Grasshopper

A sordid curiosity creeps into my twisted mind: if only 26 miserable minutes (I accurately imagine they are timed and derived as a weighted average over a certain length of time that remains - alas - unknown to us) are daily devoted to these two fundamental vital functions, the first of which, at least for me, is also a rite and an act of reconciliation with creation, without diminishing the importance of the second, which also becomes a rite, especially if performed with a Marcuzzian regularity, is it permissible for us Funarian voyeurs to know the percentage breakdown of this so limited time? And if so, is it also permissible to know the temporal sequence: first the intake and immediately afterward the output (duck-style) or vice versa? While awaiting thorough news, a 2 instead of the more logical 1, simply for the charming audacity.

P.S.: To avoid any misunderstandings, I want to clarify that I am not an "analyst" in the sense of a shrink (God save us from those), but just a very analytical guy in his reviews.

Wow, what an absolute idealization of Teresa Salgueiro... When I think that I, in a much more prosaic manner, in my review of the Madredeus, identified her as the Portuguese girl of Guccini's memory lost before the immense Atlantic ("capì ch'era un punto, ai margini di un continente..."), I can't help but think that perhaps Teresa deserved more. Of course, even a nod to the content of the album wouldn't have been bad, even though this album is a dream and dreams are not easy to describe, not even by an analyst like me, let alone by a poet.

I am reminded of my review of Diana Krall, but in that case, the stratospheric beauty and perfection of her voice were matched by a mediocre feeling, if not a complete absence of it. I also used the adjective "cold" to describe her way of playing jazz without a hint of emotion, but in this case, it seems we are facing another kind of coldness: that of perfection. It will be worth checking, having already at hand Chopin's sonatas in the versions by Pollini and Arrau, and those by Rachmaninov in the interpretation of Vladimir Ashkenazy? And above all, considering she is a beautiful creature fortunately still living and thus with copyright fully in effect, can we do this without going broke?

I wouldn’t want to stir controversy either, but with you, it takes quite an effort. Your judgments are absolute, not open to discussion: "The album is historic!" Yes, alright, I agree, it’s historic because its success has been enormous, in my opinion far beyond its actual value, and almost exclusively due to the title track. It’s not that I don’t like it: I wouldn’t have it and talked about it if that were the case, without tearing it apart but only trying to put it in perspective. A 3, in my eyes, means decent. Maybe a 4 could also be appropriate, but just look at the average rating the other debaserians gave it: 3.17. There are three possibilities: 1) The album isn’t as exceptional as it seems from the initial track. 2) Everyone else on debaser except for you doesn’t understand a thing about music. 3) I’ve become so influential on debaser that I even change other people's judgments. Choose the hypothesis you like best and ignore my previous outburst: there are plenty of mediocre reviewers out there, and you’re not the worst. Regards.

Finally, someone has remembered this jazz piano virtuoso. In his case, virtuosity was not a mere display of skill for its own sake, but corresponded to very precise stylistic needs, as is excellently highlighted here. Unfortunately, I am not familiar with the album in question, but the two collections I have, particularly the excellent "The Best Of Bud Powell On Verve," are sufficient to give an idea of this pianist's talent.

If Paolo Conte's fans are Taliban, then I am Mullah Omar. I've only heard "Sijmadicandhapajiee," which seems to be the least significant episode, and I found it to be just that. Certainly, the mere idea of comparing the aristocratic raspy voice of the Avvocato with the flashy and loud scream of Nannini, reminiscent of a watermelon seller, makes me cringe, but I trust primiballi, so I won't rule out the possibility that the miracle of this incredible fusion could have occurred.

AND FOURTEEN! That’s how many reviews there are of this record, clearly in the lead as the most reviewed on Debaser. I won't dwell on nathan84, who had convinced me much more with the live performance of the Velvet Underground. Here there's an attempt at downplaying, if not outright partial dismissal, but it's hardly supported by any valid arguments. "It's probably not the kind of music suited for me" the reviewer honestly admits. Well, in that case, a piece of advice: just leave it alone, don’t review it, like I would never review a rap album, and how rap enthusiasts would never review classical or vintage jazz records. Just a suggestion, but do as you wish, of course.

Wow, what a beautiful musical discussion I had missed. Luckily, I stumbled upon it again and eagerly devoured the whole thing. How nice that on debaser, they still talk about music... I'm late to the party: Hal has already said what I wanted to say, and much more, but the responses from j&r show that we are far from dealing with someone naive, as the ending of the review hinted, where the Manichean division between "primary" artists (and therefore good) and "derivative" ones (and therefore poor) was finally set aside. My judgment was hasty and too influenced by the initial criticisms, so for what the debaserian votes are worth, I’ll make amends with a high score to bring up the average. But what truly interests me is clarifying that if the criterion for evaluating an artist were that of j&r, based on the merit of having invented a genre, a form, or a style from nothing, the always underestimated Haydn should be considered infinitely superior to Mozart, given that it is Haydn with whom the symphony takes the form it will maintain until the late Romantic period, and it is with Haydn that the string quartet and piano trio as we know them practically emerge. Even Haydn’s Piano Concertos are already formally complete, but aside from No. 11 (the one with the Hungarian finale), is there any that can compete expressively with the Mozartian ones? Of course, one can't say that Mozart invented the Piano Concerto, but he pushed the structures already set by Haydn (which in turn were taken from Bach's harpsichord concertos) to their maximum expressive intensity, beyond which lies the Beethovenian revolution, yet even that won't entirely erase the classical formal settings of Haydn, and indeed Beethoven is still considered a composer straddling the so-called "Viennese Classicism" and Romanticism. Even I, when listening to Bach, feel that I'm exploring the depths and foundations of all classical music, of course, but that doesn’t prevent me from giving due credit to those who have been able to build authentic monuments on these foundations.

I mean that when I say overrated (rather, ENORMOUSLY overrated), I’m referring precisely to what kosmogabri said, namely that his tragic and premature death, at the same age as Schubert, has allowed someone to label him a musical genius, or at the very least, to compare him to the greatest singer-songwriters. The irony is that these clever folk have also found quite a few followers, to the point that our national Rino has become a trendy phenomenon, and I don't know how much he would have appreciated this if he had been alive. For me, he remains a musically mediocre author, who was saved by the irony and charm of his lyrics, but please don’t compare "Gianna" with "Amico fragile" (or with "Atlantide," just to please my "friend" degregorius).