DaveJonGilmour

Haha, I don't know if it's a fake, but I like him!! Hi Aljanse, nice to meet you! Where are you from?

Rorix, don't make me laugh! Do I have to list a thousand (1000) groups or do you trust me?

and then peggiocox, come on, what are you waiting for, go rate the Pink Floyd a 1, the only thing you'll gain from it is looking like a fool.. come on, you said you don't like the Pink Floyd, brag about it some more, what are you waiting for?

1) I'm talking to Randolph. 2) Go wherever you want, I don't care. 3) The votes range from 1 to 5, and anyone can give whatever they want, and I only voted once, according to my opinion. 4) What respect do you have? The fact is that you can't talk about music, you can't go beyond "I like-I don't like," and that's why I really can't see you in a review conversing normally, except with 5) the insults you've always bestowed on others (you, not me).

here's a movie I will never watch :D

But above all, what I don't understand is why you're coming across a conversation like this now... just because I said that Nirvana is music for kids? I've always heard Nirvana being listened to by guys not even in their twenties, that's all...

"not very reliable" --> this, sorry, but it makes me laugh :D

Randolph, look, even today the Pink Floyd are considered a group for drug addicts, and unfortunately not only by ignorant people, but also by educated ones (not musically educated, of course), like professors, doctors, and graduates, and I know this from experience... but I don’t care about that; I don’t care about people’s opinions, what interests me most is their music, the beautiful music they have been able to give to millions of people over 40 years... a person is not mature just because they don’t listen to a group considered “for drug addicts,” a person is mature if they can objectively evaluate the product of those “drug addicts,” that is, their music... I don’t care about sociology, I care about the notes.

Randolph, but do you really want to have a serious discussion? About Pink Floyd? First of all, I never talked about music for mature people and stuff like that. Now, what do we want to do? Should we trace back the etymology of the word "pischello"? First of all, not all boys are pischelli, because "pischello" is an almost derogatory term. Secondly, an album like Ummagumma has no age; in fact, after 40 years it hasn't lost a shred of its value, and in these 40 years it has been listened to by all possible generations, while after just 15 years Nirvana not only isn't listened to like they once were, but their music sounds stale, being indissolubly linked only to the early '90s. I really don't think that today's thirtysomethings listen to Nirvana, and anyway, there are very few left. And this discussion doesn't say anything about the quality of the music and is not meant to be a comparison... I simply find it obvious that the test of time has been passed by few, and Nirvana is not among them.

why "friend"? why is he called "floyd"? and what if he were called "cobain"? anyway, make all the comparisons you want, but not when you speak to me... I haven't made any.