I wonder, would it be worth it if a viewer were to know that the reviewer is also a scribe? Of course that doesn't rule out controversial ratings or anything, but still, if I were new to the site, maybe it could help. (Also, I have no idea how many reviewers are actually scribes, so I may be completely wrong here imagining them as a select few.)

Hello, LeMiserable.

Yeah, going from 100% to 20% in a few days sure makes his viewpoints credible.

Holy crap I haven't seen such a ridiculous turnaround in such a short time since Kruel was around and flipped from thinking Windir's Arntor was a gorgeous epic to thinking it was nothing but sugary bullshit in the span of a few hours. The difference was that Kruel was trying to stand out and be contrarian, this guy is, in the greatest show of irony I can remember, trying to fit in. I'm almost speechless.

That's really crazy, his new review. I don't know what to say about that, even - either he's expertly trolling or really just has no spine at all and for some reason lets opinions on a metal review site sway him.

TFW you turn a review into the queue but seconds afterwards you think of the perfect couple of sentences to add to it.

Congratulations, Empyreal, I don't only agree with your point of view on Havok's record but it's very well written and covers everything that is wrong with that output from the musicianship to the lyrics.

If I find the motivation, I will add my two cents in a review at a certain point. Boy, that record is terrible.

Yeah, I enjoyed yours on that German band too. Never heard of them but that was a well done review... I feel like there's a line you can cross with a review like that but the "only talk about the music and nothing else" idea is certainly wrong.

That's why you don't submit it when it's "finished". You sleep over it, read it, do some editing, and then ideally you keep doing that until one day you wake up, read your review and decide that nothing needs to be changed. Then you submit it.

http://www.metal-archives.com/reviews/I ... 997/353988



No comments.

I saw another example of that in the Crappy Diem thread. Something to the effect of 'good overall 8/10' and he rated it 70%. People need to step up their fractions game.

Currently trying to write a review for Angel Sword, and I just have the curse of the blinking cursor, staring at a totally blank page like a dumbhead. How do you guys deal with writers block?

I don't know what you're talking about--that review earns a perfect 5/7 score!

Personally I just don't write unless I have something to say. That's why I honor roughly 0.0001% of the requests I get. I'd just shelve that one for now and come back to it when your thoughts are a little clearer, because I personally think that all of my worst reviews are once I forced myself to write in one way or another.

Oh, I'm sorry, I worded that badly. I only meant 'for them' as in, a review for their album; they didn't ask me to do a review for them. My bad.

Your advice is solid either way though - much appreciated! I think I'll give it a few more listens and put the review off for now.

Same here. One reason why I've been writing reviews for popular albums that have 15+ reviews is because I have sentences and points in my head I've been wanting to convey. I'll do my best to try and expand upon said points to an acceptable review. There's a big gap in my Thin Lizzy pile where the theoretical Black Rose review should be but I my brain has germinated anything other than "Good #1 album for you. Buy now!"

I really wish that webzine/blog reviewers interested in dumping their back catalogue on MA would familiarize themselves with the site's standards regarding content, formatting, etc. before going forward.

For some reason we are getting a lot of this lately, and it is very frustrating for the staffers.

I'm glad bayern reviewed Ignorace by Pessimist. I haven't heard that one in a little while, but it's a really interesting album. The end of the review kind of tapered off, talking about the band's subsequent albums, plus Cynic and Mindwork, which I feel aren't really pertinent to the reviewed album at hand, but overall I'm glad he tackled it. It's a really cool album that I hope more people listen to now that there's writing for it.

just read caspians review of the new wytch hazel. His criticism on the record is actually why I love it. Its just so laid back and nice and awesome.
One thing also seemingly overlooked for now is that the band is almost folk metal. Just listen to Fairport Convention and such and one will notice the similarities.

Quick nitpick on Acrobat's Protector The Heritage review: There was no beer in plastic bottles before 2003.

Gotta hand it to unicorn, that was a brave opinion on Conformicide. But lordy, that score. 97% is higher than what he rated Terminal Redux, Dystopia, Think This... Oh well. None of my beeswax. Interesting read, for sure - may crack and finally give it a listen myself.

The new Conformicide review seems awfully vague considering how long it is, and he never really justified the near perfect score he gave it.

Not sure why hells_unicorn seems to have to put in a lengthy thing defending these albums from detractors' criticisms when albums have multiple negative reviews aside from his - it'd be better if he stuck to talking about the album.

Because he's a christian trumpist and an enemy of metal, obviously.

http://www.metal-archives.com/reviews/N ... ia4/212738

Nice review of Sovereign, Clam! I like the EP more now than I did when it first came out, but it was one of the reasons that I stopped following Neurosis for a few years (it wasn't until Given to the Rising that I decided to give them a chance again). Like you said, it's a cool EP that's pretty important to their development, overall.

I think it gets more credit than it deserves and that more people should focus on the amazing-ness that is Souls of Zero through Times of Grace.

Thanks, man. Obviously not up to par with the vast majority of their albums, but still a really cool release for what it is. I agree with you about Souls-Grace being their best era. Souls will always be my favourite, such a unique and massive album. Silver is another favourite of mine, easily one of the heaviest albums to have ever been associated with doom. I still think they did some worthwhile stuff after that, though. Sun that Never Sets is probably my third favourite, it's basically a heavy psychedelic rock album but it's so fucking good. I love Eye and Given as well. Honor sucked, but their new one is good even if they're maybe running a bit low on new ideas.

Uh did you not hear those pronounced bass passages? Progressive

'Conformicide' deserves a 'Shark Sandwich' length review at best. Something like "Irrelevant retro-thrash band desperate for attention".

Wow, thanks drummingnerd99 (born in 1999) for the by-the-numbers summary on why most nu metal sucks, but not all of it. Reads like one of the endless Boris clones that birthed around '03 or so.

EARLY KORN MIND YOU .. I KNOW MY BARELY TOLERABLE WANK-CORE!!

Even weirder that he attributes Anthrax for helping to start it, when really all they had was that one song that (he rightfully notes) is a Beastie Boys parody. Scott Ian was/is a well known fan of hip hop but apart from this one parody and the Bring the Noise crossover with Public Enemy he never really let it seep into Anthrax. So they have one parody and one cover, and that somehow laid the blueprint for a style that sounds absolutely nothing like them simply because of a hip hop influence? Come on man, Korn put way more funk influence than hip hop into their music, and the heavy parts were arguably more ridiculously downtuned grunge than any kind of metal. And hey, let's also throw in how it was something inconceivable to mix rap and metal when Beastie Boys had Kerry Fucking King make a guest appearance on their first album (that came out a year prior to I'm the Man).

The lesson here is "Don't give a history lesson if you aren't exactly sure what you're talking about, because big Beastie Boys fans like BH will make fun of you."

the new Neurosis didnt really grab me either but it seemed an improvement. Live they are completely destructive still however. I nearly died when i finally saw them last year. What i also found interesting was that while the given to the rising record is heavier than the couple preceeding it live the situation is reversed.

Great review of Overkill/Kreator by autothrall, I had no idea of that single's existence until reading that review and I had to listen to it immediately after reading. I agree with everything said.

I haven't seen them live since TSIB came out. Hoping to catch them this year, though. Even back then, absolutely crushing live act.

Who is this bayern guy who gives super high scores to his reviews?

Bayern is a great writer who mostly reviews old obscure classics.

I see. I'll most likely delve into his reviews a bit, then.

To be fair, that guitar solo is the most un-Kerry King like thing he's ever recorded. It sounds like The Dust Brothers are playing it with one separate arm on the guitar a piece. I get that that's the joke, but still.

Bayern is a pretty good writer for sure, but his scoring is kind of ridiculous. He has over 200 reviews and only three of them are below 80%. Also a preposterous amount of 100%ers. It means a lot less when you're willing to give so many of them.

I was bothered by it at first, but he's reviewing things that have 0-1 other reviews at most, so he's overenthusiastic but at least he's not redundant.

Iron Wizard's review of "Ace Of Spades" has a lot of contradictions.... it's given a 95% yet constantly mentions how overrated it is, for starters. It also talks about a lot of flaws for receiving that high of a score...

I would totally ignore his reviews, it looks like he is both a really inexperienced writer and listener