luciano

To Marco - Animal, I did not spend 25 years studying to be called a know-it-all. First, reach the position I have achieved and then, maybe, we can talk about it again. The dictionary you refer to I glanced at when I was in high school, out of curiosity. If it’s true that - multiplied + gives back -, your remarks can only please me. You’re not the only fan of the Police; in fact, quite a few texts about them circulate in bookstores; in this regard, it might be useful for you to read some of them, if you can afford to buy them, of course, since I don't think many are available in the second-hand market. I’ll surprise you, but I’ll reveal that you are not representative of the universe of the population, and honestly, it doesn’t seem to me that this has anything against me. Those I can clearly identify as people annoyed by me are mostly individuals whose interests conflict with my work, and I assure you they are things much larger than what the culture you are flaunting allows you to approach. The 5 to the answers is part of a discussion with the site managers, which you do not fall into (assuming my assertion that you do not coincide with the universe is valid, because in that case you would also be one of them... but in that case, wouldn’t you also be me? Don’t think about it too much; it’s easier to find the answer in some book; I don’t know if it’s also in the dictionary you mentioned earlier). I renew my greetings.

x marcmat - here, unlike your criticism of Led Zeppelin 3, you show nothing but immature resentment for a low rating you received on another review of yours (the Police - Regatta de Blanc), and your critique is nothing more than childish grasping at straws that appear in my discourse as a means to vent your squalid vendetta. Out of respect for anyone who might read your critique and fall into doubt, I would like to clarify the concept further (which seems quite clear to me): Would Leonardo have been a wonderful artist even if he hadn't painted the Mona Lisa? In my review, I suggest trying to listen to (P.S. "try to listen," not "remove") the album minus Every Breath You Take precisely to find your personal measure of appreciation for the work minus that piece, as it could be prejudicial in that sense (obviously positively :-). Dear Marcmat, if you are truly driven by spite and want to offend me like anyone else, I advise you to "try to dig deeper," not to cling to whatever comes your way... although I fully realize that to do so you would need to invest more time, perhaps so much that it would be worth using it to listen to more music or enrich your reviews instead. Best regards.

x marcmat (continued) - ... anyway, regarding the criticisms you directed at me, I actually don't find them disagreeing with what I describe in the review: a) certainly after "presence" the criticism was harsh, yet, from that period, it is definitely the worst treated. I remember adjectives like "unlucky parenthesis," "mistake," "lost road"... b) good, so what is it if not transition? c) if I had written "Blues Minor in C- with a triplet rhythm in 12/8," I would have been chastised or they wouldn’t have understood. Don't you think we're talking about the same thing? d) do you think I defined them as metalheads? if you read carefully and without prejudice, in the penultimate sentence of the review you refer to, I summarize the concept that then in the most appreciated (even the best?) melodic songs of the Metal movement, one can easily identify a core that explicitly refers to the structure of Tangerine... Bye.

x marcmmat- which one, the one from Regatta de Blanc? Well, if it’s that one, you shouldn’t take offense; I think you yourself realize that it doesn’t say much. In fact, even at first reading, it was clear that you could know a bit more, that maybe you followed its placement in punk and ska scenes, that you could interpret the music... but it seems written by someone who started boiling pasta and has only a few minutes to think while they’re frying the sauce :-) This also affects the grade I reserved for you: I give a 3 to those who didn’t understand but made an effort, got informed, and wrote well; a 4 to those who understood but didn’t lay it all out, and I encourage them to take more risks (for example, I really liked your review of "October," by the way a pretty difficult album to analyze); a 5 is like point 3 but with the difference that they didn’t understand and give me the impression that they never could :-).

2 to the review because, although elegantly written, it tells us nothing. 5 to the album which, while not reaching the level of some other masterpieces of pop music, is the best of the Police and, for the reasons thoroughly expressed by our reviewer (), represents a cornerstone of the period to which it belongs, which, among other things, is quite poor.

Dear unsigned, aside from the fact that I can boast experiences in the genre that you can't even imagine, how can you argue that D'Agostino's work is "a new path"? The most commendable things are precisely the tribute to great tracks released around 20 years ago; the "original" is all dated material that has been excessively rehashed. In its genre, I'm not getting into the absolute merits, but in its genre, this is not music, this is bolo (far from offending D'Agostino by calling him a ruminant...). You give this work a 5/5, what do you rate Nick Warren's "Rekjavick 024," 11/5? And do me a favor, sign your name, so when we want to discuss and exchange ideas, always available with everyone and with other works, we can do it properly. I'm waiting for a response, well-argued.

x met'87 - first of all, I apologize to 2+2=5 for debating a review of theirs, but I would like to briefly articulate my thoughts better... 1) It makes no sense to talk about rivalry between the two groups when together they represented a movement. If there had been a single figure or a single group, it wouldn’t have been a movement :-) 2) Common characteristics, yes, but not identical sounds; the peculiarity of that track, which has stuck with me so much that I just have to think about it to hear it defined in my mind, is precisely that eclecticism that allows it to shift from one sound to another with ease and immediacy, while remaining coherent as a whole! 3) I’m not a fan of the genre, but I find it reductive to describe the works of Metallica as you do. Don’t you find, for example, the weight of the German progressive experience from the mid-'70s? Don't you see a more solid message in the foundations, the sounds raw to the extent of becoming sharp (metallic, indeed)? The intervals are rigorously symmetrical, the scales used with mastery, the tracks develop longer, as if they found it essential to complete the closure of space (and in this I find them "inferior"). The sound is finally free from the blues nuances of the historical ones (and I don’t see this as a flaw, quite the opposite). There’s a lot to discuss… Tschuss.

Great review, I would have appreciated it if you had filled it with some other information, but the necessary details are there. Seven months have passed since its release, but I see that not many have listened to it enough to vote for it... (as often happens on this database for the few original records that come out). Almost 5 for cd1, disappointing cd2, little more than a study of someone who, fully mastering the electronic instrument, tries to venture into sonatas (which, in my opinion at least, represent the most difficult classical product to achieve and complete). Best listened to in bed because if you get up you'll take it out of the player. As for the blend of melody and electronic background, it doesn't hold a candle to "Phaedra" - Tangerine Dream or "No Pussyfooting" - Eno & Fripp; then again, to each their own... Bye.

... good dwarfs... thank you dwarfs.

5 for appreciation to a reviewer I respect. 4 for a great album that, however beautiful, does not constitute a masterpiece. I remember going to see them live at the Palladium when they came, I think about ten years ago...