Alter Bridge One Day Remains
» Back to review

Comments:Add a Comment 
Bartender
Emeritus
August 15th 2004


826 Comments

Album Rating: 1.0

[QUOTE=splashfreak]
One Day remains is fantastic, I listen to it constantly, the songs are catchy and enjoyable, and it definitely appeals to me, the only "listener" I can speak for. I will definitely be listening to it in five years.

So tell me, what did I do wrong with my final rating?[/QUOTE]

Well for one thing, you can't say that you will definitely be listening to it in five years. For another, that thread is a guide to how to review a CD, not the rules themselves. That definition of a 5/5 isn't a good one - since when does music have to be catchy to be enjoyable?

[QUOTE=splashfreak]
I don't know. a 4/5 seems so... low. Maybe a 4.5/5 would do it justice, I don't know. From now on, when I review CD's, I'm just going to skip the final rating. You get flamed no matter what you put.[/QUOTE]

That's the point we're trying to make - if you work within the rules of the forum, a 4/5 is not low; it means exceptional within the genre, which is clearly what you think of One Day Remains. It's just adapting to a rating system different to your own personal one.

Obviously you're never going to be able to rate an album so that everyone agrees, but Cd Reviews is first and foremost supposed to be informative. If you refuse to give a final rating to any other albums you review, your review will have to be deleted.

[QUOTE=splashfreak]I mean, Nirvana's albums had huge effects on the music scene, but does that mean they were good? No. I think they were crap. I don't think an album needs to change music to earn a 5/5.[/QUOTE]

Are you ever going to tire of your double standards? You think they're crap, so obviously they don't deserves a 5/5? However, you like One Day Remains, so despite the total lack of major innovation or impact, 5/5 all the way?

I didn't say that an album has to change music to get a 5/5, just that that was one of the possible criteria for a 5/5. I also never said that an album that did change music automatically deserves a 5/5.

splashfreak
August 15th 2004


196 Comments


Alright, well if that was such a crappy description in the thread, why was it stickied and no one made point of correcting it?

Are you ever going to tire of your double standards? You think they're crap, so obviously they don't deserves a 5/5? However, you like One Day Remains, so despite the total lack of major innovation or impact, 5/5 all the way?

I didn't say that an album has to change music to get a 5/5, just that that was one of the possible criteria for a 5/5. I also never said that an album that did change music automatically deserves a 5/5.


Oh. My. Goodness. I'm supposed to forget about my opinion, and be objective, right? What is "objective"? Is it reviewing a CD like the majority of human beings would? Well then, Linkin Park, Good Charlotte, and other crappy bands that have huge followings like them would get 5/5's. Is it reviewing them based upon how complicated their stuff is? Then the Beatles albums would for the most part be crap. Is it based on how they change the music scene? the Backstreet Boys changed the pop music scene, that doesn't mean they are any good.

I don't get this whole "don't give your opinion thing". That is all a review IS. It is an OPINION. My OPINION, is that this is my favorite album ever. I didn't say it HAD to be everyone else's, but I think that it is worthy of a 5/5. to try and tell me that is wrong is YET ANOTHER OPINION.

Bartender
Emeritus
August 15th 2004


826 Comments

Album Rating: 1.0

[QUOTE=splashfreak]
I don't get this whole "don't give your opinion thing". That is all a review IS. It is an OPINION. My OPINION, is that this is my favorite album ever. I didn't say it HAD to be everyone else's, but I think that it is worthy of a 5/5. to try and tell me that is wrong is YET ANOTHER OPINION.[/QUOTE]

I just explained that in my previous post! Look, right here;

That's the point we're trying to make - if you work within the rules of the forum, a 4/5 is not low; it means exceptional within the genre, which is clearly what you think of One Day Remains. It's just adapting to a rating system different to your own personal one.


You're not being told not to give your opinion within the review, because that's what the review is for, as you've said.

But, when it comes to the ranking, that's not what you go on. The definition for a 5/5 isn't just "an excellent CD", that would be a 4/5. The numbers themselves could be done away with - it's just a way of assigning a CD to a certain description.

splashfreak
August 15th 2004


196 Comments


These ridiculous rules make no sense. I come on here trying to just share my opinion of my favorite CD, and people obssessed with rules can't get over the fact that I gave it a 5/5.

I didn't say it was just an "excellent" CD, I think it is the best CD I have ever heard. And here is a qeustion, what CD's ARE worthy of 5/5's, hmm?

The JoZ
August 15th 2004


345 Comments


You know, honestly, maybe we should get rid of the number rating altogether...

I think he's perfectly entitled to think that this is a great CD, even if it is one of the best he's ever heard. He should be able to say that...

However under current guidelines, he can't give it it's top rating, because it's seen as bias...

I think a compromise is in order, because you're both making good points here.

Bartender
Emeritus
August 15th 2004


826 Comments

Album Rating: 1.0

If he'd qualified his rating, then there would've pretty much been no problem. I don't see a problem with rating what would be a 4/5 under the current system as a 5/5, if there's a qualification with it. He didn't give a qualification, and what's more, the CD hasn't even been out for a week yet. I'm just saying some perspective would be nice.

The JoZ
August 15th 2004


345 Comments


Well, I mean, I can understand your not wanting to rate this particular album 5/5 for those reasons alone...

Actually your post clarifies what I thought was going to cause discrepancies, so, yeah

Carry on

splashfreak
August 15th 2004


196 Comments


If he'd qualified his rating, then there would've pretty much been no problem. I don't see a problem with rating what would be a 4/5 under the current system as a 5/5, if there's a qualification with it. He didn't give a qualification, and what's more, the CD hasn't even been out for a week yet. I'm just saying some perspective would be nice.

First off, I'd like to thank you for not being incredibly rude. On a lot of boards--including some on this site--I would have just been mindlessly flamed to death. I would have probably quit a long time ago if it weren't for the fact that you ARE making SOME sense.

However, I don't quite get what you mean with that post. First off, qualify it? Uh, what do you mean?

Second, so what if the album has only been out a week? I have been listening to the full songs for twice that long (vh1, hear music first), and half length songs for way longer than that on their website. Also, I have pretty much listened to it nonstop since it came out.

However under current guidelines, he can't give it it's top rating, because it's seen as bias...


^That is what I have been trying to articulate. When is it RIGHT to give something a 5/5? I mean, not everyone will agree with you, EVER, so isn't it just an opinion?

The JoZ
August 15th 2004


345 Comments


In essence, what he's saying, is if you can argue your point that it's a 5/5 CD, you can rate it that without a problem.

But I have to say I don't think it can be done for this group or CD, no matter

1) How much you like them
2) How well Tremonti solos

Against Miik!
August 15th 2004


215 Comments


In response to what I read of Ripper22s post, just becuase a solo is fast doesn't make it good. On the first single, the solo is just plain showing off. It doesn't fit the song at all, and I was able to improvise a far more fitting one by simply slowing down the same set of notes he used.

splashfreak
August 15th 2004


196 Comments


In essence, what he's saying, is if you can argue your point that it's a 5/5 CD, you can rate it that without a problem.

But I have to say I don't think it can be done for this group or CD, no matter

1) How much you like them
2) How well Tremonti solos


But dang does he solo well ;-)

Anyway, I think that it is worthy of a 5/5 because everything just SOUNDS better than anything I've ever heard before. I don't know, maybe a 4.5/5 would be better, but in that case I wouldn't be able to rate ANY CD 5/5...

In response to what I read of Ripper22s post, just becuase a solo is fast doesn't make it good. On the first single, the solo is just plain showing off. It doesn't fit the song at all, and I was able to improvise a far more fitting one by simply slowing down the same set of notes he used.

I don't think he ever said that fast=good. The solo is good just because it is. And what do you mean it doesn't fit? the song actually builds up really well to that point, where nothing but a shredding solo would fit. As for him showing off... if you want to think that, think that. Not only does every musician on Earth show off, but Tremonti's solos all make the song better, and as long as they do that, who cares if he is showing off?

Bartender
Emeritus
August 15th 2004


826 Comments

Album Rating: 1.0

[QUOTE=splashfreak]
However, I don't quite get what you mean with that post. First off, qualify it? Uh, what do you mean?
[/QUOTE]

Sorry for late reply, my computer crashed. To qualify a statement means to have something after the main statement which modifies or amends it.

[QUOTE=splashfreak]
Second, so what if the album has only been out a week? I have been listening to the full songs for twice that long (vh1, hear music first), and half length songs for way longer than that on their website. Also, I have pretty much listened to it nonstop since it came out. [/QUOTE]

The problem is that you have no idea whether the album will stand up to long term listening. There must have been examples in your life (I know there have been in mine) of songs/albums which you've absolutely loved at first, but slowly grown less and less fond of, and maybe even ended up disliking.

[QUOTE=splashfreak]
I don't think he ever said that fast=good. The solo is good just because it is. And what do you mean it doesn't fit? the song actually builds up really well to that point, where nothing but a shredding solo would fit. As for him showing off... if you want to think that, think that. Not only does every musician on Earth show off, but Tremonti's solos all make the song better, and as long as they do that, who cares if he is showing off? [/QUOTE]

But doesn't the fact that you're more or less the only person who's posted here who has said those highlighted things tell you something?

Could I also ask why you're not using the quote function? I'm not trying to go for pettiness, I'm just honestly wondering. You're a good poster so far, and quotes would make your posts a lot easier to read.

splashfreak
August 15th 2004


196 Comments


Could I also ask why you're not using the quote function? I'm not trying to go for pettiness, I'm just honestly wondering. You're a good poster so far, and quotes would make your posts a lot easier to read.


Umm, because I didn't know how. Let's see if this works...

splashfreak
August 15th 2004


196 Comments


Hey, it worked.

But doesn't the fact that you're more or less the only person who's posted here who has said those highlighted things tell you something?


Yeah, that no one agrees with me. That doesn't make me wrong, it just means I have a different opinion.

Cain
August 16th 2004


155 Comments


[QUOTE=i am miik]In response to what I read of Ripper22s post, just becuase a solo is fast doesn't make it good. On the first single, the solo is just plain showing off. It doesn't fit the song at all, and I was able to improvise a far more fitting one by simply slowing down the same set of notes he used.[/QUOTE]
How much of my post did you read? I understand if you didn't read it all, as I kind of turned it into a god**** book(way too long), but I did clear up that issue with the Open Your Eyes solo, and my opinion was in total agreement with yours.

darkwhite
August 17th 2004


11 Comments


EVERYONE SHUT THE **** UP AND LISTEN TO THE ALBUM AND THEN TALK ABOUT IT. IN THIS THREAD THE THREADSTARTER AND I AND MAYBE ONE OTHER WHOLE ALBUM!!!!!!! so listen to it.....sorry about the caps but its the only way i know how to yell on here. stop basing your opinion on an album based on the first RADIO VERSION single and nothing else....Open Your Eyes is probably one of the lesser songs on the album

darkwhite
August 18th 2004


11 Comments


by the way...so far i agree 100% with the threadstarter or whoever that splash guy is

RollerQueen
August 18th 2004


209 Comments


Are you trying to say that if everyone heard the album, nobody would dislike it? I've heard the album and I stick to what I said on the first page.

demon_LLAMA
August 19th 2004


3 Comments


[QUOTE=i am miik]Tremonti is still to much of a show off. He throws a fast solo in the new single where one is clearly not needed. He thinks he is God's gift to music, and I have little respect for him. They still sound like generic radio rock to me.[/QUOTE]

If you don't like guitar solo's get out of here!!!

Bartender
Emeritus
August 19th 2004


826 Comments

Album Rating: 1.0

He didn't say he doesn't like guitar solos. He said he doesn't like that guitar solo.



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