Well yeah... did you expect them to release it in a plain white sleeve like the remixed OBC disc from TEY?
AND, they *didn't* couple TER as an exclusive with a much larger Division Bell reissue. So everyone could buy TER fairly cheap, but NOBODY had to buy it at all (and everyone could sample all of it on-line over the weeks following the release date). People who 'complain' that TER *shouldn't* have been it's own album ignore the fact that doing so made TER much MUCH easier for folks to buy (or not), however they wanted. I think TER is pretty spectacular - especially given its origins - and it really grew on me a lot over the first month I had it. I may not be to everyone's liking, but in all honesty - I like it a LOT better than The Wall, and I've already spun TER more times total, than I have The Wall (cumulatively speaking, going all the way back to when I first got a copy of The Wall back in about 1986 or so, my senior year in high school). I know TER isn't for everyone, but I really love it. Even the closing track has grown on me quite a bit, questionable lyrics and all.
Believe me, I get the irony of thinking it should have been included as a Division Bell bonus disc. (I never said it should be expensive, though...) Then again, I still ended up buying a deluxe version of TER when it was released--had to get the 5.1 mix, and hardcover book, and postcards. But it just doesn't hold up, to me, as a "Pink Floyd album". As a collection of outtakes from the Division Bell, it's perfectly fine. But even the song titles seem like they should be the names of works-in-progress, and not actual songs. (Talkin' Hawkin', On Noodle Street, etc.) I'm fairly well convinced the only reason they released and marketed it they way they did was the money. I'm sure it drummed up far more sales--and yes, money--marketed as a standalone "Pink Floyd album" than it otherwise would have had it been released in a box set. So they set about mostly having others stitch together snippets of old material to SEEM like a Pink Floyd album. Even the decision to have only one song with vocals seems like the minimal amount of work to legitimize the project as an album. For a practically all-instrumental Pink Floyd album, I think the disc 2 of the Devi/ation set works better. Julie Skaggs wrote a critical review of it, which I'm inclined to mostly agree with.
Were the music videos that MTV played for Dogs of War and On the Turning Away just lifted from Delicate Sound of Thunder? I can't remember.
While I am extremely looking forward to this box, there are some things that should have been included, indeed.
I believe Not quite : the original sessions were recorded on a decaying format, and the band decided around 2011-12 to transfer and preserve them otherwise the material would have been lost forever. The band had always intended to come back to the songs and finish them, and only got back to it after Rick's death. Sure, it would have been different if Rick was around to participate : David and Nick were, I think, somewhat on the fence about revisiting it until one of the team compiled a version from the original recordings, and they felt it appropriate to go back to, and finish the material. If it was just about money, DG would've got Nick to play drums on On An Island, and Rattle That Lock, knowing he could call it Pink Floyd, tour as long as he wanted in enormodomes, and hardly anyone would have been too bothered really. Or added lots more vocals to The Endless River.
Yes, Atlanta. It is easy to recognize because of the questionable clothing and the fact that Gilmour made a little mistake singing Dogs of war. He repetead one verse. Ps: I'm fine with Gilmour lyrics, but on AMLoR on the whole there are too many "ones"!!! One slip, one sound, one single sound, one world, one soul...
I agree, that's why I "only" purchased the regular vinyl edition. I love the album, but I view it, as you say, "as a collection of outtakes".
So, where's Pulse? Not a single preview I'm afraid the upgrade isn't up there, so they just don't want us to preview anything from it
Pulse has more shots of Rick and Nick apparently i'm sure we will see a clip from it before next week along with Venice
Transferring old material to something for preservation is fine, but it doesn't really hold water as a reason to then release it as a Pink Floyd album. And I have no problem with it having been released--my problem is really just with marketing it as a Pink Floyd album when the quality and their reduced involvement doesn't really support that idea. And of course David doesn't want to tour as Pink Floyd anymore, and that's fine. I just don't think it's incompatible that he doesn't want to fire up the Floyd machine for his new material and touring, but that with a little massaging by a producer they could sell the Division Bell outtakes as a genuine Pink Floyd album rather than include it as a bonus in a box set.
There are private screenings across the UK of DSOT, tomorrow which could be on IMAX. We will find out from people who are going from here later tomorrow & they can give us reviews on DSOT.
Probably mentioned elsewhere, but where is the Live 8 performance? Would be a perfect fit, unless they are saving that for something else...I know there is rehearsal footage that exists.
On the back cover of the Highlights release, they put David, Nick, and Richard's names prominently (and in the same size typeface) directly underneath the name Pink Floyd All chronological music box sets tell a story. This is one about those three guys, not Roger Waters. He is not part of Pink Floyd (1987) Ltd., ergo his performance with them doesn't warrant inclusion in this collection. It seems ludicrous on its face, but there you go... I doubt he wanted to appear in this box set anyhow!
Copyright release slipped into HMV stores unannounced..I missed one but was told by my local they could order me one in from elsewhere on the day it came out..and got a call a week later saying no joy ..gutted as they go for a small fortune