Zarathustra

@lloyd: Precisely.
@PIXELID: Well, of course when I use the term masterpiece in rock music, I'm referring to the genius of the composition, measured through various parameters, including of course the harmonic and melodic foundation of the piece. However, these are not the only criteria: when a piece is capable of moving and touching you deeply, it means that it has magic, and honestly, I believe few can listen to a piece like Hey Jude or In My Life or Let it Be without feeling something. And then, to define While My Guitar Gently Weeps as "just a little song" seems utterly misplaced; regarding the others, I can overlook that (as if a song must last 15 minutes, be filled with odd time signatures and changes in rhythm to be considered "great," maybe the Mona Lisa isn't a work of art in the same way as the Dome of St. Peter's?). But not with this one. Then again, you might be right; it's subjective, but I believe that denying the disarming beauty of certain pieces sometimes means playing a part, that of the intellectual snob at all costs, who can't admit to themselves that they become emotional when listening to a "little song" of 2 minutes ("In My Life" or "Paint it Black," which is a bit longer...), made up of just a few chords, while maybe hurting their eardrums listening to a piece by Gentle Giant, just to name one of the more cultured bands in rock music (even if their music isn't what you could define as emotional).

That's right, it has nothing to do with hard rock at all.

@PIXELID: I don't think the Stones' masterpiece is Angie.. Too sugary and whiny.. the Stones have done much better, Sympathy for the Devil, Paint it Black, You can't get what you want, Let it Bleed... I would choose from these. As for the Beatles' masterpieces, well: Michelle, In My Life, Yesterday, Come Together, Let it Be, Hey Jude, The Long and Winding Road, Something, While My Guitar Gently Weeps, Within You Without You, She's Leaving Home, Lucy in the Sky with Diamonds, Penny Lane, We Can Work It Out, Blackbird, I Will and.. then enough, I'm tired of it and I think I've tired you too (it was just to give you an idea of the scale).

@Seifer_Almasy: Haha, I actually think the exact opposite; I mean, I believe that LaBrie is as thrilling as the music of the Theater, and honestly, I can't imagine Dream Theater without LaBrie's high notes... and I think he can also be warm and full-bodied, like in Wait for Sleep, Hollow Years, The Spirit Carries On, just to name a few. Anyway, well, it’s all a matter of perspective. See you soon. p.s. I also love Train of Thought and frankly, I don’t understand the reason for all the criticism it has received.

@Seifer_Almasy: I want to follow your advice, you’ve piqued my curiosity.. About LaBrie: can I ask why you can’t stand him? I find him fantastic, even though he has undeniably dropped in "breath" compared to his early days (although he has been back to great levels for a while now). I mean, many people are on the same wavelength as you, but I've never understood why. See you soon.

Well, a thousand chords and notes wouldn't say it best—let's just say that the harmonic and melodic complexity wasn't the strong point of this music... but the atmosphere is right, even though Reggae music goes beyond form; it’s also music with strong social content that cannot be ignored.

They also went to Sanremo, right? Terrible.

Look, just think that all the bands from the Stones (initially born as their dirty and bad surrogate) onwards are derivative of the Beatles... Come on, even Lou Reed, who had sharp words for everyone, was in love with the Beatles, the same goes for BB King, Eric Clapton; in short, all the greatest musicians were influenced by the Beatles. Their creativity is something extraordinary in the true sense of the word; in the history of rock music, there have been very few bands as creative. This creativity is not something abstract; you can measure it in the freshness of masterpieces like Michelle, In My Life, Norwegian Wood, Nowhere Man, where you must appreciate the beauty of the lyrics in English, even before their meaning. Tastes are tastes, but to say that the Beatles don’t make real music seems to me really absurd. If by real music you mean classical music and nothing else, then I can agree. So I don't share the content, but your review I believe is perfect in form and arguments, even though I reiterate that I don't agree with them.

Hasn't anyone noticed this trend?

The review is very nice, it’s just a bit too long, but that’s okay... I only have Toxicity from them, which surprised me with its unheard-of power. Do you really think this album is negligible or is it just an expansion or simply a change of musical horizons? Because often I read similar judgments for new albums by historic bands, and sometimes I think it’s a way to accuse them of having commercialized (I’m thinking, for example, of Octavarium by the Theater, an album that I find splendid or that has been harshly criticized and torn apart in these circles). It’s not an accusation, though, especially because I don’t know the album; it was more of a statistical observation, so to speak.