lux

As far as I'm concerned, I consider them the worst of the worst.

"And for me, Jagger's motto holds true forever: 'it’s only rock and roll but I like it'. Let’s not lose sight of this, it’s just rock, a popular phenomenon." ----nananana, the pot "popular music" is just the playing field, what matters is the approach. An approach that can be ultra-avant-garde even in popular music. The problem is one: reactionary rock is dead artistically even before being conceived by the next Vasco in line. But there’s not only that horrible conservative approach in rock; there has always been a "progressive" line. To be clear: take (if you’ve listened to it) Solstice by Ralph Towner: pure classy mannerism, jazz with excellent aesthetic taste and nothing more, try digging deeper and what do you have left in your hands? The fact that you’re "listening to jazz", played by great musicians (and who cares, since when does being excellent musicians mean being Artists?) and therefore this would a priori imply that it's "superior" music.. for me, these considerations are nonsense, of course, it’s like judging an album solely based on superficial/formal/aesthetic aspects.. I don’t listen to classical music, but I happened to get curious lately and tried "La Passione secondo Matteo" by Bach and "Canticles Of Ecstasy" by Hildegard Von Bingen. Well, I'm still wondering about the meaning of what I listened to, apart from the typical baroque or medieval austerity forcefully imposed. You can see then that what matters is the attitude, not the genre (which is merely a label used by journalists to stick onto music, as a mental shortcut for the reader).

You got me all fired up, you nasty jerk! Do you see how similar they are to Don Caballero?

Vic, since when are you listening to classical music?? I preferred you before with "Yes" by Morphine and "La Spirale" by Nin.. you were more Rock! :-P

Has heavy metal been born? Well, this is a sublime historical novelty, 2008 will be remembered for them!

Oh, but Drake was absolutely essential in his approach... he didn't need circus-like touches to get noticed, besides genuinely communicating something with his twilight/depressed singing. The point is that Drake didn't need to hide behind particularly elaborate arrangements because he had something to say :-P

Well, historical importance, as Chinaski also pointed out and with which I agree this time, is not always synonymous with actual quality (but I do think originality is necessary; otherwise, why would I listen? A record of pure style and technical skill? I wouldn't like that). The most important history is the more global, more encompassing one, the international history... and I don't know what value this record would have when compared to the entire history of rock... here in Italy we get excited about records that are merely decent or even quite poor... this is because we are used to listening daily to the garbage delivered to us by the mass media. So, as soon as someone plays a bit more "alternative," we shout miracle, but how many Italian rock records could compete with those from America and England? Very few, I believe, very few. Personally, I don’t need time to understand the value of the Milanese; it’s just lacking in approach, conforming to the Italian way of playing fake indie rock, lacking humility (they're quote-referential in the worst sense), and if you strip away these fanciful arrangements, you're left with prefabricated pop radio hits that are easy to digest (I have nothing against pop, but I stand against the crude Italian pop). So here's what I mean by the term ignoble.

With their latest post, psychopompe wins my love! Pompe, can I love ya?

Never wanted to be a "novelty," I simply observed that this record is decidedly unmarketable... and among other things, even Vasco's fans continue to wet their jeans at his concerts, so I think that the ejaculation criterion is not the best possible one.

Well, I haven't read the lyrics, but I understand Italian... so I get Agnelli when he sings. The point is that I don't consider the lyrics decisive for the quality of an album, regardless of whether they are valid or banal. As for the historical criterion, I never said it's the best (oh well, still better than many others...) but it is the most objective. That the Ramones were fundamental to punk is historically proven, and that Throbbing Gristle were essential for the development of industrial music is the same. Then we can discuss the intrinsic value of the albums, but that’s another level of analysis altogether. So let's say that to evaluate the album itself, we should look at the so-called originality, the most inflated term among those who discuss music, precisely to understand whether it has the ability to tell something that is not necessarily "new," but something unique and personal. And to achieve this, to convey something personal, the album cannot simply serve an aesthetic function. We can no longer hold a Renaissance idea of beauty, of classical and baroque perfection, because doing so is now equivalent to being rhetorical, obvious, standardized, empty, and thus incapable of truly communicating something. That approach has been surpassed, today more than ever in our increasingly Post-something society.