he'd binned some stuff and released it eventually (TER). He released the boring stuff under his own name, so trash him all you like basically. Waters claimed to be it all and labels himself a genius. As I said, different.
Yeah, Roger Waters calling himself a genius really makes me sick too. I don´t think even real geniuses like Lennon or McCartney, or Dylan or Cohen or Zappa called themselves like that!
And I'm not thrashing Gilmour, he's a fucking great guitarist and musician. It's just that he totally sucks at songwriting. He's great at arrangement and sound design though. If not for him and Wright the 70s albums would suck too. But he needs a good skeleton of a song in order to work his magic.
Despite that, sometimes he's actually able to come with one or two great songs, like High Hopes or On An Island. Those two deserve the Pink Floyd moniker in my book. But the majority of his musical output is really bland and gutless, easy listening music that doesn't take you anywhere.
I can't say that I listen to anything from his solo albums. It's pleasant enough, but that's about it. Maybe except In Any Tongue. That song is great. But as I said, if it had been released under the PF name (never mind any of the lyrics etc) it would've been like "same old..."
danielcaux wrote:Y
Despite that, sometimes he's actually able to come with one or two great songs, like High Hopes or On An Island.
High Hopes proves that Gilmour is a genius when he really puts his mind and body into it. His music comes off as way too comfortable, but when he escapes that and finds energy, watch out.
Waters was the "hammer", Gilmour the wave. It's why they were perfect together. comfortably Numb is the best example of this. Waters is the "dark" with the verse, and Gilmour is the "light" with the chorus. It's the best thing ever done, by anyone, even better than and the Beatles.
I like some of Gilmour's more aggressive playing anx that seemed to go when Waters left. As a lyrics man he's got a few good songs, and quite a few downright embarrassing ones, as someone said, they don't really take you anywhere.
I do think some of Rogers lyrics are genius, but giving himself that tag when amused to death is the only decent thing he's done since 1979? Well it's not very fitting and reeks of narcissism
kjek1 wrote:I liked the crystal clear song, though it did sound like an outtake from The Final Cut
I feel like most of Waters' post-Floyd material is finalcuttish, whether or not you love it.
However, with Nigel Godrich on board... will Roger take a Radiohead path? What do you say ?
Good to hear from the man, finally. Beside Ca Ira, it's been 25 years since Amused To Death (congratulations on that jubilee, by the way ).
That sounds like new music to me, right? Or is a reworked version of Us and Them? Either way those synth/feedback drones in the background sound amazing, reminds me of Fripp's work on Bowie's heroes. Good work Mr. Godrich!
Also, this:
http://youtube.com/watch?v=QWLBtMz5OuY
During the chorus Roger's obviously using his trademark "pre-recorded backing vocals louder than live vocals" trick, but holy fuck! Pigs 3DO has never looked this good live! Are those real pipes behind the giant screen? And the performance is also spot on, I even like that new ending, it's not as mind blowing as Gilmour's inmortal Oakland 77 ending solo, yeah, but still, it does the work. This tour looks fucking amazing! I'm really glad Roger has finnally moved beyond The Wall for his live shows. And just in time for Animals 40th anniversary, hell yeah!
?
).
