Mr.music

I still have to buy it, since it comes out on the 15th! For GIOVANNIA: you’re mistaken in your judgment, really? Are you joking? Petty is a giant of American rock (among the greatest of his era), and you probably haven’t listened carefully to the subject at hand!!! The association with John Mellencamp (another relevant singer-songwriter) makes sense up to a point (although they have things in common), Petty is more important and has a different guitar sound! The Heartbreakers are excellent musicians; just watch the triple DVD of Running Down a Dream, for example. John Mellencamp has more affinity with Bruce Springsteen, and while he is less known and significant than the rocker from Freehold, he remains one of the great rock singer-songwriters MADE IN USA. Campbell is a brilliant guitarist; honestly, someone like him isn’t even in the somewhat more famous, prestigious, and legendary E-Street Band.

Beautiful, very beautiful review. Back then I had paid 125,000 lire for it. I remember I spent 20 days listening only (or almost) to these 4 blessed CDs!!!

So it's your personal judgment, no one can contest it! Our emotions are not subject to criticism!

Of course, one must—indeed, can—express judgments. Do you realize that with what you've said, you've implicitly claimed to know all the solos in the history of Rock? This is not a judgment; it's a verdict! I also need you to tell me why it's the most beautiful, or more beautiful than the others. Why?

You said some exaggerated things that I don't agree with, and a good reviewer should avoid these things (personal judgment). The review isn't bad, but it could have been better. "Comfortably Numb" is the most beautiful solo in the history of Rock, but do you know how many beautiful songs (with great solos) the history of Rock has? It's better to use absolute superlatives only in certain cases. This obviously doesn’t take anything away from C. Numb; the piece remains and will remain stunning all the same. What does it mean that the first true album is the second? Just remember that the first album was mainly composed by the late Syd (though Waters and the others also made significant contributions, except for the not-yet-present Gilmour). Let’s not forget that the instrumental and performance contribution in an album is fundamental; in this case, the imprint is very deep (see, for example, Interstellar Overdrive). This doesn’t take away from the fact that the first album is fully Pink Floyd just like the subsequent ones.

Errata corrige: I meant to say that the review is good.

Hi Primiballi, I know Vasco very well; for me, after Gli Spari Sopra (the last good album, not excellent), he made only poorly crafted albums (Nessun Pericolo Per Te and Canzoni Per Me). Some songs from these were good, but the rest was filler. After that, he released three new studio works, each worse than the last; uninspired compilations, lacking great artistic qualities, with some interesting lines that fans have incredibly exalted. Tracks wasn't bad, but how could you not include Siamo Solo Noi? Without it, it's already a flawed collection from the start. I don't think I'm mistaken, am I? The cover of Creep (Ad Ogni Costo) is really bad to me. Ragazzo Di Strada isn't bad, but we’ve all already heard it on May 1st; why keep scraping the barrel when it's already full of holes? The first Vasco was a rock musician of some value; probably, he was never an exceptional composer, but he said interesting things, often in a creative way. This is certainly not nothing for a singer, and in the Italian musical landscape, he has been important, and some songs are undeniably beautiful. Live, he is still interesting; objectively, he knows the audience well, in a nutshell, live he is still Vasco. Your review isn't good; I understood the comparisons you made, and they can stand. P.S.: As you said in a certain sense, Tracks by Springsteen is certainly not speculation like this Vasco one (18 Tracks is! The clever record labels included The Fever and The Promise to make us buy it). In the quadruple Tracks, there were some songs superior to those published and included in the Boss's albums, some of which are masterpieces of rock. The compilations of Springsteen's works have always followed a logical musical and thematic thread. Tell me if Roulette or Loose Ends (I could cite many others too) can be defined as scraps? Indeed, these are artistic choices, not scraps!

Drowse is awesome!

For VOICEFACE, what does it mean that you listened to Queen when Mercury was alive? This is the most trivial answer you could give to validate your beliefs; in fact, it doesn't even deserve a response. I've written my opinion based on certain factors, and I don't want to convince you – I don't have the truth in my pocket! However, I can say this: the Queen of the first decade was much more interesting and innovative; after that, they released less successful albums, some decent, others were just bad, especially in the arrangements. In fact, they were about to break up right after the tour for The Works; it was Live Aid that provided new motivation for the band, and afterwards they produced more valid works, especially Innuendo!

For VOICEFACE: what about Hammer To Fall, Is This The World We Created?, Radio Ga Ga, I Want To Break Free, It's A Hard Life? Of these songs, the first two (and Tear It Up) stand out, but I'm sure you've noticed that the live versions are much better than the studio ones. The reason is simple: the arrangements with certain electronics are ugly, so The Works is a mediocre album with few ideas and many mistakes, among the worst of Queen. The artistic history of Queen is in other albums, certainly not in The Works! That said, the album is also fun, but it has little artistic value!