Anyone else noticing an abundance of different using writing reviews lately? Maybe I haven't been paying as much attention to the reviews lately (aside from my own), but when I do browse through the new reviews, I see a ton of different authors.

I've seen it, too, but it's good to have new people that feel the need to review. Of course, the ones that demonstrate quality writing are the ones I would hope carry the flame for us burnout oldies.

I wrote some in college that now seem pretty lame. I'm glad I finally got back into it though... It's a blast to force my opinions on the masses!

I would like to start writing a few reviews again but I'm just so terrible articulating what I think into words that it's not worth the effort, and the end result sucks.

I'm going to try to write a review for either Symphony X's 'V - The New Mythology Suite' or Shadow Gallery's 'Tyranny' soon. I'm leaning towards the latter, since I feel that this band needs more love. I'll try to make these reviews worth reading. =D

I think that's a great idea. Shadows Gallery definitely needs more love... I love Symphony X, but apparently a lot people felt the need to review their material.

I know a guy who I have a hate-like enjoyment for his reviews, he reviews similar stuff to mine but I'm not going to name his name.

He pissed me off a few times because there was even one instance where I wrote a good, detailed, praising review for an album where I was the only reviewer for it and then he bombed on it with an absolute 0% score with a bunch of bullshit complaints that in no way explained why it should have gotten the lowest score possible.

Don't worry, nobody else likes DomDomMCMG either.

I was gonna ask how did you know it was him, but then again, let's not...

Am I in the minority in the belief that all the reviews are in serious need of editing? Way too long, I can't imagine anyone outside the band/label actually reading it in full. Or at least reading it carefully.

Edit, to be on topic:
Autothrall is clearly light years ahead in the review skill department. While I do not seem to share the same tastes or agree with him at all, one can get a sense of what the music actually sounds like. And that is all one can really ask from a review, no?

Annnd:
I'd say that Asag Asakku (Metal Obscur) is superb at transfering sound to word. AND generally keeps things at a proper length.

I partially agree with you. Reviewers like autothrall and Asag Asakku are great at writing concise reviews that convey what the music sounds like in a shorter version. UltraBoris was also great at this, even if his approach was slightly more comical. A lot of long winded reviews, such as Napero's recent Sabaton review or some of the old greats (OlympicSharpshooter and Aeturnus65 in particular) use more words and more description to get thier exact take on a certain album. If you're really passionate (either gushing or hate) about a certain album, you tend to use more words.

Asag, in my opinion, is not quite good at musical descriptions. He paints short portraits and it's always the same thing and formula. I had an argument with him considering the grammar and he decided to stop posting his reviews since they were usually translated by Google and they're a bit better in French.

I prefer the long, artsy and often funny reviews of Napero or Acrobat myself and I dislike the promotional tone of Autothrall.

Autothrall is great when he's reviewing stuff because he really feels passionate about it, rather than because a promo was sent to him.

Agreed. You can easily tell which reviews he actually stands behind in terms of his own interest and why it's something important to him.

I feel the same way about some of my reviews though, especially the ones for the zine. On occasion, I find an amazing album that I get to review or one that I exceptionally enjoy, which works a little better for me. The regular, run of the mill reviews seem slightly mechanical to me, especially my own.

Now if it’s something I utterly despise or thoroughly enjoy, that’s a completely different story.

I love reviews of MutantClannfear, and his unpopular opinions, and the fact he gave Waking The Cadaver a 90% (Actually a 89%).
Autothrall is great too but i feel butthurt that he gave Blasphemy Made Flesh a 65%.

Well that's a first. Anyways, thank you!

He's like Noktorn 2.0! I mean that in the best way possible.

On the subject of that WtC album, I have a sneaking suspicion that everyone who gave it a 0% has not actually heard a slam record prior to reviewing it.

And I have a sneaking suspicion that that's a load.

It's really a pretty straightforward slam album apart from the (extremely minute and horribly overstated) deathcore influences and the extra beatdown hardcore influence, intrinsic to the New Jersey scene of death metal, which gives it the "wiggery" sound. I bet most people writing reviews for that album and calling it the "worst album ever" would revise their statements were they to dig around in the slam scene and discover that there are dozens of bands equally as esoteric, tasteless and trashy. They don't hate Waking the Cadaver, they hate brutal death metal.

Eh, I'm not sure about that. I'd be willing to bet that most of the reviewers slamming WTC enjoy some brutal DM or slam, or at least have more experience than what they lead on. Then again, Waking the Cadaver was the moving target of MA reviews for a long time; the "The Unspoken King" bandwagon bukkake tsunami before "The Unspoken King," if you will. There's a good chance I'm wrong.

I'm sure there's a lot of the same people who do like Defeated Sanity or early Devourment.

Yeah, whereas Devourment is simply spastic and essentially worthless, WtC rubs the annoyance in your face to extreme degrees. I like a bit of BDM, but not that cretinous, insipid tripe.

Totallly brainless slam can be fun occasionally, but not Waking the Cadaver.

Early Devourment I'll maybe believe, but Defeated Sanity hardly screams as an indicator of one's tastes being firmly entrenched in brutal death metal. There's a reason they're so unanimously loved, even outside of BDM circles, and that's because they're more like a heavier Suffocation than actual slam. They incorporate OSDM riffs and other elements which deviate from the typical formula. They don't count - it'd be like justifying your hatred of Deathspell Omega by saying that you're a big fan of later Dimmu Borgir. Not that the latter is necessarily watered-down in and of itself, but it waters down and repurposes the elements found in the former.

Basically, no, I wouldn't be the least bit surprised if the average Defeated Sanity fan who disliked WTC did so out of a general aversion to slam, because that band's outside influences attract a lot of people who wouldn't be remotely interested in the slammy parts alone.

I don't have anything against certain reviewers but I do GET TIRED of seeing some pointless, bashing reviews. Reviews shouldn't be a chore or a job but a review should be submitted by someone who has something good to say about a band and what the band does right. I believe reviews should have likes and dislikes to give a glimpse of their accuracy to our community as a whole. If you wan't to read more in depth about what I think they should do to reviews, go to my thread I posted in the suggestion forums.

Ok, you've made your point: negative reviews are bad, maaan... Why negative vibes, can't we all be friends, and, like, universal love, dude? Why say bad things, wear flowers in your hair!

Or, the same thing in other words, there are no losers, someone just finished and won last, and he's still going to get a trophy for participating. No child left behind. It's all subjective anyway, so why pay attention to the negatives? No, they are not needed;if you don't like Parkway Drive, just shut up, no one is interested in your opinion, not being nice is not nice. Someone might get his feelings hurt, and that could be someone who really, really likes the band and stuff, and it might spoil his day.

Get over it, dude. You'll do better on Amazon of Facebook, obviously.

Honestly, no.
I think autothrall, Noktorn, hells_unicorn and maybe even Left Hand Ov Dog are absolutely wonderful reviewers. Short, yet detailed, and they have a certain flare in their writing that makes them entertaining.

Most of the time the only reviews on a lot of albums I like are by Autothrall, and I agree with them 80% of the time. I want to try my hand at it some day but it has to be done right. Noktorn is pretty good too, I haven't noticed any other names.

I am guilty of enjoying the shit out of negative reviews more than the positive.

I think authothrall is a pretty good reviewer but I heavily disagree with many of his reviews and I think he's a bit too liberal with the 100%'s and 0% but he's pretty good at articulating his opinion and if nothing I respect his opinion. I findthe odd review to be a bit poor, but you're bound to have a few misses here and there when you're as prolific as him.

Considering that he has well over 3,000 reviews and only 50 of those are 100% and 13 of them are 0%, I wouldn't say that he's too liberal about it. And even if he is, he's not nearly as bad as most of the other sub-standard reviewers who give a 100% to an album they've only heard twice.