Longliverock

Damn it, I've turned into a mess, too much stuff piled up...

My God, my favorite album by De Andrè, every time I listen to it it's an immense emotion!!.. I’d like to give it a 6, but it seems that's not possible, what a shame…

DeBeer, it’s not just me saying it... I don't know if you play, but in terms of the complexity of the compositions, SSOASS is MONSTROUS. Guaranteed by my friends who will perform it at the music festival (they've been playing for over 10 years). The central part, the instrumental one, is something supernatural, believe me, I'm not joking at all...

PS: "..I cast a pitying veil over Malmsteen, mr.big, Europe and other similar horrors." Ah, I see. Maybe I've understood what kind of listener you are. I wonder if you'll grasp the above discourse, or if you'll evade it or pretend not to see it like Riccardo and co. did in my third-to-last post...

And indeed, the dear Scaruffi says it loud and clear: classical music and jazz are superior genres. Finding that on his website now would be an undertaking (that site is labyrinthine!), but he has said and repeated it. I asked a friend of mine for confirmation, one who graduated from the conservatory but loves both classical music and rock equally, indifferently (he’s a pianist at the conservatory but plays drums in a rock band, and he always listens to the Beatles in the car). The issue of the superiority of one genre over another is an extremely relative topic, and certain distinctions must be made: classical music is superior to rock in terms of technique and complexity of compositions. It’s like comparing the paintings of the Sistine Chapel with the impressionistic works of Monet: from a certain point of view, we cannot say that the former is superior to the latter; they are both masterpieces. However, how can you compare the complexity, attention to detail, and technique of the former with the latter?.. The same goes for music: from certain perspectives, we cannot say that rock works are inferior to classical works; "the piper at the gates of dawn" should be considered a masterpiece just like Beethoven's 9th. But from a compositional standpoint, which is a fundamental subject in the study of music, distinctions must be drawn. According to what you say, however, a piece by Gigi D'Agostino could be on par with a piece by Eminem, which could be on par with a piece by Madonna, which could be on par with a piece by Phil Collins, which could be on par with a piece by Led Zeppelin, which could be on par with a piece by Keith Jarrett or Mozart. This argument may hold up if you present it in a site filled with wannabes and posers (I’ve read articles by a poser who only listened to dance and rap, questioning what Mozart could possibly have that was superior to the NERD), but we are on Debaser, and when I talk about music, I expect not to just find someone who thinks like me, but at least someone who can follow and understand me. And I’ll add one last thing: if it’s true that, in general, the artistic peaks of a Miles Davis are higher than those of Led Zeppelin, it’s also true that sometimes the artistic peaks of the latter have managed to match those of Davis: take "Stairway to Heaven," just to name one. Or "Child in Time," to bring the DP into it. Or "SSOASS" by Maiden. Or "Hallelujah" by Jeff Buckley. Meanwhile, I have never come across a piece by Avril Lavigne, Britney Spears, or Gigi D'Agostino that reached the levels of any of the pieces by the artists mentioned above, just like (returning to the sculpture discussion), a post-contemporary artwork (those "masterpieces" made by randomly putting together two chairs, a table, and chicken legs, I don’t know if you get my drift…) will never reach the beauty, artistic complexity, and "sublime" of cubist works, let alone impressionistic ones, and even less those of Renaissance works...

PS: as for his shameful vendetta against the Beatles, let's not even get into it. Until this morning, I thought it was just a negative critique from someone who listened to the Fab4 and didn't understand them, someone who never liked them... now I know it's pure unjustified hatred: go read the profile of BRITNEY SPEARS, see how it begins, and then tell me if that's normal. Oh, and there's still an unresolved point regarding the absence of Zakk Wylde and Black Label Society, Mr. Big and Racer X, Cinderella and Europe, Malmsteen, Marduk, Avril Lavigne (who I don't like, but if you're a critic and you include ANYONE, from pop to rap to rock to blues, you have to include Avril Lavigne because she has a 3rd album, and you can comment negatively on her, but she remains a generational phenomenon, so she's worthy of at least some minimal musical criticism)...

"..Or from those (see also one above, I think longliverock) who say "I don't listen to hip hop, but I know it's an inferior genre"? But do you really think that's different from saying "and then from 7 to Aqua (raise your hand if you've heard that album, because I won't believe you if you say you've heard it)"? When that album came out, I was 13 years old and the big single from it, "Barbie Girl," was everywhere: to my regret, I heard it, heard it again, and heard it a third and fourth time in its entirety when I went on a school trip. I was young, but I remember it as if it were yesterday. And I’ll tell you: it was pure SHIT. Regarding the notion that hip hop is an inferior genre to rock, the same principle applies that classical music is superior to rock. Ah, the fact that classical and jazz are superior genres to rock was stated by Scaruffi, did you know? (even though regarding the superiority of one genre over another, we must make significant distinctions, and it is a very relative statement). As a result, what happens? The average quality of jazz musicians or classical musicians will be higher than the average of rock records. Too bad, though, that, as I showed you in my penultimate and last post, for Scaruffi the obvious superiority of rock over pop, hip hop, rap, dance doesn't hold. And so, Made in Japan (considered, even by me, the greatest live album of all time), has a rating equal to that of Eminem and slightly superior to several albums by Madonna, and there are THOUSANDS of blasphemies like that. Look at what I wrote previously: at least 60-70% of the ratings on that site need to change. And then, I'm really sorry, but is it really necessary for me to make this argument to understand that Black Sabbath is superior to Beyoncé, and that Bob Dylan is superior to Madonna? Is there really a need for a technical discussion to understand that the most beautiful song ever made by Britney Spears doesn't even come close artistically to the worst piece by Black Sabbath? Do you really need a cold artistic critique to understand that the best album by the Black Eyed Peas is at least 1.5-2 points inferior to the worst album by the Stones or Elvis?.."

Bjorky and Emo have added new things that I completely agree with, and especially the former has brought up the issue of a truly important topic that I described in my last post and to which, STRANGELY, nobody has responded, namely: Deep Purple-"Burn"-4, Britney Spears-"Baby One More Time"-4; Iron Maiden-"Seventh Son of a Seventh Son"-5.5, Madonna-"Ray of Light"-6.5; R Williams-"I've Been Expecting You"-5, AC/DC-"High Voltage"-5; Aqua-"Aquarium"-7, Led Zeppelin-"Led Zeppelin 3"-6; Eminem-"The Marshall Mathers LP"-7.5 (just like "Made in Japan", editor's note). Pink Floyd-"The Wall"-6.5.
I don't expect you to reply to this; this was just to go a bit more into specifics with some small examples. Moreover, the artists I chose, especially the pop ones, I all know for Christ's sake, so don’t come and tell me that I already knew those ratings had to be such (I only knew about Aqua). I explained this thoroughly in a previous post, I repeat (you need to scroll up 30-40 comments), and in the end, after careful analysis of the difference between pop/hip hop and rock, and rock-jazz/classical, I was asking: is the artistic difference between a great rock band and a great jazz musician smaller than that between a great pop star and a great rock band? In other words: is Britney Spears closer artistically to Black Sabbath than they are to Miles Davis? Based on this, at least 70% of the ratings from Scaruffi should be changed.
Anyway, read my previous intervention, where I explain much better, and tell me, as a last thing: why are there artists and bands that are so niche (and usually rated very well) that only he and those who produced them know about them (and I'm not sure about the latter), while Europe and Cinderella, Mr. Big and Racer X, Black Label Society and Zakk Wylde, Malmsteen and Marduk are missing... I realized they were missing while scrolling through the list of all the artists 2-3 times, because who knows how many other very famous bands are not there...

But how can you give less than a 4 to this album??..it's a masterpiece: Blind Guardian are one of the best metal bands (and not only, and here they prove it) on the planet. And this album is monumental.

On the question of "Heavy metal before-heavy metal after," I quote Sotanaht: true and pure Heavy Metal was born in '79-'80. The Black Sabbath played a hard rock with darker shades that would incredibly influence heavy metal, that’s true, but they were Hard Rock. Regarding the album in question, what can I say? 5 with eyes closed.