Neu!

Maybe I overdid it... but I have a real soft spot for this album...

C.H.E.F.

In some reviews of Iron, it was always me; I saved myself the trouble of rewriting the comment in different words and just did a copy-paste since I don't have enough time to rewrite on all the Iron reviews.

@Omagenex9999. I’ve been misunderstood, in some parts, by a lot of people... maybe I expressed myself poorly. There’s no question that Iron Maiden are better than Britney Spears (even though I don’t like them), I was comparing Britney Spears to the thousands of little metal bands from some sub-sub-genre of metal that don’t see the difference between music and noise, often not even supported by sufficient technique...

From my point of view, definitely not. I don’t like anything by Bowie, but I understand that a couple of albums might appeal to some. Bob Dylan is one of the greatest songwriters of all time, but he has made two great albums (Highway 61 Revisited and Blonde on Blonde), some decent ones, and a lot of nonsense. Led Zeppelin? I agree on the first one, but then? The fourth one, okay, it's fine... that's enough; let's be generous, even the second one... again, not more than three. CCCP made one (very) good one (the first). I only like "Made in Japan" by Deep Purple; "Machine Head" might also be enjoyable.
Faust, Rolling Stones, and Velvet Underground are perhaps my three absolute favorite bands, yet it’s the same story here. The Velvet Underground made two masterpieces ("The Velvet Underground & Nico" and "White Light/White Heat") and one excellent live album (live); as for Faust, well, the first is pure legend, the best rock album of all time, hands down; the fourth is great, and Faust Tapes is good. I wouldn’t recommend the others. Regarding the Rolling Stones, I think the spirit and cohesion of the band have been much more evident in live performances than in studio albums. Anyway, Exile on Main Street remains their masterpiece, followed by three other good albums (Beggar's Banquet, Aftermath, Between the Buttons). So there you have it, from my point of view, none of these artists has released more than three (maybe four for the Rolling Stones, but the essence doesn't count) albums worth having.

It's clear that this album has touched you deeply; what comes out is an excellent, inspired, and moving review. In my opinion, the album isn't bad...

this reception was missing... but screw you!

tell me who! I really want to know. please tell me, because I don't know anyone

And anyway, I haven't offended anyone; I've only expressed my opinion... if the tones seemed offensive to you, I'm ready to apologize.

@anarchico. Do you want to know something? I'm also from '92, and it really annoys me when they don't want to consider my opinion just because of my age... regarding Metallica, let me correct you, only the first 3 albums are good, and the fourth one isn't bad, the Black Album is just adequate, Load and Reload are mediocre, and St. Anger is awful. So you might wonder why I like them, simple, because in rock no artist can claim more than 2-3 albums worth listening to... and also because the bad things don’t cancel out the good ones. I don’t know how to put it. Metallica could make another 1000 St. Angers but in my hypothetical list of my favorite bands, their position will never change. NO ROCK ARTIST has a discography good enough to claim all of their albums are good, which is not the case, for example, in jazz or classical music.
@Battlegods so from my talk you didn’t get whether I like Beethoven or Britney Spears? Yes, I mention both Beethoven and Britney Spears but what's important is how... I spare you the effort of re-reading it, I’m saying Britney Spears sucks (sorry if I’m falling into triviality, but I have to explain again for those who don’t understand) but certain metal bands don’t stray too far from that level (not all! Don’t misunderstand me! Even Iron Maiden, whom I don’t like, are not there).