Regarding Bands Reviewed

I've been a frequent visitor to this web-site for almost a month now, participating in the forums and submitting the odd review. I find the site insightful, informative and even humourous at times. I've checked out other prog sites and find this one to be the best. Well designed, easy to navigate & somewhat more laid back than the others. The only other site I visit on a regular basis right now is the official KK site for "Fripp's Diary".( I don't know about you but i've just gotta know what Bob is up to on a day-to-day basis or else my life just wouldn't be complete.)

The first thing I do when I log into this site is head for the reviews. I think that it is universally agreed amongst "prog" afficianados that certain bands and recordings are quintessentials of the genre. eg. Court Of The Crimson King by King Crimson, Close To The Edge by Yes, Thick As A Brick by Jethro Tull etc. But I think that while there is no question that these bands are  undisputed "monsters of prog" there are many lesser known bands whose bios appear in the  archives which are neglected when it comes to the reviews. I don't submit reviews that often, but when I do I try to pick an album which has only a few or no reviews at all and try to keep the commentary short & sweet. And I also try to review recordings which are lesser known today, particularily to the younger users of this site who weren't around during prog's glory days back in the early 70's.

Check out the review (it wasn't mine) which recently appeared on the first Greenslade album. Excellent review. Full marks. It made me dig out my old Greenslade albums which I haven't listened to for over 15 years, but when you look in the archives, no reviews! This was a classic prog band if there ever was one complete with Roger Dean artwork and heavy keyboards!

My point here is that there are certain albums which have been as "over-reviewed as Stairway to Heaven has been overplayed on "classic rock" radio stations. Many lesser known prog bands have material which is just as good or even better than the heavy hitters. I've submitted a few such bands for inclusion in the archives and it's good to see Eiliff ( one of my favourite bands ever) and Octopus from Germany now represented.

Anyone have any comments about this comment?

 PS, Vibrationbaby: re keeping your "commentary short & sweet," again, read only the the reviews you want to (nothing over a few sentences, if you like) but please don't tell me how to write! It's MY hobby and MY creation, not yours!

And guess what? I don't own any Greenslade albums!

Yes, Vibe, you are right. Some music gets all the attention. Short and Sweet? it's all in the message. I've read some LONG reviews I found interesting, which swayed my reason to actually purchase a disc from a band I was unfamiliar with.  If this website recieved a pitiance from the record companies for successful reviews, I'd have something here named after me. Anyway....What really irks me is those who POP in to give a recording a   low rating but don't offer a reason why they thought it to be a poor recording. Frustrating. Grow up, if you're going to rate it, review it.  

 Thanks for the voice of reason, Maani. I'm more calm now.

Vibrationbaby,  I may have adopted too heavy a tone in my last post to you, and "gone in with both barrels blazing," but that is because I am so passionate about my reviews (I put a lot of effort into writing them well) and my music. (Writing is also an imperfect means of human discourse, and certainly inferior to face-to-face conversation. Tone of voice and  facial expression are missing, and sincerity can sound like sarcasm (& vice-versa). It's easy for two people who don't know each other to "get their wires crossed" via this medium!) 

As I implied in my first post, I want to review both classic and other, newer discs, in the proportion and manner that I see fit. The archives administrators in their wisdom have imposed no restrictions on what discs I (or anyone) can review (if they did, I'd be out of here). I have never gotten to write record reviews for the masses before, and as I expect to have only one life, I want to use the opportunity to "testify" as to the (prog) recordings that I know and LOVE (and even sometimes loathe). (As it stands, I've already covered many of them.)  I, as with all who write reviews for this site, am a music fan first and foremost. Like all fans, I have favourite discs, and in a world where an album like CLOSE TO THE EDGE is very popular, it is understandable that many of us will choose to write about that CD -- many of us own a copy. I for one still enjoy reading others' opinions of these discs, just as I enjoy discussing Dickens or Shakespeare (both have been analyzed rather a bit, I think you'll concede) with others who enjoy their works. Surely there is room for all sorts of reviews and (prog) tastes here, yours, mine, and everyone else's.  I don't read many reviews of bands that I've never heard of (maybe because I can't afford to buy many new CDs), while others, especially those with more disposable income, may be always on the lookout for something new. I think that both types of fans (I don't think that my listening/buying  pattern is unique!) can be easily accommodated here. Again, we only need to read what we choose to read (or find interesting), and we may write in the style that comes naturally to us. Often, it is very poor or incoherent writing that makes me stop reading a review mid-way, but I don't think that I should give grammar/spelling/vocabulary lessons to the writers of those reviews. I know that they, like me, are doing ther best, and I respect that.

That being said, as Maani indicated, we "Archive Reviewers" (volunteers all) do get to hear some "new" music (not all chronologically new) via this site (a fairly new feature), so I and others have been reviewing these discs lately. A visit to my list of reviews will show that I have reviewed several discs by bands whose work was unknown to me just a few short weeks ago, including Garden Wall, Anglagard, Haggard, Pineapple Thief, Van Der Graaf Generator, etc. Assimilating these discs, while working and raising a young family, takes time. During the past week or so, I have been "absorbing" recordings by 4-5 more new artists, in preparatin for reviewing them. In the meantime, sometimes I am tired, and just want to write about (or listen to) a disc that I already know (and often, love). Sometimes a brief review of a favourite album -- favourable, or otherwise -- will prompt me to revisit that recording, and add my more in-depth input on it.

In closing, I just want to stress that I realize that your thoughtful comments were not meant as a personal attack. However, as a perhaps somewhat more prominent -- I don't mean better, or important -- reviewer for this site, I felt like I was particularly among those being addressed. I really enjoy doing this, and I put a lot of work and feeling into what I write. Even merely perceived criticism of something that I invest so much of my energy in can be hard to take. 

No hard feelings -- back to the wonderful genre we both enjoy!

PS: Take it easy, and review another more obscure album that we should all save our "shekels" for soon!

PPS: I promise you (and all others -- are you listening, recording labels?) that I will review any CD (listed on the site) that you wish to send me! 

PPPS: Most of the stuff that prolific "Special Collaborator" Greger Ronqvist reviews is new to me, if not "more obscure." Check out his fine work!

(For Peter Rideout)

Now that peace is restored I just want to re-emphasize that I just felt like making a general comment after reading this guy`s review of the original Greenslade album and NO malice was intended towards anyone . Believe me, I`m in the same boat as everyone when it comes to having extra money to spend on music! I`m lucky that I squirelled away a substantial collection of vinyl back in the 70`s and 80`s when it was relatively cheap and available.  Also, I don`t have anything against good long reviews and I actually read your Misplaced Childhood review and have more or less the same feelings towards that album. ( I saw Marillion on that particular tour as well as Script For A Jester`s Tear.) I can`t imagine this band without Fish playing live.

Let peace and love flow throughout the universe.

 Thanks Vibe, Dude and Jim! I am a peaceful, confrontation-avoiding guy by nature.

The "Rideout2001," on the other hand..... (Ha! More on that wacky thread later! (It's my turn.) Jim & Dude, your installments are HILARIOUS! Very well done!)

Thanks for the input, Marcelo. I think that we each have to decide which critic to trust (this can be based upon reading their reviews of albums that you already have: "OK, he hates CLOSE TO THE EDGE, but I love it. I won't listen to this guy!" (etc.) Sometimes, the overall "tone" of a review from an unknown reviewer can lead to your decision, as can "sounds like" comparisions to better-known acts: "They sound 'sort of like a cross between early Jethro Tull and Menudo?' Cool! I am crazy about both those bands!"

Marcelo:

As they say, opinions are like noses: everyone has one.  However, I do see your point: do opposing (or seemingly opposing) opinions help, or just confuse?  It depends.  If I found two opposing reviews of the same album, I might search for other reviews by each reviewer, to see what other music they like (or don't like) and how they approach their reviewing.  This might give me a better understanding of why they reviewed the initial album the way they did.

In addition, opposing reviews might be a positive thing if they add to the person's curiosity about the album: "Gee, these guys totally disagree on this album.  Maybe I should hear it and decide for myself."

Just a thought...

Peace.

Peter:

Has anyone ever told you you're weird?

Peace.

Peter Rideout wrote: You could also add up the stars awarded, divide by the number of reviews, and decide that the "truth" lies somewhere in the middle!

Can you give the programming code lines for this ALGORITHM ?