New Pink Floyd

[Henk]

The new PF is out. Who is first to grab it?

[Henk]

Ok, only John grabs.

[The new erato]

Not me. Seems to be more of the same.

[Henk]

Not me. Seems to be more of the same.

Curious about that. You might be right. Couldn't make up from the samples (only listened to some of it).

[Todd]

Not me. Seems to be more of the same.

A big slug of it is from the sessions for The Division Bell, so it is the same.  For me, new Pink Floyd, legal weed, seems like it could be a good winter.  Just sayin'.

[Sef]

"Grabbed" it yesterday. Was moderately impressed as I was expecting similar material to the Division Bell, but it was mainly instrumental and certainly quoted earlier Pink Floyd at times. Patchy perhaps, but nonetheless enjoyable.

[Henk]

"Grabbed" it yesterday. Was moderately impressed as I was expecting similar material to the Division Bell, but it was mainly instrumental and certainly quoted earlier Pink Floyd at times. Patchy perhaps, but nonetheless enjoyable.

That seems the problem with PF. They already did it on several recordings. Really a big weakness.

When it's done good, with slight, short during, subtle references, it's no problem, but with PF it turns into a stereotype. Or do you think otherwise regarding this recording?

It's self-overestimation, falling back on a reputation of being a great band, they do not really deserve. It's cult. Not consistent, very inconsistent actually. Their cover-art seems better than the music itself. And the cover-art isn't really impressive as well, good marketing.

[Sef]

That seems the problem with PF. They already did it on several recordings. Really a big weakness.

When it's done good, with slight, short during, subtle references, it's no problem, but with PF it turns into a stereotype. Or do you think otherwise regarding this recording?

It's self-overestimation, falling back on a reputation of being a great band, they do not really deserve. It's cult. Not consistent, very inconsistent actually. Their cover-art seems better than the music itself. And the cover-art isn't really impressive as well, good marketing.

Well I've only heard it once, so I should reserve judgement. I must admit I was expecting something of the ilk of The Division Bell (as these were originally recorded during sessions for that album), and my problem with post-Waters Floyd is the dull vocals and lack of the kind of originality that characterized their 1970's albums from Meddle through The Wall, when Pink Floyd were very consistent and were more than a great band. In my opinion, their earlier albums are more interesting than their post-Waters material, but there are signs on this new album of that earlier Floyd, and is therefore worth a listen.

[Henk]

Well I've only heard it once, so I should reserve judgement. I must admit I was expecting something of the ilk of The Division Bell (as these were originally recorded during sessions for that album), and my problem with post-Waters Floyd is the dull vocals and lack of the kind of originality that characterized their 1970's albums from Meddle through The Wall, when Pink Floyd were very consistent and were more than a great band. In my opinion, their earlier albums are more interesting than their post-Waters material, but there are signs on this new album of that earlier Floyd, and is therefore worth a listen.

Do you really think Atom Heart Mother and Ummagumma are good albums? I think Animals isn't so good as well. Some other overrated recordings. Inconsistent, not really a band, therefor I think they had too much unspoken rivality towards each other, opposing characters (Waters, Gilmour). Some great stuff as well.

[mn dave]

Nah, I'll be grabbing this instead.
[asin]B00MRKX9MW[/asin]

[Sef]

Do you really think Atom Heart Mother and Ummagumma are good albums? I think Animals isn't so good as well. Some other overrated recordings. Inconsistent, not really a band, therefor I think they had too much unspoken rivality towards each other, opposing characters (Waters, Gilmour). Some great stuff as well.

Well AHM and Ummagumma weren't between Meddle and The Wall, and AHM barely 1970s! So I never said that they were good - interesting though, for the times, as were their more psychedelic earlier albums. However, I beg to differ with Animals, and although the tension eventually broke up the band, through the 70s that tension was arguably the reason why we have such masterpieces as DSOTM and WYWH. Couldn't last for sure, and as I said, were never the same after the breakup.

[Henk]

Well AHM and Ummagumma weren't between Meddle and The Wall, and AHM barely 1970s! So I never said that they were good - interesting though, for the times, as were their more psychedelic earlier albums. However, I beg to differ with Animals, and although the tension eventually broke up the band, through the 70s that tension was arguably the reason why we have such masterpieces as DSOTM and WYWH. Couldn't last for sure, and as I said, were never the same after the breakup.

OK, interesting.