Grendel

The usual well-packaged product from the majors. But what rock and roll... play around with the soldiers, but leave the saints alone!

Good job Fidia, you’re right about the thrash, so I’m voting again, and this time, I’ll authenticate myself!

I agree, dear Copernicus!

Good job, Daniele, you're getting better with the reviews! I prefer "Traks," even though it's more expensive: it's more consistent...

At first, I also had that feeling of the guitar being "out of place" in jazz: but after hearing Hall, I changed my mind... definitely!

There are two of us who know this band of unknown losers, then! I wanted to do the review, but I guess I'll just do one for their other productions. I raised the rating, anyway, considering that I got to know them, musically speaking, right in their San Francisco when I was still a kid and the album hadn’t been out for long. I think they absorbed a lot of their grit from bands like Kansas, which at times seem to echo in their music. Anyway, these first albums of theirs are great! "When the lights go down in the city and the sun shine on the bay..."

Only the vote, the rest is superfluous.

P.S. If you have this opinion of him and also own five CDs, something doesn’t add up! To err is human, but you are a masochist and have holes in your pockets...

If DeBaser were a newspaper, the presence of what you wrote would make sense. But since this is about giving opinions on albums, I don't think a review of the singers/bands is required: otherwise, we would start talking about people, not songs. For this reason, I gave you the lowest rating, even though you wrote a very nice article: that's the point, since in the end what you produced is a nice editorial. Like in a daily or a periodical magazine: and I really don't fit in with that, otherwise for those four silly things I wrote, I should already feel like a freelance journalist. I do not defend the character in question: he is not without flaws, just like 99% of the characters who populate the varied global music scene (money is appealing to everyone, let's not kid ourselves...). I notice that lately there's an increasing tendency for bickering at the expense of dialogue, and that many reviews go outside the lines drawn by those who created and manage this site (maybe it's you, I don't know: if so, that would be rather serious, wouldn't it?). If you want to add a personal comment while talking about music, that's perfectly fine; in the end, it's all part of a democratic exchange of views; as someone once said, opinions are like assholes: everyone has one. But have you thought that what you said, in the end, can be written about almost everyone? Want an example? No, I don't think you need one: I find you smart enough, or at least I think so reading you. I think you've indulged in a bit of "commonplace"...

Dear Massimof, I always enjoy reading your comments, as you may have understood. I read, in truth, all the DeRecensioni whenever I can, regardless of whether I like the things or not. If I find it appropriate, especially if I have elements to back it up, I comment. There's also the fact that tastes are tastes (as I like to say, hurray for democracy!): but the truth is, Nirvana has never convinced me. Maybe it’s because there has always been an enormous media interest around them; perhaps they benefited from advertising hype; probably they emerged at a time when ideas, just like myths and models (not to mention popular trends...), were scarce. Let's set aside the Cobain discussion, given that his death, like that of others before him, inevitably was known to create a myth. My question is: if they had appeared in another era and in a different "historical context," would things have gone this way?
P.S. I remember the Mother Love Bone from that period with great nostalgia!