Shine

@ THE GREEN MANALISHI (or anyone who knows something about it): I’m always very interested in the dynamics of a band and its constraints. Can you tell me more about the fact that he could only write one-sixth of the Beatles' albums? How could he have signed something like that? Why? How did he cope with it? Why didn’t he ever rebel? Maybe I've gone overboard with the questions, but I’m really curious about the topic…

To the great Antonio: I’m not able to respond to you in Spanish, but I send you a big bunch of wishes and "Hasta la vista" as well! In fact, my visits to this site have dwindled a lot; it's more difficult for me to have a quick chat, considering the commitments I’ve had lately...

successful...

I'm sorry, but the review is really confusing and has several errors. Moreover, you managed to mention all the band members except for one Steve Howe...

@CURRAHEE72. I'm sorry, I attributed your "concise" to the sound and not the brevity of the album. Stress plays nasty tricks on me, understand...

@CURRAHEE72. What do you mean by synthetic? Among their live performances, I've listened to this one and the live in Verona so far, and I must say that the "sound" differences are quite evident. In the first one, the sounds are very clear and sharp; in some ways, it feels like a studio recording. In the second, the sound quality is lower, the dynamics flatter, and the sounds less impactful. So, regardless of the interpretation and the setlist, I prefer this live performance. Could you share your point of view?

Sorry, the previous comment has started again... Anyway, I don't understand why we can't discuss Ten. I know people who consider it just a good album, and I assure you they are intelligent people! Comparing this record with Death Magnetic completely shifts the focus of the discussion. It is entirely obvious to compare solo works with those of the main band, especially in cases like this where there is little deviation in musical conception. Doing the same comparison with an album that has a "metal" attitude and that has no connection to the musician seems forced to me. After all, it is not necessary to publish everything that one composes. I understand that he did it to challenge himself, but in the end, he doesn’t seem to truly believe in it either! An album of Nick Drake's (immense author) outtakes might deserve four stars, but an album of outtakes from an author who sometimes (not always) struggles in his band might only deserve two. And that’s the rating I give to the album. Musical honesty is not enough. If he weren't the bassist of Pearl Jam, no one would have talked about it, nor would it have been rated four stars. The market is full of incredibly interesting music; it’s not just crap as you seem to imply. I always have the feeling that I've listened to just a drop in a sea of music, and I often marvel at how many exceptional authors are out there. I'm sorry, you seem like an intelligent person but I get the impression you’ve been too lenient, too much of a fan...

Hello NEVSKJI. Perhaps I should have been more concise and aimed at the main point of my criticism. I start from the assumption that when I see four stars, I expect a very nice album even if it’s not a masterpiece. Many Pearl Jam albums, for me, fall into this category. The point is that I consider this album inferior to any album by the Band. The same widely criticized Riot Act, which I believe deserves three honest stars, is significantly better. You can imagine that for me, four stars are quite an exaggeration in relation. So, leaving aside interpretation, arrangement, execution, and production, it’s actually the songwriting that feels weak. The criticism I’m directing at you is therefore that you have been too lenient with this good musician. If you give Tone four stars, how many stars should you give Ten?

Hi NEVSKJI. Maybe I should have been more concise and focused on the main point of my criticism. I start from the assumption that when I see four stars, I expect a very good album, even if not a masterpiece. Many Pearl Jam albums, for me, fall into this category. The point is that I consider this album inferior to any album by the Band. The same criticized Rioct Act, which I value at three honest stars, is clearly superior. You can understand that for me, four stars are a exaggeration in this context. So, leaving aside interpretation, arrangement, execution, and production, it's the songwriting that is weak. My critique to you is that you have been too lenient with this talented musician. If you give Tone four stars, how many stars should you give to Ten?

I listened to this album carefully, and I completely disagree with you. Let me explain. The impression I have is that I'm facing scraps from Pearl Jam, with the added issue of a guitar and vocal interpretation that just doesn't measure up. Additionally, the production of the album feels quite amateurish (though this might not necessarily be a bad thing), and the artwork is banal in content and elementary in technique (I hope the Crociani won’t take offense at this distinction). As Embryo says, "apart from the wonderful Nothing As It Seems, I don't find much in the Pearl Jam songs written by him (Pilate, Low Light, Help Help,...)." I would only add Sleight of Hands, which he co-wrote with Vedder. Generally speaking, I was wondering what kind of experiments can be found in the Pearl Jam albums. I really appreciate this band for the intensity and genuineness of their songs, but to talk about experiments seems rather bold... In short, we don’t see eye to eye, but I hope we can have a constructive discussion...