fusillo

Sure! Please send the text you'd like translated.

Promised. In the meantime, as a curiosity, you could check out the site for Leviatan, the comic by Peter published by "The Independent" from 1992, every Sunday for about ten years. leviathan Bye.

ajejebrazorf: tell me I misunderstood... Pip Pyle is dead?

Yes, the caravans were nice, a bit like the review... However, a mention of Richard Sinclair and his subsequent group, the extraordinary Hatfield and the North, seems necessary to me.

Damn how beautiful, Dante... This is the only Frank album with the Mothers of Invention that I'm missing... A remedy is needed.

what exactly?

Extraordinary album and nice review. In particular, the reference to American Beauty.

Oh Zara, since it wasn't difficult to include the samples?:-) Very beautiful what seems to me the ending of the "bachiana-brasileira". I don't know, I found a touch of fado in it... The other samples are also very nice. The combination of flute and guitar is beautiful too, which is quite new for my listening experience. Bye.

And anyway, music is science. It's mathematics in rhythm and pitch and it's physics in the study of sound dynamics. Although intangible, music has a form; if it didn't, we wouldn't be able to separate it from noise and call a song a song or a symphony a symphony. It feels like I'm discovering hot water, but I guess with you I need to specify everything. So I'll reiterate: songs, concerts, symphonies, etc... are musical FORMS with their own characteristics and their own rules. And anyway, Pene, I have the impression that we will each remain more or less legitimately on our own positions. So if you don't mind, for me this part of our pleasant conversation is closed. Regards.

So Pene, first of all, I have to tell you that I'm not angry at all. I was just interested in your answer to the question about Frank Zappa simply because you've emphasized the issue of rock music for the masses in many posts. Whether you want to answer me or not doesn't matter... After all, we still don't understand each other. I didn't just criticize your citationism. For me, you can quote whoever you like. I criticized your criticism of pretazzo with its accompanying citationism. Now, however, I'm getting bored with the critique of Pretazzo as well... Not to mention the citationism... What do you say we leave all that behind? Then, do you want the name of someone who had a scientific approach to music: J.S. Bach, who, as we know, didn't invent any new musical FORM but rather "limited" himself to doing better what already existed. He applied a strict counterpoint discipline and never strayed from that. Of course, he added his own flair, but I don't think I've ever denied the existence of flair. Think about it, he ended up a bit like that Reich... In life and after death, he wasn't considered the genius he was, but rather a pain in the ass... Too difficult and rigorous. He was rediscovered only in 1812 by Mendelssohn. Since then, Bach has become the cornerstone of musical education for any serious musician.