Luca-LJ

Misunderstood, as usual! Yet I was very clear! Don’t confuse me with other people who have intervened in this forum! Read carefully what I wrote!

Yes, and it's a good thing to warn those who are not familiar with the album, given the uniqueness of the product.

After all, if I say that I liked it, I can't speak badly about it, can I?

I usually hate these experiments, but this album is an exception! Here, we’re seriously experimenting! Here, we truly explore new territories! It’s not the usual nonsense disguised as a deep, unconventional work. Certainly, it’s not the album I listen to for pure enjoyment. However, what’s here piques my interest; it really fascinates me! We do agree that it's not "music" in the common sense of the word, but an album like this should definitely be recommended to all curious souls.

Sorry, I didn't use the term "stuff" in a derogatory way. It's just my way of being; let's say that if I meet the Pope, I'd address him informally. In reality, I have a lot of respect for this (top) job.

I liked this stuff. Not too much, but the people who criticize it are largely biased (not all of them, of course). You know what? If a musician coming from rock (in Waters' case, a musician who HAS MADE rock history) takes on a project like this, there are two possible paths:
1- He attempts a stylistic contamination, building on his past experience.
2- He creates a totally academic work, well embedded in the stylistic canons of the genre.
In both cases, critics, enthusiasts, and peers will be ruthless! If he chooses the first path, all the remnants of rock present in the work will be seen as eccentricities, imperfections, naivetes, vulgarities for the uncultured masses (while if the same thing is done by a classical composer, they praise him as a great innovative genius!). If he instead takes the second route, he will be called terribly boring and predictable! They will say he is just a caricature of some other famous composer!
Now, this work may not deserve to go down in history, okay, but in my opinion, 80% of the music coming out of conservatories in the last 60 years does not deserve consideration! Yet we continue to exalt garbage musicians who serve us a lot of pretentious junk filled with noise and timbral experiments that lead nowhere. Ca ira might be a bit naive, but at least there’s some melody. When I think that many of those who get heated against this record are listeners of Cage, I can't help but laugh!
Listen to the album without prejudice, and you will find some interesting ideas.

Ginger drummer... the possibilities were 2: Ginger Baker or... Ginger fish! I also really love the Baker-Bruce-Clapton trio; it was one of my first serious listens. I missed out on Gilmour, but I don't regret it. On June 16th, I will probably go see Roger Waters in Rome; that would be a shame to miss!

I knew it too that I only have one WASP album, come on! Anyway, I can't believe you're serious! Everything you say sounds caricatural! Are you just messing with us, huh? But why? Okay, you and Killgod think the Pink Floyd are awful, fine, but still, none of what you do and say makes sense! I have nothing against your provocations (in fact, I've never attacked you, quite the opposite!) but at this point, I wonder what their purpose is!

Stop talking about God! This is not the place to discuss religion!

It's not a timeless record, in the sense that listening to it today reveals its age! However, for its time it was something exceptional, and even now I enjoy listening to it. There are some wonderful ideas (like the arrival of the four horsemen of the apocalypse, which is accompanied by music that's a mix between modulated Arabic singing and concrete music, for example), but some melodic fragments are repeated unnecessarily several times: tedious leitmotifs that only serve to stretch the running time. The review wouldn't be bad, but isn't it a bit too short?