I could say "Rolling Stone is crap" and leave it at that: it's the cliche response. But I'll try to understand why Loder would love "TFC" and hate "+-HH".

Both Pros and Cons and Final Cut are highly emotional, humanist reactions to what could be perceived as inhumane situations. On an LP record, of which Loder has reviewed thousands, the first thing one notices is whose name is on it, right? Whether or not you can respond to a humanist statement depends a lot on how well you know the human in question. In the case of The Final Cut, Loder was responding to the power of the Pink Floyd image, and after an admittedly bewildering half decade-long barrage of The Wall, the last record with Waters (and you CAN hear that it is the last one with Roger even if you don't know that yet) will sound like a breath of fresh air. When Loder hints that not everyone need be present to capture this power, he is right. The unique character voice hinted at throughout the Wall project finally breaks free in Cut and there is a promise of something greater to come.

The universality of a record like Dark Side of the Moon (which, in my opinion, Alan Parsons gets FAR TOO MUCH credit for) extends into everything with that brand name on it, for better or worse. The same does not apply to work by individual members of that collective, though they may do well to capitalize on its immediate visual associations. What I'm trying to say is that solo albums always have the bar pre-set way too high. Loder must have been expecting something else.

__________________
what do you teach your children about me?
what do you teach your little children about me?
pimp, thug, bling drug lord of the undergrounded kings
how can you be so sure i won't call down the rain?
what do you teach your little children about me?
you point your gun, wait, hide and run. i see it plain