Giona

I don’t see how giving a high rating to an excellent album makes me lose credibility... these are points of view... in my opinion, there are many excellent albums and certainly not just in prog. I know many works that can move me and make me feel good, also played masterfully, and I have no trouble considering such albums as 8 - 8.5 - 9 and so on. As for random users, what can I say... you’re right. I admit it. Prog is a challenging genre; if you take 10 random users, I certainly don’t expect a downpour of 5s, not at all! I believe the issue is that we have completely different criteria for judgment, more than just diverging tastes. It’s really the foundation of the evaluation that doesn’t add up; we see it differently... and between the two perspectives, I truly believe I am the voice out of the choir :)

Ole, I have a lot of respect for your point of view, but at some point, the sounds we're drawn to come into play... It’s like when I reviewed Arzachel; you liked them much more than I did, and in that case, I think the 5-star rating was seen through a telescope. I have no problem admitting that prog gives me more intense feelings and sounds more vivid to my ears compared to other genres. My 8.7 is objective from my perspective; if I let myself go with my feelings, I would have given it a 9.2 or thereabouts, precisely because I love "jazzed-up prog," which makes you yawn, as you already made clear when I reviewed the albums by National Health and Gilgamesh. It’s probably reciprocal since the psych tones you enjoy don’t grab me as much after a while, but that’s perfectly fine; tastes are beautiful precisely because of their diversity. Absolute objectivity is unthinkable; however, I strive to stay grounded as much as I can, certainly letting a certain dose of enthusiasm shine through because let’s be honest: I’d like to bring people closer to the genre, not push them away, so it’s clear I tend to highlight rather than criticize, always staying within the limits of the facts and never making up merits or things out of thin air.

Just because I write for those who read me, I feel compelled not to diminish a work simply because there isn't a rating capable of properly defining it. One cannot remain anchored to the mere mathematical concepts 2=4; 4=8; 3.7=7.4; 4.6=9.2 and so on... This doesn’t add up! For the reader, a 3 is a 6, a decent album and nothing more, even if the reviewer thinks it’s a 3.9, thus a decidedly good album. In this case, you round up and give it a 4... then you review an album you like and give it a 4... then you talk about a decent work that stays afloat with dignity but nothing more, and give it a 4... then you find a fabulous album that doesn’t quite become a milestone, and give it a 4... It honestly doesn’t seem like this could help the reader.

Elio, explain to me how cold and impersonal it can be to write about certain passages and place them in a musical space called "track 2" or "track 5," without mentioning the actual name of the piece. I don't want to push you towards a track-by-track analysis or a meticulous exploration of the work if it's not your style, of course, but writing down a few titles doesn't seem like a tragedy to me, quite the opposite... @Ole, Doc, pixies: I continue to perfectly understand your point of view, but I think Elio, knowing many prog records that are unfortunately unknown today, tends to present us with those he prefers, meaning the best ones, and there are indeed masterpieces in the lesser-known prog scene. In conclusion, I believe the entire misunderstanding regarding evaluations arises essentially from two key points: the first is that prog is a genre with one of the largest numbers of unknown works, and you, seeing them all rated with a 5, understandably turn up your noses, but know that they are not all like that; they are just the tip of the iceberg, a tiny part (and when I say tiny, I mean literally infinitesimal) compared to how many there actually are to rediscover. I, Elio, Jargon, etc., fish out the most beautiful ones from a sea so vast (even if hidden) that it can comfortably host many "diamond tips." I could also review hundreds of prog albums that nobody knows, ranging from horrible to mediocre to insignificant, but why should I? If I have to recommend something, I point out the best, not just the decently acceptable ones. Beyond this, the second point is about the voting element: maneuvering with a rating limited from 1 to 5 cannot produce an accurate judgment, but rather a purely indicative one. If I give a 5 to an album, it doesn’t mean it’s a 10 (actually, almost never), but it’s from an 8.5 upwards. For me, this Tonton Macoute is an 8.7, but here I write 5 because it is much more than a good album (which would correspond to a 4, equating to a 7-8); it's an excellent album, not a masterpiece, but still excellent. A 3 has become a value that barely meets or slightly exceeds sufficiency, so every decent, good, or even excellent album (but not a masterpiece) risks always receiving the same evaluation, that is, 4. I know I’ve explained myself terribly, but I hope the essence of what I’m trying to convey is understandable enough.

But are we sure that the water flowing (or entering) from the cover mask is not actually a sea of white wine?

Nothing to say... another hit from the Canadian trio.

I don't believe that those present voted 5 for the review because of the album. Personally, I find that all the essential elements for a comprehensive piece are there: Introduction, a few words about the band, identification of the genre and style, analysis of the album through a few tracks, and conclusion. If there are some errors (and indeed there are), they don't seem significant enough to disrupt or even hinder the success of the review, which I still consider excellent.

Very good, Neu! I also prefer this second work to the debut from '74, which is still a noteworthy album. Great review.

I arrive late and indeed everything has already been said... unfortunately with the summer traffic, it's quite an effort for me to keep up with the latest releases at this pace... I can only evaluate another excellent review of Neu! for an interesting and definitely underrated album.

Thank you for the comments! You know, unfortunately, it's a quirk of mine, probably due to my excessive and frantic need to research, but I tend to consider not only the work itself for evaluation but also (perhaps too much) the period and context in which it was created... For these reasons, in my eyes (well, ears is more appropriate) "I Spider" is much more than just a good album. Then again, it all comes down to subjectivity...