Neu!

from 2 to the Doors and 3 to this? oh well Francis; even if I tried, I couldn't spew all this crap... not to mention that you're not even consistent with yourself... you criticized the Doors because in your opinion they made silly little songs no longer than three minutes like the Beatles... that's your point of view, absolutely debatable but still a point of view, and then the fact that I didn't like the tone of the review on the Doors is another story... and these aren't silly little songs of three minutes? (oh no, that's right, these are horrible little songs...) even the silly little songs without any artistic value by the Beatles are gold compared to this crap and the Doors were gold compared to the silly little songs of the Beatles (if you're interested in the topic, check out my comments on any Beatles review). sorry if I didn't directly compare it to Avril Lavigne but it's too much for me, I might not be able to handle it...

Well, it seems to me that among all of us, the "forced alternative" here is just you. This is objectively a masterpiece; if you don't like it, at least have the humility not to write a review saying, "I'm the only one who's right, the critics don't understand a thing, and you are all just a bunch of alternative assholes and this record sucks." Not to mention that your critique isn't even substantiated; you just don't like it, and that’s fine. Nobody says anything to you; in fact, I’ll tell you more, you can express your opinion calmly and politely. But if you come to bother us with such arrogance and say things justified only by words like "you like this record because you’re forced to be alternative, but you’re more pretentious than those who wear designer clothes," without any arguments, you’ll get all the ones and you’d better keep quiet.

Well, I must admit that writing all the comments made about Sgt. Pepper's on a review is not a bad idea, but it's a shame that in the end the review doesn’t turn out to be so successful and, above all, is quite offensive towards the Punisher, who is the master of reviews like these; he truly excels in the subject! Perhaps the greatest reviewer on all of Debaser, the Punisher!!!

There are indeed some ideas here, but the album ultimately turns out to be quite unpleasant. The review is horrible; saying that this album is a brick is like saying that Lecciso is an artist... do you want me to recommend some real bricks? Trout Mask Replica by Beefheart, Twin Infinitives by Royal Trux; if you consider this a brick, you probably won’t even manage to listen to the first track of those albums. As for other nonsense you say? There’s an industrial quantity of it; I could write an essay about it: above all, the idea that it’s revolutionary simply because this album has a white cover; we're talking about '68! The years of experimentation, how can you say that a white cover is revolutionary? A new concept of music was developing during those years, and artistic heights were reached that have never been matched since. They were talking about psychedelia (Pink Floyd and Doors), about noise music (Red Crayola, even in '67 with "Parable Of Arable Land," and the Velvet Underground—damn, the Velvet Underground, do you know Sister Ray? Now that was a revolution!). If you’re convinced this is an "extraordinary" work when it was a rather banal effort that also masked the revolutions of the aforementioned artists; if you believe that being a double album is a revolutionary fact when that had already been experimented with far superior results ("Freak Out" by Frank Zappa and "Blonde On Blonde" by Bob Dylan). Shortly after, the quintessential rock opera, the most revolutionary, the greatest, would be released: "Trout Mask Replica" by Captain Beefheart, an album that still requires dozens and dozens of listens to be appreciated (even with the most ambitious Beatles album, one listen is more than sufficient); an album that redefined the only musical certainty still intact amidst the experiments of those years: rhythm. And in the meantime, what were the Beatles doing? Singing their silly little songs and recycling ideas (like this whole double album thing or psychedelia) from their colleagues who achieved far better results years in advance. The Beatles were late, they were late on everything, on timing and on the quality of the music... I’ll stop here because I’ve had enough of writing too...

(There's no point in commenting, I don't want to be repetitive... check out the other Beatles reviews if you're really interested in what I think.)

vote

I hadn't seen this review! I'm not giving you 5 stars because, at times, it's copied from the Scaruffi website; however, it's excellent, and I truly respect you for giving the Beatles a 2.

I was passing by here.

sorry *pere ubu

I hate light music, I hate this term and I will hate it for all my life; if by light music you mean "canzonetta," I absolutely don’t listen to any light music at all; there are a few light music records that I can consider successful (very few, you can count them on one hand) but in general, I hate light music. If by light music you mean rock music, then yes, I listen to Neu!, Velvet Underground, Pepe Ubu, Faust, Foetus, Nico, Doors, Popol Vuh, Captain Beefheart, Robert Wyatt, the first Frank Zappa, Lisa Germano, Suicide... I could go on; let me know which of these artists you know.