Jim LotFP said:
First, questions:
What is your reason for reviewing albums?
A good question. Several reasons. I enjoy metal, I enjoy talking about metal, I enjoy writing, thought I'd enjoy writing about metal in a more formal way, thought about doing it on my own, but decided to inquire at other review sites first. I honestly had no idea what I was getting myself into. I didn't know if I'd get free CDs to review or not. And if I got CDs to review, I didn't know if I'd get to keep them or have to return them. I really had no idea how it all worked. I also thought that it would be a good way for me to learn more about metal. Lastly, I thought I could add something to reviews, write reviews that I would really like to read. I haven't accomplished that yet. Working on it.
How do you decide which albums to review?
I try to review all of the albums that are sent to me by the main hauncho at SoT. I've only reviewed one of the albums that I've bought. Plan to do more, but I want to get the others done first.
Who are you hoping will read your reviews?
People that visit the site anyhow. I respected SoT, that's why I asked if I could write for them. That said, people that are wondering if they should buy the album or not. People looking for information on albums that they can't find in magazine reviews such as BW&BK, or biased, sarcastic, fanboy reviews from places like blabbermouth.
How many times do you listen to an album, in its entirety, before writing anything about it?
I don't have a number. I consider 3 major events of listening though. First thoughts (always important), comfortable thoughts (after at least 3 listens, usually ends when I feel comfortable with my feelings on the album), lasting thoughts (coming back to it a week later. Longer would probably be preferable. Sometimes its a month later.). And I do recognize that if you listen to it a bajillion times you'll probably have some different feelings than 1/2 bajillion times. Though perhaps I should listen to them more than I do. I'll have to think on it. I know some people seem to not post on their feelings of an album until they've listened to it a dozen times. Other people who listen to an album will listen to it once, and if they don't like it, they don't like it. Some others will hate an album at first and a year or two later of listening to it, find that they love it beyond belief. This is a hard area. How much is enough to write a review?
Who are your Heroes of Album Reviewing? The people that you read that make you jealous because you want to be able to make people react to your writing the way you do to theirs?
I do like a number of the writers on SoT. Pardo I think writes some excellent reviews. I haven't followed writers on other sites, as much as 'sites' in general. But again, one reason I got into this, is because a lot of reviews out there I plainly did not like.
Though, some of the reviews I've read at
www.wrekage.org, are pretty damn incredible (mostly the ones that Greg has done). The guys there have an insane amount of knowledge about metal, history, and can write really well. Though I don't always agree with them. But I guess like Roger Ebert, the best part about them is I know what they like, and can make judgements based on their writings if I'd like something or not.
Can't say I've read any reviews on this site as of yet. A lot of e-zines out there seem focused on reviewing every album released, and thus underreviewing them all. I often can't tell by the end of their review, why they gave the score to the album that they did. And honestly, right now I rely on listening to available songs on bands Web sites, and listening to some people I know. Makes you wonder if anybody -really- makes decisions based on review sites at all.
What are your thoughts on these "Commandments of Album Reviewing"?
Always directly judge a CD's quality in a review.
I agree with this one. Zen at the Art of Motorcycle Maintenance is a book that gave me a mind fuck. But what use is a review of there is no discussion of its quality?
Your individual perception of what music is and what it should sound like is your most powerful resource when reviewing.
Half agree. Probably should agree more. I argue with myself about this a lot. So I'm not completely sure yet. If you only obey your own musical tastes, perhaps you do a disservice to others who have different tastes, and thus find nothing useful out of your review. But perhaps this is in like with pop-culture too much. By trying to cater to the masses, you only feed the masses, and fail to service those who are not among the masses. I think reviewers tend to want many to listen to them and like their review. Again a pop-culture viewpoint. Perhaps by giving a review that is focused on ones individual perception is the key, because otherwise you aren't being honest. Statements like 'While I didn't like this, fans of X and Y might enjoy this.' Its a true statement. It does cater to others, but it doesn't violate ones own opinion. Its an offering for others. Generally that is what I think I try to do. Offer my own perception, but recognize there are others and try to give them something to consider. I'll be continuing to rethink how I approach this.
If the purpose of an album review is to "give people information so that they can decide if the want to buy it or not" (which I actually agree with, with asterisks as found in Scum section 30)... how tight is your judgement noose? What kind of annual budget do you expect your readers to have? (shouldn't you think of that when deciding how many albums you give a thumbs up to?)
Isn't that the purpose of a rating number? Its not just a thumbs up or thumbs down. All readers have different budgets. Is a 3/5 worth it to you? 3/5 for me, means that its alright, no real lasting power, looking for something better. I wouldn't buy it. Others might. Same with movie reviews. Its not just about an absolute money/time investment, its all relative. So we can only give people information so that they can use their own judgement. But yes, if a person can afford 5 albums in a year, they might only want to get those that reviews indicate are excellent albums in a genre that they love.
Now for your reviews specifically...
The Terrorizer review... are you familiar with World Downfall? For how long? Some of your wording here sounds like a press release... I suspect you're either just taking someone else's word that World Downfall was a "classic" or projecting something you know to be true to certain people as your own opinion. There's just that kind of "unattached" feel in your writing concerning this band.
I'm familiar with it. But I wasn't familiar with it till after I got the sophmore album. I'm sure I'm not the only one that sometimes gets albums from bands they've never listened to before. Maybe I should send those back. I don't know. Its something I think about. But if we aren't allowed to read about history to judge the present, we are at a loss. As for a classic, my wording was shotty here. I should have stated that it is generally viewed as a classic by fans of the grindcore genre. Way I wrote it made it sound like I thought the album was a classic. Either way, I didn't just follow a press release. I read about the band, about World Downfall, read reviews for it, what other bands said about Terrorizer, etc.
I agree it was unattached. My problem with it was that I had fun with the album. I enjoyed listening to it, even though its not my favorite genre. But people reading that review most likely would be fans of 'World Downfall' I doubt many are going to buy that album that haven't listened to the previous. So I was trying to give an indicate of, 'is it on the same level, will it hit me the same way," for the reader. And my review was stating that it won't. But if you don't give a shit if its going to, and just want a grindcore/death album to listen to, then its good, but not great. And the next statement probably gets more into it.
The Time Symmetry review highlights most of the problems I have with your reviews. "This album also has good lyrics..." but you never go on about what they lyrics are about, why you like them, or anything concerning them at all. You do this a lot in your reviews... you give an opinion and then drop the subject to go on to the next factoid/opinionoid like you're writing a school paper and just wanting to cover the subject enough to get a passing grade. Very dry reads.
Point taken. Will work on that.
I think that this leads to a fear I have. A fear of being 'wrong.' I'm worried about people just coming out and saying, "You don't know what you are talking about," and thus ruining any reputation. Partly why I've been 'quiet' with my reviews, I don't think I'm taking the risks that I should be taking, and so for example really digging into what I like about those lyrics. But obviously I haven't been happy with my reviews, hence the searching for into on how to write them better. Either way, its made me trying to write 'safe' and thus dry. Thanks for the feedback. Feel free to respond to whatever, and even give me advice on areas you see me struggling with (either in writing, or in these replies).
