Premier Rock Forum

pldms wrote: Wed Feb 12, 2025 7:27 am

twelvepoint wrote: Wed Feb 12, 2025 7:02 am Beware the Hammett-syndrome where not having a guitar solo will date your music to “now”

10/10 reference. That scene was like watching a puppy being kicked in the nuts, amplified by the victim looking like a balding spaniel.

Wonder if Waters and Gilmour ever had a similarly embarrassing argument

I'd hate it if I heard it for the first time today. As it stands, I heard it as a depressed, self-absorbed middle-schooler and went through a whole phase with it—as people that age are probably wont to do—and I still have enough affection for it to vote NOT CRAP with waffles. The bleak parts of it hit me where I live in some kind of reflexive way.

I've always hated all the fucking circus music on side four, though.

I'm to get through this one now. It really is art-rock for beer dads.

zorg wrote: Tue Feb 11, 2025 2:09 pm I'll have to re-listen to this one, It has been too long for my vote to count, but my impression was that it was annoying and British, and unlike what came before. Obviously the boys can still compose and play...but with diminishing returns. I will revert with a legitimate review.

I re-listened and am changing my vote to Not Crap. Really beautiful and bleak and the melodrama ALMOST gets over the line, and then they throw in the Bertolt Brecht operetta shit at the end and shoot it all to bits. Oh well. Still much better than I remembered it. My last listening session having been a end-to-end PF survey, where this is uncomfortably bloated and redundant. But on its own...very nice. I feel like some of the lyrics and musical passages are also quite "metal" in their moodiness and minor key melodies and loud/quiet dynamics.

I hate it, despite one or two good songs. It's simple, I don't want to spend 80 minutes with that fucking man baby Pink. After Animals, this was an astonishing drop in quality.

horse_laminator wrote: Mon Feb 17, 2025 3:18 pm I hate it, despite one or two good songs. It's simple, I don't want to spend 80 minutes with that fucking man baby Pink. After Animals, this was an astonishing drop in quality.

Agreed. Astonishing is a perfect way to describe it. There should be a thunderstorm between the two.

i probably listened to this record every day when i was 12 years old. what the fuck. hah. i remember going back and giving it a listen maybe 15 years ago and being blown away by how bored i was by it. i am listening to it this morning and really enjoying a lot of the songs that aren’t the radio hits. basically don’t need any of the “another brick in the wall” songs. way too much, but not as bad as i thought it would be.

akosinski wrote: Wed Feb 19, 2025 10:41 am not as bad as i thought it would be.

This should be the pull quote for the inevitable next remaster. That reminds me that I saw some PF fans discussing online how long the batteries in their "Pulse" packaging held out. Apparently a proper PF fan will cycle the double A batts every 5 years or so to keep the eternal LED flame alive.

I grew up with The Wall, so certainly nostalgia clouds my judgement, but I still enjoy throwing it on every once in a while. It's totally bloated, but I enjoy it.

My least favorite Pink Floyd records have one thing in common: Bob Ezrin produced them.