[dflee]

Wow.
If your a fan of Rogers last few albums than this might be something you'll enjoy.
I'll have to listen to it a few more times before I decide ya or nay.
It's the style Waters has morphed into but has an old familiarity to it.
Anyone else listened to it?

Don

[MttBsh]

There are a few comments, all pretty negative including my own, on Pumpkinman’s "Rock and Roll" thread.  There was no way he was going to improve on the original, but curiosity got the best of me and I was able to stream it on Qobuz. Rogers' spoken narrative over the music kept me from getting past the first few cuts. Apparently there are those who feel it is "brilliant" and more power to them.

[SteveFord]

I'll take a pass on this one, he lost his marbles quite some time ago.

[FullRangeMan]

OK Iam a Roger fan, I have just listened it on YT.
I would say its barely nice, too much narrative, not great instrumentals as the 1960/70s albums, but much better than the current pop/rock garbage or even Free Jazz, seems the EMI musical producer of Atom and Meddle is missing here.

Roger always was a fighter, a gladiator against the Emperor, not a conformist like the others, I appreciate very much Roger work capacity and his social activism at 80 years old.

[charmerci]

I've only seen that 7 and a half minute video of the one song(I forgot which one) with the panting dog. It was PAINFUL! Simply awful. Besides, who wants to watch a dog pant with its tongue hanging out for 7 minutes.
I'm not sure if I want to hear the rest. And yes, I love DSOTM. Pink Floyd wasn't good without Roger but Roger wasn't that great without PF either.

[SteveFord]

At the end of his career BB King was up on stage reminiscing about old events instead of playing.
I read one review on this latest tour: Roger is telling stories about a pet duck, getting heckled and then cursing out the audience.
They're walking out on him.

[Dieterle Tool]

^ I hear you Steve, but at the ages these guys are at, I think we're following for nostalgic reasons more than performance. I think we have all heard their respective catalogs redundantly. A little insight into what they're thinking is tolerable. I recently saw Steve Miller and the conversation between songs was more tantalizing than the old cuts, even though he had a nice slice of improvisation with them.

-Dieter   

[SteveFord]

Yep, old age is catching up.
One my sisters saw Leon Russell shortly before he passed and he said, "We'll just pretend I walked off the stage and then came back out for the encore..."

[timind]

I listened to it last night. As a big fan of Roger Waters, I must say I wasn't impressed. Dark Side Of The Moon is my third favorite Pink Floyd album. During 73 and 74, DSOTM was played constantly, especially at parties and get togethers. As big as it was for me though, I have listened to it maybe 5 times since the late 70s.

I liked the feel of the new version, but Waters' rambling/babbling really put a damper on the experience. It's a shame to me as I loved Amused To Death, and was happy with his other solo albums.

[jpm]

My thoughts reposted here from another forum.

After some thought, I believe that the big problem I have with this work is the title. Musically it’s a “leave it” for me, but then so are many other new releases I listen to. This one got under my skin because the title lead me to expect more from it.

The Dark Side Of The Moon is a musical and cultural icon. Of all their work, it’s the one most likely to be bigger than the band itself. This new work echos little bits of the original but is otherwise nowhere remotely close in stature, nor does it contribute anything to the ideas, themes, spirit or creativity of the original. The title lead me to expect the opposite.