Trolls scare a band from PA

thellama73 wrote: Dean wrote: Every artist who releases an album says in the press "This is the best thing we've ever done." And I believe they mean that - of course several years (or even months) down the line they'll change their mind (usually just before they release the next one). Yeah, but there's a difference between "the best thing we've ever done" and "the best thing anyone has ever done." Of course you want to be improving on your previous work and producing the best product you can, but that doesn't mean you are capable of writing revolutionary masterpieces.

Edited by Ivan_Melgar_M - November 13 2012 at 21:54

Epignosis wrote: Dean wrote: thellama73 wrote: But it specifically doesn't mean "one of my most favorite albums." It specifically means "Essential. A masterpiece of progressive rock music." That is the way our ratings system is set up. Now tell that to everyone who's rated a non-masterpiece album with a 5-star rating. Including all the collabs and fat bottomed girls who rated Still The Waters as a masterpiece I don't rate my own stuff, but if I did, I'd give StW either a 3 or 4.  I love the compositions but I could have fixed a lot in the recording aspect (which I am [slowly] working on now).  I have not added the album to bandcamp yet for that reason- I am going back and making adjustments. I genuinely think Refulgence is a solid four.  Which is what I go for.  I don't go for "five star," because I think that is something special that means I made a powerful connection with a listener.  I shoot for "excellent."  Most albums for me?  No amount of fiddling or tweaking will take it from a four to a five.  A five star rating here from me is special- it means the content of the album changed me in some powerful way. As for those who rated my first album highly, three things: 1. I never expected to see such a reception.  I was skeptical of it myself.  Everyone who reviewed it thusly assured me they were being honest. 2. A flood of scathing reviews came in shortly thereafter.  They were more helpful to me. 3. There are other fat bottomed girls who like my music?

It wasn't a criticism Rob - just making a point that people give 5-star ratings to albums they like/love for whatever reason regardless of what it says in the rating description/guideline. Those people must have noticed the production and recording and seen past that to the music itself and made that connection to what the music was conveying. Quite a few masterpieces suffer from production flaws that could be fixed, but as we have seen with some remix/remasters and re-recordings, fixing those doesn't necessarily make things better. Errors or weakneses in the composition/structure are something else - a masterpiece is a masterpiece regardless of how well it was recorded - there are good versions and bad versions of Beethoven's 9th but it's still a masterpiece.   Tweeking and fiddling cannot make 4-star album a 5-star album, but rethinking and revising a 4-star tune can make it a 5-star tune - Pink Floyd used to do did this all the time, "Set The Controls", "Saucerful of Secrets", "Becareful With That Axe" became 5-star live tunes after they were recorded in the studio;  "Nothing, Parts 1–24" was worked and reworked live and in the studio before it became a 5-star composition we now know as "Echoes"; "Ravin' an Droolin'" wasn't a 5-star tune but it became one after being reworked as "Sheep"; Rick Wright's "Violent Sequence" originally intended for Zabriski Point became a sublime 5-star tune as "Us And Them". 

Dean wrote: thellama73 wrote: But it specifically doesn't mean "one of my most favorite albums." It specifically means "Essential. A masterpiece of progressive rock music." That is the way our ratings system is set up. Now tell that to everyone who's rated a non-masterpiece album with a 5-star rating. Including all the collabs and fat bottomed girls who rated Still The Waters as a masterpiece

I don't rate my own stuff, but if I did, I'd give StW either a 3 or 4.  I love the compositions but I could have fixed a lot in the recording aspect (which I am [slowly] working on now).  I have not added the album to bandcamp yet for that reason- I am going back and making adjustments.

I genuinely think Refulgence is a solid four.  Which is what I go for.  I don't go for "five star," because I think that is something special that means I made a powerful connection with a listener.  I shoot for "excellent."  Most albums for me?  No amount of fiddling or tweaking will take it from a four to a five.  A five star rating here from me is special- it means the content of the album changed me in some powerful way.

As for those who rated my first album highly, three things:

1. I never expected to see such a reception.  I was skeptical of it myself.  Everyone who reviewed it thusly assured me they were being honest.

2. A flood of scathing reviews came in shortly thereafter.  They were more helpful to me.

3. There are other fat bottomed girls who like my music?  


Edited by Epignosis - November 13 2012 at 19:12

But it specifically doesn't mean "one of my most favorite albums." It specifically means "Essential. A masterpiece of progressive rock music." That is the way our ratings system is set up.

Dean wrote: Every artist who releases an album says in the press "This is the best thing we've ever done." And I believe they mean that - of course several years (or even months) down the line they'll change their mind (usually just before they release the next one).

Yeah, but there's a difference between "the best thing we've ever done" and "the best thing anyone has ever done." Of course you want to be improving on your previous work and producing the best product you can, but that doesn't mean you are capable of writing revolutionary masterpieces.

Epignosis wrote: Dean wrote: Iván has a very valid point - if a band does not think their lastest album is a masterpiece then why bother releasing it? I recall making a point similar to this in a blog about self-released albums - if a band cannot make an effort to do the best they can then why should I expend any energy in listening to it.   Anyway, we allow artists to rate their own albums and they can give themselves any rating they like. Because we still want to hear and enjoy the three and four star albums?  Most bands do their very best but don't produce masterpieces.  Nothing at all wrong with that.

Epignosis wrote: Dean wrote: Iván has a very valid point - if a band does not think their lastest album is a masterpiece then why bother releasing it? I recall making a point similar to this in a blog about self-released albums - if a band cannot make an effort to do the best they can then why should I expend any energy in listening to it.   Anyway, we allow artists to rate their own albums and they can give themselves any rating they like. Because we still want to hear and enjoy the three and four star albums?  Most bands do their very best but don't produce masterpieces.  Nothing at all wrong with that.

Rob, do you think any of your albums are as good as Tales From Topographic Oceans?

I agree with Jim. Very few albums are masterpieces and I think almost no band who is honest with themselves would rate their own music as good as the greats who inspired them to start playing in the first place.

Example: I write novels. I think they are pretty good. Certainly as good as anything that hack Steohen King comes out with. But my favorite novelist is Victor Hugo. I could never in my wildest dreams imagine producing a novel half as good as anything he's written. Does that mean I shouldn't produce anything at all, simply because I can't equal the greatest of all time?

Believing in their music and being proud of it, yes.  Concretely having to believe all of their albums are 5-star masterpiece is ludicrous. 

I think I must just be misunderstanding you. 

Ivan_Melgar_M wrote: Finnforest wrote: That's silly Ivan.  A band can be objective enough to make a good album without "having to believe" it is a 5-star masterpiece, right up there with Revolver and Dark Side (or whatever one thinks is masterpiece).  Given our definition of 5-stars (that it be used sparingly, so as to have some meaning), the vast majority of releases are not 1s and 5s.   Bands needn't give their own album 5 stars automatically, but only if they feel it is right up there with the greatest albums of all time.  If they believe that, then fine.        Respectfully disagree. If they don't trust in their own album, I don't trust them. Iván