Saputello

DeRank : 1,47
DeAge™ : 7322 days • Here since 25 may 2006
Lucinda Williams West
Voto:
"thanks to the wise production of Hal Wilner"----> Yes, but coming from someone named Hal, I consider it a biased opinion :-)). Beautiful. Really. I didn't even know her before you mentioned her.
Keiji Haino - Tatsuya Yoshida New Rap
Voto:
"Unclassifiable No wave Viking Free jazz Experimental" -----> I'm not trying to be polemical, but isn't it better to leave the de-genres box empty rather than write this nonsense? Great review.
Melvins (A) Senile Animal
Voto:
Yes, nibiio. Then those who distance themselves from metal can be divided into two categories: 1) the idiots, that is, those who feel the need to say "limited metal, metal shit" to seem cultured; 2) those who greatly broaden their horizons, but still say: "guys, be careful that metal isn't all shit and the good stuff is on par with other genres." For mature people, of course, and without prejudices. For the others, there will always be a need to say "merdallaro."
Van Halen 5150
Van Halen 5150
13 feb 07
Voto:
Apart from their first album, I can’t give any Van Halen album more than 3. That’s the maximum.
Charles Ives The Unanswered Question
Voto:
Yes, it's true, they often (not always) worked on commission, but this is an external conditioning that doesn't necessarily change your mental framework. I believe that a genius, if they wish, can present a work on commission that doesn't adhere at all to the initial specifications of the request. This has often happened with commissioned works. It occurred in painting, already in the Renaissance, and in music, from Bach and other geniuses. The artist merely needs an external excuse, which can be the commission, a love affair, a tragedy, or even a fly buzzing around. But the purpose of their creation isn't the fly buzzing and sometimes not even their love. The purpose is their art, towards which they feel a sense of totality. In contrast, for the craftsman, the purpose becomes the commission itself. Am I wrong?
Charles Ives The Unanswered Question
Voto:
In summary: if your music creation is driven by a genuine impulse and personal need that goes beyond materiality, it's one thing; if every time you force yourself to "write" a song and while doing so you think about making it marketable, it's another thing.
Charles Ives The Unanswered Question
Voto:
That is a phrase that needs to be interpreted, in my opinion. You must draw two meanings from it:
1) Everyone has the aspiration to live off music, including Carles' father and Charles himself; and that's only right. 2) The moment the motivation of "survival" becomes the fixed obsession in your music-making, your quality declines, and it's noticeable. In the craft, there's no art—there's only repetitiveness. Worse than the craft is the hypocrisy of those who make music for weak ears, the kind that gets played on the radio. The most beautiful experience from a musical standpoint is listening to a work or concert by a truly inspired artist, not watching the setup of Vasco Rossi's guitarist.
Charles Ives The Unanswered Question
Voto:
Thank you very much, everyone. I am transcribing a sentence that I find beautiful from Charles' father, which he always quotes regarding the fact that for a long time he was considered an amateur musician: "Dad used to say that a man can keep his interest in music stronger, cleaner, greater, and freer if he doesn't try to make a living from it."
Camel Moonmadness
Voto:
Alright, but you're just diluted because there are more people making shit music. Go on MySpace today and see how many ridiculous little bands are putting their insignificant music online? Let them live too, and you look for the good stuff, which is still out there.
Camel Moonmadness
Voto:
David Sylvian, first with Japan and then as a solo artist? He also worked with people before '77, Robert Fripp, Eno, Sakamoto, Czukay.