valeriozappa

Yes, but I would like to understand what changes in the ears (in the EARS) if Marilyn Manson or whoever dresses up or not. You know, one thing is if they tell me that on the records someone else sings and then live he lipsyncs, then yeah, damn. But since the voice is his in both cases, the ones who play do it on record and live.... In short, mine is a more straightforward question. If someone wants to give me an answer... what changes? I'm here waiting.

Well, tell me, what does too much makeup have to do with making music? What changes in your ears when you listen to the album? I'm not saying this out of anger, for heaven's sake! I truly want to understand why! (By the way, it seems that I'm not the only one who criticized this opinion of yours, but I repeat, "criticized"... I'm not declaring war on anyone). Let me know!

I am with you, but only from the last album. It doesn't mean that he hasn't known how to do his job, though. I consider his records to be valid in every respect. What about "The speed of Pain" featured in Mechanical Animals?

By the way, for those who criticize the fact that certain artists dress up... Peter Gabriel was an idiot in Genesis too, right?

what the hell, what the hell... you make me skip letters with this damned keyboard... :P

Maybe if those who criticize his supposed disguises studied something about the industrial movement, they would understand that it doesn't just involve staging music, but above all the multimedia aspect of making music. From this perspective, if we really want to say it all, Marilyn Manson are complete artists. Don't confuse the fact that you don't like their music with firing bigoted judgments about their clothing. What the hell have you become, your grandparents, Christ? How old are you? Talk about music; maybe you should go write reviews about fashion on "GLAMOUR" instead. Seriously...

sorry, the grade!

"Raise My Rent," completely instrumental and always very atmospheric, seems to have been the inspiration for "What do you want from me" and "Marooned" (from The Division Bell).
Holy words, holy words. In the end, there isn't much to say about the album; your concise review is essential, just enough for this album that approaches mediocrity. I would have said the same things! Let's say it's more an album for David's fans than for Pink's. You can feel that Gilmour was grappling with the sounds of Animals, which would be released soon after.

You caught me off guard, in vain... I don't know what to say to you, except that I sing my gratitude to you with all my heart.

there are better ones in Italy, of course. but what sets Lucio Battisti's music apart is its universality, even when he produces an album like "Anima Latina," surely not the best Italian progressive. but what can we say about Pink Floyd? as progressive bands, there were certainly better ones (King Crimson, Genesis, to mention the technical level) and yet... and yet Pink Floyd are "universally" more complete. so, I believe that Lucio Battisti's music (especially on this album) is complete from an experimental and harmonic point of view. and I like the completeness of a work, not the categorization into one genre or another. I mentioned progressive because (as Lucio Battisti himself admitted in some interviews of the time) it was the genre he liked most during that period. but I think so too, you know? :) anyway, thanks for the vote! a hug!