Reviews: Opinions Change

rdtprog wrote: I am afraid when i do a review after listening to the album many times that my evaluation will go so down that it would be a negative for the band. So, i don't wait much before doing a review, because more often than not, (there's some exceptions), my enthusiasm is higher in my first listening than it will be after many.

I think we zoom on one side of this post about "Review" but This post have another side: Changing opinion for yourself. I mean this "change" may happen in our personal opinions without present and share that to others by writing a review. Maybe our taste change . We must answer to ourselves in this situation (Opinion change) and try to find why and how.

Guldbamsen wrote: Then again maybe I am wrong. Maybe we should be more liberal with our ratings and only review albums we really like - and preferably only review them when our enthusiasm is at an alltime high... It sounds kinda dodgy to me though.  Masterpieces, or any other great records, should be able to stand the test of time. If one rates an album with 5 stars and then after a week or so suddenly changes his/her mind; now it's more like a 3 maybe 3.5 - and the person in question then never rectifies that, then why have a rating system altogether? I mean, if the ratings do not reflect people's real opinion, then the system becomes a sham. If we are to have ratings and reviews as a foundation for this site, then the most important thing has to be honesty.

Opinions change as musical tastes change, that's what keeps an interest in music so vital. Most people will 'discover' different music forms because their musical heroes often do. One minute you're listening to heavy metal and before you know it, you're listening to world music. What you once thought was crap you may now find challenging and often difficult to play (or even tune!). Change and growth is the spice of life!

Horizons wrote: ...I was looking at my reviews and saw a couple ratings that I disagreed with, wasn't sure whether to keep them or change them to how I feel now. I was curious how often this happens to reviewers in particular because their words typically match how they felt about the album at that point and the rating reflects that.

I'm not a great fan of the ratings, but they do tell an interesting story, however untrue and not informative they can be. I kinda think that they tend to hide something else, and that would be an individual's own ability to make up their own mind. Like the social milieu that is forcing religion and morals through the media, "ratings" are a way to tell you, what you should like and not like, and as time goes by, an individual loses the ability to make their own mind and opinions -- and these folks are always gullible and susceptible to what everyone says and they don't.

Edited by moshkito - October 16 2014 at 23:25

Well, I have developed a system in that I stay away from albums I know i won't like. A vegetarian should not critique a steakhouse, so it makes no sense for me to review a hip-hop or country album because I hold long standing and negative opinions about these genres. I will review only what I buy (or get from selected artists) that have a chance of me being appreciative of their style or effort.  I also stay away from Tech and Math because I just know too little about it, so whom am I to bash, bully or praise?The harsher metal and such also remain outside of my boundaries. I stick to what I know best , research and read other valued opinions mostly here on PA , listen to samples and decide to purchase. Then, I will listen once overall (often unimpressed ) and then twice intensely before I commit to words. My opinions rarely change because I try to get it or else I won't venture an opinion. On a rare occasion, the first spin through will hit me in the face and drool accordingly. This may be rigid formula but it works for me. 

Horizons wrote: I was looking at my reviews and saw a couple ratings that I disagreed with, wasn't sure whether to keep them or change them to how I feel now. I was curious how often this happens to reviewers in particular because their words typically match how they felt about the album at that point and the rating reflects that.  Have any of you looked over reviews and decided to change the rating to fit how you currently feel about the album? Or do you always have confidence in your ratings that every time you look back at it, you always agree? I know opinions change about music but I was just curious about how people think about this.

Depends on the review. Depends on the album. Depends on a number of things.

Edited by Dayvenkirq - October 22 2014 at 03:36

I've been listening to music for long enough that my opinions don't change anymore...

they do change, but sometimes when I re-listen to an album I realize there was a reason I gave the review I did, for better or worse.  So I don't often change ratings.  Sometimes I correct typos in old reviews, but generally a review and rating can only be stated to reflect my opinion and rating at that moment in time (even if my current opinion is usually similar anyway), and, since the review has a date, all is ok.  I'd rather review something new than dramatically change an old review anyway

Edited by kenethlevine - October 22 2014 at 12:52

When it comes to ratings, I belong to Gnosis2000 rating site, and we are encouraged to update our ratings very often (ideally every time we revisit an album).... But then again, we're a fairly closed circle.
For PA, I'll readjust the ratings when touching over a review... but it's not like I'll downgrade an album by two stars or somethng... more an adjustement in the view of the rest of a band's other releases, on order to be more coherent with myself and others.

I actually think that way more reviewers should do this: rating an album in the context of other albums in the band's discography and even in the "genre".... ex: is Genesis' Duke really not as good as Yes' Drama that it warrants one less star??

The T wrote: Plenty of my opinions have changed. Also, my opinion on plenty my reviews has changed (many of my reviews suck). I'm just too lazy to correct either discrepancy.

I must say that I've gone back and re-written many reviews on PA, partly because my early stuff is embarrassing, but also sometimes something "clicked" (or in rarer cases 'unclicked") and I've totally re-written my reviews - often for a whole band.

I'm currently in the process of thinking it all out for Crimson, but lack often the energy.

I've kind of lost the drive to write reviews too. I sometimes wonder how useful they are nowadays, now that you can sample so much on the web that one might not need reviews to encourage an acquisition anymore.

In some cases, I tend to read reviews after I got the album and even after reviewed it... Just in case someone understood something I didn't catch.

richardh wrote: octopus-4 wrote: How can you be sure that your current opinion is more "real" than the old one? if the original one was 'prejudiced' by circumstances.

or simply written a bit quickly... In Gnosis2000, they advise us not to rate a new (to you) album higher than 11 (out of 15), because of the novelty factor (and the over-enthusiasm of a discovery). You're suppposed to go back at it a few months later and move it up or down. In my case, it (rating) rarely goes up.

Guldbamsen wrote: Then again maybe I am wrong. Maybe we should be more liberal with our ratings and only review albums we really like - and preferably only review them when our enthusiasm is at an alltime high... It sounds kinda dodgy to me though.  Masterpieces, or any other great records, should be able to stand the test of time. If one rates an album with 5 stars and then after a week or so suddenly changes his/her mind; now it's more like a 3 maybe 3.5 - and the person in question then never rectifies that, then why have a rating system altogether? I mean, if the ratings do not reflect people's real opinion, then the system becomes a sham. If we are to have ratings and reviews as a foundation for this site, then the most important thing has to be honesty.

really disagree here   >> this would lead to an overwhelming sea of highly over-rated albums and induce us into error. Ideally, the music industry would love us (and other sites) to act up this way.

I've been thanked many times over for my conservative ratings, precisely because I'm relatively severe in my ratings. People like it when you tell them to avoid something in a band's discography  or wait until a second wave of investigation to get album XYZ






Edited by Sean Trane - October 27 2014 at 05:53