i don't know shit, dude. now there's a fact. not a god damn thing.
more importantly SKYRIM. lates dudes. thanks for the entertainment ; )
Seriously guys, how dare you criticize gyro? He didn't put this review up for you guys to tell him what he needs to improve on, obviously.
See, FrankRedHot gets it!
Jokes aside though, I accept and welcome criticism (read my response to Donwer) I'm just also trying to give some perspective back as well. I apologize for coming off as hostile though.
"Jokes aside though, I accept and welcome criticism (read my response to Donwer) I'm just also trying to give some perspective back as well. I apologize for coming off as hostile though."
Lol you haven't accepted one bit of criticism. Every time someone's tried to help you in this thread you've gotten pretty uppity or you just tell them they are wrong.
"Edit: you're right, I'll tone it down a little."
No, I do appreciate feedback. I admittedly attacked Jarrod's post though.
Both Adams are the only ones that really gave constructive criticism (John did after the fact) and I questioned Thomas' (am I not allowed to do this?).
"Both Adams are the only ones that really gave constructive criticism (John did after the fact) and I questioned Thomas' (am I not allowed to do this?)."
Questioning and being a pretentious douche are two different things.
And then pulling Hawks following all of that isn't going to help.
I don't see the fault in the review (biased, I know) because it reads absolutely nothing like my arvo part review, it's just an assessment of an album I ultimately found dry and bland... I don't see how I went over the score. Are we not supposed to focus on structure or use words above a 5th grade level when approaching pop-punk music? At any rate, I'm not dabbling in philosophy or using some kind of deeply profound tone. I guess I get what you're saying about it feeling extraneous, but only very small parts of the review seem that way, I think the vast majority of it is pretty fluid. Your criticism seem very harsh, like, unnecessarily so, but thanks all the same for voicing your opinion.
This is pretentious?
No, it isn't.
But this is:
"Well, please enlighten me - give me some criticisms to help me improve. You've been reading a lot of my reviews, or so you hinted at, so go on, help me out. Please post it in my shoutbox though, for obvious reasons.
Jared: I was just made away of the reasons for you quitting your staff position.. When did you become so bloody self-loathing? "
lol matt youre so little
Eh, I don't think pretentious is the word you're looking for, but it was unwarranted nonetheless. Still, that John Hanson guy just has a way of getting under your skin, y'know?
"Eh, I don't think pretentious is the word you're looking for, but it was unwarranted nonetheless. Still, that John Hanson guy just has a way of getting under your skin, y'know?"
No, I don't.
woah what happened here
Digging: RATKING - 700 Fill
Album Rating: 4.0
I disagree with this review
Holy shit this thread. Idk, I found the album to be a bit more endearing than you did. The vocals weren't all that bad imo, but to each their own.
Eli: I much prefer their EP.
Woah, wasn't expecting this thread.
Gyromania, you didn't represent yourself very well in this thread.
I find it interesting that you accuse the people who criticize you of "never reading your reviews" when the people who always comment with things like "great review as always!" are actually the ones who are much less likely to have read the review.
I think a good idea for you would be to read your reviews out loud before you post them, because there are word choices that simply don't sit well when I read them. I don't know anything about this band so I can't comment on whether or not the style of this review fits the album, but there are definitely moments where you sound, as John said, as if writing this review was just an exercise.
To me, the best reviews read as if the writer is having a conversation with someone. Not everyone can pull off a nice conversational tone, obviously, but it's better to try for it and fail than write something that nobody would be interested in listening to in a live setting.