VoodooChild

You’re messing with me. Obviously, a 31-minute song with 2 solos of 15 minutes each was a figure of speech, an exaggeration to make you understand that in songs over 20 minutes, there’s a lot of smoke and very little substance. Look, I’m not talking about all prog, but about that period when there was very little good prog, actually none at all. Don’t bring Fripp into this; he was one of the few brilliant guitarists in prog, while the quintessential instrument of those years was the keyboard. Do I really need to give you a list of the prog bands from the '70s? I mentioned the 5 major bands. And by the way, you want unnecessary superstructures? There’s Gentle Giant. Virtuosity for its own sake? Keith Emerson. But are you really comparing Hendrix with Keith Emerson? Despite Emerson being perhaps the best keyboardist ever, don’t compare him to Hendrix because they’re two very different things. The difference is that the former did it for self-indulgence; it was a cold thing. Jimi, with his solos (and not just that; every time he played), unleashed his emotions, interpreted his feelings, flowed through the scales with his eyes closed without even thinking about it. What he wanted wasn’t just to show the world his skill; at the same time, he invented and created. This is the difference between Jimi and many other virtuosos of the instrument; he was an innovator, a monster not just of skill but also of creativity, while the others (Malmsteen, Petrucci, and anyone else you want to add) are not.

Jimi's was not an end in itself. More than virtuosity, those of prog from the second half of the '70s onwards were experiments and poorly executed superstructures.

It means doing two 15-minute solos in a 31-minute song to show people you're cooler and better. It means overlooking the aesthetic side of music, the beauty of the melody, to show off your skills with the instrument, being technical and fast. In my opinion, the prog of the late '70s was no longer able to convey emotions. And let's not even talk about supergroups—one of the biggest marketing tricks ever. I’m fed up; I don’t understand if you’re joking or if you’re just the type of person who takes everything literally, analyzing every detail.

Dude, you can't talk to me like this!! I love King Crimson, Yes, our Area, or PFM like crazy. I'm nuts about virtuosity with instruments and technique. But I wouldn't spend 4 uninterrupted days listening to a guitar solo or people continually trying to come up with new stuff but ending up repeating the same things. Maybe I didn't explain myself well, I meant it was complicated because it was just too much poorly blended soup, then it was always the same story; since '77, in fact, prog has had a rough patch. The last great prog record from the '70s that comes to mind is Wind And Wuthering by Genesis. Jethro Tull hasn't done anything decent anymore, Yes made one of their worst albums, ELP were immense live, but in the studio, aside from their debut album, I don't think they did much else, King Crimson had disbanded, and progressive music had become pretty flat compared to 5 years earlier. On the other hand, punk was something new, whether you like it or not. And then, do you know what "virtuosism for its own sake" means?

Nice review for a great album. It also contains one of my favorite metal songs, "rebellion in dreamland."

sure, trivial and simple music. that's the strong point of punk. punk was born precisely because progressive music was becoming just virtuosity for its own sake; the more it evolved, the more complicated it got, making it unbearable. music needed to become something fun again, and that's how punk came to give a musical and social jolt to a period that desperately needed it. anyway, I found the site only three weeks ago, so so far I've only done reviews of Jimi, my lifelong idol.

I like the style of the guns.

But it's not true, nu-metal has always been mainstream. And enough with this story that Nirvana commercialized grunge!

But weren't the footprints fascists? Well, maybe I'm confusing them with someone else. Anyway, I don't understand why you're getting worked up about a movement that was born and died almost thirty years ago.

no, it didn't fool me the girl but don't call it a review.