ajejebrazorf

Well, I voted anyway, without meaning to. :D

My goal beyond by Mc Laughlin is a great album. And even with the Mahavishnu he was practically the boss. On this album, I share your same doubts; for me, it's a decent record. More class than substance. However, it's a distant memory, so I'll leave the ratings aside.

I only heard River of Transfiguration, of which I had heard wonderful things. Now just a listen isn't enough, but I quite like it.

if there are spaces in the address, remove them, otherwise the page won't open.

Yes, I was making a comparison about taste with Mercury Rev and Flaming Lips (who are also kindred spirits of Van Dyke in many ways, their melodies are his). In the '80s, the psychedelic pop scene also includes the Soft Boys and in the '90s, Olivia Tremor Control, whom I've only recently discovered, but they've made some great albums. They have made some great albums. I still don't know much about the 2000s. Anyway, look here, there's really a lot to enjoy (there are also the Dogbowl): link rotto

Besides Kevin Ayers, I would definitely include Van Dyke Parks among the influences, and I see him close to the more melodic works of Mercury Rev (Deserter Songs) and Flaming Lips (The Soft Bulletin), but for now, I actually enjoy him even more. I've only been listening to him for a short time, so I won't give a rating. For now, I can only say one thing: everyone should listen to him.

It never drove me crazy. I tried hard, but I never really loved it. The spark never ignited. It's not ugly, of course, but for me it’s certainly not this masterpiece.

"But the melody shouldn't suffer!" I hope you don’t take offense, but this concept I heard brought up by Matia Bazar. Precisely because I sensed this argument, I brought up Sanremo. In my opinion, your reasoning is reductive (to you, all the stuff without good melodies is garbage) and furthermore, citing Floyd, Brassens, Inti Illimani (!!!) and Fossati when you’ve only listened to the tapes of Faust, which are just fragments put together, is not even a proper album, unlike So Far and IV. The same goes for KC; I don’t know what you’ve listened to, given that alongside their experimental works, they’ve always had a great melodic vein since their first album. It’s not the reasoning that bothers me, because tastes are sacred; it’s your opinions that seem to me to be evident preconceived notions, judging without knowing and calling it intellectualism for free (by the way, I’m curious to know about Ummagumma or Saucerful of Secrets): here above in the discussion, you barely knew the bands, and now you would know them perfectly, making big inaccuracies. I remember your "but I think the other Faust members are like the tapes," and I believe your argument is based on that. My impression is that you haven’t listened to the others. Moreover, you provided examples of musicians that, aside from Daniele and the Beatles, don’t really have those great melodies. Then, Luca, you’re free not to listen, but really, don’t build theories on what you think you sense and that you evidently don’t know. No offense, of course.

"I don't know where you got the idea that I have only a superficial understanding of Faust and KC," you admitted above. "They have something very important in common: their melodic flatness (especially regarding the vocal parts)." Melodic flatness? But we aren't talking about neomelodic bands; for pure melody, there's Sanremo. Forget jazz, forget rock, forget electronics, and everything else. In music, there's more than melody; melody is the most elementary aspect of music, and these bands knew it (and since when has Steve Vai been considered a great melodist?). For me, you can listen to whatever you want, but judgments like "music for intellectuals" are really bold, and in my opinion, you don't know what you're talking about. But are Faust IV or so far really that intellectual?

"King Crimson are cut from the same cloth as Faust or the 13th Floor Elevators: bands that appeal to intellectuals wanting to show off or to people who love a certain timbral mix (a bit like me listening to the sound of the toilet flushing because it relaxes me)." Oh my God. Point one: three groups that have nothing to do with each other. Second: this sentence is spoken by someone who, judging by the above, knows less than superficially about Crimson and Faust, so an opinion that means neither more nor less than zero. Third: I know almost everything about the band, a lot about Crimson, and almost everything about Faust, and to compare a mediocre musician (an excellent arranger and superb guitarist but a mediocre musician due to his childlike concept of music as baroque and self-indulgent demonstration) to a genius and forward-thinking group like Faust (an album like Faust IV could be released today and still be a fantastic album) is a blasphemy that cannot be heard. Go listen to their records before passing judgment, Luca LJ.