New David Gilmour album!

[Jimi Dean Barrett]

Jimi, do you work at a record store ? What's the price of that CD?

Well I did try and get a job at HMV, but no. I don't work at a record store sadly. He was just at my house so I thought I'd play him a few bits from it. He said he'll get a copy (And even a CD instead of a download). No idea if or when he will though.

[Flathead]

I repeat that ''In Any Tongue'' is the best stuff he did since ''High Hope'' and could easily have been a Pink Floyd song.

I agree. High Hopes is genius (would have been another Comfortably Numb with Roger singing the verse). Poles Apart, Cluster One, and High Hopes are God-like. And it's true, the band so needed to get away from the politics and revert to that sound. But...what Gilmour has done since then is bland and lifeless.

My hope is that Godrich (Radiohead's producer) challenges Roger for his album.

[Follix]

Well that your point of view... Off course, it's not as epic as the classic Floyd era but 70% of the album is decent stuff imo especially if you compare it to today's crap...

[Flathead]

Actually, there's a lot better newer music than the Gilmour solo album.

See "Hurry Up, We're Dreaming" by M83 as an example:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lAwYodrBr2Q

Check out the mindblowing visual tributes to Pink Floyd in the video.

[mastaflatch]

To each their own - of course there's some incredible music being released every week but some people actually like what Gilmour releases nowadays. I know I do. For a lot of Floyd fans, a David Gilmour album is the next best thing to a new PF so you can't really blame anybody for liking it. I still like the album, I think it's some nice music, especially when Gilmour strays out of the comfort zone you'd come to expect from him.

[Flathead]

For a lot of Floyd fans, a David Gilmour album is the next best thing to a new PF so you can't really blame anybody for liking it.

I always judge art based on its own merits rather than association. The new Gilmour album does not sound like Pink Floyd to me. Pink Floyd was trippy, brash, mellow, yet visceral.

This sounds like adult contemporary new age music.

Gilmour was always the cool wave, and Waters the hammer. They just kind of suck apart.

[Hudini]

Actually, there's a lot better newer music than the Gilmour solo album.

See "Hurry Up, We're Dreaming" by M83 as an example

"Better music" is a purely subjective observation. What you think of as good music someone else may actually find mediocre or even bad. Thus trying to persuade someone that the music you like is "better" than what they like is futile and, in lack of better words, simply stupid.

As an example, I've always found M83's music bland and boring. Note that it's only my opinion and I'm not trying to present anything as universal truth like you seem to do. On the other hand, while personally I like new Gilmour's album I also like some new albums more, but I would never call them better because it would be simply, well, stupid.

It takes a whole lot of capability to understand that opinions don't necessarily have to be right or wrong to participate in a debate.

[moom]

Actually, there's a lot better newer music than the Gilmour solo album.

See "Hurry Up, We're Dreaming" by M83 as an example

"Better music" is a purely subjective observation. What you think of as good music someone else may actually find mediocre or even bad. Thus trying to persuade someone that the music you like is "better" than what they like is futile and, in lack of better words, simply stupid.

It takes a whole lot of capability to understand that opinions don't necessarily have to be right or wrong to participate in a debate.

However, there are some things that one artist is factually better at than another from the same niche. Like playing an instrument, for one, being creative, for two. It takes being open-minded and able to discuss and distill one thing from another.

[mastaflatch]

For a lot of Floyd fans, a David Gilmour album is the next best thing to a new PF so you can't really blame anybody for liking it.

I always judge art based on its own merits rather than association. The new Gilmour album does not sound like Pink Floyd to me. Pink Floyd was trippy, brash, mellow, yet visceral.

This sounds like adult contemporary new age music.

Gilmour was always the cool wave, and Waters the hammer. They just kind of suck apart.

Let me re-phrase my thought, then. The best place to hear new David Gilmour guitar and vocals is on a new David Gilmour album. Some people just want that. You'd be susprised at how many people really love PF in its latest incarnation which isn't particularly abrasive or trippy. This approach to music isn't devoid of any merits of its own. I love Ummagumma but you just can't expect Joe Public to look forward cranking The Narrow Way on his way back from work.

I agree that something's missing in both Waters' and Gilmour's camp if we judge their current work by association (!!) but they're both solo now and that's who they are separately. I also happen to think that Waters is the most guilty of re-hashing old tired chord progressions and lyrics into his new songs to compensate for a lack of any fresh ideas. I love the guy though - I really enjoy his interviews.

[Hudini]

However, there are some things that one artist is factually better at than another from the same niche. Like playing an instrument, for one, being creative, for two.

There is no "better" or "worse" creativity, because creativity as such can not be measured in terms of quality. There are musicians who are more creative than others, but it still can't be measured that easily.

What can be measured though is the productivity, because it's simply a quantity indicator and doesn't define quality of the product. There are musicians who record only a handful of albums during their career (i.e. are not productive) that however break new musical ground (i.e. are creative) and then there are others who record a lot of albums (i.e. are productive) but have nothing new to say on any of them (i.e. are not creative). However, you can't just measure a quality of a musician based on their productivity and/or creativity.

The quality of musicianship is a whole another issue, because it can however be measured and there are objectively better and worse musical performers, which can be more or less productive and/or creative regardless of that. But still it doesn't define a "better musician", only a technically better performer.

[moom]

There are musicians who record only a handful of albums during their career (i.e. are not productive) that however break new musical ground (i.e. are creative) and then there are others who record a lot of albums (i.e. are productive) but have nothing new to say on any of them (i.e. are not creative). However, you can't just measure a quality of a musician based on their productivity and/or creativity.

This almost exactly what I meant. But I did not include quantity in my point. There are artists who record a whole bunch of (in search of better unifying word) respected albums.
What I also tried to accent in my post was that there are albums that scream talent and there are albums that scream cheap-shot, lazy-ass copy.

The quality of musicianship is a whole another issue, because it can however be measured and there are objectively better and worse musical performers, which can be more or less productive and/or creative regardless of that. But still it doesn't define a "better musician", only a technically better performer.

I am well aware that there are so-called "technical wankers" out there, but being a technically better musician opens up options that amateurs don't have, and that can affect creativity.

[vgonis]

Despite my fears about Endless river, it is one of the few new albums I have returned over and over again the last 12 months. The new Gilmour album needs more than the usual spins, to catch my ear, apart from 2-3 stand out tracks. And it was pretty much the same with On an island, which grew in me almost 5 years after its release. Let's hope the new one blooms as well.

[Flathead]

As inconsistent and weak as The Endless River is, it's significantly better than this solo album. Significantly.

This solo album is like late-period Sting meets David Gilmour.

[kjek1]

Bore off already.

[danielcaux]

Anyone else thinks that 5 AM, A Boat Lies Waiting & And Then... could have been sequenced as yet another side of The Endless River? "A Boat" even has a recording or Rich Wright on it, so thematically those tracks totally fit better in The Endless River than in the much more pop Rattle That Lock album IMO.