Just trying too fucking hard all the time. I do agree the length was enjoyable and you got tighter so that's good.

I'm happy that you're considering reviewing more obscure or virgin albums. Not only because it's my main goal in reviewing but because it will possibly help you with your writing and will give you some new perspectives. Go for it.

I was thinking of laying off reviewing for a while (due to outside factors, school you know?) and come back to the virgin reviewing when the time is right. Before I take a leave though I decided to leave you with one more reminder of what I can do when I really think through my writing, to show that I really do want to improve and that I care. I know it's for a controversial and much reviewed album, consider it a test of if I can manage it for a divisive effort. Thoughts?

Review here: http://www.metal-archives.com/reviews/C ... tan/357873

There's a satisfaction in writing reviews and looking for a reaction, but it is so slight. I used to do it, and it was both poor reviewing and poor listening. There's nothing worse than setting out listening to write a review. It's an unfortunate mindset to listen to music in, making the experience more about you than putting yourself in the mindset of the album.

It's easy to use expectations as a crutch in reviewing. Anyone can recount a story, react to a reputation, and regurgitate a narrative. Dramatic reactions and self-reference are about you, not the music. They also made for a time when I listened to music more with passing judgment in mind than getting into it. I hate to see it when other people do it. Reacting to reputations, and recountedly cataloging classics, it just kinda feels like someone is trying to hold on to the same kind of imagined reverence that was once held by the "pop culture guru" made obsolete by Wikipedia.

This really does sum up the whole negative reviewing culture. I subscribed by it for a long time but it went out of style, and a lot of aspects of it, like you say, are just silly and pointless. These days anything I review is either for information or for comedy, not to have some kind of dick measuring contest or become known for it.

I appreciate Zodijackyl and Empyreal's reflections on their past in negative reviewing. Harping on a reputation, etc., as they described, rings wanky. One pitfall is that there's SO much mediocrity that railing on and on about yet another half baked project is tedious. Make an example of a real stinker, sure. But I'd much rather read a piece about a young band that's working hard and still falling short somehow ("almost good," in other words) vs. a writer making the easy choice and bashing on them for not being something they can't possibly be.



Couldn't give a fuck less. You do you.

This review is a significant improvement as far as clarity and getting to the point. You're still overtalking and kind of repeating yourself; after a while the main critique is worn thin. The over all effect is a lot more grounded, though, which is nice to see. I'm willing to help you with some editing, but you have to post in the workshop and not use your scribe status as a crutch.



You're letting your inner teenager do your thinking for you.

When I think about it, though, it's the exact opposite for me. I find aimless hyperbole and forced intensity boring; ungrounded spectacle in general, really. Without substance and consideration, or even a sense of having given the ideas time to gel and interact ("thought," in a word) there's not a whole lot to make me feel like I'm not getting sold shit, or, worse, advertising. When hyperbole is used to inflate not only one's opinion, but one's sense of entitlement to it, one is exagerating oneself, which is remarkably dull. I understand that it's difficult to write substantially; sometimes there just isn't that much to say. But in that case, either pick something in the topic to focus on and develop meaningfully, or just don't bother.

Flatulent, gas-swollen ranting is about as boring as it gets.

Yeah. I never did much harping on reputations, but a lot of my old ones were very much about exaggeration and hyperbole. I didn't pick the easiest targets; I never did that. But I found it fun to talk about how bad a really bad album was, and I liked comparing things to other things, making it about me in some subtle ways as I built up a reputation. It was sort of a way to cultivate that "pop culture guru" thing, only for metal and horror movies. But honestly, that was never the endgame. I wanted to get my own work out there. And the closest I got to that, the more folly I saw in trying to bash other peoples' work. It's still fun to make fun of horror movies on my blog, because by nature so many movies are silly or have stupid things about them. But why spend that much time actively hating things and subjecting yourself, intentionally, to the worst things there are, acting like the musicians were trying to create awful things on purpose?

How is this weird exactly? The MA page literally classifies them as melodic death/thrash metal. Their genre is a mix of many things but the core of Beyond the Permafrost was melodeath.

The core of basically all of their albums was thrash with all the other influences being secondary but it's not enough of a misnomer to send me into a rage or anything.

Also what I meant was the melodic death metal scene in general, I wasn't precisely calling them "melodic death". Regardless, I think we could argue about their genre for 1 or 2 pages as it's not obvious.

I'm never gonna send him away.


True. I got nothing to comment here, except that I find hyperbole funny rather than boring when I come across it.

I don't understand guys like writhingchaos who flood the scene with 100% reviews. Their inflationary ratings have the potential to devalue the entire system. But I am sure, you discussed this point before.

Does Writhingchaos understand himself, I wonder?

I understand that the guy wants to stick mostly to stuff that he's liked, but of his 105 reviews so far he's only scored 10 less than 90%, and he's given out 53(!) 100% ratings. Maybe I'm just overly critical, but to me 100% isn't a score that's meant to be thrown about all willy-nilly, it's supposed to be reserved for perfection. It just seems to undermine it all if everything's rated that highly.

There's like no way to really judge what he considers good or great or whatever. I have given out a few more 100%'s than I'm comfortable with but those were all albums that I adore and do consider basically flawless. I think once you start giving them out left and right your entire scoring system loses merit.

At least Writhingchaos is somewhat good and just gave 100% to classic albums unlike fucking Akerthorpe who really makes me mad.

Yeah Akerthorpe is even worse. It's always funny to see him give a 100% to some random EP that came out a day prior and then go give a 75% to something similar and call it an abortion or something.

Akerthorpe is indeed a rare specimen. I wonder how high he'd rate a Sloth single, though I think I kind of know the answer...

Probably a solid 65%, because in Akerthorpian a 65% = 0%

Eh, he gave a 50% once. I don't even dare to listen to that album.

The perpetually underrated and ignored NausikaDalazBlindaz did a decent review of the new Caïna (which you should be listening to instead of fucking Sabaton or Metallica and In Flames' singles in the year of our lord 2016). Feels a little messier than her usual writing, but perhaps that is stylistically appropriate considering the schizophrenic nature of 'Christ Clad in White Phosphorus'. The metaphors are on point however and it articulates a lot of what I would like to say about one of the better albums from this year.

*applause*

Could someone please link me to this ultraboris review where he quotes this? "In short... the universe is a midget, and this album rapes it so hard that Stephen Hawking learns how to walk again. And that's all I have to say about that." I've look but I can't find it anywhere.a

Here ya go man: http://www.metal-archives.com/reviews/S ... aBoris/147

That's my single favorite review on the site, that end quote is gold.

Is it a good review? Definitely not, but I'm guilty of having a soft spot for that ridiculous humor. Regardless, that was the review that made me go check that album out for the first time and it is now my second favorite thrash album. So hey, it did its job!

Edit: Compliments due to X|x|x for his rewrite of The Longest Night. Commendable job retaining the description and working out from under the track-by-track format. Good job, man. I really appreciate the time and effort you put into reworking it. It paid off.



I thought it was a review, not an advertisement.
Don't mind me, I'm tired and should be abed.

NausikaDalazBlindaz is neither ignored nor that underrated. She's been reviewing mostly unknown atmospheric/black/drone-y stuff for some time by now so there wasn't much of a reason for her to be mentioned here. I've read almost all her reviews from the last 8-10 months and I bookmarked pretty much every band she reviewed during that interval (even though I'm already close to 8000 bookmarks) and I know there were a few people who said in the underrated reviewers thread that they're following her so no - NausikaDalazBlindaz isn't ignored.

Also, I think that the fact that she never replies to whoever happens to mention her might be one of the reasons why she's not brought up very often. She's been a member since 2006 and hasn't posted even once. She's just doing her thing, regardless what other people think, so any praise/critique/mention of her on this forum is pretty much pointless.

Basically she's generally fairly dry and focuses on music not too many here get into. Certainly a godsend when looking through that sort of thing since she's often the only review. Also, 8000 bookmarked bands... do you have? I don't think there's a syndrome for that.

Just a lack of self-control when it comes to hitting that button.

Boris was awesome. His reviews are my favorite by far, he doesn't give a fvck at all. Very honest and sincere in an funny immature way that makes it enjoyable to read.

Thanks, man. Definitely much happier with the after-revision result. Visiting the feedback workshop was a great idea after all!

A bit off topic here, but is anyone else bothered by untitled reviews? Like, the ones that only have [band - album title] on top, instead of actually writing something a bit more creative in that space. Maybe I'm an asshole, but I generally skip reviews that don't have a proper title. Kinda reeks of laziness to me.

^ I don't know what to say about that... Twin_guitar_attack usually gives such lazy titles to his reviews but I usually like how the actual review turns out so the title doesn't really matter.

twin_guitar_attack isn't very good.... just another reviewer bound by webzine promo deadlines that pumps out quick-and-easy 3 paragraphers when pressured. Always seems like I'm correcting him on the same points, even years later.

Honestly, I used to do the Band name - Title thing, because I thought the title wasn't really important. Tony forced me to start giving titles, so I try to chose lyrical quotes from the album that 'kind of' relate to the final synopsis. A lot of the time it is just random, though.

I find myself doing the same thing; if there is a certain lyric that stands out to me as memorable, humorous, or just even cool to me I can't help but use it as the title of the review. I have always avoided using the title of the album as the title of the review unless making a dumb joke or something (my Scroll of Vegetable review is simply titled Scroll of Awesome).

^ Why don't you review Hades Archer's infamous EP and use "PEEEEENNNUUUUSSS" for the title?

Me.

Glad you found it helpful (it showed). And it goes both ways, too; you're a good guy to work with.

Back to the title thing; I'unno, it just feels cheap to not write anything of interest there, be it a lyrical fragment from the album as the guys said, or a little joke, or something. Like, anyone can do better than that, you know?

I agree. Titles are an art of their own, and they can be challenging. Still, it's just a little extra effort that can do a lot. It's like wearing a perfectly good suit and then putting on a busted Yosemite National Park hat that's been shoved in the map pocket. I just don't think it's the best way to finish off the outfit.