Animals re-issue including 5.1 mix coming

General discussion about Pink Floyd.
Wolfpack
Hammer
Hammer
Posts: 869
Joined: Wed Jan 27, 2010 4:15 pm

Re: Animals re-issue including 5.1 mix coming

Post by Wolfpack »

Waters vs Gilmour, Gilmour vs Waters... Boring!
No one seems to complain about this new version of 'Animals' apparently having no previously unreleased tracks.
Will at least the 8-track version of 'Pigs on the Wing' (with Snowy White) be included?

Funny imagination of how a super deluxe boxed edition could have been:
Image
source: https://twitter.com/floydpodcast/status ... 06/photo/1

And what about the expected sound quality, concerning complaints about earlier remasters/remixes?
User avatar
mosespa
Moderator
Moderator
Posts: 11454
Joined: Thu Sep 12, 2002 5:54 pm
Location: In the editing bay...working on the final cut...

Re: Animals re-issue including 5.1 mix coming

Post by mosespa »

Wolfpack wrote: Sun Jun 06, 2021 4:14 pm Waters vs Gilmour, Gilmour vs Waters... Boring!
No one seems to complain about this new version of 'Animals' apparently having no previously unreleased tracks.
Will at least the 8-track version of 'Pigs on the Wing' (with Snowy White) be included?
Gilmour has long said that Pink Floyd never had much in the way of unreleased tracks because they used everything, eventually.

I think it was just prior to Meddle that Waters said he was bored of playing the old stuff and then quipped that there didn't seem to be a lot of new stuff. I won't bother trying to trace the footprints of all of their material, but it's known that by the time of "Ummagumma's" studio disc, they were basically making stuff up specifically for the sessions; presumably because no one had any material held back. From everything I've read so far, it seems to me that "Atom Heart Mother" had a similar modus operandi; except that everyone actually got together and contributed something to the title track and "Alan's Psychedelic Breakfast."

"Obscured By Clouds" had everyone working together in various combinations with only "Free Four" and "Childhood's End" being composed entirely by individuals.

This brings us to "Dark Side Of The Moon," and also gives me an opportunity to address the people who claim that "The Final Cut" is an inferior album because it's "nothing but leftovers from "The Wall." In beginning this album, the band had but a single piece (that we know of) of "leftover" to begin with; that being "The Violent Sequence" from their "Zabriskie Point" soundtrack work. That piece aside, we again have the band seemingly cooking things up while the sessions are in progress (a more germane way of saying "making shit up on the spot,"); but they were already playing the piece (minus "Eclipse,") live a year before the album's release. So, perhaps "cooking things up on the road" would be a more appropriate statement. But as Waters had said about their writing sessions, "I don't know how much WRITING got done...we'd play E to A for five minutes and call it a song." With "Breathe" reprising after "Time" and "Any Colour You Like" basically being a second reprise, it could be said that they were already cannibalizing songs which they had just written in order to fill space in the program. Of course, this is a common practice in works which are "thematic," so I'm not trying to suggest something unsavory when I say things like "cannibalize." With "Breathe" clearly being the song Waters refers to where they just played E to A for five minutes and called it a song, that song represents two of ten tracks (because the first reprise of "Breathe" is not given it's own track number in the track listing I'm going by.) Of the remaining eight tracks, three are written solely by Waters (two of which were written on the road, before going into the studio,) one is Rick's "leftovers from Zabriskie Point," and one is just sound effects purportedly collected and assembled by Nick Mason.

This leaves just three songs: "On The Run" which began as a guitar and keyboard improv jam before becoming the experimental electronic piece we now know it as (and so becomes another example of "making shit up in the studio,") "Time," (early live versions of which sound very similar to "Echoes," so...it at least began as a cannibalization of a previously existing piece,) and "The Great Gig In The Sky," a piano piece by Rick which Claire Torry sang over.

Preparing for a tour in '74, they composed "Shine On You Crazy Diamond," "Raving And Drooling" and "You Gotta Be Crazy." Two of which are mere "leftovers" which ended up forming about 2/3s of "Animals" later on.

They go into the studio to do their next album and Waters decides that only "Shine On" should go on the next album. The other two can be held back.

Which strongly suggests that outside of the "Household Objects" projects (which supposedly only went to three tracks, two of which have since been released in boxed set collections,) "Raving and Drooling" and "You Gotta Be Crazy" were alone "in the vault."

Somewhere along the way, a song called "Flight To/From* Fantasy" emerged and from all I can gather, either remains in the vault or was transformed into "Pigs (Three Different Ones,") (my own theory, for what that's worth.)

The point that I'm making is that by the time we go to Animals, we were already getting an album of leftover tracks from the vaults which still weren't enough to fill out an entire album, so Roger came up with another couple of songs. The 8-track version would presumably be the only thing (aside, perhaps, for "Flight To/From* Fantasy,) that could be brought out. So far as anyone's aware, there simply isn't any previously unreleased stuff to complain about them not including.

Some live stuff, maybe. They do that a lot, too.

Sadly, they were in the midst of a kind of self-enforced media blackout during this period, so there supposedly isn't a great deal of video footage to fill up a disc with, either. However, I'll buy this whenever it finally comes out. It's one of my favorite albums.





*depending on who you talk to
Wolfpack
Hammer
Hammer
Posts: 869
Joined: Wed Jan 27, 2010 4:15 pm

Re: Animals re-issue including 5.1 mix coming

Post by Wolfpack »

mosespa wrote: Sun Jun 06, 2021 6:56 pmGilmour has long said that Pink Floyd never had much in the way of unreleased tracks because they used everything, eventually.
Maybe no unreleased songs from the 'Animals' sessions, but there are alternate versions.

For example, the unreleased studio version of 'Raving and Drooling'.
Leaked as 'The Extraction Tapes' ("75-76").

I'd rather have that than some sloppy liner notes.
Waters debating them, just distracts from what really is missing here.

Just some remixes and - that's it?
It's basically just buying the same album again.
Not the deluxe box which many people hoped for.
Last edited by Wolfpack on Sun Jun 06, 2021 9:03 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
theaussiefloydian
Hammer
Hammer
Posts: 509
Joined: Mon Apr 17, 2017 6:57 pm
Gender: Male

Re: Animals re-issue including 5.1 mix coming

Post by theaussiefloydian »

Wolfpack wrote: Sun Jun 06, 2021 8:58 pm Just some remixes and - that's it?
It's basically just buying the same album again.
I dunno I am curious about the new stereo mix (5.1 doesn't hold much interest for me as I don't have the set up for it and two channels is plenty for me for music anyway), but hyping it up as some massive box was definitely a daft idea.
Wolfpack
Hammer
Hammer
Posts: 869
Joined: Wed Jan 27, 2010 4:15 pm

Re: Animals re-issue including 5.1 mix coming

Post by Wolfpack »

The leaked studio version of 'Raving and Drooling' sounds amazing to me.
Pink Floyd rocking without all the overdub tricks.

Waters' vocals doing the long screams all by himself, before the synthesized result.
If he wants to defend his importance, why not quarrel with Gilmour about including this version?

No liner notes... What a loss!
ZiggyZipgun
Hammer
Hammer
Posts: 1219
Joined: Mon May 05, 2008 3:04 pm

Re: Animals re-issue including 5.1 mix coming

Post by ZiggyZipgun »

mosespa wrote: Sun Jun 06, 2021 6:56 pm Somewhere along the way, a song called "Flight To/From* Fantasy" emerged and from all I can gather, either remains in the vault or was transformed into "Pigs (Three Different Ones,") (my own theory, for what that's worth.)
Roger mentioned "Flight from Reality" in an interview in '75 or '76 - I couldn't locate it now and haven't seen it in ages. I believe all he said is that it was "very strange." "Pigs" on the other hand, isn't - it's actually very similar to "Sheep" if you just listen to Roger's rhythm guitar parts and vocals. I'm thinking the mystery piece could've evolved into The Pros and Cons of Hitchhiking; he's always pinpointed the beginning of writing The Wall, and he's discussed that project to death, while he's said very little about Pros and Cons. After Wish You Were Here, the linear narrative could be considered "very strange", and the timing coincides with that very brief gap between his first and second marriages, hence the subject matter of Pros and Cons.

Two other things: "Alan's Psychedelic Breakfast" also evolved from different bits recorded during the Zabriskie Point sessions, but it's important to note that they didn't have access to those tapes when they made Atom Heart Mother, so the various musical ideas got jumbled around a little. They expected to release it as their next album but ended up having nothing to work with. Relics was put out because the record company knew they were out of material. Also, you lose one point for not mentioning the origin of "Breathe" on Music from The Body; I haven't bothered to compare them, but it occurred to me today that "Pigs (Three Different Ones)" is awfully similar to "Chain of Life", possibly even down to the arpeggio, which could explain why Rick didn't get a co-writing credit.

I'd say they intentionally used "Breathe" multiple times as a motif, and not just on "Time" and "Any Colour You Like" - which was originally called "Breathe (Second Resprise)"; it is also quoted within the chord progression of "Great Gig in the Sky", and the lap steel part is essentially the same. It could be seen as lazy songwriting, but they put a lot work into creating a different sound for each iteration, which gives a transformative but cyclical feel to the whole album, even before the heartbeat was added to do just that.
User avatar
azza200
Judge!
Judge!
Posts: 2271
Joined: Wed Jan 07, 2004 2:18 pm

Re: Animals re-issue including 5.1 mix coming

Post by azza200 »

https://www.rollingstone.com/music/musi ... w-1177233/
The couple has also been collaborating on songs for an upcoming Gilmour solo album, and Gilmour has been working behind-the-scenes on a reissue of Pink Floyd’s Animals album. Although he addresses his rift with former Pink Floyd member Roger Waters about the release here, this interview was conducted before Waters targeted Gilmour in a caustic missive about the re-release. Asked for his reaction to Waters’ claims before publishing this interview, Gilmour had no further comment.
How has your approach to writing music together changed over the last 27 years?
Samson: I don’t hide anymore [laughs].

What do you mean by that?
Samson: The first time I wrote lyrics, I got a pretty bad response from David’s former lyricist which really kind of stung at the time. It shouldn’t have, but I didn’t know anything about these things at the time. When I first wrote lyrics on [Pink Floyd’s] The Division Bell, I didn’t want my name on it because we just lived in a time where things were really sexist.
Gilmour: “I think I’ll get tortured and murdered by legions of angry fans.”
Samson: And in fact, the angriest fan of all was the person [Roger Waters] who said, “Oh, how tragic, getting the wife to write lyrics.” And I wasn’t even his wife. And anyway, what difference does being married make? So I felt like I hadn’t really wanted to stick my head above the parapet, and David forced me to.
Gilmour: Initially, she was trying to make me write the lyrics and just be there to nudge and remind and critique. But I quickly forced her into a more prominent role, which she then had to take some credit for.
Samson: Now I don’t feel like I need to hide anything. I think it’s perfectly OK. I can write lyrics. And being a wife doesn’t disqualify me. Being female doesn’t disqualify me. And it’s all fine.
Is there anything going on with Pink Floyd on the archival front? There’s been talk of an Animals reissue in recent years.
Gilmour: Well, a very lovely Animals remix has been done, but someone has tried to force some liner notes on it that I haven’t approved and, um, someone is digging his heels and not allowing it to be released.
Samson: But you don’t have liner notes, do you?
Gilmour: No, we’ve never had liner notes.
Samson: Why are you suddenly having liner notes?
Gilmour: Because someone wants them, and they got a journalist to write some, and I didn’t approve them. And he’s just getting a bit shirty. You know how he is, poor boy.
I hope you’re able to reach a détente at some point.
Gilmour: Pretty unlikely, I’m afraid. There’s a lot of misinformation. And I’m not keen on constantly responding to every bit of untruth that I hear about myself and what I’m doing.
Wolfpack
Hammer
Hammer
Posts: 869
Joined: Wed Jan 27, 2010 4:15 pm

Re: Animals re-issue including 5.1 mix coming

Post by Wolfpack »

azza200 wrote: Mon Jun 07, 2021 8:58 pmSamson: The first time I wrote lyrics, I got a pretty bad response from David’s former lyricist which really kind of stung at the time. It shouldn’t have, but I didn’t know anything about these things at the time. When I first wrote lyrics on [Pink Floyd’s] The Division Bell, I didn’t want my name on it because we just lived in a time where things were really sexist. [...]
And in fact, the angriest fan of all was the person [Roger Waters] who said, “Oh, how tragic, getting the wife to write lyrics.” And I wasn’t even his wife. And anyway, what difference does being married make?
Waters and now Gilmour and his wife publicly digging up old interviews.
The wife hinting at "David’s former lyricist" being sexist.
Will Waters respond, will they respond, etcetera?

I'm gonna get some popcorn!
Pink Floyd in 2021...
azza200 wrote: Mon Jun 07, 2021 8:58 pm
Is there anything going on with Pink Floyd on the archival front? There’s been talk of an Animals reissue in recent years.
Gilmour: Well, a very lovely Animals remix has been done, but someone has tried to force some liner notes on it that I haven’t approved and, um, someone is digging his heels and not allowing it to be released.
Samson: But you don’t have liner notes, do you?
Gilmour: No, we’ve never had liner notes.
Samson: Why are you suddenly having liner notes?
Gilmour: Because someone wants them, and they got a journalist to write some, and I didn’t approve them. And he’s just getting a bit shirty. You know how he is, poor boy.
I hope you’re able to reach a détente at some point.
Gilmour: Pretty unlikely, I’m afraid. There’s a lot of misinformation. And I’m not keen on constantly responding to every bit of untruth that I hear about myself and what I’m doing.
"David’s former lyricist"?

Why doesn't the couple just say Waters?
As far as Waters was ever Gilmour's lyricist. :shock:

(Wasn't there a story about Charlie Watts going mad,
after Mick Jagger jokingly called him "his drummer"?)
Last edited by Wolfpack on Mon Jun 07, 2021 11:35 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
azza200
Judge!
Judge!
Posts: 2271
Joined: Wed Jan 07, 2004 2:18 pm

Re: Animals re-issue including 5.1 mix coming

Post by azza200 »

it could be them just avoiding bringing Roger into conversation hence the " former lyricist" and keep it on topic politely and David avoided saying anything regarding Rogers last video.
Wolfpack
Hammer
Hammer
Posts: 869
Joined: Wed Jan 27, 2010 4:15 pm

Re: Animals re-issue including 5.1 mix coming

Post by Wolfpack »

azza200 wrote: Mon Jun 07, 2021 11:35 pm it could be them just avoiding bringing Roger into conversation hence the " former lyricist" and keep it on topic politely and David avoided saying anything regarding Rogers last video.
Refering to Waters as "David’s former lyricist" is incorrect and rude.
Waters was Pink Floyd's lyricist, not Gilmour's!
Not mentioning Waters' name (while obviously meaning him, even in a sexist context), can be passive-aggressive behaviour.

The wife was just afraid of Waters scepticism?
Did she need his approval to be a proud lyricist?
As if he was the only "fan" who had or may still have criticism.
ZiggyZipgun
Hammer
Hammer
Posts: 1219
Joined: Mon May 05, 2008 3:04 pm

Re: Animals re-issue including 5.1 mix coming

Post by ZiggyZipgun »

Wolfpack wrote: Mon Jun 07, 2021 11:45 pm Refering to Waters as "David’s former lyricist" is incorrect and rude.
And hilarious!
User avatar
theaussiefloydian
Hammer
Hammer
Posts: 509
Joined: Mon Apr 17, 2017 6:57 pm
Gender: Male

Re: Animals re-issue including 5.1 mix coming

Post by theaussiefloydian »

Wolfpack wrote: Mon Jun 07, 2021 11:25 pm
"David’s former lyricist"?

Why doesn't the couple just say Waters?
I think they know we know who they're talking about so they don't really need to name names to get their point across.
azza200 wrote: Mon Jun 07, 2021 8:58 pm
The couple has also been collaborating on songs for an upcoming Gilmour solo album, and Gilmour has been working behind-the-scenes on a reissue of Pink Floyd’s Animals album. Although he addresses his rift with former Pink Floyd member Roger Waters about the release here,Asked for his reaction to Waters’ claims before publishing this interview, Gilmour had no further comment.
In other words Gilmour's decided that rant doesn't even warrant a response, which fair enough.
Wolfpack
Hammer
Hammer
Posts: 869
Joined: Wed Jan 27, 2010 4:15 pm

Re: Animals re-issue including 5.1 mix coming

Post by Wolfpack »

ZiggyZipgun wrote: Mon Jun 07, 2021 11:48 pmAnd hilarious!
More popcorn! :lol:
theaussiefloydian wrote: Mon Jun 07, 2021 11:51 pmIn other words Gilmour's decided that rant doesn't even warrant a response, which fair enough.
Instead, his wife refers to Waters as "David’s former lyricist" in a sexist context.

For me, this is where the Pink Floyd Soap jumps the shark.
It's getting too silly! :shock:
ZiggyZipgun
Hammer
Hammer
Posts: 1219
Joined: Mon May 05, 2008 3:04 pm

Re: Animals re-issue including 5.1 mix coming

Post by ZiggyZipgun »

Wolfpack wrote: Tue Jun 08, 2021 12:05 am Instead, his wife refers to Waters as "David’s former lyricist" in a sexist context.
In what way was her comment sexist?
ZiggyZipgun
Hammer
Hammer
Posts: 1219
Joined: Mon May 05, 2008 3:04 pm

Re: Animals re-issue including 5.1 mix coming

Post by ZiggyZipgun »

theaussiefloydian wrote: Mon Jun 07, 2021 11:51 pm I think they know we know who they're talking about so they don't really need to name names to get their point across.
Remember back when Roger posted a video crying about not having his solo work promoted on the Pink Floyd page, and then they wished him a happy birthday, mentioned his upcoming release, but didn't share a link to it? It's like that.

I think they're following The Beatles' rulebook where they only ever referred to Mark Chapman as "he who shall not be named." Roger isn't too famous to be forgotten.