The Incident

Tony R wrote: Mr ProgFreak wrote: ^ I've listened to the new Riverside album about 5 times - same with The Incident. I clearly prefer The Incident, although I also like ADHD very much. What I don't understand about your post: Why focus on what's bad, or even what's worse? So you think that The Incident is pure nonsense, not worthy of being mentioned in the same sentence with ADHD? I genuinely don't understand what is happening to this place ... when I joined even despite of all the arguments about which band should be added and which shouldn't, it was still a place where music lovers came together to praise music. Nowadays it seems to me more like a big arena where people try to slaughter bands that they, for whichever reason, can't get into after one quick listen. Hear! Hear!

Seconded, or,better, thirded. I haven't heard the album yet, though I hope to do so before we see PT live next Friday in Baltimore. However, even if I didn't like it, I would refrain from joining any one of the current bash-fests. Gosh almighty, people - this place is riddled with negative threads, 'worst' this and 'least X' that. Don't you think it's time to give it a break?

Tony R wrote: Mr ProgFreak wrote: ^ I've listened to the new Riverside album about 5 times - same with The Incident. I clearly prefer The Incident, although I also like ADHD very much. What I don't understand about your post: Why focus on what's bad, or even what's worse? So you think that The Incident is pure nonsense, not worthy of being mentioned in the same sentence with ADHD? I genuinely don't understand what is happening to this place ... when I joined even despite of all the arguments about which band should be added and which shouldn't, it was still a place where music lovers came together to praise music. Nowadays it seems to me more like a big arena where people try to slaughter bands that they, for whichever reason, can't get into after one quick listen. Hear! Hear!

Alright, I have said negative things about bands. But hey, even I need to rant from time to time.

^ nice package ... I don't like this move though, to make the high quality mix part of the exclusive limited edition. 

Raff wrote: Tony R wrote: Mr ProgFreak wrote: ^ I've listened to the new Riverside album about 5 times - same with The Incident. I clearly prefer The Incident, although I also like ADHD very much. What I don't understand about your post: Why focus on what's bad, or even what's worse? So you think that The Incident is pure nonsense, not worthy of being mentioned in the same sentence with ADHD? I genuinely don't understand what is happening to this place ... when I joined even despite of all the arguments about which band should be added and which shouldn't, it was still a place where music lovers came together to praise music. Nowadays it seems to me more like a big arena where people try to slaughter bands that they, for whichever reason, can't get into after one quick listen. Hear! Hear! Seconded, or,better, thirded. I haven't heard the album yet, though I hope to do so before we see PT live next Friday in Baltimore. However, even if I didn't like it, I would refrain from joining any one of the current bash-fests. Gosh almighty, people - this place is riddled with negative threads, 'worst' this and 'least X' that. Don't you think it's time to give it a break?

While I'm fully surprised Porcupine Tree seems to be bashed for the first time ever, I'd vote we equally be cautious with the opinions that don't break the rules by being negative. I'm personally on the "Incident stinks" side of reception right now, and I'd hate to be told that I need to listen to it 50 more times for it to grow or that I didn't hear it right or, worse, that I'm cultivating negativism.

This isn't the first time both bashing and flawlessly praising has happened, we've all seen it before, we can't really put an end to it, so let's just clear the path for the valid thoughts, both ways.



Edited by Ricochet - September 21 2009 at 16:14

Ricochet wrote: While I'm fully surprised Porcupine Tree seems to be bashed for the first time ever, I'd vote we equally be cautious with the opinions that don't break the rules by being negative. I'm personally on the "Incident stinks" side of reception right now, and I'd hate to be told that I need to listen to it 50 more times for it to grow or that I didn't hear it right or, worse, that I'm cultivating negativism. This isn't the first time both bashing and flawlessly praising has happened, we've all seen it before, we can't really put an end to it, so let's just clear the path for the valid thoughts, both ways.

I've thought about it a lot in the last couple of days. I don't mind at all if people don't like the album or even down-right hate it. What I really can't understand is when people say that it's shallow, or it has no emotions, or that some of the transitions are haphazard (just read that in an Amazon comment) ... it's just not true. Comments like that suggest to me (and I'm a suggestable reader) that the reviewer might not have given the album the necessary attention. This still isn't necessarily a bad thing for a reviewer to do ... few of us have the time to listen a dozen times to each albums they review. I'm very sure that I've also rated some albums lower than they deserve simply because I didn't give them enough time. If The Incident is an album that a) requires that much attention and b) only appeals to a certain type of listener then it might very well not be the album of the year for the average listener. It can still be that for me though.

Mr ProgFreak wrote: ^ nice package ... I don't like this move though, to make the high quality mix part of the exclusive limited edition.

I don't see what the problem is.
You pay more and you should expect to get more, simple isn't it?
That's how it always is with those deluxe/exclusive limited editions of albums, so I wouldn't sweat it.

Ricochet wrote: While I'm fully surprised Porcupine Tree seems to be bashed for the first time ever, I'd vote we equally be cautious with the opinions that don't break the rules by being negative. I'm personally on the "Incident stinks" side of reception right now, and I'd hate to be told that I need to listen to it 50 more times for it to grow or that I didn't hear it right or, worse, that I'm cultivating negativism. This isn't the first time both bashing and flawlessly praising has happened, we've all seen it before, we can't really put an end to it, so let's just clear the path for the valid thoughts, both ways.

That's a good point actually.
I'm kind of sick of the attitude "GIVE IT AT LEAST 10000000000 LISTENS MAN YOU COULD GET INTO IT LATER".
I feel I gave this new PT album a chance, despite the fact in hindsight I knew I'd be disappointed, so I think I was being very fair to give it about 10 listens and mind you I sat there and did nothing but listen to it, not reading at the same time, but just taking it all in and it disappointed quite frankly.
And even if there is the remote chance I could like it after 50 or so listens, that's 50 listens I believe better spent on something I know I already love anyway and can be sure I enjoy.


Edited by Petrovsk Mizinski - September 22 2009 at 00:59

After three listens, I like the general sound of it, but many of the songs seem rather forgettable. The Blind House and Time Flies are miles above the rest, hopefully further listens will reveal other gems.

^ indeed. Each album is different and not all reviewers are alike, but there's definitely a pattern of increased negativity for albums that some reviewers get really excited about ... those are often the "secret masterpieces" of the genres, whereas other, less extreme albums are more popular and have a higher average rating.

Hm ... maybe this is something that I could take into account at PF ... the "volatility" of the ratings can be measured and used in the average calculation.

^ I'm inclined to simply give those albums with high variance a little bonus ... I just implemented that at PF. The bonus is just half of the standard deviation. I think that this is something that specifically applies to rating art or other things that don't have any fixed rules for how/what to rate. Giving items a slight bonus which have a high variance is simply a way of giving those albums the "benefit of a doubt". Or in another way: For albums that have a high number of extreme ratings in either direction (good/bad) there's a good chance that if you check it out you will like it more than represented by its current average rating. Of course you might also hate it, but nevertheless it's an interesting album to check out than those which have little variance.

^ that's another interesting way to put it, although I would say that emotional outbursts happen on the other end as well ... still we can choose to to trust enthusiasm more than negativity. :-)