http://www.metal-archives.com/reviews/D ... /Pratl1971

only one side of the split id discussed.

http://www.metal-archives.com/reviews/C ... /eViLbOrIs

Really short and incorrect about the album being the first one. Other than that, he says it's essentially a continuation of Death's sound, which I wouldn't really agree with. That's just me, so I thought I'd put it here for a mod to glance at.

So, this is a review, huh?

http://www.metal-archives.com/reviews/C ... istie_fell

Cleared up to here.

http://www.metal-archives.com/reviews/W ... nswallower

Just a poorly done review. Quite a few grammar and spelling errors, gives it a 90% but says most of it is boring.

Agreed. A very inconsistent review.

Hmm, let's see here: a huge paragraph basically relating the track-listing with occasional vague descriptions like "good" or "boring," a brief telling of the genre, and too many spelling errors to count?

I don't see the problem, guys.

http://www.metal-archives.com/reviews/F ... 1/Human666

I'll let the text speak for itself:

"It seems like Jim Matheos couldn't write a memorable riff even if his life were depend on it. 'Anarchy Divine' sound like an error. Too many riffs that are just simply boring and has no value."

Nice verb conjugation there...

You know, all of his reviews are nearly this bad. You'd think before submitting a review to an English-language website you'd learn to speak (type) the language properly.

Moreover, if I remember correctly, he's also an idiot.

You remember correctly.

Algiz88's review of RaHoWa's Cult of the Holy War

Given, Cult of the Holy War is not even a solid album (really, two tracks from it are okay, but the rest are dull); doesn't deserve the praise that's heaped on it from the WP scene. However, Algiz88 fails to address the album's low points in length. While generalized observation can offer succinct analysis if done right, the Bon Jovi comparison and poor instrumentation are his only tangible observations a reader can gleam upon reading his review. The rest of the review just tell me of his personal attitudes towards the album.

http://www.metal-archives.com/reviews/A ... tcgjarhead

This review of Surtur Rising is quite the stinker, content-wise. The reviewer seems to harbor some misguided notion that AA are an extreme tech death metal band, or something, and then takes offense when - surprise, surprise - they aren't actually that (no idea where he's going with the comparisons to Five Finger Death Punch and Slipknot, total non-sequitur there). I didn't realize anyone still claimed AA as a pure death metal outfit, and equating them to hard rock or "down tuned heavy metal" (which aren't even really similar styles to begin with) is rather farcical whether you love or hate the band.

I could go on - like how picking on a bonus track that isn't on all editions of the album is rather silly - but I think the point is made. Armed with real ammo, a proper 40% review could be so much better than this thing, which literally adds nothing to the already-substantial set of commentary on the album (coincidentally, the other 40% review for this album is also retarded, taking off points for how these songs might sound live and whether it'll be viewed as a classic in the coming years (?!)).

http://www.metal-archives.com/reviews/T ... ical/2976/

The only review for Threshold's Light and Space.



There is virtually no description of any of the music, other than the guitars being fast and lacking pinch harmonics, and having keyboards that usually start the songs.

Actually that's Hypothetical. The intro song is "Light and Space," though!

http://www.metal-archives.com/reviews/M ... OfDarkness

He mentioned and criticized an another member and his review, Autothrall. Also I don't want to seem like a dick but the guy is a fanboy for Megadeth. The review seem very biased.

Seriously, mentioning another reviewer by name and criticizing their opinions directly is NOT cool. I don't believe the review itself is bad enough to be deleted, and I try not to mini-mod, but he really should be warned about this.

Easily one of the worst reviews I've read on here lately. I mean...cringeworthy, really. Ungodly bad.

Reads more like an advertisement than a review.

Yeah, open your eyes, stop complaining, and start liking this goddamn album already like it deserves to be.

I liked the album a lot better than Autothrall does, but I'm in agreement here that this guy SHOULD NOT mention the other reviewer by name, though I think ripping on other peoples' opinions is a valid topic in a review if done right and is kept general (ergo not naming the people who hold the opinions).

Alright, it does seem like some people have missunderstood what Imeant. It was never the meaning to criticize him. I basically wanted to let people know my opinion about this. And I'm no fanboy either. I just happen to enjoy this album a lot for what it is. But I'll modify the review and post it up again. Seriously, you wouldn't think so many people would care about such a small thing.


Is this supposed to be a joke?

Yes, my post was quite blatantly sarcastic. Rust in Peace is the latest Megadeth album I've bought; any album past that I couldn't even finish listening to. Count me in with the metal-archives review crusaders who will drag down the new Megadeth albums injustifiedly high score with their panning reviews... If they bother.

Well, that's a shame. But I don't think you see my point here. Some people complain all the time. And that is quite annoying. I also know that what I wrote in the review probably doesn't change a thing, but it's still good to let it out. I'm sure you know the feeling.

So basically what I'm saying is that it's totally fine with me if you don't like anything after Rust In Peace. I would advice you to try and give the newer albums some more listens, but you do what you do of course.

I'm irritable and far easier to annoy than to entertain. However, I'm a candidate of the "to each their own" philosophy and never attempt to convert anyone to my beliefs - if anything, I sometimes wish to warn people of overly hyped albums that I think are shit - and therefore I tend to complain only when reviews or forum posts advocate that all those who dislike whatever said review or post defends are closed-minded, and whatever reasons they may have for disliking are invalid by default. Writing off all criticism of recent Megadeth based on the suggestion that its detractors are expecting Rust in Peace II and that it isn't supposed to be that is ridiculous.

I understand what you mean, and I agree. Especially on the part of people for example expecting Rust In Peace II, which is just not going to hapen, EVER. That doesn't bother me though, but others may of course have a problem with it.

I have modified my review now, and cut out some of these fanboy-ish things that people may misunderstand. I'm really sorry for not thinking about what I wrote the first time around. Think I probably had one too many beers before writing it.

http://www.metal-archives.com/reviews/F ... 91/mikeald

http://www.metal-archives.com/reviews/F ... 02/mikeald

these, reviews just seem to be full of grammar and spelling errors which i found it hard to read and not very interetsing

Epic.

ShadeOfDarkness, you gave Endgame....100%. None of the Megadeth releases you reviewed were lower than 90%.

And he lists Megadeth as his number 1 favourite band in his profile, but shut up guys, he's not a fanboy.

The problem is that people like you think that whenever someone criticizes one thing, most likely something that you personally enjoy, they're AUTOMATICALLY a "hater" or "nitpicker." This is far from the case.

This is starting to read like The Official Review Discussion Thread, Pt. 2.

I never said I hated anyone. I'm simply trying to get people to understand that Rust In Peace is not the last good Megadeth record. They can think whatever the fuck they want for all I care, but as I said, maybe somewhat will listen to me.

And to all the rest of you guys, I am not a fucking fanboy. Megadeth is my favorite band, I love Endgame, so fucking what! I am fucking allowed to do this without being a damn fanboy. Get something better to do than sit here and accuse me of being things I am not!

Only a fan boy would say that.

That review you posted reeked of "People hate this album because it's not like Rust In Piece!". That's not how it actually is. There are more factors to decide if an album is good or not, especially for old 80's bands. But, Ilwhyan and Empyreal said that already.

And yes, anything after Rust In Piece is mediocre at best.

http://www.metal-archives.com/reviews/Ulver/Nattens_Madrigal_-_Aatte_Hymne_til_Ulven_i_Manden/3612/Noctir

I'm pretty sure Noctir screwed up when entering the rating. It has a 20% rating, but is described as "decent" and "average".

Yeah, I think you're right. He called Terrible Certainty "horrible" and gave it a 40%, so that must mean something.

did i really need to load the post with smileys and </sarcasm> so you didn't take it at face value?

See, there you go again! And yet again! Can't you fucking use your head? As I have now said two times, I am simply expressing my opinion. And you on the other hand are basically looking for reasons to rip on people for these sort of things. Just get a life already.

Oh and I almost forgot, I do not give a damn crap about what you think about the albums after RIP. The only thing I care about is the fact that I actually am so lucky to enjoy them.

The new Lulu review by Slasher666 says very little about the music, it basically just talks about the vocals, and that the rest is bad. Very borderline if you ask me.

http://www.metal-archives.com/reviews/M ... Slasher666

http://www.metal-archives.com/reviews/C ... ottrephile

OK, how the fuck did this piece of shit get approved?! It's just a shitload of senseless bashing of the band instead of actually explaining why the music sucked, overusing the words "faggoth" and stereotyping the members...seriously, who accepted this?