Encyclopaedia Metallum: The Metal Archives
https://forum.metal-archives.com/

The Official Review Discussion Thread
https://forum.metal-archives.com/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=7444		 Page 499 of 521
Author:  Red_Death [ Sun May 07, 2023 4:00 am ]
Post subject:  Re: The Official Review Discussion Thread
Lee Harrison wrote:
going back to my example of the Emperor a reviewer cannot fail to take into account the musical impact they had and for this alone they cannot be slayed…

Why?

I mean, if I listened to Nightside many times*, and I find it very lousy, taking into account the musical impact would make it even worse in a way - that would mean an album I find poor has influenced many other bands, therefore leading to other bands making shoddy music. By this logic, harping on and on about historical impact could actually lead to even lower scores.

*I don't think it's a poor album, quite the opposite.
Author:  Lee Harrison [ Sun May 07, 2023 4:26 am ]
Post subject:  Re: The Official Review Discussion Thread
If an album have an impact mean that it’s good or great

Shitty albums have no impact
Author:  Red_Death [ Sun May 07, 2023 4:47 am ]
Post subject:  Re: The Official Review Discussion Thread
Lee Harrison wrote:
If an album have an impact mean that it’s good or great

Shitty albums have no impact

That's completely arbitrary, and in no way could you defend that assertion on factual grounds (it's your personal definition, not a statement of fact; I wonder whether you'd change your tune if someone brought up an album like Korn's early ones, for instance).
It basically means people are obliged to concede the greatness of traditionally revered albums, which is a load of bollocks.

To be frank, I think all of this boils down to just that - guarding tradition, a specific tradition, from offenders who'd dare to besmirch a part of it by handing out a low score on a review. I don't think this is a sensible enterprise at all.
Author:  gasmask_colostomy [ Sun May 07, 2023 9:43 am ]
Post subject:  Re: The Official Review Discussion Thread
I'm not sure if Lee is saying this in the right way, but I kind of stand with him on this point.

Reviewing an album like Emperor's debut requires you to be aware of its background and legacy, at the very least. There are certain unavoidable marks of its importance to the metal scene (not quality necessarily) that a good review cannot choose to ignore. This is the part where I agree with the "objective" thing. In the Nightside Eclipse is an objectively important album in black metal and to say that it's not important because the music is rubbish would be wrong. However, the reviewer may still say that the music is rubbish. (Just for the record, I think Human66's review is fucking abysmal. No actual examples or evidence to support his thoughts at all, just the vaguest possible stuff to keep the review on the site.)

I think the problem we have with reviews like the one mentioned, or the recent few At the Gates ones, is that the writer seems to revel in trashing the album because they know it is important. In the end, the score or the analysis can carry the full subjective opinion of the reviewer, but a better writer will at least engage with the reasons why the album's importance holds no credit for them. Without that, much of the argument is groundless. Sure, you can listen to it as purely music and pretend that you know nothing about the context of the release, but in general the writers doing this already know what it is they are trying to discredit. It's a coward's ploy, starting an argument without identifying the point they're taking issue with.

Red_Death wrote:
By this logic, harping on and on about historical impact could actually lead to even lower scores.

This is what we saw when reviewers were giving low scores to Slaughter of the Soul because of "all the shitty music that it influenced." I find this terrible logic (I know you weren't suggesting a writer should do this, don't worry) because it's the opposite of the point above: the writer knows very well the context of the album and chooses to make the review all about the context and not about the music. How does a different, later shitty song/album/band impact the score I give to the album in the review? That's ludicrous.

The only way of doing this that makes sense to me is to say "this album produced/popularized a new style and began a trend," and therefore to reflect on the novelty of the music in question. Most of us would agree that we are more likely to look favourably on a decent album that does something new than a decent album that does nothing different to others. Your opinion on the quality of the music is therefore a separate issue to its novelty and/or influence. Thus, we come back full circle to Lee's point, which I agree with: an album that extended its influence over a genre or style (usually) has something positive going for it because it marked a certain breakthrough in the genre's progression. I'm not saying you must award it a high score, but it's something worth thinking about when you put the score down.
Author:  Lee Harrison [ Sun May 07, 2023 10:07 am ]
Post subject:  Re: The Official Review Discussion Thread
Exactly my point gas!!!!


I shiver thinking that one day it will be fashionable to destroy Raining Blood….
Author:  Empyreal [ Sun May 07, 2023 11:06 am ]
Post subject:  Re: The Official Review Discussion Thread
The problem with a lot of those reviews is just what gas said, that they're sort of obnoxiously trying to take down a classic for no reason other than to be annoying about it. "Look at how different I am" or some such mindset. They know it's influential and they want to make some case that everyone else is wrong - usually this leads to hamfisted, bad critiques that don't go beyond surface level and end up just hyperbolic.

That said, while it's probably a good idea to know what you're talking about, yeah, nobody has to like something or respect it just because it was historically important. I really don't place much importance on that at all if I don't like it. I'm an atheist that way.
Author:  Lee Harrison [ Sun May 07, 2023 1:09 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: The Official Review Discussion Thread
Im agnostic but I love metal and music all and we must respect the albums that made the story,which they gave birth to nwobhm,thrash,death and black metal …

That’s all folks…
Author:  King_of_Arnor [ Sun May 07, 2023 1:52 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: The Official Review Discussion Thread
Lee Harrison wrote:
Im agnostic but I love metal and music all and we must respect the albums that made the story,which they gave birth to nwobhm,thrash,death and black metal …

That’s all folks…

You could still respect an album for its historical importance even if you don't think it holds up in retrospect.
Author:  LawrenceStillman [ Mon May 08, 2023 3:17 am ]
Post subject:  Re: The Official Review Discussion Thread
Lee Harrison wrote:
I shiver thinking that one day it will be fashionable to destroy Raining Blood….


Or Paranoid, I've met people that shit on BS because they were old and not "heavy enough", despite the fact that the entire genre would not exist if it was not for that album
Author:  Lee Harrison [ Mon May 08, 2023 7:28 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: The Official Review Discussion Thread
How can like Sad But True Sweetie????

It’s the worst song ever made by Metallica,is crap,near new metal and boring…

How can like Sad But True????

Sry I hate that song.
Author:  Sweetie [ Mon May 08, 2023 7:40 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: The Official Review Discussion Thread
....what??
Author:  DoomMetalAlchemist [ Mon May 08, 2023 10:53 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: The Official Review Discussion Thread
Lee Harrison wrote:
How can like Sad But True Sweetie????

It’s the worst song ever made by Metallica,is crap,near new metal and boring…

How can like Sad But True????

Sry I hate that song.


Worst song by Metallica ever is St. Anger title track, IMO.
Author:  Demon Fang [ Tue May 09, 2023 2:07 am ]
Post subject:  Re: The Official Review Discussion Thread
Empyreal's review of the new Kamelot really does sum it up for me. It really did just seem like a paint by numbers affair but without much of what actually made it work on Silverthorn (and especially The Black Halo) and even the 5 year gap, the return of Conception (including that one song they did fairly recently that sounds like the best Kamelot song in a long time) and Seventh Wonder being great again weren't enough to light a fire under their asses.
Author:  Lee Harrison [ Tue May 09, 2023 4:30 am ]
Post subject:  Re: The Official Review Discussion Thread
Sweetie wrote:
....what??

(“Sad But True” is an obvious classic by now, deserving of that due to the layering of explosive riffs, jarring breaks, neat fills, and heavy bass lines laid down by Jason Newsted. There isn’t a lot that takes that to the same level….)

For you is one of best song of black album…

For me is an insulting piece or garbage….

Strange taste can be so different although I almost completely agree with your review….
Author:  Empyreal [ Tue May 09, 2023 6:51 am ]
Post subject:  Re: The Official Review Discussion Thread
Demon Fang wrote:
Empyreal's review of the new Kamelot really does sum it up for me. It really did just seem like a paint by numbers affair but without much of what actually made it work on Silverthorn (and especially The Black Halo) and even the 5 year gap, the return of Conception (including that one song they did fairly recently that sounds like the best Kamelot song in a long time) and Seventh Wonder being great again weren't enough to light a fire under their asses.


What Conception song do you mean, "The Mansion"?

But yeah - real shame, no clue what's happened to em.
Author:  Demon Fang [ Tue May 09, 2023 7:40 am ]
Post subject:  Re: The Official Review Discussion Thread
Empyreal wrote:
Demon Fang wrote:
Empyreal's review of the new Kamelot really does sum it up for me. It really did just seem like a paint by numbers affair but without much of what actually made it work on Silverthorn (and especially The Black Halo) and even the 5 year gap, the return of Conception (including that one song they did fairly recently that sounds like the best Kamelot song in a long time) and Seventh Wonder being great again weren't enough to light a fire under their asses.


What Conception song do you mean, "The Mansion"?

Monument in Time. Although that Conception album did have some slick Kamelot-esque rhythms.
Author:  CHAIRTHROWER [ Tue May 09, 2023 9:22 am ]
Post subject:  Re: The Official Review Discussion Thread
we hope you die's Smoulder review warms my heart. I'm also chuckling at how he mentions Sarah Ann's vocals have an "air of Broadway", something I've always sensed but couldn't put into words.
Author:  morbert [ Tue May 09, 2023 2:52 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: The Official Review Discussion Thread
I find the opening of grendah's Senjutsu review a bit...off

https://www.metal-archives.com/reviews/Iron_Maiden/Senjutsu/963906/grendah/1864081

Quote:
There are three types of Maiden fans:
- Classic era fans 1980-1992
- Dianno fans / Blaze fans, who aren't very enamored of Bruce's vocals.
- The ones who digest everything this band do, with potato chips included.


Uh... no. Not really.
All the 'classic era' fans I've known all these decades are discussing mostly within the boundaries of the first 7 studio albums, ergo the 1980-1988 era.
That excludes the first two with Gers.
I myself also do not consider any early Gers-album part of their classic era
Author:  CHAIRTHROWER [ Wed May 10, 2023 9:19 am ]
Post subject:  Re: The Official Review Discussion Thread
In regards to such far flung fanbaseship, I myself dropped off Maiden's bandwagon sometime after The X-Factor released when still in linguistically bisected high school. Hence, I guess I'm of the first variety, with a touch of Blaze worthiness thrown in for good measure. To be clear, I didn't mind his freshly stentorian vocals or the gang's newfound modern edge; simply, it was also around the time I joined the almighty, ever-pentatonic school of Black Sabbath. Following a tentative but golden purchase of their "greatest hits" album from their 1970-1972 era, I was off to the races with Dehumanizer, of which "TV Crimes" greatly resonated with me...
Author:  Twisted_Psychology [ Wed May 10, 2023 9:29 am ]
Post subject:  Re: The Official Review Discussion Thread
As the resident Blaze champion round these here parts, I don’t think I’ve ever heard anybody say they only liked his albums in the same way that Di’Anno purists will only stick with the first two Maiden albums.
Author:  Empyreal [ Wed May 10, 2023 9:38 am ]
Post subject:  Re: The Official Review Discussion Thread
I don't really fit in with any of those; love their stuff up to Seventh Son and after AMOLAD, but everything in between I would have more critiques of.
Author:  Napalm_Satan [ Wed May 10, 2023 5:28 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: The Official Review Discussion Thread
Yeah I wouldn't really fit into those either; I love their '80s albums, really don't care for their '90s albums Dickinson or Blaze, think Brave New World is alright and everything after puts me to sleep.
Author:  Sweetie [ Wed May 10, 2023 5:56 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: The Official Review Discussion Thread
I can't be the only one tired of seeing "female bands" "female vocals" and "female fronted" pop up in so damn many reviews in leu of better descriptors, right?
Author:  Lee Harrison [ Wed May 10, 2023 7:13 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: The Official Review Discussion Thread
https://www.metal-archives.com/reviews/ ... um/1483901

The blueprint of black metal destroyed,ok now I can die happy….
Author:  Slater922 [ Wed May 10, 2023 7:46 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: The Official Review Discussion Thread
Lee Harrison wrote:
https://www.metal-archives.com/reviews/Darkthrone/Transilvanian_Hunger/624/darktriangulum/1483901

The blueprint of black metal destroyed,ok now I can die happy….

I don't exactly agree with him giving it a 50%, but I will admit I got a bit of a chuckle with this:

darktriangulum wrote:
It's more minimalistic than a Scandinavian furniture showroom – you're left with a lonely IKEA POÄNG chair in the middle of an empty room, wondering where all the furnishings went.
Author:  Lee Harrison [ Thu May 11, 2023 4:05 am ]
Post subject:  Re: The Official Review Discussion Thread
they don't contextualize the albums…

you like subjectivism here you are satisfied…..

Ps
that then subjectivism leads to the law of the strongest you didn't know this lol
Author:  gasmask_colostomy [ Thu May 11, 2023 4:13 am ]
Post subject:  Re: The Official Review Discussion Thread
Sweetie wrote:
I can't be the only one tired of seeing "female bands" "female vocals" and "female fronted" pop up in so damn many reviews in leu of better descriptors, right?

Then you will enjoy the promo pic from these guys:
https://www.metal-archives.com/bands/To_Descend/3540440670
Author:  TheBurningOfSodom [ Thu May 11, 2023 5:34 am ]
Post subject:  Re: The Official Review Discussion Thread
gasmask_colostomy wrote:
Sweetie wrote:
I can't be the only one tired of seeing "female bands" "female vocals" and "female fronted" pop up in so damn many reviews in leu of better descriptors, right?

Then you will enjoy the promo pic from these guys:
https://www.metal-archives.com/bands/To_Descend/3540440670

I don't even know how to react to this :lol: :lol: :lol:

Lee Harrison wrote:
https://www.metal-archives.com/reviews/Darkthrone/Transilvanian_Hunger/624/darktriangulum/1483901

The blueprint of black metal destroyed,ok now I can die happy….

Hey, at least they heard you:

Not too much time ago Lee Harrison wrote:
You can make a negative review of At Nightside but also taking into consideration the objective aspects of the work and if you give him 55 I have more respect for you.

IIRC that same user tried several times to submit this review, but with a 20% rating. So, I guess it could have been worse :-P
Author:  LawrenceStillman [ Thu May 11, 2023 6:08 am ]
Post subject:  Re: The Official Review Discussion Thread
Sweetie wrote:
I can't be the only one tired of seeing "female bands" "female vocals" and "female fronted" pop up in so damn many reviews in leu of better descriptors, right?


Laughs in "Flagitious Idiosyncrasy of the Dilapidation"

https://www.metal-archives.com/bands/Fl ... tion/30341
Author:  Lee Harrison [ Thu May 11, 2023 8:12 am ]
Post subject:  Re: The Official Review Discussion Thread
And Ikea is Swedish not Norwegian…

So is a bad example lol

Ok I’m joking folks..
Author:  CHAIRTHROWER [ Thu May 11, 2023 8:29 am ]
Post subject:  Re: The Official Review Discussion Thread
Let's keep it simple today: I'd just like to point out how kluseba made a valid point in his Blood Star review about how it's a shame both "The Fear" and "Tortured Earth" were left out of the full-length. Usually, I'm not big into such singular reprisals, but in this case it wouldn't have hurt at all.

So, who's going to be the lucky first page 500 forum poster...
Author:  Twisted_Psychology [ Thu May 11, 2023 9:22 am ]
Post subject:  Re: The Official Review Discussion Thread
CHAIRTHROWER wrote:
Let's keep it simple today: I'd just like to point out how kluseba made a valid point in his Blood Star review about how it's a shame both "The Fear" and "Tortured Earth" were left out of the full-length. Usually, I'm not big into such singular reprisals, but in this case it wouldn't have hurt at all.

So, who's going to be the lucky first page 500 forum poster...


As much as I appreciate the album being so compact, getting the two songs from the single wouldn’t have hurt. I remember listening to those songs when they came out but not being sure what to make of it since it was tricky whether they’d end up being on an album later or just be their own thing.
Author:  CHAIRTHROWER [ Thu May 11, 2023 10:16 am ]
Post subject:  Re: The Official Review Discussion Thread
Between the single and full-length, however, I think I prefer the former, even if I rated them both with an "A".
Author:  BastardHead [ Thu May 11, 2023 10:51 am ]
Post subject:  Re: The Official Review Discussion Thread
I hate to have beef with a positive Cannibal review, but the newest review for Butchered at Birth is really a masterclass in passing with the bare minimum level of description while simultaneously pulling a double whammy of trying to make a grand, iconoclastic point to upend the status quo and failing miserably to make anything resembling an argument.

The thesis itself is interesting enough: "(Old School) Death Metal and Brutal Death Metal are distinct enough to be separate genres, and many people consider the genesis of the latter to be Suffocation's Effigy of the Forgotten. However, I believe Cannibal Corpse beat them to the punch with Butchered at Birth coming out a few months earlier and this review will lay out my case for why they should get the credit for truly being the first BDM band instead of 'merely' a more traditional DM band that merely influenced its child genre", essentially. This is fine, and I'd be interested to hear the rationale for why Cannibal managed to cross over that line into full BDM before anybody else because I don't necessarily agree but am fully open to being convinced.

The reviewer then goes on to describe the album in the vaguest terms possible and then provides precisely one point of comparison against any other death metal albums from the time to highlight what makes it distinct, and the one he chooses is Suffocation's Human Waste EP, which he admits came out before Butchered but doesn't personally consider it to be BDM because it "lacks many of the features that BDM needs" without describing what those features are or how they are lacking in Waste but present in Butchered beyond simply saying some of the songs were "(likely) rewritten after the release of BAB to be heavier and faster". ???? dafuq you mean "likely" just fuckin' listen to em and see if they're different dude it'll only take you like twenty minutes.

And then of course it all culminates in this absolute chef's kiss of a nothingburger

purging_of_impurity wrote:
Overall, it saddens me to see so many fans dismiss Cannibal Corpse as merely an OSDM band that happened to be influential for BDM rather than actually being BDM; which is strange, given that this album and its successor have everything BDM has: fast and chugging riffs, blast beats, double bass, and guttural vocals.


Bro those qualities describe literally every single death metal record in history. If you're going to predicate your review on the distinction between DM and BDM without describing the distinction at all beyond attributing the most basic universal aspects of both genres solely to the more narrowly defined version then you're going to wind up with something completely unhelpful. It's like saying that steak and cookies are different because cookies are food. Just. ???????????

Based solely on what this review lays out: I don't know what makes DM and BDM different, I don't know why Butchered counts while Waste doesn't but Effigy does, I don't know the difference between any of the only three albums namedropped at all, and I don't know why this is being presented as a hot take because the reviewer doesn't bother to compare anything to anything else at all besides one sentence with no further detail beyond the Effigy versions of Waste songs being heavier and faster while never once indicating that speed and heaviness is actually the distinction between BDM in the first place. Just.

??????????????????????????????
Author:  Sweetie [ Thu May 11, 2023 12:09 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: The Official Review Discussion Thread
BastardHead wrote:
I hate to have beef with a positive Cannibal review, but the newest review for Butchered at Birth is really a masterclass in passing with the bare minimum level of description


Let it be known, that got through with only 3 points.

gasmask_colostomy wrote:
Then you will enjoy the promo pic from these guys:https://www.metal-archives.com/bands/To_Descend/3540440670


:lol: :lol: :lol:
Author:  Lee Harrison [ Thu May 11, 2023 1:14 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: The Official Review Discussion Thread
That damn subjectivity….
Author:  CHAIRTHROWER [ Fri May 12, 2023 9:35 am ]
Post subject:  Re: The Official Review Discussion Thread
I find this whole new breed of hot take brouhaha rather amusing, even if most of time, I learn about these maverick spiels in the review forum's outrage n' vent section instead of actually having bent my mind to them. Also, is there a way to find out one's review's level-of-admissibility score, even as a scribe? (Then again, maybe I don't want to know!) One's thing for sure: be careful with hairbrained reflections when Bastardhead is around...
Author:  BastardHead [ Fri May 12, 2023 10:31 am ]
Post subject:  Re: The Official Review Discussion Thread
CHAIRTHROWER wrote:
Also, is there a way to find out one's review's level-of-admissibility score, even as a scribe?


Nah that doesn't get saved anywhere, other mods can't even see. Mods/sages can accept reviews and award 3, 5, or 8 points to them, but once the review is accepted and the points are awarded, it isn't shown anywhere. Only way to really know is to track your own points like a hawk (I did this a lot back in 2008, as soon as one was accepted my first course of action was to see how much my point total went up by) or to just have a super good memory when you accept something terrible or excellent. Speaking for myself, when I was active in the queue I probably gave out 5 points like 90% of the time and 3 points around the remainder. I've probably only given 8 points a dozen times or so. Everybody has their own standards though so it's kinda meaningless, just a nice way to reward an particularly well written one.

I think scribes are automatically given 5 each time, if you get points at all, lol. I genuinely can't remember because mods don't get points for reviews and I've been a mod since years before scribes were even a thing so I actually have no idea :lol:
Author:  Napalm_Satan [ Fri May 12, 2023 10:46 am ]
Post subject:  Re: The Official Review Discussion Thread
It'd be nice to have some way to indicate or keep track of that at a glance. I can't say what my scoring as a queue mod looks like for certain - I'd imagine it'd be like 90% 5 pointers, 10% 3 pointers. I can confidently say I've never given 8 points before.

I think part of that is because the writers most likely to come up with 8 pointers are already scribed, and they automatically get 5 points always. Honestly, that'd be another cool thing: being able to add or subtract points to reviews that have already been accepted - so you could add 3 points to a 5 pointer review from a scribe after the fact to reward going above and beyond.
Author:  gasmask_colostomy [ Sat May 13, 2023 2:01 am ]
Post subject:  Re: The Official Review Discussion Thread
Probably a good feature for the reviews to have would be the ability to send a note with an ACCEPTED review, instead of only with rejected ones. That way it could record the score and any minor suggestions the queue mod wanted to explain.
Page 499 of 521 All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group
http://www.phpbb.com/