Pet Peeves I Have With Reviews
Printed From: Progarchives.com
Category: Site News, Newbies, Help and Improvements
Forum Name: Help us improve the site
Forum Description: Help us improve the forums, and the site as a whole
URL: http://www.progarchives.com/forum/forum_posts.asp?TID=68229
Printed Date: November 27 2024 at 17:56
Software Version: Web Wiz Forums 11.01 - http://www.webwizforums.com
Topic: Pet Peeves I Have With Reviews
Posted By: m2thek
Subject: Pet Peeves I Have With Reviews
Date Posted: June 09 2010 at 21:03
|
Before I get started, I want to say that I'm not trying to tell people how to write their reviews, or saying that reviews that do these things are necessarily bad. These are merely things that bug me with reviews that I see constantly. Feel free to add your own, or tell me why I'm crazy for letting these bother me This is the biggest offender stylistically. Not even for reviews, but really any post on forums in general. This just makes everything really difficult to read, and gives the impression that there's no organization to a review, but simply random thoughts that came to the reviewer.
2. Writing a review by ONLY comparing the sound of the music to another band or album.
I think up to a point, comparisons to another band can be useful to the reader. For example, if the review says "If you like Popular Band X, then you should try this," then a pretty good amount of people who read the review will know if this music will or won't fit their tastes. But if the entirety of a review is comparisons to another band, it just seems lazy to not even attempt to describe the music for its own merit. Even if the comparisons are accurate, I think its useful to read what the music is like, rather than who it is like.
3. Breaking down every single song on an album
Whether this is the entire review, or just a portion, this one always baffles me. I really enjoy reading musical analysis, but when I read a review, the purpose is to find out if I will enjoy an album or not. While this could satisfy that purpose, it's a really roundabout way to do it, and isn't nearly as effective as describing the music in a general sense. Also, I think when reviews do this, it takes away the surprise from a first time listener (if they choose to read it). I don't think anyone would describe every chapter of a book in a review, so I don't understand why this gets done on this site so much. This also tends to make reviews extremely long.
Those are the big 3 that I notice a lot. I'll add more if I see them.
|
Replies:
Posted By: Kestrel
Date Posted: June 09 2010 at 21:45
|
While I totally agree with #1 (who wouldn't?), I only agree with the second two to some extent. Whereas I personally wouldn't write a comparison review or a track-by-track review, I do see the usefulness in both. You have already highlighted the usefulness of a comparison review so I won't expand. However, I personally like track-by-track reviews while I'm listening to an album. I like some in-depth analysis of all the tracks sometimes. I wouldn't consider such a review the ideal review to read when looking for new albums, but I consider them useful while listening. If these were the only reviews for albums, I would agree. But when albums often have 10+ reviews and sometimes a lot more, I prefer a variety. It's just more interesting that way and offers multiple perspectives. |
Posted By: Finnforest
Date Posted: June 09 2010 at 21:50
|
There have been so many "reviews discussion" threads, including the one titled just that, that I wonder if this thread couldn't just be rolled into one of them. But that's up to the A-team.  |
Posted By: Conor Fynes
Date Posted: June 10 2010 at 12:44
|
I agree with all three to some extent, although I like to have at least one track-by-track review on the site for each album.
Also, for albums with not very many songs (Close to the edge, hemispheres) it becomes natural, because it breaks the album down into a few concise parts to talk about.
|
Posted By: Epignosis
Date Posted: June 10 2010 at 13:11
|
Don't read reviews that bug you. [/thread] ------------- https://epignosis.bandcamp.com/album/a-month-of-sundays" rel="nofollow - https://epignosis.bandcamp.com/album/a-month-of-sundays |
Posted By: J-Man
Date Posted: June 10 2010 at 19:31
|
I have a tough time with single-paragraph reviews as well, and I try to avoid those. Of course, if they're on the shorter side it isn't a problem, but it really bugs me when there is a really long review as only one paragraph. The other two really depend for me. Comparing an album to other bands can be very useful when it comes to lesser-known acts, and some track-by-track reviews are helpful as well. It all depends on the review and the person who writes it, though. ------------- 
Check out my YouTube channel! http://www.youtube.com/user/demiseoftime" rel="nofollow - http://www.youtube.com/user/demiseoftime |
Posted By: progkidjoel
Date Posted: June 11 2010 at 01:46
------------- 
|
Epignosis wrote:Posted By: harmonium.ro
Date Posted: June 11 2010 at 02:48
I don't have a problem with one-paragraph reviews because I concentrate on reading them 
|
Posted By: Marty McFly
Date Posted: June 11 2010 at 05:40
|
^ Well, for me it's very difficult to read such reviews. It's human nature.
------------- There's a point where "avant-garde" and "experimental" becomes "terrible" and "pointless," -Andyman1125 on Lulu  Even my |
Posted By: toroddfuglesteg
Date Posted: June 11 2010 at 08:32
|
Threads like this is the ones who scares newbies from contributing with reviews at this site. Which is us shooting ourselves in the foot............ or head. We need more reviews. I have never seen a 6 months old baby run a marathon = don't criticize newbies for their first reviews. Let them grow into the role and routine of reviewing and let them find their own voice and own personality. Diversity is very much encouraged. As long as the guidelines is followed, everyone here should be encouraged to review albums and contribute with more stuff to this community. Everyone ! |
Posted By: Nightshine
Date Posted: June 11 2010 at 14:31
|
Most of the people here can't write reviews anyway, and their bias towards symphonic/70s prog sickens me. Doesn't mean I make a topic about it. |
Posted By: Epignosis
Date Posted: June 11 2010 at 14:38
Thanks for sharing. ------------- https://epignosis.bandcamp.com/album/a-month-of-sundays" rel="nofollow - https://epignosis.bandcamp.com/album/a-month-of-sundays |
Posted By: Nightshine
Date Posted: June 11 2010 at 14:46
No problem. The truth had to be revealed some day. |
Posted By: rogerthat
Date Posted: June 12 2010 at 23:53
I disagree with point three completely except to the extent that a track by track with just a cursory line about each track and nothing else by way of a review is useless. Otherwise, a breakdown of each track can be useful. I cannot possibly tell if YOU will enjoy the album I enjoyed, I cannot read your mind.  And if I simply write my opinion about my album that it rules or it sucks, how does that help you decide either? You could say that several votes in favour of an album count for something, but in that case, why read reviews, the ratings should be enough. By describing the music, the reviewer can tell you what is in the album and then you can make up your mind whether you want to try that or not.
|
Posted By: Atavachron
Date Posted: June 13 2010 at 00:47
really? I don't know, we seem to have more than ever |
Posted By: Conor Fynes
Date Posted: June 13 2010 at 01:07
Can't hurt to express advice on how one might make their reviews better though..
|
Posted By: toroddfuglesteg
Date Posted: June 13 2010 at 02:31
but we can get a lot more. in any case, we need fresh blood when both you and I signs of and meets up with our maker. |
Posted By: DisgruntledPorcupine
Date Posted: June 14 2010 at 10:27
| My biggest pet peeve is people who repeatedly review bands they hate. You then get a poor quality review thats just shown by people who are obviously going to give 2 and 1 star reviews to a band because their judgement of what is truly there and the potential of the album is clouded. It's okay to not like a band who is not for you, but repeatedly giving bad reviews to their albums is just plain annoying. It then hurts the average rating and peoples opinions who might be willing to get into the band. |
Posted By: The Hemulen
Date Posted: June 14 2010 at 12:20
This. I noticed the other day that most of Deerhoof's albums have been reviewed by just one member who clearly doesn't enjoy their music at all or perhaps even fully appreciate why they might appeal to anyone else, and has marked them down accordingly. When I'm more familiar with their albums I try to write some less biased reviews to help counteract them, but it's pretty jarring, and particularly damaging for artists without many ratings. |
Posted By: UMUR
Date Posted: June 14 2010 at 13:04
|
^I donīt see a problem with 1 and 2 star reviews given by the same reviewer to a certain act. It depends on how the review is written. Who would want to read 5 star reviews only anyways??? I like to read critical reviews of albums that I enjoy, to try and see it from the other side of the fence. As long as the reviews are well written I have no problem with that.
And back to the topic, yes I also prefer when people break up their reviews in paragraphs but itīs not a mandatory thing for me to enjoy a review that itīs not so.
Personally I generally donīt read track by track reviews. I prefer reviews that give a more general idea of how the music sounds on an album. Itīs allright to mention tracks to get a point across of course but in depth track by track analysis is not something I enjoy. I understand others enjoy those kinds of reviews though so I guess itīs an aquired taste. ------------- http://www.metalmusicarchives.com/" rel="nofollow - Metal Music Archives https://rateyourmusic.com/~UMUR" rel="nofollow - UMUR on RYM |
Posted By: moshkito
Date Posted: September 23 2010 at 20:35
It can be done, but it dang better be so well written in that paragraph that you are going to spend 10 years trying to figure out what each word and letter meant!
My biggest pet peeve ... specially when that band is "Progressive" or "Prog" ... and those 2 bands are impossible to compare to. On top of it, those two bands have massive hit records that we want duplicated ... and we won't like it either!
I rarely do that ... and the first time I did it was on the recent review of KC's first album I just posted. And why did I do that you ask? ... because Atomic's review was very good and I felt he deserved the compliment.
Gosh ... I was just thinking that if we did this on so many of these prog albums with 4 and 5 minute cuts and neo-prog design music with plasticene and bacon ... that the reviews would never get done ... yeah ... 14 songs at 3 minutes each ... how progressive of them!
 In general, and it is the same thing with my poetry and film reviews, I don't use the same format, since I write from the heart and what is inside and you can only map the heart with a picture at the doctor! Just like my postings in this board ... I tend to be all over the place and 3 or 4 people hate it!
 ...And one last thing that should be added here ... the review that is not a review but instead is some kind of writing about an idea in music that doesn't exist. Experience I can handle ... but ideas can get boring and trying sometimes, specially when they are "prog"! ------------- Music is not just for listening ... it is for LIVING ... you got to feel it to know what's it about! Not being told! www.pedrosena.com |
Posted By: JLocke
Date Posted: October 07 2010 at 03:06
|
Posted By: Dean
Date Posted: October 07 2010 at 03:18
 ------------- What? |
Posted By: moshkito
Date Posted: October 07 2010 at 20:17
To a point.
In the end, what is going to happen is that Snow Dog will never read what I write, for example ... and sooner or later you have board issues that affect the quality of the work. In general, there is no place in the "collaborators" and "reviewers" for that ... as we end up hurting the quality of the board? We had the same thing in a poetry board ... when the lack of respect and appreciation stops, the whole thing starts falling apart because the priority is not the work ... it's the individuals that would rather press the buttons! ------------- Music is not just for listening ... it is for LIVING ... you got to feel it to know what's it about! Not being told! www.pedrosena.com |
Posted By: Epignosis
Date Posted: October 07 2010 at 20:20
I think we've gone past that point. ------------- https://epignosis.bandcamp.com/album/a-month-of-sundays" rel="nofollow - https://epignosis.bandcamp.com/album/a-month-of-sundays |
Posted By: Slartibartfast
Date Posted: October 07 2010 at 22:09
By the way, serious assistance here for the guilty parties. You have to manually put in a space between paragraphs (hit enter button twice). Yeah, I know, it's a pain in the ass, but it works. ------------- Released date are often when it it impacted you but recorded dates are when it really happened... 
|
Posted By: npjnpj
Date Posted: October 08 2010 at 08:28
|
I have, in the past, actually taken long one-paragraph reviews and pasted them into Word, replacing every period with a period followed by a paragraph sign. Makes it much easier. My favourite peeve about reviews concern the ones where the reviewer actually listens with a stopwatch and informs everybody when each solo, break, change, or whatever occurs, down to the very second of every track. What a strange way to listen to an album. I just can't translate that to usable information at all. |
Posted By: AtomicCrimsonRush
Date Posted: October 08 2010 at 09:49
Thx for the compliment there - I enjoy writing those reviews too, tho admittedly have been quiet lately - I must get back into it soon....
Cheers Moshkito ------------- 
|
Posted By: Vibrationbaby
Date Posted: October 08 2010 at 10:28
I completely agree with # 3. Sometimes they are not really reviewing that album but merely describing the music. I just try to go for some song highlights myself. I go more for overall concept. My Vangelis Albedo 0.39 & Jean Michel Jarre En Attendant Cousteau review come to mind. ------------- |
Posted By: Catcher10
Date Posted: October 08 2010 at 12:44
|
I absolutely pay no attention to the rating number.....I just read the commentary and whether 4 sentences long or 4 paragraphs long is not an issue for me.
Its the CONTENT that makes me want to listen to an album. And also a 1 or 2 to me means nothing since based on the definition it only means,,,,'you should get this album only if you are a completeist'.
I don't interpret 1/2 as krapp/trash/blowup/use as cup coaster.....to me there is no rating for that in the PA.
Content is what I am looking for......now the quality of the content is another topic. -------------   
|
Posted By: Easy Livin
Date Posted: October 08 2010 at 12:52
|
Posted By: JLocke
Date Posted: October 08 2010 at 13:33
I've done that in the past. It's just a way to keep things interesting as I describe the effect the album has on me. I never review albums on my first listen. If people don't like how I go about doing the review, they are welcome to ignore my work.
|
Posted By: Finnforest
Date Posted: October 08 2010 at 14:19
And in fact, one of our most prolific and treasured reviewers describes songs in that manner....and I know for a fact that a lot of our members love his reviews. So there's probably fans of every style. As a wise collab once noted, just be yourself and write honestly and respectfully, and don't write more than you need to make your feelings known. For most people, the more they write, the better they get. |
Posted By: moshkito
Date Posted: October 08 2010 at 14:22
|
Hi,
Well .. it does say "Pet Peeves" on the thread discussion!  ------------- Music is not just for listening ... it is for LIVING ... you got to feel it to know what's it about! Not being told! www.pedrosena.com |
Posted By: Catcher10
Date Posted: October 08 2010 at 14:36
|
^ Then I guess my "pet peeve" is the use of 1/2 stars to say this is horrible/krapp/trash/worthless..... -------------
|
Posted By: AtomicCrimsonRush
Date Posted: October 08 2010 at 16:32
2. is a great reference point for where the reviewer is gaining most enjoyment...i have occasionally reviewed albums this way - its fun and gives a depth that other reviews may lack..
on the subject of reviewing every song on the album - i do this often as i gain most enjoyment of reviewing this way, and i usually read reviews most that do this as i want to know whats on the album as a whole, not read one paragraph of responses. the music is most important and the quality of every track. if a reviewer is stating every track is a compelling brilliant prog experience i will check it ou... reading reviews here lead me to Magma, Triumvirat, IQ, Spocks Beard, and Transatlantic, so I am grateful, and there are heaps of others. I will admit i only mainly read reviews from collabs, or PRs rather than the others, i guess i trust their judgement and they are rarely dishonest fanboys.
thats a segue to
My pet Peeve
people who review every album with either 1 stars
or
5 stars
its obvious they cant be trusted and many do it here to bump up their favourite artist or vice versa rather than giving a true indication of the quality of artists work. theres no way every album of an artist is a masterpiece - even the best have down times. -------------
|
Posted By: SaltyJon
Date Posted: October 08 2010 at 16:33
Alternatively, as the tips tell you, you can put <p> at the end of a paragraph then the next word will start a new one.  ------------- http://www.last.fm/user/Salty_Jon" rel="nofollow"> 
|
Posted By: Catcher10
Date Posted: October 08 2010 at 18:53
That's why I don't pay attention to the rating..... -------------
|
Posted By: ExittheLemming
Date Posted: October 08 2010 at 23:12
|
Pet peeves eh?.... Those reviews that award 5 stars for erm...cultural significance e.g. Dark Side of the Moon and In the Court of the Crimson King are very good but deeply flawed albums if appraised on their musical merit irrespective of genre. Some of said reviews end up by stating: ' some really dodgy tracks but for its contribution to Prog *****  Those reviews that award 1 star for erm...the author's ignorance e.g. this Keith Emerson solo album is not Prog and does not sound like Tarkus and does not have any tracks longer than 4 minutes * (the artist being listed in the crossover section to boot) ------------- 
|
Posted By: moshkito
Date Posted: October 12 2010 at 18:18
I don't think that there is a problem with the review on the first look/listen. As a film reviewer, you only get that one chance and you write the review, so doing the same with music is not an issue for me ... but it does require one thing that I am not sure a lot of reviewers here are capable of doing ... and that is ... the world is out there, and it's ideas and designs for "progressive" shouldn't exist ... so you can listen to it with fresh ears.
For me, listening to any music is not about me chasing down this progressive ideal or band or that something or other band or that romantic composer ... and when you go into it as an "experience" ... rather than comparing it to what you have heard before ... in the end, your experience with music will be limited by the filters you have imposed. Same with film ... and you're gonna tell me that all 6 Jason films are good ... duh, duh, duh ... simply because it is this or that ... To keep it fresh and interesting you have to let go of the idealism, to appreciate the moments in time ... and this is where a lot of "progressive" music nowadays ismostly idealistic and copy, and not innovative. I've given them all the same year I did for PF and KC and AD2 and FZ ... !
The open ear is far more adventurous, imaginative and enjoyable. You discover new worlds. You discover new paints. You discover new images. ... and they are not "yours" ... they come from the music, or the film ... and this is the material that makes for a great "review" of the work. That is the freshness that film lives for, and so many arts try hard to make these images come alive so you can see it as well ... and the best music in history? ... it all does just that! It is not just a lyric!.
And it is the main reason why it is so bizarre to me when people say I only listen to metal, or prog or this or that ... they are limiting their experience. It's their choice of course, but being a reviewer, your preference is NOT what the review is about ... the only preference I use is ... I don't do reviews for top ten or for any top money films. There are plenty of those opinions every where already! ------------- Music is not just for listening ... it is for LIVING ... you got to feel it to know what's it about! Not being told! www.pedrosena.com |
Posted By: Antennas
Date Posted: October 12 2010 at 20:32
|
My current pet peeve with reviews is that a lot of folks don't seem to understand that giving three stars to an album actually means that it is GOOD, hence why there are so many 4- and 5- star ratings being given out - even when in the actual review, there's a complete litany of 'why this album isn't perfect'-reasons given!
Even I myself have fallen into that trap more than once (will adjust it when I feel like doing so), as I feared I wouldn't get rightly understood if I'd give a 'GOOD' album 'only' three stars... ------------- 
Jesus never managed to figure out the theremin either |
Posted By: Finnforest
Date Posted: October 12 2010 at 21:10
I feel your pain man, been saying that since I got here. Some folks feel like 3 stars is a diss and pretty much start at 4 for anything they like. But don't lose sleep, just stick to your own system. Eventually regular users figure out how people rate and they can pretty much predict what that persons rating means to them. They might say....oh that guy gave it a 4, so its probably a 3 for me, etc. I know I've both under-rated and over-rated albums myself based on excitement or disappointment, we all make mistakes, but eventually I check albums again and "adjust' as necessary to what I believe the real rating to be. This is kind of an ongoing thing, there's probably still a few clunker ratings out there. Time can change your views, some albums hold up over the years, others not so much. Some people just rate more conservatively, others less so. But the important thing is to try to follow the guidelines and use 3 for a Good album, 4 for excellent/awesome, and 5 for the super-rare masterpiece. My view is that 5% generally, of a large and diverse collection, is 5 stars. Sure that could vary, but thinking of the best/top 5% of all albums gives one general definition of "masterpiece" for people to consider. |
Posted By: kenethlevine
Date Posted: October 13 2010 at 20:49
| it's not really a pet peeve, but I notice some reviewers consider an album rating to be the average rating of an individual song on the album, as if the album does not really exist as an entity in and of itself |
Posted By: 40footwolf
Date Posted: October 13 2010 at 22:46
|
The last one is definitely a pet peeve of mine too. It's actually a bad habit I've gotten into that I'm doing my best to break. ------------- Heaven's made a cesspool of us all. |
Posted By: Textbook
Date Posted: October 14 2010 at 05:28
| "Don't read reviews that bug you" cracks me up. How do you know if a review will bug you before you read it? |
Posted By: JLocke
Date Posted: October 14 2010 at 05:38
See, there's this little thing known as 'skimming' . . .
|
Posted By: Textbook
Date Posted: October 14 2010 at 05:56
|
But that won't tell you whether you like it or not either. Do you skim a CD or movie or book before you experience it properly? No because it doesn't give an accurate impression of what it's like. |
Posted By: Textbook
Date Posted: October 14 2010 at 05:57
|
Posted By: Dean
Date Posted: October 14 2010 at 07:56
------------- What? |