[OT] Roger Waters "In The Flesh" (was: HW: family tree tracklist)

[Captain Bl@ck]

As a long-time fan of Pink Floyd, I think its fair to say that Roger has
certainly been more creative than his ex-colleagues since 1984. I don't care
much for Pros and Cons, and Radio Chaos was only marginally better, but I do
think he hit on something with Amused to Death.

A Momentary Lapse of Reason is a good listen though, and I loved it at the
time. Sure, half of it is written by non-Floyds, and if it is a forgery, its
a bloody good one. But the Division Bell was, for the most part, truly
awful. Bad unimaginitive playing, poor production, lousy songs and lyrics
that are almost embarassingly bad, when you think what the 70's Floyd were
capable of.

I did see them live at Earl's Court in 1994, and I thought it was a
wonderful show.  But when you listen to the live tapes, its blindingly
obvious that Gilmour's heart just isn't in it anymore.

Captain Bl at ck



----- Original Message -----
From: Nick Medford <nick at HERMIT0.DEMON.CO.UK>
To: <BOC-L at LISTSERV.SPC.EDU>
Sent: Wednesday, January 31, 2001 9:21 PM
Subject: Re: [OT] Roger Waters "In The Flesh" (was: HW: family tree
tracklist)


> In message <5.0.2.1.0.20010131004327.0336d0b0 at kommsrv.rz.unibw-
> muenchen.de>, Denis Regenbrecht <denis.regenbrecht at UNIBW-
> MUENCHEN.DE> writes
> >Hi,
> >
> >I wish good ol' Roger would tour in Europe a little bit (it's the only
way
> >to see some Floyd live as the Gilmour-troupe is doing anything but making
> >music).
>
> I know passions run high on this issue, but I'm one of those who feel the
> band should have ended after Roger's departure. I think the subsequent
> history of "Pink Floyd" has done a great disservice to the band and their
> legend (though probably not to their bank balances).  And what I've heard
> of their post-Final Cut output has been mediocre at best.
>
> That said, I did actually see them live in the late 80s, before I had
really
> made my mind up about this, and because I wanted to see a Floyd show at
> least once in my life. But actually, despite all the pyrotechnics and
> inflatables etc., it wasn't as good as either of the Waters shows I've
seen (I
> saw the Pros and Cons tour in '84 too), because at Roger's shows the films
> and special effects and so on are very thoughtfully put together, whereas
his
> former colleagues just put on a big but artless show.
>
> >
> >>Anyway I hought the show was excellent, exceeded my expectations, but
> >>whether it
> >>would work without the visuals (i.e. as a live album) I don't know. What
say
> >>you?
> >
> >I haven't seen the live-shows so I can't comment on how good the CD
> >reflects the concerts, but it's rather good on its own IMO. The selection
> >of songs is very well-balanced: a lot from the "classic" Floyd-albums
> >(DsoTM, WYWH, Animals, Wall, tFC  and even "Set the Control for the Heart
> >of the Sun"
>
> Aha! I was hoping 'Set The Controls' would be on it. That was the
> highlight for me.
>
> >) as well as songs from Roger's solo-albums (especially from
> >"Amused to Death"). There's also a new song ("Each Small Candle") on it.
> >The sound quality is very good, but the mix isn't the best IMO: the
vocals
> >are too much in the front, whereas the instruments (especially
synths/keys
> >and bass) are too much in the back.
> >The performance of the band is very good, as you've already said. Roger
> >mustered an interesting little band around him. Some of the classic PF
> >songs (such as "Shine On..." or "Wish You Were Here") work very well
> >without Gilmour much to my surprise.
>
> Yeah, I was impressed by the way the guitarists played the songs in an
> authentic way without ever trying to just copy Gilmour's style. Especially
as
> I thought Eric Clapton was trying too hard to sound like DG on 'Pros and
> Cons'.
>
> > I rate this album higher than anything
> >put out by the the "real" Pink Floyd in the last decade,
>
> Well, that's not saying too much by my reckoning, Still, you make it sound
> good. Thanks for the response.
>
> --
> Nick Medford