Reviews: Song-by-song or Not?
Printed From: Progarchives.com
Category: Topics not related to music
Forum Name: General Polls
Forum Description: Create polls on topics not related to music
URL: http://www.progarchives.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=67367
Printed Date: January 31 2025 at 19:48
Software Version: Web Wiz Forums 11.01 - http://www.webwizforums.com
Topic: Reviews: Song-by-song or Not?
Posted By: The Quiet One
Subject: Reviews: Song-by-song or Not?
Date Posted: May 12 2010 at 19:08
|
Due to a recent thread about a reviewer wanting to know which style of reviews he should employ, I wondered what most people here think.
So, do you prefer to READ track-by-track reviews or "simply" a general view of the album?
|
Replies:
Posted By: A Person
Date Posted: May 12 2010 at 19:13
| I prefer general ones, although if they describe a song or two as an example of the rest of the album or as sticking out from the rest that's fine too. |
Posted By: SaltyJon
Date Posted: May 12 2010 at 19:15
|
For me, it really depends on the writer. I've noticed some people are great at writing the track by tracks, in which case I enjoy reading them. As far as writing them goes, I prefer writing general overviews, maybe pointing out a couple tracks, though never going into too much detail about the individual tracks. I get excessively wordy and I get bored and/or tired of reading my own reviews halfway through when I do them track by track. So I guess in general, I prefer general overviews.
------------- http://www.last.fm/user/Salty_Jon" rel="nofollow"> 
|
Posted By: Tarquin Underspoon
Date Posted: May 12 2010 at 19:17
|
I think that if you're reviewing an album, you should review an album. Not one song after another.
There are exceptions, if you want to point out a highlight or perhaps if your album only has a few songs. But as a general rule, short, sweet reviews that give me the flavor of an album are all that I need or want. ------------- "WAAAAAAOOOOOUGH! WAAAAAAAUUUUGGHHHH!! WAAAAAOOOO!!!" -The Great Gig in the Sky |
Posted By: Atavachron
Date Posted: May 12 2010 at 19:24
|
If by 'song-by-song' you mean listing each track as if it's a inventory, no, hate it. If you mean including a mention of most tracks in the review, that's different. In our time of samples and snippets, there is something to be said for a writer showing they've in fact heard the whole album. But it's not absolutely necessary to mention every cut, especially if out of say 10 cuts, a mention of 7 will suffice. |
Posted By: J-Man
Date Posted: May 12 2010 at 19:30
|
I usually skip the track by track section when I'm reading a review, unless it's exceptionally well written. If I've never heard an album before, I honestly don't care what every song is about. I just want to know what the general feel of the album is like. I used to write track-by-track reviews, but I stopped after a while. As I would revise my reviews, I would usually skip my own track-by-track section because I got bored. That's when I realized that it was time to stop! Of course, it does have its benefits as well. I love hearing some other people's takes on some of my favorites, but I generally don't care much for this style of reviewing. I like it when a few highlights or drawbacks are mentioned, but discussing every song can sometimes get repetitive. In a (very) few cases, I enjoy reading the track-by-track section (Robert comes to mind), but usually I skip that part. Just my thoughts... -Jeff ------------- 
Check out my YouTube channel! http://www.youtube.com/user/demiseoftime" rel="nofollow - http://www.youtube.com/user/demiseoftime |
Posted By: A Person
Date Posted: May 12 2010 at 19:42
Robignosis? |
J-Man wrote:Posted By: UndercoverBoy
Date Posted: May 12 2010 at 19:56
| I really like track-by-track reviews, when they go into detail about what makes the music so great. TGM: Orb's reviews are fantastic. |
Posted By: AtomicCrimsonRush
Date Posted: May 12 2010 at 20:11
I write track by track reviews usually for excellent albums or masterpieces and at times an overall review is better so both have their place I believe.
------------- 
|
Posted By: thellama73
Date Posted: May 12 2010 at 20:24
|
It really depends. I think some albums really need a track by track synopsis while for others such a style would be ridiculous. Imagine reviewing Dark Side of The Moon one track at a time. There are ple ty of highly regarded prog albums thta would benefit from an individual track analysis, however. For example, I think Selling England By The Pound lends itself to this sort of review due to the very different style of some of the songs. Danicng With The MOonlit Knight is not the same as I Know What I Like and the review should reflect this.
------------- 
|
Posted By: Epignosis
Date Posted: May 12 2010 at 21:40
|
I don't have a preference...I love the diversity of style. In fact, I could probably tell you who wrote what if you blocked out the user name and just gave me a review, because many of the constant writers here are very distinct, and I like that. I of course write track-by-track (for studio albums), but that's just me. I have many reasons why I do that. However, I offer my general opinions in the first paragraph, so if you just want a quick judgment, the first paragraph is all you need. If you want more detail, there's the track-by-track description that follows.  I have noticed that most collaborators who reviewed it, I believe, gave my album a track-by-track review, even when they normally don't write that way, and to be honest, I found that very helpful as the maker of the songs. ------------- https://epignosis.bandcamp.com/album/a-month-of-sundays" rel="nofollow - https://epignosis.bandcamp.com/album/a-month-of-sundays |
Posted By: memowakeman
Date Posted: May 12 2010 at 23:53
|
Both types of reviews can be good, it depends on the writer. I enjoy reading general overviews and track by track ones, both of them bring very interesting points of view. As you may know, I am one of those who likes reviewing track by track when it comes to studio albums, but that does not mean that I prefer reading that kind of reviews. I actually see first who is writing, and if I know his/her style, I decide if I read it or not. ------------- Follow me on twitter @memowakeman |
Posted By: Vompatti
Date Posted: May 13 2010 at 02:19
| Track-by-track is like reviewing a movie scene-by-scene: too analytic and extremely silly. Not that I care, I only read Mark Prindle's reviews anyway. |
Posted By: Dean
Date Posted: May 13 2010 at 02:48
|
Whatever style suits the author best - some people's track by track reviews read like the phone-book while others relate each track to each other and to the album as a whole - since artists and producers put a lot of care into track order for a reason, some review can reflect that care and attention to detail without becoming a shopping-list or sounding like the announcer at Waterloo Station, while others can give a general overview of an album that's like painting a picture in words allowing you to get a feel from the review that would be lost in a track-by-track analysis. Of course, whether you know the album and each track or have never heard it makes a difference.
What I don't care for is rating each song individually - if there are strong and weak tracks then say so, I don't need empirical numbers. ------------- What? |
Posted By: The Sleepwalker
Date Posted: May 13 2010 at 02:56
| I prefer general reviews, describing the overall feel and quality of the album. Often, points can be made quite well with describing a few songs of the album that stand out in some way or are very typical for the album. If I am looking for an album, the general sound of it is what I want to know, and I can't really care for reading descriptions of the individual tracks. Of course, there are some exceptions. Albums with only three songs or so, like CTTE, can work out fine with track by track reviews. |
Posted By: WalterDigsTunes
Date Posted: May 13 2010 at 03:13
|
"Writing about music is like dancing about architecture" - Frank Zappa And yeah, a pirouette for every single minarette can get tedious after a while. |
Posted By: someone_else
Date Posted: May 15 2010 at 04:52
|
It just depends on the review. A recent example of a review I really enjoyed (and which I recommend for Review of the Month April if I may be so bold) was http://www.progarchives.com/Review.asp?id=278018 - this one : very to the point, maybe I could guess which album was its subject without any titles mentioned. And that's what it's all about...
------------- 
|
Posted By: Slartibartfast
Date Posted: May 15 2010 at 08:28
Other: s------------- Released date are often when it it impacted you but recorded dates are when it really happened... 
|
Posted By: The Quiet One
Date Posted: May 15 2010 at 08:47
^
|
Posted By: JLocke
Date Posted: May 15 2010 at 09:32
| I do a mixture of both. It depends on what type of mood I'm in, how much time I have and what the album means to me. Sometimes I take the time to do song-by-song, other times, I don't. |
Posted By: Ivan_Melgar_M
Date Posted: May 15 2010 at 11:59
|
There are differet kind of albums and different kind of reviews, I usually:
1.- Rate the whole album when talking about conceptual albums (The story is more important) and compilations (because most songs have been reviewed in the original albums)
2.- A mixture of song by song and whole album when the record is formed by a lot of very short songs, with emphasis in the best songs (according to my taste)
3.- Song by song in the rest
What I never do and find disgusting is giving a rate for each song, using a formula and obtaining the average rating.
Iván ------------- 
|
Posted By: Chris S
Date Posted: May 15 2010 at 13:38
I prefer a general based view highlighting some songs, however if you read sinkadotentree's reviews he reviews mostly track by track and his reviews are brilliant ------------- ...As I venture through the slipstream, between the viaducts in your dreams...[/COLOR] |
Posted By: harmonium.ro
Date Posted: May 15 2010 at 13:46
| I'm interested in track-by-track if I already know the album, because then I can relate. A general description with a few examples is perfect for me otherwise. |
Posted By: A Person
Date Posted: May 15 2010 at 13:47
| It would be interesting to further break it down between reading reviews for albums you've already heard and albums you are looking into. |
Posted By: Oliverum
Date Posted: May 19 2010 at 15:02
|
I enjoy song-by-song reviews mostly when I have heared the album before. In that case it is quite interesting to read what other people have discovered in each song separately and find out something new for yourself.
|
Posted By: Epignosis
Date Posted: May 19 2010 at 15:05
I only like note-by-note reviews. 
------------- https://epignosis.bandcamp.com/album/a-month-of-sundays" rel="nofollow - https://epignosis.bandcamp.com/album/a-month-of-sundays |
Posted By: DisgruntledPorcupine
Date Posted: June 06 2010 at 16:08
http://www.progarchives.com/Review.asp?id=285176 - http://www.progarchives.com/Review.asp?id=285176
Thats my format. It's sort of a blend between song-by-song and other elements. I'd find it good to read, but I don't know if anyone else uses. 
|
Posted By: JJLehto
Date Posted: June 08 2010 at 15:29
|
Hmm..... as the person I THINK you created this about I need to say I prefer writing general album reviews over song by song. Also, the results of this seem to confirm that, but so ya know this will nothing to do with how I write reviews!  I'm gunna keep mixing it up |
Posted By: CinemaZebra
Date Posted: June 08 2010 at 15:55
|
An overview of the album first, a general view review, then a track-by-track review with a closer describing who the album is is for and who it isn't for.
------------- 
|