New Roger Waters album "Is This The Life We Really Want?" - June 2, 2017

Great review.

 

I love both this album and The Endless River.

 

The 24bit 48hz digital download sounds sweet. I didn't compare it to the other versions but I can clearly hear the vocals, which others have mentined were low in the mix.

 

Good evening all.

Came across another couple of very nice reviews today on websites called "echoes and dust" and "sonic abuse". Both very well written, especially the latter. Links below for anyone interested:

Roger Waters - Is This The Life We Really Want?

Roger Waters - 'Is This The Life That We Really Want?' Album Review | SonicAbuse

Enjoy.

 

Here's Wilson saying basically what I have been saying since the beginning regarding:

Steven Wilson: Roger Waters Is Arguably the Worst Musician in Pink Floyd, Yet He's Behind Most of Their Groundbreaking Music

 

Funny because during an interview for this tour Roger claimed to be the best.

 

Source?

 

Pink Floyd's Roger Waters: ‘Dave Gilmour and I will never be mates’ - interview

“The music is hugely important to me,” he says. “It may sound daft to say, but over the years I maybe haven’t taken quite enough credit for it. I think the idea that Rick [Wright, keyboard player] and David particularly tried to sell me in the band, when I was a young man, was that I was a bit of a headmaster but I shouldn’t bother myself with music because I wasn’t musical. It’s absolute crap. I’m twice the musician either of those guys ever were. I just am. I’ve got it. It’s in me.”

What an egotistical wanker.

 

As much as I like his new album I really cannot warm to Waters the person, and cannot remotely summon up the enthusiasm to get tickets for the UK leg of his tour. If he’s twice the musician that Gilmour is why does he have to lip sync?

 

Why does this quote bother you so much? Did you ever read a Lou Reed interview? I usually don't take promotional interviews to seriously.

 

I don't care about Lou read interviews and no point in comparing apples and oranges.
The quote doesn't have to bother me (and it doesn't) for me to see/expose the delusion and egocentricity in the statement.
You asked for the quote and I provided it.

 

147 pages, not bad. With only a few forays into the personal!

 

I always got the idea that Roger was great for ideas and lyrics and the concept and as much as I love the new album dear old Roger does come across like a complete **** saying that.

Gilmour has a much better sense of melody and as far as having a command over musical instruments there is no contest, DG lacks with lyrics and none of his and Polly's get close to RW's talent here though Rog is gulity of some ripe moments even in this department "que se ra se ra is that your new Ferrri car thanks but I think I'll wait for the F50".

DG & Rick just when on form and I think in the Waterless PF that is few and far between deliver and probably although I prefer both ATD & ITTLWRW as a whole, High Hopes is the best outright song produced by any PF related release.

Thought I feel personally Waters has released more consistently compelling material, I just don't as whole think the post Waters PF material is that amazing with some exceptions being the obvious one I have mentioned above.

Though Roger's assertion he was the best musician in Pink Floyd is frankly laughable considering David's mastery of the guitar and more than competently being to play other instruments including the one that dear old Rog is most recognised for within in PF.

I've fallen down alongside either side over the years and of recent have found myself jumping to Waters defense but that comment does make me think that he is still same old egotistical wanker (as @rontoon puts it) and the Live 8 scenario was just a slight thawing for a period of time that has now gone back to Rog having sour grapes due to the Gilmour being advertised as the voice and sound of Pink Floyd.

Pink Floyd in it's truest essense is all four members or 3 or 2 coming together like they did right up to Animals and with some exceptions, songs without that combination just don't compare.

You only have to hear what has been put out since then to know that.

 

Thanks for just only passing on the information from an interview from last spring from the telegraph. You have an amazing memory.

 

I think Roger’s interpretation of what is a musician (mastery of melody and arrangement) rather than Gilmour’s (technical ability to express emotion through the instrument) is where his statement came from.

I dunno - I’ve never seen anywhere that he’s disparaged Wright and Gilmour’s ability to play their instruments, but he certainly considers himself as having a better grasp on the making of music.

 

Neither have I, though I've seen him compliment their skills on several occasions. The reverse isn't true, though, with Wright calling Waters tone deaf and saying that he had to tune his bass, while Gilmour went even further and said that he'd played the parts. For all his bluster, Roger seems rather insecure and I think it's criticisms like these that he's responding to and, even after so much time, that still get under his skin.

But this has all probably been covered in the innumerable Waters vs. Gilmour threads. I think "Is This..." is a good piece of work that I keep revisiting. The songs sounded great live. He did all right here.

 

We are veering off topic, but my interpretation of this is that Waters’ moved more towards rhythm guitar in the studio after Dark Side, and the luxury of overdubbing meant that he didn’t have to play bass (just because he didn’t want to, rather than because he lacked the ability), so while I don’t doubt Gilmour’s claim (he’s said he (Gilmour) was the bassist on about a third of their recordings), I’d wager on a good number of those, Roger was playing rhythm guitar.

 

I remembered it because this quote lead to a discussion about it at the time. It's old news but in context with PDK's link to Steven Wilson's quote (and opinon) on the matter.

 

It's really funny that Wilson says Roger Waters was the worst musician in Pink Floyd. I think they all had their own style and contributions. Other than Gilmore none of them did much session work.

 

True, although Mason was a regular guest musician on Michael Mantler albums and concerts, and also produced a range of very different artists (Steve Hillage and The Damned (!) among them).

 

For Roger to say he was twice the musician is a bit of a stretch. As a band they all had good contributions, they were more than the sum of their parts. I recently saw Roger's show and it was great. The music was good and competently played. What it lacked was the sound of a true master of his or her instrument, but had great songwriting and ideas. I also saw the Gilmour Concert at the theater, and Wow what Guitar Playing by Gilmour !! That was a excellent example of somebody who is a true master of the Guitar, he is much more than just a competent Guitar Player. It is that type of playing that Roger's band lacks. What Gilmour's show lacked, at least for his solo works, was Rogers ability to write songs. From a "Playing A Musical Instrument" perspective, Roger is not in near the same league as David Gilmour, David is not in the same league as Roger when it comes to song writing. They both lack each other.

 

Telling.......

 

Wilson has a perspective as musician and producer combination. His words are not that jarring or unusual in some circles.

Knowledge and skill can inhibit the emotional ambitions of music making to some musicians.

It's unfortunate for some of our opinions here that the majority of music listeners are not musicians and it is the emotional resonance that often is the aspect of music that blows listeners away. Verses dexterity, compositional complexity, and also.... the sonic technical aspects that this community in particular are turned on by.

blah blah..... blah blah bla blah

 

When you approach music from pure imagination and depend on others to have the skills to make it happen.... it must be cool.

Limitations aren't a consideration.

One thing we all have in common.... every earthly music lover.... we can all imagine our ultimate song at that moment.

The genius TO ME is recruiting the support to make it reality.... or a close facsimile therof.

Now imagine you can't recruit... and you have to figure it all out on your own.... and eventually you acquire the skills and dexterity...

Do you think it might cloud your imagination?

Earlier in this thread I wondered why Roger's palette had not broadened... He uses the same chords and progressions....

Maybe he is smarter than we ever imagined.

Or maybe some of us get it.

Then again.... I am retarded. So there is that....

Regardless the question we must define is what defines a musician to squash the stupid conflicts here.

What defines a great musician/music?

If we can't agree on a consensus in an argument it's a waste of time.

Also, does the method we get to greatness define a qualified musician?

Does achievement by any means to musicality versus dexterity to achieve... trump the other?

I say no. The ends ambition to it's intended results is the only gauge.

Someone take me to AA now?