tom traubert

An excellent epitaph for one of the most tragically decadent parables in the Italian landscape.

5 the great news.

The last live album by De Gregori that I bought. Then I stopped (but he didn't...). Anyway, it's lovely, with some truly high-quality versions.

Reading "the best Italian voice" gave me goosebumps O_o We're all set...

Apart from how many groups I listen to, which you can't know and even less deduce from a discussion that is essentially focused on the PF, but let's set that aside, the fact is that I have studied the Floyd, I have read books, and above all, I have listened to them a lot, in addition to many other things. So don't talk about blinders because we are not discussing personal tastes, like a ranking of favorite albums; we are talking about knowledge of what each individual member has contributed to the band, whether in terms of pure creativity, composition, writing, execution, arrangements, or anything else. And it's not subjective, believe me, it's a matter of knowledge and nothing more. Documentation. If someone only likes the works of Waters or only those of Gilmour, that’s another discussion, perfectly fine, but those are preferences or, at worst, sports fan mentality; I'm not interested.

Look, isn't it "commonplace" to dismiss the period from 1968 to 1972, which is perhaps the most multifaceted and complex phase of the band, with "a lot of Waters influenced by Barrett and a few 'other' scraps"? I really don't know what else would be! This alone would be enough to label your analysis as highly superficial, considering that it was the historical moment when the band worked most as such, with the most complex and significant projects developed by three or even four hands (even "slothful" Mason contributed!). It's almost self-commentary; anyway, to each their own. Without taking anything away from anyone, it’s not enough to just skim through the credits to fire off hasty judgments.

Just like those who know nothing about Pink Floyd except by hearsay.

Wright is a true and recognized master of harmonies; whenever there's an unusual chord in the Floyd's scores, it's his work... Things like Great Gig, Us and Them, large parts (and all of the 9) of Shine On, Echoes, Saucerful, AHM, Wright has long been the band's most experimental and innovative musician.

Gilmour is as important as Waters. Anyone with a minimum of knowledge about the band knows that. Those who claim otherwise are people who stopped at The Wall and don’t move forward or backward. It seems incredible that in 2006 there are still the Waters-Gilmour diatribes that are as old as the hills and almost as pathetic as the rivalry between Duran and Spandau... but perhaps even more so. The Pink Floyd were everything but this false dualism invented by some simple-minded journalist and followed by the most superficial fans. The Floyd were much, much more than this and, above all, a reality much more complex: a magical blend of four artists who, instead of adding up, elevate to the square when they work together. All the solo members learned this the hard way, with a string of mediocre albums – with very few exceptions.
A very beautiful DVD rich in extras that needed to be mentioned, such as the "pirated" footage of Marooned, Poles Apart, On the Turning Away. And to those who said that Wright played poorly, I’d like to ask, what concert did you see... you can say whatever you want, but Gilmour and Wright play like gods here.

Really passionate review, well done.