I've gained new respect for Roger Waters...

Discussion in 'Music Corner' started by Apollo C. Vermouth, Mar 15, 2015.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Tristero

    Tristero In possession of the future tense

    Location:
    MI
    Sure, there's no question that Roger got out hand by the end to the detriment of the band's chemistry, but sometimes the most talented artists with strong leadership skills tend toward megalomania, particularly when millions of dollars are at stake. It would be nice if these people were all reasonable, good blokes, but that's rarely the case from what I've seen. Pink Floyd had a great run overall and functioned pretty well as a unit throughout the late 60s and early 70s, so I'm happy for what we got and can overlook the bitter back and forth in the 80s easily enough at this point.
     
    GodShifter, Zeki and Oliver like this.
  2. dennis the menace

    dennis the menace Forum Veteran

    Location:
    Montréal
    And that voice. It fits in so perfectly with this song an his accoustic guitar. This and "There's no way out of here" from his first ST album.
     
    Larry Mc likes this.
  3. ammoj2

    ammoj2 Forum Resident

    Location:
    Ontario
    Gilmour didn't write the music by himself in those three songs. Listen to his demo of Comfortably Numb. It's almost nothing like what the song became after Waters' input. Run Like Hell was a bit closer to the final version but still not quite the song we all know. Young Lust we don't really know about since only the band demos of it exist. Clearly it also changed quite a bit from its inception.
     
    bRETT likes this.
  4. yescool2002

    yescool2002 Forum Resident

    Location:
    Miami
    Does he?
     
  5. rockledge

    rockledge Forum Resident

    Location:
    right here
    I think he does. What I have seen of footage of him performing he seems far more confident with singing and he seems to do it naturally now.
    On PF stuff his vocal parts always sounded very strained as if he was trying too hard to get it right.
     
  6. GodShifter

    GodShifter Forum Member

    Location:
    Dallas, TX, USA
    :rolleyes:
     
  7. rockledge

    rockledge Forum Resident

    Location:
    right here
    That he didn't write lyrics doesn't mean he couldn't.
    He certainly did a great job on the solo stuff.
    From what I have read between the lines in interviews, he seems to not enjoy writing lyrics nearly as much as the music. And again, PF is about sound. DG seemed to always be the one in PF who experimented with sound.
     
  8. rockledge

    rockledge Forum Resident

    Location:
    right here
    Roger Waters never really was "hip", nor was the rest of PF except when Syd Barret was the pretty boy pop idol.
    PF always had the appearance of being the band that was anti-hip, the band that it was hip to like because they weren't.
    Hippies that were closet nerds.....
     
  9. Larry Mc

    Larry Mc Forum Dude

    Here's a live version of "Murder"

     
  10. yescool2002

    yescool2002 Forum Resident

    Location:
    Miami
    Unaltered?
     
  11. rockledge

    rockledge Forum Resident

    Location:
    right here
    Technology being what it is, you never know for sure. But he certainly seemed to have more voice control and a nicer sounding voice.
    He is also far more charismatic now, I think. What I have seen of him in footage makes me wish he did music that appeals me.
     
  12. yescool2002

    yescool2002 Forum Resident

    Location:
    Miami
    Not sure if he uses auto tuning live, but what he uses is a lot of pre-recorded stuff. There are lots of bootleg videos out there with audio recorded off the monitor feeds and there is so much pre recorded stuff that you never know if he is actually singing live. Check this out...youtu.be/-8Bx705jKLo?t=2980
     
    Last edited: Jul 29, 2015
  13. Okay, then let's flip this thing on its ear then. "Pink Floyd" is a brand name, I think we can all agree. It certainly was by 1981.

    Let's say that it was David Gilmour who quit the band in 1983, and Waters, Wright and Mason carried on with Eric Clapton on guitar (after all Clapton was looking for a band again, and he record and toured with Waters for The Pros and Cons of Hitchhiking).

    Now, are we saying that under the name Pink Floyd, that an all-star lineup with Waters, Clapton, Wright and Mason wouldn't have had the same impact, if not greater with Clapton aboard and/or that Clapton could not have, at the very least, mimicked Gilmour's style to the music? I'm not saying that both guitarists are one and the same. I'm merely pointing out that it is doubtful that Clapton would have laid an egg. Verily, I'm sure diehard Floyd fans of the time would come out in droves to see the Clapton legend on stage with "Pink Floyd" (the name brand that wasn't afforded Roger when he split the band). The Clapton fans, alone, would add to the multitude.

    Now Gilmour is a great vocalist. You're right; he contributed much to the sound...even to the point where Waters felt that some of his sole compositions were best suited for David's voice. Also, note, however, that Wright's voice came in a close second to defining the Pink Floyd vocal sound. His harmonies with Gilmour were top-flight. Retaining Wright, in the magical scenario, would surely add a continuity to the vocals.

    So, just think on it a minute. I propose that a Waters lead Floyd would have been just as successful...maybe even more so.
     
    Last edited: Jul 29, 2015
  14. Sytze

    Sytze Senior Member

    It baffles me that you keep presenting that as fact. You are entitled of course to favor the music/sound over the lyrics, but there are lots of fans - myself included - who think lyrics are an integral part of PF. Both music and lyrics are important. And if you couldn't care less about lyrics, fine. Matter of taste.
     
  15. motionoftheocean

    motionoftheocean Senior Member

    Location:
    Circus Maximus
    I submit that they'd have been more successful...and I love Gilmour, much prefer his voice to that of Waters, etc. But Pink Floyd reached its heights as Roger Waters' backing band and the songwriting was never the same once he split. Gilmour has never been able to write (lyrics) consistently at a level even approximating Waters.

    That said, there's no way in hell a Waters/Mason/Wright band would have lasted more than about 6 weeks so it's all just micturating in the wind
     
    SuntoryTime likes this.
  16. rockledge

    rockledge Forum Resident

    Location:
    right here

    I think they very possibly could have stayed popular and had impact, but to say that is a crap shoot.
    But no matter what happened, without DG they would not have been the same band. His guitar style and vocals are the two main recognizable features of Pink Floyd.
    Claptons approach to creativity is far different than DGs. The kind of music Clapton has done is not even similar.
    The thing is, there is simply nobody similar to David Gilmour in style and creativity. With the possible exception of Steve Wilson, who had a very similar approach to music as DG and Rick Wright in the Porc Tree stuff before 2000.
    Pink Floyd carried on after the unfortunate circumstances of Mr Barrett and changed their sound very drastically and became the epitome of an experimental psychedelic band. And their music was mostly based on sound experimentation. Their PA, the experimentation with plasma light shows, and their tossing away the owners manuals to studio gear and using it in ways it was not intended in order to get interesting sound.
    They were ALL involved in that. But the most recognizable sound that came from that is indeed DGs guitar sound and his vocals.
    Roger Waters bass style is very simple and his vocals during that time were somewhat non distinct.

    When he quit the band, the band went on and still kept that sound and that experimental psychedelic approach to the music.
    Pink Floyd, regardless of what means they employed to achieve it, still sounded like Pink Floyd.
    Nothing Roger Waters has done solo, including The Final Cut, has even a vague resemblance to Pink Floyd.
    The major factor in Pink Floyd still sounding like Pink Floyd is obviously David Gilmour. The guys solo albums very identifiably sound like Pink Floyd. The Orb album that he worked on has very much a Pink Floyd sound to it.
    I understand that there are those who the music itself means little too and who apparently could be just as happy reading the lyrics.
    And I get that.
    But I, like what I conjecture to be like most PF fans, listen to them for the sound. The music.
    And that sound is something that is very much dominated by David Gilmour.

    Take his guitar work out of Another Brick In The Wall or Hey You and any resemblance to PF is gone.

    A RW lead PF might have been successful too, who knows. But it sure wouldn't have been the same band. The sound would have been gone.

    Final Cut, which is not really a PF album, is the most panned of all PF albums and his solo work really hasn't exactly made a huge splash in the ocean of music. And none of it sounds even remotely like Pink Floyd.

    An anology: Mick Jagger solo albums sound nothing like the Stones. Keith Richard albums very much have a Stones groove and sound very similar to Stones albums.
    Who writes the lyrics is really not the defining factor in how either band sounds.
     
  17. Zeki

    Zeki Forum Resident

    "This may be art rock's crowning masterpiece..." Kurt Loder, Rolling Stone Magazine album review

    http://www.rollingstone.com/music/albumreviews/the-final-cut-19830414

    It appears it received mixed reviews. This, of course, is one that rates it highly. I understand, though, that generally you are correct. (Personally, I was unaware of any of the professional critic's reviews at the time, and thought it was brilliant).
     
  18. Khamakhazee

    Khamakhazee Forum Resident

    Location:
    Canada
    I'm pleased that they were able to be amicable afterwords even if it meant they would never work together on new material or tour again. David Gilmour did guest for Roger Waters and played Comfortably Numb which was awesome as well as Live 8.
     
  19. Paul W

    Paul W Senior Member

    No there is no difference between being anti-Semitic and an anti-Zionist. There have been Jews in Israel for thousands of years, so it is natural that Jews see that country as their national homeland and as the legitimate focus for Jewish national self-determination. It is based on biblical and historical ties as well as religious traditions and beliefs linking the people to the land of Israel. So if you say that you are anti-Zionist, then you are saying that these links and religious traditions and beliefs are invalid, which makes you anti-Semitic.

    It would be no different than saying that you have nothing against Christians, but believe that Jesus was a fraud and not believers' saviour.
     
  20. bopdd

    bopdd Senior Member

    Location:
    Portland, OR
    Anti-hip or not in terms of personal stance, there was quite a long stretch of time where Pink Floyd was a "hip" band and frankly they're still a hip band compared to many of their peers.
     
    Last edited: Jul 30, 2015
    Zeki likes this.
  21. bopdd

    bopdd Senior Member

    Location:
    Portland, OR
    Not that I really disagree with anything you're saying, but I should mention that making an album on the heels of bad investments or financial losses is practically a cliche in and of itself in the music industry and pertains to plenty of well-known bands like the Stones, not to mention individual artists like Van Morrison (who publicly talks about making music as a "job" and needing to compensate for getting screwed financially), but it doesn't necessarily equate to somehow compromising the music itself for the sake of selling more records. In other words, there's a difference between "needing money" and "selling out" and just because Pink Floyd could use money it doesn't somehow amount to Waters diluting the artistry for the sake of a sale. For a band like Pink Floyd, The Wall could even be perceived as a tremendous risk.
     
    Last edited: Jul 30, 2015
    Zeki, Billy Infinity and RockAddict like this.
  22. Jack White

    Jack White Senior Member

    Location:
    Canada
    Whenever I have seen Rogers being interviewed I've always been impressed by his intelligence, good nature and charm, and I agree with the opening post that that is not phony. However, I gather in different settings he can be somewhat different and difficult.
     
    SuntoryTime, Billy Infinity and bopdd like this.
  23. bopdd

    bopdd Senior Member

    Location:
    Portland, OR
    Your sentiment regarding Pink Floyd is so consistently misguided (in my opinion) that it's hard to consider you a fan. It's like you want to pick and choose certain parts of their music and then form some other band in your mind, and your subsequent analysis of "Pink Floyd" is strictly based on the utterly subjective mixtape of random snippets that exists solely for you. There is no doubt to me that Pink Floyd without Roger Waters would be absolutely nothing as far as their legacy or success goes. He was their primary songwriter for crying out loud and quite possibly hovering over the soundboard long after the remaining members had called it a day. That's not to mention the fact that Gilmour and Wright developed what you consider their signature sound over time and rest assured Waters was there every step of the way saying what did and didn't work.
     
  24. Rfreeman

    Rfreeman Senior Member

    Location:
    Lawrenceville, NJ
    Hard to imagine that scenario of a Waters Wright Mason PF when Waters had forced Wright out of the band and declined to use Mason on some tracks on TFC.

    Part of the reason he was dispensible was his inability to work with the others as well as they could work with each other. That and his dull bass playing. He could have worked as a Robert Hunter sort of figure for folks who like words that complain about things.
     
    GodShifter likes this.
  25. rockledge

    rockledge Forum Resident

    Location:
    right here
    Nice try, but your perception skills are lacking.
    My point of view is that PF put out some good stuff during EVERY period of their existence, as opposed to those who think because this member or that member left they suddenly sucked.
    I think your imagination is very vivid, next time you read my posts try to focus better.
    You seem to be the one picking and choosing.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page

molar-endocrine