On the other topic, the discussion came up that one's opinion of an album is important on a "review" of th ealbum.

 

I stated that opinions belong in the forums, not in a review.

 

A review should be a discussion of the ideas and what you see, and explained why you say what you say ... in other words I have asked that "reviewers" in this board raise their standards into a form of literary criticism ... that helps make the music better and more important.

 

Leave the opinions at home and write something insightful.

 

I came from a literary family and a very large group of literary studies, and critics. None of them gave an opinion without explaining what they saw and how. And this I am asking you folks to do as well.

 

As it turns out, I am not the only one that sees this ... and now comes the time to ask ... do you want your reviews to just be another drunk bar room talk about the music you love?

 

http://emusician.com/interviews/in_the_mix/in_mix_everyones_critic/" rel="nofollow - http://emusician.com/interviews/in_the_mix/in_mix_everyones_critic/

 

Enjoy it ... but some of you won't read it because it is a bit long ... ohhh damn ... someone has something to say!

Not sure that "change" is what is needed.

 

I just think that the leadership requesting a bit more from its "reviewers" is not too much to ask ... except maybe one person or two ... but then, that would be par for the course.

 

Again, and I posted this elsewhere, reviews should have a standard ... period ... and they should be checked or approved. In my book, opinions are not enough, and should not be the main thrust of a review.

Maybe not a change, but I think it would be good if reviewers were keeping in mind these points of Mr. Wilson:

- We artists are a sensitive bunch, so even though we shouldn’t care what a 15-year-old Metallica fan writing from his bedroom in Utah thinks about our music, a lot of us do.

not sure about this one, it doesn't follow--  he's saying he and his band are such delicate things that they care about the view of a young amateur and then goes onto explain why the reviews of said people are of poor quality.  It's like when girlband TLC sings "I don't want no scrub, a scrub is a guy who can't get no love from me" :   this is his problem not the 15-year-old Metallica fan.

It would not be too bad for reviewers, from 15 y.o fans to most prolific ones, to remember this. 

 

If reviews were simply based on facts, not only would they be boring, but they could be very misleading. For example, a track me include the most technically excellent guitar solo in the world, but when I listen to it, it sounds dreadful to me. Surely the proposal is not that the review simply reflects the technical perfection?

 

Of course we should be respectful towards the artists, reviews should never degenerate into personal insults. Constructive critisism is perfectly valid though.

 

So when one is publishing an oeuvre and sells it rather expensively (no more than the usual industry prizes, though) , he must accept criticism that comes with it... I do understand that critics are a bit harder to take when somebody didn't pay for it and still criticizes, though... but it doesn't mean the points made are less valid...  

 

yes everyone's got opinions (even Wilson), like they've got an a****le... and sometimes diarrhea strikes and sh*t comes out, usually smelling foul ... but you reap what you sow.... and as an artist, you should know that better than most humans...

 

~+~+~+~+

 

This is the old Objective/Subjective debate again - music is not a statement of factual information even though it is composed of factual elements, such as notes, melodies and rhythms ordered by instrumentation and orchestration; it is designed to be subjective, to create and stir emotions, to effect more than just objective assessment of those factual components and there it is valid to have an opinion of that subjectiveness. If that were not the case then all music would be equal and reviews unnecessary, just as a review of a telephone directory is unnecessary even if it does contain all the same words as War And Peace but in a different order. If the music does not stir you to be subjective then it is as meaningful as a Sanskrit telephone directory to an Inuit and the objective assessment of that music becomes pointless.

Even a professional critic gives us his or her opinion.

Well I just don't understand Moshkito's point at all. Who can seperate ones personal view of something and what they feel about something when writing about it. What would pure "facts" tell us?

Easy Livin wrote: Of course we should be respectful towards the artists, reviews should never degenerate into personal insults. Constructive critisism is perfectly valid though.

Atavachron wrote: Well a good writer is also an artist, why don't they deserve the same sensitivity?

For example, I don't like some reviewers' styles, but If I'll risk to critisize them I already know the answers: "It's their right to express themselves in a way they like",  "Many site visitors like their reviews", "Come and write better reviews" etc.

There is a community, we have virtual (or real) friends and even a constructive critisism can look as a personal attack.

From the other hand, everybody (well, some of us) thinks that he has the right to teach artists: Keith Emerson should not do this, Phil Collins should not do that and so on. 

I suspect that Moshkito made this thread due to me. From a comment I made elswhere. Glad I'm not going mad.

It's best to back up the opinions with examples.

We don't always do that.

So what?

Read, and use the opinions that matter to you.

Discount the rest.

Problem solved.

What I don't think is being used correctly is the rating system. A 1 star does not mean its "krapp, horrible, junk, never should been issued, don't buy it"...yet people use it to express their opinion more when they feel that is the case.

If I am not mistaken there is no rating for "junk".

 

Maybe Moshkito needs to "review" his original post and amend it to convey his feelings better.....sometimes it is hard for some to express their true feelings in the first shot.

 

All I know is in another thread he said reviews shouldn't be about opinions (that's the gist) and I disagreed. I wish I kinew whitch thread.

 

Although with my Zune Marketplace account I can pretty much preview anything, download it and then decide if I want to get the CD or vinyl.

 

So again, I think Mosh is pretty smart I just wonder if he is articulating himself well enough...but then again who am I to judge anyone.

 

I think this is missing the point of the discussion and taking things a bit further than necessary.

 

The request is for the writing to be a bit more than just a bar room discussion, which is a fun discussion amidst friends, not a "review" or a "literary criticism" as things are usually done and marked up in Europe.

 

In America, no one cares because "literary criticism" doesn't exist and the only thing that you can find is kissash stuff on stars ... so because the music is about that ... you are critical ... and if you want to write a review about that do so, but don't sit here like in a drunken rumble after a few extra beers on a Saturday Night with all of us ... but in the end, politeness is what gets you somewhere ... it may not be your favorite .. fine ... DON'T WRITE ABOUT IT ... but no ... your ego has to say something ... and at that point the review dies, because you are NOT being objective.

 

Please separate your personal feelings on this ... has nothing to do with anything else. Make it look like you are having to write an essay for your English teacher (Dean of course!) and it is due tomorrow, or Snow Dog, the enforcer, is not going to be very happy!

 

Forget the person stuff that you don't like that you find hippocritical ... show your class and ability by talking about something else that you find better ... and leave PT behind.

 

My preference is for not writing about bands of things that I have no preference with ... I am not going to sit here and trash something I don't like ... but a somment like the one above belongs in an board/forum, not in a review. Any teacher would give yo a D at best and tell you to go home and rewrite it, by taking the anger out. Which as you wrote it, you didn't do!

 

And that is a very fair request. IF, you can not write without the anger, and put together a review, then it is not a review ... it is a personal feeling that tickles your bullocks ... but I'm sure that you are intelligent enough to write something orderly and without the need to be angry and still make your point.

 

I don't want to suggest that any Joe that wants to review anything can NOT do a review ... what I am saying is that we should have 4 or 5 things that are required in the review ... and him saying that blah and blah is sh*t ... is not a review!

 

Now if he puts down the 10 explanations of why, and then the chemical explanations, and then even shows you pictorial valiadation of the statement ... how the hell can we disagree with him ... but notice that his "thesis" did not need any anger to get the point across!  It's just very Jean Genet! ((must read of course is "Our Lady of Flowers"), which is just right about the point here!

 

Please ...

 

That's like saying that Picasso never did ... or Mozart, where half of his stuff was so repetitive it was boring! ... or anyone else.

 

Ohhh c'mon ... like Harry Potter isn't? Or Chainsaw Massacre 69?

 

Give it a break ... that is not even a review of their work! That's just a comment that YOU are not hearing what you want ... and my suggestion would be ... go listen to something else! Why would you want to waste your time with crap? ... where is the logic in writing that, when there is so much good stuff that you can be writing about?

 

In between on a forum or something, just say ... nah, grew out of it 10 years ago ... end of story ...

 

It makes it all look like the very typical discussion and arguments that we have that the public "owns" the artist ... and they don't, and never will ... and if you don't like it, specially in the advertising age, go buy Lady Gaga! Don't waste your money on PT, or bothering saying anything!

When you go to graduate school and write a paper off your opinion alone, and unfformatted ... I'm going to tell you ... good luck being in graduate school next quarter, because you WON'T.

 

And the same fate is going to befit us here if we don't improve our literary standard so we stop discussing these things like we don't care how it's done. If you want to be quoted like Wiki ... you have to get better, and all you're saying is that you don't care, because you think that your opinion is more important than anyone else's ... that is called in some circles "petty tyranny".

 

You can have an opinion, of course, and it is a part of the review ... but people are confusing the discussion and not reading the subtext ... transform your opinion into an intelligent discussion and comment ... not into a single paragraph saying that it is full of crap!

 

There is a massive difference ... massive!

 

Don't you think that would be a bit personal and not worth my time or yours?

 

I just happened onto that article and it was a very good article and I sympathise with Steven from a literary point of view ... I was born in a house with 40k books of Portuguese, Brazilian and Spanish Literature and while I have not gotten to the big banana in the literary circles, I can tell you that my dad, in my family, did, and he is in the Brittanica, if you care to be curious enough ... and all I'm asking and suggesting, is ... that we raise the standard a bit ... Snow Dog might not enjoy it, because his one word euphemisms might take a hit ... but that's ok ... he can do 2 word euphemisms and anything else too!

 

Basically, if you or I were teaching a class and had to grade folks on these things, a good 25% would not get very good ratings ... and you and I would ask for a rewrite, or it would be removed. But what you are saying is that you want to write whatever you want and no one is gonna do anything about it ... and that's ok ... and after a while all you have is good stuff buried along side all the crap ... how nice ... well, to be fiar, flowers do grow on dung!

Not one person has disagreed with you about that. That's not WE mean by a review must be opinion. I sometimes wonder if you read OUR posts.

 

A CD review to me is 3 things:

1. an expose of the type of music you will hear

2. an opinion on whether or not the music appeals

3. a detailed informed analysis of the overall purpose, concept and thematic content.

 

And you can write academically or in an analytical sense, or you can choose to be more personal. Either way the review must at least review the music, some of the tracks should be mentioned and the artists styles should get a mention.

 

Theres no worng or right way i guess but a review with at least some of these things gains my respect. Reviewers that churn out one review after another that just goes for the jugular - stating the music is crap without any justification soon wears thin, and nobody can trust that type of review.   

We all read it ages ago when you first posted it.