I don't know what rock I was sleeping under, but apparently Pink Floyd have been busy over the past year putting together a "best of" compilation called Echoes. The concept of a Pink Floyd greatest hits album is rather suspect, and previous compilations of their "best" at the time leave little to be desired. This one looks interesting, though... It's got one "new" track (When the Tigers Broke Free) but what is most interesting is that the song order and arrangement was chosen to (allegedly) make it one seamless experience. Besides making me wish the Empeg's gapless playback was more perfect (please, no lectures about how MP3's can't do gapless playback) I think that it's a pretty cool idea to take the greatest hits and make a "mix" of them.

I really like the selection of songs.. Unlike a lot of Floyd diehards I'm not huge on Atom Heart Mother or Obscured by Clouds so their omission in this set doesn't bother me much. I listen to both albums now and again, but Summer '68 is the only song that I would have liked to have seen here. Obviously some of my other favorites didn't make "the final cut", but for only 2 CD's, I think they did a decent job balancing quality and diversity. The fact that they decided to put Sorrow on this set bothers me a little because it's one of the only Floyd songs I will actually skip over... But I guess David lobbied pretty hard for it.

Well anyway, I'm a sucker for anything Floyd, they're by far my favorite band. But I already have all of the albums, so I'd be interested to hear opinions from anyone who owns this collection. I can't imagine that the "remastering" has done anything drastic to the songs, so I'd really only be buying it for this alleged arrangement of the songs which supposedly took the band a full year to come up with. Is this bunk, or should I go buy it today?

Yeah, there's an article about it in the most recent Guitar Player. One of the interesting things about it is that they got the original masters, before the songs were mixed together and joined, so that the new best-of has all-new fades. Still not enough for me to buy it (``original'' Floyd albums have too much crossover as it is). Regardless, I hope that that ``Final Cut'' reference doesn't mean that either you wanted there to be a track from that vanity album in there, or, even worse, that there was.

On another note (can you tell I'm bored?), a friend of mine and I were talking the other day that Pink Floyd and Yes should have traded Roger Waters and Chris Squire, because Yes needed someone who could write lyrics, and Pink Floyd needed someone who could ... well ... play bass.

Yeah, saw an ad for that during the Floyd special on VH1. Interesting.

And if I recall, "When the Tigers Broke Free" is in the movie version of The Wall, isn't it?

How dare you say anything negative about the brilliant album "The Final Cut" or even about Roger Waters, the GENIUS behind Floyd (post Syd of course). David Gilmore is a bloated, bragging, sometimes decent guitar player - nothing more.

Yes, "When the Tigers Broke Free" was heard in "The Wall" movie, but not included on the original album. Shame.

- Jon

In reply to:

---

How dare you say anything negative about the brilliant album "The Final Cut" or even about Roger Waters, the GENIUS behind Floyd (post Syd of course). David Gilmore is a bloated, bragging, sometimes decent guitar player - nothing more.

---

The sad thing is I don't know whether you're kidding or not. It's amazing, the vast array of different types of Floyd fans. I'm personally what I see as an early Gilmour fan. That is, More through Wish or so are my favorite albums. I see Piper, Saucerful, and Ummagumma as Syd albums (yes -- I know Syd barely touched Saucerful and Ummagumma, but they have that feel). Roger is Wish through Final Cut. And Momentary and Division are obviously late Gilmour. (This is all musically, obviously. Lyrics are a whole different matter.)

Also, I think that Gilmour is one of the topmost underrated rock guitarists of all time. He really is amazing; it's just that he seldom shows off. But when he does, be prepared to be blown away.

Anyway, enough egocentrism. As if you really care what I think about it.

Au contraire, mon frere. I actually meant "the final cut" in its literal form, but I couldn't help but make the play on words. Aside from "Two Suns in the Sunset" and "Not Now John" I don't find the album very listenable. Calling it "The Wall part II" as Roger does is an insult to The Wall.

Though Roger did manage to get "The Fletcher Memorial Home" onto this collection.. almost surely, Gilmour traded that for "Sorrow" which is at best an average song.

In the Gilmour/Waters feud I tend to side with Gilmour, but in terms of their musical contributions I think they were both pretty equal. Yeah Waters is at best an average bassist, but I think the songwriting makes up for it. The two post-Waters albums both have their moments, and I think The Division Bell holds its own amongst the best Pink Floyd albums. If the bastards ever settled their differences and toured, I'd go see 'em.

Sorry, but I have to respectfully disagree with a view that sides with Gilmore. The guy is a money sucking talent-starved egomaniac.

Waters is truly Pink. Have you listened to "Amused to Death" or "Radio KAOS"? Division Smell and the other crappy "albums" can't hold a candle...

I'm not kidding at all. I really dislike Gilmore for a lot of reasons. A lot of my dislike comes from his money grubbing Floyd exploitation attempts, and a lot of it is based on the fact that he really wasn't the intelligence behind the brilliant albums that Floyd has made as evidenced by what he's done without Water's help.

- Jon

Hey, I'm all about respectful disagreement, but frankly I'm not in either Waters' or Gilmour's "camp." I just think that everything that Waters contributed in terms of lyrics and songwriting was equalled by what Gilmour gave in his own songwriting and his musicianship. In terms of exploitation, I don't think Gilmour did anything that Waters wouldn't have done if he was still on speaking terms with the rest of the band. Are you calling Shine On, Pulse, etc. exploitation attempts? You think if Waters was still part of the band he would have objected to releasing a double live album and a box set? How is any of it different than Waters' "In The Flesh"? I think that Gilmour, Mason, and Wright did what they had to do with the band, and released some damn good material despite losing such a key songwriter. They're both egomaniacs, but I guess I chose the egomaniac who carried the rest of Pink Floyd with him.

Gilmour talent-starved? Wow.. That's one I haven't heard from any fans, even the ones who are on Waters' side of the "rift" so to speak. I can totally understand your opinion of AMLOR and The Division Bell... And I agree Gilmour's best work was with Waters in the band. Nobody really denies Waters was the inspiration behind the band's best work. But Gilmour was a perfect complement to Waters' ideas, and I think none of the great albums would have been nearly as good without Gilmour's balance. Ever see any of the documentaries of the recording sessions from DSOTM or The Wall? Before I watched them I might have also believed Waters was the true "brains" but I consider Pink Floyd a "two headed monster" with the equally talented but very different Waters and Gilmour calling the shots (with occasional flashes of brilliance from Nick and Rick.

Hey, to each his own. But please don't think I'm siding with Gilmour because I like AMLOR and The Division Bell, and don't care for The Final Cut. I just want them to bury the hatchet and the band to reunite and tour again. Not gonna happen, but we can dream.

In reply to:

---

Have you listened to "Amused to Death"?

---

I've only listened to it once or twice (I only bought it last year); maybe I was in the wrong mood, but it sounded like the Wall with all the cheerful bits taken out. I'm not sure I want to listen to it while I'm driving...

Also, I think that Gilmour is one of the topmost underrated rock guitarists of all time.

I don't think I've ever seen David being "Underrated". He is widely respected among musicians. I think he's been given due credit for a long time. Every guitar player I know always listens in rapt attention when he plays.

What makes him so good is his melodic phrasing. He's not fast or flashy, he's just incredibly tasteful. A musician friend of mine put it best, she said: "He always chooses exactly the right notes. After David plays a phrase, you couldn't imagine any other notes being used in their place."

Another thing that makes him so distinctive is his tone and his sound. I had fun with a friend (the husband of the friend I mentioned above as a matter of fact) when I bought a certain Kate Bush album a few years ago. They didn't own the album yet and didn't know that David was a guest performer on one of the tracks. I put the track into their CD player and told them that they had to guess who the guest performer was. I didn't even tell them that it was a guitarist. David's guitar solo began with a single, long, sustained note. Almost instantly, my friend said "Gilmour". I swear it was only about a beat or two into this first note. He could tell it was David with just one note.

I'm not going to get into the middle of the Waters/Gilmour debate, though because I make it a point not to discuss religion.

I will say this, though: I think both are brilliant musicians and each has different strengths. Pink Floyd, to me, was the pairing of Waters and Gilmour. The albums Gilmour is doing without Roger are, in my opinion, just Gilmour solo albums which happen to have a different name printed on the cover. This doesn't make them BAD in my opinion, they just aren't the same thing as the Waters/Gilmour collaborative works.

In reply to:

---

Have you listened to "Amused to Death" or "Radio KAOS"?

---

Yup, and ``Pros and Cons of Hitch-hiking''. I was bored to tears by all of them. I liken it to enjoying Husker Du and deciding ``Boy, I should really listen to those solo Grant Hart albums.'' I've already made that mistake, too. Blech.

In reply to:

---

I don't think I've ever seen David being "Underrated". He is widely respected among musicians. I think he's been given due credit for a long time. Every guitar player I know always listens in rapt attention when he plays.

---

I meant by the great unwashed. He's swept under the rug with Frank Zappa while hacks like Yngwie "See the speeds at which I can noodle around in this myxolydian mode" Malmsteen get lauded.

PS: While searching for hacks on CDNow, I noticed that my old guitar instructor's (fairly obscure) old band, Cry of Love, has a song included on a Guitar Heroes VA album. How cool is that?