Deneil

sanjuro but what the hell does it mean that cohen is the greatest singer-songwriter of all time! I mean, you sound like a fan of Pausini saying "Pausini is the queen!" yours sounds like an overly fanatic judgment, I love Tim Buckley and Neil Young too, but I certainly wouldn’t say that Greetings from L.A. or Trans are masterpieces...a little objectivity never hurts!

I think that everything and its opposite can be said about art, simply different points of view; anyway, you have some good arguments. As for Camus, you can't deny that today he is moooooolto less considered compared to the past, certainly from the so-called mass audience, I mean.

No Sanjuro, I have a collection of Cohen; I'll try to get the first album and let you know. For now, I think Tim Buckley is clearly superior—just listen to "Dream Letter," poetry, music, voice... what a voice!

Ehm... Poletti lives like a parasite off the critics; haven't we understood that yet?

It's commercial like crazy since half of the songs are covers? But what does it mean that if you sit down it's commercial? Go listen to Nick Drake: oh my gosh, what a commercial hit! Your opinion of Nirvana is solely yours, so avoid sticking your trivial opinion on others.

Look, I'm downloading it because you pique my curiosity with your well-crafted reviews... just hope it's not like the rakes, otherwise... grrrrrr :-))))

So you mean there exists an objective reality where certain albums or bands are good and others are not? Come on, what nonsense is that? At best, one can be objectively skilled at playing, but the idea that there are objectively better albums than others... meh! Even classics like The Piper at the Gates of Dawn can be considered crap by one person and a masterpiece by another. The problem is that you, like many, believe that today's critics have arrived at an absolute truth, but that's not the case! Every era has had its critics who deemed one theory worthy and another less so, one author a genius and another crap. Then time passes and things are seen from another perspective, so the crappy author becomes a precursor to who knows what truth, while the other (just to give you a literary example, Camus, the author of The Plague, was considered great in his time and today hardly anyone knows him) gets forgotten. Little by little, these years will also pass, and our children will consider masterpieces, I don’t know, Tiziano Ferro (I seriously doubt it, but it's just a name I'm throwing out there) and crap someone else... and so on. And every era has its own truth. That said, it's undeniable that masterpieces like The Divine Comedy will always be seen as masterpieces, but maybe from different points of view, perhaps even considered inferior to Tasso, for example. Even though for older works this process is much less valid since after centuries, everyone has formed an opinion on them (or at least that's what we believe), and thus there is not much room left for new opinions. But above all, I ask myself one thing: what the hell does all of this have to do with Queen? I don’t know! What do you think about all this, Riccardo?

Ahah they're such fools! Great job, also no association... shameless in copying!

I don't like Cohen..say what you want but to me he's a great poet, not a musician. That said, I understood almost nothing from the review! :-))

the review is well done but that damn nu nu wave as they call it...really unbearable.....