Forum Home Forum Home > Progressive Music Lounges > Prog News, Press Releases
  New Posts New Posts RSS Feed - Roger Waters~Animals Reissue...Issue
  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Events   Register Register  Login Login

Roger Waters~Animals Reissue...Issue

 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1234 7>
Author
Message
iluvmarillion View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: February 09 2010
Location: Australia
Status: Offline
Points: 3236
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote iluvmarillion Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: June 03 2021 at 22:49
The song writing credits on Dogs will always show Roger Waters AND David Gilmour. Roger Waters can moan as much as he wants but that's never going to change.
Back to Top
iluvmarillion View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: February 09 2010
Location: Australia
Status: Offline
Points: 3236
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (3) Thanks(3)   Quote iluvmarillion Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: June 03 2021 at 22:56
Originally posted by Sean Trane Sean Trane wrote:

Originally posted by Catcher10 Catcher10 wrote:



Really wish Waters would stop with this kind of petty/stupisd stuff. He's making an arse of himself

Originally posted by Catcher10 Catcher10 wrote:

Originally posted by MortSahlFan MortSahlFan wrote:

I find it odd that the PINK FLOYD site shows Polly Samson's sh*t, but not Roger Waters, the man who wrote almost everything. How were those albums after Roger left? sh*t.

Roger Waters is wasting his time bitchin and moanin about the PF website and how he is banned from it. I'm not a part of Pink Floyd and I am sure I would be banned from it too LOL.

I'm not saying Gilmour and others have no part in this, but man RW needs to get laid or something......what a waste of talent.


then again, Gilmour is just as much of an arse, bringing in his wife in the fold is idiotic and designed to irrate Ol'Rog.

This said, I understand that Floyd also belongs to Mason.


Just watched a 2006 video of David Gilmour and David Bowie together. You could not find two nicer people. Gilmour doesn't involve his wife on the PF web site to piss off Roger Waters. He does it because she writes PF lyrics after Roger left the band.
Back to Top
richardh View Drop Down
Prog Reviewer
Prog Reviewer
Avatar

Joined: February 18 2004
Location: United Kingdom
Status: Offline
Points: 26140
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote richardh Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: June 04 2021 at 01:03
Waters was always the writing talent while Gilmour was the great musician. Fact is without each other they are as boring as f**k lol!
Back to Top
Frenetic Zetetic View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: December 09 2017
Location: Now
Status: Offline
Points: 9233
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Frenetic Zetetic Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: June 04 2021 at 02:29
Originally posted by richardh richardh wrote:

Waters was always the writing talent while Gilmour was the great musician. Fact is without each other they are as boring as f**k lol!

Almost all great bands have this unfortunate caveat lol. Everything sucks unless everyone is firing on full WITH each other. It's a mess otherwise, as we see here.

"I am so prog, I listen to concept albums on shuffle." -KMac2021
Back to Top
Dellinger View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar
VIP Member

Joined: June 18 2009
Location: Mexico
Status: Offline
Points: 12608
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Dellinger Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: June 04 2021 at 21:24
Originally posted by Frenetic Zetetic Frenetic Zetetic wrote:

Originally posted by richardh richardh wrote:

Waters was always the writing talent while Gilmour was the great musician. Fact is without each other they are as boring as f**k lol!


Almost all great bands have this unfortunate caveat lol. Everything sucks unless everyone is firing on full WITH each other. It's a mess otherwise, as we see here.


Waters wrote great music. So did Gilmour and Wright... and the band was at it's best when they were all writing, and it wouldn't have achieved the same greatness otherwise. Dark Side would not be nearly as great without, particularly, Wright's contributions, Wish you Were Here has lot's of writing from the whole band... or at least that is so with Shine on you Crazy Diamond (my favourite song ever). Animals has Dogs, as I understand it with the music mostly written by Gilmour, which takes nearly half the album, and is usually considered the best track on the album. There's also Echoes, which I understand was a collaboration effort, but mostly based on what Wright brought to begin with. So no, Pink Floyd was not only Waters. Yeah, Waters wrote a lot of the best music of the band, but so did the rest of the band. And yes, he wrote almost all the lyrics, and definitley the best ones. And even among the songs he wrote all by himself, I'm sure they wouldn't have come off as great if he hadn't had Wright and Gilmour to perform them and help with the arrangements.
Back to Top
moshkito View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: January 04 2007
Location: Grok City
Status: Offline
Points: 16148
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote moshkito Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: June 05 2021 at 09:21
Originally posted by Sacro_Porgo Sacro_Porgo wrote:

Waters is a genius, gotta admit, but he seems unable to practice what he preaches.

Hi,

You know what everyone says about us old folks ... we get senile and sometimes spout out the soup and everything else, not to mention drip and drop and slobber on the slightest thing possible! Ohhh, the heaven of getting old ... where is my babysitter and pacifier?

To be honest, I would imagine that someone like Roger or even Dave, do not need to be writing lyrics anymore, and they should just work music to be more than a simple song and a riff and a solo, the only thing that Dave seems to be capable of doing which is also getting as boring as that insufferable something or other!

All in all, I won't really criticize either of them for what they do ... I simply will not buy it, and if I need to evaluate it I can do that on the tuber, and not spend money on it. PF is long gone, and so are its members, and NM is getting too old to tour or do another album and get his motor to start (will he ever do any of that material? I doubt it!) and show us something other than just some different and timely touches on the drums!
Music is not just for listening ... it is for LIVING ... you got to feel it to know what's it about! Not being told!
www.pedrosena.com
Back to Top
moshkito View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: January 04 2007
Location: Grok City
Status: Offline
Points: 16148
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote moshkito Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: June 05 2021 at 09:29
Originally posted by Frenetic Zetetic Frenetic Zetetic wrote:

Originally posted by richardh richardh wrote:

Waters was always the writing talent while Gilmour was the great musician. Fact is without each other they are as boring as f**k lol!

Almost all great bands have this unfortunate caveat lol. Everything sucks unless everyone is firing on full WITH each other. It's a mess otherwise, as we see here.

Hi,

Kinda depends on a lot of things ... for example, according to Robin Williamson, Mike Heron came from a rock background, but what got them together was POETRY and how it could be interpreted, not the fact that one was into this and the other into something else. And their work was mostly about  INTERPRETING THE WORDS, rather than write a "song" ... and this is something that is really difficult for this generation of fans, that are so stuck on the commercial side of "songs" and call everything a song, not always understanding, or finding what the real design was for the piece.

Roger and Dave likely did well together at the start because Dave was the musician (read somewhere that he was one of Syd's guitar teachers!), and Roger likely was not as good a "musician" at the time, and I think that the arrangements for a lot of the early PF (Syd's stuff specially) were left to RW to develop, with input from Roger about how to color the images of the lyrics even more, which helped PF ... and mind you, this "coloring" of the lyrics, a few years later ended up in something like The Wall with a couple of other albums in between to get the ideas together.

Seen from a historical perspective, I am not sure that ANIMALS is that big a deal, but as a part of the whole, it's like a chapter in a novel ... you gotta have it to help everything come alive and be understood.
Music is not just for listening ... it is for LIVING ... you got to feel it to know what's it about! Not being told!
www.pedrosena.com
Back to Top
jlneudorf View Drop Down
Forum Newbie
Forum Newbie
Avatar

Joined: October 15 2020
Location: Saskatoon, SK,
Status: Offline
Points: 20
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (1) Thanks(1)   Quote jlneudorf Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: June 05 2021 at 22:30
This is a tough thread to read. Waters has a right to be pissed off over the website issue. But hey, that's just my opinion.
Some of the comments have been pretty harsh. So be it. Both musicians have alot to offer. I thought Waters last album is an absolute gem. Again, only my opinion. I just hope we get one or two more solo albums from them before they call it quits.
Back to Top
nick_h_nz View Drop Down
Collaborator
Collaborator
Avatar
Prog Metal / Heavy Prog Team

Joined: March 01 2013
Location: Suffolk, UK
Status: Offline
Points: 6737
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote nick_h_nz Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: June 06 2021 at 00:59
Originally posted by jlneudorf jlneudorf wrote:

This is a tough thread to read. Waters has a right to be pissed off over the website issue. But hey, that's just my opinion.
Some of the comments have been pretty harsh. So be it. Both musicians have alot to offer. I thought Waters last album is an absolute gem. Again, only my opinion. I just hope we get one or two more solo albums from them before they call it quits.

I’ve found it very tough to read as well. I don’t actually see the problem with what Waters has done here. Everyone has known there was an Animals reissue waiting to come out. No one knew what the delay was. If Waters wanted to be the 💩head you all make him out to be, he could have said all this one or two years ago. That he has waited until the issue has been resolved, and the reissue is going ahead, is surprisingly diplomatic for him.

So long as what he says is true (and if it were not, I don’t think he would come out and say it, because there would be obvious repercussions), what was holding up the release of the reissue was some liner notes. Now if Waters came out with this information, and didn’t supply the liner notes, it would have been even more controversial. I’m no great fan of Gilmour or Waters, and in much of the Pink Floyd wars, I tend towards Gilmour’s side - but in this instance, Waters really doesn’t seem to me have done anything wrong. And for the life of me, I can’t work out why Gilmour objected to the liner notes (which say nothing inflammatory or particularly unknown). I’d love to know what his objections were.

I don’t think Waters should have any access to the Pink Floyd website, as he left the band - and the lawsuits and settlements established that he left the band, and that the band continued without him. It would be unusual for an ex-member to have access to the website of a band they have left. So I think claiming he is “banned” from posting there is rather silly. But for the most part, I don’t really see the problem here. I don’t think I own any reissue such as this release that doesn’t have extensive liner notes explaining this history and circumstances of an album - so the argument that these should have had no place in the reissue hold no water for me.

For those who haven’t read it, here is what was posted on FB:

Originally posted by Roger Waters FB page Roger Waters FB page wrote:

A note from Roger Waters to Pink Floyd fans:

As I am banned by Dave Gilmour from posting on Pink Floyd's Facebook page with its 30,000,000 subscribers, I am posting this announcement here today and in full on rogerwaters.com.
First, a warm welcome back to our little band of brothers and sisters who have always kept an open mind, let’s hope some of the fans whose access to my words is suppressed by Gilmour find their way here and discover some truth.

What precipitated this note is that there are new James Guthrie Stereo and 5.1 mixes of the Pink Floyd album Animals, 1977. These mixes have languished unreleased because of a dispute over some sleeve notes that Mark Blake has written for this new release. Gilmour has vetoed the release of the album unless these liner notes are removed. He does not dispute the veracity of the history described in Mark’s notes, but he wants that history to remain secret. This is a small part of an ongoing campaign by the Gilmour/Samson camp to claim more credit for Dave on the work he did in Pink Floyd, 1967-1985, than is his due. Yes he was, and is, a jolly good guitarist and singer. But, he has for the last 35 years told a lot of whopping porky pies about who did what in Pink Floyd when I was still in charge. There’s a lot of "we did this" and "we did that," and "I did this" and "I did that." So, two things: 

(1). I am agreeing to the release of the new Animals remix, with the sleeve notes removed. Good work James Guthrie by the way, and sorry Mark Blake. The final draft of the liner notes was fact checked and agreed as factually correct by me, Nick and Gilmour. Here they are, enjoy, there’s nothing controversial, just a few simple facts.

Mark Blake: Liner Notes
Pink Floyd: Animals
Despite being recorded in London during the long, summer heatwave of 1976, Pink Floyd’s Animals remains a dark album. Its critique of capitalism and greed caught the prevailing mood in Britain: a time of industrial strife, economic turmoil, The Troubles in Northern Ireland, and the race riots of Notting Hill. The album was released on January 23rd 1977, but the roots of Pink Floyd’s tenth studio album go back earlier in the decade. Following the success of 1973’s The Dark Side Of The Moon, Pink Floyd pondered their next move. During a two-to-three week jam session in early 1974, the band worked on ideas for three new compositions. From these sessions the band developed Shine On You Crazy Diamond, (A passionate tribute to Syd Barrett, words by Roger Waters. Added by me, sorry couldn’t help it.) which became the centrepiece of Floyd’s next album, Wish You Were Here, and Raving And Drooling (composed by Roger Waters) and You Gotta Be Crazy written by Waters and David Gilmour.

Raving And Drooling was a tale of violent social disorder, while You Gotta Be Crazy told the story of a soulless businessman clawing and cheating his way to the top. Both were performed live for the first time on the Floyd’s winter tour of 1974. They were both considered for the Wish You Were Here album, but Roger insisted that neither song was relevant to the overall idea, that “Wish You Were Here” was essentially about absence, and as neither song fitted his conception of the record’s overall theme, neither song should be included. The band eventually concurred. Scroll forward two years, and Roger had an idea for the next Pink Floyd album. He borrowed from George Orwell’s allegorical story, Animal Farm, in which pigs and other farmyard animals were reimagined anthropomorphically. Waters portrays the human race as three sub-species trapped in a violent, vicious cycle, with sheep serving despotic pigs and authoritarian dogs. You Gotta be Crazy and Raving And Drooling perfectly fitted his new concept. In the meantime, a year earlier, the group had bought a set of disused church buildings in Britannia Row, Islington, which they’d converted into a studio and storage facility. Prior to this every Pink Floyd studio release had been partly or wholly recorded at Abbey Road studios. Pink Floyd had also found a new recording engineer. Brian Humphries, an engineer from Pye studios, who they had met while recording the sound track for “More”, a movie directed by Barbet Schroeder. Brian had gone on to engineer Wish You Were Here at Abbey Road, and also helped them out on the road, so they had got to know him very well. Using their own studio marked a significant change in their working methods. There were setbacks and teething problems, but also a great sense of freedom. 

Following Roger’s instincts about the new songs paid off, the songs had an aggressive edge far removed from the luxuriant soundscapes on Wish You Were Here. It was a timely change of direction. At Britannia Row, he renamed Raving And Drooling, Sheep and Gotta Be Crazy became Dogs. The narrative was completed by the addition of two new Waters songs: Pigs (Three Different Ones) and Pigs On The Wing.

On Pigs (Three Different Ones), the lyrics namechecked Mary Whitehouse, the head of the National Viewers And Listeners Association. Whitehouse was an outspoken critic of sex and violence on British television and a topical target for Roger’s ire. The subject matter was bleak, but Nick Mason recalled lighter moments over dubbing songs with special effects and barnyard noises. While Sheep also made room for Roger’s blackly comic variation on Psalm 23: “He maketh me to hang on hooks in high places/ He converteth me to lamb cutlets…” The music and the performance mirrored the intensity of the lyrics. Keyboard player Richard Wright’s eerie-sounding synths and Hammond organ cranked up the unease. While David Gilmour’s shared lead vocal on Dogs and his guitar playing throughout Animals offered a striking counterpoint to Roger’s brutal lyrics. In contrast, Animals began and ended on an optimistic note. The verses of Pigs on The Wing were split in two and bookended the album. Roger’s lyrics and vocal performance of acoustic intro and outro (“You know that I care what happens to you/ And I know that you care for me too…”) suggested hope for humanity. The idea for Pink Floyd’s flying pig was also Roger’s. He had already commissioned its building as a stage device for the next tour. Storm Thorgerson and Aubrey Powell of the design company Hipgnosis, had produced a number of design ideas for an Animals sleeve and presented them to the band but none of the band, liked them, and when Roger added his disapproval someone said, ”Well why don’t you come up with something better then?” So he did, on the drive from his house in South London to Britannia Row, he regularly passed Battersea Power Station. He was drawn to the imposing brick building, and by the number four. Four in the band, four phallic chimneys, and if the power station were turned upside down then it resembled a table with four legs. He pursued his idea and had a maquette made, a small scale model of the eventual full scale inflatable pig. He then took photographs of Battersea Power station and created a photographic mock up of an album sleeve. The rest of the band loved it. Storm and Po, who had designed all of the previous Pink Floyd album covers, graciously offered to source photographers for the photo shoot, and did. On the first day of the photo shoot, the pig failed to inflate. On the second day, it broke free of its moorings and disappeared into a beautiful brooding sky, prompting a frantic call to the police and a halt to all flights in and out of Heathrow. The pig eventually crash-landed in a farmer’s field in Kent. The following day, the shoot went ahead without a hitch, great shots of pig in situ but no brooding sky. So Storm and Po stripped Day three Pig into Day two sky, bingo! History. Animals was a hit, reaching Number 2 in the UK and Number 3 in the US. Pink Floyd’s pig, Algie, made its live debut on their subsequent “In The Flesh” tour in 1977. At stadium shows in America, it was joined by another Water’s idea, an inflatable nuclear family comprising a mother, father and 2.5 children, surrounded by the spoils of a consumerist lifestyle: an inflatable Cadillac, oversized TV and refrigerator. Roger called it Electric Theatre. Both the album and the tour signposted the way to Pink Floyd’s next release, The Wall, and to Roger’s ever more ambitious ideas, both in terms of his music, narratives, politics and stage shows. But his themes and ideas explored on Animals have endured. More than 40 years on the album has been remixed in stereo and 5.1. In troubled times and an uncertain world, Animals is as timely and relevant now as it ever was.
Mark Blake

Thanks Mark, sorry you were redacted.

(2). I am in the middle of writing my Memoirs and inevitably some of it contains references to some of the content above. For anyone with a faint heart, I suggest you sit down, but anyone who likes a good laugh, sit back and f**king howl! 😂 🤣 ✊🏼 I’m going to sit back and howl along with you.

At the beginning of this post on the subject of porky pies, I say, “There’s an awful lot of "we did this" and "we did that," and "I did this" and "I did that." Right? So here’s a short extract from my memoir: 

“As chance would have it I was doing a bit of delving in a book of press clippings and came across an interview David Fricke of Rolling Stone Magazine did with DG in a hotel room in NY in 1982, DG’s talking about the Cash register tape for the defining 7/8 rhythm on Money. The interview was published in Musician Magazine, so even back then DG was sowing the seeds of the false narrative. I quote this bit of the article verbatim:

David Fricke: “You recorded the sounds for ‘Money’ on a loop of tape.” Gilmour explains: ”You’re trying to get the impact from the cash register, ‘the snap, crack, crsssh,” You’d mark that one and then measure how long you wanted that beat to go, and that’s the piece you’d use. And you’d chop it together. It was trial and error. You just chop the tapes together, and if it sounds good, you use it. If it doesn’t, you take one section out and put a different one in. Sometimes we’d put one in and it’d be backwards, because the diagonal cut on the tape, if you turn it around is exactly the same. We’d stick that in and instead it would go ‘chung, dum, whoosh.’ And sound great so we’d use that.”

Well! The reason everything DG is saying here to David Fricke sounds like gobbledygook is because it is f**king gobbledygook. He has no f**king idea what he’s talking about. Why?  Because unless he was hiding under the f**king chair, DG wasn’t there when I made that SFX tape loop for Money in the studio I shared with my wife Judy at the bottom of our garden at 187, New North Road, Islington, next door to the North Pole Pub where I used to play darts!

THE FULL STORY OF WHAT REALLY HAPPENED IS IN MY MEMOIRS!
So, I hope that whets your, and David and Polly's appetites 😂
Love
R.

Back to Top
Guldbamsen View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Retired Admin

Joined: January 22 2009
Location: Magic Theatre
Status: Offline
Points: 23098
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Guldbamsen Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: June 06 2021 at 01:13
This is still so incredibly petty and uninteresting it literally baffles the brain.
I love the Floyd...but I really don’t care about this. Waters and Gilmour eh? More like an old married couple fighting over the tables
Listen to the music, remember it and cherish it... leave this inane battle of the egos to elderly superstars with scores to settle and way too much time on their hands.
“The Guide says there is an art to flying or rather a knack. The knack lies in learning how to throw yourself at the ground and miss.”

- Douglas Adams
Back to Top
iluvmarillion View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: February 09 2010
Location: Australia
Status: Offline
Points: 3236
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote iluvmarillion Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: June 06 2021 at 01:15
Well OK, after reading the Mark Blake liner notes I can't see what Dave Gilmour is objecting to. Mystifying to me.
Back to Top
rogerthat View Drop Down
Prog Reviewer
Prog Reviewer


Joined: September 03 2006
Location: .
Status: Offline
Points: 9869
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote rogerthat Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: June 06 2021 at 02:03
Originally posted by iluvmarillion iluvmarillion wrote:

Well OK, after reading the Mark Blake liner notes I can't see what Dave Gilmour is objecting to. Mystifying to me.

Well, it might be because Gilmour has an ego too even if it's not nearly as big as Waters'.  He does not want the plain truth that Animals was largely a Waters project to be advertised in the sleeve notes of a re-issue of the album. 
Back to Top
Dellinger View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar
VIP Member

Joined: June 18 2009
Location: Mexico
Status: Offline
Points: 12608
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Dellinger Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: June 06 2021 at 20:06
Originally posted by rogerthat rogerthat wrote:

Originally posted by iluvmarillion iluvmarillion wrote:

Well OK, after reading the Mark Blake liner notes I can't see what Dave Gilmour is objecting to. Mystifying to me.


Well, it might be because Gilmour has an ego too even if it's not nearly as big as Waters'.  He does not want the plain truth that Animals was largely a Waters project to be advertised in the sleeve notes of a re-issue of the album. 


As far as the concept is concerned, indeed, it's all Waters, and that's what the liner notes are focusing a lot about. Yet, it fails to dig a bit deeper into the writing of the music... and as I understand it, Dogs was mostly written by Gilmour... and given the length of that song, and how it is usually the fan favourite of the album, he might, in a way, be right to have an issue given the way those liner notes focus almost exclusivley on Waters.
Back to Top
iluvmarillion View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: February 09 2010
Location: Australia
Status: Offline
Points: 3236
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote iluvmarillion Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: June 06 2021 at 21:31
Originally posted by Dellinger Dellinger wrote:

Originally posted by rogerthat rogerthat wrote:

Originally posted by iluvmarillion iluvmarillion wrote:

Well OK, after reading the Mark Blake liner notes I can't see what Dave Gilmour is objecting to. Mystifying to me.


Well, it might be because Gilmour has an ego too even if it's not nearly as big as Waters'.  He does not want the plain truth that Animals was largely a Waters project to be advertised in the sleeve notes of a re-issue of the album. 


As far as the concept is concerned, indeed, it's all Waters, and that's what the liner notes are focusing a lot about. Yet, it fails to dig a bit deeper into the writing of the music... and as I understand it, Dogs was mostly written by Gilmour... and given the length of that song, and how it is usually the fan favourite of the album, he might, in a way, be right to have an issue given the way those liner notes focus almost exclusivley on Waters.
As I said I find it mystifying Gilmour would object to the Mark Blake liner notes. However reading Roger Water's comments again from his Facebook page he refers to Gilmour as a jolly good guitarist and singer. If I was Gilmour I'd personally find those comments pretty patronizing. It's like Gilmour referring to Waters as a jolly good lyricist. I think they're engaging in a personal feud that goes back a long time. Someone else referred to Water's treatment of Rick Wright post The Wall. It could even go back to the early days surrounding the departure of Syd Barrett from the band. Who knows? The older you get you tend to lose your creativity so then you get more protective about the proprietary of your original song writing contributions. You can't really blame either artist for that. What everybody agrees with here is why do they have to battle it out so publicly? 
Back to Top
rogerthat View Drop Down
Prog Reviewer
Prog Reviewer


Joined: September 03 2006
Location: .
Status: Offline
Points: 9869
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (1) Thanks(1)   Quote rogerthat Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: June 06 2021 at 22:15
Originally posted by Dellinger Dellinger wrote:

Originally posted by rogerthat rogerthat wrote:

Originally posted by iluvmarillion iluvmarillion wrote:

Well OK, after reading the Mark Blake liner notes I can't see what Dave Gilmour is objecting to. Mystifying to me.


Well, it might be because Gilmour has an ego too even if it's not nearly as big as Waters'.  He does not want the plain truth that Animals was largely a Waters project to be advertised in the sleeve notes of a re-issue of the album. 


As far as the concept is concerned, indeed, it's all Waters, and that's what the liner notes are focusing a lot about. Yet, it fails to dig a bit deeper into the writing of the music... and as I understand it, Dogs was mostly written by Gilmour... and given the length of that song, and how it is usually the fan favourite of the album, he might, in a way, be right to have an issue given the way those liner notes focus almost exclusivley on Waters.

No, then you have not really read the liner notes carefully.  Waters does mention You've Got to Be Crazy was co-written by him and Gilmour.  And that is the fact. What other role did the others have anyway in the album?  Like I said, if they hate so much to acknowledge his role in this album and The Wall, they don't have to play it, they don't have to reissue the albums.  Ah, but how can that be, these albums are full of fan favourites.  

Nobody is denying that Waters is a gigantic prick.  I am just saying Gilmour isn't exactly St Gilmour either and doesn't come out looking good from this episode.
Back to Top
nick_h_nz View Drop Down
Collaborator
Collaborator
Avatar
Prog Metal / Heavy Prog Team

Joined: March 01 2013
Location: Suffolk, UK
Status: Offline
Points: 6737
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote nick_h_nz Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: June 07 2021 at 00:27
Originally posted by iluvmarillion iluvmarillion wrote:

As I said I find it mystifying Gilmour would object to the Mark Blake liner notes. However reading Roger Water's comments again from his Facebook page he refers to Gilmour as a jolly good guitarist and singer. If I was Gilmour I'd personally find those comments pretty patronizing. It's like Gilmour referring to Waters as a jolly good lyricist. I think they're engaging in a personal feud that goes back a long time. Someone else referred to Water's treatment of Rick Wright post The Wall. It could even go back to the early days surrounding the departure of Syd Barrett from the band. Who knows? The older you get you tend to lose your creativity so then you get more protective about the proprietary of your original song writing contributions. You can't really blame either artist for that. What everybody agrees with here is why do they have to battle it out so publicly? 

It may be a cultural thing. I doubt Waters meant “jolly good” to be patronising, and I doubt Gilmour took it that way. The English are masters of the understatement. One of the highest compliments you can give to something you really like is to say it’s “not bad”. Calling something jolly good is a real acknowledgment from Waters. He can be a bit of an arse, but here I think he is being genuinely gracious. I mean, it’s a bit of a classic 💩 sandwich, as he surrounds his compliment with less positive comments - but I think Gilmour will not have taken the actual compliment as being patronising.

As for the battle not being public. In general, yes. Specifically, here, I don’t think it’s (all) part of the battle. Like others, I’ve known about the reissue of Animals for a couple of years, and known it has been subject to unexplained delays. I think Waters has done the right thing here, because he has explained the delay. Not only that, he has provided the liner notes that caused the delay, so that anyone who wants to read why Gilmour refused to have the album released with them can try and understand why he had such an issue with them.

I think Waters would have been better off simply saying something along the lines of “I know you’ve all been wondering why the Animals reissue has been so long in coming. It was all down to these liner notes. Gilmour refused to allow the album to be released with these notes. Here they are. Make of it what you will”, but of course he’s not that sort of chap. But take away his snarky comments, and advertisements for his memoirs, and there’s not really anything wrong with providing the notes that caused the delay. I, for one, am glad he did.

Waters doesn’t come off great here, because he can’t really help himself from trying to prove that he was the essence of Pink Floyd, and that the band ceased to be after he left - carrying on in name only, as a shadow of its former self. But I think Gilmour comes off worse here. Because if these liner notes really were the cause of the delay (and one has to assume that is the case, as Waters has claimed, or there would by now have been some form of rebuttal or repercussion), then Gilmour comes off as rather petty.

Back to Top
suitkees View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: July 19 2020
Location: France
Status: Offline
Points: 8694
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote suitkees Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: June 07 2021 at 02:03
Well, reading Mark Blake's liner notes I definitely get the impression he is RW's spokesperson. It is not really balanced regarding the creative contributions of all the band members. Apart from the original idea of two songs after the DSotM sessions, where Gilmour is mentioned as a creative contributor, in the rest of the text the other musicians are merely depicted as players and all the creativity originates from RW. A selection:

- ...but Roger insisted that neither song was relevant to the overall idea...
- Scroll forward two years, and Roger had an idea for the next Pink Floyd album...
- Following Roger’s instincts about the new songs
- The narrative was completed by the addition of two new Waters songs...
- The idea for Pink Floyd’s flying pig was also Roger’s.
- ...it was joined by another Water’s idea
- Both the album and the tour signposted the way to Pink Floyd’s next release, The Wall, and to Roger’s ever more ambitious ideas...

This might all be true, but why then remain silent about the creative input of the other band members? It suffices to listen to Animals to understand they all had a creative input (contrary to The Final Cut, e.g.), but from these liner notes one can conclude that RW is the sole genius of the band and the others are merely musicians (players). To me there is clearly lacking a balance, so I can fully understand why DG did not accept these liner notes.

Another notable thing is the mentioning of the names: RW's name is the most mentioned (by far), only at the first occurrence by his first name and last name. Then it is "Roger" or "Waters" everywhere. The other band members are only mentioned (once or twice) by first and last name together...
Edit: I counted it for you to make it even more clear - name occurrences:
- Roger Waters (or Roger or Waters) : 17
- David Guilmour: 2
- Nick Mason: 1
- Rick Wright: 1


Edited by suitkees - June 07 2021 at 02:23

The razamataz is a pain in the bum
Back to Top
nick_h_nz View Drop Down
Collaborator
Collaborator
Avatar
Prog Metal / Heavy Prog Team

Joined: March 01 2013
Location: Suffolk, UK
Status: Offline
Points: 6737
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote nick_h_nz Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: June 07 2021 at 02:34
Originally posted by suitkees suitkees wrote:

Another notable thing is the mentioning of the names: RW's name is the most mentioned (by far), only at the first occurrence by his first name and last name. Then it is "Roger" or "Waters" everywhere. The other band members are only mentioned (once or twice) by first and last name together...

Im not sure that is notable, as that is a fairly standard way of naming people. Both names are used the first time, and then only one (first or last) from then on. The exception here is David Gilmour who is mentioned twice by both names, but to be honest, I would have done the same, as the second mention is so long after the first. The way the names are given is pretty much exactly as I would write them if I were writing a review.

Gilmour and Wright are both given credit where it is due, but Animals is a Waters-led album, so it’s hardly surprising that his name is mentioned more. Wish You Were Here is realistically the last album by Pink Floyd as a band, and the cracks were already showing. Everything after is very much Waters. Animals, The Wall and The Final Cut all have contributions from the other members, but are undeniably vehicles for Waters. I would never go as far as some do, and claim any are effectively Waters solo albums in all but name, but for me Animals is no more or less a Waters solo album than The Final Cut, so make of that what you will.

I don’t see the problem with acknowledging how much of Animals came from Waters. I don’t say that as a fan of Waters, because I’m really not. I don’t mind any of the albums made by Floyd members outside the band (or those of the post-Waters Floyd), but none are as good as when Gilmour and Waters were both in the band. Gilmour is a jolly good guitarist, and that is noted in the comments on Dogs. But ultimately, Animals largely came from Waters, and as impressive as their contributions are to the album, it’s hard to think of what more could have been said about the other Floyd members.

Back to Top
suitkees View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: July 19 2020
Location: France
Status: Offline
Points: 8694
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (1) Thanks(1)   Quote suitkees Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: June 07 2021 at 02:58
^ Personally, I think there is much more that can be said about the creative contributions from the other band members (but I only have my ears that say that to me...), but I agree completely with the rest of your last paragraph (but, thus, disagree completely with the last line of the preceding paragraph).

The problem is probably that the creative processes in (rock) bands are much a result of some kind of synergy where the creativity of one is triggered/augmented by the creativity of others. I do believe that Waters was the driving force behind Animals, but I'm convinced that the creative input of the others were more important than what he wants to make believe in these liner notes.

Other than that, I don't care at all about their bickering, but I do think, and continue to think, that these liner notes are not balanced.

The razamataz is a pain in the bum
Back to Top
jude111 View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: October 20 2009
Location: Not Here
Status: Offline
Points: 1729
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote jude111 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: June 07 2021 at 07:34
Originally posted by Manuel Manuel wrote:

I hope they realize all this nonsense is only hurting themselves. In any case, I want to see what the package brings, to decide if I’ll buy it or not.

As a kid in the late 70s discovering Pink Floyd's 70s albums, I loved the fact that there were no photos of the band on the albums. It was a mystery who they were and what they looked like. I loved that, it was very refreshing. But my interest in them began to seriously wane in the 80s when the Waters v Gilmour feud erupted in the open. Gilmour's always managed to project an image of a decent bloke who tries to stay above the mudfights Waters initiates. (I love Waters, his last album was brilliant, my politics aligns with his, so this gives me no pleasure to say.)

Waters' reignition of this feud is just beyond the pale. The only thing I care about an Animals release is the bonus material anyway - live stuff, studio outtakes (like early versions of Animals material). I totally get why Gilmour keeps Waters off the PF webpage. Waters simply can't be trusted, he's unstable and creates toxic environments and airs his grievances in public. Too bad that's still the case; before now, I thought he had mellowed.

(On the other hand, I really hope he releases a new album, hopefully with Nigel Godrich again.)


Edited by jude111 - June 07 2021 at 07:40
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1234 7>

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down



This page was generated in 0.174 seconds.
Donate monthly and keep PA fast-loading and ad-free forever.