Andrea is entitled to write what he/she thinks, and really, a review like this is hardly going to make people stop and think "Hmm, maybe it's rubbish after all" - so I don't see a problem with it.

As for the standard of English - I think it's brave to even try to write a review in a language you're not familiar with. Sorry, em, can't back you up on that point.

I don't like it as a review, as it is sweeping and general, but anyone can write a review here, and it doesn't contain foul language and does not set out to upset anyone - even though, as a huge of Floyd fan, any negative review is a bit upsetting to me!

It's not really much of a review, is it? Just tell me why you like something, or why you don't; an unsubstantiated review- positive or negative- is useless to everyone. I actually like negative reviews of my favorite albums (including DSOTM), as long as they're well-written; sometimes they make good points and make me think about why I like certain aspects of the music...although no review has ever really changed my mind about anything.

As far as the language goes, I can (eventually) understand everything andrea writes- it's just not very impressive to begin with. There are equally banal reviews in the database from native english speakers, as well as some thoughtful and detailed observations by folks struggling with the language (some of my fellow collaborators...).

I'd be happy to hear opinions on why DSOTM is overrated, but this simply doesn't make any points worth considering.

Sorry guys, it was way past my bed time and I spat the dummy clean out of my pram.....however....that said...

On the subject of good English, my apologies for sounding "snobby", which I did but am not. Its just that in order to write a good and articulate review, one which will be of some use to the reader, communicating criticisms and praise, if any, and justifying, or at least illustraiting those stand points effectively, one is advised to use a language, the tool of communication, with which one is at least able to articulate successfully. (Sorry, that last sentence is a little convoluted, so much for successfull articulation. must stop reading Gormanghast.)

DSOTM is still a 5 star album. If  it's not then I've stumbled onto a site in some strange alternative universe, and I wanna go home!

[QUOTE=Useful_Idiot]

 it's against the rules to write in any other language, QUOTE]

Is this true?

 I've seen a lot of French, Spanish and Italian on this site. I know of other forums where nonEnglish posts are removed, but I thought we were above such things. It can be frustrating to find a review or post in an unknown language, maar als je dat niet leuk vind, heb je pech !

There's a good thread on language in the "Suggestions for the prog archives" section, dicussing the merits and otherwise of allowing reviews in languages other than English.

Personally I still rate DSOTM as an absolute masterpiece. Remember it was released well over 30 years ago. The world had never heard anything like it!

That said, I fully support Andrea's right to voice their opinion, it's just a pity they didn't go into a bit more detail with their criticism. Andrea's reviews have also featured in another thread. All credit to him/her for attempting to "stick to the rules" re language. I reckon his/her reviews are written in a native tongue, then run through an on-line translator.

By the way Emdiar, when submitting reviews, you'll see:

PROGARCHIVES REVIEWS GUIDELINES:

1 - Write in ENGLISH - Minimum 50 words. Feel free to review as many discs as you like.

emdiar wrote: DSOTM is still a 5 star album. If  it's not then I've stumbled onto a site in some strange alternative universe, and I wanna go home!

You only give it 5 stars out of 5???

It's worth at least 6

emdiar wrote: Is this true?  I've seen a lot of French, Spanish and Italian on this site. I know of other forums where nonEnglish posts are removed, but I thought we were above such things. It can be frustrating to find a review or post in an unknown language, maar als je dat niet leuk vind, heb je pech !

I believe Max is currently working on remvoing all non-english reviews.

emdiar wrote:  (Sorry, that last sentence is a little convoluted, so much for successfull articulation. must stop reading Gormanghast.)

Never say with brevity and clarity that which can be accomplished with the finely wrought purple prose of linguistic headiness that suffices to engender the sweet  verbose euphoria in the mind of the reader. Peake let us down by dying before he completed his trilogy but there's always Lovecraft to provide a worthy antedote for the omnipresent Hemingway-influenced journalistic style

richardh wrote: I only gave it 3 stars.It's overrated in my opinion.I'm glad a few people are prepared to go against the grain.Lets face it for every 2 or 3 star review there will be at least ten 5 star reviews.Not all of us understand why this album is regarded as being so important.Personally I find it dull,pedestrian and lacking in good ideas.In my view it sold in vast quantities to people who didn't like/understand prog rock but thought it was there way in to the genre.Critics have praised it the hilt .But why??.Instead of glorious innovative music lets have  MOR dressed up as prog instead.Pink Floyd have recorded at least 4 albums that are better: (Meddle,WYWH,Animals and The Wall) But 'easy listening Floyd' still wins the day in the minds of many!

Well said Richard. I, too, believe that DSOTM is good, but over-rated.

What I find Interesting is that many on this site turn on a band when they become more commercial...some even go as far as to imply that a band that is commercially successful can't really be prog...yet Floyd have avoided such rath.

A quick look at the numbers:

U.S. Sales: The Wall - 23 million units sold, 3rd biggest selling album in U.S. History; DSOTM - 15 million units sold, 21st biggest selling album in U.S. History; WYWH - 6 million units sold, 236th biggest in U.S. History. In fact, Floyd are the 7th biggest selling recording artist in U.S. History, selling 73.5 million units (more than Mariah, Celine, Whitney, Michael Jackson, Elton, The Stones, Shania...source: R.I.A.A.).

U.K. Sales: DSOTM - 2.1 million units sold, 35th biggest in U.K. history (source: rateyourmusic.com)

Global Sales: DSOTM - 35 million units sold, 7th biggest selling album in Global history (source: everyhit.com).

Floyd is as commercial as it gets.

(P.S. emdiar said: "Your review, much like your command of English, is very poor. Not everyone is cut out to be a writer, and I'm sure you have other strengths at which you excel. Please stick to them" and then comes up with: "....one which will be of some use to the reader, communicating criticisms and praise, if any, and justifying, or at least illustraiting those stand points effectively, one is advised to use a language, the tool of communication, with which one is at least able to articulate successfully". Why are you so judgemental? The phrase "he who live in glass houses..." comes to mind. Obviously, Andrea is using an on-line translator.)

Arbiter wrote: richardh wrote: I only gave it 3 stars.It's overrated in my opinion.I'm glad a few people are prepared to go against the grain.Lets face it for every 2 or 3 star review there will be at least ten 5 star reviews.Not all of us understand why this album is regarded as being so important.Personally I find it dull,pedestrian and lacking in good ideas.In my view it sold in vast quantities to people who didn't like/understand prog rock but thought it was there way in to the genre.Critics have praised it the hilt .But why??.Instead of glorious innovative music lets have  MOR dressed up as prog instead.Pink Floyd have recorded at least 4 albums that are better: (Meddle,WYWH,Animals and The Wall) But 'easy listening Floyd' still wins the day in the minds of many! Well said Richard. I, too, believe that DSOTM is good, but over-rated. What I find Interesting is that many on this site turn on a band when they become more commercial...some even go as far as to imply that a band that is commercially successful can't really be prog...yet Floyd have avoided such rath. A quick look at the numbers: U.S. Sales: The Wall - 23 million units sold, 3rd biggest selling album in U.S. History; DSOTM - 15 million units sold, 21st biggest selling album in U.S. History; WYWH - 6 million units sold, 236th biggest in U.S. History. In fact, Floyd are the 7th biggest selling recording artist in U.S. History, selling 73.5 million units (more than Mariah, Celine, Whitney, Michael Jackson, Elton, The Stones, Shania...source: R.I.A.A.). U.K. Sales: DSOTM - 2.1 million units sold, 35th biggest in U.K. history (source: rateyourmusic.com) Global Sales: DSOTM - 35 million units sold, 7th biggest selling album in Global history (source: everyhit.com). Floyd is as commercial as it gets. (P.S. emdiar said: "Your review, much like your command of English, is very poor. Not everyone is cut out to be a writer, and I'm sure you have other strengths at which you excel. Please stick to them" and then comes up with: "....one which will be of some use to the reader, communicating criticisms and praise, if any, and justifying, or at least illustraiting those stand points effectively, one is advised to use a language, the tool of communication, with which one is at least able to articulate successfully". Why are you so judgemental? The phrase "he who live in glass houses..." comes to mind. Obviously, Andrea is using an on-line translator.)

Firstly, It's not being commercial by virtue of record sales that turn prog fans off, but rather cynically courting commerciality that grates, i.e. "Love Beach",etc. Merely selling lots of albums because they are great is not a crime against prog.

Secondly, re your p.s., when quoting me you omitted my last sentence in which I refer to the convolutedness of my own post. Please look up the word 'irony'! Its a bit of a tricky concept, I know, but with practice I'm sure you will grasp it eventually. If not, I'm sure James will explain it to you, if you ask him nicely.

emdiar wrote:  ..."re your p.s., when quoting me you omitted my last sentence in which I refer to the convolutedness of my own post. Please look up the word 'irony'! Its a bit of a tricky concept, I know, but with practice I'm sure you will grasp it eventually..."

____________________________________________________________ ______

You didn't get many hugs as a child, did you em?

Let's cut to the chase, shall we. The only reason you dissed Andrea in the first place is because she was critical of an album that you like (or love). Her mistake wasn't the criticism, but rather the lack of reasoning for her opinion. The truth is that you took it personally! I'll bet a months pay that if you didn't like DSOTM or Floyd, you wouldn't have said anything about her review, maybe even jumped on her bandwagon.

Bottom line: chill out em! This is supposed to be fun. DSOTM is okay, most would say great. Don't have a hissy fit just because someone gave it two stars. (Andrea's mistake wasn't that she said DSOTM is mediocre/poor, it's that she didn't tell us why or how it's poor.)

Keep it up and I'll have my mommy call your mommy and then you'll really be in trouble!

(Hey, this is fun! By the way em, I took your advice. It turns out that Oxford defines irony as "an ill timed or perverse event or circumstances that would in itself be desirable", and also "a mock adoption of another's views or lauditory tone to ridicule; use of language with meaning for the priviledged few and another for those addressed". I simply asked you why you were being so judgemental (which you still haven't answered, or denied for that matter) and you went and had a turd. Then you turn around and also dis me instead of admitting you "crossed the line". Oh, and, coincidentally, you yourself do not understand the meaning of irony! )

Over to you em!

Arbiter:

The original post was meant to be provocative. I had already apologised, and explained that it was way past my bed time, and that I had spat the proverbial dummy, long before you chipped in. If this explanaition for the judgemental tone of my post (which I did and do not deny, I even held my hands up to sounding "snobby") is not good enough for you, then I'm sorry.

By omitting the last part of my post you seek to imply that I am unaware of the convolutedness of my criticism, and am therefore throwing stones in a glass house. You and I know that that is not the case. I was being convoluted by design, to illustrate my point. In order to make extra sure that no one would jump up and say "ha, thats the pot calling the kettle black", I added the self mockery myself to save you the bother. Had this not been the case I would have rewritten the lot instead. I am very well aware of the meaning(s) of the word irony,

"a mock adoption of another's views or lauditory tone to ridicule"

In this case, a mock adoption of anothers inarticulation in order to illustrate a point of ridicule.

ps, , a good night's sleep works wonders, I'm not really the grouch I sound, or half as pompous!

"It is a strange world of language in which skating on thin ice can get you into hot water." - Franklin P. Jones

Great volley, em!

Take care, my friend!

Emdiar wrote:

Your review, much like your command of English, is very poor.

Emdiar I know you have apologized and  believe it's a great gesture, but as a non native English speaker have to give my opinion even when it's a bit late.

As you must remember I was the first one to write a post against reviews in other languages for respect to the owners and readers of Progarchives, but to criticize someone for not using a complex and extended vocabulary is absolutely different and sounds a bit xenophobic.

Nobody except people who have a different native language can understand how difficult is for us to write a coherent review in English, most of us think in our native language and have to translate the ideas to English finding that there are not adequate words to express what we thought in our languages.

I had the luck to start learning English before I was three years and lived in the States so learned to think in English, but still have problems with some words, that's why I can easily understand the trouble Andrea has, and can't do anything but encourage her for the effort. She has the merit of writting in a hostile language (Every language except our native one is hostile).

About her review: I can't disagree more with her opinion about DSOTM, IMHO is a masterpiece but she is entitled to her own taste an opinion, and even if we believe she's wrong, everybody should respect what she honestly writes.

I also admire her courage to write something hard about an album that 99% of prog fans love, that's very brave.

Iván

Ivan, I'm sorry I'm sorry I'm sorry..... OK?

"Nobody except people who have a different native language can understand how difficult is for us to write a coherent review in English, most of us think in our native language and have to translate the ideas to English finding that there are not adequate words to express what we thought in our languages."

I really do know what you mean here Ivan. Though English, I have lived and worked in Holland for the last 14 years, speaking and writing Dutch all day long. It's not easy, I know. Even though I am fluent to the point that native Dutch speakers are surprised to find I am actually English, as soon as I start writing something I start questioning my grammar. I can and do think, dream, and even spontaneously swear in Dutch, but it remains my second language.

I once saw a news item on the BBC in which an English mother was reported to have removed her children from their predominantly asian school, as her 5 yr old daughter had returned home singing a Punjabi play ground song.

"I don't send my kids to school to learn bloody foriegn languages!" she was quoted as saying.

I never said it was their best, only that its 5 star status is irrefutable. Animals is my favourite Floyd album, but it was DSOTM that blew my 12 yr old brain. It may not be as prog as some of its successors, iyo, but it is far more important in an historical sense.

 TFTO is one of my favourite albums of all time. As a teenager, when things were black and white, I counted it the best album of all time bar none. But what has that to do with DSOTM's proggyness. Why is it less prog? it has all the ingredients, irregular time signatures, a very definate "concept", deceptively complex chords, subtly used as to sound as natural as can be, just so prog. Prog is not all ELP and Genesis, and DSOTM falls well WELL within the bounderies. imo.

No matter how you personally feel about it, DSOTM is undeniably on the top- if not at the top- of the progressive rock 'flagship' albums. It represents prog the same way "Sgt. Pepper" represents psychedelia (although it wasn't very trippy compared to what was going on in music at the time), or "Never Mind the Bollocks" represents punk (even though there were many punk albums that did it better), or "Nevermind" represents grunge (despite the fact that it was less 'gungy' than many other bands, and even less than Nirvana's previous releases). Sometimes the 'most' progressive band isn't the 'best' prog band, or the most influential prog band, or your favorite prog band...if the purpose of this site is to give useful information and impressions to newcomers to the genre or a specific band, it's important to weigh all of these considerations.

I'm a little surprised that there's much of a controversy over DSOTM- anyone can see how important it's been, even if the music does absolutely nothing for you. On the other hand, if someone wanted to take exception to my review for "Pawn Hearts", I'd love to take part in that discussion. Even I think I was unfairly critical, but nobody created a forum thread to yell at me and make fun of my english skills

Aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaarrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrgggggggggggggghhh hhhhhhh!

That's it now loike, Oi aye plaayin no mooa. Yowm orl pickin on me aye ya? Oi've sed oi'm sorry aye oi? Wot mooa d'yow lot wont, cowin blud or summat? Oi doh moind pickin mi waay fru ard ta reed stuf loike, but mek it wuffwhoile. If yow aye got nowt t'back yower comments up wiv, doh bovver Oi say.

Love DSOTM.. it deserves a 5... love any Floyd album with the exception of The Final Cut.. but then I like that better than most stuff today... Regardless of what you think of DSOTM.. the concept was brilliant... its universal... it relates to millions evidently still .. and it has incredible longevity... and it will support the Floyd members for life most likely...

Plus its a great album to have sex by...if you could just skip over "Money"

emdiar wrote: Aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaarrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrgggggggggggggghhh hhhhhhh! That's it now loike, Oi aye plaayin no mooa. Yowm orl pickin on me aye ya? Oi've sed oi'm sorry aye oi? Wot mooa d'yow lot wont, cowin blud or summat? Oi doh moind pickin mi waay fru ard ta reed stuf loike, but mek it wuffwhoile. If yow aye got nowt t'back yower comments up wiv, doh bovver Oi say.

Em's right...let's lay off, he's atoned for his sin (which, in truth, was very small in the first place and was very quickly & sincerely retracted).

Take heart em. You started a good thread...whatever you do, don't stop contributing, your posts are always worthwhile!

"Never 'for the sake of peace and quiet' deny your own experience or convictions"

- Dag Hammarskjöld

emdiar wrote: Aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaarrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrgggggggggggggghhh hhhhhhh! That's it now loike, Oi aye plaayin no mooa. Yowm orl pickin on me aye ya? Oi've sed oi'm sorry aye oi? Wot mooa d'yow lot wont, cowin blud or summat? Oi doh moind pickin mi waay fru ard ta reed stuf loike, but mek it wuffwhoile. If yow aye got nowt t'back yower comments up wiv, doh bovver Oi say.

I'm so glad someone finally transcribed "Several Species of Small Furry Animals"

It's like this folks; now and then this forum gets a bit pedestrian, dull and devoid of grit, not often, but it happens. I just wanted to be a bit provocative, that's all. If you guys are happy discussing such controversial subjects as "how pretty is pretty boy Greg Lake's  pretty baby face," and the like, then pray continue, and I'll nip off for a snooze!

Pigeons cry out to have cats put amongst them, in my world.

(Threefates,.)

threefates wrote: it will support the Floyd members for life most likely...

It could support a medium sized country for life!

emdiar wrote: If you guys are happy discussing such controversial subjects as "how pretty is pretty boy Greg Lake's  pretty baby face," and the like, then pray continue, and I'll nip off for a snooze! (Threefates,.)

Yes please... lets discuss more!!!!!

Yeh, but it was bought by 30 million young teen girls who have grown up now and given that album to the Salvation Army... and can you blame them... what happened to Peter Frampton??!!!

BTW... I downloaded "I'm In You" recently... even I like that song...

0 stars: NEU! - 2

This is the purest stoopidity in prog music!