zuckina

Aside from the nonsense about various Sonic Youth, Bob Dylan, and even the Beatles not knowing how to play… someone has lumped the Nirvana and the Smashing Pumpkins into the mix, "who couldn’t do anything"? Are you talking about a band with one of the greatest composers of the nineties? Are you talking about a group with one of the best drummers to come out of the nineties, a drummer who grew up playing jazz? Incredible, there's people here who know everything about Dream, then they know "blowin' in the wind", "help", "today" and "smells like teen spirit" and that’s it, and they think they can judge historic bands. On the other hand, I've listened to all of Dream's albums and I've even seen them live, and I also listen to all the bands denigrated by a certain Matt (and mentioned by others). Therefore, I believe I can allow myself to side with easycure, knowing what I’m talking about. That said, the fact that I own Dream's albums and that I still like some of their stuff doesn’t mean I consider them a great band in the history of music. They can be likable, they are technical, they know how to play (in the sense that they are very skilled technically with their respective instruments), they can evoke emotions (keeping easycure’s point in mind), but they don’t have many added values aside from being fast. I don’t give them much thought, but I also don’t feel qualified to compare them to the Beatles, Led Zeppelin, or even the Who, for that matter. A piece of advice: I have always been immensely pleased to be convinced that I know something and then be surprised to change my mind or understand how many other things I still didn’t know or didn’t understand. Especially in music. I’m sure that Petrucci himself, aside from the fact that he likes doing what he does the way he does it, would point you to the same historic bands that easy mentions and would blush at the thought of being compared to them.

incredible... still here... still all these comments... could make a book... so those newcomers who arrive can read not only the review but also the comments of those who a year ago said the same things and to whom easy responded in the same way. mind-blowing.

Anyway, it's annoying that astral keeps voting. In fact, it's childish. I repeat, I don't care, but it shouldn't work this way. One day, when you write some of your own reviews (since you’re still coming up empty, just comments), you’ll realize it. Out of sympathy, I'll also give myself a 1, just to make it clear that it's just a matter of maturity.

I've always been clear. I criticized in general these two songs, which I didn't like, and Waters' career, but only in terms of his role as an arranger and musician. That's it. It was clear. So before you get heated, as I've already said, read more carefully. Otherwise, it's pointless to discuss only to find out that we were basically in agreement. Bye!

they are very good, much better than negramaro. I make the comparison because they come from the same label (sugar) and the same producer arranger (rustici corrado). however, they have an extra gear. in the realm of Italian music, anyway that’s commercial for the push they have, it’s a challenging album but it’s getting a good response. I hope they don’t get too lost in the spiral of promotion and commercialism. the next single should be (from internal sources) "tu ti ricorderai di me".

Well, I didn’t insult Waters and his fans; I wrote a REVIEW, critical but still a review. Secondly, I talk about Waters because I know him well; I’m a fan of his, I’m a fan of Pink Floyd, I know their history and his very well, and I always try to listen critically and attentively. You must have noticed that I criticize particularly the poor (in my opinion, of course) musical quality of this work, and I have, so to speak, poked fun at his figure, mentioning some episodes known to many Floyd fans (it’s well-known that The Wall is almost entirely Waters’ work, but that the vast majority of the arrangements and the best musical pieces are thanks to Gilmour and Ezrin. In many, many albums, it’s Gilmour playing the bass, just as Waters has credited himself with work where someone else also contributed heavily.). After that, my provocations refer to new facts and do not aim to completely demolish the greatness of Waters and his ideas, his lyrics, and his musical qualities. I simply point out the fact that certain protests from the rest of the group have been confirmed by the fact that "musically," Waters alone hasn’t achieved the excellent Floydian results. That is, I believe I have clarified and sufficiently elaborated on which elements I was targeting in my critique, and very clearly. If you want, you can go back and read them; if not, do yourself a favor and avoid commenting. Astral, I don’t change my mind with every response. The review says things, even harshly, but it’s a review of two tracks, brief, and cannot explain everything. That’s what the comments are for. And there I explained clearly. If the fact that I clarified and explained my opinions in more depth means changing my mind, my friend, I don’t know what to tell you. I can come there and say to you: "Yes, but I think Waters is not adequate as a musician and arranger; listen to these pieces!" You respond indignantly, "Are you crazy? He made the history of the Floyd, he wrote everything himself, you can’t blaspheme." Then at that point, I try to broaden my consideration, trying to explain that my statement was a kind of outburst, etc., etc. That doesn’t mean changing my mind. Am I contradictory because I like Waters but criticize him for certain aspects? My friend, you’re the one who accepts anything just because his name is on it. If I don’t like something, I say so, even if I continue to appreciate him. Always without insulting, I point it out.

Yeah, whatever... I'm not contradictory, I always explain clearly. Cuzzo, you're really making me mad, give me an excuse, you know I don't care. It's more interesting to see that you have nothing sensible to say. I don't care if he's going to release two rock albums; I reviewed these two songs. As for the "the dark side of the moon tour," I will probably go see it, even though I would have preferred if he did The Wall. What’s the point of going to see Waters who only sings three songs from all his work? It seems like a big commercial move to me; it doesn't look like he's staying away from all of that. So, maximum respect for him and his operatic work, I'm waiting for the two rock albums he has ready. In the meantime, I didn't like these two tracks and my judgment remains unchanged. Nothing hard to understand.

What nonsense, my friend? Let's compare notes!

Uff. So many people talking nonsense. De Gregori conceited? De Gregori unlikable? Bah, I don’t understand what the problem is. If there's an artist who can do whatever they want, it's De Gregori. If a singer has to make the same album over and over again, never changing, then they’re really finished. Let's judge the album for what it is, how it came to be, in what period it’s released, and in what dimension it operates. Let’s forget about the albums from 30 years ago.

son and daughter? Are you crazy?