You´re insane

 PORCUPINE TREE Stupid Dream
Review ( http://www.progarchives.com/Review.asp?id=9583 - Permanent link ) by http://www.progarchives.com/Collaborators.asp?id=20 - Hugues Chantraine @ 2:49:39 AM EST, 2/24/2004
SPECIAL COLLABORATION

 —  After such a cornerstone as Signify , Porcupine Tree had to try even harder to renew themselves . Alas, they did but not the way I expected them to do. This album has too many hard rock guitars (borderline noisy-rock) and non-sensical songs. I never got into this album as I find it aggressive and find it relatively aimless.

What the f**k ?

PORCUPINE TREE

Revibew y http://www.progarchives.com/Collaborators.asp?id=20 - Hugues Chantr aine
SPECIAL COLLABORATION
3:00:07 AM EST, 2/24/2004

 —  This asks too much attention from the listener to be really worthy of better marks.

 

----

 

This is a review? Did you listen to the album?

 

 

Review by http://www.progarchives.com/Collaborators.asp?id=20 - Hugues Chantraine
SPECIAL COLLABORATION
10:38:15 AM EST, 2/5/2004

 —  2.9999 stars strictly on historical importance in the neverending Progstory. Can you believe this bores me to death that I never got to the end of it in one shot. The fact that this is a vocal-less album (except for some doodling towards the end of the album) is not helping me getting interested in it either. As I had the vinyll , I think I have never managed to even listen the end of both sides of it. Oh , I must've heard it many times but my attention had waned long ago.

Of course , most of my colleagues will tell you that this is great , but if you are a newcomer start elsewhere for this is not a good intro to the band - because it is totally instrumental and does not represent that very facet of Camel .

 

----------------

 

Man this is a masterpiece.

 

I can show more of this review´s of sh*t, i just hope that this disease don´t contaminate others collaborators.

 

You´re insane.

 

 

It's Hugues's personal opinion. You can't call him insane for not liking an album you like.

Cygnus X-2 wrote: It's Hugues's personal opinion. You can't call him insane for not liking an album you like.

" We suggest you listen to an album several times before writing a review. It can take a number of listens to Prog albums in particular to begin to appreciate the music. "

 by progarchives

He makes the oppose  

SevenColoured wrote: Cygnus X-2 wrote: It's Hugues's personal opinion. You can't call him insane for not liking an album you like. " We suggest you listen to an album several times before writing a review. It can take a number of listens to Prog albums in particular to begin to appreciate the music. "  by progarchives He makes the oppose

Well he has done over 1000 reviews, surely there are a few bad eggs in the bunch.

Cygnus X-2 wrote: SevenColoured wrote: Cygnus X-2 wrote: It's Hugues's personal opinion. You can't call him insane for not liking an album you like. " We suggest you listen to an album several times before writing a review. It can take a number of listens to Prog albums in particular to begin to appreciate the music. "  by progarchives He makes the oppose   Well he has done over 1000 reviews, surely there are a few bad eggs in the bunch.

These thing are reviews ?

LIZARD

Review by http://www.progarchives.com/Collaborators.asp?id=20 - Hugues Chantraine
SPECIAL COLLABORATION
11:42:07 AM EST, 2/18/2004

 —  Liked it enough at the store to buy it and once home , boy, did I get rid of that quick as it was really not my cup of tea. Neo only like Poland can do it , very clean sounding but like there are hundreds of such albums.

MIKE OLDFIELD

Review by http://www.progarchives.com/Collaborators.asp?id=20 - Hugues Chantraine
SPECIAL COLLABORATION
5:21:00 AM EST, 3/8/2004

 —  The fist one had not made much of an impression on me so the second one is even less likely to. Like most people who bought this , a buddy of mine came quickly to regret it

RICK WAKEMAN

Journey to the Centre of the Earth Review by http://www.progarchives.com/Collaborators.asp?id=20 - Hugues Chantraine SPECIAL COLLABORATION 4:33:54 AM EST, 2/26/2004  —  This is the kind of album that brought the world to laugh at prog two years later. Second class as Gary Brooker of Procol Harum might have done much better but not have saved the concept(although the general public accepted this highly laughable project)

meurglysIII wrote: Like Cygnus said, Hugues has written reviews for tons of albums.  He obviously doesn't care for an album that he gave a few stars.  It's just his opinion, besides he has good taste

I can make 1000 reviews without listening to the albuns  

and saying things without sense...

1) An opinion is an opinion, and everybody has a right to one, as long they express themselves with a certain degree of civility. I wonder what you'd make of the hammering that I gave to Kraftwerk, Can and The Enid ...

2) You'll note that all the highlighted reviews were written in Febuary or March of 2004, since then Hugues has written more than 1,000 reviews. He has actually stated elsewhere that he is not that happy with some of his earliest reviews and may go back and change them. Not that he needs me to defend him, but this guy should really be judged on his overall knowledge and reviewing skills ... read his Soft Machine series for example ...

3) In a totally unrelated note, Hugues may well be insane ... nobody can listen to that much prog and survive  

Trotsky wrote: 1) An opinion is an opinion, and everybody has a right to one, as long they express themselves with a certain degree of civility. I wonder what you'd make of the hammering that I gave to Kraftwerk, Can and The Enid ... 2) You'll note that all the highlighted reviews were written in Febuary or March of 2004, since then Hugues has written more than 1,000 reviews. He has actually stated elsewhere that he is not that happy with some of his earliest reviews and may go back and change them. Not that he needs me to defend him, but this guy should really be judged on his overall knowledge and reviewing skills ... read his Soft Machine series for example ... 3) In a totally unrelated note, Hugues may well be insane ... nobody can listen to that much prog and survive

That may as well be true...

Trotsky wrote: 1) An opinion is an opinion, and everybody has a right to one, as long they express themselves with a certain degree of civility. I wonder what you'd make of the hammering that I gave to Kraftwerk, Can and The Enid ...

Man i accept that, but i hope when he give´s one star or two to an album he explain why? Not just writing thing likes these...

"This asks too much attention from the listener to be really worthy of better marks. "

Useful_Idiot wrote: If you could lay off the insults, I'm sure we'd all appreciate it.

What insults?  

meurglysIII wrote: SevenColoured wrote: Useful_Idiot wrote: If you could lay off the insults, I'm sure we'd all appreciate it.   What insults?   Your insults of Hugues reviews and taste

I hope you dont understand me wrong, i´m not saying that hugues have bad taste, i just hope that he put arguments on that reviews to people understand why he give´s that one or two stars

SevenColoured wrote: meurglysIII wrote: SevenColoured wrote: Useful_Idiot wrote: If you could lay off the insults, I'm sure we'd all appreciate it.   What insults?   Your insults of Hugues reviews and taste I hope you dont understand me wrong, i´m not saying that hugues have bad taste, i just hope that he put arguments on that reviews to people understand why he give´s that one or two stars

You're asking "What insults?" ... well, I would call "reviews of sh*t" an insult, man. Big thumbs down emoticons don't help either.

You can edit posts, you know.

Hugues is not insane, no.

I admit that he and I have very different tastes; he has rated many of my favourite albums (including The Snow Goose and several Horslips albums) very low. But that's his opinion and I have to respect it even though I don't agree. Why? because he's put together a review to justify his views. I have reviewed them and put the alternative viewpoint. That's what this site is for.

The people I have an issue with are "reviewers" like tamtam, jordisubir,oscar n,carles and the like who rate all of some bands' albums 5* and all of some others 1 or 2* without reviews to enlighten the rest of us as to their (obviously stunning) critical skills. It's all extremes. (Hugues tends to rate to the middle which is far more realistic. There are also one or two reviewers who seem incapable of giving much less than 5* but perhaps this is because they are reviewing their favourites first.)

What they mean is 5* - I like this band. 1* - I don't like this band. That's not what the rating/ review system is for. (I don't like much of Dream Theater but I would not give one of their albums 1* because their musicianship is first class.) These cretins should put up (and actually review) or shut up.

I disagree with Hughes' review on The Snow Goose, but that is his free opinion!!

I never thought to use such words to express my disagreement!

Hello Andrea.

In Holland we use to say "Don't mind, he's from Belgium" ...  ..! By the way, Hughes tend to nail the average fine melodic prog and tend to hail the more weird and special prog, especially from the late Sixties and early Seventies. He writes a bit like like reviewer Mike who nailed progrock masterpieces from Museo Rosenbach and England ..   ...

SevenColoured,

The thtiel of your thread, and the way you presented it, appeared to be a personal attack on another member. This of course breaches site rules.

You are making a valid point, and as Useful Idiot says, Hugues is all too aware that some of his early reviews need updating. He is working his way through them.

I have amended the title of your thread, and moved it to the appropriate section.

Hi SevenCouloured!!!!

Well with such friends defending me , who needs lawyers? Thanks buddies!!!

Insane? Of course I am , Thanks for noticing!!! Did you think for a second my reviewing of almost 1400 albums is the work of somebody with a sound mind??? If so , you are the insane one!!

Ok , I said before that I have some of those early reviews to touch up (actually I have done roughly half of them , as Bob/Easy - our review moderator would attest ), because when I first started writing reviews, I started as with humorous ones meant to be read album after album (most of the review pages were completely blank back then) but as time went on , it made less and less sense, (but you should've read the suite of reviews of Styx , Rush, Saga , Camel written back then, It was funny, at least I had a ball with them) , then mailto:M@X - M@X insisted on my  joining up as Prog Reviewer.

 Which I did after a few weeks reflection, awed at the task of rewriting some already 400 reviews that were meant as jokes or simple comments: the review guidelines were not quite as strong and severe as now,  there was no fifty words rule either , and no-one was checking them out).

But I stand by my opinions , and will rewrite some reviews to make them more professional , but it does not mean that you will like them any better!!

As for Porcupine Tree , most japanese 80's symphonic prog (you missed those!!!!) , Snow Goose (as such it is not a bad album , it puts me to sleep but does not stop me from sleeping either) , and a few others ones (I think some of the more hilarious are not to be touched - Cured from Steve Hackett and Caution,Radiation from Area are real classic reviews in their own right.

As for Wakeman , he by himself brought laughter on the prog rock realm with his incredibly pompous Holiday on Ice show to go along with the Arthur tour , and his star-sprinkled capes only rivalled Liberace's !! But the man is funny and not to be taken too seriously! Except for him reading the news or eating Bami Goreng during Squire's bass solos!!

I suppose that if Mike Oldfield dishes out a new disc called The Revenge Of The Son Of The Dog of Tubullar Bells , you will rush out and buy it and place it on your altair and refer it to it as the latest wonder mankind built!

Poland specialized in neo-prog bands in the early 90's (Collage , Quidam , Abraxas, and Lizard)> I got suckered many times into buying albums I did not like once I got home, but never got rid of them without having given them a real chance! (you might want to read my review of the last Twin Age album or is it the last Valinor's Tree???)

I was expecting soon or later someone to raise the subject, and the suspense was intolerable, but you won!!!!!

First prize: one week with Phil Collins stuck on a boat while crossing the Atlantic and on;ly his discography on board!!! How's that for insanity?!?!?!?!

SevenColoured wrote: Cygnus X-2 wrote: It's Hugues's personal opinion. You can't call him insane for not liking an album you like. " We suggest you listen to an album several times before writing a review. It can take a number of listens to Prog albums in particular to begin to appreciate the music. "  by progarchives He makes the oppose

I'm sure that Hugues can (and will) speak for himself, but just to clear a couple of points up - I know for a fact that his normal practice is to have an album playing as he reviews it. He has access to a pretty awesome music library in Brussels, as well as having a highly impressive collection of his own.

He was also one of the first people to review many of the 1000 plus albums he has written about - he was here in the days when the only albums which had been reviewed were CTTE, SEBTP, ITCOTCK, DSOTM and TAAB. The sheer number of the reviews means that they may not all be detailed, but at least this meant that there was something there.

And at least when he's dismissive of a substandard album, he's witty about it. Insane? I've met the guy and he's as mad as a lorry, which is why he's such an asset to this site.

Cygnus X-2 wrote: It's Hugues's personal opinion. You can't call him insane for not liking an album you like.

Ditto - personally I have long found that album dull and there is plenty else I would prefer to hear!

Dick Heath wrote: Cygnus X-2 wrote: It's Hugues's personal opinion. You can't call him insane for not liking an album you like.   Ditto - personally I have long found that album dull and there is plenty else I would prefer to hear!

Snow Goose is one of the most over-rated album in prog IMHO, and giving two stars is hardly a bad rating. It just means average , and Camel made plenty of average record.

but if one expect 5* for every camel album , than look elsewhere!!!

I had a thought about a review lenght. If the album already has 20-200 reviews, isn't it OK to give only a short writing decribing only your own subjective feelings about it? Or would it be better to give just a rating without review? But what i one thinks it's a one or five star album?  

"The thtiel of your thread, and the way you presented it, appeared to be a personal attack on another member. This of course breaches site rules.

You are making a valid point, and as Useful Idiot says, Hugues is all too aware that some of his early reviews need updating. He is working his way through them.

I have amended the title of your thread, and moved it to the appropriate section."

This is a ridiculous overreaction, and quite hypocritical, concering the overall purpose of this site (see my previous post).  I would think that people who sit around assigning grades to music would have thicker skin when it comes to getting a negative review or two of their own.  Personal attacks on reviewers should absolutely be fair game, provided that it does not cross the line into repeated harrassment.   If one reviewer thinks that another reviewer's taste is sh*t, then why doesn't he have the right to say so?

yargh wrote: "The thtiel of your thread, and the way you presented it, appeared to be a personal attack on another member. This of course breaches site rules. You are making a valid point, and as Useful Idiot says, Hugues is all too aware that some of his early reviews need updating. He is working his way through them. I have amended the title of your thread, and moved it to the appropriate section." ____________________________________________________________ __________ This is a ridiculous overreaction, and quite hypocritical, concering the overall purpose of this site (see my previous post).  I would think that people who sit around assigning grades to music would have thicker skin when it comes to getting a negative review or two of their own.  Personal attacks on reviewers should absolutely be fair game, provided that it does not cross the line into repeated harrassment.   If one reviewer thinks that another reviewer's taste is sh*t, then why doesn't he have the right to say so?

Actually you make a valid point! But the moving of thread was done during my response and Easy Livin had taken action without consulting me , but it is his perogative to do so!

I can stand by my opinions , defend them , and you are right , the guys sitting (although I type standing up too) around and reviewing can come under fire from the readers>>> it is a fair game as long as respect is ...respected, this meaning that "personal attacks" should apply to only what is written on reviews.

And I took no offence as I thought there was no  insult hurled at me! I did not even find the original title offensive> maybe because I am INSANE!!!!!

I love baroque oblique , insane music , which is why cartesian melodic rock can bore me to death!

I'd like an answer from 7COLOURS and then I propose we leave it at that and turn the page!!

yargh wrote: "The title of your thread, and the way you presented it, appeared to be a personal attack on another member. This of course breaches site rules. You are making a valid point, and as Useful Idiot says, Hugues is all too aware that some of his early reviews need updating. He is working his way through them. I have amended the title of your thread, and moved it to the appropriate section."   This is a ridiculous overreaction, and quite hypocritical, concering the overall purpose of this site (see my previous post).  I would think that people who sit around assigning grades to music would have thicker skin when it comes to getting a negative review or two of their own.  Personal attacks on reviewers should absolutely be fair game, provided that it does not cross the line into repeated harrassment.   If one reviewer thinks that another reviewer's taste is sh*t, then why doesn't he have the right to say so?

"No personal attacks" Yargh, that's the rule. It's not "no more than three personal attacks". The question is, when does criticism become a personal attack? Of course you can critisise a review or set of reviews. The way you presented your thread though crossed the line between criticism and personal attack, in my view.

It ain't what you said, it was how you said it.

Presumably you accept that the forum requires to me moderated. Sometimes you may not agree with the moderators views or decisions, that's life. We are only human, and must interpret the rules and apply them as best we can.

Your thread is still here, all I'm asking is that you keep your posts civil and friendly.

It ain't what you said, it was how you said it."

Well, *I* didn't say anything -- I didn't start that thread.  I just don't see what was so wrong with it.  I have no opinion of Hugues' reviews other than that he seems to write a lot of them.  I've also been on music discussion boards long enough and read enough review sites to know that there usually is no point in engaging the author over what he likes and doesn't like, unless you're prepared to get into an argument that few of us have enough time for.  But that doesn't mean that it isn't *fair* to do so in an objective sense, regardless of what the site rules are. 

Why *is* this site moderated with a Gestappo-like grip?  Words can't hurt anybody, and sometimes it really takes a healthy dose of hostility to get enough blood flowing to the brain to enable the satisfactory articulation of points.       

yargh wrote: Words can't hurt anybody

I heard that words can kill, - but this is different story...

yargh wrote: "No personal attacks" Yargh, that's the rule. It's not "no more than three personal attacks". The question is, when does criticism become a personal attack? Of course you can critisise a review or set of reviews. The way you presented your thread though crossed the line between criticism and personal attack, in my view. It ain't what you said, it was how you said it." Well, *I* didn't say anything -- I didn't start that thread.  I just don't see what was so wrong with it.  I have no opinion of Hugues' reviews other than that he seems to write a lot of them.  I've also been on music discussion boards long enough and read enough review sites to know that there usually is no point in engaging the author over what he likes and doesn't like, unless you're prepared to get into an argument that few of us have enough time for.  But that doesn't mean that it isn't *fair* to do so in an objective sense, regardless of what the site rules are.  Why *is* this site moderated with a Gestappo-like grip?  Words can't hurt anybody, and sometimes it really takes a healthy dose of hostility to get enough blood flowing to the brain to enable the satisfactory articulation of points.

Yargh,

The fact that I took no offence at the thread is irrelevant to the fact that rules are meant to be followed and Bob/Easy must enforce those rules simply not to let things get out of hands.

Even the tone of your first post (I know you did not start the thread and the so-called insults did not come from you) was not as aggressive as they seem to be now! As Bob says , the critcism is fine , but it was also not placed in the right forum>

Imagine someone statrs a thread about how disgusting your tastes are and you have gone on a week holidays , and on your return you find the thread with 10 pages of attacks..... How would you react??? Probably not well and you would hate the site very quickly.

So let's leave it at that - I am still waiting for a reaction from the thread starter

PS: if you could use the QUOTE button on the top right hand corner of the post , and then write after the second (Quote) brackets , this would make it easier to read your posts. Thanks

Peace

Hugues

I was raising more of a philosophical point than getting invovled in this particular issue (as far as I'm concerned, as long as your reviews accurately represent your opinions, they're fine regardless of who gets 1-star reviews).  Ultimately, words can't hurt anybody and people reading a message board are not a captive audience -- they always have the option of not reading a thread that they find objectionable.  Barring the elimination of trolls who flood boards with what is essentially non-speech, I don't understand why this -- or any -- message board would need to be moderated.  The house rule about "playing nice" is wimpy, ultra-PC and a rather lame exercise in self-importance.  As I previously said, it's particularly ironic, given the overall purpose of the site.  This isn't my board so I don't get to make the rules -- but that doesn't prevent me from exposing the rules as silly and overbearing. 

As for going on holiday and coming back to read 10 pages of personal attacks about reviews -- all I could say to such a person who would be genuinely horrified is:  "get a spine."  They're just words, for God's sake.  And, in at least some cases, I imagine, they'd even be justified.  Some people are so hard-headed that they need to be extravagantly insulted before they embark upon much-needed self-improvement.  Plus, how different is this from an actual artist by one of the bands that doesn't get a lot of good reviews, checking out the site and seeing ten reviews of his work being trashed?  Remember, I'm only talking about harsh criticism of reviewers insofar as issues related to their actual reviews/taste in music, not their personalities in general.

All I'm saying is that criticism in itself is a hostile, personal thing. This is a site devoted to criticism.  Therefore, the rule against being overly critical of the critics seems both dupilcitous and unfair to me.     

My final word on this one Yargh. There is no such rule. Criticism is fine, as long as it is constructive, not destructive. The rule is about personal attacks, not personal attacks.

Hope that helps to clarify things.

"My final word on this one Yargh. There is no such rule. Criticism is fine, as long as it is constructive, not destructive. The rule is about personal attacks, not personal attacks."

Yes, yes... you've made it quite clear what the rule *is*, but have done precious little in the way of justifying it. 

yargh wrote: "My final word on this one Yargh. There is no such rule. Criticism is fine, as long as it is constructive, not destructive. The rule is about personal attacks, not personal attacks." Yes, yes... you've made it quite clear what the rule *is*, but have done precious little in the way of justifying it.

WE dont need to justify anything.

The reason for the rule is self-evident and you are basically being disingenous Yargh.

The Trane's reviews bolstered this site for many months and if he got the occasional one wrong (stylistically rather than critically) then so what? Five or six "dodgy" reviews from a thousand-thats over 99%-hey we should be calling this guy "The King"

As "The Tactless One" of the Admin Team,I wonder why you dont just leave us to our mediocrity and tiresome rules,and just keep walkin' down the Information Superhighway until you reach the end.

We hicks wish you well

Yall come back now.... http://www.moviewavs.com/cgi-bin/tvmp3s.cgi?Beverly_Hillbillies=yall_come_back.mp3 - http://www.moviewavs.com/cgi-bin/tvmp3s.cgi?Beverly_Hillbill ies=yall_come_back.mp3

"The Trane's reviews bolstered this site for many months and if he got the occasional one wrong (stylistically rather than critically) then so what? Five or six "dodgy" reviews from a thousand-thats over 99%-hey we should be calling this guy "The King""

Why do you persist in implying that I either 1) started the thread about Hugues, or 2) have any problem with his reviews?  I didn't start the thread and I don't understand why you continue to think that I have a problem with Hugue's reviews -- in fact, we've exchanged pleasantries on another thread in another area of the site and have gotten along quite well.  He is obviously an enthusiastic music fan and your site benefits from his contributions.  I'm talking about the big picture here; the GENERAL CONCEPT of ruthlessly-enforced niceties and the irony of having it on a site whose primary purpose is to criticize the work of other people.  One would think that critics, of all people, would have thicker skin. 

I explained why I think a less moderated forum is a better idea than the politically-correct asylum you run here and I've phrased all of these arguments in a non-combative demeanor.  Yet you've done nothing but threaten me and refuse to give any answer except complain that "we don't need to justify NUTHIN"   You don't -- it's your site -- but failing to provide an explanation to a relevant, rationally-posed question is puzzling to me, not to mention a bit of a smudge in terms of credibility.   

Furthermore, how am I being disingenuous?

James Lee wrote: yargh wrote: I explained why I think a less moderated forum is a better idea than the politically-correct asylum you run here No, you really haven't. You've stated that you hold that particular opinion, and you gave a metaphor or two, but you have not explained it. In fact, you've specifically avoided responding to a request to explain it. You're not by any chance an Intelligent Design fan, are you? Here's your chance to convert the rest of us. Most of us are willing to consider any point of view that is well-reasoned and justified. All you need to do is show that yours actually is.

Well that was uncalled for!!!!

Bob: Yargh is not the one having a problem with my reviews. This guys sevencoulours has , I sent him a mail early last week , and he read it , but so far has not reacted!

As for Yargh explaining us how a wild OK Corral-style forum would work, I'd be also interested. I think we should create virtual missiles and MP3 bombers if this was to be applied though!

Huges reviews suck.......always have n always will!

IMO of course!