Why? Why is this new album suddenly disrespectful when Momentary Lapse and Division Bell weren't?
The fact that they were immature in the past doesn't mean they shouldn't be mature now.
This new case is particularly disrespectful because of what has happened since. As I've said, I think Waters shutting the band out for two albums and then Dave having two albums without Waters at all, is a perfectly logical, fair and even balance between the two warring parties. After which they even reconciled at Live 8, likely the classiest swansong for a legendary band since The Last Waltz.
So now that everything was balanced and reconciled and apparently hunky dory, putting out a "new" Pink Floyd album without Waters is a major smack in the face to both Roger and the band's legacy.
Floyd is something that Dave and Rog both had a hand in building. I understand that when they were younger and still flying high off of their biggest successes, circumstances were bound to deteriorate, that's understandable
at the time. The difference is that they're all older and wiser now, and they've had the necessary distance & time to learn from their mistakes and come to peace with the past. At this point the legacy of the band is what deserves priority consideration.
The focus should be on preserving the heritage of the band as a whole, like they did on Echoes, with
everyone being consulted. Putting some newly reworked Division Bell outtakes on a Division Bell reissue? Perfectly reasonable. But putting out a "new" Pink Floyd album today affects the band's legacy and it's completely unfair to do that without consulting Roger Waters. At this point we should be far, far beyond the squabbles and transgressions of the past, and all indications until now pointed towards that being the case. There's no longer any excuse to not have the band's legacy be a collaborative issue.
EXACTLY. And this new album will have already recorded stuff from Wright on it, it's a Swan Song to keep him memory alive and maybe pick up some new fans.
BTW, Queen are doing a similar thing by adding music to some already recorded lyrics by Freddie Mercury. Is THAT disrespectful to Freddie?
There's a new Micheal Jackson album out that I know little about to be honest but I'm sure it's had some studio tweeking before it's release.
There's been a lot of Jimi Hendrix material released in the past ten years, and in the liner notes it says which songs have been pieced together from a few different takes, in come cases for two separate jams sessions to create a completed track.
There's also Roy Orbison. On of the songs from a posthumous album contained guitars added after his death.
As I said in an earlier post, I'm a massive fan of Dream Theater, but Portnoy is really starting to shit me. Yes, he's entitled to his opinion and to say what he wants, blah blah blah, but it''s like he was a nerd for twenty years and now he'd been accepted by the cool kids so he turned his back on his band and just keeps running his mouth to get some attention. Cheers for playing the social media so well. He's got people talking about The Winery Dogs.
Thaaaat's a whole different issue that I'm sure we could discuss all day in its own right. Personally speaking, I find it disrespectful for bands to carry on with a lucrative name after the pivotal members have exited. But I have no problem with posthumously released material featuring the original members. That's not the issue here, I have no problem with them releasing the Division Bell outtakes on the Division Bell re-release like The Stones did with their outtakes from Exile that they recorded new vocals for. My issue is with this being touted as a "new Pink Floyd album." A better comparison for this would be when Kanye West's song Otis was listed as being a collaboration with Otis Redding, when really it was just an old sample of Redding and no other artist would have listed an old sample as though they had personally worked on the track.
It's all good.
