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 11 of 520

Author:  OlympicSharpshooter [ Sun Apr 23, 2006 11:00 am ]
Post subject: 

The complete review guidelines.

Quote:
1) Stick to the music

Please, when you review an album, stick to the album and the music. It doesn't matter how well written it is, how poetic it sounds, how original it is, if all you do is make silly metaphors that mean nothing. It might sound a silly thing to ask for, but such reviews sadly exist. Reviews should give the listeners and the band's fans a good idea of what the album sounds like, not show off one's English vocabulary.
2) Stick to the music

Did we mention this yet? Well, it also means, lashing out on a band's image or attitude is not exactly a good idea either. That doesn't mean we'll refuse a review if you attack a band's image or integrity - in fact, sometimes such things do need to be pointed out and attacked. But a review based mostly on that is of little interest. Cradle of Filth reviews should be for those who might want to check out the albums, and the fans expecting a new album: they don't want to hear, again, how much you think they're "goth fags"; they don't want to hear, again, how arrogant and pretentious Yngwie Malmsteem is, or how much you don't like Jon Schaffer's attitude, or how hot Tarja Turunen is, or how dumb you think Christians/Satanists/etc are. If you think it's relevant to the actual music, by all means feel free to point it out, but don't dwell on it.
3) Intelligence and decency

If you hated an album with a passion, go ahead and flame it - just do it intelligently, and don't just cuss it out without giving good reasons (i.e., reasons that have to do with the album's music, production and overall quality). "It sucks, that band is fucking gay, the singer sucks dick" - nope, don't even think about it. And no, this isn't censorship - we freely accept any differing opinions, and we don't give a fuck about language issues (as you can see) - we just filter stupidity as much as we can. Call it censorship if you want, but censoring out retards or trolls does not seem so bad to us.

There is not really a minimum of words or lines, but chances are, if it's too short and doesn't say anything, it won't be accepted. You must describe the music (as accurately as possible! :p) and give arguments to support your opinions!
Also, avoid referring to reviews of other members. This can be considered very rude, unless you point out a previously made comparison that you agree with, or wish to elaborate on a point someone made before you. But writing a review contradictory to a previous one just out of spite, or to boost or lower the average rating, is LAME.
4) Correct spelling and grammar

While not as important for reviews as for the band and album submissions, we still ask a minimum of writing ability. We're not so strict on this (hell, English isn't our first language, and this whole page alone most likely has many grammar mistakes), and we certainly do not ask for sleek professionalism; we just ask for the review to be readable. No abuse of typos, caps or punctuation - or lack thereof - ("This album ROCKED!!!! BEST ALBUM EVER!!!!!!!!!!!!" or then "this album reallly sucked i thought it was gay and teh giutar waspoor its overal prety weak") - just try to be coherent, and if possible, helpful for the readers. Re-read your text before submitting it.

If English is not your first language, and your grasp of English is very crude, just avoid sending reviews altogether. Sorry, this isn't a rag on anyone or their nationality, but that's just the way it is. Use proper punctuation too: generally, one exclamation or question mark is sufficient. Ending every sentence that way is annoying to the reader. Also there is a SPACE after the comma (,).
5) English please

I shouldn't have to explain that... An inside joke, a quote or a small reference in another language than English is OK if it's not more than that (for example, finishing a Blind Guardian review with a brief sentence in German is fine), but the reviews must be available to any other visitor.
6) Once is enough

A no-brainer? Apparently not... Some albums are allowed to be listed more than once, depending on the nature of the re-release. But if you send the same review for both albums... we'll just reject both of them. If you managed to get past the moderators and we find out a duplicate review, we'll simply delete both reviews and take off your points.


Given that it does describe the music (albeit not to crazpete-like scientific detail), offers actual criticism, and is damned hilarious I accepted it. If another mod would like to discuss the issue with me they're welcome to, but I see no reason why the review shouldn't stay.

Author:  droneriot [ Sun Apr 23, 2006 2:07 pm ]
Post subject: 

Rather retarded attempt at a gimmick review with little points to offer. So he uses a keyboard that doesn't sound as good as a synthesizer can, wow, that's all the criticism I find in the entire review.

Author:  Visionary [ Sun Apr 23, 2006 2:34 pm ]
Post subject: 

Its refreshing to see something different and kudos for the large amount of effort this must have taken but I got bored after 3 or 4 paragraphs and there is like only 2 lines worth of musical description in the whole thing, so I don't understand why it is accepted.

Author:  KayTeeBee [ Sun Apr 23, 2006 6:15 pm ]
Post subject: 

I second visionary.

Also, Peregrin, good work on that new Slumber of Sullen Eyes review.

Author:  Osmium [ Sun Apr 23, 2006 6:22 pm ]
Post subject: 

That poem is awesome. It should definitely stay, if only for its novelty.

Author:  Napero [ Mon Apr 24, 2006 2:13 am ]
Post subject: 

Hi, everybody.

It seems that this "review" of mine has caused a bit of discussion on the board, both here and in the Oven Fodder thread. I tried to explain it already yesterday, but the board dumped me out on all six attempts. Maybe this will work this time.

The review/poem/whatever is not intended as a serious review as such, as anyone with half a brain can probably see right away. It was an idea for a gimmick that I followed through, and if some mod thinks it's too stupid and nukes it, I won't feel a bit insulted. It certainly is an oddity. And no, it didn't take much more time than my usual reviews, as the quality of the "poetry" can obviously testify.

The inspiration for the thing came from the Varg's interview that's linked on Burzums page, from the fact that I'm a bit pissed off after spending 5½ € on a copy of the album, and from reading a certain famous poem I'm sure a lot of people have already recognized. I didn't provide a scientific analysis on the music, because after an album has ~5 or so reviews, someone has certainly done it better than what I'm ever capable of. Instead, I centered on the idealism and symbolism on the album, and just decided to do it a bit differently this time.

As far as the music goes, I do not think a better synth would have saved it. I believe Varg was forced to write his music to fit the equipment he had available, and therefore playing the same songs with the best synth ever would not salvage them. The foundation of the songs themselves is lacking. I cannot consider them as ambient, they certainly are not metal or rock, and as orchestral pieces they would rival Wagner in sheer power to bore people to death. Had Varg been provided with a different keyboard, I'm sure the compositions themselves would have been different. Now, I did try to explain that in a poetic form, but couldn't... Even I have my limits, you know...

What I did handle, and I believe Unearthly understood it in the OF thread, is the ideological foundation of the work. Varg can be considered a sort of philosphical person, but I see him as someone who is stuck in the past and who cannot properly grasp the complexity of the modern world. His ideas would perhaps have worked as a basis for an actual political movement in the early 20th century, but today? No. So, the references to Odin are allegory, although bad ones at that, I admit. Varg was a prisoner of 1) the jail 2) the crappy keyboard 3) his own ideas that were manifested in his music. I honestly think that all three can be heard on Daudi Baldrs, and as a result, the album sucks major donkey.

The rest is there for comical reasons, and should not be taken seriously by anyone. I'm glad that there are at least some people here who found it amusing, that was the main point all along. And I guess the fact that Lord_Jotun thought it necessary to preserve the poem for the future generations on the board in case it gets nuked is a high form of compliment. I'm a part of a e-museum now, hehe.

If the mods think it's necessary, feel free to remove it. It would be a shame, however, if the MA lost the will to host reviews that differ from the norm. Most of the stuff should indeed be rather standard, but after an album has more than half a dozen good reviews, is it really necessary or useful?

So, yes, it is an intentional satirical gimmick, just for fun and maybe a few hidden serious thoughts. It's also the very first poem (not counting three or four gory haikus) I've ever written voluntarily. Please remember that it's impossible to write anything that everybody here would find amusing. This one maybe requires knowledge of the original poem, of the albums history and Varg's person, and a dash of twisted sense of comedy to be funny.

And, to conclude this rant, an anecdote that was born yesterday: I showed the review and some of the early comments on the board to my wife (we've lived together since 1994), and she scolded me for it. You see, she was annoyed for the fact that I've never written a poem for her, but found the time to amuse unknown zit-faced blokes with greasy long hair with one. So, I've already paid the price for it, people.

Author:  Peregrin [ Mon Apr 24, 2006 11:31 am ]
Post subject: 

Napero wrote:
Varg can be considered a sort of philosphical person, but I see him as someone who is stuck in the past and who cannot properly grasp the complexity of the modern world. His ideas would perhaps have worked as a basis for an actual political movement in the early 20th century, but today? No. So, the references to Odin are allegory, although bad ones at that, I admit. Varg was a prisoner of 1) the jail 2) the crappy keyboard 3) his own ideas that were manifested in his music. I honestly think that all three can be heard on Daudi Baldrs, and as a result, the album sucks major donkey.


I see one hell of a thread hijack on the horizon...

Author:  MaleficDevilry [ Mon Apr 24, 2006 11:42 am ]
Post subject: 

It made me laugh. I think it should stay. It's not the worst gimmick review that's been accepted here.

Author:  Napero [ Mon Apr 24, 2006 11:46 am ]
Post subject: 

Peregrin wrote:
I see one hell of a thread hijack on the horizon...


Whoops... Sorry, didn't meant to. I see what you mean. Silly me.

Now that I look at it, my explanation of the review actually seems like a better review than the poem itself. Oh well.

Author:  Nightgaunt [ Mon Apr 24, 2006 12:24 pm ]
Post subject: 

I probably wouldn't have accepted it, but I won't remove it purely of my own accord. Speedy, Clanny, Chaossphere, or any of you quiet mods--what do you think?

Author:  Visionary [ Mon Apr 24, 2006 7:37 pm ]
Post subject: 

Nightgaunt wrote:
I probably wouldn't have accepted it, but I won't remove it purely of my own accord. Speedy, Clanny, Chaossphere, or any of you quiet mods--what do you think?


Since when was Clanny quiet? :p

Anyways back on topic. After reading the explanation my opinion has changed somewhat. Perhaps the poem should stay with a brief explanation to it so people can understand where you are coming from.

Author:  Thamuz [ Mon Apr 24, 2006 7:46 pm ]
Post subject: 

Nightgaunt meant the 'quiet mods' as in addition to those mentioned.

Author:  cinedracusio [ Wed Apr 26, 2006 1:29 pm ]
Post subject: 

I really dug the last review of Now, Diabolical from Satyricunt.

Author:  Thamuz [ Fri May 05, 2006 11:02 pm ]
Post subject: 

Seconding the recommendation of brocashelm - fascinating to read his perceptions of what the scene was like 'way back then.'

Author:  OlympicSharpshooter [ Sat May 06, 2006 11:30 am ]
Post subject: 

Brocashelm is good enough that he's going to give Aeturnus65 a hell of a run for my 'favourite reviewer of 2006' crown.

Author:  Visionary [ Sun May 07, 2006 9:06 pm ]
Post subject: 

I found Gutterscream's review for Bonded by Blood to be a very enjoyable read. I have always enjoyed reading his description of the scene as it was in the 80s.

Author:  Peregrin [ Thu May 11, 2006 1:37 am ]
Post subject: 

InstinctKill's review of Iron Maiden's self-titled debut is the best review I have read in a long time.

Author:  ThrashGordon [ Sun May 14, 2006 4:22 am ]
Post subject: 

The reviews done by Annihilaytorr, particularly his negative ones are among the most entertaining I have ever read.

Author:  ~Guest 21181 [ Wed May 17, 2006 10:43 pm ]
Post subject: 

I'd like to take the time to thank Cynical for his review of Funeral Mist's Darkness demo. Does the music justice and is the reason I'm listening to it now.

Author:  Gutterscream [ Thu May 25, 2006 9:05 am ]
Post subject: 

Byrgan's review of Autopsy's '87 demo stands recommended.

Author:  Gutterscream [ Sun May 28, 2006 4:56 am ]
Post subject: 

As well as PhantomOTO's critique of Nasty Savage's debut. On the money.

Right beneath him on the list is OSS's Holocaust review.

Author:  Napero [ Thu Jun 08, 2006 1:49 am ]
Post subject: 

Noktorn wrote a pretty nice, if longish, piece for Morbid Angel's Blessed are the sick. Makes me want to dig the album out of the pile again and compare it with Altars.

Author:  Gutterscream [ Thu Jun 08, 2006 8:48 am ]
Post subject: 

Napero wrote:
Noktorn wrote a pretty nice, if longish, piece for Morbid Angel's Blessed are the sick. Makes me want to dig the album out of the pile again and compare it with Altars.


Napero beat me to it. Quite a bit of insight for the mid-teens. Reminds me of OSS a bit in the age-to-talent ratio.

Author:  Noktorn [ Thu Jun 08, 2006 10:31 am ]
Post subject: 

Thanks a lot for the compliments, guys. I'm doing a series of reviews on the entire Morbid Angel catalogue. I only have Altars and Blessed done at the moment. The latter I'll probably revise a bit, it didn't turn out as good as the one for Altars, which might be one of the best reviews I've ever done. And yeah, I know they're excruciatingly long, but it's really a vanity project. I've decided to only do reviews (on my own time, anyway) of bands that I own the entire catalogue of, to gain better insight into their history.

For you guys: I want to plug Napero's still hilarious review of Burzum's 'Dauði Baldrs', and the amazing reviews of My Dying Bride's early EPs by Gutterscream.

Author:  Gutterscream [ Sat Jun 10, 2006 6:13 pm ]
Post subject: 

Not a recommendation.

Burning_Season's In the Sign of Evil review - just some comments.

"...first wave of black metal a.k.a. blackened thrash..." - yeah, that's exactly what we called it :roll:.

"...in addition to the overall more black metallish atmosphere..." - see above

"...a very punkish element..." - no comment

"...they consist of Old school Blackened Thrash riffs..." - WTF is a blackened thrash riff? It must be important 'cause it's capitalized - just shoot me now.

"...black metal styled sound..." - black metal didn't have a style in '84.

"...highlights are "Blasphemer" for its striking similarity to Slayer's "Chemical Warfare"..." - :ugh:

Thanks for a fresh, hindsight-less look at Sodom's debut, one of the six hundred blackened thrash records to be released at the late date (not just for thrash, but for the already spawned sub-genre of Blackend Thrash) of May '84. I'm glad to see someone noticed how Sodom reflect Bathory, a nice trick considering Bathory's debut wouldn't be out for another five months (and assuming that they had even heard of each other at the time, technically who's reflecting whom?)

Author:  OlympicSharpshooter [ Sat Jun 10, 2006 7:12 pm ]
Post subject: 

Remind me to watch my use of modern genre labels in retro reviews. :lol

Author:  Gutterscream [ Sun Jun 11, 2006 11:05 am ]
Post subject: 

OlympicSharpshooter wrote:
Remind me to watch my use of modern genre labels in retro reviews. :lol


The whole thing just caught me the wrong way. ;)
I feel better now.

Author:  Gutterscream [ Mon Jun 12, 2006 8:34 pm ]
Post subject: 

OSS's latest Fates Warning made me go back and throw it on again. Liked the use of plaudits and pundits.

Author:  OlympicSharpshooter [ Mon Jun 12, 2006 10:30 pm ]
Post subject: 

I'm not sure that I shouldn't have saved the rant about people applying things to it that aren't there for ATG, but I'm glad you enjoyed it.

Author:  Peregrin [ Mon Jun 26, 2006 4:19 pm ]
Post subject: 

Gutterscream wrote:
OSS's latest Fates Warning made me go back and throw it on again. Liked the use of plaudits and pundits.


I'm still searching for the original master, perhaps on vinyl if that's what I have to do. (I've only heard the 2002 re-issue and I'm not sure if it really is better than the original)

Author:  electric27 [ Thu Jun 29, 2006 2:54 pm ]
Post subject: 

http://metal-archives.com/review.php?id=84744

HOLY ALLITERATION, BATMAN! Very fun to read out loud. Sure, sometimes the wording sounds silly for the sake of alliteration, but it doesn't seriously hurt the review. His song descriptions are a little over the top, too. It's almost like a more romantic UltraBoris.

Author:  OlympicSharpshooter [ Fri Jun 30, 2006 12:27 am ]
Post subject: 

I really like MettleAngel's stuff, he's quite skilled.

Author:  Gutterscream [ Fri Jun 30, 2006 6:38 pm ]
Post subject: 

And who the hell ever mentions Oliver Magnum nowadays?

Author:  Visionary [ Fri Jun 30, 2006 7:20 pm ]
Post subject: 

What the hell is 'mettle'?

Author:  OlympicSharpshooter [ Fri Jun 30, 2006 8:26 pm ]
Post subject: 

It's an affectation of his. Maybe they all do it on his site or something...

Author:  Peregrin [ Sat Jul 01, 2006 5:44 am ]
Post subject: 

electric27 wrote:
http://metal-archives.com/review.php?id=84744

HOLY ALLITERATION, BATMAN! Very fun to read out loud. Sure, sometimes the wording sounds silly for the sake of alliteration, but it doesn't seriously hurt the review. His song descriptions are a little over the top, too. It's almost like a more romantic UltraBoris.


It reads more like UltraBoris trying to emulate Prozak if you ask me.

Author:  failsafeman [ Sat Jul 01, 2006 2:51 pm ]
Post subject: 

Gutterscream wrote:
OSS's latest Fates Warning made me go back and throw it on again. Liked the use of plaudits and pundits.


I always enjoy reading good reviews for albums I love. It affects me emotionally in ways few others do. And OSS's review is doubly good, as it means the crappy one right below his is no longer at the top of the page.

Author:  electric27 [ Mon Jul 03, 2006 12:27 am ]
Post subject: 

Peregrin wrote:
electric27 wrote:
http://metal-archives.com/review.php?id=84744

HOLY ALLITERATION, BATMAN! Very fun to read out loud. Sure, sometimes the wording sounds silly for the sake of alliteration, but it doesn't seriously hurt the review. His song descriptions are a little over the top, too. It's almost like a more romantic UltraBoris.


It reads more like UltraBoris trying to emulate Prozak if you ask me.

Nonsense, you can tell this guy was writing this review with a big-assed thesaurus next to him, not so he can sound high-brow, but so he can have massive amounts of alliteration. THE ALLITERATION, MAN, CAN'T YOU SEE!?

Author:  Thamuz [ Fri Jul 07, 2006 3:12 am ]
Post subject: 

A thesaurus? You kid me, that is hardly strecthing the bound of a sixth grader's vocabulary.

Author:  failsafeman [ Fri Jul 07, 2006 3:48 am ]
Post subject: 

Thamuz wrote:
A thesaurus? You kid me, that is hardly strecthing the bound of a sixth grader's vocabulary.


Depends which country's school system you're talking about. ;)

Page 11 of 520 All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group
http://www.phpbb.com/