lux

I need Dave, I need...I want to do one on the Dt.

I thank Saputello for the intellectual honesty.

I can't stand Wilson's voice unfortunately... I don't know if he does it on purpose, he definitely does, but for me it's really flat, not expressive. I didn't write this review against you, I think I already told you this in the past, right? And anyway, the review on the Dt is ready and it's MOOOLTo much harsher than this one about Deadwing, you'll have fun...

Let's get to the PTs: it's clear that I'm not particularly crazy about them as a whole. I do like their early albums, but this Deadwing suffers from the same flaws as most DT records. And it's not about technique for its own sake, no. It's about compositions, songwriting, arrangements, and finally expressiveness. I assure you that when I wrote "What is this song, a posthumous unreleased track by Rush, seasoned with a small Electric Solo Made in Gilmour post...etc," I wrote it because when I listen to Deadwing (the song), it feels like I'm listening to Rush at the beginning. And that solo strikes me as Gilmour style. The solo you find halfway through the song is veeeery similar to the solo in "As I Am" by DT (I think you've never heard this song by DT). The Radiohead of Ok Computer are definitely superior to the PTs for me. But I don't believe I'm the only one who thinks so. You don't like Radiohead, that's fine, but that doesn't mean they are objectively terrible... many songs, let's say psychedelic, from Deadwing feel banal to me, not wanting to be offensive or harsh towards you or PT fans. "The romantic finale of the sort 'now you have to get emotional or I'll beat you up'... this expression only means that the finale is rhetorical, prepared, announced... stereotyped, in short. I would have bet that that song would end a certain way at the first listen, and indeed it ended that way! As for the better melodies, there are plenty of suites or high-duration songs from King Crimson, Pink Floyd, Rush, Yes, Soft Machine (although these last ones are actually more prog rock jazz) that have suites with melodies that are truer, more genuine... more beautiful, but simply more beautiful because true "original" prog is from the 70s. Most of today's stuff is revisionism.

Where do I start? Let's go with DT. So, the ratings I periodically give to the albums shouldn’t be taken too seriously; when I gave a 3 to Metropolis, I hadn’t listened to certain bands and a specific type of rock. Right now, I would give a 2 to Metropolis. Regarding Images & Words, I still think I would give it a passing grade for a simple reason: DT, with all their flaws, officially established classic prog metal with Images, so historically that album deserves a passing grade (in my opinion). The PT themselves, in a not too oblique way, have drawn from DT for a simple reason as well: they too now play prog metal (at least in certain songs), and playing prog metal today means dealing with the legacy of DT. So as for DT, you know well how much they annoy me now, but they effectively created the first prog metal album. And that should be acknowledged. Now let’s move on to Opeth: The ratings I gave back then were a bit exaggerated (I was in the middle of my fan phase), and I had still listened to little of the rock I now enjoy. Yes, Damnation is derivative and monotonous, in fact, I wouldn’t give it more than a passing grade...

Hanzo, it's not that I listen to house (God forbid!), I simply listen to other kinds of Rock. The problem remains the same.. Do you want to do progressive in the '90s-2000s? Perfect, but do it in a credible and expressive way, put technique in the background and subordinate it to the artistic message. All of this is absent in Systematic Chaos. DT reminds me of those kinds of students who, when called upon, start talking a mile a minute and regurgitating the material they've memorized, almost with a thin layer of alienation between themselves and the acquired knowledge. Then when the teacher asks them, "What do YOU think about this?" (a personal reflection, that is), that's when the student/DT freezes and doesn't know what to say anymore.

I wasn't referring either to Deep Purple or to Pink Floyd, really. This is rock that's widely known, even if it's very valid (especially regarding the early Floyd, as I'm not crazy about the Purple). But that's not the point. The issue is that here we worship this ridiculous group called DT, and no one on this review page (maybe some do) knows who Black Type for a Blue Girl or the Swans are. And that's serious.

But what does it mean that they have gone down in history?? Artistically, the early Floyd are the best, just ask any rock critic with a decent artistic sensitivity. They achieved success thanks to their 70s albums, but remember, my child: the masses (the people who unanimously praise a certain group) understand nothing about art. That's why intellectuals are as essential in this A-Critical consumerist alienated society (in any artistic, philosophical, historical, sociological, or political field) as bread.

Interstellar Overdrive is worth more than all the Floyd songs from the 70s put together. The fact that the 70s songs are more famous is linked to the fact that they are catchier and more "marketable." They are certainly not better. Let’s not joke around with The Piper at the Gates, otherwise I'll have nightmares tonight.

No Roller, I'm not the only one saying it's not a masterpiece, believe me... then I'll give you some advice: don't pay attention to what common people say, because common people are only capable of spouting clichés. The masterpieces of the Floyd are others, and anyway, I haven't said it's a bad album, it's just simply not a masterpiece.