senior86

No, come a sinistra, no way. I hope you’re being ironic.

The review is painful: first you praise them, then you spit on them... Anyway, I've listened to the whole album: the ideas could have been there, but they were presented in a boring and trivial way. There is one happy moment though: "Harder to breathe" is objectively a great song.

Nothing, the conversation ends here. We always circle back to the same point. In any case, I can perfectly tell the shit from the chocolate; I was wrong to think I could straighten out your ideas on the concept of music. Bye.

Unfortunately, I only have "Diamonds on the Inside," which is a wonderful album... I'll buy more soon...

I didn't say that Warhol isn't brilliant. He's my favorite, how could I? I said that from a technical point of view he applied certain things, and it's the message that is extraordinary. Well... It seems to me that you have a distorted view of music; you know, I know many like you with whom any discussion in this field would be closed after 5 minutes. That's why I'm proud to have a mind wide open. I would love to know if besides being a painter, you study music... If you don't study it, then your chatter is worth nothing. If you do study it, then I don't understand how you can spit on what you call "merda".....

But I believe Oasis is the most overrated band of the '90s, and the Gallagher brothers don't seem like geniuses to me at all. Wonderwall is a good song, for sure, but try listening to Ryan Adams' "stripped" version, without all those acoustic guitars and cringe-worthy arrangements. It's a whole different thing; in fact, the two little brothers have openly admitted that that version far surpasses the original.

I understand what you're saying because I know quite a bit about art history: you see, you’re a painter and I'm a singer. We both have the ability to argue our points within our respective fields. That’s why I’m telling you there’s nothing wrong with listening to people like Luca Carboni, Ramazzotti, Niccolò Fabi, or Toto, Keane, Elton John, and the like. To me, they create (or rather created) top-notch pop music. I'm not talking about little songs or ditties like those of Gigi D'Alessio, Pausini, Meneguzzi, and various crap. That’s why I compared them to Warhol’s Pop Art or the works of Haring: in the end, they weren’t doing anything genius from a pictorial (or figurative) standpoint, but the message was the fundamental factor. I could play you dozens of albums from Italian authors that are not very interesting. That said, I won't hide my great passion for the Beatles, Springsteen, Tom Petty, U2, Jeff Beck, etc. I’m a music fanatic and I almost have a physical need to continuously listen to new records. That’s why I don’t want to set limits for myself, you understand??

Look, I don't really think I have any prejudices, also because my lifestyle is like that. Unfortunately, it seems to me that you have a bit of prejudice against certain authors... You say that there are two well-defined types of music: good music and shitty music. So it's you who sets the boundaries. But believe me, I'm not saying this with resentment. It's just that I don't understand how things can be defined in art (because that's what music is). Then in the visual arts, we should consider Keith Haring or Andy Warhol as scoundrels following your reasoning. I guess there will never be a meeting point. Anyway, I'm glad we cleared things up... Bye.

but everyone understands what they want: there are people who still today can't grasp the minimal music of Nick Drake, the dirty blues of Jeff Beck, or the music of Simple Minds. I (from the few listens I've done) don't understand that of Zappa or Radiohead (to give a few examples). It's not about saying that I don't want to understand them; it's such a subjective thing...

Gèza, I agree with you, but the de gustibus applies in the sense that one shouldn't be heavily offended by tastes that to me (as I've already said) are crap. That's all.