nes Banned

And, for the record, the album was reissued 5 years ago, so it’s getting back out there.

Why review the Simphony X when you could review a dramatic turn of events? Who can understand progsters?

jargon: "Someone who tries to build a musical culture through our reviews" well, that's someone who hasn’t understood a thing :) It seems pretty clear how Debaser is not very objective and quite subjective. Don’t get me wrong: it’s this subjectivity that makes it cool. Anyway, if you want to build a musical culture, you listen to music, not read.

And let's not forget Tailer Darden, the virtuous prog/grune guitarist. Too bad not everyone gets to see him... Yes, alright, you can kick me in the ass.

better when he was in Korn's underwear.

Speechless. Well done.

stuff that "I dream of drone" makes it look like an EP.

Come on, matteodi, let’s not throw the stone and then withdraw the hand... “we don’t need experts to say that Nirvana suck like hell, and that those who listen to serious music...” this phrase as written doesn’t express an opinion, it expresses an objective fact: that Nirvana sucks and that they don’t make serious music. So let’s not start digging into the story of “but why should I justify what I say, but those are my opinions, I think that way but I don’t want to convince anyone...” because, frankly, it doesn’t work. You have your own ideas about Nirvana and you expect to hold an objective reality to such an extent that you even decide that those who listen to “artistically valid music” (which nobody has understood what the hell that is yet) seek music elsewhere. There’s not an ounce of subjectivity in your comments, rather there are judgments that you hand down. And the moment you come to tell me “If you ask me which music is valid for me, I’ll respond: for example, the music that I review. But what kind of question are you asking me...?” you make me laugh a little: what kind of questions am I asking you? It seems normal to me that someone who takes the trouble to define Cobain as someone who grunts instead of singing, someone who says that it’s obvious (a hardly subjective fact) that Nirvana don’t make “artistically valid music” should at least offer a comparison term. Someone did it by bringing up Deep Purple (identifying them as a “monstrous” group) and there I wet my pants... The funniest thing, however, is that you say you’re expressing subjective opinions while you keep pontificating in the same message: “the music of Nirvana is not ‘artistically invalid,’ it simply isn’t music; call it an outburst, call it an emotion, call it whatever you like;” I call it whatever I like? Okay then let’s say we call it music because it doesn’t seem like a literary work, nor a cinematic work, nor for that matter a theatrical work. Saying that the music of Nirvana isn’t music, excuse me, but it means nothing. It’s like saying: the sky isn’t the sky; today the sun isn’t the sun. In my opinion, you’re making a fundamental mistake: you don’t like Nirvana (to be honest it seems like they’ve raped your mother from the way you judge them). Let me make one thing clear, I could not care less about Nirvana and you have every right not to appreciate them. Now, however, I assure you that we’ve understood that you don’t like them, do us a favor, stop repeating it because we’ll keep our ideas and you’ll keep yours. And we’ll all live happily ever after.

If you're wondering who Banks is: I have no idea, I meant Bangs. And if to err is human and to persevere is diabolical, I think I've just booked another acre of land down in hell.

"Cobain and Vicious, as the ultimate 'non-musicians,' made entire generations believe that anyone could pick up an instrument," Lester Bangs used to say the same thing about the Stooges. Sure, the Stooges aren't Nirvana and you aren't Bangs... anyway, to the question: "who can't play an instrument?" the answer is: "Nes."/// One last question: "we don’t need experts to say that Nirvana sucks and that those who listen to serious music (in the sense of artistically valid music) look elsewhere... " but what the hell do you mean by "artistically valid music"? Who decides what is "artistically valid"??? Because here you are saying various things about Nirvana that many do not share, but you've decided they're true... are you perhaps the one to decide what is and what isn’t 'artistically valid' music? In which case, how much do I have to pay you to sell a CD of burps that you review as "artistically valid music"?