That may be a nice thing to do, but you never know what someone's thinking of with a draft. I tend to throw out tons of things after another glance.

As for flogging thesauruses like they're red-headed stepchildren, I'm all for it as long as it doesn't impede the review's purpose. It's fun to find a new word once in a while, it's a bit much when reading a review that sounds like they're channeling a Seventeenth Century poet, and it's even worse when they're building a cage of syllables around their ideas just for the sake of searching out unused language. The review may as well be in Latin or Aramaic if you're just going for esoteric sounds.

Sometimes it's awesome to see, like this:
but we're not all in competition here and at some point have to leave our cocoon and get to the point of the review.

Yeah I don't mind the Oxford PhD in Literature essay metal review as long as it's actually saying something, and not a bunch of ten syllable words masking a generic "I like it" statement.

Then there's the reviews in which the reviewer is in some elevated state of euphoria for whatever reason while writing. Those crack me up.
I love this one:
https://www.metal-archives.com/reviews/ ... rth/239195

If I'm feeling down, there's always FFF to enhance my "being" if I'm willing to just let go and allow the aural waves to carry me to a higher echelon of existence.



The candles are lit, the signs have been drawn, and the needle has now been dropped.
I am ready.

Haha! That beard bit was pure insanity! (It definitely tops the Ripleys Believe It or Not pic of the 19th century thespian with a floor-dragging, 16-year grown mop, ill-advised no less when it comes down to fisticuffs...(vividly use your imagination here!).

Ah, that perniciously wily and sly thesaurus and the folks who (over) use them!
I appreciate all the feedback and suggestions, as well as well-meaning lambastings, in regards to its (my) abuse. Having cleared the cobwebs and adulterants from my mind, I clearly see how it can harmfully impede the gist and flow of a review. I think now maybe one or two fangdanglers are OK (like Gasmask's colostomy, in his recent Sacred Steel review:

"If you were wondering what kind of metal Sacred Steel are hoping to play loud and at all times, it's most assuredly true metal of the kind played ever since the NWOBHM, most particularly in the CELERITOUS strands of mid-’80s European speed metal and the brawny North American power metal of the same era."

This way, it's classy without being pompous or annoying (I now know why my wordier-than-normal RAM_Death write-up from last Summer took a week to clear - flipping through the thesaurus can be time-consuming!). Not only is it easier for the reader to read after, but the writer has a much smoother go at it.

I got carried away of late. Before, up until February or so, I'd only check a handful (3, 4, maybe 5) of words in the whole review for possible synonyms/conducive embellishments, with the actual meat of the review properly accounted for an palatable, then I underwent a stressful. half-ass-backwards transition period (which is no one's fault but my own), succumbed to old nemeses and ungainly reverted to OCD patterns and self-sabotaging quirks.

Oh, Mr.Z, sorry for being somewhat petulant - your point is well taken and I'll be more considerate with my word explosions in the future.

Jesus, I hope none of my reviews come off like that. Initially I planned on holding back my enthusiasm, as gushing can be obnoxious and setting expectations high can actually harm a release you're trying to give positive exposure, but in the end I decided honesty was more important. My opinions of Been Caught Buttering and Rom 5:12 might be a bit much, but if I wasn't passionate about metal, I wouldn't spend free time reviewing it. Mr. Earth does do something which I consciously avoid, which is talking about fans and their supposed reasons for not liking something. Imploring listeners to open their minds is tiresome and it's lazy to imply the only reason someone wouldn't like an album is because of a defect, whether of intellect or character. Why not just explain the reasons a release is worth opening up your mind for?

This is reminding me of Pitchfork's infamous Kid A review.

^ I thought your Been Caught Buttering review was a real good read. Showing lots of passion and enthusiasm is cool; sometimes something just clicks like a motherfucker.

On other occasions, an album can open up a whole new genre of music for your listening pleasure, or bring back memories of the best summer of your life. There's plenty of tangible reasons to love an album, even a grisly one like BCB

Calling Been Caught Buttering the quintessential death metal album is one thing. Hell, saying it's the best album of any genre is fine. But if you had said that it's not, in fact, death metal, but a cosmic portal with properties transcending the human condition in which only the chosen few can comprehend, then the review would only be good for a few laughs.

All the Cat III Pungent Stench reviews have been good.

Thanks, guys. It's good to know people read these and I'm not one to turn down compliments (negative feedback is just as welcome). I plan on reviewing the rest of the PS discography, though not all at once. Given the Catholic scandal in the news, I should probably jump on Masters of Moral - Servants of Sin, not that I'd have to wait long for another scandal to arise.

After four months of needless absence from this thread, I have returned and have decided to try churning out reviews more consistently.

Also, I just waded through the last fourteen pages of this. Amazing.

Good to have you back. We can all use a break once in awhile.

I second this sentiment!

Thanks, guys!

I'm shouting into the wind here, but I can't help but feel that reviews that just boil down to "this is bad because the genre it's in sucks" are incredibly useless. This is a thing that happens on all genres in MA, but it is pretty prevalent on -core reviews. I understand fully that this place hates -core to death (often to the point of comically absurd performative wankery, but whatever, I'm used to people making fools of themselves) but I have seen reviews on this website that literally start off with like two paragraphs of performative "hey everyone I gotta make sure I let everyone know this genre is shit" as if you'll lose your Metalhead Cred if someone catches you reviewing a deathcore album. I don't like BDM, but I don't go around posting reviews on BDM albums that say nothing else than "this is an unpleasant wall of noise and ignorant chugging sections with a vocalist that sounds like he's about to die while violently vomiting everywhere" because they would be utterly useless to anyone who actually *does* like BDM. I don't even know why people do these reviews that are nothing but "this whole genre sucks dick, 0/100" outside of performative street cred.

inb4 "lol look at this whiny -core kid"

Yeah well they let anybody just write anything on here - some of it's inevitably gonna be shitty.

Keep in mind there are cases of readers look for reviewers whose tastes are either similar to theirs or have such a way with words that said reader wants to know their opinion on anything. It's useless for a thrash fan who doesn't like lo-fi black metal to take into consideration someone who loves nothing but that sub-genre when deciding if they want to give it a try. But if an album hailed as a "classic" by reviewers contains all the elements of that sub-genre that said reader hates, its more refreshing to a reader when someone points out "if you hate sub-genre x, you will probably hate this." This to me is the true role of positive reviews, to point out when an album rises above the bad habits of a sub-genre.

Don't be a whiny -core kid and no one will call you that!

Steelbound has been putting out some good reviews: https://www.metal-archives.com/reviews/ ... und/216005

He's descriptive without going on forever about nonsense, and analyzes the music with a comfortable familiarity that's easy to read and get into. Good stuff.

Also, in regard to the previous discussion, I wouldn't trust your taste anyway if you're the kind of person who actively thinks whole genres of music are worthless - it shows you don't really listen that hard.

I can see where deathcore can get its hate with the endless breakdowns but there is some good talent in the style. One that always comes to mind is All Shall Perish's 'The Price of Existence', that is a good album, well put together, and the vocalist has a great range. As much as Abigail Williams may get some hate, I love the intensity of "Watchtower", there's a drapery of blackness that flows over it far more comfortably than the jerky stereotype.

I think a lot of people rip on deathcore as another way to tear down breakdown bands (that and the Cryptopsy debacle), but one of the most egregious examples of breakdown bands comes in the form of slam in death metal, and that just gets to be far too repetitive. Deeds of Flesh is another great example of a band being so brutal that's it's sterile. This plushy has a more dynamic range in his super happy fun time song than too much of Deeds of Flesh's discography (and I do like Deeds of Flesh). https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QZShA_a-5r8

Holy Behemoth reviews!!

Coming from someone who hates deathcore, I actually agree with you. If I'm not into or don't understand a genre, I avoid it in general, which is why you'll find very few black metal reviews unless it's "blackened thrash" or something by me. This style of negative reviewing is how you wind up with a whole shitload of people attacking one band just because it's cool to hate that band, with pretty absurd reasons for calling it bad.

Very well said.

There's stylization as a choice, and then there's overwrought, masturbatory maximalism. Baroque, windy vocabulary could be used as a stylistic choice to mock an album that's laughably pretentious--beating them at their own game, if you will, but that's a rare case. Sometimes there's no getting around using unusual words because one has just the meaning you need ("stentorian" comes to mind, an uncommon word with a usefully specific definition that won't just stand in for "strong" or "forceful" because it's more subtle than that--not all synonyms are interchangeable). Thesauruses are exceptional tools. Use them properly.

It doesn't matter how fancy the words are. If they're useless, they go.

Grave_Wyrm indirectly complimented my vocabulary; my reviews now have meaning.

Re thesauruses, I just learn a bunch of words from Darkest Dungeon and Demolition Hammer lyrics, honestly. Thesauruses are great and all, but there are plenty of occasions where supposed synonyms just don't mean the same thing at all. Thesaurus.com especially sucks, they'll say "consecrate" is a synonym of "celebrate" just to make themselves seem more thorough. As others have said, there's no substitute for learning new words naturally, and ensuring fancy words are used appropriately. On the other hand, if Chairthrower's amazingly written comments don't bring joy to your soul, you must not have one.

Shucks, thanks Tanuki, that swell comment makes my day!

I guess I'm trying to meld thorough, actual pertinent review-al fodder with a peculiar fondness for the English language and all its quirks and nuances. Metantoine, Grave Wynn, as well as Bastardhead (albeit wryly!) duly nailed the importance of content over flair and dash, critical advice for which I'm grateful for and will do my best to incorporate in my write-ups from now on. Ha! yeah, that Primitai review I wrote last month is definitely stiff, turgid and wooden (at best!) but like Five_Nails once said to me, every review turns out different and is a sense, is informative, at times, entertaining art in its own right. Also, I find it's not so dire to use a big word like "corybantic" so long as place the 'ol (i.e.) as well as word everyone knows so they don't annoyed and hampered, thus detracting from both the review itself and their enjoyment of said review. For instance, if I say "this song/riff compels me to break out into a corybantic (i.e. frenzied and demented) dance at the drop of a (fruit) hat, that ain't so terrible now, is it. I could also just say
"into a frenzied, corybantic dance", thus eliminating the (i.e)...

Anyhow, thanks again all for valuable input and hails!

Yeah, and veeeeeery diverse in terms of writing qualities ^^

It does. A lot.

http://www.thefreedictionary.com/

This one, on the other hand, does not.

I used to use Thesaurus.com, but now my preferred source is Merriam Webster. I like how it lists related words and near synonyms/antonyms so you get an idea how close in meaning a word is to whatever you looked up. Sometimes there are short paragraphs discussing the nuances of similar words. Plus, it doubles as a dictionary so you can check the definition if you're unsure.

Of course, this tool has to be paired with actual writing skills to be of use. If you come across a word you're unfamiliar with, you may want to find how others use it before employing it yourself, or you could just take note of it and let the Baader-Meinhof phenomenon bring examples to you. Personally I enjoy finding new words, though writing that seems like an effort to not waste a single entry in a word-of-the-day calendar is exhausting. I'd also like to note that fiction and other creative forms of writing having greater allowance for verbosity and archaic vocabulary, though even then it requires a real skill to pull off.

Noticed BastardHead joined in on using "celerity".

I've been thinking about writing a Revocation review for some time, but BastardHead's new one I really don't have much to add (maybe I'd rate it slightly higher though). Totally nailed my feelings about all their works, it's weird that their stuff never does not SEEM really good yet always lacks something to make it truly stand out. No other band makes me react that way so consistently, every one of their albums is in the "kind of good" high-60's range for me. Good job BH

The "trick" to learning new words is to just read books. Actual literature ideally, not fantasy/sci-fi wank with shit made up words.



I always enjoy BH's writing but this review felt unnecessarily long, especially as he cycled through the same two points - "Revocation are really technical and good" > "Revocation are bad at writing memorable songs" ad nauseum. They are great points and he illustrates them well, but does so using twice as many words as needed. Reviews aren't assignments, you won't be marked down for not achieving some imaginary word count.

Although I agree with Superchard that Diary of a Madman is pretty overrated, I don't think denoting Randy Rhoads as an "average pop-rock guitarist" makes any sense. And additionally, claiming that he isn't a "composer" for whatever reason shows a fair amount of ignorance. Anyone can easily Google the definition of the word and find that it is not genre-specific.

As much as I distrust people who think Randy Rhoads is overrated, I have been digging his reviews of Tony Martin's post-Sabbath material. I really need to check more of it out.

Oh, man, Bastardhead duly nailed Revocation's slapdash "jangledeath" (he,he!) convolution to a tee. I've only listened to them here and there but felt the same way: awesome, breakneck riffs and jaw-dropping lead legerdemain which are akin to tossing every flavorful spice in the rack into one's puttanesca spaghetti sauce, thus creating a zanily fucked up dish where one eye-popping spoonful suffices to sum it all up...Where's the expressive soul? The genial flair? The HOOKS?!?

Great review! (As they say, jack of all trades, master of nun...)

I wanted to punch a hole through my computer screen when I read that horseshit.

Oh, and yes, Cat III, I too have sordidly succumbed to vain and futile attempts to encompass every single MA WOD in my writings...the result is a head-scratching-ly wanton employ of "sicilet" and worse, "vidilicet!" (as in, thus, therefore, as you have it, etc, etc...)

Every now and then though, a real fandangler makes itself known (such as last Summer's wicked appearance of "chthonic/chthonian", admittedly, a fetish word of mine I sagaciously cram in every third review or so...ha! "crapulous" popped up the other day, but I beat MA to the punch of that one! (name whence and win a prize!)...

Also dug, like my buddy's hyperactive snowwhite blue-nose pitball pup, Bastardhead's timely employ of "celerity" (goes well with peanut butter, no?)

One last thing today, Ezra, nice MA band inclusion of Lightning Wolf: wicked monochromatic (yellow & black) trad metal goodness for the wizened, gnarled, WOOLY! connoisseur...
I gleaned, off screwtoob, the sweet samplers "Free", "Lilith" and "Pale Horse", but seriously want to order the CD now, as it's right up my alley...So, thanks!

Why is my name in that sentence? I'm confused.

You can blame me picking up FFRK for the first time in three years for bringing that word back to the fore of my memory.



One of the reasons I've always held you in the highest regard is because you have the uncanny ability to punch right through the bullshit. Yeah, I've said before that I'm a bad guy to take advice from because I flagrantly ignore all the basic tenants of writing, one of which being that I outline nothing before writing it and every review I've ever written (barring like maybe three across twelve years) has been a first draft written in one sitting. I think it really shows on that Revocation review. I'm glad a lot of people liked it but I definitely think it's not a great example of what I can do, because I really did just kinda have one thing to say and I just kept writing longer than I probably should have, hoping to eventually find the right words to illustrate my point as I went along. Thanks for the kind words, everybody, but listen to Z, he's right, sometimes fat needs to be trimmed and I didn't do that here.



Also listen to this, seriously. Some popular writer (I think it was Stephen King but I could be wrong) once said "If you don't have time to read, you don't have time to write." Just read more often. Not only will your vocabulary expand naturally, but you'll also get more ideas and get a better feel for how to make things flow, plus you might actually learn some things and/or not be a boring dolt.

Maybe you don't give much a shit but I can't get over having typos in reviews. When I read over a piece I've put down and see a typo, that ruins the entire piece immediately for me. How do you not hate those glaring moments of bad syntax, conventions, and writing when you look back? I can't help but keep editing over and over as I write, plus a bit of alcoholism doesn't help the anxiety of having fucked up even after I publish.

Are you always looking forward? Do you look back or edit over time? What keeps you being such a great head on top of being such a bastard?

Even this I've edited far too many times after posting. It really sucks to be so paranoid that I don't feel that I've gotten the point across the right way.

(Another Anxious and Obnoxious) Edit:
Are you thinking more about the audience or about your own views? I know those are not the only points in writing many reviews but any help may help this one. Do you find yourself fitting things in quickly enough after so much time or could you see it that you think the readers 'get' your gist well enough from how you write?

(I'll stop now, I'm getting all fidgety)

I could stand to outline my reviews more. I suppose I have an outline in my head most of the time but I tend to write everything in order. I could probably stand to adopt a more stream of conscious style with thorough editing as my current style probably comes off as overly rigid at times.

Eh, that's weird, I could've sworn "Lightning Wolf" was added, as a band, by you, Ezra. Oh, well, metal regards all the same and in any event, only one track in particular caught my fancy in their regards...it's pretty lowbrow stuff but readily listenable no how!

Actually, I'm glad the whole outlining point has come up, as, I find the best writes are the product of a concerted, organized and structured method (for a time, I was walking around town with pen and notepad while listening to my mp3 player, jolting down any and all "review fodder", to be sifted through later...I should really get back to that approach, considering I only write about one a week on average these days...

Sometimes, a quick off the cuff write for a single or EP is totally feasible, even warranted (how about those 1000 word EP dissertations?!)...

Twisted P., nice Windhand review, yes they could benefit from variation somewhat; linked here is a review for it from the Canadian Weekly, Exclaim! (the cabbage leaf which actually turned me on to 3 Inches of Blood back in the day...):

http://exclaim.ca/music/article/windhand-eternal_return

Chairs!

I've always preferred the stream of consciousness style but it's not for everybody. I think it's definitely easier to outline and intentionally structure a review and it's for sure better for newer folks just starting out, but like I said I'm sorta known for giving advice that I don't follow myself. I do it the way I do it because I write exactly the same way that I talk, and it just feels so much more natural for me to approach it that way. Somebody once described caspian's reviews as something along the lines of "sitting down next to him in a pub, drinking beers, and chatting about an album", and that's the kind of thing that I think I go for myself as well.

Really you've just gotta write enough to recognize your own strengths and then play to them. That's the only one-size-fits-all advice.

You're not alone. I check my writing multiple times, always with the fear that I'll miss some error, whether spelling, grammatical or factual. Often look up words to make sure I'm using them correctly (to be fair, I have found words that I'd been misusing). Since I have no education in music theory, I'm always fearful of getting something wrong. I try to come off like a knowledgeable fan, not an academic, so hopefully any future mistakes (if I haven't already made some) aren't too damaging to my credibility.

Honestly, my biggest worry ought to be the my attempts at humor. I can write good jokes, but often I look back at something and wonder how the hell I ever thought it was funny. But I'll never stop--it's just the way I write.

Didn't realize people thought reviews should be outlined. Maybe it never occurred to me since I take notes on each track and if a particularly interesting thought about an album/song comes to my mind I'll take jot it down in a Word document.

Steven Pinker's The Sense of Style helped me to write more clearly, though like all things, nothing beats practice and observation.

Exxxekutioner’s riffs are a lot stronger than SweetLeaf gives them credit. That album has riffs for days.