Pink Floyd Animals in 5.1 Speculation, Now Pricing & Shipping thread starting Page 248

Maybe the video was shot last year. Roger knew the release date, and figured a little publicity might help...

 

Yet another black mark against the guy. Arithmetic.

 

Inflatable pigs for Black Friday shopping!

 

2018-2021 So more than 3 years since this was ready to go

 

It was even on a website with a TBA next too it but then got removed it was really close at the time in 2018 before the bickering started again behind the scenes.

 

to make it really simple

E Street Band: Little Steven or Nils Lofgren "invent" a guitar solo on a Bruce session. They get paid for the session. 1 or 10 million copies sold, money is the same.

Genesis: Mike Rutheford invents a guitar solo on a song credited to Collins or Banks. He gets royalties because is a member of the band. More copies sold=more money. Of course he gets even more money on songs he writes or co-writes.

 

I make backups for safety, in case something happens to the physical collection.

 

Hopefully the long wait means that lessons have been learned in the manufacturing process with discs and Blu-Rays etc. - Floyd's track record of issues is ridiculous

 

In all fairness, who could have forseen a problem with putting discs loose in a box?

 

Going back to Roger's dig at David for the 'we did this' for the cash register noises on Money, I recall he also has made a similar dig at Nick regarding the flash cards given to roadies / doorman etc to get their recorded responses during Dark Side - Roger (paraphrasing) said I don't remember it being 'we' it was ME. I can't find the source now, but I'm sure it was video, not written down.

 

I described the Ramones situation specifically as "inaccurate" because, in that situation, it inarguably was (everyone involved agreed/admitted the songs were Dee Dee's).

You're saying what I said in scenarios 3 and 4 of my post; in such cases, yes, absolutely, songwriting credit makes sense.

Any specific piece of music Lennon and McCartney did in a "collaborative way" would, by definition, merit a joint writing credit and wouldn't (therefore) be what I was referring to. As for non-collaborative efforts, by calling it an "agreement" and bringing money into it, you admit the inaccuracy of the credit in order to justify it.

FYI, I say "travesty" in the sense that the information communicated by the songwriting credit is literally bogus; for example, Yesterday was written by Paul McCartney; the official credit is a widely acknowledged falsehood.

Sure, there are reasons why it is done (as I said in the case of the Ramones, they can be honorable); that's why it exists and why we (as listeners) can't take songwriting credits at face value.

 

Perfect. You've answered this question precisely how I was hoping someone would in order to better frame the songwriting conversation, since, there seems to be a lot of romanticizing around this process by fans who routinely confuse what they often view as meaningful contributions to a song and/or album with the altogether less romantic business and legal realities of the music industry.

A beautiful synth intro, whether two minutes or thirty minutes, could be considered as little more than wanking in a vacuum without the structural and melodic foundations of the song itself. Regardless of how gorgeous or transformative I, you, your wife, or your neighbor's mistress thinks that intro or solo might be, it's still considered accompaniment, and is still usually only given a performance royalty, IF that performer also happens to be a legal member of the band (which I don't believe Mick Taylor was, for instance).

The main point here... Regardless of the weight fans may often give a part, no one is entitled to a songwriting credit, and, bass lines, drumbeats, xylophone runs, etc., are usually accompaniment, unless the song itself didn't previously exist without it, correct?

 

Apologies if it has already come up, but do we think Acoustic Sounds might do an SACD?

 

I know, right? It was Gilmour who held up the release, apparently. The liner notes, so we're told, had already been signed off by the band. Apparently there was a change of mind. Besides, who without a heavy bias one way or another would call those notes "heavily biased"?!? They were written, after all, by a third party...... What in the notes is factually inaccurate, and since when did music fans not want to know such things?

 

Yeah, I'd like to know what's going to happen to my pre-order from 2 or 3 years ago.

 

A bit sloppy with the artwork. The railway lines at the far right of the shed don’t line up properly as they exit. Hipgnosis would never have been so slack!

 

I counter your maybe with a reality check. The SACD was advertised in print to be released in 2018.

 

Maybe he was high.

 

Pink Floyd Animals in 5.1

 

I'm befuddled by how some people are now taking Roger's words as the absolute truth when it isn't (see below). Although this is only peripherally related to Animals, it is a good lecture on subjective truths.

Exhibit A:

This is how Roger's original loop sounded (2:11 onwards).
Exhibit B:

Exhibit C: (emphasis added by me, for obvious reasons)

einestages: After the Beatles, you worked with Pink Floyd. What was your creative input as sound engineer for "Dark Side of the Moon"?

Parsons: For example, the ticking of the clock on "Time", the sounds of a cash register on "Money" were also down to me. For that, we also threw coins on the floor and tore up paper. I could say they were 50-pound notes, but we didn't want it to be that authentic.

Alan Parsons: Soundtüftler für Beatles und Pink Floyd

Imagine yourself engineering The Dark Side of the Moon with the same band members and crew, but in 2019. With all your experience, is there anything you would do differently? - Tatyana Casino

AP: "I think it could’ve been done in a quarter of the time [laughs]. Just compiling the effects loop and getting all of the rhythmic sounds for Money took all day. You literally had to measure, with a ruler, the length of tape between each effect. If you did that on Pro Tools now, it would take 10 minutes.

"Pink Floyd was always experimenting and pushing engineers and the studio to its limits. We knew it was their best work to date, but I don’t think anyone knew we’d still be talking about it all these years later."

Prog legend Alan Parsons tells all: Dark Side Of The Moon, working with The Beatles and the "abandoned" Pink Floyd album | Guitar World

AP: The original idea to do a loop was certainly not mine; the only contribution I made was to come up with the sound of the telephone exchange as one of the sounds. The loop was slightly different on "Eclipse." It was a seven-sound loop for a 7/4 time signature. The only way to ensure that it was perfectly in time was to physically measure the tape with a rule, so that we had seven, exactly timed pieces of tape cut to exactly the same length. That [decision] was made through bitter experience: we tried to do it just by ear, and it came out hopeless. The only way to do it was to measure it accurately.

Alan Parsons Interview

GM: “Money” had the now-famous cash register included in the song.

AP: We had to assemble a loop that worked, timing-wise, for all of those different sounds. The only way to keep it in time was to take a piece of tape with the sound on it and measure it with a ruler. You would take the exact length of tape and then splice the next exact length of tape onto it. We would make circular loop that was supported with microphone stands around the machine, and we would roll the tape, and that was what the band played to.

Spend time on 'The Dark Side of the Moon' with Alan Parsons

a lot of the effects on the album were designed with quad reproduction in mind - most notably, the introduction to "Money". The idea was that each part of the cash register would emanate from a different speaker. As a result, lots of time was spent recording each segment of the sound effect on discrete channels. Obviously, no one knew that quad systems would eventually fizzle, but I would say that thinking in quadraphonic terms probably made us more careful about how we recorded the effects.

Pink Floyd news :: Brain Damage - Alan Parsons - February 1993 - Guitar World

Somewhat confusingly though, Nick said this:

“Roger and I constructed the tape loop for ‘Money’ in our home studios. I had drilled holes in old pennies and then threaded them on to strings… Roger had recorded coins swirling around in the mixing bowl [wife] Judy used for her pottery, the tearing paper effect was created very simply in front of the microphone and [Abbey Road’s] faithful sound library provided the cash registers.”

But how would they get access to Abbey Road's sound library in their home studios? Either way you spin it, Roger is very likely being disingenuous / inaccurate, because what David said in that interview lines up almost 100% with what Alan Parsons has said in several interviews over the years. So Roger is basically taking the point that David does not acknowledge Roger's original idea and input into the loop and inflating it to a point where the others had no input whatsoever - which is demonstrably false.

Edit: Somebody on Twitter posted a scan of the original article. Guess what? Roger either quoted from a different edit of the interview or he deliberately left out the mention of Alan Parsons! Which sort of proves my point.

 

Thanks.

 

I might have added cold shafts of broken glass

 

Yeah, by the way I don't think that rule is set in stone.

Eg, there's this old Sting hit, "Shape of my heart", co-credited to Sting and Dominic Miller.

Just a guess, but it seems strange to me that Sting arranged a meeting with his sideman to write something. It's possible that he had the song but while recording the "Ten summoner's tales" record, Miller invented the "Shape of my heart" acoustic guitar riff and Sting thought it was fair to credit him. Heck, I bet Miller could afford to buy houses and cars thanks to the "Shape of my heart" royalties alone.

As for Pink Floyd and Animals, I wasn't in the studio (who of us was? ) but if that incredible Fender Rhodes piano intro to Sheep is a total Rick creation, then there's no reason why he shouldn't have gotten a co-credit.

It goes on for over 1 min and 30 seconds on a 10 min track, at least 10% of the royalties should've gone to Rick. Or just spit the track in two; Sheep - intro and Sheep whatever.

After all, Shine On part 9 is credited to Rick alone. Could've been the same for the Sheep intro too. Assuming it was a total creation of him.

What I know for sure is that playing is sublime, and while I love the old mix, I hope that if and when it'll be possible to listen to the remix, Rick's keys are more audible. He and his musicianship are missed.

 

My apologies, I had only ever heard that Roger was responsible for it. I find it rather striking how similar Roger's demo (of the cash register part) sounds to the finished product. So it seems that the process of constructing the cash register effect AND fitting it into the track was a collaborative effort between Roger, Nick and Alan Parsons. However, I still stand my my observation that Gilmour was not involved, and the "we" in his account is ever so slightly misleading, just apparently not as scandalous as Roger wants us to believe, though. It makes sense that Nick was involved in the effect - I have often heard that Nick and Roger were the "architects" of the group and Rick and David the "musicians", and part of being in the architect's guild was doing the sound effects.