MrMetalinasuit1 wrote:
I can send you the master of the farthouse tapes if you like?
Or I can just review some of the mid-'90s bedroom death metal demos I've acquired.
| Encyclopaedia Metallum: The Metal Archives https://forum.metal-archives.com/ |
|
| The Official Review Discussion Thread https://forum.metal-archives.com/viewtopic.php?f=4&t=7444 |
Page 164 of 521 |
| Author: | Gutterscream [ Mon Oct 14, 2013 6:56 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: The Official Review Discussion Thread |
MrMetalinasuit1 wrote: I can send you the master of the farthouse tapes if you like? Or I can just review some of the mid-'90s bedroom death metal demos I've acquired.
|
|
| Author: | Metantoine [ Mon Oct 14, 2013 8:53 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: The Official Review Discussion Thread |
The new SubRosa has been out since more than a month and no reviews has been submitted. Weird! |
|
| Author: | lord_ghengis [ Mon Oct 14, 2013 10:44 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: The Official Review Discussion Thread |
Well the last one was hugely popular and still only got like four reviews. They don't seem to be a very popular band among the reviewers. |
|
| Author: | Acrobat [ Tue Oct 15, 2013 7:24 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: The Official Review Discussion Thread |
Metal_Thrasher90's review of Def Leppard's Hysteria wrote: We all know what happened back in 1983 with “Pyromania”. A crushing success that sold millions of copies, the sound of decadence, the album that killed the NWOBHM definitely. That's the first time I've ever heard that. Besides, what's with guys with "thrasher" in their username suggesting that X album killed Y genre/scene? |
|
| Author: | HeySharpshooter [ Tue Oct 15, 2013 12:10 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: The Official Review Discussion Thread |
Metantoine wrote: The new SubRosa has been out since more than a month and no reviews has been submitted. Weird! I'm working on it actually 
|
|
| Author: | Thumbman [ Tue Oct 15, 2013 12:57 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: The Official Review Discussion Thread |
Oh damn, forgot that was out. Gotta listen to it, their previous album was great. |
|
| Author: | Gutterscream [ Tue Oct 15, 2013 8:15 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: The Official Review Discussion Thread |
Metal_Thrasher90's review of Def Leppard's Hysteria wrote: We all know what happened back in 1983 with “Pyromania”. A crushing success that sold millions of copies, the sound of decadence, the album that killed the NWOBHM definitely. Um...what? ANationalAcrobat wrote: That's the first time I've ever heard that. Me too. In fact, the ultra-majority of the population didn't even know what NWOBHM was or intended to be, let alone that it had been slain. |
|
| Author: | Zodijackyl [ Thu Oct 17, 2013 9:48 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: The Official Review Discussion Thread |
I disagree with bitterman's assessment of the worst album from Florida. Rainfall is the worst. |
|
| Author: | lord_ghengis [ Thu Oct 17, 2013 10:35 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: The Official Review Discussion Thread |
Those "deaf" puns are getting nauseating, using it literally every time you describe a death related genre is painful... And Rainfall cops too much.shit, its mediocre with no standout moments, but it isn't painful at all. |
|
| Author: | droneriot [ Fri Oct 18, 2013 12:23 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: The Official Review Discussion Thread |
The new Waking the Cadaver review talks about the band introducing new influences into their sound but does not make a single mention of what any of them are... |
|
| Author: | Empyreal [ Fri Oct 18, 2013 7:57 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: The Official Review Discussion Thread |
http://www.metal-archives.com/reviews/M ... 547/Khat57 This has to be one of the most embarrassing reviews on the whole site. Like I'm literally embarrassed that this guy is so confident in his very stupid opinions. |
|
| Author: | Acrobat [ Fri Oct 18, 2013 8:40 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: The Official Review Discussion Thread |
Zodijackyl wrote: I disagree with bitterman's assessment of the worst album from Florida. Rainfall is the worst. Is bitterman ever gonna take on some albums that, you know, aren't ridiculously easy targets? |
|
| Author: | ~Guest 282118 [ Fri Oct 18, 2013 11:37 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: The Official Review Discussion Thread |
Empyreal wrote: http://www.metal-archives.com/reviews/Metallica/Master_of_Puppets/547/Khat57 This has to be one of the most embarrassing reviews on the whole site. Like I'm literally embarrassed that this guy is so confident in his very stupid opinions. Khat57 wrote: "A close second for worst song on the album is "Welcome Home (Sanitarium)." As I said before, it's a ballad ABOUT BREAKING OUT OF THE FUCKING LOONY BIN. That's just not the right subject matter for a ballad!! What the hell, Metallica? Metallica is one of the few metal bands that have respectable lyrics, but you wouldn't know it listening to this song." I seriously don't get what's wrong with that. I mean, isn't this guy familiar with the concept of lyrical dissonance? Besides, it's not like the song doesn't gets much heavier later or anything, which should be more beffiting of the lyrics, according to his "logic". Also, saying that Van Canto's covers of Battery and Master of Puppets are more energetic than the originals makes me want to punch the wall. |
|
| Author: | BastardHead [ Fri Oct 18, 2013 12:32 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: The Official Review Discussion Thread |
I stopped reading when he called Slaughter in the Vatican "proto-groove metal". This is why I'm not in charge of the site, I would instantly ban anybody who insisted that Exhorder's first album is even remotely similar to anything Pantera did. It is BY FAR the most irritating common willful wrongness in all of heavy metal. |
|
| Author: | Zodijackyl [ Fri Oct 18, 2013 2:02 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: The Official Review Discussion Thread |
Why would a shitty UltraBoris wannabe review the album that he is most infamous for reviewing? I mentioned it a few days ago to other mods, that review is of very poor quality and little merit, it has been removed. |
|
| Author: | Napero [ Fri Oct 18, 2013 3:16 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: The Official Review Discussion Thread |
I think I missed something epic here. Did I approve it? |
|
| Author: | Zodijackyl [ Fri Oct 18, 2013 9:39 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: The Official Review Discussion Thread |
Napero wrote: I think I missed something epic here. Did I approve it? Nah, just a shitty Master of Puppets review that took three years to notice because really, who the fuck reads reviews of Master of Puppets? |
|
| Author: | caspian [ Sat Oct 19, 2013 12:59 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: The Official Review Discussion Thread |
I'm really starting to miss the days when commonly reviewed albums aren't held to higher standards, that kinda stuff is just embarrassing. |
|
| Author: | Napero [ Sat Oct 19, 2013 4:08 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: The Official Review Discussion Thread |
caspian wrote: I'm really starting to miss the days when commonly reviewed albums aren't held to higher standards, that kinda stuff is just embarrassing. They aren't. |
|
| Author: | caspian [ Sat Oct 19, 2013 4:10 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: The Official Review Discussion Thread |
oh, yeah sorry got my thoughts all messed up then . When they were held to higher standards. |
|
| Author: | Razakel [ Sat Oct 19, 2013 4:22 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: The Official Review Discussion Thread |
Whoa, reviewer names are now in the review title? Not sure I see the point, but I guess it's arguably more convenient. |
|
| Author: | OzzyApu [ Sat Oct 19, 2013 4:31 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: The Official Review Discussion Thread |
Razakel wrote: Whoa, reviewer names are now in the review title? Not sure I see the point, but I guess it's arguably more convenient. Yeah I saw autothrall's review a day or so ago and I went, "so he's putting the 'by autothrall' in his titles now, sheesh"... until I saw another review did it, and then I checked my own and  .Readers can't see the name at the bottom of the review? |
|
| Author: | Metantoine [ Sat Oct 19, 2013 4:44 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: The Official Review Discussion Thread |
I also think it's useless but apparently a lot of people were asking for this update. Oh well! I'll be off school next week, I'll try to write a lot of reviews! |
|
| Author: | MutantClannfear [ Sat Oct 19, 2013 4:54 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: The Official Review Discussion Thread |
I like the change... in principle. This has been planned for a while, I believe, and rightfully so (it's annoying not being able to see who wrote a review until you get to the very bottom of it), but I was expecting the admins to just stick that bottom line at the very top, like this:  As it is now it's a bit visually distracting, but it's still better than nothing. |
|
| Author: | DarkWolfXV [ Sat Oct 19, 2013 5:12 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: The Official Review Discussion Thread |
Yes, the way you propose it is way better. It would be great if someone changed it. |
|
| Author: | OzzyApu [ Sat Oct 19, 2013 5:13 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: The Official Review Discussion Thread |
^ That looks better to me. Makes the title cleaner without shoving the name next to it. |
|
| Author: | Metantoine [ Sat Oct 19, 2013 5:32 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: The Official Review Discussion Thread |
I notified HellB, he'll change it. 
|
|
| Author: | Razakel [ Sat Oct 19, 2013 6:31 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: The Official Review Discussion Thread |
Yeah, that really does make all the difference. The other way is just too much of an eye sore. |
|
| Author: | OzzyApu [ Sat Oct 19, 2013 7:11 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: The Official Review Discussion Thread |
Changes in place. Nice job. No more redundancy and ugliness. 
|
|
| Author: | ~Guest 171512 [ Sat Oct 19, 2013 10:08 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: The Official Review Discussion Thread |
I liked it the way it was originally. This is a completely unnecessary change. Am I the only one who wants the old way back? |
|
| Author: | Erosion of Humanity [ Sat Oct 19, 2013 10:55 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: The Official Review Discussion Thread |
I like the new way because I tend to put more stock into reviews done by certain people than others and it's just a hell of a lot more convenient to see who did it without scrolling all the way down then back up to start reading. Specially if I'm just on my phone as is the case when I'm at work cause damn some of the reviews here are like freaking encyclopedias. |
|
| Author: | Empyreal [ Sat Oct 19, 2013 11:36 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: The Official Review Discussion Thread |
Thiestru wrote: I liked it the way it was originally. This is a completely unnecessary change. Am I the only one who wants the old way back? It looks a bit weird the way it is now and the way it was with the name in the review title. It looked more natural the way it was before all this. But either way it doesn't matter too much. |
|
| Author: | lord_ghengis [ Sun Oct 20, 2013 12:34 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: The Official Review Discussion Thread |
I'm much happier with it on the line under, sure it's not as pretty as the old "no name" thing, but I like being able to know who I'm reading without having to scroll to the bottom first. edit: why can't we have both, having the user link at the bottom was also useful? |
|
| Author: | J_Ason [ Mon Oct 21, 2013 7:26 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: The Official Review Discussion Thread |
An average album that lacks perfection - 75% Most ridiculous review title I've ever seen. Lacks perfection? I couldn't come up with a more retarded criticism of an album if I tried. (also 75% isn't fucking average, idiot) |
|
| Author: | Wilytank [ Mon Oct 21, 2013 10:32 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: The Official Review Discussion Thread |
J_Ason wrote: An average album that lacks perfection - 75% Most ridiculous review title I've ever seen. Lacks perfection? I couldn't come up with a more retarded criticism of an album if I tried. (also 75% isn't fucking average, idiot) First album with Mangina? I thought it was the previous album. |
|
| Author: | Thumbman [ Mon Oct 21, 2013 2:31 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: The Official Review Discussion Thread |
Happy that the reviewer name in the title thing didn't stick; looked totally cluttered. Think that it looks a lot better in a smaller font right underneath. |
|
| Author: | TheStormIRide [ Mon Oct 21, 2013 7:59 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: The Official Review Discussion Thread |
Wilytank wrote: First album with Mangina? I thought it was the previous album. I think Portnoy wrote the drum lines for "A Dramatic Turn of Events" and Mangina just played what was already written. |
|
| Author: | kluseba [ Tue Oct 22, 2013 1:07 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: The Official Review Discussion Thread |
First, the guy's name is Mangini (not Mangina). Second, keyboardist Rudess composed the drum patterns and Mangini only played them on the 2011 record. The new record is the first one where he actually was involved in the songwriting, so it's somehow his first record process with the band. Third, the review is fine, I wouldn't give this album more than 70-75%. The band copies itself and doesn't do anything "progressive" here at all. That's why there is a lack of perfection. And yes, 75% is a pretty average rating by these site's standards. It's the same thing as with school grades. If you get 50%, you don't pass, 60% is just tolerable and 70% starts being average. I know it's different in Europe. I come from Germany and you still pass your class if you get 5/15 points (33%). But let's say that it's as hard to get 33% in Germany than to get 60% in Canada/USA. I've read a couple of good reviews on here during the last days: theBlackHull reviews a few cool and obscure underground bands from Quebec. It's nice to see them uncovered. FateMetal did a great job reviewing the last Dream Theater. This great covering makes all other reviews of the same record unnecessary (even though I would have given the record a better rating; I'm only talking about the way this users writes). I don't want to bash anybody but these days, there are also some really bad reviews going on. Bitterman giving all albums 0% is just plain dull. He reminds me of the antagonist in "Twelve Angry Men". He is just a bad parody of it. Empyreal's reviews are also getting worse. The one about the first Ghost record is quite hard to read (sentence structure!) and somewhat ridicolous (vocabulary choice!). Apart of that, I just can't take someone giving 98% to Edguy's last disasterpiece serious (while he gives albums by Nevermore, In Flames and Iced Earth 10% or less). These are just my two cents. It's always interesting to come back to the board... |
|
| Author: | Empyreal [ Tue Oct 22, 2013 1:16 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: The Official Review Discussion Thread |
If you don't agree with me on the scores I give some bands, that's fine. But you've brought this up several times now when I have not mentioned your name on these boards or criticized any of your own very poor reviews in some time now. Let's not forget that time you bashed me for my Elvenking review and stated that I just didn't like the pop influence and that was the only reason I gave that horrendous album a low score, when the second paragraph of that review explains very clearly that I don't have a problem with that kind of influence. That alone is enough to prove that you don't even know how to read and shouldn't really be taken seriously on anything. Pretty much everything you bring up in reference to my reviews and scoring system is just a lot of huffing and puffing to disguise the fact that you're really just a whiny crybaby who can't take dissenting opinions on the shitty-ass music you like. Lo and behold, you gave that Ghost album a 79 and spent the review praising it a decent amount - no ulterior motives here at all! |
|
| Author: | Metantoine [ Tue Oct 22, 2013 1:28 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: The Official Review Discussion Thread |
I don't know, man but using the score someone gave to a review to undermine his credibility is somewhat of a poor argument (you gave Shadowmaker a 79% for fucks sake, you're the one to talk). While I'm not the biggest fan of Empyreal's reviews, he has a personality in his writing, something that your cold ass, mechanical, "written for well respected websites" by the book reviews doesn't. I support criticism but yours weren't constructive and basically bashed Empy (of course you knew he'll reply). Smug. |
|
| Page 164 of 521 | All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ] |
| Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group http://www.phpbb.com/ |
|