antoniodeste

I thank this "anonymous reviewer," even though I have no information about this new group "Pink Floyd" and this album that, according to the reviewer, should be really good. Is that so? The title is a bit unsettling, and I wouldn't want to spend 18 or 19 euros only to end up sleepless, scolding myself for causing insomnia and/or nightmares of darkened moons. But is this a valid group that promises? Or can't they play, do they write ugly and distressing songs, and just want to pay off their mortgage? Please, enlighten me from the bright side of the earth...

I laughed so much. just missing the seasoning....... Joking aside, I didn't know any of these three and they gave me "moments of healthy hilarity." but....Zappa.....where has he gone?....behind the barn?...... :D

He was about to become a child of the stars......

I find Symbad's view on this work exhaustive and exciting, something I once considered transitional and not that thrilling. Therefore, I would willingly address Copernicus's doubts about Garbarek's artistic journey (which is quite broad and changeable, by the way). However, I had already expressed doubts in other posts about the state of the art of the Norwegian saxophonist right after "I Took Up the Runes," which, I reiterate, represents for me the peak of a particularly bright and "visionary" period. Perhaps I should re-listen to the twelve moons, in light of what I've read above. The last time was four or five years ago, and the emotional "response" wasn't very positive, but maybe that's just a "personal feeling." On the other hand, I recently re-listened to another masterpiece by Garbarek, "All Those born With Wings," where he did nearly everything alone in a peculiar situation and in an almost ascetic atmosphere. And how can I forget the unforgettable duo Garbarek/Towner with eolic harp in "Dis"? It’s true, however, as my friend Gabriele said, that Garbarek should have broken away from the Bruninghaus-Weber-Katchè-Mazur formula long before what became the current state of "impasse" occurred; I say this as a lover of this formation, but I am aware that changing musicians could have created the conditions, perhaps, for a different cohesion and for more interesting future developments. Unfortunately, that wasn't the case, and Copernicus and I (and who knows how many others) found ourselves with "In Praise of Dreams," which is somewhat nice but a bit awkward and slightly disappointing, where it seems the compromise with the New Age that Symbad spoke about is more evident. I don’t know, perhaps I’m mistaken, but regarding the aforementioned Rypdal, as I said, there seems to be, in his way, a greater coherence, cohesion of elements, and conviction of direction. I take this opportunity to mention him because he recently returned with a work recorded live in 2003 ("Vossabrygg," partly inspired by "Bitches Brew"), after the contemporary orchestral "parentheses," and the result of this electric-electronic formation's work is tremendously stimulating, if not even exciting, in some parts. I truly hope Garbarek finds his way to express himself at his best, as he still stands as one of the most prominent and influential figures in European jazz at multiple levels, and I am genuinely saddened (as I was for McLaughlin in the 80s) about his creative state. @Symbad: beautiful, heartfelt, detailed review that captivated me. Perhaps one of your best. Cuong Vu doesn’t have the h. That belongs to the Popol Vuh :D. If you want to listen to a particularly beautiful version of Witchi-tai-to (also without the h), there should be one on an old ECM record by Garbarek with the same title. Additionally, the Oregon have recorded more than one. The one I prefer should be on "Winter Light," with Walcott.

@Hal: I am calm and regarding feelings I appreciate the concept you've expressed, which I believe I know very well. Here, unfortunately, the real problem is another one and it is essentially a problem of language, in all its nuances; thus, of understandability. I also appreciate the fact that you stay out of this discussion. I hope we can read each other again in other contexts. It is no longer my intention to revisit this page, mine, where my contributions about a musician and his work that I have known for thirty years have been poorly received, misunderstood, and used to cast doubts on my intellectual or moral honesty. Excuse me, I need to go vomit. Bye.

Odradek: really beautiful and elegant is your way of understanding what suits you, provoking, being a pain in the ass, and then saying goodbye, that's enough, thanks blabla. You're just a useless deluded full of yourself; paranoid (just as you see yourself), touchy and with a gigantic chip on your shoulder. If you wanted to provoke me again, here you go. No nice version, no conciliatory tone, especially with types like you. I only said that the review was appreciable. Even egotists like you sometimes write something good just to expose themselves. You’ve clung to a stupid idea (you reflect it back on yourself, you don't know how to free yourself from it (and from me) and you keep spouting lofty nonsense, making it worse and worse. You really don't deserve a thing, let alone copy and paste. Stick the nonsense you write on your forehead sometimes. If I had to count all the idiocies, the silly things, the absurdities you’ve written about me or the music, I’d waste too much (and pointless) time. In the previous post, I "dedicated" two lines to you, just to stay away from you, thus emphasizing, and I repeat, that I did not want to refer directly to you, nor did I want any confrontation, on any level (except a nod regarding the detailed review). If you want to masochistically keep being a pain (and a pain to yourself), don’t drag back into play all the idiocies you have (or if you want that "we have") written, seeing continuous attacks on your majestic person. I couldn't care less about you. At this point, having crossed the line of decency (and entering into dementia), you had the audacity to write your latest bullshit directed at me for no reason. Actually, no, you have your reason, it's true, because paranoid people with a chip on their shoulder like you have this problem: they believe they're at the center of the world and see themselves dangerously threatened when someone sings a different song from theirs. You should have those sharp psycho-anthropological analyses done by a good psychotherapist. Whether you want to consider it closed or open, at this point I care little or nothing. With your hypocritical or ironic thank-yous, you can wipe your ass. For me, and with this (I suppose unnecessary but personally necessary) intervention, I confirm this unpleasant chapter closed with this very unpleasant human being.

Damn, who expected this florilegium of Berlusclownate (or, alternatively, Berluscoglionate)?!

Dear Dante, if you’re serious: what a disappointment! @ Symbad: Bergonzoniana, yes. You’ve managed to get a little smile out of me....

What a beauty of comments! I really enjoyed Amalteo's intervention, who (probably) with "spontaneity and naturalness" (things I seem unable to manage and therefore applaud) clarified some essential phases in approaching music and in communicating the sensations it provokes. As for Odradek, I apologize for this annoying feeling caused by my constant buzzing around him, and this is a clear sign of how we find ourselves in very distant personal positions. Logically, if someone expresses opinions, I refer back to the person who expressed them to reply, as it is in their mind that they were generated... and this is, I believe, the path. I would also like to point out that the intervention to which I believe he is referring was neither addressed to him nor aimed at him, and personally, I did not want to reopen anything. If you felt called into question, I back out this time. If you need confirmation, I have never mentioned you until now, and aside from the intro and outro of the review, I appreciated the judgment and development of it. Therefore, and I’m sorry to say, it is your questionable conviction.
Regarding the contradictions pointed out by Socrates and others: it may be that sometimes some things clash against others in my head and, in the end, some opposing paths meet or vice versa, without it happening consciously. I may be wrong on a complex and delicate subject like this. It's not that one, not being a musician, should limit themselves to just drumming their fingers to keep time. I've said it before, (of course!!) they can enjoy, with their conviction, whatever they like. Another thing is the pretense of wanting to consider or direct or persuade someone about the greatness, necessity, or exceptional nature of such "work." And perhaps they don't even know what notes appear on the staff. I would just watch them and ask, "What do you want?" It’s the same authority that someone reading Alan Ford might have when commenting on The Divine Comedy. With sympathy, perhaps, and then what? To Hal, who diplomatically regulates the topic with detachment, I can confirm that certainly, his subjectivity is absolutely legitimate and true. And that’s what worries me when he perceives such a work by Towner in a "somewhat cold" manner. As for the hoped-for forum, I'm all set.
Greetings to the committed Townerians (and perhaps long-time ones). And to the workers (of musical instruments). And of course, to the others as well.

My heartfelt condolences for the recent, bitter electoral defeat. I don’t know how you’ll manage now. On the bright side, after this sad time of tears, regrets, reshuffles, and warm meals, you’ll have plenty of time to care for my poor little plants. I’m here for you, thank you. :D