Roger recent interesting Radio Interview

[Machiner83]

http://www.ameinfo.com/110982.html

Here you can find to listen and even download Part 1 of a very interesting Roger Waters recent radio interview. He talks about wishing He & Pink Floyd to do a FEW GIGS here and there ... if only David would want it.

ENJOY !

[mhspiper]

Thanks, Machiner83!

[Yucateco]

hehe Waters is really becoming addicted to playing live

[Darkest Side]

Well he says that he'd love to do "a few gigs", but he doesn't actually look like doing much about it yet - except talking.

[peesea]

Well he says that he'd love to do "a few gigs", but he doesn't actually look like doing much about it yet - except talking.

well, he can want to all he likes...but the sad fact is, Dave Gilmour now controls what happens to the name pink floyd...and DAVID doesn't want to share :p

[The Gunner's Dream]

It sounds like Roger's finally at peace with himself and no longer holds a grudge against Dave. It'd really be great if Dave would agree to bring back Pink Floyd again. If only it could have happened 10 years ago.

[hummingman]

Roger has nothing to lose from rejoining Pink Floyd. He be back in the spotlight properly again, it would look as if PF were crawling back to him, and I can't exactly see Roger letting everyone having the impression he wasn't in control of it.

[DBlaze]

hehe Waters is really becoming addicted to playing live

i don't see anything wrong with that

I really do hope they re-form...I just wonder if Dave would let Roger in, now that he has that whole control of Pink Floyd thing going on...letting Rog back in would mean they share the power once again...he might not want that...

[mosespa]

Gilmour has spent the last twenty years in control of the name Pink Floyd. At the start, he was putting a great deal of time, effort and money into getting Pink Floyd to where it could stand without Roger Waters.

AMLOR proved that it could happen without Roger. The Division Bell proved that it could happen without Roger more than once...that it could continue without Roger.

Roger spent those early years trying to destroy Pink Floyd.

Why SHOULD Gilmour allow Roger back into the fold now that he's the one who decides?

Especially since they've proven that they don't need him.

(DISCLAIMER: I think Roger Waters is one of the greatest lyricists of the twentieth century and that Pink Floyd has suffered for him not being there...I'm just trying to see it objectively in the above post.)

[DBlaze]

Gilmour has spent the last twenty years in control of the name Pink Floyd. At the start, he was putting a great deal of time, effort and money into getting Pink Floyd to where it could stand without Roger Waters.

AMLOR proved that it could happen without Roger. The Division Bell proved that it could happen without Roger more than once...that it could continue without Roger.

Roger spent those early years trying to destroy Pink Floyd.

Why SHOULD Gilmour allow Roger back into the fold now that he's the one who decides?

Especially since they've proven that they don't need him.

(DISCLAIMER: I think Roger Waters is one of the greatest lyricists of the twentieth century and that Pink Floyd has suffered for him not being there...I'm just trying to see it objectively in the above post.)

Because you can't have the true Pink Floyd sound without him...I mean I like the two post-Roger albums, but with Roger they have made all-time classic albums...

Even Dave has to admit that his lyrics fail in comparison to Roger's.

Note: I am a huge fan of both Roger and David...I'm just stating my personal opinion.

[mhspiper]

Even if Dave won't come along, the other three could grab another guitarist (preferably Snowy White) and tour under a different name. The Who toured as TED (Townshend, Entwistle, Daltrey) at one point, so members of the Floyd could do it too!

[DBlaze]

Even if Dave won't come along, the other three could grab another guitarist (preferably Snowy White) and tour under a different name. The Who toured as TED (Townshend, Entwistle, Daltrey) at one point, so members of the Floyd could do it too!

but if there's a non-Dave Floyd, then its sorta just as bad as a non-Roger Floyd...still missing one person, you know?

eh...maybe that would be the best we can get...we just have to wait and see

[hummingman]

Floyd without Gilmour wouldn't be right... Current Floyd without Roger seems more acceptable to me as he doesn't really contribute anything musically - all the songs have already been written, it's Gilmour, Rick and Nick that make the music.

And Kilminster can sod off with his windmills.

[Sonic Destruction]

Even if Dave won't come along, the other three could grab another guitarist (preferably Snowy White) and tour under a different name. The Who toured as TED (Townshend, Entwistle, Daltrey) at one point, so members of the Floyd could do it too!

but if there's a non-Dave Floyd, then its sorta just as bad as a non-Roger Floyd...still missing one person, you know?

eh...maybe that would be the best we can get...we just have to wait and see

Yeah, I agree. Unless all four of them get together on the same stage, or better yet in the same studio, it would not be a satisfying experience. I don't think post-Syd Floyd without Dave would be any better than Floyd without Roger (ie maybe pretty good at times, but not classic Floyd).

The trouble is, Dave is the music machine, but he doesn't seem to like the political lyrics that Roger would bring, so they would seem to be completely incompatible as far as doing anything new is concerned.

[J Ed]

maybe they should just not pick Dave up in their van when theyre driving to their first gig