Hal

It's not important "who" he was, but "what" he wrote, to which none of the detractors has thus far given the slightest response. Whether he was or not, he made an important contribution to the discussion that unfortunately has fallen on deaf ears.

I agree with Francesco. It's not true at all that Morgan imitates De Andrè's voice in this album. I also agree that this work deserves to be listened to and that it is well made. The comment above highlights that this project involved more risks than anything else for Morgan. Furthermore, it seems to invite supporters of the (alleged) "musical mediocrity" of the artist to engage with interesting arguments. I would love to read their responses, as I do not believe that this album is the work of a mediocre musician, quite the opposite.

Beautiful and interesting discussion, some fascinating points have emerged. I have nothing to say about Enea except for a few things. More than minor importance regarding the cd, I would say it has a different kind of importance, but those are nuances because it's very clear what you mean. Overall, I agree that there can be a decontextualized musical judgement. I didn't know Rossini had written so much (wow, he really wrote a lot!!), beyond his most famous operas, I heard a very beautiful sacred composition (a mass whose title I can't recall right now, but if I find it, I'll write it down here). The other thing about Scarpia: he may be a poor soul, but still, he gets shot by Mario Cavaradossi :) The discussion about the loggione was more aimed at challenging the idea that the relationship with opera is cold, perhaps only in here (but in terms of the number of participants in the discussion, not the content :))). @josi_, whom I’m only now reading carefully, the "pop" names in classical music are clearly indispensable; going beyond them is not always simple. After all, one follows a path. However, in my opinion, much of cultural dissemination also depends on the artistic direction that the conductors of major orchestras impose. For example, Abbado with the Berlin Philharmonic developed a study path also focused on the 20th century, and this was reflected in their discographic production. (As long as I understood correctly what you were saying). Brahms at the beginning of the century was heavily criticized until his reevaluation by Schoenberg, and today he is a "pop" name. Jordi Savall has developed a recovery and study of ancient music, giving a strong impulse and input to the public. Panta Rei, in short. Bye

just like that :) I swear to you :)))))

Anyway, going from Puccini to Squallor is pure sadism :) then (f***ing la gioconda) you make me a comparative analysis on record/movie and you screw with my mind about the opera, come onnnnnnnnn!

Damn... what the hell... do I have to tell you: I don't know the album, you know there's no review, and you know you're "fora di gabbu." So I close my eyes, move the mouse for a random rating. The mouse stops on two: rien ne va plus. And then, damn, not knowing a damn thing about these guys, I wouldn't mind if you suggested some of those reviews you used to write when you were young and naïve, like that one about the Area. Greediness.

and I'm voting again, take that! :))

So where do we start? I’d say with the brawl. Damn Enea, if you put it that way then it’s really true that you want her at all costs :))) , but I assure you that yours is a unilateral desire (and what is it? preventive war? :)))))) because I don’t feel like it at all, neither for brawls nor for matches. That said, I reiterate that the review is beautiful, I like it, I recommend it, but I don’t entirely agree with some things said, mostly in the comments (and to be clear, it has nothing to do with being piddicuso or anything else, it’s just a different way of seeing things, that’s all). The opera, as I already mentioned, is a complex work of art (in the sense that it is made up of different parts/components that interact with each other, even in the genesis of the artwork itself, but I won’t go into it further). I don’t believe this is an opinion but a fact. Listening only to the CD, to the music (which, by the way, can also present a poor execution, “misleading” nonetheless... or not?) is generally limiting for these reasons. Beyond the musical value (on which there can rightly be a separate judgment, I would say), the judgment on the work, connected to being able to fully appreciate it, should be weighed as a whole; otherwise, it’s a partial judgment, in general and not only in terms of involvement, as you say. The reason is simple in my opinion: the work is born for the ears and the eyes. Therefore, I prefer to consider its musical value linked to the other components as well. Then everyone does as they please, and it’s clear that this doesn’t diminish the value of the CD, which clearly has to exist, although I don’t love it that much and I greatly prefer going to the theater. (I really don’t understand where the controversy is.) Also because not going to the theater sometimes risks not understanding everything. If I see things this way, there’s another reason: one of the most beautiful experiences I remember was being backstage in a theater when I managed the supernumeraries for a lyric season in my city. I spent almost three months in the theater witnessing the construction and assembly of three beautiful works: "i racconti di hoffmann", "tosca", and "così fan tutte". Seeing the rehearsals for each single part: music, scenes, direction, lights, costumes, etc. and witnessing the construction was a wonderful experience. Perhaps for this reason, I see things this way. Various and sundry: About Don Giovanni you say “for that grim appearance of Don’s father at the end of the opera.” Unfortunately that’s not the case: the final appearance is not of Don Giovanni's father (who doesn’t even exist as a character in the opera), but of the commendatore who was killed in a duel in the first act by Don Giovanni himself. The commendatore was the father of one of the numerous maidens pursued by the "dissoluto punito". The funereal force of the statue of the commendatore's appearance is given by Mozart's music, as much as by the image and the words. The music is tied to the story, to the image, imbuing an unparalleled emotional tension. Music and libretto (by Mozart and Da Ponte, the latter a dirty old man by all accounts) thus interact, but this is not the only case. The music in the opera accompanies and builds the story, which must be seen, not just listened to. If one wants to have a clear idea of the whole, of course. That’s where the beauty lies. Then imagination helps; it’s also beautiful, gorgeous, wonderful to listen to the CD and imagine the opera, designing costumes and scenes in one’s mind, but... it’s always something else, very different from going to the theater, even at the risk of "getting duped" as you say. In short, regarding the rest. About Rossini: Rossini's music is powerful, wonderful. It seems (I don’t know if this story is true) that there was a connection between his compositional inspiration and sex. The first burst alongside the skills related to the second, and indeed some overtures are true “gallops”. About Ri

I saw it not long ago too, it was a nice evening, simple but beautiful. I give it that.

Thank goodness I was the piddicuso ;)) we'll talk about it again when I have a bit more time, bye.