What do you guys think of "The Final Cut"

suitkees wrote: Now, I may overinterpret some of the considerations above, but I cannot follow this discussion or reasoning of "what ifs"... The Final Cut is an album published under the name of Pink Floyd. But whatever... If it was under the name of Roger Waters or even Britney Spears, it doesn't change a bit of the music that is on that album (though Britney Spears fans might be surprised if it was issued under her name...). Personally, I like TFC. It's not their best, but still very enjoyable. And yes, it announces (or continues, if you prefer) the direction Roger Waters went into. Fine with me. It is what it is; it's maybe not what you would have wanted it to be, but well, you're not Pink Floyd (or Roger Waters, or Britney Spears...).

Being released as a Waters solo album certainly would have made a difference in that it's overwhelming dour presence, without a balance of quality from the other Floyd members, would have been expected of this Waters dominated fiasco. Perhaps it would have been better as a Britney Spears album as the expectations would have been even lower and she would have put out a better album than she usually does.




Edited by SteveG - March 27 2021 at 19:08

SteveG wrote: suitkees wrote: Now, I may overinterpret some of the considerations above, but I cannot follow this discussion or reasoning of "what ifs"... The Final Cut is an album published under the name of Pink Floyd. But whatever... If it was under the name of Roger Waters or even Britney Spears, it doesn't change a bit of the music that is on that album (though Britney Spears fans might be surprised if it was issued under her name...). Personally, I like TFC. It's not their best, but still very enjoyable. And yes, it announces (or continues, if you prefer) the direction Roger Waters went into. Fine with me. It is what it is; it's maybe not what you would have wanted it to be, but well, you're not Pink Floyd (or Roger Waters, or Britney Spears...). Being released as a Waters solo album certainly would have made a difference in that it's overwhelming dour presence, without a balance of quality from the other Floyd members, would have been expected of this Waters dominated fiasco. Perhaps it would have been better as a Britney Spears album as the expectations would have been even lower and she would have put out a better album than she usually does.

suitkees wrote: SteveG wrote: suitkees wrote: Now, I may overinterpret some of the considerations above, but I cannot follow this discussion or reasoning of "what ifs"... The Final Cut is an album published under the name of Pink Floyd. But whatever... If it was under the name of Roger Waters or even Britney Spears, it doesn't change a bit of the music that is on that album (though Britney Spears fans might be surprised if it was issued under her name...). Personally, I like TFC. It's not their best, but still very enjoyable. And yes, it announces (or continues, if you prefer) the direction Roger Waters went into. Fine with me. It is what it is; it's maybe not what you would have wanted it to be, but well, you're not Pink Floyd (or Roger Waters, or Britney Spears...). Being released as a Waters solo album certainly would have made a difference in that it's overwhelming dour presence, without a balance of quality from the other Floyd members, would have been expected of this Waters dominated fiasco. Perhaps it would have been better as a Britney Spears album as the expectations would have been even lower and she would have put out a better album than she usually does. Haha, yes... Pardon me the Spears anachronism, but you actually underline my point that judgments of this album often seem to be based on the expectations (the perhapses, what-ifs and woulds...) someone has/had rather than on the albums' music itself. Which maybe raises the question if it is always possible to disconnect one's expectations from one's appreciation (critique/judgment) of music? Over time that is probably easier than on the moment of an albums' release itself...

Again, I disagree. What you are referring to is an expectation of some style or sound. And I agree that artists have every right to evlove or change in that respect. What I'm referring to is an expectation in the album's quality of music, which naturally is greater for an Pink Floyd album than it is for any of it's solo members. Instinctively, fans (the intelligent ones) know that Floyd was a sum of it's creative parts, so the expectations for a Waters solo would have been lower. A good solo album would probably be considered as great also. And a passible Floyd album would be viewed as a failure, as many feel about the TFC, as evidenced by this thread's many negative posts.

Edited by SteveG - March 28 2021 at 09:05

The Dark Elf wrote: I won't listen to it anymore. It is Pink Floyd's In Through the Out Door...or maybe that was Zeppelin's Final Cut.

To me, it doesn't say anything which wasn't already, and better, said in The Wall.

Edited by Lewian - March 29 2021 at 06:04

Psychedelic Paul wrote: I've always regarded The Final Cut as a Roger Waters solo album anyway, and either way, I still rate the album higher than The Piper at the Gates of Dawn and Ummagumma.

yes, we know. I'm sure that you rate it high than Animals too.

Edited by SteveG - March 29 2021 at 06:22

SteveG wrote: Psychedelic Paul wrote: I've always regarded The Final Cut as a Roger Waters solo album anyway, and either way, I still rate the album higher than The Piper at the Gates of Dawn and Ummagumma.  yes, we know. I'm sure that you rate it high than Animals too.

ooof! TFC and Union, a double whammy.

Edited by SteveG - March 29 2021 at 10:11

dr wu23 wrote: SteveG wrote: Psychedelic Paul wrote: I've always regarded The Final Cut as a Roger Waters solo album anyway, and either way, I still rate the album higher than The Piper at the Gates of Dawn and Ummagumma.  yes, we know. I'm sure that you rate it high than Animals too. Well...anything Paul rates low is certainly worth buying and one should avoid anything he rates high.