Is It Just Me?

Talk about other Floyd related musicians here.
User avatar
Real Pink in the Inside
Judge!
Judge!
Posts: 2012
Joined: Fri Jun 14, 2002 7:31 pm
Location: The Dark Side of Neptune

Is It Just Me?

Post by Real Pink in the Inside »

Watching Roger's DVD earlier, I found that the performances of his solo songs are more "refined" than the performances of the non-solo songs.

What do I mean by "refined"?

Well, in short, the performances of those songs, to me, appear to be of a higher quality than the others in many aspects, if you will.

Let me explain…

First off, Roger's voice. Although I feel that on every song Roger did an adequate job of singing, I cannot help but question the amount of emotion he put into singing songs by "Pink Floyd" as opposed to the high-level of emotion that I found he put into singing his solo numbers. I found throughout the show that the singing on his solo works is almost a perfect replica of the actual studio versions of the songs. On the other hand, I found the quality of Roger's singing on most of the Pink Floyd songs to be not a complete "replica" of the studio versions, but quite different. I'm not saying that they are of a lower quality than the studio versions, but I felt there was a different "ring" to them. Am I being clear?

Secondly, the presentation of the songs. Throughout many of the Pink Floyd songs, Roger was smiling and appeared to be having fun. Just look at the performance of the song "In The Flesh". He came out, did "the hammer", and then smiled at some of the audience members who were imitating him. In "Dogs", the band breaks into playing a game of cards about halfway through the song (To allude to the famous picture of dogs playing poker, no doubt). During "Brain Damage", he's smiling, bowing, and cheering like a fan throughout much of the song.

Perhaps the apparent "light-hearted" performances of the Pink Floyd songs are more than what they appear to be. Perhaps this is Roger's way of getting his point across that people get more out of light-hearted performances of the songs in a relatively small-sized venue than they do at the mammoth stadiums the current line-up of Pink Floyd usually perform in?

On the other side of the coin, all of the performances of his solo songs, from my recollection, contain none of the smiling and fun antics. When you are watching the performances of his solo songs, you feel more like you are watching (listening to) art. Everyone on the stage is performing to the best of their abilities. Everyone is pretty much 100% serious, it seems. It's more about the music than the band, as a result. You feel like you are making a real connection with the music and its lyrics.

What do you think?
User avatar
Real Pink in the Inside
Judge!
Judge!
Posts: 2012
Joined: Fri Jun 14, 2002 7:31 pm
Location: The Dark Side of Neptune

Post by Real Pink in the Inside »

I guess it is just me...

:cry:
User avatar
Ailbhe
Axe
Axe
Posts: 57
Joined: Sun Aug 18, 2002 1:09 pm
Location: somewhere, anywhere....

Post by Ailbhe »

ohhhhhhhhh.........now I wish I had had the opportunity to see him performing at least once because I could have replied..........but I do have the CD of "In the flesh" and I noticed that the songs from the solo albums (especially Amused to Death)are rendered with much more feeling , if you get what I mean.......
User avatar
Keith Jordan
Site Admin
Site Admin
Posts: 17151
Joined: Wed Jun 12, 2002 6:54 pm
Gender: Male
Location: Cheshire, England

Post by Keith Jordan »

Real Pink, I agree with you. I think Roger and his band performed very professionally on the 2002 tour. The sound was great. Unfortunately, I have never seen Pink Floyd live but have a lot of RoIOs from 1969 to 1994! I can honestly say that, while retaining that glorious "live" and authentic sound, The Roger Waters band sounds studio like.

That is in contrast to Pink Floyd. I think the main problem with a lot of their live sound in the early days was good mixing and achieving a balanced sound. I am going from RoIOs and not a live hearing thus the mix was dine for the venu they were playing and not recording!

Some may say in defence of Pink Floyd that the "live" album P.U.L.S.E. shows that "Pink Gloyd" :lol: can achieve that studio sound when recorded live. I must completely agree: they achieve it because they sent the multitrack DAT off to be mastered like a studio album would. I have RoIOs from that P.U.L.S.E. tour that demonstrate the power of post production mixing and editing! :lol:

On the whole, Roger's band is a lot more professional in terms of their sound in my opinion. Very much refined...