Pros and Cons over Final Cut any day. It's just such a better concept and it executed great too.
Musically, KAOS and Lapse are similar. They were both influenced by synthpop, but KAOS is conceptually darker.
I would choose Division Bell over Amused to Death, because AtD suffers from the same problem as the Final Cut, in that it's basically "ALL PEOPLE ARE HORRIBLE AND HAVE RUINED THIS PLANET".
[QUOTE=CoolCorky;29022256]
Musically, KAOS and Lapse are similar.
[/QUOTE]
Na, I feel KAOS edges it in quality. I can say KAOS is more consistent than Lapse.
also, you forgot:
[img]http://www.progarchives.com/progressive_rock_discography_covers/1016/cover_0281119122010.jpg[/img]
instead of:
[img]http://4.bp.blogspot.com/_iDs5ucVMWsg/SSRR9HKlAqI/AAAAAAAAAbc/kgAoRJcP45o/s400/Pink+Floyd+-+Atom+Heart+Mother+-+Front.jpg[/img]
I dunno..... Roger does fart and burp a lot in the "music from the body" album. :smith:
[URL="http://consequenceofsound.net/2010/01/alternate-history-x-roger-waters-never-quit-pink-floyd/"]What if Roger Waters never quit Pink Floyd?[/URL]
Kinda cheesy, but fun read.
[I]A Momentary Lapse of K.A.O.S.
Amused by Bells
[/I]
in my opinion, david gilmour had a better voice than roger waters, dont get me wrong, roger has a good voice, but gilmour has the best voice for their sound i think, i could be wrong
Richard Wright had the best voice of them all :smug:
Gilmour has an amazing voice. Sounds great live. Waters generally does not sound well live, although from what I've seen he sounds good on his recent tour.
I'm thinking about getting Atom Heart next. Well, it'll all come down to Thursday when I get reimbursed for letting some folks borrow moneys. I'll use half.com and end up getting several Floyd's for cheap. I've wanted to get the Cow album for awhile as well as Ummagumma.
Do you guys think that if Rick Wright had actually contributed to Animals the band would have lasted a bit longer?
Anyway, I'm not sure about you guys but I'm a massive fan of Momentary Lapse of Reason. Some of the Division Bell was incredibly cheesy but even then there were some real gems and I think if Floyd had the drive at the time to release another album they might have released something fantastic.
I think if any other member contributed they would have lasted longer. Waters states that nobody else was writing any material, which is why he essentially became the song writer. The others complained about it, and Waters said in return to write something, which none of them really did. If it wasn't for Waters, we probably wouldn't have many of the later albums because he was the main contributor. After DSOTM was the turning point. Yeah, Waters got all egotistical, but I don't think he became the band's writer because he wanted to run the band, but more that nobody else wanted to write.
[QUOTE=Pepin;29033747]I think if any other member contributed they would have lasted longer. Waters states that nobody else was writing any material, which is why he essentially became the song writer. The others complained about it, and Waters said in return to write something, which none of them really did. If it wasn't for Waters, we probably wouldn't have many of the later albums because he was the main contributor. After DSOTM was the turning point. Yeah, Waters got all egotistical, but I don't think he became the band's writer because he wanted to run the band, but more that nobody else wanted to write.[/QUOTE]
Gilmour and Wright contributed to Wish You Were Here quite a bit though the overall idea was Waters and his name is listed as main writer on most of the songs. Gilmour also wrote pretty much all of Dogs which is a fair good amount of Animals and contributed quite a bit to it. Wright didn't though.
In the end it just seemed to be Gilmour and Waters being the only ones contributing so I can understand Waters getting frustrated. Also Gilmour contributed quite a bit to the Wall even though pretty much all of the songs were written by Waters. But its hard to retain a balance between two people I guess
[QUOTE=killerteacup;29033512]
Anyway, I'm not sure about you guys but I'm a massive fan of Momentary Lapse of Reason. Some of the Division Bell was incredibly cheesy but even then there were some real gems and I think if Floyd had the drive at the time to release another album they might have released something fantastic.[/QUOTE]
Both are incredibly enjoyable. Not above 3 stars in my mind, but I adore them. Gilmour never fails.
[QUOTE=Pepin;29028061]Gilmour has an amazing voice. Sounds great live. Waters generally does not sound well live, although from what I've seen he sounds good on his recent tour.[/QUOTE]
No, they're just tapes. He only sounds good on Comfortably Numb, but that's only because he has spoken lyrics on that one.
Maybe it's just me, but In The Flesh sounds so...off compared to the rest of The Wall. I dunno, it sounds just really...strange to me.
I think In The Flesh fits in rather well, especially in concept that it is the evil Pink talking to an audience.
Are there any queers in the audience tonight?
Get them up, against the wall!
I like the concept of the song, it's just the sound. I can't really describe, but the general sound just seems very different from the entire vibe of the Wall.
[QUOTE=Pedro the Fuzzy;29045003]I like the concept of the song, it's just the sound. I can't really describe, but the general sound just seems very different from the entire vibe of the Wall.[/QUOTE]
well, it's not that progressive so i guess you're right.
[QUOTE=Pedro the Fuzzy;29045003]I like the concept of the song, it's just the sound. I can't really describe, but the general sound just seems very different from the entire vibe of the Wall.[/QUOTE]
Well, The Wall does center on a rock star. So what better way to introduce him other than an explosive stadium rock piece?
[QUOTE=Mr._N;29049238]Well, The Wall does center on a rock star. So what better way to introduce him other than an explosive stadium rock piece?[/QUOTE]
Pink Floyd isn't Stadium Rock though, I think that's most likely what he meant.
[QUOTE=AK'z;29049292]Pink Floyd isn't Stadium Rock though, I think that's most likely what he meant.[/QUOTE]
Yes, the song is quite different, along with ABITW, in the context of their other work.
[QUOTE=Mr._N;29049346]along with ABITW, in the context of their other work.[/QUOTE]
Depends which part :smug:
[QUOTE=AK'z;29049392]Depends which part :smug:[/QUOTE]
I was talking about Part 1, of course. Never has Gilmour used so much delay up until that point.
I think the idea of Pink Floyd was that they shifted and experiment sounds so anything could really be pink floyd
[QUOTE=killerteacup;29050715]I think the idea of Pink Floyd was that they shifted and experiment sounds so anything could really be pink floyd[/QUOTE]
The more psychedelic, the more Pink Floyd. The more straight forward, the more Roger Waters.
And the more guitar solos, the more Gilmour :3:
[QUOTE=PwnNoobsFtw;29026900]Syd Barrett had the best voice of them all :smug:[/QUOTE]
:eng101:
[QUOTE=Mr._N;29024652][URL="http://consequenceofsound.net/2010/01/alternate-history-x-roger-waters-never-quit-pink-floyd/"]What if Roger Waters never quit Pink Floyd?[/URL]
Kinda cheesy, but fun read.
[I]A Momentary Lapse of K.A.O.S.
Amused by Bells
[/I][/QUOTE]
[i]Pros And Cons[/i], with Gilmour and Clapton battling on it?
[img]http://i8.photobucket.com/albums/a30/gomezjuan/ScannersExplodingHead.gif[/img]
Yeah I don't know the hate on Roger Waters' singing voice. Kind of reminds me of Syd's voice. Fair enough Gilmour has that more "popular" tone to it that allows likeability.. but face it.... Roger has soul. :smug:
Plus he's the only singer that can make screamo vocals actually sound good.
[media]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FewiqzBSdyY[/media]
[QUOTE=Kyle v2;29052435]
[i]Pros And Cons[/i], with Gilmour and Clapton battling on it?
[/QUOTE]
I dunno dude... sounds pretty amazing to me.
[media]http://soundcloud.com/akayz7/pros-and-cons-of-lapses-of-reasons[/media]
:smug:
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
