Metal Archives "Reviewers"

[TribunalRecords]

i figured i would post this since i saw a comment "quoted" in someone's signature.

i applaud all the reviewers who take time to inform people about music they have never heard. but i guess i just hasve a little issue i will bring up and see if anyone else has stuff to share.

if you are reviewing an original CD from the 80's or early 90's "thin" is not a valid term allowed for describing production or tones. EVERY album on CD from that era will sound thin compared to current day releases, but IF you were to turn it up louder than where you normally crank it to listen to current CDs it would more than likely sound more full. sure not like a current remastering job but it would sound good and not thin, but i guess they haven't figured that out yet being so young.

thin 90's production should be reserved for cvlt black metal however, that is a given.

i will stop there, anyone else with stories to share.

 

[TychoCelchu]

I try to avoid reading very long-winded reviews because they are usually less about describing the album in a helpful way and more about the reviewer showing off how deep and eloquent they are. Metal Archives has no small number of these. If I can listen to an album in less time than it takes to read the review, I don't need to read the review.

About your specific point, I think I see where you're coming from, but I don't completely agree. I do agree if the word 'thin' is just plain overused, but if it's really accurate, it's OK. I don't think every album from the 80s sounds thin, although certainly quite a few do.

Regarding production itself, I am a little glad that distorted guitar tones have largely moved on from the extreme-highs-and-extreme-lows-with-zero-mids tones that seemed to dominate the early 90s. I like "body" in guitar sound, and that means (some) midrange has to be there.

By the way, The Rain in Endless Fall has a very thin production
(Actually, I have not heard the remaster which I think came out around 2004. Was that done by you or by the band?)

 

[AngraRULES]

Wait, someone had a quote on their signature about Metal Archives reviewers?

 

[General Zod]

I have two pet peeves with reviewers...

1. When people use country of origin as a descriptor. Calling something "Lithuanian Power Metal", simply because the band hails from Lithuania, is not a descriptor. Lithuania, does not have a Power Metal scene, with characteristics that somehow makes it unique from any other form of Power Metal.

2. Saying that something sucks. Music is completely subjective. Somebody busted their ass to make that disc. They likely spent months, if not years, writing the music. In addition, saying something "sucks", is not a review or a description of any value. Finally, reviewers should be insightful enough to recognize, that something doesn't suck merely because it doesn't appeal to them. As an example, when I listen to Grave Digger, I think they suck. However, if I was writing a proper review, I wouldn't say that. I would explain that the vocals ruin the music for me. I would explain that I find the music simplistic, the lyrics poor, and that the lack of an enjoyable vocal melody leaves me flat. I'd likely rate their disc a 6, not a 0, because I would recognize that there are redeemable qualities.

Just my $0.02.

 

[AngraRULES]

Zod is definitely into something. The main problem is that anyone can call themselves a reviewer, nowadays. You don't really need to know about anything anymore. Things have certainly changed.

 

[dcowboys311]

Personally, I don't see the difference between saying "Album A sucks" and "Album B rules". IMO, just because someone spent time on something doesn't mean they did it well. But both are short, to the point, and get the message across. There are also many different styles of reviews.

That said, I find half of the reviews on M-A to be elitist bullshit. And that's coming from me...

 

[Diabolik]

I usually will read the bad reviews because 90% of the time that person has no clue what they are talking about and all the bad things "they" hated are stuff that I like. Unfortunatly with this digital age anyone can be a critic. Look back decades ago where people would wait for review shows like Siskel and Ebert to hear if a movie is good before seeing it. Now with the click of a button you can read 1,000 reviews online. If interested in a band I will search out sound clips or youtube videos and browse reviews. I dont think I have ever notbought something because a review on Metal Archives.

 

[AngraRULES]

Unfortunatly with this digital age anyone can be a critic.

This. One thousand times this.

 

[J. Golden]

Matt I just recently got in a review where the reviewer did just that and commented on the sound that is obviously a product of the time.
As for other craps about reviewers or those who fancy themselves as... well I have many issues there but no point in going into that.
I most clear up that I'm not referring to all reviewers, I have to say that before I get another email

 

[dcowboys311]

I think it's great that anybody can review anything whenever they want. Stops trends from following one person's opinion. It's not hard to ignore something when the first line is 'my cat can sing baetter lol they r gay'. Just move on to the next review! There's plenty of places to find them...once you locate a site that you trust it's no big deal.

 

[AngraRULES]

I happen to like www.sputnikmusic.com. It's one of the few websites that I have come across lately where the STAFF reviews are actually well-thought, written and interesting.

 

[J. Golden]

=

2. Saying that something sucks. Music is completely subjective. Somebody busted their ass to make that disc. They likely spent months, if not years, writing the music. In addition, saying something "sucks", is not a review or a description of any value. Finally, reviewers should be insightful enough to recognize, that something doesn't suck merely because it doesn't appeal to them. As an example, when I listen to Grave Digger, I think they suck. However, if I was writing a proper review, I wouldn't say that. I would explain that the vocals ruin the music for me. I would explain that I find the music simplistic, the lyrics poor, and that the lack of an enjoyable vocal melody leaves me flat. I'd likely rate their disc a 6, not a 0, because I would recognize that there are redeemable qualities.

Just my $0.02.

A "reviewer" said to me about one of my releases "it just sucks" so it wasn't reviewed. So much for integrity right.
I think a lot of these so called reviewers are basically clogging up the system and are really helping out nothing or no one but themselves.
Damnit this is going to turn into a thread about reviewers and I'm not sure that is what it was suppose to be. Think I should step away from this one.

 

[dcowboys311]

A "reviewer" said to me about one of my releases "it just sucks" so it wasn't reviewed. So much for integrity right.
I think a lot of these so called reviewers are basically clogging up the system and are really helping out nothing or no one but themselves.
Damnit this is going to turn into a thread about reviewers and I'm not sure that is what it was suppose to be. Think I should step away from this one.

Yeah but would you have him just slam your release on his site and give it totally bad press or just not put it up at all?

 

[AngraRULES]

A "reviewer" said to me about one of my releases "it just sucks" so it wasn't reviewed. So much for integrity right.
I think a lot of these so called reviewers are basically clogging up the system and are really helping out nothing or no one but themselves.

That's exactly the problem.

Now, did this particular reviewer stay in your "Reviewer" list after that? What balls...

 

[dcowboys311]

I happen to like www.sputnikmusic.com. It's one of the few websites that I have come across lately where the STAFF reviews are actually well-thought, written and interesting.

Sputnik rules. My favorite site is The Left Hand Path, but it's mostly because trying to decipher some of the reviews is like solving a Rubix cube with your feet. Good stuff though.

 

[General Zod]

Personally, I don't see the difference between saying "Album A sucks" and "Album B rules".

The difference is praise vs. dismissal (see below).

IMO, just because someone spent time on something doesn't mean they did it well.

True. But given the size of the community, there's a decent chance the band might read the review. If you want to shit all over someone's life work, perhaps you could at least go the effort of stating something more insightful. Keep in mind, I'm referring to proper reviews, not passing comments on boards like this one. Conversely, I'm quite sure any band is happy if you simply state "they rule".

There are also many different styles of reviews.

True... and ironically, most of them suck.

 

[J. Golden]

Yeah but would you have him just slam your release on his site and give it totally bad press or just not put it up at all?

Any press is good press for starters. Secondly the money to press discs that are sent out for free plus postage cost adds up after a while. So considering that bigger labels have cut back on promo for that reason I certainly have to. Explaining that yes I certainly do want to see something for what I put into this. Good or bad review doesn't matter to me but wasting my time and money, or rather being taken just pisses me off.
Often in cases the titles are requested before promotions are sent out so if the reviewer is not going to like a title odd are they probably already know that from the clips and various samples of an album heard online.

 

[skyrefuge]

I think it's great that anybody can review anything whenever they want.

Exactly...it boggled my mind to see these guys implying that that was a *bad* thing. Especially since they're highly-active participants in a community where the democratic expression of unvetted opinion is the whole point of the place. Hell, if the digital age didn't allow anyone to be a critic, I'm pretty sure Diabolik wouldn't even exist!

Allowing the masses to express their opinion and reach as many people as possible is awesome. Heck, look at what it's done to places like Egypt.

As for reviews in general, I mainly read them *after* I already know an album, to get further insight or an alternate view.

Beforehand, I just want a basic description, or perhaps an idea of which of a band's ten albums I should first listen to. And the democratic expression of opinion at a place like metal-archives is great for that, since there are usually enough "voters" to give a good general consensus answer to that question. A single reviewer's opinion would be a lot less reliable.

Neil

 

[dcowboys311]

Any press is good press for starters. Secondly the money to press discs that are sent out for free plus postage cost adds up after a while. So considering that bigger labels have cut back on promo for that reason I certainly have to. Explaining that yes I certainly do want to see something for what I put into this. Good or bad review doesn't matter to me but wasting my time and money, or rather being taken just pisses me off.
Often in cases the titles are requested before promotions are sent out so if the reviewer is not going to like a title odd are they probably already know that from the clips and various samples of an album heard online.

Gotcha. Yeah if the guy requested the title, that's pretty lame. If you're just sending them out though, can't expect everyone to review every album they receive! Reviewing doesn't pay well, unfortunately...

 

[J. Golden]

That's exactly the problem.

Now, did this particular reviewer stay in your "Reviewer" list after that? What balls...

Well if the reviewer or any wants to do a review based off of the EPKs then any can. But no more hard copies will be sent to him. Actually we have recently revamped our way of doing that anyway. I think these guys who take the time to write these reviews and bust their ass to get people to see them should get something for their efforts, after all they usually do it for free. However we can't keep sending out free CDs to people that are only collecting free CDs for their shelves or trade lists. So we make it clear that if a review is done (EPK provided) and if the reviewer still wants a hard copy then I will gladly send them one.