Encyclopaedia Metallum: The Metal Archives :: View topic - The Official Review Discussion Thread

Phil sounds like he can kick some ass because he actually could kick some serious ass.

This album is like a truck going 110 on the freeway.

Iron Priest wrote:

Just wondering how long it usually takes to approve or deny reviews. We all have lives and are busy I know, but what's the average time? I'm curious because I have a review that hasn't been rejected or accepted and it's been up nearly three weeks. I'm not complaining, if it usually takes a month or two to get reviews up, that's fine, I'm just curious.

Napero said:

Quote:

There's the productive but -in my eyes- quite useless reviewer, often a complete newbie, who insists on writing mediocre and unoriginal reviews on some dead horse, such as the full-lengths of Metallica, Iced Earth or Judas Priest. Those guys are the reason why reviews on Opeth, Iron Maiden, Dream Theater and other bands with 200+ reviews stay in the queue for weeks: I, personally, have an aversion to reading them, simply because I pretty much know I have seen EVERY SINGLE OPINION and analysis at least twenty times before. And still they insists on writing on such albums.

In the one case where I did submit a review for an album with an abundance of reviews, it was rejected the first time because it wasn't taken seriously, which had to be clarified.

The amount of piss poor reviews for Aeternus' Beyond the Wandering Moon is upsetting. While not as good as ...And So The Night Became, the lack of any real formulated opinion on the album in question is baffling. It's really one of the few albums which really speaks deeply to the essence of Norwegian Black Metal in it's focussed effort to utilize the transcedental atmosphere of black metal as well as the aggression which so many albums in the genre lack. I may just have to write a review for it myself.

I don't understand this review.

And yes, my nighttime boredom has stroke again!

He's saying that the chorus of The Clairvoyant is bad! DAAAAAAAMN.

/me tries not to click the "reject" button.

In my three/four days of working the queue I've already learned to fucking despise "Now on to the songs" or "Now on to the review".

I generally hate it when the only thing people can think of when starting a review is "Ah... Black Sabbath..." or "Ah, Iron Maiden..." or "Ouch D'oh Ach Durn Crap Opeth, I fell down the stairs". It's usually supposed to be kind of forced casual attitude I believe, like those YouTube people who make it a point to keep sighing all the way through their reviews or rants, as if the video was a chore to make, and instead of attention-whoring, the person was being forced by his popularity to yield to the demands of the hordes of fans to illuminate them with his words. But it's NOT a way to start talking about something you find worthy of a review. And it just sounds stupid.

In my three/four days of working the queue I've already learned to fucking despise "Now on to the songs" or "Now on to the review". Bitch if you don't say that and just start talking about the songs I'll know you're moving on to the songs. If that short sentences arises it usually also means A) They're running through an amateurish checklist style of reviewing which annoys the shit out of me, or B) a long and unnecessary introductory paragraph about how they heard of the band but didn't ever listen to them until their friend George from Kentucky sent them a Youtube vid of "Forcefed Buttnasal Penetration" and then they realized they band was great and they've since been kicking themselves for not listening sooner.

In my three/four days of working the queue

well, it's not a 0% review, relax!

In regards to the new Voice of Steel review...

DAMN IT. Fucking damn it.

The songs are mostly not atmospheric, original or progressive enough to be that long in my humble opinion.

A perfect example for all the things mentioned in this paragraphe is the closing "Біла Вежа". It's not a bad song but there are way too many strange samples, the melodies are dumbly repeated and create a hypnotizing but not truly passionate atmosphere and the vocals sound strong at first try but always turn out to stay the same throughout the whole track.

The band often happens to waste their potential in their long tracks and there are almost just epic songs on this album.

hells_unicorn liked the new Manowar, he can't write negative reviews

You truly had no problem with that production job?

:lol: Moon on a stick is a little much. I think most of us wanted something that didn't sound like total shit. After all, a farting bass sound is a little demeaning coming from one of metal's greats.

Oh dude come on, my fave reviewer likes the new Manowar album

The overall production of this beast is about as retro as it gets

hells_unicorn on the new Manowar album wrote:

The overall production of this beast is about as retro as it gets

The heck? It's cheap digital sounding distortion with a drum machine. It sounds like it could've come from a mid-1990s, one-man black metal project. Definitely not along the lines of early Manowar.

Author:	Subrick [ Thu Jul 05, 2012 8:17 am ]
Post subject:	Re: The Official Review Discussion Thread
I just read that Vulgar Display review. I like the album, but I want to find the person that wrote it and beat him in skull about 60 or 70 times. It's that dumb. Also, it's hilariously ironic that he bashes Metallica and The Black Album despite having Hetfield in his fucking name.

Author:	NWOAHM666 [ Thu Jul 05, 2012 8:58 am ]
Post subject:	Re: The Official Review Discussion Thread
After reading that review, there was one part which popped out to my eyes: Quote: Phil sounds like he can kick some ass because he actually could kick some serious ass. Anyway, the main problem in his review is his problem of overgeneralizing (e.g. implying that Black Sabbath are "groove", talking about VDoP as if it was a pure thrash album, etc.), as well as perpetuating the wrong idea that thrash was dead by 1992 and Pantera helped revitalize it. It's also impressive that such huge mistakes are being commited by someone who claims to be 46. Oh, and also interesting: Quote: This album is like a truck going 110 on the freeway. Redneck too much?

Author:	orionmetalhead [ Thu Jul 05, 2012 12:42 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: The Official Review Discussion Thread
The amount of piss poor reviews for Aeternus' Beyond the Wandering Moon is upsetting. While not as good as ...And So The Night Became, the lack of any real formulated opinion on the album in question is baffling. It's really one of the few albums which really speaks deeply to the essence of Norwegian Black Metal in it's focussed effort to utilize the transcedental atmosphere of black metal as well as the aggression which so many albums in the genre lack. I may just have to write a review for it myself.

Author:	japc [ Thu Jul 05, 2012 1:02 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: The Official Review Discussion Thread
I agree with you, unfortunatelly it came after "And So The Night Became" and people tend to do that kind of comparison.

Author:	~Guest 82538 [ Thu Jul 05, 2012 9:37 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: The Official Review Discussion Thread
I don't understand this review. And yes, my nighttime boredom has stroke again!

Encyclopaedia Metallum: The Metal Archives https://forum.metal-archives.com/

The Official Review Discussion Thread https://forum.metal-archives.com/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=7444	Page 114 of 524

Author:	Metantoine [ Fri Jul 06, 2012 1:13 am ]
Post subject:	Re: The Official Review Discussion Thread
Zodijackyl wrote: Iron Priest wrote: Just wondering how long it usually takes to approve or deny reviews. We all have lives and are busy I know, but what's the average time? I'm curious because I have a review that hasn't been rejected or accepted and it's been up nearly three weeks. I'm not complaining, if it usually takes a month or two to get reviews up, that's fine, I'm just curious. Napero said: Quote: There's the productive but -in my eyes- quite useless reviewer, often a complete newbie, who insists on writing mediocre and unoriginal reviews on some dead horse, such as the full-lengths of Metallica, Iced Earth or Judas Priest. Those guys are the reason why reviews on Opeth, Iron Maiden, Dream Theater and other bands with 200+ reviews stay in the queue for weeks: I, personally, have an aversion to reading them, simply because I pretty much know I have seen EVERY SINGLE OPINION and analysis at least twenty times before. And still they insists on writing on such albums. In the one case where I did submit a review for an album with an abundance of reviews, it was rejected the first time because it wasn't taken seriously, which had to be clarified. I agree with Zodi (and Nap), the only reviews you wrote are for Maiden and Priest (basically the only 2 metal bands you're listening to, you said that yourself in the site chat). Everything has been said on Painkiller and Fear of the Dark...

Author:	BBEdrummerAK [ Sat Jul 07, 2012 7:57 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: The Official Review Discussion Thread
orionmetalhead wrote: The amount of piss poor reviews for Aeternus' Beyond the Wandering Moon is upsetting. While not as good as ...And So The Night Became, the lack of any real formulated opinion on the album in question is baffling. It's really one of the few albums which really speaks deeply to the essence of Norwegian Black Metal in it's focussed effort to utilize the transcedental atmosphere of black metal as well as the aggression which so many albums in the genre lack. I may just have to write a review for it myself. As Aeternus is a band I really like A LOT, I agree with that ^^^ 100%.

Author:	MalignantThrone [ Sun Jul 08, 2012 12:02 am ]
Post subject:	Re: The Official Review Discussion Thread
androdion wrote: I don't understand this review. And yes, my nighttime boredom has stroke again! I like how he insists on not introducing the members and then introduces Dan Swano anyways. But...yeah, that's a really bad review. If any mods wanted to, you know, sneeze while their mouse is hovering over the delete button for that review, I wouldn't mind.

Author:	hakarl [ Sun Jul 08, 2012 2:47 am ]
Post subject:	Re: The Official Review Discussion Thread
"I won't waste time telling you that I love old school death metal, but you know, I really really do."

Author:	Empyreal [ Tue Jul 10, 2012 12:16 am ]
Post subject:	Re: The Official Review Discussion Thread
http://www.metal-archives.com/reviews/I ... evastation Whenever I see a title like that I just skip the review entirely and click the back button. The whole "it's good but not THAT good" thing just reeks of some kid who wasn't around at the time of the album trying to be 'objective' for the purpose of doing a faux-intelligent review...of course, I was not around at the time of that album either, but I usually don't write reviews for well known albums back then trying to do this sort of thing. Not to mention, it's a boring opinion. autothrall's review is a really good example of this style though.

Author:	Metantoine [ Tue Jul 10, 2012 12:25 am ]
Post subject:	Re: The Official Review Discussion Thread
He's saying that the chorus of The Clairvoyant is bad! DAAAAAAAMN. /me tries not to click the "reject" button.

Author:	Rotting_Christ_Mike [ Tue Jul 10, 2012 10:55 am ]
Post subject:	Re: The Official Review Discussion Thread
Metantoine wrote: He's saying that the chorus of The Clairvoyant is bad! DAAAAAAAMN. /me tries not to click the "reject" button. Blasphemy!

Author:	Napero [ Tue Jul 10, 2012 11:02 am ]
Post subject:	Re: The Official Review Discussion Thread
I generally hate it when the only thing people can think of when starting a review is "Ah... Black Sabbath..." or "Ah, Iron Maiden..." or "Ouch D'oh Ach Durn Crap Opeth, I fell down the stairs". It's usually supposed to be kind of forced casual attitude I believe, like those YouTube people who make it a point to keep sighing all the way through their reviews or rants, as if the video was a chore to make, and instead of attention-whoring, the person was being forced by his popularity to yield to the demands of the hordes of fans to illuminate them with his words. But it's NOT a way to start talking about something you find worthy of a review. And it just sounds stupid.

Author:	BastardHead [ Tue Jul 10, 2012 11:07 am ]
Post subject:	Re: The Official Review Discussion Thread
In my three/four days of working the queue I've already learned to fucking despise "Now on to the songs" or "Now on to the review". Bitch if you don't say that and just start talking about the songs I'll know you're moving on to the songs. If that short sentences arises it usually also means A) They're running through an amateurish checklist style of reviewing which annoys the shit out of me, or B) a long and unnecessary introductory paragraph about how they heard of the band but didn't ever listen to them until their friend George from Kentucky sent them a Youtube vid of "Forcefed Buttnasal Penetration" and then they realized they band was great and they've since been kicking themselves for not listening sooner.

Author:	Zodijackyl [ Tue Jul 10, 2012 11:21 am ]
Post subject:	Re: The Official Review Discussion Thread
BastardHead wrote: In my three/four days of working the queue I've already learned to fucking despise "Now on to the songs" or "Now on to the review". Just delete everything before that part and you'll have a serviceable review... or delete everything after it and it'll look like one of FullMetalAttorney's reviews.

Author:	naverhtrad [ Tue Jul 10, 2012 12:01 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: The Official Review Discussion Thread
Napero wrote: I generally hate it when the only thing people can think of when starting a review is "Ah... Black Sabbath..." or "Ah, Iron Maiden..." or "Ouch D'oh Ach Durn Crap Opeth, I fell down the stairs". It's usually supposed to be kind of forced casual attitude I believe, like those YouTube people who make it a point to keep sighing all the way through their reviews or rants, as if the video was a chore to make, and instead of attention-whoring, the person was being forced by his popularity to yield to the demands of the hordes of fans to illuminate them with his words. But it's NOT a way to start talking about something you find worthy of a review. And it just sounds stupid. Well yeah, that can get really annoying. I'm not sure it's so much attention-whoring, though, as a kind of feigned, affected self-effacement / false modesty, as though they're pretending that their readers already know everything about the band and that whatever they write for a review won't be sufficient for the task. But then they go ahead and write the fucking thing anyway, so perhaps it is a kind of attention-whoring. Particularly when it's a review like that Seventh Son one (and damn straight it's THAT good) where they're being deliberately contrarian and going against what they see as the received wisdom of the metal community. I vaguely remember doing something like that on my Dream Return to Tang Dynasty review, but it was done in an ironic, self-deprecating way and not toward the band - reading back over it, I think it was partly to poke fun at the band's medieval China worship. Don't know whether that's sufficiently exculpatory, though.

Author:	Napero [ Tue Jul 10, 2012 5:29 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: The Official Review Discussion Thread
BastardHead wrote: In my three/four days of working the queue I've already learned to fucking despise "Now on to the songs" or "Now on to the review". Bitch if you don't say that and just start talking about the songs I'll know you're moving on to the songs. If that short sentences arises it usually also means A) They're running through an amateurish checklist style of reviewing which annoys the shit out of me, or B) a long and unnecessary introductory paragraph about how they heard of the band but didn't ever listen to them until their friend George from Kentucky sent them a Youtube vid of "Forcefed Buttnasal Penetration" and then they realized they band was great and they've since been kicking themselves for not listening sooner. I made a rant/venting on that roughly 3 years ago. Now that you've opened Pandora's box/crotch, you better get used to certain things. Those things will soon be like the teenage daughters of ALL the houses around you, and you will see them as they are under their tender skins, perky bosoms, layers of muscles and skeletons and internal organs. You will see their black, tormented minds. They will seem harmless, but they will steal your soul, and use it in pseudo-sexual games that will include humiliation, domination, a little bit of pain, lots of horseplay, and maybe a few glimpses of certain erogenous areas every now and then, but certainly NO fulfilment on your part. Ever. And then you'll be an empty shell of a man, going through the chores and routines like a drone that tries to do what he's supposed to do before he dies, but death itself will evade you, and leave you crawling towards something like a zombie on a desert, unable to die but still thirsty for water you see in the fata morgana on the horizon. You better prepare yourself for the eventual moment when you realize you'd better crawl under the moss, stop your heartbeat, and decay for centuries like the rest of us, the vacant husks of persons we used to be... Say your prayers, young man. You've made your choice.

Author:	~Guest 82538 [ Tue Jul 10, 2012 5:30 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: The Official Review Discussion Thread
BastardHead wrote: In my three/four days of working the queue I've noticed you around, glad to see you probing the minds of others for a change. That last Depresy review has got to be the fastest acceptance I've ever had here on MA.

Author:	Metantoine [ Tue Jul 10, 2012 5:32 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: The Official Review Discussion Thread
Bastard is doing a great job, I'm glad that my recommendation is a success so far. But yeah, I gave his soul to the devil!

Author:	hakarl [ Thu Jul 12, 2012 9:47 am ]
Post subject:	Re: The Official Review Discussion Thread
Craft - Void gets a 30% and some Woods of Ypres shitfest a 90%. I feel like leaving this site now. No, I can't leave. I at least have to write some overblown reactionary reviews first.

Author:	MalignantThrone [ Thu Jul 12, 2012 10:34 am ]
Post subject:	Re: The Official Review Discussion Thread
Can a mod fix the messed-up quotation marks here? http://www.metal-archives.com/reviews/E ... ive/32602/

Author:	Metal_Detector [ Thu Jul 12, 2012 8:31 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: The Official Review Discussion Thread
In regards to the new Voice of Steel review... DAMN IT. Fucking damn it.

Author:	Metantoine [ Thu Jul 12, 2012 8:35 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: The Official Review Discussion Thread
well, it's not a 0% review, relax!

Author:	OzzyApu [ Thu Jul 12, 2012 9:47 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: The Official Review Discussion Thread
Kluseba or whatever is a very backwards reviewer when it comes to a lot of bands. He's given the shittiest In Flames album the time of day before something that restarts a band's creative juices.

Author:	IX Leviathan [ Thu Jul 12, 2012 9:50 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: The Official Review Discussion Thread
Metal_Detector wrote: In regards to the new Voice of Steel review... DAMN IT. Fucking damn it. My reactions exactly upon reading it. More or less because of the other albums he's reviewed and given higher scores too (i.e. the aforementioned In Flames). Anyway, the four other 100%'s make up for it. Then again, some of the stuff in that review I just have to straight up disagree with. Quote: The songs are mostly not atmospheric, original or progressive enough to be that long in my humble opinion. Really? Songs like "Valkyrie", "My Dream Islands" and "Ukraine" aren't original? Quote: A perfect example for all the things mentioned in this paragraphe is the closing "Біла Вежа". It's not a bad song but there are way too many strange samples, the melodies are dumbly repeated and create a hypnotizing but not truly passionate atmosphere and the vocals sound strong at first try but always turn out to stay the same throughout the whole track. I personally felt "White Tower" was an excellent closer, great followup to the acoustic "Sky of Saddened Nights" where it sort of drops you into a calmer, synthy landscape. I don't see how the samples we all that strange. It flows pretty well actually. And not passionate? Quote: The band often happens to waste their potential in their long tracks and there are almost just epic songs on this album. One word; "Ukraine". Anyway, it might just be because of my intense fanboy-ism for this album. Also, Nokturnal Mortum? Underground band?

Author:	Empyreal [ Thu Jul 12, 2012 9:52 pm ]
Post subject:	Re: The Official Review Discussion Thread
kluseba always sucks. His writing is pretty mediocre and his opinions are just batshit nuts - not a quantifiable reason why he sucks, but hey.

Author:	Metantoine [ Fri Jul 13, 2012 12:01 am ]
Post subject:	Re: The Official Review Discussion Thread
hells_unicorn liked the new Manowar, he can't write negative reviews

Author:	hells_unicorn [ Fri Jul 13, 2012 12:44 am ]
Post subject:	Re: The Official Review Discussion Thread
Metantoine wrote: hells_unicorn liked the new Manowar, he can't write negative reviews Oh for crying out loud, I have more 0 score reviews that anyone else posting reviews on this site (save maybe autothrall, and if you go by average of total reviews to ones scored zero, droneriot). The new Manowar was fun to listen to and I haven't a single issue with it apart from Eric Adams not being able to wail at the higher echelons like he used to do on "Kings Of Metal". Given the out and out unanimous sentiments on that particular album, me writing a negative review wouldn't really serve much logical purpose even if I didn't like the album.

Author:	OzzyApu [ Fri Jul 13, 2012 12:52 am ]
Post subject:	Re: The Official Review Discussion Thread
You truly had no problem with that production job?

Author:	GuntherTheUndying [ Fri Jul 13, 2012 12:58 am ]
Post subject:	Re: The Official Review Discussion Thread
Moon on a stick is a little much. I think most of us wanted something that didn't sound like total shit. After all, a farting bass sound is a little demeaning coming from one of metal's greats.

Author:	hells_unicorn [ Fri Jul 13, 2012 1:03 am ]
Post subject:	Re: The Official Review Discussion Thread
GuntherTheUndying wrote: :lol: Moon on a stick is a little much. I think most of us wanted something that didn't sound like total shit. After all, a farting bass sound is a little demeaning coming from one of metal's greats. Well, Zodi got to have his unique position on Morbid Angel's latest album, so it looks like I'll get to have one as well, but I'm still puzzled at all the complaints regarding the production. Maybe I've become desensitized after listening to a whole slew of self-produced, independent demos, or maybe I just don't have the same expectations out of them (expectations that are most likely unmeetable).

Author:	ralfikk123 [ Fri Jul 13, 2012 1:13 am ]
Post subject:	Re: The Official Review Discussion Thread
Oh dude come on, my fave reviewer likes the new Manowar album

Author:	hells_unicorn [ Fri Jul 13, 2012 1:27 am ]
Post subject:	Re: The Official Review Discussion Thread
ralfikk123 wrote: Oh dude come on, my fave reviewer likes the new Manowar album Yep, people eventually discover they have disagreements, and somehow the world doesn't end. You can feel free to set me straight on this with a review of your own, as I'm sure everyone is clamoring to get their sub-40 scores in to firm up their standing with the "in" crowd. But regardless, I think it's time for me to get some sleep and contemplate hitting the new Luca Turilli album as I promised earlier on the request thread.

Author:	ralfikk123 [ Fri Jul 13, 2012 1:50 am ]
Post subject:	Re: The Official Review Discussion Thread
I just don't find the new album good. It's really boring, that's just my biggest gripe with the album. There are no strong points on it, and as much as I don't like to use this as a description, but it feels uninspired. I honestly think that they have't put a good effort into making it. I'd give it a 50 at best, but probably a 30 just for the sake of it Also, this comes from a guy who considers Fighting the World to be one of their best albums EDIT: And speaking of reviews and requests, surprised you haven't reviewed the Cauldron albums yet, hint hint.