Pet Peeves I Have With Reviews

While I totally agree with #1 (who wouldn't?), I only agree with the second two to some extent. Whereas I personally wouldn't write a comparison review or a track-by-track review, I do see the usefulness in both. 

You have already highlighted the usefulness of a comparison review so I won't expand. However, I personally like track-by-track reviews while I'm listening to an album. I like some in-depth analysis of all the tracks sometimes. I wouldn't consider such a review the ideal review to read when looking for new albums, but I consider them useful while listening.

If these were the only reviews for albums, I would agree. But when albums often have 10+ reviews and sometimes a lot more, I prefer a variety. It's just more interesting that way and offers multiple perspectives. 

I agree with all three to some extent, although I like to have at least one track-by-track review on the site for each album.

I have a tough time with single-paragraph reviews as well, and I try to avoid those. Of course, if they're on the shorter side it isn't a problem, but it really bugs me when there is a really long review as only one paragraph.

The other two really depend for me. Comparing an album to other bands can be very useful when it comes to lesser-known acts, and some track-by-track reviews are helpful as well. It all depends on the review and the person who writes it, though.

I don't have a problem with one-paragraph reviews because I concentrate on reading them  

Threads like this is the ones who scares newbies from contributing with reviews at this site. Which is us shooting ourselves in the foot............ or head. We need more reviews. I have never seen a 6 months old baby run a marathon = don't criticize newbies for their first reviews. Let them grow into the role and routine of reviewing and let them find their own voice and own personality. Diversity is very much encouraged. 

As long as the guidelines is followed, everyone here should be encouraged to review albums and contribute with more stuff to this community. Everyone !

Nightshine wrote: Most of the people here can't write reviews anyway, and their bias towards symphonic/70s prog sickens me.

Thanks for sharing.

I disagree with point three completely except to the extent that a track by track with just a cursory line about each track and nothing else by way of a review is useless.  Otherwise, a breakdown of each track can be useful.  I cannot possibly tell if YOU will enjoy the album I enjoyed, I cannot read your mind.   And if I simply write my opinion about my album that it rules or it sucks,  how does that help you decide either?  You could say that several votes in favour of an album count for something, but in that case, why read reviews, the ratings should be enough.  By describing the music, the reviewer can tell you what is in the album and then you can make up your mind whether you want to try that or not.  

progkidjoel wrote: Epignosis wrote: Don't read reviews that bug you. [/thread]

My biggest pet peeve is people who repeatedly review bands they hate. You then get a poor quality review thats just shown by people who are obviously going to give 2 and 1 star reviews to a band because their judgement of what is truly there and the potential of the album is clouded. It's okay to not like a band who is not for you, but repeatedly giving bad reviews to their albums is just plain annoying. It then hurts the average rating and peoples opinions who might be willing to get into the band.

^I don´t see a problem with 1 and 2 star reviews given by the same reviewer to a certain act. It depends on how the review is written. Who would want to read 5 star reviews only anyways??? I like to read critical reviews of albums that I enjoy, to try and see it from the other side of the fence. As long as the reviews are well written I have no problem with that.