Encyclopaedia Metallum: The Metal Archives https://forum.metal-archives.com/ |
|
Oven Fodder (AKA Why was this review accepted? Provide LINKS, please) https://forum.metal-archives.com/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=4153 |
Page 222 of 239 |
Author: | WR95 [ Mon Oct 23, 2017 6:03 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: Oven Fodder (AKA Why was this review accepted? Provide LINKS, please) |
https://www.metal-archives.com/reviews/ ... eins/79861 https://www.metal-archives.com/reviews/ ... eins/79861 Are they acceptable by actual standards? Track-by-track and so overlong. I don't get why he includes the tracklist in his review. |
Author: | ~Guest 135946 [ Mon Oct 23, 2017 6:32 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: Oven Fodder (AKA Why was this review accepted? Provide LINKS, please) |
WR95 wrote: https://www.metal-archives.com/reviews/Black_Sabbath/Black_Sabbath_Vol_4/492/Frankingsteins/79861 https://www.metal-archives.com/reviews/ ... eins/79861 Are they acceptable by actual standards? Track-by-track and so overlong. I don't get why he includes the tracklist in his review. To me those look more like they belong on a site called an encyclopedia than many other reviews. Plus, those are well-written pieces from 2006. If anything they're a good balance of informative and opinionated. Sure, the tracklistings could have been kept out and they do get a bit track-by-track, but I don't remember seeing anything with respect to review length in the guidelines and there is plenty of context provided throughout the reviews to make even that acceptable, especially considering the age of those pieces. I've been warned about it before, veering too close to track-by-track, but one quick look at that reviewer's work over their time here shows a vast improvement. I'd say keep them up, they show a good maturation of a reviewer. I think context like that is good to keep up around here once in a while, it can help people lurking through the reviews see just how others have grown and they can get the opportunity to start on even better footing. |
Author: | thrashmaniac87 [ Sat Oct 28, 2017 12:53 am ] |
Post subject: | Re: Oven Fodder (AKA Why was this review accepted? Provide LINKS, please) |
Track-by-track that doesn't even touch on his thesis until the conclusion, and then just barely. https://www.metal-archives.com/reviews/ ... THORN/1184 |
Author: | TrooperEd [ Sat Oct 28, 2017 2:14 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: Oven Fodder (AKA Why was this review accepted? Provide LINKS, please) |
thrashmaniac87 wrote: Track-by-track that doesn't even touch on his thesis until the conclusion, and then just barely. https://www.metal-archives.com/reviews/ ... THORN/1184 It's an EP though. You kind of have to do track-by-tracks with those. |
Author: | thrashmaniac87 [ Sat Oct 28, 2017 2:30 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: Oven Fodder (AKA Why was this review accepted? Provide LINKS, please) |
TrooperEd wrote: thrashmaniac87 wrote: Track-by-track that doesn't even touch on his thesis until the conclusion, and then just barely. https://www.metal-archives.com/reviews/ ... THORN/1184 It's an EP though. You kind of have to do track-by-tracks with those. I once wrote a track by track for a 3 song EP and it was rejected, not for content but for being track by track, so I think you might be mistaken. |
Author: | blackcat2018 [ Sat Oct 28, 2017 8:11 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: Oven Fodder (AKA Why was this review accepted? Provide LINKS, please) |
https://www.metal-archives.com/reviews/ ... his/145177 "the the", "obligitory", "it's", "creem dreem", "egyption", "an mystic prophet", "Thte Black Album", "thier". Some spelling errors, delete this please. |
Author: | BastardHead [ Sun Oct 29, 2017 2:20 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: Oven Fodder (AKA Why was this review accepted? Provide LINKS, please) |
thrashmaniac87 wrote: TrooperEd wrote: It's an EP though. You kind of have to do track-by-tracks with those. I once wrote a track by track for a 3 song EP and it was rejected, not for content but for being track by track, so I think you might be mistaken. We're a bit more lenient on track-by-track reviews if there are very few tracks to talk about, but even then it needs to be somewhat camouflaged with a natural flow. This kind of review is the exact kind of thing we don't really want on the site, the only thing it was missing was individual ratings for the tracks. blackcat2018 wrote: https://www.metal-archives.com/reviews/Iron_Maiden/Virtual_XI/395/sysyphis/145177 "the the", "obligitory", "it's", "creem dreem", "egyption", "an mystic prophet", "Thte Black Album", "thier". Some spelling errors, delete this please. poof |
Author: | PaganiusI [ Wed Nov 01, 2017 10:34 am ] |
Post subject: | Re: Oven Fodder (AKA Why was this review accepted? Provide LINKS, please) |
7.5 lines. Less than 5 talking about the music. https://www.metal-archives.com/reviews/ ... ter/25206/ |
Author: | blackcat2018 [ Thu Nov 02, 2017 5:19 am ] |
Post subject: | Re: Oven Fodder (AKA Why was this review accepted? Provide LINKS, please) |
https://www.metal-archives.com/reviews/ ... _bum/70897 "emodied", "Preserverance", "masterbation", "capabilites", "guitar solo's are", "mountainious", "techincal", "repetative", "tendancies", "rythm", "distastefuly", "pleseant", "Preserverance" (again lol)... https://www.metal-archives.com/reviews/ ... ert/101472 "slighty", "eachother", "excell", "titletrack", "straight forward", "rhyhmical", "middlesection", "therefor", "Philosofer", "enjoybale", "an solos"... https://www.metal-archives.com/reviews/ ... ert/101472 "sofar", "used to be in the band", "That’s were it all went terribly wrong", "immitating", "oppososed", "aweful"... |
Author: | Derigin [ Thu Nov 02, 2017 3:57 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: Oven Fodder (AKA Why was this review accepted? Provide LINKS, please) |
PaganiusI wrote: 7.5 lines. Less than 5 talking about the music. https://www.metal-archives.com/reviews/ ... ter/25206/ Poof blackcat2018 wrote: https://www.metal-archives.com/reviews/Death/The_Sound_of_Perseverance/618/super_bum/70897 "emodied", "Preserverance", "masterbation", "capabilites", "guitar solo's are", "mountainious", "techincal", "repetative", "tendancies", "rythm", "distastefuly", "pleseant", "Preserverance" (again lol)... https://www.metal-archives.com/reviews/ ... ert/101472 "slighty", "eachother", "excell", "titletrack", "straight forward", "rhyhmical", "middlesection", "therefor", "Philosofer", "enjoybale", "an solos"... https://www.metal-archives.com/reviews/ ... ert/101472 "sofar", "used to be in the band", "That’s were it all went terribly wrong", "immitating", "oppososed", "aweful"... All fixed. |
Author: | thrashmaniac87 [ Mon Nov 06, 2017 3:38 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: Oven Fodder (AKA Why was this review accepted? Provide LINKS, please) |
Super skimpy review from the early 2000s. https://www.metal-archives.com/reviews/ ... hocles/123 |
Author: | HOT_DOG_DAY_89 [ Tue Nov 07, 2017 10:10 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: Oven Fodder (AKA Why was this review accepted? Provide LINKS, please) |
Not as skimpy as this https://www.metal-archives.com/reviews/ ... ing/12816/ |
Author: | colin040 [ Thu Nov 09, 2017 5:42 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: Oven Fodder (AKA Why was this review accepted? Provide LINKS, please) |
https://www.metal-archives.com/reviews/ ... gin/20720/ Brief! |
Author: | PaganiusI [ Sat Nov 11, 2017 5:34 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: Oven Fodder (AKA Why was this review accepted? Provide LINKS, please) |
Maron is barely talking about the music in the 3 reviews he wrote back in the days. Time Treachery - Under Eternal Nightsky Blüdwülf - Cryptic Revelations Midnight - Complete and Total Fucking Midnight |
Author: | mjollnir [ Sun Nov 12, 2017 1:37 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: Oven Fodder (AKA Why was this review accepted? Provide LINKS, please) |
PaganiusI wrote: Maron is barely talking about the music in the 3 reviews he wrote back in the days. Time Treachery - Under Eternal Nightsky Blüdwülf - Cryptic Revelations Midnight - Complete and Total Fucking Midnight Um....they might not be six long paragraphs but I get a picture of what these bands sound like from his straight the point reviews. I'm not a mod but these reviews seem acceptable to me. Could you cite an example of "barely talking about the music?" |
Author: | Diamhea [ Sun Nov 12, 2017 3:19 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: Oven Fodder (AKA Why was this review accepted? Provide LINKS, please) |
Yeah, those seem okay to me. |
Author: | DarthVenom [ Mon Nov 13, 2017 6:13 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: Oven Fodder (AKA Why was this review accepted? Provide LINKS, please) |
So, about that new Iced Earth review. https://www.metal-archives.com/reviews/ ... Meh/339203 I read the review twice to make sure, but there is no musical description here, just the constant refrain that it's "geared for radio play" and "meant to be played solely on the radio" and that it's "mainstream radio music". The closest that it gets to describing the music is when it says that a few songs "do resemble a lot of what Iced Earth has done in the past for me, a lot of what was right about their music, and a lot of what they should be doing." But that sentence would be meaningless to anyone who doesn't already know what Iced Earth sounds like. If the writer of the review is reading this: it's a pretty common criticism of IE that they have a few killers per album amidst a sea of fillers, but you need to be able to describe it with actual musical detail. If you want to express that Stu Block "performs well in all areas", then don't just say that; elaborate on specific parts of the album where he uses his range to great effect. And if you're going to accuse an album with a six-minute instrumental and a nine-minute epic as just being in it for the radio play, you really need to back that up with more than this. |
Author: | MutantClannfear [ Tue Nov 28, 2017 9:07 am ] |
Post subject: | Re: Oven Fodder (AKA Why was this review accepted? Provide LINKS, please) |
https://www.metal-archives.com/reviews/ ... nes/227178 I expect better from this guy at this point. Zero musical description. |
Author: | Empyreal [ Tue Nov 28, 2017 9:42 am ] |
Post subject: | Re: Oven Fodder (AKA Why was this review accepted? Provide LINKS, please) |
DarthVenom wrote: So, about that new Iced Earth review. https://www.metal-archives.com/reviews/ ... Meh/339203 I read the review twice to make sure, but there is no musical description here, just the constant refrain that it's "geared for radio play" and "meant to be played solely on the radio" and that it's "mainstream radio music". The closest that it gets to describing the music is when it says that a few songs "do resemble a lot of what Iced Earth has done in the past for me, a lot of what was right about their music, and a lot of what they should be doing." But that sentence would be meaningless to anyone who doesn't already know what Iced Earth sounds like. If the writer of the review is reading this: it's a pretty common criticism of IE that they have a few killers per album amidst a sea of fillers, but you need to be able to describe it with actual musical detail. If you want to express that Stu Block "performs well in all areas", then don't just say that; elaborate on specific parts of the album where he uses his range to great effect. And if you're going to accuse an album with a six-minute instrumental and a nine-minute epic as just being in it for the radio play, you really need to back that up with more than this. Quote: I think Iced Earth has come to this point where, they probably know they'll be less relevant if they don't make songs people like, so they make these songs for the radio in the first place, not even daring to experiment more and make something that is actually worth the time to listen to in one sitting. Wow, a band knows they'll be less relevant if they make songs people don't like? What a fucking revelatory statement. This kind of stuff always just shows a very shallow understanding of art... I doubt Iced Earth was going "gee, we really want to write this experimental prog epic, but fans may not like it... time to just write the same old boring stuff!" |
Author: | hakarl [ Tue Nov 28, 2017 10:47 am ] |
Post subject: | Re: Oven Fodder (AKA Why was this review accepted? Provide LINKS, please) |
Is he trying to say that the band has run out of inspiration, and is also conscious of the fact, attempting to make up for it by appealing to a lower common denominator? Yeah, I don't know if that's the kind of thought process that metal musicians might have when they streamline their style. Not even people like Jon Schaffer, I reckon. |
Author: | BastardHead [ Tue Nov 28, 2017 11:13 am ] |
Post subject: | Re: Oven Fodder (AKA Why was this review accepted? Provide LINKS, please) |
MutantClannfear wrote: https://www.metal-archives.com/reviews/Bell_Witch/Mirror_Reaper/664567/ConorFynes/227178 I expect better from this guy at this point. Zero musical description. Returned to sender. I appreciate what the album did for him and I understand what he was going for, and he's a good enough writer to make it work, but in its current form it's really just not MA material. I hope he can rewrite it and integrate some actual description into it, because I know how cathartic it can be to write pieces like that. |
Author: | Rodman [ Tue Nov 28, 2017 6:51 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: Oven Fodder (AKA Why was this review accepted? Provide LINKS, please) |
The Crown - Possessed 13 Quote: Not as brutal, but still decent - 87% Life_Sucks, November 28th, 2003 I really liked Crowned In Terror, so I decided to check out Possesed 13 when it came out. It starts kicks off with No Tomorrow, which starts with a standard introduction of stranges noises and then a grooving metal riff kicks in, which then gives way to the speedy thrashing main riff of the song. Yeah, it is fast, but the blastbeats that defined Crowned In Terror are absent. It is a good opener and a solid overall song nonetheless. The next song Face Of Destruction is a similar overall fast, yet not blasting song. The third track, Deliverance, is the most like the songs on Crowned In Terror, with a good amount of blasting and very aggressive riffing. Deliverance, Morningstar Rising (another fast blasting song that could be on Crowned In Terror), and Kill Em All (a relatively fast song with an old school thrash feel) are some of the highlights of the CD. Overall, I wasn't dissappointed with the CD, but I was expecting it to be faster and more aggressive. Most of the songs lack the blasting and intense riffing of Crowned In Terror. However, the songs here often have more groove than the ones on Crowned In Terror and there is more diversity among the songs. This is a different kind of CD than Crowned In Terror, but it is still very good. Fans of The Crown, and fans of modern thash in general, should pick up this CD. Not the worst thing ever, but a typical TBT-style early review that wouldn't be accepted today. |
Author: | BastardHead [ Tue Nov 28, 2017 10:39 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: Oven Fodder (AKA Why was this review accepted? Provide LINKS, please) |
Looks like that review was taken care of, but holy shit that album is loaded with terrible reviews. Looks like tomorrow that'll be the next band I do a silent purge for, yikes. |
Author: | AddWittyUsername [ Sat Dec 02, 2017 1:59 am ] |
Post subject: | Re: Oven Fodder (AKA Why was this review accepted? Provide LINKS, please) |
https://www.metal-archives.com/reviews/ ... edSky/1204 Brief 2003 TBT-style review. https://www.metal-archives.com/reviews/ ... eased/1837 Brief 2004 review. Makes an attempt at description, I suppose, but pretty lacking in specifics. https://www.metal-archives.com/reviews/ ... 77/kd/3863 Quote: Highly Innovative - 100% kd, February 3rd, 2004 Christ almight!!!!!!!!!!#@$#$#%#$%$#%!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! This shit is sick! I didn't think they played death metal this sick back in 1993, but boy was I wrong. Whenever I hear people mention classic NYDM, I always hear the same old "Suffocation, Immolation, early Pyrexia" shtick, never, not ever once have I heard anyone mention Afterbirth. I stumbled across this band by mistake...let's just leave it as that. More importantly, the music. Which speaks for itself. The riffs are heavy and non-technical. The drumming is fairly typical, some blasts, some decent fills. The music is mostly at mid-pace. I'd compare them with the SABDM bands of today, musically. Now, the undeniably the most important part, being the vocals on this album. The vocals sound like Ruben Rosas from Devourment, but 6 sick years earlier!!!! I could've believe it when I first heard it. Completely floored! Praise goes to the vocalist for sspawning an entire new style of vocals, because somebody had to do it. You must hear this album if you like death metal at all. Too!!Many!!Exclamation!!Marks!! (And musical description is pretty much limited to "heavy, non-technical riffs, typical drumming w/ blasts and decent fills and mid-paced. Vocals like Ruben Rosas.") https://www.metal-archives.com/reviews/ ... 68/kd/3863 Same author as the above. Riddled with spelling ("ubelievably", "Pennsyvlvania", "sophmore", "clearity", "groweled"), grammar and punctuation issues, over-enthusiastic fanboying and rather brief. Does include some musical description, though, I suppose. From a quick check, it looks like their other reviews are of the same "quality". |
Author: | Antioch [ Fri Dec 08, 2017 7:58 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: Oven Fodder (AKA Why was this review accepted? Provide LINKS, please) |
https://www.metal-archives.com/reviews/ ... ouzi/20442 Not a big fan of the album, but I'd definitely give the band more credit than this. Anyway, the review sucks.
Spoiler:
show
|
Author: | PaganiusI [ Sat Dec 09, 2017 2:10 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: Oven Fodder (AKA Why was this review accepted? Provide LINKS, please) |
https://www.metal-archives.com/reviews/ ... ayer/84427 First 2 paragraphs explain why he loves the band in general. Third paragraph states THAT he doesn't like that album. The next one has the only 2 sentences where he's talking about the music, and they don't go into detail at all: - "The sound is very cohesive, but it just sounds like so many other boring industrial outfits." - "There were a couple decent songs here and there, but I haven’t listened to it in so long that I don’t remember what they are." Last 2 paragraphs state how sad that is. His other reviews are somewhat better, but still....I don't know...fishy, too. https://www.metal-archives.com/reviews/ ... ayer/84427 https://www.metal-archives.com/reviews/ ... ayer/84427 |
Author: | Antioch [ Tue Dec 12, 2017 12:30 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: Oven Fodder (AKA Why was this review accepted? Provide LINKS, please) |
Two weak reviews of Cynic's Focus. Painful reads that echo one another. Points made: 1. This is death metal fused with jazzy elements. 2. Masvidal and Malone are phenomenal players. Amazon reviews at best.
Spoiler:
show
https://www.metal-archives.com/reviews/ ... aded/70321 https://www.metal-archives.com/reviews/ ... alho/53241 |
Author: | Jophelerx [ Wed Dec 13, 2017 5:53 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: Oven Fodder (AKA Why was this review accepted? Provide LINKS, please) |
All 4 of the reviews for Ram-Zet's Escape are pretty bare bones and/or have some kind of formatting problem, but this one is pretty obviously oven fodder material, terrible formatting and grammar and extremely track-by-track: https://www.metal-archives.com/reviews/ ... 2/mud/4391 |
Author: | Timeghoul [ Thu Dec 21, 2017 9:16 am ] |
Post subject: | Re: Oven Fodder (AKA Why was this review accepted? Provide LINKS, please) |
I am not a Christian, nor have I ever been in this band, but I feel this review is a bit jaded. This review gave it a 0% and part of the review was based on a death metal band having Christian lyrics. I ask for someone to review it. https://www.metal-archives.com/reviews/ ... rn/198216/ |
Author: | Liquid_Braino [ Fri Dec 22, 2017 1:08 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: Oven Fodder (AKA Why was this review accepted? Provide LINKS, please) |
There seems to be enough musical and visual description for it to stay, but the fact that he equates "leftist, P.C. propaganda" as being Christian and seriously pro-life is hilarious. Either he's been getting the wrong pamphlets all his life or it's just bitterman trolling away as was his game. |
Author: | Ontsarguiz [ Fri Dec 22, 2017 1:15 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: Oven Fodder (AKA Why was this review accepted? Provide LINKS, please) |
https://www.metal-archives.com/reviews/ ... 17/kd/3863 (seriously, look at his other reviews too) https://www.metal-archives.com/reviews/ ... 666/280147 (not that bad until the atrocious track-by-track kicks in) |
Author: | Napalm_Satan [ Sun Jan 07, 2018 11:28 am ] |
Post subject: | Re: Oven Fodder (AKA Why was this review accepted? Provide LINKS, please) |
This review is pretty bad. Very lacking. A short list of what he doesn't like without much actual description, no mention of positives despite giving a positive score, etc. etc. Track by track with one line per song. Maybe being a bit harsh here but this also seemed to be very lacklustre. EDIT: From the same album, this seems pretty light on description too Tbh I'm just suggesting this one, because I guess by today's standards it could be accepted as a 3 pointer? |
Author: | AddWittyUsername [ Mon Jan 08, 2018 11:07 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: Oven Fodder (AKA Why was this review accepted? Provide LINKS, please) |
Fails to describe the music other than a small number of specific songs, and even there it's light on details. Short, light on details, no paragraphing, mid-sentence capitals ("Metal"; "Metalheads") while also lacking some needed capitals, garbled run-on sentences ("The vocals by ex Darkane member Lawrence Mckrory show a lot of emotion and blend perfectly with the tracks while thought to be the weak spot in the band by any it gives Andromeda a unique sound. (although they have recently released the album with a more generic power Metal type vocalist which knocks down the quality a peg or two)"), bad punctuation and misspellings ("Mckrory"; "genertal"). Extremely short. Has some description but other than genre, the only part I have a decent idea of after reading this review is the vocals. Even then, there are two other reviews that do at least as well in describing those. Single paragraph. Light on details: description can be summarized as "catchy, non-preachy Christian metal with a vocalist reminiscent of Chris Cornell/Rob Lowe/Maynard James Keenan and good production for an indie release". |
Author: | S9NE [ Fri Jan 12, 2018 6:18 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: Oven Fodder (AKA Why was this review accepted? Provide LINKS, please) |
https://www.metal-archives.com/reviews/ ... rget/55831 Numerous spelling/capitalization/grammar errors with little to no musical description.
Spoiler:
show
|
Author: | colin040 [ Tue Jan 16, 2018 5:39 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: Oven Fodder (AKA Why was this review accepted? Provide LINKS, please) |
https://www.metal-archives.com/reviews/ ... rean/5029/ ... EDIT: Here's another one. https://www.metal-archives.com/reviews/ ... ind/56552/ |
Author: | Wilytank [ Wed Jan 17, 2018 9:14 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: Oven Fodder (AKA Why was this review accepted? Provide LINKS, please) |
So here's a review of a split album containing two very long songs, and the reviewer only reviews one of them. https://www.metal-archives.com/reviews/ ... hade/89201 |
Author: | UnholyCrusada [ Thu Jan 18, 2018 8:01 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: Oven Fodder (AKA Why was this review accepted? Provide LINKS, please) |
^ Seeing that reminded me of this review. A split live video where the review doesn't even make mention of two of the three bands featured. https://www.metal-archives.com/reviews/ ... cang/71509 |
Author: | doomster999 [ Sun Feb 04, 2018 3:51 am ] |
Post subject: | Re: Oven Fodder (AKA Why was this review accepted? Provide LINKS, please) |
https://www.metal-archives.com/reviews/ ... tKill/4115 Dude has no idea about the style of music he's reviewing. No substantial explanation of the album's sound whatsoever. Only sleeping....zzzz and all that shit. Awful biased and ignorant review. Should be nuked. |
Author: | TrooperEd [ Sun Feb 11, 2018 6:19 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: Oven Fodder (AKA Why was this review accepted? Provide LINKS, please) |
https://www.metal-archives.com/reviews/Megadeth/Rust_in_Peace/593/fullmetalraincoat/420587 Offending paragraph in question:
Spoiler:
show
Seriously, what the fuck is the projectional whining about other people's comments about reviews? |
Author: | Derigin [ Sun Feb 11, 2018 11:27 pm ] |
Post subject: | Re: Oven Fodder (AKA Why was this review accepted? Provide LINKS, please) |
Dealt with. |
Page 222 of 239 | All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ] |
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group http://www.phpbb.com/ |