Nick Mason: "I think the problem is Roger doesn’t really respect David"

When I get off the train and into my car I will definitely make sure the brakes are working before I get up to speed. Hopefully being interviewed by the police last night will have convinced him that following through would lead to his immediate incarceration for the rest of his life. Though, given how pleasant his wife is, that may not be a deterrent

 

We have to have some holiday traditions!

 

Nine hitmen hitting
Eight guns ablazing
Seven silencers silencing . . .

 

As a teen in the 80s, being not quite 17 when Momentary came out, I was firmly in the Gilmour camp. Mainly because it meant I got to see the band live!

But the years have gone by and I find myself much more on Waters' view.

Not all the way though. Gilmour is a great guitar player, he created his own sound. It's so massively duplicated because he was so significant.

But you gotta have the tunes. Floyd is different than Elvis, Sinatra, Vanilla Fudge or Joe Cocker. Just not that kind of act. For the band that they were, for the musicians that they were, for the success that they achieved, they needed a visionary. And that was Waters.

As a teenager it was an easy miss pour moi. Like RFreeman mentioned above, the performers don't necessarily require the writer. Watching Floyd in 1988 and then again in 1994 it was easy to not miss Waters. I wished he was there, but most of the tunes performed those nights had featured Dave's vocals originally and of course we had his guitar.

 

That's sad to hear that Roger McGuinn doesn't respect David Crosby.

I've been hoping for a Byrds reunion.

 

I don't give a **** about if either Roger or Dave think the other's a tool with nothing to say,
The ultimate arbiters of who was bigger/more important are the fans. They spoke by supporting the 2 Roger-less albums and tours in coliseum filling droves and by not supporting the Roger to the same degree. Game, set, match.

 

If Roger's enormous world conquering tours of the past 18 years are not "to the same degree" as PF's post Roger jaunts I'm a monkey's uncle

 

This is a good point. I’m firmly in nobody’s camp, to be clear.
The thing about Roger’s recent tours (much like the late 80s/90s Floyd tours) is the emphasis on Pink Floyd. Roger starting using the Pink Floyd name prominently in the promotions for the DSOTM tour. The Wall needs no introduction, and the Us and Them tour again uses PF in the promos.
Pink Floyd still sells out stadiums worldwide. Roger Waters or David Gilmour play smaller venues.

 

Did anybody know their names, except for the hardest-hardcore fans, back in the 80s? They were relatively anonymous (by design)

 

To sell more unreasonnable priced tickets of his current act on tour.

 

You can currently buy a ticket for $57.50 for the Chicago Theatre show. Not too unreasonable.

 

I wonder whatever happened to Syd.

 

Ticket prices for Montreal ranged from $83 (in the pit) to $500Cad (on the floor). Floor section seems to be mostly reserved for VIP packages (4 different ones).

This ain’t a PF concert. Just saw Steven Wilson at the same venue, 12th row on the floor for $78 cad.

You are lucky if Chicago didn’t go for this VIP packages non sense.

 

They do and I'm in the first row.

 

On the way to one of the gigs they were forced to detour around some road works, got a flat tire, ran out of gas and had to pay for a tow and they forgot they hadn't picked Syd up and so he missed the gig.

 

And now he's at the great gig in the sky.

 

Good for you!

Will wait for the Bluray...

 

I'm ok with different people liking different aspects of Floyd enough to fall in either camp. Yes, I'm very strongly in the Dave camp -- but separately, I also think Roger is probably a horse's @rse to work with (especially when he thinks you're working 'for' him). But that doesn't mean each one has their strengths and weaknesses.

I strongly prefer Dave, because I value the music (compositions, musicality, soloing-technique, and all the rest) far over lyrics. But others can certainly have a different value proposition. As a result, Dave's solo stuff (and Floyd 2.0, or 3.0 depending on how you're counting) is either brilliant (or at least great) -- or else incredibly boring (to team-Roger fans). And likewise, Roger's solo stuff (and The Final Cut, and arguably 70% of The Wall) is either equally brilliant/great -- or else equally incredibly boring (to team-Dave fans).

Just because I'm firmly in Dave's camp, doesn't mean that I don't recognize that there's plenty of people in Roger's camp.

That said, I still think Roger probably DID become insufferable to work with ('for') after Animals -- which is an opinion I hold separately from my personal preference between the two music-wise.

PS: And I also realize some folks like BOTH camps -- though that position does perplex me personally a little big (I'll admit).

 

Unwatch Thread!

 

I used to be pro-Dave and anti-Waters but I'm leaning a little towards Waters these days. He's basically admitted that he got it wrong and he's apologised. Gilmour seems to be the one dragging the feud out when they should be having a last hurrah tour. I think they owe the fans whether Dave can be arsed or not. Wright's absence is no biggie IMO and I don't mean to be harsh but Gilmour & Waters are the essential components.

 

David and Roger were both reasonably well known by name in the 80s. David had a popular FM radio track from his first solo album in the late 70s, and did a successful tour for his second solo album About Face in '84.

Roger was equally well-known around that time, in part because he had just put out his first solo album The Pros And Cons Of Hitchhiking (which featured Eric Clapton on guitar).

 

The Beatles?

 

Oh yeah! And I wouldn't mind hearing "Nile Song" either

 

How can we miss any of them if they won't go away?