puntiniCAZpuntini

Well, the duplicate reviews will start then. The more reviews you do of a band, the more there will be in the future; these are traps for fans who go on Google looking for information about their favorite band. If Grasshopper didn't review Bruss sprinstiin, Massimof wouldn't have come, and without the first metalheads, the others wouldn't have arrived... and so on.

Then, I also reviewed albums from the first half of the 60s, so this isn't a matter of old records, you fool. And, above all, as I already told you, the good stuff is still around, oh yes it is, and there's plenty of it, it's you who's ignorant for not knowing it, fool.

But you really are the king of idiots. Of course I realize that I have a thousand filters; I have millions of both filters and prejudices today in 2005. But reviewing is equivalent to proposing, and you propose in 2005, and in 2005 we all have filters and prejudices. Why the hell should I calculate what I would have thought in '87? In this specific case, I heard the CD at Italia 90 for the first time and it sucked; I didn't understand a damn thing but it still sucked. In a thousand other shit cases released 20 years ago, I said they sucked after 20 years from their release, with filters and prejudices, but... so what? What happens, excuse me? Do I have to listen to the CD today or in '87? I listen to CDs today, and if I consider it crap today, I say so. I don't have to decide what to do with the life of Bono, or carry the fate of millions of Somali children on my shoulders... it's just a judgment: "£it sucks, it's useless music in 2005, crap like so much other stuff, listen to something else and don't review this shit that, by indexing on Google, fills the site with idiots like Massimof." It's music, background, entertainment, emotions... but it remains nonsense, it's nothing serious and I take it as such; imagine if I start calculating the social impact of the time now. If we take the social impact discussion, we can talk about it (if we want, but it’s better to kick ourselves in the balls) and okay there’s been a lot of that here and there and up and down... but here we are talking about a recommended album in 2005, and my answer is always the same: a useless album to review in 2005, crap.

I analyze newly released albums without reading reviews at least six times a week, as is normal for someone who follows less mainstream genres; I don't see anything strange about it. When a Spiritual Beggars album comes out, it's not like within two days the internet is buzzing with reviews, is it? Is it that difficult? And what’s so challenging?... oh sorry, I didn't take into account the obvious limitations that god has gifted you.

This stuff is already heavily recommended on TV, so what's the need to reiterate it here on Debaser? For what purpose? I've been seeing Bono on TV for 6 months now, why put it out here as well? If you only know U2 and Oasis, then avoid writing about it; read a bit more and look for some serious records.

Pirlone, I repeat that I don’t have hives for those who sell, I’m listening to "Selling England By The Pound," which has sold more than this crap. You see, pirlone, you've just hit on exactly what I wanted to say: "there’s always some callow youth who needs educating." Indeed, does this seem like something to recommend to the youth? To me, it seems like pure shit; why do you even bother getting this record? There’s always some idiot who has a U2 CD in their car; they should buy Van Der Graaf Generator instead of this load of butter. Ah... now you also have the "forma mentis"... but who? You? You who wiggles to "Born in the USA"? You who mixes with the crowd of imbeciles with a lit lighter at Bruss’s live shows? Aren’t you ashamed? Your "forma mentis" deserves to be punished with labor camps, you and all your kind.

What need is there to remember this album, only you know, it sold like crazy, U2 continue to sell like crazy, we always have them in our faces. What need is there? Are you also forgetful that you don’t remember Angel Of Harlem? I know this album by heart and I think it’s shit… was there really a need to dig it up, just a hidden gem buried in the sands of time… Massimof, you're really a die-hard accountant, huh, what is it: "under a million copies the album is crap"? Explain the evaluation terms well, do groupies and TV appearances count too, or do we sum up the value of the band members' cars?

I caught him thanks to wwwhate, beautiful.

A complete shit band all around, as people, as musicians, as the music produced, as fans, as everything. Seriously one of the worst bands in history, worth getting arrested for.

<<<What upheaval took place between '69 and '70 in the minds of these budding musicians is something we cannot know,>>> How come? You already said it happened in their minds; in my opinion, they were still budding after that: they realized they were the only good guys of the entire '70s and got Robert Fripp to hook them up with the dealer. Other than that, I’d say the first drummer and the first guitarist were half-hearted; the lineup of Trespass is much tastier than the one originally put together. As for the rating, I agree and I’d also go with a two; it fits, even though I’ve only listened to this about ten times, all spread out over time. I remember it says little, but I don't really have a clear memory of what's in here.