WARNING - TNR EARLY COPIES

[Angeleyes Part II]

Heya James..yeah I know I haven't been around much..and I don't mind explaining why..me and my family had some bad news just before christmas..my young niece of 17 the only child of one of my bro's is diagnosed with leukemia..so I'm pretty much being occupied with work and suporting my brother and the rest of the family...don't ever think I will abandon this forum..I'm just a too busy atm...

edit: And to the moderator..sorry if I messed up the thread again..I'm sure someone will bring it back on track...bye..

 

[zmetallica]

Woah I totally forgot about the new album, then i saw the new Novembers Doom in a myspace bulletin with the CD release party info and i'm like woah its already almost out.

I was thinking of requesting a Promo CD for review for Metal Underground, anyone I talk with at The End for this? or is it someone else? or was the site already on the list from being requested by someone else...

none the less I'm excited to hear the new stuff. I'm too busy to go and download it right now and if i did it would probably sit in a folder for a while or in a disorganized part of my playlist and never be heard haha. or something weird like that. I'd rather get the CD anyway, besides the artwork on the last CD blew me away, really took me into the experience of the music. This is something many bands lack now. keep up the great work! and PLEASE come to NY/NJ on your next tour.

 

[Phoenix5]

I haven't heard Rain yet.

 

[NvmbrsDoom5]

Larry..can I ask why an album has to grow on you...I don't get it?

Okay....not sure why you didn't get it...I'll try to explain best I can.

Sometimes when you listen to new music (or even watch a new film, etc.), you're not instantly attracted to it, for whatever reason. Alot of times it's because the music is not simple and straightforward, and so it requires more listens to fully grasp and absorb it. Other times, it's because the music might not be the type of music you normally listen to, so you'll have a tendency to not really give it the proper attention it deserves, or allow yourself to adapt to it, so to speak. Or some times, when a band has a tendency to change their style a bit from what you're used to hearing from them, the shock of the style-change will initially turn you off, and you won't give it a chance. But then once the shock wears off and you come back and give it another, more open-minded chance, you find that you enjoy it for what it is. I had that happen to me when Voivod came out with "Angel Rat"...it was such a departure for them, at first I couldn't get into it and it took some time and many more listens before I really was able to appreciate it for what it was.

And also, I think sometimes the best albums are the ones that remain interesting and new even after many listens....those songs or albums that you still hear new things in every time you hear it. Those are the ones that have lasting power, and will continue to grow on you and impress you even after you've heard it many times.

All these reasons, and others I've not even touched upon, are reasons why I think it's good when people allow music to grow on them, rather than always going with their first, impulsive impression. Like I said before, it's always nice when people hear you for the first time and enjoy it....however, I'd rather that people perhaps get into our music and gradually learn to appreciate it more and more over time, and have real lasting power...rather than someone really liking our music when they first hear it, but then being tired of it and more or less forgetting about it a short while later.

I also realise that certain terminology like "grow on you" might seem odd to our friends here on the forum who don't have English as their first language, I apologise. Hopefully my explanation has made it more clear as to what I meant by that term.

 

[kleo706]

I always sucked at reviewing albums because of deadlines. Listening to something once in one environment doesn't provide enough of a basis for an informed opinion. Take my experience with Novembers Doom. I first heard them in the car in the middle of a blizzard that totally caught me offguard while lost off my ass in Rhode Island. They went on the back burner as "decent but not really close to killer." Then awhile later, they came out this way on tour, put on a killer show, and convinced me to re-listen. So I did over the hifi in my fiancee's apartment. Then came the headphones while writing a paper for class. Then same delivery method doing nothing but dedicated listening. Now I <3 Pale FUCKING Haunt more than words. Similar things happened with Masters Hammer, Encrimson'd, and Trouble too. Hell I seem to recall disliking Candlemass completely and Nightfall is somewhere in/around my top 10. Then there's the reverse side where I raved the fuck out about Frozen's Forever Seems Like a Waste of Time (to the point where my friend got interested enough to give them coverage in Metal Maniacs) but now see so many flaws (of course this also has to do with the fact that the band reinvented themselves and Enemy Soil is absolutely fucking astounding).
But yeah reviews are often too linear for my liking. Reviewer puts on disc, gives superficial formulaic opinion, moves on to repeat 15-115 times before deadline. Plus I have heard "Hey sorry. I need to go listen to bandX so I can give them a positive review and keep labelY happy" and "they don't send me promos anymore because I refuse to guarantee them positive copy" far too often to really trust the system anymore.

 

[Naglfar]

I don't think it's a reviewer's fault if an album has to grow on the listener, and as a result gives it a mediocre review. Part of the utility of a review is that it covers something that is recent. For example... when I was in high school, I bought Dan Swano's Moontower. Gave it a couple of listens, was like, meh, and didn't listen to it again, literally, until I was a senior in college. And Moontower is one of the best metal albums ever, at least in my opinion. But it does Swano no good if I'm a metal mag big shot and wait 6 years to give him a review (assuming that in my alternate universe, 16 year olds are allowed to be metal mag big shots).

I know some of you might think "well, thorough reviews are just as important for older stuff, not everyone buys an album within the first few months of its release." In rock music there doesn't seem to be a habit of reviewing material that's already been released for a while unless it's been a really, really long time. Like, you'll see some review of a Hawkwind album stuffed somewhere. I guess the problem is not that you might get a shitty first listen-ish review, but that a year from now, there's not going to be almost anyone actually writing down "WOW THIS IS THE BEST FUCKING METAL ALBUM I'VE EVER HEARD, WHAT THE FUCK WAS I THINKING 12 MONTHS AGO?!"

Maybe there should be metal magazines that only do reviews and a metal review archive, like book reviews in academia!

 

[Novembers Paul]

In todays day and age with the internet, there's no need for reviews anymore. You can set up a site to stream the CD, or put up good samples of the disc, even if low quality, and people can judge it for themselves. Reviews are the opinion of that one person, and the mood he's in that day. I've always said, we as a band have spent over a year writing, and recording this CD. Take more then 1 hour to listen to it if you're going to write a review for it. If it were up to me, no promos would go out for the disc, at least not until the dic is officially on sale.

 

[zmetallica]

Paul: You wouldn't even give to promote at a single radio station? I've seen a bunch that'll stream the whole CD as promo.

I completely agree with CD reviews in today's world, but I feel it can greatly help the unsigned bands. people don't wanna just listen to the massive amount of bands out there, they need to hone in on a few. Reviews can give them focus. a review can take 5-10 minutes to read, versus an album/song, which can be equal or longer. personally one song tells me nothing about a band especially if it is their "single" or "hit" song.

 

[stefan86]

Paul stated a very true problem with reviews here. People rarely review the albums/artists they're familiar with but rather stuff they're completely new to. This obviously gives quite an inaccuracy since ones opinion usually changes bigtime after hearing an album 10-20 times as opposed to one. I was thinking about posting the first M-A review for Novella Reservoir but i'm gonna wait and absorb it some more

 

[AnTz0r]

i still like reading reviews a lot, but usually only after ive listened to a cd first. or at least a few tracks. sometimes i use it to explore new music, just getting music which gets good reviews. good music USUALLY gets good reviews, although bad music usually gets it too so the key is critisism, its not about copying the opinion of your reviewer, instead i use the opinions of a lot of them to help me formulate their own. they usually compare it to things i hadn't thought of etc...

the key here, like in any form of information-gathering, is staying critical about what you are reading, and leaving room for your own opinion.

 

[NvmbrsDoom5]

...so the key is critisism, its not about copying the opinion of your reviewer, instead i use the opinions of a lot of them to help me formulate their own. they usually compare it to things i hadn't thought of etc...

the key here, like in any form of information-gathering, is staying critical about what you are reading, and leaving room for your own opinion.

Yep, that's pretty much it. I agree.

We've been fortunate to get some really good reviews in recent years and we're grateful for them. I read many reviews in mags and on sites. Sometimes they're informative and lets me know a bit about bands I don't know much about. Reviews should just be a basic guide for the reader to gauge whether or not a cd might be worth checking out for them, in terms of whether its part of a genre they enjoy or not, or even if it's similar to other bands they already know and enjoy (though sometimes, as in our case, the comparisons arent always accurate, but still....)

You can be a journalist, a critic, whatever, with degrees and diplomas and a 2000 cd library to back you up, and it still doesn't mean that your taste in music is any better, more insightful or informed than anyone elses. I want a review to give me the basic info I need to know about the band and the general sound and style of the cd, and from there I'll seek it out and decide for my own eyes and ears as to whether or not it's something I'm interested in.

 

[Novembers Paul]

My biggest complaint with sending out promos for review, is some of these little pricks leak the CDs.

 

[AnTz0r]

plenty of bands don't send promo's, just not sure if a band like ND could afford not to... do you need the promotion?

for example, the new after forever won't be out for a few months but they did a listening session some time ago.

 

[Novembers Paul]

In my opinion, promos can go out to zines the day it goes on sale to the public. This way, it won't leak early, and everyone can get it at the same time.

 

[AnTz0r]

how come there is such a long time between when a cd is ready and when it is released? i mean TNR got leaked about 1,5 months before release, ashes against the grain got released while wacken was going on (i could buy it not on the first but on the second day, hehe) and it leaked in june. thats also about 3 months?

 

[NvmbrsDoom5]

There's alot of factors involved.....for one thing, release dates are arranged according to a schedule determined by the label and the distributors. And it takes time to get all of the final product manufactured, packaged, labelled and shipped out. Also the early promos are sent out not only to journalists and radio but also to distributors and regional buyers in an effort to get them to take interest in the product and place decent orders for it. In terms of sending out early promos to journalists, the thought is that it will take X amount of time before a cd will be reviewed and then go to print, so they try to give it ample enough lead time so that the reviews arent hitting the newstand 5 months after the cd has already been on sale. Of course with a majority of reviews now coming from online sites and forums, the turnaround time is much quicker and probably doesn't require quite so much lead time but that's just how they do it still, I guess.

There are different ways that illegal downloading and the resulting affected sales could be possibly rectified some, but it would take a certain amount of extra effort from the industry that I guess they're not prepared to jump on just yet. We'll see.

 

[circus_brimstone]

In todays day and age with the internet, there's no need for reviews anymore.

I must respectfully disagree. You may, however, be talking about reviews in the traditional sense, when they functioned as the primary marketing tool, which indeed has fallen by the wayside. Or has at least taken second place behind the technology that's offered through the Internet such as streaming, downloading, etc.

1. I think there will always be a "need" - or perhaps more accurately, market - for reviews since people like to know what other people think of various forms of art (music, books, etc.).

2. Also, bands/labels often like to tout what official sources have to say about their releases - to spread the word about their products and in turn persuade potential consumers to buy them.

3. The creators of art, in addition, like to know what others think of what they've worked so hard to produce. Evidence? Just about every band keeps track of the reviews they receive in a thread/blog/webpage. In fact, one of them is right below this thread....

 

[AnTz0r]

ad (3): yes they like to know what people think of it, but is the opinion of a reviewer who gave it a quick spin more important then a fan who has listened to it numerous times? well maybe it is, but only for sales figures...

 

[Novembers Paul]

I must respectfully disagree. You may, however, be talking about reviews in the traditional sense, when they functioned as the primary marketing tool, which indeed has fallen by the wayside. Or has at least taken second place behind the technology that's offered through the Internet such as streaming, downloading, etc.

1. I think there will always be a "need" - or perhaps more accurately, market - for reviews since people like to know what other people think of various forms of art (music, books, etc.).

2. Also, bands/labels often like to tout what official sources have to say about their releases - to spread the word about their products and in turn persuade potential consumers to buy them.

3. The creators of art, in addition, like to know what others think of what they've worked so hard to produce. Evidence? Just about every band keeps track of the reviews they receive in a thread/blog/webpage. In fact, one of them is right below this thread....

My comment was a bit open. I was saying simply that by the time the reviews come out, some scum bag reviewer has already leaked the CD online, so anyone can download it and draw their own conclusion. The days a long gone where I would judge my spending by a written review, when technology is at my fingertips to sample the music for myself.

There are exceptions to everything, and the only reviews we post are those who took to time to do a proper review. I don't mean "good" review either, because if you search back, I post everything, good and bad, as long as the review is professional, and written in a way where it took the reviewer longer then 5 minutes to write it.

At the end of the day, the only opinion that matters is your own, so reviews should be taken with a grain of salt anyway. A good review points out facts, and describes the music, instead of pushing their own opinions on people. I'd rather read a detailed description of our music, then some knucklehead who says "I don't like this" or even "This is great." Tell us WHY, either way.

 

[Metalhed]

At the end of the day, the only opinion that matters is your own, so reviews should be taken with a grain of salt anyway. A good review points out facts, and describes the music, instead of pushing their own opinions on people. I'd rather read a detailed description of our music, then some knucklehead who says "I don't like this" or even "This is great." Tell us WHY, either way.

In today's crowded metal marketplace (which I am glad to see after the barren wasteland the 90's was), I use reviews to help me narrow down music to sample. I know what types of metal I like and what I don't. By reading reviews, I get the names of some bands I have never heard of before to sample. I realize it is the reviewer's own opinion, so I tend to stay with the reviewers that have been close to my own tastes in the past and that provide me good, quality reviews (as you stated above).

For example, every month Metal Rules does a bunch of reviews (always released on the first of the month). I will read through them all, make a list of bands that interest me from them and sample (my wallet always seems to open up immediately following that).

These reviews have led to many a blind purchase. That's actually how I found November's Doom...