Posts by frozenraven39

Jesse Sanchez60 said:That’s spot on—Cane and Koja just don't mesh when you look at their personalities, and honestly, if you ask me, neither does their contribution to modern music.
Even if I did love the Breakers way more back when I was a kid. 😵

When you're a kid, everything hits differently—it's instinctive, direct, immediate. As you grow up, you start thinking more abstractly, and you tend to gravitate toward more avant-garde stuff.

That said, both the Breakers and Discipline have spent forty years playing the exact same hand, each in their own way. They also pull from the same musical roots—you can see it clearly when they play covers in their side projects. It's not like there aren't similarities.

As for Cane's views, his recent interview in the Evening News makes it pretty obvious that some of his outlook is somewhat medieval—though he doesn't strike me as an indoctrinated guy who follows tribal patterns. He feels more like this strange, self-grown conservative-liberal hybrid, someone who actually exercises a sense of proportion. He’s an individual—brash and a bit shaky—but he thinks for himself rather than following the herd, and that's why I respect him, even when I disagree.

Regarding the frontman for the Tutor, I can somewhat follow his logic, but it’s equally clear from his recent posts that he’s been indoctrinated. Even though he calls for others not to be simplistic or naive, he’s the one who’s naively fallen for a single side of the story. It’s obvious from his posts (whatever he writes) that he’s completely pro-Putin—meaning he's siding with an autocrat fueled by 19th-century mythomania, someone shelling civilian targets in major cities of another sovereign nation. He justifies it using the same rhetoric used by those historical figures the world moved past, like Hitler and Milošević. (And no, I didn't get these conclusions about Putin from Western propaganda; I pulled them directly from Putin's own recent manifestos—straight from the horse's mouth). But just because the Tutor's frontman is deluded doesn't mean I should tell him he's never welcome again or that I never want to hear his name. That kind of black-and-white thinking is exactly what leads to the conflicts we're seeing between Russians and Ukrainians right now. Personally, I'm more for dialogue.

Joshua Smith5 said:I think Boris—who describes himself as a Marxist-Leninist—has drifted so far to the left that he’s actually circled back to the right. 😁 Maybe that’s why he hasn't performed with the band on Kesić's show yet (and, judging by the vibes, probably won't).

That’s exactly what I was getting at. You have billionaire Putin, the head of this neo-feudal oligarchy—basically a "rule by the few" system run by privileged, multi-billionaire neo-nobles just like him—maintaining his grip through repressive, tyrannical methods. To a Marxist, he's essentially a messiah. 🤦

Exactly. It’s far more useful—and honestly, more important—not to just ignore those who are misguided or try to isolate them into some echo chamber where their logic can just fester away. Instead, we need to actually point out the flaws and try to bring them to some level of awareness.

It won't work every single time, obviously, but if it works even once, it hasn't been a waste. It’s our responsibility to keep at it. There’s a certain quiet satisfaction in knowing you might have steered just one person toward the right path.

William Hughes40 said:Looks like he wiped his FB profile entirely.🤣

https://www.rollingstone.com/boris-vlasteli...yjJovx78y77uPw
He's still listed here, though.

And here’s that response I was mentioning:
https://i.ibb.co/Drtk2Pz/odgovor-fb.png
https://i.ibb.co/SfFNfnb/odgovor-fb2.png

The posts on the tutor's FB page have been scrubbed too.

Everyone is reporting it—it looks like he's been officially erased.

I honestly can't wrap my head around how neo-Marxists—those people who claim to champion Marxist, socialist-communist, or working-class values—can see Putin as some kind of savior. It's just as baffling to me how conservatives can look at Trump and see the ultimate protector of traditional family and religious values.

Look, I get being a hardcore Marxist or a die-hard conservative—people pick sides all the time—but treating figures like Putin or Trump as messiahs? That's where I lose them.

I’m pretty sure Boris Vlastelica—as he puts it—has been meticulously tracking all of this for years. But you know how the game works these days: it’s incredibly easy to fall into an information spiral by relying on one-sided sources, creating this total illusion that you're actually well-informed. Echo chambers and confirmation bias at work. It isn't exactly a secret that Russia has been pouring massive resources into cyber warfare for years as a modern way to run agitprop. In that specific arena, they might actually be the strongest in the World. They have entire armies dedicated to managing fake profiles, spreading fake news, and flooding portals and forums with comments. That whole army just pushes the Russian agenda in whatever language is necessary. I’ll admit, I’ve only followed this stuff on a surface level—I’m not informed enough to see the full picture or grasp every historical nuance. But sometimes, certain things are just obvious, even based on the most basic facts. For me, it's perfectly clear that any side led by someone like Alexander Lukashenko—and almost anyone else like him—is the wrong side.

Look, I’m trolling here, yet you’re standing there with this righteous confidence, spouting "facts"—which you first called "assumptions," only to pivot and correct me by saying they’re definitely "facts"—all based on something you supposedly "heard firsthand a few years ago" (so, was it your hand or someone else's? Hard to tell where the actual experience ends and the hearsay begins). And while we're at it, you're busy building these elaborate theories about my credibility.

Boštjan Menart—who is essentially the owner, or at least the only person who actually matters in that firm, and seemingly the one who pulled the plug on the album—might be lying, or he might not, but the fact remains that this is what he said: "I listened to the new Tram 11 album, Jedan i jedan, for the first time right when I got the report showing our sales had absolutely spiked."
https://www.usatoday.com/culture/music/problem-15155310

Dennis Hall41 said:Alright, look—let’s set aside the fact that you probably haven't worked in media or heard these stories firsthand. Do you just have a fundamental issue with perception here? Let’s break this down:

1. Tram 11 releases an album for Menart, and the only sane assumption is that Menart actually LISTENED to the record before putting it up for sale—unless they were planning on selling recordings of flatulence instead;
2. Around that same window, reviews start dropping—mostly positive ones—noting that while the lyrics are politically incorrect, nobody seems to be making a huge deal out of it at first;
3. Certain human rights authorities find it difficult to pin hate speech charges on the creators;
4. Then, after a few days of the authors hitting various podcasts and repeating those exact same stances from the record, Menart pulls the album from shelves, and some critics—at least some of them—start implicitly or explicitly distancing themselves to avoid any potential fallout.

So where's the breakdown in communication, other than your attempt to convince me that absolutely NOBODY heard the album before it hit the market?

Everything you're assuming—starting with that very first sentence—is dead wrong.

For those more commercially significant releases, we usually send out the streaming links along with the promo copy a few days early—mostly so the reviews can drop right alongside the release date. We aren't sitting around waiting for some critic's feedback to decide whether or not to pull the plug on an album that’s already finished its entire production cycle. Why wait?

Dennis Hall41 said:I know guys who used to write for an independent site and actually received CD promo copies for reviews just a few years back—so basically, it doesn't matter if we're talking about EPH-ovacs or Hanza, whatever the format is. There are some of us here who still value physical media, much like what you were crushing on yesterday over in the Vinyl Junkies thread. Or is vinyl so "in" now that it’s no longer considered the Stone Age?

That was a few years ago; back when neither Deezer nor Spotify even existed in the States.
And what does collecting vinyl have to do with reviewing new albums? Do you honestly think labels are sending out promo vinyl to critics? 🙂

Vinyl has become the hipster format for hobbyists. CDs are slightly less hipster for the collectors. An MP3 file is just a pathetic relic from the dark ages. FLAC never quite managed to become the go-to format for the hipster crowd. Mass media today is streaming. Using one doesn't mean you aren't also consuming the second, third, or fifth option.

But let's not get sidetracked—debating formats isn't the point. Let's get back to the actual issue:
- In the US, there isn't a single professional media outlet specializing strictly in music criticism.
- Professional music critics—meaning those people actually getting paid by mainstream US outlets (national TV, major newspapers)—are as rare as hen's teeth, and they're usually stuck covering everything under the sun instead of just music.
- These same mainstream outlets aren't even the primary way things get promoted anymore; amateur channels, social media, and YouTube took the lead long ago.
- Albums are printed in a few hundred copies at most, making record sales a minor line item in an artist's financial planning.
- Local labels like Menart deal with distributing books, magazines, decor, and toys just to stay afloat alongside their music releases.
- Small, music-only labels actually pull in more revenue by hawking vinyl reissues of the "good old days" to the aforementioned hipsters than they do from selling albums by local bands in their own catalog.
- Local artists and labels survive on touring and festivals, not on album sales.

To summarize: the media landscape has degraded. Professional standards have vanished, leaving behind only the capitalist logic of pushing any product to anyone by any means necessary.

In the scenario described above, the idea of a label organizing a listening session to get critical feedback before a release—or the notion that a label has some internal body deciding which material gets the green light—is pure science fiction.

Dennis Hall41 said:Yeah, why don't you enlighten me then? I guess real American guys just steal everything via torrents because why the hell would anyone pay a single cent for something that’s essentially free if you know where to look.

Đizs, do I really need to spell it out for you?

Spotify, Deezer, Tidal, YouTube. Or they just toss a "promo copy" your way—which, let's be honest, usually just means a WeTransfer link. Who even talks about CDs or torrents anymore? It's not like we're living in the Stone Age.

Moved from Tram 11

Dennis Hall41 said:Look, I’m going to say this for the third time now.

Even if they didn't get any promo copies—and let's be real, there's no way the label didn't listen to the album before release—just explain to me why all these restrictions only popped up AFTER the absolute firestorm started?

It's pretty obvious you're living in some fantasy land if you're still talking about "promo copies" in 2022.

Records for sale:
https://www.discogs.com/Led-Zeppelin...lease/10465138 - G/VG $13
https://www.discogs.com/Mott-The-Hoo...elease/1496272 - VG/VG $17
https://www.discogs.com/The-Sensatio...elease/1941683 - VG+/VG $17
https://www.discogs.com/Dr-John-Anyt...elease/2140053 - NM/NM $33
https://www.discogs.com/Black-Joe-Le...elease/1703066 - NM/NM $33
https://www.discogs.com/Sa%C5%A1a-21...elease/6028509 - NM/NM $33
https://www.discogs.com/Kid-Congo-An...elease/2936678 - NM/NM, signed by Kid Conga, $50

I can do a discount if you take more than one.
Price for the whole lot is $167.
If you buy any record, I'll throw in a free CD—we can talk about which one.

Local pickup available in Chicago.

Dennis Hall41 said:Maybe I should have phrased that better—and honestly, the fact that they’re fake isn't even the main issue.
The bigger problem is that while they did everything well, they rarely did anything exceptionally. You could find technically superior musicians anywhere—which makes sense, given they were punks, and that’s fine by me.
But you had, by a landslide, better songwriters, much more emotionally convincing singers, piles of stronger lyricists, and heaps of people who channeled their rage in a far more believable way.
And all of that within the realm of punk, let alone other genres.

So, they skillfully blended a lot of elements together, but they didn't truly master any single one to an extraordinary degree—and frankly, mastering one thing would have been better, even if every other segment was just mediocre.

Take Bob Dylan, for instance. He wasn't some virtuoso instrumentalist or songwriter, and some might say he’s a subpar singer (though personally, I think when he’s on his game, he conveys incredibly complex meanings and emotions—making him a rather ingenious vocalist), but what he *did* do well, he did damn well.

At this point, I suppose it just comes down to personal taste.

Joe Strummer is often described as someone who could hit the core of an issue with just a few words better than anyone else, and I agree—that was his greatest strength. Plus, he had that perfect raspy voice for spitting out those lyrics. For example, when I wake up at the crack of dawn, I don't know what else would be ringing in my head besides "Ring Ring It's 7 AM, move yourself to go again."

Mick Jones, on the other hand, was a highly musical guy who likely would have succeeded in any genre. Paul Simonon had his own merits too. And regardless of the critics who claim someone isn't a "real" punk or anarchist just because they aren't blowing up embassies like the RAF or the Red Brigade—or because they make a capitalist compromise (though releasing an album is a compromise in itself; how else would anyone hear about it if they didn't?)—all three of them seem like people whose hearts were in the right place. Their work after the band split only confirms that.

Musically speaking, The Clash's defining trait was their successful melting pot of different styles. Is there any other band that mixed punk, rock, reggae, dub, funk, and hip-hop better than them? (It’s going to be pretty hard to convince me that anyone did it better before they did.)

PS: Zappa was also that "one in a million" kind of genius. I get that people can get bored of someone for purely subjective reasons—you can just get tired of them, and it happens to me too—but objectively, you have to acknowledge those who stood apart from the rest through sheer talent, their body of work, originality, or pure discovery. David Bowie was a unique force, too, and Bob Dylan remains one of the most vital and influential figures in 20th-century art (what he does in the 21st century is still solid, just maybe not quite as revolutionary).

Dennis Hall41 said:The Clash—yet another band that should be legendary, but from where I’m sitting, there’s just something missing. There's this... I don't know, this sense of being fake about them. Honestly, I mostly loved them for the iconography and because you were basically supposed to love them—not necessarily because I was actually thinking for myself.

If you can actually put into words what that "something" is—what exactly feels off or fake about them—I’d be more than happy to push back against you.😉

Henry Campbell5 said:Right now, I'm deep in an album binge—marking favorites on Spotify and coming back to them whenever I'm too drained or busy to dig further. There’s just so much material out there that it's impossible to get bored. Praise be to the internet. It’s just a shame it’s made most people incredibly stupid. I suppose the majority has always been dim-witted, but at least before the digital age, the media had some semblance of standards beyond just chasing revenue—they weren't actively making everyone more mindless. Then came democratization—this "freedom of choice" the internet provides—which basically just kicked open Pandora's box. And then we sit here in the chat wondering why people don't talk about music anymore.🐔

The democratization brought by the internet is a double-edged sword. Personally, I’m pretty skeptical of the mantra that the sheer volume of choice provided by the web is an absolute net positive.

If we look specifically at music, sure, the internet allowed me to stumble upon gems I never would have found otherwise. It lets me finish this post, jump on YouTube, click around for a few minutes, and find something new to love. But...

What would life look like without the internet? Without it, discovering new sounds meant hitting up local record stores, digging through crates, and listening until something actually caught my ear—I definitely would have been one of those types. Or maybe relying on recommendations and trading albums with friends. That method was objectively harder and more limited in terms of sheer variety, but that’s exactly why it required actual commitment. It demanded engagement. It carried certain values we're drifting away from in this era—like real, face-to-face socialization versus this virtual substitute.

Nowadays, that brilliant new track I'll discover in five minutes will probably just end up on some random playlist—if I even bother to make one—which I might listen to later (if I don't get distracted by a hundred other things first). Back then, an album sitting on my shelf after months of hunting through shops or weeks of saving up money actually meant something. When I finally put it on the player, I gave it my full attention. I valued the opportunity. There was a ritual to it.

They don't exist. I've basically had a fully formed, set-in-stone taste in music since I was in diapers. 😁

Everything I fell in love with during my early years—and let's be honest, "serious" music listening usually kicks in around age 12—is stuff I still find brilliant whenever I put it on today. Take Queen, for instance. Or R.E.M. Of course, my horizons have expanded in all sorts of directions over time, and there are long stretches where I don't touch my old favorites, but when I do come back to them? That spark is still there.

If anything, I have way more examples of the opposite: artists who didn't do much for me at first, but then, eventually, something just clicked.

This movie isn't exactly preschool material. The CGI is incredible—which basically means the animals look so realistic they're actually pretty terrifying. Even I felt a bit uneasy during that snake scene 😉

Since the Man on Wire documentary was already shot with such a cinematic feel—and honestly, it was brilliant—watching The Walk felt almost redundant to me. But, seeing how much everyone seems to be raving about it, I guess I’ll have to give it a shot myself.

Casey Cox2 said:Man to man,
I think Luigi Pastilli is just incredible here. He was always a solid supporting actor in those top-tier Classic Westerns—this role is easily his best work.

Pastilli? Yeah, he was one of the better character actors from that era. Remember how Tucov played the monk's brother in DLZ?

The film is also basically a precursor to Death Rides a Horse—you can see the influence in that animation sequence in Kill Bill. Personally, it’s not at the very top of my list, even if Clint Eastwood absolutely crushes it (though that Batman guy is about as wooden as a plank).

wiredraven82 said:I don't see any reason to hesitate here—even though I genuinely enjoy every single one of the films I put on that voting list—but if you're asking me to pick the absolute best Classic Western, it’s this:

The Good, the Bad and the Ugly

And I have it listed differently elsewhere:

Once Upon a Time in the West

It’s pretty much a given that 99% of people are going to think along the exact same lines—it’s just a matter of which way the sequence goes. Case in point, look at me:
I don't know about you all, but I’ve been sitting here thinking about the evolution of the genre lately—it’s a bit much to process sometimes. Does anyone else feel like we’re just circling the same tropes over and over? It makes you wonder if anything truly groundbreaking actually happens anymore, or if we're all just stuck in a loop of nostalgia.
2. The Good, the Bad and the Ugly

So, the poll was pretty much a foregone conclusion—unless you count the people who vote against the grain just for the sake of being different. But honestly? Even if we look past that, the list itself is riddled with massive gaps.

Brian Ross7 said:Duck, You Dirty Dog!

🙂

Then there's this one, obviously. Even if it doesn't quite hit the heights of his other Leone classics, it’s still a massive step up from mediocre space flicks like that Baldwin piece, Django Unchained.

*Django Unchained* sits at #5 on my personal *Star Wars* list. As for #4—well, that’s where the biggest hole in my rankings lives. It’s the only non-Leone film on the list that I actually enjoy more than some of his work. Who knows? A Bullet for the General—which honestly deserves a spot in every objective Star Wars list out there—was essentially the first true Zapata western. It paved the way for a whole wave of films following that same blueprint, though if you look at certain criteria, it doesn't quite fit the mold of a pure Classic Western. Westerns.Well, if that's the case, then his "high-quality" imitation—Tepepa, who's actually on the list—doesn't really count either.

Other major omissions that deserve some attention:
My Name is Nobody — that definitely should have made the cut too.
2. Keom (though I’m not exactly a huge fan, to be honest)
Then there are those three Trinity comedies—I'm not exactly a fan myself, but they’re essential. They basically defined the whole "Classic Western" concept for most people, even if I personally find them a bit much.
Sabat.
5. Face to Face

And just as a little bonus, I’m throwing in one that's relatively under the radar—honestly, in my opinion, it beats half the stuff on this list: And God Said to Cain Probably his best role in Star Wars.