Longliverock

The votes. PS: yes, she is really very cute...

A friend played it for me in the car while we were going to play football: I had one of the worst matches of my life!.. :-)

"How can you still consider Sonata Arctica or Stratovarius after listening to 'Spiderland' by Slint? It's not plausible..." Well, I listen to these, you listen to the Smashing Pumpkins. And don’t talk to me like there’s something wrong: if you read the reviews on the site, most of the albums from the two bands (especially Stratovarius) have great ratings (even though they've put out some crap, obviously). In fact, Stratovarius and Sonata are much more appreciated than the SM in general, not just by me: as always, I'm evidently not the only idiot who doesn’t understand anything about music... And I’m not naming alternative bands at random (to look cool, mind you: if there were some girls!..): because among them there are some that I like, but many others that I don’t. And then, damn it, two posts ago you accused me of the opposite, that I’m not alternative at all and only tied to “classic” rock-hard rock-heavy metal! :-( At least get your story straight (between yourselves and maybe even with yourselves).

except for the voice, exceptional, and "Grace Kelly," a nice and catchy piece.

We didn't understand each other; it's not that I'm fixated on '70s rock derived from blues AND THAT'S IT. By saying that true rock died in '96, I'm not saying that the SP aren’t rock… simply, FOR ME, their rock is mediocre. After all, what genre is it? Alternative? Mainstream? If that's the case, even Muse are rock… BUT WHAT KIND OF ROCK is that? That's the point. And thank goodness I'm supposed to be "a little alternative" fixated only on the old idea of rock: Kid Rock and Rage Against the Machine are "Rock and hard-rock rapped," Mars Volta I don’t even know exactly what genre they belong to, but they're anything but "classics," and so are Sonata Arctica (melodic power metal), Stratovarius (hard-rock/heavy metal/power metal), Slint (I couldn’t say exactly what genre they belong to), Tool (a hard rock that is FAR from the "classical" standards), Teatro degli orrori (have you ever heard them??), Rovescio della medaglia (Progressive made in Italy, all to be discovered), Pride of Lions (hair-rock/glam metal in 2007, guys… and what glam metal!), Tokio Dragons (rock/hard-rock, definitely not "classic": a band from 2004!), Arcturus (a crazy band: epic metal, gothic alternating with classical parts). And I don’t know how many more there are that I can’t remember. It’s not about being "open" or rooted in the idea of '70s rock. It’s just that I find the genre proposed by the SP mediocre. For me, it's a pseudo-alternative post-grunge rock, unpretentious and good for then-adolescents with a somewhat dazed look who wanted to be alternative because it seemed so cool to be counter-current, (but in reality, they were the first to follow the trends). This, FOR ME, at least. Then each of you can think that the SP are the greatest band of all time—whatever. Oh, and by the way, I voted three times: I don't believe that the rating this album has now depends only on my votes (which have always been 2, never 1)!! (for the series "climbing on mirrors": just read all the comments above).

"He also played at Woodstock with Jimi Hendrix... Or maybe it was him in disguise?" No, it wasn't Chuck Norris in disguise; in reality, they had a challenge to see who was better. Jimi Hendrix played the guitar with his hands, his feet, and his tongue; Chuck Norris played the solo of "Stairway to Heaven" (which Jimmy Page copied a few years later), kicking the guitar with flying kicks. The judges declared Chuck Norris the best guitarist ever, except for one, who was immediately sent to the hospital by our man with a spinning roundhouse kick...:-)))))))))

And you want to mix the riffs of MAIDEN with those of SM??? Or with Led?? Or with Deep Purple?? Or with Metallica?? Buhahahahahahahah!!! Come on guys, don't joke: it's not enough to just use distortion and effects at full blast... for me, the only passable one is the drummer... and anyway, it's clear that I'm not the only idiot who thinks this way: now we've somewhat "monopolized" the review, but if you read all the comments from the other users from the beginning, you'll see that I'm not the only one thinking like this, quite the opposite: so it's not just me who "doesn't understand anything," but at least a good fifteen... the average rating of the album is 2.30, and the general comments about the band aren't exceptional... The fact is that you like them, I don't: I'm tired of it by now, I wonder what sense it makes to keep discussing...

Anyway, we were talking about the '90s... In any case, to say that the Who are inferior or superior to the Beatles, Led Zeppelin, Hendrix, Pink Floyd, is like saying that Botticelli is superior or inferior to Leonardo, Pinturicchio, Titian... We're talking about such MONSTERS, who have made such a significant mark on the history of rock that comparing them to each other makes no sense. And as far as I'm concerned, I don't just listen to power and hard rock... on the contrary: Classical, Opera, Jazz, Gospel, Soul, Blues, Pop, Folk, Rock (with all its subgenres), hard rock (with all its subgenres), Heavy metal, up to something from Megadeth, Metallica, and Pantera. Let's say that the maximum I can listen to are Pantera; after that, I like nothing from thrash-death and above. And to say that Stratovarius, Sonata Arctica, Timoria are worth less than Smashing Pumpkins... damn... oh, I almost forgot, besides those already mentioned by Oititi, I also include JORN LANDE (and ARK), ARCTURUS, KID ROCK, RAGE AGAINST THE MACHINE, TESTAMENT, KISKE (who as a solo artist, post-Helloween, has made some okay records but also some great ones)... But damn, I would perhaps only save the drummer of the SP: are they more avant-garde and have they been more important in recent music than many groups (better than them)? Perhaps... but even Gigi D'Agostino, in his genre, is considered a pioneer, one of the leading figures in modern Dance (music made on the computer): "avant-garde" and "importance" are very relative words in music, and from a purely musical point of view, I hear flat guitars from the SP, never a nice riff, never a solo, 2 depressing chords (someone might say: "but it's done on purpose"... and thank goodness!! :-(), which are repeated throughout the entire piece. A loud voice (but it's done on purpose... and thank goodness! But have you ever heard Dio, Dickinson, Plant, Mercury, Gillan, Tyler, Scott, Timo, Kiske, Lande, Bach, Martin, Soto, Coverdale, Matijevic??). In short, a post-grunge band that had a lot of success thanks to those pimple-faced teenagers who today are in their 25s, reminiscing nostalgically about those years; I put them just 2 steps above groups like My Chemical Romance and 30 Seconds To Mars (which are nothing more than a brief evolution of that style): in a few years, when today's teenagers grow up, they will remember My Chemical as a great band because they are tied to their youth. That's how it is, we know it well. But original, true, and authentic rock died in '95-'96.

"..This is not up for discussion" Soundgarden, Snakepit, Pearl Jam, Velvet Revolver, Skid Row, Alice in Chains, Tool, Slint, Zakk Wilde, Black Label Society, Sonata Arctica, Stratovarius, Mars Volta, Temple of the Dog, Timoria, Teatro degli orrori, Rovescio della medaglia (the last three just to stay in Italy). And who knows how many others I can't remember right now (but they are there, I guarantee it). Not to mention the work of the "oldies" from the '80s, '70s, and '60s who produced good-to-great albums in the '90s and 2000s: Aerosmith (Nine Lives from '97, Get a Grip from '93, and many others), Iron Maiden (Dance of Death, Brave New World, Fear of the Dark, Virus, A Matter of Life and Death, not to mention the always great LIVE albums), Rolling Stones (the very recent "The Bigger Bang" was a huge success, in addition to being a great album), or "Use Your Illusion" and "Spaghetti Incident" by GNR. But of course, the Smashing Pumpkins were the BEST band of the '90s alongside Nirvana, THERE'S NO DISCUSSION!!! :-((

A beautiful, fantastic album that captivates you from the first to the last track: the incorporation of keyboards, used by the band for the first time, is spot on; generally longer pieces compared to those on previous albums, allowing more space for instrumental sections (which I believe are the highlight), while following more of the stylistic features of '70s progressive rock (think Yes), and... WAIT A MINUTE, I GAVE THE WRONG REVIEW!..