Voto:
Valeriorivoli, among the copied songs you mention, I've only listened to the one from Spirit: I have to say that, in my opinion (even though I don't think it's right to copy like that and not even grant the rights), it doesn't take anything away from the music of Led Zeppelin. "Stairway to Heaven" remains a masterpiece, because what makes it so is not the Spirit's base (which is beautiful anyway), but rather what they build on top of it, which fits perfectly with the base (the melody, the solo, etc.). I can't speak about the others; I've just downloaded them. Regarding the socio-historical discussion initiated by the reviewer about the shift from the 70s to the 80s, I believe there were many reasons. The most important one is the societal change that began in the 80s; the start of a social and cultural transformation that would lead to massification and globalization. This change in society, economy, and general thought has led to a market demand for both music and cinema that could be accessible to everyone. A simple, direct, universal musical message. It's also obvious that this often came at the expense of musical quality, because if the musical message has to be "for everyone," it can't be new. It can't be experimental. It has to be something that doesn't surprise. But if it's for everyone, then perhaps it's no longer art, but something else; it becomes a business matter, music that doesn't reflect and isn't art, but music that reflects modern society, the masses, simplicity, and thus also trends and attitudes. Music that tries to hide the pains of modern society, music that, through superficial messages, pretends that these pains don't exist. Therefore, when one tries to make music for everyone, what comes out is not art but rather an interpretation of trends, of what is "in"; and it's obvious that in 90% of the cases, superficial music results. But there have been particularly skilled producers who captured this even before it was born: perhaps the first case was Elvis, followed by the Beatles. But it was still good music; with the boom of globalization, along with the "deeper" superficiality of society, there was also a vulgarization of it (a vulgarization that has now reached horrifying levels, see Britney Spears & co.), so we found ourselves with the "Beatles" of the 80s, namely Duran Duran, and then the ones of the 90s, Take That. In the 80s, rock bands like Skid Row, Europe, and Bon Jovi (music that I believe has no dignity, no artistic value) were the first step towards the abyss; in any case, both they and the masses, just coming out of the musical period of the 60s and 70s (which saw hard rock of blues origin (Led Zeppelin, Deep Purple, etc.) on one side and psychedelia on the other (Pink Floyd, 13th Floor Elevators, Red Crayola, etc.)) were still tied to that type of sound, even though they were mutating towards a more "mass" idea of music; they still retained in their music a memory of the glory of the previous years, so it was all stuff played by technically skilled musicians. Then, compositionally, it was still stuff for the masses, but at least there was a hint of nostalgia. Now, most people don't even know about the existence of 60s and 70s music. And let's face it, by the end of the 70s, hard rock had run its course; it was exhausting. There was a need for something new, something that would fit hand in hand with the new concept of society. I hope I haven't written too much; these discussions get me a bit carried away...
