cptgaio

Nice but a bit overrated, grunge was more of a cultural phenomenon than a musical one, a good review perhaps a bit biased.

You say you want to bring completeness, then you give me a decidedly brief review, a nice album but one that has aged prematurely, one extra point for the memories it evokes (sich!)

Very beautiful album, it wouldn’t deserve 5 stars but I’ll give it anyway because someone definitively acting in bad faith has lowered the average too much, useless review.

Album that I literally wore out when I was little, and still brings me emotion; the review is well done, perhaps a bit too harsh. Regarding the grunge discussion, I can somewhat agree, but the main reason is that in the end it was nothing more than a blend of Hard Rock that varied depending on the band presenting it. Therefore, influences of proto-grunge can be identified from any corner of the rock world (even in the Beatles!).

...and then Thrash wasn't invented by anyone; it simply emerged as a natural evolution within Metal.

Judas Priest didn't invent anything, they weren't Heavy Metal before the '80s (at most Hard Rock), and then they adapted to the various styles proposed by much more creative bands over the years... and then moderate your tone and don't offend others.

Tastes are tastes... I also replied with Motorhead.

sorry for the bad dysgraphia..

As for the historical errors you mention, they are not so much musical as they are about culture. Lemmy came from that working class in 70s England which was in full turmoil. All the influences you mention are correct, but what characterized this and other albums was not so much the musical style as the rebellion and frustration that the English underclass felt towards the English high-class. The very aggressive way Motorhead conveyed these concepts was truly innovative (punk would come later). I partially agree about Metallica; I also think they didn't invent anything new, but the influences they had were radically reinterpreted in their albums for the time (the same goes for Maiden). In a band, there's not just the music but also the modus operandi that makes it unique or banal depending on the case. That’s why, for example, the entire career of Maiden has been something unique and special; they reignited interest (along with other bands) in a genre that went through terrible crises in the 90s, yet thanks to a unique sound and a recognizable image, they have remained alive, while others, unfortunately, have not. Making historical reconstructions based solely on a group's sound, neglecting everything that surrounds it, is reductive. Bye!

Unfortunately, you would be right if music were an exact science. This is a site for "amateurs" who engage in reviewing musical works. Honestly, objective analyses are not only practically impossible (the evidence you claim to provide is already, in itself, strictly personal ideas) but they also become boring. After all, we are all here to discuss and not to shed light on the lives of others. I honestly stopped reading reviews from specialized newspapers or otherwise because behind the facade of infallibility, there are always personal opinions that are therefore always debatable. So, I prefer to come here and listen to what my "peers" have to say and discuss, perhaps passionately but in a civil manner. To do that, I don't need historical reconstructions or technical data, which at my venerable age I am also tired of hearing (I assure you it’s always the same things for the past twenty years), but rather to know what a particular record or song evokes in other people, so I can truly expand my knowledge and share a bit of my modest understanding.