Roger's Video about David Not Sharing

General discussion about Pink Floyd.

Should Roger Waters be allowed to publicise himself on the Pink Floyd website and social media?

Yes
26
72%
No
7
19%
Don't know
3
8%
 
Total votes: 36

movement
Axe
Axe
Posts: 75
Joined: Thu May 08, 2003 12:55 pm

Re: Roger's Video about David Not Sharing

Post by movement »

Roger needs to STFU. You reap what you sow, big guy.

everton1690
Knife
Knife
Posts: 262
Joined: Sun Apr 23, 2006 2:54 pm

Re: Roger's Video about David Not Sharing

Post by everton1690 »

Does Genesis promote any peter Gabriel material

Does supertramp promote any roger hodgson

Does marillion promote anything by fish

The list is endless , f**k off roger you old fraud

User avatar
twcc
Site Admin
Site Admin
Posts: 1227
Joined: Sat Feb 08, 2014 7:02 pm
Gender: Male
Location: Whitelackington, UK

Re: Roger's Video about David Not Sharing

Post by twcc »

I, presumably like most on this forum, know little of the real reasons behind the bust up. We read what’s printed in magazines, we listen to the interviews and form opinions but that’s it. It is all rather tiresome. Many people know only the post-Waters Pink Floyd, some only know the post-Barrett Pink Floyd. I would like to see news and features for all five individuals and all variants of Pink Floyd included on the official Pink Floyd web site. If that means including things like the ‘Celebrating Syd Barrett’ event in 2016, the official release of ‘When The Wind Blows’ on Blu-ray, the often overlooked ‘Soldiers Tale’, David selling his guitars for charity, the delayed Nick Mason Blu-ray or ‘Mother’ then so be it. Inclusion of the Polly stuff is an anomaly … I could have accepted a simple announcement regarding cancellation but the home videos do not fit and there should be a break out to watch them elsewhere.

I have some sympathy with Roger. By way of an observation, it was disappointing that the latest P.U.L.S.E video did not restore the thank-you statement that was present in the early version.

Somewhat unlikely, but David could decide to re-start the band and then allow Polly to join as a member ... <.8.>

Weslok
Embryo
Embryo
Posts: 1
Joined: Wed May 20, 2020 1:20 am

Re: Roger's Video about David Not Sharing

Post by Weslok »

I can't really say what goes on the Pink Floyd asset pages... If other people than Pink Floyd members have permission to post on the Floyds pages then for sure Roger should be allowed access just out of principle... Roger left the band and declared it done and the Band rolled on without him... Although there may never be any new material released by Pink Floyd Nick and David are still "in the band" and thus can publish there... It's a mixed feeling for me... I only visit (for the most part) the member's own pages when visiting to purchase or catch up... The simplest thing to do would let Roger access...

If they stop postings from non-band members then the ball is in Davids/Nicks court but until they stop posting they need to let Roger in...

This feuding really is getting old and still is sour in my mouth and they would do well to bury the hatchet and move on...
Roger making divisive videos like this is really not helping his situation...

Let him post and leave it alone until they stop posting non "Pink Floyd" materials...

User avatar
space triangle
Knife
Knife
Posts: 381
Joined: Tue Jan 21, 2020 1:25 pm

Re: Roger's Video about David Not Sharing

Post by space triangle »

I can't vote because of there is no fourth option: 4. Roger should be appointed as the chief moderator of all Pink Floyd websites and social media. 8)

uphollandlatic
Embryo
Embryo
Posts: 1
Joined: Sat Sep 26, 2015 2:49 pm

Re: Roger's Video about David Not Sharing

Post by uphollandlatic »

Roger left 35 years ago and then did his utmost to try and make sure that Pink Floyd never were allowed to play/record again. His contribution to Pink Floyd is of course enormous, but it's over.

User avatar
Master_Chief
Axe
Axe
Posts: 39
Joined: Sun Jan 09, 2011 7:39 pm

Re: Roger's Video about David Not Sharing

Post by Master_Chief »

Just thinking actually about the current state of play with Pink Floyd. Didn't Jon Carin (who is now back touring and playing with Roger Waters) have some of his contributions removed/altered in The Later Years boxset? I know Guy Pratt mentioned in this recent Lockdown Licks episodes that some of his solos were also scrapped, which is really off in my opinion.

Could it be that the man who refused to let someone else make Pink Floyd a dictatorship is now making it one himself?

I admit it's very unlikely Gilmour's intentions to scrap/alter any contributions from the touring members from that period and it's probably the record company's decision, but it seems Pink Floyd has gone full circle back into the realms of sniping over who played what and "should it be allowed to remain on the record." Such as sad state of play. :cry:

User avatar
twcc
Site Admin
Site Admin
Posts: 1227
Joined: Sat Feb 08, 2014 7:02 pm
Gender: Male
Location: Whitelackington, UK

Re: Roger's Video about David Not Sharing

Post by twcc »

^^^
Valid points, I recall hearing Guy talk about the changes in one of his recent podcasts. On 'The Later Years' I approve of the replacement drums and like the augmented Rick Wright parts but the removal and replacement of other contributors is, as you say, a bit off.

scarecrow
Axe
Axe
Posts: 65
Joined: Sun Nov 21, 2010 1:15 pm

Re: Roger's Video about David Not Sharing

Post by scarecrow »

Yeah, I'm not convinced it's necessarily particularly out of order to remove someone's parts from a final mix. It's not even saying that there's anything wrong with the part - I'd agree it might have the potential to be a bit pointed, but generally it's hardly newsworthy.

I think 'removing their contributions' is a more emotive way of putting it than necessary.

I suppose Paul Simon removing all of Art Garfunkel's vocals as Hearts and Bones became a solo record was a thing. It'd be easy to take it personally but it's generally not a reasonable complaint imo

User avatar
Annoying Twit
Hammer
Hammer
Posts: 1117
Joined: Sun Feb 03, 2008 1:26 pm

Re: Roger's Video about David Not Sharing

Post by Annoying Twit »

I watched Guy's youtube video. And, I listened to The Later Years disc for AMLoR.

Even if quite a few parts have been pared down, there is still quite a bit of tasteful bass work and fills on the album. I'd need to do a more careful A B comparison than I'm prepared to do

In the youtube video when describing the One Slip solo, he gleefully says that it's full of 80s. In various sources over the past few decades, there have been statements that AMLoR would be remixed to 'remove the 80s from it' (or words to that effect.)

Reading between the lines, I think I can see what happened. And, it doesn't appear to be megalomania or anything personal.

However, given what Guy describes in that video, I think he should have a writing credit for WTIO. However, he's OK with that - he says in the comments that he has a 'piece of the song'. The solo playing of the germ of the song is very nice, and when I went and re-listened to The Later Years version, I think that the production would benefit from that bass part being more prominent.

User avatar
snifferdog
Site Admin
Site Admin
Posts: 12087
Joined: Fri Jun 16, 2006 7:17 pm
Gender: Female
Location: Green Hill Zone

Re: Roger's Video about David Not Sharing

Post by snifferdog »

I can see both sides of the argument here. Roger hasn't been a member of Pink Floyd for over 30 years so why should they include any information about what he's doing now? He's an established solo artist and his fans know where to check up on the latest news. That cover of Mother showed up on a few Facebook friends' walls within hours of it being published. It's fair to say that between the different social media channels, the video got a sizeable audience.
On the other hand, you have David saying Pink Floyd is over and (presumably) he sees himself a solo artist. Allowing information about Roger's tours or albums or concert videos onto the website of a defunct band isn't going to hurt anyone, will it? It isn't as if Roger is in direct competition with David or Nick when it comes to selling concert tickets or CDs. It would be the grown-up thing to do but we've long since established that when it comes to this pair, that's an impossibility. The two of them have been sniping at each other non-stop for years and they just can't let it rest, even in their 70s. There's clearly no trust or respect there.

The one thing I have much more definite feelings about is the promotion of Polly Samson's novel on the Pink Floyd website and social media channels. If he wants to promote her book and make those dreadful "Von Trapped family" videos through his David Gilmour brand, that's fine. Maybe his missus needs a bit of extra publicity. That is where it should stop. If it's OK to splash material about Polly Samson (who isn't a member of Pink Floyd as far as I know) all over the Pink Floyd website, where will it stop? Will we start seeing videos and books from their kiddies? Their gardener? For a lady who claims to have wanted to be a writer in her own right and not to be referred to as Mrs Gilmour, she's now milking that relationship for all it's worth. She must not feel confident enough in her own brand if she has to resort to being publicised on Pink Floyd's website.

It was never going to make any difference whether Roger burned these last bridges or not. The relationship between him and David appears to be so toxic anyway, this isn't really going to blow the gates open. It'll give some websites something to write about for a few days, then it'll settle down again. Ironically, it has given Polly and her book more publicity than she'd ever have dreamed of. It might also drive some more traffic to Roger's website. So in its own way, both sides are winners and losers.

Kerry King
Knife
Knife
Posts: 282
Joined: Wed Dec 16, 2009 8:54 am

Re: Roger's Video about David Not Sharing

Post by Kerry King »

Keith Jordan wrote:
Tue May 19, 2020 8:34 am

Roger said, amongst other things, "Why do we have to sit and watch Polly Samson for year after year, month after month, day after day
Who's sitting around watching Polly Samson?

Anyone?
And yet we don't get to hear about anything that Roger is doing, or about this is not a drill, or when he makes a piece of work it is not shown."
Someone needs to remind Waters that he has not been in the band for 35 years. Does he promote Gilmour on Waters.com?

The older we get the more it seems his best lyrics were simply pandering.

User avatar
moodyblue
Hammer
Hammer
Posts: 1402
Joined: Wed Nov 26, 2003 11:06 pm
Gender: Male
Location: Market Harborough

Re: Roger's Video about David Not Sharing

Post by moodyblue »

I totally agree with Roger.

I cannot see the justification for allowing the site to be used for Polly Samson's publicity when let's face it, her contribution to Pink Floyd is 0,.00000001% compared to that of Roger Waters.

This seems pretty personal to me.

It's been pretty evident over the years as to the individual who has the most resentment between the two of them.
None of us truly know the deep seated issues between these two individuals. However, I do wonder if Roger has mellowed a bit over the years and Gilmour has carried his resentments along with him.

User avatar
moodyblue
Hammer
Hammer
Posts: 1402
Joined: Wed Nov 26, 2003 11:06 pm
Gender: Male
Location: Market Harborough

Re: Roger's Video about David Not Sharing

Post by moodyblue »

Kerry King wrote:
Thu May 21, 2020 1:18 am

Does he promote Gilmour on Waters.com?
That's completely different.

Would David promote Roger on his own website? Of course not.

User avatar
azza200
Judge!
Judge!
Posts: 2063
Joined: Wed Jan 07, 2004 2:18 pm

Re: Roger's Video about David Not Sharing

Post by azza200 »

moodyblue wrote:
Fri May 22, 2020 10:21 am
I totally agree with Roger.

I cannot see the justification for allowing the site to be used for Polly Samson's publicity when let's face it, her contribution to Pink Floyd is 0,.00000001% compared to that of Roger Waters.

This seems pretty personal to me.

It's been pretty evident over the years as to the individual who has the most resentment between the two of them.
None of us truly know the deep seated issues between these two individuals. However, I do wonder if Roger has mellowed a bit over the years and Gilmour has carried his resentments along with him.
Yeah but in the 90's David did make efforts to build bridges and be friendly to Roger yet he got shot down numerous times he invited Roger to play DSOTM at one of the Earls Court dates. Since then i think David gave up until Live 8 where Roger tried too take over thinking he was back in the band and David had to put him in his place about the set list. They mellowed for a bit with those appearances they did up too David's wall appearance in 2011.

Since then what ever happened behind the scenes with TEY release and Animals 5.1 and Roger taking pot shots belitting Davids and the other contributions in various interviews over the years. Is it any wonder why David does not want too bother when Roger shows David no respect to him and now he is insulting his family in public. Not the best way to help your cause and mend broken bridges is it.

Another thing in general
the amount of sexism towards Polly is shocking and disgusting. Being a fanboy of Roger yet happily bitching about someones wife just because you don't like the Gilmour era and Gilmour in general is beyond sad and pathetic. The levels some people go to make a point about how shit the Post Waters era is. Just because its not up Rogers standard of lyrics. Some Pink Floyd fan if you only limit yourself to taking Rogers words literally and believing everything what comes out of his mouth in interviews he is a massive hypocrite regarding loads of things.

Attacking David's wife is low stupid and petty. How would some of you like it if some stranger posted shit about your wife on forums and over social media pages all because you don't like that era of a band.