tom traubert

And now the "greatest musical genius" even!!! Well done, and who can deny it, but overrated, as primiballi has already pointed out. The problem in Italy (and not only) is that once you die - bam - you're a genius. If you were a "minor" during your life, you practically become an untouchable icon even though in reality almost none of your so-called apostles actually have your records at home.

I definitely agree with the judgment expressed by primiballi; for Dalla, it is the beginning of an irreversible decline, but all in all, the album is not one to be completely discarded, and I believe it deserves a 6. It's worth noting that I haven't listened to it in several years, and I don't even know if I will soon.

By the way, I was reading in the same little article that Faber's official discography consists of 13 studio albums, 7 (how 7???) live albums, and TWENTY-ONE compilations!!!

...But he courageously denied "categorically" a third chapter of "in direzione ostinata e contraria" eh behhhh ;-)

amen.

The adjective "cantilenante" in itself is neither negative nor positive; it is not a value judgment, but rather an observation, objective, and therefore neutral in itself. And in this case, it is also appropriate. That there might be someone (not me) who finds it unbearable is also likely, but that’s another story.
The album has always been one of the most controversial in Floyd's discography. For some, it’s a masterpiece; for others, a disaster. The live performance is universally praised; it’s beautiful, yet it presents a rather partial and limited representation of what the Floyd were doing live at the time, and the numerous bootlegs circulating are proof of that. The studio album is what sparks debates; for me, it is brave and rich in ideas but also unripe and pretentious, thus far from the status of a masterpiece.

Same nice review, but I only caught a glimpse of the song (but I recognized them right away) and that's too little to give a rating.

Votes are enough, I would say.

Dear fkam, Waters is a good composer, but when it comes to being a genius, he tends to use the same chords and the same structures. Much more genius from a compositional standpoint is Wright, whose use of harmonies is definitely less predictable as he is heavily influenced by jazz and contemporary music. From an executive point of view, it is established that Gilmour is the most technically gifted, but everyone has managed to turn their technical limitations into a strength by compensating with creativity and personality—two factors that 99% of more technical, faster musicians lack, yet make the difference between anonymous virtuosity for its own sake and music capable of moving us. And this applies to all four of the Floyd.

Dear fkam, Waters is a good composer, but when it comes to being a genius, he tends to use the same chords and the same structures. Much more genius from a compositional standpoint is Wright, whose use of harmonies is definitely less predictable as he is heavily influenced by jazz and contemporary music. From an executive point of view, it is established that Gilmour is the most technically gifted, but everyone has managed to turn their technical limitations into a strength by compensating with creativity and personality—two factors that 99% of more technical, faster musicians lack, yet make the difference between anonymous virtuosity for its own sake and music capable of moving us. And this applies to all four of the Floyd.