I dont know though. Everybody says that it was bassically a Roger Waters solo album, but i honestly dont think that's the case. I mean, Rick didnt contribute to much because he was kicked out of the band, but certainly David Gimour did contribute a lot. I mean, several of the songs had some killer David Golmour solos, and he even sang on "Not Now John". I mean, Roger certainly was the leader of the project, but i dont think his taking over was enough to really make not Pink Floyd. That's at least the way i see it.

main complaint is that it's depressing... 

don't know if it's "supposed to" 

I've also seen many calling Roger's vocal performance as whinny. 

Exactly I agree. I mean, I still like the post Waters material, but it doesn't even come close to the stuff they put out when Waters was in the band. I will say though, the later versions of the album and the one that is up on Spotify do include "When The Tigers Broke Free". 

I dont see the album as whiny, i see it as sad, very sad, but in a good way. "The Final Cut" touches me emotionally much more than any other album ever has. Whenever i hear "The Gunners Dream", I get goose bumps because the music is so deeply sad. I see "The Final Cut" as effectively turning the anger from "The Wall" and "Animals" into sadness. I dont see him as whining, i see him a mourning.

All kidding aside I actually don't think it's that bad. Not one of PF's best but still decent enough imo. It was actually the first album I bought by them. 

Well the mayonase thing is gross but i agree with what your saying. I think that it is a great album, a pure gem, but i think it is really sad and depressing, which i think is the big reason people are put off by it.

Sorry, not a fan. I've tried on multiple occasions to give it yet another chance to woo me. But the woo is more like

"Woo...I  think I might hurl !"

Not Now John is the only listenable track for me. Probably the only LP I don't regret getting rid of, although I still have the CD.

True but that's what you get from Mr Waters, he's such a barrel full of laughs!! But really, many of their albums are depressing.

What? Bruh, "In Through The Out Door" is a great album too. 

I would've commented, but I've already been there and done that on SteveG's thread on the same topic.

 

http://www.progarchives.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=125328&PN=1" rel="nofollow - http://www.progarchives.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=125328&PN=1

Love both, but disagree

The Wall's storyline is easily understood (further helped by the movie a couple of years later), while TFC's needs a fair amount of concentration.

In other words, I got TW almost immediately, but TFC took a fair while (the "grower" album par excellence) and even the return to piano & organ was surprising (after TW's synth fest), at the time were synths were invading even guitar power trios like Rush.

The TFC videoclips film helped understand where Roger was getting at, but even then, it was not a cinch.

A bit the problem of all these Waters solo album concept: maybe too self-centered, as if he (Roger) expected us to be in his head.

You'd have to try to imagine what the TFC album would've sounded like with Rick Wright still in band.

After all, Wright was a piano & organ dude before being a synth player.

It's another facet to Pink Floyd. We'd Syd and Rick's collab on Piper, the four some on most of the rest with Water Setting the Controls for the Heart of the band roughly from Animals to The Final Cut. Then the DG led version. One has to adjust the mind set rather than get bogged down in media influence.

I think TFC is excellent with links to The Wall in terms of the orchestrations and moving the war context from the Second War to that of the Malvinas. Er, Falklands. His point is that nothing changes with the doing and dying. DG contributed guitar with some as usual fine solos. Not the first and only time Floyd have used collaborators from outside. (Piper was a collaboration on the inside than out).

Thematically it's more oriented to Bring The Boys Back Home than Comfortably Numb which may have wrong footed some. Including me, it took ages to get into this album. It's austere and intellectual and has to be understood and accepted on those terms not something for most rock fans, even proving a challenge for the creme de la creme of rock audiences - the prog rock crowd. It is precise on it's locations and themes which does make it a period piece unlike the universal themes of Dark Side.

As for depressing, well who listens to PF for jolly japes? It is not mysterious and Waters does most of the work a listener might do, ensuring nothing is open to interpretation. There is no real cathartic element to it unlike most Floyd albums and the emotional impact is very distant.

It stiffed in the US, a mere 3 million sold. Possibly one or two since.

I wonder how it would be if Waters toured The Final Cut as he did The Wall....

Here's the gist of it:

I hated the Final cut when it came out. It was a massive disappointment after the Wall, which was an incredible album. It just seemed ...... boring. Played it a few times then gave up.

Fast forward a few decades - last year I really fancied hearing it again, so I bought a CD and played it a lot on my commute. Finally, it clicked for me, and I now see it as a very interesting album. In fact I probably rank it as my 5th fave Floyd album.

Progishness wrote: That for me is the one downside to TFC, suffering from what I call 'lack of Rick' - as did The Wall to an extent.  For me, Rick's lush keyboards are an integral part of the Floydian sound... but as we all know, Roger was taking totalitarian control, and DG and NM seemed to be just going through the motions when making TFC.  I still love it though as it is all part of the Floydian heritage.

.

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...).

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...

I know it sounds Crazy but Sometimes, a Piece of Me wonders what Oops!... I Did It Again would sound like performed by Roger Waters. 

It's rather telling that many here say the inclusion of "When the Tigers Broke Free" is the best song on the album, when the song itself was part of The Wall project and was rejected for that album because it was "too personal" by the other band members. Of course, it ended up in the movie as a conveyance to further the plot, but as a composition it fits in the Waters solo album The Final Cut. Richard Wright is gone, with David Gilmour and Nick Mason acting as union-scale musicians, adding parts but divorced from the whole.

Floyd at its best was when Gilmour and Water played off one another (great examples would be "Dogs",  and "Comfortably Numb"), but there is really none of that here. The continual half-speaking/singing of Waters becomes overwhelming and unlistenable. Gilmour's only real inclusion on "Not Now John" approximates that Floydish feeling, but it's ironic that Gilmour keeps repeating "F*ck all that, we got to get on with these", as if punctuating the vacuum and the coming divorce. 

There is nothing great about this album. There is no great Floyd song here: no "Time", no "Echoes", no "Wish You Were Here", no "Shine On You Crazy Diamond", no "Dogs" or "Comfortably Numb".  There is only the unrelenting whine of Waters, speak-singing through an entire album.

Same here....btw I have an original first US press if anyone wants to pay me good monety for it?

SteveG wrote: It would have been great if it was released as a Roger Waters solo album. But alas, it was not.

Does that make a difference regarding whether you (or anybody) likes it or not? (Edit: Sorry, I reacted to this reading it on p.1, that point has in the meantime been discussed... anyway, I always try to listen to it without being affected by expectations coming from the name stuck on it.)

Personally, by the way, I find it... interesting... it has some potential, it's surely not a boring or derivative album and I can find new things on it that I enjoy, however I am very rarely in the mood to listen to it. I know other albums with pessimistic lyrics or dark mood music that don't usually make me feel bad, but The Final Cut tends to do that.  Probably it's too much of these vocals that are whiney indeed.

I would love to see Roger Waters cover Oops! I Did It Again, only if he promised to make a music video wearing a hot red leather jumpsuit and lead the choreographed dancers. That would make my day and put an unusual exclamation point onto his long career. Might even be better than the Waters/Geesin "Our Song."

Yes, you already know that because I said the same thing on your thread on the same subject, although Pigs (on the Wing) might fly before I'd rate The Final Cut higher than the classic Animals album. 

Wow I missed a lot over the weekend. I should have really kept a better eye on my OWN thread lol! Anyways, I think using Yes' Union was a good example. It was less of a band effort, more or less a large effort. Lots of session players, lots of people who werent in the band working on this. However, like Yes' Union, i found that it gave it a different feel, something unique to all of the other Pink Floyd albums, something you wouldnt want for every album, but something that is interesting for this one album. I like both The Final Cut and Union too.

Well...anything Paul rates low is certainly worth buying and one should avoid anything he rates high.

You already own most of the classic British prog albums I've rated highly. 

I don't see it that way at all. Roger was the bass player and lyricist for the band and provided the concepts for the albums. David was the guitarist and shared the vocals with Roger. Both shared the musical credits for the songs while after WYWH Rick Wright retreated as a song writer. I don't see why one band member is placed above another on the basis that he writes the lyrics. The way a band should work is as a democracy.

While I agree with your assessment of the roles in PF, not all bands are democracies, nor can they always be. Sometimes there are some members that are fine just being a player and nothing more. Or are simply unable to contribute as a composer or lyricist. Other times, the group is simply the vessel of one person's vision, like the Mothers of Invention.

But I like the music. At this point, Waters had perfected the sonic dynamics that exemplified Floyd in that era. Effortlessly switching from loud to soft. Also, it contains one of the absolute gems (hidden or not) within the Floyd catalog: The Gunner's Dream. Not saying it's the best song in their library, but there isn't one better IMO. I even did a video on it: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MVhN841G4PE&t=2s&ab_channel=TheRock%26RollSoapBox

I understand why many don't like it. It's depressing. It's dated. It's closer to a Waters solo album than a true PF album.  But it's vastly superior to either of the three post-Waters PF efforts and better than anything that came out before DSOTM (Meddle and AHM about the same as TFC).  

Mostly because I loved Pros and Cons and still do. I rank it higher than any PF album other than the DSOTM / WYWH / Animals / Wall group. 

I liked it a lot then and, at the time, I didn't really care much that it was less of a true PF album then the others. I liked the tunes. I liked the somber atmosphere. I like how it made me feel. 

So, here I am, listening to it, The Gunner's Dream is on, wondering if I might tear up right when Roger sings. "and as the teardrops rise to meet the comfort of the band". Sax solo. Wow. Old friend. Let's not go another 30 years.

It is fantastic when you spin an album you haven’t listened to in years, and wonder beforehand whether it is still what it was then, and as enjoyable, and you discover that it is, and, even more, get new stuff out of it. 

I DON'T! (even think about it ... )

After spending money on the album and sitting down and hearing it, I realized it was a mistake ... it should have never been considered a PF album ... and even though a song or two were played in a few stations, in some ways ... I didn't like THE WALL Part 69 that was not included in the original, and one or two more songs added to make it like it was the band. It wasn't!

Hi,

Some of the stuff that was in that album was actually a part of the original WALL which had about 15 minutes taken out ... presumably to make sure that all of it could fit into 2 albums!

If you take the story material from that album, you will find that they fit into the story of the original ... and Roger never really explained that, and I do not think he will ... he knows that the story got screwed up, but he's not going to say that the record company told them they had to make sure it fit 2 albums!

There is just too much ... hidden that we can not see!

"When the Tigers Broke Free" was part of The Wall session and was part of the movie. It ended up on The Final Cut, but contextually it makes for more sense in the movie than on that later album. 

On the other hand, I never got the love for Amused to Death, while I thought Is This the Life We Really Want to be the best Floyd-related album since The Wall. I guess on all these counts I'm in the minority.

Floyd's greatest album. Its excellent from start to finish 

Not on all counts. I agree with Is This The Life...? being the best Floyd-related album since The Wall. 👍🏻

That surprises me that you don't like Waters' last album; I thought you'd have loved it.

On the other hand, I can't even listen to Rattle That Lock. That one was a massive disapointment to me, especially after On an Island was so excellent. I figured Floyd's members didn't have anything left in the tank, until I was greatly surprised by Waters' album. I just didn't expect such a brilliant return to form from Waters. I'm hoping for another album from him and Radiohead producer Nigel Godrich.

That was actually my impression when the singles came out prior to the album - first Deja Vu, and then Smell the Roses. They sounded lifeless to me, and I wasn't even going to bother listening to the album, but after being out for a month or two, I figured it'd give it a quick listen. And I was really surprised by how good it was. I think Waters made a mistake - Picture That should have been the first single released. The video for The Last Refugee is quite moving, so that should've been the second single.

Dellinger wrote: As far as Rattle that Lock... all of those songs are beautiful and enjoyable as far as I'm concerned, while many other albums by any of them might have a greater amount of songs that I don't care about. As far as On an Island, I do consider, in theory, that it's a better album... as a whole, not as a collection of songs, but many of those songs don't stand so well by themselves, and the album is a bit too mellow, so you must be in a mood to appreciate it.

What I love about On an Island are those first two songs, The Blue and the title track. Those are so good, that it hardly matters to me that the rest isn't up to that level. (As for the rest, I really only listen to Smile and Where We Start from time to time.) I guess I've set my standards much lower, because if there's one or two great songs, then I'm happy  (But that Waters album holds up as a complete album experience, which is why I rate it so high.) 

I'll try again with Rattle That Lock, but I've just not been able to like it. Everything about it is so un-Floyd like, from the tunes to the production. I guess that was his intention. (I really dislike the production.) I actually prefer the new song he released last year. Did you hear it, by the way? It's almost a cross between the two albums:

The Final Cut is a very good album.  Its dark, without any light, its depressing but tells the story that Waters wanted to tell.  The production is stellar, and I really like the sparse orchestrations.  Its definitely related to The Wall, but it doesn't have those great rock songs.  An acquired taste for some, but I always liked it very much.  It is step below the best of PF but it definitely works for me. 

The album for me that is overrated is Amused to Death.  Again, Waters had a lot to say, but by that time, the Waters formula was wearing thin on me.  The Ballad of Bill Hubbard gets me every time and What God Wants Part 3 is the best track here.  But its the reusing of the same idea multiple times that drags this album down a bit for me.  And I'm in the camp that really likes Waters last album.  His best solo in my book.

I prefer The Division Bell when it comes to late Floyd though. 

What TFC really misses is some Richard Wright, otherwise it would have been a great Floyd album.

But if you start from Southampton Dock until the title track, that's a true Pink Floyd epic.

 

Yup, and The Wall also suffers to an extent from what I term 'lack of Rick' - his keyboards have always been an integral part of the classic Floydian sound, probably as much so as DG's guitar (not to mention the Waters-Mason rhythm section underpinning everything).

It's clear that they were more than the sum of the parts. Years ago I went to a gig of Australian Pink Floyd and they opened it with "Learning To Fly". At the end of the song a friend and I had the same reaction: better than the studio version or any live version played by the true Pink Floyd!

The reason? The bassist played it as Waters would have probably done if he were in the band. 

Same for another cover band: Pink Floyd Legend playing The Final Cut (the whole album) with a Wright-oriented keyboardist. I'm sure that even The Pros and Cons of Hitch-Hiking would have sounded much better with Gilmour, Mason and Wright onboard.