without Internet Explorer,
in 1280 x 960 resolution
There's little that one can say fairly, considering the complex nature of most individuals in this world. I am simultaneously many things, or at least may as well be. That's all that needs to be said.
Not all of my review scores mean an absolute towards any point. If I give an album a score between 30 and 40 points, for instance, I'm obviously extremely critical of it, but I don't necessarily hate it, even though I might do. Conversely, if I give an album a score between 90 and 100 points, I may for the most part either like it a great deal or love it, but that doesn't make it invulnerable to receiving criticism from me.
Generally speaking, my review scores go like this:
90-100: Either really good, extremely good, excellent, fantastic, magnificent, or a mindblowing masterpiece, depending on the exact score, and thus obviously essential to anyone who enjoys the band responsible for said album's creation.
80-90: Generally good, from the reasonable scale up to the very good scale, but often far from perfect and may be fairly heavily criticised in some quarters, while praised in others. Often close to essential, but not always.
70-80: On the highest end of this spectrum one would have an album with either quite a few weaker tracks or quite a few overall flaws, but one usually good enough in other ways to be worth owning regardless. On the lowest end, one would have an album with quite a few problems, and despite still having good points would probably not be essential.
60-70: An album at any place on this scale is significantly flawed in one way or another. It may well still be worth owning, but obviously not necessary. It could be comprised of half a side of bad tracks and half a side of good ones, but if consistent would only be so in an average manner.
50-60: Deeply flawed, often quite annoying and/or filled with plenty of songs that are either very weak or genuinely bad, but still usually with a nearly equal number of good elements.
40-50: Quite bad in many regards, and may owe its still otherwise reasonable score to only very few extremely good songs amidst a huge number of extremely poor or downright crappy ones.
30-40: Approaches or occasionally even breaches the point of being outright terrible for the most part, but usually has one or two good or even excellent songs. The bad ones here, though, are either heading towards or already at the "stinking horrible" level.
20-30: Either horribly mediocre, extremely poor or really bad, and is unlikely to have any excellent songs. It could have one good song, but it's unlikely to have much more than that.
10-20: At a level of awfulness so bad that even owning it might constitute shaming oneself deeply. Will not have any more than a few songs on the half terrible level - everything else will be deep down in the dregs.
0-10: This is the point where an album reaches a level of such astounding, appalling atrociousness that it barely even constitutes music at all, let alone anything worthy of being left in anywhere save for, perhaps, a dung heap covered in flies. Even listening to songs from an album on this level, deep down in the sludgy, grime-coated bowels of musical worthlessness may induce burning hatred, deep depression or sick loathing and utter disgust towards such an abomination.