The Beatles Sgt. Pepper's Lonely Hearts Club Band
» Back to review

Comments:Add a Comment 
Titan50
January 21st 2009


4588 Comments

Album Rating: 5.0

If you look at his profile, he rates "classic" albums extremely low ratings, which is a bit harsh. Although he did give Back In Black a 5

kygermo
January 21st 2009


1007 Comments

Album Rating: 4.0

I think a 2 is a bit harsh for this album. At the lowest, id give it a 3.5. I certainly would not give this one a 5, no way in hell.

shindip
May 10th 2009


3539 Comments

Album Rating: 4.5

seriously, what is your f*cking problem

Electric City
May 10th 2009


15756 Comments

Album Rating: 4.0

aw hyperboleking. nicer dicer times

Aids
July 22nd 2009


24509 Comments

Album Rating: 5.0

I don't like this review. Not because I disagree (hugely) with the rating, that doesn't bother me. I'm just not into how there was little justification of it. Saying that an album is similar to its predecessor is not justification for giving it a 2/5 and calling it "dreadfully over-rated" [sic]. Nor is it proper justification to speak of whether or not it was the first concept album, or analyzing drug references. Reviews should focus on the sound of the music and the mood it sets. You should be talking about which emotions (if any) are evoked and how well the music is played. I don't like this review because it focuses on all the wrong things.



There, that's what I have to say about that.

Enotron
October 21st 2009


7695 Comments


actually i believe this album is considered revolutionary due to the approach that was used to create it. and probably because they liked the songs as well.

shit review, just like the majority of yours.

monkeygonetoheaven
December 11th 2009


71 Comments

Album Rating: 5.0

How can you give this a 2 and Back in Black a 5?!?! Thats one of the most overrated things I've ever listened to haha. But needless to say, decently well written review. Sgt. Pepper is and probably will always be in my top 5 records of all time

robertsona
Staff Reviewer
December 11th 2009


27413 Comments

Album Rating: 4.5

review/reviewer are absolutely retarded

Parallels
December 11th 2009


10144 Comments


no... hes got a point. this album is complete crap.

robertsona
Staff Reviewer
December 11th 2009


27413 Comments

Album Rating: 4.5

i dont even care if you hate the album (even tho it's really good) but the way he conveys it is pretentious and overblown (and also in his other reviews as well) that i dont care about his opinion

Parallels
December 11th 2009


10144 Comments


yeah, i understand. his reviews and profile seem like a joke to cause shitstorms by their fans.

Killler9
March 28th 2010


147 Comments


no one is going to read that

Killler9
March 28th 2010


147 Comments


spam spam spam

lol spam b gone!

Killler9
March 28th 2010


147 Comments


I'm reporting you.

Killler9
March 28th 2010


147 Comments


and you're posting it in this thread because..................?

Boognish3
March 28th 2010


264 Comments

Album Rating: 3.5

Erlewine likes EVERY ALBUM EVER RECORDED, seriously its hard to find a negative review

Boognish3
March 28th 2010


264 Comments

Album Rating: 3.5

cool trolling bro

Killler9
March 28th 2010


147 Comments


okay now I'm actually going to report you.

Killler9
March 28th 2010


147 Comments


Well then I'm going to have to ask you to stop, however feel free to write your own take on the album at any time you see fit.

Killler9
March 28th 2010


147 Comments


Spamming.



You have to be logged in to post a comment. Login | Create a Profile





STAFF & CONTRIBUTORS // CONTACT US

Bands: A B C D E F G H I J K L M N O P Q R S T U V W X Y Z


Site Copyright 2005-2023 Sputnikmusic.com
All Album Reviews Displayed With Permission of Authors | Terms of Use | Privacy Policy