Objective review about genres you dislike

Peter wrote: MikeEnRegalia wrote: Opinions can be interesting, too. I'd say that I don't want emotions in a review ... at least not if emotions are the basis/motive for writing the review. The motivation should always be to help to reader, to increase their knowledge about the item reviewed. Yes, God forbid that we should respond to art with emotions! Let's have machines make it and rate it! See "Art of the Third Reich...." Sorry -- got a trifle emotional there.

Well. u got me all wrong, but u have your opinion and I mine...hahahahahha What I ment was that a review isn't a tool for the person who writes it, i's to give an image to the reader, if it's something to buy/like or not. Too many personal opinions and too little informative description simply ruins that for the reader, I think. Take it or leave it, That's MY opinion

lostrom wrote: Peter wrote: MikeEnRegalia wrote: Opinions can be interesting, too. I'd say that I don't want emotions in a review ... at least not if emotions are the basis/motive for writing the review. The motivation should always be to help to reader, to increase their knowledge about the item reviewed. Yes, God forbid that we should respond to art with emotions! Let's have machines make it and rate it! See "Art of the Third Reich...." Sorry -- got a trifle emotional there. Well. u got me all wrong, but u have your opinion and I mine...hahahahahha What I ment was that a review isn't a tool for the person who writes it, i's to give an image to the reader, if it's something to buy/like or not. Too many personal opinions and too little informative description simply ruins that for the reader, I think. Take it or leave it, That's MY opinion

Ok -- I can go along with that. Thanks for explaining!

I see what you mean, and I use exaggeration to (forcefully) make my point -- not to insult you.

Glad you didn't take it personally -- interesting subject!

Peter wrote: Ok -- I can go along with that. Thanks for explaining!   I see what you mean, and I use exaggeration to (forcefully) make my point -- not to insult you. Glad you didn't take it personally -- interesting subject!

No problems, at least u had me explaining correctly, which I sometimes not do

Thanks for all your replies so far ... I think we can all agree that good reviews will always contain facts, opinions and emotions. And even if the review is 95% emotive, it can still be very entertaining, although it tells little about the item reviewed. Maybe the best advice is to try to be sure that you know sufficient similar artists before writing a review. And to give the album a few spins AND enough time to grow on you

TBWART wrote: Peter wrote: lostrom wrote: I rather have information than opinions in a review! Opinions are for those who wants to shine themselfs when writing, information is for those who puts the reader first! How can we respond to art without involving opinion? "This painting is 6' by 8.' It was done with oils, on canvas. There is a preponderance of blue and red. The subject is a vase of mixed flowers. The artist was 42 when he painted it. He lived in Paris." Rivetting! Or: "The band has four members. They are named Peter, Paul, Steve and Bob, and they play guitars, bass, drums and keyboards, respectively. The CD has a photo of a red car on the cover. The usual time signature is 4/4." Gripping, and so... informative! As soon as I tell you who they "sound like," or attempt to categorize the music, or even tell you if I like it, I am veering into the verboten opinion territory. Art appeals (mainly) to the emotions, not the intellect, and each of us responds in our unique way, based upon all the factors that make one an individual. That's MY opinion.... Whoops -- sorry! couldn't be more true

Excuse me, my dear overall knowing gentleman!!! Please read the rest of our debate!! We turned up in having the same opinion, so don't make a thing out of nothing!! Ok????

MikeEnRegalia wrote: Examples: - Someone who doesn't like Death Metal reviews Opeth - A "Metal Head" reviews 70s King Crimson

i agree with reviewers should stick to the genres they like for them most part

but i just have to say that your example are dead wrong

many Metalheads look down on Opeth, i would imagine Death metalheads especially

and there are a whole helluvalot of metalheads that love Crimson

no offence, but you using those examples is like giving a review of a genre you dislike

Aaron

I think it's possible to write reviews with the intention of being objective if you appreciate what the artist is trying to achieve.

At least, that's what I try to do in my reviews. It's an attempt to blend what I enjoy about analysing music in technical depth with the non-technical "touchy-feely" likes and dislikes; e.g. I dislike Dream Theater's music on "Images and Words", but can't help being impressed by the precision virtuosity.

I've reviewed some of my favourites, but those tend to be my least objective reviews, as I "get off" on the subject matter. If a piece of music excites me, then I feel the need to share that excitement in the hope that others will feel the same thing. At the same time, I do try to get at the technical reasons behind my liking for the piece - no matter how tenuous!

When I review any album - even albums I dislike, I focus on the music. What is happening in the music that brings about the effects the band are seeking to portray? Do I understand what they're trying to do, even if I don't like it? What exactly are the band doing - what resources are they using (musical styles, instrumentation, etc.), who do they remind me of, what clever technical devices are they using - anything that's interesting in the construction of the music itself. Then I try to put that into more digestible English...

Historical tid-bits are always fascinating - and DJPanurge's fantastic background on the story behind "Kid A" and "Amnesiac" is exactly the sort of stuff I like to read in other's reviews.

I think my review of ELP's debut album strikes a reasonable balance between objectivity and subjectivity - I point out the standout facets of the music that I do and don't like and, even though I dislike the album on the whole, I still awarded it 4 stars - which is appropriate for a prog album that should be in every proggers collection!

In short, I think it's possible to admire what a band does even if it doesn't tickle the musical tastebuds - but there's no point reveiwing an album if all you're going to do is go in with all guns blazing against something you hate.

Easy Livin wrote: Peter wrote: ^ I (and others) have said it all before. Can anyone find (and post) that old thread about this very subject, please? Here's one Pierre, I only remember it becuase I started that one! I think there are others though. http://www.progarchives.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=1080

Thanks Easy, you techno-wiz, you -- you're a peach!

That's one -- but not the one I was thinking of. I know that I took part, and I think that it may have been in the Collaborator's forum, after some of my fellow reviewers took issue with my (unflattering) Dream Theater review. I don't know how to post old threads like that, ....