Saputello

Well, it's true that unfortunately for some time now, the factor of commercial success has entered into the resistance against time. But I believe that if we consider longer time intervals, even this factor tends to disappear. First of all, you can already see it with the pop works published now. I challenge you to find people still talking about the first Backstreet Boys album. Really, no one. This is because those who keep the attention on an album for so long are ultimately the music enthusiasts who discuss it. Anyway, this discussion does not concern Arcade Fire, because I have the vague feeling that what they have produced does not reach the heights of other mentioned masterpieces. And anyway, the arrangements remembered are also made up of notes. In short, we are not talking about tricks, and I don’t believe that a musician is always focused on showing how skilled and cultured they are when creating pompous and citation-filled arrangements. Often, it’s not done on purpose, perhaps.

And it is this multiplicity in expressive solutions that makes great albums like "Dark Side of the Moon" (which I know you don't like, and I'm mentioning it on purpose) as well as albums like the first Velvet Underground, that makes great both Faith No More albums and those of the Melvins, that makes great both the masterpieces of Miles Davis and the compositions of Schubert, that makes great both "Modern Dance" by Pere Ubu and "Gentlemen Take Polaroids" by Japan. There is no singular way to conceive of the qualities and flaws of music. But don't confuse my relativism with saying, "Well, then Laura Pausini can also be beautiful if it's a matter of perspective," because in my opinion, the element that certifies the artistic value of a work is the test of time. If this album withstands countless listens and does not tire, then in 50 years they will still be discussing it amidst debates of "it's worth nothing" or "it's worth so much" or unanimous opinions, then it will mean that it is a great album.

Creating sophisticated arrangements without falling into academicism is no easy task, and I consider it one of the characteristics that can make a band great. Of course, this depends on the genre being considered as well as the type of arrangement being examined: let’s say that if we're talking about content, the arrangement becomes the overarching fabric above the rhythm and the underlying melody, filling the chords with meaning. On the other hand, if we discuss form, the arrangement can also be a quirky sound repeated or various production tricks. If we look at the realm of Arcade Fire, the quality of the arrangements takes on a crucial role. In other genres, not so obviously, but there is no one way to enhance a musical offering. The best manage to meet almost all the parameters: an instrumental performance with personality, innovative or creative pieces, meticulously crafted arrangements, but not academic, interesting rhythms and melodies, and so on.

I gave it a 3 for the basic idea, which I think is really great. However, it is true that the film is developed in a childish and inconclusive manner.

Certo! Inviami il testo che desideri tradurre e provvederò a farlo.

I have listened to the three tracks posted on myspace a couple of times now, so I won't score them because I don't have that authority. However, compared to what they do, I would be tempted to give a one-star rating to your review because, besides being biased, it seems to highlight only some aspects while leaving many others out. I must say that the sound quality is truly commendable. The songs are of good quality, but they seem designed specifically to appeal to the average rock listener. "Don't play rock" is a really catchy and well-constructed piece, but with a rather simple structure and a not very original sound. The guitars are fairly conventional; there isn't much personal touch to the sound, despite the fact that everything is recorded with great skill. With "Laughing," we are fully in the grunge territory—100 percent, starting from the sound, all the way to the structure, with vocals that closely resemble Nirvana's style. A well-crafted chorus. "Tonight" doesn’t appeal to me; I don’t like the choruses that are too simplistic, and I don’t like the harmonic progression, which is indeed one of those overused in all punk, pop, and pop-rock music. The vocals still evoke grunge. Upon initial listens, I don’t find this group to have a lot of personality, even though the quality is extremely high in terms of form. I will certainly listen more closely, but they haven't impressed me.

I was referring to the sculptor, what do you think... :-))

Sublime.

I am here with 5 dictionaries of different languages trying to communicate subliminally with the message of Sfascia. Now we are deciding together with the Aramaic dictionary how to pronounce "trabajare." We will keep you updated if there are any changes. Best regards to the waves. Shapù Tellius.

Good review, concise but enjoyable to read and encourages listening. In any case, I believe that a group like this needs to have a very personal and original voice to really impress. Do they have it? Also, you mentioned Death from Above 1979... Man, you're going hard :-). However, the search for something different is commendable.