Dream Theater release date

June 22nd, I thought.

June 23 is Mars Volta.

Some of us have tried to raise the question in the CZ, but to no avail, or so it seems...

believe us, we've raised concerns about nuking the entry, but there's too many variables at play to do so, so it seems. Personally, I don't care if people's illegitimate reviews are annihilated, and boo-hoo for their hard work, it's still illegal.

Unfortunately, far too many people won't do what they are asked, so the only way to go about things is to prevent them from doing so in the first place. We tried to get something done, but, as Mike said, there were too many factors involved.

topofsm wrote: I just find it ridiculous that there are some great albums that only have 30 or so reviews while BC&SL has two more weeks to be officially released and it already has over twice as much. I really think a system not allowing reviews until an official release should be encouraged. It would probably decrease bias when the legitimate copies are listened to, and I don't think as many DT haters wandering on the site before the release would be less likely to give the album a low rating pre-release. That's just my opinion.

I agree entirely.

Listening to a leaked copy, as long as it's accurate and complete doesn't make your opinions based on it any less legitimate. It may be wrong or unethical but it doesn't the fact that people can review it as long as the system allows it. In all honesty the system shouldn't open up reviews until release dates but if people can review it well, good for them.

moreitsythanyou wrote: Listening to a leaked copy, as long as it's accurate and complete doesn't make your opinions based on it any less legitimate. It may be wrong or unethical but it doesn't the fact that people can review it as long as the system allows it. In all honesty the system shouldn't open up reviews until release dates but if people can review it well, good for them.

Except it hasn't leaked fully, so the reviews will be inaccurate.

Apart from the (il)legality of it all, the fact is these people could be reviewing the wrong album, or not the complete album. Weren't there some fake copies of a previous DT album knocking around before the release date?

The promo's have been out for absolutely ages and the full (actual) album has been available illegally for weeks now. (Although my copy (CD) has been on pre-order for some time now )

The main detonator here is PA's own policy, which allows upcoming albums to be included in the database as soon as its info (tracklist, lineup, cover) becomes publicly known. And the reason for that is (so I've heard) to get more internet traffic on the site.

Now, as much as I can suck it up that "internet traffic beats professionalism" idea, and as much as I realize that this is a new era of pre-ordering, peer-to-peering and leaking, if I'd be in charge, and see that everytime a popular band has an upcoming album, my site gets flooded with pre-reviewing (over 2/3 of it bogus and illegitimate) and the huge controversy around it that happens (and this has been going on for quite two or three years by now), I'd close the pre-release adding policy completely.

PA is not a music magazine, the folks who pre-order and review it properly are always a minority, few bands have actually requested from PA to do a promotional review, in advance to the upcoming release. So there's no reason to blindly believe that this policy is beneficial.


Edited by Ricochet - June 10 2009 at 10:51