Well, no that's not the only thing, but it reads like a person learning the language. If you're a student, I recommend going to the writing center for tutoring. See the first bit of my reply to Grumpy Cat. It's for your own good.

Of course, you may also have just thought of this as a more casual situation, which is understandable. Mechanics are important, however, so if you know how to fix them, do so. If not, ask for help and then get it where you have the resources to.

This is the revised version:

Notes in spoiler.

Hey, is it allowed to request feedback on reviews that were already accepted?

If so, would you kindly give me some feedback on the reviews I've written so far, and (preferably) polish them?

1. Unpure - Trinity in Black



2. Abigail - Descending from a Blackend Sky



3. Infernal Pussy - Asesinas de la Noche



4. Wóddréa Mylenstede - s/t demo

I guess I don't have anything to add about them. A couple of punctuation marks out of place here and there, and you could forego the Highlights sections (never cared for those). Other than that, they're fine. This straightforward descriptive style is just fine for what it is. If you're looking for more input than that, I think you're going to have to try a different style or be more specific about what you're looking for.

Alright, thanks. A basic and straightforward description of the album is fine by me, so I guess it's better to stick with this style for the time being.

No problem. Proofread more carefully, but that's my only major note. Adding more personal reactions wouldn't hurt, either. Picking something specific about an album and developing it into a larger insight could help it be more interesting for a reader, but more importantly so for you personally while writing and reflecting.

Hi, I would like to get any suggestion on the review done in the Tarpit's album "There Is Nothing After Extinction"
I did myself some changes but I would like to get a second opinion

A couple of questions beforehand: I'm guessing English isn't your native language? Have you taken English composition in school? Can you please replace the necessary commas with periods to properly separate your sentences, capitalizing the appropriate words when you do? It's pretty redundant and analysis/description is thin, so as you make these corrections, feel free to work on the substance of the piece.

I'm having a hard time understanding why commas are being used instead of periods so frequently in people's submissions. I can understand not being tight on comma use within a sentence because they're multipurpose. Periods have a monopoly on their job market. They have literally one job.

You are correct, is not my native speaking language and yet still is hard to make the difference in the commas usage and that is because in almost every romance language (spanish, portuguese, french, italian etc.) the commas are being used to separate each breath when you read out loud the text so you will find a lot of commas in a regular text. Periods are just being used when you change ideas in the same sentence or to change the paragraph and that's it.

Thanks a lot for your suggestions I'm working is some corrections and adding text to unite the ideas. Hopefully I'll get something more decent.

Eh .. I'm skeptical of that, but you're the Spanish speaker. I'm looking up Italian punctuation, and it's got some variations, but not what you're saying.

In any event, here are the English rules. https://owl.english.purdue.edu/owl/resource/607/02/

Here is a corrected version.
Let me know what you think.



Thanks a lot as well for the link to the commas usage. I found it very helpful.

Hails, I've wrote a review for an album and it was rejected because of formatting errors and typos. I already corrected them, well, I think, what is your opinion on this new draft?:

"Origin- Omnipresent
Rating: 30%

The veteran technical death metal band from Kansas, Origin, have been always refered as one of the greatest icons of the genre, because of their unique style of making complex, heavy and pretty original music (which actually matches with the band's name). Since their first work in 1998, Origin has been able to kick many asses of posers and could even create their own legion of fans and faithful lovers of their music.

However, this time, Origin just failed to show up their creativity and potential, leaving their album "Omnipresent" an absolutely terrible blur on technical death metal history and obviously, in the band's own discography. The impression that I got by listening to the whole album, was that the band's musicians appeared to be following a "happy-go-luck" style, which eventually ended up in the creation of just two acceptable tracks: "All Things Dead" (track 1) and "Manifest Desolate" (track 4), having the other eleven songs all messed up.
More than that, also seems that Origin just wanted to end the album's recording as fast as they could, so, they ended up to record whatever they were thinking about and that was possible to play on guitars, bass and drums.

It just misses the "music made with soul" point. The same situation happens with the vocals. Both also miss that part that ends up to make the listener to remember the songs and to feel something positive on them. Technically, it looks like that Origin just took out influences for their new album from The Great Kat's random instrumental and vocal atrocities.

I would say that the peak of Origin's emotion and inspiration to start the production and recording of "Omnipresent" was only manifested on the beginning of it, when, probably, the aformentioned songs were created. The rest of the tracks sound totallt fucked up: an amount of shredding guitar wankery and blast beats played without any intention of making the beating to sound good. The vocals, performed by both Paul Ryan and Mike Flores (who are also, respectively, the band's guitar and bass players), are extremely random. I mean, there are just guttural growls and screams throwed up in any possible and applicable occasion.
While in "All Things Dead", the vocals sound pretty well performed and show very well done sections for both screaming and growling, the other songs even fail to have just a "good" articulation. That same track's instrumental parts are pretty good, although they start to get a little repetitive and boring even before the song ends. I don't recommend anyone to listen to this song twice in a row.

In spite of that, it is a pretty good introduction, and I expected that the whole album would be similar to it, with is respective highs and lows, just like what happens with every other band's discography. What I didn't knew is that the "low" part was going to encroach the entire full-length, leaving only one high part, also at the beginning:
"Manifest Desolate" shows up an amazing instrumental performance with a great articulation between instruments, not exceeding or appearing that it is about to fall down in any single way. More than that, the technical and progressive music roots, that are one of the biggest marks of the band (along with their heaviness), are integrated perfectly. This track is, in an instrumental level, flawless. It's sad that this is actually the only song that doesn't sound so random and souless as the others.

Overall, the album's music is extremely forgettable. It's more repetitve than memorable, I believe that the band switched up those terms while creating it. Even on the spectrum of brutality and heaviness, Origin fails to show their full power, lowing to the level of an average and watered down Suffocation-like musicality.

Despite of that, the sound production is very solid and strong, you can actually hear all the instruments and the technical skills of the musicians, as if they were playing right in front of you. In my opinion, the production is very good and absolutely flawless, the band just did not used it on the best way.

I don't recommend you to buy this album, even if you are a die-hard technical death metal fan, because it is extremely boring and unoriginal. I'm happy to know that I'm not the only one with such an opinion about "Omnipresent", since it's rating on MA and even on non-formal Youtube comments share pretty much the same opinion as mine."

You're welcome!

Notes in spoiler.





Notes in spoiler.

I'll forget about it, there are just too many things to correct and it happens in every other review I had wrote.
Thanks for your time, anyway.

I don't see why you're giving up entirely. It's not like you're that far away from taking your English to a passable level.

Next time I'll be sure to ask if the poster is interested in personal improvement before I put this much time in.

Perhaps a full-stop after 'changes' would be appropriate, albeit very Black Sabbath. 'Includes' should be 'include.' A comma before 'because' might help, to amplify the slightly notable initial claim.

You seem to be saying that the 'changes' include recurrent simple riffs and also very poor lyric usage, but presumably the poor lyrics are instead quite consistent across the album. Hence, that might be better placed in a separate sentence, along the lines of, 'It also includes...' or such.

In general, the problem with this review seems to be that almost each sentence also includes a list of elements in the music that substantiate it. This is more of a technical issue than anything. Not every sentence can be a list of aspects, you also need some to establish the overall direction of your review. Generally, it has little.


'To hear this album twice,' or rather listen to it, isn't necessarily a conventional category that can just be shunted into a review. It might not have an immediate impact. You might want to couch this with a statement like, 'After listening to this album, you wouldn't want to listen to it again,' or whatever. In addition, this just talks about the quality of the rendering, not of the music - if you want to listen to the music that much, you probably like it.

In general, these sentences seem to easily go into a list of different instruments and sounds. Perhaps you would want to write sentences expressing your overall point preceding this elaboration of it.


This is probably going to be Autothrall's next review of a Fates Warning record, so you're onto something here. Keep going, it could catch on.

Still, you have, strangely, kept on throwing out 'negative' elements of the album almost at random. The reader by this point perhaps gets the point that the album is being portrayed as 'bad,' and that you dislike several elements of it. Give this some direction.


Many black metal bands, for instance, do just this.

However, while this segment is quite understandable, sections seem to be overly qualified, as it were. 'Full explicit intentions' doesn't seem necessary. 'Creative process' is a somewhat weighted term in recent English, so you might want to avoid it - however, it's not necessarily a problem.

Perhaps something like, '...their lack of effort on the creative process unless they had the intention of making [even 'to make' is readable here] their music...' Not a major change, but it should help the sentence at least.


Mostly, this isn't new. You might wanted to have explained the 'groove' rhythm, as it's something of a notable term here. The English and whatnot is mostly fine here, it's just that the review is continually repeating the same things, without putting much of a new angle on it.

You want 'comparable,' not compared, which means that it is compared - by someone - rather than that it is similar.


This doesn't seem to speak well of your review, then.

Perhaps 'there is nothing about this album,' or something along those lines.


This isn't a review of the demos. In addition, you don't necessarily mention 'everything,' you actually leave out much of what is relevant to the genre. How are the demos going to be worse, then, anyway?

Perhaps by this point we're asking in the territory of, 'De Mysteriis Dom Sathanas,' but nonetheless these things should be clarified.


Someday, somehow, they're going to make it alright but not right now. Somewhat unfortunate choice of phrasing in the review, but anyway.

The review does little to mention the overall direction of the album or what it is conveying, and whether or not this occurs.

In general, it might be somewhat complex to fix this by generic standards, due to its being in a way a problem of approach - similar things being tacked on to each sentence - rather than merely of technical matters, which could easily be corrected.

Still, the earlier review seemed to be more fluid and in some ways better, albeit the part leading up to 'poor lyric usage' doesn't really have any precedent in the earlier sentence but claims to respond to it. It's clear that it is an explanation, but the sentence does not make it clear of what it is an explanation. Nonetheless, that seemed to require less changes, ultimately.

Users who have had most of their review attempts rejected should not be giving advice in this thread.

That shouldn't be a problem, then.

-

I had written down my first two reviews for these albums "Lacuna Coil - Delirium" and "Moonspell - Irreligious". Despite me using spell check, my reviews still got rejected due to bad grammar I need someone to check these reviews to see what is wrong.

Lacuna Coil Delirium

Still Never Disappoints! - 90%

A lot has happened for my favorite Metal band Lacuna Coil in the past three years. The band loses three of its members in just three years Cristiano Mozzati (Drummer), Pizza (Guitar) and Marco "Maus" Biazzi (Guitar) which to me was disappointing. It made me think that "Will this hinder how the band will sound on the next album?"

I was so excited about the coming of Delirium and hoping that the departure of their previous members would make them a stronger band itself. When the singles came out "House of Shame," "Delirium" and "Ghost in the Mist" I had to listen to them instantly and because I heard that Delirium would be their most aggressive album yet. However, at the first listening of Ghost of the Mist and House of Shame, it almost sounded like they were including metalcore elements because it had breakdowns in it and I was "What?!?", because I hated metalcore music, but upon continuing to listen to the songs, the songs actually sounded kick ass in my opinion and kept listening to them a lot.

When the album finally came out and got my first listen to the rest of the songs, they were actually pretty amazing. Most of the songs, but not all did have elements of breakdowns and metalcore. Cristina's voice is still strong and this was the first time that I ever hear Andrea Ferro's voice with really aggressive vocals in some songs too, which also interest me as well. Something that is different from they're previous albums. This was an album where Andrea has the most singing as well and little for Cristina to sing and didn't really hear any parts where the pair is singing together. Some of the songs though sounded like it was turning to a softer for the metal community especially when they did a cover of Madonna's song "Live To Tell" but still, I didn't have any complaints about them covering the song or turning more into radio metal music.

Favorites like Take Me Home, "Ghost in the Mist," "My Demons," "Claustrophobia" and "Broken Things," it also had core elements of what LC suppose to sound like as well, Darkness and despair and for this album talking about mental feelings, this album has good approach on the themes and lyrics as well in which some really tells a lot about what I have dealt with before. The guitar approaches though has changed. Other than the inclusion of breakdown's, the guitars are also down tuned as well which brings in more heaviness to the album, however, has more complex tempos compared to the past albums.

At the end of the day, The album stands out as the band's most aggressive album, and I loved the album and kept listening to it over and over again bringing along a catchy album. It's showing that a band is still going strong and evolving well. When since people did not like the album, confused me, what was is that wasn't good. I get that it is not one the band's most memorable albums but I couldn't care what people say about delirium negatively and it's their opinion, that's OK. However sorry, this is an amazing record and it is now is one of my personal favorite LC albums, so I say to the band, they still impress me, they are still amazing and I'm still devoted to the music. Though it gets a 90 because there are better LC albums to listen to other than Delirium. So here is a middle finger to all the elitist.

Moonspell - Irreligious

Its a Full Moon Madness! - 100%

When I was beginning to get into gothic metal, The top bands that were among my favorites are Type O Negative and Lacuna Coil. However, as my music began to evolve I started getting deeper into gothic metal and one band in particular that was beautiful when I first heard them, was Moonspell.

The first songs that I have dug up from this album were Opium and Full Moon Madness, the band's most signature songs. At first, I was instantly blown away by its Atmosphere, it had passion, Drama and Darkness combined into these songs. Full Moon Madness, in particular, is perhaps one of the most powerful songs that I have ever heard. The Dark Vocals, Powerful Guitar and lyrics that gives you the imagination, were on point and gives a lot of extra substance to the song as well.

I was impressed with the songs that I decided to listen to Irreligious in full. The albums that I like the most were not only the most catchy to me, but can have songs that will never stop in the album or can tell a story, like Rock/Metal Operas and Concept albums. The entire album is still very amazing and much like its two songs, the album is powerful and is an album for those looking for an album that has songs that can keep going throughout or halfway into the album. I mean it is Moonspell's most notable album. The Major reasons for this are of course for its Dramatic Atmosphere, the sound of Fernando's voice both clean and non-clean that sets it apart from other gothic metal bands and for its Punching Guitar sounds that made this very album they're best work and one of the greatest in the genre.

As you can tell, Irreligious is amazing to me, and is now of my favorite albums to listen to. To this day every time a Full Moon is shining the night, I always listen to Full Moon Madness. As a gothic metal fan, this is Essential to the sounds of the genre.

You might consider switching the second and third paragraphs. I think the general information in the third paragraph runs better coming out of the introduction, particularly because it does the most to describe how this is not their best album (you iconoclast, you). The introduction paragraph is pretty weak. I'm sure you can set the stage for a review of a band's inaugural, celebrated work better than "the satan and the evil and the metal and stuff and things!" It starts off all presentational and is almost an immediate let down. Either change the beginning or step up the rest of the review.

I think I'm going to do things differently from now on, starting more generally and briefly and then, once the person has shown that he/she gives a fecal yam, spending the time to point out the comma problems and other such lice.

_

My review was rejected because: "No track by track review. This is clearly written in the rules."

Actually, no, it's not clearly written in the rules. It says it's discouraged, which is why I split my review into two parts: a general synopsis and a track-by-track. Seriously if you're gonna reject it because of such a pointless reason (it's a 4 track EP, is doing a track by track really that bad), at least get your rules page straight so I don't waste the time writing it.

Could you post the review here? You're right that it's not outright banned because there are cases (especially when there are very few tracks) where it can work, but it is highly discouraged. If it's done well enough I tend to let it slide from time to time but there may also be other revisions you'd need to make as well.

It was for Skeletonwitch's new EP and each track had a 5 or 6 lines paragraphs review, that's a big no-no.

It would depend on how it is laid out. If it is cut-and-dry with a paragraph devoted to each song, with little/nothing else content-wise, it will be rejected every time. I can't emphasise enough how strongly discouraged that reviewing style is. Completely amateur; hell look at the recent posts in the "Oven Fodder" thread to see why we are so stringent about it nowadays.

How can you get feedback on a deleted draft?

-

Hi reviewers:

I´m new in Metal Archives, I submitted a review for Grand Bite - Al borde del precipicio. It was rejected. The reason is I didn´t follow the guidelines.

I really would like to contribute with Metal Archives, because I see there are bands I really like that don´t have any reviews.

I want to bother you, if you let me, make me know any especific issue with my review (see below).


“I´ve loved this record for many years now. Grand Bite is one of the most famous venezuelan metal acts, and IMHO, this is the best metal LP ever produced in that country.

"Al borde del precipio" (Close to the edge) is a very homogeneous record. At the time, Grand Bite were a power trio.

Judas Priest and NWOBHM influenced, this album stands out for the vocal performance by Luis Miguel (who is also the bass player) and Andres Guzman´s guitar work. Vocals are clean and remind me of Falconer´s singer Mathias Blad.

Production is great and highlights the band´s distinctive rhythm and tightness.

Songs are all about the same lenght not surpassing 4 minutes except for "Demonios en el cielo" (Demons in the sky) wich clocks almost 6 minutes.

Lyrics are about society as in "Cangrejo" (Crab), religion as in "Demonios en el cielo" (Demons in the sky), cold war (in the title track), girls as in "Te pierdo" (I´m losing you), corrupt political leaders as in "De cuello blanco" (White collar), and about being a metalhead as in "Larga vida al Rock and Roll" (Long live Rock and Roll).

Great riffs and vocal work. This album contains eight rockers, one excellent power ballad and one mellow ballad (not my favorite, I think the band was looking for one radio friendly song).

Enjoyable from beginnig to end. I think that if you keep liking a record after 30 years, it´s a damm good one!.”


I know everyone contributing for Metal Archives does it for the love of Metal. So if you help me, it wil be nice.

Best regards
WinterFalcon

Seems like a check list (and a crappy one at that) with some spelling mistakes and a very vague description of the music. Be more elaborate.

So follow the guidelines.

ONCE THOSE ARE READ:

I'd love some feedback on my review of the new Twilight Force: http://www.metal-archives.com/reviews/T ... 202/193921

I've found recently that there are a few albums that I'm able to talk about at length really easily. I think this is my second longest review ever. Just curious to know if I'm rambling endlessly, or if this is actually a decent review. I'm pretty happy with how it turned out.

The review is well written enough for its length, and goes into very in depth analysis. However, you criticize so many aspects of the album that the score you gave it doesn't really feel like it's justified. It's almost as if you gave it such a score in an attempt to mask your disappointment regarding the release, which clearly comes through in your writing. I'm not calling you dishonest or anything, but it kinda feels like you want to bash the album, yet you're afraid to do so for some reason.

This honestly happens to me all the time. I've always found it easier to write about negatives rather than positives. This is especially true for albums that score highly because I like them so much that I listen to them endlessly, so it's easy to notice all the flaws. I did something similar in my Ghostlights review (though that one isn't as harsh).

This is why I'm always so conflicted with giving a score. I'm going to listen to this more than 95% of the things that come out this year. It is way, way worse than the debut, but it also still rules immensely. I did say everything negative about it that I wanted to, but it's hard to reconcile the score with the review itself.

It might be an issue of distribution, really. If you had spent a single paragraph (or hell, just a few sentences) detailing your gripes with the album, no matter how minor or nitpicky they might be, and then went on praising it to high heaven for the rest of the review, then the writing would reflect the score a lot better.

Mind you, scores are just secondary in the end, with the body of the review being the real deal, and you writing is very solid. However, the divide between the two is big enough in this case that it ends up being more than a bit distracting.

Damn...this thread is pretty brutal. Having said that, lots of constructive criticism going on here. Don't mind me folks, carry on.

What do you expect when stuff like this happens?

That's a first. Thanks for the chuckle!

Edit: Just don't go too hard on these poor bastards

Hey, first time being here in both the forums and in general for this website. Mind checking out my review for Annihilation by Kublai Khan? Been rejected a couple of times for technical and grammatical errors but I'm having difficulty spotting them out. Help in any other field is also welcomed. Here you go.

...

Back when Megadeth has been just a little short of being mega famous, and just before their debut album, Dave Mustaine kicked out Greg Handevidt due to "incompetence." After only a year with the band to fated to become one of the largest names in metal, Greg join in the wave of one-shot hotshot thrash/speed metal (If you prefer, NWOOSHSTSM), under the name that is most certainly fitting for metal, Kublai Khan. And the music heard in their only album, Annihilation blows Mustaine's asinine accusation of a lack of skill.

The first track, named Death Breath- yes, Death Breath -basically sums this album's technical and musical genius and vice. The production is a double-edged sword, which I'll go into a little more, but so far just sound foul to the ears. The drumming is played without much consideration, and is sometimes too loud to allow for the riffs and vocalist to dominate one's mind. But when it does, it does it, and does it without any regard towards the idea of idealism or variety. It's followed the simple but effective strategy, thrashing throughout the entirety of this album without any unnecessary need for a break in the pattern. The gang shouts are by far some of the best I ever heard in anything thrash. Hell, best gang shouts I heard in anything metal. It has a sharp viscous and vicious, with this callous nature morphing into more plodding power-stomping. This is evident in Mongrel Horde.

Mongrel Horde basically refines the ideas in Death Breath to show even more color in the way this album was created. The low production has already enveloped a charm of sorts, adding to the age and primal nature of this album, and it also bleeds into the instruments and vocals in a good way. The gang shouts in Mongrel Horde wouldn't have that blasting force if it were of a higher production, it woulda needed to go for a higher vocal range which would not be fitting for such a song. In fact, the lead vocalist takes care of that, a monstrous voice, that man. That slugger-and-swarmer switching overtaking the beginning of this song is simply beautifully made; That riff in the start is a great and foreboding way to cut straight to a speedfest. The low production keys in again to show its magic. After the second of the third verse, it returns to the warcry that wormed this song (Not "Fall to your knees, mind you). It's goes on all the same as before. However, the low production allowed for the chanting to transform into a gutair solo! That by itself is pretty badass, and it only gets better with the solo itself rocking and the Greg even adding more to the song by getting very more frantic, as though the mongrel horde is now circling in.

The only song I find trouble with is Down to the Inferno, a tribute to those mid-tempo chugging guitars and pounding drums tunes, like Seek and Destroy from Metallica and such. However, it doesn't have that doesn't have a impacting effect on memory, and thus, by the time it's over, most of the music has faded outta memory and the only thing I can recall after numberous times was Greg yelling as he's dragged into the inferno. Not bad, I image a remaster would do a miracle to this song, but it's simply mediocre at its current (and maybe permanent) state. After this, Liars' Dice hits the stage and provide the return to thrashing insanity, and the most note-worthy track in this album follows afterwards. Passing Away/Kublai Khan. One of the only songs that break the 4 minutes part for a hefty 7 minutes. And hefty this song is. It's a well-crafted mix of a power ballad and the speeding thrash from before. Acoustic breaks and constant thrash that envelop your ears. This album can be sold from this song alone, it simply clobber most tracks beforehand and with ease, which is already difficult to do. It's simply amazing.

The songs after the title track are also quite lovely, being the simple style of the songs before it. This entire album is dedicated to thrash in its core. If anyone can get past the poorer-than-most production, this entire album is much beyond worthy of a buy. Always wished for a reunion, one more powerful than that one demo in the early 2000's. Once again, this is most certainly worth the purchase. Till then, I'll just hold on to this classic thrash.