Contemplazione

Little, but I didn't offend you at all!! And even if I had wanted to, I'm not an expert in insults; I'm not used to offending people. Well, at least one day you'll teach me some cool insults, since you can't teach me a damn thing about jazz!!! Now excuse me, but I really have to take a dump.

We're doing great! I'm reading your 47 now... please, sweetheart, don't kill yourself because I've denied you my love... I was kindly quoting Bertoldo, Bertoldino e Cacasenno with "cagare"... you're a bit ignorant! And a bit confused because I remind you once again that in your comment 14 you made your love for straightforwardness in comments public... what a touchy person you are! Come on, silly, I care about you. Next time, if I feel up to it, explain to me what it means that I'm hanging on some Italian precept. Make sure to do your homework and get braces on!! Bye bye

Think that you, on the other hand, have never evoked any emotions in me, any man. Much less with your writing; it takes much more. You don't respect the opinions of others, you think you understand everything, and you offend those who think differently from you. And all for a 1...poor thing!

Core to core, you can't decide what is objectively praiseworthy or not, nor can the CD booklets, do you realize that? Everyone praises whatever they like. Moreover, if we really want to play this game, you are the least suited to set parameters, both for giving a 5 to this album (which is a 4, otherwise how do you rate A Love Supreme, Giant Steps, Crescent, The Complete 1961 Village Vanguard Records, Interstellar Space, etc.?) and because 'Round About Midnight is perhaps the least successful album, along with "Miles," from that glorious formation, which peaks in the four "in" tracks that should be seen as a single corpus of work, overall worthy of a 5 (each will have their own preferred tracks or "in" moments and perhaps would rate one of the four albums a 4 instead of a 5). In the same way, as Omaha rightly says, the work of the second quintet as a whole deserves a 5, a unique work in progress, and whether Sorcerer is less exciting than Miles Smiles or E.S.P. who cares, that it is more evanescent and almost insubstantial is not necessarily a flaw, but an interesting characteristic. Moreover, just the track Masqualero alone is enough to obliterate much of the electric Davis that you consider even superior to Miles Smiles and probably to Kind Of Blue!!!

It depends on who wrote the booklets, whether they are understood or not...

Make sure to give 1 to the other 25,999 helpful reviews on the site as well. After all, yours, you explained to us, are light-years more effective ahahahah

Here comes the grumpy professor!

Suggestions: don't give me suggestions that you have no right to and that I haven't asked for. Enjoy reading the booklets!!

But excuse me, I really don't understand why you took it so hard... wasn't straightforwardness one of the things you appreciated the most? You write that in comment 14. I was straightforward, so what? You're the one who got all worked up like a little kid and told me "always better than yours which are banal, and then Sorcerer is terrible, the booklet says so, GNE GNE GNE!!!" Congratulations!! I don't even know what the "little heart" is, but it seems to me from how much importance you give it that it's just a "good job!" more like a pat on the back from the editors... I'll give it to you because you need it for your self-esteem. I wrote only to spread and share, not to be original and get a little heart. I have never put myself in competition with anyone, like you do with me, nor have I ever thought of myself as a professor of anything.

Anyway, besides not being able to write something about this record, you also haven't been able to read my review of Sorcerer, as I define "strepitosa" Masqualero, a composition by Shorter (and not "strepitoso" the record). Moreover, the word "meraviglioso" does not appear anywhere on the page, while with "orgasmo" I was referring globally to the body of recorded music by the Miles Davis quintet, which represents the pinnacle of all jazz. Sorcerer, as I explicitly clarify, is just a notch below E.S.P. and Miles Smiles, it would be a 4-4.5 (certainly not a 3), but since it’s them playing, it is imbued with genius and contains its magical moments. Besides that, even at a purely instrumental and improvisational level, it is a cornucopia of treasures to study for decades. Hence my 5 (which is, after all, subjective). Closing parenthesis. Now: and if for me Sorcerer were an orgasm and a masterpiece, would that be a trivial statement? Just because you, who possibly listen superficially, consider it a 3? By the way, I’m puzzled as to why it would be considered one of Davis's worst! If you feel like justifying…