Should Dave Gilmour give up the pink floyd name?

k-a-o-s · Post by **k-a-o-s** » Sat Oct 05, 2002 3:05 pm

I for one think that after the bitter legal battles to carry on using Pink Floyd as a brand name Dave has given us nothing to shout about, A momentry lapse of reason was a solo album padded out with session musiscians and as for the division bell one good song and loads of filler and in between two live albums that we could have done without.
As for the recent concerts which Dave has performed i think they are toned down too much and do not do him any justice ( he is a better musician than this ). He is also constantly saying in interviews that there are no plans for any Pink Floyd album or tour.
I for one would like to see a new Pink Floyd album rather than another pitiful solo effort.
Please Dave do something with the Pink Floyd name or put it to rest.

Post by **Keith Jordan** » Sat Oct 05, 2002 3:14 pm

I am on the fence over this issue. Big Belly Gelly Gilmour should give it up now Roger has left but David was a major part of The Floyd so should carry on with the brand name he helped build up. Roger is a less than good musician technically and the Floyd would not have been the same if it was not for Davids great contributions.

But has he really earnt the right to keep the brand name "Pink Floyd"? I don't know.

Real Pink in the Inside · Sun Oct 06, 2002 12:48 am

You mean The Final Cut isn't the final "Pink Floyd" studio album?

It is if you want it to be.

A Momentary Lapse of reason? The Division Bell? P.U.L.S.E.? Delicate Sound of Thunder? What are these?

David Smith · Post by **David Smith** » Sun Oct 06, 2002 11:01 am

Dave should give up the pink floyd name. His recent albums have both been to a low quality, and while it's always nice to hear a live CD, it's better to hear one where the band are in their prime as they perform. Pulse was ok, but really, we say that and we know it's just ****, if we had DSOTM played back in 72 or 73, then the second CD would have been omething truely special.

Pink Floyd should have ended after TFC, it just seems Gilmour wants to milk has little cash cow (hence the 8 CDs that have come out since TFC, 2 of which give new material.) If he has any morals he would realise he's not Pink Floyd, and that he should nhave quit when the going was good instead of changing The Best Band Ever!!! in to a bunch of old gits. Think about it, all those futuristic sound effects e.t.c with a 58 year old at the healm. Could that be for anything but money?

Post by **Keith Jordan** » Fri Oct 11, 2002 10:26 am

Interesting thought Mosespa!! I like the perspective on Beethoven etc. and the people in the future who will be playing it. Does that mean we should like classical music? I find some of it interesting!!

mostHigh · Post by **mostHigh** » Fri Oct 11, 2002 3:28 pm

i think rick wright has given mosepa some bad drugs

Post by **mosespa** » Fri Oct 11, 2002 6:51 pm

kjnpf wrote:Interesting thought Mosespa!! I like the perspective on Beethoven etc. and the people in the future who will be playing it. Does that mean we should like classical music? I find some of it interesting!!

Classical music has a lot of merit to it. But it's like any other style of music, some are going to like it, some are not.

The interesting thing, though, is to realize that "classical" music was the "pop" music of it's day. It's not like Mozart was writing music that only rich snobs listened to...the poor people attended his concerts. Music was being made on violins, horns and the like because those were the instruments of the day.

It's not as if there was an alternative. That's what music was then, that's what the people were listening to.

In his day, Mozart WAS a pop star; as was Beethoven, Brahms, Liszt, Tchaikovsky and all the rest. Their music is now considered "boring" by people who have been raised with electric guitars and synthesizers.

Actually, if you think about it, the popular music of the 1600's was considerably more complex than what passes for pop music today. This is, I feel, an interesting question to ponder...are we, as a species, becoming less intellegent? The vast majority of people prefers simple music, movies that spoon feed you the story rather than making you think about what you're watching...the largest part of any entertainment these days is considerably less complex and thought provoking than it once was.

But, I'm just on a soapbox here. It could be just me.

amanda_t_ · Post by **amanda_t_** » Sat Oct 12, 2002 2:11 am

kjnpf wrote: Does that mean we should like classical music?

Of course we should like classical music. Especially if we like music like Pink Floyd

Post by **Keith Jordan** » Sat Oct 12, 2002 12:11 pm

Actually, if you think about it, the popular music of the 1600's was considerably more complex than what passes for pop music today. This is, I feel, an interesting question to ponder...are we, as a species, becoming less intellegent? The vast majority of people prefers simple music, movies that spoon feed you the story rather than making you think about what you're watching...the largest part of any entertainment these days is considerably less complex and thought provoking than it once was.

But, I'm just on a soapbox here. It could be just me

I think that, as a species, we have seen our greatest days pass us by. People in general do not have enough moral fiber and respect and time to "do things right". People just want the easy way so they have more time to watch TV!!

I mean, look at tools. My dad has some great tools that belonged to his dad that are about 50 years old and my dad still uses them. He doesn't use that screwdriver that fell to bits after a couple of years! Things are just not right and proper anymore. I blame liberalism. I am a centre-right conservative and hate pure liberalism. It is good in theory but not in practice. Too much rope...

Pink Pig · Post by **Pink Pig** » Sun Oct 13, 2002 4:26 pm

I agree with KAOS. Once Syd was out, Roger was the creative force behind Floyd. If anyone has any doubt, consider Waters' live performances - musically excellent, he dominates the stage and delivers each song with power and emotion.

Post by **Keith Jordan** » Thu Oct 17, 2002 10:48 pm

I think the Floyd evolved a lot since Syd in their themes in their songs etc. to be considered a separate band from when Syd was "there".

Perhaps they should have given that name up then.

When Roger left in the 80s they should have given up the name then as well. But they did go on in a differnt direction with MLOR and TDB. MLOR is less than good I think. Not very strong thematically. Decent pop music if you like that sort of thing though. I have MLOR on MD from a friend. Won't be buying that in my lifetime!

Guest · Post by **Guest** » Tue Oct 22, 2002 4:24 pm

Well RADIO KAOS is not that decent Pop-music i think. I still think Dave's guitarwork for Pink Floyd is unique, this combined with Wright compositions and keyboards and Ezrin's adds ( as he did for THE WALL ), still make Flod a unique sound in this time. I think that's something you can't say from Rogers AMUSED TO DEATH, the music is very simple ( WHAT GOD WANTS? PERFECT SENSE etc ), added with somevery simple, cmmercial easy to listen M KAmen orchestrations. Really, nothing to be unique, unless you get a look at the Lyrics, that's were the greatness starts. EG i think Wrights BROKEN CHINA is better mussically than ATD.

Benedictusdespinoza · Post by **Benedictusdespinoza** » Tue Oct 22, 2002 4:25 pm

I'm that guest

Guest · Post by **Guest** » Wed Oct 23, 2002 4:50 pm

Anyone who thinks that broken china is better musically than amused to death should have theyre ears cleaned professionally.

Benedictusdespinoza · Post by **Benedictusdespinoza** » Wed Oct 23, 2002 8:44 pm

I'm not that previous guest. O come on boy, it's like comparing that easy Lloyd Webber stuff ( ATD ) to some though stuff like a Wagner Opera ( Broken China ). Fine for me if you can't appreciate the more difficult music.