Quote:
Originally Posted by boo boo
The live disc is great, studio material not so much.
o_O
A masterpiece? Really?
Maybe saying its bad is pushing it, but I think its below average. Its pretty much a Roger Waters solo album. Theres some good stuff on it, but I just have a personal problem with Waters hijacking the band the way he did, he may have already done it with The Wall, but it was still a great album, because it still sounded like Pink Floyd and it still sounded like a band effort, and Waters at least let Gilmour sing on more than one damn song. This album consists mostly of Waters moping about his dead father and Margaret Thatcher with bloated orchestrial backing (who needs the band?) and just the occassional Gilmour solo to remind people that he's still in the damn band. The best songs on this album are the more rockin ones, and they just sound like outtakes from The Wall.
On its own its not that bad, but by Pink Floyd standards it is IMO.
|
This post represents an interesting crux. Bands are always told to try new things and evolve lest the fans get bored, yet stray too far from an established formula and it will almost definitely fail miserably.
Problem being fans dont know which they want and will hate on bands that do either too much.