My PA rant: Stop reviewing sub-genres you dislike

moshkito wrote:   I will ask again ... we need to raise the level and quality of the reviews ... and the people in charge of each area, would be the ones responsible for making sure that the reviews are worth the salt and show PA as the quality, and the intelligent and information site that it can be and is ... but it is all buried in too much garbage!

friso wrote: When I started out on PA I did conceive the 'charts' for the genres as leading instruments for getting more progressive rock. And yes, in many cases these charts are misleading (as with Krautrock legend Can) and I learned to read reviews instead. In the meanwhile I got to learn about who are my favorite reviewers, peoples with good writing skills and a similar   approach to the genre. With the more radical genres on PA we get to read a lot of non-sense with the more known albums indeed. "I really don't understand what this music is about and what people like about it" -> good reason for NOT writing a review. People should only review music they understand. Some reviewers are just too emotional about spending 10 bucks on an album they just can't acquire the tastes for. Bottom-line. If you give low ratings, make sure you explain why and give the impression you really listened and understood the music. Then it's ok to review genres you don't like in my book.

Man Overboard wrote: So, I get the impression that most of the people contributing in this thread (and by that I mean pages 1 and 3, perhaps I should read page 2 before speaking so boldly) aren't the people the OP is calling out. Yes, ignorant people reviewing things willfully ignorantly is stupid. Yes, it's easy to spot when someone is just trolling. Not my place to recommend discipline, but such behavior does bring down the Archives, especially on the instances it fills the first page.  In the end, this problem is much more problematic in the mainstream press. Whether it's books, music, videogames, or film, seeing a prominent reviewer slamming a work while so completely obviously missing even the basics of what -makes- the genre ensures that said genre will remain niche to the public at large.

So, I get the impression that most of the people contributing in this thread (and by that I mean pages 1 and 3, perhaps I should read page 2 before speaking so boldly) aren't the people the OP is calling out. Yes, ignorant people reviewing things willfully ignorantly is stupid. Yes, it's easy to spot when someone is just trolling. Not my place to recommend discipline, but such behavior does bring down the Archives, especially on the instances it fills the first page. 

Triceratopsoil wrote: Dean I'm impressed you worked your way through that whole thing

Dean has been going above and beyond the call of duty lately. But I'm afraid that if he keeps reading moshkito's posts he may go mad. 

Dean I'm impressed you worked your way through that whole thing

DON'T SHOUT IT MAKES PEOPLE WONDER IF THIS WHOLE THREAD WAS ILL-CONCEIVED AND POORLY EXECUTED. A RANT THREAD HAS NEVER CHANGED ANYTHING IN THE HISTORY OF THE INTERNET. 

As I said when you were complaining earlier, there is a place for people who are not already fans of a certain style to talk about the most well known/accessible albums of it so others who have no experience with the genre know what they are getting into. Especially if they share the taste of the person writing the negative review. 

Slartibartfast wrote: Snow Dog wrote:   I swear people answer me as if I know nothing. I need to take a break from this place before I blow a f**king fuse. I think in this day and age you are more likely to trip freakin' circuit breaker.

Ian is old skool.

It's entirely possible to favourably review an album you don't like and vice versa. I don't award stars on how much I like an album, but rather how much merit I think it has. Most of the time I'd like to think my likes and merit are similar, but (for example) I intensely dislike 'In The Court of the Crimson King'. I gave it 5 stars though, because you can hear how significantly it influenced a generation of musicians.

So why not review albums in a genre you like less than others? The implication your ratings will be lower just isn't borne out by the evidence: RIO/Avant prog, my least liked genre, actually has my highest average rating (3.64) followed by my second-least-liked genre, Jazz Rock Fusion (at 3.5). My favourites (crossover, symphonic, heavy etc) are lower because I listen to both the good and the bad, while in the genres I dislike I only listen to the better albums.

Wow, great discussion, and lots of passion. that's what I like about PA personally.
    It's funny this topic just came up because in the last week I noticed several review for ELP albums by someone who obviously has a big hate on for them. And that's fine except that the "review" wasn't a review at all. It was spewing hate plain and simple and for that I have no tolerance. The 'reviewer' (and I use that term loosely) clearly has no idea of how to review a recording. So while it may affect the overall rating of an album it means nothing to me because he said nothing.
   Art, like food, is a very personal thing. You can review a meal by detailing ingrediants, presentation and overall preparedness without really liking the taste. The same goes for music. Tell me about the recording, the song writing, the performance or production. Is it a step forward or backward for the artist based on previous efforts (I know that can be subjective).
   But please oh please, comments like "I hate his organs" don't belong in any review. I don't really care what you like or don't like. This isn't about you, it's supposed to be about the music. So tell me what the issue is.
   At the end of the day I truly believe that most people know whether a reviewer is truly contributing to the whole or just pounding their chest. Those apes are mostly dismissed for what they are the the others will rise above.