In the Flesh DVD Jon Carin

Watching the In the Flesh DVD with the behind the scenes footage brought many smiles to my face. It appears Roger had a ton on fun on the tour and that Andy Fairweather Low is hillarious. I cracked up during the game of cards. After studying very many interviews,etc. (hobby) I see Roger Waters as someone who is very very sensitive and doesn't let things go. Cross him once and good luck getting back on his side. Is he the only person out there like that? I believe not. After watching In the Flesh on DVD I would pay twice as much money to see Roger & co. perform before seeing that other band. In fact I am a big Dave Gilmour fan. But should McCartney and Starr make a Beatles album today? NOOOOOOO! why should Gilmour have made those two "floyd albums" I like some of the music from the two albums but true floyd imo was all four of them collaborating. Also, after hearing Dogs I really think that Jon Carin's voice is 10x better than Gilmour's. And this Doyle Bramhall II is a fantastic guitar player. This is my opinion on the downfall of Pink Floyd.
1.4 stuck up brits having to spend too much time together
2.Gilmour's lust for money Mason's too.
3.Roger feeling he can't relate to the others because of their lust.
4.Mason and Wright become lazy as a result of a creative meltdown.
5.Gilmour wanting his name in the spotlight after failed solo projects.

The fact is that Gilmour and Waters complement each other in ways the two of them will never figure out. I think some of the best Floyd work was done with a Waters, Wright collaboration as well. Isn't it funny that Gilmour never agreed with Waters but was also responsible for booting Wright( and wanting Mason out) of the band? I see Gilmour as a greedy greedy man and Roger despised him for it on account of Roger's socialist political beliefs. Roger's fault was not being open minded enough to see the errs in his colleagues ways. My dream is one day to see Roger and David on stage one more time. All they have to do just like David sang is "talk". ROger is getting up there in age what is going to happen if he dies, are they not going to show up for the funeral? It's been 20 years time to grow up.


What exactly is a joke?

nicely done

I didn't know Gilmour and Mason had a lust for money.

I believe the three of them (Gilmour, Mason, and Waters) have said money is something they work towards, but who doesn't? They want money, so what?

Well, *I* would want money. Not as an ultimate end, but I would DEFINITELY want money. To not have any worries about being able to fund your children's education, or how you will take care of your parents in their old age...that IS nice.

And I admit I'd want some "toys" too...mainly some very nice musical instruments, and maybe a boat (if I can ever get the time to learn how to sail).

There is nothing wrong with money as long as you don't spend your time flaunting it in other people's faces. There is nothing wrong with quiet enjoyment of what you have earned.

Regardless of what you think of the Floydians in comparison to each other, I certainly think Mr. Gilmour has been FAR quieter about it than many famous people! :smile:

Buddy, what are you smokin? Jon Carin's voice? Gilmour greedy? Okay......

BTW, regarding Doyle Bramhall II, it's one thing to mimic David's guitar parts, another to write them in the first place.

Glad to see the responses to my view. To backtrack if Gilmour wasn't so greedy then why didn't he just make David Gilmour albums or start another band. He knew he would make more money with the name Pink Floyd. There is nothing wrong with lust for money but in Roger Waters' eyes there is and I think anyone who has listened to him or know anything about Socialism agree with what I am saying. Use your intellect. And the comment about Jon Carin was my opinion. In In the Flesh version of Dogs I prefer Carin's vocal style over Gilmour's in THAT one instance. I just think if Keith Richards left the Rolling Stones and Mick Jagger went on using the name Rolling Stones without him I would be pissed. So why are some of you not pissed about what Gilmour has done. I mean at least Page and Plant don't travel around calling themselves Led Zeppelin. And if you want to use the what about Syd instance please note the Floyd weren't very popular outside of London around then so they had the chance to build up a name. The fact remains Gilmour knew he could make alot more money using the name Pink Floyd and I never have discredited his input into the music but I think it was a greedy thing to do and so does Waters in my opinion.


So we went for a spin in the country to feel the wind in our hair.

as far as why gilmour didn't make a new band or solo album and decided to use the pink floyd name i would have to say how do you know he only did it to rake in money? were you there? i mean there is always that chance but you don't know.

There is still 3/5's of the original band.

David has no reason to call those albums David Gilmour albums, 3/4's of the classic lineup is present. It was Roger's decision not to be a part of the band, his loss. Yes, Roger was the major creative force in the band, but that doesn't make him Pink Floyd. Look at Deep Purple, all the classic lineup is together, with one exception - Ritchie Blackmore, but he wasn't a key member was he? (That's sarcasm.) Does that mean they should change their name? I guess Black Sabbath should have when Ozzy left...or Bad Company when Paul Rodgers left...or King Crimson...or Iron Maiden...or Van Halen....or (fill in the blank). Pink Floyd was not a one man band.

And for the record, everyone in Floyd (including Nick Mason) has more than enough money, and did long before the unfortunate breakup and subsequent reformation of Floyd. And I believe it was David, not Roger who donated his $6 millon house to charity (correct me if I'm wrong). If Roger wants to be a Socialist, let him go live in Sweden and give 80% of his income to the government. That's his business. If he wants to leave Floyd and write lame solo albums, that's his business as well. Leave the other blokes in Floyd alone. You seem to forget it was he that broke up one of the greatest patnerships in rock history. If you want someone to blame, blame him. Don't question David's motives as an artist.

Glimour explained his motives himself. He said "why should I let something that I have poored most of my life into die just because Roger didn't want to do it anymore".

I would have done the same as him personally.

i'm going to have to disagree with what a perfect lusk said about king crimson. it was pretty much a one man band. robert fripp pretty much does everything except playing the instruments. if robert fripp didn't want to do king crimson anymore. there would be no king crimson.

Thank you for the quote, Driven. You have proven something that I have "sensed" from a long time in the music, but never been able to show anything concrete to back it up. There is a passion in the man's playing. More than any of the other Floydians, I think it is the STAGE he loves, the live performance--not necessarily COMPOSITION like Mr. Wright or coming up with concepts like Mr. Waters--but the sharing of music. The act of playing is its own end. I think he enjoys making that connection, to actually see and feel it happen. I think that's why even after PF may be over, he continues to perform in small venues.

He genuinly LOVES what he does. How many of us can say that about OUR jobs? Some, certainly...but I would be surprised if EVERYONE here could.