Forum Home Forum Home > Site News, Newbies, Help and Improvements > Help us improve the site
  New Posts New Posts RSS Feed - Reviews discussion
  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Events   Register Register  Login Login

Topic ClosedReviews discussion

 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <12345 176>
Author
Message
tardis View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: October 02 2005
Location: Victoria, BC
Status: Offline
Points: 14378
Direct Link To This Post Posted: October 15 2006 at 15:41
Oops! I just noticed that...sorry Pete!
Back to Top
Easy Livin View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Honorary Collaborator / Retired Admin

Joined: February 21 2004
Location: Scotland
Status: Offline
Points: 15570
Direct Link To This Post Posted: October 15 2006 at 17:00
This thread is for discussing reviews. There's no rules for this thread, you can talk about good reviews, bad reviews, reviews which have been reported in the Reviews reporting thread etc.
 
The reviews reporting thread is intended to be a simple thread where people can report a review they feel is "inappropriate". Posts in that thread will be acknowledged by the admin team from time to time, but it is not intended that any discussion will take place there. (In the interest of fair play, the reviewer as the right to post a defence there).
 
What we (Guigo and I) are trying to do is keep the reviews reporting thread clean and focused. The previous "inappropriate reviews" thread tended to go off on tangents, and sometimes reported reviews got missed among the discussion.
 
The first post in each of the threads has the details.Wink
Back to Top
Australian View Drop Down
Prog Reviewer
Prog Reviewer
Avatar

Joined: June 13 2006
Location: Australia
Status: Offline
Points: 3278
Direct Link To This Post Posted: October 16 2006 at 03:52
Posted edited "Song for America" Review by KANsaS

Edited by Australian - October 16 2006 at 03:52
Back to Top
Angelo View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Honorary Collaborator / Retired Admin

Joined: May 07 2006
Location: Italy
Status: Offline
Points: 13210
Direct Link To This Post Posted: October 16 2006 at 13:43
Originally posted by Easy Livin Easy Livin wrote:

This thread is for discussing reviews. There's no rules for this thread, you can talk about good reviews, bad reviews, reviews which have been reported in the Reviews reporting thread etc.
 
The reviews reporting thread is intended to be a simple thread where people can report a review they feel is "inappropriate". Posts in that thread will be acknowledged by the admin team from time to time, but it is not intended that any discussion will take place there. (In the interest of fair play, the reviewer as the right to post a defence there).
 
What we (Guigo and I) are trying to do is keep the reviews reporting thread clean and focused. The previous "inappropriate reviews" thread tended to go off on tangents, and sometimes reported reviews got missed among the discussion.
 
The first post in each of the threads has the details.Wink


Just an idea, to avoid confusion like Peter's: I think, but I'm not sure, that the Web Wiz Forums software that is run to create this forum supports automatic addition of the word 'Moved' pr something similar to any posts moved. If not, never mind, otherwise, it could be useful here...
Back to Top
tuxon View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar
Senior Member

Joined: September 21 2004
Location: plugged-in
Status: Offline
Points: 5502
Direct Link To This Post Posted: October 16 2006 at 18:31
Originally posted by billbuckner billbuckner wrote:

PINK FLOYD — Dark Side Of The Moon
Review by t-and-g

3 stars Not sure what the point is of reviewing one of the most famous albums of all time but perhaps I feel a need to balance all the superlatives and praise heaped on this album with an alternative viewpoint.

I’ve been buying music for over forty years and was into Pink Floyd right from the early days. By the time DSOTM came out I was a student and very much into the prog scene with bands like Genesis, Yes, Van der Graaf Generator and King Crimson among my favourites plus, of course, Pink Floyd who for me reached their zenith with “Echoes” on the “Meddle” album. With the possible exception of “Shine on ….” they have done nothing to match it since.

In fact DSOTM was the first Floyd album that I didn’t buy. This was no crass desire to be different just because it was so popular because I knew disliked it before I knew how popular it was to become. My room-mate bought a copy as soon as it was released and played it frequently. I sat down to listen to it with him the first time with great expectations and as the album progressed I became more and more disappointed. The problem being that it just seemed to be a collection of middle of the road songs with mass market appeal, hence the popularity. A great move forward for them financially but a backward step musically. David Gilmour has said that he was “falling out of love” with the sound collages they had been doing prior to DSOTM – well I wasn’t and still haven’t.

I have several newer Floyd albums but still don’t have proper copy of DSOTM, the nearest being the live album “Pulse” which is pretty good and includes the whole of DSOTM on disc 2 but I play disc 1 mostly.

I don’t propose to describe the tracks, you know them, but if you’re into essentially conventional lyrical songs but with rather more about them than you’re average chart hit then this album will satisfy you as all tracks (apart from “on the run”) pretty much fit this description. It’s pleasant enough but, for me, does not rise above that level.


--------------------------

Nice story. Pity that there's next to nothing about the actual music.




 
you are right it doesn't adress the music really, but i don't think it's really a problem, no problemo for me, I tend to agree with him that it's a collection of middle of the road songs, which does say something of the music.
 
I think it's a valid review, though he says he doesn't describe the tracks because the reader knows them is slightly for the wrong audience, for people who know the album have no use for a review.
 
people who don't know the album will realise that this is a more popular release than previous albums.
 
at least this review explains his three star rating.
I'm always almost unlucky _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Id5ZcnjXSZaSMFMC Id5LM2q2jfqz3YxT
Back to Top
Certif1ed View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Honorary Collaborator

Joined: April 08 2004
Location: England
Status: Offline
Points: 7559
Direct Link To This Post Posted: October 19 2006 at 03:47
IRON MAIDEN — Iron Maiden
Review by G_Bone (Graeme)
From a progressive standpoint, this album would rank pretty low. But I'm going to rate it as music, not necessarily prog.

Site Guidelines
6 - Try to write reviews that will be of real use and interest to other progressive music fans, who can benefit by finding new avenues for their musical exploration.


I'm getting pretty fed up of people who use the review system as a kind of cheap "rate your music" instead of adhering to the spirit of this site - and bothering to read our guidelines.

This is, of course, one of oh so many - but in this case, the reviewer blatantly spells out his intention to not bother following them.

Is this a Progressive music site or not?

    

Edited by Certif1ed - October 19 2006 at 03:48
The important thing is not to stop questioning.
Back to Top
sleeper View Drop Down
Prog Reviewer
Prog Reviewer
Avatar

Joined: October 09 2005
Location: Entropia
Status: Offline
Points: 16449
Direct Link To This Post Posted: October 19 2006 at 18:45
I have problems with this review:

LIQUID TENSION EXPERIMENT — Liquid Tension Experiment 2
Review by jasusgabrielbrea

2 stars I hate prog metal. It's neither because some people believe it's the new devil in music nor for the aggressiveness it suggests. It's rather because I see it as a degeneration of progressive music (in my humble opinion and surely the opinion of many classically trained musicians).

Yes, I know I shouldn't just give out these sentences without something else to substain them (I will get to the actual review later on), so here comes the argument: for works like this!. I used to like Dream Theater when I was younger but I just find their music dull by now; their focus is to try progressive music to sound "COOL" and "HIP" to the generations of metalheads who praise Metallica for whatever the reason is; academic music is not meant to be COOL (be it classical or jazz); that's why they're heard on separate stations from the popular ones, and I wonder why bands like Dream Theater or Stratovarius are not aired much on radio, because I hear too much MTV material there. The only thing good about these "prog-metal" bands is that they induce people to listen to more challenging music (at least sometimes), although I know many people who are not into progressive music that like them along the likes of power metal and even death-metal, so it's not 100% guaranteed that it'll improve the musical taste of youth. I know I sound like George Starostin but I have no other choice but to show my dislike this way.

Now, to the actual review. I liked Experiment 1 a bit more (their previous album), because they actually managed to make some decent progressive metal with less noise or distorted bar chords, the guitar actually harmonized more; whilst it still didn't merit a 4-star rating.

And the musicianship of the individual members can't be questioned: Petrucci is very accurate (although sometimes he sound like a generic Yngwie Malmsteen wannabe, only improved); Tony Levin is known as the best session bass and stick player in rock and pop music (because he's one of the few bassists in the rock industry able to play with his bare hands instead of a pick); Jordan Rudess is an incredibly talented keyboard player in the vein of Rick Wakeman and.... well, Mike Portnoy is good, but he's no Buddy Rich, and although he's very coordinated in the bass drums, sometimes I wonder if he's playing the drums with drumsticks or with baseball bats; I mean, the guy rarely varies in intensity and he uses the bass drums way too much, but he's very talented, and no one can deny that (despite his ridiculous rocker attitude).

Apart from the individual virtuosity, not much could be said about the music: generic metal riffs accompanied with degrading improvisations (Another Dimension and Chewbacca come to mind, respectively), and, even though the overall compositions are very creative, it's still louder than thou metal; they wanted to sound "cooler" in this one and thank God they didn't go on (we still have Dream Theater though).

I can't deny there are actually good numbers here: Biaxident has a very nice latin- flavoured bridge with Santana-esque guitar licks and great keyboard feeds courtesy of Mr. Rudess; Liquid Dreams are a good way to escape from the horrible loud drums and the annoying loud bar chords, but it drags a bit in the second half, leaving us with Jordan showing his talent on keys but not much more; and Hourglass is a simple instrumental ballad with acoustic guitar (the only acoustic guitar-based song on the entire Liquid Tension short catalog), but it's not as annoying as the rest of the stuff here.

This goes to show I'm not a fan of progressive metal, but at least I consider the good aspects off it. And this is actually some of the best metal I've heard, which doesn't say much about the rest; so that's why it's my first and only prog metal review so far; it's actually worth analyzing. 2 plain stars.

The first two paragraphs do nothing but lambast prog metal, the second sentance of which is nothing but a lie (does this guy realise that a lot of prog-metal is played by classically trained musicians?). If he doesnt like the album thats fine, but I dont like him using a review to bad mouth a genre here on the front page.






Edited by sleeper - October 19 2006 at 18:45
Spending more than I should on Prog since 2005

Back to Top
The Miracle View Drop Down
Prog Reviewer
Prog Reviewer


Joined: May 29 2005
Location: hell
Status: Offline
Points: 28427
Direct Link To This Post Posted: October 19 2006 at 19:04
I agree, very close minded and biased review.
Back to Top
The Miracle View Drop Down
Prog Reviewer
Prog Reviewer


Joined: May 29 2005
Location: hell
Status: Offline
Points: 28427
Direct Link To This Post Posted: October 19 2006 at 19:26
So... it's appropriate enough to stay then?

Edited by The Miracle - October 19 2006 at 19:26
Back to Top
Atkingani View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Honorary Collaborator / Retired Admin

Joined: October 21 2005
Location: Terra Brasilis
Status: Offline
Points: 12277
Direct Link To This Post Posted: October 19 2006 at 19:40
Originally posted by The Miracle The Miracle wrote:

So... it's appropriate enough to stay then?
 
Not neccessarily, Ansen... reviews discussed here may be edited, kept untouched or, sometimes, even deleted. For the case of edition (what seems to be the case) we normally contact the reviewer but first we have to be sure about the extent of the edition. Smile
Guigo

~~~~~~
Back to Top
Cristi View Drop Down
Collaborator
Collaborator
Avatar
Crossover Team

Joined: July 27 2006
Location: wonderland
Status: Offline
Points: 7495
Direct Link To This Post Posted: November 03 2006 at 04:58

1 stars A shame to the name of Kansas. Pop rock a la Bon Jovi. Don't let the name of Steve Walsh in the line-up confusse you. Even a tentative (?) to make just one "progressive" track ("Musicatto") failed. Forget the band's 70s excellent albums and avoid it, please.

Posted Tuesday, December 30, 2003

    This review has troubled me big time. Power may not be a Kansas masterpiece but stating that it is "pop-rock a la Bon Jovi" is an exaggeration, a huge mistake. It's a mean and close minded thing to say. Any thoughts?


Edited by Cristi - November 03 2006 at 04:59
Back to Top
Atkingani View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Honorary Collaborator / Retired Admin

Joined: October 21 2005
Location: Terra Brasilis
Status: Offline
Points: 12277
Direct Link To This Post Posted: November 03 2006 at 12:17
OK, eventual discussions about Kansas' "Power" review to be done here. Thanks!
Guigo

~~~~~~
Back to Top
Ricochet View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Honorary Collaborator

Joined: February 27 2005
Location: Nauru
Status: Offline
Points: 46300
Direct Link To This Post Posted: November 04 2006 at 12:59
 
mystic fred
Collaborator
Collaborator
Avatar
Band Submissions

Joined: 13 March 2006
Location: England
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 1405
Quote mystic fred Replybullet Posted: Today at 17:30
somehow this "review" comes across as extremely insulting to the neo-prog team and fish fans..!!
 
 

MARILLION — Script For A Jester's Tear

Review by bristolstc

1 stars I used to LISTEN seriously to THIS!!!!? What was I on!? Marillion together with Arena (who just happened to be a much later spinoff/imitation) were the most vulgar insult to progressive music ever created, because they not only created "neo prog," but all the evil hypocrisies that go along with it. Let's start first in the vocal/lyric department. Fish is an awful singer who tried not very hard to clone Peter Gabriel's approach circa Lamb Lies Down and Trespass. His screeching, histrionic, overbearing vocals sound more like a really bad imitation of Iron Maiden's Bruce Dickinson and though I'm not a great fan of Maiden, at least they didn't pretend to be something they weren't. The lyrics are written at first you think from someone whose heart is at least in the right place, but then you realize a tantrum throwing track like "Forgotten Sons" which sounds pro British Soldier anti IRA on first listening is just an excuse to write another twisted and violent song about death. Fish is the real problem here, choking you and suffocating you, but the whole band are a problem. This whole record is a lie. Progressive rock? No way!!! Marillion like all neo prog are like a bad marriage of overproduced heavy metal and smug allusions to a kind of music not only the band could care less about or understand, but a kind of music people didn't understand who liked this nonsense. There isn't one passage here that I can listen to, in fact I will never listen to anything by Marillion with Fish again and haven't for years! To give credit where credit is due, after Fish left Marillion released TWO good albums- Season's End (I've really just been told its good by a friend of mine) and Holidays In Eden (this is great and you should listen to what an improvement Steve Hogarth is), actually- make that two good records and one pretty good attempt at making a concept album- the underrated and very listenable Brave. Back to this disaster, though, no matter how hard Marillion would try to avoid the mistakes of their past, they had commited the worst insult to progressive music ever with Fish and there is no forgiving them for it. The production is horrible and sounds like any other bad 80s production job, the lyrics are made even worse by Fish's delivery which is to scream, grunt, and yowl every word like someone has just stuck a knife in his back (wishful thinking), and the playing is so clunky that every tempo or mood change turns into a nightmarish exercise in inept arrogant w**king. The whole sound is bad, and Fish gets the bad music he deserves here. Neo prog? I'm even growing tired of IQ who I still have to admit I have a soft spot for (maybe because they didn't fake things and were honest) and I strongly feel there were things more "progressive" in Shy, Grand Prix, Tobruk, and the other Brit/American hard pomp rock bands. Pomp was what prog turned into, not this neo nonsense. The absolute worst track on the album is "Forgotten Sons" made even worse by the fact you know a bad imitation of "The Knife" is coming for a whole album. He even has the nerve to use the line "For Those Who Trespass Against Us" in it! What would the average soldier who Fish is trying to convince do to him? Sock him in the jaw! He'd probably more likely be a Deep Purple fan than a Marillion fan anyway. Give me Maiden if I want to be put into a painful state of mind when listening. The problem is that Bruce Dickinson was technically a very good singer who didn't always have the best material, Fish is a TECHNICALLY HORRIBLE SINGER who writes awful lyrics to go with awful material. There is no way to erase the shameful stain left on music by neo prog, and it began and was obnoxious here. Not even music

 

I just hate that. please admin, arse him! Cry


Edited by Easy Livin - November 04 2006 at 13:09
Back to Top
Stefanovic View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member


Joined: November 01 2006
Location: France
Status: Offline
Points: 287
Direct Link To This Post Posted: November 04 2006 at 13:05
I'd second that Ricochet ! Angry
 
"Fish is a TECHNICALLY HORRIBLE SINGER who writes awful lyrics"  Censored
 
show us yours Mystic Fred... Ermm
 
 
Back to Top
Easy Livin View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Honorary Collaborator / Retired Admin

Joined: February 21 2004
Location: Scotland
Status: Offline
Points: 15570
Direct Link To This Post Posted: November 04 2006 at 13:15
We need to be careful to differentiate between reviews which we disagree with, and those which need to be dealt with.
 
Here, I believe the reviewer is giving his honest opinion of the music. While his comments are harsh, I do not believe they are insulting or breach any guidelines.
 
On a personal basis, I find the review to be unpalatable as I disagree strongly with the opinions expressed. From a reviews moderation point of view though, I can see nothing which warrants intervention.
Back to Top
tardis View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: October 02 2005
Location: Victoria, BC
Status: Offline
Points: 14378
Direct Link To This Post Posted: November 04 2006 at 13:24
The production is horrible and sounds like any other bad 80s production job, the lyrics are made even worse by Fish's delivery which is to scream, grunt, and yowl every word like someone has just stuck a knife in his back (wishful thinking)...

Even if you dislike Fish, doesn't wishing a knife to be stuck in his back go a little over the edge, even for extreme dislike of a musician?

Btw, hopefully Cyggie won't see this...Dead


Edited by tardis - November 04 2006 at 13:25
Back to Top
stonebeard View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: May 27 2005
Location: NE Indiana
Status: Offline
Points: 28045
Direct Link To This Post Posted: November 04 2006 at 13:27
That person is a douchebag and needs to be repeadly given shoddy circumscisions until he passes out.
Back to Top
tardis View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: October 02 2005
Location: Victoria, BC
Status: Offline
Points: 14378
Direct Link To This Post Posted: November 04 2006 at 13:29
Shoddy circumcisions...Dead
Back to Top
stonebeard View Drop Down
Forum Senior Member
Forum Senior Member
Avatar

Joined: May 27 2005
Location: NE Indiana
Status: Offline
Points: 28045
Direct Link To This Post Posted: November 04 2006 at 13:34
Taken form his review of Tales from the Lost Attic:
 
"A great band who don't deserve to be called "neo prog," that's not what they were about. IQ were and are a real progressive band, and they will always be one of my favourite bands of the 80s, particularly for having really moving vocalists (especially Peter Nicholls)."
 
Wouldn't it be nice if in every one of my reviews, I made mention of a genre I don't like and said how much better this album is than that annoying, piece-of-sh*t, RIO eh?
 
This guy would probably jump at the chance to sniff Peter Gabrial's used costumes just to remember the smell when he goes to w**k off at night is his lonely apartment.
Back to Top
Ricochet View Drop Down
Special Collaborator
Special Collaborator
Avatar
Honorary Collaborator

Joined: February 27 2005
Location: Nauru
Status: Offline
Points: 46300
Direct Link To This Post Posted: November 04 2006 at 13:47
Originally posted by Easy Livin Easy Livin wrote:

We need to be careful to differentiate between reviews which we disagree with, and those which need to be dealt with.
 
Here, I believe the reviewer is giving his honest opinion of the music. While his comments are harsh, I do not believe they are insulting or breach any guidelines.
 
On a personal basis, I find the review to be unpalatable as I disagree strongly with the opinions expressed. From a reviews moderation point of view though, I can see nothing which warrants intervention.


I believe I must express my opinion that even the 1 star opinions can be made objectively, interestingly and diplomatically, above everything else. Contrary to that peach type of a reviewer, this one can only complain, like it's the grossest thing ever to experience. His language is vile and exactly harsh as to shock and to stirr.

Plus that he sounds deeply purist, towards the neo-prog movement, he also doesn't understand the difference between a rip-off and a major influence (the eternal conflict of Fish "imitating" Gabriel, Marillion doing the Genesis-like steps etc.)

please re-consider, Easy, because things like this can go better and more...appealing.
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <12345 176>
  Share Topic   

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

Forum Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 11.01
Copyright ©2001-2014 Web Wiz Ltd.

This page was generated in 0.141 seconds.