primiballi

On the evening of the Madrid bombings, I had my little jazz & blues radio show, and I played it. It was very moving, even more so than I had imagined, despite it being probably the hundredth time I had heard it. An incredibly beautiful record.

I, on the other hand, am very attached to this album, which I consider one of the best of MK's solo work (perhaps alongside the recent Shangri La, which is truly exceptional). The duet with Morrison, moreover, is absolutely moving. This is the power of simplicity, the opposite of simplism (only many do not understand it).

dear rancid, I could write you a hundred lines to say how many and what crap you’ve said. But, if you’re not completely stupid, in a few years you’ll get there on your own. What a nasty beast simplistic youthfulness for its own sake is...

who, for you, is not a puppet...? So let's make two comparisons

It's simplistic to dismiss Vasco with a label, however plausible, like pop-rock. What saves him from being categorized and from the abyss of hyper-commercialism (let's not forget it was the summer of Antonacci and the one who wanted to be the same...) is the fact that even in absolutely minor albums, he always manages to deliver gems of songwriting quality like the recent "Un Senso" or, earlier, but still from the recent Vasco period, "Gli Angeli" or "Sally"... Who else can do it... pop-rock or not...? Maybe Negrita...? Maybe Negramaro...? Maybe those poor fools from Le Vibrazioni...?

truly great album, even in its being considered minor. Those who, like me, are not exactly inexperienced will remember how Ghost was then mercilessly slaughtered by the nearly unanimous criticism (as had already happened with Zenyatta). Here’s a piece of news you might know, but which I recently discovered with great pleasure. A date from the (rarely documented) Ghost tour was filmed (very well) I believe for a US TV. The fact is it’s available on e-mule (or similar... I think). It’s a grand concert, worthy of the album and perhaps better than the well-documented subsequent tour. Search, find, and enjoy.

Guys: self-promotion. Go check out my review, as I’ve listened to the album quite a few times, and back at the concert in 2003, I was in the field, enough to notice they played brilliantly, perfectly Stones, as they know and must be. Obviously, in the third tier, the delay creates worrying effects. The review is not here. Our favorite Oldies deserve much more.

I know... and you’re right: the historical weight of the album is there, undoubtedly. Although I believe, even in this regard, that Dark is greater, but on the other hand, I consider the '70s to be greater than the '60s, and Gilmour to be greater (perhaps) than anyone else (thus revealing my obvious nature as a die-hard Gilmour fan...) and Waters a genius of words and voice. This is what I argue: for me, Pink Floyd are Waters and Gilmour, with a notable contribution from Wright and Mason (but secondary... like Watts or Ringo Starr, so to speak... essential in the sound, irrelevant in the composition/interpretation - in fact - of the songs). Syd was the leader of a different group. Obviously, if they had named themselves something else, we would both be happy, albeit for different reasons... Anyway, let’s be clear, we are still in the hyperuranium of Music, and we are engaging in pure academia...

well done, well done and well done: I recommend everyone to use the discs of this stupid, silly take-it-or-leave-it stuff for the wobbly furniture at home. If you only have sturdy furniture with four legs, then throw them in the toilet. They harm your critical sense, your disco, your good taste, and your critical sense. Maybe also the decor, even if seen only from the side.

Personally, I consider Wayfarin Sons by Colin James Hay a masterpiece, and this is my personal critical judgment. Just as I consider Franks Wild Years by Waits an absolute masterpiece. What I wanted to say, simply, is that it’s hard for all four elements to be present (thus not just commercial success) but Musicians-Critics-Market-Historicit y, and represent a mistake. Perhaps it’s easier to speculate that we are the ones who are wrong. Then, of course, you find Dark as commercial as I find Syd unnecessarily hippie and dated. It's a bit like comparing Formula 3 to Lucio Battisti, obviously referring to the two albums by F3 written, arranged, produced, and partly played by LB. Battisti, like the Pink, are great for what came after. Before that, you or I may like them more or less, but they were a psychedelic-hippie band that wouldn’t have gone far. At least, that's how I see it. Let me also add that I would love to have many more媚媚媚媚媚 like those of Dark today... In short…: saying that Syd has left a deeper mark on the "real" Pink than Gilmour's guitar is like saying that the Statue of Liberty is naked and is a man. Then, of course, everyone says and thinks whatever they want.