OleEinar

Very "enlightening" page, I don't know anything but it seems very interesting, I will investigate.

"For their age, they are already doing quite enough," but do you know how many bands at their age had already created milestones of rock??

In the meantime, let’s not confuse modern art with contemporary art, as they are two different things. @jessika, I have been to some contemporary art museums, and I found a little bit (very little) of beautiful stuff there, just like there is something beautiful in today's music, it's just that the Tokio Hotel are NOT it. I don't generalize; on the contrary, my argument was really to counter the generalizations of SoulOnFire, who claims that there's nothing better than Tokio Hotel out there today, so we should settle for that. This way of thinking is absurd and it's exactly what ruins music. Then, since there are a lot of people who like Ramazzotti or Britney Spears, I’m certainly not surprised that there are people who adore the Tokio Hotel; it’s legitimate and tastes vary. What needs to be understood, though, is that the Tokio Hotel are artistically worthless. Certain artistic evaluations are objective; I can very well say that I like my neighbor's messier paintings more than Van Gogh’s (to give a silly example), but that doesn’t mean I can say that my neighbor is artistically more valid than Van Gogh. If we’re here discussing with you, it’s only because we’d like to help you understand that if you like music, there are millions of better things to listen to than this, which you might not know about. If despite all this you want to continue idolizing the Tokio Hotel, it certainly doesn’t change my life!

"Well, I certainly remember Nirvana only for Kurt Cobain's death," what can I say, I feel sorry for you. "If we keep criticizing every single band trying to make their way in music," if they're trying to make their way by making music, no, if they're just making crap, then yes. Check out DeB and you'll find plenty of albums from recent years that are being praised. Of course, if you’re waiting for MTV to share them with you, it’s going to be a bit tough for you to know them. But then your argument doesn’t make any sense at all. Sorry, contemporary art makes me sick; that doesn't mean I go to a contemporary art museum and say that in the end, the works are beautiful because today they're all like that. Instead, I go to one of ancient or modern art and admire the millions of masterpieces left to us by past centuries. Even if it were true that today's music is all like these guys (and IT'S NOT), you’re not obligated to listen to it. Rather, listen to the THOUSANDS of albums better than this one that have come out in the last 50 years, which you wouldn't have enough of a lifetime to get through.

I don't know much about the current landscape, but just to give an example, there's a review of the Sterlings at home, a fantastic album. Then, to stay in Italy, there's the Teatro degli Orrori. Anyway, the point you make might be true, but who cares? Besides, the role isn't the same; the Nirvana were celebrated for Cobain's charisma but will be remembered in rock history for their music. In five years, no one will even remember these Tokio Hotel. Let's not confuse shit with chocolate, please.

So, the album, listened to multiple times, is definitely very beautiful, with truly original and engaging atmospheres and some splendid and poignant instrumental passages, as you rightly pointed out. Unfortunately, personally, I find the vocal parts unbearable; fortunately, they had the good sense to limit them to a minimum, avoiding completely ruining a splendid work like this. Of course, this is my personal taste, so it is a subjective opinion. Moreover, it is a judgment I extend to many other Italian prog albums, which in many cases I cannot appreciate fully precisely because of the unbearable nature of the vocal parts (there are much worse cases than this, anyway).

Ah, but of course. But what does that mean? You wrote that Nirvana were the Tokio Hotel of the '90s, which is absurd because Nirvana was a great band, while Tokio Hotel was not. I don't really care about the kind of following a band has; what matters is the music they produce.

mmm, I can't stand it...

Sure, with the tiny difference that Nirvana made great music...

"Don't come to idolize the Nirvana, which was nothing more than the Tokio Hotel, Him, and 30 Seconds to Mars of the '90s," but, human case right away.