Reviews discussion

Interesting idea, though perhaps, if there isn't one already (there is such a topic) there could be a thorough front page guide that people are asked to read before submitting reviews that offers tips beyond contravening guidelines, and perhaps quizzes and practice exercises with links to other helpful guides.  I belonged to Zoetrope.com virtual studios back in '99-2000 -- great site for working on screenplays (some were greenlit, I flubbed when I got my chance to make my pitch to Francis Ford Coppola and other producers at the site).  Anyway, to be allowed to upload your screenplay, one had to write five constructive reviews of others screenplays.  There was guide to read before one's own submission on how to review the screenplays (they had to be very long, detailed reviews that offered structures for reviewing).  That would put people off, be very hard on many people with English as a second langauge, and I wouldn't expect the same level of formality here.  There one's reviews would be critiques too, and if they weren't professional and thorough enough, then that would count against your screenplay being accepted.

Now for the real reason I clicked on this thread:

Certif1ed wrote: I wonder how many times I need to report this guy before he gets the message;   http://www.progarchives.com/Review.asp?id=178163 "I’m not a big fan of this band and I even think that Red Queen To Gryphon Three is a bit overrated among prog fans (at least on this site). "

Although it's been edited, i expect that due to the caching feature I am seeing the original version.  Hope it's okay if I reprint what I see...

................................................................................................................

I’m not a big fan of this band and I even think that Red Queen To Gryphon Three is a bit overrated among fans . However, I do rate the much underrated Treason album with four stars, definitely my favourite Gryphon album. Compared to Red Queen To Gryphon Three, Raindance is a bit more rock influenced. You might think that, since I like Treason so much, which was an even rockier album than Raindance, I should like this one too. Well, as a matter fact I don’t, very much.

This album is very uneven and the material is rather weak. Apart from the Beatles cover, which is nice, but no more, Wallbanger is the first track on this album to even grab my attention. It sounds good, but nothing remarkable. (Ein Klein) Heldenleben is supposed to be a masterpiece, but I just don’t see it. Sure, it is the best and only memorable track on this album. It is enjoyable to listen to, but a masterpiece it is not. They might have been a bit influenced by Yes at this time, but this is far away from Yes in both style and quality. Don’t get me wrong, they are excellent musicians, and all the instruments are very well played, but the composition is not that strong.

It seems to me that Gryphon ran out of good ideas here with this album. Most of the compositions are rather second rate and they are not as experimental as earlier albums. But don’t let this album deter you from checking out the much better Treason album, where the regained their strength.

This uneven album is really for collectors/fans only.

.................................................................................................................

I love every Gryphon album, so I'm biased, and think this album is better than he thinks, but that's just my taste.  I agree about Treason being "underrated" and would say that the debut is too.  Yes, i know mnay hate the underrated and overrated word, but it's in common parlance (is it fair to say that someone asseses or values something too highly, in some cases, but I think there are cases within certian frameworks of analysis where you can definiitely say something is held in too high esteem when the criteria have been defined well, and foften following from commonly accpeted assumptions).

I'll go the specific quote:

"I’m not a big fan of this band and I even think that Red Queen To Gryphon Three is a bit overrated among prog fans (at least on this site). "

That's his opinion, and I take no offence at him saying it.  I take it that this reviewer does this quite a bit, though.  Instead of reporting, which seems a bit formal when it comes to amateur reviews that are not overtly abusive, perhaps a friendly PM would be in order (maybe it's been tried).  The review is about Raindance, so the comment is unnecessary about Red Queen, and is better backed up in a review about that album.  I love Red Queen, and I have complaints with it, as it's formulaic (each tracks follows such a similar compositional path).  Though it doesn't get better than, say, Lament in prog (in my opinion), the Midnight Mushrumps albums has more variety which makes it rather more satisfying on the whole for me.

Anyway, saying an album "is a bit overrated amongst fans" doesn't come across as very intelligent or constructive.  Given more context, it would be fine.  In and of itself, I just don't see it as abusive, but clearly this is seen to be habitual by the reviewer. And been a while since I read the guidelines, but I do remember where it could contravene the reviews guidelines when it comes to referring to other reviews and opinions of an album.

Edited by Logan - July 25 2008 at 16:32

The T wrote: http://www.progarchives.com/Review.asp?id=178799   This review is poorly written and doesn't look worthy of a serious website. Maybe some editing would help, especially some punctuation changes and erasing the "no music" parts. Bad as it may be for the reviewer, nobody would ever call ABACAB a no-music record...

hahahha...  he gets bonus points for coining 'no wave' as a musical genre

same here....   I'm sure Bob will spank my sweet little ass if he has to move one more of my posts from this thread...

but thanks for the FYI...  and the Paul  Harvey flashback hahhaha

*sneaks out backdoor..*

micky wrote: The T wrote: http://www.progarchives.com/Review.asp?id=178799   This review is poorly written and doesn't look worthy of a serious website. Maybe some editing would help, especially some punctuation changes and erasing the "no music" parts. Bad as it may be for the reviewer, nobody would ever call ABACAB a no-music record... hahahha...  he gets bonus points for coining 'no wave' as a musical genre

No Wave actually does exist, and his use of it in that context makes no sense.  No Wave is like anti-new wave (so if something is trying to be new wave, it can't possibly be no wave).  Think early Sonic Youth, James Chance & the Contortions, early Diamanda Galas, Glenn Branca, The Work, This Heat's debut, early Nick Cave & the Bad Seeds, etc.

Easy Livin wrote: No this is the correct thread Micky! No spanking for you.

In the other thread Bob

Ricochet wrote: From The reviews reporting thread:   b_olariu wrote: Chris Stacey wrote: http://www.progarchives.com/Review.asp?id=125317 This review appears to be copied almost verbatim from Sean Trane/Greenback's reviews and the Bio....   Maybe you are right but only the first sentence from the bio "BRAND X is, no doubt about it, one the most original and well-known British groups of the seventies jazz/rock fusion scene. Made of musicians that are technicians at their respective instruments and that are as inspired as talented."  And i don't understand what is wrong with that, it's the description of the band made by PA collaborators, it's not taken from another site or something like that. It's not allowed to wrote something that is already said if it's a description or a bio??? And i don't think my review is copy paste , Sean Tran's review is diffrent , at least is what i see, with the exception last sentence   "A classic fusion album of the times but the real interestis that , as opposed to contemporary groups such as Forever or Gyra or Report , this had a definitely English twist to it and it was a welcome change but this is not really Canterbury style either although many people have done that amalgalm. IMHO, however , the better times for this sort of music had already passed along with Mahavishnu, Davis , Nucleus, Soft Machine, Isotope etc.... Nuclear Burn is simply outstanding and the rest of the tracks are all impressive in terms of dexterity/virtuosity. "   And greenback's review is also diffrent "This is the best Brand X's albums. Phil Collins (Mister 1976) is at his best, and when one says that he was one of the best drummers in the WORLD, the ultimate reference is on this VERY record! It contains outstanding impossible drums parts, especially on "Nuclear burn" and "Running of trees"! If you think Collins' best drums work is on Selling England by the pound, then you would easily change your mind at the listen of Unorthodox behaviour. If you said it is on Trick of the tail, then I think you would love the record here. At the same level & intensity as on "Los Endos", Collins here literally flies over everybody's heads. 1976 is the year of Phil Collins, no doubt! Now let's talk about the album: it contains an absolutely mind blowing, ultra fast, loud and sophisticated Wal-like bass. The music is dangerously loaded and fast! There are some complex acoustic guitars (Touch wood), free style jazzy keyboards, tons of Fender Rhodes and gross electric guitar sounds without distortion: I do not like very much the guitar sound and the solos, despite the technical performance of the musician is outstanding: the rythmic guitar is better. There are some excellent xylophone parts ("Unorthodox behaviour"), and some surprisingly good piano notes ("Touch wood", "Born ugly"). This is an excellent fusion album. EXTREMELY RECOMMENDED! " Si finaly give some response if i made some mistake posting here this message     Yeah, but surely you yourself must know that plagiarism (sorry to use this hard term,but I think, after all, that this is the accusation we're talking about) means all kind of copycat writing, without crediting the original author. We have medicine, science, socio-cultural books plagiarized completely and there's no "exception" from defining "plagiarism". So I'm not sure if the line "BRAND X is, no doubt about it, one the most original and well-known British groups of the seventies jazz/rock fusion scene. Made of musicians that are technicians at their respective instruments and that are as inspired as talented.", even if part of the bio, can be an "exception". Now, there's only one other line copied exactly from Sean Trane. Remember, it's not about Sean Trane's whole review being different, it's about that line/sentence that's copied exactly. b_olariu: Nuclear Burn is simply outstanding and the rest of the tracks are all impressive in terms of dexterity/virtuosity. Sean Trane: Nuclear Burn is simply outstanding and the rest of the tracks are all impressive in terms of dexterity/virtuosity. That being said, I couldn't actually trace a line copied from greenback's review. With all this, from your review, b_olariu: BRAND X is, no doubt about it, one the most original and well-known British groups of the seventies jazz/rock fusion scene. Made of musicians that are technicians at their respective instruments and that are as inspired as talented. Absolut amazing from start to finish, this is a masterpiece of jazz-fusion. Again Phil Collins, is beyond super, not to mention the rest. About the music, all track are sounds very tight, well played. Nuclear Burn is simply outstanding and the rest of the tracks are all impressive in terms of dexterity/virtuosity. 5 stars, highly recommended, one of the best jazz albums ever. ...the part in blue is the only one you wrote yourself. I'm surprised, I must confess, given that your knowledge in prog extends so deep, so great, and your short yet inspired overall reviews are valuable.

Ricochet, with all do respect to your (obviously) massive vocabulary and thought capacity, you do have a very, umm..... progressive way of putting that into sentences.

Ricochet is secretly a ghost writer for Jon Anderson's lyrics.

Easy Livin wrote: Ricochet is secretly a ghost writer for Jon Anderson's lyrics.

No, I was hired by Omar Rodriguez Lopez instead.

But, nota bene, I was not the lyricist of Bedlam In Goliath, if you found it to be disastrous.

I admit that I was  though, if you found it great.