puntiniCAZpuntini

1) I still haven't heard them; what the hell is this solo that lasts 4 seconds? 2) I was talking about drugs; when you're under their effects, if you see them the next day, it's different. Anyway, let's distinguish: Heroin: They told me you enjoy it in your veins; I've never tried it, but it's something that stimulates the pleasure center, makes you all soft - LSD: Super soft with your friends; you could spend an hour hugging everyone, mumbling things like "Man, how long have we known each other?", very sociable with others, everyone seems nice - MDMA: Goodness turned into a substance; "I love you" springs up like roses in spring, and you're so generous you become an idiot - Mushrooms: A mix of all these things. If you see them and nothing else, how can you understand? Just try it and then let me know; come on, take some acid and blast Yes, guaranteed you'll appreciate it four times more; prog is drug music. 3) Ah okay, if they had terrible musical tastes and got bored, they become idiots too. 4) Yes. 5) Yes. 6) Yes, I agree; I see it your way too, but I see punk as the black sheep. 7) It's a music site, so in the musical context, punk pisses me off; outside the musical context, I don't care. If a girl is hot, she's hot even in a Kennedy's shirt; if someone is sharp, they're sharp even in an NOFX shirt. I know a lot of them; in my city, 99% of the bands play either Punk or Ska Core, and despite having musical tastes that make you want to slap them behind the ears, and despite acting all tough, as soon as they see a village disco, they flee begging their parents to save them. They're great people.

1) Velvet Underground, Who, good job mentioning great bands, ROCK bands. Tell me which punk albums from '77 you found solos in; I've never heard any. 2) For the church, everything is hellish; if we're talking about the church, we're all hellish, and I'm proud of it too, better hellish than Virgin. But you brought it up by saying, ""Take Led Zeppelin, damn, they present themselves as crazy, angry, hellish people... but then take a look at the lyrics... come on, even the early Beatles weren't that mushy."" Excuse me, but according to which of your theories should Sex, Drugs & Rock N Roll not be mushy? For me, sex makes me feel good; when I feel good, I become mushy. For me and all human beings, drugs make you sociable, scientifically proven, not just assumptions; drugs make you mushy and you even love Hitler. So why shouldn't Rock N Roll be mushy? 3) I didn't understand this ""I said for punk it had broken my balls not for me"" I swear, I didn't understand. 4) I know it's right! But it's stupid stuff for teenagers! 5) Blow Up was born yesterday, Sonic self-defines as Noise-Rock, and they're right; theirs is more rock than punk, and I've never read Blow Up nor any music magazine, but Sonic Youth does quite a few solos, for me and for them, it's rock. 6) Is punk also inside rock? Excuse me, who was born first? You're just confirming what I said above; punk is nothing more than a simplification of rock; it's rock for kids: simple, direct, digestible from ages 0 to 6, at 7 you move on to real music.

It's true that the punkers used distortions, but using them in riffs is one thing, and the solo is another. The solo, as a solo, is VIRTUOSITY, whether it's played with a pick or with machines, it doesn't matter much; we're always talking about a solo.

Ah, If you're not a punk, it's all gain, well done.

1) Sonic Youth The fact that they MAKE DISTORTED SOLOS makes them ROCK, whether it's overdrive or Superfuzz, it's always a distorted solo, and a distorted solo is rock. 2) Zeppa, now explain to me what the hell is hellish about Sex Drugs & Rock N Roll. It’s Sex Drugs & Rock N Roll, not Murders Satan & Black Metal; there's nothing hellish about it. 3) That you might not like some solos is one thing, saying "Prog has bored the hell out of us with virtuosities" is a whole different matter (changing the subject? No, right?) and also nonsense. 4) You read it wrong, Goia & Rivoluzione is not direct at all; punk was direct, Prog was all about interpretation, as a complex art form compared to punk, which is just four crap lined up. 5) I’ll add this one myself) Sonic Youth play solos, punk has no solos, so Sonic Youth are not punk. Names are not always given randomly, as happened with Grunge or Nu Metal; Noise Rock is Noise Rock, it has little to do with punk, the beauty of noise is the distorted solo, the structure of the songs matters little. 6) Sonic Youth make Noise-Rock. (I insist because I like SY, I don't want them thrown into the punk trash.)

This thing about solos for their own sake, you need to explain it to me, okay? Can you tell me why Jimi Hendrix's solos are good while Robert Fripp's ones are not? Also, the word PLAYING means using a musical instrument to produce sounds; what's so wrong with producing 10,000 sounds a second? I think that the proggarelli were playing, the punkettoni tried to do it with poor results. "For their own sake" is the biggest bullshit circulating in music circles. "For their own sake" is Steve Vai, who is alone and therefore does whatever he wants; that’s PURE VIRTUOSITY. But Robert Fripp, who intertwines his virtuosity with that of Bruford, is called HARMONY, it's called STYLE, it's called MAKING MUSIC, and there’s not a damn thing about "for its own sake" in a PROG BAND. If you want to tell me that Satriani is unbearable, I’ll high-five you, but he's an SHOW-OFF, not a BAND.

For what reason are they ends in themselves? What differentiates the virtuosity of Jimi Hendrix from that of Van der Graaf? Explain this mystery to me because I just don’t get it. I've already told you about Sonic Youth, don't they play solos of PURE DISTORTION? And who invented these solos? Come on, make me laugh, they are by Hendrix, Gilmour, or various stuff or Sid Vicious? And maybe you want to tell me that Sonic Youth would be Sonic Youth without the distortions generated by machines that are purely rock and used by rock of the '70s? They wouldn't have done more than a demo if they didn't use distortions, and DISTORTIONS ARE ROCK; THEY DON'T HAVE A DAMN THING TO DO WITH PUNK.

But since we're at it, I wanted to emphasize this bullshit -> "Take Led Zeppelin, damn, they come off as crazy, pissed off, hellish..." NOW TELL ME WHERE, HOW, WHEN AND WHY THE ZEPPELIN GAVE YOU THIS IMPRESSION. Guys, seriously, what the hell do you think about 70s music? Hellish Robert Plant? And Jimmy Page? Have you ever seen them live? At the Rose Bowl in 1970, Page stepped on stage in jeans, white sneakers, a white shirt, and a sleeveless sweater with yellow and blue diamonds... WHERE DO YOU SEE HELLISH & PISSED OFF?

And again you change the subject! What do Led Zeppelin have to do with it? I'm talking about PROG, and there are millions of bad and meaningful lyrics (unlike the random "Fuck You" bullshit) — read the lyrics of Stormy Six, Consorzio Acqua Potabile, Area, and see if they aren't a million times harsher than a fucking "God Save the Queen." Gioia & Rivoluzione, for example, speaks about the joy of political change in Stratos' Greece of those years and the Portuguese revolution, but being intelligent people, they used metaphors and synonyms to make everything more artistic. The failed punks had neither the culture nor the vocabulary nor the taste to do such things, and they limited themselves to "Fuck You," limited, inept, useless, failures = shit.

Indeed, what is it called? Noise Rock or Noise Punk? I believe it's noise-rock, so your point doesn't make sense in a discussion about Punk. Let's not change the subject, come on, how's the new one from Social Distortion? Nice, right? And what about the one from Bad Religion? Even better, I’d say…