Reviews reporting thread

Evolver wrote: toroddfuglesteg wrote:   A review made four weeks before the publishing date is also a waste of the record label's resources if a legal promo copy was reviewed. In this case, this review is also premature and not based on the usual listening criterias according to the reviewer. If I still ran a record label and a review like that of one of the albums I had invested large resources in was published in PA, I would had been absolute furious and taken actions.  I disagree. While it is rare for a promo to be sent out more than a week or two before the release date, it does happen. The main reason is to generaste buzz about the album.  Either through in-store play, or reviews.  Even if the review is done early, especially if it is a positive review, I doubt the label would be angry at all.  Otherwise, what's the point of sending out the promos?

Four weeks is a long, long time in the mind of a human being/record buyer. Most people's attention span is around one week to 24 hours. A review 4 weeks before release date in the shops does not create buzz or any new buyers outside the diehard fanbase (ie which is e x a c t l y the whole point of a review) unless there is a sustained 5-6 weeks long promotion campaign around the release. Who can afford that ? Not Frontiers and hardly EMI/Warner Bros either these days.   

Most promos is sent out with a "do not publish before date X". I have sent out promos and received promos this way myself. A review need to hit the new buyer (disregard the diehard fanbase here) excactly some hours or just when he/she is able to order the album. You know, one click order at an online store or a travel down town to the record store.

Four weeks ? Please tell me what you did and what you read on the 27. May, please.