Roger Waters - Dark Side of the Moon Redux 2023 - Progressive Rock Music Forum

DSoTM was the last Pink Floyd album that wrote the songs by all members of Floyd(others less and others more) and the best one for me. So I think he shouldn't have re-recorded it...

https://antonisadelfidis.bandcamp.com/album/zantea-chronicles-the-nightmare-awakens

moshkito wrote:

Hi,

Have not heard it yet, but I have a couple thoughts on it.

Some of that material that he redid, is really good, and Mike EnRegalia posted one example and there are a couple of others. It is a bit more "updated" so it isn't so "dated", although I doubt many of us will sit and listen to Ronald Reagan and take it seriously enough. The actor was not known to be ... anything ... but an actor.

The scary thing is so many of us playing the "purist" and thinking that the original can not be improved, and we have seen many versions of Beatles tunes that were just as "good" if not better than the original, at least, they did not sound so out of time and place.

This is the scariest part of "progressive music" and our thoughts about it ... so when someone takes a different step to show something, we think that person is out of it, or this or that. The fact that some of these are being "redone" (or were) is nice, and takes them out of a specific time and place and gives us a different look at the piece of music.

It's just scary that we do not accept when the music is actually being more progressive, for its new/different interpretation, which I tend to think is a bit on the weird side of our ideas. We may not agree with the this or that, or RW's political views, but we ignore that those views helped put together DSOTM, Animals. WYWH and TW.

It's like we, as "progressive" are into an IMAGE of something that is not there ... a graven image of some sort ... and the way everyone is reacting to it all, is scary and strange for me. Why can't the artist, redo his own piece differently and us taking our ideas off the pier into the raging ocean?

Nonsense. It's simply a hubristic ego trip for a pompous 80 year-old who lost his singing voice years ago. There's is nothing "progressive" about it. What, did Roger get tired of cashing in on his never ending The Wall tours he's been on for a couple decades, and needs a new more reliable funding source? Oh, and none of the Beatles wasted time on re-doing Sgt. Peppers or Abbey Road in their entirety. They moved on.

People doing covers of The Beatles honors the band, they are not meant to eradicate the past, as Waters has with songs like "Have a Cigar" which Roy Harper sang so brilliantly. Roger never forgave Roy for being able to sing the song better than he could.

...a vigorous circular motion hitherto unknown to the people of this area, but destined
to take the place of the mud shark in your mythology...

Meh, pass . . .

Welcome to the middle of the film.

Total Crap! Thumbs Down

Dark side of the billionaire corporate rock star.

I must confess, remakes have never been a bother to me personally, but when it comes to TDSOTM I find myself treading a unique path. Money it's the one track that's never managed to win me over entirely and with this flat and monotonous essence, I can't help but wonder if it's perhaps not suitable for a low vocal performance. It seems to be filled with messages rather than the ethereal magic of music that resonates within the whole TDSOFM or at least the sonic concept. But I won't be too quick to judge. There's a curious twist awaiting as we consider how "Money" may fit into the grand tapestry of the album. As we wait for the rest of the pieces to fall into place, could it be that its purpose becomes more apparent? After all, artistic expression knows no boundaries (and the creative genius of Roger Waters certainly possesses the right to rewrite his own material as he sees fit) and who are we to challenge the vision of a mastermind?

hergest ridge wrote:

Personally, I like this reinterpretation of Money.

I'm curious to hear an adaptation of this classic that we all know... and I can't wait.

He composed it with the others, it's his right.

After 50 years, I find it interesting to hear a reinterpretation by one of the members of the band at the time.

I have no problems with Money's rework, however I hope he doesn't do the same for the rest of the album the same way (same sonics)

On some launching video, there is a bit of Breathe, and it doesn't sound all that different of the new version Money.

In that case (the whole album being that way), I'm out.

let's just stay above the moral melee
prefer the sink to the gutter
keep our sand-castle virtues
content to be a doer
as well as a thinker,
prefer lifting our pen
rather than un-sheath our sword

It's fine to re-do rock albums, it's fine for RW to remake DSOTM, but that doesn't mean we can't criticize the reasons he's doing it, criticize the music, criticize the very idea of remakes, or be skeptical of the end product. The way some people defend this redux, you'd think you're not allowed to criticize any album.

Everyone has the right to express their critiques and I've had the opportunity to experience both Roger Waters live performances and Pink Floyd without Waters. Personally, I find Roger Waters' take on the old Pink Floyd material to be more captivating and creatively reimagined, whereas David Gilmour's versions often seem somewhat flat in comparison, sticking with the albums versions. Waters consistently surprises me with new and unexpected elements in his performances, whereas with Gilmour, I can anticipate how he'll interpret Pink Floyd's music. I'll reserve my final judgment until I hear the entire "redux" album, but as of now, I have a strong preference for the original version of Money.

Edited by barbera - July 27 2023 at 16:36

Will never be as good as the original, but that's a given. Could be decent if you don't mind his politics, and he doesn't larp as Leonard Cohen for the whole thing. This choice of track does seem ironic, though...