vitols4

Okay, let me try again. Celine Dion outdoes Mariah Carey, who outdoes Michael Bolton, who outdoes Seal, who outdoes Mercury, who outdoes Bono, who outdoes John Lennon, who outdoes Mick Jagger. Among these well-known singers, I personally only regard the last two as artists (and also Mercury, come on). DE GUSTIBUS. I meant to make a timid critique of the decent review, only disagreeing with the part about vocal abilities. From there to trashing bands or solo artists is quite a leap, with all due respect to fedan 76. You don't agree? Fine. Do you want to insult me? Go ahead, I won't fall for vulgarity that, I’m convinced, most people behind the convenient anonymity of their usernames wouldn’t actually express. You don't seem to be the last fool, but I assure you that spewing such judgments shows the opposite. I hope I’ve been clear.

Wow, did they beat you up when you were little? I was hoping everything would fall within the bounds of decency, at least on the surface. I'm outta here, defeated by your pettiness. Amen.

All in all, these two illiterate Beatles maniacs weren't that bad. I saw them at their first concert in Milan (about 100 spectators) and they blew me away. They were practically punk. Useless album, which I made sure to buy to remind myself of when I was in high school and thought that if they made it, it couldn't be that hard... Now they are pop icons, and I'm just a poor fool. One-nil for Oasis.

JACK: "You are the opposite of Felo because you dismiss different groups." You wrote that and it's wrong. Saying that Mick has an octave and a half is not dismissing a group or a singer that I, elsewhere, praise. So I confirm that you are imprecise; that you are rude is confirmed by others. Anyway, peace made, if you enjoy yourself this way, good for you.

Jack: I would invite you to read my review of Jagger's "wandering spirit." But I know you won't. Given the elegance and composure of your comments, I withdraw from the calm discussion, I will leave as suggested to go fuck myself, and leave you to your enlightened ideas while I keep mine.

X Jackdaniels: I'm sorry, because following what you write, I thought you were less approximate. I adore the Beatles in a visceral way, there's no denying it. But I can also be very critical, and if you take the trouble to read me a bit, you'll notice it without effort (I've written more critiques of McCartney than anything else, and I would erase the first 4 albums of the fab4 from the earth).
Jagger covers an octave and a half with his voice, as sensual and skillfully descending as it is. It seems to me a fact. Ask him to sing T&S, or Mother, or Happiness is a Warm Gun, and then we can talk about it again. Anyway, putting me opposite to Felo is a compliment... ; ) so thank you!

For the fugitive: to fill the ENORMOUS gap, listen to me: ABBEY ROAD. You won’t need anything else. Guaranteed.

Nice review. Too bad about Jagger’s gaffe... John would still outshine him even in death as a singer. I don’t have the album yet... I declare myself against posthumous/commercial operations, yet I always end up buying them, and often I find interesting things. I’ll take care of it. As for the rest, I’ll quote myself... John Lennon is one of the few artists who made the world a little better.

I would erase the entire discography up to halfway through Rubber Soul, just for the record. But have you ever thought that 4 years after "Love Me Do," "Sgt. Pepper's" was released? Doesn’t that make you reflect? An evolution of this kind is the result of a compositional exuberance that is nothing short of volcanic, and it can only be the product of wild experimentation as well as, let’s not deny it, a constant search for inspiration all around. McCartney called the Beatles the greatest thieves in circulation back in '67. One more thing. Is it possible that those 4 musicians, ON AVERAGE, have been on everyone's lips, for better or worse, for 50 years? Is it really just advertising? Then why have Take That disappeared? Those who understand, and those who truly WANT to understand, must confront the Beatles phenomenon, necessarily. Considering them mediocre is a bit pretentious, after all. I, for instance, can’t listen to Led Zeppelin and Pink Floyd, but I could never just throw them under the bus, because they have merit, and a lot of it. “Intellectual honesty,” the fine one would have called it... all the rest is sterile chatter.

FELUZ: pleased to acknowledge that we cistiamosuibal each other (how cool), don't ask me to return to that ranting shabby site. I'm referring, in detail, to the issue of the 3 minutes. Go take a look and tell me if I'm wrong. Anyway, it's not like it's a disgrace... Piero has a brain that's terrifying. The fact that he only uses it to prove to the world that he’s the coolest because he demolishes the greatest musical phenomenon of the 20th century is another sad matter... of which you are a skilled and (a bit arrogant) prosecutor.
Regarding the Beatles\beach boys dichotomy, I suggest you find out what Wilson himself thought (buy "sixties BBC press reports", it's only available in English).
Yes, yes, I know you’re better and more learned and more influential in the music of the new millennium than McCartney and Wilson combined and blah blah blah... but the authentic interpretation of those involved is always something to consider.. I believe. Bye.