luciano

wow, it's really heavy for me, I've written everything (actually it wasn't much) and it's a third of my usual stuff. At least you could have given me 3 stars...

I was fortunate to be introduced to the figure of Prince by a dear friend, who was a fan of Prince. I’ve never fully managed to immerse myself in this artist, but this friend allowed me to recognize all of his truly "complex" facets. The review, while nice, shows a superficial understanding of the artist. The work is very beautiful, varied, original, and has peaks of energy found elsewhere only sporadically, in "Kiss" (consider the Cross, for instance). The title track, in particular, provides a fundamental contribution for that period, after which artists began to specialize and differentiate their songs to climb the radio or dance charts, or to be part of cohesive albums (and anyone who gets swept away by Radiohead, just to mention one, cannot overlook that their importance is exaggerated by this specialization). Overall, however, "Sign o' the Times" does not manage to be a masterpiece; it does not stand out distinctly above the artist's other works, and it fails to engage those who are not willing to embrace the artist's style.

Well done: you didn't say a thing. I appreciate the attempt to remain consistent with the detachment from the national scene, and you succeeded brilliantly. So, no news about Zampagnone's respectable work tenure, no mention of his work as an instrumentalist, nothing about the Roman scene where he shapes and develops his disdain for the "commercial" stereotype of the current format, nada de nada on the instrumental research that can be linked back to that, commendable, of CRX. Then, by skipping altogether the complex relationship between Roman music and the Battistian origin (Zampagnone is from Monterotondo, Battisti from Poggio Bustone, and the connection is visceral), you truly outdid yourself. And screw what might be considered the best attempt (sigh!) nonetheless, the latest in chronological order, to recreate a homegrown trend not necessarily politicized (and sponsored) to the left, which differentiates itself from the re-edition of Sanremo tunes or the imitation of imported genres, starting again from where our identity got lost: Battisti, precisely. The sentence is beautiful: "È necessario" is the only track that sounds a bit rock and in the initial chords resembles something of the Placebo...; as if to say that something is worthy only if it's rock and it's rock only if it resembles Placebo (or, I imagine, also the Red Hot Chili Peppers... am I right?). Bravo, bravo everyone.

You play my five with that "infinitely" and, WARNING, the previous "Everybody Does it So Why We...", debut album, doesn’t have Zombie but is better. Bye.

P.S. In '91, I was practically seeing a breathtaking university companion every day, and I assure you, I was feeling very, very good.

... sorry, but before you click a rating, do you actually listen to a CD? Is there a virus that attacks your ear canals and makes you deaf? But seriously, let’s give "until the end of the world" its due, it’s a masterpiece and I even spent a month working on it. Fine, we can think of a good album with other things, which is incredibly hard after Joshua Tree and deserves recognition for that, but in a non-thematic album, a collection of "loose" tracks like this one, how can you give it a 5 if it includes "... ride your wild horses" (copying is fine, but copying Venditti, absolutely not). So Cruel has a laxative effect, "tryin' to throw..." you’ve probably erased it from your mind, and "love is blindness" makes me so mad: I don’t know why, but if I try to listen to it for more than two verses, I want to start swinging my fists like I’m Coppino. 4 tracks out of 12, that’s a third, ARE PURE RUBBISH. I repeat RUBBISH. Dust off, reconsider, and re-vote, please.

x Max G: incomplete, but way better than a lot of crap that gets written around here. I totally relate to Eathersun, Guajò, stay well

:-)) Thank you, as soon as I can I promise I’ll get it and listen to it, but give me a little time. Come on, I hope to make it soon. Thanks again, bye.

2+2=5 ... mmm... I don't know: from the idea I've formed, the musical revolution was taking shape, but it doesn't seem that it was yet manifest. I would place the threshold for the beginning of the revolution at the end of 1972, progressive as one of the branches of rock, the elimination of any blues reminiscence, the search not so much to discover new sounds but to discover or invent new ways to interpret them (the Eno loop). In the USA, there was George Clinton. I don't know, in my opinion, the first well-aimed blow to rock was delivered by progressive, more from the Germans like Can than from the ones like Genesis (who, by the way, ended in '74). Pink Floyd didn’t have much hassle when they migrated. You might be right, I don't know to what extent, but what you've written makes sense. I need to think about it. By the way, you catch me off guard: you compare 3rd to 4th by the Bl Sabb, but I've only gotten as far as the first three (aaaargh!). This is because I wasn't too interested in the path they were taking and tried to be somewhat selective. I'll get it, I'll listen, re-listen to the others, and then I'll get back to you (I hope I'm on time for when we retire :-)

x Mir: Well done, I knew it, but when I wrote the review, even the staff didn’t know. See my response from May 20 in the same review. If you’re friends with Andy Smith, please do me a favor and let me meet him when they come to Italy to promote the album with the tour. I’m from Rome, so if they have a stop in Rome, that’s just a bonus. Let’s get in touch, thanks, bye.