sylvian1982

I am following these heated debates with approximate regularity, though I like them a bit less when they devolve into mindless insults. I come in peace to pose a question to DaveJonGilmour (and possibly to Lord as well, since on the review of La Crus I've been "attacked" by both). Just to clarify my thoughts and yours, could you express a judgment—preferably something more than the standard "I like" or "I don't like"—on the following artists? They are all super-famous artists that you should be well acquainted with. I’ll list a few in no particular order: BEATLES / BOB DYLAN / ROLLING STONES / DAVID BOWIE / JIMI HENDRIX / BRUCE SPRINGSTEEN / NEIL YOUNG / VELVET UNDERGROUND & LOU REED / FRANK ZAPPA / U2 / R.E.M. / SMITHS / CURE. They are almost all artists with careers spanning several decades, so just having heard one or two albums is not enough to judge them. Perhaps the answer will be a bit lengthy, but I see you don’t hold back when it comes to "posts," so I’m counting on it. If possible, I repeat, I would also appreciate Lord's opinion. Thank you in advance if you will indulge me.

Truly a record teetering between easy-listening and cheesy pop, a thin line of demarcation for good taste. It saves itself thanks to two or three songs, but I remembered it being better. Maybe because I was much younger.

Allow me to close for Lord and Gilmour. As two guys your age, I would have expected a greater open-mindedness, rather than biased and tiresome defenses of your favorites. As much as possible, I tried to speak above the fray without ever mentioning my own favorites. Therefore, since music is not mathematics, every opinion is indeed just an opinion. Yours is worth as much as mine, or anyone else's. I chose the nickname Sylvian because I particularly like David Sylvian, but if I hardly ever find him on any of the rankings that periodically appear in Italy, America, or the United Kingdom, it’s not that I’m scandalized, going around saying to everyone that they are incompetent. You love progressive rock, and there’s nothing wrong with that. However, it is a fact that this music has often been repudiated by its own authors and that in respected musical circles, it’s a genre that is, let’s say, rather debated, controversial, and alas ignored. Mind you, I also like prog, in the right doses and in the right measure, taking care to place it in the timeframe it has earned. Since I believe that people who write about music (with real knowledge!) know more than I do and you do, it seems at least respectful to accept their judgments and not say they don’t understand a thing just because your favorites aren’t represented. Otherwise, we fall back into the matter of personal tastes, and there’s no way out of that. Hello everyone and happy Sunday.

But do you like Van Dyke Parks? I have Song Cycle and to be honest, I find it a bit convoluted.

Round and round, I bought it. Despite being a pop record, it's definitely not an easy listen. To be fair, I expected it to be more accessible, more fluid. At times, it gives a bit of a disjointed feeling, almost as if the practice hasn’t adequately supported the initial theories. I need to put in more effort into listening, perhaps immersing myself in the endless gestation of this work.

And not even a progressive rock album. Don't get mad at me, okay!

In that list, there are neither Nirvana (they didn't exist in 1979) nor Sex Pistols.

If Lucio Dalla is truly great, I guess I need to go back and listen to him again because I haven't given him the attention he deserves. And then, maybe it's true that music critics are often not worth the time. However, it’s not true that they only give negative reviews. In fact, according to them, every month there are at least twenty albums worth buying. Can you imagine! And still on the topic of music critics, we must acknowledge that at least they’ve probably listened to more than we have, heard opinions, interviewed artists, seen concerts, tried picking up an instrument, and so on. If everyone thinks they hold the absolute truth, then I’ll just keep quiet.

As for the history of music, I would like to inform you both that in 1979 (when the most important Floyd albums had already been released) thirty Anglo-American journalists were asked to compile a list of the 100 most beautiful songs of all time: well, in the top twenty (the list I have stops here) there is no trace of Pink Floyd. This list was created by people who know what music is, such as Chett Flippo, Pete Frame, Paul Gambaccini, Charlie Gillett, Lenny Kaye, Greil Marcus, Deve Marsh, and Lisa Robinson. In short, not exactly newcomers (if you don’t know them, do some research). And still regarding "On An Island," I did not find a music magazine that praised it. Lastly, since the initial object of contention was La Crus, and since Ligabue and Fossati ended up in the trash heap along with Tenco, I would like to know who you see as the forefathers or masters of both past and contemporary Italian song. One more thing: since for DaveJohnGilmour commercial success is a measure of talent's greatness, where did you read that? Who said it? Generally, it's the fans of Queen who want to convince themselves/us of their greatness based on commercial success. Brian Eno (I believe it was him) once said: "The Velvet Underground's debut may have sold twenty thousand copies, but those who bought it went on to form a band." If we want to talk with slices of ham over our eyes, then the door is also open for the fans of Orietta Berti. I hope I haven't been too convoluted or twisted. Thank you for your attention and to those who had the desire and patience to read this.

As for the Pink Floyd, I have always read (so these are not my own opinions or personal tastes) that the absolute masterpiece is The Piper At The Gates Of Dawn (an almost complete work by Syd Barrett, where Gilmour wasn't even present). Just because they sold a ton of copies with Dark Side, Wish You, and The Wall (where Waters' contribution is definitely greater than Gilmour's) doesn't mean anything in terms of musical quality. Any self-respecting music critic (not me) considers the debut the true manifesto of the Pink Floyd. Then again, music is such an abstract and emotional entity that everyone has their preferences, and so when it touches the strings of the soul and emotion, it is impossible to be objective and determine what is better and what is worse.