Alexander77

Some tracks don’t convince me, or rather, I don’t like them as much as the rest of the songs, which are really a blast… yes, I think so too, in fact it’s exactly the mood of the album that makes me prefer them… the derivative talk is quite tricky, they certainly are, but if I start discussing whether it’s derivative or not, I end up with a handful of albums, so I don’t care if there’s quality…

Discone! Great review and an amazing album... I might be heretic, but I prefer them even to MBV... just curious: why 4? For the fillers?

Pannzzoone, I don’t know if you have official sales data, but I don’t think I’ve ever heard of a jazz or fusion album selling more than a certain number of copies. The only site that gives a figure for the copies sold by Spectrum is this (http://www.flixster.com/movie/billy-cobham-spectrum), and it mentions over a million copies, but nothing more (that’s a great number, but considering it’s one of the best-selling albums in the genre…). Where do you get such figures from?!
@carpa: I think the same way as you do, with the difference that there are also exceptions, fortunately... to be fair, the same Metheny has been accused of sitting on some records...
As for the rest, I completely agree with Omaha, and I can’t explain it! :D

Pannzzoone, far it please everyone is far from my intention; tastes are tastes. That said, yes, fusion was born under this spirit, but it's a pity that many have misunderstood it as "I do jazz but with a distortion pedal cranked up" or "I do jazz and throw in some blues licks," and so on... Metheny is fusion in its purest form, meaning I do what I like, blending whatever I want with whatever comes to me at the moment: at the concert, I saw him perform a piece that sounded like it came straight from an industrial band... appealing hotchpotchs for the masses? Since when is jazz or fusion appealing to the masses?!

Here I am... I'm happy to reply. Of course not, I would never dare to suggest such nonsense, but it's a discussion that transcends gender; there are inspired musicians and limited musicians in every genre, even in jazz. I appreciate him more because he sees music the way I do: I'm not a professional, but playing it, I can tell you that I get bored myself executing the same things. Well, he's one who takes the plunge, playing jazz, blues, rock, acoustic (even though he's not a pure "fingerstyler"), and when the mood strikes him, he even does noise (even if the results can't always be excellent)... he tries, he likes to play and he has fun, you can see him smiling while performing. I also find him quite unique from a stylistic point of view, but here I wouldn't be able to explain myself without going into technical details: let's say I like his "cascading" style, his rhythmic and melodic choices, and the way he uses the synth guitar. Finally, he's an exceptional person: at his concert a few years ago, he played for more than 3 and a half hours, having a blast with his musicians, giving them the right space; he even had us come down from the side seats to stand in front of him, very close to the stage, despite the bigwigs sitting in their VIP chairs in the center of the forum, convinced they were refined bourgeois just because they came to see Pat Metheny!

There would also be Joe Diorio...

I'm not saying Pat Martino (I'm not crazy about him either), but...Jim Hall absolutely, as Omaha points out, Charlie Christian (whom you yourself mentioned), John McLaughlin, Django Reinhardt, Joe Pass, John Scofield... I can think of others that I consider more jazz than Pat. But let me be clear, of all those I've mentioned, I still prefer Metheny; I just meant to say that he is much more than just a jazz guitarist!

I would have added passive anyway!

Thank you, faith, I've been laughing for a good quarter of an hour! :)

The new Depeche Mode album is out?! Damn, I’m running to buy it!