| Author |
 Topic Search  Topic Options
|
Abstrakt 
Forum Senior Member
Joined: August 18 2005
Location: Soundgarden
Status: Offline
Points: 18292
|
 Posted: November 13 2006 at 11:35 |
|
Opinion number 7.
Too long reviews are boring, so is too short ones.
|
 |
UtUmNo1
Forum Senior Member
Joined: October 29 2006
Location: Australia
Status: Offline
Points: 114
|
Posted: November 13 2006 at 13:44 |
 Trickster F. wrote:
I prefer reading for "substance".
Myself, I do not concentrate to accomplish on a specific length when I am writing my review, I just try to express myself as thoroughly and detailed as I can, it just always happen that they do not turn out short. However, I would never allow myself to write a review without an introductory part or a conclusion, so you can say it is a well-thought process.
The length does not matter, the content does. |
If yours were the ones I read the other day (there was a few revieing In the Woods I think) then you do a very good job. I did mean to give you a pat on the back at the time but it too skipped my mind.
I'm not concerned by the length of the review (reading, as i haven't written any yet) but it's content. I'm not too concerned about, and prefer not to read the, song by song reviews either. I like to know the style of the album, its obvious influences, sounds like....., for fans of....., and the feelings that the album invokes.
|
|
Trickster F.
Prog Reviewer
Joined: February 10 2006
Location: Belize
Status: Offline
Points: 5308
|
Posted: November 13 2006 at 13:53 |
|
The latest two ITW reviews are by Dieter Fischer, who I think summed up the albums very well (I have different approaches to express pretty much the same thoughts though). I am not sure which reviews were those you read though.
|
|
sig
|
|
UtUmNo1
Forum Senior Member
Joined: October 29 2006
Location: Australia
Status: Offline
Points: 114
|
Posted: November 13 2006 at 13:58 |
They we yours, I just looked.
*pats heartily on back*
|
|
Trickster F.
Prog Reviewer
Joined: February 10 2006
Location: Belize
Status: Offline
Points: 5308
|
Posted: November 13 2006 at 14:03 |
Well, my latest ITW review is from 9/28/2006 ,so I figured you were talking about Dieter's two. I think I have reviewed four ITW albums so far, so might as well review the two other ones as well, huh? Thanks for the pat, these signs of appreciation force me to make a step up towards actually attempting another review one of these weeks.
Edited by Trickster F. - November 13 2006 at 14:04
|
|
sig
|
|
UtUmNo1
Forum Senior Member
Joined: October 29 2006
Location: Australia
Status: Offline
Points: 114
|
Posted: November 13 2006 at 14:09 |
Please do review them as I am using you as a guide to discovering some new metal and I have read, and found quite worthwhile, quite a number of your reviews. 
|
|
johnobvious
Forum Senior Member
Joined: May 11 2006
Location: Nebraska
Status: Offline
Points: 1361
|
Posted: November 13 2006 at 14:09 |
|
Medium with history, if by history you mean comparing it to the band's other albums or albums by similar bands. Points of reference are key to me to help me make buying decisions. If by history you mean just regurgitating facts about the band, then no thanks.
|
|
Biggles was in rehab last Saturday
|
|
Tony R
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator / Retired Admin
Joined: July 16 2004
Location: UK
Status: Offline
Points: 11979
|
Posted: November 13 2006 at 14:10 |
I like medium sized reviews. I dont need a full run down of the qualities of each track. I dislike reviews that give marks for each track,it looks cumbersome and nerdy,even worse when the scores are totted up at the end - why?  One man's meat and all that....
|
|
Trickster F.
Prog Reviewer
Joined: February 10 2006
Location: Belize
Status: Offline
Points: 5308
|
Posted: November 13 2006 at 14:11 |
UtUmNo1 wrote:
Please do review them as I am using you as a guide to discovering some new metal and I have read, and found quite worthwhile, quite a number of your reviews. |
That's great! I should have put that into my profile as a reminder, but bear in mind that not everything that gets a rating lower than 4 in my book is not worth being heard.
I'll get to other reviews by other bands I have either wanted to review or did not fully review discographies of sooner or later.
|
|
sig
|
|
UtUmNo1
Forum Senior Member
Joined: October 29 2006
Location: Australia
Status: Offline
Points: 114
|
Posted: November 13 2006 at 14:21 |
Your efforts aren't wasted.
Kudos.
Any man who loves Agalloch as much I do can't be all bad  |
|
tuxon
Forum Senior Member
Joined: September 21 2004
Location: plugged-in
Status: Offline
Points: 5502
|
Posted: November 13 2006 at 16:55 |
Just the rating should suffice I think, some words to explain the reason for the rating, and maybe some info on musical style, relating the music to contempory's or influences, and maybe some relevant info on the the band, and maybe a pointer to what songs are the best or worst can be a nice addition.
Basically I like shorter reviews for first glance, and when that appeals to me I go read the longer reviews hoping for some more detail info.
|
|
I'm always almost unlucky _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Id5ZcnjXSZaSMFMC Id5LM2q2jfqz3YxT
|
|
salmacis
Forum Senior Member
Content Addition
Joined: April 10 2005
Status: Offline
Points: 3928
|
Posted: November 13 2006 at 16:56 |
I like to read fairly long reviews- a look at the reviews I've written over the last two years would probably confirm that! 
|
|
Pnoom!
Forum Senior Member
Joined: September 02 2006
Location: OH
Status: Offline
Points: 4981
|
Posted: November 13 2006 at 17:04 |
Tony R wrote:
I like medium sized reviews. I dont need a full run down of the qualities of each track.
I dislike reviews that give marks for each track,it looks cumbersome and nerdy,even worse when the scores are totted up at the end - why?
One man's meat and all that.... |
What I don't like is when reviewers review each track, and find the average for each track to determine the album's worth, which completely ignores the concept of the album and the flow of the album. And the fact that I know albums that from me would get an average 4.2 stars that are better than those that would get an average say, 4.6/4.7 stars.
But I do like to read reviews (and write them) that discuss each track so that I know what to expect as I listen to them the first time.
|
|
The Miracle
Prog Reviewer
Joined: May 29 2005
Location: hell
Status: Offline
Points: 28427
|
Posted: November 13 2006 at 21:46 |
|
Option 3. Usually my reviews come out very long with details - I'm a very punctual person and most of my reviews turn out long even if I didn't intend that from the beginning.
And I totally agree on track ratings and math calculations - useless and annoying IMO.
|
|
|
|
Ivan_Melgar_M
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: April 27 2004
Location: Peru
Status: Offline
Points: 19535
|
Posted: November 13 2006 at 21:52 |
I say leave every person with their own style, except those reviews that rate song by song, create a formula and reach a general average, that's absurd IMO.
My reviews normally are between 400 and 1,000 words, in the case of conceptual albums I focus more in the concept and how the band achieved it but in the nrmal albums I try to check most tracks, at least the best and the worst ones and be as descriptive as possible.
Iván
|
|
|
|
sleeper
Prog Reviewer
Joined: October 09 2005
Location: Entropia
Status: Offline
Points: 16449
|
Posted: November 14 2006 at 15:10 |
|
I agree with the sentiment of not liking they way some people have used a formula to decide the rating of a band. I can think of a few albums where the sum of the whole is greater than the sum of its parts.
|
Spending more than I should on Prog since 2005 
|
|
Pnoom!
Forum Senior Member
Joined: September 02 2006
Location: OH
Status: Offline
Points: 4981
|
Posted: November 14 2006 at 19:08 |
|
Just to give a further example of my reviews, my new Meddle review is 7 and a half pages in word (double spaced) and devotes about 8 or 9 paragraphs to Echoes alone...
|
|
tuxon
Forum Senior Member
Joined: September 21 2004
Location: plugged-in
Status: Offline
Points: 5502
|
Posted: November 14 2006 at 19:23 |
I can honestly say i didn't read a single word of that review inpraiseoffolly.
but I'm sure some will be interested in that review, so compliments on your stamina.
just out of respect I will read it, maybe it's even something I want to read.
|
|
I'm always almost unlucky _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ Id5ZcnjXSZaSMFMC Id5LM2q2jfqz3YxT
|
|
Pnoom!
Forum Senior Member
Joined: September 02 2006
Location: OH
Status: Offline
Points: 4981
|
Posted: November 14 2006 at 19:25 |
tuxon wrote:
I can honestly say i didn't read a single word of that review inpraiseoffolly.
but I'm sure some will be interested in that review, so compliments on your stamina.
just out of respect I will read it, maybe it's even something I want to read. |
Thank you... I do ramble a bit... Generally, though, I keep my reviews between two and four pages double spaced. Something about Meddle though (being my favorite album and all) inspired 7 and a half pages of adoration from me.
|
|
Joolz
Special Collaborator
Honorary Collaborator
Joined: March 24 2006
Location: United Kingdom
Status: Offline
Points: 1377
|
Posted: November 14 2006 at 19:29 |
inpraiseoffolly wrote:
Just to give a further example of my reviews, my new Meddle review is 7 and a half pages in word (double spaced) and devotes about 8 or 9 paragraphs to Echoes alone... |
Yes, and it is 2906 words !! By the way, One Of Those Days .... 'I'm going to cut you into little pieces' is aimed at British DJ Jimmy Young, not because he was a critic of theirs, but because they hated his smarmy old-granny manners And ..... the ping at the start of Echoes is not "Wright plucking a detuned piano string" but a chance harmonic distortion caused when Wright was experimenting with a piano put through a Leslie cabinet See .... I did read the review 
Edited by Joolz - November 14 2006 at 19:40
|
|
Donate monthly and keep PA fast-loading and ad-free forever.
/PAlogo_v2.gif "Progarchives.com Homepage")
A Serious Poll: Reviews
