supersoul

TRACK RECORDS Ltd. 2406 001 MADE IN Gt.BRITAIN

printed and made by MacNeill Press Ltd., London S.E.1

@hymnen thank you, as soon as I got home I checked and... the stamp-writing "The Who - Live at Leeds" on the packaging paper is BLUE! I think and hope you were referring to that when you said black!

but that's not it, man. I never said it was nonsense, Nothing is Shocking is a magnificent album; everyone said: they mimic Led Zeppelin, but it was an album of unmatched complexity—punk, dark, hard rock, psychedelia. A great record. I thought that statement was a bit bold, as you yourself pointed out. Imagine that year I also bought "Surfer Rosa," and it’s still one of my favorites. Personally, I believe that, for example, the Pixies represented more than Jane's what I expect from rock. The chubby/nerdy/weird guy like Husker Du, who is a great composer, the woman on bass who contrasts with the vocal melodies like in Jefferson, X, Santiago's irregular guitar (a coincidence with Navarro?), the ability to extract great melodies from noise like the beloved Husker, refrains that stick with you all day long. With Jane's, everything was more inflated (in the good sense, not the detrimental sense of the word, of course).

...even though "Are you receiving me" right on Go2, even in its simplicity (in comparison to the complexity of the later albums), can give you a good idea of what XTC will become.

The fact is that it was made with the leftovers of the first, which was steeped in punk spirit, distant from the subsequent stunning XTC, although it gives that extra edge that makes their more "pop" records unmatched and never trivial. Mike, if you want to enjoy XTC, I recommend the double CD compilation "Fossil Fuel: the XTC singles 1977-1992"; it’s money well spent for about thirty tracks, each one more beautiful than the last.

...McCartney and not McCarthy, is that this bastard Cormac is just too great ...

In the top 3, more than Lennon or McCarthy, Nash has always seemed to me to be Harrison, with his gentle way of approaching rock, unlike the anger of Stills' debut or the acid of "If I could..." by Crosby. Maybe it won't be a 5-star album like the other two, but damn, there are so many beautiful people playing here and in a divine way: Crosby, Neil Young, Jerry Garcia, and Phil Lesh of the grateful dead (just listen to their great work in "I Used to Be a King"), Dave Mason from the early Traffic (after having had a fistfight with Winwood), John Barbata, Rita Coolidge. I agree with donjunio in post 2, even if I’m still recovering from his definition of Jane's as the greatest American rock band of the last 20 years...

Looking back, perhaps Starblazer is so devilish that it's just mocking us all, just look at the introduction: "The year is 2005, and the absence of significant rock-based music of exceptional quality has resulted in the unthinkable: Hell is frozen over..." and then right after: "...but fortunately, The Darkness have arrived to reignite the flame of rock." No, you can't be that clueless, they're definitely joking.

But what are you surprised about? Have you forgotten that in Starblazer the first albums of Black Sabbath are terrible and Ozzy's singing is defined as a meow, while they praise the falsetto of the favorite band of former English minister Tony Blair? How much do you think his five counts for this album? In my opinion, it’s foolish to say that the review isn’t bad while disagreeing with every single word. One can write like a Nobel laureate, but if you think they’ve spouted nonsense left and right, I don’t see why one should say that the review isn’t bad. Writing a good review also means giving the impression of having properly assessed what you’re reviewing; otherwise, it comes across as a farce, nothing less than not bad.