[QUOTE=Kage;15131620]Pink Floyd is worthless without Roger Waters, so the Division Bell doesn't really count.[/QUOTE]

Pretty much how I feel, because:

[QUOTE=MrConeman;15132279]... but thats only to a Pink Floyd standard, they are just everyday standard rock lyrics[/QUOTE]

Pretty similar, but it all just seems 'standard rock', it seems to lose a lot of the Pink Floyd sound, and alot of their driving force. Obviously because Roger left, but I'm a massive fan of his, and I don't find too much interesting about Gilmour era floyd.

I do like a cople of songs though, but mostly the live versions from p.u.l.s.e.

"High Hopes" is pretty ****ing sweet.

I will have to upload it sometime. It's on the [I]Dark Side Of The Moon[/I] tour, and it's got an awesome set list. They play the entire album, as well as Shine On You Crazy Diamond Parts 1-5, Have A Cigar, Shine On Parts 6-9, Echoes and the two pre-Animals songs I talked about above.

Amazing set list.

yah that would be awesome

[QUOTE=Riva;15134690]I will have to upload it sometime. It's on the [I]Dark Side Of The Moon[/I] tour, and it's got an awesome set list. They play the entire album, as well as Shine On You Crazy Diamond Parts 1-5, Have A Cigar, Shine On Parts 6-9, Echoes and the two pre-Animals songs I talked about above.[/QUOTE]

I would say that qualifies as a MUST UPLOAD FOR THE LOVE OF GOD ALMIGHTY.

Agreed, like in the next 24 hours

Well so much for that. WTF RIVA...I liked you better when you were heavy.:p

lol, like Louie Anderson, not as cool anymore

[QUOTE=YouGottaBeCrazy;15133316]
The majority of The Wall was written by Roger, and you're just proving my point by mentioning DSOTM. It's really not any better of an album than The Final Cut is. The Floyd started to go really downhill after Roger left because they sounded uninspired. Roger was the one with the ideas and the songwriting ability.

IMO of course.[/QUOTE]
I disagree with the first point you made, and this. Heavily.
David is without any doubt what so ever the better musician, in every sense you wish to mention. The majority of The Wall was indeed composed by Roger, as was the Final Cut, which is why they are the two of the worst albums [I][B]musically[/B][/I], by Pink Floyd.

Lyrically they are great, and of course they do both have some great song writing on them and yes, the melodies are fine too, the songs are solid, I didn't say Roger was a [U]bad[/U] composer, just that Dave was better. But nothing on either album compares (again, [I][B]musically[/B][/I]) to songs that Dave composed by himself in the later days, or songs composed by the entire band in the early days. And of course this doesn't count for everything on the Wall.

Dave contributed to that album alot more than some people would like to accept. He wrote the music for Comfortably Numb, he wrote the music for Another Brick in the Wall Pt2, he wrote that great riff for In the Flesh, and generally, David wrote all the better music on that album. Roger tends to write extremely similar sounding music. Which is why the tracks he composed on the wall comprise mostly of the same melodic phrases, and why the Final Cut sounds the same as alot of The Wall. And that's fine, because it's the way he wants to do things. Dave says that Roger would have no problem using the same melody to get across different lyrics all the time.

And really, Darkside about the same as the Final Cut musically?
I mean really.

I'm sorry for ranting at you, but seriously, saying Roger Waters is better, musically, than David Gilmour is ludicrous .

[QUOTE=apple pie;15140307]Agreed, like in the next 24 hours[/QUOTE]

I'm uploading it this very minute

[QUOTE=Collis;15149617]I'm uploading it this very minute[/QUOTE]

Aww man, I just started uploading it too. :p

*cancels download*

[QUOTE=MrConeman;15148221]I disagree with the first point you made, and this. Heavily.
David is without any doubt what so ever the better musician, in every sense you wish to mention. The majority of The Wall was indeed composed by Roger, as was the Final Cut, which is why they are the two of the worst albums [I][B]musically[/B][/I], by Pink Floyd.

Lyrically they are great, and of course they do both have some great song writing on them and yes, the melodies are fine too, the songs are solid, I didn't say Roger was a [U]bad[/U] composer, just that Dave was better. But nothing on either album compares (again, [I][B]musically[/B][/I]) to songs that Dave composed by himself in the later days, or songs composed by the entire band in the early days. And of course this doesn't count for everything on the Wall.

Dave contributed to that album alot more than some people would like to accept. He wrote the music for Comfortably Numb, he wrote the music for Another Brick in the Wall Pt2, he wrote that great riff for In the Flesh, and generally, David wrote all the better music on that album. Roger tends to write extremely similar sounding music. Which is why the tracks he composed on the wall comprise mostly of the same melodic phrases, and why the Final Cut sounds the same as alot of The Wall. And that's fine, because it's the way he wants to do things. Dave says that Roger would have no problem using the same melody to get across different lyrics all the time.

And really, Darkside about the same as the Final Cut musically?
I mean really.

I'm sorry for ranting at you, but seriously, saying Roger Waters is better, musically, than David Gilmour is ludicrous .[/QUOTE]

Better musician =/= Better song writier/composer.

I would certainly say that Waters is a much better composer and song writer. There's so much more variety in his work than Gilmours, which seems very 'normal rock' verse/chorus/verse/chorus/solo style thing. There's much more variety in what Waters has written than what Gilmour has (when things like solo work is taken into account)

Admittedly, Gilmour is a great guitarist, and a fine songwriter, but Waters walks over him. Waters has so much more direction than Gilmour.

The point about Waters using the same piece of music to convey different lyrics is entirely true. But its the same thing composers have been using for years. Leitmotif. Except Waters shifts the idea forward, tying similar ideas together using not just the lyrics, but connecting the music together as a whole. It gives more flow to the pieces.

[QUOTE=Surf;15152929]Better musician =/= Better song writier/composer.
[/QUOTE]
Correct. But in this case I think it does.

[QUOTE]I would certainly say that Waters is a much better composer and song writer. There's so much more variety in his work than Gilmours, which seems very 'normal rock' verse/chorus/verse/chorus/solo style thing. There's much more variety in what Waters has written than what Gilmour has (when things like solo work is taken into account)[/QUOTE]
Being eccentric in his writing style does not make it better written music, it may be more original, but I'm still firm in the belief that Gilmour has a much better ear for writing good sounding music, no matter how 'normal' it is.

[QUOTE]The point about Waters using the same piece of music to convey different lyrics is entirely true. But its the same thing composers have been using for years. Leitmotif. Except Waters shifts the idea forward, tying similar ideas together using not just the lyrics, but connecting the music together as a whole. It gives more flow to the pieces.[/QUOTE]
Agreed, but I'm not criticizing him for it, much the opposite it's one of the things I think he excels at doing tastefully and effectively, it's probably the main reason that I praise him as being a good composer, the leitmotif idea is what makes The Wall what it is. But it doesn't change that Gilmour just writes better music. There's two sides to looking at this one, you can say, he uses the same peice of music alot, and he does it effectively therefore he's a grand composer, which is fine and valid, I just disagree. I take the view that by using the same melodies and repeating himself, while giving a good flow, and better meaning to the lyrics, it makes him lacking as a composer, certainly when compared to Dave, who is most always very melodic, and changes it up all the time.

I guess we both are correct and just have to agree to disagree. :thumb:

[QUOTE=Kage;15131620]Pink Floyd is worthless without Roger Waters, so the Division Bell doesn't really count.[/QUOTE]
[QUOTE=RNR]Pink Floyd without Rodger Waters would be like David Gilmour solo. And I like David Gilmour solo.[/QUOTE]

So basically,the way I think about it: Pink Floyd members only work as Pink Floyd together. Yeah. Pretty much.

[QUOTE=MrConeman;15148221]I disagree with the first point you made, and this. Heavily.
David is without any doubt what so ever the better musician, in every sense you wish to mention. The majority of The Wall was indeed composed by Roger, as was the Final Cut, which is why they are the two of the worst albums [I][B]musically[/B][/I], by Pink Floyd.

Lyrically they are great, and of course they do both have some great song writing on them and yes, the melodies are fine too, the songs are solid, I didn't say Roger was a [U]bad[/U] composer, just that Dave was better. But nothing on either album compares (again, [I][B]musically[/B][/I]) to songs that Dave composed by himself in the later days, or songs composed by the entire band in the early days. And of course this doesn't count for everything on the Wall.

Dave contributed to that album alot more than some people would like to accept. He wrote the music for Comfortably Numb, he wrote the music for Another Brick in the Wall Pt2, he wrote that great riff for In the Flesh, and generally, David wrote all the better music on that album. Roger tends to write extremely similar sounding music. Which is why the tracks he composed on the wall comprise mostly of the same melodic phrases, and why the Final Cut sounds the same as alot of The Wall. And that's fine, because it's the way he wants to do things. Dave says that Roger would have no problem using the same melody to get across different lyrics all the time.

And really, Darkside about the same as the Final Cut musically?
I mean really.

I'm sorry for ranting at you, but seriously, saying Roger Waters is better, musically, than David Gilmour is ludicrous .[/QUOTE]

There's a very large difference between songwriting ability (aka composing) and musicianship. How can you not possibly understand this? Waters' songs are often very minimalist and bleak. Gilmour's songs are often full of layers of music instruments playing all different things. It doesn't change the fact that Waters was the better songwriter.

Gilmour often repeated himself, as Floyd's last two albums have shown. The songs sound like uninspired versions of Floyd's older albums. Waters has the creativity and natural songwriting ability that Gilmour lacks. Gilmour has the instrumental ability and ear for guitar solos that Waters lacks. You can never go wrong with a Gilmour guitar solo.

And theirs nothing wrong with leitmotifs. It helps unite different songs into a cohesive whole. This is a songwriting skill. And Dark Side is about on par with The Final Cut. They both have their weak moments and their good moments. It's dissapointing because it seems like DSOTM had more potential to be better, whereas The Final Cut is just a pretty good album, but nothing special, and not bad either, but there isn't much more you could do with it.

and everything else I wanted to say was already covered by Surf.

Waters just completely walks over Gilmour in terms of songwriting ability, and in the end, that's what's most important.

They are both bad lyricists, though. Waters had some nice things to say before, though. Lately he sucks.

Who gives a **** what either of the two does now. We're talking 30 years ago, Tojes.

Either way, people's capacities to write interesting music don't die out with time, duh.

Although most people are just so comfortable in the things they've written for so much time it becomes almost an inherent ability to copy yourself, so yeah.

[QUOTE=TojesDolan;15155238]Either way, people's capacities to write interesting music doesn't die out with time, duh.

[/QUOTE]

sarcasm?

No, your capacity to portray sentiments doesn't die out with time

Your ability can diminish over time.

No, it gets better since you have more experience, duh.

a 15 year old isn't nearly as good at writing as say, a 25 year old.

especially in life experience older people are better describing they have better lexicon and wording and experience period

[QUOTE=YouGottaBeCrazy;15155040]There's a very large difference between songwriting ability (aka composing) and musicianship. How can you not possibly understand this? [/QUOTE]
I already clarified that I understand it perfectly well. You seem to be missing the point that I believe Gilmour to be better at both.

[QUOTE]Waters' songs are often very minimalist and bleak. Gilmour's songs are often full of layers of music instruments playing all different things[/QUOTE]
Hence you can't possibly criticize someones opinion and preference, if it's based on exactly that.

[QUOTE]Gilmour often repeated himself, as Floyd's last two albums have shown.[/QUOTE]
A Momentary Lapse does have shades of the Division Bell sound, but I think thats simply from the band taking a natural evolution from one album to the next. It's nothing they hadn't done before, back in the early days it's pretty easy to say that alot of the older, longer songs led to result in a song like Echoes. Or any other hundreds of similar comparisons we could make. I do however think that the Division Bell was a large step above Momentary Lapse. They never repeated themselves to the extent that they did with Waters at the helm.

[QUOTE]And theirs nothing wrong with leitmotifs. It helps unite different songs into a cohesive whole. This is a songwriting skill[/QUOTE]
I said the exact same thing. In fact I praised Waters ability to use them extremely well.

[QUOTE]And Dark Side is about on par with The Final Cut. They both have their weak moments and their good moments. It's dissapointing because it seems like DSOTM had more potential to be better, whereas The Final Cut is just a pretty good album, but nothing special, and not bad either, but there isn't much more you could do with it.[/QUOTE]
This is all fine and valid, and opinionated. I enjoy both albums. But I think it's pretty fair to say that Dark Side has the superior composition. Which is much down to both Gilmour and Waters. Again I'd like to stress that I never called Waters a poor composer, I just find Gilmour to be a better one, I don't see why my opinion is the cause of so much discussion.

Waters is a much better composer than Gilmour.

[QUOTE=MrConeman;15155689]I already clarified that I understand it perfectly well. You seem to be missing the point that I believe Gilmour to be better at both.


Hence you can't possibly criticize someones opinion and preference, if it's based on exactly that.


A Momentary Lapse does have shades of the Division Bell sound, but I think thats simply from the band taking a natural evolution from one album to the next. It's nothing they hadn't done before, back in the early days it's pretty easy to say that alot of the older, longer songs led to result in a song like Echoes. Or any other hundreds of similar comparisons we could make. I do however think that the Division Bell was a large step above Momentary Lapse. They never repeated themselves to the extent that they did with Waters at the helm.


I said the exact same thing. In fact I praised Waters ability to use them extremely well.


This is all fine and valid, and opinionated. I enjoy both albums. But I think it's pretty fair to say that Dark Side has the superior composition. Which is much down to both Gilmour and Waters. Again I'd like to stress that I never called Waters a poor composer, I just find Gilmour to be a better one, I don't see why my opinion is the cause of so much discussion.[/QUOTE]

Agree to disagree then.

[QUOTE=TojesDolan;15155647]No, it gets better since you have more experience, duh.

a 15 year old isn't nearly as good at writing as say, a 25 year old.

especially in life experience older people are better describing they have better lexicon and wording and experience period[/QUOTE]

sarcasm?

I don't really think Waters or Gilmour are very spectacular on their own, but together they work oh so well. That's why [I]Meddle[/I] through to [I]Wish You Were Here[/I] is my favourite Floyd-era.

Aussie Pink Floyd is coming to Portland, I think in October. I'm gonna go to that. Haven't a few of you guys seen them?

Yah, I have. They were pretty awesome.

[QUOTE=YouGottaBeCrazy;15155040]There's a very large difference between songwriting ability (aka composing) and musicianship.[/QUOTE]

kinda hard to write some cool stuff if you can't even play it :wave:

[QUOTE=Krabsworth;15171573]kinda hard to write some cool stuff if you can't even play it :wave:[/QUOTE]

wow you're stupid

[QUOTE]I don't really think Waters or Gilmour are very spectacular on their own, but together they work oh so well. That's why Meddle through to Wish You Were Here is my favourite Floyd-era.[/QUOTE]

Very true. There are many examples of this like McCartney-Lennon, amazing together, but not as seperate. Same with Gilmour-Waters. They just write better music together, plain and simple.

[QUOTE=YouGottaBeCrazy;15171629]wow you're stupid[/QUOTE]

you're nice :wave:

i'm sorry for being mean :(

Wow that was pretty blunt and harsh.

i would get mad at you, but matt sharp really is cool, so i cant

Argh I was uploading [I]Echoes in the Garden[/I] and for some reason it failed, and by the time I realised, I had to be outta the house for 4 days as I was at a music festival ...

Shall retry now.

EDIT: Here it is. Sorry for the delay.

[url]http://www.megaupload.com/?d=334ZU04L[/url]

Raving and Drooling
You've Gotta Be Crazy
Shine On Pts 1 - 5
Have a Cigar
Shine On Pts 6 - 9
DSOTM
Echoes

I think this is no doubt the greatest setlist by any band I've ever seen.

[QUOTE=MattSharpIsCool;15171351]Aussie Pink Floyd is coming to Portland, I think in October. I'm gonna go to that. Haven't a few of you guys seen them?[/QUOTE]

Best tribute band I've ever been to see. 3 times.
Absolutely great show.