danielcaux wrote:Me personally, I missed the 70s sound that had some byte and wasn't as bland.
Yep.
I'm glad to hear it back!
Same.
And also to be noted: there's lyrical economy here. These lyrics are closer to 70s Waters lyrics, where he used few words to convey a message, than to the bloated Waters lyrics of the 80s and 90s, where he was more like telling stories and delivering rants instead of singing songs. Another point for the new stuff!
The weak point though, as expected, is the voice. Too bad about that. But on the bright side, the singing ladies seem to be under control and not in fully unleashed mode like in his previous records. Another point there for the producers.
Agreed again, lol.
But it's refreshing in a way because we're not getting the whisper/talk vocals of ATD. Nigel probably just said "screw it, let's just get those raw vocals down".
kinda functions as a reminder of all the other tthings the Floyd also used to sound, beyond the anthemic guitar solos and pleasent soft acoustic textures that Dave Floyd seemed to focus on and favour the most. It's like Roger saying "hey! This also used to be 'the pink floyd sound'! What the hell happened to that boys?"
So true.
Last edited by Flathead on Sat Apr 22, 2017 10:36 pm, edited 1 time in total.
danielcaux wrote:Well, Gilmour's guitars and Wright' keyboards were definitely not EVERYTHING, as AMLOR and TDB very well proved. There was more to the PF sound recipie than just that. And this track kinda is a nod to those missing elements. That's the sad thing about them three never working together in a studio ever again. This album it's sounding good so far, but just imagine how could it have sounded with Gilmour on board! A true Pink Floyd album for the XXI century. Sad that that never happened. But still, it's really good to have this "approxima/tion" to listen to, at least
Also, you seem to have a grudge against Waters for calling himself "the creative genius of Pink Floyd". I also find that not very humble at all, to say the least, but, if it helps, view it like this: he WAS "the creative genius of Pink Floyd". But he no longer is in Pink Floyd, so he no longer is necessarily a creative genius anymore!
I wouldn't mind Roger using that tag if he could back it up but he can't now days
As for what happened to that particular sound? Roger is surely the one to answer that? He's the guy who took near full control and led us to the dirge of The Final Cut, far removed from the classic sound.
I don't mind the vocals at all. Certainly, he doesn't have the range he did when he was younger, but he doesn't try to push beyond that. He works with what he's got. I find them refreshingly raw and intense.
It is true, that as many people grow older, it becomes more and more difficult to capture that creative, innovative spark that you had in your 20's and 30's. So what if he's rehashing some ideas. It's not like he's stealing. They're his ideas, his music. A lot of artists re-purpose old ideas they had to create new things from it. And I think he did it well. Give the guy a break. If you can put out a brilliant, groundbreaking and innovative album of music when you're 73, then you might have the right to put Waters down. He wants to rock and make music and have his voice heard, when most of his peers are sitting in retirement homes playing checkers and watching TV. That takes guts. It takes courage. I really like that he's returning to his roots as a rock musician and not rehashing his latter day solo stuff.
I guess, if you don't like it, you don't like it. I'm not going to criticize you for you taste. But don't criticize Waters for not coming up with something so utterly groundbreaking, that it's going to change the face of music. He already did that. Have you done that? I think it's great song. I'm looking forward to hearing the rest of the album.
By the way, this is not a rant directed at any one person, just a general comment on the negativity towards the song.
The fans are the ones who fund his career and ultimately decide whether something's good or not, we don't don't need to have been there and done it.
If you're happy with paying for diluted versions of tunes off Animals and The Wall then by all means do so. I'm not sure releasing an album in your 70's takes balls though, plenty have done it and because of who he is and what he's done previously it's going to sell fairly well regardless, there's not much opportunity for embarrassment.
It would have taken more balls to try and go for something original rather than to closely mimick soemthing he already had success with 40 years ago.
kjek1 wrote:It would have taken more balls to try and go for something original rather than to closely mimick soemthing he already had success with 40 years ago.
True. But he also did something original (for him) 12 years ago when he ventured into classical music. At this stage in his life, maybe he enjoys re-visiting the past a little, looking back on the man he once was and enjoying that. You don't like the song, and you've stated some valid reasons for that. I respect that. I like the song, and I don't feel I'm paying for "diluted versions of tunes off Animals and The Wall". Of course, I will reserve any further judgement until I hear the rest of the album. But just because my opinion differs from yours doesn't make it 'incredibly strange'. But whatever. I think you make some good points, but it doesn't change the fact that I dig the tune. Oh waitaminute. I just remembered, I am actually incredibly strange. So, good one!
Interesting point, although I'm not sure the comparison to TER quite works, because TER was actually old recordings, and not a new album per se. I was a bit disappointed in that one though. I love long tracks, but they just seemed to meander without purpose. I find this new Waters tune far more focused, even if it does utilize some ideas from earlier in his career. I like that focus.
Massed Gadgets wrote:At this stage in his life, maybe he enjoys re-visiting the past a little, looking back on the man he once was and enjoying that.
This probably has more to do with Nigel than Roger, IMHO.
Either way, it was long overdue. It's an awesome sound, roger was a huge part of it. Glad to see the great instrumentation back. I found the engineering/production on KAOS, Pros and Cons, The Final Cut, and ATd to be bombastic and inorganic.
kjek1 wrote:
If you're happy with paying for diluted versions of tunes off Animals and The Wall then by all means do so.
Did you say this about TER?
Why are you fixated on TER on a thread about Roger Waters new album? Is your obsessive rather creepy hatred of Gilmour that strong?
TER was an album of outtakes from the Divison Bell sessions, anyone who thought it wasn't going to be similar sounding pieces of music is a moron to be honest.
This however is supposed to be a new album by Roger Waters.
kjek1 wrote:It would have taken more balls to try and go for something original rather than to closely mimick soemthing he already had success with 40 years ago.
True. But he also did something original (for him) 12 years ago when he ventured into classical music. At this stage in his life, maybe he enjoys re-visiting the past a little, looking back on the man he once was and enjoying that. You don't like the song, and you've stated some valid reasons for that. I respect that. I like the song, and I don't feel I'm paying for "diluted versions of tunes off Animals and The Wall". Of course, I will reserve any further judgement until I hear the rest of the album. But just because my opinion differs from yours doesn't make it 'incredibly strange'. But whatever. I think you make some good points, but it doesn't change the fact that I dig the tune. Oh waitaminute. I just remembered, I am actually incredibly strange. So, good one!
I don't dislike the tune or anything. It's more than decent, im just slightly disappointed that what I've gotten doesn't actually feel new or fresh because it's such an obvious attempt to do what's already been done previously, only without the key compents that made those original versions sound so good.
I'm surprised at how awful it is. Mostly for trying to sound like 70s floyd. The middle section was okay. The dogs were ludicrous. The song looks to the past. Escapism for consumers.
By the way Flathead, since you're desperate to talk about TER. You were all over Gilmour for repetition on that album, even where there were only vey tiny similarities, so it's hilarious to see you sidestepping the fact that Rog is very much ripping off old Floyd tunes.
When you buy into something so early purely as a means of berating one of the other band members and it turns out they're churning out watered down version of old hits, you end up looking like a bit of a mug
kjek1 wrote:churning out watered down version of old hits,
Like Gilmour's In Any Tongue. From the first guitar chord you know it's Comfortably Numb part 2. Or pt 3 or 4 or 5. Then here come those CN strings. Although it's more than just CN. It has an emotional musical depth to it that Waters new song lacks. Probably because Waters can't play lead guitar or sing. Maybe some of his other new songs will reach the heights of Amused To Death. I don't know if I'll get around to listening to it. In Any Tongue is the only track I've heard from Rattle. I did like the guitar solo but even that had some of the CN solo in it.
