nix

Well... what can I say, I'm a bit overwhelmed by your references: Quicksilver, Captain Beefheart, John Lee Hooker, John Fahey, La Monte Young, Keith Rowe, and the AMM, Steve Reich. All we need now is a Yiddish clarinet, in the purest Jewish-New York tradition, and the choir of the Gatti Del Vicolo Miracoli. The title is wonderful, Phonorama reminds me of certain electronic music records from the early '70s. In short, you've piqued my curiosity. Tonight, if I can find it on YouTube, I'll give it a listen.

I remember his version of "Hey Joe" that drove me crazy back then. A great artist.

For me, it's simple: I've been feeling a bit depressed lately and desperately need simple, essential things. The vinyl of "Help," but only because it doesn’t open (at least the reissue I have) and captures them artistically in a single moment of their career. A compilation, for me, is too much; I can't handle it. Too much life. God forbid there are figures, booklets, stories.

A documentary film of 12 hours on 5 DVDs just looking at it in the showcase makes me feel nauseous, especially if it’s about people I love, like the Beatles. Maybe the two double compilations (one red and one blue) where they were peeking out from the staircase at two different times, maybe that contained everything I need.

Anyway, it's not the work. It’s me who isn’t well. As soon as my serotonin starts circulating again, I’ll reassess things like this. Still, a nice piece, well-documented, well-written, and full of enthusiasm.

Every now and then someone writes a piece about this duo of musicians and I feel a thrill of happiness. I don't know, to be honest, if their records were good; I'd rather not ask myself. Of course, they brilliantly interpreted from our home (and not from England or New York) a trend of those years.

But the point is different. They were and remained until the end the outsiders, perpetually outside the television/recording system, which has always treated them with extreme stinginess (except for a "too little too late" rediscovery by Chiambretti). Excessive, sometimes wacky, always authentic, difficult to digest for the gasbag homeland of the Sanremo festival.

As far as I know, from the '90s onwards, they also experienced some hardship and suffered the humiliation of being literally forgotten by the general public. I adore them, and when someone talks about them, I feel happy. Krisma forever!

I'll get it right away. For certain purposes, I still use Eden by Everything But The Girl; it's time for a refresh.

pleasant piece about one of the few Costello albums I don't know, perhaps due to the criticism that has always been a bit off-putting. The piece encourages breaking free from ancient reviews and reconsidering works that sometimes improve with age, like wine.

Hungry, I agree with you that the session of More is one of the best things about the "early Pink Floyd" (and for me personally, the best Pink Floyd). I also share the comments and praises about the individual tracks, which, like you, I have loved and still love.
However, I also share the criticisms from CosmicJocker and ALFAMA, which I believe I understand and I humbly try to interpret (they will correct and obliterate me if I say anything stupid).
You write about this music as if it still existed.
Certainly, More by Pink Floyd still exists in the hearts and memories of many Pink Floyd fans like you and me.
But historically, it is an acoustic shard of a world and a culture that has not existed for decades. Half a century.
I'm convinced that you, Hungry, know a lot more about this album than Roger Waters or David Gilmour themselves remember. If asked, they would probably say, "More? Uh, yeah, that's something from a long time ago. I don't remember anything, to know more, talk to my PR office."
I'll tell you more: I believe that a good performance of a Brandenburg concerto by Sebastian Bach is enormously more current and modern than the contents of More by Pink Floyd. Not to mention the paleolithic hippie cinema of Barbet Schroeder. Sumerian cinema, Cro Magnon.
I share these modest opinions with melancholy because, like you, I adore this album.
But that's how I feel.
So, to conclude, I believe the perspective of your piece (which is well-researched and well-written, by the way) is distorted. You talk about it as if it were a living thing. But it isn't alive.
That said, it is and remains a beautiful album, five stars.

I love the Beatles and I find "A Day in the Life" one of the happiest moments of creativity in the twentieth century. As if that weren't enough, I always really enjoy the pieces by Thucydides.

Mrs. Review!

The fact that the album has been reviewed many times is not the point, in my opinion. It’s an important, extraordinary album, and talking about it again doesn’t hurt after all. Rather, it would be better to try to say something original. The objective data about the work is all available online in every possible language, including the dembè dialect popular in certain regions of Zambia. The subjective aspect, on the other hand, your personal relationship with the work, well, that is almost always unpublished. I believe it is on that ground that it’s possible to post about the dearly loved Debasio even on heavily inflated albums like Dark Side or Made In Japan and similar stuff. Some manage to do so with results that are sometimes remarkable. Instead, the little summary from Wikipedia is truly useless. Anyway, welcome Mojoman, I'm sure the next one will be better.