Momentary Lapse of Reason

I think Dogs of War is very bad. The singing doesn't do Dave justice and the overall feel seems like it's TRYING to be like "the wall", without doing so!

IMHO.

__________________
Its Youuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuu uuuuuuuuu!

Oh, and i just dwlded some of this album (i know, NOT the way to hear it)i need to "analyze" it and we'll talk more!

__________________
Its Youuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuu uuuuuuuuu!

Actually, I think Dogs of War is the best song on the Album. But once again I must say that I do not consider this album to be Floyd. A good album indeed, but definetely not Floyd.

I find it ironic that so many fans of this album hate the Final Cut, when that was so musically superior. Go figure.

__________________
stchrissie is not me.

I guess i'm the opposite (like you NNJ), i tend to like "The Final Cut", musically, while i'm sure i won't like "Momentary Lapse of Reason" as much, though, i'm sure i'll like some of it.

__________________
Its Youuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuu uuuuuuuuu!

If this album had been recorded by David, Nick and Richard under any name other than Pink Floyd I could accept it as OK. It does, after all, show what an awesome guitarist Mr Gilmour is.

However, it also shows who the genius behind FLoyd was. This collection of songs does not have the depth or emotion of real Floyd albums or of Roger Waters' solo works.

So you'd prefer that there wasn't Pink Floyd currently right? At least not in name.

I'm just wondering if i'm interpreting you correctly.

__________________
Its Youuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuu uuuuuuuuu!

I would prefer it if they had not used the Pink Floyd brand name.

I have the albums, but only because I want to keep the collection complete but rarely listen to them. I have refused to see them perform live since Roger Waters left the band.

If the other members had the nerve to trade under another name, I would be more comfortable with their work.

I know the argument that they kept the name after Syd left. But, Roger Waters was Mr Floyd - a massive creative talent - and it was all somewhat less commercial then.

Actually I don't feel that they did have the right to keep the name after Syd left, but they did, so what else you gonna call them. This is new incarnation though was much more like a divorce, and when Dave and the boys should have been calling themselves the ex- Mrs. Floyd

__________________
stchrissie is not me.

I understand - but, the other members were Pink Floyd as well - you can't ignore them.

And i think it can be seen that Roger Waters has, in many, accomplished what he meant to do after "The Final Cut": He left the other members with the decision of abandoning the whole thing or keeping it going - and if they kept it going, then he figured most wouldn't think it "Pink Floyd", and even he himself wouldn't recognize it....because he wasn't in it.


If Roger Waters was Pink Floyd, then why isn't Pink Floyd Roger Waters?


---------------------------------------------

The Above represents me trying to bring up interesting arguments and make everyone think.

It in no way implicitly represents my views as i am more or less neutral in it.

Actually i've had enough with names! I love the music! So floyd on!


--Charade I Am--
patrick

__________________
Its Youuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuu uuuuuuuuu!

I disagree.
I didn't find any of the floyd spirit in "Amused to Death", as much as you guys might have not felt it on the Division bell or MLOR.
There were better bassists and writers than waters when syd founded the group, and roger wasn't such an important figure at the begining. Only after Syd going nuts it was waters who took charge and brought Gilmour, which were already a very good guitarist, while waters still was in the the process of bringing himself to the proper level of skill. Indeed, he was already a better composer and bassist than before, and took leadership in a great way, but Pink floyd was/is a group of people, and not just one man.Weither It's syd,roger or David, It doesn't matter. The name stays and the spirit of team work should stay like it was in the good old days if we want pink floyd to Produce more fine albums, even if they don't match to the level of DSOTM or WYWH.

PS
I know MLOR is counted more as a Gilmour album, but i guess he had to do a counter-album to what waters had done before.
as we see on the following album(although I still don't have it, I have Pulse), the direction of team work is back on the line.
too bad they need atleast 7 more years to release another studio album.
I guess the muse is not with them for a while

__________________
Emily Tries ,But Misunderstands,
But the Sun Is Eclipsed By the Moon!
So Shine On!

Amused to Death is up there with the best Floyd albums.

Amused to Death, not Floyd, but certainly better than the Division Bell.

__________________
stchrissie is not me.

I don't have the division bell, so I can't make that comparison, but amused to Death was a Great Dissapointment for me, so I don't say The Gilmour era Albums are better/equal to the waters era albums or to any waters solo album.
I'm just saying that I'd rather listen to high hopes or to the first 5 tracks of MLOR than to amused to death. I guess The music counts a lot for me when it comes to pink floyd. The one I heard on ATD just wasn't what I expected from roger.

__________________
Emily Tries ,But Misunderstands,
But the Sun Is Eclipsed By the Moon!
So Shine On!

I've been reading threads in this forum... and all I can see is people complaining how pink floyd isn't what it used to be and after the breakup the albums aren't PF albums.

I think you're just biased (the ones who made the claims mentioned above, not generalizing...).

The first PF album I ever heard was Pulse, I was totaly blown away and then I gradualy bought all their albums. What I've noticed is that at first I preferd the performances on Pulse, I thought they flowed more and sounded more "mature". I didn't like the older original versions, like today I still prefer the DSOTM performance on Pulse rather than the orginal album. But, later on as I listened more to the other albums I found that some things sounded better in the original recording and some sounded better in later performances.

What I'm trying to say is that some people (the ones mentioned above) are used to what PF were when waters was around, which is o.k. cause I think the songs were more meaningful back then, but can't let go and won't accept the new PF.

But as I see it, there is no new PF!
Waters may have been a great song writer, but gilmour was the musical director and the "pink floyd sound" is the "david gilmour sound", in that aspect I think PF has remained the same and even improved.
Sure I find more meaning when I hear The Wall or Animals, but I can pop in the TDB anytime, kick back and listen to great music with awesome guitar playing that compose a flowing album. TDB just has this special feel to it...

So to sum it up, musically speaking, and I think I can distance myself enough to be an unbiased critic, PF never changed and perhaps even improved. Yes, when I hear older material I think "damn that is so right!!" (the lyrics that is), but you can never remove the smile of my face and the good feeling I get when I hear TDB.

Ok, I'm done, you may flame me now :smile:

__________________
You are only comming through in waves