Cult of Luna Cult of Luna
» Back to review

Comments:Add a Comment 
eternium
April 3rd 2011



16337 Comments

Album Rating: 4.0

Weakest effort but still amazing.

BetaAquilae
April 3rd 2011



248 Comments

Album Rating: 5.0

By FAAAARRR my favorite album from CoL. So raw and heavy...

ShadowRemains
April 3rd 2011



20534 Comments

Album Rating: 3.5

holy shit a relinquished review what is this i don't even


fucking this, good review too, pos'd


Digging: Banks - Goddess

ZombicidalMan
April 3rd 2011



1761 Comments

Album Rating: 4.0

Good review man.

Also, why does Umea produce such great bands? Meshuggah, Refused, Cult Of Luna, Nocturnal Rites, etc. Damn.

Irving
Staff Reviewer
April 3rd 2011



7167 Comments


Hey man; thanks for the review. That said, I would like to just point out a few things that really harm its effectiveness:

i.) You appear to have some problems expressing your ideas; here: The atmosphere has always been a key factor of their music; in every song, the atmosphere is dark and oppressive or somber and serious, but each one is reflective and thoughtful. The atmosphere is expanded upon with the help of the electronics, bringing more layers to the oppressive nature of the album.

Awkward reading, and by the end of it all the point has gotten lost in the mix.

ii.) Unimportant sentences: The length is long because of unneeded sections (the middle of “Sleep”) or extended measures in the songs (for example, the ending in “The Sacrifice”). Few may think it would have been better to add the ending of “101” to the beginning of “The Sacrifice”.

Completely filler sentences that add nothing to the review. Ironically enough.

iii.) Stilted phrases: That is to say that this isn’t to be avoided and cast aside as an unnecessary listen in the band’s discography. No, this is recommended to be given a listen. The self-titled is definitely the darkest effort Cult of Luna has made yet. Cult of Luna never forgot their roots as they never changed their sound; they only altered and improved upon it. Even after their evolution, they were amazing in their beginning.

The writing - particularly if it's in a paragraph - should be quick, concise, and to the point. Here, you meander around aimlessly and the sense is that the ideas could have been expounded upon so much more. The final sentence is an anti-climax as well, and feels kinda "meh".

It's your first review, so I won't vote this down. Unfortunately, it isn't worthy of a positive vote either.

Cheers!

Digging: Ty Segall - Manipulator

Irving
Staff Reviewer
April 3rd 2011



7167 Comments


Also, I take this review as proof that very many of the peeps on Sputnik read the reviews which they have decided to pos - beyond perhaps a bare glance-over.

Metalstyles
Staff Reviewer
April 3rd 2011



8327 Comments


It's always nice to see new users on this site.
Those damn new users with 8000 comments!

Maniac!
April 3rd 2011



26250 Comments

Album Rating: 4.0

@Irving



maybe we pos to make our friends feel good.


not taking the internet seriously 101

Irving
Staff Reviewer
April 3rd 2011



7167 Comments


Those damn new users with 8000 comments!

Haha yeah I saw that too after I went back and checked his comment count. Then I edited my post =p

Voivod
Staff Reviewer
April 3rd 2011



6006 Comments

Album Rating: 4.0

my favorite Cult of Luna record.

will read the review later.



edit:

omg this didn't have a review already?

major kudos @ Relinquished!!!

Digging: Troldhaugen - Obzkure Anekdotez For Maniakal Massez

Irving
Staff Reviewer
April 3rd 2011



7167 Comments


maybe we pos to make our friends feel good.

Might you be doing them a disservice, then? =(

xenocide.
April 3rd 2011



1187 Comments

Album Rating: 4.0

Come on guys, this is a really good review. Besides, this is the first by this guy, and the first for this album. Considering that, I think he's made a good job.

Metalstyles
Staff Reviewer
April 3rd 2011



8327 Comments


Re: Irving's criticism

First of all, I think what you're doing (not only in this thread and now, but on a daily basis) is really neat. Having a second set of eyes glance over your writing and having a second opinion from someone who is good at writing is always helpful, even for the more experienced writers, and when someone specifically points out your mistakes, it's really a great way to learn.

But on this occasion there are a couple of things I disagree with you on, namely that it isn't a well-written review in general. It's not perfect, but it's definitely good enough, especially for a first imo, because after reading it, one will indeed get a sense of what this sounds like because he did describe the sound well enough and there weren't any obvious grammar slips.

Awkward reading, and by the end of it all the point has gotten lost in the mix.
It is indeed worded a little awkwardly and re-writing it a bit is a good idea, but I wouldn't say that the idea got lost in the mix as I definitely caught what he meant.
Completely filler sentences that add nothing to the review
Again, while the example you brought out is a good one, adding just a sentence about why the parts he brought out are unneeded would easily fix this and make it a very worthwhile section because he then would tell the reader why the album is overlong in sufficient detail. So basically, I guess I'm not disagreeing with you here, I'm just telling that this is what you should do, Relinquished!
The final sentence is an anti-climax as well, and feels kinda "meh".
Maybe it's personal preference, or maybe it's because I'm familiar with the band's work, but I liked it.

eternium
April 3rd 2011



16337 Comments

Album Rating: 4.0

It's a pretty decent review.

Voivod
Staff Reviewer
April 3rd 2011



6006 Comments

Album Rating: 4.0

the review was well written, even though it needed just a tad more of proofreading, as Irving noted.

I pos'd, because the review catched the album's essence.




edit: oh and i agree with Metalstyles's previous post 100%.

Irving
Staff Reviewer
April 3rd 2011



7167 Comments


@ Metalstyles:

Fair. Maybe there's a point to be made about how I give up on a review's sense of direction too easily. I could have been a little more lax, I suppose. I also think that my having never heard the album probably counted against this review's effectiveness as well - mainly as I didn't have a frame of reference to act upon.

Haha, clearly I still have lots to improve on in terms of criticism-giving. But ultimately I guess that's what we're all here for =)

Photon
April 3rd 2011



1292 Comments

Album Rating: 4.0

Am really glad this finally got a review . One of the most consistent bands

Metalstyles
Staff Reviewer
April 3rd 2011



8327 Comments


I also think that my having never heard the album probably counted against this review's effectiveness as well
I wouldn't say that because, again, I do think he did describe the sound and feel of the album enough, it's just that his wording wasn't perfect.

But if you disagree with that feel free to post a counterargument.

Irving
Staff Reviewer
April 3rd 2011



7167 Comments


I can't say I disagree...it was just random musing, more of. Trying to figure out where I could have experienced difficulty in evaluating the review.

This was really helpful Metalstyles - I'll definitely be able to post more mindful and effective comments in future =) You are awesome.

*waits for Deviant to come in and ask everyone to hold hands and do trust falls*

Crysis
Staff Reviewer
April 3rd 2011



16310 Comments


I should probably hear this album considering "Somewhere Along The Highway" and "Salvation" are almost better than Neurosis.






I said almost.



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





FAQ // STAFF & CONTRIBUTORS // SITE FORUM // 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 2005-2014 Sputnikmusic.com
All Album Reviews Displayed With Permission of Authors | Privacy Policy