Saputello

And why shouldn’t I express my dissent? Three reviews before the release date anyway, not just two. And after having (really read) that last release that finally describes the album, I can well understand that I won’t be listening to the album, given that it’s yet another blatant mishmash of quotations.

"they play at being...", "it feels like a tribute to...", "I notice sounds very close to...", "it's time to pay homage to...". What garbage. Besides, they can't even make original quotes: the intro of one of these days had already been quoted by Brian Eno in 1974 in the song "the third uncle", from taking tiger mountain by strategy. That said: 1 dry.

I'm motivating my one a priori: You've broken my balls with the Dream Theater. 10 reviews of Octavarium have started to make me hate a band that I previously didn’t mind that much, but I don’t understand why you have to write a whole review on a shitty album when you could spend your time “promoting” a successful work by a new band that needs to be discovered, instead of yet another useless album from a band that has already had its day. Now, if you think it’s normal for the album to not be out yet and there are already two reviews... to me, it doesn’t seem normal; it seems very sad. A month will pass, and it will already have doubled the attendance of Octavarium, when I repeat, you could have written better about something worthwhile. And then what kind of reviews have come out? One that’s copied and says nothing, another that’s not copied but says the same things as the first and explains squat. You can write as many reviews of this album as you want, but then don’t complain if someone defaults on it.

@ ZannaB: No problem. I see that you somewhat agree with what I want to say.

I Beach Boys, in my opinion, have had more musical merit than the Beatles, even if they received less public appreciation (in their best albums). However, it seems to me that you want to elevate them, even though the great skill and ability of Wilson in creating non-trivial arrangements or mere embellishments—sometimes, I believe, his work as an arranger weighs down the pieces quite a bit, simply because the root of the pieces he then layered orchestral counterpoints upon and so forth was not suitable for that type of arrangement. The basic idea seems much more banal than its development. Just points of view, of course.

Well, I didn't like the review because I think you didn't manage to describe the atmospheres of the album very well, perhaps because it didn't impress you much. In any case, you didn't even mention the word folk, which is one of the characteristic sounds of the album, alongside psychedelia. Furthermore, it seems from your review that they are epigones of Pink Floyd, which I consider absolutely false. One could more accurately say that they are epigones of the '70s sound, with some modern reinterpretations in the sounds. And finally, I don't agree with the rating either, a 3, which I think is too tight for them. I believe it's an album to be discovered slowly, containing musical jewels and an intriguing dreamlike aftertaste.

Great rece.

1 dry. For you, as for everyone else who will send the review of the record.

"take it back was written by bono vox." How sad, to clock in he had to have pieces written for him even by bono vox.

I skimmed over the texts, repetitive, mediocre, lacking introspection.