Jump to content

Thoughts on Momentary Lapse of Reason & Division Bell?


ShadowOfTheWave

Recommended Posts

They have their moments, but (imo) it is not Pink Floyd. Pros and Cons of Hitchhiking is more Pink Floyd than either of these. IMO it would be like Velvet Revolver with Duff singing calling its self Guns n' Roses. Waters made that band what it was, when he was gone, so was Pink Floyd. I do like some of the songs they did, but pros and cons is better as an album. Axl has more in common with Roger Waters than just about any other musician imo. I think thats part of the reason he fought for the name like he did.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

They have their moments, but (imo) it is not Pink Floyd. Pros and Cons of Hitchhiking is more Pink Floyd than either of these. IMO it would be like Velvet Revolver with Duff singing calling its self Guns n' Roses. Waters made that band what it was, when he was gone, so was Pink Floyd. I do like some of the songs they did, but pros and cons is better as an album. Axl has more in common with Roger Waters than just about any other musician imo. I think thats part of the reason he fought for the name like he did.

some say it wasn't Pink Floyd after Barrett.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The true fans that have been there since the beginning are entitled to feel that way. Just like fans of Peter Green's Fleetwood Mac probably hate the later versions. But the difference is in both the case of Pink Floyd and Fleetwood Mac, the line ups that gained the most success are usually considered "best" of the band.

Which in the case of Pink Floyd makes it even worse, because Gimour (even though I love him) he was not an original member. He replaced Barrett. Thats like Gilby Clark becoming the leader of a Axl, Slash, and Izzy less gnr.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The true fans that have been there since the beginning are entitled to feel that way. Just like fans of Peter Green's Fleetwood Mac probably hate the later versions. But the difference is in both the case of Pink Floyd and Fleetwood Mac, the line ups that gained the most success are usually considered "best" of the band.

Which in the case of Pink Floyd makes it even worse, because Gimour (even though I love him) he was not an original member. He replaced Barrett. Thats like Gilby Clark becoming the leader of a Axl, Slash, and Izzy less gnr.

I wouldn't liken it to Gilby taking over GNR. Like you say, Gilmour was there when the band experienced its highest level of success. I'd liken it to Slash becoming the leader of GNR sans Axl and Izzy. Slash wasn't an original member, but he was there when the group achieved its most success.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Pros and Cons of Hitchhiking is more Pink Floyd than either of these.

As good a band as Waters put together, it missed the dynamics and the interplay between Gilmour, Wright, and Mason. Music-wise it sounded not much like Pink Floyd.

Clapton does well, but his playing is a forced fit with Waters' music. By the time he got around to making Amused To Death Waters had found his own(solo) sound.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

A Momentary Lapse... is pretty poor, it contains a couple of great songs but doesn't come across as a Pink Floyd album very well in my opinion.

The Division Bell is much better though.

I believe Roger came up with The Wall and Pros and Cons...at around the same time and both were presented to the others and they chose what ended up being The Wall...I have the "immersion" set of The Wall with all the demos etc and it is interesting to note that a version of the track "Sexual Revolution" that ended up on Pros and Cons...was recorded by Pink Floyd during The Wall sessions.

While I do prefer Roger's material overall, Dave (plus Richard and Nick) generally came up with the better music while Roger has brilliant ideas and motifes his albums can be rather morose and heavy going.

Neither party has done anything as good apart as what they did together.

That said, Amused To Death is the best post "classic" Floyd album.

Syd's Pink Floyd is "a whole different beast", I feel no shame in admitting I much prefer the stuff they did once Gilmour joined the band.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

MLoR has aged very poorly but The Division Bell still stands up. I consider Waters' Amused To Death to be a Pink Floyd album as well and I think it's better than TDB and MLoR combined, by a long shot. To this day, I think it's funny that both Roger and Dave wrote these albums (AFD & TDB) centered around lack of communication, yet neither of them could follow their own advice and attempt to settle their differences at the time.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Pink Floyd is not Pink Floyd without Roger Waters. Yeah, I get people saying its not Pink Floyd without Syd Barrett, and they are right in terms of that incarnation. But Pink Floyd is also very much the band that created Dark Side Of The Moon and Wish You Were Here and you can't ignore that. Anyone saying Pink Floyd wasn't Floyd without Barrett is simply ignorant or didn't like the band after they left so that excuse works for them. Pink Floyd is Roger Waters, David Gilmour, Nick Mason, Rick Wright, and early on Syd Barrett.

The flaw with my argument is I love The Final Cut and I do genuinely consider that a Pink Floyd album. The other two most certainly are not in my opinion, and with that being the case I'd be fine to not call The Final Cut one either (even though I really do think it is since it has Waters and Gilmour). Those last two albums may sound Floydish, just as Gilmour's On An Island sounds Floydish, but you can never convince me they are true Pink Floyd albums. Just as I don't think any Roger Waters album to be a Floyd album, and thats not to mention they are pretty bad as well.

Pink Floyd ended with The Wall, and arguably with Animals. Just my two cents.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Pink Floyd is not Pink Floyd without Roger Waters. Yeah, I get people saying its not Pink Floyd without Syd Barrett, and they are right in terms of that incarnation. But Pink Floyd is also very much the band that created Dark Side Of The Moon and Wish You Were Here and you can't ignore that. Anyone saying Pink Floyd wasn't Floyd without Barrett is simply ignorant or didn't like the band after they left so that excuse works for them. Pink Floyd is Roger Waters, David Gilmour, Nick Mason, Rick Wright, and early on Syd Barrett.

The flaw with my argument is I love The Final Cut and I do genuinely consider that a Pink Floyd album. The other two most certainly are not in my opinion, and with that being the case I'd be fine to not call The Final Cut one either (even though I really do think it is since it has Waters and Gilmour). Those last two albums may sound Floydish, just as Gilmour's On An Island sounds Floydish, but you can never convince me they are true Pink Floyd albums. Just as I don't think any Roger Waters album to be a Floyd album, and thats not to mention they are pretty bad as well.

Pink Floyd ended with The Wall, and arguably with Animals. Just my two cents.

Finally another voice of reason.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...