Forum Home Forum Home > Progressive Music Lounges > Prog Music Lounge
  New Posts New Posts RSS Feed - A What If Pink Floyd Question...
  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Events   Register Register  Login Login

Topic ClosedA What If Pink Floyd Question...
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  123>
Author
Message Reverse Sort Order
  Topic Search Topic Search  Topic Options Topic Options
Hippie View Drop Down
Forum Newbie
Forum Newbie
Avatar

Joined: April 03 2007
Location: United Kingdom
Status: Offline
Points: 3 		Direct Link To This Post Topic: A What If Pink Floyd Question...
    Posted: April 03 2007 at 18:10
Originally posted by The Whistler The Whistler wrote:

Not a Roger Waters keeps the band OR Syd doesn't go crazy question. No, a question that I've never heard voiced before, and as a result, one which you probably won't find all that interesting and the thread shall sink...I'm really selling this, aren't I?
 
I read in...some kind of an interview or something that good ole Rog wanted Dark Side to be really dry, whereas Dave wanted it swampy. Dave got his wish, and Roger didn't get to make a "dry-art" album until Animals. Wish was cold, to be sure, but I think that Animals is how Roger wanted Dark Side.
 
NOW, what if he'd gotten said wish (not Wish). What if Dark Side was dry, like Animals, the next album was dry, all throughout the seventies? I actually sort of prefer the drier albums by Pink Floyd, so I think it would have been good.
 
Unless, of course, he'd gone off the deep end and made the Final Cut, killing the band, noise, etc. I haven't really heard the album, but I have heard of it (both from others and sound clips), so I'll play that it's not fantastic. But was that the natural direction, or the curse of 80's prog?
 
Would Roger taking dictatorial control have been better for the band's output? Or would it have killed it sooner? Would Wish even have been created? Should this be a poll? Who's better, Pink Floyd or the Moody Blues? I'm listening...
 
Originally posted by toolis toolis wrote:

this is where we disagree... it was Roger's vision and only his... concepts such as Animals and The Wall were 99% his.. i'll admit though that PF's sound wouldn't be the same if it hadn't been the rest musicians, they wouldn't have sounded the same but i don't think it would have made that much of a difference...
 
What a load of clap trap PING!  There is NO debate, some of you need slapping with a wet mackrel!

Any real fan knows that Rick Wright was the backbone of the Pink Floyd sound in the 70s.
 

Originally posted by toolis toolis wrote:

with every respect, i think you are exadurating.. neither Mason nor Wright were brilliant musicians, they just had their own distinct sound that if it hadn't been, PF would sound merely different, not inferior..

 
You need to go and do your homework!  For a start Rick Wright was the only member of Pink Floyd who was classically trained. Look at the array of keyboards he played - Farfisa, Hammond, Leslie, Moog, Fender Rhodes, Hohner, Mellotron synthesizer, Roland, Kurzweil, baby and grand pianos to name but a few!  He also played trombone.
 
Originally posted by Chris Stacey Chris Stacey wrote:


Basically any of the great bands worked because of the combination of great personalities. Look at Zeppelin after Bonham died. I understand the importance of RW to the Floyd sound but he would not have succeeded without the brilliance genius of Rick Wright ( sadly underrated), the sophistication and sound of Gilmour, vocally and guitar wise, and the housekeeper and pacifier ( not to mention a unique drummer), Nick Mason.
 

 
This is one of the most sensible things that anyone has said in this thread (and particularly the bit I've emboldened).

 
 


Edited by Hippie - April 03 2007 at 18:29
You can't hear me, but I can you ...
For I heard you singing through the gloom
singing and singing, a merry air
lean out the window, golden hair
Back to Top
darksideof View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: February 22 2007
Location: Newark N.J.
Status: Offline
Points: 2318 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: April 02 2007 at 23:24
Originally posted by Finnforest Finnforest wrote:

I can't let this go on any further.  Waters was Pink Floyd.  Gilmour admitted as much in the Mason book when he said that Roger was the one who stayed all night, did the writing on the fly, got the job done, while he (Dave) and the others went home nice and early for a hot dinner and foot massage.  David is a talented guitarist and vocalist who gave great gifts to the sound, but make no mistake, Roger is the reason that the 70s Floyd albums are great, while the Gilmour "Floyd" albums are nice pop music schlock.  There is NO debate here.  Ole Rog was the man, while the boys played their parts as rock stars.  You take Waters out of the 70s albums and you'd have another 5 or so "Momentary Lapses" on your hands.  What a nightmare that would be.  

agreeee !!another prove? look at richard wright and dave albums from the 70's then you will know what finnforest is taking about. Pink Floyd would of being a totally disaster withour Roger.

Edited by darksideof - April 02 2007 at 23:27
http://darksideofcollages.blogspot.com/
http://www.metalmusicarchives.com/
https://www.facebook.com/pages/Darksideof-Collages/
Back to Top
Floydoid View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: April 02 2007
Location: Planet Prog
Status: Offline
Points: 1771 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: April 02 2007 at 07:26
Originally posted by Finnforest Finnforest wrote:

I can't let this go on any further.  Waters was Pink Floyd.  Gilmour admitted as much in the Mason book when he said that Roger was the one who stayed all night, did the writing on the fly, got the job done, while he (Dave) and the others went home nice and early for a hot dinner and foot massage.  David is a talented guitarist and vocalist who gave great gifts to the sound, but make no mistake, Roger is the reason that the 70s Floyd albums are great, while the Gilmour "Floyd" albums are nice pop music schlock.  There is NO debate here.  Ole Rog was the man, while the boys played their parts as rock stars.  You take Waters out of the 70s albums and you'd have another 5 or so "Momentary Lapses" on your hands.  What a nightmare that would be.  


I tend to agree up to a point.  The Floyd were a four-way partnership, two 'architects' in Roger & Nick, and two 'artists' in Dave and Rick.  I think they were driven by the tensions between them, and the leadership of Roger.  The great shame was when Rick was fired during the making of the Wall.  Both that album and the Final Cut could have been quite different had Rick still been contributing his talents.
Is it any wonder that the monkey's confused?
Back to Top
dedokras View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: December 04 2006
Location: Bulgaria
Status: Offline
Points: 635 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: April 02 2007 at 04:01
"Have you heard Broken China by Rick Wright? Perhaps along with ATD the two near perfect solo ' floyd' albums."
 
Absolutely agree with this statement!
 
"However, one can make a very strong argument that the Gilmour-led Floyd far out shone the Waters solo efforts."
 
I don't think so, IMO Amused... as well as Broken China were far better than Division and Momentary.
 
Regarding the possibility of a drier Dark Side, I think it actually was better Waters couldn't do it his way, because now as a result we have 4 different masterpieces in a row instead of 4 Animals albums (although Animals is my all time favourite album).
Back to Top
tdbark View Drop Down
Forum Groupie
Forum Groupie
Avatar

Joined: November 13 2006
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 81 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: March 31 2007 at 22:35
http://www.rollingstone.com/news/coverstory/the_madness_and_majesty_of_pink_floyd
This makes for a very interesting read.
 
The following applies directly to this discussion:
 
Waters and Gilmour had famously shown contempt for each other for a quarter-century -- each felt the other had tried to dishonor his life's work and hinder his future. After Waters started a solo career in 1984, he went on to disparage his former bandmates. Guitarist and singer Gilmour, he said, "doesn't have any ideas," and drummer Mason "can't play" (Waters had long before thrown keyboardist Wright out of the band). Gilmour gave as good as he got. When he took his version of the band on tour, he appropriated Waters' most famous prop, a gigantic pig balloon, and attached testicles to it, which some read as a commentary on how he viewed the band's former bassist. ("So they put balls on my pig," Waters said. "F**k them.")
 
Despite both triumphs and wounds, the band's members couldn't escape a certain bond -- not just a hatred for one another, but also a realization that without the community they once had, their music could never have mattered.
 
Waters, having set aside his higher education and any other ambitions, now made Pink Floyd his purpose. "He was the one," Gilmour told Barry Miles, "who had the courage to drive Syd out, because he realized that as long as Syd was in the band, they wouldn't keep it together, the chaos factor was too great. Roger always looked up to Syd and felt very guilty about the fact that he'd blown out his mate." Others, though, credited Gilmour -- now lead singer as well as lead guitarist -- with changing Pink Floyd's direction. In contrast to Barrett, Gilmour favored a more clearly structural and melodic approach. It was both this collaboration and competition between Waters and Gilmour that would largely drive Pink Floyd toward its triumphs, though it would also make for its troubles. In his early days in the band, Gilmour was already reacting to Waters' domineering manner, describing him as "a pushy sort of person."
 
There is more in the Magazine itself... The online exerpt ends about halfway through the article.  I read the entire article this morning and my impressions were that, as Waters took over the band, the musicality of the band suffered as Waters stripped the sound as much as possible, likewise Gilmour fought to keep the band musically interesting.  So the comparisons to Lennon and McCartney are very apt.  Gilmour is recognized as a great guitarist, musically sound and strong in arranging.  Waters writing voice carried the messages and his visual acuity strengthened  the band's live performances.  Without each other, they could not come close to the greatness they achieved as a "true group/partnership."  However, one can make a very strong argument that the Gilmour-led Floyd far out shone the Waters solo efforts.


Edited by tdbark - March 31 2007 at 22:38
Twenty men crossing a bridge into a village,
are twenty men
crossing twenty bridges
into twenty villages.

Wallace Stevens
Back to Top
Blacksword View Drop Down
Prog Reviewer
Prog Reviewer
Avatar

Joined: June 22 2004
Location: England
Status: Offline
Points: 16130 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: March 31 2007 at 06:46
Originally posted by The Whistler The Whistler wrote:

Originally posted by Blacksword Blacksword wrote:

Originally posted by Atavachron Atavachron wrote:

yes, or 'Another Brick.. Pt 2' ahh, but what wonderful shrieking "HOW CAN YOU HAVE ANY PUDDING IF YA DONT EAT YER MEAT?!"
STAND STILL LADDIE!!!!



 

You know what I hate about that song? Inside the opera, it's a great lil' plot advancer (even if I prefer both the other parts). But OUTSIDE the opera, it's just a "school-sucks" song. It looses all it's weight!


I thought it was, when it came out and I loved it for that reason! I was at school and it did suck!!


The song is highly relevant to the plot IMO, but Floyd were very shrewd, when they chose it to be the single for the album. It was bound to strike a chord with kids who had no idea about the 'plot' of the album. It became an anti school song for a whole generation. Genius!
Ultimately bored by endless ecstasy!
Back to Top
lightbulb_son View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member


Joined: March 20 2006
Location: United States
Status: Offline
Points: 965 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: March 30 2007 at 15:57
Originally posted by Atavachron Atavachron wrote:

   ^
Though that may be largely true, it's the same as saying John Lennon was the Beatles or Pete Townsend was the Who; though debatably accurate it ignores others' contributions that made the music distincly what it was.. and that's what a great band really is, that rare coming together of people who share a musical vision and are able to add to that vision in a way irreplacable by another.
 
Well said
When the world is sick
Can't no one be well
But I dreamt we were all
beautiful and strong

Back to Top
akin View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: February 06 2004
Location: Brazil
Status: Offline
Points: 976 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: March 30 2007 at 10:29
The "drier" albums, and coincidentally the ones which Waters play the major role as composer (and the others compose less and less, mainly Wright) are the ones I don't like. 
Back to Top
toolis View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: April 26 2006
Location: MacedoniaGreece
Status: Offline
Points: 1678 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: March 30 2007 at 08:56
Originally posted by Chris Stacey Chris Stacey wrote:

Originally posted by toolis toolis wrote:

Originally posted by A B Negative A B Negative wrote:


If "Roger Waters was Pink Floyd", why is his solo work less interesting than his work with Pink Floyd?

so were the works of the rest of PF.. this could also mean that the rest couldn't make a difference whether they were in PF or solo, so that indicates that Roger could be capable for being totally responsible for their masterpieces... another indication why your argument doesn't stand is that mostly every 70's prog monster either went pop or released much more inferior works, whether they still were together or went solo, in the 80's... so his less -for you anyway- good solo works can't tell us anything...

 

Come on brother/sister you are smoking something...........own up??? I can't believe you actually think you are making sense?


why not?
-music is like pornography...

sometimes amateurs turn us on, even more...



-sometimes you are the pigeon and sometimes you are the statue...
Back to Top
Chris S View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Honorary Collaborator

Joined: June 09 2004
Location: Front Range
Status: Offline
Points: 7028 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: March 30 2007 at 05:54
Originally posted by toolis toolis wrote:

Originally posted by A B Negative A B Negative wrote:


If "Roger Waters was Pink Floyd", why is his solo work less interesting than his work with Pink Floyd?



so were the works of the rest of PF.. this could also mean that the rest couldn't make a difference whether they were in PF or solo, so that indicates that Roger could be capable for being totally responsible for their masterpieces...
another indication why your argument doesn't stand is that mostly every 70's prog monster either went pop or released much more inferior works, whether they still were together or went solo, in the 80's... so his less -for you anyway- good solo works can't tell us anything...
 
Come on brother/sister you are smoking something...........own up??? I can't believe you actually think you are making sense?
<font color=Brown>Music - The Sound Librarian

...As I venture through the slipstream, between the viaducts in your dreams...[/COLOR]
Back to Top
Atavachron View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Honorary Collaborator

Joined: September 30 2006
Location: Pearland
Status: Offline
Points: 65440 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: March 30 2007 at 05:15
the point is that each member benefitted and was enhanced by every other member. With the loss of one piece of a magical combination, the whole is diminished.. not bad, just not as good, not the same. If you want to know what Pink Floyd may have been like without Gilmore, Wright and Mason just listen to RW solo.. good music, just not Pink Floyd. Same with the Beatles, Zep, and many other acts that broke apart.. and I admire Plant, Townsend, Daltry, George Harrison, everyone who went it alone after such a once-in-a-lifetime group experience.
Back to Top
toolis View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: April 26 2006
Location: MacedoniaGreece
Status: Offline
Points: 1678 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: March 30 2007 at 04:37
Originally posted by A B Negative A B Negative wrote:


If "Roger Waters was Pink Floyd", why is his solo work less interesting than his work with Pink Floyd?



so were the works of the rest of PF.. this could also mean that the rest couldn't make a difference whether they were in PF or solo, so that indicates that Roger could be capable for being totally responsible for their masterpieces...
another indication why your argument doesn't stand is that mostly every 70's prog monster either went pop or released much more inferior works, whether they still were together or went solo, in the 80's... so his less -for you anyway- good solo works can't tell us anything...

Edited by toolis - March 30 2007 at 04:39
-music is like pornography...

sometimes amateurs turn us on, even more...



-sometimes you are the pigeon and sometimes you are the statue...
Back to Top
The Whistler View Drop Down
Prog Reviewer
Prog Reviewer
Avatar

Joined: August 30 2006
Location: LA, CA
Status: Offline
Points: 7113 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: March 30 2007 at 02:40
Originally posted by Atavachron Atavachron wrote:

   ^
Though that may be largely true, it's the same as saying John Lennon was the Beatles or Pete Townsend was the Who; though debatably accurate it ignores others' contributions that made the music distincly what it was.. and that's what a great band really is, that rare coming together of people who share a musical vision and are able to add to that vision in a way irreplacable by another.
 
And, uh, one I. Anderson. I believe.
"There seem to be quite a large percentage of young American boys out there tonight. A long way from home, eh? Well so are we... Gotta stick together." -I. Anderson
Back to Top
The Whistler View Drop Down
Prog Reviewer
Prog Reviewer
Avatar

Joined: August 30 2006
Location: LA, CA
Status: Offline
Points: 7113 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: March 30 2007 at 02:39
Originally posted by Blacksword Blacksword wrote:

Originally posted by Atavachron Atavachron wrote:

yes, or 'Another Brick.. Pt 2'

ahh, but what wonderful shrieking "HOW CAN YOU HAVE ANY PUDDING IF YA DONT EAT YER MEAT?!"








STAND STILL LADDIE!!!!
 
You know what I hate about that song? Inside the opera, it's a great lil' plot advancer (even if I prefer both the other parts). But OUTSIDE the opera, it's just a "school-sucks" song. It looses all it's weight!
"There seem to be quite a large percentage of young American boys out there tonight. A long way from home, eh? Well so are we... Gotta stick together." -I. Anderson
Back to Top
Atavachron View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Honorary Collaborator

Joined: September 30 2006
Location: Pearland
Status: Offline
Points: 65440 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: March 30 2007 at 01:00
      ^









Edited by Atavachron - March 30 2007 at 01:02
Back to Top
Chris S View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Honorary Collaborator

Joined: June 09 2004
Location: Front Range
Status: Offline
Points: 7028 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: March 30 2007 at 00:37
Originally posted by Finnforest Finnforest wrote:

I can't let this go on any further.  Waters was Pink Floyd.  Gilmour admitted as much in the Mason book when he said that Roger was the one who stayed all night, did the writing on the fly, got the job done, while he (Dave) and the others went home nice and early for a hot dinner and foot massage.  David is a talented guitarist and vocalist who gave great gifts to the sound, but make no mistake, Roger is the reason that the 70s Floyd albums are great, while the Gilmour "Floyd" albums are nice pop music schlock.  There is NO debate here.  Ole Rog was the man, while the boys played their parts as rock stars.  You take Waters out of the 70s albums and you'd have another 5 or so "Momentary Lapses" on your hands.  What a nightmare that would be.  
 
Basically any of the great bands worked because of the combination of great personalities. Look at Zeppelin after Bonham died. I understand the importance of RW to the Floyd sound but he would not have succeeded without the brilliance genius of Rick Wright ( sadly underrated), the sophistication and sound of Gilmour, vocally and guitar wise, and the housekeeper and pacifier ( not to mention a unique drummer), Nick Mason.
 
Whilst the post Waters Floyd albums are differnt they are still frigging excellent and Waters has achieved one truly great masterpiece with ATD. I even love his other solos. Have you heard Broken China by Rick Wright? Perhaps along with ATD the two near perfect solo ' floyd' albums.
 
peaceSmile


Edited by Chris Stacey - March 30 2007 at 00:39
<font color=Brown>Music - The Sound Librarian

...As I venture through the slipstream, between the viaducts in your dreams...[/COLOR]
Back to Top
BroSpence View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: March 05 2007
Status: Offline
Points: 2614 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: March 29 2007 at 21:52
I like Roger.  WYWH and Animals are my two favorite Floyd albums (along with Piper... and AHM).  Dark Side to me is uninteresting.  Alan Parsons has a big enough ego to not mention a word on what he did in the engineering process.  Everything after Money just doesn't do it for me.  Animals has everything.  Great intro, great solo (Dogs), Great lyrics, great production.  Its fantastic.  .


Originally posted by febus febus wrote:

[QUOTE=russellk]I see Waters and Gilmour as similar to Lennon and McCartney. Each is less without the other; Gilmour and McCartney are too sugary, and Lennon and Waters are too salty. They needed each other to balance the group. Their best work was done when one kept the other in check.
 

i agree, but.........
There is a big difference between Gilmour And Paul MacCartney.The beatle was as much as responsible than Lennon as for the writing and direction of the music; it was 50/50.
Roger Waters always has the upper hand for the credits and music changes and took control of the band.


I don't know about that 50/50 bizz.  If you look at the White Album that has way more Paul than John.  It screams of Paul.  The band was falling apart.  Paul was being an ass, so he took charge of a lot of things and there's the White Album for you. 
Back to Top
febus View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Honorary Collaborator / In Memoriam

Joined: January 23 2007
Location: Orlando-Usa
Status: Offline
Points: 4312 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: March 29 2007 at 21:34
[QUOTE=russellk]I see Waters and Gilmour as similar to Lennon and McCartney. Each is less without the other; Gilmour and McCartney are too sugary, and Lennon and Waters are too salty. They needed each other to balance the group. Their best work was done when one kept the other in check.
 
 

i agree, but.........
There is a big difference between Gilmour And Paul MacCartney.The beatle was as much as responsible than Lennon as for the writing and direction of the music; it was 50/50.
Roger Waters always has the upper hand for the credits and music changes and took control of the band.


Edited by febus - March 29 2007 at 21:35
Back to Top
russellk View Drop Down
Prog Reviewer
Prog Reviewer
Avatar

Joined: February 28 2005
Location: New Zealand
Status: Offline
Points: 782 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: March 29 2007 at 19:41
I see Waters and Gilmour as similar to Lennon and McCartney. Each is less without the other; Gilmour and McCartney are too sugary, and Lennon and Waters are too salty. They needed each other to balance the group. Their best work was done when one kept the other in check.

I don't think there's much doubt that Waters/ Lennon were the 'geniuses' who took their respective groups to superstardom. However, I have no doubt at all that they would not have got there without their balancing partners.
Back to Top
chessman View Drop Down
Prog Reviewer
Prog Reviewer
Avatar

Joined: December 01 2004
Location: United Kingdom
Status: Offline
Points: 974 		Direct Link To This Post Posted: March 29 2007 at 17:38
More like Animals? God! I would hope not!
For me, Animals is one of the worst Floyd albums, lacking coherent melodies and concentrating on some very vitriolic, bile filled lyrics.
Dark Side is fine as it is, and I am glad Roger didn't get his way then.
Smile
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  123>

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down



This page was generated in 0.188 seconds.
Donate monthly and keep PA fast-loading and ad-free forever.