Something should be done about reviews!

Tony R wrote: Snow Dog wrote: ^ OK I see whats going on Slow Dog.

Well that review of yours was before my time! I missed all the Karnevil 9 stuff that went on!

Rhayader wrote: Tony R wrote: They should be more humorous This is my favourite one and it was deleted.... EMERSON LAKE & PALMER (ELP) - Works Vol. 1 Review by Karnevil Nein! @ 5:38:47 PM EST, 4/5/2005   —   I really love this album,from the ham-fisted keyboards to the twee vocals and from every over-blown piece of orchestration right up to the masterpiece of mirth that is Pirates. Long years in the making,due to ego clashes and arguments about makeup,Elton John being part of the recording process then not and finally producer Pete Waterman being replaced by Little Jimmy Osmond,the band finally got this meisterwerk out into the public consciousness.Once out there it was a smash,spending 16 weeks at Number One in Albania and going Quadruple Platinum in Belize. When one listens to Emerson's Piano Concertos one is immediately reminded of Les Dawson's egregious masterpieces of the early 70's.I can think of no higher praise than that. I find that "The Enemy God Dances With The Black Spirits" fills me with nostalgia,or should that be neuralgia? I'm not sure-but I know that Mrs Palmer should have decided against that shiny red kit for young Carl's 6th Birthday.Pirates-what can I say?I nearly choked to death the first time I heard this 13 minute epic.It sounds like the ungodly product of a demonic union between WS Gilbert and The Village People and is breath-taking in its excruciating awfulness and willfull over-ambition.There is nothing like a great Prog Rock Album and this is nothing like a great Prog Rock Album           Some people! Have you noticed that there is that exact same review for Rush's Hemispheres, just with the names changed?

I was going to point that out too!

Posted: 2005 06 July at 1:10pm | IP Logged

RUSH - Hemispheres (1978)
Review (Permanent link) by Rich @ 2:38:41 AM EST, 7/6/2005

  —   I really love this album,from the ham-fisted guitar to the girlie vocals and from the over- blown concept right up to the masterpiece of mirth that is Cignus X-1 Book11. Long years in the making,due to ego clashes and arguments about makeup,Elton John being part of the recording process then not and finally producer Pete Waterman being replaced by Little Jimmy Osmond,the band finally got this meisterwerk out into the public consciousness.Once out there it was a smash,spending 16 weeks at Number One in Albania and going Quadruple Platinum in Belize. When one listens to Geddy Lee's bass one is immediately reminded of Chas n Dave's egregious masterpieces of the early 80's.I can think of no higher praise than that. I find that "La Villa Strangiato" fills me with nostalgia,or should that be neuralgia? I'm not sure but I know that Mrs Peart should have decided against that shiny red kit for young Neal's 6th Birthday.- what can I say? Cignus X-1 Book11 I nearly choked to death the first time I heard this 18 minute epic.It sounds like the ungodly product of a demonic union between WS Gilbert and The Village People and is breath-taking in its excrutiating awfulness and willfull over-ambition.There is nothing like a great Prog Rock Album and this is nothing like a great Prog Rock Album.


This one cracked me up. Still, not a touch on Ozalan's

Posted: 2005 06 July at 1:10pm | IP Logged

Not such a great wit after all it seems!

In my opinion, when you´ll review an album, just explain how the songs are and what you like s and dislike. If anyone is a moog aficcionado, he will become interested if you say that the whole album is moog soloing.

Let the discussion about being progressive  or not outside the reviews. I´m not a great fan of prog metal, though I like many prog metal songs. If the average rating of an album is 4.99, with 1500 reviews and I read that the songs sound like Dream Theater´s The Mirror, I´ll never buy the album, cause for me that song is less progressive (and worse) than Metallica or Iron Maiden. But an album with average rating 1.5 and 2800 reviews and I read that the songs sound like Dream Theather´s Learning to Live, I´ll become interested in this album.

If an album has a poor average rating and everybody says it sounds like first Pink Floyd, I´ll want to buy it.

No matter what you may argue, individual taste of a prog fan has not to do with key signature changes, number of instruments played, duration of the songs, complexity, etc. I´m tired of reading reviews "Although this album isn´t progressive, there are good songs in it...". Come on! People should care more about the contents of the review than the rating. When someone complained of the review: "All songs are good, Petrucci is the best guitar player..." For me it´s enough, no matter if the guy rated 5 stars. I know what he means and how important to my opinion is his review.

If the whole problem is the top 100 ratings, I suggest to the administrators to remove this from the site. Bad reviews that should be excluded are the examples of ELP and Area, which are ridiculous and doesn´t say anything useful to me. The main reason for review is  to tell to the others that doesn´t know the album how it is.

Single Coil wrote: Here is what I hope to find when reading a review (on a group or CD I have not heard before): What group(s) is the music on this CD similar to? Is there more guitar or keyboards? How are they used? How long is the CD, 70 minutes? 45 minutes? Is there any "bonus" content (mpegs or extras for a PC or MAC) Is this CD the best line-up of mucicians in the bands history (Example: this was the first Spock's Beard CD without Neil Morse) What is the CDs goal? (Example: to play as technical as possible, or, to write consise songs)

I think the information that I colored red should be available in the album description at the top of the page, there's no need to include it in every review.

guitar/keyboards: Yes, the review should describe the instruments ... but it doesn't has to.

Best line-up of musicians: That is very much a subjective information, should be written (and read) with care.

The CD's goal/intention: Surely that is a very important aspect of a review.

Single Coil wrote: What I don't need to hear as much: What other reviewers had to say, I can always check out other reviews later. Song by song breakdowns of the CD. Of course sone songs just have to be described because they sort of define the album.

I think it's absolutely vital for a good review to contain NO references to other documents, in particular other reviews.

Song by song breakdowns are nice, if the reviewer really offers important informations on the tracks. It's pointless to list the songs and say "This track is awesome, that track sucks, ...". I think it's better to pick 2-3 songs that you find particularly interesting and say something about those.

Here is what I hope to find when reading a review (on a group or CD I have not heard before):

• What group(s) is the music on this CD similar to?
• Is there more guitar or keyboards? How are they used?
• How long is the CD, 70 minutes? 45 minutes?
• Is there any "bonus" content (mpegs or extras for a PC or MAC)
• Is this CD the best line-up of mucicians in the bands history (Example: this was the first Spock's Beard CD without Neil Morse)
• What is the CDs goal? (Example: to play as technical as possible, or, to write consise songs)

What I don't need to hear as much:

• What other reviewers had to say, I can always check out other reviews later.
• Song by song breakdowns of the CD. Of course sone songs just have to be described because they sort of define the album.

Man Overboard wrote: Most metalheads I know value things like melody, songwriting, and creativity over 'heaviness'.

Have a little chat with anyone into brutal death metal or raw black metal then

stonebeard wrote: Certif1ed wrote: Excuse me for getting it wrong, but the site is about Prog Rock, isn't it? Or do we not care any more, and anything goes? The 5 star rating is NOT about how much we like the music, MORE it's about how much of a Masterpiece of Progressive Rock it is. The 4 star rating is likewise NOT out of 5, but representative of an Excellent addition to ANY prog music collection. If I've got that wrong, I need new glasses or I'm on the wrong site. Essential: a masterpiece of progressive music (31%) Excellent addition to any prog music collection (31%) Good, but non-essential (25%) Collectors/fans only (6%) Poor. Only for completionists (6%) that's a very good point. i believe most people (i'm guilty too) tend to review the albums out of five stars without taking into consideration the guidelines under the rating options. they are helpful too, and i'm glad progarchives.com uses them.

Yes, but is not my fault if in PROGarchives you can find bands like Rhapsody, Nightwish, Meshuggah, Styx...  So everyone could think that those are PROG bands (because are in PROGarchives). A reviewer just rate an album that is on PROGarchives, he just find it here!

And please stop your crusade against DT!  The only reason why there are so many threads and reviews about them is because they're probably the most popular band nowadays...if you don't like their albums just rate them with a bad review...in this way we can see a general opinion!