47

Well, in my opinion, you could have done without portraying yourself as the free-minded one in the discussion by playing the victim. I would say that in the face of certain categorizations ("arrangiamenti sanremesi," the usual discussion about form, the arrangements), there isn’t much room for comparison. The album is not epoch-making, perhaps not even in the current Italian reality, but it seems that the criticism is directed at the rhetorical devices that make up the songs, which, being rock, inevitably refer to everything that has come out in the genre so far. When one criticizes from that perspective (from which one can criticize EVERYTHING that has come out since the early '90s, avant-gardes excluded), it’s because one wants to assert their point of view over others. (even just for self-convincement)
If you remove the veil of Maya, nothing remains, because there are no upheavals in rhythmic traditions or in the canonical song form (did you expect them?) and the tracks are pure form, a form made up of both music and lyrics. The Afterhours don’t copy anyone, but they cannot disregard their own technical/cultural preparation because they are not geniuses.

And I’m not even a fan of this band, which I've only recently started to listen to and am beginning to like, distantly.
@lux: while browsing through various comments of yours, I notice a really annoying common thread; your music tastes have progressed from prog-epic-fuff-metal to indie, stoner, and various scruffy recommendations, building walls each time against what’s behind, very different from the handholds that climbers are forced to fix (a metaphor for the "constructive" listener).
These walls no longer allow you to look back, and in fact, you mock all those you group into the hypothetical belonging to the previous step, namely prog metallers and their associates. (Your obsession with Opeth, Dream Theater, and other people, beyond the barrier of what can be shared, is exemplary).
The fact is your assumption that others care about your "level of musical knowledge" leads you to always specify what is in and what is not from your (temporary) standpoint. Sorry if I sound condescending, but the truth is that here no one is in competition, and dialogue would always be preferable to confrontation and the narrow views of certain extremisms. Best regards.

sparkly review, I still miss them.. big hugs XD

Well, the only thing it has in common with the Sanremo songs is just the language of the lyrics. But not even that much.
In my opinion, you're saying a bunch of nonsense. The critical judgment of an album shouldn't be an expression of some supposed musical knowledge (putting down the Afterhours while claiming to listen to "higher" sounds seems to be cool) but rather a judgment on the work itself. Hold your breath and judge in total relaxation. Then, of course, there’s the matter of taste...

@chinaski82: where do we go from here? I like it, it’s a nice piece, but I can honestly do without the others. There are two great tracks if you want: the tarantella and "è solo febbre," which is enough to dispel the skepticism towards these hated (the attitude is foreign to the music, a judgment based on that is misleading and pointless) afterhours.

I really hate the name. I also dislike the cover. The review, though, is fine.

Good job, I can sense it right away with decent curiosity. But then I hope that for 4/5 years Reznor enjoys the abundant bread he has earned and tears a little less at the market with sheep-like strategies. Regards.

I like the character but not their music. Nice review.

the review isn't really bad, considering it's the first one. I haven’t heard this and I never will, but I have fond memories of blink 182 and their "summery" and festive tunes. really awful cover.

"echoes is definitely the second" -- as far as I know, they have only made two suites.. :D