luciano

"The Return of The Space Cowboy" is the natural continuation: while remaining almost restrictively true to their signature style, Jamiroquai offers a refinement of their sound; the theme of the album changes, becoming less profound, and the willingness to take risks diminishes, but this is partially compensated by the higher quality of the product. The sense of their evolution mirrors that of Lenny Kravitz, but unlike the latter’s second album, here the absolute value declines. A record not more than 4. However, the success surpasses that of the previous one, thanks to the decisive contribution of the remix of the single, which establishes itself as a hit in small clubs, and its singles are frequently played even by novice DJs, stepping out of the niche of trend-setting clubs.

5 for the review because you worked on it. 2 for the CD because it's poor, tremendously poor: "To Young To Dye" launches on MTV (the power of Sony Music) a band at their first work that breaks into the scene where it presents itself: in 1992 club music is emerging from "Soul II Soul," deconstructed, but without a clear direction; Jamiroquai, with funk, proposes a modernized sound similar to Lenny Kravitz's Zeppelin-esque vibe, and imposes it. And let’s be clear, with the power of Sony Music, it doesn't just propose, it imposes. "Emergency on Planet Earth" is a homogeneous, dense, almost paste-like album, while at the same time being para-original; when it’s released, it’s a revelation, let’s say a work deserving of a 5.

No, sorry, where do you find that I mixed hard rock and heavy metal? I was explaining in which part of the B.S. I find a sort of "root" from which metal partially developed (which I try, with difficulty, to distinguish in turn from heavy metal, where possible). It doesn’t seem to me that we are arguing two opposing theses... Regarding the insert, I can’t follow you; I can ask a friend, the same one who said he was ready to lend me what I’m missing from the B.S., if he has it, but it’s not an immediate thing. Monday and Tuesday I have 12 hours of written exams for the state exam... Anyway, don’t make me older than I am; I don’t reach double your age, it's just that during my high school years I discovered a fairly well-stocked municipal library for music, and while telling my parents I was going to study in the library, I read a lot... Anyway, I’ll say it again, I don’t see where we diverge: in my assessment of the "incriminated" track, I was praising the B.S. for their ability to swiftly switch between different sounds; if I had posited a hypothesis of coincidence between the different sounds, where would my appreciation have been? Talk soon.

5 to the review because in your simple expression, a mirror of a pure soul, if you don’t crash into glaring mistakes, I find your writings very pleasant. 3 to the album because the return might be positive, but overall, it’s not a 5; let’s say by analogy, it’s a good wine, it could even be excellent, but it’s diluted by too many filler songs. Bye

THE KING IS NAKED (you lose the 5 points just for that terrible "... which deviates a bit from the typical Pink Floyd sound..." which implicitly assumes the acceptance of a homogeneous Pink Floyd sound, whereas this is instead composite, shifting in variations of the line-ups and in the changes of the weight of the members within the group (and in all its phases it’s a great sound and, ironically, only they and the Beatles have managed to do this consistently, as far as I can recall on the spot, along with Mozart, Beethoven, and Miles Davis in other fields)). 4 for the album because there’s no "Careful With That Axe, Eugene." Don’t tear each other apart; be good boys, ciacciao.

Again? But excuse me, are we all in agreement that it’s a cornerstone of Grunge alongside Nevermind and Superunknown, right? So, how do you find this compatible with the fact that it’s rock! Sure, if you have a seafood dinner and eat shrimp, you haven’t had a steak, and the dinner remains seafood... but is the shrimp a fish or a crustacean? So for the "De-Generi," let’s just use "rock," "jazz," "pop," and let’s all agree that it’s rock. That’s it, bye.

Okay, no problem, we understood each other, but listen, aside from the fact that I personally don't really see much of a contribution of Blues to Jazz, rather maybe a push that then shifted it mainly towards the electric realm (the metamorphosis of Miles Davis, above all (not mostly, ABOVE ALL:-)), I'm interested when you bring up the concept of fusion in the Police. I read something from someone about it, but it's a concept I've never fully embraced. I'm going to try re-listening to it from this perspective and we can happily discuss it again. Thievery Corporation impressed me; I can't quite measure them, they seemed superficial, "electronic" (in a derogatory sense), but then they stuck in my head. That's why they reminded me of the effect the Police had on me back in school (who at first seemed like punk-rockers). Maybe you won't like them, they might not resonate with you, but they shouldn't be nothing at all. Bye.

4 to this type of reviews because I find they express with vigor and at the same time in a friendly way what is ultimately the main purpose of reviews: judgment. I can't give it a 5 out of respect for the themes expressed by all those who vote it a 1. 5 for the album because it has a 4.5 average, and I want to enjoy having it among the "De-Records most appreciated." In fact, I take this opportunity to launch an appeal: GIVE IT ALL 5, LET'S MAKE GERI HALLIWELL THE MOST APPRECIATED DE-RECORD, YOU CAN JOIN THE REVISION OF GERI HALLIWELL - DON'T LISTEN TO IT, GIVE IT A 5!

Yes, even though I don't like "chapters" rather than "parts" (at most "paragraphs"). I understand and agree on "... they unconditionally require ...", but individual pieces are self-consistent; think of "Carpet Crawl." I might be crazy, but I can also enjoy "Hairless Heart" in its entirety. You had a profound insight: In fact, in general, no matter how good a work may be, how can we consider it a masterpiece if we can't identify it with some piece that stands out? I find that this album (and I mean album) has a distinct characteristic of conveying a sense of intolerance towards an audience that isn't completely attentive; it doesn't offer phases of lightness that allow those who get distracted to reconnect. I see it as a right-wing album, excellent, not difficult, not even for a select few, but at the same time not inviting. It's not a limitation, but it does limit it. If you don't agree with this direction I'm taking regarding that period of yours, I'd be happy to discuss it (I'll be waiting outside your house :-) Bye.

... no, you definitely have never listened to Eva Cassidy...