Saputello

Truly beautiful.

PIXIES: I just wanted to point out that if Scaruffi is accused of amateurism, this criticism is likely to apply to any rock critic.

I realize this while visiting the website accordo.it as a reader, for example. It's a great site for guitarists, but I can't tell you what happens when we step outside of the strictly guitar-related context to talk about music in general: a drama.

Joking aside, those who play an instrument too often have the terrible flaw of subjecting the music they listen to to the perspective of the instrument they play, in my opinion. Which I consider a flaw.

Are you telling me that those who play an instrument never talk nonsense about music? I wish!

"Already talking about it with a musician friend would be much more enriching" ------------> However, it is still not clear what the reason is.

Pixies, could you kindly illustrate within rock music the example of a critic who has the credentials to call themselves a critic?

I propose to silence those who criticize politicians and have never been politicians themselves, but above all, those who have never been women have no right to criticize women.

"Evaluating an album after just one listen? Do you think that's possible?" ------> I think it's possible to give a certain type of evaluation after one listen, which is definitely different from what you’d get after 15 listens (there’s no doubt about that). Given how criticism has evolved nowadays, Scaruffi's method and, more generally, historicism seem completely outdated, but I still find certain monographic readings to be very useful, precisely because they are partly devoid of that emotional component that you’d prefer to read about. That’s why I read Debaser or blogs if I want to discover only the emotions of those who read or the sensations experienced in particular contexts when listening to an album. These days, Scaruffi's method is no longer applicable because the whole scenario has become exponentially more complicated. In any case, I specify that regarding certain musical genres, I also find Scaruffi almost unreadable.

Damn, how bitter you all are. You can discuss Scaruffi, but then it's pointless to say that there are people who give him too much importance, because it seems to me that it is precisely through your discussions that he gains more significance than he actually has. I’ll allow myself to laugh when I see that on debaser he’s brought up roughly once every two reviews, which seems a bit excessive; this time I intervened to poke fun at this trend, the other 19 times I didn't. Then I didn’t understand one thing: why “you can’t judge an album after a single listen,” who decided this? It takes me a long time to absorb an album, but that doesn’t mean that there aren’t people who, on their first listen, can truly immerse themselves in it due to their concentration abilities. I don’t understand how one can deny this. That said, I read his site just like I read billions of other things, from ondarock to muncchio, from blogs to sentireascoltare, from storiadellamusica to arlequins, and I know more or less which pages I can trust. In Scaruffi's case, I know what kind of reviews I can read; I certainly won't read the reviews of Steely Dan and Donald Fagen because I know very well that he writes some nonsense there. Sure, if you can even launch criticisms at ondarock for dogmatism, then it means that you really don’t read what you criticize, and I start to doubt that the bitterness towards certain music magazines is driven more by personal issues than anything else (like, “they didn't accept my demo, what bastards”).