advertisement


Dave Gilmour Says He Doesn't Have Room In His Life For Pink Floyd Anymore

I think some cynicism is warranted. DG was adamant that the band should continue into the 90s and beyond, and under his effective leadership. Yet he had so little to say, that he employed an outside lyricist. I'd hoped that (given all the rancor that surrounded the split) that we were in for a distinct artistic vision, but that's exactly what didn't happen. Love him or hate him, you were never in any doubt that Waters was presenting his own worldview in his music - and isn't that a major point of being a songwriter? I'm always pretty skeptical about bands employing outside writers to bolster their ideas (even 70s King Crimson, and I love their music). I'm sure it'll sell by the truckload anyway and I am somewhat interested to know what it sounds like. Not 26 quid interested, but I do enjoy a bit of epic guitar soloing now and again.
 
sadcafe said:
The snobs out again in force. Sad lives with the need to piss on others parades. Smug, sneering and sexist (dismissive of Gilmore's song writer for being his wife). Dismissing those already giving the album 5 stars without listening to it yet then dismissing it without listening to it. We had much the same shit on the ELO thread. I never feel the need to go on threads about music I do not like to slate those that do. Always the same posters with comments about sixth form or student lyrics or themes when it is they who are stuck in days of yore with outmoded sensibilities.
Click to expand...

Well done , your have tried to rebut every post you dont like in one go , a bit scattergun and not entirely successful but a valiant attempt .

Even the most die heard floyd fan would question some of his lyrics [ if it wasnt for the nips being so good a building ships , the yards would still be open on the clyde !!!!!] But most of them were written when he was in his 20's.


And as for your go at me there is nothing snobby about it .

It is not a pink floyd album , call it anything and let it stand on its own 2 feet , but dont call it a pink floyd album and then tell the world you dont have time for pink floyd .

The last time i looked , one of the floyd was dead and one was in America sulking and I have taken out all of my real pink floyd albums and I simply cannot find "lyrics by polly samson" anywhere .

pink floyd my arse .
 
Gerald said:
Even the most die heard floyd fan would question some of his lyrics [ if it wasnt for the nips being so good a building ships , the yards would still be open on the clyde !!!!!] But most of them were written when he was in his 20's.
Click to expand...

Whose lyrics? Those you quote are by Waters.


Gerald said:
It is not a pink floyd album , call it anything and let it stand on its own 2 feet , but dont call it a pink floyd album and then tell the world you dont have time for pink floyd .

The last time i looked , one of the floyd was dead and one was in America sulking and I have taken out all of my real pink floyd albums and I simply cannot find "lyrics by polly samson" anywhere .

pink floyd my arse .
Click to expand...

There have been several variations in line-up with Pink Floyd - which do you consider the one true line-up? The original (without Gilmour), the middle period (without Syd), the later (without Waters)? If you take the view that no band is allowed to change personnel without changing their name, fine, but the many MANY Floyd fans who bought the albums and attended the shows after Waters left would disagree.
 
"Pink Floyd were over when Syd left"
"Punk was over as soon as the Sex Pistols signed a record deal"
"The Stones were nothing after Brian Jones"
"Bon Scott was ...blah blah blah..."
"Woodstock was the end...blah blah"

:D
All these tired old shit pseudo-music-intellectual cliches just make me laugh. It's all absolute bollocks.
 
Pink Floyd, IMHO should have finished when Roger left. A momentary lapse and DB would have been better branded as David Gilmour solo albums perhaps with the others in support?.......seeing the four together at Live 8 was an amazing moment but now it's over. Dave is right to move on. He will still tour those amazing songs and play that amazing guitar......it'll be there to be enjoyed under his name, without the weight that might perhaps burden him and open the floor to a lot of criticism going out as PF.......the newly released recordings are a nice gesture to the hugely loyal PF fanbase. I look forward to hearing them, but the four men standing on stage at Live 8 will always be PF for me.....
 
Will Hunter said:
Pink Floyd, IMHO should have finished when Roger left. A momentary lapse and DB would have been better branded as David Gilmour solo albums perhaps with the others in support?
Click to expand...
No I think they were very well inspired to continue as PF without Roger. Songs were a bit naff (except the world class guitar solo on On The Turning Away) but by the end of the '80s the guys staged a world tour that set new standards in the domain of bombastic arena rock, and at that they have IMO not been surpassed since (yes I'm sure they were way better 1967 playing some obscure noise in a filthy basement in London blah blah, and I am sure some PFMer WAS THERE). The praise was more or less unanimous (except from some ultra-smart but ultra-boring guys still mourning Syd's departure), and many of us were too young to attend the '70s shows so let's thank Gilmour & Co. for that.

Roger Waters was a creative head but he wanted to leave, but at the same time he wanted to take the name with him. Huh ? Being the best of the bunch doesn't entitle anyone to claim the rights IMO.

Briefly, my opinion about Syd : I like PATGOD, and Interstellar Overdrive as well as Astronomy Domine were really innovative and part of rock history, but they just weren't as good as post-Barrett works like DSOTM, WYWH, The Wall and a few other bits. Syd's band had very little in common with what PF did later, so why compare. Moreover, Syd couldn't stand the pressure of being in a famous band, the other guys could, and rightly so because it's part of the job.
 
Cheese said:
and Interstellar Overdrive as well as Astronomy Domine were really innovative and part of rock history, but they just weren't as good as post-Barrett works like DSOTM, WYWH, The Wall and a few other bits.
Click to expand...

:D Christ Cheese! You're brave.
Duck!

I love it all, for all it's evolutionary twists and turns - up to WYWH, and that was it for me.
Cirrus Minor is something I play very often.
 
I hate barrett era floyd . however you can argue what is and what isnt floyd until you find a compassionate tory , but one thing is for sure , this new one sure as hell aint a pink floyd album .
 
Rasher said:
"Punk was over as soon as the Sex Pistols signed a record deal"

:D
All these tired old shit pseudo-music-intellectual cliches just make me laugh. It's all absolute bollocks.
Click to expand...

I think you will find the real true one here was that the Pistols were over when Sid joined.
 
Rasher said:
"Pink Floyd were over when Syd left"
"Punk was over as soon as the Sex Pistols signed a record deal"
"The Stones were nothing after Brian Jones"
"Bon Scott was ...blah blah blah..."
"Woodstock was the end...blah blah"

:D
All these tired old shit pseudo-music-intellectual cliches just make me laugh. It's all absolute bollocks.
Click to expand...
This makes me think of the brief buzz created every couple of years about the 'best Beatles record according to recent survey among Beatles experts'. In the 70s it was Sgt. Pepper's, then the White Album, then Abbey Road, then Rubber Soul, and currently it looks like Revolver is the 'best song collection'. Fair enough.
 
When Peter Green left Fleetwood Mac and they went on to make lots of hugely popular albums, I bet no-one could actually tell any difference in the music at all.
I know I certainly couldn't.

(I think I've been reading too much Viz recently)
 
Was it not the case that Roger wanted to dissolve the band, not taking the name for his use and stopping the others continuing under the brand?
 
Well they have had a long career so you can take your own best bits. Personally I prefer the period covering meddle animals, dsotm, wywh up to the wall. The Syd Barrett period was absolutely fine but I prefer the later stuff. Dark Side Of The Moon and The Wall are two pinnacles of achievement

After The Wall it was downhill all the way for Floyd. I went on to enjoy most of the Roger Waters solo projects. Much better than anything the remaining members of Floyd were churning out.

Roger Waters has admitted the stresses which lead to odd decisions. People change over the years. If you cant get on there is no point continuing.

The group made more than enough money and dont owe us anything in terms of creative output. I often wonder why supergroups continue when they have nothing more to prove. An early retirement seems like the ultimate pleasure to me.
 
Minstrel SE said:
I often wonder why supergroups continue when they have nothing more to prove.
Click to expand...
The Stones seem to enjoy it, so why not.

Bono continues to need huge amounts of care and attention, while he and his bandmates cash in and go out with cool chicks. Why not.

Musically, AC/DC are still as good as they always were (well Brian is at least still fun) so why not.

In all cases, management/publisher doesn't like it when such cash cows disappear suddenly, I suppose they can be very convincing in such cases, just have a look at AC/DC who just lost their most important band member and nobody ever talked about putting an end to it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.


advertisement


Back
Top