Pink Floyd - "Animals" 5.1 Surround Sound Mix (Blu-Ray & SACD editions out in September 2022!)

[admsh]

Was that a joke, about the liner notes being the reason for the delay? And does Roger, having agreed that they won't be used, really think that publishing them online is in some twisted way, a fait accompli lol. Had they (said liner notes) been informative, in depth, utilising information gleaned from all parties involved then yes...publish and be damned. They're not in that category at all though, are they? They read like a schoolkid's essay and reading between the lines that is perhaps what was commissioned, something vague and simplistic. I'm not surprised that they have been rejected and frankly I am surprised that Roger would seek to make such a big deal out of their rejection, publishing the sub-standard notes as some kind of coup d'etat in a stupid war of his own making...the mind boggles lol. I mean, what's the point when it comes down to it? The point is nothing other than more of his "look at me!!!" agenda, sigh...you know, he doesn't need this, his importance as a founder member and genius songwriter (especially concerning Pink Floyd) is assured. Maybe there's something else going on, apart from a simple ego-trip which is, he has to know, what it appears to be.

You call it an ego trip, I suppose from his point of view he wants people to know that these masterpieces are his creations. I can't blame him, we are talking about seminal works of immeasurable importance to the history of music and conceptual art. And as he sees it, the true story has been under attack for decades. Badly written or not, I have a feeling these liner notes do tell a true story. We'll see if anyone tries to discredit them in any way, I don't think that's going to happen. Either way, let's hope and pray this release does see the light of day.

 

[splinter7]

Of course, Rick will be making the announcement on ice.

Actually, the announcement will be made from Mars.

 

[rontoon]

You call it an ego trip, I suppose from his point of view he wants people to know that these masterpieces are his creations.

And that's the problem, they're not. Sure, music gets credited to the lyricist and writer of the melody. But Raving and Drooling and Gotta Be Crazy were created as a band and developed live. And Gilmour has a writing credit for pretty much one entire side of the LP. Yes, Roger was the creative genius who put this all together but that's a far cry from alluding to the notion that Animals is all Roger's creation.

By preventing these biased liner notes from being printed Gilmour successfully kept Roger's ego in check. No small feat.

 

[admsh]

And that's the problem, they're not. Sure, music gets credited to the lyricist and writer of the melody. But Raving and Drooling and Gotta Be Crazy were created as a band and developed live. And Gilmour has a writing credit for pretty much one entire side of the LP. Yes, Roger was the creative genius who put this all together but that's a far cry from alluding to the notion that Animals is all Roger's creation.

By preventing these biased liner notes from being printed Gilmour successfully kept Roger's ego in check. No small feat.

Respectfully, I don't think it's a far cry at all. Gotta Be Crazy is the only track where DG has writing credits - with Roger for the music and the lyrics of course are Roger's, everything else is Credited to Roger. Animals is what it is because of the concept, and that's all Roger. The cover is Roger. Just like the Wall, this is Roger's masterpiece, and it's quite alright for him to want the world to know that. Otherwise every artist in history is guilty of being on an ego trip. It doesn't sound to me like the notes are biased. Again, we'll see if they're discredited by anyone, I bet they won't be.

 

[DuncanS]

I'm still curious as to what extra goodies will be included. Perhaps................?

 

[Bob Romano]

Seriously, this thread is worthless. I'll just wait for a few weeks for official release notice. Otherwise, all this chatter is beyond silly. I know, I know. grouchy old FuK

Some of these guys just can't help themselves then the whole thread goes to shit.

 

[harync]

Respectfully, I don't think it's a far cry at all. Gotta Be Crazy is the only track where DG has writing credits - with Roger for the music and the lyrics of course are Roger's, everything else is Credited to Roger. Animals is what it is because of the concept, and that's all Roger. The cover is Roger. Just like the Wall, this is Roger's masterpiece, and it's quite alright for him to want the world to know that. Otherwise every artist in history is guilty of being on an ego trip. It doesn't sound to me like the notes are biased. Again, we'll see if they're discredited by anyone, I bet they won't be.

I think the liner notes are relatively factual but written from a certain point of view. While this was undoubtedly the album where RW asserted control of the group's thematic direction, I'm sure a different version of those liner notes could be written emphasizing the collaborative nature of developing Raving and Drooling and You Gotta Be Crazy on the road.

I would wager both RW and DG have overstated their contributions. Even RW's petty example about the "Money" sound effects can simultaneously be true. Waters conceived and recorded some sound effects in his home studio, but the final process of cutting tape to exact lengths for the final recording has been confirmed by Alan Parsons. In this, as in many cases mentioned during their feud, RW emphasizes what were his ideas, and DG emphasizes how the recorded product came about.

 

[admsh]

I think the liner notes are relatively factual but written from a certain point of view. While this was undoubtedly the album where RW asserted control of the group's thematic direction, I'm sure a different version of those liner notes could be written emphasizing the collaborative nature of developing Raving and Drooling and You Gotta Be Crazy on the road.

I would wager both RW and DG have overstated their contributions. Even RW's petty example about the "Money" sound effects can simultaneously be true. Waters conceived and recorded some sound effects in his home studio, but the final process of cutting tape to exact lengths for the final recording has been confirmed by Alan Parsons. In this, as in many cases mentioned during their feud, RW emphasizes what were his ideas, and DG emphasizes how the recorded product came about.

Fair enough. It takes two to tango. IMHO idea and concept are the key words here. Michalangelo didn't paint the Sistine Chapel on his own either. And context matters, RW has been shut out of Pink Floyd for a long time, and I bet he's feeling the narrative was robbed from him. He basically says as much in some interviews I've heard, and how difficult is was for him to see the band playing his work and getting the credit for it in their live shows.

I don't believe the bashing he's getting in some posts here is justified, and most likely has nothing to do with the merits of what he is saying about Animals or the factual history of the band. People also seem to forget no one owes us anything. We should be thankful this is coming out at all, and once it does we can discuss the mix.

 

[rontoon]

RW has been shut out of Pink Floyd for a long time.

Perhaps the reason for this is that he quit the band 36 years ago and has acted as a nemesis for most of that time.

Yes, Roger was the genius behind Animals but it was a far cry from being a Roger Waters solo album.

It doesn't sound to me like the notes are biased. Again, we'll see if they're discredited by anyone, I bet they won't be.

The liner notes should tell a fair story, the ones submitted by Mark Blake do not. It's not that they aren't factual, the point is that if you're going to tell the story of this album you cant simply cherry pick your info and call it fair. You cant completely omit the guy who received credit on one side of the album and call it fair.

If Waters had his way the liner notes would simply be a single line, "I made this!"

 

[Sal1950]

I'm still curious as to what extra goodies will be included. Perhaps................?

Well first, I don't need no stinkin LP's. And why bother with the DVD if you can put all the various mixes on the BD? And if not, use 2 BD's, then fill whatevers left with more material like artwork. Or put any book, artwork, etc on a download you can access with serial numbered BD's. I'm cheap and would like to see some cost control measures put into place with these box sets.

 

[edisonbaggins]

As with The Later Years, I'll sell the DVD, if anyone expresses interest.

 

[skherbeck]

Don't forget the baaah of a sheep!

I think this is another genuinely plausible extra (alongside the inflatable and popup). The Pulse CD originally came with a flashing LED in the case.

It might be asking too much to expect a flying sheep, though: tim hunkin/Pink Floyd's pigs and sheep (This is the guy who created flying sheep for the In The Flesh tour.)

Mine is still on the shelf flashing (I've had to replace the battery every few years)

 

[AshBuchanan]

Mine is still on the shelf flashing (I've had to replace the battery every few years)

I have tried to remove the battery, but it feels like the box will fall apart

 

[rontoon]

Well now we know what set off Roger.

https://www.rollingstone.com/music/...lmour-theater-for-dreamers-interview-1177233/

 

[rtbluray]

Well now we know what set off Roger.

https://www.rollingstone.com/music/...lmour-theater-for-dreamers-interview-1177233/

That's exactly the kind of response I would expect from David, trying his best to keep his head above the murk.
Roger does seem to have three emotive states lately: "angry", "look at me", and "I'm angry you're not looking at me" and that's exactly what this whole "Animals" stunt seems to be about.

Though there is one thing that I find peculiar about this whole liner notes situation, which is that some of the Pink Floyd reissues have them and others don't. There's no consistency to any of it.

 

[rontoon]

That's exactly the kind of response I would expect from David, trying his best to keep his head above the murk.
Roger does seem to have three emotive states lately: "angry", "look at me", and "I'm angry you're not looking at me" and that's exactly what this whole "Animals" stunt seems to be about.

Though there is one thing that I find peculiar about this whole liner notes situation, which is that some of the Pink Floyd reissues have them and others don't. There's no consistency to any of it.

I see consistency here. Just compare apples to apples.

Did any of the Pink Floyd Records reissues have liner notes? No.
Did the SACD of Dark Side of the Moon come with liner notes? No.
Did the SACD of Wish You Were Here come with liner notes? No.

This Animals release isn't an Immersion box, it's not even an Experience package. It's a re-release of the single album, nothing more, in multiple format choices.

 

[rtbluray]

I see consistency here. Just compare apples to apples.

Did any of the Pink Floyd Records reissues have liner notes? No.
Did the SACD of Dark Side of the Moon come with liner notes? No.
Did the SACD of Wish You Were Here come with liner notes? No.

This Animals release isn't an Immersion box, it's not even an Experience package. It's a re-release of the single album, nothing more, in multiple format choices.

I was comparing the "Animals" reissue more to the various multi-disc box sets that have already been released.
"The Early Years" set has liner notes by Mark Blake.
"The Dark Side of the Moon" Immersion set has some liner notes by Storm.
The "Wish You Were Here" Immersion set has liner notes by Mark Blake and Storm.
"The Wall" Immersion set, "The Division Bell" 20th anniversary set and "The Later Years" set have no liner notes.

Obviously this "Animals" reissue (and all of Pink Floyd's reissues) would benefit from well-written liner notes, but the liner notes posted on Roger's website are not that at all, so I definitely agree with David that it's better for "Animals" to be released without the liner notes at all then to include what was commissioned and submitted by Mark Blake.

 

[rontoon]

I was comparing the "Animals" reissue more to the various multi-disc box sets that have already been released.

You're right about the boxes being inconsistent (crazy, isn't it?) but the individual releases have been so far.

 

[drphibes]

Well now we know what set off Roger.

https://www.rollingstone.com/music/...lmour-theater-for-dreamers-interview-1177233/

That was unexpectedly amusing to read. It seems a bit too perfect with the set up "But you don't have liner notes, do you?" but other than that it seems to tell the same story. I had earlier expressed relief that Gilmour hadn't waded in on this, but I'll give this a pass since it made me smirk.

 

[Mesozoic Mike]

I'm hoping for a Lamb Chop puppet to be included. My apologies to Shari Lewis.