D.Ingram
Member
Does that include that particular piece of advice? 
I've never been an advocate of 'reviews are gospel' as it is. The fact that people have taken MY reviews as such is a rather depressing thought, since I spend most of my writing time pointing out everything that's wrong with an album before ending it with a full summary of whether or not I think that it's worth anyone's time/money. Hell, for a while a lot of UK thrash bands seemed to take a good review on my part as a genuine 'stam of approval' which was fucking terrifying. I guess it's something that a lot of people seem to subconsciously adhere to sometimes, if a game, film or album gets a shitty review then they'll abide by it... I know so many people who'll counteract any negative opinion with "BUT IT GOT 4/5 STARS IN KNOBMUNCHERS WEEKLY". True, but that doesn't mean it's actually good or that everyone will like it. I remember reading reviews for a PSone game called 'Dragon Valor' that essentially called it crap, but I bought it and found it to be one of the most satisfying titles I owned. Same goes for anything I guess. But it's when people blindly follow it that it starts to get on my balls.
Again, with Lord McIver I just always found his opinions to actually hold a modicum of truth to them hence why I usually make an exception to the rule with him (bar the last Cavalera Conspiracy album, really butted heads with him on that). So such a bold statement befuddled me somewhat, mostly because I was tired and partially because I'm a fucking idiot haha. I've never apologised for writing something in a review though, which is something that REALLY fucks me off when people get a backlash for saying an album is worse or better than many people think it is. A review is naught more than a writeup of an individual's observations of the product - INDIVIDUAL. Again, nobody should take one person's view as absolute law, but it happens all too often and I think that it's a problem. In fact, I'd actually wager that a great many thrash fans wouldn't think so much of a lot of albums now considered 'classics' if the media hadn't harped on about them so much... that's just my two cents. Call it a hunch, call it 'Dave being a bellend', whatever haha. The other issue that comes from all of this is St. Anger syndrome, or A Matter of Life and Death syndrome as some call it, where an album will be hailed as a colossal shiny album of sexy titty-flashing glory in the media, yet pretty much everyone else on earth really, really hates it. Lines start to blur, other factors come in, everyone gets stuffed into a cardboard box and shipped off to Mexico. Then years later, the magazine/website etc. that gave the album a glowing review ten years ago will write up an article in which they call said album a pile of garbage... eh? What? Peer pressure much? If I ever do that (and I've done it ONCE with Soulfly's "Omen") then I can at least have the decency to go "Yeah, I didn't like it, but it's grown on me. Hands up, I jumped the gun a bit". The very east the media can do is that, at least say something like "Yeah, we were just blind fanboys for Metallica (or whatever band it was) so we gave it a good review without actually listening to the fucking thing" instead of just shoving that decade old review under the rug and pretending it's not there like some stale chicken that you're feeling to lazy to throw into the bin.
...Sorry, I kind of went off topic there. But yeah, you are correct Mr. Drake in that taking another person's opinion to heart isn't really a very good idea. A momentary lapse of brain cells on my part that I hereby retract and dip in a vat of boiling oil. Judgment reserved, can't wait for the album, etc. etc.
tl;dr - I'm a dick, reviews are NOT gospel, bacon.
I've never been an advocate of 'reviews are gospel' as it is. The fact that people have taken MY reviews as such is a rather depressing thought, since I spend most of my writing time pointing out everything that's wrong with an album before ending it with a full summary of whether or not I think that it's worth anyone's time/money. Hell, for a while a lot of UK thrash bands seemed to take a good review on my part as a genuine 'stam of approval' which was fucking terrifying. I guess it's something that a lot of people seem to subconsciously adhere to sometimes, if a game, film or album gets a shitty review then they'll abide by it... I know so many people who'll counteract any negative opinion with "BUT IT GOT 4/5 STARS IN KNOBMUNCHERS WEEKLY". True, but that doesn't mean it's actually good or that everyone will like it. I remember reading reviews for a PSone game called 'Dragon Valor' that essentially called it crap, but I bought it and found it to be one of the most satisfying titles I owned. Same goes for anything I guess. But it's when people blindly follow it that it starts to get on my balls.
Again, with Lord McIver I just always found his opinions to actually hold a modicum of truth to them hence why I usually make an exception to the rule with him (bar the last Cavalera Conspiracy album, really butted heads with him on that). So such a bold statement befuddled me somewhat, mostly because I was tired and partially because I'm a fucking idiot haha. I've never apologised for writing something in a review though, which is something that REALLY fucks me off when people get a backlash for saying an album is worse or better than many people think it is. A review is naught more than a writeup of an individual's observations of the product - INDIVIDUAL. Again, nobody should take one person's view as absolute law, but it happens all too often and I think that it's a problem. In fact, I'd actually wager that a great many thrash fans wouldn't think so much of a lot of albums now considered 'classics' if the media hadn't harped on about them so much... that's just my two cents. Call it a hunch, call it 'Dave being a bellend', whatever haha. The other issue that comes from all of this is St. Anger syndrome, or A Matter of Life and Death syndrome as some call it, where an album will be hailed as a colossal shiny album of sexy titty-flashing glory in the media, yet pretty much everyone else on earth really, really hates it. Lines start to blur, other factors come in, everyone gets stuffed into a cardboard box and shipped off to Mexico. Then years later, the magazine/website etc. that gave the album a glowing review ten years ago will write up an article in which they call said album a pile of garbage... eh? What? Peer pressure much? If I ever do that (and I've done it ONCE with Soulfly's "Omen") then I can at least have the decency to go "Yeah, I didn't like it, but it's grown on me. Hands up, I jumped the gun a bit". The very east the media can do is that, at least say something like "Yeah, we were just blind fanboys for Metallica (or whatever band it was) so we gave it a good review without actually listening to the fucking thing" instead of just shoving that decade old review under the rug and pretending it's not there like some stale chicken that you're feeling to lazy to throw into the bin.
...Sorry, I kind of went off topic there. But yeah, you are correct Mr. Drake in that taking another person's opinion to heart isn't really a very good idea. A momentary lapse of brain cells on my part that I hereby retract and dip in a vat of boiling oil. Judgment reserved, can't wait for the album, etc. etc.
tl;dr - I'm a dick, reviews are NOT gospel, bacon.
