Reviews discussion

This is rather a sweet review, don't you think?


EMERSON LAKE & PALMER (ELP) — Brain Salad Surgery
Review by Jeams Pfirp (Ray Donavan DeAngelo) Emerson Lake & Palmer released a great album in 1973, which was Brain Salad Surgery. This supergroup impresses me, and this album doesn't go against that, especially Karn Evil 9. So, here goes the individual song ratings.

Jerusalem: ***** I like how it celebrates about being in England. It is a 5-star song, despite being only 2:44.

Toccata: ***** This song expresses talent from the people that are part of Emerson Lake & Palmer. Each of the riffs are pretty skilled and it's like an up-tempo song to me.

Still... You Turn Me On: **** It is a pretty song, but it could be longer.

Benny the Bouncer: **** Even though it's 2:18, this is a fun song about a fight that Benny the Bouncer lost (sorry if I spoiled it to the people that haven't heard it or read it's lyrics). I like it when it's said that "He buried an axe in Benny's head" instead of the boring, "He chopped Benny's head.

Karn Evil 9: ***** This is the best song on the entire album. It's 29:32, and so far, it's the longest song I've ever heard. Saturday, though, the record will be broken by Cassandra Gemini by The Mars Volta. To the review. There are lots of instrumental passages, which are really good. In some parts of Impression 2, you're in a jungle, then you enter a haunted mansion, that's what it feels like. And the song has a happy ending. If you haven't yet, listen to all 29:32 of this song promptly!

I've got a question inspired by some Guigo's remarks. If a member writes a review that does not suit the acceptable quality for the site and eventually gets deleted, he is offered, formally or not, to write an enhanced one. Would you mind telling me how often it happens that the member indeed writes another review that is a ok for the site's standards instead of simply disappearing?

Easy Livin wrote: Hard to put figures on it T, but most reviewers are very receptive to constructive feedback.

The T wrote:      Well, as I will write in my new review, now I strongly disagree with the choice for album of the year.

Even though I liked it, I did find that entertaining, and I certainly can't accuse you of half-assing a review just to bash an album.

How many times did you listen to Dowsing before you wrote that review?

The album requires way more than 3 or 4 listens if you're not used to that type of music.

I first heard their _Choirs of the Eye_ in 2004. It took me until late 2005 for it to 'truly' click and make it my favourite album of all time. Bear in mind I was already a big fan of maudlin of the Well.

 IMO, anyone who doesn't have much positive to say about DAWCT after a few listens shouldn't be writing a review - the music is far far too dense to be able to judge so quickly.

Kayo Dot are my favourite artist (along with Diamanda Galas), and it pleases me that they've been voted album of the year on this site - not least because it'll give them more publicity and more album sales so they may hopefully helped out of their financial situation which has been a bit sh*t for the last few years.



edit: OMG Mr T

I just read your 'review' of DAWCT and I must say I'm somewhat insulted as a Kayo Dot fan that you've written such a steaming pile of rubbish about them. A few points, as if I try and refute everything you said I'd be here all day:

http://www.progarchives.com/Review.asp?id=108084

1. Kayo Dot are not 'post metal' - yes, a lot of their stuff is akin to the other sounds commonly found in that genre, but they are way way more avant garde than your average post metal band. If Kayo Dot are post metal, then all the other bands are doing it wrong.

2. You're blatently not a fan of anything like Kayo Dot or any form of 'post' rock/metal (I've seen your incredibly low ratings and slanderous Sigur Ros and Agalloch reviews (GSYBE! are the exception, but they're still nothing like KD). What really gives you a right to judge an album so harshly when it's a matter of taste and it's just that you don't like it. They're pretty damn far removed from post rock/metal - they just get lumped under that as no-one knows what to call them. Aesthetically, they're probably more like jazz or classical in their approach.

3. Maybe you have to be 'stoned' to enhance your listening pleasure of certain bands, but I assure you Kayo Dot fans do not.

4. If you can't see the structure and the fine songwriting of the songs on DAWCT, then that is your problem, not the bands.

5. 3 songs get ratings of 5, 6, and 8.5 out of 10 from you, whilst two get ratings of 1. How does that equate to an overall average of 1 out of 5 for the whole album? Do the maths. They have received from you 23.5 out of a possible 50 points. If anything, it makes their average score a solid 2 star review, not a 1 star.

6. Even more to the point, how can your only mention of the vocals in _Amaranth The Peddler_ be "When the vocals and the drums make their appearance, we're already too scared of the final outcome of the song, as we see that it lasts 14 minutes"? You completely fail to mention how sublime the vocal melodies are in this section.

7. BAD REVIEW. I'm sorry, but it really is a bad review and not in the slightest bit objective. It's simply an immature close-minded tirade about a band you don't understand. Was it meant to be an interesting/insightful/humourous review? If it was, it failed on all levels. I'd expect more from a 'journalism student'.

If you want to hear the tightly written songs Toby has written, check out the albums he made under the name maudlin of the Well (death metal, sludge, prog metal, classical, jazz, etc), or some of the songs off of the first KD album. DAWCT is by far their most avant and meandering release. Also, give it more than '3 or 4' listens - it's surely obvious to you that an album like DAWCT isn't something that anyone can get on the initial listens?

The T wrote: MikeEnRegalia wrote: The T wrote:     Well, as I will write in my new review, now I strongly disagree with the choice for album of the year. Then you risk that your review will be deleted. A review is supposed to describe one particular album, it's not a platform for complaints. I know that. Don't worry, read it and you'll see I review the album and make my arguments very clear. Not bashing for bashing's sake, so to speak. I wouldn't like my review to be deleted just because I don't agree with the "album of the year"... If one of my reviews is ever deleted, I hope it would be because it's insulting, has no coherence, is just a bashing post disguised as review, or something like that. EDIT: But you'll never see me writing like that. No unless I get intoxicated with mushrooms that weren't supossed to be eaten.

uuuh, that was an insulting, incoherent bashing post.


Edited by richeym - January 23 2007 at 16:12

Passionist wrote: not to be pushy or anything, but when I read reviews in order to find out what the album is like, there's usually a list of very short reviews with someone only saying they like it or that they don't like it, which isn't really very informative. I usually dig up one that is long and is somewhat the same in stars as the average. but 75 words is a bit vague in my opinion, because frankly, to me, these are completely useless. I'm not saying I do better, but I try to at least write over 300 words. If I don't have more to say, then I'd rather not write in vain. Just my 2 cents after reading a full page of reviews on one record.

I agree with this partially... I think a good review CAN be done with just a few words, but that would require quite a concise, superbly-written explanation as to the arguments for the rating (for example, describing the album's sound an why the reviewer did or did not like it).

But of course I prefer longer reviews, reviews that say something about the music in detail, that show that the listener actually respect the readers as much as to care to write a competent essay (that's what reviews are in the end, essays. Or that's what they SHOULD be). I don't like reviews (I would say "reviews") where the "reviewer" says "I like A because it's great and it's cool and it made me feel fine and..."....So what? That's telling us his personal feelings about something without trying first to tell us what that something is!    

richeym wrote: The album requires way more than 3 or 4 listens if you're not used to that type of music. I first heard their _Choirs of the Eye_ in 2004. It took me until late 2005 for it to 'truly' click and make it my favourite album of all time. Bear in mind I was already a big fan of maudlin of the Well.  IMO, anyone who doesn't have much positive to say about DAWCT after a few listens shouldn't be writing a review - the music is far far too dense to be able to judge so quickly. Kayo Dot are my favourite artist (along with Diamanda Galas), and it pleases me that they've been voted album of the year on this site - not least because it'll give them more publicity and more album sales so they may hopefully helped out of their financial situation which has been a bit sh*t for the last few years. edit: OMG Mr T I just read your 'review' of DAWCT and I must say I'm somewhat insulted as a Kayo Dot fan that you've written such a steaming pile of rubbish about them. A few points, as if I try and refute everything you said I'd be here all day: http://www.progarchives.com/Review.asp?id=108084 1. Kayo Dot are not 'post metal' - yes, a lot of their stuff is akin to the other sounds commonly found in that genre, but they are way way more avant garde than your average post metal band. If Kayo Dot are post metal, then all the other bands are doing it wrong. 2. You're blatently not a fan of anything like Kayo Dot or any form of 'post' rock/metal (I've seen your incredibly low ratings and slanderous Sigur Ros and Agalloch reviews (GSYBE! are the exception, but they're still nothing like KD). What really gives you a right to judge an album so harshly when it's a matter of taste and it's just that you don't like it. They're pretty damn far removed from post rock/metal - they just get lumped under that as no-one knows what to call them. Aesthetically, they're probably more like jazz or classical in their approach. 3. Maybe you have to be 'stoned' to enhance your listening pleasure of certain bands, but I assure you Kayo Dot fans do not. 4. If you can't see the structure and the fine songwriting of the songs on DAWCT, then that is your problem, not the bands. 5. 3 songs get ratings of 5, 6, and 8.5 out of 10 from you, whilst two get ratings of 1. How does that equate to an overall average of 1 out of 5 for the whole album? Do the maths. They have received from you 23.5 out of a possible 50 points. If anything, it makes their average score a solid 2 star review, not a 1 star. 6. Even more to the point, how can your only mention of the vocals in _Amaranth The Peddler_ be "When the vocals and the drums make their appearance, we're already too scared of the final outcome of the song, as we see that it lasts 14 minutes"? You completely fail to mention how sublime the vocal melodies are in this section. 7. BAD REVIEW. I'm sorry, but it really is a bad review and not in the slightest bit objective. It's simply an immature close-minded tirade about a band you don't understand. Was it meant to be an interesting/insightful/humourous review? If it was, it failed on all levels. I'd expect more from a 'journalism student'. If you want to hear the tightly written songs Toby has written, check out the albums he made under the name maudlin of the Well (death metal, sludge, prog metal, classical, jazz, etc), or some of the songs off of the first KD album. DAWCT is by far their most avant and meandering release. Also, give it more than '3 or 4' listens - it's surely obvious to you that an album like DAWCT isn't something that anyone can get on the initial listens? The T wrote: MikeEnRegalia wrote: The T wrote:     Well, as I will write in my new review, now I strongly disagree with the choice for album of the year. Then you risk that your review will be deleted. A review is supposed to describe one particular album, it's not a platform for complaints. I know that. Don't worry, read it and you'll see I review the album and make my arguments very clear. Not bashing for bashing's sake, so to speak. I wouldn't like my review to be deleted just because I don't agree with the "album of the year"... If one of my reviews is ever deleted, I hope it would be because it's insulting, has no coherence, is just a bashing post disguised as review, or something like that. EDIT: But you'll never see me writing like that. No unless I get intoxicated with mushrooms that weren't supossed to be eaten.            uuuh, that was an insulting, incoherent bashing post.

I tried to approach it in a more friendly manner. In the end of course, I realize anyone is entitled to their opinion.


Oh and for the record T, and I don't think I speak for myself on this one, your whole "FREE IDEA, opinion, etc." crap gets extremely annoying. Sorry to put it so harshly, but that's the only way I know how to say it. Whenever you state stuff like this, it comes across as if you think the readers here are incompetent. I realize I can think however I want, but there's also something called being tact. Lose the caps and I'll appreciate more of what you have to say.


Edited by OpethGuitarist - January 23 2007 at 18:29

Let's keep a civil behavior in this thread, please.

I'd hate to simplify everything here, but if I could ask one thing...

The T wrote: Zappa88 wrote: I'd hate to simplify everything here, but if I could ask one thing...   Seriosuly, what is the freaking deal? He didn't like the album, just get over it!   Good.  Maybe you disagree, maybe you agree, but WHAT'S THE f**kING POINT?   Man, after all, I think my little review had a big effect in somebody's life... I will let this go. I have to use my time better, for example, to keep on writing reviews (no matter if they go with the flow or not) or to post comments in most useful threads, or to read the thousand of much more interesting posts around here. So, whoever you are, Richeym, my review-basher, enjoy Kayo Dot, DON'T LET MY REVIEW AFFECT YOUR LIFE SO MUCH. I won't post any more comments on this thread, at least not until there's a better thing to argue about. If you want to continue with this, I'll be happy to do it in Private Messengers or even better by e-mail, let's not waste valuable bandwidth in crying about a REVIEW. Man!

You appear to have entirely missed the point - it's about your attitude to reviewing. It doesn't 'affect my life' nor make me 'cry' in the slightest, don't be so presumptious as to assume that you could achieve such a thing, so kindly drop the patronising tone. You stated before I entered the initial thread that your review was not to be an 'insulting, incoherent bashing' post masquerading as a review. I've given full reasoning as to why it is which you blatently can't refute (hence the refusal to do so). If you have convictions, and truly beleive that that review is worthy of being on the Archives for the world to see and possibly take seriously, then please reply, either in this thread or via PM if you are afraid of public humiliation


Edited by richeym - January 24 2007 at 01:00