fosca

OK, SORRY, IT WASN'T CLEAR AT ALL, LET ME START OVER: In general, I don't love controversies and even less so arguing. That said, I will just say that it's true that it's common practice to burn and belittle an artist who doesn't meet one's tastes, as if these tastes alone were truly worthy of being such (great tastes!), I have sometimes been tempted to do it too, but then I held back, thinking it over. What I mean is clear in this case; the album itself is certainly not a masterpiece, and the singer's voice is so particular that it can be either very pleasant or very unpleasant. The genre (or the genres it represents) is what it is: surely "mainstream" and light, but that doesn't mean the CD is garbage; on the contrary. I must say that "Crazy," while not a gem, has an engaging rhythm and a bass and drum foundation that is absolutely enjoyable and brilliant in its simplicity, almost reminiscent of the teased hairstyles of the late '70s. In short, it's not bad at all. Then again, choosing to indulge one's ears with completely different music is another matter, but the song itself and the album are definitely not garbage... Do I make myself clear? Perhaps the review could have been a bit more exhaustive... Kisses.

The genre (or the genres it represents) is what it is: definitely "commercial" and light, but that doesn’t mean the CD is garbage; on the contrary.. OOPPSS, PROBLEMI DERIVANTI DAL COPIA-INCOLLA

In general, I don’t love controversies and even less, therefore, engaging in them. That said, I can only mention that it is indeed common practice to burn and denigrate an artist who doesn't meet one’s tastes, as if theirs and only theirs were truly worthy of being so (great tastes!). At times, I've been tempted to do the same but then I held back, thinking it over. What I mean is evident in this case; the album itself is certainly not a masterpiece, and the singer's voice is so peculiar that it can be either very pleasant or quite unpleasant. The genre (or genres it represents) is what it is: surely “commercial” and light, but that doesn’t mean the CD is worthless; on the contrary. I must say that Crazy, while not a gem, has a catchy drive and a bass and drum rhythm that is absolutely enjoyable and brilliant in its simplicity, almost reminiscent of the backcombed heads of the late '70s... In short, it’s not bad at all. Now, the choice to listen to entirely different music for a pleasant experience is another matter, but the song itself and the album are certainly not worthless... Do I make myself clear? Perhaps the review could have been a bit more exhaustive... Kisses.

Hi, have you happened to listen to WITHOUT MERCY? It's the strangest one, a kind of orchestral suite with strings and electronic drums as well as guitar galore... I particularly love the aforementioned CD and "The Return of the D.C." but LC has a special charm, maybe because I've been listening to it since '84 and it still enchants me....

I fully agree with Fidia, the lemur, and absolutely with dEDOLUZ. Thank you. Bye

Ps for Fidia: can you define your above-mentioned "Dark Trilogy," thanks?

Personal opinions aside, the review is good. I somewhat agree with Fidia (just to change things up), but the CD isn't bad; I do love Smith's dark and twilight side, so too much "cheerfulness" after a while... however, it's a decent effort from a band that has produced multiple masterpieces...

I can't... no vacation no party :-(

Hello beautiful kids.. I really appreciate Lady Marshall but my favorite production is the angrier one, the "early Sinead O'Connors" style, meaning the first almost unobtainable CD, of which I clearly can't remember the title now, but I recall tracks like Nude as the news, or like In that hole, which although it's softer has something hypnotic, almost obsessive about it.. Anyway, there was an energy in the first CD that I think she has somewhat lost. Unfortunately, I discovered her in this version which I immediately fell in love with.. I like the rest but it gets tiring for me quickly. Sorry..

like it less...