Contemplazione

TRICKY, clearly in the case of Led Zeppelin, what really mattered was primarily the instrumental aspect, truly remarkable, the incendiary sound, Plant's thunderous voice, and Page's biting guitar work. And some songs-compositions that contained within them a generational bewilderment experienced by the band members themselves ("Dazed And Confused," just to name one). As for the lyrics, they didn't always talk about sex! They could also be evocative and cryptic, though they didn't deserve to be considered poets. But at least they had a crucial historical importance for the affirmation of a genre and a tremendous influence on dozens of bands! And they were HARD ROCK pure and hard 100%, not POP ROCK. At one of their concerts, there was no shortage of excitement! Fun, sex, drugs, and rock 'n' roll... the REAL deal.

FIRST, watch out that by "niche" I don't mean something inaccessible to the majority, hence, if it is accessible to the few "chosen ones" like myself, that shouldn't gratify me or reassure me of my "superiority"... perhaps I used that expression incorrectly! What I meant to say, in much simpler terms, is that at least in Italy there are many fewer records by Cohen than by Rossi. Now, since my personal opinion is that Cohen's artistic value is superior to Rossi's, as is his musical, literary, and cultural contribution to humanity, I say: it seems unfair to me the different treatment that life and human beings have reserved for the two characters; it’s not meritocratic. But it’s clear that the market, as free as it may be, is actually guided and responds to countless other variables, and is more receptive to the amount of "entertainment" (what's wrong with having fun?) that a PRODUCT (Rossi and his songs) can offer, rather than to the amount of art dispensed by a POET (Cohen and his poems)! Considering the "entertainment" variable, Vasco Rossi obviously trounces Leonard Cohen 10-0! However, I believe it’s more honest to talk about entertainment music, not art.

John, why did you do it? You could have continued to experiment in so many other, more musical ways, with form! But didn’t you see what Miles's quintet was doing? Damn, if you were in a creative stasis or a mystical crisis, you could have drawn inspiration from that genius Wayne Shorter instead of Ornette Coleman and Albert Ayler! To start doing Free Jazz... what a crazy idea; you could have gifted us with quite a few more masterpieces!

The pussy = one of life's pleasures; money = one of life's pleasures; success = one of life's pleasures. You, Vasco Rossi, what moral enrichments have you produced, what aesthetic added value have you provided to the world, what sharp interpretation of life have you expressed, what human feelings have you managed to grasp deeply, what material utility have you created, what charisma have you truly demonstrated to possess... etc. etc. to deserve so much of the three pleasures mentioned above? You're even ugly!! Now we've understood the tricky pussy discourse? Then Nick Drake and Leonard Cohen may be very well-known around here, perhaps (I don't know), or in any gathering of music enthusiasts, but try mentioning their names to the average Rossi audience...or on the street. I find it only a good thing that they're selling more now, even if perhaps some, as you hypothesize, are drawn to them for the underground aura that surrounds them among those who "get it." Anyway, the thousands of copies sold compared to the millions of others less worthy of attention means they remain niche, in my opinion; in short, not in the public domain. As it should be for all artistic production! You are right that art from the 20th century onwards should be understood as a mass phenomenon, however, this does not mean that every time there is mass involvement, there is also art!! On the contrary, it is often (unfortunately) the opposite. Packed football stadiums (what better place?) for Rossi would be better than the auditorium if we think in those terms. That everyone can see Van Gogh's paintings online is great, and anyway, that's another discussion... Beautiful!

Elisa is not bad at all. 3.5-4 for the artist. However, since I don't know the album in its entirety, I can't rate it.

Good job! Digressions are not a mortal sin, anyway...

Sexual references were just meant to ironically lighten the mood of my posts (which weren’t really angry), and to make the point clearer: that the absence of meritocracy in the distribution of rewards (of all kinds) can be irritating. Those who believe in meritocracy, like me, smile with a bit of bitterness (but not surprised!) at the thought that truly UNIVERSAL musical and literary values, such as the songs of Leonard Cohen or Nick Drake, are in fact NICHE; and that, on the other hand, other, less universal values become universal due to the complex mechanisms governing their IMPOSITION.
TRICKY, my not appreciating this state of affairs does not mean I don’t understand market dynamics; on the contrary! But to stop reiterating the idea that all this is not beautiful is like stopping to oppose the mafia, corruption, or the exploitation of prostitution, because "they have always existed and will always exist"! However, I’m not at the opposite extreme either; I don’t want to wage crusades; I’m perfectly calm. It’s just when I hear praise for a Maurizio Costanzo, or a Fabrizio Corona, or a Vasco Rossi that I get irritated. For 20 seconds. Then it's kisses and hugs!

Good job, Paloz. Pleasant listening, without too many thoughts, even as a "background" if you want. And so it no longer falls into Art and becomes entertainment music (pleasant!), if not precisely disposable, perhaps used, reused, used again and thrown away (still being of decent quality). Well, I find that the music produced by Allevi so far lacks qualities of universality. Perhaps now it is clearer what I wanted to say.

In my opinion, it is undeniable that music production is influenced by various extramusical variables. So if you present yourself as a fool and have the image of a fool, it’s inevitable that your playing will partly lose creative intensity, in depth. Or at least, it’s the perceived intensity that diminishes. It seems not to take music seriously; it seems that when he sits at the piano, he thinks: “now I’ll show you how good I am,” but with the clownish attitude, so it doesn’t look like I’m showing off! Now, be careful, I didn’t say he can’t play, but I just find him lacking in DEPTH. Creating short, impactful pieces for television is quite easy, anyway! His improvisational skills are then less than mediocre (or absent?), and let’s not say it’s a CHOICE not to improvise. It’s rather a FORCED CHOICE!

Allevi, cut your hair! And then don’t talk, just be quiet and play! And learn to improvise, because the live tracks are just like the studio ones. And stop going on Costanzo's show, because if there's a way to make a fool of yourself, that's definitely the best one...